CIA CONTRIBUTION TO FOIA REPORT FOR HPSCI

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP81M00980R001900030078-4
• Release Decision: RIPPUB
• Original Classification: K
• Document Page Count: 12
• Document Creation Date: December 16, 2016
• Document Release Date: September 9, 2004
• Sequence Number: 78
• Publication Date: December 12, 1978
• Content Type: MF

Approved For Release~2005/04/22 :CIA-RDP81 M00980R001900030078-4
SENDER VlIILL CHECK CLASSIFICATION TO? APiD Z3OTTOAe1
UNCLASSIFIED CO*+IFIDEN'I'IAL S)::CRE'#
?~' ~' ~CIE~A. $~~~~~i 9~.~~
Tip
NAME AND ADDRESS
DATE
INITIALS
I
z
~ ~? 1~~
3
4
5
6
A,TIOH
DIRECT REPLY
P~EPAitf REPLY
APP~OYAI
DISPATCH
REC0~17~E~iDATICIr
CO~At;19EAiT
FILE
9ETt1Ri!
C091'CU4iRfNCE
IPlfOR~iAT10M
StSP~1Ttl4E
~emar~s:
FOLD HERE TO RETURN TO S:NDI=R
FROM: NAME, ADDRESS AND
DATE
CLASSIF D C?
SiCItE'I'
UN
STAT
STAT
Approved For Release 2005/04/22 :CIA-RDP81 M00980R001900030078-4
 Approved For Re - 009808001900030078-4
' D~ErIORANDUI~9 FOR
j i~.C -=_-i~-
i..___
u -i~v 191
AI/DDA
SUBJECT CIA Contribution to FOIA Report for HPSCI
1. Forwarded herewith is the CIA input for the report
to HPSCI.
2. I suggest that the following themes be emphasized in
the Director's transmittal letter, all of which are treated
in the CIA's portion of the report.
a. The CIA believes that it has just about reached
the limits of the resources that can be employed with-
out detracting seriously from its ability to carry
out its foreign intelligence mission. .
b. An exam le of the absurdit of the FOIA is
the request
It
is estimate t at as much as nine man-years may be
expended on this case prior to its completion.
c. The decision in the Ray/Schaap case will have
the effect of increasing the amount of work expended
on FOIA requests because of its holding that agencies
must describe in considerable detail, on-a deletion-
by-deletion basis, the natuxe of the material being with-
held and justify its denial.
d. It is believed that legislative changes to
remove sensitive operational data from the purview of
the Act are of highest priority. Such changes, while
relieving the CIA from the most significant burdens
of the FOIA, would not result in the withholding of
much material which would otherwise be made available
to the public.
3. I request that the final report be forwarded through
my office on its way to Admiral Turner for signature. A
quick response is promised.
ST
Approved For Release 2005/04/22: CIA-RDP81 M00980R001900030078-4
 Approved For Release 2005/04/22: CIA-RDP81 M00980R001900030078-4
IPS/CES/ch/12 December 1978
Orig. - Adse. w/attach
1 - AI/DDA (w/attach)
1 - IPS Subject (w/attach)
STAT
~.1~
- OLC
(w/attach)
_
STAT
1
- OGC
(w/attach)
1
- DDO/IRO (w/attach
1
- DDSF~T/FOIO (w/attach)
Approved For Release 2005/04/22: CIA-RDP81 M00980R001900030078-4
 Approved For Release 2005/04/22: CIA-RDP81 M00980R001900030078-4
REPORT ON THE CENTRAL INTELLIGENCE AGENCY'S EXPERIENCES
IN ADMINISTERING THE FREEDO'~1 OF INFORMATION ACT
AND RELATED PROGRAMS - BURDENS AND OTHER PROBLEr~4S
RESULTING THEREFROM
1. Organization
The CIA's program for administering the Freedom of
Information Act (FOIA), the Privacy Act (PA), and the mandatory
classification review provisions of Executive Order 12065
(which superseded Executive Order 11652 on 1 December 1978)
is decentralized, reflecting the decentralized nature of
the Agency's records systems. Overall policy is determined
by the Information Review Committee (IRC). This Committee
is comprised of the Deputy Director for Administration-
(Chairman), the Deputy Director for Operations, the Deputy
Director for Science and Technology, and the Deputy Director
of the National Foreign Assessment Center. It is supported
by the Information Review Committee Working Group (IRC/WG),
established in May 1978, which includes, in addition to
representatives of the above officials, members from the
Office of Public Affairs, the Office of Legislative Counsel,
and the Office of General Counsel.
The Information and Privacy Staff (IPS), located organiza-
tionally within the Office of the Deputy Director for Adminis-
tration, is the focal point within the Agency for the receipt
of requests from the public and is responsible for the
coordination of their processing, the preparation of replies
and other correspondence, and the maintenance of records
of all transactions, The Office of the DCI, the National
Foreign Assessment Center, and each of the Directorates has
a person who serves as Freedom of Information officer,
and, within these organizations, each major subcomponent
has its own Freedom of Information officer (full-time or
part-time, depending upon the workload). The program
within the Directorate of Operations, however, is somewhat
more centralized than is the case elsewhere in the Agency.
That Directorate, which bears a significant share of
the Agency's FOI/PA burden, has a rather sizeable central
staff. All of the Directorate's contacts with IPS are
through that staff, whereas the IPS usually deals directly
with offices below the Directorate level in other parts of
the Agency. Requests involving Intelligence Community
records or equities are processed through the CIA mechanism,
Approved For Release 2005/04/22: CIA-RDP81 M00980R001900030078-4
 Approved For Release 2005/04/22: CIA-RDP81M00980~0~1h00030UOpointed
gas well, and the Intelligence Community Sta _
a Freedom of Information officer to serve as its contact
point t~Tith IPS.
2. Processing Procedures
Requests fall into two general categories--those received
directly from members of the public and those referred to
the CIA by other agencies. In the latter instances, searches
are not usually required. We need only to review the records
found by the referring agency in the course of searching its
files. If the referred records are of CIA origin, we respond
directly to the requester; if they are the records of another
agency containing material falling under CIA's cognizance,
they are examined and returned to the referring agency with
our review findings for final disposition.
The paper flow in processing requests is depicted on
the attached chart (Tab A). Requests are recorded in an
automated request log by IPS and, once all questions have been
resolved (fees, description of records, etc.)', copies of the
letters of request are sent to those components which might
hold relevant information in their files. (In the case of
referrals, copies of the referred records are sent to appro-
priate components for review.) All processing transactions
are entered into the automated log. As soon as the components
have completed their searches and reviewed any records found
for releasability, the results are reported back to IPS. IPS
takes care of whatever inter- and intea-agency referrals are
deemed necessary and, when all processing has been completed, `
prepares responses to the requesters, transmuting copies of
all documents being released in whole or in part, explaining the
legal basis for withholding any information being denied, and
informing the requesters of their right to administrative
appeal. If denials are appealed, the information withheld is
reviewed again, but by personnel not involved in the initial
decisions. Working closely with a member of the Office of
General Counsel, the reviewers prepare recommendations for the
Deputy Director whose records are involved, and the Deputy
Director, acting on behalf of the IRC, makes the final deter-
minations. The results are transmitted to the appellant in a
letter prepared in the Office of General Counsel, and he is
apprised at that time of his right to judicial review.
3. Request Levels, Manpower Costs, and Fees Collected
Since the beginning of CY 1975, through 15 Tlovember 1978,
the CIA has logged 19,504 requests, of which 10,030 were-
. processed under the provisions of the FOIA. (See. Tab B for
a further breakdown on these requests.) We anticipate
Approved For Release 2005/04/22: CIA-RDP81 M00980RU01900030078=4
 Approved For Release 2005/04/22: CIA-RDP81 M00980R001900030078-4
receiving between 4,000 and 5,000 requests per year through
FY 1983 barring some change in the lain or in public attitudes
vis-a-vis the Agency. Approximately 35-40 percent of these
requests, judging from past experience, will be FOIA
requests.
AT
There are about persons in the Agency who are
employed on a full-time basis in complying faith the demands of
the FOIA, the PA, and mandatory classification review requests.
Most of these full-time employees work in the Operations
Directorate, IPS, the Office of General Counsel, or the Office
of Security. In addition, hundreds of other .4gency employees
get involved in the programs on a part-time, ad hoc basis--con-
ducting searches, reviewing records, etc. The total manpower
expended each year is the equivalent of 110 or~more full-time
employees. This figure has tended to increase each year,
caused in part by_-the increasing demands of appeals and
litigation. Yet we believe that we have just about reached
the limit of the resources that can be employed without
detracting from our ability to carry out our foreign intelli-
gence mission.
A great deal of manpower can be expended on individual
requests, particularly if they go into the appeal and or
l~t~mat~nn ctaaPC
A recent opinion by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the
District of Columbia Circuit (Ellen L. Ra and !9illiam H. Schaap
v. Stansfield Turner) will have the e ect o increasing t e
manpower nee e to process FOIA requests, appeals, and liti-
gation. The Court, in this case, required that agencies
describe in considerable .detail, on a deletion-by-deletion
basis, the nature of the material being withheld under FOIA
exemptions and the justification for its denial. Early
Approved For Release 2005/04/22: CIA-RDP81 M00980R001900030078-4
 Approved For Release 2005/04/22: CIA-RDP81 M00980R001900030078-4
experience in complying tivith this new requirement indicates
that it may take as much as one man-hour per document to
satisfy it fully. Ironically, the new ruling will result in
the disclosure of less information by the Agency than heretofore.
Greater description will make more evident that which the
CIA is statutorily bound to protect. The release of segregable
portions of records, therefore, will not be feasible in
those instances where the required descriptions and justifi-
cations of withheld material would destroy the very purpose
of the withholding. ?~4oreover, the possibility that any
FOIA request may result in litigation, at which point detailed
statements would be .required, will often force upon the Agency
a more conservative disclosure policy in responding to initial
requests, despite the fact that only a few of these requests
will ever reach the litigation stage.
Our personnel costs for administering these programs.
grow each year. We estimate the costs for 1975 at $1,4"00,000;
for 1976, $2,000,000; and for 1977, $2,377,000.. Almost
one-half of these sums can be attributed to the FOIA; FOIA
requests tend to be more complex and are more likely to lead
to expensive litigation. By contrast, very little has been
collected in fees to offset these expenses. SVe do not charge
for processing PA requests, and we are required by law to
waive or reduce fees for FOIA requests whenever it is in the
public interest to do so. ~4oreover, the most expensive
part of the process--the review of records--must be totally
absorbed by the Agency; we can charge only for searches and
for the duplication of records. Only $1,867 was collected
in 1975; $10,035 in 1976; and X16,439 in 1977.- All of these
fees were for FOIA requests.
4. Efforts to Improve Efficiency and Productivity
Despite the considerable manpower diverted to these
programs, we have been unable to keep up with the requests and
large processing backlogs exist. Currently, there are approxi-
mately 2,800 unanswered requests and over 300 unanswered
appeals. With rare exceptions, requests and appeals are
handled on a first-in, first-out basis and, because of the
backlogs, the statutory deadlines usually expire long before
we can act.
The Agency has developed an active training program
designed to further employees' knowledge of the Acts and to
enhance their ability to deal with requests. Two-day workshops
are -conducted periodically to familiarize employees with the
programs and to afford them an opportunity to review documents
under controlled .conditions. In addition, two Agency-wide
Approved For Release 2005/04/22: CIA-RDP81 M00980R001900030078-4
 Approved For Release 2005/04/22: CIA-RDP81 M00980R001900030078-4
symposia have been held to discuss mutual concerns and to
exchange ideas for the solution of problems. A weekly report
on FOI/PA activities is also distributed throughout the
Agency and a newsletter. is published on an irregular basis.
A systems study has been underway tiahich, utilizing data
from the automated request log to create a computer model
of the overall process, seeks to identify bottlenecks and
other problem areas and to devise possible solutions. A
greater degree of centralization will be among the alternatives
considered in evaluating the collected data. There are, however,
certain factors present which make greater efficiency difficult,
or perhaps even impossible to achieve. Our files are
decentralized and searches are therefore complex and often
involve numerous systems of records. More important, however,
is the sensitivity of most of the records contained in .our
files. Each document must be carefully and painstakingly
reviewed by at least two levels of authority to ensure that
intelligence sources and methods are not disclosed. The
review cannot be done in haste and must be performed by
fully qualified officers.
5. Problems
The two principal problems for the CIA in administering
the FOIA and related public disclosure programs have been the
drain on its manpower resources (with relatively little
information being released of significant value to the
general public) and the chilling effect that the fear of
exposure has had on our agents and other sources and on various
cooperating foreign intelligence and security liaison services.
The manpower we must devote to processing FOIA requests,
which includes a not inconsiderable amount of time expended by
senior Agency officials, obviously detracts from our ability
to perform our critically important foreign intelligence mission.
Moreover, a 2 percent personnel reduction projected for FY 1980
will make this diversion of manpower even more serious. We
take no issue with the basic concept that the American public
has a right to know what its Government is doing and to benefit
therefrom whenever possible. Indeed, the Agency has, to the
degree consistent with its obligation to protect intelligence
sources and methods, voluntarily made its analytical products
available to the public whenever feasible. Numerous unclassi-
fied monographs, reference aids, maps, and translations of
the foreign media are released each year through the distri-
bution facilities.. of the Library of Congress, the Government
Printing Office, and tie Department of Commerce. With respect
to FOIA requests, ,however, it is clear to us that the public
is not getting much for its tax dollar. Some of the requests
Approved For Release 2005/04/22 SCIA-RDP81 M00980R001900030078-4
 Approved For Release 2005/04/22: CIA-RDP81 M00980R001900030078-4
we receive are for records concerning sensitive covert opera-
tions, the existence of which we are not even free to acknowledge.
No information is released, but manpower is nonetheless diverted
from other essential tasks, particularly so if the denials are
appealed or litigated. In other requests, the search for
and review of hundreds or thousands of pages of material
has more often than not led to the release of little more than
fragmentary and sometimes inaccurate raw intelligence data,
which, rather than enlightening the public, has sometimes
resulted in highly publicized misinterpretations.of what
actually occurred. (More accurate reports responsive to the
requests often had to be withheld to protect sensitive sources
or collection systems.) On the other hand, we have been
able to release a large number of finished intelligence studies,
in whole or in part, without posing undue risk to intelligence
sources and methods and to the benefit of American scholars
and other researchers.
In an effort to counteract the erosion of confidence in
the CIA's ability to protect secrets, we have repeatedly
assured our intelligence sources that the exemptions afforded
by the FOIA provide adequate protection--and, indeed,
the inadvertent release of sensitive information has been
exceedingly rare. However, as long as CIA operational
records are subject to the FOIA there is always the risk of
unintentional exposure (which has in fact occurred), and this
weighs heavily on the minds of those persons and foreign
services upon t~rhom we must rely as sources of intelligence.
It would be difficult to prove that information has in fact
been withheld from the Agency as a consequence of those mis-
givings, but the apprehensions have been manifested on
several occasions and a reluctance to entrust secrets to
the CIA would logically follow.
6. Legislative Relief
We submit that the CIA, as a foreign intelligence service,
is somewhat unique among U.S. Government agencies and that
legislative relief from the risks and burdens posed by the
FOIA is urgently needed. This relief could be achieved
through a number of legislative vehicles. Formal proposals
to this end will be forthcoming and Agency officials would
welcome an opportunity to consult with members of the Committee
as appropriate.
It is felt that total exemption .from the FOIA is probably
neither desirable nor feasible, However, we believe that
the most sensitive information held by the Agency--including
.that concerned" with or resulting from technical collection
systems, espionage, covert operations, counterintelligence
6
Approved For Release 2005104/22: CIA-RDP81 M00980R001900030078-4
 Approved For Release 2005/04/22: CIA-RDP81 M00980R001900030078-4
activities, security investigations, intelligence and security
liaison arrangements, and internal organizational and budgetary
matters--should be made unreachable under the FOIA. If
possible, tiae would also like to have raw, unevaluated intelli-
gence reports and cables--as contrasted with finished intelli-
gence studies and estimates--exempted from the access provisions
of the FOIA. Most of the information described above is
already covered by the existing exemptions of the FOIA. The
public would thus not be denied any significant amount of
information which tiaould not now be withheld in any event
under the current FOIA exemptions, but the CIA would be '
spared the necessity of using its scarce manpower going
through the legally mandated motions of searching its many
files, carefully reviewing relevant documents, and defending
its denials through administrative appeal and litigation
stages. Even more important perhaps, we would be in a
position to assure our sources that records revealing their
collaboration with the Agenc}~ would not be subject to
FOIA requests, thereby eliminating the risk of inadvertent
disclosure.
The above results could be achieved through legislation
describing or listing certain systems of records held by the
CIA which are exempt from the publication or disclosure pro-
visions of any other law. Another approach might be to
exempt the CIA from the requirement of searching its files
when the subject of an FOIA request pertained to specified cate-
gories of sensitive information or types of sensitive records.'
The potential manpower savings to the Agency would be diffi-
cult to estimate at this time. Fewer searches would be
required, but CIA-originated records of an operational nature
and third agency records affecting CIA's equities would
still be surfaced by other agencies in responding to FOIA
requests and would therefore have to be dealt with by the
CIA: It is certain, however, that the resources required
of us to process FOIA requests received directly from members
of the public would be appreciably reduced.
In previous communications to the Committee, CIA
officials have questioned whether other provisions of the
FOIA were not in need of change. These provisions included
the right of foreigners to submit FOIA requests, the short
deadlines for responding to requests and appeals, the pro-
hibition against charging fees for reviewing documents,
and the lack of any restrictions over the scope of requests.
We continue to believe that these provisions warrant re-
consideration by the Congress. Legislative changes to remove
sensitive operational data-from the purview of the Act ,. however,
are of far greater importance to the Agency and should be
given priority.
Approved For Release 2005/04/22: CIA-RDP81 M00980R001900030078-4
 Approved For Release ~ QQ~04/,32 a.~IaaF~D~81M00980R001900030078-4
~-_I
,; ;~.,
Lo~?_~
~_.-..
Ac?:noel e:? .;e:?~=rt
r`-- I
i
Op pS DDO I ( P f OTS ~ ~ Oth?rs
Other ~. ;enci~s
~ Direct ~:epl}~
CL~ :records
o:nr.onent :'es;~onses
to IPS
?:e#errals ~ CLr`~ Co : onents~
-- ---
--- ~-
Preparaticr. o,". '?.eply
~-
in~~.l Coordin~_tion
;.ailing
Ap.proved~ For Release 2005/04/22 :CIA-RDP81 IVI00980R00'1900030078-4
 Approved For Release 2005/04/22: CIA-RDP81 M00980R001900030078-4
}.E~UEST STf,TISTICS
Requests
received
Granted
in
full
Granted
in
~~art
Denied
in
full
Misc.*
PA
Requests
received
Granted
in
full
Granted
in
part
Denied
in
full
riisc.*
EO
Requests
received
Granted
in
full
Granted
in
part
Denied
in
full
Aiisc.*
Total requests re e d
1975
1976
1977
1978 (thru 15 Nov)
6609
761
1252
1406
300
148
167
161
428
562
241
25I
174
122
95
114
4577
523
269
587
552
2356
3023
1978
4
154
195
159
3
404
520
- 469
0
56
124
115
189
1500
1559
1116
232
374
568
398
63
F~1
156
62
b~
220
268
93
28
37
101
22
5
6
11
12
7393
3491
4843
3782
*Piisc. category includes "no record available" and f'no CIA record
available" responses; canceled and withdrawn requests; requests referred
to other agencies; early anneals; etc.
Approved For Release 2005/04/22: CIA=RDP81 M00980R001900030078-4.