STAFF PAPER ON SYSTEMATIC CLASSIFICATION REVIEW AND ITS FUTURE

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP85B00236R000100180015-9
• Release Decision: RIPPUB
• Original Classification: K
• Document Page Count: 9
• Document Creation Date: December 16, 2016
• Document Release Date: July 6, 2005
• Sequence Number: 15
• Content Type: MF

Approved F4W Release 2005/07/12: CIA-RDP85B00QNR000100180015-9
MI4ORANL)UM FOR: Deputy Director for Administration
Director of Information Services
SUBJECT: Staff Paper on Systematic Classification
Review and Its Future
1. Statement of the Problem:
a. Executive Order (E.O.) 12065 has placed a burden upon the Agency in
the form of an inefficient systematic classification review program that is
of little value to the publi.c. It has resulted in almost negligible document
declassification at a considerable expenditure of manpower and money. This
led the Agency to join with others in the Intelligence Commnuni.ty to seek major
changes in the order. The new order that has been signed, E.O. 12356, allows
each agency to conduct an internal systematic classification review program
it its option. This raises two issues: (a) the extent and character of the
future internal systematic classification review program that should be estab-
lished in the Agency (if at all), and (b) the future mission and organization
of the Classification Review Division (CRD) which has been responsible for the
systematic classification review program under E.O. 12065. Recommendations
for a ~roval are r osed in ara r ph 5.
h. Tab A is a brief history of systematic classification review in the
CIA. Tab B is a discussion of the activities that will require our continued
efforts regardless of the decision on an internal systematic classification
review program. Tab C provides a justification and rationale for structuring
a limited systematic classification review program.
2. Background:
a. Executive Order 1206; charges the Agency with the review of its
20-year-old classified material that is assessed to he of permanent value. It
was apparent early-on that the burden of this systematic classification review
program was intolerable and, with the change of acrid nistration, management sought
to join with other members of the Intelligence Community to have E.O. 12065
amended or replaced. Through this effort, a.ricw order was drafted that proposed
that each agency conduct an internal systematic class i.fication review program
at its option. That order, Executive Order 12356, has just been signed and
will be effective as of 1 August 1982.
Approved For Release 2005/07/12 : CIA-RDP85B00236R000100180015-9
 Approved FRelease 2005/07/12 : CIA-RDP85B006R000100180015-9
b. Simultaneously with systematic classification review, we have been
reviewing the OSS classified records that have been categorized by the Archivist
of the United States as permanent. A determined effort by the task force of
independent contractors is underway to complete the review of these records by
the end of Fiscal. Year 1982, which appears probable. Money has not been budgeted
for continuing the OSS review beyond that point. Also, in the latter part of
1978, additional security cl assi Cicat:ion review -responsibilities were assigned
to CRI), its resident expertise having been recognized. The Division assumed the
responsibility at that time for the Agency's review of documents proposed by the
Department of State for inclusion in its Foreign Relations of the United States
(FRIJS) series. The Division reviewed and cleared w volumes fi en remaining
in the 1950 and 1951 series, went on to review and clear the volumes of the
1952-54 series, and has recently begun to work on the first several volumes of
the proposed 1955-57 collection. Further, by direction of the Director of
Information Services, who serves as the representative of the Directorate of
Administration on the Agency's Publications Review Board, CRT) began reviewing
for that Directorate (with the exception of the Office of Security) the nonofficial
publications and oral presentations by employees and former employees. Finally,
the Division has taken on miscellaneous security classification reviews such. as
the review of former-employee publications ex post facto to determine if the
authors have violated their agrecmc"lts by revealing classified information;
proposed pub] ications by former high--ranking government officials (e. g. , former
Secretary of State Kissinger); documents in the possession of other agencies and
organizations which contain information concerning intelligence matters (e.g.,
records retired to the National Archives and Records Service (NABS) by the
Departments of State and Defense; Presidential papers held. at the Presidential
Libraries); and proposed histories and'other publications produced by other
agencies, their employees, or former employees (primarily the Department of
Defense (Doll)).
3, Discussion:
a. There is sound rationale for maintaining a systematic classification
review program in the Agency -- although not along the lines promulgated by
E.O. 12065 --. and for maintaining a centralized organization such as the
Classification Review Division to manage that program. The justification for
such a program is provided in Tab C. We need, in any case, to provide for the
Agency the capability to undertake a variety of tasks involving security
Classification rev-i.e-w in liaison with other agencies. With systematic
classification review being optional under Executive Order 12356, the principal
agencies that have been involved in the program, namely, the Department of State,
the National Security Agency (NSA), the National Security Council (NSC), the
various elements of DoD, and -- of course -- NARS, have all decided to continue
the program in some form. Essentially, the purpose is to identify information
of high interest that need no longer be withheld to protect national security
interests. Their rationale includ-z: (a) the contribution of such a program
to records management ("housecleaning" -- indeed, NSA believes that it will be
inundated in short order if it fails to continue the program); (b) the need to
release some information to the public in order to ease the burden in the
Approved For Release 2005/07/12 : CIA-RDP85B00236R000100180015-9
 Approved FqF Release 2005/07/12 : CIA-RDP85B00236R000100180015-9
Freedom of Information Act, Privacy Act, and Mandatory Review programs; and
(c) the need to demonstrate a good faith effort in releasing information. to
the public. The latter reason is most important from a good public relations
point of view.
isa. The impact of this rationale on the Agency is that the documents that
wi.l.l. be reviewed by other agencies contain much information that bears on our
equities. This information will surface as the entirety of an Agency-originated
document passed to them, as a portion of a document originated by that agency,
or is comment upon a matter of joint interest. Indeed the quantity of Agency
classified material located with. our "customers" elsewhere in the Government is
staggering in certain instances (see Tab B). To assume that our equities will.
be protected by shutting down our own systematic review program and. barring our
doors would he ostrich--.Like. '.l'o the contrary, the Agency must face the fact
that release of information of concern to as will continue regardless of our
position, We should, therefore, be positive in our efforts to control the flow
of that information in a liaison arrangement whereby the Agency is seen as being
cooperative, responsive, practical, and consistent.
c. In the press of classification review, one is constantly burdened. with
the problem of monitoring the status of all documents in process, while being
faced with questions concerning the need to coordinate given documents with
another agency -- an unwelcome requirement which imposes additional control
problems and inevitable delay. In simple terms, if an agency imposes a. difficult
coordinating process or is known to be unresponsive, one will choose not to co--
ordinate with that agency unless it is unavoidable. Considering the sensitivity
which the Agency places upon even the slightest reference to its activities --
the serious import of which is often not recognized by others -- we will place
our concerns in considerable jeopardy if we fail to posture ourselves to be
responsive to the needs of other agencies as they continue to pursue their
classification review programs,
d. An organization such as CRD, staffed with qualified reviewing officers,
can expedite inter-agency and intra-Agency classification review and thus ensure
the Agency's responsiveness. It can serve as the focal point for coordination
of external requests, and thus make coordination relatively simple and practical.
More importantly, CRD would be in the best position, in its focal-point role,
to ensure the consistency of release that is so vital in this kind of activity.
Already, several agencies, upon learning that CIA is considering the termination
of its systematic review program, have expressed the fervent hope that some unit
such as CRD will be maintained for the purpose of coordinating their continuing
programs. ',They see, as the alternative, confusion regarding coordination.
procedures, probably reduced coordination, and total frustration in having to
submit essential requests via the less responsive and more cumbersome mandatory
review program.
e. Lacking a classification review unit, the Agency probably would have
to invent one. If for no other reason, the Agency needs to provide a. capability
Approved For Release 2005/07/12 : CIA-RDP85B00236R000100180015-9
3
 Approved Fei.Release 2005/07/12: CIA-RDP85BO02 R000100180015-9
in. the Directorate of Administration for the review of unofficial publications
written by present and former employees. The publications volume to be reviewed
by each directorate has increased by about 40 percent in each of the last two
years and presently figures over 200 per year in the number of items and 20,000
in the au.m ber of pages. We believe, however, that there is a larger issue: that
the present, decentralized publications review process is not all efficient one.
We are therefore on record (DDA 81-1799/1, 18 November 1981) with a
recommendation that the effort be consolidated in CRD which would administer
the program, efficiently and expeditiously review the simpler drafts, review
and coordinate the more complex ones, and report its findings to the Publications
Review Board for concurrence. There is a compelling need for consistency in
this process, which consolidation of the review activity and the administration
(monitoring) of the program would realize, since it would be in the hands of a
qualified professional group with considerable experience in the business of
classification review. This would ensure the continued application of special
and current substantive expertise when necessary through internal coordination.
4. Su7r -ary :
a. The demand for efficiency, consistency, and a. positive posture argue strongly
for the continuation of CRD with application of :its expertise to the management
of a classification review program in its several forms -- internal systematic
review, consolidated publications review, and support to external review programs.
As the only component in the Agency with long-term, Aaenc -wide experience in
security classification review, CR1) is in the best position to shoulder these
responsibilities. While we do not project a workload that would justify a
Division with the present `T'/O 0 one must bear in mind that a professionally
balanced cadre of reasonable size must be maintained if the component is to
have the proper mix of personnel. 'there must be sufficent experience, sense of
organizational history, and breadth of expertise to comprehend most of the Agency's
professional and technical. functions in the context of the geographical areas
h
w
ere it has operated over time, and to have the capability to make and co-
ordinate its judgments accordingly.
Approved For Release 2005/07/12 : CIA-RDP85B00236R000100180015-9
STAT
 Approved FgrRelease 2005/07/12 : CIA-RDP85B002 R000100180015-9
STAT
Recommend.ati. arcs :
ra. The Agency continue with a s.,st:ematic classification review program,
as outlined in 'lab C, that is tailored to review only those permanent records
that would be of interest to the general public and could be released within
a .reasonable period without damage to national security,
Deputy Director forAdministration
E puty Dircctor Is 1',A-Lon
Deputy
----------
Attachments:
As stated
ate
Distribution:
Ori.g - Addressee w/atts
1. - OIS Subject Watts
1 - OIApCWgMRO rjR use 2005/07/12 :CIA-RDP85B00236R000100180015-9
I - CRD Subject w/at.ts
STAT IVJAL (5 April 1982) 5
 Approved Fgj,Release 2005/07/12: CIA-RDP85B002R000100180015-9
Brief Ilist.orL of
Syste1[2ticIassiIicafi011c.view_ire CIA
1. The Agency was first introduced to systematic classification review by
Executive Order (P.O.) 11.652, 1 June 1972, which called for the automatic
declassification of all national security classified documents over 30 years
old unless they were specifically certified by the head of the originating agency
or its successor as requiring continued protection. In response, the Directorate
of Operations (DO) established a unit of three OSS officers late in 1972 to
begin a review of the predecessor organization's records held at the National
Archives. P.O. 11905, 1.9 February 1976, which dealt primarily with U.S. foreign
intelligence (FI) activities, promulgated that the Director of Central Intelligence
"shall establish a vigorous program to downgrade and declassify Fl information as
appropriate and consistent with E.O. 11652." The DO increased its effort, but as
a result of discussions within the Agency regarding the merits of a centralized
versus a decentralized program, the Executive Advisory Group decided on 1 March 1977
that there should be a centralized systematic classification review program. under
the Information Systems Analysis Staff ISAS of the Directorate of Administration.
The Records Review Branch, E: I was established within ISAS
for this purpose, and, as the program developed, evolved into the Classification
Review Group and the Class if cation Review Division (CRD) under ISAS' successor.,
the O111ce of Information Services. L _j which was signed on 28 June 1978, STAT
to be effective 1. December 1978, called for the systematic classification review
of all permanent records 20 years old or older (except for foreign government
information -- 30 years old). It stipulated that the "transition to systematic
review at 20 years shall be in4)lemented. as rapidly as practicable and shall be
completed. no more than 10 years from the effective date of this order," i.e.,
by December 1988. The order established further that subsequent reviews of
documents enjoying an extension of classification shall be set at no more than
ten-yeas -i-nt.crvats, with. extensions by waiver allowable for specific categories STAT
of documents at the discretion of the Director of the Information Security Oversight
Office (ISOO). Such extensions were soon established, primarily to 20 years.
3. It became apparent almost immediately that a force of this size would be
far from enough to meet the transi Lure period target (December 1.988) set by the
order. A study conducted for the General Accounting Office in January of 1980
Approved For Release 2005/07/112 : CIA-RDP85B00236R000100180015-9
 Approved Fa Release 2005/07/12: CIA-RDP85B00236R000100180015-9
found that the Division, at production rates extant at that time, would require
STAT In
11, with production rates more than doubling without an increase in manpower,
it was still. apparent that the Division would meet less than 30 percent of its
goal. Early in 1982, the problem was restudied, with a better "fix" on the amount
of material to be reviewed. liven with production rates having nearly tripled
without an increase in manpower, the study projected that the program would
accomplish only about a third of its goal. This assumed that the current, higher
production rates could be sustained, and. the full staffing complement II would STAT
be maintained.. It was projected that, at, those levels, the transition goal could
not he reached until the year 2007; otherwise, an effort to meet the December 8
target would. require an infusion of STAT
STAT 'T'hen by 198 , me target s .:r . not having been met,
and work on the backlog thus continuing, the program would be further burdened
by t1ao additional requirements: documents originated. in the late sixties would
become eligible for their initial review, and the ten year re-review period would
commence for documents initially reviewed in 1978 and forward. By 1998, those
documents initially reviewed and marked for a 20-year re-review would be added to
the pile, and so on. Yet with all this effort, the January 1980 study indicated
that only something on the order of six jercent of the material was declassified.
The 1982 study found that, in the six montTis -preceding, about 30 percent of the
documents were being downgraded, with only ti.vo percent being declassified.
Approved For Release 2005/07/12: CIA-RDP85B00236R000100180015-9
 Approved Fw Release 2005/07/12 : CIA-RDP85B00,Z36R000100180015-9
Activities Which Require a Classification Review Function
in Liaison with other Govern;rrc nt Agencies
1., At this writing, the Department of State and the National. Archives
and Records Service (NABS) are commencing a review of the Department's 1950-54
holdings for eventual. accessioning to NARS, which is expected to occupy 25 NABS
personnel and several experienced foreign service officers for the next four
years. The Classification Review Division (CRD) of the Office of Information
Services will be supplying alternating two-man teams of officers who will
participate in the review, initially fu:l.l-time.
2. The 1955-57 series of the Department of State's Foreign Relations of
Ike United States (FRUS) will comprise an estimated 28,000 pages w}riJh tTre
Division will review rn its entirety. The Department is also ill. the process of
reviewing information which will be released as a supplement to the FRUS
collection. This may amount to some 124,000 pages which the Division will review
on a selected basis. The 1958-60 series of FRUS will require a complete review
of some 33,000 pages.
3. CR0 is coordinating with the Presidential Libraries in the review
of material in their possession. The Truman Library, for example, has requested
our assistance in the review of approximate-1.y 50,000 pages of materi_a.l concerning
national security topics, and the Eisenhower library holds approximately 138,000
pages of similar material. The Johnson and Kennedy Libraries are still cataloging
the i_r holdings, but it can be assured that their collections of documents relating
to national security will be even larger and more .sensitive. The Carter collection
is estimated to hold ncar.l.y 1000 cubic feet or approximately 2,000,000 pages of
national security paper.
4. Each week the Department of Defense (DoD) submits several documents
to the Agency which it has turned up in the course of its continuing systematic
classification review program. In addition, the Department's several historical
organizations are moving ahead vigorously with their writing of histories,
especially in covering the conflict in Southeast Asia. The Army Center for
Nlilitary History is preparing 23 volumes on Vietnam, of which CRD has so far
reviewed three. Contracts have been drawn up with several former Republic of
Vietnam generals now in this country to prepare additional volumes written
from their points of view. The other services are also busily writing: at this
moment CBI) is reviewing 600 pages of an Air Force history on interdiction in Laos.
Approved For Release 2005/07/12 : CIA-RDP85B00236R000100180015-9
 u ct,
Approved FaivRelease 2005/07/12: CIA-RDP85B0036R000100180015-9
Toward a limited Customized
--Systcma.ticZeviewrobrain
1. Records housekeeping; relief to the Freedom of Information Act,
Privacy Act, and Mandatory Review programs; and demonstration of a good--faith
effort to release information to the public provide the rationale for mTmain-
taining a systematic classification review program within the Agency, but on a
very modest scale. The problem with the present Executive order is that it
guarantees inefficiency in that its arbitrary review periods apply to all
materials with little cognizance of their widely varying degrees of sensitivity.
/l tailored systematic classification review program, on the other hand, can
recognize these variances and thus respond to the spirit of the new order by
releasing non-sensitive material. while protecting the truly sensitive information,
and can make more efficient use of resources in the process. It makes little
sense to spend man-years in the review and periodic re-review of most DO and
i_1DSFT material that is so sensitive that less than one percent will be declassified.
for many years to come. Review should concentrate instead on --- for example --
25X1 holdings and certain DDT. finished intelligence which offer some relatively
ear.y potential for declassification of material. that is sought by scholars and
researct-hers, and thus produces some reasonable results for the effort expended.
2. To implement this modest program CIRD reviewers would work. through the
Records Management Division and Directorate TPMOs lo expand their program by
including the categorizing of permanent Agency records according to their
releasability and interest to the public. The objective would be, as a part of
management planning, to identify collections to which reviewing manpower would
be most effectively applied. This activity would focus on the records of the
DD I and the DDA with very limited effort expended on DO and DDStT records since
declassifiab.le information in the latter two is so negligible.
3. There is further rationale for "keeping our hand in" and maintaining
some continuity and. expertise within CIA in the business of systematic
class:i_ficat:ion review. Should a change of administration result in one that is
desirous of returning to a stronger effort. to declassify information, we could
find ourselves in short order having to gear up from scratch to reinvent the
wheel. Also, having a program which provides evidence that we have been
maintaining a good-faith position with regard to declassification and release
might save us from the worst of a reimposed and intolerable new "12065."
Approved For Release 2005/07/12 : CIA-RDP85B00236R000100180015-9