AGENCY POLICIES ON PREPUBLICATION REVIEW PROVISIONS OF SECRECY AGREEMENTS

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP89G00720R000600620007-0
• Release Decision: RIFPUB
• Original Classification: K
• Document Page Count: 2
• Document Creation Date: December 22, 2016
• Document Release Date: October 25, 2011
• Sequence Number: 7
• Publication Date: December 1, 1982
• Content Type: REGULATION

Declassified and Approved For Release 2011/10/25: CIA-RDP89GO072OR000600620007-0
AGENCY POLICIES ON PREPUBLICATION REVIEW
PROVISIONS OF SECRECY AGREEMENTS
A. POLICY ON ENFORCEMENT OF SECRECY AGREEMENTS RELATED TO PRE-
PUBLICATION REVIEW
1. Subsequent to the Supreme Court's decision in U.S. v. Snepp, numerous inquiries have
been received concerning the Agency's policy on enforcement of its secrecy agreement. The
purpose of this notice is to set forth information concerning the Agency's policy, for purposes of
assisting persons subject to secrecy agreements to comply in good faith with the requirements
of those agreements.
2. The purpose of the prior review requirement in the secrecy agreement is to determine
whether material contemplated for public disclosure contains classified or classifiable informa-
tion and, if so, to give the Agency an opportunity to prevent the public disclosure of such infor-
mation. Prior review means that written materials are submitted to the Agency before being
circulated at each stage of their development to publishers, reviewers, or to the public. The rea-
son for this prior review requirement is to prevent comparison of the material which would
then reveal which items had been deleted by the Agency. For this reason, post-review of the
materials, i.e., after they have been submitted to the publishers, reviewers, etc., does not
comply with this policy. However, the Agency reserves the right to review any such material
for purposes of taking necessary protective action to mitigate damage caused by disclosure of
classified information it may contain, but such review and action shall be entirely without prej-
udice to the legal rights of the United States Government and the Agency under the secrecy
agreement.
3. Persons bound by the secrecy agreement should understand that the Agency cannot
determine unilaterally what action in court will be taken in the case of a breach of the agree-
ment. The Agency's recommendations in this regard are subject to the decision of the Attorney
General. The Agency Office of General Counsel will be notified in all cases when a known
breach occurs. The expressed or presumed attitude of a person toward the United States
Government or the Agency is not a factor in determining what recommendation may be made
by the Agency to the Department of justice.
4. The authors of material submitted to the Agency are expected to cooperate with and
assist the review process. In particular, they may be called upon to identify any public sources
of information which, in the Agency's judgment, appear to originate from classified sources
and to cite the source when their confirmation of the information would, in the eyes of the
Agency, cause damage. Failure or refusal to identify such public sources by itself may result in
refusal of authorization to publish the information in question.
5. Persons subject to a secrecy agreement are invited at any stage to discuss their plans for
disclosures covered by the agreement. The views of the Agency can only be given by an au-
thorized representative specifically designated for this purpose by the Director in regulation or
otherwise. No one should act in reliance on any position or views expressed by any person other
than such authorized Agency representative.
B. POLICY ON MATERIAL TO BE SUBMITTED FOR PREPUBLICATION REVIEW
1. It is not possible to anticipate each and every question that may arise. It is the policy of
the Agency to respond, as rapidly as possible, to specific inquiries raised by persons subject to
an Agency secrecy agreement as to whether specific materials require submission for review.
Procedures for submission are contained in HR 6-2. Further questions should be referred to the
Publications Review Board. Former employees should address all questions concerning secrecy
agreements to the Office of General Counsel.
2. The Agency considers the prior review requirement to be applicable whenever a
person bound by the secrecy agreement, express or implied, actually has prepared material for
public disclosure which contains any mention of intelligence data or activities or which may be
classified or classifiable pursuant to law or Executive order. The Agency views it to be that
Declassified and Approved For Release 2011/10/25: CIA-RDP89GO072OR000600620007-0
 Declassified and Approved For Release 2011/10/25: CIA-RDP89G00720R000600620007-0
person's duty to submit such material for review in accordance with the secrecy agreement. A
person's obligation under the agreement remains identical whether such a person prepares the
material himself or herself or causes another person, such as a ghost writer, spouse, friend or as-
sociate to prepare the material.
3. The provisions of the secrecy agreement requiring submission of information or
materials for review are not limited to any particular category of materials or methods of dis-
closure. In the view of the Agency, these provisions apply to both oral and written materials.
With respect to written materials, the provisions apply not only to books but to all other forms
of written materials intended for public disclosure, such as (but not limited to) newspaper
columns, magazine articles, letters to the editor, book reviews, pamphlets, and scholarly papers.
Because alleged fictional treatment can be used as a subterfuge to convey factual information,
fiction about the CIA or about intelligence activities is covered by the agreements.
4. Oral statements constitute one of the most difficult areas in application of the secrecy
agreement. The agreement applies to material that the person contemplates disclosing publicly
or actually has prepared for public disclosure. It does not, in the Agency's view, require the
preparation of such material. Thus, a person bound by the agreement is not in breach of the
agreement if that person participates extemporaneously and without prior preparation in an
oral expression of information (e.g., news interview, panel discussions, extemporaneous speech)
and does not submit material for review in advance. This does not, of course, exempt such per-
son from liability for any unauthorized disclosure of classified or classifiable information that
may occur in the course of such extemporaneous oral expression.
5. The requirement under the secrecy agreement is only to submit materials on the
subject matter of intelligence or the Agency and its activities or material which may be based
upon information classified or classifiable pursuant to law or Executive order. Current
employees must submit information which reasonably could be expected to impair the
employee's performance of duties or interfere with the authorized functions of the Central In-
telligence Agency, including information which could have an impact on foreign relations. The
prepublication review requirement does not apply to topics that are totally unrelated to
intelligence matters, such as a manuscript of a cookbook, a treatise on gardening, or writings on
domestic political matters. Nor does the prepublication review requirement extend to
discussion of foreign relations not purporting to contain or be based upon intelligence
information.
6. Material that consists solely of personal views, opinions, or judgments on matters of
public concern and does not contain or purport to contain any mention of intelligence data or
activities or contain or purport to contain data which may be based upon information classified
or classifiable pursuant to law or Executive order is not subject to the prepublication review re-
quirement. For example, a person bound by the secrecy agreement is free, without prior
review, to submit testimony to the Congress or make public speeches or publish articles on such
topics as proposed legislation as long as the material prepared by such person does not directly
or by implication constitute a statement of an informational nature about intelligence activities
or substantive intelligence information, or in the case of current employees, impair the
employee's performance or the authorized function of the Central Intelligence Agency,
including information which could have an impact on foreign relations. It should be obvious
that in some circumstances the expression of what purports to be an opinion may in fact convey
information subject to prior review under the secrecy agreement. For example, a former
intelligence analyst's opinion that the U.S. can or cannot verify SALT compliance is an implied
statement of fact about Agency activities and substantive intelligence information, and would
be subject to prior review. This does not mean that such a statement necessarily would be clas-
sified and require deletion, but merely that the subject matter required review by the Agency
before publication. A discussion of the desirability of the SALT treaty based on analysis of its
provisions and without discussion of intelligence information or activities would not. It should
be clear that descriptions of an employee's Agency activities can be expected always to require
prior review under these principles. At the other extreme, it is clear that a person subject to the
secrecy agreement, who writes or speaks about areas of national policy from the perspective of
an observer outside the Government and without purporting to rely on classified or classifiable
information, intelligence information, or information on intelligence activities, does not have to
submit such materials for prior review. While some "gray areas" may exist, persons subject to
the secrecy agreement are expected to err on the side of voluntary prepublication review in
keeping with the spirit and intent of the agreement.
Declassified and Approved For Release 2011/10/25: CIA-RDP89G00720R000600620007-0