LETTER TO JOSEPH W. LAMBERT FROM BARRY KAMINSKY RE COMMENT ON THE CIA'S PROPOSED REVISION OF 32 CFR & 1900

• Document Type: FOIA
• Collection: FOIA Collection
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): 0005633807
• Release Decision: RIPPUB
• Original Classification: U
• Document Page Count: 1
• Document Creation Date: June 24, 2015
• Document Release Date: March 22, 2011
• Case Number: F-2011-00380
• Publication Date: April 22, 2008

Lai`~'i '' ~8II1Y1^~~
(b)(6)
April 22, 2008
Joseph W. Lambert
Director of Information Management Services
Central Intelligence Agency
Washington, DC 20505
Dear Mr. Lambert:
This is a comment on the CIA's proposed revision of 32 CFR ?1900.11 Preliminary Information.
The last sentence of 32 CFR ? 1900.11 currently reads:
"Requests and appeals on requests, referrals, or coordinations received from members of
the public who owe outstanding fees for information services at this or other federal
agencies will not be accepted and action on all pending requests shall be terminated in
such circumstances."
The CIA's proposed revision would change it to:
"CIA will not accept a request for information under the FOIA or an appeal of an adverse
determination submitted by a member of the public who owes outstanding fees for
information services at this or other federal agencies and will terminate the processing of
any pending requests submitted by such persons to the CIA or to another agency."
I suggest a less restrictive rule that uses some the wording of 5 U.S.C. ?552 (a)(4)(A)(v), which
addresses similar concerns about fees. Rather than "outstanding fees" being the condition for
"termination," I suggest that "failure to pay fees in a timely fashion or a fee exceeding $250" be
the condition for "suspension." A fee could be interpreted as outstanding as soon as an agency
mails the requested documents, before the requester even receives them or the bill. Such a bill,
even if recently received, shouldn't warrant the complete termination of another FOIA request.
It should be clarified whether processing of appeals would be terminated. The handling of new
requests and new appeals are each covered by the proposed revision, but the handling of pending
appeals isn't mentioned while the handling of pending requests is.
Sincerely,
APPROVED FOR
RELEASES DATE:
07-Mar-2011