STATEMENT OF JOHN H. WRIGHT OF THE CENTRAL INTELLIGENCE AGENCY BEFORE THE SUBCOMMITTEE ON TECHNOLOGY AND THE LAW OF THE COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY UNITED STATES SENATE

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP91B00389R000500190019-7
• Release Decision: RIPPUB
• Original Classification: K
• Document Page Count: 20
• Document Creation Date: December 23, 2016
• Document Release Date: January 3, 2013
• Sequence Number: 19
• Publication Date: August 2, 1988
• Content Type: MISC

Declassified in Part- Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/01/03: CIA-RDP91B00389R000500190019-7
STATEMENT OF
JOHN H. WRIGHT
OF THE
CENTRAL INTELLIGENCE AGENCY
BEFORE THE
SUBCOMMITTEE ON TECHNOLOGY AND THE LAW
OF THE
COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY
UNITED STATES SENATE
2 AUGUST 1988
Declassified in Part- Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/01/03: CIA-RDP91B00389R000500190019-7
Declassified in Part- Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/01/03: CIA-RDP91B00389R000500190019-7
MR. CHAIRMAN, AND MEMBERS OF THE SUBCOMMITTEE ON TECHNOLOGY
AND THE LAW, I AM PLEASED TO APPEAR HERE TODAY TO OUTLINE FOR
YOU SOME OF CIA's RECENT EXPERIENCES AND ACHIEVEMENTS IN
RESPONDING TO FOIA REQUESTS FROM THE PUBLIC AND TO DESCRIBE THE
STEPS WE HAVE TAKEN IN CIA TO IMPLEMENT THE PROVISIONS OF THE
FOIA REFORM ACT OF 1986. I SERVE AS INFORMATION AND PRIVACY
COORDINATOR FOR CIA AND AM RESPONSIBLE FOR PROCESSING REQUESTS
FOR INFORMATION SUBMITTED NOT ONLY UNDER THE FOIA BUT ALSO
UNDER THE PRIVACY ACT AND THE MANDATORY DECLASSIFICATION REVIEW
PROVISIONS OF EXECUTIVE ORDER 12356 AS WELL. I WOULD FIRST
LIKE TO DESCRIBE SOME OF THE UNIQUE ASPECTS OF OUR PROGRAM,
SOME OF THE SPECIAL PROBLEMS WE FACE IN CARRYING OUT OUR
RESPONSIBILITIES UNDER THE ACTS, AND CONCLUDE BY DISCUSSING THE
IMPACT OF RECENT LEGISLATION, INCLUDING THE REFORM ACT, ON THE
OVERALL CONDUCT OF OUR PROGRAM.
THE CIA CURRENTLY EXPENDS APPROXIMATELY 100 MAN-YEARS
ANNUALLY IN RESPONDING TO INFORMATION REQUESTS SUBMITTED BY THE
PUBLIC. ABOUT HALF OF THE INFORMATION REQUESTS RECEIVED ARE
SUBMITTED UNDER THE FOIA; THE REMAINING HALF OF THE REQUESTS
RECEIVED ARE PRIVACY ACT AND MANDATORY DECLASSIFICATION REVIEW
REQUESTS. WE FACE SPECIAL DIFFICULTIES IN RESPONDING TO
INFORMATION REQUESTS BECAUSE OF THE NATURE AND MISSION OF OUR
ORGANIZATION. THE FIRST DIFFICULTY IS THAT THE RECORDS SYSTEMS
WHICH WE MUST SEARCH IN RESPONSE TO INFORMATION REQUESTS ARE
DECENTRALIZED AND HIGHLY DISSIMILAR IN TERMS OF HOW THEY CAN BE
2
Declassified in Part- Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/01/03: CIA-RDP91B00389R000500190019-7
Declassified in Part- Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/01/03: CIA-RDP91B00389R000500190019-7
SEARCHED AND THE PURPOSE FOR WHICH THEY WERE INITIALLY
ESTABLISHED. FURTHER, THE RECORDS SYSTEMS OF THE CIA ARE
DELIBERATELY COMPARTMENTED FOR REASONS OF NATIONAL SECURITY,
WITH ACCESS CONTROLLED ON A STRICTLY NEED-TO-KNOW BASIS. WHEN
RECORDS POTENTIALLY RESPONSIVE TO INFORMATION REQUESTS FROM THE
PUBLIC ARE LOCATED IN THE RECORDS SYSTEMS, THEY MUST BE
PAINSTAKINGLY REVIEWED BY SENIOR INTELLIGENCE OFFICERS ON A
LINE-BY-LINE BASIS BECAUSE OF THE HIGHLY SENSITIVE NATURE OF
THE INFORMATION THEY CONTAIN. IN MANY INSTANCES, ADDITIONAL
REVIEWS MUST BE CONDUCTED BY OTHER CIA COMPONENTS IN ORDER TO
INSURE THAT ALL INFORMATION REQUIRING CONTINUED PROTECTION IS
IDENTIFIED. THE POINT I WISH TO MAKE IS THAT THE RECORDS
REVIEW PROCESS IN CIA IS LABORIOUS, TIME CONSUMING, AND
EXPENSIVE. THE OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS IN THE REVIEW OF
RECORDS TO DETERMINE WHETHER OR NOT THEY ARE RELEASABLE ARE THE
STATUTORY REQUIREMENT LEVIED ON THE DIRECTOR OF CENTRAL
INTELLIGENCE TO PROTECT INTELLIGENCE SOURCES AND METHODS FROM
UNAUTHORIZED DISCLOSURE AND HIS MANDATE UNDER THE EXECUTIVE
ORDER TO PROTECT CLASSIFIED INFORMATION. THESE MANDATES ARE
TAKEN VERY SERIOUSLY.
DESPITE THE INHERENT DIFFICULTY CIA FACES IN RESPONDING TO
INFORMATION REQUESTS FROM THE PUBLIC, WE HAVE MADE GREAT
STRIDES IN PROCESSING REQUESTS. OUR BACKLOG OF OPEN CASES FOR
YEARS WAS MEASURED IN TERMS OF THOUSANDS OF OPEN CASES. THE
BACKLOG STOOD AT
3,146 OP EN CASES AT THE END OF 1983, BUT HAD
Declassified in Part- Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/01/03: CIA-RDP91B00389R000500190019-7
Declassified in Part- Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/01/03: CIA-RDP91B00389R000500190019-7
BEEN REDUCED TO 1,454 OPEN CASES BY THE END OF 1987 -- A
REDUCTION OF WELL OVER 50 PERCENT. THE BACKLOG TODAY IS EVEN
LOWER AND STANDS AT 1390 OPEN CASES.
EQUALLY DRAMATIC HAS BEEN OUR REDUCTION IN RESPONSE TIME TO
PROCESS CASES, WHICH AVERAGED ABOUT 15 MONTHS IN 1985, BUT ONLY
ABOUT ONE AND ONE-HALF MONTHS IN 1987. THESE IMPROVEMENTS IN
PROCESSING PERFORMANCE WERE ACHIEVED DESPITE A 35% INCREASE IN
THE VOLUME OF INCOMING REQUESTS OVER THE 1983-1987 TIME FRAME.
THE PRINCIPAL FACTOR RESPONSIBLE FOR OUR IMPROVED
PROCESSING PERFORMANCE WAS THE ENACTMENT OF THE CIA INFORMATION
ACT OF 1984, WHICH REMOVED FROM THE SEARCH, REVIEW AND
DISCLOSURE REQUIREMENTS OF THE FOIA CERTAIN SENSITIVE CIA
OPERATIONAL FILES. WE HAD PREVIOUSLY EXPENDED SIGNIFICANT
RESOURCES IN SEARCHING FOR AND REVIEWING RECORDS CONTAINED IN
THESE FILES ONLY TO FIND THAT THE LAW EXEMPTED MOST OF THE
INFORMATION FROM DISCLOSURE ANYWAY. THE CIA INFORMATION ACT
HAS CLEARLY ACHIEVED ITS PURPOSE OF ELIMINATING THIS
UNPRODUCTIVE EXPENDITURE OF RESOURCES, THUS ENABLING THE CIA TO
PROCESS REQUESTS FASTER AND MORE EFFICIENTLY WITH ESSENTIALLY
NO REDUCTION IN THE AMOUNT OF INFORMATION ULTIMATELY DISCLOSED
TO THE PUBLIC. IN A LETTER TO FORMER DIRECTOR CASEY, DATED 22
OCTOBER 1986, CONGRESSMAN ENGLISH, CHAIRMAN OF THE SUBCOMMITTEE
ON GOVERNMENT INFORMATION, JUSTICE AND AGRICULTURE STATED: "I
CONGRATULATE YOU AND THE MEMBERS OF OF THE CENTRAL INTELLIGENCE
4
Declassified in Part- Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/01/03: CIA-RDP91B00389R000500190019-7
Declassified in Part- Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/01/03: CIA-RDP91B00389R000500190019-7
AGENCY'S FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT STAFF FOR THE PROGRESS
REFLECTED IN THE FOURTH AND FINAL REPORT FILED UNDER THE
REQUIREMENTS OF THE CIA INFORMATION ACT OF 1984. THE
REDUCTIONS THAT HAVE BEEN ACHIEVED IN BOTH THE BACKLOG OF FOIA
REQUESTS AND IN THE AVERAGE RESPONSE TIME ARE SIZEABLE."
CONGRESSMAN ENGLISH CONCLUDES BY STATING: "THE IMPROVEMENTS
MADE TO DATE FULFILL THE PROMISES MADE AT THE TIME THE ORIGINAL
LEGISLATION WAS PASSED."
WE UNDERSTAND THAT YOUR PRIMARY INTEREST HERE TODAY IS TO
FOCUS ON IMPLEMENTATION OF THE PROVISIONS OF THE FOIA REFORM
ACT OF 1986, 'ESPECIALLY THOSE PORTIONS OF THE ACT DEALING WITH
THE DETERMINATIONS OF REQUESTERS' FEE STATUS. ALTHOUGH WE HAVE
ATTEMPTED TO BE AS COMPREHENSIVE AS POSSIBLE IN RESPONDING TO
THE ITEMS CONTAINED IN YOUR LETTER OF 30 JUNE 1988 -- WHICH WAS
RECEIVED IN MY OFFICE ON 19 JULY -- OUR FOIA LOGGING AND
TRACKING SYSTEM IS NOT STRUCTURED TO ENABLE U.S TO ANSWER
CERTAIN OF THE QUESTIONS YOU HAVE POSED. FURTHER, WE HAVE NOT
HAD SUFFICIENT EXPERIENCE WITH THE REFORM ACT TO PROVIDE
DEFINITIVE ANSWERS TO OTHERS. NEVERTHELESS, THERE ARE SEVERAL
GENERAL OBSERVATIONS THAT WE CAN MAKE CONCERNING THE IMPACT OF
THE FEE PROVISIONS AND I AM CONFIDENT THAT THESE OBSERVATIONS
WILL BE BORNE OUT AS OUR DATA BASE GROWS.
THE FIRST GENERAL OBSERVATION I WISH TO MAKE IS THAT THE
PERCENTAGE OF FOIA REQUESTERS OF CIA RECORDS WHO ARE ASSESSED
5
Declassified in Part- Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/01/03: CIA-RDP91B00389R000500190019-7
Declassified in Part- Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/01/03: CIA-RDP91B00389R000500190019-7
FEES WILL PROBABLY DECREASE AS A RESULT OF THE PASSAGE OF THE
REFORM ACT. MOST OF THE REQUESTS RECEIVED ARE SUFFICIENTLY
WELL DEFINED AND SPECIFICALLY FOCUSED SO AS TO BE SERVICEABLE
WITHIN THE 100 FREE PAGES OF RELEASABLE MATERIAL AND TWO HOURS
OF FREE SEARCH TIME. FURTHER, WE BELIEVE THAT THE AMOUNT OF
FEES ASSESSED THOSE REQUESTERS WHO DO NOT FALL WITHIN THESE
PARAMENTERS WILL BE LESS THAN THE AVERAGE AMOUNT PREVIOUSLY
COLLECTED PER REQUESTER. THESE OBSERVATIONS ARE BASED ON MY
EXPERIENCE AS COORDINATOR IN PERSONALLY REVIEWING THE CASE
FILES PRIOR TO SIGNING THE FINAL RESPONSE LETTERS TO THE
REQUESTERS.
IN SUM, WE BELIEVE THAT THE PROVISIONS OF THE FOIA REFORM
ACT STRIKE A REASONABLE BALANCE BETWEEN THE INTERESTS OF THE
PUBLIC IN ACCESS TO GOVERNMENT RECORDS AND THE RESPONSIBILITY
OF THE GOVERNMENT TO RECOVER USER COSTS. IN PARTICULAR, WE
BELIEVE THAT THE FEE PROVISIONS FOR COMMERCIAL REQUESTERS
PROPERLY PERMIT THE OPPORTUNITY TO COLLECT ACTUAL PROCESSING
COSTS FROM. THOSE REQUESTERS WHO SERVE TO BENEFIT COMMERCIALLY
FROM DISCLOSURES MADE TO THEM UNDER THE FOIA BY THE GOVERNMENT
AT TAXPAYERS' EXPENSE. OUR EXPERIENCE TO DATE, HOWEVER, IS
THAT VERY FEW OF OUR REQUESTERS MUST BE PLACED IN THE
COMMERCIAL CATEGORY. AND. NOTABLY, MOST HAVE ACCEPTED THIS
DETERMINATION.
Declassified in Part- Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/01/03: CIA-RDP91B00389R000500190019-7
I a
Declassified in Part- Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/01/03: CIA-RDP91B00389R000500190019-7
AN ADDITIONAL FACT THAT WE WISH TO MAKE THE SUBCOMMITTEE
AWARE OF IS THAT THE CIA FEE COLLECTIONS OVER THE YEARS HAVE
BEEN VERY SMALL IN RELATION TO THE VOLUME OF RECORDS DISCLOSED
AND, IF EXPRESSED AS A PERCENTAGE OF FOIA PROGRAM OPERATING
COSTS, AMOUNT TO ABOUT ONE HALF CENT COLLECTED FOR EVERY DOLLAR
EXPENDED. THE NEW FEE PROVISIONS SPECIFIED BY THE REFORM ACT
HAVE BEEN INTERPRETED IN ACCORDANCE WITH OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT
AND BUDGET AND DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE GUIDANCE AND ARE NOW
SPECIFIED IN OUR REGULATIONS PROMULGATED IN THE CODE OF FEDERAL
REGULATIONS AT TITLE 32, PART 1900.
THIS CONCLUDES MY STATEMENT AND I SHALL BE PLEASED TO
ANSWER TO THE BEST OF MY ABILITY ANY QUESTIONS THAT MEMBERS OF
THE SUBCOMMITTEE MIGHT HAVE AT THIS TIME.
Declassified in Part- Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/01/03: CIA-RDP91B00389R000500190019-7
' Declassified in Part- Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/01/03: CIA-RDP91B00389R000500190019-7
Section A: "FEES ASSESSED"
Note: Questions (1) through (11) below ask for separate data from two
time frames: (1) 1 January through 25 April 1987, and
(2) 26 April through 31 December 1987.
QUESTION
A(1) "How many FOIA requests were granted in whole or in part in 1987?"
ANSWER
During 1987, a total of 291 FOIA requests were granted in whole, and
a total of 294 FOIA requests were granted in part. During the time
frame 1 January through 25 April 1987, 102 FOIA requests were granted in
whole, and 105 FOIA requests were granted in part. During the time
frame 26 April through 31 Qecember 1987, 189 FOIA requests were granted
in whole, and 189 FOIA requests were granted in part.
QUESTIONS
A(2) "For how many of these requests were fees assessed according to the
'commercial use' standard in clause (ii)(I)? List all requesters
assessed fees under this clause."
A(3) "For how many of these requests were fees assessed according to the
'non-commercial use' standard, (ii)(II)? List all requesters assessed
fees under this clause."
A(4) "For how many of these requests were fees assessed according to the
'all other' standard, (ii)(III)? List all requesters assessed fees
under this clause."
A(5) "For how many of these requests were fees waived under the 'public
interest' standard, (iii)? List all requesters granted waivers under
this subparagraph."
A(6) "For how many of these requests were fee waivers denied, in whole or
in part? List all requesters dented fee waivers under this
subparagraph."
A(7) "How many requests were denied because of refusal to pay fees in
accordance with subparagraph (v)? For each request so denied, indicate
the nature of each request and the reason for each denial."
A(8) "How many requests were denied because of the requester's refusal to
pay fees for reasons other than those specified in subparagraph (v)?
Please describe each request so denied."
Declassified in Part- Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/01/03: CIA-RDP91B00389R000500190019-7
Declassified in Part- Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/01/03: CIA-RDP91B00389R000500190019-7
ANSWER
The computerized data base, in which records of FOIA requests to this
agency are maintained, was designed and put in place in 1979-80 in order
to facilitate (1) the annual reporting requirements to Congress as
established by the FOIA as amended in 1974 by Public Law 93-502, and
(2) the logging, tracking, and retrieval of basic information necessary
for effective handling of the increased volume of FOIA actions which
occurred following that amendment.
That data base does not include, nor will it accommodate, additional
categories of information such as those which came into existence when
the FOIA was again amended in 1986 by Public Law 99-570, which are not
part of the annual reporting requirements to Congress, or which are or
were not necessary to effective handling of FOIA requests prior to the
1986 amendment to the FOIA.
In order to answer fee-related questions (2) through (8) above, a
file-by-file manual review,of approximately 1044 FOIA requests received
in 1987, to which these questions are applicable, would have to be
conducted. Of these, 303 requests were received during the time frame
1 January through 25 April 1987; 741 requests were received during the
time frame 26 April through 31 December 1987. These 1044 requests
include all FOIA requests made directly to this agency and received in
1987; specifically excluded are FOIA actions involving referrals from
other agencies, since fee determinations do not apply to the latter
category of incoming requests. We estimate that such a manual review
would require an average expenditure of approximately one hour of
professional time per file, or a total expenditure of 1044 professional
manhours.
This same lack of readily available data also applies to a number of
the remaining questions. For clarity and brevity, our responses to
these questions will hereinafter be phrased: "No data are readily
available; answer would require file-by-file review." As appropriate,
this statement will be accompanied by a statement designating whether
such a manual review would include only FOIA requests received in 1987,
only FOIA requests responded to in 1987, or both.
QUESTION
A(9) "What is the agency's policy on processing FOIA requests when the
initial fee determination has been disputed?"
ANSWER
We understand "initial fee determination" to mean the initial
determination made with respect to (1) whether or not a fee waiver or
reduction is granted or not granted, and (2) absent a fee waiver, the
2
Declassified in Part- Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/01/03: CIA-RDP91B00389R000500190019-7
Declassified in Part- Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/01/03: CIA-RDP91B00389R000500190019-7
category ("commercial use, non?commercial use, all other") in which a
particular requester/request is placed for fee purposes.
As set forth in 32 CFR Part 1900.25(d), " ... when anticipated
charges will amount to more than $25 and the requester has not indicated
his willingness to pay applicable fees, the processing of the request
shall be suspended until the requester indicates his willingness to
pay."
With respect to denials of requests for fee waivers or reductions
which are disputed by the requester, CIA regulations, 32 CFR Part
1900.25(c), provide that the requester may appeal such denial by writing
to the Chairman of the Information Review Committee, via the
Coordinator. If appropriate, the requester is invited to supply
additional information pertinent to the fee waiver or reduction issue
prior to consideration of such a fee appeal.
With respect to fee categorizations which are disputed by the
requester, the requester may appeal such determinations, and, as
appropriate, is invited to supply any additional information germain to
established criteria for fee categorization and to any reconsideration
of the category in which his particular request has been placed.
QUESTION
A(10) "How many FOIA requesters submitted more than ten separate FOIA
requests to your agency during 1987? For each such requester, please
provide the total number of FOIA requests made by that requester, and
the total amount of any fees waived or fee reductions extended to that
requester."
ANSWER
During 1987, more than ten FOIA requests were received directly from
seven individuals or were referred from other agencies on behalf of
those individuals. A listing of these requesters follows:
1 January through 25 April 1987:
--- 12 requests
-- 21 requests
26 April through 31 December 1987:
30 requests
13 requests
18 requests
22 requests
21 requests
3
STAT
STAT
Declassified in Part- Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/01/03: CIA-RDP91B00389R000500190019-7
Declassified in Part- Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/01/03: CIA-RDP91B00389R000500190019-7
As the significance of "more than ten" data about requests made by
individuals acting on their own behalf is worthy of note, so too is the
significance of "moce than ten" data about requests made by individuals
acting on behalf of particular organizations. In point of fact, the
impact of multiple requests from individuals acting on behalf of
organizations has been far greater than the impact of multiple requests
made by individuals acting on their own behalf. During 1987, a total of
212 such requests were made on behalf of just four organizations,
consisting of 141 requests from the National Security Archive, 41
requests from the National Resources Defense Council, 19 requests on
from the Center for Strategic and International Studies, and 11 requests
from the Washington Post. A listing of the organizations and numbers of
requests received follows:
1 January through 25 April 1987:
National Security Archive 34 requests
Center for Strategic and International Studies 19 requests
26 April through 31 Dec&ber 1987:
National Security Archive 106 requests
National Resources Defense Council 41 requests
Washington Post 11 requests
No data are readily available on any fee waivers or reductions which
may have been granted; answer would require a file-by-file review of the
above-referenced requests received in 1987.
QUESTION
A(11) "Please provide the best available information on the total amount of
fees waived by your agency and the total amount of fee reductions during
1987."
ANSWER
No data are readily available; answer would require a file-by-file
review of all requests received in 1987.
Section B: "DOCUMENT AVAILABILITY"
QUESTION
B(1) "Does your office maintain a public list of records that previously
have been disclosed under FOIA?"
4
Declassified in Part- Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/01/03: CIA-RDP91B00389R000500190019-7
Declassified in Part- Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/01/03: CIA-RDP91B00389R000500190019-7
ANSWER
This agcncy does maintain a computerized listing of records
previously disclosed under FOIA. Direct electronic access to this
listing by the public is precluded by national security requirements.
The data base is housed in a classified CIA mainframe system; access to
this system can only be granted to individuals possessing a Top Secret
clearance, and password access to elements of this system is determined
strictly on a need?to?know basis. Indirect access, however, in the form
of a printed listing of records pertinent to the requester's particular
topic or topics of interest, can be made available to requesters. From
such a listing, requesters may order documents of their choosing by
paying applicable reproduction fees. On one occasion, a request was
made to this agency for "access to a copy of the current list/index of
your 'previously processed' records;" this listing was produced and,
with the agreement of the requester, reproduction costs in the amount of
$500 were charged and paid.
QUESTION
B(2) "How many, if any, requests, were not fulfilled because the requested
record was not in the possession of the agency?"
ANSWER
We understand this question to be concerned with requests for
documents over which this agency has determination authority but which
have been given over to another agency as permanent custodian thereof.
Specifically, we refer to documents from forerunner and predecessor
organizations of this agency, such as the Office of Strategic ServiCes
(OSS), which have been accessioned by the National Archives and Records
Administration (NARA).
With respect to the number of requests for OSS documents which have
been referred to NARA: No data are readily available; answer would
require a file?by?file review of all requests received in 1987.
QUESTION
8(3) "How many, if any, requests were not fulfilled because no responsive
documents were found?"
ANSWER
We understand that this question asks how many FOIA requests were
received in 1987, for which no responsive records were located. In
1987, a total of 119 responses were sent to FOIA requesters advising
them that no records responsive to their requests had been located.
5
Declassified in Part- Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/01/03: CIA-RDP91B00389R000500190019-7
Declassified in Part- Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/01/03: CIA-RDP91B00389R000500190019-7
QUESTION
6(4) "How many, if any, requests were not fulfilled because responsive
documents had been altered?"
ANSWER
None.
We are genuinely puzzled by this question. It appears to be based on
a premise that requests might not be fulfilled because documents,
although initially identified as responsive, are subsequently determined
to be nonresponsive as a result of "altering" the documents.
The management of agency records is carried out in accordance with
records control schedules approved by the National Archives and Records
Administration (NARA); these schedules prohibit the altering of official
records.
QUESTION
6(5) "How many, if any, requests were not fulfilled because responsive
documents had been destroyed?"
ANSWER
No data are available. Our computerized data base contains no
information pertinent to this question. The paper files of our requests
contain only the results of searches which are conducted for documents
in existence as of the acceptance of a particular request. Any
destruction of records would be carried out in strict accordance with
our NARA-approved records control schedules.
QUESTION
6(6) "How many, if any, requests are not fulfilled initially because of
insufficient specificity?"
ANSWER
We understand that this question pertains to requests which lack
adequate information, or which otherwise fail to describe the records
sought in a manner adequate for effective and reasonable search.
No data are readily available; answer would require a file-by-file
review of all requests received in 1987.
6
Declassified in Part- Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/01/03: CIA-RDP91B00389R000500190019-7
Declassified in Part- Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/01/03: CIA-RDP91B00389R000500190019-7
We would note, however, that when a request lacks "sufficient
specificity," we respond to the requester by asking him to supply
whatever additional information is necessary in order to conduct an
effective and reasonable search.
QUESTIONS
B(6)(a) "How many of these requests were resubmitted after modification?"
B(6)(b) "How many of these modified requests were subsequently granted?"
ANSWERS
No data are readily available; answers would require a file?by?file
review of all FOIA requests received and all requests granted in 1987.
QUESTION
B(6)(c) "Does the agency assist4requesters in reformulating their requests
in those instances in which it has determined that the original request
was not specific enough?"
ANSWER
32 CFR 1900.31(c)(2) states that if a requester has "failed to
reasonably describe the records of interest, [the Coordinator] shall so
inform the originator of the communication promptly, in writing, and he
may offer to assist the originator in revising and perfecting the
description of the records of interest." This statement reflects
current practice.
Section C: "EXPEDITION"
QUESTION
C(1) "Does the agency have any procedure for expediting FOIA requests? If
so, what factors are considered?"
ANSWER
Yes, this agency does have procedures for expediting FOIA requests.
In accordance with guidelines issued by the Department of Justice,
primary considerations include demonstrable evidence that an
individual's life or personal safety would be jeopardized by the failure
to process a request immediately, or that substantial due process rights
of the requester would be impaired by the failure to immediately process
information which is not otherwise available.
7
Declassified in Part- Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/01/03: CIA-RDP91B00389R000500190019-7
Declassified in Part- Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/01/03: CIA-RDP91B00389R000500190019-7
The factors considered include establishment of (a) the existence of
a genuine need for the material requested, (b) the necessity for
ulgency, and (c) the willingness by the requester to limit the scope of
the request in a manner to facilitate processing.
QUESTION
C(2) "How does a determination to expedite a FOIA request change the
processing?"
ANSWER
As soon as an FOIA request has been granted expedited processing, the
request is appropriately "flagged" for priority handling. Consideration
of the request moves ahead of ongoing actions on requests received at
earlier dates, and continues on a priority basis until all actions have
been completed.
QUESTION
C(3) "How many requests were granted under the expedited procedure in
1987?"
ANSWER
No data are readily available; answer would require file-by-file
review of all FOIA requests received in 1987.
SECTION D: "STAFFING"
QUESTIONS
D(1) "How many professional staff members were employed in the FOIA office
in 1987? How many were full-time? How many were part-time?"
D(2) "How many professional staff vacancies occurred in 1987? What was
the average period of time required to fill these positions?"
D(3) "What was the average period of employment for professional staff
members in the FOIA office, as of December 31, 1987?"
D(4) "How many support staff members were employed in the FOIA office in
19871 How many were full-time? How many were part-time?"
D(5) "How many support staff vacancies occurred in 1987? What was the
average period of time required to fill these positions?"
8
Declassified in Part- Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/01/03: CIA-RDP91B00389R000500190019-7
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/01/03 : CIA-RDP91B00389R000500190019-7
0(6) "What was the average period of employment for support staff members
in the FOIA office, as of December 31, 1987?"
ANSWER
This agency's records of personnel expenditures dedicated to requests
made pursuant to the FOIA, Privacy Act, and mandatory classification
review are maintained primarily in terms of employee hours and not in
numbers of personnel. During 1987, a total of 170,436 employee hours
were expended on the processing of FOIA, Privacy Act, and mandatory
classification review requests. On requests made solely pursuant to the
FOIA, a total of 105,469 employee hours were expended in 1987,
consisting of 77,857 professional hours and 27,612 support staff hours.
We do not currently maintain statistics relating to numbers of
personnel engaged in FOIA-related duties because it has very limited
significance or meaning in terms of our overall processing of FOIA
requests. Specifically, many personnel, whose primary responsibilities
are in matters other than FOIA, are called upon from time to time, and
for varying periods of time:, because their particular expertise is
required to source and evaluate sensitive or particular aspects of
information contained in specific documents undergoing FOIA review.
From our final Congressional report on performance under the CIA
Information Act, we can advise that 115 Agency employees were primarily
or entirely tasked with processing FOIA, Privacy Act, and mandatory
classification requests in 1986. Of these, 74 were full-time staff, 18
were part-time staff, and 23 were retired annuitants working two or more
days per week.
0
Section E: "ELECTRONIC RECORDS"
QUESTION
E(1) "How many FOIA requests were for information maintained by your
agency in an electronic format, e.g. magnetic tape, magnetic disk,
optical disk, or similar non-paper record system?"
ANSWER
No precise data are available; precise data would require a
file-by-file review of all requests received in 1987. Based solely on
personal recall, however, there have been very few requests for
electronic as well as any other type of "non-paper" records.
(a) Two requesters asked for a copy of a film entitled "Pilots in
Pajamas." The requesters were offered a choice of the record in film
Declassified in Part- Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/01/03: CIA-RDP91B00389R000500190019-7
Declassified in Part- Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/01/03: CIA-RDP91B00389R000500190019-7
format (at actual reproduction cost of $1900), or in VHS video format
(at actual reproduction cost of $200); both ordered and received the
VHS video format.
(b) One other requester asked for tapes of broadcasts made from
Hanoi during the Vietnam War, and was advised that the tapes in
question are actually "dictabelts" for which the agency lacks extant
technology necessary for making a copy. The requester then asked if
he could try to make copies himself; we replied in the affirmative,
stating that an appointment for access would be arranged at his
convenience. To date, we have heard nothing further from the
requester.
(c) Another requester asked for copies of videotapes, photographs,
"or any other material" showing the "captivity, torture,
interrogation and imprisonment of William F. Buckley." Under the
provisions of the FOIA and the CIA Information Act, the requester was
advised that no responsive records had been located.
(d) Finally, one requester, who had received a paper copy in
response to his request for a "copy" of an index to previously
released documents, subsequently asked for a copy of the index on
magnetic tape. Resolution of this matter is presently before the
courts.
QUESTION
E(2) "How many requests for records maintained by the agency in an
electronic format were denied because (a) the agency determined that the
request was not a "record" under the FOIA, (b) the request would cause
an undue burden for the agency, or (c) for some other reason? In each
instance, describe the nature of the request, the format in which the
information is stored, and a copy of the agency determination or
notice."
ANSWER
The medium of a document -- be it paper, tape, disk, film, or other --
does not affect the determination as to whether it is a record for
purposes of the FOIA or the Federal Records Act. Thus, no requests have
been denied because the information sought was in electronic format.
With respect to the denial of requests because they did not seek
"agency records" under the FOIA, data are not available. However, from
recall, the request referred to in E(1)(d) above is relevant. There,
the requester initially asked for a "copy" of the index; he was
initially advised (copy of response attached) that his request for the
index did not meet the definition of a record as defined in our
regulations, 32 CFR ?1900.3(g)(1). This request asked for an "index;"
an index is a finding device, not a record. The definition of a record
is set forth in 44 USC ?3301, "Definition of records," which states:
10
Declassified in Part- Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/01/03: CIA-RDP91B00389R000500190019-7
Declassified in Part- Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/01/03: CIA-RDP91B00389R000500190019-7
"As used in this chapter, 'records' includes all books, papers,
maps, photographs, or other documentary materials, regardless of
physical form or characteristics, made or received by an agency of
the United States Government under Federal law or in connection with
the transaction of public business and preserved or appropriate for
preservation by that agency or its legitimate successor as evidence
of the organization, functions, policies, decisions, procedures,
operations, or other activities of the Government or because of the
informational value of the data in them. Library and museum material
made or acquired solely for reference or exhibition purposes, extra
copies of documents preserved only for convenience of reference, and
stocks of publications and of processed documents are not included."
This requester's subsequent interest in obtaining the index in
magnetic form is presently before the courts.
No requests for records maintained in electronic format were denied
because of "undue burden," or "some other reason."
QUESTION
E(3) "How many requests were made for records to be provided in a
particular electronic format, e.g. magnetic tape? In each instance, was
the information released in the format requested? How was each
determination made? How is the determination made if the record exists
only in an electronic format?"
ANSWER
No data available; from recall, only one such request, the request
referred to in E(1)(d) above. Initially, the request was denied because
the information sought did not meet the definition of "agency records"
under the FOIA. Subsequently, as a matter of administrative discretion,
the "agency records" requirement was waived and a paper copy provided
because security requirements precluded the public dissemination of the
information in electronic form or magnetic media. Such determinations
-- to release paper copies -- are consistently made for all records
existing in electronic format.
QUESTION
E(4) "Approximately what percentage of records disclosed under FOIA in
1987 were stored by the agency in an electronic format? In what formats
were they stored? In what formats were they disclosed?
ANSWER
No data as to what percentage of agency records are stored in
electronic form. As set forth in NARA-approved records schedules, the
11
Declassified in Part- Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/01/03: CIA-RDP91B00389R000500190019-7
Declassified in Part- Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/01/03: CIA-RDP91B00389R000500190019-7
agency utilizes magnetic tape, magnetic disk, and optical disk for
electronic storage. Regardless of the electronic form in which they are
stored, such agency records are invariably disclosed in paper format.
QUESTION
E(5) "Has the agency considered facilitating record disclosure under FOIA
in developing plans for agency record automation? If so, how?"
ANSWER
No; the objectives of our records automation program are security and
mission fulfillment. The disclosure of records necessitates an
item?by?item review of the contents and does not appear to be
susceptible to records automation plans.
QUESTION
4
E(6) "Has the agency established any policy for disclosure of electronic
records to FOIA requesters? If so, please provide a statement of the
policy."
ANSWER
No, we have not, because we do not differentiate between the records
in paper format and records in electronic format. For purposes of
access under the FOIA, however, our current practice is to disclose such
records only in paper format because of security considerations.
QUESTION
E(7) "Has the agency denied requests for previously disclosed records
because the information no longer exists in a paper format?"
ANSWER
No. A record may exist in one of several media, such as paper,
microfiche, electronic form and the like; the record, regardless of
media, would be converted to paper format, reviewed for releasability,
and released as appropriate.
QUESTION
E(8) "How are fee determinations made for the disclosure of records in
electronic formats so as to be consistent with the requirements of the
Freedom of Information Reform Act?"
12
Declassified in Part- Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/01/03: CIA-RDP91B00389R000500190019-7
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/01/03 : CIA-RDP91B00389R000500190019-7
ANSWER
32 CFR 1300.25(G)(S) states that "[f]or duplication of non-paper
media (film, magnetic tape, diskette, etc.) or any document which cannot
be reproduced on a standard officer copier, actual direct cost [shall be
the cost of the document]." This same "actual cost" criteria would also
be applicable to requests for releasable records which, although
available in paper format, are specifically requested in electronic
format.
13
Declassified in Part- Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/01/03: CIA-RDP91B00389R000500190019-7