Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 1 Filed 05/08/09 Page 1 of 10

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON

AT SEATTLE 10

11 AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION

OF WASHINGTON,

)

12

)

Plaintiff,

)

13

)

v.

)

14

)

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE,

)

15

)

)

16

Defendant.

)

)

17

COMPLAINT

18

COMPLAINT FOR DECLARATORY AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF

19

1. This is an action under the Freedom of Information Act (“FOIA”), 5 U.S.C. § 552, for

20 declaratory and injunctive relief to compel the disclosure and release of agency records

21 improperly withheld from Plaintiff American Civil Liberties Union of Washington (“ACLU”) by
22 Defendant U.S. Department of Justice (“DOJ”).
23

24

2. The ACLU seeks to compel the release of records describing the operation and

25 maintenance of the National Crime Information Center (“NCIC”) Violent Gang and Terrorist

26 Organization File (“VGTOF”) maintained by the Federal Bureau of Investigation (“FBI”), a

27 component of Defendant, DOJ. The NCIC is a computerized system that makes criminal history

28
COMPLAINT

- 1 -

AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION OF WASHINGTON FOUNDATION 705 Second Avenue, Suite 300 Seattle, Washington 98104-1799 (206) 624-2184

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 1 Filed 05/08/09 Page 2 of 10

information instantly and widely available to police officers and tens of thousands law 1 2 enforcement agencies across the United States. The object of this action is to obtain information

3 about how the NCIC VGTOF database is maintained and used by the FBI.

4

3. Inclusion in the NCIC VGTOF database can have significant impact upon even routine

5 interactions with the police and may affect an individual’s employment opportunities and
6 financial standing. The NCIC database has been exempted from the Privacy Act since 2003
7 because the Justice Department has argued that “it is impossible to determine in advance what
8
9 information is accurate, relevant, timely and complete.” Thus, despite the serious potential harms

10 resulting from misinformation in the NCIC system, traditional governmental mechanisms for

11 ensuring accuracy and accountability do not apply to that database. No process exists for

12 individuals to contest or ensure the accuracy of their designation, or even to ascertain how, why,

13 or whether they are included.

14 4. Despite the ACLU’s compliance with all statutory requirements in requesting records
15 regarding the NCIC, Defendant has been entirely unresponsive to the ACLU’s request.
16

17

JURISDICTION AND VENUE

18

5. This Court has both subject matter jurisdiction over the ACLU’s claims and personal

19 jurisdiction over Defendant agency pursuant to 5 U.S.C. § 552(a)(4)(B). This Court also has

20 jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331 and 1346.

21 6. Venue lies in this district pursuant to 5 U.S.C. § 552(a)(4)(B) and 28 U.S.C. § 1391(e),
22 as Plaintiff resides in Seattle, Washington.
23
PARTIES 24

25

7. Plaintiff ACLU is a Seattle, Washington based civil liberties organization. The ACLU

26 seeks access to these records in order to understand how the FBI is using the NCIC VGTOF as a

27 law enforcement tool and whether it is doing so in a manner consistent with civil liberties.

28
COMPLAINT

- 2 -

AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION OF WASHINGTON FOUNDATION 705 Second Avenue, Suite 300 Seattle, Washington 98104-1799 (206) 624-2184

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 1 Filed 05/08/09 Page 3 of 10

8. Defendant DOJ is the federal agency responsible for the legal business of the United 1 2 States, including the investigation and prosecution of criminal activity within the United States.

3 The FBI, a component entity of DOJ, is responsible for investigating violations of the criminal

4 laws of the United States. The FBI maintains the NCIC database and regularly employs it in 5 carrying out investigations. DOJ is an agency within the meaning of 5 U.S.C. § 552(f). 6

7
STATEMENT OF FACTS 8

9

The NCIC Violent Gang and Terrorist Organization File

10

9. The National Crime Information Center (“NCIC”) is a nationwide clearinghouse of

11 records operated by the FBI. The NCIC provides direct on-line access to its computerized index

12 of criminal justice information for local, state, federal, and tribal law enforcement officers,

13 government agencies, financial institutions, prospective employers, and others nationwide.

14 10. The NCIC database includes a Violent Gang and Terrorist Organizations File
15 (“VGTOF”), which contains entries on suspected terrorist organizations and individuals.
16

17

11. Upon information and belief, as of 2003, there were over 7000 individuals listed in

18 VGTOF as “terrorists,” many of whom have no criminal records. Entry into the terrorist member

19 portion of the VGTOF does not require prior arrest or conviction for a terrorism offense.

20

12. An incorrect entry into the VGTOF carries potentially grave ramifications. For

21 instance, a simple traffic stop can become a prolonged search, result in harsher treatment of
22 individuals, and lead to direct contact between the patrol officer and the FBI. VGTOF entries
23
often advise a responding officer: “WARNING: APPROACH WITH CAUTION.” Once an 24

25 officer receives an NCIC “hit,” the officers are likely to treat the encounter as potentially

26 dangerous, as the “hit” sharply raises the perceived risk of harm to the officer, the subject, and

27

28
COMPLAINT

- 3 -

AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION OF WASHINGTON FOUNDATION 705 Second Avenue, Suite 300 Seattle, Washington 98104-1799 (206) 624-2184

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 1 Filed 05/08/09 Page 4 of 10

bystanders. Actions officers may take include unlocking the safety control on the officer’s 1 2 handgun, flattening the individual against the police car, or calling for back-up.

3

13. The NCIC VGTOF screen also frequently instructs the officer to call the Terrorist

4 Screening Center immediately at a number provided on the officer’s screen. The Terrorist
5 Screening Center sends back one of four responses to the officer: “arrest, detain, investigate, or
6 query.” There is no “allow to proceed” option among these responses.
7 14. In a 2005 test carried out by the Terrorist Screening Center, the VGTOF was found to
8 9 contain a 40% error rate, with most errors in the “handling codes,” the portion of the database that
10 instructs officers on how to approach and interact with individuals who have entries in the

11 VGTOF. See also Audit Division, Office of the Inspector General, U.S. Dep’t of Justice, The

12 Federal Bureau of Investigation’s Terrorist Watchlist Nomination Practices, Audit Rep’t 09-25
13 (May 2009), http://www.usdoj.gov/oig/reports/FBI/a0925/final.pdf (finding numerous delays and 14
failures to remove individuals from the terrorist watchlist). 15
15. The VGTOF manuals have been previously released by the government without 16 17 protective order, and the VGTOF portion of the NCIC Operating Manual, updated in 2008, is
18 publicly available at http://cjis.ci.lincoln.ne.us/~lso/adminsup/NCIChtm/VGTOF.htm. .

19

Plaintiff’s FOIA Request to the Federal Bureau of Investigation

20

16. By letter to the FBI dated December 19, 2008, Plaintiff submitted a FOIA request for

21 “any record held by the U.S. Federal Bureau of Investigation describing the operation and
22 maintenance of the National Crime Information Center (“NCIC”) Violent Gang and Terrorist
23
Organization File (“VGTOF”).” A copy of that letter is attached to this complaint as Exhibit A. 24

25

17. The FBI received the letter on December 20, 2008.

26

18. On January 8, 2009, Plaintiff received a letter dated January 5 acknowledging this

27 request.
28
COMPLAINT

- 4 -

AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION OF WASHINGTON FOUNDATION 705 Second Avenue, Suite 300 Seattle, Washington 98104-1799 (206) 624-2184

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 1 Filed 05/08/09 Page 5 of 10

19. Plaintiff has received no further notice of FBI action since that time. 1

2

20. To date, the FBI has not provided the records requested by Plaintiff in this FOIA

3 request, notwithstanding FOIA’s requirement of an agency response within twenty (20) working

4 days.

5

21. Defendant’s failure to comply with 5 U.S.C. § 552(a)(6)(A)(i) amounts to a

6 constructive denial of Plaintiff’s acknowledged request.
7 22. The FBI has wrongfully withheld the requested records from Plaintiff.
8

9

10

CAUSE OF ACTION

11

Defendant DOJ Failed to Disclose and Release Records Responsive to Plaintiff’s Request

12 23. Plaintiff repeats and re-alleges each and every allegation contained in paragraphs 1
13 through 22 as if repeated and reincorporated herein.
14
24. The FBI, a component of DOJ, has violated Plaintiff’s right to DOJ records under 5 15

16 U.S.C. § 552.

17

REQUEST FOR RELIEF

18 WHEREFORE, Plaintiff respectfully requests that this Court:

19

1) Assume jurisdiction over this matter;

20

2) Order Defendant to disclose the requested records in their entireties and to make copies

21

available to Plaintiff;

22

3) Provide for expeditious proceedings in this action;

23

4) Award Plaintiff costs and reasonable attorneys’ fees in this action as provided by 5 U.S.C.

§ 552(a)(4)(E); and 24

25

5) Grant any other relief the Court deems appropriate.

26

27

28
COMPLAINT

- 5 -

AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION OF WASHINGTON FOUNDATION 705 Second Avenue, Suite 300 Seattle, Washington 98104-1799 (206) 624-2184

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 1 Filed 05/08/09 Page 6 of 10

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

Dated May 8, 2009 Seattle, Washington

24

25 * Pro hac vice motion forthcoming. 26

27

28
COMPLAINT

Respectfully submitted,
_/s/ Harry Williams IV___________________ Sarah Dunne, WSBA # 34869 Harry Williams IV, WSBA # 41020 ACLU OF WASHINGTON FOUNDATION 705 Second Ave, Suite 300 Seattle, WA 98104 Tel. (206) 624-2184 dunne@aclu-wa.org hwilliams@aclu-wa.org
Lee Gelernt*, State Bar No. NY-8511 Eunice Lee*, State Bar No. NY-4607859 Farrin Anello*, State Bar No. NY-4403952 AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION
FOUNDATION IMMIGRANTS' RIGHTS PROJECT 125 Broad Street, 18th Floor New York, NY 10004 Tel. (212) 549-2676 lgelernt@aclu.org elee@aclu.org fanello@aclu.org
Michael Wishnie, Supervising Attorney* State Bar No. CT27221 Zac Hudson, Law Student Intern ALLARD K. LOWENSTEIN INTERNATIONAL HUMAN RIGHTS CLINIC
NATIONAL LITIGATION PROJECT 127 Wall Street New Haven, Connecticut 06511 Tel. (203) 432-4800 michael.wishnie@yale.edu
Counsel for Plaintiff.

- 6 -

AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION OF WASHINGTON FOUNDATION 705 Second Avenue, Suite 300 Seattle, Washington 98104-1799 (206) 624-2184

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 1 Filed 05/08/09 Page 7 of 10
Exhibit A

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 1 Filed 05/08/09 Page 8 of 10

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 1 Filed 05/08/09 Page 9 of 10

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 1 Filed 05/08/09 Page 10 of 10

 
 Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 98 Filed 03/11/13 Page 1 of 4 Case 2:09·cv-00642-RSL Document 97 Filed 03/07/13 Page 1 of 5

1

THE HONORABLE ROBERT S. LASNIK

2

3

lllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllll

4

llllllllllllllllllllllllllllll

s

09-CV-00642-BR

6

7

8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON

AT SEATTLE

10

lJ AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION
OF WASHINGTON, 12

13

Plaintiff,

14
V.
15

CASE No. C09-642RSL
STIPULATION FOR COMPRONUSESETTLEMENT AND RELEASE OF CLAIMS

16 U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE,
17 Defendant.
18

19

I.

STIPULATION

20

PlaintiffAmerican Civil Liberties Union of Washington ("Plaintiff'') and Defendant

21

United States Department of Justice ("Defendant"), by and through their undersigned counsel,

22

hereby enter into this Settlement Agreement as follows:

23

I. In consideration for the release of Plaintiff's claims regarding attorneys' fees and costs

24

against Defendant, the United States shall pay to Plaintiff within sixty (60) days of the execution

25

of this Stipulation the sum of fifty thousand dollars ($50,000.00) payable to the ACLU of

26

Washington Foundation via wire transfer, which sum Plaintiff and its counsel agree to accept as

27

28
STIPULATION FOR COMPROMISE SETILEMENT AND RELEASE Case No. C09-642RSL

1
ACLUF IMMIGRANTS' RlGHTS PROJECT 125 Broad Street, 18thF1oor, NY, NY 10004
. (212) 549-2616

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 98 Filed 03/11/13 Page 2 of 4 Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 97 Filed 03/07/13 Page 2 of 5

1 full settlement of any and all claims, credits, demands, rights and causes of action for attorneys'

2 fees and costs incurred by Plaintiff in this action, and is inclusive of interest.

3

2. Upon execution of this Settlement Agreement, Plaintiff hereby releases and forever

4 discharges Defendant and its successors, the United States of America, and any department,

5 agency, or establishment of the United States, and any officers, employees, agents, successors, or

6 assigns of such department, agency, or establishment, from any and all past, present, or future

7 claims for fees, costs, or litigation expenses in connection with the above-captioned litigation.

8

3. Upon the execution of this Settlement Agreement, Plaintiff hereby releases and forever

9 discharges Defendant, and its successors, the United States of America, and any department,

10 agency, or establishment of the United States, and any officers, employees, agents, successors, or

11 assigns of such department, agency, or establishment, from any and all claims and causes of

12 action that Plaintiff asserts or could have asserted in this litigation, or which hereinafter could be

13 asserted by reason of, or with respect to, or in connection with, or which arise out of, the FOIA

14 request on which this action is based.

15

4. The parties acknowledge that this Settlement Agreement is entered solely for the

16 purpose of settling and compromising any remaining claims in this action without further

17 litigation, and it shall not be construed as evidence or as an admission regarding any issue of law

18 or fact, or regarding the truth or validity of any allegation or claim raised in this action, or as

19 evidence or as an admission by the Defendant regarding Plaintiff's entitlement to attorney's fees

20 and other litigation costs under the FOIA.

21

5. The Parties agree that this Stipulation, including all the terms and conditions of this

22 compromise settlement, may be made public in their entirety, and the Parties expressly consent

23 to such release and disclosure pursuant to 5 U.S.C. § 552a(b).

24

6. The persons signing this Stipulation warrant and represent that they possess full

25 authority to bind the entities, agencies and organizations on whose behalf they are signing to the

26 terms of the Stipulation.

27

7. This Stipulation represents the entire agreement between the Parties with regard to the

28
STIPULATION FOR COMPROMISE SETILEMENT AND RELEASE Case No. C09-642RSL

2
ACLUF IMMIGRANTS' RIGHTS PROJECT
125 Broad Street, 18" Floor, NY, NY 10004 (212) 549·2616

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 98 Filed 03/11/13 Page 3 of 4 Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 97 Filed 03/07/13 Page 3 of 5

1 matters set forth herein and no other agreements, understandings or representations, oral or

2 otherwise, bind the Parties except as herein expressly set forth in writing and signed by all

3 Parties.

4

8. The Court retains jurisdiction to enforce the provisions of this Stipulation.

5 SO STIPULATED AND AGREED this 7th day of March, 2013

6

7

Is/ Lee Gelernt

Lee Gelemt,* State BarNo. NY-8511

8

Dror Ladin* State Bar No. NY-4942215

AMERJCAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION

9

FOUNDATION

IMMIGRANTS' RJGHTS PROJECT

10

125 Broad Street, 18th Floor

II

New York, NY 10004 Tel. (212) 549-2619

12

1gelemt@aclu.org

dladin@aclu.org

13
Katherine Desormeau,* State Bar No. CA-266463

14

AMERJCAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION

FOUNDATION

15

IMMIGRANTS' RIGHTS PROJECT

16

39 Drumm Street San Francisco, CA 94111

17

Tel. (415) 343-0778

kdesormeau@aclu.org

18 Michael Wishnie,* State Bar No. CT Juris No. 429553

19

Jerome N. Frank Legal Services Organization

Yale Law School

20

127 Wall Street

21

New Haven, CT 06511 Tel. (203) 432-4800

22

michael. wishnie@yale.edu

23

Sarah A. Dunne, WSBA #34869

901 Fifth Avenue, Suite 630

24

Seattle, WA 98164

Tel. (206) 624-2184

25

dunne@aclu-wa.org

26

Counsel for Plaintiff

27

*Admitted pro hac vice.

28
STIPULATION FOR COMPROMISE SETILEMENT AND RELEASE Case No. C09-642RSL

3
ACLUF IMMIGRANTS' RIGHTS PROJECT 125 Broad Street, 18th Floor, NY, NY 10004
(212) 549-2616

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 98 Filed 03/11/13 Page 4 of 4

'

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 97 Filed 03/07/13 Page 4 of 5

1

2

Jenny A. Durkin

United States Attorney 3

4

Brian C. Kipnis Assistant United States Attorney

5

5220 United States Courthouse

700 Stewart Street

6

Seattle, WA 98101-7970

7

Stuart F. Delecy

Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General 8

9

Elizabeth J. Shapiro Deputy Branch Director

10 /s/ Marcia K. Sowles

11

Marcia K. Sowles

Senior Counsel

12

United States Department of Justice

Civil Division, Federal Programs Branch

13

20 Massachusetts Ave., NW, Room 7114

Washington, DC 20530 14

15

Counselfor Defendants

16

l7 IT IS SO ORDERED.

.ll. 18

~

DATED this day of March, 2013.

19

20

II. ORDER
ROBERTS. LASNIK United States District Judge

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28
STIPULATION FOR COMPROMISE SETTLEMENT AND RELEASE Case No. C09-642RSL

4
ACLUF IMMIGRANTS' R.!GIITS PROJECT 125 Broad Street, 18"' Floor, NY, NY I0004
(212) 549-2616

 
 1

2

3

4

5

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

6

WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON

AT SEATTLE

7

_______________________________________

8

)

AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION ) No. C09-0642RSL

9 OF WASHINGTON,

)

)

10

Plaintiff,

)

v.

) ORDER GRANTING IN PART

11

) DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE,

) SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND

12

) ORDERING PRODUCTION OR

Defendant.

) SUPPLEMENTATION OF VAUGHN

13 _______________________________________) INDEX

14 This matter comes before the Court on defendant’s “Notice of Motion and Motion
15 for Summary Judgment.” Dkt. # 39. This case involves a request for information under the
16 Freedom of Information Act (“FOIA”), 5 U.S.C. § 552, and highlights the tension between the
17 government’s need to protect the homeland, with its concomitant need for secrecy and
18 confidentiality, and the public’s interest in understanding how the government exercises its
19 extraordinary powers toward that goal. As a general matter, the courts are not well-suited to run
20 executive branch functions, including law enforcement activities and the terrorist watch list.
21 Courts are, however, capable of determining whether a party is in compliance with the law, and
22 that is the issue presented here. Having reviewed the memoranda and exhibits submitted by the
23 parties, the Court finds as follows:
24

25

26
ORDER GRANTING IN PART DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT

1

BACKGROUND

2

On December 19, 2008, plaintiff submitted a FOIA request for records describing

3 the operation and maintenance of the National Crime Information Center (“NCIC”) Violent

4 Gang and Terrorist Organization File (“VGTOF”). Plaintiff indicated that it was willing to pay

5 up to $100 in copying costs and requested that any additional fees be waived. Defendant timely

6 notified plaintiff that it had located responsive documents, but that the estimated duplication

7 costs exceeded the amount plaintiff was willing to pay. When plaintiff did not respond –

8 plaintiff maintains that it never received the notification letter – defendant put plaintiff’s FOIA

9 request aside without addressing plaintiff’s application for a waiver of fees.

10

In May 2009, plaintiff filed this action to compel production of the requested

11 documents. On November 17, 2009, defendant denied plaintiff’s request for a fee waiver and

12 renewed its processing of plaintiff’s FOIA request. Defendant has identified 13,088 pages of

13 responsive documents, as well as two cassette tapes and a DVD that are also responsive, but has

14 determined that 425 pages are exempt from disclosure under FOIA in their entirety, with another

15 4,952 pages and the DVD subject to redactions.1 The parties have agreed to proceed to summary

16 judgment based on a representative sample of the withheld documents. Defendant has provided

17 a description of 127 withheld documents or portions thereof and a statement regarding why the

18 materials are exempt from production under FOIA. Defendant seeks a determination that it

19 properly withheld records, that it reasonably segregated exempt portions and produced that

20 which was feasible, and that plaintiff must pay $1,274.60 in copying costs associated with the

21 production.2

22

23

1 During the course of briefing this summary judgment motion, defendant reevaluated the

exemptions claimed for certain documents. While the numbers in the text are no longer accurate, they

24 provide a general sense of the magnitude of the dispute between the parties.

25

2 Plaintiff does not dispute the adequacy of defendant’s search for responsive documents.

Defendant is therefore entitled to summary judgment on that issue. 26

ORDER GRANTING IN PART DEFENDANT’S

MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT

-2-

1

DISCUSSION

2 A. FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT AND THE VAUGHN INDEX

3

FOIA represents a balance “between the right of the public to know and the need

4 of the Government to keep information in confidence.” John Doe Agency v. John Doe Corp.,

5 493 U.S. 146, 152 (1989) (quoting H.R. Rep. No. 1497, at 6 (1966), reprinted in 1966

6 U.S.C.C.A.N. 2418, 2423). In enacting FOIA, Congress clearly recognized that “legitimate

7 governmental and private interests could be harmed by release of certain types of information

8 and provided nine specific exemptions under which disclosure could be refused.” Fed. Bureau of

9 Investigation v. Abramson, 456 U.S. 615, 621 (1982). In order to foster the public disclosure

10 objective of the statute, the exemptions are narrowly construed and the burden is on the agency

11 to show that a document was properly withheld. Dep’t of the Air Force v. Rose, 425 U.S. 352,

12 361 (1976); 5 U.S.C. § 552(a)(4)(B).

13

Because only the agency has access to the withheld documents, plaintiff is at a

14 significant disadvantage when arguing the applicability of statutory exemptions. The courts

15 therefore require agencies to provide a “Vaughn index”3 that identifies each withheld document,

16 the applicable exemption, and “a particularized explanation of how disclosure of the particular

17 document would damage the interest protected by the claimed exemption.” Wiener v. Fed.

18 Bureau of Investigation, 943 F.2d 972, 977 (9th Cir. 1991). The purposes of the index are to

19 provide plaintiff with an adequate foundation to challenge, and the Court an adequate basis to

20 review, the soundness of the withholding: in effect, it is designed to restore the traditional

21 adversary nature of our judicial process despite plaintiff’s lack of access to the documents. Id. at

22 977-78; Vaughn, 484 F.2d at 828.

23

If an agency asserts that an exemption applies to a particular document, the Court

24

25 3 Vaughn v. Rosen, 484 F.2d 820 (D.C. Cir. 1973).
26

ORDER GRANTING IN PART DEFENDANT’S

MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT

-3-

1 will presume that the agency is operating in good faith. Affidavits offered in support of the

2 claimed exemption will be given full faith and credit “provided the justifications for

3 nondisclosure are not controverted by contrary evidence in the record or by evidence of [agency]

4 bad faith.” Minier v. Central Intelligence Agency, 88 F.3d 796, 800 (9th Cir. 1996) (internal

5 quotation marks omitted). The affidavits must, however, provide individualized information

6 regarding each document in order to justify withholding. Where the Vaughn index lacks

7 specificity and the affidavits provide only “boilerplate” explanations for why whole categories of

8 documents should be exempt from disclosure without attempting to show that the revelation of

9 the particular document at issue threatens the interest protected by the claimed exemption,

10 neither the adversary process nor the Court can perform its function. Wiener, 943 F.2d at 978-

11 79. With these principles in mind, each of the claimed exemptions is discussed below.

12 B. EXEMPTION 1

13

FOIA does not require production if the document discloses matters that are

14 “(A) specifically authorized under criteria established by an Executive order to be kept secret in

15 the interest of national defense or foreign policy and (B) are in fact properly classified pursuant

16 to such Executive order.” 5 U.S.C. § 552(b)(1). The FBI has withheld all or parts of six

17 documents under Exemption 1 (Document Nos. 79, 80, 81, 84, 100, and 124).

18

Defendant argues that the six documents withheld under Exemption 1 meet the

19 criteria of Executive Order 12958, which allows information to be classified as national security

20 information if:

21

(1) an original classification authority is classifying the information;

22

(2) the information is owned by, produced by or for, or is under the control of the

23

United States Government;

24

(3) the information falls within one or more of the categories of information listed

25

in section 1.4 of this order; and

26

ORDER GRANTING IN PART DEFENDANT’S

MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT

-4-

1

(4) the original classification authority determines that the unauthorized disclosure

of the information reasonably could be expected to result in damage to the national

2

security, which includes defense against transnational terrorism, and the original

3

classification authority is able to identify or describe the damage.

4 Executive Order No. 12958 § 1.1(a). Plaintiff does not contest the first two elements of

5 Executive Order No. 12958, but argues that the information provided in the Vaughn index and

6 the accompanying affidavit are insufficient to establish that the information deemed classified

7 falls withing § 1.4 or that its release reasonably could be expected to damage national security.

8

The agency offers the Declaration of David M. Hardy, the Section Chief of the

9 FBI’s Record/Information Dissemination Section, in support of the claimed exemption. Mr.

10 Hardy states that the withheld materials reflect “intelligence activities (including special

11 activities), intelligence sources or methods, or cryptology,” as set forth in Executive Order No.

12 12958 § 1.4(c). Decl. of David M. Hardy (Dkt. # 39) at 16. Mr. Hardy asserts that the

13 information is exempt because its disclosure would reveal (1) the actual intelligence activities

14 utilized by the FBI against counterintelligence targets or (2) the limits of those intelligence

15 gathering activities. Decl. of David M. Hardy (Dkt. # 39) at 16-17. Such disclosures are to be

16 avoided, Mr. Hardy tells us, because once hostile entities know which intelligence activities are

17 used by the FBI and the effort the FBI is putting into a particular investigation, they could

18 develop countermeasures to thwart the FBI’s investigations. Decl. of David M. Hardy (Dkt.

19 # 39) at 17.

20

Taking Document No. 79 as an example, it is not clear what intelligence activities

21 are described in this one-page email between Terrorist Screening Center (“TSC”) personnel.

22 The email transmits an undisclosed attachment and laments that, despite having requested input

23 from DOJ regarding the attached document, DOJ has been unwilling to green light the

24 document. Most of the redactions seem to be employee names, the withholding of which

25 plaintiff does not contest. It is hard to imagine what intelligence activities or limitations are

26

ORDER GRANTING IN PART DEFENDANT’S

MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT

-5-

1 hidden in the other redacted sections, and neither Mr. Hardy’s declaration nor the “Summary and 2 Justification of Deleted Information” provides the answer. The declaration says that all of the 3 documents withheld under Exemption 1 contain information regarding either “the actual 4 intelligence activities utilized by the FBI against specific targets of foreign counterintelligence 5 investigations or operations” or “the intelligence gathering capabilities of the activities directed 6 at specific targets.” Decl. of David M. Hardy (Dkt. # 39) at 16. Such weighty matters seem well 7 beyond the scope of this one-page procedural email. The “Summary and Justification” offered 8 for Document No. 79 simply repeats, in truncated fashion, the substance of Mr. Hardy’s 9 declaration. The Vaughn index summarizes Document No. 79 as “[o]ne-page e-mail dated 10 February 13, 2009 between TSC personnel regarding the new caveats and other TSC issues.” 11 Neither the description nor the disclosed portions of Document No. 79 suggests that actual 12 intelligence activities or capabilities are discussed. The claimed exemption is justified without 13 reference to the document: in fact, the justification section is virtually identical to the 14 justifications provided for Document Nos. 80, 81, 84, 100, and 124.4 Absent some effort to 15 tailor the explanation to the specific document withheld, neither plaintiff nor the Court is able to 16 evaluate the merits of the redaction. The FBI has, in effect, parroted the language of the 17 Executive Order (in the disjunctive) and declared that the redacted information falls within one 18 or more of the categories covered by the order. This categorical approach is “clearly

19

20

4 Defendant argues that cutting and pasting is appropriate because the “information withheld in

21 some documents is similar (if not identical) in nature to information contained in other documents in the sample.” Reply (Dkt. # 43) at 1. As far as the Court can discern, the fact that all six (b)(1) documents
22 are covered by the same “justification” is more a function of the generality of Mr. Hardy’s description of
the classified material than of any similarities between the documents or the information contained 23 therein. The fact that all six documents contain information regarding “intelligence activities” or

24 “intelligence gathering capabilities” tells us very little about an individual document, whether it is properly withheld, and/or whether its disclosure would harm national security. A review of the
25 documents themselves suggests that the information contained therein varies, but whether the differences are significant for purposes of the Exemption 1 analysis cannot be determined.
26

ORDER GRANTING IN PART DEFENDANT’S

MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT

-6-

1 inadequate.” Wiener, 943 F.2d at 978-79 (quoting King v. Dep’t of Justice, 830 F.2d 210, 218

2 (D.C. Cir. 1987)).

3

Mr. Hardy also states that the FBI has redacted “information which relates to

4 unique record identifier and standard terminology/phraseology used in the most recent FBI

5 investigations.” Decl. of David M. Hardy (Dkt. # 39) at 17.5 It is not clear from the declaration

6 how terminology/phraseology fall within Executive Order No. 12958. They do not appear to be

7 intelligence activities, sources, or methods, nor does Mr. Hardy indicate that “standard

8 terminology/phraseology” involves encryption or other conversion from ordinary text. Even if

9 the Court assumes for purposes of this motion that the terms and phrases constitute “cryptology”

10 for purposes of § 1.4, the FBI has not provided enough information from which the Court could

11 conclude that each of the withheld documents contains classified terminology/phraseology or

12 that its release, in the absence of unique record identifiers, could reasonably be expected to

13 damage national security. Mr. Hardy states that the disclosure of “standard terminology/

14 phraseology as well as unique record identifiers” could allow investigation targets to thwart

15 agency investigations: he says nothing about what could be divined from the disclosure of

16 terminology/phraseology standing alone.

17

In addition to the six documents withheld by the FBI, the State Department has

18 reviewed Document No. 66 and determined that the disclosure of certain information contained

19 therein could damage national security. Approximately two lines of text were classified under

20 Executive Order No. 12958 § 1.4(c) and § 1.4(d).6 Margaret P. Grafeld, the Acting Deputy

21 Assistant Secretary for Global Information Services at the Department of State asserts that the

22

23

5 Plaintiff does not contest the redaction of unique record identifiers – its interest in the VGTOF

centers on how the database works and where error creeps into the system rather than on the details of

24 any individual’s or organization’s file.

25

6 Section 1.4(d) permits agencies to classify information concerning “foreign relations or foreign

activities of the United States, including confidential sources.” 26

ORDER GRANTING IN PART DEFENDANT’S

MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT

-7-

1 redacted information relates to intelligence-sharing with foreign governments and that its

2 disclosure could damage U.S. foreign relations. Plaintiff does not contest the withholding of this

3 document.

4 C. EXEMPTION 2

5

Section 552(b)(2) of FOIA exempts from disclosure matters that are “related solely

6 to the internal personnel rules and practices of an agency.” This provision covers “the rules and

7 practices dealing with employee relations or human resources.” Milner v. Dep’t of the Navy,

8 No. 09-1163, slip op. at 7 (U.S. March 7, 2011). Defendant concedes that the investigative

9 techniques and guidelines it has withheld do not fall within this limited exemption.7

10 D. EXEMPTION 5

11

Exemption 5 protects from disclosure those documents which would be subject to

12 a privilege in the civil discovery context, including the deliberative process privilege. Nat’l

13 Labor Relations Bd. v. Sears, Roebuck & Co., 421 U.S. 132, 149 (1975); Lahr v. Nat’l Transp.

14 Safety Bd., 569 F.3d 964, 979 (9th Cir. 2009).

15

The deliberative process privilege rests on the obvious realization that officials

will not communicate candidly among themselves if each remark is a potential

16

item of discovery and front page news, and its object is to enhance the quality of

17

agency decisions by protecting open and frank discussion among those who make

them within the Government.

18

19 Dep’t of Interior v. Klamath Water Users Protective Ass’n, 532 U.S. 1, 8-9 (2001) (internal

20 citations and quotation marks omitted). To fall within this privilege, a document must be both

21 7 Until very recently, Exemption 2 had been interpreted to protect not only rules and practices
22 governing day-to-day employment matters within the agency, but also materials (a) that are
predominantly internal and (b) the disclosure of which would present a risk of circumvention of agency 23 regulation. Milner v. Dep’t of the Navy, 575 F.3d 959, 965 (9th Cir. 2009). The Supreme Court

24 substantially narrowed the scope of Exemption 2 on March 7, 2011, when it reversed the Ninth Circuit’s “high 2” analysis. Because the effect of the requested disclosure on the agency’s ability to regulate is
25 also a consideration under Exemption 7(E), the Court has addressed the parties’ arguments regarding “risk of circumvention” in that section.
26

ORDER GRANTING IN PART DEFENDANT’S

MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT

-8-

1 pre-decisional (i.e., prepared to assist an agency decisionmaker in arriving at a decision) and

2 deliberative (i.e., reflects a candid discussion within the agency regarding how to perform its

3 functions). Lahr, 569 F.3d at 979.

4

The FBI has withheld six documents, in whole or in part, under Exemption 5. Two

5 of the documents (Nos. 43 and 75) discuss various proposals for how to respond to attempts by

6 persons on the watchlist to purchase firearms. The fact that the FBI was already making changes

7 to its procedures when Document No. 75 was written does not preclude a finding that these

8 documents were pre-decisional. Mr. Hardy states that these proposals were made in the course

9 of obtaining a final administrative decision from the Attorney General, and there is no evidence

10 in the record that contradicts this assertion. The other four documents (Nos. 19, 25, 29, and 30)

11 are drafts that do not reflect final agency decisions and, according to Mr. Hardy, are integral

12 parts of an on-going decision-making process within the agency.

13 E. EXEMPTION 6

14

Exemption 6 protects from disclosure “personnel and medical files and similar

15 files the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal

16 privacy.” 5 U.S.C. § 552(b)(6). Plaintiff does not seek disclosure of the names, contact

17 information, or titles of law enforcement personnel or the government contractors. Decl. of

18 David M. Hardy (Dkt. # 39) at ¶ 22; Opposition (Dkt. # 40) at 20. There does not appear to be

19 any dispute regarding the redactions of the types of information protected by Exemption 6.

20 F. EXEMPTION 7(C)

21

FOIA does not require the disclosure of information compiled for law enforcement

22 purposes that “could reasonably be expected to constitute an unwarranted invasion of personal

23 privacy.” 5 U.S.C. § 552(b)(7)(C). In order for disclosure to constitute an unwarranted invasion

24 of personal privacy, the information at issue must be identifiable as applying to a particular

25 individual. Dep’t of State v. Wash. Post Co., 456 U.S. 595, 602 (1982). Plaintiff agrees that

26

ORDER GRANTING IN PART DEFENDANT’S

MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT

-9-

1 certain information, such as name, address, date of birth, height, weight, eye color, social

2 security number, and database identifier number, need not be disclosed because it would identify

3 specific individuals. Decl. of David M. Hardy (Dkt. # 39) at ¶ 22. It argues, however, that more

4 generic information – namely race, sex, country of birth, passport country, and criminal history –

5 can be disclosed without invading the privacy interests of the target.

6

The parties generally agree that identifying information is exempt from disclosure:

7 they simply disagree regarding how many categories of information should be redacted to ensure

8 that the target will not be identified. Having reviewed the declarations provided and the

9 documents discussed by the parties, the Court finds that descriptors that apply to whole

10 populations, such as race, sex, country of birth, and passport country, are not reasonably likely to

11 identify any particular individual. Other information, such as criminal history, telephone

12 number, and license plate number, could be combined with publicly available information to

13 identify an individual and may therefore be redacted under Exemption 7(C).8 Defendant has not

14 provided any evidence regarding the documents at issue or the surrounding production that

15 would justify a more stringent privacy analysis in this case.

16 G. EXEMPTION 7(D)

17

Information compiled for law enforcement purposes that could reasonably be

18 expected to disclose the identity of a confidential source or the information provided by that

19 source is protected under Exemption 7(D). Confidential sources include “a State, local, or

20

21

8 One of the documents withheld under Exemption 7(C) is Document No. 33, which is made up

of two pages of a larger document. The inclusion of partial documents in the Vaughn index is not

22 particularly helpful. In order to determine whether disclosure is appropriate under FOIA, the Court

must understand the context in which documents were written and exemptions are asserted. Chopping 23 the documents up and presenting only the heavily redacted (or entirely withheld) pieces deprives the

24 Court of potentially valuable information regarding unredacted text, dates, formatting, etc. This practice not only disadvantages plaintiff and the Court, it occasionally makes it difficult for defendant to justify a
25 claimed exemption. In this case, defendant ultimately discovered that the missing pages related to Document No. 33 had to be produced in order to explain why the document was withheld in its entirety.
26

ORDER GRANTING IN PART DEFENDANT’S

MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT

-10-

1 foreign agency or authority or any private institution which furnished information on a

2 confidential basis . . . .” 5 U.S.C. § 552(b)(7)(D). A source is considered confidential if it were

3 expressly told that its identity would be held in confidence or if the circumstances surrounding

4 the receipt of information suggest that the informant would not have provided the information

5 without an implicit assurance of confidentiality. Wiener, 943 F.2d at 986-87.

6

The FBI has withheld Document No. 27 in its entirety because the information was

7 provided by a foreign government under express and implied assurances of confidentiality. In

8 such circumstances, Exemption 7(D) authorizes the redaction of information that would identify

9 the source, but not the substance of the information provided. The FBI has not alleged, much

10 less shown, that the information was compiled “in the course of a criminal investigation” or

11 “lawful national security intelligence investigation.” 5 U.S.C. § 552(b)(7)(D). There being no

12 evidence that the FBI was investigating a particular individual or incident when it sought and/or

13 obtained this information (Shaw v. Fed. Bureau of Investigation, 749 F.2d 58, 63 (D.C. Cir.

14 1984)), defendant has failed to justify the nondisclosure of the information provided by the

15 confidential source under Exemption 7(D).9

16

Document Nos. 116-120 are letters from the FBI to other law enforcement

17 agencies identifying possible unauthorized uses of the VGTOF database and requesting an

18 investigation. Taking Document No. 118 as an example, the FBI asserts that it has redacted “the

19 identity of and the information provided by a state law enforcement agency under an implied

20 assurance of confidentiality.” Decl. of David M. Hardy (Dkt. # 39) at 258. This assertion is

21 9 In his supplemental declaration, Mr. Hardy attempts to link Document No. 27 to a particular
22 criminal investigation by asserting that the foreign source was sharing “techniques and information used
to facilitate criminal investigations with respect to different law enforcement data systems which 23 reference specific individuals.” Dkt. # 43, Ex. 1 at ¶ 9. Communications regarding investigative

24 techniques do not necessarily arise “in the course of a criminal investigation,” and Mr. Hardy’s generalized assertions do not establish the necessary link.

25

The Court has not separately considered defendants’ Exemption 2, 5, and 7(E) assertions, raised

for the first time in reply, regarding Document No. 27. 26

ORDER GRANTING IN PART DEFENDANT’S

MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT

-11-

1 factually and legally unsupported. The source of the information regarding the possible

2 unauthorized access has not been redacted: the letter informs the local law enforcement agency

3 that “a special agent from the FBI Field Office in Miami, Florida” reported the leak. In addition,

4 only some of the information provided by the source has been redacted, strongly suggesting that

5 the redactions are designed to protect some other facet of the communication, not necessarily the

6 confidential source or his contributions. Nor is there any indication in the letter or the

7 declarations submitted by Mr. Hardy that the original and apparently undisclosed source of the

8 information asked for, received, or would assume he had a promise of confidentiality in the

9 circumstances presented here.10 Defendant has not justified the nondisclosure of these five

10 documents under Exemption 7(D).

11

Finally, defendant asserts that Document No. 33 does not have to be produced

12 because the printouts were provided by a confidential source in the course of a criminal

13 investigation. In reply, defendant provided the letter that accompanied the printouts (Dkt. # 43,

14 Ex. 8). There is no indication that the author requested confidentiality or believed that his

15 communication would be maintained in confidence. Nor do the circumstances surrounding the

16 communication suggest that the complaining officer would not have shared the information

17 absent a promise of confidentiality: the complainant was employed by a different law

18 enforcement agency and leveled a number of complaints against the police chief.

19 H. EXEMPTION 7(E)

20

Exemption 7(E) authorizes the redaction of information compiled for law

21 enforcement purposes that would “disclose techniques and procedures for law enforcement

22

23

10 In reply, defendant argues that because the source of the information is a law enforcement

24 officer or agency connected with the alleged wrongdoer, the source would be reluctant to report the leak in the absence of an implied promise of confidentiality. Again, this argument is not based on the
25 documents at issue. Document No. 117, for example, identifies an insurance investigator as the source of relevant information, not a local law enforcement agency.
26

ORDER GRANTING IN PART DEFENDANT’S

MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT

-12-

1 investigations or prosecutions, or would disclose guidelines for law enforcement investigations

2 or prosecutions if such disclosure could reasonably be expected to risk circumvention of the

3 law.” 5 U.S.C. § 552(b)(7)(E). As argued by the parties, the key consideration is whether

4 disclosure of the requested document creates a “risk of circumvention” of the law. The FBI has

5 withheld eight types of documents pursuant to Exemption 7(E), each of which is discussed

6 below using one or more documents as examples.

7

1. Operating Procedures (Document Nos. 15, 16, and 17)

8

The FBI has withheld documents reflecting its policies, procedures, techniques,

9 and strategies pertaining to the watchlisting process. Plaintiff contests the agency’s apparent

10 assumption that the disclosure of any part of the 103 pages that refer or relate to the VGTOF

11 would allow investigative targets to avoid detection or develop countermeasures to watchlisting.

12 Mr. Hardy carefully states that the “complete revelation” of the SOPs “in its entirety” would

13 increase the risks of circumvention. Decl. of David M. Hardy (Dkt. # 39) at 20. There is no

14 indication, however, that every policy or protocol in the document reveals information that could

15 be utilized to avoid detection or develop countermeasures. The logical inference arising from

16 the nature of SOPs and Mr. Hardy’s careful choice of language is that entire sections of the

17 document can likely be disclosed without any real risk to the watchlisting process.11

18

2. Form FD-930 (Document No. 20)

19

According to Mr. Hardy, Form FD-930 is used to supply information for entry into

20 VGTOF. The form relies on a specific set of identifiers, such as name, date of birth, and/or

21 passport number, to identify individuals. Mr. Hardy asserts that “releasing a comprehensive list

22 of all identifiers which the US Government can collect, store, and use to track a terrorist” could

23

24

11 The Court reserves judgment on plaintiff’s “secret law” argument. Mr. Hardy has not

described the SOPs in enough detail for the Court to determine whether they establish a standard of

25 conduct below which members of the populace cannot fall without risking inclusion in the VGTOF and

heightened scrutiny in many aspects of daily living. 26

ORDER GRANTING IN PART DEFENDANT’S

MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT

-13-

1 allow terrorists to “learn what types of information to falsify, obscure, or hide in order to remain

2 undetected.” Decl. of David M. Hardy (Dkt. # 39) at 22. While the argument sounds promising,

3 plaintiff has provided a publicly-available document that purports to identify the types of data

4 included in twelve watchlists maintained by the federal government, including the VGTOF.

5 Decl. of Shana Khader (Dkt. # 40) at 23.12 In reply, the FBI argues that, even if a comprehensive

6 list of identifiers were disclosed in the past, the list may have been altered in ways that have not

7 yet been made public. Reply (Dkt. # 43) at 4-5.

8

Despite having all relevant information at its disposal, the FBI does not state that

9 the identifiers utilized in Form FD-930 have changed since they were publicly disclosed in 2003.

10 Even if that were the case, the fact that the list of identifiers was disclosed in the past suggests

11 that its public availability did not present a risk of circumvention of agency regulation. Because

12 the agency’s claimed justification for nondisclosure is controverted by contrary evidence in the

13 record, the FBI has failed to establish that this group of documents was properly withheld under

14 Exemption 7(E).

15

3. Specific Non-Public Databases and/or Systems (Document No. 110)

16

The FBI has withheld documents that identify where particular sorts of data are

17 recorded within the agency’s databases and/or systems. Decl. of David M. Hardy (Dkt. # 39) at

18 22. Neither the data structures nor the type of information stored therein is identified, and Mr.

19 Hardy makes no effort to explain how disclosure of a system’s architecture (i.e., where certain

20 pieces of information are stored in relation to others) could allow persons to circumvent the

21 VGTOF.

22

Mr. Hardy asserts that publication of “secret information about national security

23 and terrorism investigations,” including “what types of information are needed to authorize

24 12 In addition, Document No. 67 instructs FBI Field Offices to provide an FD-930 with any
25 request for entry in the VGTOF and specifically identifies a number of personal identifiers required for such entry.
26

ORDER GRANTING IN PART DEFENDANT’S

MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT

-14-

1 particular investigative techniques,” could enable terrorists to cover their tracks. Decl. of David

2 M. Hardy (Dkt. # 39) at 22-23. It is not clear how these concerns relate to this category of

3 documents. Mr. Hardy’s description of the material withheld – information that identifies where

4 data is recorded – does not suggest that disclosure of investigative techniques is even a

5 possibility. If, as may be the case, Mr. Hardy’s description of the documents does not accurately

6 summarize the nature of the information withheld in this category, a revised Vaughn index is

7 necessary. On the other hand, if the materials simply reveal the location of information within

8 the FBI’s databases and systems, the agency has not justified its nondisclosure.

9

4. Procedure Used to Prevent Disclosure to Watchlisted Individuals (Document No. 113)

10

For purposes of its initial production, the FBI withheld many documents

11 referencing “a specific procedure used to prevent an individual from determining whether he or

12 she is a known or suspected terrorist as identified on the watchlist . . . .” Decl. of David M.

13 Hardy (Dkt. # 39) at 23.13 When plaintiff pointed out that the agency had already disclosed the

14 name and certain operational details of the “silent hits” procedure, the FBI reevaluated its

15 claimed exemption for this category of documents. Mr. Hardy states that certain documents that

16 contain the term “silent hits” have now been produced, but the agency continues to withhold

17 documents in which the term is connected to a specific individual or specific details regarding

18 law enforcement procedures or techniques.

19

It appears that Mr. Hardy’s parameters for reevaluating the “silent hit” documents

20 were too strict. It is not enough to disclose the term “silent hits” where it was previously

21 redacted. Plaintiff has shown that certain operational details of the procedure, the protocol for

22 selecting a subject, the four sub-groups indicating level of interest, and the corresponding

23 warning statements for law enforcement officers have all been publicly disclosed. Defendant

24

25

13 Certain references to the procedure slipped through the FBI’s initial screening process. See

Document No. 67 at 2. 26

ORDER GRANTING IN PART DEFENDANT’S

MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT

-15-

1 apparently recognizes that plaintiff is entitled to all iterations and versions of publicly-available

2 material and yet continues to withhold the same information in documents such as Document

3 No. 113. No explanation or justification is given. While plaintiff does not object to the

4 withholding of information that would identify the specific individuals who are subject to the

5 “silent hits” procedure, it is entitled to the release of the types of information that have already

6 been disclosed to the public.

7

5. VGTOF Nomination Criteria (Document No. 127)

8

The FBI initially contended that disclosure of the criteria considered for

9 nomination to the VGTOF would allow terrorists to adjust their tactics to avoid entry in the

10 VGTOF. After its reevaluation of the withheld documents, however, the FBI released the

11 criteria for entry contained in Document No. 127. The evidence in the record therefore suggests

12 that disclosure of the nomination criteria will not, in fact, pose an unacceptable risk that persons

13 or entities will be able to use the information to circumvent VGTOF entry or agency regulation.

14

6. VGTOF Field Codes (Document No. 92)

15

Mr. Hardy describes the VGTOF Field Codes by their function: they apparently

16 “permit entry and retrieval of records by group and subgroup name and/or numeric identifiers.”

17 Decl. of David M. Hardy (Dkt. # 39) at 23. Mr. Hardy asserts that disclosure of these codes

18 would allow a target to “change its tactics, frustrate an existing VGTOF entry, compromise an

19 investigation, and possibly increase its chances of circumventing the law.” Decl. of David M.

20 Hardy (Dkt. # 39) at 24. Even if it were plausible that the release of coding information could

21 have the negative repercussions posited by Mr. Hardy, the codes for the sub-groups and the

22 corresponding warning statements for law enforcement officers have already been publicly

23 disclosed. The FBI offers no justification for the nondisclosure in response to plaintiff’s FOIA

24 request.

25

7. Guidelines for Encounters with Watchlisted Individuals (Document No. 115)

26

ORDER GRANTING IN PART DEFENDANT’S

MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT

-16-

1

As discussed above, the instructions provided to law enforcement officers

2 regarding encounters with watchlisted persons have been publicly disclosed. Defendant has

3 made this information available through NCIC-VGTOF-6894-6896 (Decl. of Farrin R. Anello

4 (Dkt. # 40), Ex. G) and the new version of Document No. 112, but continues to withhold the

5 same information in documents such as Document Nos. 113 and 115. No explanation or

6 justification is given. The agency has not met its burden.

7

8. Terrorist-Related Trend Information (Document No. 39)

8

The FBI has declined to produce statistical reports regarding terrorist-related trend

9 information. Mr. Hardy states that disclosure of hits and travel patterns by geographic area

10 “could serve to warn suspected terrorists that the FBI is aware of their plans and they could then

11 take countermeasures against law enforcement, including changing target cities and locations.”

12 Decl. of David M. Hardy (Dkt. # 39) at 25. Because the “justifications for nondisclosure are not

13 controverted by contrary evidence in the record or by evidence of [agency] bad faith,”the Court

14 accords Mr. Hardy’s declaration substantial deference. Minier, 88 F.3d at 800. No further

15 production or supplementation of the Vaughn index is required regarding these documents.14

16 Because the FBI’s evidence regarding risk of circumvention was the dispositive factor in the

17 Court’s Exemption 2 rulings, those rulings apply equally to defendant’s Exemption 7(E) claims.

18 I. PRODUCTION OF “REASONABLY SEGREGABLE PORTIONS” OF THE RECORD

19

There is no reason to assume or suspect that defendant has failed to disclose all

20 reasonably segregable portions of a record after deleting exempt information. 5 U.S.C. § 552(b).

21

22

14 Mr. Hardy’s declaration focuses on the dangers of disclosing travel patterns and regional data. 23 Based on the description of the withheld documents and the highlighted risks, the Court has assumed

24 that the nondisclosure extends only to these types of statistics and that other types of statistical information regarding the VGTOF have not been categorically withheld. If this assumption is incorrect,
25 the FBI shall supplement its Vaughn index so that it clearly identifies other types of statistical reports that have been withheld and justifies each nondisclosure.
26

ORDER GRANTING IN PART DEFENDANT’S

MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT

-17-

1 J. DUPLICATION COSTS

2

The Court finds that plaintiff is not required to pay duplication costs associated

3 with its December 19, 2008, FOIA request above the $100 that has already been tendered. This

4 determination is based on the following statutory provisions and factual determinations:

5

! Pursuant to 5 U.S.C. § 552(a)(4)(A)(viii), an agency shall not assess search or

6 duplication fees against a representative of the news media if the agency has failed to comply

7 with FOIA’s time limits. For purposes of this statute, a representative of the news media “means

8 any person or entity that gathers information of potential interest to a segment of the public, uses

9 its editorial skills to turn the raw materials into a distinct work, and distributes that work to an

10 audience.” 5 U.S.C. § 552(a)(4)(A)(ii). Plaintiff qualifies as a representative of the news media

11 under this definition. See http://www.aclu-wa.org/.

12

! Pursuant to FOIA § 552(a)(6)(C), a person making a request for records is deemed to

13 have exhausted his administrative remedies with respect to any such request if the agency fails to

14 act in a timely manner. As discussed in this Court’s “Order Denying Defendant’s Motion for

15 Open America Stay” (Dkt. # 27), the FBI did not seek an administrative extension of time in

16 which to produce documents and did not justify its request for an indefinite extension. Nor did

17 the FBI respond to plaintiff’s request for a fee waiver in a timely manner.

18

! The Court finds that disclosure of the information sought by plaintiff is in the public

19 interest in that it is “likely to contribute significantly to public understanding of the operations or

20 activities of the government . . . .” 5 U.S.C. § 552(a)(4)(A)(iii).

21

CONCLUSION

22

The attempt to prove and disprove the applicability of FOIA exemptions through a

23 sample of heavily redacted or withheld documents is fraught with danger. Plaintiff and the

24 Court are deprived of most meaningful pieces of information, while defendant is tasked with

25 generating summaries of documents and justifications for their nondisclosure that are neither too

26

ORDER GRANTING IN PART DEFENDANT’S

MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT

-18-

1 general nor too specific. The Court is left to parse declarations, summaries, and redacted

2 documents to determine whether defendant said the right thing and whether there is any evidence

3 in the record that contradicts those statements.

4

In this case, the Court concludes that defendant interpreted a number of claimed

5 exemptions too broadly and/or failed to provide facts that would justify the claimed exemption.

6 Where there is a reasonable basis to believe that the failure to justify nondisclosure may not

7 necessarily mean that the failure to disclose is unjustified, the Court has opted to require a

8 supplemental Vaughn index and in camera production of the documents in an effort to resolve

9 the ambiguities. Where, however, it appears that the claimed exemption simply does not reach

10 the documents at issue, production is appropriate.

11

For all of the foregoing reasons, it is hereby ORDERED that:

12

1. Defendant’s motion for summary judgment regarding the adequacy of its search and

13 the production of reasonably segregable portions of the record is GRANTED.

14

2. Defendant shall, within thirty days of the date of this Order, revise its “Summary and

15 Justification of Deleted Information” for Document Nos. 79, 80, 81, 84, 100, and 124. It is

16 highly recommended that a summary and justification be written specifically for each document,

17 rather than relying on descriptions and generalizations that are so broad that they can be applied

18 to whole categories of documents. The revised Vaughn index must impart real information

19 regarding the content of each document at issue and why the release of that information

20 reasonably could be expected to damage national security. Where the Vaughn index consists of

21 a partial document, such as Document No. 80, defendant shall supplement the index by

22 substituting the complete communication, memorandum, or document in place of the partial

23 document.

24

3. Defendant’s motion for summary judgment regarding the redactions to Document No.

25 66 is GRANTED.

26

ORDER GRANTING IN PART DEFENDANT’S

MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT

-19-

1

4. Defendant’s motion for summary judgment regarding the redactions to Document Nos.

2 19, 25, 29, 30, 43, and 75 under Exemption 5 is GRANTED.

3

5. Defendant’s motion for summary judgment regarding redactions under Exemption 6 is

4 GRANTED.

5

6. Defendant shall, within twenty-one days of the date of this Order, remove redactions

6 asserted under Exemption 7(C) related to descriptors that apply to whole populations, such as

7 race, sex, country of birth, and passport country, and produce the documents to plaintiff.

8

7. Defendant shall, within thirty days of the date of this Order, revise its “Summary and

9 Justification of Deleted Information” for Document No. 27 if it intends to pursue its recent

10 claims under Exemptions 5 and 7(E), following the recommendations discussed in ¶ 2 above.

11 If defendant does not intend to pursue the Exemption 5 and 7(E) arguments, it shall, within

12 twenty-one days of the date of this Order, remove the redactions to Document No. 27 asserted

13 under Exemption 7(D) and produce the document to plaintiff.

14

8. Defendant shall, within twenty-one days of the date of this Order, remove redactions

15 to Document Nos. 33 and 116-120 asserted under Exemption 7(D) and produce the documents to

16 plaintiff.

17

9. Defendant shall, within thirty days of the date of this Order, revise its “Summary and

18 Justification of Deleted Information” for operating procedures withheld or redacted under

19 Exemptions 2 and 7(E), following the recommendations discussed in ¶ 2 above.

20

10. Defendant shall, within twenty-one days of the date of this Order, remove redactions

21 asserted under Exemptions 2 and 7(E) to Form FD-930 and related documents and produce the

22 documents to plaintiff.

23

11. Defendant has not shown that information regarding specific non-public databases

24 and/or systems was properly withheld. If, as may be the case, the existing Vaughn index does

25 not accurately summarize the nature of the information withheld in this category, defendant

26

ORDER GRANTING IN PART DEFENDANT’S

MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT

-20-

1 shall, within thirty days of the date of this Order, revise the relevant “Summaries and

2 Justifications of Deleted Information” following the recommendations discussed in ¶ 2 above.

3 If, however, the documents in this category simply identify where particular sorts of data are

4 recorded within the agency’s databases and/or systems, defendant shall, within twenty-one days

5 of the date of this Order, remove redactions asserted under Exemptions 2 and 7(E) to non-public

6 databases and/or systems documents and produce the documents to plaintiff.

7

12. Defendant shall, within twenty-one days of the date of this Order, remove redactions

8 asserted under Exemptions 2 and 7(E) related to information regarding the “silent hits”

9 procedure that has already been disclosed to the public, including any documents related to the

10 basic operational details of the procedure, the protocol for selecting a subject, the sub-groups

11 indicating level of interest, and the corresponding guidelines to law enforcement officers

12 encountering watchlisted individuals, and produce the documents to plaintiff.

13

13. Defendant shall, within twenty-one days of the date of this Order, remove redactions

14 asserted under Exemptions 2 and 7(E) related to VGTOF nomination criteria, VGTOF field

15 codes, and the guidelines for encounters with watchlisted individuals, and produce the

16 documents to plaintiff.

17

14. Defendant’s motion for summary judgment regarding the redactions to documents

18 disclosing terrorist-related trend information is GRANTED, provided that the redactions in this

19 category extend only to statistics that would disclose travel patterns and regional data. If other

20 types of statistical information regarding the VGTOF have been categorically withheld,

21 defendant shall, within thirty days of the date of this Order, revise its “Summary and

22 Justification of Deleted Information” for terrorist-related trend information withheld or redacted

23 under Exemptions 2 and 7(E), following the recommendations discussed in ¶ 2 above.

24

15. Plaintiff is not required to pay duplication costs associated with its December 19,

25 2008, FOIA request above the $100 that has already been tendered.

26

ORDER GRANTING IN PART DEFENDANT’S

MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT

-21-

1

16. Defendant shall produce the documents discussed in paragraphs 2, 7 (if a revised

2 Vaughn index is generated), 9, 11 (if a revised Vaughn index is generated), and 14 (if a revised

3 Vaughn index is generated) for in camera review, along with Mr. Hardy or another

4 knowledgeable person who can explain the documents and their import. Chambers staff will

5 contact defense counsel to schedule a time for production.

6

7

If the parties are able to resolve this litigation following supplementation of the

8 Vaughn index, they shall notify the Deputy Clerk, Kerry Simonds, at 206-370-8519 in a timely

9 manner. If the parties are unable to resolve their dispute, plaintiff may, within thirty days of

10 production of the revised Vaughn index, file a supplemental memorandum to assist the Court

11 during the in camera review.

12

13

Dated this 10th day of March, 2011.

14

15

A

Robert S. Lasnik

16

United States District Judge

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

ORDER GRANTING IN PART DEFENDANT’S

MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT

-22-

 
 Joseph-Charles, Saeeda 11/24/2016 For Educational Use Only

American Civil Liberties Union of Washington v. U.S. Dept...., Not Reported in...

2011 WL 1900140 Only the Westlaw citation is currently available. United States District Court, W.D. Washington,
at Seattle.
AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION OF WASHINGTON, Plaintiff,
v. U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Defendant.
No. C09–0642RSL. |
May 19, 2011.
Attorneys and Law Firms
Lee Gelernt, American Civil Liberties Union Foundation, New York, NY, Michael J. Wishnie, New Haven, CT, Sarah A. Dunne, Melody Rose Spidell, Seattle, WA, Katherine Desormeau, San Francisco, CA, for Plaintiff.
Brian C. Kipnis, Seattle, WA, Marcia Kay Sowles, Washington, DC, for Defendant.
ORDER GRANTING IN PART DEFENDANT'S MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION
ROBERT S. LASNIK, District Judge.
*1 On March 10, 2011, the Court ordered defendant to produce specific categories of documents under the Freedom of Information Act (“FOIA”), 5 U.S.C. § 552. Defendant filed a timely motion for reconsideration (Dkt.# 46), and the Court requested additional briefing (Dkt.# 49). This matter is now ripe for consideration.
FOIA represents a balance “between the right of the public to know and the need of the Government to keep information in confidence.” John Doe Agency v. John Doe Corp., 493 U.S. 146, 152, 110 S.Ct. 471, 107 L.Ed.2d 462 (1989) (quoting H.R.Rep. No. 1497, at 6 (1966), reprinted in 1966 U.S.C.C.A.N. 2418, 2423). Although the burden is on the agency to show that a document has been properly withheld from the public (Dep't of the Air Force v. Rose, 425 U.S. 352, 361, 96 S.Ct. 1592, 48 L.Ed.2d 11 (1976); 5 U.S.C. § 552(a)(4)(B)), defendant

acknowledges that its original Vaughn index 1 was too general. Defendant divided the universe of documents into broad categories based on the general nature of the information contained therein. Specific and distinct information embedded within the documents was not addressed, and the agency failed to assert exemptions from disclosure that it now deems applicable. As discussed in more detail below, defendant's failure to assert all possible objections to production at one time is inappropriate under the statute and governing case law. Because final judgment has not yet been entered in this case and the parties continue to review documents in preparation for the in camera review, however, the Court has considered the new exemptions and arguments asserted by the agency.
Having reviewed the memoranda and exhibits submitted by the parties, the Court finds as follows:
1. Suspicious Indicators (Document No. 13) Exemption 7(E) authorizes the redaction of information compiled for law enforcement purposes that would “disclose techniques and procedures for law enforcement investigations or prosecutions, or would disclose guidelines for law enforcement investigations or prosecutions if such disclosure could reasonably be expected to risk circumvention of the law.” 5 U.S.C. § 552(b)(7)(E). Defendant asserts that Document No. 13 contains information describing suspicious indicators that law enforcement officers should look for when attempting to detect possible terrorist activity and that this information has not been disclosed to the public. Decl. of Christopher M. Piehota (Dkt. # 46) at 5. Defendant shall, within five days of the date of this Order, revise its “Summary and Justification of Deleted Information” for Document No. 13. It is highly recommended that a summary and justification be written specifically for this document, rather than relying on descriptions and generalizations that are so broad that they can be applied to whole categories of documents. The revised Vaughn index must impart real information regarding the content of Document No. 13 at issue and why the release of that information reasonably could be expected to damage national security.
2. Federal Agency Coordination (Document Nos. 115)

© 2016 Thomson Reuters. No claim to original U.S. Government Works.

1

Joseph-Charles, Saeeda 11/24/2016 For Educational Use Only

American Civil Liberties Union of Washington v. U.S. Dept...., Not Reported in...

*2 Defendant argues that certain documents, such as Document No. 115, contain information regarding the procedures the Terrorist Screening Center (“TSC”) follows once the identity of a known or suspected terrorist has been confirmed by reference to the Violent Gang and Terrorist Organizations File (“VGTOF”). The agency's description of this information and the nature of the “procedures” is cryptic and sparse. It appears that the procedures relate to TSC's communications with other federal agencies once a positive VGTOF response arises. Defendant states that the information details “the coordination that occurs among federal law enforcement agencies” (Reply (Dkt.# 55) at 2) and identifies “the various agencies or entities involved in responding to a positive encounter with a known or suspected terrorist” (Decl. of Christopher M. Piehota (Dkt.# 46) at 6). Although defendant asserts that the disclosure of this information “could reasonably be expected to risk circumvention of the law” (Decl. of Christopher M. Piehota (Dkt.# 46) at 6), this statement is wholly conclusory. Defendant has not provided “a particularized explanation of how disclosure of the particular document would damage the interest protected by the claimed exemption.” Wiener v. Fed. Bureau of Investigation, 943 F.2d 972, 977 (9th Cir.1991). Nor does the description of the document as “information describing the coordination among federal agencies” give rise to a reasonable expectation that identifying the agencies that follow up on a positive VGTOF response will thwart law enforcement. Defendant has not met its burden under FOIA or Local Civil Rule 7(h)(1).
3. Form FD–930: FBI's Level of Interest (Document Nos. 6, 92, 113, and 127)
Form FD–930 (Document No. 6) is used to supply information regarding individuals for entry into VGTOF. The form not only reveals the specific identifiers recorded for each watchlisted individuals, such as name, date of birth, and/or passport number, but also reveals the minimum level of interest or investigative status necessary for inclusion in the VGTOF. Because the types of data included in various watchlists maintained by the federal government, including the VGTOF, were already in the public domain, the Court found that Form FD–930 was not properly withheld. The Court considered the FBI's argument that not all of the information deemed relevant

to inclusion in the VGTOF had been disclosed, but found that simply identifying additional criteria for inclusion did not present a risk of circumvention of agency regulation.
Defendant's current argument fares no better. Defendant asserts that the disclosure of the minimum level of interest or investigative status necessary for inclusion in the VGTOF will be detrimental to national security. Mr. Piehota suggests that if the government is forced to disclose the minimum level of interest necessary for inclusion in the VGTOF, individuals who suspect that they are on the watchlist will be able to estimate the government's level of interest in them and adjust their activities accordingly. This argument verges on the illogical. A positive VGTOF response is not disclosed to the individual. Thus, a person who already suspects or affirmatively believes that he is on the VGTOF watchlist has all the incentive he needs—or is likely to get—to conceal illegal activities, destroy evidence, and/or modify his behavior. 2 The agency has not shown that disclosure of additional criteria for entry in the VGTOF could reasonably be expected to risk circumvention of the law under Exemption 7(E).
4. Form FD–930: Criteria for Inclusion in No Fly and Selectee Lists *3 For the first time in this motion for reconsideration, the Transportation Security Administration (“TSA”) has expressed an interest in certain documents sought by plaintiff. In particular, TSA argues that a portion of page 3 of Form FD–930 is protected from disclosure under Exemption 3 based on the agency's determination that the criteria for placement on the No Fly and Selectee Lists is sensitive security information (“SSI”) under regulations promulgated pursuant to 49 U.S.C. § 114(r). TSA excuses its previous lack of participation in this action on the ground that it was unaware of plaintiff's FOIA request until March 21, 2011.
This litigation has been pending for over two years. Defendant's failure to bring plaintiff's December 19, 2008, FOIA request to TSA's attention until after the Court had rendered its summary judgment decision is inexplicable. As a general rule, the government “must assert all exemptions at the same time” and may not “play cat and mouse by withholding its most powerful cannon

© 2016 Thomson Reuters. No claim to original U.S. Government Works.

2

Joseph-Charles, Saeeda 11/24/2016 For Educational Use Only

American Civil Liberties Union of Washington v. U.S. Dept...., Not Reported in...

until after the District Court has decided the case and then springing it on surprised opponents and the judge.” August v. Fed. Bureau of Investigation, 328 F.3d 697, 699 (9th Cir.2003) (internal citations omitted). Defendant is essentially trying its objections to the production of Form FD–930 seriatim, resulting in wasted effort for both plaintiff and the Court. Nevertheless, because final judgment has not yet been entered in this matter, the agency's failure to refer plaintiff's FOIA request to TSA does not appear to have been tactical, and the interests asserted by TSA are weighty, the Court will consider the applicability of Exemption 3. 3 Defendant shall, within five days of the date of this Order, revise its “Summary and Justification of Deleted Information” for Document No. 6 to address the applicability of Exemption 3, following the recommendations discussed in section 1 above.
5. Form FD–930: Confidential Sources (Document No. 6 and “related documents”) Defendant belatedly argues that (a) Form FD–930 and “related documents” reveal the names of foreign partners which share and exchange information with TSC, (b) the identity of these partners is confidential, and (c) this information is exempt from disclosure under Exemption 7(D). Information compiled for law enforcement purposes that could reasonably be expected to disclose the identity of a confidential source or the information provided by that source is protected under Exemption 7(D). Confidential sources include “a State, local, or foreign agency or authority or any private institution which furnished information on a confidential basis ....” 5 U.S.C. § 552(b)(7)(D). A source is considered confidential if it were expressly told that its identity would be held in confidence or if the circumstances surrounding the receipt of information suggest that the informant would not have provided the information without an implicit assurance of confidentiality. Wiener, 943 F.2d at 986–87.
*4 Mr. Piehota asserts that the information-sharing agreements with the countries named in Document Nos. 6 and 28 were negotiated with the understanding,

both express and implied, that the countries would not be identified to the public. In response to plaintiff's charge that this assertion is little more than boilerplate, defendant requests an opportunity to supplement its Vaughn index and submit the documents for in camera review. Defendant shall, within five days of the date of this Order, revise its “Summary and Justification of Deleted Information” for Document Nos. 6 and 28 to address the applicability of Exemption 7(D), following the recommendations discussed in section 1 above.
CONCLUSION
For all of the foregoing reasons, defendant's motion for reconsideration is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part. Following supplementation of the Vaughn index regarding the documents discussed in sections 1, 4, and 5, the parties shall attempt to resolve their differences regarding production of these documents. If the parties are unable to reach agreement, plaintiff may, within thirty days of production of the revised Vaughn index, file a supplemental memorandum to assist the Court during in camera review of the contested documents.
Defendant shall, within thirty days of production of the revised Vaughn index, produce the documents described in sections 1, 4, and 5 above (along with all of the contested documents discussed in the Court's March 10, 2011, order) for in camera review. Once the documents have been received in chambers, court staff will contact defense counsel to schedule a conference with Mr. Hardy or another knowledgeable person who can explain the documents and their import.
Defendant shall, on or before June 30, 2011, produce the documents discussed in sections 2 and 3 above.
All Citations
Not Reported in F.Supp.2d, 2011 WL 1900140

Footnotes

1

Vaughn v. Rosen, 484 F.2d 820 (D.C.Cir.1973). Because only the agency has access to documents that are withheld from

production under FOIA, plaintiff is at a significant disadvantage when arguing the applicability of statutory exemptions. The

© 2016 Thomson Reuters. No claim to original U.S. Government Works.

3

Joseph-Charles, Saeeda 11/24/2016 For Educational Use Only

American Civil Liberties Union of Washington v. U.S. Dept...., Not Reported in...

courts therefore require agencies to provide an index that identifies each withheld document, the applicable exemption,

and “a particularized explanation of how disclosure of the particular document would damage the interest protected by

the claimed exemption.” Wiener v. Fed. Bureau of Investigation, 943 F.2d 972, 977 (9th Cir.1991). The purposes of the

index are to provide plaintiff with an adequate foundation to challenge, and the Court an adequate basis to review, the

soundness of the withholding: in effect, it is designed to restore the traditional adversary nature of our judicial process

despite plaintiff's lack of access to the documents. Id. at 977–78; Vaughn, 484 F.2d at 828.

2

Plaintiff is not seeking information regarding any particular individual, his inclusion in the VGTOF, or the government's

level of interest in him.

3

Defendant argues that this Court lacks jurisdiction to evaluate the merits of TSA's designation of information as SSI under

49 U.S.C. § 46110. Pursuant to that statute, the United States Courts of Appeals have exclusive jurisdiction to affirm,

amend, modify, or set aside any order issued under Subtitle VII, Parts A or B of Title 49 or under subsections 114(l) or

(s) of that title. The SSI determination asserted by the TSA in this case was made pursuant to 49 U.S.C. § 114(r), not

subsections (l) or (s). The exclusive jurisdiction provision of 49 U.S.C. § 46110 does not, therefore, apply.

End of Document

© 2016 Thomson Reuters. No claim to original U.S. Government Works.

© 2016 Thomson Reuters. No claim to original U.S. Government Works.

4

 
 Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 17 Filed 10/01/09 Page 1 of 6

1

2

3

4

5

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

6

WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON

AT SEATTLE

7

8 AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION
9 OF WASHINGTON,

10

Plaintiff(s),

11

v.

12 U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE,

13

Defendant(s).

CASE NO. C09-642RSL
ORDER REGARDING INITIAL DISCLOSURES, JOINT STATUS REPORT, AND EARLY SETTLEMENT

14 I. INITIAL SCHEDULING DATES

15 Pursuant to the December 1, 2000 revisions to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, the Court sets

16 the following dates for initial disclosure and submission of the Joint Status Report and Discovery Plan:

17 Deadline for FRCP 26(f) Conference:

October 29, 2009

18 Initial Disclosures Pursuant to FRCP 26(a)(1): November 5, 2009

19

Combined Joint Status Report and Discovery

20

Plan as Required by FRCP 26(f)

and Local Rule CR 16:

November 12, 2009

21

If this case involves claims which are exempt from the requirements of FRCP 26(a) and (f), please notify

22

Teri Roberts, the judicial assistant, by telephone at 206-370-8810. 23

II. JOINT STATUS REPORT & DISCOVERY PLAN 24

All counsel and any pro se parties are directed to confer and provide the Court with a combined 25

Joint Status Report and Discovery Plan (the "Report") by November 12, 2009. This conference shall be 26

ORDER REGARDING INITIAL DISCLOSURES, JOINT STATUS REPORT, AND EARLY SETTLEMENT - 1

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 17 Filed 10/01/09 Page 2 of 6

1 by direct and personal communication, whether that be a face-to-face meeting or a telephonic conference.

2 The Report will be used in setting a schedule for the prompt completion of the case. It must contain the

3 following information by corresponding paragraph numbers:

4

1. A statement of the nature and complexity of the case.

5

2. A statement of which ADR method (mediation, arbitration, or other) should be used. The

6 alternatives are described in Local Rule CR 39.1 and in the ADR Reference Guide which is available

7 from the clerk’s office. If the parties believe there should be no ADR, the reasons for that belief should

8 be stated.

9

3. Unless all parties agree that there should be no ADR, a statement of when mediation or

10 another ADR proceeding under Local Rule CR 39.1 should take place. In most cases, the ADR

11 proceeding should be held within four months after the Report is filed. It may be resumed, if necessary,

12 after the first session.

13

4. A proposed deadline for joining additional parties.

14

5. A proposed discovery plan that indicates:

15

A. The date on which the FRCP 26(f) conference and FRCP 26(a) initial disclosures

16

took place;

17

B. The subjects on which discovery may be needed and whether discovery should be

18

conducted in phases or be limited to or focused upon particular issues;

19

C. What changes should be made in the limitations on discovery imposed under the

20

Federal and Local Civil Rules, and what other limitations should be imposed;

21

D. A statement of how discovery will be managed so as to minimize expense (e.g.,

22

by foregoing or limiting depositions, exchanging documents informally, etc.); and

23

E. Any other orders that should be entered by the Court under FRCP 26(c) or under

24

Local Rule CR 16(b) and (c).

25

6. The date by which the remainder of discovery can be completed.

26

ORDER REGARDING INITIAL DISCLOSURES, JOINT STATUS REPORT, AND EARLY SETTLEMENT - 2

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 17 Filed 10/01/09 Page 3 of 6

1

7. Whether the parties agree that a full-time Magistrate Judge may conduct all proceedings,

2 including trial and the entry of judgment, under 28 U.S.C. § 636(c) and Local Rule MJR 13. The

3 Magistrate Judge who will be assigned the case is Mary Alice Theiler. Agreement in the Report will

4 constitute the parties' consent to referral of the case to the assigned Magistrate Judge.

5

8. Whether the case should be bifurcated by trying the liability issues before the damages

6 issues, or bifurcated in any other way.

7

9. Whether the pretrial statements and pretrial order called for by Local Rules CR 16(e), (h),

8 (i), and (l), and 16.1 should be dispensed with in whole or in part for the sake of economy.

9

10. Any other suggestions for shortening or simplifying the case.

10

11. The date the case will be ready for trial.

11

12. Whether the trial will be jury or non-jury.

12

13. The number of trial days required.

13

14. The names, addresses, and telephone numbers of all trial counsel.

14

15. If, on the due date of the Report, all defendant(s) or respondent(s) have not been served,

15 counsel for the plaintiff shall advise the Court when service will be effected, why it was not made earlier,

16 and shall provide a proposed schedule for the required FRCP 26(f) conference and FRCP 26(a) initial

17 disclosures.

18

16. Whether any party wishes a scheduling conference prior to a scheduling order being

19

entered in the case.

20

If the parties are unable to agree on any part of the Report, they may answer in separate

21 paragraphs. No separate reports are to be filed.

22

The time for filing the Report may be extended only by court order. Any request for extension

23 should be made by telephone to Teri Roberts at 206-370-8810.

24

If the parties wish to have a status conference with the Court at any time during the pendency of

25 this action, they should notify Teri Roberts by telephone at 206-370-8810.

26

ORDER REGARDING INITIAL DISCLOSURES, JOINT STATUS REPORT, AND EARLY SETTLEMENT - 3

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 17 Filed 10/01/09 Page 4 of 6

1

III. PLAINTIFF'S RESPONSIBILITY

2

This Order is issued at the outset of the case, and a copy is delivered by the clerk to counsel for

3 plaintiff (or plaintiff, if pro se) and any defendants who have appeared. Plaintiff's counsel (or plaintiff,

4 if pro se) is directed to serve copies of this Order on all parties who appear after this Order is filed within

5 ten (10) days of receipt of service of each appearance. Plaintiff's counsel (or plaintiff, if pro se) will be

6 responsible for starting the communications needed to comply with this Order.

7

IV. ALTERATIONS TO ELECTRONIC FILING

8

PROCEDURES AND COURTESY COPIES

9

As of June 1, 2004, counsel are required to electronically file all documents with the Court.

10 Pro se litigants may file either electronically or in paper form. Information and procedures for

11 electronic filing can be found on the Western District of Washington’s website at

12 www.wawd.uscourts.gov. The following alterations to the Electronic Filing Procedures apply in all

13 cases pending before Judge Lasnik:

14

- Section III, Paragraph F - pursuant to Local Rule 10(e)(8), when the aggregate submittal to

15 the court (i.e., the motion, any declarations and exhibits, the proposed order, and the certificate of

16 service) exceeds 50 pages in length, a paper copy of the documents (with tabs or other organizing aids

17 as necessary) shall be delivered to the Clerk’s Office for chambers by 10:30 am the morning after

18 filing. The chambers copy must be clearly marked with the words “Courtesy Copy of Electronic

19 Filing for Chambers.”

20

- Section III, Paragraph L - unless the proposed order is stipulated, agreed, or otherwise

21 uncontested, the parties need not e-mail a copy of the order to the judge’s e-mail address.

22

Pursuant to Local Rule 10(e)(10), all references in the parties’ filings to exhibits should be as

23 specific as possible (i.e., the reference should cite the specific page numbers, paragraphs, line

24 numbers, etc.). All exhibits must be marked to designate testimony or evidence referred to in the

25 parties’ filings. Filings that do not comply with Local Rule 10(e) may be rejected and/or returned to

26

ORDER REGARDING INITIAL DISCLOSURES, JOINT STATUS REPORT, AND EARLY SETTLEMENT - 4

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 17 Filed 10/01/09 Page 5 of 6

1 the filing party, particularly if a party submits lengthy deposition testimony without highlighting or

2 other required markings.

3

V. PRIVACY POLICY

4

Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 5.2 and Local Rule 5.2, parties must redact the

5 following information from documents and exhibits before they are filed with the court:

6

* Dates of Birth - redact to the year of birth

7

* Names of Minor Children - redact to the initials

8

* Social Security Numbers and Taxpayer Identification Numbers - redact to the last four digits

9

* Financial Accounting Information - redact to the last four digits

10

* Passport Numbers and Driver License Numbers - redact in their entirety

11

All documents filed in the above-captioned matter must comply with Federal Rule of Civil

12 Procedure 5.2 and Local Rule 5.2.

13

VI. EARLY SETTLEMENT CONSIDERATION

14

When civil cases are settled early -- before they become costly and time-consuming -- all

15 parties and the court benefit. The Federal Bar Association Alternative Dispute Resolution Task Force

16 Report for this district stated:

17

[T]he major ADR related problem is not the percentage of civil cases that ultimately

settle, since statistics demonstrate that approximately 95% of all cases are resolved

18

without trial. However, the timing of settlement is a major concern. Frequently, under

our existing ADR system, case resolution occurs far too late, after the parties have

19

completed discovery and incurred substantial expenditure of fees and costs.

20

The judges of this district have adopted a resolution “approving the Task Force’s

21 recommendation that court-connected ADR services be provided as early, effectively, and

22 economically as possible in every suitable case.”

23

The steps required by this Order are meant to help achieve that goal while preserving the

24 rights of all parties.

25

If settlement is achieved, counsel shall notify Kerry Simonds, deputy clerk, at 206-370-8519.

26

ORDER REGARDING INITIAL DISCLOSURES, JOINT STATUS REPORT, AND EARLY SETTLEMENT - 5

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 17 Filed 10/01/09 Page 6 of 6

1

VII. SANCTIONS

2

A failure by any party to comply fully with this Order may result in the imposition of

3 sanctions.

4

5

DATED: October 1, 2009

6

7

A

8

Robert S. Lasnik

United States District Judge

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

ORDER REGARDING INITIAL DISCLOSURES, JOINT STATUS REPORT, AND EARLY SETTLEMENT - 6

 
 Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 27 Filed 01/19/10 Page 1 of 6

1

2

3

4

5

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

6

WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON

AT SEATTLE

7

_______________________________________

8

)

AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION ) No. C09-0642RSL

9 OF WASHINGTON,

)

)

10

Plaintiff,

)

v.

) ORDER DENYING DEFENDANT’S

11

) MOTION FOR OPEN AMERICA STAY

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE,

)

12

)

Defendant.

)

13 _______________________________________)

14 This matter comes before the Court on defendant’s “Notice of Motion and Motion
15 for an Open America Stay.” Dkt. # 22. Having reviewed the memoranda and exhibits submitted
16 by the parties, including defendant’s “Notice of Filing of Status Report” (Dkt. # 25), the Court
17 finds as follows:
18 BACKGROUND
19 On December 19, 2008, plaintiff submitted a Freedom of Information Act
20 (“FOIA”) request for records describing the operation and maintenance of the National Crime
21 Information Center (“NCIC”) Violent Gang and Terrorist Organization File (“VGTOF”).
22 Plaintiff indicated that it was willing to pay up to $100 in copying costs and requested that any
23 additional fees be waived. Defendant timely notified plaintiff that it had located responsive
24 documents, but that the estimated duplication costs exceeded the amount plaintiff was willing to
25 pay. When plaintiff did not respond – plaintiff maintains that it never received the notification
26
ORDER DENYING DEFENDANT’S
MOTION FOR OPEN AMERICA STAY

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 27 Filed 01/19/10 Page 2 of 6

1 letter – defendant put plaintiff’s FOIA request aside without addressing plaintiff’s application for

2 a waiver of fees. In May 2009, plaintiff filed this action to compel production of the requested

3 documents. On November 17, 2009, defendant denied plaintiff’s request for a fee waiver and

4 now seeks additional time in which to produce the estimated 25,339 pages of documents and 192

5 audio tape recordings that are responsive to plaintiff’s FOIA request.

6

DISCUSSION

7 A. FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT, 5 U.S.C. § 552

8

Pursuant to FOIA § 552(a)(6), defendant had twenty days from receipt of

9 plaintiff’s request to notify plaintiff that it would comply with the request for production, at

10 which point “the records [were to have been] made promptly available . . . .” The strict statutory

11 deadlines can be extended in two circumstances. Recognizing that certain logistical hurdles

12 could delay production, Congress specifically authorized the responding agency to extend the

13 production period by up to ten days upon written notice to the requester. 5 U.S. C.

14 § 552(a)(6)(B). The “unusual circumstances” that can justify an administrative extension under

15 this subparagraph include the need for consultation with other agencies, the location of

16 responsive documents in field offices, and/or the volume of records that need to be reviewed. It

17 does not appear that defendant employed an administrative extension in this case.

18

Congress also gave the courts leeway to grant extensions of virtually any duration

19 if the appropriate showing is made. Pursuant to § 552(a)(6)(C)(I), the court may further extend

20 the time to complete review and production of responsive documents “[i]f the Government can

21 show exceptional circumstances exist and that the agency is exercising due diligence in

22 responding to the request . . . .” Plaintiff argues that defendant has failed to show either

23 “exceptional circumstances” or “due diligence” and proposes a February 1, 2010, deadline for

24 the completion of the production.

25

Defendant relies primarily on Open America v. Watergate Special Prosecution,

26

ORDER DENYING DEFENDANT’S

MOTION FOR OPEN AMERICA STAY

-2-

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 27 Filed 01/19/10 Page 3 of 6

1 547 F.2d 605 (D.C. Cir. 1976), as support for its request for an indefinite extension of time.

2 When Open America was decided, FOIA had been recently amended, and the court was being

3 asked to interpret “exceptional circumstances” for the first time. The court noted that Congress

4 had not appropriated any additional resources for implementation of the 1974 FOIA

5 amendments and had mistakenly projected that the costs of compliance would be minimal. 547

6 F.2d at 612. The court therefore viewed § 552(a)(6)(C) as a necessary “safety valve” in case the

7 rigid time limits of subparagraphs (A) and (B) proved unworkable. In this context, the D.C.

8 Circuit found that the agency’s evidence regarding the unexpectedly high number of FOIA

9 requests received and the related costs of compliance could “reasonably be viewed as

10 ‘exceptional circumstances’” under § 552(a)(6)(C). Open America, 547 F.2d at 612.

11

In 1996, Congress amended FOIA to “ensure agency compliance with statutory

12 time limits.” H.R. 3802, 104th Cong., 110 Stat. 3048 (1996). Section 552(a)(6)(C) was divided

13 into three subparts, and the following language was added as § 552(a)(6)(C)(ii):

14

For purposes of this subparagraph, the term “exceptional circumstances” does not

include a delay that results from a predictable agency workload of requests under

15

this section, unless the agency demonstrates reasonable progress in reducing its

16

backlog of pending requests.

17 As noted by the Ninth Circuit, “Congress wrote a tough statute on agency delay in FOIA

18 compliance, and recently made it tougher.” Fiduccia v. U.S. Dep’t of Justice, 185 F.3d 1035,

19 1041 (9th Cir. 1999).

20 B. “EXCEPTIONAL CIRCUMSTANCES”

21

Defendant argues that a judicial extension of time to complete production is

22 appropriate under § 552(a)(6)(C) because:

23

(1) the 2006-2008 relocation of the Federal Bureau of Investigation’s

24

Record/Information Dissemination Section from headquarters to a facility in

Virginia caused “numerous” employees to retire or resign; 25

26

ORDER DENYING DEFENDANT’S

MOTION FOR OPEN AMERICA STAY

-3-

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 27 Filed 01/19/10 Page 4 of 6

1

(2) the agency does not have the staff to respond adequately to all requests and

administrative appeals;

2

3

(3) the FBI is complying with court orders in other FOIA litigation and new

administrative guidelines for processing FOIA requests;

4

5

(4) plaintiff’s request involves over 25,000 pages of potentially responsive records and 192 tape recordings;

6

(5) the review of responsive materials is time-consuming and will likely require

7

consultation with other agencies; and

8

(6) the agency made substantial progress in reducing its backlog of requests between

9

1996 and 2006.

10 Most of these circumstances, such as office relocations, resignations,1 litigation, and processing
11

guidelines, affect how staff are allocated to various tasks and, ultimately, the speed of 12

production. Predictable staffing limitations do not, however, constitute “exceptional 13

circumstances.” 14

Though FOIA doubtless poses practical difficulties for federal agencies, federal

15

agencies can educate Congress on the practical problems they have, and attempt to

16

persuade Congress to change the law or provide additional funds to achieve

compliance. So long as the Freedom of Information Act is the law, we cannot

17

repeal it by a construction that vitiates any practical utility it may have.

18 This is not to denigrate the practical problems. It may be that agency heads . . .

19

can be forced by the Freedom of Information Act to divert staff from programs

20

they think more valuable to Freedom of Information Act compliance. It may be

that people with ulterior motives can use Freedom of Information Act requests to

21

interfere with the proper functioning of federal agencies. Arguably taxpayers are

22

providing an excess of free research and copying services to authors and investigators. But these policy concerns are legislative, not judicial, and we

23

24 1 The move to Virginia was completed in October 2008, two months before plaintiff filed its
25 FOIA request. Any residual effect of the move and mass exodus is now the status quo for the agency and can no longer constitute “exceptional circumstances.”
26

ORDER DENYING DEFENDANT’S

MOTION FOR OPEN AMERICA STAY

-4-

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 27 Filed 01/19/10 Page 5 of 6

1

intimate no views on them.

2 Fiduccia, 185 F.3d at 1041.

3

Nor has the agency shown that its overall workload during the relevant period

4 justifies an extension of the normal 20-day production deadline. Defendant states that, over the

5 past seven years, it has received an average of 1,043 FOIA requests per month, while the

6 average for the first ten or eleven months of 2009 was 1,126 requests per month. A seven-year-

7 average can hide many important facts. For example, if the number of requests has grown

8 steadily over the years, a 2009 average that is in keeping with the decade-long trend would not

9 be unusual or unexpected in any way. On the other hand, if the number of requests bounced

10 widely between 2001 and 2008, the 2009 numbers may fall within the “normal” range. The

11 declaration of David M. Hardy, the Records/Information Dissemination Section Chief (Dkt.

12 # 22-2 at 15), suggests that the latter is true: during the relevant period, the number of requests

13 fell below 915 per month in 2005 and rose above 1,250 per month in 2006. Given this wide

14 fluctuation in the average number of requests, it is impossible to characterize the 2009 numbers

15 as “exceptional.”

16

The fourth and fifth factors urged by defendants are “unusual circumstances” as

17 that term is used in § 552(a)(6)(B). Congress gave agencies the authority to delay production for

18 ten days if the documents requested were voluminous and/or inter-agency consultation were

19 required. These factors cannot be used to justify the open-ended judicial extension requested by

20 the FBI in this case.

21

Given that the delay at issue in this case results from a predictable workload of

22 FOIA requests, the Court may grant additional time to complete the review only if the agency

23 “demonstrates reasonable progress in reducing its backlog of pending requests.”

24 § 552(a)(6)(C)(ii). Between 1996 and 2006, the agency hired additional staff and moved to

25 paperless processing of FOIA requests, resulting in a ten fold decrease in pending requests.

26

ORDER DENYING DEFENDANT’S

MOTION FOR OPEN AMERICA STAY

-5-

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 27 Filed 01/19/10 Page 6 of 6

1 Although the agency continues to update its technology in order to pursue “its primary goal of

2 reducing the time required to process requests” (Decl. of David M. Hardy, Dkt. # 22-2 at 15), its

3 actual progress in reducing the backlog of pending requests apparently stalled a few years ago.

4 Defendant has not, therefore, shown that exceptional circumstances justify additional time in

5 which to respond to plaintiff’s FOIA request.2

6

CONCLUSION

7

For all of the foregoing reasons, defendant’s request for an indefinite extension of

8 time in which to respond to plaintiff’s FOIA request is DENIED. Pursuant to an agreement

9 between the parties, defendant began producing responsive documents on December 15, 2009,

10 when 1,495 pages of non-exempt documents were delivered to plaintiff’s counsel. Because the

11 resolution of this motion was delayed, defendant shall have until March 15, 2010, to complete

12 production of all responsive, non-exempt records. A case management schedule consistent with

13 this production deadline will issue shortly.

14

Dated this 19th day of January, 2010.

15 16

A
Robert S. Lasnik

17

United States District Judge

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

2 Because defendant must show both “exceptional circumstances” and “due diligence” in order

to obtain an Open America stay, the Court need not consider whether defendant acted appropriately.

25 The Court notes, however, that failing to act upon plaintiff’s request for a fee waiver for eleven months

does not bespeak diligence. 26

ORDER DENYING DEFENDANT’S

MOTION FOR OPEN AMERICA STAY

-6-

 
 Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 73 Filed 06/20/11 Page 1 of 2

1

2

3

4

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

5

WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON

AT SEATTLE

6

_______________________________________

7

)

AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION ) No. C09-0642RSL

8 OF WASHINGTON,

)

)

9

Plaintiff,

)

v.

) ORDER GRANTING SECOND

10

) MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE,

)

11

)

Defendant.

)

12 _______________________________________)

13 On May 19, 2011, the Court found that it has jurisdiction to evaluate the merits of
14 the Transportation Security Administration’s designation of information as “sensitive security
15 information.” Dkt. # 61 at 5 n.3. Defendant filed a second motion for reconsideration (Dkt.
16 # 63) in which it argues that “while this Court has authority to determine whether 49 U.S.C.
17 § 114(f) is an Exemption 3 statute and whether TSA has in fact designated the withheld
18 materials as SSI under § 114(r),” jurisdiction to review the validity of TSA’s designation of the
19 information as SSI lies solely in the Circuit Courts of Appeal pursuant to 49 U.S.C. § 46110.
20 Defendant requests that the Court amend its previous order to delete the jurisdictional analysis in
21 its entirety.
22 Having reviewed the memoranda submitted by the parties, defendant’s second
23 motion for reconsideration is GRANTED. The Court’s May 19, 2011, “Order Granting in Part
24 Defendant’s Motion for Reconsideration” (Dkt. # 61) is hereby amended to delete footnote 3.
25

26
ORDER GRANTING SECOND MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 73 Filed 06/20/11 Page 2 of 2

1

Dated this 20th day of June, 2011.

2

A

3

Robert S. Lasnik

United States District Judge

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

ORDER GRANTING SECOND

MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION

-2-

 
 1

2

3

4

5

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

6

WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON

AT SEATTLE

7

_______________________________________

8

)

AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION ) No. C09-0642RSL

9 OF WASHINGTON,

)

)

10

Plaintiff,

)

v.

) ORDER FOLLOWING IN CAMERA

11

) REVIEW

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE,

)

12

)

Defendant.

)

13 _______________________________________)

14 Following a series of orders in which the Court attempted to evaluate the adequacy
15 of the government’s response to a request for information under the Freedom of Information Act
16 (“FOIA”), 5 U.S.C. § 552, the Department of Justice produced a number of unredacted
17 documents for in camera review. Having reviewed the documents and the memoranda
18 submitted by the parties,1 the Court finds as follows:
19 Document No. 2
20 Pursuant to Exemption 7(E), FOIA does not require the disclosure of information
21 compiled for law enforcement purposes that would “disclose techniques and procedures for law
22 enforcement investigations or prosecutions, or would disclose guidelines for law enforcement
23

24

1 In its March 10, 2011, order, the Court indicated that it might require the assistance of Mr.

25 Hardy or another knowledgeable person to complete the in camera review process. Having now

reviewed the documents, the court finds that ex parte communication with a defense representative, to 26 which plaintiff objected, is not necessary or warranted.

ORDER FOLLOWING IN CAMERA REVIEW

1 investigations or prosecutions if such disclosure could reasonably be expected to risk

2 circumvention of the law.” 5 U.S.C. § 552(b)(7)(E). The Court finds that the information

3 redacted from NCIC-VGTOF-8352 was compiled for law enforcement purposes, discloses

4 investigative techniques and procedures, and could reasonably be expected to be of use to those

5 attempting to circumvent the law.

6

With regards to the redactions asserted under Exemptions 6 and 7(C), defendant

7 appropriately redacted personal (albeit in some cases coded) identifiers and contact information,

8 the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy. No

9 further disclosures regarding Document No. 39 are necessary.

10 Document Nos. 3, 4, 16, and 17

11

Exemption 5 protects from disclosure those documents which would be subject to

12 a privilege in the civil discovery context, including the deliberative process privilege. Nat’l

13 Labor Relations Bd. v. Sears, Roebuck & Co., 421 U.S. 132, 149 (1975); Lahr v. Nat’l Transp.

14 Safety Bd., 569 F.3d 964, 979 (9th Cir. 2009).

15

The deliberative process privilege rests on the obvious realization that officials

will not communicate candidly among themselves if each remark is a potential

16

item of discovery and front page news, and its object is to enhance the quality of

17

agency decisions by protecting open and frank discussion among those who make

them within the Government. 18

19 Dep’t of Interior v. Klamath Water Users Protective Ass’n, 532 U.S. 1, 8-9 (2001) (internal

20 citations and quotation marks omitted). To fall within this privilege, a document must be both 21 pre-decisional (i.e., prepared to assist an agency decisionmaker in arriving at a decision) and

22 deliberative (i.e., reflects a candid discussion within the agency regarding how to perform its

23 functions). Lahr, 569 F.3d at 979.

24

Defendant has withheld four documents solely on the ground that they are drafts.

25 Drafts are not presumptively exempt from production under Exemption 5. Defendant has failed 26 to show that any portion of these documents, much less their entireties, were prepared to assist

ORDER FOLLOWING IN CAMERA REVIEW

-2-

1 an agency decisionmaker in arriving at a decision and reflect a candid discussion of anything

2 more weighty than word choice or grammatical considerations. Defendant shall, within fourteen

3 days of the date of this Order, remove redactions asserted under Exemption 5 to Document Nos.

4 3, 4, 16, and 17 and produce the documents to plaintiff.

5 Document Nos. 5 and 15

6

The redactions asserted under Exemption 7(D) in the supplemental Vaughn index

7 have been removed following discussions between the parties. Dkt. # 78 at 11, n.7. To the

8 extent information has been withheld from these documents pursuant to Exemption 3 as

9 Sensitive Security Information (“SSI”), no further production will be ordered, however. The

10 Court lacks jurisdiction to evaluate the validity of the Transportation Security Administration’s

11 designation of information as SSI.

12 Document No. 6

13

To the extent information has been withheld from Document No. 6 pursuant to

14 Exemption 3 as Sensitive Security Information (“SSI”), no further production will be ordered.

15 The Court lacks jurisdiction to evaluate the validity of the Transportation Security

16 Administration’s designation of information as SSI.

17 Document No. 13

18

Exemption 6 protects from disclosure “personnel and medical files and similar

19 files the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal

20 privacy.” 5 U.S.C. § 552(b)(6). FOIA also protects from disclosure information compiled for

21 law enforcement purposes that “could reasonably be expected to constitute an unwarranted

22 invasion of personal privacy.” 5 U.S.C. § 552(b)(7)(C). In order for disclosure to constitute an

23 unwarranted invasion of personal privacy, the information at issue must be identifiable as

24 applying to a particular individual. Dep’t of State v. Wash. Post Co., 456 U.S. 595, 602 (1982).

25 Plaintiff does not seek disclosure of the names or contact information of government employees

26 or contractors. Dkt. # 39 at ¶ 22; Dkt. # 40 at 20; Dkt. # 78 at 18. Thus the redaction of

ORDER FOLLOWING IN CAMERA REVIEW

-3-

1 employee/contractor names and their contact information from Document No. 13 is appropriate.

2 There does not, however, appear to be any privacy-related justification for the redaction of

3 agency, center, or other organizational unit names or contact information under Exemptions 6 or

4 7(C).

5

Exemption 7(E) authorizes the redaction of information compiled for law

6 enforcement purposes that would “disclose techniques and procedures for law enforcement

7 investigations or prosecutions, or would disclose guidelines for law enforcement investigations

8 or prosecutions if such disclosure could reasonably be expected to risk circumvention of the

9 law.” 5 U.S.C. § 552(b)(7)(E). Defendant has withheld information on NCIC-VGTOF-10651-

10 52 because it describes events, behaviors, and objects that should be considered when law

11 enforcement officers are attempting to detect possible terrorist activity. Even if some of the

12 indicators are already known to the public through common sense or other avenues, the

13 disclosure of the combined lists would make it easier to adjust activities and belongings so that

14 fewer indicators are triggered, thereby frustrating law enforcement efforts. Defendant need not

15 produce NCIC-VGTOF-10651-52.

16 Document No. 27

17

Information compiled for law enforcement purposes that could reasonably be

18 expected to disclose the identity of a confidential source or the information provided by that

19 source is protected under Exemption 7(D). Confidential sources include “a State, local, or

20 foreign agency or authority or any private institution which furnished information on a

21 confidential basis . . . .” 5 U.S.C. § 552(b)(7)(D). A source is considered confidential if it were

22 expressly told that its identity would be held in confidence or if the circumstances surrounding

23 the receipt of information suggest that the informant would not have provided the information

24 without an implicit assurance of confidentiality. Wiener v. Fed. Bureau of Investigation, 943

25 F.2d 972, 986-87 (9th Cir. 1991).

26

The FBI has made two redactions to Document No. 27 under Exemption 7(D).

ORDER FOLLOWING IN CAMERA REVIEW

-4-

1 The redaction on NCIC-VGTOF-11098 references a place: it does not reflect information

2 shared by foreign partners, disclose the existence of a foreign partner relationship, or suggest an

3 express or implied promise of confidentiality. Defendant shall, within fourteen days of the date

4 of this Order, remove the redaction to NCIC-VGTOF-11098 asserted under Exemption 7(D) and

5 produce the document to plaintiff. No further disclosure of NCIC-VGTOF-11099 is necessary,

6 however.

7

With regards to the redactions asserted under Exemptions 6 and 7(C), defendant

8 primarily redacts personal identifiers and contact information, the disclosure of which would

9 constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy. Defendant has not, however,

10 justified the redaction of telephone conference access information under either of the identified

11 exemptions. Defendant shall, within fourteen days of the date of this Order, remove the access

12 information redaction from NCIC-VGTOF-11094 and produce the document to plaintiff.

13 Document No. 39

14

The information redacted from NCIC-VGTOF-11738-39 and NCIC-VGTOF-

15 11741 was compiled for law enforcement purposes, discloses investigative techniques and

16 analysis, and could reasonably be expected to be of use to those attempting to circumvent the

17 law. With regards to the redactions asserted under Exemptions 6 and 7(C), defendant

18 appropriately redacted personal identifiers and contact information, the disclosure of which

19 would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy. No further disclosures

20 regarding Document No. 39 are necessary.

21 Document No. 63

22

Defendant has made three redactions to Document No. 63 under Exemption 7(D)

23 and 7(E). The other redactions are made pursuant to Exemptions 6 and 7(C). No further

24 disclosures regarding Document No. 63 are necessary.

25 Document No. 69

26

The information redacted from Document No. 69 was compiled for law

ORDER FOLLOWING IN CAMERA REVIEW

-5-

1 enforcement purposes, discloses investigative techniques and analysis, and, to the extent it

2 reveals travel patterns or regional data, could reasonably be expected to be of use to those

3 attempting to circumvent the law. Defendant has not, however, shown that disclosure of the four

4 categories of records, the totals for each category, or the data on NCIC-VGTOF-9199 would

5 reveal information that is related to travel patterns or regions and could be used to circumvent

6 the law. Defendant shall, within fourteen days of the date of this Order, remove the redactions

7 from the categories, the totals, and NCIC-VGTOF-9199 and produce Document No. 69 to

8 plaintiff.

9 Document No. 70

10

The information redacted from Document No. 70 is not based on geographic area

11 and does not reveal travel patterns or regional data related to law enforcement efforts.

12 Defendant’s assertion of Exemption 7(E) is therefore unwarranted. Defendant shall, within

13 fourteen days of the date of this Order, remove the redactions from Document No. 70 and

14 produce the document to plaintiff.

15 Document No. 71

16

The information redacted from Document No. 71 was compiled for law

17 enforcement purposes, discloses investigative techniques and analysis, and, to the extent it

18 reveals travel patterns or regional data, could reasonably be expected to be of use to those

19 attempting to circumvent the law. Mr. Piehota states that the DCTSC data can be used to

20 identify geographic regions (Dkt. # 58-1), and the Court will not order disclosure of regional

21 data related to law enforcement efforts. Defendant has not, however, shown that disclosure of

22 the various categories of records or the totals for each category would reveal information that is

23 related to travel patterns or regions and could be used to circumvent the law. Defendant shall,

24 within fourteen days of the date of this Order, remove the redactions from the categories and the

25 totals and produce Document No. 71 to plaintiff.

26

ORDER FOLLOWING IN CAMERA REVIEW

-6-

1 Document Nos. 74 and 76

2

The information redacted from NCI-VGTOF-10084 and NCIC-VGTOF-10107-08

3 was compiled for law enforcement purposes, discloses investigative techniques and analysis, and

4 could reasonably be expected to be of use to those attempting to circumvent the law. With

5 regards to the redactions asserted under Exemptions 6 and 7(C), defendant appropriately

6 redacted personal identifiers and contact information, the disclosure of which would constitute a

7 clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy. No further disclosures regarding Document

8 Nos. 74 or 76 are necessary.

9 Document Nos. 79 and 81

10

FOIA does not require production if the document discloses matters that are

11 “(A) specifically authorized under criteria established by an Executive order to be kept secret in

12 the interest of national defense or foreign policy and (B) are in fact properly classified pursuant

13 to such Executive order.” 5 U.S.C. § 552(b)(1). Mr. Hardy asserts that information in

14 Document Nos. 79 and 81 relates to unique record identifier terminology or the sharing of

15 information gathered through intelligence collection methods and that the disclosure of the

16 information could make the intelligence collection methods susceptible to countermeasures that

17 would inhibit future collection efforts. Dkt. # 56-1. Defendant argues that the information

18 withheld meets the criteria of Executive Order No. 12958, which allows information to be

19 classified as national security information if it reveals “intelligence sources and methods”

20 (§ 1.4(c)), the original classification authority determines that the unauthorized disclosure of the

21 information reasonably could be expected to result in damage to the national security

22 (§ 1.1(a)(4)), and the original classification authority is able to identify or describe the damage

23 (§ 1.1(a)(4)).

24

Defendant has not shown that the information redacted from Document Nos. 79

25 and 81 under Exemption 1 was properly classified, that the terminology used to describe a new

26 handling code or the mention of an attached document constitute intelligence sources or

ORDER FOLLOWING IN CAMERA REVIEW

-7-

1 methods, or that disclosure of this information would reveal a protected intelligence source or

2 method. Defendant shall, within fourteen days of the date of this Order, remove the Exemption

3 1 redactions from Document Nos. 79 and 81 and produce them to plaintiff.

4

With regards to the redactions asserted under Exemptions 6 and 7(C), defendant

5 appropriately redacted personal identifiers and contact information, the disclosure of which

6 would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

7 Document No. 80

8

The first two paragraphs of NCIC-VGTOF-10567 discuss the source of certain

9 intelligence streams and the methods by which those streams are shared. Although the Court has

10 some doubts regarding the adequacy of the procedures used to classify this material, disclosure

11 will not be ordered. The third paragraph of NCIC-VGTOF-10567 and the redacted paragraph on

12 NCIC-VGTOF-10570 do not reveal intelligence sources or methods, however.

13

With regards to the redactions asserted under Exemptions 6 and 7(C), defendant

14 primarily redacts personal identifiers and contact information, the disclosure of which would

15 constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy. Defendant has not, however,

16 justified the redaction of agency, center, or other organizational unit names or contact

17 information.

18

Defendant shall, within fourteen days of the date of this Order, remove the

19 redactions from the third paragraph of NCIC-VGTOF-10567 and NCIC-VGTOF-10570 and the

20 contact information redactions from NCIC-VGTOF-10568-69 and produce Document No. 80 to

21 plaintiff.

22 Document No. 84

23

Certain redactions on NCIC-VGTOF-10608, including the first redaction in the

24 first paragraph, the redactions in the bullet list, and the last redaction on the page, discuss the

25 source of certain intelligence streams. Although the Court has some doubts regarding the

26 adequacy of the procedures used to classify this material, disclosure will not be ordered.

ORDER FOLLOWING IN CAMERA REVIEW

-8-

1

The other redactions asserted under Exemption 1 do not reveal intelligence sources

2 or methods, however. Neither the terminology used to describe a new handling code nor the

3 legal repercussions of using terminology interchangeably constitutes intelligence sources or

4 methods, and there is no reason to suspect that disclosure of this information would reveal a

5 protected intelligence source or method. Defendant shall, within fourteen days of the date of this

6 Order, remove these Exemption 1 redactions from Document No. 84 and produce it to plaintiff.

7

With regards to the redactions asserted under Exemptions 6 and 7(C), defendant

8 appropriately redacted personal identifiers and contact information, the disclosure of which

9 would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

10 Document No. 96

11

Exemption 7(E) authorizes the redaction of information compiled for law

12 enforcement purposes that would “disclose techniques and procedures for law enforcement

13 investigations or prosecutions, or would disclose guidelines for law enforcement investigations

14 or prosecutions if such disclosure could reasonably be expected to risk circumvention of the

15 law.” 5 U.S.C. § 552(b)(7)(E). The incomplete and very general information provided in

16 Document No. 96 regarding behaviors and objects that might be considered suspicious are

17 already known to the public through common sense or other avenues, and their disclosure cannot

18 reasonably be expected to aid terrorists in their attempts to circumvent the law. Defendant shall,

19 within fourteen days of the date of this Order, remove the redactions from Document No. 96 and

20 produce it to plaintiff.

21 Document No. 100

22

Mr. Hardy asserts that information redacted from Document No. 100 relates to

23 “intelligence collection methods which are used to investigate a specific individual or group of

24 individuals who the U.S. Government has determined to be of national security interest.” Dkt.

25 # 56. A review of NCIC-VGTOF-10889 does not support this assertion, however. The redacted

26 information does not reveal intelligence collection methods or sources, nor does it describe

ORDER FOLLOWING IN CAMERA REVIEW

-9-

1 investigative techniques or procedures. Rather, the redacted information relates to coding

2 options available to an official nominating an individual for inclusion in the NCIC/VGTOF.

3 Having failed to show that the information redacted from NCIC-VGTOF-10889 was properly

4 classified, that the information constitutes intelligence sources or methods, or that disclosure of

5 the information would reveal a protected intelligence source or method, redaction under

6 Exemption 1 is not justified. Defendant shall, within fourteen days of the date of this Order,

7 remove the Exemption 1 redactions from Document No. 100 and produce them to plaintiff.

8

With regards to the redactions asserted under Exemptions 6 and 7(C), defendant

9 appropriately redacted personal identifiers and contact information, the disclosure of which

10 would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

11 Document Nos. 109 and 110

12

The information redacted from NCIC-VGTOF-11065 and NCIC-VGTOF-11080

13 was arguably compiled for law enforcement purposes, but the data element disclosed in the

14 redacted text is already known to the public through common sense or other avenues (including

15 preceding sentences in these same documents), and its disclosure cannot reasonably be expected

16 to aid terrorists in their attempts to circumvent the law. Defendant shall, within fourteen days of

17 the date of this Order, remove the Exemption 7(E) redaction from Document Nos. 109 and 110

18 and produce them to plaintiff.

19

With regards to the redactions asserted under Exemptions 6 and 7(C), defendant

20 appropriately redacted personal identifiers and contact information, the disclosure of which

21 would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

22 Document Nos. 112 and 113

23

Exemption 7(E) authorizes the redaction of information compiled for law

24 enforcement purposes that would “disclose techniques and procedures for law enforcement

25 investigations or prosecutions, or would disclose guidelines for law enforcement investigations

26 or prosecutions if such disclosure could reasonably be expected to risk circumvention of the

ORDER FOLLOWING IN CAMERA REVIEW

-10-

1 law.” 5 U.S.C. § 552(b)(7)(E). Defendant has withheld text from NCIC-VGTOF-11134, NCIC-

2 VGTOF-11138, and NCIC-VGTOF-11142 because it describes specific individuals of interest to

3 the FBI with reference to the conduct and location that excited the agency’s attention. Although

4 the disclosure of this information may, as Mr. Hardy asserts, “warn terrorists from this location

5 and/or who fit the described characteristics that they are under investigation [and] cause them to

6 take countermeasures to avoid detection,” there is no indication that the redacted information

7 “discloses techniques and procedures for law enforcement investigations or prosecutions.”

8 Exemption 7(E) does not, therefore, apply and defendant has offered no alternative grounds to

9 justify the redactions. Defendant shall, within fourteen days of the date of this Order, remove

10 the Exemption 7(E) redaction from Document Nos. 112 and 113 and produce them to plaintiff.

11

With regards to the redactions asserted under Exemptions 6 and 7(C), defendant

12 appropriately redacted personal identifiers and contact information, the disclosure of which

13 would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

14 Document No. 114

15

FOIA protects from disclosure information regarding government employees,

16 contractors, and investigative subjects that would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of

17 personal privacy. Thus, the redaction of employee/contractor names and their contact

18 information from Document No. 114 is appropriate. There does not, however, appear to be any

19 privacy-related justification for the redaction of agency, center, or other organizational unit

20 names or contact information as occurred on NCIC-VGTOF-11150.

21

Nor has defendant justified its assertion of Exemption 7(E) with regards to

22 Document No. 114. Defendant offers no theory under which the telephone number for the

23 Terrorism Watch List could be considered a law enforcement technique, guideline or procedure.

24 The information redacted from NCIC-VGTOF-11155 on Exemption 7(E) grounds has already

25 been ordered disclosed in the context of Document No. 100.

26

The redactions on NCIC-VGTOF-11156-59 are justified as the information is

ORDER FOLLOWING IN CAMERA REVIEW

-11-

1 outside the scope of plaintiff’s FOIA request.

2

Defendant shall, within fourteen days of the date of this Order, remove the

3 Exemption 7(E) redactions from Document No. 114 and the redaction on NCIC-VGTOF-11150

4 and produce the document to plaintiff.

5 Document No. 124

6

The fourth paragraph under “P. (U) The Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court

7 (FISC),” the text under “Q. (U) Attorney-Client Privilege” on NCIC-VGTOF-11575, and the

8 list of investigative techniques on NCIC-VGTOF-11576 discuss the source of certain

9 intelligence streams, the methods by which those streams are shared, and/or the means by which

10 intelligence is gathered. The Court therefore finds that the information withheld in these

11 paragraphs is appropriately characterized as national security information in that it reveals

12 “intelligence sources and methods” for purposes of Executive Order No. 12958, § 1.4(c).

13 Although the Court has some doubts regarding the adequacy of the procedures used to classify

14 this material, disclosure of this information will not be ordered. The first three paragraphs under

15 “P. (U) The Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC)” on NCIC-VGTOF-11575 discuss

16 requirements of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act and do not reveal intelligence sources

17 or methods, however.

18

The information redacted from NCIC-VGTOF-11580-81 on Exemption 1 grounds

19 has already been ordered disclosed in the context of Document No. 100.

20

With regards to the redactions asserted under Exemptions 6 and 7(C), there does

21 not appear to be any privacy-related justification for the redaction of agency, center, or other

22 organizational unit names or contact information.

23

Defendant shall, within fourteen days of the date of this Order, remove the

24 redactions from the first three paragraphs under “P. (U) The Foreign Intelligence Surveillance

25 Court (FISC)” on NCIC-VGTOF-11575, the Exemption 1 redactions from NCIC-VGTOF-

26 11580-81, and the contact information redactions from NCIC-VGTOF-11579-80 and produce

ORDER FOLLOWING IN CAMERA REVIEW

-12-

1 Document No. 124 to plaintiff.

2

3

Having resolved all outstanding issues in the above-captioned matter, the Court

4 directs the Clerk of Court to enter judgment.

5

6

Dated this 21st day of September, 2012.

7

8

A

Robert S. Lasnik

9

United States District Judge

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

ORDER FOLLOWING IN CAMERA REVIEW

-13-

 
 Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-2 Filed 07/06/11 Page 1 of 113
EXHIBIT B (Part 1)

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-2 Filed 07/06/11 Page 2 of 113
DOCUMENT2

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-2 Filed 07/06/11 Page 3 of 113
FBI Nominations & VGTOF Training
January 28,2008
DOCUMENT 2 NOC-VGTOF-8342

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-2 Filed 07/06/11 Page 4 of 113
b6 b7C

Defmitions ................................................................... 1

Condensed Histoey ............................................................ 2

Ty'pes of FBI Nominations ...................................................... 3

CJIS Division Non-Investigative Subject Nominations •.••••••••..••••••.••••••••••• 4

• TID~

tsource Docs 7111) and TIDEI

ksource Docs 1/2).

FBI Headquarter's Non-Investigative Subject Nominations •••••. o ••• o •••••• o • o •••••• 4

•

TIDEI

~Source Docs 1/2/3).

Investigative Subject Nominations ............................................... S
• TIDEI I

TSC's Minimum Entry Criteria For VGTOF •• o •••••••••••••••••••••• o •••••••• o •• o 6

Handling Codes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 - 9

Cautions and Medical Conditions .............................................. 10

Who Should Be Watclilisted In VGTOF o • o •••••••••• o •••••••••••••••• o ••• o o o • 11 o ••

• · t TID~

also referenced under 'Decon:tliction).

Exemption Requests .......................................................... 11

Who Should NOT Be Watchlisted In VGTOF (or the TSDB) ••••.••••••• o ••• o o ••• o. 12

What Records Should Be Marked FBI SRC=Y • :13 o • o • o •• o ••••• o • o • o •• o •• o •• o • o ••••

What Records Should NOT Be Marked FBI SRC=Y •••••••• 13 o •••••• o ••••••••• o ••••

How To Determine FBI SRCNGTOF Status . o • o ••••••• o ••••••••• o •• o ••••••••• o •• 14

• TPNI

[TIDE

; Note:

Reference this section and the explanation on Page 1 of'Detennining VGTOF & FBI

SRC Status' document, dated 03/21/2007.

Is Why Does It Matter How The Record Marked • 15 0 ••••••••••• 0 • 0 o •••••• 0 ••• 0 0 • 0 ••

VGTOF=Y.......What Happens Next? ........................................ 16- 17

How To See What's Happened To A Reeord ..• 18 o •••••••• o o •• o ••••• o ••••••••••••••

Deciphering 'The Dump' Report .......... •. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 - 19

Who Entered That Record .................................................... 20

Deconftietion ................................................................. 21

What NOT To Send To The VGTOF SME .••• o ••••••••• o ••• o • 22 o •••••••••••••••••• Processing Delete Actions For FBI Nominations ••••••• 23 0 o ••• o ••••••• o •••• o o •••••••

NCIC-VGTOF-8343

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-2 Filed 07/06/11 Page 5 of 113

Defmitions

• 'ACS' - Automated Case Support system.

• 'AGDIR' - FBI Legal AttacheiLEGAT record.

• 'CDC' -FBI ChiefDivision Counsel.

• 'CMC' - Cautions and Medical Conditions.

• 'Dewatchlisted' - Completely removed from the TSDB and all downstream systems.

• 'DT' - Domestic Terrorist.

• 'DTE'- Date.

• 'FBI Information' - NIC and OCA.

• 'FBI SRC' - The person is under investigation by the FBI and the particular identity contained

within the TIDE!rSDB was nominated for watchlisting by the FBL

·

• 'FI' - Full Investigation.

• 'FNU' - First Name Unknown.

• 'IAFIS' - Integrated Automated Fingerprint Identification System.

• 'ill' - Interstate Identification Index.

• 'IT'- International Terrorist. .

• 'Legacy Record' -A record entered into the VGTOF by an FBI entity on or before August 8,

2004.

• 'LNU' - Last Name Unknown.

• 'MILDET' - FBI Military Detainee record.

• 'NIC' - NCIC record identification number.

• 'NCIC' -National Crime Information Center.

• 'NCTC' - National Counterterrorism Center.

• 'OCA' - Originating case agency number.

• 'OGA' -Other Government Agency.

• 'OGC' -FBI Office ofthe General Counsel.

• 'ORI'- Originating Agency Identifier.

• 'PI' - Preliminary Investigation.

• 'Sources'- Identity-level documents/information in the TIDE.

• 'Person Sources' - Person-level documents/information in the TIDE.

• 'TIDE' - Terrorist Identities Datamart Environment.

• 'TREX Unit' - Terrorist Review'and Examination Unit.

• 'TSC'- Terrorist Screening Center.

• 'TSDB' - Terrorist Screening Database.

• 'VGTOF' - Violent Gang and Terrorist Organization File.

1
NCIC-YGTOF-8344

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-2 Filed 07/06/11 Page 6 of 113
Condensed History
• August 2004: Known as the '2004 VGTOF IT Import', all terrorist records contained in the VGTOF were provided to NCTC and served as the consolidation of the FBI's IT watchlist into TIPOFF. o Instant Quality Assurance Issues No type ofqualify assurance review was conducted prior to this file being provided to the NCTC. All records were defaulted to USPER=YES. All records were placed on the Selectee List. Not all data fields were entered into TIPOFF and/or the data was entered but. not into fields mapped to export to the TSDB (for example - the Unique Comments field).
• August 9, 2004: The ability ofall FBI Field Offices to affect action directly in the VGTOF (for terrorist records) was rescinded. o Effective this date, the TREX Unit, the TSC, and limited entities within the CllS Division became the only entities with the ability to add, modify, and delete terrorist records in the VGTOF. o No type ofqualify assurance review was conducted by the record owners prior to their access being rescinded.
• October 2004: Add DT records contained in the VGTOF were provided to the TSC and served as the consolidation ofthe FBI's DT watchlist into the TSDB.
• January 2005: The TSDB had the ability to mark records 'FBI SRC'. Prior to this time, all IT nominations submitted to the TSC were automatically exported to the VGTOF ifthe minimum entry criteria was met.
• May 2005: The VGTOF Refresh was conducted to address several short- and long-term issues that affected terrorist records in the VGTOF. It also accomplished the following: o Deleting 7,264 TSC-entered terrorist records. o Modifying/updating 113,000 TSC-entered terrorist record. o Adding 12,474 records that were previously rejected from the VGTOF.
• June 2005: The TSDB's near-real-time connectivity to the NCIC was established. prior to this date, the TSC only added terrorist records into the VGTOF (via daily electronic files)--TSC-entered records were not modified or deleted.
• October 2005: The ens Division provided the NCTC with a file containing 5,289 MITDET and AGDIR records that the ens Division had entered into the VGTOF between August
2004 and October 2005, but had not provided the nomination information to the NCTC so
2
NCIC-VGTOF-8345

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-2 Filed 07/06/11 Page 7 of 113

they were not into the TIDE or the TSDB. • November 5, 2006: The TSDB began exporting to the VGTOF at the identity/TSC ID level,
rather than by the watchlist entry/TSDB ID level, which enabled a one-for-one relationship between the TIDE ID, the TSC ID, and· the NIC.

Types of FBI No~inations

•

Non-Investigative Subjects

o By the ens Division

FBI MILDET nominations.

• 199E-HQ-1404383, Serial3036, dated 10/01/2003.

FBI AGDIR nominations.

• 66F-HQ-A1308701, Serial593, dated 05/21/2002.

o By FBI Headquarters

These individuals are 'on the radar' but are not currently under investigation by

the FBI.

Basic information sharing.

The Military Liaison & Detainee Unit may also submit FBI MILDET

nominations.

•

Investigative Subjects

o By FBI Field Offices

Pis

Fis

3 NCIC -VGTOF-8346

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-2 Filed 07/06/11 Page 8 of 113

CJIS Division Non-Investi&ative Subjeet Nominations

The CJIS Division processes all FBI MILDET and AGDIR nominations for which biometrics are obtained.

Previous Process • August 2004- September 2005: The CJIS Division indexed the biometrics into the IAFIS,
established a record in the III, and created a corresponding terrorist record in the VGTOF, but the information was not submitted to the NCTC.

Current Process

• October 2005 - C'up'ent: The CJIS Division indexes the biometrics into the IAFIS, establishes

a record in the III, and submits the information to the NCTC for watchlisting.

o CJIS Division nominations were originally submitted to the NCTC via cable/teletype,

but are now <rormally) rmitted via e-mail spreadsheets.

- TIDE

Source Docs 7/11 [cable].

b6

• QA issue exists due to the fact that AGDIR designation code was not

b7C

entered into the 'Location Last Seen At' field.

TIDEI

ISource Docs 1/2 [spreadsheet].

• MILDET record with no designation code cited/requested.

The majority ofall FBI MILDET and ADGIR records are nominated with an OCA and a unique MILDET or AGDIR code (ex: MILDETIQ or AGDIRRO). The MILDET and AGDIR codes are to be entered into the 'Location Last Seen Af field in TIDE and exported to the TSDB for further export to the VGTOF. This 'Location' field is mapped within the TSDB to auto-export to the VGTOF 'MIS' field.

FBI Headquarters Non-lnvesti&ative Subject Nominations FBI Headquarters will submit cables/teletypesiiiR.s to the intelligence community regarding
4
NCIC-VGTOF-8347

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-2 Filed 07/06/11 Page 9 of 113
persons ofinterest. Generally, these individual are not under investigation by the FBI. Legacy records exist wherein FBI Headquarters has used the FD-930 to watchlist non-
investigative subjects. Conduct a drill-down/review ofthe ACS to determine ifthe individual is, in fact, under investigation by the FBI.

InvestiJative Subject Nominations

• The FD-930 is the primary mechanism by which action to FBI investigative subject records is
affected.
o FD-930s were not able to be uploaded into the ACS system until the eForm FD-930 was deployed in May 2006.
o The eForm FD-930s cannot be viewed by selecting 'T'/text in the ACS. They must be downloaded and opened.

• An FD-930 will not be attached at the 'Sources' or 'Person Sources' level in TIDE for every

subject that is under investigation by the FBI

o Example: Ifan investigative subject was entered into TIPOFF/TIDE by way ofthe

VGTOF IT Import and a Modify FD-930 has not been submitted since that time, there

will not be an FD-930 in TIDE.

TIDEDis an example ofthis.

b6 b7C

5 NCIC-VGTOF-8348

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-2 Filed 07/06/11 Page 10 of 113

TSC's Minimum Entry Criteria For VGTOF

• Full First Name (no FNU). o A single initial constitutes a full first name.
• Full Last name (no LNU). • Circa Year of Birth.
o The TSDB auto-exports to the VGTOF a '11' for the month and/or day ifeither or both elements are not provided because the 'DOB' field in the VGTOF requires all eight characters to be populated.
• A Category Code other than 17 or 89.

• The VGTOF's minimum entry criteria is less stringent than what the TSC dictates. Because of the difference in minimum entry criteria, legacy records exist wherein the TSC's minimum entry criteria is not met. In these instances, mark the record appropriately (FBI SRC=:Y) as ifthe TSC's minimum entry criteria has been met and:

b6 b7C

0 for FBI MILDET and AGDIR non-investigative subject nominations, provide the TIDE

ID tof

ror resolution; and

0 for investigative subject nominations and FBI :Headquarters non-investigative subject

nominations, create a QA ticket for resolutioD..

6 NCIC-VGTOF-8349

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-2 Filed 07/06/11 Page 11 of 113

Handlin1 Codes
Each individual nominated for inclusion into the VGTOF must be assigned one offive Handling Codes, based on their investigative status and available biographic information. A description of each Handling Code and basic guidance for handling standard situations is as follows:

•

Handling Code 1

o Handling Code 1 is reserved for individuals who have been indicted in a U.S.

Court on a Federal charge and a record for the individual has been established

in the Wanted Persons File in the NCIC.

The charge does not have to be terrorism-related.

Interpol and other foreign warrants do not, in and ofthemselves, qualify

a person to receive a Handling Code 1.

o As of June 2007, the NCTC agreed to begin placing statements regarding an

individ~'s Handling Code 1 status into the Common Comments field in the

TIDE. The basic jargon will be:

.

'As ofMMIDDIYYYY, this person is a valid Handling Code 1. NCIC

Wanted Person File record number WJIII'Hifi/NO:I.' .

• As ofJune 2007, the Handling Code 1 statements are only

being entered based on the receipt of an FD-930 or at the

TSC's request as a result of the Handling Code 1

Reconciliation Project.

o Not all valid Handling Code 1 subject records may contain the Handling Code

1 statement in the Common Comments field in the TIDE. The absence ofthe

7

NCIC-VGTOF-8350

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-2 Filed 07/06/11 Page 12 of 113
Handling Code 1 statement should not be interpreted to mean the individual is not a valid Handling Code 1. o All individuals that have been issued a Handling Code 1 (by the TREX Unit and/or the NCTC and/or the TSC) or, based on a review ofthe case file/derogatory information, appear to qualify for a Handling Code 1, must be sent to the VGTOF SME queue for review and handling. Handling Code 1 records are not to be processed outside ofthe VGTOF SME queue.
• Handling Code 2 o Handling Code 2 is reserved for individuals who meet one ofthe following criteria: Reasonable, articulable suspicion of criminal domestic or international terrorism activity; or A commitment from the Department ofHomeland Security that they will issue a 'Detainer' should the individual be encountered by law enforcement; or Exigent circumstances which require immediate entry of a record. (A record nominated by an agency under these circumstances will be reviewed on the next business day following the entry oftbis record.) o The issuance of a Handling Code 2 requires a review and approval for legal sufficiency by both the FBI Field Office CDC and the FBrs OGC. o As ofJune 2007, the NCTC agreed to begin placing statements regarding an individual's Handling Code 2 status into the Common Comments field in the TIDE. The basic jargon will be: 'As ofMM/DDIYYYY, this person is a valid Handling Code 2. Field Office CDC and FBIHQ OGC concurrence was obtained and is set forth in enter document file number(s) and serial number(s).' • As of June 2007, the Handling Code 2 statements are only being entered based on the receipt ofan FD-930 or at the TSC's request as a result ofthe Handling Code 2 Reconciliation Project o Not all valid Handling Code 2 subject records may contain the Handling Code 2 statement in the Common Comments field in the TIDE. The absence ofthe Handling Code 2 statement should not be interpreted to mean the individual is not a valid Handling Code 2. o All individuals that have been issued a Handling Code 2 (by the TREX Unit and/or the NCTC and/or the TSC) or, based on a review ofthe case file/derogatory information, appear to qualify for a Handling Code 2, must be sent to the VGTOF SME queue for review and handling. Handling Code 2 records are not to be processed outside ofthe VGTOF SME queue.
8
NCIC-VGfOF-8351

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-2 Filed 07/06/11 Page 13 of 113
b7E
• Handling Code 3 o Handling Code 3 is for individuals that do not qualify for Handling Code 1, 2, R or S (for DTs) and meet the TSC's minimum entry criteria.
• Silent Hit Handling Codes Rand S o Handling Code R: Routine Silent Hit o Handling Code S: Sensitive Silent Hit*
0
0
o Within the NCIC, there is no operational difference between Handlin Codes R and S. Handlin Codes Rand S ar Therefore, it is imperative
._tha:~t~in-d-::i~vi:-:d:-ual-:"s-t':':"h-at:-p-o_se_an_y-::d:-egr-ee-o-::f:-::threa::---:-i-:-to~the safety of an encountering law enforcement officer not be issued a Silent Hit Handling Code. Any individual for whom information is gleaned that indicates the individual is known to be anned and dangerous and/or has a docwnented propensity for violence must be issued a Handling Code 3, unless they otherwise qualify for a Handling Code 1 or 2.
o Mere possession or ownership ofweaponry or a concealed weapon permit is not sufficientjustification for an individual to be excludedfrom being
issued a Silent Hit Handling Code ifthey otherwise qualifyfor it. An
individual's threat to any encountering law enforcement officer and/or their propensity for violence needs to be evidenced in accompanying derogatory information.
o Only in rare situations will sole OOA nominations be authorized to receive a Handling Code R. OGA nominations that are deemed the 'same as' a subject under investigation by the FBI shall be issued Handling Code Rs, as long as the FBI subject qualifies for Handling Code R status.
9
NCIC-VGTOF-8352

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-2 Filed 07/06/11 Page 14 of 113
Cautions And Medical Conditions • Within the NCIC, there are 17 unique alerts, also known as Cautions and Medical
Conditions/CMCs, which may be added to the beginning ofNCIC person records. Included in the 17 available CMCs are 'Armed and Dangerous' and 'Violent Tendencies'. • It is expected that the recipients ofVGTOF records will treat the individual they have encountered with the appropriate level ofcaution. To assist law enforcement officers in being adequately prepared, the statement 'Warning- Approach With Caution' precedes every terrorist record that is returned in response to an NCIC transaction and is the functional equivalent of 'Armed and Dangerous'. • Inasmuch as the presence of a CMC, particularly 'Armed and Dangerous' and 'Violent Tendencies' will cause an officer to approach an individual with an extremely heightened state of alert and, in most cases, with their weapon drawn, the application ofeither of these CMCs.must be well documented -- the available derogatory information must indicate the subject is Armed and Dangerous and/or has Violent Tendencies, or the available derogatory information describes the individual as likely being Armed and Dangerous and/or having Violent Tendencies.
10 NCIC -VGTOF-8353

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-2 Filed 07/06/11 Page 15 of 113
• Mere possession or ownership ofweaponry or a concealed weapon permit is not sufficient justification to apply the 'Armed and Dangerous' and/or the 'Violent Tendencies' CMC.

Who Should Be Watchlisted In VGTOF

Assurillng the tsC's minimum entry criteria has been met:

• All subjects ofFis.

o Ifthe individual's nexus to terrorism has not been ruled out, they are to remain

watchlisted even ifthe case has been closed.

Cases are closed administratively for various reasons, to include the

depof subject left CONUS, relocated to another Field Office's territory,

whereabouts are unkno,

incarcerated, etc.

• Example: In TID

the TREX Unit erroneously

b
h

67 c

processed and submitted a Removal FD-930 to the NCTC.

The TSC did not catch this issue/error and, therefore, the

individual was not watchlisted in the VOTOF from January

2007 to January 2008, even though his nexus to terrorism was

well-documented by the FBI; in fact, he was indicted and tried

on terrorism and other charges.

• All subject's ofgrum Pis.

11

NCIC-VGTOF-8354

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-2 Filed 07/06/11 Page 16 of 113
o Subjects ofPis must be dewatcblisted when the case is closed. This is current 315 policy and is under review at this time.
• All FBI CJIS Division MILDET and AGDIR nominations. • All FBI Headquarters non-investigative subject nominations. • All sole OGA records.
Exemption Reoests
An individual watchlisted as a known or appropriately suspected terrorist will be included in all supported systems if the individual meets the criteria for inclusion. An individual may be excluded from a particular supported system in rare cases when there is a reasonable and detailed operational justification for not including the individual in a particular supported system and the request for exclusion has been reviewed and approved by the TR.EX Unit and the TSC. (Reference HQ-00, Serial 54, dated 08/01/2005.)
Due to the VGTOF Silent Hit Handling Code, there is no such thing as an exclusion request for VGTOF.
Who Should NOT Be Watchlisted In VGTOF (or the TSDB)
• Anyone who has been determined to have no nexus fo terrorism or 'the allegations against the individual were determined to be without merit.
• Ifit is believed that a criminal or other reason exists for an individual to remain in the VGTOF or any other downstream system but it has been determined that they have no nexus to terrorism, they may not remain in the system with a terrorist record.
o The agent/agency that wants them to remain in the system needs to coordinate their
entry with a local representative from the agency that governs the system to have a non~ terrorist record established. • Category Code 17 records. • Category Code 89 records.
12
NCIC·VGTOF-8355

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-2 Filed 07/06/11 Page 17 of 113 - ·-------------------------------------------------~------------------.
What Reeonls Should Be Marked FBI SRC=Y • Any record wherein the individual is under investigation by the FBI and the specific identity
contained within the TIDE ID has been nominated by the FBI. o A thorough review ofeach identity that was nominated and the supporting
documentation needs to occur. Example: The FBI establishes a record in the VGTOF with the first name of 'Abu'; however, when the NCTC establishes the record in the TIDE, it is established as lfNU'. In instances such as this, the record should be marked FBISRC=Y.
o The majority ofrecords contained in the TIDE wherein the person is under investigation by the FBI and the identity was nominated by the FBI also contain biographical identifiers that were not submitted/nominated by the FBI. Because ofthis, the additional identifie:J;S may not be in the VGTOF. However, these records must still be 13 NCIC -VGTOF-8356

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-2 Filed 07/06/11 Page 18 of 113
marked FBI SRC=Y. What Records Should NOT Be Marked FBI SRC=Y
• FBI CJIS Division :MILDET and AGDIR nominations. • FBI Headquarters nominations wherein the individual is not under investigation by the FBI. • Sole QGA nominations.
How To Determine FBI SRCNGTOF Status To properly determine FBI SRC vs VGTOF status, each individual identity must be reviewed, to include reviewing the FBI-originated documents (FD-930 and/or 2004 VGTOF IT Import) and the VGTOF. • In most instances, records with an FD-930 attached under 'Sources' and a NIC and an OCA (in the 'FBI Information' tab) have been entered into the VGTOF by the TREX Unit Records meeting this criteria are to be marked FBI SRC=Y. • The two exceptions to the above are: o When an FD-930 has been attached under 'Sources' in order to support placement ofa
14 NCIC -VGTOF-8357

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-2 Filed 07/06/11 Page 19 of 113

person-level attribute and not because the identity was nominated by the FBI. Person-level attributes include: • CMCs • USPER status • TECS and/or VGTOF Silent Hit status • Category Code • Deadstatus

• Examnle; TPN) I__ I ~------------------~

b6 b7C

* The first three TIDE IDs were included on the FD-930; the last

was not
* The FD-930 is attached under 'Sources' to all four records. * The FD-930 is attached to the last TIDE ID only to justify the

TECS Silent Hit status.
* The FBI Information was only applied to the first three TIDE

IDs to indicate that they are the only FBI-nominated identities.

Why Does It Matter How The Record Is Marked?
Ifrecords are not properly reviewed and marked today, we are increasing the probability of not encountering a known or appropriately suspected terrorist (because the information was not exported to the VGTOF when it should have been) and/or we are creating a TSC QA project for the future.
• Marking a record FBI SRc-Y prohibits the requisite transaction from being submitted to the VGTOF.
• Marking a record VGTOF=Y (and selecting 'SUBMIT) triggers the requisite transaction to be submitted to the VGTOF.
15
NQC -VGTOF-8358

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-2 Filed 07/06/11 Page 20 of 113
o Ifthe last reviewed nomination contains a NIC and OCA that was received from the TIDE, the TSDB will not send the requisite transaction to the VGTOF, even ifthe record is marked VGTOF=Y.
VGTOF=Y..........What Happens Next?
When a record is marked VGTOF=Y and 'SUBMIT' is selected, the following occurs: • The appropriate transaction is submitted to the VGTOF, which garners one ofthe following
results: o 'Add'- the transaction was successful
This response results in a terrorist record being established, supplemented, or
16 NCIC-vGTOF-8359

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-2 Filed 07/06/11 Page 21 of 113
modified, as appropriate, and the NIC is returned to and stored in the TSDB. o 'Duplicate Add' - the transaction was successful, but it appears to match another record
intheNCIC. This response results in a terrorist record being established, supplemented, or modified, as appropriate. • Ifthe transaction was to establish/create a terrorist record, the NIC is returned to and stored in the TSDB.
o 'Duplicate Reject' - the transaction was unsuccessful. This response results in a record not being established, modified or supplemented, depending on the type oftransaction that was sent Ifthe transaction was to establish/create a terrorist record, a NIC will not be returned to or stored in the TSDB; however, the record will remain VGTOF=Y intheTSDB.
o 'Reject - Not On File' - the transaction was unsuccessful. This response results in a record not being modified, supplemented or deleted, depending on the types oftransaction that was sent.
o 'Edit Error' - the transaction was unsuccessful due to the fact that there is a formatting or code error. This response results in a record not being established, modified or supplemented, depending on the type oftransaction that was sent Ifthe transaction was to establish/create a terrorist record, a NIC will not be returned to or stored in the TSDB ;however, the record will remain VGTOF=Y.
All terrorist records in the VGTOF have a TSC operational ORI: DCTSCOl00, DCTSC0200, DCTSC0300, DCTSC0400, DCTSC0500, DCTSC0600, DCTSC0700, DCTSC0800 or DCTSC0900.
Incremental ORis are necessary to work around the NCIC validation criteria/edits that are in place to enforce the person-level record concept that is the foundation ofthe NCIC, and to allow the TSC to better support the intelligence community's way ofwatchlisting terrorists at the identity le.vel.
When exported from the TSDB, records are (in most cases) exported using the first ORI in the series provided above. Ifthe transaction is 'duplicate rejected', it is automatically re-sent using the next ORI in the series. This process is repeated until the record response is 'add' or 'duplicate add'. Ifthe
final oru in the series is reached and all responses have been 'duplicate reject', the transaction is not
affected in the VGTOF, be it the establishmeD.t ofa new record, the modification ofan existing record, or the supplementation of an existing record.
A new ORJ structure and/or modifications to the NCIC that will better support terrorist
17
NCIC-VGTOF-8360

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-2 Filed 07/06/11 Page 22 of 113
- -~----------------------------------------------------,
watchlisting at the identity level is being devised.
How To See What's Happened To A Record • Dump Consumer Message Report
o 'Reports' tab.
o 'Export' folder. 18 NCIC-VGTOF-8361
-~--------~-- - - - · - · · -~-------------

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-2 Filed 07/06/11 Page 23 of 113

b6 b7C
o 'Dump Consumer Message: Report Consumer Messages' (third from the bottom) May be run by TSC ID or TSDB ID. The majority ofrecords contained in the TSDB have all oftheir TSDB-toNCIC and NCIC-to-TSDB activity logged in this report.

Deeipherine 'The Dump' Report
Transaction Types/Codes • EGMT: Add transaction. • EGMN: Supplemental transaction.
o Sent using NAM and NIC. • MGM: Modify transaction.
o Sent using NAM and NIC, unless the NAM is what is being modified, i.q which case the NIC and OCA is sent.
• XGM: Cancel transaction. o Sent using NIC and OCA.
• XGMN: Cancel a supplemental data field transaction. o Sent using NAM and NIC.
Header and transaction lines to the NCIC are in period delimited formats -- each period
I represents a field in the VGTOF. The following is a partial view ofwhat you would see ifyou run a
'Dump' Report on TSC IDj
..Ao..add.j:EfrMUDllli.!W:4i"on was sent establishing the record in the VGTOF:
r--------------~EGMn1~----------------------------------~
~==~~~~~·~···~...~..·~··ThiTRN~~TLX~T·~~mGCODE r-~~~~~------~~O~NUP~~S=ER~N~CL____jRnLNAME~~------~

A supplementaJ/EGMN transaction was sent adding one AKA and three alternate DOBs to

the record:

-

I ~IWP_ _______.~

Asu

one AKA to the record:

19 NCIC -VGTOF-8362

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-2 Filed 07/06/11 Page 24 of 113

A cancel supplemental/XGMN transaction was sent to caneeJ/delete one AKA and two
I_alternate DOBs from tJ~he~rGe-co-~rd-:~--~-~-------~-~N~~oB~I~~-~--------~-~~

A mod· IMGM transaction was sent to add the subfeet's height to the record:

b6

.~...-__--_-_ --_-_ --_,r..-GMTG/5M11

N~-----------------~ h7C

A cancel/XGM transaction was sent to eanceJ/remove the record from the VGTOF:

I

~GM~------------------------~

Who Entered That Record?
20
NCIC-VGTOF·8363

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-2 Filed 07/06/11 Page 25 of 113
• DTE of20050507 and after with an all numeric OCA are TSC-entered. o TSC IDs are the·ocAs for records entered or modified beginning in November 2006. o TSDB IDs are the OCAs for records entered prior to and not modified after November 2006. (A special project in November/December 2006 reconciled the majority ofthese, so there should not be too many in the VGTOF.)
• DTE of20040808 and before with an alpha-numeric OCA are FBI-entered (either by the TREX Unit, the FBI Field Office or the CJIS Division).
• DTE of20040809 and after with an ~pha-numeric OCA may be TSC- or FBI-entered.
For additional indicators, look at the VGTOF 'N.IIS' field: • TSDB maps the following data fields to export to the VGTOF 'N.IIS' field in the
following order: o MILDETxx or AGDIRxx (if applicable to the record). o USPER status o TIDE ID (in the 'NC #/##G###' fonnat, ifa TIDE ID exists) o Full Name (ifthe base name ofthe record was truncated because it exceeded
30 characters) o PPT Country(ies) • The 'MIS' field formatting/mapping. above, does not definitively me8n that the TSC ep.tered the record, due to the fact that, in several known instances, the TREX Unit adopted our 'MIS' field data format for FBI investigative subject nominations and, in other instances, they 'commandeered' TSC-entered records and modified them to appear to be FBI-entered records.
21
NCIC -VGTOF-8364

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-2 Filed 07/06/11 Page 26 of 113
Deconfliction Instances arise wherein an intelligence community entity, normally the FBI, detennines an individual to have no nexus to terrorism; however, one or more other entities believe that a nexus exists. In these instances, NCTC and TSC Analysts work to coordinate a definitive decision by the disagreeing entities. o Ifthe individual is the subject ofan FBI investigation, the FBI 'trumps' the disagreeing
agency. o Ifthe disagreeing agency provides derogatory information that was not addressed
by/during the FBI case, the individual will remain watchlisted until such time as the derogatory information is refuted.
22 NCIC-VGTOF-8:365

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-2 Filed 07/06/11 Page 27 of 113
I-
I
What To Send To The VGTOF SME
• Any record being upgraded to, downgraded from or maintained as a Handling Code 1 or 2. o Look in the ACS. o Look in the NCIC. o Look in the TIDE Common Comments for: a Handling Code 1 or 2 statement. • Currently only being entered based on the receipt of an FD-930 or at the TSC's request as a result ofthe Handling Code 1 & 2 Reconciliation Project. a reference to the individual having been indicted in a U.S. Court on a Federal charge. • Interpol and other foreign warrants do not, in and ofthemselves, qualify a person to receive a Handling Code 1 or 2 status.
• Any unique/strange situation for which additional guidance is needed ~d you are not able to locate a VGTOF SME for consultation.
What NOT To Send To The VGTOF SME
• Records that appear to qualify for export to the VGTOF but are not sent by the NCTC as VGTOF=Y. o Conduct the requisite drill-down/review to determine ifa valid teason exists to not export the record to the VGTOF. (Hint: There are no valid reasons ifminimum entry criteria is met.) o Ifnone exists, mark the record as VGTOF=Y citing the reason for the change as 'Individual qualifies for export to the VGTOF' (or something along this line). · o Making the change in the single review queue and not opening a QA Ticket will ensure that the NCTC receives the change in the Feedback Report (as long as the change is being affected in the single review queue).
• Records that do not appear to qualify for a Handling Code R.
o Conduct the requisite drill-down/review io determine ifthe subject qualifies for a
Handling CodeR. Reference HQ 315-00, Serial 59, dated 07/25/2006.
o Ifjustification is not found, open a QA Ticket.
23
NCIC-vGTOF-8366

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-2 Filed 07/06/11 Page 28 of 113
Processing Delete Actions For FBI Nominations • Delete actions, to include those for FBI nominations, need to be thoroughly reviewed.
o Search the ACS. o Search the VGTOF. • It is not uncommon for the TREX Unit to submit 'Removal' FD-930s to the NCTC when it is inappropriate to do so. o The NCTC has not been able to catch and stop all ofthem. o Reference Pages 11 - 12 ofthis Manual regarding who should and should not be in the
VGTOF. o Ifyou receive a delete nomination or a modify nomination setting all exports to 'N'
wherein the Removal FD-930 was submitted and processed in error, send the nomination to the TECS SME. • It is not uncommon for the TREX Unit to submit 'Removal' FD-930s when it is appropriate to do so; however, they did not remove the FBI-entered record from the VGTOF. o Reference Pages 11 - 12 ofthis Manual regarding who should and should not be in the VGTOF. o Ifyou receive a delete nomination in the single review queue wherein the Removal FD930 was submitted in processed in accordance with existing policy but the TREX Unit did not remove the FBI-entered record from the VGTOF, print a eopv of the
VGTOF record and provide it to any QA Analyst for resolution.
24
NCIC-VGTOF-8367

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-2 Filed 07/06/11 Page 29 of 113
DOCUMENTS 3 & 4

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-2 Filed 07/06/11 Page 30 of 113

OPCA-20 (12-3-96)

xxxxxx
xxxxxx xxxxxx

FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION

"'

FOIPA

DELETED PAGE INFORMATION SHEET

__5$_ Page(s) withheld entirely at this location in the flle. One or more of the following statements, where indicated,

explain this deletion.

J( Deletions were made pursuant to the exemptions indicated below with no segregable material available for

release to you.

.

. ·

Section 552

Section 552a

0 (b)(l)

0 (b)(7)(A)

0 (d)(5)

0 (b)(2)

0 (b)(7)(B)

0 0)(2)

0 (b)(3)

0 (b)(7)(Q

0 (k)(l)

0 (b)(7)(D)

0 (k)(2)

0 (b)(7)(E)

0 (k)(3)

0 (b)(7)(F)

0 (k)(4)

D (b)(4)
X(b)(5)

0 (b)(8)
0 (b)(9)

0 (k)(5) 0 (k)(6)

D (b)(6)

0 (k)(7)

D Information pertained only to a third party with no reference to the subject of your request or the subject of your request is listed in the title only.

0 Documents originated with another Government agency(ies). These documents were referred to that agency(ies) for review and direct response to you.

Pages contain information furnished by another Government agency(ies). You will be advised by the FBI as to the releasability of this information following our consultation with the other agency(ies).

Page(s) withheld inasmuch as a final release determination has not been made. You will be advised as to the disposition at a later date.

Pages were not considered for release as they are duplicative o f - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Page(s) withheld for the following reason(s):

(,{ The following number is to be used for re

A.

-

-

xxxxxx
xxxxxx
XXX XXX

Doc tAIV\t'lt~4 3+ '1 (~-r So?")

xxx:xxxxxxxxxxx

X Deleted Page(s) X

X No Duplication Fee X

X for this page

X

xxxxx:xxxxxxxxxx

J<l:IT/T'>tol

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-2 Filed 07/06/11 Page 31 of 113
DOCUMENTS

I I II I Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-2 Filed 07/06/11 Page 32 of 113
Sensitive But Unclassified

STANDARD OPERATING PROCEDURES:
Nominations Process

Nominations & Data Integrity Unit

NOC-VGTOF-8426

April 23, 2007
Sensitive But Unclassified

DOCUMENT 5

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-2 Filed 07/06/11 Page 33 of 113

I

I

II

I

Sensitive But Unclassified

TSC STANI>ARD OPERATING PROCEDURES: Nominations Process
Table of Contents

I. lntroduction

ll. Supported Systems & Minimum Criteria

2

A. TSA No-Fly & Selectee Lists

3

B. VGTOF & FBI Sok Source

5

C. CLASS

8

D. TUSCAN & TACTICS

9

E. IBIS

10

III. TSC Nominations Process

1 l

A. File Ingest Proccdurl!s

II

B. Single Review Queue

15

C. Subject Matter Exp~rt Review

24

l. TSA No-Fl) & Selectee

25

2. IBIS

28

D. Supported System t:xport

29

1. TSA

30

2. VGTOF

34

3. ACS

35

4. DOS

36

4. IBIS

39

E. Domestic Terrorist l~ntry Procedure

43

F. Feedback Reporting

54

Appendices

A. Acronyms

58

B. Reference Sheet: Minimum Criteria for TSC Export

59

C. Relcrcnce Sheet: Integrated Nominations Process Oven i~w

61

D. No Fly Implementation Guidance

62

E. lN NCategory Codes

86

F. U.S. Person Definition

87

NCIC-VGfOF-8427

Sgnsitive But llndassitied

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-2 Filed 07/06/11 Page 34 of 113

I

I

II

I

Sensitive But Unclassified

l'SC STANDARD OPERATING PROCEDURES: Nominations Process
I. Introduction
Six days per week the staff of th.: TSC Nominations and Data Im.:grity Unit receive, process and export nominations of known or appropriately suspected terrorists lor inclusion in the United States Government's consolidat.:d terrorist watch1ist, the Terrorist Screening Database (TSDB). This Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) details this process.

NCIC-VGTOF-8428

Sensitive But Unclassified

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-2 Filed 07/06/11 Page 35 of 113

I

I

II

I

Sensitive But Unclassified

TSC STANDARD Ol>ERATING PROCEDURES: Nominations Process
II. Supported Systems & Minimum Criteria
The Terrorist Screening Database (TSDB) is the United Stal\.'S Government's consolidated terrorist watchlist. TSDD is owned by the TSC and contains biographic information on all known or appropriately suspected terrorists, both Domestic and International. Currently, subsets of TSDB are exporll:d to various entities within government tasked with conducting terrorism screening. The TSC supported systems, databases receiving exported sub-sets of TSDD. currently are as folhms:
• Transportation Security Administration (TSA) No Fly List • TSA Selectee List • NCIC Violent GanJ!. and Terrorist Organization Fill' (VGTOF) • Department of State (DOS) Consular Lookout and Support System (CLASS) • TIPOFF US-Canada (TUSCAN) • TIPOFF US-Australia (TACTICS) • Interagency Border Inspection System (IBIS)
Descriptions of each supported system and minimum criteria to be considered for TSDD export to them can be found in this section.

Sensitive But Unclassified
NOC-VGTOF-8429
2

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-2 Filed 07/06/11 Page 36 of 113

I

I

II

I

Sensitive But Unclassified

TSC STANDARD <WERATING PROCEDURES: Nnminations Process

II.A: Supported Systems & Minimum Criteria: TSA No-Fly & Selectee Lists

Description:

The No Fly & Selectee Lists are sub-sets of TSDB owned by the Transportation Security

Administration. These are lists of known or appropriately suspected terrorists used by public

carriers, both airline and other modal, to screen their passengers. The No Fly List ''is a list of

individuals who are prohibited from boarding an aircraft." 1 The Selectee List "is a list of

individuals who must undergo additional security screening bl:fore being permitted to board

anaircraft."2

b3 49 CFR Section 1520.5(a)

I http:;";www.tsa.gov/rcscarch,ipn. van l.aqs.shtm 2 Ibid. ~See .-\rmcndix ll for a full list id INi\ Category Codes and their meanings.
.1See Section II.H for a description<'' VGTOF Handling Codes Sensitive But Unclassified
3

I I II I Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-2 Filed 07/06/11 Page 37 of 113
Sensitive But Unclassified

TSC STANDARD OPERATING PROCEDURES: :\ominations Process

11.8: Supported Systems & Minimum Criteria: VGTOF & FBI Sole Source

Description:

Terrorist records contained in the Violent Gang and Terrorist Organi:t..ation File (VGTOF), a sub-set of TSDB owned by the Department of Justice, is a s~gment of the National Crime Information Center (NCICI. NCIC is a vast database queried by federal, tribal, state and local law enforcement agencies in performance of their duties.

Minimum Criteria:

In order for a known or suspected terrorist to be nominated for inclusion in VGTOF, the following biographic infom1ation is required:
• First Name • Last Name • Circa Year of Birth
o Historically. exceptions for this requirement h~1ve been made by the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), most commonly with Military Detainees (MILDETS) or watchlisting as a result of ,\llorney General Directive for LEGA'f records. (AGDIR)

As with all TSDB records. the nominated individual must be a known or appropriately suspected terrorist. As a n:sult, a derogatory information re' iew on individuals nominated for inclusion in VGTOF must demonstrate a nexus to terrorism, or an active investigation to ascertain whether a nexus to t<!rrorism exists.

Handling Codes

Each. individual nominated for inclusion in VGTOF is assigned one of six Handling Codes (HC) based on the invcstigat ive status of an individual, their mailable biographic information or the desire of the FBI to ..silently" watchlist the subject. ,\ description of each HC and basic guidance for handling non-standard situations is as follm\ s:

Handling Code I

Handling Code 1 is rescn ed for individuals who are the subject of formal indictments. An agency nominating a record for this category must ensure that the arrest warrant is current and active in the Wanted Persons File in NClC.

Subject should be run in NClC and Warrant Number should be written in the Edit Systems Identifiers allocated slot in TSDB. lfthc warrant number is not in NClC and the

NQC-VGTOF-8431

Sensitive But Unclassified

5

I I II I Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-2 Filed 07/06/11 Page 38 of 113
Sensitive But Unclassified

subject has a current valid indictment follow through with the FBI Terrorist Review & Examination Unit (TREX), and or Case Agent to ensure that the subject has been entered into NCIC Wanted tile ~.:orrectly.
Handling Code 2
Handling code 2 is resern:d for individuals who meet one nrthe following criteria:
• Reasonable, articulable suspicion of criminal dom~.:stic or international terrorism activity, or
• A commitment from the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) that they will issue a "Detainer'· should the individual be cncounl\:rcd by law enforcement, or
• Exigent circumstances which require immediate entry of the record. (A record nominated by an agency under these circumstances will be reviewed on the next business day fblluwing the entry of this record.)
Nominations of records to the TSC with this handling cod~.: will require a particularized review of the intclligen~.:~: records by the appropriate indi\ idual to determine if ay of the above standards are satislied. To use Handling Code 2, a review and approval for legal sufficiency by both the Chief Division Counsel and the Office of Genera) Counsel is required for this entry. You must utilize the FBI computer, specifically the ACS section to perform confirmation research. If the case agent has not secured and provided the CD(' and OGC approval the subject must be changed to a Handling Code 3 until the legal authority can be provided.
Handling Code 3 and Ihmdling Code 4 will be analyzed and assessed by the individual analyst.

Handling Code 3
Full Name (no FNU/LNl.') and a complete (mm/dd/yyyy) Date of Birth OR
Full Name (no rNU/LNt:) and a true Passport Number
Note: A true Passport ]\;umber is defined as not having a ·NONE Number' or 'TSC Number' in the Passport lield of the client record. It is n.t!! a requirement that a Country of Issuance (COl) be id~.:ntified in the client record.
Handling Code 4 Name and incomplete l)( >B

NCIC-vGTOF-8432

Sensitive But Unclassified

6

I I II I Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-2 Filed 07/06/11 Page 39 of 113
Sensitive But Unclassified
See Handling Code 3 guidance. All other client records not meeting the criteria set forth above, and they are not \'a lid Handling Code 1s, 2s or Sik·nt Hits, shall be designated as Handling Code 4s.
Silent Hit (Routine or Sensitive)
Silent hits are not display~d when using the standard VGlOF query. As law enforcement officers may be unaware of a potential threat when encountering silent hit subjects, armed and dangerous (A&D) subjects will not be included in VGTOf as silent hits. A subject will be deemed A&D if there is derogatory information in the FD-930 indicating the subject is A&D or other available source reporting including EC's, cables, or other intelligence products describes the subject as likely being ,\&D. TSC will make changes to A&D subjects who haYI! been nominated as a silent hit to the respective VGTOF handling code and noti1~ the case agent and TREX accordingly. Generally, other government agencies (OGA) should not be nominating subj..;cts as silent hits. lfOGA nominates a subject as <1 silent hit, TSC will change the nomination from a silent hit to the respective VGTOF handling code and notify NCTC.
FBI Sole Source
FBl Sole Source records arc not considered a separate exported sub-set of TSDB. Instead,
or these individuals are distin~.:tly identified because, as a result the FBI terrorist nomination
process, they are already ent~red in VGTOF by TREX prior lo their arrival at the TSC. As a result, TSC export to VGTOF is unnecessary. In order to pre\ cnt unnecessary duplication of records in VGTOF, these individuals are then marked as FBI Sole Source.

NCIC-VGTOF-8433

Sensitive But Unclassified

7

I I II I Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-2 Filed 07/06/11 Page 40 of 113
Sensitive But Unclassified
TSC STANDARD (WE.RATING PROCEDURES: :\ominations Process
11.0: Supported Systems & Minimum Criteria: TUSCAN & TACTICS
Description:
TlPOFF US-Canada (TUSCAN) and TIPOFF US-Australia (TACTICS) arc sub-sets of TSDB shared with the Canadian and Australian governments. r~spectively.
Minimum Criteria:
In order for an individual to be nominated for inclusion in cith~r TUSCAN or TACTICS, the following biographic infom1ation is required:
• First Name • Last Name • Year of Birth
Certain other conditions also exist when examining a nomination for inclusion in TUSCAN or TACTICS:
• Dead people are ineligible for inclusion in either list. • Individuals with Category Code 17 (Spouse or Child of a known or appropriately
suspected terrorist) or Category Code 98 (Lost or S10kn Passport) are ineligible for inclusion in either list.6
• US Citizens and US Pcrsons7 arc ineligible for inclusion in either list.
''Silent" Hits are ineligible for inclusion in either list.x
• Canadian Citizens ar~ ineligible for inclusion in TUSCAN.
As with all TSDB records. the nominated individual must be a known or appropriately suspected terrorist. As a result, a derogatory information r~\ iew on individuals nominated for TSC inclusion in either TUSCAN or TACTICS must dctmmstrate a reasonable suspicion ofties to terrorism.

6 See A[J[)endix I) for a full list id INA Category Codes and their meanings.
~ce Appendix F for the definition or" US Person Aee Sectionll.ll for a description or VGTOF Handling Codes

NCIC -VGTOF-8434

Sensitive But Unclassified

9

I I II I Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-2 Filed 07/06/11 Page 41 of 113

Sensitive But Unclassified

•:,.._.•:.-S!flg_le Review Queue

jTIDE Single f<<'Vie~w~Q~ueue=S~ele~cto~r====;-----;:

Uil.;:-.-..l(lflCd TIDE Nominations

1 Ov~rall ~~

T>di)i h~H'«II·• ,......

'!lflt<l:fiy II I"

Note: the numbers under Overall Progress do not necessarily add up to the total number of nominations because a nomination can have multiple export eligibilities and also have a handling code of 1 or 2 and thus will be listed in more than one category under Overall Progress.

lSA
Total: :l VGTOF HC I -:l!lliirdl. 0
SML 1 Total. 1 VGTOF HC 2 , ..,,t',,l. (l SME. 1 Totz.l: 1
IBIS

:f•1E 2 Total: 5

General

# of

unassigned nominations

marked for the given

export eligibility or

handling code

SME - # of nominations
marked for the given export eligibility or handling code that have been forwarded to a SME

Total - total for the given export eligibility or handling code

6. Click the

Get Ne>J f'Jominat

button to select th~ next nomination in the queue.

7. The selected nomination is displayed on the screen. Once you select a nomination, other users will not be able to review it. Each user can n:vicw only one nomination (or group of alias nominations) at a time. If you attempt to open multiple windows of the Single Review Queue. the same nomination will appear in each window and may cause unexpected issues.

i~\:;~{;-;.~~-·-~-- --·-----·--- .

-·-··-··-. -· .... .. -*-----;;;;;·-;-~;:~ I ~~·~;~~~- huli/1~;;;(~',~·~·-·--·-

j~....S(.,• ~

'>.!~r~h J ~·~~

~ ;mpr..:rt ~ Nom1nat10n L

~::..:..~~~.:Single Review Queue

! TIDE Alias Gror..p 10: 0

-··" II c.mcel I 1 Dele•

TIDE Nomination Information

Handling

5

Code•

f

l!
"

li <I

~=

"

.l

NO "

HI~

3 "

Cartesians~ c~··: D2u~;,~;:oooa ResuItl•ng

~ "11olld p rett1DUI GN•imnnl Sumaul8' 008 lP(o.f"ti"J'~'R")

"""' f•Q'''

NO

10

~ Cartesians' , , "'""' f•oht c.se.
Previous"~"uralt Proble1ns

111--:. rzooa NO

l9

Validity

rh~re are no w.ctlttJ Cd'ltt~l.l<:tlJ~; Ptj,OaStl sel~·;t ., ~$t c:-ne cattes..:m

Overall Problems

NOC-vGTOF-8435

Sensitive B

Note: CLASS PPT is grayed out because the rules are applied in TSDB Client-
Server after
the ingest.

Export Eligibilities

~
~ . = "

~~
J:!!! ~

"z~

~
~ "

!3 c 1?1 ,,._..,, n

b6 b7C

Note: The Cancel I button returns the record to the queue without saving
changes made
to it.
16

I I II I Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-2 Filed 07/06/11 Page 42 of 113

Sensitive But Unclassified

\,.~981' The nomination including the export recommendations as modified by the import business rules is displayed across the top of the screen. Previous values, if applicable, for the VGTOF handling code, the Silent Hit indicator. the INA code, and the export recommendations are displayed below that.

9. The light pink boxes indicate export eligibilities that ar~ selected for "Post" but which do not currently have <~ valid Cartesian which quali1ks. Scrolling over these boxes brings up a pop-up message indicating this.

.......... . ~--~~·.,·--·----~-·~~

~ ...--<.....,------~~---

' :_i"'f.'~'--;·\.,

'! '·rsc·"" ~

t P,';p:>rt~ .

r:;•.~·.) Single Review

;··Jl r: 1 Nom.not1on i'
Queue

..,....,

!:~IQE &fS:!Ofl Type: A

D Nam~
lase2, EIIJIJt

DOB

Pa..,por1 (Citlren)
CPITP·TGH

llll12GPJ:)!:

.
~
I

Silo#nttitt;

\OR)

lli>T

11111J2fi::f•-

. (Ill

NO

CIT; fT

Vatld"Previous Gi,.,en Surn•me ~oa Puspur1

- D"=~·· New

ffiQht C.ase2

111ll2G'"'r · r .

19 ~

,

lGR)

New

Erul~t C.He2

PI>'!. l11112tZf·r
(lll

Ovt:rall Pr~lent\ 1here ~:SO? Ya!Jd ~S1.tns; P!~ase select a~ ~l?.i;Sl' ,- ~:artesan

Handlfnll Code a

~

ii;;

Note: the light pink

boxes will appear with

~ Lxpolt EllllibiUtl}{ all nominations when

i !!l~ '; ~
;: ; ;

;;
~

....
~!

c

i :~:

"'

they are first displayed.

~ z

~

~

,l ¥

f~j [tJ

.-::_; ~~:J L-;_; L~

.,, ON~ti·U~,;:,!fJII..:. ,..,.,.,. ~~~~ "'11'1! um:tt Ji;c~

b6 b7C

I0. The resulting Cartesians are listed below the nomination. Overall problems are listed under the Cartesians.

11. The "Previous" column next to each Cartesian indicate1i the Cartesian's previous validity. Previous validity can take one ofthree forms:

• Valid--the previous version of the Cartesian was marked "Valid" • Invalid--the pn:vious version of the Cartesian \\US marked "Invalid" • New--this Carll:sian is new and there is no previous version

Note: SRQ will present ·'Modify" nominations that haw not been previously seen in the queue as "New".

NCIC-VGTOF-8436

Sensitive But Unclassified

17

I I II I Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-2 Filed 07/06/11 Page 43 of 113
Sensitive But Unclassified
I I 12. The View Nom button opens the Identity Analysis History Report in a new window
allowing you to see the history of the TIDE ID.

b6 b7C

Identlfiftr: TJDEJ:SUU-vl7l~c..'loe lliii..-~"U~¥QOOOODOU6
MoSSdQi' Type: NanllnaUo• Sent Oi:it6: Tue Feb 01 12:29:2#' I ~I 200~ Load Oat~· Wetl Mar OB 07;56: n l "'' 2006 ~----~-

____ ----

. - ~-

13. Each Cartesian initially appears without a check mark (./)in the "Valid'' box and will not show its export eligibilities. You should consult the source information available in TIDE Online to verify which Cartesian records arc valid.

I4. Check the "Valid" bo~ lor each valid Cartesian which is supported by the source information.

I 15. Click the Refresh butlon to run the valid Cartesians against the business rules. The
refreshed screen shO\\s the results of the Cartesians being run against the business rules tor the selected export digibilitics. Boxes with a check mark in them indicate customers set to recei'..: the given Cartesian records.

@verify the export eligibilities, VGTOF handling code, Silcnt Hit indicator, INA code. and the US Person indicator for the Cartesians making the appropriate changes to the nomination. Whenever you modify any of these fields. : ou will be prompted to add comments explaining the reason for the change.

NCIC-vGTOF-8437

Sensitive But Unc:lassified

18

I I II I Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-2 Filed 07/06/11 Page 44 of 113
Sensitive But Unclassified
17. For training purposes. suppose you decide to change the VGTOF handling code to 1.'.J - A comment box appears for you to enter a reason tor changing the handling code.

I uwae I Hand'ina Code ch.:nged for TIDE lD

b6 b7C

!...C......:.;berogatory Justifies Overt Hit

0 Derogatory Justifies Silent Hit

IIIJinimum Criteria Met

Minimum Criteria Not l'·'let

Other

Note: Only SBU information may be entered in this comments area.

I 18. Click the Save Cornrnent j button to save the comm...·nt. A pencilt•con appears next
- to the VGTOF handling code label indicating a change to the version of the nomination sent from TIDE.
I 19. Click the Refresh button to run the valid Cartesians against the business ruJes. The
refreshed screen shows the results.

1 :

NOTE:

This

is

for

demonstration

purposes

only.

Current protocol dictates that all

Handling Code I and 2

nominations are deterred to the VGTOF Subject Maner Experts (SMEs) for v.:ri lication and entry of code-specific

data. Details on how to defer a record can be found later in this section.

Sensitive But Unclassified

NCIC-VGTOF-8438
19

I I II I Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-2 Filed 07/06/11 Page 45 of 113
Sensitive But Unclassified

Forwarding Nomination to SME

There are five basic situations in which a User should forward a SRQ record to a Subject Matter Expert (SME) in one of four areas (TSA, VGTOF, DOS. IBIS):

1. If the User is unable to validate export eligibility for a Supported System, or is unsure if a nominated individual qualifies for export to that System, the record should be deferred to the most appropriate SME.
-2. If a nominated indi\'idual is exported to TSC with a Handling Code of 1 or 2-()r the User believes the individual meets the criteria for either Handling Code-then the record must be deiern:d to the VGTOF SME for validation & processing. 3. If the User recommends any change to a nominated individual's TSA No-Fly or
Selectee eligibility, then the record must be deferred to the TSA SME for appropriate coordination or notification. (See TSA SME Section liw details on NCTC notification and "72-hour" coordination rule.) 4. If the User recommends any change to a nominated individual's TUSCAN or TACTICS eligibility. then the record must be deferred to the DOS SME for review and concurrence. 5. If the User believes that the exported nomination, or modification, should be rejected for any reason, then the record must be exported to th-.· IBIS SME for further review and concurrence prior to TSC action.

If the nominated individual meets any of the above criteria, or the User feels that the record requires examination by a more experienced Analyst then the rl.'cord can/should be deferred to a SME as follows:

I 1. Click the Defer button to forward the nomination to a SME.

'~~:......_:'!f?i~·';.':

! ·,I"S(.,.;~·

s:~. .rd 1 k~,:vrt · Inlp·..'Jr*t J Nomination 1

!·:..... i ~ .. ·'.:
~~·Single Review Queue

'TlOE Alias Group ID: 0

I I - - - - - , - - - - - - - - - ;,, set Relresh

Edit S~~~n h.Jet1tifuars

TIDE IO

Na.me

0

Passport (Citlz.,n)

...-lll'V!!3l!?'5l!1!6"R"'"I......llase2. E•ohr

· ·''

Tvt:;e: A S.lent Hit:

111112 :.11· J:Ja' (GP ,

..c:
"
I •

NO v

PPT
lltlll~'lZl>.S

(lZJ err:~~

NO v

Handling

..

codu

"

19 ~

1 v

ReJect th1!. {Jjentity

Export Eligibilities

.; ~ <:

M
~

~~ ;, •z

.
~
~

,. c
~= !el

.• • ~ ::;

z
~,.,

~

l;l

c :?] (.!j 0 0 r::J

b6 b7C

Sensitive But Unclassified
NCIC -VGTOF-8439
21

I I II I Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-2 Filed 07/06/11 Page 46 of 113
Sensitive But Unclassified

2. A pop-up window appears. Add a comment in the comm~m box explaining why the nomination is being for" urded to the SME. Then select th~ SME to whom you want to forward the nomination. There are SMEs tbr TSA, Departm~nt of State, VGTOF, and
IBIS.

I 3. Cl1.ck the Defer button to defier the nomm. att.on.
-..ot...: .;~or1, nc.m~n.-lt•nn<~ IT'Ibl'l· 1·. IPJA-:tlt'in en ttll!o rrPYli!U<: -tcree:r. """ n.1t h4i f$J>"~r'l ·•ho>r: hJfwa•detl to !:..\4£:. Pc:ss1. •·· .sOt<s •or rf'iel..t.i•lr1 car, tit t~!,lt 1M ttiV forw;.tramg: re:.:~:.wi

Note: if you decide not to forward the nomination, click the
I Cancel Defer
button.

----·---

NOC-vGTOF-8440

Sensitive But Unclassified

22

I I II I Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-2 Filed 07/06/11 Page 47 of 113
Sensitive But Unclassified
TSC STANDARD (WERATING PROCEDURES: ~uminations Process
lii.C: Subject Matter Expert Review
Within the Nominations and Data Integrity Unit, individuals that have a great deal of experience in an area or arc a designated representative from l.hdr parent agency are considered Subject Matter Lxperts. (SMEs) The NDIU currently has four different types of SMEs: TSA, VGTOF, Department of State and IBIS. SMEs s~.·rve primarily as a point of reference for SRQ users in one of three ways:
• A SME is the primary point of contact for SME users \\ho require guidance as to interpretation of minimum criteria, derogatory threshold requirements and guidance documents for their n:spective areas. Often a SRQ us...·r can obtain clarification on proper watchlisting protocol in an area, resolving a pot...·ntial issue prior to completion of the record. lf an issue requires a greater level of analytical ability and cannot be resolved by the SRQ user, records within the SRQ may be deferred directly to a SME for iinal resolution.
• SMEs are, in most cases, the final authority with regard to watchlisting within their respective supported systems. Should a SRQ user beli~.·ve a change in watchlisting status be required in TSA No Fly or Selectee lists, or the Department of State's TUSCAN or TACTICS programs, they must defer the record to the respective SME for review. In the narrative box required upon deferraL the SRQ user must enter the recommended change as well as the basis for their recommendation.
• SMEs also act as a point-of-contact with outside parties with regard to their respective supported systems. In some cases the SML ~.·oordinates the data export to the system, feedback to nominating parties and responds to inquiries regarding their system from other TSC customer agencies.

NCIC-VGTOF-8441

Sensitive But Unclassified

24

I I II I Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-2 Filed 07/06/11 Page 48 of 113
Sensitive But Unclassificd
TSC STANDARD OPERATING PROCEDURES: ~ominations Process
111.0.2: Supported System Export VGTOF
Records that arc received, t\:viewed and validated via the SIH) are ingested into the TSDB. After being ingested into the TSDB, records whose VGTOF Export Eligibility is 'Y' are routed to NCIC-VGTOF ekl.:tronically.
Records that are manually entered into the TSDB-as is the case with expedited and Domestic Terrorist (DT) nominations-and whose VGTOF Export Eligibility is 'Y' are directed to the VGTOF R~.:' iew Queue. When the record is reviewed and accepted in the VGTOF Review Queue, it is routed to NCIC-VGTOF electronically.
Existing records that are modified within the TSDB whose VGTOF Export Eligibility is 'Y' are directed to the VGTOF Rl.!view Queue. When the record is reviewed and accepted in the VGTOF Review Queue, it is routed to NCIC-VGTOF electronically.
ln June 2005, near-real-timl.! transactional capability between the TSDB and NCIC-VGTOF was established. This connl.'ctivity allowed for the transmission of a transaction (add, modify or delete) to VGTOF and receipt of NCIC's response in appro:ximately 60 seconds. With the release of the SRQ, the TSDB's ncar-real-time transactional capability with NCIC-VGTOF was negated inasmuch as rather than the records whose VGTOF Export Eligibility is 'Y' being submitted to NCIC-VGTOF after it is reviewed and accepted, all records in the SRQ are ingested into the TSDB at one time so a queue is formed sending the transactions one at a time. Transaction times now vary from several hours to in \.·xcess of one day or longer if there are transmission dHlkulties. With the planned release of TSDB v 1.9 (scheduled for late-August 2006), near-real-time transactional capability hdween the TSDB and NCICVGTOF should be reston.:d; however, the capability will always be hindered should transmission difficulties exist.

NOC-VGTOF-8442

Sensitive But Unclassified

34

I I II I Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-2 Filed 07/06/11 Page 49 of 113
Sensitive But Unclassified
TSC STANDARD <WERATING PROCEDURES: 'ominations Process
III.E: Domestic Terrorist Entry Procedures
This section details the process whereby known or appropriately suspected Domestic Terrorists (DTs) are entered into TSDB and identifies the TSDB fields in which record data received on a DT FD-930 form should be entered to enable the form data to be transmitted systematically to NCIC/VGTOF.
I Purpose
Through the implementation of the TSDB 1.4 project, a DT rc<.:ord received by TSC via an FD-930 form can be entered into both TSDB and NCICIVGTOF with a single manual data entry point. By entering the FD-930 form data into TSDB using the instructions and guidelines in this document. a formatted GMC transaction will be generated for systematic real-time transmission to NCICIVGTOF.
2 Responsible Parties
The responsible parties for carrying out the guidelines of this procedures document arc the FBI representatives assigned to the TSC Nominations staff.
3 Required Equipment/Tools
To complete the procedures defined in this document, the usl·r will need access to the production TSDB client/serwr interface (TSDB IB) and, optionally, the TSDB 1.4 reports interface. The reports interl~t<.:e is not required for the entry ol' IJT records into TSDB; rather, it provides the user with fe~.:dhack regarding both data values that may not have been transmitted to NCIC due to rormatting errors and the status of the NClC transactions a user generates and transmits through his or her actions with the TSI>B 1B interface.
4 Entering DT FD-930 Forms into TSDB
The TSDB 1B Client screen and Bio List provide the necessary fields to enter all FD-930 form data into a single record tor transmission to NCIC. The following sections address each of the pieces ofthe FD-930 lt>rm and identify the TSDB fields in which FD-930 iorm data should be entered to enable tl1e data to be transmitted to NCIC.
4.1 Mandatory Field.\· The first section of the J-'1)-930 form contains the mandatory data fields for creation of the record, as shown in the tigure below.

NCIC-vGTOF-8443

Sensitive But Unclassified

43

I I II I Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-2 Filed 07/06/11 Page 50 of 113
Sensitive But Unclassified

:'\TIC Yioleuc Ga111 and Tl>rrori~t Oq~auization~ Fil~ (\.GIOf) Gang ~ll'lnbl'r Entry Form
tNCIC lhn¥ GtCilp ru:.d Sub~~<·"J..' c:.de·~ "" Jo:hnted (cct entered) ::y tte FBI Cl!S Dl\i•;i01: "r•lopl:.:ne uumt'fi .~0-1·62.5->000 ~nJ f:rx ll"Jli.lbtt 3•)4-62) ..~ .~93. Once i\'-::·::~.:~.1 ':bt- Gal!g Grttup nn:i Subgroup .:~de~ u:.u~t bt:~ntt:l~.J iut.:- NCIC b:.. the oti;ul3tclg_ ·~•nc;·; );( K o~~t>:>r. Aft<"!· the Gac" '-" .•:tp auG S'Jl>l\'f~U? :be lllt-..l:btl lx'l<>c.~\ tc lllo b•~" "'·~td. l'at 11~n~ me:u\'.1•4!1 1e:co•d ""'' tl:en ~e ~llte1ed inro NC'!C t:: :he oti~ll"'"'" ogtc.cy)
0 Sup?:tultll:~ l:utio: !>ubct,·>iz•n

--~,, ________ _
Height,_ _ _ _ Wo;;;hc_ _ _ _ Eye _ _ _ _ _ ....... _ _ _ _ __
_ Sub~:!Up. _ _ __ Eutn· C'1iten• Cxle (){uozt l.lt!' .:;,. G.;;;,· H ~1· a:J~· ::_ ~woc~er "E OF THE FOl.L0\\1:'\G :PI••"' •;eu.,,.,r·.e~
~~ To enable data from thcs~.· fields to be transmitted systemati~ally to NCIC via TSDll 1.4, enter the data as follows:
Submission Type
The type of submission marked on the FD-930 lonn does not need to be entered into a field in the TSDB record. However, it will detennine whether a new TSDB record should be created or an I.!Xisting record should be modifiL'd. deleted, or marked as ineligible for VGTOF.
Gang Memberfferrorist Member Checkbox
By default, aU transactions submitted from TSDB to NCIC arc sent as Terrorist Member transactions. There is no lield in TSDB that will allow you to override this value in the NCIC transaction that is sent.
Name
The primary name on the FD-930 lonn should be entered into the First Name and Last Name fields on the TSIJil Main Client screen.
Sex
The value entered in the Sex field of the torm should be l:lllcred into the TSDB Main Client screen Sex field only if the value isM or F. If the li.mn indicates the subject's sex is unknown, leave the TS DB field blank.
Race
Enter the subject's race into the TSDB Bio List using the Race bio code entry. TSDB 1.4 will automatically conwrt the text value to the proper NC I(' code (e.g., White will be transmitted as 'W', Asian as 'A'). If the subject's race is unknown, do not enter a value in the Bio List--TSDB 1.4 will send 'U' when no race value I.!Xists in the record. Height
Enter the subject's height into the TSDB Bio List using the Height bio code entry. Enter the subject's height in in.:hes only (i.e., ifthe subject is 6' 1" enter 72). TSDB 1.4 will convert the value to the NCIC height format.

NOC-vGTOF-8444

Sensitive But Unclassified

44

I I II I Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-2 Filed 07/06/11 Page 51 of 113
Sensitive But Unclassified
Weigbt Enter the subject's weight into the TSDB Bio List using th~: Weigbt bio code entry. The weight should be entered in pounds, and should include only the numeric value (i.e., '21 0' not '21 0 lbs.'). Eye Enter the subject's eye color into the TSDB Bio List using the Eyes bio code entry. Eye color can be entered using either the NCIC code or the full text of the color. For example, both 'BROWN' and 'BRO' can be entered in TSDB. Hair Enter the subject's hair ~:olor into the TSDB Bio List using the Hair bio code entry. Ilair color can be entered using either the NCIC code or the full text of the color. For example, both 'BROWN' and 'BRO' can be entered in TSDB. Gang The Gang value that is sent from TSDB 1.4 in the NCIC transaction is determined by the presence or absence of a TlPOFFfriDE 10 in the record. II' the record has a TIDE ID, the NCIC transaction will be sent using Lhe International Extremist gang code; if there is no TIDE ID, the Domestic Extremist code will be sent as the gang affiliation. There is no need to manually enter a Gang value in the TSDB record l(lr DT FD-930 forms. Subgroup The Subgroup value that is sent from TSDB 1.4 in the NCIC transaction is automatically generated based on: 1) th~: record's YGTOF Handling Code, and 2) whether the record is IT or DT based on the existence of a TIDE 10. The value string required in the Subgroup position in the NCJC transaction will be automatically generated by TSDB 1.4, and does not need to be entered into the TSDB record. File# Enter the case file numb~:r (OCA) in the OCA field on the TSDB Main Client screen. Entry Criteria Code You can enter the ECR \ ~1lue from the FD-930 into the TSDB Bio List using the FBI ECR bio code entry. If) ou do not enter an ECR value in the TSDB record, TSDB 1.4 wil1 use the default ECR \alue of 'H' in the generation and transmission of the NClC transaction.

NCIC-vGTOF-8445

Sensitive But Unclassified

45

I

I II I Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-2 Filed 07/06/11 Page 52 of 113

Sensitive But Unclassified

4.2 Additionalldentijiers

The next section of the FD-930 form provides the additional identifier information for the

record, as shown in the ligure below.
:...::..:.==---==:::::r ~~-- -----"'""-:->.~
~or Hor ~y: d:~n.Kttr .. ~~:.~·~~Jt;~C!~cI:..:f '.'-.'\"D AT L:EA<;T O~E OF !BE FOLLOWI:\"G ,?lfa~f ~ue1·~t·-• ude f.;:t Cl<•re mf•mtu: . .:.J

DOB,_ _ _ _ !;OC"

· - - - - - - !'!~ceofButh _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __

::<;PER~.- ncon-t"SPER - - - - - - - -

!.li,_,·:L•.L•~n; = · - - - - - -

OpeutQt'~ Licrtne ;::, State. aJ:d Ye~u of~·-=yUa~;:.u - - - - - - - - - - -
0:-t.;;! ~.:~W;:a1.1J:;. 't:fift..}

Li<•l1~ ?l>1e =-!>tat~. Ynt ~:E~~tt:~rc: .. -~ T;-?e - - - - - - - - - -
:~'t":;;~ :-vuz:c.tu ;ill .; ~~eut;;i

To enable data from thes~.: ticlds to be transmitted systematically to NCIC via TSDB 1.4, enter the data as follows:
Date of Birth (DOB)
Enter the subject's primary date ofbirth on the TSDB Main Client screen in the DOB field. If additional dates of birth are listed on the FD-930. these should be entered in the Bio List under the ALT DOB bio code entry using the same format as the ()OB field (ddMONyyyy).
Social Seturity Number (SOC#) Enter the subject's social security number in the Bio List under the Sotial Security Number bio code entry. Ifan FD-930 contains multiple SOC values, enter each value as a separate entry in the Bio List. The social security number value may be entered with or without hyphens; TSDB 1.4 will strip out any hyphens when it generates the NCIC message.
Place of Birth
Enter the subject's place of birth in the Bio List under the FBI POD bio code entry. If an FD-930 contains multipk POB values, enter each value as a separate entry in the Bio List.
USPER or non-USPER
The subject's US Person status should be entered in the liS Person field on the TSDB Main Client screen as either 'YES' for a USPER or 'NO' !'or a non-USPER. This value will be entered in the MIS tield in the NCIC message.
FBI Number
Enter the subject's FBI Number in the Bio List under the FIJI Number bio code entry.

NCIC-VGTOF-8446

Sensitive But Unclassified

46

I I II I Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-2 Filed 07/06/11 Page 53 of 113
Sensitive But Unclassified

Miscellaneous Numbers

If the MNU is a passport enter the value in the Passport licld on the TSDB Main Client screen. Do not enter the 'PP-' prefix, as it will be added to the passport number when the NClC message is generated. Also, if an issuing country is identified for the passport number, enter it in the Main Client screen COl iield. (Noh:: If the FD-930 does not have a passport number with an issuing country, you will need tn enter 'XXX Unknown' as the COl in order to save the record.)

If the FD-930 contains multiple passport numbers, the additional values should be entered in the Bio List using the ALT PPT bio code entry. Additional information for alternate passport entries can be entered using the PPT INFO bio code; however, this data does not map to the NCIC messages and would need to be entered directly into the VGTOF record.

For MNU values other than passports, the Bio List contains several codes that correspond to the MNU prefixes. \\'hen using these bio codes, enter the value exactly in its normal format. Do not enter the pretix in the tield, as it will be adtkd during the generation of the message. Also, do not drop any alphabetic characters from the military serial numbers, as they will be removed during the message fonnatting (e.g.. for an Air Force Serial Number, when you enter RA 1234567 in the Bio List, the NCIC message will send AF1234567).

The list ofBio Codes that correspond to the non-passport !\lNU types are listed in the

1bllowing table.

VGTOFMNU

VGTOF

T s'DB BIOCODE

CODE

Air Force Serial#

AF

Air National Guard Serial if

AS

Alien Registration#

AR

ALII·:NI REGISTRATION #

Army Serial #

AS

ARM Y OR NG SERlAL #

Canadian Social Insurance

CI

Marine Corps Serial #

MC

Mariner's Document or ID

MD

National Guard Serial #

AS

ARM Y OR NG SERIAL#

Navy Serial #

NS

t-9ri~inatin~ A~ency Police .or ID#

OA

VGTOFO HGNATING AGENCY#

PersonallD # (State-issue~ ~ort_~ecuritl: Card #

PI

PERSON t\L IDENTIFICATION #

PS

RCMP lD or Fingerprint ~t ion#

MP

Selecti·v·-e--S·-ervice #

ss

• U.S. Coast Guard Serial #

CG

• Veterans Administration Claim#

VA

NOC-VGTOF-8447

Sensitive But Unclassificd

47

I I II I Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-2 Filed 07/06/11 Page 54 of 113
Sensitive But Unclassified

Operator's License Information
Operator's license data from the FD-930 form can be entered into the Bio List using either the Drivers License or the Operator License bio codes. All three values for the license information need lobe entered into the same Bio List entry in a specific format to enable TSDB 1.4 to format the data into the NCIC message. Each element of the Operator License data set must be preceded by its 3-charuetcr NCIC field code and a colon, and each code-value pair should be separated on the line by a single space, as in the following example:
OLN:123456789 OLS:TX OL\' :2008
The state value can be entered using either the NClC code or the full state name. If one of the three values in the data set is not listed on the FD-930. l'nter the field code and colon only. Because NCIC requires all three clements to accept an Operator License, if not all license data is entered TSDB 1.4 will not include any of the license iniormation in the message it generates for transmission.
Note: For the purposes \)rmaking it possible to provide dri,er's license information to other customers in the future, it is preferred"ihat when the license information pertains to an automobile driver's license the data should be entered using the Drivers License bio code. This will provide an additional level of specificity '' ithin TSDB.
License Plate Information
Vehicle license plate data from the FD-930 form can be entered into the Bio List using the Vehicle License bio code. All four values for the license plate information need to be entered into the same Bio List entry in a specific format tu enable TSDB 1.4 to format the data into the NCIC message. Each clement of the Vehicle I .icense data set must be preceded by its 3-charactcr NCIC field code and a colon, and each code-value pair should be separated on the line by a single space, as in the foliO\\ ing example:
UC:ABC123 LIS:NY LIY:2006 LIT:PC
The state value can be entered using either the NCIC code or the full state name. If one of the four values in the data set is not listed on the FD-930, .:nter the field code and colon only. Because NClC reLiuires all four elements to accept a Vehicle License, TSDB 1.4 will not include any of llw license plate information in the message it generates for transmission if all license plate data is not present in the Bio List entry.
Vehicle Information
Vehicle information from the FD-930 form can be entered into the Bio List using the Vehicle bio code. All six values for the vehicle information need to be entered into the same Bio List entry in a specific format to enable TSDB 1.4 to format the data into the NClC message. Each element of the vehicle data set must be preceded by its 3-character NCIC field code and a eolon, and each code-value pair should be separated on the line by a single space, as in the following example:
VIN:ABCD1234 VYR:2002 VMA:TOYOTA VMO:COI{OLLA VST:SEDAN VCO: BLACK

NOC-VGTOF-8448

Sensitive But Unclassified

48

I I II I Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-2 Filed 07/06/11 Page 55 of 113
Sensitive But Unclassified
The vehicle information values can be entered using either the NCIC code or the full text of the data. For example. the same information above could be entered as:
VIN:ABCD1234 VYR:2002 VMA:TOYT VMO:COA VST:SD VCO:BLK If one of the values in th.:- data set is not listed on the FD-930, enter the field code and colon only. Because NCIC requires the YIN, Year, Make and Style clements to accept a Vehicle entry, TSDB l..t will not include any Vehicle infi.mnation in the NCIC message if any of these four elemL·nts are not present in the Bio List entry. The Vehicle Model and Color values are optional. and the Vehicle info will be sent even if they are not entered. However, the 3-charact.:-r tield codes need to be included in the Bio List entry to enable TSDB 1.4 to properly parse the data for creation of theN( 'IC message.
4.3 Optional Fields The tina! section on the lhmt page of the FD-930 form prm ides the optional fields for the record, as shown in the ligure below.
------ ----~;: comau: 9~ OP1JO:S:\L FIELDS
SK.'\_--:-;::---::::----- POB (Sk:ut Ton•i

Add!.li~n.'l
lde.alili""~ Ah.ne;_ _ _ __

--······-----

.. :n C:\.~l~,.H:O:::l. ;;;- t.::~A:" lll~-.,!a!:~:'\' .6t~d;;. ~t.~ ~n;~~:m.: n~u crJ-;t ~ ·~Ot:J?J,:tN betC.r~ rhe e!l'IY WtU l>e .L: .·:peci b\' :\C'IC

:c -:.... ·:: .... T:;e,;t fieJd~ ~·~ t.C•t m!~6::ry for:\(

:::.o·tn•·.•r CID :rud CT:l rtqt~.:t·t-; :ht' ..:cmp~::...~ ~·f :J~~ .~ f;tlG~ ~,;.pou a~:ai.J't.lJty

'":a~;~o: U:. thf .J.Il.t~~rJ:M~C\1~ t!eld. l!lduilt ,1: lt'J~t the !.;~l~Wul-:!1 ,a..,e- ;,~tnt and ;;omACf phoc.~ 1.. 1~1.'.:et. ~.ub;ec:·~ l"SPER ~Hnu-::.. and

~ubjrc:\ c..:-:.mtry ~r .;iu.zt!l1~lup. tf k:.1o--..·d1

To enable data from thcs.:- fields to be transmitted systematically to NCIC via TSDB 1.4, enter the data as follows:
Skin Tone
Enter the subject's skin lone into the TSDB Bio List using the Skin Tone bio code entry. TSDB 1.4 will automatically convert the text value to the proper NCIC code (e.g., Olive will be transmitted as 'OI.V', Light as 'LGT'). If the subj.:-ct's skin tone is unknown, do not enter a value in the Bio List.

NOC-VGTOF-8449

Sensitive But Unclassified

49

I I II I Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-2 Filed 07/06/11 Page 56 of 113
Sensitive But Unclassified

Place of Birth Enter the subject's plac~: of birth in the Bio List under the l<'RI POB bio code entry. If an FD-930 contains multipk POB values, enter each value as a separate entry in the Bio List. Place of birth data is entered using a format similar to vehicle and driver's license information, as shown in the following examples.
Locality:Albany StateOrProvincc:NY Country: US
Each element tag is necessary only if there is a value for that element (i.e., if no city is listed, you do not need to enter 'Locality:' in the field). The value for StateOrProvince needs to be entered using the two-character NCIC code. TSDB 1.4 will send this value in the NCIC message when it exists in the bio entry.
The Country value must be entered either as the country full name, or the two-letter FIPS country code that is part ofthe TWPDES standard. The FIPS code is required instead of the NClC code for country because the place of birth data in records received from TIDE follows the FlPS country code list and is written to the same bio code. When a country code is entered TSDB 1.4 will assume it is a FIPS countr~ code and will translate it to the corresponding NCIC code when there is no StateOrProvincc value to send ior place of birth.
Fingerprint Classification
Enter the subject's fingerprint classification into the TSDB Bio List using the FBI FP Dcsc bio code entry. TSDB 1.4 does not perform any translation of this value in creating the NCIC message, so the fingerprint classification value you enter must be in the format required by NCIC or it \Yill not be sent If the subject's fingerprint classification is unknown, do not enter a \'alue in the Bio List
Scars, Marks, and Tattoos
There are several Bio List codes that are used when entering SMT data from the FD-930 record. For example, if the SMT value is a scar, enter the \ alue using the Scars bio code; if it is a tattoo, enter the value under the Tattoos bio cod~:. rhc other bio code entries that will map to the NClC SvlT field code are Glasses and Ph~·sical Deformities. SMT information can be entered using either the NClC codes or the full text description.
Cautions & Medical Conditions
Enter any CMCs tor the subject in the Bio List under the FIJI CMC bio code entry. If an FD-930 contains multiple CMC values, enter each value us a separate entry in the Bio List. Enter the text value lor the CMC in the bio entry, and TSDB 1.4 will automatically convert the text value to the proper NCIC numeric code. l·or example, if you enter 'Armed and Dangerous· as a FBI CMC, the NClC transa.:tion will send the '00' code.
Date of Purge All NCIC transactions sent from TSDB are sent with the ·',QNEX~' date of purge value. There is no field in TSDB that will store an overriding purge date.
Notify Originating Agency
All NClC transactions sent from TSDB are sent with the NOA value set to 'Y'. This value cannot be overridden.

NOCNGTOF-8450

Sensitive But Unclassified

50

I I II I Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-2 Filed 07/06/11 Page 57 of 113
Sensitive But Unclassified
Miscellaneous Currently, TSDB 1.4 is configured to automatically write certain information to the NCIC MIS field, included the subject's passport country, full name (if it exceeds the 30 character limit), TIDE lJ) (for IT records only), and US Person status. FBI Agent point of contact information that needs to be included in the MIS lkld should be entered into the Bio List using the ??'! bio code entry. Additional information that would normally be entered in10 the MIS field (e.g., additional detail for SMTs such as tattoo designs, etc.) can be entered into TSDB using the FBI Comments bio code entry. However, TSDB 1.4 is not curro.:ntly set up to include data from the FBI Comments in the messages it transmits to NCIC due to QA concerns over the data that currently exists in this field for some TSDB records. Therefore, at this time any detailed information that is pluccd in the FBI Comments field in TSDB during data entry from an FD-930 form will also need to be manually entered into the NCIC record once TSDB 1.4 has successfully sent the transaction. (This issue is currently being assessed, and will be resolved in a future release.)
Additional Identifiers/Aliases Additional identifying inl'urmation (e.g., additional vehicles, Social Security Numbers, or MNUs) should be entered in the same manner as the original value for that field. If the original value is entered in a Main Client screen tield that allows only one value, such as DOB, enter the additional values in the corresponding Bio List field. Aliases and variant names should be entered in the Bio List under the FBI AKA bio code entry in 'Last Name, First Name' tormat. If an FD-930 contains multiple variant name values, enter each value as a separate entry in the Bio List. NCICNumber lbere should be no need to enter an NCJC JD from an FD-930 form into TSDB. If the FD-930 is a new entry, it will not have an NCIC ID listed on the form. If it is a modify, supplement or cancel suhmission, the NCIC ID listed on the form-if present- -can be used to retrieve the TSDH record that corresponds to the l·l>-930 form. Supporting Document Serial Number TSDB does not support the Supporting Document Serial :-;umber field.
4.4 Handling Code and Other Watchlist Recommendations
The Handling Code assignment and watchlist recommendation checkboxes on the second page of the FD-930 (as shown below) must also be entered into the TSDB record.

NCIC-vGTOF-8451

Sensitive But Unclassified

51

I II I Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-2 Filed 07/06/11 Page 58 of 113
Sensitive But Unclassified

TACTIC'\
To enter the data from this section of the form, usc the following information. VGTOF Handling Code Enter the VGTOF Handling Code for the subject in the V<iTOF Eligibility window that can be opened from the Main Client screen.

Watch lists
For a new TSDB record. all export eligibilities arc set to · ~ · by default. If a watchlist checkbox on the FD-930 is checked, you do not need to s~t the eligibility tield; if a watchlist's checkbox is blank on the form, enter a 'Y' in th~ appropriate eligibility field on the TSDB record. Also, set the VGTOF eligibility to ·y· when you create the record.
5 DT Record Review and Transmission
Once you have entered all or the FD-930 form data and saved the record in TSDB, you will
need to review and accept th~ record for transmission to NClt · via the VGTOF Review form. The review process fbr the DT records works in the same manner as the existing VGTOF review. Once you bring up th~.: record in the Review screen and accept it for export, TSDB 1.4 will format and send th~ message to NCIC, receive the response, and, if the transaction is successful (i.e., and add or duplicate add), will post the NCIC ID back to the TSDB record. If the record contains multipk \ alues for one or more fields, TSDB 1.4 will automatically generate and submit the appropriate supplemental entry transw.:lions to send the additional data to NCIC.

6 Creating Additional Records for Other Watchlists

lf a record created from an FD-930 form has multiple names that were entered as FBI AKA
values, the final step in the data entry process is to create additional TSDB records for each of the alias names. This will ~nable the additional names to be both queried via the Fuzzy

NCIC-vGTOF-8452

Sensitive But Unclassified

52

I

• II Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-2 Filed 07/06/11 Page 59 of 113

I

Sensitive But Unclassified

Finder tool and exported to other customer watchlists. The alias records should not be created until the primary record has been transmitted to NCIC and the NCIC ID has been posted back into the primary record. Once the primary record displays the NClC ID on the Main Client screen, perform the following steps to create the alias records.
1. Display the primary n:cord on the Main Client screen. 2. In the Alias block at the center of the screen, double-click the first blank licld in the
Passport column. A Create Alias window wilt display. 3. In the Create Alias\\ indow, enter the alias name and th-.: country value you entered
for the primary record (unless the alias record will ha'-.: a different passport number with a different country value) in the appropriate fields and click OK. 4. The newly created record should display on the Main Client screen. Copy and paste the NCIC ID from th-.: primary record into the NCIC IU field in the alias record. Also, the alias record will be created with a system-gcn-.:rated 'TSC' passport number. If the FD-930 contains actual passport numbers, you can copy and paste (or directly type) the passport number into the alias record. 5. To complete the creation of the alias record, change the VGTOF export eligibility flag to 'N' and the FTTfF eligibility flag to 'Y', then save the record. This will identify the record as an alias record and will prevent duplicate information from being sent to NCIC. J\11 other export eligibility flags should match the eligibilities of the primary record. 6. Repeat this process I(H· any additional alias/aka names. alternate dates of birth, and alternate passport numbers on the FD-930 form.

NOC-VGTOF-8453

Sensitive But Unclassified

53

I I II I Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-2 Filed 07/06/11 Page 60 of 113
Sensitive But Unclassified

TSC STANDARD OPERATING PROCEDURES: Nominations Process

Appendix A. Acronyms

ACS AGDIR CBP CLASS DHS DOS DOJ DT EXC FBI FBINET FOUO HC lBlS INR INRISS lSSO IT LEO MILDET NCIC NCTC NOL OGA POS SBU SCION SME SRQ TACTICS TIDE
TIPOFF TREX TSA TSCNET TSDB TUSCAN VGTOF

FBI Automated Case Support System Attorney General Directive watchlisting US Customs and Border Protection DOS Consular Lookout And Support System Department of Homeland Security Department of State Department of Justice Domestic Terrorist! rerrorism Exclude from Syst~o:m Export in SRQ Federal Bureau of Investigation FBI Secret-Collateral Operational Network Unclassified II For Official Use Only VGTOF Handling Code (Followed by 1-4, R or S) interagency Border Inspection System DOS Bureau oflntelligence and Research DOS INR Information Support System SCI Operational Network TSC Information S) stems Security Officer International Terrorist/Terrorism Law Enforcement Otllcer Military Detainee National Crime lnl()rrnation Center National Counterh:rrorism Center NCTC Online Collaboration Area Other Government Agency. Can refer to any government entity except FBI. Post. Include inS) stem Export in SRQ Sensitive But Unclassified FBI SCI Operational Network Subject Matter Expert Single Review Queue TIPOFF US-Australia Terrorist Identities Datamart Environment. Database containing derogatory information on all IT subjects. Database now km)\\ n as TIDE FBI Terrorist Revi~:w & Examination Unit Transportation Security Administration TSC SBU-Collatcml Operational Network TSC Terrorist Screening Database TIPOFF US-Canada Violent Gang and Terrorist Organization File in NCIC

NCIC-vGTOF-8454

Sensitive But Unclassified

58

I I II I Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-2 Filed 07/06/11 Page 61 of 113

Sensitive But Unclassificd TSC STANDARl) OPERATING PROCEDURES: Nominations Process
Appendix C: Integrated Nominations Process Overview
I
u;

.....
·-U)
'-

~~!

I -
I

--

Li I~ IQ

~

}!I I

"' '"

0

''--

Q)

t- U)

"'C
..Q..).

U)
Q)
CJ

e!ma..0 '-

1.0 0 0

N

,_
:1
,.".'.

c c .SU)

«i
~ ....

Q)
- 0 .c
..... E

·..-.. c cu ..Q...).

Q)

0.

Q)

E c (/)

·- c E

$ " .\.1.
~ e
i"'
"~ '
d z
"

'-
Q)
>

z 0

(r:~~~~=

0

(!)

• (/)
•
:J

NOC-vGTOF-8455
59

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-2 Filed 07/06/11 Page 62 of 113
DOCUMENTS

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-2 Filed 07/06/11 Page 63 of 113

Law Enforcement Sensitive

For Official Use Only

FD-930
Revised 03-08·2007

FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION
GANG OR TERRORIST MEMBER WATCHLISTING FORM
NCIC-VGTOF for Gang Members/National Watchlistlng for Terrorist Members

Form Validation:
This form has many validation rules. Hints are provided as the form is completed, and when completed you can check the form in its entirety by clicking the "Validate Form" button below. The validation warning banners do not refresh automatically, you must dick the button each time you want to check the form. You can save the form with validation errors and return to it later to correct them.
NOT VALID

Subject Type:
I Gang Member

REQUEST TYPE
Type of Investigation:
I Preliminary Investigation

Date:

I Subject of International Terrorism Case

I Full Investigation

I Subject of Domestic Terrorism Case
Type of Request:
I Initial Submission

I Remove Individual from ALL Watchlisting and Supported Systems

I Add Data To Existing Record

I Modify or Delete Data from Existing Record

Substantive Case Number:

CASE INFORMATION
Serial Number of EC supporting this FD-930:

Serial Number of the NOI or LHM:

NCIC (NIC) Number: Case Agent or Analyst Name:

Phone Number:

Entry Criteria Code:

r

A-admitted membership in a gang or terrorist organization at the time of his/her arrest or incarceration

r

B-has been identified by an individual of proven reliability as a group member

r

C-has been identified by an individual of unknown reliability as a group member and that information has been corroborated in significant respect

r

D-has been observed by members of the entering agency to frequent a known group's area, associate with known group members and/or affect that group's style of dress, tattoos, hand signals, or symbols

r

E-has been arrested on more than one occasion with known group members for offenses consistent with group activity

r

F·has admitted membership in the identified group at any time other than arrest or incarceration

r

G-Terrorist acting alone

r

H-Subject is suspected or believed to be associated with terrorism or a terrorist organization

Last Name:

BIOGRAPHICAL INFORMATION
First/Middle Name:

Race:

Skin Tone:

Sex:

Fingerprint Class:

Height:

'Weight:

'Hair Color:

Cautions and Medrcal Conditions: (Enter up to 10) Condition:

]Eye Color: Further Description:

Date(s) of Birth associated with this unique identity: (Enter up to 9)

Month:

Day:

Year:

Social Security Number(s) associated with this unique identity: (Enter up to 9)
DOCUMENT 6

Operator's License Number associated with this unique Identity:

State/Location Category: FD-930 (Revised OJ-08-2007)

State/Location Value: Page 1 of 3

ear of Expiration:
FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-2 Filed 07/06/11 Page 64 of 113

Law Enforcement Sensitive

For Official Use Only

SMT: (Enter up to 9) Category:

SCARS, MARKS, TATTOOS AND OTHER PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS

Scar/Mark/Tattoo/Other Characteristic Descriptive Information:

Additional Identifiers:

U.S. Person:

Passport Number:

r Yes r No

Place of Birth Category:

Country of Citizenship:

Does your subject have any known aliases? License Plate Number: License Plate Type: State/Location Category: Color 1: Style:

Miscellaneous: NATIONALITY Passport Country of Issuance:
Place of Birth Location:
ALIASES
r: Yes r No
VEHICLE INFORMATION
State/Location Value: olor 2:

License Plate Exp Year:

Year:

FBI Number:

MISCELLANEOUS NUMBERS

Other Miscellaneous Numbers: Description:

ID Number:

RECOMMENDED HANDLING CODE

The case agent will recommend a Handling Code for terrorist records based on nomination criteria set forth below. The Terrorist Screening Center (TSC) will review the case agent's nominations and make the final determination as to the appropriate Handling Code and other supported systems to which the subject is entered or removed.

Is the individual a sworn or civilian law enforcement agency employee? (This includes local/state/federal/military/tribal/territorial law enforcement.)

rYes r No

Handling Code Description

Handling Code 1 is reserved for individuals who are the subject of formal criminal charges or indictments. An agency

1.

r nominating a record for this category must ensure that the arrest warrant is current and active in the Wanted Persons File

in NCIC.

Handling Code 2 is reserved for individuals for whom the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) has or will issue a 'Detainer' should the individual be encountered by law enforcement.

2.
3. Silent Hit.

r Nominations of records to the TSC with this Handling Code will require a particularized review of the intelligence records.

To use Handling Code 2, a review and approval for legal sufficiency by the Chief Division Counsel and the

r Office of the General Counsel is required. · Handling Code 3 is reserved for those records which contain a full first and last name and a complete date of birth or a full

r first and last name and a passport number. A Silent HiJJs !lllent cmly wh.en q~eried...tb.ro h NCIC

system_. The law enforcement

agency that queries NCIC does not receive any Indication that the subject has been entered In VGTOF.

NO FLY LIST

FD-930 (R.evised 03-08-2007)

Page 2 of 3

FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-2 Filed 07/06/11 Page 65 of 113

Law Enforcement Sensitive

49 CFR Seefunrlc1i5i2Ge5:(my(3)

Is the individual qualified for placement on the No Fly List?

I Yes I No

If no, is the individual qualified for placement on the Selectee List?

I Yes I No

~--------------------------------------------_.----------------------------------~b3

EXCLUSION FROM SUPPORTED SYSTEMS

An individual watchlisted as a known or appropriately suspected terrorist will be included in all supported systems if the individual meets the criteria for inclusion. An individual may be excluded from a particular supported system in rare cases when there is a reasonable and detailed operational justification for not including the individual in a particular supported system and the request for exclusion has been reviewed and approved by the Terrorist Review and Examination Unit (TREX Unit) and the Terrorist Screening Center (TSC). (Ref~renc_e_.!::!Q_]lS_:OO, S_~d~! S_•L_!tate~_QB/01/2005.) A detailed explanation of each supported system is available on the TSC's webpage on the Counterterrorism Division's (CTD's) Intranet website and in previously disseminated ECs.

Supported System(s) for which you are requesting exclusion·

Check to Exclude
r

System CLASS

Description The Department of State's name check system for visas and passports.

r

IBIS

The Department of Homeland Security's primary integrated lookout system available at U.S. ports of entry.

r

No Fly List The List of passengers prohibited from boarding a plane within or destined for the U.S.

r

Selectee List The lookout system for individuals that warrant secondary screening prior to boarding a plane.

r

TUSCAN

Canada's border lookout system.

r

TACTICS

Australia's border lookout system.

r

VGTOF

A file in NCIC serving as the FBI's lookout system for gang groups and members, as well as known or appropriately suspected terrorists.

Enter f1le number that provides justification for excluding the subject from one or more supported systems:

Enter serial number that provides justification for excluding the subject from one or more supported systems:

Enter file number that documents TREX Unit's and TSC's approval: (TREX Unit will enter this information, if request is approved)

Enter serial number that documents TREX Unit's and TSC's approval: (TREX Unit will enter this information, if request is approved)

Nomination Log: (For Use By TREX, NCTC and TSC Only)

FD-930 (Revised 03-0B-2007)

NCIC-VGTOF-10072

Page 3 of 3

FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-2 Filed 07/06/11 Page 66 of 113
DOCUMENT 13

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-2 Filed 07/06/11 Page 67 of 113 ,,

From:

Sent: To: Attachments:

lc~rds_LIVE ::~ :c:ah~~ j 5 2009 11:13 AM

1

ra1nmg

System.doc; FW Current VGTOF Handling Codes from

TSC.htm b2

l:J6

Please see the attached. This is utilized for dispatcher training. Not sure if you need this or not.

.b7C

I

I

External Trammg and Outreach Coordinator

ning Center

office

blackberry

ALL IJo!FOPllil.TI ON COliTAilolED HEREIN IS UNCLASSIFIED DATE 02-19-2010 BY uc/baw 60324

NCIC-VGTOF-10653

1

DOCUMENT 13

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-2 Filed 07/06/11 Page 68 of 113

NCIC Message / CATEGORY 1

"*** LAW ENFORCEMENT SENSITIVE INFORMATION ***

WARNING- APPROACH WITH CAUTION

THIS INDIVIDUAL IS ASSSOCIATED WITH TERRORISM AND IS THE SUBJECT OF AN ARREST WARRANT, ALTHOUGH THE

WARRANT MAY NOT BE RETRIEVABLE VIA THE SEARCHED IDENTIFIER. IF AN ARREST WARRANT FOR THE INDIVIDUAL IS

RETURNED IN YOUR SEARCH OF NCIC, DETAIN THE INDIVIDUAL PURSUANT TO YOUR DEPARTMENT'S PROCEDURES FOR

IHANDLING AN OUTSTANDING WARRANT, AND IMMEDIATELY CONTACT THE TERRORIST SCREENING CENTER (TSC) A T D IFOR ADDITIONAL DIRECTION. '

b2

b6

b7C

IF AN ARREST WARRANT FOR THE INDIVIDUAL IS NOT RETURNED, USE CAUTION AND IMMEDIATELYCONTACT THE TSC

b~E

ATJ

JFOR ADDITIONAL DIRECTION WITHOUT OTHERWISE EXTENDING THE SCOPE OR DURATION OFTHE

ENCOUNTER. IF YOU ARE A BORDER PATROL OFFICER IMMEDIATELY CALL THE NTC.

UNAUTHORIZED DISCLOSURE OF TERRORI~T WATCHLIST INFORMATION IS PROHIBITED. DO NOT ADVISE THIS INDIVIDUAL THAT THEY MAY BE ON A TERRORIST WATCHLIST. INFORMATION THAT THIS INDIVIDUAL MAY BE ON A TERRORIST WATCH LIST IS PROPERTY OF THE TSC AND IS A FEDERAL RECORD PROVIDED TO YOUR AGENCY THAT MAY NOT BE DISSEMINATED OR USED IN ANY PROCEEDING WITHOUT THE ADVANCE JI:UTHORIZATION OF THE TSC.

***LAW ENFORCEMENT SENSITIVE INFORMATION***"

ALL IIIFORJI:ATIO!l CONTAINED HEREIN IS UNCLASSIFIED DATE 02-19-20!0 BY UC/baw 603224

NCIC-VGTOF-10646

December 2008

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-2 Filed 07/06/11 Page 69 of 113

NCIC Message/ CATEGORY 2

"***LAW ENFORCEMENT SENSITIVE INFORMATION ***

WARNING- APPROACH WITH CAUTION

THIS INDIVIDUAL IS OF INVESTIGATIVE INTEREST TO LAW ENFORCEMENT REGARDING ASSOCIATION WITH TERRORISM AND

THERE MAY BE A DETAINER AVAILABLE FROM THE DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY FOR THIS INDIVIDUAL

2

I IMMEDIATELY coNTACT THE TERRORIST scREENING CENTER AT

loR, IF You ARE A BORDER PATROL

OFFICER, IMMEDIATELY CALL THE NTC TO ASCERTAIN IF A DETAINER IS AVAILABLE FOR THE INDIVIDUAL AND TO OBTAIN

ADDITIONAL DIRECTION. PLEASE QUESTION THIS INDIVIDUAL TO ASSIST THE TSC IN DETERMINING WHETHER THE

INDIVIDUAL ENCOUNTERED IS THE SUBJECT OF A DETAINER WITHOUT OTHERWISE EXTENDING THE SCOPE OR DURATION

OF THE ENCOUNTER.

UNAUTHORIZED DISCLOSURE OF TERRORIST WATCHLIST INFORMATION IS PROHIBITED. DO NOT ADVISE THE INDIVIDUAL THAT THEY MAY BE ON A TERRORIST WATCH LIST. INFORMATION THAT THIS INDIVIDUAL MAY BE ON A TERRORIST WATCH LIST IS PROPERTY OF THE TSC AND IS A FEDERAL RECORD PROVIDED TO YOUR AGENCY THAT MAY NOT BE DISSEMINATED OR USED IN ANY PROCEEDING WITHOUT THE ADVANCE AUTHORIZATION OF THE TSC.

***LAW ENFORCEMENT SENSITIVE INFORMATION***"

NCIC-VGTOF-10647

December 2008

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-2 Filed 07/06/11 Page 70 of 113

NCIC Message/ CATEGORY 3

"***LAW ENFORCEMENT SENSITIVE INFORMATION***

DO NOT ADVISE THIS INDIVIDUAL THAT THEY MAY BE ON A TERRORIST WATCH LIST.
b2

coNTACT THE TERRORIST scREENING cENTER (TSC) ATI

b6

louRING THIS ENCOUNTER. IF THIS wouLD EXTEND THE scoPE

b7C

OR DURATION OF THE ENCOUNTER, CONTACT THE TSC IMMEDIATELY THEREAFTER. IF YOU ARE A BORDER PATROL OFFICER

b7E

IMMEDIATELY CALL THE NTC.

ATIEMPT TO OBTAIN SUFFICIENT IDENTIFYING INFORMATION DURING THE ENCOUNTER WITHOUT OTHERWISE EXTENDING THE

SCOPE OR DURATION OF THE ENCOUNTER, TO ASSIST THE TSC IN DETERMING WHETHER OR NOT THE NAME OR IDENTIFIER(S) YOU

QUERIED BELONG TO AN INDIVIDUAL IDENTIFIED AS HAVING POSSIBLE TIES WITH TERRORISM:

.

DO NOT DETAIN OR ARREST THIS INDIVIDUAL UNLESS THERE IS EVIDENCE OF A VIOLATION OF FEDERAL, STATE OR LOCAL STATUTES.

UNAUTHORIZED DISCLOSURE IS PROHIBITED.

INFORMATION THAT THIS INDIVIDUAL MAY BE ON A TERRORIST WATCH LIST IS THE PROPERTY OF THE TSC AND IS A FEDERAL RECORD PROVIDED TO YOUR AGENCY ONLY FOR INTELLIGENCE AND LEAD PURPOSES. THIS RECORD, AND ANY INFORMATION CONTAINED WITHIN IT, MAY NOT BE DISCLOSED OR USED IN ANY PROCEEDING WITHOUT THE ADVANCE AUTHORIZATION OF THE TSC.

WARNING-APPROACH WITH CAUTION

"***LAW ENFORCEMENT SENSITIVE INFORMATION***"

...

December 2008

NCIC-VGTOF-10648

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-2 Filed 07/06/11 Page 71 of 113

Terrorism Quick Reference Card

Handling Codes
Handling Code 1: Approach with caution. The individual is the subject of an arrest warrant. If a warrant is returned, detain the individual pursuant to your department's procedures and immediately contact the TSC. If a warrant is not returned, use caution and immediately · contact TSC for additional direction without otherwise extending the scope/duration of the enconnter.

Handling Code 2: Approach with caution. There may be a derainer available from DHS for this individual. Immediately contact the TSC to ascertain if a detainer is available. Please question the individual to assist the TSC in identifying the individual without otherwise extending the scope or duration of the enconnter.

Handling Code 3: Contact the TSC during this encounter. If this would extend the scope or duration of the encounter, contact the TSC immediately thereafter. Attempt to obtain
sufficient identifying information during the encounter without extending its scope or duration. Do not detain or arrest this individual unless there is evidence of a violation of federal, state or local statutes.

TSC Phone Number:

b2

b6

.b7C

b7E

. ----

NCIC -VGTOF-10649

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-2 Filed 07/06/11 Page 72 of 113

Terrorism Quick Reference Card
First responding officers should be aware of suspicious indicators that may suggest a possible terrorist threat. Upon receiving a possible match to a known or suspected terrorist, pursuant to an NC!C query, encountering law enforcement agencies sho!Jid contact the Terrorist Screening Center (TSC) at the number below. The suspicious indicators should be considered collectively in assessing a possible threat. This quick reference guide is intended to provide practical information for first responding officers but may not encompass every threat or circumstance.

TSC Phone Number:

.b2
b6

b7C

b7E

NCIC-VGTOF-10650

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-2 Filed 07/06/11 Page 73 of 113
b7E
NCIC-VGTOF-10651

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-2 Filed 07/06/11 Page 74 of 113
NCIC-vGTOF-10652

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-2 Filed 07/06/11 Page 75 of 113
DOCUMENT 15

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-2 Filed 07/06/11 Page 76 of 113 SENSITIVE BUT UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
Terrorist Screening Center Tactical Operations Center Standard Operating Procedures

Version 2.0 October 1, 2008

DOCUMENT 15

NCIC-vGrOF-10756 SENSITIVE BUT UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-2 Filed 07/06/11 Page 77 of 113

SENSITIVE BUT UNCLASSFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
Document Change History

Version Draft 0.6 Draft 0.7
Draft 0.8
Draft 0.9

1\JI', ..............Jly_

Date 12 September 2006

Summarv of Chane:es Incorporated & updated protocols for TSA-OI and NTC, dated 9-8-06.

20 September 2006 a. Updated database checks text

from document dated

09/17/06 (which is located

onpage36)

b. Updated subsequent text in

document to refer to

document bookmark for the

database checks.

c. Added in section 5.6.1 (DoS

PPTreview)

d. Added scenarios to DoS PPT

:

review (sections 5.6.1.1-

5.6.1.3)

e. Added "Draft" to headers

and cover page.

f. Updated CIS protocols dated

b6

9-18-06, inserted into section b7C

5.2

20 September 2006 a. Corrected Table of Contents formatting w/4tb level items
b. Updated TSC DB checks to insert in positive sections of protocols.
c. Updated references in negative and inconclusive sections
d. Added IDW text to section 3.12
e. Added NTC Pre-clearance to section 5.5.1
f. Broke out "Special Encounter Protocols" to be a top-level section (from 5.8 to 6.0)
g. Added in ICE Memorandum, section 6.4.1
I 25 October 2006 a. Added DoS I SAO protocols
NCIC-VGTOF-10757

2

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-2 Filed 07/06/11 Page 78 of 113

S:.sNSITIVE BUT UNCLASSFIEDI/FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

Draft 0.10
DraftO.ll Draft0.12

dated 10-23-06 to section

5.6.1 in document

b. Added DoS I Visa

Revocation protocols from

10-23-06 to section 5.6.2 to

document

c. Due to addition, Dos I U.S.

Passport Review is now

section 5.6.3 in this

document

4 November 2006 a. Inserted Soundex traffic stop

protocols, section 5.1.1

b. Inserted Call Center

Worksheet with Soundex

fields highlighted. (rec'd

from RV e-mail10-31-06 via

LK) c. Inserted call center

h6 b7C

worksheet and traffic stop

(law enforcement) worksheet

in appendix

d. Updated section 3.10, CCD

Query instructions.

e. Added section 10.10, CCD

useraccountc~on

instructions.

f. Rename section 10.4 from

''TODE" to "TIDE' -

assumed a typographical

error.

6 November 2006 a. Section 5.1, modified the LE

protocols, adding in QWT

text.

7 December 2006 a. Modified cover page layout

b. Updated CIS Encounter

scenarios to gather additional

information noted in

10124/06 SOP update

c. Updated LE encounter to

provide guidance for final

resolution values for

encounters in which the

identity match was (-) or (?)

and the traveler was

"arrested"

d. Updated TSA and NTC SO~

NCIC-VGTOF-10758

3

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-2 Filed 07/06/11 Page 79 of 113

SENSITIVE BUT UNCLASSFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

Draft 0.13

I Draft0.14

I .

Draft 0.15

~

I Draft0.16

J

Draft0.17

Draft 0.18

Draft0.19 Andrea Farmer

to provide guidance for final

resolution values for

encounters in which the

identity match was (-) or (?)

and the traveler was "denied

entry"

e. Performed grammatical
corrections in ens section

5.3

i

f. Added section 6.4.1.1-

Details ofiCE I DRO No Fly

List Directive

g. Added Silent Hit (S-1) EMA

Entry Procedures to section

5.

h. Modified VGTOF

screenshots to mask out real

usemame in screen detail.

23 January 2007 a. Moved S-1 Silent Hit to end

of section #5

b. Renamed section 6 to ''Name

Checks Protocol" .

c. Updated Soundex encounter

form on page 39

d. Updated all referen6e of"Hit i

DB checks" from 21 January ;

2007 revision

23 February 2007

a. U:pd1!ted J2er markuo review

fr;i I · b. U ~tea section 3.91o match

b6 b7C

updated No Fly

Implementation Guidance

(25 July 2006), and moved

bulk to !:g)~endix 10.7

28 February 2007 a. Added 10.8 ''TSC Watch

Commander's NO FLY

I

Downgrade SOP"

i

6March2007

a. Added updated Expedite

Procedures, section 4.1.

22 March 2007

a. Added updated Expedite

Procedures, section 4.1.

10 April2007

a. Removal of Handling Code

4. No longer valid.

b. Updated Traffic Stop Sheet

26 Apri12007

a. U~dated information on

NCIC-vGTOF-10759

4

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-2 Filed 07/06/11 Page 80 of 113

SENSITIVE BUT UNCLASSFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

EMA Database Checks

b. Added SOUNDEX Call

sheet
c. Updated ens information.

Version 't.O

I

9May20Q7

a. Updated "TSA Other

Programs,, section.

b. Statused as Baselined Version 1.0 nP.l" rA11 rP.nTP.l"

b6 b7C

Supervisor!

I

Draft 2.0

1 October 2008

a. Updated and Standardized

encounter procedures

b. Updated all policies and

procedures as they relate to

TSTOC

Facilitation of revision

c. SOP Appendices (Basic Help

by TSC Compliance

I User Guides for Center

Uriit

Operations Specialists)

Version2.0

Finalized by FBI

1 October'2008

Deputy Director Cory

Nelson

Complete SOP Revision reflecting current protocols in TSTOC.

Version 2.0 Effective October 1, 2008 Approved by:

Cory B. Nelson FBI Deputy Director Terrorist Screening Center

NOC-vGrOF-10760 5

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-2 Filed 07/06/11 Page 81 of 113 SENSITIVE BUT UNCLASSFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
Distribution Restriction This publication contains technical and operational information utilized by the Terrorist Screening Center (TSC) and its affiliates for official purposes only. Distribution is limited to other U.S. Governmental agencies. Distribution is strictly limited to U.S. Government agencies. Requests from outside the U.S. Government for the release of any information contained in this publication under the Freedom of Information Act or Foreign Military Sales Program must be made to the Director of the Terrorist Screening Center.
NCIC-VGTOF-10761 6

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-2 Filed 07/06/11 Page 82 of 113

SENSillVE BUT UNCLASSFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

Table of Contents

1. Mission

2. Purpose

3. Background

4. Databases

4.1 Encounter Management Application (EMA)

4.2 Terrorist Screening Database (TSDB)

4.3 National Crime Information Center (NCIC)

4.3.1 Violent Gang & Terrorist Organization File (VGTOF)

4.4 Automated Case Support (ACS)

4.5 Terrorist Identity Datamart Environment (TIDE)

.

4.6 Treasury Enforcement Communication System (TECS) I Interagency

Border Inspection System (IBIS)

4.7 TSA No Fly and Selectee Lists

4.8 Consular Consolidated Database (CCD)

4.8.1 Passport Information Electronic Record System (PIERS)

4.8.2 Non-Immigrant Visa (NIV)

4.8.3 Immigrant and Diversity Visa (IV/DV)

4.9 Investigative Data Warehouse (IDW)

4.10 Department of Defense (DOD) Detainee Reporting System

5. Acronyms

6. Routine Encounter Procedures

6.1 Standard Procedures for Database Checks

6.2 National Targeting Center (NTC) Encounter

6.2.1 Introduction

6.2.2 Advance Passenger Information System (APIS)

6.2.3 Electronic System for Travel Authorization (ESTA)

6.2.4 Encounter Link Management Operation (ELMO)

6.2.5 Caribbean Community (CARICOM)

6.2.6 · Pre-Clearances/Preflight Inspection

6.2.6.1 Outbound Flights from the U.S.

6.2.6.2 Extraterritorial Flights

6.2.7 Encounter Procedures for All Types ofNTC Encounters

6.3 Transportation Security Administration Office ofIntelligence

(TSA-OI)

6.3.1 Introduction

6.3.2 Encounter Procedures

6.4 Law Enforcement Encounter

6.4.1 Introduction

6.4.2 Encounter Procedures

6.5 Criminal Justice Information Services (CnS) Encounter

6.5.1 Introduction

6.5.2 Encounter Procedures

6.6 Transportation Threat Assessment Credentialing (TTAC) Encounter

6.6.1 Introduction

NQC-VGTOF-10762

7

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-2 Filed 07/06/11 Page 83 of 113

SENSITIVE BUT UNCLASSFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

6.6.2 Encounter Procedures

6.7 U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (CIS) Encounter

6.7.1 Introduction

6.7.2 Encounter Procedures

6.8 Department of State Encounters

6.8.1 Introduction

6.8.2 U.S. Passport Review Encounter

6.8.2.1 Encounter ProceQ.ures

6.8.3 TSC Tactical Operations Center Protocol for Handling

Department ofState (DOS) Security Advisory Opinion (SAO)

Encounters

6.8.4 Visa Revocation Encounter

6.&.4.1 Introduction

6.8.4.2 Encounter Proce(l.ures

6.9 Customs and Border Protection (CBP) Encounter

6.10 Standard Procedures for EMA Data Entry, Record Close Out, and

Team Leader/Watch Commander Follow-up

7. Encounter Procedures Requiring Special Handling

7.1 Terrorist Encounter Review Process (TERP)

7.2 TACTICS AND TUSCAN Encounters

7.2.1 Introduction

7.2.2 Encounter Procedures

7.3 OATEWAY Encounters

7.3.1 Introduction

7.3.2 Encounter Procedures

I 7.4
7.5

Epcmmt~;sefmrootme Q[:u::elrRy eEmncooutentQerusery International (RQI)]

7.6 Procedures to Request a Tearline for All Forei Countries

b7D

7.6.1 Protocol :6

equests 7.6.2 ~e-p-artm~ent of State (DOS)Requests 7.6.3 Federal Bureau oflnvestigation (FBI) Requests 7.6.4 Additional Comments 7.7 Legally Restricted Encounter 7.7.1 Introduction 7.7.2 Encounter Procedures 7.8 T-7 Encounters 8. Special Programs 8.1 VOTOF Query Project 8.1.1 Introduction 8.1.2 Encounter Procedures 8.2 Overseas Private Investment Corporation (OPIC) 8.2.1 Introduction 8.2.2 Encounter Procedures 8.3 Silent Hit (S-1) EMA Entry Procedures
NCIC-VGTOF-10763
8

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-2 Filed 07/06/11 Page 84 of 113
SENSITIVE BUT UNCLASSFIEDI/FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
8.3.1 Introduction 8.3.2 Encounter Procedures 8.4 Outbound Passenger Manifest Received by Email 9. Priority and Expedited Nominations 9.1 Introduction 9.2 Priority Nominations 9.2.1 Introduction 9.2.2 Nomination Procedures 9.3 Expedited Nominations 9.3.1 Introduction 9.3.2 Nomination Procedures 10. Watch Commander Protocols 10.1 No Fly Waiver and TSC Role for Deportee 10.2 Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) Memorandum: Detention Removal Operations (DRO) No Fly List Directive 10.3 TSC Watch Commanders No Fly Downgrade Standard Operating Procedures (as ofDecember 29, 2006) 11. Watchlist Status Checks 11.1 NCTC Watchlist Status Check 11.1.1 Introduction 11.1.2 Procedures 11.2 Current Intelligence Report (CIR) Watchlist Status Checks 12. Other Guidance 12.1 Guidance for the "Present I Not Present" Button 12.2 EMA Deletions 12.3 Press Inquiries 13. Appendices 13.1 EMA Data Entry SOP 13.2 TSDB User Guide 13.3 NCIC I VGTOF Help Guide 13.4 ACS 13.5 TIDE · 13.5.1 User Guide 13.5.2 OUtbound TIDE Procedures 13.6 TECS Appendix 13.7 TSA No Fly and Selectee Guidance 13.8 CCD User Guide 13.9 Terrorist Encounter Review Process (TERP) SOP 13.10 Encounter Call Sheets
NOC-vGTOF-10764
9

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-2 Filed 07/06/11 Page 85 of 113
SENSITIVE BUT UNCLASSFIED/IFOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
1. MISSION
The mission ofthe Terrorist Screening Center (TSC) is to consolidate and coordinate the U.S. Government's approach to terrorism screening and facilitate the sharing of information that protects the Nation and our foreign partners while safeguarding civil liberties.
2. PURPOSE
The purpose ofthis document is to modify and update the Standard Operating Procedures (SOP) for the Tactical Operations Center of the Terrorist Screening Center. This SOP is a set of written instructions that detail the regularly recurring work processes to be followed within the Tactical Operations Center. The SOP documents the manner in which activities are to be performed to facilitate consistent conformance to technical and quality system requirements and to support data quality and compliance with governmental regulations. The SOP will be reviewed and reinforced by the Team Leaders, Watch Commanders, Operations Supervisor and Operations Unit Chief. Current copies ofthe SOP will be readily accessible in the work areas ofthe Tactical Operations Center, in hard copy and electronic format.
3. BACKGROUND·
The TSC was established by Homeland Security Presidential Directive 6 on September 16,2003, which directed that a center be established to consolidate the government's approach to terrorism screening and to provide for the appropriate and lawful use ofterrorist information in screening processes. As a result, a Memorandum of Understanding on the Integration and Use ofScreening Information was signed, creating the TSC and placing it within the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), U.S. Deparbnent of Justice (DOJ). The TSC began operations on December 1, 2003. See further MOU legal documentation.
The TSC serves as the U.S. Government's consolidation point for appropriately known and suspected terrorist watchlist information, both foreign and domestic. The TSC, administered by the FBI and supported by federal departments and agencies including DOJ, Department ofHomeland Security (DHS), Department of State (DOS), the Office ofthe Director ofNational Intelligence (ODNI), and the National Counterterrorism Center (NCTC) ensures that information provided to l!nd consolidated by TSC is thorough, current, and accurate.
The TSC developed a consolidated database for terrorist identity information known as the Terrorist Screening Database (TSDB) and receives terrorist identity records from two sources. The information about known .or suspected international terrorists comes from NCTC, which assembles and analyzes information from a wide range of sources. The FBI provides the TSC with the identities ofknown or suspected domestic terrorists who have no known link to international terrorism.
NOCNGTOF-10765
10

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-2 Filed 07/06/11 Page 86 of 113 SENSITIVE BUT UNCLASSFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
The TSC supports federal, state, local, territorial, and tribal law enforcement agencies and some foreign governments that conduct terrorist screening by making the TSDB information available to them for screening purposes. TSC's 24-hour Tactical. Operations Center also supports agencies' terrori~ screening processes by determining whether the person being screened is an identity match to the TSDB. TSC supports terrorism screening for various agencies and has also made terrorist identity information accessible through the National Crime Information Center (NCIC) system to law enforcement officers, incl1Jding approximately 870,000 state and local officers nationwide, adding those resources to the fight against terrorism. . The TSC is administered by the FBI with support from the Intelligence Community, the DOD, DHS, DOJ, DOS, and the Department of the Treasury (DOT).
NCIC-vGrOF-10766 11

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-2 Filed 07/06/11 Page 87 of 113
SENSITIVE BUT UNCLASSFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
4. DATABASES
There are ten searchable databases that TSC personnel query when processing an encounter. These databases are briefly described: in this section:
4.1. E~COUNTER MANAGEMENT APPLICATION (EMA)
EMA is the application that the TSC uses to record calls and encounter information. EMA stores and displays valuable information regarding the call, caller, agency, incident, and subject identity information. The EMA Data Entry SOP can be found in Appendix 13.1.
4.2. TERRORIST SCREENING DATABASE (TSDB)
The TSDB is a database of known or suspected terrorist identities and incorporates international terrorism and domestic terrorism subjects and suspects into an unclassified, law enforcement sensitive database. The TSDB User Guide for the Tactical Operations Center can be found in Appendix 13.2.
4.3. NATIONAL CRIME INFORMATION CENTER (NCIC)
NCIC is a computerized index of criminal justice information (i.e. -criminal record history information, wanted individuals, stolen properties, missing persons, etc.). It is available to federal, state, and local law enforcement and other criminal justice agencies and is operational 24 hours a day, 365 days a year. The NCIC Help Guide can be found in Appendix 13.3.
4.3.1. VIOLENT GANG TERRORIST ORGANIZATION FILE (VGTOF)
Created in December 1993, VGTOF is designed to provide identifying information about violent criminal gangs and terrorist organiz~tions and their members. VGTOF is a subset ofNCIC records and its information is exclusively utilized by criminal justice agencies for criminal justice purposes.
4.4. AUTOMATED CASE SUPPORT SYSTEM (ACS)
The FBI's ACS is the centralized case management system used by the FBI. As the lead federal agency responsible for the investigation of domestic terrorism and international terrorism in the United States, the FBI develops information regarding domestic terrorism. (DT) and international terrorism (IT) from a number of intelligence sources and substantive investigations. Furthermore, all information contained in· the TSDB is exported into ACS, which then serves as a point ofreference for the FBI to the TSC. The ACS User Guide can be found in Appendix 13.4.
NCIC-VGirOF-10767
12

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-2 Filed 07/06/11 Page 88 of 113

SENSITIVE BUT UNCLASSFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

5. FREQUENTLY USED ACRONYMS

Acronym

What Acronym Stands For

ACS AKA AKO APIS ARN ATSP/ ATSC BIO BP
CA CARlCOM CBP CBSA CCD CIA CIS
c.ns
CLASS COPS
cos
CTC CTW Derog DHS DIA DIDO DL DOB DOD DOJ DOS DRO DRS DT EC ECF ELMO
EMA
ESTA FAA

Automated Case Support Also Known As Army Knowledge On line Advance Passenger Information System Alien Registration Number Automated Targeting System Passeng~rs I Automated Targeting Cargo Shipments Biographic~ Information Border Patrol Consular Affairs Caribbean Community Customs and Border Protection
da Border Services Agency Consular Consolidated Database Central Intelligence Agency Citizenship and Immigration Services Criminal Justice Information System Consular Lookout And Support S_ystem Central Operations Police Suite Operations Center Operations Specialist Counter Terrorism Center Counter Terrorism Watch Derogatory Information Department of Homeland Security Defense Intelligence Agency Designated Intelligence Disclosure Official Driver's License Date of Birth Department of Defense Department of Justice Department of State Detention and Removal Office Detainee Reporting System Domestic Terrorism Electronic ·Communication Electronic Case File Encounter Link Management Operation Encounter Management Application Electronic ~ystem for Travel Authorization Federal Aviation Administration
NCIC-VGTOF-10768
15

Agency, Branch
FBI
US Army CBP
NTC
J
I

DOS

DHSINTC ·

DHS

Canada

DOS

I

DHS FBI DoS US Army

CIA FBI

DOD

ICE US Army
FBI,ACS DHSINTC TSC DHSINTC

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-2 Filed 07/06/11 Page 89 of 113

SENSITIVE BUT UNCLASSFIBD//FOR OFFICIAL USB ONLY

FAM FBI FLT FLR FOIL FOUO FPE FTTTF IAFIS IBIS IC ICE IDW ISN IT ITOS J'ITF KST LEO LES LESC MNU NCIC NCTC NDRC NICS NOC NON-US PER NORAD NSA NTC. ODNI OFAC ORI PAX PIERS POB POE PPT QA SAO sEQ SRN SSN

Federal Air Marshal

Federal Bureau ofInvestigation

Flight

Foreign Liaison R~resentative

Freedom of Information Law

For Official Use Onl_y

Foreign Partner Extract

Foreign Terrorist Tracking Task Force

Integrated Automated Fif!gerprint Identification ~stem

Interagency Border Inspection System

Intelligence CommuniJY

Immigration and Customs Enforcement

Investigative Data Warehouse

Internment Serial Number

International Terrorism

International Terrorism O_perations Section

Joint Terrorism Task Force

:

KnoW~) or Suspected Terrorist

Law Enforcement Officer

Law Enforcement Sensitive

Law Enforcement Support Center

Miscellaneous number

National Crime Information Center

National Counterterrorism Center

National Detainee R~rtin_g Center

National Instant Criminal Background Check ~stems

NCTC Operations Center

Not a U.S. Person

North American Aero~ce Defense Command National Security Agency National Targeting Center Office of the Director ofNational Intelligence Office ofForeign Assets Control Originating Agency Identifier Passenger Pass_port Information Electronic Record System Place of Birth Port ofEntry Passport Quality Assurance Security Advisory Opinion Sequence Number Service Request Number Social Security Number
NCIC-vGTOF-10769

16

TSC
FBIHQ FBI CBP
FBI US Army FBI,CTD FBI TSC
NCIC
USArm_y NCTC
I
CBP Treasury
DOS/CCD CBP
DOS US Army TSC

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-2 Filed 07/06/11 Page 90 of 113

SENSITIVE BUT UNCLASSFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

TACTICS
TECS TERP TIDE TIG TIPOFF
TL TMG TSA TSC TSDB TSOC TSOU TTAC TTIC TUSCAN UNI USCG USMC USPER
usss
VGTOF VWP
we

Tipoff Australian Counterterrorism Information Control System Tre~ Enforcement Communications System Terrorist Encounter Review Process Terrorist Identities Datamart Environment Terrorist Identities Group Terrorist Threat Integration Center (TtiC) database; predecessor to TIDE Team Leader Threat Matrix Group Transportation Security Administration Terrorist Screenin_g Center Terrorist Screening Database Trans_portation SecuriJy Qperations Center Terrorist Screening Operational Unit Transportation Threat Assessments & Credentiali~ Terrorist Threat Integration Center Ti1>9ffUnited States and Canada Universal Index United States Coast Guard United States Marine Corps U.S. Person United States Secret Service Violent Gang and Terrorist Organization File Visa Waiver Program Watch Commander

Australia
CBP TSC NCTC NCTC
NCTC DHS FBI
TSJ\ FBI DHS/TSA
Canada FBI,ACS DHS DOD
Treasury FBI

NCIC-vGTOF-10770 17

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-2 Filed 07/06/11 Page 91 of 113
SENSITIVE BUT UNCLASSFIBD//FOR OFFICIAL USB ONLY
may be different, i.e. been removedfrom or added to the watchlist. Ifa
different conclusion is reached, the COS must notify to TL ofthe determination and supporting reasoning.
• Ifpreviously encountered in EMA, record the three most recent SR numbers on the call sheet. Ensure that the TSC bas not recorded an encounter for the same reason that day. Ifthe COS has a duplicate encounter, notify the Team Leader (TL).
• Ifapplicable, check www.flightview.com. www.flightarriyals.com. or similar websites to confirm Departure and Arrival times and record this information on the call sheet.
• TSDB: Check the subject's name and DOB in TSDB and, if positive, record all current biographical data and database numbers on the call sheet. Ifnegative, check the subject match's name and DOB or TSC/NONB number in TSDB. Record all current biographical data and database numbers on the call sheet.
• 1IDE: Check the passenger's name and DOB in TIDE, and if positive, compare all current biographical info with data on the call sheet. Be alert to the fact that a watchlisted subject may have more than one record in TIDE. Ifso, select the record that most closely matches the screenee. Notify the TL ofthe existence of more than one TIDE record. Do not record TIDE information on the wor~heet. DO NOT RECORD TIDE INFO. If negative, check the subject match's name and DOB or TIDE number in TIDE. Compare all current biographical info with data on the call sheet.
NOTE: The TIDE database defaults to the male gender when the gender of an identity is not entered Caution should be exercised when a gender mismatch is suspectedfor this very reason.
• In conducting the database inquiries ofTSDB and TIDE databases, the COS should be aware ofthe possibility that the subject may not be a match to the identity initially provided yet he or she could be a match to another identity in these databases.
• ~: Query subject's name, DOB (YYYYMMDD), and SSN (if applicable) in NCIC. Print out the record to attach with call sheets. Run subject match's name and DOB or NCIC number in NCIC. Print out the record to attach with call sheets. In addition to verifying that a subject has a VOTOF file, it is important to use NCIC to search for active wants or arrest warrants.
NQC-VGTOF-10771
19

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-2 Filed 07/06/11 Page 92 of 113
SENSITIVE BUT UNCLASSFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
NOTE: Ensure tltere is only one NCIC entry in VGTOFfor t/1e lookout. Q'more tl1an one entry is found, submit a QIA ticket in TSDB
• CCD: Query subject's name and DOB or Passport/VISA number in CCD/PIERS. If positive, record all biographical data. Run subject match's name and DOB or Passport/VISA number in CCD/PIERS. If positive, record all biographical data.
• ACS: Query subject's name, DOB, and identification numbers in ACS. If positive, compare all current biographical data with data on the call sheet. DO NOT RECORD ACS INFO. Run subject match's name, DOB, and identification numbers in ACS. Ifpositive, compare all current biographical data with data on the call sheet.
• Compare all biographical data gathered on the passenger to all biographical data gathered on your subject match. Determine if it is positive, negative, or inconclusive. If you need more information on your passenger to include POB, parent/spoUse/sibling names, travel history, etc. contact the NTC Inspector to request this info.
• Unless a definitive identity match has.been determined, check all available databases to include TSDB, ACS [both Universal Index (UNI) & Electronic Case File (ECF)], TIDE, NCIC, EMA, TECS, CCD/PIERS, andiDW.
Once all available information has been acquired on the subject and the terrorist identity that the subject has been matched against, the comparf!,tive analysis process can begin. In comparing the two identities, the COS will attempt to match identifying elements and history between the subject and the terrorist identity which would deem the encounter a positive match to a known or appropriat~ly suspected terrorist. Conversely, the COS would also look for identifying elements or history which woUld eliminate the subject as a match to a terrorist identity.
REMEMBER: Positive an4 negative cpnclusions by the COS should be based on a minimum of three different data sets, such as full name, DOB, place of birth (POB), country of citizenship (COC), etc. These data sets must.be documented on the worksheet and in EMA. For example, the TSC Comments Section will include a statement similar to "Positive (or negative) hit based on name, DOB, and COC comparison." If unable to make a determination based on three data sets, the COS must ask the TL and WC to review the data. The standard that the TSC requires in all screenings is "artieulable facts and circumstances which would lead a reasonable person to believe that a terrorist has been encountered."
NCIC-VClfOF-10772
20

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-2 Filed 07/06/11 Page 93 of 113
SENSITIVE BUT UNCLASSFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
After all database checks have been executed and proper comparative analysis has been completed, each type of encounter will have different protocols depending if the identity match was deemed positive, negative, or inconclusive. For example, protocol regarding how to handle an encounter after identifying a positive identity match in an NTC encounter will be different from that of a law enforcement encounter. Please see the appropriate section for guidance.
6.2. NATIONAL TARGETING CENTER (NTC) ENCOUNTERS
6.2.1. INTRODUCTION
The NTC maintains a 24-hour operations .center whose primary mission is to centralize and coordinate CBP targeting for anti-terrorist/national security concerns. These encounters typically come into the TSC via fax or email, and are the results ofTECS, TIDE, VGTOF, and TSA No Fly/Selectee database hits. The NTC encounters that arrive via email go into a common email queue called ''NfC2TSC''. NTC personnel will call to advise that an encounter has been emailed. Only the WCs and TLs have access to the NTC e-mail account and will assign each encounter to a COS.
There are different types ofNTC encounters in which the Tactical Operations Center receives and screens for possible identity matches. The following sections describe the various types ofNTC encounters: APIS (Section 5.2.2)~ ESTA (Section 5.2.3); ELMO (Section 5.2.4); and CARICOM (Section 5.2.5).
NOTE: APIS, ESTA, ElMO, and CARICOM are all types ofNTC encounters in which identities are similarly vetted and identified The only difference is how the particular type ofencounter is derived \
6.2.2. ADVANCE PASSENGER INFORMATION SYSTEM (APIS)
APIS, contained within TECS, is a system used by the NTC that contains flight information on international and domestic airline flight manifests. NTC compares the flight manifest and forwards any passenger information which is a preliminary match to a "B-10" record (TECS terrorist record) and forwards that hit to TSC for further screening.
6.2.3. ELECTRONIC SYSTEM FOR TRAVEL AUTHORIZATION (ESTA)
A second type ofNTC encounter is known as ESTA. ESTA is an automated system used to determine the eligibility ofvisitors to travel to the United States under the Visa Waiver Program 0/WP) and whether such travel. poses any law enforcement or security risk. The VWP is administered by DHS and
NCIC-VGTOF-10773
21

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-2 Filed 07/06/11 Page 94 of 113
SENSITIVE BUT UNCLASSFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
deployed to Barbados to assist in DHS security efforts. CBP developed an area-specific APIS that provides information on travelers arriving in and departing from the participating Caribbean Community (CARlCOM) nations. CBP-NTC monitoring oftravelers between the participating CARICOM countries will remain an ongoing security initiative until further notice.
To date, CARICOM reports that the following ten countries have enacted legislation to support this effort: Antigua; Jamaica, Grenada, Guyana, Barbados, Dominica, St Kitts & Nevis, St Vincent & the Grenadines, Trinidad & Tobago, and St Lucia.
6.2.6. PRECLEARANCE LOCATIONS/PREFLIGHT INSPECTION
The CBP maintains preclearance locations at 15 foreign airports. Preclearance is also referred to as preflight inspection. Travelers cleared at one ofCBP's foreign preclearance locations are not required to clear customs and immigration again when they arrive in the US. In Canada, the preclearance airports are Calgary (YYC), Edmonton (YEG), Halifax (YHZ), Montreal (YUL), Ottawa (YOW), Toronto (YYZ), Vancouver (YVR), Victoria (YYJ), and Winnepeg (YWG). Shannon (SNN) and Dublin (DUB) are the preclearance airports in Ireland. In the Caribbean are Freeport, Bahamas (FPO), Nassau, Bahamas (NAS), Bermuda (BDA), and Aruba (AUA). The Hit Location is the preclearance location, where the traveler is first encountered by CBP.
NOTE: Pre-vetting calls from NTC are handled at the TSC by TLs and WCs, and in most instances involve negative matches where NTC needs one additional piece ofinformation to vet a call negative. In the typical prevetting, no entry is made in EMA. and no NTC Call Sheet is received at the TSC.
OUTBOUND FLIGHTS FROM THE iTNITED STATES
Throughout the day, NTC and TSA-OI provide TSC with preliminary matches . oftravelers departing the US by airplane or ship. In addition, twice daily
NTC will provide TSC with an Excel spreadsheet which contains the names, DOBs, and passports of approximately 250-350 outbound travelers who are potential matches to TIDEffSDB (BlO) records. The Excel spreadsheet is attached to an NTC e-mail which arrives in the NTC2TSC e-mail box at approximately midnight and 3:00a.m. every night. NTC refers to this spreadsheet as the Outbound TIDE. The WC will review the spreadsheet and sort the information as necessary to identify the positive outbound encounters. Thereafter, the positive encounters will be transferred to a worksheet for entry into EMA. TSOU will be notified ofthe positive outbound encounters. The exact procedure for processing the Outbound TIDE encounters is included in Appendix 13.5.2.
NCIC-VGTOF-10774
23

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-2 Filed 07/06/11 Page 95 of 113
SENSIDVE BUT UNCLASSFIED/IFOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
6.4. LAW ENFORCEMENT ENCOUNTER
6.4.1. INTRODUCTION
State, local, federal, territorial, and tribal authorities generate NCIC I VGTOF "hits" during the course of law enforcement actions that require the law enforcement agency to query the individual through NCIC. These law enforcement actions include, but are not limited to:
• Arrest • Traffic Violation • Plate Check • Investigation • Domestic Dispute • Jail/Prison Related
6.4.2. ENCOUNTER PROCEDURES
• The COS will verify that the encounter is NOT a Soundex hit by ensuring that the subject's name and DOB are the same as on the NCIC printout. A Soundex hit is an NCIC hit based on a "sound alike" name or same DOB as a watchlisted subject.
***It is very important that the law enforcement officer (LEO) be aware that the subject of the encounter should NOT be advised that be or she is a subject of a terrorism investigation or is listed on a terrorism watcblist. ***
• First, it is important for the COS to duplicate the query the LEO conducted to generate the hit. This ensures the COS will see the same information the LEO is seeing on his/her screen, whether it be through NCIC or another system.
• Check the subject's name and DOB in TSDB, and ifpositive, record all current biographical data and database numbers on the Law Enforcement Field Interview Questionnaire. If negative, check NCIC, and ACS to ensure that it is a negative match.
• Ask for all the requested information on the Law Enforcement
Encounter Sheet. NO DETAIL IS TOO SMALL!
• Continue to complete all required database checks to determine ifthe encounter is positive(+), negative(-) or inconclusive(?). Please see Section 5.1 for exact protocol.
NOC-VGTOF-10775
32

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-2 Filed 07/06/11 Page 96 of 113

SENSITIVE BUT UNCLASSFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

• WITH ANY LAW ENFORCEMENT ENCOUNTER, THANK THE LEO FOR CALLING TSC.

Ifthe subject is deemed to be a positive match, continue with the following procedures:

• The COS should handle and process all traffic stop encounters for LEOs that involve a watchlisted subject who is a Handling Code 3.

• Advise Watch Commander (WC) immediately of any Handling Codes 1 or 2 and then immediately notify and conference in TSOU of any traffic stop or law enforcement encounter ofa Handling Code 1 or 2.

• Do not conference TSOU for a Handling Code 3, unless there is a unique circumstance that requires TSOU's immediate involvement.

• Collect all of the information on the "Traffic Stop Questionnaire" sheet and enter into EMA upon completing the call with the LEO.

• Record the "Hit Reason" as "Law·Enforcement Encounter'' (followed by the reason i.e. a traffic stop, domestic dispute, license plate check)

• Advise the LEO that the information will be forwarded to the case agent WHO MAY OR MAY NOT CONTACT THE LBO.

If the subject is deemed to be a negative match, continue with the following procedures:

• Ifyou have deemed this to be a n~gative match, inform the LEO that it is a negative match.

Ifthe subject is deemed to be an inconclusive match, continue with the following procedures:

•

If match is deemed to be inconcl~ive, inform the LEO that it is an

inconclusive match. Confer with WC ifthere is sufficient information

and/or derog to forward to TSOU.

• The COS will enter all available (unclassified) information into EMA. The COS will select "Inconclusive" as the TSC Disposition. The COS will indicate in the TSC Comments field that "Insufficient data exists on the passenger and/or the subject match to make a determination."

• The TL and WC should be notified. of and review all "Inconclusive" determinations. If approved by the WC, TSOU will be notified ofthe NCIC-VGTOF-10776
33

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-2 Filed 07/06/11 Page 97 of 113
SENSITIVE BUT UNCLASSFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
inconclusive match. TSOU will be requested to review the record and provide any additional information that would deem the traveler a "positive" or "negative" match. TSOU may contact the FBI case agent or the CTC/CAS to determine if additional information regarding the subject match is available. TSOU may also set a Guardian lead to • assist in reaching a determination.
NOTE: Ifwaitingfor a call back/rom the NTC for the requested
information, annotate the requested unclassified data to compare it
with in the TSC Disposition Section ofthe EMA encounter. Ifthe
iriformation to which is being compared is classified, write it on a post-it note and attach to the call sheet.
6.5. CRIMINAL JUSTICE INFORMATION SERVICES (CJIS) ENCOUNTER
6.5.1. INTRODUCTION
The ens Division is a component ofthe FBI whose mission is to reduce
terrorist and criminal activities by maximizing the ability to provide timely and relevant criminal justice information to the FBI and to qualified law enforcement, criminal justice, civilian, academic, employment, and licensing agencies concerning individuals, stolen property, criminal organizations and activities, and other law enforcement related data.
Information regarding KSTs contained in TSDB is exported to the VGTOF file within NCIC.
ens will generate VGTOF, Integrated Automated Fingerprint Identification
System (IAFIS), & National Instant Check System (NICS) hits. The common encounter hit reasons generated by CJIS ¥C=
• Attempt to Purchase a Handgun • Attempt to Purchase a Long Gun • Weapons Permit • Concealed Weapons Permit • Fingerprint Check (IAFIS) • A-1 (CIC) • R-1 (Residential) • E-1 (Employment) • B-1 (Benefits) • National Visa Center
It should be noted that some states have a requirement for a weapons permit to buy a weapon; an application for a concealed weapons permit is a separate
NCIC-VGTOF-10777
34

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-2 Filed 07/06/11 Page 98 of 113

SENSIDVE BUT UNCLASSFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

and distinct pemrlt.

6.5.2. ENCOUNTER PROCEDURES

• Check the subject's name and DOB in TSDB, and ifpositive, record all current biographical data and database numbers on the call sheet. If negative, check NCIC, and ACS to ensure that it is a negative match.

• Be sure to ask for all the requested info on the FBI-CJIS encounter sheet. NO DETAIL IS TOO SMALL!

• Continue to complete all required database checks to determine ifthe encounter is positive(+), negative(-) or inconclusive(?). See Section 5.1 for exact protocol.

If the subject is deemed to be a positive match, continue with the following procedures:

• Ifdeemed to be a positive match, inform the CJIS Analyst. Record the name of the CJIS POC ·and the time of notification.

• The WC or TL will contact TSOU to advise them of the positive match.

Ifthe subject is deemed to be a negative match, continue with the

following procedures:

'

• Ifdeemed to be a negative match,·inform the CJIS Analyst. Record the name of the CJIS POC and the time ofnotification.

Ifthe subject is deemed to be an inconclusive match, continue with the following procedures:

• Ifdeemed to be an inconclusive match, inform the CJIS. Record the name ofthe CJIS POC and the tinie ofnotification. Confer with WC ifthere is sufficient info/derog to forward to TSOU.

NOTE: ffwaitingfor a call backfrom the NTCfor the requested ir(ormation, annotate the requested unclassified data to compare it
with information in the TSC Dispqsition Section ofthe EMA
encounter. g the information being compared is classified, write it on
a post-it note and attach to the call sheet.

NCIC-vGTOF-10778
35

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-2 Filed 07/06/11 Page 99 of 113

SENSITIVE BUT UNCLASSFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

6.5.3. GUIDANCE REGARDING CERTAIN STATES' AUTOMATIC MONTHLY NICS CHECKS ON GUN PERMIT HOLDERS

Certain states automatically run a monthly NICS check on all gun permit holders within their State. A watchlisted gun pennit holder will have a positive NICS hit every month, creating multiple hits on the same individual, with no new information obtained. This DOES NOT pertain to a new gun permit application from a watchlisted person.

The TSC, in concert with TSOU, agreed on the following protocol responding to these monthly encounters:

• The COS will verify, through previous EMA entries, that it is a monthly NICS check on a gun permit holder within a certain state.

• The COS will determine ifthere is any new information on the current NICS check.

•

Ifthe"<re is new information, a new EMA encounter will be created with

the new information added. TSOU will then be forwarded the

encounter.

• If no new information is obtained, then the date ofthe current inquiry should be added in the comments section of the most recent NICS check. This encounter does not need to be forwarded to TSOU.

6.6. TRANSPORTATION THREAT ASSESSMENT AND CREDENTIALING (TTAC) ENCOUNTER

6.6.1. INTRODUCTION

Historically, the TSC has done limited screening for various TSA programs. The TSA and TSC have agreed to expand the role of the TSC in TSA's Security Threat Assessment Programs (sometimes referred to as "TSA Other Programs''). A MOU is in place detailing TSA and TSC's roles in these "Other Programs".

A majority ofTSA's vetting or screening is conducted at the Colorado Springs Operations Center (CSOC). The entity ofTSA at CSOC is TTAC. TTAC will notify its TSA HQ counterpart of any matches they believe to be positive, referred to as ''red hits", via email with the Vetting Match Report (VMR) as an attachment to the email. It is the VMR that contains the biographical data of the applicant and the watchlisted person as well as the results of the database checks.

NCIC-VGTOF-10779
36

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-2 Filed 07/06/11 Page 100 of 113

SENSITIVE BUT UNCLASSFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

TSA has agreed to have TTAC e-mail the VMRs directly to TSC. Watch

Commanders and Team Leaders can open these e-mails using the password

Tsc**Tsa. The letter from TSA HQ will no longer be sent to TSC rather will

be forwarded directly to TSOU.

-

6.6.2. ENCOUNTER PROCEDURES

• TTAC will have already queried NCIC, TECS, and TIDE and will provide those results in the VMR. TSC will query NCIC and TIDE and all other databases (as stated in Section 5.1). The e-mail will contain a telephone number to call if the VMR does not contain all of the information needed to complete EMA.

• Ask for all the requested info on the TTAC encounter sheet. NO DETAIL IS TOO SMALL!

• Continue to complete all required database checks to detennine ifthe
encounter is positive (+), negative (-) or inconclusive (?). See Section
5.1 for exact protocol.

If the subject is deemed to be a positive match, continue with the following procedures:

• If deemed to be a positive match, inform the TTAC Analyst. Record the name ofthe TTAC POC and the time of notification.

• The WC or TL will notify TSOU of all positive encounters (unless previously referred on a prior date). TTAC conducts perpetual vetting so when EMA is queried, if it is determined that there is a pr~vious TTAC encounter for the same reason that has been forwarded to TSOU, do not forward the new encounter to TSOU unless this encounter provides new information, i.e. new address, etc. It is important to review each EMA entry to determine whether TSC had prior encounters for the same reason.

• Fax TSOU both the completed call sheet and the VMR. TSOU will be responsible for matching its letter from TSA HQ with TSC's call sheet andVMR.

• Read the VMR carefully as TTAC, upon getting a VGTOF hit, may send it to TSC with violent gang affiliations and no nexus to terrorism. Ifno apparent terrorism nexus exists, bring the referral to the attention ofthe.Watch Commander (WC) for handling instructions. Without a nexus to terrorism, these encounters will not be entered into EMA.

NCIC-vGTOF-10780 37

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-2 Filed 07/06/11 Page 101 of 113

SENSITIVE BUT UNCLASSFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

7.5.

IREMOTE QUERY ENCOUNTER$

eOxnchManayge2w3,a2t00c7h, tlhiJsItGionv~eTrhne TmSCenwtilslipgrn9evdidaentMheONUo

with the Fly and

TSC to Selectee

lists and a list of federal arrest warrants (Handling Code 1 in VGTOF) to the

I

povernment for terrorist watchlisting purposes. When thd

I

Government encounters a potential watchlisted name, the following

procedures will occur:

•

~will On a potential watchlisted name, ~
contact the FBI Legal Attache (LEGAT) Q

b7D

• The Legat will contact the TSC with the potential name match.

• The TSC will make an identity match determination and on negative

matches will record th~ entry in f<MA and notify the Legat, who will

subsequently notify th _

_Government.

• On positive matches, the TSC will record the entry in EMA, notify TSOU, and initiate a request for a "tearline'' communication from the originating agency.

•

I I I The TSC will pass the outcome of the ''tearline" request to the FBI

Legat il

who will subsequently notify the

Government.

7.6. PROCEDURES TO REQUEST A TEARLINE FOR ALL FOREIGN COUNTRIES

When a true hit is identified for a foreign country, a tearline must be drafted detailing a short synopsis of derogatory information on the subject. Before sharing the tearline with a foreign country, it must be submitted for approval to the originator.

The procedures below explain in detail th~ five most common sources used, but are not limited to the use ofother sources. Each agency has their own specific procedures to follow when releasing derogatory information to foreign countries. Please follow the procedures precisely to ensure accuracy.

Ifthe TSCIDOS representative cannot make a true identification on the subject and non-leading questions can be asked to further the assessment of the request, then a tearline can still be submitted to the originator as a possible hit, if necessary. It will be up to the foreign country's point-of-contact, usually the FBPs Legal Attache of the US Embassy in that country, to determine if it is true based on the derogatory information provided.

NCIC-vGTOF-10781 51

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-2 Filed 07/06/11 Page 102 of 113
SENSffiVE BUT UNCLASSFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
8. SPECIAL PROGRAMS
8.1. VGTOF QUERY PROJECT
8.1.1. INTRODUCTION
This project is initiated by when CJIS receives a NCIC query on a KST's VGTOF record, but no corresponding service request was received at TSC. ECs will be sent to the field offices requ~ting them to obtain details of the
encounter. ens has received fingerprint submissions for KSTs from NCTC
and has implemented special security stops. When subsequent fingerprint submissions are received which match a NCTC subject, CJIS will notify
NCTC and TSC. ens forwards this "hit" information via an EC which is
uploaded into ACS. The leads are discretionary and do not require any action by TSC. However, it is imperative that TSC determine the exact nature of the encounter by the agency submitting the fingerprints. Ifnot contacted initially by the submitting agency, the TSC will send ECs to the field offices requesting specific details of the non-reported encounter. The sole purpose ofthis project is to capture encounters for which TSC is currently not aware.
8.1.2. ENCOUNTER PROCEDURES
• The control file containing these leads is 32A-HQ-C1387900 NCICHITS. A printout containing these uncovered leads has been provided. Open the serial containing the lead and extract the identifiers for the fingerprinted inc;tividual.
• Query EMA to see ifTSC was notified of this encounter by the encountering agency.
• IfTSC already had captured the encounter in EMA, no further action is required.
• TSC will generate an EC to the appropriate FBI office to obtain full details ofthe hit. The TSC is attempting to follow up on actual encounters with a watchlisted individual. Some of the lead summary sheets contain leads generated by agencies searching for criminal histories. TSC will not follow up on these with leads to the field.
• Again, all leads both those in and not in EMA in this control file should be cleared.
• Once an EC is sent to the field and they respond with the specifics of an encounter, EMA will be updated. TSC will not forward positive encounters to TSOU as these will be historic after-the-fact encounters.
NClC-VGTOF-10782
62

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-2 Filed 07/06/11 Page 103 of 113
SENSITIVE BUT UNCLASSFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
• Prior to drafting an EC to the field, the COS must query the VGTOF Query Project to ensure that the TSC has not already tasked the field with obtaining details of the encounter.
• Th~ EC to the field should be dual captioned with the CJIS control file and the file # of any case in which the individual is a main subject. The lead to the field office seeking information should be the field office in whose territory the submitting agency resides. This may be other than that in which the case is opened.
8.2. OVERSEAS PRIVATE INVESTMENT CORPORATION (OPIC)
8.2.1. INTRODUCTION
The Overseas Private Investment Corporation (OPIC) is an independent U.S. Government agency whose mission is to mobilize and facilitate the participation ofU.S. private capital and. skills in the economic and social development ofless developed countries imd areas, and countries in transition from nonmarket to market economies. Established in 1971, OPIC assists U.S. companies by providing financing, political risk insurance, and investment funds. OPIC complements the private section in managing risks associated with foreign direct investment and supports U.S. foreign policy.
On September 26, 2006, TSC entered into an MOU with OPIC under the authority provided by HSPD-6. Conversely, OPIC entered into the MOU with TSC under authority provided by 22 U.S.C. § 2199. Below are encounter procedures set forth by the TSC and OPIC MOU detailing TSC's support in appropriate and lawful terrorist screening opportunities arising in the context of OPIC's mission. Also, this MOU details that OPIC will provide to the TSC identifying data for individuals associate with OPIC's loan, loan guarantee, and insurance transactions in order to assess any possible terrorism nexus of the individuals or entities involved in those transactions.
8.2.2. ENCOUNTER PROCEDURES
The following protocol is to be followed according to the MOU between TSC andOPIC:
• TSC will compare OPIC identity <;lata to the TSDB and report any positive identity matches to the TSOU.
• IfTSC is unable to determine whether an individual is a positive identity match to the TSDB, TSC will request additional information fromOPIC.
• TSC will make a record of any positive identity match in EMA. NCIC-vGrOF-10783
'63

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-2 Filed 07/06/11 Page 104 of 113
SENSITIVE BUT UNCLASSFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
• OPIC will receive notice of a positive identity match through TSOU.
• IfTSOU notifies OPIC of a positive match, OPIN will coordinate with TSOU and the relevant agencies to develop an appropriate operational response. TSOU will coordinate the appropriate operational response with any other relevant agencies or entities.
• OPIC personnel with clearance at the TS/SCI level will work with the TSC and the agency that nominated the identity to the TSDB to obtain access to sensitive and classified law enforcement and intelligence information related to an individual who is a positive identity match to the TSDB in order for OPIC to assess the impact ofthe information on OPIC's business decisions.
• OPIC and TSC will establish agree-upon language for any communication OPIC may need to make to an affected individual or entity regarding the screening process and the use ofscreening results under this MOU.
NOTE: OPIC will not disclose any TSDB data, including whether an individual is a positive or negative identity match to the TSDB, without the explicit written authorization ofthe Director ofthe TSC, or the Director's designee.
• TSC will update EMA to reflect any disposition of the encounter after coordination through TSOU.
• Upon completion ofthe screening, TSC will delete OPIC identity data in TSC's paper and/or electronic records, .except such identity data incorporated in TSC's EMA records.
8.3. Sll..ENT mT (S-1) EMA ENTRY PROCEDURES
8.3.1. INTRODUCTION
The FBI's Terrorist Review and Examination Unit (TREX) receive notification from CJIS whenever an FBI-Wa.tchlisted subject, who is coded as a silent hit, is queried in NCIC. TREX notifies the FBI case agent ofthe silent hit and records the information and notification in the TREX log, which is available on the FBI lntranet. TSC will record many ofthese silent hits in EMA, based on the WC's determination that the hit probably represents a true law enforcement encounter with the subject. On a daily basis, the WC will copy each "true hit" encounter from the TREX log for entry into EMA.
NOC-VGTOF-10784
64

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-2 Filed 07/06/11 Page 105 of 113
SENSITIVE BUT UNCLASSFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
8.3.2. ENCOUNTER PROCEDURES
The following procedures should be followed for these encounters:
• Check EMA to see if a call has been received from the same organization in the last 2 to 3 days ofthe encounter. If so, do not enter the silent hit.
• In the "Agency" (top left) section ofEMA: ·
o ORI- In the ORI field, enter the ORI as listed on the printout of Silent Hits. ORis should be 2 letters that indicate a state, and 7 additional characters.
o Agency- The agency listed on the Silent Hit printouts should be verified for accuracy by querying the ORI in NCIC as follows: Enter the agency in the Agency box. This is not the respective FBI division the case is held, but the agency querying the individual.
o When in NCIC:
• Select "Fonns" • Select "ORI Functions" • Select ''NCIC" • Select "Query" • Select "ORI File" • Enter the ORI provided on the Silent Hit sheet • Select "T'' for transmit
• Address -The address will be included on the Silent Hit printouts the COS receives. Enter the address in the address fields as for any regular hit. If an address is not provided but an ORI was provided, query NCIC for the ORI's address with the instructions above.
• Caller -Leave the caller field BLANK. Please do not enter TREX. Also, do not enter CJIS.
• Phone Numbers- If phone numbers are included on the silent hit printouts, enter in the fields.
• In the "Hit Information" section ofEMA:
o NTC Log- Since these calls do not come from NTC, leave this field BLANK
o Hit Type- The hit type for silent hits will ALWAYS be NCIC. NCIC-VGTOF-10785
65

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-2 Filed 07/06/11 Page 106 of 113 SENSITIVE BUT UNCLASSFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

o Hit Reason -The hit reason will always be S-1. .DO NOT enter Silent, Silent Hit, S-1 Silent Hit

o Hit Location - Enter the same information from the address section, including the city and state ofthe agency.

• In the "Transportation'' section ofEMA:

o Leave the transportation section blank. Also, since the "Mode of Transportation" is auto-filled to "Air", please delete that word.

• In the ''Investigatee/Preliminary Match Information" section of EMA, enter as usual

o Information found on the silent hit printout should go under Investigateeffraveler and the name found in databases should go on the Preliminary/Subject side.

o BOTH SIDES SHOULD BE FILLED OUT.

• In the ''Disposition ofService Request#*******" section ofEMA, the TSC Identity match will always b~ POSmVE

o In the ''TSC Other Actions field", type the following text: ''Encounter captured by TREX and information was sent to the case agent."

o TSOU Disposition will always be Not Passed to TSOU and the Final Resolution will always be Not Referred.

o Do not enter comments in the TSOU action or Miscellaneous Comments field.

• In the "Classifications" (bottom) section ofEMA, VGTOF Classification will always be VGTOF Class S and Border Classification will always be Interior

• DTIIT cases that have a 315 are IT and cases with a 266 are DT.

• Most ofthe silent hits the Tactical· Operations Center receives are from

state and local law enforcement. However, some are received from

federal law enforcement agencies like the Drug Enforcement Agency

(DEA) and Bureau ofAlcohol, TQbacco, Firearms and Explosives

(ATF).

:

NCIC-vGTOF-10786 66

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-2 Filed 07/06/11 Page 107 of 113
SENSITIVE BUT UNCLASSFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
9. PRIORITY AND EXPEDITED NOMINATIONS
9.1. INTRODUCTION
The Terrorist Screening Database (TSDB) is the U.S. Government's consolidated database for terrorist screening. Under normal circumstances, nominations for inclusion in the TSDB are processed in one oftwo ways: I) JT identities information is processed via the NCTC, and 2) DT identities information is processed via the FBI's Terrorist Review and Examination Unit
(TREX).
However, in the event a subject must be watchlisted in an expeditious manner, a nomination may be processed directly by the TSC. These expeditious nominations fall into two categories, expedited and priority nominations.
All other non-expeditious requests will be processed through the normal daily ingest process and should be submitted to NCTC for International Terrorism matters and to TREX for Domestic Terrorism matters.
9.2. PRIORITY NOMINATIONS
9.2.1. INTRODUCTION
A priority nomination ensures the subject's information is sent to the TSC's exported database known as VGTOF. A Priority Nomination is defihed as any new initial submission of a FBI IT investigative subject of 315 Classification and falls into one or more ofthe following categories:
1. NoFly 2. Handling Code 2 3. Armed And Dangerous 4. Violent Tendencies
Additionally, if a previously watchlisted ~ubject receives the appropriate authorization qualifying them as a Handling Code 2, a Priority Nomination action may be submitted to the TSC. (Due to the fact that a subject's status of being Armed and Dangerous and/or have Violent Tendencies should be identified in the preliminary checks conducted by the Field Office, a subject whose status has changed and is identified as being Armed and Dangerous and/or have Violent Tendencies after they have been watchlisted shall be addressed via the normal nominations process.
Lastly, if a currently watchlisted subject qualifies for placement on the No Fly List that will be handled through the normal nominations process or through the Expedited Nominations process in instances where travel ofthis subject is imminent
NCIC-VGTOF-10787
97

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-2 Filed 07/06/11 Page 108 of 113
SENSITIVE BUT UNCLASSFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
9.2.2. NOMINATION PROCEDURES
TREX procedures for forwarding Priority Nominations to the TSC are as
follows:
• Following TREX's vetting to ensure that the individual meets the criteria for anyone ofthe listed categories, they will forward the FD 930 and supporting documents to the TSC.
• The documents will be sent to a dedicated Public Mail Folder on
FBINET. The path to that Public Folder is as follow:
o Select/Open 'all Public Folders' o Select/Open 'HQ' o Select/Open 'TSC' o Select/Open 'Priority Nominations•
• Once the FD 930 and supporting documentation is received the review process will take place and the TSDB record will be generated or modified, depending on the circumstances.
• It will be the responsibility ofthe individual at TRE:X: that is
responsible for sending the Priority Nomination to the TSC to notify the TSC Point of Contact that a Priority Nomination has been sent to the Priority Nomination Public Folder.
• TREX should call the TSC Tactical Operations Center and send to TSC the priority nomination while continuing to process that nomination. TREX will forward the original IT Nomination to NCTC. TREX should make every effort to ensure that these Priority Nominations are forwarded to the TSC between the hours of 7:30 and 5PM Monday thorough Friday in order to alleviate the burden of any additional responsibilities for the Tactical Operations Center Personnel.
• Once the TSC has created the new TSDB Record, the TSC will have the responsibility of updating the <'lectronic FD 930 and Nominations Log portion ofthe FD 930 and return it to TREX via Email.
• In the event the NDIU Supervisor or Watch Commander (WC) to determine that the Nomination does not within the four areas described above, they will notify TREX. TREX will then be afforded the opportunity to provide additional information or rescind their original request.
NCIC-VGTOF-10788
68

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-2 Filed 07/06/11 Page 109 of 113

SENSITIVE BUT UNCLASSFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

• Once the NDIU supervisor or WC has detennined this is a valid Priority Nomination they will create the record and mark the nominated record eligible for VGTOF. Once the record is successfully updated the FD 930 will be updated to include the Nominations Log within the FD 930.

• The completed FD 930 will be returned via Email to the TREX individual that initiated the Priority Nomination request.

• The TSC personnel who created the Priority Nomination record will then record the Priority Nomination in the TSC Shared Folder named Tactical Operations Center/Nominations/Priority Nomination Excel Spreadsheet. The Excel Spreadsheet must be populated with the requested information for each column and the document must be saved upon completion.

• Additionally TSC personnel will create a QA Ticket and indicate on the ticket that this particular nomiilation is a Priority Nomination and needs to be deleted upon receipt ofthe original nomination that was processed through NCTC.

•

As it pertains to any other downstream watchlisted systems the

Tactical Operations Center will not have to ensure that any other

downstream customers are notified of the existence of this Priority

Nomination. The sole purpose ofthese Priority Nominations is to

satisfy the FBI's request to create a VGTOF record to alleviate any

concerns for officer safety.

·

9.3. EXPEDITED NOMINATIONS

9.3.1. INTRODUCTION

An expedited nomination ensures the subject's information is sent to TSC's exported databases (i.e., the No Fly List, Selectee List, VGTOF,IBIS, CLASS, TUSCAN, and TACTICS) for immediate notification. Most Expedited Nominations will request placement on the Transportation Security Administration's (TSA}No Fly List or Selectee List. The TSC Nominations Unit Supervisor, Tactical Operations Center Supervisor or WC will make a recommendation to the TSC Director or Deputy Director of Operations (DDO) regarding the eligibility to either the No Fly or Selectee List and the Director or DDO will make the final detepnination.

In addition to the TSA lists, the expedited nominee should also be placed in VGTOF ofNCIC and also in IBIS. The DOS Representative at TSC will be notified to determine the necessity and expeditious nature of placing the

NCIC-VGTOF-10789 69

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-2 Filed 07/06/11 Page 110 of 113
SENSITIVE BUT UNCLASSFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USB ONLY
subject(s) in CLASS, and other supported systems (Australian TACTICS and Canadian· TUSCAN).
All Expedited Nominations will be processed immediately at TSC, and
thereafter the nominations paperwork wili be sent to NCTC (IT matters) or
TRBX (DT matters) for the routine nomination process on the next business day.
NDIU will handle all expedited nominations during nonnal working hours (Monday- Friday, 7:00a.m. to 5:00p.m.). All other after-hour and weekend expedited nominations will be handled by the TSC Tactical Operations Center.
9.3.2. NOMINATION PROCEDURES
When an expedited nomination is received at TSC, immediate contact will be made with the DDO, who will coordinate it with the appropriate Section Chief at the FBI Counterterrorism Division (CTD) or other nominating agency. A CTD Section Chief should be the individual requesting the expedited nomination. The DDO will discuss the expedited nomination with the CTD Section Chief and accept it with the understanding that the supporting derogatory information within arrive at the TSC's NDIU within 72 hours. If the DDO is not available, contact will be made with the TSC Principal Deputy Director, or Director. In all cases, the TSC Director will be notified, either personally or by Blackberry, within 24 hours of the expedited nomination.
The following procedures for expedited nominations will be followed when:
• TSC receives an expedited nomination from TR.BX, or
• Another authorized federal agency (DHS, NCTC, etc.) requests an expedited nomination, in which case, the requestor will fax the "Expedite Nomination Worksheet~' to the TSC. If faxing is impractical, the requestor will provide the information required for the TSC operator to complete the worksheet.
When TSC receives a request for expedited placement in the TSDB and, subsequently, TSC's exported databases (i.e., the No Fly List, Selectee List, VOTOF, IBIS, CLASS, TUSCAN, and TACTICS), the following procedures are to be followed:
• Verify the identity of the requestor and fill out both sides ofthe TSC Expedited Nomination Request Worksheet.
• Check TSDB to ensure that the subject is not already listed as requested.
NCIC-VGTOF-10790
70

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-2 Filed 07/06/11 Page 111 of 113 SENSITIVE BUT UNCLASSFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

• Be prepared to brief the DDO regarding whether the subject meets the following two-prong requirements for expedited nominations:

o The individual meets the minimum criteria for inclusion in the

specifiedexporteddatabaseasfollows:

b3 49CFR section 1520.5(a) (3

• VGTOF- Last Name and First Name and year of birth.
• TECS - Last Name and one other identifier.
o There is specific information regarding the imminent travel ofthe individual requested for expedited nomination.
• For an' after-hours Expedited Nomination, the WC will contact the DDO, who will coordinate the expedited nomination with the appropriate CTD Section Chiefor other nominating entity.
• Upon instruction ofthe Deputy Director, the WC will provide a summary, via Blackberry, ofthe expedited noinination to the following:
o TSC Director (whom is to be notified ofall expedited nominations within 24 hours),
o TSC Principal Deputy Director, · o TSC Deputy Director for Operations,
NQC-VGTOF-10791
71

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-2 Filed 07/06/11 Page 112 of 113
SENSITIVE BUT UNCLASSFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
o TSC Deputy Director for Department of State, o TSC Operations Unit Chief, o TSC Tactical Operations Center Supervisor, o TSC Nominations/QA Unit Chief, and o TSC Nominations Supervisor • Notify NTC and request the subject(s) be placed immediately in TECS, using TECS "boilerplate language,, for TIDE imports. Note the time and name ofwhom was advised on the Expedited Nomination Request Form. • Notify TSA-01 and request the subject(s) be placed immediately on the No Fly List or Selectee List, ru; appropriate. Note the time and name ofWhom was advised on the Expedited Nomination Request Form. • Once the WC has determined that this is a legitimate request, a TSDB record is created. The WC will eiiSUre that the subject is nominated to the appropriate watchlists based upon eligibility. Once the record has been created and submitted to TSOB and verified, the WC will notify the requesting entity that Expedited Nomination was processed. • The WC should email the NDID Supervisor with the TSC ID for the newly created Expedited Nomination. It will be the responsibility of NDIU to delete the Expedited Nomination from the TSDB once the nomination is received from NCTC.
NCIC-VGTOF-10792
72

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-2 Filed 07/06/11 Page 113 of 113

SENSITIVE BUT UNCLASSFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

10.2. IMMIGRATION ANJ> CUSTOMS ENFORCEMENT (ICE)
MEMORANDUM: DETENTION ANI) REMOVAL OPERATIONS (DRO) NO FLY LIST DIRECTIVE

The following protocol will a-gply for the~e encounters:

• Field offices will continue to conduct an NCIC or TECS check immediately upon taking custody of any alien with the intention of removing them. Ifthe FBI Number is known, NCIC should be queried using that number.

• Ifthe NCIC check is returned as a hit from VGTOF, the field will contact a TSC COS to advise of a,potential hit on a watchlisted individual. Ifthe atien is a positiv.e match to a subject on the terrorist watchlist, the TSC COS will advise if further action is required.

• If a TECS check is retumed as a hit on a TECS record for a possible known or suspected terrorist on the watchlist, the field will contact a TSC COS to advise of a potential hit on a watchlisted individual. Although the TECS record will include a message to call CBP's NTC, the field will call the TSC.

• The field will ~Jlso forward the alien's name, aliases (ifany), DOB/POB, ARN, and FBI Number to the DRO Intelligence Operations Unit (IOU). The IOU will verify that the alien is on the TSA No Fly or Selectee List and notify the field accordingly.

• Aliens on the TSA No Fly List scheduled to be deported or transferred to another location within the United States via a charter, JPATS or military flight do not require a temporary No Fly Waiver Letter. However, the field must report such removals to the TSC twenty-four (24) hours prior to the event. Ifthe deportation does not take place, the field must also notify the TSC.

• Aliens on the TSA No Fly List scheduled to be deported or transferred to another location within the United States via a commercial airline require a temporary No Fly Waiv~r Letter, which will be facilitated by the IOU.

• The following information for aliens on the TSA No Fly List scheduled to be deported or transferred to another location within the United States by a commercial airline will be forwarded to the IOU seventy-two (72) hours prior to the event:

o Aliens name, biographical da~ and travel document or passport

number;

·

NCIC-VGTOF-10793

74

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-3 Filed 07/06/11 Page 1 of 100
EXHIBIT B (Part 2)

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-3 Filed 07/06/11 Page 2 of 100
DOCUMENTS 16 & 17

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-3 Filed 07/06/11 Page 3 of 100

OPCA-20 (12-3-96)

xxxxxx xxxxxx xxxxxx

FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESI'IGATION

FOIPA

/

DELETED PAGE INFORMATION SHEET

J i Page(s) withheld entirely at this location in the ftle. One or more of the following statements, where indicated,

explain this deletion.

lJ ~erial Deletions were made pursuant to the exemptions indicated below with no segregable A release to you.

available for

Section 552

Section 552a

0 (b)(l)

0 (b)(7)(A)

0 (d)(5)

0 {b)(2)

0 {b)(7)(B)

0 (j)(2)

D (b)(3)

D (b)(7)(C)

0 (k)(l)

0 (b)(7)(D)

0 (k)(2)

0 (b)(4)
t (b)(5)
D (b)(6)

0 (b)(7)(E) 0 (b)(7)(F) 0 {b)(8) 0 (b)(9)

0 (k)(3) 0 (k)(4) 0 (k)(5)
D (k)(6) D (k)(7)

D Information pertained only to a third party with no refererice to the subject of your request or the subject of your request is listed in the title only.

0 Documents originated with another Government agency(ies). These documents were referred to that agency(ies) for review and direct response to you.

Pages contain information furnished by another Government agency(ies). You will be advised by the FBI as to the releasability of this information following our consnltation with the other agency(ies).

Page(s) withheld inasmuch as a final release determination has not been made. You will be advised as to the disposition at a later date.

Pages were not considered for release as they are duplicative o f - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Page(s) withheld for the following reason(s):

The following number is to be used for reference regarding these pages:
t{~tC.-\l6ToE- lO 11'1- tof>V

xxxxxx
xxxxxx
YYl(X'XY

Doc..~ t.f\:fs ="= I C::, + II
(t>RAFr SoP~)

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

X Deleted Page(s) X

X No Duplication Fee X

X for this page

X

xxxxxx.xxx:xxxx

liiilillrnru

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-3 Filed 07/06/11 Page 4 of 100
DOCUMENT27

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-3 Filed 07/06/11 Page 5 of 100 Page 1 of1
From: To:

Sent:

Friday, September 24, 2004 10:45 AM

Attach: Tri Country Open Action Items 2004-0B-16.wpd; Tri Country Open Action Items 2004-0B-16.pdf

Subject: Tri-Country Conference Call - NEW ACCESS CODE

b2

Item Type: Appointment

b6 b7C

Start Date: Monday, 04 Oct 2004 10:30 am Eastern Daylight Time (04-10-04,10:30 -0400)

Duration: 1 Hour, 30 Mins

Place: !dent Bldg, Room 505

Attached you will fmd the Action Items dated 2004-08-16.

Our Tri Country Conference call will be held on Monday, October 4th.

Access code for all the participants isl'-_ _ ____.lfollowed by #._I_ _.....

Please note that ifyou are unavailable to participate in this Conference Call please send your updates in

advance to me.

·

Thank you!

RCMP/GRC

NCIC-VGTOF-11094
DOCUMENT 27 11/18/2009

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-3 Filed 07/06/11 Page 6 of 100

Action 2001#13b
Date 16Aug2004
07June2004 22Apr2004 01Mar2004 02Feb2004 15Dec2003 03Nov2003
30Sep2003
28July2003 30June2003
13Mar2003 03Sep2002

Tri Country Open Action Items Updated: 16 August 2004

Primary Contact

FBI :I

I

PITO: ~/A

RCMP:

Description MOC
I Revise existing ACUPIES Agreement to reflect current communications protocols and services

1) From action: 200~is reviewing the existing ACUPIES Agreement and will report.

Current Status

Acupies agreement opened up to deal with Firearms. looking for common

definition of prohibitions from!

I(OIC NWEST, RCMP)c:::J

II

!Indicated that the document Is ready to be signed here.

Awaiting for the last approval from the Department of Justice in U.S.A..

Foreign Affairs recommendations have been Incorporated. New MOC is in being done between RCMP and FBI.

RCMP Is meeting with Foreign Affairs on March 2"".1

lwill

provide an update at our next Conference Call on April 5.

MOC wording is still being reviewed.

Duetol

bbsence this item will be update at the next TCS

Conference Call on February 2nc1, 2004.

2001# 13 split Into 2001#13a and 2001#13b.
MOC wording Is being reviewed. FBI CJIS is researching the 'Possibilities of wording changes to address Canadian data protection issues. Legal
review is ongoing at the US Department of Justice.

II

~agreed to take on the responsibility to resolve the data

retention issue within the FBI.

The ACUPIES agreement has been reworked and the reimbursement

clauses removed. Final review is in process.

I

Ito discuss aftert,

in September.

~acation is finished and report

I
I

I Iis reviewing the ACUPIES agreement and will be contacting

I I

has provided a draft and had been awaiting

for feedback. He will report at September teleconference.

From action: 2002#221 Agreement and will report.

I is reviewing the existing ACUPIES

II

Jrecommended changes to the description wording above

to more accuratelY deoict the issue.

b6
b7C
b6
b7C

NCIC-VGTOF-11095

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-3 Filed 07/06/11 Page 7 of 100

ACtion 2001#22 Date 16Aug2004 07June2004 22Apr2004 01Mar2004 02Feb2004
15Dec2003 03Nov2003 30Sep2003

Primary Contact

FBI: I

I

PITO: N/A

RCMP:I

I

Description create bi-lateral exchange agreement between FBI and RCMP to support full NIST exchange.

Current Status

11

!advises that temporary TRAs are in place to permit testing. Test

transactions have been place between RCMP and FBI, debugging is

compete and testing has been resumed. When this is complete the FBI to

RCMP and FAST submission will be tested. Target completion oftesting is

end of September.

II

lstated connectivity between FBI and RCMP is finally expected

within the next week. Transaction type and workflow issues appear to have

been resolved.

Once the lines are in place manual testing with FBI and CCRA (for FAST) can begin. Following this LiveScan submissions will be tested.
FBI TRA has been approved by RCMP. The current activity is to resolve transaction types and volume matrix. The next step is connectivity in April then the testing plan schedule followed by limitsd production.
•indicated that the FAT/SAT terms detail testing is on schedule. A meeting with the Departmental Security has been scheduled to discuss the FBI TRA which is being schedule next week or so.

Their was a general discussion on use of FBI interface and FAST requirement given the operational impact to RCMP.
Motorola/Printrak and the RCMP are working closely on a contract with a delivery date of March 31, 2004 for software enhancements which would allow a bidirectional interface with the FBI. Functionality delivered will be the capability of bidirectional Criminal Tenprint (no add) submissions, Miscellaneous Applicant Civil submissions and Refugee submissions (as a Criminal tenprint) with the requisite Submission Results-Electronic or Error Response Transactions as required.

The FBI Threat Risk Assessment (TRA) should be completed by Feb. 6

We have set a target date of March 1 to connect to the Test NIST server.

The Project is currently showing as on schedule with a demonstration to the
RCMP in Anaheim, California on March 29, 2004.

We are working with I

!(FBI) on the actual interface. The FBI has

indicated that they will make their Test Interface available to the RCMP. The

FBI is aware of our April 1 deadline, and is assisting I responding to our

requests in a timely matter.

II

!reported that some clarification on the technical requirement

dialogue is still being negotiated between RCMP and Printrak/FBI.

I

Ireported that a contract is in place between RCMP and Prlntrak

for the FBI NIST interface and that a teleconference is scheduled Nov 6th to

discuss technical issues. There are ongoing internal RCMP discussion

relating to the workflow issues.c:::::Jwill give an update before the next TCS

Conference Call scheduled for December 15th.

RCMP advises the contract has been Issued to Prlntrak/Motorola for the

creation of the EFTS interface between IAFIS and RCMP National AFIS.

I

!has be~ed by the FBI as the contact for the implementation

of this interface.

advised that this interface will have Rmited capacity

NCIC-VGTOF-11096

2

b6 b7C
b6
b7C

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-3 Filed 07/06/11 Page 8 of 100

28July2003

30June2003 28May2003 15May2003 20Mar2003
13Mar2003 03Sep2002
11Apr2002

will be in contact after July 11th.

. Contract in place with Motorola for creation of EFTS interface from our NIST Server.

Full function ability of the MOC by August 20, 2003.

IMoved item above to acr~; jtem 2001#1~ because action is unrelated.

!to contact!__

Jto kick start the NIST interface

______ between the RCMP and I.

.

MOC com Jete. Functional before end of April .._

_.

to fax draft copy of new agreement to

FBI.

.__-:-:-~--:-~and!

Ito review new A

agreement to

see if the new bilateral agreement for NIST connection can be worked into

the ACUPIES agreement.

FBI now has certified copies of agreement. a reement for discussion with FBI.

to draft bi-lateral

Action 2002#07
Date 15Aug2004
07June2004 22Apr2004
01Mar2004 02Feb2004 15Dec2003 03Nov2003

Primary Contact

FBI:!

I

PITO:I

I

RCMP:

J

Descriotion

I

Ito provide!

tne PITO common data dictionary.

Ia copy of

I

I I to provide

Ia copy of

the Global XML common data dictionary.

J Upon completion of the IJI data standards

dictionary

lwill forward these

documents to IJI 088 and ask for a gap analysis

which will be shared by the group.

Current Status

I

lcontactedl

lat PSEPC and the response was

that due to priorities at this moment PSPEC will not be able to action on

this open action Item. Need other agencies to pickup this task or c!ot~e this

issue.

lraised issue with!

Iat PSEPC (Public Safety

and Emergency Preparedness Canada) for reconsideration.

I

!reported that a response from Solicitor Gen was received and

that they are not prepared to do the GAP Analysis.

RCMP will approach PESEP Ministry to determine if they will perform action.

:I

rreported nothing new to report except that the Ministry had

published their CPSIN Data Standard.

I

I reported that the Solicitor General is not in position to do the

GAP analysis before April 1st 2004.

As CPIC services was not represented at the last TCS Conference Call it will be ':fpdated on February 2, 2004.

II

!reported that a request for a gap analysis of our Canadian

CPSIN Data Standards by the IJISecretariat (SoiGen) with both the U.S.

Justice XML Data Standards and the PITO Data Standards. At this point

NCIC-vGTOF-11097

3

b2 b6 b7C
b6 b7C
b6 b7C

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-3 Filed 07/06/11 Page 9 of 100

30Sep2D03 28July2003 30June2003

the IJIS has not done the work and while stating that they see the gap analysis as an important exercise, they currently lack of funding to do this work and are inquiring (unofficially so far) if the RCMP would pay (making a financial contribution of approx. 5DK). status to be provided on the funded Issue by the next TCS Conference Call scheduled for December 15th.

15May2003 20Mar2003 13Mar2003 03Sep2002
11A r2002 Action 2003#5
Date 16Aug2004 07June 2004 07Apr2004
01Mar2004
02Feb2004 15Dec2003 03Nov2003 30Sep2003 28July2003 30June2003

to provide follow up by the end of May.

as ordered CO's and will send when available f'-----..,.,.4:."1 recommends PITO and RCMP download the V1 XML

rap sheet dictionary from www.nlets.org using download section.

-I

1RCMP advises IJI dictionary near final product and he

will ask for gap analysis with other dictionaries when available.

Initiated b TCS Executive

Primary Contact Description

RCMP:I Current Status

I Information provided to private fingerprints industries. Will share the draft for now and final product once completed.

Awaiting!

I.Jpdate.

I

!reported that this issue is still under review by private

industry legal services and police environment.

Ireported that it's still ongoing under the Department of Justice with consultation to private industries.

Ongoing, presently on Version 9.

I

Jreported that if a private industry follows the government

standards it will be a~[:j,take fingerprints as sanctioned l:ly a law

enforcement agency. will be sending.an eMail tOI

L

Jis still awaiting a response from the Department of Justice.

I

Jreported that it has gone to two private companies. The

report cannot be released until the Department of Justice approves.

I

!has a meeting with the CPIC Advisory Committee today.

After thiS meetlngc::Jwill provide PITO and FBI a copy of the draft policy.

RCMP advises document still being reviewed by DOJ. Can not release.

Now at version 5. Can't release until Dept. Justice gives final OK.

II

Jwill orovide 310 version of draft within the neXt few weeks.

h6 b7C b7D
b6 . b7C

Date

Current Status

b6

16Aug2004

The lights out reliability paper Is being drafted by

h7C

07June 2004

"=~--::-__.was assigned this action item and has started to gather information.

NCIC-VGTOF-11098

4

--····----·-----------------......J

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-3 Filed 07/06/11 Page 10 of 100

Action 2004#04

Date 16Aug2004

07June2004

Action

2004#0

b6

b7c

b7D

Date

16Aug2004

07June2004

Date 16Aug2004 07June2004
Action 2004#0
Date 16Aug2004
07June2004

Current Status Awaiting update from On hold due to election on June 28 in Canada.

Prima ontact All

Descri tion

Senl rap; cap~re requirement Ideas y May 5 to

FBI.

be forwarded to NIJ (National

Institute Justice).

Current Status

All agencies have con · uted all requirements. FBI will award contact in

fiscal year 2005·0

ill support with possible future funding.

Date

. Current Status

b6 b7C

16Aug2004

Letter was sent by FBI to CrimTrac. Awaiting formal written response

soon.

07June2004

NCIC-VGTOF-11099

s

----···--···

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-3 Filed 07/06/11 Page 11 of 100

Action 2004#11

Date 16Aug2004
07June2004

RCMP is awaiting response from Australia. PITO sent draft of bilateral agreement. A discussion was held as to determine if guidelines should be put in place for future bilateral agreements.
RCMP will have to start working on a bilateral agreement once Australia has acce ted the FBI invitation.

Action 2004#12
Date 16Aug2004
07June2004 Action
004#13 Date 16Aug2004

Contact

Desert tion Determine Name ofTCS Group. To be considered and discussed at June 2004 Conference Call.

Current Status

Still pending on approval from Australia.

These names were suggested at the Conference Call for future reference. Multi Country Symposium (MCS) Multi Country Identification Symposium (MCIS} International Identification Symposium Group Multi Lateral Identification Symposium Group

Attendance to Tn-Country Conference in Edinburgh, England from April 19 to 21, 2005. Current Status ..,__-.:-:---:-lis requested from all agencies to provide a count and names if possible, of possible participants for the next Tri-Country Conference.
lL;::-;;-_ _ __.lsent to PITO the RCMP possible participants on 2004-0820 •.

users can access NCIC VGTOF files directly on CPIC or via NCIC query using ACUPIES.
r-lwm also determine if there is a need to
1reiiero'p new entry procedures for terrorist data on CPIC so that a query on either NCIC or CPIC will result in full disclosure of terrorist files.
The group will look at establishing a procedure to extract, share and store terrorist data files from/to PNC, NCIC and CPIC.

NOC-VGTOF-11100

6

......-..:....-------------···-···-··--

b6 b7C
b6 b7C

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-3 Filed 07/06/11 Page 12 of 100

2003#8 (Info Item)

RCMP_r=:]_ PITO:c:::::J FBI: TBD by
I I

Share infonnation on flat versus ten prints issues.
Continue to promote rolled impression as a gold
standard. Ongoing.

' .. ~ .lk~iit-tU

16Aug2004

Nothing new to report.

07June2004

Nothing new to report.

01 Mar2004
02Feb2004 15Dec2003 03Nov2003 30Sep2003 28July2003
30June2003

reported that a discussion at the IAI Conference took place an partrc pants were concerned with the response from Departmental Homeland Security. A letter will be. sent to the Congress, Senate Appropriations Committee for DHS and the Executive Office of the White House.
RCMP will not be doing any more testing until the RTID AFIS system is in place.

TCS Members will. promote "TEN ROLLED IS GOLD".

Nothing new to report.

1.-.,1s=-o:-:ct~2~0""03,t.h..eD,HPS troogvrisaimt IAMFaInSaagnedr

for US Visits did not attend describe expectations.

the

HS on

I

!attended this session and should be able to upd·a~tr:-e-::CI~r~ec~tL to

FBI prior to the next TCS Conference Call.

RCMP reports that the IAIIetterwas sent. No response from Homeland

Security was received.

FBI advises!

!will meet with DHS on 15 Oct 2003 to

discuss. Will report results to TCS.

~o~n~th~e~ir~p""'o""!sr~tio~n~roef upsoirntsg

that latest visit to NIST indicates DHS 2 fingers only and is now leaning to 8

is softening fingers (4

plains left and right). They are pushing to get to 10 plains.

RCMP reports lAI board of directors is going to send a letter to USA Dept

of Homeland Security on the isl?ue of using ten rolled impressions over a 2

finger system. 10 plains would be the minimum acceptable to the IAI.

~w:mr-r:::av~e~a~:roepinodrteexdfitnhgaetrtshesyDsetepmarItnmpelnatcoef(HSoema e&

and Security Airports) by

(DH$)

December 31, 2003. It was decided that any updates will be reported

durin conference calls.

Data Standards Working Group to identify risks and detennine strategies towards a global standard for Biometrics other than fingerprints by September 30111,2003.

NCIC-VGTOF-11101

7

b6 b7C
b6 . b7C
b6 b7C

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-3 Filed 07/06/11 Page 13 of 100
b6 b7C

NCIC-VGTOF-11102

8

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-3 Filed 07/06/11 Page 14 of 100
DOCUMENT39

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-3 Filed 07/06/11 Page 15 of 100

(Rev. 01·31·2003)

FEDERAL BUREAU OF I~ESTIGATION

. Precedence: ROUTINE
To: All Divisions Counterterrorism·
Office of Intelligence Law Enforcement Services CJIS

Date: 11/02/2004

Attn: All SACs

All ASACs

All LEt;;ATs

All JTTF SSAs

Attn: EAD John·S. Pistole

DAD Donald Van Duyn

All CTD SCs

All CTD UCs

Donna Bucella/TSC Director

I

fiiig

Attn: EAD Maureen A·. BagJ.nski

Attn: EAD Grant D. Ashley

AD Louis F. Quijas

Attn: I

I

Global Initiatives Unit

From:

Counterterrorism NTCS/CT Watch

r

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

_

_

_

,

Contact: SSA

~--------------------------~

Appfoved By:

I

b2

Harrinaton T J

b6

b7C

Drafted By: -~---------.J~dhw
Case ID #: G~F-HQ-1407259 (Pendi.ng) 66F-HQ-1407.259-TSC (Pending)

Title:

COUNTERTERRORISM WATCH (CTW)/ TERRORIST SCREENING CENTER (TSC) OPERATIONAL GROUP (OPS); NATIONAL THREAT CENTER SECTION (NTCS); COUNTERTERRO~ISM DIVISION (CTD).

Synopsis: 0~/14/2004 to 09/15/2004 CTW/TSC Ops land border crossing trend analysis.

Enclosure(s) : Copy of CTW/TSC Operations CONUS map..displaying hits by state and outlining the top five points of entry.

NCIC-VGTOF-11737
DOCUMENT 39

..

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-3 Filed 07/06/11 Page 16 of 100

To: All Divisions From: Counterterrorism Re: 66F-HQ-1407259, 10/19/2004

Detai1s: By way of background, the Terror~sm Screening Center (TSC) commenced operations on 12/01/2003 as a direct result of Homeland Security Presidential Directive-6 (HSPD-6), dated Septemb~r 16, 2003, entitled "Integration ·and Use. of Screenins;r Information to Protect Against Terrorism." The TSC functions as the initial point of contact to receive inquiries from Federal, State, or local law enforcement agencies for possible terrorism related subject(s). The TS~ provides these agencies with direct assi?tance to determine identity of the subject(s) of the inquiry. These inquiries are generated from hits in the NCIC Violent Gang Terrorist Organization File (VGTOF) and/or from the Department. of State (DOS) TIPOFF database which is administered by the Terrorist Threat Integration Center (TTIC}. If a positive or inconclusive identity match is made, the TSC refers the matter to the CT Watch/TSC Operations Group (CTW/TSC Ops) for operational management.
Many positive or inconc~usive hits 'are generated as a result of terrorist related subject(s) attempting to enter the country via a land border·crossing. By examining· the data of where these hits originate, a trend has been established regarding li~ely points of entry of terrorist related suojects.
From the time period of 03/14/2004 to 09/15/2004, analysis was conducted on 413 border crossing hits that were referred to CTW/TSC Ops. These hits represent only the positive/inconclusive border crossing matches that were reported to the TSC from CBP/N.TC, and ·ultimately referred to CTW/TSC Ops for operational management. The data confirms that certain states a9count for higher instances of border crossing .activity by terrorist related subject(s). The following is a summary of the trends:

b2 b7E

2 NCIC-vGTOF-11738

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-3 Filed 07/06/11 Page 17 of 100 To: All Divisions From: Counterterrorism Re: 66F-HQ-140J259, 10/19/2004
b2 D7E

b2
The above information is being provided to CT.D executive b7E managemen~, field division manageme.nt, and fieid JTTFs for information and review to aid ih proper resource allocation.

~EAD(s):

3 NCIC-vGTOF.-11739

. .

Case 2:09-cv-006,.42-R,.SL

Do" c_. u_..m....e..n...t

77-3 ,. . ·~

~-

Filed =--=--:-.::--:.:.:-:.-.:-.:-. 07/06/11 Page 18 of 100 . -· r •• • ";'''':•:-•:--•:-.:-:•-•::::-::_.:;:-,-•:-•:-:.:• •-.:-.:.:-:-.-:--.-::--:-=-..

··'

To: All Divisions Fro~:. Counterterrorism

R~:. 6_6F-HQ-l407259, .·10f19/2004

. .

Set Lead 1: (Action)
COUNTERTERRQRISM ·AT· WA~H~NG1:'0~, DC ~T NTCS-CTW/TSC OPS, aft~r approval by FBI Execu~ive'
Manag~ment, ·cTW/TSC Ops wili disseminate. to all field .offices.

I
!·

cc:

1 1
1
1
1
1
1
1

·-------

Mr. Mr.

Pistole Harrinqton

i ..:.

b6 b7C

y-~.

1 l'"

-1
1

..,

- ~

-~·

___ -

... .:__

4 NCIC-vGTOF-11740

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-3 Filed 07/06/11 Page 19 of 100
•' I
NCIC-vGTOF-11741

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-3 Filed 07/06/11 Page 20 of 100
DOCUMENT63

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-3 Filed 07/06/11 Page 21 of 100
b6 b7C
ICCJIS) (FBI)
From:
Sent: To:
Cc:
Subj!JCt:

Thanks. We will enter them into TIPOFF and check the VGTOF box. I have asked

I

Ito set up a time next week to get CJIS, TSC, and TTIC together

to discuss duplicate records and how we will deal with all the new FBI

subjec~s we will be entering in TIPOFF. This seems like a related topic.

..... >>> ~==-.:---_ (CK) ~FBI) 04/23 9:36 AM >»
UNCLASSIFIED NON-RECORD

Per DAD Harrington's request, all names and identifiers have been entered into VGTOF using Handling Code ~. I have asked one of the analysts to prepare an EC back to you documenting what was done.
~~~----~lwanted me to cc you on this response since there is a lead set to TTIC to enter these names into appropriate databases and didn't want a duplicate effort where VGTOF is concerned.
c::::Juestions, let me know.

b6

b7C

-----Original Message-----

From: I

I

rd I Sent: Monday,
To: SubJect:

April 19, 2004 10:41 AM
~for~mCaK)tio(FnB/SI)uspected

terrorists

Per our telephone conversation, we received approximate!~

!names of

b2

suspected terrorists from th~~--------------------------~

b7E

b2

b7D

b6

DAD Harrington has requested ~hat the names be entered.into VGTOF. We think

b7c

the most logical way to enter the names or batch loading them into VGTOF. We

are asking for your~ssistance with this matter.

-

The followin9 EC has been prepared.with th~ name~:

66F-HQ-Al41361-4-C, Serials: 22, 25, 2.6, 27 1 28 1 29 and .30. Any question please call or e-mail,

Thank you,

UNCLASSIFIED

NCIC-vGTOF-11679

1

DOCUMENT 63

.•

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-3 Filed 07/06/11 Page 22 of 100
DOCUMENT69

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-3 Filed 07/06/11 Page 23 of 100
Cumulative VGTOF Stats for Field Offices and TSC
b2 b7E

NOC-VGTOF-9197

For period 01/112008-01/3112008

DOCUMENT 69

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-3 Filed 07/06/11 Page 24 of 100
Cumulative VGTOF Stats tor Field Offices and TSC

Field Office

Newark, New Jersey

Albuquerque, New Mexico

Las Vegas, Nevada

I I

Albany, New York

II

Buffalo, New York

II

NewYork, New Yo

Cincinnati, Ohio

II

Cleveland~
MuskOgee, Oklaho

Oklahoma

Tulsa, Oklahoma

l?ortland, Oreaon

Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania

Philadelphia, Pennsylvania

San Juan, Puerto Rico

Columbia, S

Knoxville, Tennessee

~·Tennessee
exas

Texas

Houston, Texas

San Antonio, Texas

Salt Lake City, Utah

Norfolk, Virginia

Richmond, Virginia

Seattle, Washington

Milwaukee, Wisconsin

MiiDet & Legat

Totals

Terrorist Screening Center I

Totals

I

NCIC-VGTOF-9198

Jan-08 b2 b7E
For period 01/1/2008-01/3112008

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-3 Filed 07/06/11 Page 25 of 100
Cumulative VGTOF Stats for Field Offices and TSC

Field Office

Jan-08
b2 b7E

NOC-vGTOF-9199

For period 01/1/2008-01/31/2008

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-3 Filed 07/06/11 Page 26 of 100
DOCUMENT70

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-3 Filed 07/06/11 Page 27 of 100

RECORDS OF AS 01101/2009

IJe<>.a

NCTC AND NON-NCTC

VGTOF RECORDS

ITYPE

ROS NON-NCTC RECORDS

I ]

r

I I

TOTALS

L--1

I

.. ~
'

I

I

I

I

H

I I
I
h2 h7E

.

ALL INFORMATION CONTAINED HEREIN IS UNCLASSIFIED DATE 02-03-2010 BY uc/baw 60324

NCIC-vGTOF-10025

DOCUMENT 70
'

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-3 Filed 07/06/11 Page 28 of 100
DOCUMENT71

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-3 Filed 07/06/11 Page 29 of 100

DCTSC3100 DCTSC3200 DCTSC3300 'DCTSC3400 OCTSC3500 DCTSC3500 OCTSC3700 DCTSC3800 OCTSC3800 OCTSC4000 OCTSC4100 OCTSC4200 OCTSC4300 OCTSC4400 DCTSC4900 TOTALS

FOR PERIOD 0110112009·

MIUTARY DETAINEE

ORIGINATING AGENCY TOTALS

LEGALATTACHE ORIGINATING

ENTRIES

AGENCY

TOTALS

INTERNATIONAL ORIGINATING AND DOMESTIC AGENCY
DCTSC0100 DCTSC0200 DCTSC0300 DCTSC0400 DCTSC0500 DCTSC0600 DCTSC0700 OCTSC4900 TOTALS

NCTC AND NON·

NCTCVGTOF

ENTRIES

TYPE

OCTSC3100 DCTSC3200 DCTSC3300 OCTSC3400 DCTSC3500 OCTSC3500 DCTSC3700 DCTSC3500 OCTSC3900 DCTSC4000 DCTSC4100 DCTSC4200 DCTSC4300 DCTSC4400 OCTSC4900

NUMBER OF NUMBER OF IMAGE

TRANSLATED AGENCY (BY MIS) ENTRIES

ENTRIES

0

0

b2 b7E

NUMBER OF NUMBER OF IMAGE

TRANSLATED AGENCY (BY MIS) ENTRIES

ENTRIES

0

0

TRANSLATED AGENCYORI (BY TRANSLATED NUMBER OF

~----------------------------,

OCA)

AGENCY

DOMESTIC NON-

DCTSC0100

DCTSC0200

DCTSC0300

DCTSC0400

DCTSC0500

DCTSC0600

DCTSC0700

DCTSC4900

L-..----...111~- - - - - - - - 1 NOC-VGTOF-10026

~·····----· --------------------------------------------------------------~

DOCUMENT 71

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-3 Filed 07/06/11 Page 30 of 100

D

NCTC ENTRIES TOTALS
ORIGINATING AGENCY DCTSC0100 DCTSC0200 DCTSC0300 DCTSC4900 TOTALS

CUMULATIVE ORIGINATING VGTOF ENTRIES AGENCY
DCTSC0100 DCTSC0200 DCTSC0300 DCTSC0400 DCTSC0500 DCTSCOOOO DCTSC0700 DCTSC4900 TOTALS

ORIGINATING AGENCY DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100

I

TRANSLATED AGENCY ORI (BY OCA) DCTSC0100 DCTSC0200 DCTSC0300 DCTSC4900

TRANSLATED AGENCY

TRANSLATED TRANSLATED AGENCY (BY OCA) AGENcY DCTSC0100 DCTSC0200 DCTSC0300
DCTSC0400 DCTSC0500 DCTSC0600 DCTSC0700 DCTSC4900

NICNUMBER

ORIGINATING

CASE

32-HQ-

32-HQ-

32-HQ-

32-HQ-

32-HQ-

b2

32-HQ-

b6

32-HQ-

b7C 32-HQ-

32-HQ-

32-HQ-

32-HQ-

32-HQ-

32-HQ-

32-HQ-

32-HQ-

32-HQ-

32-HQ-

32-HQ-

32-HQ-

NOC.VGTOF-10027

h2 b7E

·--·----------------------------------------1

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-3 Filed 07/06/11 Page 31 of 100

DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100. DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 .
DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0200 DCTSC0200 DCTSC0200 DCTSC0200 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100

32-HQ32-HQ.. 32-HQ.. 32-HQ.. 32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ.. 32-HQ.. 32-HQ32-HQ.. 32-HQ.. 32-HQ.. 32-HQ.. 32-HQ.. 32-HQ.. 32-HQ.. TEST RECORD TEST RECORD TEST RECORD 1631-IS-146 1631-PA-s709 1631-PA-9709 32-HQ.. 32-HQ32-HQ.. 32-HQ.. 32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ.. 32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ.. 32-HQ.. 32-HQ.. 32-HQ.. 32-HQ-
NCIC-VGTOF-10028

- --·····~-·--------·--~ . .

b2
b6 b7C

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-3 Filed 07/06/11 Page 32 of 100

DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100.
DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 OCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 OCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100

32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HO· 32-HQ-
32-HQ· 32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ-
32-HO· 32-HQ-
32·HO· 32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-Hci32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ-

NCIC-VGTOF-10029

b2 b6
b7C

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-3 Filed 07/06/11 Page 33 of 100

DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100
DCTSC0100 OCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 OCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 OCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 OCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 OCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 OCTSC0100 OCTSC0100 OCTSC0100 OCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 OCTSC0100 OCTSC0100 ·ocTSC0100 DCTSC0100 OCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 OCTSC0100

32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ· 32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ· 32-HQ32-HQ-

NCIC-VGTOF-10030

b2 b6
b7C

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-3 Filed 07/06/11 Page 34 of 100

DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100' DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 OCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 0CTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100

32-HQ.. 32-HQ.. 32-HQ.. 32-HQ.. 32-HQ.. 32-HQ.. 32-HQ.. 32-HQ.. 32-HQ.. 32-HQ.. 32-HQ.. 32-HQ.. 32-HQ.. 32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ.. 32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ.. 32-HQ.. 32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ-' 32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ-

NOC.VGTOF-10031

b2 b6 b7C

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-3 Filed 07/06/11 Page 35 of 100

DCTSC0100 DCTSc0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 ocTsC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 OCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 OCTSC0100 OCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 OCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 OCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 OCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 OCTSC0100 OCTSC0100 OCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 OCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 OCTSC0100 DCTSC0100

32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ· 32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ· 32-HQ· 32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ· 32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ-

NOC-VGTOF-10032

b2 b6
b7C

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-3 Filed 07/06/11 Page 36 of 100

DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100

32.-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32.-HQ32-HQ32-HQ.. 32-HQ.. 32.-HQ32.-HQ.. 32.-HQ32.-HQ32-HQ32.-HQ.. 32-HQ· 32-HQ32-HQ32.-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32.-HQ· 32-HQ32-HQ· 32.-HQ.. 32-HQ32-HO· 32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32.-HQ32-H032-HQ· 32-HQ.. 32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ· 32-HQ32-HQ.. 32-HQ32.-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ-

b2 b6 h7C

NCIC-VGTOF-10033

--·--·-·- Ca· s· e - 2:- 09- -c- v-· 00- 6· 42~ -R- S· L-D-o· cu- m· e· nt- 7- 7-- 3 -F- ile- d- 0- 7/- 06- /1- 1-P-a- ge-3- 7- o- f 1- 00--------

DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 OCTSC0100 OCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 OCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 OCTSC0100 OCTSC0100 OCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 OCTSC0100 OCTSC0100 OCTSC0100 OCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 OCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 OCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 OCTSC0100 OCTSC0100 OCTSC0100 DCTSC0100

32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ-
32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HO· 32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ· 32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ-

NCIC -YGTOF-10034

h2 b6
b7C

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-3 Filed 07/06/11 Page 38 of 100

OCTSC0100

32-HQ..

OCTSC0100

32-HQ..

OCTSC0100

32-HQ..

OCTSc0100

32-HQ-

OCTSC0100

32-HQ..

DCTSC0100

32-HQ-

OCTSC0100

32-HQ..

DCTSC0100

32-HQ-

OCTSC0100

32-HQ..

DCTSC0100

32-HQ-

OCTSC0100

32-HQ..

DCTSC0100

32-HQ..

DCTSC0100

32-HQ-

DCTSC0100

32-HQ..

OCTSC0100

32-HQ·

DCTSC0100

32-HQ-

DCTSC0100

32-HQ-

DCTSC0100

32-HQ·

DCTSC0100

32-HQ..

OCTSC0100

32-HQ..

DCTSC0100

32-HQ..

b2

oCTSC0100

32-HQ..

b6

DCTSC0100

32-HQ..

b7C

OCTSC0100

32-HQ..

DCTSC0100

32-HQ..

DCTSC0100

32-HQ..

DCTSC0100

32-HQ..

OCTSC0100

32-HQ..

OCTSC0100

32-HQ..

DCTSC0100

32-HQ..

DCTSC0100

32-HQ-

DCTSC0100

32-HQ-

DCTSC0100

32-HQ-

OCTSC0100

32-HQ..

DCTSC0100

32-HQ..

DCTSC0100

32-HQ..

DCTSC0100

32-HQ..

DCTSC0100

32-HQ..

DCTSC0100

32-HQ-

DCTSC0100

32-HQ..

DCTSC0100

32-HQ-

DCTSC0100

32-HQ-

DCTSC0100

32-HQ-

DCTSC0100

32-HQ-

NCIC-VGTOF-10035

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-3 Filed 07/06/11 Page 39 of 100

DCTSC0100

32-HQ-

OCTSC0100

32-HQ-

DCTSC0100

32-HQ-

DCTSC0100

32-HQ-

DCTSC0100

32-HQ-

DCTSC0100

32-HQ-

DCTSC0100

32-HQ-

DCTSC0100

32-HQ-

DCTSC0100

32-HQ-

DCTSC0100

32-HQ-

DCTSC0100

32-HQ-

DCTSC0100

32-HQ-

DCTSC0100

32-HQ-

DCTSC0100

32-HQ-

DCTSC0100

32-HQ-

DCTSC0100

32-HQ-

DCTSC0100

32-HQ-

DCTSC0100

32-HQ-

DCTSC0100

32-HQ-

DCTSC0100

32-HQ-

DCTSC0100

32-HQ-

b2

DCTSC0100

32-HQ-

b6

DCTSC0100

32-HQ-

"b7C

DCTSC0100

32-HQ-

DCTSC0100

32-HQ-

DCTSC0100

32-HQ-

DCTSC0100

32-HQ-

DCTSC0100

32-HQ-

DCTSC0100

32-Ha-

DCTSC0100

32-Ha-

DCTSC0100

32-HQ-

DCTSC0100

32-HQ-

DCTSC0100

32-HQ-

DCTSC0100

32-HQ-

DCTSC0100

32-HQ-

DCTSC0100

32"HQ-

DCTSC0100

32-HQ-

DCTSC0100

32-HQ-

DCTSC0100

32-HQ-

DCTSC0100

32-IfQ.

DCTSC0100

32-HQ-

DCTSC0100

32-HQ-

DCTSC0100

32-HQ-

DCTSC0100

32-HQ-

NQC-VGTOF-10036

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-3 Filed 07/06/11 Page 40 of 100

DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 QCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100

32-HQ.. 32-HQ.. 32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ.. 32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ.. 32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ.. 32-HQ.. 32-HQ.. 32-HQ.. 32-HQ.. 32-HQ32-HQ..
32-HQ32-HQ.. 32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ.. 32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ.. 32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ-

b2
b6
b7C

NCIC·VGTOF-10037

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-3 Filed 07/06/11 Page 41 of 100

OCTSC0100 OCTSC0100 OCTSC0100 OCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 OCTSC0100 OCTSC0100 OCTSC0100 OCTSc0100 OCTSC0100 OCTSC0100 OCTSC0100 OCTSC0100 OCTSC0100 OCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 OCTSC0100 OCTSC0100 OCTSC0100 OCTSC0100 OCTSC0100 OCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 OCTSC0100 OCTSC0100 OCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 OCTSC0100 . DCTSC0100 OCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 OCTSC0100 OCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 OCTSC0100 OCTSC0100 OCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 OCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 OCTSC0100 OCTSC0100

32-HQ32-HQ· 32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ-

b2 b6 b7C

NOC-VGTOF-10038

-"~~-"~"-"-""--~--~""--~----------------------------~

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-3 Filed 07/06/11 Page 42 of 100

DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100

32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32·HQ32·HQ.. 32-HQ.. 32-HQ.. 32-HQ· 32-HQ.. 32-HQ32-HQ.. 32-HQ32-HQ.. 32-HQ32-HQ· 32-HQ.. 32-HQ.. 32-HQ.. 32-HQ32-HQ.. 32-HQ32-HQ.. 32-HQ32-HQ.. 32-HQ32-HQ.. 32-HQ.. 32-HQ· 32-HQ.. 32·HQ.32·HQ..
32-HQ32-HQ.. 32-HQ.. 32-HQ.. 32-HQ.. 32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ· 32-HQ.. 32-HQ·

NCIC-VGTOF-10039

b2 b6
b7C

~~·-~·------------·~----------------------------'

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-3 Filed 07/06/11 Page 43 of 100

OCTSC010Q DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 OCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 OCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 OCTSC0100 OCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 OCTSC0100 OCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSCo100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 OCTSC0100 OCTSC0100 OCTSC0100 OCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 OCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 OCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100

32-HQ.. 32-HQ32-HQ.. 32-HQ32-HQ.. 32-HQ32-HQ.. 32-HQ32-HQ.. 32-HQ.. 32-HQ.. 32-HQ32-HQ.. 32-HQ32-HQ.. 32-HQ.. 32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ.. 32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ· 32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ· 32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ-

NCIC-VGTOF-10040

b2 b6 b7C

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-3 Filed 07/06/11 Page 44 of 100

DCTSC0100

32-HQ-

DCTSC0.100

32-HQ-

DCTSC0100

32-HQ-

DCTSC0100

32-HQ-

DCTSC0100

32-HQ-

DCTSC0100

32-HQ-

DCTSC0100

32-HQ-

DCTSC0100

32-HQ-

DCTSC0100

32-HQ-

DCTSC0100

32-HQ-

DCTSC0100

32-HQ-

DCTSC0100

32-HQ-

DCTSC0100

32-HQ-

DCTSC0100

32-HQ-

DCTSC0100

32-HQ-

DCTSC0100

32-HQ-

DCTSC0100

32-HQ-

DCTSC0100

32-HQ-

DCTSC0100

32-HQ·

DCTSC0100

32-HQ-

DCTSC0100

32-HQ-

b2

DCTSC0100

32-HQ-

b6

DCTSC0100

32-HQ-

b7C

DCTSC0100

32-HQ-

DCTSC0100

32-HQ-

OCTSC0100

32-HQ-

DCTSC0100

32-HQ-

DCTSC0100

32-HQ-

DCTSC0100

32-HQ-

OCTSC0100

32-HQ-

DCTSC0100

32-HQ-

DCTSC0100

32-HQ-

DCTSC0100

32-HQ-

DCTSC0100

32-HQ-

DCTSC0100

32-HQ-

DcTSC0100

32-HQ-

DCTSC0100

32-HQ-

DCTSC0100

32-HQ-

DCTSC0100

32-HQ-

DCTSC0100

32-HQ-

DCTSC0100

32-HQ-

DCTSC0100

32-HQ-

DCTSC0100

32-HQ-

DCTSC0100

32-HQ-

NOC-VGTOF-10041

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-3 Filed 07/06/11 Page 45 of 100

DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100

32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ. 32-HQ32-HQ. 32-HQ. 32-HQ. 32-HQ. 32-HQ32-HQ. 32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ. 32-HQ. 32-HQ. 32-HQ. 32-HQ32-HQ. 32-HQ32-HQ. 32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ. 32-HQ32-HQ. 32-HQ32-HQ. 32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ. 32-HQ32-HQ. 32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ. 32-HQ. 32-HQ. 32-HQ. 32-HQ. 32-HQ.

NOC-VGTOF-10042

b2 b6
b7C

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-3 Filed 07/06/11 Page 46 of 100

DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100
DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 ·DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100

32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ· 32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ· 32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ· 32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ· 32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ-

NCIC-VGTOF-10043

b2 b6 b7C

---------- ~---~----~----------------------------------"

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-3 Filed 07/06/11 Page 47 of 100

DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 OCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 OCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 OCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100
DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 OCTSC0100

32-HQ.. 32-HQ32-HQ.. 32-HQ.. 32-HQ.. 32-HQ.. 32-HQ32-HQ.. 32-HQ· 32-HQ32-HQ.. 32-HQ32-HQ.. 32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ.. 32-HQ32-HQ.. 32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ.. 32-HQ.. 32-HQ.. 32-HQ.. 32-HQ.. 32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ.. 32-HQ.. 32-HQ32-HQ.. 32-HQ32-HQ.. 32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ.. 32-HQ32-HQ.. 32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ-

b2
b6 b7C

NCIC-VGTOF-10044

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-3 Filed 07/06/11 Page 48 of 100 ·--.-~-··--··--··--··--·~--- ---~-----~----------------------------,

DCTSC0100

32-HQ..

OCTSC0100

32-HQ-

OCTSC0100

32-HQ-

OCTSC0100

32-HQ-

OCTSC0100

32-HQ·

OCTSC0100

32-HQ·

OCTSC0100

32-HQ-

OCTSC0100

32-HQ..

OCTSC0100

32-HQ..

OCTSC0100

32-HQ-

OCTSC0100

32-HQ-

OCTSC0100

32-HQ-

OCTSC0100

32-HQ-

bCTSC0100

32-HQ·

OCTSC0100

32-HQ..

OCTSC0100

32-HQ-

DCTSC0100

32-HQ-

OCTSC0100

32-HQ-

OCTSC0100

32-HQ-

DCTSC0100

32-HQ..

DCTSC0100 OCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 OCTSC0100

32-HQ32-HQ.. 32-HQ.. 32-HQ-

b2 b6 b7C

OCTSC0100

32-HQ..

OCTSC0100

32-HQ..

OCTSC0100

32-HQ-

OCTSC0100

32-HQ·

OCTSC0100

32-HQ-

OCTSC0100

32-HQ·

OCTSC0100

32-HQ-

OCTSC0100

32-HQ-

OCTSC0100

32-HQ-

OCTSC0100

32-HQ-

OCTSC0100

32-HQ-

OCTSC0100

32-HQ-

OCTSC0100

32-HQ-

OCTSC0100

32-HQ·

OCTSC0100

32-HQ-

OCTSC0100

32-HQ·

OCTSC0100

32-HQ-

OCTSC0100

32-HQ·

DCTSC0100

32-HQ-

OCTSC0100

32-HQ-

NOC-vGTOF-10045

· - · - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ~------------------~--------.....J

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-3 Filed 07/06/11 Page 49 of 100

DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100

32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ' 32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ· 32-HQ32-HQ-

NOC-VGTOF-10046

h2 b6
h7C

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-3 Filed 07/06/11 Page 50 of 100

DCTSC0100 OCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 OCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 OCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTS<(0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100

32-HQ... 32-HQ... 32-HQ32-HQ... 32-HQ... 32-HQ32-HQ... 32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ... 32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ... 32-HQ... 32-HQ... 32-HQ... 32-HQ... 32-HQ• 32-HQ...
32-HQ... 32-HQ32-HQ... 32-HQ... 32-HQ... 32-HQ... 32-HQ... 32-HQ...·
32-HQ-
~HQ-
32-HQ32-HQ... 32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ... 32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ... 32-HQ... 32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ...

b2
b6 b7C

NCIC-VGTOF-10047

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-3 Filed 07/06/11 Page 51 of 100

DCTSC0100
DCT~0100
DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100

32-HQ· 32-HQ· 32-HQ.. 32-HQ32-HQ.. 32-HQ.. 32-HQ. 32-HQ32-HQ.. 32-HQ.. 32-HQ.. 32-HQ.. 32-HQ.. 32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ.. 32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ· 32-HQ32-HQ.. 32-HQ32-HQ· 32-HQ.. 32-HQ· 32-HQ· 32-HQ.. 32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ.. 32-HQ.. 32-HQ32-HQ.. 32-HQ.. 32-HQ32-HQ.. 32-HQ.. 32-HQ32-HQ.. 32-HQ.. 32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ..

NCIC-VGirOF-10048

b2 b6 b7C

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-3 Filed 07/06/11 Page 52 of 100

DCTSC0100

32-HQ-

DCTSC0100

32-HQ-

DCTSC0100

32-HQ-

DCTSC0100

32-HQ-

DCTSC0100

32-HQ-

DCTSC0100

32-HQ-

DCTSC0100

32-HQ-

DCTSC0100

32-HQ-

DCTSC0100

32-HQ-

DCTSC0100

32-HQ-

DCTSC0100

32-HQ-

DCTSC0100

32-HQ-

DCTSC0100

32-HQ-

DCTSC0100

32-HQ-

DCTSC0100

32-HQ-

DCTSC0100

32-HQ-

DCTSC0100

32-HQ-

DCTSC0100

32-HQ-

DCTSC0100

32-HQ-

DCTSC0100

32-HQ-

DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100

32-HQ32-HQ-

b2

DCTSC0100

32-HQ-

.b6

DCTSC0100

32-HQ-

b7C

DCTSC0100

32-HQ-

DCTSC0100

32-HQ-

DCTSC0100

32-HQ-

DCTSC0100

·32-HQ-

DCTSC0100

32-HQ-

DCTSC0100

32-HQ-

DCTSC0100

32-HQ-

DCTSC0100

32-HQ-

DCTSC0100

32-HQ-

DCTSC0100

32-HQ-

DCTSC0100

32-HQ-

DCTSC0100

32-HQ-

DCTSC0100

32-HQ-

DCTSC0100

32-HQ-

DCTSC0100

32-HQ-

DCTSC0100

32-HQ-

DCTSC0100

32-HQ-

DCTSC0100

32-HQ-

DCTSC0100

32-HQ-

DCTSC0100

32-HQ-

NOC·V~OF-10049

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-3 Filed 07/06/11 Page 53 of 100

DCTSC0100

32-HQ-

DCTSC0100

32-HQ-

DCTSC0100

32-HQ-

DCTSC0100

32-HQ-

DCTSC0100

32-HQ-

DCTSC0100

32-HQ-

DCTSC0100

32-HQ-

DCTSC0100

32-HQ-

DCTSC0100

32-HQ-

DCTSC0100

32-HQ-

DCTSC0100

32-HQ-

DCTSC0100

32-HQ-

DCTSC0100

32-HQ-

DCTSC0100

32-HQ-

DCTSC0100

32-HQ-

DCTSC0100

32-HQ-

DCTSC0100

32-HQ-

DCTSC0100

32-HQ-

DCTSC0100

32-HQ-

DCTSC0100

32-HQ-

DCTSC0100

32-HQ-

b2

DCTSC0100

32-HQ-

b6

DCTSC0100

32-HQ·

b7c

DCTSC0100

32-HQ-

DCTSC0100

32-HQ-

DCTSC0100

32-HQ-

DCTSC0100

32-HQ-

DCTSC0100

32-HQ·

DCTSC0100

32-HQ-

DCTSC0100

32-HQ·

DCTSC0100

32-HQ-

DCTSC0100

32-HQ-

DCTSC0100

32-HQ-

DCTSC0100

32-HQ-

DCTSC0100

32-HQ-

DCTSC0100

3~-HQ-

DCTSC0100

32-HQ-

DCTSC0100

32-HQ-

DCTSC0100

32-HQ-

DCTSC0100

32-HQ-

DCTSC0100

32-HQ-

DcrSC0100

32-HQ-

·oCTSC0100

32-HQ-

DCTSC0100

32-HQ-

NCIC-VGfOF-10050

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-3 Filed 07/06/11 Page 54 of 100

DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 · DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100

32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ· 32-HQ32-HQ· 32-HQ.. 32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ.. 32-HQ. 32-HQ.. 32-HQ32-HQ.. 32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ-

NOC-YGTOF-10051

h2 b6 b7C

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-3 Filed 07/06/11 Page 55 of 100

DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100

32-HQ.. 32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ.. 32-HQ.. 32-HQ.. 32-HQ.. 32-HQ.. 32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ.. 32-HQ.. 32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ.. 32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ.. 32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ· 32-HQ.. 32-HQ.. 32-HQ.. 32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ.. 32-HQ-

NCIC-VGTOF-10052

b2 b6 b7C

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-3 Filed 07/06/11 Page 56 of 100

DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC01oo DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100

32-HQ.. 32-HQ.. 32-HQ.. 32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ.. 32-HQ32-HQ32-1'1032-HQ.. 32-HQ· 32-HQ32-HQ.. 32-HQ.. 32-HQ.. 32-HQ.. 32-HQ.. 32·HO· 32-HQ· 32-HQ32·HO· 32-HQ.. 32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ. 32-HQ.. 32-HQ.. 32-HQ.. 32-HQ.. 32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ.. 32-HQ.. 32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ.. 32-HQ.. 32-HQ.. 32-HQ.. 32-HQ.. 32-HQ-

NCIC-VGTOF-10053

b2 b6 b7C

--------~-------------------------------------------,,
Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-3 Filed 07/06/11 Page 57 of 100

DCTSC0100. DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100

32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ-

b2
b6 b7C

NCIC-VGTOF-10054

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-3 Filed 07/06/11 Page 58 of 100

DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100

32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ· 32-HQ· 32-HQ· 32-HQ· 32-HQ32-HQ32·HQ32·HQ· 32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ· 32-HQ· 32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ-

b2 b6 b7C

NCIC-VGTOF-10055

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-3 Filed 07/06/11 Page 59 of 100

DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC010P oCTsC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 'DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100

32-HQ.. 32-HQ.. 32-HQ.. 32-HQ.. 32-HQ.. 32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-l-IQ32-l-IQ32-l-IQ32-l-IQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-l-IQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ.. 32-HQ.. 32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ.. 32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-l-IQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ.. 32-HQ32-HQ-

NCIC-VGTOF-10056

b2 b6 b7C

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-3 Filed 07/06/11 Page 60 of 100

DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100

32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ-

NCIC-VGTOF-10057

b2 b6 b7C

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-3 Filed 07/06/11 Page 61 of 100

OCTSC0100 OCTSC0100 OCTSC0100 OCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 OCTSC0100 OCTSC0100 oCTSC0100 OCTSC0100 OCTSC0100 OCTSC0100 OCTSC0100 OCTSC0100 OCTSC0100 OCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 OCTSC0100 OCTSC0100 OCTSC0100 OCTSC0100 OCTSC0100 OCTSC0100 OCTSC0100 OCTSC0100 OCTSC0100 OCTSC0100 OCTSC0100 OCTSC0100 OCTSC0100 0CTSC0100 OCTSC0100 OCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0'100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 OCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 OCTSC0100 OCTSC0100 OCTSC0100 DCTSC0100

32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ-

b2 b6 b7C

NCIC-VGTOF-10058

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-3 Filed 07/06/11 Page 62 of 100

DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 OCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 OCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 OCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 OCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 OCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 OCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 OCT$C0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100

32-HQ.. 32-HQ32-HQ.. 32-HQ.. 32-HQ.. 32-HQ.. 32-HQ.. 32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ.. 32-HQ.. 32-HQ.. 32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ.. 32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ.. 32-HQ· 32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ.. 32-HQ32-HQ.. 32-HQ.. 32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ.. 32-HQ32-HQ.. 32-HQ32-HQ.. 32-HQ.. 32-HQ· 32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ.. 32-HQ32-HQ..

NCIC-VGTOF-10059

b2 b6 b7C

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-3 Filed 07/06/11 Page 63 of 100

DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100

32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ· 32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ-

b2 b6 b7C

NCIC-vGTOF-10060

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-3 Filed 07/06/11 Page 64 of 100

DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100· DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 · DCTSC0100
DCTSCO~OO.
DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0200 DCTSC0200 DCTSC0200 DCTSC0200 DCTSC0200 OCTSC0200

32-HQ32-HQ· 32-HQ32-HQ· 32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ. 32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ- •
32-HQ32-HQ. 32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ. 32-HQ. 32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ. 32-HQ-

b2
b6 .b7C

tiiOC-VGTOF-10061

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-3 Filed 07/06/11 Page 65 of 100

DCTSC0200 DCTSC0200 DCTSC0200 DCTSC0200 DCTSC0200 DCTSC0200 DCTSC0200 DCTSC0200 DCTSC0200 DCTSC0200 DCTSC0200 DCTSC0200 ·DCTSC0200 DCTSC0200 DCTSC0200 DCTSC0200 DCTSC0200 DCTSC0200 DCTSC0200 DCTSC0200 DCTSC0200 DCTSC0200 DCTSC0200 DCTSC0200 DCTSC0200 DCTSC0200 DCTSC0200 DCTSC0200 DCTSC0200 DCTSC0200 DCTSC0200 DCTSC0200 DCTSC0200 DCTSC0200 DCTSC0200 DCTSC0200 DCTSC0200 DCTSC0200 DCTSC0200 DCTSC0200 DCTSC0200 DCTSC0200 DCTSC0200 DCTSC0200

32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ.. 32-HQ.. 32-HQ.. 32-HQ.. 32-HQ.. 32-HQ.. 32-HQ.. 32-HQ.. 32-HQ. 32-HQ.. 32-HQ32-HQ. 32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ· 32-HQ32-HQ· 32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ.. 32-HQ.. 32-HQ.. 32-HQ.. 32-HQ.. 32-HQ.. 32-HQ.. 32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HO· 32-HQ32-HQ32-H032-HQ.. 32-HQ.. 32-HQ.. 32-HQ.. 32-HQ.. 32-HQ.. 32-HQ.. 32-HQ.. 32-HQ-

NCIC-vGTOF-10062

b2 h6 h7C

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-3 Filed 07/06/11 Page 66 of 100

OCTSC0200 DCTSC0200 OCTSC0200 DCTSC0200· DCTSC0200 DCTSC0200 OCTSC0200 DCTSC0200 DCTSC0200 OCTSC0200 DCTSC0200 DCTSC0200 1:lCTSC0200 OCTSC0300 DCTSC0300 DCTSC0300 DCTSC0300 OCTSC0300 OCTSC03QO OCTSC0300 DCTSC0300 DCTSC0300 DCTSC0300 DCTSC0300 DCTSC0300 DCTSC0300 DCTSC0300 DCTSC0300 DCTSC0300 DCTSC0400 DCTSC0400 DCTSC0400 DCTSC0400 DCTSC0400 DCTSC0400 OCTSC0500 DCTSC0500 DCTSC0500 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 OCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100

32-HQ32-HQ· 32-HQ32-HQ· 32-HO· 32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-f!Q32-HQ32-HQ· 32-HQ32-HQ32-H032-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ. 32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ80-PR-78-E-16 80-PR-78-E-16 80-PR-78-E-16 80-PR-78-E-16 80-PR-78-E-16 80-PR-78-E-16

b2 b6 b7C

NCIC-V(;fOF-10063

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-3 Filed 07/06/11 Page 67 of 100

DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 OCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 OCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 OCTSC0100 OCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100

BO-PR-77-C-14 BO-PR-77-C-14 BO-PR-77-C-14 BO-PR-77-C-14 BO-PR-77-C-14 BO-P R-77-C-14 80-PR-77-C-14 1631-PA-9464 1631-PA-9464 32-HQ.. 32-HQ.. 32-HQ.. 32-HQ.. 32-HQ.. 32-HQ32-HQ.. 32-HQ.. 32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ.. 32-HQ.. 32-HQ.. 163G-BN32-HQ. 32-HQ.. 32-HQ.. 32-HQ.. 32-HQ.. 32-HQ.. 32-HQ.. 32-HQ.. 32-HQ.. 32-HQ.. 32-HQ.. 32-HQ.. 32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ· 32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ-
NOC·VGTOF-10064

b2 b6 b7C

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-3 Filed 07/06/11 Page 68 of 100

OCTSC0100 OCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 OCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 OCTSC0100 OCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 OCTSC0100 OCTSC0100 OCTSC0100 OCTSC0100 OCTSC0100 OCTSC0100 OCTSC0100 OCTSC0100 OCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 OCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 OCTSC0100 OCTSC0100 OCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 OCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 OCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 OCTSC0100 OCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 OCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 OCTSC0100 OCTSC0100 OCTSC0100

32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ-
32-HQ. 32-HQ80-Nl-C53-58 80-NI-C53-58 80-NI-C53-58 66F-MH-A50566F-MH-A50566F-MH-A50566F-MH-A50566F-MH-A50566F-MH-A50566F-MH-A50568F-MH-A50566F-MH-A50566F-MH·A505· 66F-MH-A50566F-MH-A50566F-MH-A50566F-MH-A50566F-MH-A50566F-MH-A50566F-MH-A50566F-MH-A50566F·MH-A50566F-MH-A50566F-MH-A50566F-MH-A505· 66F-MH-A50566F-MH-A50566F-MH-A50566F-MH-A50566F-MH-A50566F-MH-A50566F-MH-A50566F-MH-A505· 66F-MH-A50566F-MH·A505· 66F-MH-A50566F-MH-A505-

b2 b6
b7C

NCIC-VGTOF-10065

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-3 Filed 07/06/11 Page 69 of 100

DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100· DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 'DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100

66F-MH-A50566F-MH-A50566F-MH-A50566F-MH-A50566F-MH-A505MH265-0-36 MH266-0-36 MH 265-0-36 . MH265-0..36 MH 265-o-36 MH266-0-36 66F-MH-A50566F-MH-A50566F-MH-A50566F-MH-A50566F-MH-A505· 66F-MH-A50566F-MH-A50566F-MH-A50566F-MH-A50566F-MH-A50566F-MH-A50566F·MH-A50566F-MH-A50566F-MH-A50566F-MH-A50566F-MH-A50566F-MH-A50566F-MH-A50566F-MH-A50566F-MH-A50566F-MH-A50566F·MH-A50566F-MH-A50566F-MH-A50566F-MH-A50566F-MH-A50566F-MH-A50566F-MH-A50566F-MH-A50566F-MH-A50566F·MH-A50566F·MH-A50566F-MH-A505-
NCIC-VGTOF-10066

b2
b6 b7C

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-3 Filed 07/06/11 Page 70 of 100

DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCT.SC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100

66F-MH-A50566F-MH-A50566F-Mii-Asos66F-MH-A50566F-MH-A50566F-MH-A50566F·MH-A50566F-MH-A505· 66F-MH-A50566F-MH-A50566F-MH-A50566F·MH-A50566F-MH-A50566F-MH-A50566F-MH-A50566F-MH-A50566F-MH-A50566F-MH-A50566F-MH·A50566F-MH-A50566F-MH-A50566F·MH-A50566F-MH-A50566F·MH-A50566F-MH·A50566F-MH-A50566F-MH-A50566F-MH·A50566F-MH·A50566F-MH·A50566F-MH-A50566F-MH-A50566F-MH·A50566F-MH-A50566F-MH-A50566F-MH-A50566F-MH-A505-
66F·MH-A505· 66F-MH-A50566F-MH-A50566F-MH-A505· 66F-MH-A50566F-MH-A50566F-MH-A505-

b2 b6 b7C

NCIC·VGTOF-10067

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-3 Filed 07/06/11 Page 71 of 100 ~··--··---··---~-----·----~-------------------------------,

D

DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCT$C9100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 .DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100
ORIGINATING AGENCY DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100 DCTSC0100

0

66F-MH-A50566F-MH-A505· 66F-MH-A50566F-MH-A50566F-MH-A50566F-MH-A50566F-MH-A50566F-MH-A50566F-MH-A50566F-MH-A50566F·MH·A50566F·MH-A50566F-MH-A50566F-MH-A50566F-MH-A50566F-MH-A50566F-MH-A505· 66F-MH-A50532-HQ32-HQ32-HQ. 32-HQ32-HQ. 32-HQ. 32-HQ32-HQ· 32-HQ. 32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ32-HQ· 32-HQ32-HQ. 32-HQ-

ORIGINATING CASE

b4
b6

32-HQ-

b7C

32-HQ32-HQ.

b7E

32-HQ-

32-HQ-

32-HQ.

NOC-VGTOF-10068

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-3 Filed 07/06/11 Page 72 of 100

DCTSC0100

32-HQ-

DCTSC0100

32-HQ-

DCTSC0100

32-HQ-

DCTSC0100

32-HQ-

DCTSC0100

32-HQ..

DCTSC0100

32-HQ-

OCTSC0100

32-HQ-

OCTSC0100

32-HQ-

DCTSCOiOO

32-HQ-

DCTSC0100

32-HQ-

DCTSC0100

32-HQ..

DCTSC0100

32-HQ..

DCTSC0100

32-HQ-

b2

ORIGINATING AGENCY ... NO RECORDS

NICNUMBER

ORIGINATING CASE

b6 b?C b?E

NCIC -VGfOF-10069

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-3 Filed 07/06/11 Page 73 of 100
DOCUMENT74

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-3 Filed 07/06/11 Page 74 of 100

· • (Rev. 01·31·2003)

FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVI!BTIGATION

Precedence: ROUTINE
To: CJIS Counterintelligence Counterterrorism Cyber Criminal Investigative All Field Offices

Date: 05/02/2005

Attn:
Attn: Attn: Attn: Attn: Attn:

AD, DAD, SCs
AD, DAD, SCs AD, DAD, SCs AD, DAD, SCs AD, DAD, SCs SAC, ASAC, CDC

From:

CJIS

National Instant

Check

System, ~M~o~d~u~l~e~~~~----------------------,
Contact: ~~--------------~~----------------~

Approved By:~~~~~~~~

"b2

b6

b7C

Drafted By:
Case :tD #: 319X-HQ-A1487720-CJIS _,J

Title:

LEGAL ADVICE AND OPINIONS, CJIS; PROGRAM OFFICIALS GUIDANCE ON OBTAINING NATIONAL INSTANT CRIMINAL BACKGROUND CHECK SYSTEM (NICS) INFORMATION REGARDIN_G VIOLENT GANG AND TERRORIST ORGANIZATION FILE (VGTOF) SUBJECTS.

Synopsis: This provides guidance on using information from NICS when a s~bject in the VGTOF attempts to obtain a firearm or an explosives license.

-Details: Under the Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act of

1993 (Brady Act), prior to transferring a. firearm, a Federal

Firearm Licensee (FFL) is required to contact the NiCS for a

background check on the purchaser to qetermine whether the

system has information de~onstrating the purchaser is

·

prohibited from possessing-a firearm under federal or state

law· ... The FFL initiates the check after the pu~chaser h~s

filled_out and signed Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and

Explosives (ATF) Form 4473 (sometimes referred to as the

"yellow :form" because of its standard color) . Form 44 73-

requires the purchaser to_provide in his/her handwriting

NCIC-vGTOF-10082
DOCUMENT_: 7 4 .

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-3 Filed 07/06/11 Page 75 of 100
To: CJIS From: vJIS Re: 319X-HQ-Al49772G, 05/02/2005
certain biographical data: name, date of birth, address, place of birth, height, weight, sex, race, country of citizenship, and Bureau of Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE)-issued alien number or admission number. Providing a social security number is optional and points of contact (POCs) are not required to obtain height or weight. The form also requires the purchaser to answer a number of questions related to whether the purchaser is the actual buyer or is prohibited from possessing a firearm under any of the ten federal firearm prohibitions in the Gun Control Act. If the purchaser is an alien "nonimmigrant," he/she must claim a specific exception which permits him/her to possess a firearm notwithstanding the general federal prohibition against nonimmigrant possession.
The FFL is not required to record the make, model and serial number of the firearms the purchaser intends to . purchase until after the NICS check is completed. The FFL must, however, inform the NICS whether the individu~l wishes to purchase or redeem (if a pawn chec;:k) a handgun, long gun, or both.
~he FFL initiates the check by contacting either the NICS Section by phone (through a Call Center) or the Internet or a sta~e or local criminal justice agency serving as a. POC on behalf of the FBI by similar means. The FFL must provide the NICS Section with all of the biographical information except the purchaser's address. Neither the NICS Section nor the POC obtains Form 4473s or copies.
The NICS computer conducts a name-based check of three databases automatically: National Crime Information Center (NCIC) (including VGTOF), Interstate Identification Index, and the NICS Index. If the purchaser claims to be an alien, the NICS generates an automated query of ICE databases. The POCs and other agencies using NICS for permits may.also query ~dditional state/local databases. If no records are found potentially matching the purchaser's name, the NICS generates. a "proceed" response. If any records .(without regard to whether the record is indicative of a firearm prohibition). are discovered, the NICS generates a "delay" response. The NICS cannot generate a "deny" response, only a NICS Section or POC employee can deny a firearm transfer based upon review of the .records identif~ed by the NICS. Membership (or suspected membership) in a terrorist organization does·not prohibit a· person from possessing or receiving _firearms. Consequently, all VGTOF hits r~quire further research.
' 2 NCIC-VGTOF-10083

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-3 Filed 07/06/11 Page 76 of 100
To: CJIS From: ~JIS Re: 319X-HQ-Al487720, 05/02/2005

In February 2004, pursuant to a Department of Justice directive, the NICS began delaying all firearm and explosive background checks that hit on a VGTOF record. 1 The new procedures were implemented so that NICS personnel, in compliance with the Brady Act, can coordinate with FBI field agents to determine whether the agents have information about a prospective purchaser entered in VGTOF that is not yet available in the automated databases checked by the NICS, which indicates that the purchaser is prohibited from possessing a firearm. 2
The NICS Section and the POC employees have been instructed to provide interested FBI field offices all available information regarding the VGTOF subject originally provided by the FFL captured in the NICS database. In addition, if an agent desires, the NICS employees and the POCs have beer. instructed to call the FFL and obtain the purch~ser's residence address from the Form 4473. The FFL is not legally required to provide the additional information. If the FFL refuses to provide the address, FBI field personnel
b7E

1The VGTOF has a sub-file.with records handlin codes: "R"

as "silent

2 The new procedQres have been successful in enabling the NICS . Section to deny two ·gun· transactions during a five-month period based . on "prohibiting information" provided by FBI field agents that had
not yet been entered in the automated databases checked by the NICS (active state warrants).
3
NCIC-VGTOF-10064

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-3 Filed 07/06/11 Page 77 of 100
vv~~ From: ~JlS Re: 319X-HQ-A1487720, 05/02/2005
can obtain this and other information such as the type of government issued photo identification used by the purchaser on "·proceeded" or "delayed.. transactions from gun dealers for investigative purposes through coordination with the ATF. In certain circumstances, the ATF may be able to obtain a copy of the Form 4473 in question or the original. This could provide fingerprint or handwriting evidence which may be of interest. The FBI' has made these procedures an explicit part of the written NICS VGTOF Standard Operating Procedures used by NICS Legal Instruments Examiners and POCs. 3
The NICS is also available for use by f~deral, state and local criminal justice agencies prior to their issuance·of a firearm or explosive-related permit. In the case of information from state/local firearm or explosive permit applications, there is no Brady Act limitation on.the state supplying transaction information to FBI field agents for investigative purposes after identity is established, as use and dissemination of state permit information is governed by state law. Information on permit applications and the information collected for state back~round investigations may far exceed the information on a Form 4473. State and local agencies that issue firearm or explosive permits have been advised to share all information with FBI field personnel to the fullest extent allowable under state law.
There is no limitation under the Brady Act on sharing NICS information with law enforcement agencies about persons determined to be prohibited from possessing or receiving a firearm, and NiCS information on "denied" transactions can be and routinely is provided to the. ATF.
3 It is important to note that under the Brady Act, the NICS Section or a POC can only delay the transfer of a ~irea~ for three business days when the NICS h~s identified recordswhich could lead to information which demonstrates the subject is prohibited from possessing_a firearm. After the third business day, the FFL is not prohibited from transferring the Urearm, althou?h f7deral law does . not compel him to transfer. The NICS employees ~nqu1re as to whether the firearm has transferred only if the FBI is prepared to give the FFL "deny" response after the third business da~. Consequ7ntly~ .this is not information the NICS Section ·can typ~cally prov~de f1eld personnel. However, th.e ATF can obtain such inform~tion and. the make, model, and serial number of the transferred f~rearms and provide it upon request.
4
NCIC-VGTOf-lOOBS .

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-3 Filed 07/06/11 Page 78 of 100
To: CJIS From: ~JIS Re: 319X-HQ-A1487720, 05/02/2005

In addition, although NICS information about "proceeded" transactions cannot, because of Brady Act restrictions, be shared with law enforcement officials just to
provide notice of lawful gun purchases by persons of investigative interest, such information can be and routinely is shared by the NICS Section with law enforcement agencies when the information indicates a violation, or suspected violation, of law or regulation.

FBI field offices are not prohibited by the Brady Act. from .sharing information obtained from the NICS Section or a POC with other law enforcement or intelligence agencies for
legitimate law enforcement, counterterrorism, or .counterintelligence purposes. This includes sharing such information with non-FBI members of a Joint Terrorist Task Force.

Since implementing these procedures in February 2004, it has become apparent that the volume of affected
transactions is low enough that all of the VGTOF hits could be processed by the NICS Section. Consequently, the NICS Section is scheduled to comme'nce proces.sing all VGTOF hits, including POC-initiated transactions, on 07/03/2005. Thereafter, FBI field perspnnel will_liaise with the NICS employees rather than the POC agencies. The NICS Section will obtain all available information from the POCs and provide it to the field.

In summary, while under the Brady Act the primary

purpose of-obtaining information about the purchaser must be

to aid the NICS in determining an identity match or obtaining

prohibiting information, the FBI is not prohibited from

obtaining the·ancillary benefit of using that. information if

it is relevant to a counterterrorism or counterintelligence

investigation.

'

5 NCIC-VGTOF-10086

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-3 Filed 07/06/11 Page 79 of 100 To: CJIS From: CJIS Re: 319X-HQ-Al487720, 05/02/2005 LEAD(s): Sat Lead 1: (Info)
ALL RECEIVING OFFICES Please disseminate to all appropriate personnel .
••
6 NCIC-VGTOF-10087

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-3 Filed 07/06/11 Page 80 of 100
DOCUMENT76

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-3 Filed 07/06/11 Page 81 of 100

FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION

Precedence; ROUTINE

Date: 04/20/2005

To: All Field Offices

Attn: FBIHQ, Manuals Desk

From: General Counsel

I Access Integrity Unit, Module E3, wv
Contact:

------~----------------------~

Approved By:

b2

Patrick W

b6 b7c

Drafted By:
Case ID i: 319X-HQ-Al487720

Title: GUIDANCE ON AVAILABILITY AND USE OF INFORMATION OBTAINED AS A RESULT OF NATIONAL CRIMINAL INSTANT CRIMINAL
BACKGROUND CHECK SYSTEM {NICS) CHECKS INVOLVING TERRORIST WATCH LIST RECORDS
Synopsis: This communication discusses the information which is available to a Field Office from the NICS Section or another criminal justice agency conducting NICS checks when a known or suspected terrorist subject entered into the NCIC Violent Gang and Terrorist Organization File (VGTOF)attempts to obtain a firearm from a Federal Firearms Licensee {FFL)or a firearm or explosive license.
Details:

The following outlines the types of information available to a Field Office and the process to obtain that information if a
known or suspected terrorist subject in VGTOF attempts to obtain a firearm from an FFL or a firearm or explosive permit.

•

NICS generates a notice to TSC whenever it hits on a

subject entered into the VGTOF by the FBI. TSC will

notify the case agent investigating the VGTOF subject.

The case agent is instructed to contact either the NICS

Section or the state or local criminal justice agency

conducting the NICS check.

•

All NICS users have been instructed to share all

available information from the NICS query with the case

agent: spec~fically name, date of birth, place of

NCIC-VGTOF-10105

DOCUMENT 76

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-3 Filed 07/06/11 Page 82 of 100

.To: ·All Field Offices From: General Counsel
Re: 319X-HQ-Al487720, 04/20/2005

birth, height, weight, sex, race·, country of citizenship, ICE-issued alien or admission number, type of firearm (handgun, long gun or both) ,any exception to nonimmigrant prohibition claimed by an alien. NOTE: NICS queries do not contain a firearm purchaser's address.

•

All NICS users have been instructed to obtain

additional information from an FFL, such as address and

the government-issued identification cards (drivers

license, etc.) used and provide all additional

information from a permit application if requested by a

field office. FFL's are not required to provide this

information. If an FFL refuses, Field Offices are

encouraged to contact ATF, ATF can obtain additional

information, including the make, model and serial

number of any firearm purchased by the VGTOF subject as

well as the form the purchaser must fill out (ATF Form

4473). Form 4473's may provide useful handwriting or

fingerprint information.

•

Field Offices may share any of the information obtained

under these procedures with any law enforcement,

counterterrorism or counterintelligence agency,

including members of a JTTF.

Background: Under the Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act of 1993 (8rady Act), prior to transferring a firearm, an FFL is required to contact NICS for a background check on the purchaser to determine whether the system has information demonstrating the purchaser is prohibited from possessing a firearm under federal or state law. The FFL initiates the check after the purchaser has filled out and signed ATF Form 4473 (sometimes referred to as the "yellow form" because of its standard color). Form 4473 requires the purchaser to provide in his/her handwriting certain biographical data: name, date of birth, address, place of birth, height, weight, sex, race, country of citizenship, and ICE-issued
alien number or admission number. Providing a social security
number is optional. The form also requires the purchaser to answer a number of questions related to whether the purchaser is the actual buyer, prohibited from possessing a firearm under any of the ten federal firearm prohibitions in the Gun Control Act. If the purchaser is a nonimmigrant, he/she must claim a specific exception which permits him/her to possess a firearm notwithstanding the general prohibition against nonimmigrant firearm
NCIC-VGTOF-10106
2

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-3 Filed 07/06/11 Page 83 of 100

:to: "All Field Offices From: General Counsel
Re: 3l9X-HQ-Al4B7720, 04/20/2005
The Frt is not required to record the make, model and serial number of the firearms the purchaser intends to purchase until after the NICS check is completed. The FFL must, however, inform the· NICS whether the individual wishes to purchase or redeem (if a pawn check) a handgun, long gun or both.
The FFL initiates the check by contacting either the NICS Section by phone (through a Call Center) or via the Internet or a state or local criminal justice agency serving as a Point of Contact (POC)on behalf of the FBI by similar means. The FFL must provide the NICS Section with all of the biographical information but the purchaser's address. POCs are not required to obtain height, or weight. Neither the NICS Section nor a POC obtains any Form 4473s or copies.
The NICS computer conducts a name based check of three databases automatically: NCIC (including VGTOF), III, and the NICS Index. All subjects in the NICS Index are prohibited from possessing a firearm under federal law. If the purchaser claims to be an alien, the NICS generates an automated query of ICE databases. POCs and other agencies using NICS for permits may also query additional state/local databases. If no records are found potentially matching the purchaser's name, NICS generates a ~proceed" response. If any records (without regard as to whether the record is indicative of a firearm prohibition}are discovered, NICS generates a "delay" response. NICS cannot generate a "deny" response, only a NICS Section or POC employee can deny a firearm transfer based upon review of the records identified by NICS. Membership (or suspected membership) in a terrorist organization does not prohibit a person from possessing or receiving firearms. Consequently, all VGTOF hits require further research.
In February 2004, pursuant to a DOJ directive, the NICS began delaying all firearm and explosive background checks that hit on a VGTOr record. 1 The new procedures were implemented so

1The VGTOF has a sub-file with records designated as "silent hits" with two available

handling codes: "R" ("Routine silent hits") or "S"(Sensitive silent hits)!

J

b?E

3 NCIC-VGTOF-10107

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-3 Filed 07/06/11 Page 84 of 100
To: 'All Field Offices From: General Counsel
Re: 3l9X-HQ-Al487720, 04/20/2005
that NICS personnel, in compliance with the Brady Act, can coordinate with FBI field agents to determine whether the agents have prohibiting information about a prospective purchaser entered in VGTOF that is not yet available in the automated databases checked by the NICS. 2
The NICS Section and POC employees have been ~nstructed to provide interested FBI field offices all available information regarding the VGTOF subject originally provided by the FFL captured in the NICS database. In addition, if an agent desires, the NICS employees and the POCs have been instructed to call the FFL and obtain the purchaser's residence address from the Form 4473. The FFL is not legally required to provide the additional information. If the FFL refuses to provide the address, FBI field personnel can obtain additional information on "proceeded" or "delayed" transactions from gun dealers for investigative purposes through coordination with the ATf. Thus, a counterterrorism official can, if he/she wishes to see address or other additional information recorded on a Form 4473, such as the government issued photo identification used by te purchaser, can coordinate with ATF to obtain the additional information from the gun dealer. In certain circumstances, ATF may be able to obtain a copy of the Form 4473 in question or the original. This could provide fingerprint or handwritihg evidence which may be of interest. The FBI has made these procedures an explicit part of the written NICS VGTOF SOP used by VGTOF Examiners. 3
h7E
2 The new procedures have been successful in enabling the NICS to deny two gun transactions during the five-month period reviewed based on prohibiting information provided by the FBI field agents that had not yet been entered in the automated databases checked by NICS (active state warrants) .
3It is importatn to note that under the Brady Act, the NICS Section or a POC can only delay the transfer of a firearm for three business days when NICS has identified records which could lead to information which demonstrates the subject is prohibited form possessing a firearm. After the third business day, the FFL is no.t prohibited from transferrng the firearm, although federal law does not compel him to transfer. NICS employees inquire as to whether the firearm has transferred only if the FBI is prepared to give the FFL a "deny" response after the third business day. Consequenlty, this is not information the NICS Section can typically provide field personnel. However, ATF can obtain such information and the mak~t. model and serial number of
J-..CIC-vGTOF-10108
4

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-3 Filed 07/06/11 Page 85 of 100
To: ~All Field Offices From: General Counsel Re: 319X-HQ-Al487720~ 04/20/2005
NICS is also available for use by federal, state and local criminal justice agencies prior to their issuance of a firearm or explosive related permit. In the case of information from state/local firearm or explosive permit applications, there is no Brady Act limitation on the state supplying transaction information to FBI field agents for investigative purposes after ~dentity is established, as use and dissemination of state permit information is governed by state law. Information on permit applications and the information collected for state background investigations may far exceed the information an a Form 4473. State and local agencies that issue firearm or explosive permits have been advised to share all information with the FBI field personnel to the fullest extent allowable under state law.
There is no limitation under the Brady Act on sharing NICS information with law enforcement agencies about persons determined to be prohibited from possessing or receiving a firearm, and NICS information on "denied" transactions can be and routinely is provided to ATF.
In addition, although NICS information about "proceededu transactions cannot, because of Brady Act restrictions, be shared with law enforcement officials just to provide notice of lawful gun purchases by persons of investigative interest, such information can be and routinely is shared by the NICS with law enforcement agencies when the information indicates a violation, or suspected violation, of law or regulation.
FBI Field Offices are not prohibited by the Brady Act from sharing information obtained from the NICS section or a POC with other law enforcement or intelligence agencies to a legitimate law enforcement or counterterrorism/counterintelligence purpose. This includes sharing such information with non-FBI members of a JTTF.
Since implementing these procedures in February 2004, it has become apparent that the volume of affected transactions is low enough that all of the VGTOF hits could be processed by the FBI NICS Section. Consequently, the FBI NICS Section is scheduled to commence processing all VGTOF hits, including POC-initiated transactions~ on July 31 2005. Thereafter, FBI field personnel will liaise with FBI NICS employees rather than POC agencies. The
the transferred firearms and provide it upon request.
5 NCIC-vGTOF-10109
r-
1

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-3 Filed 07/06/11 Page 86 of 100 ~o: "All Field Offices From: General Counsel Re: 3l9X-HQ-Al497720, 04/20/2005 FBI NICS Section will obtain all available information from the POCs and provide it to the field.
While under the Brady Act the primary purpose of obtaining such information must be to aid NICS in determining an identity match or obtaining prohibiting information, the FBI is not prohibited from obtaining the ancillary benefit of providing information which may be useful to a counterterrorism or counterintel~igence investigation.
6 NCIC-VGTOF-10110

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-3 Filed 07/06/11 Page 87 of 100
DOCUMENT79

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-3 Filed 07/06/11 Page 88 of 100

I(TSC) (CON)

From: Sent: To: Subject:

b6

bl

b7C

Attachments:

1.-.-----------l (s)

i§cBI¥ •nuepe: c

RECORD 315-HQ-C1477837-G

bl
ALL INfOPJ:IATION CONTAINED HEREIN IS UNCLASSIFIED EXCEPT 1iJHEP.E :'SHOWN OTHERWISE

From: Sent:
To: Cc: Subject:
)ECBEifJII8FDIIC"'
RECORD 315-:HQ-C14n837-G

andling Codes) bl
(S)

DATE: 02-16-2010 CLASSIFIED BY uc/baw 60324 REASON: 1.4 (c) DECLASSIFY ON: 02-18-2035
b6
b7C

bl

Q. for~ attached has been ending with OGC, TSC Legal and DOJ since lale-2007. It Is a request

\ I

Handling Codes.

s the OGC (at the TSC) point-of-contact on this. The ball has heen in DJ1s court and, she \. 1S)

advises · ·

n the works'. The short of it is that DOJ finally advised last summer that the TSC could overtly \

watchlis

cords in VGTOF.C]drafted a letter from Director Boyle to DOJ requesting double-

b6

confirma on on ss an , w en pressed to put it in definitive language in writing, DOJ has been reluctant to respond. So, b 7 c

until they do, it's in a holding pattern.

b 1

When it does get the green Ught, you will need to change some of the information (attn line, leads, etc.) but other than that is should be good-to-go unless major changes are ordered by DOJ.

wttti You will need to coordinate this

Iat CJIS. Upon receipt of the approved EC, she will take the matterto ·

CJJS Executive Management for ranking 1n the1r list of priorities and from that they will determine an implementation date.

a: (S)

··Y.ouwill also
CJIS has not

need be@~

to kee~
able to1stri6ute

a

~laGtTCOJFlS(itnerthroerilsotoppo.rtBioenc)abursoechoufrtehesinpceendNinogvenmewbecra2v0e0a6ts.

and other TSC issues, I also advisedQhat

if

~~ c
·

.

•.:.:n:neu we are going to use buzz..w.Qrds ~~~.:.
explanation of the issue regafd

i

n

f

l

ae~~r.:.l' in the ecords,

tnheewecxaavcetaptrso,tothceolT, SetCc.,wbillenceaeud~etoitpwroillvcidaeusaewarliettretns

to

go

up

in

the User Community and CJIS WI ne o relay e information to the community by way of an all CSO Letter (which Is

required anyway prior to the release/deployment of the new caveats).

Thao~C\!

I

I

bl

./ ( s)

bl

NCIC-VGTOF-10565

1

DOCUMENT 79

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-3 Filed 07/06/11 Page 89 of 100
DOCUMENT SO

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-3

(Rev. 06-04-2007)

ALL INFORMATION CONTAINED HEREIN IS UNCLASSIFIED EXCEPT T,JHERE SHOTm OTHER~ISE

Filed 07/06/11 Page 90 of 100
DATE: 02-16-2010 CLASSIFIED BY uc/baw 60324 REASON: 1. 4 (c) DECLASSIFY ON: 02-18-2035

FEDERAL BUREAU. OF INVESTIGATION

Precedence: PRIORITY To.: CJIS

Date: 12/17/2007
Attn:
RQMU, ITMS

CDIG, INGOS

Counterterrorism

TSEU, LATSS
Attn: I
TREX Unit, NTCS

TSOU, NTCS
From: Counterterrorism Terrorist Screening Center
Contact: ~~---------------------------------­
Approved By: Boyle Leonard C Kooel Richard

b6 b7C
b2 b6 b7C

Drafted By: ~------------~~lmrl

Case ID #: (U) 315-HQ-C1477837-G (Pending)

Tit1e: (U)

TERRORIST SCREENING CENTER -
TERRORIST RECORDS IN VGTOF ESTABLISHMENT OF NEW HANDLING CODES

Synopsis: (U) To request that the Criminal Justice Information Services (CJIS) Division establish four new Handling Codes (HCs)/Subgroups (SGPs) for international terrorist (IT) records contained in the National Crime Information Center's {NCIC) Violent Gang and Terrorist Organization File {VGTOF).

NCIC-VGTOF-10566 DOCUMENT 80

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-3 Filed 07/06/11 Page 91 of 100
we ~cQt /1 ,.. 'BHitTGI' I
To: CJIS From: Counterterrorism Re: (U) 315-HQ-C1477837-G, 12/17/2007

bl
bl
X (S)

bl

(U) HANDLING CODE 2L*IFBI (U) HANDLING CODE 3L*IFBI

2 NCIC-vGTOF-10567

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-3 Filed 07/06/11 Page 92 of 100
-s!CRib:z'tiQ!Z llt/ltOiiWif-
To: CJIS From: Counterterrorism Re: (U) 315-HQ-C14 77837-G, 12/17/2007

(U) HANDLING CODE RL*IFBI

The caveat preceding all hit responses containing HC 1L terrorist records shall read:

***LAW ENFORCEMENT SENSITIVE INFORMATION***

WARNING - APPROACH WITH CAUTION

THIS RECORD INCLUDES INFORMATION THAT MAY ONLY BE USED IN A LEGAL OR
ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEEDING/PROCESS WITH THE ADVANCE AUTHORIZATION OF THE RECORD OWNER AND THE ATTORNEY GENERAL. ANY RECIPIENT INTERESTED IN SUCH USE MUST FIRST CONTACT THE TERRORIST SCREENING CENTER TO OBTAIN THE NECESSARY APPROVAL.

THIS INDIVIDUAL IS ASSOCIATED WITH TERRORISM AND IS THE SUBJECT OF AN

ARREST WARRANT, ALTHOUGH THE WARRANT MAY NOT BE RETRIEVABLE VIA THE

SEARCHED IDENTIFIERS. IF AN ARREST WARRANT FOR THE INDIVIDUAL IS

RETURNED IN YOUR SEARCH OF NCIC, DETAIN THE INDIVIDUAL PURSUANT TO

YOUR DEPARTMENT'S PROCEDURES FOR HANDLING AN OUTSTANDING IMMEDIATELY CONTACT THE TERRORIST SCREENING CENTER ATA

WARRANT~ANDd

FOR ADDITIONAL DIRECTION. IF AN ARREST WARRANT FORT E INDIVIDU I

I . NOT RETURNED, USE CAUTION AND IrMEDIATELY CONTACT THE TERRORIST

SCREENING CENTER

FOR ADDITIONAL DIRECTION.

b2 b6 b7C b7E

***LAW ENFORCEMENT SENSITIVE INFORMATION***

The caveat preceding all hit responses containing HC 2L terrorist records shall read:

***LAW ENFORCEMENT SENSITIVE INFORMATION***

WARNING - APPROACH WITH CAUTION

THIS RECORD INCLUDES INFORMATION THAT MAY ONLY BE USED IN A LEGAL OR ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEEDING/PROCESS WITH THE ADVANCE AUTHORIZATION OF THE RECORD OWNER AND THE ATTORNEY GENERAL. ANY RECIPIENT INTERESTED
IN SUCH USE MUST FIRST CONTACT THE TERRORIST SCREENING CENTER TO OBTAIN THE NECESSARY APPROVAL.

PLEASE DETAIN THIS INDIVIDUAL FOR A REASONABLE AMOUNT OF TIME FOR

QUESTIONING. THIS INDIVIDUAL IS OF INVESTIGATIVE INTEREST TO LAW

I I ENFORCEMENT REGARDING ASSOCIATION WITH TERRORISM.

IMMEDIATELY CONTACT THE TERRORIST FOR ADDITIONAL DIRECTION.

SCREENING

CENTER

AT ·

~-------------~~b~Zc

b7E
g¢11'''1'' tllllt;'H:a• •Ph1 :

3
NCIC-vGTOF-10568

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-3 Filed 07/06/11 Page 93 of 100
~Ciiij! I bCWUl/NOE o:Eilr
To: CJIS From: Counterterrorism Re: {U) 315-HQ-C1477837-G, 12/17/2007

***LAW ENFORCEMENT SENSITIVE INFORMATION***

The caveat preceding all hit responses containing HC 3L terrorist records shall read:

***LAW ENFORCEMENT SENSITIVE INFORMATION***

DO NOT ALERT THIS INDIVIDUAL TO THIS NOTICE

THIS RECORD INCLUDES INFORMATION THAT MAY ONLY BE USED IN A LEGAL OR ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEEDING/PROCESS WITH THE ADVANCE AUTHORIZATION OF THE RECORD OWNER AND THE ATTORNEY GENERAL. ANY RECIPIENT INTERESTED IN SUCH USE MUST FIRST CONTACT THE TERRORIST SCREENING CENTER TO OBTAIN THE NECESSARY APPROVAL •

I . coNTACT THE TERRORIST scREENING CENTER AT

louRING THIS

ENCOUNTER. IF THIS WOULD EXTEND THE SCOPE OR DURATION OF THE

b2

ENCOUNTER, CONTACT THE TSC IMMEDIATELY THEREAFTER.

hb76C

THE NAME OR IDENTIFIER{S) YOU QUERIED ARE SIMILAR TO OR THE SAME AS b7E

THOSE BELONGING TO AN INDIVIDUAL IDENTIFIED AS HAVING POSSIBLE TIES

WITH TERRORISM.

ATTEMPT TO OBTAIN SUFFICIENT IDENTIFYING INFORMATION DURING THE ENCOUNTER, WITHOUT OTHERWISE EXTENDING THE SCOPE OR DURATION OF THE ENCOUNTER, TO ASSIST THE TERRORIST SCREENING CENTER IN DETERMINING WHETHER OR NOT THE NAME OR IDENTIFIER{S) YOU QUERIED BELONGS TO AN
INDIVIDUAL IDENTIFIED AS HAVING POSSIBLE TIES WITH TERRORISM.

DO NOT DETAIN OR ARREST THIS INDIVIDUAL UNLESS THERE IS EVIDENCE OF A VIOLATION OF FEDERAL, STATE OR LOCAL STATUTES.

DO NOT SHOW OR PROVIDE THIS RECORD TO THE SUBJECT OR ANY NONAUTHORIZED PERSONNEL/ENTITY.

DO NOT ADVISE THIS INDIVIDUAL THAT THEY MAY BE ON A TERRORIST
~ATCHLIST

WARNING - APPROACH WITH CAUTION

***LAW ENFORCEMENT SENSITIVE INFORMATION***

The caveat preceding all hit responses containing HC RL terrorist records shall read:

~¢Rk'''/OIZI8lf;'lri:'i' •Q1L
4
NCIC-VGTOF-10569

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-3 Filed 07/06/11 Page 94 of 100
~CRET7UQ1 Cll;'HSL UW:
To: CJIS From: Counterterrorism Re: (U) 315-HQ-C1477837-G, 12/17/2007
THIS RECORD INCLUDES INFORMATION THAT MAY ONLY BE USED IN A LEGAL OR ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEEDING/PROCESS WITH THE ADVANCE AUTHORIZATION OF THE RECORD OWNER AND THE ATTORNEY GENERAL. ANY RECIPIENT INTERESTED IN SUCH USE MUST FIRST CONTACT THE TERRORIST SCREENING CENTER TO OBTAIN THE NECESSARY APPRQVAL.
b7E
(U) Although the length of the new caveats are considerable, it is imperative that all points contained in the caveat are provided to recipients of terrorist records to ensure compliance regarding the proper handling and dissemination of terrorist record information. In furtherance of this, prior to the implementation of the new HCs, the CJIS Division is requested to advise the NCIC User Community of the importance of ensuring that the caveats that precede terrorist records are, in their entirety, provided to individual authorized recipients of terrorist records. Subsequent to previous unauthorized disclosures/secondary disseminations, the CJIS Division has advised that the caveats that precede terrorist records are not protected information (as the subject information contained in the actual record is) and that reco·rd formats are published in the Federal Register and, therefore, are public information. Due to this circumstance, the CJIS Division is limited in the instructions/mandates they are able to assert among the User Community. However, the TSC respectfully requests that the CJIS Division impress upon the NCIC User Community the importance of retaining the caveats that precede terrorist records in the VGTOF with their accompanying terrorist record inasmuch as the caveats not only contain information on how the encountering law enforcement/criminal justice community should respond to the possible encounter, but legal guidance that is intended to protect both the law enforcement/criminal justice employee, their employing agency, and the Federal government from legal action. This request will be reiterated when the additional information that will be provided to the CJIS Division, pursuant to Leads 2 and 3 in this communication, is set forth.
5 NCIC-VGTOF-10570

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-3 Filed 07/06/11 Page 95 of 100
_!EcRE'l'Zn!, ;;a;'ttez SiC
To: CJIS From: Counterterrorism Re: (U) 315-HQ-C1477837-G, 12/17/2007
(U) The request set forth in this communication has been coordinated with and agreed upon by the DOJ, TSC Leg~1 and the FBI's Office of the General Counsel.
gc•z•,'tiU!etf/lfe£ Olli!l 6
NCIC-VGTOF-10571

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-3 Filed 07/06/11 Page 96 of 100

. '

= slr!QE"'/CM8Utltlli liJiiJI

To: CJIS From: Counterterrorism Re: {U) 315-HQ-C1477837-G, 12/17/2007

LEAD(s):
Set Lead 1:

(Action)

AT CLARKSBURG. WV

I {U) Attn:

I

Requirements Management Unit {RQMU)

TSC,

of

The RQMU is the effective

requeste date of

d to the

chaadngvesi~sre-e_q_u_e_s~t~e-d~~~·n--t~h~~~·s--------~

communication.

b6

b7C

Set Lead 2: (Info)

AT CLARKSBURG, WV

(U) Attn: I

I

CJIS Division Intelligence Group (CDIG)

The CDIG will be provided with additional information regarding the establishment of the new HCs and will be provided with additional information that will need to be provided to the NCIC User Community by way of an all CJIS System Officer and/or Agency Letter, as well as the VGTOF Brochure.

Set Lead 3: (Info)

AT CLARKSBURG. WV

{U) Attn: I

I

Training and Systems Education Unit (TSEU)

b6 b7C

The TSEU will be provided with additional information regarding the establishment of the new HCs.

7 NCIC-vGTOF-10572

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-3 Filed 07/06/11 Page 97 of 100

I I

= ~:sCR#zne• ' R>'if&l S:Ni

To: CJIS From: Counterterrorism Re: (U) 315-HQ-C1477837-G, 12/17/2007

Set Lead 4: (Info)
COUNTERTERRORISM
AT TREX UNIT
(U) The Terrorist Review and Examination Unit will be provided with additional information regarding the establishment and implementation of the new HCs.
Set Lead 5: (Info)
COUNTERTERRORISM
AT TSOU
(U) The Terrorist Screening Operations Unit will be provided with additional information regarding the establishment of the new HCs, as well as be advised of the implementation date of the new HCs.
Set Lead 6: (Info)
ALL RECEIVING OFFICES
(U) The TSC will provide all FBI Field Offices, Legal Attaches and Counterterrorism Division entities, by way of an electronic communication, with additional information regarding the establishment and implementation of the new HCs.
CC: 1 - All TSC Operations Branch P~rsonnel (via e-mail notification)
••

gcRit z1'R' c11/ttePIIZi
8 NCIC-VGTOF-10573

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-3 Filed 07/06/11 Page 98 of 100
DOCUMENT81

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-3 Filed 07/06/11 Page 99 of 100
.

From: Sent:
To: Subject:

l(TSC) {CON)

I

I(TSC) (CON)

I fuesda:

October

27,

2009

9:53 PM ITSC) (CON)

***FW: lease Read - HC Discrepancies (Pre-Refresh Reconciliation Projects) (FOIA

REQUEsn-

Importance:

High

UNCLASSIFIED NON-RECORD

ALL IN~ORMATION CONTAINED

HEREIN IS UNCLASSIFIED EXCEPT

b6

li.lHERE SHOO O'IHERTHISE

b7c

From:
sent:
To:
Subject: Importance:

DATE: 03-12-2010

CLASSIFIED BY uc/baw 60324

REASON: 1.4 (c)

Saturday,

APni

OS,

~CTD) ZOO 4:40

(FBI) PM

DECLASSIFY ON: 03-12-2035

HQ_DlV13_1SCNDIU

Please Read - HC Discrepandes (Pre-Refresh Recondllation Projects)

High

UNCLASSIFIED NON-RECORD

All, In preparation for the 5/1 0/08 deployment and subsequent 'roiRng refresh', I have been tasked with reconciling several TSDB..to-VGTOF issues, to include Handling Code discrepancies between the two systems. Many of these discrepancies are centered around Silent Hit records (either their TSDB HC is R and their VGTOF HC is 3, or vice versa). While the Silent Hit Scrub will, when completed, address most of these discrepancies, all of the identifiable issues must be reconciled before the 5/10/08 deployment.

Therefore, I've taken the following steps to ensure the reconciliations are affected before the deployment --for the Silent Hit Handling Code discrepancies:

QA Tickets for the affected records are being created with the following jargon: DATE: Pre-2008 VGTOF Refresh HC Discrepancy Reconciliation Project. This record was identified by TSC IT as a records whose HC in TSDB does not match the HC that is in VGTOF (whether the record is a TSC-entered record or an FBI-entered record). HC discrepancies must be resolved prior to the deployment and 'rolling refresh' in May 2008; therefore the TSDB HC was changed to reflect the HC that is in VGTOF as of today. The correct HC will be determined when the record is reviewed by way of the on-going Silent Hit Scrub.

Note: The last sentence of the statement, above, may or may not be included in the record, depending on whether or not It was flagged with a Silent Hit Scrub QA Ticket.

Opening tickets in the TSDB to synchronize the HCs results in two scenarios: • unassigned QA tickets for these records being assigned to me; and/or • my QA ticket being assigned to someone else if a QA ticket(s) for these records was already being worked by
someone else.

The biggest impact will be on the unassigned tickets queued up for the Silent Hit Scrub. All QA Personnel: Please advise the Call Center perSonnel that are working with you on the Silent Hit Scrub that, when they come to a TSC JD that is on their list to scrub and they see that the ticket has been assigned to me, they should ask you (or anyone else in QA, since each of you has the ability to reassign tickets) to reassign that ticket from me to you. (Since tickets cannot be reassigned to 'unassigned', this is the only work-around.)

All NDIU personnel should take care in ensuring that if a record has a HC R but it does not qualify, etc., that the HC in TSDB is the same as the HC in VGTOF (regardless of what is cited in TIDE). If we change the HC In TSDB before TREX affects the change. In VGTOF, submits the 930 to NCTC, etc., we only create additional discrepancies between the TSDB and VGTOF and, post-511 0/08, this will be a bigger problem in the instances where the FBI legacy record is an R and we

1
NCIC-VGTOF-10574

DOCUMENT 81

., ..

~ Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-3 Filed 07/06/11 Page 100 of 100

Ibl

,! Issue and export to v!TOF a 3 - we may find ourselves back In the 'you've blown my cas<f situations.( S) records are, obviously, the exception to this rule; as well as HC 1s and 2s and those wherein derogatory'""lntO""""'rrn"""""'a...,bo"""n_ __. \. (

identifies the individual as being Armed and Dangerous or having Violent Tendencies. Yes; the justification for the Silent

Hit is supposed to be in ACS, but that is not always the case.

You may reference TSC 10~'--------------'~s examples.

b6

b7C

Please let me know if you have any questions.

Thanks
I I
C J Thank you for pitching in and helping me with these spreadsheets.
~..-_ _ _ ____.·I Thank you for working out the QA ticket issues with me.

b6

UNCLASSIFIED

b7C

UNCLASSIFIED

j4T

NCIC-vGTOF-10575
2

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-4 Filed 07/06/11 Page 1 of 70
EXHIBIT B (Part 3)

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-4 Filed 07/06/11 Page 2 of 70
DOCUMENT84

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-4 Filed 07/06/11 Page 3 of 70

From:
Sent
To:
Subject:

!crsc) {CON)

I

I(TSC) (CON)

b6
b7C

Tuesday. October27. 200910:04 PM

I

I(TSC) (CON)

***FW: QA PROCESS CHANGE: Added searches when changing VGTOF Handling Code

from R (FOIA REQUESn***

j;C:PiJ J/fU! iihSij RECORD 315-HQ-C1477837-QA2

From:

I

kcro) (FBI)

b6

Sent:

Thursday, Mai'di 13, 2008 9:22 AM

b7C

To:
Cc:

I HO

rny13

n~ :m& <cro>

ccoN,>r.

-

-

-

-

-

-

,
kcro>

ccoNJf

bo> (FBI}

Subject:

QA PROCESS OtANGE: Added MUleS WI Jell UtailQiiJg VGTOF Handling COde fi'om R

SECRii IhiCCPOitA
RECORD 315-HQ-C1477837-QA2

QA: (S)

As the Silent Hit Scru~and NDIU's reviews of VGTOF Silent Hit records-progresses and the issu~.

~:: wbos: ·:at:: fBI Subj~cts remai~s, we

a..._.,_l'"_l"_l'r-.w_~r_~o'nutfoarpmpalytirnognt-hoer

SUbject curren

must

?e vigi}ant. to m:estr:at1o:

ewnassurperetdhi~ctawteeddoo~n't

;;ad:erte;t::atqhli~
_ __ -·-- _jcollect:on-:n

!Protocol. As we canna re y on

or the Field to

·

{ ~'
( 5)

appropriately identify such informaton, weveeveopei:l the followin!l additional steps that must be taken

bl

when changes from VGTOF HC R are requested or received: {St_

When receiving a record in QA Noms where the VGTOF Hlartj;Wn!;U;~iiUlJUJ~~D.modified from R to 3, the

QA Analyst must review ACS in an attempt to determine if th

protocol should be applied

to the Subject. The QA Analyst should review the following WI :n

• Revi

(S)

•

e orm t e following be present:

text searches within

the case file

to

determine if an

...._ _

_

_

___

.

~:Sta
• (

m5)ay

l

bl

I

{S)

ad Per current SOP, if a record is received marked

·· .. hhen the record should be deferred to

TECS after completion of the identity analysis. No cha~ge"s have been made to this requirement.

(S) !f;~8!"r-eviewingJJ:t~li~t~~ doct~ment:and~ert:rmi~g the required searches, the QAAnalyst s~e~ no :nd1cat1on that the record maybt _ ... _ __ _" then the record may be processe~=r~Xlstlng :op, If
l the QA Analyst identifies any reasona le :ndicat on t at the record may be subject to th e protocol, then the record must be deferred to the TECS SME with a comment indicatingat reco~ may '· ( S)
be restricted, listing the specific serials that are questionable.

When requesting a Handling Code change of an FBI nominated record from TREX in which the record

-=o-=-z- =-19-=- ~zo=-=-1-=-o- - - - - - - : : - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - . . . . 1 \ ( Clltrentbt cardes HC-R the OA Anah«s* mttp+ fimt qtfgmn* tn confirm *bat thp S••bjnet mcorcf done not gontain

uc/ba:~ l..:D:-:A=:n::=-: CLASSIFIED BY

60324.

~ 1

ALL IMFORMllTIOM CO:NTA.IMED

S)
b1

BEASON': 1. 4 (c)

NCIC-VGTOF-10608

HEm!IN IS UNCLASSU'IED EXC!PT

I>ECLASSU'Y ON: 02:-19-2035

DOCUMENT 84 IBERE SHOim OTHERWISE

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-4 Filed 07/06/11 Page 4 of 70

.. ·~...

~T

(S)············· .....

above. If the QA Analyst determines that the record is likeJ

Ihe/she must confer with a

TECS SME in order to confirm the restrictio~ : +ake s+:ns •a 1nsure the protocol is applied. If the Analyst

can reasonably believe that the record is no~

_ an concurs with the Handling Code change

request, he/she will then draft an e-mail to TR reques ng a modified FD-930 making the change. The e-

bl

mail request must contain a substantive version of the following statement:

"Please review and coordinate as necessary to generate a modified FD-930 changing the Subject's
( S) HVGTOFH~Il~l~ng Code from R to 3, unless TREX determines that the case is predicated by or identities

have been denvedfrol1

!means."

·

b6

These analysis changes are effective immediately. If you have questions, please see a TECS SME,Oor b7C

(S) i me.

.

•

I

bl

Regards,

I

I

Management and Program Analyst

Terrorist Screening Center.

Counterterrorism Division

Ma1'Istoo: TSC

b2

0

u)

b6

F

u)

b7C

M

flu)

p ~

u)

u

sU.

{Blackberry)

I T\:)/\:)\..1 I:

NCIC-vGTOF-10609
2

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-4 Filed 07/06/11 Page 5 of 70
DOCUMENT96

-

• I Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-4 FileIdI07/06/11 Page 6 of 70

Terrorist Screening Center "Category 3"
FADE IN

Started on 02 Nov 2004 Approved on 11 Apr 2005 Last revised on 19 Jun 2005

NARRATOR (YO) Who can ever forget these images? Who can forget the acts of terror we witnessed on that September day in 2001.

NARRATOR (YO) And whu among us would not have stopped those horrific events if we could have?

NARRATOR But we can't rewind our history to September tenth. And we can't push the pause button ...on lik. (Beat) But there are lots of things we .£ill! do to prevent future terrorism. J'm Fred Iacovo for the Terrorist Screening Center. I'm not a cop. I don't even phly one on TV. But f can tell you this:
NARRATOR State and Local Officers are in a great position to collect important information on terrorists and their allies.
NARRATOR And the Terrorist Screening Center stands ready to help you.
NARRATOR Before TSC was created in December 2003, the cop on the str~.:ct had no way ofknowing if someone he'd stopped was associated with terrorism. But now, TSC consolidates the terrorist lists of many agencies. And you connect to them automatically, through NCIC.

NCIC-VGTOF-10859

Page I of I I
DOCUMENT 96

•

• II I Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-4 Filed 07/06/11 Page 7 of 70

Terrorist Screening Center

"Category 3"

NARRATOR (VO) Whenever you run an NCIC name check, you connect with TSC. And running any name that's on our wat~h list ...

NARRATOR (VO) ...will automatically give you a hit and some specific instructions on how to handle that person.

NARRATOR Depending on which category he's been designated, what you should do ranges from clap them in irons to let'em walk.

19 June 2005

NARRATOR Categor) I is for the baddest ofthe bad. Thi:-, is someone you should arrest immediately, just like you'd handle any other warrant. Then cali th~ TSC. Odds arc you won't see any of these guys.
Category 2 is for people who may have ties '' ith terrorism. You should call TSC right away, and you may b~: asked to detain them for a reasonuble time. You probably won't see any of these people either.
Category 3. If you get a hit, it'll most likely b~ a category 3. These are people that may have tks to terrorism. but don't know that we know. And we want to keep it that way. So don't let them know that they're on a watch list or that you're calling TSC. And don't let them hear the call. Baskaily, you want to deal with him as you normally \Hndd, without the hit. But ask probing questions to gd a positive ID. Obviously, someone might have the same name as a guy on the list withoutactually being that guy.
Category 4 is for other people who may have til:'s to terrorism. but the connection is not as sure. So we want you to get positive lD info on them, and then
NCIC-VGTOF-10860

Page 2 of l 1

•

• ll I Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-4 Filed 07/06/11 Page 8 of 70

Terrorist Screening Center

"Category 3"

call TSC if you think they should be investigated for terrorist activity. Some people in our database are not adive terrorists, but only associates or supporters who are under inyestigation.

19 June2005

NARRATOR You arc the nation's front line in the fight ugainst terrorism. If a terrorist gets into our country, what law eniorcement officer is most likely to run into him first? You are! You get up close and personal with more people in this country than anyone else. Through your eyes, the counter-terrorism agencies of America can see and detect terrorist threuts long before a deadly act unfolds. (beat) Let's look at a couple likely examples.

NARRATOR (VO) This of1icer has just stopped
this drhcr for driving 55 in a 40 mile an hour zone.
He ran the car's plate before approaching, then got the driver's license and car registration. When he ran them through NCIC, the driver's name gave a Category 3 hit from TSC, saying he might be connected to terrorism.
NARRATOR So how docs our officer handle the news? The way YOU should! Watch.
OFFICER Hello? Yes, this is Deputy Chappell ofthe Stafford County Sheriff's Office in Virginia. Is this the Terrorist Screening Center? (Pause) Yeah, J'vejust made a trartic stop. The driver's name gave a category 3 hit through NCIC and I was advised to call you.
NOC-vGTOF-10861

Page 3of I1

•

• II I Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-4 Filed 07/06/11 Page 9 of 70

Terrorist Screening Center

"Category 3"

NARRATOR And that's the name ofthat song. Call TSC. The
r screencrs there can help you know for sure i the
guy you stopped is really the guy on the list. And even if he's an exact match, he may not be a terrorist.
Some of the people we're interested in are associates or supporters, under investigation because they're affiliated with terrorism.

NARRATOR Since this is a Category 3" hit, the Officer should collect information on both these people, but not let them know that law enforcement is interested in them for terrorism.

OFFICER So where are you coming from?

Our home.

DRIVER

OFFICER Is that) our wife?

Girlfriend.

DRIVER

OFFICER (to PASSENGER) Ma'am, c<~n I see some ID, please? Thank you;·

19 June 2005

NARRATOR Next step. Run the passenger's name.
DISPATCH(VO) Go ahead 2 I7.
NCIC-VGTOF-10862

Page 4 of I1

•

• II I Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-4 Filed 07/06/11 Page 10 of 70

Terrorist Screening Center

"Category 3"

19 June 2005

OFFICER Name ~:heck on Kovack, kilo, Oscar, victor. alpha, Charlie. kilo. Karen, common spelling. DOll 1983,
04,09.

NARRATOR
With Category 3 or 4 hits, you won't make any arrests that you wouldn't have made otherwise.

DISPATCH (VO) 217, no wants, no warrants.

217, Ten-lour.

OFFICER

NARRATOR Since thl! results for the passenger were negative, the Officer finishes his normal business for the traffic stop.

OFFICER
Your signature is not an admission ofguilt. It just certifies that your mailing address is correct. All the other instructions are on the form.

NARRATOR (VO)
Of course. he's going to keep his eyes open liJr anything interesting or unusual in the car.

NARRATOR (VQ) That would inclu<i_9_
h7E

NCIC-vGrOF-10863

Page 5 of II

•

• II I Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-4 Filed 07/06/11 Page 11 of 70

Terrorist Screening Center

"Category 3"

19 June 2005

NARRATOR With thl: stop concluded and the suspects on their way, the officer will talk to the Terrorist Scn:cning Center once again. This time he'll give them all the info he gathered on the car and the two peoph:. And TSC may connect him with CT Watch as well.

NARRATOR And with that, he's done. (Beat) Now let's take a look at another call where you might meet someone on the list. The Suspicious Person call.

NARRATOR See, way down there, there's a woman taking photos of the dam.

NARRATOR Someonl: called 911 and reported a suspicious person. Our officer took the call and is just arriving on the scene.

OFFICER 217.

Unit217.

DISPATCH

OFFICER I am at the Smith Lake Dam and have a white female in her twenties taking photos near the spillway.

10-4, 217.

DISPATCH

NCIC-VGTOF-10864

Page 6 of 11

•

• II I Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-4 Filed 07/06/11 Page 12 of 70

Terrorist Screening Center

"Category 3"

19 June 2005

NARRATOR All of) ou know how to interview someone. so let's fast fon\ard. We'll pick it up after he's heard her story and gotten her lD.
OFFICER Lima, alpha, November, alpha, tango, alpha. First name, Maria, Middle Initial A. DOB: Nineteen seventy seven, oh seven, thirteen.
NARRATOR (VO) As you guessed, she's going to be a Category 3 hit.
NARRATOR And since it's very important that we don't let HER know that WE know, both the Dispatcher and the Officer need to make sure that she doesn't hear the radio trallic.

DISPATCH 217, is your radio secure?
OFFICER Standby. If I could ask you to wait right here please ...
NARRATOR What our young lady won't be able to hear is the dispatcher telling the officer....
NARRATOR .... that she MAY be associated with terrorism and that he should get information to make a positive match. Dispatch is also giving him the number to call for the Terrorist Screening Center.

NCIC-vGTOF-10865

Page 7 of I J

•

• II I Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-4 Filed 07/06/11 Page 13 of 70

Terrorist Screening Center

"Category 3"

19 June 2005

OFFICER Where did you say you were taking those photo classes?
PHOTOG
At Stafl(Jrd Community College.
OFFICER Did you get anyone's permission to shoot hen.:?
PHOTOG
I didn't think I'd need anyone's permission Just to take a couple of photographs.
OFFICER Please \\a it right here and do not take anymon: photographs.
NARRATOR (YO)
So now tbe officer will go back to his car...
NARRATOR (YO)
...call TSC on his cell phone, and talk to one of the screeners there who will determine if this woman is really the one we're interested in, or just someone else with the same name.
NARRATOR
In the case of this young lady, she really is the person on the watch list, and TSC has asked him to get more info on her without letting her knO\\ that we're imcrl.!sted.
NARRATOR
Let's sec how he handles it.
OFFICER (to PHOTOG) Ma'am, this is government propl.!rty and I'm afraid I am gonna have to ask you to leave.
NCIC-vGTOF-10866

Page 8 of II

•

• II I Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-4 Filed 07/06/11 Page 14 of 70

Terrorist Screening Center

"Category 3"

19 June 2005

PHOTOG Why, l'm not hurting anything!!??

OFFICER The park manager doesn't want anyone dO\\n here and I n~:~:d you to leave with me.

PHOTOG Well sure. Officer. I didn't think this would be such a big deal, just taking photos.

OFFICER It's a liability thing. The bureaucrats are afraid You'll stub your toe on their property, and that you'll sue.

I guess.

PHOTOG

OFFICER Tell you what, I'll take you to your car that \\ay you don't stub your toe.

Nice camera. Thanks.

OFFICER PBOTOG

OFFICER My sister was thinking of getting a Toyata. What model is that?

Camry, the LE.

PHOTOG

What y~:ar?

OFFICER

PHOTOG You know, I don't remember, '99.

NCIC-vGTOF-10867

Page 9 of 11

•

• II I Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-4 Filed 07/06/11 Page 15 of 70

Terrorist Screening Center

"Category 3"

19 June 2005

You like it?

OFFICER

PHOTOG Oh yeah. it's great.

OFFICER Yeah, you've really got a lot of room back there. Hey, is that your scuba gear?

Yeah

PHOTOG

OFFICER How long have you been diving?

About a year.

PHOTOG

OFFICER So, like\\ hat's the deepest you've ever gone'!

PHOTOG I don't know, I don't really pay attention to that sort of thing.

OFFICER OK, you have a good day and be sure to drhe safe.

PHOTOG OK, you too, see ya.

Take care.

OFFICER

NARRATOR Because our officer handled this encounter correctly. our photographer is on her way, thinking that she \\Oil this one. In reality, we just gained some valuable intelligence. By feigning a personal interest in her car, he got a good look at it and her possessions without alerting her.
NCIC-VGTOF-10868

Page 10 of I I

•

• II I Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-4 Filed 07/06/11 Page 16 of 70

Terrorist Screening Center

"Category 3"

19June 2005

NARRATOR Now hc"s calling TSC. (points to phone number) At this number. You might want to keep it handy yourself.
We don't need the details.

OFFICER Hello, this is Deputy Chappell of the Stafford County Sheriffs Office. 1 have some addililmal information for you on Maria Lanata.

Yea, she had some scuba gear in the back of her car. She said she was a diver but she didn't km)\\ the first thing about diving. I don't think the diving gear was her's; same thing about the car too.

NARRATOR

He'll give TSC info a1out the car1 He'll also give

them detai Is about the_

tand other things

b7E

he saw inside. And if the comes back registered to

someone dse, that's yet another connection that

could be valuable to know.

NARRATOR So there you have it. Simple, every day encounters. No bombs. No guns. No chemical agents. But a few more pieces added to the terrorism jigsaw puzzle. And with the teamwork oflocal, state. and federal law enforcement, we have an excellent opportunity to see the picture and solve the puLZle, before these terrorists can strike again. For the Terrorist Screening Center, I'm Fred Iacovo. Thank you for watching (beat) and stay safe.

FADEOUT THE END

NOC-VGTOF-10869

Page 11 of II

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-4 Filed 07/06/11 Page 17 of 70
DOCUMENT 100

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL
.
(Rev. Ot-31-2003)

Document 77-4
s~

Filed 07/06/11

Page 18 of 70

FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATIO.N

Precedence: ROUTINE

Date: 07/25/2006

To: All Field Offices

Attn:

ADIC/SAC JTTF ASAC JTTF SSAs NCIC Operator FBIHQ, Manuals Desk

Counterterrorism

Attn:

Section Chiefs Unit Chiefs National JTTF TSOU
TREX

Directorate of Inte~ligence

Attn: NCTC/TIG

From: Counterterrorism

b2 b6

Terrorist
Contact:

SScSrAe~~~e~-n-~-i-~-n~-g-~-C-~-e"-n-~-t-~-e~-r-~-----------------------------------------------,

b7C

Approved By: Billy Joseph Jr

Hard naton T J
IBucella Donn$!

b6 b7C

Drafted By:

Case ID #: (U)
(U) (U) (U) (U) (U)

315-00 (Pending) 66F-HQ-Al413164-D {Pending) 66F-HQ-A1192083 (Pending) HQ 66-Al9203 (Pending) 66F-HQ-C1384970
66F-HQ-A1397155-B

Title: (U) TERRORIST SCREENING PROCEDURES - SILENT HIT POLICY

Synopsis: (U) Set out the limited circumstances under which the FBI should recommend that a known or appropriately suspected terrorist be entered as an NCIC/VGTOF "silent hit" on the FD-930.

DATE: 02-16-2010 CLASSIFIED BY uc/baw 60324 REASON: 1.4 (c) DECLASSIFY ON: 02-16-2035

ALL INFORMATION CONTAINED HEREIN IS UNCLASSIFIED EXCEPT
t.JHERE SHOT.JN OTHERWISE
NCIC-VGTOF-10888
DOCUMENT 100

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-4 Filed 07/06/11 Page 19 of 70 To: All Field Offices From: Counterterrorism Re: 315-00 1 ~7/25/2006

Details: (U) This EC provides guidance regarding the limited
circumstances when the FBI should recommend that a known or appropriately suspected terrorist be entered as an NCIC/VGTOF "silent hit" on a FD-930 form.

' ..... ,_I

I

hl

(5). ··... •. ·... ··..
bl
I

bl
(U) The Terrorist Screening Center has coordinated this policy guidance with NCTC 1 TREX1 and OGC.
NCIC-vGrOF-10889

.,

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-4 Filed 07/06/11 Page 20 of 70

To: All Field Offices From: Counterterrorism Re: 315-00, 07/25/2006
LEAD(s): Set Lead l: (Action)
ALL RECEIVING OFFICES (U) Disseminate this EC to appropriate personnel .
••

NCIC-VGTOF-10890

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-4 Filed 07/06/11 Page 21 of 70
DOCUMENT 109

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-4 Filed 07/06/11 Page 22 of 70 Page 1 of3

From: To:

Cc:

Sent:

Wednesday, October 13,2004 8:23AM

Subject: RE: Need change in VGTOF output

1

Sorry for this apparent confusion. The issue of strings of ones was

I I last

discussed from

9w/7itb-l"""9~/1~.3-..,.A~ll-o'"'!!'f'"'!!'th-e-se'""'!i-n.,..,di-vt:-.d:,-ual~s-can-c~h-ec~k-t=-he..,.i_ r

_

_ ___.

Outlook e-mails to confirm that this was discussed. The long and short of it is:

-Strings of zeros are not acceptable. We receive a reject/edit error

report following enS's dump of the 1B e~port into VGTOF. Every DOB

that gets exported to VGTOF with a string of zeros in either the day and/or month field appears on that reject/edit error report an~

I

has to manually go into VGTOF and change it to a string of ones.

r-Ldvised that double zeros in either or both the month and day

b2

'ne:rts" invalidates the DOB field as a numeric identifier and, therefore,

b6
b7C

requires another valid numeric identifier, e.uassport number, etc.

(which we more often than not do not have

dvised that if a record

with double zeros in the month and/or day 1e 1s hit on, the DOB will

appear with 01 in the 00 field. I have tested numerous record~ that

were submitted with a double zero entry in the month and/or day field

(and returned on our reject/edit error report) and the message returned

to me is "No NCIC VGTOF Record," e.g., the record is not in VGTOF.

-Strings of ones, as opposed to a string of 110101,11 is used inasmuch as a DOB with an "01" string will preclude subjects of Query 10-Print inquiries from being reviewed against the VGTOF file.

-If our primary concern is to get the individuals in VGTOF with or without exact DOB info, a string of ones is the most effective way of doing that.
D-In answer to your previous e-mail:

-Following an inquiry I placed to ens on 10/5, ens did make a software

chan e on 8/1/04 to onl match the exact DOB.

b7E

were not a VIse o s c ange so we not ow unti

at It

was made. However, it is common practice in the law enforcement

community to search DOBs using strings of subjects in VGTOF with strings of ones that

onnoetsa;tsaolli.t's(Fboeltltp.t;:tT~t:,roii~ ~le: OF-11065

DOCUMENT 109

11/18/2009

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-4 Filed 07/06/11 Page 23 of 70
Page2 of3
if we don't use strings of ones, non-FBI subjects without a full DOB will not get entered into VGTOF at all.)

b6 b7C b2

I The VGTOF GMC Format requirements state that O"s should be used for
partial dates. As I remember my last conversation wi~

they are acceptable. I know that in the dumps they send to us they send

l's instead. I've ~edl

lfor clarification. The program

will be changed today if needed.

b6

b7C

Subject: RE: Need change in VGTOF output

b2

Everyone should have known this requirement as it was discussed several times. P~ let me know when the exports will be in the
correct format.-L_J

To All:
Yes; this change needs to be made. Records with string
zeros in the DOB field (for either the month or day or both~OF-11066

b6 b7C b2
11/1812009

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-4 Filed 07/06/11 Page 24 of 70 Page 3 of3
accepted by VGTOF and get kicked-back to us as rejects. We then have to manually go into VGTOF and make the change to a string of ones. Records having strings ofones does cause other concerns to arise, but this is an old issue for the TSC's VGTOF staff and it has been addressed with
ens.
Thanks,
I I

b6

Subject: Need change in VGTOF output

b7C

b2

Perl

IThe export from TSDB to VGTOF

cannot use '0000' to indicate unknown birth day and month. That

condition should use '1111.'

I don't know the how difficult this would be to implement. ~s should be added to your list ofneeded changes.

NCIC-VGTOF-11067

11118/2009

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-4 Filed 07/06/11 Page 25 of 70
DOCUMENT 110

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-4 Filed 07/06/11 Page 26 of 70 Page 1 of4

From: To:

Cc:

Sent:

Subject:

b2

I understand about the 00 inputs now. We will send 11 instead for all unknown months and day.

b6

b7C

I am more confused about the dump (import/ingest) files we have been getting. Here is my understanding:

A Dob that is 11111111 or 11110101 is unknown.

A Dob that is YYYY1111 is either an unknown month/day entered by someone who had no other number field (SOC, MNU, FBI, LIC or VIN) or Nov 11, or Nov with unknown day. ITICffSC will treat these as dob's that only have a year (YYYY)
A Dob that is YYYYMMll is either an unknown day entered by someone who had no other number field (SOC, MNU, FBI, LIC or VIN) or the 11th day ofthe given month ITICffSC will treat these. as dob's that only have a year and month (MONYYYY)

A Dob that is YYYY0101 is either an unknown month/day entered by someone who had another

number field (SOC, MNU,

FBI, LIC or VIN) or Jan 01, or Jan with unknown day.

ITICffSC is currently handling these as full dates of birth. (There were only 50 of these in a test file of

5000)

.

A Dob that is YYYYMM11 is either an unknown day entered by someone who had another number field (SOC, MNU,
FBI, LIC or VIN) or the 1st day ofthe given month ITIC/TSC will treat these as full dates ofbirth.

We need to develop a plan on what to do at ITIC (VGTOF IT) and TSC (VGTOF DT) with the entries with o1 in the month and/or day.

b2 b6 b7C

I

I

Subject: Re: Need change in VGTOF output

NCIC-vGTOF-11079

___________D_OC_U_M_EN_T__11_0_____1_11_18_/2_00_9_____j

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-4 Filed 07/06/11 Page 27 of 70 Page 2 of4
NCIC will accept a DOB with a '00' as the month, '00' as the day or both '00' for the month and day AS LONG AS THERE IS ANOTHER IDENTIFIER (SOC, MNU, FBI, LIC or VIN). We will reject the record if'OO' is entered for the month or day and there is not another identifier.
Any record in the system that has '00' in the month or day field will be
returned with '00' as the month or day in the response. DB2 is our DBMS.
The actual field in the database is a DATE field which means it must have a valid date. We will change the '00' to '0 1' to allow the value to be stored in the database. This is something internal to the application. We set another field in the database to indicate that the month/day is unknown. We are able to detennine whichDOB's have a valid '01' in the month or day and which values were loaded with '00' in the month or day.
b7E
The delimited extracts that was provided to TSC did not account for the field indicating that the month/day was unknown. This is my fault. DOB's that are in the delimited extract would have '01' in the month/day field. I can correct this.
·Please call me ifthere are any questions.

Cc:
b2
b6 b7C

> The VGTOF GMC Format requirements state that O"s should be used for

partial dates. As I remember my last conversation witlj

Is they

are acceptable. I know that in the dumps they send to us they send 1's

instead. I've asked!

Ifor clarification. The program will be

changed today ifneeded.

NCIC-vGTOF-11080

11/18/2009

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-4 Filed 07/06/11 Page 28 of 70
Page3 of4

>>I_ ____,

> > ----Original Message-->>SFermo:mW~~oo~ta~/~13~n~a~M~6:~02~AJ4~~----------~

>To:l

>Cc:_

I

I

> Subject: RE: Need change in VGTOF output

>

>

> Everyone should have known this requirement as it was discussed several

times. Please let me know when the exports will be in the correct

format.-0

.

>

> ----Original Message----

>Froml

I

> Sent: Tuesday, October 12. 2004 4:48 PM >To~ >Cc~

> Subject: RE: Need change in VGTOF output

>

>

>To All:

>Yes; this change needs to be made. Records with string zeros in the DOB

field (for either the month or day or both) are not accepted by VGTOF and
get kicked-back to us as rejects. We then have to manually go into VGTOF

and make the change to a string of ones. Records having strings of ones

does cause other concerns to arise, but this is an old issue for the TSC's

VGTOF staff and it has been addressed with CJIS.

>

>Thanks,

i

I

>

> --Original Message---

>From:l

I

:~t ~October 12,2004 4:36PM

L~ject: N~ chOllgeinVGTOF output

> >

>

>Perl

trhe export from TSDB to VGTOF cannot use '0000' to indicate

unknown birth day and month. That condition should use '1111.' >

NCIC-VGTOF-11081

b2
b6 b7C
b6 b7C

11/18/2009

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-4 Filed 07/06/11 Page 29 of 70 Page4 of4

>I don't know the how difficult this would be to implement. This should be

added to your list of needed changes.

>

>

>>Jr-----.

b6

>

b7C

>

NCIC-VGTOF-11082

11/18/2009

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-4 Filed 07/06/11 Page 30 of 70
DOCUMENT 112

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-4 Filed 07/06/11 Page 31 of 70

(1213111995)

FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION

Precedence: Immediate

Date: 06/10/2002

To: All Field Offices
All Divisions National Security
CJIS
Counterterrorism

Attn: AD:f:Cs SACs ADs

From: Counterterrorism Division Domestic Terrorism I Counterterrorism Planning Secfion
Contact: ssAIL--------------------------------~-

b2

Approved By: Mueller Robert S

b6

b7C

Drafted By:
Case ID #: 66F-HQ-A1255362 (Pending) Serial 104 66F-HQ-C1321794 (Pending)
Title: PLACEMENT OF TERRORIST INFORMATION IN THE NATIONAL CRIME INFORMATION CENTER (NCIC)
Reference: 66F-HQ-A1255362, serial 12, 66F-HQ-A1255362, serial 13, 66F-HQ-A1255362, serial 68 and 66F-HQ-A1296544-P, serial 37.
Synopsis: Notification to all Field Offices of upcoming changes and protocol procedures for Counterterrorism Program subjects placed into NCIC.
Details: As all recipients are aware, based upon an analysis of the systems use and functionality during the 2002 Winter Olympic
NCIC-VGTOF-11130
DOCUMENT 112

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-4 Filed 07/06/11 Page 32 of 70

To: All Field Offices Re: 66F-HQ-~255362

From: Counterterrorism Division Date: 06/10/2002

Games, the minimal potential for compromise to active investigations, feedback from field offices, and in light of the Director's initiative for designing and maintaining the FBI'S new Terrorism Watch List, a meeting was held on'March 20, 2002, among senior FBI managers. During this meeting the decision was made to previae guidance to the field and provide protocols to clarify which subject names and identifying information from the Counterterrorism Program must be kept in NCIC.

I. PROTOCOLS FOR USING AND MAINTAINING INFORMATION IN NCIC

NCIC includes a file for listing members of violent criminal gangs as well as members of terrorist organizations.
Currently these are grouped together in NCIC under the heading "Violent Gang and Terrorist Organization File" (VGTOF). As explained in this communication, the Bureau is adding more NCIC sub-groups for other categories of persons who may not meet the criteria for existing NCIC files, and it may be appropriate in the future to change the heading "VGTOF" to a more generally encompassing heading. Until such time as the term "VGTOF" might be changed, the NCIC entries addressed by this communication (except for silent hits) will be entered into the NCIC file described herein via the VGTOF entry screen and its newly created sub-groups.

.

The following protocols are to be used for determining

which subjects are to be entered into the system and when the

Silent Hit system should be utilized:

1) As of the date of this communication only FULL
investigation subjects will be required to be placed into the NCIC system.

2) The decision as to which, if any, Preliminary Inquiry (PI's) subjects are placed into the NCIC system is delegated to the SAC and appropriate Section Chief of the International or Domestic Terrorism program at FBIHQ. If the SAC or Section Chief deems a particular individual who is the subject of a PI, to be appropriate for entry into the system, then that SAC or Section Chief can order that subject's name and identifying information be loaded and maintained in the NCIC
~ystem.

3) The protocol for selecting a subject (Full or PI) as a candidate for a Silent·Hit, are as follows:

2

NCIC-VGTOF-11131

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-4 Filed 07/06/11 Page 33 of 70

To: All Field Offices Re: 66F-HQ-~255362

From: Counterterrorism Division Date: 06/10/2002

A) International Terrorism Investigations - SACs should consider the following criteria when selecting an IT subject of a FULL investigation to be placed into the Silent Hit system within NCIC.
i) Subject of investigation is target of classified collection techniques or FULL investigation was opened based upon single source reporting. ·
ii) Subject of FBI FULL investigation was opened due to classified information received from other U.S., or foreign law enforcement or intelligence agencies.
iii) Subject does not pose a safety or violence threat to local law enforcement.
B) Domestic Terrorism Investigations - SACs should consider the following criteria when selecting a DT subject of a FULL investigation to be placed into the Silent Hit system within ·NCIC.
i) Subject of FULL investigation was opened based upon single source reporting.
ii) Subject of FBI FULL investigation was opened due to classified
information received from other u.s., or
foreign law enforcement or inte~ligence agencies.
iii) Subject does not pose a safety or violence threat to local law enforcement.
iv} Subject is an employee, member of or affiliated with a military, federal, state, local or other·law enforcement agency1 first responder agency or any group that could have access to NCIC terminals.
II. THE FBI TERRORISM WATCH LIST AND NCIC SILENT HITS
3
NCIC-VGTOF-11132

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-4 Filed 07/06/11 Page 34 of 70

To: All Field Offices Re: 66F-HQ-Al255362

From: Counterterrorism Division Date: 06/10/2002.

As described in the communication creating the FBI's new Terrorism Watch List (see 66F-HQ-Al296544-P, serial 37), the Counterterrorism Threat Assessment & Warning Unit (CTAWU) at FBIHQ, will establish a permanent Terrorism Watch List. In light of the Terrorism Watch List (TWL) project which will be managed on a 24 hour per day, seven day per week schedule by the CTAWU at FBIHQ, the decision was made that CJIS will not re-program its software concerning NCIC usilent Hits." At this time, reporting of a "Silent Hit" is made only to FBIHQ SIOC, however, in light of the proposed capabilities of the Terrorism Watch List Group and after discussions with CJIS personnel, it was decided that CJIS will program its system to report all "Silent Hits" to the TWL personnel at FBIHQ who will be responsible for notifying a field office when a subject of a Silent Hit is identified.
Once the TWL project personnel and 24/7 operations are established and in place within the CTAWU at FBIHQ, all offices will be notified so that all ADICs and SACs can make their NCIC operators and Counterterrorism Program personnel aware of the Silent Hit notification being sent to the CTAWU and to establish a method"for responding to the Silent Hit notifications communicated to the field office.
III. CREATION OF SUB-GROUP CATEGORIES WITHIN NCIC
Consistent with the communication creating the new TWL there will be four (4) sub-groups created within the NCIC (which until further notice will be accessed under the VGTOF heading) .
The four sub-groups will be comprised of:
Category 1: Individuals who are the subject of formal criminal charges or indictments (this includes individuals1 named to the Most Wanted Terrorist List) ;
Category 2: Individuals of Special Counterterrorism· interest to the FBI, but do not yet have formal charges pending. This category will be limited to uniquely situated individuals such as, the three (3) remaining individuals listed on the FBI's
1 Please be advised that out of the 22 individuals named to the FBI'S Most Wanted Terrorist List, 19 of these individuals are listed in the wanted Per~ons file within NCIC due to the fact that arrest warrants exist for those individuals. However, the 19 known terrorists will additionally be listed in sub-group Category 1 within the VGTOF file of NCIC. The remaining three (3) individuals will be listed in sub-group Category 2, within the VGTOF file of NCIC.
4
NCIC-VGTOF-11133

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-4 Filed 07/06/11 Page 35 of 70

b2

To: All Field Offices

From: Counterterrorism Division

b7E

Re: 66F-HQ-~255362

Date: 06/10/2002

1M~o-s-t--W-a-n-te-d--T--er-r-o-r-j -s-t -T-.-j s-t-•-I------------------~land those
individuals identified during "Operation Enduring Freedom" that pose a threat to the United States.
Category 3: All subjects of FBI Domestic and International Terrorism FULL Investigations and subjects of Preliminary Inquiries as deemed appropriate by the SAC or Section Chief; and
Category 4: Individuals of active Investigative ;nterest. For example 1 the individuals who the FBI wanted to interview who were identified as part of the Penttbom Watch List.
Based upon the creation of the NCIC sub-group categories described above, there will also be a corresponding warning statement programmed within the system for each sub-group category that will provide federal 1 state and local law enforcement officers with directions of what to do when an individual within the system is identified.

Field offices entering information into NCIC should differentiate between the Wanted Persons File within NCIC and the sub-group Category 1 within the VGTOF file. Field offices are directed to enter ALL Subjects of terrorist investigations2 who have arrest warrants issued into BOTH the Wanted Persons File within NCIC and the sub-group Qategory 1 within the VGTOF file. All field office subjects of non-terrorism criminal charges. who have arrest warrants issued should only be placed into the Wanted Persons File within NCIC. NOT Category 1 sub-group of the VGTOF file.
Category 1: Indiyiduals who are the subject of fcr.mal criminal
2 Subjects of Terrorist investigations include all domestic and international terrorism and weapons of mass destruction classifications, including (98, 183C, 199 1 253A, 256B1 265, 266, 279, 291), but also all other traditional criminal classifications with a.terrorism nexus, including but not limited to explosives or weapons violations, or any of the covered offenses enumerated under Title 18 of the United States Code Section 2332b(g) {5) {B) (i) {ii) and {iii).
5
NQC-YGTOF-11134

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-4 Filed 07/06/11 Page 36 of 70

To: All Field Offices Re: 66F-HQ-Al255362

From: Counterterrorism Division Date: 06/10/2002

charges or.indictments. ALL field offices and the CTAWU will have the ability to enter subject identifying information into this category.
The following information will be programmed within the NCIC system as directions to federa1 1 state and local law enforcement officers:
"WARNING - APPROACH WITH CAUTION - ABMED AND DANGEROUS. PLEASE ARREST AND DETAIN INDIVIDUAL. ONCE THE INDIVIDUAL IS SECURELY DETAINED, IMMEDIATELY CONTACT YOUR LOCAL FBI FIELD OFFICE. 11
Category 2: Individual.s of Counterterrorism interest to the FBI, but do not have formal. charges pending. Only the CTAWU will have. the ability to enter subject identifying information into this category.
The following information will be programmed within the NCIC system as directions to federal, state and local law enforcement officers:
"WARNING - APPROACH WITH CAUTION. PLEASE DETAIN THIS INDIVIDUAL FOR QUESTIONING. THIS INDIVIDUAL IS OF INVESTIGATIVE INTEREST TO THE FBI. ONCE THE INDIVIDUAL IS SECURELY DETAINED CONTACT YOUR LOCAL FBI FIELD OFFICE IMMEDIATELY. "
Category 3: Al.l. subjects of FBI Domestic and International.
Terrorism FULL Investigations and subiects of Prel.iminary Inauiries as d.eemed appropriate by the SAC or ·Section Chief. ALL
field offices and the CTAWU will have the ability to enter subject identifying information into this category.
The fol.lowing information will be programmed within the NCIC system as directions to federal 1 state and local +aw enforcement officers:
"WARNING - APPROACH WITH CAUTION. HOWEVER, MAKE NO EFFORT TO ARREST INDIVIDUAL UNLESS THERE IS EVIDENCE OF A VIOLATION OF FEDERAL, STATE, OR LOCAL STATUTE (S) . ONCE AN INDIVIDUAL IS IDENTIFIED WITHIN THIS SYSTEM1 CONDUCT ALL LOGICAL INVESTIGATION UTILIZING TECHNIQUES AUTHORIZED IN YOUR JURISDICTION. DO NOT ALERT THE
6
NCIC-vGTOF-11135

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-4 Filed 07/06/11 Page 37 of 70

To: All Field Offices Re: 66F-HQ-A1255362

From: Counterterrorism Division Date: 06/10/2002

INDIVIDUAL TO THE FBI'S INTEREST AND CONTACT YOUR LOCAL FBI FIELD OFFICE AT THE EARLIEST OPPORTUNITY."

Category 4: Indiv.idual.s of Act.ive Invest.igat.ive .interest. Only the CTAWU will have the ability to enter subject identifying information into this category.

The following information will be programmed within the NCIC system as directions to federal, state and local law enforcement officers:

"WARNING - APPROACH WITH CAUTION. HOWEVER, MAKE NO
EFFORT TO A.limEST INDIVIDUAL UNLESS THERE IS EVIDENCE OF
A VIOLATION OF FEDERAL 1 STATE 1 OR LOCAL STATUTE (S) . ONCE AN INDIVIDUAL IS IDENTIFIED WITHIN THIS SYSTEM, CONDUCT ALL LOGICAL INVESTIGATION UTILIZING TECHNIQUES AUTHORIZED IN YOUR JURISDICTION. DO NOT ALERT THE INDIVIDUAL TO THE FBI'S INTEREST AND CONTACT YOUR LOCAL FBI FIELD OFFICE AT THE EARLIEST OPPORTUNITY."

IV. RE-DESIGNATION OF TERRQRIST ORGANIZATION CLASSIFICATIONS

In an efzort to reduce the risk of another law enforcement agency compromising an active FBI investigation by matching a single subject to a specific organization, FBIHQ has instructed CJIS to redefine the Terrorist Organization Classifications. For all Domestic Terrorism subjects, the Terrorist Organization Classification is: Domestic Extremist (DMST XTMST*DFBI). For all International Terrorism subjects, the Terrorist Organization Classification is: International Extremist (INTRNTL XTMSTS*IFBI).

All field offices that have the capability to enter information into the NCIC file must use the preceding Terrorist Organization Classifications and corresponding codes for Domestic and International Terrorism prior to entering individual subject information. Those field divisions that do not have the ability to enter information into NCIC, must follow the previously described procedures for submitting information to CJIS.

All field offices are reminded to continue to initiate and use the two tiered Reporting and Audit system referenced on page three (3) of the communication located at 66F-HQ-Al255362, serial 68. Additionally, all receiving offices are instructed to continue using a 66 classification (administrative file) for their divisions and use that file number as the default file

7

NCIC-VGTOF-11136

--·······------------------------------i

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-4 Filed 07/06/11 Page 38 of 70

To: All Field Offices Re: 66F-HQ-A1255362

From: Counterterrorism Division Date: 06/10/2002

number for entry of all Counterterrorism Program records . (Domestic or International) into the NCIC system.

LEAD (s) :.
Set Lead 1:
ALL RECEIVING OFFICES
1) Please ensure that all names and all identifying information of ALL investigative classifications for domestic and international terrorism, including cases concerning any diplomats from state sponsors of terrorism are maintained in the NCIC system for All FULL INVESTIGATIONS ONLY. All offices are requested to review all cu~rent entries of subject information that each office has in the NCIC system, and to cancel or modify any current entries that do not meet the new criteria outlined above, and for offices in non--programmed NCIC states to submit any cancellations or modifications ~o CJIS.
2) Review ALt individuals who are subjects of domestic and international terrorism Preliminary Investigations (PI) to determine which subjects are relevant enough to the FBI's mission of Counterterrorism and Prevention, to maintain in the NCIC system.
3) Review and modify all "Silent Hit" submissions to make certain they are consistent with the new criteria outlined above.
Set Lead 2:
8
NCIC-vGTOF-11137

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-4 Filed 07/06/11 Page 39 of 70

To: All Field Offices Re: 66F-HQ-A1255362

From: Counterterrorism Division Date: 06/10/2002

AT CLARKSBURG, WV

1} Please modify the NCIC program software, so that "Silent Hit" notifications will be sent to the Counterterrorism Threat Assessment & Warning Unit (CTAWU} at FBIHQ, room 5432.

2) Please modify the system software so that "Silent Hits" are given a unique code designation, so that Counterterrorism "Silent Hits" can be distinguished from Undercover Operation "Silent Hits."

3) Please modify the system software to re-define the Terrorist Organization Classifications, for all Domestic Terrorism subjeots, the Terrorist Organization Classification is: Domestic Extremist (DMST XTMST*DFBI), for all International Terrorism subjects, the Terrorist Organization Classification is: International Extremist (INTRNTL XTMSTS*IFBI).

4) Pl~ase modify the system software to create four (4) sub-group codes within the NCIC file system. The four subgroup codes will correspond to:

Category 1: Individuals who are the subject of formal criminal charges or indictments. (This includes individuals named to the Most Wanted Terrorist List};

Category 2: Individuals of Counterterrorism interest

to the FBI, but do not have formal charges pending. For example,

Wthaen

ttehd r

eTee

r

r(3)r

i

r

em

a

i

n

i

n individuals listed on the FBI's Most ?-~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~----~

b2

~~~~~~~--~--------~------~~------~tpose individuals

b7E

identified during "Operation Enduring Freedom" that pose a threat

to the United States and others sought in connection with the

PENTTBOM investigation;

Category 3: All subjects of FBI Domestic and
International Terrorism FULL Investigations and subjects of
Preliminary Inquiries as deemed appropriate by the SAC or Section Chief; and

Category 4: Individuals of Active Investigative
interest. For example, the type of individuals who the FBI
wanted to interview who were identified as part of the Penttbom Watch List.

9
NCIC-YGTOF-11138

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-4 Filed 07/06/11 Page 40 of 70

To: All Field Orfices Re: 66F-HQ-A1255362

From: Counterterrorism Division Date: 06/10/2002

5) In connection with the creation of the sub-group categories, please program the appropriate Warning Statement that corresponds to the appropriate sub-group category as defined in detail in Section III, of this communication.

Set Lead 3 : (Adm.)
AT CLARKSBURG, WV Please address, in consultation wit·h the Office of the General Counsel (OGC), the feasability and desirability of replacing the heading ~violent Gang and Terrorist Organization File" (VGTOF) with a more appropriately descriptive term .
••

10 NCIC-vGTOF-11139
~ --~~~-~~~~~~------------~~--------------------_j

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-4 Filed 07/06/11 Page 41 of 70
DOCUMENT 113

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-4 Filed 07/06/11 Page 42 of 70

{Rev. 08-28-2000)

FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION

Precedence: ROUTINE

Date: 07/11/2002

To: All Field Offices

Attn: ADIC
SACs DT/IT SSAs

F:rom: CJIS

Programs Development Section/Criminal Information

Coordination Unit/Module C3
Contact:!~----------------------------~

I 1\pproved By:

b2 b6

b7C

Drafted By:
~--------------~
Case ID #: 66F-HQ-Cl250689
Title: CJIS DIVISION VIOLENT GANG AND TERRORIST ORGANIZATION FILE
Synopsis: Instructions to all field offices to utilize new terrorist organization group/subgroup codes and to modify all NCIC VGTOF terrorist records to new codes.
Reference: 66F-HQ-Al255362 Serial 104
Enclosure(s): Modification chart/worksheet
Details: As all recipients are aware, the National Crime Information Center (NCIC) Violent Gang and Terrorist Organization File (VGTOF) has been utilized sine~ January 2002 in an effort to prevent potential terrorist attacks. The referenced electronic communication provides direction for the entry of Counterterrorism Program subjects into the NCIC VGTOF.
The entry of the Counterterrorism Program subjects into the VGTOF increases information sharing among law enforcement throughout the United States and Canada. In an effort to facilitate the field offices in modification of existing VGTOF records, to comply with the revised criteria as detailed in the above referenced electronic communication (EC), the CJIS Division has developed new VGTOF terrorist group and subgroup codes. The new VGTOF group codes which are to be used in new cases, as well as, in the modification of records already entered into NCIC are listed below:

NCIC-VGTOF-11140

DOCUMENT 113

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-4 Filed 07/06/11 Page 43 of 70
To: All Field Offices From: CJIS Re: 66F-HQ-C1250689, 07/11/2002

GROUP

Domestic Extremist NCIC Code:

(DMST XTMST*DFBI}

International Extremist NCIC Code:

(INTRNTL XTMSTS*IFBI}

In addition to the new group codes, four new categories of subgroup codes have been created for both domestic (DFBI} and international {IFBI) terrorism cases. The new subgroup codes are listed below with associated description of each and caveat which will appear at the top of the VGTOF record. It is important to ensure the proper codes are used so the appropriate warning is appended to the record. The warning caveat directs federal, state, and local law enforcement on proper procedures upon an encounter with the subject listed in VGTOF.

SUBGROUPS

Category 1

Individuals who are the subject of formal criminal charges or indictments (this includes individuals1 named to the Most Wanted Terrorist List). ALL field offices and FBIHQ's Counterterrorism Threat Assessment and Warning Unit {CTAWU) have the ability to enter subjects into VGTOF using this category. The new VGTOF subgroup codes which are to be used are listed below:

Domestic NCIC Gode:

CATEGORY 1*DFBI

International NCIC Code: CATEGORY 1*IFBI

cav¢at:

WARNING - APPROACH WITH CAUTION - ARMED AND D~GEROUS. PLEASE ARREST AND DETAIN INDIVIDUAL. ONCE THE INDIVIDUAL IS SECURELY DETAINED, IMMEDIATELY CONTACT YOUR LOCAL FBI FIELD OFFICE.

Please he advised that out of the 22 individuals named to the FBI's Most Wanted Terrorist List, 19 are listed in the NCIC Wanted Person File. However, the 19 known terrorists will additionally he listed in sub-group Category 1, within the VGTOF file of NCIC. The remaining three(3) individuals will he listed in sub-group Category 3, within the VGTOF file of NCIC.
2 NCIC-VGTOF-11141
~- ~··------~---------------------------------......1

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-4 Filed 07/06/11 Page 44 of 70

To: All Field Offices From: CJIS Re: 66F-HQ-C1250689, 07/11/2002

b2

Category 2

b7E

Individuals of Counterrorism interest to the FBI. but do

not yet have formal charges pending. This category will be limited

to uniquely individuals

situate listed

d i on

ndividu the FBI

al 1s

s such as: Most Wante

t d

he Te

three rroris

t

r

eLmisatin·iln~g._----~

and those J.ndivJ.duals J.dentJ.fJ.ed durJ.ng "Operation urJ.ng Freedom11 that pose a threat to the United States. Only the FBIHQ's CTAWU have the ability to enter subjects into VGTOF using this category. The new VGTOF subgroup codes which are to be used
are listed below:

Domestic NCIC Code:

CATEGORY 2*DFBI

International NCIC Code: CATEGORY 2*IFBI

Caveat:

WARNING - APPROACH WITH CAUTION. PLEASE DETAIN THIS INDIVIDUAL FOR QUESTIONING. THIS INDIVIDUAL IS OF INVESTIGATIVE INTEREST TO THE FBI. ONCE THE INDIVIDUAL IS SECURELY DETAINED CONTACT YOUR LOCAL FBI FIELD OFFICE IMMEDIATELY.

Category 3

All Subiects of FBI Domestic and International Terrorism FULL Investigations and Subjects of Preliminary Inquiries as deemed appropriate by the SAC or section Chief. All field offices and the FBIHQ's CTAWU has the ability to enter subjects into VGTOF using this category. The new VGTOF subgroup codes which are to be used are listed below:

Domestic NCIC Code:

CATEGORY 3*DFBI

International NCIC Code: CATEGORY 3*IFBI

Caveat:

WARNING - APPROACH WITH CAUTION. HOWEVER, MAKE NO EFFORT TO ARREST INDIVIDUAL UNLESS THE~ IS EVIDENCE OF A VIOLATION OF FEDERAL, STATE, OR .LOCAL STATUE(S). ONCE AN INDIVIDUAL IS IDENTIFIED WITHIN THIS SYSTEM', CONDUCT ALL LOGICAL INVESTIGATION UTILIZING TECHNIQUES AUTHORIZED IN YOUR JURISDICTION. DO NOT ALERT THE INDIVIDUAL TO THE FBI'S INTEREST AND CONTACT YOUR LOCAL FBI FIELD OFFICE AT THE EARLIEST OPPORTUNITY.

3 NCIC-vGTOF-11142

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-4 Filed 07/06/11 Page 45 of 70
To: All Field Offices From: CJIS Re: 66F-HQ-C1250689, 07/11/2002

Category 4

Individuals of Active Investigative interest. For
example, the individuals the FBI wanted to interview who were identified as part of the Penttbom Watch List could be entered into
VGTOF using this category. Only the FBIHQ's CTAWU has the ability to enter subjects into VGTOF using this category. The new VGTOF subgroup codes which are to be used are listed below:

Domestic NCIC Code:

CATEGORY 4*DFBI

International NCIC Code: CATEGORY 4*IFBI

Caveat:

WARNING - APPROACH WITH CAUTION. HOWEVER, MAKE NO EFFORT
TO ARREST INDIVIDUAL UNLESS THERE IS EVIDENCE OF A VIOLATION OF FEDERAL, STATE, OR LOCAL STATUTE (S}. ONCE AN
INDIVIDUAL IS IDENTIFIED WITHIN THIS SYSTEM, CONDUCT ALL
LOGICAL INVESTIGATION UTILIZING TECHNIQUES AUTHORIZED IN YOUR JURISDICTION. DO NOT ALERT THE INDIVIDUAL TO THE FBI'S INTEREST AND CONTACT YOUR LOCAL FBI FIELD OFFICE AT
THE EARLIEST OPPORTUNITY.

All new VGTOF terrorist entries and existing VGTOF records should use the aforementioned·codes. Per the referenced EC, all field offices have been directed to use the new codes when making VGTOF record entries. In addition, all field offices are directed to modify existing VGTOF records to reflect the new group and subgroup codes.

Below is an example of an existing VGTOF terrorist record. Please note· this is a test record.

WARNING - APPROACH WITH CAUTION. HOWEVER, MAKE NO EFFORT
TO ARREST INDIVIDUAL UNLESS THERE IS EVIDENCE OF A VIOLATION OF FEDERAL, STATE, OR LOCAL STATOTE(S}. ONCE AN
INDIVIDUAL IS IDENTIFIED WITHIN THIS SYSTEM1 CONDUCT ALL LOGICAL INVESTIGATION UTILIZING TECHNIQUES AUTHORIZED IN YOUR JURISDICTION. DO NOT ALERT THE INDIVIDUAL TO THE
FBI'S INTEREST AND CONTACT YOUR LOCAL FBI FIELD OFFICE AT THE EARLIEST OPPORTUNITY.

MKE/TERRORIST ORGANIZATION MEMBER - CAUTION ORI/DCBIWAT2 NAM/ALWALI, TEST TEST TEST TEST SEX/F RAC/W DOB/19690107
GNG/ANRKST*DFBI SGP /NONE KNOWN
ECR/DF DOP/20070118 OCA/123456 TEST TEST MIS/TEST TEST TEST TEST TEST TEST TEST TEST TEST TEST' TEST TEST
MIS/TEST TEST TEST TEST TEST TEST TEST TEST TEST TEST TEST TEST MIS/TEST TEST TEST TEST TEST TEST TEST TEST TEST TEST TEST TEST

4 NCIC-vGTOF-11143

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ---- ---~--

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-4 Filed 07/06/11 Page 46 of 70

To: All Field Offices From: CJIS Re: 66F-HQ-C1250689, 07/11/2002

MIS/TEST TEST TEST TEST TEST ORI IS NCIC INVEST & OPER ASSIST UNIT/CJIS 000 000-0000 IMN/I255004094 IMT/I IMN/I490004110 IMT/M IMN/I265005412 IMT/I NIC/T250007891 DTE/20020118 1021 EST
If the field office utilizes formatted screens for NCIC VGTOF entries, it is suggested the NCIC operator always use the NIC number (a unique NCIC number assigned to the record by the computer), along with other fields, to identify the record being modified. If a field office does not have formatted screens the following string format will need to be used to modify all existing VGTOF records:
MMG.DCFBIWAT2.NIC/T250007891.NAM/ALWALI, TEST TEST TEST TEST.OCA/123456 TEST TEST.GNG/DMST XTMST*DFBI.SGP/CATEGORY 1
Also note the above record is identified by NIC, Name of subject (NAM), and Originating Agency Case Number (OCA), while the Group (GNG) and Subgroup (SGP) fields are being modified to the new codes. Additionally, the modification of the VGTOF record will change the caveat which is appended to the top of the record. After modification, the record would appear as follows:
WARNING - APPROACH WITH CAUTION - ARMED AND DANGEROUS. PLEASE ARREST AND DETAIN INDIVIDUAL. ONCE THE INDIVIDUAL IS SECURELY DETAINED, IMMEDIATELY CONTACT YOUR LOCAL FBI FIELD OFFICE.
MKE/TERRORIST ORGANIZATION MEMBER - CAUTION ORI/DCBIWAT2 NAM/ALWALI, TEST TEST TEST TEST SEX/F RAC/W DOB/19690107 GNG/DMST XTMST*DFBI SGP/CATEGORY l ECR/DF DOP/20070118 OCA/123456 TEST TEST MIS/TEST TEST TEST TEST TEST TEST TEST TEST TEST TEST TEST MIS/TEST TEST TEST TEST TEST TEST TEST TEST TEST TEST TEST MIS/TEST TEST TEST TEST TEST TEST TEST TEST TEST TEST TEST MIS/TEST TEST TEST TEST TEST ORI IS NCIC INVEST & OPER ASSIST UNIT/CJIS 000 000-0000 IMN/I255004094 IMT/I IMN/I490004110 IMT/M IMN/I265005412 IMT/I NIC/T250007891 DTE/20020118 1021 EST
FBI staff should refer to the NCIC Operating Manual for additional information on modification of records. In addition, for NCIC audit and review purposes, all supporting documentation

5 NOC-VGTOF-11144

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-4 Filed 07/06/11 Page 47 of 70
To: All Field Offices From: CJIS Re: 66F-HQ-Cl250689, 07/11/2002

should be placed in a 66 classification file with original 'documentation related to the entry of the record which is being modified.

For those field offices located in states that are not

programmed to make VGTOF entries in NCIC (Anchorage, Boston,

Chicago, Kansas City, New Haven, New Orleans, Philadelphia, Phoenix,

Pittsburgh, San Juan, Springfield, and St. Louis Field Offices),

CJIS Division will continue to make the entries/updates until

advised otherwise. A chart/spreadsheet should be created by each

above-mentioned field office specifying the new group and subgroup

codes for the modification(s). The chart should identify the

b2

record(s) to be modified by the NIC, NAM, OCA, new GNG, and new SGP

b6

data (see attached).· All records utilizing the same group and

b7c

subgroup codes should be listed together in the chart and sent to

the CJIS Division attached to an EC. All documentation should be

sent to: CJIS Division,
Unit Chief I

Pro

grams
I O

De nce

velopment the CJIS

Section, Division

Attention: has completed

the NCIC transactions, the original NCIC printouts will be mailed

back to the field office for placement in the 66 classification file

for review and audit purposes. All new VGTOF entries should

continue to be forwarded tol

lvia cover EC with a completed

FD-930 for each individual entry. Any questions regarding the

modification of records b the CJIS Division should be forwar ed to

6 NCIC-VGTOF-11145

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-4 Filed 07/06/11 Page 48 of 70
To: All Field Offices From: CJIS Re: 66F-HQ-C1250689, 07/11/2002

LEAEJ(s):

Set Lead 1:

ALL RECEIVING OFFICES

1) Use the newly created terrorist codes for entry of all new NCIC VGTOF records.

2) All existing VGTOF records should be modified to reflect the new codes.

3) The CJIS Division will continue to update existing VGTOF records for Anchorage, Boston, Chicago, Kansas City, New Haven, New Orleans, Philadelphia, Phoenix, Pittsburgh, San Juan, Springfield, and St. Louis Field Offices. To modify your VGTOF records, you are requested to create a chart listing each VGTOF record, specifying the appropriate new group and subgroup codes along with the record's NIC, NAM, and OCA. Forward this chart
with a cover EC to: CJIS Division, Progra;s Development Section,
Attention: Unit Chief L.l_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __...j..

4) All new VGTOF entries should continue to be forwarded via cover EC with a completed FD-930 for each individual entry to the CJIS Division. Progrfms Development Section, Attention: Unit ChiefL.I_...._...._...._...._....~_...._....._

Set Lead 2: (Adm)

b6

b7C

COUNTERTERRORISM

AT WASHINGTON, DC

Attention: Chiefi Domestic Terrorism/ Counterterrorism Planning Section

For information only. Please read and clear.

++

7 NCIC-VGTOF-11146

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-4 Filed 07/06/11 Page 49 of 70
DOCUMENT 114

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-4 Filed 07/06/11 Page 50 of 70

(Rev. 08-28-2000)

FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION

Precedence: DEADLINE 11/15/2002

Date: 10/23/2002

To: All Field Offices

Attn:

ADICs SACs IT Program Manager DT Program Manager

All Legats

CJIS

Counterterrorism

Section Chiefs

b2 b6

b7C

From: Counterterrorism

NJSAWS/TWWU/Ro?o~m~1~1~3~0~3------------------------~

Contact: SSA

I Approved Byl~~~~~~~~--~ Pistole John s

Drafted By: L---------~hodh
Case ID #: 66F-HQ-Cl392852 (Pending) Serial 8
Tit1e: TERRORISM WATCH LIST
Synopsis: This communication summarizes the evolution of the FBI's Terrorism Watch List {TWL), sets forth criteria and protocols for TWL entries and removals, highlights ongoing TWL initiatives, and distinguishes the TWL from other watch lists.
Reference: 66F-HQ-A1296544-P Serial 37 66F-HQ-A1255362 Serial 104 66F-HQ-C1250689 Serial 88
Details: By EC dated 03/19/2002 {see referenced serial 37), all field offices, FBIHQ Divisions and Legats were advised of the creation of a permanent Terrorism Watch List {TWL). The purpose of the TWL was to serve as a centralized repository of names of investigative interest related to terrorism investigations. The TWL was intended tq supplement existing terrorist-related databases and to be the Counterterrorism Division's single, integrated listing of individuals of investigative interest.

NCIC-VGTOF-11149
DOCUMENT 114

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-4 Filed 07/06/11 Page 51 of 70
To: All Field Offices From: Counterterrorism Re: 66F-HQ-Cl392852, 10/23/2002

A comprehensive assessment of the TWL operation revealed the TWL has not been utilized to its potential. Some of the contributing
factors to the TWL's underutilization were the lack of understanding of the TWL's purpose, the lack of clearly defined criteria and protocols governing entries to/removals from the TWL, confusion over the various "watch" lists maintained by other government agencies, and limited applications of available technological resources to exploit TWL data. As a result of the assessment, the TWL is undergoing significant modif.ications to transform it into a viable information management system which will exploit all collected data and facilitate information sharing. Like any information system, the success of the TWL is dependent upon the quality of information received from the field. This communication will summarize the evolution of the TWL, set forth criteria and protocols for TWL entries and removals, highlight ongoing initiatives, and distinguish the TWL from'other
frequently utilized watch lists.

Background
Following the 09/11/2001 terrorist attacks against the United States, FBIHQ created and implemented the "Project Lookout" Watch List. The purpose of Project Lookout was to identify individuals believed to be associates of the 09/11 hijackers; material witnesses to the terrorist incidents; or in some way connected to the events of 09/11. Inclusion on the Project Lookout Watch List did not necessarily mean an individual was a known and/or willing participant in criminal activity; rather the list identified the individual as someone who might possess information of value to the PENTTBOMB investigation (Major Case #182). Project Lookout met with a high degree of success in identifying and interviewing individuals potentially connected to the PENTTBOMB investigation, as well as resolving their status as a threat to U.S. interests. In the weeks which followed, a comprehensive review of the Project Lookout Watch List was con~ucted and it was determined the project had served its purpose. Subsequently, the Project Lookout Watch List was discontinued.
As a result of Project Lookout's success, FBI Director Robert S. Mueller, III directed the establishment of a permanent watch list to serve as a single integrated repository of individuals of interest to FBI terrorism investigations. Consequently, the TWL was created.

The TWL is administered by a professional staff assigned to

the Terrorist Watch and Warning Unit, National Joint Strategic

Assessment and Warning Section, Counterterrorism Division, FBIHQ. The

TWL staff is located in room 11303 at FBIHQ and can be reached at its

24-hour hotline, I

~ The TWL staff's mission is to manage

b2

2 NCIC-vGTOF-11150

b6 b7C

b7E

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-4 Filed 07/06/11 Page 52 of 70
To: All Field Offices From: Counterterrorism Re: 66F-HQ-C1392852, 10/23/2002

effectively for the FBI a comprehensive database management system consisting of all known or suspected terrorists and/or individuals of
investigative interest to the FBI in regard to terrorism matters. Staff members are available 24 hours per day to field questions
regarding the TWL and/or other watch lists.

TWL CRITERIA FOR ENTRY

Individuals meeting any of the following criteria should be entered into the TWL database:

All subjects of full field domestic and international terrorism investigations, and subjects of terrorism-related investigations as determined by the field office or substantive unit at FBIHQ.

Inclusion of subjects of preliminary inquiries is optional and requires, at a minimum, SAC or a Counterterrorism Section Chief authority.

All individuals positively identified by the FBI as terrorists or individuals of special interest to the FBI, but are not subjects of formal investigations because of special circumstances, i.e., military detainees.

Most entries under this criteria will result from
requests by substantive units within the Counterterrorism Division.

TWL PRO~OCOL FOR ENTRY

To have an ent~y made into the TWL database, field offices, FBIHQ Divisions, or Legats should draft and forward a comprehensive
communication to Counterterrorism, Attn: TWL, Room 11303. The
communication should be uploaded and indexed into ACS and contain as much of the following information which is available:

a.

Name of the individual to be entered

b.

Alias(es)

c.

Last known address(es}/telephone number(s)

d.

Nationality

e.

Gender

f.

Date of birth

g.

Place of birth

h.

Social Security Account Number

i.

Height

j .

Weight

3 NCIC-VGTOF-11151

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-4 Filed 07/06/11 Page 53 of 70
To: All Field Offices From: Countert~rrorism Re: 66F-HQ-C1392852, 10/23/2002

k.

Hair Color

1.

Eye Color

m.

Scars, Marks, Tattoos, Other Characteristics

n.

Passport Number (Identify Originating Country)

o.

operator's License Number (Identify State)

p.

Any known vehicles (Include description and

license plate)

q.

Terrorist Group Affiliation

r.

Picture of the subject (can be surveillance photo)

s.

FBI or other agency point of contact (include

agency, title of individual, and contact telephone

number)

t.

Case File Number

.

u.

Any other information/miscellaneous numbers

(identify type) deemed pertinent

v.

Statement whether the subject has been entered

into NCIC's Violent Gang and Terrorist

Organization File (VGTOF) 1 If so, provide the

NCIC number

If additional identifying information is acquired by the originating office during the course of an investigation, an updated
communication should be forwarded to Counterterrorism, Attn: TWL, Room 11303. The updated communication should reference the original communication. Similarly, any additional information acquired by the
TWL staff regarding subjects entered into the TWL database will be forwarded to the originating office.

TWL CRITERIA FOR REMOVAL

It is incumbent that TWL entries be removed from the TWL once the individual is no longer considered of investigative interest to the FBI. As information regarding individuals listed on the TWL will have been uploaded in ACS, this will ensure information is retrievable should the individual become of interest in future
investigations. The following entries should be removed from the TWL:

Subjects of closed full field domestic and international terrorism investigations, as well as discontinued preliminary inquiries (if applicable), who were not prosecuted or were acquitted of all charges brought against them.

Individuals previously identified by the FBI as terrorists or individuals of special interest, but

1Required for full field domestic and international terrorism investigations. See 'TWL Versus Other "Watch" Lists' section ofthis communication.
4 NCIC-VGTOF-11152

----····------------------- -----------------....i

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-4 Filed 07/06/11 Page 54 of 70
To: All Field Offices From: Counterterrorism Re: 66F-HQ-Cl392852, 10/23/2002
now determined by the FBI to be either deceased or no longer a threat to U.S. interests.
TWL PROTOCOL FOR REMOVAL
Once a field office, FBIHQ Division or Legat determines an individual should be removed from the TWL, a communication should be drafted and forwarded to Counterterrorism, Attn: TWL, Room 11303. The ·communication should reference the serial number of the original entry communication. Also, the communication specifically should identify which individual(s) should be removed from the TWL, as well as the reason for removal. The TWL staff will send a communication to the originating office confirming removal of the TWL record.
It is incumbent that field offices also ensure entries are removed from VGTOF, to include "Silent Hits," once the entries are no longer of interest. Only the office which made the VGTOF entry has the capability to remove the entry. Silent Hit entries have to be removed by CJIS.
TWL INITIATIVES
The TWL staff is working closely with the Office of the Chief Scientist, Information Resources Division, FBIHQ to develop a database management system to replace the TWL's current system. The new system will consist of a browser-based Windows application which will allow users to acces·s a secure database containing classified TWL information. The application will contain phonetic search and scan capabilities, user tracking parameters, and security protocols which will enable query access via the FBI Intranet for FBI field offices and FBIHQ divisions.
Once the new database management system is completed, field offices and FBIHQ Divisions will have the capability to not only view TWL entries via the Intranet, but also submit electronic requests for entry to or removal. from the TWL. An electronic feedback form also will be available on the Intranet, to solicit recommendations/comments regarding future enhancements or modifications to the TWL.
In addition to the above, the TWL staff is working closely with the FBI-led Foreign Terrorist Tracking Task Force (FTTTF} to develop procedures wherein data maintained in the TWL database will be exploited and analyzed by the FTTTF. Per U.S. Attorney General memorandum dated 04/11/2002, the FTTTF has the mission of keeping foreign terrorists and their supporters out of the U.S. by providing critical and timely information to border control and interior enforcement agencies and officials. To accomplish its mission, the FTTTF has acquired electronic access to various databases. It is feasible these databases can be used to exploit TWL data. Results of
5 NCIC-VGTOF-11153

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-4 Filed 07/06/11 Page 55 of 70
To: All Field Offices From: Counterterrorism Re: 66F-HQ-C1392852, 10/23/2002

any FTTTF analyses on TWL data will be disseminated to the respective field office and/or FBIHQ substantive unit for lead value and any further investigation deemed appropriate.
The technological enhancements to the TWL database management system, combined with the interaction between the TWL staff and other count;.erterrorism initiatives, will take the TWL beyond its original sole function as a central repository of names to a truly useful tool which will facilitate the sharing, exploitation and analysis of information.
Finally, the TWL staff will implement procedures to track all other watch lists in which TWL subjects appear. In conjunction with this, the TWL staff will establish ~d implement semi-annual validation procedures to ensure only those subjects falling within established criteria remain on the TWL and other watch lists, as applicable. The information will be validated through the agency/office which.requested the initial TWL entry.

TWL VERSYS OTHER "WATCH" LISTS

During the comprehensive assessment of the TWL, it was
apparent that confusion existed over the TWL and other watch lists utilized in the fight against terrorism. Set forth below are
descriptions of other watch lists and how they are interrelated, if at all, to the TWL.

National Cr~e Information Center Violent Gang and Terrorist Organization File
(VGTOF)

VGTOF is an electronic file in NCIC, administered by the

Programs Development Section, CJIS Division, Clarksburg, West

Virginia. VGTOF is designed to provide identifying information about

violent criminal gangs and terrorist organizations, as well as members

of those gangs and organizations, to law enforcement personnel. This

information serves to warn law enforcement ·officers of the potential

dangers posed by violent individuals and to promote the exchange of

information about these individuals and organizations. VGTOF

information is for the use of criminal justice agencies for criminal

justice purposes.

·

By EC dated 06/10/2002 (66F-HQ-A1255362 serial 104), field offices were provided with VGTOF entry protocols in terrorism

6 NCIC-VGTOF-11154

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-4 Filed 07/06/11 Page 56 of 70
To: All Field Offices From: Counterterrorism Re: 66F-HQ-C1392852, 10/23/2002

matters. 2 By EC dated 07/11/2002 (66F-HQ-C1250689 serial 88), field offices were provided with new terrorist group/subgroup codes and instructed to modify their existing VGTOF records with the new codes. 3
Currently, VGTOF is the primary mechanism the FBI utilizes to retain and share unclassified terrorist-related information with other agencies who have access to NCIC. As VGTOF contains no classified information, only names and identifying data relative to terrorist subjects are loaded into VGTOF. Once the new secure TWL database is completed, VGTOF will continue to be utilized to share unclassified identifying information regarding terrorism subjects with other agencies. The TWL database will retain the classified information, to include electronic copies of supporting documents. The classified information retained in the TWL database will be shared with other agencies authorized to receive such information. Information placed in VGTOF by field offices will be entered into the TWL database. Most field offices can enter their own data into VGTOF, while only the TWL staff can make entries into the TWL database. Those field offices unable to make entries into VGTOF should continue to submit those entries through CJIS. In concert with the development of the new TWL database management system, technological enhancements are being explo~ed which would allow fie~d offices to submit information simultaneously for entry into VGTOF and the TWL.
Following discussions with personnel assigned to various field offices, the TWL staff opined the "Silent Hit" feature of NCIC, as described in the 06/10/2002 EC, caused confusion regarding its purpose and criteria for entry. 4 Currently, Silent Hit entries only

20nly subjects of full field investigations are required to be placed into NCIC's VGTOF. The decision as to which, if any, preliminary inquiry subjects are placed into the NCIC system is delegated to the SAC and appropriate Section Chief ofthe International or Domestic Terrorism Programs at FBlliQ.

3The new VGTOF group codes which are to be used in new cases, as well as in the modification of records

already entered into NCIC, are the Domestic Extremist NCIC Code (DMST XTMST*DFBI) and International

Extremist NCIC Code (INTRNTL XTMSTS*IFBI). Moreover, four new categories of subgroup codes were

created for domestic and international terrorism cases: (1) Category l*DFBI and Category l*IFBI; (2) Category

2*DFBI and Category 2*1FBI; {3) Category 3*DFBI and Category 3*IFBI; and (4) Category 4*DFBI and Category

4*1FBI.

b7E

4Criteria to be considered when entering subjects of International Terrorism cases as Silent Hits are as

follows: Subject is the target of a classified collection technique, or the full field investigation was opened based on

single source reporting; the full investigation was opened due to classified information received from other U.S. or

foreign law enforcement or intelligence agencies; or subject does not pose a threat to local law enforcement.

Criteria to be considered when entering subjects ofDomestic Terrorism cases as Silent Hits are as follows: Full

field investigation was opened based on single source reporting; the full investigation was opened due to classified

information received from othe

·

· ·

·

•

threat to local law enforcement·

7 NCIC-VGTOF-11155

- -- -----~------------------------------------------~--------------~

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-4 Filed 07/06/11 Page 57 of 70
To: All Field Offices From: Counterterrorism Re: 66F-HQ-C1392852, 10/23/2002
can be made by CJIS. As such, field offices should direct a communication to CJIS to enter a subject as a Silent Hit. If a
subject is entered into NCIC as a Silent Hit, the officer/official
inquiring about the subject through NCIC will receive no response
regarding the subject as a result of the inquiry. However 1 the TWL
staff will receive an instantaneous notification that an inquiry was conducted on the subject. Thereafter 1 the TWL staff will
telephonically notify the office of origin and identify the agency
which made the inquiry on the subject. The TWL staff will document the telephonic notification via EC to the appropriate field office.
In an effort to ensure both VGTOF and the TWL contain the most current and accurate data1 field offices are requested to review
all their terrorist-related VGTOF entries 1 to include Silent Hits 1 and
ensure the entries are consistent with the protocols and criteria set forth in the 06/10/2002 and 07/11/2002 ECs referenced herein. Furthermore, field offices will ensure all VGTOF entries contain a file number for reference and a point of contact. This will expedite notifications by local law enforcement and the TWL staff. VGTOF reviews and any modifications must be completed by COB 11/15/2002. Thereafter, the TWL staff will acquire from CJIS all terrorist-related VGTOF entries and load the updated data into the TWL database. The TWL staff will continue to acquire from CJIS, on a regular basis, all new VGTOF entries and Silent Hit requests.
Transportation Security Administration outside the scope (No Fly and Selectee Lists)
8 NCIC-VGTOF-11156

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-4 Filed 07/06/11 Page 58 of 70

OPCA-20 (12-3-96)

FEDERAL BUREAU OF. INVESTIGATION FOIPA
DELETED PAGE INFORMATION SHEET

xxxxxx xxxxxx xxxxxx

_ 3 _ Page(s) withheld entirely at this location in the ftle. One or more of the following statements, where indicated,
explain this deletion.

0 Deletions were made pursuant to the exemptions indicated below with no segregable material available for release to you.

Section 552

Section 552a

0 (b)(l)

0 (b)(7)(A)

0 (d)(S)

0 (b)(2)

0 (b)(7)(B)

0 (j)(2)

0 (b)(3)

0 (b)(7)(C)

0 (k)(l)

0 (b)(7)(D)

0 (k)(2)

D (b)(4) D (b){S) D (b)(6)

0 (b)(7)(E) 0 {b){7)(F) 0 (b)(8)
0 (b)(9)

0 (k)(3) D (k)(4) D (k)(S) 0 (k)(6) 0 (k)(7)

0 Information pertained only to a third party with no reference to the subject of your request or the subject of your request is listed in the title only.

0 Documents originated with another Government agency(ies). These documents were referred to that agency(ies) for review and direct response to you.

Pages contain information furnished by another Government agency(ies). You will be advised by the FBI as to the releasability of this information following our consultation with the other agency(ies).

Page(s) withheld inasmuch as a final release determination has not been made. You will be advised as to the disposition at a later date.

Pages were not considered for release as they are duplicative o f - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
_J__ Page(s) withheld for the following reason(s):

K The folio~~number is to be used for reference regarding these pages: c- /1151 \)qTOE; lll5 7 -

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

X Deleted Page(s) X

X No Duplication Fee X

X for this page

X

x:xxxxxxxxxxxxx

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-4 Filed 07/06/11 Page 59 of 70
To: All Field Offices From: Counterterrorism Re: 66F-HQ-C~392852, ~0/23/2002
LEAD (s) :
Set Lead 1: ALL RECEIVING OFFICES By no later than close of business ~~/~5/2002, (a) review
and ensure all terrorist-related VGTOF entries are consistent with the protocols and criteria set forth in 66F-HQ-A~255362 serial ~04 and 66F-HQ-C~250689 serial 88; and (b) ensure all VGTOF entries contain a file number for reference and a point of contact.· Set Lead 2:
ALL RECEIVING OFFICES International Terrorism and Domestic Terrorism Program
Managers will disseminate this communication to appropriate personnel and ensure compliance with the criteria and protocols established for the Terrorism Watch List .
••
12 NCIC-VGTOF-11160

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-4 Filed 07/06/11 Page 60 of 70
DOCUMENT 124

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-4 Filed 07/06/11 Page 61 of 70
National Foreign Intelligence Program Manual (NFIPM)

NFIPM Section 19 (U) International Terrorism Investigations

(See also MIOG, Part 1, 100-1.2, 100-1.2.2, 100-2.3, 199-1, 256-10, 262-1, 265-1, and 315-1.)

EFFDATE: 04/30/2004 MCRT# 1338 Div. CT Cav:

SecCiass: Unclassified

Section 19-01 (U) Introduction to International Terrorism Investigations

A. (U) [The 199 (International Terrorism), 265 (Act of Terrorism), 256A (Hostage Taking by
International Terrorists), and 262 (Overseas Homicide/Attempted Homicide) classifications have been deleted from the Manual of Investigative Operations and Guidelines (MIOG). The 315 classification (International Terrorism) replaces these four previous violations and will be the appropriate classification for International Terrorism investigations. B. (U) International Terrorism investigations are national security investigations that s_upport the FBI's priority to protect the United States from terrorist attack. This goal drives the Counterterrorism Division's (CTD's) mission to prevent, disrupt, and defeat terrorist operations before they occur. C. (U) The nature of International Terrorism investigations must focus on: 1. The complete identification of all subjects. 2. The exhaustive development of intelligence on the operations and capabilities of these subjects, including support, training, recruitment, financing, and attack planning. 3. The dissemination and exploitation of the intelligence, to include human and technical source reporting. 4. A properly targeted response that considers all available investigative opportunities, which includes criminal prosecution. Because of the potential for eventual criminal prosecution, International Terrorism investigations should, whenever possible, be conducted in a manner that preserves this option while collecting disseminable intelligence. D. (U) Within the international terrorism arena, there is no longer a distinction between "criminal" and "intelligence" investigations, Agents, or squads. E. (U) There were three significant legal developments after September 11, 2001 that affected International Terrorism investigations: 1. "Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism Act of 2001" (USA PATRIOT Act), effective October 26, 2001. 2. "Intelligence Sharing Procedures for Foreign Intelligence and Foreign Counterintelligence Investigations Conducted by the FBI," issued on March 6, 2002 by the Department of Justice (DOJ). 3. Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court of Review's opinion issued on November 18, 2002, In reSealed Case, 310 F.3d 717 (FISCR 2002). (U) These developments removed the "walls" that were historically erected between "criminal" and "intelligence" International Terrorism investigations. They also permit unprecedented coordination among the FBI, DOJ, and the U.S. Intelligence Community (USIC). F. (U) In support of International Terrorism investigations, CTD has developed a Model Counterterrorism Investigative Strategy (MCIS), detailed within this section, which is to be utilized by International Terrorism investigators and analysts. G. (U) The FBI shall conduct its International Terrorism investigations in compliance with the Attorney General's Guidelines for FBI National Security Investigations and Foreign Intelligence Collection (National Security Investigations Guidelines, or NSIG), which were issued October 31, 2003. The general objective of the NSIG is the full utilization of all authorities and investigative techniques, consistent with the Constitution and laws of the United States, so as to protect the United States and its people from terrorism and other threats to the national security.

DATE: 02-26-2010 CLASSIFIED BY 65179 dnh/baw FIASOM: l. 4 (c)
DECLASSIFY ON: OZ-26-2035

]F.r 'ki I ;H6Ft9M
1
NCIC-VGTOF-11574

ALL INFORMATION CONTAINED HEREIN IS UNCLASSIFIED EXCEPT
WHERE SHOWN OTHER~ISE

DOCUMENT 124

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-4 Filed 07/06/11 Page 62 of 70

National Foreign Intelligence Program Manual (NFIPM)
= :S:E'I d1' ffi8F'OM

Su ...

• ~n..rt ti=ISCl

bl

(s) .

\\

• :li..nt
R. (U) Violent Gang and Terrorist Orgamzat1on File (VGI ur) ana 1erronsrscreemng-cemer (TSC) Database 1. (U) Subjects of both Preliminary and Full Investigations must be entered into the Violent Gang and Terrorist Organization File (VGTOF) by completing an FD-930. In the FD-930, case Agents must make a recommendation to the Terrorism Review and Examination Unit (TREX) regarding into which databases the subject should be entered and a recommended Handling Code. Upon closing the Preliminary or Full Investigation, the case Agent shall remove subjects who no longer merit inclusion via form FD-930. 2. (U) The "Miscellaneous" field on the FD-930 should include the case Agent's name and 2417 contact number, the subject's USPER status and country of citizenship, and any other pertinent information. CLASSIFIED INFORMATION MAY NOT BE LISTED IN THE "MISCELLANEOUS" FIELD. 3. (U) The databases into which a subject can be entered will be listed in the FD-930, but they include the Violent Gang and Terrorist Organization File (VGTOF), TSA No Fly or TSA Selectee lists, Treasury Enforcement Communications Systems (TECS), and Consular Lookout and Support System (CLASS) for non-USPERs. 4. (U) The Handling Codes categories, and a description of each, will be listed in the FD-930. S. (U) Information Sharing 1. (U) Information acquired during the course of an International Terrorism investigation should be shared as consistently and fully as possible among agencies with relevant responsibilities to protect the United States and its people from terrorism and other threats to national security, except as limited by specific statutory or policy constraints. Information may be disseminated to obtain information for the conduct of a lawful investigation by the FBI.
=- :§EtKEY /Pl9F@' IS 15 NCIC -VGTOF-11575

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-4 Filed 07/06/11 Page 63 of 70
National Foreign lnteJUgence Program Manual (NFIPM)
SU Rl''f :ff8t'8Rf4
B. Closing Communication to FBIHQ 1. The closing communication will be sent to the Counterterrorism Division to the attention of the following: a) Substantive unit b) Terrorist Review and Examination Unit (TREX), LX-1 3S-200 c) CT Analytical Section, LX-1 3W-400 d) TFOS/PMCU, Rm. 4933 e) Other sections or units, as appropriate f) Appropriate field office or Legal Attache (Mlegat"), if subject relocated 2. An FD-930 will be enclosed to remove or modify the entry in VGTOF. 3. The Details section of the closing communication will contain the following information: a) The type of investigation (i.e., Preliminary or Full) b) The date it was opened c) The date it was converted from a Preliminary Investigation to Full Investigation, if applicable d) If a Full Investigation, then the date and serial number of the most recent Annual Summary e) Whether the investigation involves a United States person f) An assessment of the extent to which the subject is (or members of the group are) aware of the terrorist aims of the foreign power g) Any Sensitive National Security Matters, which are defined in the NSIG as "a threat to the national security involving the activities of an official of a foreign country other than a threat country, a domestic public official or political candidate, a religious or political organization or an individual prominent in such an organization, or news media, or any other matter which, in the judgment of the official authorizing an investigation, should be brought to the attention of FBI Headquarters and other Department of Justice officials. • h) Name and all aliases of the subject and complete biographical information regarding the subject i) Subject classification (see D. below) i) A summarv of the investioation to include a list of the investigative techniques used, to include:
b7E

.§f;LB!i''f ltl9PGIUS=
17
NCIC-VGTOF-11576 .

I bl
b7E

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-4 Filed 07/06/11 Page 64 of 70
National Foreign Intelligence Program Manual (NFIPM)
e) A Recruiter knowingly works to identify and/or attract individuals to participate in terrorismrelated activity and/or facilitates those individuals' entry into such activities. To classify a subject as a Recruiter, investigators must articulate specific information indicating the subject appears to be or could in the near future be expected to knowingly assist a terrorist organization with acquisition of new operatives or supporters.
Examples of information possibly supporting classification of a subject as a Recruiter include:
Detainee reporting naming the subject as knowingly assisting the detainee in his entry into terrorist activity and/or training; records or source reporting related to travel arrangements or contacts indicating the subject facilitates others' travel for overseas terrorist training or indoctrination f) Other: Subjects of counterterrorism investigations who do not otherwise fit the criteria for the above designations. Describe the known or suspected nexus to a foreign power in detail. E. Completion and Submission of the FD-930, details are available on the TREX website: http://ctd.fbinet.fbiltrex/ 1. Completion of Gang, Subgroup, and File #fields a) In the Gang field, enter International Extremist" b) In the Subgroup field, enter the VGTOF handling code (1, 2, 3, 4, or silent hit) c) In the File# field, enter the substantive 315 file number, not an administrative file number (such as the 66 classification) or other control file number 2. To remove or modify a record in VGTOF, send a copy of the closing communication and an enclosed FD-930 to the TREX. Check the "Remove" box or the "Supplements Initial Submission" box at the top of the form. The FD-930 must be sent directly to the TREX, not to the substantive unit. 3. Upon closing a Preliminary or Full Investigation, the case agent shall request the removal from U.S. government watch lists of any subject who no longer merits inclusion. 4. Subjects of Full Investigations may remain in VGTOF and other watchlists, if appropriate. Example: The subject of a Full Investigation is still a threat to national security, but moves to another field office's area of responsibility or outside the USA and thus the field office closes .its case. Notify appropriate field office or Legat in the Details area of the closing communication F. Leads: Field offices are required to provide notification to the appropriate CTD substantive desk whenever an investigation is closed.
EFFDATE: 04/11/2005 MCRT# 1382 Div. CTCav: SecCiass:~
Section 19...05 (U) Conclusion
A. (U) The FBI's investigation of international terrorism, through the MCIS, emphasizes collecting, analyzing, and disseminating intelligence on terrorist targets in an effort to prevent future attacks. Criminal prosecution remains a possibility throughout the investigation. This approach, which employs both intelligence collection and traditional law enforcement tools, is a central to the FBI's successful counterterrorism mission.
EFFDATE: 12/01/2003 MCRT# 1314 Div. CT Cav: SecCiass: Unclassified
Section 19...06 (U) Terrorism Screening Procedures (Watchlisting)
A. (U) Role of the Terrorist Screening Center (TSC)
(U) The TSC was established by Homeland Security Presidential Directive (HSPD) 6 on 09/16/2003, which directed the establishment of an organization that would consolidate the government=s approach to terrorism screening and provide for the appropriate and lawful use of
"SJ!,i lilT ?N9POII!If 20
NCIC~VGTOF-11577

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-4 Filed 07/06/11 Page 65 of 70
National Foreign Intelligence Program Manual (NFIPM)
terrorist information in screening processes. The mission of the TSC is to facilitate and assist in the protection against terrorism by: 1. Consolidating the Govemmenr-s approach to terrorism screening; 2. Providing for the appropriate and lawful use of the terrorist information in screening processes; 3. Maintaining consolidated, thorough, accurate and current terrorist identities information; 4. Sharing information globally and between the Federal, State, local, territorial, and tribal law· enforcement and Intelligence communities; and carrying out these activities in a manner consistent with the Constitution and applicable laws protecting privacy and civil liberties. B. (U) Watchlisting Policy for Known or Appropriately Suspected Terrorists 1. The Counterterrorism Division's (CTD) policy requires that all main IT subjects for both Full and Preliminary Investigations in the 315 classification and all subjects of domestic terrorism (DT) Full Investigations in the 266 classification shall be nominated for entry into the TSC's Terrorist Screening Database (TSDB) and all eligible supported systems if the subject meets the criteria for inclusion. Individuals being investigated as part of a Threat Assessment shall not be included in the TSDB or any of its supported systems. See Section C below for a discussion of the TSDB's supported systems. 2. Main DT subjects for both Full and Preliminary Investigations in the 174 classification and subjects of DT Preliminary Investigations in the 266 classification may, at the discretion of the nominating official (e.g., Joint Terrorism Task Force, FBI Case Agent or Intelligence Analyst, or Headquarters supervisor, if HQ Is the Office of Origin), be nominated for entry into the TSDB and, if the subject meets the criteria for inclusion, all eligible supported systems. 3. The nomination of main subjects for entry into the TSDB and all eligible supported systems is consistent with HSPD-6 and the "Memorandum of Understanding On Integration and Use of Screening Information to Protect Against Terrorism," issued 09116/2003 (the "MOU"), and provides a consistent and efficient method to ensure that only individuals who are known or appropriately suspected terrorists are included in all eligible supported systems. 4. Subjects with no nexus to terrorism shall not be nominated for entry into the TSDB. Terrorist group or organization names cannot be nominated for entry into the ·TSDB. The procedure for nominating subjects for entry into the TSDB Is detailed below in Section D. C. (U) Terrorist Screening Database and its Supported Systems (U) The TSC maintains the U.S. Governmenfs consolidated terrorist watchlist, known as the TSDB. of the names and other identifying information for all known or appropriately suspected terrorists. The TSC consolidated into the TSDB the existing subsets of information about known or appropriately suspected terrorists from supported systems. (U) The TSC receives "Terrorist Identifiers" (as defined in Addendum B to the aforementioned MOU) from two sources. The information about known or appropriately suspected international terrorists comes from the National Counterterrorism Center (NCTC). which assembles and analyzes information from a wide range of sources. The FBI provides the TSC directly with the identities of known or appropriately suspected purely domestic terrorists. The Terrorist Identifiers in the TSDB are deemed For Official Use Only. (U) The TSDB and its supported systems are used by Federal, State, local, territorial, and tribal authorities and certain foreign governments to screen for known or appropriately suspected terrorists as part of their security or law enforcement missions. These authorities use their systems to run name checks against TSDB data. The TSC regularly exports updated subsets of TSDB data to the following supported systems: 1. Violent Gang and Terrorist Organization File (VGTOF). VGTOF is a file within the National Crime Information Center (NCIC) database that is composed of information in possession of the U.S. Government related to the identities of individuals known or appropriately suspected to be or have been involved in activities constituting, in preparation for, in aid of, or related to IT or DT. 2. No Fly and Selectee Lists. On 10/21/2004, the Homeland Security Council Deputies Committee met and established the following criteria for the No Fly and Selectee Lists: No Fly List:
~(:RF ll~48F8RtC
21
NOC-VGTOF-11578

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-4 Filed 07/06/11 Page 66 of 70
National Foreign Intelligence Program Manual (NFIPM)

3. All subjects who qualify for inclusion on the No Fly List will be nominated to that list in no more

than 24 hours. Individuals will not be included on the No Fly or Selectee Lists without sufficient

derogatory information supporting inclusion.

4. The TSDB contains only the identities of known or appropriately suspected individual

terrorists. A nomination to include a subject in the TSDB who is not associated with terrorism will

not be processed.

5. The submission of an EC, FD-930 and NOI/LHM affirms the subject is a known or

appropriately suspected terrorist. Any FD-93Qs received without an accompanying EC will not be

processed.

6. After the TREX Unit reviews and approves the FD-930, it forwards the FD-930 to NCTC for all
IT nominations and directly to the TSC for all purely DT nominations. For IT nominations, NCTC forwards the relevant information to the TSC for entry into the TSDB and eligible supported

systems, as appropriate.

E. (U) Exclusion from a Particular Supported System

1. An individual included in the TSDB will be included in all supported systems if the individual

meets the criteria for inclusion. An individual may be excluded from a particular supported

system in rare cases when there is a reasonable and detailed operational justification for not

including the individual in a particular supported system and the request for exclusion has been

reviewed and approved by the TREX Unit and the TSC. The reasonable and detailed justification

must be included in both the EC and the appropriate field of the FD-930. The existence of a local

or state "Sunshine Law" is not sufficient justification for exclusion.

2. The justification to exclude a subject from any particular support system will be reviewed by

the TREX Unit and the TSC. After the review, the TREX Unit will notify the nominating official

regarding whether CTD: (1) supports the justification resulting in the exclusion of the name from a

particular supported system, or (2) finds the justification for exclusion insufficient resulting in the

subjecfs addition to the particular supported system. The TSC will make the final decision.

F. (U) VGTOF Handling Codes

.

(U) Each record in VGTOF will be assigned a Handling Code, as follows:

1. Handling Code 1 is reserved for individuals for whom there is an active arrest warrant in the

NCIC Wanted Persons File. The warrant number must be included on the FD-930. If the arrest

warrant is no longer valid, then the case agent has an obligation to submit a new FD-930 to the

TREX Unit to update the record. The following banner appears in VGTOF when a Handling Code

1 is encountered:

'WARNING -APPROACH WITH CAUTION

THIS INDIVIDUAL IS ASSOCIATED WITH TERRORISM AND IS THE SUBJECT OF AN

ARREST WARRANT, ALTHOUGH THE WARRANT MAY NOT BE RETRIEVABLE VIA THE

SEARCHED IDENTIFIERS. IF AN ARREST WARRANT FOR THE INDIVIDUAL IS RETURNED

IN YOUR SEARCH OF NCIC, DETAIN THE INDIVIDUAL PURSUANT TO YOUR

DEPARTMENT'S PROCEDURES FOR HANDLING AN OUTSTANDING WARRANT. AND

IMMEDIATELY CONTACT THE TERRORIST SCREENING CENTER ATI

fOR

ADDITIONAL DIRECTION. IF AN ARREST WARRANT FOR THE INDIVIDUAL IS NOT

RETURNED, USE CAUTION AND IMMEDIATELY CONTACT THE TERRORIST SCREENING

CENTE~

IFOR ADDITIONAL DIRECTION.

IF YOU ARE A BORDER PATROL OFFICER IMMEDIATELY CALL THE NTC."

2. Handling Code 2 is reserved for individuals for whom DHS has or will issue a ADetainer@

should the individual be encountered by law enforcement.

Nominations of individuals in VGTOF with this handling code will require a particularized review of

the intelligence records. To use Handling Code 2, a review and approval for legal sufficiency by

both the Chief Division Counsel and the Office of General Counsel (OGC) is required for this

Handling Code. The TSC-OGC representative, in coordination with the National Security Law

Branch (NSLB), will provide such approval for OGC. The following banner appears in VGTOF

when a Handling Code 2 is encountered:

~cRea IN8P81\JC
23 NCIC-VGfOF-11579

b2
b6 b7c b7E

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-4 Filed 07/06/11 Page 67 of 70
National Foreign Intelligence Program Manual (NFIPM)

'WARNING- APPROACH WITH CAUTION

PLEASE DETAIN THIS INDIVIDUAL FOR A REASONABLE AMOUNT OF TIME FOR

QUESTIONING. THIS INDIVIDUAL IS OF INVESTIGATIVE INTEREST TO LAW

ENFORCEMENT REGARDING ASSOCIATION WITH TERRORISM.

IMMEDIATELY coNTACT THE TERRORIST scREENING CENTER ATI

!FoR

ADDITIONAL DIRECTION.

IF YOU ARE A BORDER PATROL OFFICER IMMEDIATELY CALL THE NTC."

3. Handling Code 3 is reserved for those records which contain a full first and last name and a

complete date of birth or a full first and last name and a passport number. The following banner appears in VGTOF when a Handling Code 3 is encountered: ***DO NOT ALERT THIS INDIVIDUAL TO THIS NOTICE.*** THE PERSON QUERIED THROUGH THIS SEARCH MAY BE AN INDIVIDUAL IDENTIFIED BY INTELLIGENCE INFORMATION AS HAVING POSSIBLE TIES WITH TERRORISM.

b2 b6
b7C
b7E

CONTACT THE TERRORIST SCREENING CENTER ATI

dFOR ADDITIONAL

IDENTIFYING INFORMATION AVAILABLE TO ASSIST YOU IN MAKIN THIS

DETERMINATION.

DO NOT ARREST THIS INDIVIDUAL UNLESS THERE IS EVIDENCE OF A VIOLATION OF

FEDERAL, STATE OR LOCAL STATUTES. CONDUCT LOGICAL INVESTIGATION USING

TECHNIQUES AUTHORIZED IN YOUR JURISDICTION AND ASK PROBING QUESTIONS TO

DETERMINE IF THIS INDIVIDUAL IS IDENTICAL TO THE PERSON OF LAW ENFORCEMENT

INTEREST.

WARNING ··APPROACH WITH CAUTION.

IF YOU ARE A BORDER PATROL OFFICER IMMEDIATELY CALL THE NTC.

***DO NOT ADVISE THIS INDIVIDUAL THAT THEY ARE ON A TERRORISTWATCHLIST.***"

4. Handling Code 4 is reserved for those records which have limited biographical data, but are of

interest to law enforcement. The following banner appears in VGTOF when a Handling Code 4 is

encountered:

"***DO NOT ALERT THIS INDIVIDUAL TO THIS NOTICE***

THE PERSON QUERIED THROUGH THIS SEARCH MAY BE AN INDIVIDUAL IDENTIFIED BY

b2

INTELLIGENCE INFORMATION AS HAVING POSSIBLE TIES WITH TERRORISM.

b6

CONTACT THE TERRORIST SCREENING CENTER ATI

~OR ADDITIONAL

b7c

IDENTIFYING INFORMATION THAT MAY BE AVAILABLE TO ASSIST YOU IN MAKING THIS

b7E

DETERMINATION.

DO NOT ARREST THIS INDIVIDUAL UNLESS THERE IS EVIDENCE OF A VIOLATION OF

FEDERAL, STATE OR LOCAL STATUTES. ATTEMPT TO OBTAIN SUFFICIENT

IDENTIFICAl"ION INFORMATION TO POSITIVELY IDENTIFY THIS INDIVIDUAL IN A MANNER

CONSISTENT WITH THE TECHNIQUES AUTHORIZED IN YOUR JURISDICTION.

(S)

WARNING· APPROACH WITH CAUTION.

IF YOU ARE A BORDER PATROL OFFICER IMMEDIATELY CALL THE NTC.

***DO NOT ADVISE THIS INDIVIDUAL THAT HE IS ON A TERRORIST WATCHLIST***"
G ll n Silent Hits

bl

= ~tRt}J i$l9lii'lf 24 NCIC-VGTOF-11580

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-4 Filed 07/06/11 Page 68 of 70
National Foreign Intelligence Program Manual (NFIPM)
(S)
hl
H. (U) U.S. Person (USPER) status A subjecfs USPER status does not affect his/her nomination for entry into the TSDB, but it may affect a subject's export to a particular supported system. For example, the TSC exports US PER identities to DOS's CLASS-Passport system, but not to CLASS-Visa, TUSCAN or TACTICS. Since an USPER would have no reason to apply for a visa to enter the United States, USPERs are not in CLASS-Visa. I. (U) Nomination of Non-FBI Subjects for Terrorist Screening 1. Individuals who are known or appropriately suspected terrorists, but who are not FBI subjects of an IT investigation, may be nominated by the FBI for inclusion in the TSDB via the NCTC as provided below. 2. The FBI may nominate non-USPERs or presumed non-USPERs (as those terms are defined in the Attorney General's Guidelines for FBI National Security Investigations and Foreign Intelligence Collection, or NSIG, issued 10/31/2003) who are not subjects of IT investigations (315 classification) for entry into NCTC's Terrorist Identities Datamart Environment (TIDE) for terrorist screening purposes. Such entry does not apply to subjects of pending or closed FBI IT investigations (315 classification). For procedures relating to the nomination of an FBI subject for entry into the TSDB, refer to Section D above. 3. All FBI personnel -- either Headquarters or Field Offices -- desiring to submit information (i.e., military detainee or Legat records) to NCTC for terrorist screening purposes must send an EC, uploaded with unrestricted text, to the substantive unit in CTD that has program management responsibility for the terrorist organization to which the known or appropriately suspected terrorist is a member or affiliate. 4. The EC to CTD should contain enough substantive information to identify the individual as a known or appropriately suspected terrorist. Although the teletype to NCTC will not contain sources and methods, the EC to the substantive desk should include the source of the information. The EC should not provide mere conclusions (e.g., "subject is an international terrorist"). Instead, the EC should provide specific justification (e.g., "subject is a member of a HAMAS cell that includes individuals currently opened as Full Investigations in the 315 classification"). Any information that may be subject to use restrictions (i.e., federal grand jury (Rule 6e), FISA, sealed material or Bank Secrecy Act information) should be clearly marked. When known, information that an individual is considered "Armed & Dangerous" should also be clearly marked. 5. The EC should also contain all the identifying information known on the individual: a. full legal name and aliases; b. dates of birth (month, date, and year); c. places of birth; d. unique identifying numbers such as alien registration numbers, visa numbers, social security account number(s); e. passport information, including passport numbers, countries of issuance, dates and locations of issuance, expiration dates. passport photos, and other relevant data; f. countries of origin and nationalities; g. physical identifiers, such as sex, race, height, weight, eye color, hair color, scars, marks, or tattoos: h. known locations, i.e., addresses; i. photographs or renderings of the individual; j. fingerprints or other biometric data; k. employment data; I. license plate numbers; and m. any other terrorism information that originators specifically provide for passage to the TSC.
"'SEI UT R¥6'9i:N::-
25 NCIC-VGTOF-11581

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-4 Filed 07/06/11 Page 69 of 70
National Foreign Intelligence Program Manual (NFIPM)

6. The substantive unit will be required to draft a teletype to NCTC requesting the entry of the individual(s) into TIDE. Based on the derogatory information in the teletype, NCTC will determine whether to nominate an individual to the No Fly or Selectee list. For non-subjects, a teletype is required, since this information is being disseminated outside of the FBI to the U.S. Intelligence Community (USIC). 7. Once the teletype is received by NCTC, a record will be generated and the For Official Use Only (FOUO) identifying information will be forwarded to the TSC. The individual will then be entered into the TSDB and eligible supported systems. 8. The teletype to NCTC should not contain any information identifying sources or methods, since this teletype will be available for review by authorized members of the USIC who have access to NCTC Online. However, it should contain all relevant unclassified identifying information referenced above in subsection 5.
J. (U) On-going Requirement to Update Information .
(U) After the initial submission of the FD-930, it is essential that information about a known or appropriately suspected terrorist (e.g., change in investigation status, updated biographical information or in the nominating official's contact information) be updated as information changes and/or new information becomes available. To update or modify a record, check the "Add Data to Existing Record" box or the "Modify or Delete Data from Existing Record" box at the top of the FD-930 and enter the updated information in the appropriate fields. The FD-930 and an EC must be sent via e-mail directly to the TREX Unit with a copy to the substantive unit. K. (U) Removal of Identities from the TSDB 1. To remove an identity from the TSDB and all the eligible supported systems, e-mail a copy of the approved closing communication and FD-930 to the TREX Unit at HQ_DIV13_TREX. The "Administrative" section of the closing communication should include language to the following effect: "Per concurrence with CTD [reference approving authority and substantive unit], the PI/FI is being closed." Check the "Remove Individual From ALL Watchlisting and Supported Systems" box. The FD-930 and EC must be e-mailed directly to the TREX Unit with a copy to the substantive unit. The TREX Unit does not require hard copies of the FD-930 and EC. 2. When a Preliminary Investigation is closed, the subject must be removed from the TSDB (i.e., VGTOF and the other supported systems). 3. If a Full Investigation is closed because no link to terrorism was established, the subject must be removed from the TSDB. However, if a subject of a Full Investigation moves to another Field
Office=s jurisdiction or outside the United States, the subject should remain in the TSDB, if the
subject continues to pose a threat to national security. In those cases, the case agent must notify the appropriate FBI Field Office or Legat in the closing communication that his/her subject is moving to their jurisdiction.
L. (U) Expedited Nominations
(U) In the event that a subject must be watchlisted in an expeditious manner (e.g., the known or appropriately suspected terrorist's travel is imminent), a nomination may be processed directly by the TSC. This expedited action, known as an Expedited Nomination. ensures the subject's information is sent to TSC's exported data base (i.e., No Fly List, Selectee List. VGTOF, IBIS, CLASS, TUSCAN and TACTICS) for immediate notification. Expedited nominations must still meet the criteria for entry in the TSDB. Most Expedited Nominations will request placement on the Transportation Security Administration's (TSA) No Fly or Selectee List. The TSC will determine if the subject qualifies for either of these lists. In addition to the TSA lists, the expedited nominee should also be placed in VGTOF and IBIS. The DOS's representative at TSC will be notified to determine the necessity and expeditious nature of placing the subject(s) in CLASS and the other supported systems (TACTICS and TUSCAN). (U) All Expedited Nominations will be processed immediately at TSC, and thereafter the nominations paperwork will be sent to NCTC for IT matters (so that a record in TIDE can be created) or the TREX Unit for DT matters for the nomination process on the next business day. The TSC will remove the expedited record from the TSDB and all supported system 72 hours

].ICJUf'f /N8F~i C
26

NCIC-VGTOF-11582

Case 2:09-cv-00642-RSL Document 77-4 Filed 07/06/11 Page 70 of 70
National Foreign Intelligence Program Manual (NFIPM)
= ""]Ji:C R l'f ;1(81" ~ P'i
later, unless the nominating official forwards sufficient derogatory information through the routine process. (U) All non-expedited requests will be processed through the normal daily ingest process and should be submitted to the TREX Unit. The TREX Unit will submit to NCTC for IT matters and directly to TSC for purely domestic matters. M. (U) Arrest Warrants and Interpol Notices for Watchlisted Individuals If there is an active arrest warrant in the NCIC Wanted Persons File for a subject in the TSDB, then the case agent must submit both a notification EC and FD-930 to the TREX Unit. VGTOF Handling Code 1 is reserved for subjects who have an active arrest warrant in the NCIC Wanted Persons File. 1. The notification EC and FD-930 must include the NCIC Warrant Number listed in the NCIC Wanted Persons File. In the case of currently watchlisted individuals, this documentation should also include any descriptive, biographical, or cautionary information about the subject that has not already been entered into the TSDB. The TREX Unit will enter the information into VGTOF, and, if necessary, make an appropriate change to the subject's handling code. 2. If there is an active arrest warrant for the subject, absent sensitive circumstances, the case agent should apply for an Interpol Red Notice. Interpol publishes these notices to their member states with a view to arrest and extradite the person to the country who holds the arrest warrant. The application for an Interpol Red Notice is available on the FBI's Intranet or by contacting an FBI representative at Interpol's U.S. National Central Bureau in Washington, D.C. 3. If an Interpol Red Notice is filed, then notification must be submitted to the TSC and the appropriate unit at FBIHQ. The Red Notice notification may be included in the original notification EC concerning the arrest warrant, or in a later EC as needed. The TSC will enter into the TSDB that the individual is subject of an Interpol Red Notice. 4. If an arrest warrant is no longer active in the NCIC Wanted Persons File (e.g., the arrest warrant has been served or recalled by the court), then a notification EC must be sent to the TREX Unit. The TREX Unit will make an appropriate entry into VGTOF reflecting the disposition of the warrant. 5. In rare circumstances, such as e sealed indictment, it may be necessary to keep information concerning an arrest warrant out of the TSDB. In such circumstances, the notification EC concerning the warrant must articulate a reasonable and detailed justification for such exclusion.
Section 19-07 (U) Deleted
EFFDATE: 12/01/2003 MCRT# 1314 Div. CT Cav: SecCiass: Unclassified
Section 19-08 (U) Deleted
EFFDATE: 12/01/2003 MCRT# 1314 Div. CT Cav: SecCiass: Unclassified
Section 19-09 (U) Deleted
EFFDATE: 01/17/2003 MCRT# 1273 Div. CT Cav: SecCiass: Unclassified
Section 19·10 (U) Human Rights Offenses
]~CftE'f $J9FOIIJS : 27
NCIC-VGTOF-11583

 
 1

2

3

4

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

5

WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON

AT SEATTLE

6

_______________________________________

7

)

AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION ) No. C09-0642RSL

8 OF WASHINGTON,

)

)

9

Plaintiff,

)

v.

) ORDER GRANTING THIRD

10

) MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE,

)

11

)

Defendant.

)

12 _______________________________________)

13 On September 21, 2012, the Court issued an order following in camera review
14 requiring disclosure of certain information. Defendant sought reconsideration, arguing that it
15 had additional classified information regarding the applicability of Exemption 1 that it had not
16 yet provided, apparently in the belief that it would be given an opportunity to present a witness
17 to further explain the documents and their import.
18 Although this is a very close call given that defendant failed to mention the
19 existence of any additional information until after disclosure had been ordered, the Court will err
20 on the side of caution. The motion for reconsideration is therefore GRANTED to the extent that
21 defendant will be permitted to deliver to chambers an ex parte declaration addressing the
22 applicability of Exemption 1 to Document Nos. 79, 80, and 84. Per the suggestion of the
23 Classified Information Security Officer assigned to this case, a printed electronic copy of the
24 declaration and/or other classified information shall be transmitted via classified channels
25 through the U.S. Attorney’s office in Seattle for hand-delivery directly to chambers within
26
ORDER GRANTING THIRD
MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION

1 fourteen days of the date of this order. The submission shall be sealed and clearly marked “For

2 In Camera Review – Judge’s Eyes Only.” Neither Mr. Hardy nor the Classified Information

3 Security Officer need appear in chambers.

4

5

Dated this 20th day of November, 2012.

6

A

7

Robert S. Lasnik United States District Judge

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

ORDER GRANTING THIRD

MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION

-2-

 
 Case: 2:09-cv-642 As of: 05/14/2015 08:26 AM PDT 1 of 9
CLOSED
U.S. District Court United States District Court for the Western District of Washington (Seattle)
CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE #: 2:09−cv−00642−RSL

American Civil Liberties Union of Washington v. US Department of Justice Assigned to: Judge Robert S. Lasnik Cause: 05:552 Freedom of Information Act
Plaintiff

Date Filed: 05/08/2009 Date Terminated: 09/21/2012 Jury Demand: None Nature of Suit: 895 Freedom of Information Act Jurisdiction: U.S. Government Defendant

American Civil Liberties Union of Washington

represented by Dror Ladin AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION (NY) IMMIGRANTS' RIGHTS PROJECT 125 BROAD ST 18TH FLOOR NEW YORK, NY 10004−2400 212−284−7303 Email: DLadin@aclu.org LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Lee Gelernt AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION FOUNDATION 125 BROAD ST 18TH FL NEW YORK, NY 10004 212−549−2616 Email: lgelernt@aclu.org LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Michael J. Wishnie ALLARD K. LOWENSTEIN INTERNATIONAL HUMAN RIGHTS CLINIC NATIONAL LITIGATION PROJECT YALE LAW SCHOOL 127 WALL ST. NEW HAVEN, CT 06511 203−432−4800 Email: michael.wishnie@yale.edu LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Sarah A Dunne ACLU OF WASHINGTON 901 FIFTH AVENUE SUITE 630 SEATTLE, WA 98164 206−624−2184 Email: sarahadunne@yahoo.com LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Eunice Lee

Case: 2:09-cv-642 As of: 05/14/2015 08:26 AM PDT 2 of 9
AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION FOUNDATION 125 BROAD ST 18TH FL NEW YORK, NY 10004 212−549−2676 Email: elee@aclu.org TERMINATED: 09/01/2009 PRO HAC VICE
Farrin Anello AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION FOUNDATION 125 BROAD ST 18TH FL NEW YORK, NY 10004 212−284−7303 Email: fanello@aclu.org TERMINATED: 10/04/2010 PRO HAC VICE
Harry Williams , IV LAW OFFICE OF HARRY WILLIAMS LLC 707 East Harrison SEATTLE, WA 98102 206−769−1772 Email: harry@harrywilliamslaw.com TERMINATED: 01/25/2010
Katherine Desormeau AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION FOUNDATION IMMIGRANTS' RIGHTS PROJECT 39 DRUMM STREET SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94111 415−343−0778 Email: kdesormeau@aclu.org PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Melody Rose Spidell ACLU OF WASHINGTON 901 FIFTH AVENUE SUITE 630 SEATTLE, WA 98164 206−624−2184 Email: spidell@aclu−wa.org TERMINATED: 05/10/2012

V. Defendant US Department of Justice

represented by Brian C Kipnis US ATTORNEY'S OFFICE (SEA) 700 STEWART ST STE 5220 SEATTLE, WA 98101−1271 206−553−7970 Email: Brian.Kipnis@usdoj.gov ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Marcia Kay Sowles US DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE (CIVIL

Case: 2:09-cv-642 As of: 05/14/2015 08:26 AM PDT 3 of 9
− 20 MASS) CIVIL DIVISION FEDERAL PROGRAMS 20 MASSACHUSETTS AVE NW STE 7300 WASHINGTON, DC 20530 202−514−4960 Email: marcia.sowles@usdoj.gov ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Date Filed 05/08/2009 05/14/2009 05/14/2009 05/14/2009 05/14/2009 05/14/2009 05/14/2009 05/14/2009 05/14/2009 08/28/2009 08/31/2009 08/31/2009

# Docket Text
1 COMPLAINT FOR DECLARATORY AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF against defendant US Department of Justice (Summons(es) issued)(Receipt # SEA26052), filed by American Civil Liberties Union of Washington. (Attachments: # 1 Civil Cover Sheet, # 2 Transmittal Email)(MKB) (Entered: 05/11/2009)
2 APPLICATION OF ATTORNEY Michael J. Wishnie FOR LEAVE TO APPEAR PRO HAC VICE for Plaintiff American Civil Liberties Union of Washington (Fee Paid) Receipt No. 09810000000001751314. (Attachments: # 1 Appendix ECF Registration Form)(Williams, Harry) (Entered: 05/14/2009)
3 APPLICATION OF ATTORNEY Eunice Lee FOR LEAVE TO APPEAR PRO HAC VICE for Plaintiff American Civil Liberties Union of Washington (Fee Paid) Receipt No. 09810000000001751321. (Attachments: # 1 Appendix ECF Registration Form)(Williams, Harry) (Entered: 05/14/2009)
4 APPLICATION OF ATTORNEY Farrin Anello FOR LEAVE TO APPEAR PRO HAC VICE for Plaintiff American Civil Liberties Union of Washington (Fee Paid) Receipt No. 09810000000001751324. (Attachments: # 1 Appendix ECF Registration Form)(Williams, Harry) (Entered: 05/14/2009)
5 APPLICATION OF ATTORNEY Lee Gelernt FOR LEAVE TO APPEAR PRO HAC VICE for Plaintiff American Civil Liberties Union of Washington (Fee Paid) Receipt No. 09810000000001751326. (Attachments: # 1 Appendix ECF Registration Form)(Williams, Harry) (Entered: 05/14/2009)
6 ORDER re 2 Application for Leave to Appear Pro Hac Vice. The Court ADMITS Attorney Michael J. Wishnie for American Civil Liberties Union of Washington, by Bruce Rifkin. (No document associated with this docket entry, text only.)(DS) (Entered: 05/14/2009)
7 ORDER re 3 Application for Leave to Appear Pro Hac Vice. The Court ADMITS Attorney Eunice Lee for American Civil Liberties Union of Washington, by Bruce Rifkin. (No document associated with this docket entry, text only.)(DS) (Entered: 05/14/2009)
8 ORDER re 4 Application for Leave to Appear Pro Hac Vice. The Court ADMITS Attorney Farrin Anello for American Civil Liberties Union of Washington, by Bruce Rifkin. (No document associated with this docket entry, text only.)(DS) (Entered: 05/14/2009)
9 ORDER re 5 Application for Leave to Appear Pro Hac Vice. The Court ADMITS Attorney Lee Gelernt for American Civil Liberties Union of Washington, by Bruce Rifkin. (No document associated with this docket entry, text only.)(DS) (Entered: 05/14/2009)
10 SERVICE OF SUMMONS and Complaint returned executed upon defendant US Department of Justice on 8/25/2009 (KL) (Entered: 08/31/2009)
11 AFFIDAVIT of Mailing of Summons and Complaint to Department of Justice on 8/25/2009, filed by Plaintiff American Civil Liberties Union of Washington. (Williams, Harry) (Entered: 08/31/2009)
12 AFFIDAVIT of Mailing of Summons and Complaint to Eric H. Holder on 8/25/2009, filed by Plaintiff American Civil Liberties Union of Washington. (Williams, Harry) (Entered: 08/31/2009)

Case: 2:09-cv-642 As of: 05/14/2015 08:26 AM PDT 4 of 9

09/01/2009 09/24/2009 09/25/2009 09/25/2009 09/30/2009 10/01/2009 10/09/2009 11/12/2009 11/19/2009 11/23/2009 11/24/2009
12/07/2009
12/11/2009
12/15/2009 01/19/2010 01/19/2010

13 NOTICE OF WITHDRAWAL OF COUNSEL: Attorney Eunice Lee for Plaintiff American Civil Liberties Union of Washington. (Anello, Farrin) (Entered: 09/01/2009)
14 STIPULATION AND PROPOSED ORDER for Extension of Time to File Answer by parties. (Kipnis, Brian) (Entered: 09/24/2009)
15 NOTICE of Appearance by attorney Brian C Kipnis on behalf of Defendant US Department of Justice. (Kipnis, Brian) (Entered: 09/25/2009)
Attorney Marcia Kay Sowles for US Department of Justice added. (ELS) (Entered: 09/25/2009)
16 STIPULATION AND ORDER FOR EXTENSION OF TIME TO FILE ANSWER by Judge Robert S. Lasnik. (RS) (Entered: 09/30/2009)
17 ORDER REGARDING INITIAL DISCLOSURES, JOINT STATUS REPORT AND EARLY SETTLEMENT Joint Status Report due by 11/12/2009, by Judge Robert S. Lasnik. (KERR) (Entered: 10/01/2009)
18 ANSWER to 1 Complaint, by US Department of Justice. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A − C)(Sowles, Marcia Kay) (Entered: 10/09/2009)
19 JOINT STATUS REPORT signed by all parties estimated Trial Days: 0.. (Anello, Farrin) (Entered: 11/12/2009)
20 MOTION for Leave to File Excess Pages Memorandum in Support of Motion to Stay Proceedings pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 552(a)(6)(C) by Defendant US Department of Justice. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order) Noting Date 11/19/2009, (Sowles, Marcia Kay) (Entered: 11/19/2009)
21 ORDER granting dft's 20 Motion for Leave to File Excess Pages by Judge Robert S. Lasnik.(RS) (Entered: 11/23/2009)
22 MOTION to Stay Proceedings, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 552(a)(6)(C), to Allow the FBI Additional Time Complete its Proceesing of Plaintiff's FOIA Request by Defendant US Department of Justice. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit Declaration of David M. Hardy, # 2 Proposed Order) Noting Date 12/11/2009, (Sowles, Marcia Kay) (Entered: 11/24/2009)
23 RESPONSE, by Plaintiff American Civil Liberties Union of Washington, to 22 MOTION to Stay Proceedings, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 552(a)(6)(C), to Allow the FBI Additional Time Complete its Proceesing of Plaintiff's FOIA Request MOTION to Stay Proceedings, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 552(a)(6)(C), to Allow the FBI Additional Time Complete its Proceesing of Plaintiff's FOIA Request. (Attachments: # 1 Certificate of Service, # 2 Exhibit Declaration, # 3 Exhibit A, # 4 Exhibit B, # 5 Exhibit C, # 6 Exhibit D, # 7 Exhibit E, # 8 Proposed Order)(Anello, Farrin) (Entered: 12/07/2009)
24 REPLY, filed by Defendant US Department of Justice, TO RESPONSE to 22 MOTION to Stay Proceedings, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 552(a)(6)(C), to Allow the FBI Additional Time Complete its Proceesing of Plaintiff's FOIA Request MOTION to Stay Proceedings, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 552(a)(6)(C), to Allow the FBI Additional Time Complete its Proceesing of Plaintiff's FOIA Request (Sowles, Marcia Kay) (Entered: 12/11/2009)
25 NOTICE of Filing of Status Report regarding the processing of Plaintiff's FOIA request ; filed by Defendant US Department of Justice. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit First Status Declaration of David M. Hardy)(Sowles, Marcia Kay) (Entered: 12/15/2009)
26 CASE MANAGEMENT ORDER; Joinder of Parties deadline set for 1/28/2010, Dispositive motions due by 4/15/2010, Oppositions to dispositive motions due by 5/28/2010 and Replies to dispositive motions due by 6/18/2010 (KERR) (Entered: 01/19/2010)
27 ORDER denying dft's 22 Motion for an Open America Stay by Judge Robert S. Lasnik.(RS) (Entered: 01/19/2010)

Case: 2:09-cv-642 As of: 05/14/2015 08:26 AM PDT 5 of 9

01/22/2010 01/25/2010 03/15/2010 03/16/2010 04/01/2010
04/02/2010 04/07/2010 04/12/2010
04/14/2010 06/14/2010 06/15/2010 06/18/2010
07/30/2010 08/11/2010 08/12/2010

28 NOTICE of Appearance by attorney Melody Rose Spidell on behalf of Plaintiff American Civil Liberties Union of Washington. (Spidell, Melody) (Entered: 01/22/2010)
29 NOTICE OF WITHDRAWAL OF COUNSEL: Attorney Harry Williams, IV for Plaintiff American Civil Liberties Union of Washington. (Dunne, Sarah) (Entered: 01/25/2010)
30 STIPULATION AND PROPOSED ORDER for Extension of Time to Complete Production of Seventy−three pages which required consultation with other federal agencies and/or other components of the DOJ by parties re 27 Order on Motion to Stay. (Sowles, Marcia Kay) (Entered: 03/15/2010)
31 STIPULATION AND ORDER for extension of time to complete production by Judge Robert S. Lasnik. (RS) (Entered: 03/17/2010)
32 MOTION for Extension of Time to File Motion for Summary Judgment and for Leave to File Vaughn Index Based upon a Representative Sample by Defendant US Department of Justice. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A −− Declaration of Dennis J. Argall, # 2 Exhibit B −− Email from Farrin Anello, # 3 Proposed Order) Noting Date 4/12/2010, (Sowles, Marcia Kay) (Entered: 04/01/2010)
33 MINUTE ORDER RE−NOTING 32 MOTION for Extension of Time to File Motion for Summary Judgment and for Leave to File Vaughn Index Based upon a Representative Sample ; Noting Date 4/9/2010 (KERR) (Entered: 04/02/2010)
34 RESPONSE, by Plaintiff American Civil Liberties Union of Washington, to 32 MOTION for Extension of Time to File Motion for Summary Judgment and for Leave to File Vaughn Index Based upon a Representative Sample. (Spidell, Melody) (Entered: 04/07/2010)
35 STIPULATION AND PROPOSED ORDER by parties re 32 MOTION for Extension of Time to File Motion for Summary Judgment and for Leave to File Vaughn Index Based upon a Representative Sample. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit Exhibit A to Stipulation and Proposed Order)(Spidell, Melody) (Entered: 04/12/2010)
36 STIPULATION AND ORDER for Extension of Time to File Motion for Summary Judgment and for Leave to File Vaughn Index Based upon a Representative Sample by Judge Robert S. Lasnik. (RS) (Entered: 04/14/2010)
37 MOTION for Leave to File Excess Pages by Defendant US Department of Justice. Noting Date 6/18/2010, (Sowles, Marcia Kay) (Entered: 06/14/2010)
38 ORDER Granting Pltf's Unopposed 37 Motion to File Overlength Memorandum by Judge Robert S. Lasnik.(TF) (Entered: 06/16/2010)
39 MOTION for Summary Judgment by Defendant US Department of Justice. Oral Argument Requested. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit Declaration of David Hardy − Part 1 of 4, # 2 Exhibit Declaration of David Hardy −− Part 2 of 4, # 3 Exhibit Declaration of David Hardy −− Part 3 of 4, # 4 Exhibit Declaration of David Hardy −− Part 4 of 4, # 5 Exhibits A − N to Declaration of David Hardy, # 6 Exhibit O (Part 1) to Declaration of David Hardy, # 7 Exhibit O (Part 2) to Declaration of David Hardy, # 8 Exhibit O (Part 3) to Declaration of David Hardy, # 9 Exhibit Declaration of Margaret P. Grafeld) Noting Date 8/20/2010, (Sowles, Marcia Kay) (Entered: 06/18/2010)
40 RESPONSE, by Plaintiff American Civil Liberties Union of Washington, to 39 MOTION for Summary Judgment. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit Declaration of F. Anello and Exhibits, # 2 Exhibit Declaration of S. Khader and Exhibits)(Anello, Farrin) (Entered: 07/30/2010)
41 MOTION for Extension of Time to File Reply in Support of Motion for Summary Judgment by Defendant US Department of Justice. Noting Date 8/11/2010, (Sowles, Marcia Kay) (Entered: 08/11/2010)
42 ORDER granting dft's 41 Motion for Extension of Time;dft has until 8/31/10 to reply; clerk renoted 39 MOTION for Summary Judgment : Noting Date 9/3/2010, by Judge Robert S. Lasnik.(RS) (Entered: 08/12/2010)

Case: 2:09-cv-642 As of: 05/14/2015 08:26 AM PDT 6 of 9

08/31/2010
10/04/2010 03/10/2011 03/24/2011 03/24/2011 03/24/2011 03/25/2011 03/30/2011 03/30/2011 03/30/2011 04/04/2011 04/04/2011 04/08/2011 04/11/2011

43 REPLY, filed by Defendant US Department of Justice, TO RESPONSE to 39 MOTION for Summary Judgment (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit Exhibit 1 −− Supplemental Declaration of David Hardy, # 2 Exhibit Exhibits A and B to Supp. Declaraton of David Hardy, # 3 Exhibit Exhibit 2, # 4 Exhibit Exhibit 3, # 5 Exhibit Exhibit 4, # 6 Exhibit Exhibit 5, # 7 Exhibit Exhibit 6, # 8 Exhibit Exhibit 7, # 9 Exhibit Exhibit 8, # 10 Exhibit Exhibit 9, # 11 Exhibit Exhibit 10)(Sowles, Marcia Kay) (Entered: 08/31/2010)
44 NOTICE OF WITHDRAWAL OF COUNSEL: Attorney Farrin Anello for Plaintiff American Civil Liberties Union of Washington. (Gelernt, Lee) (Entered: 10/04/2010)
45 ORDER granting in part dft's 39 Motion for Summary Judgment and ordering production or supplementation of Vaughn Index by Judge Robert S. Lasnik.(RS) (Entered: 03/11/2011)
46 MOTION for Reconsideration re 45 Order on Motion for Summary Judgment by Defendant US Department of Justice. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit Declaration of Chrisopher M. Piehota, TSC, # 2 Exhibit Declaration of William E. Benner) Noting Date 3/24/2011, (Sowles, Marcia Kay) (Entered: 03/24/2011)
47 MOTION to Stay re 45 Order on Motion for Summary Judgment by Defendant US Department of Justice. Noting Date 4/8/2011, (Sowles, Marcia Kay) (Entered: 03/24/2011)
48 MOTION for Extension of Time to Comply with Certain Provisions of Order dated March 10, 2011 by Defendant US Department of Justice. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit Declaration of David M. Hardy) Noting Date 4/1/2011, (Sowles, Marcia Kay) (Entered: 03/24/2011)
49 ORDER FOR FURTHER BRIEFING; RE−NOTING 46 MOTION for Reconsideration re 45 Order on Motion for Summary Judgment ; Noting Date 4/8/2011, by Judge Robert S. Lasnik. (RS) (Entered: 03/25/2011)
50 STIPULATION AND PROPOSED ORDER for Stay of Order dated March 10, 2011 by parties re 45 Order on Motion for Summary Judgment. (Sowles, Marcia Kay) (Entered: 03/30/2011)
51 APPLICATION OF ATTORNEY Katherine Desormeau FOR LEAVE TO APPEAR PRO HAC VICE for Plaintiff American Civil Liberties Union of Washington (Fee Paid) Receipt No. 0981−2381051. (Attachments: # 1 Certificate of Service)(Spidell, Melody) (Entered: 03/30/2011)
52 ORDER re 51 Application for Leave to Appear Pro Hac Vice. The Court ADMITS Attorney Katherine Desormeau for American Civil Liberties Union of Washington, by William M. McCool. (No document associated with this docket entry, text only.)(DS) (Entered: 03/30/2011)
53 STIPULATION FOR STAY OF ORDER by Judge Robert S. Lasnik.(RS) (Entered: 04/04/2011)
54 RESPONSE, by Plaintiff American Civil Liberties Union of Washington, to 46 MOTION for Reconsideration re 45 Order on Motion for Summary Judgment MOTION for Reconsideration re 45 Order on Motion for Summary Judgment. (Desormeau, Katherine) (Entered: 04/04/2011)
55 REPLY, filed by Defendant US Department of Justice, TO RESPONSE to 46 MOTION for Reconsideration re 45 Order on Motion for Summary Judgment MOTION for Reconsideration re 45 Order on Motion for Summary Judgment (Sowles, Marcia Kay) (Entered: 04/08/2011)
56 NOTICE of Filing Supplemental Vaughn Declarations re 45 Order on Motion for Summary Judgment ; filed by Defendant US Department of Justice. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A −− Second Supplemental Declaration of David M. Hardy, # 2 Exhibit B −− Second Declaration of Christopher M. Piehota)(Sowles, Marcia Kay) (Entered: 04/11/2011)

Case: 2:09-cv-642 As of: 05/14/2015 08:26 AM PDT 7 of 9

04/11/2011 05/04/2011 05/06/2011 05/11/2011 05/19/2011 05/24/2011
05/24/2011 05/25/2011
05/26/2011 05/31/2011 06/01/2011 06/02/2011
06/02/2011 06/03/2011 06/06/2011
06/07/2011 06/20/2011 06/22/2011

57 ORDER granting dft's 48 Motion for Extension of Time to Comply with Disclosure Provisions in 3/10/11 Order by Judge Robert S. Lasnik.(RS) (Entered: 04/11/2011)
58 NOTICE of Filing of Corrected Exhibit B re 56 Notice−Other, ; filed by Defendant US Department of Justice. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit Corrected Exhibit B)(Sowles, Marcia Kay) (Entered: 05/04/2011)
59 STIPULATION AND PROPOSED ORDER FOR EXTENSION OF TIME by parties. (Desormeau, Katherine) (Entered: 05/06/2011)
60 STIPULATION AND ORDER for extension of time by Judge Robert S. Lasnik. (RS) (Entered: 05/11/2011)
61 ORDER granting in part and denying in part dft's 46 Motion for Reconsideration by Judge Robert S. Lasnik.(RS) (Entered: 05/19/2011)
62 NOTICE of Filing Supplemental Vaughn Declarations pursuant to Order dated May 19, 2011 re 61 Order on Motion for Reconsideration ; filed by Defendant US Department of Justice. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A − Third Declaration of Christopher M. Piehota, # 2 Exhibit B − Supplemental Declaration of William Benner, Jr., # 3 Exhibit C − Letter from David Hardy)(Sowles, Marcia Kay) (Entered: 05/24/2011)
63 MOTION for Reconsideration re 61 Order on Motion for Reconsideration by Defendant US Department of Justice. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order) Noting Date 5/24/2011, (Sowles, Marcia Kay) (Entered: 05/24/2011)
64 ORDER FOR FURTHER BRIEFING; RE−NOTING 63 MOTION for Reconsideration re 61 Order on Motion for Reconsideration ; Noting Date 6/3/2011, pltf's response due 6/1/11 by Judge Robert S. Lasnik. (RS) (Entered: 05/26/2011)
65 STIPULATION AND PROPOSED ORDER for Stay of Order by parties re 61 Order on Motion for Reconsideration, 53 Order on Motion to Stay. (Sowles, Marcia Kay) (Entered: 05/26/2011)
66 STIPULATION AND PROPOSED ORDER TO CONSOLIDATE BRIEFING by parties. (Desormeau, Katherine) (Entered: 05/31/2011)
67 RESPONSE, by Plaintiff American Civil Liberties Union of Washington, to 63 MOTION for Reconsideration re 61 Order on Motion for Reconsideration. (Desormeau, Katherine) (Entered: 06/01/2011)
68 STIPULATION AND PROPOSED ORDER Stipulation for Extension of Time to File Reply in Support of Second Motion for Reconsideration by parties re 63 MOTION for Reconsideration re 61 Order on Motion for Reconsideration. (Kipnis, Brian) (Entered: 06/02/2011)
69 STIPULATION AND ORDER TO CONSOLIDATE BRIEFING by Judge Robert S. Lasnik. (RS) (Entered: 06/03/2011)
70 STIPULATION AND ORDER FOR STAY OF ORDER by Judge Robert S. Lasnik. (RS) (Entered: 06/03/2011)
71 ORDER EXTENDING TIME FOR REPLY, by Judge Robert S. Lasnik. The Clerk of Court is directed to re−note defendant's "Notice of Motion and Second Motion for Reconsideration" (Dkt. # 63 ) on the Court's calendar for June 10, 2011.Reply due 6/7/2011. (CL) (Entered: 06/06/2011)
72 REPLY, filed by Defendant US Department of Justice, TO RESPONSE to 63 MOTION for Reconsideration re 61 Order on Motion for Reconsideration (Sowles, Marcia Kay) (Entered: 06/07/2011)
73 ORDER granting dft's 63 Second Motion for Reconsideration by Judge Robert S. Lasnik.(RS) (Entered: 06/20/2011)
74 NOTICE of Filing Supplemental Vaughn Declarations re 45 Order on Motion for Summary Judgment ; filed by Defendant US Department of Justice. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A −− Fourth Declaration of Christopher Piehota, # 2 Exhibit B −−

Case: 2:09-cv-642 As of: 05/14/2015 08:26 AM PDT 8 of 9

06/22/2011
06/27/2011 07/06/2011
07/06/2011 05/10/2012 09/21/2012 09/26/2012 10/01/2012 10/01/2012 10/01/2012 10/09/2012 10/09/2012 10/12/2012 10/12/2012
10/16/2012 10/19/2012 11/20/2012

Third Supplemental Declaration of David M. Hardy)(Sowles, Marcia Kay) (Entered: 06/22/2011)
75 STIPULATION AND PROPOSED ORDER to Extend Deadlines for Plaintiff to file Supplemental Memorandum and for Defendant to submit documents for in camera review by parties re 69 Stipulation and Order, 61 Order on Motion for Reconsideration. (Sowles, Marcia Kay) (Entered: 06/22/2011)
76 STIPULATION AND ORDER for an extension of time by Judge Robert S. Lasnik. (RS) (Entered: 06/28/2011)
77 NOTICE of Submission of Documents for In Camera Review ; filed by Defendant US Department of Justice. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A − Chart of Documents Submitted In Camera, # 2 Exhibit B −− Part 1 (redacted version of documents submitted In Camera), # 3 Exhibit B −− Part 2 (redacted version of documents submitted In Camera), # 4 Exhibit B −− Part 3 (redacted version of documents submitted In Camera))(Sowles, Marcia Kay) (Entered: 07/06/2011)
78 MEMORANDUM to Assist the Court in Its In Camera Review by Plaintiff American Civil Liberties Union of Washington. (Desormeau, Katherine) (Entered: 07/06/2011)
79 NOTICE OF WITHDRAWAL OF COUNSEL: Attorney Melody Rose Spidell for Plaintiff American Civil Liberties Union of Washington. (Dunne, Sarah) (Entered: 05/10/2012)
80 ORDER FOLLOWING IN CAMERA REVIEW by Judge Robert S. Lasnik. (RS) (Entered: 09/21/2012)
81 JUDGMENT BY COURT is hereby entered (RS) (Entered: 09/26/2012)
82 MOTION for Reconsideration re 80 Order, Terminated Case by Defendant US Department of Justice. Noting Date 10/1/2012, (Sowles, Marcia Kay) (Entered: 10/01/2012)
83 NOTICE of Lodging of In Camera, Ex Parte Classified Declaration of David M. Hardy re 82 MOTION for Reconsideration re 80 Order, Terminated Case ; filed by Defendant US Department of Justice. (Sowles, Marcia Kay) (Entered: 10/01/2012)
84 STIPULATION AND PROPOSED ORDER Regarding Court's Order Dated September 21, 2012 by parties re 80 Order, Terminated Case. (Sowles, Marcia Kay) (Entered: 10/01/2012)
85 ORDER FOR FURTHER BRIEFING; RE−NOTING 82 MOTION for Reconsideration re 80 Order, Terminated Case ; Noting Date 10/19/2012, by Judge Robert S. Lasnik. (RS) (Entered: 10/09/2012)
86 STIPULATION AND ORDER re court's order dated 9/21/12 by Judge Robert S. Lasnik. (RS) (Entered: 10/10/2012)
87 APPLICATION OF ATTORNEY Dror Ladin FOR LEAVE TO APPEAR PRO HAC VICE for Plaintiff American Civil Liberties Union of Washington (Fee Paid) Receipt No. 0981−2978273. (Dunne, Sarah) (Entered: 10/12/2012)
88 ORDER re 87 Application for Leave to Appear Pro Hac Vice. The Court ADMITS Attorney Dror Ladin for American Civil Liberties Union of Washington, by William M. McCool. (No document associated with this docket entry, text only.)(DS) (Entered: 10/12/2012)
89 RESPONSE, by Plaintiff American Civil Liberties Union of Washington, to 82 MOTION for Reconsideration re 80 Order, Terminated Case . (Gelernt, Lee) (Entered: 10/16/2012)
90 REPLY, filed by Defendant US Department of Justice, TO RESPONSE to 82 MOTION for Reconsideration re 80 Order, Terminated Case (Sowles, Marcia Kay) (Entered: 10/19/2012)
91 ORDER Granting Third 82 Motion for Reconsideration by Judge Robert S. Lasnik.(TF) (Entered: 11/20/2012)

Case: 2:09-cv-642 As of: 05/14/2015 08:26 AM PDT 9 of 9

12/06/2012 01/07/2013
01/10/2013 02/19/2013 02/21/2013 03/07/2013 03/11/2013

92 ORDER amending 80 Order following in camera review by Judge Robert S. Lasnik. (RS) (Entered: 12/06/2012)
93 Stipulated MOTION Regarding Time to File Fee Petition and Proposed Order by Plaintiff American Civil Liberties Union of Washington. Noting Date 1/7/2013, (Desormeau, Katherine) (Entered: 01/07/2013)
94 ORDER granting 93 Stipulated Motion re time to file fee petition by Judge Robert S. Lasnik.(RS) (Entered: 01/11/2013)
95 STIPULATION AND PROPOSED ORDER FOR EXTENSION OF BRIEFING SCHEDULE by parties. (Ladin, Dror) (Entered: 02/19/2013)
96 STIPULATION AND ORDER to extend briefing schedule for fee petition by Judge Robert S. Lasnik. (RS) (Entered: 02/22/2013)
97 STIPULATION AND PROPOSED ORDER for Compromise Settlement and Release of Claims by parties. (Gelernt, Lee) (Entered: 03/07/2013)
98 STIPULATION AND ORDER FOR COMPROMISE SETTLEMENT AND RELEASE OF CLAIMS by Judge Robert S. Lasnik. (RS) (Entered: 03/12/2013)