Register, Ronnie H.

Rhame, Thomas G.

Robertson, Charles T., Jr.

Romanowski, Alina L.

Rudd, Glenn A.

Schachter, Leon J.

Scheflen, Kenneth C.

Schlatter, Joseph A., Jr.

Schriefer, Luther F.

Schuster, Carl O.

Scoggins, William B.

Scott, James. T.

Civ

MajGen

MajGen
Civ

Civ

Civ

Civ

Col

Capt

LtCol

LtGen

Deputy Director, Management, Advanced
Research Projects Agency, Under Secretary of
Defense (Acquisition and Technology)

Director, Defense Security Assistance Agency,
Under Secretary of Defense (Policy)

Vice Director, Joint Staff

Director, Near East and South Asian Affairs,
Assistant Secretary of Defense (International
Security Affairs), Under Secretary of Defense
(Policy)

Deputy Director, Defense Security Assistance
Agency, Under Secretary of Defense (Policy)

Director, Industrial Security Clearance Review,
Defense Legal Services Agency; Director,
Defense Office of Hearing and Appeals, General
Counsel

Director, Defense Manpower Data Center,
Deputy Under Secretary of Defense
(Requirements and Resources), Under
Secretary of Defense (Personnel and Readiness)

Deputy Director, Deputy Assistant Secretary of
Defense (Prisoner-of-War/Missing -in-Action
Affairs), Assistant Secretary of Defense
(International Security Affairs), Under
Secretary of Defense (Policy)

Director, Inter-American Region, Deputy
Assistant Secretary of Defense (Inter-American
Affairs), Assistant Secretary of Defense
(International Security Affairs), Under
Secretary of Defense (Policy)

Chief, Plans and Readiness Division,
Intelligence Directorate, United States Pacific
Command

Assistant Deputy Director, Counterdrug, SCJ3,
United States Southern Command

Commander, United States Army Special
Operations Command

16

38

12

50



Thompson, R. L.

Tobin, P. E.
Tomiak, W. W.

Town, C.S.

Tyler, R. S.

Wagner, G. F. A.

Wallace, E. C.

Walsh, D. F.

Walsh, R. F.

Wang, P. P.

Waters, W.A.

Watson, A. J.
White, D. M.

White, R. D.

Williams, R. R.

Wistes, R. B.

Civ

Capt

Col

Capt

Capt

Capt

Capt

Lt

Capt

Capt

Cdr

Capt

Cdr

Head, Freedom of Information Act/Privacy Act
Office, Headquarters United States Marine
Corps

Vice Chief, Naval Education and Training
Command

Acting Commander, Pacific Division, Naval
Facilities Engineering Command

Commander, 1st Force Service Support Group,
Camp Pendleton, CA, United States Marine
Corps

Commanding Officer, Southern Division , Naval
Facilities Engineering Command

Commander, Space and Naval Warfare Systems
Command

Deputy for Operations, United States Naval
Academy

Commanding Officer, Engineering Field Activity
Northwest, Naval Facilities Engineering
Command

Legal Counsel, Bureau of Naval Personnel

Staff Judge Advocate, Naval Computer and
Telecommunications Command

Commanding Officer, Northern Division, Naval
Facilities Engineering Command

Commander, Navy Recruiting Command

Staff Judge Advocate, Naval Base, Seattle,
United States Pacific Fleet

Staff Judge Advocate, Naval Base, Seattle,
United States Pacific Fleet

Acting Director, Operations, Plans and Politico-
Military Affairs (N31/N52), Office of the Chief of
Naval Operations

Staff Judge Advocate, Naval Base, San Diego,
United States Pacific Fleet

37

311

25

76

18



McCurry, R. A.

McKissock, G. 8.

McMahon, K. P.

McPherson, J. E.

Meade, C. A.

Miller, S. E.

Moeller, R. L.

Mollison, R. M.
Mooberry, W. J.
Moore, E.

Moore, E., Jr.
Moore, R. M.
Morin, G. S.

Munninghoff, J. M.

Murphy, K. J.

Muth, C. C.

Nanos, G. P.
Nash, D. J.

Capt

BrigGen

Cdr

Cdr

Cdr

Civ

Capt
Capt

LtCol

Capt

Civ

Deputy Commander, Navy Recruiting 3
Command
Commanding General, 1st Force Service 2

Support Group, Camp Pendleton, CA, United
States Marine Corps

Deputy Assistant Judge Advocate General, 5
Admiralty
Force Judge Advocate, Commander Submarine 2

Force Atlantic, United States Atlantic Fleet

Special Assistant for Legal, Navy Recruiting 4
Command

Attorney, Naval Warfare Center, China Lake, 57
Naval Air Systems Command

Vice Commander, Naval Facilities Engineering 1
Command

Director, Admin Support Division (NAMARA) 20
Executive Director, Naval Safety Center 99
Commander, Cruiser-Destroyer Group THREE, 2
United States Pacific Fleet

Commandant, Naval District of Washington 1
Commander, Naval Supply Systems Command 2
Deputy Director, Manpower Division, Quantico, 3
VA, United States Marine Corps

Commanding Officer, Naval Air Station, Key 1
West, United States Atlantic Fleet

Commander, Cruiser-Destroyer Group EIGHT, 1
United States Atlantic Fleet

Counsel, Naval Facilities Engineering 7
Command

Director, Strategic Systems Programs 5
Commander, Pacific Division, Naval Facilities 1
Engineering Command

33



Malandrino, J. P.

Marro, Michael

May, Kerry

Mayo, Leon

McBride, James W.

McCladdie, Willie

McGinty, Michael E.

McNamara, Roger T.

McPherson, Carl L.

Miller, Brian D.

Mueller, George K.

Nii, Darryl L.

Nowak, Craig R.

Nowak, John M.

Page, Roland J.

Patterson, Eric L.

Col

LtCol

Col

LtCol

Col

Col

MajGen

Civ

Col

Col

LtGen

LtCol

LtCol

LtGen

Col
LtCol

Chief, Inquiries Division, Inspector General,
Office of the Secretary of the Air Force

Acting Director, Information Management, Air
Education and Training Command

Chief, Ground Safety Nuclear Surety, Air Force
Safety, Headquarters United States Air Force

Acting Chief, Information Management, Air
Mobility Command

Staff Judge Advocate, Sacramento Air Logistics
Center, Air Force Materiel Command

Acting Director, Communications, Air Force
Materiel Command

Acting Deputy, Chief of Staff, Personnel,
Headquarters United States Air Force

Attorney Advisor, General Counsel, Office of
the Secretary of the Air Force

Director, Command Staff, Air Force Special
Operations Command

Director, Information Management, Pacific Air
Forces

Principal Deputy Director, Acquisition, Office of
the Secretary of the Air Force

Director, Mission Support, Air Force Personnel
Center

Acting Staff Judge Advocate, Air Force
Development Test Center, Air Force Materiel
Command

Director, Supply, Deputy Chief of Staff,

Logistics, Headquarters United States Air
Force

Vice Commander, Air Force Safety Agency
Director, Security and Special Program

Oversight, Office of the Administrative
Assistant to the Secretary of the Air Force

42

23

26

30

74

49

11

20



Chiles, Henry G., Jr.

Clark, Carole

Connolly, Timothy G.

Cooke, David O.

Cortez, Christopher O.

Deegan, Gene A.
Dellermann, Frank J.

Dix, Mary A.

Dunlap, Charles J., Jr.

Ello, John V.

Fau, Wayne B.

Fitzgibbon, Gerald M.

Frostic, Fredrick L.

Adm

Civ

Civ

Civ

Col

MajGen

Civ

Civ

Col

Civ

Col

Civ

Civ

Commander-in Chief, United States Strategic
Command

Chief, Management Services Division, Defense
Technical Security Administration

Principal Deputy, Assistant Secretary of
Defense (Special Operations and Low Intensity
Conflict), Under Secretary of Defense (Policy)

Director, Administration and Management,
Washington Headquarters Services

Executive Assistant/Deputy Chief of Staff to the
Deputy Commander-in Chief/Chief of Staff,
United States Pacific Command

Vice Director, Joint Staff

Director, Strategy, Forces and Operations,
Deputy Assistant Secretary (Forces Policy),
Assistant Secretary of Defense (International
Security Policy), Under Secretary of Defense
(Policy)

Vice President, Administration and
Management, Uniformed Services University of
Health Sciences

Staff Judge Advocate, United States Strategic
Command

Executive Director, Defense Science Board,
Under Secretary of Defense (Acquisition and
Technology)

Chief, Joint Intelligence Center, United States
Southern Command

Acting Director, Deputy Assistant Secretary of
Defense (Counterproliferation Policy), Assistant
Secretary of Defense (International Security
Policy), Under Secretary of Defense (Policy)

Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense
(Requirements and Plans), Assistant Secretary
of Defense (Strategy and Requirements), Under
Secretary of Defense (Policy)

10

19

10



2. A previous denial of records is reversed in total, or in part, and the
assessable costs are not substantial (e. g. $15.00 - $30.00).

6-104 Fee Assessment

a. Fees may not be used to discourage requesters, and to this end, FOIA fees are
limited to standard charges for direct document search, review (in the case of commercial
requesters) and duplication.

b. In order to be as responsive as possible to FOIA requests while minimizing
unwarranted costs to the taxpayer, Components shall adhere to the following procedures:

1. Analyze each request to determine the category of the requester. Ifthe
Component determination regarding the category of the requester is different than that
claimed by the requester, the Component shall:

(i) Notify the requester that he should provide additional justification
to warrant the category claimed, and that a search for responsive records will not be
initiated until agreement has been attained relative to the category of the requester.
Absent further category justification from the requester, and within a reasonable period of
time (i. e., 30 calendar days), the Component shall render a final category determination,
and notify the requester of such determination, to include normal administrative appeal
rights of the determination.

(ii) Advise the requester that, notwithstanding any appeal, a search
for responsive records will not be initiated until the requester indicates a willingness to pay
assessable costs appropriate for the category determined by the Component.

2. Requesters must submit a fee declaration appropriate for the below
categories.

(i) Commercial. Requesters must indicate a willingness to pay all
search, review and duplication costs.

Gi) Educational or No ercial Scientific Institution or News
Media. Requesters must indicate a willingness to pay duplication charges in excess of 100
pages if more than 100 pages of records are desired.

Gii) All Others. Requesters must indicate a willingness to pay
assessable search and duplication costs if more than two hours of search effort or 100 pages
of records are desired.

3. If the above conditions are not met, then the request need not be
processed and the requester shall be so informed.

4. In the situations described by subparagraphs 6-104, b.1. and 2., above,
Components must be prepared to provide an estimate of assessable fees if desired by the
requester. While it is recognized that search situations will vary among Components, and
that an estimate is often difficult to obtain prior to an actual search, requesters who desire

70



Item 5(c)

Other Reasons Cited on Appeal Determinations

Category* _
ce se 6
OSD/JS 20 12 0 2 24 0
Dept Army 0 0 0 0 0 2
[Dept Navy 24 61 1 37 37 0
(Dept Air Force 0 0} 1) 0! 2 0
IDCAA 0 1 0 0 0 0
DFAS 0 0 0 0 0 )
DIA 0 0 0 0 0 0}
DIS 1 0 0 1 0 0
‘DISA 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 3 0
1 0 0 0 0 0
1 1 0 i) 0 0}
0 2 0 0 0 0)
0 0 4 1 0
8 0 1 _ 3 0
is 1 _70 2

* Types of Categories

1. Transferred Request

2. Lack of Records

3. Failure of Requester to Reasonably Describe Record

4. Other Failures by Requester to Comply with Published Rules and/or
Directives

5. Request Withdrawn by Requester

6. Not an Agency Record

(see page 8 for description of each category)

52



Item 5(a)

Exemptions Invoked on Appeal Determinations

Exemptions by Num!
Compon ji 2 3h 4 38
lOSD/JS 34 2 1 2 10 8 1 0 0

‘Dept Army 6 25 0 3 17; 40 27 0 0 118
[Dept Navy 15 13 6 11 83) 126) 117 0 0 371
(Dept Air Force 1 1 0 1) 21 9° «15 0 0} 48
IDCAA 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 2
DFAS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
DIA 35; 26 0 i) 0; 22 0 0 0 83)
DIS 0 1 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 4
DISA 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1)
(DLA 0 1 0 3 4 6 4 0 0 18
DMA. 0 0 0 1 4 1 1 i) 0 7
IDNA 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0}
INRO. 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 2
INSA/CSS 24 2 0 0 1 1 0 0 95)
[OIG, DOD 0 0 5 13 29 0 0 48)

: a 21 _ise|__0

8% 2% 23%| 0%

* Total may not agree with denials in Item 4 because of cases where two
or more exemptions were cifed.

50



Item 7

Court Opinions and Actions Taken

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE

Public Education Center v. Department of Defense, C.A. No. 95-CV-00946,

U.S.D.C. D.C. Plaintiff sought access to classified special operations videos of the battle of
Mogadishu, Somalia, which had been withheld pursuant to 5 UCS 552 (b)(1). Defendant
submitted a classified Vaughn Index justifying continued withholding of the videos. Court
ruled in favor of defendant on November 17, 1995.

General Dynamics v. Department of Defense, C.A. No. 93-0256, U.S.D.C. D.C.
Plaintiff filed a complaint to compel the Defense Acquisition Regulatory Office to produce
deliberative, pre-decisional documents withheld under 5 USC 552 (b)(5). Stipulation of
dismissal filed without prejudice on June 6, 1994.

Jeffrey C. Weinstock v. Department of Defense, C.A. No. 91-1646, U.S.D.C. D.C.
Plaintiff filed a complaint to compel the Defense Acquisition Regulatory Office to produce
deliberative, pre-decisional documents withheld under 5 USC 552 (b)(5). Stipulation of
dismissal filed without prejudice on December 19, 1994.

E. Mal ers v. National Reconnai: Office, Department nse.
Central Intelligence Agency, and Department of the Air Force, C.A. No. CV-94-B-

2934-S, U.S.D.C.N.D. AL. Suit for all records on the National Reconnaissance Office
construction project near Dulles Airport. The DoD released several documents, while
referring others to the National Reconnaissance Office and the Central Intelligence Agency
for determination. The court dismissed DoD and the Air Force from the suit, while
retaining the remainder of defendants in an Open America stay.

DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY

Moore v. United States, C.A. No. 93-1797, U.S.D.C. D.C. Plaintiff sued challenging the
Army’s “no records” response to plaintiffs request for certain documents relating to the
Panama Canal. The court, concluding that the Army had conducted a thorough search,
nevertheless gave plaintiff the option of paying for an additional search. The Army
estimated a second search would cost $360.00.

Wavra v. Department of the Army, C.A. No. 94-0837, U.S.D.C. D.C. Pro se plaintiff
submitted FOIA requests seeking documents relating to “Six million dollar man
information” and similar “space-age projects.” Plaintiff sued challenging the Army’s
responses. The court granted the Army’s motion for summary judgment and dismissed the
complaint.

56



DEFENSE INVESTIGATIVE SERVICE

The National ine and Max Holland v. ent of State, Central
Intelligence Agency, Department of Justice, and Department of Defense,

C.A. No. 92-23-3 (JHC), U.S.D.C. D.C. Plaintiff filed suite because Federal defendants
declined to release files pertaining to H. Ross Perot. The Defense Investigative Service
(DIS) is included in the list of Federal defendants as a component of the Department of
Defense. DIS withheld investigative files pertaining to H. Ross Perot under 5 USC
552(b)(6) and (b)(7)(C). Defendants filed a motion for summary judgment on February 5,
1993. DIS claimed it had complied with the obligations under FOIA and that its
withholding of the two documents was properly withheld pursuant to the claimed
exemptions. Plaintiff challenged DIS’ asserted FOIA exemptions. The Court held that
disclosure of specific information contained in the DIS investigative files tell us nothing
more about the operations of DIS. While this information might be of “interest” to the
public, it is not the “public interest” projected by FOIA. Court granted DIS’ motion on
summary judgment on August 18, 1995.

DEFENSE INFORMATION SYSTEMS AGENCY

Sprint Communications Company, L.P. v. The United States of America, et al.,
C.A. No. 94-891-A, U.S.D.C.E.D. VA. The complaint contained three counts, two of which
did not concern Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) issues. Count III alleged that the
Defense Information Systems Agency (DISA) violated the Act in that its failure to provide
documents in response to Sprint’s request was “arbitrary, capricious, and an abuse of
discretion, not in accordance with law, and without a rational basis.” DISA filed a Motion
to Dismiss Count III based on the following Agency actions: (1) acknowledgment and
notice of access to the requested agency record within the statutory limits; (2) uncontested
request for extention of time to Sprint; (3) interim release of documentation within the time
extension requested; and, (4) statement that the remainder of the information was being
processed with an anticipated time for completion of the request. The Motion as to Count
III was denied by the Court on October 12, 1994. The matter was subsequently scheduled
for hearing on February 7, 1995. The Agency released the requested information, with
redactions (based on exemptions (b)(4) and (b)(6) on November 23, 1994). Count III was
dismissed, without prejudice, on January 23, 1995, by agreement of the parties to allow for
further discussions and potential narrowing/elimination of the remaining issues. The
parties have agreed that Sprint can refile its complaint on Count ITI if a settlement cannot
be reached.

Bradley C. Carter v. NSA, C.A. No. 93-2847, U.S.D.C. MD. Plaintiff alleged inadequate
search and improperly withheld records. Court ordered Agency-wide search, which was
done. No records were located. Upon the Government’s motion for summary judgment,
the Court dismissed the complaint on January 10, 1995. Carter submitted an appeal

(No. 95-1269) on April 20, 1995. Summary affirmance granted May 22, 1995.

60



Steigleman, Anthony E. Capt Commander, Defense Distribution Region West

Thompson, Lonnie L. Civ Deputy, Defense Logistics Agency Systems
Design Center

Watts, Lloyd T., Jr. Col Commander, Defense Contract Management
District South

Wilson, Leon A. BrigGen Commander, Defense Fuel Supply Center

Wright, Dennis L. Capt Commander, Defense Contract Management

Command International

DEFENSE MAPPING AGENCY
Black, David L. Civ Deputy Director, Command Information
Meehan, Terence S. Civ Director, Command Information
DEFENSE NUCLEAR AGENCY
Ullrich, George W. Civ Deputy Director
NATIONAL RECONNAISSANCE OFFICE
Casey, Patricia O. Civ Director, External Relations
Kingsley, Mary Jo Civ Chief, Information Access and Release Center

NATIONAL SECURITY AGENCY/CENTRAL SECURITY SERVICE

Cavanaugh, James P. Civ Deputy Director of Policy

OFFICE OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL, DOD

Dulacki, Nadine K. Civ Chief, Freedom of Information/Privacy Act
Office

48

21

15

36

25

381

306



Bagley, Claude T.

Bailey, Robert B.

Baratz, Max
Bates, Jared L.

Beardall, Charles W.

Berry, Peter T.

Black, Henry H.

Black, Verbon

Bowers, Charles

Brown, Genise

Brown, Harry D.

Brunson, F. Gil

Burt, Thomas W.

Ciummo, David

Clagett, David C., Jr.

Cohen, Martin R.

Civ

Col

MajGen
LtGen
Col

MajGen

Civ

Civ

Civ

Civ

Col

LtCol

Civ

Civ

Col

Civ

Division Counsel-Lower Mississippi Valley
District, Corps of Engineers

Chief of Staff, Third United States
Army/Central Command

Chief, United States Army Reserve
The Inspector General

Chief, Army Procurement Fraud Division Office
of the Judge Advocate General

Commanding General, United States Army
Criminal Investigation Command

District Counsel, Vicksburg District, Corps of
Engineers

Chief Counsel, United States Army Missile
Command, United States Army Materiel
Command

Freedom of Information Act Officer, Office of the
Surgeon General

Deputy Chief of Staff for Operations & Plans,
United States Army Strategic Defense
Command

Acting Chief, Administrative Law Division,
Office of the Judge Advocate General

Command Judge Advocate, United States Army
Test and Evaluation Command

District Counsel, Mobile District, Corps of
Engineers

Chief, United States Army Information Systems
Command, Office of Acquisition Management

Principal Assistant Responsible for Contracting,
United States Army Europe

Assistant Chief Counsel for Litigation, Corps of
Engineers

20

12

12

115

34

34



Womack, S. M. LtCol Staff Judge Advocate, Marine Corps Air Bases
Western Area, El Toro, Santa Ana, CA, United
States Marine Corps

Woods, H. F. Cdr Commanding Officer, Naval Support Activity La
Maddalena, United States Naval Forces Europe

Wright, T. W. VAdm = Chief, Naval Education and Training Command

Wynn, A. L. Capt Commanding Officer, Public Works Center San
Francisco, Naval Facilities Engineering
Command

Zorica, J. W. Capt Executive Officer, Engineering Field Activity
Chesapeake, Naval Facilities Engineering
Command

DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE

Anderson, Marcus A. LtGen The Inspector General

Andrews, Victor C. Col Vice Superintendent, Air Force Academy

Bagley, Samuel S. LtCol Staff Judge Advocate, Human Systems Center,
Air Force Materiel Command

Batten, Frank M. Civ Chief, Information Release Division, Air Force
Office of Special Investigations

Baurlein, Robert D. Civ Deputy Under Secretary International Affairs,
Office of the Secretary of the Air Force

Blankenbeker, Joan W. Col Director, Information Management, Air
Education and Training Command

Block, David O. Maj Acting Director, Information Management, Air
Force Space Command

Blum, Gary R. Col Acting Director, Military Personnel Policy,
Deputy Chief of Staff, Personnel, Headquarters

~ United States Air Force
Boesch, Eugene F. Civ Assistant for Special Program Oversight, Office

of the Administrative Assistant to the
Secretary of the Air Force

38

27

11

745

57



lead to a significant public understanding of the issue. Components shall not make value
judgments as to whether the information is important enough to be made public.

2. Disclosure of the information "is not primarily in the commercial interest
of the requester."

Gi) The existence and magnitude of a commercial interest. If the
request is determined to be of a commercial interest, Components should address the

magnitude of that interest to determine if the requester's commercial interest is primary,
as opposed to any secondary personal or non-commercial interest. In addition to profit-
making organizations, individual persons or other organizations may have a commercial
interest in obtaining certain records. Where it is difficult to determine whether the
requester is of a commercial nature, Components may draw inference from the requester's
identity and circumstances of the request. In such situations, the provisions of paragraph
6-104, below, apply. Components are reminded that in order to apply the commercial
standards of the FOIA, the requester's commercial benefit must clearly override any
personal or non-profit interest.

Gi) The pri: interest in disclosure. Once a requester's commercial
interest has been determined, Components should then determine if the disclosure would
be primarily in that interest. This requires a balancing test between the commercial
interest of the request against any public benefit to be derived as a result of that disclosure.
Where the public interest is served above and beyond that of the requester's commercial
interest, a waiver or reduction of fees would be appropriate. Conversely, even if a
significant public interest exists, and the relative commercial interest of the requester is
determined to be greater than the public interest, then a waiver or reduction of fees would
be inappropriate. As examples, news media organizations have a commercial interest as
business organizations; however, their inherent role of disseminating news to the general
public can ordinarily be presumed to be of a primary interest. Therefore, any commercial
interest becomes secondary to the primary interest in serving the public. Similarly,
scholars writing books or engaged in other forms of academic research, may recognize a
commercial benefit, either directly, or indirectly (through the institution they represent);
however, normally such pursuits are primarily undertaken for educational purposes, and
the application of a fee charge would be inappropriate. Conversely, data brokers or others
who merely compile government information for marketing can normally be presumed to
have an interest primarily of a commercial nature.

d. Components are reminded that the above factors and examples are not all
inclusive. Each fee decision must be considered on a case-by-case basis and upon the merits
of the information provided in each request. When the element of doubt as to whether to
charge or waive the fee cannot be clearly resolved, Components should rule in favor of the
requester.

e. In addition, the following additional circumstances describe situations where
waiver or reduction of fees are most likely to be warranted:

1. Arecord is voluntarily created to preclude an otherwise burdensome effort

to provide voluminous amounts of available records, including additional information not
requested.

69



Department of Defense

Reporting Agencies

Under the Freedom of Information Act

a

OSD/JS

Dept Army
Dept Navy
Dept Air Force
DCAA

DFAS

DIA

DIS

DISA

DLA
DMA

DNA
NRO
NSA/CSS

OIG, DOD

Office of the Secretary of Defense
(Including the Joint Staff)

Secretary of the Army
Secretary of the Navy
Secretary of the Air Force
Defense Contract Audit Agency

Defense Finance and Accounting
Service

Defense Intelligence Agency

Defense Investigative Service

Defense Information Systems Agency

Defense Logistics Agency
Defense Mapping Agency

Defense Nuclear Agency
National Reconnaissance Office

National Security Agency/Central
Security Service

Office of the Inspector General,
Department of Defense

Hon William J. Perry

Hon Togo D. West, Jr.
Hon John B. Dalton

Hon Sheila E. Widnall
Mr. William H. Reed

Mr. Richard F. Keevey
LtGen James R. Clapper,
USAF/LtGen Kenneth A.
Minihan, USAF

Mr. John F. Donnelly

LtGen Albert J. Edmonds,
USAF

VAdm Edward M. Straw, USN

MajGen Philip W. Nuber,
USAF

MajGen Gary L. Curtin, USAF
Mr. Jeffrey K. Harris

VAdm John M. McConnell,
USN

Ms. Eleanor Hill



c. Commercial Requesters. Fees shall be limited to reasonable standard charges for
document search, review and duplication when records are requested for commercial use.
Requesters must reasonably describe the records sought (see paragraph 1-507).

1. The term "commercial use" request refers to a request from, or on behalf
of one who seeks information for a use or purpose that furthers the commercial, trade, or
profit interest of the requester or the person on whose behalf the request is made. In
determining whether a requester properly belongs in this category, Components must
determine the use to which a requester will put the documents requested. Moreover, where
a Component has reasonable cause to doubt the use to which a requester will put the
records sought, or where that use is not clear from the request itself, Components should
seek additional clarification before assigning the request to a specific category.

2. When Components receive a request for documents for commercial use,
they should assess charges which recover the full direct costs of searching for, reviewing for
release, and duplicating the records sought. Commercial requesters (unlike other
requesters) are not entitled to two hours of free search time, nor 100 free pages of
reproduction of documents. Moreover, commercial requesters are not normally entitled to a
waiver or reduction of fees based upon an assertion that disclosure would be in the public
interest. However, because use is the exclusive determining criteria, it is possible to
envision a commercial enterprise making a request that is not for commercial use. It is also
possible that a non-profit organization could make a request that is for commercial use.
Such situations must be addressed on a case-by-case basis.

d. Educational Institution Requesters. Fees shall be limited to only reasonable
standard charges for document duplication (excluding charges for the first 100 pages) when
the request is made by an educational institution whose purpose is scholarly research.
Requesters must reasonably describe the records sought (see paragraph 1-507). The term
"educational institution" refers to a pre-school, a public or private elementary or secondary
school, an institution of graduate high education, an institution of undergraduate higher
education, an institution of professional education, and an institution of vocational
education, which operates a program or programs of scholarly research.

e. Non-Commercial Scientific Institution Requesters. Fees shall be limited to only
reasonable standard charges for document duplication (excluding charges for the first 100
pages) when the request is made by a non-commercial scientific institution whose purpose
is scientific research. Requesters must reasonably describe the records sought (see
paragraph 5-107). The term "non-commercial scientific institution" refers to an institution
that is not operated on a "commercial" basis as defined in subparagraph 6-104, c., above,
and which is operated solely for the purpose of conducting scientific research, the results of
which are not intended to promote any particular product or industry.

f. Components shall provide documents to requesters in subparagraphs 6-104, d.
and e., above, for the cost of duplication alone, excluding charges for the first 100 pages. To
be eligible for inclusion in these categories, requesters must show that the request is being
made under the auspices of a qualifying institution and that the records are not sought for
commercial use, but in furtherance of scholarly (from an educational institution) or
scientific (from a non-commercial scientific institution) research.

72



estimates are entitled to such before committing to a willingness to pay. Should
Component estimates exceed the actual amount of the estimate or the amount agreed to by
the requester, the amount in excess of the estimate or the requester's agreed amount shall
not be charged without the requester's agreement.

5. No DoD Component may require advance payment of any fee; i. e.,
payment before work is commenced or continued on a request, unless the requester has
previously failed to pay fees in a timely fashion, or the agency has determined that the fee
will exceed $250.00. As used in this sense, a timely fashion is 30 calendar days from the
date of billing (the fees have been assessed in writing) by the Component.

6. Where a Component estimates or determines that allowable charges that
a requester may be required to pay are likely to exceed $250.00, the Component shall notify
the requester of the likely cost and obtain satisfactory assurance of full payment where the
requester has a history of prompt payments, or require an advance payment of an amount
up to the full estimated charges in the case of requesters with no history of payment.

7. Where a requester has previously failed to pay a fee charged in a timely
fashion (i. e., within 30 calendar days from the date of the billing), the Component may
require the requester to pay the full amount owed, plus any applicable interest, or
demonstrate that he or she has paid the fee, and to make an advance payment of the full
amount of the estimated fee before the Component begins to process a new or pending
request from the requester. Interest will be at the rate prescribed in 31 U. S. C. 3717
(reference (af)), and confirmed with respective Finance and Accounting Offices.

8. After all work is completed on a request, and the documents are ready for
release, Components may request payment before forwarding the documents if there is no
payment history on the requester, or if the requester has previously failed to pay a fee ina
timely fashion (i. e., within 30 calendar days from the date of the billing). In the case of the
latter, the previsions of subparagraph 6-104, b.7., above, apply. Components may not hold
documents ready for release pending payment from requesters with a history of prompt
payment.

9. When Components act under subparagraphs 6-104, 1 through 7, above,
the administrative time limits of the FOIA (i.e., 10 working days from receipt of initial
requests, and 20 working days from receipt of appeals, plus permissible extensions of these
time limits) will begin only after the Component has received a willingness to pay fees and
satisfaction as to category determination, or fee payments (if appropriate).

10. Components may charge for time spent searching for records, even if that
search fails to locate records responsive to the request. Components may also charge
search and review (in the case of commercial requesters) time if records located are
determined to be exempt from disclosure. In practice, if the Component estimates that
search charges are likely to exceed $25.00 it shall notify the requester of the estimated
amount of fees, unless the requester has indicated in advance his or her willingness to pay
fees as high as those anticipated. Such a notice shall offer the requester the opportunity to
confer with Component personnel with the object of reformulating the request to meet his
or her needs at a lower cost.

71



document or documents, solely in order to avoid payment of fees. When a Component
reasonably believes that a requester or, on rare occasions, a group of requesters acting in
concert, is attempting to break a request down into a series of requests for the purpose of
avoiding the assessment of fees, the agency may aggregate any such requests and charge
accordingly. One element to be considered in determining whether a belief would be
reasonable is the time period in which the requests have occurred. For example, it would be
reasonable to presume that multiple requests of this type made within a 30 day period had
been made to avoid fees. For requests made over a longer period; however, such a
presumption becomes harder to sustain and Components should have a solid basis for
determining that aggregation is warranted in such cases. Components are cautioned that
before aggregating requests from more than one requester, they must have a concrete basis
on which to conclude that the requesters are acting in concert and are acting specifically to
avoid payment of fees. In no case may Components aggregate multiple requests on
unrelated subjects from one requester.

6-106 Effect of the Debt Collection Act of 1982 (P.L. 97-365).

The Debt Collection Act of 1982 (P.L. 97-365) provides for a minimum annual rate of
interest to be charged on overdue debts owed the Federal Government. Components may
levy this interest penalty for any fees that remain outstanding 30 calendar days from the
date of billing (the first demand notice) to the requester of the amount owed. The interest
rate shall be as prescribed in 31 U. S. C. 3717 (reference (ae)). Components should verify
the current interest rate with respective Finance and Accounting Offices. After one
demand letter has been sent, and 30 calendar days have lapsed with no payment,
Components may submit the debt to respective Finance and Accounting Offices for
collection pursuant to the Debt Collection Act of 1982.

6-107 Computation of Fees

The fee schedule in this Chapter shall be used to compute the search, review (in the
case of commercial requesters) and duplication costs associated with processing a given
FOIA request. Costs shall be computed on time actually spent. Neither time-based nor
dollar-based minimum charges for search, review and duplication are authorized.

Section 2
COLLECTION OF FEES AND FEE RATES
6-200 Collection of Fees

Collection of fees will be made at the time of providing the documents to the
requester or recipient when the requester specifically states that the costs involved shall be
acceptable or acceptable up to a specified limit that covers the anticipated costs. Collection
of fees may not be made in advance unless the requester has failed to pay previously
assessed fees within 30 calendar days from the date of the billing by the DoD Component,

or the Component has determined that the fee will be in excess of $250 (see paragraph 6-
104).

74



Grossenbacker, J. J.

Gunn, T.

Hagen, D. F.

Hamn, E. R.

Hannas, M. D.

Hardy, D. M.

Hayden, W.

Herrera, H. F.

Higginbotham, G. P.

Hlinka, G.

Holder, G. S.

Horne, R. J.

Ihlenfeld, D. L.

Irvin, E. E.

Johnson, G. W.

Johnson, M. R.

Capt

VAdm

Capt

Civ

Capt

RAdm

BrigGen

RAdm

Capt

Capt

Cdr

Civ

Capt

Deputy Director, Submarine Warfare Division
(N87), Office of the Chief of Naval Operations

Commanding Officer, Southwest Division,
Naval Facilities Engineering Command

Chief, Bureau of Medicine and Surgery

Commanding Officer, Engineering Field Activity
Chesapeake, Naval Facilities Engineering
Command

Acting Deputy Assistant Judge Advocate
General, Claims and Tort Litigation

Fleet Judge Advocate, United States Naval
Forces Europe

Chief of Naval Air Training, Naval Education
and Training Command

Commander, Submarine Group NINE, United
States Pacific Fleet

Commanding General, 1st Force Service
Support Group, Camp Pendleton, CA, United
States Marine Corps

Deputy Assistant Judge Advocate General,
Investigations

Commander, Naval Base, Pearl Harbor, United
States Pacific Fleet

Assistant Vice Chief of Naval Operations
(NO9B), Office of the Chief of Naval Operations

Commander, Amphibious Group THREE,
United States Pacific Fleet

Staff Judge Advocate Commander, Naval Base
Norfolk, United States Atlantic Fleet

Director, Civilian Human Resources Office, East
Cherry Point, NC, United States Marine Corps

Commanding Officer, Southwest Division,
Naval Facilities Engineering Command

31

46

543

22

30



Sellman, Wayne S.

Servant, Robert E.

Shaw, Chris W.

Sheridan, Brian E.

Skelly, Linda

Smith, Frederick C.

Smith, Hubert G.

Smith, John W.

Smith, Leo M., Jr.

Stremple, John L.

Swain, Thomas E.

Tarbell, David

Civ

LtCol

Col

Civ

Civ

Civ

LtGen

BrigGen

Civ

Civ

BrigGen

Civ

Director, Accession Policy, Assistant Secretary
of Defense (Force Management Policy), Under
Secretary of Defense (Personnel and Readiness)

Alternate Command Facility Division, United
States Pacific Command

Chief, Current Operations Division, United
States Pacific Command

Deputy, Assistant Secretary of Defense (Drug
Enforcement Policy and Support), Assistant
Secretary of Defense (Special Operations and
Low-Intensity Conflict), Under Secretary of
Defense (Policy)

Program Analyst, Policy Guidance Branch,
Plans, Policy and Programs Directorate,
Central Imagery Office

Director, Near East and South Asian Region,
Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense (Near
East and South Asian Affairs), Assistant
Secretary of Defense (International Security
Affairs), Under Secretary of Defense (Policy)

Deputy Commander-in-Chief, United States
Transportation Command

Director, Intelligence, SCJ2, United States
Southern Command

Chief, Administrative Services, Washington
Headquarters Services

Director, Department of Defense Office of
Dependents Education

Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense (Policy
and Missions), Assistant Secretary of Defense
(Special Operations and Low-Intensity
Conflict), Under Secretary of Defense (Policy)

Director, Defense Technology Security
Administration

17



Hamilton, Milton H.

Hanko, Kenneth J.

Harrison, Yvonne M.

Henningsen, Gary M.

Hiltz, James E.

Hitts, Earl T.

Hoener, Kathryn T.

Holloman, J. Thomas

Holmes, R. Dale

Hough, William A.

Hudson, Joel B.

Hyatt, Scott W.

Jones, Robert H.

Jordan, Franklin Z.

Jordan, Larry R.
Kaplan, Marshall M.

Civ

Civ

Civ

Civ

Civ

Civ

Civ

Col

Civ

Civ

Civ

Col

Civ

Civ

MajGen
Col

Administrative Assistant, Office of the
Secretary of the Army

Supervisory Attorney Advisor, United States
Army, Military Traffic Management Command

Administrative Assistant to the Secretary of the
Army

District Counsel, Omaha District, Corps of
Engineers

Chief, Civilian Personnel Management
Directorate, United States Total Army
Personnel Command

Chief, Staff Judge Advocate Office, United
States Army Materiel] Command

Chief Counsel, Communications-Electronics
Command

Chief, Army Procurement Fraud Division Office
of the Judge Advocate General

District Counsel, St. Louis District, Corps of
Engineers

District Counsel, Savannah District, Corps of
Engineers

Acting Administrative Assistant to the
Secretary of the Army

Deputy Commander, United States Army
Safety Center

Division Counsel, Southwestern District, Corps
of Engineers

District Counsel, Charleston District, Corps of
Engineers

Deputy The Inspector General

Chief, Army Standards of Conduct Office, Office
of the Judge Advocate General

23

14

111

11

153

71



Williamson, Molly K.

Wilson, James L.

Woods, Roy S., Jr.

Wykle, Kenneth R.

Yarborough, J. E.

Yergovich, Michael R.

Civ

BrigGen

Civ

LtGen

Capt

Civ

Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense (Middle
East and African Affairs), Assistant Secretary
of Defense (International Security Affairs),
Under Secretary of Defense (Policy)

Director, Inter-American Region, Deputy
Assistant Secretary of Defense (Inter-American
Affairs), Assistant Secretary of Defense
(International Security Affairs), Under
Secretary of Defense (Policy)

Deputy Director, Acquisition Program
Integration, Under Secretary of Defense
(Acquisition and Technology)

Deputy Commander-in-Chief, United States
Transportation Command

Deputy Commander/Chief of Staff, Special
Operations Command Pacific, United States
Pacific Command

Acting Director, External Affairs, Central
Imagery Office

DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY

Abbett, James T.

Ackley, Robert

Ackroyd, Harry E.

Adams, William

Alan, Kurt

Anderson, Edward G.

Civ

LtCol

Col

Col

Civ

MajGen

Chief Counsel, United States Army Materiel
Command

Staff Judge Advocate, United States Army Test
and Evaluation Command

Chief of Staff, United States Army Reserve
Personnel Center

Deputy Command Counsel, Command Staff
Judge Advocate, Headquarters United States
Army Materiel Command

Chief Counsel, Tank-Automotive Command,
United States Army Materiel Command

Assistant Deputy Chief of Staff for Operations
& Plans, Force Development

19

45

24



Jones, D. A.

Jones, R. A.

Kaskin, J. D.

Kavanaugh, J. T.

Kelly, L. J.

Kenney, S. A.

Kotzen, P. F.

Kristensen, E. K.

Kubic, C. R.

Lagomarsino, T. S.

Little, W.

Marks, N. A.

Mazach, J. J.

McCabe, S. J.

McClure, B. P.

McCullough, L. A.

Cdr

Capt

Civ

Civ

LtCdr

Civ

Capt

Capt

LtCdr

Capt

RAdm

Capt

Cdr

Capt

Acting Commanding Officer, Northern Division,
Naval Facilities Engineering Command

Director, Admin Support Division, Navy-Marine
Corps Appellate Review Activity (NAMARA)

Director, Logistics Plans and Policy/Strategic
Sealift Programs Division (N42), Office of the
Chief of Naval Operations

Commander, Navy Exchange Service
Command, Naval Supply Systems Command

Director of Administration & Resources
Management, Headquarters United States
Marine Corps

Staff Judge Advocate, Naval Postgraduate
School

Deputy Inspector General

Commander, Logistics Group TWO, United
States Atlantic Fleet

Vice Commander, Atlantic Division, Naval
Facilities Engineering Command

Commander, Naval Training Center Orlando,
Naval Education and Training Command

Acting Deputy Assistant Judge Advocate
General, Investigations

Chief of Staff, Submarine Group TEN, United
States Atlantic Fleet

Director, Strategy & Policy Division (N51),
Office of the Chief of Naval Operations

Staff Judge Advocate, Naval Base, San
Francisco, United States Pacific Fleet

Staff Judge Advocate, United States Naval
Forces Marianas, United States Pacific Fleet

Fleet Judge Advocate, COMSIXFLt, United
States Naval Forces Europe

32

11

89

70



Maguire, Joseph

Marineau, Charles R.

Marshall, Andrew W.

McBride, Edmund F.

McCoy, Ronald P.

McDonald, William. M.

McKalip, H. Diehl

McNicol, David L.

Miller, James E., Jr.

Miller, Joseph E.

Mirkovich, David

Molholm, Kurt N.

Murdock, Clark

Capt

Cdr

Civ

Civ

Col
Civ

Civ

Civ

BrigGen

Civ

Col

Civ

Civ

Deputy Commander/Chief of Staff, Special
Operations Command Pacific, United States
Pacific Command

Chief, Casualty Data Division, Joint Task
Force-Free Accounting, United States Pacific
Command

Director, Net Assessment, Under Secretary of
Defense (Policy)

Chief, Documents Division, Joint Staff; Chief,
Information Management, Joint Staff

Chief of Staff, Defense Commissary Agency

Director, Freedom of Information and Security
Review, Assistant to the Secretary of Defense
(Public Affairs)

Acting Director, Defense Security Assistance
Agency, Under Secretary of Defense (Policy);
Deputy Director, Defense Security Assistance
Agency, Under Secretary of Defense (Policy)

Deputy Director, Resource Analysis, Program
Analysis and Evaluation, Under Secretary of
Defense (Comptroller/Chief Financial Officer)

Director, Intelligence, ECJ2, United States
European Command

Acting Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense
(Middle East and African Affairs), Assistant
Secretary of Defense (International Security
Affairs), Under Secretary of Defense (Policy)

Deputy Director, Management Operations,
Ballistic Missile Defense Organization, Under
Secretary of Defense (Acquisition and
Technology)

Administrator, Defense Technical Information
Center

Deputy Director, Deputy Under Secretary of
Defense (Policy Planning), Under Secretary of
Defense (Policy)

14

54

11



g. Representatives of the news media. Fees shall be limited to only reasonable
standard charges for document duplication (excluding charges for the first 100 pages) when
the request is made by a representative of the news media. Requesters must reasonably
describe the records sought (see paragraph 1-507).

1. The term "representative of the news media" refers to any person actively
gathering news for an entity that is organized and operated to publish or broadcast news to
the public. The term "news" means information that is about current events or that would
be of current interest to the public. Examples of news media entities include television or
radio stations broadcasting to the public at large, and publishers of periodicals (but only in
those instances when they can qualify as disseminators of "news") who make their products
available for purchase or subscription by the general public. These examples are not meant
to be all-inclusive. Moreover, as traditional methods of news delivery evolve (e. g.,
electronic dissemination of newspapers through telecommunications services), such
alternative media would be included in this category. In the case of "freelance" journalists,
they may be regarded as working for a news organization if they can demonstrate a solid
basis for expecting publication through that organization, even through not actually
employed by it. A publication contract would be the clearest proof, but Components may
also look to the past publication record of a requester in making this determination.

2. To be eligible for inclusion in this category, a requester must meet the
criteria in subparagraph 6-104, g.1., above, and his or her request must not be made for
commercial use. A request for records supporting the news dissemination function of the
requester shall not be considered to be a request that is for a commercial use. For example,
a document request by a newspaper for records relating to the investigation of a defendant
in a current criminal trial of public interest could be presumed to be a request from an
entity eligible for inclusion in this category, and entitled to records at the cost of
reproduction alone (excluding charges for the first 100 pages).

3. "Representative of the news media" does not include private libraries,
private repositories of Government records, or middlemen, such as information vendors or
data brokers.

h. All Other Requesters. Components shall charge requesters who do not fit into
any of the above categories, fees which recover the full direct cost of searching for and
duplicating records, except that the first two hours of search time and the first 100 pages of
duplication shall be furnished without charge. Requesters must reasonably describe the
records sought (see paragraph 1-507). Requests from subjects about themselves will
continue to be treated under the fee provisions of the Privacy Act of 1974 (reference (af)),
which permit fees only for duplication. Components are reminded that this category of
requester may also be eligible for a waiver or reduction of fees if disclosure of the
information is in the public interest as defined under subparagraph 6-103, a., above. (See
also subparagraph 6-104, ¢.2.).

6-105 Aggregating Requests

Except for requests that are for a commercial use, a Component may not charge for
the first two hours of search time or for the first 100 pages of reproduction. However, a
requester may not file multiple requests at the same time, each seeking portions of a

73



Isabelita Lawler v. Department of the Navy, C.A. No. 94-11827-S (BTM),

U.S.D.C. CA. Case involved FOIA request submitted on August 5, 1994, seeking copies of
contracts between the government and John Greene Corporation and Alcorn Fence
regarding the installation and maintenance of a power gate outside the Outlying Field,
Imperial Beach Commissary in Imperial Beach, California as well as maintenance records
and records showing installation. Complaint alleged that the Navy failed to disclose the
records and that the plaintiff has thereby exhausted administrative remedies. The Navy
filed a motion to dismiss or for summary judgment on January 22, 1995. The case was
dismissed without prejudice with each party to bear its own costs and attorney fees
pursuant to a stipulation for dismissal on March 20, 1995.

Tidewater Marine, Inc. v. Department of the Navy, C.A. No. 95-CV-01688,
U.S.D.C. D.C. Seeking injunctive relief under FOIA from withholding records. Records
sought are abstracts of offers and evaluation of offerors in a negotiated procurement
(N623787-95-R-1304) for the time charter of up to two tugs for Mayport, Florida. A Joint
Stipulation for dismissal without prejudice was filed by the parties on November 3, 1995.

Carter Myers Dean v. Secretary of the Navy, C.A. No. 94-CV-533, U.S.D.C.E.D. TN.
Plaintiff requested the Safety Mishap Report (MIR) into his son’s death. On May 4, 1994,
the Navy sent a redacted copy of the report. Plaintiff appealed on June 20, 1994. Navy
JAG denied the appeal on July 21, 1994. An advance copy of the JAGMAN investigation
was forwarded to the family the week of October 31, 1994, with minimal redaction. MIR
and declaration were prepared for an in camera review by court. Government’s motion to
dismiss granted August 21, 1995; time for an appeal has expired.

John Desmond v. Department of the Navy and VA, C.A. No. 91-11932-MLW,
U.S.D.C. MA. Pro se plaintiff sought damages for alleged constitutional and intentional
torts from the Navy and VA. Plaintiff was an active duty USNR ensign hospitalized and
medically discharged as schizophrenic on July 15, 1985. Plaintiff requested and received
hospital records under FOIA/Privacy Act. Alleges assault, battery, false imprisonment,
abuse of process, slander, libel, interference with contract and violations of 4th, 5th, 6th
amendments by the Department of the Navy. Motion to dismiss premised on six year
statute of limitations.

Robert P. Russell v. Cheney, C.A. No. 93-0003, U.S.D.C. D.C. Pro se plaintiff
challenged the delay in processing his FOIA request to the Naval Criminal Investigative
Service (NCIS). Plaintiff is a former Marine officer convicted of murdering his wife at
Quantico. The crime was investigated by the FBI and NCIS. Plaintiff has submitted FOIA
requests to both agencies. Court granted partial motion for summary judgment. Court
denied plaintiffs motion for reconsideration without prejudice with the expectation that a
new, more detailed affidavit will resolve questions as to the adequacy of the search.
Affidavit and renewed motion for summary judgment filed January 1995. Court ordered
plaintiff to show cause why the case should not be dismissed. On March 31, 1995, case
dismissed since plaintiff failed to submit response.

58



LS8

Kae

OS

TT

6bE

L81

88st

Las

oT

or

T

&

we IT

I

IT

re IP
8

or |§

es

62

1.
oanpeosorg
TeuruyAD Jo sony [eropeg ‘(9)9 eMY|
@) 80% OSN og
(8)(P) 80% OSN Og
98-98 “T'd ‘9 298 “8FON ZO OSN OF
O6T-ZOL *T'd
‘2801 99g 3FON LO OSN OS
(g)(@) $-€0F 905
‘popuoure se “bas 92 10h OSN OS|
SOL “T'd ‘8912-1912 OSN ZF
Ser OSN TP
6326 OSN Ts
£019 OSN 92)
(®) 8LL2 DSN Z|
862 OSN 8st
9622 OSN OT
ZOIT OSN OT
@ 819 OSN OT
(®) 90% 998 ‘Sab OSN OT
081 OSN OT
861 OSN OT

(Ms Wd]



Caldorisi, G. V.

Center, W. D.

Chamberlain, P. D.

Clemins, A.

Clopton, C. M.

Corcoran, G. J.

Creekman, C. T., Jr.
Dames, T. A.

Davidson, J. P.

Davis, D.

Dejaegher, R. H.

Delaney, K. F.

Demlein, J. J., Jr.

Dirren, F. M., Jr.

Doherty, C. L.

Capt

Capt

VAdm

Cdr

Capt

Capt

Cdr

Commander, Cruiser-Destroyer Group THREE,
United States Pacific Fleet

Commander, Naval Surface Group, Pacific NW,
United States Pacific Fleet

Commanding Officer, Northern Division, Naval
Facilities Engineering Command

Commander, SEVENTH Fleet, United States
Pacific Fleet

Staff Judge Advocate, Naval Air Systems
Command

Commander, United States Naval Activities,
United Kingdom, United States Naval Forces
Europe

Chief of Staff, Naval District of Washington

Commander, Atlantic Division, Naval Facilities
Engineering Command/Commander, Pacific
Division, Naval Facilities Engineering
Command

Commander Officer, Navy Aviation Supply
Office, Naval Supply Systems Command

Staff Judge Advocate, Marine Corps Air Bases
Western Area, El Toro, Santa Ana, CA, United
States Marine Corps

Commander, Fleet Air Western Pacific, United
States Pacific Fleet

Commander, Naval Base, Jacksonville, United
States Atlantic Fleet

Chief of Staff, Submarine Group TWO, United
States Atlantic Fleet

Commander, Naval Base, Jacksonville, United
States Atlantic Fleet

Executive Officer, Public Works Center San

Francisco, Naval Facilities Engineering
Command

29

81

19

22



CHAPTER VI
FEE SCHEDULE
Section 1
GENERAL PROVISIONS
6-100 Authorities

The Freedom of Information Act (5 U.S.C. 552), as amended; by the Freedom of
Information Reform Act of 1986; the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 35); the Privacy
Act of 1974 (5 U.S.C. 552a); the Budget and Accounting Act of 1921 (31 U.S.C. 1 et. seq.);
the Budget and Accounting Procedures Act (31 U.S.C. 67 et. seq.); the Defense
Authorization Act for FY 87, Section 954, (P.L. 99-661), as amended by the Defense
Technical Corrections Act of 1987 (P.L. 100-26).

6-101 Application

a. The fees described in this Chapter apply to FOIA requests, and conform to the
Office of Management and Budget Uniform Freedom of Information Act Fee Schedule and
Guidelines. They reflect direct costs for search, review (in the case of commercial
requesters); and duplication of documents, collection of which is permitted by the FOIA.
They are neither intended to imply that fees must be charged in connection with providing
information to the public in the routine course of business, nor are they meant as a
substitute for any other schedule of fees, such as DoD Instruction 7230.7 (reference (r)),
which does not supersede the collection of fees under the FOIA. Nothing in this Chapter
shall supersede fees chargeable under a statute specifically providing for setting the level of
fees for particular types of records. A "statute specifically providing for setting the level of
fees for particular types of records" (5 U.S.C. 552 (a)(4)(a)(vi) means any statute that
enables a Government Agency such as the Government Printing Office (GPO) or the
National Technical Information Service (NTIS), to set and collect fees. Components should
ensure that when documents that would be responsive to a request are maintained for
distribution by agencies operating statutory-based fee schedule programs such as the GPO
or NTIS, they inform requesters of the steps necessary to obtain records from those sources.

b. The term "direct costs" means those expenditures a Component actually makes in
searching for, reviewing (in the case of commercial requesters), and duplicating documents
to respond to an FOIA request. Direct costs include, for example, the salary of the
employee performing the work (the basic rate of pay for the employee plus 16 percent of
that rate to cover benefits), and the costs of operating duplicating machinery. These factors
have been included in the fee rates prescribed at Section 2 of this Chapter. Not included in
direct costs are overhead expenses such as costs of space, heating or lighting the facility in
which the records are stored.

c. The term "search" includes all time spent looking for material that is responsive
to a request. Search also includes a page-by-page or line-by-line identification (if necessary)
of material in the document to determine if it, or portions thereof are responsive to the
request. Components should ensure that searches are done in the most efficient and least

65



Consequently, if a Component, after completing its portion of a request, finds it necessary
to refer the request to a subordinate office, another DoD Component, or another Federal
Agency to action their portion of the request, the referring Component shall inform the
recipient of the referral of the expended amount of search time and duplication cost to date.

c. The elements to be considered in determining the "cost of collecting a fee" are the
administrative costs to the Component of receiving and recording a remittance, and
processing the fee for deposit in the Department of Treasury's special account. The cost to
the Department of Treasury to handle such remittance is negligible and shall not be
considered in Components’ determinations.

d. For the purposes of these restrictions, the word "pages" refers to paper copies of a
standard size, which will normally be "8 1/2 x 11" or "11x 14". Thus, requesters would not
be entitled to 100 microfiche or 100 computer disks, for example. A microfiche containing
the equivalent of 100 pages or 100 pages of computer printout; however, might meet the
terms of the restriction.

e. In the case of computer searches, the first two free hours will be determined
against the salary scale of the individual operating the computer for the purposes of the
search. As an example, when the direct costs of the computer central processing unit,
input-output devices, and memory capacity equal $24.00 (two hours of equivalent search at
the clerical level), amounts of computer costs in excess of that amount are chargeable as
computer search time.

6-103 Fee Waivers

a. Documents shall be furnished without charge, or at a charge reduced below fees
assessed to the categories of requesters in paragraph 6-104 when the Component
determines that waiver or reduction of the fees is in the public interest because furnishing
the information is likely to contribute significantly to public understanding of the
operations or activities of the Department of Defense and is not primarily in the commercial
interest of the requester.

b. When assessable costs for an FOIA request total $15.00 or less, fees shall be
waived automatically for all requesters, regardless of category.

c. Decisions to waive or reduce fees that exceed the automatic waiver threshold
shall be made on a case-by-case basis, consistent with the following factors:

1. Disclosure of the information "is in the public interest because it is likely
to contribute significantly to public understanding of the operations or activities of the
Government."

(Gi) The subject of the request. Components should analyze whether
the subject matter of the request involves issues which will significantly contribute to the
public understanding of the operations or activities of the Department of Defense.
Requests for records in the possession of the Department of Defense which were originated
by non-government organizations and are sought for their intrinsic content, rather than
informative value will likely not contribute to public understanding of the operations or

67



activities of the Department of Defense. An example of such records might be press
clippings, magazine articles, or records forwarding a particular opinion or concern from a
member of the public regarding a DoD activity. Similarly, disclosures of records of
considerable age may or may not bear directly on the current activities of the Department
of Defense; however, the age of a particular record shall not be the sole criteria for denying
relative significance under this factor. It is possible to envisage an informative issue
concerning the current activities of the Department of Defense, based upon historical
documentation. Requests of this nature must be closely reviewed consistent with the
requester's stated purpose for desiring the records and the potential for public
understanding of the operations and activities of the Department of Defense.

Gi) The informative value of the information to be disclo:
factor requires a close analysis of the substantive contents of a record, or portion of the
record, to determine whether disclosure is meaningful, and shall inform the public on the
operations or activities of the Department of Defense. While the subject of a request may
contain information which concerns operations or activities of the Department of Defense, it
may not always hold great potential for contributing to a meaningful understanding of
these operations or activities. An example of such would be a heavily redacted record, the
balance of which may contain only random words, fragmented sentences, or paragraph
headings. A determination as to whether a record in this situation will contribute to the
public understanding of the operations or activities of the Department of Defense must be
approached with caution, and carefully weighed against the arguments offered by the
requester. Another example is information already known to be in the public domain.
Disclosure of duplicative, or nearly identical information already existing in the public
domain may add no meaningful new information concerning the operations and activities of
the Department of Defense.

Gii) The contribution to an understanding of the subject by the
general public likely to result from disclosure. The key element in determining the
applicability of this factor is whether disclosure will inform, or have the potential to inform
the public, rather than simply the individual requester or small segment of interested
persons. The identity of the requester is essential in this situation in order to determine
whether such requester has the capability and intention to disseminate the information to
the public. Mere assertions of plans to author a book, researching a particular subject,
doing doctoral dissertation work, or indigency are insufficient without demonstrating the
capacity to further disclose the information in a manner which will be informative to the
general public. Requesters should be asked to describe their qualifications, the nature of
their research, the purpose of the requested information, and their intended means of
dissemination to the public.

(iv) The significance of the contribution to public understanding. In
applying this factor, Components must differentiate the relative significance or impact of

the disclosure against the current level of public knowledge, or understanding which exists
before the disclosure. In other words, will disclosure on a current subject of wide public
interest be unique in contributing previously unknown facts, thereby enhancing public
knowledge, or will it basically duplicate what is already known by the general public. A
decision regarding significance requires objective judgment, rather than subjective
determination, and must be applied carefully to determine whether disclosure will likely

68



Pearce, William E.

Pike, Lloyd D.

Putnam, Gerald H.

Redfield, Michael

Retson, Nicholas P.

Reznick, Harvey

Riggs, John M.

Rosenblatt, James H.

Scales, Robert H., Jr.

Serene, Jan W.

Shapiro, Alan P.

Sheldon, Patrick R.

Shinseki, Eric

Siegfried, R. S.

Solomon, Sanford A.

Stirling, James W.

Civ

Civ

MajGen

Civ

Col

Civ

BrigGen

Col

MajGen

Col

Civ

Civ

MajGen

MajGen
Civ

Civ

Chief, Freedom of Information/Privacy Office,
United States Army Intelligence and Security
Command

District Counsel, Jacksonville District, Corps of
Engineers

Assistant Deputy Chief of Staff for Operations
and Plans

District Counsel, Seattle District, Corps of
Engineers

Chief, Contract Law Division, Office of the
Judge Advocate General

Chief Counsel, United States Army Materiel
Command

Director, Assistant Deputy Chief of Staff for
Operations & Plans, Requirements

Commander, United States Army Claim
Service, Office of the Judge Advocate General

Director, Assistant Deputy Chief of Staff for
Operations & Plans, Readiness & Mobilization

Chief, Labor & Employment Law Division,
Office of the Judge Advocate General

Division Counsel, South Pacific District, Corps
of Engineers

Chief Counsel, Chemical & Biological Defense
Command

Assistant Deputy Chief of Staff for Operations
and Plans

Acting The Inspector General

Division Counsel, North Central District, Corps
of Engineers

District Counsel, Wilmington District, Corps of
Engineers

26

448

10

13

11

45

68
17



d. Paper prints (engineering drawings), 1.50

each
e. Paper reprints of microfilm indices, each 10
3. Review Time
Grade Hourly Rate ($)
Clerical E9/GS8 and below 13.25
(Minimum Charge) 8.30

Professional and Executive (To be established at actual hourly rate
prior to review. A minimum charge will be established at 1/2 hourly rates)

d. Other Technical Data Records

Charges for any additional services not specifically provided subparagraph 6-
300, c., above, consistent with DoD Instruction 7230.7 (reference (r)), shall be made by
Components at the following rates:

Minimum charge for office copy (up to six images) .
Each additional image .
Each typewritten page.
Certification and validation with seal, each..
Hand-drawn plots and sketches, each hour or fraction thereo!

TP wD

78



DMA

DNA

NSA/CSS

OIG, DOD

Capt L. W. Urbik, USN, Chief
of Staff

MajGen Gary L. Curtin, USAF,
Director

Mr. Jimmie D. Hill, Deputy
Director

Mr. William P. Crowell, Deputy
Director

Mr. Nicholas Lutsch, Assistant
Inspector General for
Administration and Information
Management

Mrs. Helen Sharetts-Sullivan,
Associate General Counsel

LtCol Lane M. van-de Steeg,
USA, Public Affairs/Freedom of
Information Officer

Ms. Mary Jo Kingsley, Chief,
Information Access Release
Center

Mr. James P. Cavanaugh, Deputy
Director of Policy

Ms. Nadine Dulacki, Chief,
Freedom of Information Act and
Privacy Act Office



Department of Defense
FOI Appeal and Program Officials

OSD/JS

Dept Army

Dept Navy

Dept Air Force

DCAA

DFAS

DIA

DIS

DISA

DLA

Mr. Clifford H. Bernath,
Principal Deputy Assistant to
the Secretary of Defense (Public
Affairs)

Hon William T. Coleman,
General Counsel

RAdm H. E. Grant, USN, Judge
Advocate General/Hon Steven
S. Homigman, General Counsel
of the Navy

Mr. Walter A. Willson Assistant
General Counsel

Mr. John H. van Santen,
Assistant Director, Resources

Mr. Richard F. Keevey, Director

Mr. John T. Berbrich, Chief of
Staff

Mr. John F. Donnelly, Director
LtGen Albert J. Edmonds,
USAF, Director

VAdm Edward M. Straw, USN,

Director/MajGen Ray E. McCoy,
USA, Principal Deputy Director

Mr. Anthony H. Passarella,
Director, Freedom of Information
and Security Review

Mrs. Rose Marie Christensen,
Chief, Information Branch,
Freedom of Information and
Privacy Act Division,
SAIS-IDP-F/P

RAdm Joseph S. Mobley, USN,
Director of the Navy Staff

Mr. William A. Davidson,
Administrative Assistant to the
Secretary of the Air Force

Mr. Dave Henshall, Information
and Privacy Advisor

Mr. John P. Barber, Director,
External Affairs and
Administrative Support

Mr. Robert P. Richardson, Chief,
Freedom of Information Act Staff

Mr. Dale L. Hartig, Chief,
Information/Public Affairs

Mrs. Susan Chadick, General
Counsel

Mr. Raul Martinez,
Administrator, Administrative
Support Center



Neal, R. 1.

Newberry, Robert

Nye, Joseph S., Jr.

O'Donnell, William K.

Ochmanek, David A.

Ormsbee, William H.

Ostovich, Rudolph, III
Owen, William K.

Passarella, Anthony H.

Peksens, Rudolf F.

Plumer, David B.

Quigley, Craig R.

Ra'‘anan, Michael Y.

LtGen

Col

Civ

Civ

Civ

Civ

MajGen
Civ

Civ

BrigGen

Col

Capt

Civ

Deputy Commander-in Chief/Chief of Staff,
United States Central Command

Principal Director, Deputy Assistant Secretary
of Defense (Drug Enforcement Policy and
Support), Assistant Secretary of Defense
(Special Operations and Low-Intensity
Conflict), Under Secretary of Defense (Policy)

Assistant Secretary of Defense (International
Security Affairs), Under Secretary of Defense
(Policy)

Director, Plans, Programs and Administration,
Assistant Secretary of Defense (Command,
Control, Communications and Intelligence)

Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense
(Strategy), Assistant Secretary of Defense
(Strategy and Requirements), Under Secretary
of Defense (Policy)

Acting Deputy Director, Public Affairs, United
States Southern Command

Vice Director, Joint Staff

Head, Information Services, Armed Forces
Radiobiology Research Institute

Director, Freedom of Information and Security
Review, Assistant to the Secretary of Defense
(Public Affairs)

Director, Plans, SCJ5, United States Southern
Command

Chief, Military Group Peru, United States
Southern Command

Director, Public Affairs, United States Atlantic
Command

General Counsel, On Site Inspection Agency,
Assistant to the Secretary of Defense (Atomic
Energy), Under Secretary of Defense
(Acquisition and Technology)

15

37

12

42



Item 2(a)

Exemptions Invoked on Initial Determinations

ejoccocoooseoseeososeooeososcs
Siccooooosososeosesoseoosg

pf otal| 11%) 6%

* Total may not agree with denials in Item 1 because of cases where two
or more exemptions were cited.



Item 10(b)

Calendar Year Costs and Fees Collected

Annual Gost] __ Fees Collectec
$2,857,711.29 $52,457.75
$10,122,004.77 $349,261.73
$7,641,319.73 $361,214.41
‘Dept Air Force $7,553,215.00 $160,414.00
IDCAA $193,462.78 $7,093.02
[DFAS $288,951.25 $9,031.00
[DIA $320,165.00 $3,369.00
DIS $98,196.25 $224.90
DISA $132,283.75 $5,339.10
DLA $1,388,768.00 $123,940.00
[DMA $231,247.76 $1,690.87
IDNA $301,323.98 $3,436.12
INRO $676,041.75 $5,037.50
INSA/CSS $952,823.75 $5,224.15
OIG, DOD
[pop Totals

80



‘q'] UBY} 19Y}0 JoMUOSAIg 45

sormp [0g ewyy-71ed 10 oury}-[NJ pousyssu ouUOsI0d x

86'SsE' Loss
o0'0$

GL'COH'T$
99'F82$
SZ'BETTS
00'0$
00'0$
eo'6I$
00°0$
00'0$
OL'8S0‘T$
oo's9$

61'106‘66z$
+Z'086'6S$
GL'ZB9‘Vs$
00'8FT‘a$
92'6L8$
00°L9T F$
00°L29°01$
Os’ TOL‘T$

02'868‘LI2$
Sp

OL'LESTES$
00°002'F$

6L'L28F$
pr'so6$
SLT98°8$
9L°608$
00°0$
O8'Fr$
00°0$
SL's
90'%68'2$
or60r$

8S'0ts'szzg
SLU POP PFS
ZL TS6V$
Or'Les$
o9'9T8$
os'808$
Sh'980'%$
60'S6T'T$

PLVPSCLIS
os

00'89z‘88s‘T$
00'891‘9$

oo'ss9's6$
OO'TET‘6T$
00'FZ2‘9L$
00'LTS‘8T$
oo'0$
00'z88'T$
00's68'T$
00°6T6'L$
00°L98'TF$
00°949'F$

00'Sh6'982'T$
oo'ese‘LSz$
00°L22FF1$
00°T88°62$
00'LTO‘9T$
00°889'ZI$
00'srE'9$
00's08'62$

oo'eze'sss$
88%

npr pannsttaueeaness

(P4409) (MOT 99]

SL'S8s‘sET$
00°0$

os'seL'a$
OS PFT'T$
00'8L9'F$
00°0$
00°0$
00'0$
00°0$
00'0$
00°8L9'F$
00'0$

SB TIS‘OZI$
ge'z0s‘az$
00°808‘9$
00'0$
OO'LSTF$
00'92$
00'92'T$
O0'PrE TS

00°904'F6$
TS

(IT 9.193 1] $9809 1490] ‘AT
posseo0ag sysonboy eulynoy Jo 3802 “IIT|

(1+ HI M01 “¢

[TH J° %$Z] PBO470AQ TT

[9 n1g3 y] [2709qNS "H

72930 9D

S[Bliezey] [ENSTAOTpny *

Adog seyndui0Z "gq

spioo0y port ‘C

woronpoadey eyotjo101T "OD

uoyonpoidey Adod 201430 “dT

eUIL], qorweg sayndui0y ‘vy
83800 pozeloy OSB) 10470 “IT

[a 0.143 @] [2901 “a
{(0 + @) 5° 4B] PeoqIEAO “A
[(g) B14) (1)] T4701 (9)
SeTsTAHOY 10490 ()
uolnjeredoig UL10,J/eouepuodse.z10/ (F)
yeaoiddy 2 uor,eUIp100{) (§)
Buystoxy F Moracy (Z)
OUL, YOABag (T)
xx(S2F8Y OTNPOYOS 00,7)
£1080789 Aq $380) amoyuLY] poyeuysy ‘OD
83809 avoAuvyl “g
,SiBoAuB] poyeulrysy “VY

83809 JouuOs.eg ‘J

83



Cox, Joseph J.

Craig, George

Crane, Thomas F.

Culver, Daniel

De Kunffy, Anthony

DiGiovanni, Joseph

Doherty, Daniel A.

Doss, Oliver H.

Douglas, Alfred

Dupay, Arthur P.

Dutch, Michael

Eft, John H.

Ellerson, John C.

Falcone, Anthony J.

Feighny, Michael L.

Femimo, Dominic

Civ

Civ

Civ

Civ

Civ

Civ

BrigGen

Col

Civ

Col

Civ

Civ

MajGen

Capt

Civ

Civ

Division Counsel-North Atlantic District, Corps
of Engineers

District Counsel, Pittsburgh District, Corps of
Engineers

District Counsel, Rock Island District, Corps of
Engineers

Depot Counsel, United States Army Materiel
Command

Freedom of Information Act Officer,
Headquarters 5th Signal Command

Division Counsel-New England District, Corps
of Engineers

Commanding General, United States Army
Criminal Investigation Command

Acting Principal Assistant Responsible for
Contracting, United States Army Forces
Command

Principal Assistant Responsible for Contracting,
Military District of Washington

Chief of Staff, United States Total Army
Personnel Command

Chief Counsel, United States Army Materiel
Command

District Counsel, San Francisco District, Corps
of Engineers

Director, Strategy Plans & Policy, Deputy Chief
of Staff for Operations and Plans

Command Judge Advocate, Yuma Proving
Ground, Test & Evaluation Command

Division Counsel-Pacific Ocean District, Corps
of Engineers

Chief Counsel, Vint Hill, Communication-
Electronics Command

21

65



DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE

FREEDOM OF INFORMATION
ACT
PROGRAM
CY 1995

REPORT TO CONGRESS

PREPARED BY:
OFFICE OF THE ASSISTANT TO THE SECRETARY OF DEFENSE
(PUBLIC AFFAIRS)
DIRECTORATE FOR FREEDOM OF INFORMATION
AND SECURITY REVIEW



“q'] WEY} TaYyIO JouNOSIIg 4

sormp [Od ewn-71ed 10 ourT}-][NJ pousisse JouUOSIEd y

os'g90'STS$
o0'0$

FS BHOFS
ah'826$
GL'STL'S$
LYSETS
oo's$
00'0$
sr'es$
00'0$
69'FLE'S$
OS LTS

90'Ler‘OTE$
TS'F80's9$
ST'Les‘og$
SB'SLL'9$
SL'608'°%$
SL'661°6$
gz's80'FE$
ST'496's$

ZL'666'T61$
TT?

GL'8B8‘SS6$
00°0$

SZ 16s‘6T$
92'8s8's$
oo'ser‘St$
00°0$
00'0$
00'0$
00'0$
00'0$
00°F62'6$
oo'eet‘9$

os'zes'se6$
Os'90L‘98T$
00'008‘99T$
00°Szz0T$
00°696‘LT$
00'se6'LF$
00°S8L‘LT$
00°@ET'ZL$

oo'9ze‘oss$
eel

SL THO‘9L9$
00°0$

SL'860°FE$
GL'8T8'9$
00°SL2'LZ$
00°OFLT$
o0'0$
00'0$
00'0$
00'0$
oo'00s‘az$
oo'se$

00'8F6'TF9$
o9'68s‘8z1$
or'ecozes$
oF'806‘008$
00°006$
00'0L9‘sz$
OO TTZ‘s$
00'0sh'2$

00'°6TS‘T8T$
vs

(II 91g} T] $9800 [#701 “AT
pessesorg sysonboy ourynoy Jo 4802 ‘TIT

[1+ HI TMOL ¢

[H J° %92] PBO41040 *T

[9 1193 V] 183979N§ "H

22110 °D

sTePIoyeIl [ENStAorpny *]

&dog szoynduiog "gy

spiooey powitg ‘

uoronpoidey eqoTyor91yAl ‘O

uononpoidey Ado 20130 *d

OUIL], YoIveg Joyndu0D -y
83809 poqepoy OseD 40410 “TI

(a 9243 a] [8901 “AT
[(0 + & Jo %GZ] Peeqt04Q ‘
[(G) 2-149 (1)] T2701, (9)
Ser}TATOV 10430 (9)
uoneredeig UL10g/aouepuodsoa.10Z (F)
[eaoaddy x uoTeurps100_ (§g)
Sulsioxg F Mepsey (Z)
oulEy, Yoawes (T)
xx(S27VY O[NPIYyOS 027)
4£1080389 Aq 83809 InoyuB_ pozyeulTsy *D
83809 awoAuRyl
,ssivokueyy] pozyeulnjsy” “Vy
8380 Jouuosi9g ‘|

(P,AAOD) (Q)OT WIT

aC

84



Shaffer, Glen D.

Smallwood, Glenn H.

Smith, Scott M.

Sobota, Anne E.

Stanford, Kenneth L.

Stein, Paul E.

Stephens, William E.

Sullivan, James M.

Teiber, Joseph F., Jr.

Toews, Georgette M.

Trapp, Lanford E.

Upschulte, Phillip P.

Walker, Johnny R.

Walmsley, Robin D.

Walters, Charles W.

Walters, Tom H., Jr.

Col

Col
LtCol

Maj

Col

LtGen
Col

Col

Col

Col

BrigGen

Civ

Maj

Col
Col

Commander, Air Force Technical Applications
Center

Acting Director of Communications

Military Assistant, Administrative Assistant to
the Secretary of the Air Force

Acting Chief, Information Management, Air
Combat Command

Vice Commander, Air Force Technical
Applications Center

Superintendent, Air Force Academy

Director, Inspections, Inspector General,
Headquarters United States Air Force

Commander, 497 Intelligence Group, Air
Intelligence Agency

Director, Information Management, Air Force
Reserves

Acting Director, Mission Support, Air Force
Personnel Center; Director, Mission Support,
Air Force Personnel Center

Deputy Director, Legislative Liaison, Office of
the Secretary of the Air Force

Principal Assistant Secretary, Manpower,
Reserve Affairs, Installations and
Environment, Office of the Secretary of the Air
Force

Acting Chief, Information Management, Air
Combat Command

Acting Staff Judge Advocate, Sacramento Air
Logistics Center, Air Force Materiel Command

Vice Commander, 11th Wing

Acting Director, Progrms and Evaluation,
Headquarters United States Air Force

44

16

20

10

16

47

11



"Other Reasons" Described

1. Transferred Request

This category applies when responsibility for making a determination or a decision on
categories listed below is shifted from one Component to another Component/Federal Agency.

2. Lack of Records

This category covers situations wherein the requester is advised the agency has no record, or
has no statutory obligation to create a record.

3. Failure of Requester to Reasonably Describe Record

This category is specifically based on Section 552(a)(3)(A) of the FOIA.

4, Other Failures by Requester to Comply with Published Rules and/or Directives

This category is based on Section 552(a)(8)(B) of the FOIA and includes instances of failure to
follow published rules concerning time, place, fees and procedures.

5. Request Withdrawn by Requester

This category covers situations when the requester asks an agency to disregard the request (or
appeal) or pursues the request outside FOIA channels.

6. Not an Agency Record

This category indicates the requested information is not an agency record.



Item 2(c)

Other Reasons Cited on Initial Determinations

lOSD/JS 256 18 1,867]
[Dept Army 2,647| 2,107 644 705 827 741 7,671)
[Dept Navy 5,480) 1,956 461 630 807 215) 9,549]
[Dept Air Force 423| 1,765 245 933 569 306 4,241
IDCAA 25 28 4 1 20 1 79
DFAS 53 104 35 96 13 41 342|
DIA 45 189 6 27 10 52) 279
DIS 15 24 4 1 5 4 53
DISA 15 12 0 31 8| 67
[DLA 231 364 264 70 299 70) 1,298}
‘DMA. 10 18 2 64 4 10 108
IDNA 26 31 1 7 9 86
INRO 9 19 0 0 0] 34!
INSA/CSS 63 184 23 61 4| 371
OIG, Dop 43 44) 8 37 3) 151)
“Types of Categories

Transferred Request

Lack of Records

. Failure of Requester to Reasonably Describe Record

. Other Failures by Requester to Comply with Published Rules and/or
Directives

5. Request Withdrawn by Requester

6. Not an Agency Record

(see following page for description of each category)

PON



Joseph A. Chenkin v. Department of the et al., C.A. No. 94-7109, Third Circuit,
Philadelphia, PA. The U.S. Court of Appeals affirmed the judgment of the District Court
entered January 14, 1994, with costs taxed against Appellant. The appeal was based on
the District Court’s finding in favor of the Government and granting judgment sustaining
the denial of information to Mr. Chenkin.

Southwest Center for Biodiversity, et al. v. U.S. Army Corps of Engi

C.A. No. 94-2570-PHX-EHC, U.S.D.C. AZ. Plaintiff filed suit for defendant’s refusal to
release draft E.A. NEPA documents on the Wellton-Mohawk Flood Control Project under
exemption (b)(5) on predecisional grounds. Subsequently, the documents were released to
plaintiff and the case was settled on July 20, 1995.

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

CM Manufacturing Inc. v. Department of the Navy, C.A. No. 93-CV-2251,
U.S.D.C.N.D. OH. Case involved the withholding of drawings by the Naval Air Systems
Command (NAVAIR). On January 13, 1994, the court denied defendant's motion for a
protective order stating that the motion "may be refiled following the filing of a dispositive
motion." A motion for summary judgment was filed on April 1, 1994. CM filed its
memorandum in opposition on May 5, 1994. On June 3, 1994, the government filed a reply
brief. CM submitted a memorandum in opposition on June 8, 1994, asserting that the
government reply brief was untimely. The magistrate who supervises pre-trial matters,
reviewed the motions and recommended to Judge Oliver on January 4, 1995, that the court
deny the government's motion for summary judgment. The government filed its objections
to the recommendation on January 18, 1995. CM filed a memorandum in support of the
recommendations on February 6, 1995. On August 25, 1995, the court adopted the
Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation and denied the motion for summary
judgment.

Nathaniel Just v. Department of Navy, C.A. No. 95-3394-18AJ, U.S.D.C. SC.
This Charleston Naval Shipyard case pro se involving a "no records" denial of plaintiff's
FOIA appeal. The Government filed a motion to dismiss on December 18, 1995.

Christine Leonardich v. Department of the Navy, C.A. No. C93-0167-TEH,
U.S.D.C.N.D. CA. This is a civil rights action alleging unlawful sex discrimination with
four causes of action and a fifth cause of action under the Freedom of Information Act for
failure to provide to plaintiff a copy of an investigative report by the Criminal Intelligence
Division which bears on her civil rights complaint. A status hearing was held on April 12,
1993. The Navy filed a motion for a stay and to bifurcate the FOIA action. Based on a
settlement by the parties, on November 22, 1994, the court ordered the case dismissed with
prejudice after the passage of 90 days to allow either party to request the order to be
vacated. Neither party did so and the case was dismissed on February 22, 1995.

57



Druyen, Darleen A.

Dula, Leslie M.

Eickmann, Kenneth E.

Euretig, Joseph G.

Fain, James A., Jr.

Fairchild, Deborah A.

Fortuna, John A.

Fox, Charles L.

Furcron, Wyckliff S.

Gilmore, Deborah A.

Gordon, Marilyn A.

Habiger, Eugene E.

Hale, Robert

Hannan, Stephen J.

Henabray, William M.

Higham, James L.

Civ

Col

MajGen

Col

LtGen

LtCol

Civ

Col

Maj

Civ

LtCol

LtGen

Civ

Col

BrigGen

Deputy Assistant Secretary, Acquisition, Office
of the Secretary of the Air Force

Chief, Information Management, Air Mobility
Command

Commander, Oklahoma City Air Logistics
Center, Air Force Materiel Command

Staff Judge Advocate, Sacramento Air Logistics
Center, Air Force Materiel Command

Assistant Vice Chief of Staff, Headquarters
United States Air Force

Chief, Information Resources, Air Force
Command, Control, Communications and
Computers Agency

Deputy to the Commander, Air Force Services

Agency

Deputy Director, Legislative Liaison, Office of
the Secretary of the Air Force

Acting Staff Judge Advocate, Sacramento Air
Logistics Center, Air Force Materiel Command

Chief, Administrative Services Division,
National Guard Bureau

Acting Staff Judge Advocate, Sacramento Air
Logistics Center, Air Force Materiel Command

Deputy Chief of Staff, Personnel, Headquarters
United States Air Force

Assistant Secretary of the Air Force, Financial
Management and Comptroller, Office of the
Secretary of the Air Force

Director of Information Systems Support, Air
Reserve Personnel Center

Staff Judge Advocate, Sacramento Air Logistics
Center, Air Force Materiel Command

Vice Commander, Air Force Special Operations
Command

40

138

24

42

10

38



*g'] UBY} IoYy}O JoUUOSIO” 4x

samp [Od owty-j2ed 20 ouryy-[]Ny pousisse euuosieg x

oo'stz‘ess‘z$
00'0$

00'aze‘LOr$
00'S9F18$
oo'o98‘sze$
00°L0L‘6>$
00'F98'L¢
00°096‘s$
00°L22'6$
OO'LOL‘T$
00°8z0'z0z$
Oo'szE'TS$

00°068‘Sh1‘'L$
00'SLT‘62FTS
0o'sT6‘6g9$
Oo'sTs‘S9$
00'T29'9ZT$
00°F92'6rT$
00°T08‘FLT$
00°F T8‘ShT$

00°L6L‘990°S$
LSet

SL°6IE'THO‘LS
PEOSL PS

9B'L96'Sah$
av'seo're$
os'eLe‘see$
6S ZEL‘E9$
os'P86$
Te'SITO1$
o0's6e‘t$
00'S2T'F$
o0's8s'sTz$
Oor-ose‘or$

PU ZONELTLG
SP OLPEFTS
P8'BLT'169$
98'29P'ss$
89° 96FL6$
S'SL8‘8ST$
L9°89L‘L9T$
PSLLS'BLIS

LB°ZOL‘LEO'SS$
eter

BL'PO0'SZT ‘OTS
g0'98h‘ST$

SL'6PP'S99$
g6°680'SeT$
BL ege'zes$
Z0'808'9F$
Za°820'S$
so'seL‘es$
S8'61S'L$
soroes'h$
Os IbF0ze$
8h L8P'BOT$

00°6 IT FhF'6$
08°S28°888'T$
08°280‘L92'T$
STPLE SETS
SL°60L‘86Z$
98°SIT‘LET$
ZS PZT‘OTE$
To'098‘aze$

00°ST2‘88z‘'9$
S Let

6UTIL‘'LS8‘S$
00'0$

6z'FEs'6s$
98°906‘L1$
EPLEOTLG
86'ZLO'T$
oo'ss$
zoreee$
ov 96e$
06'21z$
90°9S8'LZ$
Za's6S'TH$

OO'LLT‘89L‘e$
or se9‘ess$
SLGLE PLES
SL'689°6Z$
09'8h9'Sz$
OT 96L°6z$
vE'8rS'e8$
L8°R6S'9F$

88°993'000‘2$
Sse

[III 8.293 J] $3800 [4991 “Al
pessesorg sysonbay ourznoy Jo 4S0Z “TIT

(+ HI TROL "¢

[H Je %gz] Peeq10AQ *]

[pd 1243 vy] 127079n§ *H

20490 "D

syelieze] [ENsTAorpny “Wh

Adog sz0yndureg "qh

sp1000y poyaitd "Cd

uoronposdey eqoyorrg "OD

uononpoidey Adod e0130."A

oul, yorweg 10yndul0D *y
8780) poze[oy O88 10430 “TI

[a 92193 a] 1979.0 A
[(0 + @) 5° %GZ] PEOqI0AO “A
[(g) ny? (1)] 12991 (9)
SaTsTAT~oV 10490 ()
uonsaederg W410,j/e0uepuodse.1t410( (F)
Teaoaddy ¥ uoHeuTpr005 (g)
Buysyoxg YF Mopaecy (Z)
oulEy, qorweg (T)
+x(8278Y O[NPOYOS oof)
£1080789 Aq $3809 NoyUL_] posyeullysy *D
8}80Q 180AuBy “Gg
,SrvoduBy poyeulyysy” “V
$4809 Jouuosied ‘|

0.1800

(P,FA0D) (OT We]

81



Yokas-Reese, Marina Civ Attorney, United States Army Materiel
Command

Young, Richard O. Civ Principal Assistant Responsible for Contracting,
United States Army Pacific

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

Anderson, J. D. Capt Acting Chief, Naval Education and Training
Command

Barnett, S. R. Capt Commanding Officer, Naval Air Station
Sigonella, United States Naval Forces Europe

Barr, J. M. RAdm Commander, Submarine Force, Pacific, United
States Pacific Fleet

Bernson, V. E. Lt Staff Judge Advocate, Naval Support Activity
Naples, United States Naval Forces Europe

Boland, J., Jr. Capt Director, Shore Safety Programs, Naval Safety
Center

Bordy, M. W. RAdm Commander, Cruiser-Destroyer Group ONE,
United States Pacific Fleet

Bowman, M. E. Capt Deputy Assistant Judge Advocate General,
General Litigation

Brabham, J. A., Jr. LtGen Deputy Chief of Staff for Installations and
Logistics, Headquarters United States Marine
Corps

Branch, E. B. Civ Executive Director, Acquisition and Business
Management (Research Development and
Acquisition)

Brewer, D. L., III RAdm Commander, United States Naval Forces
Marianas, United States Pacific Fleet

Bucholz, R. P. Cdr Acting Commanding Officer, Engineering Field
Activity West, Naval Facilities Engineering
Command

Burt, C. H. Capt Deputy and Chief of Staff, Naval Surface Force,

Pacific, United States Pacific Fleet

28

11



Washabaugh, Walter M. Col Acting Director, Information Management, Air
Education and Training Command

White, Eugene Civ Chief, Information Security Division, Air Force
Security Police, Headquarters United States
Air Force

Wilder, Harlan G. Civ Chief, General Law, Judge Advocate General,
Headquarters United States Air Force

Wilson, John K., IIT Col Deputy Director, Legislative Liaison, Office of
the Secretary of the Air Force

Wingfield, Stephen R. Col Commander, Air Force Sesrvices Agency

Wolff, Robert D. Civ Deputy Civil Engineer, Headquarters United
States Air Force

Woltoff, Rod A. Maj Staff Judge Advocate, Human Systems Center,
Air Force Materiel Command

Yanker, Gerald L. Civ Executive Director, Oklahoma City Air

Logistics Center, Air Force Materiel Command

DEFENSE CONTRACT AUDIT AGENCY

Buhre, Richard R. Civ Regional Director, Eastern Region

Cherry, C. T. Civ Regional Director, Central Region

Matter, Robert W. Civ Regional Director, Western Region

Summers, Francis P. Civ Regional Director, Northeastern Region

‘Woulhueter, Robert Civ Chief, Information Resources Management
‘ Branch, Headquarters

45

14

1

a wo Oo ©



Swann, Robert L.
Tanner, James R.
Temmel, Stephen E.
Thomason, Matthew D.,
Ill

Tillery, Herbert R.
Towers, Joseph
Townsend, John

Trant, Charles E.
Turner, Robert

Vela, Hector

Wheaton, Kelly D.

Wilks, Riggs L.

Wilson, Johnnie E.

Wilson, Joseph K., Jr.

Wixted, Michael G.

Woodling, Dale N.

LtCol

Civ

Civ

Civ

Col

Civ

Civ

Col

Civ

Civ

Maj

Col

LtGen
Col

Col

LtCol

Deputy, Criminal Law Division, Office of the
Judge Advocate General

Chief Counsel, United States Army Materiel
Command

District Counsel, Los Angeles District, Corps of
Engineers

Counsel, Engineering and Support Center,
Center-Huntsville District, Corps of Engineers

Commandant, United States Disciplinary
Barracks, United States Army

District Counsel, New Orleans District, Corps of
Engineers

Acting Division Counsel, Ohio River District,
Corps of Engineers

Chief, Criminal Law Division, Office of the
Judge Advocate General

District Counsel, Portland District, Corps of
Engineers

Division Counsel, Southwestern District, Corps
of Engineers

General Litigation Attorney, Office of the Judge
Advocate General, United States Army
Strategic Defense Command

Chief Trial Attorney, United States Army Legal
Services Agency

Deputy Chief of Staff for Logistics

Chief, Contracting Division, Principal Assistant
Responsible for Contracting, United States
Army Forces Command

Chief of Staff, United States Total Army
Personnel Command

Acting Chief, Administrative Law Division,
Office of the Judge Advocate General

27

13

30

73



Item 9

Fee Schedule and Fees Collected

The fee schedule on pages 65 through 78, reprinted from Chapter VI, DoD Regulation
5400.7-R, October 1990, with Change 1, May 10, 1991, establishes standard costs
coliectable by Department of Defense Agencies.

$1,088,427.59 was collected from the public for making records available during the year
1995 (see item 10(b), page 80 for agency totals).

64



Item 1

Determinations

88

503

467
Dept Air Force 20,222 18,579 2,037 365 4,241 20,222)
DCAA 172 66 23 4 79 172
IDFAS 2,080 1,697 17 6 342 2,062)
DIA 760 137 340 4 279) 760)
DIS 156 56 26 21 53 156)
DISA 283 199 il 8 65 283)
[DLA 12,713 11,453 146 20 1,298) 12,917
(DMA 301 165 27 9 108 309
‘DNA. 259 139 32 4 86 261
INRO 15 23 5 34 vis)
INSA/CSS 726 257 124 296 748)
216 90 151 492

i

* Total Actions may exceed Total Requests because more than one
action may be taken on a single request.



Taylor, Wesley B., Jr.

Thomas, Donald D.

Tracy, David S.

Trost, Howard F.

Tucker, David C.

Tyrrell, John T.

Vanderploog, Paul J.

Wallerstein, Mitchel B.

Weaver, Keith T.

Weidmann, Kent M.

Welling, Craig D.

Wiles, John A.

BrigGen Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense (Policy

Civ

Cdr

Civ

Col

MajGen

Civ

Cdr

Civ

Capt

Civ

and Missions), Assistant Secretary of Defense
(Special Operations and Low Intensity
Conflict), Under Secretary of Defense (Policy)

Director, Program Control and Administration,
Defense Research and Engineering, Under
Secretary of Defense (Acquisition and
Technology)

Acting Executive Director, Defense Evaluation
Support Activity

Executive Assistant, United States Pacific
Command

Deputy Director, Policy Planning, Deputy
Assistant Secretary of Defense (Policy and
Missions), Assistant Secretary of Defense
(Special Operations and Low-Intensity
Conflict), Under Secretary of Defense (Policy)

Director, Public Affairs, United States Atlantic
Command

Director, Logistics, ECJ4, United States
European Command

Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense
(Counterproliferation Policy), Assistant
Secretary of Defense (International Security
Policy), Under Secretary of Defense (Policy)

Deputy Executive Secretary, Executive
Secretary of the Department of Defense

Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense (Asian
and Pacific Affairs), Assistant Secretary of
Defense (International Security Affairs), Under
Secretary of Defense (Policy)

Executive Assistant, Assistant to the Secretary
of Defense (Atomic Energy), Under Secretary of
Defense (Acquisition and Technology)

Executive Director, Defense Evaluation

Support Activity, Under Secretary of Defense
(Acquisition and Technology)

18

10

13



“q'] WEY} J0yIO oUUOSIe” 4s
sermp [Od ey-yaed 10 ourl}-[[NJ pousisse ouUOSIOg ,

Se'96T'86$ oo's9t‘oze$ Se TS6‘ess$ SL'ZOP‘S6T$ (IIL 8149 T] $9800 [290], AT]
00°0$ 00'0$ 00°0F6'L$ 00°0$ pesseo0ag sysonboy oulynoy Jo 4800 ‘TIT
00°SLF$ 00°0S0'2$ GL'SLL'OS$ TL'e68'e$ {1 + H] 1901 ‘¢
oo's6$ 000TH I$ SL°gst'9$ PLBLU'T$ [E130 %9z] PeOyACAG ‘T
oo'ose$ 00°0F9'S$ 00°829Fz$ LOVIL'$ [9 1293 v1 18399qNS “H
00°0$ 00°0$ oo'sez‘s$ o0'0$ 12110 "9
00°0$ oo'sss‘e$ 00'0$ 00°0$ s[elioqeyy [ensTAorpny “yy
00°0$ 00'0$ o0'9z$ 00°0$ Adog xz0yndurog “gq
oo'sT$ 00'08$ 00°0T$ 06'ST$ spsoooy poqurig ‘d
00°0$ 00'0$ 00'L$ 00'0$ uopjonpoaday eyoyor01W] “OD
o0's9$ oo'eTs$ 00°6T#‘9$ 09'689°F$ uoronposdey Ado e0130 “a
o0'008$ 00'T99‘2$ 00°9L8'6$ Ly 6$ aUIL], Yoaeeg z0yndur0g *y

89809 poqepey 88D 10440 “IT

SB TZL‘L6$ Oost r‘ste$ Os'sEz‘srz$ 90°699‘L8T$ [a 9.243 g] [FOL “A

7 6 6, * a
SB'PPSEI$ 00°829°z9$ 09'9F0°6+$ Ts'ST9‘Le$ [(0 + & Jo %Gz] PeeyteAg ‘Cd ©
00'80S‘z¢ oo'osT‘0s$ 00°6Z0'TL$ 92'966°01$ [(g) n-199 (1)] 18101 (9)
00'0$ 00°SZL$ OO'PPETZS oo'os$ SOMTATOY 10430 (9)
00°09T$ 00'er8'z$ oo'se6'L$ GL'908'T$ uoyerederg W10,j/eouspucdse1i0) (F)
00°090°T$ 00'r89'z$ 00'6T8‘s$ SZ'360'T$ Teaoaddy y uo1;euTp1005 (§)
00°086$ 00°6LL01$ 00°66T‘OT$ os'bL6's$ Suystoxg YP Maracy (Z)
oo'soe$ 00°S2z‘eT$ O0'zEL‘az$ SLSLE'SS ourEy, Yoawes (T)
ax(S0}BY OTNPEYIE 02,7)
4£10%0389 Aq s}s0p MoyUL_] poyeuljs| ‘OD
00°699'S2$ 00°%hE0zz$ OO'LST'SZI$ 00°6S0'68T$ 8380) reokueyy “a
kad oF rs bx ,Sreoduey] poyeulyysg” “V

$9809 JouUos.iaq "]|

Tsoo

(P4402) (MOT WF]



DEFENSE LOGISTICS AGENCY

Babbitt, George T. MajGen Principal Deputy Director 1

Farrell, Lawrence P., Jr. LtGen Principal Deputy Director 1

McCoy, Ray E. MajGen Principal Deputy Director 6

Straw, Edward M. VAdm Director 6
DEFENSE MAPPING AGENCY

Urbik, Lawrence W. Capt Chief of Staff 4
DEFENSE NUCLEAR AGENCY

None

Hill, J. D. Civ Deputy Director 1

Adams, Ralph W. Civ Executive Director 4

Crowell, William P. Civ Deputy Director 23

OFFICE OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL, DOD

Lutsch, Nicholas T. Civ Assistant Inspector General, Administration 31
and Information Management

55



Item 10(a)

Availability of Records

(New categories or segregable portions of records now being revealed.)

POW/MIA documents continue to be available at the Library of Congress, and the
National Archives and Records Administration.

79



Item 10(e)

Time Limit Extensions

Ip JoooooCOoOoO oC OOO OoONOS

85



Item 8

FOIA Implementation Rules or Regulations

2

OSD/JS

Dept Army

Dept Navy

Dept Air
Force

DCAA

DFAS

DIA

DIS

DISA

"DoD Freedom of Information Act (FOIA)
Program"

"The Army Freedom of Information Act
Program"

"Availability of Department of Navy
Records and Publication of Department of
the Navy Documents Affecting the Public"

"Air Force Freedom of Information Act
Program"

"Defense Contract Audit Agency (DCAA)
Freedom of Information Act Program"

“Freedom of Information Act Program"

"Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA)
Freedom of Information Act"

“Defense Investigative Service Freedom of
Information Practices"

"Defense Information Systems
Agency/Office of the Manager, National
Communications System (DISA/OMNCS)
Freedom of Information Act Program"

62

32 CFR 286

32 CFR 518

32 CFR 701

32 CFR 806

32 CFR 290

(pending revision)

32 CFR 292

32 CFR 298

32 CFR 287



Rannenberg, J.

Ress, R. G.

Reyes, W.

Riggs, R. K.

Russo, F. V.

Saalfeld, F. E.

Sabbatini, J.

Sanford, F. G.

Sareeram, R. R.

Schmitt, C. H.

Schwenk, J. R.

Semko, P. S.

Sesser, R. J., Jr.

Shaffer, R. L.
Shore, J. F.

Capt

Civ

Capt

Civ

Capt

RAdm

Civ

Col

Capt

Civ

Capt

Director, Contracting Directorate, Naval
Information Systems Management Center

Counsel, Marine Corps Air Bases Western Area,
El Toro, Santa Ana, CA, United States Marine
Corps

Director, Admin Support Division, Navy-Marine
Corps Appellate Review Activity (NAMARA)

Assistant Deputy Chief of Staff for Installations
and Logistics, Headquarters United States
Marine Corps

Staff Judge Advocate, Naval Base, San Diego,
United States Pacific Fleet

Deputy Chief/Technical Director, Office of Naval
Research

Commanding Officer, Engineering Field Activity

Chesapeake, Naval Facilities Engineering
Command

Commander, Naval Medical Center, Oakland,
United States Pacific Fleet

Director, Supply Programs and Policy Division
(N41), Office of the Chief of Naval Operations

Deputy Director, Naval Nuclear Propulsion
Program (NOON), Office of the Chief of Naval
Operations

Staff Judge Advocate, Marine Corps Air Bases
Western Area, El Toro, Santa Ana, CA, United
States Marine Corps

Commandant, Naval District of Washington

Commander, Submarine Group NINE, United
States Pacific Fleet

Auditor General of the Navy

Commanding Officer, Naval Air Station,
Whidbey Island, United States Pacific Fleet

35

35

11

37



6-201 Search Time

a. Manual Search

Type Grade Hourly
Rate($
Clerical E9/GS8 and below 12
Professional 01-06/GS9-GS/GM15 25
Executive 07/GS/GM16/ES1 and above 45

b. Computer Search

Computer search is based on direct cost of the central processing unit,
input-output devices, and memory capacity of the actual computer configuration. The
salary scale (equating to paragraph a. above) for the computer operator/programmer
determining how to conduct and subsequently executing the search will be recorded as part
of the computer search.

6-202 Duplication

Type Cost per Page (¢)
Pre-Printed material 02
Office copy 15
Microfiche 25

Computer copies (tapes or printouts) Actual cost of duplicating the tape or
printout (includes operator's time and
cost of the tape)

6-203 Review Time (in the case of commercial requesters)

Type Grade Hour
Rate($)
Clerical E9/GS8 and below 12
Professional 01-06/GS9-GS/GM15 25
Executive 07/GS/GM16/ES1 and above 45

6-204 Audiovisual Documentary Materials
Search costs are computed as for any other record. Duplication cost is the actual

direct cost of reproducing the material, including the wage of the person doing the work.
Audiovisual materials provided to a requester need not be in reproducible format or quality.

6-205 Other Records

Direct search and duplication cost for any record not described above shall be
computed in the manner described for audiovisual documentary material.

75



Simms, R. G.

Sinclair, N. A.

Smith, B. J.

Smith, G. J.

Smith, R. C.
Snyder, J. W.
Southgate, G. V.

Spane, R. J.

Spearman, W. C.

Spindler, R. P.

Starr, M. W.

Sterner, G. R.

Stevens, G. A.

Stuckert, B. T.

Taylor, P. E.

Taylor, T. R.

Tedeschi, E. F., Jr.

Lt

Lt

RAdm

Capt

VAdm

Capt

Civ

Lt

VAdm

Capt

Capt

Capt

Cdr

RAdm

Commander, Naval Activities, Spain, United
States Naval Forces Europe

Staff Judge Advocate, Naval Security Group
Command

Commander, Carrier Group FIVE, United
States Pacific Fleet

Staff Judge Advocate, Naval Support Activity
Naples, United States Naval Forces Europe

Commander, Naval Special Warfare Command
Acting Director, Navy IPO

Commander, Naval Training Center Orlando,
Naval Education and Training Command

Commander, Naval Air Force, Pacific, United
States Pacific Fleet

Chief of Staff, Fleet Air Keflavik, United States
Atlantic Fleet

Attorney, Naval Warfare Center, China Lake,
Naval Air Systems Command

Staff Judge Advocate, Naval Intelligence
Command

Commander, Naval Sea Systems Command

Commanding Officer, Naval Support Activity,
Naples, United States Naval Forces Europe

Commander, Naval Activities, Spain, United
States Naval Forces Europe

Commander, Submarine Group NINE, United
States Pacific Fleet

Force Judge Advocate, Naval Air Force Atlantic,
United States Atlantic Fleet

Commander, Combat Logistics Group ONE,
United States Pacific Fleet

36

18

20

79

49

56



Item 5(b)

Statutes Invoked on Appeal Determinations

Statute

10 USC 1102 (f)

18 USC 798

41 USC 423

42 USC 290 dd-3

42, USC 2161-2168, P.L. 703

50 USC 401 et seq., as
amended, Sec 403-3 (c)(5)

50 USC 402 Note, Sec 6,
PLL. 86-36

(Rule 6(e), Federal Rules

of Criminal Procedure

21

8 B ro ew

=

51



Kelley, Terence J.

Kirk, William C.

Korman, Carl E.

Lamy, Joel R.

LaNoue, Alcide M.

Lealing, Gerald J.

Lederer, Calvin M.

Lingenfelter, Stephen I.

Lipes, Sharon A.

Livingston, Mark

Longbottom, Harry W.

Loschi, Joseph R.

Lovelady, William N., Jr.

Lundberg, Steven B.

Lyon, Suzanne C.

Mahoney, Robert N.

Civ

Col

Civ

Col

LtGen
Col

Col

Civ

Civ

Civ

Maj

Civ

Civ

Col

Civ

Civ

Division Counsel, Ohio River District, Corps of
Engineers

General Counsel, Army & Air Force Exchange
Service

District Counsel, Sacramento District, Corps of
Engineers

Commander, United States Army Medical
Command, Acquisition Activity

The Surgeon General

Chief, Administrative Law Division, Office of
the Judge Advocate General

Chief, Environmental Law Division, Office of
the Judge Advocate General

Division Counsel, South Atlantic District, Corps
of Engineers

Chief Counsel, United States Army Materiel
Command

Chief of Policy and Plans, United States Army
Forces Command

Command Judge Advocate, Yuma Proving
Ground, Test & Evaluation Command

District Counsel, Norfolk District, Corps of
Engineers

Counsel, Waterways Experiment Station
District, Corps of Engineers

Judge Advocate, Chief Counsel, United States
Army Materiel Command

Acting Principal Assistant Responsible for
Contracting, United States Army Forces
Command

Division Counsel-Missouri River District, Corps
of Engineers

24

46

17

117
12



Honigman, S. S. Civ General Counsel

Monahan, R. P. Cdr Deputy Assistant Judge Advocate General
(General Litigation)
DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE
Willson, Walter A. Civ Deputy General Counsel (Civilian Personnel
and Fiscal Law), Office of the Secretary of the
Air Force

DEFENSE CONTRACT AUDIT AGENCY

Van Santen, John Civ Assistant Director, Resources

DEFENSE FINANCE AND ACCOUNTING SERVICE

None

DEFENSE INTELLIGENCE AGENCY

Berbrich, John T. Civ Chief of Staff

DEFENSE INVESTIGATIVE SERVICE

Donnelly, John F. Civ Director

DEFENSE INFORMATION SYSTEMS AGENCY

None

54

52

43

41



DLA

DMA

DNA

NSA/CSS

OIG, DOD

“Defense Logistics Agency (DLA) Freedom
of Information Act Program"

"Defense Mapping Agency (DMA)
Freedom of Information Act (FOIA)
Program"

"Defense Nuclear Agency (DNA) Freedom
of Information Act Program"

“National Reconnaissance Office Freedom
of Information Act Program"

“Public Access to Records"

"Office of the Inspector General Freedom
of Information Act Program"

63

32 CFR 1285

32 CFR 286i and 293

82 CFR 291 (pending
revision)

32 CFR 296

32 CFR 299

32 CFR 295



Table of Contents

PAG!

DoD Reporting Agencies Under the Freedom of Information Act 1
DoD Freedom of Information Act Appeal and Program Officials 2
Item 1 - Initial Determinations 4
Item 2 - Initial Determinations

(a) Exemptions Invoked 5

(b) Statutes Invoked 6

(c) Other Reasons 7

(d) Description of "Other Reasons" 8
Item 3 - Initial Denial Authorities by Participation 9
Item 4 - Appeal Determinations 49
Item 5 - Appeal Determinations

(a) Exemptions Invoked 50

(b) Statutes Invoked 51

(c) Other Reasons 52
Item 6 - Appeal Denial Authorities by Participation 53
Item 7 - Court Opinions and Actions Taken 56

Item 8 - Freedom of Information Act Implementation Rules or Regulations 62
Item 9 - Fee Schedule and Fees Collected 64
Item 10 - Administrative Efforts

(a) Availability of Records 79

(b) Calendar Year Costs and Fees Collected 80
(c) Time Limit Extensions 85



Pelak, Andrew, Jr.

Peterson, Richard A.

Ralston, Joseph W.

Rathje, Norman F.
Reynolds, Gerald E.

Rhodes, Robert N.

Roadman, Charles H.

Robb, Jeffrey L.

Ronsick, Eugene J.

Ross, Walter H.

Rowell, Gary L.

Sams, John B., Jr.

Schlecter, Alvin E.

Schlegel, Thomas E.

Sgroi, Anthony

BrigGen Acting Deputy Chief of Staff, Personnel,

Civ

LtGen

Col

Civ

Col

MajGen

Maj

Col

LtCol

LtCol

MajGen

Col

Col

LtCol

Headquarters United States Air Force

Acting Chief, General Law, Judge Advocate
General, Headquarters United States Air Force

Deputy Chief of Staff, Plans and Operations,
Headquarters United States Air Force

Vice Commander, Air Force Personnel Center

Deputy Director, Plans and Requirements,
Deputy Chief of Staff, Plans and Operations,
Headquarters United States Air Force

Chief, Inquiries, Inspector General, Office of
the Secretary of the Air Force

Director, Air Force Medical Operations Agency,
Air Force Surgeon General, Headquarters
United States Air Force

Acting Staff Judge Advocate, Sacramento Air
Logistics Center, Air Force Materiel Command

Director, Command Staff, Air Force Special
Operations Command

Chief, Information Management, Air
Intelligence Agency

Acting Staff Judge Advocate, Warner Robins
Air Logistics Center, Air Force Materiel
Command

Director, Forces, Deputy Chief of Staff, Plans
and Operations, Headquarters United States
Air Force

Staff Judge Advocate, Air Force Development
Test Center, Air Force Materiel Command

Staff Judge Advocate, Air Force Flight Test
Center, Air Force Materiel Command

Acting Chief, Information Management, Air
Combat Command

43

19

119

10

36

66

21



Holt, Lake B.

Hopson, Everett G.

Howard, Olin A.

Idrogo, Samuel

Jones, Michael L.

Katahara, Lester K.

Kenyon, Steele M.

Kloeber, Peter K.

Koenig, Robert F., Jr.

Land, Mark R.

Larson, Eric Y.

Lender, Steven N.

Lepper, Edward C.

Linhard, Robert E.

Lowas, Albert F.

Col

Civ

Civ

Civ

Col

Col

Maj

Col

Col

Maj

Col

Col

Maj

MajGen

Civ

Staff Judge Advocate, Warner Robins Air
Logistics Center, Air Force Materiel Command

Chief , General Law Division, Office of The
Judge Advocate General, Headquarters United
States Air Force

Director, Communications, Air Force Materiel
Command

Chief, Commander’s Action Office, San Antonio
Air Logistics Center, Air Force Materiel
Command

Director, Information Management, United
States Air Forces in Europe

Staff Judge Advocate, Ogden Air Logistics
Center, Air Force Materiel Command

Staff Judge Advocate, Human Systems Center,
Air Force Materiel Command

Commander, Air Force Civil Engineer Support
Agency

Director, Information Management, Air Force
Space Command

Acting Staff Judge Advocate, Sacramento Air
Logistics Center, Air Force Materiel Command

Vice Commander, Air Force Technical
Applications Center

Staff Judge Advocate, Air Force Flight Test
Center, Air Force Materiel Command

Acting Chief, Information Management, Air
Intelligence Agency

Director, Plans, Deputy Chief of Staff, Plans
and Operations, Headquarters United States
Air Force

Deputy Director, Air Force Base Conversion
Agency

41

18

87

84



expensive manner so as to minimize costs for both the Component and the requester. For
example, Components should not engage in line-by-line searches when duplicating an
entire document known to contain responsive information would prove to be the less
expensive and quicker method of complying with the request. Time spent reviewing
documents in order to determine whether to apply one or more of the statutory exemptions
is not search time, but review time. See subparagraph 6-101, e., for the definition of
review, and subparagraph 6-201, b., for information pertaining to computer searches.

d. The term "duplication" refers to the process of making a copy of a document in
response to an FOIA request. Such copies can take the form of paper copy, microfiche,
audiovisual, or machine readable documentation (e. g., magnetic tape or disc), among
others. Every effort will be made to ensure that the copy provided is in a form that is
reasonably usable, the requester shall be notified that their copy is the best available and
that the agency's master copy shall be made available for review upon appointment. For
duplication of computer tapes and audiovisual, the actual cost, including the operator's
time, shall be charged. In practice, if a Component estimates that assessable duplication
charges are likely to exceed $25.00, it shall notify the requester of the estimate, unless the
requester has indicated in advance his or her willingness to pay fees as high as those
anticipated. Such a notice shall offer a requester the opportunity to confer with Component
personnel with the object of reformulating the request to meet his or her needs at a lower
cost.

e. The term "review" refers to the process of examining documents located in
response to an FOIA request to determine whether one or more of the statutory exemptions
permit withholding. It also includes processing the documents for disclosure, such as
excising them for release. Review does not include the time spent resolving general legal or
policy issues regarding the application of exemptions. It should be noted that charges for
commercial requesters may be assessed only for the initial review. Components may not
charge for reviews required at the administrative appeal level of an exemption already
applied. However, records or portions of records withheld in full under an exemption which
is subsequently determined not to apply may be reviewed again to determine the
applicability of other exemptions not previously considered. The costs for such a
subsequent review would be properly assessable.

6-102 Fee Restrictions

a. No fees may be charged by any DoD Component if the costs of routine collection
and processing of the fee are likely to equal or exceed the amount of the fee. With the
exception of requesters seeking documents for a commercial use, Components shall provide
the first two hours of search time, and the first one hundred pages of duplication without
charge. For example, for a request (other than one from a commercial requester) that
involved two hours and ten minutes of search time, and resulted in one hundred and five
pages of documents, a Component would determine the cost of only ten minutes of search
time, and only five pages of reproduction. If this processing cost was equal to, or less than
the cost to the Component for billing the requester and processing the fee collected, no
charges would result.

b. Requesters receiving the first two hours of search and the first one hundred
pages of duplication without charge are entitled to such only once per request.

66



Goetz, Richard B., Jr.
Goldberg, Marc D.

Gonzales, Lillian

Gordon, John P.

Groves, L. K.

Halgus, Joseph D.

Hall, John B.

Hall, Warren D.

Hamre, John J.

Hassebrock, Ronald A.

Haughton, Claiborne D.

Hawthorne, Everett G.

MajGen

Capt

Civ

Col

Civ

Civ

BrigGen

Col

Civ

Col

Civ

Col

Vice Director, Joint Staff

Executive Assistant, Assistant to the Secretary
of Defense (Atomic Energy), Under Secretary of
Defense (Acquisition and Technology)

Director, Department of Defense Education
Activity

Director, Management, Assistant to the
Secretary of Defense (Public Affairs)

Executive Assistant, Assistant to the Secretary
of Defense (Atomic Energy), Under Secretary of
Defense (Acquisition and Technology)

Acting Director, European Policy, Deputy
Assistant Secretary of Defense (European and
NATO Policy), Assistant Secretary of Defense
(International Security Affairs), Under
Secretary of Defense (Policy)

Director, Asian and Pacific Region, Deputy
Assistant Secretary of Defense (Asian and
Pacific Affairs), Assistant Secretary of Defense
(International Security Affairs), Under
Secretary of Defense (Policy)

Staff Judge Advocate, United States Southern
Command

Under Secretary of Defense (Comptroller/Chief
Financial Officer)

Deputy Director, Defense Procurement, Under
Secretary of Defense (Acquisition and
Technology)

Acting Deputy, Deputy Assistant Secretary of
Defense (Equal Opportunity), Assistant
Secretary of Defense (Force Management
Policy), Under Secretary of Defense (Personnel
and Readiness)

Executive Assistant, Strategic and Space
Systems, Under Secretary of Defense
(Acquisition and Technology)

11

23



Item 6

Appeal Denial Authorities by Participation

|Name

Bacon, Kenneth H. Civ Assistant to the Secretary of Defense (Public
Affairs)

Bernath, Clifford H. Civ Principal Deputy Assistant to the Secretary of
Defense (Public Affairs)

Taylor, Robert W. Civ Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary of
Defense (Public Affairs)

DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY

Baskir, Lawrence L. Civ Principal Deputy General Counsel, Office of the
Army General Counsel

Berry, Peter T. MajGen Commanding General, Criminal Investigative
Command

Doherty, Daniel A. BrigGen Commanding General, Criminal Investigative
Command

Stockdale, Earl H. Civ Deputy General Counsel, Office of the Army

General Counsel

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
Angrist, E. P. Civ Deputy General Counsel
Bowman, M. E. Capt Deputy Assistant Judge Advocate General
(General Litigation)
Henebery, J. Capt Deputy Assistant Judge Advocate General
(General Litigation)

53

45

30

32
110

75



Kenneth Short v. Department of the Navy, C.A. No. C-95-259, U.S.D.C.S.D. TX.
Plaintiff allegedly submitted a FOIA request for a copy of his medical records and a copy of
the bill of his treatment. Plaintiff alleges that his FOIA request was not fulfilled. U.S.
Attorney provided missing documents to the plaintiffs attorney during conference with
Judge. Case was dismissed without attorney’s fees on August 5, 1995.

DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE

Rogers v. NRO, C.A. No. CV-94-B-2934-S, U.S.D.C.N.D. AL. Plaintiff sued Air Force,
DOD, CIA, and NRO for information concerning the new NRO office building in Chantilly,
VA. Air Force dismissed from the case because Plaintiff never made a FOIA request for the
information to the Air Force. DOD dismissed from the case after providing responsive
documents. Open America stay for other defendants.

Connors v. Department of the Air Force, C.A. No. 95-1517 EGS, U.S.D.C. D.C.
Nevada state prisoner sued Air Force after making a FOIA request for a map of the Nellis
Range Road area. The request was subsequently forwarded to the Defense Mapping
Agency. Case dismissed by Court after Defendant moved to dismiss, or in the alternative
for summary judgment, then Plaintiff failed to respond to the motion.

The Army Times Publishing Co. v. Department of the Air Force, C.A. No. 90-1383,
U.S.D.C. D.C. The publisher of the Air Force Times filed suit under FOIA, seeking to
obtain CAT] (computer assisted telephone interview) surveys. In the district court, the Air
Force successfully argued that the materials should be withheld under exemption (b) (5), as
predecisional, deliberative material. The Court of Appeals disagreed, remanding the case
to the district court with instruction to enter a finding on segregability. On February 28,
1995, the District Court for the District of Columbia ruled against the Air Force saying that
the Air Force must provide the remaining data. In April 1995, DOJ agreed to pay $60,000

in attorney fees (about 90% of the bill) - the fees were within range typically allowed by
DOJ.

Sheet Metal Workers’ Intl Assn Local Union No. 9 v. Department of the Air Force,
C.A. No. 93-M-429, U.S.D.C. CO. U.S. lost at U.S.D.C. Sheetmetal Workers’ Union filed a
FOIA request for certified payroll records of a nonunion contractor doing work at the Air
Force Academy. The request was refused under exemption (b)(6). 10th District reversed
and remanded August 25, 1995, U.S.D.C. Order entered December 15, 1995 (no names to
be released).

Beth Bruker Walos v. Department of the Air Force, C.A. No. DKC-94-2821,
U.S.D.C.S.D. MD. Ms. Walos requested documents under FOIA. The request was not
answered timely, so she sued. Summary Judgment granted October 30, 1995.

59



Kirsch, Kevin

Knight, William E.

Knosp, Lawrence

Krysa, John

Lair, J. A..

Lamb, Ivan F.

Langston, Arthur M.

Lantz, William

Logan, Patrick R.

Lusey, Rodney S.

Lynum, Chery] P.

MacMurray, Michael

Maj

Col

Maj

Civ

Col

Capt

Col

Col

Col

Maj

Military Assistant, Assistant Secretary of
Defense (Legislative Affairs)

Dean, Administration and Services, Defense
Systems Management College

Executive Assistant, Mobility Operations
Branch, United States Pacific Command

Director, Inter-American Region, Deputy
Assistant Secretary of Defense (Inter-American
Affairs), Assistant Secretary of Defense
(International Security Affairs), Under
Secretary of Defense (Policy)

Director, Operations, ECJ3, United States
European Command

Deputy Director, Manpower, Personnel and
Administration, ECJ1, United States European
Command

Executive Assistant, Chief of Staff, United
States Pacific Command

Legal Policy Coordinator, Deputy Assistant
Secretary of Defense (Drug Enforcement Policy
and Support), Assistant Secretary of Defense
(Special Operations and Low-Intensity
Conflict), Under Secretary of Defense (Policy)

Deputy Chief of Staff, Special Operations
Command Pacific, United States Pacific
Command

Joint Secretary, United States Space Command

Chief, Management Oversight, Ballistic Missile
Defense Organization, Under Secretary of
Defense (Acquisition and Technology)

Director, Middle Eastern Affairs, Deputy
Assistant Secretary of Defense (Middle East
and African Affairs), Assistant Secretary of
Defense (International Security Affairs), Under
Secretary of Defense (Policy)

13

17

51



The total DoD operating cost associated with the 1995 requests was $33,067,528.36.
The average cost of processing a single case during 1995 was approximately $320. Fee
collections for records provided to the public amounted to $1,088,427.59. Total program
costs since inception of the report are reflected below.

DOD FOI Program Costs

35 7
M
; 2
L495
L
I 20
oO $
N 15+
s

10
°
F 5

Cy)

7 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95

YEAR

Questions regarding this report should be addressed to the Director, Freedom of
Information and Security Review, OATSD (Public Affairs), Room 2C757, 1400 Defense
Pentagon, Washington, D.C. 20301-1400.



Naugle, K. J.

Neubauer, R. D.

Newcomb, J. F.

Oliver, J. T.

Olson, J. D.

Ostag, W. P.

Ouellette, R. E.

Pannell, R. N.

Parker, S. J.

Peters, R. K.

Phillips, R. L.

Pixa, R. R.

Preda, S. D.

Prochazka, F. J.

Quast, P. M.
Randall, T. E.

Cdr
Cdr

Cdr

Capt

Cdr

Capt

Civ

Maj

Civ

Capt

Capt

Maj

Capt

VAdm

Capt

Director, Admin Support Division(NAMARA)

Staff Judge Advocate, Naval Air Systems
Command

Acting Commanding Officer, Naval Support
Activity Naples, United States Naval Forces
Europe

Deputy Assistant Judge Advocate General,
Administrative Law

Commander, Naval Reserve Force

Commanding Officer, Engineering Field Activity
Northwest, Naval Facilities Engineering
Command

Assistant, Judge Advocate General, Military
Justice

Deputy Director of Administration & Resources
Management, Headquarters United States
Marine Corps

Deputy Staff Judge Advocate, Naval Criminal
Investigative Service

Director, Civilian Personnel Management

Executive Officer, Naval Construction Battalion
Center, Port Hueneme, Naval Facilities
Engineering Command

Staff Judge Advocate, Naval Air Systems
Command

Command Adjutant, Quantico VA, United
States Marine Corps

Force Judge Advocate Commander, Naval
Surface Force, United States Atlantic Fleet

Commander, Military Sealift Command

Fleet Judge Advocate, United States Naval
Forces Europe

34

30

15

10

654

173

22



6-206 Costs for Special Services

Complying with requests for special services is at the discretion of the Components.
Neither the FOIA, nor its fee structure cover these kinds of services. Therefore,
Components may recover the costs of special services requested by the requester after
agreement has been obtained in writing from the requester to pay for one or more of the
following services:

a. Certifying that records are true copies.
b. Sending records by special methods such as express mail, etc.
Section 3
COLLECTION OF FEES AND FEE RATES FOR TECHNICAL DATA
6-300 Fees for Technical Data

a. Technical data, other than technical data that discloses critical technology with
military or space application, if required to be released under the FOIA, shall be released
after the person requesting such technical data pays all reasonable costs attributed to
search, duplication and review of the records to be released. Technical data, as used in this
Section, means recorded information, regardless of the form or method of the recording of a
scientific or technical nature (including computer software documentation). This term does
not include computer software, or data incidental to contract administration, such as
financial and/or management information. DoD Components shall retain the amounts
received by such a release, and it shall be merged with and available for the same purpose
and the same time period as the appropriation from which the costs were incurred in
complying with request. All reasonable costs as used in this sense are the full costs to the
Federal Government of rendering the service, or fair market value of the service, whichever
is higher. Fair market value shall be determined in accordance with commercial rates in
the local geographical area. In the absence of a known market value, charges shall be
based on recovery of full costs to the Federal Government. The full costs shall include all
direct and indirect costs to conduct the search and to duplicate the records responsive to the
request. This cost is to be differentiated from the direct costs allowable under Section 2 of
this Chapter for other types of information released under the FOIA.

b. Waiver. Components shall waive the payment of costs required in subparagraph
6-300, a., above, which are greater than the costs that would be required for release of this
same information under Section 2 of this Chapter if:

1. The request is made by a citizen of the United States or a
United States corporation, and such citizen or corporation certifies that the technical data
requested is required to enable it to submit an offer, or determine whether it is capable of
submitting an offer to provide the product to which the technical data relates to the United
States or a contractor with the United States. However, Components may require the
citizen or corporation to pay a deposit in an amount equal to not more than the cost of
complying with the request, which will be refunded upon submission of an offer by the
citizen or corporation;

76



Finncane, Melinda

France, Edward W., III

Frenette, Richard

Gaines, Toni M.

Gallaher, Shawn T.

Garrett, Joseph

Gauger, Raymond A.

Gile, Greg L.

Gilmore, Deborah A.

Gray, Kenneth D.
Griffin, Gordon D.

Griffith, Ronald H.

Grimm, Beverly R.

Guenther, Otto J.

Guinan, William J.

Haddox, Hayes P.

Civ

LtCol

Civ

Civ

Maj

MajGen

Col

MajGen

LtGen

Civ
Civ

Senior Legal Advisor, United States Army
Materiel Command

Staff Judge Advocate, Chief Counsel, United
States Army Test & Evaluation Command

Counsel, Humphreys Engineer Center Support
Activity, Corps of Engineers

Acting Principal Assistant/Principal Assistant
Responsible for Contracting, United States
Army Forces Command

Command Judge Advocate, Yuma Proving
Ground, Test & Evaluation Command

Director, Strategy Plans & Policy, Deputy Chief
of Staff for Operations and Plans

Director, Acquisitions, Deputy Chief of Staff for
Base Operations Support, United States Army
Training and Doctrine Command

Director, Assistant Chief of Staff for Operations
and Plans, Readiness & Mobilization

Chief, Administrative Services, National Guard
Bureau

Assistant Judge Advocate General

Executive Officer, United States Army Safety
Center

The Inspector General
Chief, Contracting Division, Acquisitions,
United States Army Training and Doctrine

Command

Director, Director of Information Systems for
Command, Control, Communications, and
Computers

Counsel, United States Army Audit Agency

District Counsel, Louisville District, Corps of
Engineers

22

10

67

17

41

13

17



FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT
ANNUAL REPORT
CALENDAR YEAR 1995

SUMMARY

A total of 103,347 public requests for records under the Freedom of Information Act
(FOIA) were completed during 1995 by the Department of Defense. As shown below, there
was a slight decline in the number of cases processed in 1995 from the previous year.

1D FOL ests leted

150,000
125,000
C 100,000
S$ 75,000
S$ 50,000

25,000

75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95
YEAR

The Department of Defense fully denied 1,718 and partially denied 8,430 out of
103,347 requests on the basis of FOIA exemptions. Of those exemptions, 11% were for
classified information; 6% for internal rules and practices; 6% for statutory exemptions; 9%
for proprietary data; 15% for deliberative material; 31% for privacy information; and 21%
for law enforcement investigations. Twenty-five thousand six hundred fifty-five requests
could not be filled in whole or in part for other reasons, such as lack of records, referral to
another agency, or lack of specificity sufficient to identify the requested records. There
were 902 actions taken on appeals of denied requests (84 granted, 198 partially denied, 330
fully denied, and 290 could not be filled for other reasons, as mentioned earlier).



DEFENSE FINANCE AND ACCOUNTING SERVICE

Bitz, Gregory P. Civ Director, Defense Finance and Accounting
Service-Indianapolis Center
Hudson, Phyllis M. Civ Director, Defense Finance and Accounting

Service-Cleveland Center

Nabil, John S. Civ Director, Defense Finance and Accounting
Service-Denver Center

Turner, Steve E. Civ Director, Defense Finance and Accounting
Service-Kansas City Center
DEFENSE INTELLIGENCE AGENCY
Richardson, Robert P. Civ Chief, Freedom of Information Act Staff
DEFENSE INVESTIGATIVE SERVICE
Hartig, Dale L. Civ Chief, Office of Information and Public Affairs

DEFENSE INFORMATION SYSTEMS AGENCY
Chadick, M. Susan Civ General Counsel

46

344

47

19



Dougherty, R.

Eddingfield, L. E.

Ellis, W. G.

Evans, M. J.

Farrar, G. W.

Farrell, R. K.

Finch, M. D.

Fitzgerald, J.

Flanagan, T. J.

Foshay, W. E.

Freeman, R. N.

Gaffney, P. G.

Gaston, M. C.

Gebert, D. K.

Gilevich, T.

Green, T. W.

Col

Capt

Capt

VAdm

Capt

Capt

Capt

Capt

Cdr

Cdr

Director, Aviation Safety Programs, Naval
Safety Center

Deputy and Chief of Staff, Naval Surface Force,
Pacific, United States Pacific Fleet

Commander, Submarine Group TEN, United
States Atlantic Fleet

Commander, Navy Recruiting Command

Fleet Public Affairs Officer, United States
Atlantic Fleet

Commander, Naval Education and Training
Command

Deputy Assistant Judge Advocate General,
Claims and Tort Litigation

Inspector General

Director, Operations Plans and Politico-Military
Affairs (N31/N52), Office of the Chief of Naval
Operations

Commander (Acting), Patrol Wings Atlantic,
United States Atlantic Fleet

Program Manager, Anti-Ship Weapon Systems
Program (PMA-258), Office of the Chief of Naval
Operations

Commander, Naval Meteorology and
Oceanography Command

Commander, Naval Training Center, Great
Lakes, Naval Education and Training
Command

Commanding Officer, Engineering Field Activity
Northwest, Naval Facilities Engineering
Command

Judge Advocate General, Bureau of Medicine
and Surgery

Force Judge Advocate, United States Naval
Forces Japan, United States Pacific Fleet

30

11

111

18



Boles, Billy J.

Bowen, William P.

Bracher, Phillip E.

Bruinooge, Jon P.

Burklund, Bernard B., Jr.

Burr, H. Hale, Jr.

Campbell, Frank B.

Chapman, Thomas N.

Chavis, Dullivan C.

Coacher, Leellen

Corso, Andrew A.

Crawford, Jackie R.
Culkowski, V. W.

Daniel, Larry D.

Dimitt, Ted A.

LtGen

Col

MajGen

Civ

Col

MajGen

BrigGen

Col

LtCol

Maj

Civ

Civ
Civ

Col

Maj

Deputy Chief of Staff, Personnel, Headquarters
United States Air Force

Staff Judge Advocate, Warner Robins Air
Logistics Center, Air Force Materiel Command

Director, Plans, Policy and Resources, Deputy
Chief of Staff, Command, Control,
Communications, and Computers,
Headquarters United States Air Force

Acting Staff Judge Advocate, Sacramento Air
Logistics Center, Air Force Materiel Command

Commander, Air Force Safety Agency

Assistant Deputy Under Secretary
International Affairs, Office of the Secretary of
the Air Force

Director, Forces, Deputy Chief of Staff, Plans
and Operations, Headquarters United States
Air Force

Chief, Information Management, Air Combat
Command

Acting Director, Information Management,
Pacific Air Forces

Staff Judge Advocate, Human Systems Center,
Air Force Materiel Command

Acting Chief, Security Police, Headquarters
United States Air Force

The Auditor General

Deputy Director, Intelligence Plans and
Requirements, Assistant Chief of Staff,
Intelligence, Headquarters United States Air
Force

Vice Commander, National Air Intelligence
Center, Air Intelligence Agency

Acting Director, Information Management, Air
Force Reserves

39

30

66

165



Marchand, Michael J.

McCoy, Helen T.

McFarren, Freddy

Meixell, John T.

Millard, Michael

Miller, Phyllis

Miller, Robert C.

Mobley, Richard

Moore, Edward J.

Moore, James R.., Jr.

Moulin, Francis R.

Moye, Danny R.

Naccarato, Timothy E.

Nardotti, Michael J., Jr.

O’Brien, Howard E.

Pavlik, Donald C.

Col

Civ

BrigGen

LtCol

LtCol

Civ

Civ

LtCol

Col

Col

Civ

Col

MajGen

Col

Col

Chief, Administrative Law Division, Office of
the Judge Advocate General

Assistant Secretary of the Army for Financial
Management

Director, Assistant Deputy Chief of Staff for
Operations & Plans, Training

Acting Chief, Criminal Law Division, Office of
the Judge Advocate General

Acting Commander, United States Army Claim
Service, Office of the Judge Advocate General

Freedom of Information Act Officer, Office of the
Deputy Chief of Staff for Personnel, United
States Military Academy

District Counsel, Nashville District, Corps of
Engineers

General Attorney, United States Army Materiel
Command

Principal Assistant Responsible for Contracting,
United States Army South

Information Management Officer, Office of the
Deputy Chief of Staff for Personnel, United
States Army

Acting Commander, United States Army Claim
Service, Office of the Judge Advocate General

Attorney Advisor, United States Army Materiel
Command

Chief, Litigation Division, Office of the Judge
Advocate General

The Judge Advocate General

Chief, Security Force Protection and Law
Enforcement Division, Deputy Chief of Staff for
Operations and Plans

Deputy Commander, Operations, United States
Army Community & Family Support Center

25

19

13

10

62

68

16



Item 3

Initial Denial Authorities by Participation

Abbot, C. S.

Akins, Carl

Allen, Jerrold P.

Bailey, Claud

Banghart, Allan

Basso, Sharon

Bennett, Lee, Jr.

Blundell, Diana L.

Boros, Louis L.

Brick, Samuel T.

Carrato, Thomas

Civ

MajGen

Col

Capt

LtCol

Civ

Col

Civ

Civ

Director, Operations, ECJ3, United States
European Command

Director, Acquisitions and Administration,
Office of Civilian Health and Medical Program
of the Uniformed Services

Director, Plans, ECJ5, United States European
Command

Deputy Director, Radiation Experiment
Command Center

Executive Assistant, Deputy Under Secretary of
Defense (Logistics), Under Secretary of Defense
(Acquisition and Technology)

Director, External Affairs, Central Imagery
Office

Deputy Director, Manpower, Personnel and
Administration, SCJ1, United States Southern
Command

Acting Director, Defense Security Assistance
Agency, Under Secretary of Defense (Policy)

Vice Director, Operations, SCJ3, United States
Southern Command

Director, Legislative Reference Services,
General Counsel

Director, Managed Care, Office of the Assistant
Secretary of Defense for Health Affairs

10

20

13



Computer Professionals for Social Responsibility v. NIST, C.A. No. 94-5153,
U.S.D.C. D.C. Plaintiff alleged improper withholding of information/documents by NIST.
Upon review, documents were referred to this Agency for review. Government prevailed on
summary judgment (April 11, 1994), and plaintiff appealed. Government motion for
summary affirmance was filed in September 1994. Summary affirmance granted January
13, 1995.

Michael R. Meade v. Secretary of the Army, et al., C.A. No. 94-949-Civ-Orl-19,
U.S.D.C.M.D. FL. Plaintiff alleged inadequate search for information on himself. The
court concluded that NSA made a good faith search effort and granted the Government’s
motion for summary judgment on February 27, 1995.

Sims v. DOJ, C.A. No. 94-5208, U.S.D.C. D.C. Plaintiff alleged improper withholding of
information. Government prevailed on summary judgment (July 5, 1994), and plaintiff
appealed. Government motion for summary affirmance was filed. Summary affirmance
granted March 14, 1995.

John C. Gilmore v. NSA, C.A. No. 94-16165, U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit.
Appellant argued that the District Court abused its discretion in declining to issue a
general injunction directing the NSA to improve the timeliness of its FOIA processing
(CV-92-3646, U.S.D.C.N.D. CA., September 4, 1992. Motion for Summary Judgment
granted May 6, 1994.). Appellate Court affirmed the District Court’s decision on December
11, 1995.

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE, INSPECTOR GENERAL

Aircraft Gear v. Derek Vander Schaaf, C.A. No. 94-C-00870, U.S.D.C.N.D. IL. Case
dismissed by agreement, February 23, 1995. Court case was filed in early 1994 based on
Agency’s failure to comply with 10 day time constraints of the Act, in not providing
responsive documents. Court agreed to allow Component to continue queue process based
on satisfactory showing of reasonable efforts to comply. Case was dismissed when
Component completed processing of the request.

61



2. The release of technical data is requested in order to comply
with the terms of an international agreement; or,

3. The Component determines in accordance with subparagraph
6-103, a., above, that such a waiver is in the interest of the United States.

c. Fee Rates

1. Search Time

(i) Manual Search

Type Grade Hour! te
Clerical E9/GS8 and below 13.25
(Minimum Charge) 8.30

Professional and Executive (To be established at actual hourly rate
prior to search. A minimum charge will be established at 1/2 hourly rates)

(ii) Computer search is based on the total cost of the central
processing unit, input-output devices, and memory capacity of the actual computer
configuration. The wage (based upon the scale in subparagraph 6-300, c.1. (i), above) for
the computer operator and/or programmer determining how to conduct, and subsequently
executing the search will be recorded as part of the computer search.

2. Duplication

Type Cost
Aerial photographs, specifications, permits, $2.50
charts, blueprints, and other technical

documents

Engineering data (microfilm)

a. Aperture cards

G) Silver duplicate negative, per card 75
When key punched and verified, per card 85
Gi) Diazo duplicate negative, per card 65
When key punched and verified, per card i)
b. 35mm roll film, per frame 50
c. 16mm roll film, per frame 45

77



DEFENSE LOGISTICS AGENCY

Baird, Bruce
Beauchamp, Roy E.
Cantor, Charles M.

Casey, Michael W.

Castleberry, John M.

Elliot, Ernest A.

Finley, M. E.
Gould, Jeffrey P.

Hempson, Donald A., Jr.

Higginbotham, G. B.
Hinebaugh, James C.
House, Jonathan W.
Ketts, R. L.

Labounty, James W.
Lehmann, Miles R.

MacKinlay, William

Martinez, Raul

Pinion, E. W.
Scott, Robert

Civ
BrigGen
Civ

Capt
Col

Capt

Capt

Capt

BrigGen
Col
Col

Capt

Col
Col
Col

Civ

Capt
Civ

General Counsel

Commander, Defense Industrial Supply Center
Executive Director, Business Management,
Defense Logistics Agency Systems Design
Center

Commander, Defense Distribution Region West

Chief of Staff, Defense Personnel Support
Center

Commander, Defense Construction Supply
Center

Commander, Defense General Supply Center

Commander, Defense Contract Management
District North

Commander, Defense Reutilization and
Marketing Service

Commander, Defense Industrial Supply Center
Commander, Defense Distribution Region East
Commander, Defense Electronic Supply Center

Commander, Defense Contract Management
District West

Commander, Defense Distribution Region West
Staff Director, Command Security

Commander, Defense Contract Management
District North

Administrator, Defense Administrative Support
Center

Commander, Defense Logistics Agency Pacific

Executive Director, Contract Management

AT

14
28

14

19
12

11



Item 4

Appeal Determinations

a Duted||| Denied)
|Component = Full| in Part) i
OSD/JS 110 8 40 7
‘Dept Army 56 8 13 33
‘Dept Navy 452, 22 61 209
(Dept Air Force 50 5 3 40
IDCAA 3] 0 0 2
DFAS 27 27 0 0
DIA 41 0 33 8
DIS 4 0 1 1
DISA 0 0 0 0
‘DLA 17 0 6 8
[DMA 5 0 0 4
IDNA 4 2 0 0
INRO 3 0 1 0
INSA/CSS 76 9 12 15
OIG, DOD 51 2 3
DoD: Totals im |

* Total Actions may exceed Total Requests because more than one
action may be taken on a single request.

49



Hayden, Michael V.

Higgins, Donald, Jr.

Hoehn, Andrew

Holbein, Jack R.

Horn, John R.

Hosmer, Bradley C.
Hubbard, Robert L.

Hyde, S. J.

Jacobs, Jimmy O.

Johnston, David T.

Jones, Jeffrey A.

Kendall, Cynthia

BrigGen Director, Intelligence, ECJ2, United States

Col

Civ

Col

Civ

European Command

Vice Director, Operations, SCJ3, United States
Southern Command

Director, Requirements, Deputy Assistant
Secretary of Defense (Requirements and Plans),
Assistant Secretary of Defense (Strategy and
Requirements), Under Secretary of Defense
(Policy)

Deputy Chief of Staff, United States Special
Operations Command

Chief, External Inquiries, Deputy Assistant
Secretary of Defense (Prisoner-of-War/Missing -
in-Action Affairs), Assistant Secretary of
Defense (International Security Affairs), Under
Secretary of Defense (Policy)

MajGen Vice Director, Joint Staff

Capt

Cdr

Col

Cdr

Civ

Civ

Vice Director, Intelligence, SCJ2, United States
Southern Command

Deputy Director, Counterdrug SCJ2, United
States Southern Command

Senior Military Assistant, Assistant Secretary
of Defense (Economic Security), Under
Secretary of Defense (Acquisition and
Technology)

Executive Assistant, Operations Directorate,
United States Pacific Command

Assistant Deputy Under Secretary of Defense
(Material and Distribution), Deputy Under
Secretary of Defense (Logistics), ), Under
Secretary of Defense (Acquisition and
Technology)

Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense
(Information Management), Assistant
Secretary of Defense (Command, Control,
Communications and Intelligence)

12

18

17

23