DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY

Hamilton, Milton H.

Hurst, Nicholas R.

Cromartie, Eugene R.

Berry, Peter T.

Walsh, Robert J., Jr.

Makarewicz, Theodore

Guinan, William J.

Petrilli, Frank J., Jr.

Dickman, Verling P.

Anderson, Paul B.

Bruger, James A.

Major, William J., Jr

Cundick, Ronald P.

DeFord, Maurice H.

MG

Civ

COL

Civ

LTC

Administrative Assistant, Office of the
Secretary of the Army

Director of Contracting, Office of the
Assistant Secretary of the Army (Research
and Acquisition)

Commanding General, United States Army
Criminal Investigation Command.

Commanding General, United States Army
Criminal Investigation Command

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

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

Counsel, United States Army Audit Agency
Director, Administrative Operations Support

Directorate, United States Army
Information Systems Command-Pentagon

General Counsel, Army and Air Force
Exchange Service

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

Chief, International Affairs Division, Office
of the Judge Advocate General

Chief of Staff, United States Army
Community and Family Support Center

Chief Trial Attorney, Office of the Judge
Advocate General

Acting Commander, United States Army

Legal Services Agency, Office of the Judge
Advocate General

17

29

415

45

968

37

36
124

13


Pugh, L. G.

Rak, Daniel S.

Ramsey, Joseph C., Jr.

Ramsey, Stephen F.

Rhoden, Harold H.

Robinson, Peter D.

Rutherford, Robert L.

Sanders, James G.

Sherman, Jay D.

Shumway, Elwyn D.

Smith, R. D.

Snell, Linwood H.

Speirs, J. K.

Stapleton, Joseph K.

Swarts, Robert F.

Civ

Civ

Col

Civ

BGen

MGen

LGen

MGen

Col

Col

MGen

Col

BGen

MGen

MGen

Executive Assistant, Warner Robins Air
Logistics Center, Headquarters, Air Force
Logistics Command

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

Commander, Headquarters, Air Reserve
Personnel Center

Chief of Staff, Headquarters, United States
Air Force Academy

Deputy Inspector General, Office, Secretary
of the Air Force

Commander, Air Force Operational Test and
Evaluation Center

Deputy Chief of Staff, Programs and
Resources, Headquarters, United States Air
Force

Deputy Surgeon General, Headquarters,
United States Air Force

Vice Commander, Headquarters, Air Force
Technical Applications Center

Chief of Staff, Air Force Military Personnel
Center

Commander, San Antonio Air Logistics
Center, Air Force Logistics Command

Assistant Chief of Staff, Headquarters,
United States Air Forces in Europe

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

Deputy Inspector General, Office, Secretary
of the Air Force

Commander, Headquarters, Air Force
Commissary Service

38

34

17

16

55

21

36

75

13

56


Eaglet, Robert D.

East, Belinda A.

Ellis, Larry G.

Fischer, Eugene H.

Fox, Charles L.

Frampton, James H.

Fry, Cecil W.

Furusho, Marvin T.

Gardetto, Bernard A.,
Jr.

Gereg, Samuel W.

Gillis, R. F.

Greenberg, Harvey

Griffith, J.C.

MGen

Col

MGen

Col

Col

Col

LtCol

MGen

LtCol

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

Director of Information Management,
Headquarters, Air University

Chief of Staff, Air Force Flight Test
Center, Air Force Systems Command

Assistant Deputy Chief of Staff, Programs
and Resources , Headquarters, United States
Air Force

Chief of Staff, Headquarters, Pacific Air
Forces

Acting Staff Judge Advocate, Headquarters,
Strategic Air Command

Director, Information Release Division,
Headquarters, Air Force Office of Special
Investigations

Deputy for Security and Investigative
Programs, Office, Secretary of the Air
Force

Deputy Assistant Comptroller,
Headquarters, Air Force Accounting and
Finance Center

Acting Chief of Staff, Air Force
Development Test Center, Air Force
Systems Command

Commander, Warner Robins Air Logistics
Center, Air Force Logistics Command.

Acting Staff Judge Advocate, Headquarters,
Strategic Air Command

Vice Commander, Ogden Air Logistics
Center, Air Force Logistics Command

34

12

39

74

738

12



Ttem 4

Appeal Determinations
Total | Granted Denied Denied Total
Component Requests | in Full in Part in Full Other Actions*
OSD/JS 73°41 2 25 16 30 73
DEPT ARMY 208 | 14 18 158 18 208
DEPT NAVY 359 | 24 82 121 142 369
DEPT AF 209 | 5 25 179 0 209
DCA ol 0 0 0 0 0
DCAA 5 | 3 0 2 0 5
DIA 32) «1 0 15 17 0 32
pis 11 0 0 1 0 1
DLA 12 = «| 2 6 2 2 12
DMA 4 | 2 1 0 1 4
DNA ol 0 0 0 0 Oy)
NSA/CSS 25 | 0 3 22 0 25
OIG, DOD 52 | 3 16 26 7 52
DoD Totals 980 | 55 191 544 200 990

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

43


Wright, Timothy W.

Gaffney, Frank

Perle, Richard

Spector, Eleanor

McDonald, W. M.

Woods, Roy S., Jr.

Van Son, Paul

Shapiro, Edward J.
Fields, Craig 1.
Ludlow-MacMurray,
Susan

Trosch, H. Dennis

Gilliat, Robert L.

Register, Ronnie H.

RADM Director, East Asia and Pacific Region,

Assistant Secretary of Defense,
International Security Affairs

Deputy Assistant Secretary, Nuclear Forces
and Arms Control Policy, Assistant
Secretary of Defense, International Security

Policy

Assistant Secretary of Defense,
International Security Policy

Deputy Assistant Secretary, Procurement,
Assistant Secretary of Defense, Production
& Logistics

Director, Freedom of Information and
Security Review, Assistant Secretary of
Defense, Public Affairs

Chief, Congressional Actions and Internal
Reports, Directorate of Acquisition Policy
& Programs Integration

Assistant Director, Foreign Military Rights
Affairs, Assistant Secretary of Defense,
International Security Policy

Assistant General Counsel, Legal Counsel,
General Counsel

Director, Defense Advanced Research
Projects Agency

Senior Attorney, General Counsel
Assistant General Counsel, Logistics,
General Counsel

Assistant General Counsel, Personnel &
Health Policy, General Counsel

Deputy Director for Management, Defense
Advanced Research Projects Agency

11

25

29



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;

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
Gi) Manual Search
Type 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
search. A minimum charge will be established at 1/2 hourly rates)

Gi) 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, $2.50
specifications, permits,
charts, blueprints, and
other technical documents
Engineering data (microfilm)
a. Aperture cards
(i) Silver duplicate negative, per card 715
When key punched and verified, per 85
card
(ii) Diazo duplicate negative, per card 65

71


dismissing case, Navy provided medical records and enclosures to JAGMAN. Plaintiff
faxed voluntary dismissal to Navy on 4 October 1990.

Willens (Siemer) vs DOD, et. al.,U.S.D.C. D.C. C.A. 88-1212, Plaintiff sought various
documents relating to the Marianas Islands. Plaintiff dismissed action with prejudice on

6 June 1990.

Elizabeth A. Robischon vs Department of the Navy, C.A. 90-2616-CRR. Plaintiff, a

legal assistant with the law firm McKenna, Conner and Cuneo, requested the
unclassified portions of the draft solicitation for the Advanced Interdiction Weapon
System. The entire solicitation (classified and unclassified) had previously been released.
to approximately 12 private firms which had requested it after publication of a
synopsis notifying private industry of its availability. Upon determination that no
exemption existed to withhold the requested information, NAVAIR released the
information to the plaintiff and the case was dismissed with prejudice.

DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE

Antonelli, Michael C. vs FBI, et al., U.S.D.C. D.C. C.A. 90-0450. On 19 November
1990 defendant’s motion for summary judgment was granted with prejudice. Mr.
Antonelli’s broad request for information was dated 9 December 1989. Air Force
responded to the request on 28 December 1989, asking that he reasonably describe the
records he wanted. No records were denied him because none could be identified.

Downwinders, Inc vs Deparmtent of Defense and United States Air Force, U.S.D.C.
UT, C.A. 89-C-878-S. On 27 August 1990, plaintiff voluntarily moved to dismiss
without prejudice. Most of the documents in dispute were drafts of the Description
of Proposed Action and Alternatives (DOPAA), and Area Narrowing Reports, used in
creating a Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS). Plaintiff contended these
were not predecisional, claiming the DOPAA represented a final agency decision.

Hale Fire Pump Company vs United States Army, Secretary of the Air Force, U.S.D.C.
E.D. PA C.A. 90-2714. On 30 July 1990 defendant’s summary judgment motion was

granted. A discretionary release was made of the documents that had originally been
withheld pursuant to exemption (b)(5) of the FOIA. Plaintiff asserts that the agency’s
search for responsive records was deficient and that the Air Force was under an
obligation to obtain individual fire truck maintenance records from every Air Force
installation worldwide. Air Force provided plaintiff a list of fire truck locations.

Schwaner, Henry C. vs United States Air Force, U.S.D.C. D.C. C.A. 88-0560. Henry

Schwaner, an insurance salesman, requested a list of names and duty addresses for all
enlisted personnel E-5 and below assigned to Bolling Air Force Base which was denied
citing exemption (b)(2) of the FOIA. On 1 August 1988, summary judgment for
defendant; 16 March 1990 plaintiffs granted; 9 May 1990 reconsideration by
defendant denied; 5 September 1990 stipulation and order closing case in favor of
plaintiff.

53


Normal F. Newton vs United States of America, et al., N.D. ND C.A. 90-CV-174.
Plaintiff sought the release of a soldier’s home address and a copy of an investigation
conducted under AR 15-6. On 30 May 1990, the plaintiff voluntarily dismissed the
complaint.

Carl Oglesby vs Department of the Army, et al., D.C. C.A. 89-5219. Plaintiff, an

author, requested United States Army records on various Nazi underground
organizations and operations. The District Court granted our motion for summary
judgment and dismissed the complaint. On appeal, the court initially denied our motion
for summary affirmance. On 4 December 1990, however, the court determined that
plaintiff had failed to exhaust his administrative remedies. Accordingly, the court
vacated the district court’s judgment as it applied to the Army and remanded the case
with instructions to dismiss the claims based on appellants’ failure to exhaust his
administrative remedies.

Waldron-Ramsey vs Department of the Army, D. NJ C.A. 89-2856. Plaintiff seeks the
telease of all telephone bills in 1985 for the 11th Special Forces Group Airborne,
formerly located at Tappan, New York. Plaintiff claims that the records are necessary
to prepare his defense in criminal proceedings. On 7 February 1990, the court granted
our motion for summary judgment and dismissed the case, finding that we had already
provided the plaintiff with the requested records. The court also held that the money
damages are not available under FOIA. Plaintiff has noticed an appeal.

Gary Walker vs United States Department of the Army, D. CO C.A. 89-1556.
Plaintiff, manager of Walker Ranches and as agent of his father who owns real

property adjacent to Fort Carson and immediately down-stream of Teller Reservoir,
sought access to certain documents concerning Teller Reservoir. The subject
documents were withheld based on Exemption 5 (deliberative process privilege and
attorney work product). The parties agreed to a settlement and the complaint was
dismissed with prejudice. Plaintiff was given copies of some of the requested
documents. Plaintiff, in consideration of the agreement, waived any claim for costs or
attorney fees.

War Babes, et al. vs Don Wilson, et al., D.D.C. C.A. 88-3633. Plaintiff sought the
release of the last known address of World War II veterans who were believed to be
the natural fathers of children born out of wedlock during the war. Plaintiff
organization assists its members by attempting to locate and reunite them with their
natural parents. On 16 November 1990, the parties reached a settlement agreement
that establishes procedures to forward letters to veterans from War Babes’ members.
Attorney fees and costs associated with the litigation are still to be determined.

The Retired Officers Association vs Department of the Army, D.D.C C.A. 88-2054.
On 14 May 1990, the court granted in part our motion for summary judgment.
Plaintiff requested the release of the names and home addresses of all retired officers
and the names and duty addresses of active duty officers about to retire. The court
decided that although FOIA Exemption (b)(2) does not justify refusing to release the
information pertaining to active duty officers, the disclosure of the names and

51


Item 9
Fee Schedule and Fees Collected

The fee schedule on pages 57 through 71, reprinted from Chapter 6, DoD
Regulation 5400.7-R, October 1990, establishes standard costs collectible by
Department of Defense Agencies.

$1,450,693.27 was collected from the public for making records available during
the year 1990 (see item 10(b), page 73 for agency totals).

57



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."

(i) 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 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.

(ii) The informative value of the information to be disclosed. This
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

61


OFFICE OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL, DOD

Whitlock, Stephen A.

Lutsch, Nicholas T.

Civ
Civ

FOI Appellate Review Authority

Assistant Inspector General for
Administration & Information Management

49

41



Klements, Newton

DiGiovani, Joseph

Solomon, Sandy

Reinke, Cecil

Page, Reba

Pettinato, Berg

Lingenfelter, Stephen

Vela, Hector

Kurke, Kathy

Shapiro, Alan

Frenette, Richard

Mahoney, Robert

Baughman, Norman B.

Miller, Kathleen M.

Schweppe, John E.

LTC

LTC

Division Counsel, North Atlantic , United
States Corps of Engineers

Acting Division Counsel, New England,
United States Army Corps of Engineers

Division Counsel, North Central, United
States Army Corps of Engineers

Division Counsel, North Pacific, United
States Army Corps of Engineers

Division Counsel, Ohio River, United States
Army Corps of Engineers

Division Counsel, Pacific Ocean, United
States Army Corps of Engineers

Division Counsel, South Atlantic, United
States Army Corps of Engineers

Division Counsel, Southwestern United
States Army Corps of Engineers

Assistant Chief Counsel for Research and
Development, Humphreys Engineer Center
Support Activity

Division Counsel, South Pacific, United
States Army Corps of Engineers

Counsel, Humprheys Engineer Center, United
States Army Corps of Engineers

Division Counsel, Europe United States
Army Corps of Engineers

Division Counsel, Huntsville United States
Army Corps of Engineers

Principal Assistant Responsible for
Contracting, United States Army South

Principal Assistant Responsible for
Contracting, United States Army South

21

12

18

14

11

23

20

11


Thompson, BarryL. Col Acting Deputy Inspector General, Office,
Secretary of the Air Force

Thompson, D. W. MGen Chief of Staff, Headquarters, Air Force
Logistics Command

Viccellio, Henry, Jr. LGen Deputy Chief of Staff, Logistics and
Engineering, Headquarters, United States Air
Force

Webster, Emest R. Col Acting Chief of Staff, Headquarters, Air
Force Reserves

Williams, Billy L. Civ Chief, Records Management Division,
Directorate of Information Management,
Headquarters, Air Training Command

Wood, J. D. BGen Vice Commander, San Antonio Air Logistics
Center, Air Force Logistics Command

Zickert, M. M. Col Chief of Staff, Headquarters, Air Force
Operational Test and Evaluation Center

DEFENSE CONTRACT AUDIT AGENCY

Valenzuela, Joel Civ Director, Central Region

Matter, Robert Civ Director, Northeastern Region

Bernarda, H. Della Civ Director, Eastern Region

Topf, Bernard Civ Director, Western Region

Emami, Sophie Civ Chief, Information Resources Management

Branch

DEFENSE INTELLIGENCE AGENCY

Hardzog, Robert C.

Civ

Freedom of Information Officer

DEFENSE INVESTIGATIVE SERVICE

Hartig, Dale L. Civ Chief, Office of Information and Public
Affairs
DEFENSE LOGISTICS AGENCY

39

16

14

22

16

337

35


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

70


Department of Defense

FOI Appeal and Program Officials

Agency Appellate Agency

Abbreviation Authority Program Head

OSD/JS Hon Pete Williams, Assistant Mr. William M. McDonald,
Secretary of Defense (Public Director, Freedom of
Affairs) Information and Security Review

Dept Army Hon William J. Haynes, II, Mrs. E. M. Miley, Chief,
General Counsel Information Branch, Freedom of

Information & Privacy Act Div,
HQUSAISC-P (ASQNS-OP-F)

Dept Navy RADM E. D. Stumbaugh, Mrs. Gwendolyn R. Aitken,
USN, Judge Advocate PA/FOIA Branch, Office of the
General/Hon Craig S. King, Chief of Naval Operations
General Counsel of the Navy

Dept Air Force Mr. Robert J. McCormick, Mrs. Anne Turner, Air Force
Admin Asst to the Secretary Access Programs Manager, Office
of the Air Force of the Secretary of the Air Force

DCA LTG Thurman D. Rodgers, Mrs. Susan Chadick, General
USA, Director Counsel

DCAA Mr. John H. van Santen, Mr. Dave Henshall, Management
Asst Director, Resources Analyst

DIA Mr. Dennis Nagy, Executive Mr. Robert C. Hardzog, Chief,
Director FOIA Office

DIS Mr. John F. Donnelly, Mr. Dale L. Hartig, Chief,
Director Information/Public Affairs

DLA LGen Charles McCausland, COL Gary C. Tucker, USA, Staff
USAF, Director Director, Administration

DMA Mr. Edward Obloy, General Mr. David L. Black, Director,
Counsel Public Affairs

DNA MG Gerald G. Watson, USA, LTC Jay A. Craig, USA, Public

Director

Affairs Officer


ITEM 10a)
Availability of Records

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

Critical Incidents Studies conducted by the Weapons Systems Evaluation Group
(WSEG) for the 1950’s and 1960’s.

73


When key punched and verified, 75

per card
b. 35mm roll film, per frame 50
c. 16mm roll film, per frame A5
d. Paper prints (engineering drawings), 1,50
each
e. Paper reprints of microfilm indices, 10
each
3. Review Time
Type 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:

1. Minimum charge for office copy (up to six images) ................005 $3.50
2. Each additional image ...................000008 : «+. 10
3. Each typewritten page.............0. .+. 3.50
4. Certification and validation with seal, each............... . 5.20
5. Hand-drawn plots and sketches, each hour or fraction thereof........... 12.00

72


*@°I wey} rey;0 Teuuoszeayy
seTanp og ouyq-gzed xo ewT3-TIng peubysse Teuuosredy

GL°ELO‘PS9‘DS GL°9EO'LVE'SS EO°T66‘BPT‘LS 62°SEB‘PES‘TS [IIT n2zy3 1] 8380p TeIOL “AT
00°0$ 00°Es ‘LZg 8L°00S ‘6S 00°0%0 ‘ZS pessecozg sqsenbey eutaynoy Jo 3800 “IIT
OS" L9L‘8zs$ 00°09¢ ‘SERS $8" €9€‘069$ OZ" ET6 ‘90S [1 + H] TeIoL “c
OS "ESL ‘SOTS 00°2TT ‘Les LL‘ZL0 ‘BETS p9°Z8E ‘6S (H x %¢z] peeqrteag ‘T
00° PTO ‘EZHS 00°SbP ‘eres 80° T6z‘zss¢ 9S°0ES ‘LES {5 nzqq v) Teqo7qQMS “H
00°8ET ‘LOTS 00°899 ‘6E$ 0661S ‘995 62°9L0‘LTS 7zeT30 “SD
00°0s 00°€90 ‘TS €p°SEO ‘PTS 06°8LTS STRTTOIEN TENSTACTPOY “a
00°0$ 00°E9P ‘PS v6°STL‘LTS 0v°800 ‘TS Kdop zeqndmop +a
00° T9S ‘S$ 00° LOL ‘DS 09°OLD ‘6S Sz*opes sprocey pequytd “d
00° Tse ‘ss os "6Ee “LS vS°068 ‘STS oe "SEzS uoTIONpordey SYOTJOIOTH *D
00°OLD ‘127s OS" LOT ‘2pzs TESTZ‘pszs ey'ess ‘PIS vorjonpordey Adop eots3s0 “a
00° P6D ‘OPS 00°080 ‘69S 9E°OPPDLTS ¥6°Z09 ‘ES euTL, yorwes Teqndwo “y
S3SOD PSRPTSY-Ss¥H TeUIO “IT
GZ°906‘SZT’DS SL°EZO‘DES‘DS OF'9ZT‘6DR‘9S 60°Zee ‘SES ‘TS [a nxya a) TeIoL “a
SZ* Tet ‘szes SL“ p08 ‘9L6S 8t°S78'68Z‘TS ZH °OLT‘LOES lesz x (0 + a] peeqzeap a
00°z9z ‘sees 00°SOp ‘ZOL$ LT‘ Tez ‘28s Ls" see ‘eats [(s) nrqa (t)] Teqon(9)
00° T6L ‘08S 00°ZLP ‘oss SS°9Lb‘ZOTS Ov S66 ‘TTS seT TATION zeT70 (S)
00° L68 ‘PETS 00°99€ ‘OTIS 6€ 16d‘ TETS GE"SZE ‘ETS wopqeredexg wr0,g/eouspuodsezz05 (p)
00°EZS 66S 00° SEE ‘STIS OT SLE ‘SETS ¥Z°6LS ‘BES Teaozddy 3 vot euTpr0cn (¢)
00°820EEzS 00°L2z‘ZpTs 82° 198 ‘LOZ$ 0€ "958 ‘OLS Supstoxg 3 aetaey(Z)
00°€Z0 LETS 00°Z00 ‘E8z$ 6L°9L0'997S 8Z°6LS ‘8S eur, yxrves (T)

44 (809%a ETHPEYDS eed)

Kzobeyeo Aq #380 rnoyueq peqeuyTysg “5

00°E9P‘S9P'Z$ OPTS ‘POZ‘ES GE"6TO’LIE’DS$ OTOLE’SHO'TS 83809 zeekueq “a
S*00T 8°60T 6°8ET z0z sozeekuey peqeuTasg “Y
83809 Teuuoszeg ‘I

Hodod UIW Laad = AAYN Lda AWN _ Laid s¢/aso SNITLOO LSOD

s}soQ) weis01d IO
(pauoy) (q)oT WAIT

75



DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE

Ackerman, Edward

Adams, Jimmie V.

Allen, J. R.

Andersen, Ty J.

Anderson, Eddie L.

Baines, E. Darden

Baker, Norman R.

Batten, Virgil F.

Bingham, Billy J.

Birkner, John H.

Boesch, Gene

Boyd, Charles G.

Bracken, E. R.

LtCol

BGen

LtCol

Col

Civ

Col

Col

Col

MGen

MGen

Acting Director of Information
Management, Headquarters, Military Airlift
Command

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

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

Director of Information Management,
Headquarters, Tactical Air Command

Director of Information Management,
Headquarters, Military Airlift Command

Chief, Office of Administrative Services,
National Guard Bureau

Chief of Staff, Headquarters, Pacific Air
Forces

Chief of Staff, Headquarters, Air Force
Reserves

Deputy Assistant Chief of Staff,
Intelligence, Headquarters, United States Air
Force

Deputy Commander for Resources,
Headquarters, Air Force Intelligence Agency

Acting Deputy for Security and Investigative
Programs Office, Secretary of the Air Force

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

Chief of Staff, Headquarters, Air Force
Logistics Command.

32

25

44

85

43

25

22

13

13


Gilligan, Francis A.

Gravelle, Adrian J.

Hanson, Donald H.

Lane, Jack F.

Leeling, Gerald J.

Lehman, William J.

Smith, Stephen D.

Lemax, J.

Korte, Edward J.

Jeffcoat, Clyde E.

Reimer, Dennis J.

Sullivan, Gordon R.

Duffie, R. Dennis

Sparacino, Ronald A.

LTC

LTC

LTC

LTG

LTG

LTC

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

Acting Commander, United States Army
Legal Services Agency, Office of the Judge
Advocate General

Chief, Army Legal Assistance, Office of the
Judge Advocate General

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

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

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

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

Principal Assistant Responsible for
Contracting, United States Army Health
Services Command

Office of the Command Counsel, United
States Military Academy

Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Army for
Finance and Accounting

Deputy Chief of Staff for Operations and
Plans

Deputy Chief of Staff for Operations and
Plans

Chief of Staff, United States Total Army
Personnel Command.

Deputy Chief of Staff for Personnel and

Logistics, United States Total Army
Personnel Command

18

10

41

24

12

96

12


Perkins, J. B., II

Kelly, J. P.

Larson, D. C.

Reynolds, A.A.

Misiaszek, P.E.

Duff, B. L.

Dowgwilla, F. M.

Mercer, T. A.

Atwell, M. A.

Olsen, D. H.

Villemez, C. J.

Wong, H. K.

Kalleres, M. P.
Hewson, W. C.
McBride, R. M.

Kahn, T. K.

Geer, J. J., Jr.

RADM

VADM.

Col

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

Commander, Training Command, United
States Pacific Fleet

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

Force Judge Advocate, Naval Air Pacific

Fleet Judge Advocate, United States Naval
Forces, Europe

Acting Chief of Staff, United States Naval
Forces, Europe

Commander, United States Naval Forces,
Japan

Commander, United States Naval Forces,
Philippines

Chief of Staff, United States Naval Forces,
Philippines

Chief of Staff, United States Naval Forces,
Philippines

Staff Judge Advocate, United States Naval
Forces, Marianas

Commander, United States Naval Activities,
Spain

Commander Second Fleet
Deputy Assistant Judge Advocate General
Deputy Assistant Judge Advocate General

Acting Assistant Judge Advocate General
(Military Justice)

Acting Assistant Judge Advocate General
(Military Justice)

24

96
97


Downhour, O. Wayne

Cathcart, C. Mark

Levanson, Joel S.

Maliniak, John A.

Douglas, Alfred D.

Kilmartin, Thomas M.

Ward, William F.
Lanoue, Alcide M.
Bussey, Frederick N.

Blanck, Ronald R.

Stofft, William A.

Phillips, Zane

Cohen, Martin R.

Bagley, Claude

Anderson, Bruce

LTC

86 6 & &

8

Principal Assistant Responsible for
Contracting, United States Army Training
and Doctrine Command

Director, Requirements and Acquisition
Management Directorate, United States
Amy Training and Doctrine Command

Principal Assistant Responsible for
Contracting, United States Army Europe
and 7th Army

Principal Assistant Responsible for
Contracting, United States Army
Information Systems Command
Principal Assistant Responsible for
Contracting, United States Army
Information Systems Command

Commander, United States Army Reserve
Personnel Center

Chief, Army Reserve
Deputy Surgeon General
Deputy Surgeon General

Director, Professional Services, Offices of
the Surgeon General

Director of Management, Office of the
Chief of Staff, United States Army

Principal Assistant Responsible for
Contracting, United States Army Strategic
Defense Command

Assistant Chief Counsel for Litigation,
United States Army Corps of Engineers

Division Counsel, Lower Mississippi Valley,
United States Army Corps of Engineers

Division Counsel, Missouri River, United
States Army Corps of Engineers

20

14

99

90

50


Campbell, H.N.

Cooper, J. G.

Creller, Bruce O.

Culpepper, J. B.

Davidson, Alexander

Davidson, William A.

Davies, John W.

Daviess, Norman F.

Diekman, Jack L.

Dillingham, Larry D.

Donahue, William J.

Douglass, W. M.

Dula, Brett M

MGen

Civ

Col

Civ

MGen

Civ

Col

LtCol

Col

MGen

Col

Assistant Deputy Chief of Staff, Logistics
and Engineering, Headquarters, United States
Air Force

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

Chief of Staff, Air Force Military Personnel
Center

Executive Assistant, Sacramento Air
Logistics Center, Air Force Military
Personnel Center

Commander, Headquarters, Air Force
Inspection and Safety Center

Deputy Administrative Assistant, Office,
Secretary of the Air Force

Commander, Air Force Computer
Acquisitions Center, Air Force
Communications Command

Acting Director of Information
Management, Office, Secretary of the Air
Force

Director of Information Management,
Headquarters, Tactical Air Command

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

Deputy Assistant Chief of Staff, Systems
for Command Control, Communications and
Computers, Headquarters, United States Air
Force

Vice Commander, Warner Robins Air
Logistics Center, Air Force Logistics
Command

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

33

11

20

73

11


Schachter, Leon

Stringer, J. K., Jr

Scheflen, Kenneth C.

Sanchez, Nestor

Wermuth, Michael

Jajko, Walter

McNicol, David L.

Libby, I. Lewis

Alderman, Craig

Kinnamon, Kenneth

Rudman, William

Muckerman, Joseph, II

Butcher, Paul D.

Dunn, Michael W.

Civ

Col

Civ

Civ

Civ

Civ

Civ

Civ

Civ

Civ

Civ

Civ

VADM

LTC

Director, Directorate for Industrial Security
Clearance Review

Executive Assistant, DoD Comptroller

Director, Defense Manpower Data Center,
Assistant Secretary of Defense, Force
Management & Personnel

Deputy Assistant Secretary, Inter-American
Affairs, Assistant Secretary of Defense,
International Security Affairs

Deputy Assistant Secretary, Drug
Enforcement Policy, DoD Coordinator for
Drug Enforcement Policy and Support

Director, Special Advisory Staff, Deputy
Under Secretary of Defense for Security
Policy

Deputy Assistant Secretary, Resource
Analysis, Assistant Secretary of Defense,
Program Analysis & Evaluation

Principal Deputy Under Secretary of
Defense, Strategy and Resources

Deputy Under Secretary of Defense for
Security Policy

Vice President for Operations, Uniformed
Services University of the Health Sciences

Deputy Under Secretary of Defense, Trade
Security Policy

Director, Emergency Planning, Deputy Under
Secretary of Defense for Security Policy

Deputy Commander in Chief, United States
Transportation Command

Deputy Director, J-1, United States
Southern Command

15

23


Item 10(b)
Calendar Year Costs and Fees Collected

Component. Annual Cost Fees Collected
OSD/JS $1,584,835.29 $25,193.21
DEPT ARMY $7,148, 991.03 $386, 388.58
DEPT NAVY $5,347,036.75 $472,579.37
DEPT AIR FORCE $4, 654,673.75 $313,006.00
DCA $129,364.14 $3,711.28
DCAA $190,363.33 $3,445.69
DIA $304,090.89 $5,816.80
pDIs $40,053.60 $319.92
DLA $1, 360,077.75 $226,907.00
DMA $23,638.14 $862.50
DNA $108,143.46 $4,587.40
NSA/CSS $402,238.75 $6,564.00
OIG, DOD $67,737.50 $1,311.52
DoD Totals $21, 361,244.38 $1, 450, 693.27

74


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 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 useable, 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
Tesponse 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

59



Ttem 2(c)

Other Reasons Cited on Initial Determinations

Component Category* Total
1 2 3 4 5 6 |
OsD/JS 729° «423 45 62. «237 o 1 1,496
DEPT ARMY 3,709 2,348 346 789 840 622 | 8,654
DEPT NAVY 2,501 3,058 342 710 871 «228 | 7,710
DEPT AIR FORCE 1,765 2,902 322 950 792 745 | 7,476
DCA 17 26 1 0) 3 8 | 55
DCAA 17 8 6 3 86 4 | 124
DIA 14-190 9 18 0) 130 «I 244
DIs 12 1 0 18 t) 29 | 60
DLA 339 = 460 81 157 286 106 | 1,429
DMA 18 1 1 1 7 3 4 41
DNA 4 22 0 3 15 2 4 46
NSA/CSS 47 83 5 50 18 10 | 213
OIG, DOD 29 19 1 16 8 9 4 82
DoD Totals 9,201 9,551 1,159 2,777 3,163 1,779 | 27, 630
*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 following page for description of each category.)


Crane, T. C.

DiGeorge, F. P.

Koehr, J. E.

Ailes, R. H.

Weaver, J.C.

Holloway, L. J.

Coomes, W. A.

O’Hara, J. A.

Jacobson, D. L.

Winglass, R. J.

Carson, W. G.

Studds, W. A.

Carter, R. L.

Vitalie, J. S.

RADM
RADM

RADM

RADM

Col

Civ

LtGen

MajGen

MajGen

Col

Civ

Commanding Officer, Public Works Center,
San Francisco Bay

Executive Officer, Public Works Center, San
Francisco Bay

Commander, Naval Oceanography Command

Commander, Space and Naval Warfare
Systems Command.

Commander, Space and Naval Warfare
Systems Command

Vice Commander, Space and Naval Warfare
Systems Command.

Deputy Commander for Plans, Policy and
Security Programs, Naval Investigative
Service Command

Acting Deputy Commander for Plans, Policy
and Security Programs, Naval Investigative
Service Command

Acting Deputy Commander for Plans, Policy
and Security Programs, Naval Investigative
Service Command

Deputy Chief of Staff, Installations and
Logistics, Headquarters, Marine Corps

Deputy Chief of Staff , Installations and
Logistics, Headquarters, Marine Corps

Director, Intelligence Division, Headquarters,
Marine Corps

Director, Manpower Management
Information Systems Division,
Headquarters, Marine Corps

Deputy Director, Manpower Management
Information

30

428

34

11

21

61


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
Tesearch. 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.

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

66


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).

68



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 Actual cost of duplicating
(tapes or printouts) 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 Hourly 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.

69



Henriksen, G. G.

Myers, S.C.

Saalfeld, F. E.

Runyon, J.C.

Spofford, B. A.

Legrand, C. M.

Hosken, E. W.

Berkley, R. C.

Strohsahl, G. H.

Vernallis, S. L.

Finney, J. H.
Norton, L. F.
Mooberry, W. J.

Cantrell, W. H.

MacKinnon, M.

Miller, J. E.

Frye, J. K.

Jones, R. A.

RADM

RADM

RADM

RADM

RADM

Special Assistant for Security, Naval
Security Group

Special Assistant for Security, Naval
Security Group

Director, Office of Naval Research

Freedom of Information Act Coordinator,
Naval Intelligence Command

Deputy for Operations, United States Naval
Academy

Legal Counsel, Naval Military Personnel
Command

Legal Counsel, Naval Air Systems Command

Staff Judge Advocate, Naval Air Systems
Command

Commander, Pacific Missile Test Center

Acting Commander, Pacific Missile Test
Center

Commander, Naval Safety Center
Commander, Naval Safety Center
Chief of Staff, Naval Safety Center

Vice Commander, Naval Sea Systems
Command

Vice Commander, Naval Sea Systems
Command

Vice Commander, Naval Sea Systems
Command

Vice Commander, Navy Resale and Services
Support Office

Executive Assistant, Naval Investigative
Service Command

27

19

151

13
168

31
39

12

113



ITEM 10(d) Optional
Other Information

Of the 2,497 requests completed in the Office of the Secretary of Defense, the following
table categorizes the requesters by percentage of the total case load:

CATEGORY PERCENTAGE
Business Firms 25.4
Congress 2
Educational 5.2
Foreign A
Individual 47.2
Law Firms 2.9
News Media 13.5
Research 8
Special Interest 4.2
Students 2

79



Item 1

Initial Determinations
Total | Granted Denied Denied Total
Component Requests | in Full in Part in Full Other Actions*
OSD/JS 2,952 | 834 189 373 1, 638 3,034
DEPT ARMY 43,323 | 32,574 2,448 677 8,646 44,345
DEPT NAVY 34,500 | 25,540 1,736 427 7,666 35,369
DEPT AF 24,831 | 14,614 1,918 823 7,476 24,831
DCA 192 | 134 4 2 52 192
DCAA 289 =| 135 17 13 124 289
DIA 860 | 279 270 67 244 860
pis 330 | 235 20 15 60 330
DLA 10,104 | 8,932 188 29 1,429 10,578
DMA 152 | 98 10 3 41 152
DNA 171 ~«| 86 35 4 46 171
NSA/CSS 461 | 45 214 36 166 461
OIG, DOD 367 | 66 48 171 82 367
DoD Totals 118,532 | 83,572 7,097 2,640 27,670 120,979

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


Agency Appellate Agency

Abbreviation Authority Program Head
NSA/CSS Mr. Robert L. Prestel, Dr. Richard W. Gronet, Director
Deputy Director of Policy
OIG, DOD Mr. Steven Whitlock, Appelate Mr. David C. Stewart, Assistant
Authority Director, Investigative Support
Directorate



Kemp, Terry G.

Stallworth, Adrienne C.

Lane, Richard J.

Magruder, Lawson

Lutz, Joseph C.

Hodge, Clifford

Quincannon, Joseph

Felder, Jerry W.

Hanley, Paul W.

Pease, Kendell

Barrett, Thomas P.

Hardy, Robert S., Jr.

Akins, Carl

Stremple, John L.

Lagomarsino, Bartley

Civ

Civ

Col

Col

BG

Civ

Civ

Civ

Attorney, Advisor (International), United
States Southern Command

Information Specialist, United States
Southern Command

Acting Director, J-1, United States Pacific
Command

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

Chief of Staff, United States Special
Operations Command.

Chief of Staff, United States Air Force
Special Operations Command

Acting Commander, Naval Special Warfare
Command

Deputy Chief of Staff, United States Space
Command

Public Affairs Officer, United States Atlantic
Command

Public Affairs Officer, United States Atlantic
Command

Director for Personnel and Administration,
United States European Command

Director for Manpower, Personnel and
Security, United States European Command

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

Director, Department of Defense Dependent
Schools

Deputy Director, Department of Defense
Dependent Schools

16

11

15

18

10


Item 2(b)

Statutes Invoked on Initial Determinations

Statute Number of Times by Agency Total*
OSD/ NSA/ OIG |
JS ARMY NAVY AF DCAA DIA DLA DNA CSS DOD |
10 USC 128 2 2 1 2 | 7
10 usc 130 2 2 14 22 2 5 2 1 47
10 USC 618e 2 3 | 5
10 usc 1102 1 9 9 1 19
18 USC 798 4 2 56 1 62
21 usc 1175 1 | 1
26 USC 6103 1 | 1
35 USC 122 1 | 1
41 usc 423 1 #14 1 15
42 USC 2160 1 1 1
42 USC 2161-2165 4 2 1 6
42 usc 2162 7 5 3 8 1 23
42 USC 4528 1 1 1
50 USC 402 Note, 3 207 1 210
Section 6,Public |
Law 86-36 |
50 USC 403(d) (3) 4 5 20 61 | 90
50 USC 403(g) 2 I 2
IG Act of 1978 2 I 2
as amended by |
Public Law I
95-4524 1
Federal Rules of 1 5 | 6
Criminal Proce- |
dure, Rule 6(e) |
|
Agency Totals 32 6 40 54 1 20 1 #15 325 5 | 499



Ross, Jimmy D.

Hilmes, Jerome B.

Borland, David

Harms, John K.

Gore, Willie L.

Mugno, Scott A.

Elgnawey, Yvonne

Korte, Edward J.

Michael, Danny R.

Smith, James D.

Mallory, Glynn C.

Delrossa, Louis

LTG

LTG

COL

Deputy Chief of Staff for Logistics Office
of the Deputy Chief of Staff for Logistics,
United States

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

Director, United States Army Information
Systems Selection and Acquisition Agency

Deputy Staff Judge Advocate, United States
Army Military Traffic Management
Command

Deputy Chief of Staff for Logistics, United
States Army Military Traffic Management
Command

Deputy Staff Judge Advocate, United States
Army Military Traffic Management
Command

Deputy Chief of Staff for Personal
Property, United States Army Military
Traffic Management Command

Command Counsel, United States Army
Materiel Command

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

Director, Operations, Readiness and
Mobilization, Office of the Deputy Chief of
Staff for Operations and Plans

Director, Operations, Readiness and
Mobilization, Office of the Deputy Chief of
Staff for Operations and Plans

Director, Space and Special Weapons, Office

of the Deputy Chief of Staff for Operations
and Plans

22

13

34

164


FREEDOM
OF

INFORMATION ACT

PROGRAM
CY 1990

REPORT TO CONGRESS

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



Ttem S(b)
Statutes Invoked on Appeal Determinations

Statute Number of Times by Agency Total*

AIR NSA/ OIG |
OSD ARMY NAVY FORCE CSS DOD |

10 usc 128 1
10 usc 130 2
10 USC 618e
10 usc 1102 1 1
18 USC 798 4
31 USC 3729 (d) 1
35 usc 205 1
42 USC 2162 (d) 1
50 usc 402 21
Note, Section 6,
Public Law 86-36
50 USC 403(d) (3) 1 14
IG Act of 1978 12
as amended by
Public Law
95-4524
Sec 822, Natl Def 1
Auth Act, FY 90 &
91 (P.L. 101-189;
103 Stat 1352,1503)

rPNUW

ry
PPR EP AWN Oe

N

Agency Totals 2 2 5 11 50 13 «1 83

45



Item 3

Initial Denial Authorities by Participation

Name Rank Title Number of
Instances
OSD/JS

Tucker, Alvin Civ Deputy Comptroller, Management Systems, 2
DoD Comptroller

Putnam, Carl L. Civ Special Assistant to the Comptroller, DoD 1
Comptroller

Kendall, Cynthia Civ Deputy Comptroller, Information Resources 1
Management, DoD Comptroller

Cooke, D.O. Civ Director, Administration and Management 11

Berteau, David J. Civ Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary, 3
Assistant Secretary of Defense, Production
& Logistics

O’Donnell, William Col Executive Assistant, Assistant Secretary of 3
Defense, Command, Control,
Communications, & Intelligence

Pope, Barbara S. Civ Deputy Assistant Secretary, Family, 1
Support, Education and Safety, Assistant
Secretary of Defense, Force Management &
Personnel

Newhall, David Civ Acting Assistant Secretary of Defense, 3
Health Affairs

Gray, Anthony W. Civ Deputy Director, Inter-American Region, 5
Assistant Secretary of Defense,
International Security Affairs

Ford, Carl W. Civ Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary of 3
Defense, International Security Affairs

Ropka, Lawrence Civ Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary of 1

Defense, International Security Affairs


"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)(3)(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 FOJA channels.

6. Not an Agency Record

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


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.

58



Hall, D.W. CAPT Commander, Defense Industrial Plant
Equipment Center

Kobernus, George M. Col Commander, Defense Logistics Services
Center

Agnor, Raymond M., — Col Commander, Defense Reutilization and

Jr. Marketing Services

Miller, James J. Col Acting Commander, Defense Construction
Supply Center

Cusick, John M. BG Commander, Defense Personnel Support
Center

Castleberry, John M. COL Chief of Staff, Defense Personnel Support
Center

Walsh, D. BGen Commander, Defense Industrial Supply
Center

Bondi, Peter A. RADM Commander, Defense General Supply Center

Reinkober, Thomas E. Col Commander, Defense Contract
Administrative Services Region -
International

DEFENSE MAPPING AGENCY

Smith, Stanley O. BGen Chief of Staff

Robinson, Bill E. Civ Director, Defense Mapping Technical
Services Center

Bishop, Howard S., Jr. Civ Associate General Counsel, Defense Mapping
Agency Aerospace Center

Deranger, Andrew H. = Civ Associate General Counsel, Defense Mapping
Agency Hydrographic/Topographic Center

Sande, Kermit A. Civ Associate General Counsel, Defense Mapping
Agency Hydrographic/Topographic Center

DEFENSE NUCLEAR AGENCY
Ullrich, George W. Civ Deputy Director

41

71

30

13

14


Bump, S. E.

Carlsen, K. L.
Adams, J. W.
Brackx, O. M.

Epstein, H. S.

Ives, Jon R.

Buffington, J. E.

Bersani, R. R.

Rohrback, R. M.

Smith, L. M.

Delker, J. L.

Morris, D. G.

Allshouse, C. R.

Runberg, B. L.

Heine, R. F.

Saunders, P. D.

Kiesling, R. F.

RADM
RADM

RADM

RADM

RADM

Commander, Naval Base, Charleston
Commander, Naval Base, Norfolk
Commander, Naval Base, San Diego

Acting Commander, Naval Base, San Diego

Staff Judge Advocate, Naval Base, San
Diego

Commander, Pacific Division, Naval Facilities
Engineering Command

Commander, Pacific Division, Naval Facilities
Engineering Command

Acting Commander, Pacific Division, Naval
Facilities Engineering Command

Commander, Western Division, Naval
Facilities Engineering Command

Vice Commander, Western Division, Naval
Facilities Engineering Command.

Vice Commander, Western Division, Naval
Facilities Engineering Command

Acting Commander, Western Division, Naval
Facilities Engineering Command.

Acting Commander, Western Division, Naval
Facilities Engineering Command.

Commanding Officer, Southern Division
Naval Facilities Engineering Command

Commanding Officer, Engineering Field
Activity, Northwest

Acting Commanding Officer, Engineering
Field Activity, Northwest

Executive Officer, Navy Public Works
Center, San Diego

29

20

12


Ttem 5(c)
Other Reasons Cited on Appeal Determinations

Component Category* Total

rm
ix}
w
-
w
a

osD/JS

DEPT ARMY
DEPT NAVY 5
DEPT AIR FORCE
DCA

DCAA

DIA

DIS

DLA

DMA

DNA

NSA/CSS

OIG, DOD

NI
S|

ReODCC COC OMUN
eocoHNDOCOCCOROD
ecocoeoe ooo OMmCe
NSCCCOCCOCOCOCORUN
BOCCCCOOO Ohm
ececeocecoCoCONCSe
sCORNGDOCOO

DoD Totals

a
a
r
w:
a
w
°
a
o
ry
a

200

* Types of Categories

1. Transferred Appeal

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 full description of "other reasons". )

46


Lannom, C. R.

Powers, R. J.
Ursey, D.

Houley, W. P.

Oliver, D. R., Jr.
Kaup, K. L.
Conway, F. M., II
Fernandez, W. J.
Partington, J. W.
Moriarty, J. A.
Molinengo, H. R.
Bitoff, J. W.

Braden, R. F.

Unruh, J. L.
Mercer, T. A.
Lewis, F. L.
Jesberg, R. H.
Walker, J. S.

Latendresse, T. B.

Lynch, T. C.
King, R. G.

Civ

Civ
Civ
RADM

RADM
RADM
CAPT

RADM
RADM
LCDR

RADM

RADM
RADM
RADM
RADM
RADM

RADM

Deputy Commander, Naval Investigative
Service Command

Acting Director, Naval Investigative Service
Acting Director, Naval Investigative Service

Commander, Submarine Group 2, Naval
Submarine Base, Groton, CT

Commander, Submarine Group 5
Commander, Submarine Group 5

Chief of Staff, Submarine Group 10

Acting Chief of Staff, Submarine Group 10
Commander, Strike-Fighter Wings, Atlantic
Commander, Strike-Fighter Wings, Atlantic
Staff Judge Advocate, Patrol Wings Atlantic
Commander, Logistics Group 1

Chief of Staff, Fighter Airborne Early
Warning Wing, United States Pacific Fleet

Commander, Carrier Group One
Commander, Carrier Group Seven
Commander, Tactical Wings, Atlantic
Commander, Helicopter Wings, Atlantic
Commander, Helicopter Wings, Atlantic

Acting Commander, Cruiser-Destroyer
Group 3

Commander, Cruise-Destroyer Group 12

Staff Judge Advocate, Light Attack Wing,
United States Pacific Fleet

28

46



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 in a 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
Tequesters 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.

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

65


Ttem 2(a)

Exemptions Invoked on Initial Determinations

Component Exemptions by Number (5 U.S.C. 552(b)) Total*
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 ae |
OsD/JS 279 24 32 #69 «#194 78 16 ) o' 692
DEPT ARMY 430 620 6 331 844 1379 608 0 ot 4,218
DEPT NAVY 144 230 40 253 518 898 1133 0 ol 3,216
DEPT AIR FORCE 156 314 54 609 927 715 988 0 ol 3,763
DCA 1 ) 0 5 2 2 0 ) o4 10
DCAA ) 2 1 1 22 4 1 0 o | 30
DIA 247° «111 20 19 10 22 6 0 ool 435
pis 1 #17 (i) 4 8 12 19 0 ol 61
DLA 2 6 1 6151 #45 #13 «14 (i) ol 232
DMA 1 0 t) 2 9 1 ) 0 ol 13
DNA 17 2 15 14 4 8 ) i) ool 60
NSA/CSS 98 19 325 24 13 43 5 ) ol 527
OIG, DOD 6 71 5 16 99 41 196 0 ool 434
DoD Totals 1382 1416 499 1498 2694 3216 2986 i) Oo | 13,691
Percent of I
Total 10% «10% 4% 11% 20% 23% 22% 0% oe | 100%

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



Behler, Gene R.

Wise, Franklin R.

Gailbraith, Joseph E.

Helm, Shelia

McNeely, Joe B.

Doctor, Henry, Jr.
Boylan, Peter J.
Allen, Teddy G.

Corns, Johnnie H.

Brashears, Bobbie F.

Hennies, C. A.

Pongonis, James A.

Baines, E. Dardan

Tugwell, Tyler

Benson, William E.

Civ

LTG

BG

Deputy Chief of Staff for Plans and
Analysis, United States Total Army
Personnel Command

Chief of Staff, United States Army
Personnel Command

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

Deputy Director, Civilian Personnel
Management Directorate, United States
Total Army Personnel Command

Chief, Field Operations Division, Civilian
Personnel Management Directorate, United
States Total Army Personnel Command
The Inspector General of the Army
Acting Inspector General

Acting Inspector General

The Inspector General of the Army
Acting Inspector General

Commanding General, United States Army
Safety Center

Deputy Commander, United States Army
Safety Center

Chief, Office of Administrative Services,
National Guard Bureau

Director, Personnel and Administration,
United States Army Military Entrance
Processing Command

Deputy Acquisition Director, United States

Amny Training and Doctrine Command

19

10

22

26

73

24

33

25

25

25

25

173

34

16


COMPONENT

DOCUMENT IDENTIFICATION

CER. REF.

NSA/CSS

OIG/DOD

DLA Regulation 5400.14, "DLA Freedom
of Information Act Program", 5 Jul 88

DMaA Instruction 5400.7, "DMA Freedom
of Information Act (FOIA) Program,
21 Jan 88

DNA Instruction 5400.7C, "Defense
Nuclear Agency (DNA) Freedom of
Information Act (FOIA) Program, 13 Dec
90

Public Access to Records of the National
Security Agency/Central Security Service,
DoD

IG Instruction 5400.7, "Inspector General
Freedom of Information Act Program",
18 Sep 89

56

32 CFR 1285, Vol
53, No. 143, pg
27962, 26 Jul 88;
amended 3 Oct 88, pg
38716

32 CFR 295, Vol 53,
No. 45, pg 7358, 8
Mar 88; amended 16
Mar 88, pg 8629

32 CFR 291, Vol 53,
No. 56, pg 9435, 23
Mar 88

32 CFR 299, Vol 56,
No. 9, pg 1375, 14
Jan 91

32 CFR 284, Vol 54,
No. 51, pg 11237,
17 Mar 89


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. A record is voluntarily created to preclude an otherwise burdensome
effort to provide voluminous amounts of available records, including additional
information not requested.

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 FOJA 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. If
the 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.

63


Huebner, Carl R.

Idrogo, S.

Iverson, Ronald W.

Jaynes, Jay J.

Jeske, James C.

Johnson, Jeanne M.

Jones, Roger A.

Kishiyama, Arthur Y.

Klich, Michael A.

Koontz, W.

Lahendro, Albert L.

Layman, Lester C., Jr.

Lotzbire, Bruce J.

Col

LtCol

LtCol

Col

LtCol

Col

Col

Civ

MGen

Acting Deputy Assistant Chief of Staff,
Systems for Command, Control,
Communications and Computers,
Headquarters, United States Air Force

Executive Assistant, San Antonio Air
Logistics Center, Air Force Logistics
Command

Vice Commander, Air Force Military
Personnel Center

Commander, Headquarters, Air Force
Technical Applications Center

Director of Information Management,
Headquarters, Air Force Communications
Command

Deputy Director of Information
Management, Headquarters, Air Force
Training Command

Staff Judge Advocate, Headquarters,
Strategic Air Command.

Chief of Staff, Electronic Systems Division,
Air Force Systems Command

Acting Director of Information
Management, Headquarters, Air Force Space
Command

Assistant Chief of Staff, Headquarters, Air
Forces in Europe

Acting Chief of Staff, Space Systems
Division, Air Force Systems Command.

Acting Director of Information
Management, Headquarters, Air Force
Systems Command

Chief of Staff, Headquarters, United States
Air Forces in Europe

36

27

49

138

22

24


“GI weqQ zey_o Touucsredyy

*seTanp od euya-y2ed zo ewrz-TINz peubtsse Teuucszedy

09°€S0 ‘Ops 68°060'POES  EEEIE‘OGTS PT" P9E‘EZTS (rrr n7q3 I] #3809 TeROL “AT
00°0$ 00°0$ 00°0$ 00°0$ pessecorg syeenbey eupynoy Jo 3800 “IIT
68°S99$ DT" E98 ‘LTS ST"80T ‘es TL "SET ‘PTS (1 +B] Teqn ‘¢
BT eeTs €9°ZLS ‘ES €9°Tz9$ pL Lze ‘7s [H = $57] Preyteno “I
Te zess TS" 062 ‘PTS zs"98p ‘ZS L6°OTE ‘TTS [o nua ¥] Tea07qns “H
00°0$ 00°0$ 96°26E$ LL" 92 ‘TS xeq90 "D
00°0$ 00° ¥9€ ‘TS 00°0$ OT "£20 ’s$ sTepzeqeH TensTAoTpny “a
00°0$ 00°0$ 00°0$ 00°0$ Adop xeqndmoa *x
os"ests ST'6tz$ 79° DOLE OL'€$ sprcoey peqyza “a
00°0$ 00°s9$ 00°0$ 00°0$ woTqonpordey eYDTFOIOTH °D
00ers g9e"9sz‘es op opz ‘TS op €z0 ‘S$ worqonpordey Adop eotsz0 “a
Tz" Toes os" Sse ‘6s ys"s8s 00°0$ euy, Yorves Teqndwop -y
83800 peqeTeY-es"D zeqIO “IT
TL" Lee ‘6E$ GL°L2Z‘987$ = BT"GGZ‘LETS §=—-ZP"ST“STTS (aq nga a] TeI0L “a
pS" LLB ‘LE Sg" spz‘Lss vO" TSP ‘LES 80°SPO‘EzS [ssz x (0 + @)] peeqreno “a
LT'269 ‘ZS oz" Tes ‘ess V9" OSE ‘DS VE"ODD ‘DS [(s) naa (1)] TeI0n(9)
00°0$ SZ"6VE ‘TS 00°LPTS 00°0$ seTatatay 26770 (s)
Tz"ze9s SZ" 807 ‘DS 00"0s$ ee" S9TS uopqeredera wrog/eouspuodserz05 (p)
00°S26 TS 02"098 ‘ZT$ 00°00z¢ s€"0s6 ‘e¢ Teaorddy 3 uopqeuTpz0cp (¢)
90°98$ G2"80S ‘DZS G2" LOE ‘zs ee" S9Ts buystoxa 3 meTaey(Z)
06'8h$ G%"G09 ‘OTS 6€"0S9 ‘TS €€"S9TS eurL yorees (T)
44 (8090E ETHPEyDS eet)

Azobeze9 Aq sysop cnoyvey peqeutasE *O
00°8T8 ‘8z$ OO'TSH‘SLT$  OS"6PP‘SPTS  00°DEL‘LES 8380p zeehuey “a
60 ’ se € yszeekuey peqeuTasy “VY

#480) Teuucszeg ‘IT

sia xia wood woa SNTLLOO LSOO

sjsoQ weido1g 104
(Pauod) (OT Wary

76



McCoy, R. P.

McDonald, Ralph O.

McFalls, John O., II

Meseserli, Glenn E.

Metcalf, Charles D.

Milam, David W.

Miller, Brian D.

Mock, James W., III

Monsour, Lawrence F.

Nibbelin, Denis R.

Oakes, Howard J.

O’Neal, S. A.

Peterson, Richard A.

Peura, Edwin A.

Col

Col

Col

MGen

Col

LtCol

Col

Col

Col

Col

Civ

Civ

Col

Vice Commander, Headquarters, Air Force
Logistics Command.

Chief of Staff, Headquarters, Air Force
Accounting and Finance Center

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

Chief of Staff, Air Force Development Test
Center, Air Force Systems Command

Commander, Headquarters, Air Force
Accounting and Finance Center

Chief of Staff, Aeronautical Systems
Division, Air Force Systems Command

Director of Information Management,
Headquarters, Air Force Communications
Command

Chief of Staff, Headquarters, Electronic
Security Command.

Director of Information Management,
Headquarters, Air Training Command

Director of Information Management,
Headquarters, Air Force Systems Command

Chief of Staff, Electronic Systems Division,
Air Force Systems Command

Executive Assistant, Sacramento Air
Logistics Center, Air Force Logistics
Command

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

Chief of Staff, Space Systems Division, Air
Force Systems Command.

37

31

57

38

19

23

29

32


addresses of retired officers is an unwarranted invasion of privacy under Exemption
(0)(6)1.

Lisee vs Central Intelligence Agency, et al., D.D.C. C.A. 89-1266. On 6 August 1990,
the court held that plaintiff’s FOIA request for information about how the United
States reacted to the Quebec separatist movement was being processed with due
diligence. Plaintiff is an author who seeks the information for a book he is writing.
The court held that an author or publisher cannot request expedited treatment or set
FOIA deadlines simply by invoking their own production schedules.

Bennett vs United States, ED. MI C.A. 89 CV 40298. On 7 June 1990, the court
granted our motion for summary judgment in this suit filed under both the Freedom of
Information Act and Privacy Act. Plaintiffs are a father and son, both former soldiers,
who allege that we wrongfully refused to disclose social security numbers of various
soldiers against who they wished to prefer court-martial charges. Plaintiffs also
claimed that the Privacy Act was violated when a record of plaintiff’s nonjudicial
punishment was posted on a unit bulletin board.

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
Clinton D. Hubbard vs Department of the Navy, U.S.D.C. Southern District of

California. Plaintiff seeking release of information from David Taylor Research Center
pertaining to a Supervisor of Shipbuilding Contract controversy before the ASBCA.
Case was voluntarily dismissed on 9 April 1990, without prejudice to plaintiff.

Project on Military Procurement vs Department of the Navy, D.C. C.A. 88-2130.

Court ruled plaintiff was entitled to a fee waiver because the information sought can
contribute to public understanding. Plaintiff voluntarily dismissed request for
documents. The only remaining issue to be resolved is the amount of attorney’s fees
to be awarded.

Todd Shipyards Corporation vs Defense Contract Audit Agency and Naval Sea Systems
Command,D.C. C.A. 87-2401TJH. This was an Open America case that was dismissed

with prejudice on 14 November 1990 by stipulation of the parties.

DONCO vs Department of the Navy, N.D. CA. Civilian injured working on USS
ENTERPRISE. No Judge Advocate General Manual (JAGMAN) investigation. Admiralty
incident letter report prepared. Worker sued private contractors, who then sought
report. Denied under work product theory. Motion or summary judgment (MSJ) filed.
Cross MSG received 28 December 1989. Judge granted defense protective motion.
Argument 29 January 1990.

lean Jeffrey vs Department of the Navy, E.D. VA. Plaintiff alleges she wrote to NLSO

Norfolk and other Navy and DOD sources in an attempt to access medical records,
investigative reports and other documents. Attorney was informed in July that
material was available if fees would be paid. He refused and now claims denial of access.
JAGMAN was prepared to defend admin claim and for quality assurance. In return for

52



Mitchell, C. H.

Vogel, L.

Shaffer, R. L.
Testa, R. F.
Walsh, R. M.
Jones, R. C.

Schmidt, C.

Curtis, G. H., II
Straw, E. M.
O’Connell, B. J.

Lange, J. R.

Buffington, J.

Rogers, D. N.

Coady, P. J.

Tindal, R. L.

Itkin, R. I.

McGrail, C. R., Jr.

Oliver, D. R.

Brooks, T. A.

Col

Col

RADM

RADM

RADM

RADM
RADM

RADM

RADM

RADM

RADM

RADM

Assistant Judge Advocate General (Military
Justice)

Assistant Judge Advocate General (Military
Justice)

Auditor General of the Navy

Acting Chief, Office of Legislative Affairs
Assistant Vice Chief of Naval Operations
Assistant Vice Chief of Naval Operations

Deputy Director, Naval Nuclear Propulsion
(OP-OONB)

Acting Deputy, Logistics (OP-04B)
Director, Material Division (OP-41)
Assistant Planning/Real Estate (OP-44E)

Director, Ships Maintenance/Modernization
(OP-43)

Director, Shore Activities (OP-44)

Deputy Assistant Chief Naval Operations,
Air Warfare (OPO05B)

Director, Politico-Military Policy and
Current Plans Division (OP-61)

Director, Strategic and Theater Nuclear
Warfare Division (OP-65)

Deputy Director, Office of Naval Warfare
(OP-07)

Assistant Deputy Chief of Naval Operations,
Naval Warfare (OP-07)

Director, General Planning and Programming
Division (OP-80)

Director of Naval Intelligence (OP-092)

25

282

77

23


Item 8

FOIA Implementation Rules or Regulations

COMPONENT DOCUMENT IDENTIFICATION CFR. REF.
OSD/IS DoD Regulation 5400.7-R, "DoD 32 CFR 286, Vol 55,
Freedom of Information Act Program", No. 248, pg 53104,
Oct 90 26 Dec 90
DEPT ARMY AR 25-55, "The Department of the Army 32 CFR 518, Vol 55,
Freedom of Information Act Program", No. 57, pg 10870, 23
10 Jan 90 Mar 90
DEPT NAVY SECNAVINST 5720.42D, "Department 32 CFR 701, Vol 53,
of the Navy Freedom of Information Act No. 248, pg 52139,
(FOIA) Program", 4 Dec 87 27 Dec 88
DEPT AIR AFR 12-30, "Air Force Freedom of Pending Revision. 32
FORCE Information Act Program", 15 Dec 82 CFR 806, Vol 48,
No. 69, pg 15248, 8
Apr 83
DCA DCA Instruction 210-225-1, "DCA 32 CFR 287, Vol 55,
Freedom of Information Act Program",7 No. 151, pg 31829, 6
Feb 90 Aug 90
DCAA DCAA Regulation 5410.8, "DCAA 32 CFR 290, Vol 54,
Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) No. 142, pg 31014,
Program", 17 May 89 26 Jul 89
DIA DIA Regulation 12-39, "Freedom of 32 CFR 292, Vol 53,
Information Act Program", 14 Sep 87 No. 128, pg 25157, 5
Jul 88
DIS DIS Regulation 01-12, "Freedom of 32 CFR 298b, Vol

Information Practices", 10 Dec 87

55

53, No. 185, pg
36968, 23 Sep 88


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.

(ii) Educational or Noncommercial Scientific Institution or News
Media. Requesters must indicate a willingness to pay duplication charges in excess of

100 pages if more 100 pages of records are desired.

(ii) 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 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.

64



Department of Defense

Reporting Agencies
Under the Freedom of Information Act
Agency Agency
Abbreviation Agency Head
OSD/JS Office of the Secretary of Defense Hon Richard B. Cheney
(Including the Joint Staff)
Dept Army Secretary of the Army Hon Michael P. W. Stone
Dept Navy Secretary of the Navy Hon H. Lawrence
Garrett, IIT

Dept Air Force Secretary of the Air Force Hon Donald B. Rice

DCA Defense Communications Agency LTG Thurman D.
Rodgers, USA

DCAA Defence Contract Audit Agency Mr. William H. Reed

DIA Defense Intelligence Agency LTG Harry E. Soyster,
USA

DIS Defense Investigative Service Mr. John F. Donnelly

DLA Defense Logistics Agency LGen Charles
McCausland, USAF

DMA Defense Mapping Agency MGen William K. James,
USAF

DNA Defense Nuclear Agency MG Gerald G. Watson,
USA

NSA/CSS National Security Agency/Central VADM William O.

Security Service Studeman, USN
OIG, DOD Office of the Inspector General, Hon Susan Crawford.

Department of Defense


Item 5(a)
Exemptions Invoked on Appeal Determinations

Component. Exemptions by Number (5 U.S.C. 552(b)) Total*
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 4

OsD/JS 25 1 2 2 18 6 3 0 ol 57
DEPT ARMY 27 27 2 14 87 78 59 0 oj! 294
DEPT NAVY 21 «35 5 74 98 59 9 0 ot 301
DEPT AIR FORCE 15 #14 #411 #35 103 52 88 0 ol 318
DCA 0 i) 0 0 ) i) 0 0 ou 0
DCAA 0 0 0 i) 2 0 0 0 ou 2
DIA 30 418 0 1 1 2 (1) 0 ol 52
DIS 0 1 0 1 i) 0 0 0 ool 2
DLA 0 0 0 5 4 4 1 0 Oo | 14
DMA 0 0 0 0 2 1 0 0 | 3
DNA 0 0 0 0 0 ) 0 0 ool 0
NSA/CSS 19 3 50 1 2 0 0 0 o4 75
OIG, DOD o 19 13 1 22 #18 32 0 o4 105
DoD Totals 137° 118 #483 134 339 220 192 0 od 1223
Percent of

Total 11% 108 7% 11% 28% 18% 16% 0% 0% | 100%

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

44



Scheidt, John C. MGen _ Acting Deputy Director
Bachkosky, John M. Civ Acting Deputy Director
NATIONAL SECURITY AGENCY/CENTRAL SECURITY SERVICE
Gronet, Richard W. Civ Director of Policy, Office of Policy
OFFICE OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL, DOD
Stewart, David C. Civ Assistant Director, Freedom of
Information/Privacy Act Division, Office of

Assistant Inspector General for
Investigations

42

17

250

219


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, c.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 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

67



Farr, Craig A.

Kern, Vincent D.

Rodgers, Richard L.

Lemon, James F.

Bosley, Dale E.

Appleton, R. E.

Reay, James H.

Brown, James

Hansen, D. B.

Vesser, Dale A.

Deegan, G. A.
Crist, George
White, Maurice
Goetze, Richard, Jr.
Hosmer, Bradley C.

Fites, Jeanne B.

Donnell, Joseph S., [II

Civ

Civ

CDR

Col

CDR

Col

MGen
MGen
Civ

RADM

Staff Assistant, Director, Defense Research
and Engineering

Director, Africa Region, Assistant Secretary
of Defense, International Security Affairs

Deputy, Executive Secretariat of the
Department of Defense

Deputy, Executive Secretariat of the
Department of Defense

Deputy, Executive Secretariat of the
Department of Defense

Deputy, Executive Secretariat of the
Department of Defense

Director, Supply Management Policy,
Assistant Secretary of Defense, Production
& Logistics

Director, Directorate for Industrial Security
Clearance Review

Director, Base Closure and Utilization,
Assistant Secretary of Defense, Production
& Logistics

Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense,
Requirements & Policy

Vice Director, Joint Staff

Vice Director, Joint Staff

Staff Attorney, General Counsel

Vice Director, Joint Staff

Vice Director, Joint Staff

Principal Director, Resource Management and
Support, Assistant Secretary of Defense,

Force Management & Personnel

Acting Vice Director, Joint Staff

12

43


The Retired Officers Association vs Department of the Navy, Army, Air Force,
U.S.D.C.D.C. C.A. 88-2054. On 12 July 1989, summary judgment in favor of

plaintiff's 14 May 1990 motion for reconsideration in favor of both defendant and
plaintiffs’ 12 July 1990 protective notice of appeal by defendant; 29 August 1990
defendant withdrew appeal and case was closed. Record withheld consisted of home
addresses of retired officers and names and duty addresses of individuals assigned to
overseas areas, to routinely deployable units, and to units involved in classified or
sensitive operations. The remaining material withheld consisted of names and duty
addresses denied under exemption (b)(2) pursuant to DOD policy.

Yakubik, Andrew J. vs Department of the Air Force, CIA and NSA, U.S.D.C. SD, NV,
C.A. CV-S-90-354-PMP-LRL. Records withheld were denied under exemption (b)(1)(a).

On 24 August 1990, defendant’s motion to dismiss was granted.

NATIONAL SECURITY AGENCY/CENTRAL SECURITY SERVICE

American Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee ys United States Department of Justice,
et al., D.D.C. C.A. 88-0654. This FOIA suit sought access to information concerning

various Israeli organizations and individuals. NSA provided an unclassified declaration in
1989 and an in_camera declaration on 2 February 1990 to support exemption from
release of our information. The government’s motion for summary judgment was
granted on 21 March 1990.

Helmut Gaensel vs Central Intelligence Agency, S.D. FL C.A. 89-1610. Gaensel brought

suit against CIA for release of documents which pertain to himself and his gold mining
company. NSA provided a declaration in July 1990 to support the government’s
motion for summary judgment which was granted on 27 December 1990.

Ray Lindsey vs NSA, D. MD C.A. HM-87-1564. Plaintiff filed suit seeking records on
himself and various subjects, including the salvage of the Russian sub, Glomar Explorer.
The district court dismissed the case on 22 May 1990. The Fourth Circuit affirmed
the decision on 9 October 1990, except for the adequacy of the Agency’s search with
Tespect to the Assistant U.S. Attorney’s Office a motion for summary judgment and a
supporting unclassified declaration describing the record search.

Peck vs Federal Bureau of Investigation, N.D. OH C.A. C79-0846. Peck filed suit
seeking release of documents in the possession of the FBI regarding himself. NSA
became involved in the litigation when the FBI located Agency documents responsible
to Mr. Peck’s request. The plaintiff modified his complaint to seek only the documents
that disclosed acts of abuses or illegal activities by the government in relation to him.
The judge reviewed NSA’s classified declaration in camera and found that the Agency’s
documents did not meet the plaintiff’s criteria. NSA was dismissed from the case on
29 June 1990.

54



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.
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 "11 x 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:

60


Halgus, Joseph

Kelly, James A.

Fajans, Arthur

Ward, Katherine

Chase, E. J.

McDevitt, M. A.

Smith, Frederick C.

Jackson, Karl D.

Sokolski, Henry D.

Kahn, William

Caulfield, M. P.

Gottschalk, Geneese

Kline, John P.

LtCol

COL

RADM

Civ

Civ

Col

Assistant Director, European Policy,
Assistant Secretary of Defense,
International Security Policy

Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense,
International Affairs

Director, Security Plans and Programs,
Deputy Under Secretary of Defense for
Security Policy

Deputy Director, African Region, Assistant
Secretary of Defense, International Security
Affairs

Executive Assistant, Assistant Secretary of
Defense, Atomic Energy

Director, East Asia and Pacific Region,
Assistant Secretary of Defense,
International Security Affairs

Director, Near East and South Asian Region,
Assistant Secretary of Defense,
International Security Affairs

Deputy Assistant Secretary, East Asia and
Pacific Affairs, Assistant Secretary of
Defense, International Security Affairs

Deputy for Non-Proliferation Policy,
Assistant Secretary of Defense,
International Security Affairs

Director, Theater Nuclear Forces Policy,
Assistant Secretary of Defense,
International Security Policy

Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense,
International Affairs

Executive Assistant, Operational Test &
Evaluation

Military Assistant, Director Defense
Research and Engineering

14

10



Table of Contents

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

(a) Exemptions Invoked

(b) Statutes Invoked

(c) Other Reasons

Description of “Other Reasons"

Item 3 - Initial Denial Authorities by Participation
Item 4 - Appeal Determinations
Item 5 - Appeal Determinations

(a) Exemptions Invoked

(b) Statutes Invoked

(c) Other Reasons
Item 6 - Appeal Denial Authorities by Participation

Item 7 - Court Opinions and Actions Taken

Item 8 - Freedom of Information Act Implementation Rules or Regulations

Item 9 - Fee Schedule and Fees Collected
Item 10 - Administrative Efforts

(a) Availability of Records

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

(d) Other Information

PAGE

OIA

©

43



Hallsworth, Frederick

Hammond, T. A.

Harris, M.

Harrison, George B.

Hartung-Schuster,
Eckbert M.
Harvey, George C.
Haseltine, John E.
Heinke, Wayne R.

Hellier, Richard G.

Hellikson, Larry D.

Hodge, Clifford A.

Hopp, James W.

Hopson, Everett G.

Hudson, Ralph E.

Col

MGen

MGen

Col

Col

Col

Col

Col

Col

Col

MGen

LtCol

Director of Information Management,
Headquarters, Air Training Command.

Commander, Sacramento Air Logistics
Center, Air Force Logistics Command

Vice Commander, Oklahoma City Air
Logistics Center, Air Force Logistics
Command .

Assistant Chief of Staff, Studies and
Analysis, Headquarters, United States Air
Force

Chief of Staff, Headquarters, Air Force
Inspection and Safety Center

Vice Commander, Air Force District of
Washington

Acting Deputy Inspector General, Office,
Secretary of the Air Force

Director of Information Management,
Headquarters, Air Force Space Command.

Acting Deputy Inspector General, Office,
Secretary of the Air Force

Chief of Staff, Air Force Contract
Management Division, Air Force Systems
Command

Chief of Staff, Air Force Special Operations
Command

Acting Deputy Chief of Staff, Logistics and
Engineering, Headquarters, United States Air
Force

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

Deputy Chief of Staff, Information

Management, Headquarters, Air Force Office
of Special Investigations

35

59

198

40

77

18

14



“GL weqy req;0 Teuuoszedys
“seTaNp Tog euy-gzed zo eurrz-TTNg peubysee Teuuoszedy

Os" LEL ‘LOS SL'SEZ‘ZOVS —-9H"EDT’BOTS = HT "SED ‘EZS SL*LLO‘O9E‘TS [rrr nzya I] #3800 TRIO] “AT
00°08 00°08 00°0$ 00°0$ 00°60L$ pessecora sysenbey eupancy Jo 30D “IIT
00°O2T ‘98 00°0SP ‘LTS SL“00L‘z$ 6P'S6T‘TS 0S" L6S‘L8z$ [It +H] Teaon -c
00°pzz ‘TS 00°06) ES ST“opss Ot 6ezs Os"6TS’LS$ [H x 357] peeyreso “I
007968 ‘DS 00°096 ‘ETS 09° 09T ‘zg 6E“956$ 00°8L0‘0Ezs [o nua ¥) Tea07qns -H
00°0$ 0070 ot'eess 00° 01S 00° Tee ‘s¢ z©q70 "9
00°9s 00°0$ 00°0$ zyets 00° L69$ sTepzeqeH TensTsotpny “a
00°0$ 00°0$ 00°0$ 00°0$ 00°9€6 ‘ZL8 Adog zeqndwop -x
00° pzg 00°0$ 00°08 zeus 00°989 ‘6S sprocey pequTza “a
00°0$ 00°08 00°0$ 00°08 00088 ‘zz$ uoTzonpordey eYOTSOIOTH “OD
00°8ZL‘¥: 00°6S0'6$ 0S "609 ‘TS SPTLLLS 00°€L0 ‘TEs woyzonpordey Adep eoTs30 “a
00° OPTS 00° 106 ‘PS 00"ets OE EpTs 00°Szy ‘Les euTL yorees zeqnduog -y
S380D peqeTey-eseD 7eqI0 “IT
OS" LT9 ‘T9$ GL'SBL‘VBES  TL'ZHH‘SOTS = SO-ZPH ‘zz SZ*TLL‘TLO‘“TS (a nxq3 a] TeI0L “x
os" €ze ‘ZT$ GL°LS6‘9LS ¥S"880 ‘TZ$ es" eep ‘ys SZ*YSE‘DTZS [esz x (9 + @)] peeqreso -a
00° 962 ‘6rS 00°900 srs LT“€98 ‘62S ZZ" 906 ‘OTS 00 zee ‘osTs [(s) nzua (1)] TeI0L(9)
00°2zs ‘6s 00°08 0€"L90 ‘TS Z0"00z ‘ES seTatataoy zeq30(¢)
007618 ‘TS 00°SL0‘zz$ GL°ELLS 0006s 00°ZT0‘zTs voyqeredezg wrog/eouepucdserz0p (p)
00°ZLS ‘98 00°0$ 8S" TLY ‘OTS Os" LT8 ‘es 00°89 ‘LTS Teaorddy » wop3euTpz0cp (¢)
00°Ev0’szs 00880 ‘S$ 6L°SZ0 ‘OTS 00°6L8‘TS 00° Ts0 ‘6s$ buystoxg 3 setae (Z)
00°8Lz‘9$ 00°€b8 ‘LTS GL 92S ‘TS OL LTD ‘TS 00°H6T ‘PLS ewTE yorees (T)
+4 (s03@E ETNPEUDS ee,
Kzobez"9 fq 9380p Tnoquey peyeuT3sa “OD
00°0$ 00"sze‘z9z$ = 00" T6W ‘PSs 06°60 ‘LS 00°S€0‘LL9$ #380 zeekueq “a
° 9 sz To Lt sezeeKuey peqeuTasz “W
sys00 Teuuoszea “I
goa’sto SS0/¥SN yg wa vig @NTLLAO Ls0o

s\so) wuresso1g JOA
(pauoD) (OT wart

77



Assistant Deputy Chief of Staff for
Operations and Plans

Director, Procurement Policy, Office of the
Assistant Secretary of the Navy (Research,
Development and Acquisition)

Public Affairs Officer, United States Atlantic
Fleet

Public Affairs Officer, United States Atlantic
Fleet

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

Commander, Submarine Force, United States
Atlantic Fleet

Commander, Submarine Force, United States
Atlantic Fleet

Chief of Staff, Submarine Force, United
States Atlantic Fleet

Acting Chief of Staff, Submarine Force,
United States Atlantic Fleet

Deputy Chief of Staff for
Management/Inspector General, United
States Pacific Fleet

Deputy Chief of Staff for Operations/Plans,
United States Pacific Fleet

Deputy Chief of Staff for Operations/Plans,
United States Pacific Fleet

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

Granrud, Jerome H. MG
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
Cammack, E. G. Civ
Hanley, P.W. CAPT
Pease, K. CAPT
Rose, S. A. CDR
Bacon, R. F. VADM
Chiles, H. G. VADM
Ellis, W.G. CAPT
Jordan, J. F. CAPT
Lautenbachter, C. C. CAPT
Bennett, D. M. RADM
Bull, L. F, RADM
Selfridge, H. E. CAPT
Sussilleaux, J. F. CAPT

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

23

13


CY 1990 FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT
ANNUAL REPORT

SUMMARY

A total of 118,532 public requests for records under the Freedom of Information Act
(FOIA) were processed during 1990 by the Department of Defense. This, compared
with an average annual case load of 78,152 for the years 1977-1989, the reporting
period since the act was amended, is roughly 52% above average.

The Department of Defense initially denied 9,737 out of 118,532 requests on the
basis of FOIA exemptions. Of those initially denied requests, 10% were for classified
information; 10% for internal rules and practices; 4% for statutory exemption; 11%
for proprietary data; 20% for deliberative material; 23% for privacy information; and
22% for law enforcement investigations. An additional 27,670 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 980 appeals of denied requests, 55 of which were fully granted, 191
partially granted, and 544 denied.

The total DoD operating costs associated with these requests were $21,361,244.38.
The average cost of processing a single case during 1990 was approximately $180. Fee
collections for records provided to the public amounted to $1,450,693.27.

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


Ttem6
Appeal Denial Authorities by Participation

Name Rank Title Number of
Instances
OSD/JS
Williams, Pete Civ Assistant Secretary of Defense (Public 37
Affairs)
Taylor, Robert W. Civ Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary of 4
Defense (Public Affairs)
DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY

Gamboa, Anthony H. Civ Deputy General Counsel for Acquisition,
Office of the Army General Counsel

Peck, Darrell Civ Deputy General Counsel for Military & Civil
Affairs, Office of the Army General Counsel

Reres, Matt Civ Special Assistant General Counsel for Fiscal
Law, Office of the Army General Counsel

Taylor, Thomas W. Civ Deputy General Counsel for Installations and
Operations, Office of the Army General
Counsel

Dickman, Verlin P. COL General Counsel, Army & Air Force
Exchange Service

Willcher, Emest M. Civ Acting Deputy General Counsel for Military
& Civil Affairs, Office of the Army General
Counsel

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

King, C. S. Civ General Counsel

Beach, C. P. Civ _ Principal Deputy General Counsel

Geer, J. J., Jr. CAPT Assistant JAG (Civil Law)

47

10

154

39
57


Cassity, J. E.

Hamilton, F. X.

Brickley, J. P.

Grinalds, J. S.M

Shuter, D. V.

Underwood, J. E.

Lucas, W. J.

Huckaby, R. H.

Neil, M. I.

Mahady, F. J., Jr.

Damon, D. E.

Yoder, R. W.

Collins, D. W.

Duncan J. K.

Bayer, R. A., Jr.

MajGen

MajGen

BGen

MajGen

BGen
Col

Col

BGen

Col

Col

Commanding General, Marine Corps
Logistics Base, Albany, GA

Commanding General, Marine Corps
Logistics Base, Albany, GA

Commanding General, Marine Corps
Logistics Base, Albany, GA

Commanding General, Marine Corps Recruit
Depot, Western Recruiting Region

Commander, Marine Corps Air Bases, West
Commander, Marine Corps Air Bases, West

Staff Judge Advocate, Marine Corps Air
Bases, West

Commanding General, Marine Corps Base,
Camp Pendleton, CA

Commanding General, Marine Corps Base,
Camp Pendleton, CA

Base Commander, Marine Corps Base, Camp
Pendleton, CA

Chief of Staff, Marine Corps Base Camp,
Camp Butler

Command Adjutant, Marine Corps Combat
Development Command, Quantico, VA

Assistant Chief of Staff Manpower, Marine
Corps Base, Camp Lejuene, NC

Management Assistant Officer, Cherry
Point, NC

Management Assistant Officer, Cherry
Point, NC

31

12


Connelly, Richard J.

Knapp, Thomas J.
Aldermann, Lloyd
Lenius, Harlan J.
Gordon, William V.

Scott, Robert P.

Ressler, A.

Tucker, Gary C.

Perry, Crollyn

Miarecki, Edward A.

Creel, J. C.

Cashman, James F.

Musgrave, A. W.

Grosse, Vinson G.

Thomson, John

Miller, Kenneth

Parson, Donald F.

Holland, Francis B.

Civ

Col

Col

BG

BGen

Comptroller 5
Assistant Director 6
Staff Director 1
Staff Director 1
Executive Director 2
Special Assistant, Defense Contract 4
Management Center

Deputy Staff Director 2
Commander, Defense Logistics Agency 6
Administrative Support Center

Associate General Counsel 1
Associate General Counsel 2
Commander, Defense Distribution Region - 5
West

Commander, Defense Contract Management 7

District - Northwest

Commander, Defense Contract Management 10
District - Mid-Atlantic

Commander, Defense Contract Management 10
District - South

Commander, Defense Contracting 1
Administration Services Region - New York

Commander, Defense Contracting 5
Administration Services Region - West

Commander, Defense Contracting 3
Administration Services Region - St Louis

Commander, Defense Contracting 11

Administration Services Region - North
Central

40


Stone, T. E.

Kordalski, R. E.

Hauck, F. H.

Davis, W. J., Jr.
Malley, K. C.

Peters, R. K.

Catenaccio, F. T.

Marname, J. P.
Disher, J. S.
Conner, E. D.

Barnes, F. J.

Luke, J. D.

Hinson, T. P.

Jakubiak, T. F.

Wilmot, L. C.

Knutson, R. A.

Peters, R. K.

RADM

RADM
RADM
Civ

Civ

VADM
RADM

Director, Naval
Communications/Information Systems
Division (OP-941)

Director, Command and Control and
Electronics Warfare Systems Division
(OP-942)

Director, Navy Space Systems Division
(OP-943)

Commandant, Naval District Washington
Director, Strategic Systems Programs

Director, Office of Civilian Personnel
Management

Director, Office of Civilian Personnel
Management

Dean of Administration, Naval War College
Chief of Naval Education and Training
Vice Chief of Naval Education and Training

Commander, Naval Education and Training
Center, Newport

Commander, Naval Education and Training
Center, Newport

Deputy Chief of Naval Technical Training

Staff Judge Advocate, Chief of Naval Air
Training

Commander, Naval Training Center, Orlando

Commander, Naval Training Center, San
Diego

Acting Commander, Naval Training Center,
San Diego

26


Sharkey, William, Jr.

Dominguez, Michael

Byron, Michael J.

Marshall, Andrew W.

Epstein, David F.

Bryen, Stephen D.

Johnson, D. S.

Crouch, J. D.

Schulte, Gregory L.

Joseph, Robert G.

Rudd, Glenn A.

Dubreuil, John E.

Wright, William A.

Civ

Director, Program Support, Assistant
Secretary of Defense, Productions &
Logistics

Executive Assistant, Assistant Secretary of
Defense, Program Analysis & Evaluation

Director, Inter-American Region, Assistant
Secretary of Defense, International Security
Affairs

Director, Net Assessment
Deputy Director, Net Assessment

Deputy Under Secretary of Defense, Trade
Security Policy

Director, European Policy, Assistant
Secretary of Defense, International Security
Policy

Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary of
Defense, International Security Policy

Director, Strategic Forces Policy, Assistant
Secretary of Defense, International Security
Policy

Deputy Assistant Secretary, Nuclear Forces
and Arms Control Policy, Assistant
Secretary of Defense, International Security
Policy

Deputy Director, Defense Security
Assistance Agency

Director, Office of Industrial Base
Assessment, Assistant Secretary of Defense,
Production & Logistics

Military Assistant, Assistant Secretary of
Defense, Production & Logistics

10

12

40


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 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."

(i) 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.

ii) The pri interest in disclos Once a requester’s commercial
q'

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
Tequester’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

62


Ttem 10(c)

I i} II & IItr i}
Component Unusual Circumstances i} Court | Total

Location Volume Consultation | Involvement |
OsD/JS 1 298 1421 | o | 1,720
DEPT ARMY 117 168 56 | 1s] 342
DEPT NAVY 33 429 22 =| ool 484
DEPT AIR FORCE 6 717 168 | o 4 891
DCA 3 3 24 ol 8
DCAA 4 3 3 04 0 | 10
DIA 25 404 35 1 0 | 464
DIS 0 6 ool | 6
DLA 310 387 123) «| 0 | 820
DMA 1 5 4 | Cn 10
DNA 41 17 75 | ool 133
NSA/CSS 0 300 7 1 o | 307
OIG, DOD 0 305 1201 o | 317
DoD Totals 541 3,042 1,928 | 1s) 5,512

78


McCoy, D. F. CAPT Assistant JAG (Civil Law)

Turner, P. C. CAPT Assistant JAG (Civil Law), Acting

McBride, R. M. CAPT Assistant JAG (Civil Law), Acting
DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE

Davidson, William A. Civ Deputy Administrative Assistant, Office of
the Secretary of the Air Force

DEFENSE CONTRACT AUDIT AGENCY
van Santen, John Civ Assistant Director, Resources

DEFENSE INTELLIGENCE AGENCY

Nagy, D. M. Civ _ Executive Director
Prombain, L. A. Civ Acting Executive Director
Negus, G. Civ Executive Director

DEFENSE INVESTIGATIVE SERVICE
Donnelly, John F. Civ _ Director

DEFENSE LOGISTICS AGENCY
McCausland, Charles LGen Director

Henry, Charles R. MG Deputy Director (Acquisition Management)
DEFENSE MAPPING AGENCY
Obloy, Edward J. Civ General Counsel

NATIONAL SECURITY AGENCY/CENTRAL SECURITY SERVICE

Young, Gerald R. Civ Deputy Director
Devine, John P. Civ Deputy Director
Prestel, Robert L. Civ Deputy Director

48

65
17

16

204

22

12

11


Item7
Court Opinions and Actions Taken

OSD/JS

Willens (Siemer) vs DOD, et. al.,U.S.D.C. D.C. C.A. 88-1212. Plaintiff sought various
documents relating to the Marianas Islands. Plaintiff dismissed action with prejudice on
6 June 1990.

BMY, Division of Harsco Corporation vs DoD, D.C. Middle District of PA C.A.
90-1329. Plaintiff sought release of Letter of Offer and Acceptance (LOA) between
the government of Austria and the DoD for the manufacture, test, and delivery of 24
M109A2 howitzers. Case mooted in September 1990 upon discovery that the LOA
had been released to BMY by U.S. government personnel in Austria.

DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY

Fox vs Department of the Army, E.D. MI C.A. 89-CV-71757-DT. Plaintiff requested
that the Army Corps of Engineers release all judgments or determinations, orders
requiring payment of penalties or fines, and orders of dismissal or settlement
agreements arising out of actions filed against any party alleged to have violated
wetland protection laws and regulations. On 10 January 1990 the parties stipulated to
the dismissal of the case without prejudice to plaintiff seeking attorney fees.
Subsequently, the court held that plaintiff was not automatically entitled to attorney
fees just because some of the requested documents were produced after plaintiff filed
suit.

Journal-Gazette Company, Inc. vs U.S. Department of the Army, N.D. IN C.A. F
89-147. On 8 January 1990 the court granted plaintiff's motion for summary

judgment in this challenge to our refusal to release a coroner’s report, autopsy results,
and other records concerning the death of pilot in an aircraft accident. The court held
that the plaintiff’s request met the underlying purpose of the FOIA to allow public
scrutiny of government action and that the public interest in disclosure of the records
outweighs the minimal privacy interests of the deceased’s next of kin.

Mantooth vs Department of the Army, D.D.C. C.A. 88-3503. Plaintiff, a real estate
broker, challenged the denial of his request for officer assignment instructions. On 12
October 1990, the parties stipulated that the case be dismissed without prejudice, with
each side to bear its own costs and fees. This disposition followed the decision not to
seek certiorari in Schwaner vs Department of the Air Force, 898 F. 2d 793 (D.C. Cir.
1990), which held that FOIA Exemption (b)(2) did not justify withholding a roster of
names and duty addresses of enlisted personnel at Bolling Air Force Base. Thus, we
will release the list of names and duty addresses sought in this case, excluding those
personnel assigned to sensitive or routinely deployable units.

50



Anderson, Maynard C.

Daniel, Ted

Ledesma, Richard

Ello, John V.

Janssen, Daniel F.

Vinson, Deborah

Ryan, Lois

Miller, Franklin C.

Graham, Douglas

loffredo, Michael L.

Coll, Alberto

Wigg, David G.

Maresca, John J.

Civ

Civ

Civ

Civ

Assistant Deputy Under Secretary of
Defense, Counterintelligence and Security

Director, Directorate for Management,
Assistant Secretary of Defense, Public
Affairs

Director, Weapons Systems Assessments,
Director, Defense Research and Engineering

Executive Director, Defense Science Board

Assistant Director Management Oversight,
Strategic Defense Initiative Operations

Director, Management Operations, Strategic
Defense Initiative Organization

Deputy Director, Management Operations,
Strategic Defense Initiative Organization

Deputy Assistant Secretary, Nuclear Forces
and Arms Control Policy, Assistant
Secretary of Defense, International Security

Policy

Deputy Assistant Secretary, Strategic
Defense Space & Verification Policy,
Assistant Secretary of Defense,
International Security Policy

Deputy Assistant Secretary, Strategic
Programs, Assistant Secretary of Defense,
Program Analysis & Evaluation

Deputy Assistant Secretary, Policy &
Requirements, Assistant Secretary of
Defense, Special Operations/Low Intensity
Conflict

Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense,
Policy Analysis

Deputy Assistant Secretary, European &

NATO Policy, Assistant Secretary of
Defense, International Security Policy

13

18