Stremple, John L. Civ Director, Department of Defense Dependents
Schools

Stringer, J. K., Jr Col Executive Assistant to the DoD Comptroller

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

Trosch, H. Dennis Civ Assistant General Counsel (Logistics), Gen-
eral Counsel

Viccellio, Henry, Jr. LtGen _ Director, Joint Staff

Vinson, Deborah Civ Management Operations, Strategic Defense
Initiative Organization

Yamanaka, Bill T. LCDR Deputy Chief, Public Affairs, On-Site Inspec-
tion Agency

White, Maurice Civ Staff Attorney, General Counsel

Wilson, Craig Civ Director, Intelligence Policy and Planning,
Assistant Secretary of Defense (Command,
Control, Communications & Intelligence)

Woods, James L. Civ Deputy Assistant Secretary (African
Affairs), Assistant Secretary of Defense
(International Security Affairs)

Woods, Roy S., Jr. Civ Chief, Congressional Actions and Internal
Reports, Directorate of Acquisition Policy
& Programs Integration

Wright, William A. CDR Military Assistant, Assistant Secretary of
Defense (Production & Logistics)

Zimble, James A. Civ President, Uniformed Services University of
the Health Sciences

DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY

Hamilton, Milton H. Civ Administrative Assistant, Office of the Sec-
Tetary of the Army

Howerd, Robert T. BG Director, Operations and Support, Office of

the Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Army
for Budget

16

28


McFalls, John O., III

McNamara, Roger T.

McGinty, Michael D.

Meseserli, Glenn E.

Milam, David W.

Miller, Brian D.

Miller, Judy A.

Mock, James W., III

Monsour, Lawrence F.

Moorman, William A.

Morrison, William B.

Nibbelin, Denis R.

Oakes, Howard J.

Olschner, C. E.

Col

BrigGen

Col

Col

LtCol

Col

Col

Col

Col

Col

Col

Col

Deputy Director, Office of Legislative Liai-
son, Office, Secretary of the Air Force

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

Vice Commander, Headquarters, Air Force
Military Personnel Center

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

Chief of Staff, Aeronautical Systems Divi-
sion, Headquarters, Air Force Systems Com-
mand

Director of Information Management, Head-
quarters, Air Force Communications Com-
mand

Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary of the
Air Force (Manpower, Reserve Affairs,
Installations and Environment), Office, Sec-
retary of the Air Force

Chief of Staff, Headquarters, Electronic
Security Command

Director of Information Management, Head-
quarters, Air Training Command

Acting Staff Judge Advocate, Headquarters,
Strategic Air Command

Deputy Inspector General, Office, Secretary
of the Air Force

Director of Information Management, Head-
quarters, Air Force Systems Command

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

Vice Commander, 16AF, Headquarters,
United States Air Forces in Europe

37

54

41

74

21

70

17

31

16


Behr, Stephen E. Maj
Bennett, Stephen LtCol
Birkner, John H. Col
Boles, Billy LtGen
Bracken, E. R. MajGen
Buethe, Robert A. MajGen
Chambers, James Gen
Clapper, James R. MajGen.
Cooper, J. G. Civ
Creller, Bruce O. Col

Cropper, Thomas L. LtCol

Cunningham, A. J. LtCol

Davidson, Alexander MajGen

Davis, James C. LtCol

Acting Director of Information Manage-
ment, Headquarters, Military Airlift Com-
mand

Director, Distance Support Services, Head-
quarters, Air Force Intelligence Support

Agency

Vice Commander, Headquarters, Air Force
Intelligence Agency

Deputy Chief of Staff, Personnel, Headquar-
ters, United States Air Force

Chief of Staff, Headquarters, Air Force
Logistics Command

Deputy Surgeon General, Headquarters
United States Air Force

Commander, 17AF, Headquarters, United
States Air Forces in Europe

Assistant Chief of Staff, Intelligence, Head-
quarters, United States Air Force

Assistant Secretary of the Air Force (Man-
power, Reserve Affairs, Installations and
Environment), Office, Secretary of the Air
Force

Chief of Staff, Headquarters, Air Force
Military Personnel Center

Acting Chief of Staff, Human Systems Divi-
sion, Headquarters, Air Force Systems Com-
mand.

Acting Staff Judge Advocate, Headquarters,

Strategic Air Command

Commander, Headquarters, Air Force Inspec-
tion and Safety Center

Deputy Chief of Staff/Mission Support,

Headquarters, Air Force Office of Special
Investigations

33

14

10

79

16



Kobernus, George M. Col Commander, Defense Logistics Services Cen-
ter

Agnor, Raymond M., Col Commander, Defense Reutilization and Mar-

Jr. keting Services

Stewart, John N. COL Commander, Defense Reutilization and Mar-
keting Services

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

McCoy, Ray BG Commander,

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

Hekman, J. G. RADM Commander, Defense General Supply Center

DEFENSE MAPPING AGENCY

Rose, Charles Col Chief of Staff

Sluis, James Col Chief of Staff

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

NATIONAL SECURITY AGENCY/CENTRAL SECURITY SERVICE

Gronet, Richard W.

Smith, Michael A.

Civ

Civ

Director of Policy, Office of Policy

Director of Policy, Office of Policy

OFFICE OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL, DOD

Charters, Jane T.

Civ

Director, Investigative Support

42

97

20

31

243

56

57



Bracken, Edward R.

Brown, Charles W.

Burke, Jerome J.

Campbell, D. M.

Caudill, L. L.

Chase, E. J.

Coll, Alberto

Concannon, James P.

Cooke, D.O.

Covais, R. T.

Crouch, Jack D., II

Daniel, Ted

Deegan, G. A.

DeMinico, Joseph T.

Dominguez, Raymond.

LTG

Col

Civ

Col

Civ

Chief of Staff, Air Force Logistics Com-
mand

Director, Defense Security Assistance
Agency

Executive Assistant, Assistant Secretary of
Defense (Command, Control, Communica-
tions & Intelligence)

Executive Officer, Defense Security Assis-
tance Agency

Administrative Officer, Defense Security
Assistance Agency

Executive Assistant, Assistant to the Secre-
tary of Defense (Atomic Energy)

Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary of
Defense (Special Operations & Low Intensity
Conflict)

Director, Manpower, Personnel and Adminis-
tration, United States Southern Command

Director, Administration and Management

Military Assistant, Assistant Secretary of
Defense (International Security Affairs)

Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary of
Defense (International Security Policy)

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

Vice Director, Joint Staff

Deputy Chief of Staff, United States Cen-
tral Command

Deputy Assistant Secretary (Forces &
Resources), Assistant Secretary of Defense
(Special Operations & Low-Intensity Con-
flict)

10

17

18

13

11

52


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. Ail
reasonable costs as used in this sense are the full costs to the Federal Government of
rendering the service, or fair market value of the service, whichever is higher. Fair
market value shall be determined in accordance with commercial rates in the local
geographical area. In the absence of a known market value, charges shall be based on
recovery of full costs to the Federal Government. The full costs shall include all direct
and indirect costs to conduct the search and to duplicate the records responsive to the
request. This cost is to be differentiated from the direct costs allowable under Section
2 of this Chapter for other types of information released under the FOIA.

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

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

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

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

c. Fee Rates
1. Search Time

(i) Manual Search

Type Grade Hourly Rate ($)
Clerical E9/GS8 and below 13.25
(Minimum Charge) 8.30

70

_



Colonial Trading Corp. v. Department of the Navy, D.C. CA No. 87-1406 GHR, Judge
Revercomb. The Memorandum Decision and Order dated 5 Apr 90 granted Navy’s
Motion for Summary Judgment. The court held that Navy was entitled to rely upon
exemption (b)(3) - 10 USC 130 and the Arms Export Control Act to withhold
unclassified technical data. The court also rejected Plaintiff’s arguments that 15 USC
637b requires release of MK-46 torpedo technical data since Plaintiff only builds spare
parts for torpedoes, not entire torpedoes or that Plaintiff is an alternative responsible
source under the Competition in Contracting Act. On 26 Oct 90, Plaintiff appealed the
judgment of the court to the U. S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia.

The Plaintiff withdrew its appeal on 19 Feb 91.

Kirk Brothers Mechanical Contractors, Inc. v. Department of the Navy, U. S. District
Court, Eastern District of Pennsylvania, CA No. 90-0486, U. S. Court of Appeals,
Third Circuit, 90-1564. The Northern Division, Naval Facilities Engineering Command
had an injunctive and declaratory relief case filed on 23 Feb 90 on the theory of
violation of the Administrative Procedures Act, 5 U. S. C. 701 et. seq. The suit also
alleged violations of rights to free speech, and petitioned the courts for redress and
due process under the 1st and Sth amendments of the U. S. Constitution. The motion
filed on 19 Mar 90 requested the court to enjoin the Navy from withholding records
requested under FOIA, to order immediate production of the documents, and to assess
attorney’s fees and costs as a result of untimely processing of a FOIA request for
information relating to five contracts. On 12 Jun 90, a court order was issued
dismissing Plaintiff’s motion for sanctions. On 26 Jun 90, the court issued an order
dismissing the case for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. On 24 Jul 90, Kirk
Brothers filed a Notice of Appeal to the Third Circuit Court of Appeals. On 18 Jan
91, the Third Circuit Court of Appeals issued a judgment order affirming the lower
court’s decision.

Project on Military Procurement v. Department of the Navy, D.C. CA No. 88-2130,
Judge Stanley Sporkin. Memorandum Opinion dated 10 Apr 89 granted Plaintiff's
Motion for Summary Judgment resulting in granting Plaintiffs request for the fee
waiver because "the information sought can contribute to the public understanding.”
The court order dated 7 May 91 awarded to Plaintiff its attorney’s fees and expenses
in an amount over $10,000.

Caryl A. Potter III, Esquire v. Department of the Navy, CA No. 88-1850 GHR, Judge
Revercomb. This was an Open America case. The case was dismissed on 12 Mar 91
after the Naval Sea Systems Command processed the four requests. The Stipulation of
Dismissal was made without prejudice, with each party to bear its own costs and
attorney’s fees.

Falzone v. Department of the Navy, CA No. 85-3862, D.C. Circuit. Pro se Plaintiff
sought list of all Marine officers transferring to Pensacola, Florida, from overseas or
from deployable service units. Government Motion for Summary Judgment was
granted on the grounds that the requested lists were exempt from release under
exemption (b)(6) - personal privacy. Final district court decisions were entered on 21
Nov 86, but stayed as a result of Washington Post v. U. S. Department of State.
Supplemental brief was filed on 23 Jul 90. Case was dismissed on 3 Jun 91 since the

52



Item 7

Court Opinions and Actions Taken .

OSD/JS
None
DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY

Carney vy. CIA, No. 88-0602-MRP, C.D. CA, 15 Feb 91. Plaintiff sought documents
concerning the alleged capture, torture, and execution of her father (James F. Carney)
by members of Honduran armed forces in September 1983. The government withheld
the documents under FOIA exemption 1. On 15 February 1991, the district court
adopted the findings of the Magistrate and granted the government’s motion for

summary judgment.

Hudson v. Department of the Army, No. 87-01114, D.C. Cir., 26 Feb 91. Plaintiff,
an insurance agent, sought release of a computer tape with name, address, and other :
information about all active motor vehicle registrants in Europe. The Army withheld |
disclosure consistent with policy not to release unit addresses for personnel assigned . |
to units that are sensitive, routinely deployable, or stationed overseas. On 26 .
February, the Court of Appeals, District of Columbia Circuit Court, affirmed the
district court’s reliance on FOIA exemption 6, to deny plaintiff’s demand for the
documents. The court accepted the Army’s argument that release of the information
would be a clearly unwarranted invasion of privacy because of the terrorism threat
faced by overseas soldiers.

Myles-Pirzada v. Department of the Army, No. 91-1080, D.D.C., filed 13 May 91.
FOIA suit arising out of plaintiff’s request for redacted portions of a National Guard
Bureau Inspector General’s report about plaintiff’s involuntary transfer to an inactive
status. Plaintiff was a major in the District of Columbia National Guard. The
Inspector General redacted the report based on FOIA exemption 5. During the
litigation, the Army learned that the District of Columbia National Guard Inspector
General read plaintiff portions of the withheld documents. The Army subsequently
released those documents to plaintiff. The Army’s motion for summary judgment for
the remaining documents is pending.

National Guard Association v. National Guard Bureau, No. 91-0673, D.D.C., filed 1
Apr 91. Plaintiff requested roster or magnetic tape listing name, pay grade, home
address or unit and installation of every officer in the Army and Air National Guard
residing in the United States. Based on decision in Schwaner v. Department of the Air
Force, the government released the requested information and plaintiff dismissed its
lawsuit.

50



COMPONENT

DOCUMENT IDENTIFICATION

CFR. REF.

DIS

DISA

DLA

DMA

DNA

NSA/CSS

OIG/DOD

"Defense Investigative Service Freedom of
Information Practices"

"Defense Communications Agency (DCA)
Freedom of Information Act Program"

“Defense Logistics Agency (DLA) Freedom

of Information Act Program"

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

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

“Public Access to Records"

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

56

32 CFR 298b, as amd
by FR Vol 53, No.
185, 23 Sep 88
(Pending Revision)

32 CFR 287, as amd
by FR Vol 55, No.
151, 6 Aug 90 (Pend-
ing Revision)

32 CFR 1285, as amd
by FR Vol 56, No.
242, 17 Dec 91

32 CFR 286i and

293, as amd by FR

Vol 56, No. 111, 10

Jun 91; and FR Vol

56, No. 227, 25 Nov 7
91 *

32 CFR 291, as amd
by FR Vol 56, No.
46, 8 Mar 91 (Pending
Revision)

32 CFR 299, as amd
by FR Vol 56, No.
72, 15 Apr 91

32 CFR 295, as amd
by FR Vol 56, No.
190, 1 Oct 91 |



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 Compo-
nent 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 deter-
mined against the salary scale of the individual operating the computer for the purposes -
of the search. As an example, when the direct costs of the computer central processing
unit, input-output devices, and memory capacity equal $24.00 (two hours of equivalent
search at the clerical level), amounts of computer costs in excess of that amount are
chargeable as computer search time.

6-103 Fee Waivers

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

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

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

1, Disclosure of the information "is in the public interest because it is

likely to contribute significantly to public understanding of the operations or activities
of the Government."

60



Ttem 6

Appeal Denial Authorities by Participation

Name Rank Title Number
Pastances
OSD/JS
Williams, Pete Civ Assistant Secretary of Defense (Public 13
Affairs)
Taylor, Robert W. Civ Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary of 4
Defense (Public Affairs)
DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
Grayson, William E. Civ _ Principal Deputy General Counsel, Office of 59

Gamboa, Anthony H. Civ

the Army General Counsel

Deputy General Counsel (Acquisition), Office 19

of the Army General Counsel
Peck, Darrell L. Civ _ Deputy General Counsel (Military & Civil 41
Affairs), Office of the Army General Coun-
sel
Reres, Matt Civ Deputy General Counsel (Fiscal Law & Pol- 16
icy), Office of the Army General Counsel
Taylor, Thomas W. Civ Deputy General Counsel (Installations & 37
Operations), Office of the Army General
Counsel
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
| Beach, C. P. Civ _ Principal Deputy General Counsel 25
| Wilcox, H. J. Civ _ Deputy General Counsel (Logistics) 25
| McCoy, D. F. CAPT Assistant JAG (Civil Law) 123
Geer, J. J., Jr. CAPT Principal Deputy Assistant JAG (Operations 3
& Management)

48



Gaines, Toni M.

Major, William J., Jr.

Berry, Peter T.

Lamy, Joel R.

Speakman, Hank

Walsh, Robert J., Jr.

Petrilli, F. J., Jr.

Korte, Edward J.

Kullman, Thomas M.

Phillips, Zane

Downhour, O. Wayne

Reimer, Dennis J.

Hennies, C. A.

Pongonis, James A.

LTC

Civ

Civ

LTG

BG

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

Chief of Staff, United States Army Commu-
nity and Family Support Center

Commander, United States Army Criminal
Investigation Command

Commander, United States Army Health
Services Command Acquisition Activity

Principal Assistant Responsible for Con-
tracting, United States Army Information
Systems Command

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

Director, Administrative Operations Sup-
port, United States Army Information Sys-
tems Command-Pentagon

Command Counsel, United States Army
Materiel Command

Staff Judge Advocate, United States Army
Materiel Command

Principal Assistant Responsible for Con-
tracting, United States Army Strategic
Defense Command

Principal Assistant Responsible for Con-
tracting, United States Army Training and
Doctrine Command

Deputy Chief of Staff for Operations and
Plans

Commander, United States Army Safety
Center

Deputy Commander, United States Army
Safety Center

20

15

493

554

83

40

‘231

17

18

115



O’Brien, William E.

O’Lear, Richard J.
O'Neal, S. A.
Palau, J.

Parker, Charles W.

Pavich, M. D.

Peterson, Richard A.

Peura, Edwin A.
Profitt, Glen A., IT

Pugh, L. G.

Rak, Daniel S.
Ramsey, Joseph C., Jr.
Ramsey, Stephen F.
Rhoden, Harold H.
Riddick, Richard R.

Robertson, H. E.

Col

MajGen

Civ

Civ

Col
MajGen

Civ

Col

BrigGen

Civ

Civ

Col

Civ

BrigGen

Col

BrigGen

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

Assistant Chief of Staff, Intelligence, Head-
quarters, United States Air Force

Executive Assistant, Sacramento Air Logis-
tics Center, Air Force Logistics Command

Executive Assistant, Sacramento Air Logis-
tics Center, Air Force Logistics Command

Commander, Air Force Safety Agency

Commander, Sacramento Air Logistics Cen-
ter, Air Force Logistics Command

Acting Chief, General Law Division, Office
of the Judge Advocate General, Headquar-
ters, United States Air Force

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

Commander, 17AF, Headquarters United
States Air Forces in Europe

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 Per-
sonnel Center

Chief of Staff, Headquarters, Air Reserve
Personnel Center

Deputy Inspector General, Office, Secretary
of the Air Force

Commander, 3AF, Headquarters, United
States Air Forces in Europe

Director, Public Affairs, Office, Secretary
of the Air Force

38

38

20

27

59

56

14



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 Rat
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.

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

69



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, IIIT
Dept Air Force Secretary of the Air Force Hon Donald B. Rice
DCAA Defense Contract Audit Agency Mr. William H. Reed
DFAS Defense Finance and Accounting Mr. Albert V. Conte
Service
DIA Defense Intelligence Agency Lt Gen James R.
Clapper, USAF
DIS Defense Investigative Service Mr. John F. Donnelly
DISA Defense Information Systems Agency — LTG Alonzo E. Short,
Jr., USA
DLA Defense Logistics Agency Lt Gen Charles
McCausland, USAF
DMA Defense Mapping Agency Maj Gen 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, Mr. Derek J. Vander

Department of Defense

Schaaf


d. Other Technical Data Records

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

Minimum charge for office copy (up to six images) ........-----2e00e-
Each additional image ...................0000-

Each typewritten page.................
Certification and validation with seal, each...
Hand-drawn plots and sketches, each hour or fraction thereof

vePynr

72



~ Professional and Executive (To be established at actual hourly rate prior to

search. A minimum charge will be established at 1/2 hourly rates)

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

2. Duplication
Type

Aerial photographs,
specifications, permits,
charts, blueprints, and
other technical documents

Engineering data (microfilm)
7 a. Aperture cards

(i) Silver duplicate negative, per card
When key punched and verified, per
card

(ii) Diazo duplicate negative, per card
When key punched and verified,
per card

b. 35mm roll film, per frame

c. 16mm roll film, per frame

d. Paper prints (engineering drawings),
each

e. Paper reprints of microfilm indices,

3. Review Time

Type Grade
: Clerical E9/GS8 and below
- (Minimum Charge)

Cost
$2.50

75
85

65

50

1.50

10

Hourly Rate($)

13.25
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).

71



Ttem 10(b)
Calendar Year Costs and Fees Collected

Component. Annual Cost Fees Collected

osp/gs $1,807, 991.83 $25, 466.33

DEPT ARMY $8,053, 932.56 $405,086.17

DEPT NAVY $5,591,278.96 $388,415.00

DEPT AIR FORCE $5, 023,342.50 $412,892.00

DCAA $188,196.79 $3,913.40

DFAS $143,766.23 $1,464.44

DIA $340,587.59 $3,131.70

DIS $56,319.47 $206.91

DISA $99,546.16 $2,554.03

DLA $1, 638,503.75 $319, 668.00

DMA $49,194.34 $1,429.35

DNA $125, 669.19 $4,018.45 .

NSA/CSS $538,760.00 $21,396.00 z
OIG, DoD $305,080.30 $3,769.00

DoD Totals $23, 962,169.67 $1,593, 410.78 .

74



Mooberry, W. J.

Peters, R. K.

Catenaccio, F. T.

Spofford, B. A.

Jones, R. A.

Lohman, C. M.

Cook, T. P.

Lannom, C. R.

Carter, R. L.

Vitalie, J. S.

Riggs, R. K.

Scanlon, M. F.

Reese, H.

Damon, D. E.

Stennick, J. F.

Civ

Civ

Col

Civ

Col

Col

Col

Col

Chief of Staff, Naval Safety Center

Director, Office of Civilian Personnel Man-
agement

Director, Office of Civilian Personnel Man-
agement Northeast Region

Assistant Chief of Staff Operations, United
States Naval Academy

Executive Assistant, Naval Investigative Ser-
vice Command

Executive Assistant, Naval Investigative Ser-
vice Command.

Staff Judge Advocate, Naval Investigative
Service Command

Deputy Commander, Naval Investigative
Service Command

Director, Manpower Management Informa-
tion Systems Division, Headquarters, United
States Marine Corps

Deputy Director, Manpower Management
Information Systems Division, Headquarters
United States Maine Corps

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

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

Deputy for Support, Marine Corps Research
Development and Acquisition Command,
Washington, DC

Base Commander, Marine Corps Base, Camp
Pendleton, CA

Base Commander, Marine Corps Base, Camp
Pendleton, CA

31

580

268

158

68

78



Corns, Johnnie H.
Griffith, Ronald H.
Boylan, Peter J.
Brashears, Bobby F.
Bean, Roger K.
Allen, Teddy D.
Guinan, William J.

Anderson, Paul B.

Barnes, Joseph B.

Cooper, Norman G.

Corrigan, Dennis M.

Cundick, Ronald P.

Fowler, Joseph C., Jr.

Gilligan, Francis A.

Hemingway, Charles W.

Kirk, William C.

Lane, Jack F., Jr.

LTG

6 & &

COL

LTC

COL

The Inspector General

The Inspector General

Acting The Inspector General

Acting The Inspector General

Acting The Inspector General

Acting The Inspector General

Counsel, United States Army Audit Agency

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

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

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

Chief, Personnel, Plans and Training Divi-
sion, Office of the Judge Advocate General

Chief, trial Attorney, Contract Appeals :
Division, Office of the Judge Advocate Gen-
eral

Commander, United States Army Claims
Service, Office of the Judge Advocate Gen-
eral

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

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

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

Commander, United States Army Claim Ser-
vice, Office of the Judge Advocate General

17

102
76
52
31

39
11

21

10



Kahn, T. K.

Borro, R. J.

Villemez, C. J.

Guy, D. A.

Roberts, G. B.

Vogel, R. L.

Hewson, W. C.

Jackson, A.

McCleary, J. R.

Chang, M. E.
Davis, G. W.
Kotzen, P. F.
Shaffer, R. L.
Saalfeld, F. E.

Walsh, R. M.

Wileen, G. C.

Straw, E. M.

Sareeram, R. R.

LtCol

Col

RADM

RADM

Principal Deputy Assistant Judge Advocate
General, Military Justice

Acting Deputy Assistant Judge Advocate
General, General Litigation

Deputy Assistant Judge Advocate General,
Civil Affairs

Deputy Assistant Judge Advocate General,
Administrative Law

Head, FOIA/Privacy Branch (Administrative
Law)

Acting Judge Advocate General, Military
Law

Deputy Assistant Judge Advocate General,
Investigations

Acting Deputy Assistant Judge Advocate
General, Investigations

Deputy Chief of Legislative Affairs
Inspector General

Inspector General

Deputy Inspector General

Auditor General of the Navy
Director, Office of Naval Research

Assistant Vice Chief of Naval Operations
(OP-09B)

Acting Assistant Vice Chief of Naval Opera-
tions (OP-09B)

Director, Supply Programs and Policy Divi-
sion (OP-41)

Director, Supply Programs and Policy Divi-
sion (OP-41)

23

59

159

62

27
39

13



Vela, Hector

Frenette, Richard

Shapiro, Alan

Baughman, Norman B.

Thomason, M. D., III

Lovelady, William, Jr.

Woodard, William D.

Ward, William F.
Sandler, Roger W.

Kilmartin, Thomas J.

Baines, E. Darden

Michael, Danny R.

Ross, Jimmy D.

Fox, Alexander J.

Makarewicz, T. W.

Bruns, Thomas E.

Civ

Civ

Civ

MG
BG

Civ

COL

LTG

COL

COL

Division Counsel-Southwestern District,
Corps of Engineers

Counsel-Humphreys Engineer Center Dis-
trict, Corps of Engineers

Division Counsel-South Pacific District,
Corps of Engineers

Division Counsel-Huntsville District, Corps
of Engineers :

Division Counsel-Transatlantic District,
Corps of Engineers

Laboratory Counsel-Waterways Experiment
Station District, Corps of Engineers

Laboratory Counsel-Construction Engineer-
ing Research District, Corps of Engineers

Chief, Army Reserve
Chief, Army Reserve

Commander, United States Army Reserve
Personnel Center

Chief, Administrative Services, National
Guard Bureau

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

Deputy Chief of Staff for Logistics

Director, Command, Control, Communica-
tions and Computers, United States Army
Forces Command

Principal Assistant Responsible for Con-
tracting, United States Army Forces Com-
mand

Principal Assistant Responsible for Con-

tracting, United States Army Forces Com-
mand

19

11

130

24

42

30



Hamilton, F. X. MajGen Commander, Marine Corps Logistics Base,
Albany, GA

Davis, D. E. Col Commanding Officer, Marine Corps Logis-
tics Base, Barstow, CA

Yoder, R. W. Maj Command Adjutant, Marine Corps Combat
Development Command, Quantico, VA

Collins, D. W. Civ Assistant Chief of Staff, Manpower, Marine
Corps Base, Camp Lejeune, NC

DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE

Ackerman, Edward LtCol _— Acting Director of Information Manage-
ment, Headquarters, Military Airlift Com-
mand

Ahearn, Joseph MajGen The Civil Engineer, Headquarters, United
States Air Force

Allen, J. R. BrigGen Vice Commander, Oklahoma City Air Logis-
tics Center, Headquarters, Air Force Logis-
tics Command

Almquist, Tommy Col Director, Reports and Analysis, Air Force
Safety Agency

Andersen, Ty J. LtCol _ Director of Information Management, Head-
quarters, Tactical Air Command

Anderson, Eddie L. Col Director of Information Management, Head-
quarters, Military Airlift Command

Anderson, Wayne LtCol —_ Acting Director of Information Manage-
ment, Headquarters, Tactical Air Command

Baines, E. Darden Civ Chief, Office of Administrative Services,
National Guard Bureau

Baker, Norman R. Col Chief of Staff, Headquarters, Pacific Air
Forces

Beddingfield, Jerry Col Acting Chief of Staff, Headquarters, Elec-

tronic Security Command

32

17

32

58

35

50



Meyer, Mary J. CDR

Moore, Burton R. MajGen

Morrison, James W. Civ

Needham, T. H. BG

Neiderlehner, Leonard Civ

Normand, Anthony H. COL

Olsen, Thomas R. MajGen

Ostovich, Rudolph, IIT MG
Parry, Scott CAPT
Pease, Kendall CAPT

Putnam, William L. CAPT

Quinn, Thomas P. Civ
Ra’anan, Michael Civ
Rangel, Hector M. COL

Register, Ronnie H. Civ

Rodgers, Richard L. CDR

Chief of Administration, United States
Transportation Command.

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

Director, Soviet and East European Affairs,
Principal Deputy Under Secretary of Defense
(Strategy and Resources)

Commander, Joint Casualty Resolution Cen-
ter, United States Pacific Command

Deputy General Counsel

Chief of Staff, United States Army Special
Operations Command.

Vice Commander, United States Central Air
Force

Vice Director, Joint Staff
Deputy Director of Defense Procurement

Public Affairs Officer, United States Atlantic
Fleet

Executive Assistant to the DoD Comptroller

Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense
(Strategic and Tactical Command, Control
and Communications), Assistant Secretary
of Defense (Command, Control, Communi-
cations & Intelligence)

General Counsel, On-Site Inspection Agency
Deputy Director, Directorate for Manage-
ment, Assistant Secretary of Defense (Public
Affairs)

Deputy Director for Management, Defense
Advanced Research Projects Agency

Deputy, Executive Secretariat of the Depart-
ment of Defense

14

11

4
17

10

46


ITEM 10{a)
Availability of Records

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

None

73


CHAPTER VI

FEE SCHEDULE
Section 1
GENERAL PROVISIONS
6-100 Authorities

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

6-101 Application

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

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

c. The term "search" includes all time spent looking for material that is
responsive to a request. Search also includes a page-by-page or line-by-line identifica-

58


Item 2(b)

Statutes Invoked on Initial Determinations

Statute Number of Times by Agency Total*
OSD/ NSA/ OIG |
JS ARMY NAVY AF DIA DLA DMA DNA CSS DOD |
10 usc 128 2 1 32 2 | 37
10 usc 130 1 4 8 18 | 32
10 USC 618e 14 1 14
10 usc 1102 2 4 12 1 18
10 USC 2796 (b) (1) 1 1 1
18 USC 798 1 90 1 92
41 USC 423 5 26 2 | 33
42 USC 2161-2168 9 18 4 6 { 37
50 USC 402 Note, 1 2 222 | 225
Section 6,Public 1
Law 86-36 |
50 USC 403(d) (3) 1 4 10 82 | 97
Federal Rules of 6 | 6
Criminal Proce- |
dure, Rule 6(e) |
Sec 38(e) of the 4 | 4
Arms Export Con- |
trol Act (22 USC !
2778 (e)) |
Sec 822, Natl Def 1 i} 1
Auth Act, FY 90 & |
91 (P.L. 101-189; |
103 Stat 1352,1503) |
Agency Totals 22 8 68 76 10 2 1 8 394 6 | 595



Doebler, J. C.

Rever, J. N.

Runberg, B. L.

Moeller, R. L.

Delker, J. L.

Allshouse, C. R.

Heime, R. R.

Crane, T. C.

Buffington, J. E.

Bersani, R. R.

Puncke, F.

Malley, K. C.
LeGrand, C. M.

Ramsay, K. P.

Guinn, R. A.

Dolle, J.

RADM

RADM

Commander, Atlantic Division, Naval Facili-
ties Engineering Command Activities

Vice Commander, Atlantic Division, Naval
Facilities Engineering Command Activities

Commanding Officer, Southern Division,
Naval Facilities Engineering Command Activi-
ties

Commander, Western Division, Naval Facili-
ties Engineering Command Activities

Acting Commander, Western Division, Naval
Facilities Engineering Command Activities

Acting Commander, Western Division, Naval
Facilities Engineering Command Activities

Commanding Officer, Engineering Field
Activity Northwest , Naval Facilities Engi-
neering Command Activities

Commanding Officer, Southwest Division,
Naval Facilities Engineering Command Activi-
ties -

Commander, Pacific Division, Naval Facilities
Engineering Command Activities

Acting Commander, Pacific Division, Naval
Facilities Engineering Command Activities

Acting Commander, Pacific Division, Naval
Facilities Engineering Command Activities

Commander, Naval Sea Systems Command
Legal Counsel, Bureau of Naval Personnel

Staff Judge Advocate, Navy Recruiting
Command Activities

Assistant Staff Judge Advocate, Navy
Recruiting Command Activities

Commanding Officer, Navy Recruiting Dis-
trict, Jacksonville

29

11

15

48

84


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 commer-
cial, 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
Tequest to a specific category.

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

d. Educational Institution Requesters. Fees shall be limited to only reasonable

standard charges for document duplication (excluding charges for the first 100 pages)
when the request is made by an educational institution whose purpose is scholarly

65



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 investiga-
tion 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 reproduc-
tion. 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
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

67


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).

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.

68



Paulsen, T. D.
Reynolds, A. A
Bennett, D. M.
Selfridge, H. E.
Halvorson, J. E.

Dowgwilla, F. M.
Becker, F. J.

Earner, W. A.
Baird, D. W.
Briggs, S. R.
Smith, B. J.

Bremner, B. B.

Prueher, J. W.
Olson, P. R.
Marsh, L. R.
Middents, P. W.
Beard, G. C.
Quast, P. M.

Coady, P. J.

RADM

VADM

RADM

RADM

RADM

RADM

RADM

RADM

RADM

RADM

RADM
RADM

Deputy Chief of Staff (Operations), United
States Pacific Fleet

Fleet Judge Advocate, Naval Air Force,
Pacific

Commander Naval Surface Force, United.
States Pacific Fleet

Deputy Commander Naval Surface Force,
United States Pacific Fleet

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

Chief of Staff, Naval Forces, Japan
Fleet Judge Advocate, Third Fleet

Commander, Naval Surface Group, Middle
Pacific

Commander, Anti-Submarine Warfare Wing,
United States Pacific Fleet

Commander, Strike Fighter Wing, United
States Pacific Fleet

Commander, Strike Fight Wing, United
States Pacific Fleet

Commander, Medium Attack Tactical Elec-
tronic Warfare Wing, United States Pacific
Fleet

Commander, Carrier Group 1
Commander, Cruiser Destroyer Group 1
Commander, Submarine Group 9

Acting Commander, Submarine Group 9
Acting Commander, Submarine Group 9

Commander, Cruiser Destroyer Group 3

Commander, Cruiser Destroyer Group 5

26

28

18

11

10

11



Ttem 10(c)

Time Limit Extensions

I | I%& III |
Component Unusual Circumstances ! Court | Total

Location Volume Consultation | Involvement |
osD/Js 78 256 1367 | Oo} 1,701
DEPT ARMY 95 496 139 | 1) 731
DEPT NAVY 41 523 78 | ol 642
DEPT AIR FORCE 3 985 264 | o | 1,252
DCAA ) 4 11 o | 5
DFAS 1 23 11 o | 25
DIA 35 549 58 | o | 642
DIS 193 0 65 | o| 258
DISA 2 4 8 | 1 | 15
DLA 401 283 70 | 21 756
DMA 2 3 3 1 o1 8
DNA 16 29 37 1 ol 82
NSA/CSS 0 500 25 | o4 525
OIG, DOD 3 51 al | 58
DoD Totals 870 3,706 2,120 | 4 1 6,700

78

re



Agency Appellate Agency

Abbreviation Authority Program Head

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

NSA/CSS Mr. Robert L. Prestel, Mr. Michael A. Smith, Director of
Deputy Director Policy

OIG, DOD Mr. Nicholas Lutsch, Assistant Ms. Nadine Dulacki, Assistant

IG for Administration and
Information Management

~ Director, FOIA and Privacy Act

Division



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
DCAA Mr. John H. van Santen, Mr. Dave Henshall, Information
Asst Director, Resources and Privacy Advisor
DFAS Mr. Albert V. Conte, Mr. Carroll Dennis, Director,
Director Extemal Affairs and Management
Support
DIA Mr. A. Denis Clift, Chief of Mr. Robert P. Richardson, Chief,
Staff FOIA Branch
DIS Mr. John F. Donnelly, Mr. Dale L. Hartig, Chief,
Director Information/Public Affairs
DISA LTG Alonzo E. Short, Jr., Mrs. Susan Chadick, General
USA, Director Counsel
DLA Lt Gen 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



Rostow, Victor

Rowen, Henry S.

Rudd, Glenn A.

Rudman, William

Scheflen, Kenneth C.

Schlossberg, George R.

Seaquist, Larry

Sharkey, William, Jr.

Smith, Frederick C.

Smith, Mason E.

Snyder, Donald

Spector, Eleanor

Stanford, John H.

Sterlacci, Michael A.

Civ

Civ

Civ

Civ

Civ

Civ

Civ

Civ

Col

MajGen

Civ

Civ

Principal Director, Deputy Assistant Secre-
tary (Conventional Forces & Arms Control
Policy), Assistant Secretary of Defense (In-
ternational Security Policy)

Assistant Secretary of Defense (Interna-
tional Security Affairs)

Deputy Director, Defense Security Assis-
tance Agency

Deputy Under Secretary of Defense (Trade
Security Policy)

Director, Defense Manpower Data Center,
Assistant Secretary of Defense (Force Man-
agement & Personnel)

Attorney-Advisor, General Counsel

Assistant to Principal Deputy Under Secre-
tary of Defense (Strategy & Resources)

Director, Program Support, Assistant Secre-
tary of Defense (Production & Logistics)

Director, Near East and South Asian Region,
Assistant Secretary of Defense (Interna-
tional Security Affairs)

Deputy Chief of Staff, United States Space
Command

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

Deputy Assistant SecretaryP(rocurement),
Assistant Secretary of Defense (Production
& Logistics)

Acting Deputy Commander in Chief, United
States Transportation Command

Assistant General Counsel (Legal), General
Counsel

15

16

17



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 9]
oOsD/Js 281 42 23 78 #149 69 5 0 ol 647
DEPT ARMY 439 528 8 515 970 1261 845 0 Oo | 4,566
DEPT NAVY 181 392 68 203 538 695 1096 0 0 | 3,173
DEPT AIR FORCE 205 244 76 596 830 657 1010 0 Oo | 3,618
DCAA 1 0 i) 7 5 3 3 ) ol 19
DFAS 0 1 (0) 0 1 13 0 0 ol 15
DIA 373 251 10 4 13 33 9 ti) 0] 693
DIS 1 5 0 5 5 19 19 Vy) Oo! 54
DISA 0 0 0 6 1 0 0 to) O01 7
DLA 1 2 2 = 137 54 41 8 0 Oo | 245
DMA 0 (i) 1 4 1 4 0 0 ol 10
DNA 9 0 8 10 4 10 1 0 Oo] 42
NSA/CSS 129 24 236 8 13 37 12 0 ol 459
OIG, DOD 0 58 6 10 90 24 161 0 Oo! 349
DoD Totals 1620 1547 438 1583 2674 2866 3169 0 0 | 13,897
Percent of |
Total 12% «11% 3% 11% 19% 21% 23% 0% 0 | 100%

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



Stolarcek, William G.

Gore, Willie L.

Helmcamp, Dewey E.

Wise, Franklin F.

Faber, Morris R.

Bealer, Gene R.

Galbraith, Joseph E.

Hiltz, James E.

Keith, Lois K.

Griner, Remer W.

Borland, David

Hilmes, Jerome B.

Stofft, William A.

Hart, William L.

Smith, James D.

LTG

Deputy Commander, United States Army
Safety Center

Deputy Chief of Staff for Logistics, Mili-
tary Traffic Management Command

General Counsel, Army and Air Force
Exchange Service

Chief of Staff, United States Total Army
Personnel Command

Acting Chief of Staff, United States Total
Army Personnel Command

Acting Chief of Staff, United States Total
Army Personnel Command

Director, Civilian Personnel Management,
United States Total Army Personnel Com-
mand

Chief, Field Operations Division, United
States Total Army Personnel Command

Acting Chief, Field Operations Division,
United States Total Army Personnel Com-
mand.

Acting Chief, Field Operations Division,
United States Total Army Personnel Com-
mand

Director, United States Army Information
Systems Selection and Acquisition Agency

Director, Command, Control, Communica-
tions, and Computers

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

Commandant, United States Disciplinary
Barracks

Director, Operations, Readiness, Mobiliza-

tion, Office of the Deputy Chief of Staff
for Operations and Plans

21

58

14

34

70

25

11



FREEDOM
OF
INFORMATION ACT

PROGRAM
CY 1991

. REPORT TO CONGRESS

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



Item 4
Appeal Determinations

Total | Granted Denied Denied Total
Component. Requests| in Full in Part in Full Other Actions*

osD/Js _ at 11 12 5 58 86
DEPT ARMY 196 | 9 28 144 15 196
DEPT NAVY 270 | 16 63 115 76 270
DEPT AF 142 | 5 13 100 24 142
DCAA 11 1 0) 0 i) 1
DFAS lt 0 ti) 1 i) 1
DIA 59 | 0 10 46 3 59
pis 21 i) 2 te) 0 2
DISA ol 0 tt) 0 0 0
DLA 10 | 3 0 4 3 10
DMA 1] 0 ) 0 1 1
DNA 11 0 0 ) 1 1
NSA/CSS 26 | 0 2 24 ) 26
OIG, DOD 17 1 1 13 3 0 17
DoD Totals 800 | 46 143 442 181 812

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

44



"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 FOIA channels.

6. Not an Agency Record

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



Ttem 2(c)
Other Reasons Cited on Initial Determinations

Component Category* Total
1 2 3 4 5 61

osp/ss 817 471 58 47 331 14 | 1,738
DEPT ARMY 3,316. 2,354 308 780 842 606 | 8,206
DEPT NAVY 4,368 2,445 357 850 906 283 | 9,209
DEPT AIR FORCE 1,484 2,346 370 1,306 559 768 | 6,833
DCAA 31 10 7 C) 75 Oo! 123
DFAS 34 214 28 1 2 5 | 284
DIA 6 387 3 1 6 o | 403
Dis 4 0 0 28 0 47 | 79
DISA 11 10 1 t) 5 21 29
DLA 226 530 146 196 239 67 | 1,404
DMA 28 17 1 0 7 oO | 53
DNA 1 23 1 3 12 4 54
NSA/CSS 139 113 15 117 37 12 | 433
OIG, DoD 13 27 2 5 2 2) 51
DoD Totals 10,488 8,947 1,297 3,334 3,023 1,810 | 28,899
*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.)



Item9

Fee Schedule and Fees Collected

The fee schedule on pages 58 through 72, reprinted from Chapter VI, DoD
Regulation 5400.7-R, October 1990, with Change 1, May 10, 1991, establishes
standard costs collectable by Department of Defense Agencies.

$1,593,410.78 was collected from the public for making records available during
the year 1991 (see item 10(b), page 74 for agency totals).

57



White, James Col Commander, Headquarters, Air Reserve Per-
sonnel Center

White, James B. Col Chief of Staff, Headquarters, Air Force
Special Operations Command

Williams, Billy L. Civ Chief, Records Management Division, Direc-

torate of Information Management, Head-
quarters, Air Training Command

Wilson, Walter A. Civ Assistant General Counsel, Civilian Personnel
& Fiscal, Office, Secretary of the Air Force
DEFENSE CONTRACT AUDIT AGENCY
Valenzuela, Joel Civ Director, Central Region
Matter, Robert Civ Director, Northeastern Region
Bernarda, H. Della Civ Director, Eastern Region

Kraft, Jr., William Civ Director, Mid-Atlantic Region

Topf, Bernard Civ Director, Western Region
Emami, Sophie Civ Chief, Information Resources Management
Branch

DEFENSE FINANCE AND ACCOUNTING SERVICE
Jeffcoat, Clyde E. Civ Director, Denver Center
Wilson, Michael E. Civ Director, Indianapolis Center
DEFENSE INTELLIGENCE AGENCY
Hardzog, Robert C. Civ Freedom of Information Officer
Timko, Michael Civ Acting Freedom of Information Officer

Richardson, Robert P. Civ Freedom of Information Officer

DEFENSE INVESTIGATIVE SERVICE
Hartig, Dale L. Civ Chief, Office of Information and Public
Affairs

40

26

14

221
86

106

34



Oden, L. N.

Luke, J. D.

Henebery, J. K.

Ailes, R. H.

Coyle, R. E.

Risher, E. D.

Berkely, R. C.

Newman, W. E.

Vernallis, S. L.

Myers, S.C.

Ritter, D. L.

Sabbatini, J.

Dames, T. A.

Gallen, R. M.

Brown, R. E.

RADM

RADM

LCDR

RADM

Commander, Naval Training Center, Orlando

Commander, Naval Education and Training
Command.

Staff Judge Advocate, Bureau of Medicine
and Surgery

Commander, Space and Naval Warfare Sys-
tems

Staff Judge Advocate, Naval Air Systems
Command

Staff Judge Advocate, Naval Air Systems
Command

Staff Judge Advocate, Naval Air Systems
Command

Commander, Pacific Missile Test Center

Acting Commanc¢er, Pacific Missile Test Cen-
ter

Special Assistant for Security, Naval Secu-
tity Group Command

Administrative Officer, Information Tech-
nology Acquisition Center, Naval Informa-
tion Systems Management Center Activities

Deputy Commander for Manpower and
Organization, Naval Facilities Engineering
Command Activities

Commanding Officer, Northern Division,
Naval Facilities Engineering Command Activi-
ties

Commanding Officer, Chesapeake Division,
Naval Facilities Engineering Command Activi-
ties

Commanding Officer, Chesapeake Division,

Naval Facilities Engineering Command Activi-
ties

28

109

52

100

12

ll

27

22

10



Ttem 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 91

osD/Js 13 C0) 2 1 5 3 0 0 ot 24
DEPT ARMY 17 23 6 20 89 80 46 ti) Oo | 281
DEPT NAVY 17 33 6 10 66 60 56 0 oO | 248
DEPT AIR FORCE 23 9 4 7 54 37 34 Vy) Oo | 168
DCAA 0 0 i) 0 i) 0 0 0 ot tv)
DFAS 0 0 0 ) 0 1 te) 0 Oo | 1
DIA 51 32 0 0 1 7 3 0 ol 94
DIS 0 1 0 1 0 1 1 ti) 0 | 4
DISA 0 0 UY) 0 0 0 0 0 o' 0
DLA 0 0 i) 2 1 1 1 0 o| 5
DMA 0 i) 0 ) 0 ti) 0 0 O01 0
DNA tv) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Oo] 0
NSA/CSS 12 t) 17 () 1 3 1 0 Oo! 34
OIG, DOD 0 5 0 0 6 1 15 ) Oo} 27
DoD Totals 133 103 35 41 223 194 157 0 oO 1 886
Percent of |
Total 15% 12% 4s 5% 25% 22% 18% 0% 0%] 100%

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

45



Tobin, P. E.

Epstein, H. S.

Bitoff, J. W.
Dodds, V. E.
Ruck, M. W.

Misiaszek, P. E.

Randall, T. E.

Glover, J. R.

Simms, R. G.
Wong, H. K.

Lichtman, D. M.

Cooper, C. J.

Rosen-Serafini, J.

Malley, K. C.
Mitchell, J. T.

Wilmot, L. C.

Conner, E. D.

Jakubiak, T. F.

RADM

RADM

RADM

RADM

CDR

LCDR

RADM
RADM
RADM

RADM

Commander, Naval Surface Group, Western
Pacific

Staff Judge Advocate, Naval Base, San
Diego

Commander, Naval Base, San Francisco
Chief of Staff, Naval Base, San Francisco
Commander, Logistics Group 1

Fleet Judge Advocate, United States Naval
Forces, Europe

Fleet Judge Advocate, United States Naval
Forces, Europe

Commanding Officer, U. S. Naval Support
Activity, Naples, Italy

Commander, Naval Activities Spain
Commander, Naval Activities Spain

Commanding Officer, National Naval Medical
Center

Judge Advocate, National Naval Medical Cen-
ter

Judge Advocate, National Naval Medical Cen-
ter

Director, Strategic Systems Program
Director, Strategic Systems Program

Vice Chief, Chief of Naval Education and
Training Activities

Vice Chief, Chief of Naval Education and
Training Activities

Staff Judge Advocate, Chief of Naval Tech-
nical Training

27



(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.

(iii) 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 Compo-
nents, 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.

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
requesters with a history of prompt payment.

64



Initial D inations
Total | Granted Denied Denied Total
Component. Requests| in Full in Part in Full Other Actions*
OsD/JS 3,121 | 1,007 425 109 1,734 3,275
DEPT ARMY 44,964 | 35,028 2,045 788 8,085 45,946
DEPT NAVY 34,223 | 22,559 2,298 381 9,098 34,336
DEPT AF 24,631 | 15,824 1,902 491 6,833 25,050
DCAA 249 | 107 15 4 123 249
DFAS 1,180 | 887 7 8 280 1,182
DIA 1,024 | 208 367 46 403 1,024
DIS 258 | 145 28 6 79 258
DISA 399 | 342 5 1 26 374
DLA 18,149 | 16,892 204 27 1,404 18,527
DMA 128 | 76 9 0 50 135,
DNA 153 | 86 29 2 54 171
NSA/CSS 632 | 50 235 64 283 632
OIG, DOD 326 | 69 140 66 51 326
DoD Totals 129,437 | 93,280 7,709 1,993 28,503 131,485

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



Lederer, Calvin, M.

Leeling, Gerald J.

Lehman, William J.

Woodruff, William A.

Bussey, Frederick N.

Cohen, Martin

Bagley, Claude

Anderson, Bruce

Mahoney, Robert

Klements, Newton

DiGiovani, Joseph

Soloman, Sandy

Reinke, Cecil

Page, Reba

Pettinato, Bert

Lingenfelter, Stephen

LTC

COL

COL

Civ

Acting Chief, Personnel, Plans and Training
Office, Office of the Judge Advocate Gen-
eral

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

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

Chief, Litigation Division, Office of the
Judge Advocate General

Deputy Surgeon General

Assistant Chief Counsel for Litigation,
Corps of Engineers

Division Counsel-Lower Mississippi Valley
District, Corps of Engineers

Division Counsel-Missouri River District,
Corps of Engineers

Division Counsel-Missouri River District,
Corps of Engineers

Division Counsel-North Atlantic District,
Corps of Engineers

Division Counsel-New England District,
Corps of Engineers

Division Counsel-North Central District,
Corps of Engineers

Division Counsel-North Pacific District,
Corps of Engineers

Division Counsel-Ohio River District, Corps
of Engineers

Division Counsel-Pacific Ocean District,
Corps of Engineers

Division Counsel-South Atlantic District,
Corps of Engineers

18

14

17

151
32

12

16

13


Item 8

FOIA Implementation Rules or Regulations

COMPONENT DOCUMENT IDENTIFICATION CFR. REF.
OSD/IS "DoD Freedom of Information Act 32 CFR 286, as amd
(FOIA) Program" by FR Vol 55, No.
248, 26 Dec 90; and
FR Vol 56, No. 89, 8
May 91
DEPT ARMY “Release of Information and Records 32 CFR 518, as amd
from Army Files” by FR Vol 56, No.
211, 31 Oct 91
DEPT NAVY “Availability of Department of Navy 32 CFR 701, as amd
Records and Publication of Department of | by FR Vol 56, No.
the Navy Documents Affecting the Public" 247, 24 Dec 91
DEPT AIR “Air Force Freedom of Information Act 32 CFR 806, as amd
FORCE Program" by FR Vol 48, No.
69, 8 Apr 83 (Pending
Revision)
DCAA “Defense Contract Audit Agency (DCAA) 32 CFR 290, as amd
Freedom of Information Act Program" by FR Vol 56, No.
190, 1 Oct 91; and
FR Vol 56, No. 216,
7 Nov 91
DIA "Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) Free- 32 CFR 292, as amd
dom of Information Act" by FR Vol 53, No.

55

128, 5 Jul 88, and FR
Vol 56, No. 206, 24
Oct 91 (Pending Revi-
sion)



(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. Compo-
nents 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 magni f 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 primary interest in disclosure. Once a requester’s commercial
interest has been determined, Components should then determine if the disclosure
would be primarily in that interest. This requires a balancing test between the
commercial interest of the request against any public benefit to be derived as a result
of that disclosure. Where the public interest is served above and beyond that of the
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
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.

62



Fry, Howard J., Jr.

Furusho, Marvin T.

Gereg, Samuel W.

Gillis, R. F.

Gordon, Darwin

Hammond, T. A.

Hanes, Richard M.

Harris, M. J.

Hartung-Schuster, Eck-

bert M.

Harvey, George C.

Hawley, Richard E.

Heinke, Wayne R.

Hodge, Clifford A.

Hopson, Everett G.

Hovall, C. Ronald

Col

Col

LtCol

MajGen

Col

LtGen

Col

BrigGen

Col

Col

LtGen

Col

Col

Civ

Vice Commander, 16AF, Headquarters,
United States Air Forces in Europe

Deputy for Security and Investigative Pro-
grams, Office, Secretary of the Air Force

Acting Chief of Staff, Air Force Develop-
ment Test Center, Headquarters, Air Force
Systems Command

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

Chief of Staff, Human Systems Division,
Headquarters, Air Force Systems Command

Vice Commander, Air Force Logistics Com-
mand

Vice Commander, Headquarters, Air Force
Civil Engineering Activity

Vice Commander, Oklahoma City Air Logis-
tics Center, Air Force Logistics Command

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

Vice Commander, Air Force District of
Washington

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

Director of Information Management, Head-
quarters, Air Force Space Command

Chief of Staff, Headquarters, Air Force
Special Operations Command

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

Principal Deputy, Assistant Secretary of the

Air Force (Financial Management & Comp-
troller), Office, Secretary of the Air Force

35

19

12

62

42

40

79

24



“GI veyZ rTeyQo Teuucszedsy
*seT{Np og ewrz-qzed zo ewTty-TInz peubysse Teuuoszed,

OS'ZPE‘EZO'S$ 96°BLZ'TES‘SS 9G°ZEG‘ESO‘S$ EB" TEE ‘LOS ‘TS {rIr nrqa I) sas0p TeI0% “AT
00°0$ 00°000 ‘Tz$ 00°ZL6 9S pessecorg sysenbey eupqnoy Jo 3800 “IIT
SL°SSO‘T8pS  BZ'ENR‘ZEES — 9T"ZBH‘zZ99G =: ST “EET SLE {1 +B) Teson *c
GL TTZ ‘968 s9°9zs ‘BL Sp'96n‘ZET$ 99" 9Z0'STS (H x $92] peeqreag “1
OO'LS’PBES ZI PIT’PTES  Te'Se6‘6zS$  — SG"90T‘O9$ fo maya ¥) Tea07qns “H
OO"LLS‘OETS 00 SB ‘GES LE“6SD ‘Zh T9"9L8 ‘97S zeqTI0 “D
00°06$ 00°66Es SE" PTZ‘zs$ oz" pszs STeTIEIH TenspAcTpry -f
00°zEz$ os‘ ose ‘es OL Tzp‘zTs v9" 680s Adep xeqndwop *a
00" Tse ‘ss ze“gve es By ZTL ‘LS 8L°969$ sprocey pequTzd “a
00°02T DS 00° LLT‘8$ SZ*OLT‘8T$ 89°SPTS woyqonpordey SqDTFOIOTH “OD
OO'OPL‘S6T$ OE BZS‘OTZS  TO'SBE’BSZs 9ZTLT‘Izs uopzonpordey Adop e0t330 “a
00° LEZ ‘BPs 05° 896 ‘LPs S9°2Z9'SET$ —-BE“ZLD ‘OTS euTL yorves zeqnduop -y
9480p peqeTeY-eseD TeNI0 “IT
GL'EBZ‘ZYS'PS 69°SE9'LLT'SS OEOSH‘TGE’LS ¥9"988'SZL‘TS [a nzu3 a] Tern “a
SL°9SP‘806$  — PT"LZS‘SEO'TS 90°06Z’BLD‘TS EE°LLT SHES lesz x (9 + @)] peeqreno «a
O0-00p’LTS$ — SO"6ZE‘GB9S — GLOGZ‘ZE6$ OL GZ THTS ((s) nzaa (1)] TeaIon(9)
00°6TS‘ze$ 00°6zS ‘Svs 00° Tse ‘z9$ ZE*VEL ‘TIS seTaTaTIoW 7eqI0(s)
OO-L9L’BTT$  OT"BSL‘VOTS —-OZ"ZZB‘PLTS —O9 BLT ETS vopqerederg wrog/eouepuodserz00 (p)
OO°TS6‘T6TS  SO'SST’EET$  ST°9PO'TLTS So°ESP‘zES Teaorddy 3 uopqeuTprocp (¢)
OO'LTL‘6EZ$  — SP"9GZ‘I9TS BS eSS’E9zS Ob 900ESS Suystoxd 3 meTaey (Z)
OO'9TD’PBTS SE"OEZ‘SPZS  9B'ZPP‘OTES — EB BSB ‘OES eurL yrees (T)

44 (809TMq ETNPeYOS eeg)

Fxobez2p Aq s3s0p znoyuey pequutasy *D

00°LZY‘9TB‘Z$ OS*GLT‘ZGb‘ES SP°606‘OEG‘DS 9°6LP’GEZ ‘TS sq80p zveXuey “a
6°OTT €°86 L°TSt vez yszeekuey peqeuyasg “WY
83809 Teuuoszeg “I

Msg MIN Lad = AAWN Laid AW Laid s¢/aso @NITIOO ISCO

S\so) wresso1g 104
(PauoD) (q)oT wary

“ . ”

75


Idrogo, S.

Irving, George

Iverson, Ronald W.

Jaeger, James A.

Jones, Roger A.

Judd, Thayne H.

Klich, Michael A.

Krebs, Richard A.

Lauher, John

Layman, Lester C., Jr.

Lewis, D.

Link, Charles D.

Ludwig, Robert H.

Madsen, David W.

Col

BrigGen

BrigGen

Col

LtCol

Col

Col

MajGen

LtGen

LtCol

Executive Assistant, San Antonio Air Logis-
tics Center, Air Force Logistics Command

Chief of Staff, Human Systems Division,
Headquarters, Air Force Systems Command

Vice Commander, Headquarters, Air Force
Military Personnel Center

Commander, Headquarters, Air Force Tech-
nical Applications Center

Staff Judge Advocate, Headquarters, Strate-
gic Air Command

Acting Chief of Staff, United States Air
Force Academy

Acting Director of Information Manage-
ment, Headquarters, Air Force Space Com-
mand.

Vice Commander, Air Force Technical Appli-
cations Center

Vice Commander, 17AF, United States Air
Forces in Europe

Director of Information Management, Head-
quarters, Headquarters, Air Force Systems
Command

Executive Assistant, Oklahoma City Air
Logistics Center, Air Force Logistics Com-
mand

Commander, 3AF, Headquarters, United
States Air Forces in Europe

Deputy Chief of Staff, Command, Control,
Communications, and Computers, Headquar-
ters, United States Air Force

Acting Staff Judge Advocate, Headquarters,
Strategic Air Command.

36

31

62

37

11



Providence Journal Co. v. Department of the Army, No. 91-0255, D. RI, 12 Dec 91.
Plaintiffs, a newspaper and one of its reporters sues for release of redacted portions
of Army Inspector General Report of Investigation into misconduct by senior officers
in the Rhode Island National Guard. The Army filed a motion for summary judgment,
arguing that it properly withheld the documents under FOIA exemptions 5, 6, and
7(C). Plaintiffs filed their own motion for summary judgment. On 12 Dec 91, the
district court granted in part and denied in part the cross motions for summary
judgment, ordering the Army to disclose most of the withheld documents. The Army

will appeal.

Scheer v. Stone, No. CIV91-0150, D. ID, filed 24 Apr 91. FOIA lawsuit arising out
of plaintiff’s request for redacted parts of a Safety Accident Board Investigation into
the crash of a UH-1H helicopter, which injured plaintiff and killed the remaining
crewmen. The Army withheld the findings and recommendations of the safety board
and the autopsies of the deceased crewmen based on FOIA exemptions 5 and 6. The
Army filed for summary judgment in September 1991. Its motion is pending.

Schok D/B/A Flowline Alaska v. Department of the Army, No. F90-022, D. AK, filed 3

May 90. Plaintiff is a contractor who completed the conversion of a building at Fort
Wainwright from quarters for hospital staff into hospital administration offices.
Plaintiff requested numerous documents under the FOIA pertaining to the contract.

the Army released all but two documents, a one-page document containing hand-written
calculations and a two-page internal memo. These two documents related to
government estimates for delays in the performance of the contract, and until plaintiff
presented a properly certified contract claim, the contracting officer did not want to
prematurely reveal his estimates and forfeit his bargaining position. Upon submission
of a properly certified claim on 17 June 1991, the Army released the documents to
plaintiff. The Army has now moved to dismiss the case as moot.

Weinstock v. Department of the Army, No. 91-1733, D.D.C., 12 Sep 91. FOIA suit
arising out of plaintiff’s request of 14 June 1991 for documents related to Army
General Counsel opinion regarding incremental funding of fixed-price contracts.
Plaintiff did not receive a timely response to his request and promptly filed suit. The
Army sought an "Open America stay". The court dismissed the case without prejudice
pending plaintiff’s exhaustion of administrative remedies.

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

Capitol Industries, Inc. v. Garrett, CA No 91-320-N, U. S. District Court, ED VA,
Norfolk Div. A reverse FOIA lawsuit was filed on 28 May 91 in response to an 8 May
91 decision by the Principal Deputy General Counsel granting an appeal by Steven
Fellman, Esquire on behalf of the National Organization of Theatre Owners (NATO) to
release portions of a Norfolk Naval Base concession contract with R. C. Theatres
(Capitol Industries). The order of dismissal of 22 Aug 91 required the Office of
General Counsel to reconsider the appeal. After reconsideration, the Deputy General
Counsel (Logistics) partially denied the appeal on 27 Nov 91.

31



Bozzelli, P. A.

Coady, P. J.

Plott, B. M.

Tindel, R. L.

Reardon, K. J.

Itkin, R. 1.

Allen, R. C.

Jordan, W. E.

Sheafer, E. D.

Bentz, J. R.

Hagen, D. F.
Zimble, J. A.
Guilbault, R. G.

Stone, T. E.

Enterline, E. R.

Corcoran, J. L. K.

Allard, D. C.

RADM

RADM

RADM

RADM

RADM

VADM
VADM.

RADM

RADM

CAPT

Civ

Deputy Director, Strategy, Plans, Policy and
Operations Division (OP-60)

Director, Politico-Military Policy and Cur-
rent Plans (OP-61)

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

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

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

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

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

Director, Anti-Submarine Warfare Division
(OP-71)

Director of Naval Intelligence (OP-092)

Executive Assistant, Director of Naval Intel-
ligence (OP-092)

Surgeon General of the Navy (OP-093)
Surgeon General of the Navy (OP-093)

Deputy Director, Space and Electronic War-
fare (OP-094B)

Director, Naval Communications Informa-
tion Systems Division (OP-941)

Director, Navy Space Systems Division
(OP-943)

Acting Director, Navy Space Systems Divi-
sion (OP-943)

Director of Naval History

24

14



NATIONAL SECURITY AGENCY/CENTRAL SECURITY SERVICE

Frederick Bauer v. DoD, et al., Civ. No. Y-91-1182 D. MD, 3 May 91. In this case,
the plaintiff sought a writ of mandamus from the District Court to compel NSA to
process his request under the FOIA/PA for records on himself. NSA submitted a
declaration which was filed with the court and on 7 Nov 91, the court found the
petitioner’s claim to be moot.

Brad Carter v. NSA and CIA, Civ. No. 91-3532-WDK(Kx) C. D. CA, 28 Jun 91. This
lawsuit arose from the alleged failure of NSA and CIA to respond to plaintiff’s
requests under the FOIA/PA. Both defendants submitted sworn affidavits in support
of a motion to dismiss and on 23 Oct 91, the court dismissed the case with prejudice.

Grove y. Central Intelligence Agency, et al., Civ. No. 89-0090-SSH D.D.C, Feb 89. A

Philadelphia policeman sought disclosure of NSA records associated with a 1980 arrest
he made in Philadelphia for possession of explosives. In 1991, the United States filed

an NSA declaration that a search found no records and moved for summary judgment,

which is still pending.

Ray Lindsey v. NSA, Civ. No. JFM-87-1564 D. MD, 4 Dec 87. Plaintiff filed suit
seeking records on himself and various subjects, including the salvage of a Russian sub
and the Glomar Explorer. The government was granted summary judgment by the
district court in July 1991 and Lindsey filed a notice of appeal on 12 Aug 91.

54


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 FOIA requests while minimizing
unwarranted costs to the taxpayer, Components shall adhere to the following
procedures:

1. Analyze each request to determine the category of the requester. 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.

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.

63



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

COIN An

wo

44

45
47
48

50

57

73
78


Stewart, David C. Civ Assistant Director, Freedom of Information 94
Act/Privacy Act Division

Dulacki, Nadine K. Civ Assistant Director, Freedom of Information 56
Act/Privacy Act Division

43


DEFENSE INFORMATION SYSTEMS AGENCY

Chadick, Susan Civ General Counsel
: DEFENSE LOGISTICS AGENCY

Knapp, Thomas J. Civ Assistant Director

Aldermann, Lloyd Civ Assistant Staff Director

Lenius, Harlan J. COL Staff Director

Gordon, William V. Civ Executive Director

Hickman, Donald E. RADM _ Executive Director

Malone, Michael J. Civ Associate General Counsel

Miarecki, Edward A. Civ Associate General Counsel

Labounty, James W. COL. Commander, Defense Distribution Region
West

. Baker, Thomas W. COL Commander,Defense Distribution Region

East

Cashman, James F. Col Commander, Defense Contract Management
District - Northwest

Kammer, Herman C. MG Commander, Defense Contract Management
District - Mid-Atlantic

Grosse, Vinson G. Col Commander, Defense Contract Management
District - South

Klick, Jean E. BrigGen Commander, Defense Contract Management
District - West

Holland, Francis B. COL Commander, Defense Contract Management
District - North Central

Tucker, Gary C. COL Commander, Defense Logistics Agency
Administrative Support Center

Rawlings, David G. CAPT Commander, Defense Industrial Plant Equip-

ment Center

Al

15

12

19

15


research. Requesters must reasonably describe the records sought (see paragraph
1-507). The term "educational institution" refers to a pre-school, a public or private
elementary or secondary school, an institution of graduate high education, an
institution of undergraduate higher education, an institution of professional education,
and an institution of vocational education, which operates a program or programs of
scholarly research.

e. Non-Commercial Scientific Institution Requesters. Fees shall be limited to

only reasonable standard charges for document duplication (excluding charges for the
first 100 pages) when the request is made by a non-commercial scientific institution
whose purpose is scientific research. Requesters must reasonably describe the records
sought (see paragraph 5-107). The term "non-commercial scientific institution" refers
to an institution that is not operated on a "commercial" basis as defined in subpara-
graph 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)
Tesearch.

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 subscrip-
tion by the general public. These examples are not meant to be all-inclusive. Moreover,
as traditional methods of news delivery evolve (e. g., electronic dissemination of
newspapers through telecommunications services), such alternative media would be
included in this category. In the case of "freelance" journalists, they may be regarded
as working for a news organization if they can demonstrate a solid basis for expecting
publication through that organization, even through not actually employed by it. A
publication contract would be the clearest proof, but Components may also look to
the past publication record of a requester in making this determination.

2. To be eligible for inclusion in this category, a requester must meet the
criteria in subparagraph 6-104, g.1., above, and his or her request must not be made

66



Donnell, Joseph S., I

Dubia, John A.

Duncan, Robert C.

Dunn, Michael W.

Eggers, Thomas E.

Ellis, James R.

Fajans, Arthur

Felder, Jerry W.

Fields, Craig I.

Fitzgibbon, G. M.

Ford, Carl W.

Gaskins, Philip W.
Gee, George N.

Getchell, George L.

Gnehm, Edward W.

Goetze, Richard, Jr.

RADM.

BG
Civ

LTC

MajGen

Civ

Col

Civ

Civ

Civ

COL
RADM

Col

Civ

MajGen

Acting Vice Director, Joint Staff

Executive Secretary of the Department of
Defense

Director, Operational Test & Evaluation
Deputy Director, Manpower, Personnel and
Administration, United States Southern

Command

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

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

Director, Security Plans and Programs, Dep-
uty Under Secretary of Defense for Security
Policy

Deputy Chief of Staff, United States Space
Command

Director, Defense Advanced Research
Projects Agency

Director, Proliferation Controls & Counter-
measures, Assistant Secretary of Defense
(International Security Affairs)

Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary of
Defense (International Security Affairs)

Chief of Staff, National Defense University
Commander, Joint Task Force Four

Chief of Staff, United States Central Air
Force

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

Vice Director, Joint Staff

11



plaintiff failed to respond to the court ordered briefing and never met deadlines and
order to show cause.

Jill E. Cragin v. U.S. Navy, CA No. 90-0115P, D. ME. In 1969, Plaintiff’s daughter
suffered from meningitis and neurological impairment. Lawsuit was filed in 1985, but
was deemed time-barred by the Federal Judge. A Tort Claim Litigation investigation in
anticipation of litigation was performed. Plaintiff received most of the investigation
under FOIA, except for Medical Quality Assurance reports and certain privacy matters
documents. Release of information made on 30 Jul 90. Submission of declarations
made on 1 Oct 90. Government Motion to Dismiss was granted due to mootness (i.
e., Government release all requested documents). Case was dismissed on 14 Mar 91.

Richard D’Aleo v. U.S. Navy, CA No. 89-2347. D.D.C. Alleged former
counterintelligence agent sought release of a non-disclosure agreement he says he
executed with the Naval Investigative Service in 1983. FOIA/PA request was denied on
26 Aug 87. Plaintiff seeks release of records or declaratory relief, declaring that the
non-disclosure agreement, if any, non-binding, and injunctive relief (enjoining
enforcement or threatened enforcement of any non-disclosure agreement). In Mar 90,
Plaintiff committed suicide. Plaintiff moved to substitute. Navy filed opposition on
20 Sep. 90. Dismissal granted on 15 Apr 91, as Plaintiff did not file appeal within
allowed time.

McDonnell v. United States. CA No. 88-362(HET), D.N.J. Plaintiff requested
documents from FBI relating to the sinking of the SS MORRO CASTLE in 1934. FBI
referred the case to the Naval Military Personnel Command (NMPC). NMPC released.
some documents and referred the remainder of the case to the Naval Investigative
Service Command (NISCOM). NISCOM redacted some information under exemptions
(b)(7)(C) - personal privacy and (b)(7)(D) - confidential source. Plaintiff's appeal for
redacted information was denied. Plaintiff later requested additional documents from
NISCOM. None were available. Plaintiff filed suit for previously denied information
and information he feels NISCOM should hold. Motion for Summary Judgment
granted on 6 Sep 91.

DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE

Howard, David L. v. Secretary of the Air Force, et. al., USDC WD, TX Civ. No.
SA-89-CA-1008. Plaintiff requested copies of all outdated Code of Federal Regulations
(CFR). On 30 November 1990, defendants filed a motion to dismiss or in the
alternative for summary judgment. Defendants state the requested materials (CFRs) are
not agency records obtainable under the FOIA. On 11 December 1990, plaintiff (David
L. Howard) filed an opposition and a cross-motion for summary judgment seeking
injunctive relief based upon defendants’ refusal to provide him with outdated copies of
the CFRs. Both parties agreed to proceed before a magistrate. On 13 July 1991,
plaintiff requested production of documents. On 7 August 1991, defendants requested
that discovery be stayed pending decision on the motions for dismissal. Court denied
defendants’ motion to stay discovery. On 2 October 1991, defendants’ motion to
dismiss was granted.

53



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

6-102 Fee Restrictions

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

59



Kem, Vincent D.

Kinnamon, Kenneth

Kline, John P.

Koller, D. G.

Kundahl, George G.

Lanier, Jack O.

Lee, Michael G.

Libby, I. Lewis

Locher, James R., II

Magruder, L. W., 01

Maresca, John J.

Marshall, Andrew W.

McDevitt, M. A.

McDonald, W. M.

McDuffee, Frank W.

McNeill, John H.

Civ

Col

Col

Civ

RADM

Civ

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

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

Military Assistant, Director, Defense
Research and Engineering

Joint Secretary, United States Pacific Com-
mand.

Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary of
Defense (Reserve Affairs)

Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary of
Defense (Health Affairs)

Deputy, Executive Secretariat of the Depart-
ment of Defense

Principal Deputy Under Secretary of Defense
(Strategy and Resources)

Assistant Secretary of Defense (Special
Operations & Low-Intensity Conflict)

Executive Assistant to Deputy, United
States Pacific Command

Deputy Assistant Secretary (European &
NATO Policy), Assistant Secretary of
Defense (International Security Policy)
Director, Net Assessment

Director, East Asia and Pacific Region,
Assistant Secretary of Defense (Interna-
tional Security Affairs)

Director, Freedom of Information and Secu-
tity Review, Assistant Secretary of Defense
(Public Affairs)

Deputy Commander, Joint Task Force Four

Assistant General Counsel (International &
Intelligence), General Counsel

13

10

18



The total DoD operating cost associated with the 1991 requests was $23,962,169.67.
The average cost of processing a single case during 1991 was approximately $185. Fee
collections for records provided to the public amounted to $1,593,410.78. Total program
costs since inception of the report are reflected below.

DOD FO! PROGRAM COSTS

M 25 7
I
L 20 4
L
} 15 7+
N
Ss 10 =
OF

55
$

0

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

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.



Davis, Phillip R. Col
Debellevue, Charles Col

Diekman, Jack L. Col

Dillingham, LarryD. — MajGen

Dula, Brett M BrigGen
East, Belinda A. Maj
Eberhart, Ralph E. BrigGen
Ellis, Larry G. Col

Fairchild, Deborah Maj

Fairbrother, C. Col
Ferris, Joseph D. Col
Fister, Bruce L. MajGen
Flynn, Mary F. LtCol
Frampton, James H. Col
Fry, Cecil W. Civ

Acting Chief of Staff, Headquarters, Air
Force Reserve

Chief of Staff, Headquarters, Air Force
Systems Command

Director of Information Management, Head-
quarters, Tactical Air Command

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

Deputy Director, Office of Legislative Liai-
son, Office, Secretary of the Air Force

Director of Information Management, Head-
quarters, Air University

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

Chief of Staff, Air Force Flight Test Cen-
ter, Headquarters, Air Force Systems Com-
mand

Acting Director of Information Manage-
ment, Headquarters, Military Airlift Com-
mand

Commander, 696 Inspector General, Head-
quarters, Air Force Intelligence Command

Vice Commander, 17AF, Headquarters,
United States Air Forces in Europe

Commander, Headquarters, Air Force Special
Operations Command

Acting Director of Information Manage-
ment, Headquarters, Military Airlift Com-
mand

Acting Staff Judge Advocate, Headquarters,
Strategic Air Command

Director, Information Release Division,

Headquarters, Air Force Office of Special
Investigations

34

88

19

18

29

74

535



“@°I weyQ zeyR0 Teuuosredes

‘seTINP IOg euyy-yred zo ewTy-TInz peubysse Teuuoszedy

9T*9bS ‘66S Ly 6TE ‘95S 6S'LES‘OVES «EZ OOL’EDTS «GL 96T “BBTS [rrr nya I] 23809 TeI0L “AT
00°0$ 00°0$ 00°0$ 00°0$ 00°0$ pessecorg sqsenbey eufynoy Jo 390D “IIT
99°BZL‘2S €2'862$ ST pes ‘zes T6"9ze ‘zs 99° Lee ‘zs {1 + BH] TeIn “c
€L "spss s9°6s6 €8°905‘9$ 86° 9909 €s"695$ [a x $5z] peeqreso “I
€6°Z8T ‘2S 8s"8ezg ZE"LZ0 ‘97S €6°658 ‘TS ET'BLz ‘2S lo naa y] Te303qQns “H
00°spzs 00°0$ os" LTs¢ 00°0$ 0070s e470 "9
0070 00°0$ 00°66s$ 00°0$ 00°0$ STeTIeIeH TeNsTACTPNY “aE
00°0$ 00°0$ 000s 00°0$ 00°0$ Fdeg zeqndwop “a
00°0$ 00°0$ ZL°BL$ 00"s$ S6"OzTS sprocey pequTzd “d
00°0$ 8S °6ETS GL*vzs Sz" Ls9$ 00°0$ uoyqonpordey eyOTFOIOTH “OD
00°0$ 00°0$ Ge"zs0'es oz" s8T ‘TS 9988p ‘TS uopqonpordey Adop eoTzJo “a
€6° LEG ‘TS 00°66 00°SSL‘TZs ar6g ps"899$ euTL, yorwes reqnduop “y
#3800 peqeTeY-eseD Tey} “IT
os" LT8‘96$ SZ" Tz0'9S$ py'eso’s0e$ «TE IVP‘IDTS ZT “GPE ‘SBTS [a naga a) Tear -a
os" €9€ ‘6TS SZ" vOz TTS 69019 ‘T9$ 92°82 ‘87S zB"690 ‘LES [asz x (0 + @)] peeqreno «a
00° p00 ‘es 00°€z9$ SL“6TT‘Z9$ SL°6E6 ‘97S 0€ "S89 ‘DS ((s) nzaa (1)] TeIL(9)
00°0$ 00°0$ 00° L928 ot'2ts ‘8 op" 90€$ seTaTaTqoY 76q30(s)
00°8zTs 00-s0z$ 09° zps S$ $6°299 ‘S$ 00"S0zs uopqerederg wr0g/eouspuodserz00 (p)
00°0z9 ‘2S 00° Trzg ST" ¥SE‘ZTS 85°8L9 ‘ZS SL“SOTS Teaorddy 3 uoTqeuTpr00p (¢)
00°8zT$ 00°96 08 "9Sz‘Lzs TEZET PS GL: 229 ‘2s buystoxg 3 meTsed(z)
00°8zTs 00° 80Ts 02°699 ‘9TS To" ps9 ‘sg Ov'SbY ‘TS eurE yorwes (T)
4x (8098G ETHPeYDS 0,2)
Azobezep Aq sjs0D rnoyuey pezeuTys” °D
00°OSb ‘PLS 00° P6T DES OO"EZE‘PSTS OE “ETZ ‘98S 00° P6S‘EDTS 8320p aeekuey “a
z 60 ’ ze sy xervekuey PeqeuTasy “VW
83809 Teuuoszed “I
wsia sia wid svad wood SNITLLOO LSOO

s}soQ wrewso1g 1OA
(pauoD) (Q)OT WAIT

76


Delrossa, Louis MG

Granrud, Jerome H. MG

Levanson, Joel S. COL

Schweppe, John E. LTC

Director, Space and Special Weapons, Office
of the Deputy Chief of Staff for Operations
and Plans

Assistant Deputy Chief of Staff for Opera-
tions and Plans

Principal Assistant Responsible for Con-
tracting, United States Army Europe/7th
Amy

Principal Assistant Responsible for Con-
tracting, United States Army South

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

Camack, E. G. Civ

Mansager, D. L. CAPT

Greiveldinger, G. R. CAPT

Finch, M. D. CAPT

Hannas, M. D. Civ

Dombrowski, J. E. CAPT

Vogel, R. L. Col
Rossi, R. R. CAPT
Stutzel, R. H. Maj

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

Deputy Assistant Judge Advocate General
(International Law)

Deputy Assistant Judge Advocate General
(International Law)

Deputy Assistant Judge Advocate General,
Claims and Tort Litigation

Acting Deputy Assistant Judge Advocate
General, Claims and Tort Litigation

Deputy Assistant Judge Advocate General,
Management and Plans

Assistant Judge Advocate General (Military
Justice)

Deputy Assistant Judge Advocate General,
Admiralty

Director, Administrative Support Division,

Navy and Marine Corps Apellate Review
Activity

22

16



CY 1991 FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT
ANNUAL REPORT

SUMMARY

A total of 129,437 public requests for records under the Freedom of Information Act
(FOIA) were processed during 1991 by the Department of Defense. As shown below, this
continues the upward trend in number of cases processed since the since the inception of the
report in 1975.

DOD FOIA REQUESTS PROCESSED

125,000

100, 000

75,000

amanroa

50,000

25,000

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

The Department of Defense fully denied 7,709 and partially denied 1,993 out of
129,437 requests on the basis of FOIA exemptions. Of those exemptions, 12% were for
classified information; 11% for internal rules and practices; 3% for statutory exemptions;
11% for proprietary data; 19% for deliberative material; 21% for privacy information; and
23% for law enforcement investigations. An additional 28,503 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 800 appeals of denied
requests, 46 of which were granted, 143 partially denied, and 442 fully denied.



Item 5(b)
Statutes Invoked on Appeal Determinations

Statute Number of Times by Agency Total*

osD/ AIR NSA/ |
Js ARMY NAVY FORCE CSS |

10 USC 130 2 1 | 3
10 USC 618e 2 i} 2
10 USC 1102 5 2 1 | 8
18 USC 798 12 | 12
42 USC 2161-2168 4 | 4
50 USC 402 17: 1 17
Note, Section 6, i}
Public Law 86-36 I
50 USC 403 (d) (3) 12 | 12
Sec 822, Natl Def 1 i} 1
Auth Act, FY 90 & |
91 (P.L. 101-189; I
103 Stat 1352,1503) |
Agency Totals 2 6 6 4 41 | 59

46


Eckelberger, J. E.

Musgrave, A. W.

Fyfe, J. K.

LaValle, A. A.

Jones, R. C.

Fuller, R. C.

Jones, W. C.

Runyon, J.C.

Davis, E.

Gabriel, C. A.
Snyder, W. T.
Koehr, J. E.
Chandler, D. F.

Cantwell, L. J.

Moriarty, J. A.
Eddington, D. E.

Batwinis, J. E.

Finney, J. H.

RADM

RADM
Civ

RADM
RADM

LCDR

RADM

RADM

Commanding Officer, Aviation Supply
Office, Naval Supply Systems Command
Activities

Vice Commander, Navy Exchange Service
Command.

Vice Commander, Naval Exchange Service
Command

Executive Director, Naval Exchange Service
Command.

Commandant, Naval District Washington

Inspector General, Naval Intelligence Com-
mand

Acting Inspector General, Naval Intelligence
Command

Inspector General, Naval Intelligence Com-
mand

Deputy Commander, Naval Computer and
Telecommunications Command

Commander, Naval Imaging Command

Acting Commander, Naval Imaging Command
Commander, Naval Oceanography Command
Vice Commander, Military Sealift Command

Staff Judge Advocate, Naval Postgraduate
School

Commander, Strike-Fighter Wings, Atlantic
Force Judge Advocate, Naval Reserve Force

Staff Judge Advocate, Naval Reserve
Recruiting Command

Commander, Naval Safety Center

30

10

17

60



Rosenmeier, Harvey

Roth, Kenneth E.

Sanders, James G.

Searock, C. J.

Sheetz, Roy D.

Snell, Linwood H.

Speirs, J. K.

Steele, Stephen B.

Thompson, Barry L.

Thompson, D. W.

Townsley, Emory, Jr.

Traczyk, Jeffrey S.

Waddill, Donald E.

Weaver, Richard L.

White, Eugene J., Jr.

Col

LtGen

Col

Col

BrigGen

Col

Col

MajGen

LtCol

Maj

Col

Col

Chief of Staff, Headquarters, Air Force
Reserve

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

Deputy Surgeon General, Headquarters,
United States Air Force

Vice Commander, Headquarters, Air Force
Logistics Command

Commander, Air Force Morale, Welfare and
Recreation Center

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

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

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

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

Chief of Staff, Headquarters, Air Force
Logistics Command.

Acting Staff Judge Advocate, Headquarters,
Strategic Air Command

Acting Director of Information Manage-
ment, Headquarters, Air Force Space Com-
mand

Vice Commander, 17AF, Headquarters,
United States Air Forces in Europe

Deputy for Security and Investigative Pro-
grams, Office, Secretary of the Air Force

Assistant Deputy Assistant Secretary for

Space, Plans and Policy, Office, Secretary of
the Air Force

39

20

17

46

16

13



Pease, K.

Ellis, W. G.

Hartman, R. H.
Mackin, J. J.

Meinicke, T. A.

Baumstark, J. S.

Gay, R. G.
Conway, F. M.
DeCicco, W. A.

Uris, R. B.

Williams, J. A.

Tobin, B. E.
Bump, S. E.
Olson, J. D.
Flanagan, A. B.
Kalleres, M. P.
Davis, W. J.

Parcells, P. W.

Walker, J. S.

Bull, L. F.

RADM
RADM
RADM

VADM

RADM

RADM

RADM

RADM

Public Affairs Officer, United States Atlantic
Fleet

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

Chief of Staff, Submarine Group 2
Chief of Staff, Submarine Group 2
Commander, Submarine Group 6
Acting Commander, Submarine Group 6
Chief of Staff, Submarine Group 10
Chief of Staff, Submarine Group 10

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

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

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

Commander, Naval Base, Norfolk
Commander, Naval Base, Charleston
Commander, Naval Base, Philadelphia
Chief of Staff, Naval Base, Philadelphia
Commander, Second Fleet
Commander, Carrier Group 6

Commander, Tactical Wings, United States
Atlantic Fleet

Commander, Helicopter Wings, United
States Atlantic Fleet

Deputy Commander in Chief, United States
Pacific Fleet

25

10


Ttem3
Initial Denial Authorities by Participation

Name Rank Title Number
of
Instances
OSD/JS
Akins, Carl Civ Deputy Director, Office of Civilian Health & 10
Medical Program of the Uniformed Services
Alderman, Craig Civ Deputy Under Secretary of Defense for 5
Security Policy
Alexander, RobertM. LtGen Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense (Mili- 1

tary Manpower & Personnel Policy, Assis-
tant Secretary of Defense (Force Manage-
ment & Personnel)

* Allen, Teddy G. LTG Director, Defense Security Assistance 2
Agency

Anderson, Maynard C. Civ Assistant Deputy Under Secretary of 1
Defense for Security Policy

Appleton, R. E. Col Deputy, Executive Secretariat of the Depart- 1
ment of Defense

Bader, G. W. Civ Principal Director, European & NATO Pol- 1
icy, Assistant Secretary of Defense (Interna-
tional Security Policy)

Baker, Robert W. COL Military Assistant, Director, Defense 7
Research and Engineering

Basel, J. M. Col Executive Assistant to Deputy, United 1
States Pacific Command

Begert, William J. Col Chief of Staff, United States Transporta- 1
tion Command

Bernath, Clifford H. Civ Director, Directorate for Management, 4
Assistant Secretary of Defense (Public
Affairs)



(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 Depart-
ment 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 informa-
tion 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.

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

61



“@° weyR rey; TeuUCSTEayy
‘eeTanp Tog eupy—yred zo ewTy-TInz peubtese Teuuoszedy

O€"0B0'SOES 00 9LBESS «GT "G99'SZTS HE DET ‘EDS SL"€0S‘8E9 ‘TS [zzz n7y3 I] #3809 TeIOL “AT
00°0$ 00°0$ 00°0$ 00°0$ 00°0ze ‘TS pessecorg sysenbey eupynoy Jo 3800 “IIT
Tz" Loss Os *ZgT ‘ETS TEz2t'Es 99° L92‘TS S2°99n‘TSES [1 + 8] Ten *s
vy T06s 0S"0€9 ‘2S 9b pZ9s es"esz$ SZ"E6z OLS In x $5z] peeyzeao -I
LL*S09 ‘ES 00°zzS ‘OTs SB" L6D ‘ZS ET PTO‘TS 00° ELT ‘Tezs fp nzu3 ¥] TeI07q—NSs “H
ST"9TPS 00°0$ 00°9€9 ‘TS 00°0$ 00° POT ‘Szg zeq70 “D
00°08 00°0$ 00°0$ 00°0$ 00°ST$ STeTIEIEH TENsTACTPNY “WT
00°0$ 00°0$ 00°08 oss 00°SLE ‘OTS Adog xeqndmon 3
oL'es$ 00°0$ 82°08 00°0T$ 00°Sz9 ‘zs sprocey pequyzd “a
00°0$ 00°0$ 00°0$ 00°0$ 00°090 ‘PSs woyqonpordey SYDTFOIOTH “D
2g°096 ‘2S 00° TRL ’SS so°ezes 88° ES6$ 00° TZL‘vES uoyzonpordey Adop eots30 “a
ov SLTS 00° T8L ‘bs zs"ee$ SL“90S 00°€62‘PSTS euyL yorees zeqndwop -y
S4s0p peqeTeY-eseD TEUIO “IT
6O"ELS‘OOE$ OS" LOD’SZG$ —--LB“OPS‘ZZT$ §=—=—-L9"9ZE ‘LOS OS*LTL’S8z ‘TS [a nzu3 a] TeIL “a
29° PTT ‘09$ OS'TZT‘SOT$ BE“6OS'bZS ee"Ses 6S OS" EpT ‘LSzs [ssz x (9 + a)] peeqreao ‘a
O9°LTT‘zEs 00°6z6 ‘89$ 88" TEO‘6TS bz" DES ‘DS 00°0ss ‘zpz$ Us) nzua (1)] TeIn(9)
0s "8T8‘9$ 00°0$ OE TTY ‘zs bz °9ET'TS 00°zEE ‘09s seTaTATIOW T6730 (s)
sp" tz9$ 00°909 ‘TS 00"ET6$ 00°ssz$ 00°99S‘azs uopqerederg w10g/eouepuodserz0p (p)
s9°6Sz ‘S$ 00°0$ SZ"06P ‘DS os"SEL$ 00° DEG ‘LTS Teaorddy 3 uopzeuppx09g (£)
p8"98L8 ‘9TS 00° L69 ‘vES 80°68 ‘8$ 06"9bz ‘TS 00°008 ‘9S$ Suystoxd 3 Metaey (Zz)
9T'6ES ‘ZS 00°9zL ‘zE$ Sz" 86e'2$ 09° LZT ‘TS 00°86 ‘BLS eur] yorees (T)

44 (809@Y ETMPeyDS ee7)

Kx0603%D Aq #3809 znoyuey peqeuTasy “OD

LB"OvE’B0ZS  —OCO"LSS‘TSES —- Z9"SO0 6S OT’ Los ‘ees 00°bz0‘98L$ 83809 zeekueH “a
La ws oT 9°0 zEez sezeekuey peqeuyasy “YW
83809 Teuuoszed “IT

aod ‘SIO SSO/WSN wa wa vid ZNITLLOO IS0o

S1soQ weis01g IOA
(pauod) (Gor wary

77



Ttem 5(c)
Other Reasons Cited on Appeal Determinations

Component. Category* Total

ra
Nn
w
rs
w
a

OsD/JS 20 11
DEPT ARMY 0 13
DEPT NAVY 26 19
DEPT AIR FORCE 0 20

NaRPuw
ChRAU

DFAS

DIA

pis

DISA

DLA

DMA

DNA
NSA/CSS
OIG, DOD

ecocorooeoeoe fe
ecorowoowo
ecoceoeoeo eo eC eC eC eC OoOW OF
ececoeoeo eo oO OO OR N
eoeoeooe ooo OR oH
ecoceoeoeo eo eC COCO OWS
ecCOoOrFFWOOCWSO

DoD Totals 47 70

=
B
iS}

45 3) 181

* 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". )

47



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

Davidson, William A. Civ Deputy Administrative Assistant to the Sec-
retary of the Air Force

McCormick, Robert J. Civ Administrative Assistant to the Secretary of
the Air Force

DEFENSE FINANCE AND ACCOUNTING SERVICE

Davidson, William A. Civ Deputy Administrative Assistant, Office of
the Secretary of the Air Force
DEFENSE INTELLIGENCE AGENCY
Clift, A. Denis Civ Chief of Staff
Prombain, Louis Civ Acting Executive Director
Nagy, Dennis M. Civ Executive Director
DEFENSE INVESTIGATIVE SERVICE
Donnelly, John F. Civ _ Director
DEFENSE LOGISTICS AGENCY

McCausland, Charles LtGen Director

NATIONAL SECURITY AGENCY/CENTRAL SECURITY SERVICE
Prestel, Robert L. Civ Deputy Director

OFFICE OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL, DOD

Silverstein, Morris B. Civ Assistant Inspector General for Criminal
Investigation Policy & Oversight

Whitlock, Stephen A. Civ Director, Inspections Directorate

Lutsch, Nicholas T. Civ Assistant Inspector General for Administra-
tion & Information Management

49

110

28

29

26

10



Graham, Douglas

Hadley, Stephen J.

Hansen, D. B.

Hardy, Robert S., Jr.

Hawkins, Charles A.

Howe, Richard

Janssen, Daniel F.

Johnson, D. S.

Johnston, Robert B.

Jones, Donald W.

Kahn, William

Kendall, Cynthia

Col

Civ

MajGen

LTG

Deputy Assistant Secretary (Strategic 3
Defense Space & Verification Policy), Assis-

tant Secretary of Defense (International

Security Policy)

Assistant Secretary of Defense (Interna- 1
tional Security Policy)

Director, Base Closure and Utilization, 2
Assistant Secretary of Defense (Production
& Logistics)

Director for Manpower, Personnel and Secu- 16
tity, United States European Command

Principal Deputy for Intelligence, Assistant 2
Secretary of Defense (Command, Control,
Communications & Intelligence)

Director, Theatre and Tactical Command, 1
Control and Communications, Assistant

Secretary of Defense (Command, Control,
Communications & Intelligence)

Assistant Director Management Oversight, 34 .
Strategic Defense Initiative Organization

Director, European Policy, Assistant Secre- 4

tary of Defense (International Security Pol-

icy)

Deputy Commander in Chief/Chief of Staff, 3

United States Central Command.

Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense (Mili- 3

tary Manpower & Personnel Policy), Assis-
tant Secretary of Defense (Force Manage-

ment & Personnel)

Director, Theater Nuclear Forces Policy, 1

Assistant Secretary of Defense (Interna-

tional Security Policy) .
Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense (In- 1

formation Systems), Assistant Secretary of
Defense (Command, Control, Communica-
tions & Intelligence)

12