Stringer, George T.
Sullivan, Peter M.

Tamblyn, Marcia J.

Taylor, Robert W.

Taylor, Wesley B., Jr.

Thomas, Trent N.

Thompson, John C.

Tucker, Alvin

Vesser, Dale A.

Wermuth, Michael A.

Wiles, John A.

Woods, Roy S., Jr.

Woodworth, John A.

Zakem, Jeffrey S.

Col

Civ

LtCol

Civ

BrigGen

BrigGen

MajGen

Civ

LtGen

Civ

Civ

Civ

Civ

Capt

Executive Assistant to the Department of
Defense Comptroller

Acting Deputy Under Secretary of Defense
(Trade Security Policy)

Executive Assistant, Assistant Secretary of
Defense (Command, Control, Communications
and Intelligence)

Principal Deputy, Assistant to the Secretary of
Defense (Public Affairs)

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

Director, Intelligence, United States Southern
Command

Director, Operations, United States Southern
Command

Deputy Comptroller (Management Systems),
Department of Defense Comptroller

Principal Deputy, Assistant Secretary of
Defense (Strategy, Requirements and
Resources)

Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense (Drug
Enforcement Policy and Support)

Director, Defense Evaluation Support Activity,
Under Secretary of Defense (Acquisition)

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

Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense
(European and NATO Policy), Assistant
Secretary of Defense (International Security
Policy)

Public Affairs Officer, United States Atlantic
Command

16 .

28



Miller, Brian D.

Miller, Judy Ann

Miskell, C. David
Moore, William F.
Morrison, William B. III
Norwood, George W.
O'Berry, Carl G.

Olsen, Alan K.

Owens, Jeffrey R.

Page, Roland J.

Palau, Javier
Pamerleau, Susan L.

Pardini, Edward A.

Parker, Charles E.

LtCol

Civ

Civ

BrigGen

BrigGen

MajGen

Civ

Col

Civ

Col

Director, Information Management,
Headquarters Air Force Command, Control,
Communications, and Computer Agency;
Director, Information Management,
Headquarters Pacific Air Forces

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

Acting Chief, Administrative Services,
National Guard Bureau

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

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

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

Deputy Chief of Staff, Command, Control,
Communications and Computers
Headquarters United States Air Force
Director, Air Force Base Conversion Agency

Staff Judge Advocate, 645 Air Base Wing
Air Force Materiel Command

Vice Commander, Headquarters Air Force
Safety Agency -

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

Vice Commander, Headquarters Air Force
Military Personnel Center

Director, Information Management, Office of
The Administrative Assistant to the Secretary
of the Air Force

Commander, Headquarters Air Force Safety
Agency

387

79

10

50

10


Boles, Billy J.

Boyd, Richard L.

Brotzman, Robert L.

Brummett, Duane L.

Buckingham, F. N.

Buethe, Robert E.

Burgess, Ronald A.

Chapman, Thomas N.

Chavis, Dullivan C.

Clapper, John R.

Closner, John J.

Coacher, Lellen

Cole, James L., Jr.

Cozza, James A.

Culkowski, Vladimir

LtGen

Col

LtCol

BrigGen

MajGen

Capt

Col

Civ

Col

MajGen

BrigGen

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

Director, Information Management, Air
University

Vice Commander, 3d Air Force, United States
Air Forces in Europe

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

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

Director, Medical Programs and Resources,
Office of The Surgeon General, Headquarters
United States Air Force

Director, Information Management, Air
University

Director, Information Management,
Headquarters Air Combat Command

Director, Information Management,
Headquarters Pacific Air Forces

Commander, Headquarters Air Force Safety
Agency

Chief, Air Force Reserve, Headquarters United
States Air Force

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

Chief of Safety, Headquarters United States
Air Force

Director of Information Management,
Headquarters Pacific Air Forces

Deputy Director, Intelligence Plans and

Requirements, Assistant Chief of Staff
Intelligence

33

30

20

156

22

13



Hempson, Donald

Hruskocy, Thomas
Ketts, R. L.

Labounty, James E.

Lebarron, R. S.

Lehmann, Miles R.
Lippert, K. W.
Papas, Pat
Parsons, Bobby L.
Phillips, Glenn P.
Pope, James H.
Simpson, L. E.
Stewart, John N.

Thompson, Lee
Tucker, Gary C.

Williams, Fred A.
Wilson, Leon A.
Wojtaszek, Frank

Capt

BrigGen
Capt

Col

Capt

Civ

Civ

Col

Capt

Civ

Commander, Defense Reutilization and
Marketing Service

Executive Director, Quality Assurance

Commander, Defense Contract Management
District West

Commander, Defense Distribution Region West

Acting Commander, Defense Electronic Supply
Center

Staff Director, Command Security
Commander, Defense General Supply Center
Associate General Counsel

Staff Director, Information Services

Executive Director, Operations Policy

Deputy Staff Director, Command Security
Commander, Defense Logistics Services Center

Commander, Defense Reutilization and
Marketing Service

Commander, Defense Contract Management
District North Central

Commander, Defense Logistics Agency
Administrative Support Center

Commander, Defense Distribution Region East
Commander, Defense Fuel Supply Center

Acting Executive Director, Contract
Management

42

an NY w

10

10



Carpenter, Dennis D.

Cheney, Steve

Cole, George P.

Coll, Alberto R.

Connelly, Janet M.

Cook, Charles

Cooke, David O.

Dallager, John R.

Deegan, Gene A.
Dellermann, Frank

Dyke, Charles W.
Ellis, Robert L.

Fites, Jeanne

Fitzgibbon, Gerald M.

Fister, Bruce L.

LtCol

LtCol

Civ

Col

Civ

MajGen

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

Deputy Executive Secretary of the Department
of Defense

Deputy Executive Secretary of the Department
of Defense

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

Deputy Chief, Documentation Division, Joint
Staff

Military Assistant, Director, Test and
Evaluation, Defense Research and Engineering

Director, Administration and Management,
Washington Headquarters Services

Deputy Chief of Staff, United States Central
Command

Vice Director, Joint Staff

Director, Strategy Forces and Operations,
Assistant Secretary of Defense (Nuclear
Security and Counter Proliferation)

Vice Director, Joint Staff

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

Principal Director, Requirements/Resources,
Assistant Secretary of Defense (Force
Management and Personnel)

Director, Proliferation Controls and

- Countermeasures, Assistant Secretary of

Defense (International Security Affairs)

Commander, United States Air Force Special
Operations Command

10

11



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

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

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

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

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

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

70



7472, U.S.D. C. NY, November ry 1991. Plaintiff filed suit with several Federal agencies,
one of which was the Office of the Secretary of Defense, and the Defense Security
Assistance Agency. Plaintiff sought records on himself. Two separate searches for records
responsive to plaintiff's FOIA request resulted in no records being located. Case dismissed
without prejudice on October 22, 1992.

ot: Area swWYe & * PAY
C.A. No. 89-1848, U.S.D.C.N.D. CA, June 4, 1993. The vacate Bay Area Lawyers
Alliance for Nuclear Arms Control submitted a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request
to the Department of State (DOS) for information about negotiations and other efforts to
achieve the discontinuance of nuclear test explosions and for report evaluating United
States compliance with its treaty obligations. Two Department of Defense (DoD)
documents were located and referred by Department of State (DOS) for release
determination. The documents were exempt as classified and deliberative in nature, and
were successfully defended by DoD. Summary judgment granted in favor of DoD, June 7,
1993.

DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY

Major Charles Harry v. Department of the Army, C.A. No. 92, U.S.D.C. D.C., July 15,
1992. Plaintiff, an active duty officer, sought release of a commander's inquiry under the
Freedom of Information Act (FOIA). The commander's inquiry was requested by an officer
who was given an adverse officer efficiency report (OER) by the plaintiff. Plaintiff
requested a copy of the commander's inquiry to assist him in appealing his own adverse
OER. The U.S. Army Personnel Command withheld most of the commander's inquiry
under Exemption 5 and Exemption 6 of the FOIA. After conducting an in-camera review of
the 57 page document, the court in a very favorably worded opinion upheld the Army's
withholding of the redacted portions of the inquiry.

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

AT&T v. Department of the Navy, C.A. No. 92-2152, U.S.D.C. D.C., September 21,
1992. Case involved information generated under an MCI contract for the Navy Exchange
Service Command consisting of monthly public phone total revenue reports for 1991 for
each Navy and Marine installation. Information was withheld under Exemption 4. On
February 12, 1993, the parties filed a Stipulation of Dismissal with prejudice.

Boeing Company v. Department of the Navy,C.A. No. C93-0838-D, U.S.D.C.W.D. WA,
June 22, 1993. Case involved Naval Air Systems Command (PMA-240) Activity Reports by
manager of Navy's on-site team at Boeing pertaining to the P-3 Update IV Program. On
August 10, 1993, the court granted plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment and ordered
release of unredacted copies of all activity reports.

Joseph A. Camardo, Jr. v. Department of the Navy,C.A. No. 92-CV-935, U.S.D.C.N.D.
NY, July 21, 1992. Case involved two causes of action: (1) Plaintiff made request to the

52



DEFENSE LOGISTICS AGENCY

Farrell, L. P., Jr. MajGen Deputy Director
Straw, Edward M. VAdm Director
Obloy, Edward J. Civ General Counsel

DEFENSE NUCLEAR AGENCY

Hagemann, Kenneth L. MajGen Director

NATIONAL RECONNAISSANCE OFFICE

Hill, J.D. Civ Deputy Director

Parsons, Donald L. Civ Executive Director

Prestel, Robert L. Civ Deputy Director

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

50

15

27

30



Charles R. Hansen y. Department of the Air Force, C.A. No. 91-0099-LFO, U.S.D.C.
D.C. Plaintiff sought several volumes of an Air Force history entitled "A History of the Air
Force Atomic Energy Program, 1943-1953." Plaintiff made his initial FOIA request in 1980
and parts of the history were released, but the rest required a declassification review. In
1988, plaintiff appealed because he had heard nothing in 8 years; in 1990 the appeal was
denied under Exemption 1, for classified parts, and Exemption 5, for the remainder because
the Air Force considered the history to be only a draft. Plaintiff appealed those specific
denials and that appeal was denied in May 1990. In April 1992, summary judgment was
granted to plaintiff on the Exemption 5 material, because the Court found the history not to
be a draft. The Air Force conducted a declassification review and released the unclassified
part of the history in November 1992. In early 1993, the case was dismissed with prejudice
with a stipulation for payment of $34,500 to plaintiff in attorney's fees and cost.

Gary Stanley v. DoD and Department of the Air Force, C.A. No. 91-4054-JLF,
U.S.D.C.S.D. IL. Plaintiff sought records on management, procedures, and policies from
USAF hospitals, with a focus on material used to support hospital accreditation. The court
considered 5 test counts out of 594 and dismissed the case with prejudice pursuant to the
parties' stipulation on February 19,1993. -

i C.A. No. 91-505-CIV-J-20,
U.S.D.C.M.D. FL. Plaintiff sought information on the military family housing maintenance
contract at Seymour Johnson AFB, SC. Plaintiff was the successful offeror on this contract,
but then sold its right to another company, which objected to releasing the information
plaintiff sought. After defendant filed its summary judgment motion in January 1993,
plaintiff agreed to a stipulation of dismissal, which was granted February 18,1993.

Willie M. Lee Dep nt of the A e of the dge Advocate General,
C.A. No. CV-92-2069, U.S.D.C.C.D. CA. Plaintiff sought the HQ USAF/JAJM Article 69(b)
UCMJ review prepared in his special court-martial when he was a TSgt. Defendant
released the review and the case was dismissed on May 27, 1992. Plaintiff's motion for
reconsideration was denied on July 8, 1992.

John Cummings v. DoD, C.A. No. 91-1736, U.S.D.C. D.C. Plaintiff sought Vietnam era
aerial reconnaissance photos of specified coordinates in Southeast Asia. Plaintiff amended
his complaint to include the USAF in January 1992. After limited discovery, the court
dismissed the suit with prejudice on plaintiff's motion on November 17, 1992.

hae Blue apt, SAFR vy ent of the Ai. orce and etary o
the Air Force, C.A. No. 92-0517, U.S.D.C. AZ. Plaintiffis a pilot in the Air Force Reserve,
who sought his own Article 138 complaint file, the report of investigation of an IG
complaint he filed; a report of a security incident investigation in which he was the subject;
and the report and documents arising from an inquiry into the 302d Tactical Fighter
Squadron at Luke AFB, AZ. He filed suit before processing was complete on his FOIA
requests. Records were withheld under Exemption 5, deliberative process, and Exemptions
6 and 7(C) to protect personal privacy. After partial releases, summary judgment was
granted to defendants on May 1, 1993. Defendants were ordered to pay attorney's fees and
cost of $4,340.73

56



Item 8

Implementation Rule

tion:

OSD/JS

Dept Army

Dept Navy

Dept Air
Force

DIA

DIS

DISA

DLA

"DoD Freedom of Information Act (FOIA)
Program"

“Release of Information and Records from.
Army Files"

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

“Air Force Freedom of Information Act
Program"

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

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

"Defense Investigative Service Freedom of
Information Practices"

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

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

60

32 CFR 286

82 CFR 518

32 CFR 701

32 CFR 806

82 CFR 290, as amd by FR
Vol 58, No. 228, 30 Nov 93

32 CFR 292

82 CFR 298b, as amd by FR,
Vol 53, No. 185, 23 Sep 88

(pending revision)

32 CFR 287

32 CFR 1285



Bernath, Clifford H. Civ Deputy Assistant to the Secretary of Defense
(Public Affairs) (Operations)
McDonald, W. M. Civ Director, Freedom of Information and Security
Review, Assistant to the Secretary of Defense
(Public Affairs)
Taylor, Robert W. Civ Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary of
Defense (Public Affairs)
DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
Gamboa, Anthony H. Civ Deputy General Counsel (Acquisition), Office of
the Army General Counsel
Peck, Darrell L. Civ Deputy General Counsel (Military & Civil
Affairs), Office of the Army General Counsel
Reres, Matt Civ Deputy General Counsel (Fiscal Law & Policy),
Office of the Army General Counsel
Stockdale, Earl H. Civ Deputy General Counsel (Civil Works and
Environment), Office of the Army General
Counsel
Taylor, Thomas W. Civ Deputy General Counsel (Installations and
Operations), Office of the Army General
Counsel
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
Albrecht, D. A. Capt Assistant Judge Advocate General (Civil Law)
Dombrowski, J. E. Capt Assistant Judge Advocate General (Operations)

25

66

112

209
41



Lane, Jack F., Jr.

LaNoue, Alcide M.

Lappin, Don E.

Lingenfelter, Stephen

Lovelady, William N., Jr.

Lowe, Gregory A.

Lyman, Carter

Mahoney, Robert

Middleton, Douglas J.

Miskell, C. David

Moore, Edward J.

Murray, Robert E.

Nardotti, Michael J.
Otgen, John P.
Owens, Billy E,

Page, Reba

Paschke, Jerry B.

LtGen

Civ

Civ

Col

Civ

Civ

Civ

LtCol

MajGen

MajGen
MajGen
Civ

Capt

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

The Surgeon General

Chief, General Law Division, United States
Army Armament, Munitions and Chemical
Command

Division Counsel-South Atlantic District, Corps
of Engineers

Laboratory Counsel-Waterways Experiment
Station District, Corps of Engineers

Commandant, United States Disciplinary
Barracks

Division Counsel-Pacific Ocean District, Corps
of Engineers

Division Counsel-Missouri River District, Corps
of Engineers

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

Acting Chief, Administrative Services, National
Guard Bureau Staff for Personnel

Principal Assistant Responsible for
Contracting, United States Army South

Assistant Judge Advocate General, Office of the
Judge Advocate General

The Judge Advocate General

Acting The Inspector General

Principal Assistant Responsible for
Contracting, United States Army Intelligence
and Security Command

Division Counsel-Ohio River District, Corps of
Engineers
Legal Officer, Sierra Army Depot

20 .

53”

20

17



Pavich, Michael D.

Peterson, Richard A.

Phillips, John F.

Pugh, Larry G.

Ray, Alan C.

Rekowski, Paul J.

Ritchey, Steven R.

Saxon, Vernon P.

Schepens, William

Schlechter, Alvin E.

Sgroi, Anthony S.

Shulstad, Raymonda A.

Smallwood, Glenn H.

Speelman, Thomas Jr.

Spiers, Joseph K.

Stein, Paul

Civ

MajGen

Civ

Col

Civ

LtCol

BrigGen

Col

BrigGen

MajGen

Commander, Sacramento Air Logistics Center,
Air Force Materiel Command

Acting Chief, General Law Division,
Headquarters United States Air Force

Commander, Sacramento Air Logistics Center,
Air Force Materiel Command

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

Staff Director, Air Force Development Test
Center, Air Force Materiel Command

Environmental Coordinator, Operating
Location, Air Force Base Conversion Agency

Acting Deputy Under Secretary, International
Affairs

Vice Commander, Air Force Flight Test
Center, Air Force Materiel Command

Director, Inspections, Office of The Inspector
General

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

Acting Director, Information Management,
Headquarters Air Combat Command

Chief of Staff, Aeronautical Systems Center,
Air Force Materiel Command

Director, Corporate Information, Headquarters
Air Force Materiel Command

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

Commander, Oklahoma Air Logistics Center,
Air Force Materiel Command

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

38

1

143

21

20

18

11

22



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

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

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

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

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

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

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

69



er Fr m fe

ati c

OSD/JS

Dept Army
Dept Navy
Dept Air Force
DCAA

DFAS

DIA

DIS
DISA

DLA

DMA

DNA

NSA/CSS

OIG, DOD

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

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

Defense Finance and Accounting
Service

Defense Intelligence Agency

Defense Investigative Service
Defense Information Systems Agency

Defense Logistics Agency
Defense Mapping Agency
Defense Nuclear Agency
National Reconnaissance Office

National Security Agency/Central
Security Service

Office of the Inspector General,
Department of Defense

Hon Les P. Aspin

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

Hon Shelia E. Widnall
Mr. William H. Reed

Mr. John P. Springett
LtGen James R. Clapper,
USAF

Mr. John F. Donnelly

LtGen Alonzo E. Short, Jr.,
USA

VAdm Edward M. Straw,
USN

MajGen Raymund E.
O'Mara, USAF

MajGen Kenneth L.
Hagemann, USAF

Vacant

VAdm John M. McConnell,
USN

Mr. Derek J. Vander
Schaaf



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

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

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

6-107 Computation of Fees

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

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

Collection of fees will be made at the time of providing the documents to the
requester or recipient when the requester specifically states that the costs involved shall be
acceptable or acceptable up to a specified limit that covers the anticipated costs. Collection
of fees may not be made in advance unless the requester has failed to pay previously
assessed fees within 30 calendar days from the date of the billing by the DoD Component,
or the Component has determined that the fee will be in excess of $250 (see paragraph 6-
104).

72



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

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

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

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

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

6-105 Aggregating Requests
Except for requests that are for a commercial use, a Component may not charge for

the first two hours of search time or for the first 100 pages of reproduction. However, a
requester may not file multiple requests at the same time, each seeking portions of a

71



6-206 Costs for Special Services

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

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

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

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

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

714



Tucker, R. D.

Utecht, M. S.

Vitalie, J. S.

Walls, R. G.
Walsh, D. F.
Walsh, J. R.
Warner, M. C.
Waters, W. A.
Watkins, E. L.
Whitaker, M. L.
William, J. A.
William, R.R. OI
Wilmot, L. C.
Winfrey, R. R.
Wities, R. B.

Wright, J. C.

Civ

Col

Capt

Maj

Capt

Capt

Lt

Capt

Capt

Capt

Commander, Logistics Group Western Pacific,
United States Pacific Fleet

Staff Judge Advocate, Naval Base Norfolk,
Untied States Atlantic Fleet

Director, Administration and Resources
Management Division, Headquarters United
States Marine Corps

Assistant Chief of Staff, Marine Corps Base,
Camp Pendleton

Commanding Officer, Engineering Field
Activity, Northwest, Naval Facility, Silverdale

Command Adjutant, Marine Corps Command
Development Command Quantico

Deputy Commander, Naval Security Group
Command

Commanding Officer, Northern Division, Naval
Facilities Engineering Command

Commander, United States Naval Forces
Korea, United States Pacific Fleet

Acting Deputy Assistant Judge Advocate
General (Investigations)

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

Acting Director, Operations, Plans and Political
Military Affairs Division (N31/N52)

Vice Chief, Chief of Naval Education and
Training Activities

Acting Fleet Judge Advocate, United States
Pacific Fleet

Staff Judge Advocate, Office of Naval
Intelligence

Executive Officer, Public Works Center, San
Diego, Naval Facilities Engineering Command

31 .

12

53

27

47

26

15


Zubel, John S. Col Chief of Staff, 9th Air Force, United States

Central Command
DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY

Bagley, Claude Civ Division Counsel-Lower Mississippi Valley
District, Corps of Engineers

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

Bates, Dennis L. Civ Chief Counsel, Letterkenny Army Depot

Baughman, Norman B. Civ Division Counsel-Huntsville District, Corps of
Engineers

Bedwell, Richard E. LtCol —_ Executive Officer, United States Total Army
Personnel Command

Berry, Peter T. MajGen Commander, United States Army Criminal
Investigation Command

Black, Richard H. Col Chief, Criminal Law Division, Office of the
Judge Advocate General

Black, Verbon Civ Chief Counsel, United States Army Missile
Command

Blanton, Barbara A. Civ Acting Chief, Freedom of Information/Privacy,
United States Army Intelligence and Security
Command

Borland, David Civ Director, United States Army Information
Systems Selection and Acquisition Agency

Bruns, Thomas E. Col Chief, Contracting Division, G4 (Logistics),
United States Army Forces Command

Bush, Brian X. Col Acting Commander, United States Army
Claims Service, Office of the Judge Advocate
General

Cisneros, Marc A. MajGen Deputy The Inspector General

Ciummo, David Civ Principal Assistant Responsible for

Contracting, United States Army Information
Systems Command

17

362

16

303

41

56

87



Chema, J. R.

Cook, R.

Cook, T. P.

Courtney, T. E.

Coyle, R. E.

Coyle, S. J.

Dames, T. A.

Davis, D. E.

Davis, E. B.

Decicco, W. A.

Dejaegher, R. H.

Despain, W. M.

Dirren, F. M., Jr.

Dombroski, J. E.
Doran, W. F.

Doyle, J. R.

LtCdr

Capt

LtCdr

Capt

Capt

Capt

Capt

Capt

Capt

Staff Judge Advocate, Office of Naval
Intelligence

Vice Commander, Naval Air Warfare Center
(Weapons), Naval Air Systems Command

Staff Judge Advocate, Naval Criminal
Investigative Service

Staff Judge Advocate, Naval Aviation Activities
Brunswick, United States Atlantic Fleet

Staff Judge Advocate, Naval Air Systems
Command

Acting Fleet Judge Advocate, United States
Pacific Fleet

Commanding Officer, Atlantic Division, Naval
Facilities Engineering Command

Commanding Officer, Marine Corps Logistics
Base, Barstow

Deputy Commander, Naval Computer and
Telecommunications Command

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

Commander, Fleet Air Western Pacific, United
States Pacific Fleet

Commander, United States Naval Base,
Guantanamo Bay, United States Atlantic Fleet

Commander Naval Aviation Activities,
Jacksonville, United States Atlantic Fleet

Vice Commander, Naval Legal Service
Command

Director, Operations, Plans and Political
Military Affairs Division (N31/N52)

Executive Officer, Naval Construction Center,
Pt. Hueneme

23 .

13

975

49

340


Guinan, William J.
Gunn, Ralph L.
Hahn, Alan K.

Halperin, Ben
Hamilton, Milton H.
Heath, Herman S.
Hemingway, Charles W.
Hilts, Earl T.

Hiltz, James E.

Hobbs, Quincy C., Jr.

Holloman, J. Thomas
Kaplan, Marshall M.

Kilmartin, Thomas G.
King, Bruce J.

Klements, Newton
Kullman, Thomas M.

Lamy, Joel R.

Civ
Civ
Col

Civ

Civ

Col

Col

Counsel, United States Army Audit Agency
Information Manager, Headquarters

Chief Counsel, United States Army Test and
Evaluation Command

Chief Counsel, United States Army Research,
Development and Engineering Center

Administrative Assistant, Office of the
Secretary of the Army

Deputy Commander, United States Army
Safety Center

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

Chief, Staff Judge Advocate's Office, Watervliet
Arsenal

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

Principal Assistant Responsible for
Contracting, United States Army Contracting
Center, Europe

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

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

BrigGen Deputy Chief, United States Army Reserve

Civ

Civ

Col

LtCol

Acting Director, Contracting Division, United
States Army Acquisition Agency

Division Counsel-North Atlantic District, Corps
of Engineers

Staff Judge Advocate, United States Army
Materiel Command

Commander, United States Army Health
Services Command Acquisition Activity

19

35

168

25

148

17

31

18



Wright, T. W. VAdm Commander, SEVENTH Fleet, United States
Pacific Fleet
Wright, W. H. RAdm Director, Operations, Plans, Political Military
Affairs Division (N31/52)
Wynn, A. L. Capt Commanding Officer, Public Works Center, San
Francisco
Zakem, J. S. Capt Public Affairs Officer, United States Atlantic
Fleet
DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE
Bagley, Samuel S. LtCol Staff Judge Advocate, Human Systems Center,
Air Force Materiel Command
Bailey, Gregory Col Vice Commander, 16th Air Force, United
States Air Forces in Europe
Baines, E. Darden Civ Chief, Administrative Services, National
Guard Bureau
Batten, Frank H., Jr. Civ Chief, Information Release, Headquarters Air
Force Office of Special Investigations
Bauerlein, Robert D. Civ Deputy Under Secretary of the Air Force,
International Affairs
Baugh, Robert L. Civ Assistant Auditor General (Operations),
Headquarters Air Force Audit Agency
Beach, John W. Civ Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Air Force
(Financial Management and Comptroller)
Blankenbeker, Joan W. Col Director, Information Management,
Headquarters Air Education and Training
Command
Blanton, Walter W. LtCol Acting Director, Information Management,
Headquarters Air Combat Command
Block, David O. Maj _ Acting Director, Information Management,

Headquarters Air Force Space Command

32 .

20

32

420

82

16



Ra'anan, Michael
Rangel, Hector M.
Ream, David W.
Register, Ronnie H.
Rhoden, Harold H.
Rigby, David J.

Robertson, Charles T., Jr.
Rogers, Richard L.

Ross, Edward W.

Rostow, Victor

Roth, Stanley O.

Rudd, Glenn A.
Rudman, William N.

Sanders, Ronald P.

Civ

Civ

Civ

BrigGen

Civ

MajGen
Civ

Civ

Civ

Civ

Civ

Civ

General Counsel, On Site Inspection Agency

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

Director, Standard of Conduct Office, General
Counsel

Deputy Director for Management, Defense
Advanced Research Projects Agency

Vice Commander, 9th Air Force, United States
Central Command

Deputy Chief, Public Affairs, On Site Inspection
Agency

Vice Director, Joint Staff

Deputy Executive Secretary of the Department
of Defense

Acting Director, Assistant Secretary of Defense
(POW/MIA Affairs); Acting Director, Defense
POW/MIA Office

Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense
(Conventional Forces and Arms Control Policy),
Assistant Secretary of Defense (International
Security Policy)

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

Deputy Director, Defense Security Assistance
Agency

Deputy Under Secretary of Defense (Trade
Security Policy)

Principal Director, Deputy Assistant Secretary
of Defense (Civilian Personnel/Equal
Opportunity), Assistant Secretary of Defense
(Personnel and Readiness)

14

19

27



6-201 Search Time

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

b. Computer Search

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

6-202 Duplication
Ime
Pre-Printed material 02
Office copy 15
Microfiche 25

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

cost of the tape)
6-203 Review Time (in the case of commercial requesters)
Ime Grade Hourly
Rate($)
Clerical E9/GS8 and below 12
Professional 01-06/GS9-GS/GM15 25
Executive 07/GS/GM16/ES1 and above 45

6-204 Audiovisual Documentary Materials

Search costs are computed as for any other record. Duplication cost is the actual
direct cost of reproducing the material, including the wage of the person doing the work.
Audiovisual materials provided to a requester need not be in reproducible format or quality.
6-205 Other Records

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

73



Se ener aad Pecos Domed, CA. No. oO nOL KEV, USDC. KS. Plaintiffs a
prisoner at Ft. Leavenworth who was court-martialed in 1985, when he was a SSgt, and
sentenced to 25 years confinement for indecent acts and sodomy with his daughter. He
sought the Air Force Clemency and Parole Board (AFCPB) October 1990 decision on his
clemency request and all background records the board used in that decision. His initial
Privacy Act request for the records was processed under both the FOIA and PA, and some
records were released, and other withheld under both FOIA and PA. On July 8, 1993, the
court dismissed SECAF and AFCPB as defendants; dismissed plaintiff's FOIA claims for
failure to exhaust administrative remedies; and granted summary judgment to the Air
Force on record withheld under the Privacy Act.

Eric W. Bulfinch, Major, USAF v, Secretary of the Air Force, C.A. No. 93-407-A,
U.S.D.C.E.D. VA. Plaintiff sought personnel records and promotion folders of other Majors
in 23d Air Force who met the May 1989, Lieutenant Colonel selection board. The Air Force
Military Personnel Center denied his FOIA request under Exemptions 2, 5, and 6. He
appealed in September 1991, and suggested a way to segregate the information to protect
personal privacy. The Air Force Military Personnel Center told him the cost of conducting
the search would be over $3,600, suggested an alternate method of search, and asked
plaintiff how he wanted them to proceed. He never replied but filed suit instead. After the
Air Force Military Personnel Center made a partial release, the suit was dismissed
pursuant to joint stipulation on October 19, 1993.

D. C. Plaintiff filed suit because Federal defendants declined to release files pertaining to
H. Ross Perot. The Defense Investigative Service (DIS) is included in the list of Federal
defendants as a component of the Department of Defense. The DIS withheld investigative
files pertaining to Perot under Exemption 6 and 7(C). Defendants filed a Motion for
Summary Judgment on February 5, 1993. The parties are awaiting the court's decision
regarding this motion.

DEFENSE LOGISTICS AGENCY
TPS, Inc. v. DoD, C.A. No. C-93-0119-SBA, U.S.D.C.N.D. CA, January 11, 1993. TPS

seeks refund for alleged overcharges for records produced pursuant to FOIA requests. Case
settled September 22, 1993.

NATIONAL SECURITY AGENCY/CENTRAL SECURITY SERVICE
, C.A. No. C-92-3646, U.S.D.C.N.D. CA,

John C, Gil National S ity A
September 4, 1992. Plaintiff alleged improperly withheld records and sought injunctive
and declaratory relief for failure to process requests within statutory time limits. Court

58



98 9 g Lo
SIT |16 = |at ca
ST 81

iS z

iy v
S62 |#8Z z T 8
TS OT sr sit 8
T T

sg 8 we {4 6

T TI

td Kd
8616 4
Tt T

ey Tm jie jk

Lo 0¢ jh

Le ss 19 T

(Mz wer]

pepuoute se ‘(g)(P) ZOT WOT}00s
“ANS ‘LFGT JO JOY AyLMdeg JeUOTEN]
(9)() &-80F 22g
‘popuowre se ‘(bas 39 10h OSN
09) LP6T 30 20V AyLANdag PeuOTEN,
(8)90F 998 ‘86 A
oy uoHeztoy Ny s0uesT] {070
(S) (2) 801 998 ‘g6 Aa
oy uoHEzloq Ny souesT]]{Oq0]
@) sob OSn os|
96-98 “T'd ‘9 29g BION 207 OSN 0S
(804 *T'd) 8912-1912 DSN ZF
§-PP06Z OSN ZF
8@P OSN TF}
88T-I8T OSN gs
(©) 8422 DSN 23}
864 OSN 81
9642 OSN OT
@) ZOIT Osn oT
(©) 819 OSn oT
O&8T OSN OT
821 OSN OT



Retz, W. A.

Rever, J. N.
Reynolds, A. A.
Riddell, R. A.
RiHenour, H. T.
Ritter, D. L.
Robertson, T. J.
Ruck, M. W.
Rushing, J. M.

Saalfeld, F. E.
Sanford, F. G.

Schmitt, C. H.
Setser, R. J., dr.
Simms, R. G.
Smith, B. J.

Smith, G. R.

Capt

Capt

Capt

Civ

Civ

Capt

Capt

Commander, Naval Surface Group, Middle
Pacific, United States Pacific Fleet;
Commander, Naval Base Pearl Harbor, United
States Pacific Fleet

Commanding Officer, Southern Division, Naval
Facilities Engineering Command

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

Commander, Naval Base Seattle, United States
Pacific Fleet

Head, CV/Air Station Programs (N885)

Administrative Officer, Information Technology
Acquisition Center, Naval Information Systems
Management Center

Commander, Submarine Group 10, United
States Atlantic Fleet

Commander, Naval Base San Francisco, United
States Pacific Fleet

Director, Afloat Safety Programs, Naval Safety
Center

Director, Office of Naval Research

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

Deputy Director, Naval Nuclear Propulsion
(NOONB)

Commander, Submarine Group 9, United
States Fleet Pacific

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

Commander, Carrier Group FIVE, United
States Pacific Fleet

Executive Officer, Chesapeake Division, Naval
Facilities Engineering Command

29

10

10

11

38


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

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

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

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

6-103 Fee Waivers

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

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

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

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

(i) The subiect 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

65


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

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

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

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

1. A record is voluntarily created to preclude an otherwise burdensome effort

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

67 >



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.

Gi) Education al Scientific Insti ews
Media. Requesters must indicate a willingness to pay duplication charges in excess of 100
pages if more than 100 pages of records are desired.

(ii) All Others, Requesters must indicate a willingness to pay

assessable search and duplication costs if more than two hours of search effort or 100 pages
of records are desired.

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

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

68



Kaup, K. L.
Kavanaugh, J. T.
Kelley, P. W.
Kelly, L. J.
Kihune, R. K. U.
Kill Kelley, J.

Kotzen, P. S.
Kristensen, E. K.

Krol, J. J.
Lagomarsino, T. S.
Lair, J. A.
Lawrence, R.
Lewis, W. H.
Linder, B. R.
Litchman, D. M.
Lowe, M. E.

Lynch, D.

Capt

Civ

VAdm
Civ

Civ

Capt

Capt

BrigGen

Commander, Naval Base Charleston, United
States Atlantic Fleet

Commander, Naval Exchange Service
Command

Deputy Assistant Judge Advocate General
(Admiralty)

Director, Administration and Resources
Management Division, Headquarters United
States Marine Corps

Chief of Naval Education and Training

Acting Director, Office of Civilian Personnel
Management

Deputy Inspector General

Commander, United States Naval Forces
Marianas, United States Pacific Fleet

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

Acting Commander, Naval Training Center
Orlando

Commander, Carrier Group 2, United States
Atlantic Fleet

Staff Judge Advocate, Chief of Naval Air
Traini

Acting Commanding Officer, Western Division,
Naval Facilities Engineering Command

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

Commander, National Naval Medical Center,
Bethesda, Bureau of Medicine and Surgery

Chief of Staff, Marine Corps Base, Camp
Pendleton

Commanding General, Marine Corps Base,
Camp Pendleton

26

10

10

47

20



lOSD/JS

(Dept Army
(Dept Navy
Dept Air Force
IDCAA

DFAS

‘DIA.

DIS

Item 10(b)

$2,710,044.81
$9,116,512.98
$7,652,129.76
$6,326,037.50
$177,270.20
$233,155.43
$821,291.88
$98,711.25
$139,668.75
$1,654,250.50
$188,368.34
$191,461.86
$186,383.25
$877,567.50

78

$37,995.83
$324,451.90
$458,233.98
$304,594.11
$7,101.10
$19,890.77
$992.00
$341.00
$7,964.32
$280,510.00
$301.40
$8,301.64
$0.00
$4,079.00
$586.80



DMA

DNA

NRO

NSA/CSS

OIG, DOD

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

MajGen Kenneth L. Hagemann,
USAF, Director

Mr. Jimmie D. Hill, Deputy
Director

Mr. Robert L. Prestel, Deputy
Director

Mr. Nicholas Lutsch, Assistant

IG for Administration and
Information Management

Mr. Edward J. Obloy, General
Counsel

LtCol Deborah G. Irby, USA,
Public Affairs/Freedom of
Information Officer

Mr. Michael P. Healy, Director,
External Relations

Mr. Michael A. Smith, Director of
Policy

Ms. Nadine Dulacki, Chief, FOIA
and Privacy Act Office



Dept Navy

Dept Air Force

Hon Kathleen M. deLaski,
Assistant to the Secretary of
Defense (Public Affairs)

Hon Lawrence Baskir, Deputy
General Counsel

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

Mr. Robert J. McCormick,
Admin Asst to the Secretary of
the Air Force

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

Mr. John P. Springett, Director

Mr. A. Denis Clift, Chief of Staff

Mr. John F. Donnelly, Director

LtGen Alonzo E. Short, Jr.,

USA, Director

VAdm Edward M. Straw, USN,
Director

Mr. William M. McDonald,
Director, Freedom of Information
and Security Review

Mrs. Rose Marie Christensen,
Chief, Information Branch,
Freedom of Information &
Privacy Act Division,
HQUSAISC-P

Capt F.J. Herron, USN, Assistant
Vice Chief of Naval Operations

Mrs. Anne Turner, Air Force

Access Programs Manager, Office
of the Secretary of the Air Force

Mr. Dave Henshall, Information
and Privacy Advisor

Mr. Carroll Dennis, Director,
External Affairs and
Management Support

Mr. Robert P. Richardson, Chief,
FOIA Staff

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

Mrs. Susan Chadick, General
Counsel

Col Gary C. Tucker, USA, Staff
Director, Administration



Schachter, Leon J.

Scheflen, Kenneth C.

Schlatter, Joseph A., Jr.
Schneider, Mark B.

Schriefer, Luther F.

Schulte, Gregory L.

Scott, J. T.

Scott, R. Mark
Sharkey, William J., Jr.

Sheridan, Brian E.
Smith, Darrell G.

Smith, Frederick C.

Smith, Mason E.

Sterlacci, Michael A.
Stremple, John L.

Civ

Civ

Civ

LtGen

Civ

Civ

Col

Civ

Civ

Director, Directorate for Industrial Security
Clearance Review, Defense Legal Services
Agency

Director, Defense Manpower Data Center,
Assistant Secretary of Defense (Force
Management and Personnel)

Deputy Chief, Defense POW/MIA Office

Acting Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense
(Strategic Defense Space and Verification
Policy), Assistant Secretary of Defense
(International Security Policy)

Acting Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense
(Inter American Affairs), Assistant Secretary of
Defense (International Security Affairs)

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

Commanding General, United States Army
Special Operations Command

Chief, Policy Division, Central Imagery Office

Director, Program Support, Assistant Secretary
of Defense (Production and Logistics)

Deputy, Assistant Secretary of Defense (Drug
Enforcement Policy and Support)

Deputy Chief of Staff, United States Special
Operations Command

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

Deputy Chief of Staff, United States Space
Command

Deputy General Counsel, General Counsel

Director, Department of Defense Dependents
Schools

15

18

10

14

12



Item 2(a)

x tion voked on Initial D

inati

toe
ao

o8

592

883

8

3

4

1

3

63

0

9 6
0 2
15

23)

eoooeooeoescoooe so of:

Rlococosoccoocc oc Bole

918)
5,431
3,394

* Total may not agree with denials in Item 1 because of cases where two

or more exemptions were cited.



*g'] UY} J9YI0 JouUOSIEg 44

Sop [0d outt}-z2ed 20 ouryy-[[ny poustsse ouuosi0d ,

SZ TIL86$

00°0$

O9'221'S6$
09°F29'ST$
00°F
00°0$
00'ss$

oo Tsz$
00'r6T$
00°T89'T$

O0'FsE'ZL$
“Lt

88°T62‘TZE$
00°0$

88° TOPST$
88'080'S$
Os TZ8'ZI$
oo'o$
Os"L9z$
00'0$
00°0$
o0'0$
00°F69'T$
00"098‘0T$

00'068‘s08$
00'8LT'T9$
oo'sso'ze$
00°669'T$
oo'sss'F$
00's89‘9$
00°LET'8z$
00'6s9'0T$

00°FL9'Z61$
or

SP'Ssl'esz$
00'080's$

Se'osrTI$
LE LESCS$
90°681'6$
OO'LFTS$
00'sT$
TO'CLZ$
ba'sT$
SB'8E7$
os'Ts0's$
OL'9bH'TS

OT'6s9'sIz$
BS LEL‘'CHS
pa'zos‘arg
00°860°FT$
88°88h'9$
ge'sT9‘s¢
9z'989'9$
99°Ls6'6$

PO'SPE'SZI$
ev

(P,7B0HD) (q)OT Wey

OZOLELLIS
00'0$

80'ZZ1's$
Bv'PZO'CS
99°L60°F$
00°0$
00°0$
00°0$
oo'os$
00'0$
8B'8EL'E$
SP'6IS$

ST'SPT'SLI$
£9°6ZH'bE$
Os TE9sI$
0s"26$
00'TZz'T$
00°660'Z$
00'L96'F$
OO'LST‘a$

OO'LST'FZI$
oS

[III nay 1] $9809 ye304, “AI|
pessesorg ssonbey eurynoy Jo 3809 “II]|

(1+ BH) e901 “e

(3° 492] peoyz2eag ‘J

[ 124} y] Te707qNg “A

20 '°D

S[8l1978WW [eNnsyAolpny “J

Adog szayndu0g “4

Sproosey poyatig *d

uoHonpordey eyoyor9tW *D

uoronpoidey Adog a04j0 “g

oul], qorwag zayndur0g9 *y
8380) poqe[oy 988) 10430 ‘I

[a 92g) a] 12701 “aT
((0 + &) J0 %92] peoyzeag ‘q
[(g) nays (1)] T8901 (9)
SOMTATOYV 101130 (9)
uoHeredeig w10,j/a0uepuodsai10Z (7)
Teaoiddy @ uoyeuyps00g (¢)
Suysjoxy P Maracy (Z)
OUILL Yorwag (1)
««(S8}8Y O|MPoyog 92,7)
41080480 Aq 83809 noyuey poyeuryysg *D
8180) qeokuey “gf
sSiBohuey] poyeuysy "vy
83800 JeuuOsieg *T}

80


Item 10(c)

INSA/CSS
OIG, DOD

-
eseocoureoocore Sen



Peay, J. H. Binford, III

Phillips, Zane

Reinke, Cecil

Renkey, Leslie E.
Rucker, John T.

Ruppert, Raymond C.

Salomon, Leon E.
Sandler, Roger W.
Sealock, Jane B.

Shapiro, Alan

Simek, Peggy O.

Solomon, Sandy

Srump, John A.

Thomason, Matthew D.,
I
Tilelli, John H.

VanLieu, Edna M.

Vela, Hector

LtGen

Col

LtGen
MajGen
Civ

LtCol

Civ

LtGen

Civ

Deputy Chief of Staff for Operations and Plans

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

Division Counsel-North Pacific District, Corps
of Engineers

Chief Counsel, Blue Grass Army Depot

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

Chief, International and Operations Law
Division, Office of the Judge Advocate General

Deputy Chief of Staff for Logistics
Chief, Army Reserve

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

Division Counsel, South Pacific District, Corps
of Engineers
Principal Assistant Responsible for

Contracting, Military Traffic Management
Command

Division Counsel-North Central District, Corps
of Engineers

Staff Judge Advocate, United States Army
White Sands Missile Range

Division Counsel-Transatlantic District, Corps
of Engineers

Deputy Chief of Staff for Operations and Plans

Chief, Contracting Division, United States
Army Training and Doctrine Command

Division Counsel-Southwestern District, Corps
of Engineers

21

10

169

20

174

123

10


FREEDOM OF INFORMATION
ACT

PROGRAM
CY 1993 |

REPORT TO CONGRESS

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



Item 4

Determ ion:

ef
wnronmoooos 8

is]
=

tt
mSSoOF SF SCONON DRO

ABBE ae Re u Beak

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



"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.

8. 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.



Item 2(c)

er s Cit itial Determinati

z

_
an

* 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. Notan Agency Record

(see following page for description of each category)



Antuco, Inc, y. DoD, et al,, C.A. No. 92-0957, U.S.D.C. D.C. Plaintiff sought records on
Carlos Cardoen, Industrias Cardoen, Ltd and Swissco Charter Co., Inc. The suit was
dismissed without prejudice on plaintiff's motion on July 31, 1992

Anchorage Daily News v. Department of the Air Force, C.A. No. A92-608 Civil,
U.S.D.C. AK. Plaintiff sought records on any loss of medical privileges at Elmendorf AFB
hospital by Dr. Burton Ake and on patient complaints against Dr. Ake. Dr. Ake was a
former Air Force OB/GYN doctor who was convicted of sexual assaults on several female
patients of his civilian medical practice after he left the Air Force. The plaintiff's FOIA
appeal was denied, with a "no record" response to loss of privileges, and other records
withheld under Exemptions 5 and 6. Defendant made a partial release of records in April
1993. A joint Stipulation of Dismissal was filed on October 29, 1993, based on paying
plaintiff $1,500 in attorney's fees.

z Robisc an ‘ e Air Force, C.A.
No. 92. 2259, US. D. C. D.C. Plaintiff sought records on the use of a Limitation of
Government Obligation (LOGO) clause in the C-17 contract, and changes to that and other
similar clauses in federal acquisition regulations. Headquarters Air Force Systems
Command made partial releases pursuant to the initial FOIA request and the appeal;
recommendations, opinions, and legal opinions were withheld under Exemption 5. After a
settlement conference, plaintiff agreed to Stipulate of Dismissal if the Air Force released
four documents, including two legal opinions. The documents were released and the
Stipulation for Dismissal with prejudice was approved on March 10, 1993.

S A orce, C.A. No. C92-3986
MIP, USDOND. CA. Plaintiff sought application packages for the 1992 Air Force JAG
Department LL.M. selection board and statistics showing numbers of applicants and
selectees by rank, sex, and race for 1986-1992. Plaintiff was an unsuccessful applicant for
the 1992 LL.M. program and was seeking evidence to support an allegation of illegal
discrimination in the selection process. The requested statistics and her own application
were released in October 1992, but the other application packages were withheld under
Exemption 6 because they contain applicants' personnel files and other personal
information. In March 1993, the court granted partial summary judgment to plaintiff, and
ordered the application packages released to plaintiff, with the names, addresses, and social
security numbers of the applicants and other persons redacted. The US Court of Appeals,
9th Circuit denied defendant's request for a stay pending appeal, and the Solicitor
General's office did not seek a stay from the Supreme Court. The redacted packages were
released, and on August 18, 1993, the District Court denied plaintiff's application for
attorney's fees (because she was pro se) but granted her costs.

Cooling & Herbers, PC v, USAF , C.A. No. 93-0204-CV-W-6, U.S.D.C.W.D. MO.
Plaintiff sought the air traffic control audio tape of contact between the tower at Edwards
AFB, CA and a Navy aircraft that crashed at Edwards in May 1992. The tape was initially
withheld under Exemption 7 because the accident investigation was ongoing, but was
released after the investigation was completed. The parties Stipulated to a Dismissal with
prejudice on April 22, 1993.

57



DEFENSE CONTRACT AUDIT AGENCY

Della Bernarda, H. Civ Regional Director, Eastern 6
Kraft, William Civ Regional Director, Mid-Atlantic 2
Summers, Francis Civ Regional Director, Northeastern 2
Valenzuela, Joel Civ Regional Director, Central : 1
Woulhueter, Robert Civ Chief, Information Resources Management 12
Branch, Headquarters
| Bitz, Gregory P. Civ Director, Defense Finance and Accounting 3
| Service-Kansas City Center
| Charles, Richard P. Civ Records Manager, Defense Finance and 1
Accounting Service-Columbus Center
| Dennis, Carroll W. Civ Director, External Affairs Management 3
Support, Defense Finance and Accounting
Service-Headquarters
Nabil, John S. Civ Director, Defense Finance and Accounting 2
Service-Denver Center
7 Williams, Jay F. Civ Director, Defense Finance and Accounting 3
| Service-Cleveland Center
Wilson, Michael E. Civ Director, Defense Finance and Accounting 6
| Service-Indianapolis Center
Richardson, Robert P. Civ Chief, Freedom of Information Act Staff 436
|
| DEFENSE INVESTIGATIVE SERVICE
Hartig, Dale L. Civ Chief, Office of Information and Public Affairs 29

40 *



*a'] WY} Joyjo JouTOSI9d 44

Seap 104 ouy}-77ed 40 oun-[[Ny pousjssu jouuosied ,

98° L9F‘T6T$
00°0$

8T'802'Z$
9'1bPS
OS"994‘T$
00°0$

O9°L6T$

DL'ESZ'ESTS
SL098'LE$
6h r0S'Ez$
Tr'pP0'9$
os'serg
Te'eze's$
TS'91L‘Z1$
98°F86's$

O9'868‘2Z1$
Vs

PE'BOS'BSTS
SL'8I‘S$

6L'80L‘T$
OL THES

09°068'T$
68° T69'T$

00°96L'24T$
ix

osrosz‘vs0'T$ | sz-soo'astg

00's99‘%$ oo'os
Os'L90‘068$ SL'SLZ'6$
OS TTO‘BLS SL'P98'T$
00°9F0'Z18$ 00°6TF‘2$
oo'oTr‘or$ 00°0$
00°0$ 00°0$
00°F 18'69$ 00'8e$
00'920's$ o0'0$
00'866‘9T$ oo'o$
oo'ors‘sr$ 00'809°z$

00'ssz‘99T$ 00°8L8'F$

00'SzS'T9z'T$ o0's6s‘osT$
00's0s‘zaz$ 00°6L0'9z$
00'sse'06z$ 00'Es¢‘a$

00°F68'L¥$ 00'0s$

00'rs0'os$ 00'9z6'T$
00'LZr'61$ 00°F0z'T$
OO'LEL‘PLS 00'680'T$

00°8r8'STI$ 00°F02'T$

00'998'8IL$ 00's98'86$
92S 8s

(P,440D) (q)OT W199]

(IIT 9143 [] 83809 yeq0], “Ay
Passeoorg sysonbay ournoy Jo 4802) ‘TIT

(1+ HI 01 "¢

[H 3° %92] peeqseag ‘J

[5 n.aq) Vy] 18107qQNg “*H

72m0°D

S[Bl1078] [ens[Aorpny *J

doo zaynduiog *q

Sprlosey pezultg “qd

woyonpordey eqoyor01 WW *D

uoronpoidey Adog s21730 “gq

ouUNLL, qorwag 19yndur0D -y
83802) poze[sy 888) 10470 “IT

: [a 2G) gi] 18101 “7
[(D + €) 30 %9¢] peoqseag -q
[(g) 243 (1)] THO], (9)
SAHFANOV 10430 (9)
uoTjeredorg wWa10g/oouspucdsesi0| (7)
Teaorddy 9 uoyyeurpa00; (g)
Suystoxy FP Moyaoy (Z)
OUIEL YorBag (1)
+x(8978Y OTMpayog 20,7)
4103038) Aq 8380 anoquey poyeunysy “D
89800 reoAuByl “Gg
sSavokuey] poyeunsy -y
93800 jouuOsS.9q *]|

81



Munninghoff, J. M.

Myers, R. H.

Newman, R. C.

Newman, W. E.

Norton, F. L.

Nuernberger, J. A.

ONéeil, D. L.

Ostag, W. P.

Parker, S.

Pattarozzi, N. J.

Perkins, J.B. III

Peters, R. K.

Picotte, L.

Puncke, F. D.

Quigley, S. T.

Randall, T. E.

Capt

Col

Capt

Capt

Capt

Capt

Capt

Capt

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

Commanding Officer, Marine Corps Logistics
Base, Barstow

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

Commander, Naval Air Warfare Center
(Weapons), Naval Air Systems Command

Commander, Fleet Air Caribbean, United
States Atlantic Fleet

Chief of Staff, Submarine Group 8, United
States Atlantic Fleet

Commander, Naval Aviation Activities,
Jacksonville, United States Atlantic Fleet

Executive Officer, Engineering Field Activity,
Northwest, Naval Facility, Silverdale

Acting Staff Judge Advocate, Naval Criminal
Investigative Service

Commander, Naval Education Training Center,
Chief of Naval Education and Training
Activities

Commander, Amphibious Group THREE,
United States Pacific Fleet

Director, Office of Civilian Personnel
Management

Commander, Amphibious Group 2, United
States Atlantic Fleet

Acting Commanding Officer, Pacific Division,
Naval Facilities Engineering Command

Acting Director, Strategy and Policy Division
(N51)

Fleet Staff Judge Advocate, United States
Naval Forces, Europe

28

14

113



Item 5(a)

118

87

50,

104) 88

22)

14; 115

6
5

17
37;

10)

23

9
28
42

OSD/JS

Dept Army

(Dept Navy

(Dept Air Force
IDCAA

IDFAS

[DIA

DIS

DISA

[DMA
IDNA

INRO

INSA/CSS

OIG, DOD

“Total may not agree with denials in item 4 because of cases where two

or more exemptions were cited.



Mackwell, G. A.

Malley, K. C.
Malloy, C. J.

Mandsager, D. L.

Mazach, J. J.

McCarty, S.

McClelland, T. L.

McElhaney, M. K.

McGadney, R. L.
Megonigal, W. F.
Mitchell, J. T.
Mitchell, R. M.

Mixson, R. D.
Moeller, R. L.

Monahaz, R. P.

Mooberry, W. J.
Moore, E.

Morgan, E. L.

Capt

VAdm

Capt

Capt

Capt
Civ

Capt

Capt

Capt

Deputy Commander, Naval Computer and
Telecommunications Command

Commander, Naval Sea Systems Command

Acting Deputy Commander, Naval Security
Group Command

Fleet Judge Advocate, United States Pacific
Fleet

Commander, Carrier Group 2, United States
Atlantic Fleet

Executive Assistant, Naval Air Warfare Center
Weapons Division, Naval Air Systems
Command

Vice Chief of Naval Education and Training

Counsel, Naval Facilities Engineering
Command

Acting Director, Office of Civilian Personnel
Management

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

Director, Strategic Systems Programs

Commanding Officer, Ships Parts Control
Center, Naval Supply Systems Command

Director, Air Warfare (N88)

Commanding Officer, Western Division, Naval
Facilities Engineering Command

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

Executive Director, Naval Safety Center
Commandant, Naval District of Washington

Chief of Staff, Submarine Group 2, United
States Atlantic Fleet

27 .

92


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

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

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

6-102 Fee Restrictions

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

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

64 :



OSD/JS 3,900
‘Dept Army 34,481
[Dept Navy 34,653
[Dept Air Force 21,957
IDCAA 193
DFAS 1,452
DIA 1,076]
DIS 256
DISA 432
DLA 18,855)
‘DMA 144
IDNA 218
INRO 55
INSA/CSS 789

190

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



Cohen, Martin
Cooper, Fredrick D.

Corman, Roger

DiGiovani, Joseph

Downhour, O. Wayne

Edwards, John T.
Eiche, Jay

Fowler, Joseph C., Jr.
Frenette, Richard
Frost, John W.
Futch, Michael
Gaines, Toni M.
Gallagher, Shawn T.
Gauger, Raymond A.

Goodbary, Robert A.
Griffith, Ronald H.
Griner, Remer W.

Capt
Civ

Col

Capt

Col

Civ

Col

Civ

Col

MajGen
LtGen
Civ

Assistant Chief Counsel for Litigation, Corps of
Engineers

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

Chief Counsel, Tooele Army Depot

Division Counsel-New England District, Corps
of Engineers

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

Commandant, The Judge Advocate General
School, Office of the Judge Advocate General

Legal Counsel, United States Army Material
Command

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

Counsel-Humphreys Engineer Center District,
Corps of Engineers

Commander, United States Army Reserve
Personnel Center

Chief Counsel, Tobyhanna Army Depot
Acting Principal Assistant Responsible for
Contracting, United States Army Forces
Command

Command Judge Advocate General, Yuma
Proving Ground

Director for Acquisition, United States Army
Training and Doctrine Command

Acting The Inspector General
The Inspector General

Chief, Technical Service Branch, United States
Total Army Personnel Command

18

59

23

16

15

190

28

23
17

15
197
30



“W'] Weg} 19q}0 JouUOSI9d 44

SelM [OJ euN}-7.7ed 10 ouny}-[[Ny pousysse jouuosieg ,

88°Sh9'TEZ$
00°0$

£9°F06'TS
se'08s$
OL'829'TS
SPLITS
00°0$
00°0$
OL'Br$
00'0$
96°640'T$
ss'9az$

Sz°6E9'6zz$
S8°LZ6°Sh$
OF LL'ZI$
00'szT's$
00'FLLE
gg°09T's$
OL°69h'F$
ST'8h0'T$

OO'PETTLTS
6s

0S°L98‘LL8$
00'0$

SZ'96h' L$
9z'66r'8$
00°L66'81$
00'0$
00'0$
00'0$
00'0$
00'0$
00°r66'F$
00°800'6$

92° TL0°098$
SB PIOCLIS
00'6z8‘s9$

00'Shs'LZ$
00'169'68$

00'8zL‘619$
CRT

Se°sss'osI$
00'0$

SL'819'T$
GLEzE$
00's6z'T$
00°006$
00'0$
00'0$
00'0$
00'0$
00'SLE$
00°0z$

O9°F9L'F8I$
06°zs6'98$
O9°LPL'9$
00'0$

00'0$

00°0$

OT T66‘s$
os'9aL'z$

00°F90'TFT$
9%

[III 2.249 1] $3802 [eI], “AT
pessavorg sysenbey aurynoy Jo 3809 “THI

(1+ H] e101 -¢

[H 39 492] peeyt2ag ‘T

£ 1243 y] 18707qQNg “H

20 'D

S[elsoze] [ENstAorpny “yy

Adog s0yndur0g “gq

Splooey pozytid ‘d

uorjonpoidey oyoor9TI °O

uoryonpoiday Adog a0130 ‘a

oulLL Yoreeg 1ayndu0D -y
8480) poz8[SY OSBD 10430 “II

(d 9.2193 €) 18301 “a
[(€O + a) Jo 492] peeqseag ‘q
[() 9.293 (1)] T8701 (9)
SONTANOY 10410 (9)
uonersdarg uL10,y/a0uspuodse.i0; (7)
Teaoaddy  uoreurpaoo; (g)
Sulsjoxy FP Moyaoy (Z)
oWLL qorBeg (T)
+9(S978Y BTNPSYIS 09,4)
41080389 Aq $380) snoquey poyeunys” *D
8780) JeoAuByl “a
ssaBoduey poyeuysy “Vy
9800 JouUOSIe *T|

(PUD) (Q)OT W287]

82


e, C.A. No. 88-0481,

U.S.D. C. D. (on Plaintiff sought records ona “contract awarded to Zenith Data Systems by
the Air Force Computer Acquisition Center, Hanscom AFB, MA. Plaintiff filed suit before
the appeal process was completed. In March 1989, partial summary judgment was granted
to defendant on technical scores, which were withheld under Exemption 5, and to plaintiff
on "company proprietary information" withheld under Exemption 4. In May 1989, the
court granted the Air Force motion for reconsideration and ordered that the Exemption 4
material need not be released.

e ii et al., C.A. No. 88-
2835, U. S. D. C. NU. Plaintiff : sought documents ¢ concerning a base housing renovation
contract awarded to plaintiff, the previous contract awarded to another contractor; and
performance ratings and other personnel information on four Air Force employees. Plaintiff
filed suit before receiving the response to the FOIA request, which was made the day suit
was filed. Some records were released and others withheld under Exemptions 5 and 6. The
parties stipulated to dismissal of individual defendants in November 1988 and to dismissal
of the entire action with prejudice on September 23, 1992. .

CA. No. 88-: 3272, U: S.D.C. D. C. Plaintiff Bled this reverse FOIA suit to prevent the Air
Force from releasing option pricing information requested by McDonnell Douglas
Astronautics Company. Summary judgment was granted to defendant in March 1992 and
plaintiff appealed. Before the U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, District of Columbia Circuit
could hear the appeal, McDonnell Douglas withdrew its FOIA request for the records in
August 1993. The Circuit Court then remanded the case to the District Court to be
dismissed as moot.

ra A. ‘No. 589- ‘CV 0269, USD.OND. OH. Plaintiff sought from NIH c certain AIDS
information and from the Air Force his own AF 201 file and all attachments; all Air Force
records with his name or social security number; and any record of his alleged forced
exposure to a poison tear gas in 1961 during basic training at Lackland AFB, TX. Plaintiff
alleges he is an Air Force veteran and totally disabled due to the alleged exposure to poison
tear gas. Summary judgment was granted to defendants in March 1992; plaintiff's request
for reconsideration was denied in April 1992; and the U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, 6th
Circuit, dismissed the case in March 1993 for want of prosecution after plaintiff failed to
pay filing fees.

William .M. Lips v. Secretary of the Air Force, C.A. No. 89-0830-HHG, U.S.D.C. D.C.
Plaintiff is a prisoner at Ft. Leavenworth who sought all information in the Air Force's
possession used by the Air Force Clemency and Parole Board in its adverse decision on his
parole in October 1988. In October 1990, the court ordered the defendant to give plaintiff
copies of his medical records, and in April 1991, the court granted summary judgment to
defendant, finding it had released all responsive records. In July 1991, the court denied
plaintiffs motion for reconsideration and rehearing enbanc. Plaintiff appealed and the U.S.
Circuit Court of Appeals, District of Columbia Circuit dismissed the case for mootness on
May 24, 1993.

55



“W'] TSY} 104}0 JouuOsI18d +4

Sermnp 10d ount}-}4ed 10 ouN}-[[nJ pausisse JouuOsIeg ,

Os"L80'9z8'9$
00°0$

os'zI8'eEs$
Os'Z9L‘90T$
00°090'LZF$
00's66'zEr$
00° T0S‘Z1¢
00'9z9'T$
00°069'L$
00'esT's$
oo'sss‘ezz$
00'LIS‘EF$

00°S22‘z6L‘s$
00'SF'SST'I$
00°0L8'90L$
00°L6F'FL$
00°80S‘611$
OO°ZOL‘LLTS
00°L98°T81$
OO'THL‘EST$

00°016‘9z6'E$
Z6ZI

OL'6ZT'Z99'L$
o0'998‘sz$

89°68 TZL$
VE'TOSHFTS
PL'LOO'LLSS
88°8Z9'SZ$
So°SL8'T$
99°092'E$
¥6'920'F$
Os'sTs‘98$
OF'OLL'8Z2$
TS°89L‘'6LZ$

60°FSF'206'9$
Z8'06r08E'T$
SSOPL‘LESS$
9L°680‘08$
Zr069'SSI$
89'GPS'ELIS
TS'SIT'99T$
TL°L69°69z$

FG'CZE'F89'F$
O'LIT

86°ZT9'OTT6$
OO'LILT2$

68° 1L08'brs$
82°096'891$
TTT ¥8‘929$
89'S T‘OSTS
LO'VGY'S$
6O'ZEZ0T$
10°%z6'F$
TO'SLL‘8$
PS'IES‘SLES
19°690°8ZT$

69°F66'6TZ'8$
26'866'6Y9'T$
90°008'602'I$
PS'GFTLZIS
TW'Sh9P8I$
¥8'099'R61$
SL'TIS‘OSr$
69°Z81'69z$

T9°S6T‘068'S$
8'6Z1

(P.4G0HD) (GOT WAIT

TS°PHO‘OTL'2$
09°L68‘18$

PEZLO'OSS
LOVISTIS
LE'LEB'PPS
SS'LELE
00°r9$
LL'988$
LE18h$
so'ese$
O8'S2a‘L2z$
So'oes‘st$

86°FL0'CLE'Z$
O0'STHFIS$
LVZOP'TSI$
OT'SLz'81$
OL'Z89'TZg
SL'90T'SZ$
Te'ss6'6r$
TL'1h9'98$

T8'L61‘906'T$
V2

[III 1.193 T] $380 [e30], “AT
Pessas01g sysonbay ourynoy Jo 4809 “TIT

[1 + Hi] e107, "¢

[H 3° 492] peays0Ag ‘|

[5 nay) y] [e107qNg “"H

7210 °D

S[el1078W [enstAorpny “4

Adog sayndurog *q

Sprooey pozurag *q

woHonpordey eyoyor91W “OD

uoonpoadey Adop 20430 ‘gd

euUlL], Yorwag 10yndu0D “y
$380) poqe[sy O88D 19410 “II

[d nag? gq] 1101, °F
((O + &) 30 4692] peoyzeag ‘g
[(g) nays (1)] T2703, (9)
SOTATOV 101190 (9)
woHerBderg W110,j20uapu0dsa.110Z (7)
Teaoaddy 7p uoreurpa00; (g)
Suystoxy FP morasy (Z)
aumEy, youwag (1)
++(S078Y O[NPayOS 0)
41030382 Aq 83809 anoyuey poyeunysy "9
8780) seoXueyy “gf
sSiBokuey payenysy “vy

83809 Jouuosiag *

79



Item 9

F Fees Coll.

The fee schedule on pages 63 through 76, 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.

$1,450,343.85 was collected from the public for making records available during the year
1993 (see item 10(b), page 78 for agency totals).



Holt, Lake B. III

Hopson, Everett G.

Howard, Olin A.

Hummell, Dennis K.

Hurd, Joseph

Idrogo, Samuel

Irving, George W. III

Johnson, Dennis B.

Johnson, Jeanne M.

Johnson, Mose

Jones, William E.

Kelly, Lawrence W.

Kessler, Brian L.

Klich, Michael A.

Koenig, Robert F. Jr.

Col

Civ

Civ

BrigGen

BrigGen

Civ

SMSgt

LtCol

LtCol

MajGen

LtCol

LtCol

Col

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

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

Director, Corporate Information, Headquarters
Air Force Materiel Command

Vice Commander, Aeronautical Systems
Center, Air Force Materiel Cmmand

Assistant Deputy Under Secretary
(International Affairs)

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

Staff Director, Human Systems Center, Air
Force Materiel Command

Acting Director, Information Management
Air University

Deputy Director, Information Management,
Headquarters Air Education and Training
Command

Acting Staff Director, Air Force Development
Test Center, Air Force Materiel Command

Director, Forces, Deputy Chief of Staff Plans
and Operations

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

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

Director, Information Management,
Headquarters Air Force Space Command

Director, Information Management,
Headquarters Air Force Space Command

35

10

21

11

21

65

28

52

32



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
Clerical E9/GS8 and below 13.25
(Minimum Charge) 8.30

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

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

2. Duplication

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

documents

Engineering data (microfilm)

a. Aperture cards

(i) Silver duplicate negative, per card 15
When key punched and verified, per card 85
(i) Diazo duplicate negative, per card 65
When key punched and verified, per card 75
b. 35mm roll film, per frame 50
c. 16mm roll film, per frame 45

7



Letellier, Patrick J.

Lorber, John G.
Lyles, Lester I.
Mackey, Thomas J.

Malandrino, J. Paul, Jr.

Mandrell, Gene D.
Mannell, Stephen
Mattice, James J.
McCarthy, James
McGovern, Francis X.

McNamara, Roger

McPherson, Carl L.
Middleton, Gordon

Milam, David W.

MajGen

MajGen

Col

Civ

BrigGen

Civ

BrigGen

LtCol

Civ

Col

Commander, Investigative Operations Center,
Headquarters Air Force Office of Special
Investigations

Director, Operations, Deputy Chief of Staff,
Plans and Operations

Commander, Ogden Air Logistics Center, Air
Force Materiel Command

Staff Director, Electronic Systems Center, Air
Force Materiel Command

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

Acting Director, Corporate Information,
Headquarters Air Force Materiel Command

Chief, Security Police, Headquarters United
States Air Force

Deputy Assistant Secretary for Acquisition
(Research and Engineering)

The Civil Engineer, Headquarters United
States Air Force

Chief, Office of Information Management,
Headquarters Air Mobility Command

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

Director, Command Staff, Air Force Special
Operations Command

Director, Space Policy, Planning and Strategy,
Office of the Secretary of the Air Force

Chief of Staff, Aeronautical Systems Center,
Air Force Materiel Command

36

46

47

17



Item 7
inion Acti n

OSD/JS

The Washington Post Company vy. DoD, C.A. No. 84-3400, U.S.D.C. D.C., November 7,
1984. Plaintiff sought all documents relating to the aborted Iranian hostage rescue
attempt during the last days of the Carter Administration. During litigation, segregable
documents were selectively released, and others remained classified. A Stipulation of
Dismissal with prejudice was signed by both parties on September 22, 1993.

Edward W. Spannaus v. DoD, C.A. No. 92-2435, U.S.D.C. D.C., October 27, 1992.
Plaintiff sued for adequacy of search of documents involving six individuals and eleven
organizations associated with the La Rouche movement. Defendant produced three
documents, the majority of which were released, with the exception of names of FBI agents
and DoD military personnel providing logistical support to the FBI. The names were
withheld under Exemption 7 (C). On September 13, 1993, the Court ruled in favor of
defendant for adequacy of search, and for the correct application of Exemption 7 (C). Case
is now on appeal.

Waynard Worsham vy. Richard B. Cheney, et al,, C.A. No. 91-0557, U.S.D.C. D.C.,
March 14, 1991. Plaintiff sought records on himself. By Declaration June 25, 1991, it was
reiterated that query into the Defense Clearance and Investigative Index revealed no
components of DoD having any records on plaintiff. On August 28, 1991, plaintiff's motion
for a preliminary injunction enjoining defendants from destroying information pertaining to
him was denied and defendant's motion for summary judgment and dismissal was granted.

C.. ‘- No. 92-462, U. 8. D. C. OR, “April 17, 1992, Plaintiff i isa ‘a convicted espionage ‘agent and
is currently incarcerated. Plaintiff requested a copy of the Damage Assessment Report
outlining DoD's damage assessment for all the classified documents seized by the FBI in
Harper's arrest. The report was released in redacted form, with classified information
withheld under Exemption 1. Defendant submitted declarations supporting its claim for
withholding classified information. Defendant's declarations were accepted, and the suit
was dismissed August 10, 1993.

Cc. ‘A. No. 92-670, U. s. D. C. OR, June 1992. Plaintiff i isa Convicted espionage agent,
currently incarcerated. Plaintiff sought two DoD classified reports. One report was 1400
pages, and 90 percent classified. Defendant submitted a declaration advising it would cost
in excess of $23,000 to complete and would take approximately two years. The second
report (451 pages) was released in redacted form, with classified information withheld
under Exemption 1. Defendant submitted a declaration supporting the withheld
information as classified. The court accepted both declarations, and the suit was dismissed
on August 10, 1993.

51



Eddingfield, L. E.

Eddington, D. E.
Elder, C. E.

Ensch, J. C.
Estes, G. B.

Finch, M. D.

Fiske, R. N.

Fladd, W. R.

Flemming, R. P.
Foxall, R. W.

Gabriel, C. A.
Gallagher, T.

Gay, R. G.

Goetz, G. F.

Grant, F. I.
Green, M. G.

Gunn, T. E.

Hagen, D. F.

Capt

Capt

Capt

Capt

Capt

Lt

Capt
LtCdr

Capt

Lt

Capt
Lt

Capt

VAdm

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

Force Judge Advocate, Naval Reserve Force

Staff Judge Advocate, Chief of Naval Air
Training

Commander, Naval Training Center San Diego

Commanding Officer, Pacific Division, Naval
Facilities Engineering Command

Deputy Assistant Judge Advocate General,
Claims and Tort Litigation

Deputy Assistant Judge Advocate General,
Investigations

Deputy and Chief of Staff, Naval Surface Force,
United States Pacific Fleet; Commander South
Atlantic Force, United States Atlantic Fleet

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

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

Commander, Naval Media Center

Deputy Staff Judge Advocate, Naval Criminal
Investigative Service

Chief of Staff, Submarine Group 10, United
States Atlantic Fleet

Assistant Force Judge Advocate, Naval Reserve
Force

Director, Naval Council of Personnel Boards

Staff Judge Advocate, Naval Postgraduate
School

Commanding Officer, Southern Division, Naval
Facilities Engineering Command, Charleston

Chief, Bureau of Medicine and Surgery

221

236

29

43



provide a substantive response. This action was dismissed without prejudice and with each
party bearing its own costs and attorney fees on June 16, 1993, by a Stipulation of
Dismissal.

t i C.A. No. C-93-0167, U.S.D.C.N.D.
CA, January 14, 1998. Civil rights action case alleging unlawful sex discrimination with
four causes of action and a fifth cause of action under the Freedom of Information Act for
failure to provide to Plaintiff a copy of an investigative report by the Criminal Intelligence
Division which bears on her civil rights complaint. A status hearing was held on April 12,
1993. The Navy filed a Motion for a Stay and to bifurcate the FOIA action. The FOIA
appeal by Mr. Jaffe (Attorney for Ms. Leonardich) was denied by the Deputy General
Counsel (Logistics) on September 21, 1993, under Exemptions 5 and 6.

Sullivan v. Department of the Navy, C.A. No. 87-0305-B, U.S.D.C.N.D. ME. Plaintiff
sought production of documents relating to her father's disappearance in a small
Government plane over South America/Cuba in 1963. Navy had only one document, a one-
page letter mentioning the father's alleged partner. Navy released it, without partner's
name, based upon Exemption 6. Navy was joined in the suit , filed against nine Federal
agencies, to compel release of this name. AUSA filed an answer May 7, 1988. AUSA filed
Motion for Summary Judgment on December 2, 1991. FBI and CIA are only real parties.
Judge granted Summary Judgment in favor of all defendants; Plaintiff appealed to CIA.
On May 26, 1993, First Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed grant of Summary Judgment.

Henry R. Goode v, Department of the Navy, C.A. No. 92-1098, U.S.D.C.S.D. AL,
January 1993. Suit filed concerning FOIA request in December 1988 seeking information
concerning the existence or non-existence in WWII of U.S. Naval Recruiting Station,
Atlanta, and its Officer in Charge, a LT Parrott. Request was bifurcated: information
pertaining to Recruiting Station was referred to Navy Recruiting Command. Information
regarding LT Parrott was referred to Bureau of Naval Personnel. Recruiting Command, in
turn, forwarded to Naval Historical Center, which advised plaintiff that no records
available; Bureau of Naval Personnel apparently did not respond. In June 1993, judge held
claim was mooted by release of information and granted Motion to Dismiss.

Fulton Building Company Inc. v. Department of the Navy, C.A. No. 92-1533,
US.D.C. NJ. Plaintiff sought JAG Manual investigation. Response was not made within
10 days so plaintiff sued, after which Investigations Division/IDA responded. Judge
dismissed case May 5, 1993.

DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE
, C.A. No. 87-0305-B,

Sherry Ann Sulllivan v. Department of the Air Force, et al.

U.S.D.C. ME. Plaintiff sought records on her father who disappeared while flying an

aircraft to Central America in 1963. The National Personnel Records Center (NPRC) in St.

Louis maintains the responsive Air Force records, and it released to her all Air Force .
records on her father after she filed suit. Summary judgment was granted to all

defendants in 1992, and the U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, 1st Circuit affirmed the District

Court decision on May 26, 1993.

54



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 (81 U.S.C. 67 et. seq.); the Defense
Authorization Act for FY 87, Section 954, (P.L. 99-661), as amended by the Defense
Technical Corrections Act of 1987 (P.L. 100-26).

6-101 Application

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

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

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

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
(d) 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 Action 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

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

orga

o



DEFENSE MAPPING AGENCY

Black, David Civ Deputy Director, Command Information
Sande, Kermit A. Civ Associate General Counsel

DEFENSE NUCLEAR AGENCY
Ullrich, George W. Civ Deputy Director

NATIONAL RECONNAISSANCE OFFICE

Healy, Michael P. Civ Director, External Relations
Isham, Joanne O. Civ Director, External Relations

NATIONAL SECURITY AGENCY/CENTRAL SECURITY SERVICE

Smith, Michael A. Civ Director of Policy, Office of Policy

OFFICE OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL, DOD

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

Rosen, Jeffrey P. Civ Chief, Administration and Policy Review
Division

43

36

15

395

79

12


Chadick, Susan M.

General Counsel

DEFENSE LOGISTICS AGENCY

Alderman, Lloyd C.

Barnett, Marilyn

Beauchamp, Roy E.

Browning, Richard

Burke, Michael R.
Castleberry, John

Cook, Janet C.
Connelly, Richard
Farrell, Lawrence
Garret, L. T.
Gould, Jeffrey P.

Grady, James J.

Grosse, Vinson G.

Grove, W: E.

Harder, Larry D.

Heckman, J. G.

Civ

Civ

BrigGen
BrigGen

Civ
MajGen
BrigGen
Capt

Capt

Capt

Staff Director, Small and Disadvantaged
Business Utilization

Administrator, Defense National Stockpile
Center

Commander, Defense Industrial Supply Center

Commander, Defense Construction Supply
Center

Staff Director, Information Services

Chief of Staff, Defense Personnel Support
Center

Special Assistant, Contracting Integrity
Comptroller

Principal Deputy Director

Commander, Defense Electronic Supply Center

Commander, Defense Contract Management
District Northeast

Deputy Executive Director, Supply Operations

Commander, Defense Contract Management
District South

Acting Commander, Defense Electronic Supply
Center

Commander, Defense Contract Management
Command International

Commander, Defense General Supply Center

41

35

1

23
4

93



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

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

ii) The

Dublic 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.

ignificance he cc i mn. to public understanding In applying
this factor, Components must differentiate the relative significance or impact of the
disclosure against the current level of public knowledge, or understanding which exists
before the disclosure. In other words, will disclosure on a current subject of wide public
interest be unique in contributing previously unknown facts, thereby enhancing public
knowledge, or will it basically duplicate what is already known by the general public. A
decision regarding significance requires objective judgment, rather than subjective
determination, and must be applied carefully to determine whether disclosure will likely
lead to a significant public understanding of the issue. Components shall not make value

66



Ford, Carl W., Jr.

Freeman, Waldo D.

Garant, Ronald G.
Gilliat, Robert L.

Ginman, Richard T.

Goetze, Richard B., Jr.

Gray, Edward

Groves, Linda K.

Gulyas, Stephen M.
Hamilton, Kelly S.

Hamilton, Mark R.

Hensler, Robert M.

Ikle, Fred

Janssen, Daniel F.

Johnson, Darel S.

Jones, Jerome C.

Kern, Vincent D.

MajGen

Civ
Civ

Capt

MajGen
LtCol

Capt

LtCol

BrigGen

Principal Deputy, Assistant Secretary of
Defense (International Security Affairs)

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

Director for Investment, Comptroller

Deputy General Counsel, Personnel and Health
Policy, General Counsel

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

Vice Director, Joint Staff

Deputy Director, Management Operations
Division, Ballistic Missile Defense Organization

Executive Assistant, Assistant to the Secretary
of Defense (Atomic Energy)

Chief of Staff, National Defense University

Chief, SEA Branch, Plans/Policy Division,
United States Pacific Command

Deputy Director, Plans/Policy Division, United
States Pacific Command

Chief, Operations, Plans Division, United
States Pacific Command

Under Secretary of Defense for Policy

Assistant Director, Management Operations
Division, Ballistic Missile Defense Organization
Director, European Policy, Assistant Secretary
of Defense (International Security Policy)

Vice Commander, United States Air Force
Special Operations Command

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

11 .

32


Naval Sea Systems Command (NAVSEA) for Novamarine America, Inc. contract materials
on March 11, 1992, in connection with a GAO protest by Nautical International against
award to Novamarine on the grounds that the contract violates foreign shipyard
construction prohibition; violates preference for domestic commodities; is unfair
competition; contractor sells defective boats; and contractor is in breach of an exclusive
representation agreement. On June 5, 1992, NAVSEA refused to expedite the request
which it is processing under its Open America Procedures. (2) Plaintiff made request to
the Defense Logistics Agency (DLA) on May 6, 1992. DLA was contacting submitters and
had not responded to plaintiff. On March 30, 1993, Court denied the Government's motion
to dismiss or in the alternative for Summary Judgment, concluded that the Navy was
exercising due diligence, but the backlog of similar FOIA requests did not constitute
exceptional circumstances. Thus, the Court ordered the Navy to complete its response to
the request within six months of the date of the order and to report to the court every two
months. The Court was notified that processing was completed on September 27, 1993.
Plaintiff has failed to pay fees in excess of $3,000 for processing of 4,573 responsive pages of
documents. Partial releases were made, but Navy is declining to release all responsive
documents or an index to withheld material until payment is made. Navy has submitted
written arguments to the Court in support of this position.

al Sy e e Navy, C.A. No. 92-6047,
USDCED. PA, October 20, 1992, Case filed by Robert G. Fryling of Saul, Ewing,
Remick & Saul, Philadelphia, PA, concerning the Integrated Financial Management
Information System (IFMIS) which originated at the Naval Air Warfare Center, Aircraft
Division, Warminister, PA (NAWC, Warminister). On December 2, 1992, the Court
dismissed the action without prejudice.

General Dynamics v. Department of the Navy, C.A. Nos. 93-0305, 93-0309, 93-0333,
93-0341, 93-0359, U.S.D.C. D.C. Five cases pertain to the A-12 program. (1) Case 93-
0305: The Naval Air Systems Command (NAVAIR) withheld an April 18, 1989, Attorney-
Client memorandum from Donna Dooley providing review panel comments on a solicitation
for Fleet Electronic Warfare Support Group Replacement Aircraft. The denial was upheld
by the appellate authority on December 23, 1992. This action was dismissed without
prejudice and with each party bearing its own costs and attorney fees on May 12, 1993, by
a Stipulation of Dismissal. (2) Case 93-0309: October 1991 request for 12 items of
documents pertaining to 1989-1991 A-12 documents (including DoD information). NAVAIR
did not provide a substantive response. On March 17, 1993, NAVAIR withheld two
responsive documents under Exemptions 1 and 5, and advised that DoD would respond for
documents under their cognizance. This action was dismissed without prejudice and with
each party bearing its own costs and attorney fees on May 24, 1993, by a Stipulation of
Dismissal. (3) Case 93-0333: November 1993 request for 12 items of A-12 budgetary
information. NAVAIR did not provide a substantive response. This action was dismissed
without prejudice and with each party bearing its own costs and attorney fees on August
20, 1993, by a Stipulation of Dismissal. (4) Case 93-0341: February 1991 request for two
items of documents pertaining to A-12 cost-at-completion projection studies. NAVAIR did
not provide a substantive response. This action was dismissed without prejudice and with
each party bearing its own costs and attorney fees on June 25, 1993, by a Stipulation of
Dismissal. (5) Case 93-0359: December 2, 1991, request to the Office of Management and
Budget which was referred to Navy on January 7, 1992, for two items of documents
pertaining to FY 91 and FY 92 budget requests for the A-12 program. NAVAIR did not

53



upheld the Agency's withholding of records on the basis of Exemptions 1 and 3. When it
was proven the records were previously disclosed and in the public domain, the Agency
released the documents. Upon the Government's motion for summary judgment on
February 12, 1993, the court dismissed the complaint for injunctive and declaratory relief.
The court vacated the dismissal and reopened the case upon motion by the plaintiff.

Professional for Social Res y gen

No. 93-1074, U.S.D.C. D.C., June 28, 1993. Action brought for untimely response to
request for records relating to Clipper Chip technologies. The Open America motion filed in
June 1998 to stay proceedings was granted by the court and the documents are being
processed by NSA.

59 >



McKalip, H. Diehl
Menas, George E.
Michael, Louis C.
Miles, David A.

Mirkovich, David

Mock, William G.

Molholm, Kurt N.

Muckerman, Joseph E.

O'Connor, Richard M.

O'Donnell, William K.

Ostovich, Rudolph, III
Pendley, William T.

Pollari, Ray W.
Pontius, Harry

Powell, Gary

Civ

Civ

Col

LtCol

Civ

Civ

Civ

Col

Civ

Civ

Acting Director, Defense Security Assistance
Agency

Acting Director, Defense Technical Security
Administration

Principal Deputy, Assistant Secretary of
Defense (International Security Policy)

Deputy Chief of Staff, United States Special
Operations Command

Deputy Director, Management Operations
Division, Ballistic Missile Defense Organization

Regional Director, Deputy Assistant Secretary
of Defense (Inter American Affairs); Deputy
Director, Assistant Secretary of Defense
(International Security Affairs)

Administrator, Defense Technical Information
Center

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

Director, Treaty Implications, United States
Southern Command

Executive Assistant, Assistant Secretary of
Defense (Command, Control, Communications
and Intelligence)

Vice Director, Joint Staff

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

Acting Deputy, Assistant Secretary of Defense
Command, Control, Communications and
Intelligence)

Director, Policy Directorate, Assistant
Secretary of Defense Command, Control,
Communications and Intelligence)

Executive Assistant, Deputy Assistant
Secretary of Defense (Production Resources)

13

16

34



The total DoD operating cost associated with the 1993 requests was $30,099,397.89.
The average cost of processing a single case during 1993 was approximately $254. Fee
collections for records provided to the public amounted to $1,450,343.85. Total program
costs since inception of the report are reflected below.

30
M 2
I
Lown
fs
0 $10
N
$s 5
0

DOD FOI Program Costs

7% 76 77 78 79 8 81 & 8 & & 8% 87 8 9 09 RB

YEAR

Questions regarding this report should be addressed to the Director, Freedom of
Information and Security Review, OATSD (Public Affairs), Room 2C757, 1400 Defense

Pentagon, Washington, D.C. 20301-1400.

*

ry



D'Alexander, J. F.
Darby, Thomas A.
Delligatti, Robert
Dimitt, Ted A.
Dorger, John M.
Druyun, Darleen
Euretig, Joseph G
Fortuna, John A.
Fry, Cecil W.

Garry, Peter

Gereg, Samuel W.
Glosson, Buster
Hannan, Stephen J.
Harris, Philip L.
Hogle, Walter

Hokkanen, Jerry

Civ

Col

MajGen

Capt

Col

Civ

LtCol

LtGen

Civ

BrigGen

BrigGen

Col

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

Chief, Office of Information Management,
Headquarters Air Mobility Command

Chief of Staff, Headquarters United States Air
Forces in Europe

Acting Director, Information Management,
Headquarters Air Force Reserve

Vice Commander, United States Air Force
Academy

Deputy Assistant Secretary for Acquisition
(Management and Policy)

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

Deputy to the Commander, Headquarters Air
Force Services Agency

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

Commander, Investigative Operations Center,
Headquarters Air Force Office of Special
Investigations

Acting Staff Director, Air Force Development
Test Center, Air Force Materiel Command

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

Director, Information Systems Support,
Headquarters Air Force Audit Agency

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

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

Vice Commander, 17th Air Force, United
States Air Forces in Europe

12

177

93

31

139

15

28



d. Paper prints (engineering drawings), 1.50
each

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

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

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

d. Other Technical Data Records

Charges for any additional services not specifically provided subparagraph 6-300, c.,

above, consistent with DoD Instruction 7230.7 (reference (r)), shall be made by Components
at the following rates:

oP ON ee

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

76



Wise, Franklin F. Col Chief of Staff, United States Total Army
Personnel Command

Wixted, Michael G. Col Chief of Staff, United States Total Army
Personnel Command

Woodard, William D. Civ Laboratory Counsel-Construction Engineering
Research District, Corps of Engineers

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

Allard, D. E. Civ Director of Naval History

Anselmo, P. S. RAdm Head, Aviation Plans and Requirements
Branch (N880)

Ayers, L. L. Capt Vice Commander, Atlantic Division, Naval
Facilities Engineering Command

Baggett, J. E Capt Deputy Judge Advocate General (International
Law)

Baker, J. Capt Director, Afloat Safety Programs, Naval Safety
Center

Beard, G. C., Jr. Capt Commander, Submarine Group 9, United
States Pacific Fleet

Becker, F. R. Capt Legal Counsel, Bureau of Naval Personnel

Bennett, D. M. VAdm Inspector General

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

Bond, J. N. LtCdr Staff Judge Advocate, Fleet Air Mediterranean,
United States Naval Forces Europe

Brown, R. E. Capt Commanding Officer, Chesapeake Division,
Naval Facilities Engineering Command

Burns, J. D. Capt Deputy Commander, Naval Security Group
Command

Cantrell, W. H. RAdm Commander, Space and Naval Warfare

Systems Command

22

67
53

22

68
42

10



FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT
ANNUAL REPORT
CALENDAR YEAR 1993

SUMMARY

A total of 118,651 public requests for records under the Freedom of Information Act
(FOIA) were completed during 1993 by the Department of Defense. As shown below, there
was a slight decline in the number of cases processed in 1998 from the previous year.

DOD FOI Requests Completed

150,000

125,000

CS 100,000

A

S$ 75,000

E

§ 50,000
25,000

7% 76 Ti 78 79 80 81 82 8&3 84 8 86 87 88 89 9 91 92 98
YEAR

The Department of Defense fully denied 1,798 and partially denied 9,229 out of
118,651 requests on the basis of FOIA exemptions. Of those exemptions, 10% were for
classified information; 8% for internal rules and practices; 5% for statutory exemptions;
12% for proprietary data; 18% for deliberative material; 26% for privacy information; and
22% for law enforcement investigations. An additional 28,810 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 1,417 actions
taken on appeals of denied requests, (69 granted, 357 partially denied, 594 fully denied,
and 397 could not be filled for other reasons, as mentioned earlier).



Item 5(b)

tat In d_on Aj

10 USC 128

10 USC 180

10 USC 618 (e)

10 USC 1102 (f)

18 USC 798

41 USC 423

42 USC 290dd-3

42 USC 2161-2168
(P.L. 703)

50 USC 401 Note,
Sec 1082
(P.L. 102-190)

50 USC 402 Note
(Sec 6, P.L. 86-36)

‘National Security
Act of 1947, (50
USC 401 et sec,
as amended,
403-3 (c)(5)

Intelligence Auth
Act, FY 93,

Sec 406 (a)

Totals __

etermination:

19)

18)

ES WE ES

ios

et oO

29]

21



Spane, R. J.
Stevens, R. A.
Stewart, J. D.
Stoutamire, S. L.
Stutzel, R. K.
Tanner, T. J.
Taylor, P. E.
Taylor, R. A.
Taylor, T. B.
Taylor, T. R.
Tennes, M. J.
Thompson, B. L.
Tiebout, R. A.
Tillotson, F. L.
Tomiak, W. W.

Town, D. S.

VAdm

MajGen

Capt

Maj

Capt

Capt

Capt

Capt

Civ

LtGen

Capt

Commander, Naval Air Force, United States
Pacific Fleet

Force Judge Advocate, Submarine Force,
United States Pacific Fleet

Commander, Marine Corps Logistics Base,
Albany, Georgia

Acting Deputy Commander, Naval Computer
and Telecommunications Command

Director, Administrative Support Division,
Navy-Marine Corps Appellate Review Acting

Commanding Officer, Northwest Division,
Naval Facilities Engineering Command

Commander, Submarine Group 9, United
States Pacific Fleet

Acting Commanding Officer, Southern Division,
Naval Facilities Engineering Command

Public Affairs Officer, United States Atlantic
Fleet

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

Deputy Commander, Naval Space Command.

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

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

Commander, Naval Training Center Orlando

Acting Commander, Pacific Naval Facilities
Engineering Command, Pearl Harbor

Commander, 1st Force Service Support Group,
Camp Pendleton

30

21



Stewart, Todd I.

Teiber, Joseph F. Jr.

Thompson, Dale W.

Tillstrom, Richard P.

Trest, Warren A.

Tucker, John E.

Walker, Johnny R.

Walters, Charles W.

Weaver, Richard L.

White, Eugene J. Jr.

White, Joe M.

Wilbur, David M.

Williams, Billy L.

Wingfield, Stephen R.

Yanker, Gerald

Col

Col

MajGen

Col

Civ

Maj

Civ

Civ

LtCol

Civ

Deputy Civil Engineer, Headquarters United
States Air Force

Director, Information Management,
Headquarters Air Force Reserve

Commander, Ogden Air Logistics Center, Air
Force Materiel Command

Chief of Staff, Headquarters Air Force Military
Personnel Center

Acting Director, Air Force Historical Research
Agency

Acting Chief, Information Security Division,
Chief of Security Police, Headquarters United
States Air Force

Acting Director, Information Management,
Headquarters Air Combat Command

Vice Commander, Headquarters Air Force
District of Washington

Deputy, Security and Investigative Programs,
Office of The Administrative Assistant to the
Secretary of the Air Force

Chief, Information Security Division, Chief of
Security Police, Headquarters United States
Air Force

Acting Director, Information Management,
Headquarters Air Force Space Command

Acting Director, Information Management,
Headquarters Air Combat Command

Chief, Administrative, Communications and
Records Management, Headquarters Air
Education and Training Command

Commander, Headquarters Air Force Services
Agency

Executive Assistant, Oklahoma Air Logistics
Center, Air Force Materiel Command

39

14

119

41

31

27



Hall, T. F.
Hamilton, F. X., Jr.

Hancock, W. A.

Hanel, L. E.

Hannas, M. D.

Hargrave, D.

Harness, F. W.

Hendrickson, D. M.

Hickman, D. E.

Higginbotham, G. B.

Holtz, M. B.

Jackson, A. P.

Johnson, P. N.

Jones, J. E.

Jones, R. G., Jr.

Kalleres, M. P.
Kamrath, R. A.

MajGen

Capt

Civ

Capt

BrigGen

Civ

LtCdr

Capt

Capt

VAdm

Capt

Commander, Naval Reserve Force

Commander, Marine Corps Logistics Base,
Albany, Georgia

Assistant Chief of Staff Operations, United
States Naval Academy

Acting Commander, Naval Base Seattle, United
States Pacific Fleet

Acting Deputy Assistant Judge Advocate
General (Claims and Tort Litigation)

Executive Assistant, Naval Air Warfare Center

Weapons Division, Naval Air Systems
Command

Commander, Naval Base Philadelphia, United
States Atlantic Fleet

Chief of Staff, United States Central Command,
United States Atlantic Fleet

Vice Commander, Naval Supply Systems
Command

Commanding General, 1st Force Service
Support Group, Camp Pendleton

Director, Public Affairs, Military Sealift
Command

Acting Deputy Assistant Judge Advocate
General (Investigations)

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

Commanding Officer, Engineering Field
Activity, Mediterranean

Staff Judge Advocate, Chief of Naval Air
Training

Commander, Military Sealift Command

Chief of Staff, Naval Base Charleston, United
States Atlantic Fleet

25

18


itial Denial A:

Alderman, Craig

Alexander, Robert M.

Aly, Stewart

Andrews, Duane P.

Aurelio, Frank J.

Ball, Elwood G.

Basel, John M.

Baumgardner, Haynes M.,
rr.

Brick, Samuel T.

Caddell, Ray L.

Civ

Civ

LtGen

Civ

Civ

Civ

Col

Civ

Col

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

Deputy Under Secretary of Defense for Security
Policy

Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense
(Military Manpower and Personnel Policy),

Assistant Secretary of Defense (Force
Management and Personnel)

Associate Deputy General Counsel (Legal
Counsel), General Counsel

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

Acting Assistant to the Secretary of Defense
(Intelligence Oversight)

Special Assistant , Director, Defense Research
and Engineering

Executive Assistant to Deputy Commander,
United States Pacific Command

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

Director, Legislative Reference Service, General
Counsel

Director, Management Operations, Strategic
Defense Initiative Organization

18

11

14

16



DMA

DNA

NSA/CSS

OIG, DOD

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

Program"

"Defense Nuclear Agency (DNA) Freedom

. of Information Act Program"

Public Access to Records of the National
Reconnaissance Office

"Public Access to Records"

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

61

32 CFR 286i and 293, as amd
by FR Vol 56, No. 111, 1 May
93

32 CFR 91 (pending revision)

32 CFR 296, as amd by FR
Vol 58, No. 219, 16 Nov 93

82 CFR 299

32 CFR 295



Item 10(a)
ilability of Records
(New categories or segregable portions of records now being revealed.)

POW/MIA documents being placed in the Library of Congress, and the National
Archives and Records Administration.

Human rights violations in El Salvador placed in the Library of Congress.

77



Item 5(c)

(Dept Air Force
DCAA.

DFAS

[DIA

(DIS

DISA

moescoconrocoo eo SALE

esoesooscoeocoeoeooeoeosoeces

BPiscooocreroooocooococok

* 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. Notan Agency Record

(see page 8 for description of each category)

47



Wilcox, Harvey J. Civ Deputy General Counsel (Logistics)

Wylie, P. C. Capt Deputy Assistant Judge Advocate General
(General Litigation)
DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE
Davidson, William A. Civ Deputy Administrative Assistant to the
Secretary of the Air Force
McNamara, Roger T. Civ Attorney Advisor to Assistant General Counsel,
Office of the Secretary of the Air Force
Willson, Walter A. Civ Assistant General Counsel, Office of the
Secretary of the Air Force
DEFENSE CONTRACT AUDIT AGENCY
Van Santen, John Civ Assistant Director, Resources
DEFENSE FINANCE AND ACCOUNTING SERVICE
None
DEFENSE INTELLIGENCE AGENCY
Clift, Denis A. Civ Chief of Staff
Prombain, Louis A. Civ Acting Chief of Staff
DEFENSE INVESTIGATIVE SERVICE
Donnelly, John F. Civ Director
DEFENSE INFORMATION SYSTEMS AGENCY
Short, Alonzo E., Jr. LtGen Director

49

81
33

18

215

39



Kincaid, William R.

Kingsley, James A.

Koch, Michael E.
Lanier, Jack O.

Lekang, Janet M.
Lilley, James R.

Locher, James R. III
Lowe, Robert A.
Lusey, Rodney S.
Mabry, Robert C.
Malinowski, Paul A.

Marshall, Andrew W.
Martin, Edward D.

Maude, Timothy J.
McBride, Edmund F.

McDevitt, Michael A.

McDonald, W. M.

Civ

Col

Col
Civ

Civ
Civ

Civ

Col

Capt

LtCol

BrigGen

Civ

Civ

Special Assistant to the Director, Tactical
Systems, Under Secretary of Defense
(Acquisition)

Chief, Operations, Liaison Division, United
States Pacific Command

Chief of Staff, Defense Commissary Agency

Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary of
Defense (Health Affairs)

Deputy Chief, Document Division, Joint Staff

Assistant Secretary of Defense (International
Security Affairs)

Assistant Secretary of Defense (Special
Operations and Low Intensity Conflict)

Chief of Staff, United States Transportation
Command

Deputy Chief of Staff, United States Space
Command

Deputy Chief of Staff, United States Special
Operations Command

Secretary, Joint Staff, United States Special
Operations Command

Director, Net Assessment

Acting Assistant Secretary of Defense (Health
Affairs)

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

Chief, Documents Division, Joint Staff
Director, East Asia and Pacific Region,
Assistant Secretary of Defense (International
Security Affairs)

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

12

15