Department of Defense

Freedom of Information Act

Report 

for

Fiscal Year 2007 

Prepared By: 

Director of Administration and Management 
i

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE 

FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT 

REPORT FOR 

FISCAL YEAR 2007 

(Report Period: October 1, 2006 through September 30, 2007)

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

 During fiscal year 2007 (FY 07), a total of 78,392 public requests for records under the 

Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) were completed by the Department of Defense (DoD). In 

the processing of these cases, DoD fully denied 2,345 and partially denied 12,691 on the basis of 

FOIA exemptions. Of those exemptions, 6% were for classified information; 11% for internal 

rules and practices; 8% for statutory exemptions; 6% for proprietary data; 8% for deliberative 

material; 41% for privacy information; and 20% for law enforcement investigations. 25,714 

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 

1046 actions taken on appeals of denied requests: 35 granted, 146 partially denied, 328 fully 

denied, and 537 not filled for other reasons cited above. 

 The total DoD operating cost associated with the processing of requests during this report 

period was $66,905,445. The average cost of processing a single case during this period was 

approximately $869.43. Fee collections for records provided to the public amounted to 

$497,354.00 (0.7% of total program cost). 
ii

Table of Contents 

Item Page

Item I. Basic Information Regarding the Report 1

Item II. How to Make a FOIA Request 1

Item III. Definitions of Terms and Acronyms Used in the Report 2

Item IV. Exemption 3 Statutes 5

Item V. Initial FOIA/PA Access Requests 8

 Part A. Numbers of Initial Requests 8

 Part B. Disposition of Initial Requests 8

Item VI. Appeals of Initial Denials of FOIA/PA Requests 10

 Part A. Numbers of Appeals 10

 Part B. Disposition of Appeals 10

Item VII. Compliance with Time Limits/Status of Pending Requests 11

 Part A. Median Processing Times for Initial Requests Processed During

the Year 

11

 Part B. Status of Pending Requests 12

Item VIII. Comparison With Previous Years 12

Item IX. FOIA Staffing/Costs 12

Item X. Fees Collected from Public 13

Item XI. FOIA Regulation and Fee Schedule 13

Item XII. Report on Executive Order 13392 Implementation 14

 Part A. Description of supplemental/modification of agency 

improvement plan 

 Part B. Report on agency implementation of its plan, including its 

 performance in meeting milestones, with respect to each 

improvement area 

14

 Part C. Identification and discussion of any deficiency in meeting plan 

 milestones 

17

 Part D. Additional narrative statement regarding other executive orderrelated activities 18

 Part E. Concise descriptions of FOIA exemptions 19
iii

 Part F. Additional statistics: 

1. Time range of requests pending, by date of request 

2. Time range of consultations pending with other agencies, by 

date of initial interagency communication 

20

 Part G. Attachments: Agency improvement plan with modification 20
1

Item I. 

Basic Information Regarding the Report

A. Title, address, and telephone number of person to be contacted with questions about the 

report: 

Write to: Chief, Defense Freedom of Information Policy Office 

 1950 Defense Pentagon 

 Washington, DC 20301-1950 

 Telephone: (703) 696-4689 

 Name of Incumbent Chief, Defense Freedom of Information Policy Office: Mr. Will 

Kammer 

 Name of Person who prepared this report: Mr. Stephen L. Fisher 

B. The electronic address (Universal Resource Line, URL) for this report is: 

http://www.dod.mil/pubs/foi/dfoipo/

C. You may obtain a paper copy of this DoD Annual FOIA Report for FY 07 by writing to the 

above address. A FOIA request is not necessary. Please include a mailing address. 

Item II. 

How to Make a FOIA Request

The DoD Freedom of Information Act Handbook provides general information about the 

FOIA Program within DoD and provides basic information about how to submit a FOIA request. 

This document also contains DoD Component addresses, a brief description of expected 

response times, and the reason why some requests are not granted. The DoD Freedom of 

Information Act Handbook can be found at:

http://www.dod.mil/pubs/foi/dfoipo/docs/FOIAhandbook.pdf
2

Item III. 

Definitions of Terms and Acronyms Used in the Report

A. Agency-specific acronyms. 

1. Defense Freedom of Information Policy Office: DFOIPO 

2. Defense Intelligence Agency: DIA. 

3. Director of Administration and Management: DA&M. 

4. Human Resources Directorate, Washington Headquarters Services: HRD 

5. National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency (formerly National Imagery and Mapping Agency 

or NIMA): NGA. 

6. National Security Agency: NSA. 

7. National Security Personnel System: NSPS. 

8. National Reconnaissance Office: NRO. 

9. Office of the Secretary of Defense: OSD. 

10. Prisoner of War/Missing in Action: POW/MIA. 

B. Other agency acronyms. 

1. Central Intelligence Agency: CIA. 

2. Office of Personnel Management: OPM 

C. “Other Reasons” cited on initial and appeal determinations. 

1. No Records. A reasonable search of files failed to identify records responsive to the 

request. 

2. Referrals. The request was referred to another DoD Component or Federal Agency for 

action. 

3. Withdrawn. The request was withdrawn by the requester. 

4. Fee-Related Reason. The requester is unwilling to pay fees associated with the request; 

the requester is past due in the payment of fees associated with a previous FOIA request; or 

the requester disagrees with a fee estimate. 
3

5. Records not Reasonably Described. The request could not be acted upon since the record 

had not been described with sufficient particularity to enable the DoD Component to locate it 

by conducting a reasonable search. 

6. Not a Proper FOIA Request for Some Other Reason. The requester has failed 

unreasonably to comply with legitimate procedural requirements which are not fee-related. 

7. Not an Agency Record. The requested information was not a record within the meaning 

of the FOIA. 

8. Duplicate Request. A request for the same information by the same requester. This 

includes identical requests received via different means (e.g., electronic mail, facsimile, 

mail, courier) at the same or different times. 

9. Other. Any other reason a requester does not comply with published rules, other than 

those mentioned above. 

D. Common terminology. 

1. Freedom of Information Act/Privacy Act (FOIA/PA) request: A FOIA request is 

generally a request for access to records concerning a third party, an organization, or a 

particular topic of interest. A Privacy Act request is a request for records concerning 

oneself; such requests are also treated as FOIA requests. 

2. Initial request: A request to a Federal Agency for access to records under the FOIA. 

3. Appeal: A request to a Federal Agency asking that it review at a higher administrative 

level a full denial or partial denial of access to records under the FOIA, or any other 

adverse FOIA determination. 

4. Processed request or appeal: A request or appeal for which an agency has taken a final 

action on the request or the appeal in all respects. 

5. Multi-track processing: A system in which simple requests requiring relatively minimal 

review are placed in one processing track and more voluminous and complex requests are 

placed in one or more other tracks. Requests in each track are processed on a first-in/first 

out basis. A requester who has a compelling need for records may request expedited 

processing (see below). 

6. Expedited processing: An agency will process a FOIA request on an expedited basis 

when a requester has shown a compelling need or urgency for the records which warrants 

prioritization of his or her request over other requests that were made earlier. 

7. Simple request: A FOIA request that an agency using multi-track processing places in its 

fastest (nonexpedited) track based on the volume and/or simplicity of records requested. 

8. Complex request: A FOIA request that an agency using multi-track processing places in 

a slower track based on the volume and/or complexity of records requested. 
4

9. Grant: An agency decision to disclose all records in full in response to a FOIA request. 

10. Partial denial: An agency decision to disclose a record in part in response to a FOIA 

request, deleting information determined to be exempt under one or more exemptions 

under the FOIA; or a decision to disclose some records in their entirety, but to withhold 

others in whole or in part. 

11. Denial: An agency decision not to release any part of a record or records in response to 

a FOIA request because all the information in the requested records is determined by the 

agency to be exempt under one or more of the FOIA exemptions, or for some procedural 

reason such as no record is located in response to a FOIA request. 

12. Time limits: The time period in the FOIA for an agency to respond to a FOIA request 

(ordinarily 20 working days from proper receipt of a "perfected" FOIA request). 

13. "Perfected" request: A FOIA request for records which adequately describes the records 

sought, which has been received by the FOIA office of the agency or agency component 

in possession of the records, and for which there is no remaining question about the 

payment of applicable fees. 

14. Exemption 3 statute: A separate federal statute prohibiting the disclosure of a certain 

type of information and authorizing its withholding under FOIA subsection (b)(3). 

15. Median number: The middle number, not the average number. For example: of 3, 7, and 

14, the median number is 7. 

16. Average number: The number obtained by dividing the sum of a group of numbers by 

the quantity of numbers in the group. For example: the average of 3, 7, and 14 is 8. 
5

Item IV. 

Exemption 3 Statutes Invoked 

Court 

Upheld? Statute Types of Material Withheld Under Statute 

No 5 USC §574(j) Administrative Dispute Resolution Act - Dispute resolution 

communication between a neutral and a party to the dispute 

No 5 USC Sec 7114(b)(4) Civil Service Reform Act – Representation Rights and Duties, 

Labor Unions 

No 10 USC §128 Unclassified Special Nuclear Weapons Information 

Yes1 10 USC §130 Unclassified Technical Data with Military or Space Application 

Yes2 10 USC §130b Personnel in Overseas, Sensitive or Routinely Deployable Units 

Yes3 10 USC §130c Certain Sensitive Information of Foreign Governments and 

International Organizations 

Yes4 10 USC §424 Protection of Organizational and Personnel Information for DIA, 

NRO, and NGA 

No 10 USC §455 Maps, Charts, and Geodetic Data; Public Availability 

No 10 USC §457 NGA Operational Files 

No 10 USC §613a(a) Promotion Selection Board Proceedings 

No 10 USC §1102 Confidentiality of Medical Records 

No 10 USC §2305(g) Protection of Contractor Proposals 

No 10 USC §2371(i) Research Projects: Transactions Other Than Contracts and Grants 

No 10 USC §2485(h) Commissaries: Limitations on Release of Commercially Valuable 

Information 

No 10 USC §2640(h) Authority to Protect Safety-Related Information Voluntarily 

Provided by an Air Carrier 

No 12 USC §3403 Confidentiality of Financial Records 

No 16 USC §470w-3 National Historic Preservation 

Yes5 18 USC §798(a) Communications Intelligence 

No 22 USC §2778(e) Sec 

38(e) 

Control of Arms Export 
6

Court 

Upheld? Statute Types of Material Withheld Under Statute 

No 26 USC §6103 Confidentiality and Disclosure of Returns and Return Information

No 31 USC §3729(d) False Claims Act Civil Action for False Claims against the U.S. 

No 35 USC §122 Confidential Status of Patent Applications 

Yes6 41 USC §253b(m)(1) Disclosure of Contractor Proposals 

No 42 USC §290dd-2 Confidentiality of Patient Records 

Yes7 42 USC §2162(a) Restricted Data (Atomic Energy), Atomic Energy Act of 1954 

No 42 USC §2168(a)(1)(C) Formerly Restricted Data (Atomic Energy), Atomic Energy Act 

of 1954 

Yes8 50 USC §402 Note Sec 6 NSA Functions and Information 

Yes9 50 USC §403-l(i) Intelligence Sources and Methods (Director of National 

Intelligence use only) 

Yes10 50 USC §403(g), Section 

6 of the CIA Act of 1949 

CIA Functions and Information 

No 50 USC §421 Protection of Identities of U.S. Undercover Intelligence officers, 

agents, informants, and sources 

No 50 USC §435 Note Sec 

1082 

Disclosure of Information Concerning US Personnel Classified as 

POW/MIA During Vietnam Conflict (McCain “Truth Bill”) 

No 50 USC §2411(c) Export License Application Information 

Item IV. Endnotes 

1 Chenkin v. Department of the Army, No. 93-494, 1994 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 20907, at *8 (E.D. Pa. Jan. 14, 1994), 

aff’d, 61 F.3d 894 (3d Cir. 1995) (unpublished table decision); Colonial Trading Corp. v. Department of the 

Navy, 735 F. Supp. 429, 431 (D.D.C. 1990); see also American Friends Serv. Comm. v. DOD, No. 83-4916, 

1986 WL 10659, at *4(E.D. Pa. Sept. 25, 1986), rev’d on other grounds, 831 F.2d 441 (3d Cir. 1987). 2 Hiken v. Dep’t of Defense, No. 06-02812, 2007 U.S. LEXIS 73545 (N.D. Cal. Oct. 2, 2007). 

3 ACLU v. Dep’t of Defense, 389 F. Supp. 2d 547, 554 (S.D.N.Y. 2005). 4 Larson v. Department of State et al., No. 1:02CV01937, (D.D.C. Aug. 10, 2005). 5 Winter v. NSA, 569 F. Supp. 545, 548 (S.D. Cal. 1983); see also Gilmore v. NSA, No. C 92-3646, 1993 U.S. 

Dist. LEXIS 7694, at **26-27 (N.D. Cal. May 3, 1993) (finding that information on cryptography currently used 

by NSA “integrally related” to function and activity of intelligence gathering and thus protected). 6 Hornbostel v. Department of Interior, 305 F. Supp. 2d 21 (D.D.C. 2003). 7

 Meeropol v. Smith, No. 75-1121, slip op. at 53-55 (D.D.C. Feb. 29, 1984), aff’d in relevant part & remanded in 

part sub nom. Meeropol v. Meese, 790 F.2d 942 (D.C. Cir. 1986). But see General Elec. Co. v. NRC, 750 F.2d 

1394, 1401 (7th Cir. 1984) (concluding that provision concerning technical information furnished by license 

applicants lacked sufficient specificity to qualify as Exemption 3 statute).

8 Founding Church of Scientology v. NSA, 610 F.2d 824, 828 (D.C. Cir. 1979); Hayden v. NSA, 452 F. Supp. 

247,252 (D.D.C. 1978), aff’d, 608 F.2d 1381 (D.C. Cir. 1979).
7

9 CIA v. Sims, 471 U.S. 159, 167 (1985); see also Minier v. CIA, 88 F.3d 796, 801 (9th Cir. 1996) (finding that 

agency properly refused to confirm or deny existence of records concerning deceased person’s alleged 

employment relationship with CIA); Maynard v. CIA, 986 F.2d 547, 554 (1st Cir. 1993) (stating that under § 

403(d)(3) it is responsibility of Director of CIA to determine whether sources or methods should be disclosed); 

Krikorian v. Department of State, 984 F.2d 461, 465 (D.C. Cir. 1993) (same); Fitzgibbon v. CIA, 911 F.2d 755, 

761 (D.C. Cir. 1990) (same); Hunt v. CIA, 981 F.2d 1116, 1118 (9th Cir. 1992) (upholding agency’s “Glomar” 

response to request on foreign national, because acknowledgement of any records would reveal sources and 

methods); Knight v. CIA, 872 F.2d 660, 663 (8th Cir. 1989) (same); Levy v. CIA, No. 95-1276, slip op. at 14-17 

(D.D.C. Nov. 16, 1995) (same), aff’d, No. 96-5004 (D.C. Cir. Jan. 15, 1997); Roman v. Dailey, No. 97-1164, 

1998 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 6708, at **10-11 (D.D.C. May 11, 1998) (concluding that agency properly refused to 

confirm or deny existence of records pertaining to agency personnel and spy satellite programs); Blazy v. Tenet, 

979 F. Supp. 10, 23-24 (D.D.C. 1997) (protecting intelligence sources and methods located in requester’s 

personnel file), summary affirmance granted, No. 97-5330 (D.C. Cir. May 12, 1998); Andrade v. CIA, No. 95-

1215, 1997 WL 527347, at **3-5 (D.D.C. Aug. 18, 1997) (holding intelligence methods used in assessing 

employee fitness protectible); Earth Pledge Found. v. CIA, 988 F. Supp. 623, 627 (S.D.N.Y. 1996) (finding 

agency’s “Glomar” response proper because acknowledgement of records would generate “danger of revealing 

sources”), aff’d per curiam, 128 F.3d 788 (2d Cir. 1997) (unpublished table decision); Campbell v. United States 

Dep’t of Justice, No. 89-CV-3016, 1996 WL 554511, at *6 (D.D.C. Sept. 19, 1996) (“CIA director is to be 

afforded ‘great deference’ by courts determining the propriety of nondisclosure of intelligence sources”); cf. 

Linder v. DOD, 133 F.3d 17, 25 (D.C. Cir. 1998) (“[C]ourts must give ‘great deference’ to the Director of 

Central Intelligence’s determination that a classified document could reveal intelligence sources and methods and 

endanger national security.”) (non-FOIA case). 

10 Minier, 88 F.3d at 801; Roman, 1998 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 6708, at **10-11; Blazy, 979 F. Supp. at 23-24; Earth 

Pledge Found., 988 F. Supp. at 627-28; Campbell, 1996 WL 554511, at *6; Kronisch v. United States, No. 83-

2458, 1995 WL 303625, at **4-6 (S.D.N.Y. May 18, 1995); Hunsberger v. CIA, No. 92-2186, slip op. at 3 

(D.D.C. Apr. 5, 1995); Rothschild v. CIA, No. 91-1314, 1992 WL 71393, at *2 (D.D.C. Mar. 25, 1992); Lawyers 

Comm. for Human Rights v. INS, 721 F. Supp. 552, 567 (S.D.N.Y. 1989); Pfeiffer v. CIA, 721 F. Supp. 337, 

341-42 (D.D.C. 1989). 
8

Item V. 

Initial FOIA/PA Access Requests

A. Numbers of initial requests. 

 1. Number of requests pending as of end of FY 06: 18,2881

 2. Number of requests received during FY 07: 86,299 

 3. Number of requests processed during FY 07: 78,392 

 4. Number of requests pending as of end of FY 07: 26,195 

B. Disposition of initial requests. 

 1. Number of grants: 37,642 

 2. Number of partial denials: 12,691 

 3. Number of total denials: 2,345 

a. Number of times each FOIA exemption used (counting each exemption once per 

request). 

(1) Exemption 1: 1,474 

(2) Exemption 2: 2,855 

(3) Exemption 3: 2,055 

(4) Exemption 4: 1,583 

(5) Exemption 5: 2,179 

(6) Exemption 6: 10,679 

(7) Exemption 7(A): 484 

(8) Exemption 7(B): 20 

(9) Exemption 7(C): 4,419 

(10) Exemption 7(D): 178 

 

1

 This number differs from the number reported at the end of the 2006 report due to more advanced counting 

methods. This figure is believed to be more accurate than that reported last year. 
9

(11) Exemption 7(E): 96 

(12) Exemption 7(F): 17 

(13) Exemption 8: 0 

(14) Exemption 9: 6 

 4. Other reasons for nondisclosure (total): 25,714 

a. No records: 6,363 

b. Referrals: 8,668 

c. Request withdrawn: 2,688 

d. Fee-related reason: 787 

e. Records not reasonably described: 821 

f. Not a proper FOIA request for some other reason: 2,847 

g. Not an agency record: 782 

h. Duplicate request: 1,203 

i. Other (total): 1,555 

(1) Electronic referral: 78 

(2) Insufficient address/information: 438 

(3) Lacked 3rd party waiver: 336 

(4) Publicly sold documents: 26 

(5) Direct National Personnel Records Center referral: 281 

(6) Non-attribution: 14 

(7) Improper referrals: 73 

(8) National Archives referral: 19 

(9) Not agency issue: 290 
10

Item VI. 

Appeals of Initial Denials of FOIA/PA Requests

A. Numbers of appeals. 

 1. Number of appeals received during FY 07: 1,040 

 2. Number of appeals processed during FY 07: 1,046 

B. Disposition of appeals. 

 1. Number denied in full: 328 

 2. Number denied in part: 146 

 3. Number completely reversed (granted): 35 

 a. Number of times each FOIA exemption used (counting each exemption once per 

appeal). 

(1) Exemption 1: 102 

(2) Exemption 2: 46 

(3) Exemption 3: 98 

(4) Exemption 4: 18 

(5) Exemption 5: 100 

(6) Exemption 6: 185 

(7) Exemption 7(A): 11 

(8) Exemption 7(B): 2 

(9) Exemption 7(C): 101 

(10) Exemption 7(D): 7 

(11) Exemption 7(E): 11 

(12) Exemption 7(F): 1 

(13) Exemption 8: 0 
11

(14) Exemption 9: 0 

 4. Other reasons for nondisclosure (total): 537 

a. No records: 102 

b. Referrals: 28 

c. Appeal withdrawn: 74 

d. Fee-related reason: 139 

e. Records not reasonably described: 1 

f. Not a proper FOIA request for some other reason: 22 

g. Not an agency record: 2 

h. Duplicate request: 13 

i. Other2

 (specify): 156 

Item VII. 

Compliance With Time Limits/Status of Pending Requests

A. Median processing time for requests processed during the year (FY 2007). 

 1. Simple requests. 

 a. Number of requests processed: 58,467 

 b. Median number of days to process: 11.5 

 2. Complex requests. 

 a. Number of requests processed: 18,621 

 b. Median number of days to process: 45.5 

 3. Requests accorded expedited processing. 

 

2

 Other reasons were appeals not submitted within required time frame and improper address. 
12

 a. Number of requests processed: 1,304 

 b. Median number of days to process: 1 

 B. Status of pending requests (as of September 30, 2007) 

 1. Number of requests pending: 26,195 

 2. Median age of above cases in days: 111 

Item VIII. 

Comparison With Previous Years

Number of initial expedited requests received (FY 05) 528 

Number of initial expedited requests granted (FY 05) 411 

Number of initial expedited requests received (FY 06) 955 

Number of initial expedited requests granted (FY 06) 708 

Number of initial expedited requests received (FY 07) 1,575 

Number of initial expedited requests granted (FY 07) 1,304 

Item IX. 

FOIA Staffing/Costs

A. Staffing levels (expressed in work-years). 

 1. Number of full-time FOIA personnel: 415.50 

 2. Number of personnel with part-time or occasional FOIA duties: 555.00 

 3. Total number of personnel: 970.50 

B. Total costs (including staff and all resources). 

 1. FOIA processing (including appeals): $64,598,467 
13

 2. Litigation-related activities (estimated): $2,306,978 

 3. Total costs: $66,905,445 

Item X. 

Fees Collected From Public

A. Total amount of fees collected by the agency for processing requests: $497,354.00 

B. Percentage of total costs: .7% 

 

Item XI. 

FOIA Regulation and Fee Schedule

A. The Department of Defense (DoD) Freedom of Information Act Program Regulation, DoD 

 5400.7-R, September 4, 1998, which provides guidance regarding administration of FOIA 

Program within the DoD, can be found at:

http://www.dtic.mil/whs/directives/corres/pdf/540007r.pdf

B. The Fee Schedule is Chapter 6 of the above regulation and as modified at: 

http://www.defenselink.mil/pubs/foi/foiafees.pdf

C. Additional Department of Defense FOIA documents and hyperlinks can be found by 

 accessing the following Universal Resource Locator (URL): 

http://www.dod.mil/pubs/foi/ 
14

Item XII. 

Report on FOIA Executive Order 13392 Implementation

A. The DA&M submitted Modification #2 to the DoD FOIA Improvement Plan on December 

28, 2007. Copies of the plan and both modifications are at enclosure 1. They are also 

available at: http://www.dod.mil/pubs/foi/dfoipo/. Modification #2 updated three areas of 

the plan, as follows: 

1. Organizational Structure and Manning. Modification #2 changed two objectives 

within this area. 

a. Optimal organizational placement of FOIA Offices. This objective had as a 

milestone the submission of quarterly progress reports from the DoD Components. 

This requirement was open-ended without a date for the final status report. 

Modification #2 added a final date for these reports, September 30, 2007. 

b. Standardized job series and GS levels. The DoD transition to the National 

Security Personnel System (NSPS) required a change to this objective. With the 

introduction of the NSPS, it was determined that different and more extensive levels 

of review within OSD human resources components would be required to reach the 

goal of obtaining standardized job series and employment levels for FOIA 

personnel. Therefore, it was necessary to revise the objective and its milestones. 

The revised milestones provide more realistic dates to accomplish the complex 

external coordination necessary to meet this objective. 

2. Training. Two milestones for the second objective in this area, “Develop a DoD FOIA 

online training capability within a newly created DFOIPO web site”, were withdrawn. 

These two milestones presumed the necessity of outsourcing for the development of 

online FOIA training modules. However, the Department was able to develop these 

modules without having to resort to outsourcing. Because the overall objective was met 

(Develop a DoD FOIA online training capability within a newly created Defense Freedom 

of Information Policy Office Website), these two milestones became irrelevant and were 

withdrawn. 

3. Resources and Backlog. The second objective within this area, “Fund additional FOIA 

personnel staffing required to reduce backlogs in FY 08 and beyond”, was revised by 

Modification 2. This revision was appropriate because of a DoD Program Budget 

Decision directing FY 08 and beyond budgeting for support of DoD Component FOIA 

programs. Specifically, DoD took an unprecedented action when it issued Program 

Budget Decision 704 (PBD 704) on December 12, 2006. This PBD directs the DoD 

Components to provide funding to support their FOIA Programs in FY 08 and FY09. In 

response to this action, modification #2 added two new milestones for 2007 to reflect the 

steps taken to implement PBD 704 directed FOIA funding. 
15

B. Twelve milestones were completed in 2007, including two milestones scheduled for 

completion in 2008. 

1. Organizational Structure and Manning. This improvement area has two objectives 

with milestones for 2007. 

a. Optimal organizational placement of FOIA Offices. The milestones for 2007 

were met for this objective. On January 15, 2007, the DoD Components were 

required to submit progress reports in response to the December 29, 2006, DA&M 

correspondence requesting they review the current placement of their FOIA Offices 

within their organizational structure. The milestone also required progress reports 

to be submitted quarterly; however, there was no prescribed end date. This 

milestone was revised by Modification #2, which established the last report 

submission as September 30, 2007. The second milestone anticipated the DoD 

Components implementing the changes recommended in the referenced December 

29, 2006, correspondence by December 2007. The Defense Commissary Agency 

and the U.S. Strategic Command, for example, are two DoD Components that made 

significant changes to the FOIA structure within their organizations, thereby 

enhancing the status of their FOIA responsibilities. 

b. Standardized job series and GS levels. There were two 2007 milestones from the 

initial plan for this objective. These objectives were revised with Modification #2 

and one new milestone for 2007 was established in Modification #2. The December 

2007 and a January 2008 milestone from Modification # 2 were met in December 

2007 with a memorandum from DFOIPO to the DoD Human Resources office.

2. Training. This improvement area contains one objective, “Develop a DoD FOIA online 

training capability within a newly created DFOIPO Website”, that had 2007 milestones. 

Two milestones that were to be met during 2007 were withdrawn by Modification #2 

because DFOIPO was able to meet the objective without having to outsource this effort. 

Additionally, a milestone that was scheduled for July 2008, “Online training modules 

established on FOIA Website,” was met in 2007. 

3. Technology. There are three objectives in this area, all of which had 2007 milestones. 

a. “Analyze FOIA software for expanded use in streamlining DoD FOIA Processes.” 

This objective had one milestone that was met in 2007. On June 29, 2007, DFOIPO 

issued a memorandum advising DoD FOIA Offices on obtaining information 

technology support for their FOIA Programs. 

b. “Standardize DoD FOIA Websites to enable better public access.” This objective 

had one 2007 milestone that was met. In January, 2007, DFOIPO conducted an 

audit of DoD Component FOIA Websites to determine compliance with previously 

published (September 29, 2006) policy. Each Component whose Website was not 

in compliance was notified, and the Components took the steps necessary to ensure 

compliance.
16

c. “Conduct a feasibility study for a DoD wide electronic network to expedite FOIA 

processing.” Two milestones were accomplished in 2007 for this objective. An 

Integrated Processing Team (IPT), composed of representatives from DFOIPO, the 

DoD Components, and information technology (IT) specialists, advised the DA&M 

that a DoD-wide FOIA electronic network is not feasible at this time. A second 

milestone (approval of a DoD wide electronic network) became moot.

4. Resources/Backlog. The second objective in this area, “Fund additional FOIA personnel 

staffing required to reduce backlogs in FY 08 and beyond”, had one milestone scheduled 

to be completed by March 2007. The accomplishment of this milestone, “If funded, 

hiring process begins for new FOIA personnel within DFOIPO and OSD FOIA Office,” 

was partially met when the DoD issued PBD 704. FY 08 funding has been authorized for 

the OSD FOIA Office for backlog reduction. Additional personnel resources are 

scheduled to be in place within the OSD FOIA Office by May 2008. Two new milestones 

for 2007, which were added in Modification #2, were accomplished. The first of these 

milestones, “Obtain status/progress from WHS/OSD and DoD Comptrollers on execution 

of FOIA offset funding within PBD 704”, and the second, “Obtain status/progress from 

WHS/OSD and DoD Comptrollers regarding specific DoD funding allocations as directed 

within PBD 704”, were accomplished by a series of communications between DFOIPO 

representatives and DoD budgeting officials. 

C. Below are three FOIA Improvement Areas with three milestone deficiencies and their 

projected dates of completion cited in the DoD FOIA Improvement Plan: 

1. Area: Standardized Job series and GS levels for FOIA personnel. 

a. Milestone: “DFOIPO establishes specific job series and designates grade levels for 

DoD FOIA personnel”. 

(1) Target date: February 2007. 

(2) Steps taken to correct deficiency: This milestone was not met because of the 

introduction of the NSPS within the DoD. New milestones were established to 

better facilitate the establishment of a FOIA occupational series within the 

DoD. Modification #2 reflects these new milestones. 

(3) Future remedial steps: As indicated in Modification #2, HRD will submit a 

request by March 2008 for the creation of a new FOIA/Privacy Act civilian 

occupational series within DoD. 

b. Milestone: “DFOIPO coordinates with HRD and OPM to standardize grade levels 

and job series for FOIA personnel government-wide”. 

(1) Target date: March 2007. 

(2) Steps taken to correct deficiency: Like the previous milestone, this milestone 

was not met because of the introduction of NSPS within DoD. 
17

(3) Future remedial steps: None. The milestone is rendered moot by Section 11 of 

the OPEN Government Act of 2007, which states that OPM will examine 

possible government-wide FOIA /Privacy Act occupational series. 

2. Area: Technology. 

a. Milestone: “Establish security standards within DoD for FOIA software”.

(1) Target date: September 2007. 

(2) Steps taken to correct deficiency: None. DoD Components have been given 

guidance by the DoD Security Office to apply security standards when 

considering the purchase of FOIA software applications. 

(3) Future remedial steps: None. Although specific security standards for FOIA 

software were not published, DoD Components are utilizing existing 

information technology security standards for potential purchases of FOIA 

software products. 

D. Other Executive Order related activities: 

1. The DoD FOIA Website guidance published on September 29, 2006, assisted DoD FOIA 

Websites to comply with the requirements of Executive Order 13392. However, specific 

guidance was lacking that addressed how the requirements of the FOIA, specifically 5 

U.S.C. § 552 (a)(2), (g)(1), and (g)(2), were met by all DoD FOIA Websites at all levels 

from unit/installation through major commands to Component headquarters. Guidance 

was needed that applied common standards to the uniqueness of decentralized DoD 

FOIA processing and FOIA Websites. Accordingly, on October 11, 2007, DFOIPO 

published specific guidance for DoD FOIA Reading Rooms. Additionally, the DoD 

Components were advised that DFOIPO will audit their Websites for compliance with 

both the September 29, 2006, and October 11, 2007 guidance. All announced standards 

for DoD FOIA Websites will be incorporated within DoD Regulation 5400.7-R, which is 

currently completing a full revision. 

2. DFOIPO considers FOIA training a major issue within DoD and essential to an effective 

program throughout the Department. Periodic changes in FOIA policy and procedures 

and continuous turnover in key FOIA Officers mandate timely and effective training to 

sustain and enhance FOIA service to the requester community. To this end, DFOIPO 

trained over 700 DoD personnel in 2007. The DFOIPO staff conducted FOIA training at 

American Society of Access Professionals conferences and Department of Justice 

training sessions. Additionally, the DFOIPO staff conducted DoD-specific training, 

sponsored by the Combatant Commands, at locations throughout the world to 

accommodate FOIA Officers assigned to military locations in the United States, the 

Pacific, and in Europe. 

E. Concise descriptions of FOIA exemptions: 
18

(b)(1)--records currently and properly classified in the interest of national security; 

(b)(2)--records related solely to internal personnel rules and practices; Two profiles – 

Low and High. 

Low – Records qualifying under the Low (b)(2) profile are those that are trivial and 

housekeeping in nature for which there is no legitimate public interest or benefit to be 

gained by release, and it would constitute an administrative burden to process the 

request in order to disclose the records. 

High – Records qualifying under High (b)(2) are those containing or constituting 

statutes, rules, regulations, orders, manuals, directives, instructions, and security 

classification guides, the release of which would allow circumvention of these 

records thereby substantially hindering the effective performance of a significant 

function of DoD. 

(b)(3)--records protected by another law that specifically exempts the information 

from public release; 

(b)(4)--trade secrets and commercial or financial information obtained from a private 

source which would cause substantial competitive harm to the source if disclosed; 

(b)(5)-- inter-agency or intra-agency memorandums or letters containing information 

considered privileged in litigation; 

(b)(6)--records which if released, would result in a clearly unwarranted invasion of 

personal privacy; 

(b)(7)--investigatory records or information compiled for law enforcement purposes; 

(b)(8)--records for the use of any agency responsible for the regulation or supervision 

of financial institutions; and 

(b)(9)--records containing geological and geophysical information (including maps) 

concerning wells. 
19

F. Additional statistics: 

1. Ten oldest pending FOIA requests. 

Calendar 

Year 

1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 

Requests May 5 

May 12 

June 19 

August 8 

August 14 

December 1 

December 23 

December 23 

March 16 

April 21 

 

2. Consultations. The Department historically has tracked consultations received from other 

agencies as FOIA requests; however, absent a pre-existing requirement to specifically track 

these consultations separately, DoD is unable to provide this data. 

G. Attachments: 

 1. DoD FOIA Improvement Plan, June 14, 2006 

2. Modification #1 to DoD FOIA Improvement Plan, November 2, 2006 

3. Modification #2 to DoD FOIA Improvement Plan, December 28, 2007 
Attachment 

1 

Department of Defense

Freedom of Information Act 

Executive Order 13392 Improvement Plan 

June 14, 2006 

Department of Defense 

Freedom of Information Policy Office 

1155 Defense Pentagon 

Washington, D.C. 20301-1155 
i 

Table of Contents 

 

 Page

Executive Summary iii 

Part A – The DoD FOIA Program and Implementation of Executive 

Order (EO) 13392, Improving Agency Disclosure of Information 1 

 

 A.1. Introduction 1 

 A.2. Areas of Consideration for DoD FOIA Review 2 

Part B – Areas Selected for Review 2 

 B.1. DoD FOIA Office Survey 2 

 B.2. DoD Component Chief Public Liaison Officer Survey 3 

Part C – Results of Review 3 

 C.1. Information Collection Plan 3 

 C.2. FOIA Office Survey Population 4 

 C.3. FOIA Staff Demographics 4 

 C.4. FOIA Office Survey Findings and Observations – 

Information Source #1 4 

 C.5. DoD Component Chief Public Liaison Officer 

Findings and Observations – Information Source #2 7 

 C.6. Senior DFOIPO Findings and Observations – 

Information Source #3 10 

 

Part D – Areas Chosen For Improvement 11 

D.1. Organizational Structure and Manning 11 

D.2. Training 11 

D.3. Technology 11 

D.4. Resources/Backlogs 11 

Part E – Plans for Selected Improvement Areas 11 

 E.1. Name: Organizational Structure and Manning 11 

 

 Objective 1: Optimal organizational placement of FOIA Offices 11

 

Objective 2: Standardized job series and GS levels for FOIA 

 Personnel 12 

 Objective 3: Establish standards within DoD for contracting 

 FOIA functions 13 
ii 

E.2. Name: Training 14 

Objective 1: Develop DoD FOIA resident training program 14 

 Objective 2: Develop a DoD FOIA online training capability 

 within a newly created DFOIPO Website 15 

 

 E.3. Name: Technology 15 

 Objective 1: Analyze FOIA software for expanded use in 

 streamlining DoD FOIA processes 15 

 Objective 2: Standardize DoD FOIA Websites to enable 

 better public access 16 

 Objective 3: Conduct a feasibility study for a DoD-wide 

 electronic network to expedite FOIA processing 17 

 E.4. Resources/Backlog 18 

 Objective 1: Determine manpower required to reduce 

 backlogs in FOIA Offices that have backlogs 

 over 50 requests 18 

 Objective 2: Fund additional FOIA personnel staffing 

 required to reduce backlogs in FY 08 

 and beyond 18 

Part F – Grouping of Improvement Areas 19 

 F.1. Areas anticipated to be completed by December 31, 2006 19

 F.2. Areas anticipated to be completed by December 31, 2007 20 

 F.3. Areas anticipated to be completed after December 31, 2007 20 

Part G – Summary 21 

TABS: 

A. Executive Order 13392 – Improving Agency Disclosure of Information, December 

14, 2005 

B. Deputy Secretary of Defense Memorandum, Executive Order (EO) 13392 on the 

Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), January 11, 2006 

C. Director of Administration and Management Memorandum, Executive Order 13392 

on the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) – DoD Implementation, February 1, 2006 

D. Chief Defense Freedom of Information Policy Office Memorandum, DoD 

Implementation of Executive Order 13392 on the Freedom of Information Act 

(FOIA), February 10, 2006 

E. Department of Defense Freedom of Information Act Program Survey 

F. Chief Defense Freedom of Information Policy Office Memorandum, Executive Order 

13392 – Review of DoD FOIA Program, March 24, 2006 

G. Department of Defense Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) Program Study, May 19, 

2006 
iii 

Executive Summary 

Department of Defense (DoD) Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) Improvement Plan for 

Executive Order (EO) 13392, Improving Agency Disclosure of Information 

 The review of FOIA operations within DoD has been thorough and comprehensive. The 

findings and observations have been drawn from survey data received from over 500 FOIA 

Offices DoD-wide. Additionally, DoD Component Chief Public Liaison Officers from 16 major 

headquarters and senior FOIA managers from the Defense Freedom of Information Policy Office 

(DFOIPO) also provided their perspectives on backlogs, customer service, adequacy of 

resources, FOIA Websites, and more. 

 The FOIA Review, supported by this highly effective Information Collection Plan, 

confirmed the following areas within DoD need improvement: organizational structure and 

manning; training; technology; and resources/backlogs. 

 Organizational structure and manning is an improvement area that will focus on the 

optimal placement of FOIA Offices to assure their visibility and support by senior leaders. This 

improvement area will also include the development of standardized job series and grade levels 

to better sustain the FOIA workforce. Standards for contracting FOIA functions are also an issue 

to address to assure a balance is maintained between the requirement for inherently 

governmental positions in FOIA management and the prudent use of skilled contractor 

personnel. 

 Training is a key improvement area that concentrates on the development of both resident 

and online FOIA training opportunities. This training is intended not only for FOIA Office staff, 

but also for their senior leaders and supporting legal advisors – a need frequently documented in 

survey responses. 

 Technology, the third DoD FOIA improvement area, will address the expanded use of 

FOIA software to streamline the process. Technology will also encompass the standardization of 

FOIA Websites within DoD to better enable public access. Also within this improvement area is 

the long-term objective to develop an electronic document control system that will serve FOIA 

applications on a DoD enterprise network. 

 These three improvement areas have been selected based on their overall impact on the 

FOIA. They primarily focus on the fundamentals of an effective FOIA process – a supported 

organizational structure; a well trained workforce; and the technological tools to enhance the 

effort. These three improvement areas are the critical enablers of the FOIA process. 

The fourth area of improvement more narrowly targets backlog – a principal objective of 

EO 13392 – and the resources necessary to reduce it. Within DoD, elimination of backlog is not 

an attainable objective due to the extraordinary complexity of many FOIA requests for 

voluminous documents from multiple Component sources. Because defense issues routinely 

include the equities from other Federal Agencies, referrals consume considerable time. 

Additionally, the special handling given to the volume of highly classified documents responsive 
iv 

to FOIA requests also adds time to the process. However, a measurable reduction of backlog is 

an attainable objective. 

FOIA Office survey data established that the backlog issues in DoD are confined to a 

relatively small number of FOIA Offices. Approximately 48 DoD FOIA Offices (9%) reported a 

backlog greater than 50 cases. These FOIA Offices provided a strong survey response that they 

were not adequately funded or staffed. There is no backlog problem in the majority of smaller 

DoD Offices routinely processing a manageable number of FOIA requests. Survey data also 

showed that 58% of the backlog is at the headquarters level (28 of the 48 backlogged offices). 

 

The DoD Improvement Plan will aggressively identify those FOIA Offices with backlogs 

greater than 50 cases; will determine the manpower required (Federal civilians and/or 

contractors) to significantly reduce the backlog; and will seek the necessary funding to provide 

this additional staffing. 

The DoD FOIA Improvement Plan is ambitious, and the accomplishment of some 

objectives requires additional manpower and/or funding. The changes in policy and procedures 

reflected in this Plan will be institutionalized in the DoD Directives, Instructions, and 

Regulations that govern this program. 

 

 

 

 
 

Department of Defense

Freedom of Information Act 

Executive Order 13392 Improvement Plan 

June 14, 2006 

“Unique location in Baghdad, Iraq. Mail processing 

slow, slow IT [information technology] connections, 

lack of fax capability and ground transportation is 

dangerous.” 

– One respondent’s answer to the Department

of Defense (DoD) Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) 

survey item: “Please indicate the obstacles that impede 

FOIA processing.” 

 

Part A – The DoD FOIA Program and Implementation of Executive Order (EO) 13392, 

Improving Agency Disclosure of Information 

A.1. Introduction. DoD administers the largest, globally decentralized FOIA 

Program in the Federal Government. In fiscal year 2005, DoD completed 78,775 FOIA requests 

at an estimated cost of $47,876,973. FOIA litigation related activities added another $2,180,360 

in estimated FOIA costs. The requests made to DoD encompass the most complex legal and 

administrative issues associated with the FOIA, to include the processing of significant amounts 

of classified information. 

Of the 78,775 FOIA requests completed by DoD, the number of total grants (requesters 

received what they requested) was 36,587 (46%). The number of requests for information 

partially released was 15,307 (19%), and the total denials were 1,765 (2%). The remaining 

25,116 (33%) requests were closed for other reasons, such as no responsive records were found 

and/or referrals were made to another appropriate agency. The FOIA exemption employed most 

often within DoD to deny information to requesters was Exemption 6, personal privacy. This 

exemption was used to deny information 10,327 times. 

A stated objective of EO 13392 (TAB A) is for each Federal Agency to examine ways to 

eliminate or reduce FOIA backlog. Within DoD, elimination is not an attainable objective due to 

the extraordinary complexity of many FOIA requests for voluminous documents from multiple 
Component sources. Because defense issues routinely include the equities from other Federal 

Agencies, referrals consume considerable time. Additionally, the special handling given to the 

volume of highly classified documents responsive to FOIA requests also adds time to the 

process. However, a measurable reduction of backlog is an attainable objective as this FOIA 

Review and Plan will explain. 

DoD Components, consisting of the Military Departments, Joint Staff, Combatant 

Commands, and the Defense Agencies and Field Activities, are responsible for establishing and 

maintaining their own FOIA programs. Effective upon the publication of EO 13392, the Defense 

Freedom of Information Policy Office (DFOIPO) was established to serve as the responsible 

action office for the DoD Agency Chief FOIA Officer (ACFO) to implement the provisions of 

EO 13392 throughout the Department. The DFOIPO provides FOIA policy guidance to all of 

DoD and it oversees the Office of the Secretary of Defense (OSD) FOIA Office, which processes 

FOIA requests for the OSD and the Joint Staff (OSD/JS). 

Following designation as DoD ACFO (TAB B), the Director of Administration and 

Management issued EO 13392 implementation guidance to DoD Components (TAB C). DoD 

Components were tasked to establish FOIA Public Liaisons and FOIA Service Centers. On 

February 10, 2006, the DFOIPO gave further guidance on the implementation of the EO, 

identified specific focus areas concerning the FOIA to be evaluated, and initiated a survey 

instrument to be used to collect data for the DoD FOIA Review (TAB D).

A.2. Areas of Consideration for DoD FOIA Review. As reflected in the February 10, 

2006, DFOIPO memorandum, the areas of FOIA operations within DoD that were initially 

considered for review were: 

• Current FOIA processes to identify reasons for Component FOIA Office backlogs 

• Customer service practices by which the Component FOIA Office assists and informs 

the public on their respective FOIA processes 

• Current IT systems and software used for FOIA processing 

• Current resources committed to FOIA operations (funding, manpower, facilities, IT 

support, etc.) 

• Component use of Websites to make information available to the public in 

compliance with 5 U.S.C. 552(a)(2) 

• Component recommendations to resolve shortfalls identified above 

Part B – Areas Selected for Review

B.1. DoD FOIA Office Survey. DFOIPO contracted a recognized specialist in the 

administration of Federal Agency surveys to develop and administer a unique survey that would 

capture data from FOIA managers and action officers at all levels within DoD. The contractor 

interviewed DFOIPO personnel and other key DoD FOIA managers to obtain information on the 

FOIA process. This comprehensive survey (TAB E) was sent electronically to over 600 FOIA 

Offices throughout DoD. The survey instrument was designed to address the specific FOIA 

areas identified in the February 10, 2006 DFOIPO memorandum. As reflected in the survey, 

these areas were: 

2
• Identification of methods of communication with requesters 

• Identification of methods of FOIA request tracking/control 

• Primary redaction methods 

• Percentages of requests associated with Initial Request categories 

• The impact on backlog of various categories of processing time 

• The current backlog in the office of the respondent 

• The average number of initial requests received by the respondent’s office per year 

• Job satisfaction issues including perceived expertise and understanding of FOIA 

• Resources, including personnel, equipment, and IT support available to respondent 

• Respondent’s perception of leadership, teamwork, and cooperation 

• Level of customer service from respondent’s office 

• Obstacles impeding timely FOIA processing 

• Respondent’s recommendations to improve the FOIA process 

• Position levels of FOIA staff in respondent’s office 

• Type of FOIA training received (if any) within respondent’s office during the year 

• Identification of DoD Component 

B.2. DoD Component Chief Public Liaison Officer Survey. In addition to the 

survey, the DFOIPO queried the newly designated DoD Component Chief Public Liaison 

Officers to provide their managerial perspectives in a headquarters level assessment separate 

from the FOIA Office survey. As reflected in a March 24, 2006 DFOIPO memorandum (TAB 

F), DoD Chief Public Liaison Officers were asked to provide their perspectives on: 

• Causes of FOIA backlogs 

• FOIA customer service practices and managerial oversight 

• IT available to support FOIA processing 

• Current resources committed to FOIA processing 

• Component compliance with Website requirements and applications 

• Component vision for a FOIA process that meets the objectives of EO 13392 

 

Part C –- Results of Review

C.1. Information Collection Plan. The DFOIPO developed an Information 

Collection Plan consisting of three separate feedback sources to conduct the DoD FOIA Review. 

The three primary sources were: 

• The FOIA Office survey that was conducted by the contractors. These results 

were statistically significant with an estimated 90% response rate; 548 from an 

estimated 600 FOIA Offices responded. Additionally, the validity of the 

responses was high based on the remarkably high response rate and the quality of 

responses to open-ended questions. 

3
• The input from DoD Component Chief Public Liaison Officers proved valuable 

from the perspective of DoD Component headquarters, often reinforcing the 

findings and observations from the FOIA Office survey responses. This narrowly 

focused data collection was also statistically significant with 16 of 17 

Components responding. 

• The invaluable experience of senior DFOIPO managers in administering the DoD 

FOIA Program; a combined total of 112 years experience in FOIA processing, 

customer service, policy, appeals, and litigation. 

 

C.2. FOIA Office Survey Population. The survey was designed to solicit 

information from one staff member from each DoD FOIA Office, although the responses often 

reflect data on multiple staff members from the same FOIA Office. To be specific, there were 

548 FOIA Office respondents to the survey out of an estimated total potential population of 600 

FOIA Offices, with individual data provided from over 1200 military, civilian, and contract 

personnel performing FOIA functions. The contractors who administered the survey indicated 

that this survey generated an extraordinarily high response rate, a likely reflection of the high 

level of interest from DoD personnel who process FOIA actions. In addition to receiving 

revealing responses from the specific questions posed in the survey, a significant amount of 

relevant information was also collected from the analysis of responses to open-ended questions 

that prompted candid comments, recommendations, and insights. 

C.3. FOIA Staff Demographics. The survey included a question on the grade levels 

of FOIA personnel. Of the 900 civilian personnel processing FOIA requests, 171 (19%) are 

levels of GS-1 to GS-7; 312 (35%) are GS-8 to GS-11; and 417 (46%) are GS-12 and above. 

There were 35 different civil service job series reported by the respondents. The survey shows 

that DoD personnel receive training in varied ways, but 23.6% indicated that they had never 

received any FOIA training in the FOIA. 

Contractors involved in the processing of FOIA requests play a small but increasingly 

more important role within DoD. Although only 7.4% of the FOIA staff positions were 

identified as contract personnel, the use of contractors in processing FOIA requests has grown. 

In some DoD locations, such as the OSD FOIA Office, contract personnel provide over half the 

FOIA workforce. 

C.4. FOIA Office Survey Findings and Observations – Information Source #1. 

• The complete Program Study Report of survey findings is at TAB G. The

findings are divided into three study areas: demographics, general results, and 

organizational climate. It also provides an analysis that compares these three 

study areas. A targeted analysis for two specific demographic groups was 

conducted for those FOIA Offices reporting more than 100 requests processed 

annually (128 or 23% of respondents), and those FOIA Offices reporting a 

backlog greater than 50 (48 or 9% of respondents). Despite their relatively small 

percentage of all 548 FOIA Offices, these two groups work the majority of DoD 

FOIA requests. Based on this observation, it was determined that an 

4
organizational climate analysis of these two groups would be valuable in 

determining their perspectives on customer focus, job mastery, cooperation/ 

teamwork, and available resources. The Program Study Report contains more 

detailed statistical analyses of the survey data than are summarized in this DoD 

FOIA Review. 

• The organizational placement of FOIA Offices varies greatly within DoD. This 

inconsistency substantiates that FOIA Offices are sometimes placed within an 

organizational structure that can lead to a lack of emphasis on the FOIA program, 

or result in FOIA Offices not receiving adequate oversight or legal support. 

Survey data supported this finding. One of the lowest scoring survey questions on 

the strongly agree – strongly disagree scale was “This office's FOIA staff is 

adequate for FOIA processing.” 

• The survey indicated high scores for DoD personnel in the area of communication 

with requesters. An average of 80% of respondents answered that they routinely 

accomplished the following actions: “Acknowledgement of request receipt; 

Notification of request referral; Point of contact and telephone number provided; 

Resolve fees before processing the request; Interim communication at 

approximately 20 working days”; and “Requesters advised when they will receive 

a response.” These positive responses were anticipated because DoD has 

established effective methods of communicating with requesters, and FOIA 

personnel routinely contact requesters to try to resolve problems and to better 

define requests. 

• DoD uses a variety of methods to track and control FOIA requests. 57% most 

often use a manual or paper system with only 21% of the respondents currently 

using specialized FOIA software. 80% of the offices surveyed accept FOIA 

requests electronically. Only 54% reported having a specific telephone number 

available for FOIA inquiries and only 46% said there was a FOIA Website 

dedicated for their activity or location. Questions on methods of redaction 

revealed that the overwhelming majority (81%) of respondents still use manual 

redaction methods and are not using redaction software currently available in the 

commercial market. 

• A recurring theme throughout the survey comments indicates FOIA Officers 

believe they are not adequately supported by their senior leadership, and the 

organizational climate scores for specific target groups indicate this lack of 

support is a contributing factor to large backlogs. Even though these comments on 

leader support were primarily from installation/activity level respondents within 

the Services, they did come from all levels throughout DoD. One respondent 

stated: “[not] having management’s support makes it very hard to get the OPRs 

[Offices of Primary Responsibility] to respond in a timely manner,” while another 

said, “Something needs to be done through the chain of command to management 

explaining the importance of this program ... [Make] the FOIA program a special 

interest item so commanders can brief their people that processing a FOIA is 

5
vitally important. If we lead from the head down there won’t be as many 

problems.” When we review these comments with climate scores from the 

survey, we note the following: 

• Concerning the survey item “The leadership of this activity supports the 

 FOIA program,” the total population of respondents strongly agreed with 

this item and rated it highly. However, the scores for the two chosen 

target groups, those with volume (number of FOIA requests received 

annually) greater than 100 and those with backlogs greater than 50 cases, 

rated this item lower. 

• A more in-depth study of these scores for the target groups reveals more 

telling statistics. For the survey item “Other offices involved in FOIA 

processing cooperate to achieve FOIA program goals,” the target groups 

scored in the high range. For the item “This office receives timely 

responses from offices tasked for record search and review,” the scores 

associated with this item were in the medium to low range; meaning few 

responding FOIA Offices agreed with the statement. These comments and 

statistics appear to show a direct correlation between senior leader support 

for the FOIA Program and large backlogs. 

• Two conclusions can be drawn here, particularly from FOIA Offices with

large backlogs: 1 – DoD officials who are tasked by FOIA Offices to 

process requests need FOIA awareness training; and 2 – the senior staff at 

all levels of DoD must be made aware of the importance of the FOIA and 

need to emphasize this within their organizations, especially to the office 

of primary responsibility (OPR) charged to search and review FOIA 

 requests. 

• Questions concerning the processing of requests revealed that searches for 

documents are required 68.3% of the time, and that a thorough response is 

received by the due date 62.8% of the time. These statistics indicate that a high 

frequency of time-consuming searches for responsive documents is a primary 

reason for FOIA Offices failing to respond within the statutory 20-day time period 

and, subsequently, is a prime cause of case backlog. Note that most searches and 

reviews are required to be conducted by OPRs outside of the FOIA Offices. 

• The issue of FOIA backlog is a primary concern of EO 13392. DoD routinely 

compiles backlog statistics for the Annual FOIA Report submitted to the 

Department of Justice, and DoD awareness and concern for FOIA backlog is well 

documented. The DoD review for the EO revealed that the Components with the 

biggest backlogs, as expected, are the ones that have the most resource concerns. 

While this is not a surprise, the data from the survey establishes that the backlog 

issues in DoD are confined to a relatively small number of FOIA Offices. 

Approximately 48 DoD FOIA Offices (9%) reported a backlog greater than 50 

cases. These FOIA Offices provided a strong survey response that they were not 

6
adequately funded or staffed. There is no backlog problem in the majority of 

smaller DoD Offices routinely processing a manageable number of FOIA

requests. Survey data also showed that 58% of the backlog is at the headquarters 

level (28 of the 48 backlogged offices). 

• A standard part of most professionally administered surveys is the measurement 

of job satisfaction. DoD was especially interested in these measurements because 

of a perceived high level of turnover of FOIA Staff. However, the job satisfaction 

climate reported by DoD FOIA Office personnel was rated high on the survey’s 

strongly agree – strongly disagree scale. No differences were observed in job 

satisfaction ratings between the headquarters, intermediate and installation/ 

activity levels. The areas comprising job satisfaction included job mastery, 

available resources, cooperation/teamwork, and customer focus. When the job 

satisfaction data was analyzed, DoD FOIA Offices having the larger backlogs, not 

surprisingly, were the ones that had the lower job satisfaction ratings. The

deficient areas most often cited by these FOIA Offices with the higher backlogs 

are adequate resources and proper training. Specifically, budget allocations were 

given the lowest score out of any climate assessment question in the survey. The 

next lowest deficient areas were adequate numbers of FOIA personnel and 

administrative support. Interestingly, those FOIA Offices with the largest 

backlogs scored highest on the following climate items: “This FOIA office is 

responsive to customer inquiries; The FOIA staff in this office understands their 

FOIA roles and responsibilities”; and “The FOIA staff in this office has the 

expertise and judgment required for FOIA processing.” Collectively, these 

measures indicate FOIA Offices, despite their backlog, have a high level of job 

satisfaction, as defined by the variables of job competence and responsiveness. 

C.5. DoD Component Chief Public Liaison Officer Findings and Observations – 

Information Source # 2 

• Findings from DoD Chief Public Liaison Officers mirror many of those from the 

FOIA Office survey. The Chief Public Liaison Officers stated that effective 

FOIA processes are in place, and responsive customer service has generally been 

established enabling requesters to obtain information about their requests. 

• Inadequate resources dominate the concerns presented by the Chief Public Liaison 

Officers. One Chief Public Liaison Officer stated: “Backlogs are prevalent in 

large organizations that lack adequate personnel resources to process requests.” 

The overall tone of their responses was that FOIA personnel are doing the best 

they can in a Federal Agency that in recent years has had budget cuts that have 

affected their FOIA Programs. 

 

• DoD Chief Public Liaisons agree with the findings of the survey that backlogs 

exist in the FOIA Offices that have the most resource concerns. These concerns 

were succinctly stated by two Components: “Many FOIA Offices 

throughout...have backlogs due primarily to lack of resources” and “The 

7
personnel and financial resources committed to FOIA...are inadequate.” One 

Component noted that resource concerns are not new: “In the early years, there 

were only one or two case officers assigned to process all requests...” Another 

Chief Public Liaison stated: “During the past six years, the...FOIA staff was cut 

from six to three... employees,” and that their office “could meet the criteria of 

Executive Order 13392 as well as the FOIA by tripling the number of 

...employees on its FOIA staff and supplementing them with 10 contractor 

employees...” Other factors affecting backlogs voiced by the Chief Public 

Liaison Offices include failure of record custodians to provide timely responses to 

FOIA Offices and review time required by their staff attorneys. Comments about 

time consuming reviews from attorneys included: “Review by command attorneys 

takes time because of their other commitments,” and “sending all FOIA actions to 

the servicing legal office causes a bottle-neck affect and timeliness of review 

decreases exponentially.” 

• Most FOIA Offices within DoD already have established effective customer 

practices consistent with the provisions of EO 13392. Many FOIA Offices within 

DoD were set up years ago and have reputations for excellent relationships with 

FOIA requesters. One Component Chief Public Liaison Officer stated, “Many 

FOIA positions...have established customer service as a standard that is evaluated 

when preparing annual performance appraisals.” Another observed, “The 

...FOIA office places a high value on being responsive to FOIA requesters. The 

...Chief of FOI...frequently contacts requesters telephonically or via email so that 

ambiguous requests can be clarified.” This spirit of customer service prevalent 

within DoD was summed up in this quote from another Chief Public Liaison 

Officer, “...[our FOIA Office] has always worked closely with the requester 

community to meet their needs. We frequently contact requesters by phone to 

discuss their cases, helping them to clarify, helping them to focus/narrow their 

requests, and/or explaining the FOIA process.” 

• Conversely, survey questions on managerial oversight revealed that emphasis 

needs to be placed on FOIA programs in some DoD Components. One Chief 

Public Liaison Officer said, “FOIA doesn’t receive the support it should from

immediate supervisors and top management...FOIA Officers have complained 

that they are not allowed to attend FOIA training due to budget 

constraints...Some have complained about poor service from their office of 

counsel.” Other DoD Components reported no problems with management 

oversight as reflected by one Chief Public Liaison Officer who indicated, “We 

enjoy autonomy in managing our program based on our reputation...” 

• Although some DoD Components have purchased or developed FOIA timesaving redaction or other FOIA software programs, most do not have modern IT 

solutions for FOIA. As one DoD Component stated, “At this point ... [our 

Component] does not have any information technology programs to support our 

FOIA processing...due to lack of funding... [and] still does not have any 

supporting information technology software to process and track FOIA requests.” 

8
Some Components indicated they would like to purchase FOIA software but 

cannot due to budget concerns within their IT departments. In general, because of 

IT budget concerns and the requirement that redaction software pass security 

standards, some Chief Public Liaison Officers point out that IT support for FOIA 

is problematic. One Component stated, “We have no redaction software. 

Previously, software was tested...but would not pass the security side of the 

house...All redaction is done with [an]X-Acto knife by the FOIA officer.” 

Another Public Liaison Officer agreed saying, “We lack the necessary software to 

perform electronic redactions...we are reliant upon them [supporting IT staff] to 

test and approve software packages for deployment...It is over two years and we 

are still awaiting approval...” 

• The comments from the Chief Public Liaison Officers on resource issues parallel 

their comments concerning FOIA backlog. Their subjective input, when 

combined with the survey data, reinforces the finding that most of the FOIA 

resource concerns in DoD are from the FOIA Offices with the highest backlogs. 

Chief Public Liaison Officers drew on their experience and illuminated other 

unique concerns regarding resources such as, “...it is extremely difficult to recruit 

at the General Schedule (GS) 11/12 grades,” and “...FOIA is a very specialized 

area and FOIA trained candidates are not easy to find...Finding candidates who 

understand the intricacies and relationships...are difficult to find.” These 

comments demonstrate the difficulty in finding and retaining the uniquely 

qualified personnel essential to successful FOIA Offices. Some Chief Public 

Liaison Officers believe that senior management is sympathetic to FOIA resource 

issues, but funding for FOIA is perceived to be a low priority. 

• DoD Chief Public Liaison Officers expressed differing opinions on compliance by 

their FOIA Offices with Website requirements. This is due to DoD’s 

decentralized FOIA Program and a lack of DoD wide standards. Many 

Components thought their FOIA Office web applications were current and 

adequate. Others indicated that there was work to be done in making more

information available to the public on FOIA Office Websites. Those Chief Public 

Liaison Officers who agree that FOIA Websites need improvement cite as 

contributing factors a lack of dedicated resources and a misunderstanding on the 

part of some senior managers on what is required to be put on FOIA Websites. 

• DoD Chief Public Liaison Officers were asked to give their visions for a more 

effective FOIA process within their Component. As expected, additional 

resources was the principal outcome hoped for in the implementation of EO 

13392. Additional resources would be used to address backlogs and provide even 

better customer service. As one Component states, “However, this is an unlikely 

scenario in the near future.” The responses to this question indicated that the 

Chief Public Liaison Officers are realistic about where FOIA Offices stand within 

Component funding priorities. 

9
• The Chief Public Liaison Officers would also like to see the FOIA Offices better 

located within their organizations to facilitate higher visibility commensurate with 

the importance of their FOIA Programs. Some of the Public Liaison Officers also 

expressed the desire to see standardized job series and grades for FOIA personnel 

to provide for potential advancement in a professional FOIA career field. They 

also want to see a certification program for FOIA Officers to improve their 

professional standing. 

C.6. Senior DFOIPO Findings and Observations – Information Source #3 

• The DFOIPO senior staff agrees the issue of resources dedicated to processing 

FOIA requests is a major concern within DoD. 

• The DFOIPO staff has observed an increase in litigation resulting from untimely 

responses to FOIA requests, which can be traced to DoD Component backlogs. 

Although the survey found only 9% of DoD FOIA Offices report a backlog of 

more than 50 cases, those same offices are more likely to be engaged in costly and 

time-consuming FOIA litigation as a result of the backlog. 

• The DFOIPO staff has heard many comments over the years concerning the 

placement of the FOIA function within DoD Component organizational 

structures. Although evidence indicates this is a problem in all categories of DoD 

Component, it is especially problematic at the installation/ activity level. When 

the FOIA function is subordinated within an activity at a level far removed from

the senior leadership, the results are often detrimental to the efficient functioning 

of the FOIA Program. 

• Frequently, the position descriptions of FOIA staff personnel are insufficient to 

adequately reflect their responsibility and authority. DFOIPO has observed that 

this deficiency significantly impairs the ability to increase the grade level of the 

FOIA position commensurate with responsibility and authority. This is a concern 

at all levels throughout the Department. 

• The issue of employing contractors to process FOIA requests has become a more 

prevalent issue in recent years. Because FOIA is an inherently governmental 

function, outsourcing this function must be controlled. Because FOIA Officers 

often exercise judgment in determining releasability of documents, the assessment 

of fees, and expedited processing, FOIA Officer positions can not be outsourced 

and must be filled by Federal employees in an inherently governmental position. 

• Consistent with the responses from DoD Chief Public Liaisons, the DFOIPO 

recognizes a legal review of all FOIA actions prior to final disposition often 

increases FOIA processing time and backlogs. It is recognized that legal reviews 

are necessary in many cases; however, because DoD attorneys, both civilian and 

military, are already overburdened with more pressing legal issues, their FOIA 

case load is often given a low priority. 

10
Part D – Areas Chosen For Improvement 

The DoD FOIA Program is a decentralized effort with many and varied DoD Component 

organizations, missions, functions, and locations. The results of the review undertaken in 

accordance with EO 13392 reveal many positives about the DoD Program. There are, however, 

areas that require improvement. Of the many subject areas reviewed, the FOIA areas selected by 

DoD as areas for improvement are: 

D.1. Organizational Structure and Manning

• Optimal organizational placement of FOIA Offices 

• Standardized job series and GS levels 

• Standards for contracting of FOIA functions 

D.2. Training 

• Resident FOIA training 

• Online FOIA training 

D.3. Technology 

• Use of FOIA software to streamline processing

• Enhanced FOIA Websites to increase public knowledge

• A DoD wide electronic network to expedite FOIA processing

D.4. Resources/Backlogs 

• Focus on specific FOIA Offices where problems exist 

• Increased personnel resources to help reduce backlogs 

Part E – Plans for Selected Improvement Areas 

E.1. Name: Organizational Structure and Manning 

• Objective 1: Optimal organizational placement of FOIA Offices – Provide 

guidance to DoD Components on the optimal organizational placement of FOIA 

Offices. The survey revealed that DoD FOIA Offices are placed within a variety of 

different organizational elements. In some instances, FOIA Offices are within a 

functional organization like IT systems and services that are unrelated to the FOIA 

mission. This occurs at all levels of DoD. The goal is to determine where the FOIA 

Offices are currently placed and to establish consistent standards within the 

Department to maximize the effectiveness of all FOIA Offices. The intent is to raise 

the visibility and level of importance of the FOIA Office to more effectively garner

senior leader support. 

 

11
• Steps to be taken: 

• Survey DoD Components to determine where FOIA Offices are currently 

placed and to solicit recommendations for optimal placement in their 

organizational structures 

• Analyze DoD Component responses 

• Develop a DoD proposal for optimum FOIA Office placement at all DoD 

levels 

• Milestones: 

• Jun 30, 2006 – DoD Components requested to provide recommendations for 

the optimum organizational placement of their FOIA Offices; response due 

Aug 15, 2006

• Sep 15, 2006 – DFOIPO memo published recommending where DoD 

Components should place their FOIA Offices

• Jan 15, 2007 – DoD Components provide initial progress reports on 

implementation and quarterly thereafter

• Dec 2007 – DoD Components implement changes to organizational structure

• Means of measuring success/outcomes: 

• DoD Components implement organizational changes 

• FOIA Offices are more visible and effective 

• Objective 2: Standardized job series and GS levels for FOIA personnel – The 

review revealed a multitude of job series for DoD FOIA personnel that may be 

affecting their job advancement opportunities and professional training and 

development. Additionally, the review suggests that there are DoD civilian personnel 

performing critical FOIA functions at improperly low grade levels. One objective is 

to establish a standard job series for FOIA personnel within DoD and work towards 

the establishment of an Office of Personnel Management (OPM) career field for 

FOIA personnel across all Federal Agencies. Another objective is to standardize 

grade levels of DoD FOIA personnel. To support these goals, a standardization of 

position descriptions within DoD is warranted. 

• Steps to be taken: 

• DoD Components recommend one single job series for civilian FOIA 

personnel, and to offer recommendations on standardizing grade levels for 

civilian personnel in the FOIA job series 

• DFOIPO publishes recommended wording to be used within the position 

descriptions of DoD FOIA personnel 

• With the assistance of the Human Resources Directorate (HRD) of 

Washington Headquarters Services, DFOIPO attempts to establish a specific 

job series for FOIA personnel within DoD 

• DFOIPO establishes recommended standard grade levels for DoD personnel 

processing FOIA requests 

12
• Once these standards are established within DoD, DFOIPO works with HRD 

and OPM to establish standards for job series and grade levels for FOIA 

personnel government wide 

• Milestones: 

• Jul 14, 2006 – DoD Components requested to provide input and 

recommendations on job series and grade levels for FOIA personnel; 

responses due Oct 30, 2006

• Sep 15, 2006 – DFOIPO publishes standard position descriptions for DoD 

FOIA personnel

• Feb 2007 – DFOIPO establishes specific job series and designates grade 

levels for DoD FOIA personnel

• Mar 2007 – DFOIPO coordinates with HRD and OPM to standardize grade 

levels and job series for FOIA personnel government wide

• Means of measuring success/outcomes: 

• Establishment of standard job series for FOIA personnel within DoD 

• Establishment of standard grade levels for DoD FOIA personnel 

• Standard position descriptions of FOIA personnel that accurately reflect the 

responsibility and authority required of the FOIA function 

• DoD FOIA personnel transitioned into common job series at appropriate grade 

levels 

• Long range – Establishment by OPM of a government wide FOIA Career 

Field with centralized oversight of professional development and staffing 

standards. 

• Objective 3: Establish standards within DoD for contracting FOIA functions – 

The review has shown that contractors currently support FOIA Offices within some

DoD Components. The objective is to establish standards within DoD on what FOIA 

functions are inherently governmental, thus exempt from outsourcing. 

• Steps to be taken: 

• DoD Components advise DFOIPO on what FOIA Offices have contract 

support and which have outsourced their entire FOIA function due to an A-76 

review 

• DFOIPO obtains legal review of inherently governmental determinations 

• DFOIPO publishes guidance defining the limits of outsourcing the FOIA 

function

• Milestones: 

• Aug 4, 2006 – DoD Components survey their use of contractors and document 

any A-76 outsourcing of FOIA functions; responses due Oct 30, 2006

• Oct 16, 2006 – DFOIPO obtains legal review on the applicability of 

outsourcing an activity’s FOIA responsibility

13
• Dec 15, 2006 – DFOIPO issues standards for contracting FOIA operations in 

DoD

• Means of measuring success/outcomes: 

• Number of DoD Components that report information by due date 

• No outsourcing of FOIA functions within DoD that includes inherently 

governmental positions; potential increase in outsourcing of other noninherently governmental positions 

E.2. Name: Training 

• Objective 1: Develop DoD FOIA resident training program – According to the 

survey, only 76.7% of FOIA personnel have received any FOIA training. 

Additionally, comments provided by the survey respondents indicate their senior 

leaders and staff attorneys lack an understanding of the requirements of the FOIA. 

The goal is to develop plans for resident training to include a FOIA Officer 

Certification Program. Funding sources for this training development will also be 

addressed. 

• Steps to be taken: 

• DFOIPO and the Component Chief Public Liaison Officers develop plans to 

conduct resident training for the FOIA workforce, senior leaders, and staff 

attorneys on a biennial basis 

• Military Departments requested to determine the feasibility of adding/ 

increasing FOIA training to the curriculum at Service Judge Advocate General 

Schools 

• DFOIPO develops a FOIA Officer Certification Program built on completion 

of training and service in a FOIA position 

• Milestones: 

• Jul 17, 2006 – DoD Components requested to identify their resident training 

requirements and their plans to provide this training; responses due by 

November 24, 2006

• Jul 17, 2006 – Military Services requested to study the feasibility of 

adding/increasing FOIA training to JAG school curriculum; responses due by 

October 16, 2006

• Dec 15, 2006 – Concept for FOIA Officer Certification Program approved; 

implementation pending deployment of FOIA training 

• Means of measuring success/outcomes: 

• FOIA Officers attend FOIA training on a regular basis; the percentage of 

FOIA Officers trained to be tracked as a performance metric 

• DoD attorneys, both military and civilian, have a fundamental knowledge of 

the FOIA; the percentage trained to be tracked as a performance metric 

14
• Senior leaders have a better understanding and appreciation for their FOIA 

Programs; the percentage trained to be tracked as a performance metric 

• A DoD FOIA Officer Certification Program is implemented concurrent with 

deployment of a DoD FOIA training plan 

• Objective 2: Develop a DoD FOIA online training capability within a newly 

created DFOIPO Website – A comprehensive online DoD FOIA training 

capability designed to reinforce resident training will keep DoD FOIA personnel 

current as well as provide a starting point for incoming personnel. The product, to 

be contracted, would provide basic and advanced training as well as to serve as an 

additional vehicle for DoD FOIA personnel to receive guidance from DFOIPO on 

policy matters and to get technical responses to specific policy or procedural 

questions. 

• Steps to be taken: 

• FOIA online training capability submitted in the FY 08 budget 

• Process online training contract 

• DFOIPO works with contractor to establish content of training modules 

• Establish final training modules on DFOIPO Website 

• Milestones: 

• Aug, 2006 – Budget submission to OSD for FOIA online training 

• Mar, 2007 – Submit bid to contract for the FOIA online project 

• Sep, 2007 – Contract awarded; development of training modules begins 

• Jul, 2008 – Online training modules established on FOIA Website 

• Means of measuring success/outcomes: 

• FY08 budget proposal approved to establish DoD online training project 

• Contract awarded to establish online training in FY 08 

• FOIA online training modules are established on DFOIPO Website 

• Access to online training Website measured to assure ever increasing use 

 E.3. Name: Technology 

• Objective 1: Analyze FOIA software for expanded use in streamlining DoD 

FOIA processes – Provide guidance to Components on options available for FOIA 

software and electronic redaction solutions and improve the FOIA-IT 

funding/procurement process. The survey revealed that only 19% of FOIA Offices 

within DoD are currently utilizing FOIA software suites or redaction modules. The 

goal is to make all DoD Components aware of electronic options available to them

and encourage their purchase and use if FOIA workload warrants the expense. 

Additionally, DoD Components report difficulty purchasing FOIA software, thus 

requiring review and improvement of current IT budget/procurement processes that 

support FOIA operations. 

15
• Steps to be taken: 

• Conduct a FOIA software use and applicability study; document FOIA 

software applications currently in use in DoD FOIA Offices; determine 

potential applications for future use 

• Provide guidance to Components on options available for FOIA software and 

electronic redaction solutions to include expected system performance 

standards and vendor identification 

• Establish security standards within DoD for redaction software 

• Establish liaison with DoD IT funding and procurement agents to examine IT 

budgeting/procurement processes; to eliminate budgetary impediments; to 

facilitate procurement of FOIA software; and to implement FOIA software 

policies within DoD 

• Milestones:

• Jul 14, 2006 – FOIA software standards, commercial options, and vendors 

defined 

• Aug 22, 2006 – DoD Components conduct an internal FOIA software use and 

applicability study; responses due October 2, 2006 

• Jun, 2007 – Complete review of IT budgeting/procurement process that 

supports FOIA 

• Sep, 2007 – Establish security standards within DoD for FOIA software 

• Oct, 2007 – Implement policy within DoD to facilitate purchase of FOIA 

software 

• Means of measuring success/outcomes: 

• DoD Components have an understanding of the performance standards 

expected from FOIA software and the products that are available 

• Under Secretary of Defense for Intelligence establishes standards for 

redaction software 

• DoD Component studies received by DFOIPO by due date

• DoD Components better understand and manage their budgeting/procurement 

processes to purchase FOIA software

• Long Range – Increase in the number of DoD Components using FOIA 

software

• Objective 2: Standardize DoD FOIA Websites to enable better public access – 

Develop a DFOIPO Website as a platform for online training, promulgation of policy 

and procedures, other FOIA network communications, and customer service 

feedback. Develop and implement a policy for standardizing DoD Component 

Websites. Currently, DoD FOIA Websites are inconsistent in fulfilling the 

requirements set forth in the 1996 Electronic Freedom of Information Act 

amendments. The goal is to implement policy across DoD, to standardize DoD FOIA 

Websites, and to enable better public access. 

16
• Steps to be taken: 

• Establish DFOIPO Website

• Establish standards for all DoD Websites

• Issue standards to DoD Components to improve FOIA Websites

• Monitor progress of improvements to DoD Websites

 

• Milestones:

• Aug 31, 2006 – Establish DFOIPO Website

• Sep 22, 2006 – Publish standards for improving DoD Websites 

• Jan 31, 2007 – Complete DoD improvements to Websites; continue to monitor

• Means of measuring success/outcomes: 

• DFOIPO Website functional by Aug 31, 2006 with links established to all 

DoD Component FOIA Websites 

• Increase in percentage of DoD Components having FOIA Websites 

• Increase in percentage of DoD Components posting frequently requested 

documents and providing pertinent information to the public 

• Objective 3: Conduct a feasibility study for a DoD wide electronic network to 

expedite FOIA processing – There is no existing IT network that links DFOIPO 

with all DoD Components and their FOIA Offices capable of transmitting both 

unclassified and classified materials responsive to FOIA requests. Additionally, there 

is no existing network for DoD FOIA Offices to refer classified FOIA requests to all

other Federal Agencies with equities in the materials. Throughout DoD and the other 

Federal Agencies there are some FOIA Offices equipped with classified SIPRNET 

email systems that serve the purpose, but these capabilities are rare. In most 

situations, classified FOIA cases are either hand-carried or mailed, an inefficient and 

time-consuming process. The long-term intent is an electronic document control 

system that will serve FOIA applications on a DoD enterprise network. The pace of 

developing such a DoD enterprise network will be driven by many considerations to 

include cost, technology, and applications other than FOIA. 

• Steps to be taken: 

• Form an integrated processing team (IPT) from Component FOIA and IT 

staffs 

• IPT determine the requirements for this system

• IPT examines IT systems that will support the requirements 

• IPT documents findings in feasibility study to include cost considerations 

• DFOIPO makes recommendations to ACFO on system procurement and 

deployment 

• If approved and funded, DoD electronic FOIA network established 

• Milestones: 

• Oct, 2006 – Form IPT 

17
• Jun, 2007 – IPT completes feasibility study 

• Jul, 2007 – Decision brief to ACFO 

• Aug, 2007 – If approved, submit funding for FY 09 

• Means of measuring success/outcomes: 

• A DoD wide electronic FOIA network is determined to be feasible 

• The network is approved and funded 

• The network is established 

E.4. Resources/Backlog 

• Objective 1: Determine manpower required to reduce backlogs in FOIA Offices 

that have backlogs over 50 requests – One of the key points of the survey was the 

correlation between FOIA Offices with backlogs over 50 requests and FOIA Offices 

believed to have adequate manpower resources. Since the survey indicated backlog 

and resource concerns within DoD appear to be concentrated within FOIA Offices 

with backlogs over 50, these specific offices must be identified for further analysis 

and targeting of potential manpower resource allocations. 

• Steps to be taken: 

• DoD Components identify FOIA Offices with routine backlogs over 50 

requests 

• DFOIPO evaluates information 

• Targeted FOIA Offices are identified and discourse begins with DoD 

Components on levels of resources provided these FOIA Offices 

• Increased staffing plan developed for targeted FOIA Offices 

• Milestones: 

• Jul 14, 2006 – DFOIPO requests DoD Components identify FOIA Offices 

with routine backlogs of over 50; response due Aug 1, 2006 

• Aug 15, 2006 – Increased staffing plan developed for targeted FOIA Offices 

• Means of measuring success/outcomes: 

• The number of FOIA Offices identified as having backlogs of over 50 

parallels the number identified on the survey – a validation of survey findings 

• FOIA Offices with backlogs over 50 are targeted for further analysis to 

determine specific resource requirements 

• Increased manpower staffing plan developed for FY 08 funding consideration 

• Objective 2: Fund additional FOIA personnel staffing required to reduce 

backlogs in FY 08 and beyond – The DoD FOIA Review for EO 13392 has clearly 

revealed FOIA personnel shortages in FOIA Offices with backlogs. In the absence of

specific appropriations from Congress for FOIA, budgeting for additional FOIA 

personnel within DoD must be included in the FY 08 (and beyond) planning cycle. 

Accordingly, DFOIPO and the OSD FOIA Office requested additional resources in 

18
the FY 08 budget. To comply with the provisions of the EO, specific budgeting for 

FOIA resources must also be accomplished by DoD Components for their FOIA 

Offices with backlogs over 50. 

• Steps to be taken: 

• DFOIPO/OSD FOIA Office submits FY 08 budget request 

• FY 08 funding sought for DoD wide increased manpower staffing to include 

consideration of both Federal civilian and contractor personnel. 

• Milestones:

• Jun, 2006 – DFOIPO/OSD FOIA Office submits FY 08 budget requirements 

• Aug 15, 2006 – Funding request submitted for increased staffing plan 

developed for targeted FOIA Offices

• Mar, 2007 – If funded, hiring process begins for new FOIA personnel within 

DFOIPO and OSD FOIA Office

• FY 08 – If funded, increased FOIA staffing across DoD 

• Means of measuring success/outcomes: 

• The FY 08 budget approved for OSD FOIA operations to include increased 

staffing for DFOIPO to implement this Improvement Plan 

• The FY 08 budget approved for DoD wide increased manpower staffing plan 

• New FOIA personnel are hired in DFOIPO/OSD FOIA Office 

• FOIA Offices that routinely have backlogs over 50 are adequately staffed 

commensurate with FOIA workload 

• Long Term – FOIA backlogs are significantly reduced 

Part F – Grouping of Improvement Areas 

F.1. – Areas anticipated to be completed by December 31, 2006 

 

• Organizational Structure and Manning 

o DFOIPO issues standards for contracting FOIA operations in DoD 

o Manpower requirements (GS and contractor) submitted for funding in 

FY 08 

• Training 

o FOIA resident training requirements are documented 

o FOIA online training capability submitted in the FY 08 budget 

o Concept approved for a DoD FOIA Officer Certification Program

• Technology 

o DFOIPO Website functional and links established to all DoD 

Component FOIA Websites 

o Significant increase in the percentage of DoD Components having 

FOIA Websites designed to standard 

19
• Resources/Backlog 

o Increased manpower staffing plan for DFOIPO/OSD FOIA Office 

developed for FY 08 funding 

o Increased manpower staffing plan for DoD Component FOIA Offices 

developed for FY 08 funding 

F.2. – Areas anticipated to be completed by December 31, 2007 

• Organizational Structure and Manning 

o DoD Components implement organizational changes, where 

necessary, regarding placement of FOIA Offices 

o Establishment of standard job series for DoD FOIA personnel 

o Establishment of standard grade levels for DoD FOIA personnel 

o Standard position descriptions documented and effective for FOIA 

personnel that accurately reflect the responsibility and authority 

required of the FOIA function 

• Training 

o A DoD FOIA Officer Certification Program is implemented 

concurrent with deployment of the DoD FOIA training plan 

• Technology 

o DoD Components have an understanding of the performance standards 

expected from FOIA software and the products that are available 

o DoD Components better understand and manage their 

budgeting/procurement processes to purchase FOIA software 

o Increase in percentage of DoD Components posting frequently 

requested documents and providing pertinent information to the public 

o Feasibility determined for a DoD wide electronic FOIA network 

• Resources/Backlog 

o If funded, new FOIA hiring process begins (Oct-Dec 07) to augment 

DFOIPO to implement this FOIA Improvement Plan 

o If funded, new FOIA hiring process begins (Oct-Dec 07) to reduce 

backlogs in targeted DoD FOIA Offices 

F.3. – Areas anticipated to be completed after December 31, 2007 

• Organizational Structure and Manning 

o Establishment by OPM of a government wide FOIA Career Program

with centralized oversight of professional development and staffing 

standards 

o DoD FOIA personnel transitioned into common job series at 

appropriate grade levels 

• Training

o Online training modules established 

20
o FOIA Officers attend resident FOIA training on a biennial basis; the 

percentage of FOIA Officers trained increases 

o DoD attorneys attend resident FOIA training on a biennial basis; the 

percentage of attorneys trained increases 

o Senior leaders attend resident FOIA training on a biennial basis; the 

percentage of senior leaders trained increases 

• Technology 

o Increase in the number of DoD Components using FOIA software

o If feasible, approved, and funded, a DoD wide electronic FOIA 

network to be implemented 

• Resources/Backlog 

o DFOIPO is adequately staffed to successfully implement the long-term

objectives of this Improvement Plan and EO 13392 

o FOIA Offices that routinely have backlogs over 50 are adequately 

resourced commensurate with FOIA workload 

o FOIA backlogs are significantly reduced 

Part G – Summary 

The FOIA Review, supported by a comprehensive and highly effective Information 

Collection Plan, confirmed the following areas within DoD need improvement: organizational 

structure and manning; training; technology; and resources/backlogs. The Improvement Plan is 

ambitious, and the accomplishment of some objectives requires additional manpower and/or 

funding. The changes in policy and procedures reflected in this FOIA Improvement Plan will be 

institutionalized in the DoD Directives, Instructions, and Regulations that govern this program. 

21
TAB A 
Monday, 

December 19, 2005 

Part V 

The President 

Executive Order 13392—Improving 

Agency Disclosure of Information 

Presidential Documents

75373 

Federal Register 

Vol. 70, No. 242 

Monday, December 19, 2005 

Title 3— 

The President 

Executive Order 13392 of December 14, 2005 

Improving Agency Disclosure of Information 

By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the 

laws of the United States of America, and to ensure appropriate agency 

disclosure of information, and consistent with the goals of section 552 

of title 5, United States Code, it is hereby ordered as follows: 

Section 1. Policy. 

(a) The effective functioning of our constitutional democracy depends 

upon the participation in public life of a citizenry that is well informed. 

For nearly four decades, the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) has provided 

an important means through which the public can obtain information regarding the activities of Federal agencies. Under the FOIA, the public can obtain 

records from any Federal agency, subject to the exemptions enacted by 

the Congress to protect information that must be held in confidence for 

the Government to function effectively or for other purposes. 

(b) FOIA requesters are seeking a service from the Federal Government 

and should be treated as such. Accordingly, in responding to a FOIA request, 

agencies shall respond courteously and appropriately. Moreover, agencies 

shall provide FOIA requesters, and the public in general, with citizencentered ways to learn about the FOIA process, about agency records that 

are publicly available (e.g., on the agency’s website), and about the status 

of a person’s FOIA request and appropriate information about the agency’s 

response. 

(c) Agency FOIA operations shall be both results-oriented and produce 

results. Accordingly, agencies shall process requests under the FOIA in 

an efficient and appropriate manner and achieve tangible, measurable improvements in FOIA processing. When an agency’s FOIA program does 

not produce such results, it should be reformed, consistent with available 

resources appropriated by the Congress and applicable law, to increase efficiency and better reflect the policy goals and objectives of this order. 

(d) A citizen-centered and results-oriented approach will improve service 

and performance, thereby strengthening compliance with the FOIA, and 

will help avoid disputes and related litigation. 

Sec. 2. Agency Chief FOIA Officers. 

(a) Designation. The head of each agency shall designate within 30 days 

of the date of this order a senior official of such agency (at the Assistant 

Secretary or equivalent level), to serve as the Chief FOIA Officer of that 

agency. The head of the agency shall promptly notify the Director of the 

Office of Management and Budget (OMB Director) and the Attorney General 

of such designation and of any changes thereafter in such designation. 

(b) General Duties. The Chief FOIA Officer of each agency shall, subject 

to the authority of the head of the agency: 

(i) have agency-wide responsibility for efficient and appropriate compliance 

with the FOIA; 

(ii) monitor FOIA implementation throughout the agency, including 

through the use of meetings with the public to the extent deemed appropriate by the agency’s Chief FOIA Officer, and keep the head of the 

agency, the chief legal officer of the agency, and the Attorney General 

appropriately informed of the agency’s performance in implementing the 

FOIA, including the extent to which the agency meets the milestones 

75374 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 242 / Monday, December 19, 2005 / Presidential Documents 

in the agency’s plan under section 3(b) of this order and training and 

reporting standards established consistent with applicable law and this 

order; 

(iii) recommend to the head of the agency such adjustments to agency 

practices, policies, personnel, and funding as may be necessary to carry 

out the policy set forth in section 1 of this order; 

(iv) review and report, through the head of the agency, at such times 

and in such formats as the Attorney General may direct, on the agency’s 

performance in implementing the FOIA; and 

(v) facilitate public understanding of the purposes of the FOIA’s statutory 

exemptions by including concise descriptions of the exemptions in both 

the agency’s FOIA handbook issued under section 552(g) of title 5, United 

States Code, and the agency’s annual FOIA report, and by providing 

an overview, where appropriate, of certain general categories of agency 

records to which those exemptions apply. 

(c) FOIA Requester Service Center and FOIA Public Liaisons. In order 

to ensure appropriate communication with FOIA requesters: 

(i) Each agency shall establish one or more FOIA Requester Service Centers 

(Center), as appropriate, which shall serve as the first place that a FOIA 

requester can contact to seek information concerning the status of the 

person’s FOIA request and appropriate information about the agency’s 

FOIA response. The Center shall include appropriate staff to receive and 

respond to inquiries from FOIA requesters; 

(ii) The agency Chief FOIA Officer shall designate one or more agency 

officials, as appropriate, as FOIA Public Liaisons, who may serve in the 

Center or who may serve in a separate office. FOIA Public Liaisons shall 

serve as supervisory officials to whom a FOIA requester can raise concerns 

about the service the FOIA requester has received from the Center, following an initial response from the Center staff. FOIA Public Liaisons 

shall seek to ensure a service-oriented response to FOIA requests and 

FOIA-related inquiries. For example, the FOIA Public Liaison shall assist, 

as appropriate, in reducing delays, increasing transparency and understanding of the status of requests, and resolving disputes. FOIA Public 

Liaisons shall report to the agency Chief FOIA Officer on their activities 

and shall perform their duties consistent with applicable law and agency 

regulations; 

(iii) In addition to the services to FOIA requesters provided by the Center 

and FOIA Public Liaisons, the agency Chief FOIA Officer shall also consider what other FOIA-related assistance to the public should appropriately 

be provided by the agency; 

(iv) In establishing the Centers and designating FOIA Public Liaisons, 

the agency shall use, as appropriate, existing agency staff and resources. 

A Center shall have appropriate staff to receive and respond to inquiries 

from FOIA requesters; 

(v) As determined by the agency Chief FOIA Officer, in consultation 

with the FOIA Public Liaisons, each agency shall post appropriate information about its Center or Centers on the agency’s website, including contact 

information for its FOIA Public Liaisons. In the case of an agency without 

a website, the agency shall publish the information on the Firstgov.gov 

website or, in the case of any agency with neither a website nor the 

capability to post on the Firstgov.gov website, in the Federal Register; 

and 

(vi) The agency Chief FOIA Officer shall ensure that the agency has 

in place a method (or methods), including through the use of the Center, 

to receive and respond promptly and appropriately to inquiries from FOIA 

requesters about the status of their requests. The Chief FOIA Officer shall 

Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 242 / Monday, December 19, 2005 / Presidential Documents 75375 

also consider, in consultation with the FOIA Public Liaisons, as appropriate, whether the agency’s implementation of other means (such as tracking numbers for requests, or an agency telephone or Internet hotline) 

would be appropriate for responding to status inquiries. 

Sec. 3. Review, Plan, and Report. 

(a) Review. Each agency’s Chief FOIA Officer shall conduct a review 

of the agency’s FOIA operations to determine whether agency practices 

are consistent with the policies set forth in section 1 of this order. In 

conducting this review, the Chief FOIA Officer shall: 

(i) evaluate, with reference to numerical and statistical benchmarks where 

appropriate, the agency’s administration of the FOIA, including the agency’s expenditure of resources on FOIA compliance and the extent to 

which, if any, requests for records have not been responded to within 

the statutory time limit (backlog); 

(ii) review the processes and practices by which the agency assists and 

informs the public regarding the FOIA process; 

(iii) examine the agency’s: 

(A) use of information technology in responding to FOIA requests, including without limitation the tracking of FOIA requests and communication with requesters; 

(B) practices with respect to requests for expedited processing; and 

(C) implementation of multi-track processing if used by such agency; 

(iv) review the agency’s policies and practices relating to the availability 

of public information through websites and other means, including the 

use of websites to make available the records described in section 552(a)(2) 

of title 5, United States Code; and 

(v) identify ways to eliminate or reduce its FOIA backlog, consistent 

with available resources and taking into consideration the volume and 

complexity of the FOIA requests pending with the agency. 

(b) Plan. 

(i) Each agency’s Chief FOIA Officer shall develop, in consultation as 

appropriate with the staff of the agency (including the FOIA Public Liaisons), the Attorney General, and the OMB Director, an agency-specific 

plan to ensure that the agency’s administration of the FOIA is in accordance 

with applicable law and the policies set forth in section 1 of this order. 

The plan, which shall be submitted to the head of the agency for approval, 

shall address the agency’s implementation of the FOIA during fiscal years 

2006 and 2007. 

(ii) The plan shall include specific activities that the agency will implement 

to eliminate or reduce the agency’s FOIA backlog, including (as applicable) 

changes that will make the processing of FOIA requests more streamlined 

and effective, as well as increased reliance on the dissemination of records 

that can be made available to the public through a website or other 

means that do not require the public to make a request for the records 

under the FOIA. 

(iii) The plan shall also include activities to increase public awareness 

of FOIA processing, including as appropriate, expanded use of the agency’s 

Center and its FOIA Public Liaisons. 

(iv) The plan shall also include, taking appropriate account of the resources 

available to the agency and the mission of the agency, concrete milestones, 

with specific timetables and outcomes to be achieved, by which the head 

of the agency, after consultation with the OMB Director, shall measure 

and evaluate the agency’s success in the implementation of the plan. 

(c) Agency Reports to the Attorney General and OMB Director. 

(i) The head of each agency shall submit a report, no later than 6 months 

from the date of this order, to the Attorney General and the OMB Director 

that summarizes the results of the review under section 3(a) of this order 

and encloses a copy of the agency’s plan under section 3(b) of this order. 

75376 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 242 / Monday, December 19, 2005 / Presidential Documents 

The agency shall publish a copy of the agency’s report on the agency’s 

website or, in the case of an agency without a website, on the Firstgov.gov 

website, or, in the case of any agency with neither a website nor the 

capability to publish on the Firstgov.gov website, in the Federal Register. 

(ii) The head of each agency shall include in the agency’s annual FOIA 

reports for fiscal years 2006 and 2007 a report on the agency’s development 

and implementation of its plan under section 3(b) of this order and on 

the agency’s performance in meeting the milestones set forth in that plan, 

consistent with any related guidelines the Attorney General may issue 

under section 552(e) of title 5, United States Code. 

(iii) If the agency does not meet a milestone in its plan, the head of 

the agency shall: 

(A) identify this deficiency in the annual FOIA report to the Attorney 

General; 

(B) explain in the annual report the reasons for the agency’s failure 

to meet the milestone; 

(C) outline in the annual report the steps that the agency has already 

taken, and will be taking, to address the deficiency; and 

(D) report this deficiency to the President’s Management Council. 

Sec. 4. Attorney General. 

(a) Report. The Attorney General, using the reports submitted by the 

agencies under subsection 3(c)(i) of this order and the information submitted 

by agencies in their annual FOIA reports for fiscal year 2005, shall submit 

to the President, no later than 10 months from the date of this order, 

a report on agency FOIA implementation. The Attorney General shall consult 

the OMB Director in the preparation of the report and shall include in 

the report appropriate recommendations on administrative or other agency 

actions for continued agency dissemination and release of public information. 

The Attorney General shall thereafter submit two further annual reports, 

by June 1, 2007, and June 1, 2008, that provide the President with an 

update on the agencies’ implementation of the FOIA and of their plans 

under section 3(b) of this order. 

(b) Guidance. The Attorney General shall issue such instructions and 

guidance to the heads of departments and agencies as may be appropriate 

to implement sections 3(b) and 3(c) of this order. 

Sec. 5. OMB Director. The OMB Director may issue such instructions to 

the heads of agencies as are necessary to implement this order, other than 

sections 3(b) and 3(c) of this order. 

Sec. 6. Definitions. As used in this order: 

(a) the term ‘‘agency’’ has the same meaning as the term ‘‘agency’’ under 

section 552(f)(1) of title 5, United States Code; and 

(b) the term ‘‘record’’ has the same meaning as the term ‘‘record’’ under 

section 552(f)(2) of title 5, United States Code. 

Sec. 7. General Provisions. 

(a) The agency reviews under section 3(a) of this order and agency plans 

under section 3(b) of this order shall be conducted and developed in accordance with applicable law and applicable guidance issued by the President, 

the Attorney General, and the OMB Director, including the laws and guidance 

regarding information technology and the dissemination of information. 

(b) This order: 

(i) shall be implemented in a manner consistent with applicable law 

and subject to the availability of appropriations; 

(ii) shall not be construed to impair or otherwise affect the functions 

of the OMB Director relating to budget, legislative, or administrative proposals; and 

(iii) is intended only to improve the internal management of the executive 

branch and is not intended to, and does not, create any right or benefit, 

Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 242 / Monday, December 19, 2005 / Presidential Documents 75377 

substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or in equity by a party 

against the United States, its departments, agencies, instrumentalities, or 

entities, its officers or employees, or any other person. 

W 

THE WHITE HOUSE, 

December 14, 2005. 

[FR Doc. 05–24255 

Filed 12–15–05; 8:45 am] 

Billing code 3195–01–P 

TAB B 

Monday, 

December 19, 2005 

Part V 

The President 

Executive Order 13392—Improving 

Agency Disclosure of Information 

Presidential Documents

75373 

Federal Register 

Vol. 70, No. 242 

Monday, December 19, 2005 

Title 3— 

The President 

Executive Order 13392 of December 14, 2005 

Improving Agency Disclosure of Information 

By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the 

laws of the United States of America, and to ensure appropriate agency 

disclosure of information, and consistent with the goals of section 552 

of title 5, United States Code, it is hereby ordered as follows: 

Section 1. Policy. 

(a) The effective functioning of our constitutional democracy depends 

upon the participation in public life of a citizenry that is well informed. 

For nearly four decades, the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) has provided 

an important means through which the public can obtain information regarding the activities of Federal agencies. Under the FOIA, the public can obtain 

records from any Federal agency, subject to the exemptions enacted by 

the Congress to protect information that must be held in confidence for 

the Government to function effectively or for other purposes. 

(b) FOIA requesters are seeking a service from the Federal Government 

and should be treated as such. Accordingly, in responding to a FOIA request, 

agencies shall respond courteously and appropriately. Moreover, agencies 

shall provide FOIA requesters, and the public in general, with citizencentered ways to learn about the FOIA process, about agency records that 

are publicly available (e.g., on the agency’s website), and about the status 

of a person’s FOIA request and appropriate information about the agency’s 

response. 

(c) Agency FOIA operations shall be both results-oriented and produce 

results. Accordingly, agencies shall process requests under the FOIA in 

an efficient and appropriate manner and achieve tangible, measurable improvements in FOIA processing. When an agency’s FOIA program does 

not produce such results, it should be reformed, consistent with available 

resources appropriated by the Congress and applicable law, to increase efficiency and better reflect the policy goals and objectives of this order. 

(d) A citizen-centered and results-oriented approach will improve service 

and performance, thereby strengthening compliance with the FOIA, and 

will help avoid disputes and related litigation. 

Sec. 2. Agency Chief FOIA Officers. 

(a) Designation. The head of each agency shall designate within 30 days 

of the date of this order a senior official of such agency (at the Assistant 

Secretary or equivalent level), to serve as the Chief FOIA Officer of that 

agency. The head of the agency shall promptly notify the Director of the 

Office of Management and Budget (OMB Director) and the Attorney General 

of such designation and of any changes thereafter in such designation. 

(b) General Duties. The Chief FOIA Officer of each agency shall, subject 

to the authority of the head of the agency: 

(i) have agency-wide responsibility for efficient and appropriate compliance 

with the FOIA; 

(ii) monitor FOIA implementation throughout the agency, including 

through the use of meetings with the public to the extent deemed appropriate by the agency’s Chief FOIA Officer, and keep the head of the 

agency, the chief legal officer of the agency, and the Attorney General 

appropriately informed of the agency’s performance in implementing the 

FOIA, including the extent to which the agency meets the milestones 

75374 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 242 / Monday, December 19, 2005 / Presidential Documents 

in the agency’s plan under section 3(b) of this order and training and 

reporting standards established consistent with applicable law and this 

order; 

(iii) recommend to the head of the agency such adjustments to agency 

practices, policies, personnel, and funding as may be necessary to carry 

out the policy set forth in section 1 of this order; 

(iv) review and report, through the head of the agency, at such times 

and in such formats as the Attorney General may direct, on the agency’s 

performance in implementing the FOIA; and 

(v) facilitate public understanding of the purposes of the FOIA’s statutory 

exemptions by including concise descriptions of the exemptions in both 

the agency’s FOIA handbook issued under section 552(g) of title 5, United 

States Code, and the agency’s annual FOIA report, and by providing 

an overview, where appropriate, of certain general categories of agency 

records to which those exemptions apply. 

(c) FOIA Requester Service Center and FOIA Public Liaisons. In order 

to ensure appropriate communication with FOIA requesters: 

(i) Each agency shall establish one or more FOIA Requester Service Centers 

(Center), as appropriate, which shall serve as the first place that a FOIA 

requester can contact to seek information concerning the status of the 

person’s FOIA request and appropriate information about the agency’s 

FOIA response. The Center shall include appropriate staff to receive and 

respond to inquiries from FOIA requesters; 

(ii) The agency Chief FOIA Officer shall designate one or more agency 

officials, as appropriate, as FOIA Public Liaisons, who may serve in the 

Center or who may serve in a separate office. FOIA Public Liaisons shall 

serve as supervisory officials to whom a FOIA requester can raise concerns 

about the service the FOIA requester has received from the Center, following an initial response from the Center staff. FOIA Public Liaisons 

shall seek to ensure a service-oriented response to FOIA requests and 

FOIA-related inquiries. For example, the FOIA Public Liaison shall assist, 

as appropriate, in reducing delays, increasing transparency and understanding of the status of requests, and resolving disputes. FOIA Public 

Liaisons shall report to the agency Chief FOIA Officer on their activities 

and shall perform their duties consistent with applicable law and agency 

regulations; 

(iii) In addition to the services to FOIA requesters provided by the Center 

and FOIA Public Liaisons, the agency Chief FOIA Officer shall also consider what other FOIA-related assistance to the public should appropriately 

be provided by the agency; 

(iv) In establishing the Centers and designating FOIA Public Liaisons, 

the agency shall use, as appropriate, existing agency staff and resources. 

A Center shall have appropriate staff to receive and respond to inquiries 

from FOIA requesters; 

(v) As determined by the agency Chief FOIA Officer, in consultation 

with the FOIA Public Liaisons, each agency shall post appropriate information about its Center or Centers on the agency’s website, including contact 

information for its FOIA Public Liaisons. In the case of an agency without 

a website, the agency shall publish the information on the Firstgov.gov 

website or, in the case of any agency with neither a website nor the 

capability to post on the Firstgov.gov website, in the Federal Register; 

and 

(vi) The agency Chief FOIA Officer shall ensure that the agency has 

in place a method (or methods), including through the use of the Center, 

to receive and respond promptly and appropriately to inquiries from FOIA 

requesters about the status of their requests. The Chief FOIA Officer shall 

Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 242 / Monday, December 19, 2005 / Presidential Documents 75375 

also consider, in consultation with the FOIA Public Liaisons, as appropriate, whether the agency’s implementation of other means (such as tracking numbers for requests, or an agency telephone or Internet hotline) 

would be appropriate for responding to status inquiries. 

Sec. 3. Review, Plan, and Report. 

(a) Review. Each agency’s Chief FOIA Officer shall conduct a review 

of the agency’s FOIA operations to determine whether agency practices 

are consistent with the policies set forth in section 1 of this order. In 

conducting this review, the Chief FOIA Officer shall: 

(i) evaluate, with reference to numerical and statistical benchmarks where 

appropriate, the agency’s administration of the FOIA, including the agency’s expenditure of resources on FOIA compliance and the extent to 

which, if any, requests for records have not been responded to within 

the statutory time limit (backlog); 

(ii) review the processes and practices by which the agency assists and 

informs the public regarding the FOIA process; 

(iii) examine the agency’s: 

(A) use of information technology in responding to FOIA requests, including without limitation the tracking of FOIA requests and communication with requesters; 

(B) practices with respect to requests for expedited processing; and 

(C) implementation of multi-track processing if used by such agency; 

(iv) review the agency’s policies and practices relating to the availability 

of public information through websites and other means, including the 

use of websites to make available the records described in section 552(a)(2) 

of title 5, United States Code; and 

(v) identify ways to eliminate or reduce its FOIA backlog, consistent 

with available resources and taking into consideration the volume and 

complexity of the FOIA requests pending with the agency. 

(b) Plan. 

(i) Each agency’s Chief FOIA Officer shall develop, in consultation as 

appropriate with the staff of the agency (including the FOIA Public Liaisons), the Attorney General, and the OMB Director, an agency-specific 

plan to ensure that the agency’s administration of the FOIA is in accordance 

with applicable law and the policies set forth in section 1 of this order. 

The plan, which shall be submitted to the head of the agency for approval, 

shall address the agency’s implementation of the FOIA during fiscal years 

2006 and 2007. 

(ii) The plan shall include specific activities that the agency will implement 

to eliminate or reduce the agency’s FOIA backlog, including (as applicable) 

changes that will make the processing of FOIA requests more streamlined 

and effective, as well as increased reliance on the dissemination of records 

that can be made available to the public through a website or other 

means that do not require the public to make a request for the records 

under the FOIA. 

(iii) The plan shall also include activities to increase public awareness 

of FOIA processing, including as appropriate, expanded use of the agency’s 

Center and its FOIA Public Liaisons. 

(iv) The plan shall also include, taking appropriate account of the resources 

available to the agency and the mission of the agency, concrete milestones, 

with specific timetables and outcomes to be achieved, by which the head 

of the agency, after consultation with the OMB Director, shall measure 

and evaluate the agency’s success in the implementation of the plan. 

(c) Agency Reports to the Attorney General and OMB Director. 

(i) The head of each agency shall submit a report, no later than 6 months 

from the date of this order, to the Attorney General and the OMB Director 

that summarizes the results of the review under section 3(a) of this order 

and encloses a copy of the agency’s plan under section 3(b) of this order. 

75376 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 242 / Monday, December 19, 2005 / Presidential Documents 

The agency shall publish a copy of the agency’s report on the agency’s 

website or, in the case of an agency without a website, on the Firstgov.gov 

website, or, in the case of any agency with neither a website nor the 

capability to publish on the Firstgov.gov website, in the Federal Register. 

(ii) The head of each agency shall include in the agency’s annual FOIA 

reports for fiscal years 2006 and 2007 a report on the agency’s development 

and implementation of its plan under section 3(b) of this order and on 

the agency’s performance in meeting the milestones set forth in that plan, 

consistent with any related guidelines the Attorney General may issue 

under section 552(e) of title 5, United States Code. 

(iii) If the agency does not meet a milestone in its plan, the head of 

the agency shall: 

(A) identify this deficiency in the annual FOIA report to the Attorney 

General; 

(B) explain in the annual report the reasons for the agency’s failure 

to meet the milestone; 

(C) outline in the annual report the steps that the agency has already 

taken, and will be taking, to address the deficiency; and 

(D) report this deficiency to the President’s Management Council. 

Sec. 4. Attorney General. 

(a) Report. The Attorney General, using the reports submitted by the 

agencies under subsection 3(c)(i) of this order and the information submitted 

by agencies in their annual FOIA reports for fiscal year 2005, shall submit 

to the President, no later than 10 months from the date of this order, 

a report on agency FOIA implementation. The Attorney General shall consult 

the OMB Director in the preparation of the report and shall include in 

the report appropriate recommendations on administrative or other agency 

actions for continued agency dissemination and release of public information. 

The Attorney General shall thereafter submit two further annual reports, 

by June 1, 2007, and June 1, 2008, that provide the President with an 

update on the agencies’ implementation of the FOIA and of their plans 

under section 3(b) of this order. 

(b) Guidance. The Attorney General shall issue such instructions and 

guidance to the heads of departments and agencies as may be appropriate 

to implement sections 3(b) and 3(c) of this order. 

Sec. 5. OMB Director. The OMB Director may issue such instructions to 

the heads of agencies as are necessary to implement this order, other than 

sections 3(b) and 3(c) of this order. 

Sec. 6. Definitions. As used in this order: 

(a) the term ‘‘agency’’ has the same meaning as the term ‘‘agency’’ under 

section 552(f)(1) of title 5, United States Code; and 

(b) the term ‘‘record’’ has the same meaning as the term ‘‘record’’ under 

section 552(f)(2) of title 5, United States Code. 

Sec. 7. General Provisions. 

(a) The agency reviews under section 3(a) of this order and agency plans 

under section 3(b) of this order shall be conducted and developed in accordance with applicable law and applicable guidance issued by the President, 

the Attorney General, and the OMB Director, including the laws and guidance 

regarding information technology and the dissemination of information. 

(b) This order: 

(i) shall be implemented in a manner consistent with applicable law 

and subject to the availability of appropriations; 

(ii) shall not be construed to impair or otherwise affect the functions 

of the OMB Director relating to budget, legislative, or administrative proposals; and 

(iii) is intended only to improve the internal management of the executive 

branch and is not intended to, and does not, create any right or benefit, 

Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 242 / Monday, December 19, 2005 / Presidential Documents 75377 

substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or in equity by a party 

against the United States, its departments, agencies, instrumentalities, or 

entities, its officers or employees, or any other person. 

W 

THE WHITE HOUSE, 

December 14, 2005. 

[FR Doc. 05–24255 

Filed 12–15–05; 8:45 am] 

Billing code 3195–01–P 

TAB C 












DoD Component FOIA Chief Public Liaisons

ACFO DFOIPO

Army Navy Air Force DISA DCAA DCMA DFAS

OSD

FOI

A

Office

Mari

n

e

s NGB

DSS DLA DOD IG DTRA NGA NRO NSA DIA

Joint

Staff COCOMS Field Activiti

OSD

D

DoD Component Chief FOIA Public Liaisons
TAB D 




TAB E 







TAB F 


TAB G 
TR051906 May 19, 2006

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE 

Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) 

Program Study 

Office of the Secretary of Defense 

Quality Management Office 

Washington, DC 

Interaction Research Institute, Inc.
Inquiries regarding this study or the results contained herein 

may be referred to: 

Interaction Research Institute, Inc. 

4428 Rockcrest Drive 

 Fairfax, Virginia 22032 

Voice : (703) 978-0313 

 Email : iriinc@aol.com 

 Website : www.irism.com
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE 

Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) 

Program Study

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Executive Summary

Chapter One. Introduction

Chapter Two. Demographics 

Chapter Three. General Results

Chapter Four. Organizational Climate

Chapter Five. Comparison Groups

Chapter Six. Analysis of Target Groups

Appendix A. FOIA Program Study Detailed Analysis by DoD Component & Hierarchical Level 

- Table A.1: Communication with Requesters

- Table A.2: FOIA Tracking/Control

- Table A.3: E-FOIA Capability in Office/Activity

- Table A.4: Request Processing

- Table A.5: Climate Item Scores 

Appendix B. DoD FOIA Program Survey

 
Executive Summary

The Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) is a federal statute (5 U.S.C. § 552) that establishes the public's right to 

request existing records from Federal government agencies. Enacted in 1966, the Freedom of Information Act was 

the first law to establish an effective legal right of access to government information. The statute was amended by 

the Electronic Freedom of Information Act Amendments of 1996. This legislation established annual reporting and 

E-FOIA requirements, and extended the legal response period from 10 to 20 working days. 

Executive Order 13392 was issued by President Bush on Dec 14, 2005. The Executive Order (EO) establishes 

procedures for a more citizen-centered and results-oriented approach, and requires a review of each agency's 

FOIA operations to assess compliance with FOIA legislation and identify ways to eliminate or reduce FOIA backlog. 

The EO also directs that each agency submit a plan of specific activities that will be implemented to improve 

customer service and eliminate or reduce backlog. 

The DoD Freedom of Information Act Program Study was conducted in April 2006 to provide information for the 

review required by Executive Order 13392. The study included a survey of FOIA processes and organizational 

climate. The results will be used to formulate recommendations to improve the DoD FOIA Program.

Interaction Research Institute, Inc. (IRI) designed and constructed the customized web-based survey for all DoD 

FOIA activities. IRI reviewed pertinent handbooks and regulations and conducted Critical Incident Interviews with 

FOIA professionals in order to customize the survey to reflect the unique terminology and issues associated with 

DoD FOIA processing.

Due to its size and complexity, the Department of Defense's FOIA program is decentralized among the DoD 

components, which operate their own FOIA offices and respond directly to the public for their own records. The 

target audience of the study was the primary FOIA officer within each DoD activity that receives and processes 

FOIA requests. The survey was completed by over 80% (548) of the DoD FOIA activities.

The study results reveal excellent customer focus, cooperation, and teamwork within FOIA offices. The study also 

disclosed the following improvement opportunities:

● Access to and training of all FOIA staff members

● E-FOIA compliance

● Support of the FOIA program within each command/activity/installation

● Software to facilitate redaction

● Standardization of FOIA Job Series and Grade/Rank position levels 

Detailed analysis of FOIA staff training disclosed that FOIA personnel in the offices with the greatest FOIA workload 

are better prepared for FOIA duties. However, there are some employees at all levels who are not sufficiently 

trained. This indicates that a DoD-wide training initiative is required to ensure that all FOIA staff members receive 

the training needed to perform their jobs effectively. 

A targeted analysis of DoD FOIA offices with large request volumes and backlogs reveal that backlog has a much 

greater impact on resource requirements than request volume. Offices/activities with a large request volume do not 

report insufficient resources, unless they also have a large backlog. 

These findings indicate that a targeted approach is required to reduce FOIA backlog - to provide additional 

resources (personnel and budget) to offices that are accumulating a large backlog. Short-term options include 

resource redistribution or targeted Tiger Teams. 

 
Chapter One TOC

Introduction

Executive Order 13392 directs each agency to submit a plan of specific activities that will be implemented to 

improve customer service and eliminate or reduce backlog. The DoD FOIA Program Survey was developed and 

conducted by Interaction Research Institute, Inc (IRI) as a means to solicit information and feedback about the 

FOIA program from those involved in daily FOIA processing. The survey instrument can be viewed in Appendix B . 

The DoD FOIA Program Survey was administered through a web-based form. Invitations to complete the survey 

were emailed to the target population with a link to the survey cover page. Responses were transmitted directly to 

IRI for analysis. Response to the survey was anonymous and voluntary on the employee's part. No respondent 

identifying information was obtained or recorded into the database. 

 
Chapter Two TOC

Demographics

Over 80 percent (548) of the DoD FOIA offices completed the survey. Tables 2.1 and 2.2 show the demographic 

characteristics of the respondents. 

Table 2.1 

DoD Component

DoD Component Number Percent

Department of the Army 137 25.0 

Department of the Navy/USMC 190 34.7 

Department of the Air Force 141 25.7 

Unified Combatant Command 7 1.3 

Other DoD Agency or Field Activity 49 8.9 

Not Indicated 24 4.4 

Total 548 100.0 

Table 2.2 

Hierarchical Level

Hierarchical Level Number Percent 

Headquarters for component 124 22.6 

Intermediate (major command, etc.) 109 19.9 

Unit (installation, etc.) 288 52.6 

Not Indicated 27 4.9 

Total 548 100.0 

Table 2.3 displays the sample used for comparative analyses of results by DoD Component and Hierarchical Level. 

Due to the small sample size, the Unified Combatant Command respondents were included in the Other DoD

group. This table does not include respondents that did not indicate their component or hierarchical level

Table 2.3 

Sample for Comparative Analysis by Component &Hierarchical Level 

Hierarchical Level AF Army Navy Other 

DoD TOT 

Headquarters for component 28 27 42 27 124 

Intermediate (major command, etc.) 16 21 59 13 109 

Unit (installation, etc.) 96 88 88 16 288 

TOTAL 140 136 189 56 521 

Respondents were asked to input the number of employees in their office within specified Grade/Rank levels. Table 

2.4 depicts the number and percent of FOIA staff within each Grade/Rank level. Detailed analysis of the 171 

employees below GS-8 revealed that 46 work in a Headquarters activity, 28 within an intermediate activity, and 97 

at a unit/installation activity.

 
Table 2.4 

FOIA Staff Position Levels

Position Level Number Percent 

GS-1 to GS-7 171 13.9 

GS-8 to GS-11 312 25.3 

GS-12 and above 417 33.9 

Contractor or adjunct personnel 91 7.4 

E-1 to E-6 87 7.1 

E-7 to E-9 45 3.7 

O1 to O3 55 4.5 

O4 and above 52 4.2 

Total 1230 100.0 

The survey asked respondents to indicate the Job Series of staff members at their location. Table 2.5 shows the 

series represented, and the number of offices/activities that reported at least one FOIA staff member with the 

position description for that series. 

Table 2.5 

Job Series of FOIA Staff Members

Series Description Count 

0343 Management & Program Analysis 117 

0905 General Attorney 100 

0950 Paralegal Specialist 77 

0301 Miscellaneous Administration & Program 62 

0344 Program Assistant 54 

0986 Legal Assistance 30 

0303 Miscellaneous Clerk & Assistant 23 

0342 Support Services Administration 15 

1102 Contracting 12 

0132 Intelligence 6 

0201 Human Resources Management 6 

0318 Secretary 6 

0341 Administrative Officer 6 

2210 Information Technology Management 5 

0080 Security Administration 4 

0326 Office Automation Clerical & Assistance 3 

0335 Computer Clerk & Assistant 3 

0511 Auditing 3 

1106 Procurement Clerical & Technician 3 

1801 General Inspection, Investigation & Compliance 3 

0086 Security Clerical & Assistance 2 

1420 Archivist 2 

0111 Economist 1 

0180 Psychology 1 

0309 Correspondence Clerk 1 

0669 Medical Records Administration 1 

1035 Public Affairs 1 

1082 Writing & Editing 1 

1083 Technical Writing & Editing 1 

1105 Purchasing 1 

1222 Patent Attorney 1 

1412 Technical Information Service 1 
1550 Computer Science 1 

1654 Printing Services 1 

1802 Compliance Inspection & Support 1 

Table 2.6 shows the number and percent of FOIA staff that received the specified types of training within the past 

year. The denominator to compute the percentages (1186) includes the number of FOIA staff members reported by 

those respondents that entered a number (e.g., 0, 1, 2) in at least one of the types of training. 

Table 2.6 

Training of FOIA Staff

Training of FOIA Staff Number Percent 

On-the-job training 604 50.9% 

Formal FOIA training conducted by external 

source 

359 30.3% 

Formal FOIA training conducted by DoD 172 14.5% 

Formal FOIA training conducted at your location 159 13.4% 

No formal FOIA training 280 23.6% 

No training of any type 109 9.2% 

 
Chapter Three TOC

General Results

Table 3.1 through 3.3 displays the number and percent of respondents who checked the checkbox indicating that 

the activities are executed within their FOIA office. The denominator to compute the percents is all respondents that 

completed this set of questions (541). Table 3.1 shows the number and percent of respondents that checked each 

type of communication with requesters. 

Table 3.1

Communication with Requesters

Type of Communication Number Percent 

Acknowledgement of request receipt 451 83% 

Notification of request referral 481 89% 

Point of contact and telephone number provided 494 91% 

Resolve fees before processing the request 404 75% 

Interim communication at approximately 20 working 

days 427 79% 

Requesters advised when they will receive a response 380 70% 

Table 3.2 displays the number and percent of respondents who checked each tracking/control mechanism. 

Table 3.2 

FOIA Tracing/Control

Tracking/Control Method Number Percent 

Manual (paper) 307 57% 

Microsoft Excel or other spreadsheet 238 44% 

Microsoft Access or other database 129 24% 

Specialized FOIA software 111 21% 

Web or Server based processing 

system 106 20% 

Multi-track processing system 97 18% 

Table 3.3 displays the number and percent of respondents who checked that their office/activity has the specified EFOIA capabilities.

Table 3.3 

E-FOIA Capabilities at Office/Activity 

E-FOIA at Activity/Location Number Percent 

Accept FOIA requests electronically 433 80% 

FOIA website for this activity/location 249 46% 

Link to a DoD FOIA website 244 45% 

Telephone number for FOIA inquiries 291 54% 

Link to FOIA handbook 193 36% 

Neither website nor link to website 234 43% 

Table 3.4 shows the primary redaction method used in the FOIA offices that responded to the survey. 

 
Table 3.4 

Primary Redaction Method

Redaction Method Number Percent 

Manual 446 81.8 

Generic Redaction Software 41 7.5 

Specialized Redaction 

Software 38 6.9 

Not Indicated 21 4.5 

Total 548 100.0 

Respondents estimated the percent of requests in their office within each category below. Table 3.5 displays the 

average percent of requests for each category. 

Table 3.5 

Request Processing - Estimated Percent of Requests

Category Percent 

Requester contacted to clarify request, fees, and/or 

scope 

22.6% 

Responsive records maintained in your office 30.0 % 

Search required 67.8% 

Thorough response received by tasked office by due date 62.8% 

No redaction required 37.5% 

Expedited requests that demonstrate a compelling need 6.2% 

Survey respondents were asked to rank order the five major FOIA processing steps according to impact on 

backlog. The results were converted to a 0-100 scale. A step would receive a score of 100 if all respondents 

indicated that the step had the greatest effect on backlog. Figure 3.1 shows that the Compilation, redaction and 

final response preparation and Record Search/Retrieval steps have the greatest impact on backlog. 
Figure 3.1 

FOIA Process Steps in Rank Order 

According to Impact on Backlog 

Figure 3.2 displays the distribution of backlog (number of pending requests). The Frequency 

represents the number of FOIA offices. Figure 3.2 shows that almost 180 offices had no backlog 

whatsoever at the time of the survey. 
Figure 3.2 

FOIA Backlog Distribution 

Figure 3.3 displays the distribution of the average number of FOIA requests received per year. It 

shows that 128 offices reported request volumes greater than 100 per year. 
Figure 3.3 

FOIA Request Volume Distribution 
Chapter Four TOC

Organizational Climate

The organizational climate section of the survey assessed respondent perceptions about their work environment. 

Organizational climate items measure concerns, conditions, and issues that provide diagnostic insight into the 

motivational level of the work force. This information is useful for management to direct activity toward 

improvement. The following categories of assessment comprise the organizational climate section. 

Organizational Climate Categories

Job Mastery : Development of and competence in required skills.

Resources : Adequacy of resources for FOIA processing at respondent location.

Cooperation & Teamwork : Coordination, collaboration and cooperation within and between groups involved in FOIA 

processing.

Customer Focus : Customer orientation and perceived satisfaction.

Each category consists of several relevant item statements representing key issues and conditions about FOIA 

processing in their office. Respondents were asked to make judgments about each statement along a five point 

scale shown in the table below.

Response Alternatives 

Value Description

5 Strongly agree

4 Agree

3 Neither agree nor disagree

2 Disagree

1 Strongly disagree

N Not applicable or don't know

Organizational climate scores were converted to a 0-100 scale for ease of interpretation. Each score represents 

the percent of the total possible score. The overall score (Climate Quotient) is 71.0. The Mean Score and Grade 

Level interpretation below (derived using empirical data and the Normal Curve model) shows that the Climate 

Quotient is in the Excellent range. 

Mean Score and Grade Level

Mean Score Grade Performance 

68 - 80+ A Excellent 

56 - 68 B Good 

44 - 56 C Fair 

< 44 D Poor 

The scores for the four organizational climate categories are displayed in rank order in Figure 4.1, and in sequential 

order in Table 4.1.
Figure 4.1 

DoD FOIA Climate Category Scores 

Table 4.1 

Category Scores 

Category Score

Job Mastery 73.5

Resources 65.3

Cooperation & Teamwork 73.2

Customer Focus 736

Climate Quotient 71.0

Table 4.2 displays the category and item scores. This table reveals that the low score for the Resources category is 

attributable to FOIA staff, administrative support, and budget allocations. 
Table 4.2 

Climate Category & Item Scores

No. Category/Item Score 

Job Mastery - The FOIA staff in this office: 73.5 

1 Receive the training needed to perform their jobs effectively. 65.6 

2 Have the expertise and judgment required for FOIA processing. 76.6 

3 Understand their FOIA roles and responsibilities. 81.1 

4 Have Position Descriptions that specify FOIA duties. 70.6 

Resources - The following resources are adequate for FOIA processing in this office: 65.3 

5 Office equipment (scanner, fax, etc.). 75.5 

6 Office materials and supplies. 79.8 

7 FOIA staff (full and part time personnel). 58.9 

8 Administrative support. 59.7 

9 IT support (software, help desk, etc.). 63.6 

10 Budget allocations. 53.0 

Cooperation and Teamwork 73.2 

11 There is a spirit of cooperation and teamwork within this FOIA office. 79.4 

12 Other offices involved in FOIA processing cooperate to achieve FOIA program goals. 69.3 

13 This office receives timely responses from offices tasked for record search and review. 63.7 

14 Affected parties (e.g., Legal Counsel, IDA, SME's) respect the advice and decisions from this FOIA 

office. 76.0 

15 The leadership of this activity supports the FOIA program. 75.2 

16 This office receives timely updates on the FOIA program from your component's FOIA Policy Office. 75.9 

Customer (Requester) Focus 73.6 

17 FOIA processes are designed to meet customer needs. 77.1 

18 This FOIA office is responsive to customer inquiries. 85.2 

19 Customer feedback is used to improve FOIA products and services. 65.3 

20 Documents electronically available to the public are kept current. 64.2 

Climate Quotient 71.0 

 
Chapter Five TOC

Comparison Groups

The Demographic segment of the DoD FOIA Program Survey included items to indicate the DoD Component and 

the Hierarchical Level of the reporting office. Table 5.1 displays the sample used for comparative analyses of 

results by DoD component and hierarchical level. This table does not include respondents that did not indicate their 

component and/or hierarchical level. 

Due to the small sample sizes within the cells, a difference of 10 points or greater is needed for statistical 

significance. Statistical significance indicates that the differences among groups are most likely attributable to an 

underlying cause, rather than to sampling variation. 

Table 5.1 

Sample for Comparative Analysis by Component &Hierarchical Level 

Hierarchical Level AF Army Navy Other 

DoD TOT

Headquarters for component 28 27 42 27 124 

Intermediate (major command, etc.) 16 21 59 13 109 

Unit (installation, etc.) 96 88 88 16 288 

TOTAL 140 136 189 56 521 

Table 5.2 shows that there are no significant differences in the overall Climate Quotient by Component or 

Hierarchical Level. 

Table 5.2 

Climate Quotient by Component & Hierarchical Level 

Hierarchical Level AF Army Navy Other 

DoD TOTAL 

Headquarters for component 67.5 72.7 73.6 69.4 71.1 

Intermediate (major command, 

etc.) 68.9 68.4 79.7 72.9 70.7 

Unit (installation, etc.) 74.0 71.0 67.4 62.8 70.3 

TOTAL 71.8 70.6 70.3 68.3 71.0 

Appendix A displays the FOIA Program Survey items by DoD Component and Hierarchical Level. Although most of 

the differences are not statistically significant, the following findings are noteworthy.

● The headquarters level and the Other DoD component (comprised of DoD agencies, field activities, and 

combatant commands) report the highest percentage of FOIA staff that received training within the past year. 

These groups also exhibit the highest scores for the climate item: The FOIA staff in this office receive the 

training needed to perform their job effectively. 

● The Army reports a higher percentage of offices that use a multi-track processing system.

● The Air Force and Other DoD component exhibit higher percentages for E-FOIA compliance.

● The Navy exhibits the highest scores for timeliness of response from offices tasked for search and review. 

● The Headquarters level of the Other DoD component exhibits significantly lower scores regarding sufficent 

Staff and Budget allocations.

 
Chapter Six TOC

Analyses of Target Groups

A targeted analysis was conducted to compare findings for groups that process a large volume of requests and/or 

have a large backlog. Climate item scores were computed for two target groups: 

● Request Volume > 100: FOIA offices that reported processing more than 100 requests per year (128 

respondents). 

● Backlog > 50: FOIA offices that reported a backlog greater than 50 (48 respondents). This group includes 

six offices that either did not report the number of requests, or reported a request volume slightly less than 

100. 

A demographic analysis of the Request Volume > 100 group disclosed that less than one third (31%) reported 

backlogs greater than 50, and 30% reported backlogs less than 10. Table 1 shows the DoD component and 

hierarchical level of this group. 

Table 6.1 

Request Volume >100 Target Group by Component and Hierarchical Level

Hierarchical Level AF Army Navy Other DoD TOTAL 

Headquarters for component 6 11 12 17 46 

Intermediate (major command, etc.) 3 5 13 4 25 

Unit (installation, etc.) 14 26 11 6 57 

TOTAL 23 42 36 27 128 

Table 6.2 shows the distribution of the offices that reported backlogs greater than 50. Most of this group (42 of the 

48) also process more than 100 requests per year. 

Table 6.2 

Backlog >50 Target Group by Component and Hierarchical Level

Hierarchical Level AF Army Navy Other DoD TOTAL 

Headquarters for component 3 11 4 10 28 

Intermediate (major command, etc.) 0 3 2 2 7 

Unit (installation, etc.) 2 6 4 1 13 

TOTAL 5 20 10 13 48 

Table 6.3 displays the Climate Item scores for the two target groups and the Non-Target group (the remainder of 

the respondents). 

 
Table 6.3 

Climate Item Scores for Target and Non-Target Groups

No. Item Volume 

> 100 

Backlog 

> 50 

Non 

Target 

1 The FOIA staff in this office receive the training needed to perform their jobs effectively. 74.4 80.2 62.3 

2 The FOIA staff in this office have the expertise and judgment required for FOIA processing. 83.2 81.8 74.1 

3 The FOIA staff in this office understand their FOIA roles and responsibilities. 88.1 85.9 78.3 

4 The FOIA staff in this office have Position Descriptions that specify FOIA duties. 79.7 79.7 66.9 

5 Our office equipment is adequate for FOIA processing. 72.9 76.0 76.2 

6 This office's office materials and supplies are adequate for FOIA processing. 79.1 80.9 79.7 

7 The FOIA staff in this office is adequate for FOIA processing. 52.8 40.6 60.7 

8 This office's Administrative support is adequate for FOIA processing. 51.2 46.4 62.7 

9 This office's IT support is adequate for FOIA processing. 59.9 62.2 64.7 

10 This office's budget allocations are adequate for FOIA processing. 45.3 40.3 55.8 

11 There is a spirit of cooperation and teamwork within this FOIA office. 82.3 80.3 77.9 

12 Other offices involved in FOIA processing cooperate to achieve FOIA program goals. 65.3 65.4 70.9 

13 This office receives timely responses from offices tasked for record search and review. 55.9 51.0 67.2 

14 Affected parties (e.g., Legal Counsel, IDA, SME's) respect the advice and decisions from this FOIA 

office. 77.2 74.0 75.5 

15 The leadership of this activity supports the FOIA program. 71.4 68.6 76.3 

16 This office receives timely updates on the FOIA program from your component's FOIA Policy Office. 76.6 78.6 75.7 

17 FOIA processes are designed to meet customer needs. 80.1 76.6 75.9 

18 This FOIA office is responsive to customer inquiries. 87.7 86.5 84.1 

19 Customer feedback is used to improve FOIA products and services. 68.0 65.2 63.9 

20 Documents electronically available to the public are kept current. 61.2 50.6 65.4 

Table 6.3 reveals that perceptions regarding most of the issues are similar for the three groups. The difference 

(disparity) in scores for the group with a large request volume is not as great as for the group with a large backlog . 

The Backlog > 50 group displays substantially lower scores for the following items, ranked in descending order 

according to the amount of disparity. 

● The FOIA staff in this office is adequate for FOIA processing. 

● This office's Administrative support is adequate for FOIA processing. 

● This office receives timely responses from offices tasked for record search and review. 

● This office's budget allocations are adequate for FOIA processing. 

● Documents electronically available to the public are kept current. 

● The leadership of this activity supports the FOIA program. 

The Backlog > 50 group exhibits a score 20 points less than the Non-Target group for Item 7 regarding FOIA 

staffing. Scores for this and other Resources items were computed for two subsets of the Request Volume > 100 

group; (1) offices with backlogs > 50, and (2) offices with backlogs < 50. The analysis revealed that scores for the 

Request Volume > 100 offices with a backlog < 50 are approximately equivalent to those of the Non-Target group. 

Therefore, backlog has a much greater impact on resource requirements than request volume. 

Table 6.3 also displays higher scores for all the Job Mastery items for both target groups: 

● The FOIA staff in this office receive the training needed to perform their jobs effectively. 

● The FOIA staff in this office have Position Descriptions that specify FOIA duties. 
● The FOIA staff in this office understand their FOIA roles and responsibilities. 

● The FOIA staff in this office have the expertise and judgment required for FOIA processing. 

FOIA Training 

The FOIA Program Survey included two questions to assess training: (1) the number of FOIA staff members that 

received training within the past year, and (2) whether FOIA personnel receive sufficient training to perform their 

jobs effectively. 

Detailed analysis found that insufficient training is more prevalent in offices that process a small number of 

requests. However, ten of the Request Volume > 100 offices reported that none of their FOIA personnel had 

received training within the past year . 

Comparative analysis of the Climate items disclosed that offices with large request volumes and backlogs have 

significantly higher scores regarding Receiving training needed to perform their jobs effectively, and Position 

Descriptions that specify FOIA duties. 

These findings indicate that FOIA personnel in the offices with the greatest FOIA workload are better prepared for 

FOIA duties, but across the board improvement is warranted. Therefore, a systemic approach is required to 

address the content, logistical, and budgetary challenges to provide relevant training to all FOIA personnel.

Table of Contents
Appendix A TOC

Table A.1: Communication with Requesters 

Table A.2: FOIA Tracking/Control

Table A.3: E-FOIA Capability at Office/Activity

Table A.4: Request Processing

Table A.5: Climate Item Scores by Component & Hierarchical Level

 

Table A.1 

Communication with Requesters

C1 - Acknowledgement of request receipt 

Hierarchical Level AF Army Navy Oth DoD TOTAL 

Headquarters for component 92.9% 96.3% 90.5% 88.9% 91.9% 

Intermediate (major command, 

etc.) 81.3% 71.4% 86.4% 92.3% 83.5% 

Unit (installation, etc.) 79.2% 72.7% 84.1% 81.3% 78.8% 

TOTAL 82.1% 77.2% 86.2% 87.5% 82.9% 

C2 - Notification of Request Referral 

Hierarchical Level AF Army Navy Oth DoD TOTAL 

Headquarters for component 96.4% 100.0% 88.1% 92.6% 93.5% 

Intermediate (major command, 

etc.) 100.0% 76.2% 88.1% 76.9% 86.2% 

Unit (installation, etc.) 89.6% 90.9% 83.0% 75.0% 87.2% 

TOTAL 92.1% 90.4% 85.7% 83.9% 88.5% 

C3 - POC & telephone number provided 

Hierarchical Level AF Army Navy Oth DoD TOTAL 

Headquarters for component 92.9% 96.3% 97.6% 100.0% 96.8% 

Intermediate (major command, 

etc.) 87.5% 76.2% 89.8% 92.3% 87.2% 

Unit (installation, etc.) 89.6% 90.9% 89.8% 87.5% 89.9% 

TOTAL 90.0% 89.7% 91.5% 94.6% 91.0% 

C4 - Resolve fees before processing the request 

Hierarchical Level AF Army Navy Oth DoD TOTAL 

Headquarters for component 78.6% 70.4% 71.4% 88.9% 76.6% 

Intermediate (major command, 

etc.) 87.5% 61.9% 76.3% 84.6% 76.1% 

Unit (installation, etc.) 72.9% 84.1% 65.9% 68.8% 74.0% 

TOTAL 75.7% 77.9% 70.4% 82.1% 75.0% 

C5 - Interim communication at approximately 20 working days 

Hierarchical Level AF Army Navy Oth DoD TOTAL 
Headquarters for component 96.4% 74.1% 66.7% 66.7% 75.0% 

Intermediate (major command, 

etc.) 87.5% 71.4% 71.2% 84.6% 75.2% 

Unit (installation, etc.) 87.5% 87.5% 71.6% 75.0% 81.9% 

TOTAL 89.3% 82.4% 70.4% 73.2% 78.9% 

C6 - Requesters advised when they will receive a response 

Hierarchical Level AF Army Navy Oth DoD TOTAL 

Headquarters for component 82.1% 74.1% 76.2% 59.3% 73.4% 

Intermediate (major command, 

etc.) 81.3% 61.9% 69.5% 61.5% 68.8% 

Unit (installation, etc.) 76.0% 69.3% 65.9% 56.3% 69.8% 

TOTAL 77.9% 69.1% 69.3% 58.9% 70.4% 

Table A.2 

FOIA Tracking/Control

T1 - Manual Tracking 

Hierarchical Level AF Army Navy Oth DoD TOTAL 

Headquarters for component 67.9% 55.6% 47.6% 40.7% 52.4% 

Intermediate (major command, 

etc.) 37.5% 42.9% 66.1% 23.1% 52.3% 

Unit (installation, etc.) 57.3% 53.4% 69.3% 62.5% 60.1% 

TOTAL 57.1% 52.2% 63.5% 42.9% 56.6% 

T2 - Microsoft Excel or other spreadsheet 

Hierarchical Level AF Army Navy Oth DoD TOTAL 

Headquarters for component 64.3% 44.4% 47.6% 55.6% 52.4% 

Intermediate (major command, 

etc.) 62.5% 28.6% 39.0% 69.2% 44.0% 

Unit (installation, etc.) 47.9% 26.1% 42.0% 50.0% 39.6% 

TOTAL 52.9% 30.1% 42.3% 57.1% 43.6% 

T3 - Microsoft Access or other database 

Hierarchical Level AF Army Navy Oth DoD TOTAL 

Headquarters for component 28.6% 29.6% 28.6% 40.7% 31.5% 

Intermediate (major command, 

etc.) 50.0% 19.0% 23.7% 30.8% 27.5% 

Unit (installation, etc.) 19.8% 33.0% 10.2% 12.5% 20.5% 

TOTAL 25.0% 30.1% 18.5% 30.4% 24.4% 

T4 - Specialized FOIA software 

Hierarchical Level AF Army Navy Oth DoD TOTAL 

Headquarters for component 0.0% 66.7% 11.9% 37.0% 26.6% 

Intermediate (major command, 

etc.) 6.3% 61.9% 5.1% 23.1% 18.3% 

Unit (installation, etc.) 9.4% 38.6% 3.4% 43.8% 18.4% 
TOTAL 7.1% 47.8% 5.8% 35.7% 20.6% 

T5 - Web or Server based processing system 

Hierarchical Level AF Army Navy Oth DoD TOTAL 

Headquarters for component 14.3% 25.9% 14.3% 18.5% 17.7% 

Intermediate (major command, 

etc.) 12.5% 19.0% 6.8% 0.0% 9.2% 

Unit (installation, etc.) 11.5% 48.9% 13.6% 18.8% 24.0% 

TOTAL 12.1% 39.7% 11.6% 14.3% 19.5% 

T6 - Multi-track Processing System 

Hierarchical Level AF Army Navy Oth DoD TOTAL 

Headquarters for component 17.9% 25.9% 14.3% 33.3% 21.8% 

Intermediate (major command, 

etc.) 18.8% 9.5% 10.2% 23.1% 12.8% 

Unit (installation, etc.) 7.3% 45.5% 4.5% 6.3% 18.1% 

TOTAL 10.7% 36.0% 8.5% 23.2% 17.9% 

 

Table A.3 

E-FOIA Capability at Office/Activity

E-1 Accept FOIA Requests Electronically 

Hierarchical Level AF Army Navy Other DoD TOTAL 

Headquarters for component 78.6% 70.4% 83.3% 100.0% 83.1% 

Intermediate (major command, 

etc.) 100.0% 85.7% 76.3% 84.6% 82.6% 

Unit (installation, etc.) 82.3% 84.1% 68.2% 81.3% 78.5% 

TOTAL 83.6% 81.6% 74.1% 91.1% 80.4% 

E2 - FOIA Website Percentage 

Hierarchical Level AF Army Navy Other DoD TOTAL 

Headquarters for component 75.0% 33.3% 50.0% 85.2% 59.7% 

Intermediate (major command, 

etc.) 100.0% 9.5% 30.5% 69.2% 41.3% 

Unit (installation, etc.) 71.9% 33.0% 18.2% 56.3% 42.7% 

TOTAL 75.7% 29.4% 29.1% 73.2% 46.4% 

E3 - Link to FOIA Website Percentage 

Hierarchical Level AF Army Navy Other DoD TOTAL 

Headquarters for component 67.9% 29.6% 61.9% 77.8% 59.7% 

Intermediate (major command, 

etc.) 68.8% 14.3% 37.3% 76.9% 42.2% 

Unit (installation, etc.) 55.2% 20.5% 34.1% 56.3% 38.2% 

TOTAL 59.3% 21.3% 41.3% 71.4% 44.5% 

E4 - Telephone number on website for FOIA related inquiries 

Hierarchical Level AF Army Navy Other DoD TOTAL 
Headquarters for component 71.4% 37.0% 64.3% 96.3% 66.9% 

Intermediate (major command, 

etc.) 93.8% 38.1% 40.7% 92.3% 54.1% 

Unit (installation, etc.) 68.8% 43.2% 31.8% 56.3% 49.0% 

TOTAL 72.1% 41.2% 41.8% 83.9% 54.3% 

E5 - Link to FOIA Handbook 

Hierarchical Level AF Army Navy Other DoD TOTAL 

Headquarters for component 60.7% 22.2% 42.9% 74.1% 49.2% 

Intermediate (major command, 

etc.) 81.3% 14.3% 25.4% 76.9% 37.6% 

Unit (installation, etc.) 54.2% 21.6% 18.2% 37.5% 32.3% 

TOTAL 58.6% 20.6% 25.9% 64.3% 36.4% 

Table A.4 

Request Processing - Estimated Percentage of Requests

P1 - Requester contacted to clarify request, fees, and/or scope 

Hierarchical Level AF Army Navy Oth DoD TOTAL 

Headquarters for component 25.6% 11.9% 20.2% 25.7% 21.0% 

Intermediate (major command, 

etc.) 10.7% 34.4% 21.9% 24.2% 23.0% 

Unit (installation, etc.) 22.1% 23.0% 24.2% 20.5% 23.0% 

TOTAL 22.4% 22.7% 22.5% 24.0% 22.6% 

P2 - Responsive records maintained in your office 

Hierarchical Level AF Army Navy Oth DoD TOTAL 

Headquarters for component 39.0% 15.8% 37.0% 6.4% 26.1% 

Intermediate (major command, 

etc.) 18.2% 41.7% 49.3% 20.3% 39.7% 

Unit (installation, etc.) 21.1% 25.0% 35.7% 47.2% 28.5% 

TOTAL 24.7% 25.3% 40.5% 20.3% 30.4% 

P3 - Search required 

Hierarchical Level AF Army Navy Oth DoD TOTAL 

Headquarters for component 61.5% 67.6% 63.5% 80.7% 57.8% 

Intermediate (major command, 

etc.) 63.3% 76.5% 70.8% 85.8% 60.8% 

Unit (installation, etc.) 66.5% 73.6% 55.3% 86.4% 66.1% 

TOTAL 64.5% 73.0% 62.2% 83.6% 68.3% 

P4 - Thorough response received from tasked office by due date 

Hierarchical Level AF Army Navy Oth DoD TOTAL 

Headquarters for component 62.7% 43.7% 68.0% 51.2% 57.8% 

Intermediate (major command, 

etc.) 73.9% 59.1% 59.3% 57.6% 60.8% 

Unit (installation, etc.) 61.6% 70.4% 67.7% 54.2% 66.1% 
TOTAL 63.5% 63.7% 65.3% 53.7% 62.8% 

P5 - No redaction required 

Hierarchical Level AF Army Navy Oth DoD TOTAL 

Headquarters for component 36.5% 28.5% 23.0% 25.2% 27.8% 

Intermediate (major command, 

etc.) 40.1% 56.8% 28.4% 37.0% 36.2% 

Unit (installation, etc.) 45.4% 53.7% 30.9% 52.5% 44.0% 

TOTAL 42.7% 49.3% 28.2% 35.2% 37.5% 

P6 - Expedited requests that demonstrate a compelling need 

Hierarchical Level AF Army Navy Oth DoD TOTAL 

Headquarters for component 1.7% 4.8% 7.6% 2.6% 4.5% 

Intermediate (major command, 

etc.) 2.9% 6.3% 8.8% 3.5% 6.7% 

Unit (installation, etc.) 5.9% 6.5% 8.2% 1.9% 6.6% 

TOTAL 5.4% 6.2% 8.2% 2.7% 6.2% 

Table A.5 

Climate Item Scores by Component & Hierarchical Level

Q1 - The FOIA staff in this office receive the training needed to perform their jobs effectively. 

Hierarchical Level AF Army Navy Other DoD TOTAL 

Headquarters for component 64.3 66.7 72.0 90.7 73.2 

Intermediate (major command, etc.) 85.9 60.0 65.1 71.2 68.0 

Unit (installation, etc.) 55.6 66.5 62.2 60.9 61.3 

TOTAL 61.2 65.1 65.3 77.7 65.6 

Q2 - The FOIA staff in this office have the expertise and judgment required for FOIA processing. 

Hierarchical Level AF Army Navy Other DoD TOTAL 

Headquarters for component 74.1 70.4 79.2 88.9 78.2 

Intermediate (major command, etc.) 89.1 78.8 72.9 76.9 76.9 

Unit (installation, etc.) 74.7 82.8 71.9 65.6 75.8 

TOTAL 76.4 79.4 73.8 79.5 76.6 

Q3 - The FOIA staff in this office understand their roles and responsibilities. 

Hierarchical Level AF Army Navy Other DoD TOTAL 

Headquarters for component 78.6 77.8 81.5 92.6 82.5 

Intermediate (major command, etc.) 89.1 85.7 76.7 86.5 81.4 

Unit (installation, etc.) 79.0 85.9 77.6 71.9 80.3 

TOTAL 80.2 84.0 78.2 85.3 81.1 

Q4 - The FOIA staff in this office have Position Descriptions that specify FOIA duties. 

Hierarchical Level AF Army Navy Other DoD TOTAL 

Headquarters for component 70.2 63.0 71.2 83.3 71.8 

Intermediate (major command, etc.) 89.1 70.2 60.2 76.9 68.8 

Unit (installation, etc.) 65.9 80.5 67.5 61.7 70.8 
TOTAL 69.5 74.8 66.1 75.9 70.6 

Q5 - Our office equipment is adequate for FOIA processing. 

Hierarchical Level AF Army Navy Other DoD TOTAL 

Headquarters for component 75.9 75.9 73.8 76.9 75.4 

Intermediate (major command, etc.) 81.3 79.8 72.0 75.0 75.2 

Unit (installation, etc.) 71.5 79.9 75.6 70.3 75.3 

TOTAL 73.5 79.0 74.2 74.6 75.5 

Q6 - Our office materials and supplies are adequate for FOIA processing. 

Hierarchical Level AF Army Navy Other DoD TOTAL 

Headquarters for component 77.7 71.3 81.1 85.2 79.1 

Intermediate (major command, etc.) 87.5 82.1 78.0 88.5 81.4 

Unit (installation, etc.) 76.3 82.2 79.7 75.0 79.1 

TOTAL 78.1 80.0 79.5 83.0 79.8 

Q7 - Our FOIA staff is adequate for FOIA processing. 

Hierarchical Level AF Army Navy Other DoD TOTAL 

Headquarters for component 60.7 53.7 60.6 39.8 54.5 

Intermediate (major command, etc.) 70.3 52.4 55.1 71.2 58.7 

Unit (installation, etc.) 57.0 65.6 60.7 54.7 60.7 

TOTAL 59.6 61.1 59.1 51.3 58.9 

Q8 - Our Administrative support is adequate for FOIA processing. 

Hierarchical Level AF Army Navy Other DoD TOTAL 

Headquarters for component 67.6 56.5 62.8 37.0 56.8 

Intermediate (major command, etc.) 66.1 52.4 54.7 67.3 57.2 

Unit (installation, etc.) 55.4 65.1 67.3 45.3 61.5 

TOTAL 59.4 61.3 62.4 46.4 59.7 

Q9 - Our IT support is adequate for FOIA processing. 

Hierarchical Level AF Army Navy Other DoD TOTAL 

Headquarters for component 66.1 69.4 59.8 50.9 61.4 

Intermediate (major command, etc.) 73.4 67.5 51.3 63.5 59.1 

Unit (installation, etc.) 62.6 72.4 64.0 59.4 65.9 

TOTAL 64.9 70.9 59.2 56.3 63.6 

Q10 - Our budget allocations adequate for FOIA processing. 

Hierarchical Level AF Army Navy Other DoD TOTAL 

Headquarters for component 59.0 55.4 54.1 27.0 49.3 

Intermediate (major command, etc.) 55.0 50.0 52.6 68.2 54.1 

Unit (installation, etc.) 48.3 57.0 58.3 48.3 53.9 

TOTAL 51.2 55.5 55.5 42.2 53.0 

Q11 - There is a spirit of cooperation and teamwork within this FOIA office. 

Hierarchical Level AF Army Navy Other DoD TOTAL 

Headquarters for component 79.6 70.2 78.0 90.4 79.3 

Intermediate (major command, etc.) 86.7 77.4 81.9 82.7 81.8 
Unit (installation, etc.) 77.0 80.8 78.7 75.0 78.6 

TOTAL 78.9 78.1 79.7 84.1 79.4 

Q12 - Other offices involved in FOIA processing cooperate to achieve FOIA program goals. 

Hierarchical Level AF Army Navy Other DoD TOTAL 

Headquarters for component 77.7 73.1 70.8 60.6 70.7 

Intermediate (major command, etc.) 68.8 62.5 72.3 69.2 69.5 

Unit (installation, etc.) 63.8 66.1 77.8 59.4 68.4 

TOTAL 67.5 66.9 74.4 62.3 69.3 

Q13 - This office receives timely responses from offices tasked for record search and review. 

Hierarchical Level AF Army Navy Other DoD TOTAL 

Headquarters for component 75.9 60.2 72.6 42.6 64.1 

Intermediate (major command, etc.) 65.0 58.8 64.7 73.1 64.7 

Unit (installation, etc.) 56.4 62.2 73.1 51.6 62.8 

TOTAL 61.8 61.3 70.4 52.2 63.7 

Q14 - Affected parties respect the advice and decisions from this FOIA office. 

Hierarchical Level AF Army Navy Other DoD TOTAL 

Headquarters for component 78.6 72.1 82.1 71.3 76.7 

Intermediate (major command, etc.) 85.9 76.3 76.8 73.1 77.6 

Unit (installation, etc.) 70.9 78.9 75.9 71.9 75.0 

TOTAL 74.6 76.9 77.6 71.9 76.0 

Q15 - The leadership of this activity supports the FOIA program. 

Hierarchical Level AF Army Navy Other DoD TOTAL 

Headquarters for component 80.4 70.4 76.8 65.4 73.8 

Intermediate (major command, etc.) 82.8 73.8 79.4 75.0 78.3 

Unit (installation, etc.) 70.1 77.6 80.0 57.8 74.7 

TOTAL 73.9 75.6 79.1 65.5 75.2 

Q16 - This office receives timely updates on the FOIA program from your component's FOIA Policy 

Office. 

Hierarchical Level AF Army Navy Other DoD TOTAL 

Headquarters for component 76.8 64.8 84.1 91.7 79.9 

Intermediate (major command, etc.) 70.0 73.8 75.9 75.0 74.5 

Unit (installation, etc.) 69.8 76.7 78.4 73.4 74.7 

TOTAL 71.5 73.5 78.8 82.6 75.9 

Q17 - FOIA processes are designed to meet customer needs. 

Hierarchical Level AF Army Navy Other DoD TOTAL 

Headquarters for component 79.5 77.8 78.0 79.6 78.7 

Intermediate (major command, etc.) 89.1 69.0 75.4 67.3 75.2 

Unit (installation, etc.) 75.5 82.1 76.2 59.4 76.9 

TOTAL 78.1 79.2 76.5 71.0 77.1 

Q18 - This FOIA office is responsive to customer inquiries. 

Hierarchical Level AF Army Navy Other DoD TOTAL 

Headquarters for component 86.6 78.7 86.3 88.0 85.1 
Intermediate (major command, etc.) 95.0 86.3 80.4 84.6 84.1 

Unit (installation, etc.) 86.8 88.2 83.5 75.0 85.6 

TOTAL 87.8 85.9 83.3 83.5 85.2 

Q19 - Customer feedback is used to improve FOIA products and services. 

Hierarchical Level AF Army Navy Other DoD TOTAL 

Headquarters for component 66.7 62.0 62.2 66.3 64.0 

Intermediate (major command, etc.) 80.8 57.9 67.7 55.8 65.9 

Unit (installation, etc.) 65.8 69.6 62.2 56.7 65.4 

TOTAL 67.9 66.1 64.1 61.1 65.3 

Q20 - Documents electronically available to the public are kept current. 

Hierarchical Level AF Army Navy Other DoD TOTAL 

Headquarters for component 77.4 57.6 62.1 58.3 63.4 

Intermediate (major command, etc.) 83.9 56.7 61.3 57.7 63.7 

Unit (installation, etc.) 67.7 67.9 58.5 59.4 64.7 

TOTAL 71.4 63.9 60.2 58.5 64.2 

Table of Contents : Top of Page
FOIA Program Survey

The items below refer to FOIA requests received and processed in your FOIA office:

Communication with requesters - Please check all activities performed by your FOIA office:

 Acknowledgement of request receipt.

 Notification of request referral.

 Point of contact and telephone number provided.

 Resolve fees before processing the request.

 Interim communication at approximately 20 working days. 

 Requesters advised when they will receive a response.

FOIA Tracking/Control - Please check all that apply:

 Manual (paper)

 Microsoft Excel or other spreadsheet

 Microsoft Access or other database

 Specialized FOIA software (FOIA Xpress, FACTS, etc.)

 Web or Server based processing system

 Multitrack processing system

E-FOIA - Please check all that apply to this office:

 Accept FOIA requests electronically

 FOIA website for this activity/location/installation

 Link to a DoD FOIA website (agency, component, etc.)

 Telephone number on your website for FOIA related inquires 

 Link to FOIA handbook

Primary redaction method in your office - Please check one:

 Manual (marker, etc.)

 Generic software (Adobe Acrobat, MS Word, etc.) 

 Specialized redaction software (RedactXpress, Redax, etc.)

Request Processing - Please estimate the percent of requests that fall in each category below:

 Requester contacted to clarify the request, fees, and/or scope.

 Responsive record(s) are maintained in your office - tasking to other offices not required.

 Search required.

 Thorough response received from tasked office(s) by the due date.

 No redaction required.

 Expedited requests that demonstrate a compelling need.

Processing Time - Please rank order the following according to impact on your backlog.

1 = greatest impact, 5 = least impact.

 Request screening, logging, and assignment.

 Record search/retrieval.

 Review/consultation with affected parties (Subject Matter Experts, other Federal Agencies, etc.).

 Compilation, redaction, and final response preparation.

 Signatory approval process (IDA, legal review, Public Affairs, chain of command, etc.)
 Current Backlog - Please input the number of initial requests pending (open cases) in this FOIA office.

 Initial Requests - Please input the average number of initial requests received by this FOIA office per year.

For each statement below, please mark the circle that most closely represents this FOIA office: 

# Job Mastery - The FOIA staff in this office: Strongly 

Agree Agree

Neither 

agree nor 

disagree

Disagree Strongly 

Disagree

NA or don't 

know

1. Receive the training needed to perform their jobs effectively.

2. Have the expertise and judgment required for FOIA processing.

3. Understand their FOIA roles and responsibilities.

4. Have Position Descriptions that specify FOIA duties. 

# Resources - The following resources are adequate for FOIA 

processing in this office:

Strongly 

Agree Agree

Neither 

agree nor 

disagree

Disagree Strongly 

Disagree

NA or don't 

know

5. Office equipment (scanner, fax, etc.).

6. Office materials and supplies.

7. FOIA staff (full and part time personnel).

8. Administrative support.

9. IT support (software, help desk, etc.).

10. Budget allocations.

# Cooperation and Teamwork Strongly 

Agree Agree

Neither 

agree nor 

disagree

Disagree Strongly 

Disagree

NA or don't 

know

11. There is a spirit of cooperation and teamwork within this FOIA office.

12. Other offices involved in FOIA processing cooperate to achieve FOIA 

program goals.

13. This office receives timely responses from offices tasked for record search 

and review.

14. Affected parties (e.g., Legal Counsel, IDA, SME's) respect the advice and 

decisions from this FOIA office.

15. The leadership of this activity supports the FOIA program. 

16. This office receives timely updates on the FOIA program from your 

component's FOIA Policy Office. 

# Customer (Requester) Focus Strongly 

Agree Agree

Neither 

agree nor 

disagree

Disagree Strongly 

Disagree

NA or don't 

know

17. FOIA processes are designed to meet customer needs.

18. This FOIA office is responsive to customer inquiries.

19. Customer feedback is used to improve FOIA products and services.

20. Documents electronically available to the public are kept current.

Please indicate the key obstacles that impede FOIA processing.
Please offer your recommendations to improve the FOIA program. 

Position Levels of FOIA Staff in this office - Please indicate the number of employees in each level:

 GS-1 to GS-7 

 GS-8 to GS-11 

 GS-12 and above 

 Contractor or other adjunct personnel 

 

 E-1 to E-6 

 E-7 to E-9 

 O1 to O3 

 O4 and above 

 

Job Series of FOIA Staff in this office - Please check all that apply:

 0086 

 0301 

 0303 

 0340 

 0342 

 0343 

 0675 

 0905 

 0950 

 0986 

 1102 

 Other - please specify: 

Training of FOIA Staff in this office - Please indicate the number trained in each category within the past year:

 On-the-job training 

 Formal FOIA training course/conference by external source (DOJ, ASAP, USDA, etc.) 

 Formal FOIA training conducted by DoD 

 Formal FOIA training conducted at your location 

 

Hierarchical Level - Please indicate the level of this activity within your component command structure:

 Headquarters for your component 

 Intermediate (major command, etc.) 

 Unit (installation, etc.) 

 

Please select your DoD Component

 Department of the Army 

 Department of the Navy/USMC 

 Department of the Air Force 

 Unified Combatant Commands 

 Other DoD Agency or Field Activity 

 

 

RCS DD-DA&M(OT)2234
Attachment 

2 






Attachment 

3 
OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY OF DEFENSE 

1950 DEFENSE PENTAGON 

WASHINGTON, DC 20301 -1 950 

ADMINISTRATION AND 

MANAGEMENT 

MEMORANDUM FOR THE ATTORNEY GENERAL 

DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT AND BUDGET 

SUBJECT: Modification #2 to Department of Defense (DoD) Freedom of Information 

Act (FOIA) Improvement Plan for Executive Order (EO) 13392, Improving 

Agency Disclosure of Information, June 14,2006 

On behalf of the Secretary of Defense and as the DoD Chief FOIA Officer, I 

hereby submit Modification #2 to the DoD FOIA Improvement Plan dated June 14,2006. 

The DoD FOIA Improvement Plan, to maintain viability, continues to be an evolutionary 

process requiring periodic adjustments in both pace and direction. This Modification 

revises milestones in three FOIA Improvement Areas: Organizational Structure and 

Manning (Objectives 1 and 2); Training (Objective 2); and Resources/Backlog (Objective 

2). The following information provides the rationale for these changes. 

Organizational Structure and Manning: 

o Objective 1 requires quarterly progress reports from the DoD 

Components. This requirement was open-ended without a date for 

the final status report. That date, September 30,2007, is now 

reflected in the DoD Plan. 

o Objective 2 requires change due to the DoD transition to the 

National Security Personnel System (NSPS). After the DoD FOIA 

Improvement Plan was submitted, it was discovered that NSPS 

would provide a better opportunity to meet this objective 

(standardized job series and GS levels for FOIA personnel) than 

pursuing this initiative through the Office of Personnel Management. 

Therefore, it was necessary to revise the objective and its milestones. 

Revised milestones provide realistic dates to accomplish the 

necessary staffing within DoD to meet this objective. 

Training: Two milestones for Objective 2 were withdrawn. These two 

milestones required the outsourcing for the development of online FOIA 

training modules. However, using internal resources, the Department was 

able to develop these modules without having to resort to outsourcing. 

Because the overall objective was met (Develop a DoD FOIA online 
training capability within a newly created Defense Freedom of Information 

Policy Office Website), these two milestones became irrelevant and were 

withdrawn. They will not be reported as unmet milestones in the DoD 

Annual FOIA Report. 

Resources1 Backlog: On December 12, 2006, the DoD Comptroller, 

through Program Budget Decision 704, directed offset funding to support 

DoD Component FOIA Programs. This unprecedented funding support 

caused a reevaluation and revision of the milestones necessary to meet 

Objective 2, as reflected in the attached Modification. 

This Modification has been added as Part I of the Table of Contents to the DoD 

FOIA Improvement Plan. See attachment 2. Additional Modifications to the DoD Plan 

will be published, as required, as the Department continues to refine policies, procedures, 

and resource allocations to improve FOIA customer service and to reduce FOIA case 

backlog. 

Michael B. Donley 

Director 

Attachments: 

1. Modification #2 

2. Revised Table of Contents 
Attachment 1

Part I – Modification # 2 to DoD FOIA Improvement Plan 

 (Revised milestones in bold font.) 

 E.1. Name: Organizational Structure and Manning 

• Objective 1: Optimal organizational placement of FOIA Offices – Provide 

guidance to DoD Components on the optimal organizational placement of FOIA 

Offices. The survey revealed that DoD FOIA Offices are placed within a variety of 

different organizational elements. In some instances, FOIA Offices are within a 

functional organization like IT systems and services that are unrelated to the FOIA 

mission. This occurs at all levels of DoD. The goal is to determine where the FOIA 

Offices are currently placed and to establish consistent standards within the 

Department to maximize the effectiveness of all FOIA Offices. The intent is to raise 

the visibility and level of importance of the FOIA Office to more effectively garner 

senior leader support. 

 

• Steps to be taken: 

• Survey DoD Components to determine where FOIA Offices are currently 

placed and to solicit recommendations for optimal placement in their 

organizational structures 

• Analyze DoD Component responses 

• Develop a DoD proposal for optimum FOIA Office placement at all DoD 

levels 

• Revised Milestones: 

• Jun 30, 2006 – DoD Components requested to provide recommendations for 

the optimum organizational placement of their FOIA Offices; response due 

Aug 15, 2006

• Sep 15, 2006 – DFOIPO memo published recommending where DoD 

Components should place their FOIA Offices

• Jan 15, 2007 – DoD Components provide initial progress reports on 

implementation and quarterly thereafter until September 30, 2007 

• Dec 2007 – DoD Components implement changes to organizational structure

• Means of measuring success/outcomes: 

• DoD Components implement organizational changes

• FOIA Offices are more visible and effective

• Objective 2: Standardized job series and GS levels for FOIA personnel – The 

review revealed a multitude of job series for DoD FOIA personnel that may be 

affecting their job advancement opportunities and professional training and 

development. Additionally, the review suggests that there are DoD civilian personnel 
performing critical FOIA functions at improperly low grade levels. One objective is 

to establish a standard job series for FOIA personnel within DoD and work towards 

the establishment of an Office of Personnel Management (OPM) career field for 

FOIA personnel across all Federal Agencies. Another objective is to standardize 

grade levels of DoD FOIA personnel. To support these goals, a standardization of 

position descriptions within DoD is warranted. 

• Steps to be taken: 

• DoD Components recommend one single job series for civilian FOIA 

personnel, and to offer recommendations on standardizing grade levels for 

civilian personnel in the FOIA job series 

• DFOIPO publishes recommended wording to be used within the position 

descriptions of DoD FOIA personnel 

• With the assistance of the Human Resources Directorate (HRD) of 

Washington Headquarters Services, DFOIPO attempts to establish a specific 

job series for FOIA personnel within DoD 

• DFOIPO establishes recommended standard grade levels for DoD personnel 

processing FOIA requests 

• Once these standards are established within DoD, DFOIPO works with HRD 

and OPM to establish standards for job series and grade levels for FOIA 

personnel government wide 

• Revised Milestones: 

• Jul 14, 2006 – DoD Components requested to provide input and 

recommendations on job series and grade levels for FOIA personnel; 

responses due Oct 30, 2006

• Sep 15, 2006 – DFOIPO publishes standard position descriptions for DoD 

FOIA personnel

• Feb 2007 – DFOIPO establishes specific job series and designates grade 

levels for DoD FOIA personnel

• Dec 2007 – DFOIPO submits request to HRD to establish a FOIA/PA 

specialty within the GS-0301 Miscellaneous Administration and Program 

Series for the DoD 

• Jan 2008 – DFOIPO submits request to HRD to begin process of creating 

a new FOIA/PA occupational series within the DoD 

• Mar 2008 – HRD submits request to Civilian Personnel Management 

Service for the creating of a new FOIA/PA occupational series within the 

DoD 

• Means of measuring success/outcomes: 

• Establishment of standard job series for FOIA personnel within DoD 

• Establishment of standard grade levels for DoD FOIA personnel 

• Standard position descriptions of FOIA personnel that accurately reflect the 

responsibility and authority required of the FOIA function 

2
• DoD FOIA personnel transitioned into common job series at appropriate grade 

levels 

• Long range – Establishment by OPM of a government wide FOIA Career 

Field with centralized oversight of professional development and staffing 

standards. 

 E.2. Name: Training 

• Objective 2: Develop a DoD FOIA online training capability within a newly 

created DFOIPO Website – A comprehensive online DoD FOIA training 

capability designed to reinforce resident training will keep DoD FOIA personnel 

current as well as provide a starting point for incoming personnel. The product, to 

be contracted, would provide basic and advanced training as well as to serve as an 

additional vehicle for DoD FOIA personnel to receive guidance from DFOIPO on 

policy matters and to get technical responses to specific policy or procedural 

questions. 

• Steps to be taken: 

• FOIA online training capability submitted in the FY 08 budget 

• Process online training contract 

• DFOIPO works with contractor to establish content of training modules 

• Establish final training modules on DFOIPO Website 

• Revised Milestones: 

• Aug, 2006 – Budget submission to OSD for FOIA online training 

• Mar, 2007 – Submit bid to contract for the FOIA online project - 

Milestone withdrawn – online training modules were created in-house 

without the need for funding 

• Sep, 2007 – Contract awarded; development of training modules begins - 

Milestone withdrawn – online training modules were created in-house 

without the need for funding 

• Jul, 2008 – Online training modules established on FOIA Website 

• Means of measuring success/outcomes: 

• FY08 budget proposal approved to establish DoD online training project 

• Contract awarded to establish online training in FY 08 

• FOIA online training modules are established on DFOIPO Website 

• Access to online training Website measured to assure ever increasing use 

E.4. Resources/Backlog 

• Objective 2: Fund additional FOIA personnel staffing required to reduce 

backlogs in FY 08 and beyond – The DoD FOIA Review for EO 13392 has clearly 

revealed FOIA personnel shortages in FOIA Offices with backlogs. In the absence of 

specific appropriations from Congress for FOIA, budgeting for additional FOIA 

3
personnel within DoD must be included in the FY 08 (and beyond) planning cycle. 

Accordingly, DFOIPO and the OSD FOIA Office requested additional resources in 

the FY 08 budget. To comply with the provisions of the EO, specific budgeting for 

FOIA resources must also be accomplished by DoD Components for their FOIA 

Offices with backlogs over 50. 

• Steps to be taken: 

• DFOIPO/OSD FOIA Office submits FY 08 budget request 

• FY 08 funding sought for DoD wide increased manpower staffing to include 

consideration of both Federal civilian and contractor personnel. 

• Revised Milestones: 

• Jun, 2006 – DFOIPO/OSD FOIA Office submits FY 08 budget requirements 

• Aug 15, 2006 – Funding request submitted for increased staffing plan 

developed for targeted FOIA Offices

• Sept. 18, 2006 – DoD Chief FOIA Officer submits FOIA funding request 

to DoD Comptroller 

• Dec. 12, 2006 – Program Budget Decision 704 (PBD-704) issued directing 

FY 08 offset funding to address FOIA backlog 

• Apr, 2007 – Obtain status/progress from WHS/OSD and DoD 

Comptrollers of execution of FOIA offset funding within PBD-704 

• Oct, 2007 – Obtain status/progress from WHS/OSD and DoD 

Comptrollers regarding specific DoD funding allocations as directed 

within PBD-704 

• Mar, 2008 – Depending upon progress of PBD-704 execution, hiring 

process begins for new contractor FOIA personnel within DFOIPO and 

OSD FOIA Office 

• FY 08 – Depending upon progress of PBD-704 execution, increased FOIA 

staffing across DoD 

• Means of measuring success/outcomes: 

• The FY 08 budget approved for OSD FOIA operations to include increased 

staffing for DFOIPO to implement this Improvement Plan 

• The FY 08 budget approved for DoD wide increased manpower staffing plan 

• New FOIA personnel are hired in DFOIPO/OSD FOIA Office 

• FOIA Offices that routinely have backlogs over 50 are adequately staffed 

commensurate with FOIA workload 

• Long Term – FOIA backlogs are significantly reduced 

4
i 

Attachment 2

Table of Contents 

 

 Page

Executive Summary iii 

Part A – The DoD FOIA Program and Implementation of Executive 

Order (EO) 13392, Improving Agency Disclosure of Information 1 

 

 A.1. Introduction 1 

 A.2. Areas of Consideration for DoD FOIA Review 2 

Part B – Areas Selected for Review 2 

 B.1. DoD FOIA Office Survey 2 

 B.2. DoD Component Chief Public Liaison Officer Survey 3 

Part C – Results of Review 3 

 C.1. Information Collection Plan 3 

 C.2. FOIA Office Survey Population 4 

 C.3. FOIA Staff Demographics 4 

 C.4. FOIA Office Survey Findings and Observations – 

Information Source #1 4 

 C.5. DoD Component Chief Public Liaison Officer 

Findings and Observations – Information Source #2 7 

 C.6. Senior DFOIPO Findings and Observations – 

Information Source #3 10 

 

Part D – Areas Chosen For Improvement 11 

D.1. Organizational Structure and Manning 11 

D.2. Training 11 

D.3. Technology 11 

D.4. Resources/Backlogs 11 

Part E – Plans for Selected Improvement Areas 11 

 E.1. Name: Organizational Structure and Manning 11 

 

 Objective 1: Optimal organizational placement of FOIA Offices 11 

 

Objective 2: Standardized job series and GS levels for FOIA 

 Personnel 12 

 Objective 3: Establish standards within DoD for contracting 

 FOIA functions 13 

 E.2. Name: Training 14 
ii 

Objective 1: Develop DoD FOIA resident training program 14 

 Objective 2: Develop a DoD FOIA online training capability 

 within a newly created DFOIPO Website 15 

 

 E.3. Name: Technology 15 

 Objective 1: Analyze FOIA software for expanded use in 

 streamlining DoD FOIA processes 15 

 Objective 2: Standardize DoD FOIA Websites to enable 

 better public access 16 

 Objective 3: Conduct a feasibility study for a DoD-wide 

 electronic network to expedite FOIA processing 17 

 E.4. Resources/Backlog 18 

 Objective 1: Determine manpower required to reduce 

 backlogs in FOIA Offices that have backlogs 

 over 50 requests 18 

 Objective 2: Fund additional FOIA personnel staffing 

 required to reduce backlogs in FY 08 

 and beyond 18 

Part F – Grouping of Improvement Areas 19 

 F.1. Areas anticipated to be completed by December 31, 2006 19

 F.2. Areas anticipated to be completed by December 31, 2007 20 

 F.3. Areas anticipated to be completed after December 31, 2007 20 

Part G – Summary 21 

Part H – Modification # 1 to DoD FOIA Improvement Plan 22 

Part I – Modification # 2 to DoD FOIA Improvement Plan 25 

TABS: 

A. Executive Order 13392 – Improving Agency Disclosure of Information, December 

14, 2005 

B. Deputy Secretary of Defense Memorandum, Executive Order (EO) 13392 on the 

Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), January 11, 2006 

C. Director of Administration and Management Memorandum, Executive Order 13392 

on the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) – DoD Implementation, February 1, 2006 

D. Chief Defense Freedom of Information Policy Office Memorandum, DoD 

Implementation of Executive Order 13392 on the Freedom of Information Act 

(FOIA), February 10, 2006 

E. Department of Defense Freedom of Information Act Program Survey 

F. Chief Defense Freedom of Information Policy Office Memorandum, Executive Order 

13392 – Review of DoD FOIA Program, March 24, 2006 

G. Department of Defense Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) Program Study, May 19, 

2006