SUPPLEMENTARY PLANNING ISSUE REPORT

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP84-00933R000200160004-1
• Release Decision: RIFPUB
• Original Classification: K
• Document Page Count: 6
• Document Creation Date: December 12, 2016
• Document Release Date: March 26, 2001
• Sequence Number: 4
• Content Type: REPORT

OG.C Has. Reviewed
SUPPLEMENTARY PLANNING ISSUE REPORT
Management Issue No. 6: What must CIA do. to adequately comply
with statutory requirements concerning records control, review,
and public disclosure without significantly impeding perform--
ance of its primary missions.
A'. Systematic Classification Review
Discussion:
The consensus. of the Executive Committee was that the
Agency should push-for the amendment of.Executive Order, 112_065
to eliminate the 20-year systematic review requirement,'as
recommended recently by the Government Accounting Office
(GAO).. To that end, the Agency should commence preparing an
official position and sounding out other National Security
Council (NSC) member agencies on their stances, on this-issue..
Fallback proposals should be developed for the eventuality that
the NSC or the President might find the GAO recommendation
unacceptable, such as the exemption of the CIA alone, or at
least extension of the period of time for the review of foreign
intelligence information from the present 20 years to 50 years.
Once it is clear that the systematic review requirement
will be eliminated or modified in such a way as to substan-
tially reduce the Agency's workload, the future staffing needs.
of the Classification Review Division (CRD) should be
reassessed, and, if there are no legal strictures, surplus
personnel should be detailed or transferred to other CIA
components, including FOI/PA staffs when. appropriate. Tray
review of the Agency's OSS records, however, should be`
completed, with the objective of offering these records to the
National Archives and Records Service (NARS) for accessioning
at the earlie-st'possible date.
If Executive Order 12065 is not amended with respect to
the systematic review provision, the additional positions
authorized for CRD in FY 1981 should be filled. Efforts should
be made, working in close collaboration with NARS, to reduce
the review workload through the revision of records control
schedules and by gaining approval for certifying the need for
retaining the classification of entire series of selected
intelligence records in lieu of a document-by-document review-
.
Proposal No. 1: That the Deputy Director for Administration
take the lead in ensuring that the NSC consider, and act
favorably upon, the GAO recommendation that the provision of
Executive Order 12065 requiring the systematic review of
permanent, 20-year-old records be eliminated. DDA initiatives
should be coordinated with the Office of General Counsel (OGC)..
Approv'~ rr TJ6 ,011" .1cr p6 ,9D b200160004-1
 Approves For Release 2002/01/08 : CIA-RDP84 10933R000200160004-1
Approved For Release 2002/01/08 : CIA-RDP84-00933R000200160004-1
 Approved For.Release. 2002/01/08 : CIA-RDP84-00939F`t000200160004-.1.
Deputy Director of Central Xntelligence
DISAPPROVED:
Deputy Director of Central Intelligence
Proposal No. 2: That when and if the systematic review
requirement of Executive Order. 12065 is eliminated or substan-
tially modified, and if there are no legal restrictions to
preclude such a move, personnel surplus to CRD's future
staffing needs be detailed or transferred to FOIIPA work or
other Agency activities. Review of the OSS records, however,
should be completed.
APPROVED:
DISAPPROVED:
Deputy Director of Central Intelligent e
DATE
Proposal To. 3: That, . if there is no. change: in Executive Order
120652 the new positions approved for CRD for FY 1981 be
filled, and every avenue be pursued to reduce the number of
documents that must be systematically reviewed.
APPROVED:
Deputy Director of Central I_nte licence
Deputy Director of Central Intelligence
DISAPPROVED:
Deputy Director of Central Intelligence
B. FOI/PA Backlogs
Discussion: The Executive Committee was obviously concerned
over the extended period of time required to answer many
requests/appeals, and the fact that these delays have led to
increased litigation with the Agency. The Committee proposed
that rare take a hard look at the way in which we process
Approved F Kul, erl -f Ir. I. aas~
to 160004-1
 Approved FozeIease 2002/01/08: CIA-RDP84-00930ROOD200160004-1
requests to determine if changes are in order.. Specifically,
it was suggested that any superfluous levels of review be
eliminated to speed up the process, and that, if OGC approved,
consideration be given to establishing a separate queue for
projects, i.e., cases involving a fixed, predetermined number
of documents,. in order that work could proceed on the less
complicated requests instead of their being held up by rela-
tively massive requests. The Director made it clear that he
wanted the Agency to insist upon requesters providing a reason-
able description of the records they seek, as opposed to
"fishing expeditions," and, within the limits of the law, to
f
rom
assess fees, when appropriate, to weed out frivolous
serious, scholarly requests.
* With respect to appeals processing, the issue was raised
of whether it was necessary for OGC to continue its role of.
preparing response letters. The General Counsel stressed the
ont that it was essential that the Agency's-appeal determi-
p
nations hold up in court, and that this could be ensured only
through participation of OCC in the appeals process. Whether
OGC could achieve.this.objective while acting only in an
advisory capacity was not discussed. There seemed to be.a
consensus in the Committee, however, that the processing of
appeals should *be expedited, either by the employment of
additional paralegal personnel in OGC or by assigning responsi--
bility for preparing appeal responses to-another organiza-
tion. The General Counsel suggested that eliminating second.
searches during the processing of appeals, which he stated were
not required by law, might expedite the process.
There was general agreement that the Agency should. be in a
position to demonstrate to the courts and to the Congress that
every reasonable effort had been made to comply with the
response deadlines stipulated by law. In that context, the
proposed request for a supplemental appropriation for positions
and funds for FOIIPA administration was discussed at some
length, as was the possibility of diverting systematic review
personnel to FOI/PA work.
Proposal No. 1: That FOI/PA processing methods be streamlined
whenever this can be done without undue risk. For example,
agency components should look into the various levels of review
they currently employ and eliminate any that are not deemed
essential to the protection of intelligence sources and
methods.
Deputy Director of Central Intelligence
DATE:
Deputy Director of Central Intelligence
QUID P-B
 Approved For Release-200210.1/O8':. CIA-RDP84-00933R000200160004-1
Proposal No. 2: That, with the approval of OGC, a separate
queue be established for massive requests in order that
manpower can be freed to work on less complex requests sub-
mitted at a'laterr date, thereby reducing the total number of
unanswered requests. The basis for placing requests in - the new
queue should be the number, of pages that require review' ' This
figure should be determined jointly by the DDO and IPD, and
concurred in by OGC.
APPROVED:
Deputy Director of Central Intelligence
DISAPPROVED:
Deputy Director of. Central IntellLgence
DATE:
Proposal No. 3: That OGC take measures to ensure that
responses to appeals are drafted promptly upon completion of
the action components' reviews,. including, if necessary, the
addition of new paralegal personnel to OGCrs staff. If the
problem persists, consideration should be given to assigning
responsibility for the preparation of appeal letters to another
component, with the understanding that. OGC will be consulted
whenever appropriate.
APPROVED:
Deputy Director of Central Intelligence
DATE:
Deputy Director of Central Intelligence
Proposal No. !: That the Agency submit a request to the
Congress, through the Office of Management and Budget, for a
supplemental appropriation authorizing sufficient positions and
funds to facilitate reduction of the processing backlogs and to
enable the Agency to respond to requests in a more timely
manner.
Deputy Director of Central Intelligence
Approve
Deputy Director of Central Intelligence
InIj ?8f3
1 /'N
000160004-1
 Approved For Release 2002/01/08 : CIA-RDP84-00933R000200160004-1
Proposal No. 5: That future Agency budget submissions provide
for enough FOI/PA positions to accommodate all employees who
are,.in fact, devoting 100 percent of their time to FOI/PA
Processing.
APPROVED:
Deputy Director of Central Intelligence
DISAPPROVED:
Deputy Director of Central Intelligence
Approve d~~ L~'PhOp(t3R0i0160004-1