GAO REQUIREMENTS FOR INFORMATION BEARING ON SYSTEMATIC REVIEW FOR DECLASSIFICATION

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP85B00236R000200130013-5
• Release Decision: RIPPUB
• Original Classification: K
• Document Page Count: 5
• Document Creation Date: December 12, 2016
• Document Release Date: December 18, 2001
• Sequence Number: 13
• Publication Date: January 7, 1980
• Content Type: MF

Approved For ReI a 2002/01/24: CIA-RDP85B00236R0 100130013-5
7 January 1980
MEMORANDUM FOR: Chief, Records Management Division, ISS
STATINTL FROM:
Chief, Classification Review Division, ISS
SUBJECT: GAO Requirements for Information Bearing on
Systematic Review for Declassification
1. Attached is a C/CRD memorandum for record of discussions with
GAO representatives on systematic review for declassification together
with a list of their information requirements.
2. Also attached is a C/ISS memorandum dated 19 July 1979 entitled,
"CIA Holdings of Permanent Records" which ties into the GAO requirements.
3. Would you please address the GAO requirement concerning the
status of records control schedules together with total records holdings
and the percentage breakdown into permanent and temporary. I am asking
NFAC and DDS&T on a priority basis to verify or adjust the figures in
the aforementioned C/ISS memorandum. You may want to check the figures
for Records Center, Archives, and Headquarters which combined comprise
total CIA records holdings. DO, and O/DCI stand on the figures noted in
C/ISS's memorandum.
4. We must within the next two weeks determine, as precisely as
we can, the number of pages or cubic feet of permanent records to be
reviewed by 1988. This is really the base for answering other GAO
requirements.
5. I propose to draft the reply to the GAO but will need your
input because the GAO requirements cut across both our division's
responsibilities. The collection of information should be accomplished
within two weeks.
STATINTL
Attachments: As stated
Distribution:
Original - Adse
STATINTL
- SS
Approved~ForpRse 2002/01/24: CIA-RDP85B00236R000200130013-5
DDA/ISS/CRD~ Zjhp (7 Jan 80)
 Approved For Retie 2002/01/24: CIA-RDP85B00236RGQX00130013-5
4 January 1980
SUBJECT: Meeting with Representatives of GAO on 3 January 1980
1. On 3 January 1980, C/CRD and C/CRD/OPS met with Messrs. Douglas
Cannon (TS clearance), William Hutchinson (Secret clearance), and Joseph
Frainella (TS clearance) of the General Accounting Office to discuss
the Agency's Systematic Classification Review Program. While the GAO
representatives had several questions to raise, their primary aim was to
determine the cost to the U.S. Government of this program; how helpful
and to whom was declassified information; and how much material is there
to review by 1988 when, as required under E.Q. 12065, all permanent
information 20 years of age or older must have been reviewed.
2. We discussed how CIA documents and. information are handled at
NARS, and pointed out that CIA documents in multiple copies are acces-
sioned to NARS by other agencies. The GAO representatives noticed that
other agencies provide guidelines to NARS and the latter does the
classification review. C/CRD stated that CIA provides guidelines to
enable NARS personnel to identify CIA documents and information but that
CRD personnel perform the classification review. He emphasized that
experienced intelligence officers must conduct the classification review
of intelligence information because of the complexities and nuances
involved and the adverse impact of errors on CIA's operations abroad and
the conduct of U.S. foreign policy. We noted that NARS personnel can
take action on some CIA information, such as unevaluated intelligence
reports which are automatically exempt from declassification pursuant
to the DCA's letter of October 1978, and documents appearing on CIA
computer listings recording review actions previously taken by CRD
personnel.
3. The GAO representatives asked about what guidance we provide
our reviewers to perform the declassification review and whether copies
could be made available to them. We discussed guidelines for systematic
declassification review as well as some specific CRP items which could
be read in our offices. Emphasis was placed on the general declassifi-
cation guidelines required under E.O. 12065 and the classification
criteria set forth in Section 1-301 of E.O. 12065.
Approved For Release 2002/01/24: CIA-RDP85B00236R000200130013-5
 ate' -Jand
Approved For Releq,b 2002/01/24: CIA-RDP85B00236R00.07030013-5
4. The question of most interest to the GAO representatives
appeared to be the cost of the declassification. program, both systematic
and mandatory review. They asked if we could provide at least estimates
of the cost of declassification from the Fall of 1972, when our review
of OSS documents began up to the present time with projections to 1988.
We agreed to provide such information to the best of our ability.
5. A second question of interest was our estimate of material to
be reviewed by 1988. C/CRD provided some information on this from the
C/ISS memorandum to the four Deputy Directors written on 19 July 1979
subject: "CIA Holdings of Permanent Records." They requested a copy
of this ADMINISTRATIVE-INTERNAL USE ONLY memorandum and C/CRD agreed to
provide it. They also asked how many people are involved in systematic
classification review and whether or not CIA could complete the backlog
with current resources allocated to the program. They were told that
according to our preliminary workload estimate, and at the current review
rate it would take us 42 years to complete the task. An effort is being
made to provide a more precise estimate.
6. Another question related to the value to the American public
of the information released or declassified. They noted, for example,
that the FBI receives a high percentage of FOIA requests from criminals
serving time in prisons. They asked what type of people request infor-
mation from CIA. C/CRD commented generally citing examples of requestors
highlighted in the IPD Weekly Report; however, Mr. C/TPD,
STATINTL was cited as the knowledgeable source in this area. They also asked
about Records Control Schedules and whether we had identified permanent
from temporary records. We noted that most of the screening had already
been accomplished through use of task forces. The name of Mr.~TINTL
STATINTL /RMD, was given as the knowledgeable officer on the creation,
use, and updating of Records Control Schedules. The GAO representatives
also asked what proportion of CIA records were being declassified in our
systematic review. We noted that the percentage varies according to
category and age of the records. We are declassifying about 90% of OSS
records. C/CRD estimated that 30% of ORE reports are being declassified
STATINTL and promised a more precise figure. - noted that for DO records
the percentage is running very low, possibly as little as two percent.
Reasons for this were discussed, namely that almost all DO activity
involves sources and methods and that it has historically been the
practice for intelligence services to keep their organizational data
secret as well as their activities. It might be noted here that they
also questioned why we felt it was necessary to protect all unevaluated
field intelligence reports. We ticked off the following ten points in
answer to this:
Approved For Release 2002/01/24: CIA-RDP85B00236R000200130013-5
 Approved For Relei,p/e 2002/01/24: CIA-RDP85B00236R0Q00130013-5
a) Confirms the existence of our Station.
b) Indicates the size of the Station.
c) Indicates the extent of our intelligence activity.
d) Reveals areas we target against.
e) Indicates something of how the Station is organized.
f) Could indicate covers being used, particularly official. cover.
g) Reveals incompatible operations.
h) May confirm a liaison relationship.
i) Could betray a liaison penetration.
j) Could identify sources.
7. The GAO representatives stated that they had already visited
State, FBI, DOE, DEA, and other agencies. It appeared that they were
concluding that the cost of the systematic declassification program far
exceeds what Congress anticipated. They cited a Congressional estimate
of ten million a year but noted that it now costs that much at State
alone. Although they did not feel that the Congress would go along with
relieving CIA and other intelligence agencies from the systematic review
requirement, they are considering recommending that the requirement be
abandoned with agencies responding only to mandatory review requests.
Thus, information would be available to those who want it and intelli-
gence agencies would be spared the cost of systematic review of infor-
mation largely exempt from declassification in any case.
8. The GAO representatives are going to telephone specific ques-
tions to C/CRD with C/CRD referring to C/IPD and C/RMD those that pertain
to their activities.
STATINTL
Approved For Release 2002/01/24: CIA-RDP85B00236R000200130013-5
 Approved For RelWe 2002/01/24: CIA-RDP85B00236ROQW0013OM-PMENT
QUESTIONS SUBMITTED VIA TELEPHONE BY
MR. DOUGLAS CANNON (GAO) RE
SYSTEMATIC REVIEW FOR DECLASSIFICATION
(Dates of 4 and 7 January 1980)
1. The number of CIA personnel working on systematic review for
declassification each fiscal year beginning with FY 1973 to FY 1980
with projections FY 1981-FY 1988.
2. The yearly cost of systematic review for declassification
beginning with FY 1973 to FY 1980 with projections FY 1981-1988.
3. Status of Records Schedules--total holdings with percent
permanent and temporary.
4. The estimated number of pages of permanent records to be
reviewed by 1988. Rate of review with current resources. Shortfall
if any and cost.
VV 5. Number of pages reviewed to date and percent declassified.
OSS vs. CIG/CIA.
6. Copies of declassification guidelines.
} 7. Estimate of percent of CIA records which must be reviewed
document by document as opposed to bulk declassification.
8. If CIA relieved of systematic review requirement and continued
mandatory review only--what would be the savings?
Approved For Release 2002/01/24: CIA-RDP85B00236R000200130013-5