The Department of Defense (DoD) Freedom of Information Act Handbook provides basic information about how to make a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request and general information about the Freedom of Information Act Program within the Department of Defense (DoD). This document also contains DoD component addresses, a brief description of response times, and the reason why some requests are not granted. The DoD Freedom of Information Act Handbook can be found at: http://www.defenselink.mil/pubs/foi/foiapam3.pdf Item III. Definition of Terms and Acronyms Used In The Report A. Agency-specific acronyms or other terms. 1. The Military Departments.
a. The Department of the Army: Dept Army.

b. Department of the Navy: Dept Navy. The United States Marine Corps, USMC, is a part of the Department of the Navy.

c. Department of the Air Force: Dept Air Force.

2. Other Defense Agencies and Activities.

a. Defense Contract Audit Agency: DCAA.
b. Defense Finance and Accounting Service: DFAS.
c. Defense Information Systems Agency: DISA.
d. Defense Intelligence Agency: DIA.
e. Defense Logistics Agency: DLA.
f. Defense Security Service: DSS. Formerly Defense Investigative Service, DIS.
g. Defense Threat Reduction Agency: DTRA. Formerly Defense Special Weapons Agency, DSWA.
h. National Imagery and Mapping Agency: NIMA. Formerly Defense Mapping Agency, DMA.
i. National Security Agency/Central Security Service: NSA/CSS or NSA.
j. National Reconnaissance Office: NRO.
k. Office of the Inspector General, Department of Defense: OIG, DoD.

3. Office of the Secretary of Defense, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Combatant Commands, and Defense Agencies/Activities not listed above: OSD/JS.
4. "Other Reasons" Cited on Initial and Appeal Determinations.

No Records

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

c. Withdrawn. The request was withdrawn by the requester.

d. 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.

e. 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.

f. Not a Proper FOIA Request for Some Other Reason. The requester has failed unreasonably to comply with legitimate procedural requirements which are not not fee-related.

g. Not an Agency Record. The requested information was not a record within the meaning of the FOIA.

h. 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.

i. Other. Any other reason a requester does not comply with published rules, other than those mentioned above.

B. Basic terms, expressed in common terminology.

Freedom of Information Act/Privacy Act (FOIA/PA) request

2. Initial Request: A request to a federal agency for access to records under the Freedom of Information Act (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 Freedom of Information Act, or any other FOIA determination such as a matter pertaining to fees.

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 an urgent 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 an exceptional 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.

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

10. Partial grant: 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 of the FOIA's exemptions; or a decision to disclose some records in their entireties, 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's exemptions, or for some procedural reason (such as because no record is located in response to a FOIA request).

12. Time limits: The time period in the Freedom of Information Act 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 with holding under FOIA subsection (b)(3).

15. Median number: The middle, not 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, of 3, 7, and 14, the average number is 8.

Item IV. Exemption 3 Statutes

Court Upheld?	Statute	Types of Material Withheld Under Statute
Yes¹	5 USC §7114(b)(4)	Civil Service Reform Act – Representation Rights and Duties, Labor Unions
No	10 USC §128	Authority to Withhold Unclassified Special Nuclear Weapons Information
Yes²	10 USC §130	Authority to Withhold Unclassified Technical Data with Military or Space Application
No	10 USC §424	Protection of Organizational and Personnel Information for DIA, NRO, and NIMA
No	10 USC §455	Maps, Charts, and Geodetic Data; Public Availability
No	10 USC §618(f)	Action on Reports of Selection, Generally for Promotion, Boards
No	10 USC §1102	Confidentiality of Medical Records
No	10 USC §2305(g)	Protection of Contractor Proposals
No	16 USC §470w-3	National Historic Preservation
Yes³	18 USC §798(a)	Communications Intelligence
No	22 USC §2778(e) Sec 38(e) of the Arms Export Control Act	Control of Arms Exports
Yes⁴	26 USC §6103	Confidentiality and Disclosure of Returns and Return Information
No	31 USC §3730(b)(2)	Civil Actions for False Claims (specifies that materials related to civil complaints filed by private individuals on behalf of the U. S. Government under the False Claims Act will remain under seal for at least 60 days and shall not be served on a defendant until the court so orders).
No	41 USC §423	Procurement Integrity

Court Upheld?	Statute	Types of Material Withheld Under Statute
Yes⁵	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
Yes⁶	50 USC §402 Note Sec 6, P.L. 86-36	NSA Functions and Information
Yes⁷	50 USC §403-3(c)(6) National Security Act of 1947, Subsection 102(d)(3), as amended	Intelligence Sources and Methods
Yes⁸	50 USC §403(g), Section 6 of the CIA Act of 1949	CIA Functions and Information
No	50 USC §435 Note Sec 1082, P.L. 102-190	Disclosure of Information Concerning US Personnel Classified as POW/MIA During Vietnam Conflict (McCain "Truth Bill")
Yes⁹	50 U.S.C. app. § 2411(c) (1), The Export Administration Act of 1979	Confidentiality of Information Obtained Under the Export Administration Act of 1979

Item IV. Endnotes

¹ Dubin v. Department of the Treasury, 555 F. Supp. 408, 412 (N.D. Ga. 1981), aff'd, 697 F.2d 1093 (11^th Cir. 1983) (unpublished table decision); NTEU v. OPM, No. 76-695, slip op. at 4 (D.D.C. July 9, 1979).

²Chenkin 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).

³Winter 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).

⁴Church of Scientology v. IRS, 484 U.S. 9, 15 (1987); Aronson v. IRS, 973 F.2d 962, 964-65 (1st Cir. 1992) (finding that IRS lawfully exercised discretion to withhold street addresses pursuant to 26 U.S.C. § 6103(m)(1)); Long v. IRS, 891 F.2d 222, 224 (9th Cir. 1989) (holding that deletion of taxpayers' identification does not alter confidentiality of § 6103 information); DeSalvo v. IRS, 861 F.2d 1217, 1221 (10th Cir. 1988); Grasso v. IRS, 785 F.2d 70, 77 (3d Cir. 1986); Long v. IRS, 742 F.2d 1173, 1179 (9th Cir. 1984); Ryan v. ATF, 715 F.2d 644, 645 (D.C. Cir. 1983); Currie v. IRS, 704 F.2d 523, 527-28 (11th Cir. 1983); Willamette Indus. v. United States, 689 F.2d 865, 867 (9th Cir. 1982); Barney v. IRS, 618 F.2d 1268, 1274 n.15 (8th Cir. 1980) (dictum); Chamberlain v. Kurtz, 589 F.2d 827, 843 (5th Cir. 1979).

⁵ 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).

⁶Founding 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).

⁷CIA 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).

⁸Minier, 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).

⁹Armstrong v. Executive Office of the President, No. 89-142, slip op. at 30-35 (D.D.C. July 28, 1995) (protecting information from export license application under Export Administration Act as Exemption 3 statute even though statute had lapsed and its provisions were extended by executive order); Africa Fund v. Mosbacher, No. 92 Civ. 289, 1993 WL 183736, at *6 (S.D.N.Y. May 26, 1993) (holding that Export Administration Act protection applied to agency denial made after Act expired and before subsequent reextension); Lessner v. United States Dep't of Commerce, 827 F.2d 1333, 1336-37 (9th Cir. 1987) (construing statute as effective in 1987).

Item V. Initial FOIA/PA Access Requests

A. Numbers of initial requests.

1.
Number of requests pending as of end of preceding fiscal year (1 Oct 97):
8,804

2.
Number of requests received during current fiscal year (FY 1998):
107,627

3.
Number of requests processed during current fiscal year (FY 1998):
106,191

4.
Number of requests pending as of end of current fiscal year (30 Sep 98):
10,240

B. Disposition of initial requests.

1.
Number of grants:
65,164

2.
Number of partial grants:
9,998

3.
Number of denials:
2,065

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

(1)
Exemption 1:
1,370

(2)
Exemption 2:
970

(3)
Exemption 3:
1,177

(4)
Exemption 4:
1,259

(5)
Exemption 5:
2,216

(6)
Exemption 6:
5,810

(7)
Exemption 7(A):
419

(8)
Exemption 7(B):
52

(9)
Exemption 7(C):
3,468

(10)
Exemption 7(D):
735

(11)
Exemption 7(E):
295

(12)
Exemption 7(F):
742

(13)
Exemption 8:
0

(14)
Exemption 9:
0

4. Other reasons for nondisclosure (total):

a.
No records:
9,126

b.
Referrals:
9,809

c.
Request withdrawn:
2,741

d.
Fee-related reason:
1,425

e.
Records not reasonably described:
4,425

f.
Not a proper FOIA request for some other reason:
1,949

g.
Not an agency record:
1,922

h.
Duplicate request:
1,678

i.
Other (specify*):
253

* Note: See table later.

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

A. Numbers of appeals.

1.
Number of appeals received during fiscal year (FY 1998):
1,096

2.
Number of appeals processed during fiscal year (FY 1998):
1,098

B. Disposition of appeals.

1.
Number denied in full:
647

2.
Number denied in part:
118

3.
Number completely reversed (granted):
38

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

(1)
Exemption 1:
88

(2)
Exemption 2:
44

(3)
Exemption 3:
62

(4)
Exemption 4:
38

(5)
Exemption 5:
200

(6)
Exemption 6:
270

(7)
Exemption 7(A):
58

(8)
Exemption 7(B):
4

(9)
Exemption 7(C):
107

(10)
Exemption 7(D):
13

(11)
Exemption 7(E):
9

(12)
Exemption 7(F):
5

(13)
Exemption 8:
0

(14)
Exemption 9:
0

4. Other reasons for nondisclosure (total):

a.
No records:
98

b.
Referrals:
60

c.
Request withdrawn:
112

d.
Fee-related reason:
19

e.
Records not reasonably described:
7

f.
Not a proper FOIA request for some other reason:
18

g.
Not an agency record:
0

h.
Duplicate request:
4

i.
Other (specify*):
6

* Note: See table later.

Item VII. Compliance With Time Limits/Status of Pending Requests

A. Median processing time for requests processed during the year (FY 1998).

1. Simple requests.

a.
Number of requests processed:
85,964

b.
Median number of days to process:
16

2. Complex requests.

a.
Number of requests processed:
17,907

b.
Median number of days to process:
39

3. Requests accorded expedited processing

a.
Number of requests processed:
2,320

b.
Median number of days to process:
2.5

B. Status of pending requests (as of: 30 Sep 98).

1.
Number of requests pending:
10,240

2.
Median age of above cases in days:
73

Item VIII. Comparison With Previous Year

(Optional, Not Used)

Item IX. Costs/FOIA Staffing

A. Staffing levels (expressed in work years).

1.
Number of full-time FOIA personnel:
285.57

2.
Number of personnel with part-time or occasional FOIA duties:
520.35

3.
Total number of personnel:
805.92

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

1.
FOIA processing (including appeals):
$39,086,264.90

2.
Litigation-related activities (estimated):
$499,424.07

3.
Total costs:
$39,585,.688.97

Item X. Fees

A.
Total amount of fees collected by the agency for processing requests:
$689.154.55

B.
Percentage of total costs:
1.7

Item XI.

FOIA Regulations (Including 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 the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) Program within the Department of Defense (DoD), can be found at:

http://www.dtic.mil/whs/directives/corres/html/54007.htm

B. The Fee Schedule is Chapter 6 of the above regulation.

C. Additional Department of Defense FOIA documents and hyperlinks, including a copy of this report in portable document file format, can be found by accessing the following Universal Resource Locator (URL):

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

While not required, the tables on the pages that follow provide additional information for DoD components.