In the denial letter, the CIA confirmed the existence of this manual but indicated that it was being withheld for two reasons: first, because it applies to information pertaining solely to the internal personnel rules and practices of the Agency, the b(2) exemption.

An agency employee could not specify whether the exemption cited was low b(2) or high b(2), but indicated that the Agency uses both exemptions, despite Department of Justice guidelines to the contrary.

The second reason for withholding was that the agency claims that the document describes intelligence sources and methods (the b(3) exemption).

The Agency said that no portions of the handbook were releasable, even including the cover page.

The denial letter was signed by Kathryn I. Dyer, the CIA's Information and Privacy Coordinator, dated March 19, 2003, under case number F-2003-00028, in response to a request letter submitted dated January 14, 2003.

FREEDOM OF INFORMATION APPEAL

Agency Release Panel
c/o Kathryn I. Dyer
Information and Privacy Coordinator
Central Intelligence Agency
Washington, DC 20505

Dear Sirs:

We hereby appeal the decision to withhold in full the Headquarters Handbook on release of information to the public, which we requested on December 23, 2002 (F-2003-00028). The initial denial letter (attached and dated March 19, 2003) said that the record was denied in its entirety under exemptions b(2) and b(3).

We question the use of exemption b(2). There are two types of exemption b(2) acknowledged in government manuals and in federal case law. One type is "high" b(2) where release would be likely to cause circumvention of agency rules or regulations or statutes. The other type is "low" b(2) which pertains to trivial or mundane internal materials for which there is no real public interest in their release.

The Justice Department has issued guidance that strongly disfavors the use of the low b(2) exemption, and most agencies do not invoke b(2) unless would be likely to lead to a likely circumvention of agency rules or regulations or statutes. Therefore, if the agency is invoking low b(2), its application is almost certainly improper because the agency handbook on release of information to the public is of overwhelming public interest and importance.

Or, if the agency is invoking high b(2), it claims that release of any portion of this document would cause circumvention of a CIA regulation or a statute. We cannot envision circumstances where the release of the handbook on the subject of release of information to the public would cause circumvention. Instead, the release of this handbook would serve to explain to the public (and the press) what types of information are properly releasable and which types of matters are not, something eminently suitable for public dissemination. If there are certain parts which would cause circumvention, then those parts could be redacted. But this was not done.

We also believe that exemption b(3) was improper. B(3) protects from disclosure intelligence sources and methods, as well as the organization, function, names, official titles, salaries or numbers of personnel employed by the Agency. This document does not describe intelligence sources and methods, and while it may contain minor bits concerning the remaining subjects under b(3), those minor bits can be removed via redaction and do not require withholding of the entire document.

It also appears that no attempt was made to review the document to determine which portions might not fall under that category and might be segregably releasable. For example, the title page and/or table of contents and/or introduction or forward might be considered likely to be releasable.

For these reasons, we believe the determination was incorrect in part or whole and we ask that you review this decision.

Sincerely,

Michael Ravnitzky
Reporter

Office of Senator Patrick Leahy
Attn: Ms. Tara Magner
433 Russell Senate Office Bldg.
United States Senate
Washington, DC 20510

Dear Ms. Magner:

I wish to bring to your attention a letter I received recently in which the Central Intelligence Agency denied in full access to their "Headquarters Handbook on Release of Information to the Public."

In my opinion, the CIA provided no legitimate justification for withholding this material in its entirety. They cited b(3) sources and methods, even though this document would appear to have nothing to do with intelligence sources and methods in what appears to be a gross misuse of the exemption statute. CIA also cited b(2) (internal records) but did not specify whether it was low or high b(2). In a conversation, CIA staff indicated that they do use low b(2) despite Justice Department guidance recommending against the use of low b(2) in most cases.

They provided no segregable releasable portions, when one would expect there to be such portions.

This is an egregious example of the withholding of what would appear to be a document with public content.

I want you to know that this is not an isolated example--we are being bombarded with improper denials--many agencies now take steps to withhold most materials requested by news reporters. The Justice Department is asking agencies to make more liberal use of certain exemptions, leaning agencies away from making discretionary disclosures of material that admittedly would cause "no foreseeable harm," and is asking agencies to focus their energies on fee categorization to an extent never seen before.

Sincerely,

Michael Ravnitzky
Reporter

encl: CIA Denial Letter dated March 19, 2003

Copyright 2003 Michael Ravnitzky

front page | newest additions | index + search
about | contact | donate