Page images
PDF
EPUB

such an index in camera, thereby preventing undue disclosures to the plaintiffs. While in camera consideration will deprive

the court of the benefit of plaintiffs' critique of the index, it does have certain advantages. It is preferable to the laborious task of scrutiny of the documents themselves. Furthermore, a properly drawn index will summarize documents, and put into relief their fundamental facts and importance. An index will also focus the court's attention on the basis of the government's claim that each document is covered by Lone of the exemptions.7" See also Lesar v. Department of Justice, 455 F.Supp. 921 (D.D.C. 1978).

ANNUAL REPORT

Existing Law

Subsection 552 (d) requires each agency to submit to Congress on or before March 1 of each calendar year a report covering the preceding calendar year. It also requires the Attorney General to submit an annual report on or before March 1 for the prior calendar year. Both reports must include statistical compilations for various aspects of the processing of Freedom of Information Act requests.

Observations

We are required to keep two sets of statistics: one for the calendar year report required by the statute and another for programs operating on a fiscal year basis. The administrative burden and unnecessary expense which result from these duplicative efforts could be eliminated if the existing statute required a fiscal year report.

Proposal

We propose the first sentence of existing subsection 552 (d) be amended to read,

"On or before December 1 of each calendar

year, each agency shall submit a report covering

the preceding fiscal year to...."

and the last paragraph of subsection 552 (d) be

amended to read,

"The Attorney General shall submit an

annual report on or before December 1 of each calendar year which shall include for the

prior fiscal year a listing of...."

APPENDIX

SURVEY OF IMPACT OF

THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FOIA)

AND

PRIVACY ACT (PA)

ON LAW ENFORCEMENT ACTIVITIES

INTRODUCTION

On April 25, 1978, the General Accounting Office (GAO) requested Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) participation in a GAO study on the impact of the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) and the Privacy Act (PA) of 1974 on law enforcement activities. To compile data for the GAO request, the FBI canvassed its Headquarters components and 59 field divisions. The following examples include instances of perceived and/or actual impact reported by FBI field offices and Headquarters divisions in response to the GAO request and subsequent to the GAO study. Examples which involve classified matters are not included.

A. STATE AND MUNICIPAL LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCIES

An FBI office noted a trend to exclude Agents working organized crime matters from key intelligence meetings in their area. Several state law enforcement officers have mentioned a concern for the security of information in connection with Freedom of InformationPrivacy Acts (FOIPA) disclosures as the reason for the closed meetings. The office undertook efforts through meetings with state and local law enforcement agencies to improve their understanding of the FOIA and PA legislation. These efforts have not met with complete success.

*

The Attorney General for a certain state has advised he intends to follow a policy concerning the release of state records to be in conformity with the FOIPA. Consequently, in applicant background investigations, state police arrest records concerning relatives of applicants are not made available to the FBI.

*

Due to the FOIPA, difficulty has been experienced on several occasions in obtaining information from a certain police department. Some officers have stated their reluctance to make information available concerning subjects of local investigation because of these Acts. The organized crime control bureau and the intelligence division of the police department have expressed concern over the FBI's ability to protect sources of information.

*

« PreviousContinue »