FAS Comment Submitted via Regulations.gov
March 3, 2016
Agency: Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI)
Document Type: Rulemaking
Title: Mandatory Declassification Review Program
Document ID: ODNI-2016-0001-0001
Comment:
This is a comment on the ODNI direct final rule on the Mandatory
Declassification Review (MDR) program.
I recommend that the fee provisions in Section 1704.8 of the rule
be withdrawn and replaced with fee provisions comparable to those
in ODNI's Freedom of Information Act program (32 CFR 1700.6).
It is clear that ODNI has the authority to recover fees in its MDR
program. And it makes sense that fees should be charged whenever
a valid public interest is not served by an MDR request. However,
the proposed fee schedule in the new final role seems onerous,
inconsistent with other agency policies, and likely to have adverse
consequences.
The ISOO implementing directive for executive order 13526 states
that "In responding to mandatory declassification review requests
for classified records, agency heads may charge fees in accordance
with 31 U.S.C. 9701 or relevant fee provisions in other applicable
statutes." There are several noteworthy points here.
First, fees are a matter of agency discretion. They "may" be charged.
But the ODNI final rule appears to remove any such discretion and
to categorically require that requesters "shall be responsible for
paying all fees" under all circumstances. That is not what the
ISOO implementing directive says.
Second, the referenced statute in 31 U.S.C. 9701 dictates several
factors in the fee decision that are not reflected in the ODNI
final rule. In particular, it says that the fee must be fair; that
it should be based on actual costs to the Government; based on the
value of the service to the requester; and based on other public
policy or interests served. But the ODNI rule does not provide
for any moderation of fees that would take these factors into
account. And the proposed photocopying charge of 50 cents per page
seems both unfair to the requester and unlikely to be based on
actual costs to the Government.
Third, the same statute directs that fee policies "shall be as
uniform as practicable." But the new ODNI MDR fee policy is
significantly inconsistent with the ODNI FOIA fee policy in 32
CFR 1700.6.
The ODNI FOIA fee policy notably charges ten cents per page, not fifty.
It provides an automatic waiver of incurred fees that are less than $10,
a provision that is absent from the MDR fee policy. And it admits
the possibility of a public interest fee waiver, which is also excluded
from the MDR fee policy. Although the ISOO implementing directive is
silent on a waiver of fees, such a waiver is arguably implicit in
the discretionary quality of the fee requirement.
Given the sharp disparity between the MDR and the FOIA fee policies,
sensible requesters will naturally perceive an incentive to favor
the FOIA process over the MDR. Is this ODNI's intent or preference?
I don't know why that would be the case.
In sum, I suggest that ODNI MDR fee policy should be revised so as
to conform more closely to ODNI FOIA fee policy. Making this change
would be consistent with the ISOO implementing directive, with the
fee statute, and, I believe, with the public interest.
Thank you for considering this comment.
Steven Aftergood
Federation of American Scientists