In addition to the Department of Justice Annual Report, the Attorney General is also required by § 552(d) to submit a listing of the number of cases arising under the section. The lists are attached: First, a list of Freedom of Information cases received in the Civil Division in 1975, and second, a list of Freedom of Information cases handled by the Civil Division in which a final decision was issued in 1975. These lists do not include litigation handled by the Tax Division, data as to which will be submitted in the very near future.
During 1975, the Justice Department, in the face of intensified need for guidance, continued an active program of encouraging improved compliance by other federal agencies with the Freedom of Information Act. (See U.S.C. 552(d), last sentence, referring to efforts of this nature.) This program included various types of efforts, as follows:
(a) Approximately 450 consultations between the Department's Freedom of Information Committee and representatives of other agencies concerning proposed final denials by such agencies of requests under the Act were conducted in 1975, as compared to approximately 220 as reported for 1974. However, whereas a majority of the 1974 consultations, like those of prior years, were "in-depth" (i.e., involving several members of the Committee who met with agency representatives or review documentation from the agency or both), about 95 percent of the 1975 consultations were "summary," typically involving a telephone discussion between agency counsel and the Chairman of the Committee. These summary consultations, in addition to furnishing agencies with legal advice and encouragement toward improved compliance, helped to identify those proposed final denials by agencies which, because of their apparent difficulty or importance, were regarded as calling for "in-depth" consultation. Twenty-five such in-depth consultations are included in the total of 450 consultations fort 1975. (In these figures, a telephone discussion which might have been a summary consultation by which in fact led to an in-depth consultation is counted only once, as the latter. Moreover, if the agency changed its mind and released the requested records before the in-depth consultation, the consultation would be cancelled and is not counted at all.)
The reasons for the shift in the Committee's practice in 1975 toward more summary consultations with fewer and selected in-depth consultations include the following:
(1) The general increase in the volume of FOI activity in 1975 and the new statutory time limits on agency denials;
(2) the need to prepare and publish "The Attorney General's Memorandum on the 1974 Amendments to the Freedom of Information Act," a top priority task involving Committee members during late 1974 and the first 6 weeks of 1975;
(3) the demand by agencies for more guidance at earlier stages in the processing of those requests or expected requests which they regard as of special difficulty or importance, a demand met by providing preliminary advice which, though it is not counted as "consultation" because a final denial is not yet contemplated, may involve significant Committee effort and be of significant value in encouraging compliance;
(4) the growing expertise of some agency personnel in handling their workload under the Act, especially the somewhat repetitive portions, where the justification for the denial may depend almost entirely upon factual issues of types previously discussed with the Committee;
(5) the time required to keep Committee members current on the growing volume of case law and other significant literature in this field; and
(6) the time required to deal with major special problems pertaining to Freedom of Information, such as the procedural and substantive "interface" between FOI and the Privacy Act, and the problems of interagency coordination in the processing of requests in which two or more agencies have interests in the records sought, conformably with the time limits and other provisions of the Act.
In addition to the summary and in-depth consultations referred to above, there were many instances in which individual members of the Committee provided expedited telephone advice to agencies on questions arising under the Act, often at an early stage as referred to in (3) above.
(b) Assistance was given to Civil Service Commission representatives in reviewing and revising their materials for training agency executives and lawyers on Freedom of Information and Privacy.
(c) An expanded and improved "FOIA Case List --June 1975 Edition," citing court decisions under the Act with notations as to the exemptions and other provisions involved in each, was distributed to all agency General Counsels and made available to other users. As the year ended, an update of this list was in preparation.
(d) On 27 occasions during 1975 the Chairman or other members of the Committee appeared as speakers at seminars, conferences and similar efforts designed to develop improved understanding and administration of the Act. These presentations, which usually included questions from the floor, were arranged by the Civil Service Commission, other agencies, or by professional groups containing significant numbers of agency personnel and users of the Act. It is estimated that a total of over 6,000 persons, chiefly agency executives, supervisors and lawyers, attended these 27 presentations, of which 16 were conducted in Washington and 11 in other cities. In addition, the Information and Privacy Unit of the Civil Division furnished speakers at similar presentations and generally supports efforts to encourage improved agency compliance with the Act.
(e) The Attorney General's Memorandum on the 1974 Amendments to the Freedom of Information Act which was issued in February 1975, attained a distribution of 15,000 copies through December 1975.
Go to: Table of Contents // DOJ FOIA Page // Justice Department Home Page