Documents / FOIA release
This is a declaration by Delores M. Nelson, the CIA's Information and Privacy Coordinator, signed January 22, 2010. It was filed in support of the CIA's motion for summary judgment in Larry W. Bryant v. CIA, Civil Action No. 09-0940 in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia. It covers Bryant's FOIA request about a 1987 FAA meeting on the November 17, 1986 Japan Air Lines Flight 1628 encounter over Alaska. It also covers later airborne UFO cases, the dispute over his fee category, and the CIA's searches. The CIA found no records of the meeting and three records from other agencies, which it referred to the State Department and NSA.
“CIA”15 pages
Approved for Release: 2025/06/10 C07083373 and the charge was for duplication only, it was not affected by fee category.2 The letter further explained that requests for fee waivers3 must be considered under the standards that Agency regulations outlined at Part 1900 of Title 32 of the Code of Federal Regulations (C.F.R.). In accordance therewith, the CIA informed Mr. Bryant that because the information he sought was already in the public domain, and “its re-release would not likely contribute significantly to public understanding of the operations and activities of the United States Government,” his request for a fee waiver was denied. The September 30, 2008 letter also informed Plaintiff that he could appeal the denial of his request for a fee waiver within 45 days from the date of the letter, but if CIA has started to process a request, the Agency would accept an appeal of a fee waiver denial only “if the requester agrees to be responsible for the costs in the event of an adverse administrative or judicial decision.” With this letter, the CIA enclosed a copy of a previously released article published by the Center for the Studies in Intelligence, an Agency joumal containing unofficial publications on intelligence topics. (A true and correct copy of CIA’s September 30, 2008 letter and enclosures is attached hereto as Exhibit B.) 2 The CLA did not formally address Plaintiff’s request for status as a new media representative in its September 30, 2008 letter, although after explaining the cost of the UFO package—ten cents per page less the first 100 pages, the letter stated “as a requester in the ‘all other’ category.” Regardless, since the only charge was for duplication, the fee was the same whether his fee category was determined to be news media or all other. ‘ 3 Although Plaintiff used the term “waiver” in his request letter, based on context of his letter (and subsequent appeal and complaint), it appears that there was confusion over fee category (status) and fee waiver and that requester used the latter term to mean his request for news media status. Notwithstanding that it appears Plaintiff did not request a fee waiver, because of his use of the term waiver, the CIA treated it as such. 4 Approved for Release: 2025/06/10 C07083373
FOIA release, from the cia-readingroom collection. The PDF is mirrored here; the original link is under it. 17 pages are in the text index: search them above, or from the library's search.