[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 137 (Wednesday, July 18, 2007)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 39315-39316]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E7-13931]



32 CFR Part 1900

FOIA Processing Fees

AGENCY: Central Intelligence Agency.

ACTION: Final rule.


SUMMARY: On January 8, 2007, the Central Intelligence Agency submitted 
a proposed rule for public comment on Freedom of Information Act 
processing fees to the Federal Register. The CIA has reviewed and 
carefully considered all of the comments that were submitted in 
response to our proposal. As a result of that review, the CIA hereby 
issues its final rule on FOIA processing fees.

[[Page 39316]]

EFFECTIVE DATE: July 18, 2007.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Scott A. Koch, Information and Privacy 
Coordinator, Central Intelligence Agency, Washington, DC 20505 or by 
telephone, 703-613-1287.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In the January 8, 2007 edition of the 
Federal Register, the CIA published a proposed rule which reflected a 
zero-based review of its public FOIA regulations on processing fees. 
The proposed rule was an expansive attempt to streamline our 
administrative approach in order to improve our processing of FOIA 
requests. The proposed system contained a number of innovative features 
to make this new approach workable. The CIA received comments that 
supported some aspect of the proposed rule, while also receiving 
comments which were very critical of other aspects of this approach. 
After a review and consideration of all of the comments, it was clear 
that there was no way to reconcile the positive and negative comments 
into a refinement of our approach that was workable. We concluded that 
if any features of the proposed system were dropped, the advantages 
would not outweigh the disadvantages of adopting this system.
    Since there was no support to proceed with the proposed rule as 
originally drafted, rather than implementing the sweeping changes set 
forth in the proposed rule, we have a more modest change by simply 
adopting the definition of ``news media'' contained in the March 27, 
1987, Office of Management and Budget FOIA Guidelines. Although, the 
CIA remains confident in the adequacy and sufficiency of its previous 
interpretation of ``news media'' fee status, it has concluded that it 
is preferable to avoid sterile and unproductive technical litigation 
and the associated diversion of resources from more productive pursuits 
that that entails.

List of Subjects in 32 CFR Part 1900

    Classified information, Freedom of Information.

As stated in the preamble, the CIA is amending 32 CFR part 1900 as 


1. The authority citation for part 1900 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: The Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), as amended (5 
U.S.C. 552); the CIA Information Act of 1984 (50 U.S.C. 431); sec. 
102 of the National Security Act of 1947, as amended (50 U.S.C. 
403); and sec. 6 of the Central Intelligence Agency Act of 1949, as 
amended (50 U.S.C. 403(g)).

2. In Sec.  1900.02, revise paragraph (h)(3) to read as follows:

Sec.  1900.02  Definitions.

* * * * *
    (h) * * *
    (3) Representative of the News Media refers to any person actively 
gathering news for an entity that is organized and operated to publish 
or broadcast news to the public. The term ``news'' means information 
that is about current events or that would be of current interest to 
the public. Examples of news media entities include television or radio 
stations broadcasting to the public at large, and publishers of 
periodicals (but only in those instances when they can qualify as 
disseminators of ``news'') who make their products available for 
purchase or subscription by the general public. These examples are not 
intended to be all-inclusive. Moreover, as traditional methods of news 
delivery evolve (e.g., electronic dissemination of newspapers through 
telecommunications services), such alternative media would be included 
in this category. In the case of ``freelance'' journalists, they may be 
regarded as working for a news organization if they can demonstrate a 
solid basis for expecting publication through that organization, even 
though not actually employed by it. A publication contract would be the 
clearest proof, but agencies may also look to the past publication 
record of a requestor in making this determination:
* * * * *

    Dated: July 9, 2007.
Edmund Cohen,
Chief of Information Management Services.
 [FR Doc. E7-13931 Filed 7-17-07; 8:45 am]