From: [d--a] at [bilver.uucp] (Don Allen) Newsgroups: alt.freedom.of.information.act,alt.activism,alt.conspiracy Subject: RESOURCE: FOIA KIT part 2 Date: 26 Feb 92 01:54:50 GMT ---------------------------FOIA-KIT part 2---------------------------- <5> FOIA Addresses of selected Federal Agencies FUND FOR OPEN INFORMATION AND ACCOUNTABILITY, INC. P.O. BOX O2 2397, BROOKLYN, NY 11202-0050 FOIA/PA ADDRESSES FOR SELECTED FEDERAL AGENCIES Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts Washington, D.C. 20544 (202) 633-6117 Bureau of Prisons 320 1st St., NW Washington, D.C. 20534 (202) 724-3198 Central Intelligence Agency Information and Privacy Coordinator Washington, D.C. 20505 Civil Service Commission Appropriate Bureau (Bureau of Personnel Investigation, Bureau of Personnel Information Systems, etc.) Civil Service Commission 1900 E Street, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20415 (202) 632-4431 Commission on Civil Rights General Counsel, U.S. Commission on Civil Rights 1121 Vermont Ave., N.W., Rm. 600 Washington, D.C. 20405 (202) 376-8177 Consumer Producet Safety Commission 1111 18th St., N.W. Washington, D.C. 20207 (301) 492-6580 Defense Intelligence Agency The Pentagon Washington, D.C. 20301-6111 (202) 697-8844 Department of Defense/Department of the Air Force Freedom of Information Manager Headquarters, USAF/DADF Washington, D.C. 20330-5025 (202) 545-6700 Department of Defense/Department of the Army General Counsel Secretary of the Army The Pentagon, Rm. 2E727 Washington, D.C. 20310 (202) 545-6700 Department of Defense/ Marine Corps Commandant of the Marine Corps Department of the Navy Headquarters, Marine Corps Washington, D.C. 20380-0001 (202) 694-2500 Department of Defense/ Dept. of the Navy Chief of Naval Operations OP 09 B30 Pentagon, Rm. 5E521 Washington, D.C. 20350-2000 (202) 545-6700 Department of Energy 1000 Independence Ave., S.W. Washington, D.C. 20585 (202) 252-5000 Department of Justice/ General Administration (includes Civil Rights Division, Antitrust Division, Drug Enforcement Admin., Immigration and Naturalization Service) FOIA/ Privacy Act Unit (of the appropriate division) Department of Justice Constitution Ave. & 10th St., N.W. Washington, D.C. 20530 (202)633-2000 Department of Labor 200 Constitution Ave., N.W. Washington, D.C. 20210 (202) 523-8165 Department of State Director, Freedom of Information Bureau for Public Administration Department of State, Rm 239 2201 C St., N.W. Washington, D.C. 20520 (202) 647-3411 Department of the Treasury Internal Revenue Service 1111 Constitution Ave., N.W. Washington, D.C. 20224 (202) 566-5000 (Consult phone book for regional offices) Environmental Protection Agency Freedom of Information Office A101 Room 1132 West Tower 401 M St., S.W. Washington, D.C. 20460 (202) 382-4048 Equal Employment Opportunities Comm. Office of Legal Services 2401 E St., N.W., Rm. 214 Washington, D.C. 20507 Attn. Richard Roscio, Assc. Legal Counsel (202) 634-6922 Federal Communications Commission 1919 M St., N.W. Washington, D.C. 20554 (202) 254-7674 Food and Drug Administration 5600 Fishers Lane Rockville, MD 20857 (301) 443-1544 Health and Human Services 200 Independence Ave., S.W. Washington, D.C. 20201 Housing and Urban Development 451 Seventh St., S.W. Washington, D.C. 20410 (202) 755-6420 National Aeronautics & Space Administration 400 Maryland Ave, S.W. Washington, D.C. 20546 (202) 453-1000 National Archives and Records Service Pennsylvania Ave. at 8th St., N.W. Washington, D.C. 20408 (202) 523-3130 National Labor Relations Board 1717 Pennsylvania Ave., N.W. Washington, D.C. 20570 (202) 632-4950 National Security Agency Ft. George G. Meade, MD 20755-6000 (301) 688-6311 National Security Council Old Executive Bldg. 17th & Pennsylvania Ave., N.W. Washington, D.C. 20506 Attn. Brenda Reger (202) 395-3103 Nuclear Regulatory Commission Director, Office of Administration Washingto n, D.C. 20555 (202) 492-7715 Secret Service U.S. Secret Service 1800 G St., N.W. Washington, D.C. 20223 Attn. FOIA/ Privacy Office (202) 634-5798 Securities and Exchange Commission 450 5th St., N.W. Washington, D.C. 20549 (202) 272-2650 U.S. Customs Service 1301 Constitution Ave., N.W. Washington, D.C. 20229 (202) 566-8195 U.S. Agency for International Development 320 21st. St., N.W. Washington, D.C. 20532 (202) 632-1850 U.S. Office of Personnel Management 1900 E St., N.W. Washington, D.C. 20415 (202) 632-5491 U.S. Postal Service Records Office 475 L'Enfant Plaza, S.W. Washington, D.C. 20260-5010 (202) 245-5568 Veterans Administration 810 Vermont Ave., N.W. Washington, D.C. 20420 (202) 389-2741 <6> FBI Addresses & phone numbers nationwide 2/88 DIVISION ADDRESS TELEPHONE Albany, NY 12207 502 U.S. Post Office and Courthouse 518-465-7551 Albuquerque, NM 87102 301 Grand Ave. NE 505-247-1555 Alexandria, VA 22314 300 N. Lee St 703-683-2680 Anchorage, AK 99513 701 C St 907-276-4441 Atlanta, GA 30302 275 Peachtree St. NE 404-521-3900 Baltimore, MD 21207 7142 Ambassador Rd 301-265-8080 Birmingham, AL 35203 Room 1400, 2121 Bldg 205-252-7705 Boston, MA 02203 John F. Kennedy Federal Office Bldg 617-742-5533 Buffalo, NY 14202 111 W. Huron St 716-856-7800 Butte, MT 59702 U.S. Courthouse and Federal Bldg 406-792-2304 Charlotte, NC 28210 6010 Kenley Lane 704-529-1030 Chicago, IL 60604 219 S. Dearborn St 312-431-1333 Cincinnati, OH 45205 50 Main St 513-421-4310 Cleveland, OH 44199 1240 E. 9th St 216-522-1400 Columbia, SC 29201 1529 Hampton St 803-254-3011 Dallas, TX 75202 1801 N. Lamar 214-741-1851 Denver, CO 80202 Federal Office Bldg 303-629-7171 Detroit, MI 48226 477 Michigan Ave 313-965-2323 El Paso, TX 79901 202 U.S. Courthouse Bldg 915-533-7451 Honolulu, HI 96850 300 Ala Moana Blvd 808-521-1411 Houston, TX 77002 515 Rusk Ave 713-224-1511 Indianapolis, IN 46204 575 N. Pennsylvania St 317-639-3301 Jackson, MS 39264 100 W. Capitol St 601-948-5000 Jackonsville, FL 32211 7820 Arlington Expressway 904-721-1211 Kansas City, MO 64106 300 U.S. Courthouse Bldg 816-221-6100 Knoxville, TN 37919 1111 Northshore Dr 615-588-8571 Las Vegas, NV 89101 Las Vegas Blvd. S 702-385-1281 Little Rock, AR 72201 215 U.S. Post Office Bldg 501-372-7211 Los Angeles, CA 90024 11000 Wilshire Blvd 213-477-6565 Louisville, KY 40202 600 Federal Pl 502-583-3941 Memphis, TN 38103 67 N. Main St 901-525-7373 Miami, FL 33137 3801 Biscayne Blvd 305-573-3333 Milwaukee, WI 53202 517 E. Wisconsin Ave 414-276-4684 Minneapolis, MN 55401 392 Federal Bldg 612-339-7861 Mobile, AL 36602 113 St. Joseph St 205-438-3674 Newark, NJ 07102 Gateway 1, Market St 201-622-5613 New Haven, CT 06510 150 Court St 203-777-6311 New Orleans, LA 70112 1250 Poydras St., Suite 2200 504-522-4670 New York, NY 10278 26 Federal Plaza 212-553-2700 Norfolk, VA 23510 200 Granby Mall 804-623-3111 Oklahoma City, OK 73118 50 Penn Pl 405-842-7471 Omaha, NE 68102 215 N. 17th St 402-348-1210 Philadelphia, PA 600 Arch St 215-629-0800 Phoenix, AZ 85012 201 E. Indianola 602-279-5511 Pittsburgh, PA 1000 Liberty Ave 412-471-2000 Portland, OR 97201 1500 SW 1st Ave 503-224-4181 Quantico, VA 22135 FBI Academy 703-640-6131 Richmond, VA 23220 200 W. Grace St 804-644-2631 Sacramento, CA 95825 2800 Cottage Way 916-481-9110 St. Louis, MO 63103 1520 Market St 314-241-5357 Salt Lake City, UT 84138 125 S. State St 801-355-8584 San Antonio, TX 78206 615 E. Houston 512-225-6741 San Diego, CA 92188 880 Front St 619-231-1122 San Francisco, CA 94102 450 Golden Gate Ave 415-552-2155 San Juan, PE 00918 Hato Rey, PR 809-754-6000 Savannah, GA 31405 5401 Paulsen St 912-354-9911 Seattle, WA 98174 915 2nd Ave 206-622-0460 Springfield, IL 62702 535 W. Jefferson St 217-522-9675 Tampa, FL 33602 500 Zack St 813-228-7661 Washington, DC 20401 1900 Half St. SW 202-324-3000 A sample article from Our Right To Know - From FOIA, Inc. --------------- cut here ------------------------------------- O U R R I G H T T O K N O W A Publication of the Fund for Open Information & Accountability, Inc. P.O. Box 02 2397, Brooklyn, NY 11202-0050 Tel: (212) 477-3188 Subscriptions: ORTK is published quarterly. Print: $12 per year Electronic: $10 per year Autumn 1988 Washington Update on Information Policy by Donna Demac Sample from the current edition of OUR RIGHT TO KNOW (Autumn 1988) Copyright 1988, FOIA, Inc. WASHINGTON UPDATE ON INFORMATION POLICY By Donna Demac "Facts are stupid things," blurted out President Reagan not too long ago. He apparently feels the same way about rights, including the right to know. During this last year of Reagan's reign, the executive branch as well as Congress have adopted yet more policies that weaken public access to information. What follows is a summary of recent developments in Washington and a look ahead to those issues that are germane to government accountability and information policy in the coming year. A trend to keep an eye on is the proposed adoption of increased restrictions covering unclassified information. In some cases, though not all, such proposals explicitly exempt information from disclosure under the Freedom of Information Act. An early example of this was a 1983 amendment to the Atomic Energy Act which allows the Department of Energy to restrict "unclassified controlled nuclear information." This broadly-worded standard encompasses, among other things, information about the health effects on humans from past and present nuclear testing. In the Department of Defense authorization bill for 1987, DOD was given a green light to withhold "sensitive, technical information whether classified or unclassified." Important here is the extraordinary amount of research funded by DOD and the seemingly limitless number of publications that could potentially be restricted. Even before this exemption was passed, there were complaints about DOD's rulings on research that could be shared at scientific conferences, and DOD's classifying research projects midway-- projects that started out unclassified. Other agencies began seeking the same privilege to restrict unclassified information. In 1988 legislation was introduced that would allow the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to withhold "certain sensitive generic safeguards information" which could "negate or compromise site specific security measures." Another bill permitted NASA to withhold from disclosure any technical data that could not be exported without a license under the Export Administration Act of 1979. This link to export controls broadens considerably the volume of information NASA could restrict if this bill were enacted. Since the late seventies, government concern over the appropriation of scientific and technical information by foreign countries has resulted in the use of export regulations that previously applied to hardware to limit the flow of information. In one well-known instance, the Atomic Energy Act was used in 1979 to prohibit the publication of an article entitled "The H-Bomb: How We Got It, Why We're Telling It," in The Progressive magazine, even though all the information contained in that article was readily accessible. From the outset, the Reagan administration has aggressively used export regulations to stop what it calls a "massive hemorrhage" of sensitive information to the Soviets. As a result, scientists and researchers are required to submit their writing for prior review by their government sponsors, foreign students have been barred from certain courses in U.S. universities and, in several instances, attendance at scientific conferences has been limited to U.S. citizens. Yet another expansive rationale for restricting unclassified information has appeared on the scene. This one is aimed at limiting the dissemination of technological and scientific information on the grounds that unfettered access could harm the "economic competitiveness of the U.S." The underlying concern is that laboratory research in this country is not being turned to commercial advantage fast enough to compete with foreign firms. The Superconductivity Competitiveness Act, a White House-sponsored bill, incorporated this reasoning and received a considerable amount of attention this year. Although defeated, if it had been passed, this legislation would have exempted from release under the FOIA certain commercially valuable scientific and technical information if it: (1) had been generated in government laboratories; (2) had commercial value; and (3) disclosure could "be reasonably expected to cause harm to the economic competitiveness of the United States." At a hearing last spring on the bill, industry witnesses and research scientists opposed the legislation. Robert Park of the American Physical Society said the bill "reeks of chauvinism and ignores the international character of the research." Others argued that contrary to what the proponents' stated intentions were--that secrecy would result in the strengthening of the economic competitiveness of the U.S.--it is the open exchange of information that increases the odds of remaining competitive. Nonetheless, it's clear that strong competition from abroad is generating greater support in Congress for controlling the international flow of technical information. After the superconductivity bill was defeated, similar language appeared in another piece of legislation that would have allowed national laboratories to withhold technological information from universities and private industry. Known as the National Laboratories Competitiveness Act, this bill too, was defeated. Yet FOIA supporters should remain on the alert for future agency attempts to use a commercial value test as a rationale for exempting material under FOIA. Indeed, the close nexus between government and industry in the development of superconductors and other advanced technology suggests that we will see the institutionalization of the commercial value test rationale with research contracts as well as administrative regulation. Scientists and industry leaders concerned with excessive secrecy say that support for the development of new superconductors--a technology that has both military and civilian applications--is already dominated by the military. One of the principal recommendations of a report issued in October to the DOD on the national economy was that the Pentagon should take a more active role in heading off "an increasing loss of technological leadership to both our allies and adversaries." FOIA supporters face two other important challenges in 1989. First, we must become actively involved in hearings and legislation to correct the way in which executive branch agencies have interpreted the fee waiver provisions adopted in the Freedom of Information Reform Act of 1986. Both the Justice Department and the Office on Management and Budget issued regulations which make it more difficult, and in many cases cost prohibitive, for researchers, freelance journalists and others to obtain fee waivers. Some members of Congress have voiced their dissatisfaction with these actions. Representative Glenn English, a sponsor of the 1986 Act, has advised agencies which fall under FOIA to ignore OMB's restrictive definitions of "news media" and "educational institutions," saying the agency went beyond its limited authority to issue fee schedule guidelines. Despite English's protestations, the CIA, DOD and other agencies are beginning to follow OMB's guidelines. A number of fee waivers have been denied to individuals and organizations on the grounds that the information being sought will not be "of current interest to the general public," or that the public will not "ultimately benefit from the information."* The question of whether or not information will be relevant or of interest to the public is subjective, and difficult to regulate. One of the dangers is that these kinds of decisions could be politically motivated, and that agencies could begin to protect themselves from public scrutiny, using a fee waiver rationale. Representative Gerald Kleczka has introduced legislation (H.R. 3885) that would improve the 1986 Act by, among other things, broadening the categories of requesters entitled to waivers and permitting judges to penalize agencies which delay disclosure or withhold information in violation of the law. The second task is to push for legislation that will update the FOIA for the computer age. The Act itself must clearly state that it applies to information collected, stored in, and disseminated by computer. We must monitor those agencies that deny us access to information on the grounds that the requested information is computerized. This occurred not long ago when the Community Environmental Health Center at Hunter College submitted a FOIA request to the Department of Labor for data about health hazards at some 100 companies in Brooklyn. At first the Center was told that it should request computer tapes; then, that this would cost $1,000 and no fee waiver would be granted; and then that the FOIA does not apply to computerized government data. Still, there have been a few encouraging rulings at the agency appellate level, including a dazzling DOE decision, in which a request by the National Security Archive for a list of limited access reports held by DOE's Office of Scientific and Technical Information was upheld. DOE ruled that agencies are obligated under the FOIA to do an on-line search for records, stating that this "is not, in substance, significantly different from a search of a file cabinet for paper records that are responsive to a request," and "If the FOIA required anything less it would allow agencies to conceal information from public scrutiny by placing it in computerized form." Despite this good news, me must remain vigilant. Until the FOIA is updated to include computerized information, some agencies will continue to maintain that such information does not qualify as "records" and therefore does not fall under the Act. We will have opportunities to voice our opinions on this crucial issue in the coming spring when the House Government Operations Committee's,the Subcommittee on Information and the Senate Judiciary Committee's Subcommittee on Technology are expected to hold hearings. Accountability and open government continues to be jeopardized in the executive branch of our government, through the use of Presidential Directives that make sweeping changes in government information policy. Each administration since 1947 has used Presidential Directives for circulating decisions regarding domestic, foreign and military policies. According to a recent Government Accounting Office report, most of these Directives remain classified and details about them are largely unavailable for congressional and public scrutiny. The Reagan administration has used National Security Decision Directives to influence the course of a number of controversial issues, including the Strategic Defense Initiative, U.S. policy in Central America, and government-wide information policy. NSDD 145 on federal telecommunications and automated information systems extended government authority to monitor and "protect" classified and unclassified material stored in or disseminated by government and commercial communications and computer systems. NSDD 84, issued in 1983 imposes wholesale prior restraint by requiring government employees to sign nondisclosure agreements and submit to polygraph examinations. To date, more than 2 million people have signed these agreements. An Executive Order (E.O. 12600) issued in June 1987 requires agencies to notify businesses when confidential information about them has been requested under FOIA. Though agencies in the past have often notified businesses before the issuance of this E.O., the Order makes such third- party consultations official. According to Harry Hammitt, editor of Access Reports, many of these directives have taken on a quasi-statutory status. Yet, to date, opposition to Presidential Orders has concentrated on their content, while ignoring the way they serve to protect the government from public scrutiny or, as with the business notification order, to amend the FOIA. For example, although NSDD 145 was challenged by industry leaders, librarians, public groups, and members of Congress, the legitimacy of the Directive itself was never challenged. The time has come for a full-fledged critique of this procedure. We can no longer allow the government to issue secret edicts which affect public access to government information. One final issue. Declaring its intention not to compete with the private sector and to slash government paperwork, the Reagan administration has sought to transfer federal data collections and publishing activities into the hands of profit-making enterprises. A carryover from the Carter years, this policy of "privatization" has been gaining ground since a 1985 circular from the OMB required all executive branch agencies to abstain from supplying information to programs of interest to private sector firms. Information collections at more than two dozen agencies, including the Department of Housing and Urban Development, the Environmental Protection Agency and the Department of Energy have already been placed under private management. Also, Congress has passed laws authorizing the creation of data-bases that would make information collected by the government more readily available to companies interested in marketing "value-added" services. A provision in this new trade law, for example, calls for the Commerce Department to pull together information on exports, imports and international economic competition into a central depository called the National Trade Data Bank. The stated intention is to make it easier for U.S. companies to research conditions in foreign markets. What is distressing about this privatization trend (or more accurately stated, this new hybrid government-industry information creation) is that new information programs are being created with public monies that will have dramatic implications for the cost and availability of information. Yet little attempt has been made to ensure that the wider public benefits. The new ground rules for obtaining access could endanger the integrity of precious information collections, and since private entities are not subject to regulation regarding public access, privatization has the potential to further promote government secrecy. In 1984 the Patent and Trademark Office signed an agreement with private companies for the automation of agency records which required the agency to deny FOIA requests for the records in automated form. The good news is that the public presently has its first major opportunity to get involved in the automation of an agency data-base. Two years ago, Congress passed the Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act of 1986,which requires the Environmental Protection Agency to establish a computerized toxic chemical inventory data-base that should be accessible to "any person," either electronically, through a personal computer or in paper form. By law, the EPA data-base should be activated in the spring of 1989. This is the only federal statute of its kind and represents the first attempt to view the automation of agency information as a means to widen public access to that information. A precedent-setting project, the EPA data-base will be used to assess the public's interest, not only in computerized toxics information, but in utilizing government data-bases. Among the issues that require broad-based public comment at this time are how to ensure that the data-base is accessible under the FOIA, and how it should be designed and maintained so that people can obtain information of relevance to their needs and particular geographic concerns. [Donna A. Demac is a New York-based attorney and writer, and the author of "Liberty Denied: The Current Rise of Censorship in America" (1988), PEN American Center (568 Broadway, NYC 10012, 212-334-1660)]