On May 9, I shared news about how I had received a response from officials at the Defense Intelligence Agency to a Freedom of Information Act request I had submitted almost 10 months earlier. I found it strange and less than coincidental that DIA’s response came less than two weeks after the release of my book, THE CLAPPER MEMO, which is critical about the agency’s involvement with the subject matter of my FOIA request. Well within the 60-day window available to appeal the agency’s response, I forwarded the following letter, postmarked with today’s date, to the DIA’s FOIA Office in Washington, D.C.:
Almost 10 months after I submitted a Freedom of Information Act Request (Case #0329-2012) to your agency, I received a letter (dated May 2, 2013) from Alesia Y. Williams, Chief of the FOIA Staff, containing the Defense Intelligence Agency’s response to said request. Unfortunately, YOUR AGENCY’S FULFILLMENT OF MY REQUEST FALLS FAR SHORT OF REASONABLE EXPECTATIONS.
My initial FOIA request of July 16, 2012, read as follows:
In accordance with 5 USC, and Public Law 106-554, I would like to request copies of any and all initial and follow-up contracts (i.e., solicitations, contracts, statements of work and task orders) related to the Portable Credibility Assessment Screening System (PCASS) or Preliminary Credibility Assessment Screening System (PCASS) that have been awarded by any Department of Defense agency to Lafayette Instrument Company of Lafayette, Indiana, and any other contractors, academic institutions, laboratories and subcontractors from January 1, 2000, to present.
In responding to my request, you included only 12 pages of documentation dating back as far as June 25, 2010. That, by any stretch of the imagination, is UNSATISFACTORY; therefore, I must contest the $155.80 assessment for “professional search and review time of 3.5 hours at $44.00 per hour, reproduction and release costs of 12 pages at 15¢ per page.” Until such time as a genuine effort is made on behalf of your agency to provide the requested documentation, I shall not remit payment as requested.
Why are DIA officials so reluctant to provide documentation related to PCASS (a.k.a. “portable polygraph”) contracts? For starters, I suspect they know the information will, when made public, damage the credibility of these professionals allegedly in the business of credibility assessment. For more answers to that question, however, you’ll have to read THE CLAPPER MEMO.