See
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/03/03/politics/03archives.html?ei=5094&en=b9932bb452d6188e&hp=&ex=1141448400&partner=homepage&pagewanted=print
or
http://shrinkster.com/clq

Excerpt:

"After complaints from historians, the National Archives directed intelligence agencies on Thursday to stop removing previously declassified historical documents from public access and urged them to return to the shelves as quickly as possible many of the records they had already pulled.

Allen Weinstein, the nation's chief archivist, announced what he called a "moratorium" on reclassification of documents until an audit can be completed to determine which records should be secret."

MAARJA'S COMMENTS:  This sounds like a sound move on the part of Dr. Weinstein.  NARA is lucky that it has a unit such as the Information Security Oversight Office (ISOO) within it to turn to, and that it is headed by someone with Bill Leonard's reputation.

I did notice that Scott Shane reported that "Mr. Weinstein, who became archivist of the United States a year ago, said he knew 'precious little' about the seven-year-old reclassification program before it was disclosed in The New York Times on Feb. 21."

Agency heads have a lot to juggle and I daresay other matters, such as electronic records issues or the Nixon Library flap, took up much of Dr. Weinstein's time during his first year.  I don't know enough about Dr. Weinstein to know how approachable he is, the little I've heard, just from a couple of people, suggests that some NARA employees at the working level have found him easy to talk to. 

There have been a few earlier  news stories pointing to potential problems with NARA, e.g., George Lardner's May 19, 2002 article
available at
http://www.fas.org/sgp/news/2001/05/wp051901.html
and
http://www.slate.com/id/2114963/

Minutes posted publicly on the Internet from a 2001 meeting of a State Department history advisory committee also reflected strong concern about reclassification. 

My view is that as with anything any public or private sector organization does, institutional credibility often relies on good internal controls and proper procedures being in place.  The more internal controls, oversight and yes, opportunities for an agency's employees to express concern up their reporting chain or to a unit such as ISOO, the better.

As with the question of Presidential families, these records access situations involve people at every point of their life cycle.  Are their vulnerabilities as a result?  Of course!    Under E.O. 12958, as amended, information is not supposed to be classified simply to shield embarrassing actions.  Classification and declassification requires a very careful balance. 

Here's a hypothetical.  If there was a complete lack of internal controls over the process, how many of you, handed the ability to stamp something secret, would choose to try improperly to shield forever work-related documents involving you that should be unclassified under the E.O. but might reflect embarrassing actions?  The more controls and the more rigor in the process, the less likely that such mistakes will occur.  Remember what ISOO Director Bill Leonard said in his excellent speech in 2004, available at
http://www.archives.gov/isoo/speeches-and-articles/ncms-2004.html

Of course, security classified information always should be protected until it is declassified properly. 

Maarja




A posting from the Archives & Archivists LISTSERV List sponsored by the Society of American Archivists, www.archivists.org. For the terms of participation, please refer to http://www.archivists.org/listservs/arch_listserv_terms.asp.

To subscribe or unsubscribe, send e-mail to [log in to unmask] In body of message: SUB ARCHIVES firstname lastname *or*: UNSUB ARCHIVES To post a message, send e-mail to [log in to unmask]

Or to do *anything* (and enjoy doing it!), use the web interface at http://listserv.muohio.edu/archives/archives.html

Problems? Send e-mail to Robert F Schmidt <[log in to unmask]>