T5 B5 Dos Employee Fdr- Entire Contents- Emails- Notes- Letters- Withdrawal Notice 176

9/11 Working-level Employee

I

I

Background Time in Berlin Personnel and their approaches Oversight and direction ftom high level in embassy Visa policy in Berlin, written and unwritten Describe precisely TCN policy • How many years' residency? • How many years' school? • What kind of financial support? • What other factors? Egyptian versus Lebanese versus Yemeni I

i

Knowledge about AQ presence in Germany Atta's visa - May 18, 2000 -- Don't recall? Statements to State - OIG

-

9/11 Classified Information

...•••''9/11 Working-level Employee

to rna^Ajui nafluvv^u

9/11 Classified Information

9/11 Classified Information

rv -r^rvi/^\JLl

DOl

9/11 Working-level Employee

cc

r»at

7»

9/11 Working-level Employee

v JQ

U/Vi

~"

f\*

*~*

cuUWk/VNfl

i-Ca CT.

"9

1 S to -

A

<J

I

9/11 Classified Information

J

oUd

\SSov^^H

Gc.

fto T^VATTR—J

*-OCAXO

•Vo 0

ce^ ^-j ^NLM

V-J

M

Q> O

ex.

Joanne Accolla From: Sent: To; Subject:

Tom Eldridge Wednesday, February 18, 2004 9:38 AM Joanne Accolla FW: Kohn letter ,0 ... .,

TT

, .

/9/11 Working-level Employee

Kohn letter l.doc (19 KB)

Please put this in I

r's file.

Thanks.

-- Tom

Original Message From: Borek, Jamison S (SBU) [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Friday, February 13, 2004 5:33 PM To: Tom Eldridge Subject: Kohn letter FYI my interim response. «Kohn letter l.doc»

/9/11 Working-level Employee

February 13, 2004 Mr. Stephen M. Kohn Kohn, Kohn & Colalpinto 3233 P Street, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20007 Dear Mr. Kohri: I ani in receipt of your letter of February 12, 2004. I note that] | | jhas rescheduled his interview with the 9/11 Commission for 10:00 am on February 20, 2004. For your information, Ms. Paula Barton of this office is planning to attend for the Department of State. I note that, according to the fax I received, your letter was transmitted at 5:21 pm yesterday. Your letter makes numerous requests to which a response is requested by COB today; this deadline is unrealistic in any event. I am writing to advise you that it will not be possible to provide you with a response to your letter today. I must also advise you that the Department of State does not necessarily agree with your various legal assertions. However, I will look into the questions that you raise and provide you with a more detailed response in the future.

Sincerely,

Jamison S. Borek

- JflN.16.2004

7:10PM

ISO. 989

9/11 Working-level Employee FAX COVER SHEET To: Mr. Stephen M. Kohn Kohn, Kohn & ColapJnto, UP Attn: ToinEldridge From: Dan Marcus 9-11 Cotnmission Date: January 16,2004

Fax No.: 202-342-6984 202-358-3124 Office Tel: 202-331-4065 Unclassified Fax: 202-296-5545 Pages (including cover): 2

Re: Interview with your ch'eatl

www.9-1 lcoiriTnission.gov

P. 1/2

flN.16.2004 £'?«,

CHAIR

7:10PM

Lee H Hamilton

9/11 Working-level Employee

Jamie S. Gorelick

Mr. Stephen M. Kohn. Kohn, Koha & Colapinto, LLP 3233 P Street, N,W. Washington, D.C. 20007

Slade Gorton

Dear Mr. Kohn:

FjedF. Raiding

P. 2/2

January 16,2004

VICE CHAIR

Richard Bert-Veniae

NO.989

BobKure/ John F. Tj*hffrvar>

TimothyJ. Roesaer James

In response to your letter of January 15,2004, the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States hereby agrees to providcf [with 30 days advance notice if the Commission is going to release his name and identity in its reports, or otherwise. Very truly yours,

F.XECVTIVE Duucro*

7^

Daniel Marcus General Counsel

PAX

) 331-4060 296-5545

Ol/lSjflN.15.2004 * 5:44PM*ao"i"t

"v""

NO.967

P.2/5

KOHN, KOHN 8 COLAPINTO. LLP ATTORNEYS AT I

3233 P STREET, N,w. WASHINGTON, DC 20007-2756 _ _ TELEPHONE (202)342-8980

January 15,2004 CONFTDENTIAL PRIVACY ACT-PROTECTED

Via Fax Jamison S.Borek Assistant Legal Adviser legislation and General Management Room 3422 Department of State Washington DC 20520 Fax. 202/736-7116 William H.Taft,IV Legal Adviser Office of the Legal Adviser Room 6423 Department of State 2201 C St., N.W. Washington DC 20520 Fax. 202/647-7096 Tamara GeJboin Acting Counsel Office of the Inspector General Department of State Room 6817 2201 C St., N.W. Washington, DC 20520 Fax. 202/647-9410

FACSIMILE (202) 3*2-69* 4

01/lUftN. 15.2004» * 5:44PM'4Ztt*e*

*«iin «™»

N0.9S7

P.3/5

Thomas Eldridge Counsel National Commission on Teirotist Attacks Upon the United Stales 301 7thSt.,N.W. Room 5125 Washington, DC 20407 Fax. 202/296-5545 /9/11 Working-level Employee

Daniel Marcus

Dear ShVMadam:

/ \l Coonsel

/

\l

/ \l Commission on Ter

M* h Cloyed by^he P^^*^»"

international economist, with respect to the agency's wquestttwrtk* be interviewed by The National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States (hereinafter; the "Commission" or "9-11 Commission/'). Please be advised tfaatj Pf?85* TL cooperate with the CwaSuabMPto' just as he has fuUy cooperated wi^m me Ir^pector Gael's prior audit! Interview before tte 9-11 Commission is currently scheduled to take place on Tuesday, January 20,2004.

\n light of the strong privacy interests ax stake, we are

Tnai^r.tT.g our client's privacy interests as well as protecting his identity in mis matter. ttierefore,we would like to ensure prior toj [appearance before tie Commission, there will not be any disclosure of his identity, without his consent by tie Commission, the agency, the Inspector General or any other government entity, employee or appointee investigating or reviewing this matter. We note mat me Commission has agreed that it will not pubh'ciy disclose the names of State Department officers, in its report or otherwise, without the prior agreement of the Departmeut. Su Letter from Daniel Marcus, General Counsel, 9-11 Commission, to Karl Hofinann, Executive Secretary, Department of State (Aug. 15,2003), However, that agreement between the agency and the Commission possibly permits the agency to wajvej I privacy interests and allowthe Commission to disclose his identity without] ^consent

01/15JAN.15.20041 * 5:44PM I4ZOWO *

*""" •"**"

"

NO.967

P.4/5

-3-

As the Department of Justice has recognized, Votecting **» privacy interests of individuals who are named hi investigatory records requires special procedures." Freedom of Information Act Guide* Privacy Act Overview, pp. 366-367 (Sept 1998). The privacy interests of individuals who are either the subject of or identified during the course of a -ovemment investigation must be protected because "members of the public may draw adverse inferences from the mere feet that an individual is mentioned in the files of a criminal law enforcement agency." Id, p, 367. Moreover, it is well established mat public employees have a strong wivacy/reputational interest protected under the Fifth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.Rothv. Veteran's Administration, *S6?.2dUQl (9th Cir. 1988) (federal employee interest in "good name" and "reputation"). Notably, Hoe federal courts have vigilantly upheld the privacy interests of public employees who are mentioned in government investigatory records and the courts have held that the identities of such persons, interviewees and witnesses are exempt from disclosure under FOIA Exemptions 6 and/or 7(C). In fact, the courts have "admonished repeatedly" that witnesses informants, and investigating agents have a "substantial interest m seeing that their participation remains secret" King, 830 F.2d 210,233 (D.C. Cir. 1987). See also, Fitzgibbon v. CIA, 911 F.2d 755,767 (D,C. Cir. 1990) ("the mention of an individual's name in a law enforcement file will engender comment and speculation and carries a stigmatizing connotation."); Lesar v. U.S. Dept. of Justice. 636 F.2d 472,488 (E.G. Cii. 1980) ("'It is difficult if not impossible, to anticipate all respects in which disclosure might damage reputation or lead to personal embarrassment and discomfort.'"); Maroscia v. Levi, 569 F.2d 1000,1002 (7th Cir, 1977) (protecting references to third parties "to minimize the public exposure or possible harassment"); Ugarner v. Reno, 2 F. Supp. 2d 400.405 (S.D.N.Y. 1998) (protecting names in file to avoid retaliation, discrimination, and encourage whistleblowers to come forward in future); Anderson v. U.S. Postal Serv., 7 F. Supp. 2d 583, 586 (E.D. Pa. 1998) (disclosing identities of interviewees and witnesses may result in embarrassment or annoyance). Significantly, "publicity in the popular media cannot vitiate the FOIA privacy exemption." Bastv. United Slates Dep't of Justice, 665F.2d 1251,1255 (D.C.Cir.1981). Although there exists widespread media interest in the September 11* tragedy and the government's investigations into what happened, the privacy interests of individuals, interviewees and witnesses named hi government reports must still be protected. See also, Kimberlin v. Dep't of Justice, 139 F.3d 944,949 (D.C. CJr.1998) (official's statement to the press that tie was investigated and disciplined did not waive his privacy interests for FOIA purposes). Moreover, the courts have even extended privacy protection to the identities of mid- and low-level federal employees accused of misconduct as well as to the details and results of any internal investigations into such allegations of impropriety. See, Stern v. FBI, 737 F.2d 84,94 (D C Cur. 1984); Duntelberger v, Dept. of Justice, 906 F,2d 779,782 (D.C. Cir. 1990). Also see, McCutchen v. HHS, 30 F.3d 183,187-189 (D.C. Cir. 1994) (protecting identities of federally employed scientists investigated for possible scientific misconduct.); Heller v. U.S. Marshals Serv., 65$ F. Supp. 1088,1091 (D.D.C. 1987) ("extremely strong interest'' in protecting privacy interest of individual who cooperated with internal investigation of possible criminal activity").

01/HJftN.15.2004> I 5:44PM»«0»»«

IWHH aw«» w*—*«»«

NO.967

P.5/5

/9/11 Working-level Employee

The Privacy Act, 5 U.S.C. §552^pay also be applicable in mis matter. Certainly, any information pibvided by the agency, oithe Inspector General to the .9-11 Commission concerning I Lould be protected by the privacy Act Any records rented roifo Inspector General's priorreviewof this matter, bicludnig the IC's prior interview of| | should also be protected by the Privacy ActiSee, e.g., 2.FAM 031.4 (Release of 010 Reports, Documents and JnformaTion); 2 FAM 031,4-1 (Access to Inspection Reports); 2 FAM 031.4-2 (Access to Security Oversight Inspection Reports); ,2 FAM 031,4-3 (Release of Investigative Information). \e believe that protecting the privacy interests and identity oq

j"^ othe

similarly situated agency employees whip coapeaae with;ti& varioaa governmental Investigations or inquiries into the September 11th tragedy will also serve Jo protect the integrity of the Commission's review. By assuring employees ^hat their privacy interests and identities win be fully protected, it will facilitate the frank) Ml arid free disclosure of mfonnstion by agency employees to the Commission. \t seems that the most expedient w^y to assure that o;ir client's privacy interest identity will be protected is for the agency and the Inspector General to commit that they will not provide the Commission with permission to disclose] [identity wlrnoui his consent, and for the Commission to agree to providel Iwitrt JgcEyg advance notice if Ae Commission is going to release his name and identity either in bs reports, of otherwise. Please let us know your respective positions on this matter as soon as possible. We look forward to hearing from you in writing on Friday, given that! I interview is scheduled for next Tuesday. Thank you in advance for your prompt attention to this matter. Sincerely,

Stephen M. Kohn David KL ColBfiinto. Attorneys foj

9/11 Working-level

Employee

Working-level Employee Joanne Accolla

/;

From: Sent: To: Subject:

Tom Cldridge Thursday, January 15, 2004 10:15 AM JoanneiAccolla FW: Tirhe Sensitive: Confirmation and Questions Concerning DOS Interview #17

Joanne -

/

Please put into|

~ Tom

;

Is file. Thanks.

I

—Original Message— I From: Young, Jeffrey A [mailto:[email protected] Sent: Wednesday, January 14, ?004 4:14 PM To: Tom Eldridge j Subject: RE: Time Sensitive: Confirmation and Questions Concerning DOS Interview #17

—Original Message— From: |_ Sent: Wednesday, January 14, 2004 1:39 PM To: Tom Eldridge' Subject: Time Sensitive: Confirmation and Questions Concerning DOS Interview #17 Tom,

Thank you very much for rescheduling the interview to 1:30 on Tuesday, January 20, 2004 at the Commission's Offices, 301 7th Street SW, Room 5125. I'm looking forward to meeting you and Susan Ginsburg at the meeting. When we spoke recently, you mentioned that the focus of your questions would be on the following areas: - Visa policies in place in Berlin during my time there for third country nationals - The process and standards for visa issuances for this general category of applicants - Review of procedures and standards relating to such applicants, and whether they were written or verbally communicated - Level of discretion delegated to consular officers in making visa decisions to approve or deny applicants -- Use of the 221 (g) refusal clause by officers at Berlin -- Possible review or discussion of applications refused during the period, obtained from Berlin's files. - Questions on the Inspection MemCon created by the Department's Office of the Inspector General Because I would like to give maximum assistance to the Commission - and because the Department's Legal Adviser also asked me for specifics on what will be covered - if there are other areas you anticipate covering, other documents you may reference, or further details you can provide concerning the above questions, please let me know. The Department's Legal Adviser has asked to meet with me early on Friday, January 17 for a pre-brief. With respect to the interview, I would like to request that my personal representative Stephen Kohn and AFSA General Counsel Sharon Papp or Attorney Zlatana Badrich be able to attend, and that there be no taping. To ensure accuracy, we would like to have a copy of the official notes from the interview, if possible. If you would like to speak with my personal representative, Stephen M. Kohn, Attorney at Law, please feel free to do so. He can be reached at: Kohn, Kohn & Colapinto, 3233 P Street N.W., Washington DC 20037, Email: [email protected]. Tel. 202/342-6980, Fax. 202/342-6984.

I look forward to cooperating fully with the Commission and hope to be of assistance. Sincerely,

- ;;:-;/9/11 Working-level Employee

J LInternatinnfll Prnnnmist uepanmeni or Tel: Tel: Fax E-mal lalHL

9/11 Working-level Employee

Tn^

/

Jf

IJ

T"

9/11 Working-level Employee

,.^f//n 7 nc.

\-*Zfyj fi

^

t

9/11 Working-level Employee

'

-M

.<£

II

- (A/^f ( J-

u

/

•£/

/

7

t? ^« °,V/» V V C

£

r4H-

'M -?€

9/11 Working-level Employee

ilbL'6 fO& [uAz/ -"*• - f- •' i f

^T(& o\- /^n/6ftA5

WITHDRAWAL NOTICE RG: 148 Box: 00002 Series:

Copies: 1

Folder: 0001 Document: 19 9/1 1 Commission Team 5 Pages: 2 ACCESS RESTRICTED

The item identified befow has been withdrawn from this file: Folder Title: Document Date: ~~ Document Type: Handwritten Notes From: To:

\:

In the review of this file this item was removed because access to it is restricted. Restrictions on records in the National Archives are stated in general and specific record group restriction statements which are available for examination.

NND: 46009 Withdrawn: 04-28-2007

by:

RETRIEVAL #: 46009 00002 0001 19

v*£ V

S^-

rc^.

a

9/11 Working-level Employee

/ *-)

$A *

In