Team 3 Update on Agencies' Document Production Since the 2nd Interim Report

Date: October 2,2003

EOF:

As of October 2, EOF hasn't produced any new documents. But we have been promised that EOF 3 is
basically ready and should be there very soon—perhaps today or tomorrow. Also, EOF 2 Clinton material
is thin, particularly around the 1998 bombings and the Cole.

CIA:

Some documents have been provided that had not been produced before the 2nd Interim report, notably in
response to Item#6, one of our litmus tests. These are materials related to discussions between the DCI and
senior-level foreign intelligence officials. There are about 70 of these documents. They do not document
every such conversation, as some were meetings and phone conversations not recorded in cable traffic. We
do not yet have a good sense of their quality.
As for other litmus test documents:
—No word on Items #1 and #2 (PDBs and related items), though this is an FO issue.
—Nothing for Item #3, briefing packages for PCs and DCs.
—Nothing for Item #4, materials given by DCI to President or VP.
—Very little material for Item #5 which requests materials used to prepare DCI for meetings with National
Security Adviser, SecDef, SecState, and FBI Director. As noted before, all we have here are talking points
for the DCI's meetings with Rumsfeld and Powell, and there are maybe 15 substantive pages provided—for
most of the meetings we have "no responsive materials." We were told there are no booklets for FBI
meetings for 2001. And we have no response at all on: materials for meetings with the National Security
Adviser, or meetings with any of the Principals from 1998 - 2000. (Note: a new document request—DCI
Document Request no. 15—specifically asks for materials from meetings with the National Security
Adviser, Deputy National Security Adviser, and Dick Clarke for the period 1998-9/12/01). We should get
some certification that this is all the CIA has in response to Item #5.
—Item#8, after-action reports for specified terrorist attacks: some of these were said to correspond to items
responded to in DCI #6 (reports on the WTC 1993 and Khobar Towers attacks), and for the others
(Embassy bombings, USS Cole, Millennium Plot & 9/11) there are said to be no responsive documents.
Again, we should get some certification on this.
Item #18, agendas of meetings between the DCI,& SecDef or Deputy SecDef. This is another "no docs
responsive" item.| Mis us the Rumsfeld CT items are covered in #5, but that she may be able
to get us dates of meetings for Cohe^i and the Deputy SecDef (but no talking points or agendas)—that was
on August 25*, but nothing from her yet.

DoD:

As of October 2 Team 3 has nor received documents responsive to Document Request 6 that focuses on
high-level policy. DoD has provided us with documents that are in response to Team 2 requests
incorporated into Document 6. But the policy foetus of Request 6 remains unanswered. Pat Downs of DoD
has advised that the policy documents are under review by EOF and that is the reason for the slow down.
But we have not been given an estimate of when those documents will be available.

State:

Since our last update, we continue to receive documents from the Department. Although the quantity has
slowed the quality is high. For example, we have recently reviewed a number of memos and
correspondence sent to or from the Secretary of State, or Deputy .Secretary of State, concerning USG
relations and strategy with Pakistan and the Taliban. Also, included with these documents are a number of
suggested talking points for POTUS conversations with foreign dignitaries. These documents are
responsive to some of the main Litmus Test points we had specified, including Item #1 of DOS Document

9/11 Closed by S t a t u t e
Request #3 calling for substantive policy discussions. State is still producing more but they expect to
complete their document search/production within the next few weeks, if not sooner. We are starting to see
this high-level quality production, which was not in evidence at the time of our last update.

DoJ:

DoJ Document Request 2 relates to substantive policy development, policy guidance, and related
communications from January 1998 to September 20, 2001. Since the 2nd Interim Report DOJ produced
322 pages of classified info provided to the OAG and ODAG. Many of the documents provided by DoJ
concern Critical Infrastructure, including cyber protection, interagency meetings and discussions. These
are perhaps of greater interest to other Teams. Many documents also concern response to WMD and
exercises to be prepared for WMD attacks. One document records Talking Points for DoJ's role after the
War on Terrorism was declared in September '01. There are a number of initial reports on the bombing of
the USS Cole and intel summaries and highlights on terrorist groups' operations. One document of some
interest contains Talking Points for a June 1999 AG Reno meeting with Dick Clarke at which UBL is
discussed, among other things. Another concerns DoJ's role in national security. Many documents consist
of the required 2-year review of groups to determine whether they can continue to be designated terrorist
groups. And there is a piece discussing Executive Order 12333 and the question of assassination. Some of
these documents are deliberative in character. And some hold interest, but we have not yet struck the
policy mother lode. Also, on October 2, DOJ delivered an additional 1,147 pages to the Commission.
These have not yet been reviewed. On the same date, DoJ is making available for reading at DoJ an
additional 58 pages of classified, in some cases deliberative, material.

FBI:

Since the 2nd Interim Report we have received no new documents from the FBI. We have spoken to our
Point of Contact at the Bureau who has informed us that he thinks that they have for the most part
exhausted their production for documents responsive to our Team's request (FBI Document Request #9).
Our POC does have some documents related to Director Freeh's calendar and is making them available to
us for review this coming Monday afternoon. We have arranged to send a staff member to the Bureau to
review them. Based upon our review here and on the comments of our POC it doesn't look like FBI
produced-documents are likely to bear much fruit..