Office of the Historian

June 2024

Advisory Committee on Historical Diplomatic Documentation June 10-11, 2024

Minutes

Committee Members

  • James Goldgeier, Chair
  • Kristin Hoganson
  • Adriane Lentz-Smith
  • Sharon Leon, At Large
  • Nancy McGovern
  • Timothy Naftali
  • Deborah Pearlstein
  • Kori Schake
  • Sarah Snyder

Office of the Historian

  • Kristin Ahlberg
  • Carl Ashley
  • Margaret Ball
  • Forrest Barnum
  • Sara Berndt
  • Josh Botts
  • Tiffany Cabrera
  • Mandy Chalou
  • Elizabeth Charles
  • Kathryn David
  • Cynthia Doell
  • Lynette Evans-Tiernan
  • Thomas Faith
  • Stephanie Freeman
  • Amy Garrett
  • David Geyer
  • Renée Goings
  • Ben Greene
  • Michelle Guzman
  • Charles Hawley
  • Kerry Hite
  • Adam Howard
  • Richard Hulver
  • Alina Khachtourian
  • Virginia Kinniburgh
  • Laura Kolar
  • Aaron Marrs
  • Michael McCoyer
  • Brad Morith
  • Christopher Morrison
  • David Nickles
  • Nicole Orphanides
  • Paul Pitman
  • Alexander Poster
  • John Powers
  • Kathleen Rasmussen
  • Matthew Regan
  • Amanda Ross
  • Seth Rotramel
  • Daniel Rubin
  • Nathaniel Smith
  • Douglas Sun
  • Brooks Swett
  • Melissa Jane Taylor
  • Chris Tudda
  • Dean Weatherhead
  • Joseph Wicentowski
  • Alex Wieland
  • Tristan Williams
  • James Wilson
  • Louise Woodroofe

Bureau of Administration

  • Jeff Charlston
  • Corynne Gerow
  • Timothy Kootz
  • Mallory Rogoff
  • Marvin Russell

National Archives and Records Administration

  • William Fischer
  • David Langbart
  • Don McIlwain

Public

  • Over 50 members of the public

Open Session, June 10

Opening of the Meeting

James Goldgeier opened the session by welcoming all attendees, in person and online. He then introduced Kathy Rasmussen, FRUS General Editor.

Roundtable – Carter’s Legacy Revisited: Reassessing U.S. Foreign Relations through the FRUS Lens

Rasmussen echoed Goldgeier’s welcome and introduced the presenters for the round table: Kristin Ahlberg, Assistant General Editor, Office of the Historian (OH); James Wilson, Supervisory Historian, Global Issues and General Team, Office of the Historian; and Vanessa Walker, Gordon Levin Associate Professor of Diplomatic History, Amherst College.

Ahlberg, who retires at the end of June, began by dedicating her presentation to the late Lloyd Ambrosius, her dissertation advisor and Former Samuel Clark Waugh Distinguished Professor of International Relations and Emeritus Professor of History at the University of Nebraska, Lincoln. Turning to President Carter’s legacy, Ahlberg recounted the characterization of Carter as a micromanager epitomized in a Saturday Night Live television skit, “Ask President Carter,” in which Carter (actor Dan Aykroyd), interviewed by news anchor Walter Cronkite (actor Bill Murray), fielded questions ranging from farming to nuclear proliferation, space, and illegal drugs. Ahlberg noted the portrayal of Carter left a lasting impression and one she balanced with her professional research during her work on FRUS 1977–1980, Volumes I, Foundations of Foreign Policy; II, Human Rights and Humanitarian Affairs; and XXX, Public Diplomacy.

Through documents selected from each of the volumes, Ahlberg highlighted three themes of Carter’s administration evident in the compilations: 1) the intentional integration of Carter’s human rights focus into administration policy; 2) the intellectual give-and-take between Carter and his top leaders, particularly Zbigniew Brzezinski; and 3) the role of First Lady Rosalynn Carter as a political partner, exemplified in her visit to Latin America early in Carter’s presidency.

Ahlberg, whose reputation as a meticulous and thoughtful compiler, reviewer, and editor has made “Ask Kristin Ahlberg,” something of a regular statement in the Office. She will be sorely missed by her colleagues.

Vanessa Walker expressed her gratitude for the scholarly research that informs the work of Ahlberg and other compliers as they select documents of FRUS volumes. She described her use of the series in both her own research and as a teaching resource. The volumes not only provide key documentation of administration decisions and policies, but also a glimpse at the great diversity of topics officials juggled at any given time. Walker related a colleague’s quip that the reliability and variety in FRUS volumes read like “a complex novel. Move over Tolstoy, here comes FRUS!” This context shows the “messy conversations” involved in politics that expands understanding from first-year students through scholarly research.

James Wilson offered some of that context in his discussion of Volume IV, National Security Policy. While few historians question Carter’s commitment to nuclear nonproliferation, Wilson found a more nuanced narrative emerged during his research. Carter took a hands-on approach to National Security Policy, particularly with regard to the modernization of the nuclear stockpile, based on the belief that his direct involvement could help prevent nuclear catastrophe. Wilson noted that the turning point for Carter came after several false reports of imminent nuclear attack and, finally, with the Soviet Union’s invasion of Afghanistan. These events, Wilson surmised, accelerated Carter’s nuclear nonproliferation efforts.

Kristin Ahlberg, Vanessa Walker, and James Wilson concluded their presentation. Kathy Rasmussen asked the audience for questions.

Deborah Pearlstein asked Wilson if Carter changed his views about national security over time, or if he had, as Wilson postulated, more of a static long-going policy analysis, using the example of Carter’s cancellation of the B–1 bomber to challenge Wilson’s argument.

Wilson joked that Carter cancelled the B–1 bomber because it was an “ugly plane.” Wilson then stated that the B–1 was cancelled because B–52 cruise missiles were found to be more effective in the long run, and those B-52 cruise missiles spurred the Soviets to upgrade their missile technology. Wilson added that maybe Carter shouldn’t have tried to change Cold War agreements made by Kissinger and Brezhnev, but it took a while for Carter to come to that conclusion because Carter wanted more ambitious agreements. Wilson said, for instance, SALT II didn’t die in 1980; the United States adhered to it until 1986 and the balance between the Carter administration’s policy evolution versus their long-term plans was a “complicated story.”

Rasmussen asked all three panelists about the struggle between the executive branch and Congress regarding foreign policy.

Ahlberg noted that Congress played a major role in foreign policy decisions, a trend that continued from the 1960s. She used the example of Hubert Humphrey, the Democratic nominee for President in 1968, who marshalled Congressional support for the continuation and expansion of programs such as Food for Peace during the Carter administration. Ahlberg stated human rights was also an important issue to Congress during the Carter administration. Walker stated that the Carter administration recognized that Congress was central to the human rights debate, citing an example during Cyrus Vance’s confirmation hearing in which Vance gave out his personal phone number to a congressman so Vance could answer further questions from the congressman. She stated that Congress indirectly represented the voice of non-state actors concerned about human rights and to preserve executive power the Carter administration placed a strong emphasis on Congressional outreach.

Goldgeier asked Walker if human rights successes in Latin America challenged the perception that Carter was naïve about foreign policy and if that perception should be re-examined.

Walker responded that there was a real effort to integrate human rights with other issues, such as economic and military interests, and that the Carter administration did not want human rights to eclipse those issues. She said that Carter deserved praise for dealing with human rights with sincerity, knew how to work behind the scenes, and hasn’t yet received credit for certain actions his administration took. Walker stated Carter was okay with not receiving credit from the public. Ahlberg agreed and added that Vance emphasized “quiet diplomacy.”

Goldgeier thanked the roundtable for their contributions, applauded Sarah Snyder for suggesting the roundtable, and acknowledged the contributions of the late Bob Pastor, who played a major role in human rights policy in the Western Hemisphere and allowed Goldgeier to speak to Carter.

Implementation of the October 1991 Foreign Relations statute and other matters of concern to the Office of the Historian

Goldgeier asked the Committee to approve the minutes of the March 2024 meeting. The Committee unanimously approved the minutes. Goldgeier welcomed FSI Director, Ambassador Joan Polaschik.

Remarks from FSI Director Joan Polaschik

Polaschik opened her remarks by welcoming everyone attending the meeting in the physical and virtual room and noted that the physical room was quite warm. Polaschik noted that Goings had indicated beforehand that the room would be warm and quipped that must be due to the hot discussions that had just concluded. Next, Polaschik shared “profound thanks” to Howard for stepping into the role of Acting FSI Deputy Director for the previous two months. Polaschik noted that Howard had assisted with a massive modernization and reform agenda and helped to facilitate the transition to the new Deputy Director Maria Brewer. Polaschik said that FSI was incredibly lucky that Brewer joined the team. Brewer is a Career Foreign Service Officer who brings decades of experience including serving as Ambassador. Brewer was hoping to join the meeting today but is currently conducting interviews that are essential to the modernization process at FSI.

Polaschik continued by thanking Lentz-Smith for five years of service on the HAC and Ahlberg for her many contributions to the work of OH over twenty-one years and on more than eighty FRUS volumes.

Polaschik opined that summer is the transition season and so it is appropriate to note the good news on the hiring front. She welcomed Tristan Williams to the staff as a member of the Declassification Coordination team. Polaschik also welcomed Sabrina Waite who joined the Oral History team as a summer intern and projected that two additional historians will be joining the office before the next HAC meeting in September.

Polaschik announced that FSI had interviewed the finalists for the new Provost position in May and that Polaschik had recently selected a candidate who is extremely qualified and hoped that there will be a formal announcement in the coming months following a successful Senior Executive Service hiring process. FSI is also hiring for the senior leadership of the new Office of the Provost and hoovering up all of the educational experts from across the Institute including EdTech, innovation leaders, and professional development experts to build up a large 150-person team that will be led not just by the Provost but also by a Vice Provost and five division directors. She stated that FSI is in that process now. She noted that it has been an intensive six weeks of various interviews of upwards of 120 people applying for each of those six jobs, which is great and shows that a lot of people are excited about FSI and its mission and our desire to step up our game with the academic rigor of our programs, but, it also means a lot of work. Polaschik noted that a lot of these are internal candidates and that it’s exciting to see how hopefully FSI can build a succession ladder for our colleagues. She further noted that FSI’s goal is to complete the hiring for the six positions by early August and start onboarding people in the fall to start operationalizing the plan. FSI also hopes to roll out a new centralized evaluation system by October 1.

Polaschik stressed that it was a really exciting time for FSI because all of the work that the Institute has been doing to think through our strengths and weaknesses and what can be done better to finally allow FSI to finally and fully address decades’ worth of recommendations.

Polaschik noted that the HAC will submit an annual report soon that will cover everything through June of this year. On that subject, Polaschik raised the recent reduction in the Department’s FY2024 budget. This entails a seven percent cut in FSI’s operation budget and is associated with an effort to address long-standing needs from the Department to make the locally employed staff whole with their salaries. She stated that thankfully, Department leadership is working to even out the reductions such that FSI will probably face only a two or three percent cut. FSI will have to make some tough choices and look for greater economies of scale. Polaschik concluded that she wants the Committee to know that FSI places a high priority on the work of OH and we need to invest. The spirit of Secretary Blinken’s modernization agenda involves working to update paradigm systems processes from the 1980s or 1990s. She looks forward to seeing the Committee’s report about all of the amazing work being done in OH. Goldgeier responded by reassuring Polaschik that the report will emphasize the continued need for resources.

Polaschik raised the potential of Artificial Intelligence (AI) and its potential to improve aspects of FSI’s horizon of work. Polaschik lauded OH for being a leader in many respects in exploring AI’s potential. FSI will launch an artificial intelligence working group chaired by Brewer in the near future and report back to the HAC at the September meeting.

Howard thanked Polaschik for her report and, as always, her strong support for OH.

Goldgeier interjected that there was a question from Bill Burr of the National Security Archive in the chat. Burr asked: “What does modernization mean as it applies to the work of OH?”

Goings answered that the modernization involves processes that date back, in some cases, to the founding of the FRUS series in 1861. Our work has been paper based. We have used paper for research, paper to annotate and compile, and paper to print the volumes. What we want to do now is to find a way to gain intellectual control over the hundreds of thousands of pieces of paper that we work with. In that vein, we are digitizing them so that we can have a taxonomy and ontology and that we can track decisions about declassifications and redactions, and that all of this information can be at our fingertips. That is main goal of OH modernization but it will also make our products more discoverable across the Department, and our colleagues working on foreign policy can access the historical context on their networks. Ultimately it is about bringing us from the Lincoln administration up to at least the end of the 20th century.

Polaschik interjected that Goings was being modest and that we are going beyond the end of the 20th century and doing some pretty exciting stuff. Polaschik thanked Goings for her leadership with all of that.

Leon asked about the budget and resources for hiring. Polaschik responded that there are currently a lot of uncertainties regarding the federal budget. The leadership of the Department asked each component to assess needs and hopefully we will begin to open the aperture again. Everything that had been in train is continuing but we are still seeing moving around with the FY2024 budget. Polaschik also noted that the reorganization at FSI may offer some wiggle room with civil service positions for OH and described her answer as “squishy” but a fair assessment of the whole lay of the land.

Goings noted the four incoming OH employees that are already in the pipeline and the three additional vacancies.

There was a question from the online chat about applying a social network analytics framework to review and map historical actors, foreign and domestic engagements, and the events that shaped our understanding of the foreign relations of the United States. Goings offered to continue that discussion after the meeting.

Remarks from the Executive Secretary

Howard announced that it was a bittersweet moment because the office was losing two people, one a long-term member of the Advisory Committee and the other Kristin Ahlberg who served 21 years here. Howard read statements of appreciation into the record for Dr. Lentz-Smith and Dr. Kristin Ahlberg:

“The Office of the Historian would like to express its deep appreciation to Adriane Lentz-Smith for her five years of service to this Committee. We are particularly grateful for her participation on a roundtable at the 2021 meeting of the Organization of American Historians, commemorating the 160th anniversary of the FRUS series, as well as her participation in a Department roundtable to provide historical context and perspective in policy making. We wholeheartedly thank Dr. Lentz-Smith for her efforts and dedication on behalf of the Office of the Historian and the Foreign Relations series.

We are deeply grateful for Dr. Ahlberg’s 21 years of dedicated service at the Office of the Historian. Through her work on more than 80 Foreign Relations of the United States volumes, she significantly advanced U.S. Government openness, transparency, and accountability. As an editor, compiler, and Assistant General Editor, her unparalleled attention to detail, exceptional research skills, and historical objectivity have played a key role in making FRUS thorough, accurate, and reliable.” In addition, Dr. Ahlberg’s contributions to policy deliberations have enabled Department officials to situate current challenges within a broader historical context, while her public outreach has promoted appreciation of how U.S. foreign policy influenced the course of the 20th century, fostered a more informed and engaged citizenry, and increased diversity and inclusion in professional historical organizations.

“We thank Dr. Ahlberg for her many contributions and their lasting impact on the Foreign Relations series, the Department, and the broader foreign policy community.”

Next, Howard welcomed Tristan Williams to the office and gave an update about the OH presence at the International Conference of Editors of Diplomatic Documents. The group meets biannually to discuss the latest methodologies and research practices as it relates to those countries who have, like us, a historical documentary series based on the foreign policy of their country. Howard noted the contributions of Historian Elizabeth Charles to a joint compilation published on the theme of the end of the Cold War. Howard also thanked Historian Katie David for presenting a paper about African American activists who were involved the H.W. Bush administration’s policy formulation about South African apartheid. Howard also thanked Rasmussen for delivering a paper of the modernization process of FRUS. Finally, Howard thanked Digital History Advisor Joseph Wicentowski for presenting a paper about the use of artificial intelligence and the work of the office. Howard concluded by noting that he was looking forward to attending the next meeting, which will be in Switzerland.

Remarks from the General Editor

Rasmussen opened her remarks by thanking Lentz-Smith for her service on the committee and praising Lentz-Smith’s curiosity, openness to new ideas, excellent humor, and unfailing ability to ask just the right question at just the right time and get us to the heart of an issue. Rasmussen stated: “I truly appreciate your unflagging support for FRUS and the office and offer you many heartfelt thanks for your service.”

Rasmussen also thanked Ahlberg, noting that it’s not possible to sum up Ahlberg’s twenty years of work on FRUS in the short time that she had today. Instead, I’ll confine my remarks to highlighting Ahlberg’s work as Assistant General Editor of the Foreign Relations series. Rasmussen addressed Ahlberg: “since you became the Assistant General Editor in 2011, you have facilitated FRUS interagency research, mentored and trained multiple compilers, served as an integral member of the OH management team, worked on Department of State records issues, and, of course, conducted legendary reviews of some 45 FRUS volumes. Moreover, you have offered me honest opinions, wise counsel, and steadfast support since I became General Editor in 2019 (and before then, too!), for which I am deeply grateful. This job would have been exponentially harder without you. And, somehow, through it all, you managed to find time to continue compiling FRUS volumes and maintain your robust engagement with the academic community through both scholarship and service in multiple professional organizations. You have definitely left your mark on the series by working hard every day to make sure that every volume (actually, every document and every footnote!) meets the standard of being thorough, accurate, and reliable. For that, as well as a host of other things, I thank you, Kristin.”

Rasmussen agreed with Howard that the biennial meeting of the International Conference of Editors of Diplomatic Documents was a great success. With representatives from more than 20 countries, and excellent organization by the Italian hosts, the conference enabled us to learn more about the work of similar documentary and official history programs around the world and compare notes on the challenges and opportunities that we face. Rasmussen seconded Adam’s thanks to Elizabeth Charles for her work on the ICEDD documentary collection and Katie and Joe for their illuminating presentations.

Rasmussen concluded her remarks with an update on FRUS production. She expressed delight that as of early May, we are now able to conduct FRUS research in the classified George H.W. Bush records transferred from the Presidential Library in College Station to the National Declassification Center at NARA II. Three FRUS historians either are or will soon be researching these records; they join three other FRUS historians who are or will soon be conducting research in the George W. Bush presidential records that were already at the NDC. Many thanks to Bill Fischer, Don McIlwain, Jennifer Dryer, Ryan Bass, and Stephanie Coon for their support in getting us into the NDC to research these crucial records. In addition, one FRUS historian visited the Ronald Reagan Library in California to research Western Europe; as before, I’d like to thank Cate Sewell at the Reagan Library for facilitating this visit.

Rasmussen added that, since the last HAC meeting in March, one more FRUS volume was submitted for technical editing and declassification coordination review: Iran; Iraq 1980–1985. Congratulations to Historian Chris Morrison, who researched and compiled this volume, which documents the U.S. approach to the war that broke out between those two countries in 1980, as well as the United States’ bilateral relationship with each of them. With the submission to declassification and editing of three Reagan volumes this year—Iran; Iraq, 1985–1988, by Historian Charles Hawley in February; Central America, 1985–1988, by Historian Seth Rotramel in March; and Iran; Iraq, 1980–1985, by Morrison in May—we are now five volumes away from finishing researching and compiling the Reagan subseries.

Goldgeier asked regarding the ICEDD if there are comparable groups like the Historical Advisory Committee for other countries, adding that it would be nice to attend the next conference in Switzerland. Howard responded, noting that in his conversations with participants he had not heard of similar oversight groups. Rasmussen added that some of the member countries have a different model of production wherein outside contractors assist with the research and compilation. She quipped that Goldgeier might investigate that option.

Hoganson commented that that Rasmussen’s last comment made her curious about the takeaways for OH from these ICEDD meetings in terms of practices or possibilities for the work of the Office. Rasmussen responded, noting that it was her first time attending and that it was interesting to hear about the many different ways in which people put these collections together. She mentioned the Israeli program that is actually housed in their archives, which has challenges but also opportunities regarding declassification coordination. Rasmussen also noted the presentations on oral histories, AI, and the Canadian presentation on current practices.

Howard added that OH and FRUS are the gold standard in terms of resources and production and described a lot of envy about OH’s direct connection to the Department in comparison to the other types of public private partnerships where it’s more being done a shoestring budget. Howard also noted the Swiss program’s efforts to innovate with the use of AI technology.

Remarks from the Director of Declassification, Publishing, and Digital Initiatives

Powers began his report by lauding the arrival in the office of Historian Tristan Williams. Williams began in the Office of the Historian on May 20 after transferring from DoD’s Historical Office in the Office of the Secretary of Defense. She has an M.A. in U.S. History from Marshall University and will receive her PhD in American History from the University of West Virginia later this year. Her dissertation is titled: The State in the Middle: Civil Defense in Cold War West Virginia. Powers is very excited and happy to have her as a member of the Declassification Coordination team. Powers added that two new team members will be joining the Division before the September meeting, a declassification researcher and an editor.

Next Powers highlighted four themes:

First: The Office continues to emphasize professional training and outreach. In the past quarter, the staff has attended and participated in presentations on how the Department and the Department of Defense are testing and piloting Artificial Intelligence and Machine Learning technologies for declassification and attended several FSI classes on AI and Industry-sponsored conferences on AI. Work continues on an internal test project on using technology to improve indexing. The Division participated in the annual meetings of the National Council on Public History and the Society for History in the Federal Government. Members of the Division also attended the Defense Intelligence Agency’s INFOCOM conference where Powers spoke to Department of Defense and Intelligence Community Information Management professionals about FRUS’s importance to our national security and how FRUS aids policymakers. Powers also noted the International Conference of Editors of Diplomatic Documents where Joe Wicentowski spoke about his test project to use Artificial Intelligence to transcribe the contents of the Department Consular Cards, over 6,000 handwritten index cards listing all officials who worked at U.S. diplomatic and consular posts from 1789–1960. Powers described this as an important project that offers promise for the future. Later this summer, Powers anticipates that the Division will receive equity recognition briefings from the Department of Defense and the CIA, and OH will receive in-depth training on the Department of State’s classification and declassification guides. Powers described these as essential projects to help us build up our professional competencies and will allow us to improve our reviews and work.

Second: Powers described the effort to modernize our processes and procedures. Publishing FRUS is complex, with many moving parts often going on simultaneously. We are being deliberate and conducting this effort at the same time we are also addressing our backlog, coordinating declassification review of records, editing manuscripts, and improving our website. On the front end, our Declassification Coordination Team is dividing volumes into discrete chapters where possible to aid agencies in completing their reviews within the statutory timeline. Our editing team is streamlining their processes by editing at the chapter-level before those records are sent to agencies for declassification coordination. On the back end for legacy volumes, we are breaking them up into tranches during all phases of the production process so we can publish sooner.

Third: Powers outlined efforts to build and strengthen stakeholder communications. These communications and relationships are important. We share common objectives and are all working diligently towards the same goal. We held quarterly meetings with the Department of Defense and the CIA and have had ongoing productive telephone conversations with both agencies. They are helpful and permit our office and the relevant agencies to set priorities that are realistic, manageable, and understood.

Powers continued with this fourth and final theme: Resources across government are very tight while priorities are (too) many. OH competes with FOIA, FOIA Litigation, other litigation, special declassification reviews, mandatory Declassification Reviews, and staff shortages at other agencies. Processes are antiquated, further impacting effectiveness and efficiency. Powers suggested that the best approach is to communicate with other agencies clearly and work toward shared goals that are manageable.

Powers concluded his remarks by describing a busy quarter in the office. We are on track to publish two more volumes this year. We are also making great progress on two additional full volumes and we are testing new processes for long backlogged volumes and also a new way for new volumes that are just entering declassification to proceed. With that he thinks we are going to be able to publish four additional chapters next year. We will also have some suggestions for ongoing OH AI initiatives and we are working hard to stay on target with the 120-day statutory requirements by making sure the agencies have the priorities that we need for them to focus on.

Goldgeier suggested that, due to time limitations, the meeting proceed to the next presentation on the agenda rather than pausing for questions.

Report from the Office of Information Programs and Services

Mallory Rogoff, Agency Records Officer and Division Chief of the Records and Archives Management Division in the Office of Information, Programs, and Services (IPS) in the Department of State provided an overview of the permanent records transfers to the National Archives over the last two years.

Rogoff described the June 30, 2024, deadline posed by a National Archives and Office of Management and Budget mandate to transition to electronic records. The Department of State calculated that scanning all of its permanent paper records would cost around thirty million dollars (which is an incredible amount of money for something that would be considered a records management effort) and so departmental leadership sought mitigation solutions. One source of relief has been to accelerate the transfer of paper records in advance of the deadline. Rogoff noted that the Department has massively accelerated the rate of records transfer over the last two years. To date, IPS has over four thousand cubic feet of permanent paper records approved for transfer. Some boxes have already been physically transferred and many others are approved for future transfer even if it happens after the passing of the June 30 deadline.

Rogoff described the diversity of subjects covered in the records noting domestic and overseas departmental records, Rosalynn Carter condolence books, records from posts around 9/11, the Challenger explosion, treaty negotiation files from the U.S. Arms Control and Disarmament Agency, and records from the Bureau of Intelligence and Research. There are also non-textual records in this collection: just over 42 cubic feet of cartographic records, motion pictures, and photographs, including, among other subjects, Israel, Egypt, peace talks, disengagement and demarcation lines. There are also records from the U.S. Information Agency, now defunct, that include many expositions and exhibitions on issues like science and technology, art, education, and economics.

Rogoff underscored the amount of effort it took to undertake this rapid increase in records transfers. Within the four thousand cubic feet of records there are over 1,100 individual collections, each one, requiring its own process to be transferred. There is a whole set of paperwork that goes with each and every collection that goes between IPS and NARA and there is often adjudication back and forth. Within these records there are varying degrees of classification, so everything must be handled appropriately. Rogoff described this as a robust administrative process.

Rogoff concluded by again describing the compromise struck between IPS and NARA that allows future transfer of records past the June 30 deadline as long as the transfer request package has been fully approved. Rogoff said that IPS was extremely pleased to get these materials over to NARA. In the past, IPS had been transferring roughly 500 cubic feet of records a year to NARA. This new effort entailed the transfer in two years of over 4,000 cubic feet and it took a lot of work and tremendous collaboration with NARA. Rogoff expressed gratitude for NARA’s attention and assistance.

Leon thanked Rogoff and her team for getting the many boxes at least in process to be sent over and asked about the materials that are left over and about the oldest materials that have yet to be transferred.

Rogoff responded that the remaining records are from all over the Department. They are still accepting paper records and will need to digitize them going forward. IPS is also working on an exception request, which is allowed within the current agreement. It is unclear whether IPS will need to digitize everything. Rogoff was unsure about the oldest lot of materials but noted a concerted effort to process and transfer records as they become eligible to retire.

Naftali asked about the state of the finding aids, or at least the inventories, for these records. Rogoff replied that every collection has an extremely detailed manifest that inventories the originating unit, which is the Bureau or post it came from, the classification information, and a robust records or folder title. Researchers will be able to see a detailed breakdown of what is contained not just in the boxes but also in individual folders within the boxes.

Langbart announced that he needed to respond to Rogoff’s description of the records’ manifests. The manifests, he stated, do not list everything that’s in every office. The manifest lists the office, a series title and the folder lists, nothing more. To learn anything about what’s in the folders, a researcher or somebody from the Archives has to look.

Leon asked a question she thought that McGovern would ask: Given the mandate regarding electronic records what efforts has IPS undertaken to educate the members of the Department about keeping digital records digital?

Rogoff answered that there has been quite a bit of socializing going on within the Department about the importance of keeping electronic records in digital format rather than printing them out in hard paper copy. There is still a preference by some for paper. IPS is also working to distinguish between permanent records and extra paper copies that might be floating around. The Department workforce is improving on this and we have been very engaged in education about the need to produce less paper records.

Goldgeier concluded the open session of the meeting by thanking presenters and attendees.

Closed Session, June 10

The CIA and the Foreign Relations Series

Howard opened the session, introducing Powers. Powers then introduced CIA Information Review Managers Mary H. and Michelle M. (Mary’s supervisor). Powers and the CIA officials then described the processes that the CIA and OH have recently put in place to improve and expedite the declassification process. Powers and the CIA officials emphasized the progress that these changes have produced in safely and quickly declassifying documents and facilitating the publication of the Foreign Relations series. The CIA team tasked with reviewing the FRUS has made these strides despite severe constraints on their resources, namely a lack of dedicated reviewers. The CIA officials and Powers shared their appreciation for the effective communication and partnership between OH and the CIA. The HAC expressed similar gratification for the reported progress in declassification. OH and the CIA are continuing to work together on the new test procedures that have been going well. The HAC also reiterated interest in meeting the historical advisory panel for the CIA once it is assembled and offered to advocate for additional resources to be dedicated to the CIA’s work of reviewing FRUS.

Report from the National Declassification Center

Goldgeier called the session to order at 2:05 p.m. and welcomed Don McIlwain of the National Declassification Center (NDC) to give his presentation.

McIlwain began his presentation by adding his thanks to Kristin Ahlberg for her time at OH (also jokingly added thanks for Kristin’s return of an old Nixon Project badge) and stated that he will miss her when she retires. Speaking for NDC Director Bill Fischer, he shared some updates. First, he stated he had no further information regarding the timetable for the moves of classified materials for the remaining “unconsolidated” Presidential Libraries (Nixon, Reagan, and Clinton) and noted that continuing holdups were due to a mixture of budgeting and logistics coordination. Second, he updated the HAC on the status of 25-Year Systematic Review projects: the completion of review of the Walt Rostow papers at LBJ; the continuing review by media specialists of recordings collection at LBJ; at Eisenhower, the imminent completion of all open MDRs pertaining to the review of the Lauris Norstad papers as well as other older NATO-related records; and the ongoing interagency review of old security investigations files.

McIlwain then turned to the Department of State’s review of P and N reels, noting that Department reviewers had completed 85% of 1981 P reels, after which they would proceed to 1981 N reels. Other agencies are currently in the process of doing quality control/quality assurance reviews of 1980 reels, and these would be completed soon. After all reviews were completed, all 1980 and 1981 reels would be accessioned formally together.

McIlwain then discussed the status of reviews currently being undertaken at the NDC. He noted that his team was currently working on gaining intellectual control over the material from the Bush 43 and Bush 41 administrations. He also updated the HAC on his team’s work on processing open MDR and FOIA cases. He stated Stephanie Coon had asked stakeholders to prioritize their open cases as part of the NDC’s broader MDR “surge” to get open cases sent out to agencies and speed their processing and ultimate closure. Citing Bill Fischer’s read-ahead, McIlwain stated they were currently processing 391 open Federal FOIA cases, 322 Federal MDR cases, 768 Presidential Library FOIA cases (covering Ford, Bush 41, Bush 43, and the Obama administrations), and 12,500 Presidential Library MDR cases. He observed that the overall backlog of cases under process had grown with the consolidation of Presidential Library records.

McIlwain then turned to personnel issues. He stated that for FY2024, the NDC employed 73 FTEs across four programs divisions, including metrics and IT specialists. The NDC had also recently completed two new hires. He noted with regret that they were losing longtime declassification coordinator Jennifer Dryer who moved on to a different position. McIlwain expressed hope that approval for a backfill replacement would be forthcoming soon.

McIlwain discussed his recent exchanges with Rasmussen about OH research at the NDC and reported that these resulted in two new initiatives. First, in order to stretch OH researcher access beyond the allotted two days per week currently available for outside researchers, the NDC was enacting “Copy Wednesdays.” On Wednesdays, researchers would not be able to request new box pulls from NDC staff, but would be allowed to come in to make copies from boxes already pulled. Renée Goings interjected to thank him for helping arrange this accommodation. McIlwain reiterated NDC’s enthusiasm for having FRUS researchers, but lamented the limited availability of physical work space. The second initiative, he continued, was the regular series of briefings OH historians will be giving to NDC staff on the organization and foreign policy priorities of the Bush 41 administration. These briefings, which will begin on June 26 with presentations by Seth Rotramel, Louise Woodroofe, and Danny Rubin, will be designed to assist staff members as they begin to process Bush 41 materials. McIlwain highlighted the broader value of exchanges between OH and NDC staffs and the mutual learning opportunities that these presented. Rasmussen stated that the briefing initiative grew out of Danny Rubin’s experience working with staff to identify Bush 43 materials for subseries planning. McIlwain noted the briefing model’s future value as FRUS and NDC begin work on subsequent administrations.

McIlwain concluded his presentation by reiterating that the current challenges facing the NDC stemmed from shortages of physical space, not shortage of staff. Nevertheless, he is hopeful that conversations within NARA will alleviate this issue. He then invited questions.

Sharon Leon asked about the status of the 15 new positions that McIlwain previously indicated the NDC had been allocated. Were the two new hires he discussed part of that? McIlwain responded that the two new hires were backfill hires and that the 15 positions had been filled.

Goldgeier thanked McIlwain for his presentation and asked if the Nixon, Reagan, and Clinton Libraries were currently processing FOIA and MDR cases. McIlwain responded that the NDC were currently sending returns to the Libraries with the assumption they were still processing cases, pending the future consolidation of records. To Naftali’s follow-up on this, Woodroofe observed that Clinton Library staff appeared to be processing as usual when she recently visited.

Citing her own experiences with open MDR requests, Sarah Snyder asked about the procedures for closing MDR requests. McIlwain responded that NARA will contact requestors to confirm their continued interest in their requests, but following statutory 60-day response time the NDC would close unconfirmed open cases. He added that closure would not happen immediately at 60-day mark; requestors responding close to end of 60-day period would still be accommodated.

Kristin Hoganson asked about the prospects for reducing the current declassification backlog and the production of better finding aids for collections the NDC was processing. McIlwain responded by noting that records from the Obama administration forward are being processed entirely by the NDC; processing of earlier administrations is contingent upon a back-and-forth with individual Presidential Libraries. Backed by Langbart, McIlwain noted that “finding aids” that accompany materials—Presidential or Federal—are manifests that provide basic information (retiring office, collection description, and folder titles). Agencies retiring records were required to provide such information, but NARA had to continually adapt to different ways the agencies transferred records. Langbart noted that no archival processing occurred until NDC processing complete. Hoganson noted that the limited information might make it more difficult to locate specific records or collections. Several OH staff, including Rasmussen and Nickles, chimed in by stating that FRUS researchers are familiar with working in records that are similarly inventoried. Moreover, they are familiar with the different processing procedures adopted by different Presidential Libraries. These presented challenges for FRUS research, but are not unfamiliar.

Naftali asked about how FOIA cases pertaining to Bush 43 records were processed. McIlwain responded that the materials were databased and that NDC consulted with Library archivists in Dallas. At times, NARA has also needed to follow-up with requestors to narrow or refine requests.

Goldgeier asked about the NDC’s space constraints. McIlwain responded that the challenge was converting the appropriate amount of space to meet the appropriate level of security/storage needs. He reiterated hopes that progress in identifying and converting space could be made by September. Goldgeier expressed concern that FRUS researchers had adequate space to complete work in timely fashion. Snyder asked if “Copy Wednesday” was possible, why not Mondays or Fridays? McIlwain noted that NDC needed space to do its own processing on those days. Snyder asked if FRUS-dedicated space could be found. McIlwain responded that there was still the need for NARA staff to be present with researchers.

Citing the HAC’s need to draft its annual report, Deborah Pearlstein asked about the state of processing of more recent Presidential records. McIlwain responded that NDC was currently getting a handle on Obama records and producing folder inventories. Goldgeier followed up by observing that in addition to the upcoming annual report, the HAC also had a meeting scheduled with Archivist of the United States Dr. Colleen Shogan in September. He invited input from the NDC in preparing for both, particularly with regard to the perceived constraints that had been discussed, but also the possibilities for ameliorating them. McIlwain welcomed this and he repeated his hope that more storage and working space could be created.

Goldgeier concluded the session at 3:07 p.m.

Closed Session, June 11

Report from the George W. Bush Subseries Working Group

The General Editor and members of the George W. Bush plan working group briefed the Committee and the Office on the scope of the Bush FRUS plan, and the progress that the group has made in identifying key volumes for the subseries.