The CIA Wants To Delete Old Email; Critics Say 'Not So Fast' The CIA plan calls for deleting the email of almost all employees after they leave the agency. But opponents say this would erase too many important documents. The example they cite: Edward Snowden.

The CIA Wants To Delete Old Email; Critics Say 'Not So Fast'

  • Download
  • <iframe src="" width="100%" height="290" frameborder="0" scrolling="no" title="NPR embedded audio player">
  • Transcript


It's a question most of us have wrestled with - what emails should we save and what should be trashed? That's also a question the CIA is trying to answer. It's come up with a plan to destroy the emails of nearly all of its employees and contractors within three years of them leaving the agency. Critics say the plan would result in the loss of important CIA records. NPR's David Welna says the plan was first discovered in some fine print.

DAVID WELNA, BYLINE: It was a routine notice in a September issue of the Federal Register, a listing of federal agencies proposing new schedules to the National Archives for the destruction of email considered not worth saving.

STEVEN AFTERGOOD: And when I looked at it closely, I realized it was actually pretty important.

WELNA: That's Steven Aftergood. He directs the Federation of American Scientists' Project on Government Secrecy. What caught Aftergood's eye was one of the agencies listed - the CIA. Aftergood, whose long criticized the CIA's aversion to public scrutiny, then found that the National Archives in August had quietly given the agency a kind of thumbs up.

AFTERGOOD: The Archive had done a preliminary assessment of the CIA proposal and they decided that it tentatively looked OK, and they were ready to move forward on it.

WELNA: This is all part of the National Archives push to get every federal agency, by the end of 2016, to winnow out important email, store it electronically and discard the rest. Most agencies plan to hold onto everyone's email for seven years. The CIA has a different plan. It would destroy the email of virtually every employee and contractor within three years of them leaving the agency. The only exceptions would be the CIA's 22 top officials. That, Aftergood says, simply won't do.

AFTERGOOD: The 22 senior officials, whose emails have been selected for preservation, are really at the top of a tall pyramid. And there are many second and third and fourth tier officials who are doing tremendously important and consequential work whose emails would, in many cases, just be destroyed.

WELNA: Here's one example - Edward Snowden, who, before he leaked thousands of documents as an NSA contractor, had worked for the CIA years earlier. His old emails would have been destroyed under the CIA's proposed policy. Douglas Cox is a law professor at City University of New York.

DOUGLAS COX: The whole purpose of requiring the retention of records for a more extended period of time is an acknowledgement that the significance of records aren't always immediately apparent, and the case of Snowden would be a perfect example of that.

WELNA: Another example, says the Federation of American Scientists' Aftergood, is the CIA's secret destruction, nine years ago, of videotapes recording the waterboarding of suspected terrorists.

AFTERGOOD: They didn't ask permission. They just went ahead and eliminated these records. They will never be retrieved. They will never be reconstructed.

WELNA: The CIA, for its part, stands by its new plan for managing email. In a written statement, a CIA spokesperson asserted the agency would, quote, "move to a standard of preservation that is greater than the National Archives's requirements, well above current CIA policy." To see if that's so, I went to the Archives to speak with the man who oversees records management for all federal agencies.

PAUL WESTER: I am Paul Wester, the chief records officer for the U.S. government.

WELNA: Wester says, by proposing to keep only the email of its top officials, the CIA is in fact following a system suggested by the National Archives for all federal agencies. But he concedes there may be better ways for the CIA to retain key records, which is why the Archives is open to public comments on the CIA's proposal through the end of this week.

WESTER: The feedback that we're getting from the public interest process has been very illuminating on different positions that we think we need to maybe rethink, and ask more questions of the CIA.

WELNA: This week, top members of the Senate Intelligence Committee, which oversees the CIA, also weighed in. Chairwoman Diane Feinstein and ranking member Saxby Chambliss warned the National Archives the CIA's proposal could allow destruction of crucial documentary evidence and should not be approved. David Welna, NPR News, Washington.

Copyright © 2014 NPR. All rights reserved. Visit our website terms of use and permissions pages at for further information.

NPR transcripts are created on a rush deadline by an NPR contractor. This text may not be in its final form and may be updated or revised in the future. Accuracy and availability may vary. The authoritative record of NPR’s programming is the audio record.