You are on page 1of 22


citizens for responsibility

and ethics in washington
June 24, 2011
By Email: and First-Class Mail
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
Attn: FOIA Officer
Public Reference Facility (OF A56)
1315 East West Highway (SSMC3)
Room 10730
Silver Spring, Maryland 20910
Re: Freedom of Information Act Request
Dear FOIA Officer:
Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington ("CREW") makes this request for
records, regardless of format, medium, or physical characteristics, and including electronic
records and information, audiotapes, videotapes and photographs, pursuant to the Freedom of
Information Act ("FOIA"), 5 U.S.C. 552, et seq., and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration ("NOAA") regulations, 15 C.F.R. 4.
CREW seeks records related to NOAA' s decision to use Google Apps for Government
for the Administration' s email. See J. Nicholas Hoover, From Ocean to Cloud: NOAA Goes
Google Apps, InformationWeek (June 9, 2011), (Attached as Exhibit
A). As described more specifically below, CREW seeks records related to considerations NOAA
has made, and steps NOAA has taken, or plans to take, to address records management issues in
a cloud computing environment.
Specifically, CREW seeks records related to the following categories:
1. All records reflecting NOAA' s records management policies and data governance
practices, and the development of these policies and practices, for NOAA' s future cloud
computing email system.
2. All records indicating steps NOAA has taken or plans to take to address record keeping
requirements in a cloud computing environment including, but not limited to, any
considerations given to NARA' s Bulletin 2010-05, Guidance on Managing Records in
Cloud Computing Environments (Sept. 8, 2010)
mgmt/bulletins/2010/2010-05.html (Attached as Exhibit B).
1400 Eye Street, N.W., Suite 450, Washington, D.C. 20005 I 202.408.5565 phone I 202.588.5020 fax I
FOIA Officer
June 24, 2011
Page 2
3. All records indicating the attendees, or prospective attendees, and their titles of all NOAA
meetings held, or scheduled to be held, addressing the use and development of cloud
computing systems.
4. All records showing the development of instructions defining which copy of NOAA
records will be declared as the agency's record copy in a cloud computing environment,
as set forth in NARA Bulletin 2010-05 question 7, response 2.
5. All records related to the development of instructions of how to determine whether
federal records in a cloud environment are covered under an existing records retention
schedule, as set forth in NARA Bulletin 2010-05 question 7, response 3.
6. All records related to the development of instructions of how records will be captured,
managed, retained, made available to authorized users, and retention periods applied for
cloud computing systems as set forth in NARA Bulletin 2010-05 question 7, response 4.
7. All records related to the development of instructions on conducting a records analysis,
developing and submitting records retention schedules to NARA for unscheduled records
in a cloud environment, including instructions about scheduling system documentation,
metadata, and related records, as set forth in NARA Bulletin 2010-05 question 7,
response 5.
8. All records related to the development of instructions on periodically testing transfers of
federal records to other environments, including agency servers, to ensure the records
remain portable, as set forth in NARA Bulletin 2010-05 question 7, response 6.
9. All records related to the development of instructions of how data will be migrated to
new formats and operating systems in a cloud computing environment so that records are
readable throughout their entire life cycle, as set forth in NARA Bulletin 2010-05
question 7, response 7.
10. All portions of contracts between Google, Earth Resources Technologies (ERT) Inc.,
Unisys, or Tempus Nova and NOAA that show language reflecting record management
considerations for NOAA's use of Google Apps for Government, including, but not
limited to, language set forth in the answer to question 8 in NARA Bulletin 2010-05.
11. All records reflecting communications between Google, Microsoft, Earth Resources
Technologies (ERT) Inc., Unisys, or Tempus Nova and NOAA regarding record
management and compliance with records management laws in a cloud computing
FOIA Officer
June 24, 2011
Page 3
12. All records reflecting record keeping considerations regarding NOAA's request for
proposal ("RFP") in January 2011 referenced in JnformationWeek's June 9, 2011 article
From Ocean to Cloud: NOAA Goes Google Apps. See Hoover, supra.
13. All records reflecting records management considerations for NOAA's pilot cloud
computing projects implemented in Spring 2011. See Hoover, supra.
14. All portions of contracts between Google, Earth Resources Technologies (ERT) Inc.,
Unisys, or Tempus Nova and NOAA that show language reflecting record management
considerations for NOAA pilot cloud computing projects implemented in Spring 2011.
See Hoover, supra.
Please search for responsive records regardless of format, medium, or physical
characteristics. Where possible, please produce records electronically, in PDF or TIF format on a
CD-ROM. We seek records of any kind, including electronic records, audiotapes, videotapes,
and photographs. Our request includes any letters, emails, facsimiles, telephone messages, voice
mail messages, and transcripts, notes, or minutes of any meetings, telephone conversations, or
discussions. Our request also includes any attachments to these records.
For any email, please produce metadata and/or headers that show the email address of the
sender and any recipient in addition to their display name, the names and email addresses of any
"bee:" recipients, and any data regarding the time and date the email was sent, received, and/or
If it is your position that any portion of the requested records is exempt from disclosure,
CREW requests that you provide it with an index of those documents as required under Vaughn
v. Rosen, 484 F.2d 820 (D.C. Cir. 1973), cert. denied, 415 U.S. 977 (1972). As you are aware, a
Vaughn index must describe each document claimed as exempt with sufficient specificity "to
permit a reasoned judgment as to whether the material is actually exempt under FOIA."
Founding Church of Scientology v. Bell, 603 F.2d 945,949 (D.C. Cir. 1979). Moreover, the
Vaughn index must "describe each document or portion thereof withheld, and for each
withholding it must discuss the consequences of supplying the sought-after information." King v.
US. Dep 't of Justice, 830 F.2d 210,223-24 (D.C. Cir. 1987) (emphasis added). Further, "the
withholding agency must supply 'a relatively detailed justification, specifically identifying the
reasons why a particular exemption is relevant and correlating those claims with the particular
part of a withheld document to which they apply."' Id at 224 (citing Mead Data Central v. US.
Dep 't of the Air Force, 566 F.2d 242,251 (D.C. Cir. 1977)).
In the event some portions of the requested records are properly exempt from disclosure,
please disclose any reasonably segregable non-exempt portions of the requested records. See 5
U.S.C. 552(b ). If it is your position that a document contains non-exempt segments, but that
FOIA Officer
June 24, 2011
Page 4
those non-exempt segments are so dispersed throughout the document as to make segregation
impossible, please state what portion of the document is non-exempt, and how the material is
dispersed throughout the document. Mead Data Central, 566 F.2d at 261. Claims of
nonsegregability must be made with the same degree of detail as required for claims of
exemptions in a Vaughn index. If a request is denied in whole, please state specifically that it is
not reasonable to segregate portions of the record for release.
Finally, CREW welcomes the opportunity to discuss with you whether and to what extent
this request can be narrowed or modified to better enable your office to process it within the
FOIA's deadlines. Anne Weismann, the CREW attorney handling this matter, can be reached at
(202) 408-5565 or
Fee Waiver Request
In accordance with 5 U.S.C. 552(a)(4)(A)(iii) and NOAA regulations, 15 C.P.R.
4.11 (k), CREW requests a waiver of fees associated with processing this request for records.
The subject of this request concerns the operations of the federal government and expenditures,
and the disclosures will likely contribute to a better understanding of relevant government
procedures by CREW and the general public in a significant way. Moreover, the request
primarily and fundamentally is for non-commercial purposes. 5 U.S.C. 552(a)(4)(A)(iii). See,
e.g., McClellan Ecological v. Carlucci, 835 F.2d 1282, 1285 (9th Cir. 1987).
These records are likely to contribute to greater public awareness about how NOAA plans
to fulfill its records management requirements in a cloud computing environment. "Cloud
computing is a technology that allows users to access and use shared data and computing services
via the Internet or a Virtual Private Network." See NARA Bulletin 2010-05, supra. In
December 2010, the Office of Management and Budget ("OMB") announced a plan to overhaul
federal information technology and asked federal agencies and departments to identify three
services they could move to a cloud environment by May 2012. See Joseph Marks, Agencies
identify 78 services for cloud transition, Nextgov (May 26, 2011), 20110526 1117.php (Attached as Exhibit C). As a result
of this initiative, several federal agencies and departments have announced plans to or have
already moved their email systems to a cloud. See e.g., Michael S. Rosenwald, Federal
government loosens its grip on the Backberry, The Washington Post, May 30, 2011 (Attached as
Exhibit D). In June 2011, NOAA announced that it plans to use Google Apps for Government
for its cloud email and collaboration services. See Hoover, supra. NARA has recognized there
are records management challenges associated with cloud computing; at least one agency that
uses cloud computing services already has acknowledged records management requirements
were not addressed with its cloud computing system. See NARA Bulletin 2010-05, supra.
FOIA Officer
June 24, 2011
Page 5
CREW is a non-profit corporation, organized under section 501 ( c )(3) of the Internal
Revenue Code. CREW is committed to protecting the public's right to be aware of the activities
of government officials and to ensuring the integrity of those officials. CREW uses a
combination of research, litigation, and advocacy to advance its mission. The release of
information garnered through this request is not in CREW's financial interest. CREW will
analyze the information responsive to this request, and will share its analysis with the public,
either through memoranda, reports, or press releases. In addition, CREW will disseminate any
documents it acquires from this request to the public through its website,, which also includes links to thousands of pages of documents CREW
acquired through its multiple FOIA requests as well as documents related to CREW's litigation
and agency complaints, and through
Under these circumstances, CREW satisfies fully the criteria for a fee waiver.
News Media Fee Waiver Request
CREW also asks that it not be charged search or review fees for this request because
CREW qualifies as a "representative of the news media" pursuant to the FOIA and NOAA
regulations, 15 C.F.R. 4.11(d)(1). InNat'l Sec. Archive v. US. Dep't of Defense, 880 F.2d
13 81, 1386 (D.C. Cir. 1989), the Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit found the
National Security Archive was a representative of the news media under the FOIA, relying on the
FOIA's legislative history, which indicates the phrase "representative of the news media" is to be
interpreted broadly; "it is critical that the phrase 'representative of the news media' be broadly
interpreted if the act is to work as expected .... In fact, any person or organization which
regularly publishes or disseminates information to the public ... should qualify for waivers as a
'representative of the news media."' 132 Cong. Rec. S14298 (daily ed. Sept. 30, 1986) (emphasis
added), cited in id.
CREW routinely and systematically disseminates information to the public in several
ways. First, CREW maintains a frequently visited website,, that
received 36,383 page visits in May 2011. The website reports the latest developments and
contains in-depth information about a variety of activities of government agencies and officials.
In addition, since April14, 2010, when CREW began postings its documents on, there have been 930,800 visits to its documents.
Second, since May 2007, CREW has published an online newsletter, CREWCuts, that
currently has 15,632 subscribers. CREWCuts provides subscribers with regular updates
regarding CREW's activities and information the organization has received from government
entities. A complete archive of past CREW Cuts is available at
FOIA Officer
June 24, 2011
Page 6
Third, CREW publishes a blog, Citizens Bloggingfor Responsibility and Ethics in
Washington, that reports on and analyzes newsworthy develop!J.1ents regarding government ethics
and corruption. The blog, located at, also provides links
that direct readers to other news articles and commentary on these issues. CREW's blog had
5,951 hits in May 2011.
Finally, CREW has published numerous reports to educate the public about government
ethics and corruption. Examples include: CREW's Most Corrupt 2010: Unfinished Business;
Top 10 Ethics Scandals of2010; and FOIA at the Mid-term: Obstacles to Transparency Remain.
These and all other CREW reports are available at
Based on these extensive publication activities, CREW qualifies for a fee waiver as a
"representative of the news media" under the FOIA.
If you have any questions about this request or foresee any problems in releasing fully the
requested records, please contact me at (202) 408-5565. Also, if CREW's request for a fee
waiver is not granted in full, please contact our office immediately upon making such
determination. Please send the requested records to Anne L. Weismann, Citizens for
Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, 1400 Eye Street, N.W., Suite 450, Washington, D.C.
1\nne L. Weismann
Chief Counsel
Page 1 of2
In rm
From Ocean to Cloud: NOAA Goes Google Apps
The climate and weather agency joins a growing list of its federal government peers moving to
cloud-based email and collaboration.
By J. Nicholas Hoover, lnformationWeek
June 09, 2011
URL: http://www. informationweek. com/news/government/cloud-saas/230500 17 4
(click image for larger view)
Slideshow: Top 20 Government Cloud Service Providers
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration CIO Joe Klimavicz announced Thursday that NOAA plans to
migrate 25,000 mailboxes to Google Apps for Government by the end of2011, becoming the latest in a series of
federal agencies to tap into the public cloud for email and collaboration.
NOAA, which heads up federal research on climate. weather. oceanographv. and fisheries, will use the suite of
applications to help drive collaboration across the agency's widely distributed workforce. Employees will be able
to use not just Gmail, but also video chat, real-time document collaboration, and wider mobile email supp01i than
agency employees have currently.
AMEX launched a free dashboard to help customers manage social media.
Find out how this tool will help vou suceed (even ifvou aren't an AMEX customer).
In jumping into the cloud for email, NOAA joins a growing list of agencies that also includes the General
Services Administration, the Department of Agriculture, and the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory. Other
agencies, including the Department of Labor and the Department ofthe Interior, also are plotting cloud email
moves. NOAA's switch also is in line with the Obama administration's aggressive push for agencies to move
services to the cloud.
"Cloud computing has great value allowing us to ramp up quickly, avoid redundancy, and provide new services
and capabilities to large groups of customers," Klimavicz said in a statement. "This system will allow [personnel]
to share information and strengthen collaborative productivity."
NOAA released an RFP for cloud email and collaboration in January after determining that that email systems at
NOAA were too fragmented and past end-of-life. The agency carried out two pilot projects in the spring.
http:/ / 17 4 ?printer _friendl... 6/24/2011
Page 2 of2
"Every reason you've heard about to go into the cloud is a fact," Klimavicz said in a March interview with
Information Week Government. "It's faster, it's easier, the technology is mature, and security can be addressed. I
like the idea of reducing my commodity IT to a bill, and we'll be able to provide a better service at a reduced
cost." The agency estimates cloud email will cost 50% less than an on-premises deployment.
NOAA won't be getting Google Apps directly from Google, but instead via a three-year, $11.5 million contract
with a small government contractor, Earth Resources Technologies, who in tum will be working with Google,
Unisys, and Tempus Nova, which specializes in migrating companies from legacy email systems to Google Apps.
That's in line with other agencies like GSA that also are working with contractors.
Email isn't NOAA's first venture into hosted services. The agency uses hosted voice over IP from AT&T, a
hosted emergency notification system from Everbridge, and a hosted Web server farm. Klimavicz also looks
forward to a day when supercomputing--something NOAA does a lot of--can be carried out in the cloud. "High-
performance computing in the cloud is kind of the ultimate," he said. "Cloud storage and services are easy, but
actually computing without knowing what hardware it's running on isn't as easy."
In the new, all-digital issue of Information Week Government: More than half of federal agencies will use cloud
computing within 12 months, our new survey finds. Security, ROI, and management challenges await them.
Download it novv. (Free registration required.)
Copyright 2011 United Business Media LLC, All rights reserved. 6/24/2011
NARA Bulletin 2010-05
NARA Bulletin 2010-05
September 08, 2010
TO: Heads of Federal agencies
SUBJECT: Guidance on Managing Records in Cloud Computing Environments
EXPIRATION DATE: September 30, 2013
1. What is the purpose of this bulletin?
This bulletin addresses records management considerations in cloud computing environments and is a
formal articulation of NARA's view of agencies' records management responsibilities. As agencies are
increasingly evaluating, piloting, and adopting these technologies, they must comply with all Federal
records management laws, regulations, and policies.
2. How does this bulletin differ from "Frequently Asked Questions about Managing Federal
Records in Cloud Computing Environments"?
NARA issued an FAQ in February 2010 to provide agencies with a basic overview of cloud computing.
This bulletin expands on that discussion by including a more detailed definition, Federal agency
examples of cloud computing, records management guidelines, and contract language to consider
when procuring cloud computing services.
3. What is cloud computing?
Cloud computing is a technology that allows users to access and use shared data and computing
services via the Internet or a Virtual Private Network. It gives users access to resources without having
to build infrastructure to support these resources within their own environments or networks.
General interpretations of cloud computing include "renting" storage space on another organization's
servers or hosting a suite of services. Other interpretations of cloud computing reference particular
social media applications, cloud-based e-mail, and other types of Web applications. However, the
National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) has been designated to develop standards and
guidelines for the Federal cloud computing effort and to provide an authoritative definition.
NIST defines cloud computing as "a model for enabling convenient, on-demand network access to a
shared pool of configurable computing resources (e.g., networks, servers, storage, applications, and
services) that can be rapidly provisioned and released with minimal management effort or service
provider interaction." (NIST Definition of Cloud Computing, Version 15, 10-07-2009) NIST has stated
that the definition of Cloud Computing is evolving. The user should consult the most current definition
available from NIST and other resources.
NIST also identifies five essential characteristics of cloud computing:
On-demand self-service. A consumer can unilaterally provision computing capabilities, such
as server time and network storage, as needed automatically without requiring human interaction
with each service's provider.
Broad network access. Capabilities are available over the network and accessed through
standard mechanisms that promote use by heterogeneous thin or thick client platforms (e.g.,
mobile phones, laptops, and PDAs).
Resource pooling. The provider's computing resources are pooled to serve multiple
consumers using a multi-tenant model, with different physical and virtual resources dynamically
assigned and reassigned according to consumer demand. There is a sense of location
independence in that the customer generally has no control or knowledge over the exact location
of the provided resources but may be able to specify location at a higher level of abstraction (e.g.,
country, state, or datacenter). Examples of resources include storage, processing, memory,
network bandwidth, and virtual machines.
http:/ / 10/2010-05 .html
Page 1 of 5
NARA Bulletin 2010-05
Rapid elasticity. Capabilities can be rapidly and elastically provisioned, in some cases
automatically, to quickly scale out and rapidly released to quickly scale in. To the consumer, the
capabilities available for provisioning often appear to be unlimited and can be purchased in any
quantity at any time.
Measured SetVice. Cloud systems automatically control and optimize resource use by
leveraging a metering capability at some level of abstraction appropriate to the type of service
(e.g., storage, processing, bandwidth, and active user accounts). Resource usage can be
monitored, controlled, and reported providing transparency for both the provider and consumer of
the utilized service.
(NIST Definition of Cloud Computing, Version 15. 1 0-07-2009)
The terminology above is used in the IT community and by NIST to describe characteristics of
cloud computing.
4. What are cloud computing service and deployment models?
Cloud computing service models refer to how an agency can adopt cloud computing. Currently NIST
describes the models as follows:
Cloud Software as a SeTVice (SaaS). The capability provided to the consumer is to use the
provider's applications running on a cloud infrastructure. The applications are accessible from
various client devices through a thin client interface such as a web browser (e.g., web-based
email). The consumer does not manage or control the underlying cloud infrastructure including
network, servers, operating systems, storage, or even individual application capabilities, with the
possible exception of limited user-specific application configuration settings.
Cloud Platform as a SeTVice (PaaS). The capability provided to the consumer is to deploy onto
the cloud infrastructure consumer-created or acquired applications created using programming
languages and tools supported by the provider. The consumer does not manage or control the
underlying cloud infrastructure including network, servers, operating systems, or storage, but has
control over the deployed applications and possibly application hosting environment
Cloud Infrastructure as a SetVice (laaS). The capability provided to the consumer is to
provision processing, storage, networks, and other fundamental computing resources where the
consumer is able to deploy and run arbitrary software, which can include operating systems and
applications. The consumer does not manage or control the underlying cloud infrastructure but
has control over operating systems, storage, deployed applications, and possibly limited control of
select networking components (e.g., host firewalls).
Depending upon user needs, and other considerations, cloud computing services are typically
deployed using one of the following four models as defined by NIST:
Private cloud. The cloud infrastructure is operated solely for an organization. It may be
managed by the organization or a third party and may exist on premise or off premise.
Community cloud. The cloud infrastructure is shared by several organizations and supports a
specific community that has shared concerns (e.g., mission, security requirements, policy, and
compliance considerations). It may be managed by the organizations or a third party and may
exist on premise or off premise.
Public cloud. The cloud infrastructure is made available to the general public or a large
industry group and is owned by an organization selling cloud services.
Hybrid cloud. The cloud infrastructure is a composition of two or more clouds (private,
community, or public) that remain unique entities but are bound together by standardized or 10/2010-05 .html
Page 2 of5
NARA Bulletin 2010-05
proprietary technology that enables data and application portability (e.g., cloud bursting for load-
balancing between clouds).
(All definitions are from NIST Definition of Cloud Computing, Version 15, 10-07-2009)
Public and private clouds are terms used in the IT community and by NIST to describe various cloud
configurations. These terms are not related to whether records in those clouds are publicly accessible.
In addition, definitions do not preclude agency responsibilities to manage the records.
5. How are Federal agencies using cloud computing?
NARA interviewed agencies that are using cloud computing services to achieve benefits such as cost
savings, accessibility, scalability, collaboration, and flexibility. All of the agencies interviewed recognize
the challenge of managing data in the cloud. They have begun to address concerns around cloud
computing environments such as privacy, security, and data ownership. However, the agencies stated
that managing records in a cloud computing environment is a concern that they are only beginning to
In one example, an agency dealing with globally-dispersed employees needed a rapid solution for
information sharing. Using a commercial contractor, the agency deployed a private cloud to share
financial data, capture reports, provide world-wide access to information, and solve security
challenges. In this instance, the agency used a separate commercial platform to prevent unauthorized
users from using the application as a back door to access secure agency servers. The agency said the
system meets all fiscal audit requirements, but also said it recognizes that records management
requirements were not addressed, and no data is being deleted.
In another example, at least two units in the same agency built and offer cloud computing services as
providers to other offices in different parts of the agency. Both units deal with classified information
and need to retain control of these records within their organizations. They control the use of and
access to the system. One of the units experienced an increase in the use of its collaboration software
because customers no longer need to worry about software and hardware acquisition, updating
software and operating systems, back-ups, and access/permissions control. Customers are
responsible for the content and determining its record status and for managing records in the cloud.
In a final example, at least two other agencies offer cloud computing services both within the agency
and to other agencies. One of these agencies is offering storage space over which the customer has
complete configuration control. While still a pilot, it is anticipated that customers will be responsible for
managing records stored in the cloud. The two agencies are considering "Terms of Service"
agreements that would address records management requirements.
For more agency examples see the CIO Council's report on the State of Public Sector Cloud
Computing (pdf). For security issues with cloud computing see GAO's report Federal Guidance
Needed to Address Control Issues with Implementing Cloud Computing (pdf).
6. What are some of the records management challenges associated with cloud computing?
NARA recognizes that the service and deployment models affect how records may be created, used,
and stored in cloud computing environments. The level of agency control over the design,
implementation, and operations of a cloud computing environment containing Federal records may
vary depending on service and deployment models. For example, in the case of laaS and PaaS
service models, the agency is more likely to maintain the records outside the cloud. In the SaaS
service model, the agency may maintain records in contractor-provided clouds, and any negotiated
contract language will need to address specific records management responsibilities. See Question 8
for a general clause that an agency can modify to fit the planned type of service.
NARA has identified several records management challenges with cloud computing environments:
Cloud applications may lack the capability to implement records disposition schedules, including
the ability to transfer and permanently delete records or perform other records management
functions. Therefore specific service and deployment models may not meet all of the records
management requirements of 36 CFR Pari 1236 (formerly 36 CFR part 1234). Examples of these
requirements include:
http:/ / 10/201 0-05.html
Page 3 of 5
NARA Bulletin 2010-05
Maintaining records in a way that maintains their functionality and integrity throughout the
records' full lifecycle
Maintaining links between the records and their metadata
Transfer of archival records to NARA or deletion of temporary records according to NARA-
approved retention schedules.
Depending on the application, cloud service providers must be made aware of the record
retention requirements governing a given body of Federal records stored in one or more cloud
locations. Agencies need to be able to control any proposed deletion of records pursuant to
existing authorities, wherever the records may be located in the providers' cloud. Cloud service
providers must also act to ensure that records are accessible so as to ensure agency
responsiveness to discovery, or FOIA!Privacy Act, or other access requests.
Various cloud architectures lack formal technical standards governing how data are stored and
manipulated in cloud environments. This threatens the long-term trustworthiness and
sustain ability of the data.
A lack of portability standards may result in difficulty removing records for record keeping
requirements or complicate the transition to another environment. This could affect the ability of
agencies to meet their recordkeeping responsibilities for temporary or historically valuable records
being transferred to NARA
Agencies and cloud service providers should anticipate how continued preservation and access
issues will be resolved in a contingency where the cloud service provider's business operations
materially change (e.g., bankruptcy), or cease altogether.
7. How can agencies meet their records management responsibilities?
Federal agencies are responsible for managing their records in accordance with NARA statues
including the Federal Records Act (44 U.S.C. Chapters 21, 29, 31 ,33) and NARA regulations (36 CFR
Chapter XII Subchapter B). This is true regardless of which cloud service and deployment models are
adopted. However, NARA recognizes that the differences between models affect how and by whom
(agency/contractor) records management activities can be performed.
The following are guidelines for creating standards and policies for managing an agency's records
created, used, or stored in cloud computing environments:
1. Include the agency records management officer and/or staff in the planning, development,
deployment, and use of cloud computing solutions.
2. Define which copy of records will be declared as the agency's record copy and manage these in
accordance with 36 CFR Part 1222. Remember, the value of records in the cloud may be greater
than the value of any other set because of indexing or other reasons. In such instances, this
added value may require designation of the copies as records.
3. Include instructions for determining if Federal records in a cloud environment are covered under
an existing records retention schedule.
4. Include instructions on how all records will be captured, managed, retained, made available to
authorized users, and retention periods applied.
5. Include instructions on conducting a records analysis, developing and submitting records
retention schedules to NARA for unscheduled records in a cloud environment, These instructions
should include scheduling system documentation, metadata, and related records.
6. Include instructions to periodically test transfers of Federal records to other environments,
including agency servers, to ensure the records remain portable.
7. Include instructions on how data will be migrated to new formats, operating systems, etc., so that
records are readable throughout their entire life cycles. Include in your migration planning
provisions for transferring permanent records in the cloud to NARA. An agency choosing to pre-
accession its permanent electronic records to NARA is no longer responsible for migration
except to meet its business purposes.
8. Resolve portability and accessibility issues through good records management policies and other
data governance practices. Data governance typically addresses interoperability of computing
systems, portability of data (able to move from one system to another), and information security 10/2010-05 .html
Page 4 of 5
NARA Bulletin 2010-05
and access. However, such policies by themselves will not address an agency's compliance with
the Federal Records Act and NARA regulations.
8. What is an agency's responsibility when dealing with contractors?
Ultimately, an agency maintains responsibility for managing its records whether they reside in a
contracted environment or under agency physical custody (see 36 CFR Part 1222.32 (b)). When
dealing with a contractor, an agency must include a records management clause in any contract or
similar agreement At a minimum, a records management clause ensures that the Federal agency and
the contractor are aware of their statutory records management responsibilities.
The following is a general clause that an agency can modify to fit the planned type of service and
specific agency records management needs:
Use of contractor's site and services may require management of Federal records. If the contractor
holds Federal records, the contractor must manage Federal records in accordance with all applicable
records management laws and regulations, including but not limited to the Federal Records Act (44
US. C. chs. 21, 29, 31, 33}, and regulations of the National Archives and Records Administration
(NARA) at 36 CFR Chapter XII Subchapter B). Managing the records includes, but is not limited to,
secure storage, retrievability, and proper disposition of all federal records including transfer of
permanently valuable records to NARA in a format and manner acceptable to NARA at the time of
transfer. The agency also remains responsible under the laws and regulations cited above for ensuring
that applicable records management laws and regulations are complied with through the life and
termination of the contract.
If an agency decides to create or join a private or community cloud, it will still need to meet records
management responsibilities. The agencies may describe these responsibilities in agreements among
the participating offices or agencies. If a cloud provider ceases to provide services an agency must
continue to meet its records management obligations. Agencies should plan for this contingency.
9. Where do I go for more information?
NARA's National Records Management Program can provide assistance. See "List of NARA Contacts
for Your Agency." In addition, NARA maintains the Toolkit for Managing Electronic Recmds as a
resource for agencies to share and access records management best practices.
Archivist of the United States
Us Accessibility Privacy Policy Freedom of Information A<J No FEAH A(t US/\.qov
PDF files require the free Adobe Reader.
More information on Adobe Acrobat PDF files Administration
1-86-NARA-NAilA or 1 -866--2/L--6272
http://www. archives. gov /records-mgmt/bulletins/20 1 0/20 1 0-0 5 .html
Page 5 of 5
EXHIBITC Agencies identify 78 services for cloud transition Page 1 of 1
Agencies ide11tify 78 services for clotld tra11sition
By Joseph l\t1arks 05/26111
Federal agencies have identil1ed 78 computer systems they plan to migrate to the cloud within a year,
according to the Office of Management and Budget.
The listing follows a directive in OMB's 25-point plan to reform federal IT, published in December 2010,
that ordered federal agencies to identifY three services they could move to the cloud by May 2012.
The transition to cloud computing should save the federal government at least $5 billion annually, federal
Chieflnformation Officer Vivek Kundra told members of a Senate panel Wednesday. A firmer estimate of
those savings will have to wait on individual contracts for the moves to be negotiated and other factors,
Kundra said.
Computer clouds essentially are large banks of computer servers that can operate much closer to full
capacity than standard servers by rapidly repacking data as one customer surges in usage and another one
dips. Data storage in the cloud is operated like electricity grids or other utilities, with customers paying only
for what they use.
A handful of low-risk government services, such as websites that don't take in sensitive public information,
are already in privately owned cloud space. But some government officials have expressed skepticism about
moving some very sensitive or complex operations to either private clouds or to government-only clouds,
worrying that the move could jeopardize security.
The majority of projects slated for transition seem to be low-hanging fruit, securitywise. Out ofthe 78 cloud
-bound items, for instance, 14 are email systems, which are easy to standardize in the manner required for
inclusion in the cloud.
The General Services Administration announced on May 9 it would include bids from vendors offering to
transfer agency email systems to the cloud on its GSA schedule, a list of approved contractors and prices
that allows individual agencies to drive down service costs by leveraging the buying power of the entire
federal government.
Other common items slated for cloud transition include websites and document storage, among other
Federal government loosens its grip on the BlackBerry- The Washington Post
Back to previous page
Federal government loosens its grip on the
By Michael S. Rosenwald, Published: May 30
Page 1 of 4
Somewhere in America, perhaps at this very moment, a bad guy is under video surveillance. He is being
watched, every movement, every step- but not on a little TV. That's so 2009. Instead, a special agent
from the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives is keeping tabs on an iPad.
This is not a movie. This is not a Steve Jobs dream. This is the federal government 2.0, where
technology upgrades no longer come at a "Little House on the Prairie" pace. Even President Obama, a
BlackBerry devotee, has upgraded. He now owns an iPad, and it has been seen on his desk and under his
The flashy consumer products that have been adopted in the corporate workforce - upending
BlackBerrys for iPhones, Microsoft Outlook for Gmail, and lately laptops for iPads - are now invading
the federal government. The State Department. The Army. The Department ofVeterans Affairs. NASA.
The General Services Administration is in the process of moving 17,000 employees onto Gmail.
The stakes are huge. The change may damage companies long associated with Washington work culture,
but officials say the shift will make workers more productive while slashing billions from the $80 billion
spent annually on information technology. The government is trying to keep up with federal workers'
interest in the new gadgets.
"The demand we are seeing now in the last 90 days has been just extraordinary," said Tim Hoechst,
http://www. /federal-government-loosens-its-grip-o... 6/24/2011
Federal government loosens its grip on the BlackBerry- The Washington Post Page 2 of 4
chief technology officer at Agilex Technologies, which is helping federal agencies integrate Apple
products into workforces. (Like other contractors racing to meet demand, Agliex practices what it
preaches; it has replaced its sign-in book at the reception desk with an iPad.) "It's like everybody is
saying, 'This is really happening here now.' "
From home to work
Analysts and government officials say the demand for consumer technologies is coming from two
directions. At the top, agency directors and senior officials are using iPads, Android phones or Web-
based e-mail in their personal lives and asking IT administrators why they can't use them at work. But
the bigger push is coming from frontline workers, who see the value consumer technology could add to
their working life, making them more mobile and less tied to an office.
"People have better access to information technology at their homes than they do at work, and that's
especially true in the public sector," said Vivek Kundra, the federal government's chief information
officer. "If you look at the average school kid, he or she probably has better technology in his or her
backpack than most of us do in government offices."
And employees are no longer taking no for an answer. A recent Forrester Research study showed 35
percent of workers in the United States either buy their own smartphone for work, use unsanctioned
Web sites or download unapproved applications on a work computer. Why? Twenty four percent of do-
it-yourselfers say the technology is better than what their job provides. Thirty-six percent say they need
it, and their employer won't provide an alternative. And nearly 40 percent say they use it at home and,
well, they want it at work, too.
"This is about innovation and it's about bringing new ideas and new ways of doing things into the
workforce," said Ted Schadler, an analyst for Forrester Research, which studies tech trends in the
government and corporate world. "People now have easy access to technology that can solve problems."
Kundra, the U.S. top information officer, said, "The line between work and home in terms of technology
is beginning to blur." Asked what he typically hears from workers about government- or corporate-
provided technology, Kundra said, "It's not a question of whether they don't like it. They despise it."
So many consumer devices are being brought in by federal workers that Rep. Darrell Issa (R- Calif.),
chairman of the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, recently voiced his concern
about authorized uses in a rather surreal hearing, in which he held up an iPad and asked a White House
official, "Are any of these carried into the White House?" When the official answered yes, Issa replied,
"So people carry a product which circumvents your entire system by going to the AT&T network on a
daily basis in the White House, isn't that true?" Eventually, the official conceded that was true. Issa said
he is concerned about what it means for presidential recordkeeping. His office did not respond to a
request for comment.
Kundra's answer to the issue of people using unauthorized devices is simple: Give them what they want.
Like many federal workers, he carries two devices- a BlackBerry (for work stuff) and an iPhone (for
personal stuff). And like many people, Kundra says he wants to be a "one-device guy." He recently
began pondering a radical idea with federal agencies: Let workers use whatever mobile device they
want, apply strict security settings, and have the government pay a stipend for service. Agencies and
cabinet departments, with the help of companies like Agilex, could then build apps for internal
employee use and distribute them on private app stores.
Potential savings
http://www. washingtonpost.comlbusiness/economy /federal-government -loosens-its-grip-o... 6/24/2011
Federal government loosens its grip on the BlackBerry- The Washington Post Page 3 of 4
The shift to consumer technologies is also about controlling costs: By moving to cloud-based e-mail
with Google, the GSA says it will cut expenses by 50 percent over the next five years by not having to
maintain its own servers and pay for expensive updates to software. The Agriculture Department is also
moving its
e-mail to the cloud, though with a competing product from Microsoft, which is going head-to-head with
Google on many cloud initiatives. The USDA says it will save about $6 million a year with the switch.
The new system is "always updated," said Casey Coleman, the GSA's chief information officer. "It's
always refreshed. It's always modem."
And GSA workers can easily access their e-mail from iPhone or Android devices, which the agency is
The adoption of these consumer devices, though still modest in size, has been widespread across a
variety of agencies.
At ATF, there are about 50 iPads or iPhones in use, and the number could increase to 100 soon. At the
Pacific Northwest National Laboratory, the 1,000 BlackBerrys used last year have dropped to about 700
as workers picked other smartphones. The State Department is testing iPads. Congress now allows iPads
and iPhones on the House floor.
And the Department of Veterans Affairs is getting ready to allow its clinicians to choose an iPad or
iPhone instead of a BlackBerry. VA chief information officer Roger Baker said not offering access to
consumer devices threatened to harm the department's services by making it an undesirable place for
young, bright doctors to work. "The more we say no, the more stodgy we would look," Baker said. "So
we had to figure out a way to say yes."
As iPhones, iPads and Android devices pop up more in government, it could spell further trouble for
Research in Motion, the maker ofthe BlackBerry, whose market share fell from 21 percent in 2009 to 14
percent last year.
Analysts say RIM focused too much on its highly secure e-mail service instead of building a flexible
application platform on which users and developers could innovate to make customers' working lives
more mobile and productive. The company also was late to the booming tablet market, which so far is
dominated by Apple, with interest also bubbling in a slew of Android entrants.
"The best way I can describe BlackBerry is as a one-trick pony," said Charlie Wolf, an analyst for
Needham & Co., an investment bank. "The one trick was their secure messaging platform. Management
has yet to understand that the world has changed. They didn't understand that it was a software game
going forward."
For their part, RIM executives say they are making great strides in expanding developer interest in an
updated version of the BlackBerry platform. And though a variety of third-party companies have popped
up with services claiming to make iPhones and Android devices as secure as BlackBerrys, Theron
Dodson, a senior RIM executive, said, "This is harder than it looks."
At the same time, RIM quietly announced it was providing a new service allowing iPhones and Android
devices to connect to its secure e-mail system. That was a tacit admission, analysts say, of the brutal
challenges posed by Apple and Google.
http://www. washington post. com/business/ economy /federal-government -loosens-i ts-gri p-o... 6/24/2 0 11
Federal government loosens its grip on the BlackBerry- The Washington Post Page 4 of 4
"The rise of consumer technology in the enterprise- it's here," Kundra said. "It's happening as we
Sponsored Links
Do NOT Buy Car Insurance!
Your Auto Insurer Hates This. Obey this amazing trick to get extremely cheap rates!
Hot Penny Stock: RMGX
Improves gas mileage & lowers emission. Smart investors Learn more now
Reverse Mortgage Info
Free Reverse Mortgage Educational Video. Request Your Kit Today.
The Washington Post Company
Buy a link here
http://www. /federal-governrnent-loosens-its-grip-o... 6/24/20 11