All withheld information exempt under b( 1) and b(3) except as othenivise noted. Approved for public release. UNITED STATES FOREIGN INTELLIGENCE SURVEILLANCE COURT WASHINGTON, DC. MEMORANDUM OPINION This matter is before the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Coum 01' ?Court?) on the ?Government?s Ex Paite Submission of Amendments to 702(g)? Ex Parte Submission of Amended Minimization Procedures,? which was filed on November 15, June 13, 2017, Public Release EFF v. DOJ Document 15, page 1 of 30 pages. All withheld information exempt under b(1) and b(3) except as otherwise noted. Approved for public release. I 2013 (?November 15 Submission?). Through the November 15 Submission, the government requests approval of amendments to all of? to permit the use of revised minimization procedures. For the reasons set forth below, the Court concludes that. as amended by the November 15 Submission,- the required statutory elements and that the revised minimization procedures are consistent with the applicable statutory requirements and the Fourth Amendment. Accordingly, the government?s request for approval is granted. I. PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND The amendments that are included as part of the November 15 Submission were executed by the Attorney General and the Director of National Intelligence pursuant to Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act which is codi?ed at 50 U.S.C. 1881a (2008). They are accompanied by three sets of revised minimization procedures for use by the National Security Agency the Federal Bureau of Investigation and the Central lntelligence respectively. The purpose of the amendments, which became effective immediately upon their execution, is to authorize the use of these revised minimization procedures in connection with information acquired under? By operation of law, the amendments included as part of the November 15 Submission supersede the amendments that were submitted by the government on July 31, 2013, and which, as discussed below, were still pending before this Court for review on November 15. _S_e_g 50 1 1 Page 2 June 13, 2017, Public Release EFF v. DOJ Document 15, page 2 of 30 pages. All withheld information exempt under b( 1) and b(3) except as otherwise noted. Approved for public release. II.S.C. 188la(i)(l The Court has 30 days from the date of submission to complete its review of the new amendments and issue an order and supporting written statement as required by Section 702. ?c_e id. 1881a(i)(1)(C), II. REVIEW OF THE AMENDMENTS Under the judicial review procedures that apply to amendments by virtue of Section 1881a(i)(1)(C), the Court must review each of the amended certi?cations ?to determine whether the certi?cation contains all the required elements.? 50 U.S.C. l88la(i)(2)(A). The Court has previously determined that? tiled in all of the above-captioned dockets, as originally submitted to the Court and previously amended, contained all the required elements. Like the prior certifications and amendments, the amendments now before the Court were executed under oath by the AG and the DN1, as required by Section 1881a(g)(1)(A), and submitted to the Court within the time allowed under Section l881a(i)(l)(C). See Amendment to Pursuant to Section 1881a(g)(2)(A)(ii), the latest amendments include the attestations of the AG and the DN1 that the accompanying amended NSA, FBI, and CIA minimization procedures satisfy the statutory de?nition of minimization procedures, are consistent with the requirements of the Fourth Amendment, and will be submitted to the Court for approval. Se he latest amendments also include effective dates that comply with Section l88la(i)(1). 9 All other Page 3 June 13, 2017, Public Release EFF v. DOJ Document 15, page 3 of 30 pages. All withheld information exempt under b(1) and b(3) except as othenlvise noted. Approved for public release. aspects of- in the above-captioned dockets - including the further attestations made therein in accordance with Section 18 8 the targeting procedures submitted therewith in accordance with Section 1881a(g)(2)(B), and the af?davits executed in support thereof in accordance with Section 188 are unaltered by the latest amendments. In light of the foregoing, the Court ?nds that the above?captioned certi?cations, as amended, each contain all the required statutory elements. 50 U.S.C. 1881a(i)(2)(A). REVIEW OF THE REVISED MINIMIZATION PROCEDURES The Court is required to review the revised NSA, FBI, and CIA minimization procedures to determine whether they are consistent with the requirements of Section 1881a(e)(1). _S_cc 50 U.S.C. Section 1881a(e)(1) requires that the minimization procedures ?meet the de?nition of minimization procedures under [50 U.S.C. 1801(h) or Further, 1Sections 1801 and 1821(4) de?ne ?minimization procedures? in pertinent part as: (1) speci?c procedures, which shall be adopted by the Attorney General, that are reasonably designed in light of the purpose and technique of the particular surveillance [or physical search], to minimize the acquisition and retention, and prohibit the dissemination, of nonpublicly available information concerning unconsenting United States persons consistent with the need of the United States to obtain, produce, and disseminate foreign intelligence information;[] (2) procedures that require that nonpublicly available information, which is not foreign intelligence information, as de?ned in [50 U.S.C. 1801 shall not be disseminated in a manner that identi?es any United States person, without such person?s consent, unless such person's identity is necessary to understand foreign intelligence information or assess its importance; [and] (3) notwithstanding paragraphs (1) and (2), procedures that allow for the retention and dissemination of information that is evidence of a crime which has been, is being, or is about to be committed and that is to be retained or disseminated for WSW Page 4 June 13, 2017, Public Release EFF v. DOJ 16-CV-02041 Document 15, page 4 of 30 pages. All withheld information exempt under b(1) and b(3) except as othenNise noted. Approved for public release. under Section 1881a(i)(3)(A), the Court must determine whether the minimization procedures are consistent with the requirements of the Fourth Amendment. The revised minimization procedures are, in most respects, identical to the corresponding procedures that this Court recently approved for us? In its August 30, 2013 Memorandum Opinion (?August 30 Opinion? or ?Aug. 30 this Court concluded that the prior versions of these minimization procedures satis?ed the de?nition set forth in footnote 1 above and the requirements of the Fourth Amendment. SQ Aug. 30 Op. at 15-25. As discussed in more detail below, the only changes to the procedures include: (1) new provisions in the NSA, FBI, and CIA minimization procedures requiring additional analysis to confirm the ?foreignness? of the target before certain categories of previously-acquired communications may be used in any manner; and (2) a new provision in the FBI minimization procedures allowing the limited use of ?ad hoc? storage systems to house FISA-acquired information. Accordingly, the Court incorporates by reference herein its August 30 Opinion and focuses the discussion below on the new provisions and whether those provisions alter the Court?s recent conclusion that the NSA, FBI, and CIA minimization procedures satisfy the requirements of Section 180] and the Fourth Amendment. law enforcement purposes[.] 50 U.S.C. 1801(h); see also 1821(4). The de?nitions of ?minimization procedures? set forth in these provisions are substantively identical (although Section refers to ?the purposes . . . of the particular physical search?) (emphasis added). For ease of reference, subsequent citations refer only to the de?nition set forth in Section 1801(h). Page 5 June 13, 2017, Public Release EFF v. DOJ Document 15, page 5 of 30 pages. All withheld information exempt under b( 1) and b(3) except as othenivise noted. Approved for public release. I 1 1? A. The_New ?Foreigness? Check Provisions of the NSA, FBI, and CIA Mininn'zaionlmcedures The ?rst change mentioned above (the addition of new provisions requiring foreignness checks) was prompted by two recent noncompliance incidents, both of which involve the post- tasking checks that NSA conducts pursuant to its targeting procedures to ensure that telephone numbers tasked under Section 702 have not roamed into the United States. The ?rst noncompliance incident, which the Court discussed in its August 30 Opinion, was initially reported atter? were ?led on July 31, 2013. In notices submitted to the Court on August 13, 2013 (?August I3 Notice? or Notice? and 2013 oticc? or? Notice? the explained that Page6 JUne 13, 2017, Public Release EFF v. DOJ Document 15, page 6 of 30 pages. All withheld information exempt under b( 1) and b(3) except as othenivise noted. Approved for public release. NSA may determine that a tasked telephone identi?er is being used from inside the United States. i_