Page 4 - AssessmentReport

Explanation for the Recommendation:

The Board recommended that the government immediately implement several additional
privacy safeguards to mitigate the privacy impact of the present Section 215 program. The
Board noted that the recommended changes can be implemented without any need for
congressional or FISC authorization.

Discussion of Status:

The Board proposed that four new safeguards be implemented if the bulk telephone
records program were to continue for any period of time. In the Recommendations
Assessments Report released by the Board in January 2015, the Board described how the
Administration had partially implemented the recommendation. Now that
Recommendation 1 has been fully implemented through enactment of the USA FREEDOM
Act, Recommendation 2 has been superseded. There is no longer a Section 215 bulk
telephone records program to which additional privacy safeguards could be applied.

Recommendation 3: Enable the FISC to Hear Independent Views on
Novel and Significant Matters

Status:

Implemented (USA FREEDOM Act)

Text of the Board’s Recommendation:

Congress should enact legislation enabling the FISC to hear independent views, in addition
to the government’s views, on novel and significant applications and in other matters in
which a FISC judge determines that consideration of the issues would merit such additional
views.

Explanation for the Recommendation:
Although the FISC continues to review applications for individualized FISA warrants, in the
past decade it has also been called upon to evaluate requests for broader collection
programs, such as the Section 215 telephone records program, and to review extensive
compliance reports regarding the implementation of the surveillance authorized under

Section 702. This expansion of the FISC’s jurisdiction has presented it with complex and
novel issues of law and technology. Currently, these issues are adjudicated by the court
based only on filings by the government, supplemented by the research and analysis of the
judges and their experienced legal staff.
The Board believes that, when FISC judges are considering requests for programmatic

surveillance affecting numerous individuals or applications presenting novel issues, they
should have the opportunity to call for third-party briefing on the legal issues involved. In

4