PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Congressional Research Service
Version 35 · Passed Senate amended · Sep 17, 1996
Electronic Freedom of Information Improvement Act of 1996 - Amends the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) to require Federal agencies, via computer telecommunications or other electronic means, to: (1) publish all information required to be published in the Federal Register; (2) make available a list of statutes relied on by the agency to withhold information; and (3) make available (unless promptly published) for public inspection and copying final opinions, policy statements, administrative staff manuals, an index of all major information systems containing agency records, and an index of all records made available to any person, as well as copies of all records likely to become subject to subsequent requests. Requires agencies to provide requesters records in the form or format in which they are maintained. States that, if, at any agency's request, the Comptroller General determines that the agency annually has either provided responsive documents or denied requests in substantial compliance with FOIA requirements, then one-half of the fees collected from FOIA requests shall be credited to the collecting agency and expended to offset compliance costs. Extends from ten to 20 days the length of time allowed an agency to decide whether to comply with a FOIA request. Requires an agency not in compliance with specified time limits to demonstrate to a court that its delay is warranted under the circumstances. Defines as unforeseen the "exceptional circumstances" of a delay allowing a court to permit an agency additional time to review its records, and excludes from "exceptional" delays resulting from a predictable workload (including an ongoing backlog) in the ordinary course of processing record requests. Requires each agency to process requests on a first-in, first-out basis. Authorizes an agency to establish separate processing tracks for simple and complex requests. Provides for expedited access to records for persons demonstrating specified compelling need. Declares that, where a reasonably segregable portion of a record is provided to a requester after FOIA-exempt portions are deleted, the extent of any deletions shall be indicated on the released portion of the record at the place where they were made.
People & committees
Sen. Leahy, Patrick J. [D-VT] · D–VT
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Held at the desk.
Message on Senate action sent to the House.
Received in the House.
Passed Senate with an amendment by Unanimous Consent. (consideration: CR S10713-10715)
Passed/agreed to in Senate: Passed Senate with an amendment by Unanimous Consent.(consideration: CR S10713-10715)
Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 406.
Committee on Judiciary. Reported to Senate by Senator Hatch with an amendment in the nature of a substitute. With written report No. 104-272. Additional views filed.
Committee on Judiciary. Reported to Senate by Senator Hatch with an amendment in the nature of a substitute. With written report No. 104-272. Additional views filed.
Committee on Judiciary. Ordered to be reported with an amendment in the nature of a substitute favorably.
Referred to Subcommittee on Terrorism, Technology, Government.
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Judiciary.
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR S10888-10891)
Introduced in Senate
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Aug 10, 2026. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Analyze S.1090 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
Examine S.1090 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
Examine S.1090 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
Examine S.1090 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.