I write to inform you of recent changes I have made with
respect to the Electronic Surveillance Unit (ESU) of the
Division's Office of Enforcement Operations, and to request your
assistance to ensure that wiretap packets submitted to ESU are
ripe for consideration.
As you know, ESU attorneys work diligently to timely process
wiretap applications.
Unfortunately, as the number of wiretaps
submitted for consideration to ESU has increased exponentially in
the last 18 years (from 782 requests in FY 1990 to 2,724 in FY
2007), the number of attorneys within ESU (7-9) has remained
constant, despite budget requests to increase its size. This low
level of staffing, when coupled with the large amount of wiretap
approval requests then pending ("the queue") and the inconsistent
quality of the requests submitted for consideration, has led to
delays in processing wiretap applications. Such delays are
problematic, and must be addressed immediately.
What we in the Criminal Division are doing:
- By the end of this month, we will double the number of attorneys
assigned to ESU. That will bring the total number of attorneys
assigned to ESU to 19. This increase will be accomplished, in the
short term, by the reassignment of other attorneys, including
contract attorneys, from other sections of the Criminal Division
to ESU until longer term replacements can be funded and put in
place.
- We are transitioning, as of August 1, 2008, to a paperless system,
such that all Title III application packets must be submitted by
email.
- We are instituting, effective August 1, 2008, a series of measures to
ensure that applications do not enter the queue until they are
ready to be acted upon. These requirements are listed in
Attachment A. Incomplete or non-compliant packets will not be
considered as a general rule, and if resubmitted, will be placed
at the end of the queue.
What you can do:
- Institute or maintain quality-control measures in your district to
ensure that packets sent to ESU are complete, accurate, internally
consistent, and ready to be acted upon. Many districts already
have such procedures in place. Anything which improves the
quality of what is in the queue will quicken the time in which all
packets can be turned around. At a minimum, I would ask that you
give strong consideration to having a supervisory level Assistant
United States Attorney (AUSA) "clear" all wiretap packets prior to
their submission to ESU. Title III training for supervisory AUSAs
and others will be offered at the National Advocacy Center this
coming February.
- Make sure that your district is not one of those that allows law
enforcement agents to submit Title III packets directly to ESU,
without the review of an AUSA. Such submissions are commonplace in
many districts.
- Make sure that requests for wiretap extensions or "re-ups" are
submitted as soon as practical and not, for example, on the date
the wire expires.
- Distribute the Attachments to this email to the AUSAs in your
district who apply for wiretaps. These Attachments, which provide
guidance as well as outline some new procedures and requirements,
are:
Attachment A: ESU requirements for Title III
submissions
Attachment B: Common deficiencies in Title III
submissions
Attachment C: Checklist for Title III affidavit
submissions
I am confident that once the measures identified above are
implemented, and if we work together, we will be able to
substantially reduce delays in obtaining approval for meritorious
wiretap application packets. Questions about ESU's
requirements, or any of the Attachments, should be directed to
Julie Wuslich or Tom Taylor, who can be reached in the ESU at
(202) 514-6809.
Thank you for your cooperation and consideration
[updated July 2008] [cited in USAM 9-7.010] |