Originally Posted by
sbm12
I just gave the older version a once-over and there are some subtle differences, enough for me to believe the claim that the document may have never actually been put into production. Interestingly enough, the sections that are redacted in the two versions are actually different as well. Page 5 of the papersplease doc has a rather obvious example. In that version 2A-3(A) has only the 25% redacted. In the version from the FBO.gov site the whole paragraph was removed, as was paragraph B which is the unlabeled part under A in the papersplease version.
So there are some differences but it is quite obvious that the bulk of the content is the same. The version we see may truly have "never been approved" but that doesn't mean that it isn't close enough to be considered a substantially accurate snapshot of what was going on at that time.
I just gave the papersplease.org's FOIA copy and the "never issued" copy a thorough comparison. I printed out the papersplease copy and used Adobe Acrobat Professional to read the "never issued" copy aloud. (cool feature) I read along with the papersplease copy and verified every word.
The text is the EXACT same. The only differences between the two is formatting.
When the papersplease FOIA request was processed the clerk copy pasted the relevant text from the master into the SOP template. By using a different font size than the "never issued" copy caused the page breaks to be different. The part of the document that states the Revision number, Date, Implementation date, and Sensitive Security Information is a header. The SSI claim at the bottom is a footer.
This header and footer are part of a generic template used for the Mangement SOP SSI requests for this revision. Note the lack of page numbering on the papersplease copy.
The "never issued" document contains the proper page numbering. If the page numbering was redacted there would have been a black mark on the papersplease copy.
The missing "B" on the papersplease document was due to the clerk missing that paragraph on the initial copy paste. When the clerk corrected for the missing paragraph they failed to include the "B".
As for the difference in redaction, that would be because the people redacting were different and the purpose of the redaction was different. One was in response to a FOIA request and the other was in response to a bid.
I will have to disagree with your source and Blogger Bob's claim that this document was never issued. If by some chance this document was not issued then the revision number would have been different than the one on the papersplease copy.