By the year 2000, as much as 75 percent of the federal government's business will be conducted electronically. That's exciting news for computer-equipped reporters. Washington is the world's largest publisher. Reporters find it increasingly difficult to cover any beat without in some way relying on federal data.

But several recent surveys of federal agencies reveal many treat electronic information as a special class of data - outside the range of the Freedom of Information Act and often off limits to the public.

The Justice Department says it may rely on these agency views when crafting FOIA policy - unless Congress acts first.

In 1993 and again in 1994 I surveyed 70 federal agencies on their FOIA policies toward electronic records. Key questions asked agencies were:

- Must agencies create or modify computer programs to search for and retrieve electronic records? - Must agencies create or modify computer programs to segregate the releasable portion of a record? - Do requesters have the right to specify the format in which information is released?

More than 75 percent of the agencies answered the first question "no;" about half answered the second two questions "no." Most agencies not answering "no," said that they hadn't yet dealt with the questions and had no opinion. Fewer than 5 percent answered any question "yes."

The responses are significant for three reasons. First, they reveal strong opposition to increased FOIA access to computerized federal files. The implication of questions 1 and 2 is that information retrievable only through creation or modification of computer programs is not covered by the FOIA. Maybe the agency will release it; maybe not. Question 3 implies that an agency can release information in an undesired format - say, a 1,000-page printout instead of floppy disks.

The answers are also important because the Justice Department asked the same questions of agencies in a 1989 survey (receiving essentially the same answers.) The Justice Department says it may rely on these agency views when crafting FOIA policy - unless Congress acts first.

Finally, the answers are important because they haven't changed. I resurveyed the same 70 agencies in 1994 - seven months after President Clinton announced a new FOIA policy, encouraging electronic disclosure. Clinton's policy was the first by a president specifically mentioning electronic information. It was also the first to emphasize the public has a right to information stored in computers. "Each agency has a responsibility to enhance public access through the use of electronic information systems," Clinton said.

Despite this emphasis, agency responses in 1994 remained virtually unchanged from 1989 and 1993, revealing a persistent bureaucratic hostility to FOIA requesters seeking electronic records. Not one agency surveyed in 1994, after the Clinton policy was announced, had drafted a new electronic record FOIA policy. Many said they were already practicing maximum disclosure, and thus no new policy was needed.

The surveys reveal agencies eager to retain control over "their" electronic records, using the ambiguity created by a new technology to limit public access. For instance:

- Some agencies refuse to perform even simple computer programming to retrieve information. But if information exists only in an electronic form, retrievable only through programming, then an electronic black hole is created, containing information the public can't obtain. - While agencies must conduct reasonable searches for information specified in FOIA requests, some agencies say they won't use computers for these searches, although this might make searches quicker and more accurate. - Agencies are slow to tell the public what information they maintain electronically, although a database list could save time and money. - Other agencies say they will provide information in an electronic form, but only if requesters pay fees not required for paper documents.

These unclear and inconsistent policies appear to violate the spirit of the FOIA and perhaps the letter of the law. Worse, they have quietly shifted the burden of proof for disclosing information. Instead of the law's requirement that federal agencies prove why information should be withheld, a process forcing agencies to cite specific exemptions to overcome a presumption of openness, requesters seeking computerized data now increasingly find they must prove why information should be released in that electronic form.

The mandate of the FOIA - stating information is presumed to be releasable unless an agency can prove otherwise - appears in question. The new form in which information is kept allows agencies, by bureaucratic fiat, to overturn one of the more important reforms achieved by passage of the FOIA.

There is clearly a need for Congress to enact a detailed policy for federal electronic records. The Leahy-Brown Bill, which passed the Senate this year but died in the House, would have been a modest first step. Something on this order - or more comprehensive - should be considered next year.

As Congress considers legislation to bring the FOIA into the computer age, it can expect substantial agency opposition to changing the status quo. Four factors, however, can help Congress place that opposition in its proper perspective:

- The federal government's use of computers continues to increase. At the same time, the federal government's reliance on paper records continues to decrease. - The power of personal computers continues to improve. This has given reporters and others requesting computerized records a greater ability to access, analyze, and use federal electronic records, when agencies allow this access. - The demand for federal computerized records continues to increase. Journalists, academics, lobbyists and lawyers have joined the list of those wanting electronic access. Requesters know computerized information is easier to use, and thus more valuable, than the same information printed on paper. - A significant number of organizations, from the American Bar Association to the Office of Technology Assessment, have studied the issues raised by electronic federal records and the FOIA and concluded that - despite agency protestations - increased access to these records is both legal and logical. Most also conclude that allowing this access is necessary if the intent and letter of the law are not to be violated.