|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Document
|
|
PO-1953-F
|
|
|
/ifq?>
|
File #
|
|
PA-000202-1
|
|
|
|
Institution/HIC
|
|
Ministry of Natural Resources
|
|
|
|
Summary
|
|
NATURE OF THE APPEAL: The Ministry of Natural Resources (the Ministry) received a request under the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act (the Act ) for access to the following: all records (including, but not limited to, documents, files, correspondence, memos, briefing notes, information notes, faxes, reports, email messages and email attachments) within the possession of the [Ministry] including the Minister's office and Ontario Parks relating to consideration of extending, or proposals to extend, cottage leases at Rondeau Provincial Park for the time period of January 1, 1998 to present. This will include for example, but not be limited to, records involving cottage leaseholders, the Rondeau Park Leaseholders' Association, and the Municipality of Chatham-Kent, in addition to records generated by provincial agencies. The requester (now the appellant) is a charitable organization concerned with environmental issues. In response to the appellant's request, the Ministry issued a fee estimate in the amount of $930.00, which is calculated as follows: Search time (14.5 hours x $30 per hour) $435.00 Record preparation (5 hours x $30.00 per hour) $150.00 Photocopies (1700 pages x .20 per page) $340.00 Total $930.00 The Ministry requested a deposit of $465.00 and also advised the appellant that no final decision has been made regarding access. The appellant responded by asking the Ministry for some details about the types of responsive records that are available and the estimated cost, with a view to narrowing the scope of the request. At the same time, the appellant also sought a fee waiver on the basis that dissemination of the records will benefit public health [section 57(4)(c) of the Act ] and explained its basis for taking this position. The Ministry responded by providing the appellant with a description of nine categories of responsive records, and the approximate number of pages in each category. The Ministry also advised the appellant that the total number of pages would be reduced by approximately 30% because of duplicate records. In addition, the Ministry advised that "it is estimated that twenty percent of the pages would be exempt from disclosure". The Ministry also made a decision not to waive the fees. The appellant appealed the Ministry's fee estimate, in particular, the amount charged for search time. The appellant also appealed the Ministry's decision not to waive the fees. At the same time, the appellant narrowed the scope of the request and advised the Ministry that it was only seeking access to certain categories of records. In turn, the Ministry issued a revised fee estimate to the appellant based on the narrowed request. The revised fee estimate totalled $730.00 and was calculated as follows: Search time (13.5 hours x $30.00 per hour) $405.00 Record preparation (3.5 hours x $30.00) $105.00 Photocopies (1100 pages x .20 per page) $220.00 Total $730.00 The Ministry requested the appellant to remit payment of the deposit ($365.00) and advised that it will resume processing the request upon receipt of the deposit. The appellant was not satisfied with the revised fee estimate. Further mediation was not possible so the appeal was transferred to the adjudication stage. In this appeal, the issue of the amount of fees charged places an initial burden of proof on the Ministry. With respect to fee waiver, the appellant must bring itself within the relevant provisions of the Act and Regulation 460. To facilitate the orderly and fair processing of the appeal, this office initiated the inquiry by sending a Notice of Inquiry, setting out all issues in the appeal, to the Ministry. The Ministry's representations were then sent to the appellant, who submitted representations in response. The appellant's response was then provided to the Ministry, which in turn submitted reply representations. DISCUSSION: FEE ESTIMATE Introduction The charging of fees is authorized by section 57(1) of the Act , which states: A head shall require the person who makes a request for access to a record to pay fees in the amounts prescribed by the regulations for, (a) the costs of every hour of manual search required to locate a record; (b) the costs of preparing the record for disclosure; (c) computer and other costs incurred in locating, retrieving, processing and copying a record; (d) shipping costs; and (e) any other costs incurred in responding to a request for access to a record. Section 6 of Regulation 460 also deals with fees. It states, in part, as follows: The following are the fees that shall be charged for the purposes of subsection 57(1) of the Act for access to a record: 1. For photocopies and computer printouts, 20 cents per page. ... 3. For manually searching a record, $7.50 for each 15 minutes spent by any person. 4. For preparing a record for disclosure, including severing a part of the record, $7.50 for each 15 minutes spent by any person. ... Under section 57(5) of the Act , my responsibility is to ensure that the amount charged by the Ministry is reasonable in the circumstances. Submissions The appellant submits that following the narrowing of the request, the small reduction in the Ministry's fee estimate was not commensurate with the reduction in the volume of records that were requested. The appellant also explains that it does not have access to the Ministry's document systems to know whether its submissions in this regard are accurate. Nevertheless, the appellant submits that the Ministry did not discharge its obligations set out in the Notice of Inquiry, by providing only a brief explanation that does not cover all the aspects required, and thus failed to
|
|
|
|
Legislation
|
|
|
|
|
|
Subject Index
|
|
|
|
|
|
Signed by
|
|
Irena Pascoe
|
|
|
|
Published
|
|
Sep 28, 2001
|
|
|
|
Type
|
|
Order – Final
|
|
|
|
<<
Back
|
|
|
|
Back to Top
|
 |
|
|
© Copyright
2013
Information and Privacy Commissioner of Ontario. All Rights Reserved.
|