|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Document
|
|
PO-2310
|
|
|
|
|
|
File #
|
|
PA-030415-1
|
|
|
|
|
|
Institution/HIC
|
|
Ministry of the Environment
|
|
|
|
|
|
Summary
|
|
NATURE OF THE APPEAL: The Ministry of the Environment (the Ministry) received a request under the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act (the Act ) for records relating to chemical emissions from two named facilities. The Ministry conducted a preliminary search and identified that there were approximately 3000 pages of responsive records. The Ministry provided the requester with an interim decision letter and fee estimate, indicating that partial access would be provided, subject to the severance of the identity of various individuals who had made complaints about the facilities, under section 21(1) of the Act . The Ministry’s fee estimate consisted of the following items: Search - 2 hours @ $30/hour = $60 Photocopy - 3000 pages @ $0.20/page = $600 Preparation - 5 hours @ $30/hour = $150 Delivery = $10 Total = $820 The Ministry asked the requester for a deposit of $410, representing 50% of the estimated total fees. The Ministry also advised the requester that additional responsive records might exist at the Ministry’s Mississauga Records Centre, and that if he wanted the Ministry to retrieve and review these records he would have to pay an additional $60 fee. The requester, now the appellant, appealed the Ministry’s fee estimate, including the $60 charge for obtaining records from the Ministry’s Records Centre in Mississauga. During mediation, the appellant narrowed the scope of his request to “a list of emissions given off by [two named facilities] between 1972 and 1992”. The Mediator also advised the appellant that he could ask the Ministry for a fee waiver, pursuant to section 57(4) of the Act . The appellant indicated that he was not prepared to do so at this time. Mediation was otherwise not successful, and the file was transferred to the adjudication stage of the appeal process. I began my inquiry by sending a Notice of Inquiry to the Ministry, setting out the facts and issues in the appeal. The Ministry responded with representations. Because the appellant had reduced the scope of the appeal, the Ministry amended the fee estimate to $388, as outlined in the representations. I then sent the Notice to the appellant, along with the Ministry’s representations. The appellant provided representations in response. DISCUSSION: INTERIM ACCESS DECISION Where a fee exceeds $100, an institution may choose to do all the work necessary to respond to the request at the outset. If so, it must issue a final access decision. Alternatively, the institution may choose not to do all of the work necessary to respond to the request, initially. In this case, it must issue an interim access decision, together with a fee estimate [Order MO-1699]. Also, where the fee is $100 or more, the institution may require the requester to pay a deposit equal to 50% of the estimate before the institution takes any further steps to respond to the request [section 7 of Regulation 460]. The purpose of the fee estimate, interim access decision and deposit process is to provide the requester with sufficient information to make an informed decision as to whether or not to pay the fee and pursue access, while protecting the institution from expending undue time and resources on processing a request that may ultimately be abandoned [Order MO-1699]. An interim access decision is basedon a review of a representative sample of the requested records and/or the advice of an individual who is familiar with the type and content of the records. An interim access decision must be accompanied by a fee estimate and must contain the following elements: a description of the records; an indication of what exemptions or other provisions the institution might rely on to refuse access; an estimate of the extent to which access is likely to be granted; name and position of the institution decision-maker; a statement that the decision may be appealed; and a statement that the requester may ask the institution to waive all or part of the fee. [Orders 81, MO-1479, MO-1614] The appellant’s request letter provides considerable detail on the type of records he is seeking. They all concern emissions data gathered by the Ministry over the course of the time period identified in the request for two named facilities in Niagara Falls. Although the Ministry does not describe the responsive records in detail, it is clear from the content of the request letter that the appellant knows the type of records he is seeking and I am satisfied that there is no ambiguity in the Ministry’s decision letter on this requirement. The decision letter indicates that partial access will likely be provided, and identifies section 21(1) as the basis for denying access to the identity of complainants contained in the various records. The decision letter is signed by the Manager of the Ministry’s Freedom of Information Office as the person responsible for the decision, and includes a statement advising the requester of his right to appeal the decision to this office. The decision letter does not inform the requester of his right to ask the Ministry to waive all or part of the fee, which is a requirement of a proper interim access decision. However, the Mediator remedied this defect in discussions with the appellant. I would remind the Ministry to ensure that all elements of an interim decision letter be included in future, including a statement that the requester may ask the Ministry to waive all or part of the fee. FEES General principles As noted earlier, where the fee is $100 or more, an institution’s fee estimate may be based on either: the actual work done by the institution to respond to the request, or a review of a representative sample of the records and/or the advice of an individual who is familiar with the type and content of the records. [MO-1699] In all cases, the institution must include a detailed breakdown of the estimated fee, and a detailed statement as to how the fee was calculated [Order P-81, MO-1614]. This office may review an institution’s fee estimate and determine whether it complies with the fee provisions in the Act , as set out below. Section 57(1) requires an institution to charge fees for requests under the Act . That section reads: 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. More specific provisions regarding fees are found in sections 6, 6.1, 7 and 9 of Regulation 460 under the Act . The Ministry’s representations General The Ministry’s fee estimate, as revised in response to the appellant’s narrowed request, identifies fees to be charged in three categories: Search time Photocopying Shipping The Ministry bases its estimate on the advice of program area staff familiar with th
|
|
|
|
|
|
Legislation
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Subject Index
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Signed by
|
|
Tom Mitchinson
|
|
|
|
|
|
Published
|
|
Aug 13, 2004
|
|
|
|
|
|
Type
|
|
Order
|
|
|
|
|
|
<<
Back
|
|
|
|
Back to Top
|
 |
|
|
|
© Copyright
2013
Information and Privacy Commissioner of Ontario. All Rights Reserved.
|