|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Document
|
|
PO-1990
|
|
|
|
|
|
File #
|
|
PA-010002-2
|
|
|
|
|
|
Institution/HIC
|
|
Ministry of the Solicitor General
|
|
|
|
|
|
Summary
|
|
NATURE OF THE APPEAL: The Ministry of the Solicitor General (the Ministry) received a request under the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act (the Act ) for access to all Ontario Provincial Police (OPP) orders (the orders). The appellant indicated that his intention is to view the orders and to take notes, but not to obtain copies of them. In situations where records are too expensive to produce for inspection, either because of the size of the record or its physical location, the head of an institution can provide a fee estimate under section 57(3) of the Act, and an interim decision on access. Because of the large volume of responsive records, the Ministry provided the appellant with a fee estimate of $7,109.50 and an interim access decision, indicating that portions of the orders would likely be exempt from disclosure under sections 14 (law enforcement), 21 (invasion of privacy) and 22 (information publicly available) of the Act . The appellant appealed the fee estimate. Since the Ministry made only an interim decision on access, only the fee estimate is at issue in the appeal, not the applicability of the exemptions. The orders consist of 76 parts totaling 3,183 pages. Thirty-six parts contain information related to OPP policy and cover such topics as administration, telecommunications, disaster procedures, prisoner care, and explosives disposal. Forty parts contain no information. Of these, some parts have been given a subject heading, but are empty; others are completely reserved for future orders. Given the number and variety of the orders, the Ministry sought to assist the appellant to narrow his request by providing him with an index of the subjects discussed in each part. The Ministry asked the appellant to use the index to identify those parts to which he was seeking access. The appellant re-iterated that he wished to see all the orders. During the mediation process, the Ministry revised its fee estimate to $2,310.00 based on a review of a representative sample of the orders. The Ministry advised that the sample consisted of 30 pages, made up of 10 randomly selected pages from each of Parts 2, 10 and 15. Part 2 (Protocol and Dress) discusses the topics of "order of dress" and "dress of a member". Part 10 (Operations) deals with drug enforcement, and Part 15 sets out guidelines on the development and maintenance of informants. From its 30-page sample, the Ministry identified four pages from Part 2 (40%), eight pages from Part 10 (80%), and 10 pages from Part 15 (100%) as requiring severances. However, on the copy provided to this office, the Ministry had identified nine pages (90%) from Part 10 as requiring severances, but acknowledged only eight in its calculation. The correct number of pages in the sample as identified by the Ministry as requiring severance is therefore 23. Extrapolating from the Ministry's sample, 76% of the pages (2,419 pages) will require severances. Using the Ministry's estimate of two minutes per page to carry out the severances, it will take 80 hours to complete the orders for a fee estimate of $2,400.00. The Ministry also provided an estimate for photocopying costs. However, since the appellant indicated that he is not seeking a copy of the orders, the photocopying costs are not chargeable and therefore are not at issue. The Ministry also advised that it no longer expected to claim the exemptions in sections 21 and 22 of the Act , but would likely rely on the exemption in section 14 and an additional discretionary exemption in section 20 (danger to health and safety) to withhold portions of the record. I initially sent a copy of a Notice of Inquiry that set out the issues in this appeal to the Ministry and received representations. I then sent a Notice together with the Ministry's entire representations to the appellant who also sent in submissions. Later, to clarify the nature and scope of the orders, I went to the OPP headquarters in Orillia, Ontario to view them. I worked from a hard copy of all of the orders prepared by a representative of the OPP. DISCUSSION: Introduction The charging of a fee is authorized by section 57(1) of the Act and section 6 of Regulation 460 under the Act . The relevant portions state: 57. (1) 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, (b) the costs of preparing the record for disclosure; . . . . . 6. The following are the fees that shall be charged for the purposes of subsection 57(1) of the Act for access to a record: . . . . . 4. For preparing a record for disclosure, including severing a part of the record, $7.50 for each 15 minutes spent by any person. . . . . .
|
|
|
|
|
|
Legislation
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Subject Index
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Signed by
|
|
Dawn Maruno
|
|
|
|
|
|
Published
|
|
Jan 30, 2002
|
|
|
|
|
|
Type
|
|
Order
|
|
|
|
|
|
<<
Back
|
|
|
|
Back to Top
|
 |
|
|
|
© Copyright
2013
Information and Privacy Commissioner of Ontario. All Rights Reserved.
|