|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Document
|
|
P-425
|
|
|
|
|
|
File #
|
|
P-911146
|
|
|
|
|
|
Institution/HIC
|
|
Ministry of Education
|
|
|
|
|
|
Summary
|
|
ORDER BACKGROUND: The Ministry of Education (the Ministry) received a request under the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act (the Act ) for access to "copies of government documents, records, memos, letters, studies, notes or reports pertaining to the integration, mainstreaming and/or segregation of mentally and/or physically disabled children in the Ontario school system." The requester also sought the same materials "pertaining to the provision of 'special education' for the above group." The requester further stated that she is "a parent of a mentally handicapped child who requires the information to lobby to have his future education needs met" and requested that all fees associated with the request be waived. The Ministry provided the requester with some records, and advised her that "since most of [the records] are publicly available documents which do not fall under the FOI Act, the total fee involved in processing this request is waived." The requester appealed this decision on the basis that she was not provided with complete access to all records responsive to her request in the custody or under the control of the Ministry. During mediation of the appeal, the Ministry indicated that background material specifically related to the records released to the requester did exist in its custody and control, and that they represented approximately 10,000 pages in 26 boxes of files. The Ministry issued a fee estimate of a total of $3040.00 ($2040.00 for 68 hours of search time and $1000.00 for copying severed pages of the record). The Ministry also suggested to the requester that she narrow the scope of her request with a view to minimizing the amount of the fees, and invited her to meet with program area officials to discuss any concerns she may have with respect to the area of her request. Other than agreeing to examine the records rather than receive copies, the requester did not wish to narrow the scope of her request, nor did she want to meet with Ministry officials. The Ministry then sent her a new decision letter outlining the details of the fee estimate, and denying her request for a fee waiver. Further mediation was not successful, and notice that an inquiry was being conducted to review the decision of the Ministry was sent to the Ministry and the appellant. Written representations were received from both parties. During the processing of the appeal, it appeared that the Ministry had made its fee waiver decision without obtaining the requester's specific reasons for waiver and any evidence she might provide. Therefore, the Appeals Officer asked the appellant to send to the Ministry her reasons for requesting a fee waiver, with supporting evidence. The Ministry was also asked to provide more details as to the calculation of the fee estimate, and the nature of the severances contemplated with the applicable exemptions. After receiving additional information from the appellant with regard to the fee waiver, the Ministry issued a revised decision, providing details of the calculation of the fee estimate and the grounds for declining to waive the fees. The Ministry also submitted additional representations and documents supporting its decision. ISSUES: The issues arising in this appeal are: A. Whether the amount of the estimated fee under section 57(1) of the Act was calculated in accordance with the terms of the Act . B. Whether the Ministry's decision not to waive the fee under section 57(4) of the Act was in accordance with the terms of the Act . SUBMISSIONS/CONCLUSIONS: ISSUE A: Whether the amount of the estimated fee under section 57(1) of the Act was calculated in accordance with the terms of the Act . Section 57(1) of the Act reads: Where no provision is made for a charge or fee under any other Act, a head shall require the person who makes a request for access to a record to pay, (a) a search charge for every hour of manual search required in excess of two hours 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; and (d) shipping costs. In its revised decision letter, the Ministry explained the fee estimate as follows: Due to the volume of records involved and the complexity of the subject matter of your request, the ministry estimated the following costs: a) approximately 70 hours of manual search time, of which two hours are provided free, leaving 68 hours at $30.00/hour for a total of $2,040.00; b) the cost of preparing the record for disclosure, which is the time required to sever materials from the files (estimate of 416 hours at $30.00 an hour). The total cost for severing the materials is $12,480.00. Please note that in consideration of the very broad nature of your request, we decided not to charge you these costs. Therefore, this amount did not appear in our letter to you of May 29, 1992 [the first fee estimate]. c) The cost of copying the records includes both the cost of time spent copying the record for the purpose of severing and the cost of the actual photocopies for you to review. Please note that while the total cost of the photocopying for the ministry is $1,578.00, we are charging you for the cost of the photocopies only, the amount of approximately $1,000.00. Should you decide that you want your own copies of any of the material that you have viewed, the cost for the copies will be twenty cents per page, as set out in the Regulation to the FOI Act . In this letter the Ministry also informed the appellant that the total cost to the Ministry of processing the request, which included the cost of supervising the appellant's examination of the records, exceeded $34,000.00, an amount "equivalent to hiring one staff member full-time for a year." In addition, the Ministry advised the appellant that the anticipated severances in the record would be effected pursuant to the exemptions under sections 12, 13 and 21 of the Act . Although not specifically stated in the letter, the Ministry implied that a final decision on access will be issued once all of the responsive records have been retrieved and reviewed by the Ministry. The Ministry reiterated its earlier offer to provide to the appellant one of the Ministry's specialists in the fiel
|
|
|
|
|
|
Legislation
|
|
-
FIPPA
-
57(1)
-
57(1)(a)
-
57(1)(b)
-
57(1)(c)
-
57(1)(d)
-
57(4)
-
57(4)(b)
-
57(4)(c)
-
57(5)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Subject Index
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Signed by
|
|
Asfaw Seife
|
|
|
|
|
|
Published
|
|
Mar 02, 1993
|
|
|
|
|
|
Type
|
|
Order
|
|
|
|
|
|
<<
Back
|
|
|
|
Back to Top
|
 |
|
|
|
© Copyright
2013
Information and Privacy Commissioner of Ontario. All Rights Reserved.
|