|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Document
|
|
P-2
|
|
|
|
|
|
File #
|
|
Appeal 880003
|
|
|
|
|
|
Institution/HIC
|
|
Ontario Hydro This appeal was received pursuant to subsection 50(1) of the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act, 1987 which gives a person who has made a request for access to a record under subsection 24(1) a right to appeal to the Commi
|
|
|
|
|
|
Summary
|
|
order deals only with the issues that arise in the context of this appeal, that is: A. whether the head's decision to deny an opportunity to examine the record in Ottawa was in accordance with the terms of the Act, B. whether the amount of the fees charged in this case is proper, C. whether the head's decision not to waive fees is proper in the circumstances of this case. ISSUE A: The head's position is that it is not "reasonably practicable" to permit the appellant to examine the record because it is subject to a substantial amount of severing, pursuant to subsection 10(2) of the Act, which requires the head to provide as much of a record as can be reasonably severed without disclosing information that falls under one of the exemptions set out in the Act. In this case the Board Minutes for 1986 and 1987 contain over 95 separate severances. The head's position is that the record cannot be provided for examination where it has been so substantially severed. The head also states that subsection 304(1) of the Ontario Corporations Act requires the minutes of Board of Directors' meetings be kept at the head office of the corporation and open to inspection by any director during normal business hours of the corporation. The head's position is that the Board of Directors minutes are a vital record of the corporation and, as such, are to be maintained in a secure environment. The head's position is that the risk of loss or damage in transporting these records to another location for examination, if the originals could be viewed, is unacceptable. Subsection 30(2) of the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act, 1987 states as follows: Where a person requests the opportunity to examine a record or a part thereof and it is reasonably practicable to give the person that opportunity, the head shall allow the person to examine the record or part thereof in accordance with the regulations. I have reviewed the record in question in its entirety including those parts which the head intends to sever which are interspersed throughout the record. In the circumstances, I agree with the decision of the head that it is not reasonably practicable to provide the appellant an opportunity to examine the record, whether it be in Ottawa or Toronto, while at the same time ensuring that exempt information is not disclosed. Accordingly, the decision of the head not to allow the appellant to examine the record or parts thereof under subsection 30(2) is upheld. Having found that it is not reasonably practicable in the circumstances of this case to provide an opportunity to examine the record, it is not necessary for me to deal with the issue of where the record might be examined. However, I do not preclude the possibility in a proper case where it is "reasonably practicable" to examine a record, that arrangements could be made to transfer the record from a government office in one city or location to a government office in another city or location to make it more convenient for a requester to examine a record. ISSUE B: With respect to the appellant's objection that a photocopy charge of $.20 per page is too high, the Act provides in subsection 57(1) that a head may require a person who makes a request for access to a record to pay a fee. Subsection 57(1) states as follows: Where no provision is made for a charge or fee under any other Act, a head may require the person who makes a request for access to a record or for correction of 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.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Legislation
|
|
-
FIPPA
-
10(2)
-
30(1)
-
30(2)
-
57(1)
-
57(3)(c)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Subject Index
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Signed by
|
|
Sidney Linden
|
|
|
|
|
|
Published
|
|
Jun 09, 1988
|
|
|
|
|
|
Type
|
|
Order
|
|
|
|
|
|
<<
Back
|
|
|
|
Back to Top
|
 |
|
|
|
© Copyright
2013
Information and Privacy Commissioner of Ontario. All Rights Reserved.
|