News
Law
Oceana sues NOAA, calls FOIA fees 'prohibitively high'; Industry says same; IG gave warning in '09 |
Oceana sues NOAA, calls FOIA fees 'prohibitively high'; Industry says same; IG gave warning in '09 |
|
NEW BEDFORD, Mass. and WASHINGTON -- Dec. 28, 2010 — In a federal lawsuit filed just before Christmas, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration is accused of violating the Freedom of Information Act by charging the environmental group Oceana Inc. exorbitant fees to fulfill its document requests. "The (National Marine) Fisheries Service told Oceana that it would only provide the unclassified, non-commercial documents to which Oceana is entitled if Oceana paid $16,338.60 in advance," says the suit filed in federal district court in Washington, D.C. "This happens all the time," Pamela Lafreniere, a New Bedford lawyer who deals with fisheries cases, told The Standard-Times. She said she is being billed some $600 for the answer to a single question about the use of the asset forfeiture fund within NOAA.
This is not the first time issues have arisen surrounding NOAA's handling of FOIA requests. In a February 26, 2009 letter to the late Senator Edward Kennedy of Massachusetts,
the Commerce Department Inspector General found that "NMFS did not
comply with its own procedures" in handling a 2008 FOIA request from
scallop industry representatives. In that case, "NOAA did not meet
required FOIA deadlines and overestimated the fees associated with the
FOIA request." The Inspector General found that "NOAA's poor handling"
of the request "contributes to its reputation in the Northeast Region as
an agency that is unconcerned with transparency." According to the
Inspector General, industry representatives found "NOAA's mishandling"
of the FOIA request "frustrating to them, yet not surprising given
previous exchanges with the agency."
Even after the Inspector General's findings were reported to Senator
Kennedy, industry requests for information have received similar
responses. In Sept. 2009, a
letter signed by an assistant for Mark Paterni, Assistant Director of
Law Enforement, stated that filling a request for documents detailing
fines collected by the NOAA Fisheries Office of Law Enforcement in the
Northeast would require a payment of more than $17,000. These fines
later became the subject of an inquiry by the Commerce Department
Inspector General.
Oceana, based in Washington, D.C., contends that it is entitled to a
waiver of fees on the grounds that it qualifies as a media company
because it publishes government information to inform the public about
environmental issues. Media outlets are exempt from charges associated
with FOIA requests.
Read the complete story from the South Coast Today.
[This story was compiled from material in the New Bedford Standard-Times' story and supplemented by material obtained by Saving Seafood's Washington-based research staff.]
|
|||
|
|
|
||
HASTINGS: Time to improve the Endangered Species Act
May 18, 2012 - When the Endangered Species Act (ESA) was signed into law in 1973 by President Nixon, he spoke about the importance of preserving “the rich array of animal life with which our country has been blessed.” I believe that goal is as important today as it was back then. However, after nearly 40 years, it’s time to take a fresh, honest look at the law and consider whether there are ways it could be improved to do a better job of protecting and recovering species.






