Case 1:17-cv-01448 Document 1 Filed 07/20/17 Page 1 of 10 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA ) ) ) ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) ) U.S. DEPARTMENT OF ) HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES, ) 200 Independence Avenue SW ) Washington, DC 20201 ) ) and ) ) OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT AND BUDGET, ) 725 17th Street NW ) Washington, DC 20503 ) ) Defendants. ) ) AMERICAN OVERSIGHT, 1030 15th Street NW, B255 Washington, DC 20005 Case No. 17-1448 COMPLAINT 1. Plaintiff American Oversight brings this action against the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services and the Office of Management and Budget under the Freedom of Information Act, 5 U.S.C. § 552 (FOIA), and the Declaratory Judgment Act, 28 U.S.C. §§ 2201 and 2202, seeking declaratory and injunctive relief to compel compliance with the requirements of FOIA. JURISDICTION AND VENUE 2. This Court has jurisdiction over this action pursuant to 5 U.S.C. § 552(a)(4)(B) and 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331, 2201, and 2202. 1 Case 1:17-cv-01448 Document 1 Filed 07/20/17 Page 2 of 10 3. Venue is proper in this district pursuant to 5 U.S.C. § 552(a)(4)(B) and 28 U.S.C. § 1391(e). 4. Because Defendant the Department of Health and Human Services has denied American Oversight’s request for expedited processing, American Oversight is now entitled to judicial review of that claim under 5 U.S.C. § 552(a)(6)(A)(ii). 5. Because Defendants have failed to comply with other applicable time-limit provisions of FOIA, American Oversight is deemed to have constructively exhausted its administrative remedies pursuant to 5 U.S.C. § 552(a)(6)(C)(i) and is now entitled to judicial action enjoining the agency from continuing to withhold agency records and ordering the production of agency records improperly withheld. PARTIES 6. Plaintiff American Oversight is a nonpartisan, non-profit section 501(c)(3) organization committed to the promotion of transparency in government, the education of the public about government activities, and ensuring the accountability of government officials. Through research and FOIA requests, American Oversight uses the information it gathers, and its analysis of it, to educate the public about the activities and operations of the federal government through reports, published analyses, press releases, and other media. The organization is incorporated under the laws of the District of Columbia. 7. Defendant the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) is a department of the executive branch of the U.S. government headquartered in Washington, DC, and an agency of the federal government within the meaning of 5 U.S.C. § 552(f)(1). HHS has possession, custody, and control of the records that American Oversight seeks. 2 Case 1:17-cv-01448 Document 1 Filed 07/20/17 Page 3 of 10 8. Defendant the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) is an agency of the federal government within the meaning of 5 U.S.C. § 552(f)(1) headquartered in Washington, DC. OMB has possession, custody, and control of the records that American Oversight seeks. STATEMENT OF FACTS 9. On information and belief, on or about March 23, 2017, the Trump administration presented a document to congressional Republicans outlining potential regulatory actions the administration could take to affect the implementation of parts of the Affordable Care Act without legislative action. 10. On Thursday, May 4, 2017, American Oversight submitted two identical FOIA requests to HHS and OMB seeking a copy of that document, among other things. 11. The FOIA requests sought access to the following records: (1) A copy of any letter or memorandum sent on or about March 23, 2017 to Congressional Republicans outlining potential regulatory actions related to the Affordable Care Act. The requested record was referenced in an April 4, 2017 letter from 21 Senators to Secretary Tom Price.5 (2) Any other communications from [your agency] to any member of Congress or congressional staff concerning potential administrative actions relating to implementation of the Affordable Care Act. Please provide all responsive records from March 6, 2017, to the date the search is conducted. Footnote 5 in the FOIA requests stated that the letter to Secretary Price is available at https://www.casey.senate.gov/newsroom/releases/senators-demand-trump-administrationreleasesecret-plan-to-undermine-health-care-system-that-was-presented-to-house-freedomcaucus. Copies of the FOIA requests are attached hereto as Exhibits A (HHS) and B (OMB) and incorporated herein. 3 Case 1:17-cv-01448 Document 1 Filed 07/20/17 Page 4 of 10 Entitlement to Expedited Processing 12. American Oversight sought expedited processing of both the HHS and OMB FOIA requests pursuant to 5 U.S.C. § 552(a)(6)(E)(v)(II), as well as 45 C.F.R. § 5.27(b)(2) and 5 C.F.R. § 1303.10(d)(1)(ii), respectively. 13. American Oversight’s FOIA requests were “made by a person primarily engaged in disseminating information,” and there is an “urgency to inform the public concerning actual or alleged Federal Government activity.” 5 U.S.C. § (a)(6)(E)(v)(II); see also 45 C.F.R. § 5.27(b)(2); 5 C.F.R. § 1303.10(d)(1)(ii). 14. American Oversight is primarily engaged in disseminating information to the 15. American Oversight’s mission is to promote transparency in government, to public. educate the public about government activities, and to ensure the accountability of government officials. American Oversight uses the information it gathers, and its analysis of it, to educate the public through reports, press releases, and other media. American Oversight also makes materials it gathers available on its website and promotes their availability on social media platforms. 16. There is an urgent need to inform the public about the federal government activity that is the subject of American Oversight’s FOIA requests. 17. At the time American Oversight filed its FOIA request, House Republicans had pulled their initial proposal to “repeal and replace” the Affordable Care Act (ACA), and Speaker of the House Paul Ryan had declared that the ACA was “the law of the land” and would remain so “for the foreseeable future.” That remains true today, as Senate Republicans recently failed to gather enough votes for their parallel effort to “repeal and replace” the ACA. 4 Case 1:17-cv-01448 Document 1 Filed 07/20/17 Page 5 of 10 18. Absent legislative action to replace the ACA, President Donald Trump has stated on numerous occasions—both before the filing of American Oversight’s FOIA requests and after—that he believes the government should let the ACA fail. 19. There is an urgent need for the public to understand how the Trump administration is planning to regulate the health care system under current law consistent with the President’s oath to faithfully execute the law. 20. Uncertainty about the administration’s regulatory approach to the health care system and the implementation of current law is reportedly having an adverse effect on health insurance marketplaces, providers, and consumers. 21. The information sought in American Oversight’s FOIA requests will meaningfully further public understanding of the administration’s plans to regulate the health care system under current law. Agency Responses 22. HHS assigned the request tracking number 2017-00722-FOIA-OS. 23. On June 9, 2017, HHS sent American Oversight a letter denying its request for expedited processing. A copy of HHS’s letter is attached hereto as Exhibit C and incorporated herein. 24. American Oversight has received no further communication from HHS regarding its FOIA request. 25. American Oversight has received no communication from OMB regarding its FOIA request. 5 Case 1:17-cv-01448 Document 1 Filed 07/20/17 Page 6 of 10 Exhaustion of Administrative Remedies 26. Neither HHS nor OMB has responded to American Oversight’s FOIA requests, notwithstanding the obligation of the agencies under FOIA to respond within twenty working days. 27. Through HHS’s denial of American Oversight’s request for expedition, American Oversight has exhausted its administrative remedies as to that issue and seeks immediate judicial review. 28. Through HHS’s failure to respond to American Oversight’s FOIA request within the time period required by law, American Oversight has constructively exhausted its administrative remedies as to that issue and seeks immediate judicial review. 29. Through OMB’s failure to make a determination as to American Oversight’s request for expedition or to respond to American Oversight’s FOIA request within the time period required by law, American Oversight has constructively exhausted its administrative remedies as to OMB and seeks immediate judicial review. COUNT I Violation of FOIA, 5 U.S.C. § 552 Wrongful Denial of Expedited Processing by HHS 30. American Oversight repeats the allegations in the foregoing paragraphs and incorporates them as though fully set forth herein. 31. American Oversight properly requested records within the possession, custody, and control of HHS on an expedited basis. 32. HHS is an agency subject to FOIA and must process FOIA requests on an expedited basis pursuant to the requirements of 5 U.S.C. § 552(a)(6)(E) and 45 C.F.R. § 5.27(b). 6 Case 1:17-cv-01448 Document 1 Filed 07/20/17 Page 7 of 10 33. American Oversight is primarily engaged in disseminating information to the public, and there is an urgent need to inform the public about the federal government activity that is the subject of American Oversight’s FOIA request, such that expedited processing is appropriate under 5 U.S.C. § 552(a)(6)(E)(v)(II) and 45 C.F.R. § 5.27(b)(2). 34. HHS wrongfully denied expedited processing of American Oversight’s request. 35. HHS’s failure to grant expedited processing under 45 C.F.R. § 5.27(b)(2) violated FOIA and HHS regulations. 36. Plaintiff American Oversight is therefore entitled to declaratory and injunctive relief requiring HHS to grant expedited processing of American Oversight’s FOIA request. COUNT II Violation of FOIA, 5 U.S.C. § 552 Failure to Grant Expedited Processing by OMB 37. American Oversight repeats the allegations in the foregoing paragraphs and incorporates them as though fully set forth herein. 38. American Oversight properly requested records within the possession, custody, and control of OMB on an expedited basis. 39. OMB is an agency subject to FOIA and must process FOIA requests on an expedited basis pursuant to the requirements of 5 U.S.C. § 552(a)(6)(E) and 5 C.F.R. § 1303.10(d). 40. American Oversight is primarily engaged in disseminating information to the public, and there is an urgent need to inform the public about the federal government activity that is the subject of American Oversight’s OMB FOIA request, such that expedited processing is appropriate under 5 U.S.C. § 552(a)(6)(E)(v)(II) and 5 C.F.R. § 1303.10(d)(1)(ii). 7 Case 1:17-cv-01448 Document 1 Filed 07/20/17 Page 8 of 10 41. OMB failed to determine whether expedited processing was appropriate and notify American Oversight of any such determination within ten days after the date of its FOIA request. 42. OMB’s failure to grant expedited processing violates FOIA and OMB regulations. 43. Plaintiff American Oversight is therefore entitled to injunctive and declaratory relief requiring OMB to grant expedited processing of American Oversight’s FOIA request. COUNT III Violation of FOIA, 5 U.S.C. § 552 Failure to Conduct Adequate Search for Responsive Records by HHS and OMB 44. American Oversight repeats the allegations in the foregoing paragraphs and incorporates them as though fully set forth herein. 45. American Oversight properly requested records within the possession, custody, and control of Defendants. 46. Defendants are agencies subject to FOIA and must therefore make reasonable efforts to search for requested records. 47. Defendants have failed to promptly review agency records for the purpose of locating those records that are responsive to American Oversight’s FOIA requests. 48. Defendants’ failure to conduct an adequate search for responsive records violates 49. Plaintiff American Oversight is therefore entitled to declaratory and injunctive FOIA. relief requiring Defendants to promptly make reasonable efforts to search for records responsive to American Oversight’s FOIA requests. 8 Case 1:17-cv-01448 Document 1 Filed 07/20/17 Page 9 of 10 COUNT IV Violation of FOIA, 5 U.S.C. § 552 Wrongful Withholding of Non-Exempt Records by HHS and OMB 50. American Oversight repeats the allegations in the foregoing paragraphs and incorporates them as though fully set forth herein. 51. American Oversight properly requested records within the possession, custody, and control of Defendants. 52. Defendants are agencies subject to FOIA and must therefore release in response to a FOIA request any disclosable records and provide a lawful reason for withholding any materials. 53. Defendants are wrongfully withholding agency records requested by American Oversight by failing to produce records responsive to its FOIA requests. 54. Defendants’ failure to provide all responsive records violates FOIA. 55. Plaintiff American Oversight is therefore entitled to declaratory and injunctive relief requiring Defendants to promptly produce all non-exempt records responsive to its FOIA requests and provide indexes justifying the withholding of any responsive records withheld under claim of exemption. REQUESTED RELIEF WHEREFORE, American Oversight respectfully requests the Court to: (1) Order Defendants to expedite the processing of American Oversight’s FOIA requests; (2) Order Defendants to conduct a search reasonably calculated to uncover all records responsive to American Oversight’s FOIA requests; (3) Order Defendants to produce, by such date as the Court deems appropriate, any and all non-exempt records responsive to American Oversight’s FOIA requests and 9 Case 1:17-cv-01448 Document 1 Filed 07/20/17 Page 10 of 10 indexes justifying the withholding of any responsive records withheld under claim of exemption; (4) Enjoin Defendants from continuing to withhold any and all non-exempt records responsive to American Oversight’s FOIA requests; (5) Award American Oversight attorneys’ fees and other litigation costs reasonably incurred in this action, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. § 552(a)(4)(E); and (6) Grant American Oversight such other relief as the Court deems just and proper. Dated: July 20, 2017 Respectfully submitted, /s/ Sara Kaiser Creighton Sara Kaiser Creighton D.C. Bar No. 1002367 Austin R. Evers D.C. Bar No. 1006999 John E. Bies D.C. Bar No. 483730 AMERICAN OVERSIGHT 1030 15th Street NW, B255 Washington, DC 20005 (202) 869-5246 sara.creighton@americanoversight.org austin.evers@americanoversight.org john.bies@americanoversight.org Counsel for Plaintiff 10 Case 1:17-cv-01448 Document 1-1 Filed 07/20/17 Page 1 of 8 Exhibit A Case 1:17-cv-01448 Document 1-1 Filed 07/20/17 Page 2 of 8 May 4, 2017 VIA ELECTRONIC MAIL Michael Marquis Freedom of Information Officer Department of Health and Human Services Hubert H. Humphrey Building, Room 729H 200 Independence Avenue SW Washington, DC 20201 FOIARequest@hhs.gov Re: Expedited Freedom of Information Act Request Dear Mr. Marquis: Pursuant to the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. § 552 et seq. and Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) implementing regulations, 45 C.F.R. Part 5, American Oversight makes the following request for records. On Monday, March 6, 2017, Republicans in the House of Representatives introduced their proposal to “repeal and replace” the Affordable Care Act (ACA), a set of bills collectively known as the American Health Care Act (AHCA). However, on March 24, 2017, House Republican leaders pulled the AHCA after failing to gather enough support to pass the proposal. At that time, President Trump stated that he believed the best path forward would be to let the ACA “explode,” so that Democrats would be motivated to negotiate for a new health care deal. Since then, there have been numerous reports about plans by the Trump administration to take administrative actions that would affect the operation of the ACA. Additionally, the Trump administration 1 2 3 4 Amy Goldstein et al., House Republicans Release Long-Awaited Plan to Replace Obamacare, WASH. POST Mar. 6, 2017, https://www.washingtonpost.com/powerpost/new-details-emerge-ongop-plans-to-repeal-and-replace-obamacare/2017/03/06/04751e3e-028f-11e7-ad5bd22680e18d10_story.html?utm_term=.dc0109d81374. Mike DeBonis et al., GOP Health-Care Bill: House Republican Leaders Abruptly Pull Their Rewrite of the Nation’s Health-Care Law, WASH. POST, Mar. 24, 2017, https://www.washingtonpost.com/powerpost/house-leaders-prepare-to-vote-friday-on-health-carereform/2017/03/24/736f1cd6-1081-11e7-9d5a-a83e627dc120_story.html?hpid=hp_rhp-bannermain_housevote715a-banner%3Ahomepage%2Fstory&utm_term=.a8fe3ca41561. DeBonis et al., supra note 2. See, e.g., Stephanie Armour, With GOP Plan Dead, Trump Weighs Other Ways to Reshape Health Care, WALL ST. J. (Mar. 25, 2017, 1:33 PM), https://www.wsj.com/articles/with-gop-plandead-trump-eyes-other-ways-to-reshape-health-care-1490434201; Dan Diamond & Josh Dawsey, Trump Dangles Obamacare Payments to Force Dems to the Table, POLITICO (Apr. 12, 2017, 8:18 PM), http://www.politico.com/story/2017/04/donald-trump-obamacare-subsidies-negotiate1 2 3 4 1030 15th Street NW, Suite B255, Washington, DC 20005 AmericanOversight.org Case 1:17-cv-01448 Document 1-1 Filed 07/20/17 Page 3 of 8 reportedly delivered a letter to Congressional Republicans on March 23, 2017, that outlined ACA regulations the administration could repeal on its own, without Congress, and other administrative actions that the administration might take that would affect the implementation of the ACA. The public deserves to know what steps the administration is taking to meet its obligations to implement the current health care law, as well as what role industry groups are having in that process. Requested Records American Oversight requests that HHS produce the following within twenty business days and seeks expedited review of this request for the reasons identified below: 1. A copy of any letter or memorandum sent on or about March 23, 2017 to Congressional Republicans outlining potential regulatory actions related to the Affordable Care Act. The requested record was referenced in an April 4, 2017 letter from 21 Senators to Secretary Tom Price. 5 2. Any other communications from HHS to any member of Congress or congressional staff concerning potential administrative actions relating to implementation of the Affordable Care Act. Please provide all responsive records from March 6, 2017, to the date the search is conducted. In addition to the records requested above, American Oversight also requests records describing the processing of this request, including records sufficient to identify search terms used and locations and custodians searched and any tracking sheets used to track the processing of this request. If your agency uses FOIA questionnaires or certifications completed by individual custodians or components to determine whether they possess responsive materials or to describe how they conducted searches, we also request any such records prepared in connection with the processing of this request. American Oversight seeks all responsive records regardless of format, medium, or physical characteristics. In conducting your search, please understand the terms “record,” “document,” and “information” in their broadest sense, to include any written, typed, recorded, graphic, printed, or audio material of any kind. We seek records of any kind, including electronic records, audiotapes, videotapes, and photographs, as well as letters, emails, facsimiles, telephone messages, voice mail messages and transcripts, notes, or minutes of any meetings, telephone conversations or discussions. Our request includes any attachments to these records. No category of material should be omitted from search, collection, and production. 237174; Benjamin Siegel, Trump Threatens to Undermine Obamacare to Get Democrats to Negotiate, ABC NEWS (Apr. 12, 2017, 10:03 PM), http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/trumpthreatens-undermine-obamacare-democrats-negotiate/story?id=46764709. The letter to Secretary Price is available at https://www.casey.senate.gov/newsroom/releases/senators-demand-trump-administration-releasesecret-plan-to-undermine-health-care-system-that-was-presented-to-house-freedom-caucus. 5 2 HHS-17-0133 Case 1:17-cv-01448 Document 1-1 Filed 07/20/17 Page 4 of 8 Please search all records regarding agency business. You may not exclude searches of files or emails in the personal custody of your officials, such as personal email accounts. Records of official business conducted using unofficial systems or stored outside of official files is subject to the Federal Records Act and FOIA. It is not adequate to rely on policies and procedures that require officials to move such information to official systems within a certain period of time; American Oversight has a right to records contained in those files even if material has not yet been moved to official systems or if officials have, through negligence or willfulness, failed to meet their obligations. 6 7 In addition, please note that in conducting a “reasonable search” as required by law, you must employ the most up-to-date technologies and tools available, in addition to searches by individual custodians likely to have responsive information. Recent technology may have rendered HHS’s prior FOIA practices unreasonable. In light of the government-wide requirements to manage information electronically by the end of 2016, it is no longer reasonable to rely exclusively on custodian-driven searches. Furthermore, agencies that have adopted the National Archives and Records Agency (NARA) Capstone program, or similar policies, now maintain emails in a form that is reasonably likely to be more complete than individual custodians’ files. For example, a custodian may have deleted a responsive email from his or her email program, but HHS’s archiving tools would capture that email under Capstone. Accordingly, American Oversight insists that HHS use the most up-to-date technologies to search for responsive information and take steps to ensure that the most complete repositories of information are searched. American Oversight is available to work with you to craft appropriate search terms. However, custodian searches are still required; agencies may not have direct access to files stored in .PST files, outside of network drives, in paper format, or in personal email accounts. 8 See Competitive Enter. Inst. v. Office of Sci. & Tech. Policy, 827 F.3d 145, 149—50 (D.C. Cir. 2016); cf. Judicial Watch, Inc. v. Kerry, 844 F.3d 952, 955—56 (D.C. Cir. 2016). See Competitive Enter. Inst. v. Office of Sci. & Tech. Policy, No. 14-cv-765, slip op. at 8 (D.D.C. Dec. 12, 2016) (“The Government argues that because the agency had a policy requiring [the official] to forward all of his emails from his [personal] account to his business email, the [personal] account only contains duplicate agency records at best. Therefore, the Government claims that any hypothetical deletion of the [personal account] emails would still leave a copy of those records intact in [the official’s] work email. However, policies are rarely followed to perfection by anyone. At this stage of the case, the Court cannot assume that each and every workrelated email in the [personal] account was duplicated in [the official’s] work email account.” (citations omitted)). Presidential Memorandum—Managing Government Records, 76 Fed. Reg. 75,423 (Nov. 28, 2011), https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/the-press-office/2011/11/28/presidentialmemorandum-managing-government-records; Office of Mgmt. & Budget, Exec. Office of the President, Memorandum for the Heads of Executive Departments & Independent Agencies, “Managing Government Records Directive,” M-12-18 (Aug. 24, 2012), https://www.archives.gov/files/records-mgmt/m-12-18.pdf. 6 7 8 3 HHS-17-0133 Case 1:17-cv-01448 Document 1-1 Filed 07/20/17 Page 5 of 8 Under the FOIA Improvement Act of 2016, agencies must adopt a presumption of disclosure, withholding information “only if . . . disclosure would harm an interest protected by an exemption” or “disclosure is prohibited by law.” If it is your position that any portion of the requested records is exempt from disclosure, American Oversight requests that you provide an index of those documents as required under Vaughn v. Rosen, 484 F.2d 820 (D.C. Cir. 1973), cert. denied, 415 U.S. 977 (1974). As you are aware, a Vaughn index must describe each document claimed as exempt with sufficient specificity “to permit a reasoned judgment as to whether the material is actually exempt under FOIA.” Moreover, the Vaughn index “must describe each document or portion thereof withheld, and for each withholding it must discuss the consequences of disclosing the sought-after information.” Further, “the withholding agency must supply ‘a relatively detailed justification, specifically identifying the reasons why a particular exemption is relevant and correlating those claims with the particular part of a withheld document to which they apply.’” 9 10 11 12 In the event some portions of the requested records are properly exempt from disclosure, please disclose any reasonably segregable non-exempt portions of the requested records. If it is your position that a document contains non-exempt segments, but that those non-exempt segments are so dispersed throughout the document as to make segregation impossible, please state what portion of the document is non-exempt, and how the material is dispersed throughout the document. Claims of nonsegregability must be made with the same degree of detail as required for claims of exemptions in a Vaughn index. If a request is denied in whole, please state specifically that it is not reasonable to segregate portions of the record for release. 13 You should institute a preservation hold on information responsive to this request. American Oversight intends to pursue all legal avenues to enforce its right of access under FOIA, including litigation if necessary. Accordingly, HHS is on notice that litigation is reasonably foreseeable. To ensure that this request is properly construed, that searches are conducted in an adequate but efficient manner, and that extraneous costs are not incurred, American Oversight welcomes an opportunity to discuss its request with you before you undertake your search or incur search or duplication costs. By working together at the outset, American Oversight and HHS can decrease the likelihood of costly and time-consuming litigation in the future. Where possible, please provide responsive material in electronic format by email or in PDF or TIF format on a USB drive. Please send any responsive material being sent by mail to American Oversight, 1030 15 Street NW, Suite B255, Washington, DC 20005. If it will accelerate release of responsive records to American Oversight, please also provide responsive material on rolling basis. th FOIA Improvement Act of 2016 § 2 (Pub. L. No. 114–185). Founding Church of Scientology v. Bell, 603 F.2d 945, 949 (D.C. Cir. 1979). King v. U.S. Dep’t of Justice, 830 F.2d 210, 223—24 (D.C. Cir. 1987) (emphasis in original). Id. at 224 (citing Mead Data Central, Inc. v. U.S. Dep’t of the Air Force, 566 F.2d 242, 251 (D.C. Cir. 1977)). Mead Data Central, 566 F.2d at 261. 9 10 11 12 13 4 HHS-17-0133 Case 1:17-cv-01448 Document 1-1 Filed 07/20/17 Page 6 of 8 Fee Waiver Request In accordance with 5 U.S.C. § 552(a)(4)(A)(iii) and 45 C.F.R. § 5.54, American Oversight requests a waiver of fees associated with processing this request for records. The subject of this request concerns the operations of the federal government, and the disclosures will likely contribute to a better understanding of relevant government procedures by the general public in a significant way. Moreover, the request is primarily and fundamentally for non-commercial purposes. 14 15 American Oversight requests a waiver of fees because disclosure of the requested information is “in the public interest because it is likely to contribute significantly to public understanding” of government.” On March 24, 2017, House Republican leaders pulled their proposal to “repeal and replace” the ACA after failing to gather enough support to pass the proposal. Although efforts to pass health care reform legislation continue, the ACA remains in effect. Given that the ACA remains the law of the land, the public has both a need and a right to know how the Trump administration is planning to regulate the current health care system under applicable law. 16 17 18 This request is primarily and fundamentally for non-commercial purposes. As a 501(c)(3) nonprofit, American Oversight does not have a commercial purpose and the release of the information requested is not in American Oversight’s financial interest. American Oversight’s mission is to promote transparency in government, to educate the public about government activities, and to ensure the accountability of government officials. American Oversight will use the information gathered, and its analysis of it, to educate the public through reports, press releases, or other media. American Oversight will also make materials it gathers available on our public website and promote their availability on social media platforms, such as Facebook and Twitter. One example of American Oversight’s demonstrated public disclosure of documents and creation of editorial content is in its recently launched “Audit the Wall” effort, where the organization is gathering and analyzing information and commenting on public releases of information related to the administrations proposed construction of a barrier along the U.S.-Mexico border. 19 Accordingly, American Oversight qualifies for a fee waiver. 45 C.F.R. § 5.54(a). 45 C.F.R. § 5.54(a). 45 C.F.R. § 5.54(b)(1)-(2). DeBonis et al., supra note 2. 45 C.F.R. § 5.54(b)(3). American Oversight currently has over 10,800 page likes on Facebook, and over 32,200 followers on Twitter. American Oversight, FACEBOOK, https://www.facebook.com/weareoversight/ (last visited May 1, 2017); American Oversight (@weareoversight), TWITTER (last visited May 1, 2017). 14 15 16 17 18 19 5 HHS-17-0133 Case 1:17-cv-01448 Document 1-1 Filed 07/20/17 Page 7 of 8 Application for Expedited Processing Pursuant to 5 U.S.C. § 552(a)(6)(E)(i) and 45 C.F.R. § 5.27(b), American Oversight requests that HHS expedite the processing of this request. I certify to be true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief, that there is an urgent need to inform the public about the federal government activity that is the subject of this request. On March 24, 2017, House Republican leaders pulled their proposal to “repeal and replace” the Affordable Care Act. Given Mr. Trump’s well-known hostility toward the ACA, there is an urgent need for the public to understand how the Trump Administration is regulating the health care system under the current law. The information sought in this request will meaningfully further public discourse on this issue of national concern. 20 I further certify that American Oversight is primarily engaged in disseminating information to the public. American Oversight’s mission is to promote transparency in government, to educate the public about government activities, and to ensure the accountability of government officials. Similar to other organizations that have been found to satisfy the criteria necessary to qualify for expedition, American Oversight “‘gathers information of potential interest to a segment of the public, uses its editorial skills to turn the raw material into a distinct work, and distributes that work to an audience.’” American Oversight will use the information gathered, and its analysis of it, to educate the public through reports, press releases, and other media. American Oversight will also make materials it gathers available on its public website and promote their availability on social media platforms, such as Facebook and Twitter. One example of American Oversight’s demonstrated public disclosure of documents and creation of editorial content is in its recently launched “Audit the Wall” effort, where the organization is gathering and analyzing information and commenting on public releases of information related to the administrations proposed construction of a barrier along the U.S.-Mexico border. 21 22 23 Accordingly, American Oversight’s request satisfies the criteria for expedition. Conclusion We share a common mission to promote transparency in government. American Oversight looks forward to working with your agency on this request. If you do not understand any part of this request, have any questions, or foresee any problems in fully releasing the requested records, DeBonis et al., supra note 2. See ACLU v. U.S. Dep’t of Justice, 321 F. Supp. 2d 24, 30—31 (D.D.C. 2004); EPIC v. Dep’t of Defense, 241 F. Supp. 2d 5, 15 (D.D.C. 2003). ACLU, 321 F. Supp. 2d at 29 n.5 (quoting EPIC, 241 F. Supp. 2d at 11). American Oversight currently has over 10,800 page likes on Facebook, and over 32,200 followers on Twitter. American Oversight, FACEBOOK, https://www.facebook.com/weareoversight/ (last visited May 1, 2017); American Oversight (@weareoversight), TWITTER (last visited May 1, 2017). 20 21 22 23 6 HHS-17-0133 Case 1:17-cv-01448 Document 1-1 Filed 07/20/17 Page 8 of 8 please contact Sara Creighton at foia@americanoversight.org or (202) 869-5246. Also, if American Oversight’s request for a fee waiver is not granted in full, please contact us immediately upon making such a determination. Sincerely, Austin R. Evers Executive Director American Oversight 7 HHS-17-0133 Case 1:17-cv-01448 Document 1-2 Filed 07/20/17 Page 1 of 8 Exhibit Case 1:17-cv-01448 Document 1-2 Filed 07/20/17 Page 2 of 8 May 4, 2017 VIA ELECTRONIC MAIL FOIA Officer Office of Management and Budget 725 17 Street NW Washington, DC 20503 OMBFOIA@omb.eop.gov th Re: Expedited Freedom of Information Act Request Dear Freedom of Information Act Officer: Pursuant to the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. § 552 et seq. and Office of Management and Budget (OMB) implementing regulations, 5 C.F.R. § 1303, American Oversight makes the following request for records. On Monday, March 6, 2017, Republicans in the House of Representatives introduced their proposal to “repeal and replace” the Affordable Care Act (ACA), a set of bills collectively known as the American Health Care Act (AHCA). However, on March 24, 2017, House Republican leaders pulled the AHCA after failing to gather enough support to pass the proposal. At that time, President Trump stated that he believed the best path forward would be to let the ACA “explode,” so that Democrats would be motivated to negotiate for a new health care deal. Since then, there have been numerous reports about plans by the Trump administration to take administrative actions that would affect the operation of the ACA. Additionally, the Trump administration 1 2 3 4 Amy Goldstein et al., House Republicans Release Long-Awaited Plan to Replace Obamacare, WASH. POST, Mar. 6, 2017, https://www.washingtonpost.com/powerpost/new-details-emerge-ongop-plans-to-repeal-and-replace-obamacare/2017/03/06/04751e3e-028f-11e7-ad5bd22680e18d10_story.html?utm_term=.dc0109d81374. Mike DeBonis et al., GOP Health-Care Bill: House Republican Leaders Abruptly Pull Their Rewrite of the Nation’s Health-Care Law, WASH. POST, Mar. 24, 2017, https://www.washingtonpost.com/powerpost/house-leaders-prepare-to-vote-friday-on-health-carereform/2017/03/24/736f1cd6-1081-11e7-9d5a-a83e627dc120_story.html?hpid=hp_rhp-bannermain_housevote715a-banner%3Ahomepage%2Fstory&utm_term=.a8fe3ca41561. DeBonis et al., supra note 2. See, e.g., Stephanie Armour, With GOP Plan Dead, Trump Weighs Other Ways to Reshape Health Care, WALL ST. J. (Mar. 25, 2017, 1:33 PM), https://www.wsj.com/articles/with-gop-plandead-trump-eyes-other-ways-to-reshape-health-care-1490434201; Dan Diamond & Josh Dawsey, Trump Dangles Obamacare Payments to Force Dems to the Table, POLITICO (Apr. 12, 2017, 8:18 PM), http://www.politico.com/story/2017/04/donald-trump-obamacare-subsidies-negotiate237174; Benjamin Siegel, Trump Threatens to Undermine Obamacare to Get Democrats to 1 2 3 4 1030 15th Street NW, Suite B255, Washington, DC 20005 AmericanOversight.org Case 1:17-cv-01448 Document 1-2 Filed 07/20/17 Page 3 of 8 reportedly delivered a letter to Congressional Republicans on March 23, 2017, that outlined ACA regulations the administration could repeal on its own, without Congress, and other administrative actions that the administration might take that would affect the implementation of the ACA. Given that OMB and its director, Mick Mulvaney, were heavily involved in the initial AHCA proposal, there is reason to believe that OMB may have been involved in the preparation of the letter or its presentation to Congress. The public deserves to know what steps the administration is taking to meet its obligations to implement the current health care law, as well as what role industry groups are having in that process. Requested Records American Oversight requests that OMB produce the following within twenty business days and seeks expedited review of this request for the reasons identified below: 1. A copy of any letter or memorandum sent on or about March 23, 2017 to Congressional Republicans outlining potential regulatory actions related to the Affordable Care Act. The requested record was referenced in an April 4, 2017 letter from 21 Senators to Secretary Tom Price. 5 2. Any other communications from OMB to any member of Congress or congressional staff concerning potential administrative actions relating to implementation of the Affordable Care Act. Please provide all responsive records from March 6, 2017, to the date the search is conducted. In addition to the records requested above, American Oversight also requests records describing the processing of this request, including records sufficient to identify search terms used and locations and custodians searched and any tracking sheets used to track the processing of this request. If your agency uses FOIA questionnaires or certifications completed by individual custodians or components to determine whether they possess responsive materials or to describe how they conducted searches, we also request any such records prepared in connection with the processing of this request. American Oversight seeks all responsive records regardless of format, medium, or physical characteristics. In conducting your search, please understand the terms “record,” “document,” and “information” in their broadest sense, to include any written, typed, recorded, graphic, printed, or audio material of any kind. We seek records of any kind, including electronic records, audiotapes, videotapes, and photographs, as well as letters, emails, facsimiles, telephone messages, voice mail messages and transcripts, notes, or minutes of any meetings, telephone conversations or Negotiate, ABC NEWS (Apr. 12, 2017, 10:03 PM), http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/trumpthreatens-undermine-obamacare-democrats-negotiate/story?id=46764709. The letter to Secretary Price is available at https://www.casey.senate.gov/newsroom/releases/senators-demand-trump-administration-releasesecret-plan-to-undermine-health-care-system-that-was-presented-to-house-freedom-caucus. 5 2 OMB-17-0134 Case 1:17-cv-01448 Document 1-2 Filed 07/20/17 Page 4 of 8 discussions. Our request includes any attachments to these records. No category of material should be omitted from search, collection, and production. Please search all records regarding agency business. You may not exclude searches of files or emails in the personal custody of your officials, such as personal email accounts. Records of official business conducted using unofficial systems or stored outside of official files is subject to the Federal Records Act and FOIA. It is not adequate to rely on policies and procedures that require officials to move such information to official systems within a certain period of time; American Oversight has a right to records contained in those files even if material has not yet been moved to official systems or if officials have, through negligence or willfulness, failed to meet their obligations. 6 7 In addition, please note that in conducting a “reasonable search” as required by law, you must employ the most up-to-date technologies and tools available, in addition to searches by individual custodians likely to have responsive information. Recent technology may have rendered OMB’s prior FOIA practices unreasonable. In light of the government-wide requirements to manage information electronically by the end of 2016, it is no longer reasonable to rely exclusively on custodian-driven searches. Furthermore, agencies that have adopted the National Archives and Records Agency (NARA) Capstone program, or similar policies, now maintain emails in a form that is reasonably likely to be more complete than individual custodians’ files. For example, a custodian may have deleted a responsive email from his or her email program, but OMB’s archiving tools would capture that email under Capstone. Accordingly, American Oversight insists that OMB use the most up-to-date technologies to search for responsive information and take steps to ensure that the most complete repositories of information are searched. American Oversight is available to work with you to craft appropriate search terms. However, custodian searches are still required; agencies may not have direct access to files stored in .PST files, outside of network drives, in paper format, or in personal email accounts. 8 See Competitive Enter. Inst. v. Office of Sci. & Tech. Policy, 827 F.3d 145, 149—50 (D.C. Cir. 2016); cf. Judicial Watch, Inc. v. Kerry, 844 F.3d 952, 955—56 (D.C. Cir. 2016). See Competitive Enter. Inst. v. Office of Sci. & Tech. Policy, No. 14-cv-765, slip op. at 8 (D.D.C. Dec. 12, 2016) (“The Government argues that because the agency had a policy requiring [the official] to forward all of his emails from his [personal] account to his business email, the [personal] account only contains duplicate agency records at best. Therefore, the Government claims that any hypothetical deletion of the [personal account] emails would still leave a copy of those records intact in [the official’s] work email. However, policies are rarely followed to perfection by anyone. At this stage of the case, the Court cannot assume that each and every workrelated email in the [personal] account was duplicated in [the official’s] work email account.” (citations omitted)). Presidential Memorandum—Managing Government Records, 76 Fed. Reg. 75,423 (Nov. 28, 2011), https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/the-press-office/2011/11/28/presidentialmemorandum-managing-government-records; Office of Mgmt. & Budget, Exec. Office of the President, Memorandum for the Heads of Executive Departments & Independent Agencies, “Managing Government Records Directive,” M-12-18 (Aug. 24, 2012), https://www.archives.gov/files/records-mgmt/m-12-18.pdf. 6 7 8 3 OMB-17-0134 Case 1:17-cv-01448 Document 1-2 Filed 07/20/17 Page 5 of 8 Under the FOIA Improvement Act of 2016, agencies must adopt a presumption of disclosure, withholding information “only if . . . disclosure would harm an interest protected by an exemption” or “disclosure is prohibited by law.” If it is your position that any portion of the requested records is exempt from disclosure, American Oversight requests that you provide an index of those documents as required under Vaughn v. Rosen, 484 F.2d 820 (D.C. Cir. 1973), cert. denied, 415 U.S. 977 (1974). As you are aware, a Vaughn index must describe each document claimed as exempt with sufficient specificity “to permit a reasoned judgment as to whether the material is actually exempt under FOIA.” Moreover, the Vaughn index “must describe each document or portion thereof withheld, and for each withholding it must discuss the consequences of disclosing the sought-after information.” Further, “the withholding agency must supply ‘a relatively detailed justification, specifically identifying the reasons why a particular exemption is relevant and correlating those claims with the particular part of a withheld document to which they apply.’” 9 10 11 12 In the event some portions of the requested records are properly exempt from disclosure, please disclose any reasonably segregable non-exempt portions of the requested records. If it is your position that a document contains non-exempt segments, but that those non-exempt segments are so dispersed throughout the document as to make segregation impossible, please state what portion of the document is non-exempt, and how the material is dispersed throughout the document. Claims of nonsegregability must be made with the same degree of detail as required for claims of exemptions in a Vaughn index. If a request is denied in whole, please state specifically that it is not reasonable to segregate portions of the record for release. 13 You should institute a preservation hold on information responsive to this request. American Oversight intends to pursue all legal avenues to enforce its right of access under FOIA, including litigation if necessary. Accordingly, OMB is on notice that litigation is reasonably foreseeable. To ensure that this request is properly construed, that searches are conducted in an adequate but efficient manner, and that extraneous costs are not incurred, American Oversight welcomes an opportunity to discuss its request with you before you undertake your search or incur search or duplication costs. By working together at the outset, American Oversight and OMB can decrease the likelihood of costly and time-consuming litigation in the future. Where possible, please provide responsive material in electronic format by email or in PDF or TIF format on a USB drive. Please send any responsive material being sent by mail to American Oversight, 1030 15 Street NW, Suite B255, Washington, DC 20005. If it will accelerate release of responsive records to American Oversight, please also provide responsive material on rolling basis. th FOIA Improvement Act of 2016 § 2 (Pub. L. No. 114–185). Founding Church of Scientology v. Bell, 603 F.2d 945, 949 (D.C. Cir. 1979). King v. U.S. Dep’t of Justice, 830 F.2d 210, 223—24 (D.C. Cir. 1987) (emphasis in original). Id. at 224 (citing Mead Data Central, Inc. v. U.S. Dep’t of the Air Force, 566 F.2d 242, 251 (D.C. Cir. 1977)). Mead Data Central, 566 F.2d at 261. 9 10 11 12 13 4 OMB-17-0134 Case 1:17-cv-01448 Document 1-2 Filed 07/20/17 Page 6 of 8 Fee Waiver Request In accordance with 5 U.S.C. § 552(a)(4)(A)(iii) and 5 C.F.R. § 1303.70, American Oversight requests a waiver of fees associated with processing this request for records. The subject of this request concerns the operations of the federal government, and the disclosures will likely contribute to a better understanding of relevant government procedures by the general public in a significant way. Moreover, the request is primarily and fundamentally for non-commercial purposes. 14 15 American Oversight requests a waiver of fees because disclosure of the requested information is “in the public interest because it is likely to contribute significantly to public understanding” of government.” On March 24, 2017, House Republican leaders pulled their proposal to “repeal and replace” the ACA after failing to gather enough support to pass the proposal. Although efforts to pass health care reform legislation continue, the ACA remains in effect. Given that the ACA remains the law of the land, the public has both a need and a right to know how the Trump administration is planning to regulate the current health care system under applicable law. 16 17 18 This request is primarily and fundamentally for non-commercial purposes. As a 501(c)(3) nonprofit, American Oversight does not have a commercial purpose and the release of the information requested is not in American Oversight’s financial interest. American Oversight’s mission is to promote transparency in government, to educate the public about government activities, and to ensure the accountability of government officials. American Oversight will use the information gathered, and its analysis of it, to educate the public through reports, press releases, or other media. American Oversight will also make materials it gathers available on our public website and promote their availability on social media platforms, such as Facebook and Twitter. One example of American Oversight’s demonstrated public disclosure of documents and creation of editorial content is in its recently launched “Audit the Wall” effort, where the organization is gathering and analyzing information and commenting on public releases of information related to the administrations proposed construction of a barrier along the U.S.-Mexico border. 19 Accordingly, American Oversight qualifies for a fee waiver. 5 C.F.R. § 1303.70. 5 C.F.R. § 1303.70. 5 C.F.R. § 1303.70. DeBonis et al., supra note 2. 5 C.F.R. § 1303.70. American Oversight currently has over 10,800 page likes on Facebook, and over 32,200 followers on Twitter. American Oversight, FACEBOOK, https://www.facebook.com/weareoversight/ (last visited May 1, 2017); American Oversight (@weareoversight), TWITTER (last visited May 1, 2017). 14 15 16 17 18 19 5 OMB-17-0134 Case 1:17-cv-01448 Document 1-2 Filed 07/20/17 Page 7 of 8 Application for Expedited Processing Pursuant to 5 U.S.C. § 552(a)(6)(E)(i) and 5 C.F.R. § 1303.10(d), American Oversight requests that OMB expedite the processing of this request. I certify to be true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief, that there is an urgent need to inform the public about the federal government activity that is the subject of this request. On March 24, 2017, House Republican leaders pulled their proposal to “repeal and replace” the Affordable Care Act. Given Mr. Trump’s well-known hostility toward the ACA, there is an urgent need for the public to understand how the Trump Administration is regulating the health care system under the current law. The information sought in this request will meaningfully further public discourse on this issue of national concern. 20 I further certify that American Oversight is primarily engaged in disseminating information to the public. American Oversight’s mission is to promote transparency in government, to educate the public about government activities, and to ensure the accountability of government officials. Similar to other organizations that have been found to satisfy the criteria necessary to qualify for expedition, American Oversight “‘gathers information of potential interest to a segment of the public, uses its editorial skills to turn the raw material into a distinct work, and distributes that work to an audience.’” American Oversight will use the information gathered, and its analysis of it, to educate the public through reports, press releases, and other media. American Oversight will also make materials it gathers available on its public website and promote their availability on social media platforms, such as Facebook and Twitter. One example of American Oversight’s demonstrated public disclosure of documents and creation of editorial content is in its recently launched “Audit the Wall” effort, where the organization is gathering and analyzing information and commenting on public releases of information related to the administrations proposed construction of a barrier along the U.S.-Mexico border. 21 22 23 Accordingly, American Oversight’s request satisfies the criteria for expedition. Conclusion We share a common mission to promote transparency in government. American Oversight looks forward to working with your agency on this request. If you do not understand any part of this request, have any questions, or foresee any problems in fully releasing the requested records, DeBonis et al., supra note 2. See ACLU v. U.S. Dep’t of Justice, 321 F. Supp. 2d 24, 30—31 (D.D.C. 2004); EPIC v. Dep’t of Defense, 241 F. Supp. 2d 5, 15 (D.D.C. 2003). ACLU, 321 F. Supp. 2d at 29 n.5 (quoting EPIC, 241 F. Supp. 2d at 11). American Oversight currently has over 10,800 page likes on Facebook, and over 32,200 followers on Twitter. American Oversight, FACEBOOK, https://www.facebook.com/weareoversight/ (last visited May 1, 2017); American Oversight (@weareoversight), TWITTER (last visited May 1, 2017). 20 21 22 23 6 OMB-17-0134 Case 1:17-cv-01448 Document 1-2 Filed 07/20/17 Page 8 of 8 please contact Sara Creighton at foia@americanoversight.org or (202) 869-5246. Also, if American Oversight’s request for a fee waiver is not granted in full, please contact us immediately upon making such a determination. Sincerely, Austin R. Evers Executive Director American Oversight 7 OMB-17-0134 Case 1:17-cv-01448 Document 1-3 Filed 07/20/17 Page 1 of 3 Exhibit Case 1:17-cv-01448 Document 1-3 Filed 07/20/17 Page 2 of 3 DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH & HUMAN SERVICES Office of the Secretary Assistant Secretary for Public Affairs Washington, D.C. 20201 Refer to: Request Number 2017-00722-FOIA-OS June 9, 2017 Austin R. Evers Executive Director American Oversight 1030 15th Street, N.W., Suite B255 Washington, DC 20005 Dear Mr. Evers: This acknowledges receipt and is an interim response to your May 04, 2017, Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request, submitted to the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), FOI/Privacy Acts Division. Specifically, you requested: “1. A copy of any letter or memorandum sent on or about March 23, 2017 to Congressional Republicans outlining potential regulatory actions related to the Affordable Care Act. The requested record was referenced in an April 4, 2017 letter from 21 Senators to Secretary Tom Price. 2. Any other communications from HHS to any member of Congress or congressional staff concerning potential administrative actions relating to implementation of the Affordable Care Act. Please provide all responsive records from March 6, 2017, to the date the search is conducted.” I apologize for the delay in responding. We received your request on May 04, 2017. We have initiated a search to locate records falling within the scope of your request. If our searching units advise us that you have requested a voluminous amount of records that require extensive search and examination, my staff will contact you shortly to discuss your willingness to modify your request. As a result of our review of your request for expedited processing, I have determined that your request for expedited processing does not meet the requirements under the FOIA and HHS implementing regulations and cannot be granted. The FOIA requires that an agency expedite processing of a request only when the requester demonstrates a “compelling need.” Our review indicates that you have not clearly demonstrated a “compelling need.” You have not clearly articulated an imminent threat to the life or physical safety of an individual; and you also have not demonstrated that there is an “urgency to inform the public concerning actual or alleged Federal activity” through a request by one primarily engaged in disseminating information to the public. The law authorizes us to collect fees for responding to FOIA requests. Because we are uncertain that applicable fees will exceed our minimum charge ($25.00), we are not addressing your request for a fee waiver at this time. However, if we determine there will be fees associated with processing your request, we will contact you at that time. If you are not satisfied with my action on this request, you may administratively appeal this denial of expedited processing. By filing an appeal, you preserve your rights under FOIA and give the agency a chance to review and reconsider your request and the agency’s decision. Your appeal must be mailed within 90 days from the date of receipt of this letter, to: Case 1:17-cv-01448 Document 1-3 Filed 07/20/17 Page 3 of 3 Evers – Page 2 of 2 2017-00722-FOIA-OS Ms. Catherine Teti Deputy Agency Chief FOIA Officer U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Office of the Assistant Secretary for Public Affairs Room 729H 200 Independence Avenue, S.W. Washington, DC 20201 Please clearly mark both the envelope and your letter “Freedom of Information Act Appeal.” You may also e-mail your appeal to: HHS.ACFO@hhs.gov. If you would like to discuss our response before filing an appeal to attempt to resolve your dispute without going through the appeals process, you may contact the HHS FOIA Public Liaison for assistance at: Michael Bell HHS FOIA Public Liaison U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Office of the Assistant Secretary for Public Affairs Room 729H 200 Independence Avenue, S.W. Washington, DC 20201 Telephone: (202) 260-0793 E-mail: HHS_FOIA_Public_Liaison@hhs.gov If you are unable to resolve your FOIA dispute through our FOIA Public Liaison, the Office of Government Information Services (OGIS), the Federal FOIA Ombudsman’s office, offers mediation services to help resolve disputes between FOIA requesters and Federal agencies. The contact information for OGIS is: Office of Government Information Services National Archives and Records Administration 8601 Adelphi Road – OGIS College Park, MD 20740-6001 Telephone: 202-741-5770 Toll-Free: 1-877-684-6448 E-mail: ogis@nara.gov Fax: 202-741-5769 Sincerely yours, Michael S. Marquis Director FOI/Privacy Acts Division