Case No. VFA-0404, 27 DOE ¶ 80,137

May 8, 1998

DECISION AND ORDER

OF THE DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Appeal

Name of Applicant:Francis M. Kovac

Case Number: VFA-0404

Date of Filing: April 9, 1998

On April 9, 1998, Francis Kovac of Oak Ridge, Tennessee, filed an Appeal from a determination issued on March 5, 1998, by the Oak Ridge Operations Office (Oak Ridge Operations) of the Department of Energy (DOE). That determination denied Mr. Kovac's request for information submitted pursuant to the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. § 552, as implemented by the DOE in 10 C.F.R. Part 1004. The FOIA requires that agency records held by a covered branch of the federal government, and which have not been made public in an authorized manner, generally be released to the public upon request. 5 U.S.C. § 552(a)(3). This Appeal, if granted, would require Oak Ridge Operations to conduct another search of its files for responsive information.

BACKGROUND

Mr. Kovac is a Councilman for the City of Oak Ridge, Tennessee. On February 12, 1998, Councilman Kovac submitted a handwritten note to Oak Ridge Operations requesting “a copy of any data showing the U.S. Department of Energy paid money directly or reimbursed” seven specified individuals. On March 5, 1998, Oak Ridge Operations responded that a search of the files in its control and possession revealed only one responsive document. However, no documents accompanied the determination letter, and in fact that letter set forth the procedures for appealing a determination in which the DOE stated that no responsive documents existed. Oak Ridge Operations claims that the language in the letter was a

mistake. It reaffirmed to both Councilman Kovac and this Office that there were no responsive documents.

Councilman Kovac challenges the adequacy of the Oak Ridge Operations search. In support of his claim that the search was insufficient, Councilman Kovac submitted photocopies of requests for payment or reimbursement that a DOE contractor made to Oak Ridge Operations. Some of the names that Councilman Kovac listed in his present FOIA request appear on those documents either as potential recipients of reimbursements or as signatories of the claim(s) for reimbursement on behalf of the DOE contractor.

ANALYSIS

Under the FOIA, in response to an appropriate request that reasonably describes the information sought and conforms to agency regulations, an agency must search its records and release responsive, unpublished, non-exempt information that it has created or obtained. 5 U.S.C. § 552(a)(3), (b); Department of Justice v. Tax Analysts, 492 U.S. 144-45 (1989); James L. Schwab, 22 DOE ¶ 80,127 at 80,558 (1992). A search that complies with the FOIA need not cover every corner of the agency. Oglesby v. Department of the Army, 920 F.2d 57, 68 (D.C. Cir. 1990) (and cases cited therein); Citizens' Action Committee of Pike County Citizens, 22 DOE ¶ 80,178 at 80,679 (1993). Rather, an adequate search under the FOIA need only be one reasonably calculated to uncover the documents requested. Kowalczyk v. Department of Justice, 73 F.3d 386, 389 (D.C. Cir. 1996); Thomas Stampahar, 26 DOE ¶ 80,140 at 80,593-94 (1996). "An adequate search, however, must be 'a thorough and conscientious search for responsive documents.'" Energy Research Foundation, 22 DOE ¶ 80,114 at 80,529 (1992) (quoting The Lowry Coalition, 21 DOE ¶ 80,108 at 80,535 (1991)).

We contacted Oak Ridge Operations to determine if it performed a proper search. Oak Ridge Operations informed us that it referred this search to its Finance Division, which is responsible for all disbursements. The Finance Division stated that it searched the Departmental Integrated Accounting System (DIAS) database. Among its functions, DIAS is the combined accounting and record keeping system that Oak Ridge Operations uses to make and track disbursements. A check of the DIAS accounts payable records for the seven names Councilman Kovac listed found no matches. Thus, it appears DOE made no direct payments to the seven persons who were the subject of this request.

Although the DIAS System only shows disbursements made by DOE, at our request, Oak Ridge Operations searched to determine whether there might be records from DOE contractors showing disbursements to its employees, consultants, or subcontractors. Oak Ridge Operations stated that it does have forms from at least some contractors that deal with either requests for reimbursement or financial status, and that these forms may list some names of individuals who were part of the contractor’s claim for reimbursement. These seem to be the forms that Councilman Kovac submitted on appeal but which were not available to Oak Ridge Operations during its original search. Oak Ridge Operations informed us that if Councilman Kovac submits a new FOIA request matching the names of individuals to the DOE contractor(s) he believes may have submitted requests for reimbursement, it will attempt to search its records for any potentially responsive documents.

We believe that given the state of the information before it at the time of its search, Oak Ridge Operations made a satisfactory attempt to satisfy Councilman Kovac’s request. Therefore, we find that the Oak Ridge Operations search was conscientiously performed, was reasonably calculated to reveal the records Councilman Kovac sought, and satisfies the requirements of the FOIA. Cf. Archie M. LeGrand, Jr., 25 DOE ¶ 80,171 at 80,681 (1996). Accordingly, Mr. Kovac's Appeal should be denied.

It Is Therefore Ordered That:

(1) The Appeal filed by Francis M. Kovac of Oak Ridge, Tennessee, OHA Case No. VFA-0404, is hereby denied.

(2) This is a final Order of the Department of Energy from which any aggrieved party may seek judicial review pursuant to the provisions of 5 U.S.C. § 552(a)(4)(B). Judicial review may be sought in the district in which the requester resides or has a principal place of business, or in which the alleged agency records are situated, or in the District of Columbia.

George B. Breznay

Director

Office of Hearings and Appeals

Date: May 8, 1998