Case No. VFA-0752

July 12, 2002

DECISION AND ORDER

OF THE DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Appeal

Name of Petitioner: Iva D. Moore

Date of Filing: June 14, 2002

Case Number: VFA-0752

On June 14, 2002, Iva D. Moore filed an Appeal from a determination the DOE’s Oak Ridge Operations Office (DOE/OR) issued on May 16, 2002. The determination responded to a request for information filed under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. § 552, as implemented by the Department of Energy (DOE) in 10 C.F.R. Part 1004.

I. Background

Ms. Moore requested from DOE/OR

a copy of any and all of the following records of her husband, DOE contractor employee Elbert Ray Moore, . . .

Medical Records Industrial Hygiene Records

Chest X-Rays Personnel Records

Radiation Exposure RecordsPersonnel Security File

OPM background investigation

[Mr. Moore] was employed at the Bendix/Allied Signal/Honeywell plant in Kansas City, Missouri from 1949 through 1983. Mr. Moore is now deceased.

Letter from Mark A. Kille, Boyd & Kenter, P.C., to Amy Rothrock, DOE/OR (October 25, 2001). In a May 16, 2002 determination letter, DOE/OR informed Ms. Moore that a "search of the files of [DOE/OR] was conducted. However, no records could be found." Letter from Amy Rothrock to Mark A. Kille (May 16, 2002).

II. Analysis

We have stated on numerous occasions that a FOIA request deserves a thorough and conscientious search for responsive documents, and we have not hesitated to remand a case where it is evident that the search conducted was in fact inadequate. See, e.g., Butler, Vines and Babb, P.L.L.C., 25 DOE ¶ 80,152 (1995). The FOIA, however, requires that a search be reasonable, not exhaustive. "[T]he standard of reasonableness which we apply to agency search procedures does not require absolute exhaustion of the files; instead, it requires a search reasonably calculated to uncover the sought materials." Miller v. Department of State, 779 F.2d 1378, 1384-85 (8th Cir. 1985); accord Weisberg v. Department of Justice, 745 F.2d 1476, 1485 (D.C. Cir. 1984). In cases such as these, "[t]he issue is not whether any further documents might conceivably exist but rather whether the government's search for responsive documents was adequate." Perry v. Block, 684 F.2d 121, 128 (D.C. Cir. 1982) (emphasis in original).

Accordingly, we contacted DOE/OR and found out the following regarding its search. DOE/OR holds certain records containing information on employees of contractors of the DOE and its predecessor agencies "from the 40's through the late 50's." These records are kept in boxes in a classified warehouse. Electronic mail from Amy Rothrock to Steven Goering, OHA (June 14, 2002). The records are not indexed, and so the

boxes have to be searched manually - folders contain documents such as rosters of multiple names and data which have to be searched line by line. This data was never organized so that the data could be retrievable by identifier.

For this request, we searched the Records Holding Area where these boxes are for Privacy Act records (retrievable by his identifier), and the Oak Ridge Associated Universities epidemiology records by identifier. Since he never worked at Oak Ridge and his employers (Bendix, Allied Signal and Honeywell) at Kansas City had no contracts with Oak Ridge, those two locations in Oak Ridge were the only reasonable repositories to search at Oak Ridge. Since his employers had DOE contracts with the Kansas City Plant through DOE Albuquerque, it is reasonable that Albuquerque should send it to their Kansas City Plant for a search of former contractor employee files [at] that site.

Electronic mail from Amy Rothrock to Steven Goering, OHA (June 18, 2002). DOE/OR has forwarded a copy of Ms. Moore's request to the DOE's Albuquerque Operations Office, which will issue a separate response to Ms. Moore.

Based on the above descriptions, it appears clear to us that DOE/OR performed a diligent search of locations where responsive documents were most likely to exist. We therefore conclude that the search was reasonably calculated to uncover the records Ms. Moore sought. Thus, the present Appeal will be denied.

It Is Therefore Ordered That:

(1) The Freedom of Information Act Appeal filed by Iva D. Moore, Case Number VFA-0752, 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 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 agency records are situated, or in the District of Columbia.

George B. Breznay

Director

Office of Hearings and Appeals

Date: July 12, 2002