FLAGFTC

To Whom It May Concern:

Pursuant to Florida's Sunshine Law (Fla. Stat. secs. 119.01 to 119.15 (1995)), I hereby request the following records:

For the time period between March 1st 2017 to March 1st 2018:

1. Copies of any and all electronic communication and attachments between the Office of the Attorney General and the Federal Trade Commission. For email addresses affiliated with the Federal Trade Commission, please use email addresses that contain the domain “@ftc.gov”. Please exclude any emails from "subscribe@subscribe.ftc.gov"

2. Copies of any other communications between the Office of the Attorney General and the Federal Trade Commission during that time frame.

The requested documents will be made available to the general public, and this request is not being made for commercial purposes.

In the event that there are fees, I would be grateful if you would inform me of the total charges in advance of fulfilling my request. I would prefer the request filled electronically, by e-mail attachment if available or CD-ROM if not.

Thank you in advance for your anticipated cooperation in this matter. I would request your response within ten (10) business days.

Sincerely,

John Doan

Thank you for the response. In my original request, I was requesting for the time period of March 1st 2017 to March 1st 2018. The initial estimate of 'over 10,000 pages of archived records' leads me to believe the search might have been for all records, which was not needed.

I am attempting to get more information on how the FTC is working with the state of Florida on partnerships, workshops, advocacy, and education for Florida residents. I am making a similar request to other states. I am looking to compare the level of FTC support, proactive cooperation and focus on helping Florida residents compared to other states. The initial request was for a one year period for a better comparison however if that time period is too voluminous, I will modify my request and rescind the second part so we are only looking at e-mail communications:

From June 1st 2017 to December 31st 2017: Copies of any and all electronic communication and attachments between the Office of the Attorney General and the Federal Trade Commission. For email addresses affiliated with the Federal Trade Commission, please use email addresses that contain the domain “@ftc.gov”. Please exclude any emails from "subscribe@subscribe.ftc.gov".

(I rescind the second part of my request for any other communication)

I do understand the exemptions that apply to this request and hope the revision helps.

Mr. Weilhammer, Thank you for the response and cost estimate.

I did not anticipate there would be so many records. I will attempt to narrow my search once more. (I am narrowing it to a 3 day period and removing the "and attachments" from the request).

From May 9th 2017 to May 11th 2017: Copies of any and all electronic communication without attachments between the Office of the Attorney General and the Federal Trade Commission. For email addresses affiliated with the Federal Trade Commission, please use email addresses that contain the domain “@ftc.gov”. Please exclude any emails from "subscribe@subscribe.ftc.gov".

Thank you

Thank you for your response.

I do apologize but I am confused on the "additional documents may reside in the inboxes and other databases used by this office's 1,200-plus employees. Consequently, having each user search his or her inbox.."

From past experience and research into other requests seeking electronic communications from this office, I was not aware that having each user search his or her inbox was something that was required nor common practice. There are more than one but I have attached one example from over 2 years ago where a similar request did not require users manually searching their inbox. In fact that request produced hundreds of pages of redacted email records as I am sure you have access to as well.

I did limit my request quite extensively, I was hoping that it could be answered as the office has answered other requests in the past that were more extensive such as the example I attached.

Was there something about my request specifically that requires users to search their inboxes as opposed to other requests that did not require that? Were you able to indicate how many records were found in the search as you did previously?

Again I must apologize, after researching other requests and seeing the responses from this office I was expecting my very narrow request to be fully answered without having 1200 people search their inbox.