POTUS and Vice Presidential Visits

Martin Pfeiffer filed this request with the Department of Energy, National Nuclear Security Administration of the United States of America.
Tracking #

19-00231-DD

Due July 10, 2019
Est. Completion None
Status
Awaiting Response

Communications

From: Martin Pfeiffer

To Whom It May Concern:

1) This is a FOIA Request
This is a request under the Freedom of Information Act. Pursuant to the Freedom of Information Act, I hereby request the following records:

Photographs and other media, reports, newsletters, historical retrospectives, and other records documenting presidential and vice-presidential visits to Los Alamos, Sandia (both locations), and what is now Lawrence Livermore. To assist you with locating relevant records please note that the following list or Presidential and Vice-Presidential visits to these locations may be incomplete and partial and should not be taken as definitive for purposes of this search:
JFK: 1962 Los Alamos and Sandia (Albuquerque)
Gerald Ford: July 1974 Los ALamos
Clinton: 1993 Los Alamos

As the FOIA requires please release all reasonably segregable portions of responsive records. If you withhold records or portions of records then please indicate under which exemption you claim to do so and provide me with my options for appeal. If you are not the proper agency for this request then I please forward this request to the proper agency and notify me that you have done so.

2) Fees and Fee Status
I am a PhD student at the University of New Mexico and the information requested is for academic and public education purposes, including my PhD dissertation project, and not primarily for commercial use. Furthermore, I will make responsive records available to the public via my academic publications and presentations as well as on social media and my blog and the news website Muckrock.com. Please note that you can access my UNM student profile page at the following url: https://anthropology.unm.edu/people/grad-students/profile/martin-pfeiffer.html.

Therefore, as per Sack v. DOD (2016) I qualify for educational institution fee status and ask that you process my request accordingly. In your response please confirm that you will be processing my request under the educational institution fee status. I agree to pay fees up to $30 without additional notice. In the event that there are fees exceeding $30 then please inform me of the total charges in advance of fulfilling my request.

3) Record Delivery and Communications
I hereby request that all records generated by this request be delivered in electronic format via email or, if that is not possible, on CD-ROM if available. If you have any questions or information regarding this request then please do not hesitate to contact me, preferably via email. Please provide an email address through which I can contact you to discuss this request.

You may, and I request that you do so, engage in rolling release of responsive records.

I look forward to receiving your response within the twenty day statutory period. Thank you for your anticipated cooperation and time in this matter.

Regards,
Martin Pfeiffer, MA
Scholar, National Security Studies Program
Graduate Assistant, Department of Anthropology
University of New Mexico

From: Department of Energy, National Nuclear Security Administration

Dear Mr. Pfeiffer,
Please see the attached acknowledgment letter/fee denial letter for your recent request made with our office.

Thank you,
Donna Del Rio
FOIA/PA Analyst
Office of General Counsel
National Nuclear Security Administration

From: Martin Pfeiffer

Dear Ms. Del Rio,

Thank you for your message. I believe this is the first request we have worked together on. I regret that this has the potential for being less smooth sailing than most of my other requests.

1) So that I may make an effective appeal I request to know on what grounds I was denied my requested fee status especially as it is the fee status I have been granted in the past. I would again refer us all to the 2017 Sack v. DOC decision which explicitly widens the educational/fee status category to include students, such as myself, doing school related research as I am. I consider this behavior to be petty bureaucratic harassment whose effect obstructs access to records covered by the FOIA and have made that claim in said appeals to these responses. My next step is to approach my State and Congressional representation as I am vexed at these repeated efforts to avoid doing what the law requires.

2) If you refer to my original FOIA request you will please notice under the "FEES AND FEE STATUS" labeled-section a discussion of my willingness to pay fees. In what way is this deficient for perfecting my request?

3) I consider this a response to your letter. Please respond by July 4th confirming your acceptance, or lack thereof, of this response. Please provided additional specific required info and my options for appeal.

I expect that OHA will be in contact with you soon regarding my appeals.

Regards,
-marty-
Martin Pfeiffer

From: Department of Energy, National Nuclear Security Administration

Mr. Pfeiffer,

The Office of Hearings and Appeals issued a Decision and Order dated July 11, 2019, indicating that prior to a fee category determination, the agency must clarify your intended use of the records requested. Therefore, please clearly identify your intended use for the requested records in this FOIA matter. Please respond no later than July 19, 2019. If we do not receive a response from you by July 19, 2019, we will consider the lack of response as a withdrawal of your request, and it will be closed.

Thank you,
Donna Del Rio
FOIA/PA Analyst
Office of General Counsel
National Nuclear Security Administration

From: Martin Pfeiffer

Ms. Del Rio,

Please find attached a copy of the appeal you reference for your convenience.

I have already stated my intended use of these materials in my original request. As a matter of patient courtesy I will briefly restate and slightly expand them here: as part of my PhD research and for analysis and dissemination through my social media, scholarly writing, journalistic writing, and inclusion in my free, publicly accessible archive of research materials. This means you have an option of alternately assignment me a category as a representative of the news media as I have the intent and ability to self-publish and acquire other publishing outlets.

As indicated in the appeal you reference (included here for your reference) as per 10 C.F.R. 1004.2(c)--as well as the 5th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution because Due Process matters!--if you wish to challenge my claims of how these documents will be used then you will provide me with the basis for your challenge or questions so that I may answer your challenge and questions properly.

You are not allowed to endlessly demand I justify my fee status without telling me on what points you want clarification or the grounds on which you are considering denying it when I have made a prima facie case for being assigned to it. I am more than confident that OHA will agree both on principle and as per the language of the appeal decision you referenced (included here for your convenience).

Therefore: please either inform me that this message meets your requirements and grant me my requested fee status or provide me with the information necessary for me to clarify my use of these records to your satisfaction. If you are unable or unwilling to do either of these things then please inform me of that as well as my options for appeal at which point I will begin those procedures.

Please pardon the shortness of this letter; I have made clear in other communications how I regard these continued and repeated failures to properly follow NNSA/DOE policy and FOIA statute.

I am,
-marty-
Martin Pfeiffer

From: Martin Pfeiffer

Ms. Del Rio,

I am informing you that I have filed an appeal with the DOE Office of Hearings and Appeals regarding your message to me (July 12, 2019) which you sent me in response to the decision rendered by OHA in Case Nos. FlA-19-0020-23.

I am,

Martin Pfeiffer

From: Martin Pfeiffer

Ms. Del Rio,

The Office of Hearing and Appeals has declined to consider your most recent message an action which I can appeal.

I maintain that you have not provided me the necessary information required to adequately respond to your questions about my fee status. As such, I am unable to provide a concise and cogent response. Therefore, in response to your most recent message, you will find attached a copy of the appeal I attempted to file with OHA regarding your most recent message. It includes a lengthy discussion of my fee status and use of records. Refer to that discussion--including my description of my Patreon--as the best good-faith response possible given your failure to provide me details regarding your concerns and what you feel should be clarified.

I consider this matter--of clarifying my intent for the use of documents in this request--closed unless you are willing to provide specific and detailed questions and concerns about my use of records in this request.

Therefore, I once again point out that I meet all of the criteria for assignment of my requested fee status of educational institution (or alternately media) and I insist you grant me one of those statuses accordingly. If you are unwilling or unable to do so then notify me as soon as possible along with a detailed justification for doing so and my options for appeal.

I am,

Martin Pfeiffer

Files

pages

Close