Invoices, work orders, installation plans, wiring diagrams for public utility poles 1311440 and 1307407 (WSDOT)

To Whom It May Concern:

Pursuant to RCW Ch. 42.56 (Public Records Act), I hereby request the following records:

Invoices, work orders, installation plans, and wiring diagrams for utility poles 1311440 and 1307407 dated January 1, 2010, or later.

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 fees cannot be waived, 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 look forward to receiving your response to this request within 5 business days, as the statute requires.

Sincerely,

Phil Mocek

Dear Mr. Lee:

I received your e-mails of September 21 and 29 noting that you consulted with one or more unspecified offices and requesting clarification of my request.

With which office(s) did you consult? With whom did you consult?

In each of those messages, you asked for location of the poles identified in my request. This implies that the numbers 1311440 and 1307407 do not uniquely identify two utility poles, and that multiple poles identified by these numbers exist in multiple locations. If this was the case, it seems to me that a logical conclusion on your part would be that I requested information about all poles identified by either of those numbers about which your agency holds records. If that was the case then there would be no need for me to clarify my request prior to your processing of it.

I do not believe that me communicating to you the locations of "utility poles 1311440 and 1307407" would constitute clarification of my request.

If, however, you are not requesting clarification of my request, but requesting assistance with performance of your search for relevant records (e.g., if there exist multiple databases for you to search, and a more specific though no more clear request would allow you to avoid searching multiple databases for the poles I identified, different staff with whom you expect to inquire have expertise with different sets of poles, etc.), then please provide me with additional information about your data set(s) (e.g., database names and purposes, etc.) and I will consider narrowing my request.

Cordially,
Phil Mocek

Dear Mr. Lee:

I received your confirmation of my records request of September 15 via e-mail attachment on September 30.

On September 21 and on September 29, you wrote via e-mail that you consulted with one or more unspecified offices and requested clarification of my request. I asked via e-mail on September 30 with which office(s) you consulted and whom you consulted, but you didn't answer in the e-mail you sent later that day. Would you please tell me?

Also, are you still awaiting clarification from me? You neither confirmed nor denied my expressed suspicion that you were actually seeking narrowing of my request, not clarification of it. Nor did you confirm or deny my expressed belief that me communicating to you the locations of utility poles 1311440 and 1307407 would not clarify my request.

Cordially,
Phil Mocek

Dear Mr. Lee:

I received your e-mail of October 2. Thank you for your informative response.

Please consider my request of September 15 to be for records regarding WSDOT-owned poles in Seattle. In response to a similar records request I placed with Seattle City Light, I was informed by public disclosure officer Stacy Irwin that at least one of poles 1311440 and 1307407 is owned by WSDOT.

Cordially,
Phil Mocek

To Whom It May Concern:

A copy of the appeal copied below has been submitted to the Office of the Washington State Attorney General.

Thank you.

_______

Dear Mr. Lee:

I appeal. On October 21, 2015, Stacy Irwin, public disclosure officer at Seattle City Light, reported to me that her colleague confirmed with Jon Cornelius at WSDOT that they (your agency) owns pole 1311440. She also relayed from SCL's street light department that, "pole 1311440 (at 611 5th Ave) shows as being set by WSDOT in 1963 with a replacement pole set by WSDOT in 2004."

Please search again for the records I requested of you on September 15. I am confident that documentation of equipment installation on this pole exists.

For your information: The poles about which I inquired with your agency, Seattle City Light, Seattle Department of Transportation, and King County Metro, are two of those poles upon which mysterious surveillance cameras were discovered earlier this year. Seattle City Light reported that the cameras were installed by the U.S. Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms. This was reported by multiple print, television, and radio news media.

Cordially,
Phil Mocek

Dear Mr. Lee:

I appeal. On October 21, 2015, Stacy Irwin, public disclosure officer at Seattle City Light, reported to me that her colleague confirmed with Jon Cornelius at WSDOT that they (your agency) owns pole 1311440. She also relayed from SCL's street light department that, "pole 1311440 (at 611 5th Ave) shows as being set by WSDOT in 1963 with a replacement pole set by WSDOT in 2004."

Please search again for the records I requested of you on September 15. I am confident that documentation of equipment installation on this pole exists.

For your information: The poles about which I inquired with your agency, Seattle City Light, Seattle Department of Transportation, and King County Metro, are two of those poles upon which mysterious surveillance cameras were discovered earlier this year. Seattle City Light reported that the cameras were installed by the U.S. Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms. This was reported by multiple print, television, and radio news media.

Cordially,
Phil Mocek

Mr. Lee:

I have received the following files from you regarding this request (filename, size, MD5 checksum):
- 11-13-15_MR21280_INT.pdf, 28M, fcb2a45893bc74eb96436eb3e268ea72
- MocekAck15-2704.pdf, 112K, 6ce159bdfdd80419a2709aed05c20d2a
- MocekClosure_15-2704.pdf, 96K, 776e3ff6b554312c9f97e47f4fc4dbbb
- MocekClosure15-2704.pdf, 96K, 90fcf69bd24831edbd673d7786d3ab57
- MP_165.42-5th__Columbia_St.-signal_plan.pdf 228K, 973b00d1b2a6f9e35f2117a1a3f32fec
- PLG3A26.tif, 304K, b150383ad3a6eaef9f512cd4d1669fa3
- PLG3A26_tpxCRou.tif, 304K, b150383ad3a6eaef9f512cd4d1669fa3

This indicates to me that you have no record of installation on pole1311440 or 1307407 of the surveillance cameras found there, for which cameras ATF claimed responsibility. If, by chance, such work is documented in some record other than a "work order" then I would appreciate a pointer to just which record does, in fact, document such work.

Cordially,
Phil Mocek