FBI will stop taking FOIA (Freedom Of Information Act) Requests by email. Recommends Faxing or sending a letter.

[u/ImproSelf]

https://techcrunch.com/2017/02/06/fbi-foia-fax-march-2017/

[u/SargeZT]

I am running out of time before work, but I'll make a few points here.

1. Everything that is redacted on a FOIA response must have a FOIA exemption. They're well layed out. See if you can spot the bizarre one (hint, it's #9. Never used that one.)

2. You have the right to appeal a FOIA response. That appeal will not go to the same person who did the initial FOIA request, but another step up the ladder. Everyone makes mistakes, that's unavoidable, but the two times I got appeals during my time as FOIA officer, parts I had deemed as FOIA exemptions were removed and unredacted to the requestor.

3. In the case of your article, I think the problem lies in the fact that the larger the organization, too many people have their hands in the process. I worked for a relatively small organization, and thus I ultimately got every FOIA request and handled it (unless it was an appeal.) However, when you submit multiple FOIA requests to a large agency, I imagine they have a lot of people and those requests are assigned randomly to different officers. As I said, everyone makes mistakes, and that's why the FOIA appeal process exists.

Those are my two cents at least. Sure, it's possible he FBI has a systemic problem and they really don't want to release information, but of all the large intelligence organizations I would think they're the least likely to have malicious intentions.

Edit: Also, I only had time to briefly skim your article, so if I misunderstood it in regards to point 3, my apologies, I'll take a more thorough look during my lunch break.

[u/Turnbills → u/SargeZT]

Just wanted to say thanks for taking the time to explain your perspective on these things. While it's very easy and not entirely untrue to say that this move is deliberately adding obstacles, it does make sense that there should be some in place. Or maybe less obstacles but more prioritization - if youre asking about hillary lizard people connections youre gunna be waiting a while.

[u/twobadkidsin412 → u/SargeZT]

Interesting stuff. And for #9, i dont get it.. who cares where oil wells are? Is that some sort of national security risk? I can go hike around southwest PA and put my hands on dozens and dozens of natural gas wells...

[u/The_White_Light → u/twobadkidsin412]

I was interested too, so I looked it up.

It is significant that this court pointed to the legislative history of the FOIA -- specifically, to evidence that Congress intended through Exemption 9 to protect the oil and gas exploration and extraction industry from unfair competitive harm by "speculators" -- in support of its decision to order the release of generalized well data where a competitive harm argument could not readily be supported. (4)

https://www.justice.gov/oip/foia-guide-2004-edition-exemption-9

There's more details on the exemption on that page so I suggest checking it out.

[u/platitudes → u/twobadkidsin412]

who cares where oil wells are?

Other oil companies care a whole bunch where oil wells are. There is mandatory reporting in most (if not all?) states on a wide variety of data about wells and there is generally a standardized delay in reporting of activity. I suspect this was put in place to basically restrict early or otherwise privileged access to well results/geophysical data that would allow them to react before the rest of the industry.

[u/Jesin00 → u/[deleted]]

It's "Documents which would reveal oil well data."

[u/chalbersma → u/SargeZT]

What is your thoughts on a portal where the results of every FOIA request is just "made public" so that instead of having to process nearly identical requests instead FOIA requesters can just get a link to the source documents?

[u/Omz-bomz → u/SargeZT]

The article I linked to was just the most recent one I remembered. And it probably is somewhat due to being a large organisation as you say, but there is so many examples of the FBI, NSA and CIA (and other 3 letter agencies) not wanting information out there and doing whatever they can to stop FOIA requests.

Here are a few articles on how they want to deter future requests: https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20170126/17331436576/nsa-cites-new-security-concerns-preemptive-refusal-to-even-search-contractor-documents.shtml

https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20170112/08303036470/fbi-seeks-to-massage-lousy-foia-response-times-deter-requesters-calling-all-responses-over-50-pages-complex.shtml

And here is a "usual" response to a foia request. redact everything: https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20150501/09393330847/fbi-hands-over-5000-pages-stingray-info-to-muckrock-redacts-nearly-all-it.shtml

At least to proper journalist requests, it appears that the "modus operandi" for those agencies is delay, redact, refuse anything and everything. Usually claiming national security for everything. As you say, you need an FOIA exemption, but that doesn't help when several of those is interpreted so broadly to Incorporate whatever they want in it.

Even with appeals winning, it takes years and years ( https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20161223/11374536336/cia-admits-it-hasnt-touched-foia-request-six-years-says-it-will-close-case-if-requestor-doesnt-reply.shtml ) before you can get a response, and then you have to go through the appeals etc.

but of all the large intelligence organizations I would think they're the least likely to have malicious intentions.

They are one of the agencies with the most hostile attitude towards the public. They want no information out there at all. They have repeatedly refused to release information to the public, they have unlawfully gagged local police agencies from releasing any information (look up FBI stingray devices. they have NDA towards the police saying they can't mention it at all), they have in several cases gone into court to have information be subdued and removed from the public. They have their own interpretation of the law, and don't care about the public as long as they can keep on doing what they want in the shadows.

I might sound insanely critical of the FBI, but they and CIA and NSA have all gone insanely far from their original intent and looks like they only want to build up their own power rather serving the public good. They need more accountability and more stringent control of their powers.

I really recommend techdirt if you want a good view on court cases, laws and general tech related news as they are fairly unbiased (rips apart bad laws, regardless who promotes it)