Electronic Privacy Information Center v. United States Drug Enforcement Administration
208 F. Supp. 3d 108
D.D.C.2016Background
- EPIC submitted a two-part FOIA request to the DEA (PIAs not publicly available; PTAs/IPAs since 2007) seeking final privacy assessments and related initial assessments.
- The DEA assigned its Chief Information Officer Support Unit (CIOSU) to search paper files, Share Drive, SharePoint, and staff email using terms like "Privacy Impact Assessment," "PIA," and the filter "final." CIOSU found ten pages of DEA PIAs (one previously unpublished) and produced them.
- For Part 2, CIOSU searched for PTAs/IPAs (terms: "PTA," "IPA," "privacy@usdoj.gov") and located 13 OPCL determination letters; OPCL produced minimally redacted copies to EPIC. EPIC accepted those letters in lieu of drafts.
- After review, EPIC identified four OPCL letters directing the DEA to complete PIAs for specific systems (LIMS, DrugSTAR, NVNS, WebOCTS) that were not produced or found online, and asked the DEA to search for those PIAs.
- The DEA re-ran the original searches (same terms and locations) but did not search the SCOP custodian or run program-name-specific searches for the four systems; DEA moved for summary judgment asserting its searches were reasonable.
- The Court found the DEA's initial search reasonable and in good faith but held that the DEA's supplemental search inadequately followed a "clear and certain" lead (the OPCL letters) regarding four specific PIAs, and ordered a limited additional search or a supplemental declaration explaining why such a search would be unlikely to locate the records.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Adequacy of initial search methodology | DEA should have interviewed OPCL/SCOP and searched more custodians; keyword search insufficient | CIOSU was the appropriate office; searches of CIOSU locations (paper, Share Drive, SharePoint, email) were reasonable and tailored | Held for DEA: initial CIOSU-led search was reasonable and in good faith |
| Use of search terms (use of "final") | Adding "final" improperly narrowed search and missed responsive PIAs | CIOSU reasonably used "final" because final PIAs are customarily labeled "final"; CIOSU also ran searches without "final" for program names | Held for DEA: use of "final" justified; supplemental program-name searches yielded no new results (no substantial doubt raised) |
| Duty to modify search after receiving OPCL determination letters | EPIC argued DEA had to follow the letters' lead to locate four PIAs (clear and certain lead) | DEA re-ran prior searches but did not search SCOP files or run program-specific searches for the four systems | Held for EPIC in part: DEA failed to adequately follow the lead re: four PIAs; court ordered supplemental search or explanatory declaration |
| Overall FOIA compliance and disposition | EPIC sought summary judgment that searches were inadequate | DEA sought summary judgment that its searches satisfied FOIA | Court: Granted in part and denied in part DEA's motion; denied in part and reserved in part EPIC's cross-motion; ordered limited additional action by DEA |
Key Cases Cited
- Am. Civil Liberties Union v. U.S. Dep't of Justice, 655 F.3d 1 (D.C. Cir. 2011) (FOIA's purpose to open agency action to public scrutiny)
- SafeCard Servs., Inc. v. SEC, 926 F.2d 1197 (D.C. Cir. 1991) (agency declarations presumptively in good faith; reasonable search standard)
- Ancient Coin Collectors Guild v. U.S. Dep't of State, 641 F.3d 504 (D.C. Cir. 2011) (agency must show search reasonably calculated to uncover all relevant documents)
- Valencia-Lucena v. U.S. Coast Guard, 180 F.3d 321 (D.C. Cir. 1999) (standard for adequacy of FOIA searches)
- Mobley v. C.I.A., 806 F.3d 568 (D.C. Cir. 2015) (plaintiff can rebut adequacy by showing agency failed to follow a clear and certain lead)
- Campbell v. U.S. Dep't of Justice, 133 F. Supp. 3d 58 (D.D.C. 2015) (an agency need not search another component's records when those records are outside its control)