VS. 
Genealogist Emilio Reyes, Gabrieleno-Tongva descendant is well versed in the law/policies of FOIA requests. He reports that the BIA continues to pull some OKIE DOKES on fulfilling the requests. Why does the agency feel it can skirt the requirement? Why does the JUSTICE Dept. not step in?
Here's a letter from Emilio explaining to BIA Southern CA superintendant Javin Moore where his department FAILED.
Dear Javin Moore,
I am in receipt of the attached documents pertaining to my FOIA Request assigned BIA-2017-01721. In your correspondence dated August 14, 2017, the SCA provided 25 pages of responsive documents. The 25 pages of responsive documents were redacted claiming exemption 6.
First of all, the exemptions claimed do not apply. If the DOI follows NARA standards, BIA should Know these records don't qualify for redactions as the creation of these records were created 77 years ago, meaning, the individuals can be presumed deceased.
Second, In your correspondence your letter signed by you state these records were located in the NARA. However, I personally went to the NARA to verify the records and the NARA staff confirmed also the records your office provided are not from NARA.
Furthermore, In accordance to 43 CFR 2.23, the BIA has the right to deny a request as done in the other FOIA requests if records cannot be located or is not in the agency's possession or control.
By this email I am requesting two things. Please provide the records as soon as possible with no redactions. Second, please provide the copies from your repository not from NARA. In past request, your offices has never "gone" to the archives to get records. What is special about this one? (OP: Could it BE the HANDWRITTEN Notations that were added much.....much later?)
Within seven days of receipt of this email, if no reply is received or no records are provided with no redactions, this FOIA request shall be appeal with the SOL and then with the courts.
Respectfully,
Emilio Reyes
No comments:
Post a Comment