Re: Declaration in Bryant V CIA

Approved for Release: 2025/06/11 C07083374 .
and correct copy of CIA’s September 30, 2008 letter and enclosures is attached
hereto as Exhibit B.)
8. By letter dated October 3, 20084, Plaintiff appealed the CIA’s decision “to deny
my FOIA request status as a representative of the news media” regardin request
F-2008-01781. Plaintiff went on to state “[b]y this appeal, I hereby characterize
my records-search-fee-waiver.‘request’ as a DEMAND” and cited 5 U.S.C. § 522
“a(4)(A)(ii)(II), namely, ‘fees shall be limited to reasonable standard charges for
document duplication when...the request is made by...a representative of the news
media.”’ (A true and correct copy of Plaintiffs appeal request is attached hereto
as Exhibit C.)
9. By letter dated October 28, 2008, the CIA acknowledged Plaintiffs letter in
which he appealed our determination to deny him “status as a representative of
the news media” and to deny his “request for a fee waiver.”
10. The CIA explained to Plaintiff that since records responsive to his FOIA request
had been previously released and no additional searches were conducted, he
would be responsible “for copying costs associated with this request regardless of
fee category determination.” That is, the copying fees would apply even if he
were placed into the news media fee category. With respect to his appeal of the
denial of a fee waiver, the CIA reiterated that “if processing has been initiated, the
requester must agree to be responsible for costs in the event of an adverse
4 The “letter” composed as email on October 3, 2008, is actually dated “6 Oct 2008” in a
handwritten annotation next to Plaintiffs signature. The text states in part: “By snail-
mail, I’m sending to you a signed printout of this e-fonnatted letter.” The appeal was
received in my office on October 14, 2008 (see date stamp).
5
Approved for Release: 2025/06/11 C07083374