The request for public information was filed by the nonprofit Environmental Working Group (EWG) last March. EWG is seeking to determine the quantity and value of oil and gas extracted from public lands in the U.S. EWG's investigation also seeks to ascertain the environmental impact of extracting oil and gas from land leased to private corporations by the U.S. Department of the Interior, said Arianne Callender, general counsel for EWG.

"We are hoping to analyze the value of the Department of the Interior's oil and gas activities as it compares to other uses of the land," Callender told BushGreenWatch. "We hope to find out what these leases are really worth, and if there is potential harm to our natural resources."

But the federal government's response to the request imposes a "cost-prohibitive" $6,500 fee and asserts that it would take 200 hours of staff time to compile data, pushing the release of the information to well past the end of the year – and, notably, past the upcoming presidential election. [1]

In return for the use of public lands, companies that extract oil and gas pay the government a royalty of 12.5 percent of the value of what they remove, said Dusty Horwitt, an analyst for EWG. Without knowing how much each company extracts, it is impossible to determine the value of those leases to the public.

The agency's response denies EWG a waiver of the $6,500 fee (although a waiver is standard practice for public information requests when the information will be broadly disseminated to the public) – on the grounds that the public will not be sufficiently interested in the subject, and that the information is allegedly already available to the public. In addition, the acting Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) officer disagreed with EWG's "view that these programs are a giveaway of public resources." [2]

"It's difficult to distinguish which of these arguments is the most specious and irrelevant," argues EWG President Ken Cook, in his written appeal of the decision.

Cook points out that, at a time when gasoline prices (and federal deficits) are skyrocketing, there is perhaps no topic less likely to be ignored. "When 59 percent of Americans surveyed in the most recent USA Today/CNN/Gallup poll said gas prices would cause financial hardships for them this summer, we are hard pressed to think of an issue that the public cares more about than oil and gas prices and supplies," Cook wrote.

Cook also refutes the assertion that the information is already available, stating that the data is not available in a form that makes it possible to determine "where the oil and gas are coming from or who is paying for them."

He especially takes issue with Acting FOIA Officer Ralph L. Johnson's argument that he can block access to data because he doesn't like EWG's assessment of "how the oil and gas leasing system works."

"Taxpayers paid to compile these data, and they are not Acting FOIA Officer Johnson's personal property," Cook wrote. "He doesn't get to decide who will or who won't get access to them, and his interpretation does not supersede the public's right to know."

EWG's appeal of the decision is pending before the Department of the Interior.

###

SOURCES:
[1] EWG letter, Jun. 2, 2004.
[2] Ibid.