Federal Communications Commission FCC 09-87 Before the Federal Communications Commission Washington, D.C. 20554 In the Matter of MAUREEN NEVIN On Request for Inspection of Records ) ) ) ) ) ) FOIA Control No. 2008-241 MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Adopted: September 30, 2009 Released: October 1, 2009 By the Commission: 1. This memorandum opinion and order denies an application for review filed by Maureen Nevin (Nevin).1 Nevin appeals a decision by the Enforcement Bureau (EB) 2 granting in part and denying in part her Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request3 for information regarding the Commission’s investigation of station WYGG, Asbury Park, New Jersey. 2. Nevin’s application for review states that she “respectfully request[s] a review of your office’s decision to withhold 16 documents from my FOIA request.” 4 There is no explanation of why Nevin believes that EB erred in withholding the documents. Nevin also states that she “[has] some questions regarding the documents themselves,” but, similarly, does not elaborate on what questions she has. 1 Letter from Maureen Nevin to G. Michael Moffitt, Acting Regional Director (Mar. 26, 2008) (AFR). 2 Letter from G. Michael Moffitt to Ms. S. Maureen Nevin (Mar. 14, 2008) (Response). 3 See Letter from Frank Pallone, Jr., Member of Congress to Mr. Kevin Washington, Director, Office of Legislative Affairs (Jan. 28, 2008) (EB treated Congressman Pallone’s letter as containing a FOIA request from Nevin). 4 AFR at 1. EB withheld 15 documents pursuant to the deliberative process privilege encompassed by FOIA Exemption 5 (5 U.S.C. § 552(b)(5)) and one document as a privileged or confidential financial document under FOIA Exemption 4 (5 U.S.C. § 552(b)(4)). See Response at 1. Federal Communications Commission FCC 09-87 2 3. The Commission rule regarding applications for review provides that “[t]he application for review shall concisely and plainly state the questions presented for review. . . .”5 As noted, Nevin’s AFR fails to state any grounds for review and therefore will be denied.6 4. Accordingly, it is ordered that the application for review, filed by Maureen Nevin IS DENIED. Nevin may seek judicial review of this action, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. § 552(a)(4)(B). 5. The officials responsible for this action are the following: Chairman Genachowski and Commissioners Copps, McDowell, Clyburn and Baker. FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Marlene H. Dortch Secretary 5 47 C.F.R. § 1.115(b)(1). See also Imposition of a Forfeiture Against Capitol Radiotelephone, Inc., 11 FCC Rcd 8232, 8236-37 (1996) (Commission will consider only those arguments specifically raised by the application for review). 6 As a related matter, EB charged Nevin fees for processing her FOIA request as an “all other requester.” Letter from G. Michael Moffitt to Ms. S. Maureen Nevin (Apr. 7, 2008), citing 47 C.F.R. § 0.470(a)(3). Nevin responded that “I was quite surprised to read that I am not a representative of the media [and thus entitled to reduced fees].” Letter from Maureen Nevin to G. Michael Moffitt (Apr. 10, 2008). See 47 C.F.R. § 0.470(a)(1). She also states that she is “surprised” at the amount of the fees. Id. She concluded, however, “Well, if that’s the cost of open records, then I guess we’ll just have pay it.” Id. In view of this statement, we do not deem Nevin to have appealed the fee determination.