Dear New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection,

Under OPRA and the common law right of access, please provide a copy of the Treatment Works Approval (TWA) Permit Application received by the Division of Water Quality on July 6, 2021 for development of a new school at 50 Jersey Avenue in New Brunswick.

Yours faithfully,

Charlie Kratovil

Dear Mr. Shaw,
I am perplexed by the response provided to my request for the TWA permit application regarding 50 Jersey Avenue in New Brunswick. Your response states "Based on the record request, no responsive records have been identified. Requester should contact the Office of Record Access at 609-341-3121 with any questions."

I called the number and left a message explaining that the DEP Bulletin from September 1 notes that a TWA permit application was received on 7/6/2021. See here: https://www.nj.gov/dep/bulletin/bu2021_0...

I never received a response to my voice message. Please provide the requested record.

Yours sincerely,

Charlie Kratovil

Dear Griffith Shaw,

I am at a loss. DEP's own documents state that an application was received months ago. I filed a request for the application and was told none exists. I followed up and was promised someone would get back to me. No one has reached out with any further information. When can I expect a response?

Yours sincerely,

Charlie Kratovil

Dear Griffith Shaw,

I have not received the requested records, and it is apparent to me that the DEP's initial rejection of my request was erroneous. You said on October 7 that the records were located and that they were "being sent." However, I still have not received the records. Will you providing the records? What is the holdup?

Yours sincerely,

Charlie Kratovil

Dear Alex Ortiz,
Please explain why you are sending me a bill/invoice for this request (OPRA# 298258). Did I authorize or agree to pay any costs in my original request?

Yours sincerely,

Charlie Kratovil

Dear Griffith Shaw,

Thank you for clarifying. It's very confusing getting alternating messages from you and Mr. Ortiz. I'm sure you deal with a lot of requests, so I will recount the procedural history of this one: Mr. Coefer initially signed a document saying there were no "responsive records." I pointed out that other DEP documents explicitly contradicted the false claim that responsive records were not in your possession. Subsequent to this, I tried to contact you via telephone and left a message for you. No response was received, and responsibility for this error was unapologetically deflected to the "front desk," which is "usually pretty good at replying to the calls received."

"You should receive a response no later than 5 business days for the revisit," I was told. Subsequently, no calls or emails were received for over two weeks, and I emailed you in dismay on October 7.

On October 7, you replied: "I have reached out to the program for the records you are looking for again on Tuesday. On 09/29/21 they added in the comments of your request that 'physical records found and being sent / records expected to be in possession shortly'. I will send another email today and try again to find out when we can except these records... Sorry for the inconvenience!"

I received nothing for another 20 days. Only after I raised the issue again was I sent, without context or explanation, something that is "not an actual invoice, but you can use it as an invoice." I was told by Mr. Ortiz to go to a website and click on "pay a paper invoice" (even though what I have is not an actual invoice and not on paper." No one told me how much to pay or what I am paying for. Indeed I never agreed to pay anything at all.

The "not an actual invoice" says that the amount is $20.55 and it's for copies and shipping. I am asking you to waive these fees due to the issues identified above. I should have been more clear, but my strong preference for all requests is to receive the records electronically via email. If that's not possible, I will accept physical copies that I can pick up at your headquarters in Trenton. Please advise if you are willing to waive the fee and/or provide the records via email. Thank you for your time and attention to this.

Yours sincerely,

Charlie Kratovil

Dear NJDEP,
Having received no response to my message on November 23, I have reluctantly paid the bill you sent me. I hope that in the future the DEP will be more transparent about what records you have, more responsive to questions and messages, and that you will produce digital copies of your records without onerous fees.

I'll look forward to receiving the records pursuant to my August 30 request. Thank you.

Yours sincerely,

Charlie Kratovil

Dear Mr. Ortiz,

I continue to be astonished at how poorly DEP has handled this request. At 10:33am today, I paid the bill in question. Less than 10 minutes later, you sent a follow-up email indicating that I was delinquent in payment of this same bill. The email you sent me has many other troubling false statements contained within:

1) You say you received my request on September 9, 2021. Yet, you say you responded to the request on September 1, 2021. How does that make any sense? Does DEP have a time machine?
2) You claim that I signed a Printing Agreement Authorization request. This is not true. I never authorized any copies or charges, and repeatedly asked questions about why I was being charged, without receiving adequate answers to the questions.
3) Finally, as stated previously, the bill/invoice/"not an invoice" was paid this morning at 10:33am. If you require proof of payment, please contact me and I will send you the receipt. I ask that you confirm DEP has received this payment and that you cease references to my alleged delinquency. Indeed it has been DEP that has been delinquent in its responses to my request and subsequent communications.

I will note for context that I asked you, Alex Ortiz, a direct question on November 21: "Did I authorize or agree to pay any costs in my original request?" This question was not answered in the reply I received from Mr. Shaw. In a follow-up message I sent Mr. Shaw on November 23, I was explicit in my assertion that: "No one told me how much to pay or what I am paying for. Indeed I never agreed to pay anything at all."

I asked Mr. Shaw that the fee be waived because of this fact (and the multitude of errors DEP made in handling this request). I received no response to my waiver request for 57 days, so this morning, I reluctantly paid the bill that you had sent me, only to receive your email referencing my "delinquency in make [sic] restitution of [my] copy service invoice." I am deeply concerned that DEP is not following its own rules and procedures for responding to OPRA requests, and that charges are being attributed to requesters without their permission, and without proper communication.

Under OPRA and the common law right of access, please produce a copy of the "Printing Agreement Authorization request" that you claim I signed and returned so that I can investigate if a forgery has taken place, and if so, pursue legal action against the guilty party that forged my signature on same.

Yours sincerely,

Charlie Kratovil

Dear Alex Ortiz,
I paid for the records, so you can be certain that I want them. Please send them as soon as possible. Thank you for providing the "printing agreement. " I will note it has no signature, only the printed initials "MJC" (not my initials).

Yours sincerely,

Charlie Kratovil