FDIC logo(Editor’s note: Russell Carollo won the Pulitzer Prize for national reporting in 1998 and has been a finalist three other times, most recently in 2002. He specializes in obtaining and analyzing government databases and other public records. He has spent more than a year acquiring travel records for JunketSleuth.com through the federal Freedom of Information Act and analyzing the information.)

Of all the federal agencies that have fought JunketSleuth.com’s efforts to give the American public access to government travel records, none has been more obstinate than the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp.

Practically everyone who has a checking or savings account knows the agency, if only by its acronym. The FDIC is the backbone of the nation’s banking system. It insures individual deposits, regulates certain financial activities and temporarily takes control of failed banks.

More than 15 months ago, in October 2009, JunketSleuth filed a request with the FDIC for data on employee travel – records clearly defined as public under federal law.

Last November, JunketSleuth filed a separate request for documents related to travel by the agency’s chairman, vice chairman and director. We also sought information for the Comptroller of the Currency and the director of the Office of Thrift Supervision, both of whom serve on the FDIC’s board.

JunketSleuth filed the requests under the federal Freedom of Information Act, which allows public access to government records that do not fall under one of several exemptions. That list includes exemptions that protect personal privacy, national security, active law enforcement investigations and confidential business information.

With the exception of Social Security numbers, credit card numbers, frequent flyer numbers and other personal details, the vast majority of travel information requested by JunketSleuth is public.

But the FDIC repeatedly refused to provide any information on travel by its employees, claiming, among other things, that it has no central database, that Junketsleuth’s requests were too broad and that even if they had the information, the public wouldn’t have a right to see it.

“Based upon experience, records relalting to travel by FDIC employees include personal information, such as home addresses, the disclosure of which would constitute an iinvasion of personsal privacy,” FDIC counsel Fredrick L. Fisch wrote in a Nov. 10, 2009, letter.

The FDIC’s travel spending has taken on added public interest since the near-meltdown of the financial system in 2008. Nearly every week for the past two-and-a-half years, the agency has dispatched its employees to cities around the country, to help seize and safeguard the assets of insolvent banks. That casualty list now tops 330 institutions.

Although the FDIC has rejected all of JunketSleuth’s Freedom of Information Act requests, more than 20 other agencies that got identically worded letters turned over their travel databases, which contain hundreds of thousands of records. A number of other agencies that got our letters have agreed to send the information soon.

In addition, more than 30 agencies have provided JunketSleuth with other types of records. Those include hotel bills, airline receipts and other documents related to travel by top agency officials and other government employees, or to travel to specific destinations that we asked about.

But the FDIC provided nothing.

In response to JunketSleuth’s initial request for data, the FDIC claimed that our request – again, worded identically to those that yielded voluminous records from many other agencies – did not “reasonably describe” the information being sought.

The FDIC also said that we did not specify a time frame for the records we sought, suggesting that our request for data could be interpreted to mean all travel-related information compiled since the agency was created in 1933.

The time period that JunketSleuth used in its requests to every agency was described as “all years,” because millions of records can fit on storage devices the size of a human thumb, and because listing specific years would require agencies to search only for those years and to remove years not requested – which would require more work by government FOIA representatives. Also, without knowing what years are on an agency’s database, JunketSleuth would be required to guess.

Most agencies either told JunketSleuth what years were available in their databases, or provided all available years (which usually meant about five years of records).

But the FDIC provided no specific information on its travel data.

“Moreover,” the agency wrote, “the FDIC does not maintain a central database of all information related in any way to travel... We have no practical way of identifying which files would need to be searched.”

JunketSleuth, however, did not request a “central database.” Our filing sought “all databases.” (To see the correspondence between JunketSleuth and the FDIC, go here.)

Nearly every agency that responded to JunketSleuth’s request for travel records had only one primary database that satisfied the request. Only a few had more than one. Although some other agencies also asked JunketSleuth to provide specific date ranges, they eventually provided data.

In a letter dated July 12, JunketSleuth responded to the FDIC:

“Your response does not identify the number of databases you have, indicate that any search was conducted or otherwise identify the volume or complexity of responsive materials to justify the need for me to narrow the request or further define the records I requested.”

The FDIC did not respond to the JunketSleuth letter, which was delivered by Federal Express.

On Nov. 19, JunketSleuth appealed the FDIC’s rejection of our first request for travel data. The agency denied the appeal in late December, reiterating its position that it possessed nothing that could be described as a travel “database.’’

Instead of offering an explanation for that lack of digital records, the FDIC focused on the wording of JunketSleuth’s letter, arguing that it was impossible for the agency to respond – and that it had no obligation to respond – because the request was overbroad.

For example, the FDIC took exception to the phrase “information related in any way to travel by FDIC employees and/or financed by FDIC.”

In a letter dated Dec. 28, the agency’s senior counsel, Barbara Sarshik, wrote:

“Because you did not define ‘related in any way’ your request could be construed to include – in addition to every record the agency has maintained since its inception that concerns travel by employees or paid for by FDIC – newspaper articles, training materials, published decisions, or any other type of record that relates, even tangentially, to travel.”

No other federal agency interpreted the request that way.

In response to JunketSleuth’s separate request for documents other than those in the requested databases, the FDIC claimed: “Your request did not seek agency records.”

The FDIC also said that, even if the request did ask for “agency records,” it did not “reasonably describe” the information.

JunketSleuth believes the description was both reasonable and specific. It stated:

“I request access to and copies of all records (with the exception of computer records covered in a separate FOIA) related in any way to travel by the chairman, the vice chairman, the director, the comptroller of the currency and the director of the office of thrift supervision (all including acting and former holders of the positions) since Jan. 1, 2010.

This request includes, but is not limited to, copies of hotel receipts, airline tickets, taxi receipts, etc., and all records of non-federal source travel.”

On Dec. 2, JunketSleuth filed another request, suspecting that travel money for the top officials identified in the request might somehow have come from another source outside the agency. This new request also sought documents related to travel by a second tier of officials, noting that their names and titles were taken from the FDIC’s website.

The FDIC responded:

“Though your request seeks information relating to the travel of various current and former officers and employees of FDIC, your request still does not seek agency records of the FDIC.”

Other agencies initially told JunketSleuth that their travel databases were not agency records, noting that they were maintained by other government bodies or by private contractors. But many later agreed to turn over those databases in response to appeals or to interventions by FOIA experts within the government.

The FDIC’s responses to JunketSleuth’s request for travel information were nearly identical to the types of responses it gave to requests for information sought by our partner site, BailoutSleuth.com.

JunketSleuth and BailoutSleuth both are operated by a nonprofit foundation funded by entrepreneur Mark Cuban.

On the same day that JunketSleuth requested FDIC travel data, a separate request was filed on behalf of BailoutSleuth for records identifying databases held by the FDIC’s Office of Foreign Assets Control. Federal guidelines and practices require that agencies keep lists of their databases, and agencies have routinely released such lists.

The FDIC, however, refused, citing some of the same reasons it used to deny request for travel records: Noting that the request did not specify a time period and suggesting that the request could include records dating to FDIC’s founding in 1933, long before databases existed.

The FDIC rejected BailoutSleuth’s requests for a database or other central listing of tort claims against the agency, and for correspondence between regulators and certain failed financial institutions.

The FDIC even denied our request for its database of all Freedom of Information filings submitted to the agency, records routinely released by the Department of Defense and many other agencies.

As with other requests, FDIC alleged we did not “reasonably describe” the information, even though other agencies – such as the Department of Defense – have responded to a nearly identically worded requests by releasing the information sought.

JunketSleuth plans to file additional Freedom of Information Act requests with the FDIC. We will report on the agency’s response.