EFTA00015493.pdf

Case 1:20-cv-00833-PAE Document 39 Filed 01/15/21 Page 1 of 18
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
THE NEW YORK TIMES COMPANY,
Plaintiff,
No. 20-CV-833 (PAE)
v.
FEDERAL BUREAU OF PRISONS,
Defendant.
SUPPLEMENTAL DECLARATION OF KARA CHRISTENSON
I, Kara Christenson, hereby declare as follows:
I. I am employed by the United States Department of Justice, Federal Bureau of
Prisons ("BOP"), as a Government Information Specialist ("GIS") for Central Office, stationed
at the Federal Medical Center in Rochester, Minnesota ("FMC Rochester"). My background and
employment history with BOP are described in my declaration filed in this matter on August 5,
2020.
2. The statements made in this declaration are based upon my personal knowledge
and information available to me in my official capacity and about which I have become
knowledgeable.
3. I submit this supplemental declaration in further support of GOP's motion for
summary judgment in this case and in opposition to plaintiffs' cross-motion for summary
judgment.
4. Plaintiffs have raised the issue of whether BOP received FOIA requests for video
footage before plaintiffs' own request on August 12, 2020. BOP received a separate FOIA
1
EFTA00015493
Case 1:20-cv-00833-PAE Document 39 Filed 01/15/21 Page 2 of 18
request (not from plaintiffs) for Metropolitan Correctional Center video records dated August 10,
2019, the same day BOP turned over the video records to the Federal Bureau of Investigation,
and this request was logged on August 12, 2019.
BOP 's Productions Since August 5, 2020
5. On August 11, 2020, BOP produced 77 additional pages of records to plaintiffs,
consisting of 5 pages released in full and 72 pages released in part. These pages included
approximately 57 pages of various log books pertaining to Epstein, including approximately 51
pages of attorney log books showing attorney visits to Epstein. In connection with the GOP's
releases of pages of log books, I need to make a correction to my declaration filed on August 5,
2020. In that declaration at Paragraph 22, I stated that BOP had located two pages of scanned
visitor logs, which it was reviewing and intended to release in part. Instead, BOP located
approximately 51 pages of copies of scanned attorney log books showing attorney visits to
Epstein, which it released to plaintiffs with appropriate redactions.
6. Relatedly, at Paragraph 39 of my declaration filed on August 5, 2020, I
inadvertently stated that BOP had located and produced with redactions a page from a log
showing a visitor for Epstein on July 30, 2019. In fact, the page (copied onto two pages) that was
produced to plaintiffs with redactions came from an Intake Screening Phone Log showing that
Epstein made a phone call on July 30, 2019, not that he received a visit on that date. BOP did not
produce the cover to this log because it does not refer to Epstein and is non-responsive. Because
the log book showed a phone call, rather than a visit, Paragraph 36 of my declaration filed on
August 5, 2020, should be modified to state that BOP also located one physical log book, the
Intake Screening Phone Log, showing a call made by Epstein on July 30, 2019.
7. On August 31, 2020, BOP produced 351 additional pages of records to plaintiffs,
consisting of 12 pages released in full and 339 pages released in part. These pages included the
2
EFTA00015494
Case 1:20-cv-00833-PAE Document 39 Filed 01/15/21 Page 3 of 18
approximately 51 pages of attorney log books, showing attorney visits to Epstein, as attachments
to email records.
8. In October 2020, BOP reached an agreement with plaintiffs, through counsel,
pursuant to which the Office of Inspector General of the United States Department of Justice
("OIG") would produce back to BOP certain records BOP had produced to OIG in connection
with investigations into Epstein's death, and that BOP would review these records in response to
plaintiffs' FOIA request. BOP subsequently reached a further agreement with plaintiffs, through
counsel, that it would not review emails records in OIG's possession, except for emails to or
from Epstein himself while he was at MCC. BOP has determined that Epstein did not send or
receive any emails himself while he was at MCC. Specifically, any email sent or received by
Epstein while he was at MCC would be logged in GOP's Trulincs system, and Trulincs shows
that Epstein did not send or receive any emails while he was at MCC. Accordingly, BOP did not
review the email records in OIG's possession.
9. BOP received approximately 7,475 pages of records back from OIG, not
including emails. I reviewed these pages and determined that approximately 6,898 were non responsive or duplicative of records previously reviewed by BOP. Of the remaining pages (the
"Returned Records"), BOP withheld 387 pages in full, pursuant to Exemptions 6, 7(C), and/or
7(A). On January 8, 2021, BOP produced the remaining 190 pages of records to plaintiffs,
consisting of 14 pages released in full and 176 pages released in part. These pages included 8
pages of records that BOP had previously withheld in full pursuant to Exemption 7(A), but that
BOP has since determined in consultation with the United States Attorney's Office for the
Southern District of New York could be released with certain redactions.
BOP's Updated Index
3
EFTA00015495
Case 1:20-cv-00833-PAE Document 39 Filed 01/15/21 Page 4 of 18
10. Attached as Exhibit 1 to this declaration is an updated index of records withheld
in full by BOP in this case (the "Updated Index"). The Updated Index includes certain changes
and additions to the Index submitted as Exhibit 8 to my declaration submitted on August 5, 2020
(the "Original Index").
II. The Updated Index reduces the number of pages of count documents noted as
withheld at Entry 24 by 18 pages. These 18 pages consist of an inmate census roster dated
August 9, 2019, containing Epstein's name and the names of other inmates held at MCC. Two of
the 18 eighteen pages, including the page showing Epstein's name, were released in part to
plaintiffs.' The remaining 16 pages were withheld in full under Exemptions 6 and 7(C) and are
now included at Entry 59 of the Updated Index, along with pages of other inmate census rosters
for other dates.
12. The Updated Index omits two entries of the Original Index, Entries 34 and 37,
consisting of records from the MCC's Special Housing Unit (the "SHU") that BOP determined
could be released in part, with redactions pursuant to Exemptions 6, 7(A), and 7(C), instead of
withheld in full pursuant to Exemption 7(A).2 The Updated Index also omits Entry 54, consisting
The first, cover page of this inmate census roster, as received from BOP, appears to have barely
legible handwriting on it. BOP located a copy of this pages with the handwriting moderately
more visible among its previously withheld records. BOP released the version returned by CMG
with the barely legible handwriting and would have redacted the handwriting pursuant to
Exemptions, 6, 7(C), 7(E), and/or 7(F) had it released the more legible version. This census
inmate roster does not appear to specifically concern Epstein (apart from his appearance on one
page of the roster, which was released in part), and the handwriting does not appear to relate to
Epstein but instead appears to relate to counting of inmates.
2 Of the three pages noted at Entry 37 of the Original Index, two pages were duplicates, with
handwritten notes on one of the pages. Because those portions of the page were redacted, only
one copy of these two pages were released in part to plaintiffs. The redacted portions and the
handwritten portions do not appear to relate to Epstein. In addition, the four pages noted at Entry
34 of the Original Index had also been counted in the pages noted at Entry 22, and the page count
noted at Entry 22 of the Updated Index has been reduced accordingly.
4
EFTA00015496
Case 1:20-cv-00833-PAE Document 39 Filed 01/15/21 Page 5 of 18
of emails withheld under Exemption 5 and the attorney-client privilege, because plaintiff is not
challenging the withholding of these records.
13. Entry 19 of the Updated Index includes 12 pages of Epstein's medical records,
withheld in full under Exemption 7(A), and in part under Exemption 6 and 7(C). On August 31,
2020, after I submitted my previous declaration, BOP produced 88 pages of Epstein's medical
records, but withheld in full 12 pages for reasons explained at Paragraph 20 of the August 5,
2020, declaration of Counsel to the Acting United States Attorney Russell Capone.
14. The Updated Index corrects an inadvertent error that resulted in double counting
of seventeen pages of emails listed at Entry 52 and twenty-nine pages of emails listed at Entry
53.
BOP 's Assertions of Exemptions 5 and 7(E) Over Documents Previously Withheld in Full
15. The Updated Index clarifies that BOP is not asserting Exemptions 5 or 7(E) as a
basis to withhold certain documents in full. BOP has conducted a further review of certain
records that previously were withheld in full pursuant to Exemptions 5 and/or 7(E), in addition to
Exemption 7(A). As a result of that further review, and as reflected on the Updated Index, BOP
is withdrawing its assertion of Exemption 5 as a basis to withhold in full Entries 1, 2, and 12.
BOP continues to assert Exemption 5 as a basis to withhold portions of Entries 2 and 12 for the
reasons explained in my prior declaration, but not Entry 1, as reflected on the Updated Index. All
of these documents are separately withheld in full pursuant to Exemption 7(A).
16. With respect to the responses to the psychological reconstruction prepared after
Epstein's death, listed at Entry 12 on the Updated Index, the majority of the pages withheld are
drafts, containing comments from various perspectives within BOP on versions of the document
preceding its final version. Five pages of the responses to the psychological reconstruction
5
EFTA00015497
Case 1:20-cv-00833-PAE Document 39 Filed 01/15/21 Page 6 of 18
prepared after Epstein's death consist of a timeline of events, over which BOP is no longer
asserting Exemption 5.
17. As a result of its further review, BOP is no longer asserting Exemption 7(E) to
withhold any document in full. Specifically, and as reflected on the Updated Index, BOP is
withdrawing its assertion of Exemption 7(E) as a basis to withhold in full Entries 2, 9, 10, 12, 13,
15, 17, 18, and 36. As reflected on the Updated Index, BOP continues to assert Exemption 7(E)
as to non-public information in these documents that would reveal investigatory techniques and
procedures or the specific application thereof, except for Entries 10 and 36, over which BOP no
longer asserts Exemption 7(E). All of these documents are separately withheld in full pursuant to
Exemption 7(A).
18. BOP is asserting Exemption 7(E) to protect information in the incident report,
listed at Entry 1 on the Updated Index, which would reveal specific steps taken in responding to
an inmate emergency in the Special Housing Unit. Releasing this type of information would
allow inmates to learn the manner in which MCC staff are likely to respond to emergencies and
potentially interfere with staff's ability to manage emergency situations.
19. BOP is asserting Exemption 7(E) to protect information in the psychological
reconstruction of inmate death, listed at Entry 2 on the Updated Index, which would reveal
particular sources of information that such investigations typically rely on or seek to rely on.
Specifically, it discusses how the availability or lack thereof of specific sources of information
affected an investigation, as well as typical sources routinely relied upon. Because of the specific
constraints under which investigations must proceed in the correctional facility setting,
identification of sources that are typically relied upon or that are unavailable or relied upon in a
specific instance are part of BOP investigatory plans and response, and disclosure of sources that
were unavailable or relied upon or typical sources relied upon could hamper GOP's ability to
6
EFTA00015498
Case 1:20-cv-00833-PAE Document 39 Filed 01/15/21 Page 7 of 18
conduct investigations in the future by alerting staff and/or inmates to such sources and allowing
them to take steps to interfere with sources or evidence.
20. BOP is asserting Exemption 7(E) to protect information in the inmate
investigative report, listed at Entry 9 on the Updated Index, regarding the use of Security Threat
Group ("STG") designations. STG is an enhanced monitoring technique used to maintain
balanced prison populations in an effort to protect the safety and security of staff and inmates.
Inmates are generally not aware of their placement in an STG, and only certain inmates are
assigned an STG. Not every inmate has an STG assignment. BOP is also asserting Exemption
7(E) to protect information in the inmate investigative report concerning specific steps taken in
responding to an inmate emergency in the Special Housing Unit. Releasing this type of
information would provide an opportunity for inmates to learn the manner in which staff are
likely to respond to emergencies and potentially interfere with staff's ability to manage
emergency situations.
21. BOP is asserting Exemption 7(E) to protect information in the responses to the
psychological reconstruction prepared following Epstein's death, listed at Entry 12 on the
Updated Index, which would reveal specific steps taken in responding to an inmate emergency in
the Special Housing Unit. Releasing this type of information would provide an opportunity for
inmates to learn the manner in which staff are likely to respond to emergencies and potentially
interfere with staff's ability to manage emergency situations.
22. BOP is asserting Exemption 7(E) to protect information in an August 14, 2019,
letter, listed at Entry 13 on the Updated Index, that would reveal details about how a BOP team
investigating an incident, known as an After Action Review Team, conducts an investigation,
and the access it requires to BOP facilities to complete its work. Release of these details would
alert staff to systems and information reviewed as part of an investigation and could lead to
7
EFTA00015499
Case 1:20-cv-00833-PAE Document 39 Filed 01/15/21 Page 8 of 18
attempts to distort, delete, or otherwise manipulate details and data relevant to an investigation.
Release of the names of members of the After Action Review Team, contained in the August 14,
2019 letter, would also disclose law enforcement techniques and procedures because the manner
in which team members are selected, the positions they hold, and the locations from which they
were chosen and deployed are critical considerations in the assembly of an After Action Review
Team. Withholding the names of team members protects the investigative process by ensuring
staff are not aware of who is deemed an appropriate team member and reducing the opportunity
to attempt to influence the investigation of an event.
23. BOP is asserting Exemption 7(E) to protect information in a memorandum and
report from Epstein's July 23, 2019 apparent suicide attempt (Form 583), listed at Entry 15 on
the Updated Index, regarding the use of STG designations, for the reasons stated above with
regard to the inmate investigation report. BOP is also asserting Exemption 7(E) to protect certain
information in the memorandum and report from Epstein's July 23, 2019 attempt (Form 583)
that was obtained from witnesses. In any investigation, identifying witnesses and how an
interview is conducted, including questions and responses, are critical components of the
investigatory techniques of security staff of the BOP, especially in a correctional setting where
there are often multiple witnesses and the correctional setting poses a significant risk of
contamination or influence of witness by other witnesses and/or other inmates. The investigative
techniques involved include what witnesses to interview and what procedures must be
undertaken to ensure the greatest cooperation by the witness during any interview. Witnesses to
an event might influence each other if they are not separated before any interactions or
conversations occur between them. In this sense, the investigative techniques, in a correctional
setting, include strategic decisions that account for the secure and orderly operations of the
correctional facilities to ensure inmate and staff safety is not put in jeopardy. Disclosure of this
8
EFTA00015500
Case 1:20-cv-00833-PAE Document 39 Filed 01/15/21 Page 9 of 18
information in the memorandum and report would reveal how the information was gathered and
could provide an opportunity for inmates to manipulate victims or witnesses to an incident in an
effort to improperly influence an investigation.
24. BOP is asserting Exemption 7(E) to protect information in a chain of custody
form, listed at Entry 17 on the Updated Index, about where evidence is stored. Release of this
information could provide an opportunity for staff to manipulate evidence or the staff responsible
for controlling it.
25. BOP is asserting Exemption 7(E) to protect information in the reports of Epstein's
July 23, 2019, apparent suicide attempt, listed at Entry 18 on the Updated Index, regarding
specific procedures, including notification processes, used in an inmate emergency in the Special
Housing Unit. Releasing this type of information would provide an opportunity for inmates to
learn the manner in which staff are likely to respond to emergencies and potentially interfere
ith staff's ability to manage emergency situations.
Application of Exemptions to the Returned Records
26. The Updated Index identifies at Entries 55-61 the pages of the Returned Records
withheld in full by BOP. All of the Returned Records withheld in full by BOP are withheld
under FOIA Exemption 7(A), except for the 2 pages of records showing transferors of funds to
Epstein noted at Entry 58 of the Updated Index and the 274 pages of inmate census rosters at
Entry 59 of the Updated Index, which are withheld under Exemption 6 and 7(C) and discussed
below. The basis for withholdings of Returned Records under Exemption 7(A) is explained in
the accompanying supplemental declaration of Counsel to the Acting United States Attorney
Russell Capone. In addition to the withholdings in full under Exemptions 6, 7(A), and 7(C),
BOP has also withheld certain portions of Returned Records under Exemptions 6, 7(A), 7(C),
7(E), and 7(F).
9
EFTA00015501
Case 1:20-cv-00833-PAE Document 39 Filed 01/15/21 Page 10 of 18
Threshold Justification for Application of Exemption 7
27. As a threshold to applying Exemption 7, an agency has to demonstrate that the
"records or information [were] compiled for law enforcement purposes." 5 U.S.C. §552(b)(7).
28. As explained at Paragraphs 51-53 of my previous declaration, the BOP is a law
enforcement agency.
29. All of the Returned Records were compiled for law enforcement_purposes
because they were compiled in the exercise of GOP's statutory authority to detain certain
individuals. All of these records relate to GOP's operations and were compiled in order to carry
out GOP's responsibilities to protect the safety, security, and orderly operation of BOP facilities,
specifically MCC New York, to protect the public, and/or to protect the safety and care of
inmates at MCC New York, including Epstein. In addition, as with many of the records
previously withheld in this matter, the Returned Records were gathered and provided to OIG in
connection with a law enforcement investigation of Epstein's death. The records at issue in this
FOIA request meet the law enforcement threshold of Exemption (b)(7).
Records Withheld Pursuant to Exemptions 6 and 7(C)
30. 5 U.S.C. § 552(b)(6) ("FOIA Exemption 6") protects from disclosure "personnel
and medical files and similar files the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted
invasion of personal privacy." 5 U.S.C. § 552(b)(6).
31. 5 U.S.C. § 552(b)(7)(C) ("Exemption 7(C)") exempts from disclosure records or
information compiled for law enforcement purposes where its disclosure "could reasonably be
expected to constitute an unwarranted invasion of personal privacy." 5 U.S.C. § 552(b)(7)(C).
32. Some of the Returned Records withheld by BOP contain personal information
withheld under Exemptions 6 and 7(C) (the "6 & 7(C) Returned Records"). The 6 & 7(C)
Returned Records include personnel files within the meaning of Exemption 6, such as daily
10
EFTA00015502
Case 1:20-cv-00833-PAE Document 39 Filed 01/15/21 Page 11 of 18
assignment rosters for the MCC. The remainder of the 6 & 7(C) Returned Records are "similar
files" within the meaning of Exemption 6 because they contain information about particular,
identifiable individuals. This information includes personally identifying information, such as
names and contact information, of various third-party individuals other than Epstein.
33. Exemptions 6 and 7(C) each require a balancing of the privacy interests
implicated by disclosure of a record with the public interest in its disclosure. The privacy
interests implicated by the 6 & 7(C) Returned Records include the privacy interests of BOP
employees, BOP inmates other than Epstein, visitors or senders of funds to BOP inmates, and
legal counsel for BOP inmates. The 6 & 7(C) Returned Records contain personally identifying
information, such as names and contact information, for each of these categories of individuals
and for some individuals detail their association with Epstein or their involvement in Epstein's
incarceration. Release of this information—particularly in light of the intense media interest in
and public speculation concerning Epstein's death—could reasonably be expected to expose
these third parties to unwanted scrutiny, embarrassment, and even harassment or retaliation.
34. The sole public interest in disclosure to be weighed against these privacy interests
under both Exemption 6 and 7(C) is the public's understanding of BOP or other government
operations. The personal information withheld from the 6 and 7(C) Records will not
significantly contribute to the public's understanding of the operation or activities of BOP or any
other government agency. The withheld personal information does not provide significant
insight into government activities or operations in connection with Epstein's incarceration or the
response of BOP or any other government agency to Epstein's death.
35. The large volume of publicity and often unfounded speculation concerning the
circumstances of Epstein's death increase the likelihood that disclosure of the information
11
EFTA00015503
Case 1:20-cv-00833-PAE Document 39 Filed 01/15/21 Page 12 of 18
withheld under Exemptions 6 and 7(C) would cause an unwarranted invasion of personal
privacy.
36. In light of this public and unfounded speculation about Epstein's death and the
media coverage thereof, it is reasonable to expect that individuals identified through government
disclosures as associated with Epstein's incarceration and death, or investigation of the charges
against Epstein or the circumstances of his death, could be targeted or harassed. Accordingly,
publicizing the identity, contact information, or other personal information about a particular
individual's associations or interactions with Epstein will amount to a significant invasion of
personal privacy, with no meaningful contribution to the public's understanding of how the
government works.
37. For each category of individuals with personally identifying information present
in the 6 & 7(C) Returned Records, the individual privacy concerns outweigh the putative public
interest in their disclosure.
a. The disclosure of personally identifying information of BOP employees, such
as their names or contact information, would significantly invade their
personal privacy without contributing significantly to public understanding of
how BOP works. Disclosing the names or contact information of individual
BOP employees does not provide insight into how BOP works.
b. The disclosure of personally identifying information of BOP inmates, such as
their names or contact information, would significantly invade their personal
privacy without contributing significantly to public understanding of how
BOP works. The names or contact information of particular inmates sheds no
light on how BOP works.
c. The disclosure of personally identifying information of visitors or senders of
funds to BOP inmates, such as their names and contact information, would
significantly invade their personal privacy without contributing significantly
to public understanding of how the government works. Identification of
individuals who visited or sent money to Epstein or other inmates does not
shed light on BOP conduct or how BOP or any other government agency
works.
12
EFTA00015504
Case 1:20-cv-00833-PAE Document 39 Filed 01/15/21 Page 13 of 18
d. The disclosure of personally identifying information of legal counsel to
Epstein and other BOP inmates, such as their names and contact information,
would significantly invade their personal privacy without contributing
significantly to public understanding of how the government works.
Identification of counsel to Epstein or other inmates does not shed light on
BOP conduct or how BOP or any other government agency works.
38. Two sets of Returned Records were withheld in full under Exemptions 6 & 7(C).
One set of the Returned Records, noted at Entry 59 of the Updated Index, consists of 274 pages
from inmate census rosters for July 23-25 and 27-31, 2019, and August 1-6 and 8-10, 2019.
Although Epstein's name appears once on each of these rosters, the pages with his name were
released in part. The 274 pages withheld in full contain no information about Epstein and
instead list the names and some personal information of other inmates at MCC on those dates.
Identification of other inmates incarcerated at the same time as Epstein would shed no light on
BOP's or the government's operations, but would invade the privacy of the other inmates,
including by associating them with Epstein in a government document.
39. The other set of Returned Records withheld in full under Exemptions 6 & 7(C),
noted at Entry 58 of the Updated Index, consists of 2 pages showing the transferors of funds to
Epstein. Specifically, these pages are electronically generated pages containing details of
transfers of funds to Epstein. The transfers themselves, including the amount of the transfer but
not the names of the transferors, were documented in pages released in part. The pages withheld
in full include identifying details of the transferors. The identity of the transferors of funds to
Epstein would not shed any light on how BOP or the government works, but would invade the
privacy of the transferors, including by detailing their association with Epstein during his
incarceration.
40. The release of the personally identifying information in the 6 & 7(C) Returned
Records would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion under Exemption 6, and, at a minimum,
13
EFTA00015505
Case 1:20-cv-00833-PAE Document 39 Filed 01/15/21 Page 14 of 18
could reasonably be expected to constitute an unwarranted invasion under Exemption 7(C), of
the personal privacy of BOP employees, BOP inmates other than Epstein, visitors or senders of
funds to BOP inmates, or legal counsel for BOP inmates.
Returned Records Withheld Pursuant to Exemptions 7(E)
41. 5 U.S.C. § 522 (b)(7)(E) ("Exemption 7(E)") exempts from disclosure "records or
information compiled for law enforcement purposes, but only to the extent that the production of
such law enforcement records or information ... would disclose techniques and procedures for
law enforcement investigations or prosecutions, or would disclose guidelines for law
enforcement investigations or prosecutions if such disclosure could reasonably be expected to
risk circumvention of the law."
42. Some of the Returned Records withheld in part by BOP contain information about
or discussion of law enforcement techniques and procedures or guidelines for law enforcement
investigations or prosecutions (the "7(E) Returned Records").
43. Portions of the 7(E) Returned Records fall within the scope of Exemption 7(E)
because they include information or discussions that would disclose law enforcement techniques
and procedures or guidelines for law enforcement investigations and their use in managing the
MCC. With one exception, none of the information in the Returned Records withheld by BOP
under Exemption 7(E) pertains specifically to Epstein. Instead, the information concerns steps
taken by BOP staff in response to issues at the MCC unrelated to Epstein or primarily routine
actions taken by BOP staff. Specifically, BOP disclosed in part pages of lieutenant's logs,
TRUINTEL logs, inmate census roster pages, and an MCC running board page that mention or
refer to Epstein but also document techniques, procedures, and/or guidelines used in managing
14
EFTA00015506
Case 1:20-cv-00833-PAE Document 39 Filed 01/15/21 Page 15 of 18
the MCC and enforcing the law there? For example, disclosing details of counts within the MCC
or the use of body alarms there would disclose law enforcement techniques, procedures, and/or
guidelines. If the Court requires further information, BOP is prepared to file an ex parte
supplemental declaration explaining in greater detail the techniques, procedures, and guidelines
at issue.
44. The one redaction in the 7(E) Returned Records made by BOP pursuant to
Exemption 7(E) that does pertain specifically to Epstein is the redaction of certain information
on an electronically generated inmate profile of Epstein that would disclose how BOP classifies
certain inmates for security purposes. Disclosure of that portion of Epstein's inmate profile
would disclose a law enforcement technique or procedure by disclosing how BOP classifies
certain inmates in connection with security issues.
45. Disclosure of the information in the 7(E) Returned Records withheld pursuant to
Exemption 7(E) would create a risk of circumvention of the law. Disclosure of the information
would provide inmates or other individuals with details about how MCC works and its security.
They could use this information to destabilize the MCC and to perpetrate crimes there.
Returned Records Withheld Pursuant to Exemption 7(F)
46. 5 U.S.C. § 522 (b)(7)(F) ("Exemption 7(F)") exempts from disclosure "records or
information compiled for law enforcement purposes, but only to the extent that the production of
such law enforcement records or information ... could reasonably be expected to endanger the
life or physical safety of any individual."
3 Lieutenant's logs withheld in full pursuant to Exemption 7(A), noted at Entry 49 of the
Updated Index, also contain information that falls with the scope of Exemption 7(F) for the
reasons discussed here.
15
EFTA00015507
Case 1:20-cv-00833-PAE Document 39 Filed 01/15/21 Page 16 of 18
47. Some of the Returned Records withheld by BOP in full or in part contain
information that falls within the scope of Exemption 7(F) (the "7(F) Returned Records"). Such
information falls into two categories. First, disclosure of the personally identifying information,
such as names and contact information, of third-party individuals employed by BOP could
reasonably be expected to endanger the life or physical safety of these individuals. Second,
disclosure of certain techniques and procedures used in the management of the MCC could
reasonably be expected to endanger the life or physical safety of BOP employees and inmates
held by BOP.
48. First, some of the 7(F) Returned Records fall in part within the scope of
Exemption 7(F) because the release of the personally identifying information contained in these
records could reasonably be expected to endanger the life or physical safety of BOP employees
whose personally identifying information is contained in the 7(F) Returned Records. BOP
employees work with inmates and criminal defendants who, upon their release from
incarceration or during their incarceration, might target BOP employees for reprisal. BOP
employees in many cases live in the cities where they work, frequently utilize public
transportation, and regularly engage in community and social activities in those cities. The
release of personally identifying information of BOP employees increases the risks of such
targeting or harassment because it would make it easier for identified employees to be targeted or
harassed. Because of the attention and speculation surrounding Epstein's death, it is reasonable
to expect that individuals identified through disclosures by the government as associated with
Epstein's incarceration and death could be targeted.
49. Second, some of the 7(F) Returned Records fall in part within the scope of
Exemption 7(F) because the release of information contained therein would reveal details about
the operation and management of the MCC that could be used to destabilize the MCC and
16
EFTA00015508
Case 1:20-cv-00833-PAE Document 39 Filed 01/15/21 Page 17 of 18
perpetrate crimes there, endangering the lives and physical safety of BOP employees and MCC
inmates. With one exception, none of this information pertains specifically to Epstein. Instead,
the information concerns steps taken by BOP staff in response to issues at the MCC unrelated to
Epstein or primarily routine, but sensitive, actions taken by BOP staff. Specifically, BOP
disclosed in part pages of lieutenant's logs, TRUINTEL logs, inmate census roster pages, an
MCC running board page, and SHU records that mention or refer to Epstein but also document
aspects of the MCC and its operations that are not public and could enable individuals to harm
BOP employees or MCC inmates.4 For example, disclosing certain details of counts within the
MCC or the use of body alarms there could reasonably be expected to endanger the lives and
physical safety of BOP employees and MCC inmates. If the Court requires further information,
BOP is prepared to file an ex parte supplemental declaration explaining in greater detail the
information at issue.
50. The one set of redactions in the Returned Records made by BOP pursuant to
Exemption 7(F) that does pertain specifically to Epstein is the redaction of certain information on
an electronically generated inmate profile of Epstein that would disclose how BOP classifies
certain inmates for security purposes. Disclosure of those portions of Epstein's inmate profile
could reasonably be expected to endanger the lives and physical safety of BOP employees and
MCC inmates by revealing how BOP classifies certain inmates in connection with security
issues.
4 TRUINTEL reports and lieutenant's logs withheld in full pursuant to Exemption 7(A), noted at
Entries 32 and 49 of the Updated Index, also contain information that falls with the scope of
Exemption 7(F) for the reasons discussed here.
17
EFTA00015509
Case 1:20-cv-00833-PAE Document 39 Filed 01/15/21 Page 18 of 18
Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1746, I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true
and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief.
Executed this _15th_ day of January 2021.
e4inerseevz fr\
Kara Christenson
Government Information Specialist
FOIA/PA Section (Central Office)
Bureau of Prisons
18
EFTA00015510