 Office of the ATTORNEY GENERAL GREG ABBOTT | |
|
March 26, 2003 Mr. Glen Van Slyke
OR2003-2048 Dear Mr. Van Slyke: You ask whether certain information is subject to required public disclosure under chapter 552 of the Government Code. Your request was assigned ID# 178420. The Harris County Attorney (the "county attorney") received a request for an answer to whether four named doctors were or are informed of the rules and regulations of Ben Taub General Hospital and the Harris County Hospital District. In this regard, we note that the Public Information Act (the "Act") does not require a governmental body to answer factual questions, perform legal research, or create new information in responding to a request. See Open Records Decision Nos. 605 at 2 (1992), 563 at 8 (1990), 555 at 1-2 (1990), 534 at 2-3 (1989). However, a governmental body has a duty to make a good faith effort to relate a request for information to information the governmental body holds or to which it has access. Economic Opportunities Dev. Corp. v. Bustamante, 562 S.W.2d 266, 267-68 (Tex. Civ. App. - San Antonio 1978, writ dism'd); Open Records Decision No. 561 at 8 (1990). Because you have identified one record that is responsive to the requestor's question, we address your claim that the submitted information is excepted from disclosure under section 552.101 of the Government Code. Section 552.101 of the Government Code excepts from disclosure "information considered to be confidential by law, either constitutional, statutory, or by judicial decision." This section encompasses information protected by other statutes. You advise that the document at issue is a record of a medical peer review committee. Medical peer review is defined by the Medical Practice Act (the "MPA"), found at subtitle B of title 3 of the Occupations Code, to mean "the evaluation of medical and health care services, including evaluation of the qualifications of professional health care practitioners and of patient care rendered by those practitioners ." Occ. Code § 151.002(a)(7). A medical peer review committee is "a committee of a health care entity . . . or the medical staff of a health care entity, that operates under written bylaws approved by the policy-making body or the governing board of the health care entity and is authorized to evaluate the quality of medical and health care services[.] . . . ." Occ. Code § 151.002(a)(8). Section 160.007 of the MPA states that, "[e]xcept as otherwise provided by this subtitle, each proceeding or record of a medical peer review committee is confidential, and any communication made to a medical peer review committee is privileged." Occ. Code § 160.007. You state and the submitted documents reflect that the information at issue consists of a physician's application to the "Medical Board/Credentials Committee" for renewal of his clinical privileges to practice medicine and surgery at a particular hospital. We concur with your assessment that the information is protected by medical peer review and medical committee confidentiality. See St. Luke's Episcopal Hosp. v. Agbor, 952 S.W.2d 503, 505 (Tex. 1997); Memorial Hosp.-the Woodlands v. McCown, 927 S.W.2d 1, 5 (Tex. 1996) (finding that review by medical staff committee of application for staff privileges qualifies as medical peer review because it necessarily involves review of physician's qualifications, competence, and ethics). Therefore, the responsive information you have submitted must be withheld under section 552.101 of the Government Code in conjunction with section 160.007 of the Occupations Code. This letter ruling is limited to the particular records at issue in this request and limited to the facts as presented to us; therefore, this ruling must not be relied upon as a previous determination regarding any other records or any other circumstances. This ruling triggers important deadlines regarding the rights and responsibilities of the governmental body and of the requestor. For example, governmental bodies are prohibited from asking the attorney general to reconsider this ruling. Gov't Code § 552.301(f). If the governmental body wants to challenge this ruling, the governmental body must appeal by filing suit in Travis County within 30 calendar days. Id. § 552.324(b). In order to get the full benefit of such an appeal, the governmental body must file suit within 10 calendar days. Id. § 552.353(b)(3), (c). If the governmental body does not appeal this ruling and the governmental body does not comply with it, then both the requestor and the attorney general have the right to file suit against the governmental body to enforce this ruling. Id. § 552.321(a). If this ruling requires the governmental body to release all or part of the requested information, the governmental body is responsible for taking the next step. Based on the statute, the attorney general expects that, within 10 calendar days of this ruling, the governmental body will do one of the following three things: 1) release the public records; 2) notify the requestor of the exact day, time, and place that copies of the records will be provided or that the records can be inspected; or 3) notify the requestor of the governmental body's intent to challenge this letter ruling in court. If the governmental body fails to do one of these three things within 10 calendar days of this ruling, then the requestor should report that failure to the attorney general's Open Government Hotline, toll free, at (877) 673-6839. The requestor may also file a complaint with the district or county attorney. Id. § 552.3215(e). If this ruling requires or permits the governmental body to withhold all or some of the requested information, the requestor can appeal that decision by suing the governmental body. Id. § 552.321(a); Texas Dep't of Pub. Safety v. Gilbreath, 842 S.W.2d 408, 411 (Tex. App.--Austin 1992, no writ). Please remember that under the Act the release of information triggers certain procedures for costs and charges to the requestor. If records are released in compliance with this ruling, be sure that all charges for the information are at or below the legal amounts. Questions or complaints about over-charging must be directed to Hadassah Schloss at the Texas Building and Procurement Commission at (512) 475-2497. If the governmental body, the requestor, or any other person has questions or comments about this ruling, they may contact our office. We note that a third party may challenge this ruling by filing suit seeking to withhold information from a requestor. Gov't Code § 552.325. Although there is no statutory deadline for contacting us, the attorney general prefers to receive any comments within 10 calendar days of the date of this ruling. Sincerely, Kristen Bates
c: XX. XXXXX XXXXX
POST OFFICE BOX 12548, AUSTIN, TEXAS 78711-2548 TEL: (512) 463-2100 WEB: WWW.OAG.STATE.TX.US |