 ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS GREG ABBOTT | |
 |
March 30, 2007 Mr. Nathan C. Barrow OR2007-03556 Dear Mr. Barrow: You ask whether certain information is subject to required public disclosure under the Public Information Act (the "Act"), chapter 552 of the Government Code. Your request was assigned ID# 273451. The City of Fort Worth (the "city") received a request for four categories of information pertaining to cameras operated by the city. You state that the city has no information related to latitude, longitude, or elevation for the cameras. (1) You assert that the requested IP and MAC addresses and the location maps are not public information subject to the Act. You claim that the remaining requested information is excepted from disclosure under section 552.101 of the Government Code. We have considered your arguments and reviewed the submitted information. (2) Initially, we address your argument that IP addresses, MAC addresses, and detailed maps of the camera locations do not constitute public information for purposes of chapter 552 of the Government Code. In Open Records Decision No. 581 (1990), this office determined that certain computer information that has no significance other than its use as a tool for the maintenance, manipulation, or protection of public property, such as source codes, documentation information, and other computer programming, is not the kind of information made public under section 552.021 of the Government Code. Based on the reasoning in this decision and our review of the information at issue, we determine that IP and MAC addresses do not constitute public information under section 552.002 of the Government Code. Accordingly, this information is not subject to the Act and need not be released. However, a detailed map of camera locations has significance other than its use as a tool for the maintenance, manipulation, or protection of public property. Accordingly, we conclude that the remaining information is public information as defined by section 552.002, and is subject to disclosure under the Act. We will therefore address your arguments regarding disclosure of this information. Section 552.101 excepts from disclosure "information considered to be confidential by law, either constitutional, statutory, or by judicial decision." Gov't Code § 552.101. This section encompasses information made confidential by other statutes, such as section 418.182 of the Texas Homeland Security Act (the "HSA"), chapter 418 of the Government Code. Section 418.182 provides: (a) Except as provided by Subsections (b) and (c), information, including access codes and passwords, in the possession of a governmental entity that relates to the specifications, operating procedures, or location of a security system used to protect public or private property from an act of terrorism or related criminal activity is confidential. Gov't Code §§ 418.182. The fact that information may be related to a governmental body's emergency response preparedness or security concerns does not make such information per se confidential under the HSA. See Open Records Decision No. 649 at 3 (1996) (language of confidentiality provision controls scope of its protection). Furthermore, the mere recitation by a governmental body of a statute's key terms is not sufficient to demonstrate the applicability of a claimed provision. As with any exception to disclosure, a governmental body asserting one of the confidentiality provisions of the HSA must adequately explain how the responsive records fall within the scope of the claimed provision. See Gov't Code § 552.301(e)(1)(A) (governmental body must explain how claimed exception to disclosure applies). You assert and we find that the submitted information relates to the specifications, operating procedures, or location of a security system used to protect public or private property from an act of terrorism or related criminal activity. Thus, the information is confidential under section 418.182 of the Government Code and must be withheld under section 552.101 of the Government Code. As our ruling is dispositive, we do not address your remaining claims. 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, upon receiving this ruling, the governmental body will either release the public records promptly pursuant to section 552.221(a) of the Government Code or file a lawsuit challenging this ruling pursuant to section 552.324 of the Government Code. If the governmental body fails to do one of these things, 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 Office of the Attorney General 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. 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, Cindy Nettles Assistant Attorney General Open Records Division CN/eb Ref: ID# 273451 Enc. Submitted documents c: Mr. Jesse Pitt 1095 Roundrock Drive Saginaw, Texas 76179 (w/o enclosures)
1. The Act does not require a governmental body to release information that did not exist when a request
for information was received or to prepare new information in response to a request. See Econ. Opportunities
Dev. Corp. v. Bustamante, 562 S.W.2d 266, 267-68 (Tex. Civ. App. - San Antonio 1978, writ dism'd); Open
Records Decision Nos. 605 at 2 (1992), 452 at 3 (1986), 362 at 2 (1983).
We assume that the "representative sample" of records submitted to this office is truly representative
of the requested records as a whole. See Open Records Decision Nos. 499 (1988), 497 (1988). This open
records letter does not reach, and therefore does not authorize the withholding of, any other requested records
to the extent that those records contain substantially different types of information than that submitted to this
office. POST OFFICE BOX 12548, AUSTIN, TEXAS 78711-2548 TEL: (512) 463-2100 WEB: WWW.OAG.STATE.TX.US |