February 3, 2009

Mr. Carey E. Smith

General Counsel

Texas Health and Human Services Commission

P.O. Box 13247

Austin, Texas 78711

OR2009-01402

Dear Mr. Smith:

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# 333802.

The Texas Health and Human Services Commission (the "commission") received a request for: (1) the personnel files of nine named individuals, including the file of the requestor, (2) any discrimination complaints for a specified time period, and (3) specific applications, interview schedules, questions, scoring sheets, and notes for a specified time period. You state you do not have information responsive to one of the requested personnel files. ⁽¹⁾ You state you have released some of the requested information to the requestor. You claim that the remaining information is excepted from disclosure under sections 552.101, 552.102, 552.103, 552.107, 552.111, 552.117, 552.122, 552.130, 552.136, and 552.137 of the Government Code. ⁽²⁾ We have considered the exceptions you claim and reviewed the submitted representative sample of information. ⁽³⁾

Section 552.103 of the Government Code provides in relevant part as follows:

(a) Information is excepted from [required public disclosure] if it is information relating to litigation of a civil or criminal nature to which the state or a political subdivision is or may be a party or to which an officer or employee of the state or a political subdivision, as a consequence of the person's office or employment, is or may be a party.

. . .

(c) Information relating to litigation involving a governmental body or an officer or employee of a governmental body is excepted from disclosure under Subsection (a) only if the litigation is pending or reasonably anticipated on the date that the requestor applies to the officer for public information for access to or duplication of the information.

Gov't Code § 552.103(a), (c). A governmental body has the burden of providing relevant facts and documents sufficient to establish the applicability of section 552.103 to the information that it seeks to withhold. To meet this burden, the governmental body must demonstrate: (1) that litigation was pending or reasonably anticipated on the date of its receipt of the request for information and (2) that the information at issue is related to that litigation. See Univ. of Tex. Law Sch. v. Tex. Legal Found., 958 S.W.2d 479 (Tex. App.--Austin 1997, no pet.); Heard v. Houston Post Co., 684 S.W.2d 210 (Tex. App.--Houston [1st Dist.] 1984, writ ref'd n.r.e.); see also Open Records Decision No. 551 at 4 (1990). A governmental body must meet both prongs of this test for information to be excepted under section 552.103 of the Government Code.

In this instance, you state that the commission, through its Medicaid Integrity division, conducted Medicaid fraud and abuse investigations of Medicaid providers. You explain that "[a]s a result of certain of those investigations, the Medicaid providers filed lawsuits against the [c]ommission after the [c]ommission sought to recoup suspected overpayments of Medicaid funds." You state that these legal actions were pending on the date the commission received the current open records request. Finally, you explain that three of the employees whose personnel files are at issue "have knowledge of the underlying facts in the lawsuits," and you assert that the "opposing parties in the litigation could attempt to use information contained in the employees' personnel files to impeach those employees' testimony." Thus, we conclude that the commission has shown that litigation was pending prior to the receipt of the present request for information. We further conclude that the marked personnel files of the three employees at issue relate to the pending litigation for purposes of section 552.103(a) of the Government Code. Therefore, the personnel files of the three employees at issue, which you have marked, may be withheld pursuant to section 552.103 of the Government Code. ⁽⁴⁾

We note, however, that once the information at issue has been obtained by all parties to the pending litigation through discovery or otherwise, no section 552.103(a) interest exists with respect to the information. See Open Records Decision Nos. 349 (1982), 320 (1982). Thus, any submitted information that has either been obtained from or provided to all other parties in the pending litigation is not excepted from disclosure under section 552.103(a) and must be disclosed. Further, the applicability of section 552.103(a) ends once the litigation has concluded. See Attorney General Opinion MW-575 (1982); see also Open Records Decision No. 350 (1982).

Section 552.101 of the Government Code 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 other statutes make confidential. You argue that a portion of the remaining information is excepted from disclosure under section 552.101 in conjunction with section 12.003 of the Human Resources Code. Federal and state statutes prohibit the disclosure of information concerning a state plan for medical assistance, except for a purpose directly connected with the administration of the plan. See 42 U.S.C. § 1396a(a)(7); Hum. Res. Code § § 12.003, 21.012; Open Records Decision Nos. 584 (1991), 166 (1977). Section 12.003 of the Human Resources Code provides in relevant part:

(a) Except for purposes directly connected with the administration of the [department's] assistance programs, it is an offense for a person to solicit, disclose, receive, or make use of, or to authorize, knowingly permit, participate in, or acquiesce in the use of the names of, or any information concerning, persons applying for or receiving assistance if the information is directly or indirectly derived from the records, papers, files, or communications of the department or acquired by employees of the [department] in the performance of their official duties.

Hum. Res. Code § 12.003(a). ⁽⁵⁾ In Open Records Decision No. 584 (1991), this office concluded that "[t]he inclusion of the words 'or any information' juxtaposed with the prohibition on disclosure of the names of the [department's] clients clearly expresses a legislative intent to encompass the broadest range of individual client information, and not merely the clients' names and addresses." Open Records Decision No. 584 at 3 (1991). Consequently, it is the specific information pertaining to individual clients, and not merely the clients' identities, that is made confidential under section 12.003. See also 42 U.S.C. § 1396a(a)(7) (state plan for medical assistance must provide safeguards that restrict use or disclosure of information concerning applicants and recipients to purposes directly connected with administration of plan); 42 C.F.R. §§ 431.300 et seq.; Hum. Res. Code § 21.012(a) (requiring provision of safeguards that restrict use or disclosure of information concerning applicants for or recipients of assistance programs to purposes directly connected with administration of programs); Open Records Decision No. 166 (1977).

You state that some of the submitted information contains information about a recipient of Medicaid benefits. You also inform us that the release of information at issue, in this instance, would not be for purposes directly connected with the administration of a health and human services program. Based on your representations and our review, we conclude that the information we have marked is confidential under section 12.003 of the Human Resources Code and it must be withheld under section 552.101 of the Government Code. However, no portion of the remaining information consists of specific information pertaining to individual Medicaid clients. Accordingly, none of the remaining information may be withheld on this basis.

Next, you claim that some of the remaining information is confidential under section 6103(a) of title 26 of the United States Code, which is also encompassed by section 552.101 of the Government Code. This office has held that section 6103(a) of title 26 of the United States Code renders tax return information confidential. Attorney General Opinion H-1274 (1978) (tax returns); Open Records Decision No. 600 (1992) (W-4 forms). Section 6103(b) defines the term "return information" as a taxpayer's "identity, the nature, source, or amount of income." See 26 U.S.C. § 6103(b)(2)(A). Federal courts have construed the term "return information" expansively to include any information gathered by the Internal Revenue Service regarding a taxpayer's liability under title 26 of the United States Code. See Mallas v. Kolak, 721 F. Supp. 748, 754 (M.D.N.C. 1989), aff'd in part, 993 F.2d 1111 (4th Cir. 1993). Consequently, the commission must withhold the submitted W-4 form pursuant to section 552.101 of the Government Code in conjunction with section 6103(a) of title 26 of the United States Code.

You contend that a portion of the remaining information constitutes medical records. Section 552.101 of the Government Code encompasses the Medical Practice Act (the "MPA"), chapter 159 of the Occupations Code, which governs access to medical records. Section 159.002 of the Occupations Code provides in pertinent part:

(b) A record of the identity, diagnosis, evaluation, or treatment of a patient by a physician that is created or maintained by a physician is confidential and privileged and may not be disclosed except as provided by this chapter.

(c) A person who receives information from a confidential communication or record as described by this chapter, other than a person listed in Section 159.004 who is acting on the patient's behalf, may not disclose the information except to the extent that disclosure is consistent with the authorized purposes for which the information was first obtained.

Occ. Code § 159.002(b), (c). This office has concluded that the protection afforded by section 159.002 extends only to records created by either a physician or someone under the supervision of a physician. See Open Records Decision Nos. 487 (1987), 370 (1983), 343 (1982). Further, information that is subject to the MPA also includes information that was obtained from medical records. See Occ. Code. § 159.002(a)-(c); see also Open Records Decision No. 598 (1991). Upon review, we find that none of the remaining information consists of medical records that are subject to the MPA. Thus, we conclude the commission may not withhold any portion of the remaining information under section 552.101 in conjunction with the MPA.

Next, you generally assert that some of the remaining information may consist of records that are made confidential under of the Americans with Disabilities Act (the "ADA"). 552.101 encompasses the ADA, 42 U.S.C. §§ 12101 et seq. The ADA provides that information about the medical conditions and medical histories of applicants or employees must be 1) collected and maintained on separate forms, 2) kept in separate medical files, and 3) treated as a confidential medical record. In addition, an employer's medical examination or inquiry into the ability of an employee to perform job-related functions is to be treated as confidential medical records. 29 C.F.R. § 1630.14(c); see also Open Records Decision No. 641 (1996). The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (the "EEOC") has determined that medical information for the purposes of the ADA includes "specific information about an individual's disability and related functional limitations, as well as general statements that an individual has a disability or that an ADA reasonable accommodation has been provided for a particular individual." See Letter from Ellen J. Vargyas, Legal Counsel, EEOC, to Barry Kearney, Associate General Counsel, National Labor Relations Board, 3 (Oct. 1, 1997).

Federal regulations define "disability" for purposes of the ADA as "(1) a physical or mental impairment that substantially limits one or more of the major life activities of the individual; (2) a record of such an impairment; or (3) being regarded as having such an impairment."  29 C.F.R. § 1630.2(g). Upon review of your arguments and the information at issue, we find that you have failed to establish that any portion of the remaining information is confidential under the ADA. Accordingly, the commission may not withhold any of the remaining information under section 552.101 of the Government Code in conjunction with the ADA.

Section 552.101 also encompasses common-law privacy, which protects information from public disclosure if (1) it is highly intimate or embarrassing facts, the publication of which would be highly objectionable to a person, and (2) is not of legitimate concern to the public. See Indus. Found. v. Tex. Indus. Accident Bd., 540 S.W.2d 668, 685 (Tex. 1976). Section 552.102 of the Government Code, which you also raise, excepts from disclosure "information in a personnel file, the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy[.]" Gov't Code § 552.102(a). Section 552.102(a) protects information relating to public officials and employees. The privacy analysis under section 552.102(a) involves the same common-law privacy test under section 552.101 and Industrial Foundation. See Hubert v. Harte-Hanks Tex. Newspapers, Inc., 652 S.W.2d 546, 549-51 (Tex. App.-Austin 1983, writ ref'd n.r.e.) (addressing statutory predecessor to Gov't Code § 552.102). We will therefore consider the applicability of common-law privacy under section 552.101 together with your claim regarding section 552.102.

You state that the submitted information includes documentation of investigations of alleged sexual harassment. In Morales v. Ellen, 840 S.W.2d 519 (Tex. App.-El Paso 1992, writ denied), the court addressed the applicability of common-law privacy to information relating to an investigation of alleged sexual harassment. The investigation files in Ellen contained individual witness statements, an affidavit by the individual accused of the misconduct responding to the allegations, and conclusions of the board of inquiry that conducted the investigation. See id. at 525. The court ordered the release of the affidavit of the person under investigation and the conclusions of the board of inquiry, stating that the public's interest was sufficiently served by the disclosure of such documents. Id. The Ellen court held that "the public did not possess a legitimate interest in the identities of the individual witnesses, nor the details of their personal statements beyond what is contained in the documents that have been ordered released." Id.

Thus, if there is an adequate summary of an investigation of sexual harassment, the summary must be released along with the statement of the person accused of sexual harassment, but the identities of the victims and witnesses must be redacted and their detailed statements must be withheld from disclosure. If no adequate summary of the investigation exists, then detailed statements regarding the allegations must be released, but the identities of victims and witnesses must be redacted from the statements. In either event, the identity of the individual accused of sexual harassment is not protected from public disclosure.

In this instance, you state that portions of the remaining information relate to sexual harassment investigations. You do not indicate the commission has completed and released adequate summaries of these investigations. Because there are no adequate summaries of the investigations, any requested documents relating to the sexual harassment investigation must generally be released, with the identities of the witnesses and victims redacted pursuant to section 552.101 in conjunction with common-law privacy and the holding in Ellen. We have marked the identifying information of alleged victims of sexual harassment that must be withheld pursuant to section 552.101 of the Government Code in conjunction with common-law privacy and the holding in Ellen.

This office has also found some kinds of medical information or information indicating disabilities or specific illnesses are excepted from required public disclosure under common-law privacy. See Open Records Decision Nos. 470 (1987) (illness from severe emotional and job-related stress), 455 (1987) (prescription drugs, illnesses, operations, and physical handicaps). In addition, certain types of personal financial information are protected from public disclosure under common-law privacy. Financial information that relates only to an individual ordinarily satisfies the first element of the common-law privacy test, but the public has a legitimate interest in the essential facts about a financial transaction between an individual and a governmental body. See Open Records Decision Nos. 600 at 9-12 (1992) (identifying public and private portions of certain state personnel records), 545 at 4 (1990) (attorney general has found kinds of financial information not excepted from public disclosure by common-law privacy to generally be those regarding receipt of governmental funds or debts owed to governmental entities), 523 at 4 (1989) (noting distinction under common-law privacy between confidential background financial information furnished to public body about individual and basic facts regarding particular financial transaction between individual and public body), 373 at 4 (1983) (determination of whether public's interest in obtaining personal financial information is sufficient to justify its disclosure must be made on case-by-case basis). Thus, a public employee's allocation of part of the employee's salary to a voluntary investment program offered by the employer is a personal investment decision, and information about that decision is protected by common-law privacy. See, e.g., ORD 600 at 9-12 (participation in TexFlex), 545 at 3-5 (deferred compensation plan). Likewise, the details of an employee's enrollment in a group insurance program, the designation of the beneficiary of an employee's retirement benefits, and an employee's authorization of direct deposit of the employee's salary are protected by common-law privacy. See ORD 600 at 9-12. We have marked medical and personal financial information that the commission must withhold under section 552.101 in conjunction with common-law privacy. ⁽⁶⁾

We note that the remaining information is related to State of Texas employees and their conduct in the workplace. As this office has frequently stated, information relating to public employment and public employees is generally a matter of legitimate public interest. See, e.g., Open Records Decision Nos. 562 at 10 (1990) (personnel information does not involve most intimate aspects of human affairs, but in fact touches on matters of legitimate public concern), 470 at 4 (1987) (job performance does not generally constitute public employee's private affairs), 444 at 6 (1986) (public has genuine interest in information concerning law enforcement officer's qualifications and performance and circumstances of his termination or resignation). Because the public has a legitimate interest in the remaining information that the commission contends is private, none of that information may be withheld under common-law privacy.

You contend that some of the remaining information is excepted from public disclosure under section 552.107 of the Government Code. Section 552.107 protects information coming within the attorney-client privilege. When asserting the attorney-client privilege, a governmental body has the burden of providing the necessary facts to demonstrate the elements of the privilege in order to withhold the information at issue. Open Records Decision No. 676 at 6-7 (2002). First, a governmental body must demonstrate that the information constitutes or documents a communication. Id. at 7. Second, the communication must have been made "for the purpose of facilitating the rendition of professional legal services" to the client governmental body. Tex. R. Evid. 503(b)(1). The privilege does not apply when an attorney or representative is involved in some capacity other than that of providing or facilitating professional legal services to the client governmental body. In re Tex. Farmers Inc. Exch., 990 S.W.2d 337, 340 (Tex. App.-Texarkana 1999, orig proceeding) (attorney-client privilege does not apply if attorney acting in a capacity other than that of attorney). Governmental attorneys often act in capacities other than that of professional legal counsel, such as administrators, investigators, or managers. Thus, the mere fact that a communication involves an attorney for the government does not demonstrate this element. Third, the privilege applies only to communications between or among clients, client representatives, lawyers, and lawyer representatives. Tex. R. Evid. 503(b)(1)(A)-(E). Thus, a governmental body must inform this office of the identities and capacities of the individuals to whom each communication at issue has been made. Finally, the attorney-client privilege applies only to a confidential communication, meaning it was "not intended to be disclosed to third persons other than those to whom disclosure is made in furtherance of the rendition of professional legal services to the client or those reasonably necessary for the transmission of the communication." Id. 503(a)(5). Whether a communication meets this definition depends on the intent of the parties involved at the time the information was communicated. Osborne v. Johnson, 954 S.W.2d 180, 184 (Tex. App.-Waco 1997, no writ). Moreover, because the client may elect to waive the privilege at any time, a governmental body must explain that the confidentiality of a communication has been maintained. Section 552.107(1) generally excepts an entire communication that is demonstrated to be protected by the attorney-client privilege unless otherwise waived by the governmental body. See Huie v. DeShazo, 922 S.W.2d 920, 923 (Tex. 1996) (privilege extends to entire communication, including facts contained therein).

In this case, you inform us the information at issue consists of a memo documenting a communication between a commission attorney and staff member that was made in furtherance of the rendition of professional legal services to the commission. You have identified the parties to the communication. You state that the information at issue was intended to be confidential and the commission has maintained its confidentiality. Based on your representations and our review, we find that the commission may withhold the information you have marked under section 552.107 of the Government Code.

You also raise section 552.117 for a portion of the remaining information. Section 552.117(a)(1) excepts from disclosure the home addresses and telephone numbers, social security numbers, and family member information of current or former officials or employees of a governmental body who request that this information be kept confidential under section 552.024. Whether a particular piece of information is protected by section 552.117 must be determined at the time the request for it is made. See Open Records Decision No. 530 at 5 (1989). Therefore, the commission may only withhold information under section 552.117 on behalf of current or former officials or employees who made a request for confidentiality under section 552.024 prior to the date on which the request for this information was made. For those employees who timely elected to keep their personal information confidential, the commission must withhold the employees' home addresses and telephone numbers, social security numbers, and any information that reveals whether these employees have family members. You indicate that the named employees timely requested that their home addresses and telephone numbers, social security numbers, and family member information be made confidential pursuant to section 552.024. Based upon your representations and our review, we agree that the information we have marked must be withheld under section 552.117(a)(1) of the Government Code.

However, we note that a portion of the remaining information you seek to withhold under section 552.117 of the Government Code consists of the personal information of commission job applicants. You do not inform us that any of these applicants were hired by the commission. Therefore, we must rule conditionally. If an applicant who was hired by the commission made a timely election under section 552.024, then the commission must withhold the applicants' information we have marked under section 552.117(a)(1). However, the commission may not withhold this information under section 552.117 if the applicant was not hired or if a timely election was not made under section 552.024. ⁽⁷⁾

Section 552.122 of the Government Code excepts from public disclosure "a test item developed by a . . . governmental body[.]" Gov't Code § 552.122(b). In Open Records Decision No. 626 (1994), this office determined that the term "test item" in section 552.122 includes "any standard means by which an individual's or group's knowledge or ability in a particular area is evaluated," but does not encompass evaluations of an employee's overall job performance or suitability. Id. at 6. The question of whether specific information falls within the scope of section 552.122(b) must be determined on a case-by-case basis. Id. Traditionally, this office has applied section 552.122 where release of "test items" might compromise the effectiveness of future examinations. Id. at 4-5; see also Open Records Decision No. 118 (1976). Section 552.122 also protects the answers to test questions when the answers might reveal the questions themselves. See Attorney General Opinion JM-640 at 3 (1987); Open Records Decision No. 626 at 8 (1994).

You contend that some of the submitted interview questions and responses are excepted from disclosure under section 552.122(b) of the Government Code. You state that release of these test items would compromise the effectiveness of the commission's hiring and interview process. Based upon your representations and our review, we find that questions 3, 4, and 5 qualify as test items under section 552.122(b) of the Government Code. We also find that the release of the responses to these questions would tend to reveal the questions themselves. Thus, we conclude that the commission may withhold test questions 3, 4, and 5, as well as their corresponding answers, under section 552.122 of the Government Code. However, we find that question 6 is a general question evaluating an applicant's individual abilities, personal opinions, and subjective ability to respond to particular situations, and does not test any specific knowledge of an applicant. Accordingly, question 6 and the actual response to this question are not excepted from disclosure under section 552.122 of the Government Code, and must be released to the requestor.

You state that the remaining information contains Texas motor vehicle record information. Section 552.130 of the Government Code excepts from disclosure information that relates to "a motor vehicle operator's or driver's license or permit issued by an agency of this state." Gov't Code § 552.130(a)(1). Therefore, the commission must withhold the Texas motor vehicle record information we have marked under section 552.130 of the Government Code.

You argue that the remaining information includes e-mail addresses excepted from public disclosure under section 552.137 of the Government Code. Section 552.137 excepts from disclosure "an e-mail address of a member of the public that is provided for the purpose of communicating electronically with a governmental body" unless the member of the public consents to its release or the e-mail address is of a type specifically excluded by subsection (c). See Gov't Code § 552.137(a)-(c). Under section 552.137, a governmental body may disclose the e-mail address of a member of the general public if the individual to whom the e-mail address belongs has affirmatively consented to its public disclosure. See id. § 552.137(b). You do not inform us that a member of the public has affirmatively consented to the release of any e-mail address. Further, the e-mail addresses at issue do not fall within any section 552.137 exceptions. Thus, the commission must withhold the e-mail addresses you have marked, along with the additional e-mail addresses we have marked, under section 552.137 of the Government Code.

In summary, the personnel files of the three employees you have marked may be withheld pursuant to section 552.103 of the Government Code. In conjunction with section 552.101 of the Government Code, the commission must withhold: (1) the information we have marked under section 12.003 of the Human Resources Code, (2) the submitted W-4 form pursuant to section 6103(a) of title 26 of the United States Code, (3) the identifying information of alleged victims of sexual harassment we have marked under common-law privacy and the holding in Ellen, and (4) the medical and personal financial information we have marked under common-law privacy. The commission may withhold the marked information under section 552.107 of the Government Code. The information of the named employees we have marked must be withheld under section 552.117(a)(1) of the Government Code. To the extent an applicant who was hired by the commission made a timely election under section 552.024, the commission must withhold the type of information we have marked under section 552.117(a)(1) of the Government Code. The commission may withhold test questions 3, 4, and 5, as well as their corresponding answers, under section 552.122 of the Government Code. The commission must withhold the Texas motor vehicle record information we have marked under section 552.130 of the Government Code. The e-mail addresses you have marked, along with the additional e-mail addresses we have marked, must be withheld under section 552.137 of the Government Code. The remaining information must be released.

This letter ruling is limited to the particular information 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 information or any other circumstances.

This ruling triggers important deadlines regarding the rights and responsibilities of the governmental body and of the requestor. For more information concerning those rights and responsibilities, please visit our website at http://www.oag.state.tx.us/open/index_orl.php, or call the Office of the Attorney General's Open Government Hotline, toll free, at (877) 673-6839. Questions concerning the allowable charges for providing public information under the Act must be directed to the Cost Rules Administrator of the Office of the Attorney General at (512) 475-2497.

Sincerely,

Christina Alvarado

Assistant Attorney General

Open Records Division

CA/cc

Ref: ID# 333802

Enc. Submitted documents

cc: Requestor

(w/o enclosures)

Footnotes

1. The Act does not require a governmental body to disclose 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).

2. Although you raise section 552.139 of the Government Code, you provide no explanation of how this exception is applicable to the submitted information. Accordingly, we do not address section 552.139. See Gov't Code §§ 552.301, .302.

3. 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.

4. As our ruling is dispositive, we need not address your remaining arguments against disclosure for this information.

5. We note that the former Texas Department of Human Services ("DHS") ceased operations on September 1, 2004, and that the Texas Health and Human Services Commission now administers the Medicaid program formerly administered by DHS. See Health and Human Services Commission website at http://www.hhsc.state.tx.us; Act of June 2, 2003, 78th Leg., R.S., ch. 198, 2003 Tex. Gen. Laws 611.

6. As our ruling is dispositive, we need not address your remaining argument under section 552.136 for this information.

7. Regardless of the applicability of section 552.117, section 552.147(b) of the Government Code authorizes a governmental body to redact a living person's social security number from public release without the necessity of requesting a decision from this office under the Act.

POST OFFICE BOX 12548, AUSTIN, TEXAS 78711-2548 TEL: (512) 463-2100 WEB: WWW.OAG.STATE.TX.US
An Equal Employment Opportunity Employer