February 3, 2011

Ms. Shirley Thomas

Senior Assistant General Counsel

Dallas Area Rapid Transit

P.O. Box 660163

Dallas, Texas 75266-0163

OR2011-01795

Dear Ms. Thomas:

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# 406442.

Dallas Area Rapid Transit ("DART") received a request for all complaints filed or disciplinary actions taken against five named officers, including any internal or external complaints against the named officers for excessive force and racial comments during a specified time period. You claim the requested information is excepted from disclosure under sections 552.101, 552.103, 552.107, and 552.108 of the Government Code. We have considered the exceptions you claim and reviewed the submitted representative sample of information. ⁽¹⁾

Some of the information you have submitted to us for review is not responsive to the request for information because it was created after DART received the request. This ruling does not address the public availability of any information that is not responsive to the request, and DART is not required to release this information, which we have marked, in response to this request.

Next, we note the information submitted as Exhibits B and C consists of completed investigations subject to section 552.022(a)(1) of the Government Code. Section 552.022(a)(1) provides for the required public disclosure of "a completed report, audit, evaluation, or investigation made of, for, or by a governmental body, except as provided by Section 552.108." Gov't Code § 552.022(a)(1). Pursuant to section 552.022(a)(1), completed investigations, reports, and evaluations are expressly public unless they are either excepted under section 552.108 of the Government Code or expressly confidential under other law. Although you raise section 552.103 of the Government Code for this information, section 552.103 is a discretionary exception to disclosure that protects a governmental body's interests and may be waived. See id. § 552.007; Dallas Area Rapid Transit v. Dallas Morning News, 4 S.W.3d 469, 475-76 (Tex. App.--Dallas 1999, no pet.) (governmental body may waive section 552.103); Open Records Decision No. 665 at 2 n.5 (2000) (discretionary exceptions generally), 663 (1999) (governmental body may waive section 552.103). As such, section 552.103 is not "other law" that makes information confidential for the purposes of section 552.022. Therefore, DART may not withhold Exhibits B and C-1 under section 552.103 of the Government Code. Section 552.101 of the Government Code constitutes other law for purposes of section 552.022. We will, therefore, consider whether the information subject to section 552.022 is excepted under section 552.101. In addition, because information subject to section 552.022(a)(1) may be excepted under section 552.108 of the Government Code, we will address your argument under this exception. We also note some of this information is subject to sections 552.102, 552.117, 552.130, 552.136, and 552.137 of the Government Code. Because these exceptions are other law for purposes of section 552.022, we will consider their applicability.

Section 552.101 of the Government Code excepts from public disclosure "information considered to be confidential by law, either constitutional, statutory, or by judicial decision." Gov't Code § 552.101. Section 552.101 encompasses information made confidential by statute. Section 58.007(c) of the Family Code provides for the confidentiality of juvenile law enforcement records related to delinquent conduct or conduct indicating a need for supervision that occurred on or after September 1, 1997. See Fam. Code § 51.03 (defining "delinquent conduct" and "conduct indicating a need for supervision"). The relevant part of section 58.007(c) reads as follows:

(c) Except as provided by Subsection (d), law enforcement records and files concerning a child and information stored, by electronic means or otherwise, concerning the child from which a record or file could be generated may not be disclosed to the public and shall be:

(1) if maintained on paper or microfilm, kept separate from adult files and records;

(2) if maintained electronically in the same computer system as records or files relating to adults, be accessible under controls that are separate and distinct from controls to access electronic data concerning adults; and

(3) maintained on a local basis only and not sent to a central state or federal depository, except as provided by Subchapters B, D, and E.

Id. § 58.007(c). For purposes of section 58.007(c), "child" means a person who is ten years of age or older and under seventeen years of age. See id. § 51.02(2). Upon review, we find DART police report numbers DTC10000616, DTC10000933, DTC10001566, and DTC10002140, as well as the additional information we have marked, constitute confidential law enforcement records under section 58.007(c). Moreover, it does not appear that any of the exceptions in section 58.007 apply to this information. Accordingly, DART must withhold report numbers DTC10000616, DTC10000933, DTC10001566, and DTC10002140 and the additional information we have marked under section 552.101 in conjunction with section 58.007(c). ⁽²⁾

Section 552.108(a)(1) of the Government Code excepts from disclosure "[i]nformation held by a law enforcement agency or prosecutor that deals with the detection, investigation, or prosecution of crime . . . if . . . release of the information would interfere with the detection, investigation, or prosecution of crime." Gov't Code § 552.108(a)(1). A governmental body claiming section 552.108 must reasonably explain how and why the release of the requested information would interfere with law enforcement. See id. §§ 552.108(a)(1), .301(e)(1)(A); see also Ex parte Pruitt, 551 S.W.2d 706 (Tex. 1977). We note that section 552.108 is generally not applicable to records of an internal affairs investigation that is purely administrative in nature and does not involve the investigation or prosecution of crime. See City of Fort Worth v. Cornyn, 86 S.W.3d 320 (Tex. App.--Austin 2002, no pet.); Morales v. Ellen, 840 S.W.2d 519, 525-26 (Tex. Civ. App.--El Paso 1992, writ denied) (statutory predecessor to section 552.108 not applicable to internal investigation that did not result in criminal investigation or prosecution). You state, and provide statements from the DART police department confirming, the remaining incident reports in Exhibit B pertain to pending criminal cases. Based on your representations and the submitted statements, we conclude the release of this information would interfere with the detection, investigation, or prosecution of crime. See Houston Chronicle Publ'g Co. v. City of Houston, 531 S.W.2d 177 (Tex. Civ. App.--Houston [14th Dist.] 1975) (court delineates law enforcement interests that are present in active cases), writ ref'd n.r.e. per curiam, 536 S.W.2d 559 (Tex. 1976).

Section 552.108, however, does not except from disclosure basic information about an arrested person, an arrest, or a crime. Gov't Code § 552.108(c). Basic information refers to the information held to be public in Houston Chronicle, and includes a detailed description of the offense. See 531 S.W.2d at 186-88; Open Records Decision No. 127 at 3-4 (1976) (summarizing types of information deemed public by Houston Chronicle). Thus, with the exception of basic information, you may withhold the remaining information submitted as Exhibit B pursuant to section 552.108(a)(1) of the Government Code.

Next, you claim the internal affairs investigations submitted as Exhibit C are excepted from disclosure under section 552.108(b)(2) of the Government Code. Section 552.108(b)(2) protects "an internal record or notation of a law enforcement agency or prosecutor that is maintained for internal use in matters relating to law enforcement or prosecution . . . if . . . the internal record or notation relates to law enforcement only in relation to an investigation that did not result in conviction or deferred adjudication[.]" Gov't Code § 552.108(b)(2). A governmental body claiming subsection 552.108(b)(2) must demonstrate the requested information relates to a criminal investigation that has concluded in a final result other than a conviction or deferred adjudication. See id. § 552.301(e)(1)(A) (governmental body must provide comments explaining why exceptions raised should apply to information requested). As noted above, the information at issue consists of internal affairs investigations of DART police officers and section 552.108 is generally not applicable to records of an internal affairs investigation that are purely administrative in nature and do not involve the investigation or prosecution of crime. See City of Fort Worth v. Cornyn, 86 S.W.3d 320 (Tex. App.--Austin 2002, no pet.); Morales v. Ellen, 840 S.W.2d 519, 525-26 (Tex. Civ. App.--El Paso 1992, writ denied). You state the officers at issue in the internal affairs reports were exonerated of any charges. We note, however, the charges at issue are violations of administrative policies and you do not state the administrative investigations resulted in criminal investigations. Accordingly, we find you have failed to demonstrate that section 552.108(b)(2) applies to the information in Exhibit C. Therefore, DART may not withhold any portion of the remaining information under section 552.108(b)(2) of the Government Code.

Section 552.101 of the Government Code also encompasses the Medical Practice Act (the "MPA"), subtitle B of title 3 of the Occupations Code, which provides in part the following:

(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, when a file is created as the result of a hospital stay, all the documents in the file that relate to diagnosis and treatment constitute either physician-patient communications or records of the identity, diagnosis, evaluation, or treatment of a patient by a physician that are created or maintained by a physician. See Open Records Decision No. 546 (1990).

Medical records must be released upon the patient's signed, written consent, provided that the consent specifies (1) the information to be covered by the release, (2) reasons or purposes for the release, and (3) the person to whom the information is to be released. Occ. Code §§ 159.004. Section 159.002(c) also requires that any subsequent release of medical records be consistent with the purposes for which the governmental body obtained the records. Open Records Decision No. 565 at 7 (1990). Medical records may be released only as provided under the MPA. Open Records Decision No. 598 (1991). We have marked the medical record that may only be released in accordance with the MPA.

Section 552.101 also encompasses laws that make criminal history record information ("CHRI") confidential. CHRI generated by the National Crime Information Center or by the Texas Crime Information Center is confidential under federal and state law. Title 28, part 20 of the Code of Federal Regulations governs the release of CHRI that states obtain from the federal government or other states. Open Records Decision No. 565 at 7 (1990). The federal regulations allow each state to follow its individual law with respect to CHRI it generates. Id. Section 411.083 of the Government Code deems confidential CHRI the Department of Public Safety ("DPS") maintains, except DPS may disseminate this information as provided in chapter 411, subchapter F of the Government Code. See Gov't Code § 411.083. Sections 411.083(b)(1) and 411.089(a) authorize a criminal justice agency to obtain CHRI; however, a criminal justice agency may not release CHRI except to another criminal justice agency for a criminal justice purpose. Id. § 411.089(b)(1). Other entities specified in chapter 411 of the Government Code are entitled to obtain CHRI from DPS or another criminal justice agency; however, those entities may not release CHRI except as provided by chapter 411. See generally id. §§ 411.090-.127. Similarly, any CHRI obtained from DPS or any other criminal justice agency must be withheld under section 552.101 of the Government Code in conjunction with Government Code chapter 411, subchapter F. Upon review, we find a portion of the remaining information constitutes CHRI. DART must withhold this information, which we have marked, pursuant to section 552.101 in conjunction with section 411.083 of the Government Code.

Section 552.101 of the Government Code also encompasses the doctrine of common-law privacy and excepts from public disclosure private information about an individual if the information (1) contains highly intimate or embarrassing facts, the publication of which would be highly objectionable to a reasonable person and (2) is not of legitimate concern to the public. Indus. Found. v. Tex. Indus. Accident Bd., 540 S.W.2d 668, 685 (Tex. 1976). To demonstrate the applicability of common-law privacy, both prongs of this test must be satisfied. Id. at 681-82.

In Morales v. Ellen, 840 S.W.2d 519, the court addressed the applicability of the common-law privacy doctrine to files of an investigation of allegations of 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. Ellen, 840 S.W.2d 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. In concluding, the Ellen court held "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 alleged sexual harassment, the investigation summary, along with the statement of the accused, must be released under Ellen, but the identities of the victims and witnesses of the alleged sexual harassment must be redacted, and their detailed statements must be withheld from disclosure. See Open Records Decision Nos. 393 (1983), 339 (1982). If no adequate summary of the investigation exists, then all of the information relating to the investigation ordinarily must be released, with the exception of information that would identify the victims and witnesses. We note that supervisors are generally not witnesses for purposes of Ellen, except where their statements appear in a non-supervisory context. Further, since common-law privacy does not protect information about a public employee's alleged misconduct on the job or complaints made about a public employee's job performance, the identity of the individual accused of sexual harassment is not protected from public disclosure. See Open Records Decision Nos. 438 (1986), 405 (1983), 230 (1979), 219 (1978).

The information we have marked in Exhibit C-2 pertains to an investigation of a claim of sexual harassment. Upon review, we find this investigation includes a report that constitutes an adequate summary of the investigation. Thus, pursuant to section 552.101 and the ruling in Ellen, this summary, along with the statement of the accused, is not confidential under common-law privacy. However, the identifying information of the alleged victims and witnesses must be withheld under section 552.101 in conjunction with common-law privacy. Accordingly, DART must withhold the identifying information of the alleged victims and witnesses in the summary and statement of the accused, which we have marked, under section 552.101 in conjunction with common-law privacy. Dart must also withhold the remaining information pertaining to the sexual harassment investigation, which we have marked, under section 552.101 of the Government Code in conjunction with common-law privacy and the court's holding in Ellen.

Common-law privacy also protects the types of information considered highly intimate or embarrassing by the Texas Supreme Court in Industrial Foundation, which included information relating to sexual assault, pregnancy, mental or physical abuse in the workplace, illegitimate children, psychiatric treatment of mental disorders, attempted suicide, and injuries to sexual organs. 540 S.W.2d at 683. This office has 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 No. 455 (1987) (information pertaining to prescription drugs, specific illnesses, operations and procedures, and physical disabilities protected from disclosure). In addition, this office has found that an individual's criminal history when compiled by a governmental body may be protected under common-law privacy. Cf. United States Dep't of Justice v. Reporters Comm. for Freedom of the Press, 489 U.S. 749 (1989). This office has also determined common-law privacy protects the identifying information of juvenile offenders. See Open Records Decision No. 394 (1983); cf. Fam. Code § 58.007.

This office has also found that personal financial information not relating to a financial transaction between an individual and a governmental body is excepted from required public disclosure. See Open Records Decision Nos. 600 (1992) (employee's designation of retirement beneficiary, choice of insurance carrier, election of optional coverages, direct deposit authorization, forms allowing employee to allocate pre-tax compensation to group insurance, health care or dependent care), 545 (1990) (deferred compensation information, participation in voluntary investment program, election of optional insurance coverage, mortgage payments, assets, bills, and credit history).

However, the work behavior of a public employee and the conditions for his or her continued employment are generally matters of legitimate public interest not protected by the common-law right of privacy. See ORD 438. Similarly, information about a public employee's qualifications, disciplinary action and background is not protected by common-law privacy. See Open Records Decision Nos. 444 at 5-6 (1986) (public has interest in public employee's qualifications and performance and the circumstances of his resignation or termination), 405 at 2-3 (public has interest in manner in which public employee performs his job), 329 at 2 (1982) (information relating to complaints against public employees and discipline resulting therefrom is not protected under former section 552.101), 208 at 2 (1978) (information relating to complaint against public employee and disposition of the complaint is not protected under either the constitutional or common-law right of privacy).

You also assert the remaining information in Exhibit C is private in its entirety. Generally, only highly intimate information that implicates the privacy of an individual is withheld. However, in certain instances, where it is demonstrated that the requestor knows the identity of the individual at issue and the nature of the incident, the entire report must be withheld to protect the individual's privacy. Upon review, we find you have not demonstrated, nor does it otherwise appear, this is a situation where the entirety of the information at issue must be withheld on the basis of common-law privacy. However, we find portions of this information are highly intimate or embarrassing and of no legitimate interest to the public. The remaining submitted information either is not highly intimate or embarrassing or is legitimate concern to the public, and, therefore, is not confidential under common-law privacy. Accordingly, DART must withhold only the information we have marked under section 552.101 of the Government Code in conjunction with common-law privacy.

You also claim some of the remaining information is excepted from disclosure under constitutional privacy, which is also encompassed by section 552.101 of the Government Code. Constitutional privacy consists of two interrelated types of privacy: (1) the right to make certain kinds of decisions independently, and (2) an individual's interest in avoiding disclosure of personal matters. ORD 455 at 4. The first type protects an individual's autonomy within "zones of privacy" which include matters related to marriage, procreation, contraception, family relationships, and child rearing and education. Id. The second type of constitutional privacy requires a balancing between the individual's privacy interests and the public's need to know information of public concern. Id. The scope of information protected is narrower than that under the common-law doctrine of privacy; the information must concern the "most intimate aspects of human affairs." Id. at 5 (citing Ramie v. City of Hedwig Village, Texas, 765 F.2d 490 (5th Cir. 1985)). Upon review, we find no portion of the remaining information at issue falls within the zones of privacy or otherwise implicates an individual's privacy interests for purposes of constitutional privacy. Therefore, DART may not withhold any of the remaining information under section 552.101 in conjunction with constitutional privacy.

Section 552.107(1) of the Government Code protects information that comes 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. See 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. See 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. See In re Tex. Farmers Ins. Exch., 990 S.W.2d 337, 340 (Tex. App.--Texarkana 1999, orig. proceeding) (attorney-client privilege does not apply if attorney is acting in 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. See 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. Lastly, the attorney-client privilege applies only to a confidential communication, id. 503(b)(1), 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. See Osborne v. Johnson, 954 S.W.2d 180, 184 (Tex. App.--Waco 1997, no pet.). 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).

You state Exhibit D documents a confidential communication between a DART employee and DART attorney that was made in furtherance of the rendition of professional legal services to DART. You also state the communications were intended to be and have remained confidential. Based on your representations and our review, we conclude Exhibit D constitutes a privileged attorney-client communication that DART may withhold under section 552.107 of the Government Code.

Section 552.102(a) of the Government Code excepts from disclosure "information in a personnel file, the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy." ⁽³⁾ Gov't Code § 552.102(a). The Texas Supreme Court recently held section 552.102(a) excepts from disclosure the dates of birth of state employees in the payroll database of the Texas Comptroller of Public Accounts. Tex. Comptroller of Pub. Accounts v. Attorney Gen. of Tex. & The Dallas Morning News, Ltd., No. 08-0172, 2010 WL 4910163 (Tex. Dec. 3, 2010) (Dec. 20, 2010, motions for reconsideration and rehearing pending). Having carefully reviewed the information at issue, we have marked the information that must be withheld under section 552.102(a) of the Government Code.

Section 552.117(a)(1) of the Government Code excepts from disclosure the current and former 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 this information be kept confidential under section 552.024 of the Government Code. Whether a particular piece of information is protected by section 552.117(a)(1) must be determined at the time the request for it is made. See Open Records Decision No. 530 at 5 (1989). Section 552.117(a)(2) of the Government Code excepts from disclosure this same information regarding a peace officer, as defined by article 2.12 of the Texas Code of Criminal Procedure, regardless of whether the officer elected under section 552.024 or 552.1175 of the Government Code to keep such information confidential. Section 552.117 of the Government Code also encompasses a personal cellular telephone number, provided that a governmental body does not pay for the cellular telephone service. See Open Records Decision No. 506 at 5-6 (1988) (Government Code section 552.117 not applicable to cellular telephone numbers paid for by governmental body and intended for official use). But an individual's personal post office box number is not a "home address" for purposes of section 552.117, and therefore may not be withheld under section 552.117. See Open Records Decision No. 622 at 4 (1994) (purpose of section 552.117 is to protect public employees from being harassed at home); see also Open Records Decision No. 658 at 4 (1998) (statutory confidentiality provision must be express and cannot be implied).

We have marked the information of police officers that DART must withhold under section 552.117(a)(2); however, DART may only withhold the marked cellular telephone numbers of officers if the officers themselves paid for the cellular telephone service. ⁽⁴⁾ DART must also withhold the information we have marked under section 552.117(a)(1), if the employee at issue elected to keep such information confidential prior to DART's receipt of the request for information.

Section 552.130 provides information relating to a motor vehicle operator's license, driver's license, motor vehicle title, or registration issued by a Texas agency is excepted from public release. Gov't Code § 552.130(a)(1), (2). Upon review, we find portions of the remaining information consist of Texas motor vehicle record information. Accordingly, DART must withhold the Texas motor vehicle record information we have marked under section 552.130 of the Government Code.

Section 552.136 of the Government Code states that "[n]otwithstanding any other provision of this chapter, a credit card, debit card, charge card, or access device number that is collected, assembled, or maintained by or for a governmental body is confidential." Id. § 552.136(b). DART must withhold the insurance policy numbers and bank account and routing numbers we have marked under section 552.136 of the Government Code.

Section 552.137 of the Government Code 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 id. § 552.137(a)-(c). The e-mail addresses at issue do not appear to be of the types specifically excluded by section 552.137(c) of the Government Code. Accordingly, DART must withhold the e-mail addresses we have marked under section 552.137 of the Government Code, unless the owners affirmatively consents to their disclosure.

Finally, we note some of the remaining information may be protected by copyright. A custodian of public records must comply with the copyright law and is not required to furnish copies of records that are copyrighted. Open Records Decision No. 180 at 3 (1977). A governmental body must allow inspection of copyrighted materials unless an exception applies to the information. Id.; see Open Records Decision No. 109 (1975). If a member of the public wishes to make copies of copyrighted materials, the person must do so unassisted by the governmental body. In making copies, the member of the public assumes the duty of compliance with the copyright law and the risk of a copyright infringement suit.

In summary, the following information must be withheld under section 552.101 of the Government Code: (1) report numbers DTC10000616, DTC10000933, DTC10001566, and DTC10002140, as well as the additional information we have marked, under section 58.007(c); (2) the CHRI we have marked under section 411.083 of the Government Code; and (3) the information we have marked under common-law privacy. The marked medical records may only be released in accordance with the MPA. With the exception of basic information, DART may withhold the remaining information submitted as Exhibit B pursuant to section 552.108(a)(1) of the Government Code. DART may withhold Exhibit D under section 552.107 of the Government Code. DART must withhold the information we have marked under sections 552.102(a), 552.130, and 552.136 of the Government Code. We have marked the information of police officers that DART must withhold under section 552.117(a)(2); however, DART may only withhold the marked cellular telephone numbers of officers if the officers themselves paid for the cellular telephone service. DART must also withhold the information we have marked under section 552.117(a)(1), if the employee at issue elected to keep such information confidential prior to DART's receipt of the request for information. DART must withhold the e-mail addresses we have marked under section 552.137 of the Government Code, unless the owners affirmatively consent to their disclosure. ⁽⁵⁾ The remaining information must be released, but any information that is protected by copyright may only be released in accordance with copyright law. ⁽⁶⁾

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, toll free, at (888) 672-6787.

Sincerely,

Tamara Wilcox

Assistant Attorney General

Open Records Division

TW/vb

Ref: ID# 406442

Enc. Submitted documents

c: Requestor

(w/o enclosures)

Footnotes

1. We assume 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 those records contain substantially different types of information than that submitted to this office.

2. As our ruling is dispositive for this information, we do not address your remaining argument against disclosure of this information.

3. The Office of the Attorney General will raise mandatory exceptions on behalf of a governmental body, but ordinarily will not raise other exceptions.

4. We note a government body may withhold a peace officer's home address and telephone number, personal cellular telephone and pager numbers, social security number, and family member information under section 552.117(a)(2) without requesting a decision from this office. See Open Records Decision No. 670 (2001); Gov't Code § 552.147(b).

5. This office issued Open Records Decision No. 684 (2009), a previous determination to all governmental bodies authorizing them to withhold ten categories of information, including Texas driver's license and license plate numbers under section 552.130 of the Government Code, insurance policy numbers and bank account and routing numbers under section 552.136 of the Government Code, and e-mail addresses of members of the public under section 552.137 of the Government Code, without the necessity of requesting an attorney general decision.

6. We note the information being released contains social security numbers. 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. See Gov't Code § 552.147(b).

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