# The Attorney General ofTexas

Ikcenlbcr 1, 1980 MARKWHITE Attorney General Honorable Robert Bernstein, M.D., F.A.C.P. Commissioner ofHealth Texas Department ofHealth 1100West 49th Street Austin, Texas 78756 Dear Dr. Bernstein: Opinion No. lrlw-283 Re: Whether apublic employee’s home telephone number and dete of birth are open under the Open Records Act

You have requested our decision regarding whether apublic employee’s home telephone number and date ofbirth are available to the public under the Open Records Act, article 6252-17a, V.T.C.S. Section 3(a)(2) of the act exempts from disclosure “information in personnel files, the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.” In Open Records Decision No. 169 (1977), this office held that, absent special circumstances:

the overwhelming weight of authority holds that there is normally no legally recognizable privacy interest inone’s borne address. Furthermore, the “special circumstances” necessary:

to bring home address [information] within the section 3(a)(2) exception from disclosure must be more than a &sire for privacy or a generalized fear of harassment orretribution. Prior to lhe issutlnce of Open Records Decision No. 169, the City Public Service Uoard of the city ofSan Antonio and the Police Department of the city of El Paso had asked their employees whether they wished to assert a privacy interest in their home address, end if so, what facts or circumstances would justify withholding the informalion. Of 1400responses submiltcd, this off&*, found only five indivihals:

who lvtvc botll lukun effective uction 110 restrict public access to their telephone numbers] and have nlso demonstrated lruly cxceptionul circumstances

‘such as, for instance, an imminent threat ofphysical

p. 905rlcnorable Robert Ikrnstcin - Page Two (MW- 263)

danger us opposed to 4 gcncralized and speculative fenr of harrassmcnt or retribution. In accordance with this standard, we believe that an employee is entitled to withhold his home telephone number only ifhe can first demonstrate that he has taken steps to restrict public access. to the number, including but not limited to maintaining the number as unlisted. In addition, the employee must also demonstrate exceptional circumstances such as an imminent threat ofphysical danger. Open Records Decision No. 169(1977). As wns noted inOpen Records D>cision No. 169,the determination of these questions must be made on 4case-by-case basis, and the agency should make the initial determination. The agency should submit for our consideration cnly those clnims which it determines may legitimately fall within the exception. Asto the date ofbirth of 4public employee, wehave found no decision which has held such information to be confidential. On the contrary, this office has on three occasions said that information inlicensing files, including date ofbirth, issubject to disclceure. See Open Records Decision Nos. 215 (1978); 157 (1977); Attorney General Opinion H-2421974). It is therefore our decision that the date of birth of apublic employee isnot excepted from disclceure under the Open Records Act. SUMMARY A public employee’s date of birth is not excepted from disclosure. Apublic employee’s home telephone number may be excepted only upon ashowing ofexceptional circumstances. Very truly yours,

Attorney General ofTexas JOHN W.FAINTER, JR. First Assistant Attorney General RICHARD E.GRAY HI Executive Assistant Attorney General Prepared by Rick Gilpin Assistant Attorney General APPROVED: OPlNlON COMMlT’l’EI~ Susan L. Garrison, Acting Chairman Jon Bible Ric* Gilpin Eva Loutzcnhiscr

p. 906