Source: https://archives.utah.gov/src/srcappeal-2013-07.html
Timestamp: 2017-07-23 06:56:33
Document Index: 706522024

Matched Legal Cases: ['§ 63', '§ 63', '§ 63', '§ 63', '§ 63', '§ 63', '§ 63', '§ 63', '§ 63']

Navigation Open Government State Records Committee Decisions 2013-2015
On or about January 18, 2013, Mr. Williams requested Peace Officer Standards and Training (“POST”) records for seven former and current Corrections employees. Corrections denied the request finding that “[t]hese are not prison records.” Mr. Williams filed an appeal of the decision and in a letter dated March 12, 2013; the Acting Executive Director of Corrections wrote that further investigation found that the requested records were maintained by Corrections. Corrections later determined that these records were considered protected records pursuant to Utah Code § 63G-2-305(11) & (13). In a document dated April 15, 2013, Mr. Williams filed a records request with Corrections for the “incident report (IR-1)” written regarding an incident occurring at the prison on April 13, 2013. The Division of Institutional Operations denied the request stating that the information was private or protected pursuant to Utah Code § 63G-2-302 & -305. Mr. Williams filed an appeal of the decision and in a letter dated May 13, 2013, the Deputy Director of Corrections denied the request finding the information contained in the IR-1 “is private and protected” pursuant to Utah Code § 63G-2-302(2) and -305(9).
1.	The Government Records Access and Management Act (“GRAMA”) specifies that “all records are public unless otherwise expressly provided by statute.” Utah Code § 63G-2-201(2). Records that are not public are designated as either “private,” “protected,” or “controlled.” See, Utah Code §§ 63G-2-302, -303, -304 and -305. 2.	Utah Code § 63G-2-305 states that the following governmental records are considered protected records if they are properly classified by a governmental entity: (1) Records the disclosure of which would jeopardize the life or safety of an individual; and (2) Records that if disclosed, would jeopardize the security or safety of a correctional facility, or records relating to incarceration, treatment, probation, or parole, that would interfere with the control and supervision of an offender’s incarceration, treatment, probation, or parole. See, Utah Code § 63G-2-305(11) & (13).
3.	Corrections presented testimony at the hearing that release of POST training records for prison personnel could result in harm to persons and/or jeopardize the security or safety of the prison. Corrections argued that the disputed records were properly classified by Corrections to be protected records pursuant to Utah Code § 63G-2-305(11) & (13). 4.	In Whiteman v. Utah Dept. of Corr., State Records Committee Decision No. 96-03 (June 20, 1996), the Committee previously held that Corrections’ classification of the information contained within the IR-1 form as protected “is justified and is consistent with GRAMA.” See also, Penman v. Utah Dept. of Corr., State Records Committee Decision No. 94-17 (Nov. 17, 1994).
5.	After reviewing the arguments submitted by the parties, hearing oral arguments and testimony, and reviewing in camera the disputed POST records, the Committee finds that Corrections properly classified the records as protected records pursuant to Utah Code § 63G-2-305(11) & (13). ORDER
THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED THAT the appeals of Petitioner, Reginald Williams are DENIED. RIGHT TO APPEAL