FREEDOM OF INFORMATION COMMISSION
OF THE STATE OF CONNECTICUT
In the Matter of a Complaint by FINAL
DECISION
David J.D. Evans and Cummins Diesel Engines of
Connecticut, Inc.,
Complainants
against Docket
#FIC 88-134
State of Connecticut Department of Motor Vehicles,
Respondent August
24, 1988
The above-captioned
matter was heard as a contested case on June 2, 1988, at which time the
complainants and the respondent appeared, stipulated to certain facts and
presented testimony, exhibits and argument on the complaint.
After consideration of
the entire record, the following facts are found:
1. The respondent is a public agency within the
meaning of §1-18a(a), G.S.
2. On January 18, 1983, the commissioner of the
respondent department established a policy concerning access to motor vehicle
records and fees for such records. He stated that the respondent was not
obligated to create files or lists and would furnish any existing file or list
of registered owners at a fee of $0.75 per name, as authorized by §14-50a(a),
G.S.
3. By letter dated April 4, 1988, the
complainants requested a printout or copies of the following records:
a.
The registration records for all present holders of Class 3 motor
vehicle licenses, including the vehicle identification number, the name and
address of the registrant, the county of and date (month/year) of the
registration, the vehicle's fuel type and the name of the vehicle's
manufacturer.
b.
The registration records for all past holders of Class 3 motor vehicle
licenses from 1984 to 1987.
Docket #FIC 88-134 Page 2
4. By letter dated April 12, 1988, the
commissioner of the respondent stated that the registration records were not
maintained in the medium requested and offered to provide the complainants with
a copy of the current registration master file, consisting of 4,338,262 records
(including historical data dating back to 1984), on a computer magnetic tape,
at a cost of $0.75 per name of registered owner.
5. By letter of complaint dated April 11, 1988
and filed with the Commission on April 12, 1988, the complainants alleged that
they were denied access to public records.
6. At the hearing, the parties agreed that the
complainants sought access to the requested registration records on a computer
magnetic tape.
7. The respondent claims that although the
requested registration records are maintained on the registration master file,
it is not obligated to create a program to retrieve the requested information. The complainants, in order to obtain access
to the requested records, must purchase the complete registration master file.
8. It is found the requested records are public
records within the meaning of §1-18a(d), G.S.
9. It is found that the respondent's
registration master file is not organized by class of registration and the
respondent, therefore, does not maintain a separate file for holders of Class 3
motor vehicle licenses. The master file
also does not include the county where the vehicle is registered and the
vehicle's fuel type.
10. It also is found that by conducting a search
for the requested records on the computer, the respondent determined that the
subject records concerned some 77,000 active holders of Class 3 motor vehicle
licenses.
11. It further is found that the respondent can
extract the requested records from the registration master file either by
creating a computer program or by utilizing a program presently on the computer
system.
12. It therefore is concluded that the
complainants need not purchase a copy of the complete registration master file
in order to obtain access to the requested records.
13. At the hearing, the respondent stated that
it would provide the complainant with copies of the requested registration
records on a computer magnetic tape, at a cost of $0.75 per name, as authorized
by §14-50a(a), G.S.
Docket #FIC 88-134 Page 3
14. The complainants
allege that the imposition of a fee of approximately $58,000 effectively denies
them access to the requested information.
The complainants are willing to pay for the cost of copying the requested
information on a computer magnetic tape pursuant to the fee provisions
enumerated in §1-15, G.S.
15. The respondent claims that §14-50a(a), G.S.,
governs the copying costs for the requested records.
16. It is found that §14-50a(a), G.S. applies
only to the commissioner of the respondent department. Subsection 10 of that section specifically
provides that the commissioner shall charge $0.75 for a copy of the "name
of registered owner" and $1.00 on and after July 1, 1988.
17. It further is found that the cost of copying
the requested records is governed by the specific language of §14-50a(a), G.S.,
and not by the general language of §1-15, G.S.
18. It therefore is concluded that the
Commission does not have the authority to order the respondent to charge a fee
for copies of the requested records pursuant to the fee provisions enumerated
in §1-15, G.S.
The following order by
the Commission is hereby recommended on the basis of the record concerning the
above-captioned complaint:
1. In light of the circumstances described in
paragraph 13 of the findings above, the respondent shall forthwith provide the
complainant with copies of the requested records described in paragraphs 3a and
3b of the findings, above, (absent the information described in paragraph 9 of
the findings, above), in the form of a computer magnetic tape, at a fee to be
determined by the respondent.
2. The Commission notes that some of the
requested records described in paragraph 3b of the findings, above, no longer
may exist due to their destruction by the respondent pursuant to the retention
schedule adopted by the State Public Records Administrator.
Approved by order of
the Freedom of Information Commission at its special meeting of August 24,
1988.
Catherine
H. Lynch
Acting
Clerk of the Commission