FREEDOM OF INFORMATION COMMISSION

OF THE STATE OF CONNECTICUT

In the Matter of a Complaint by FINAL DECISION

Phil M. Salafia, Jr. and Powerphone, Inc.,

Complainant,

against Docket #FIC 90-26

Administrator, State of Connecticut, Bureau of Statewide Emergency Telecommunications,

Respondent October 10, 1990

The above-captioned matter was heard as a contested case on June 1, 1990, at which time the complainant 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 and conclusions of law are reached:

1. The respondent is a public agency within the meaning of 1-18a(a), G.S.

2. The complainant appealed to the Commission by letter dated January 19, 1990, alleging the respondent denied him access to certain records.

3. At the hearing on this matter, the respondent moved to dismiss the case, claiming that the complainant had not requested documents, but rather had asked a series of interrogatories.

4. It is found that by letter dated January 2, 1990, the complainant requested that the respondent answer some six pages of questions and provide supporting documentation, all concerning the selection of a bid for developing and implementing a training program for public safety emergency services telecommunicators and dispatchers.

5. It is concluded, therefore, that this letter included a request for records and that the Commission has jurisdiction over the case.

6. The motion to dismiss in hereby denied.

Docket #FIC 90-26 Page Two

7. It is found that by letter dated January 8, 1990, the respondent informed the complainant that his request would take some time to fulfill.

8. It is concluded that the respondent responded to the complainant's request within four business days of receiving it, as required by 1-21i(a), G.S.

9. It is found that respresentatives of the respondent's office met with the complainant on February 10, 1990, to respond to his questions. At that time he received copies of some 400 pages of documents to help answer his questions.

10. It is found that the complainant still seeks a copy of a particular worksheet, a summary of the selection committee members' individual worksheets, on which he placed his initials during a meeting with the respondent on January 14, 1988.

11. It is found that the respondent provided the complainant with a copy of the original of that document, although it does not show the complainant's initials.

12. Upon clarification at the hearing on this matter, the respondent agreed to provide the complainant with copies of the individual worksheets that were used to arrive at the summary and the membership list of the committee members.

13. It is found that the respondent still has not provided the complainant with access to the testing materials, such as curriculum examinations, and the instructor's manual developed by the successful bidder.

14. It is found that these are public records as defined by 1-18a(d), G.S.

15. It is also found, however, that the testing materials are test questions, scoring keys and other examination data used to administer a licensing examination.

16. It is concluded that the testing materials are exempt from disclosure under 1-19(b)(6), G.S.

17. It is also concluded, however, that the respondent violated 1-15, G.S., by denying the complainant access to the instructor's manual.

The following order of the Commission is hereby recommended based on the complete record in the above-captioned case:

Docket #FIC 90-26 Page Three

1. The respondent forthwith shall provide the complainant access to inspect, but not to copy, the instructor's manual for the program described in paragraphs 4 and 13 of the findings, above.

Approved by order of the Freedom of Information Commission at its regular meeting of October 10, 1990.

Tina C. Frappier

Acting Clerk of the Commission

Docket #FIC 90-26 Page Four

PURSUANT TO SECTION 4-180(c), G.S. THE FOLLOWING ARE THE NAMES OF EACH PARTY AND THE MOST RECENT MAILING ADDRESS, PROVIDED TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION COMMISSION, OF THE PARTIES OR THEIR AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE.

THE PARTIES TO THIS CONTESTED CASE ARE:

PHIL M. SALAFIA, JR. AND POWERPHONE, INC.

c/o Joseph B. Burns

Hoberman & Pollack

One State Street

Hartford, CT 06103

ADMINISTRATOR, STATE OF CONNECTICUT, BUREAU OF STATEWIDE EMERGENCY TELECOMMUNICATIONS

c/o Henri Alexandre, Esq.

Assistant Attorney General

MacKenzie Hall

110 Sherman Street

Hartford, CT 06105

Tina C. Frappier

Acting Clerk of the Commission