FREEDOM OF INFORMATION COMMISSION

OF THE STATE OF CONNECTICUT

In the Matter of a Complaint by FINAL DECISION

Richard L. Howard,

Complainant

against Docket #FIC 91-56

State of Connecticut Department of Correction,

Respondent July 10, 1991

The above-captioned matter was heard as a contested case on May 20, 1991, 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. By letter dated February 14, 1991 the complainant requested records concerning employees on the current promotional list for correctional lieutenant, MPS Exam 093-0000, including the ages of all employees on the list.

3. By letter dated February 26, 1991, the respondent refused to provide records of employees' ages.

4. The complainant filed his complaint with the Freedom of Information Commission on March 8, 1991.

5. The respondent claimed the ages of the employees on the promotional list are exempt from disclosure under 1-19(b)(2), G.S.

6. The Commission takes administrative notice of the fact that dates of birth are included on Connecticut motor vehicle operators' licenses.

7. It is found that Connecticut motor vehicle operators' licenses are available for public inspection pursuant to 14-10(c), G.S.

#Docket # 91-56 Page 2

8. It is found that there was no evidence produced at the hearing which proved that persons on the list had a reasonable expectation of privacy with respect to their ages.

9. It is found that the respondent has given persons on the list an opportunity to object to disclosure of their ages.

10. It is found that some objections had been received at the time of the date of the hearing.

11. At the hearing the respondent agreed to provide the complainant with the ages of persons who did not object to disclosure.

12. It is found that the respondent failed to prove that any of the persons on the list had a reasonable expectation of privacy with respect to their ages.

13. It is concluded, therefore, that the ages of the persons on the promotional list are not exempt from disclosure pursuant to 1-19(b)(2), G.S.

The following order by the Commission is hereby recommended on the basis of the record concerning the above-captioned complaint:

1. The respondent shall provide the complainant with the requested records forthwith.

Approved by Order of the Freedom of Information Commission at its regular meeting of July 10, 1991.

Debra L. Rembowski

Acting Clerk of the Commission

#Docket # 91-56 Page 3

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:

Richard L. Howard

44 Eggleston Street

Torrington, CT 06790

State of Connecticut Department of Correction

c/o Michael J. Lanoue

Assistant Attorney General

MacKenzie Hall

110 Sherman Street

Hartford, CT 06105

Debra L. Rembowski

Acting Clerk of the Commission