FREEDOM OF INFORMATION COMMISSION
OF THE STATE OF CONNECTICUT

In the Matter of a Complaint by FINAL DECISION
Michael Nash,  
  Complainant  
  against   Docket #FIC 2009-231
Commissioner, State of Connecticut,
Department of Environmental Protection; and
State of Connecticut, Department of
Environmental Protection,
 
  Respondents February 24, 2010
       

 

The above-captioned matter was heard as a contested case on August 24, 2009, at which time the complainant and the respondents appeared, stipulated to certain facts and presented testimony, exhibits and argument on the complaint.  For purposes of hearing, this matter was consolidated with Docket #FIC 2009-372; Michael Nash, Conservator of the Estate of Charla Nash  v. Commissioner, State of Connecticut, Department of Environmental Protection; and State of Connecticut, Department of Environmental Protection.  After consideration of the entire record, the following facts are found and conclusions of law are reached:

 

1.      The respondents are public agencies within the meaning of 1-200(1), G.S.

 

2.      It is found that on March 24, 2009, the complainant made a written request for copies of records concerning “a chimpanzee known as Travis” and records concerning non-domesticated or wild animals.

 

3.      It is found that, in response to the complainant’s request, described in paragraph 2, above, the respondents undertook a prompt and diligent search for records.

 

4.      It is found that by April 13, 2009, the respondents produced the first set of records for the complainant’s review.  It is found that by July 24, 2009, the respondents had provided thousands of pages of records for the complainant’s review, the result of hundreds of hours of employee time.  It is found that the respondents continued to provide additional records to the complainant as they became available.

 

5.      The respondents did not disclose some records that were responsive to the complainant’s request because they claimed that they were exempt from mandatory disclosure.

 

6.      On April 21, 2009 the complainant appealed to this Commission on behalf of his client, alleging that the respondents violated the Freedom of Information (“FOI”) Act by failing to provide him with all of the records he requested, described in paragraph 2, above.

 

7.      Section 1-200(5), G.S., in relevant part, defines “public records” as follows:

 

Public records or files means any recorded data or information relating to the conduct of the public's business prepared, owned, used, received or retained by a public agency, …whether such data or information be handwritten, typed, tape-recorded, printed, photostated, photographed or recorded by any other method.

 

8.      Section 1-210(a), G.S., provides, in relevant part:

 

Except as otherwise provided by any federal law or state statute, all records maintained or kept on file by any public agency, whether or not such records are required by any law or by any rule or regulation, shall be public records and every person shall have the right to inspect such records promptly during regular office or business hours or to receive a copy of such records in accordance with the provisions of section 1-212.

 

9.      Section 1-212(a), G.S., provides:  “Any person applying in writing shall receive, promptly upon request, a plain or certified copy of any public record.”

 

10.   It is concluded that the records requested by the complainant are public records within the meaning of 1-200(5), 1-210(a), and 1-212(a), G.S.

 

11.  After the hearing in this matter, the respondents submitted unredacted copies of the disputed records, described in paragraph 5, above, for in camera inspection, which pages shall be identified herein as IC-2009-231-1 through IC-2009-231-486.[1]

 

12.     The respondents claim that 1-210(b)(1) and 1-210(e)(1), G.S., exempt some records from disclosure. (See Index to Records Submitted for In Camera Inspection, attached, and incorporated herein by reference.)

 

13.   Section 1-210, G.S., states in relevant parts:

 

(b) Nothing in the Freedom of Information Act shall be construed to require disclosure of:

 

1) Preliminary drafts or notes provided the public agency has determined that the public interest in withholding such documents clearly outweighs the public interest in disclosure;

 ….

 

(e) Notwithstanding the provisions of subdivisions (1) and (16) of subsection (b) of this section, disclosure shall be required of:

 

(1) Interagency or intra-agency memoranda or letters, advisory opinions, recommendations or any report comprising part of the process by which governmental decisions and policies are formulated, except disclosure shall not be required of a preliminary draft of a memorandum, prepared by a member of the staff of a public agency, which is subject to revision prior to submission to or discussion among the members of such agency….

 

 14.  It is found that the respondents determined that the public interest in withholding the records referenced in paragraph 12, above, clearly outweighed the public interest in disclosure.  The respondents testified that they disclosed some preliminary drafts where the records reflected the opinions of more than one staff member so that the contents of such records closely reflected the agency’s decisions or policies. The respondents testified further that they withheld other preliminary drafts where the contents did not have the input of other staff or the approval of supervisors.

 

15.   Upon careful examination of the records submitted in camera referenced in paragraph 12, above, it is found that, with the exceptions noted in paragraphs 17, below, such records are preliminary drafts prepared by staff subject to revision prior to submission to or discussion among officials of the respondent Department of Environmental Protection with decision-making authority, within the meaning of 1-210(e)(1), G.S.

 

16.   It is concluded, therefore, that the respondents did not violate the FOI Act by not disclosing the records referenced in paragraph 15, above.

 

17.   With respect to IC-2009-231-26, -27,[2] -29, -57, -63, -66, -228, -236, -351, -352, -353, -355, and -407, it is found that, although such records were preliminary drafts, they were provided to officials of the respondent Department of Environmental Protection with decision-making authority, within the meaning of 1-210(e)(1), G.S.  It is also found that the respondents failed to prove that IC-2009-231-57, which is identified on the Index as a wild and exotic animal log, is a preliminary draft or note.  See Strillachi v. FOIC, CV08-4018120S, New Britain J.D. (Cohn, J., April 20, 2009) (police chief’s notes on status of lawsuits not preliminary because there was no expectation that document would be modified nor did document contain information not ‘required or germane’ to its ultimate purpose).

 

18.   Accordingly, it is concluded that the respondents violated the FOI Act by failing to provide copies of the records referenced in paragraph 17, above.

 

19.   The respondents claim that 1-210(b)(3)(C), G.S., exempts some of the records from mandatory disclosure.  (See Index to Records Submitted for In Camera Inspection, attached, and incorporated herein by reference.)

 

20.   Section 1-210(b)(3), G.S., provides, in relevant part, that nothing in the FOI Act shall be construed to require disclosure of:

 

[r]ecords of law enforcement agencies not otherwise available to the public which records were compiled in connection with the detection or investigation of crime, if the disclosure of said records would not be in the public interest because it would result in the disclosure of … (C) information to be used in a prospective law enforcement action if prejudicial to such action …

 

21.   It is found that the State Environmental Conservation Police, Department of Environmental Protection, is a law enforcement agency within the meaning of 1-210(b)(3), G.S., and that the respondents compiled the records in connection with the investigation of crime.    It is also found that the records referenced in paragraph 19, above, concern the investigation of a single individual.

 

22.   In Department of Public Safety v. FOIC, 51 Conn. App. 100, 105 (1998), the court stated that 1-210(b)(3)(C), G.S., required an evidentiary showing that (1) the records are to be used in a prospective law enforcement action and (2) the disclosure of such records would be prejudicial to such action.  The court further stated that “there must be an evidentiary showing that the actual information sought is going to be used in a law enforcement action and that the disclosure of that information would be prejudicial to that action.”

 

23.   Upon careful examination of the records referenced in paragraph 19, above, it is found that, except for IC-2009-231-93, such records were compiled in connection with the detection or investigation of crime.

 

24.   The respondents claimed that disclosure of the name of the subject of the investigation would prejudice a prospective law enforcement action.  It is found that the respondents’ witness testified that prejudice would result from the disclosure of information about other agencies involved or how the subject obtained a wild or non-domesticated animal from out of state.

 

25.  It is found, however, that the respondents failed to prove that disclosure of the name of the subject of the investigation would prejudice the investigation in the manner they claimed, as described in paragraph 24, above.

 

26.  It is found that the respondents did prove that disclosure of the name of the law enforcement officer referenced in the first word of the second line of the body paragraph of the e-mail identified as IC-2009-231-5, and wherever such e-mail is reprinted in other in camera records, would prejudice a prospective law enforcement action, within the meaning of 1-210(b)(3)(C), G.S. 

 

27.  On January 27, 2010, counsel for the respondents informed the Commission that, except for IC-2009-231-295, the respondents are withdrawing their claim of exemption pursuant to 1-210(b)(3)(C), G.S., for the records referenced in paragraph 19, above, because the criminal investigation was no longer pending. 

 

28.   It is concluded that except for the redaction described in paragraph 26, above, the respondents violated the FOI Act by failing to promptly disclose the records referenced in paragraph 19, above. 

 

29.   The respondents claim that 1-210(b)(10), G.S., exempts some of the records from mandatory disclosure.  (See Index to Records Submitted for In Camera Inspection, attached, and incorporated herein by reference.)

 

30.  In relevant part, 1-210(b)(10), G.S., permits the nondisclosure of “communications privileged by the attorney-client relationship….”

 

31.   Established Connecticut law defining the attorney-client privilege governs the applicability of the exemption contained in 1-210(b)(10), G.S.   Such law is well set forth in Maxwell v. FOI Commission, 260 Conn. 143 (2002).  In that case, the Supreme Court stated that 52-146r, G.S., which established a statutory privilege for communications between public agencies and their attorneys, merely codifies “the common-law attorney-client privilege as this court previously had defined it.” Id. at 149.

 

32.   Section 52-146r(2), G.S., defines “confidential communications” as:

all oral and written communications transmitted in confidence between a public official or employee of a public agency acting in the performance of his or her duties or within the scope of his or her employment and a government attorney relating to legal advice sought by the public agency or a public official or employee of such public agency from that attorney, and all records prepared by the government attorney in furtherance of the rendition of such legal advice. . . .

 

33.   Upon careful examination of the records referenced in paragraph 29, above, it is found that, with the exceptions described in paragraph 36, below, such records are either communications transmitted in confidence between attorneys for the respondents and employees and officials of the respondent DEP relating to legal advice sought by DEP employees and officials, or are records prepared by DEP attorneys in furtherance of the rendition of such legal advice, within the meaning of 52-146r(2), G.S.

 

34.  It is found, therefore, that the records referenced in paragraph 33, above, are communications privileged by the attorney-client relationship, within the meaning of 1-210(b)(10), G.S.

 

35.  It is concluded, therefore, that the respondents did not violate the FOI Act by withholding from disclosure the records referenced in paragraph 33, above, by redacting as indicated on the copies of records submitted for in camera inspection.

 

36.  With respect to IC-2009-231-45, (line 28 through the end of page 3); IC-2009-231-165; IC-2009-231-274 (page 2 to end); IC-2009-231-412 (page 1 and page 2, line 22 to end); and wherever duplicate copies of such records occur within the records submitted for in camera inspection; it is found that such records are neither communications of legal advice between attorney and client, nor records prepared in furtherance of the rendition of legal advice. 

 

37.  It is concluded, therefore, that the records described in paragraph 36, above, are not exempt from disclosure, and the respondents violated the FOI Act by failing to disclose them.

 

Although the respondents violated the FOI Act by failing to disclose the records described in the findings of fact, above, the Commission recognizes the respondents’ overall prompt and thorough compliance with the complainant’s request for records, especially in light of pressing circumstances facing the respondents at the time of the request.

 

The Commission appreciates and commends the respondents for their well-organized, legible, and easily reviewable Index and in camera records.

 

Based on the record in this case, the Commission makes the following order:

 

1.          The respondents shall forthwith provide the complainant with copies of records described in paragraphs 17, 28, and 36 of the findings of fact, above.

 

Approved by Order of the Freedom of Information Commission at its regular meeting of February 24, 2010.

 

 

____________________________

S. Wilson

Acting Clerk of the Commission

 

 

 

 

 

 

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:

 

Michael Nash

C/o Mark H. Middlen, Esq.

Willinger, Willinger & Bucci, P.C.

855 Main Street

Bridgeport, CT 06604

 

Commissioner, State of Connecticut,

Department of Environmental Protection;

and State of Connecticut,

Department of Environmental Protection

C/o Melinda M. Decker, Esq.

79 Elm Street

Hartford, CT 06106

 

 

____________________________

S. Wilson

Acting Clerk of the Commission

 

 

FIC/2009-231FD/sw/2/25/2010

 

 

 

 

       


 

INDEX TO RECORDS SUBMITTED

FOR IN CAMERA INSPECTION

FIC-I New 3/08

STATE OF CONNECTICUT
FREEDOM OF INFORMATION COMMISSION
**AMENDED 9/25/2009**

 

 

IMPORTANT: Read instructions on reverse side carefully before completing.

(A)

RECORD

REF#

 

(C)
DESCRIPTION OF INFORMATION BELIEVED TO BE EXEMPT

(D)
EXEMPTION

STATUTE

10

 

Email regarding future wild/exotic animal website

(Disclose)

15, 16, 209

 

Draft news releases which were never utilized by the DEP Re: Charla Nash/Travis

(Disclose)

18, 25, 26, 29

 

Various iterations of draft letter Re: Possession of potentially dangerous animals legislation

1-210(b)(1)

27

 

Draft attorney/client media question & answer outline Re: Charla Nash/animal legislation

1-210(b)(1)

1-210 (b)(10)

43

 

 Internal draft policy documents Re: Animal regulations which were never fully vetted and were not approved and implemented

1-210(b)(1)

54, 55

 

Draft internal memos Re: Exotic/wild animal and website update; website is still a work in progress and has not been finalized

1-210(b)(1)

56, 60, 67

 

Drafts concerning Wild and Exotic animal potential website.

1-210(b)(1)

57, 66

 

 Potential Wild and Exotic animal log Re: public calls and emails containing   draft letters to Pacelle and Rice, not similar to final letters. (Final letters released and attached)

1-210(b)(1)

63

 

Draft potentially dangerous animal bill for internal review and was not final version that was released for legislative consideration

1-210(b)(1)

80

 

In house questions and answers Re: Possession of potentially dangerous or regulated wild animals; disseminated for internal review

1-210(b)(1)

116

 

Draft website edits Re: possession of dangerous/wild animals; website still

pending final approval.

1-210(b)(1)

228, 236

 

Draft content for letter to legislative leaders Re: Proposed legislation; final letter substantially changed and was disclosed.

1-210(b)(1)

244-249, 251,

253-260

 

Various iterations of draft legislation in which author sought internal feedback

1-210(b)(1)

306-308

 

Draft DEP Statement Re: Travis attack

All of these exhibits are duplicates numbered 15, 16 and 209 respectively

(Disclose)

321

 

Draft letter Re: Onthank FOIA request (original response never sent)

1-210(b)(1)

331, 332, 351, 352, 355, 407

 

Internal draft letter Re: Wild/Exotic dangerous animal legislation All of these exhibits are duplicates numbered 18, 228, 25, 26, 29, 236 respectively

1-210(b)(1)

353

 

Draft potential media questions and answers Exhibit is a duplicate of number 27

1-210(b)(1)

 

 

 

 

 

409

 

Draft was released preliminary FOI exemption log; attorney/client, work in progress, final version was released

1-210(b)(1)

1-210(b)(10)

4

 

Pending law enforcement investigation, redacted name and information only

1-210(b)(3)(C)

5, 6

 

Pending law enforcement investigation

1-210(b)(3)(C)

48

 

No longer a pending law enforcement matter

(Disclose)

49, 50

 

Pending law enforcement investigation, redacted name only

1-210(b)(3)(C)

58

 

Pending law enforcement investigation, redacted name only

1-210(b)(3)(C)

65, 68, 75, 76

 

Pending law enforcement investigation

1-210(b)(3)(C)

92, 93

 

Pending law enforcement investigation

1-210(b)(3)(C)

117

 

Pending law enforcement investigation, partial redaction

1-210(b)(3)(C)

187

 

Pending law enforcement investigation, redacted name and information only

1-210(b)(3)(C)

203

 

Pending law enforcement investigation

1-210(b)(3)(C)

204

 

No longer a pending law enforcement investigation

(Disclose)

206

 

Pending law enforcement investigation, redacted name only

1-210(b)(3)(C)

207

 

Pending law enforcement investigation, redacted name only, second page

1-210(b)(3)(C)

208

 

Pending law enforcement investigation

1-210(b)(3)(C)

 

241

 

Pending law enforcement investigation

1-210(b)(3)(C)

276,277, 278,279, 280

 

Law enforcement matter disclosed, no longer pending

(Disclose)

281, 282

 

Pending law enforcement investigation, redacted name only Exhibit 281 is a duplicate of number 49

1-210(b)(3)(C)

284, 285

 

No longer a pending law enforcement investigation, (redacted name and information only)

(Disclose)

295

 

Pending law enforcement investigation in New York; not responsive to request for CT related records

1-210(b)(3)(C)

296

 

Law enforcement matter disclosed, no longer pending

(Disclose)

320, 326, 382

 

Law enforcement matter disclosed, no longer pending

(Disclose)

389

 

Pending law enforcement, redacted name and information only Exhibit is a duplicate of number 4

1-210(b)(3)(C)

391, 392

 

Pending law enforcement investigation

All exhibits are duplicates numbered 241 and 92 respectively

1-210(b)(3)(C)

61

 

Redaction of personal cell phone number, page 2

Complainant has consented to DEP redaction

238

 

Redaction of paragraph with reference to issue with minor children which is unrelated to FOI matter; remainder is being disclosed

Complainant has consented to DEP redaction

242, 243, 250, 252, 261, 262, 263, 264

 

Complainant wished to be anonymous so contact information is being withheld; complainant's name redacted only

Law enforcement tool 1-210(b)(3)Complainant will consider whether to consent to redaction

304

 

Photos of minor children

Complainant has consented to DEP redaction

458

 

Orangutans dietary information, identified as confidential

Complainant has consented to DEP redaction

417

 

DeFrancesco photos

(Disclose)

457, 465, 466, 467, 468, 469, 470

 

Law enforcement matter disclosed, no longer pending

(Disclose)

 

 

 

 

INDEX'TO RECORDS SUBMITTED

FOR IN CAMERA INSPECTION

FIC-1 New 3108

 

STATE OF CONNECTICUT

FREEDOM OF INFORMATION COMMISSION

**AMENDMENT TO 10/15/2009 INDEX**

 

IMPORTANT: Read instructions on reverse side carefully before completing.

(A)

RECORD

REF#

 

(C)
DESCRIPTION OF INFORMATION BELIEVED TO BE EXEMPT

(D)
EXEMPTION

STATUTE

 

 

1

 

Memo from DEP attorney Re: Law Enforcement case

1-210(b)(10)

 

2

 

Email from legal director Re: FOI issues

1-210(b)(10)

 

3

 

Email exchanges between agency legal director and others within DEP and Governor's Office Re: Chimpanzee attack and internal review

1-210(b)(10)

 

7

 

Email to legal director Re: Communication with wildlife division staff concerning chimpanzee attack

1-210(b)(10)

 

8, 9, 12, 83

 

Emails between agency legal director and staff     Re: Pending chimpanzee FOI

matters (#8, pages 2 and 3 disclosed)

1-210(b)(10)

 

11

 

Website info

Disclose

 

13

 

Pending chimpanzee FOI matters

Disclose

 

14, 17

 

Attorney/Client communication Re: Media stories (#17 partially redacted)

1-210(b)(10)

 

19, 20, 21

 

Attorney/Client communication Re: various drafts of letter to legislators concerning wildlife

1-210(b)(10)

 

22, 23, 24,

28, 231

 

Attorney/Client communications       Re: Preparation for press questions

concerning proposed legislation

1-210(b)(10)

 

30

 

Attorney/Client communication Re: Wildlife questions (partial redaction)

1-210(b)(10)

 

31

 

Media stories

Disclose

 

32

 

FOI

Disclose

 

33, 34, 51,

69

 

Staff emails seeking legal assistance      Re: FOI (#34 partial redaction)

1-210(b)(10)

 

35, 36, 37,

38, 39,78

 

Attorney/Client communication Re: Media and public inquiries (#35 partially redacted) #36, #37 partial redaction to page 2, #38 partial redaction to page 2, #39 partial redaction to page 2, #78 partial redaction to page 3

1-210(b)(10)

 

40, 41, 42

 

Communications via email between DEP Communications, DEP Legal and others within DEP and Governor's Office Re: Press story (#42 partially redacted)

1-210(b)(10)

 

44

 

Former law enforcement case

Disclose

 

45, 46, 47, 112

 

Email exchanges between DEP staff and AG's Office Re: Wildlife legislation (#112 redacted to page 3)

1-210(b)(10)

 

52

 

Attorney Client communication Re: Wild animal update (partial redaction)

1-210(b)(10)

 

59

 

Attorney/Client communication Re: Wild animal update, second page withheld

1-210(b)(10)

 

62

 

Attorney/Client communication Re: USDA matters wherein name is being withheld (partially redacted)

1-210(b)(10)

 

64

 

Attorney/Client communication Re: Pending law enforcement

1-210(b)(10)

 

70

 

Attorney/Client communication Re: Wildlife permits

1-210(b)(10)

 

73, 74, 89, 91

 

Email exchanges concerning press inquiries (#73 partial redaction and incorrect composer recited on exemption log, #89 partial redaction)

1-210(b)(10)

 

77, 90

 

Communications between DEP legal and wildlife Re: Meeting

1-210(b)(10)

 

79

 

Attorney/Client email exchange Re: Law enforcement file updates

1-210(b)(10)

 

81

 

Attorney/Client Re: Computer search request

1-210(b)(10)

 

82, 84, 87

 

Legal director meeting request with staff Re: Chimpanzee incident & record requests

1-210(b)(10)

85, 86

 

Email exchanges between legal, wildlife & legislative Offices Re: Wildlife legislation (#86 is partially redacted)

1-210(b)(10)

 

88, 234

 

Email exchanges between legal, legislative and wildlife offices Re: Legislative issues and associated news articles (partial redaction)

1-210(b)(10)

 

94

 

Email from Commissioner to agency legal director concerning wildlife legislation

1-210(b)(10)

 

 

 

 

 

 

95, 96, 97,

 

Email exchanges between DEP legal, DEP staff and Governor's Office

1-210(b)(10)

98, 99,

 

concerning internal investigation into chimpanzee incident

 

100, 102,

 

(#96, news article disclosed)

 

103, 104,

 

 

 

105, 106,

 

 

 

107, 113,

 

 

 

118132,

 

 

 

135, 136,

 

 

 

137, 138,

 

 

 

214, 215,

 

 

 

239, 240

 

 

 

101

 

AG email inquiry

Disclose

108

 

Legal Director/HR Administrator memo concerning chimpanzee incident

1-210(b)(10)

109

 

Assistant Attorney General/DEP Attorney Memo Re: 1997 Law Enforcement

1-210(b)(10)

 

 

Case

 

110

 

Legislative advisor

Disclose

111

 

DEP Legal Director/Assistant Attorney General Email Re: Primate issue

1-210(b)(10)

114,115

 

Assistant Attorney General / Legal Director communication Re: Travis

1-210(b)( 0)

119

 

Email exchange between legal director and commissioner Re: discussion with

1-210(b)(10)

 

 

AG's office concerning legislation

 

120,121

 

Legal Director/staff communication Re: Wildlife legislation

1-210(b)(10)

122

 

Legal Director communication to Commissioner   Re: Attorney General press

release (partial redaction)

1-210(b)(10)

123

 

Legal Director communication        Re: Correspondence with AG's office

1-210(b)(10)

124

 

Email exchange between Legal and DEP Communications Re: Chimpanzee

1-210(b)(10)

125, 126,

 

Legal Director's handwritten notes Re: Matters pertaining to Travis and

1-210(b)(10)

128, 129,

 

wildlife legislation

 

140, 145,

 

 

 

146, 148

 

 

 

127, 133

 

Attorney/Client communication       Re: FOI request (partial redact on)

1-210(b)( 0)

130, 182

 

Email exchange between Legal and Wildlife offices Re: Discussion with staff concerning chimpanzee incident

1-210(b)( 0)

131

 

Email exchange between legal and communications Re: Press release comments, anticipated press questions and status of law

-210(b)( 0)

134

 

PETA and Attorney General's Office concerning legislation

Disclose

139

 

Legal Director communication with AG's office concerning Chimpanzee FOI

1-210(b)(10)

141,  142

 

Emails between legal staff and AG's office Re: FOI (partial redaction)

1-210(b)(10)

143, 144,

 

Legal Director/Staff communication Re: FOI requests

1-210(b)(10)

147, 148,

 

 

 

149, 150,

 

 

 

152

 

 

 

151

 

Attorney's handwritten notes          Re: Status of FOI requests

1-210(b)(10)

153, 154,

 

Emails between legal and staff     Re: Various FOI issues (#153 attachment to

1-210(b)(10)

155, 156,

 

email disclosed, #154, #155, #158, partial redaction)

 

158

 

 

 

157

 

Legal Director's chronology and internal analysis

1-210(b)(1)

 

 

 

1-210(b)(10)

159

 

Attorney/Client communication Re: FOI request (partial redaction)

1-210(b)(10)

160

 

Nash attorney communication

Disclose

161

 

Legal Office communication       Re: FOI exemption log

1-210(b)(10)

 

 

 

1-210(b)(1)

162

 

Legal Office communication        Re: Second Nash FOI

1-210(b)(10)

163

 

Attorney/Client draft chronology of events

1-210(b)(10)

 

 

 

1-210(b)(1)

164, 167

 

Emails between agency legal director and AG's office

1-210(b)(10)

165

 

Attorney work product        Re: Legislative history of several wildlife statutes

1-210(b)(10)

 

 

(documents are separately available through state library)

 

 

 

166

 

Emails between legal, legislative and communication offices Re: proposed legislation

1-210(b)(10)

168, 169

 

Attorney/Client communication Re: FOI

1-210(b)(10)

170

 

FOI exemption list

Disclose

171, 172,

 

Email exchanged between legal and wildlife offices Re: Meeting

1-210(b)(10)

173

 

 

 

174

 

Attorney/Client communication Re: Nash document (partially redacted)

1-210(b)(10)

175, 176,

 

Legal office communications Re: Nash attorney FOI reply (partially redacted)

1-210(b)(10)

177, 192,

 

 

 

195, 198,

 

 

 

199

 

 

 

178

 

Legal office communications Re: FOT

1-210(b)(10)

179, 180,

 

Legal office communications: Re: POT (partial redaction)

1-210(b)(10)

181

 

 

 

183, 184,

 

Emails between legal and staff Re: FOT requests (partial redaction)

1-210(b)(10)

185

 

 

 

186, 190

 

Attorney/Client communications Re: Inquiries about possible law enforcement matters (partial redaction)

1-210(b)(10)

188, 189

 

Legal office communications with preliminary exemption logs

1-210(b)(10)

 

 

 

1-210(b)(1)

191, 193,

 

Attorney/Client communications Re: Possible pending law enforcement and

1-210(b)(10)

196

 

effect on FOI requests

 

194

 

Exemption list

Disclose

197

 

Attorney/Client communications Re: Electronic search for records

1-210(b)(10)

200, 201,

 

DEP/AG staff communications and internal legal discussion       Re: Wildlife

1-210(b)(10)

202, 226,

 

legislation (#200 partial redaction to page 3)

 

227, 229,

 

 

 

230

 

 

 

205

 

Wildlife legislation

Disclose

210

 

DEP/AG staff emails Re: Wildlife legislation (partial redaction)

1-210(b)(10)

211, 213

 

FOI issues

Disclose

212

 

Legal and Wildlife office communication Re: FOT issues

1-210(b)(10)

216, 217,

 

Correspondence exchanged between DEP Commissioner and Legal Director

1-210(b)(10)

218, 219

 

Re: Chronology and internal review

 

220

 

Emails between DEP and Governor's office Re: Chimpanzee story and legislation

1-210(b)(10)

221

 

Legislative memo

Disclose

222

 

Attorney/Client communication       Re: FOI file search

1-210(b)(10)

223, 224,

 

Attorney/Client communication      Re: FOT request (partial redaction)

1-210(b)(10)

225

 

 

 

232, 233

 

Attorney/Client communication Re: Animal legislation inquiries

1-210(b)(10)

235

 

Attorney/Client communications Re: Legislative history and press inquiry

1-210(b)(10)

237

 

Attorney/Client memo Re: Animal legislation analysis

1-210(b)(10)

265

 

Exhibit is duplicate number 86

1-210(b)(10)

266

 

Exhibit is duplicate number 45

1-210(b)(10)

267

 

Exhibit is duplicate number 227

1-210(b)(10)

268

 

Exhibit is duplicate number 210

1-210(b)(10)

269, 270,

 

Attorney/Client communication Re: Wildlife legislation public inquiries

1-210(b)(10)

271

 

 

 

272

 

Exhibit is duplicate number 46

1-210(b)(10)

273

-

Exhibit is duplicate number 230

1-210(b)(10)

274

 

Attorney/Staff communication Re: Nash FOI request

1-210(b)(10)

275

 

Exhibit is duplicate number 9

1-210(b)(10)

 

286, 287, 288, 289, 290, 291, 292, 293, 294, 297, 298,   299

 

Attorney/Staff discussion and instructions regarding various FOI requests

Exhibit 292 is duplicate number 51 Exhibit 293 is duplicate number 12

1-210(b)(10)

300

 

Attorney/Client staff memorandum Re: Update exotic/wild animal, second page redacted

1-210(b)(10)

301

 

Attorney/Client communication Re: FOI/pemiit wild/exotic animals

1-210(b)(10)

302

 

Exhibit is duplicate number 185

1-210(b)(10)

303

 

Exhibit is duplicate number 1

1-210(b)(10)

305

 

Exhibit is duplicate number 14

1-210(b)(10)

309

 

Exhibit is duplicate number 119

1-210(b)(10)

310

 

Exhibit is duplicate number 120

1-210(b)(10)

311

 

Exhibit is duplicate number 110

1-210(b)(10)

312

 

Exhibit is duplicate number 85

1-210(b)(10)

313

 

Exhibit is duplicate number 94

1-210(b)(10)

314

 

Exhibit is duplicate number 122

1-210(b)(10)

315

 

Exhibit is duplicate number 123

1-210(b)(10)

316

 

Exhibit is duplicate number 111

1-210(b)(10)

317

 

Exhibit is duplicate number 17

1-210(b)(10)

318

 

Exhibit is duplicate number 226

1-210(b)(10)

319

 

Exhibit is duplicate number 227

1-210(b)(10)

322

 

Exhibit is duplicate number 82

1-210(b)(10)

323

 

Exhibit is duplicate number 211

1-210(b)(10)

324

 

Exhibit is duplicate number 124

1-210(b)(10)

325

 

Exhibit is duplicate number 91

1-210(b)(10)

327

 

Exhibit is duplicate number 205

1-210(b)(10)

328

 

Exhibit is duplicate number 212

1-210(b)(10)

329

 

Exhibit is duplicate number 213

1-210(b)(10)

330

 

Exhibit is duplicate number 127

1-210(b)(10)

333

 

Exhibit is duplicate number 22

1-210(b)(10)

334

 

Exhibit is duplicate number 229

1-210(b)(10)

335

 

Exhibit is duplicate number 200

1-210(b)(10)

336

 

Exhibit is duplicate number 112

1-210(b)(10)

337

 

Exhibit is duplicate number 230

1-210(b)(10)

338

 

Exhibit is duplicate number 20

1-210(b)(10)

339

 

Exhibit is duplicate number 21

1-210(b)(10)

340

 

Exhibit is duplicate number 24

1-210(b)(10)

341

 

Exhibit is duplicate number 26 (Exhibit on Draft Index filed 9/24/2009)

(Remove)

342

 

Exhibit is duplicate number 19

1-210(b)(10)

343

 

Exhibit is duplicate number 223

1-210(b)(10)

344

 

Exhibit is duplicate number 95

1-210(b)(10)

345

 

Exhibit is duplicate number 231

1-210(b)(10)

346

 

Exhibit is duplicate number 23

1-210(b)(10)

347

 

Exhibit is duplicate number 88

1-210(b)(10)

348

 

Exhibit is duplicate number 232

1-210(b)(10)

 

349

 

Exhibit is duplicate number 24

1-210(b)(10)

350

 

Exhibit is duplicate number 47

1-210(b)(10)

354

 

Exhibit is duplicate number 28

1-210(b)(10)

356

 

Exhibit is duplicate number 131

1-210(b)(10)

357

 

Exhibit is duplicate number 233

1-210(b)(10)

358

 

Exhibit is duplicate number 96

1-210(b)(10)

359

 

Exhibit is duplicate number 97

1-210(b)(10)

360

 

Exhibit is duplicate number 239

1-210(b)(10)

361

 

Exhibit is duplicate number 103

1-210(b)(10)

362

 

Exhibit is duplicate number 214

1-210(b)(10)

363

 

Exhibit is duplicate number 104

1-210(b)(10)

364

 

Exhibit is duplicate number 98

1-210(b)(10)

365

 

Exhibit is duplicate number 105

1-210(b)(10)

366

 

Exhibit is duplicate number 3

1-210(b)(10)

367

 

Exhibit is duplicate number 215

1-210(b)(10)

368

 

Exhibit is duplicate number 99

1-210(b)(10)

369

 

Exhibit is duplicate number 106

1-210(b)(10)

370

 

Exhibit is duplicate number 100

1-210(b)(10)

371

 

Exhibit is duplicate number 30

1-210(b)(10)

372

 

Exhibit is duplicate number 31

1-210(b)(10)

373

 

Exhibit is duplicate number 184

1-210(b)(10)

375

 

Exhibit is duplicate number 135

1-210(b)(10)

376

 

Exhibit is duplicate number 136

1-210(b)(10)

377

 

Exhibit is duplicate number 240

1-210(b)(10)

378

 

Exhibit is duplicate number 102

1-210(b)(10)

379

 

Exhibit is duplicate number 118

1-210(b)(10)

380

 

Exhibit is duplicate number 137

1-210(b)(10)

381

 

Exhibit is duplicate number138

1-210(b)(10)

382

 

Exhibit is duplicate number 48 (Exhibit on Pending Law Enforcement Index dated 9/24/2009 — previously disclosed)

(Remove)

383

 

Exhibit is duplicate number 139

1-210(b)(10)

384

 

Exhibit is duplicate number 142

1-210(b)(10)

385

 

Exhibit is duplicate number 149

1-210(b)(10)

386

 

Exhibit is duplicate number 219

1-210(b)(10)

387

 

Exhibit is duplicate number 150

1-210(b)(10)

388

 

Exhibit is duplicate number 152

1-210(b)(10)

389

 

Exhibit is duplicate number 4 (Exhibit on Pending Law Enforcement Index dated 9/24/2009)

(Remove)

390

 

Exhibit is duplicate number 11

1-210(b)(10)

391

 

Exhibit is duplicate number 241 (Exhibit on Pending Law Enforcement Index dated 9/24/2009)

(Remove)

392

 

Exhibit is duplicate number 92 (Exhibit on Pending Law Enforcement Index dated 9/24/2009)

(Remove)

393

 

Exhibit is duplicate number 141

1-210(b)(10)

394

 

Exhibit is duplicate number 83

1-210(b)(10)

395

 

Exhibit is duplicate number 8

1-210(b)(10)

396

 

Exhibit is duplicate number 143

1-210(b)(10)

 

397

 

Exhibit is duplicate number 144

1-210(b)(10)

398

 

Exhibit is duplicate number 147

1-210(b)(10)

399

 

Exhibit is duplicate number 152 & Duplicate of 388

1-210(b)(10)

400

 

Exhibit is duplicate number 153

1-210(b)(10)

401

 

Exhibit is duplicate number 235

1-210(b)(10)

402

 

Exhibit is duplicate number 154

1-210(b)(10)

403

 

Exhibit is duplicate number 32

1-210(b)(10)

404

 

Exhibit is duplicate number 89

1-210(b)(10)

405

 

Exhibit is duplicate number 84

1-210(b)(10)

406

 

Exhibit is duplicate number 220

1-210(b)(10)

407

 

Exhibit is duplicate number 236 (Exhibit on Draft Index filed 9/24/2009)

(Remove)

408

 

Exhibit is duplicate number 52

1-210(b)(10)

410

 

Exhibit is duplicate number 220

1-210(b)(10)

411

 

Exhibit is duplicate number 224

1-210(b)(10)

412

 

Attorney/Client communications Re: FOT request (not Nash)

1-210(b)(10)

413

 

Exhibit is duplicate number 223

1-210(b)(10)

414

 

Exhibit is duplicate number 155

1-210(b)(10)

415

 

Exhibit is duplicate number 185

1-210(b)(10)

416

 

Exhibit is duplicate number 43 (Exhibit on Draft Index filed 9/24/2009)

(Remove)

418

 

Exhibit is duplicate number 91

1-210(b)(10)

420

 

Exhibit is duplicate number 155

1-210(b)(10)

421

 

Exhibit is duplicate number 225

1-210(b)(10)

422

 

Exhibit is duplicate number 158

1-210(b)(10)

423

 

Exhibit is duplicate number 159

1-210(b)(10)

424

 

Exhibit is duplicate number 160

1-210(b)(10)

425

 

Exhibit is duplicate number 188

1-210(b)(10)

426

 

Exhibit is duplicate number 161

1-210(b)(10)

427

 

Exhibit is duplicate number 13

1-210(b)(10)

428

 

Exhibit is duplicate number 189

1-210(b)(10)

429

 

Exhibit is duplicate number 194

1-210(b)(10)

430

 

Exhibit is duplicate number 164

1-210(b)(10)

431

 

Exhibit is duplicate number 166

1-210(b)(10)

432

 

Exhibit is duplicate number 33

1-210(b)(10)

433

 

Exhibit is duplicate number 69

1-210(b)(10)

434

 

Exhibit is duplicate number 114

1-210(b)(10)

435

 

Exhibit is duplicate number 167

1-210(b)(10)

436

 

Exhibit is duplicate number 71

Disclose

437

 

Exhibit is duplicate number 168

1-210(b)(10)

438

 

Exhibit is duplicate number 72

Disclose

439

 

Exhibit is duplicate number 169

1-210(b)(10)

440

 

Exhibit is duplicate number 34

1-210(b)(10)

441

 

Exhibit is duplicate number 73

1-210(b)(10)

442

 

Exhibit is duplicate number 74

1-210(b)(10)

443

 

Exhibit is duplicate number 78

1-210(b)(10)

444

 

Exhibit is duplicate number 35

-210(b)(10)

445

 

Exhibit is duplicate number 170

-210(b)(10)

446

 

Exhibit is duplicate number 115

1-210(b)(10)

447

 

Error — no such document exists

(Remove)

448

 

Exhibit is duplicate number 37

1-210(b)(10)

449

 

Exhibit is duplicate number 38

1-210(b)(10)

450

 

Exhibit is duplicate number 39

1-210(b)(10)

451

 

Exhibit is duplicate number 172

1-210(b)(10)

452

 

Exhibit is duplicate number 40

1-210(b)(10)

453

 

Exhibit is duplicate number 41

1-210(b)(10)

454

 

Exhibit is duplicate number 42

1-210(b)(10)

455

 

Exhibit is duplicate number 197

1-210(b)(10)

456

 

Exhibit is duplicate number 198

1-210(b)(10)

457

 

Previously disclosed

(Remove)

458

New

Attorney/Client typed and handwritten notes of S. Frechette based on legal directors interviews with staff (some bearing dates 3/16/09 & 3/17/09)

1-210(b)(10)

459

New

Email pertaining to Pending law enforcement investigation

1-210(b)(3)(C)

460, 461

New

Legal Director communication with staff re: interviews (#461 partial redacted)

1-210(b)(10)

462,463, 464

New

Internal draft Re: Animal possession website (#462 partial redaction)

1-210(b)(1)


Text Box: INDEX TO RECORDS SUBMITTED
FOR IN CAMERA INSPECTION
FIC-1 New 3/08

STATE OF CONNECTICUT
FREEDOM OF INFORMATION COMMISSION
***ADDENDUM TO OCTOBER 15, 2009***

 

IMPORTANT: Read instructions on reverse side carefully before completing.

(A)

RECORD

REF#

(B)
LINE REF.

(C)
DESCRIPTION OF INFORMATION BELIEVED TO BE EXEMPT

(D)
EXEMPTION
STATUTE

 

465 - 475

NEW

Email exchanges between Office of Legal Counsel and Assistant Attorneys General

1-210(b)(10)

 

476

NEW

Internal Discussion re: FOIA inquiries (partial redaction)

1-210(b)(10)

 

477 - 481

NEW

Email exchanges between Office of Legal Counsel, staff and Assistant Attorneys General re: proposed legislation

1-210(b)(10)

 

482 - 486

NEW

Email exchanges between Office of Legal Counsel and DEP staff re: regulations/legislation

1-210(b)(10)

 

 

 

 



[1] The respondents grouped the records and identified each group by number and by name.  For instance, IC-2009-231-244 through IC-2009-231-249, -251, and -253-260 are grouped together and identified in the respondents’ Index as “Various iterations of draft legislation in which author sought internal feedback.”  IC-2009-231-244 consists of three pages and is labeled “241” by the respondents. In this matter, therefore, an in camera identification number refers not necessarily to a single page but to the set of pages assigned the number by the respondents in their Index and penciled onto the grouped records.

[2] It is found, however, that IC-2009-231-27 is exempt from disclosure pursuant to 1-210(b)(10), G.S.  See paragraph 29 below.