Opinion
Opinion By: Chris Gorman, Attorney General; Amye B. Majors, Assistant Attorney General
IN RE: Earl McFall/Eastern Kentucky Correctional Complex
OPEN RECORDS DECISION
This matter comes to the Attorney General on appeal from the actions of Eastern Kentucky Correctional Complex (EKCC) relative to Mr. Earl McFall's request to inspect his most recent transfer authorization form. Mr. McFall is an inmate at EKCC, and his request was made under the Kentucky Open Records Act.
In his letter of appeal to this Office, Mr. McFall stated that "[a]round or about January 1, 1993," he requested a copy of the document, but his request was denied "pursuant [to] chapter 81 [sic]." He did not attach a copy of his request or EKCC's response.
This Office has been advised by Ms. Amanda Korphage, Offender Records Specialist at EKCC, that Mr. McFall's request was submitted on January 11, 1993, and that his transfer authorization form was released to him on the same date. Ms. Korphage has reviewed Mr. McFall's files, and is unable to locate any other request for the form dated January 1, 1993, or otherwise. In addition, she has provided this Office with a copy of Mr. McFall's January 11 request and EKCC's response, a copy of which is attached. This document confirms Ms. Korphage's statements.
Absent any documentation to support Mr. McFall's allegation that EKCC violated the Open Records Act by denying his request, we must conclude that no violation has occurred. As we noted in 92-ORD-1449, "to perfect an appeal under the Open Records Act, a complaining party must provide the Attorney General with a copy of the written request and the written denial, if available," citing KRS 61.880(2). This Office recognized that the rules of procedure governing an open records appeal should be relaxed to permit the greatest possible access to this forum and that a rule of substantial compliance should generally be applied. Nevertheless, our review is based on the written record with which we are provided. Mr. McFall's allegations are directly contradicted by the document which was provided by Ms. Korphage, and which indicates that his request was honored. We therefore find that EKCC's actions were entirely consistent with the Open Records Act.
Mr. McFall may challenge this decision by initiating action in the appropriate circuit court pursuant to KRS 61.880(5) and KRS 61.882.