Skip to main content

Request By:
[NO REQUESTBY IN ORIGINAL]

Opinion

Opinion By: Albert B. Chandler III, Attorney General; James M. Ringo, Assistant Attorney General

Open Records Decision

This matter comes to the Attorney General on appeal from the Cabinet for Public Protection and Regulation, Office of Petroleum Storage Tank Environmental Assurance Fund's (PSTEAF) response to Dennis Conniff's open records request to have made available for his inspection all claim forms submitted to the PSTEAF (except for those submitted by Advanced Technologies International, Inc. (ATI), between January 1, 1997 and September 30, 1998, containing a request for reimbursement of costs associated with four types of work done and related documentation.

Responding on behalf of PSTEAF, Joseph W. O'Reilly, General Counsel, Cabinet for Public Protection and Regulation, stated:

PSTEAF does not keep records based on the type of work done. To go into all its records to so segregate and produce the records requested would constitute an unreasonable burden. Your request is denied per KRS 61.872(6).

As an alternative you may want to arrange to have someone inspect each of the files at PSTEAF.


After receipt of Mr. Conniff's letter of appeal, we sent a "Notification to Agency of Receipt of Open Records Appeal" to the Cabinet. As authorized by KRS 61.880(2) and 40 KAR 1:030. Section 2, Mr. O'Reilly provided this office with a response to the issues raised in the appeal. Elaborating on the PSTEAF's original response, Mr. O'Reilly explained that its original response did not deny Mr. Conniff access to the requested claim forms. Instead, the Cabinet advised that the agency did not retain its records by category of type of work done and that to require the agency to inspect each file for the 7,724 claims submitted during the time period in question for the purpose of segregating them for his inspection would constitute an unreasonable burden within the meaning of KRS 61.872(6). Mr. O'Reilly further explained:

ATI has requested voluminous information in the past and received a great deal of information and cooperation from Appellant. The Appellant did not refuse ATI access to this information. The response indicated ATI could come over to review these files itself. This can be done in an orderly way. Appellant will need to have a representative present and the files will have to be provided over a reasonable period of time in view of the number of files involved.

We are asked to determine whether the Cabinet violated the Open Records Act by denying the request for inspection of public records. For the reasons that follow, we conclude that the response of the Cabinet was consistent with the requirements of the Open Records Act and did not constitute a violation.

In the instant case, the Cabinet maintains that it did not deny or refuse to permit inspection of its public records. It states it denied, instead, Mr. Conniff's request to segregate the records into categories of information in a format in which the agency did not maintain its records because it would be unduly burdensome to search through 7,724 claim form files to find and separate such information.

KRS 61.872(6) provides:

If the application places an unreasonable burden in producing public records or if the custodian has reason to believe that repeated requests are intended to disrupt other essential functions of the public agency, the official custodian may refuse to permit inspection of the public records or mail copies thereof. However, refusal under this section shall be sustained by clear and convincing evidence.

In our view, the Cabinet has met its burden of establishing that compliance with this request would place an undue burden on it. Requiring an agency to search through 7,724 claim form files, in order to segregate them by categories of type of work, a format by which the agency does not retain its records, would constitute such a burden.

The Cabinet should not be required to search through 7,724 claim form files to retrieve the information Mr. Conniff seeks and segregate them for his inspection. Nevertheless, although a public agency is not required to research public records to provide information to meet the parameters of an open records request, it is required to make available for inspection, during regular business hours, records which might yield the information sought. OAG 90-19.

In OAG 76-375, we recognized that if a requester cannot identify the records he desires with sufficient specificity, or wishes to extract information which has not already been compiled, he "may make a fishing expedition through public records on his own time and under the restrictions and safeguards of the public agency. "

In this context, the Cabinet has agreed to make the relevant claim form files available for Mr. Conniff's inspection. In his response, Mr. O'Reilly advised Mr. Conniff that he was welcome to come over and inspect each of the PSTEAF files during regular office hours. Thus, we conclude this response was consistent with the requirements of the Open Records Act. Accordingly, Mr. Conniff should contact the Cabinet and make the necessary arrangements to inspect the records.

A party aggrieved by this decision may appeal it by initiating action in the appropriate circuit court pursuant to KRS 61.880(5) and KRS 61.882. Pursuant to KRS 61.880(3), the Attorney General should be notified of any action in circuit court, but should not be named as a party in that action or in any subsequent proceeding.

1998

1998 Ky. AG LEXIS 187

1998 Ky. AG LEXIS 186

1998 Ky. AG LEXIS 188

1998 Ky. AG LEXIS 206

1998 Ky. AG LEXIS 202

1998 Ky. AG LEXIS 201

1998 Ky. AG LEXIS 200

1998 Ky. AG LEXIS 203

1998 Ky. AG LEXIS 204

1998 Ky. AG LEXIS 205

1998 Ky. AG LEXIS 189

1998 Ky. AG LEXIS 190

1998 Ky. AG LEXIS 191

1998 Ky. AG LEXIS 192

1998 Ky. AG LEXIS 193

1998 Ky. AG LEXIS 194

1998 Ky. AG LEXIS 197

1998 Ky. AG LEXIS 195

1998 Ky. AG LEXIS 196

1998 Ky. AG LEXIS 199

1998 Ky. AG LEXIS 198

1998 Ky. AG LEXIS 162

1998 Ky. AG LEXIS 163

1998 Ky. AG LEXIS 164

1998 Ky. AG LEXIS 165

1998 Ky. AG LEXIS 168

1998 Ky. AG LEXIS 182

1998 Ky. AG LEXIS 167

1998 Ky. AG LEXIS 166

1998 Ky. AG LEXIS 169

1998 Ky. AG LEXIS 170

1998 Ky. AG LEXIS 183

1998 Ky. AG LEXIS 172

1998 Ky. AG LEXIS 216

1998 Ky. AG LEXIS 171

1998 Ky. AG LEXIS 173

1998 Ky. AG LEXIS 175

1998 Ky. AG LEXIS 215

1998 Ky. AG LEXIS 174

1998 Ky. AG LEXIS 176

1998 Ky. AG LEXIS 184

1998 Ky. AG LEXIS 177

1998 Ky. AG LEXIS 223

1998 Ky. AG LEXIS 214

1998 Ky. AG LEXIS 213

1998 Ky. AG LEXIS 212

1998 Ky. AG LEXIS 178

1998 Ky. AG LEXIS 179

1998 Ky. AG LEXIS 181

1998 Ky. AG LEXIS 180

1998 Ky. AG LEXIS 87

1998 Ky. AG LEXIS 88

1998 Ky. AG LEXIS 91

1998 Ky. AG LEXIS 222

1998 Ky. AG LEXIS 90

1998 Ky. AG LEXIS 89

1998 Ky. AG LEXIS 95

1998 Ky. AG LEXIS 92

1998 Ky. AG LEXIS 94

1998 Ky. AG LEXIS 93

1998 Ky. AG LEXIS 125

1998 Ky. AG LEXIS 120

1998 Ky. AG LEXIS 17

1998 Ky. AG LEXIS 96

1998 Ky. AG LEXIS 97

1998 Ky. AG LEXIS 98

1998 Ky. AG LEXIS 99

1998 Ky. AG LEXIS 101

1998 Ky. AG LEXIS 102

1998 Ky. AG LEXIS 100

1998 Ky. AG LEXIS 103

1998 Ky. AG LEXIS 105

1998 Ky. AG LEXIS 104

1998 Ky. AG LEXIS 107

1998 Ky. AG LEXIS 106

1998 Ky. AG LEXIS 108

1998 Ky. AG LEXIS 109

1998 Ky. AG LEXIS 110

1998 Ky. AG LEXIS 121

1998 Ky. AG LEXIS 111

1998 Ky. AG LEXIS 113

1998 Ky. AG LEXIS 112

1998 Ky. AG LEXIS 114

1998 Ky. AG LEXIS 115

1998 Ky. AG LEXIS 116

1998 Ky. AG LEXIS 220

1998 Ky. AG LEXIS 221

1998 Ky. AG LEXIS 122

1998 Ky. AG LEXIS 210

1998 Ky. AG LEXIS 117

1998 Ky. AG LEXIS 118

1998 Ky. AG LEXIS 119

1998 Ky. AG LEXIS 21

1998 Ky. AG LEXIS 20

1998 Ky. AG LEXIS 25

1998 Ky. AG LEXIS 24

1998 Ky. AG LEXIS 22

1998 Ky. AG LEXIS 23

1998 Ky. AG LEXIS 35

1998 Ky. AG LEXIS 34

1998 Ky. AG LEXIS 32

1998 Ky. AG LEXIS 209

1998 Ky. AG LEXIS 33

1998 Ky. AG LEXIS 31

1998 Ky. AG LEXIS 30

1998 Ky. AG LEXIS 29

1998 Ky. AG LEXIS 28

1998 Ky. AG LEXIS 27

1998 Ky. AG LEXIS 131

1998 Ky. AG LEXIS 132

1998 Ky. AG LEXIS 133

1998 Ky. AG LEXIS 129

1998 Ky. AG LEXIS 134

1998 Ky. AG LEXIS 128

1998 Ky. AG LEXIS 135

1998 Ky. AG LEXIS 14

1998 Ky. AG LEXIS 207

1998 Ky. AG LEXIS 208

1998 Ky. AG LEXIS 136

1998 Ky. AG LEXIS 230

1998 Ky. AG LEXIS 137

1998 Ky. AG LEXIS 139

1998 Ky. AG LEXIS 12

1998 Ky. AG LEXIS 140

1998 Ky. AG LEXIS 141

1998 Ky. AG LEXIS 142

1998 Ky. AG LEXIS 229

1998 Ky. AG LEXIS 143

1998 Ky. AG LEXIS 228

1998 Ky. AG LEXIS 144

1998 Ky. AG LEXIS 145

1998 Ky. AG LEXIS 185

1998 Ky. AG LEXIS 149

1998 Ky. AG LEXIS 150

1998 Ky. AG LEXIS 148

1998 Ky. AG LEXIS 146

1998 Ky. AG LEXIS 151

1998 Ky. AG LEXIS 86

1998 Ky. AG LEXIS 126

1998 Ky. AG LEXIS 85

1998 Ky. AG LEXIS 127

1998 Ky. AG LEXIS 152

1998 Ky. AG LEXIS 218

1998 Ky. AG LEXIS 158

1998 Ky. AG LEXIS 156

1998 Ky. AG LEXIS 155

1998 Ky. AG LEXIS 157

1998 Ky. AG LEXIS 154

1998 Ky. AG LEXIS 160

1998 Ky. AG LEXIS 124

1998 Ky. AG LEXIS 227

1998 Ky. AG LEXIS 159

1998 Ky. AG LEXIS 56

1998 Ky. AG LEXIS 54

1998 Ky. AG LEXIS 57

1998 Ky. AG LEXIS 60

1998 Ky. AG LEXIS 66

1998 Ky. AG LEXIS 61

1998 Ky. AG LEXIS 161

1998 Ky. AG LEXIS 63

1998 Ky. AG LEXIS 64

1998 Ky. AG LEXIS 59

1998 Ky. AG LEXIS 62

1998 Ky. AG LEXIS 58

1998 Ky. AG LEXIS 217

1998 Ky. AG LEXIS 53

1998 Ky. AG LEXIS 52

1998 Ky. AG LEXIS 51

1998 Ky. AG LEXIS 7

1998 Ky. AG LEXIS 50

1998 Ky. AG LEXIS 9

1998 Ky. AG LEXIS 49

1998 Ky. AG LEXIS 48

1998 Ky. AG LEXIS 43

1998 Ky. AG LEXIS 44

1998 Ky. AG LEXIS 45

1998 Ky. AG LEXIS 47

1998 Ky. AG LEXIS 42

1998 Ky. AG LEXIS 41

1998 Ky. AG LEXIS 40

1998 Ky. AG LEXIS 39

1998 Ky. AG LEXIS 123

1998 Ky. AG LEXIS 38

1998 Ky. AG LEXIS 226

1998 Ky. AG LEXIS 37

1998 Ky. AG LEXIS 70

1998 Ky. AG LEXIS 69

1998 Ky. AG LEXIS 71

1998 Ky. AG LEXIS 68

1998 Ky. AG LEXIS 75

1998 Ky. AG LEXIS 74

1998 Ky. AG LEXIS 72

1998 Ky. AG LEXIS 73

1998 Ky. AG LEXIS 5

1998 Ky. AG LEXIS 225

1998 Ky. AG LEXIS 77

1998 Ky. AG LEXIS 79

1998 Ky. AG LEXIS 76

1998 Ky. AG LEXIS 224

1998 Ky. AG LEXIS 211

1998 Ky. AG LEXIS 80

1998 Ky. AG LEXIS 81

1998 Ky. AG LEXIS 83

1998 Ky. AG LEXIS 84

1998 Ky. AG LEXIS 82

1998 Ky. AG LEXIS 19

1998 Ky. AG LEXIS 36

1998 Ky. AG LEXIS 138

1998 Ky. AG LEXIS 26

1998 Ky. AG LEXIS 153

1998 Ky. AG LEXIS 147

1998 Ky. AG LEXIS 55

1998 Ky. AG LEXIS 65

1998 Ky. AG LEXIS 67

1998 Ky. AG LEXIS 46

1998 Ky. AG LEXIS 78

1998 Ky. AG LEXIS 219

1998 Ky. AG LEXIS 2

LLM Summary
The decision concludes that the Cabinet for Public Protection and Regulation did not violate the Open Records Act by denying a request to segregate and produce records based on the type of work done, as it would constitute an unreasonable burden. The Cabinet did not refuse access to the records but advised that the records were not maintained in the requested format and that searching and segregating them would be unduly burdensome. The decision supports the Cabinet's response and advises the requester to inspect the files at the agency during regular business hours.
Disclaimer:
The Sunshine Law Library is not exhaustive and may contain errors from source documents or the import process. Nothing on this website should be taken as legal advice. It is always best to consult with primary sources and appropriate counsel before taking any action.
Requested By:
Dennis Conniff
Agency:
Cabinet for Public Protection and Regulation
Type:
Open Records Decision
Lexis Citation:
1999 Ky. AG LEXIS 9
Cites:
Cites (Untracked):
  • OAG 76-375
Forward Citations:
Neighbors

Support Our Work

The Coalition needs your help in safeguarding Kentuckian's right to know about their government.