00-037
Whether applications for teaching and administrative certificates and other records received by the Department of Education as part of the certification process are public records which may be withheld from the public under Neb. Rev. Stat. § 84-712.05(5) as records which constitute a part of an examination or investigation or under any other exception
Cite as Neb. Op. Att'y Gen. No. 00-037
DON STENBERG
A HORNEY GENERAL
DATE:
SUBJECT:
STATE OF NEBRASKA
®ffi:c~ nf ±4.~ ~fnrn~u ®~n~ral
211 5 STATE CAPITOL BUILDING
LINCOLN, NE 68509-8920
(402) 471-2682
TOO (402) 471-2682
CAPITOL FAX (402) 471-3297
1235 K ST. FAX (402) 471-4725
STATE OF NEBRASKA
OFFICIAL
OCJ
~:~0 2000
DEPT. OF JUSTICE
October 18, 2000
STEVE GRASZ
LAURIE SMITH CAMP
DEPUTY ATTORNEYS GENERAL
Whether applications for teaching and administrative certificates and
other records received by the Department of Education as part of the
certification process are public records which may be withheld from
the public under Neb. Rev. Stat. § 84-712.05(5) as records which
constitute a part of an examination or investigation or under any other
exception.
REQUESTED BY: · Douglas D. Christensen
Commissioner of Education
WRITTEN BY:.
Don Stenberg, Attorney General
Charlotte R. Koranda, Assistant Attorney General
This opinion is written in response to your request for an opinion to clarify a public
records issue. In your letter you state that, pursuant to state statute, the Commissioner of
Education is responsible for issuing teaching and administrative certificates to qualified
individual applicants. Specifically, you cite Neb. Rev. Stat. § 79-305 and Neb. Rev. Stat.
§§ 79-801 through 79-816 and regulations promulgated thereunder, 92 NAC 21 and 92
NAC 23. Individuals seeking certification fill out and submit applications to the Department
of Education ("Department"). The certificate application states that materials furnished to
th ~ Department by an applicant become the property ofthe Department. Other information
gathered as part of the certification process include criminal conviction records, college
academic transcripts, scores on basic skills competency examinations, college
recommendations, verification of teaching experience, request for issuance of a certificate
Jenn1fer M. Amen
DaVJd K. Arterbum
W•lliam R. Barger
L. Jay Bartel
J. Kirk Brown
Marte C. Clarke
Dale A. Comer
DaVJd D. Cookson
Kyle C Dahl
Suzanne Glover-Ettrich
Scott G. Gunem
Susan J. Gustafson
Robert E. Harkins
Royce N. Harper
Jason W . Hayes
Amber F. Herrick
William L. HOYAand
Marilyn B. Hutchinson
Therese N James
Kimbe~y A. Klein
Cha~otte R. Koranda
Cha~e s E. Lowe
Lisa D. Martin-Price
Lynn A. Melson
Donald J B Miller
Ptinted with soy 1nk on recycled paper
Ronald D. Moravec
Frednck F. Neid
Thomas J. Olsen
Peny A. Pirseh
Mark D. Raffety
Hobert B. Rupe
James D. Smith
James H. Spears
Mark D. Starr
Martin Swanson
John R. Thompson
Bany Waid
Terti M. Weeks
Melanie J. Whitt.amore·Mantz•os
Linda L. Willard
Douglas D. Christensen
October 18, 2000
Page -2-
from a school, copies of other states' certificates, employment records, and mental health
records or statements.
Public records are defined at Neb. Rev. Stat.§ 84-7121.01:
(P]ublic records shall include all records and documents, regardless of
physical form, of or belonging to this state, any county, city, village, political
subdivision, or tax-supported district in this state, or any agency, branch,
department, board, bureau, commission, council, subunit, or committee of
any of the foregoing ....
These records are generally open to public inspection.
Except as otherwise expressly provided by statute, all citizens of this state,
and all other persons interested in the examination of the public records, as
defined in section 84-712.01, are hereby fully empowered and authorized to
examine the same, and to make memoranda and abstracts therefrom ....
Neb. Rev. Stat.§ 84-712.
Records falling under the purview of Neb. Rev. Stat.§ 84-712.05 may be withheld
from public disclosure at the discretion of the agency charged with custody of the records.
Subsection (5) of§ 84-712.05 authorizes public bodies to withhold records which are part
of an investigation or examination.
The following records ... may be withheld from the public by the lawful
custodian of the records: (5) Records developed or received by law
enforcement agencies and other public bodies charged with duties of
investigation or examination of persons, institutions, or businesses, when the
records constitute a part of the examination, investigation, intelligence
information, citizen complaints or inquiries, informant identification, or
strategic or tactical information used in law enforcement training, except that
this subdivision shall not apply to records so developed or received relating
to the presence of and amount or concentration of alcohol or drugs in any
body fluid of any person;
Neb. Rev. Stat.§ 84-712.05(5) (Supp. 1999) ("investigation or examination exception").
The Attorney General's office has issued two previous opinions discussing public
records which are part of an examination. In Op. Att'y Gen. No. 123 (June 7, 1983), this
office concluded that the results of written examinations conducted by the State Board of
Douglas D. Christensen
October 18, 2000
Page -3-
Examiners for Professional Engineers and Architects ("State Board") could properly be
withheld from public disclosure under this exception where the State Board administers the
examination as part of its duty to determine an applicant's qualifications to practice as a
professional engineer or architect. Shortly thereafter this office issued Op. Att'y Gen. No.
128 (June 27, 1983) reaching a similar conclusion that certain agency records could be
withheld under this same exception.
The records at issue were received by the
Department of Roads where the Department of Roads was required by federal regulation
to examine records of ownership, personnel qualifications, and financial strength of
companies seeking qualification as Minority Business Enterprises.
More recently, the Nebraska Supreme Court rendered a decision discussing public
records which are part of an investigation. In Nebraska Health Care Association v.
Department of Health and Human Services Finance and Support, 255 Neb. 784, 587
N.W.2d 100 (1998), the Nebraska Health Care Association ("NHCA") sought to obtain
documents created by the Department of Health and Human Services ("HHS") as part of
its supervision of medicaid payments to Nebraska nursing homes where it audits claims
for reimbursements submitted annually by the nursing homes.
Nursing homes in Nebraska annually submit detailed cost reports that are used by
HHS . to calculate the rates at which each nursing home will receive medicaid
reimbursement payments. HHS conducts desk and field audits to verify that the costs
reported are accurate and to distinguish compensable from non-compensable expenses.
NHCA sought to review written communications from HHS to the nursing homes where
HHS needed additional information from the nursing homes in order to complete its desk
or field audits.
To determine whether records are part of an investigation for purposes of§ 84-
712.05(5), the supreme court in Nebraska Health Care Association adopted a two part
standard based on the federal Freedom of Information Act ("FOIA"). "[A] public record is
an investigatory record where (1) the activity giving rise to the document sought is related
to the duty of investigation or examination with which the public body is charged and (2)
the relationship between the investigation or examination and that public body's duty to
investigate or examine supports a colorable claim of rationality." Nebraska Health Care
Association, 255 Neb. At 792, 587 N.W.2d at 106.
The court further noted that a distinction should be drawn between routine oversight
activities and a more focused inquiry. "It has generally been held that a distinction must
be drawn between (1) routine administration or oversight activities and (2) focused inquiries
into specific violations of law." ld. "If a document is compiled ancillary to an agency's
administrative function, then it is not protected from disclosure; when, however, an inquiry
by an administrative agency departs from the routine and focuses with special intensity on
Douglas D. Christensen
October 18, 2000
Page -4-
a particular party, an investigation is underway for purposes of the investigatory records
exception." I d. at 792, 587 N.W.2d at 106-107.
The supreme court concluded in Nebraska Health Care Association that HHS
could properly withhold the documents from public disclosure under the investigation
exception of § 84-712.05. "[l]n the instant case, the activities of the Department had
departed from the routine when the auditors began to make specific requests for the
production of specific documents. The Department is charged with the administrative
function of reviewing the cost reports submitted by nursing homes. When certain aspects
of those reports draw special attention, be they the entire report or simply particular items
within the report, then the investigatory duties of the Department have supplanted the
Department's routine administration of the medicaid program." ld. at 793, 587 N.W.2d at
107.
The federal FOIA was enacted in 1966 to provide public access to records held by
the federal government.
It was substantively amended in 197 4 and 1986. Certain
information was exempt from public disclosure since its enactment in 1966. One of those
exemptions was "investigatory files compiled for law enforcement purposes except to the
extent available by law to a party other than an agency." 5 U.S.C. § 552(b)(7) (1966)
("investigatory exemption"). The investigatory exemption was narrowed in 197 4 when
"files" was changed to "records" and six specific harms were added, stating that
investigatory records could be withheld from disclosure if their release would cause one
of the six specific harms. The requirement of proving actual harm was removed in 1986
when "would" was substituted with "could reasonably be expected to;" in addition,
"investigatory records" was replaced with "records or information." The investigatory
exemption, as currently contained within the FOIA, states that the disclosure requirements
do not apply to "records or information complied for law enforcement purposes, but only
to the extent that the production of such law enforcement records or information" could
reasonably be expected to interfere with enforcement proceedings, deprive someone of
a fair trial, be an unwarranted invasion of privacy, disclose the identity of a confidential
source, disclose certain law enforcement techniques, procedures or guidelines, or
endanger the life or physical safety of an individual.
Nebraska's public records statute, on the other hand, was enacted in 1866 by its
territorial legislature. Section 84-712.05, authorizing state agencies to withhold certain
records from public disclosure, was implemented in 1979 with the passage of LB 86.
Subsection (5) of§ 84-712.05 states that records may be withheld from public disclosure
if they were "developed or received by law enforcement agencies and other public bodies
charged with duties of investigation or examination of persons, institutions, or businesses,
when the records constitute a part of the examination, investigation, intelligence
information, citizen complaints or inquiries, informant identification, or strategic or tactical
information used in law enforcement training, except that this subdivision shall not apply
Douglas D. Christensen
October 18, 2000
Page -5-
to records so developed or received relating to the presence of and amount or
concentration of alcohol or drugs in any body fluid of any person."
Although the investigation or examination exception was not discussed on the floor
of the legislature during the enactment of LB 86, it was discussed at the committee
hearing. Discussion was held on four areas of records held by the Nebraska Department
of Banking which it proposed be kept confidential.
These records are reports of
examination prepared at least once each year on all financial institutions subject to
examination by the Department of Banking, computer records generated during the bank
examinations, investigations of security fraud and "confidential correspondence," which
includes applications for licensing of executive officers or security officers and
communication relating to the financial statements or financial condition of certain persons.
Senator Murphy, the introducer of LB 86, and Alan Peterson representing Media of
Nebraska, a major proponent of the bill, both stated that LB 86 exempted from public
disclosure all of the records of concern to the Department of Banking. "So if you refer to
your white copy, I think it brings into completeness all of the objections that have been
raised by industry, by the University, by the Department of Banking, and I think is as
explicit as we can get." Hearing on LB 86 Before the Gov't, Military & Veterans Affairs
Comm., 86'h Leg., 151 Sess. 2 (Feb. 9, 1979) (statement of Senator Murphy). "Department
of Banking, they made up their list of proposed exceptions, of which there were four, and
they distributed them and they gave them to me in advance. I believe that they are all
covered by the provision that we have in the exceptions now." ld. at 28 (closing comment
by Alan Peterson).
We believe a fair comparison of the Nebraska exception to the federal one reaches
the conclusion that Nebraska's exception is broader than that found in the FOIA. Under
the FOIA, records must be compiled for law enforcement purposes and be reasonably
expected to interfere with one of the six "harms" to be lawfully withheld from public
disclosure. Under the Nebraska public records statute, the records must be part of a state
entity's duty of investigation or examination of persons, institutions or businesses to be
lawfully withheld from public disclosure. Those involved in drafting LB 86 testified before
the Government, Military and Veterans Affairs Committee that annual bank examinations
conducted by the Department of Banking and computer records generated thereunder, as
well as information compiled as part of the Department of Banking's application process
for licensing of executive officers and security officers, fit within the investigation or
examination exception of§ 84-712.05.
We also believe this position is not inconsistent with the court's decision in
Nebraska Health Care Association. The records sought and ruled upon by the supreme
court were records of investigations conducted by HHS to verify that costs reported were
accurate and to distinguish compensable from non-compensable expenses. Specifically,
they were written communication from HHS to nursing homes requesting additional
Douglas D. Christensen
October 18, 2000
Page -6-
information as part of a desk or field audit. Desk audits are generally conducted annually
for each of Nebraska's 230 nursing homes. Field audits, which are more extensive on-site
investigations, occurred less frequently with HHS conducting 20 to 30 per year.
Section 84-712.05(5) allows public agencies in Nebraska to keep certain records
confidential when they involve an "investigation or examination." "The word 'or,' when used
properly, is disjunctive." Pfizer v. Lancaster County Bd. of Equalization, 260 Neb. 265,
281,616 N.W.2d 326 (2000). "We have said that 'or,' when used properly, is disjunctive,
and 'and' is conjunctive." Baker's Supermarkets v. State, 248 Neb. 984, 993, 540
N.W.2d 574, 581 (1995). "The words are so frequently interchanged that in construing a
civil statute, 'or' may be read as 'and' where a strict reading would lead to an absurd or
unreasonable result and defeat the intent of the statute." ld. We don't find that a strict
reading of "or" in the investigation or examination exception of§ 84-712.05(5) would lead
to an absurd or unreasonable result and defeat the intent of the statute. "By the use of
different words, Nebraska statutes distinguish between [those words]." M & D Masonry,
Inc. v. Universal Surety Co., 6 Neb. App. 215, 222, 572 N.W.2d 408, 413 (1997). The
Department of Education, similar to the Department of Banking, is charged with duties of
examination of persons in order to determine whether to issue a license to those
individuals. The Department of Education compiles its records for the purpose of issuing
teaching and administrative certificates to qualified applicants.
If the Department
concludes that an individual is a qualified applicant, then it issues the appropriate
certificate. This scenario, while outside of the scope of the investigations discussed in
Nebraska Health Care Association , also falls within the purview of subsection (5) of§ 84-
712.05.
Based on the above analysis, we conclude that the records developed or received
by the Department of Education pursuant to its duties of examining persons for the
purpose of issuing teaching and administrative certificates to qualified applicants fit within
the investigatory or examination exception set forth in§ 84-712.05(5). You state in your
letter that the Department has operated under a policy allowing public disclosure of the
certification records. The public records statutes allow the Department to continue this
practice. Section 84-712.05 does not require state entities to withhold records which fall
within any of the exceptions enumerated therein, but gives them the option to withhold
such records from public disclosure. "The following records ... may be withheld from the
public by the lawful custodian .... " Neb. Rev. Stat.§ 84-712.05 (Supp. 1999). See also
Douglas D. Christensen
October 18, 2000
Page-?-
Burlington Northern R.R. v. O.P.P.D., 703 F. Supp. 826 (D. Neb. 1988), aff'd, 888 F.2d
1228 (81h Cir. 1989). Therefore, the Department's current policy is in compliance with
Nebraska's public records statutes. Based upon the facts presented in your letter, it
appears that the certification records do not qualify for any of the other exceptions
enumerated in§ 84-712.05.
Sincerely,
DON STENBERG
CJ:~~fuj2. kat~
Charlotte R. Koranda
Assistant Attorney General
42-242-10.4