Opinion No.
Background
- FOIA requests seek employee data (names, titles, department, agency, salary, gender, hire date, employment status, pay basis) for Little Rock National Airport employees.
- Records custodian intends to release the requested information, arguing it is responsive to FOIA and constitutes public records.
- The requester argues disclosure would invade privacy and implicate security concerns under SSI (Sensitive Security Information).
- Attorney General’s opinion applies a balancing test to determine whether disclosure of personnel records constitutes a clearly unwarranted invasion of privacy.
- The opinion acknowledges federal airport-security regulations (SSI) may supersede FOIA to the extent conflicts arise, requiring custodian review with counsel.
- Conclusion: disclosure of basic employment information is generally consistent with FOIA, subject to SSI and other federal security considerations being addressed by the custodian.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the records are public records under FOIA. | Times argues records should be public; privacy concerns are asserted but not controlling. | Custodian appropriately classified as public records; FOIA presumes openness. | Yes; records qualify as public records. |
| Whether disclosure of personnel data is allowed under the privacy exemption. | Disclosure would invade privacy for individuals. | Public interest in basic employment info outweighs privacy interests. | Generally, disclose; public interest usually outweighs privacy. |
| Whether listing salary, hire date, and related data constitutes a clearly unwarranted privacy invasion. | Potential privacy concerns warrant withholding. | Public employment data typically disclosable; privacy invasion not clearly unwarranted. | Disclosures ordinarily permissible. |
| Whether SSI regulations may supersede FOIA and restrict disclosure of identifying information. | SSI may require withholding identified personnel data. | SSI considerations may apply; must be addressed by custodian with counsel. | SSI may restrict disclosure where applicable; custodian must determine. |
| What is the proper process for applying federal security requirements to the FOIA request? | Not deeply argued; focus on privacy. | Custodian should review for SSI and other federal requirements; may consult counsel. | Custodian must undertake SSI review and possible other federal requirements. |
Key Cases Cited
- Young v. Rice, 308 Ark. 593 (1992) (balancing privacy vs. public interest in disclosure of personnel records)
- Stilley v. McBride, 332 Ark. 306 (1998) (narrow construction of exemptions; privacy interests weighed against public interest)
- In re September 11 Litigation, 431 F. Supp. 2d 405 (S.D.N.Y. 2006) (SSI regulatory framework; TSA/SSI guidance guiding compelled disclosure)
- County of Santa Clara v. Superior Court, 170 Cal. App. 4th 1301 (2009) (federal protection for critical infrastructure information; SSI considerations)