U Memo 20-13Posted on Jun 30, 2020 in Informal Opinions - UIPA Opinions
U Memo 20-13
June 30, 2020
Requester appealed the Department of Transportation’s (DOT) denial of access to his “complete complaint and investigative file” (Investigative File). OIP found that a majority of the Investigative File was Requester’s personal record, because the subject matter was the investigation of Requester’s complaint and Requester was identified throughout. OIP concluded that Part III of the UIPA, which governs access by individuals to their personal records, allowed DOT to withhold only those portions of the Investigative File that identified or could allow actual identification of interviewees who were promised confidentiality, under section 92F-22, HRS.
OIP further found that limited portions of the Investigative File were not Requester’s personal records as they were not “about” Requester, and, therefore, were subject to the public disclosure requirements and exceptions to disclosure set forth in Part II of the UIPA. OIP determined that DOT improperly denied access to those government records, as none of the exceptions to disclosure under Part II apply. See HRS § 92F-13 (2012).