NOTE:  As provided in LFC policy, this report is intended only for use by the standing finance committees of the legislature.  The Legislative Finance Committee does not assume responsibility for the accuracy of the information in this report when used for other purposes.

 

The most recent FIR version (in HTML & Adobe PDF formats) is available on the Legislative Website.  The Adobe PDF version includes all attachments, whereas the HTML version does not.  Previously issued FIRs and attachments may be obtained from the LFC in Suite 101 of the State Capitol Building North.

 

F I S C A L   I M P A C T   R E P O R T

 

 

SPONSOR:

Snyder

 

DATE TYPED:

2/20/03

 

HB

 

 

SHORT TITLE:

Inspection of Public Water & Wastewater Info.

 

SB

382/aSRC

 

 

ANALYST:

Maloy

 

APPROPRIATION

 

Appropriation Contained

Estimated Additional Impact

Recurring

or Non-Rec

Fund

Affected

FY03

FY04

FY03

FY04

 

 

 

 

 

Minimal

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Relates House Bill 254, exempting from public disclosure risk assessments and tactical response plans prepared by or for the state which may be used to facilitate a terrorist attack.

 

SOURCES OF INFORMATION

 

Responses Received From

Environment Department

Public Regulatory Commission

Department of Public Safety

New Mexico Finance Authority

 

SUMMARY

 

            Synopsis of SRC Amendment

 

The Senate Rules Committee has amended SB 382 to clarify the language to relate directly to security vulnerabilities and not environmental assessments.  This was an amendment recommended by the agencies that reviewed the original bill.

 

Synopsis of Original Bill

 

Senate Bill 382 amends the Inspection of Public Records Act to provide an exemption for “security and risk assessment information concerning drinking water and wastewater facilities”.  The effect of this exemption is that such assessment records would not be open for public, or even inter-agency, review and copying. 

 

 

Significant Issues

 

1.                  As a matter of public policy, both federal and state, the objective should always be making government records readily available for review and copying by any member of the public. The belief is that the citizenry had a right to know its government’s business.

 

The question raised is whether the right of the citizenry to know its government’s business is outweighed by government’s interest in keeping “security and public” risks assessments relating to drinking and wastewater records from the public’s view.

 

In today’s political environment, the government interest in seeking exemptions such as this is largely protecting its citizenry from terrorist attack.

 

2.                  Existing exemptions in the law include such circumstances as: 

 

                                                               i.      records pertaining to physical or mental examinations and medical treatment of persons confined to an institution;

 

                                                             ii.      letters of reference concerning employment licensing or permits’;

 

                                                            iii.      letters or memorandums that are matters of opinion in personnel files or students’ cumulative files;

 

                                                           iv.      law enforcement records revealing confidential sources, methods, investigations, possible evidence, and the like;

 

                                                             v.      trade secrets, attorney-client privileged information; and

 

                                                           vi.      public records containing the identity of, or identifying information relating to an applicant or nominee for the position of president of a public  institution of higher education.

 

3.                  Does keeping water and wastewater facility security and risk assessment information from the public share an underlying purpose similar to those exemptions currently in the law?  What if having this information readily available means that it may be used by those who seek to achieve extensive harm on a wide-scale basis?

 

4.                  SM 382 contains the term “risk assessment”.  This is a term of art for an environmental evaluation.   Use of this term could be problematic as used in this public records exemption.  For example, a public water system could decide that risks posed by contaminants found in the water supply fall under the exemption in order to keep

chemical data from the public. 

 

Presumably this is an unintended consequence of SB 382 that can be addressed through a minor amendment.  (See Amendment section below.)

 

FISCAL IMPLICATIONS

 

The fiscal and/or administrative impact of this exemption is minimal.

 

AMENDMENTS

 

In order to keep a clear distinction between information that may be used by a terrorist to determine weaknesses in the water system that may be used to inflict maximum harm (vs.) environmental information (or other such information) relating to the cleanliness / purity / availability / etc. of water, the following amendment(s) are proposed:

 

·        Page 2, Line 21, strike “risk” and insert “security vulnerability assessments”.  Or,

 

·        Alternatively, Page 2, Line 21, strike “risk assessment information concerning” and insert “ information regarding risks posed to system security at”.  Or,

 

·        Alternatively, Page 2, Line 21, strike “and risk assessment information”.

 

SJM/yr/njw