|
VIRGINIA
FREEDOM OF INFORMATION
ADVISORY COUNCIL
COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA
|
Technology Nomenclature
Workgroup
September 7, 2004,
Richmond
The
Technology Nomenclature Workgroup, headed by FOIA Council
staff, met on September 7, 2004 to discuss whether any amendments
were needed to the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) to correct
obsolete technology terms. The workgroup meeting was attended
by representatives of the Virginia Information Technologies
Agency (VITA), the Virginia Press Association, the Virginia
Coalition for Open Government, the Fairfax County Privacy
Council, and the Virginia Association of Counties, as well
as other interested parties. The charge of the workgroup was
limited to the definition of "public records," the
provisions concerning the production of electronic records
found in § 2.2-3704, and the electronic meeting provisions
found in § 2.2-3708.
The
representative of VITA indicated that the agency had no problems
with the technology terms found in the definition of "public
records" and suggested that they should remain as is
found in current law because the technologies mentioned were
still in use.
The
workgroup briefly discussed the distinction between uses of
the terms "format" and "medium" found
in § 2.2-3704 and decided that no further clarification
was necessary.
The representative
of VITA presented a draft that would introduce the use of
the term "information systems" in various sections
of FOIA. However no definition for this term was provided
and it was the consensus of the work group that "information
systems" did not help to clarify FOIA, but instead created
ambiguity. Staff noted that the only definition in law for
"information systems" was found in § 2.2-3801
of the Government Data Collection and Dissemination Practices
Act and applied only to that act.1As a result,
this VITA recommendation was rejected by the workgroup. A
Virginia Press Association representative cautioned the workgroup
about mixing up concepts. He stated that for the purposes
of security, it did not matter whether the record was in paper
or electronic form. The workgroup agreed and stated that it
was not within their purview to make substantive changes to
FOIA exemptions related to public safety. The workgroup did
note, however, that the issue of security of information systems
was best addressed by a rewrite of the existing exemption
found in subdivision 3 of § 2.2-3705.2.2
Finally
the workgroup discussed § 2.2-3708 which requires notice
of all electronic meetings be sent to VITA. Staff indicated
that from a practical perspective, it was unclear to whom
in VITA such notices should be sent and what, if anything,
VITA did with the information. Section 2.2-3708 also requires
reports from state public bodies concerning their experiences
with conducting electronic meetings be filed with VITA. The
VITA representative stated that VITA had no problem with receiving
the notices and reports, but was unsure of the utility in
providing them to the agency. It was also noted that under
the pilot program for electronic meetings3, the FOIA Council
was one of the recipients for reports required to be filed
under the program's provisions. It was recommended that the
FOIA Council replace VITA as the agency for receiving notice
and reports of electronic meetings to be consistent with the
pilot program and because electronic meetings are within the
purview of the FOIA Council. The workgroup will recommend
to the full FOIA Council that the above-described amendment
be made to § 2.2-3708.
1
"Information system" means the total components
and operations of a record-keeping process, including information
collected or managed by means of computer networks and the
global information system known as the Internet, whether automated
or manual, containing personal information and the name, personal
number, or other identifying particulars of a data subject.
2 Subdivision 3 of § 2.2-3705.2 provides an exemption
for " [D]ocumentation or other information that describes
the design, function, operation or access control features
of any security system, whether manual or automated, which
is used to control access to or use of any automated data
processing or telecommunications system."
3 See 1999 Acts of Assembly, c. 704, as amended
by Acts 2002, c.910; Acts 2002, c. 429; and Acts 2003 c. 346.
|