23-ORD-047
March 2, 2023
In re: Leslie Haun/Luther Luckett Correctional Complex
Summary: The Luther Luckett Correctional Complex (“the Complex”)
did not violate the Open Records Act (“the Act”) when it denied a request
for records that do not contain a specific reference to the requesting
inmate.
Open Records Decision
Inmate Leslie Haun (“the Appellant”) submitted a request to the Complex to
inspect four specific ACA1 “Standards of Reference.” The Complex denied the request
under KRS 197.025(2) and KRS 61.878(1)(l) because the requested records do not
contain a specific reference to the Appellant. This appeal followed.
On appeal, the Complex continues to assert that it is not required to provide
the ACA “Standards of Reference” because they do not contain a specific reference to
the Appellant. Under KRS 197.025(2), a correctional facility such as the Complex
“shall not be required to comply with a request for any record from any inmate
confined in . . . any facility . . . unless the request is for a record which contains a
specific reference to that individual.” KRS 197.025(2) is incorporated into the Act
through KRS 61.878(1)(l), which exempts from inspection public records “the
disclosure of which is prohibited or restricted or otherwise made confidential by
enactment of the General Assembly.” This Office has historically interpreted “specific
reference” to require a record mention an inmate by name. See, e.g., 22-ORD-119; 22-
ORD-087; 17-ORD-119; 09-ORD-057; 03-ORD-150. Specifically, this Office has found
that a record does not contain a “specific reference” to the requesting inmate
1
“ACA” refers to the American Correctional Association, a private company that publishes a manual
establishing industry standards for correctional facilities.under KRS 197.025(2) simply because it is relevant to, pertains to, or personally
affects him. See, e.g., 22-ORD-087; 17-ORD-119; 17-ORD-073.
Here, the Complex states, “ACA standards are national standards generated
by the association and used for accreditation by the association. They are not the type
of records [that] contain a reference to a specific inmate.” On appeal, the Appellant
argues the “Standards . . . are intended for each inmate as an individual and that
individuals [sic] confidential health care needs.” Although these standards may affect
the Appellant to some degree, it is undisputed that the standards do not specifically
mention the Appellant by name. Thus, under KRS 197.025(2), the Complex was not
required to provide the Appellant a copy of the record and it did not violate the Act
when it denied his request.
A party aggrieved by this decision may appeal it by initiating action in the
appropriate circuit court pursuant to KRS 61.880(5) and KRS 61.882 within 30 days
from the date of this decision. Pursuant to KRS 61.880(3), the Attorney General shall
be notified of any action in circuit court, but shall not be named as a party in that
action or in any subsequent proceedings. The Attorney General will accept notice of
the complaint e-mailed to OAGAppeals@ky.gov.
Daniel Cameron
Attorney General
s/ Zachary M. Zimmerer
Zachary M. Zimmerer
Assistant Attorney General
#051
Distributed to:
Leslie Haun #205731
Amy V. Barker
Lydia C. Kendrick
Ann Smith