CopyCited 44 times | Published | Supreme Court of Florida | 1994 WL 70104
...[18] In October 1992, the audit team issued its first data request of 103 items. According to the PSC, the company has failed to respond to 44 of the items requested, has objected to 15 of them, and is "substantially deficient" in 14 of their responses. Order No. PSC-93-0424-FOF-TL, p. 3. Based on the language of section 364.183, Florida Statutes (1991), the PSC ordered Southern Bell to provide access to the requested records. Subsection 364.183(1) provides in part: The commission shall have reasonable access to all company records, and to the records of the telecommunications company's affiliated companies, including its parent company, regarding transactions or cost allocat...
...t is directed." In the eyes of Southern Bell, the issue is whether the affiliates' general ledgers and financial statements are within Southern Bell's possession, custody, or control. In our eyes, however, the issue presented by this case is whether section 364.183 provides the PSC with the authority to gain access to the records of Southern Bell's affiliates....
...team. As the regulating body for telecommunications companies, the PSC is charged with ensuring that a company's non-regulated activities are not subsidized by ratepayers, the company's regulated rates, or by a company's affiliates. §§
364.01 and
364.183, Fla....
...Customer Adjustment Loop Operations System (LMOS). 2. Mechanized Adjustments Mechanized Out of Service Adjustments (MOOSA). 3. Key Service Results Indicator (KSRI) Network Customer Trouble Rate. 4. PSC Schedule II. 5. Network Operational Review. [12] We hold that section 364.183(1), Florida Statutes (1991), does not apply to documents that are sought as part of discovery in a legal proceeding....
CopyCited 13 times | Published | Florida 1st District Court of Appeal
...ministerial function would extend to supervising events which have not occurred," and that the Newspapers had not exhausted adequate available administrative remedies. The central issue here is whether the Commission's determination, under sections
364.183 and
366.093, that a document it has required a utility company to produce contains "proprietary confidential business information" is an exercise of discretion, or merely a nondiscretionary, ministerial act for which the remedy of mandamus is available....
...In the latter case, because the complainant can show a "clear *1265 legal duty" under the Public Records Act to disclose the information, mandamus will lie to compel that ministerial act. Gadd v. News-Press Publishing Company,
412 So.2d 894 (Fla. 2d DCA), rev. den.,
419 So.2d 1197 (Fla. 1982). But sections
364.183 and
366.093 are worded differently from other exemption provisions....
...dministrative remedy. [11] We find that the circuit court correctly ruled that the Newspapers had available to them an adequate administrative remedy under rule 25-22.006 to challenge the Commission's determinations of confidentiality under sections
364.183 and
366.093....
...rative procedure statutes and rules. [14] The circuit court's order denying the complaint for writ of mandamus is AFFIRMED. NIMMONS and MINER, JJ., concur. NOTES [1] Southern Bell produced the documents after it had obtained a protective order under section
364.183, Florida Statutes (1987), and Rule 25-22.006, Florida Administrative Code, to prevent public disclosure of material the Commission had determined to be "proprietary confidential business information" exempt from the disclosure requirements of the Public Records Act, section
119.07(1). The Commission closed two other proceedings involving AT & T Communications of the Southern States and Florida Power Corporation, respectively, in which there was discussion of documents declared confidential under sections
364.183 and
366.093....
...ly authorize suits for injunction in circuit court in lieu of administrative remedies," but as appellees point out, this dictum cannot logically be applied to statutory exemptions to the Public Records Act that did not exist when Willis was written (section 364.183 was not enacted until four years after Willis was decided)....
...by the Commission from a utility as "specified confidential information" upon the request of the utility, which bears the burden of showing that the document contains "bona fide proprietary confidential business information" under sections
350.121,
364.183,
366.093, or
367.156....
CopyCited 8 times | Published | Florida 1st District Court of Appeal | 1992 WL 74968
...ERVIN, Judge. Appellant, Southern Bell Telephone and Telegraph Company (Bell), seeks review of an order issued by the Public Service Commission (PSC or Commission), denying appellant's request to classify certain documents as confidential, pursuant to Section 364.183, Florida Statutes (Supp....
...The underlying case was initiated after the Office of Public Counsel (OPC) petitioned the PSC to investigate and review Bell's Cost Allocation Manual (CAM). During that proceeding, Bell contended that certain documents it produced during discovery constituted "proprietary confidential business information" under section
364.183 [1] and, therefore, *875 should be protected from public disclosure and considered exempt from the Public Records Act (Section
119.07(1), Florida Statutes (Supp....
...ion of Bell's regulated operations and nonregulated customer premises equipment operations. The above documents were produced for all parties, subject to a motion for protective order wherein Bell sought confidential treatment of the documents under section 364.183. In regard to Document A, Bell considered the document "to be an internal audit... entitled to be treated as proprietary confidential business information pursuant to Section 364.183(3)(b), Florida Statutes." In response thereto, the OPC argued that Document A is not a report of internal auditors, but rather is a report from an operations review team....
...Appellant reasoned that since the reports were created to obtain an understanding of the internal workings of the company, much like internal audits, it should not matter whether they were created by an internal auditor or an outside consultant. Even if the document did not fit within any specific category set out in section 364.183(3), Bell argued that it should be afforded confidential treatment because the disclosure of critical self-analysis would stifle the gathering of similar information in the future, and thereby have a chilling effect on the preparation...
...would be less likely to provide frank, critical, honest, confidential information, and the analysts would be discouraged from investigating thoroughly and frankly. Because of such potential harm, Bell argued that the Commission had discretion under section 364.183 to consider such materials confidential, because they are similar to internal audits....
...[2] The OPC responded that Document D was not an internal audit, because it was prepared by an external consultant, and that there is no statutory exception for critical self-analysis. In regard to Document A, Bell, as previously stated, contended that it qualified for confidential classification under section 364.183(3)(b), dealing with "[i]nternal *876 auditing controls and reports of internal auditors." The record shows, however, that although Document A was prepared by employees of Bell, it was not constructed by internal auditors but rather by a review committee. Because the document admittedly is not a report of an internal auditor, we agree the PSC did not err by concluding that confidentiality was not mandated under section 364.183(3)(b)....
...l audit and that its disclosure would be harmful. In that the information was not an internal auditor's report, the Commission properly exercised its discretionary delegated legislative authority in denying such material confidential treatment under section 364.183(3)(b)....
...Austin,
559 So.2d 246, 247 (Fla. 1st DCA), review denied,
574 So.2d 140 (Fla. 1990). The Commission's interpretation is also consistent with the liberal construction afforded the Public Records Act in favor of open government. Id. Thus, once the exceptions set forth in section
364.183(3) are considered in conjunction with the Public Records Act, the Commission's conclusions that section
364.183(3) should be narrowly construed and that no exception should be created for critical self-analyses are reasonable....
...The courts will not depart from such a construction unless it is clearly unauthorized or erroneous." (Citation omitted.)). In so concluding, we agree with the Commission's implicit determination that Bell failed to establish the harm necessary to allow proprietary confidential business treatment of Document D under section 364.183(3)....
...released to the public. Under such circumstances, we cannot say that the Commission abused its discretion by declining to afford proprietary confidential business status to the documents. PW Ventures. AFFIRMED. WOLF and KAHN, JJ., concur. NOTES [1] Section 364.183, Florida Statutes (Supp....
...We consider that this argument, which was made in a motion for reconsideration filed after the initial ruling by the prehearing officer that the document was not entitled to confidential treatment, came too late. Bell, having relied solely on the internal audit exception in section 364.183(3)(b) until it suffered an adverse ruling, should be considered foreclosed from arguing another basis after that ruling....
...ose listed in the six enumerated categories are confidential. In Order No. 23634, the prehearing officer specifically stated that confidentiality may be proved "by demonstrating that the documents fall into one of the statutory exemptions set out in Section 364.183," or "by demonstrating that the information is proprietary confidential information, the disclosure of which will cause the Company or its ratepayers harm." The Commission stated in Order No....
