Public commenter says BRN accidentally released unredacted diversion records; board counsel says release inadvertent

A public commenter told the Board of Registered Nursing on Feb. 26 that he had received hundreds of pages of unredacted materials related to the board’s intervention/diversion program and that the board had not notified affected participants.

The commenter, identified in public materials only as a member of the public and an attorney, said he first filed a records request in May 2024 and that the board’s October response said materials were being reviewed “in order to avoid disclosure of confidential information pursuant to business and professions code.” He said he nonetheless received unredacted records before Christmas containing participant names and communications and that the board had not notified participants of the release. “The BRN’s refusal to notify participants about the release of their confidential information,” the commenter said, “is unacceptable,” and he said he had returned the materials and would not disclose them.

Board legal counsel Reza Pejuhesh replied during the same public-comment period that the disclosure had been inadvertent. Pejuhesh said staff were working in “batches” to produce thousands of pages while applying redactions and that the records had been reviewed in the attorney’s absence; a substitute attorney had assisted with the public-records response. “There was an inadvertent failure to redact the records,” Pejuhesh said, adding that the requester had promptly returned the unredacted records as requested. Pejuhesh said the office was researching whether a formal disclosure notice to affected participants is required and that staff are continuing to review the production and make appropriate redactions.

Executive Officer Loretta Melby later told the board that staff are continuing the rolling production of a very large public-records request and working with Department of Consumer Affairs legal staff and the Office of the Attorney General as needed. Melby said the agency is handling the request in batches because it covers “thousands and thousands of pages” and that some materials previously provided to the requester have since been re-reviewed and redacted. She said staff appreciate the requester returning inadvertent materials and that the board does not intentionally disclose confidential participant information.

The board did not take a formal action in open session related to the disclosure during the Feb. 26 meeting. Board counsel invited the commenter to follow up directly and said staff will research the duty to provide notice to participants and whether a formal disclosure notice is legally required.