i Mi US. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH HUMAN SERVICES Of?ce of the Regional Manager Of?ce for Civil Rights 999 13* Street South Terrace, Suite 417 Denver, Colorado 80202 Telephone: (303) 844-7915 FAX: (303] 344-2025 TDD: {303} 344-3439 August 23, 2012 J. Re: Prater v. Veteran?s Administration Clinic Alamosg, Colorado OCR Transaction Number: 12-144269 Dear On June 4, 2012, the US. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), Of?ce for Civil Rights (OCR), Region received your complaint. You alleged that the Veteran?s Administration Clinic in Alamosa, Colorado (VA Clinic) has violated the Federal Standards for Privacy of Individually Identi?able Health Information andfor the Security Standards for the Protection of Electronic Protected Health Information (45 Code of Federal Regulations (C.F.R.) Parts 160 and 164, Subparts A, and E, the Privacy and Security Rules). Speci?cally, you allege that, on lune 1, 2012, you entered the VA Clinic and the nurse at the front desk began discussing information that included your protected health information (PHI) which information you allege could be overheard by others in the waiting area. This allegation, if substantiated, could re?ect a violation of 45 CPR 164.502(a) and Thank you for bringing this matter to attention. Your complaint plays an integral part in enforcement efforts. OCR enforces the Privacy, Security, and Breach Noti?cation Rules. OCR also enforces Federal civil rights laws, which prohibit discrimination in the delivery of health and human services because of race, color, national origin, disability, age, and under certain circumstances, sex and religion. The Privacy Rule permits certain incidental uses and disclosures of PHI that occur-as a by- product of another permissible or required use or disclosure of PHI, as long as the covered entity has applied reasonable safeguards and implemented the minimum necessary standard, where applicable, with respect to the primary use or disclosure.l For example, the Privacy Rule permits covered health care providers to share PHI for treatment purposes without patient authorization 45 can. Page 2 as long as they use reasonable safeguards when doing so. These safeguards may vary depending on the mode of communication used. For example, when discussing patient health information orally with another provider or the patient in proximity of others, a doctor may be able to reasonably safeguard the information by lowering hisfher voice or moving to a more private location. We have care?illy reviewed your complaint against the VA Clinic and have determined to resolve it informally through the provision of technical assistance. Should OCR receive a similar allegation of noncompliance against the VA Clinic in the ?ame, OCR may initiate a formal mvestigation of that matter. Based on the foregoing, OCR is closing your complaint without ?irther action, effective the date of this letter. determination as stated in this letter applies only to the allegations in the complaint that OCR reviewed. Under the Freedom of Information Act, we may be required to release this letter and other information about the subject matter upon request by the public. In the event OCR receives such a request, we will make every effort, as permitted by law, to protect information that identi?es individuals or that, if released, could constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy. If you have any questions regarding disposition of your complaint, please contact Ms. Kelly Lewis J.D., Equal Opportunity Specialist, at (303) 344-7833 or via email at kellv.lewis@hhs.gov. Thank you. Sincerely, Velveta Howell Regional Manager