Kassel, David v. Department of Public Health - Division of Health Care Facility Licensure and Recertification (SPR 20150471)

The Commonwealth of Massachusetts William Francis Galvin, Secretary of the Commonwealth Public Records Division Shawn A. Williams Supervisor ofR ecords August 20, 2015 SPRlS/471 Ms. Rebecca Rodman, Esq. Deputy General Counsel Department of Public Health 250 Washington Street Boston, MA 02108 Dear Attorney Rodman: This office has received a petition from David Kassel on behalf of the Massachusetts Coalition ofF amilies and Advocates, Inc. (CO FAR) appealing the response of the Department of Public Health (Department) to his request for a copy of an investigative report concerning the death of a specifically identified individual. See G. L. c. 66, § 1O (b ); see also 950 C.M.R. 32.08(6). This request was the subject of a previous appeal. See SPR15/108 Determination of the Supervisor of Records (April29, 2015). In a response to this Determination dated May 8, 2015, the Department provided Mr. Kassel with a redacted copy of a report along with a cover letter explaining that the redactions were made pursuant to Exemption (c) of the Public Records Law. G. L. c. 4, § 7(26)(c). In Camera Inspection ofR ecords Upon further consideration of Mr. Kassel's petition, it is the finding of this office that an in camera review of an unredacted copy of the responsive report would facilitate a determination as to the applicability of the exemption claim made by the Department. See 950 C.M.R. 32.08(6). After I complete my review of the documents, I will return the record to your custody and issue an opinion on the public or exempt nature of the record. The authority to require the submission of records for an in camera inspection emanates from the Code of Massachusetts Regulations. 950 C.M.R. 32.08(6); see also G.L. OneAshburton Place, Room 1719, Boston, Massachusetts 02108 · (617) 727-2832 ·Fax (617) 727-5914 www.sec.state.ma. us/pre

Mr. Ms. Rebecca Rodman, Esq. SPR15/471 Page Two August 20, 2015 c. 66, § 1. This office interprets the in camera inspection process to be analogous to that utilized by the judicial system. See Rock v. Massachusetts Comm'n Against Discrimination, 3 84 Mass. 198, 206 (1981) (administrative agency entitled deference in the interpretation of its own regulations). Records are not voluntarily submitted, but rather are submitted pursuant to an order by this office that an in camera inspection is necessary to make a proper finding. Records are submitted for the limited purpose of review. This office is not the custodian of records examined in camera, therefore, any request made to this office for records being reviewed in camera will be denied. See 950 C.M.R. 32.03 (defining "custodian" as the government employee who in the normal course of her duties has access to or control over records). This office has a long history of cooperation with governmental agencies with respect to in camera inspection. Custodians submit copies of the relevant records to this office upon a promise of confidentiality. This office does not release records reviewed in camera to anyone under any circumstances. Upon a determination of the public record status, records reviewed in camera are promptly returned to the custodian. To operate in any other fashion would seriously impede our ability to function and would certainly affect our credibility within the legal community. Accordingly, you are hereby ordered to provide this office with an unredacted copy of the responsive record within ten (1 0) days of this order. Supervisor of Records cc: Mr. David Kassel Mr. Sherman Lohnes