Megan Ottens-Sargent v. Executive Office of Energy and Environmental Affairs (SPR 20252674)

The Commonwealth of Massachusetts William Francis Galvin, Secretary of the Commonwealth Public Records Division Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records September 19, 2025 SPR25/2674 Gavin Tullis, Esq. Associate General Counsel Executive Office of Energy and Environmental Affairs 100 Cambridge Street, Suite 900 Boston, MA 02114 Dear Attorney Tullis: I have received the petition of Megan Ottens-Sargent appealing the response of the Executive Office of Energy and Environmental Affairs (Office) to a request for public records. See G. L. c. 66, § 10A; see also 950 C.M.R. 32.08(1). On July 23, 2025, Ms. Ottens-Sargent requested “...the EIR- Environmental Impact Report- associated with the MEPA filing EEA # 12592 Project name: Rehabilitation and maintenance of existing firebreaks in the Manuel Correllus State Forest, Martha’s Vineyard, MA - Edgartown, West Tisbury, Tisbury Project proponent: DEM/DCR Date: 2001.” The Office responded on August 11, 2025. Unsatisfied with the Office’s response, Ms. Ottens-Sargent petitioned this office and this appeal, SPR25/2674, was opened as a result. The Public Records Law The Public Records Law strongly favors disclosure by creating a presumption that all governmental records are public records. G. L. c. 66, § 10A(d); 950 C.M.R. 32.03(4). “Public records” is broadly defined to include all documentary materials or data, regardless of physical form or characteristics, made or received by any officer or employee of any agency or municipality of the Commonwealth, unless falling within a statutory exemption. G. L. c. 4, § 7(26). It is the burden of the records custodian to demonstrate the application of an exemption in order to withhold a requested record. G. L. c. 66, § 10(b)(iv); 950 C.M.R. 32.06(3); see also Dist. Attorney for the Norfolk Dist. v. Flatley, 419 Mass. 507, 511 (1995) (custodian has the burden of establishing the applicability of an exemption). To meet the specificity requirement a custodian must not only cite an exemption, but must also state why the exemption applies to the withheld or redacted portion of the responsive record. One Ashburton Place, Room 1719, Boston, Massachusetts 02108 • (617) 727-2832• Fax: (617) 727-5914 sec.state.ma.us/pre • pre@sec.state.ma.us

Gavin Tullis, Esq. SPR25/2674 Page 2 September 19, 2025 The Office’s August 11th Response In its August 11, 2025 response, the Office stated, “[a]fter a reasonable search, we have not located any records responsive to your request.” Current appeal In her appeal, Ms. Ottens-Sargent states, “I am requesting clarification through your office that based on EEA’s recent records search, which was at my request, that the 2001 Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the Manuel Correllus State Forest in Dukes County, on Martha’s Vineyard does not exist, as reflected in the EEA records request response document, attached. I also include the MEPA Certificate requiring an EIR ... My concern is that without a required EIR, no state project can be permitted by the state until an EIR is compiled and completed- which should entail a new MEPA review. My hope is that EEA will address this, and consider reopening the MEPA process, and pause the cutting operation.” Based on Ms. Ottens-Sargent’s claims, in conjunction with the Office’s response, it is unclear if the Office possesses any records responsive to her request. The duty to comply with requests for records extends to those records that exist and are in the possession, custody, or control of the custodian of records at the time of the request. See G. L. c. 66, § 10(a)(ii). However, custodians are expected to use their superior knowledge of the records in their custody to assist requestors in obtaining the desired information. See 950 C.M.R. 32.04(5). Consequently, the Office must clarify whether any responsive records exist. If records were destroyed, I find that the Office must demonstrate whether it followed proper records retention protocol. The Office must clarify this matter. Conclusion Accordingly, the Office is ordered to provide Ms. Ottens-Sargent with a response to the request, provided in a manner consistent with this order, the Public Records Law and its Regulations within ten business days. A copy of any such response must be provided to this office. It is preferable to send an electronic copy of the response to this office at pre@sec.state.ma.us. Ms. Ottens-Sargent may appeal the substantive nature of the Office’s response within ninety (90) days. See 950 C.M.R. 32.08(1). Sincerely, Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records cc: Megan Ottens-Sargent