David Stoff v. Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority (SPR 20253553)

The Commonwealth of Massachusetts William Francis Galvin, Secretary of the Commonwealth Public Records Division Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records December 16, 2025 SPR25/3553 Julie A. Ciollo, Esq. Assistant General Counsel Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority 10 Park Plaza, Suite 7760 Boston, MA 02116 Dear Attorney Ciollo: I have received the petition of David Stoff appealing the response of the Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority (MBTA) to a request for public records. See G. L. c. 66, § 10A; see also 950 C.M.R. 32.08(1). On June 19, 2025, Mr. Stoff requested, “…any public records in the MBTA’s possession regarding ground water in the vicinity of the MBTA’s Alewife Station, including tracks, or tunnels appurtenant to the Alewife Station.” Specifically, Mr. Stoff sought: [1] Any records about groundwater quality; [2] Any records about ground water management; [3] Any records about ground water discharges[.] In his request, Mr. Stoff also provided the MBTA with examples of the types of records that would be responsive to his request. The MBTA initially responded on July 7, 2025, July 22, 2025, and August 13, 2025, assigning the request reference number R000770-062325. Previous Appeal This request was the subject of a previous appeal. See SPR25/2250 Determination of the Supervisor of Records (August 14, 2025). In my August 14th determination, I ordered the MBTA to clarify whether it possesses additional records responsive to the request. The MBTA responded on September 16, 2025. Unsatisfied with the MBTA’s response, Mr. Stoff petitioned this office and this appeal, SPR25/3553, 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 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

Julie A. Ciollo, Esq. SPR25/3553 Page 2 December 16, 2025 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. If there are any fees associated with a response, a written, good faith estimate must be provided. G. L. c. 66, § 10(b)(viii); see also 950 C.M.R. 32.07(2). Once fees are paid, a records custodian must provide the responsive records. The MBTA’s September 16th Response In its September 16, 2025 response, the MBTA stated, “[a]fter additional searches were requested of the records custodians, no additional records were located that would be responsive to your request.” Current Appeal In correspondence to the MBTA, Mr. Stoff stated that records responsive to this request were provided to him in response to other public records requests. Mr. Stoff contends that this indicates the MBTA possesses additional responsive records. In a telephone conversation with this office on December 12, 2025, the MBTA confirmed that it does not possess any additional responsive records. No Duty to Create Records Please be advised, under the Public Records Law a custodian is not required to create a record in response to a public records request. See G. L. c. 66, § 6A(d). In addition, a public employee is not required to answer questions, or do research, or create documents in response to questions. See 32 Op. Att’y Gen. 157, 165 (May 18, 1977). Further, 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). Conclusion Given that the MBTA has confirmed that it possesses no additional records responsive to the request, and this office has no authority to compel the MBTA to create records, I will consider this administrative appeal closed. If Mr. Stoff is not satisfied with the resolution of this

Julie A. Ciollo, Esq. SPR25/3553 Page 3 December 16, 2025 administrative appeal, please be advised that this office shares jurisdiction with the Superior Court of the Commonwealth. See G. L. c. 66, §§ 10(b)(ix), 10A(c) (pursuing administrative appeal does not limit availability of judicial remedies). Sincerely, Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records cc: David Stoff