Crompton, Sean v. Division of Occupational Licensure (SPR 20260102)

The Commonwealth of Massachusetts William Francis Galvin, Secretary of the Commonwealth Public Records Division Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records January 23, 2026 SPR26/0102 Malav Patel, Esq. Assistant General Counsel for Public Affairs Division of Occupational Licensure 1000 Washington Street, Suite 710 Boston, MA 02118 Dear Attorney Patel: I have received the petition of Sean Crompton appealing the response of the Division of Occupational Licensure (Division/DOL) to a request for public records. See G. L. c. 66, § 10A; see also 950 C.M.R. 32.08(1). On December 17, 2025, Mr. Crompton requested the following: …copies of all records related to [an identified individual’s] real estate license application, Application No. IA 0003113210, submitted via the eLIPSE licensing platform on Mass.gov. … Accordingly, I request the following records from October 1, 2025 to the present: [1] Communications with PSI All emails, correspondence, call logs, notes, or records reflecting communications between any Board or Division of Occupational Licensure staff and PSI Services LLC that reference: [An identified individual] Application No. IA-0003113210 Exam eligibility or transmission of application data Communications with IT All emails, tickets, service requests, internal messages, or notes reflecting communications between Board/DOL staff and any internal or external IT 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

Malav Patel, Esq. SPR26/0102 Page 2 January 23, 2026 personnel concerning [an identified individual’s] application, eLIPSE, or transmission of data to PSI. Records evidencing transmission to PSI Any confirmation, submission record, system log, audit trail, transaction ID, batch report, or acknowledgment indicating that [an identified individual’s] application or exam eligibility was transmitted to PSI. Any records reflecting failed, delayed, or incomplete transmissions. [2] Internal communications All internal emails, memoranda, notes, or messages referencing: [An identified individual] Application IA-0003113210 PSI IT involvement Exam scheduling eligibility eLIPSE system records Application status histories, audit logs, or workflow records associated with Application IA-0003113210. Any error logs or exception reports related to [an identified individual’s] application. The Division responded on January 2, January 8, and January 9, 2026. Unsatisfied with the responses, Mr. Crompton petitioned this office and this appeal, SPR26/0102, 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).

Malav Patel, Esq. SPR26/0102 Page 3 January 23, 2026 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. Current Appeal In his appeal petition, Mr. Crompton contends: … I am appealing on the following grounds: 1. Failure to provide a timely and complete response by the agency’s stated deadline of January 9, 2026. 2. Failure to issue a compliant written extension with a definite date and statutory justification. 3. Uncertainty as to the completeness of the search. 4. The agency’s continued delay materially prejudices my ability to understand and address issues that affected [an identified individual’s] professional licensure. … The Division’s Responses In its response on January 2, 2026, the Division stated the following: The DOL acknowledges that it may be in possession of at least some records responsive to your request. However, due to the relative size, scope, and complexity of your request, as well as other extenuating circumstances, the DOL requires additional time to gather, segregate, and prepare the records for production. Pursuant to G.L. c. 66, § 10(b)(vi), the DOL anticipates that a final response including any available, responsive records subject to disclosure, or portions thereof, will be provided on or before January 9, 2026. On January 8, 2026, the Division responded, “[w]e are still processing your request and will send you a response when completed.” On January 9, 2026, the Division responded, “[w]e are still processing your request and I am hopeful that we will be able to send you a response next week.”

Malav Patel, Esq. SPR26/0102 Page 4 January 23, 2026 Timeliness in Providing Records G. L. c. 66, § 10(b) provides, in pertinent part, that if the magnitude or difficulty of the request unduly burdens the other responsibilities of the agency or municipality such that the agency or municipality cannot provide records within 10 business days, the agency or municipality must inform the requestor in writing within 10 business days. With respect to the timeframe to produce responsive records, the written response shall: identify a reasonable timeframe in which the agency or municipality shall produce the public records sought; provided, that for an agency, the timeframe shall not exceed 15 business days following the initial receipt of the request for public records and for a municipality the timeframe shall not exceed 25 business days following the initial receipt of the request for public records; and provided further, that the requestor may voluntarily agree to a response date beyond the timeframes set forth herein. G. L. c. 66, § 10(b)(vi). Where Mr. Crompton submitted his request on December 17, 2025, it is unclear why the Division has not provided the responsive records. 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). 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); see also G. L. c. 66, § 10(a) (records must be provided without unreasonable delay). To the extent possible, the Division must provide responsive records on a rolling basis. Conclusion Accordingly, the Division is ordered to provide Mr. Crompton with a response to the request, provided in a manner consistent with this order, the Public Records Law and its Regulations within ten (10) 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. Mr. Crompton may appeal the substantive nature of the Division’s response within ninety days. See 950 C.M.R. 32.08(1). Sincerely, Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records cc: Sean Crompton