Cell site simulator documents (Boston Police Department)

To Whom It May Concern:

Pursuant to the Massachusetts Public Records Law, M.G.L. c.66, §10, I hereby request the following records as part of my ongoing investigation into use of StingRays by law enforcement agencies nationwide:

1. A copy of all memos or emails between the Boston Police Department and the Harris Corporation.

2. A copy of all memos or emails between the Boston Police Department and the Boeing company.

3. A copy of all meeting minutes for meetings pertaining to cell site simulators, IMSI catchers, "Stingray" devices, "DRTBox" devices or "KingFish" devices.

4. A copy of all letters, agreements or other documents containing guidelines or instructions for responding to FOIA requests or equivalent state or local law pertaining to the Harris Corporation, Boeing, cell site simulators, IMSI catchers, "Stingray" devices, "DRTBox" devices or "KingFish" devices.

5. Records regarding your agency's acquisition of cell site simulators (also referred to as "IMSI catchers", "StingRay" devices, "DRTBox" devices or "KingFish" devices — "cell site simulators" below), including but not limited to invoices, purchase orders, contracts, loan agreements, evaluation agreements, solicitation letters, correspondence with companies and public agencies that provide the devices, and similar documents.

6. Records regarding any offer, proposal, arrangement, agreement, or memorandum of understanding with Massachusetts State Police ("MSP"), Naval Criminal Investigative Service ("NCICS"), Federal Bureau of Investigation ("FBI"), U.S. Marshals Service, FBI's Data Intercept Technology Unit ("DITU"), Boston Regional Intelligence Center ("BRIC"), Commonwealth Fusion Center ("CFC"), or any corporation, to borrow, permanently acquire from, or use any cell site simulator owned or possessed by these organizations.

7. All nondisclosure agreements with Harris Corporation, Digital Receiver Technology (DRT, formerly Utica Systems, now a subsidiary of Boeing Corporation), Septier Communication Limited, Proximus LLC, any other corporation, and any state or federal agencies, regarding your agency's actual or potential possession or use of cell site simulators.

8. Records regarding policies and guidelines governing use of cell site simulators, including but not limited to :
a) when, where and how they may be used
b) logging, retention and purging of data from the devices
c) what kind of legal process (including an administrative warrant, judicial warrant, or other legal process) should or should not be obtained to use the devices

5. Training materials for use of cell site simulators

6. Any licenses, waivers, or agreements with federal or state communications regulatory agencies (e.g., Federal Communications Commission, Massachusetts Office of Consumer Affairs & Business Regulation (Telecommunications Division), Massachusetts Attorney General (Energy and Telecommunications Division), etc.) concerning use of cell site simulators


I also request that, if appropriate, fees be waived as we believe this request is in the public interest, as suggested by the recommendations of the Massachusetts Supervisor of Public Records. The requested documents will be made available to the general public free of charge as part of the public information service at MuckRock.com, processed by a representative of the news media/press and is made in the process of news gathering and not for commercial usage.

I expect the request to be filled in an accessible format, including for screen readers, which provide text-to-speech for persons unable to read print. Files that are not accessible to screen readers include, for example, .pdf image files as well as physical documents.

In the event that fees cannot be waived, I would be grateful if you would inform me of the total charges in advance of fulfilling my request. I would prefer the request filled electronically, by e-mail attachment if available or CD-ROM if not.

Thank you in advance for your anticipated cooperation in this matter. I look forward to receiving your response to this request within 10 calendar days, as the statute requires.

Sincerely,

Shawn Musgrave

To Whom It May Concern:

I wanted to follow up on the following Freedom of Information request, copied below, and originally submitted on April 7, 2015. Please let me know when I can expect to receive a response, or if further clarification is needed.

Thank you for your help.

To Whom It May Concern:

I wanted to follow up on the following Freedom of Information request, copied below, and originally submitted on April 7, 2015. Please let me know when I can expect to receive a response, or if further clarification is needed.

Thank you for your help.

Hello -

I have been made aware of the attached Supervisor of Records determination in Mr. Mike Katz-Lacabe's request regarding StingRay records held by the Boston Police Department, as well as the FBI's public statements — as reported by the Washington Post (see http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/fbi-clarifies-rules-on-secretive-cellphone-tracking-devices/2015/05/14/655b4696-f914-11e4-a13c-193b1241d51a_story.html) — that its non-disclosure agreement does not forbid law enforcement from disclosing use of StingRay devices.

As the reported by the Post: "In a handful of criminal cases around the country, local police officers have testified in recent months that non-disclosure agreements with the FBI forbid them from acknowledging the use of secret cellphone-tracking devices. In some, prosecutors have settled cases rather than risk revealing sensitive details about use of the devices in court proceedings. [....] The FBI, however, says such agreements do not prevent police from disclosing that they used the equipment, often called a StingRay."

I trust that BPD will keep in mind both the SPR's determination and the FBI's clarification of NDA requirements as the department processes my request. In light of the considerable time that has passed since I submitted this request for documents regarding BPD's acquisition and use of cell site simulators, I look forward to a substantive response soon.

Respectfully,
Shawn Musgrave
Investigative reporter, MuckRock

Hello -

Checking on this .

Best,
Shawn

Hello -

I look forward to receiving a substantive response to this request within the week.

Respectfully,
Shawn Musgrave
MuckRock

Supervisor of Records
Office of the Secretary of the Commonwealth
McCormack Building, Room 1719
One Ashburton Place
Boston, MA 02108

To Whom It May Concern:

This is an appeal for the constructive denial of my request to the Boston Police Department for a range of public records concerning cell site simulators. My request was filed in early April, but I have not received any substantive update since BPD acknowledged my request on April 10, despite several followups I have sent to the department by email. As this request is now over ten days and under 90 days from its receipt by BPD, I now appeal to the Supervisor of Records.

Please direct BPD to conduct a good faith search for responsive records and to provide documents, in accordance with the department's obligations under the Massachusetts public records statute.

Respectfully,
Shawn Musgrave
Reporter, MuckRock

Hello -

I've a sent a copy of the below appeal to the Supervisor.

Respectfully,
Shawn Musgrave
MuckRock

Ms. Rastellini -

Please see below for the language of the appeal I mailed to the Supervisor of Records on June 8. To date I have not received any acknowledgement of this appeal.

Please confirm receipt.

Best,
Shawn Musgrave
MuckRock

Patricia -

Thank you for confirming receipt. Please provide a tracking number once it's entered into the Supervisor of Record's appeal system.

Best,
Shawn Musgrave
MuckRock

Hi Patricia -

I haven't received an official acknowledgement of this appeal, nor do I see it listed on the Supervisor's listing of appeals. Please advise whether I need to send it again?

Best,
Shawn Musgrave
MuckRock

Thank you!

Lt. Det. McCarthy -

Per the attached, BPD has failed to respond to the SPR's previous order for specific rationale behind the department's rejection of my request. Please confirm that BPD will be responding to SPR's current order to provide such specific rationale within 10 business days of this latest letter.

Respectfully,
Shawn Musgrave
MuckRock

Hi Mike -

Can you confirm whether Legal received the previous SPR order to provide documents or a more specific justification for withholding the documents?

Best,
Shawn

Hello -

It seems that this is the same justification for rejection that BPD provided to Mr. Katz-Lacabe in May 2015, and which the SPR ruled was insufficient (see attached).

Please advise as to whether supplementary justification was meant to be included in your rejection of my request.

Best,
Shawn Musgrave

Hello -

Checking on this.

-Shawn

Supervisor of Records
Office of the Secretary of the Commonwealth
McCormack Building, Room 1719
One Ashburton Place
Boston, MA 02108

To Whom It May Concern:

On September 30, 2015, Boston Police Department provided a supplementary response to my request for documents regarding cell site simulator devices. The BPD's response is identical to one provided to Mr. Katz-Lacabe in May 2015, and which the SPR ruled was insufficient (see attached). As such, I continue to appeal the department's failure to provide adequate justification for withholding the requested documents, as well as the department's utter failure to provide any justification whatsoever until the Supervisor issued a subsequent order.

Boston Police Department has a clear obligation under the public records law to release documents or provide an adequate legal justification for withholding such documents. The Supervisor has already determined that BPD's justification is substantively inadequate due to lack of specificity. Please remand this request once again back to BPD for provision of requested documents.

Respectfully,
Shawn Musgrave
MuckRock

Mr. Shorey -

Please clarify whether your office considers BPD's response of September 30, 2015 to satisfy the SPR's order to provide justification with specificity for withholding documents responsive to my request.

Best,
Shawn

Mr. Shorey -

Yes, I hereby appeal the adequacy of the Boston Police Department's subsequent answer. The Supervisor has already directed the BPD to provide justification with greater specificity for withholding documents relating to cell site simulator in response to a request on the same topic submitted by Mr. Katz-Lacabe. The BPD's response to my own request is identical to its response to Mr. Katz-Lacabe. As the Supervisor has previously determined that BPD's response to Mr. Katz-Lacabe was inadequate, it follows that BPD's response is inadequate for the present request.

As such, I ask that the SPR remand this request to BPD for good faith search and provision of responsive documents under the Massachusetts public records law.

Respectfully,
Shawn Musgrave
MuckRock

Hello -

In light of the documents released to Mr. Mike Katz-Lacabe (see: https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/2516535-boston-pd-stingray-response-18nov2015.html), I reassert that BPD has yet to provide me with any documents pertaining to its deployment of cell site simulators. My request encompasses more than the NDA released to Mr. Katz-Lacabe, as it includes fiscal and policy documents.

I reassert my right under the Massachusetts public records law to these documents, and insist that you provide them promptly.

Respectfully,
Shawn Musgrave

Hello -

Please advise immediately as to the status of this request and appeal to the Supervisor. Again, my request has not been fulfilled.

Respectfully,
Shawn Musgrave

Hello -

I have heard nothing further on this request since SPR's subsequent upholding of my appeal. Please advise as to the status of BPD's processing of this request.

Respectfully,
Shawn Musgrave

Hello -

Thank you for sending this document, which was already released by BPD to another requester.

As I've indicated a few times below, BPD has not responded to the bulk of my request. My request is for a number of other records beside the NDA, including procurement/acquisitions documents, policy documents and communications with the FBI. Please address these outstanding portions of the request.

Respectfully,
Shawn Musgrave

Ms. Hoffman -

Thank you. I look forward to your response.

Best,
Shawn Musgrave
NECIR

Ms. Hoffman -

Has there been any update on the remaining portions of my request?

Best,
Shawn

Hi Katherine -

Any update on this?

Best,
Shawn

Hi Kate -

Thanks for the update. Have a great weekend.

Best,
Shawn

Hi Kate -

Any word as to when the meeting will be?

Best,
Shawn

Ms. Hoffman -

Thank you for sending the latest batch of documents.

Has the BPD signed a nondisclosure agreement with Harris Corp., and does that document fall within the "Terms and Conditions" that your office has withheld?

Additionally, do you have a sense for when the rest of the documents will be released.

Best,
Shawn

Hi Kate -

Checking on the below.

Thanks,
Shawn

Hi Kate -

Thanks so much for the update. Yes, go ahead and mail to the MuckRock PO box.

Will one of these documents be a nondisclosure that the BPD signed with Harris Corporation? To be clear, this is distinct from the NDA signed between the BPD and the FBI to acquire Harris Corp. equipment. It is my understanding that the Harris Corp. requires law enforcement to sign a separate NDA.

Best,
Shawn

Hi Kate -

I hope you had a great weekend. Please confirm that documents were put in the mail today, as planned.

Best,
Shawn

Hi Kate -

Great. Was the NDA with Harris Corp. included with those documents?

Thanks,
Shawn