"air conditioning filters for nyct subway cars"

To Whom It May Concern:

Pursuant to the New York Freedom of Information Law, I hereby request the following records:

Public documents reference an agency specification for purchasing filters, namely "Air Conditioning Filters for NYCT Subway Cars, 2061-PROD-89, rev. E".

All revisions of this document, and specifications it may supersede.

The requested documents will be made available to the general public, and this request is not being made for commercial purposes.

In the event that there are fees, 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 5 business days, as the statute requires.

Sincerely,

ALEXANDER RICCIO

On page 193 of the MTA/NYCT TECHNICAL SPECIFICATION
NEW CAR PROCUREMENT CONTRACT
for the R34211 (R211) there is a reference to this document, as such:

7.2.4.14. The Contractor shall design the filter system for maximum system running time between required
filter changes. As a minimum, filters shall meet the construction and performance requirements
within Appendix C-10 (Air Conditioning Filters for NYCT Subway Cars, 2061-PROD-89, rev. E).

On page 489 of the same document, there is a similar reference:

19.17.1.1 Filters shall be selected in accordance with NYCT Specification 2061-PROD-89 contained
within Appendix C-10 (“Air Conditioning Filters for NYCTA Subway Cars, Supply of (Dry Pleated Media”) for the specific equipment involved.

Given that this is a document that would need to be readily available for the MTA to solicit bids for a short life consumable part, it boggles my mind to think that it would require the MTA "engage in herculean or unreasonable efforts to identify or locate records".

In the obviously ancient MTA commodity management system, there is the following entry:

FILTER, A/C. NOMINAL SIZE 18-1/8" X 13-3/8 x 1-3/4" USED ON OVERHEAD FRAME ASSEMBLY 6 PER CAR, THE CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR INSPECTING ALL MATERIALS FURNISHED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF THIS SPECIFICATION. ACCEPTANCE BY THE NYCTA OF MATERIALS FURNISHED BY THE CONTRACTOR, IS SUBJECT TO INSPECTION VERIFICATION AND APPROVAL OR DISAPPROVAL BY THE NYCTA

With a further reference in the next column to 2061-PROD-89, REV. F.

Another entry the same MTA database is as follows:
"FILTER, A/C, RETURN AIR, ACTUAL SIZE: 19-1/2" X 15-1/2" X 1-3/4". 2 PER HVAC UNIT. THE CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR INSPECTING ALL MATERIALS FURNISHED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF SPEC. # 2061-PROD-89 (LATEST REV.). ACCEPTANCE BY THE NYCT OF MATERIALS FURNISHED BY THE CONTRACTOR IS SUBJECT TO INSPECTION, VERIFICATION AND APPROVAL OR DISAPPROVAL BY NYCTA."

This clearly references an official agency document that is supposed to be readily available.

Elsewhere in the same database is an entry for an entirely different item:
BATTERY, NICKEL CADIUM, 200 AMPERE HOURS, H PLATE WITH UDEL POLYSULFONE P1700 PLASTIC CELL CASE MATERIAL. THIS IS THE REPLACEMENT BATTERY FOR THE 195 AMPERE HOURS STEEL CASE BATTERY, 25 CELLS, 5X5 TRAY ASSEMBLY WITH ALL CONNECTING CABLES. WARRANTY OF 4 YEARS

The "mfg part no" column for that item references "2106-PROD-15 REV. B".

This obviously appears to show that number-prod-number is some form of agency record tracking ID.

Much the same, another entry:
BATTERY, STORAGE, NICKEL CADMIUM, 100 AMPERE HOURS STAINLESS STEEL CASE, ASSEMBLED AS A CAR SET OF 25 CELLS IN A 9-8-8 CONFIGURATION

And the spec reference:

2071-PROD-91 REV. C

Another item:
KIT, WINDOW INSTALLATION, VANDAL-PROOF, COMPLETE WITH FRAME GLASS AND HARDWARE, FOR END DOOR (STORM)

And the spec reference:
2056-PROD-89

Another item:
ADAPTER, JOURNAL BEARING TRUCK SET 4 TIMKEN ADAPTERS PER SET, CONSISTING OF 2 OF 15-13-0517 PH 1 OF 15-33-0519 LH: OF NYCIA 15-33-0521 LH WITH TRIPCOCK BRACKET ON NYCTA RH SIDE ALL ADAPTERS PER NYCTA D R-33-1244, REV, A LINES 6, 5, & 4, RESPECTIVELY MATERIAL TO BE PACKAGED IN TRUCK SETS.

And the reference:

2047-PROD-86 REV. B

Another item:
AXLE, MOTOR, STANDARD TRUCKS, 5 x 9. JOURNAL ON EACH CRATE VENDOR SHOULD LIST WITH LETTERS/NUMBERS THAT ARE AT LEAST 2 INCHES HIGH N.Y.C. TRANSIT STOCK NUMBER: N.Y.C. TRANSIT PURCHASE ORDER NUMBER: QUANTITY IN THE CRATE:

SCHEDULED RECEIPT DATE.

VENDOR DRAWING MUST BE APPROVED BY NYCT PRIOR TO ALL PURCHASES. AXLE QUALIFICATION AXLES SHALL BE SUPPLIED BY A MANUFACTURER WHO HAS FURNISHED AT LEAST 12 AXLES PER YEAR FOR SERVICE ON THE NYCT SYSTEM FOR A PERIOD OF AT LEAST FIVE (5) YEARS WITH NO INJURIOUS IMPERFECTIONS FOR THOSE VENDORS WHO HAVE NOT SUPPLIED AXLES TO NYCT THE FOLLOWING SHALL APPLY. VENDOR SHALL SUPPLY INDEPENDENT CERTIFICATION THAT ALL PHYSICAL AND CHEMICAL REQUIREMENTS OF THIS SPECIFICATION HAVE BEEN HET OR EXCEEDED. VENDOR SHALL SUPPLY A MINIMUM OF TWENTY AXLES FOR A MINIMUM TWO-YEAR IN-SERVICE QUALIFICATION TEST, SUBJECT TO THE CONDITIONS OF A LOAN AGREEMENT BETWEEN NYCT AND THE VENDOR. MATERIAL SUPPLIED MUST HAVE BEEN INSPECTED IN ACCORDANCE WITH A QUALITY ASSURANCE PROGRAM THAT HAS BEEN CERTIFIED BY THE AAR AGAINST AAR M-1003. CERTIFICATION IS TO BE SUPPLIED BY VENDOR WITH EACH SHIPMENT THAT MATERIAL HAS BEEN INSPECTED AND IS IN COMPLIANCE.

And the spec:
2092-PROD-97 REV, C

....there are 20 or 30 more.

I have not even requested you conduct a search *of* records, I have given you the exact name and record ID of the record I seek. Namely, I think it's obvious that "2061-PROD-89, rev. E" refers to a record keeping number of some sort. I attempted to show that above by providing several (of DOZENS) of examples. If your office does not know where to locate the document, then simply email or call other offices to find out who might know where the document is.

Phone calls and emails are not herculean or unreasonable efforts to identify or locate records.

If you cannot figure out which office to contact, here are some names I've pulled from publicly available sources that might be able to assist you:
Heating and Ventilation, Joseph Miano, joseph.miano@nyct.com

Subway Car Parts, Darlene Cooper, darlene.cooper@nyct.com, Justina Burke justina.burke@nyct.com

Furthermore, this is the contact info for the procurement department:
MTA Headquarters
Procurement Department
333 W. 34th Street, 9th floor
New York, NY 10001-2402
bscvprocsol@mtabsc.org

I'm sure they'd be able to assist you in finding the relevant document.

Ok. I see where you're confused and I might be able to resolve this.
I am *not* referring to a contract itself. I am referencing some text in a *technical specification for a contract* that the MTA published. The text I am referring to contains the official name/identifier of a document that I am requesting.

The cover page for the document I am using as reference says:

MTA New York City Transit

SUBWAY CAR PROCUREMENT

FOR THE

B DIVISION

TECHNICAL SPECIFICATION

NEW CAR PROCUREMENT CONTRACT

R34211 (R211)

I suspect R34211 that may be the information you require.

I encourage you to Google select phrases from my excerpt in quotes to locate the document I am looking at if you need to do so.

I suspect that the document I am requesting, 2061-PROD-89, is not attached to or specific to a contract. I suspect there is an easily fixable records access issue here. I suspect all of the technical specifications are together somewhere in the agency and they might easily be indexed for future requests.

In my message yesterday, I made an educated guess that the following three agency employees might be knowledgeable on this:
Heating and Ventilation, Joseph Miano, joseph.miano@nyct.com

Subway Car Parts, Darlene Cooper, darlene.cooper@nyct.com, Justina Burke justina.burke@nyct.com

Given their obvious role in procuring items for the MTA, I think it's reasonable for me or you to assume that they may be knowledgeable about documents like this specification because they presumably need to reference it, or may know someone familiar with the document.

I suspect I could try get in contact with them directly to ask them to help me hear, but I know that these days city and state agencies have been unpleasant with employees about communicating with members of the public, and I do not wish to get them in any trouble.

Further down, the most recent reply I have from you says:
A request for "public documents" without limitation, that include a certain name, for example, might not be found to reasonably describe the records when a search using that name produces thousands of other records irrespective of the content of those items.

If you are copying and pasting from a script or a list of canned responses, I would really like to kindly ask you to be more specific and relevant. I have not made such a broad request. I am requesting a specific document using the exact terminology that someone at the MTA officially decided to use to name and identify it as a document.

The court case you have cited includes a discussion of a FOIL request where someone requested every document that contained their prisoner identifier. On one hand, that was in 1986, when digital full text search was a rare availability. On the other hand, I am not asking the MTA to exhaustively search every document and record for the term "Air Conditioning Filters for NYCT Subway Cars, 2061-PROD-89, rev. E", I am asking for the document that is named "Air Conditioning Filters for NYCT Subway Cars, 2061-PROD-89, rev. E". Please explain how that case is relevant.

Since you insist on putting us through this, I do not believe this would require the level of effort involved searching a haystack for a needle.

In the practical sense, Italian artist Sven Sachsalber took around 18 hours to find an actual needle in an actual haystack. (See: "This Artist is Looking for a Needle in a Haystack (Literally)"). I believe the legal meaning of a herculean search may need rephrasing to avoid the use of an 18 hour search as a synonym for untenable.

But there are more issues.

In Gonsalez v. N.Y.C. Transit Auth. The court rejected a similar argument:

Unlike the decision maker in Matter of Aron, however, the MTA FOIL Appeals Officer merely asserted, without any factual support, that the work involved in locating responsive records would be "herculean."

And

In short, his determination was conclusory. An administrative determination may not be sustained where, as here, the decision maker provides only a "perfunctory recitation" of relevant statutory factors, legal standards, or other required considerations as a basis for his or her conclusions

Here, I have provided you with suggestions for how you might more easily located the records. I encourage you to try and reach out to that office.

Dear anonymous FOIL officer,

Thanks so much for your help with this request! I really appreciate it. You've done better than in 90+% of FOIL requests I've filed with an agency in NY.

Sincerely,
ALEXANDER RICCIO