# Preservation Demand and CPD Response This three-page Word file contains request 760's demand to preserve Flock Organization Audit, Network Audit, search, access, and associated records and a CPD response dated July 22. The response makes a limited preservation commitment, maintains the Department's disclosure position, and refers vendor preservation for legal review. ## Key takeaways - **The demand seeks both agency and vendor preservation.** It asks CPD to preserve and direct its vendor to preserve audit and usage records while the requests and any resulting proceeding remain pending (`FOIA 760 Preservation Demand - Connor.docx`, p. 1). - **CPD commits only as to existing records within its possession or administrative control.** The response says, "The Department will preserve potentially responsive existing records currently in the Department's possession or administrative control as required by applicable law, Department practice, and direction of legal counsel" (p. 2). - **CPD maintains its categorical legal position.** It says the named audit and usage records may contain or reveal ALPR-derived, investigative, or access activity and maintains the previously cited ALPR, computer-security, and conditional investigation grounds (pp. 2-3). - **Already unavailable records will not be recreated.** CPD says that records deleted, purged, overwritten, or unavailable before the demand under ordinary settings, vendor practices, or law cannot be recreated (p. 3). - **Vendor preservation remains unresolved.** The response says the request to direct the vendor to preserve records "has also been referred for legal review" and promises only additional steps required by law or directed by counsel (p. 3). ## Open questions / follow-ups - What potentially responsive records existed on July 22 and what preservation steps were actually taken. - Whether Flock received a preservation direction. - Whether any responsive category had already been deleted or purged.