This supplemental finding addressed whether Complainant's rebuttal altered our finding in Sullivan v. City of Newport, PR 17-38. We found that the Complainant's suggestion that the City should have responded in a narrative manner was not governed by the APRA and that the City's failure to do so did not violate the APRA. See Chase v. Department of Corrections, PR 11-36. Additionally, based on the evidence presented, we failed to find any evidence that would lead us to conclude that other responsive documents existed that were being improperly withheld by the City. Instead, we found that the City's search was reasonably calculated to discover all responsive documents. See Nye v. Rhode Island Department of Public Safety, PR 16-46. Accordingly, we found no violation.