This supplemental finding addressed whether Complainant's rebuttal altered our finding in Katz v. Employees Retirement System, PR 16-32. The evidence demonstrated that Complainant's APRA request sought data that was not part of the public body's computer program's usual outputs. Calculating a new output would require substantial computer reprogramming at a considerable cost. We found that the APRA did not require a public body to bear this undue burden. See R.I. Gen. Laws §38-2-3(h). Accordingly, we found no violation.