Defence FOI 965/24/25
Ben Fairless
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx@xxxxxxxxxxx.xxx.xx
Dear Ben
NOTIFICATION OF A REQUEST CONSULTATION PROCESS – FOI 965/24/25
I refer to your request for access to the following documents, in the possession of the
Department of Defence (Defence) under the
Freedom of Information Act 1982 (Cth) (FOI
Act):
…documents relating to the removal, suppression, or anonymisation of aircraft data from
third-party flight tracking services such as FlightRadar24, PlaneFinder, ADS-B
Exchange, or similar platforms. Specifically, I’m after:
1. Policies, procedures, or internal guidelines concerning requests to third-party
services for the removal or suppression of aircraft tracking data;
2. Correspondence between your agency and third-party flight tracking platforms
relating to the suppression, removal, or anonymisation of aircraft data;
3. Internal discussions, briefings, or records outlining the rationale or decisions
around seeking to suppress aircraft data from public tracking platforms;
4. Statistics, reports, or summaries indicating the volume and nature of requests
made to third-party platforms over the past five years;
5. Any agreements, memoranda of understanding, or formal arrangements between
your agency and third-party flight tracking platforms relating to data suppression
or visibility restrictions.
I am the authorised officer authorised pursuant to section 23(1) of the FOI Act to make
decisions for this FOI request.
I am writing to advise that a large volume of potentially relevant documents have been
identified as falling within the scope of the request. Due to the broad scope of the request and
the volume of potentially relevant documents, I consider that the work involved in processing
the request in its current form would substantially and unreasonably divert the resources of
Defence from its other operations. Accordingly, I intend to refuse the request under section
24AA [practical refusal reason] of the FOI Act.
As set out in section 24AB [request consultation process] of the FOI Act, you have the
opportunity to revise your request before I make a final decision.
You have 14 days to
respond to this notice. The consultation period starts on the day after you receive this notice
and ends on
Wednesday 21 May 2025.
Reason for Intending to Refuse Your Request I consider the work involved in processing your request in its current form, would
substantially and unreasonably divert the resources of the agency from its other operations.
1
Section 24(1) of the FOI Act provides that an agency may refuse to give access to documents
in accordance with an FOI request if:
• a practical refusal reason exists in relation to the request; and
• following a request consultation process under section 24AB of the FOI Act, the
agency is satisfied that the practical refusal reason still exists.
Section 24AA(1)(a)(i) of the FOI Act provides that a practical refusal reason exists in relation
to a request if the work involved in processing the request would substantially and
unreasonably divert the resources of the agency from its other operations.
In making my assessment as to the substantial and unreasonable diversion of resources, I have
placed weight on the time taken to conduct the initial searches and identify potentially
relevant documents, as well as the time estimated to be required to process and finalise your
request. I have also considered the broad nature of the multiple parts of your request, and the
staffing resources required to support processing.
Taking a common sense approach to interpreting the terms and scope of the request I
identified:
• There is no timeframe for the request.
• The request seeks approximately 12 different types of documents, namely; policies,
procedures, internal guidelines, correspondence, internal discussions, briefings,
records, statistics, reports, summaries, agreements, formal arrangements, memoranda
of understanding.
• The request comprises a large number of individual search terms, including;
‘removal’, ‘suppression’, ‘anonymisation’, ‘aircraft data’, ‘third-party services’, ‘flight
tracking’, ‘flight-tracking services’, ‘platforms’, ‘flight tracking platforms’, ‘public
tracking platforms’, ‘FlightRadar24’, ‘PlaneFinder’, ‘ADS-B Exchange’, ‘similar
platforms’, ‘aircraft tracking data’, ‘volume and nature of requests’, ‘data
suppression’, ‘visibility restrictions’.
I consider that the absence of a timeframe, the number of individual search terms, the diverse
categories of documents requested, as well as the results of initial searches sufficiently
establish the impractical breadth of the scope of the request.
To ensure all reasonable steps are taken to locate documents within the scope of the request,
multiple areas within Defence are required to undertake searches. The initial document search
and retrieval processes undertaken to date has taken substantial resourcing to administer, and
has identified a large number of potentially relevant documents that will require assessment to
confirm relevancy and sensitivities. For example, the results of initial searches, conducted in
the Defence electronic document record management system ‘Objective’, identified more than
7,000 individual documents. I consider this to be a substantial number of potentially relevant
documents that will need to be assessed to confirm relevancy.
I have also identified from this initial scoping exercise that third party consultation is likely to
be required, in accordance with section 15(6) [extension of processing period to comply with
requirements of section 26A, 27 or 27A] of the FOI Act.
In summary, I am satisfied that the resourcing required to administer searches, confirm
relevancy of and sensitivities within the documents, and undertake third party consultation
with a variety of organisations, constitutes an unreasonable diversion of Defence resources.
2
Using a conservative estimate, I have calculated that it would take at least 1 minute to review
each document for relevancy, plus an additional 2 minutes per document to apply redactions
where relevant, and to make a decision on release.
Further, to finalise the request a statement of reasons, and schedule of documents would be
required to be prepared. I have calculated that the above activities would take more than 400
hours to complete, and would substantially divert Defence resources from other activities,
including impeding the operations of relevant line areas. I am satisfied that a practical refusal
reason exists.
Request Consultation Process
So that Defence can continue processing the request, you have the opportunity to consider and
provide a written response to one of the following options
by no later than Wednesday 21
May 2025:
1. Withdraw your request.
2. Make a revised request.
3. Advise that you do not wish to revise your request.
Revising your request can be actioned by clarifying or significantly reducing the scope of the
request to make it more manageable, or by specifying certain types of documents you wish to
access. For example you could amend the terms of your request to:
• provide a timeframe for the request;
• reduce the categories of documents sought (e.g. only briefings or agreements);
• specify a single flight-tracking service, or name all flight-tracker services of interest;
• reduce the number of parts to your request; and/or
• identify a specific Defence Group/Service.
Please note that the time taken to consult you regarding the scope of the request is not taken
into account for the purposes of the 30 day time limit for processing the request.
If you do not respond to one of the three options listed above during the consultation period,
your request will be taken to have been withdrawn.
Contact Officer
If you would like to revise your request or have any questions, please contact Defence FOI at
xxx.xxxxxxxxxxxxxx@xxxxxxx.xxx.xx. Kind regards
Digitally signed
Sandy by Sandy TURNER
TURNER Date: 2025.05.06
16:51:27 +10'00'
S. Turner
Air Commodore
Accredited Decision Maker
Royal Australian Air Force
Tuesday 6 May 2025
3
Document Outline
