This is an HTML version of an attachment to the Freedom of Information request 'In re: Reason codes'.

Date: Thu, 16 Mar 2017 09:57:57 +0000
Subject: Re: Voicemails + scheduling
From: "Mark R. Diamond" <[FOI #3114 email]>
To: Kate Friedrich <[email address]>

FOI Requests
Attention: Ms Kate Friedrich
Level 11, 100 Arthur Street
North Sydney NSW 2060

Dear Ms Friedrich,

In re: Reason codes
Dear Ms Friedrich,

Thank you for your latest follow-up email. I tried calling you again today during the times that you mentioned (13.10, 13.26, 13.48, 14.13, 16.48, 17.18) but got put through to voicemail on every occasion. Since telephone seems destined to fail, I'll try with more detail here.

You remarked in your email of 23 February 2017 that, "of the opinion that it would be an unreasonable diversion of nbn’s resources, per sections 24 and 24AA of the FOI Act. This is because there are scores of data that may fit within the scope of your request". I don't understand how you would have reached that conclusion.

In a letter (actually a template of a letter) dated 11 June 2014, and available from nbnco at , Susan Huggett, General Manager – Wholesale Supply, explains that the nbnco has introduced "standard reason codes to Trouble Ticket In Progress-Pending and In Progress-Held notifications together with standard resolution codes to Trouble Ticket Resolved Notifications". In light of the standardisation of the coding, and given that it is precisely those codes that I'm seeking, it seems improbable that there are "scores of data" tha might fit within the scope of my request. Rather, the strong implication is that there is a repository (perhaps in the form of a database) that would enable a person to rapidly determine the appropriate code associated with a particular reason for the issuance of a Trouble Ticket".

Note that I am not seeking information about any of the many thousands of trouble tickets that are likely to have been issued, only generic information about how those tickets are coded.

If the information that I have given here does not remove the s 24AA practical refusal reason, I would be grateful if you could tell me why it does not, and what further detail you think is needed to remove the practical refusal reason.


Mark R. Diamond
p.s. My apologies for mis-spelling your name in my earlier email!

-----Original Message-----

Hi Mark

I received your voicemails, thank you. I’ve been in meetings and was not
at my desk to take your calls. I note you said you are going to try again
this afternoon, but please note I am in back to back meetings today. If
you were able to leave a return phone number, I’d be happy to try you back
when I get a break.

Alternatively and as foreshadowed previously, if there was a time that
also suited you, I would also be happy to lock that time in the diary for
our discussion. For example, I have full availability between 1 and 2.30pm
and 4 and 5.30pm, tomorrow Thursday 16 March. Please let me know if there
is a window within these times that also suits you.

Kind regards


Kate Friedrich

Senior Legal Counsel – FOI, Privacy & Knowledge Management

P +61 2 9927 4118| E [1][email address]

Level 11, 100 Arthur Street, North Sydney, NSW 2066

* Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday


Visible links
1. mailto:[email address]

Please use this email address for all replies to this request:
[FOI #3114 email]

This request has been made by an individual using Right to Know. This message and any reply that you make will be published on the internet. More information on how Right to Know works can be found at:

If you find this service useful as an FOI officer, please ask your web manager to link to us from your organisation's FOI page.