This is an HTML version of an attachment to the Freedom of Information request 'Documents relating or referring to DVA FOI 23544'.


Document 1
FOIREQ18/00175   001
From:

, Leia on behalf of Information.Law
To:
FOIDR
Cc:
Information.Law
Subject:
FOI 23544 – Request for an extension of time under section 15AB of the FOI Act [DLM=For-Official-Use-
Only]
Date:
Thursday, 30 August 2018 2:47:24 PM
Attachments:
image001.png
OAIC extension form - 15AB - FOI 23544.pdf
FOI 23544 - Notice of intention to refuse request - Consultation due to practical refusal reason.pdf
Re FOI 23544 - Notice of intention to refuse request - Consultation due to practical refusal reason -
Response sought by 29 August 2018 SECUNCLASSIFIED.msg
RE FOI 23544 - Notice of intention to refuse request - Consultation due to practical refusal reason -
Response sought by 29 August 2018 SECUNCLASSIFIED.msg
FOI 23544 DLMSensitiveLegal.msg
Good afternoon OAIC,
FOI 23544 – Request for an extension of time under section 15AB of the FOI Act
Please find attached a request for an extension of time to 1 October 2018 (noting 30 days would
fall on Sunday, 30 September), to finalise the above FOI request. Details are contained within the
attached form. I have also attached documents to help in your decision making.
Please feel free to contact me should you have any questions or require any further
justifications.
Kind Regards,
Leia s 47F
Assistant Director
Information Law | Legal Services & Assurance
Department of Veterans’ Affairs
T: 02 6120 8128 | E: xxxxxxxxxxxxxx@xxx.xxx.xx | W: www.dva.gov.au
cid:image001.png@01D0027A.1DAB84F0
IMPORTANT
1. Before opening any attachments, please check for viruses.
2. This e-mail (including any attachments) may contain confidential information
for the intended recipient. If you are not the intended recipient, 
please contact the sender and delete all copies of this email. 
3. Any views expressed in this e-mail are those of the sender and are not
a statement of Australian Government Policy unless otherwise stated. 
4. Electronic addresses published in this email are not conspicuous publications and DVA
does not consent to the receipt of commercial electronic messages. 
5. To unsubscribe from emails from the Department of Veterans' Affairs (DVA) please go
to 
http://www.dva.gov.au/contact_us/Pages/feedback.aspx
, and advise which mailing list you would like to unsubscribe from. 
6. Finally, please do not remove this notice.


Document 2
FOIREQ18/00175   002






FOIREQ18/00175   005


FOIREQ18/00175   006


Document 3
FOIREQ18/00175   007
FOI 
Request consultation process due to existence of a practical refusal 
reason under section 24AB of the Freedom of Information Act 1982
 
Information Law, Legal Services & Assurance, Department of Veterans’ Affairs 
Applicant: 
Verity Pane 
Notice date: 
15 August 2018 
FOI reference number: 
FOI 23386 
Requested documents: 
“In light of recent media reporting and admissions by the Minister in Federal Parliament that the 
Department spent more than $0.6m in external legal services fees in regards to just one veteran - Martin 
Rollins - in relation to DVA’s deliberate backdating of a rewrite of a DVA policy to exclude Mr Rollins’ 
receiving a benefit he was entitled to at the time of his applying for it (http://www.abc.net.au/7.30/dva-
secretly-changed-rules-to-deny-veterans-claim/9883774 ) there is a public interest in understanding how 
the Department is expending public funds on external legal services. 

While the Department reports just one summary total of expenditure on external legal services in its annual 
reports, this is clearly insufficient and far too opaque to understand what the Department is spending on 
external legal costs for individual matters. While this information does indicate the Department spends 
between $7m - $10m on external legal services roughly every financial year, it gives no indication whether it 
may relate to only a small number of individual veterans or many or what the Department roughly spends 
per legal issue - which is important to understand when considering if the claims that the Department is 
combative and litigious are overstated or not. 

Certainly the recent admission (initially refuted) that the Department has spend in excess of half a million 
dollars, litigiously, to defend this backdated change of policy to deny Martin Rollins a benefit that existed at 
the time he applied for it (and ironically this legal expenditure many hundreds of thousands of dollars 
greater than the benefit he was otherwise entitled to receive), raises public interest questions whether such 
excessive external legal expenditure is endemic or is a one off isolated case. 

To that end, under FOI, I seek under s 17 of the FOI Act for a summary document to be created (so as to 
avoid unnecessary disclosure of irrelevant Departmental information) from data in the Departments 
financial and information management systems, to break down these global external legal services 
expenditure, so that greater transparency is given. 

I seek a breakdown to be provided for the last three financial years - FY17/18, FY16/17, and FY15/16 - and 
to be broken down to matters involving individual veterans and other. Where matters involved individual 
veterans, this should be further broken down to stating the cumulative external legal services expenditure 
per veteran involved (with each veteran referred to by pseudonym - so first veteran is Veteran A, next is 
Veteran B, and so on). In order to reduce burden, where external legal expenditure involving an individual 
veteran is below $10K cumulative for each financial year, they may be reported as a group (as the interest is 
in excessive external legal expenditure). An example of the layout I seek is below: 


FOIREQ18/00175   008
...............................FY17/18...................FY16/17....................FY15/16 
......................................$...............................$...............................$ 
Other 
Veteran A 
Veteran B 
etc 
Veterans > $10K” 

 
Dear Verity Pane, 
 
Freedom of Information Request: FOI 23544 
 
I refer to your request for access to documents under the Freedom of Information Act 1982 (FOI Act) 
received 16 July 2018.  
 
I, Position Number 62210022, am an officer authorised by the Secretary of the Department of Veterans’ 
Affairs (the Department) to make decisions about access to documents in the possession of the 
Department in accordance with section 23(1) of the Freedom of Information Act 1982 (the FOI Act).  
 
This is a notice of an intention to refuse access to the documents you have requested because a ‘practical 
refusal reasons’ exist under section 24(1) of the FOI Act. I am issuing this notice under section 24AB(2) of 
the FOI Act.  
 
The practical refusal reason applicable to your request is that the work involved in processing your request 
would substantially and unreasonably divert the resources of the Department from its operations as 
specified in section 24AA(1)(a)(i) of the FOI Act due to its size and complexity.  
 
Section 24AA  
 
Under section 24AA(2) of the FOI Act, the agency must have regard to the resources that would have to be 
used for:  
o  identifying, locating or collating the documents within the filing system of the agency; 
o  deciding whether to grant, refuse or defer access to a document to which the request relates, or to 
grant access to an edited copy of such a document (including resources that would have to be used 
for examining the document or consulting with any person or body in relation to the request); 
o  making a copy or an edited copy, of the document; and 
o  notifying any interim or final decision on the request. 
 
I consider that all of the above factors have a bearing on your request. The reasons why a practical refusal 
reasons exists in relation to your request is set out below.  
 
Why I intend to refuse your request 
 
Request is substantial 
 
Following initial enquiries, I estimate that 60 hours of processing time is required to deal with this request. 
The reasons for this are as follows: 
  Your request asks the Department to create a document under section 17 of the FOI Act. To do so, 
the Department needs to retrieve data that is not readily available, review that data and assemble 
it in the manner you have requested. This requires, for example: 

FOIREQ18/00175   009
a. initial searches and retrieval of data that may be relevant to your request;
b. extraction and sorting the data into Financial Years;
c. identification of each line item for each month to ascertain which payments are within the
scope of your request;
d. further searches to clarify payments of line items where it is not apparently clear they fall
within the scope of your request (for example, payments can range from, but are not
limited to, cost recovery, matters in the AAT, the Federal Court and other related legal
costs of the Department);
e. extraction of the relevant line items into a new document;
f.
sorting the data to collate payments related to individual surnames/clients;
g. searches to ascertain the surnames identified are for the same individual and not for
different individuals who share the same surname;
h. removal of identifying information;
i.
sorting information so as to indicate which line items fall under or over the $10,000
threshold.
 Approximately eight (8) hours was taken to identify relevant material. The data that was identified
covers the 2015/16 and 2016/17 Financial Years. Data for the 2017/18 Financial Year is not yet
readily available. Due to the voluminous nature of potentially relevant material and the broad
scope of your request, manual verification of the data is and would continue to be required to
ensure relevant information has been captured and that each payment is within the scope of your
request. I conservatively estimate an additional two (2) hours would be required to ensure all
relevant data has been identified and retrieved.
 To assist in ascertain whether a document could be created as per your request, a sample of the
available information was used to undertake the tasks noted above. This sample involved the
assessment of 110 line items comprising a three (3) month period. This task took 3 hrs and
45 minutes to complete.
 An assessment of available information for the 2015/16 and 2016/17 Financial Years indicates a
total of 1,449 line items covering the 24 month period will need to be assessed. The processing
time involved in undertaking this task, based on the time it took to undertake the sample above is
estimated to be in excess of 48 hours.
 The relevant document once finalised, will have to be analysed and a decision made before it can
be released to you. Some of the information within the document, may be exempt from disclosure
under the FOI Act.
 Further to the previous point, a Statement of Reasons will still need to be provided to you. I
anticipate that it would take approximately two (2) hours to draft the Statement of Reasons and
Schedule of Documents for this decision, noting on initial review that any exemptions applied
would need to be detailed.
The above estimate does not take into account the time taken to review and prepare the sample of 
documents or to issue this notice to you. 
Taking these factors into account, I have concluded the request as it currently stands is substantial. 
Request is unreasonable 
For the purpose of providing this notice, I have considered whether the substantial resource burden would 
be unreasonable having regard to the following:  

FOIREQ18/00175   010
  60 hours of processing time is, at face value, an unreasonable burden for a single FOI request, 
taking into account the need to process multiple requests at any given time, and the impact such a 
burden would have on responding to other FOI applicants. 
  High level data relating to the Department legal expenditure is already available to you and the 
public through reporting within the Department’s Annual Reports.  
  Due to the broad nature of your request and the fact that is covers legal expenses spanning several 
Financial Years, the volume of material to be assessed is high. There also exists complexity in 
determining which payments fall within the scope of your request. 
 
Taking these factors into account, I have concluded the request as it currently stands is unreasonable, as 
well as substantial (as outlined above).  
 
Further clarification about what is sought 
 
In addition to the above, it is unclear precisely what payments you want identified in the document. As 
noted above, the payments identified range from cost recovery action, matters involving the AAT, the 
Federal Court and other related legal costs. In its current form those items do not provide such information 
concerning the documents you seek to access as is reasonably necessary to enable a responsible officer of 
the Department to identify. This is also called a ‘practical refusal reason’ (section 24AA). 
 
What you should do? 
 
You can revise the request in a form that would remove the grounds for refusal. Please note that even if 
you do modify your request, it is possible that a practical refusal reason under subsection 24AA(1)(a)(i) may 
still exist or the Department may need further time to process your revised request – this will depend on 
the terms of your final request. As far as is reasonably practicable, we are happy to provide you with 
further information to assist you in making your request in such a form that removes the practical refusal 
ground.  
 
 
If you are able to pinpoint the specific information you seek to be included that would assist. In particular, 
you may wish to consider for example: 
  limiting payments to specific activities such as costs related to matters before the Administrative 
Appeals Tribunal; 
  narrowing the scope to a more specific timeframe, rather than a three year period;  
  providing further information and clarification to explain what types of legal payments you want 
captured in the document. 
 
Please note you have 14 days from the date you receive this notice to either:  
  withdraw the request; 
  make a revised request; or 
  indicate that you do not wish to revise the request.  
 
If you do not respond in one of these ways within 14 days the request will be taken to have been 
withdrawn pursuant to section 24AB(7) of the FOI Act. If you indicate you do not wish to revise your 
request, the Department will proceed to make a decision on whether to refuse the request on resource 
grounds under section 24(1).  
 
If you need more time to respond, please contact Information Law within the 14 day period to discuss your 
need for an extension of time.  
 

FOIREQ18/00175   011
Please note under section 24AB(8) of the FOI Act, the time for processing your FOI request is suspended 
from the day you receive this notice until the day you do one of the things listed above.  
If you would like to revise your request or have any questions, please contact Information Law using the 
details listed below: 
Post: Legal Services & Assurance, Department of Veterans’ Affairs 
GPO Box 9998, Canberra ACT 2601 
Facsimile: (02) 6289 6337 
Email: xxxxxxxxxxxxxx@xxx.xxx.xx 
Yours sincerely 
Position Number 62210022 
Information Law 
Legal Services & Assurance  
15 August 2018 

Document 4
FOIREQ18/00175   012
From:
Verity Pane
To:
Information.Law
Subject:
Re: FOI 23544 - Notice of intention to refuse request - Consultation due to practical refusal reason -
Response sought by 29 August 2018 [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]
Date:
Wednesday, 15 August 2018 8:22:58 PM
Dear Unnamed Officer (Position Number 62210022),
While a rough estimation has been provided, it appears the Department is satisfied based on its enquiries that
this FOI would take 60 leisurely hours for collection, assessment and decision issuance.
The primary basis of your agency’s practical refusal intention is that the amount of external legal services
expenditure against veterans is very large, and covers a large number of matters. That does answer a question
in, and of, itself that the Department is a frequent user of external legal services providers in litigation and
opinion seeking against veterans.
But in light of this, if there is a willingness to pay for this, as per usual cost recovery processes in FOI, does the
Department still intend to refuse access? Just because as FOI may exceed the free processing period is generally
insufficient to refuse access, and mechanisms exist for requester contribution to be made in these circumstances.
You state to process the FOI application would deny others the opportunity to have their own FOI applications,
but provide no supporting evidence to substantiate that. How many open and overdue FOIs does DVA have
presently? Is there any reason a consent to extend the processing deadline cannot offset any intensity of
resource allocation, as I would be prepared to consider that.
You also state the application covers ‘several’ financial years, despite only three being sought, and is too
‘broad’, yet paying for external legal services providers is not a common administrative practice and requires
SES level approval. While making reference to this, you fail to provide enough information to allow for any
stratification to adequately allow for any informed revision of scope to occur.
I would however be willing to refine the scope to FY15/16 in the first instance, which could have helpfully been
identified in your estimates but wasn’t (instead you looked for factors to reject, rather than offer alternatives).
I guess the only thing we both agree in full on is that it is evident that DVA is a regular high frequency user of
external legal services providers, over and above the more limited use by other agencies.
I still think that ways ahead exist, despite your claims to the contrary.
Yours sincerely,
Verity Pane
-----Original Message-----
Good evening Verity Pane,
 FOI 23544 – section 24AB Notice of intention to refuse – Request
 consultation due to practical refusal reason
 I refer to your request for access to information under the Freedom of
 Information Act 1982 (FOI Act); received on 16 July 2018.
 Please find attached a notification under section 24AB of the FOI Act,
 advising you of the Department’s intention to refuse your request on the

FOIREQ18/00175   013
 grounds that a practical refusal reason exists. A decision on this request
 will be made pending the outcome of this requested consultation process.
 Please review and consider the attached notice and advise how you wish to
 proceed by 29 August 2018.
 If you require any further assistance or time to respond to this notice
 please do not hesitate to contact us.
 Kind Regards,
 Information Law Team
 Department of Veterans’ Affairs
 E: [1][email address] | W: [2]www.dva.gov.au
 [3]cid:image001.png@01D0027A.1DAB84F0
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Please use this email address for all replies to this request:
s 22
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:
https://www.righttoknow.org.au/help/officers
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.
-------------------------------------------------------------------

Document 5
FOIREQ18/00175   014
From:
Verity Pane
To:
Information.Law
Subject:
RE: FOI 23544 - Notice of intention to refuse request - Consultation due to practical refusal reason -
Response sought by 29 August 2018 [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]
Date:
Friday, 24 August 2018 7:23:38 PM
Dear Unnamed Officer,
As you waited until the second last day to issue a practical refusal notice, when practice is that practical refusal
notification should be made within 14 days (and it appears the reason for the late issue was to intentionally
delay progress of this FOI, unethically), I will only grant you an additional 14 days (plus an extra day or two to
show I’m kinder than you) from the original statutory expiry date.
The new statutory deadline is therefore 5pm on Friday 31 August 2018.
Yours sincerely,
Verity Pane
-----Original Message-----
Good evening Verity Pane,
Thank you for your email and option to revise the scope.
Information regarding the amount of work involved and options to revise were provided to you on 15 August. A
decision to impose a charge to process your request has not been considered because the work involved in
processing your request in its current form, would result in a diversion of resources. An extension of time to
process your request would not remove the practical refusal reasons in its current form. As explained in the
consultation notice to you, the request is considered both substantial and unreasonable for one request. The
process involved in extracting the information you seek and the type of legal expenses that may be covered in
that data was explained in the notice. The notice provided options to you, including for example, to revise the
timeframe or even clarify which payment types you wanted captured. Further, information about the
Department's volume of FOI requests is publicly available (e.g. within the OAIC's Annual Report and on
data.gov.au; https://data.gov.au/dataset/freedom-of-information-statistics). This should give you an indication of
the volume of requests the Department deals with each year.
Based on the below, I am satisfied that revising the scope to the 2015/16 Financial Year will remove the
practical refusal reason. We would be grateful if you would agree to an extension of time under section 15AA
of the FOI Act, to allow the Department more time finalise your request. If possible, we would be grateful for
an extension of 30 days.
I hope the above assists.
Kind Regards,
Information Law Team
Department of Veterans’ Affairs
E: [email address] | W: www.dva.gov.au
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Please use this email address for all replies to this request:
s 22
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:
https://www.righttoknow.org.au/help/officers
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.

FOIREQ18/00175   015
-------------------------------------------------------------------

Document 6
FOIREQ18/00175   016
From:
Komora, George
To:

 Leia
Cc:
Reglar, Alison
Subject:
FOI 23544 [DLM=Sensitive:Legal]
Date:
Friday, 24 August 2018 7:45:49 PM
Note, Leia – following Verity Pane’s response, in the above matter, tonight, he posted on RTK:
Verity Pane left an annotation (August 24, 2018)
I predict that not only will this agency reject the offer of extension but will apply to the
OAIC under s 15AB to extend this statutory deadline further, despite just stating that
only one financial year was *not* complex or voluminous (which are the grounds for
extension being approved). 
As highlighted by respected FOI commentator Peter Timmis, s 15AB requests get ticked
and flicked by the OAIC despite no evidence frequently being provided by the agencies
that request them (in fact it is a very rare event indeed if the OAIC rejects such an
application) http://foi-privacy.blogspot.com/2013/02/... 
That’s the problem of a so called regulator who is too much in bed with those they are
supposed to monitor.
Regards,
George

Document 7
FOIREQ18/00175   017
From:
FOIDR
To:
s 22
Subject:
RQ18/02489 - Extension of time application by the Department of Veterans" Affairs [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]
Date:
Friday, 31 August 2018 10:41:00 AM
Our reference: RQ18/02489
Agency reference: FOI 23544
Ms Verity Pane
By email: s 22
Extension of time application by the Department of Veterans' Affairs  
Dear Ms Pane
I write to you to advise that on 30 August 2018 the Office of the Australian Information
Commissioner (the OAIC) received a request from the Department of Veterans' Affairs (the
Department) for an extension of time to process your freedom of information request.
The Department has applied for an extension of time under s 15AB of the Freedom of Information
Act 1982 (Cth) because your request is considered to be voluminous and complex.
The Department has requested an extension of time to 1 October 2018. I will take any
comments you may have to make into account when deciding the application.
Please respond to this email by 5 September 2018. If I do not hear from you by this date, I will
proceed to make a decision on the basis of the information provided to me by the Department.
You will be notified of the decision once the matter has been finalised.
Contact
If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me . In all correspondence please
include reference number RQ18/02489.
Kind regard
Megan McKenna | Assistant Review Officer | Freedom of Information Dispute Resolution
Office of the Australian Information Commissioner
Level 3, 175 Pitt Street, SYDNEY NSW 2000
GPO Box 5128 SYDNEY NSW 2001| www.oaic.gov.au
Phone: +61 2 8231 4292| E-mail: xxxxx.xxxxxxx@xxxx.xxx.xx


Document 8
FOIREQ18/00175   018
From:

, Leia on behalf of Information.Law
To:
Megan McKenna
Subject:
***24AB form as discussed*** FOI 23544 – Request for an extension of time under section 15AB of the
FOI Act [DLM=For-Official-Use-Only]
Date:
Friday, 31 August 2018 11:55:02 AM
Attachments:
image001.png
FOI 23544 - Notice of intention to refuse request - Consultation due to practical refusal reason.pdf
Re FOI 23544 - Notice of intention to refuse request - Consultation due to practical refusal reason -
Response sought by 29 August 2018 SECUNCLASSIFIED.msg
RE FOI 23544 - Notice of intention to refuse request - Consultation due to practical refusal reason -
Response sought by 29 August 2018 SECUNCLASSIFIED.msg
FOI 23544 DLMSensitiveLegal.msg
OAIC extension form - 15AB - 23544 - Copy.pdf
Hi Megan,
24AB form as discussed. If you are wanting to provide the applicant any of the other documents
attached (internal DVA emails) please ensure our names are removed. I can do this if needed.
Thank you. Please let me know if there is anything further you require or if you would like us to
respond to any comments made by the applicant regarding the extension sought.
Kind Regards,
Leia s 47F
Assistant Director
Information Law | Legal Services & Assurance
Department of Veterans’ Affairs
T: 02 6120 8128 | E: xxxxxxxxxxxxxx@xxx.xxx.xx | W: www.dva.gov.au
cid:image001.png@01D0027A.1DAB84F0
From: s 47F , Leia On Behalf Of Information.Law
Sent: Thursday, 30 August 2018 2:47 PM
To: 'xxxxxxxxxxxxx@xxxx.xxx.xx' <xxxxxxxxxxxxx@xxxx.xxx.xx>
Cc: Information.Law <xxxxxxxxxx@xxx.xxx.xx>
Subject: FOI 23544 – Request for an extension of time under section 15AB of the FOI Act
[DLM=For-Official-Use-Only]
Good afternoon OAIC,
FOI 23544 – Request for an extension of time under section 15AB of the FOI Act
Please find attached a request for an extension of time to 1 October 2018 (noting 30 days would
fall on Sunday, 30 September), to finalise the above FOI request. Details are contained within the
attached form. I have also attached documents to help in your decision making.
Please feel free to contact me should you have any questions or require any further


FOIREQ18/00175   019
justifications.
Kind Regards,
Leia s 47F
Assistant Director
Information Law | Legal Services & Assurance
Department of Veterans’ Affairs
T: 02 6120 8128 | E: xxxxxxxxxxxxxx@xxx.xxx.xx | W: www.dva.gov.au
cid:image001.png@01D0027A.1DAB84F0
IMPORTANT
1. Before opening any attachments, please check for viruses.
2. This e-mail (including any attachments) may contain confidential information
for the intended recipient. If you are not the intended recipient, 
please contact the sender and delete all copies of this email. 
3. Any views expressed in this e-mail are those of the sender and are not
a statement of Australian Government Policy unless otherwise stated. 
4. Electronic addresses published in this email are not conspicuous publications and DVA
does not consent to the receipt of commercial electronic messages. 
5. To unsubscribe from emails from the Department of Veterans' Affairs (DVA) please go
to 
http://www.dva.gov.au/contact_us/Pages/feedback.aspx
, and advise which mailing list you would like to unsubscribe from. 
6. Finally, please do not remove this notice.


Document 9
FOIREQ18/00175   020
FOI 
Request consultation process due to existence of a practical refusal 
reason under section 24AB of the Freedom of Information Act 1982
 
Information Law, Legal Services & Assurance, Department of Veterans’ Affairs 
Applicant: 
Verity Pane 
Notice date: 
15 August 2018 
FOI reference number: 
FOI 23386 
Requested documents: 
“In light of recent media reporting and admissions by the Minister in Federal Parliament that the 
Department spent more than $0.6m in external legal services fees in regards to just one veteran - Martin 
Rollins - in relation to DVA’s deliberate backdating of a rewrite of a DVA policy to exclude Mr Rollins’ 
receiving a benefit he was entitled to at the time of his applying for it (http://www.abc.net.au/7.30/dva-
secretly-changed-rules-to-deny-veterans-claim/9883774 ) there is a public interest in understanding how 
the Department is expending public funds on external legal services. 

While the Department reports just one summary total of expenditure on external legal services in its annual 
reports, this is clearly insufficient and far too opaque to understand what the Department is spending on 
external legal costs for individual matters. While this information does indicate the Department spends 
between $7m - $10m on external legal services roughly every financial year, it gives no indication whether it 
may relate to only a small number of individual veterans or many or what the Department roughly spends 
per legal issue - which is important to understand when considering if the claims that the Department is 
combative and litigious are overstated or not. 

Certainly the recent admission (initially refuted) that the Department has spend in excess of half a million 
dollars, litigiously, to defend this backdated change of policy to deny Martin Rollins a benefit that existed at 
the time he applied for it (and ironically this legal expenditure many hundreds of thousands of dollars 
greater than the benefit he was otherwise entitled to receive), raises public interest questions whether such 
excessive external legal expenditure is endemic or is a one off isolated case. 

To that end, under FOI, I seek under s 17 of the FOI Act for a summary document to be created (so as to 
avoid unnecessary disclosure of irrelevant Departmental information) from data in the Departments 
financial and information management systems, to break down these global external legal services 
expenditure, so that greater transparency is given. 

I seek a breakdown to be provided for the last three financial years - FY17/18, FY16/17, and FY15/16 - and 
to be broken down to matters involving individual veterans and other. Where matters involved individual 
veterans, this should be further broken down to stating the cumulative external legal services expenditure 
per veteran involved (with each veteran referred to by pseudonym - so first veteran is Veteran A, next is 
Veteran B, and so on). In order to reduce burden, where external legal expenditure involving an individual 
veteran is below $10K cumulative for each financial year, they may be reported as a group (as the interest is 
in excessive external legal expenditure). An example of the layout I seek is below: 


FOIREQ18/00175   021
...............................FY17/18...................FY16/17....................FY15/16 
......................................$...............................$...............................$ 
Other 
Veteran A 
Veteran B 
etc 
Veterans > $10K” 

Dear Verity Pane, 
Freedom of Information Request: FOI 23544 
I refer to your request for access to documents under the Freedom of Information Act 1982 (FOI Act) 
received 16 July 2018.  
I, Position Number 62210022, am an officer authorised by the Secretary of the Department of Veterans’ 
Affairs (the Department) to make decisions about access to documents in the possession of the 
Department in accordance with section 23(1) of the Freedom of Information Act 1982 (the FOI Act).  
This is a notice of an intention to refuse access to the documents you have requested because a ‘practical 
refusal reasons’ exist under section 24(1) of the FOI Act. I am issuing this notice under section 24AB(2) of 
the FOI Act.  
The practical refusal reason applicable to your request is that the work involved in processing your request 
would substantially and unreasonably divert the resources of the Department from its operations as 
specified in section 24AA(1)(a)(i) of the FOI Act due to its size and complexity.  
Section 24AA 
Under section 24AA(2) of the FOI Act, the agency must have regard to the resources that would have to be 
used for: 
o
identifying, locating or collating the documents within the filing system of the agency;
o
deciding whether to grant, refuse or defer access to a document to which the request relates, or to
grant access to an edited copy of such a document (including resources that would have to be used
for examining the document or consulting with any person or body in relation to the request);
o
making a copy or an edited copy, of the document; and
o notifying any interim or final decision on the request.
I consider that all of the above factors have a bearing on your request. The reasons why a practical refusal 
reasons exists in relation to your request is set out below.  
Why I intend to refuse your request 
Request is substantial 
Following initial enquiries, I estimate that 60 hours of processing time is required to deal with this request. 
The reasons for this are as follows: 
 Your request asks the Department to create a document under section 17 of the FOI Act. To do so,
the Department needs to retrieve data that is not readily available, review that data and assemble
it in the manner you have requested. This requires, for example:

FOIREQ18/00175   022
a. initial searches and retrieval of data that may be relevant to your request;
b. extraction and sorting the data into Financial Years;
c. identification of each line item for each month to ascertain which payments are within the
scope of your request;
d. further searches to clarify payments of line items where it is not apparently clear they fall
within the scope of your request (for example, payments can range from, but are not
limited to, cost recovery, matters in the AAT, the Federal Court and other related legal
costs of the Department);
e. extraction of the relevant line items into a new document;
f.
sorting the data to collate payments related to individual surnames/clients;
g. searches to ascertain the surnames identified are for the same individual and not for
different individuals who share the same surname;
h. removal of identifying information;
i.
sorting information so as to indicate which line items fall under or over the $10,000
threshold.
 Approximately eight (8) hours was taken to identify relevant material. The data that was identified
covers the 2015/16 and 2016/17 Financial Years. Data for the 2017/18 Financial Year is not yet
readily available. Due to the voluminous nature of potentially relevant material and the broad
scope of your request, manual verification of the data is and would continue to be required to
ensure relevant information has been captured and that each payment is within the scope of your
request. I conservatively estimate an additional two (2) hours would be required to ensure all
relevant data has been identified and retrieved.
 To assist in ascertain whether a document could be created as per your request, a sample of the
available information was used to undertake the tasks noted above. This sample involved the
assessment of 110 line items comprising a three (3) month period. This task took 3 hrs and
45 minutes to complete.
 An assessment of available information for the 2015/16 and 2016/17 Financial Years indicates a
total of 1,449 line items covering the 24 month period will need to be assessed. The processing
time involved in undertaking this task, based on the time it took to undertake the sample above is
estimated to be in excess of 48 hours.
 The relevant document once finalised, will have to be analysed and a decision made before it can
be released to you. Some of the information within the document, may be exempt from disclosure
under the FOI Act.
 Further to the previous point, a Statement of Reasons will still need to be provided to you. I
anticipate that it would take approximately two (2) hours to draft the Statement of Reasons and
Schedule of Documents for this decision, noting on initial review that any exemptions applied
would need to be detailed.
The above estimate does not take into account the time taken to review and prepare the sample of 
documents or to issue this notice to you. 
Taking these factors into account, I have concluded the request as it currently stands is substantial. 
Request is unreasonable 
For the purpose of providing this notice, I have considered whether the substantial resource burden would 
be unreasonable having regard to the following:  

FOIREQ18/00175   023
 60 hours of processing time is, at face value, an unreasonable burden for a single FOI request,
taking into account the need to process multiple requests at any given time, and the impact such a
burden would have on responding to other FOI applicants.
 High level data relating to the Department legal expenditure is already available to you and the
public through reporting within the Department’s Annual Reports.
 Due to the broad nature of your request and the fact that is covers legal expenses spanning several
Financial Years, the volume of material to be assessed is high. There also exists complexity in
determining which payments fall within the scope of your request.
Taking these factors into account, I have concluded the request as it currently stands is unreasonable, as 
well as substantial (as outlined above).  
Further clarification about what is sought 
In addition to the above, it is unclear precisely what payments you want identified in the document. As 
noted above, the payments identified range from cost recovery action, matters involving the AAT, the 
Federal Court and other related legal costs. In its current form those items do not provide such information 
concerning the documents you seek to access as is reasonably necessary to enable a responsible officer of 
the Department to identify. This is also called a ‘practical refusal reason’ (section 24AA). 
What you should do? 
You can revise the request in a form that would remove the grounds for refusal. Please note that even if 
you do modify your request, it is possible that a practical refusal reason under subsection 24AA(1)(a)(i) may 
still exist or the Department may need further time to process your revised request – this will depend on 
the terms of your final request. As far as is reasonably practicable, we are happy to provide you with 
further information to assist you in making your request in such a form that removes the practical refusal 
ground.  
If you are able to pinpoint the specific information you seek to be included that would assist. In particular, 
you may wish to consider for example: 
 limiting payments to specific activities such as costs related to matters before the Administrative
Appeals Tribunal;
 narrowing the scope to a more specific timeframe, rather than a three year period;
 providing further information and clarification to explain what types of legal payments you want
captured in the document.
Please note you have 14 days from the date you receive this notice to either: 
 withdraw the request;
 make a revised request; or
 indicate that you do not wish to revise the request.
If you do not respond in one of these ways within 14 days the request will be taken to have been 
withdrawn pursuant to section 24AB(7) of the FOI Act. If you indicate you do not wish to revise your 
request, the Department will proceed to make a decision on whether to refuse the request on resource 
grounds under section 24(1).  
If you need more time to respond, please contact Information Law within the 14 day period to discuss your 
need for an extension of time.  

FOIREQ18/00175   024
Please note under section 24AB(8) of the FOI Act, the time for processing your FOI request is suspended 
from the day you receive this notice until the day you do one of the things listed above.  
If you would like to revise your request or have any questions, please contact Information Law using the 
details listed below: 
Post: Legal Services & Assurance, Department of Veterans’ Affairs 
GPO Box 9998, Canberra ACT 2601 
Facsimile: (02) 6289 6337 
Email: xxxxxxxxxxxxxx@xxx.xxx.xx 
Yours sincerely 
Position Number 62210022 
Information Law 
Legal Services & Assurance  
15 August 2018 

Document 10
FOIREQ18/00175   025
From:
Verity Pane
To:
Information.Law
Subject:
Re: FOI 23544 - Notice of intention to refuse request - Consultation due to practical refusal reason -
Response sought by 29 August 2018 [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]
Date:
Wednesday, 15 August 2018 8:22:58 PM
Dear Unnamed Officer (Position Number 62210022),
While a rough estimation has been provided, it appears the Department is satisfied based on its enquiries that
this FOI would take 60 leisurely hours for collection, assessment and decision issuance.
The primary basis of your agency’s practical refusal intention is that the amount of external legal services
expenditure against veterans is very large, and covers a large number of matters. That does answer a question
in, and of, itself that the Department is a frequent user of external legal services providers in litigation and
opinion seeking against veterans.
But in light of this, if there is a willingness to pay for this, as per usual cost recovery processes in FOI, does the
Department still intend to refuse access? Just because as FOI may exceed the free processing period is generally
insufficient to refuse access, and mechanisms exist for requester contribution to be made in these circumstances.
You state to process the FOI application would deny others the opportunity to have their own FOI applications,
but provide no supporting evidence to substantiate that. How many open and overdue FOIs does DVA have
presently? Is there any reason a consent to extend the processing deadline cannot offset any intensity of
resource allocation, as I would be prepared to consider that.
You also state the application covers ‘several’ financial years, despite only three being sought, and is too
‘broad’, yet paying for external legal services providers is not a common administrative practice and requires
SES level approval. While making reference to this, you fail to provide enough information to allow for any
stratification to adequately allow for any informed revision of scope to occur.
I would however be willing to refine the scope to FY15/16 in the first instance, which could have helpfully been
identified in your estimates but wasn’t (instead you looked for factors to reject, rather than offer alternatives).
I guess the only thing we both agree in full on is that it is evident that DVA is a regular high frequency user of
external legal services providers, over and above the more limited use by other agencies.
I still think that ways ahead exist, despite your claims to the contrary.
Yours sincerely,
Verity Pane
-----Original Message-----
Good evening Verity Pane,
 FOI 23544 – section 24AB Notice of intention to refuse – Request
 consultation due to practical refusal reason
 I refer to your request for access to information under the Freedom of
 Information Act 1982 (FOI Act); received on 16 July 2018.
 Please find attached a notification under section 24AB of the FOI Act,
 advising you of the Department’s intention to refuse your request on the

FOIREQ18/00175   026
 grounds that a practical refusal reason exists. A decision on this request
 will be made pending the outcome of this requested consultation process.
 Please review and consider the attached notice and advise how you wish to
 proceed by 29 August 2018.
 If you require any further assistance or time to respond to this notice
 please do not hesitate to contact us.
 Kind Regards,
 Information Law Team
 Department of Veterans’ Affairs
 E: [1][email address] | W: [2]www.dva.gov.au
 [3]cid:image001.png@01D0027A.1DAB84F0
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Please use this email address for all replies to this request:
s 22
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:
https://www.righttoknow.org.au/help/officers
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.
-------------------------------------------------------------------

Document 11
FOIREQ18/00175   027
From:
Verity Pane
To:
Information.Law
Subject:
RE: FOI 23544 - Notice of intention to refuse request - Consultation due to practical refusal reason -
Response sought by 29 August 2018 [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]
Date:
Friday, 24 August 2018 7:23:38 PM
Dear Unnamed Officer,
As you waited until the second last day to issue a practical refusal notice, when practice is that practical refusal
notification should be made within 14 days (and it appears the reason for the late issue was to intentionally
delay progress of this FOI, unethically), I will only grant you an additional 14 days (plus an extra day or two to
show I’m kinder than you) from the original statutory expiry date.
The new statutory deadline is therefore 5pm on Friday 31 August 2018.
Yours sincerely,
Verity Pane
-----Original Message-----
Good evening Verity Pane,
Thank you for your email and option to revise the scope.
Information regarding the amount of work involved and options to revise were provided to you on 15 August. A
decision to impose a charge to process your request has not been considered because the work involved in
processing your request in its current form, would result in a diversion of resources. An extension of time to
process your request would not remove the practical refusal reasons in its current form. As explained in the
consultation notice to you, the request is considered both substantial and unreasonable for one request. The
process involved in extracting the information you seek and the type of legal expenses that may be covered in
that data was explained in the notice. The notice provided options to you, including for example, to revise the
timeframe or even clarify which payment types you wanted captured. Further, information about the
Department's volume of FOI requests is publicly available (e.g. within the OAIC's Annual Report and on
data.gov.au; https://data.gov.au/dataset/freedom-of-information-statistics). This should give you an indication of
the volume of requests the Department deals with each year.
Based on the below, I am satisfied that revising the scope to the 2015/16 Financial Year will remove the
practical refusal reason. We would be grateful if you would agree to an extension of time under section 15AA
of the FOI Act, to allow the Department more time finalise your request. If possible, we would be grateful for
an extension of 30 days.
I hope the above assists.
Kind Regards,
Information Law Team
Department of Veterans’ Affairs
E: [email address] | W: www.dva.gov.au
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Please use this email address for all replies to this request:
s 22
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:
https://www.righttoknow.org.au/help/officers
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.

FOIREQ18/00175   028
-------------------------------------------------------------------

Document 12
FOIREQ18/00175   029
From:
Komora, George
To:

, Leia
Cc:
Reglar, Alison
Subject:
FOI 23544 [DLM=Sensitive:Legal]
Date:
Friday, 24 August 2018 7:45:49 PM
Note, Leia – following Verity Pane’s response, in the above matter, tonight, he posted on RTK:
Verity Pane left an annotation (August 24, 2018)
I predict that not only will this agency reject the offer of extension but will apply to the
OAIC under s 15AB to extend this statutory deadline further, despite just stating that
only one financial year was *not* complex or voluminous (which are the grounds for
extension being approved). 
As highlighted by respected FOI commentator Peter Timmis, s 15AB requests get ticked
and flicked by the OAIC despite no evidence frequently being provided by the agencies
that request them (in fact it is a very rare event indeed if the OAIC rejects such an
application) http://foi-privacy.blogspot.com/2013/02/... 
That’s the problem of a so called regulator who is too much in bed with those they are
supposed to monitor.
Regards,
George


Document 13
FOIREQ18/00175   030






FOIREQ18/00175   033


FOIREQ18/00175   034

Document 14
FOIREQ18/00175   035
Megan McKenna
From:
FOIDR
Sent:
Friday, 31 August 2018 3:01 PM
To:
'Verity Pane'
Subject:
RE: RQ18/02489 - Extension of time application by the Department of Veterans' Affairs 
[SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]
Attachments:
OAIC extension form - 15AB - 23544 - Copy.pdf; FOI 23544 - Notice of intention to refuse 
request - Consultation due to ....pdf; Re: FOI 23544 - Notice of intention to refuse request 
- Consultation due to practical refusal reason - Response sought by 29 August 2018 
[SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]; RE: FOI 23544 - Notice of intention to refuse request - 
Consultation due to practical refusal reason - Response sought by 29 August 2018 
[SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]
Security Classification:
UNCLASSIFIED
Dear Ms Pane 
I understand you have previously written to Ms Megan McKenna of this office requesting a copy of the Department 
of Veteran's Affairs' (the Department) application for an extension of time. A copy of the application and supporting 
documents is attached for your reference.  
I would appreciate if you could provide any further comments you wish to make by 3 September 2018. Although, if 
you need further time to provide comments, please let me know before that date. Otherwise, If I do not receive 
further information from you by that date I will make a decision on the basis of the information we already have on 
hand.  
Kind regards 
Carl English | Assistant Review and Investigation Officer | Freedom of Information Dispute Resolution 
Office of the Australian Information Commissioner 
GPO Box 5218 SYDNEY NSW 2001| www.oaic.gov.au 
Phone:  +61 2 9284 9745 | E‐mail: xxxx.xxxxxxx@xxxx.xxx.xx  
‐‐‐‐‐Original Message‐‐‐‐‐ 
From: Verity Pane s 22
  
Sent: Friday, 31 August 2018 11:43 AM 
To: FOIDR <xxxxx@xxxx.xxx.xx> 
Subject: Re: RQ18/02489 ‐ Extension of time application by the Department of Veterans' Affairs [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]
Dear FOIDR, 
I forgot to add it is worth reflecting that Veteran’s have previously caused extensive delays to other FOIs I have 
made to them, included one valid FOI 
(https://apac01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.righttoknow.org.au%2Frequest%2Fc
ost_of_external_legal_services%23incoming‐
12905&amp;data=01%7C01%7Cfoidr%40oaic.gov.au%7C6618f9ffbc614a63fee408d60ee3200d%7Cea4cdebd454f42
18919b7adc32bf1549%7C1&amp;sdata=2dlVCqHLU6E2RNjBwSLsJir8YCJ2HRpnACfI%2Fu3vTuQ%3D&amp;reserved=
0 ) they refused to acknowledge for the whole statutory period and even after it became a deemed refusal, until I 
made an OAIC IC Review application about it (and even then they drew it out), despite me confirming that had 
received each and every communication in that FOI. 
1

FOIREQ18/00175   036
While I reserve the right to make a submission with the benefit of having seen Veteran’s s 15AB appplication first, I 
offer this as something to reflect on in the interim. 
Yours sincerely, 
Verity Pane 
‐‐‐‐‐Original Message‐‐‐‐‐ 
Our reference: RQ18/02489 
 Agency reference: FOI 23544 
 Ms Verity Pane 
 By email: [FOI #4697 email] 
 Extension of time application by the Department of Veterans' Affairs   
 Dear Ms Pane 
 I write to you to advise that on 30 August 2018 the Office of the 
 Australian Information Commissioner (the OAIC) received a request from the 
 Department of Veterans' Affairs (the Department) for an extension of time 
 to process your freedom of information request. 
 The Department has applied for an extension of time under s 15AB of the 
 Freedom of Information Act 1982 (Cth) because your request is considered 
 to be voluminous and complex. 
 The Department has requested an extension of time to 1 October 2018. I 
 will take any comments you may have to make into account when deciding the 
 application. 
 Please respond to this email by 5 September 2018. If I do not hear from 
 you by this date, I will proceed to make a decision on the basis of the 
 information provided to me by the Department. 
 You will be notified of the decision once the matter has been finalised. 
 Contact 
 If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me . In all 
 correspondence please include reference number RQ18/02489. 
 Kind regard 
2

FOIREQ18/00175   037
 Megan McKenna | Assistant Review Officer | Freedom of Information Dispute 
 Resolution 
 Office of the Australian Information Commissioner 
 Level 3, 175 Pitt Street, SYDNEY NSW 2000 
 GPO Box 5128 SYDNEY NSW 2001| 
[1]https://apac01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=www.oaic.gov.au&amp;data=01%7C01%7Cfoidr%40oaic.g
ov.au%7C6618f9ffbc614a63fee408d60ee3200d%7Cea4cdebd454f4218919b7adc32bf1549%7C1&amp;sdata=%2BAA
44dEEWWiSB6Ea%2BQYiMA%2BE%2B1kJXvHe4UDQcwlen%2Bo%3D&amp;reserved=0 
 Phone: +61 2 8231 4292| E‐mail: [2][email address] 
References 
 Visible links 
 1. 
https://apac01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.oaic.gov.au%2F&amp;data=01%7C01%
7Cfoidr%40oaic.gov.au%7C6618f9ffbc614a63fee408d60ee3200d%7Cea4cdebd454f4218919b7adc32bf1549%7C1&a
mp;sdata=dMIE02Cpqxkauv9xarC8%2FmRBsFgri%2BV3XMGfZcNu62g%3D&amp;reserved=0 
2. mailto:[email address]
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ 
Please use this email address for all replies to this request: 
s 22
 
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: 
https://apac01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.righttoknow.org.au%2Fhelp%2Foffice
rs&amp;data=01%7C01%7Cfoidr%40oaic.gov.au%7C6618f9ffbc614a63fee408d60ee3200d%7Cea4cdebd454f421891
9b7adc32bf1549%7C1&amp;sdata=WhVkWUITkUCbxNRTO0asYRWd2bOFnodDnzlcQRePHHI%3D&amp;reserved=0 
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. 
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ 
3

Document 15
FOIREQ18/00175   038
Megan McKenna
From:
FOIDR
Sent:
Friday, 31 August 2018 4:00 PM
To:
'Verity Pane'
Subject:
RE: RQ18/02489 - Extension of time application by the Department of Veterans' Affairs 
[SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]
Attachments:
20180831155521573.pdf
Security Classification:
UNCLASSIFIED
Dear Ms Pane 
My apologies, as advised by Ms McKenna we will wait until 5 September 2018 for your submissions. I have attached 
another version of the application. 
Please let me know if you cannot open it.  
Kind regards 
Carl English | Assistant Review and Investigation Officer | Freedom of Information Dispute Resolution 
Office of the Australian Information Commissioner 
GPO Box 5218 SYDNEY NSW 2001| www.oaic.gov.au 
Phone:  +61 2 9284 9745 | E‐mail: xxxx.xxxxxxx@xxxx.xxx.xx  
‐‐‐‐‐Original Message‐‐‐‐‐ 
From: Verity Pane s 22
  
Sent: Friday, 31 August 2018 3:43 PM 
To: FOIDR <xxxxx@xxxx.xxx.xx> 
Subject: RE: RQ18/02489 ‐ Extension of time application by the Department of Veterans' Affairs [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]
Dear Carl, 
As per Megan’s email of earlier today opportunity to respond was by 5 September, but I note you have reduced that 
now to 3 September. 
I will endeavour to provide response by 3 September however, in order to allow the OAIC to make decision within 
five business, but I am unable to do so currently as the copy of Veteran’s s 15AB submission you have attached is not 
a copy of the Veteran’s s 15AB application at all (the other documents work though and are what they say they are).
Please remedy as soon as possible today. 
Yours sincerely, 
Verity Pane 
‐‐‐‐‐Original Message‐‐‐‐‐ 
Dear Ms Pane 
1

FOIREQ18/00175   039
I understand you have previously written to Ms Megan McKenna of this office requesting a copy of the Department 
of Veteran's Affairs' (the Department) application for an extension of time. A copy of the application and supporting 
documents is attached for your reference. 
I would appreciate if you could provide any further comments you wish to make by 3 September 2018. Although, if 
you need further time to provide comments, please let me know before that date. Otherwise, If I do not receive 
further information from you by that date I will make a decision on the basis of the information we already have on 
hand. 
Kind regards 
Carl English | Assistant Review and Investigation Officer | Freedom of Information Dispute Resolution 
Office of the Australian Information Commissioner 
GPO Box 5218 SYDNEY NSW 2001| 
https://apac01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=www.oaic.gov.au&amp;data=01%7C01%7Cfoidr%40oaic.gov.
au%7C7bb7aa09c075437aecfd08d60f04a545%7Cea4cdebd454f4218919b7adc32bf1549%7C1&amp;sdata=iqcTtU2b
ZCWN5YYQy7rd35Qj5%2F4Gr3v6aM2DPMDz3uM%3D&amp;reserved=0 
Phone: +61 2 9284 9745 | E‐mail: [email address] 
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ 
Please use this email address for all replies to this request: 
s 22
 
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: 
https://apac01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.righttoknow.org.au%2Fhelp%2Foffice
rs&amp;data=01%7C01%7Cfoidr%40oaic.gov.au%7C7bb7aa09c075437aecfd08d60f04a545%7Cea4cdebd454f42189
19b7adc32bf1549%7C1&amp;sdata=%2F2gbnfw77hVA6yojg7G7TkrWtxdiHUGuFpzfXfBcXlM%3D&amp;reserved=0 
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. 
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ 
2

Document 16
FOIREQ18/00175   040
From:
Carl English
To:
Sandra Wavamunno
Cc:
Megan McKenna
Subject:
RQ18/02489 - EOT request - DVA and Verity Pane [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]
Date:
Friday, 31 August 2018 12:03:00 PM
Hi Sandra
Just want to flag the below.
We’ve received an EOT request from DVA in regards to Verity Pane. Ms Pane contacted us before
the DVA submitted the application, advised she expected the EOT application would be made,
and asking for a copy of the application once it was received.
Megan contacted DVA and consulted about releasing the application and DVA have provided a
version that they are happy for us to provide to Ms Pane.
Ms Pane has provided an extensive submission opposing the EOT and advises she may provide
more after seeing the s 15AB application.
I am minded to grant the EOT at this stage. Ms Pane is unlikely to be satisfied with the decision.
Happy to discuss.
Carl English | Assistant Review and Investigation Officer | Freedom of Information Dispute
Resolution
Office of the Australian Information Commissioner
GPO Box 5218 SYDNEY NSW 2001| www.oaic.gov.au
Phone:  +61 2 9284 9745 | E-mail: xxxx.xxxxxxx@xxxx.xxx.xx



FOIREQ18/00175   042
I have decided to grant the Department an extension of time under s 15AB(2) of the FOI Act 
to 1 October 2018. In coming to this decision I have considered factors including your advice 
that: 

list things we have taken into consideration in making decision, such as volume of
documents, complexities, difficulties with document retrieval or searches, delays in
consultations etc
I am satisfied with the Department’s proposal to manage this request, in particular: 

list things that agency has said it will do to manage the extended time such as hold
regular meetings, staged release and expected dates for this to occur, keeping
applicant updated, follow up on consultations etc
[Remove if irrelevant] I have also taken into consideration that Ms Pane has raised no 
objections to the Department’s request. 
By granting an extension of time it is anticipated that the Department will provide a well-
reasoned and better managed decision. 
Or (if not granting EOT) 
I have decided not to grant the Department an extension of time under s 15AB(2) of the FOI 
Act. In coming to this decision I have considered the following factors: 
 [insert reasons for decision].
Ms Pane will be notified of this decision. 
Contact 
If you have any questions about this email, please contact me on (Phone number) or via email 
xxxx.xxxxxxx@xxxx.xxx.xx. In all correspondence please include OAIC reference number 
RQ18/02489.  
Yours sincerely 
www.oaic.gov.au  |  2 



FOIREQ18/00175   044
Yours sincerely 
Carl English 
Review and Investigation Officer 
Dispute Resolution Branch 
www.oaic.gov.au  |  2 

Document 19
FOIREQ18/00175   045
From:
FOIDR
To:
s 22
Subject:
RQ18/02489 - Extension of time decision [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]
Date:
Friday, 7 September 2018 4:09:00 PM
Attachments:
Letter to Ms Pane.pdf
Our reference: RQ18/02489
Agency reference: FOI 23544
Ms Verity Pane
Sent by email: s 22
Extension of time under s 15AB
Dear Ms Pane
Please find correspondence in relation to the processing of your FOI request attached.
Yours sincrely
Carl English | Assistant Review and Investigation Officer | Freedom of Information Dispute
Resolution
Office of the Australian Information Commissioner
GPO Box 5218 SYDNEY NSW 2001| www.oaic.gov.au
Phone:  +61 2 9284 9745 | E-mail: xxxx.xxxxxxx@xxxx.xxx.xx




FOIREQ18/00175   047
Yours sincerely 
Carl English 
Assistant Review and Investigation Officer 
Freedom of Information Dispute Resolution 
7 September 2018 


Document 21
FOIREQ18/00175   048
From:
FOIDR
To:
"xxxxxxxxxxx.xxxxxx@xxx.xxx.xx"
Subject:
RQ18/02489 - Extension of time decision [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]
Date:
Friday, 7 September 2018 4:06:00 PM
Attachments:
Extension of time decision to DVA.pdf
Our reference: RQ18/02489
Your reference: FOI 23544
Ms Leia s 47F
Department of Veterans' Affairs
By email: xxxxxxxxxxx.xxxxxx@xxx.xxx.xx
Extension of time under s 15AB
Dear Ms s 47F
Please find the Office of the Australian Information Commissioner’s extension of time decision
attached.
Kind regards
Carl English | Assistant Review and Investigation Officer | Freedom of Information Dispute
Resolution
Office of the Australian Information Commissioner
GPO Box 5218 SYDNEY NSW 2001| www.oaic.gov.au
Phone:  +61 2 9284 9745 | E-mail: xxxx.xxxxxxx@xxxx.xxx.xx




FOIREQ18/00175   050
 The Department estimates it would take 30 hours to finalise the request.
By granting an extension of time it is anticipated that the Department will provide a well-
reasoned and better managed decision. 
Ms Pane will be notified of this decision. 
Contact 
If you have any questions about this email, please contact me on 02 9284 9745 or via email 
xxxx.xxxxxxx@xxxx.xxx.xx. In all correspondence please include OAIC reference number 
RQ18/02489.  
Yours sincerely 
Carl English 
Assistant Review and Investigation Officer 
Freedom of Information Dispute Resolution 
7 September 2018 







Document 23
FOIREQ18/00175   051
Megan McKenna
From:
FOIDR
Sent:
Wednesday, 12 September 2018 11:48 AM
To:
'Verity Pane'
Subject:
RE: RQ18/02489 - Extension of time decision [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]
Attachments:
Extension of time decision to DVA.pdf
Security Classification:
UNCLASSIFIED
Dear Ms Pane 
Thank you for your email. I apologise for the delay in my response.  
I note that your comments were taken into consideration in coming to this decision. I have attached a copy of the 
detailed reasons provided to the Department of Veteran's Affairs. However I have removed the contact details of 
the specific contact at the Department. 
I hope this satisfies your query. 
Kind 
Carl English  |  Assistant Review Officer 
Freedom of Information Dispute Resolution 
Office of the Australian Information Commissioner 
GPO Box 5218 Sydney NSW 2001  |  oaic.gov.au  
regards
+61 2 9284 9745  |  +61 412 345 678  |  xxxx.xxxxxxx@xxxx.xxx.xx 
| 
| 
| 
Subscribe to OAICnet newsletter 
‐‐‐‐‐Original Message‐‐‐‐‐ 
From: Verity Pane s 22
  
Sent: Tuesday, 11 September 2018 3:35 AM 
To: FOIDR <xxxxx@xxxx.xxx.xx> 
Subject: Re: RQ18/02489 ‐ Extension of time decision [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED] 
Dear Carl, 
I note, despite being required to consider the submission made about the s 15AB extension, your decision letter 
does not reflect any such consideration and merely uses the OAIC template text which is to say nothing more than 
the submission was considered (but gives no evidence of such consideration, such as evidence of weighing up the 
submission against the the submission of DVA) and merely repeats the template text line that by granting the s 15AB 
application it is anticipated DVA will provide a well reasoned and managed response (despite DVA never having 
done so for any FOI it has received a s 15AB extension for). 
As you may be aware, a failure by a delegate to demonstrate consideration was given in a decision letter provides a 
reviewable ground. 
1

FOIREQ18/00175   052
Before proceeding down that path, can you give transparency to your reasoning in your decision, beyond 
throwaway generic template text, or does this reflect you gave no consideration at all and merely just spat out the 
template letter. 
Yours sincerely, 
Verity Pane 
‐‐‐‐‐Original Message‐‐‐‐‐ 
Our reference: RQ18/02489 
Agency reference: FOI 23544 
Ms Verity Pane 
Sent by email: [FOI #4697 email] 
Extension of time under s 15AB 
Dear Ms Pane 
Please find correspondence in relation to the processing of your FOI 
request attached. 
Yours sincrely 
Carl English | Assistant Review and Investigation Officer | Freedom of 
Information Dispute Resolution 
Office of the Australian Information Commissioner 
GPO Box 5218 SYDNEY NSW 2001| 
[1]https://apac01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=www.oaic.gov.au&amp;data=01%7C01%7Cfoidr%40oaic.g
ov.au%7C57f5be8dd1574968966808d61743be08%7Cea4cdebd454f4218919b7adc32bf1549%7C1&amp;sdata=i3cpj
emQMNTzTZmkC3brEVPl2VZsZE9ReA4fJxDBbx8%3D&amp;reserved=0 
Phone:  +61 2 9284 9745 | E‐mail: [email address] 
References 
Visible links 
2

FOIREQ18/00175   053
1. 
https://apac01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.oaic.gov.au%2F&amp;data=01%7C01%
7Cfoidr%40oaic.gov.au%7C57f5be8dd1574968966808d61743be08%7Cea4cdebd454f4218919b7adc32bf1549%7C1
&amp;sdata=sTS90QPURtFQDWl3LmwxAUOtfu1wMvrlhxyDxzFLYi8%3D&amp;reserved=0 
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ 
Please use this email address for all replies to this request: 
s 22
 
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: 
https://apac01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.righttoknow.org.au%2Fhelp%2Foffice
rs&amp;data=01%7C01%7Cfoidr%40oaic.gov.au%7C57f5be8dd1574968966808d61743be08%7Cea4cdebd454f4218
919b7adc32bf1549%7C1&amp;sdata=HRgOrr4EuJQVD48Y2%2BVZrGC75xJJIUqd9XVhMg7%2F180%3D&amp;reserve
d=0 
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. 
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ 
3




FOIREQ18/00175   055
 The Department estimates it would take 30 hours to finalise the request.
By granting an extension of time it is anticipated that the Department will provide a well-
reasoned and better managed decision. 
Ms Pane will be notified of this decision. 
Contact 
If you have any questions about this email, please contact me on 02 9284 9745 or via email 
xxxx.xxxxxxx@xxxx.xxx.xx. In all correspondence please include OAIC reference number 
RQ18/02489.  
Yours sincerely 
Carl English 
Assistant Review and Investigation Officer 
Freedom of Information Dispute Resolution 
7 September 2018 


Document 25
FOIREQ18/00175   056
Megan McKenna
From:
Sandra Wavamunno
Sent:
Wednesday, 12 September 2018 11:37 AM
To:
FOIDR
Subject:
RE: RQ18/02489 - Extension of time decision [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]
Security Classification:
UNCLASSIFIED
Thanks Carl 
As discussed.  
Kind regards 
Sandra 
‐‐‐‐‐Original Message‐‐‐‐‐ 
From: FOIDR  
Sent: Wednesday, 12 September 2018 9:58 AM 
To: Sandra Wavamunno <xxxxxx.xxxxxxxxx@xxxx.xxx.xx> 
Subject: FW: RQ18/02489 ‐ Extension of time decision [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED] 
Hi Sandra 
Ms Pane has objected to the s 15AB decision we made, on the grounds that we did not take her consultation 
responses into consideration. I think all we can really do in response is to give her a copy of the reasons for decision 
provided to the agency, which provides more detailed explanation of why we granted the request.  
Do you agree? Happy to discuss. 
Carl 
‐‐‐‐‐Original Message‐‐‐‐‐ 
From: Verity Pane s 22
  
Sent: Tuesday, 11 September 2018 3:35 AM 
To: FOIDR <xxxxx@xxxx.xxx.xx> 
Subject: Re: RQ18/02489 ‐ Extension of time decision [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED] 
Dear Carl, 
I note, despite being required to consider the submission made about the s 15AB extension, your decision letter 
does not reflect any such consideration and merely uses the OAIC template text which is to say nothing more than 
the submission was considered (but gives no evidence of such consideration, such as evidence of weighing up the 
submission against the the submission of DVA) and merely repeats the template text line that by granting the s 15AB 
application it is anticipated DVA will provide a well reasoned and managed response (despite DVA never having 
done so for any FOI it has received a s 15AB extension for). 
As you may be aware, a failure by a delegate to demonstrate consideration was given in a decision letter provides a 
reviewable ground. 
Before proceeding down that path, can you give transparency to your reasoning in your decision, beyond 
throwaway generic template text, or does this reflect you gave no consideration at all and merely just spat out the 
template letter. 
1

FOIREQ18/00175   057
Yours sincerely, 
Verity Pane 
‐‐‐‐‐Original Message‐‐‐‐‐ 
Our reference: RQ18/02489 
 Agency reference: FOI 23544 
 Ms Verity Pane 
 Sent by email: [FOI #4697 email] 
 Extension of time under s 15AB 
 Dear Ms Pane 
 Please find correspondence in relation to the processing of your FOI 
 request attached. 
 Yours sincrely 
 Carl English | Assistant Review and Investigation Officer | Freedom of 
 Information Dispute Resolution 
 Office of the Australian Information Commissioner 
 GPO Box 5218 SYDNEY NSW 2001| 
[1]https://apac01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=www.oaic.gov.au&amp;data=01%7C01%7Cfoidr%40oaic.g
ov.au%7C57f5be8dd1574968966808d61743be08%7Cea4cdebd454f4218919b7adc32bf1549%7C1&amp;sdata=i3cpj
emQMNTzTZmkC3brEVPl2VZsZE9ReA4fJxDBbx8%3D&amp;reserved=0 
 Phone:  +61 2 9284 9745 | E‐mail: [email address] 
References 
 Visible links 
 1. 
https://apac01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.oaic.gov.au%2F&amp;data=01%7C01%
7Cfoidr%40oaic.gov.au%7C57f5be8dd1574968966808d61743be08%7Cea4cdebd454f4218919b7adc32bf1549%7C1
&amp;sdata=sTS90QPURtFQDWl3LmwxAUOtfu1wMvrlhxyDxzFLYi8%3D&amp;reserved=0 
2

FOIREQ18/00175   058
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ 
Please use this email address for all replies to this request: 
s 22
 
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: 
https://apac01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.righttoknow.org.au%2Fhelp%2Foffice
rs&amp;data=01%7C01%7Cfoidr%40oaic.gov.au%7C57f5be8dd1574968966808d61743be08%7Cea4cdebd454f4218
919b7adc32bf1549%7C1&amp;sdata=HRgOrr4EuJQVD48Y2%2BVZrGC75xJJIUqd9XVhMg7%2F180%3D&amp;reserve
d=0 
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. 
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ 
3







Document 27
FOIREQ18/00175   060
From:
Carl English
To:
Sandra Wavamunno
Subject:
RQ18/02489 - response to Ms Pane [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]
Date:
Friday, 14 September 2018 3:36:00 PM
Attachments:
image001.jpg
image002.png
image003.png
image004.png
image005.png
Hi Sandra
I’ve drafted a response to Ms Pane. Do you mind having a look? Its attached to the file.
Carl
  Carl English  |  Assistant Review Officer
Freedom of Information Dispute Resolution
Office of the Australian Information Commissioner
GPO Box 5218 Sydney NSW 2001  |  oaic.gov.au
+61 2 9284 9745  |  +61 412 345 678  |  xxxx.xxxxxxx@xxxx.xxx.xx
|
|
 
Subscribe to OAICnet newsletter

Document 28
FOIREQ18/00175   061
Megan McKenna
From:
FOIDR
Sent:
Friday, 14 September 2018 10:37 AM
To:
Sandra Wavamunno
Subject:
FW: RQ18/02489 - Extension of time decision [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]
Security Classification:
UNCLASSIFIED
Hi Sandra 
I'm not sure what more we can provide Ms Pane. We could provide her the below (I modified the closure review 
rights), which I think also applies to EOTs 
Judicial review 
You can apply to the Federal Court of Australia or the Federal Circuit Court for a review of a decision of the 
Information Commissioner if you think that a decision by the Information Commissioner to grant an extension of 
time is not legally correct. You can make this application under the Administrative Decisions (Judicial Review) Act 
1977. 
The Court will not review the merits of your case but it may refer the matter back to the Information Commissioner 
for further consideration if it finds the decision was wrong in law or the Information Commissioner’s powers were 
not exercised properly. 
An application for review must be made to the Court within 28 days of the OAIC sending the decision to you. You 
may wish to seek legal advice as the process can involve fees and costs. Please contact the Federal Court registry in 
your state or territory for more information, or visit the Federal Court website at http://www.fedcourt.gov.au/. 
Making a complaint to the Commonwealth Ombudsman 
If you believe you have been treated unfairly by the OAIC, you can make a complaint to the Commonwealth 
Ombudsman (the Ombudsman). The Ombudsman's services are free. The Ombudsman can investigate complaints 
about the administrative actions of Australian Government agencies to see if you have been treated unfairly. 
If the Ombudsman finds your complaint is justified, the Ombudsman can recommend that the OAIC reconsider or 
change its action or decision or take any other action that the Ombudsman considers is appropriate. You can contact 
the Ombudsman's office for more information on 1300 362 072 or visit the Commonwealth Ombudsman's website 
at http://www.ombudsman.gov.au. 
What do you think? 
Carl 
‐‐‐‐‐Original Message‐‐‐‐‐ 
From: Verity Pane s 22
  
Sent: Wednesday, 12 September 2018 12:50 PM 
To: FOIDR <xxxxx@xxxx.xxx.xx> 
Subject: RE: RQ18/02489 ‐ Extension of time decision [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED] 
Dear Carl, 
1

FOIREQ18/00175   062
While I appreciate copy of your decision to DVA, which includes a copy of a few lines from the submission of DVA, it 
again demonstrates no reconciliation between the competing claims of the parties, and again throws away a generic 
“I have considered” without showing any such consideration or analysis. 
In particular, despite DVA claiming (without any evidence in support, beyond the unsupported claim itself) that it 
needed to retrieve archived material from off‐site storage, for a s 17 compilation that can only be from digital 
information system holdings from TRIM, G: drive and their FMIS, you appear to have satisfied yourself that is a 
necessity without even knowing what is required to be retrieved and from where or any supporting information at 
all. 
It appears that an unsupported vague and opaque claim of off‐site storage of something, despite being specifically 
challenged by my submission that the digital holdings in question are not archived in some dusty warehouse in some 
undisclosed location, but being recent and in digital form, remain on the premises of the Department’s servers and 
is still immediately accessible. 
This appears that you made your decision not on the facts, but rather on formulatic unsupported claims by DVA (if 
they say off site then on that alone, without any detail of what is allegedly offsite, you reach a unsustainable state of 
satisfaction). 
Of course it may be possible you received some information you have not disclosed still, but you are yet to show 
any, and you did state you had provided everything you based your decision on, so the conclusion is you did so 
unreasonably and irrationally formulatically, despite being a directly contested ground. 
Also, that approach would directly contradict that FOI applicants are not to penalised by an agency’s (intentional) 
poor records management or (intended) failures to mantain an adequate records system, which is reflected 
explicitly in the Guidelines and also as the Senate report on FOI noted, “A poor information retrieval system or 
unwise delegation of authority [to someone who will be absent or away from the workplace] may be the cause of 
the burden of which it [the agency] complains... [but agencies] would realise soon enough that reliance on reasons 
of their own ineptitude would not be considered a legitimate invocation of the exemption” 
I would remind you of your OAIC s 15AB processing policy which states: 
Under s 15AB (2) the Information Commissioner may extend the initial period by 30 days, or longer, by written 
instrument, where the Information Commissioner considers the application justified. Key issues in considering such 
a request will be: 
* The length of extension sought – is it less than, or greater than, 30 days 
* The justifications provided by the agency on why they consider the matter complex or voluminous 
* The nature and scope of the FOI Request 
* Views of the applicant in relation to an EOT 
* The likelihood that the agency will make a decision within the extended period of time or the matter will become a
deemed refusal (s 15AC). 
Agency applications should provide measurable/quantifiable explanations and justifications as to why a matter is 
either complex or voluminous, why the required EOT is needed, and how they will ensure a decision is made within 
the EOT. This information should be provided up front, with minimal need to request additional information from an 
agency. Examples of the types of information provided by agencies where s 15AB EOTs have been granted include: 
* An explanation of activities taken in processing the FOI request as at the date of application for the EOT. This type
of information is useful in assessing whether the request has been appropriately managed. This should include when 
the matter was received and any EOTs already granted by agreement (15AA) or by the agency/Minister (eg: 15(6) or 
(7)). 
* The number of documents and folios identified, or an approximation where scoping work is continuing.
2

FOIREQ18/00175   063
* An explanation of the type of documents located (eg: reports, briefings, investigation files, etc) and key
exemptions identified. These issues quite often go to complexity of a matter. Such information can be based on a 
sample for large requests. 
* An outline of activities to be undertaken within the EOT to deliver a decision on the FOI request – eg:
 ‐ Estimate of time to assess documents and to undertake redactions (days/weeks) 
 ‐ Estimate of time to retrieve records (eg: where they are old and stored off site)  
 ‐ Sensitivities/complexities that affect time needed  
– ongoing investigations, etc.
      ‐ Whether a need to consult third parties has been identified, and how much time is estimated to consult and 
assess responses. 
As per the OAIC policy, OAIC officers are required to review all relevant documents, identifying key elements of the 
matter relevant to the s 15AB application – eg justification by agency, scope of FOI request, EOT sought (above or 
below 30 days), urgency, any indication that the applicant would object (ask agency if they have contacted the 
applicant for their views about the EOT – and if not why not). 
However, there is little to no evidence of this having been obtained and assessed, again it appears that the OAIC is 
satisfied on nothing more than simply saying the words ‘off‐site’ without any details or evidence to support, and no 
testing of that unsupported claim took place, despite it being a contested claim. 
So did you seek any information from DVA to justify the unsupported off‐site claim before you made the s 15AB 
approval, and did you consider that applicants are not to be penalised by claimed poor records management or poor 
delegation of an agency before granting the s 15AB approval in the ritualised way you appear to have done (rather 
than on reasonable considered grounds)? Can you show any reconciliation of the disputed claims? As none of this is 
evident in the material provided, and infers the decision was made unreasonably, without due consideration (simply 
having template text that says you considered is insufficient if there is nothing to demonstrate any evaluation of 
that allegedly considered) 
If you can’t, then I guess there is no choice but to seek external review of this decision. 
Yours sincerely, 
Verity Pane 
‐‐‐‐‐Original Message‐‐‐‐‐ 
Dear Ms Pane 
 Thank you for your email. I apologise for the delay in my response. 
 I note that your comments were taken into consideration in coming to this 
 decision. I have attached a copy of the detailed reasons provided to the 
 Department of Veteran's Affairs. However I have removed the contact 
 details of the specific contact at the Department. 
 I hope this satisfies your query. 
 Kind regards[1][IMG]  
 Carl English  |  Assistant Review 
 Officer 
 Freedom of Information Dispute 
 Resolution 
3

FOIREQ18/00175   064
 Office of the Australian Information 
 Commissioner 
 GPO Box 5218 Sydney NSW 2001  | 
  [2]oaic.gov.au 
 +61 2 9284 9745  |  +61 412 345 678  |  
 [3][email address] 
 [4][IMG] | [5][IMG] | [6][IMG] |   [7]Subscribe to OAICnet newsletter 
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ 
Please use this email address for all replies to this request: 
s 22
 
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: 
https://apac01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.righttoknow.org.au%2Fhelp%2Foffice
rs&amp;data=01%7C01%7Cfoidr%40oaic.gov.au%7C3d5c7560d34f4f05267208d6185a7ae7%7Cea4cdebd454f42189
19b7adc32bf1549%7C1&amp;sdata=Qi1Pb5LI5AfZwQcrLyyqRJSL2%2BbBgbwjDvXgc23EoVA%3D&amp;reserved=0 
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. 
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ 
4





Document 29
FOIREQ18/00175   065
From:
FOIDR
To:
"Verity Pane"
Subject:
RE: RQ18/02489 - Extension of time decision [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]
Date:
Tuesday, 18 September 2018 11:47:00 AM
Attachments:
image001.jpg
image002.png
image003.png
image004.png
image005.png
Our reference: RQ18/02489
Dear Ms Pane
Thank you for your correspondence of 12 September 2018.
Further information about how applications to extend the timeframe to process an FOI request
are handled by the Office of the Australian Information Commissioner (OAIC) can be found
published on our website:
 FOI fact sheet 16: Freedom of information — Extensions of time
FOI agency resource 13: Extension of time for processing requests
The OAIC will take an applicant’s views into account when deciding a request for an
extension of time under s 15AB, as we have done in this instance, however the final decision
rests with the OAIC.
If you disagree with the OAIC’s decision you can apply to the Federal Court of Australia or
the Federal Circuit Court for a review of a decision of the Information Commissioner if you
think that a decision by the Information Commissioner to grant an extension of time is not
legally correct. You can make this application under the Administrative Decisions (Judicial
Review) Act 1977.
The Court will not review the merits of your case but it may refer the matter back to the
Information Commissioner for further consideration if it finds the decision was wrong in law
or the Information Commissioner’s powers were not exercised properly.
An application for review must be made to the Court within 28 days of the OAIC sending the
decision to you. You may wish to seek legal advice as the process can involve fees and costs.
Please contact the Federal Court registry in your state or territory for more information, or
visit the Federal Court website at http://www.fedcourt.gov.au/.
Yours sincerely
  Carl English  |  Assistant Review Officer
Freedom of Information Dispute Resolution
Office of the Australian Information Commissioner
GPO Box 5218 Sydney NSW 2001  |  oaic.gov.au
+61 2 9284 9745  |  +61 412 345 678  |  xxxx.xxxxxxx@xxxx.xxx.xx
|
|
 
Subscribe to OAICnet newsletter






FOIREQ18/00175   068

Document 31
FOIREQ18/00175   069
RQ18/02489
McKenna, Megan
15-Nov-2018 1:42 PM
Title
DVA - Department of Veterans' Affairs | Pane, Verity
Receipt Details
File Type:
Extension of time
Received Date:
30-Aug-2018 12:00 AM
Case Type:
Extension of time
Received By:
English, Carl
How Received:
Registered Date:
31-Aug-2018 9:50 AM
Owned By:
English, Carl
Registered By:
English, Carl
Closed Date:
07-Sep-2018 4:09 PM
Closed By:
English, Carl
Case Details
How Received:
Email
File Security:
UNCLASSIFIED
Agency Reference 
FOI 23544
Number:
Request Decision:
Granted
Extension Date:
1-Oct-2018
Primary Client Group:
Agency
Represented By Client 
Individual
Group:
Parent Case Entity 
IC Request
Code:
Case PrimaryPerson:
DVA - Department of Veterans' Affairs
Case Respondent:
Pane, Verity
Extension days:
30
Original Decision Date:
31-Aug-2018
Request from:
Agency
Request Sub Type:
s15AB - complex or voluminous
Agency Request 
16-Jul-2018
Received Date:
Retention Class:
OAIC RA 61986 (D2)
Case Parties - 2
Requestor Client:
DVA - Department of Veterans' Affairs
Request Relating To 
Pane, Verity
Client:
Summary
See email address provided
consult due 5 September
Actions - 12 (All Completed)
Action
Owner
Due
Completed
Record Request details 
English, Carl
03-Sep-2018
31-Aug-2018
and attach docs 
(Agency)
Send EOT 
Triage - FOI
03-Sep-2018
31-Aug-2018, English, Carl: Not required
acknowledgement 
(Agency)
Move to Triage basket
English, Carl
03-Sep-2018
31-Aug-2018
Allocate to Triage 
Triage - FOI
03-Sep-2018
31-Aug-2018, English, Carl
Officer (REQ)
Page 1 of 3
15/11/2018

FOIREQ18/00175   070
Assess EOT Request
English, Carl
03-Sep-2018
07-Sep-2018: Don’t escalate
Correspondence from 
English, Carl
05-Sep-2018
07-Sep-2018
request relating to
Hi Carl, s 54T subs in resolve. Thanks
Notify Parties of 
English, Carl
10-Sep-2018
07-Sep-2018
Decision (REQ EOT)
Close Request
English, Carl
10-Sep-2018
07-Sep-2018
Prepare Letter (Ad-
English, Carl
18-Sep-2018
14-Sep-2018
Hoc)
Await Manager 
Wavamunno, 
16-Sep-2018
18-Sep-2018: Approved
Approval (Corro Ad 
Sandra
Hoc)
Send Letter
English, Carl
21-Sep-2018
18-Sep-2018
Await Clearance -
Wavamunno, 
08-Nov-2018
05-Nov-2018
Assistant Director
Sandra
Hi Sandra I've just prepared a response to Verity's new request - grateful for your review. Thank you! 
Vivian
Documents - 36
Title
Date Added
By
FOI 23544 – Request for an extension of time 
30-Aug-2018 2:47 PM
English, Carl
under section 15AB of the FOI Act [DLM=For-
Official-Use-Only]
RQ18/02489 - Extension of time application by the 
31-Aug-2018 10:41 AM
McKenna, Megan
Department of Veterans' Affairs 
[SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]
Re: RQ18/02489 - Extension of time application by 
31-Aug-2018 11:34 AM
McKenna, Megan
the Department of Veterans' Affairs 
[SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]
Re: RQ18/02489 - Veterans’ Affairs FOI 23386 - s 
31-Aug-2018 11:37 AM
McKenna, Megan
15AB request. Copy of s 15AB request to respond 
to. [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]
Re: RQ18/02489 - Extension of time application by 
31-Aug-2018 11:43 AM
McKenna, Megan
the Department of Veterans' Affairs 
[SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]
***24AB form as discussed*** FOI 23544 –
31-Aug-2018 11:54 AM
English, Carl
Request for an extension of time under section 
15AB of the FOI Act [DLM=For-Official-Use-Only]
RE: RQ18/02489 - Extension of time application by 
31-Aug-2018 3:01 PM
English, Carl
the Department of Veterans' Affairs 
[SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]
Re: RQ18/02489 s 15AB DVA application
31-Aug-2018 3:55 PM
English, Carl
RE: RQ18/02489 - Extension of time application by 
31-Aug-2018 3:59 PM
English, Carl
the Department of Veterans' Affairs 
[SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]
RE: RQ18/02489 - Extension of time application by 
31-Aug-2018 3:43 PM
English, Carl
the Department of Veterans' Affairs 
[SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]
RE: RQ18/02489 - Extension of time application by 
31-Aug-2018 4:29 PM
English, Carl
the Department of Veterans' Affairs 
[SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]
RE: RQ18/02489 - Extension of time application by 
31-Aug-2018 4:26 PM
English, Carl
the Department of Veterans' Affairs 
Page 2 of 3
15/11/2018