Design and architecture decisions for MTM Distribution Fibre Network (DFN) - named document;NBN-NTO-EDS-359 Network Design Rules MTM Distribution Fibre Network
Dear NBN Co Limited,
I am requesting information on behalf of the Australian public to understand key architecture decisions around key components of the NBN Network - specifically MTM (multi technology mix) and if these have been cost effective (SoE clause) and considered decisions following best practices that give the best value for the money loaned to the organisation.
I would like to request the following named NBN Document to be released to the Australian public.
NBN-NTO-EDS-359 Network Design Rules MTM Distribution Fibre
Network
Yours faithfully,
Timothy Nothdurft
I'm questioning the consistency of the charges based on previous costings
to retrieve 8 named documents (find attached).
How does a single named document require 1full hours, but 8 similarly
named documents requires only an additional 15 minutes?
Also the decision making time is disproportionate. 20 hours for a single
document is not in line with other Government department FOI costings.
There is enough public interest to release this data to validate technical
choice design decisions and if the CiC costs are proportional to the
design.
Therefore despite the disproportionate costings I'm requesting this
document be made public under FOI act.
Regards
Get [1]Outlook for Android
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: FOIOfficer <[email address]>
Sent: Monday, July 1, 2019 11:32:27 AM
To: Tim Nothdurft
Cc: FOIOfficer
Subject: Acknowledgement and ADR - Request for network design rules
Dear Mr Nothdurft
Please find attached a letter in relation to your recent FOI request.
As this letter relates to the ADR that has been determined in relation to
your request, we have sent this to your direct email address. However, we
will process all other aspects of this request via the Right To Know
address ([2][FOI #5476 email]), from which your
request originated.
Regards
Kate
nbn FOI Officer
References
Visible links
1. https://aka.ms/ghei36
2. mailto:[FOI #5476 email]
Dear Mr Nothdurft
Thank you for your email.
I consider that the decision making will constitute the majority of
processing time with your request. Please note that in estimating the time
involved, I considered your specific request for one document, rather than
looking at your previous request for eight documents and simply dividing
it by eight. In this regard, my preliminary view is that the Advance
Deposit Request and fees outlined to you represent an accurate estimate of
the processing time for your request. I also note that the decision making
time estimate is for twelve, not twenty, hours.
Please also note that the FOI Act enables FOI applicants to request a
reduction or waiver of the fees in circumstances where it can be shown
that the release of requested documents would be in the public interest or
they are experiencing financial hardship. I note that you have not made a
request or specific contentions in that regard. If you wish to make such a
request, I would refer you to paragraphs 4.75-4.89 of the [1]Office of the
Australian Information Commissioner’s FOI Guidelines. For reference, I am
required to complete my Internal Review within 30 days. I would ask that
you provide me with any contentions at your earliest convenience.
Regards
nbn FOI Officer
From: Tim Nothdurft <[email address]>
Sent: Monday, 1 July 2019 12:07 PM
To: FOIOfficer <[email address]>
Cc: [FOI #5476 email]
Subject: [External] Re: Acknowledgement and ADR - Request for network
design rules
This message is from an external sender - be cautious, particularly with
links and attachments.
I'm questioning the consistency of the charges based on previous costings
to retrieve 8 named documents (find attached).
How does a single named document require 1full hours, but 8 similarly
named documents requires only an additional 15 minutes?
Also the decision making time is disproportionate. 20 hours for a single
document is not in line with other Government department FOI costings.
There is enough public interest to release this data to validate technical
choice design decisions and if the CiC costs are proportional to the
design.
Therefore despite the disproportionate costings I'm requesting this
document be made public under FOI act.
Regards
Get [2]Outlook for Android
------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: FOIOfficer <[email address]>
Sent: Monday, July 1, 2019 11:32:27 AM
To: Tim Nothdurft
Cc: FOIOfficer
Subject: Acknowledgement and ADR - Request for network design rules
Dear Mr Nothdurft
Please find attached a letter in relation to your recent FOI request.
As this letter relates to the ADR that has been determined in relation to
your request, we have sent this to your direct email address. However, we
will process all other aspects of this request via the Right To Know
address ([3][FOI #5476 email]), from which your
request originated.
Regards
Kate
nbn FOI Officer
References
Visible links
1. https://www.oaic.gov.au/freedom-of-infor...
2. https://aka.ms/ghei36
3. mailto:[FOI #5476 email]
Thank you for your timely response.
NBN internal processes must be inefficient if finding and retrieving 8
named documents from an internal records management system is not
proportional to retrieving of one in such a simplic request?
Irrespectively the decision making is also disproportionate and not inline
with other agencies.
Could you please provide basic metadata of this document.
Including page count, versioning, date. Surely this can be freely
provided and to help determine if the quoted costs for the information are
in fact reasonable and consistent?
Get [1]Outlook for Android
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: FOIOfficer <[email address]>
Sent: Tuesday, July 2, 2019 3:27:32 PM
To: Tim Nothdurft; FOIOfficer
Cc: [FOI #5476 email]
Subject: RE: Acknowledgement and ADR - Request for network design rules
Dear Mr Nothdurft
Thank you for your email.
I consider that the decision making will constitute the majority of
processing time with your request. Please note that in estimating the time
involved, I considered your specific request for one document, rather than
looking at your previous request for eight documents and simply dividing
it by eight. In this regard, my preliminary view is that the Advance
Deposit Request and fees outlined to you represent an accurate estimate of
the processing time for your request. I also note that the decision making
time estimate is for twelve, not twenty, hours.
Please also note that the FOI Act enables FOI applicants to request a
reduction or waiver of the fees in circumstances where it can be shown
that the release of requested documents would be in the public interest or
they are experiencing financial hardship. I note that you have not made a
request or specific contentions in that regard. If you wish to make such a
request, I would refer you to paragraphs 4.75-4.89 of the [2]Office of the
Australian Information Commissioner’s FOI Guidelines. For reference, I am
required to complete my Internal Review within 30 days. I would ask that
you provide me with any contentions at your earliest convenience.
Regards
nbn FOI Officer
From: Tim Nothdurft <[email address]>
Sent: Monday, 1 July 2019 12:07 PM
To: FOIOfficer <[email address]>
Cc: [FOI #5476 email]
Subject: [External] Re: Acknowledgement and ADR - Request for network
design rules
This message is from an external sender - be cautious, particularly with
links and attachments.
I'm questioning the consistency of the charges based on previous costings
to retrieve 8 named documents (find attached).
How does a single named document require 1full hours, but 8 similarly
named documents requires only an additional 15 minutes?
Also the decision making time is disproportionate. 20 hours for a single
document is not in line with other Government department FOI costings.
There is enough public interest to release this data to validate technical
choice design decisions and if the CiC costs are proportional to the
design.
Therefore despite the disproportionate costings I'm requesting this
document be made public under FOI act.
Regards
Get [3]Outlook for Android
------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: FOIOfficer <[email address]>
Sent: Monday, July 1, 2019 11:32:27 AM
To: Tim Nothdurft
Cc: FOIOfficer
Subject: Acknowledgement and ADR - Request for network design rules
Dear Mr Nothdurft
Please find attached a letter in relation to your recent FOI request.
As this letter relates to the ADR that has been determined in relation to
your request, we have sent this to your direct email address. However, we
will process all other aspects of this request via the Right To Know
address ([4][FOI #5476 email]), from which your
request originated.
Regards
Kate
nbn FOI Officer
References
Visible links
1. https://aka.ms/ghei36
2. https://www.oaic.gov.au/freedom-of-infor...
3. https://aka.ms/ghei36
4. mailto:[FOI #5476 email]
I would like to make a request for the information to be released on the
grounds of public interest based on...
The document relates to a matter of public debate, or a policy issue under
discussion within an agency, and disclosure of the document would assist
public comment on or participation in the debate or discussion. [1][30]
The National Broadband Network is a significant infrastructure project and
every Australian holds a stake. Release of technical documentation raises
awareness, gives transparency, and hold the contractor entities
accountable for costings and performance.
The document relates to an agency decision that has been a topic of public
interest or discussion, and disclosure of the document would better inform
the public as to why or how the decision was made, including highlighting
any problems or flaws that occurred in the decision-making process.
[2][31]
NBN has recently announced FttC to FttP and HFC to FttP uplifts. There is
evidence that contractors are not adhering to the design documentation and
this makes the release of this information critical to protect the
integrity of the project.
The document would add to the public record on an important and recurring
aspect of agency decision making. [3][32]
Fundamental architecture is unique to the NBN offers no commerical in
confidence advantage and provides important framework for all decisions
now and in the future and should be made public for analysis and debate.
This document is also referenced in key public high level architecture
documents.
Get [4]Outlook for Android
From: Tim Nothdurft
Sent: Tuesday, 2 July, 15:53
Subject: Re: Acknowledgement and ADR - Request for network design rules
To: FOIOfficer
Cc: [FOI #5476 email]
Thank you for your timely response.
NBN internal processes must be inefficient if finding and retrieving 8
named documents from an internal records management system is not
proportional to retrieving of one in such a simplic request?
Irrespectively the decision making is also disproportionate and not inline
with other agencies.
Could you please provide basic metadata of this document.
Including page count, versioning, date. Surely this can be freely
provided and to help determine if the quoted costs for the information are
in fact reasonable and consistent?
Get [5]Outlook for Android
From: FOIOfficer <[email address]>
Sent: Tuesday, July 2, 2019 3:27:32 PM
To: Tim Nothdurft; FOIOfficer
Cc: [FOI #5476 email]
Subject: RE: Acknowledgement and ADR - Request for network design rules
Dear Mr Nothdurft
Thank you for your email.
I consider that the decision making will constitute the majority of
processing time with your request. Please note that in estimating the time
involved, I considered your specific request for one document, rather than
looking at your previous request for eight documents and simply dividing
it by eight. In this regard, my preliminary view is that the Advance
Deposit Request and fees outlined to you represent an accurate estimate of
the processing time for your request. I also note that the decision making
time estimate is for twelve, not twenty, hours.
Please also note that the FOI Act enables FOI applicants to request a
reduction or waiver of the fees in circumstances where it can be shown
that the release of requested documents would be in the public interest or
they are experiencing financial hardship. I note that you have not made a
request or specific contentions in that regard. If you wish to make such a
request, I would refer you to paragraphs 4.75-4.89 of the [6]Office of the
Australian Information Commissioner’s FOI Guidelines. For reference, I am
required to complete my Internal Review within 30 days. I would ask that
you provide me with any contentions at your earliest convenience.
Regards
nbn FOI Officer
From: Tim Nothdurft <[email address]>
Sent: Monday, 1 July 2019 12:07 PM
To: FOIOfficer <[email address]>
Cc: [FOI #5476 email]
Subject: [External] Re: Acknowledgement and ADR - Request for network
design rules
This message is from an external sender - be cautious, particularly with
links and attachments.
I'm questioning the consistency of the charges based on previous costings
to retrieve 8 named documents (find attached).
How does a single named document require 1full hours, but 8 similarly
named documents requires only an additional 15 minutes?
Also the decision making time is disproportionate. 20 hours for a single
document is not in line with other Government department FOI costings.
There is enough public interest to release this data to validate technical
choice design decisions and if the CiC costs are proportional to the
design.
Therefore despite the disproportionate costings I'm requesting this
document be made public under FOI act.
Regards
Get [7]Outlook for Android
From: FOIOfficer <[email address]>
Sent: Monday, July 1, 2019 11:32:27 AM
To: Tim Nothdurft
Cc: FOIOfficer
Subject: Acknowledgement and ADR - Request for network design rules
Dear Mr Nothdurft
Please find attached a letter in relation to your recent FOI request.
As this letter relates to the ADR that has been determined in relation to
your request, we have sent this to your direct email address. However, we
will process all other aspects of this request via the Right To Know
address ([8][FOI #5476 email]), from which your
request originated.
Regards
Kate
nbn FOI Officer
References
Visible links
1. https://www.oaic.gov.au/freedom-of-infor...
2. https://www.oaic.gov.au/freedom-of-infor...
3. https://www.oaic.gov.au/freedom-of-infor...
4. https://aka.ms/ghei36
5. https://aka.ms/ghei36
6. https://www.oaic.gov.au/freedom-of-infor...
7. https://aka.ms/ghei36
8. mailto:[FOI #5476 email]
Dear FOI officer.
You have had sufficient time to respond under the statutory requirements
of my request to have information released on public grounds.
There has been no attempt to answer or address any of my concerns around
reasonable costs for the release of one named document.
I have not agreed to any formal extension or terms.
I would like to draw your attention to FOI 2019 legislature, Freedom of
Information (Charges) Regulations 2019
Section 7.
(3) There is no charge in respect of a request for access to a document
if:
(a) the period referred to in paragraph 15(5)(b) of
the Act is extended under subsection 15(6) or (8), section 15AA or
subsection 15AB(2) of the Act; and
(b) the applicant is not notified of a decision on
the request within the extended period.
And the total costs should not exceed that of actually producing a copy of
the document as per the guidance on charges within the FOI legislation.
I would encourage you to respond asap and release this document to the
public domain.
Regards
Tim
Get [1]Outlook for Android
From: Tim Nothdurft
Sent: Tuesday, 2 July, 21:22
Subject: Re: Acknowledgement and ADR - Request for network design rules
To: FOIOfficer
Cc: [FOI #5476 email]
I would like to make a request for the information to be released on the
grounds of public interest based on...
The document relates to a matter of public debate, or a policy issue under
discussion within an agency, and disclosure of the document would assist
public comment on or participation in the debate or discussion. [2][30]
The National Broadband Network is a significant infrastructure project and
every Australian holds a stake. Release of technical documentation raises
awareness, gives transparency, and hold the contractor entities
accountable for costings and performance.
The document relates to an agency decision that has been a topic of public
interest or discussion, and disclosure of the document would better inform
the public as to why or how the decision was made, including highlighting
any problems or flaws that occurred in the decision-making process.
[3][31]
NBN has recently announced FttC to FttP and HFC to FttP uplifts. There is
evidence that contractors are not adhering to the design documentation and
this makes the release of this information critical to protect the
integrity of the project.
The document would add to the public record on an important and recurring
aspect of agency decision making. [4][32]
Fundamental architecture is unique to the NBN offers no commerical in
confidence advantage and provides important framework for all decisions
now and in the future and should be made public for analysis and debate.
This document is also referenced in key public high level architecture
documents.
Get [5]Outlook for Android
From: Tim Nothdurft
Sent: Tuesday, 2 July, 15:53
Subject: Re: Acknowledgement and ADR - Request for network design rules
To: FOIOfficer
Cc: [FOI #5476 email]
Thank you for your timely response.
NBN internal processes must be inefficient if finding and retrieving 8
named documents from an internal records management system is not
proportional to retrieving of one in such a simplic request?
Irrespectively the decision making is also disproportionate and not inline
with other agencies.
Could you please provide basic metadata of this document.
Including page count, versioning, date. Surely this can be freely
provided and to help determine if the quoted costs for the information are
in fact reasonable and consistent?
Get [6]Outlook for Android
From: FOIOfficer <[email address]>
Sent: Tuesday, July 2, 2019 3:27:32 PM
To: Tim Nothdurft; FOIOfficer
Cc: [FOI #5476 email]
Subject: RE: Acknowledgement and ADR - Request for network design rules
Dear Mr Nothdurft
Thank you for your email.
I consider that the decision making will constitute the majority of
processing time with your request. Please note that in estimating the time
involved, I considered your specific request for one document, rather than
looking at your previous request for eight documents and simply dividing
it by eight. In this regard, my preliminary view is that the Advance
Deposit Request and fees outlined to you represent an accurate estimate of
the processing time for your request. I also note that the decision making
time estimate is for twelve, not twenty, hours.
Please also note that the FOI Act enables FOI applicants to request a
reduction or waiver of the fees in circumstances where it can be shown
that the release of requested documents would be in the public interest or
they are experiencing financial hardship. I note that you have not made a
request or specific contentions in that regard. If you wish to make such a
request, I would refer you to paragraphs 4.75-4.89 of the [7]Office of the
Australian Information Commissioner’s FOI Guidelines. For reference, I am
required to complete my Internal Review within 30 days. I would ask that
you provide me with any contentions at your earliest convenience.
Regards
nbn FOI Officer
From: Tim Nothdurft <[email address]>
Sent: Monday, 1 July 2019 12:07 PM
To: FOIOfficer <[email address]>
Cc: [FOI #5476 email]
Subject: [External] Re: Acknowledgement and ADR - Request for network
design rules
This message is from an external sender - be cautious, particularly with
links and attachments.
I'm questioning the consistency of the charges based on previous costings
to retrieve 8 named documents (find attached).
How does a single named document require 1full hours, but 8 similarly
named documents requires only an additional 15 minutes?
Also the decision making time is disproportionate. 20 hours for a single
document is not in line with other Government department FOI costings.
There is enough public interest to release this data to validate technical
choice design decisions and if the CiC costs are proportional to the
design.
Therefore despite the disproportionate costings I'm requesting this
document be made public under FOI act.
Regards
Get [8]Outlook for Android
From: FOIOfficer <[email address]>
Sent: Monday, July 1, 2019 11:32:27 AM
To: Tim Nothdurft
Cc: FOIOfficer
Subject: Acknowledgement and ADR - Request for network design rules
Dear Mr Nothdurft
Please find attached a letter in relation to your recent FOI request.
As this letter relates to the ADR that has been determined in relation to
your request, we have sent this to your direct email address. However, we
will process all other aspects of this request via the Right To Know
address ([9][FOI #5476 email]), from which your
request originated.
Regards
Kate
nbn FOI Officer
References
Visible links
1. https://aka.ms/ghei36
2. https://www.oaic.gov.au/freedom-of-infor...
3. https://www.oaic.gov.au/freedom-of-infor...
4. https://www.oaic.gov.au/freedom-of-infor...
5. https://aka.ms/ghei36
6. https://aka.ms/ghei36
7. https://www.oaic.gov.au/freedom-of-infor...
8. https://aka.ms/ghei36
9. mailto:[FOI #5476 email]
I've challenged the costings as outlined in the legislation and have been
very specific in my request, and have been ignored.
Please release this information as per your legislative requirements.
Putting it on hold and hoping it lapses is very poor form and once again
demonstrates NBN internal processes are lacking any professionalism.
Get [1]Outlook for Android
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: David Mesman <[email address]>
Sent: Tuesday, July 23, 2019 11:20:15 AM
To: Tim Nothdurft <[email address]>
Subject: RE: Acknowledgement and ADR - Request for network design rules
Mr Nothdurft – I refer you to the attached letter. Your application is
currently on hold, pending the payment of the advance deposit, as are the
statutory deadlines for the processing of your FOI application. As
outlined in the attached letter, 11 days have passed in the statutory
deadline.
On the 2^nd of July 2019, you made contentions seeking an FOI processing
fee reduction/waiver. nbn’s FOI Team is currently considering your request
and is required to respond within 30 days with an FOI fee decision. We
will endeavour to have a response before that deadline, which is 31 July
2019. Once that determination is made – and if fees are waived, the
processing time limits will re-commence, i.e. from the 11 days already
passed. If FOI processing fees are not waived or reduced, nbn will issue
with a new advance deposit or resend the original advance deposit. You
will be provided with your relevant review and appeal rights at the time
in relation to nbn’s fee decision. Please note that the processing fee
decision is a separate matter from completing an FOI access decision.
Best regards, David Mesman
From: Tim Nothdurft <[email address]>
Sent: Tuesday, 23 July 2019 10:35 AM
To: FOIOfficer <[email address]>
Cc: [FOI #5476 email]
Subject: [External] Re: Acknowledgement and ADR - Request for network
design rules
This message is from an external sender - be cautious, particularly with
links and attachments.
Dear FOI officer.
You have had sufficient time to respond under the statutory requirements
of my request to have information released on public grounds.
There has been no attempt to answer or address any of my concerns around
reasonable costs for the release of one named document.
I have not agreed to any formal extension or terms.
I would like to draw your attention to FOI 2019 legislature, Freedom of
Information (Charges) Regulations 2019
Section 7.
(3) There is no charge in respect of a request for access to a document
if:
(a) the period referred to in paragraph 15(5)(b) of
the Act is extended under subsection 15(6) or (8), section 15AA or
subsection 15AB(2) of the Act; and
(b) the applicant is not notified of a decision on
the request within the extended period.
And the total costs should not exceed that of actually producing a copy of
the document as per the guidance on charges within the FOI legislation.
I would encourage you to respond asap and release this document to the
public domain.
Regards
Tim
Get [2]Outlook for Android
From: Tim Nothdurft
Sent: Tuesday, 2 July, 21:22
Subject: Re: Acknowledgement and ADR - Request for network design rules
To: FOIOfficer
Cc: [3][FOI #5476 email]
I would like to make a request for the information to be released on the
grounds of public interest based on...
The document relates to a matter of public debate, or a policy issue under
discussion within an agency, and disclosure of the document would assist
public comment on or participation in the debate or discussion. [4][30]
The National Broadband Network is a significant infrastructure project and
every Australian holds a stake. Release of technical documentation raises
awareness, gives transparency, and hold the contractor entities
accountable for costings and performance.
The document relates to an agency decision that has been a topic of public
interest or discussion, and disclosure of the document would better inform
the public as to why or how the decision was made, including highlighting
any problems or flaws that occurred in the decision-making process.
[5][31]
NBN has recently announced FttC to FttP and HFC to FttP uplifts. There is
evidence that contractors are not adhering to the design documentation and
this makes the release of this information critical to protect the
integrity of the project.
The document would add to the public record on an important and recurring
aspect of agency decision making. [6][32]
Fundamental architecture is unique to the NBN offers no commerical in
confidence advantage and provides important framework for all decisions
now and in the future and should be made public for analysis and debate.
This document is also referenced in key public high level architecture
documents.
Get [7]Outlook for Android
From: Tim Nothdurft
Sent: Tuesday, 2 July, 15:53
Subject: Re: Acknowledgement and ADR - Request for network design rules
To: FOIOfficer
Cc: [8][FOI #5476 email]
Thank you for your timely response.
NBN internal processes must be inefficient if finding and retrieving 8
named documents from an internal records management system is not
proportional to retrieving of one in such a simplic request?
Irrespectively the decision making is also disproportionate and not inline
with other agencies.
Could you please provide basic metadata of this document.
Including page count, versioning, date. Surely this can be freely
provided and to help determine if the quoted costs for the information are
in fact reasonable and consistent?
Get [9]Outlook for Android
From: FOIOfficer <[10][email address]>
Sent: Tuesday, July 2, 2019 3:27:32 PM
To: Tim Nothdurft; FOIOfficer
Cc: [11][FOI #5476 email]
Subject: RE: Acknowledgement and ADR - Request for network design rules
Dear Mr Nothdurft
Thank you for your email.
I consider that the decision making will constitute the majority of
processing time with your request. Please note that in estimating the time
involved, I considered your specific request for one document, rather than
looking at your previous request for eight documents and simply dividing
it by eight. In this regard, my preliminary view is that the Advance
Deposit Request and fees outlined to you represent an accurate estimate of
the processing time for your request. I also note that the decision making
time estimate is for twelve, not twenty, hours.
Please also note that the FOI Act enables FOI applicants to request a
reduction or waiver of the fees in circumstances where it can be shown
that the release of requested documents would be in the public interest or
they are experiencing financial hardship. I note that you have not made a
request or specific contentions in that regard. If you wish to make such a
request, I would refer you to paragraphs 4.75-4.89 of the [12]Office of
the Australian Information Commissioner’s FOI Guidelines. For reference, I
am required to complete my Internal Review within 30 days. I would ask
that you provide me with any contentions at your earliest convenience.
Regards
nbn FOI Officer
From: Tim Nothdurft <[13][email address]>
Sent: Monday, 1 July 2019 12:07 PM
To: FOIOfficer <[14][email address]>
Cc: [15][FOI #5476 email]
Subject: [External] Re: Acknowledgement and ADR - Request for network
design rules
This message is from an external sender - be cautious, particularly with
links and attachments.
I'm questioning the consistency of the charges based on previous costings
to retrieve 8 named documents (find attached).
How does a single named document require 1full hours, but 8 similarly
named documents requires only an additional 15 minutes?
Also the decision making time is disproportionate. 20 hours for a single
document is not in line with other Government department FOI costings.
There is enough public interest to release this data to validate technical
choice design decisions and if the CiC costs are proportional to the
design.
Therefore despite the disproportionate costings I'm requesting this
document be made public under FOI act.
Regards
Get [16]Outlook for Android
From: FOIOfficer <[17][email address]>
Sent: Monday, July 1, 2019 11:32:27 AM
To: Tim Nothdurft
Cc: FOIOfficer
Subject: Acknowledgement and ADR - Request for network design rules
Dear Mr Nothdurft
Please find attached a letter in relation to your recent FOI request.
As this letter relates to the ADR that has been determined in relation to
your request, we have sent this to your direct email address. However, we
will process all other aspects of this request via the Right To Know
address ([18][FOI #5476 email]), from which
your request originated.
Regards
Kate
nbn FOI Officer
References
Visible links
1. https://aka.ms/ghei36
2. https://aka.ms/ghei36
3. mailto:[FOI #5476 email]
4. https://www.oaic.gov.au/freedom-of-infor...
5. https://www.oaic.gov.au/freedom-of-infor...
6. https://www.oaic.gov.au/freedom-of-infor...
7. https://aka.ms/ghei36
8. mailto:[FOI #5476 email]
9. https://aka.ms/ghei36
10. mailto:[email address]
11. mailto:[FOI #5476 email]
12. https://www.oaic.gov.au/freedom-of-infor...
13. mailto:[email address]
14. mailto:[email address]
15. mailto:[FOI #5476 email]
16. https://aka.ms/ghei36
17. mailto:[email address]
18. mailto:[FOI #5476 email]
I would also like to highlight there has been NO agreed upon extension and
you are required by law to either deny or release this information
irrespective of any advanced deposit.
I have giving NBN Australia plenty of time to respond to my concerns on
the ADR dated 1st of July and have been ignored by that FOI officer.
You are not entitled to a 30 day extension from my understanding of the
Legislation.
You, Mr Mesman are in breach of Federal Law and continue to act in a
manner that denies the public access to important information regarding
the NBN rollout and architectural decisions that are SPECIFIC only to the
NBN network.
Get [1]Outlook for Android
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Tim Nothdurft
Sent: Tuesday, July 23, 2019 11:33:44 AM
To: David Mesman <[email address]>
Cc: [FOI #5476 email]
<[FOI #5476 email]>
Subject: Re: Acknowledgement and ADR - Request for network design rules
I've challenged the costings as outlined in the legislation and have been
very specific in my request, and have been ignored.
Please release this information as per your legislative requirements.
Putting it on hold and hoping it lapses is very poor form and once again
demonstrates NBN internal processes are lacking any professionalism.
Get [2]Outlook for Android
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: David Mesman <[email address]>
Sent: Tuesday, July 23, 2019 11:20:15 AM
To: Tim Nothdurft <[email address]>
Subject: RE: Acknowledgement and ADR - Request for network design rules
Mr Nothdurft – I refer you to the attached letter. Your application is
currently on hold, pending the payment of the advance deposit, as are the
statutory deadlines for the processing of your FOI application. As
outlined in the attached letter, 11 days have passed in the statutory
deadline.
On the 2^nd of July 2019, you made contentions seeking an FOI processing
fee reduction/waiver. nbn’s FOI Team is currently considering your request
and is required to respond within 30 days with an FOI fee decision. We
will endeavour to have a response before that deadline, which is 31 July
2019. Once that determination is made – and if fees are waived, the
processing time limits will re-commence, i.e. from the 11 days already
passed. If FOI processing fees are not waived or reduced, nbn will issue
with a new advance deposit or resend the original advance deposit. You
will be provided with your relevant review and appeal rights at the time
in relation to nbn’s fee decision. Please note that the processing fee
decision is a separate matter from completing an FOI access decision.
Best regards, David Mesman
From: Tim Nothdurft <[email address]>
Sent: Tuesday, 23 July 2019 10:35 AM
To: FOIOfficer <[email address]>
Cc: [FOI #5476 email]
Subject: [External] Re: Acknowledgement and ADR - Request for network
design rules
This message is from an external sender - be cautious, particularly with
links and attachments.
Dear FOI officer.
You have had sufficient time to respond under the statutory requirements
of my request to have information released on public grounds.
There has been no attempt to answer or address any of my concerns around
reasonable costs for the release of one named document.
I have not agreed to any formal extension or terms.
I would like to draw your attention to FOI 2019 legislature, Freedom of
Information (Charges) Regulations 2019
Section 7.
(3) There is no charge in respect of a request for access to a document
if:
(a) the period referred to in paragraph 15(5)(b) of
the Act is extended under subsection 15(6) or (8), section 15AA or
subsection 15AB(2) of the Act; and
(b) the applicant is not notified of a decision on
the request within the extended period.
And the total costs should not exceed that of actually producing a copy of
the document as per the guidance on charges within the FOI legislation.
I would encourage you to respond asap and release this document to the
public domain.
Regards
Tim
Get [3]Outlook for Android
From: Tim Nothdurft
Sent: Tuesday, 2 July, 21:22
Subject: Re: Acknowledgement and ADR - Request for network design rules
To: FOIOfficer
Cc: [4][FOI #5476 email]
I would like to make a request for the information to be released on the
grounds of public interest based on...
The document relates to a matter of public debate, or a policy issue under
discussion within an agency, and disclosure of the document would assist
public comment on or participation in the debate or discussion. [5][30]
The National Broadband Network is a significant infrastructure project and
every Australian holds a stake. Release of technical documentation raises
awareness, gives transparency, and hold the contractor entities
accountable for costings and performance.
The document relates to an agency decision that has been a topic of public
interest or discussion, and disclosure of the document would better inform
the public as to why or how the decision was made, including highlighting
any problems or flaws that occurred in the decision-making process.
[6][31]
NBN has recently announced FttC to FttP and HFC to FttP uplifts. There is
evidence that contractors are not adhering to the design documentation and
this makes the release of this information critical to protect the
integrity of the project.
The document would add to the public record on an important and recurring
aspect of agency decision making. [7][32]
Fundamental architecture is unique to the NBN offers no commerical in
confidence advantage and provides important framework for all decisions
now and in the future and should be made public for analysis and debate.
This document is also referenced in key public high level architecture
documents.
Get [8]Outlook for Android
From: Tim Nothdurft
Sent: Tuesday, 2 July, 15:53
Subject: Re: Acknowledgement and ADR - Request for network design rules
To: FOIOfficer
Cc: [9][FOI #5476 email]
Thank you for your timely response.
NBN internal processes must be inefficient if finding and retrieving 8
named documents from an internal records management system is not
proportional to retrieving of one in such a simplic request?
Irrespectively the decision making is also disproportionate and not inline
with other agencies.
Could you please provide basic metadata of this document.
Including page count, versioning, date. Surely this can be freely
provided and to help determine if the quoted costs for the information are
in fact reasonable and consistent?
Get [10]Outlook for Android
From: FOIOfficer <[11][email address]>
Sent: Tuesday, July 2, 2019 3:27:32 PM
To: Tim Nothdurft; FOIOfficer
Cc: [12][FOI #5476 email]
Subject: RE: Acknowledgement and ADR - Request for network design rules
Dear Mr Nothdurft
Thank you for your email.
I consider that the decision making will constitute the majority of
processing time with your request. Please note that in estimating the time
involved, I considered your specific request for one document, rather than
looking at your previous request for eight documents and simply dividing
it by eight. In this regard, my preliminary view is that the Advance
Deposit Request and fees outlined to you represent an accurate estimate of
the processing time for your request. I also note that the decision making
time estimate is for twelve, not twenty, hours.
Please also note that the FOI Act enables FOI applicants to request a
reduction or waiver of the fees in circumstances where it can be shown
that the release of requested documents would be in the public interest or
they are experiencing financial hardship. I note that you have not made a
request or specific contentions in that regard. If you wish to make such a
request, I would refer you to paragraphs 4.75-4.89 of the [13]Office of
the Australian Information Commissioner’s FOI Guidelines. For reference, I
am required to complete my Internal Review within 30 days. I would ask
that you provide me with any contentions at your earliest convenience.
Regards
nbn FOI Officer
From: Tim Nothdurft <[14][email address]>
Sent: Monday, 1 July 2019 12:07 PM
To: FOIOfficer <[15][email address]>
Cc: [16][FOI #5476 email]
Subject: [External] Re: Acknowledgement and ADR - Request for network
design rules
This message is from an external sender - be cautious, particularly with
links and attachments.
I'm questioning the consistency of the charges based on previous costings
to retrieve 8 named documents (find attached).
How does a single named document require 1full hours, but 8 similarly
named documents requires only an additional 15 minutes?
Also the decision making time is disproportionate. 20 hours for a single
document is not in line with other Government department FOI costings.
There is enough public interest to release this data to validate technical
choice design decisions and if the CiC costs are proportional to the
design.
Therefore despite the disproportionate costings I'm requesting this
document be made public under FOI act.
Regards
Get [17]Outlook for Android
From: FOIOfficer <[18][email address]>
Sent: Monday, July 1, 2019 11:32:27 AM
To: Tim Nothdurft
Cc: FOIOfficer
Subject: Acknowledgement and ADR - Request for network design rules
Dear Mr Nothdurft
Please find attached a letter in relation to your recent FOI request.
As this letter relates to the ADR that has been determined in relation to
your request, we have sent this to your direct email address. However, we
will process all other aspects of this request via the Right To Know
address ([19][FOI #5476 email]), from which
your request originated.
Regards
Kate
nbn FOI Officer
References
Visible links
1. https://aka.ms/ghei36
2. https://aka.ms/ghei36
3. https://aka.ms/ghei36
4. mailto:[FOI #5476 email]
5. https://www.oaic.gov.au/freedom-of-infor...
6. https://www.oaic.gov.au/freedom-of-infor...
7. https://www.oaic.gov.au/freedom-of-infor...
8. https://aka.ms/ghei36
9. mailto:[FOI #5476 email]
10. https://aka.ms/ghei36
11. mailto:[email address]
12. mailto:[FOI #5476 email]
13. https://www.oaic.gov.au/freedom-of-infor...
14. mailto:[email address]
15. mailto:[email address]
16. mailto:[FOI #5476 email]
17. https://aka.ms/ghei36
18. mailto:[email address]
19. mailto:[FOI #5476 email]
Dear Mr Nothdurft,
Please refer to my email, below, as well as to paragraphs 4.13 and 4.14 of
the Office of the Australian Information Commissioner’s FOI Guidelines.
For your ease of reference, it is found here at the following link
[1]https://www.oaic.gov.au/assets/freedom-o....
The relevant text is as follows:
4.13 Upon receiving the applicant’s reasons for contesting the charge, the
agency or minister must, within 30 days or earlier if practicable (s
29(6)), provide a written notice of decision to the applicant as to
whether the charge will be imposed, reduced or waived. In making its
decision, the agency or minister must take into account whether payment of
the charge would cause financial hardship, or whether giving access
without charge or at a reduced charge would be in the public interest (see
[4.75]–[4.87] below) (ss 29(4)–(5)).
4.14 Where the agency or minister does not provide its decision to the
applicant within 30 days, it is taken that a decision is made to impose
the charge specified in the notice of preliminary assessment (s 29(7)).
You will receive a fee determination in due course, as required by the FOI
Guidelines.
Best regards, David Mesman
From: Tim Nothdurft <[email address]>
Sent: Tuesday, 23 July 2019 11:43 AM
To: David Mesman <[email address]>
Cc: [FOI #5476 email]
Subject: [External] Re: Acknowledgement and ADR - Request for network
design rules
This message is from an external sender - be cautious, particularly with
links and attachments.
I would also like to highlight there has been NO agreed upon extension and
you are required by law to either deny or release this information
irrespective of any advanced deposit.
I have giving NBN Australia plenty of time to respond to my concerns on
the ADR dated 1st of July and have been ignored by that FOI officer.
You are not entitled to a 30 day extension from my understanding of the
Legislation.
You, Mr Mesman are in breach of Federal Law and continue to act in a
manner that denies the public access to important information regarding
the NBN rollout and architectural decisions that are SPECIFIC only to the
NBN network.
Get [2]Outlook for Android
------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Tim Nothdurft
Sent: Tuesday, July 23, 2019 11:33:44 AM
To: David Mesman <[3][email address]>
Cc: [4][FOI #5476 email]
<[5][FOI #5476 email]>
Subject: Re: Acknowledgement and ADR - Request for network design rules
I've challenged the costings as outlined in the legislation and have been
very specific in my request, and have been ignored.
Please release this information as per your legislative requirements.
Putting it on hold and hoping it lapses is very poor form and once again
demonstrates NBN internal processes are lacking any professionalism.
Get [6]Outlook for Android
------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: David Mesman <[7][email address]>
Sent: Tuesday, July 23, 2019 11:20:15 AM
To: Tim Nothdurft <[8][email address]>
Subject: RE: Acknowledgement and ADR - Request for network design rules
Mr Nothdurft – I refer you to the attached letter. Your application is
currently on hold, pending the payment of the advance deposit, as are the
statutory deadlines for the processing of your FOI application. As
outlined in the attached letter, 11 days have passed in the statutory
deadline.
On the 2^nd of July 2019, you made contentions seeking an FOI processing
fee reduction/waiver. nbn’s FOI Team is currently considering your request
and is required to respond within 30 days with an FOI fee decision. We
will endeavour to have a response before that deadline, which is 31 July
2019. Once that determination is made – and if fees are waived, the
processing time limits will re-commence, i.e. from the 11 days already
passed. If FOI processing fees are not waived or reduced, nbn will issue
with a new advance deposit or resend the original advance deposit. You
will be provided with your relevant review and appeal rights at the time
in relation to nbn’s fee decision. Please note that the processing fee
decision is a separate matter from completing an FOI access decision.
Best regards, David Mesman
From: Tim Nothdurft <[9][email address]>
Sent: Tuesday, 23 July 2019 10:35 AM
To: FOIOfficer <[10][email address]>
Cc: [11][FOI #5476 email]
Subject: [External] Re: Acknowledgement and ADR - Request for network
design rules
This message is from an external sender - be cautious, particularly with
links and attachments.
Dear FOI officer.
You have had sufficient time to respond under the statutory requirements
of my request to have information released on public grounds.
There has been no attempt to answer or address any of my concerns around
reasonable costs for the release of one named document.
I have not agreed to any formal extension or terms.
I would like to draw your attention to FOI 2019 legislature, Freedom of
Information (Charges) Regulations 2019
Section 7.
(3) There is no charge in respect of a request for access to a document
if:
(a) the period referred to in paragraph 15(5)(b) of
the Act is extended under subsection 15(6) or (8), section 15AA or
subsection 15AB(2) of the Act; and
(b) the applicant is not notified of a decision on
the request within the extended period.
And the total costs should not exceed that of actually producing a copy of
the document as per the guidance on charges within the FOI legislation.
I would encourage you to respond asap and release this document to the
public domain.
Regards
Tim
Get [12]Outlook for Android
From: Tim Nothdurft
Sent: Tuesday, 2 July, 21:22
Subject: Re: Acknowledgement and ADR - Request for network design rules
To: FOIOfficer
Cc: [13][FOI #5476 email]
I would like to make a request for the information to be released on the
grounds of public interest based on...
The document relates to a matter of public debate, or a policy issue under
discussion within an agency, and disclosure of the document would assist
public comment on or participation in the debate or discussion. [14][30]
The National Broadband Network is a significant infrastructure project and
every Australian holds a stake. Release of technical documentation raises
awareness, gives transparency, and hold the contractor entities
accountable for costings and performance.
The document relates to an agency decision that has been a topic of public
interest or discussion, and disclosure of the document would better inform
the public as to why or how the decision was made, including highlighting
any problems or flaws that occurred in the decision-making process.
[15][31]
NBN has recently announced FttC to FttP and HFC to FttP uplifts. There is
evidence that contractors are not adhering to the design documentation and
this makes the release of this information critical to protect the
integrity of the project.
The document would add to the public record on an important and recurring
aspect of agency decision making. [16][32]
Fundamental architecture is unique to the NBN offers no commerical in
confidence advantage and provides important framework for all decisions
now and in the future and should be made public for analysis and debate.
This document is also referenced in key public high level architecture
documents.
Get [17]Outlook for Android
From: Tim Nothdurft
Sent: Tuesday, 2 July, 15:53
Subject: Re: Acknowledgement and ADR - Request for network design rules
To: FOIOfficer
Cc: [18][FOI #5476 email]
Thank you for your timely response.
NBN internal processes must be inefficient if finding and retrieving 8
named documents from an internal records management system is not
proportional to retrieving of one in such a simplic request?
Irrespectively the decision making is also disproportionate and not inline
with other agencies.
Could you please provide basic metadata of this document.
Including page count, versioning, date. Surely this can be freely
provided and to help determine if the quoted costs for the information are
in fact reasonable and consistent?
Get [19]Outlook for Android
From: FOIOfficer <[20][email address]>
Sent: Tuesday, July 2, 2019 3:27:32 PM
To: Tim Nothdurft; FOIOfficer
Cc: [21][FOI #5476 email]
Subject: RE: Acknowledgement and ADR - Request for network design rules
Dear Mr Nothdurft
Thank you for your email.
I consider that the decision making will constitute the majority of
processing time with your request. Please note that in estimating the time
involved, I considered your specific request for one document, rather than
looking at your previous request for eight documents and simply dividing
it by eight. In this regard, my preliminary view is that the Advance
Deposit Request and fees outlined to you represent an accurate estimate of
the processing time for your request. I also note that the decision making
time estimate is for twelve, not twenty, hours.
Please also note that the FOI Act enables FOI applicants to request a
reduction or waiver of the fees in circumstances where it can be shown
that the release of requested documents would be in the public interest or
they are experiencing financial hardship. I note that you have not made a
request or specific contentions in that regard. If you wish to make such a
request, I would refer you to paragraphs 4.75-4.89 of the [22]Office of
the Australian Information Commissioner’s FOI Guidelines. For reference, I
am required to complete my Internal Review within 30 days. I would ask
that you provide me with any contentions at your earliest convenience.
Regards
nbn FOI Officer
From: Tim Nothdurft <[23][email address]>
Sent: Monday, 1 July 2019 12:07 PM
To: FOIOfficer <[24][email address]>
Cc: [25][FOI #5476 email]
Subject: [External] Re: Acknowledgement and ADR - Request for network
design rules
This message is from an external sender - be cautious, particularly with
links and attachments.
I'm questioning the consistency of the charges based on previous costings
to retrieve 8 named documents (find attached).
How does a single named document require 1full hours, but 8 similarly
named documents requires only an additional 15 minutes?
Also the decision making time is disproportionate. 20 hours for a single
document is not in line with other Government department FOI costings.
There is enough public interest to release this data to validate technical
choice design decisions and if the CiC costs are proportional to the
design.
Therefore despite the disproportionate costings I'm requesting this
document be made public under FOI act.
Regards
Get [26]Outlook for Android
From: FOIOfficer <[27][email address]>
Sent: Monday, July 1, 2019 11:32:27 AM
To: Tim Nothdurft
Cc: FOIOfficer
Subject: Acknowledgement and ADR - Request for network design rules
Dear Mr Nothdurft
Please find attached a letter in relation to your recent FOI request.
As this letter relates to the ADR that has been determined in relation to
your request, we have sent this to your direct email address. However, we
will process all other aspects of this request via the Right To Know
address ([28][FOI #5476 email]), from which
your request originated.
Regards
Kate
nbn FOI Officer
References
Visible links
1. https://www.oaic.gov.au/assets/freedom-o...
2. https://aka.ms/ghei36
3. mailto:[email address]
4. mailto:[FOI #5476 email]
5. mailto:[FOI #5476 email]
6. https://aka.ms/ghei36
7. mailto:[email address]
8. mailto:[email address]
9. mailto:[email address]
10. mailto:[email address]
11. mailto:[FOI #5476 email]
12. https://aka.ms/ghei36
13. mailto:[FOI #5476 email]
14. https://www.oaic.gov.au/freedom-of-infor...
15. https://www.oaic.gov.au/freedom-of-infor...
16. https://www.oaic.gov.au/freedom-of-infor...
17. https://aka.ms/ghei36
18. mailto:[FOI #5476 email]
19. https://aka.ms/ghei36
20. mailto:[email address]
21. mailto:[FOI #5476 email]
22. https://www.oaic.gov.au/freedom-of-infor...
23. mailto:[email address]
24. mailto:[email address]
25. mailto:[FOI #5476 email]
26. https://aka.ms/ghei36
27. mailto:[email address]
28. mailto:[FOI #5476 email]
You have actually made no decision regarding the release of the document
and the actual cost. You have provided a generic quoted template that is
inconsistent with the type of request as outlined in the legislation. The
ADR is not a reflection of the real world costs and only an estimate,
based on very little information. I have not once acknowledged acceptance
of the ADR or pausing of the statutory limits of the FOI request.
For the record, I have asked to be provided simple document metadata and
have been denied and/or ignored. This should be encapsulated within the
original 30 day period.
Either way I suspect this is typically of an organisation that is unable
to act in the best interest of its public stakeholders and operate fairly
within the FOI legislation.
Get [1]Outlook for Android
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: David Mesman <[email address]>
Sent: Tuesday, July 23, 2019 11:54:28 AM
To: Tim Nothdurft <[email address]>
Cc: [FOI #5476 email]
<[FOI #5476 email]>
Subject: RE: Acknowledgement and ADR - Request for network design rules
Dear Mr Nothdurft,
Please refer to my email, below, as well as to paragraphs 4.13 and 4.14 of
the Office of the Australian Information Commissioner’s FOI Guidelines.
For your ease of reference, it is found here at the following link
[2]https://www.oaic.gov.au/assets/freedom-o....
The relevant text is as follows:
4.13 Upon receiving the applicant’s reasons for contesting the charge, the
agency or minister must, within 30 days or earlier if practicable (s
29(6)), provide a written notice of decision to the applicant as to
whether the charge will be imposed, reduced or waived. In making its
decision, the agency or minister must take into account whether payment of
the charge would cause financial hardship, or whether giving access
without charge or at a reduced charge would be in the public interest (see
[4.75]–[4.87] below) (ss 29(4)–(5)).
4.14 Where the agency or minister does not provide its decision to the
applicant within 30 days, it is taken that a decision is made to impose
the charge specified in the notice of preliminary assessment (s 29(7)).
You will receive a fee determination in due course, as required by the FOI
Guidelines.
Best regards, David Mesman
From: Tim Nothdurft <[email address]>
Sent: Tuesday, 23 July 2019 11:43 AM
To: David Mesman <[email address]>
Cc: [FOI #5476 email]
Subject: [External] Re: Acknowledgement and ADR - Request for network
design rules
This message is from an external sender - be cautious, particularly with
links and attachments.
I would also like to highlight there has been NO agreed upon extension and
you are required by law to either deny or release this information
irrespective of any advanced deposit.
I have giving NBN Australia plenty of time to respond to my concerns on
the ADR dated 1st of July and have been ignored by that FOI officer.
You are not entitled to a 30 day extension from my understanding of the
Legislation.
You, Mr Mesman are in breach of Federal Law and continue to act in a
manner that denies the public access to important information regarding
the NBN rollout and architectural decisions that are SPECIFIC only to the
NBN network.
Get [3]Outlook for Android
------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Tim Nothdurft
Sent: Tuesday, July 23, 2019 11:33:44 AM
To: David Mesman <[4][email address]>
Cc: [5][FOI #5476 email]
<[6][FOI #5476 email]>
Subject: Re: Acknowledgement and ADR - Request for network design rules
I've challenged the costings as outlined in the legislation and have been
very specific in my request, and have been ignored.
Please release this information as per your legislative requirements.
Putting it on hold and hoping it lapses is very poor form and once again
demonstrates NBN internal processes are lacking any professionalism.
Get [7]Outlook for Android
------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: David Mesman <[8][email address]>
Sent: Tuesday, July 23, 2019 11:20:15 AM
To: Tim Nothdurft <[9][email address]>
Subject: RE: Acknowledgement and ADR - Request for network design rules
Mr Nothdurft – I refer you to the attached letter. Your application is
currently on hold, pending the payment of the advance deposit, as are the
statutory deadlines for the processing of your FOI application. As
outlined in the attached letter, 11 days have passed in the statutory
deadline.
On the 2^nd of July 2019, you made contentions seeking an FOI processing
fee reduction/waiver. nbn’s FOI Team is currently considering your request
and is required to respond within 30 days with an FOI fee decision. We
will endeavour to have a response before that deadline, which is 31 July
2019. Once that determination is made – and if fees are waived, the
processing time limits will re-commence, i.e. from the 11 days already
passed. If FOI processing fees are not waived or reduced, nbn will issue
with a new advance deposit or resend the original advance deposit. You
will be provided with your relevant review and appeal rights at the time
in relation to nbn’s fee decision. Please note that the processing fee
decision is a separate matter from completing an FOI access decision.
Best regards, David Mesman
From: Tim Nothdurft <[10][email address]>
Sent: Tuesday, 23 July 2019 10:35 AM
To: FOIOfficer <[11][email address]>
Cc: [12][FOI #5476 email]
Subject: [External] Re: Acknowledgement and ADR - Request for network
design rules
This message is from an external sender - be cautious, particularly with
links and attachments.
Dear FOI officer.
You have had sufficient time to respond under the statutory requirements
of my request to have information released on public grounds.
There has been no attempt to answer or address any of my concerns around
reasonable costs for the release of one named document.
I have not agreed to any formal extension or terms.
I would like to draw your attention to FOI 2019 legislature, Freedom of
Information (Charges) Regulations 2019
Section 7.
(3) There is no charge in respect of a request for access to a document
if:
(a) the period referred to in paragraph 15(5)(b) of
the Act is extended under subsection 15(6) or (8), section 15AA or
subsection 15AB(2) of the Act; and
(b) the applicant is not notified of a decision on
the request within the extended period.
And the total costs should not exceed that of actually producing a copy of
the document as per the guidance on charges within the FOI legislation.
I would encourage you to respond asap and release this document to the
public domain.
Regards
Tim
Get [13]Outlook for Android
From: Tim Nothdurft
Sent: Tuesday, 2 July, 21:22
Subject: Re: Acknowledgement and ADR - Request for network design rules
To: FOIOfficer
Cc: [14][FOI #5476 email]
I would like to make a request for the information to be released on the
grounds of public interest based on...
The document relates to a matter of public debate, or a policy issue under
discussion within an agency, and disclosure of the document would assist
public comment on or participation in the debate or discussion. [15][30]
The National Broadband Network is a significant infrastructure project and
every Australian holds a stake. Release of technical documentation raises
awareness, gives transparency, and hold the contractor entities
accountable for costings and performance.
The document relates to an agency decision that has been a topic of public
interest or discussion, and disclosure of the document would better inform
the public as to why or how the decision was made, including highlighting
any problems or flaws that occurred in the decision-making process.
[16][31]
NBN has recently announced FttC to FttP and HFC to FttP uplifts. There is
evidence that contractors are not adhering to the design documentation and
this makes the release of this information critical to protect the
integrity of the project.
The document would add to the public record on an important and recurring
aspect of agency decision making. [17][32]
Fundamental architecture is unique to the NBN offers no commerical in
confidence advantage and provides important framework for all decisions
now and in the future and should be made public for analysis and debate.
This document is also referenced in key public high level architecture
documents.
Get [18]Outlook for Android
From: Tim Nothdurft
Sent: Tuesday, 2 July, 15:53
Subject: Re: Acknowledgement and ADR - Request for network design rules
To: FOIOfficer
Cc: [19][FOI #5476 email]
Thank you for your timely response.
NBN internal processes must be inefficient if finding and retrieving 8
named documents from an internal records management system is not
proportional to retrieving of one in such a simplic request?
Irrespectively the decision making is also disproportionate and not inline
with other agencies.
Could you please provide basic metadata of this document.
Including page count, versioning, date. Surely this can be freely
provided and to help determine if the quoted costs for the information are
in fact reasonable and consistent?
Get [20]Outlook for Android
From: FOIOfficer <[21][email address]>
Sent: Tuesday, July 2, 2019 3:27:32 PM
To: Tim Nothdurft; FOIOfficer
Cc: [22][FOI #5476 email]
Subject: RE: Acknowledgement and ADR - Request for network design rules
Dear Mr Nothdurft
Thank you for your email.
I consider that the decision making will constitute the majority of
processing time with your request. Please note that in estimating the time
involved, I considered your specific request for one document, rather than
looking at your previous request for eight documents and simply dividing
it by eight. In this regard, my preliminary view is that the Advance
Deposit Request and fees outlined to you represent an accurate estimate of
the processing time for your request. I also note that the decision making
time estimate is for twelve, not twenty, hours.
Please also note that the FOI Act enables FOI applicants to request a
reduction or waiver of the fees in circumstances where it can be shown
that the release of requested documents would be in the public interest or
they are experiencing financial hardship. I note that you have not made a
request or specific contentions in that regard. If you wish to make such a
request, I would refer you to paragraphs 4.75-4.89 of the [23]Office of
the Australian Information Commissioner’s FOI Guidelines. For reference, I
am required to complete my Internal Review within 30 days. I would ask
that you provide me with any contentions at your earliest convenience.
Regards
nbn FOI Officer
From: Tim Nothdurft <[24][email address]>
Sent: Monday, 1 July 2019 12:07 PM
To: FOIOfficer <[25][email address]>
Cc: [26][FOI #5476 email]
Subject: [External] Re: Acknowledgement and ADR - Request for network
design rules
This message is from an external sender - be cautious, particularly with
links and attachments.
I'm questioning the consistency of the charges based on previous costings
to retrieve 8 named documents (find attached).
How does a single named document require 1full hours, but 8 similarly
named documents requires only an additional 15 minutes?
Also the decision making time is disproportionate. 20 hours for a single
document is not in line with other Government department FOI costings.
There is enough public interest to release this data to validate technical
choice design decisions and if the CiC costs are proportional to the
design.
Therefore despite the disproportionate costings I'm requesting this
document be made public under FOI act.
Regards
Get [27]Outlook for Android
From: FOIOfficer <[28][email address]>
Sent: Monday, July 1, 2019 11:32:27 AM
To: Tim Nothdurft
Cc: FOIOfficer
Subject: Acknowledgement and ADR - Request for network design rules
Dear Mr Nothdurft
Please find attached a letter in relation to your recent FOI request.
As this letter relates to the ADR that has been determined in relation to
your request, we have sent this to your direct email address. However, we
will process all other aspects of this request via the Right To Know
address ([29][FOI #5476 email]), from which
your request originated.
Regards
Kate
nbn FOI Officer
References
Visible links
1. https://aka.ms/ghei36
2. https://www.oaic.gov.au/assets/freedom-o...
3. https://aka.ms/ghei36
4. mailto:[email address]
5. mailto:[FOI #5476 email]
6. mailto:[FOI #5476 email]
7. https://aka.ms/ghei36
8. mailto:[email address]
9. mailto:[email address]
10. mailto:[email address]
11. mailto:[email address]
12. mailto:[FOI #5476 email]
13. https://aka.ms/ghei36
14. mailto:[FOI #5476 email]
15. https://www.oaic.gov.au/freedom-of-infor...
16. https://www.oaic.gov.au/freedom-of-infor...
17. https://www.oaic.gov.au/freedom-of-infor...
18. https://aka.ms/ghei36
19. mailto:[FOI #5476 email]
20. https://aka.ms/ghei36
21. mailto:[email address]
22. mailto:[FOI #5476 email]
23. https://www.oaic.gov.au/freedom-of-infor...
24. mailto:[email address]
25. mailto:[email address]
26. mailto:[FOI #5476 email]
27. https://aka.ms/ghei36
28. mailto:[email address]
29. mailto:[FOI #5476 email]
For the public record, the ineffectiveness of NBN Australia to operate
fairly under the FOI act has been clearly demonstrated time and time
again.
I don't believe a decision has been made or that the document in question
would require any special treatment outside standard operating procedures
by ANY Government GBE or Department.
I strongly believe that are trying to influence and discourage FOI request
by applying excessive charges and fees that are not proportionate to the
actual cost for undertaking the work involved irrespective of excuses made
(sic). Appropriate justification has not, and never has, been provided to
support the excessive hours claimed as required to action my request for a
single named document.
This is clear by the significant reduction in FOI documents released by
this GBE over the last three to four years.
There is also significant evidence that the internal staff are incapable
of dealing with basic questions to facilitate the fair release of
information.
The amount of time spent by employees in denying access to important
documents is very apparent and the cost far exceeds the time for a single
document to be released for the public interest.
The motivation by continuing breaking email chains and manipulation is
also evident. The behaviours are obvious and clear.
I firmly believe based on my dealing with NBN FOI teams over the last few
years, along with personal accounts of internal inefficiency and culture
that a serious review into NBN FOI processes and staff is urgently
required.
Get [1]Outlook for Android
From: David Mesman
Sent: Friday, 26 July, 13:34
Subject: nbn FOI Charges Decision
To: Tim Nothdurft
Please find attached nbn’s FOI Charges Decision.
Details regarding your rights of review and appeal are contained in the
attached letter.
David J Mesman
General Counsel │ FOI, Privacy & Knowledge Management
Corporate Advisory and Systems Engineering & Operations Legal Team
E [2][email address]
Level 11, 100 Arthur Street, North Sydney NSW 2060
[3]cid:image001.png@01D4186E.FCC70E80
nbn acknowledges and pays respects to the traditional custodians of all
the lands upon which we work.
Notice to recipient: This e-mail is intended only to be read or used by
the addressee. It is confidential and may contain information that is
subject to legal professional privilege or protected by copyright. If you
are not the addressee indicated in this message (or responsible for
delivery of the message to that person), you may not copy or deliver this
message to anyone, and you should destroy this message and kindly notify
the sender by reply e-mail. Copyright, confidentiality and legal
professional privilege are not waived or lost by reason of mistaken
delivery to you. Emails to/from nbn co limited ABN 86 136 533 741 may
undergo email filtering and virus scanning, including by third party
contractors, however, nbn co limited does not guarantee that any email or
any attachment is secure, error-free or free of viruses or other unwanted
or unexpected inclusions. Any views expressed in this message are those of
the individual sender, except where the sender specifically states them to
be the views of nbn co limited.
PLEASE CONSIDER OUR ENVIRONMENT BEFORE PRINTING
References
Visible links
1. https://aka.ms/ghei36
2. mailto:[email address]
Hello,
I have paid the advanced deposit into the nominated bank account.
Regards
Tim
Get [1]Outlook for Android
Mr Nothdurft – nbn has received your payment and will continue processing
your FOI application.
Best, David Mesman
From: Tim Nothdurft <[email address]>
Sent: Monday, 29 July 2019 11:19 AM
To: David Mesman <[email address]>; FOIOfficer
<[email address]>
Cc: [FOI #5476 email]
Subject: [External] Re: nbn FOI Charges Decision
This message is from an external sender - be cautious, particularly with
links and attachments.
Hello,
I have paid the advanced deposit into the nominated bank account.
Regards
Tim
Get [1]Outlook for Android
Mr Nothdurft – Please find attached my FOI decision in relation to your
request for the following document – NBN-NTO-EDS-359 Network Design Rules
MTM Distribution Fibre Network.
David J Mesman
General Counsel │FOI, Privacy & Knowledge Management
Corporate Advisory and Systems Engineering & Operations Legal Team
E [1][email address]
Level 11, 100 Arthur Street, North Sydney NSW 2060
[2]cid:image001.png@01D4186E.FCC70E80
nbn acknowledges and pays respects to the traditional custodians of all
the lands upon which we work.
Notice to recipient: This e-mail is intended only to be read or used by
the addressee. It is confidential and may contain information that is
subject to legal professional privilege or protected by copyright. If you
are not the addressee indicated in this message (or responsible for
delivery of the message to that person), you may not copy or deliver this
message to anyone, and you should destroy this message and kindly notify
the sender by reply e-mail. Copyright, confidentiality and legal
professional privilege are not waived or lost by reason of mistaken
delivery to you. Emails to/from nbn co limited ABN 86 136 533 741 may
undergo email filtering and virus scanning, including by third party
contractors, however, nbn co limited does not guarantee that any email or
any attachment is secure, error-free or free of viruses or other unwanted
or unexpected inclusions. Any views expressed in this message are those of
the individual sender, except where the sender specifically states them to
be the views of nbn co limited.
PLEASE CONSIDER OUR ENVIRONMENT BEFORE PRINTING
References
Visible links
1. mailto:[email address]
In the response to the decision.
I feel your decision is genetic and predictable and as usual left to the
11th hour in processing an administrative outcome.
I expect as a bare minimum for the document to be released as a fully
redacted document for the amount of time spent processing a trival
standard.
It has been demonstrated on numerous occasions that NBN staff are
incapable of applying the correct classifications.
Noting..
NBN infrastructure is public domain, it is in the open and this high level
"standard" does not compromise security in anyway. It is a know generic
response and an excuse to block transparency.
If the security of out national infrastructure is so weak there are
significant other issues at play here and should be addressed.
NBN build and construction is protected from competition, it follows know
pathways, and therefore the information contained within high level
standards should not be considered CiC or as a sensitive nature.
Passive optical network design is common and it is important for the
community to have access to these documents.
This is a lazy and typical response. I should be disgusted at the level of
professionalism shown and is quite commercial in nature.
I have also got significant input and donations from the community in
wanting this information released.
The value and revenue on the NBN is irreverent to this decision making
process.
I still strongly believe you and NBN are in breach of FOI rules and not
acting in the best interest of Australians.
I would like to have the decision reconsider based on the grounds above.
Get [1]Outlook for Android
Mr Nothdurft – I am writing to you in my personal and individual
professional capacity. My colleagues will separately respond to your
request for an Internal Review (nbn reference FOI1819/116) in due course
and in compliance with the provisions of the Freedom of Information Act
1982.
Your allegations regarding my professionalism and ethics are without
foundation and offensive to me on a personal and professional level. In my
work with nbn, I have always acted and will continue to act in an ethical
manner – and as required by my duties to the court as a practising
solicitor. Consistent with that approach, nbn has previously informed you
on at least five separate occasions of your right to make a complaint to
Office of the Australian Information Commissioner (OAIC) if you consider
that your complaint is valid. My understanding is that you have not made a
complaint to the OAIC to date.
I trust that you understand my position, and will refrain from posting any
further personal commentary of this nature.
David Mesman
David J Mesman
General Counsel │FOI, Privacy & Knowledge Management
Corporate Advisory and Systems Engineering & Operations Legal Team
E [1][email address]
Level 11, 100 Arthur Street, North Sydney NSW 2060
[2]cid:image001.png@01D4186E.FCC70E80
nbn acknowledges and pays respects to the traditional custodians of all
the lands upon which we work.
Notice to recipient: This e-mail is intended only to be read or used by
the addressee. It is confidential and may contain information that is
subject to legal professional privilege or protected by copyright. If you
are not the addressee indicated in this message (or responsible for
delivery of the message to that person), you may not copy or deliver this
message to anyone, and you should destroy this message and kindly notify
the sender by reply e-mail. Copyright, confidentiality and legal
professional privilege are not waived or lost by reason of mistaken
delivery to you. Emails to/from nbn co limited ABN 86 136 533 741 may
undergo email filtering and virus scanning, including by third party
contractors, however, nbn co limited does not guarantee that any email or
any attachment is secure, error-free or free of viruses or other unwanted
or unexpected inclusions. Any views expressed in this message are those of
the individual sender, except where the sender specifically states them to
be the views of nbn co limited.
PLEASE CONSIDER OUR ENVIRONMENT BEFORE PRINTING
References
Visible links
1. mailto:[email address]
I have kept OAIC in the loop over my dealing with the NBN FOI process and
have record of dealing with them.
I also make note that your Government GBE (NBN) …
- Only tend to only reply to emails and correspondence at the very last
moment or on Friday afternoons
- Ignore questions asked during correspondence
- Break email chains and purposely delude.
- Go dark and unresponsive
- Are unable to perform basic duties and administration one would expect
from a Government GBE and purposely acting against the public interest.
I feel this response is threatening and unprofessional, once again
evidence towards the generally professionalism shown by yourself, the FOI
team, and NBN as a whole . There is enough evidence to show that this is
the case and very much on the public record and with correspondence with
OAIC.
There is serious enough concerns to bring this in front of Senate
Estimates or the NBN Committee for long overdue questioning.
Have a nice weekend
From: David Mesman <[email address]>
Sent: 30 August 2019 15:53
To: [FOI #5476 email]
Subject: nbn FOI matters
Mr Nothdurft – I am writing to you in my personal and individual
professional capacity. My colleagues will separately respond to your
request for an Internal Review (nbn reference FOI1819/116) in due course
and in compliance with the provisions of the Freedom of Information Act
1982.
Your allegations regarding my professionalism and ethics are without
foundation and offensive to me on a personal and professional level. In my
work with nbn, I have always acted and will continue to act in an ethical
manner – and as required by my duties to the court as a practising
solicitor. Consistent with that approach, nbn has previously informed you
on at least five separate occasions of your right to make a complaint to
Office of the Australian Information Commissioner (OAIC) if you consider
that your complaint is valid. My understanding is that you have not made a
complaint to the OAIC to date.
I trust that you understand my position, and will refrain from posting any
further personal commentary of this nature.
David Mesman
David J Mesman
General Counsel │FOI, Privacy & Knowledge Management
Corporate Advisory and Systems Engineering & Operations Legal Team
E [1][email address]
Level 11, 100 Arthur Street, North Sydney NSW 2060
[2]cid:image001.png@01D4186E.FCC70E80
nbn acknowledges and pays respects to the traditional custodians of all
the lands upon which we work.
Notice to recipient: This e-mail is intended only to be read or used by
the addressee. It is confidential and may contain information that is
subject to legal professional privilege or protected by copyright. If you
are not the addressee indicated in this message (or responsible for
delivery of the message to that person), you may not copy or deliver this
message to anyone, and you should destroy this message and kindly notify
the sender by reply e-mail. Copyright, confidentiality and legal
professional privilege are not waived or lost by reason of mistaken
delivery to you. Emails to/from nbn co limited ABN 86 136 533 741 may
undergo email filtering and virus scanning, including by third party
contractors, however, nbn co limited does not guarantee that any email or
any attachment is secure, error-free or free of viruses or other unwanted
or unexpected inclusions. Any views expressed in this message are those of
the individual sender, except where the sender specifically states them to
be the views of nbn co limited.
PLEASE CONSIDER OUR ENVIRONMENT BEFORE PRINTING
References
Visible links
1. mailto:[email address]
Ben Fairless left an annotation ()
I've decided to stop replies and comments on this request. The requestor is not using our site to make a request but rather copying the Right to Know email address.
In addition, we have now gotten to the point where comments are being made which others find offensive.
I've decided not to hide the request as I think both sides have had an opportunity to put their point of view forward. I think it's appropriate to call an end to this one. Any further replies to this request will now bounce, and the request has been closed to comments.