WHS Notices
Dear Department of Defence,
Please provide all Work Health and Safety notices and reports, including Sentinel Event Incident Reports and Notifications to Comcare in relation to the MRH-90 Taipan helicopter
Yours faithfully,
James Smith
OFFICIAL
Dear James,
Acknowledgement
I refer to your correspondence of 19 June 2024 seeking access to documents
held by the Department of Defence (Defence), under the Freedom of
Information Act 1982 (FOI Act).
The scope of your request is:
Please provide all Work Health and Safety notices and reports, including
Sentinel Event Incident Reports and Notifications to Comcare in relation
to the MRH-90 Taipan helicopter
Timeframe
The statutory timeframe to provide you with a decision on your request
ends on 19 July 2024. This period may be extended if we need to consult
with third parties, or for other reasons. We will advise you if this
happens.
Please note that where the due date falls on a Saturday, Sunday or public
holiday, the timeframe will expire on the next working day. This is in
accordance with the FOI Guidelines issued by the Office of the Australian
Information Commissioner under section 93A of the FOI Act.
Disclaimer
Where staff details are captured in documents within the scope of your FOI
request, this information will be redacted; this includes private email
addresses, signatures, personnel (PMKeyS) numbers and mobile telephone
numbers, unless you specifically request such details. Defence excludes
duplicates of documents and any documents sent to or from you.
Furthermore, Defence only considers final versions of documents.
Charges
Defence may impose a charge for the work involved in providing access to
the documents in accordance with the Freedom of Information (Charges)
Regulations 2019. We will notify you if your request attracts a charge.
Please note that there is no charge for documents that contain the
personal information of the applicant.
Disclosure Log
Documents released under the FOI Act may be published on Defence’s
disclosure log, located on our website.
Contact Details
We will contact you via the email address you have provided. Please advise
if you would prefer us to use an alternative means of contact.
Should you have any questions relating to your request, please do not
hesitate to contact me via email: [1][email address].
Kind regards,
Ryan
Freedom of Information
Media and Information Disclosure Branch
Ministerial & Executive Coordination and Communication Division
Department of Defence
Tel: 02 5108 8851
[2]Freedom of information requests | About | Defence
IMPORTANT: This email remains the property of the Department of Defence.
Unauthorised communication and dealing with the information in the email
may be a serious criminal offence. If you have received this email in
error, you are requested to contact the sender and delete the email
immediately.
References
Visible links
1. mailto:[email address]
2. https://www.defence.gov.au/about/accessi...
OFFICIAL
Dear James
I refer to your correspondence of 19 June 2024 seeking access to documents
held by the Department of Defence, under the Freedom of Information Act
1982 (FOI Act).
The scope of your request is:
Please provide all Work Health and Safety notices and reports, including
Sentinel Event Incident Reports and Notifications to Comcare in relation
to the MRH-90 Taipan helicopter
We currently processing your request, however in order to assist the
Decision Maker please confirm the timeframe for your request and the type
of documents you seek. For example, you may wish to seek documents related
to a particular incident or point in time.
I would be grateful for your response by 4 July 2024.
Thank you and regards
Freedom of Information Team
Media and Information Disclosure Branch
Ministerial & Executive Coordination and Communication Division
Department of Defence
[1]Freedom of information requests | About | Defence
IMPORTANT: This email remains the property of the Department of Defence.
Unauthorised communication and dealing with the information in the email
may be a serious criminal offence. If you have received this email in
error, you are requested to contact the sender and delete the email
immediately.
References
Visible links
1. https://www.defence.gov.au/about/accessi...
Dear FOI Case Management,
The period of time spans the operational service of the MRH-90 Taipan helicopter with the Australian Defence Force.
Yours sincerely,
James Smith
OFFICIAL
Dear James,
Please find attached a letter in relation to Defence FOI 1005/23/24.
Kind regards,
Freedom of Information Team
Media and Information Disclosure Branch
Ministerial & Executive Coordination and Communication Division
Department of Defence
[1]Freedom of information requests | About | Defence
IMPORTANT: This email remains the property of the Department of Defence.
Unauthorised communication and dealing with the information in the email
may be a serious criminal offence. If you have received this email in
error, you are requested to contact the sender and delete the email
immediately.
References
Visible links
1. https://www.defence.gov.au/about/accessi...
Dear Ms Groves
The following are the key considerations when assessing whether a practical refusal reason exists:
1. the estimated volume of information involved in the request
2. the agency’s size and resources
3. the decision period
With regard to item 1, you have not disclosed the volume of information involved in the request and have merely stated there are 'numerous' documents. However, the stated 200 minutes (or 3 hours and 20 minutes) does not appear to be an onerous period of time to undertake the review and is unlikely to meet the threshold test of a "substantial and unreasonable" diversion of resources. The test is whether a "substantial and unreasonable" diversion of resources would occur, not as you allege, that "a significant amount of resources" would have to be diverted.
We are unable to find any IC or AAT cases that are analogous and support Defence's assertion that 3-4 hours is a substantial and unreasonable diversion of resources. In fact, the cases support the proposition that only until timeframes reach over 40 hours would they begin to be considered substantial and unreasonable.
Further, stating that the period requested involved "multiple" decades is an over exaggeration. The MRH-90 has been in service for 17 years.
Defence has a budget of over $50bn and a workforce of 82,000 people. It has a large and sophisticated FOI team and system (see Defence FOI / 623/23/24). Accordingly, 3-4 hours is not a "substantial and unreasonable" diversion of resources. In Farrell; Chief Executive Officer, Services Australia [2020] AATA 2390, the Tribunal found that 61.25 hours or 8 days was not a "substantial and unreasonable" diversion of resources for Services Australia, an organisation of similar size to Defence.
With regard to item 2, Defence has a large and permanent FOI team, dedicated to handling requests such as the instant one. Defence also has a sophisticated WHS reporting and recording system, where accessing information does not involve collating materials from diverse and disparate sources.
With regard to item 3, I am willing to entertain a reasonable extension to the decision period to accommodate any purported 'burden' on the resources of Defence.
Additionally, as Defence is aware, there is significant public interest value in the disclosure of the information contained in the documents. In the circumstances it is difficult to justify that a practical refusal reason exists on the basis that processing the request would have an unreasonable effect on the agency (see FOI Guidelines s3.113). Defence has committed to transparency in matters of air safety and it is expected that this would include disclosure of the document the subject of the instant FOI application.
Finally, I am willing to limit the time frame of the request from 2015 to date.
I trust the above addresses the purported concerns in your notice, which should now be withdrawn. As there is no reasonable basis for the practical refusal, Defence should continue with processing the application.
Yours sincerely,
James Smith
OFFICIAL
Dear James
Please find attached the Decision relating to Defence FOI 1005/23/24.
Review Rights
If you disagree with the decision made by the Department of Defence or the
Minister under the Freedom of Information Act 1982 (the FOI Act), you can
ask for the decision to be reviewed. You may want to seek review if you
sought certain documents and were not given full access, if your
application to have your personal information amended was not accepted or
your comments in response to formal consultation were not accepted.
You must apply in writing and should include a copy of the notice of the
decision provided and the points to which you are objecting and why. You
may apply directly to the Information Commissioner, within 60 days of
receiving your decision.
Further information about the external review process or how to make a
complaint to the Information Commissioner is available:
Online: [1]www.oaic.gov.au
Post: GPO Box 5218 Sydney NSW 2000
Email: [2][email address]
Regards
Freedom of Information Team
Media and Information Disclosure Branch
Ministerial & Executive Coordination and Communication Division
Department of Defence
[3]Freedom of information requests | About | Defence
IMPORTANT: This email remains the property of the Department of Defence.
Unauthorised communication and dealing with the information in the email
may be a serious criminal offence. If you have received this email in
error, you are requested to contact the sender and delete the email
immediately.
References
Visible links
1. http://www.oaic.gov.au/
2. mailto:[email address]
3. https://www.defence.gov.au/about/accessi...