FOI charges letters
Dear National Offshore Petroleum Safety and Environmental Management Authority,
I request access to the following documents under the Freedom of Information Act 1982:
1. The most recent 30 notices of charges issued to FOI applicants.
For each of these 30 requests, if applicable, please also provide:
2. Any subsequent decisions regarding charges following applicant contention.
3. Any subsequent decisions regarding charges following internal or external review.
Please exclude the following information:
i) Personal information of FOI applicants.
Yours faithfully,
CR
OFFICIAL
Dear CR,
Please find attached letter of acknowledgement for FOI request received.
We would like to contact you to discuss the scope further, please provide
your phone number if possible.
Kind regards,
Melissa Catalano | Regulatory Assistant
Legal and Governance
National Offshore Petroleum Safety and Environmental Management Authority
T: [1](08) 6188 8769 | E: [2][email address] | W:
[3]nopsema.gov.au
To assure the protection of lives and the environment offshore.
For the latest news and information [4]subscribe here.
Acknowledgement of Country
NOPSEMA recognises the First Peoples of this nation and their ongoing
connection to land and sea Country. We acknowledge First Nations Peoples
as the Traditional Owners, Custodians and Lore Keepers of the world's
oldest living culture and pay respects to their Elders past, present and
emerging.
-----Original Message-----
From: CR <[FOI #12122 email]>
Sent: Tuesday, October 1, 2024 3:59 PM
To: FOI (Shared Mailbox) <[NOPSEMA request email]>
Subject: Freedom of Information request - FOI charges letters
[You don't often get email from
[5][FOI #12122 email]. Learn why this is
important at [6]https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdentific... ]
Dear National Offshore Petroleum Safety and Environmental Management
Authority,
I request access to the following documents under the Freedom of
Information Act 1982:
1. The most recent 30 notices of charges issued to FOI applicants.
For each of these 30 requests, if applicable, please also provide:
2. Any subsequent decisions regarding charges following applicant
contention.
3. Any subsequent decisions regarding charges following internal or
external review.
Please exclude the following information:
i) Personal information of FOI applicants.
Yours faithfully,
CR
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Please use this email address for all replies to this request:
[7][FOI #12122 email]
Is [8][NOPSEMA request email] the wrong address for Freedom of Information
requests to National Offshore Petroleum Safety and Environmental
Management Authority? If so, please contact us using this form:
[9]https://aus01.safelinks.protection.outlo...
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:
[10]https://aus01.safelinks.protection.outlo...
Please note that in some cases publication of requests and responses will
be delayed.
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.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
OFFICIAL
References
Visible links
1. file:///tmp/tel:(08)%206188%208769
2. mailto:[email address]
3. https://nopsema.gov.au/
4. https://nopsema.us2.list-manage.com/subs...
5. mailto:[FOI #12122 email]
6. https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdentific...
7. mailto:[FOI #12122 email]
8. mailto:[NOPSEMA request email]
9. https://www.righttoknow.org.au/change_re...
10. https://www.righttoknow.org.au/help/offi...
Dear FOI Officer,
I am writing to amend the scope of my FOI request to assist with its processing.
As I wish to access only recent charge decisions, I have introduced a time frame and clarified the exclusions. I confirm the revised scope of my request as follows:
1. The most recent 30 notices of charges issued to FOI applicants.
For each of these 30 requests, if applicable, please also provide:
2. Any subsequent decisions regarding charges following applicant contention.
3. Any subsequent decisions regarding charges following internal or external review.
The time period for my request is from 1 July 2022 to 1 October 2024.
Please exclude the following information:
i) Personal information of FOI applicants, including supporting evidence or details of personal circumstances in a financial hardship contention.
ii) Emails that attached the charges notices/decision letters.
Please feel free to contact me if you require any clarification or have further questions regarding this request.
Yours sincerely,
CR
OFFICIAL
Hello
Thank you for your email.
I am writing to clarify the documents that you are requesting.
As part of our decision making, if there are charges involved, we will issue a "Schedule of Charges" with our final Freedom of Information decision. This schedule outlines the relevant deposit paid, outstanding amount owed and breaks down the charges into 6 different categories. Would these documents provide the information which you are seeking?
If so, could you please review the attached draft scope of request, and confirm by Wednesday 16 October 2024 whether you agree/have any comments on the amended scope.
Kind regards
Michela Giubilato |Authorised Freedom of Information Officer
Legal and Governance
National Offshore Petroleum Safety and Environmental Management Authority
T: (08) 6188 8789 | E: [NOPSEMA request email] | W: nopsema.gov.au
To assure the protection of lives and the environment offshore.
For the latest news and information subscribe here.
Acknowledgement of Country
NOPSEMA recognises the First Peoples of this nation and their ongoing connection to land and sea Country. We acknowledge First Nations Peoples as the Traditional Owners, Custodians and Lore Keepers of the world's oldest living culture and pay respects to their Elders past, present and emerging.
OFFICIAL
-----Original Message-----
From: CR <[FOI #12122 email]>
Sent: Tuesday, 8 October 2024 6:24 PM
To: FOI (Shared Mailbox) <[NOPSEMA request email]>
Subject: Re: Acknowledgement of Freedom of Information request - FOI charges letters
[You don't often get email from [FOI #12122 email]. Learn why this is important at https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdentific... ]
Dear FOI Officer,
I am writing to amend the scope of my FOI request to assist with its processing.
As I wish to access only recent charge decisions, I have introduced a time frame and clarified the exclusions. I confirm the revised scope of my request as follows:
1. The most recent 30 notices of charges issued to FOI applicants.
For each of these 30 requests, if applicable, please also provide:
2. Any subsequent decisions regarding charges following applicant contention.
3. Any subsequent decisions regarding charges following internal or external review.
The time period for my request is from 1 July 2022 to 1 October 2024.
Please exclude the following information:
i) Personal information of FOI applicants, including supporting evidence or details of personal circumstances in a financial hardship contention.
ii) Emails that attached the charges notices/decision letters.
Please feel free to contact me if you require any clarification or have further questions regarding this request.
Yours sincerely,
CR
-----Original Message-----
OFFICIAL
Dear CR,
Please find attached letter of acknowledgement for FOI request received.
We would like to contact you to discuss the scope further, please provide
your phone number if possible.
Kind regards,
Melissa Catalano | Regulatory Assistant
Legal and Governance
National Offshore Petroleum Safety and Environmental Management Authority
T: [1](08) 6188 8769 | E: [2][email address] | W:
[3]nopsema.gov.au
To assure the protection of lives and the environment offshore.
For the latest news and information [4]subscribe here.
Acknowledgement of Country
NOPSEMA recognises the First Peoples of this nation and their ongoing
connection to land and sea Country. We acknowledge First Nations Peoples
as the Traditional Owners, Custodians and Lore Keepers of the world's
oldest living culture and pay respects to their Elders past, present and
emerging.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Please use this email address for all replies to this request:
[FOI #12122 email]
This request has been made by an individual using Right to Know. This message and any reply that you make will be published on the internet. More information on how Right to Know works can be found at:
https://www.righttoknow.org.au/help/offi...
Please note that in some cases publication of requests and responses will be delayed.
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.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Dear FOI Officer,
I decline the proposed revised scope.
Perhaps you could tell me the issue with the current scope?
This request was sent to multiple agencies, and some reported that the scope in its current form may require third party consultation. In order to assist processing, please add the following exclusions:
• Personal information of third parties.
• Business information of third parties.
• Personal information of Commonwealth staff below SES.
Happy to make reasonable adjustments in order to facilitate processing, however, your proposed scope removes some critical information I am seeking.
Yours sincerely,
CR
OFFICIAL
Hello
Thank you for getting back to us in a timely manner.
We are seeking to ascertain what document you understand to be the "notices of charges" and "charges decision". Would this be the notice of charge letter sent to notify the applicant of the charge to be imposed?
To facilitate processing this request, are you able to provide me with a contact number or phone me on the number below to discuss?
Kind regards
Michela Giubilato | Authorised Freedom of Information Officer
Legal and Governance
National Offshore Petroleum Safety and Environmental Management Authority
T: (08) 6188 8789 | E: [NOPSEMA request email] | W: nopsema.gov.au
To assure the protection of lives and the environment offshore.
For the latest news and information subscribe here.
Acknowledgement of Country
NOPSEMA recognises the First Peoples of this nation and their ongoing connection to land and sea Country. We acknowledge First Nations Peoples as the Traditional Owners, Custodians and Lore Keepers of the world's oldest living culture and pay respects to their Elders past, present and emerging.
OFFICIAL
-----Original Message-----
From: CR <[FOI #12122 email]>
Sent: Monday, 14 October 2024 8:35 PM
To: FOI (Shared Mailbox) <[NOPSEMA request email]>
Subject: Re: Revised draft scope of request - FOI charges letters - F281
[You don't often get email from [FOI #12122 email]. Learn why this is important at https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdentific... ]
Dear FOI Officer,
I decline the proposed revised scope.
Perhaps you could tell me the issue with the current scope?
This request was sent to multiple agencies, and some reported that the scope in its current form may require third party consultation. In order to assist processing, please add the following exclusions:
* Personal information of third parties.
* Business information of third parties.
* Personal information of Commonwealth staff below SES.
Happy to make reasonable adjustments in order to facilitate processing, however, your proposed scope removes some critical information I am seeking.
Yours sincerely,
CR
-----Original Message-----
OFFICIAL
Hello
Thank you for your email.
I am writing to clarify the documents that you are requesting.
As part of our decision making, if there are charges involved, we will issue a "Schedule of Charges" with our final Freedom of Information decision. This schedule outlines the relevant deposit paid, outstanding amount owed and breaks down the charges into 6 different categories. Would these documents provide the information which you are seeking?
If so, could you please review the attached draft scope of request, and confirm by Wednesday 16 October 2024 whether you agree/have any comments on the amended scope.
Kind regards
Michela Giubilato |Authorised Freedom of Information Officer
Legal and Governance
National Offshore Petroleum Safety and Environmental Management Authority
T: (08) 6188 8789 | E: [NOPSEMA request email] | W: nopsema.gov.au
To assure the protection of lives and the environment offshore.
For the latest news and information subscribe here.
Acknowledgement of Country
NOPSEMA recognises the First Peoples of this nation and their ongoing connection to land and sea Country. We acknowledge First Nations Peoples as the Traditional Owners, Custodians and Lore Keepers of the world's oldest living culture and pay respects to their Elders past, present and emerging.
OFFICIAL
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Please use this email address for all replies to this request:
[FOI #12122 email]
This request has been made by an individual using Right to Know. This message and any reply that you make will be published on the internet. More information on how Right to Know works can be found at:
https://www.righttoknow.org.au/help/offi...
Please note that in some cases publication of requests and responses will be delayed.
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.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Dear FOI Officer,
Thank you for your response.
Your interpretation of the scope is correct.
To clarify, I am requesting the following documents:
1. The notice of charge letter that informs the applicant of the charge to be imposed.
2. The decision letter issued after the applicant contests the charge, which either: affirms the original charge, adjusts the charge, or waives the charge.
3. Any decision made following an internal or external review of the charge, which either: affirms the original charge, adjusts the charge, or waives the charge.
I hope this clears up any confusion.
Yours sincerely,
CR
OFFICIAL
Hello
Thank you for your timely response.
In line with your scope outlined below, please review the attached revised draft scope.
If you could please let us know whether you agree to the draft scope of request by COB tomorrow, 16 October 2024.
Kind regards
Michela Giubilato | Authorised Freedom of Information Officer
Legal and Governance
National Offshore Petroleum Safety and Environmental Management Authority
T: (08) 6188 8789 | E: [NOPSEMA request email] | W: nopsema.gov.au
To assure the protection of lives and the environment offshore.
For the latest news and information subscribe here.
Acknowledgement of Country
NOPSEMA recognises the First Peoples of this nation and their ongoing connection to land and sea Country. We acknowledge First Nations Peoples as the Traditional Owners, Custodians and Lore Keepers of the world's oldest living culture and pay respects to their Elders past, present and emerging.
OFFICIAL
-----Original Message-----
From: CR <[FOI #12122 email]>
Sent: Monday, 14 October 2024 8:35 PM
To: FOI (Shared Mailbox) <[NOPSEMA request email]>
Subject: Re: Revised draft scope of request - FOI charges letters - F281
[You don't often get email from [FOI #12122 email]. Learn why this is important at https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdentific... ]
Dear FOI Officer,
I decline the proposed revised scope.
Perhaps you could tell me the issue with the current scope?
This request was sent to multiple agencies, and some reported that the scope in its current form may require third party consultation. In order to assist processing, please add the following exclusions:
* Personal information of third parties.
* Business information of third parties.
* Personal information of Commonwealth staff below SES.
Happy to make reasonable adjustments in order to facilitate processing, however, your proposed scope removes some critical information I am seeking.
Yours sincerely,
CR
-----Original Message-----
OFFICIAL
Hello
Thank you for your email.
I am writing to clarify the documents that you are requesting.
As part of our decision making, if there are charges involved, we will issue a "Schedule of Charges" with our final Freedom of Information decision. This schedule outlines the relevant deposit paid, outstanding amount owed and breaks down the charges into 6 different categories. Would these documents provide the information which you are seeking?
If so, could you please review the attached draft scope of request, and confirm by Wednesday 16 October 2024 whether you agree/have any comments on the amended scope.
Kind regards
Michela Giubilato |Authorised Freedom of Information Officer
Legal and Governance
National Offshore Petroleum Safety and Environmental Management Authority
T: (08) 6188 8789 | E: [NOPSEMA request email] | W: nopsema.gov.au
To assure the protection of lives and the environment offshore.
For the latest news and information subscribe here.
Acknowledgement of Country
NOPSEMA recognises the First Peoples of this nation and their ongoing connection to land and sea Country. We acknowledge First Nations Peoples as the Traditional Owners, Custodians and Lore Keepers of the world's oldest living culture and pay respects to their Elders past, present and emerging.
OFFICIAL
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Please use this email address for all replies to this request:
[FOI #12122 email]
This request has been made by an individual using Right to Know. This message and any reply that you make will be published on the internet. More information on how Right to Know works can be found at:
https://www.righttoknow.org.au/help/offi...
Please note that in some cases publication of requests and responses will be delayed.
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.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Dear FOI Officer,
I decline the proposed revised scope.
I don't understand why you insist on changing the scope. I sent this FOI request to 16 agencies and you are the only one who is having trouble understanding the scope of this request.
There is nothing wrong with the scope in its current form.
Yours sincerely,
CR
OFFICIAL
Dear CR
Please see attached correspondence in relation to your Freedom of Information request.
Kind regards
Michela Giubilato | Authorised Freedom of Information Officer
Legal and Governance
National Offshore Petroleum Safety and Environmental Management Authority
T: (08) 6188 8789 | E: [NOPSEMA request email] | W: nopsema.gov.au
To assure the protection of lives and the environment offshore.
For the latest news and information subscribe here.
Acknowledgement of Country
NOPSEMA recognises the First Peoples of this nation and their ongoing connection to land and sea Country. We acknowledge First Nations Peoples as the Traditional Owners, Custodians and Lore Keepers of the world's oldest living culture and pay respects to their Elders past, present and emerging.
OFFICIAL
-----Original Message-----
From: CR <[FOI #12122 email]>
Sent: Tuesday, 15 October 2024 2:36 PM
To: FOI (Shared Mailbox) <[NOPSEMA request email]>
Subject: RE: Revised draft scope of request - FOI charges letters - F281
[You don't often get email from [FOI #12122 email]. Learn why this is important at https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdentific... ]
Dear FOI Officer,
I decline the proposed revised scope.
I don't understand why you insist on changing the scope. I sent this FOI request to 16 agencies and you are the only one who is having trouble understanding the scope of this request.
There is nothing wrong with the scope in its current form.
Yours sincerely,
CR
-----Original Message-----
OFFICIAL
Hello
Thank you for your timely response.
In line with your scope outlined below, please review the attached revised draft scope.
If you could please let us know whether you agree to the draft scope of request by COB tomorrow, 16 October 2024.
Kind regards
Michela Giubilato | Authorised Freedom of Information Officer Legal and Governance
National Offshore Petroleum Safety and Environmental Management Authority
T: (08) 6188 8789 | E: [NOPSEMA request email] | W: nopsema.gov.au To assure the protection of lives and the environment offshore.
For the latest news and information subscribe here.
Acknowledgement of Country
NOPSEMA recognises the First Peoples of this nation and their ongoing connection to land and sea Country. We acknowledge First Nations Peoples as the Traditional Owners, Custodians and Lore Keepers of the world's oldest living culture and pay respects to their Elders past, present and emerging.
OFFICIAL
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Please use this email address for all replies to this request:
[FOI #12122 email]
This request has been made by an individual using Right to Know. This message and any reply that you make will be published on the internet. More information on how Right to Know works can be found at:
https://www.righttoknow.org.au/help/offi...
Please note that in some cases publication of requests and responses will be delayed.
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.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
OFFICIAL
Dear CR
Please direct all correspondence in relation to your Freedom of Information request to [NOPSEMA request email].
Authorised Freedom of Information Officer Legal and Governance
National Offshore Petroleum Safety and Environmental Management Authority
E: [NOPSEMA request email] | W: nopsema.gov.au To assure the protection of lives and the environment offshore.
For the latest news and information subscribe here.
Acknowledgement of Country
NOPSEMA recognises the First Peoples of this nation and their ongoing connection to land and sea Country. We acknowledge First Nations Peoples as the Traditional Owners, Custodians and Lore Keepers of the world's oldest living culture and pay respects to their Elders past, present and emerging.
OFFICIAL
-----Original Message-----
From: Michela Giubilato
Sent: Tuesday, 22 October 2024 4:44 PM
To: CR <[FOI #12122 email]>
Cc: FOI (Shared Mailbox) <[NOPSEMA request email]>
Subject: Notice of charge enclosing estimate - F281
OFFICIAL
Dear CR
Please see attached correspondence in relation to your Freedom of Information request.
Kind regards
Michela Giubilato | Authorised Freedom of Information Officer Legal and Governance
National Offshore Petroleum Safety and Environmental Management Authority
T: (08) 6188 8789 | E: [NOPSEMA request email] | W: nopsema.gov.au To assure the protection of lives and the environment offshore.
For the latest news and information subscribe here.
Acknowledgement of Country
NOPSEMA recognises the First Peoples of this nation and their ongoing connection to land and sea Country. We acknowledge First Nations Peoples as the Traditional Owners, Custodians and Lore Keepers of the world's oldest living culture and pay respects to their Elders past, present and emerging.
OFFICIAL
-----Original Message-----
From: CR <[FOI #12122 email]>
Sent: Tuesday, 15 October 2024 2:36 PM
To: FOI (Shared Mailbox) <[NOPSEMA request email]>
Subject: RE: Revised draft scope of request - FOI charges letters - F281
[You don't often get email from [FOI #12122 email]. Learn why this is important at https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdentific... ]
Dear FOI Officer,
I decline the proposed revised scope.
I don't understand why you insist on changing the scope. I sent this FOI request to 16 agencies and you are the only one who is having trouble understanding the scope of this request.
There is nothing wrong with the scope in its current form.
Yours sincerely,
CR
-----Original Message-----
OFFICIAL
Hello
Thank you for your timely response.
In line with your scope outlined below, please review the attached revised draft scope.
If you could please let us know whether you agree to the draft scope of request by COB tomorrow, 16 October 2024.
Kind regards
Michela Giubilato | Authorised Freedom of Information Officer Legal and Governance
National Offshore Petroleum Safety and Environmental Management Authority
T: (08) 6188 8789 | E: [NOPSEMA request email] | W: nopsema.gov.au To assure the protection of lives and the environment offshore.
For the latest news and information subscribe here.
Acknowledgement of Country
NOPSEMA recognises the First Peoples of this nation and their ongoing connection to land and sea Country. We acknowledge First Nations Peoples as the Traditional Owners, Custodians and Lore Keepers of the world's oldest living culture and pay respects to their Elders past, present and emerging.
OFFICIAL
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Please use this email address for all replies to this request:
[FOI #12122 email]
This request has been made by an individual using Right to Know. This message and any reply that you make will be published on the internet. More information on how Right to Know works can be found at:
https://www.righttoknow.org.au/help/offi...
Please note that in some cases publication of requests and responses will be delayed.
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.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Dear FOI Team,
I wish to contend that the charge has been wrongly assessed and that providing access to the documents would be in the public interest. I outline my arguments below.
1. Incorrect Assessment of Time to Process the Request
You have estimated that it took 7 hours to retrieve the 30 documents relevant to my request. I submit that this estimate is the result of poor or inefficient record-keeping practices. The FOI Guidelines at [4.28] assume that agencies maintain a high-quality record system, and at [4.29], they explain that applicants should not be disadvantaged by poor record-keeping. Furthermore, [4.30] assumes that decision-makers have the necessary skills to efficiently process requests.
To retrieve the documents I have requested, a simple search in your FOI mailbox should suffice, using these parameters:
i) In your "sent" folder,
ii) Contains a PDF attachment,
iii) Contains the word "charge" in the attachment title.
This method would quickly identify the relevant documents. Therefore, to claim that this process took 7 hours suggests inefficiency in your record-keeping system, which should not be reflected in the charges imposed on me.
Additionally, you have estimated that it will take 11.16 hours to review and make decisions on the 30 documents. This estimate is excessive and unsupported by the nature of the requested documents. My request concerns the most recent 30 notice of charge letters sent to FOI applicants. These charge letters are largely template documents, with only minimal customisation (e.g., applicant’s personal details, scope of the request, charge amount, FOI reference number, and the decision-maker’s signature). I submit that the majority of pages are essentially duplicates, varying only in the charge amount, FOI reference number, and the decision-maker's signature. As these pages are standard templates with minimal sensitive content, they should require little to no decision-making time.
2. The Cost of Calculating and Collecting this Charge Exceeds the Cost of Processing the Request
In Emmanuel Freudenthal and Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade (Freedom of information) [2019] AICmr 15, the Information Commissioner stated at [46]:
“The FOI Guidelines explain that the ‘lowest reasonable cost’ objective should be interpreted broadly in imposing any charges under the FOI Act and that where the cost of calculating and collecting a charge might exceed the cost to the agency to process the request, it would generally be more appropriate not to impose a charge.”
Furthermore, she states:
“In assessing the costs of calculating and collecting a charge, agencies should also take into account the likely costs that may be incurred by the agency, as well as other review bodies, if the applicant decides to seek further review.”
These principles regarding cost assessment are further elaborated upon in subsequent decisions.
The legislative framework for charges and related aspects of the FOI Guidelines is discussed at length in the decision of 'ABX' and Department of Veterans' Affairs (Freedom of information) [2022] AICmr 57 (ABX).
In ABX, the applicant sought IC review of a decision of the Department of Veterans' Affairs (DVA) to impose a charge of $403.45 to process an FOI request. ABX considers whether a charge should be imposed where the cost to the Commonwealth of assessing, imposing and collecting the charge from the applicant might exceed the cost to DVA of processing the applicant's request (or the amount of the charge itself).
The FOI Commissioner explained at [3]:
“As a general rule, a charge should not be imposed in circumstances where the cost of assessing, imposing and collecting a charge is likely to be greater than the charge itself. In those circumstances, imposing a charge will generally only serve to delay or discourage access while incurring a net cost to the Commonwealth.”
In determining whether a charge should be imposed, the FOI Commissioner stated at [45]:
“Even if a charge could have been correctly imposed by reference to an actual cost of $291.68, the Department should have considered at the outset whether it was preferable to decide that the applicant was liable to pay a charge at all. The amount of that charge should have raised an obvious question in the minds of those considering its imposition – would it cost the Commonwealth an amount greater than the charge itself to assess and notify the charge, provide the applicant with procedural fairness, and collect the charge? The likely answer to that question would have been ‘yes’. In those circumstances, proceeding with a charge would likely only serve to delay access at a net financial cost to the Commonwealth. While the FOI Act and Charges Regulations would not, by their terms, have prevented the Department from deciding the applicant was liable to pay a charge, the preferable decision would have been to decide that the applicant was not liable to pay a charge.”
The FOI Commissioner accepted that, in the circumstances of the matter before him, the cost of calculating and collecting a charge might exceed the amount of the charge itself. He noted that the object set out in s 3(4) is not limited to the provision of access at the lowest reasonable cost, but also expresses a parliamentary intention that functions and powers under the FOI Act must be performed and exercised to facilitate and promote the prompt public access to information. The FOI Commissioner was satisfied that having regard to these considerations, and the public resource already applied in relation to the matter, warranted a decision that no charge be applied in the circumstances.
I also wish to bring to your attention recent IC Review decisions regarding whether a charge has been wrongly assessed.
In Paul Farrell and Services Australia (Freedom of information) [2023] AICmr 27 (Paul Farrell and Services Australia), the Department determined that the applicant is liable to pay a charge of $342.10 for processing the request. Services Australia submitted that ABX was inconsistent with the FOI Guidelines and previous decisions. The Information Commissioner extensively disputed the Department's submissions and addressed the implications of ABX at [35]-[45].
In this IC Review, the applicant had already made a deposit to progress the processing of their FOI request. As the bulk of the cost necessary to administer the charge had already been utilised and spent, this decision under review differs slightly. The Information Commissioner stated at [48]:
“This is notwithstanding that, in my view, a decision not to impose any charge would have been open, and probably would also have been the preferable decision to make, under s 29(4) had Services Australia approached the decision-making process differently.”
In CropLife Australia and Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry (Freedom of information) [2024] AICmr 159, the Department determined that the applicant is liable to pay a charge of $710 for processing the request.
The Assistant Commissioner, Freedom of Information, stated at [25]:
“I also note that in this case, there is a real possibility that the cost of calculating and collecting a charge might exceed the cost to the agency of processing the request, which would militate in favour of the waiver of the charge. As noted in ABX, in such circumstances, proceeding with a charge would likely only serve to delay access at a net financial cost to the Commonwealth.”
Given the extensive case law established by these recent decisions, I strongly urge you to reconsider whether your charge of $229.67 might incur a net financial cost to the Commonwealth. The Information Commissioner has consistently demonstrated a preference for waiving charges when their collection costs could potentially outweigh the processing costs, particularly in cases where the charges were higher than mine: $291.68 in ABX, $342.10 in Paul Farrell and Services Australia, and $710 in CropLife Australia. I believe the same logic applies in this instance, making it preferable to not impose the charge at all.
3. Public Interest in Disclosure
I believe that providing access to the requested documents would serve the public interest. I have concerns that some government agencies may be using inflated charges as a mechanism to delay or discourage access to information. Disclosure of this information would provide insight into whether your agency is adequately meeting its statutory obligations under the FOI Act.
As part of my broader inquiry into FOI practices across multiple agencies, I made similar requests to approximately 15 other agencies (as detailed here: https://www.righttoknow.org.au/info_requ...). I intend to use the information gathered from these requests to file a complaint with the OAIC, with the aim of prompting an investigation into the administration of FOI requests across offending agencies. According to the Agency FOI 2022-23 dataset on data.gov.au, it appears that your agency issued charges on almost 43% of requests received during the 2022-23 financial year. This ratio is significantly higher than other agencies. In addition, the charge letter that you have sent in regard to my request is further evidence that there are deficiencies with respect to your agency's administration of FOI requests.
In CropLife Australia, the Assistant Commissioner, Freedom of Information, noted at [24]:
"where there are concerns about whether an agency is carrying out its statutory obligations appropriately with respect to a particular process (such as under the FOI Act), providing access to documents relating to the conduct of those obligations would go beyond merely enhancing transparency by assisting inquiry into whether the agency is adequately fulfilling those obligations. Accordingly, I accept the applicant’s submission that giving access to information that might reveal any deficiencies with respect to the Department’s administration of FOI requests under the FOI Act would be in the general public interest."
In light of my arguments set out in:
- [Item 1]: The charge has been incorrectly assessed,
- [Item 2]: The cost of calculating and collecting the charge exceeds the cost of processing the request, and
- [Item 3]: Disclosure would be in the public interest,
I respectfully request that you reconsider the charge imposed on my request.
Yours sincerely,
CR
Dear FOI Team,
I wish to provide clarification as to the scope of my request.
If a preliminary charge notice or decision of a charge is sent via the body of an email (as opposed to an email attachment) I wish to access a copy of that email, as well as the applicant's contention reasons.
Yours sincerely,
CR
OFFICIAL
Dear CR
Thank you for your email. We will consider your submissions and get back to you as soon as practicable.
Regards
Emma Bell | Authorised Freedom of Information Officer
Legal and Governance
National Offshore Petroleum Safety and Environmental Management Authority
T: (08) 6188 8712 | E: [NOPSEMA request email] | W: nopsema.gov.au
To assure the protection of lives and the environment offshore.
For the latest news and information subscribe here.
Acknowledgement of Country
NOPSEMA recognises the First Peoples of this nation and their ongoing connection to land and sea Country. We acknowledge First Nations Peoples as the Traditional Owners, Custodians and Lore Keepers of the world's oldest living culture and pay respects to their Elders past, present and emerging.
OFFICIAL
-----Original Message-----
From: CR <[FOI #12122 email]>
Sent: Tuesday, 22 October 2024 7:34 PM
To: FOI (Shared Mailbox) <[NOPSEMA request email]>
Subject: Re: Freedom of Information request - F281
Dear FOI Team,
I wish to contend that the charge has been wrongly assessed and that providing access to the documents would be in the public interest. I outline my arguments below.
1. Incorrect Assessment of Time to Process the Request
You have estimated that it took 7 hours to retrieve the 30 documents relevant to my request. I submit that this estimate is the result of poor or inefficient record-keeping practices. The FOI Guidelines at [4.28] assume that agencies maintain a high-quality record system, and at [4.29], they explain that applicants should not be disadvantaged by poor record-keeping. Furthermore, [4.30] assumes that decision-makers have the necessary skills to efficiently process requests.
To retrieve the documents I have requested, a simple search in your FOI mailbox should suffice, using these parameters:
i) In your "sent" folder,
ii) Contains a PDF attachment,
iii) Contains the word "charge" in the attachment title.
This method would quickly identify the relevant documents. Therefore, to claim that this process took 7 hours suggests inefficiency in your record-keeping system, which should not be reflected in the charges imposed on me.
Additionally, you have estimated that it will take 11.16 hours to review and make decisions on the 30 documents. This estimate is excessive and unsupported by the nature of the requested documents. My request concerns the most recent 30 notice of charge letters sent to FOI applicants. These charge letters are largely template documents, with only minimal customisation (e.g., applicant's personal details, scope of the request, charge amount, FOI reference number, and the decision-maker's signature). I submit that the majority of pages are essentially duplicates, varying only in the charge amount, FOI reference number, and the decision-maker's signature. As these pages are standard templates with minimal sensitive content, they should require little to no decision-making time.
2. The Cost of Calculating and Collecting this Charge Exceeds the Cost of Processing the Request
In Emmanuel Freudenthal and Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade (Freedom of information) [2019] AICmr 15, the Information Commissioner stated at [46]:
"The FOI Guidelines explain that the 'lowest reasonable cost' objective should be interpreted broadly in imposing any charges under the FOI Act and that where the cost of calculating and collecting a charge might exceed the cost to the agency to process the request, it would generally be more appropriate not to impose a charge."
Furthermore, she states:
"In assessing the costs of calculating and collecting a charge, agencies should also take into account the likely costs that may be incurred by the agency, as well as other review bodies, if the applicant decides to seek further review."
These principles regarding cost assessment are further elaborated upon in subsequent decisions.
The legislative framework for charges and related aspects of the FOI Guidelines is discussed at length in the decision of 'ABX' and Department of Veterans' Affairs (Freedom of information) [2022] AICmr 57 (ABX).
In ABX, the applicant sought IC review of a decision of the Department of Veterans' Affairs (DVA) to impose a charge of $403.45 to process an FOI request. ABX considers whether a charge should be imposed where the cost to the Commonwealth of assessing, imposing and collecting the charge from the applicant might exceed the cost to DVA of processing the applicant's request (or the amount of the charge itself).
The FOI Commissioner explained at [3]:
"As a general rule, a charge should not be imposed in circumstances where the cost of assessing, imposing and collecting a charge is likely to be greater than the charge itself. In those circumstances, imposing a charge will generally only serve to delay or discourage access while incurring a net cost to the Commonwealth."
In determining whether a charge should be imposed, the FOI Commissioner stated at [45]:
"Even if a charge could have been correctly imposed by reference to an actual cost of $291.68, the Department should have considered at the outset whether it was preferable to decide that the applicant was liable to pay a charge at all. The amount of that charge should have raised an obvious question in the minds of those considering its imposition - would it cost the Commonwealth an amount greater than the charge itself to assess and notify the charge, provide the applicant with procedural fairness, and collect the charge? The likely answer to that question would have been 'yes'. In those circumstances, proceeding with a charge would likely only serve to delay access at a net financial cost to the Commonwealth. While the FOI Act and Charges Regulations would not, by their terms, have prevented the Department from deciding the applicant was liable to pay a charge, the preferable decision would have been to decide that the applicant was not liable to pay a charge."
The FOI Commissioner accepted that, in the circumstances of the matter before him, the cost of calculating and collecting a charge might exceed the amount of the charge itself. He noted that the object set out in s 3(4) is not limited to the provision of access at the lowest reasonable cost, but also expresses a parliamentary intention that functions and powers under the FOI Act must be performed and exercised to facilitate and promote the prompt public access to information. The FOI Commissioner was satisfied that having regard to these considerations, and the public resource already applied in relation to the matter, warranted a decision that no charge be applied in the circumstances.
I also wish to bring to your attention recent IC Review decisions regarding whether a charge has been wrongly assessed.
In Paul Farrell and Services Australia (Freedom of information) [2023] AICmr 27 (Paul Farrell and Services Australia), the Department determined that the applicant is liable to pay a charge of $342.10 for processing the request. Services Australia submitted that ABX was inconsistent with the FOI Guidelines and previous decisions. The Information Commissioner extensively disputed the Department's submissions and addressed the implications of ABX at [35]-[45].
In this IC Review, the applicant had already made a deposit to progress the processing of their FOI request. As the bulk of the cost necessary to administer the charge had already been utilised and spent, this decision under review differs slightly. The Information Commissioner stated at [48]:
"This is notwithstanding that, in my view, a decision not to impose any charge would have been open, and probably would also have been the preferable decision to make, under s 29(4) had Services Australia approached the decision-making process differently."
In CropLife Australia and Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry (Freedom of information) [2024] AICmr 159, the Department determined that the applicant is liable to pay a charge of $710 for processing the request.
The Assistant Commissioner, Freedom of Information, stated at [25]:
"I also note that in this case, there is a real possibility that the cost of calculating and collecting a charge might exceed the cost to the agency of processing the request, which would militate in favour of the waiver of the charge. As noted in ABX, in such circumstances, proceeding with a charge would likely only serve to delay access at a net financial cost to the Commonwealth."
Given the extensive case law established by these recent decisions, I strongly urge you to reconsider whether your charge of $229.67 might incur a net financial cost to the Commonwealth. The Information Commissioner has consistently demonstrated a preference for waiving charges when their collection costs could potentially outweigh the processing costs, particularly in cases where the charges were higher than mine: $291.68 in ABX, $342.10 in Paul Farrell and Services Australia, and $710 in CropLife Australia. I believe the same logic applies in this instance, making it preferable to not impose the charge at all.
3. Public Interest in Disclosure
I believe that providing access to the requested documents would serve the public interest. I have concerns that some government agencies may be using inflated charges as a mechanism to delay or discourage access to information. Disclosure of this information would provide insight into whether your agency is adequately meeting its statutory obligations under the FOI Act.
As part of my broader inquiry into FOI practices across multiple agencies, I made similar requests to approximately 15 other agencies (as detailed here: https://www.righttoknow.org.au/info_requ...). I intend to use the information gathered from these requests to file a complaint with the OAIC, with the aim of prompting an investigation into the administration of FOI requests across offending agencies. According to the Agency FOI 2022-23 dataset on data.gov.au, it appears that your agency issued charges on almost 43% of requests received during the 2022-23 financial year. This ratio is significantly higher than other agencies. In addition, the charge letter that you have sent in regard to my request is further evidence that there are deficiencies with respect to your agency's administration of FOI requests.
In CropLife Australia, the Assistant Commissioner, Freedom of Information, noted at [24]:
"where there are concerns about whether an agency is carrying out its statutory obligations appropriately with respect to a particular process (such as under the FOI Act), providing access to documents relating to the conduct of those obligations would go beyond merely enhancing transparency by assisting inquiry into whether the agency is adequately fulfilling those obligations. Accordingly, I accept the applicant's submission that giving access to information that might reveal any deficiencies with respect to the Department's administration of FOI requests under the FOI Act would be in the general public interest."
In light of my arguments set out in:
- [Item 1]: The charge has been incorrectly assessed,
- [Item 2]: The cost of calculating and collecting the charge exceeds the cost of processing the request, and
- [Item 3]: Disclosure would be in the public interest,
I respectfully request that you reconsider the charge imposed on my request.
Yours sincerely,
CR
-----Original Message-----
OFFICIAL
Dear CR
Please direct all correspondence in relation to your Freedom of Information request to [NOPSEMA request email].
Authorised Freedom of Information Officer Legal and Governance
National Offshore Petroleum Safety and Environmental Management Authority
E: [NOPSEMA request email] | W: nopsema.gov.au To assure the protection of lives and the environment offshore.
For the latest news and information subscribe here.
Acknowledgement of Country
NOPSEMA recognises the First Peoples of this nation and their ongoing connection to land and sea Country. We acknowledge First Nations Peoples as the Traditional Owners, Custodians and Lore Keepers of the world's oldest living culture and pay respects to their Elders past, present and emerging.
OFFICIAL
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Please use this email address for all replies to this request:
[FOI #12122 email]
This request has been made by an individual using Right to Know. This message and any reply that you make will be published on the internet. More information on how Right to Know works can be found at:
https://www.righttoknow.org.au/help/offi...
Please note that in some cases publication of requests and responses will be delayed.
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.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
OFFICIAL
Dear CR
At this stage in the processing of your freedom of information request, the options for next steps (as outlined in correspondence dated 22 October 2024) included:
a. agree to pay the charges in full or pay, as a minimum, the deposit amount ($57.42); or
b. provide reasons contending that the charge has been wrongly assessed, should be reduced or not imposed; or
c. withdraw your request.
You provided reasons to contend that charges should not be imposed, and I now attach correspondence in relation to my Notice of decision to waive the charge.
In relation to your further email dated 23 October 2024, it is not possible to amend the scope of your request at this time. If you wish to amend the scope of your request, please withdraw the current request and submit a new one. Alternatively, you are also welcome to submit a new freedom of information request just for this additional information.
I will continue to process your request, and you can expect a decision on 7 November 2024.
Kind regards
Michela Giubilato | Authorised Freedom of Information Officer
Legal and Governance
National Offshore Petroleum Safety and Environmental Management Authority
T: (08) 6188 8789 | E: [NOPSEMA request email] | W: nopsema.gov.au
To assure the protection of lives and the environment offshore.
For the latest news and information subscribe here.
Acknowledgement of Country
NOPSEMA recognises the First Peoples of this nation and their ongoing connection to land and sea Country. We acknowledge First Nations Peoples as the Traditional Owners, Custodians and Lore Keepers of the world's oldest living culture and pay respects to their Elders past, present and emerging.
OFFICIAL
-----Original Message-----
From: CR <[FOI #12122 email]>
Sent: Wednesday, 23 October 2024 8:10 PM
To: FOI (Shared Mailbox) <[NOPSEMA request email]>
Subject: Re: Freedom of Information request - F281
Dear FOI Team,
I wish to provide clarification as to the scope of my request.
If a preliminary charge notice or decision of a charge is sent via the body of an email (as opposed to an email attachment) I wish to access a copy of that email, as well as the applicant's contention reasons.
Yours sincerely,
CR
-----Original Message-----
OFFICIAL
Dear CR
Please direct all correspondence in relation to your Freedom of Information request to [NOPSEMA request email].
Authorised Freedom of Information Officer Legal and Governance
National Offshore Petroleum Safety and Environmental Management Authority
E: [NOPSEMA request email] | W: nopsema.gov.au To assure the protection of lives and the environment offshore.
For the latest news and information subscribe here.
Acknowledgement of Country
NOPSEMA recognises the First Peoples of this nation and their ongoing connection to land and sea Country. We acknowledge First Nations Peoples as the Traditional Owners, Custodians and Lore Keepers of the world's oldest living culture and pay respects to their Elders past, present and emerging.
OFFICIAL
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Please use this email address for all replies to this request:
[FOI #12122 email]
This request has been made by an individual using Right to Know. This message and any reply that you make will be published on the internet. More information on how Right to Know works can be found at:
https://www.righttoknow.org.au/help/offi...
Please note that in some cases publication of requests and responses will be delayed.
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.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
OFFICIAL
Dear CR,
Please see attached my decision in relation to your Freedom of Information
(FOI) request dated 1 October 2024.
We would appreciate it if you could please confirm receipt of this email
and 2 attachments by 11 November 2024.
Shortly you will receive a separate email containing access to the
documents for release. If this email is not received by tomorrow, please
let me know.
Regards,
Michela Giubilato | Authorised Freedom of Information Officer
Legal and Governance
National Offshore Petroleum Safety and Environmental Management Authority
T: [1](08) 6188 8789 | E: [2][NOPSEMA request email] | W: [3]nopsema.gov.au
To assure the protection of lives and the environment offshore.
For the latest news and information [4]subscribe here.
Acknowledgement of Country
NOPSEMA recognises the First Peoples of this nation and their ongoing
connection to land and sea Country. We acknowledge First Nations Peoples
as the Traditional Owners, Custodians and Lore Keepers of the world's
oldest living culture and pay respects to their Elders past, present and
emerging.
OFFICIAL
References
Visible links
1. file:///tmp/tel:(08)%206188%208789
2. mailto:[NOPSEMA request email]
3. https://nopsema.gov.au/
4. https://nopsema.us2.list-manage.com/subs...
Dear CR
Please see links below to the documents for release under your Freedom of
Information request - F281.
Regards
Michela Giubilato
[1]Download Files
[2]Reply to this Secure Message
Secure Message Info
Message ID SzD0JntSKDdqh2nMTYChL5
Message Saturday, 30 November
Expires
Message [3]https://securefile.nopsema.gov.au/messag...
URL
Permission Only specified recipients can access the files attached to this
message.
Files attached to this message
Filename Size
30. F185 - Notice of charge enclosing estimate - Redacted.pdf 656 KB
1. F257 - Notice of decision not to impose a charge - Redacted.pdf 103 KB
2. F253 - Notice of partial refusal decision - Redacted.pdf 316 KB
3. F248 - Notice of charge enclosing estimate - Redacted.pdf 1 MB
3a. F248 - Notice of final decision with information regarding final 290 KB
charges - marked up.pdf
4. F246 - Notice of decision not to impose a charge - Redacted.pdf 104 KB
5. F238 - Notice of decision not to impose a charge - Redacted.pdf 102 KB
6. F236 - Notice of charge enclosing estimate - Redacted.pdf 646 KB
7. F235 - Notice of charge enclosing estimate - Redacted.pdf 545 KB
8. F233 - Notice of decision not to impose a charge - Redacted.pdf 97.7 KB
9. F232 - Notice of decision not to impose a charge - Redacted.pdf 118 KB
10. F229 - Notice of charge enclosing estimate - Redacted.pdf 427 KB
11. F228 - Notice of charge enclosing estimate - Redacted.pdf 491 KB
12. F226 - Notice of decision not to impose a charge - Redacted.pdf 103 KB
13. F219 - Notice of charge enclosing estimate - Redacted.pdf 472 KB
14. F218 - Notice of decision not to impose a charge - Redacted.pdf 103 KB
15. F214 - Notice of decision not to impose a charge - Redacted.pdf 107 KB
16. F213 - Notice of charge enclosing estimate - Redacted.pdf 432 KB
17. F212 - Notice of decision not to impose a charge - Redacted.pdf 102 KB
18. F207 - Notice of decision not to impose a charge - Redacted.pdf 102 KB
19. F205 - Notice of decision not to impose a charge - Redacted.pdf 102 KB
20. F204 - Notice of decision not to impose a charge - Redacted.pdf 91.5 KB
21. F202 - Notice of decision not to impose a charge - Redacted.pdf 103 KB
22. F201 - Notice of decision not to impose a charge - Redacted.pdf 84.7 KB
23. F198 - Notice of decision not to impose a charge - Redacted.pdf 99.3 KB
24. F194 - Notice of charge enclosing estimate - Redacted.pdf 552 KB
25. F193 - Notice of charge enclosing estimate - Redacted.pdf 621 KB
26. F192 - Notice of charge enclosing estimate - Redacted.pdf 542 KB
27. F188 - Notice of charge enclosing estimate - Redacted.pdf 430 KB
28. F187 - Notice of charge enclosing estimate - Redacted.pdf 430 KB
29. F186 - Notice of charge enclosing estimate - Redacted.pdf 427 KB
[4]Download Files
[5]Reply to this Secure Message
You will need to authenticate to view this Secure Message. If you don't have
an account on securefile.nopsema.gov.au, you can still click on the download
link and you will be prompted to validate your email.
[6]Secure File Transfer Server: [7]https://securefile.nopsema.gov.au
References
Visible links
1. https://securefile.nopsema.gov.au/messag...
2. https://securefile.nopsema.gov.au/messag...
3. https://securefile.nopsema.gov.au/messag...
4. https://securefile.nopsema.gov.au/messag...
5. https://securefile.nopsema.gov.au/messag...
6. file:///tmp/VM-NSFT-002.internal.nopsema.gov.au
7. https://securefile.nopsema.gov.au/
Validate Email
You are trying to access: https://securefile.nopsema.gov.au. In order to
verify your email please either enter the Secure Token below, or click on
the Validate Email button/link.
Secure Token: RKGR-3gms
[1]Validate Email
Secure Token Expires at: 06:13:07
[2]Secure File Transfer Server: [3]https://securefile.nopsema.gov.au
References
Visible links
1. https://securefile.nopsema.gov.au/sessio...
2. file:///tmp/VM-NSFT-002.internal.nopsema.gov.au
3. https://securefile.nopsema.gov.au/