TfL Ref: FOI-1525-2324
Thank you for your request which we received on 10 August 2023.
Your request has been considered under the requirements of the Environmental Information Regulations (EIRs) and our information access policy. I can confirm that we hold some of the information you require. You asked:
Could you please provide the management asbestos surveys carried for the Northern line and Victoria line with their latest asbestos register (both stations and tunnels).
Could you please also provide the asbestos removal reports post 2000 for both lines.
Although we hold the asbestos surveys, your request covers a 23 year period and covers every station and tunnel on the entire Northern and Victoria lines, which involves, potentially, a vast amount of information, including material that may not be held in electronic format. This would take an excessive amount of staff time and resources to gather together. With regard to your question concerning asbestos removals since 2000, we would not necessarily hold all this information because in the case of major projects, such as Old Street or Bank station upgrade projects, this would have been done under the control of the relevant Principal Contractor assigned to carry out the works and likely held by them.
Given the extent of the work involved in processing your request, we are applying Regulation 12(4)(b) as we believe that the request is ‘manifestly unreasonable’ because providing the information you have requested would impose unreasonable costs on us and require an unreasonable diversion of resources.
The use of this exception is subject to a public interest test, which requires us to consider whether the public interest in applying the exception outweighs the public interest in disclosure. We recognise that the release of information would promote accountability and transparency in public services. However, the time it would take to provide the information you have requested would divert a disproportionate amount of our resources from its core functions and on balance we consider that the public interest currently favours the use of the exception.
I would advise, therefore, that you reframe your request to narrow its scope and to focus on the information that is of most importance to you. In doing so I would suggest you review the guidance provided by the Information Commissioner on how best to access information from public bodies, published on the ICO website here:
https://ico.org.uk/your-data-matters/official-information/
As you can see, the table of “Dos and Don’ts” found on that page includes the following advice:
Do... Be as specific as possible about the information you want rather than asking general questions. Try to include details such as dates and names whenever you can.
Don’t... Send ‘catch-all’ requests for information (such as ‘please provide me with everything you hold about ‘x’) when you aren’t sure what specific documents to ask for. If in doubt, try searching on the authority’s website or enquiring whether any indexes and file lists are available.
Don’t... Disrupt a public authority by the sheer weight of requests or the volume of information requested.
I would suggest that you limit your request to specific locations and, where possible, more specific dates. For example the asbestos removal documentation is best searched by the year it was done so if you could also look at limiting the time period, we may be able to provide the information within the designated timescales.
If you are not satisfied with this response please see the attached information sheet for details of your right to appeal.
Yours sincerely
Eva Hextall
FOI Case Management Team
General Counsel
Transport for London
