2000 Millennium Incuse RAM Image

[purplepennyhunter]

Interesting reading, I look forward to their response.

[Pedro]

Hmmm ... call me a cynic but "As you can imagine records from 2000 are quite difficult to find" might equate to "we don't really want to answer those questions"! Maintain the mystique of the incused 50c and all that.

Pedro

[Steveqld]

Just a quick update.  Looks like they have found some material and are working out how much to charge for it.  Their email today:

Thank you for the clarification on the request and your understanding of how busy the end of financial year can be.

As the electronic filing system only came into play a few years ago here at the Mint there is quite a bit of seeking and finding that needs to be done so I hope to get an charge estimates letter to you by the end of the week. Please note in the preliminary discussions I have had it does not look like the decision was documented but it does look like there are records of the die existing and possibly how many were made from it.

 I will send through an update at the end of the week.


Looks like many of the answers are available but not sure which "does not look like the decision was documented" refers to, ie the decision to create the die or the decision not to use it.  I think that's rather astounding for a Govt agency whose core business is minting national coinage.

Also amazed that they only went to electronic filing records a couple of years ago.  My former agency went to them back in the late 80's.

Will have to wait and see how much they want to charge me.

[serial]

Looks like we may need to pass the hat around

[Steveqld]

Looks like we may need to pass the hat around

I knew at the time of the application that the applicant is liable for charges.

There's a few provisions in the Act and the Regs that require these to be reasonable and they can't charge for the time where it is due to the inefficiency of their file records.  How long can it take to look up a file number then pull it out of a box in a filing room?  Certainly an hour or 2 is reasonable.  The first 5 hours of assessing the file is free and photocopying is only $0.10 per page so the costs can't be excessive.

Will have to wait and see and if too great then ask for them to be reconsidered or internally reviewed.  I'm trying to be nice and the contact does seem like a really nice person so don't want to upset them.

 The Act required the material to be provided to me by today (30 days after receipt of the application) and the FOI officer didn't seem to realize I had to consent in writing to an extension of that time.  I did that unilaterally so am (I think) in the good books at the moment.

[Australian coin]

ok I had a bash thru the annual report 2000 - 2001
and the currency page (nothing there)

things of interest to keep for later (Bradman coin)


coin production


set production


tooling

there's nothing to say that the number here can be applied to a 50c die

[Steveqld]

Storm clouds on the horizon with the FoI request.  RAM now advises that mintage records do not exist but they can provide "Master Tool Reports for the plaster and the die cards that show how many dies were made".  That's a long way from what I requested but have been advised the cost is just $37.54 which is acceptable.

They also advise that some material will be exempt as commercial in confidence/commercial copyright.  Reading between the lines they don't want to release the diagrams.

Unfortunately the goalposts have moved since making the application. If the applicant disagreed with a decision they lodged an internal then external review to the Australian Information Commissioner at no cost.  Unfortunately the July budget abolished that office and appeals now are direct to the Administrative Appeals Tribunal from 1/1/15 but that has a cost >$800.  So effectively if the department doesn't want to give you the material then it's cost prohibitive to take it to an impartial decision maker.

I think the abolition of the OAIC may be a retrograde step for government accountability.

[Pedro]

Ah, well, at least you gave it a shot Steve. Doesn't look like the info the RAM are able to provide is going to get us much closer to potential numbers.

Pedro

[trout]

I think the abolition of the OAIC may be a retrograde step for government accountability.

NOT as far as the Government is concerned :dodgy:

[eccentric]

In April, May and June of 2007 I made extensive enquiries about this coin with the RAM.  There was some difficulty in collating the information at the time, as the enquiries encompassed a number of different sections within the Mint itself, each with different responsibilities within the production process.  Initially, it seems that the incuse die was originally intended to be used only for the Mint Set coins.  However, this decision was apparently later changed and one of the incuse dies was used for a limited production run of circulated coins.  The reply I received from the RAM at that time is as follows:

'We have followed up on your enquiry regarding the millennium 50c piece.  Thorough investigations of our records indicate that there were 2 master tools.  The incused master tool was used to strike a series of uncirculated grade dies.  At a later date the incised master tool was used to strike a series of circulating grade dies.  Records indicate that an uncirculated die was converted to a circulating die and used to strike production coins.  The number of pieces a die makes varies and the number of circulating pieces struck by this die could possibly be in the region of 1-2% of total circulation.'

So, although a series of uncirculated grade dies was produced, no uncirculated coins were ever actually minted for inclusion in the Mint Sets and the limited run of circulation coins - namely, 1-2% of total production -  was the only instance of the use of the incused die.  Given that the mintage was 16,630,000, the number of incuse coins issued into circulation should be in the range of 166,300 to 332,600.

[ausjack]

Hahar I thought so, so a lot higher than people thought, thanks eccentric.

[robbiegal]

In April, May and June of 2007 I made extensive enquiries about this coin with the RAM.  There was some difficulty in collating the information at the time, as the enquiries encompassed a number of different sections within the Mint itself, each with different responsibilities within the production process.  Initially, it seems that the incuse die was originally intended to be used only for the Mint Set coins.  However, this decision was apparently later changed and one of the incuse dies was used for a limited production run of circulated coins.  The reply I received from the RAM at that time is as follows:

'We have followed up on your enquiry regarding the millennium 50c piece.  Thorough investigations of our records indicate that there were 2 master tools.  The incused master tool was used to strike a series of uncirculated grade dies.  At a later date the incised master tool was used to strike a series of circulating grade dies.  Records indicate that an uncirculated die was converted to a circulating die and used to strike production coins.  The number of pieces a die makes varies and the number of circulating pieces struck by this die could possibly be in the region of 1-2% of total circulation.'

So, although a series of uncirculated grade dies was produced, no uncirculated coins were ever actually minted for inclusion in the Mint Sets and the limited run of circulation coins - namely, 1-2% of total production -  was the only instance of the use of the incused die.  Given that the mintage was 16,630,000, the number of incuse coins issued into circulation should be in the range of 166,300 to 332,600.

thanks for that                                          
now does that solve the matter at hand?

[Pedro]

Not until we find all the little beggars :biggrin:

Pedro

[Steveqld]

It certainly helps and fits with the rumours that have been flowing around for the last few years and the mintage figures seem about right.  A couple of questions though:

What was the specimen coin supposed to look like?  Was it to have enamel inserts as posted elsewhere?  Why didn't they strike the specimen coins?  When the mint says "an uncirculated die was converted to a circulating die" was that intentional or accidental?  Was it struck in error or is it an intended circulating variety?

No harm in looking at the original reports to see what else they say although the answer to that could be "nothing".

Apparently the FoI material was mailed out today so I'll find out later in the week what the RAM is prepared (or able) to release.

While researching the application I came across this AAT decision from 1997 where a banknote collector took the Reserve Bank of Australia on an FoI application for their pricing and supply policies.  Someone may know the applicant:

http://www.austlii.edu.au/cgi-bin/sinodisp/au/cases/cth/AATA/1997/217.html?stem=0&synonyms=0&query=royal%20australian%20mint

[runway]

In April, May and June of 2007 I made extensive enquiries about this coin with the RAM.  There was some difficulty in collating the information at the time, as the enquiries encompassed a number of different sections within the Mint itself, each with different responsibilities within the production process.  Initially, it seems that the incuse die was originally intended to be used only for the Mint Set coins.  However, this decision was apparently later changed and one of the incuse dies was used for a limited production run of circulated coins.  The reply I received from the RAM at that time is as follows:

'We have followed up on your enquiry regarding the millennium 50c piece.  Thorough investigations of our records indicate that there were 2 master tools.  The incused master tool was used to strike a series of uncirculated grade dies.  At a later date the incised master tool was used to strike a series of circulating grade dies.  Records indicate that an uncirculated die was converted to a circulating die and used to strike production coins.  The number of pieces a die makes varies and the number of circulating pieces struck by this die could possibly be in the region of 1-2% of total circulation.'

So, although a series of uncirculated grade dies was produced, no uncirculated coins were ever actually minted for inclusion in the Mint Sets and the limited run of circulation coins - namely, 1-2% of total production -  was the only instance of the use of the incused die.  Given that the mintage was 16,630,000, the number of incuse coins issued into circulation should be in the range of 166,300 to 332,600.

thanks for that                                          
now does that solve the matter at hand?

Eccentric once again fantastic information :wavemulticolor: