Ombudsman David McGee, in a letter on the investigation of the complaints, showed Mr Ryall had failed to comply with the time limits for two requests.
He said Mr Ryall had advised administrative processes within his office and the Ministry of Health were being reviewed to ensure improved practice with regard to requests for official information.
Mr McGee said in view of Mr Ryall's advice it was unnecessary for him to take any further action.
The ODT lodged complaints over the time it took Mr Ryall to respond to a request for notes taken at the briefing given to Mr Ryall by former Otago District Health Board chairman Richard Thomson on January 21 on the $16.9 million fraud of the board.
That request was made on January 30 and was turned down by Mr Ryall on March 23, when it should have been made by March 2.
The second complaint related to a request made on February 17, the same day as Mr Thomson's sacking, for the letter sent by the health board in response to Mr Ryall's letter advising the board he was considering removing Mr Thomson as chairman.
This request had been transferred by the board on February 17 and a decision should have been made no later than March 17, but Mr Ryall did not release the letter until March 25.
A complaint about the March 23 decision not to release the meeting notes resulted in Mr Ryall releasing part of the notes on May 22 pertaining to the fraud issue, but declining to release notes which the ombudsmen's office advised pertained to a discussion on a range of issues confronting the board.
Mr Ryall declined to release the rest of the information on the ground that withholding was necessary to maintain the effective conduct of public affairs through free and frank expression of opinions.
The ODT has sought further investigation from the ombudsmen's office on that, expressing the view it finds it hard to be confident about this ground, given it was also used for the original decision not to release any of the information, and arguing a public interest in discussion of issues confronting the board.
Mr McGee said he was awaiting a response from Mr Ryall on queries raised about this.
Official Information Act
> When a request is received, those covered by the Act must make a decision within a maximum 20 working days.
> If this is not possible, extensions can be made.
> Any extension decision must be conveyed within the 20 working days.
> Extensions must be for "a reasonable period of time having regard to the circumstances".
> A requester can complain to the Office of the Ombudsmen about an extension decision.
> No extension decisions were made by Mr Ryall in the two complaints. OIA requests to the Minister of Health 2009 from ODT
> One lodged January 30; refused March 23.
> Decision should have been made and conveyed by March 2 .
> One lodged February 17; approved March 25.
> Decision should have been made and conveyed by March 17.
- Office of the Ombudsmen letter
