Outcome:	1. Environment			Question No:  14
Division/Agency:	Department of the Environment and Heritage
Topic:	Lead contamination of water supply in office building
Hansard Page ECITA:	Written Question on Notice

Senator Carr asked:
There were a number of newspaper stories in late January about the fact that the Department had informed staff just before Christmas that water in its Parkes building was contaminated with lead levels recorded at 10 to 16 times accepted levels.
(a)	Please outline what the Department has done to respond to this issue.
(b)	When was the Department first aware of the problem? Can you confirm that it was a result of monitoring conducted on 1 December 2005?
(c)	Was this – as reported in the Canberra Times – the first time the building’s water had been monitored for lead levels?
(d)	If so, why was there not previous monitoring and what prompted the monitoring that revealed the problem?
(e)	The Canberra Times reported that the Department has asked Comcare to conduct an investigation, to report in mid-March. Is this correct? Is the report still expected in mid-March?
(f)	What will happen once the report is received? Will it be made public? Has a timeframe been set for responding to the Comcare report?
(g)	When were to staff first notified?
(h)	What kind of information was provided to the staff?
(i)	How many staff have now had blood tests?
(j)	How many staff in the affected office were pregnant at the time of their potential exposure?
(k)	The media coverage indicates that experts differ as to whether blood tests are the best way to measure lead absorption into the body. Is the Department considering offering any other kind of test to people – especially pregnant women – who may be particularly concerned?
(l)	the Department offered specific counselling to staff?
(m)	Were the levels of any other contaminants in the water supply above the levels specified in Australian water quality guidelines?

Answer/s:
(a)	On Friday 16 December 2005 the Department received a report indicating that the quality of the rain water supply to the refurbished former communications centre in the John Gorton Building did not meet the Australian Drinking Water Guidelines in relation to lead, copper and zinc. The rest of the John Gorton Building was not affected. The contaminated water supply was immediately turned off and replaced with mains water supply. Comcare was advised of the incident and attended the site on the following day. The ACT Chief Health officer was immediately requested to  assess the level of public health risk associated with the contamination and advised that there was a low risk. The Department appointed an independent occupational physician to provide advice and support to the Department and its staff on health matters related to the incident. The Department has held meetings of staff and provided numerous written advices. Rectification work on the water supply system has been undertaken and all appliance (eg dishwashers) have been replaced. A water quality testing regime is in place. In accordance with the relevant Comcare Approved Code of Practice and based on expert medical advice the Department has offered blood testing to affected employees. About 170 employees have presented for testing. No cases of lead poisoning have been identified. Former employees and contractors of the Department who may have had some risk have been contacted. Comcare is undertaking a formal investigation of the incident. 

(b)	The Department was first aware of the problem on Friday 16 December 2005 when it received results from a water sample test taken on 1 December 2005.

(c)	Yes, as far as the Department is currently aware.

(d)	The rain water system was installed as part of the refurbishment of the Communications Centre in October 2003. It was designed by HughesTrueman, consulting engineers and planners, who were the hydraulics service consultants for the project. It is designed to collect rainwater, supplemented when necessary in dry spells by ActewAGL domestic water. The design includes filtration and ultraviolet sterilisation of water. A maintenance manual was developed by HughesTrueman as part of the project. 

In late 2005, a new A/g Director responsible for DEH property maintenance was appointed. The A/g Director noted that the rainwater system was installed to supply potable water to the Communications Centre and checked the maintenance of the system to ensure compliance with the recommendations in the maintenance manual. The A/g Director noted that there was no reference in the maintenance manual to routine water quality testing requirements and that there was no evidence of any water quality testing undertaken. The A/g Director recommended to the relevant Assistant Secretary that the water quality be tested. This was agreed. The testing was then undertaken. 

(e)	No. On 20 December 2005 Comcare wrote to the Secretary of the Department advising that Comcare would be conducting a formal investigation into the incident. The timing for the completion of the report is Comcare’s responsibility.

(f)	It is the Department’s intention to release the report to staff unless Comcare directs otherwise. The timeframe for responding to the report will be determined once the report has been received.

(g)	A notice to all staff was provided when they resumed duty on Monday 19 December 2005. 

(h)	See Attachment A.

(i)	The Occupational Physician’s most recent advice is that over 170 individuals have been tested for lead in blood.
(j)	The Occupational Physician’s most recent advice is that less than twenty women have been identified.

(k)	The Department has complied with the Comcare Approved Code of Practice for dealing with employees whose work environment exposes them to inorganic lead, including recommended blood tests. 

	The Department has provided extensive information to employees on the health issues related to exposure to elevated levels of lead, copper and zinc in drinking water. Staff with particular concerns, including those who are pregnant, have been encouraged to consult their own medical practitioner and/or the independent Occupational Physician engaged by the Department. 

	In a few instances additional medical testing has been undertaken to address particular medical concerns. 

(l)	Yes.

(m)	Yes, the water also exceeded the Australian Drinking Water Guidelines in relation to copper and zinc.

ATTACHMENT A to Question on Notice 14

All Staff

WATER SUPPLY TO THE COMMUNICATIONS CENTRE

I am writing to advise you of an issue that has arisen in relation to the water quality of the rain water drinking supply to the Communications Centre and to let you know of the steps the Department is taking to rectify the issue and to assess potential health implications, if any. 

Water supplies to the remainder of the John Gorton Building are not affected and can be used as normal.

A briefing session will be held for all AGO and other interested staff in the Bunker Theatre at 10.00 am today, Monday 19 December 2005.

The issue

On Friday afternoon 16 December the Department received a report on a laboratory analysis of the water quality of the rainwater supply to the Communications Centre. The samples were taken on 1 December and analysed by a NATA accredited laboratory. 

The report states “The heavy metal analyses results of lead, copper and zinc are above the levels recommended by the Australian Drinking Water Guidelines. The pH level is below the recommended level for drinking water. I cannot see any other areas of concern”.

A further sample from the rainwater supply was taken on Saturday 17 December which will be tested by another NATA accredited laboratory. The results of this testing will be available soon.

The issue was discussed with the Secretary at a Senior Executive Management Meeting and as a consequence the water to the Communications Centre was turned off at about 5.20pm.

The rain water system

The rain water system was installed as part of the refurbishment of the Communications Centre in October 2003. It was designed by HughesTrueman, consulting engineers and planners, who were the hydraulics services consultants for the project. It is designed to collect rainwater, supplemented when necessary in dry spells by ActewAGL domestic water. The design includes filtration and ultraviolet sterilisation of water. 

Immediate follow up action

The Department is concerned about this issue and naturally all staff will want to know when the water supply will be restored and if there are any potential health issues arising from this situation. 

The following immediate steps have been taken to rectify the issue. The Department is following a conservative precautionary approach to the situation.

Comcare

In accordance with its statutory obligations the Department has advised Comcare of this incident. Ms Linda Maxwell, the ACT Regional Manager of Comcare inspected the site at 2.00pm Saturday. The Regional Manager was provided with a further update on Sunday afternoon. Comcare is satisfied with 

ATTACHMENT A to Question on Notice 14 (cont’d)

the remedial action being taken by the Department and is being kept informed of follow up action. Comcare will continue to monitor the situation.

Water supply

The rain water system has been physically separated (disconnected) from the Communications Centre water supply. The Communications Centre is now connected to the ActewAGL domestic water supply. HughesTrueman, the consulting engineers who designed the water supply system for the Communications Centre, supervised this work and have confirmed that: 

“We can now certify that all fixtures within the AGO tenancy in the old communications centre that were originally provided with rainwater are now provided with potable water from the ActewAGL mains water supply. 

Although the water supply is now from ActewAGL the Department will not turn on the water for drinking purposes until further testing has been undertaken to ensure that the water is suitable for drinking. Test samples of the new water supply, now connected to the ActewAGL mains, were taken Sunday morning and the Department expects to have results late Monday. We will advise you of the outcome.

In line with a conservative precautionary approach the Department replaced the hot water tank that serves the wash basins in the toilets. The Billi units under the four kitchen sinks will also be replaced as soon as possible and will not be used in the meantime. 

Staff should dispose of any water left over from last week.

We are taking these precautionary steps because we want our staff to have complete confidence in the water supply to the Communications Centre.

The water in the toilet basins is suitable for hand washing. No water should be drunk from these taps until the Department advises staff that the test results confirm that the water is suitable for drinking. 

Temporary water supply

The Department has provided bottled water for drinking and urns for hot water until the water supply is turned on. Staff may, of course, use any of the facilities in the rest of the JGB. 
Potential health issues

The Department is taking action to seek expert scientific and health advice on whether there are any health implications for staff arising from this situation. We will keep all staff closely informed about progress. We will write to all staff and convene a meeting of all staff as soon as we are in a position to provide you with informed expert scientific and health advice. We will advise you as soon as we have the arrangements and timing for the completion of this work. We will make every effort to obtain this advice before the end of the week.

We will prepare staff contact lists for any potentially affected staff to cover periods of leave. Any staff member who has worked previously in the Communications Centre should send an email to Jacquie Shannon advising her of this.

We understand that some staff may be anxious about this situation. If any staff member feels they wish to consult their medical advisor before the Department is able to provide expert scientific and health advice they should do so and retain their receipts for reimbursement by the Department.

Staff, if they wish, can also consult Davidson Trahaire Corpsych, the Department’s counselling service. They can be contacted on 1300 360 364. Any staff member contacting Davidson Trahaire Corpsych should identify themselves as being a DEH employee and that they have concerns about the water supply issue. This will ensure prompt referral to a counsellor.

ATTACHMENT A to Question on Notice 14Attachment A (cont’d)

Other actions

The Department will be commissioning an independent expert investigation to examine all issues associated with the design and operation of the rainwater system, the Department’s statutory responsibilities and any other issues that need to be addressed. Staff will have an opportunity to provide their comments to the investigator. The report will be provided to the Secretary as soon as possible.

As indicated above, the Department will compile a list of all staff and others currently working in the Communications Centre or who have worked in the Centre previously, so that they can be contacted if necessary. 

Contact point

Any staff who have follow up questions or comments can contact either Jeanne Ottrey, Ag Director Program Services Section (extension 1964) or Jacquie Shannon, Director People Assistance and Advisory Group (extension 1118).

Keith Fairbrother
Assistant Secretary
People Management Branch

18 December 2005

Outcome:	1. Environment		Question No:  15
Division:	Corporate Strategies
Topic:	Certified Agreement
ECITA Page:	Written Question on Notice

Senator Carr asked:
(a).	What stage is the negotiation of the Department’s new Certified Agreement up to?
(b).	Will the coverage of the new Certified Agreement change compared to the existing Agreement? If so, what are the changes?
(c).	Is it the case that expeditioner employees engaged after 1 July this year will not be covered by the Agreement?
(d).	Does this mean that the way the Department will only engage new expeditioner employees will be through AWAs?
(e).	If not, how will expeditioner employees be employed and how will their conditions be determined?
(f).	If so, what is the rationale for this decision? How will the Department benefit from restricting the work choices of its employees or potential employees?
(g).	Was the decision to exclude expeditioner employees from coverage  under the Certified Agreement driven solely by some potential benefit identified by the Department, or has there been a directive from the Minister or DEWR for the Department to find ways to increase coverage by AWAs?

Answer/s:
(a).	The Department’s bargaining committee has met several times since January of this year and further negotiation is required on a number of issues.
(b).	Yes the coverage will change. The new Collective Agreement will cover employees in all Divisions including the Australian Antarctic Division, except future expeditioner employees. 
(c).	Yes
(d).	Yes
(e).	Employment conditions will be directly negotiated between the employer and employee under an AWA. All expeditioners will be covered by the Public Service Act 1999.
(f).	The Department considers that the use of AWAs as the employment mode would enhance its ability to attract suitably qualified applicants for Antarctic expeditioner positions in a highly competitive market place and provide flexibility for possible changed employment circumstances with the introduction of the Antarctic air-link.
(g).	Yes, the decision is driven solely by business requirements.

Outcome:	1. Environment		Question No:  16
Division:	Corporate Strategies
Topic:	Certified Agreement
ECITA page:	Written Question on Notice

Senator Carr asked:
(a).	What is the Department’s current position on AWAs?
(b).	Who is offered an AWA under current arrangements?
(c).	How many staff are currently on AWAs and what proportion of staff does this represent?
(d).	How does this compare with other Departments?
(e).	Is (this) indicative of what’s to come under so-called WorkChoices across other Departments?
(f).	How is the decision to exclude one group of employees from the CA consistent with APS values or the notion of employee choice?
(g).	Until recently, many Departments have effectively restricted access to AWAs to higher level staff, whom one might expect to have stronger bargaining power than the average public servant. Would expeditioner employees fall into this category?

Answer/s:
(a).	Our policy is to offer AWAs to all SES and executive level staff and in some circumstances to other staff where sufficient business reasons require this.
(b).	All SES and executive level staff, other staff who have previously had an AWA and to other staff where sufficient business reasons require this.
(c).	Approximately 500 or 25% of staff
(d).	The Department is not aware of the practice in other Departments.
(e).	The Department is not aware of what other Departments are planning.
(f).	All expeditioner employees will continue to be employed under the Public Service Act 1999, their employment on AWAs is consistent with the APS Values and the employee will be able to negotiate their individual employment conditions.
(g).	AWAs are being introduced to enhance the Department’s ability to attract suitably qualified applicants for Antarctic expeditioner positions in a highly competitive market place. Given the competitive market, prospective expeditioners will be well placed to negotiate suitable employment conditions before accepting an employment contract.

Outcome:	1. Environment		Question No:  17
Division:	Corporate Strategies
Topic:	Certified Agreement
ECITA page:	Written Question on Notice

Senator Carr asked:
(a)	Does the section of the draft CA that will apply to current expeditioner employees say that the decision to engage a person whose duties will be predominantly in Antarctica as an expeditioner employee may be varied to suit changed circumstances “provided it will not disadvantage the employee”? How will this type of protection be maintained when expeditioner employees are no longer covered by the CA?
(b)	Can the Department assure future expeditioner employees (or their equivalent) that the bonuses paid to those undertaking extra duties, such as Search and Rescue Leader, Fire Chief or Boat Master at Macquarie Island, will remain?
(c)	Will the principle that the Department “will ensure that expeditioner employees participate in learning and development activities … that enable them to do their jobs effectively …” still apply when expeditioner employees are no longer covered by the CA? How can future expeditioner employees be confident that the Department will ensure appropriate learning and development activities are pursued?
(d)	Does the Department have any plans to shift other identifiable groups of employees onto AWAs?

Answer/s:
(a) and (b) Employment conditions will be directly negotiated between the employer and employee under an AWA. All expeditioners will be covered by the Public Service Act 1999.

(c) 	All expeditioner employees will be provided with appropriate training to enable them to effectively perform their duties in a safe environment.

(d)	Not at this time.

Outcome:	1. Environment			Question No: 18
Division/Agency:	Environment and Heritage portfolio
Topic:	Grants to Hillsong Church
Hansard Page ECITA:	Written Question on Notice

Senator Ludwig asked:
How many grants have you issued to Hillsong Church, its associated corporations and entities? List name, price and duration of funding by department.

Answer/s:
Nil.