authorised for publication 'd1 - parliament.act.gov.au · mr traves: i had carriage of that...

• Authorised for Publication

'D1.o J,. ~~

LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY FOR THE AUSTRALIAN CAPITAL TERRITORY

Annual and Financial Reports 2010-2011

ANSWER TO QUESTION TAKEN ON NOTICE DURING PUBLIC HEARINGS

Environment and Sustainable Development Directorate- DECCEW Annual Report Hearings 01 December 2011.

The following question asked by Zed Seselja MLA was taken on notice: Ref: Proof Hansard Transcript 01 December 2011 page 36+

In relation to : Dickson Lyneham and Gungahlin - Ponds

MR SESELJA: Minister, page 16 deals with some capital deferrals. Could you bring us up to date with the deferral of construction costs associated with Dickson and Lyneham ponds? Where are they up to? Are they now completed? If so, what has been the total cost to date?

Mr Corbell: Dickson and Lyneham ponds commenced construction in October 2010, Mr Seselja. Both developments are expected to be complete by December; so that is the state of play in relation to those projects.

MR SESELJA: So that is December of this year. And the cost to date and the estimate of the total final cost?

Mr Corbell: For Dickson and Lyneham the total budgeted cost is $13.87 million, with $6.52 million expended to date.

MR SESELJA: And they are due to be finished this month, is that right?

Ms Farnsworth: The ponds themselves are due to be completed at the end of December, although there may be some slight delay if we get further rain. The pipes and pumps to allow the trial to be conducted are expected to be completed by November 2012. So that is the infrastructure to make the pumping mechanism work.

MR SESELJA: And that is the total cost of the project. With only $6 million spent to date, most of the cost is still to come, but that will be spent next year on the associated infrastructure, is that right?

Ms Farnsworth: Yes, we have spent to date $6.52 million.

MR SESELJA: Yes.

Ms Farnsworth: And the total cost is $13.87 million.

MR SESELJA: Yes, so there is still half to go.

Ms Farnsworth: Yes.

of2

MR SESELJA: So about half the cost is associated works. What is the split with what is due to be finished at the end of this month and then what is due to be finished in November next year?

Mr Corbell: I would have to take that on notice, Mr Seselja.

Ms Farnsworth: Yes. I believe we are due to go to tender for the second stage shortly.

MR SESELJA: Okay. And the reason for the delay-is it just rain or are there other factors?

Mr Traves: I had carriage of that project back in the previous financial year. The Lyneham one is largely delayed due to rain and also a slight delay in the movement of a sewerage pipe that had to be relocated on site. The Dickson one went exactly to schedule.

MR SESELJA: So Dickson is finished, is it?

Mr Traves: Dickson is completely finished.

MR SESELJA: And will Dickson need the same amount of associated works as Lyneham, and has that started, or-

Mr Traves: The intention of the inner north reticulation system is to link the Flemington ponds area-ponds 1 and 2-to Lyneham and Dickson. So once the final pond is in place, then that linking infrastructure will be put in place, and that is the second stage the minister referred to.

MR SESELJA: And the deferral of construction for the valley ponds in Gungahlin of $1 millionwhat is the reason for that?

Mr Traves: It may have occurred since I was in that unit. I will have to take that on notice.

MR SESELJA: Are you able to also find out for us whether that is expected to come within budget, if it is completed and, if not, when it is expected to be completed?

Mr Corbell: My advice in relation to the valley ponds is that the budgeted costs of the valley ponds is $6.5 million. Is that correct?

Ms Farnsworth: Yes, and it is scheduled for completion in September 2012.

MR SESELJA: And we expect it to be within the $6.5 million budget?

Ms Farnsworth: At this stage, that is my expectation. Construction commenced last month.

MR SESELJA: And the reason for the delay?

Ms Farnsworth: I would need to get further information on that for you.

MR BARR : The answer to the Member's questions is as follows:

The total cost of the Dickson and Lyneham Ponds, including a pump station at each pond, is $10.5 million. $6.52 million was paid at the end of November 2011, and $3.98 is yet to be paid.

The construction of the Valley Ponds was delayed due to the need to undertake extensive reviews of filter options.

Approved for circulation to the Committee

Andrew Barr MLA Date: C.(. /2..

Acting Minister for the Environment and Sustainable Development

of2

-- -----_--_-::-_----;:--;:-:;:-_--

Andrew Barr MLA DEPUTY CHIEF MINISTER

TREASURER

MINISTER FOR ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT

MINISTER FOR TOURISM, SPORT AND RECREATION

MEMBER FOR MOLONGLO

Authorised for Publication

o I· c;'v. rz,.

Ms Meredith Hunter MLA Chair Standing Committee on Climate Change, Environment and Water ACT Legislative Assembly GPO Box 1020 CANBERRA ACT 2601

I am writing to clarify an answer Minister Corbell gave to a question from you as Chair of the above Committee at the 1 December 2011 Annual and Financial Report hearings for the then Department of the Environment, Climate Change, Energy and Water. The question was in relation to the review of Think water, Act water, the ACT Government's water conservation strategy.

As indicated to the Standing Committee, the review is being conducted in stages. These stages being:

• review and analysis of the Think water, act water Implementation Plan (Progress Report) to determine the performance outcomes of the current strategy;

• evaluation of existing strategic objectives, water saving targets and water reuse targets- this will determine where the ACT needs to be in an agreed policy timeframe in the context of water availability relative to projected climate change, levels of water use, infrastructure development and projected population growth; and

• the development of a revised strategy with an integrated approach to water planning and management, outlining measures to be put in place to enable strategic objectives to be realised within the agreed policy timeframe.

An independent assessment of the progress and performance of the strategy has been undertaken. This work is guiding the development of a revised strategy.

The revised strategy will also take into account recent local developments, updated research and any improved modelling, as well as external policy development and influencing factors such as the Murray-Darling Basin Agreement, the National Water Initiative Agreement and COAG water reforms.

ACT LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY

London Circuit, Canberra ACT 2601 GPO Box 1020, Canberra ACT 2601

Phon~'> (OJ\ nJOS 0000 F<~x (07\ nJOS OS3S Fm<~il corhl"llt!il<~r.t_!l"OV_<IIJ

The review of the strategy will be finalised once the Murray Darling Basin Plan is finalised. This will allow the Government to accurately factor in the targets in order to achieve the set Sustainable Diversion Limit (SDL). The need to factor in the SDL means the review will be completed in mid 2012 rather than the end of 2011.

Yours sincerely

Andrew Barr MLA A/g Minister for the Environment and Sustainable Development

2 3 DEC 2011


o1·J1.r rv • LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY FOR THE AUSTRALIAN CAPITAL TERRITORY ~--....

<(;G ~ ~ '(}·~:~C\ ;~ ... Annual and Financial Reports 2010-2011


Environment and Sustainable Development Directorate - DECCEW Annual Report Hearings 01 December 2011.

The following question asked by Vicki Dunne MLA was taken on notice: Ref: ProofHansard Transcript 22 November 2011 page 49+

In relation to : Salt level discharge from the lower Molonglo water quality control

MRS DUNNE: This may be something to take on notice: what is the licensed discharge of salt from the lower Molonglo and what have our discharges been, say, over the last five years?

MR CORBELL: I am happy to take that on notice.

MR BARR: The answer to the Member's questions is as follows:

The Lower Molonglo Water Quality Control Centre (LMWQCC) is authorised by the Environment Protection Authority under the Environment Protection Act 1997. The Authorisation specifies both a concentration and a load limit for the parameter of Total Dissolved Solids (TDS) also known as 'salt', for effluent discharged from LMWQCC (see table below). While the concentration ofTDS has at times exceeded the limit specified in the Authorisation it should be noted that the amount (load) of TDS discharged has remained well below the load limit of the Authorisation.

Concentration Concentration Average daily Average

Parameter (mg/L) 50th (mg!L) 90th load limit Performance percentile percentile (kg/d) period (months)

(a) (b) (c) (d) (e)

TDS 500 550 60,000 12 1

The concentration of the effluent discharged for the past five years, presented as rolling percentiles, from the LMWQCC is shown in Figure 1.

Page 1 of2

------ ------ ---------~-~----

LMWQCC Effluent TDS Concentration --12-m rolling median--- EPA Limit [median] --12-m rolling 90%ile-- EPA Limit [90%ile]

590 .--~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~--~-~~

570

550

530

510

::::: 490 C)

E en 470 c 1-

450

---- ---- -- ~----- ----1---- --~~~---------

-----~-- ----~ ----~- -----~-~ r--~- r---- ----~ -------------- --~------------ -----r---- ---~-----------~ ~----------·--~-

-- 1---- ---- ---- --

~~~=~~~~~~~~~=~=?~~~~~~~~~~~==~~==~~~~ ~====~=~~~~1~~~~;~===~=~-;;~~~~~~~ =-~~~~~- =~~~~===:~~~~~~~~~~~--=~: -~~~~=~~~~~--=~~--= ----- ----

~~=~-=~~=~~~~f~~~~=j~~~-~;;;-~1~;;;~-=-;=;;; ~~=t~~~~~~~~~~==~~~~~==l~~~~~~!=~§ ------------------ ---- -------r--~-- ----------------- --------- f-~------~--- ----------- 1------------ -----------~--

~---- --- --r---- r------ -----------~--- ----- -----t----- --- ---~-~- ~-----1-----

---- ---- --- -~-------- --~~--- r----- --- ---~-r-----~-

L!) L!) <D <D 1'- 1'- ro ro 0"> 0"> 0 0 ....- ....- N 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ....- ....- ....- ....- ....-

I I ....!.. I ....!.. I I I I I ....!.. I ....!.. I I c (.) ::J (.) ::J (.) c (.) c (.) ::J (.) ::J (.) c ::J Q) --, Q) --, Q) ::J Q) ::J Q) --, Q) --, Q) ::J --, 9 I 9 I 9 --, 0 --, 9 I 9 I 9 --, _! _! I _! _!

Figure 1. Effluent concentration from LMWQCCfor the period June 2005 to November 2011.

The TDS load in kilograms per day, presented as a 12 month average, is presented in Figure 2.

LMWQCC Effluent TDS Load

--TDS Load kg/d [12-m average] --EPA Limit [12-m average]

70000

60000

50000

40000

30000

20000

~ 10000 ~

"C C'G 0 0 ..J en c 1-

!v-.. v -....... h

I

I

- .............. ...... I f.-" - - ,.J""

~

I I

Figure 2. TDS load from LMWQCC from January 2000.


~~

I i

Andrew Barr MLA Date: J. I. I 1... Acting Minister for the Environment and Sustainable Development

Page 2 of2

....__ v-r- r--..._

/


of·ov-11,

• LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY FOR THE AUSTRALIAN CAPITAL TERRITORY



Environment and Sustainable Development Directorate - DECCEW Annual Report Hearings 0 1 December 2011.

The following question asked by Shane Rattenbury MLA was taken on notice: Ref: ProofHansard Transcript 01 December 2011 page 55+

In relation to: Recycling - fluorescent light globes and tyres.

THE CHAIR: Question 1: Page 222 of the annual report mentions national product stewardship initiatives in relation to fluorescent light globes. As you would know, issues have been raised by the Greens around the lack of recycling facilities for light bulbs and batteries in the ACT. Could you tell me more about this particular initiative and what it means for recycling fluorescents in the ACT?

Question 2: Could you also take it on notice around tyres as well?


Answer 1. 1

The Council of Australian Governments Standing Council on Environment and Water (SCEW), formerly the Environment Protection and Heritage Council, has been working on fluorescent tubes and compact fluorescent lamp (CFL) recycling for some time.

In May 2009, the SCEW announced its support for FluoroCycle, a voluntary partnership between government and industry to increase recycling of mercury containing lamps by the commercial and public lighting sectors.

FluoroCycle (www.fluorocycle.org.au) commenced operations on 21 July 2010 as a voluntary, national product stewardship scheme. The initial focus of the scheme is on those sectors that account for the largest consumption of mercury containing lamps, the commercial and public lighting sectors.

In addition to the services provided under FluroCycle, the ACT has set up collection facilities for residents to drop off fluorescent tubes and lamps at no charge. The Government pays for these to be sent interstate for recycling. Facilities have been established at both Mitchell and Mugga Lane Resource Management Centres.

The ACT Government has been progressively implementing further services for the free drop-off of batteries and CFLs. TAMS has finished designing its new one-stop drop-off facility at the Mugga Lane Resource Management Centre for the acceptance of a wide range of household hazardous wastes. Construction will commence shortly.

Answer2 In November 2009, the former Environment Protection and Heritage Council (now the Standing Council on Environment and Water or SCEW) considered a draft Regulation Impact Statement (RlS) for end of life tyres which indicated that a case could not be made for regulation. This was despite the RlS indicating that sixty-six per cent of tyres in Australia are being disposed of via landfills, stockpiles or illegal dumping, with only a small percentage recycled.

Consequently the SCEW asked the tyre industry to develop a voluntary industry-led product stewardship scheme. The proposed tyre product stewardship scheme model was put to Environment Ministers on 16 September 2011 and received in-principle support. The scheme is expected to be operational in 2012.

The ACT believes that more should be done to recover the inherent value in tyres and has instituted an operational ban on sending tyres to landfill supported by a user pays recycling scheme in the Territory.

The ACT is working actively with the SCEW to ensure the national tyre product stewardship scheme complements the ACT's existing practices.


Date: .:21. 1'2· 2.o11

Andrew Barr MLA Acting Minister for the Environment and Sustainable Development


0 ,.- c '1,. . ,,.,

_;-_ -______ _ ---- ------ - -------- -~-


CEIV Annual and Financial Reports 2010-2011 4.!;- ~()


1 1· :JAN £012


The following question asked by Caroline Le Couteur MLA was taken on notice: Ref: Proof Hansard Transcript 01 December 2011 page 58

In relation to: The national waste initiatives and the Australian Packaging Covenant Action Plan.

MS LE COUTEUR: On page 222 we have got the national waste initiatives and the Australian Packaging Covenant Action Plan. What actions are we undertaking to meet some of those initiatives? You talked a bit about it before when Ms Hunter dealt with fluorescent lights, but specifically packaging waste we did hot dwell on. It is dealt with in the second and third paragraphs from the bottom on page 222.

MS GALLAGHER: The answer to the Member's questions is as follows:

The ACT Government's Action Plan for the National Packaging Covenant 2011-2016 was released in June 2011 and can be found at http://www.environment.act.gov.au/waste.

The ACT Government supports further investigation by Standing Council on Environment and Water into options to address resource efficiency, environmental impacts and litter from packaging such as beverage containers.

Mr Simon Corbell issued a media release 5 July 2010 supporting a national Container Deposit Scheme (CDS). Reference is made to the CDS in the draft ACT Waste Strategy, under Strategy 3.2 (National approaches to litter management), where it states:

"In April 2008, the Commonwealth and State/Territory Ministers through the Environment Protection and Heritage Council (EPHC) agreed to conduct an assessment of options for national measures to address resource efficiency, environmental impacts, and the reduction of litter from packaging wastes such as beverage containers. The EP HC agreed to undertake the development of a consultation regulatory impact statement (RIS) for CDS, and other options which may have a positive cost benefit and a tangible impact on recovery rates and litter reduction. The ACT is an active participant in this national work. "


Jl~G~ Katy Gallagher MLA U /D·/·12-

Date: Chief Minister

•

---~----~-:-.::-~--=-=-=---~-- - -------- - ------ ---


0 i· o ~, 1~





The following question asked by Shane Rattenbury MLA was taken on notice: Ref: ProofHansard Transcript 01 December 2011 page

In relation to : Capacity - medium scheme and micro scheme

THE CHAIR: How much capacity did the government take from the medium scheme and use in the micro scheme for applications before May 2011?

Mr Traves: I might just take you through the whole story, from the first closure to the second closure. That might help.

THE CHAIR: Yes, that would be great, thank you.

Mr Traves: With the first closure, there was a period oftime when the commonwealth had announced what they were doing with its REC certificates, which was basically the subsidy that they provided to purchasers of PV. They had announced the particular schedule and then they changed that. That caused a bit of a panic in the market. At about the same time, New South Wales abruptly closed their feed-in tariff, so there was a huge amount of supply in the country. There was panic in the market about whether they would be able to get in, and we were the available market.

So in that six weeks leading up to the first closure, as many applications arrived at ActewAGL distribution offices as used to arrive every quarter previously. They had installers turning up to the counter with boxes of applications-200 to 300 at a time. By the time they worked through and made sure all of those applications were correct and verified to go into their system, because they were on a network, it was extremely close to the 15 at that stage. So we had to draw the line at that point.

That then closed. There was then a subsequent round of amendments done through the Assembly to revamp and reopen that scheme. In the interim, the medium scheme component had not closed. So the medium scheme continued to tick over up until the 12th, when the new revamped scheme opened, which again led to another flood, and it had to close by lunchtime the following day. At that stage provision had already been made by the government, with the agreement of the Assembly, to recognise people who had, in good faith, entered into contracts, started their installations but had not put their paperwork in to ActewAGL, and there was a deadline that was set at that time. So that deadline has now passed. ActewAGL have done the calculations and are currently working their way through those connections.

- --~-~ --- "-:-:-.-:----~----

The final figure will be very much dependent upon whether all of the medium-scale applications do go ahead, because they are a little bit more complicated than the household ones. They often rely on external finance and a number of them rely on finance from Europe, which, at the moment, is obviously a little bit shaky. So they may not proceed but we know what the quantum will be if everything goes ahead in a perfect world.

MR RATTENBURY: In regard to the first closure in May, presumably there has been an opportunity now to tally the full extent of applications received at that first closure. What was the figure for received applications at the end of that first closure?

Mr Traves: I would have to get that figure from ActewAGL. The cap is dealt with in terms of capacity, so I got capacity figures from them; I did not get the numbers of applications. My understanding-

MR RATTENBURY: Capacity is the question I am interested in, I suppose-a megawatt figure.

Mr Traves: Yes, we can get that figure but I cannot get you the number of applications at that time.

MR RATTENBURY: That is fme. I am not worried about that so much.

THE CHAIR: I just note that that has been taken on notice.


As at 31 May 2011, the initial closure date of the micro category of the Feed-in Tariff Scheme, advice received from ActewAGL Distribution was that approximately 19MW of capacity had been committed in micro applications. Accordingly, 4MW ofthe medium category cap of the Scheme was allowed for at that time for transfer to the micro category cap.


Andrew Barr MLA Date: .21.12. 2..11


-------------------_--_-,:_-;_-






The following question asked by Meredith Hunter MLA was taken on notice: Ref: Proof Hansard Transcript 01 December 2011 page 73

In relation to : Outreach Program

THE CHAIR: So how much was spent on the Outreach Program during the 2010-11 financial year?

MS FARNSWORTH: The budget allocation in the 2010-11 financial year was $1.64 million. I have not got the exact expenditure against that allocation.

THE CHAIR: Are you able to take that on notice?

MS FARNSWORTH: Yes.

THE CHAIR: How much is budgeted for 20 11-12?

MS LYONS WRIGHT: That is about $1.79 million.

MRS DUNNE: Could I add to the things you might take on notice and ask: from that expenditure, what do you estimate to be the annual household saving or the aggregate of that, and also the annual aggregate saving of energy?

MR CORBELL: In 2010-11 during the trial ofthe program, 895 low income households participated in the trial. Energy savings have been estimated at 920 megawatt hours. Greenhouse gas savings were approximately 800 tonnes of C02 equivalent, and their energy bill savings combined of around $130,000.

MRS DUNNE: For how much expenditure?

MR CORBELL: The funding was for $1.64 million. The exact acquittal of that I would have to take on notice.

MRS DUNNE: So the savings in energy consumption would be about 10 per cent ofthe expenditure. So we would be taking 10 years to see the investment returned?

MR CORBELL: That is a saving per annum.

MRS DUNNE: Yes, that is why I am saying it would take 10 years.

MR CORBELL: An ongoing saving to those households.

MRS DUNNE: Yes.

Page 1 of3

-- -- -~ -

---------------------- ___ ---=~=-------:-:---:-:-:-.. ----

WEST Budget and Expenditure

Expenditure on WEST in 2010-11 was $23,256.

The program budget for 2011-12 is $54,000 (which includes $34,000 from Housing ACT).

Projected savings to date for the WEST Program (based on a detailed analysis of the program in 2008-09) are:

• energy, 1,034 MWh; • water, 6092 kL; • greenhouse gas emissions 4 77 tonnes C02 equivalent; and • householder energy and water costs of $98,000.

WEST Plus Budget and Expenditure

Expenditure on WEST Plus in 2010-11 was $81,754.

This program and associated budget was merged with the Outreach Program in 2011-12.


~~ Andrew Barr MLA Date: ?/./2 Acting Minister for the Environment and Sustainable Development

Page 3 of3


or?- o v · rv





The following question asked by Zed Seselja MLA was taken on notice: Ref: ProofHansard Transcript 01 December 2011 page 74

In relation to : Mac house energy

MR SESELJA: Could you also, perhaps on notice, confirm that my reading of the 164 per cent, which struck me as odd at first, is correct and that it is to do with offsetting against gas use as well as electricity use, that it was to offset gas emissions?


The 164% figure is correct.

The Environment and Sustainable Development Directorate (ESDD) purchased 195,690 kilowatt hours (kWh) of renewable energy and certified GreenPower during the 2010-11 financial year. In 2010-11, ESDD reported electricity use of 118,984 kWh of energy within Macarthur House Annex.

Under the methodology used by the Online System for Comprehensive Activity Reporting (OSCAR), renewable energy and GreenPower purchase offset emissions from stationary energy (electricity and gas).


~~ Andrew Barr MLA Date: 3.1. I 2.. Acting Minister for the Environment and Sustainable Development

Page 1 of 1

----------------------- --==~-------------------=------------------


'D']· J -z,, it--





The following question asked by Shane Rattenbury MLA was taken on notice: Ref: Proof Hansard Transcript 01 December 2011 page 81

In relation to : IDC -Weathering the Changes Action Plan 2

MR RATTENBURY: One last question on this front: is there an inter-directorate committee operating to implement the Weathering the Change Action Plan? I realise you are waiting for the new one, but presumably Action Plan 1 is still in force? Is there an IDC operating to implement that?

Ms Farnsworth: Yes, there has been. I do not believe it has met recently, because the focus has been on contributing to the development of Action Plan 2. Many of the actions in action plan 1 are complete. There are a couple that are ongoing. But the focus of the directorate has been more on the next plan.

. Ongoing groups are involved in monitoring the sustainability performance across directorates, such as the sustainable property working group. That one is currently ongoing and still meeting. But, in short, yes, there is a climate change IDC across government. It was looking retrospectively; it is now looking forward.

MR SESELJA: So when did it last meet?

Ms Farnsworth: I would have to get that date for you.

THE CHAIR: I note that has been taken on notice. Does the Commissioner for the Environment sit on that IDC or have anything to do with it?

Ms Farnsworth: No, I do not believe so. I am not sure whether a representative of the office has attended. I can check that.

Page 1 of2

---~-:------------------:------ -------------- ------------ -----------------------------~---


The Climate Change Interdepartmental Committee (CCIDC) last met on 12 May 2011.

The Office of the Commissioner for Sustainability and the Environment is an statutory body that operates independently from ACT Government Directorates. Representatives of the Commissioner for Sustainability and the Environment have not been invited to attend the CCIDC. Participation would reduce the Office's capacity to independently comment upon initiatives arising from the CCIDC discussions.


Andrew Barr MLA Date: 1.1. 12. 2o 11


-----------------------~- ---=~-----~-~"- --- --------






The following question asked by Vicki Dunne MLA was taken on notice: Ref: ProofHansard Transcript 01 December 2011 page 83+

In relation to: Weed project

MRS DUNNE: Could I go back to the weed project? Was that for $700,000? What was that for?

Mr Corbell: Weeds, $300,000.

MRS DUNNE: Sorry, $300,000.

Mr Corbell: It was for addressing weeds of national significance in the Territory through a targeted grant program.

MRS DUNNE: What does that mean-$300,000 to address which weeds and who did the grants go to?

Mr Corbell: I will just have a quick look.

MRS DUNNE: That is Commonwealth money-that is in addition to ACT money that is allocated for weed management?

Mr Corbell: I am sorry. I seem to have information on every other program except the weeds program, Mrs Dunne. I apologise.

MRS DUNNE: Okay.

Mr Corbell: I will have to get some advice for you.

MRS DUNNE: If you could take that on notice, but could you also for the committee provide some advice on the quantum of the national program on significant weeds and the proportion that the ACT receives? Do we receive a sort of capitation grant, essentially, from caring for country or do we have to put up proposals and then we go into a larger pool?

Mr Corbell: A large number of these programs are delivered by Territory and Municipal Services or in conjunction with Territory and Municipal Services as the land manager. I would have to seek some further advice; so I will take your question on notice.

MRS DUNNE: Thanks.

Page 1 of2


The ACT received $300,000 of Commonwealth Caringfor our Country (CFOC) funds to administer a competitive grants program to address the most abundant formally listed Weeds of National Significance (WONS) within the ACT. The $300,000 CFOC grant is the result of an ACT Natural Resource Management Council proposal that was awarded through a Commonwealth Government competitive application process that delivered more than $31.3 million for Landcare and sustainable agriculture projects across Australia.

There are currently 20 species listed as WONS. The WONS species of most concern that can be effectively addressed through community action are: Blackberry (Rubusfruticosus aggregate), Chilean Needle Grass (Nassella neesiana) and Serrated Tussock (Nassella trichotoma). Funds will be used to provide grants to ruralleasees and community groups to undertake eradication and remediation activities. Applications for funding close on 2 February 2012.

Grants must be used to control Blackberry, Chilean Needle Grass and Serrated Tussock. However, other weeds that may also be present on site may also be addressed in tandem with efforts to address these three species.

The funding is additional to the ACT Government money allocated to weed control administered through the Territory and Municipal Services Directorate.


~~ Andrew Barr MLA Date: 21.12 · 2oll



0~- ol-- (V


r ·s~ t· '"' <· v '""'J' l},v c.~ \

• 9 J~M ·,o\1 )

~"' ":CT Ll\ /7 ~.,.~ ,.., x '•!:JJ ~T:~'i~:c




The following question asked by Vicki Dunne MLA was taken on notice: Ref: ProofHansard Transcript 01 December 2011 page 84+

In relation to : Single select processes for procurement

MR SESELJA: The Sustainability Advice Team is the contractor. It is $485,000. It is for the provision of energy efficiency audits and other things. It was April2010. What was the time frame? What was the urgency there where you did not go to a tender process?

MS FARNSWORTH: It was not possible in the time frames there to conduct an open tender process and to fully expend the funds within that financial year. We will be commencing an open tender process for the delivery of WEST Plus and Outreach.

MR SESELJA: When was the decision made to spend that money as opposed to when that contract was signed?

MS FARNSWORTH: I do not have that detail with me. I can get back to you on that.

MR SESELJA: Okay. But it was an urgent process, was it? It was a very contracted process?

THE CHAIR: I will just note that that has been taken on notice.

MR SESELJA: You have said before the end of the financial year, but the contract was in April; so you still had a couple of months, at least, before the end of the financial year.

MS FARNSWORTH: Yes. I understand that approval to proceed with the program was received in February.

MR SESELJA: Okay.

MS FARNSWORTH: That left a limited time within that financial year for expenditure.

MR SESELJA: That is five months. Is that not enough time to do at least a limited tender process or some other form of process where you could test value for money?

MS FARNSWORTH: It is a very big program with a significant amount of funding attached to it. It was an agency that has been used in the past. An assessment was made at that time that there was not sufficient time to do a full, open process and then implement the program within the time frames.

MR SESELJA: So is-

MS FARNSWORTH: Sorry-

Page 1 of4

-------------------- --,---------==cc:-

MR SESELJA: Is five months normally not enough time to do a tender process?

MS FARNSWORTH: You can complete a tender process within five months usually, but then the expenditure was to occur within that financial year; so the delivery component is also taken into account in considering those time frames.

MR SESELJA: So all of that was delivered in that financial year, was it?

MS FARNSWORTH: I would need to check the expenditure against the budget allocation. That was certainly our aspiration.

MR SESELJA: What was the urgency with particularly completing it in that financial year?

MS FARNSWORTH: It is desirable generally when we have funds allocated to a financial year to expend them in that financial year. Treasury is not always keen on rollovers.

MR SESELJA: So it was to avoid a rollover?

MS FARNSWORTH: Yes, that is right, and because it is an important program, we considered it important to get that money out into the community as soon as we could. But we are going to-1 believe we have commenced an open tender process for the remaining program.

MR SESELJA: Minister, is that a good enough reason? You have got five months before the end of the financial year. There is an urgency to want to spend money, but it is a large contract. Is that a good enough reason not to even have a limited tender process?

MR CORBELL: As I understand it, the firm that was selected to deliver the program in the short term was a firm that was already providing the same types of services to government-that is, the Sustainability Advice Team, as I understand it, already delivers the HEAT program, which many people would be familiar with. We have been very comfortable with the level of service provided under that program. Given that this was an expansion of the same sorts of services for the purposes of WEST Plus and outreach, that we were dealing with a firm that already had established credentials in this area, that was already delivering services in this area, and that the single select was for a limited period of time to allow an expansion of those types of services to the community prior to a competitive tender being commenced for the delivery of WEST Plus and outreach from 1 October this year-all those things considered-! think that was a reasonable decision.

MR SESELJA: What was the size of the previous contract that the Sustainability Advice Team got that you referred to?

MR CORBELL: They undertake the HEAT program, as I understand it, which provides audits and advice on retrofitting and energy efficiency in private dwellings. The value of that project I would have to get advice on. I do not have it immediately at hand.

MR SESELJA: What was the nature of that procurement?

MR CORBELL: The HEAT program has been provided in the ACT for an extended period of time now. I do not have further advice on that to hand.

MR SESELJA: So you will take that on notice also

MR CORBELL: I will take that on notice.

MR SESELJA: As to how that was procured.

Mr Corbell: Yes.

Page 2 of4

~"- ------------=-""".:::---~--;=_--________________ --- --------"------.---.--- ----_-------------


In April2010, following a competitive tender process, the Sustainability Advice Team (SAT) was engaged to provide energy advice and auditing for three Department for the Environment, Climate Change, Energy and Water (DECCEW) programs: the Home Energy Advice Team (HEAT), the ACT Energy Wise Rebate Scheme, and the Water and Energy Saving in the Territory (WEST) program. SAT also provided a small number of energy efficiency retrofits to homes of WEST clients with funding from the then Department of Disability, Housing and Community Services. SAT had satisfactorily provided a similar service for the ACT energy efficiency programs since 2003.

The value ofthis contract awarded to SAT was to a maximum of$1,974,000 (GST incl) over three years. The budgeted expenditure over three years was lower than this amount- $1,333,315. The difference is a result of the decision not to pursue the audit, rebate and advice on the installation of solar hot water systems as a result of the Commonwealth running a similar scheme at the time.

Following the successful implementation and evaluation of the Outreach Trial in 2009- 2010, approval to develop the Outreach Program was given in February 2011. The trial program provided energy-efficient home appliances to low income clients of five Community Welfare Organisations. The new program was to be expanded to include free energy efficiency audits, client education and home retrofitting on a trial basis in 2011. Negotiations were commenced with the five Community Welfare Organisations to assist with delivery of the appliance component of the Outreach program in early 2011.

At the same time, approval was given to expand the WEST program to provide energy efficiency retrofit services to renters and homeowners. Previously WEST provided audits and education to all clients referred by ACAT as hardship cases but only Housing ACT clients received retrofits. Consequently, as both these programs required residential energy efficiency auditing, education and retrofitting services for clients commencing in April2011, permission was sought and obtained from the Director-General to exempt this procurement from the applicable provisions on the basis that:

a. The proposed short term contract would ensure continuity of service to clients.

b. The effective working relationships already established could be expected to be maintained and would facilitate risk management during the introduction of the two new programs. The proposed service provider had been providing similar services in a satisfactory manner for some years in an effective working relationship with Sustainability Programs and was contracted to provide services for the HEAT, ACT Energy Wise and WEST programs until the expiry of the current contract in 2013.

c. Using SAT for this project provided standardisation and compatibility between the new and existing services and was expected to provide minimum disruption to the original services.

d. SAT was found to provide the best value for money outcome in the open tender leading to the April 2010 contract for the HEAT, ACT Energy Wise and WEST programs. It was considered that the market had not significantly shifted since that time and that SAT would still provide a value for money outcome.

e. It was not possible in the time frames to conduct an open tender process and to fully expend the funds within that financial year.

f. The contract would be put in place only until an open tender process to procure a panel of service providers for the delivery of WEST Plus and Outreach was completed.

This proposed exemption was in line with advice provided by Procurement Solutions.

Page 3 of4

---------- ------ --~~~- ---::~_~--~---

------ -- ---

Documentation for an open tender process was developed and refined during the period of the short term contract and was informed by the experience gained during the contract. The tender process involved a request for proposal process to ensure that the broadest range of approaches to the delivery of these services was considered.

The tender process is now close to completion and it expected that a new panel of providers will be in place early in the new year.


~~ Andrew Barr MLA Date: 3.1. f'Z. Acting Minister for the Environment and Sustainable Development

Page 4 of4

-------------------~~~--~~-~~






The following question asked by Meredith Hunter MLA was taken on notice: Ref: Proof Hansard Transcript 01 December 2011 page 89

In relation to : EPA monitoring - new development areas - Gungahlin Dunlop Molonglo

THE CHAIR: I have a question from page 229, about EPA monitoring. It is mentioned that one of the roles of the EPA has been to monitor the land development activities at Gungahlin, Dunlop and Molonglo. Have there been any breaches by developers on these sites or other sites?

MR WALTERS: To get to specifics about individual sites would be quite diffiCult. I would have to go back and look at the actual details. All developers are required to hold environment protection agreements with the Authority. As part of the normal program, our officers go out and do site inspections and ensure that those measures are in place. Generally the industry is pretty good. We have had some particularly wet weather in recent times, so it has been quite difficult. The guidelines are based on accepting a reasonable amount of rain, and we have had some quite significant storm events.

The EPA works cooperatively with them to try and make sure that they can meet their general environmental duty. You could build a massive sediment dam to try and control the sediment, but that would take up half of the site. The national guidelines have been developed. Ours are based on the New South Wales guidelines, which give a measure of what is deemed to be a satisfactory level of protection. I would have to get back to you about specific issues in relation to-

THE CHAIR: That would be good, if you could take it on notice. You mentioned all of the rain that has been going on. There is that issue of run-off. Obviously that can cause a high level of turbidity in local waterways. Has that been a particular issue this year?


The EPA has undertaken the following regulatory action:

Infringement notices Issued to a developer in:

Franklin for no stabilised access; and Weston for sediment on the road.

Page 1 of 2

------------------- --------~--~~

Warnings Verbal warning to developers in Casey for a sediment control dam which failed following a large storm event. Verbal warnings to developers in the Belconnen and Gungahlin areas to maintain sediment controls. Follow up inspections identified pollution controls had been rectified. Written warning to developers in Weston for a breach (i.e. not maintaining records) of an Environmental Authorisation condition. Written warning letters to a developer in Weston for non compliance with approved sediment and erosion control plans.

Recent high rainfall events has caused sediment control ponds, which are constructed to EPA standards of 150 cm3 per ha, to overtop and discharge sediment laden water to downstream water bodies. Environment Protection Officers undertake routine inspections of the development sites ensuring the ponds are maintained at the 20% capacity, however, in the recent storm events these ponds have reached their capacity and overflowed.

As recently as 26 November 2011, developers who were constructing Coombs Pond B called the on-call Environment Protection Officer to seek permission to discharge some of the captured water in the pond to ensure the integrity of the dam wall. The water had flowed through from two sites upstream after sediment ponds had overtopped and caused damage to diversion drains, thus allowing water to be captured in the pond. The pond was not designed to be used as a sediment pond during the construction phase. The on-call officer attended the site and allowed the water level of the pond to be reduced to ensure the integrity of the dam wall. If the water had overtopped the dam wall, scouring will have caused the dam wall to fail which in tum would have potentially allowed more than 91,000m3 of sediment laden water to enter the Molonglo River.


~7-Andrew Ban MLA Date:(/ /7.._ Acting Minister for the Environment and Sustainable DeveloQ_ment

------------------~~~----~~~~

------

Authorised for Publication ./.Oiii-~~-----:....~

o{.o'L·I·v (~j\ \ -~ --21 ~ ·_ r

""'"-.....; ___ ~---~"

LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY FOR THE AUSTRALIAN CAPITAL TERRITORY ,.,~.;,-;-:~

~- •,..., II- J (: ~ .......... ;J,v <)\

Annual and Financial Reports 2010-2011 .. \

9 JAN 'L012 J

ANSWER TO QUESTION TAKEN ON NOTICE C'c, A-CT LA "/) ~"'~•'"' -~ .y DURING PUBLIC HEARINGS •l,-rr-,-·u:~-

•.. ""'!'""""':' --


The following question asked by Shane Rattenbury MLA was taken on notice: Ref: Proof Hansard Transcript 01 December 2011 page 102

In relation to: HEAT services in units

Ms Farnsworth: In response to a question from Mr Rattenbury about access to HEAT services in units, we would like to provide further clarification on that, but if it is all right, I will do that in writing when I have more information.

MR RATTENBURY: That would be great, thank you.


Owners of unit titles are not eligible for the HEAT home energy audit and rebate. During the initial development of the program, it was decided that units and apartments would have limited ability to make changes to infrastructure such as shared walls and roof space. Consequently they would be unable to achieve the $2,000 expenditure required to be eligible for the rebate.

The Environment and Sustainable Development Directorate is considering how it can assist owners of units/apartments under the HEAT program. This may involve a revised rebate scale which would allow these owners to be eligible to a receive an energy audit, recommendations for energy efficiency improvements and a rebate under the program.


~~ Andrew Barr MLA Date: 3.1. lZ. Acting Minister for the Environment and Sustainable Development

Page 1 of 1

---------~~~- ~~~~~

• Authorised for Publication

o tr o z- . j'"V





The following question asked by Zed Seselja MLA was taken on notice: Ref: Proof Hansard Transcript 01 December 2011 page 40+

In relation to: Renewable energy technology showcase

MR SESELJA: How much are those higher construction costs? Is it just the $0.1 million or is it more than that?


The higher costs in 2010-11 relate to the rollover of funding from 2009-10 to 201 0-11. The total project has come in under budget. The project budget was $0.417 million and the final cost ofthe project was $0.392 million.


~~ Andrew Barr MLA Date: .21.12. loll


Page 1 of 1

authorised for publication 'd1 - parliament.act.gov.au · mr traves: i had carriage of that...

Documents