You are on page 1of 14

From: Damian Carstens [mailto:ethosbuilt@bigpond.com] Sent: Saturday, 1 January 2011 8:07 PM To: 'Peter Scott' Cc: allanh2011@gmail.

com; 'Doongul Creek'; 'Allen Peter'; 'Neil.Collins@bmtwbm.com.au'; 'Peter Care'; 'Brent Lillywhite' Subject: RE: lenthalls river heights EAP

Dear Peter, You have heard definitively the two numbers did not work at all due to WBW/James Castles action and will not be used we had to deal with the distress caused you did not. I have left phone messages to this affect with you and Donna has emailed you. As stated James Castles calls went well out side of EAP requirement and caused a panicked premature evacuation in which he did not follow procedure the consequence of his action as stated was panic and leaving of the site without winches light etc. According to EAP and agreed process the contacts to be made by WBW to these numbers were to relay information only! in the case of Marie WBW did not have a brief to repeat call causing panic, putting herself and others at risk. We can definitively tell you we cannot risk this behaviour from WBW in communication to this number we have told Marie she will not have to deal with the stress and will not be receiving your calls I think this is the third time this has been stated. Ditto with the call to Nicole Condon also as James Castle admitted to Damian Carstens he phoned Nicole well before the evacuation level at 350mm above RL26 ( EAP). We will not be advising these people of our whereabouts in order to save them the distressing experience they have just been put through as we attempt to localise we experience due to the development. James Castle did not adhere to the EAP and I still do not have an explanation as to why a panicking ? James Castle contacted Marie 3 times, prior to the EAP requiring evacuation at 350mm above RL26. Why did he panic her saying he was party to special information This statement from James Castle in particular caused her to panic . The statement regarding special information made by James Castle was was made without elaboration or additional fact and as such was not helpful, it just added to the uncertainty. What concerns me is that these comments were well outside of the EAP requirement and for no good purpose, if there is genuinely no need to evacuate yet (ie350mm above 26 has not been reached) and there was no special information. Water Levels: Further we have strong reason to doubt it peaked at the times you advise or the levels and our experts do also. The water was much higher on Maries late leaving well after 7.10 than her entry I might remind you that the panic caused a not very well strategized crossing of rising water levels at Powel Creek when James called her he said the water was rising at 1cm every 20m and that he had additional data ? what did he mean?

Powell Creek rose rapidly and went very high as did the water generally. As stated this was not a sound way for WBW to minimise risk, these actions made the situation much worse. We say please follow procedure as outlined in the EAP ( until such a time as it is rewritten and given the carry on contacting mobiles we now say do not contact these people) we no longer know what the solution is regarding contacts as these numbers CANT be used. I appreciate and look forward to your provision of the data. Regards Esther

A note. I believe that James Castle had some part in the construction of a lowered Powell Creek crossing ( below the bed and bank) and at the time of construction when we pointed out that the risks to us were enhanced I can recall that he was not very concerned. I think the tone we have experienced from Peter Care and Mr Castle in the past has been sneering disinterest. I also recall that either or both Peter Care and David Wiskar told Ron Guppy (DERM) that there was no problem with Lenthalls Dam Gates when they were jammed early in 2008. Ron Guppy DERM had to call them back to get the facts when I alerted Ron to the level of incoming rainfall not correlating with the peaks at that time. Some of your staff are not always clear regarding the facts with DERM or ourselves. Luckily in that instance DERM was dispassionate and investigated further. You can understand given the irregularities in the past week, why we keep asking questions. I have maintained contact with you in the hope that your expressed sincerity as new CEO was and is genuine and that we will receive accurate and credible reporting not something we could rely on in the previous CEO and Peter Cares day and that moves will be made to resolve the risk once and for all. As Peter Allen has stated more than once, the relocation should have been finalised prior to construction, I think your consultants at GHD have stated similar at conference informally and advised that this was a low cost solution given the value of a life. The informal commentary at the time ( under last CEO) was that it was a concern when WBW did not take their own experts advice. Thankyou for your time.

From: Peter Scott [mailto:peter.scott@widebaywater.qld.gov.au] Sent: Saturday, 1 January 2011 6:24 PM To: 'Damian Carstens' Cc: allanh2011@gmail.com; 'Doongul Creek'; 'Allen Peter'; 'Neil.Collins@bmtwbm.com.au'; Peter Care; Peter Scott Subject: RE: lenthalls river heights EAP

Dear Esther, I have attached the email I sent to Donna during the evening of the 28th and confirm that the peak was as per the dot point below. I will see what data we have when I return to work on Tuesday re the plot but as I indicated previously our Scarda/Telemetry system went down during the height of the flooding and we relied on staff advice from site re heights. I am not sure why FCRC still is showing on the Graphic below but will also check that out next week, I suspect that this change to WBWC just hasnt been advised to the Bureau. 1. Lenthall Dam RL 28.120 at 7:10pm tonight and has peaked ; There were no repairs whatsoever to the Dam during the flooding at or around the 28th the 4 gates worked automatically post our maintenance earlier in the prior week other than gate 5 which stayed up. As indicated in the attached email James made the call to the secondary text ,mobile out of genuine concern for the whereabouts of Marie et al. I havent heard whether your family wants to revert to the landline or stick with the two mobile system which worked well alb eit I readily acknowledge we will stick strictly to the agreed protocol going forward if that is agreeable with your family. Kind Regards.

Peter Scott Chief Executive Officer Wide Bay Water Corporation Phone 07 4194 7888

Mobile 0438 054 308 Email: peter.scott@widebaywater.qld.gov.au

From: Damian Carstens [mailto:ethosbuilt@bigpond.com] Sent: Saturday, 1 January 2011 3:53 PM To: Peter Scott Cc: allanh2011@gmail.com; 'Doongul Creek'; 'Allen Peter'; 'Neil.Collins@bmtwbm.com.au' Subject: FW: lenthalls river heights EAP

Peter,
Assuming below is accurate ( it appears to be FCRC data) could you please advise at what level and time the water peaked, and provide us with a copy of the missing data on this plot? I am hearing that on the evening of the 28 the early calls that so distressed Marie Carstens and Nicole Condon ( out of step with EAP) were placed due to repairs at the dam, I would be grateful if you could elaborate? Regards Esther Allan
th

Latest River Heights for Burrum R at Lenthalls Dam #


Issued at 10:11 pm EST Thursday 30 December 2010 About river heights plots | About this Plot Station details:Station Number: 040906 Name: Burrum R at Lenthalls Dam # Owner: CBM/FCRC:137903 Data from the previous 4 days.

Data as Table | Previous Station | Next Station | Back to Bulletin

About this plot


1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. The river height data is the latest available operational data provided for flood warning purposes and has not been quality controlled. Stations marked with * or # indicate that the data is provided from automatic equipment. Stations marked with * are Telephone Telemetry Devices and are nominally polled once a day and more often during floods. Stations marked with # are ALERT Radio Telemetry and report every 3 hours and more often when the water level changes. All river height reports are in metres and are shown in local time. Heights or depths above/below roads, bridges, dam spillways and weirs are given as a guide only. For road open/closed information, see the RACQ website.

7. This product includes data made available to the Bureau by other agencies. Separate approval may be required to use the data for other purposes. Refer to Listing of Operating Agencies for Station Ownership. 8. Where data is supplied from a Department of Environment and Resource Management (DERM) Monitoring Site, please follow this link to get advice on data use and copyright.

From: Peter Scott [mailto:peter.scott@widebaywater.qld.gov.au] Sent: Monday, 27 December 2010 8:55 AM To: 'Damian Carstens' Cc: 'Allen Peter'; Peter Care; James Castle Subject: RE: lenthalls river heights EAP

Hello Esther,

The chronology in brief last evening is that James rang the primary mobile number to talk to Maree around 6.30 pm and sent a text to the secondary mobile thereafter ( he rang the Brisbane number around the same time just as a further back up and I suspect that is the 10pm log?) Maree called back for a briefing from James before 7 pm. As I understand James then made contact again around 8.30 via both mobiles and the same again around 9.30 pm. The Dam peaked as per our telemetry at 2.45 am at 26.420 ( James was on site nearly all night thus is at home trying to get some sleep) yet the BOM site provides 26.6.

In terms of the variance the BOM site is about 200mm higher than our electric equipment shows thus provides a buffer. The four gates are down but as previously advised G5 isnt and we dont expect it will come down at this stage.

Clearly the way the forecast is the levels are going to rise again and perhaps substantially in the next 48 hours. Regards.

Peter Scott Chief Executive Officer Wide Bay Water Corporation Phone 07 4194 7888 Mobile 0438 054 308 Email: peter.scott@widebaywater.qld.gov.au

From: Damian Carstens [mailto:ethosbuilt@bigpond.com] Sent: Monday, 27 December 2010 8:20 AM To: Peter Scott Cc: 'Allen Peter' Subject: RE: lenthalls river heights EAP

HI Peter, I have just received a very odd electronic message to my Brisbane number that said it was sent at at 10pm last night this would be of little or no help to any one at the farm. The phone ringing at 8.04 this morning in Brisbane. Who sent that ? This is new? Has any one followed procedure last night when the water was 350mm over? Further the anomalies in the plotting are really odd See below for the same time frames. If the lower plot belongs to FCRC it should be more accurate than DERM given that FCRC feed into BOM and DERM? Yet you tell me plot number 1 issued at 5.41 and being data supplied by FCRC is wrong and that the DERM below is correct? As I understand it the 5.41 would be more accurate as it is FCRC telemetry being fed in. The long and the short of all of this is that we are trying to gauge road conditions locally for example and family safety and need to make us use of the property. We have stock to feed etc. The sort of data we are receiving seems unreliable/ contradictory and delayed there fore unusable.

Regards

Latest River Heights for Burrum R at Lenthalls Dam *


Issued at 7:41 am EST Monday 27 December 2010 About river heights plots | About this Plot Station details:Station Number: 540267 Name: Burrum R at Lenthalls Dam * Owner: DERM:137303 Data from the previous 4 days.

Data as Table | Previous Station | Next Station | Back to Bulletin

About this plot

1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6.

The river height data is the latest available operational data provided for flood warning purposes and has not been quality controlled. Stations marked with * or # indicate that the data is provided from automatic equipment. Stations marked with * are Telephone Telemetry Devices and are nominally polled once a day and more often during floods. Stations marked with # are ALERT Radio Telemetry and report every 3 hours and more often when the water level changes. All river height reports are in metres and are shown in local time. Heights or depths above/below roads, bridges, dam spillways and weirs are given as a guide only. For road open/closed information, see the RACQ website. 7. This product includes data made available to the Bureau by other agencies. Separate approval may be required to use the data for other purposes. Refer to Listing of Operating Agencies for Station Ownership. 8. Where data is supplied from a Department of Environment and Resource Management (DERM) Monitoring Site, please follow this link to get advice on data use and copyright. 9. For other Station details: Flood Classifications, Road Crossings, Survey/AHD Details, Maps

Home | About Us | Contacts | Careers | Search | Site Map | Help | Feedback Weather & Warnings | Climate Information | Water Information | Radar | RSS | Learn About Meteorology

Copyright Commonwealth of Australia 2010, Bureau of Meteorology (ABN 92 637 533 532) Please note the Copyright Notice and Disclaimer statements relating to the use of the information on this site and our site Privacy and Accessibility statements. Users of these web pages are deemed to have read and accepted the conditions described in the Copyright, Disclaimer, and Privacy statements. Please also n ote the Acknowledgement notice relating to the use of information on this site. No

From: Peter Scott [mailto:peter.scott@widebaywater.qld.gov.au] Sent: Sunday, 26 December 2010 6:25 PM To: 'ethosbuilt@bigpond.com'; 'peter.allen@derm.qld.gov.au'; James Castle Cc: 'donnaallan@iprimus.com.au'; 'Sue.Brooks@frasercoast.qld.gov.au'; Peter Care Subject: Re: lenthalls river heights EAP

Hello Esther, I have just sent a text to James to ring you which he was eminently about to . The levels on the bom site are higher than our telemetry shows hence the slight mismatch in timing. He has been watching this closely all day as you would expect. Regards.
From: Damian Carstens [mailto:ethosbuilt@bigpond.com] Sent: Sunday, December 26, 2010 05:59 PM To: 'Allen Peter' <Peter.Allen@derm.qld.gov.au> Cc: 'Donna' <donnaallan@iprimus.com.au>; Peter Scott; 'Sue Brooks' <Sue.Brooks@frasercoast.qld.gov.au> Subject: lenthalls river heights EAP Peter, We received a call this morning telling us the river height was rising, we were told we would get a call when the dam level was 350mm above RL 26 We have not received any contact since this morning, do you know what is going on? Regards Esther

Latest River Heights for Burrum R at Lenthalls Dam #


Issued at 5:41 pm EST Sunday 26 December 2010 About river heights plots | About this Plot Station details:Station Number: 040906 Name: Burrum R at Lenthalls Dam # Owner: CBM/FCRC:137903 Data from the previous 4 days.

Data as Table | Previous Station | Next Station | Back to Bulletin

About this plot


1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. The river height data is the latest available operational data provided for flood warning purposes and has not been quality controlled. Stations marked with * or # indicate that the data is provided from automatic equipment. Stations marked with * are Telephone Telemetry Devices and are nominally polled once a day and more often during floods. Stations marked with # are ALERT Radio Telemetry and report every 3 hours and more often when the water level changes. All river height reports are in metres and are shown in local time. Heights or depths above/below roads, bridges, dam spillways and weirs are given as a guide only. For road open/closed information, see the RACQ website.

7. This product includes data made available to the Bureau by other agencies. Separate approval may be required to use the data for other purposes. Refer to Listing of Operating Agencies for Station Ownership. 8. Where data is supplied from a Department of Environment and Resource Management (DERM) Monitoring Site, please follow this link to get advice on data use and copyright. 9. For other Station details: Flood Classifications, Road Crossings, Survey/AHD Details, Maps

______________________________________________________________________ This email has been scanned for Wide Bay Water by the MessageLabs Email Security System. ______________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________ This email has been scanned for Wide Bay Water by the MessageLabs Email Security System. ______________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________ This email has been scanned for Wide Bay Water by the MessageLabs Email Security System. ______________________________________________________________________ ***************************** Disclaimer ***************************** The contents of this electronic message and any attachments are intended only for the addressee and may contain privileged or confidential information. They may only be used for the purposes for which they were supplied. If you are not the addressee, you are notified that any transmission, distribution, downloading, printing or photocopying of the contents of this message or attachments is strictly prohibited. The privilege of confidentiality attached to this message and attachments is not waived, lost or destroyed by reason of mistaken delivery to you. If you receive this message in error please notify the sender by return e-mail or telephone. Please note: the Department of Public Works carries out automatic software scanning, filtering and blocking of E-mails and attachments (including emails of a personal nature) for detection of viruses, malicious code, SPAM, executable programs or content it deems unacceptable.

All reasonable precautions will be taken to respect the privacy of individuals in accordance with the Information Privacy Act 2009 (Qld). Personal information will only be used for official purposes, e.g. monitoring Departmental Personnel's compliance with Departmental Policies. Personal information will not be divulged or disclosed to others, unless authorised or required by Departmental Policy and/or law. Thank you. !detstamp!