217/16/17 Serial 1 - Department of Defence · 217/16/17 Item 1 b/c Serial 1. For Official Use Only...

For Official Use Only

File Note – Meeting with NAB • NAB: credit and risk area determined Dec 2015 -> this area determines using

information from credit and risk teams in local area, and from anecdotalevidence from residents, etc.

• NAB: valuer panels are shared by the majors• NAB: release of Health guidelines will lower perceived risk• HHRA expected in June; final version in July -> NAB seem to require this• NAB: Government is considering a buyback scheme, until determined cannot

move; if scheme is in place, then values are “cut and dry”• AC: no international or national guidance on the substances• if buyback, hold onto base until applied• NAB: anecdotal evidence that the market is waiting for more information.• NAB: How can the broader market be more informed? (“register”) -> if

individual house is green, next door red. what happens• NAB: Policy exists restricting financing new loans in the area.• AC: why not restrict Oakey?• NAB: confidence in market performance at Oakey (could be other issues at play

in WLM)• NAB: noting prudential regulations and economic conditions as reasons to why

risk appetite has changed. (this is markedly different to anecdotal evidencesuggesting the application denial was due to contamination)

• Treasury raised that a different bank may have a greater share of the mortgagemarket in 2318.

• Treasury raised that we needed to make a distinction between buying/sellingnew v.s. claiming equity.

File Note – Meeting with ANZ • No specific credit policy in location. checked with POC of local branch, brokers

and valuers• No blanket credit policy for people in location 2318• ANZ mortgage process: physical valuation (saleability and demand), capacity

for repayments, assessment of character, assessment of collateral.• industry standards provide guidance on valuations undertaken by registered

valuers – Australian Property Institute provides industry standards.• Valuations include environmental information and risks.• All valuations made by registered valuers provide a monetary value and risk

assessment of the property.• When a high risk rating, gets referred to credit risk area for assessment and if

applicable, underwriting.• No recent examples from location to base from. ANZ does not have any

customers in the local area.

File Note – Meeting with API (Mike Zissler) • Very collegiate atmosphere.• state “affiliations”, loose categorisation, not grouped organisations. Formerly

organised in state divisions.

217/16/17Item 1 b/cSerial 1

KimArthur

Cross-Out

For Official Use Only

• Split into “Discussion groups” according to specialisation; real estate, resources,valuables etc. valuers

• MZ: can call meeting with residential valuer discussion group.• 85% of valuations are based on historical data; 15% is based on physical

valuations and risk assessments• Valuers are trained to be risk averse – cannot overstate valuations, as

discrepancies could be sued for.• Mr Fluffy comparison – valuers turning up wit PPE• valuers are individual practitioners; risks are absorbed within their individual

entities – cannot be directed by API.• MZ request online/electronic distribution of information.• Defence informed MZ that residents receive letters about testing done on their

property – but are unable to share openly with API due to privacy reasons.• Defence suggests API could ask valuers to engage with homeowners to obtain

this information.• MZ requests maps to show patters and clear identification of contamination

plume.• MZ confirms that valuations include commentary/written assessments.• Valuation is contracted work; if accept, get income. It is in their interest to

conduct valuations.

KimArthur

Cross-Out

Williamtown Environmental Investigations - Information Session for Valuers Hosted by the Australian Property Institute

Noahs on the Beach, Cnr Shortland Esplanade & Zaara Street, Newcastle

Friday, 3 June 2016 8:00 – 9:30am

AGENDA

1. Welcome – Australian Property Institute

- Introductions

8:00 – 8:10am

2. What are PFCs? – NSW EPA

- Past uses in Australia

- Presence and behaviour in the environment

- Potential sources of PFCs and extent to which these have been investigated across NSW

- Questions and Answers

8:10 – 8:20am

2. Health implications – NSW Health/Hunter New England Health

− Scientific uncertainties

− enHealth statements on PFCs

− Exposure pathways

− Questions and answers

8:20 – 8:30am

3. Defence environmental investigations – Defence

− Defence’s historical use of PFCs

− What is an ‘investigation area’?

− Provision of drinking water

− Current status of environmental investigations

− Availability of results

− Environmental site assessment and human health risk assessment

− Government response

− Questions and answers

8:30 – 8:50am

217/16/17Item 1b/cSerial 2

4. Implications for Property Use – NSW EPA / Port Stephens Council

- Existing uses

- Development applications

8:50 - 9:00am

5. Communications – All 9:00 - 9:10am

6. Discussion 9:10 - 9:25am

7. Close (API) 9:30am

Australian Government

Department of DefenceEstate and Infrastructure Group

Chris Birrer

First Assistant Secretary InfrastructureInfrastructure Division

Brindabella Business Park (BP26-2-AOO 1)PO Box 7925Department of DefenceCANBERRA BC ACT 2610S: (02) 6266 8004B: chris. birrer@defence. gov. au

FAS-ID/OUT/2016/AF25558781

Tom Clayton242 Pitt StreetSYDNEY NSW 2000

Dear Mr Clayton,

ENVIRONMENTAL INVESTIGATIONS AT WILLIAMTOWN AND OAKEY

You may recall that earlier this year we discussed the detailed environmental investigationsbeing undertaken by the Department of Defence (Defence) regarding per- and poly-fluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) including perfluorooctane sulfonate (PFOS) andperfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA) on, and in the vicinity of, RAAF Base Williamtown nearNewcastle, New South Wales and the Army Aviation Centre near Oakey, Queensland.

I am writing to provide you with an update on progress with those investigations. Since ourmeeting, Human Health Risk Assessment (HHRA) reports for RAAF Base Williamtown andthe Army Aviation Centre Oakey have been undertaken for Defence by independentenvironmental consultants. The HHRA reports found that the risks to human health fromPFAS are generally "low and acceptable" for people living, working or undertakingrecreational activities within these investigation areas, provided PFAS affected groundwateris not consumed. The phrase "low and acceptable" which appears throughout the report isstandard terminology used in HHRAs completed in accordance with the NationalEnvironmental Protection (Assessment of Site Contamination) Measure (NEPM). This phraserefers to circumstances where the exposure is estimated to be below a level at which healtheffects are not expected to occur.

You may be aware from media reporting that on 8 November 2016 Defence released a reportdetailing the outcomes of a Preliminary Sampling Program at a further 12 Defenceproperties, in addition to the Williamtown and Oakey investigations. Defence will beundertaking detailed environmental investigations at these additional properties. UntilDefence is able to proceed with its detailed environmental investigations, the actual extent ofPFAS contamination and any associated risks to human health and the environment at eachsite cannot be determined.

All key reports and fact sheets on PFAS contamination at RAAF Base Williamtown, theArmy Aviation Centre Oakey and the National Program are available publicly at:

http://www. defence. eov. au/ID/PFOSPFOA/Default. asp

Defending Australia and its National Interests


s22

ashlee.smith

Highlight

The Environmental Health Standing Committee (enHealth), the standing committeeresponsible for providing agreed environmental health policy advice, has also issuedguidance regarding what is known about PFAS. According to enHealth, there is currently noconsistent evidence that exposure to PFAS causes adverse human health effects. However,because these compounds persist in humans and the environment, enHealth recommends thathuman exposure to these chemicals is minimised as a precaution. The guidance fromenHealth is publicly available at:

http://www. health. gov. au/intemet/main/publishing. nsf/Content/ohp-pfas. hto

Defence understands the concerns of people living in and around PFAS environmentalinvestigation areas, including difficulties some of them appear to be having accessing financeor valuation services. Defence is being open and transparent in making verifiedenvironmental testing results and reports available to the local communities and is alsosharing this information with relevant state/temtory and local authorities to assist with futureplanning.

My discussion with you earlier this year was useful in helping me understand your Bank'sapproach to valuations and lending within the Williamtown and Oakey investigation areas.

I would like to suggest a further discussion with you at your earliest convenience to exchangeperspectives on this important issue. My office will be in touch to arrange a mutuallyconvenient time.

I look forward to continuing a productive dialogue with the ANZ Banking Group in relationto Defence's environmental investigations.

Yours sincerely,

Chris Birrer

First Assistant Secretary Infrastructure^ November 2016


s22


Department of DefenceEstate and Infrastructure Group

Chris Birrer

First Assistant Secretary InfrastructureInfrastructure Division

Brindabella Business Park (BP26-2-A001)PO Box 7925Department of DefenceCANBERRA BC ACT 2610

a: (02) 6266 8004S: chris. birrer@defence. gov. au

FAS-ID/OUT/2016/AF27339519

Luke Lawler

Head, Public Affairs

Customer Owned Banking AssociationGPO Box 4686SYDNEY NSW 2001

Dear Mr Lawler,

I write regarding bank lending policies for residents living in or near environmentalinvestigation areas in Williamtown, New South Wales, and Oakey in Queensland.

The Department of Defence is currently conducting environmental investigations intocontamination from the legacy use of fire fighting foam at Defence properties acrossAustralia, including on, and in the vicinity of, RAAF Base Williamtown and theArmy Aviation Centre Oakey. I am seeking to meet with you, either in person or via ateleconference, to provide background on this matter. I believe that furtherbackground information would enable you to assist your members to undertake fullyinformed assessments in determining lending policies in these areas.

By way of background, aqueous film forming foam (AFFF) containing per- and poly-fluoroalkyl substances (PFAS), including perfluorooctane sulfonate (PFOS) andperfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA), was historically used worldwide and within Australiadue to its effectiveness in fighting liquid fuel fires. The AFFF product now used byDefence is more environmentally safe.

Most people living in developed nations will have levels of PFAS in their body asthese compounds were also used in common household and industrial applications.According to the Environmental Health Standing Committee (enHealth), there iscurrently no consistent evidence that exposure to PFAS causes adverse human healtheffects. However, because these compounds persist in humans and the environment,enHealth recommends that human exposure to these chemicals is minimised as aprecaution. The guidance from enHealth is publicly available at:http://www. health. gov. au/intemet/main/publishing. nsf/Content/ohp-pfas. htm

Defence has been proactive in its environmental investigations into the presence ofPFAS across the Defence estate and is investigating long-term management andremediation options for PFAS contamination as a high priority. The current phase ofdetailed environmental investigations at Williamtown and Oakey will be concludedby December 2016. Detailed environmental investigations are also underway atRAAF Base East Sale, RAAF Base Pearce and HMAS Albatross and an investigationwill commence at RAAF Base Edinburgh by the end of 2016.



Human Health Risk Assessments (HHRA) for Williamtown and Oakey have beenundertaken for Defence by independent environmental consultants. The HHRAreports found that the risks to human health from PFAS are generally "low andacceptable" for people living, working or undertaking recreational activities withinthese investigation areas, provided PFAS affected groundwater is not consumed. Thephrase "low and acceptable" refers to circumstances where the exposure is estimatedto be below a level at which health effects are not expected to occur.

Defence will be undertaking detailed environmental investigations at a further 12Defence properties in 2017. Until Defence is able to proceed with its detailedenvironmental investigations, the actual extent of PFAS contamination and anyassociated risks to human health and the environment at each site cannot be

determined. All key reports and fact sheets on PFAS contamination at RAAF BaseWilliamtown, the Army Aviation Centre Oakey and the National Program areavailable publicly at: http://www. defence. gov. au/ID/PFOSPFOA/Default. asp.

We are aware of reports that some residents in the Williamtown and Oakeyinvestigation areas have been finding it difficult to secure finance and buy and sellproperties because of lowered property valuations and/or bank lending decisionsreportedly related to increased risk associated with properties in the investigationareas.

Defence understands the concerns of people living in and around PFASenvironmental investigation areas, including difficulties some of them appear to behaving accessing finance or valuation services. Defence is being open and transparentin making verified environmental testing results and reports available to the localcommunities and is also sharing this information with relevant state/territory and localauthorities to assist with future planning.

Throughout this year Defence has engaged with representatives of major banks todiscuss their views on property lending policies and practices in Williamtown andOakey. In addition to continuing engagement with these banks, Defence would like tohold discussions with the Customer Owned Banking Association to ensure consistentinformation on this issue as our environmental investigations progress.

I would be grateful if your office could contact Ms Clare Murphy(clare. murphy@defence. gov. au) to arrange a mutually convenient time for an initialdiscussion. I look forward to a productive dialogue with the Customer OwnedBanking Association in relation to Defence's environmental investigations.

Yours sincerely,

Chris Birrer

First Assistant Secretary Infrastructure^ I November 2016


s22


s22

s22

s22

s22s22

s22

s22

s22

s22s22

s22

s22

s22s22

s22

s22

s47F

Independent Objective Authoritative The home for property professionals in Australia

Australian Property Institute 6 Campion Street Deakin ACT 2600 ACN 608 309 128

Telephone: Facsimile: Email: Website:

02 6282 2411 02 6285 2194 [email protected] www.api.org.au

Australian Property Institute Limited

VALUATION PROTOCOLS – AIRPORT-RELATED INVESTIGATION ZONE FOR CONTAMINATED LAND

Reference Version 1 – Airport-Related Investigation Zone for Contaminated Land

Effective 14 December 2016

Owner National Manager – Professional Standards


Australian Property Institute Valuation Protocols – Airport-Related Investigation Zone for Contaminated Land Page 2 of 6

Contents Valuations Protocols – Airport-Related Investigation Zone for Contaminated Land ........................................ 3

1.0 Introduction ............................................................................................................................................ 3

2.0 Initial Investigation .................................................................................................................................. 4

2.1. Is the property within an investigation zone or potential known area? ........................................... 4

2.2. On assessing the above the valuer is to assess the value based on sales: ........................................ 4

2.3. If property is outside zone: ................................................................................................................ 4

3.0 Recommendations .................................................................................................................................. 4

4.0 Scenario Based Risk Ratings for Properties Located Nearby or Within an Investigation Zone ............... 5

4.1 Scenario 1 ...................................................................................................................................... 5

4.2 Scenario 2 ...................................................................................................................................... 5

Environmental Risk Rating 4 ...................................................................................................................... 5

4.3 Scenario 3 ...................................................................................................................................... 6


4.4 Scenario 4 ...................................................................................................................................... 6



Valuations Protocols – Airport-Related Investigation Zone for Contaminated Land

1.0 Introduction

In recent times, it has been revealed that contamination from the use of certain firefighting substances within airports has led to contamination investigation zones being established around a number of airports within Australia and other areas of potential investigation being identified.

At a meeting organised by the Newcastle Study Group of the API on 3 June 2016, presentations were provided to Valuers by representatives of the Department of Defence, the New South Wales Environment Protection Authority and the New South Wales Department of Health on the status of the current investigations into the extent and consequences of the presence of PFOA and PFOS in groundwater samples emanating from past practices at Williamtown and other defence force aerodromes throughout Australia.

In response, the Department of Defence, along with relevant State Government bodies, have undertaken a series of studies to address the problems.

At the date of publication:

• The long term effects of exposure to PFOA and PFOS are unknown at this stage, howeverauthorities acknowledge they are an external synthetic chemical and from the limited studies sofar caution should be exercised where they are detected.

• The use of these chemicals has been phased out from 2004, however they do not readily breakdown in the environment and will most likely be present for the foreseeable future.

• The Department of Defence has conducted a number of tests within areas surrounding airportswhere there is the possibility of site contamination, and preliminary testing from theinvestigation at Williamtown indicated a large percentage (90%) had a “nil detected”classification, although as the chemicals are migrating, this does not exclude future tests asbeing positive.

• Although landholders have received the results of testing, these are not available on the publicrecord.

In view of the uncertainty surrounding the above and a number of negative newspaper articles on the response of Valuers, it was agreed that a standard set of protocols for valuation of properties in the Williamtown area and, by extension, other facilities throughout Australia, be established to offer guidance to Valuers, land owners and lending authorities.


2.0 Initial Investigation

2.1. Is the property within an investigation zone or potential known area?

a. If so, does it have mains/town water connected or is proposed?b. Has site been subject to testing for PFOA and PFOS, if so, is a copy of the results available?c. Does the property rely on bore water or tank water only?d. What is the use of the property, i.e. residential or primary production?

2.2. On assessing the above the Valuer is to assess the value based on sales:

a. Within the investigation zone, if there are insufficient sales to confidently assess the value, thenb. Analyse sales in close proximity to the investigation zone and make due allowance of possible

stigma. Stigma allowance will be dictated by market evidence within the investigation zone incomparison to surrounding areas. Similarly, market evidence from other contaminated arease.g. lead smelters, industrial facilities etc. may provide guidance as to the effect on values.

2.3. If property is outside zone:

a. Is property within the adjoining suburbs or postcodes to that of the investigation zone?b. State in valuation that property is outside investigation zone, with “3” in environmental issues

and comment on distance from investigation zone.c. Assess if proximity to investigation zone may create a “stigma” and assess value accordingly.

3.0 Recommendations

The Australian Valuation Standards Board recommends for residential “property pro” valuations the following sample “provisos” be utilised, however we stress this is a matter for the individual Valuers and / or firms on each property.

General – To be inserted in all reports (S.8 Property Pro Additional Comments)

“The property is situated within an EPA designated investigation zone to assess the presence and likely impacts of PFOA and PFOS contamination within groundwater and soils stemming from past uses at nearby aerodromes. At the date valuation the effects of such chemicals, if detected, are unknown but the EPA has issued a precautionary guideline regarding the use of bore water and ingestion of certain food groups that are grown with bore water, i.e. meat, vegetables, eggs, etc.”

“Whilst the values applied reflect the current sales activity within the general area, the prices could fluctuate suddenly depending on further investigation, publicity and buyer perception of proposed risks of individual properties.”

Valuers should utilise the risk matrix within the Supporting memorandum for consultation to other risks that may be applied, in particular, consideration should be given to Location and Market Segment Conditions. It is imperative that Valuers are aware of the guidance provided in the


Supporting Memorandum when applying a risk within their Valuation, as below:

Risk ratings should reflect the current status of the subject property within the local economy and property market. They should not reflect general/macroeconomic/property market fluctuations. The purpose of risk ratings is to highlight likely under performance of a particular asset not the general performance of the market.

A risk should only be assessed once under a single risk rating/category. Each risk issue should only be assessed once under a specific risk rating. Refer to the Risk Rating User Guide on the following pages. A property may have multiple risk issues where each issue would be assigned a different risk category.

Allocation of risk ratings will be dependent on the compliance or non-compliance with the above items however for properties affected by possible contamination this may fall into multiple risk categories being environment, location or market segment.

4.0 Scenario Based Risk Ratings for Properties Located Nearby or Within an Investigation Zone

4.1 Scenario 1 The property is located outside but in close proximity to an investigation zone. It is unlikely to have an environmental risk as a buffer zone has already been built into the delineation of the investigation zone. However a stigma may still be present by association with the area and although having limited environmental risk consideration to Location and Market Segment Condition risk ratings should be given for this scenario.

4.2 Scenario 2

The property is located within an investigation zone, has reticulated town water, no bores and is used solely for residential purposes and documentary evidence has been sighted that a “no detect” compliance certificate has been issued. As the property is located within the investigation zone and recognising that PFOA and PFOS are migratory substances and may be present in future tests, an Environmental risk rating of 3 is required although as time goes by it is considered that such instances will become rarer.

Should differing classification types within the investigation zone be applied, revision of the Environmental risk rating would be required.

Environmental Risk Rating 3

The subject property is connected to town or tank water and has been tested for PFOA and PFOS with a “no detect” result. Although this does not preclude any future contamination, it is generally considered unlikely at this stage. On current information the property should be suitable for continuation of its existing use, however until further studies clarify the ongoing health risks there will be an element of reduced saleability for properties in this area and this has been reflected in our valuation.


4.3 Scenario 3

The property is located within an investigation zone, and is not connected to town water. Its source of drinking water is via rainwater tanks and used primarily for residential purposes. No testing has been done or the owner cannot provide proof of testing. In this case environmental risk rating of 4 would be appropriate. This may also be appropriate for properties where its proposed use is agriculture or for animal and livestock, e.g. as kennels, equestrian, agriculture and other forms of farming enterprises.


The subject property is reliant on tank water only, which has not been shown to harbour PFOA or PFOS. No documentary evidence could be provided of any groundwater tests results, nor confirmation they have been undertaken. The property is identified as being within a high risk area within the investigation zone and until such time as the tests results have been provided, it is our opinion that the saleability of the property in the market place will be affected and this has been reflected in our valuation.

4.4 Scenario 4

The property is located within an investigation zone however does not have town water and relies on bore water, and has been positively tested for PFOA and PFOS a risk rating of 5 should be applied. Naturally the classification within this category will affect the saleability of the property and will also be reflected in the value placed upon the property.


The subject property is not connected to town water and principally relies on bore water for services. The property has been positively identified as having PFOA and PFOS contaminants in groundwater samples. Although the ramifications of such chemicals are unknown, their presence within the land would significantly affect the saleability of the subject property and this has been reflected in our valuation.

RAAF Base Williamtown Environmental Investigations - Information Session

The Department of Defence is currently undertaking detailed environmental investigations to

understand the full extent of the presence of perfluorinated chemicals (PFCs) on and in the vicinity

of RAAF Base Williamtown. API (Newcastle) has arranged for an information session to provide you

a factual overview of the situation. This information session is designed to ensure that property

valuers in the Williamtown area have access to current and accurate information.

Representatives from the Department of Defence, NSW Department of Premier and Cabinet, NSW

Environment Protection Authority and Hunter New England Health will also be available to answer

any questions you may have.

Upon completion, it is envisaged an appropriate methodology will be established for valuations in

the area.

It is highly recommended that all real property valuers operating in the Port Stephens area and

the near region attend this information session.

Time & Date 8:00 am – 9:30 am Friday 3 June 2016

Location Noah’s on the Beach Function Centre

Cnr Shortland Esplanade & Zaara Street, Newcastle NSW

Refreshments Tea, coffee and light snacks will be served (no breakfast)

Cost There will be nil cost to attendees



Department of Defence

RE: LENDING POLICIES OF BANKS IN THE WILLIAMTOWN AREA

Thank you for the opportunity to meet with you on 31 March 2016. Your willingness todiscuss your issues has provided valuable insight into the consequences of the detection ofperfluorinated compounds in the Williamtown area.

Matters relating to the lending policies and attitudes of financial institutions in theWilliamtown area are now the subject of discussion between the Department of Premier andCabinet (NSW), Department of Defence and the Fullerton Cove Residents Action Group. Atthis stage, it is intended that banks will be approached by representatives of this combinedgroup.

My team will be actively contributing to this approach and I will keep you informed.

I have also enclosed a copy of the enHealth Guidance Statement on Perfluorinated Chemicalsthat we discussed in our meeting. enHealth is the Environmental Health Standing Committeeof the Australian Health Protection Principal Committee. Further information about enHealthcan be found at: http://www. health. gov. au/intemet/main/publishing. nsf/Content/ohp-environ-enhealth-committee.htm.

If there are any developments regarding your financial situation or any other matter relating tothe detections, please feel free to contact me direct.

Yours sincerely

Defence Special CounselDefence LegalDepartment of DefenceCP2-4-061Campbell Park Offices ACT 2600michael. lvsewvcz(a)defence. sov. au

Phone: (02) 6266 2004

-^ April 2016

Enclosed: enHealth Guidance Statement of Perfluorinated Chemicals 2016


s22

s22

s22

s22s47F

39

Gibb, Melanie MISS

From: Nic Frankham Sent: Friday, 13 January 2017 4:37 PMTo: Matias, Keifer MRSubject: Re: ATTN: Nic Frankham - Letter - Environmental Investigations at Williamtown and

Oakey [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]

Dear Keifer

Thank you for your follow up email and apologies for the delay in responding. At this time the ABA does not need a briefing on this issue. Should circumstances change, I will be sure to make contact.

Best

Nic

Nic Frankham Director, Communications and Government Relations

Level 3, 56 Pitt Street | Sydney NSW 2000 +61 2 8298 0423 |

From: Matias, Keifer MR [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Friday, 9 December 2016 3:12 PM To: Reception <[email protected]> Cc: Murphy, Clare DR <[email protected]>; E&IG Infrastructure FASI Exec Support <[email protected]> Subject: ATTN: Nic Frankham ‐ Letter ‐ Environmental Investigations at Williamtown and Oakey [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]

UNCLASSIFIED

Good Afternoon Mr Frankham,

I would like to follow up the letter we have sent to you, with information about Mr Birrer's availabilities in the coming weeks to discuss this issue before the end of December. We recognise that you may be unable to meet in person before year end, so we would welcome the opportunity to discuss the progress of Defence's environmental investigations over the phone.

Mr Birrer is available in the morning of 21 December 2016, or the morning of 22 December 2016.

Please indicate your preferred time - or if you are unavailable between these times, please let me know of your availabilities and I will work with his office to find a workable solution.

Thank you for your time, and we look forward to your reply.


s22

s22s22

From: Matias, Keifer MRSent: Wednesday, 23 November 2016 10:51 AMTo: '[email protected]'Cc: Murphy, Clare DR; E&IG Infrastructure FASI Exec SupportSubject: ATTN: Nic Frankham - Letter - Environmental Investigations at Williamtown and Oakey

[SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]Attachments: Nic Frankham.pdf

Categories: UNCLASSIFIED

UNCLASSIFIED


As discussed on the phone - please find attached a letter from Mr Chris Birrer, First Assistant Secretary Infrastructure at the Department of Defence, regarding Environmental Investigations at Williamtown and Oakey.

If you could please provide details of the best point of contact for your office so that we may arrange a mutually convenient time for a discussion between yourself and Mr Birrer.

Thank you for your time.

Kind Regards,

Keifer MatiasPFAS Investigation and Management BranchInfrastructure DivisionDepartment of Defence

Ph: 02 626 68457BP26-02-B026 | Brindabella Park | PO Box 7903 | Canberra BC | ACT 2610

IMPORTANT: This email remains the property of the Department of Defence and is subject to the jurisdiction of section 70 of the Crimes Act 1914. If you have received this email in error, you are requested to contact the sender and delete the email.

35

Gibb, Melanie MISS

From: Avakian, Garbis MRSent: Monday, 16 January 2017 1:02 PMTo: 'Macmillan, Steven'Subject: RE: Environmental Investigations at Williamtown and Oakey [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]

UNCLASSIFIED

Steve, thank you very much for these details, they are very much appreciated.

Regards Garbis

Garbis Avakian A/g Director Policy PFAS Investigation and Management Branch Infrastructure Division Estate & Infrastructure Group Department of Defence BP26-2-B068 P: (02) 6266 8267 E: [email protected]

From: Macmillan, Steven [mailto Sent: Monday, 16 January 2017 11:09 To: Avakian, Garbis MR Subject: RE: Environmental Investigations at Williamtown and Oakey [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]

Good morning Garbis

Apologies for the delay in responding to the below request.

Customers’ requests for finance are considered on a case‐by‐case basis. If any customer feels their request has not received adequate attention (or our service has otherwise been inadequate) they should contact our Group Customer Relations team on 1800 805 605.

If existing customers are facing financial difficulties as a result of the PFAS contamination issue they can contact our Customer Assist Team, which is dedicated to assisting customers in hardship. The team can be contacted on 1300 720 814, 8am to 9pm Monday to Friday and 9am to 2pm Saturday, or emailed on [email protected].

Last year I also undertook to provide once again the names of the valuers we use in the area, should you want to talk through progress on the issue with them:

CBRE Residential Valuations – NSW Peter Fallon (Director, NSW)

HTW (Newcastle & Hunter Region) Pty Ltd Leigh Mather (Director)

Opteon Property Group (Newcastle & Central Coast NSW) Matthew Durie (Director)


s22

s22

s22

s22

s22

36

Property Valuations NSW Scott McMonigal (Director)

Australian Property Institute (API) Kevin Thompson (National Standards Manager)

Any follow up questions please don’t hesitate to contact me.

Regards Steve

________________________ Commonwealth Bank

Steven Macmillan Executive Manager Government, Industry & International Affairs | Group Corporate Affairs Level 5 | Tower 1 | Darling Park 201 Sussex Street Sydney NSW 2000 P: +61 2 9303 8265

From: Matias, Keifer MR [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: 12 January 2017 10:56 To: Macmillan, Steven < Cc: E&IG Infrastructure FASI Exec Support <[email protected]>; Avakian, Garbis MR <[email protected]> Subject: RE: Environmental Investigations at Williamtown and Oakey [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]

UNCLASSIFIED

Good Morning Steven,

As you may recall from your conversation with Mr Birrer, the Department of Defence was seeking your assistance in providing a point of contact to forward concerns from existing CBA customers.

As per your previous discussion, Defence has received anecdotal reports from residents in the Williamtown and Oakey areas about the ability to access finance. Defence would like to be able to relay these concerns from existing customers to the CBA.

Grateful if you could please provide these details to Mr Garbis Avakian (cc'd on this email) at your earliest convenience.

Kind Regards,

Keifer Matias PFAS Investigation and Management BranchInfrastructure DivisionDepartment of Defence

Ph: 02 626 68457

The linked image cannot be displayed. The file may have been moved, renamed, or deleted. Verify that the link points to the correct file and location.

s22

s22

s22

s22

s22

44

Gibb, Melanie MISS

From: Matias, Keifer MRSent: Wednesday, 21 December 2016 10:31 AMTo: 'Macmillan, Steven'Cc: E&IG Infrastructure FASI Exec SupportSubject: Environmental Investigations at Williamtown and Oakey [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]Attachments: Williamtown - HHRA - Fact Sheet.pdf; Williamtown - ESA - Fact Sheet.pdf;

image001100140.jpg


UNCLASSIFIED

Good Morning Steven,

Further to your conversation this morning with Mr Chris Birrer, he advised that I share further information specifically regarding the Human Health Risk Assessment and the Environmental Site Assessment for the Williamtown area.

I have attached the Fact Sheets for the Human Health Risk Assessment and Environmental Site Assessment undertaken at Williamtown. These Fact Sheets were based upon the findings of the independent environmental consultant that Defence had engaged to undertake these assessments. Similar Fact Sheets exist for Oakey, and I would be happy to share those, if required.

Executive Summaries and full versions of these assessments can also be found in the website supplied below. This website is constantly kept up to date with information regarding Defence's investigations:

http://www.defence.gov.au/ID/Williamtown/Documents.asp

Thank you again for taking the time to speak with us.

Kind Regards,





42

Gibb, Melanie MISS

From: Avakian, Garbis MRSent: Friday, 6 January 2017 11:07 AMTo: 'Bob Dupont'Subject: RE: API National Conference [SEC=UNOFFICIAL]

UNOFFICIAL

Thanks for that Bob, much appreciated.

Regards Garbis

From: Bob Dupont [ Sent: Wednesday, 4 January 2017 17:43 To: Avakian, Garbis MR Subject: RE: API National Conference [SEC=UNOFFICIAL]

Garbis Couldn’t have summarised it better myself By all means issue as is

Regards

Robert Dupont FAPI MSIZ CPV

CEO / Director

Preston Rowe Paterson Newcastle and Central Coast Pty Ltd

98 Hannell Street, Wickham NSW 2293

Phone 02 4922 0600

Fax 02 4922 0688

.au www.prp.com.au

Investment. Development. Asset. Corporate Real Estate. Mortgage. Government. Insurance. Occupancy. Sustainability. Research.

www.prp.com.au

*Liability limited by a scheme approved under Professional Standards Legislation. DISCLAIMER

From: Avakian, Garbis MR [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Wednesday, January 4, 2017 5:06 PM To: Bob Dupont < Subject: API National Conference [SEC=UNOFFICIAL]


s22

s22

s22

43

UNOFFICIAL

Hi Bob

I'm not sure whether you are on holidays or not - if you are back I hope you had a great break.

I was wondering whether I could trouble you for a short paragraph on what your talk on PFAS contamination to the API National Conference covered, and any outcomes? We've just been asked to provide some advice up our chain. I was going to offer something along the following lines:

The Australian Property Institute (API) National Property Conference was held on the Gold Coast over the period 4-5 November 2016. The Conference heard a short presentation on Contamination of Land from Mr Bob Dupont from Preston Rowe Paterson, who is also a member of the Standards Board of the API. The presentation was billed as follows: "The issue of site contamination from past firefighting practices at defence force airbases and other airports is becoming a critical issue for all property in the immediate vicinity of airports Australia-wide. The experience at Williamtown in the Hunter Valley is seen as the test case for the rest of Australia for both remediation strategies and the repercussions on land and property prices in the area. The presentation will take us through the events, repercussions and methods applied by the API to provide guidelines for this and other contamination of land issues."

The presentation provided a general overview of the current progress of Defence's environmental investigation at Williamtown and Oakey, and noted that investigations were underway at a number of other sites. The Conference also noted that a number of other non-Defence sites, including civilian airports, may need to consider consider potential PFAS contamination issues into the future. The presentation noted that the understanding of around PFAS continued to develop, including in relation to health and the environmental impacts. The Conference then explored how PFAS contamination issues had impacted property prices, and were impacting the property valuation process. The Conference noted that in June 2016, the API developed and issued Valuation Protocols - Williamtown Investigation Zone and Contaminated Land to assist property valuers in valuing property in the Williamtown area affected by PFAS contamination. The Conference heard that these Protocols were being updated to have applicability beyond Williamtown - they were subsequently issued on 14 December 2016 as the Valuation Protocols - Airport-Related Investigation Zone For Contaminated Land (attached).

Regards Garbis

Garbis Avakian Assistant Director Policy PFAS Investigation and Management Branch Infrastructure Division Estate & Infrastructure Group Department of Defence BP26-2-B068 P: (02) 6266 8267 E: [email protected]

45

Gibb, Melanie MISS

From: Frolow, Alexander MRSent: Friday, 16 December 2016 12:13 PMTo: Matias, Keifer MRCc: Avakian, Garbis MR; Giltrap, Daniel MR; Kerr, Lee DR 1; PFASIM Edinburgh; Rees-

Scott, Rachel MRS; 'White, Annie'Subject: FW: Engagement with People's Choice Credit Union [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]Attachments: image001100140.jpg

UNCLASSIFIED

Hi Keifer

I spoke with Mr Krecinic yesterday afternoon. I am currently in Darwin and have had limited opportunities to make contact as have had significant travel in last 2 weeks.

The key points raised by Mr Krecinic and what he was keen to get a better understanding off were as follows and my comments back to him:

1. Is PFAS off Base and if so to what extent? - I advised that at this stage our Contractor for the detailedinvestigation is determining the sampling plan that will apply for the Edinburgh investigation and that plan willinclude off site sampling and that the purpose of the off site sampling is to determine if it has moved off site aswell as where/extent if it has moved off site. I did make comment about the positive tests recorded by City ofSalisbury at their 2 nearby water supply locations (part of their ASR aquifer storage recovery system). Hewas well aware of these tests by Council. I reiterated that the purpose of the sampling plan and investigationwas to determine extent etc off Base and until such time that this is undertaken I could not provide any furthercomment.

2. Is the PFAS in drinking water? - I advised that mains water is available in the area and if available should bethe source for drinking purposes. I advised that if people were drinking bore water in lieu of mains supplythen they should be aware of the risks of doing so as is referenced by the SA EPA and SA Health on theirwebsites ie if drinking bore water then individuals should have testing of the water done frequently.

3. What impact is there on nearby market gardens that use bore water for irrigation? - I advised that at this stagecan not comment and that investigation will cover issues re environmental and human health aspects. I alsoadvised that I would confirm some details and get back to him regarding what I understand to be is someresearch on impacts on food via ANU. Would appreciate if some one can confirm this for me (Rachel?). Thiswas things like uptake by fruit and vegetables, chicken eggs etc. I can then go back to him and advise.

4. He made a comment about the time taken to do the investigation and testing and that that may drawunfavourable media attention - I advised that the investigation does take a considerable period of timebecause Defence is wanting to ensure that it is rigorous and thorough with science based approach

5. He made comment that if Salisbury Council had undertaken testing of its ASR and was able to do it so quicklywhy is Defence taking so long, as a tax payer he would ask the question - I advised that Salisbury undertooktesting of its own accord and has obligations under its licence to do testing of water it sells via the ASRarrangement. I advised that although Defence is now undertaking these detailed investigations it had takenother steps since 2003 to eliminate use of the legacy product. I also made reference to this being anemerging issue and so work still being done on many fronts.

I asked him how the current process works between his organisation and Valuers and he advised that at present a Valuer undertakes an investigation of the property under consideration, prepares and submits a report to the organisation with valuation and the organisation then undertakes a due diligence process over the report to determine all relevant processes adhered to as well as to ensure that all relevant matters taken into consideration. He stated that as PFAS in soil or water, and particularly re market gardens, may have an impact and so this could lead to devalued property prices and so needs consideration by his organisation. He indicated that the organisation typically takes the valuers report on face value with their own due diligence as follow up and so now that PFAS could be an impactor this is being looked at by his organisation. He made no reference to any links in with the Customer Owned Banking Association and I made no reference at this stage to the letter from Chris Birrer to that Association.

I would like to be able to confirm my discussion with him as well as clarify the issue re ANU research so happy for any comments back re the above. I will then reengage with him to update. As indicated above, I am in Darwin and offered to meet with him face to face next week but he was happy for the phone discussion.


46

Thanks

Alex

AlexFrolow PFAS Community Liaison Officer - RAAF Base Edinburgh Defence PFASInvestigation & Management Branch Infrastructure Division Estate and Infrastructure Group

Building 304 RAAF Base Edinburgh SA 5111

Tel: (08) 738 33235 Fax: (08) 738 32559

Email: mailto:[email protected]

DSCW EDP Website

From: Frolow, Alexander MR Sent: Tuesday, 13 December 2016 20:00 To: Matias, Keifer MR Cc: Avakian, Garbis MR; Giltrap, Daniel MR; Kerr, Lee DR 1; Jeffery, Marcus MR; O'Connell, Mark MR 2; Clarke, Matthew MR 1 Subject: RE: Engagement with People's Choice Credit Union [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]

UNCLASSIFIED

Hi Keifer

I have had a discussion with Mark and Matt on this one and will be looking to meet with Mr Krecinic some time next week.

Regards

Alex



Tel: (08) 738 33235 Fax: (08) 738 32559


DSCW EDP Website

From: Frolow, Alexander MR Sent: Thursday, 1 December 2016 16:18

s22

s22

47

To: Matias, Keifer MR Cc: Avakian, Garbis MR; Giltrap, Daniel MR; Kerr, Lee DR 1; Jeffery, Marcus MR; O'Connell, Mark MR 2 Subject: RE: Engagement with People's Choice Credit Union [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]

UNCLASSIFIED

Hi Matias

Thanks for this, I will familiarise myself with the material and then make contact.

Marcus/Mark - if you have any materials that could assist would appreciate that. I will contact you as well to discuss and draw upon your experience in this space.

Regards

Alex



Tel: (08) 738 33235 Fax: (08) 738 32559


DSCW EDP Website

From: Matias, Keifer MR Sent: Thursday, 1 December 2016 11:40 To: Frolow, Alexander MR Cc: Avakian, Garbis MR; Giltrap, Daniel MR; Kerr, Lee DR 1 Subject: Engagement with People's Choice Credit Union [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]

UNCLASSIFIED

Good Afternoon Alex,

As you know, we are trying to engage banks and other financial institutions to educate them about what Defence knows about PFAS, and to outline the work that we are undertaking to manage PFAS contamination.

During the community walk in session on 1 November 2016, FASI - Chris Birrer, spoke with a representative from People's Choice Credit Union, Mr Sasha Krecinic. He noted his interest in engaging with us to better understand what contamination might mean for their business. FASI has now passed on his details, and we would like your support in engaging with him.

As per our previous discussions, we encourage you as the Liaison Officer to engage with local financial institutions to gather their thoughts and to understand their lending policies in investigation areas. It might help to speak to Marcus Jeffrey and Mark O'Connell regarding their engagement with the local financial institutions so far, to help shape your engagement with Mr Krecinic.

For your reference, I have also attached a letter that we sent to the Customer Owned Banking Association, the peak body for financial institutions like mutual funds and credit unions (People's Choice Credit Union is a member of this

s22

48

association), to initiate engagement at a higher level. It should be noted that we have not yet received contact from COBA regarding this attached letter.

PFAS Policy will be able to assist you should you require any support to help shape your engagement with Mr Krecinic.

Mr Krecinic's contact details are as follows:

Sasha Krecinic Credit Risk Analyst 08 8305 7710

60 Light Square Adelaide SA 5000

Kind Regards,








s22

49

Gibb, Melanie MISS

From: Matias, Keifer MRSent: Friday, 16 December 2016 12:04 PMTo: Birrer, Chris MRCc: Murphy, Clare DR; Avakian, Garbis MR; E&IG Infrastructure FASI Exec Support; Firkins-

Fox, Isabel MRSSubject: Australian Bankers' Association - Thursday 22 December 2016 [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]Attachments: image001100140.jpg

UNCLASSIFIED

Hi Chris,

As directed, I contacted ABA to confirm if they recieved my correspondence, and to inform them of your availabilities next week.

I was unable to secure time with the ABA on Thursday 22 December 2016 to follow your meeting with the Expert Panel in Sydney.

The ABA confirmed that they have recieved your letter and my subsequent follow-up emails about a telecon. They also informed me that the ABA will reply to your letter accordingly if the ABA determine that it can help in any way. They also closed the conversation by saying that Mr Nic Frankham would be unable to meet next week, due to a busy end of year schedule.

I hope this information has been useful.

Kind Regards,





50

Gibb, Melanie MISS

From: Chris M Venus <Sent: Tuesday, 13 December 2016 12:49 PMTo: Matias, Keifer MR; Cameron G MorganCc: E&IG Infrastructure FASI Exec SupportSubject: RE: Letter - Chris Venus - Environmental Investigations at Williamtown and Oakey

[SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]

Good Afternoon Keifer,

Thank for highlighting this information. We will ensure the appropriate people at NAB are aware of it.

We appreciated the opportunity to speak with Mr Birrer. If you have further questions for NAB, please don’t hesitate to contact Cameron or I.

Kind Regards, Chris

Chris Venus ConsultantGovernment Affairs & Public PolicyNational Australia Bank

Pier 3 Level 4, 800 Bourke St, Docklands VIC Tel: +61 (0) 3 92085571 | Mob: +61

From: Matias, Keifer MR [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Monday, 12 December 2016 12:10 PM To: Chris M Venus; Cameron G Morgan Cc: E&IG Infrastructure FASI Exec Support Subject: RE: Letter - Chris Venus - Environmental Investigations at Williamtown and Oakey [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]

UNCLASSIFIED

Good Afternoon Chris and Cameron,

Further to your conversation this morning with Mr Chris Birrer, he advised that I share further information specifically regarding the Human Health Risk Assessment and the Environmental Site Assessment for the Williamtown area.

I have attached the Fact Sheets for the Human Health Risk Assessment and Environmental Site Assessment undertaken at Williamtown. These Fact Sheets were based upon the findings of the independent environmental consultant that Defence had engaged to undertake these assessments.

Executive Summaries and full versions of these assessments can also be found in the website supplied below. This website is constantly kept up to date with information regarding Defence's investigations:

http://www.defence.gov.au/ID/Williamtown/Documents.asp

Thank you again for taking the time to speak with us.

Kind Regards,



s22

s22s22

51


From: Chris M Venus [mailtoSent: Tuesday, 6 December 2016 11:53 To: Matias, Keifer MR Cc: Cameron G Morgan Subject: RE: Letter - Chris Venus - Environmental Investigations at Williamtown and Oakey [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]

Hi Keifer,

Many thanks. My colleague Cameron Morgan (on CC, ) from NAB’s Management Assurance division will be joining me on the call. We will be dialling in from separate locations (me from Melbourne and Cameron in Sydney).

Are you able to provide any further detail (to what was in the letter) on what Mr Birrer would like to discuss?

Kind Regards, Chris


Pier 3 Level 4, 800 Bourke St, Docklands VIC Tel: +61 (0) 3 92085571 | Mob: Email:

From: Matias, Keifer MR [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Tuesday, 6 December 2016 11:35 AM To: Chris M Venus Subject: RE: Letter - Chris Venus - Environmental Investigations at Williamtown and Oakey [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]

UNCLASSIFIED

Hi Chris,

Yes this time slot is still available. We will send through an Outlook invitation shortly to yourself, and your colleague - please supply their contact details so I can send them a similar invitation.

On another note, I just wanted to confirm if your colleague will be dialling in from a different location, or joining you from your phone? I will amend the telecon details according to your advice.


Kind Regards,

- Keifer

From: Chris M Venus Sent: Tuesday, 6 December 2016 10:31 To: Matias, Keifer MR Cc: Murphy, Clare DR Subject: RE: Letter - Chris Venus - Environmental Investigations at Williamtown and Oakey [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]

s22s22

s22

s22

s22

52

Hi Keifer,

Thanks for your email. Monday 12 December, 10.30am‐11.00am work best for a teleconference with a colleague and I from NAB. Is that time still available?

Kind Regards, Chris


Pier 3 Level 4, 800 Bourke St, Docklands VIC Tel: +61 (0) 3 92085571 | Mob:

From: Matias, Keifer MR [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Monday, 5 December 2016 1:06 PM To: Chris M Venus Cc: Murphy, Clare DR Subject: RE: Letter - Chris Venus - Environmental Investigations at Williamtown and Oakey [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]

UNCLASSIFIED

Good Afternoon Chris,

We've had to do a bit of rejigging to Mr Birrer's calendar, to arrange a block of time for this discussion and I'm pleased to share that he will be available to speak with you this coming Fri 9 December 2016. Mr Birrer will be available for a 30 minute phone discussion between 2:30 pm and 4:30pm.

If you are unavailable between these times, Mr Birrer would also be available for a discussion on Mon 12 December 2016, between 10.30am-11.00am or alternatively 2.30pm-3.00pm.

Please let me know your preference, or please let me know of your availabilities and I will work with his office to find a workable solution.

Kind Regards,



From: Chris MD Venus Sent: Wednesday, 23 November 2016 15:39 To: Matias, Keifer MR Cc: Murphy, Clare DR; E&IG Infrastructure FASI Exec Support Subject: RE: Letter - Chris Venus - Environmental Investigations at Williamtown and Oakey [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]

Hi Keifer,

Thanks for your email and letter. Best number to contact me on is to arrange a meeting time.

s22

s22

s22

63

Gibb, Melanie MISS

From: Matias, Keifer MRSent: Tuesday, 22 November 2016 5:18 PMTo: ' 'Cc: Murphy, Clare DR; E&IG Infrastructure FASI Exec SupportSubject: Letter - Chris Venus - Environmental Investigations at Williamtown and Oakey

[SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]Attachments: Chris Venus.pdf; image001100140.jpg


UNCLASSIFIED

Good Afternoon Mr Venus,

Please find attached a letter from Mr Chris Birrer - First Assistant Secretary Infrastructure at the Department of Defence, regarding Environmental Investigations at Williamtown and Oakey.



Kind Regards,





s22

56

Gibb, Melanie MISS

From: Birrer, Chris MRSent: Thursday, 1 December 2016 12:26 PMTo: 'Cc: O'Connell, Mark MR 2; Hetherington, Daniel MR 1; Avakian, Garbis MRSubject: Townsville community information session [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]

UNCLASSIFIED

Peter,

Thank you for attending Defence's community information session for the RAAF Townsville environmental investigation on Tuesday.

As we discussed, we would welcome engaging with you during the investigation to keep you informed as to our progress with the investigation, and to also seek your views as a valuer working in the area. We would also welcome interacting with any of your fellow valuers who also undertake work in the vicinity of RAAF Base Townsville.

Let us know if you require any further information at this stage. I have cc'd on this email Mark O'Connell and Danny Hetherington, who you also spoke to yesterday, and also Garbis Avakian, who was not present but who has been engaging with valuers and lending institutions on the environmental investigations.

Regards,

Chris

Chris Birrer First Assistant Secretary Infrastructure | Department of Defence

BP26-2-A002 | Brindabella Park | PO Box 7901 | Canberra BC | ACT 2610 P: +61 2 6266 8004 | F: +61 2 6266 8044



s22

s22

57

Gibb, Melanie MISS

From: Birrer, Chris MRSent: Thursday, 24 November 2016 1:57 PMTo: ' 'Cc: Avakian, Garbis MR; Pearson, Sarah MISS 1Subject: Advice regarding valuations in the vicinity of Williamtown, NSW [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]

UNCLASSIFIED

Dear Tony,

We have been provided with your contact details by the Australian Property Institute which recommended that you might be an appropriate contact within the Commonwealth Bank for raising this matter.

We have been contacted by residents who live in the vicinity of RAAF Base Williamtown in NSW who have had difficulties with obtaining finance for their properties or with having valuations conducted. I have seen a recent representation from a resident which included advice, that he stated was from the Commonwealth Bank, regarding his property. Amongst other things, this advice stated the resident would need to provide environmental reports concerning their property, and that there were WH&S concerns with valuers visiting the property in question due to reports of contamination.

As you might be aware, Defence is conducting a detailed environmental investigation of PFAS contamination migrating from RAAF Base Williamtown into the community near the base. As part of this investigation, a Human Health Risk Assessment was released in August 2016. This Human Health Risk Assessment provides information that would address concerns about WH&S from entering properties within the NSW Government’s Investigation Area at Williamstown.

I would welcome discussing with you the Commonwealth Bank’s position regarding the obtaining of valuations in the vicinity of RAAF Base Williamtown at a mutually agreeable time.

Regards,

Chris

Chris Birrer First Assistant Secretary Infrastructure | Department of Defence

BP26-2-A002 | Brindabella Park | PO Box 7901 | Canberra BC | ACT 2610 P: +61 2 6266 8004 | | F: +61 2 6266 8044



s22

s22

60

Gibb, Melanie MISS

From: Avakian, Garbis MRSent: Wednesday, 23 November 2016 12:27 AMTo: Birrer, Chris MRCc: McLeod, Luke MR 1; Giltrap, Daniel MR; Murphy, Clare DR; Matias, Keifer MRSubject: Engagement with Banks [DLM=For-Official-Use-Only]Attachments: 161023 0753 - Email From MK To ML - Water Contamination Salt Ash.pdf

For-Official-Use-Only

Chris,

Further to our discussion today regarding engagement with the Commonwealth bank.

You have recently signed letters to the big four banks updating on the status of investigations and so on, and we will seek to follow those letters with meetings where we can. Those meetings would cover the full scope of issues we may wish to cover with an institution, including their lending practices, how they see the lending market in an area and issues affecting that market, how the contamination issues plays into their considerations, how they work with their valuers etc etc.

While we have worked with API to ensure that valuers have good information about the status of our investigations, and API has indicated that most valuation firms in Williamtown are conducting valuations, a Williamtown constituent

) has sought to use equity in a Salt Ash property to finance an investment property (attached). He has been unable to get a valuation on his property through the Commonwealth. API advises that the Commonwealth use CBRE, and that CBRE conducts a majority of the valuation work for the Commonwealth. In advice provided to Killick by the Commonwealth, it would seem that CBRE will not conduct a valuation due to OH&S concerns. I note that we have previously encountered the same issue through a mortgage broker in Williamtown, with identical wording used by an unnamed valuer.

In discussions with the Australian Property Institute, the API has indicated that the big four banks are all represented in the Residential Valuation Industry Group, and API has provided the contact details for those representatives. If we pursue these contacts, API is happy for us to indicate the we have sourced the contacts from API. As discussed, I will arrange a call between yourself and the Commonwealth bank representative, focussed in the first instance on the apparent inability of (some) Commonwealth Bank customer to gain a property valuation in the Williamtown area due to OH&S concerns. For the CBA, API indicate that Tony Celinas is aware of the issues at Williamtown and will be a good contact.

FYI, contact details for the Bank reps are as follows (Westpac has just changed over and API has limited contact through RVI):

NAB: Mark Browning Head of Valuations Customer Services, Enterprise Services & Transformation

ANZ: Andrew McDonald Director Property Risk - Technical Services Phone: +61 3 8655 6510

CBA Tony Selinas Senior Manager Valuation Quality Secured Credit Risk Management

CBA:


s22s22

s22

s22

s47F

61

Mark Lim

Westpac: Paul Deall

Regards Garbis



s22

s22

58

Gibb, Melanie MISS

From: Avakian, Garbis MRSent: Wednesday, 23 November 2016 1:41 PMTo: Birrer, Chris MRSubject: RE: Engagement with lending institutions [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]

UNCLASSIFIED

Chris, are you able to send through the details of the Member's Choice representative you met in Edinburgh? We will speak with Alex Frolow and look to provide some advice on where things are at.

Regards Garbis

‐‐‐‐‐Original Message‐‐‐‐‐ From: Birrer, Chris MR Sent: Tuesday, 1 November 2016 16:25 To: Murphy, Clare DR; Avakian, Garbis MR Subject: Engagement with lending institutions

Clare and Garbis,

I was speaking to RADM Clint Thomas who offered that he might be able to assist with engaging with lending institutions leveraging off his role at the Defence bank. This might be a useful avenue for engaging with member held institutions such as Newcastle Permanent, Members' Choice etc, but perhaps not so much the big four. Grateful if you could give some though to how we could engage Clint on this.

Also, a representative of Members' Choice near Edinburgh spoke to me at the walk‐in this morning. He is interested in engaging with us to better understand what the contamination might mean for their lending business. I'll pass you the details tomorrow.

Regards,

Chris

Sent from my iPad



59

Gibb, Melanie MISS

From: Matias, Keifer MRSent: Wednesday, 23 November 2016 10:51 AMTo: '[email protected]'Cc: Murphy, Clare DR; E&IG Infrastructure FASI Exec SupportSubject: ATTN: Nic Frankham - Letter - Environmental Investigations at Williamtown and Oakey

[SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]Attachments: Nic Frankham.pdf; image001100140.jpg


UNCLASSIFIED





Kind Regards,





62

Gibb, Melanie MISS

From: Matias, Keifer MRSent: Tuesday, 22 November 2016 5:32 PMTo: 'lCc: Murphy, Clare DR; E&IG Infrastructure FASI Exec SupportSubject: Letter - Luke Lawler - Environmental Investigations at Williamtown and Oakey

[SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]Attachments: Luke Lawler.pdf; image001100140.jpg


UNCLASSIFIED

Good Afternoon Mr Lawler,




Kind Regards,





s22

66

Gibb, Melanie MISS

From: Matias, Keifer MRSent: Tuesday, 22 November 2016 5:12 PMTo: 'Cc: Murphy, Clare DR; E&IG Infrastructure FASI Exec SupportSubject: Letter- Tom Clayton - Environmental Investigations at Williamtown and Oakey

[SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]Attachments: image001100140.jpg; Tom Clayton.pdf


UNCLASSIFIED

Good Afternoon Mr Clayton,




Kind Regards,





s22

64

Gibb, Melanie MISS

From: Matias, Keifer MRSent: Tuesday, 22 November 2016 5:17 PMTo: 'Cc: Murphy, Clare DR; E&IG Infrastructure FASI Exec SupportSubject: Letter - Steve Macmillan - Environmental Investigations at Williamtown and Oakey

[SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]Attachments: Steven Macmillan.pdf; image001100140.jpg


UNCLASSIFIED

Good Afternoon Mr MacMillan,




Kind Regards,





s22

65

Gibb, Melanie MISS

From: Matias, Keifer MRSent: Tuesday, 22 November 2016 5:15 PMTo: 'Cc: Murphy, Clare DR; E&IG Infrastructure FASI Exec SupportSubject: Letter - Michael Johnston - Environmental Investigations at Williamtown and Oakey

[SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]Attachments: image001100140.jpg; Michael Johnston.pdf


UNCLASSIFIED

Good Afternoon Mr Johnston,




Kind Regards





s22

73

Gibb, Melanie MISS

From: Avakian, Garbis MRSent: Tuesday, 22 November 2016 4:34 PMTo: 'Kevin Thompson'; 'Bob Dupont'Subject: RE: RVI Lender Reps [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]

UNCLASSIFIED

Excellent, thanks very much Kevin.

Regards Garbis

From: Kevin Thompson [ Sent: Tuesday, 22 November 2016 16:33 To: Avakian, Garbis MR; 'Bob Dupont' Subject: RE: RVI Lender Reps [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]

Garbis,

The actual reps are as previously advised, namely Mark Browning for NAB and Andrew McDonald for ANZ. CBA have two reps on the RVI Group, Mark Lim and Tony Selinas so either contact will be able to assist you.

I have not met the Westpac rep as they sometimes just dial into the meetings (which are always in Sydney) rather than attend in person.

Kind Regards

Kevin Thompson Professional Standards Manager Australian Property Institute Ltd

P: 02 9299 1811

F: 02 9299 1490 Level 3, 60 York Street, Sydney, NSW, 2000

www.api.org.au

This email and any attachments may contain privileged or confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient of this email any use, disclosure, storage or copying of any information contained in this email or attachments is unauthorised and you must delete all copies of this email and notify us. API collects, uses, discloses and stores personal and sensitive information in accordance with its Privacy Policy which can be found on its website. Opinions, conclusions and other information in this email that do not relate to the official business of the Australian Property Institute (API) shall be understood as neither given nor endorsed by it. Employees of API do not have authority to legally bind API and you must not rely on any statement or representation made as being legally binding unless expressly otherwise stated by an authorised representative of API. Please note that neither API nor the sender accepts any responsibility for any viruses that may be contained in this e‐mail or its attachments. It is therefore your responsibility to ensure that your systems have adequate protection against virus infection.

From: Avakian, Garbis MR [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Tuesday, 22 November 2016 3:47 PM


s22

74

To: Kevin Thompson; 'Bob Dupont' Subject: RE: RVI Lender Reps [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]

UNCLASSIFIED

Kevin, Bob,

Thanks very much for those details and confirming that we can advise that API provided the contact details.

The prompt response is greatly appreciated.

Just to clarify with the latest contacts you have provided - they are alternate contacts for the actual RVI representatives from the respective banks? And with the change at Westpac, there is not yet an alternate POC?

Regards Garbis

From: Kevin Thompson Sent: Tuesday, 22 November 2016 15:38 To: Bob Dupont; Avakian, Garbis MR Subject: RE: RVI Lender Reps

Garbis,

No problem stating that the API forwarded you respective contact details on the respective bank representative on the industry committee known as the Residential Valuation Industry Group (RVI). Westpac have advised that their contact on the Residential Valuation Industry Group (RVI) is now Paul Deall

I only have the above email address for Paul Deall at Westpac . I don’t have contact details for Mark Lim at CBA however an alternate person at CBA is Tony Selinas who is aware of the Williamtown situation and will be a good contact on this issue. Tony’s contact details are below.

Contact number for Mark Browning, NAB: Mark Browning Head of ValuationsCustomer Services, Enterprise Services & TransformationNational Australia Bank

Pier 4 Level 5 UB 4524, 800 Bourke Street, Docklands VIC 3008

Contact for Andrew McDonald, ANZ: Andrew McDonald | ANZ | Director | Property Risk -Technical Services Level 16, 100 Queen Street, Melbourne, Vic 3000, Australia Phone: +61 3 8655 6510 | Mobile: www.ANZ.com

Contact for Tony Selinas at CBA: Tony Selinas Senior Manager Valuation Quality Secured Credit Risk Management Risk Management RBS Commonwealth Bank Place – South Building Level 3A, 11 Harbour Street, Sydney NSW 2000 P:

Kind Regards

s22

s22

s22

s22

s22

75


P: 02 9299 1811


www.api.org.au


From: Bob Dupont [ Sent: Tuesday, 22 November 2016 2:35 PM To: Avakian, Garbis MR Cc: Kevin Thompson Subject: RE: RVI Lender Reps

Garbis Best check I personally cant see a problem Kevin See below – Do you have any objections (or phone numbers may be more informal in first instance)

Regards


CEO / Director



Phone 02 4922 0600

Fax 02 4922 0688

Email www.prp.com.au


s22

s22

s22

s22

69

Level 3, 60 York Street, Sydney, NSW, 2000

www.api.org.au


From: Bob Dupont [ Sent: Tuesday, 22 November 2016 2:35 PM To: Avakian, Garbis MR Cc: Kevin Thompson Subject: RE: RVI Lender Reps

Garbis Best check I personally cant see a problem Kevin See below – Do you have any objections (or phone numbers may be more informal in first instance)

Regards


CEO / Director



Phone 02 4922 0600

Fax 02 4922 0688

www.prp.com.au


www.prp.com.au


From: Avakian, Garbis MR [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Tuesday, November 22, 2016 2:29 PM To: Bob Dupont Subject: RE: RVI Lender Reps [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]

s22

s22

s22

s22

85

Gibb, Melanie MISS

From: Avakian, Garbis MRSent: Tuesday, 22 November 2016 2:29 PMTo: 'Bob Dupont'Subject: RE: RVI Lender Reps [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]

UNCLASSIFIED

Bob, thanks very much for these. I've discussed with my First Assistant Secretary, Chris Birrer, who I believe you may have met in Williamtown.

I was just wondering if we reach out to these points of contact within the big banks (and the Commonwealth in particular), are you happy to indicate that we have been provided these contact details by the API in the context of working through valuation issues in the Williamtown area?

And just to confirm - email addresses are the only contact details you have for these points of contact (i.e. not phone numbers)?

Thanks again.

Regards Garbis

From: Bob Dupont [ Sent: Thursday, 17 November 2016 17:08 To: Avakian, Garbis MR Subject: FW: RVI Lender Reps

Garbis See below

Regards


CEO / Director



Phone 02 4922 0600

Fax 02 4922 0688



www.prp.com.au


s22

s22

82


www.prp.com.au


From: Bob Dupont Sent: Friday, October 7, 2016 11:03 AM To: Subject: FW: RVI Lender Reps

Jodie See below These are the people the API deal with on residential valuation matters. Some of them are way up the food chain so Ill leave it to you as how you approach them.

Regards


CEO / Director



Phone 02 4922 0600

Fax 02 4922 0688



www.prp.com.au


s22

s22

83

From: Kevin Thompson [ Sent: Friday, October 7, 2016 10:32 AM To: Bob Dupont < Alicia Watson < Subject: RVI Lender Reps

Hi Bob,

Representatives on the RVI Group from the 4 big banks :‐

NAB Mark Browning

ANZ Andrew McDonald

CBA Mark Lim

Westpac Alicia Watson

Kind Regards


P: 02 9299 1811


www.api.org.au



s22

s22 s22

s22

s22

s22

s22

s22

s22

88

Gibb, Melanie MISS

From: Andrew Bell <Sent: Wednesday, 9 November 2016 6:32 PMTo: Avakian, Garbis MRSubject: Valuers - Oakey

Hello Garbis,

You recently contacted Emma Rice at the API in relation to valuation and contamination of land issues in and around Oakey.

I don’t have your phone number but would welcome the opportunity to speak with you in relation to how we might be able to assist you in this matter. Could you please give me a call when time permits so that we can discuss?

Regards Andrew Bell National Manager – Communications Member Services Manager – Queensland Australian Property Institute Ltd

P: 07 3832 3139 D: 07 3832 9388 Level 2, 131 Leichhardt Street, Spring Hill QLD 4000 PO Box 106, Spring Hill QLD 4004

www.api.org.au



s22

s22

89

Gibb, Melanie MISS

From: Avakian, Garbis MRSent: Wednesday, 9 November 2016 1:35 PMTo: 'Bob Dupont'Cc: 'Jodie Calvert'Subject: RE: Issues with a valuer in Williamtown [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]

UNCLASSIFIED

Bob, thanks for this update - very much appreciated. I will make contact with Bruce and welcome you providing his details.

Jodie - I left you a message as well and hope to have quick chat.

Regards Garbis


From: Bob Dupont [mailto Sent: Tuesday, 8 November 2016 11:35 To: Avakian, Garbis MR Cc: Jodie Calvert Subject: RE: Issues with a valuer in Williamtown [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]

Garbis My presentation went well and I suggest you call Bruce Krause Ph re Oakey as he is expecting your call and I have briefed him on what we have done at Newcastle. The Api approved the revised guidelines last week to be distributed nationally and I shall chase them up

Before my presentation I contacted most of the major firms operating in Newcastle and all replied they were conducting valuations in the area in accordance with the API guidelines although CBA primarily use CBRE and they don’t have a local office (all done on line through call centres)

Jodie Calvert from Premiers office was also chasing this up so you may wish to contact her details below and I have copied her in.

Jodie Calvert | Acting Director - HunterRegional Coordination Branch, Department of Premier and CabinetLevel 5, 26 Honeysuckle Drive, Newcastle NSW 2001T: 02 4921 2602 | | [email protected] | dpc.nsw.gov.au

Regards


CEO / Director


s22

s22

s22

92

Gibb, Melanie MISS

From: Avakian, Garbis MRSent: Tuesday, 8 November 2016 9:24 AMTo: 'Bob Dupont'Subject: Issues with a valuer in Williamtown [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]

UNCLASSIFIED

Hi Bob

I hope your national conference was a success, and you achieved all the aims you had intended. I'm keen to follow up on that with you, and will seek to do so in the near future.

At present though, we have a constituent you has been unable to obtain a valuation of a property through their bank (Commonwealth). The reasons given are exactly the same as those provided in the previous circumstance we encountered with Aussie Home Loans (i.e. identical wording).

The current situation has a constituent with conditional approval for an investment property, who is seeking to use equity in an existing property in Salt Ash to get a loan to build a house. However, the valuers will apparently not come to value the house to enable a loan to be provided. In this case, the valuers are sourced through a bank (Commonwealth).

The valuer's comments (as advised by the Commonwealth) were "We refer to your valuation instructions. In recent times properties in the location of the subject property have been identified as being potentially in an area affected by a contamination incident caused by fire-fighting foams from the nearby Williamtown Royal Australian Air Force (RAAF) Base . At present the full impact of potential contamination to individual properties is unknown . Accordingly expert environmental reports and audits will be required for all properties which are potentially impacted . Until Environmental Studies are completed it is considered that property within the contaminated zone will suffer buyer resistance and could be further impacted as Lending Institutions introduce new lending restrictions in the short term. We further advise that from an occupational health and safety point of view our valuers will not be in a position to complete the valuation without all necessary safety certification. Should the Lender seek further information we recommend this be undertaken with the relevant Federal and State Government Agencies."

In these circumstances, is this something the API would be in a position to assist with? I do not have contact details for the Commonwealth Bank, but I can seek them from the constituent. I'm not sure if the Commonwealth's response is coming from a local branch or not.

I'd of course be very happy to discuss this further with you.

Regards Garbis




93

Gibb, Melanie MISS

From: Avakian, Garbis MRSent: Monday, 31 October 2016 4:52 PMTo: 'Bob Dupont'Subject: RE: API National Conference and related issues [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]

UNCLASSIFIED

Thanks very much for your time today Bob

Further to our discussion, the key elements which I thought I'd highlight are as follows:

The Department of Health's website contains a range of useful information, including a presentation recentlydelivered by the Chief Medical officer in Williamtown and Oakey (Walk-In-Sessions), and the current PFASFact Sheet and Guidance Statement (enHealthdocuments). http://www.health.gov.au/internet/main/publishing.nsf/Content/ohp-pfas.htm

You are also aware that the Environmental Site Assessment (ESA) and Human Health Risk Assessment(HHRA) for Williamtown and Oakey have been released in the past few months. These reports provide keyinformation that take forward our understanding of the implications of PFAS contamination for thesecommunities.

o In general terms, for both Williamtown and Oakey, the HHRAs found that for the typical person living,working or undertaking recreational activities with the investigation areas, there is a “low andacceptable” risk to health from PFAS exposure. This includes inhalation of dust from soil irrigated withgroundwater, incidental ingestion and contact with surface water and groundwater, and incidentalingestion and contact with soil and sediment in outdoor activities. The phrase ‘low and acceptable’ isstandard terminology used in Australian human health risk assessments completed in accordancewith the National Environment Protection Measures, and refers to circumstances where the level ofrisk is calculated to be below the threshold where potential health impacts may occur.

o The media release summarising the Williamtown HHRA is athttp://news.defence.gov.au/2016/08/11/findings-of-the-williamtown-human-health-risk-assessment/

o Defence continues to work closely with the NSW and Queensland Governments in progressing therespective investigations.

o A copy of the respective HHRAs and other reports are available athttp://www.defence.gov.au/id/Williamtown/Documents.asp andhttp://www.defence.gov.au/id/Oakey/Documents.asp.

On valuation issues more specifically, we've had numerous valuers note that they are unable to conductvaluations for OH&S reasons, which is not supported by the evidence. If this could be addressed during the conference, that would be excellent. For example, we have received comments such as "In recent times properties in the location of the subject property have been identified as being potentially in an area affected by a contamination incident caused by fire-fighting foams from the nearby Williamtown Royal Australian Air Force (RAAF) Base . At present the full impact of potential contamination to individual properties is unknown . Accordingly expert environmental reports and audits will be required for all properties which are potentially impacted. Until Environmental Studies are completed it is considered that property within the contaminated zone will suffer buyer resistance and could be further impacted as Lending Institutions introduce new lending restrictions in the short term. We further advise that from an occupational health and safety point of view our valuers will not be in a position to complete the valuation without all necessary safety certification. Should the Lender seek further information we recommend this be undertaken with the relevant Federal and State Government Agencies."

In this regard, is there any prospect of the outcomes of environmental investigations being more prominentlyreflected in the Protocols? The Protocols were developed prior to ESA and HHRA being released. While perceptions obviously play a role in the process (and the "Stigma Allowance" caters for this to some degree), drawing direct attention to the outcomes of environmental investigations may assist in the conduct of valuations.

Regards Garbis

From: Avakian, Garbis MR Sent: Friday, 28 October 2016 15:07 To: 'Bob Dupont' Subject: API National Conference and related issues [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]


95

Gibb, Melanie MISS

From: Bob Dupont <Sent: Monday, 31 October 2016 12:44 PMTo: Avakian, Garbis MRSubject: RE: API National Conference and related issues [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]

Garbis Nice to talk you again Contact to speak to at API re attendance national conference is Emma Rice 07 38323139 She should also be able to help with local API contact at Oakey

Venue Gold Coast Convention and Exhibition Centre 2684 ‐2690 Gold Coast Highway, Broadbeach, Queensland.

Presentation Title and overview Contamination of Land

The issue of site contamination from past firefighting practices at defence force airbases and other airports is becoming a critical issue for all property in the immediate vicinity of airports Australia‐wide. The experience at Williamtown in the Hunter Valley is seen as the test case for the rest of Australia for both remediation strategies and the repercussions on land and property prices in the area. This presentation will take us through the events, repercussions and methods applied by the API to provide guidelines for this and other contamination of land issues.

Date and time of presentation 1:30pm to 2:15pm, Friday 4 November 2016 Presentation time of 40 minutes plus Q+A

Regards


CEO / Director



Phone 02 4922 0600

Fax 02 4922 0688



www.prp.com.au


s22

s22

96


From: Avakian, Garbis MR [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Friday, October 28, 2016 3:07 PM To: Bob Dupont Subject: API National Conference and related issues [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]

UNCLASSIFIED

Hi Bob, I hope this finds you well. I tried to call today but I understand you are out of the office.

You've previously indicated that you would present on PFAS issues to the API National Conference, and that you would be working towards updating the Valuation Protocols in advance. In this regard, I was wondering:

whether it would be possible to have visibility of your presentation to the national conference in relation toPFAS? We are most interested to ensure that information in the public domain relating to Defence'senvironmental investigations is accurate.

whether the Valuation Protocols have been updated to have applicability beyond Williamtown (or nationalapplicability)? And if not, whether there is a timeframe for this?

whether there is scope for our Senior Defence Liaison Officer at Oakey to attend the session at your NationalConference where PFAS issues are discussed as an observer, and hopefully to make some contacts withlocal valuers? Also if there is an API representative that we should engage with covering the Oakey area?

about your thoughts on a meeting (or meetings) to talk through developments in Defence's investigationsprogram? We've had some personnel changes, both in Canberra and at some key sites, so was wonderinghow we might engage with API in this regard. This would be something to consider for after the nationalconference.

I'd have preferred to be be able to talk through some of the points above with you, but thought I'd send them through in advance. I will follow up with a call on Monday.

Regards Garbis



s22

100

Gibb, Melanie MISS

From: Avakian, Garbis MRSent: Wednesday, 12 October 2016 1:04 AMTo: Murphy, Clare DRCc: Matias, Keifer MRSubject: Previous engagement with financial institutions and the API [DLM=For-Official-Use-Only]Attachments: WLM property lending - Westpac and CBA [DLM=For-Official-Use-Only]; AF25169647 -

File Note - Banks.doc; RE: Lending institutions [DLM=For-Official-Use-Only]



Clare, some background details for you on what we’ve done with financial institutions and the API.

Attachment 1 ‐ email from Lauren from May 2016 ‐ outlines discussions with Westpac and Commonwealth. Attachment 2 ‐ file note from Keifer ‐ some points from separate meetings between FASI with reps from NAB, ANZ and API. Attachment 3 ‐ email from Lauren notes key POC in Treasury in relation to financial institutions.

Financial Institutions - what we've done

Engaged with each of the big 4 banks to understand how they view lending in Williamtown. As noted in someof the records, banks had less concerns with the 'risk' in Oakey.

Westpac and St George also lent based on valuations – but suggested there were problems with gettingvaluations – this was a trigger that led us towards API

CBA also indicated there was an issue with valuations being conducted. Suggested there should be moredetail about Defence’s environmental investigations in the public domain

CBA and Westpac both suggested any issues were limited to the investigation area, not the postcode.

API – what we’ve done Met with the CEO to discuss reports of not being able to get valuations done Worked with PAI to set up forum in Williamtown – with NSW Health, NSW EPA, NSW DPC, Port Stephens

Council. Valuation Protocols promulgated following the forum Worked with API to resolve one-off issues raised with us in relation to problems around valuations API updating protocols following release of ESA, HHRA, and to cover other sites (e.g. Oakey).

I’ll address intent of engagement with API and financial institutions, and what we might do next, separately.

G



s47G

101



102

Gibb, Melanie MISS

From: Bob Dupont <Sent: Monday, 3 October 2016 9:48 AMTo: Avakian, Garbis MRSubject: RE: Property Valuations - proposed words for Senate Estimates [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]

Garbis I have no problems with that I have prepared a modification for national use that will be put to AVSB next meeting on 27th

Regards


CEO / Director



Phone 02 4922 0600

Fax 02 4922 0688



www.prp.com.au


From: Avakian, Garbis MR [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Friday, September 30, 2016 6:24 PM To: Bob Dupont < Subject: Property Valuations ‐ proposed words for Senate Estimates [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]

UNCLASSIFIED

Good evening Bob

We have Senate Estimates coming up, and need to be prepared for PFAS contamination to get a run. One issue we are preparing some Q&A for is property values. Can I ask you to review the words below and advise whether you have any concerns or thoughts? I'd be happy to take on board any feedback you might have.

While I cannot guarantee that Defence's senior officials would use briefs we prepare word-for-word, the briefs would provide a guide for the approach we might take if an issue was raised by Senators. Estimates is a public forum, so if cleared, I would want you to be comfortable for these words to be used in that way.


s22

s22

s22

103

Your earliest advice would be greatly appreciated.

I would of course be happy to discuss this further with you.

On 3 June 2016, in a forum organised by the Australian Property Institute, Defence, theNSW Environment Protection Authority and Hunter New England Health briefedproperty valuers on the progress of Defence environmental investigations, and healthand environmental information relevant to the use of land and property valuations.

o Further to this forum, in August 2016 the Australian Property Institute released“Valuation Protocols – Williamtown Investigation Zone and ContaminatedLand” to assist in the conduct of valuations.

The Protocols state “…..it was agreed that a standard set of protocols forvaluation of properties in this area be established to offer guidance tolending authorities.”

o Defence understands the Australian Property Institute is updating these protocolsfollowing the release of the Williamtown Environmental Site Assessment andHuman Health Risk Assessment.

o Defence also understands that the Australian Property Institute is updating theProtocols to given them broader applicability to other sites, including Oakey.

Regards Garbis

Garbis Avakian Assistant Director Policy Defence PFAS Taskforce Infrastructure Division Estate and Infrastructure Group Department of Defence BP26-2-B068 P: (02) 6266 8515 E: [email protected]


104

Gibb, Melanie MISS

From: Avakian, Garbis MRSent: Monday, 19 September 2016 9:10 AMTo: 'Bob Dupont'Subject: RE: property valuations in the Williamtown area [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]

UNCLASSIFIED

Thanks very much Bob, much appreciated. If you hear anything further from Jacquie, I’d be most interested.

Regards Garbis


From: Bob Dupont [mai Sent: Saturday, 17 September 2016 2:39 PM To: Avakian, Garbis MR Subject: RE: property valuations in the Williamtown area [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]

Garbis No we never got that far but she will try again

Regards


CEO / Director



Phone 02 4922 0600

Fax 02 4922 0688



www.prp.com.au



s22

s22

105

From: Avakian, Garbis MR [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Friday, September 16, 2016 4:30 PM To: Bob Dupont Subject: RE: property valuations in the Williamtown area [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]

UNCLASSIFIED

Thanks Bob.

Did the conversation reach a point where a valuation would be conducted, either through the current valuers used by Aussie or through Aussie using another valuer? I accept that the issue of lending is separate, but would hope that we could at least get a valuation done?

I will be providing Jacquie with advice from the Williamtown Human Health Risk Assessment that addresses the request for advice on the risk of walking in the Williamtown area.

Your continued assistance is very much appreciated

Regards Garbis

From: Bob Dupont [ Sent: Friday, 16 September 2016 10:31 To: Avakian, Garbis MR Subject: RE: property valuations in the Williamtown area [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]

Garbis Spoke to Broker and sent her the protocols but the issue still seems to be with banks

Regards


CEO / Director



Phone 02 4922 0600

Fax 02 4922 0688

Email b www.prp.com.au


www.prp.com.au


s22

s22

s22

110

Gibb, Melanie MISS

From: Bob Dupont >Sent: Saturday, 17 September 2016 2:39 PMTo: Avakian, Garbis MRSubject: RE: property valuations in the Williamtown area [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]

Garbis No we never got that far but she will try again

Regards


CEO / Director



Phone 02 4922 0600

Fax 02 4922 0688



www.prp.com.au


From: Avakian, Garbis MR [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Friday, September 16, 2016 4:30 PM To: Bob Dupont Subject: RE: property valuations in the Williamtown area [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]

UNCLASSIFIED

Thanks Bob.

Did the conversation reach a point where a valuation would be conducted, either through the current valuers used by Aussie or through Aussie using another valuer? I accept that the issue of lending is separate, but would hope that we could at least get a valuation done?

I will be providing Jacquie with advice from the Williamtown Human Health Risk Assessment that addresses the request for advice on the risk of walking in the Williamtown area.

Your continued assistance is very much appreciated


s22

s22

s22

107

Gibb, Melanie MISS

From: Avakian, Garbis MRSent: Monday, 19 September 2016 9:06 AMTo: 'Jacqueline Stokes'; ' 'Subject: RE: property valuations in the Williamtown area [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]

UNCLASSIFIED

Thank you for your email Jacquie. Thanks also for your suggestion that Defence issue a media release stating that walking in the investigation area does not present health risks.

You may be aware that Defence has released a number of reports in relation to its environmental investigations in Williamtown, including a Human Health Risk Assessment released in August. The media release announcing the Human Health Risk Assessment states:

"AECOM’s environmental experts found that the risk for residents in the broader investigation area from everyday exposure including from inhalation of dust from soil irrigated with groundwater, incidental ingestion and contact with surface water and groundwater, and incidental ingestion and contact with soil and sediment in outdoor activities, was ‘low and acceptable’."

"The phrase ‘low and acceptable’ which appears throughout the AECOM report is standard terminology used in Australian human health risk assessments completed in accordance with the National Environment Protection Measures. This phrase refers to circumstances where the level of risk is calculated to be below the threshold where potential health impacts may occur."

The media release can be found at http://news.defence.gov.au/2016/08/11/findings-of-the-williamtown-human-health-risk-assessment/.

I trust this information is useful to you, and I would be happy to discuss this matter further.

Regards Garbis

From: Jacqueline Stokes [mailto Sent: Wednesday, 14 September 2016 15:50 To: [email protected] Cc: Avakian, Garbis MR Subject: RE: property valuations in the Williamtown area [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]

Hi Bob,

In relation to the below email, we have come across an instance where we were unable to get a property valued in the area. I have provided below the comments that the valuation firm left in relation to the valuation that we ordered.

VMT Action Only:Part 1 - We refer to your valuation instructions. In recent times properties in the location of the subject property have been identified as being potentially in an area affected by a contamination incident caused by fire-fighting foams from the nearby Williamtown Royal Australian Air Force (RAAF) Base . At present the full impact of potential contamination to individual properties is unknown . Accordingly expert environmental reports and audits will be required for all properties which are potentially impacted .

VMT Action Only:Part 2 - Until Environmental Studies are completed it is considered that property within the contaminated zone will suffer buyer resistance and could be further impacted as Lending Institutions introduce new lending restrictions in the short term. We further advise that from an occupational health and safety point of view our valuers will not be in a position to complete the valuation without all necessary


s22

s22

108

safety certification. Should the Lender seek further information we recommend this be undertaken with the relevant Federal and State Government Agencies.

I hope this information gives you some more clarity on the issue that was raised regarding this certain valuation.

As a suggestion to alleviate any future issues in relation to the RAAF contamination it may be of benefit for the Department of Defence to release a press statement stating that the contaminated areas do not present any health risks to anyone walking on the properties.

We are always happy to do what we can to get a positive outcome for our clients and if I can be of any more assistance please do not hesitate to contact me.

Regards, Jacquie

Jacqueline Stokes Aussie Broker

Credit Rep. 421053

t: 02 4987 3283f: 02 4983 1832m: a: 19A William

Street Raymond Terrace NSW 2324

https://www.facebook.com/aussiehomeloansjacquelinestokes

https://twitter.com/Aussie

http://www.linkedin.com/company/43869

http://www.aussie.com.au/find-broker/aussie-mortgage-broker.htm?BrokerID=980438

Australian Credit Licence Number - 246786 | AHL Investments Pty Ltd ABN 27 105 265 861


From: Avakian, Garbis MR [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Wednesday, 14 September 2016 2:50 PM To: Jacqueline Stokes Cc: 'Bob Dupont' < Subject: property valuations in the Williamtown area [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]

UNCLASSIFIED

Dear Ms Stokes

Thank you very much for your time earlier today.

As discussed, we have been contacted by a member of the community in the Williamtown area who is seeking to buy a property. We understand they have been advised that valuers used by your firm are not in a position to value properties in the Williamtown area due to OH&S restrictions. We see no evidence to support this assessment.

In discussions with Defence, the Australian Property Institute (API) has offered to reach out to valuers (and brokers) in an effort to help talk through issues such as this, and to offer the API's perspective. Thank you for agreeing to

s22

s22s22

109

discuss this matter with the API. Our primary point of contact in the API is Bob Dupont, who can be contacted on 4922 0600. I have cc'd Bob above.

Again, many thanks for your willingness to talk through this issue today.

Regards Garbis

Garbis Avakian Assistant Director Policy Defence PFAS Taskforce Infrastructure Division Estate and Infrastructure Group Department of Defence BP26-2-B068 P: (02) 6266 8515 E: [email protected]


Notice: This email and any attachments are confidential. If you are not the intended recipient, you should not use or disclose the information in them in any way. If you have received this email in error, please contact the sender and delete this email and any attachments from your computer. Aussie does not guarantee the integrity of any emails or attached files. The views or opinions expressed are the author's own and may not reflect the views or opinions of Aussie.

118

Gibb, Melanie MISS

From: Bob Dupont <Sent: Wednesday, 14 September 2016 1:22 PMTo: Avakian, Garbis MRSubject: RE: Williamtown Human Health Risk Assessment [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]

That’s fine Garbis

Regards


CEO / Director



Phone 02 4922 0600

Fax 02 4922 0688



www.prp.com.au


From: Avakian, Garbis MR [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Wednesday, September 14, 2016 12:25 PM To: Bob Dupont Subject: RE: Williamtown Human Health Risk Assessment [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]

UNCLASSIFIED

Bob, I spoke to the broker today, and she's happy to speak with you. Are you happy with the way the email below is characterised? If so, I will send to the broker. She is from Aussie.

Thanks Garbis

*****************************************

Dear Ms Stokes


s22

s22

s22

119

Thank you very much for your time earlier today.

As discussed, we have been contacted by a member of the community in the Williamtown area who is seeking to buy a property. We understand they have been advised that valuers used by your firm are not in a position to value properties in the Williamtown area due to OH&S restrictions. As discussed, there is no evidence to support this assessment.

In discussions with Defence, the Australian Property Institute (API) has offered to reach out to valuers (and brokers) in an effort to help talk through issues such as this, and to offer the API's perspective. Thank you for agreeing to discuss this matter with the API. Our primary point of contact in the API is Bob Dupont, who can be contacted on 4922 0600. I have cc'd Bob above.

Again, many thanks for your willingness to talk through this issue today.

Regards Garbis

From: Avakian, Garbis MR Sent: Monday, 12 September 2016 18:02 To: 'Bob Dupont' Subject: RE: Williamtown Human Health Risk Assessment [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]

UNCLASSIFIED

OK, thanks Bob. The issue was raised with us in correspondence with our Minister. We will need to confirm that the resident is happy for us to seek to resolve it in that way.

We'll keep you informed as we engage with them. I appreciate your prompt response.

Regards Garbis

From: Bob Dupont [m Sent: Monday, 12 September 2016 17:46 To: Avakian, Garbis MR Subject: RE: Williamtown Human Health Risk Assessment [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]

Garbis Probably best if you get broker to ring me direct and I will see what we can do

Regards


CEO / Director



Phone 02 4922 0600

Fax 02 4922 0688


s22

s22

129

Cc: 'Kevin Thompson' >; 'Hodge, Tyrone' < > Subject: RE: Williamtown Human Health Risk Assessment [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]

UNCLASSIFIED

Hi Bob,

I was wondering if you might be able to offer a practical solution to the community member who is unable to secure a valuation in the Williamtown area through their broker? Could we perhaps point them in API's direction, or might you offer a different solution? We are very keen to offer options if you have any.

Regards Garbis

From: Avakian, Garbis MR Sent: Friday, 2 September 2016 15:38 To: 'Bob Dupont' Cc: 'Kevin Thompson'; 'Hodge, Tyrone' Subject: RE: Williamtown Human Health Risk Assessment [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]

UNCLASSIFIED

Bob, thank you very much for this helpful update. You've outlined a number of productive streams of work. We would welcome the opportunity to stay engaged with you on this, without seeking to interfere in your work.

If possible, I would like to touch base on your return to see if there is a practical solution for the community member who is currently unable to get a valuation through their broker.

Regards Garbis

From: Bob Dupont [ Sent: Thursday, 1 September 2016 21:49 To: Avakian, Garbis MR Cc: Kevin Thompson; Hodge, Tyrone Subject: RE: Williamtown Human Health Risk Assessment [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]

Garbis

Yes APi standards board recommended that Williamtown protocols be re written to broaden scope to encompass other areas And I have been given the task.Ssimilarly I propose to incorporate updated assessments but due to a heavy workload this is taking some time I am aware that some lending institutions and valuers are still reticent to lend/value in this area but that is a matter of education. Not all people read our releases. I have asked that I can address the banking and finance committee of the API to clarify our position and by copy of this email will follow up Kevin Thompson to see when this can be arranged I have also been asked to address the matter at the API’s national conference in November so that should also broaden the base. I am off for a week but will get in touch on my return Reagrds

Bob

From: Avakian, Garbis MR [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Thursday, 1 September 2016 5:44 PM

s22s22

s22

s22

157

Gibb, Melanie MISS

From: Avakian, Garbis MRSent: Friday, 12 August 2016 9:23 AMTo: 'Bob Dupont'Subject: RE: Williamtown Human Health Risk Assessment [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]

UNCLASSIFIED

Bob, yesterday Defence issued a media release announcing the finding of the Williamtown Human Health Risk Assessment: http://news.defence.gov.au/2016/08/11/findings-of-the-williamtown-human-health-risk-assessment/

Williamtown investigation reports, including the HHRA, can be found at: http://www.defence.gov.au/id/Williamtown/Documents.asp

Please let me know if you'd like any further details.

Regards Garbis

From: Bob Dupont [mailto: ] Sent: Tuesday, 2 August 2016 18:30 To: Avakian, Garbis MR Subject: RE: API Williamtown forum and Valuation Protocols [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]

Next standards council is 12 th August but if you like you can refer valuer to me

Regards


CEO / Director



Phone 02 4922 0600

Fax 02 4922 0688



www.prp.com.au



s22

s22

From: Bob Dupont Sent: Thursday, 1 September 2016 9:49 PMTo: Avakian, Garbis MRCc: Kevin Thompson; Hodge, TyroneSubject: RE: Williamtown Human Health Risk Assessment [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]

Garbis

Yes APi standards board recommended that Williamtown protocols be re written to broaden scope to encompass other areasAnd I have been given the task.Ssimilarly I propose to incorporate updated assessments but due to a heavy workload this is taking some timeI am aware that some lending institutions and valuers are still reticent to lend/value in this area but that is a matter of education. Not all people read our releases.I have asked that I can address the banking and finance committee of the API to clarify our position and by copy of this email will follow up Kevin Thompson to see when this can be arrangedI have also been asked to address the matter at the API’s national conference in November so that should also broaden the base.I am off for a week but will get in touch on my returnReagrds

Bob

From: Avakian, Garbis MR [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Thursday, 1 September 2016 5:44 PMTo: Bob DupontSubject: RE: Williamtown Human Health Risk Assessment [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]

UNCLASSIFIED

Hi Bob

I was wondering whether I might be able to trouble you for an update in relation to the API standards council meeting held on 12 August (if that is something you are able to share)? Not surprisingly, I am particularly interested in whether the standards council might have considered any extension or rewording of the Williamtown Valuations Protocols to have national applicability, or at least applicability for the Oakey area.

Separately, I'd be interested in whether the Williamtown Valuation Protocols have been/are being reviewed in the context of the release of the Williamtown Human Health Risk Assessment and Environmental Site Assessment earlier this month? The version on the web appears to be the 11 July 2016 version.

Lastly, we have recently been approached by a community member in the Williamtown area who has been advised by their broker that "At this stage due to the current environmental risk, our valuers will not even value properties within the area due to Occupational Health and Safety restrictions." You would appreciate that such statements are not supported by the evidence. Are we perhaps able to offer to put the community member in touch with the API, or provide details of a number of property valuers who we can be confident will complete valuations?

We appreciate the API's continuing willingness to work with Defence on these important issues.

RegardsGarbis


s22

s22

Garbis AvakianAssistant Director PolicyDefence PFAS TaskforceEstate and Infrastructure GroupDepartment of DefenceBP26-2-B068P: (02) 6266 8515E: [email protected]

From: Avakian, Garbis MR Sent: Friday, 12 August 2016 09:23To: 'Bob Dupont'Subject: RE: Williamtown Human Health Risk Assessment [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]

UNCLASSIFIED

Bob, yesterday Defence issued a media release announcing the finding of the Williamtown Human Health Risk Assessment:http://news.defence.gov.au/2016/08/11/findings-of-the-williamtown-human-health-risk-assessment/

Williamtown investigation reports, including the HHRA, can be found at:http://www.defence.gov.au/id/Williamtown/Documents.asp

Please let me know if you'd like any further details.

RegardsGarbis

From: Bob Dupont Sent: Tuesday, 2 August 2016 18:30To: Avakian, Garbis MRSubject: RE: API Williamtown forum and Valuation Protocols [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]

Next standards council is 12 th August but if you like you can refer valuer to me

Regards

Robert Dupont FAPI MSIZ CPVCEO / Director

Preston Rowe Paterson Newcastle and Central Coast Pty Ltd98 Hannell Street, Wickham NSW 2293

Phone 02 4922 0600Fax 02 4922 0688


Investment. Development. Asset. Corporate Real Estate. Mortgage.

s22

s22

s22

Government. Insurance. Occupancy. Sustainability. Research.

www.prp.com.au


From: Avakian, Garbis MR [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Tuesday, August 2, 2016 4:54 PMTo: Bob Dupont Cc: 'Kevin Thompson' Subject: RE: API Williamtown forum and Valuation Protocols [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]

UNCLASSIFIED

Thanks Bob Will certainly provide a link to the HHRA and ESA when they are published (I understand they'll be very lengthy documents). I also used the wrong points when providing dates - I understand 8 August is the release date. Community consultation is 9-10 August. The ESA for Oakey has been published already, with the HHRA to follow in the coming weeks. A link to the Oakey ESA is available at the following link:http://www.defence.gov.au/id/Oakey/Documents.asp Just on the Toowoomba piece - can I ask when the next standards council meeting will be, and should we hold off speaking with the valuer who has contacted us in advance of that meeting (the timing may also assist in determining that). RegardsGarbis

From: Bob Dupont [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Tuesday, 2 August 2016 14:53To: Avakian, Garbis MRCc: Kevin ThompsonSubject: RE: API Williamtown forum and Valuation Protocols [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]

GarbisI had a phone call from a solicitor from that area asking if we could extend / reword the Protocols so it applied to all of Australia and we have put this on the agenda for the next meeting of the standards councilIf possible can you send me a copy of the HRA when released? Regards

Robert Dupont FAPI MSIZ CPV CEO / Director


s22

s22

Phone 02 4922 0600Fax 02 4922 0688

Email [email protected]


www.prp.com.au


From: Avakian, Garbis MR [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Tuesday, August 2, 2016 2:14 PMTo: Bob Dupont 'Kevin Thompson' Subject: RE: API Williamtown forum and Valuation Protocols [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]

UNCLASSIFIED

Bob,

You may be aware that both the Williamtown Environmental Site Assessment and Human Health Risk Assessment are currently scheduled for release on 5 August, ahead of community consultations on 9-10 August. As you have indicated below, this may provide an opportunity to further review the Protocols.

Separately, and in relation to the national applicability of the Protocols and API's national remit (so perhaps more for Kevin?) - Defence has been approached by a property valuer in the Toowoomba area, who has indicated that a number of financial institutions have inquired about PFAS issues around Oakey. The property valuer has asked to meet with Defence. While Defence is certainly prepared to meet with property valuers to provide advice on the progress of its environmental investigations, we would welcome API's advice on whether API would prefer to engage valuers more collectively, perhaps following a similar model to that followed in the Williamtown area? Any comments welcome.

RegardsGarbis

From: Bob Dupont Sent: Monday, 11 July 2016 12:45To: Avakian, Garbis MRCc: 'Kevin Thompson'Subject: RE: API Williamtown forum and Valuation Protocols [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]

GarbisSee belowDocument was well received by community and stakeholders at meeting last ThursdaySome minor changes will be implementedSee belowWe also expect a review of the document on release of Base Level Health Report next month.

s22

s22

s22s22

Regards



Phone 02 4922 0600Fax 02 4922 0688



www.prp.com.au


From: Avakian, Garbis MR [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Wednesday, 6 July 2016 10:49 AMTo: Bob Dupont <[email protected]>Cc: 'Kevin Thompson' Subject: API Williamtown forum and Valuation Protocols [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]

UNCLASSIFIED

Bob, I would like to thank you and the API again for the recent opportunity for Defence and other agencies to brief API members on the environmental investigations we are undertaking in the Williamtown area, and for Hunter Region Health and the NSW EPA to brief on relevant health and environmental issues. You may recall that Defence took two questions on notice during the discussion, and I wanted to follow up on those briefly. Unfortunately I do not have the details of the API members who asked the questions - I'm not sure whether you recall or took those details.

We discussed that Defence was unable to release the results of its testing of private properties, but there was a question as to whether Defence could provide details of the properties we have accessed to conduct testing. I can advise that privacy restrictions prevent Defence from releasing these details. Advice on properties accessed or results of testing would need to be obtained from individual property owners. OKThere was also a question about a former Defence 'Minehunter' site at Tomago. I understand that Defence disposed of the property in question many years ago. Defence is not therefore in a position to advise on the potential presence of PFCs on the property. OK

Valuation ProtocolsDefence continues to discuss the progress of our environmental investigations with financial institutions. I have seen that API has released its Valuation Protocols - Williamtown Investigation Zone and Contaminated Land. I appreciate that the outcome for lending will be a consideration of a valuers assessment, the customer's financial circumstances and a financial institution's risk appetite. I was wondering whether, for my understanding, you would have any initial advice on how most banks might generally respond to the

s22

s22

Risk Ratings? In particular, in your experience, how much distinction would financial institutions draw between Risk Ratings 3, 4 and 5 in terms of practical outcomes for lending? If it would not be appropriate for you to provide comment, please let me know.

There are a number of criteria that banks look at when assessing a loan outside the valuation such as ability of borrower to repay , exposure to certain projects, loan to value ratios etc The valuation is just another tool in the process but generally a 3 is considered mid level and for notation only , a 4 is mid to high that the financier should take into account in assessing loan and a 5 is high level that will affect the security being offered.Unofficially 3’s don’t matter that much, 4’s are usually ok providing everything else stacks up but 5’s have a strong adverse effect on lending process

In addition, I understand you will be discussing the Protocols with the Williamtown Community Reference Group tomorrow. In that context, there were a couple of issues I thought I might raise, which may also be raised in the discussion tomorrow. I'd welcome any thoughts or comments you may have. I acknowledge the independence of your processes, the conservative nature of the valuation process and the need for valuers to consider risks arising from stigma regardless of the actual risk of exposure to PFOS/PFOA.

The Protocols go some way to acknowledging the role of exposure pathways, and the importance of properties which are connected to town water, but there is no mention of properties which are supplied alternative water (e.g. bottled or tankered water) and therefore have limited exposure pathways. To the best of Defence's knowledge, all properties within the Investigation Area are connected to town water or are provided an alternative source of drinking water (tankered or bottled water).

The need to rely on bottled water would have a quantifiable effect on saleability and value and thus the 4 rating

It appears the the lowest Risk Rating available is 3, which means all properties in the Investigation Area will have "an element of reduced saleability" - regardless of exposure pathways. Risks and effect on saleability increases from this point.

Agreed and the fact it is in the investigation area itself will cause a perceived risk in the market hence the 4 rating

On my reading, the Protocols suggest that even if a property is outside the investigation Area, but within the suburbs of Williamtown, Salt Ash and Fullerton Cove, it should be categorised as "Risk Rating 4" for environmental issues, with subsequent commentary on proximity of the property to the Investigation Area. The valuer should then determine if the proximity of the property to the Investigation Zone will create a 'stigma'. This appears inconsistent with the ability to apply "Risk Rating 3" for environmental issues to a property within the Investigation Area with a "no detect result" and connected to town tank water?

Agreed This does appear contradictory and I since been advised the investigation area included a buffer zone consequently the API have decided to change all areas outside the investigation zone to a 3. As this is a live document this will done on our website

RegardsGarbis

Garbis AvakianAssistant DirectorPolicy and GovernancePFAS Environmental Management ProgramEstate and Infrastructure GroupDepartment of DefenceBP26-2-B068P: (02) 6266 8515E: [email protected]



IMPORTANT: This email remains the property of the Department of Defence and is subject to the jurisdiction of section 70 of the

Crimes Act 1914. If you have received this email in error, you are requested to contact the sender and delete the email.



174

Gibb, Melanie MISS

From: Avakian, Garbis MRSent: Thursday, 7 July 2016 9:41 AMTo: 'Bob Dupont'Cc: 'Kevin Thompson'Subject: RE: API Williamtown forum and Valuation Protocols [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]

UNCLASSIFIED

Of course Bob, thank you.

Regards Garbis

From: Bob Dupont Sent: Wednesday, 6 July 2016 19:08 To: Avakian, Garbis MR Cc: Kevin Thompson Subject: RE: API Williamtown forum and Valuation Protocols [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]

Garbis Apolgies I have been under a timeline today I will be addressing a community meeting tomorrow re below and maybe best that I wait till after that to reply Regards

Regards


CEO / Director



Phone 02 4922 0600

Fax 02 4922 0688

www.prp.com.au


www.prp.com.au



s22

s22

175

From: Avakian, Garbis MR [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Wednesday, 6 July 2016 10:49 AM To: Bob Dupont < Cc: 'Kevin Thompson' Subject: API Williamtown forum and Valuation Protocols [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]

UNCLASSIFIED

Bob, I would like to thank you and the API again for the recent opportunity for Defence and other agencies to brief API members on the environmental investigations we are undertaking in the Williamtown area, and for Hunter Region Health and the NSW EPA to brief on relevant health and environmental issues. You may recall that Defence took two questions on notice during the discussion, and I wanted to follow up on those briefly. Unfortunately I do not have the details of the API members who asked the questions - I'm not sure whether you recall or took those details.

We discussed that Defence was unable to release the results of its testing of private properties, but there wasa question as to whether Defence could provide details of the properties we have accessed to conducttesting. I can advise that privacy restrictions prevent Defence from releasing these details. Advice onproperties accessed or results of testing would need to be obtained from individual property owners.

There was also a question about a former Defence 'Minehunter' site at Tomago. I understand that Defencedisposed of the property in question many years ago. Defence is not therefore in a position to advise on thepotential presence of PFCs on the property.

Valuation Protocols Defence continues to discuss the progress of our environmental investigations with financial institutions. I have seen that API has released its Valuation Protocols - Williamtown Investigation Zone and Contaminated Land. I appreciate that the outcome for lending will be a consideration of a valuers assessment, the customer's financial circumstances and a financial institution's risk appetite. I was wondering whether, for my understanding, you would have any initial advice on how most banks might generally respond to the Risk Ratings? In particular, in your experience, how much distinction would financial institutions draw between Risk Ratings 3, 4 and 5 in terms of practical outcomes for lending? If it would not be appropriate for you to provide comment, please let me know.

In addition, I understand you will be discussing the Protocols with the Williamtown Community Reference Group tomorrow. In that context, there were a couple of issues I thought I might raise, which may also be raised in the discussion tomorrow. I'd welcome any thoughts or comments you may have. I acknowledge the independence of your processes, the conservative nature of the valuation process and the need for valuers to consider risks arising from stigma regardless of the actual risk of exposure to PFOS/PFOA.

The Protocols go some way to acknowledging the role of exposure pathways, and the importance ofproperties which are connected to town water, but there is no mention of properties which are suppliedalternative water (e.g. bottled or tankered water) and therefore have limited exposure pathways. To the bestof Defence's knowledge, all properties within the Investigation Area are connected to town water or areprovided an alternative source of drinking water (tankered or bottled water).

It appears the the lowest Risk Rating available is 3, which means all properties in the Investigation Area willhave "an element of reduced saleability" - regardless of exposure pathways. Risks and effect on saleabilityincreases from this point.

On my reading, the Protocols suggest that even if a property is outside the investigation Area, but within thesuburbs of Williamtown, Salt Ash and Fullerton Cove, it should be categorised as "Risk Rating 4" forenvironmental issues, with subsequent commentary on proximity of the property to the Investigation Area.The valuer should then determine if the proximity of the property to the Investigation Zone will create a'stigma'. This appears inconsistent with the ability to apply "Risk Rating 3" for environmental issues to aproperty within the Investigation Area with a "no detect result" and connected to town tank water?

Regards Garbis

Garbis AvakianAssistant DirectorPolicy and Governance PFAS Environmental Management Program

s22s22

177

Gibb, Melanie MISS

From: Gray, Lauren MSSent: Monday, 20 June 2016 11:29 AMTo: Parker, Melita MS; Bulkeley, Sally MRSCc: DL Special Counsel; Lehmann-Bird, Heidi MS; Lysewycz, Michael MR; Hannon, Stacey

MS; Clifton, Alison MS; Birrer, Chris MR; Savill, Janet MRS; Avakian, Garbis MRSubject: RE: Update on discussions with banks [DLM=For-Official-Use-Only]


Hi Melita,

The anticipated timing of report release and community events is now dependent on discussions with the NSW EPA and Expert Panel tomorrow. I have adjusted the below to account for this recent development. We have more going on in the background in consultation with NSW EPA with potential to improve certainty for lending institutions aroundactual implications for property uses but it is too early to comment on this to claimants.

Following our letter of xx April 2016, Defence has been working in consultation with the NSWEnvironment Protection Authority, NSW Department of Premier and Cabinet and Hunter New EnglandHealth to support an improved understanding of perfluorinated compounds and the status of Defence'senvironmental investigations.

Defence is completing its detailed investigations to identify the extent and levels of perfluorooctane sulfonate (PFOS) and perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA) compounds on and around RAAF Base Williamtown. To date, more than 430 residential water samples have been collected across theinvestigation area and about 90 percent of these samples have returned ‘nil detects’.

The key priority of Defence is to do scientifically credible sampling while also providing certainty for local communities at the earliest opportunity.

Defence will finalise the environmental site assessment report in the next couple of weeks. Thisreport will be made available on Defence’s website and will identify the detection zone and levelsof PFOS/PFOA in groundwater, surface water and soil.

In late July 2016, a comprehensive human health risk assessment will be finalised. This report willdeal with all potential pathways that could contribute to PFOS/PFOA being ingested by humanssuch as eggs, honey, water and vegetables.

An ecological risk assessment will be completed in mid August 2016 and is looking at any potentialrisk that may be caused by PFOS/PFOA to the ecological environment, including flora and fauna.

These reports will inform Defence in developing management solutions to reduce any identified risks toacceptable levels.

In the interim, Defence continues to supply water to 69 properties that would otherwise use bore waterfor drinking.

In September 2016, an interim treatment plant will treat the outflow of Lake Cochran to successfully filter PFOS/PFOA from the outflow water. Defence also continues to work with industry to develop longer termtreatment solutions for the entirety of Lake Cochran. Defence is also trialling remediation technologies for soil and groundwater.

Defence has also met with a number of lending institutions and the Australian Property Institute to discussproperty lending and valuations. On 3 June 2016, representatives from Defence, the NSW Environmental Protection Authority and Hunter New England Health, presented at a workshop for property valuers heldby the Australian Property Institute. Defence explained the investigations currently underway in theWilliamtown area to assist them to understand progress with the investigations and the timing of results.

Defence is committed to ensuring that community members are informed of the results of investigations at community meetings and have the opportunity to ask individual questions at community walk‐in


178

sessions. Defence will be diseminating advice to residents regarding the specific timing of thesecommunity meetings shortly.

Regards,

Lauren

From: Parker, Melita MS Sent: Monday, 20 June 2016 09:57 To: Bulkeley, Sally MRS Cc: DL Special Counsel; Gray, Lauren MS; Lehmann-Bird, Heidi MS; Lysewycz, Michael MR; Hannon, Stacey MS; Clifton, Alison MS; Birrer, Chris MR; Savill, Janet MRS Subject: RE: Update on discussions with banks [DLM=For-Official-Use-Only]


Hi Sally

Following our discussion at Friday's meeting, could you please provide an update regarding Defence's engagement with lenders and valuers that you are comfortable communicating to potential claimants? Please also include any upcoming events where potential claimants could get infomation on these issues.

I will then draft a template letter and circulate to ensure it addresses the concerns raised at Friday's meeting.

Thanks Melita

Melita Parker Office of Defence Special Counsel CP2-3-044 Campbell Park Offices, PO Box 7911, Canberra BC ACT 2610 02 626 62881 [email protected]

Note: This document contains legal advice and may be the subject of legal professional privilege. Unless it is waiver or lost, legal professional privilege is a rule of law that, in part, provides that the client need not disclose communications between a legal practitioner and client. To keep this privilege the purpose and content of this advice must only be disclosed to those persons who have a need to know and on the basis that those persons also keep it confidential.

From: Birrer, Chris MR Sent: Wednesday, 15 June 2016 17:19 To: Parker, Melita MS; Gray, Lauren MS Cc: DL Special Counsel; Lehmann-Bird, Heidi MS; Lysewycz, Michael MR; Avakian, Garbis MR; Hannon, Stacey MS; Clifton, Alison MS; Bulkeley, Sally MRS Subject: RE: Update on discussions with banks [DLM=For-Official-Use-Only]


Melita,

I think this would be worth discussing at our Friday Groundwater Contamination meeting.

Regards,

Chris

179

From: Parker, Melita MS Sent: Wednesday, 15 June 2016 15:51 To: Gray, Lauren MS Cc: DL Special Counsel; Lehmann-Bird, Heidi MS; Lysewycz, Michael MR; Avakian, Garbis MR; Hannon, Stacey MS; Birrer, Chris MR; Clifton, Alison MS; Bulkeley, Sally MRS Subject: RE: Update on discussions with banks [DLM=For-Official-Use-Only]


Hi Lauren

Thank you for your email - I have discussed with Michael.

In relation to further correspondence with the prospective claimants regarding banks and valuers, could you please confirm that your position is that ODSC engage in no further dialogue with these individuals? We note the risk in discontinuing communication with these individuals is that they may make claims or join the class action.

Thanks Melita



From: Gray, Lauren MS Sent: Tuesday, 14 June 2016 23:46 To: Parker, Melita MS Cc: DL Special Counsel; Lehmann-Bird, Heidi MS; Lysewycz, Michael MR; Avakian, Garbis MR; Hannon, Stacey MS; Birrer, Chris MR; Clifton, Alison MS; Bulkeley, Sally MRS Subject: RE: Update on discussions with banks [DLM=For-Official-Use-Only]


Hi Melita,

Alison is on leave this week so I am unsure what was discussed between her and Rachel, but the concept below seems to deviate a bit from the last direction Alison gave me about how much we should be relaying about conversations with lending institutions and API. I have discussed with Stacey and we have reservations about Defence taking an approach of proactively writing out to prospective legal claimants advising of Defence actions taken on the issue of valuations and lending. This potentially raises expectations regarding the policies and methodology of parties that Defence does not control. We have particular reservations when such a letter would follow a communication stream about a possible legal compensation inquiry. These letters could also be counterproductive to resolving the issue; if these letters were in turn passed to lending institutions it could be received as Defence pressuring a certain outcome. I also note there are some inaccuracies in the April letter (eg we did not plan to include the Fullerton Cove Action Group in discussions with banks).

It may be useful to discuss the approach to communications with prospective claimants more broadly as I understood that the ODSC communications were directed to understanding the nature of prospective claims (originally) and are now limited to seeking further detail to inform the assessment of lodged claims?

There will be a community walk‐in sessions on 8 July and we will ensure that Defence representatives are positioned with cleared talking points to update community members who inquire about land values and lending. We will think

180

about whether there is another way to address intent of letter – eg perhaps disseminating the NSW DPC CRG messages that included a short mention of the valuers forum for info, along with an invitation to the 7 and 8 July sessions...

Regards, Lauren


From: Parker, Melita MS Sent: Tuesday, 14 June 2016 2:30 PM To: Gray, Lauren MS Cc: DL Special Counsel; Lehmann-Bird, Heidi MS; Lysewycz, Michael MR; Avakian, Garbis MR Subject: RE: Update on discussions with banks [DLM=For-Official-Use-Only]


Hi Lauren

Thanks for the update.

Our concern is that the TPs are not specific enough about this issue. We understand that the meeting with the Australian Property Institute Forum was publicly advertised, including through the CRG. Further, I understand that Rachel discussed this issue with Alison last Friday who agreed in principle that we should be keeping people updated.

We also last wrote to these potential claimants on 7 April 2016 and advised that we would keep them informed (see attached letter and list of individuals). Given that we have not been involved in the more recent discussions regarding these issues, we would be grateful if you would provide an update to these potential claimants (and provide us with a copy for our records).

Happy to discuss further.

Kind regards Melita



From: Gray, Lauren MS Sent: Thursday, 9 June 2016 18:36 To: Parker, Melita MS Cc: DL Special Counsel; Lehmann-Bird, Heidi MS; Lysewycz, Michael MR; Avakian, Garbis MR Subject: RE: Update on discussions with banks [DLM=For-Official-Use-Only]


181

Hi Melita, advice to claimants should not go any further than the cleared TPs.

For your background, the meeting with valuers went well and the Australian Property Institute will develop standards for a methodology to conduct valuations for properties in an investigation area. I believe this advice may encourage valuers to ask property owners if they wish to share any information regarding any sampling that may have been undertaken on their property, noting the residential water sampling results would not be available via public sources (ie their detect/nil detect letter). NSW Health also debunked the myth about WHS risks for valuers. There will obvioiusly be more certainty once a detection zone is announced, more again once the HHRA is available in July and then more again once risk management strategies are determined and communicated.

The sample size for sales is small (it is not a high turnover area and there have been sales in the last 6 months) so the API suggested that the data does not suggest that sale prices have diminished - but there is potentially a reduced buyer pool due to difficulties for non-cash buyers in obtaining a loan.

Regards, Lauren

From: Parker, Melita MS Sent: Thursday, 9 June 2016 16:32 To: Gray, Lauren MS Cc: DL Special Counsel; Lehmann-Bird, Heidi MS; Lysewycz, Michael MR Subject: Update on discussions with banks [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]

UNCLASSIFIED

Hi Lauren

We understand that you have had some further discussions with banks and valuers in relation to Williamtown. We would be interested to know what progress you have made on that front so that we can keep potential claimants updated.

For your information, we have now received an unlitigated claim for diminuation in property value or a 'buyout' (the latter not really being an option under the LSDs) in Williamtown. We are also in discussions with the relevant government agencies about sharing information (e.g. NSW DPI for catch records and DHS for Centrelink records).

Thanks Melita






188

The sample size for sales is small (it is not a high turnover area and there have been sales in the last 6 months) so the API suggested that the data does not suggest that sale prices have diminished - but there is potentially a reduced buyer pool due to difficulties for non-cash buyers in obtaining a loan.

Regards, Lauren

From: Parker, Melita MS Sent: Thursday, 9 June 2016 16:32 To: Gray, Lauren MS Cc: DL Special Counsel; Lehmann-Bird, Heidi MS; Lysewycz, Michael MR Subject: Update on discussions with banks [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]

UNCLASSIFIED

Hi Lauren

We understand that you have had some further discussions with banks and valuers in relation to Williamtown. We would be interested to know what progress you have made on that front so that we can keep potential claimants updated.

For your information, we have now received an unlitigated claim for diminuation in property value or a 'buyout' (the latter not really being an option under the LSDs) in Williamtown. We are also in discussions with the relevant government agencies about sharing information (e.g. NSW DPI for catch records and DHS for Centrelink records).

Thanks Melita






183

Gibb, Melanie MISS

From: Gray, Lauren MSSent: Thursday, 16 June 2016 1:03 PMTo: 'Cheryl Clarke'Cc: 'Jodie Calvert'; Avakian, Garbis MRSubject: RE: Banks [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]

UNCLASSIFIED

Hi Cheryl,

That's correct. Did you have any luck with a way forward for speaking with Newcastle Permanent?

Regards, Lauren

From: Cheryl Clarke [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Thursday, 16 June 2016 12:46 To: Gray, Lauren MS Subject: Banks

HI Lauren

I just wanted to check to ascertain whether federal Treasury and Defence were able to catch up with the Commonwealth Bank. I can’t remember our last conversation whether you had met with them or not. If so, are they the same as others in terms of not having a specific policy but interested in waiting for results of investigation and HHRA

Regards

Cheryl

Cheryl Clarke | Senior Coordination OfficerRegional Coordination Branch, Department of Premier and CabinetLevel 5, 26 Honeysuckle Drive, Newcastle NSW 2300

T: 02 4921 2603| [email protected] | dpc.nsw.gov.au



189

Gibb, Melanie MISS

From: Avakian, Garbis MRSent: Friday, 3 June 2016 4:06 PMTo: 'Cheryl Clarke'Cc: Gray, Lauren MS; Matias, Keifer MRSubject: FW: Williamtown Contamination Investigation Zone - Newcastle Permanent Building

Society [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]

UNCLASSIFIED

Cheryl, for your information and as discussed with Lauren today, please see below the advice we received from Newcastle Permanent.

Regards Garbis

From: Avakian, Garbis MR Sent: Friday, 3 June 2016 16:04 To: 'Garry Butterworth' Cc: 'Ashleigh Killingly' Subject: RE: Williamtown Contamination Investigation Zone - Newcastle Permanent Building Society [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]

UNCLASSIFIED

Garry, many thanks for your response, and I apologise for the delay in responding.

I appreciate you taking the time to outline Newcastle Permanent Building Society's position.

We will of course ensure we advise you of relevant public forums in the future.

I hope the weather isn't too wild over the weekend.

Regards Garbis

Garbis Avakian Assistant Director Policy and Governance PFC Environmental Management Program Estate and Infrastructure Group Department of Defence BP26-2-B068 P: (02) 6266 8515 E: [email protected]

From: Garry Butterworth [mailto Sent: Thursday, 2 June 2016 16:36 To: Avakian, Garbis MR Cc: Ashleigh Killingly Subject: Williamtown Contamination Investigation Zone - Newcastle Permanent Building Society

Good afternoon Garbis,


s22

190

Thank you for your communication and offer to meet with Newcastle Permanent to discuss the Williamtown contamination zone issue. We are aware of the published information available on this issue and the existence of the ongoing investigation into the contamination by the NSW EPA.

Newcastle Permanent would however be only too happy to attend any public meetings designed to deliver any further information regarding the progress of the investigation, relevant to the marketability of property in the area.

Kind regards,

Garry Butterworth Senior Manager Credit Policy p 02 4927 4316 f 02 4927 4637

This message is for the designated recipient only and may contain confidential, proprietary or otherwise private information. If you have received it in error, please notify the sender by return e-mail immediately and delete the original. Any review, re-transmission, disclosure, dissemination or other use of, or taking of any action in reliance upon, this information by persons or entities other than the intended recipient is prohibited and may result in legal proceedings against you. The sender does not guarantee that this email and any attachments will be virus-free and will not affect your computer.



s47G

191

Gibb, Melanie MISS

From: Avakian, Garbis MRSent: Thursday, 2 June 2016 12:11 PMTo: 'Bob Dupont'Subject: Defence media release [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]

UNCLASSIFIED

Bob, as discussed, the media release that went out last night is below. http://news.defence.gov.au/2016/06/01/defence-progresses-with-pfospfoa-environmental-investigations-at-williamtown/

MEDIA RELEASE

Defence progresses with PFOS/PFOA Environmental Investigations at Williamtown

01 June 2016

Defence is progressing detailed investigations to identify the extent and levels of perfluorooctane sulfonate (PFOS) and perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA) on, and in the vicinity of, RAAF Base Williamtown. Defence has taken over 430residential water samples and around 90 percent have returned nil detect.

Defence continues to collaboratively work with the NSW Environment Protection Authority to ensure they have currentinformation when considering possible actions. Defence is providing the technical interpretation of the aquaticsampling data, collected by NSW government departments, to the NSW Environment Protection Authority today.

Defence is on track to finalise the environmental site assessment in the next month, comprehensive human healthrisk assessment in late July 2016 and ecological risk assessment in mid August 2016. Defence will provide thesereports to the NSW Environment Protection Authority and release them publicly.

Once the reports are released, residents, businesses and local stakeholders will be offered a chance to discuss the findings with Defence and NSW representatives.

More information about the Defence National PFC Environmental Management Program is available online at http://www.defence.gov.au/id/Williamtown/Default.asp

A fact sheet about the preliminary water sampling program and Defence’s historical use of PFCs can be found at http://www.defence.gov.au/id/PFOSPFOA/DefenceSites.asp

Media Contact: Defence Media 02 6127 1999

Regards Garbis

Garbis Avakian Assistant Director Policy and Governance PFC Environmental Management Program Estate and Infrastructure Group Department of Defence BP26-2-B068 P: (02) 6266 8515 E: [email protected]


From: Avakian, Garbis MRSent: Wednesday, 1 June 2016 2:11 PMTo: 'Bob Dupont'Subject: RE: meeting [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]

UNCLASSIFIED

Perfect, thanks very much for that Bob. I appreciate you taking the time.

RegardsGarbis

From: Bob Dupont Sent: Wednesday, 1 June 2016 12:58To: Avakian, Garbis MRSubject: FW: meeting

Garbis

Attached is attendance list , with the exception of the 3 PCA members I mentioned they are all valuers although 2 are predominately real estate agents

Regards



Phone 02 4922 0600Fax 02 4922 0688 www.prp.com.au


www.prp.com.au


From: Kilmartin, Kath @ Newcastle Sent: Wednesday, 1 June 2016 12:48 PM


s22

s22

s22

http://www.prp.com.au/

https://www.facebook.com/pages/Preston-Rowe-Paterson-National-Property-Consultants/333724466651122?fref=ts

https://twitter.com/PRPAustralasia

http://www.linkedin.com/company/preston-rowe-paterson


http://prp.com.au/privacy-policy/

To: Bob Dupont Subject: RE: meeting

Hi Bob

The reply emails all seemed legit to me, have attached the list for you. Ended up with 68

See you Friday

Kath Kilmartin | Valuer AAPI CPVResidential Valuations Newcastle/Central CoastT 1300 407 092

| www.cbre.com.au

“Liability limited by a scheme approved under Professional Standards Legislation"Please consider the environment before printing this email.

From: Bob Dupont Sent: Wednesday, 1 June 2016 12:18 PMTo: Kilmartin, Kath Subject: meeting

KathCan you send me a list of attendees at the meetingSeems like Defence is worried that it include non valuers but don’t know what we can do about that

Regards




s22

s22

s22

s22

s22

http://www.cbre.com.au/

https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.prp.com.au_&d=CwMFAg&c=jozbAXBGpZCeJmn-Q9SThA&r=y27lYvp6fU3axvfhkpuirkLpjVVx9CHNj5O9czpljkA&m=T-RaRT06lc_RQrSOlol_Cz7QpoJnLmQ77NqQawx1cmc&s=V1MFEta7Ti7xelQxi14pPT64nHRJ0LDKzA1lVEbGkDE&e=


www.prp.com.au


____________________________________________________________________________ This message and any attachments may be confidential and/or legally privileged. If you received this message in error, please do not copy or distribute it. Instead, please destroy it and notify the sender immediately. To the extent that this email contains information provided to CBRE by other sources, CBRE does not warrant that it is accurate or complete. To the extent that there are opinions or views expressed in this email, they are those of the individual sender and may not necessarily reflect the views of CBRE. CBRE respects your privacy and is bound by the Australian Privacy Principles. If this email consists of direct marketing material and you would prefer to be removed from this mailing list, please contact our Privacy Officer via phone 61 3 8621 3497, facsimile 61 3 8621 3330 or email [email protected] A copy of our Privacy Policy can be viewed at http://www.cbre.com.au/Pages/Australia-Privacy-Statement.aspx Please do not delete or alter this notice


https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.facebook.com_pages_Preston-2DRowe-2DPaterson-2DNational-2DProperty-2DConsultants_333724466651122-3Ffref-3Dts&d=CwMFAg&c=jozbAXBGpZCeJmn-Q9SThA&r=y27lYvp6fU3axvfhkpuirkLpjVVx9CHNj5O9czpljkA&m=T-RaRT06lc_RQrSOlol_Cz7QpoJnLmQ77NqQawx1cmc&s=y9swwwtL-vbucGW14mxTW_T7WJaxNgNQdTfE8m3nLcI&e=

https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__twitter.com_PRPAustralasia&d=CwMFAg&c=jozbAXBGpZCeJmn-Q9SThA&r=y27lYvp6fU3axvfhkpuirkLpjVVx9CHNj5O9czpljkA&m=T-RaRT06lc_RQrSOlol_Cz7QpoJnLmQ77NqQawx1cmc&s=2j4G-yjfKaDBUEOXsce7usB4vND7elY97nNOAyrqJv8&e=

https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.linkedin.com_company_preston-2Drowe-2Dpaterson&d=CwMFAg&c=jozbAXBGpZCeJmn-Q9SThA&r=y27lYvp6fU3axvfhkpuirkLpjVVx9CHNj5O9czpljkA&m=T-RaRT06lc_RQrSOlol_Cz7QpoJnLmQ77NqQawx1cmc&s=ftVlrLiNphKoMhFPxom5xayzx3iKMlh3J0JK84YF3JY&e=

https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.prp.com.au_&d=CwMFAg&c=jozbAXBGpZCeJmn-Q9SThA&r=y27lYvp6fU3axvfhkpuirkLpjVVx9CHNj5O9czpljkA&m=T-RaRT06lc_RQrSOlol_Cz7QpoJnLmQ77NqQawx1cmc&s=V1MFEta7Ti7xelQxi14pPT64nHRJ0LDKzA1lVEbGkDE&e=

https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__prp.com.au_privacy-2Dpolicy_&d=CwMFAg&c=jozbAXBGpZCeJmn-Q9SThA&r=y27lYvp6fU3axvfhkpuirkLpjVVx9CHNj5O9czpljkA&m=T-RaRT06lc_RQrSOlol_Cz7QpoJnLmQ77NqQawx1cmc&s=ovL1xifuXV4h3KqcDx9wYFUIdttYjC19Xl0JWaq1_mE&e=

mailto:[email protected]

http://www.cbre.com.au/Pages/Australia-Privacy-Statement.aspx

From: Avakian, Garbis MRSent: Tuesday, 31 May 2016 10:44 PMTo: 'Cc: Gray, Lauren MS; 'Subject: RE: Important Information Session regarding Williamtown Department of Defence Environmental

Investigations [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]Attachments: API Agenda.doc

UNCLASSIFIED

Sorry Kath, I dropped you off my email to Bob.

RegardsGarbis


From: Avakian, Garbis MR Sent: Tuesday, 31 May 2016 10:40 PMTo: 'Bob Dupont'Cc: Gray, Lauren MSSubject: RE: Important Information Session regarding Williamtown Department of Defence Environmental Investigations [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]

UNCLASSIFIED

Bob, thanks for your email below. I have touched base with Noahs and we've secured a larger room so can continue as we were. The new room will fit around 70 comfortably, 80 max. I'd suggest presenting organisations (Defence, NSW Govt, Port Stephens Council etc) will bring 10-15, so we won't have too much additional space.

So I'd suggest we could let numbers reach around 65, but may need to place a cap on further numbers after that. Perhaps if some organisations are represented by multiple personnel, we could ask them to limit their representatives.

For your information, I've attached our working agenda for the meeting. It provides a guide for the issues we'd like to talk through and indicative timings. We'd welcome any comments you may have, although would ask that the agenda not be for further distribution at this stage. I note that EPA and Health representatives will need to depart a little earlier than 0930, so we will seek to ensure that we can work through all the relevant issues in the time available.

I am of course happy to discuss any aspect of this further with you.

RegardsGarbis

From: Bob Dupont Sent: Tuesday, 31 May 2016 16:22To: Kilmartin, Kath @ NewcastleCc: Avakian, Garbis MR; Gray, Lauren MS; Subject: RE: Important Information Session regarding Williamtown Department of Defence Environmental Investigations

Yes and with Defence which I will copy into this email


s22

s22

s22

s22

s22

(good roll up looks like we have stirred up a bit interest)

Regards





www.prp.com.au



From: Kilmartin, Kath @ Newcastle Sent: Tuesday, 31 May 2016 2:11 PMTo: Bob Dupont Subject: FW: Important Information Session regarding Williamtown Department of Defence Environmental Investigations

We have 59 to attend on Friday so far! Bob do we need to confirm numbers with Noahs?


| www.cbre.com.au


s22

s22

s22

s22


https://www.facebook.com/pages/Preston-Rowe-Paterson-National-Property-Consultants/333724466651122?fref=ts

https://twitter.com/PRPAustralasia

http://www.linkedin.com/company/preston-rowe-paterson


http://prp.com.au/privacy-policy/


From: Kilmartin, Kath @ Newcastle Sent: Tuesday, 31 May 2016 1:52 PMTo: Kilmartin, Kath @ Newcastle Subject: Important Information Session regarding Williamtown Department of Defence Environmental Investigations

Hi All

If you haven’t advised me and you would like to attend this event, please RSVP by 11am tomorrow.

For those enquiring this event will provide 2 CPD points.


| www.cbre.com.au



s22

s22


mailto:[email protected]

http://www.cbre.com.au/Pages/Australia-Privacy-Statement.aspx

203


www.prp.com.au



From: Kilmartin, Kath @ Newcastle [ Sent: Tuesday, 31 May 2016 2:11 PM To: Bob Dupont < Subject: FW: Important Information Session regarding Williamtown Department of Defence Environmental Investigations

We have 59 to attend on Friday so far! Bob do we need to confirm numbers with Noahs?

Kath Kilmartin | Valuer AAPI CPV Residential Valuations Newcastle/Central Coast T 1300 407 092

www.cbre.com.au

“Liability limited by a scheme approved under Professional Standards Legislation" Please consider the environment before printing this email.

From: Kilmartin, Kath @ Newcastle Sent: Tuesday, 31 May 2016 1:52 PM To: Kilmartin, Kath @ Newcastle < Subject: Important Information Session regarding Williamtown Department of Defence Environmental Investigations

Hi All

If you haven’t advised me and you would like to attend this event, please RSVP by 11am tomorrow.

For those enquiring this event will provide 2 CPD points.

s22

s22

s22s22

s22

204


www.cbre.com.au

“Liability limited by a scheme approved under Professional Standards Legislation" Please consider the environment before printing this email.


s22s22

196

Gibb, Melanie MISS

From: Bob Dupont Sent: Wednesday, 1 June 2016 12:58 PMTo: Avakian, Garbis MRSubject: FW: meetingAttachments: API May attendance.xlsx

Garbis

Attached is attendance list , with the exception of the 3 PCA members I mentioned they are all valuers although 2 are predominately real estate agents

Regards


CEO / Director



Phone 02 4922 0600

Fax 02 4922 0688



www.prp.com.au


From: Kilmartin, Kath @ Newcastle [ Sent: Wednesday, 1 June 2016 12:48 PM To: Bob Dupont > Subject: RE: meeting

Hi Bob

The reply emails all seemed legit to me, have attached the list for you. Ended up with 68

See you Friday



s22

s22

s22

s22

s22

210

Gibb, Melanie MISS

From: Matias, Keifer MRSent: Friday, 27 May 2016 11:57 AMTo: Avakian, Garbis MRSubject: FW: ANZ lending policies for 2318 postcode [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]

UNCLASSIFIED

From: Gray, Lauren MS Sent: Tuesday, 3 May 2016 18:30 To: 'Clayton, Tom' Cc: Matias, Keifer MR; 'Southwell, Amanda'; '[email protected]' Subject: RE: ANZ lending policies for 2318 postcode [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]

UNCLASSIFIED

Hi Tom,

Further to our telephone conversation yesterday, thank you for agreeing to our request for a meeting with ANZ representatives.

We would like to invite you for a teleconference discussion to be held on Friday 6 May 2016, 15:00 - 16:00.

Details to join the teleconference have been provided below: Dial 02 8335 5909 Participant Pin: 319740

Additional participants from Defence are likely to include Mr Chris Birrer, First Assistant Secretary Infrastructure and Ms Alison Clifton, Assistant Secretary Environment and Engineering.

We look forward to speaking with you on Friday.

Regards, Lauren

From: Clayton, Tom Sent: Monday, 2 May 2016 08:41 To: Gray, Lauren MS Cc: Matias, Keifer MR Subject: RE: ANZ lending policies for 2318 postcode [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]

Hi Lauren,

Let’s do a telephone discussion as the first step. I think we can probably cover this off without the need for travel and face-to-face.

I can currently do any time on Friday afternoon between 1pm and 4pm.

Regards,

Tom


s22

211

Tom Clayton | ANZ | Head of Acquisition Risk | Retail Risk Level 12, 242 Pitt Street, Sydney, NSW 2000, Australia Phone: +61 2 8937 7294 | www.anz.com

Join the Retail Risk discussion on MaxConnect

From: Gray, Lauren MS [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Friday, 29 April 2016 5:56 PM To: Clayton, Tom Cc: Matias, Keifer MR Subject: ANZ lending policies for 2318 postcode [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]

UNCLASSIFIED

Good evening Tom,

Further to the email trail below, Defence and Treasury representatives would appreciate an opportunity to meet with ANZ to discuss concerns raised by some community members in the 2318 postcode regarding ANZ lending policies for the area.

If you happen to have plans to travel to Canberra for Budget week, it would be very convenient to arrange a time to meet while you are in town. Alternatively, we are happy to arrange a time to travel to Melbourne to meet with you.

Please feel free to nominate some dates and times that may work for you, or I am happy to phone you on Monday to align diaries if that is easier.

Kind regards,

Lauren Gray Director - Policy and Governance Environment and Engineering Branch Estate and Infrastructure Group Department of Defence BP-2-B-060 Tel: (02) 626 68267 Email: [email protected]

From: Southwell, Amanda [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Friday, 29 April 2016 10:37 AM To: Gray, Lauren MS Subject: FW: Defence - contact for lending practices in 2318 postcode

Hi Lauren

Please see the relevant contact at ANZ below. His email address is

Kind regards,

Amanda Southwell

Banking, Insurance and Capital Markets Unit Financial System Division The Treasury Langton Crescent, Parkes ACT 2600 Phone: +61 2 6263 3110 Email: [email protected]

s22

s22

212

From: Cabion, Alessandra [ Sent: Thursday, 28 April 2016 9:04 AM To: Southwell, Amanda Cc: Clayton, Tom Subject: FW: Defence - contact for lending practices in 2318 postcode

Good morning Amanda. Apologies for my delay in getting back to you.

Best contact is Tom Clayton, Head of Acquisition Risk. His telephone numbers are 02 8937 7294 / I have copied him here so you have his email address.

Bye for now, Alessandra

Regards, Alessandra Cabion Executive Assistant to Gerard Brown ‐ Group General Manager Corporate Affairs ANZ Centre, Level 10, 833 Collins Street, Docklands VIC 3008, Australia Phone: +61 3 8654 3423 | | Email:

Please note that I jobshare this role with Paula Giaquinta. I am in the office from Wednesday ‐ Friday. Paula is in the office from Monday ‐ Tuesday and every alternate Wednesday. She can be reached on +61 3 8654 4455

From: Southwell, Amanda [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Friday, 22 April 2016 1:06 PM To: Cabion, Alessandra Cc: Luu, Nghi; Lomdahl, Rob Subject: Defence - contact for lending pracitices in 2318 postcode

Dear Alessandra

Thank you for your time this morning. As we discussed, the Department of Defence are seeking contact details to discuss ANZ Bank’s lending policies for property in postcode 2318, NSW.

The Department of Defence is currently conducting environmental investigations for compounds known as perfluorooctane sulfonate (PFOS) and perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA) in the vicinity of RAAF Base Williamtown near Newcastle, NSW. They are seeking to meet with the ANZ Bank to provide further background to this matter to enable the ANZ Bank to undertake a fully informed assessment in determining its lending policies for this area.

On the 16 March 2016, the Australian Environmental Health Standing Committee (enHealth) released a guidance statement that states: "There is currently no consistent evidence that exposure to PFOS and PFOA causes adverse human health effects. Because these chemicals persist in humans and the environment, enHealth recommends that human exposure to these chemicals is minimised as a precaution." In terms of exposure pathways, the guidance statement advises "In sites contaminated by PFOS and PFOA, drinking water and specific foods may be important exposure pathways.". Defence has been providing alternative drinking water to properties in the investigation area while it completes its environmental investigation.

The investigation area for Williamtown has been defined by the NSW Environment Protection Authority. We note that this investigation area only extends across part of the 2318 postcode. The Defence investigations are now well advanced. To date, more than 400 samples have been taken and 80‐90 percent of the results have been a 'nil detect'.

s22

s22

s22 s22

213

Defence understand sales have continued to progress in the 2318 post code. They also understand that it is possible the buyer pool may now be limited by purchasers having difficulty obtaining finance for properties in the 2318 post code area. Defence have similarly received anecdotal advice from the community that there may be policy restrictions on the ANZ Bank’s lending to property owners who are seeking to make improvements in this area or prospective sellers who wish to buy before they sell.

Defence executives are eager to meet with ANZ Bank to discuss this matter at your earliest convenience. Treasury representatives would also likely attend. I am happy to provide you with the contact details for the person at Defence if this makes it easier for you.

Kind regards

Amanda Southwell

Banking, Insurance and Capital Markets Unit Financial System Division The Treasury Langton Crescent, Parkes ACT 2600 Phone: +61 2 6263 3110 Email: [email protected]

Please Note: The information contained in this e-mail message and any attached files may be confidential information and may also be the subject of legal professional privilege. If you are not the intended recipient, any use, disclosure or copying of this e-mail is unauthorised. If you have received this e-mail by error please notify the sender immediately by reply e-mail and delete all copies of this transmission together with any attachments.

This e-mail and any attachments to it (the "Communication") is, unless otherwise stated, confidential, may contain copyright material and is for the use only of the intended recipient. If you receive the Communication in error, please notify the sender immediately by return e-mail, delete the Communication and the return e-mail, and do not read, copy, retransmit or otherwise deal with it. Any views expressed in the Communication are those of the individual sender only, unless expressly stated to be those of Australia and New Zealand Banking Group Limited ABN 11 005 357 522, or any of its related entities including ANZ Bank New Zealand Limited (together "ANZ"). ANZ does not accept liability in connection with the integrity of or errors in the Communication, computer virus, data corruption, interference or delay arising from or in respect of the Communication.



This e-mail and any attachments to it (the "Communication") is, unless otherwise stated, confidential, may contain copyright material and is for the use only of the intended recipient. If you receive the Communication in error, please notify the sender immediately by return e-mail, delete the Communication and the return e-mail, and do not read, copy, retransmit or otherwise deal with it. Any views expressed in the Communication are those of the individual sender only, unless expressly stated to be those of Australia

214

and New Zealand Banking Group Limited ABN 11 005 357 522, or any of its related entities including ANZ Bank New Zealand Limited (together "ANZ"). ANZ does not accept liability in connection with the integrity of or errors in the Communication, computer virus, data corruption, interference or delay arising from or in respect of the Communication.



215

Gibb, Melanie MISS

From: Karen Oddy Sent: Wednesday, 25 May 2016 5:31 PMTo: Avakian, Garbis MRSubject: RE: Updated Williamtown Information Session [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]

Many thanks, Garbis

Regards

Karen Oddy JP

Personal Assistant



Phone 02 4922 0600

Fax 02 4922 0688

www.prp.com.au


www.prp.com.au


From: Avakian, Garbis MR [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Wednesday, 25 May 2016 5:24 PM To: Karen Oddy Cc: Gray, Lauren MS <[email protected]>; Matias, Keifer MR <[email protected]>; Bob Dupont Subject: RE: Updated Williamtown Information Session [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]

UNCLASSIFIED

Karen, my sincere apologies for the delay in responding.

I can confirm that we are good to go for 0800 on Friday 3 June. We have amended the wording on the Flyer, and would ask that the attached be used. If you have any concerns I would be very happy to discuss those with you.

Regards Garbis


s22

s22

s22

s22

208

Re above can you have a look at proposed flyer and see if okay As I will be in field for next 2 days can you reply this afternoon Otherwise contact Kath Kilmartin directly and she will distribute to members

Regards


CEO / Director



Phone 02 4922 0600

Fax 02 4922 0688



www.prp.com.au


From: Karen Oddy Sent: Tuesday, 24 May 2016 1:29 PM To: Bob Dupont < Subject: Updated Williamtown Contamination Briefing Session

Regards

Karen Oddy JP

Personal Assistant



Phone 02 4922 0600

Fax 02 4922 0688

www.prp.com.au

s22

s22

s22

216

Garbis Avakian Assistant Director Policy and Governance PFC Environmental Management Program Estate and Infrastructure Group Department of Defence BP26-2-B068 P: (02) 6266 8515

E: [email protected]

From: Bob Dupont Sent: Tuesday, 24 May 2016 13:45 To: Gray, Lauren MS Cc: Kilmartin, Kath @ Newcastle Subject: FW: Updated Williamtown Contamination Briefing Session

Lauren

Re above can you have a look at proposed flyer and see if okay As I will be in field for next 2 days can you reply this afternoon Otherwise contact Kath Kilmartin directly and she will distribute to members

Regards


CEO / Director



Phone 02 4922 0600

Fax 02 4922 0688



www.prp.com.au


From: Karen Oddy Sent: Tuesday, 24 May 2016 1:29 PM

s22

s22

s22

207

Gibb, Melanie MISS

From: Avakian, Garbis MRSent: Friday, 27 May 2016 1:41 PMTo: 'Subject: FW: Updated Williamtown Information Session [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]Attachments: Williamtown Information Session.docx

UNCLASSIFIED

Bob, further to my last, below are the names of some valuers we have been provided in conversations with some financial institutions. We just wanted to ensure that they were included in the list of invitees that API was tracking.

HTW (Newcastle & Hunter Regional) WBP Property Group CBRE Residential Valuations - NSW Opteon Property Group (Newcastle & Central Coast NSW) Property Valuations NSW

Regards Garbis

From: Avakian, Garbis MR Sent: Wednesday, 25 May 2016 17:24 To: Cc: Gray, Lauren MS; Matias, Keifer MR; 'bob.dupont Subject: RE: Updated Williamtown Information Session [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]

UNCLASSIFIED

Karen, my sincere apologies for the delay in responding.

I can confirm that we are good to go for 0800 on Friday 3 June. We have amended the wording on the Flyer, and would ask that the attached be used. If you have any concerns I would be very happy to discuss those with you.

Regards Garbis

Garbis Avakian Assistant Director Policy and Governance PFC Environmental Management Program Estate and Infrastructure Group Department of Defence BP26-2-B068 P: (02) 6266 8515

E: [email protected]

From: Bob Dupont Sent: Tuesday, 24 May 2016 13:45 To: Gray, Lauren MS Cc: Kilmartin, Subject: FW: Updated Williamtown Contamination Briefing Session

Lauren


s22

s22

s22

s22

s22

219


www.prp.com.au


From: Karen Oddy Sent: Tuesday, 24 May 2016 1:29 PM To: Bob Dupont < Subject: Updated Williamtown Contamination Briefing Session

Regards

Karen Oddy JP

Personal Assistant



Phone 02 4922 0600

Fax 02 4922 0688

www.prp.com.au


www.prp.com.au



s22

s22s22

221

Gibb, Melanie MISS

From: Gray, Lauren MSSent: Tuesday, 24 May 2016 1:01 PMTo: 'Macmillan, Steven'Cc: Avakian, Garbis MRSubject: RE: Valuers for Williamtown area [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]

UNCLASSIFIED

Thank you Steven, much appreciated.

Regards, Lauren

From: Macmillan, Steven Sent: Tuesday, 24 May 2016 09:22 To: Gray, Lauren MS Subject: RE: Valuers for Williamtown area [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]

Lauren Apologies for the delay. The details of the valuers are below. Regards Steve

CBRE Residential Valuations – NSWPeter Fallon (Director, NSW)

HTW (Newcastle & Hunter Region) Pty LtdLeigh Mather (Director)

Opteon Property Group (Newcastle & Central Coast NSW)Matthew Durie (Director)

Property Valuations NSWScott McMonigal (Director)

Australian Property Institute (API)Kevin Thompson (National Standards Manager)


s22

s22

s22s22

s22 s22

s22

s22s22

s22

222

________________________ Commonwealth Bank

Steven Macmillan Executive Manager Government, Industry & International Affairs | Group Corporate Affairs Level 5 | Tower 1 | Darling Park 201 Sussex Street Sydney NSW 2000 P: +61 2 9303 8265

From: Gray, Lauren MS [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: 13 May 2016 12:14 To: Macmillan, Steven < Cc: Matias, Keifer MR <[email protected]> Subject: Valuers for Williamtown area [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]

UNCLASSIFIED

Good afternoon Steven,

Thank you again for your time this morning. As discussed, we would be grateful to receive details of the property valuers that CBA uses in the vicinity of Williamtown, NSW so that we can inform these valuers of the status of our investigations and findings to date.

We will also keep you appraised of further developments with the investigations and Government response.

Kind regards,



************** IMPORTANT MESSAGE ***************************** This e-mail message is intended only for the addressee(s) and contains information which may be confidential. If you are not the intended recipient please advise the sender by return email, do not use or disclose the contents, and delete the message and any attachments from your system. Unless specifically indicated, this email does not constitute formal advice or commitment by the sender or the Commonwealth Bank of Australia (ABN 48 123 123 124) or its subsidiaries. We can be contacted through our web site: commbank.com.au. If you no longer wish to receive commercial electronic messages from us, please reply to this e-mail by typing Unsubscribe in the subject line. **************************************************************

The linked image cannot be displayed. The file may have been moved, renamed, or deleted. Verify that the link points to the correct file and location.

s22

s22

224

Gibb, Melanie MISS

From: Avakian, Garbis MRSent: Tuesday, 24 May 2016 9:46 AMTo: Matias, Keifer MRSubject: FW: Contamination seminar - Newcastle [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]

UNCLASSIFIED

FYI. This is the new POC for the valuers. Lauren spoke with him yesterday.....

From: Gray, Lauren MS Sent: Monday, 23 May 2016 11:43 To: 'Kevin Thompson' Cc: 'Bob Dupont'; Avakian, Garbis MR Subject: RE: Contamination seminar - Newcastle [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]

UNCLASSIFIED

Thanks Kevin, much appreciated. We will look forward to progressing the arrangements with Bob.

Kind regards,


From: Kevin Thompson Sent: Monday, 23 May 2016 10:52 To: Gray, Lauren MS Cc: Bob Dupont Subject: Contamination seminar - Newcastle

Hi Lauren,

Bob Dupont is a valuer who works in Newcastle and is very aware of the issues in Newcastle. Bob is also on the API standards committee and I spoke with him last Friday re the intention to set up a meeting next week between the Department of Defence, NSW Government, Port Stephens Council and API Valuers in the Newcastle area. Bob has agreed to liaise with local valuers and assist in the arrangement of a meeting which he suggested would work best as a morning meeting in Newcastle.

To expedite arrangements Bob, who is cc’d into this email, will contact you directly in relation to the proposed meeting. His contact details are:


CEO / Director



Phone 02 4922 0600 Email


s22

s22

225

Fax 02 4922 0688

www.prp.com.au

Once a meeting date, time and location have been agreed, will you contact NSW Government and Port Stephens council representatives who may wish to attend?

Kind Regards


P: 02 9299 1811


www.api.org.au




s22

s22

238

Gibb, Melanie MISS

From: Gray, Lauren MSSent: Wednesday, 18 May 2016 10:35 AMTo: 'Southwell, Amanda'Cc: Avakian, Garbis MR; Matias, Keifer MRSubject: Lending institutions [DLM=For-Official-Use-Only]


Hi Amanda,

Hope you are well.

Thank you very much again for putting us in touch with the major four banks. We have not pursued a meeting with the CBA and Westpac/St George but I had fruitful phone conversations with their representatives, who echoed their reliance on valuers rather than a specific lending policy and provided some useful tips in approproaching Defence's future discussions with valuers.

It has been suggested that Defence should also speak with Newcastle Permanent and Aussie Home Loans for market coverage in the area. Would you happen to also have existing contacts with these institutions or should we pursue these independently?

Kind regards,



matthew.ashauer

Typewritten Text

217/16/17 Item 1 b/c Serial 54

239

Gibb, Melanie MISS

From: Birrer, Chris MRSent: Tuesday, 17 May 2016 12:27 PMTo: Grzeskowiak, Steven MRCc: Clifton, Alison MS; Gray, Lauren MS; Matias, Keifer MR; Avakian, Garbis MRSubject: Lending institution discussions on lending policies [DLM=Sensitive]

Sensitive

Steve,

We just met with the CEO of the Australian Property Institute, which is the professional association for property valuers. We will work with him to push out information to valuers in the Williamtown and Oakey areas to ensure they are informed of the facts that we have and the Government's position on PFCs.

We have had discussions (face-to-face or phone) with head office representatives of NAB, ANZ, Westpac (its head office also covers St George), and CBA. We are following up with Aussie Home Loans and Newcastle Permanent.

The Aust Property Institute also undertook to contact key lenders in the Williamtown area.

In addition to these discussions, NSW Premier and Cabinet is also holding discussions with local bank officials.

Regards,

Chris


matthew.ashauer

Typewritten Text


240

Gibb, Melanie MISS

From: Gray, Lauren MSSent: Friday, 13 May 2016 12:28 PMTo: Birrer, Chris MR; Clifton, Alison MSCc: Lysewycz, Michael MR; Matias, Keifer MR; Avakian, Garbis MR; Hannon, Stacey MS;

'Southwell, Amanda'; '[email protected]'; Grzeskowiak, Steven MRSubject: WLM property lending - Westpac and CBA [DLM=For-Official-Use-Only]


Chris and Alison,

I spoke further with Michael Johnston of Westpac by phone this morning:

- Michael has made inquiries with local branches for Westpac and St George and indicated that neither 'bank' have reservations in lending to people in the area who meet other standard income etc criteria, as

long as the valuers are able to provide a valuation. The local lending advisers have confirmed that the valuers are having difficulty in valuing properties due to the perceived risks and potential impacts of those risks on property values. Therefore, he suggested that Westpac/St George are not directly tracking the perceived risks/commercial effects of the investigations and the valuers are the key avenue we should follow up. Michael has agreed to provide details of the valuers they use in the local area.

- Across Westpac/St George their maket share of mortgages in NSW is 25-30% and he would expect similar in the local area

- (Michael's number for my own future ref is

I also spoke with Steven MacMillan of CBA this morning:

- CBA's situation is similar to Westpac, in that they do not have direct lending policies, although they are obviously tracking the issue more closely and suggested that resolving the investigations and the Govt response, as well as having this understood by the public is important. Steven advised the primary issue is valuers are advising they can not confidently value the properties.

- Steven has fed back the introductory email information I provided regarding the status of our investigations to their risk area and suggested that we need to have this type of 'actual' level of risk information (eg 80-90% nil detects, limited exposure pathways etc) better understood in the public domain to influence how valuers are assessing the commercial risk, ie talk directly to valuers, but also important for consumers (and real estate agents) to have this understanding. He noted my advice that the Government response quotes this figure and our commitment to making reports publicly available.

Both banks advised that the valuation issues are limited to the investigation area, not the broader postcode.

Separately, we have heard back from the CEO of the Australian Property Institute (valuation standards) regarding a possible meeting time while he is in Canberra next Tuesday morning and Keifer will work with your respective EAs to lock in the details.

I spoke with NSW DPC last week about the merits of educating local valuers with the full facts and DPC agreed to pull together a local meeting for attendance by local valuers, Defence, NSW DPC, NSW EPA and Port Stephens Council. Today's phone discussion reinforced it may also be worth dove-tailing a session with local real estate agents.

Happy to discuss.

Regards,

Lauren Gray Director - Policy and Governance Environment and Engineering Branch Estate and Infrastructure Group Department of Defence

s22

s47G

s47G

matthew.ashauer

Typewritten Text


241

BP-2-B-060 Tel: (02) 626 68267 Email: [email protected]


I ,, <

L:-'

Report for Sullivan Nicolaides pathology:

Analysis of polyfluoroalkyl substances in serum

Materials and Methods:

Reagents and sample preparation

Amy L Heffernan. PhD, MRACI National Research Centre for Environmental Toxicology

31August2015

Ammonium acetate (>97%) was purchased from Chem-Supply (Gillman, SA, Australia), and methanol

(99.8%, LiChrosolv®) and acetonitrile (99.9%, LiChrosolv®) from Merck (Darmstadt, Germany). All

water used was laboratory produced ultra-pure water. A native standard mix containing native PFAAs

(perfluorooctane sulfonate (PFOS), perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA), and perfluorohexane sulfonate

(PFHxS)) and a mass labelled internal standard mix (13C4-PFOS, 13C4-PFOA and 180i-PFHxS, and) were

from Wellington Laboratories (Guelph, Ontario, Canada). An aliquot of 200 µL serum was transferred

to a 2 ml Eppendorf tube followed by addition of the internal standards. Acetonitrile was used to

precipitate the proteins and the extraction was facilitated by ultrasonication and vortex mixing. After

centrifugation, the supernatant was filtrated into a LC vlal through a 2 µm RC membrane

(Phenomenex, Torrance, CA) and reduced to 200 µL using nitrogen, after which 300 µL 5 mM

ammonium acetate in water and the performance standards 13Cs-PFOS and 13Cs-PFOA (Wellington

Laboratories) were added.

HPLC-MS/MS Analysis

The analytical system consisted of a Nexera HPLC (Shimadzu Corp., Kyoto, Japan) coupled to

APl5500QTRAP mass spectrometer (AB/Sciex, Concord, Ontario, Canada) with electrospray ionization

(ESI) interface operating in negative mode. Chromatographic separation of the analytes was achieved

with a C18 Gemini column, 50x2.0mm, 4µm (Phenomenex, Torrance, CA), maintained at 45 °C, with a

flow rate of 0.3 ml/min and injection volume of 5 µL. Mobile phases consisted of methanol:water

(1:99, v/v) (A), and methanol:water (95:5, v/v) (B), with 5mM ammonium acetate in both phases. An

isolator column (Phenomenex) was included inline directly after the mobile phase mixing chamber to

delay the elution of solvent-derived background PFC contamination. Data acquisition and processing

was carried out using Analyst® TF 1.6 and MultiQuantTM software (AB Sciex).

Page 1of5

•

j

217/16/17Item 2Serial 1

1 \ I

I I

l

Quality assurance:

Serum samples were extracted in four batches from 30th March 2015 to 28th August 2015. The limit

of reporting was determined by quality of peak shape and using a minimum signal-to-noise ratio of

10:1 in matrix, and was 0.5, 0.1and0.1 ng/ml for PFOS, PFOA and PFHxS, respectively. Contamination

was assessed by inclusion of procedural blanks (ultra-pure water, minimum 3 per batch, total n=16)

extracted in parallel with unknown samples. Linearity was established from 0.05 to 50 ng/ml serum

for PFOA and 0.05 to 100 ng/ml serum for PFOS and PFHxS using non-extracted aqueous standards,

with R2 values >0.998. Samples with a measured concentration more than 10% outside the calibration

range were diluted to 10% and re-analysed.

Analytes were identified based on retention time (<2% RSD from standard), and confirmed by a second

MRM transition. Quantification was performed using isotope dilution mass spectrometry. PFOS, PFOA

and PFHxS, were quantified against their mass-labelled analogues, 13C4-PFOS, 13C4-PFOA and 180r

PFHxS, respectively. Method precision and accuracy were assessed using a certified reference material

(CRM), SRM 1957 (National Institute of Standards and Technology, NIST) with a minimum of three

replicates per batch, and a mean normalized difference of <3% (Table 1). A subset of samples (n=6)

were sent to an external reference laboratory (National Measurement Institute, Sydney) for inter

laboratory comparison. The mean normalised difference was -1.4, -1.7 and 1.6% for PFOS, PFOA and

PFHxS, respectively.

Table 1. Summary of quality control parameters. Values are given in ng/ml serum.

PFOS PFOA PFHxS

MRM Transitions• 499.1/99 413.1/369 399.1/80 499.1/80 413.1/169 399.1/99

Linearity, R2 >0.999 >0.999 >0.998

Limit of Reporting 0.5 0.1 0.1

Av. blank concentration (n=16) <0.05 <0.05 <0.05

ifAc~I!~ .· · . .. ',.,. · : sii>h~::: ';;;.·:=~:;;; :r;. ~ :· J!Si ~.~ ·· Im f~jkli l ;·1;;;;;,:; . '.'~: ••t .H; ,·•'VJ i~~,,:·:.>,. ;;';rt.f . . ;;~;~

Certified cpncentration b 17.7 5.00 4.00 Av. measured concentration (n=l3} 16.4 4.45 3.71 Reproducibility, RSD (%) 10 13 10 Inaccuracy(%) -7.1 -11 -7.2 Mean normalized difference (%) c 1.8 2.9 1.9

•Confirmation transition shown in italics b Certified reference material, SRM 1957 (National Institute of Standards a.nd Technology) (Riddell et al 2009) c Calculated using the formula: ((x - y) I ((x + y} I 2) x 100), where xis the certified concentration (NIST), and y is the concentration calculated in this study.

Page 2 of 5

I

I J

Comments:

Quantitation of PFOS

Comparison of total PFOS results for SRM 1957 in the current study (18.2 ng/ml, using linear PFOS for

quantification) compared to literature values (17.7 ng/ml, Riddell et al. (2009) using a mixture of linear

and branched isomers of PFOS for quantification), suggests that quantification of total PFOS (branched

plus linear isomers) against the linear standard produces viable results. However, as all isomers of

PFOS using the current method were quantified against linear PFOS (m/z 499 > 99), the results have

an associated uncertainty factor of unknown magnitude due to a known difference in MS/MS

response factors for structural isomers (Riddell et al., 2009). As the amount of branched isomers can

vary considerably between individu~, a 30-40% difference in calculated total PFOS concentrations

between quantification methods, using the transition m/z 499 > 99, is not unusual (Berger et al., 2011).

PFOS results reported here are as total PFOS (sum of branched and linear isomers).

References:

Berger U, Kaiser MA, Karrman A, Barber JL and van Leeuwen SP. Recent developments in trace analysis

of poly- and perfluoroalkyl substances. Anal Bioanal Chem. 2011. 400(6):1625-35. doi:

10.1007/s00216-0ll-4823-8.

Riddell N, Arsenault G, Benskin JP, Chittim B, Martin JW, McAlees A and McCrindle R. Branched

perfluorooctane sulfonate isomer quantification and characterization in blood serum samples by

HPLC/ESl-MS(/MS). Environ Sci Technol. 1009. 43(20):7902-8. doi: 10.1021/es90126lv.

Page 3 of 5

Results:

Table 2: Summary of results for total PFOS, PFOA and PFHxS. Concentrations reported as ng/ml serum.

Sample SNP sample Entox sample Concentration (ng/ml serum)

number code code PFOS PFOA PFHxS

1 603583818 HBSOAK15 01 54.8 3.00 110

2 603583557 HBSOAK15 02 {360) 4.44 215

3 603583562 HBSOAK15 03 134 3.19 60.6

4 604117761 HBSOAK15 04 113 ( 9~50'1 89.2 ....

5 604117886 HBSOAK15 05 55.4 4.88 38.5

6 599275157 HBSOAK15 06 ~32') 3.42 64.3

7 603449443 HBSOAK15 07 ~ 4.35 117

8 603449453 HBSOAK15 08 296 5.20 93.8

9 603702598 HBSOAK15_09 5.28 1.98 3.73

10 598357930 HBSOAK15_10 59.6 4.80 70.1

11 unknown HBSOAK15 11 38.0 2.03 68.6

12 616761302 HBSOAK15 12 (lo()) 1.27 102

13 616761323 HBSOAK15_13 29.6 1.07 5.73

14 616761384 HBSOAK15_14 129 1.13 65.0

15 616761301 HBSOAK15_15 7.16 2.44 2.95

16 616761145 HBSOAK15 16 4.66 1.74 2.07

17 616761259 HBSOAK15 17 2.35 1.37 2.07

18 616761046 HBSOAK15_18 103 4.78 62.6

19 616761368 HBSOAK15_19 209 2.16 207

20 616761218 HBSOAK15_20 3.53 1.15 1.60

21 616183980 HBSOAK15_21 26.3 2.40 10.8

22 616761223 HBSOAK15_22 18.2 3.18 20.4

23 616761213 HBSOAK15_23 5.12 2.25 2.97

24 616761307 HBSOAK15_24 5.96 2.75 5.45

25 616761099 HBSOAK15_25 32.6 1.60 50.6

26 616253517 HBSOAK15_26 20.7 3.83 33.4

27 616761233 HBSOAK15 27 103 5.79 34.4

28 616761342 HBSOAK15 28 (._ 1361) 2.68 135

29 616285038 HBSOAKlS 29 (99.8) 2.99 38.5

30 616428543 HBSOAK15 30 201 2.23 54.0

31 616285524 HBSOAK15 31 53.3 1.65 41.5

32 617210249 HBSOAK15 32 50.9 4.06 148

33 616761268 HBSOAK15 33 13.8 2.48 7.81

34 616761140 HBSOAK15_34 3.77 1.84 3.00

35 616182933 HBSOAK15_35 79.6 2.52 20.6

36 616183972 HBSOAK15 36 32.7 2.38 11.5

37 616183977 HBSOAK15_37 50.8 2.71 13.0

38 616761208 HBSOAK15 38 6.13 2.14 3.17

39 617210113 HBSOAK15_39 12.7 2.74 10.1

Page 4 of 5

I

I

l

Sample SNP sample Entox sample Concentration (ng/mL serum)

number code code PFOS PFOA PFHxS

40 616183957 HBSOAK15 40 141 5.13 24.7

41 616285037 HBSOAK15 41 107 3.72 42.2

42 616761373 HBSOAK15 42 32.5 3.23 27.6

43 616761347 HBSOAK15 43 18.1 1.80 20.6

44 617480680 HBSOAK15 44 48.5 3.06 36.7

45 617480654 HBSOAK15 45 42.0 4.41 16.7

46 617210386 HBSOAK15 46 16.4 0.91 11.7

47 617276103 HBSOAK15 47 32.1 1.84 12.0

48 617210393 HBSOAK15 48 6.61 1.73 2.80

49 617480849 HBSOAK15 49 20.5 1.44 9.53

50 617276048 HBSOAK15 50 27.5 1.99 9.72

51 617273849 HBSOAK15 51 24.4 2.45 22.5

52 617480652 HBSOAK15 52 37.0 3.63 16.0

53 617480936 HBSOAK15 53 17.8 2.58 14.1

54 617386551 HBSOAK15 54 9.01 3.56 1.68

55 603897157 HBSOAK15 55 34.8 3.10 15.6

56 617480577 HBSOAK15 56 167 2.65 43.9

57 616761425 HBSOAK15 57 67.2 1.40 35.3

58 617210311 HBSOAK15 58 70.9 6.64 48.1

59 617480650 HBSOAK15 59 194 3.20 137

60 617210398 HBSOAK15 60 11.2 0.78 7.29

61 617480565 HBSOAK15 61 125 2.31 48.6

62 617480657 HBSOAK15 62 200 4.32 119

63 617210306- HBSOAK15 63 53.7 4.21 39.6

64 617884689 HBSOAK15 64 6.88 1.32 1.21

65 617480981 HBSOAK15 65 31.5 3.24 16.2

66 617884758 HBSOAK15 66 14.3 0.90 2.97

67 617884700 HBSOAK15 67 7.75 1.80 5.25

68 617884515 HBSOAK15 68 80.0 1.48 30.7

69 617884618 HBSOAK15 69 86.2 ?fo.21 373 ..___

70 617480931 HBSOAK15 70 5.15 1.35 4.23

71 617884783 HBSOAK15 71 15.2 1.25 5.18

72 617884725 HBSOAK15 72 73.7 3.41 115

73 617884813 HBSOAK15 73 9.18 1.07 3.76

74 617884833 HBSOAK15 74 35.2 3.19 33.0

75 617884823 HBSOAK15 75 65.8 4.23 47.0

Page 5 of 5

Blain, Helen MS

To: Gray, Lauren MS

Subject: FW: Results for people tested twice in Oakey blood testing [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]


UNCLASSIFIED

FYI

Helen Blain Director Environment and Heritage Policy Development Environment and Engineering Branch

DEIG Infrastructure Division I DEPARTMENT OF DEFENCE

Page 1 of2

Ph: 02 6266 8043 I Fax: 02 6266 80771 !Address: BP26-2-B001 I PO Box 79251 Canberra BC 2610 Email: [email protected] Website: www.defence.gov.au/envlronment

From: Blain, Helen MS Sent: Tuesday, 20 October 2015 10:40 To: 'Gardner, Ian (Dr)' Cc: Hannon, Stacey MS; Nakhla, Sherif MR Subject: Results for people tested twice in Oakey blood testing [SEC= UNCLASSIFIED]

UNCLASSIFIED

Ian

I can't recall whether I passed these comparisons on to you. Below are the data for the 6 people who were tested twice.

Best wishes Helen

Helen Blain Director Environment and Heritage Policy Development Environment and Engineering Branch

DEIG Infrastructure Division I DEPARTMENT OF DEFENCE Ph: 02 6266 8043 I Fax: 02 6266 8077 I !Address: BP26-2-B001 I PO Box 7925 I Canberra BC 2610 Email: [email protected] Website: www.defence.gov.au/environment

From: David Rowbottom Sent: Monday, 14 September 2015 11:23 To: Blain, Helen MS Subject: FW: PFOS comparison

Good Morning Helen,

Attached is a table comparing people who have had multiple tests.

Regards

David

3/03/2016

217/16/17Item 2Serial 2

s22

s22

s22

of2

David Rowbottom I Business Development Manager I Commercial Testing I Sullivan Nicolaides Pathology I P+61 (07) 4727 5557 I I Fax (07) 4779 9827 I

-·------·--·-·-· -····-,-------------~-----From: Michelle Williams Sent: Monday, 14 September 2015 11:15 AM To: David Rowbottom Subject: PFOS comparison

Hi David,

Here is the table comparing the patients that have presented twice for PFOS testing

Sample No

1

2

3 4

5 57

Cheers Michelle

Date 1 PFOS

12/03/15 54.8

13/03/15 360

3/03/15 134

11/03/15 113

11/03/15 55.4

26/06/15 67.2

PFOA PFHxS Sample No

3.00 110 72

4.44 215 59 3.19 60.6 61 9.50 89.2 58 4.88 38.5 63 1.40 35.3 68

Michelle Williams I Commercial Testing I Townsville I Sullivan Nicolaides Pathology

Date 2

21/08/15

3/07/15

3/07/15

22/06/15

22/06/15

30/08/15

P + 61 (07) 4727 55601 Fax 4775 5873 I

PFOS PFOA PFHxS

73.7 3.41 115

194 3.20 137

125 2.31 48.6

70.9 6.64 48.1

53.7 4.21 39.6

80.0 1.48 30.7

This message and any files transmitted with it contain privileged and confidential mformatton mtended only for the addressee named above If you are not the intended recipient of this message, you must not disseminate, copy or take any action m reliance of it. If you have received this message in error, please contact Sullivan Nicolaides Pathology immediately and delete the email and any attachments. Any views expressed in this message are those of the individual sender and Sullivan Nicolaides Pathology accepts no liability for the content of the message except where the sender specifically states them to be the views of Sullivan Nicolaides Pathology.

Please consider the environment before you print this email



I j

s22 s22

s22s22

217/16/17 Serial 1 - Department of Defence · 217/16/17 Item 1 b/c Serial 1. For Official Use Only...

Documents

Transcript of 217/16/17 Serial 1 - Department of Defence · 217/16/17 Item 1 b/c Serial 1. For Official Use Only...