Comcare Report

8/7/2019 Comcare Report

1/43

AustralianGovernmentComcare

REPORTOF INVESTIGATION

AUSTRALIAN UCLEAR CIENCE NDTECHNOLOGYoRGANISATIONANSTO)ABN 47 956969590LucasHeightsNEWSOUTHWALES

Alleged breach of section 76 of the OccupationalHealthandSafety Act 1991

To assess omplianceith heOccupational ealth ndSafetyAcf 1991(Cth)

Invest igat ionumber: 245Investioator:cottNOTLEY

Released nder FOI


2/43

. 9. 9eakHealth rogramChronologyf significantventseadingo and ollowinghesuspensionfM rR e id . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9ANALYSIS F SAFETYINCIDENTS' 'A ISED Y MRREID. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .12ReportsOf Incidents repared y ANSTO nd,ARPANSA......................12ANSTOncident nalysis eport ARIEvent 8/265Mo-99).. . . .. . . . . . . . . . . .12ARPANSAnspec t ionMo-99) . . . . . .. . . . . . . . .1 .2ARPANSAnspec t ionY-90) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .12Remedialmeasures aken by ANSTO n response o investigationsconducted y ANSTO nd ARPANSA... . . . . . . . . . . . . . .13ANSTO ncidentnalysis eport ARIEvent 8/265Mo-99). . . . . . . . . . . . .13ARPANSAnspectioneportMo-99) . . . . . .13ARPANSAnspectioneportY-90).. . . . . . . . . . . .13Further emedialmeasures doptedby ANSTO ......................14Cont inuousmprovementro jec t. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .4Safety nalysis eport. . . . . . . . . . . . .15Superuisionnd raining..... . ....16Supervisionnd raining ith especto the Mo-99 ncident .16Superv is ionnd ra in ing i th espec to heY-90 nc iden t . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .11Previousncident ssociafed ithY-90 roduction ......................17RequirementorANSIO b report he ncidentso Comcare............ ........... ..18FINDINGS EGARDING OTIFICATIONNDREPORTINGREQUIREMENTS . . . /1 ' : . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .9CONCLUSIONSEGARDING OTIFICATIONND REPORTINGREQUIREMENTS . . . . . . 19FINDINGS EGARDINGECTION 6 N RELATIONO "SAFETYINCIDENTS". . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .9Assessmet of foreseeableazards.... .....20ldentificationf hazards nd risks ARlsysfems f work ..........20CONCLUSIONSEGARDINGECTION 6 NRELATION O "SAFETYfN C ID E N T S " . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 2DIDANSTOSUSPEND ND NVESTIGATERREIDBECAUSE ECOMPLAINEDBOUTHEALTH NDSAFETYSSUESNTHEWoRKPLACE?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .23Mr Reid 's is tory f a l leged orkplaceehaviourDecember994 16March 009) . . . . . . . . . . . . . .23TheLeg is la t ionsec t ion6 o f heAc t . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .26ANALYSf . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .27

Conrcare ReDor t f Inves t isat ion245 ANSTO Releasedno., rt


3/43

3Released nder FOICorncare l ieponof I r rves t igat ion245 ANSTo


4/43

INTRODUCTION1. This sa reportof an investigationonducted nder he Occupational

Healthand Safety ct 1991 theAct), thepurpose f whichhasbeento determine hetherherewascompliance ith herequirementsfthe Act, he Occupational ealthand Safety SafetyArrangements)Regulations 991 SA Regulations) nd he Occupational ealth ndSafety SafetyStandards) egulations 994 SS Regulations).

INVESTIGATION2. Mr DavidReid Mr Reid), Health ndSafetyRepresentativeHSR)attachedo ANSTORadiopharmaceuticalsnd ndustrialsARl)1

claimshathe hasbeenbullied yANSTOmanagementue o himraising ealth ndsafetyssues hichextendo includeheunder-reporting f safetyncidents yANSTO o the Australian adiationProtectionndNuclear afety gency ARPANSA) ndComcare.3. On 18June2009,MrReidwassuspendedromduty withpay) nrespect f four 4)allegations adeagainst imbyANSTO mployees.Shortlyhereafter, Consultantngaged y ANSTO ommencedninvestigationnto heseallegations.o date,Mr Reid emainssuspended ith wo(2)of theallegationsgainst im ound o beunsubstant iated.4. Mr Reid sof thebeliefhat heallegationsgainst imare abricatedrexaggeratedndhissubsequentuspensionherefores o preventhim romperformingis ole n heworkplace s HSR.Scope5. The nvestigationntoMr Reid's omplaint,onducted nder ection41(1) f theAct, s to determinef therewassufficientvidenceosubstantiatehe inding f a causal onnectionetweenMr Reidhavrng

hadhisposition rejudiciallylteredthrough issuspension),ndwhetherhatsuspension asdue o him aisingmatters oncerninghehealth ndsafety t workof AN$TOemployees. he nvestigationlsoaddresseshe allegedailure TANSTOo report otifiableoccupationalealth ndsafet/incidentso Comcare ndARPANSA. tis beyondhe scope f this nvestigationowevero makecomment nany ssues hatmay elateo he egislativeequirementsf theAustralianRadiationProtection nd NuclearSafety ARPANS)Act7998 ARPANS ct).

'Now l


5/43

lnvestiqator/s6. I am ScottNOTLEY, Senior nvestigatorppointed nder ection40(2)of the Act.7. On 13August 009,Comcare enior nvestigatorigelDOCKERcommencedn nvestigationnto heallegations.uring he course fthe nvestigation,therdulyqualified omcarenvestigatorsssistedwith he nvestigationonducted nderPart4 of theAct(theinvestigation).8. This s a report f the nvestigationreparedn accordance ithsection53 of theAct (the Report).

EVIDENCEOLLECTEDReport ndAttachments9.

10.

The Report ontainsnformationollectedroma number f sourceswhichare referredo below.The ollowing ctionwas akenby Comcarenvestigators:(a) 25 September009 Section 3 notice ddressedo DrAdrianPaterson,DrPaterson)CEOANSTO(b) 15December 009 Section 3 notice ddressedo DrAdrianPaterson(c) 18January 010Magnus arsson,(d) 2 February2010- Meeting yith

, ANSTO; nvestigatorrettGodfrey,(lnvestigatorComcare

Godfrey)Comcare nd nvestigatorotley,

20 May2010 Section 3 notice ddressedo DrAdrianPaterson2 June2010 Sitevisit oANSTO y Investigatorsotley ndGodfrey,meeting ithANSTOHSEpersonnel ndwalkthroughof ARI

- Section 3 notice ddressedo Dr Carl-(DrLarsson)CEOARPANSA

(e )

(0

5Released nder FOICorncare Repor t l ' l nves t ieat ron1245 ANSTO


6/43

StatementsL1.. Duringhe course f the nvestigation,he ollowing itness tatementswere akenby Comcare nvestigators:

(a) 22 July2009 Statement DavidReid(b) 3 September009 Electronicallyecorded nterview DavidReid

Reports'12. I also elied n the ollowing:

(a) 14 September 009 ARPANSAnspection eportRB-lNS-R09/08803ssue - MIBGPlant, RIBui ld ing3A Inspect ionconducted10June2009

(b) '14September009 ARPANSAnspection eportRB-INS-R09/08810ssue2 - ARI Building 3A Inspectiononducted'17June2009(c) 21 January 010 nd 30 Jufy 2010 Responseo section 3notice y ARPANSA(d) 27 January 010 ARPANSAnspection eportR09/12971

Incidentnvolv ing o-99 28August 008) ARIBui ld ing3Ainspectionsonducted2,23 & 28 October 009(e) 1BMarch2010 Responseo section 3 notice yANSTO(f) 29 March2010 ARPANSAnspection eportR09/12971(lssue ) Incidentnvolving o-99 28August 008) ARIBuilding 3A inspectionsonducted2,23 & 28 October 009(g) 28 May2010 ARPANSAnspection eport Preliminary)R10/04108Incidentnvolv ing-90 3 September007) ARI

Building 3A- inspectionsonducted5 January, , 9, 18and23 February 010(h) 12 July2010 Responseo section 3 notice yANSTO(i) 10September 010 ARIANSA Inspection eport lssue )R10/07631 Incidentnvolving -90 3 September 007) ARIBuilding 3A- inspectionsonducted5 January, , 9, 18 and23 Februarv 010

Cor lcare Repor t f lnves t igat ion245 ANS' fO Relcaseclno., fol


7/43

0) Safety nalysis eport SAR)- RadiopharmaceuticalsRadiochemicalsroduction supportNo:ARI TR 0A 100 B .RP1 APri l 008RELEVANTEGISLATION13. Under ection 6(1 of the Act,anemployer ust akeall reasonablypracticableteps o protecthe health ndsafetyat workof itsemployees.L4. Under ection 6(2XaXi)f theAct,an employer ust akeallreasonablyracticableteps o provide ndmaintain workingenvironmentncluding lantandsystem f work hat s safe oremployees ithout isk o health.L5. Under ection 6(2)(e) f theAct,employersre equiredo providenappropriateanguages,he nformation,nstruction,raining ndsupervisionecessaryo enableheiremployeeso perform ork n amannerhat s safeandwithout isk o health.1,6. Part3 of the ActwhichdealswithHSRs, heir unctions, owerandrights.17. Section 8of theActrequires n employero notifyComcare f certainaccidentsnddangerousccurrencesithin pecifiedegislative

timeframes.18. Section 6 of theActprohibits n employerromdoingan actwhichinjures n employeen theiremploymentnd/orromprejudiciallyaltering n employee'sosition ecauseheemployee ascomplainedabouta matter oncerninghe health, afety rwelfare f employeestwork.19. Regulation.05of the SS Regulationsazarddentificationnd iskassessmenttateshat:

(1) An emptoyer must ensure, n relation to the implementationof theseRegulations,hat appropriatesfeps are taken to identify al l reasonablyforeseeableazardsarising romworkwhichmay affect he healthor safetyof employees r otherpersons t work20. Regulation7Aof the SA Regulationsequires nemployero notifyComcare f certain ccidents nddangerousccurrencesithinspecifiedegislativeimeframes.

Corrcare Repor t l ' lnves t igat ior r2 '15 ANSI l ) 7Released nderFO I


8/43

BACKGROUNDThe Emplover2T. ANSTO sa 'CommonwealthAuthori ty 'andemployer 'asdefined y

section of theAct.22. ANSTO salsoa 'Commonwealthentity' s defined y section 3of theARPANSAct and herefore controlledacility hat equires licenceto undertake therurriserohibited ctivity nder he ARPANSAct.23. ANSTO s alsoclassifieds a MajorHazard acilityMHF) ccordingothedefinitionsn Part9 (MHF) f theSS Regulations.TheEmplovee24. Mr Reidhasbeenemployed ithANSTO ince29 June1981 ndpriorto hissuspensionerformedhesubstantiveoleof ProductionTechnicianMr Reid s therefore 'Commonwealthauthorityemployee's defined ysection (2A)of theAct.25. Mr Reid s also heelectedHSR or Designated orkGroup DWG)ANSTOHealth formerly RI)LucasHeightsOperationsnd hatelectionemainednplace t all relevantimes.ARPANSA26. ARPANSAs a FederalGovernmentgency harged ith heresponsibilityorprotectinghe health ndsafety f people, nd heenvironment,rom heharmful ffects f onising ndnon onisingradiat ion.227. ARPANSAegulatesheAustralian overnmentnd tscontractors'useof radiationources nd acilitiesndnuclearnstallationshrouohtheadministrationf theARPANSAct 1998.28. ARPANSAs tself 'CommonwealthAuthority'nd employer'asdefined ysection of theAct.ARI29. On 24 December 002,ARPANSAssuedo ANSTO Facility icenceNo.F0044-5A,8, 5C authorisingheoperation f ARl.30. ARIoperates adiopharmaceuticalRadioisotoperoductionacilitiesto manufactureadiopharmaceuticalsndradio hemicals.Radiopharmaceuticalperations,s defined n the icence,means hemanagementf activitiesnvolving rocessingrradiationarget' Source:http://rvrvw.arpansa.gov.au/AoutUs/r dex.cfm

Comcare Repo(of Invcs t igat io l r245 ANSl l l Releasedna.r1'ot


9/43

materialsor heproductionf radioisotopessed n medicine,ndustryand esearch.3L. On 25 May2009,Comcaressued o ANSTOa Certificatefcompliance o.coc-2009/007, nderPart9 of the ss Regulations,having eensatisfiedhat heworkplaces icensed nd s complyinEwithcomparable ommonwealthegislationi.e. heARPANS ct)withsimilar afety utcomeso those ontained ithinPart9 of theSSRegulations.SafetvAnalvsisReport (SAR)gZ. The SAR s a comprehensiveeport utlininghe safety rrangementsoperat ingn Bui ld ing3Aandwas

prepared o demonstratehe level of safety at the facilityand tosafisfy he requirementsf the regutatory uthorityARPANSA3nd...provideshe ANSTOSafetyAssessmentCommitteeSAC)withthe necess ry informationo assess he safetyof the facilityand ispari of the applicationo SAC or suchan assessmenf.

Peak HealthProqram33. ANSTO'sHealthCentre ocuseson proactivemeasures o maintain he

healthand well-being f ANSTOstaff.This includes egularmen's andwomen'shealth nitiatives nd the introduction f a Peak HealthProgramaimedat appropriate hysical onditioningor thoseundertakingmanual asks o minimise he impactof any adversebodystressing.

Chronoloqv f siqnificant vents eadinq o and fol lowinq he suspension f MrReid34. On 22 April2009,Mr Reidandattended n ARI OHSmeetingwhere heyhavealleged hat"safetyincidentsat ARIare beingcoveredup by superulsors nd managers

and also hat here s no feedback n ncidents."Onesuchmatter,ARIEvent081265 as cited hat elatedo an incidentwhichoccurred tARIon 28 August 008 nvolvingheradioactivesotope nown sMolybdenum9 (Mo-99).Theallegationsaised t he meetingbecamehe subject f an nvestigationhatwas o be henconducted- lARt.

I Se eSA R Executive Summary at para Ia Ibid at para4

by

qReleased nderFO I

Comcare l l .enor t 1 ' lnves t leat ion245 ANSI-O


10/43

35.

36.

38.

39.

On 5 May 2009,Mr Reidand rIltrttended the CentralSafetyCoordinatingommitteeCSCG) here hey aised ssentiallyhesameallegationss heyhaddonepreviouslyn 22 April2009.On 18 May2009,Mr Reidand lttended a meeting eldbyHwhere therepor to f r inves t iga t ion in to thea | |ega t ionscitedon 22 April nd 5 May2009was abled.investioationound hat

There s no evidence o substantiatehe claims hat incidentsarebeingcoveredup at ARl...Theres someevidenceo suggestha tARI should furTher trengthen ncident nvestigationand trainingand theseare listed n the 10] recommendations.n additionothertrainingand processes ould mprovepracticeson communicationon events. This would assisf with improvinga "perception"thatincidents re coveredup.

37. Onesuch ecommendationadeby was or ANSTO o"Re-openincident08/265and nvestigateurther. OHSreps fo beincludedn theprocess ARI/QSERP1528) 5

I!} ARl,under ection 9 of theActwhich laimedhatan"uncontrolledrelease f 1123 lodine123)vapours romgloveboxresultingn internalcontamination f staffviasuspecfednhalation."On 10June2009as a consequencef the notice eing ssued,ARPANSA onductedn unannouncednspectionf theARIbuildingto obtainnformationbout heallegedelease f l-123 n he MIBG(Metaodobenzyl uanidine)lant f ARl. At theconclusionf heinspection, r ReidallegedlynformedMr SamirSarkar,MrSarkar)Inspector,RPANSA, f the ncidentnvolving o-99 nda separate,incidentnvolvingheradioactivesotope nownas Yttrium 0 (Y'90).'

On 17June2009,ARPANSA onductedn unannouncednspectionftheARI buildingo obtainurthernformationbout afetyssuesaisedbyMr Reid ur inghe nspect ionn 10June2009.85Se eANSTO eport itledSB Investigationre- andDavidReidClaims;Version .0 8Ma y2009purporledly uthored yuComcares not n possessionf anymaterialhatwouldsuggestha tANSTO disputedhePI N naccordanceith heplovisrons f section 9(8)of theAc t7Se e nspection eporlANSTO Radiopharmaceutic alsnd ndustrialsARl) Building23A (823A)RB-lNS- l{09/08803SSUE Inspect ionate 0 June 009; r leNumber 2009/00149urportedlysrgned y SamirSar-i


11/43

41. On 18June2009, n ANSTO mployeendaccusedMr Reidof assaultingi.e. houlderbarging) imwithout rovocationn theworkpraceAllegation ). MrReidwassubsequentlyuspendedromdutywithpaypending ninternalnvestigationnto hisallegation.e42. On 19June2009,

ECorpora teCounse | ,ANSTo, toconduLta fac t f ind inginvestigationndprepare reportntoAllegation and hree 3)otherallegationscollectivelyhe Allegations):(i) On 10June2009,MrReid,n hecompany fQ;)and ;lr andan auditorromARpANSA,alsely ccused

I of informingtaffnot o complete n ncidenteportinvolving contaminationpill presumablys required nderANSTOegistat ion)Ai legat ion );( i i ) on 25 May2009,MrReid ssauttedi.e. houtderarged)fI without rovocationn theworkplaceAllegation2);'( i i i) On 18June2009,Mr Reid erbalty busedIf intheworkplaceAllegation ).

4 3 . o n 2 2 S e p t e m b e r 2 0 0 9 , E p u b | i s h e d a r e p o r t o f rinvestigationn which tatedhatl had oundAllegation andAllegation weresubstantiatedowever, llegation andAllegationwereunsubstantiated.

44. On20October 009,n,ANSTO,andlrll,ffi}Tisro,compiled reportntoARIEvent081265.1145. Between 2 and28 october 009,ARPANSA onducted plannedinspectionf theARIbuildingo nvestigatehe ncidentnvolving o-99 whichoccurred n 28 August 008.12

'See letter ddressedo DavidReiddated 8 June 009andpurporredlyigned y Margaret it t ler,HR Manager, NSTO,OIITII' ' See ncident nalysis epor l ARI Event 812652gl08/200g)'' See nspection eportR09ll21 purportedlyigned y SamirSarkar ndJohnWarddated jl0l l l0an d nspection eportR0911211SSUE puryortedlyigned y SamirSarkar ndJohnWarddated29103, l0

1oreceivednstructionsrom

Corrcare Repor l l l l ves t igat ion245 ANSTO ReleasednolrLol


12/43

46. Between 5 January nd 23 February 010,ARPANSA onductedplannednspectionf the ARIbuildingo investigatehe ncidentinvolving -90whichoccurred n 3 SeptemberOO7.13collectivelyheincidents)ANALYSISF SAFETYINCIDENTS''AISED YMRREIDReporfsOf lncidentsPrepared y ANSTO nd ARPANSAANSTO ncident nalvsis eport ARIEvent 8/265 Mo-99)47. With eferenceo paragraph4,ANSTO'snternalnvestigationrevealedhat:

Based on the information gathered during the investigation of thisevent, there is no evidence of falsificationof records or cover up atARl. There ls a/so no evidence that the operator (or any otherperson involved) received radiation doses above fhe ANSIO limits,in fact /he doses received were negligible. Nevertheless, fhe doseswere avoidable.la

ARPANSAnspectionMo-99)48. With eferenceo paragraph5, he nspectiononducted yARPANSA id not ind"anyevidencehat hiseventhasbeencoveredup or under eported."t5nspector arkar lsonoted hat

...therewasno necessityo repoft his ncidento ARPANSAsoccupational dose limits were not exceeded and the workers wereatloperating within their dose constraints.l6

ARPANSAnspectionY-90)49. With eferenceo paragraph6,ARPANSA ubmittedhat:

The lnspectorsnote that all relevantsupervrsorsand managerswere nformedabout the incident. This ncidentwas also repoftedin fhe ANSIO quarterly reporl (July to September 2007) toARPANSA.lT

lr Se e nspection eportRl0/04108 urpor-tedlyigned y SamirSarl


13/43

50. With eferenceo this ncident eing coveredup"byANSTO, nspectorSarkar ubmittedhat, the phrase coveredup"wasnot usedby MrReidand herefore,t was notusedn the lnspection eport."l851. I alsonote hatARPANSAeporthat heoperatorsnvolvedn thisincident idnot eceive. r wereunlikelvo receive, n nternal oseofradiat ion. leRemediat measures taken by ANSTO n response to investigations conductedhy ANSTO and ARPANSAANSTO ncident nalvsis eport ARIEvent 8/265 Mo-99)52. ANSTO roduced n lncident nalysis eportnwhich t provided

number f conclusionsnd ecommendationsowardsmprovinghehealth ndsafety f ARI employees53. I am n possession f a copyof the Responseo Recommendationsmade n theANSIO IncidentAnalysisReport ARIEvent08/265(28/08/2008)nd note hat,at the imeof itsprovisiono Comcare, 6of 16recommendationsadbeen inalised.ARPANSAnspection eoort Mo-99)54. ARPANSA roduced n Inspection eportn which t provided

number f conclusionsnd ecommendationsowardsmprovinghehealth ndsafety f ARIemployees.55. I am n possession f a copyof the ANSfO HealthResponseoARPA|VSAnspectionReporlR09/12971 /ssue2 - Plannedlnspection o lnvestigate n lncident nvolvingMo-99on 28 August2008 l,Jpdated esponseo Recommendationsnd note hat,at thetimeof tsprovisiono Comcare,hree 3) ecommendationsadbeenfinalised ith our 4) ecommendationsndicating status f "AlreadyUndenruay."ARPANSAnspection eport Y-90)56. ARPANSA roduced n Inspection eportnwhich t providednumber f conclusionsnd ecommendationsnto he ncident.57. I am npossessionf a copyof ANSTO's esponseo ARPANSA'srecommendationsndnote hat,at the imeof tsprovisionoComcare, of 7 recommendationsadbeen inalised.

' t Source: eplyemail romMr Sarkaro Investigatorotleydated l8l2ol0at l0.26amreSe eY-90 nspection eport Prelimrnary)t para .3& 5.4

Clomcare Re orto1 ' lnves t igat ior r245 ANSI-O t aI JRcleased Ljnder FO I


14/43

58.

Further remedial measuresadopted by ANSTOContinuous mprovement roiect

'o As Lo* As Reasonablyracticablerr Se eANSTOss43 esponseo Comcare ated 2 July2010 tpage 8

Followinghe ncidents,nd n additiono t acceptingndimplementingoth tsownandARPANSA'secommendations,NSTOembarked pona continuousmprovementroject ithinARI hatwasinitiatedy Dr Patersonn August 009.Theproject xamined//aspecfs f radiopharmaceuticalroductionand reliedheavilyon plantoperators nd QC staff to generateproposalsor improvement. n initial list of BB actionswasidentified. ctionswereprioritised n fhe basisof maximumbenefitin the shorfesf possib/e timescales. The responsibility or the

. implementation f these initial actions u/asgiven to a dedicatedproject team, overseenby a steeringgroup made up of ANSIOSeniorManagers epoftingdirectly o the CEO. Capital undingof$2.3millionhasbeenapproved or the nitial actions,withadditionalfunding having been recently approved for capital projects toimprove he processworkflowand wastemanagement apabilitieswithin the facility. Approximately50% of current identified actionswere completed by the end of the 2010 financial year. Ihisrepresentssignificantprogress given that many of the actionsinvolve engineering upgrades with significant multi-disciplinaryengineering design challenges. The continuous mprovementprogramwill be maintainedn line with the requiremento manageriskswithin he facilityunder heALARA2j rinciple.2l

I am in possessionof a copy of the B23A lntermediateSafety UpgradeProject WorkSchedule V1 and note that, at the time of its provision oComcare, 0 of 88 actionshavebeen inal ised.As furtherevidence f i ts continuous mprovement roject,ANSTOprovideda documententitledSfafus on Actions orANSfO HealthReportExecutiveSummary n which Mr Jenkinsonstates ha t

A numberof reviews or improving he OHS n ARI(now ANSTOHealth)have been conducted over the years. The ensuing reporls haveproduced a number of recommendations o be considered forimplementation;owever the sfafus of these past recommendationshasnot beenknown (my emphasisadded).A reviewof this document denti f ieshat 16 of 27 reports ontain inprogress" ctionswhich nclude,but are not imited o, the fol lowingissues:

59.

60.

6't.

Corrcare Report f Investrgatrorr245 ANSI-O 1 4ReleasedJndeirOI


15/43

. Report n Bld23 Concerns 28 July 1999

. SafetyMattersSummary 25 October1999

. Production rocess eviewby ISOSo/uflons 23 December1999

. ProcessHandlingConcernswithproduction 29 July2002

. ARIOHS WorkingGroup December2004

. Auditof ARISafetySysfems May 2006

. RCAof extremity ver-exposuren Y-90process July 200762. Comcare s in possessionof a copy of the RecommendationsnProgressand note that at the time of its provision o Comcare,76

actions dentifying statusof "in progress" emain. I do notehowever,that70% of actionshavebeencompleted.Safety AnalysisRepoft69. Followingtsconclusionsnto he Mo-99 ncident, RPANSArecommendedhat:

ARI operating practices and equipment associafed with 823 shouldbe subject to a comprehensive review. This review should includeHAZOP sfudies or a suitable alternative to identify potential safetyweaknesses which may then be investigated for engineeredsolutions or procedu al enhanceme nts.22

In respondingo ARPANSA'secommendationNSTO ubmittedhat:A review of the 823 processes was underiaken as paft of thepreparation of the current 823 SAR. However given recentincidents, we have commenced a fresh comprehensive review ofthe ARI operating processes and equipmenf assoclated with 823.Ihls consists of riskassessrnentsof all ARI processesand a reviewof all equipment. The review commenced in December 2009 and isscheduled to be completed n Juty 2010.23

In a section 3 noticeo ANSTO o provide ocuments hich he SACrelied n to assess hesafetv f he acilitv. NSTO ubmittedhat:A comprehensiveSafety Analysis Report outlining the safetyarrangements perating n Building23A was first completedandsubmitted o the ANSIO Safetv AssessmentCommittee n 2004.

" Se eMo-99 nspection eport lssue ) atpara .1do t point" Se eResponseo ARPANSA ecommendationsated 6 February 010an dpurportedlyigned yI(arenWolfe, lrenActingGeneralManager',RI

64.

65.

Corncare Repon l ' lnves t rgat ion245 ANSI 'O Releaseclno"lfo,


16/43

66.

The Safety Analysis Report was reviewed and re-submitted nOctober 2007 and an approval to operate was given with therequirementhat ufther isk assessmenfs e completed.Basedonthe feedback from the Safety Assessment Committee,a fuftherreview s current ly akingplace ncorporatingiskassessments f allprocesses...Sixteenreas requiring isk assessment ave beenidentified.Tenof thesearecomplete...

I am in possession f a copy of ANSTO's response o ARPANSA'srecommendation nd note hatat the time of i ts provisiono Comcare,'10of 16 r iskassessments avebeen ina l ised.Supervisionnd raining67. Under ection 6(2Xe) f heAct,ANSTOhasa duty o provideemployees ith he nformation,nstruction,raining ndsupervisionnecessaryo enablehem o performheirwork na mannerhat s safeandwithout isk o theirhealth.Supervisionnd raininq ith especto theMq-99 ncident68. Contained ithin heMo-99 nspection eport,ARPANSA tate hat:

...lnspector s ound deficiencies n th e manner by which this eventwas managed both in the immediate aftermath and the subsequentevent investigation. ln this regard, lnspectors consider that thearrangements for supervisionand training have not been effectivein delivering the standard of safety that is required for an isotopeprod uction facility.2a

In a section 3 notice o ANSTO o provideecords f the raining ivento ARIstaff,ANSTO ubmitted,nteralia, hat:ANSIOprovides comprehensiveuiteof trainingo ensurehatall staff reequipped ith he equisite kills ndknowledgeoworksafely.

Inmy opinion,t s ncumbentn ANSTO o ensuretsstaff s rainedandsupervisedo ensurehat heyproperlymplement roceduresordeal ing i th, nd espondingo,safetyncidentsincludingpi l l ndcontaminations)nd hat heyhavebeenproperly ndadequatelyinducted.A review f ANSTO'snternalnvestioationnto he Mo-99 ncidentrevealshat:

" SeeMo-99 nspect ioneportlssuc ) atpara .37

69.

70.

7T.

7 aI oReleased nderFO ICor rcare I iepor t l ' l nves t igat ion245 ANSTO


17/43

The senior operator sfafed that he was unaware of the ARIprocedure for Minor Sp//s and Contamination.2sNew staff member,- worker, had not completedGeneral Safety tnductionor RadiationSafety tnduction cotlrse.26The immediafe response and the supervisor's response to theevent was inadequate.27The operator doing the l-131 unloading loading task was relativelyinexperienced and operating under supervision, and had notcompleted the site wide OHS induction training or the radiationsafety trainingprovided by S&RP (now QSERP).28

72. ANSTO herefore idnotafford adiopharmaceuticalorkersnvolvedin the Mo-99ncidenthe evel f traininghat t dulyowed hemundertheprovisionsf theAct.73. Indeed, NSTOdid notafford the evelof traininghat t dulyowedhimbothprior o and ollowingheMo-99 ncident.Accordingot ra in ingrecords29supp | iedbyANSTo, -under tookAR|inductionn 51212009;afetynductionn 141712009;HSEAlertGuidel inesndOHSEatARIon 11312010,period f6, 11and19months espectivelyfter he ncident.Supervisionnd raininq ith especto theY-90 ncident74. Contained ithin heY-90 nspection eport,ARPANSA tate hat:

...the majorityof ANSIO staff stated hat they were satisfiedwiththe training rovidedby ANSTO.The inspectors erified he training ecord of the staff affectedbythe contaminationncident...andound hatbothhadcompletedhetraining equired o undeftakeY-90production.s0

Previous incident assoclafed with Y-90production75. In a separatedocumentaddressing RPANSA'sY-90 InspectionReportANSTO submitted hat:37

" Se eANSTO ncident nalysisReporl tpage 0'l luia ut page I' ' Ibidat page I'" Ibidat page I2eSe ePathlor"eeamrngManagementystem lintoutr0Se eY-90 Inspection eport lssue ) at para .2 2& 4.23t' Se eSummary f lnrprovementsade o Y-90 Production rocess tpage , para

Corrcare lLe orto1 ' l rvcs t rgat ion245 ANSI-O Rcleased"oJ7o,


18/43

Before his ncident ccurred, RIhadbeen focussingn regularreviewsof the Y-90process. Thishad arisenrom an ALARAassessmenthatwasbeingundeftakeno ascerTainf productioncouldbe safelyncreased.Duringhrsassessment,xtraextremitydosimeters erewornby operators.Thisprocessdentifiedhatoneoperator xceededheannual imitof s)1msv and a secondoperator xceededhemonthlltnvestiqationimitof 40m5v.32Thiseventwasrepoftedo ARPANSAn 13April2007by emailandwas ollowed p bya repofton 24April2007.76. ANSTO herefore ossess nowledgehat hey-g0 incidentnseptember 007wasnot he irst ime hatprocessingperatorsengagedn Y-90productionad heirhealth ndsafety ompromised.Requirementor ANSTO o repori he ncidentso Comcare77. As partof tsBusinessManagementystem,ANSTOhavean OHSEGuide itledReportingto Comcare'whichrovidesor he notificationand eportingf incidentso Comcare.3378. ln a section 3 notice o ANSTo o provide n explanations o whytheMo-99ncident asnot eportedo Comcaren accordance ith heprovisionsf section 8 of theAct,ANSTO ubmitted,nteralia. hat'3a

Under arrangements agreed with the cEo of the AustralianRadiation Protection and Nuclear Safety Agency (AR?ANSA),ANSIO has a binding obligation and duty to repoft eyenfs rated asLevel 2 or above on the lnternationalNuclear Event Sca/e (/NES) -to ARPANSA within 24 hours.Given heagreed rotocolsor eporTingncidentso ARpANSA,hereporTingf such ow eveleventso comcare s s.6Bnotificationswould epresent grossdisparity etweenhecriteria or reporTingto our espectiveegulators.

With espect,heagreementetweenheCEOsof ARPANSA ndANSTO swholly rrelevantinso aras ANSTosobligationo reportnotifiablencidentso comcare) ndquite implymeans hat hecEoshave eached n understandingegardinghe nterpretationfARPANSA'sotificationequirements.nas muchas t maywish oprogresstsposition n this ssue, NSTO hould e vigilant f the act

tt In my vierv, the incident would appear o be sub.legt f the repolt tilled, ncident Intte"stigtttionntctHigh Extrenit), Dose.s E lnterim report showirg data ro l8 Aprit 2007and iisted in the Slatrlson Actionfor ANST) Health Report Executive Suntrnaryat page 3r r SeeANSTO OHSE Cuide AG 23113t It is acknowledged ha t ANSTOs response oncemed he non-reporting o Comcareof the Mo-99rncident,bu t it is assumed ha t ANSTO would pr-ovide he same easonins or the Y-90 matters

79.

Corrcarc I {epor l l lnves t igat ion245 ANSI-O Releasedna"lFor


19/43

that hese equirementsaveno resemblancer relevanceo tslegislativeeportingequirementsnder heOHSAct.

FINDINGSEGARDINGOTIFICATIONNDREPORTINGEQUIREMENTS80. lt is myview hat he ncrdents entionedn paragraphs5,46& 75ofthe Reportmeet hedefinitionf a dangerousccurrencesdefinednregulation of the SA Regulations,herefore,NSTOwasrequiredo,butdidnotnotifyComcare f these ncidentsn accordanceithsection 8 of theAct,and egulation7Aand378of the SARegulations.t thereforeollowshatComcare asno nitialecord fthe reasonablyracticableteps hatANSTO ook o protecthe healthandsafety f radiopharmaceuticalperatorssa result f theseparticularncidents.CONCLUSIONS EGARDING OTIFICATION ND REPORTINGREQUIREMENTS81. I do notdisputehatANSTOwerenot equiredo reporthe ncidentsmentionedn paragraphs 5 & 46 of the Reporto ARPANSA owever,ANSTO's eporting bligationso Comcare ursuanto section 8 oftheActarenotamelioratedy heARPANS ct,or anyarrangementragreementetweenheCEOsof either rganisation.NSTOappearsto haveadoptedheargumenthat, followingRPANSA'snd tsowninternalindings)f occupationalose imitswerenotexceeded,henno

onecouldhavebeen njured,hereforeheir eportingbligationsoComcare erenot equiredo be enlivened.f this s ndeedheargument ut orward yANSTO,hen n myview, t hasno merit.Thefailureo provide ndmaintain safeworking nvironmentthroughinefficientystems f work,supervisionnd raining)s sufficientreasonorANSTO o invoketsnotificationequirementso Comcare(forpublicnteresteasonsf noother).82. As notedabove,n myview t was ncumbentponANSTO, ndersection 8 of theAct, o notifyComcare f the ncidents entionedn

paragraph0 of the Report.t failed o do so.Accordingly,am of theview hatANSTO reached ection 8 of theAct n hat t failed onotifyComcare f thedangerousccurrencess theregulationsrequrre.FINDINGSEGARD]NGECTION6INRELATIONO SAFETYINCIDENTS"83. On hedateof the ncidents,ection 6of theAct mposed dutyonANSTO o takeall easonablyracticableteps o protecthehealthandsafety f tsemployeesy providingndmaintainingworking

Clorncare Repor l o l lnvcst tgat ion42.15 ANSTO Released"a.iPor


20/43

84.

environmenthatwassafe or tsemployees ndwithout isk o theirhealth.35Assessment f foreseeable azards

Theworkconducted ithinARI has nherent HS isks, ence heneed or ANSTO o identify ll reasonablyoreseeableazards ndassess he esultantisks, nd o ensurehatappropriateystems fworkhavebeendeveloped,mplementedndmaintained.nparticular,tsOHSsystems eed o be clearly nderstoodhere heparticular azard nd risk s associated ith he ntegrity fradiopharmaceuticalperationsonducted ithinARl.Criticalo theperformancef workconducted ithinARI s the need ohaveeffectiveonsultativerrangementsn place etween upervisorsandprocessingperators. heexisting azarddentificationnd iskassessmentontrol rocesseshould e understoodndcomplied ithby allANSTO mployeesincludingupervisorsndmanagers)oreduce he evel f riskposed o employees ndertakingradiopharmaceuticalperations. hiscontentions supportedy hefact hatANSTO, spartof ts nternalnvestigationnto heMo-99incident,ubmittedhat:

[t]herewas nadequateommunicationmongst elevant taff nrelation o the incident, and there were at that time inadequateformal processes for effectivecommunicationamongst staff inrelationo an abnormal ccurrence.'ou

ldentificat ion f hazardsand risks ARlsysfemsof work86. Inadditiono ensuringhatemployeesnderstandndcomplywith hehazard dentificationnd riskassessmentontrol rocesses, NSTOshould egularlyssesstsvarious olicies ndprocedurest thecorporateevel o ensurehat tssystems fwork emain ontemporaryfor tsemployeesndwithout isk o theirhealth.87. Under egulat ion.05 f theSS Regulat ions,n employer ust akeappropriateteps o identify ll reasonablyoreseeable azards ndriskassess hose dentifiedazards.Regulation,05(3) rovides listof riskassessmentoolsavailableo theemployer nd ncludes,but snot imitedo) audit ing, 'and discussionswithemployeesrotherrelevant arties.' s partof ts nternalnvestigationnto he Mo-99incident,NSTO ubmittedhat:

3 5s l 6 ( 2 ) ( a )16Se e oot cause RC5) of ANSTO Incident Analysis Reporrat page4

85.

20Released nderFO ICorncare Repor t f Inves t rgat ion245 ANSTO


21/43

88.

There s...anndicationhatprocesseserenoteffectivelyollowedand that a moreconscientiousttitudes requiredrom all staff.There s an apparentack of reinforcementf, and a lack ofmonitoringf compliance ith,safetyelated rocedures.'o'

This statements further nforced y the act hatDr Paterson, s partof his ormal esponse ddressedo Dr Carl-Magnusarsson, EOARPANSA oncerningRPANSA's -90 nspection eport, ubmitsthat... lf ls acceptedhatmanagementrocesses erenotrobust, ro-active or predictableas indicated by the findings andrecommendationsf bothANSfO'sand ARPANSA'snvesfgationsinto the August 2008 incident [Mo-99]... ln general themanagementrrangementsof the Y-90 ncident] ppearo havebeengenerally ore obusthan heAugust 008ncident."

Having egard o ANSTO's ubmissionsutlinednparagraphs7 & 88of the Report, amtherefore f the view hat an auditof itsARI andcorporateystems f workshould ave urnedANSTO'smind o theprobabilityhatARIprotocolseeded o be orensicallyxamined riorto the ncidentshesubject f thisReport, articularlyiven hepreviousncident fY-90 n April2007.PriorOHS eviewsmadeanumber f recommendationshatANSTO ouldhaveappliedn makingtheworkplace afe hatmayhaveminimised r eliminatedheoccupationalealth ndsafetyssueswith adiopharmaceuticaloperations. hiscontentions supported y he act hathazardidentificationnd iskassessmentontrol rocesses,ubject f anapparent udit fARIsafety ystemsn May2006, emainedoutstanding38ntilenlivenednd urther eviewed s partof thecontinuousmprovementroject hich ommencedn August 009.ANSTO herefore,newor should aveknown,hatradiopharmaceuticalperationsaddeficiencieshatshould avebeenaddressed.I am therefore f theview hatANSTO, n tscorporateapacitythroughhe SAC,have heability nd he means o dentify ndcontrolanypotential azards nd isksassociated ith adiopharmaceuticaloperations. o thatend, hecurrenteview f the SARappearso bereactive nly, n that iskassessmentsrenotupdated ntil fter uchtime hat he health ndsafety f an employee asbeenplaced t risk,and/orhe ntegrity f radiopharmaceuticalperationsasbeencompromised.

" See ootcauseRC5)of ANSTO ncident nalysisReporr t pagett And the ecommendationsf which emained nknown smentionedn para 0 of this eporl

89.

90.

9L.

Comcare Rcpor t l ' lnves t igat ion245 ANSTO . . . . 2 J ^ .Keletsed t . rn( le r ( r l


22/43

92. Both heARPANSA ndANSTO nvestigationeports ighlightncident"underreporting"in additiono OHShazards ndrisks. t is alsocontendedhatbothsupervisorsndemployeesave endedo'normalise'potential azards nd isks ssociated ithproductiontechniquesndequipment hichpotentiallyompromisesNSTO'sduty o beactive nddiligentn dentifyingndcontrollingisksn areasonablyracticable anner s required y heAct andSSRegulat ions.CONCLUSIONSEGARDINGECTION6INRELATIONO SAFETYINCIDENTS' '93. The healthand safety f Australian orkers s a key concern fAustralianovernmentst all evels. llworkers ave he ight o a safe

andhealthy orkplace ndemployersave he right o expecthatworkers ndvisitorso theirworkplaces il lco-operate ithoccupationalealth ndsafety ules.3s94. Based pon hematerial vailable,concludehaton thedateof heincidents,NSTO reached ection 6(1) f theAct n that.

(a) ANSTO idnot akeall easonablyracticableteps o provideandmaintain working nvironmentincludingafesystems fwork)for tsemployees howereengagednradiopharmaceuticalperations;nd(b) ANSTO idnot akeall easonablyracticableteps o provideitsemployees howereengagedn radiopharmaceuticaloperationshe nformation,nstruction,raining ndsupervisionnecessaryo enablehem o performheirwork n a mannerhatwassafeandwithout isk o heirhealth.

95. I am alsoof theview hatANSTO,n tscorporateapacityo takeallreasonablyracticableteps o protecthe health ndsafety f tsemployees twork, ailed o comprehensivelyiskassessradiopharmaceuticalsroductionn hat t ailed o ensurehathazardidentificationnd iskassessmentcontrol, asunderstoodndimplementedt thesupervisoryemployeeevel.96. Notwithstandinghe nformationighlightedn hissection f theReport, NSTOappearso have nvested ignificantlyfinanciallyndmanagerially)o ensurehatpro-active anagementctions rekey ndrivingtssafety ulture ithin Rl. This s particularlyvident iventhe ntroductionf thecontinuousmprovementrojectnAugust 009and hecurrenteview f theSAR,which n tandemwhen inalised,reNational Review into Model OccupatronalHealthand SafetyLaws, First Report o the WorkplaceRelat ionsMin is ters 'Counc i lOc tober 008at i

Corncare Repor t f Inves t igat lon245 ANSI-O . . , 2 2 .K eteaseo Jnoer f( l


23/43

should nsure hatANSTOhasdevelopednd mplementedffectivehazarddentificationnd riskassessmentontrol rocessesoremployeesndertakingadiopharmaceuticalperations.97. On 2 June2010,Investigatorsotley ndGodfrey onducted'walkthrough'of ARI o observeheenvironment,lant ndequipmentwhere he ncidentsccurred. t that ime,we wereaccompaniedyIf I l , I I IandI l . Duringthatwalkthrough,oth he Mo-99 ndY-90productionrocess asprofessionallyrated y I and respectively. hilstit sobvioushat heARI acilitysaged, heapparent ommitment,knowledgendprofessionalismisplayedyARIpersonnelndANSTOmanagements particularlyoteworthy.aODIDANSTO USPENDND NVESTIGATERREID ECAUSEECOMPLAINEDBOUTHEALTH NDSAFETYSSUESNTHEWORKPLACE?BACKGROUNDMr Reid's istorv f alleqed orkplaceehaviourDecember994 16 March2009)98. Prior o hissuspension, r Reidwassufferingromwork elated i-lateral ainand ateral picondilytisndwasbeing reated y DrGrahamHall Dr Hall)attachedo theANSTOHealthCentre.As a

consequence,ndas partof a returnoworkprogram,Mr Reidwasapart ic ipantalbeit nwi l l ing)n hePeakHealth rogram.99. Between ecember 994and29 May2008 espectively,r Reidwasinvolvedn our 4)workplacencidents,amely:41

. he employed abusive language (result - written counselling);

. verbal disagreement which led to Mr Reid holding a work colleaguein a headlock (result- disciplined(not fufther described);

. 'incident' (not furlher described) involving security (result - writtendiscipline counselling) and

. swearing at a nurse while attending the ANSIO Health Centre toundeftake the Peak Health Program (result - informed behaviour wasunacceptable)

a0It shouldbe noted hat the wall


24/43

100. on 23 June2008, ollowing meeting ithMr Reid, l l l l l ,If - ARl, orurrardedmemorandumoMr Reid n whichhe confirmed isunderstandingf the ssueshathadbeendiscussedt thatmeeting.nparticular,he ollowing asdocumented:42Mr Reid'sanger in not wanting to attend the ANSTO Medical Centre;Clarificationsurrounding the commencement of shifts and absencesfrom the workplace;E stating that he had been advised by the Heatth Centrethat Mr Reid had refused to attend the Peak Health Program; andA advising Mr Reid that any future occurrences of refusingto accept direction from [his] superuisoror aggressive andinappropriatebehaviour may lead to more formal action beingundeftaken.

101. On 8 October 008,Mr Reidattended meeting ithEland aunion epresentative,here he ssue f hisnonattendancet hePeakHealthProgram asdiscussed.ANSTOallege hatMr Reidabruptlyeft hemeeting fteragreeingo attend he Program.a3102. On 16 March 009,Mr Reidattended meeting ithIIII:

I lf I f ProductionupervisorRl,where he ssueof his eturn o workprogram asdiscussed. NSTOallege hatMrReidbecame gitatedo sucha degreehat inemanagement asorganisedo assist ndsupportl.oo

103. TheANSTOEnterprise greementtheAgreement) 009 2011states,nter lia, hat:Followinghe nvestigation,he superuisor/manageray:c provide the employee with verbaland/or written counselling,

with written confirmation to the employee copied to theirpersonal ile or a periodof 12months.

L04. According o the Agreement, t is apparent hat an employeewho is arecipient f thissanctionwil l have heirpersonal i le noted hatcounsell ing as undertaken.The fi lenoteshall emaincurrent or aperiodof two (2) years,duringwhich ime he employee'sperformancewil lbe monitored y l ine management.At the end of that period, hearSe eChlonology f D Rerd vents lior to suspensionAppendix of ANSTOss43 esponseoConrcareated 2 March 010.See lsomemorarrdumit led'Behaviourn t l reworkplace'purportedlysigned yl l l l an ddated24106108* rbidot It.,id

Corrcarc Repor t l ' lnves t igat ion2:15 ANSl 'O 24Released nder FOI


25/43

file noteshallbe destroved rovidedhatno urther reachof dutyhasoccurred.105. Notwithstandinghe equivocal ature f the ime rame hata filenoteis o remain urrent n an employee'sersonalile,ast appears learthatuponcertain onditionseing atisfiedy inemanagement,hefi lenote s to bedestroyed.L06. There anbe no disputehatduringheperiod etween ecember'1994and29 May2008,Mr Reidwas hesubject f our 4) ncidentswhich, n ime,occurred t thevery east ouryears part rom hepreviouslyecordedncident. lthought s notentirelyn accordwiththe recognisedanctionsn theAgreement,46'ANSTOubmithat timposed nMr Reid wri t tencounsel l ing'Dec'94),discip l ine[d] '(Dec'98)and writtendisciplineounselling'Apdl03)in respect f hosethree 3) ncidents.t is alsoapparenthat, n respect f the ncidentrecorded n 29 May2008,ANSTO id not mpose n Mr Reidanyrecognisedction vailablen theAgreement,ther hansubmittingthatMr Reid'sbehaviourwasunacceptable'andhat t'would ediscussedwithhissupervisor.'-r,07.With especto the ncidents ecorded n 8 October 008and 16March 009,ANSTO, ccordingo the material rovided, idnotimpose n Mr Reidanyrecognisedanctionn heAgreement.108. On 25 June2010, n a memorandumddressedo Dr Paterson,l- I - - ,ANSTOI I ,submittedhataT

David Reid has a historyof behaviourover many years that has notbeen addressed. ANSfO I am surprisedat the tevetof tolerancedemonstrated y the organisation,owardsan individualwho appearsto have repeatedlybehaved n a waythatwoutdbe viewedas unacceptablen mostorganisafions. hereare a number of file notes reflecting hreateningand physicalbehaviour hat is not appropriate n the workplace.As a result Iwoutdbe fundamentally pposed o him returning o theproductionareaof Building23.

109. Whilst t cannotbe disputed hat Mr Reid has a historyof behaviourhatappears nconsistent ith his duty as an employeeof ANSTO, t isfactuallyncorrect orlf to submit hat Mr Reid's"behaviourovermanyyears hasnot been addressed." ndeed, he material

*' TlreAg'eement tateswo periods.e. 2 months 2 yeatsouwith th eexception f written ounselling" Se emenlorandumitledANSTO lealthproduction ehaviour urportedlyrgned ylp;D25ReleascdUn(cr FO ICor rcare Repor t f Inves t rgat ron2,15 ANS' fO


26/43

provided yANSTO learly egateshissubmission,nd n anycase,thedecisiono (ornot o) mpose nyaction orsanction)n respect fthe ncidentsecorded gainstMr Reidbetween ecember 994and16March 009,wasclearly f a subjectiveature ndertakeny herelevant ecision aker t that imeof each ncident.Of course.tgoeswithout ayinghat II has hebenefit f hindsight th isdisposalnassessing r Reid 's ntecedentehaviour,ui te nl ikethedecision akerwho,at that ime,had o giveconsiderationsasothe nature nd evel f the behaviour lleged, aturaljustice,proceduralairness nddeterrenceo otherswhenconsideringheappropriatection o mpose n Mr Reid.110. IIf alsosubmitshatANSTO re n possessionf a numberof fi lenotes n respect f Mr Reid's ehaviour. hematerial rovided

by ANSTO ighlightshree 3)particularncidentsDec 94- April 03)where,n accordanceith heAgreement, f i lenotewouldhave ikelybeenplaced nMrReid 's ersonali le.111.. In ightof heAgreement,nd n additiono the act hatMr Reid'sperformanceadnotbeenquestionedy inemanagement ithintwoyearperiod between ec'94 29 May2008), NSTO,ncomplying ith tsownpolicy, hould avedestroyedhe ilenote(s) sno urther reach f dutyhadbeen ecorded gainstMr Reid.LTz. I am hereforef theview hat,based n Mr Reid's ntecedentbehaviourrovided yANSTO,Mr Reid's ersonalileshould othavecontained ny ilenote(s)eferencinghreateningndphysicalbehaviour,articularlys twouldappear videnthat his nformationis, n part,being elied n by ANSTO o preventMr Reid rom eturningto work n bui ld ing3ARl.The Leqislationsection 6 of theAct113. Section 6(1) f theActprohibits n employerrom:

dismissing n employee; rdoingan act hat results n an employeebeing njured n his or heremployment; rprejudicial lyl tering he employee's osit ion whether y the deductionor withholding f remuneration r by any othermeans);orthreateningo take such action referred o in (a), (b) or (c )because he employee:

' 8 Inc lud ingbut not l in r i ted o those ac tors b l lowrng

(a )(b )

(c)

( d )

Corncarc I lepor t l ' lnves t igat ion245 ANSTO 26Released nderFOI


27/43

complainedbout n OHS ssue: rassisVedn an OHS nvestiqation

114. In my view, he conduct f ANSTO atisfieshe ermsof section 6(1)(b)and(c)as suspensionnd nvestigationonstitutesifferenttreatment hich s prejudicial.1L5. Although ubsection6(f) sprobablyimitedo assistanceheemployee rovidedo an nvestigationonductednder heOHSAct,subsect ione)wouldikelynclude lmost nyengagementnemployee aswithanexternal ourcen a genuine ttempto airOHSmatters. n hepresent ircumstances,t would nclude ot ustMrReid's ealings ithComcare, utmayextendo hisengagementith

ARPANSA, NSTOmanagementndpotentiallyther ources.Accordingly, r Reid's onduct atisfieshe ermsof section 6(1Xe).11.6. As such, f ANSTO ubjected r Reid o prejudicialreatmentecausehe madecomplaintsoANSTO, RPANSA, tcetera,henANSTOwillhavebreached 76 of the Act.ANALYSIS1L7. Insuspending r Reid,ANSTO elied pon heANSTOCodeofEthicsaetheCode) clauses and450;,heAgreementBreach f

Employees utyclause .3)and heANSTOPreventionndManagementf Workplace arassment.5l118. As partof a section 3 notice, NSTOprovidedo ComcaredocumentitledDavidReidallegations record f meeting ated18June2009'whichdenti f ieshecircumstancesndconsiderat ionsnwhichANSTO uspended r Reid romduty. Thedocument,nderthe heading f Record tates,nteralia, hat:52

Mr Reid stated that he had "brushed"aqainstthat was all. lt was a non event and there were plenty of peoplearound [i.e. Allegation 4].Mr Reid sfated that he was unaware of anv other earlier incidentconcerning [i.e. Allegation 2] .Reid wanted it recorded that:

toANSTOcite hat'Values ndstandardsf behaviour rliculated ith theCodehave eennfornred,wlrere elevanto ANSTO,by Sections0 and 3 of thePublicService ct, 1999'toClause resemblesir rpart) ectjons f theAP SCodeof Conductt ' See tem . l4 of ANSTOs 43 esponseo Comcareated 2 March 010srSe eFilenote e conversationvithMr Reidadvising f hissuspensionurportedlyuthored VII (Lrnsigned)Appendix 0 of ANSTOs 43 esponseo Comcare ated 2 Malch20 0

(e )(0

21Releasedjnder FO IConrcare I lepor t f Inves t igat rot t245 ANS' fO


28/43

i. He believed the action was vindictive on the paftmanagement ecausehe raisedsafetyconcerns

ii. He believed hat ANSIO's action amounted o hinderingOH&SRepresentative hichwascontrary o theAct.

Daviesssndicated hat in the face of the allegations,ogetherwithanother ecentcomplaint y a superuisor boutharassment nd anincident report regardingRerd'sbehaviour n the medical centre,there was a concern from management's erspective hat Reidshould be suspended on pay while the issues could beinvestigated.Mr Davies stated haf ANSfO was exercising ts duty of care to itsemptoyeesand that David enjoyed he presumptionof innocencewhile he nvestigation as underway.

119. The Agreement, t clause7.3 states hat:The procedures outlined in this clause apply to all ANSTOemployeeswho act n a mannerwhich 's nconsisf nt with heirdutyas an emptoyeeof ANSIO and provide for natural ustice andproceduralairness.

120. The Agreement, t clause7.3.2states, nteral ia, hat:Where an incident adses or information is received regarding analleged breach of duty, the supervisor or nominated manager shallcarry out a preliminary investigationand raise the matter with theemployee who will be given an oppoftunity to give his or her versionof the events.

TheAlleqat ions12L. There s someevidence hich uggestshatMr Reidwas nformed ftheAl legat ionshich ed o hissuspensioni.e.Al legat ions&2) on

18June2009.54 owever, e wasnotprovided ith he specific etailof thoseallegations,r a furtherwo(2)allegations,amely llegations1 & 3, untilANSTO's ngagem_entfll whichproceededissusoensionn 18June2009. '"

t t E ,5 4 ^ see oomote )l ,FIII'ANSro55Se eExecutive ummaryundated, nsignedndno authordentif ied ut t is assumedhedocumentis autholed yllll) - Appendix of ANSTOs 43 esponseo Comcare ated 2 March2010

of

Corncare Repor t f I l ves t igat ion245 ANSTO 28Released nder FOI


29/43

122. lt is alsoapparenthat Mr Reidwas notprovided ithan opportunityoproperlyespond ndputhiscase orurrardrior o ANSTO's ecisionosuspend im. ANSTO ubmithat:56The processunder the enterprise greement s that if an incidentarlses or information s received egardingan allegedbreachofduty,a preliminarynvestigations carriedout and thematter s thenraisedwith the employeewho will be given an opportunity o givetheirversionof events."'ANSIO Legal Counselengagedan externalawyer,lf, tounderlakea fact finding nvestigationnto these allegations...TherepoftpreparedbyJJ)was forwardedo Mr Reidon 14July2009 giving him an opporiunity o put forward his version ofevenfs.ss

1 2 g . o n 2 1 J u | y 2 0 0 9 , M r R e i d r e s p o n d e d t o E J r e p o r t i n w h i c h h estates, nteral ia, hat:

Il|l has claims sic] o make indingsof factagainstme,yett havenot been nterviewed y her. Neitherhave I beenrequestedto attendan interview. Thus, believe he reporl fails o uphold heprinciples of natural justice required by the ANSIO CerlifiedAgreement.

124. Containedwithin "Executive Summary" undated) t isstated that, "ln accordance with Human Resources practice andprocedure instructionswere given that Mr Reid was not to beinteruiewed s parl of the fact finding nvestigation. Similardialogue salsocontained n IIf "Summaryof Evidence." ndeed, n her"FinalAddendum"II:l states hal, "lnstructionswere receivedfrom ANSTO on 10 September 2009 to conduct an interuiew with MrDavid Reid to obtain his response o the four allegations contained nthe Fact Finding lnvestigation Report dated 9 July 2009."

'1.25. To clarify fl f instructions which end to provide he basis asto the reasonMr Reidwas not nterviewed) askedANSTO,as partofa section 43 notice, to "providethe HR practice and procedure that IIf refers o and secondly, who instructed Mr Reidnot to beinterviewedand upon what "grounds"was hat decisionmade?'6e

126. In response o that notice,ANSTO submitted hat:5"Se eANSTOs 43 esponseo Comcare ated 2 July20 0 para & 3 at page 9tt In my view, hecontext f clause.3.2ts such ha tan nvestigationoncemtng breachs conductedprior to thematter eing aisedwith theemployee" Ncar ly month l ter issuspension' . ,Source :Enra i | t i t l ed .Addendumtos43 ' f r o rnNo t ley toFandeda ted22. lune 01

29Released nder FOICorncare Repon f ' lnves t igat ion12,15ANS' lO


30/43

At no time dld ANSIO provide any instruction o fI not tointerviewMr Reid,as the Breachof Dutyprocessclearlysfafes hafafter the preliminary investigation the employee is given theoppoftunityo give hisversionof events. Mr Reidwas givenmanyopporlunitieso give his versionof events,but refused o until hewas inally nteruiewed VQ on 16September 009.127. With respect,ANSTO'sresponse s factuallyncorrect.Clause7.3.2ofthe Agreement o which ANSTO refersdoes not state (eitherdirectlyorindirectly)hatan employeebe given he opportunityo give his versionof eventsafter he prel iminarynvestigation.128. lt is also incorrect or ANSTO to state hat Mr Reid "refused"to give hisversionof eventsunti l nterviewed yll as Mr Reid provided

If witha response o all the Allegations n 21July 2009.60Indeed,as partof that response,Mr Reidstates hat, nteral ia:Therepoft ncludingattacheddocumentation,s hundredsof pageslong...TheOrgansiation asgrantedme, the ndividualwith scarceresources, ive workingdays with whichto sought [sic] through thehundredsof pages of materialand providea response...Assuch,this letter provides a summary response. I can provide acomprehenslve esponse fo all the material at a later date ifrequired.

L29. On 11 August2010, spoke ol l f concerning er nstructionsfromANSTO hatare containedwithinboth he "ExecutiveSummary"and "Summaryof Evidence." f l stated hat:"Well I can tell you that I was definitelygiven instructionsnot tointerviewMr Reidat that time. Theysaid t was n line with humanresourcepractice and procedureor something ike that." I said,"Canyou recall whogave you those nstructions?"She sard, Oh, Ican't eally emember, ut I assumet waslFff" I said,"ls it the case hatyou didn't nterviewMr Reid until nstructed o doso by on the 10 September referring o the

"FinalAddendum dated 22/9/2009)?" She sard, "Yes, yes that wascorrect, because at that stage I was at a distinct disadvantagebecauseMr Reid had been given the interviews had conductedwithotherpeople."

1 3 0 . W h a t m u s t b e a | s o b o r n e i n m i n d i s t h a t n s t a t e d t h a t M r R e i dwould enjoy the 'presumption of innocence while the investigation wasunderway."

60Whether Mr Reid's responseo ANSTO was deerned nsatisfactoryn some way or another sirrelevant, he fact s that he did provide a response ha t contained enials,partial admissions ndinfotrnatton hat ANSTO ha d prior l


31/43

i.31. On29 July2009,I1responded to Mr Reid's esponsef 21 July2009. Inaddressing r Reid's esponseo Allegations& 2,1-submittedhat, nteralia, Yourresponses to simplydeny hat hisincidentoccurred. Youhaveprovidedno evidencewhatsoeverosupport ourversion f events." n addressing llegation 'Ilsubmittedhat, nteralia, Youhavenotprovided nyevidenceosupport our espor?se."n addressing llegation , tsubmittedhat, nteralia, ...youhavenotprovided ny evidenceosupport ourstatement iustallegations.Indeed,n her"SummaryofEvidence"ddressingheevidence oncerningllegation ,flsubmitted that, nteralia, UnlessMr Reid anproduce olidevidence o ustify hat t was a reasonably eldbeliefat the time hathe made he statement,henhe hasmadea false ccusation bout]tll"

1gZ. The erm presumptionof nnocence"s n actnota truepresumptionat all. Rather, hatexistss the concept f "burdenof proof."Whilstthe standard f proof aidout n Brigginshaw Brigginshawo's a lessstringenttandardo that mposedn a criminal atter, do notbelievethatANSTOwas n possession f adequate videnceor heprosecutorialurdeno havebeendischargeduring nystage f theinvestigativehase.133.

L34.

tn the'Addendum o FactFinding nvestigation epoft nto conductof David Reid,'

It s alsonoteworthvhat

-

" ' ( 1938) 0CLR336 HCA)

Corncare Repor r t ' l r rvcs t igatron245 ANSTO a 1J IReleased Under FO I


32/43

|-

II

It fabricatedhe incidentand that he had a motive or doingso...l bel ieve is al legation as made n an effort o discreditmylegitimatel legationsgainst im."

135. ANSTO, n response o the request, ssential lyeiteratefcommentary as statedabove). However,ANSTOalsostate hat:

tn October2009,After had completedand repoftedonher investigation, -f2 requested that additionalinvestigationsbe underTaken y ANSTO into several mattersbetween personnel in ARl. e from ProActiveReso/utions as engagedby ANSTO o investigafehesematters.

136. I note that the ProActiveResolutionsReport,as partof itsrecommendationsStates hat, "We recommend he investigationntofhe issues raisedbyZlllbe closed" and "We recommend theinvestigationnto fhe ssues aisedagainst be closed." tis notknownwhetherhe recommendationsefer o oneand he Sameinvestigationowever,heydo suggesthatan nvestigationasonfoot n respect f matters oncerningf and l. lf that sin act hecase,Comcares notaware f anyconclusionsnd/orfindingshat esultedrom heconduct f the nvestigations.

Corlcare I lepo t l o f Invest tgat ion'12'15 ANSl-O 32Released nderFOI


33/43

T37. Whatcannot edisputeds hatANSTO, pon eceipt f Allegations& 2, mmediatelyuspended r Reid romduty n heabsence f anyindependentr corroborativevidenceorwitnesses)o attesto thefacts omplainedf byl. lt is of urthernteresthatlfwasnotsuspendedor n act hesubject f a rigorousndependentinvestigation)iven hat henature f theallegationsgainst imandthecircumstancesn which heyoccurred63reextraordinarilyimilarothosewhich awMr Reid uspended.

138. -

139. For he record,Comcare as not received ny advice romANSTOwhich uggestshatANSTO ispute or ndeed gree o) hecontentsofl) formal omplaintoncerning140. With especto Allegation,utn my view l conclusionsresomewhat nsatisfactory. finds hatMr Reid's ccusationhatl

I toldstaffnot o completeertainncidenteports as"falseandhadno validbasis."However,S rationales confusing;f statesthat certain tatements re nconsistent hen heyarenot,citesnoevidenceromlI concedeshatMr Reidwassimply nsweringtheARPANSAnspector'suestions,nd inally oncludeshatMr Reid is a safety representative ith responsibflityor raisingsafety rssaes and that responsibility is not being questioned,however, he appropriafenessf making thisallegation regardlessof whetheror not t was correct) n that mannerand in that forummustbe questioned.

'1.41..On 17 June 2009 (1 day prior o Mr Reid'ssuspension)Mr Sarkar,duringhis inspection f ARI reports hat, I stated hat hissupervisor,-ff , instructed him not to fill in an event form

ot i.e. no independentwitness(es) o the ncidentan d having to prefer one persolls estimony o that ofanother6aSe eFormal Complaint againstRamezHelou purportedlyauthoredbV El an d addressedoI|If 'dated 14JulY2009dn i iegu t io r rt ( no tw i ths tand rng tha t i t i sdevo ido f theda teand thepar l i cu la r subs tance thesub jec to fthe, ,spi l l " ) ppearso relateo I-123 lodine 123) owever,heevidencet.e. he est imonyf thoseinterviewed)sequivocals o what ar l icular- 123 spi l l " is being eferredo n al leginghatMr Reidnrade false ccusatiort

Corncarc Repor t 1 ' l l . r ves t igation12'15 ANSTo Released 3t Jndei


34/43

and o assisfotheroperatorsn the cellface."66n a sect ion 3 noticeto ANSTO uestioninghetherheyhadany ntentiono nterview rSarkar o confirmhestatementllegedly adeby Il, ANSTOsubmittedhat, ANSfO doesnot ntend nteruiewing r Sarkar fARPANSA.'L42. On 24 June2009,I1 repeated isallegationoncerning

If in a protectiveisclosure eeting ithMr Reid,IIf andotherANSTOpersonnel.143. - was nterviewedyMs Neilson n 20August 009however,it s evidenthathisalleged onversationithMr Sarkar ndlllwassimply ot a ised.ARPANSAnspectioneport 17June 009L44. Alsoon 17June2009,Mr Sarkar, uring is nspectionfARI eportsthat:

|f|, unpromptedby any question orm ARPANSA old usabout the ANSfO employmentbackground of Mr Reid. Iremarks ncludedwords o the effect that:''. He had eft ARI or HIFAR. ad been urneddown or OPALand"was only allowed back to ARI becausehe produceda letter

provide o him at the time of the HIFAR ransfer o say he couldretu n.. Theemployment istoryof Mr Reid had been "troubled"and that

ARI had only accepted im back becauseof the commitmentpreviouslymade n the etter.. I appearedo be nftuenced y Mr Reid.

L45. Consideringhe commentary f Mr Sarkar, n my view t wouldhavebeen reasonableorff to exploreany perception f bias hatIIf may have heldagainstMr Reid,and in that regard,bothMrSarkar nd shouldhavebeen nterviewed.

Investiqatorualifications146. ANSTO,as partof a section 3 noticewererequestedo provide

A description f the relationship etweenANSIO andJZII inctudinga brief description f the work or busrness lIf has conducted or ANSro both before and since the

"" Se eARPANSA nspection eport ated 7 .lune 00 9para24 arpage67See RPANSA nspect ionepor l ated7 June 009uhderheheading'Entry eet ing' t pagc

34Releasedjnder FO IConrcare Rcpor t 1 ' lnves t rgal ion245 - ANSl-O


35/43

incident.Also,an explanation s to why - wasselected oconduct the investigationnto Mr Reid, ncludinga copy of anyrelevantquatificationslIl holds forexample,qualificationsapproved by the AustralianPublic Secfor Commission;see

1,47. ln responseo thenotice, NSTO ubmittedhat:The nvestigationnto the attegationsmade againstMr Reid s thefirstwork conducted V7) for ANSTO.Fff did notperformany work for ANSTObefore he investigation nd hasnotbeen involved in any investigationsince. II I wasapproached y ANSTO's egalCounsel,conduct he investigation n an urgent basis ollowing he incidenton 18 June 2009. II was se/ecfed based uponexperience, bitity, ualificationsndavailability.

t48. . lt wouldappearhate holdsno ormal

to

investigativeualifications,6sorhasa history f conducting orkplaceinvestigationsntilFebruary 009withf resumedentifying roleas:

:.L49. heevidentiary aterial nwhichIII} relied i.e. nterviews ithANSTO ersonnel)s explicitlyevoid f any ecognisednterviewingtechnique hichonewould xpecto see roma competentndexperiencednvestigator. ritically,he nterviewso not dentify ow'and n whatcontext,esponses eregiven. Rather,he nterviewsconsist f statementsn he thirdperson" hich ackanyprobativeand/oractual ontent.

1 .5 0 . { F r , t o a si g n i f i c a n te X ten t , a | s o re | i e so n th e h e a rsa y a n dsomewhat rejudicialestimonyf those nterviewed'nsimpleerms,there s a lackof considerations o thevalue hat s placed n hereliabilityf theevidence,ndon hecredibilityf the ndividualinterviewed.151. Inadditiono the above, also ind hebelow actors omewhattroubl ing:, 'sSuchas a Master Licenceor OperatorsLicenceaccording o th e provisiorrs 1'theContmercialAgents & Prit,ate Inqtiry Agents (CAPI) Act 2001 (NSW)

Corrcare Repor r f lnves t igat ion1245 ANSTC) RelcasednoJior


36/43

o the act hatII reliedupon he contents f an nterviewconducted ith --f ARl, whenif'$e i.e.he nterview]

. relying n an ncidenthatoccurred ithMr Reid n themedicalcentreon 29 May2008. f| states hat,"/fdoesnotformpaft of the nvestigation ttegations ut s backgroundinformation nd indicates rioraggressive ehaviouron thepaftof Mr Reid.'no152. With espect,I indicatesrior ggressiveehaviourn thepartof i however,If states hat, Whetheror not|Ir hasengaged n similarconducts nof within he scopeof thisinvestigation."TlL53. Whilsthat s thepositionhatll and/orANSTOadopted,t sclear hat l allegationserenotconsidereds "backgroundinformation"espitehecontentionhatbothMr Reidandstatethatt . . fabr icated' ' iSSUeSorincidentsintheworkp|aceand urther,hat he allegationsllege rioraggressiveehaviournthe partofll.F I N D I N G SLS4. ANSTO ontendhat tsconducts consistent ith tsdisciplinarypolicies ndprocedures.nmyview,ANSTO herefore adanobligationo identifyheparticularlements f thecode (andAgreement)hatANSTO onsidered r Reidhadallegedly reached'prior o mposing nydisciplinaryction ponhim. on thematerialbeforeme, here s no evidencehatsupports NSTO n havingundertakenhis ask. Indeed,t appearshatbreaches f theCode orAgreement )wereno t iden t i f iedun t i | -p rov idedANSTowi thI "ExecutiveSummary." o thatend,given he act hatAllegations& 2 wereultimatelyound o be unsubstantiated,r Reid's uspension

is somewhat xtreme nd herefore isproportionateo thenature fanybreach lleged YANSTO.1S5. lt cannot edisputedhatMr Reidhadno prior nowledge f Allegation2 despitehe act hatFllhad madea contemporane_o^uscomptainto ANSTOHRat the imeof theallegedncident.T2n he69SeeSuppleIr rentarylnforrnat ion-- InterviewSummarycontainedwithintheSummar.yofE,videncetpage 3tolbid - n4r. .i"a'.previous onduct ontained ithinSummary f Ev.idencet pages 3 &24t' Which do notaccept ecausell l al legationsreboth elevant ndprobativeo Allegatrons4 & 2,notu,ithstandinghe act hat hoseAllegations ave ee n oundunsubstantrated72Se eFileNotedared 6 May 2009 unsignedj urportedlyuthoredvll an dcompiledfi 'oma phone all eceivedtomlll

had "nevereven seenand;

Courcare Report f Invest igat ion24 5 ANSTo Releasedn,r.ifor


37/43

material eforeme, here s no evidencehat ndicateshatANSTOhadraisedhecomplaint ithMr Reiduntil hedayof hissuspension24daysafter he nitial omplaint).t is alsoevidenthroughheprovisionof emailsromANSTO, hatANSTO,f andARImanagementlarifiedertain videntia{issueswith especto theAllegationn 27 Mayand15 June2009 22daysand3 days espectivelyrior o Mr Reid's uspension) hen|I l confirmedhat herewere nowitnesseso the Allegation.T3

156. ln additiono Allegation & 2,ANSTO lso elyupon anotherrecentcomplaint y a supervisor boutharassmenf"assumedo beAllegation ) and an "incidentreport egardingReid'sbehaviourn themedical entre" this ncident oesnot ormpartof theAllegations)nsuspending r Reid.L57. Ofcourse, NSTO onsideredheallegationsgainstMr Reid o beserious owever,heevidence,Taiven he ormandcontextn which tis presented,s unequivocallyeficientn dentifyinghether r notMrReidwasprovided ith ulldisclosuref allmatters lleged s groundsforhissuspension.1"58. Criticalo clause .3of theAgreements"proceduralfairness."fANSTO ad airly nd ully nformed r Reidof allmatters ubject fhis mmediateuspensioninparticular llegation), hen t isassumedhathe wouldhavehadan appreciationf thesubstanceftheAllegationsnd, n my viewmore mportantly,ada reasonableopportunityo respondnwhichhecouldhavedenied r rebuttedheallegations;ut orward nyevidencen his avour; roperly xplainedtheallegationsr presentedn nnocent xplanationnd;provided nymitigatingircumstance(s)rior o ANSTO aking hedisciplinaryctionthat t embarked pon n theabsence ndconsiderationf the ullfactual ircumstancesnd merit f eachAllegation.159. Thataside, heopportunityo provideMr Reidwitha reasonableopportunityo respondo theallegationseededo be balanced

againstheseriousnessn whichANSTO iewed isalleged onduct.Ofcourse, s mentioned reviously, r Reidwas notgivenareasonablepportunityo respondo theAllegationsrior o hissuspensionather, ewas affordedive 5)days o respond nemonthafter issuspension.T5

" See mai l i -omItot l l at2.57pm n l5 June 0097aFilenote e conversationith Mr Reidadvising f his suspensionurporledly r-rthoredyllf (unsigned)Appendrx 0 of ANSTOss43 esponseo Comcare ated 2 March2010& lettersaddressedo DavidReiddated 8 & 19June 00 9purporledly igned yIIfII ANSTO" ln hrs eponseated 1Juiy2009

ClorncareRepor t f I r rvcs t igat ron245 ANS' l 'O Releasednoerl6t


38/43

CONCLUSIONSL60. On hematerial eforeme, find that:

(a) ANSfO hasdonean act hat esultedn Mr Reidbeing njurednhisemployment;nd(b) ANSTO rejudiciallylteredMr Reid's osition;nd(c) Mr Reid omplainedbouta matter oncerninghehealth ndsafety f ANSTOemployees t work.

L6']-,.However, s notedabove hose indingswillonlyamount o a breachofsection 6 f I furtherind hatANSTOperpetratedheactwhich njuredMr Reid's mploymentr prejudiciallyltered isposition ecauseMrReid omplainedboutOHSmatters.-t62. On heevidence eforeme, t wouldappearhatMr Reidwassubstantiallyenied roceduralairness;hatanother mployeeaccused f similar onduct was subjecto quitedifferenttreatment;hat he nvestigatorasnotappropriatelyualified ndoveremphasisedertai evidential aterial hileunderemphasisigothers.Given he multiplenadequaciesn heprocess hich esultedin Mr Reid 's uspension,have rave oncernsbout hemannernwhichANSTO onductedt andcannotclosemy mind o thepossibil ity

thatANSTO ndother elevant arties erebiasedowardsMr Reid.'t63. Nevertheless,substantiveeconsiderationf those indingss beyondthe scope f my nvestigationndmy statutoryunction. oresignificantly,hosegrave oncerns otwithstanding,here s nsufficientevidenceor me o concludehatMr ReidwassuspendedorcomplainingboutOHSmatters tANSTO.L64. As such, l lof the concernsexpressedbove otwithstanding,conclusionhatANSTObreachedection 6 of theActwouldbeunsubstantiatedithoutmore.Although noccasions'circumstantial'

evidence aysuffice,n his nstance conclusionf breachwouldbemerely peculative.take hisviewdespitehe act hatclause (2)oftheAct everseshe onusof proving ausationn civi lproceedings.CLAIMSOF BULLYINGAND HARASSMENTBACKGROUND16s. on 14April 009,IIID I,{III , ANSTO,fonruardednemail o Comcare's laimsHelpDesk eeking"responsein writing...inelation o the statements adeby Mr Dave

Corncare Repon 1' lnvestrgatron24 5 ANS O Releasedno.,J$l


39/43

Reid n relationo hiscraim, he peakHeatthprogramaf ANSro, hisReturn o work plan and theadvicegiven o himby comcare.,r6'l '66. on 17April2009, hereeTottenhamMsTottenham), eamLeader,claimsServices ranch, omcare, espondedoI email nwhich hestated,nter lia:

[you]wereadvisedhat t wasnot appropriateo use theRTWp ocompel a claimant to parTicipate in an in-house preventativeexercise program..-.Comcare'sposrtion s that the RTWP plan should not nctude thePeak Health program but simpty reflect the agreed work hoursandconditions, that is, having regard to the medical evidence from thetreatingpractitionerand rehabilitationadvice. 77

167. On4 May2009, ollowing meeting ithMr Reid,Ts-fonrrardednemail o Mr Reid nwhich heconfirmedheir iscussionsand heagreed utcomes f thatmeeting. nparticular,twasagreedthatMr Reid, nteraria,would adhereto his rostered ours nd work naccordancewiththe secondReturn To work programexcludingattendance t PeakHealthuntil resultsromthemedicalexaminationare eceived." uringhemeeting,Mr Reid laimedhathe hadbeenbullied ndharassed[in heworkplace].lf noted hat,"shouldDavidhavea complaint, e shouldadviseHR in writing o thatthismattermaybe propertynvestigated...andnclude lt details. aresandrelevantnformation..'re

168. on 20 May2009,Mr Reid onrrrardedn email oI I inwhichhedetai led iscla ims f bui ly ingndharassment.n hemain,MrReid's omplaintetails isdissatisfactionf havingo participatenthePeakHealth rogram hirst ufferingroma work elatednjury.L69. on24 June2009, 6days oilowing issuspension) r Reidattendedameet ingwi thQ(andf iveo therANSTomanagementpersonnelncludingll) wherehisclaims f bullying ndharassmentanddisclosuref safety over-upst ARI)werediscussedandelectronicallyecorded nder hepremise f theANSToWhistleblowerolicy.170. on 29 July2009,Iwrote to Mr Reidandstatedhat

On 24 June 200g you were provided, at your request, with anoppoftunity to meet with a member of the ANSro Executive to' " See mai l i t ledMr DaveReidClaimNo:67 5glg/7See nrai l i t iedCMc ACTIONEDANSTOcn 6715g/gtt In conrpany rt hAR I personnelf ' ) ^Sc e emarl tt lcd Meeting With David REID and sent o thosepersonsmentionedat footnote7g

3 9I{eleasedUnder FOICorncare Repor t f Inves t igat ron1245 ANSTO


40/43

outline your concerns regarding safety lssues within ANSroHealth. Thismeetingwasconvenedafteryou hadmadea series fallegations bout safetyissues.Youwitt ecall hatyou were askedto providedocuments r details egardinghose ssue . priorto themeeting, ou wereadvised hat he meetingwoutdbe tapedso that,in the absence of documentation, ou courd provide a verbalaccount of the issues. you and your representative,-agreed hat the transcript f the meetingwould hen be signed ffby yourserf and I as a true record of the meeting.Notwithstandinghat agreement,at the end of the meetingyouchanged your position and indicated you wourd not sign thetranscript. For the record, you provided no evidence ordocumentation t the meeting or Managemento acton. Rather.you madea seriesof unsubstantiatedltegations.rrL. lf f is suggesting hat Mr Reid provided*noevidenceordocumentation"ormanagemento acton because e failed o sign hetranscript,hen t is procedura[y nfairandwithout oundation.n hisdisclosure, r Reidprovidesncident etails ndnames fwitnessesthatwouldhaveallowed NSTo o conduct preliminarynvestigationo f t h e c | a i m s w h i c h h e h a d m a d e o n 2 4 J u n e 2 0 0 9 . l n d e e d , _viewof Mr Reid'sevidence eems o differsomewhatrom hatof

-If whostates,nter liaat theconclusionf he nterview:Alright, hat'sgood that gives us enough nformationo moveon. So he processs thatwewittdo somenvestigationf this ndproducea reporTwhichwiil go to you for comment.we cangiveyoua transcriptfwhat's n ape f you'd ike hat.

T72. rr alsodiscrosednJresponse that,despiteheadviceromcomcare oncerninghepeakHealth rograms'anddespitehea d v i c e f r o m Q toM rR e id ,8 1 M rR eid ' s re tu rn to w ork w o u | dbe acilitatedf a number f termsweremet, ncrudinghe oilowing:That you formalryagree to fuily participate n the peak HeatthProgram n your workarea nctuding sic)and furtypafticipate ithAIr/SIO'scasemanagersn relation o your workers compensationclaim(s)and any return o workprogram.

173. On 7 September009,If wrote o Mr Reidadvising imof thef ind ingso fan in te rna | inves t iga t ionconduc tedov* l

to At para 16 6of th e Reporto ' A t p a r a1 67o f t h e R e p o l t

Corrcarc I lcpor t f lnves t igat ior r245 ANSI- ( ) 40Released Jn i lF r FOI


41/43

--, ANSTO,nto heclaimsmadeby MrReidon 24 June2009.82L74. The report Vlonly addresseshe"coverup"of allegedsafetyncidents lleged y Mr Reid f], anddoesnotdisclose ny referenceo Mr Reid's llegationsoncerningisclaims(includinghosepersons ndwitnessesdentified)elativeo thePeakHealth rogram r anybullying ndharassmentlaimshathe wasallegedlyubjectedo. Thiscontentionppearso be supportedy DrPaterson ho, n hisacceptance f the report tates hat, Separafeinvestigations avecome o the same conclusion.Executivewillreview he process lready nitiated o improve ncident epofting."175. On hematerial vailable,oth land Mr Paterson reclearly

referringo the nvestigationsreviouslyonducted yfandIr.L76. In short, n the material vailable eforeme, am of theview hatMrReid's llegationsf bullying ndharassmentavenotbeeninvestigatedyANSTO.ANALYSISL77. Section 6(1 of theAct equires mployerso takeall reasonablypracticableteps o protecthe healthand safetyof its employees t

work.Oneof themostbasic and herefore,ypically,he mostpracticable)tepsan employeran ake s to nvestigatenyallegedrisks o health r safety, etermine hetherhe risk s realand tsextent, ndwhat, ifany)stepsmust henbe taken o minimiset.178. Furthermore,ustas an employer ouldbeara dutyunder ection16(1 of theAct o seriouslyonsider nd nvestigateisks fphysioloqicalarmand njury,n my view t s ncumbent ponanemployero nvestigateisks f psvcholoqicalarm. Indeed,ustasemployershould evelop nd mplementystemso respondophysicalisks, mployershould evelop nd mplementystemsorespondo psychologicalisk.179. lt isgenerally cceptedhatbullying ndharassment aycauseemotional r psychologicalarm.As such,employers eara dutyunder ection 6of theAct o nvestigatellegationsf bullying ndharassment.ndeed, lthoughheextent f thatobligation aybedependantpon hegravity ndveracity f the allegationseven f theE2See |e t te rda ted7Sep tember2009purpo r1ed lys ignedbyEandaddressed toDav idReid n additiono ANSTOMernorandumitled lnvestigationInto Disclosure f'Saf'ety overUp atARI' authored VIl for heattention f Dr AdrianPaterson, EO ANSTO,dated 6 August2009andpurportedly rgned y[J

Corncare Repor t 1 ' lnves t igat ion245 ANSTo ReleasedfifrJrPor


42/43

allegationsanbe characteriseds itt lemore hangossip, andprovidedheyare not far-fetchedor anciful")nemployer ears dutyto makeappropriatenquiries.n my view, hat s a basic ystemsrequirement.180. I note hat nf emai l oe (and thers)on May2009,

llff notes hat Mr Reid"shouldadviseHR in writingso that this[bullying nd harassment]mattermaybe properly nvestigated.'1ltwould, herefore,ppear hatII recogniseshe need oinvestigateuchallegations.CONCLUSION18L. As noted bove,n my view t was ncumbentponANSTO, ndersection 6(1) f theAct, o investigate r Reid's llegationsf bullyingandharassment.t failed o do so.Accordingly,am of theview hatANSTO reached ection 6(1) f heAct n hat t failed o takeallreasonablyracticableteps o protectMr Reid's ealth ndsafety twork.-182. Furthermore,alsoconcludehatANSTO,ndirecting r Reid oattendhe PeakHealthProgram gainst iswill,andcontraryoComcare'sirection,s tself breach f section 6 of theAct.RECOMMENDATIONS183. Based pon he evidence eforeme,andcomplying ithsection 3(2)of theAct, recommendhatANSTO:184. Engage competentersono undertake/overseeystematicmonitoringf allworkplaceshatundertakeadiopharmaceuticaloperationso ensure ngoing omplianceith heAct and egulations;

Action n respect f recommendationshould nclude, utnotnecessarilye imitedo:Engaging r directing n appropriatelyualified erson(s),hohasspecialistnowledgef hazardousubstancesnddemonstratedompetencyn managingisksassociated ithhazardousubstances,o oversee n ongoing ystem fauditingo ensure hat adiopharmaceuticalperations aintainappropriateystems f work o ensurehe uturehealth ndsafety f radiopharmaceuticalmployeess appropriatelymanaoed.

42Released nderFOI

Corncare I leDon f lnves t rqat ion245 ANSI-O


43/43

185. Provide ngoing ocumentedvidenceo Comcarehatsystemat,'monitoringsoccurring s outlined bove.186. Audit tsconsultativerotocols ithallpersonsnvolvednradiopharmaceuticalperationsrom ime o time o ensure tspolicre"andproceduresre effectivelyarried ut by ts employeeso ensureongoing ompliance ith heAct and egulationsndANSTOhealthandsafety equirements;187. Audit ts ecord eeping rocedureso ensurehatappropriateinformations recorded, aintainednd etainedn relationo thehealth ndsafety f employees ngagedn radiopharmaceuticaloperations188. Ensurehatnotifiablencidents re eportedo Comcaren accordancewithsection 8 of theActand egulation7Aand378 of the SA Regs.

, " / - - .Scott NotleySenior nvest igatorRegionalServiceDelivery NSW / ACTWork Health& SafetyGroupComcare

Documents

Comcare Report