 |
Dam engineer John Ruffini received a $1500 fine and
was ordered to pay costs when he appeared
in Brisbane Magistrate's Court. |
A DAM engineer who pleaded guilty to unlawfully working while unregistered during Queensland's disastrous 2011 floods has been fined $1500.
John Lawrence Ruffini, 47, was prosecuted by the state's Board of Professional Engineers on a charge of "carrying out a professional engineering service when not a registered engineer".
Mr Ruffini worked as a flood operations engineer for Brisbane's Wivenhoe, Somerset and North Pine dams during the floods crisis in January 2011.
He was charged in September after allowing his registration with the board to lapse on June 30, 2010 until he was re-registered on March 22, 2012.
Prosecutor Dan Piggott said Mr Ruffini was a flood operations engineer from January 7 to 17, 2011, when he issued directives on the release of water from the dams based on calculations; produced situation reports and performed other ancillary tasks.
''It was unlawful for Mr Ruffini to do those things in circumstances when he was not a registered professional engineer and when he was not under the direct supervision of someone else who was,'' Mr Piggott said.
''The Board does not make any submission about the competence or otherwise of the professional engineering services provided by Mr Ruffini.''
He argued Mr Ruffini was providing professional engineering services in respect to significant public infrastructure at a time when he was not a registered engineer, which was contrary to the requirements of the dam's operating manuals at the time.
Defence lawyer Alan MacSporran, for Mr Ruffini, said his client's offending was a ''technical breach'', adding he was a ''vastly experienced engineer'' who first became qualified in 1982.
Mr MacSporran said his client was the director of Water Planning and Coastal Services during the floods crisis and was ''well-regarded'' in the industry, having worked on at least 20 similar flood events since 1997 in his time as a flood operations engineer.
He said Mr Ruffini had been on a family holiday to Bundaberg before the Queensland flood crisis in 2011 and had been called back to work.
''The role is, as you would understand, one that carries huge responsibility, it's extremely onerous and on most occasions when the work is carried out, it's stressful because it's usually a crisis situation,'' Mr MacSporran said.
''His work as a flood operation engineer is not dependant upon, or conditional upon, his registration as a professional engineer and it doesn't affect the quality of his work.
''He has done this role many times before January 2011, always with distinction and professionalism.''
He said Mr Ruffini was hospitalised in April 2010 and did not see reminder notices asking him to renew his engineering registration with the board.
Magistrate Anne Thacker fined Mr Ruffini $1500 and ordered he pay costs of $2578.
She said there was no doubt Mr Ruffini was well qualified, not just by his studies over the years but also because of his professional experience.
''The point that I am making here is you have been providing vital services to the community for a very long time,'' she said.
''You have been providing services to the community with respect to being a flood engineer operating the dams of southeast Queensland since 1997.''
She said Mr Ruffini's failure to be a properly registered engineer had no bearing on the quality of his work and did not put the public at risk.
''There has been much written about the January 2011 floods; what happened, how it could be improved, whether anyone could be blamed and that's something that is investigated after a disaster and was investigated by the Holmes commission,'' she said.
''An internal review was conducted by the US Army Corp and the engineers of Australia came out in support of what had been done by those investigations and the evidence across the board, that the best that could be done was done at the time to mitigate the floods.
''Four engineers, you being one of them, who worked 12 hour shift throughout that period of crisis have all been commended for the work that you did but that is not what this prosecution is about.''
Ms Thacker likened Mr Ruffini's lapse in registration as similar to a person who hadn't renewed their driver's license, adding the whole purpose of professional registration was ''linked to public safety''.
No conviction was recorded.
The operation of the dams during the crisis was a key focus of the Queensland Floods Commission of Inquiry, led by Commissioner Cate Holmes, which found Wivenhoe operators had not escalated their flood mitigation strategy as required by the dam manual.
12.12.12
COMMENT: This court report provides an extraordinary insight into the circusmtances of the 2011 flood. In the critical days leading up to and after the flood crisis at Wivenhoe Dam on 11 January 2011, the plain facts of the matter are that John Ruffini was not registered as an Engineer. This is a damning indictment in itself of the failure of Seqwater management to perform basic checks on the legal registration requirements of its staff.
Someone in Seqwater must have been asleep at the wheel to have allowed this to happen. Yet, instead of of being quietly shown the door, they have probably been given an annual bonus or promoted to their proper level of incompetence.
The most-disturbing aspect of this report in The Courier-Mail is:
Prosecutor Dan Piggott said Mr Ruffini was a flood operations engineer from January 7 to 17, 2011, when he issued directives on the release of water from the dams based on calculations; produced situation reports and performed other ancillary tasks.
''It was unlawful for Mr Ruffini to do those things in circumstances when he was not a registered professional engineer and when he was not under the direct supervision of someone else who was,'' Mr Piggott said.
''The Board does not make any submission about the competence or otherwise of the professional engineering services provided by Mr Ruffini.''
He argued Mr Ruffini was providing professional engineering services in respect to significant public infrastructure at a time when he was not a registered engineer, which was contrary to the requirements of the dam's operating manuals at the time.
Three disturbing issues arise from this report:
1. What Mr Ruffini did whilst unregistered was unlawful by issuing directives "on the release of water from the dams based on calculations".
2. This was "contrary to the requirements of the dam's operating manuals".
3. No submission was made by the prosecution regarding Mr Ruffini's "competence or otherwise". Is this the smoking gun in the Brisbane River flood of 2011? Did Mr Ruffini give competent advice or was it "otherwise"?
All of this must be a total embarrassment to Peter Borrows, CEO of Seqwater under whose stewardship this debacle took place. Peter Borrows now has a duty to explain to the public how this arose, why insufficient checks - or no checks at all - were in place to weed out unregistered professional engineers like John Ruffini.
 |
The Seqwater organ
grinders go free |
While he has paid the price for his lapse, it is his bosses who have let down the people of southeast Queensland. They are the ones who allowed this situation to occur right under their very noses.
They should have taken responsibility for checking the mandatory credentials of all of their staff instead of wasting any time on long lunches and the devouring of cream buns, donuts and coffee at their regular morning teas.
As one erudite Brisbane Engineer puts it:
"Oh well done;
Punish the monkey and let Organ-Grinders go
free!
Chutzpah Chutzpah Chutzpah."
