WATER SUPPLY (Contamination by sewage pipe leakage)

Dr Wang Kai Yuen asked the Minister for Trade and Industry what measures his Ministry is taking to ensure that the Public Utilities Board's water supply will not be contaminated by leakage of sewage pipes anywhere in Singapore as had happened at the Sherwood Tower Condominium.

Dr Wang Kai Yuen asked the Minister for Trade and Industry what is his Ministry's view on the response of the Public Utilities Board to the contamination of fresh water supply at the Sherwood Tower Condominium.

Mr Tang Guan Seng (for the Minister for Trade and Industry): Mr Speaker, with your permission, I will take Question Nos. 14 and 15 together.

Mr Speaker: Yes.

Mr Tang Guan Seng: The contamination of water supply in Sherwood Tower Condominium on 22nd August is an isolated incident. It affected Bukit Timah Plaza, which comprises Sherwood Tower Condominium, a shopping complex and eating outlets. Waste water from a corroded sanitary pipe seeped into an uncovered water tank located below the sanitary pipe. The problem was confined to this 20-year-old building. The integrity of our public water supply system was not in doubt.

When PUB and ENV were alerted to the problem, they worked immediately with the managing agent of the building to clean and disinfect the contaminated water reticulation system. ENV also closed all food stalls in the Plaza and advised all residents to boil their water. The contamination was contained and residents were provided with alternative water supply through water tankers and nearby fire hydrants. Water supply to the residents and businesses was fully restored in the morning of 24th August. Continued monitoring by PUB and ENV showed that the water supply within the building is now normal.

The Attorney-General's Chambers is reviewing the case to determine if the managing agent should be taken to task for the failure to keep the water supply and sewerage systems in proper working order.

We have specific regulatory requirements in our water services, sewerage and sanitary works to ensure safe supply of water to all buildings. Our regulatory code stipulates that water tanks should not be located below sewer lines. This was disallowed since 1989 for new buildings. The requirement was not applied retrospectively to old buildings since they might not be adequately designed to comply with this requirement. Furthermore, such contamination problem would not have arisen if the sanitary pipes were kept in good condition and the water tanks covered. The new rule in 1989 was an added precautionary measure. In view of the incident, PUB and ENV will require old buildings to take adequate measures to prevent a recurrence of the incident.

PUB and ENV have inspected 972 buildings of 10 years or older. The water reticulation systems of these buildings were found to be safe. The sanitary pipes and the water tanks were in good condition and posed no risk. 49 of the buildings checked have sanitary pipes located above the water tanks. The management corporations of these buildings have been requested to divert the sanitary pipes or relocate the water tanks.

In addition, PUB has also instructed management corporations of high-rise buildings to check their entire water piping systems and water tanks to confirm that they are in satisfactory condition and that unauthorised access to the tanks is prevented. They are to submit a report by end October 2000 to PUB.

Dr Wang Kai Yuen: I would like to ask the Senior Parliamentary Secretary how did it come about that the design of water tanks below the sewerage line came to be approved by the building authorities. Was PUB involved in such approvals? And of the 49 buildings which were found to have certain problems, would he identify those buildings? Would he take action to inform residents of those buildings so that if something happens in future, they will know something may be wrong with their water supply?

On compensation to the tenants, it was reported in the newspapers that the management corporation was prepared to compensate the tenants. But in my mind, would not PUB be responsible too and would PUB be held responsible to pay compensation to the tenants as well because, after all, the business relationship is between the tenant, someone who pays for the water bill, and the water supplier, that is, PUB, and not the management corporation?

Mr Tang Guan Seng: Applications for installations of water tanks and water pipes have to be submitted by professional engineers for approval. In this case, we have to see whether there is any alteration to the original plan.

For the 49 cases, I was informed that 15 out of these 49 cases, in fact, have plans to either relocate their water tanks or make changes to their water pipes. I think their water supply is normal and safe. On compensation, it is the responsibility of the registered customer of PUB to ensure that the water piping system is in order. This means that if anything is not in order, the registered customer has to take responsibility. The compensation between the tenants and the management corporation is a matter for the tenants of the building and the management corporation to resolve.

Dr Wang Kai Yuen: The Senior Parliamentary Secretary said that once the problem was notified to the authorities, they took immediate action. But to my mind, Sir, the time lag between notification and action seemed to be too long. The report was made by the doctor to the authorities and by the time PUB took action, I believe there was a time lag of 24 hours. For your information, Sir, during those 24 hours, I was one of those invited guests to the dinner function at that particular location.

Mr Tang Guan Seng: From what I know, PUB and ENV were alerted to this problem on 22nd August but apparently, the doctor discovered this problem on 18th August. So from 18th to 22nd August, it was a matter between the doctor and the management corporation or may be the managing agent and the authorities, PUB and ENV, were not alerted to the problem. On 22nd August, PUB and ENV took immediate action after they were alerted to this problem. So there is no lapse on the part of ENV and PUB.

Dr Wang Kai Yuen: Sir, I believe that the press report said there was a laboratory test that PUB took and it was after the laboratory test confirmed that the water was contaminated that action was taken. So to my mind, if my impression was correct, there was indeed a time lag of 24 hours for the laboratory test to be confirmed.

Mr Tang Guan Seng: From the report I have, PUB immediately took action when they were alerted to this problem.