COODE ISLAND COMMUNITY
Thursday 3 February 2005
CICCC / Chairperson
State Manager, Terminals Pty Ltd / Ex Off Committee Member
Community Rep. / CICCC Committee
Managing Director, Terminals Pty Ltd / Ex Off Committee Member
Community Rep. / CICCC Committee
Environment Protection Authority / Ex Off Committee Member
Community Rep. / CICCC Committee
Manager, Emergency Mgmt, City of Maribyrnong / Ex Off Committee Member
Melbourne Fire Brigade, Assistant Chief Fire Officer / Ex Off Committee Member
ITEM 1. WELCOME BY THE CHAIR
Robin Welcomed everyone those present.
ITEM 2. APOLOGIES
Peter Brotherton, Peter La Rose, Cr Colleen Hartland, Margaret Donnan, Michael Isaachsen, Sue Chatterton
ITEM 3. CONFIRMATION OF DRAFT AGENDA
Adopted, with Item 10 brought forward to enable Chris Watt to return to emergency duties.
ITEM 10. PRESENTATION – CHRIS WATT
FOAM AVAILABILITY AT COODE ISLAND
Chris had previously circulated a six page “Audit of MFB Foam Capacity” by email on 6 December 2004. In summary:
53,230 litres are held in MFB Appliances and “B” Class supplies;
11,250 litres are held by the Aviation Rescue & Fire Fighting Service;
71,000 litres are held by Harbour Control;
71,000 litres are held by Mobil;
64,000 litres are held by Kidde/Angus Fire;
14,350 litres are held by Chubb Australia;
8,200 litres are held by 3M.
Potential Composite total for MFB Use 293,030 litres
Type A Foam was very efficient, but was too toxic. The industry standard is now AFFF (Aqueous Film Forming Foam), and most of the above inventory is AFFF. Some of this AFFF foam is also ATC (Alcohol Type Concentrate).
All the foam is concentrate, and is mixed at the time of application to a fire in a 3% to 6% combination with water. Appliances can handle both types of concentrates, and a setting is available for the dilution factor required. Commonly foam will be applied to a tank fire at a rate of 6½ litres per square metre of tank area per minute for 55 minutes. For a 20 metre diameter tank (like the acrylate tanks) this would require 90,000 litres, or say 5,000 litres of concentrate.
Should foam supplies be expended, further supplies can be obtained from interstate within 24 hours. Interstate supply might be used to refill an exhausted supply after a major fire.
George reminded the meeting that all Terminals tanks have foam injection equipment, able to be activated from the foam control room. Terminals has 12,000 litres of AFFF ATC concentrate at Plant B and a further 2,500 litres at Plant C. George also stated that in a big fire that is too hot to get near, water deluging with sprays is used first.
Chris gave a brief report on the emergency activity resulting from the rainfall event of the previous 24 hours. MFB responded to 600 calls from 10:15 pm Wednesday to midnight, with a further 820 calls received to 2 pm Thursday. Further rain is expected tonight, and a high tide is expected at about 10:00 pm. The interaction of river flows and high tide may present further problems of flooding. Emergency Command Victoria assists in prioritising calls for assistance.
Chris also advised that MFB is reviewing its roles across Melbourne, and representation at CICCC will become a Western Region function. If a wider perspective is sought, or specialized knowledge in relation to Major Hazard Facilities, Chris will remain available to provide advice.
On behalf of the Committee, Robin thanked Chris for his contribution to the Committee’s deliberations.
ACTION: Chris will advise Robin of the name and contact details of the Western Region officer who will represent MFB in future at CICCC.
ITEM 4: ADVISORY COMMITTEE RE 99 MOELAND ST “CALL IN” & PORT BUFFER AREA
Theo tabled a report by David Walmsley on the Directions Hearing held on 3 February. Key items in the report are:
The advisory Committee is seeking to confine its deliberations to the merits of 99 Moreland Street, while having regard to the Port Environs Plan and the draft new format Port Planning Scheme.
The key process and timeframes outlined by the Advisory Committee are:
§ Draft Port Environs Plan — 11 February
§ Draft New Format Port Planning Scheme —25 February
§ Second Directions Hearing — 3 March
§ Exchange of information between parties — 18 March
§ Advisory Committee hearings from 25 March for 3 weeks to 15 April
§ Advisory Committee reports to Minister by end of May 2005
The applicant is in negotiation with the State Government about possible relocation of their project to the Footscray station precinct.
Deborah reported that she had made a submission on the process to the Advisory Committee on behalf of CICCC (presenting the view that the time scale was inadequate), and had tabled that submission (previously circulated by email).
George advised the Committee that the applicant seemed to have very little support from the 30 or so attendees at the Directions Hearing, a number that included legal representation for a number of parties, and representation from a number of Government Departments. He stated that while some work had been done in relation to buffer areas around Geelong Port, no-one appears to have been looking at zoning around the port in Melbourne. George tabled a summary of the Fremantle Inner Harbour Buffer Definition Study, which he recommended. It is on the web at www.freport.wa.gov.au
Theo offered to keep the Committee advised when the Draft Port Environs Plan and the New Format Port Planning Scheme are received by Council, and to provide copies to members. The Committee decided to change the date of the next meeting from 24 February to 3 March 2005.
ACTION: Theo to provide advice and copies of the two documents to Committee members when they are available.
ITEM 5 REPORTS FROM AGENCIES AND TERMINALS
ITEM 5A: TERMINALS PTY LTD
Attachments: Terminals Operations Report December 2004 /January 2005
A further 5 week extension has been granted on the lease. Now the East side tanks are to be liquid free by 8 April 2005. By 3 June 2006 the statement of environmental audit must be provided. A condition on Terminals’ Major Hazard Facilities License (restricting use of the east side after the end of 2004) has been amended to allow continued operation.
During the period since the last visit, Councilors from the City of Greater Geelong visited Coode Island. They are considering a request from Terminals to set up a Consultative Committee similar to the CICCC. Robin reported that he had received a phone call from Peter Reeve seeking advice on the CICCC Terms of Reference and procedures.
Government has provided further advice on the sewer for Coode Island, and the sewer is now firmly expected to be installed by the end of 2005.
Eight tanks have now been relocated to the west side, with two more to follow shortly, and a further two a little later. Planning approval was provided for the relocation of two of these tanks, a Phenol tank from the East Side to the West Side, and Tank 314 in the same bund.
The facility was closed down on 3 February 2005 due to the severe storms and rain, which caused water to pond near the base of some switch boards.
ITEM 5B: WORKSAFE
representative of WorkSafe has been appointed since the resignation of Bronwyn
Brookman Smith. (By email on 4 February 2005, Geoff Cooke,
Principal Safety Analyst WorkSafe - Hazard Management Division has advised that he will be the new WorkSafe representative on the CICCC.)
ITEM 5C: ENVIRONMENT PROTECTION AUTHORITY
Quentin: While advice was given at the last meeting that Richard Marks would be the new client manager, Richard has now accepted a different post within EPA. Quentin will continue to attend CICCC meetings.
EPA attended the 99 Moreland Street Advisory Committee Directions Hearing, and requested to be heard.
EPA is reviewing the new EIP. In response to questions, Quentin mentioned two points in relation to the EIP. The first was that there was no mention of the Improvement Action Report (and EPA supports its continued use), and the second was that there was no specific treatment of greenhouse emissions. Terminals stated that a number of the proposed improvements would be greenhouse friendly.
Jim: Jim reminded the Committee of the usual practice in other EPA committees for representatives of the Committee to sign off the EIP, along with EPA and the proponent. Discussion followed, with reference made to the different procedures adopted by the CICCC from those at some of the other committees. Robin drew attention to the report in the October 2005 Minutes and Media Release stating that the EIP had been reviewed in detail at the CICCC meeting.
Quentin Quentin advised that commissioning of the Marstel facility was anticipated over the next two months. A Works Approval for butadiene storage at Terminals’ Geelong facility has been submitted and accepted, and is now being advertised.
Carlo The City of Greater Geelong is the Responsible Authority for the Port Planning Scheme at Geelong (unlike Melbourne, where the Minister is the Planning and Responsible Authority). Although there is no statutory provision for third party comment under the Geelong Port Scheme (which is the same as for the Port of Melbourne in this respect), the City of Greater Geelong did advertise the permit, and about ten objections to the planning permit for the Butadiene proposal were received. These have no statutory standing. Terminals has now appealed to VCAT for the failure of the City of Greater Geelong to decide the application in the statutory time.
ITEM 5D: CITY OF MARIBYRNONG
Theo: Council has implemented the telephone alert system to cover premises along the Maribyrnong River where there is some potential for flooding. A message of reassurance was sent to the 500 people on the system advising about the likely impact of the heavy rain, and providing a number for further information. Few people rang the further information number, and Council felt that the exercise had been successful. The cost of the automatic calls to 500 numbers was $200, a modest charge for the service provided.
ITEM 6: TARGETS/OBJECTIVES FOR THE 2ND EIP FOR THE PERIOD 2005 TO 2008
Carlo: Carlo presented overheads of the material previously circulated by email on 1 December 2004. (The full document also provides a broad description of the works.)
Robin summarized the Second EIP as covering:
§ Review of the effectiveness of the first EIP;
§ Clean up of the East Side;
§ Groundwater monitoring;
§ Continued tank upgrading on West Side;
§ Continued work on drainage on West Side;
§ Combuster heat recovery;
§ Truck filling arrangements;
§ Connecting remaining tanks to the new vapour recovery system.
Ian sought advice from George on the results of groundwater monitoring.
In response to a comment by Jim that the Second EIP needed thorough scrutiny by the Committee, George suggested that he would develop a program to take the Committee through the new aspects of the EIP at the next few scheduled meetings. Quentin drew to the Committee’s attention the importance of the EIP in relation to Terminal’s Accredited Licensee status.
Ian enquired about the greenhouse requirements of EPA and Environment Australia. Quentin offered to circulate the EPA’s guidelines for EIP’s.
ACTION: George to program new EIP items for presentation at future meetings, and to provide an overview of groundwater monitoring results.
Quentin to circulate the EPA requirements for EIP’s.
ITEM 7: REVIEW OF MEETING FREQUENCY
Deborah noted that there would be six meeting in 2005, and that George had scheduled extra meetings where needed. While drawing attention to the two and a half month gap between the July and October meetings, a period that seemed excessive, Deborah advised that she was prepared to stay with the present arrangements, given that many of the significant issues facing Terminals in the past had been thoroughly explored by the Committee.
ITEM 8: REPORT ON REMEDIATION PLAN FOR THE EAST SIDE
George made a presentation on the remediation plan, showing overheads of the various contaminated areas and the depths of soil to be removed. (A copy of the overheads will be emailed for distribution.) Where the depth of material to be removed is shown as, say, 0 – 1 metre, all the material will be taken offsite to the Lyndhurst Landfill. Where the depth of material is shown as 1 – 1½ metre, say, the top 1 metre will be removed and stockpiled, and replaced along with other clean fill when the contaminated strata has been removed.
The consultants for the work are ERM, and tenders are currently being assessed. Below the tanks that are being moved, where testing was not able to be done previously, test pits will be dug, and the material tested.
Further to the advice provided earlier that the east side tanks are to be liquid free by 8 April, the will be gas free and cleaned by 6 May, and the demolition will commence shortly after that date.
Ian asked about the criteria to be used to decide what contaminated material was to be removed, and George said he would provide the criteria. Robin requested that it be also referenced to the low level and high level criteria for acceptance at landfills.
ACTION: George to provide advice on contamination levels, with the criteria for removal from site, and acceptance at tips included.
George advised that the groundwater wells on the east side would continue to be monitored, and that P&O Ports lease would provide for access by Terminals for such monitoring.
ITEM 9: CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES
The draft minutes for the meetings of 14 October and 9 December 2004 were adopted without change.
ITEM 11: OTHER BUSINESS
Advice on the Geelong butadiene planning process and the review of the next meeting date have been reported above. George requested that the issue of refreshing Community Membership of the CICCC be put on the agenda for the next meeting.
Meeting Closed 10:20 pm