COODE  ISLAND  COMMUNITY CONSULTATIVE  COMMITTEE


Adopted Minutes

Thursday 14 February 2002

 

PRESENT

 

Robin Saunders  
  Chairperson

Jim Clements
  Env. Protection Authority/ex off comm

Michael Ragen
 Cash Controller, Burns, Philp & Company Limited/CICCC Committee

Ian Thomas  
  community rep./ committee

Bill Horrocks
  City of Maribyr. Councillor/committee 

Faye Simpson
  community rep./ committee

Jarrod Edwards
  WorkCover/ ex off comm

Trevor Perkins
  MF&ESB/ex off comm

Deborah Macfarlane  
  community rep./   CICCC committee

Carlo Fasolino
 Op. Manager Terminals / committee

Ted Towson  
  community rep./ committee

Dr Peter Brotherton
  Combined Enviro. Groups / committee

George Horman  
  Terminals Pty Ltd / committee

Michael Isaachsen
  community rep./ committee

Cameron Fitzgerald  
   Environ. Protec Auth / ex off comm

Jeff Hibbert  
  Engineering Manager Terminals Pty Ltd

Vanessa Richardson  
  minute taker


ITEM 1. WELCOME BY THE CHAIR

Robin Saunders welcomed the committee members and other people attending theCICCC meeting. On behalf of all the CICCC he congratulated Trevor Perkins who hasbeen awarded the Australian Fire Service Medal.

  

ITEM 2. APOLOGIES

Apologies were received from Allen Hugli and John Luppino.

ITEM 3. CONFIRMATION OF THE DRAFT AGENDA

The draft agenda was adopted with an extra item added to Other Business see 13.5‘CICCC comments on the Marstel Works Approval.’

 

ITEM 4.  BRIEF REPORT FROM AGENCIES AND TERMINALS ON KEY ISSUES

Cameron said that on the 9 Jan 2002 the EPA conducted a Compliance Assessment at the Terminals P/L site. There were 2 minor non-compliances only.

He said that the Minister for State & Regional Development requires that the Marstel proposal and the Terminals P/L environmental improvements, be of Worlds Best Practice (WBP). As a result the Terminals license is being amended to incorporate further improvements including the vapour control system.

Deborah asked which development (Terminals or Marstel) was the best, if both  had been required to be Worlds Best Practice.

Cameron said that Terminals have future plans to reduce their benzene emissions to 90kgs per year (which is WBP for a Terminals type facility) but Marstel will have lower emissions of benzine (2kg per year) which is Worlds Best Practise for a brand new ‘state of the art’ facility.

George said that he did not accept that the Marstel proposal was better. He said that the Terminals system was as good as the  Marstel proposal.  The Marstel emissions will not be lower because Marstel are planning to fill the ship tanks with return vapours from the shore tank.  These ships then go out into the bay and release their vapour to the atmosphere. He said more product would remain in the ships tanks this way than if the vapours were not returned to the ship.

He said that at least Terminals were going to combust their benzene emissions in the new VECS reducing the quantity vented in the bay.

Cameron said that neither system prevented the possible practise of venting vapours at sea.

Ian Thomas said that WBP is given as a title to what is absolutely the best in the world at that time.

Cameron said that at the time, these two sites were WBP compared with what was being done elsewhere in the world in similar facilities. They did exceed other similar terminals. He said that until a facility reaches ‘nil’ amounts of emissions, WBP would keep improving year after year.  

Jim said that the assessment of the Marstel proposal has not been completed yet.

Peter asked how a facility could be WBP when it is hampered by old infrastructure as was the case with the Terminals facility. He said this was the first time he had been told that the Marstel emissions could be vented at sea.

Jim said that the Altona facility vents its emissions.

Robin said he was disappointed that the EPA had told the CICCC last year that the Terminals proposal was WBP when in fact it appears that it was not. The Ministers Press Release had said quite clearly that “the highest possible standard of safety and environmental responsibility” would be required.

Michael stated that Worlds Best Practice depended in part on the complexity of the plant.

Cameron stated that different facilities would have World’s Best Practice in different areas (eg. emissions, run-off management etc.).

Jim said that the State Environment Protection Policy would be met. He also indicated that an ‘Ecological Footprint’ was being currently considered by EPA as a means of identifying waste management practices in the future.

Peter suggested that the State Environment Protection Policies were not World’s Best Practice.  

ACTION. The EPA will provide the CICCC with more information about the  percentage of emissions from both sites showing the volumes of benzine and how they are divided into the amounts that 1) are returned to ships, and 2) are treated by the VECS. The CICCC also requested further information about the management of all wastes on and off the sites, including when venting occurs; washing tanks and lines and other EPA control requirements.

Peter said that WBP needs to be described in relation to specific criteria.

Deborah said that she would like to have the full picture including the limitations when WBP is used to describe a facility.

Ian asked about Marstel’s proposal for vapour returning from road tankers. This will be raised at Tuesdays meeting with Tim Gunning. He said that on pp 76 of the Marstel Works Approval document the ‘in confidence report’ of fundamental information was inappropriate because the information needs to be assessed by the community. This matter will also be raised with Tim on Tuesday.

ACTION. Jim took a question on notice about the competency of the report in the above regard.

Ian said that pp 65 of the Marstel WA discussed an overseas example of a vapour return system, for benzene at Houston, and questioned what was World’s Best Practice

ACTION. Jim took the above question on notice for the next meeting.

Faye asked Jim about any ash remaining in a VECS burner, and if so was it incorporating in manufacturer garden/environment type bricks.

Jim said that ash came from the burning of solid materials and not from the burning of gaseous material as was the case with the VECS.


ACTION. Cameron will have results for the Air Monitoring Project at the next CICCC meeting.

Jarrod said that WorkCover had made several visits to the Terminal’s facility since the last CICCC meeting in December 2001. They included

    1. A follow up on the recent Improvement Notice,

    2. An assessment of a degreasing bath, where a risk assessment has now been requested of
        Terminals, and

    3. The prohibition for the usage of one tank, following an incident (see the last paragraphs of Section 

    4.  WorkCover have given feedback about the Corio Safety Case Pilot Study.

    The regular 6 monthly audit of the Coode Island site will commence in Feb 2002.


ACTION. On completion, a WorkCover officer will brief the CICCC about the audit.

Ian asked if there would be any changes to the Marstel Works Approval process of assessing safety. Cameron said that the process would be the same as that followed for the Terminals WA.

 

Trevor said that the Metropolitan Fire & ESB had not had any reason to have dealings with Terminals over the Xmas, New Year period.

In regard to the Emergency Management Project, Theo has generated a report from the results of a public research project that was undertaken recently.

Peter asked Trevor for his thoughts about the ABC TV Four Corners Report on the chemical site fire in WA. He asked Trevor what he thought about the reported incidents of firemen walking over incinerated drums of dangerous chemicals?

Trevor said he has not seen the program but that WA has had safe processes for about 15 years.  

Faye reminded the CICCC that the Health Department had not raised any of theconcerns she had discussed with them during the Terminal’s WA process. It would appear that relevant health information and long term health risks associated with many chemicals is simply not on anyone’s agenda when considering Works Approvals.

George said that construction of the new Terminals VECS system is imminent and that they are just finalising the contracts and finalising the EPA license amendment.  

Before Xmas they signed a 20-year lease with the Melbourne Port Corporation for the B-West and C-West sites. On the basis of the security they now have over the site, Terminals now propose to upgrade the plant, consistent with EPA and WorkSafe requirements. The upgrade will include: 

1.      The new VECS system

2.      Acrylate tanks

3.      Other flammable tanks

4.      Exchange systems

5.      Liners to bunds

6.      Clay liners throughout the terminal

The new VECS system (combustors  and ducting) will cost $4.3 million.  

The Remediation Action Plan has been given to the EPA for consideration. Terminals are conducting a pilot test to remediate the soil in that area in a bio pile. This method uses naturally occurring microbes to decontaminate the area of lube oil contamination. The trial is under way and there are no odours.  

Terminals have commenced the development of the Safety Case for their Coode Island facility. They propose to submit the report in June 2002.  

There was one incident recently on site, where a styrene leak occurred in a 2mm hole in the floor of a tank. They transferred the product to another tank and notified the authorities of the leak. About 1,000 litres of material was leaked. 1-2 tons have been successfully recovered. The styrene did not reach the water table. A natural clay layer of 300mm below the surface acts as a natural barrier to any leak. In the future, a polythene layer will be installed under all the tanks on the site and in between the tanks a clay layer will be installed.

Deborah asked about the effects if the styrene reached the water table.

George said that it would float on the water.

Carlo said that the sparge process stops the movement of volatile contaminants from spreading in the ground water.  

George said that the tank will be repaired. This tank will not be lifted and upgraded yet but the base will be scanned and repaired at this stage.

Ted said that the testing used is NDT (Non Destructive Testing)  

 

ITEM 5. CONFIRMATION OF THE MINUTES OF THE PREVIOUS MEETING 8 NOV 2001.  

    The minutes were adopted with the following alterations  

1. Michael Ragen’s name to be added to the list of those present for the meeting.  

2. The correction to the November minutes (where the authorship of one remark was clarified by spelling out who “he” referred to) will be corrected in the Adopted Minutes on the web site.

 

ITEM 6.  ACTION ITEMS FROM THE PREVIOUS MEETING  

    6.1 Follow up action on the Newsletter (Deborah)

Deborah has met with teachers from a local primary and secondary schools. They are drawing up a list of information that could be used by teachers. The teachers liked the web site and they are developing a list of questions for the children to answer, based around the contents of the CICCC web site.  

Robin said that the CICCC web site had not been upgraded for 2 years and it might need some attention.  

Ted suggested that an ongoing audit of CICCC activities be added to the web site so that journalists could use it as an information source in the future.  

Deborah asked if there were any newspaper articles archived somewhere.  

ACTION. Robin to follow up the above inquiry with PACIA.  

Michael said that Marstel’s 2nd newsletter will be completed soon and the committee members will do a local letterbox drop of the newsletter.  

    Ian said he thought that Terminals should have their own newsletter.

    Robin said that as the Committee had previously decided not to have a newsletter, theCICCC web site will be the best way of keeping the community updated withinformation.

 

6.2 Possible public forum  

Robin suggested that a forum was required in the next few months so that the community can be updated on CI activities.

George suggested that Marstel combine with Terminals to present the forum as their new site will be under construction by then.

Faye suggested that P&O and the matter of future railroad use (Toll & Lang proposal) be included for discussion.

Robin suggested that other interested groups and businesses will probably send representatives to the forum.

 

ACTION. Robin will follow up this matter with the Marstel committee.  

Ted asked about the Marstel and CICC committees amalgamating and going forward.

Robin said that the CICCC supported the concept of having one Committee in the future, but at this stage cooperation through small steps would be appropriate.  

 

6.3 Review of sitting fees

See e-mail sent 13 Dec 2002.

The proposed increase represents rises in the CPI in recent years and is equivalent to arise of 9.3%. ($137.50 to $150.30)

Ian said he thought it inappropriate that CICCC members received sitting fees and that he couldn’t see why it was necessary to invoice Terminals for the payment each month.

Peter said he disagreed with Ian’s comments because it was normal practise on other committees that sitting fees be paid on receipt of an Invoice for the amount. This had been the case since the advent of GST last year.

Robin clarified that invoices were only required for GST purposes, and that they were not required for all Committee Members.  

ACTION. On behalf of Terminals Pty Ltd, Michael Ragen approved the above increase in sitting fees.

 

6.4 Discussion on the Community Information/Alert Project broadsheet

 

ACTION. Robin will write and invite Robyn Betts from the Office of the Emergency Services Commissioner to present the findings of the community survey to the CICCC.

 

 

6.5 Transcript of two ABC radio programs on the new major hazards regulations

 

ACTION  Robin  will e-mail the document and Vanessa will  post it out to those with out e-mail.

   

  6.6 Meeting convened by EPA for CICCC community & environment representatives to input to the Marstel Woks Approval process

Robin said that most of the CICCC representatives had attended.

Ian said it was an excellent and well presented meeting. Opportunities to contributehad almost been lost. He said that involvement would have occurred earlier ifparticipants had been compensated to do so.

 

ITEM 7. CORRESPONDENCE OUT

See e-mail dated 6 December 2001 with attached letter re Bronwyn Pike.

After the receipt of the letter, the Maribyrnong City Council has advised thatthe proposed meeting is not imminent.

 

ACTION. The City of  Maribyrnong will be asked to update the CICCC on this matter.

 

ITEM 8. CORRESPONDENCE IN

 

No correspondence received.

 

 

ITEM 9. TERMINALS (LICENCE AMENDMENT) DESIGN FOR VAPOUR

EMISSIONS CONTROL SYSTEMS  (VECS)

See Attachment 3  

The VECS will pick up all the small emissions from around the site in an air sweep and take them to the combustor.

The combustors are situated in the non-hazardous area of the site.

Everything will be connected to the operational VECS in May 2003.

George said that $1.2 million will be spent on the combustors, while the overall new VECS System will cost about $4.3 million..

 

ITEM 10. TERMINALS ACRYLATE TANKAGE UPGRADE PROGRAM (GEORGE HORMAN)

See Attachment 4  

The acrylate tanks will be lifted and the floors repaired as necessary. They will be modified so that tank pressures can be adjusted from 2.5 to 5 kpa. There is no vapour return to the VECS for theses tanks. They will have a nitrogen blanket which they do not have at present. Further details are in the Works Approval document.

There is a budget of $3.5 million to do eleven tanks.

   

ITEM 11. SAFETY CASE REGULATORY REGIME REVIEW (DNV)

See attachment 5  

Robin reported that he spoke to DNV today and he said that they believed that this issue is of limited value to the CICCC.  

ACTION The DNV Briefing Paper will be circulated as an attachment, and the Committee will decide at its next meeting whether to ask for a briefing from DNV.  

 

 

ITEM 12. AGENDA FOR THE NEXT MEETING (14 MARCH 2002)

 

See the above ACTION  ITEMS.

 

 

ITEM 13. OTHER BUSINESS

13.1 Chair to be absent on 11 April 2002

ACTION. It was suggested that Deborah chairs the next meeting and that Faye will chair the following one when necessary.

13.2 Approach to chair by Paul Conroy of the Sunday Age re Emergency Management (article in the Sunday Age 10/2/02)

See Attachment 1

          Robin said he spent time briefing Paul and giving him the contact details of others like HazMAG, the Office of the Emergency Services Commissioner, Maribyrnong City Council, and individual CICCC community and environmental representatives. He said he advised Paul that it is his practise to consult with the CICCC members before making public comments about the CICCC. For that reason he declined to make comment when asked. John Luppino’s comments to Robin were that the article was so inaccurate that it did not warrant a response.

Others agreed.

Other CICCC members stated their surprise at the extent of the inaccuracies. The following comments were made

• extraordinary ‘beat up’

• it was disappointing that there was nothing reported about the communities concerns about sirens in the area

• the article did not differentiate between key points being 1) the safety of  

             Coode Island and 2) the Emergency Safety procedures & developments

• Paul only had a basic understanding

• there was no mention of the Marstel project

• Paul asked me about possible terrorist attaches

• Paul was inaccurate when he said this committee has had divergent views

             about the Emergency Management Plan

• I told Paul that the CICCC has shown leadership in the debate about what 

  is needed for community safety management but he did not print that  

The CICCC discussed how it might take advantage of this opportunity to further publicise the issues in a more accurate way.

ACTION. Deborah will write a factual account of the risks on Coode Island and the Emergency Safety Plans & measures for the community to date. Robin will edit the draft (Trevor and Peter will also assist as necessary) and send it to The Age.. The draft will be ready by Thursday 21 February 2002.

   

13.3 Offer by Tim Gunning to brief community members on the WA Application(& reminder to advise EPA of intended submissions)

John Luppino will e-mail the Meinhardt Report on the Marstel Works Approval application (commissioned by the Cities of Maribyrnong and Melbourne) to Robin for circulation to Committee Members prior to this proposed meeting with Tim Gunning.

        Bill said that the reports were available in the local library.

ACTION. Bill will e-mail the report to Robin.    

Ian said that at this stage he feels less confident about commenting on the Marstel WA      than he felt about commenting at the same time on the Terminals WA. He said thiswas because Terminals had conducted special meetings to fully inform CICCCcommunity members  of their proposal and Marstel have not made the same offer.

ACTION. A meeting of CICCC Community and Environmental representatives with Tim Gunning will be held on Tuesday 19 Feb 2002 at 6.30pm. Bill will organise a meeting room. It will not be a CICCC meeting.

 

    Items for discussion at the above meeting might include:

Vapour return to ship during discharge.

Vapour return to tanks during road tanker loading.

Modelling of vapour emissions (Report noted as “Confidential” in WAApplication)

Emissions from ships in Bay and elsewhere (venting and washing tanks).

Proximity of PO tanks to Terminals Pty Ltd tanks.

The recommendations of the Meinhardt report.

The EPA’s response and questions of the Meinhardt Report

   

 

    13.4 Exchange of information with the Marstel Community Group.

Robin has had some recent discussions with Cheryl Batagol who chairs the Marstel Community group. She agrees that it is useful to have separate committees at this stage but suggests that the two committees merge when the Safety Case is developed. At this stage she would like to share appropriate material between committees ie Robin will circulate to her all items that he circulates to the CICCC members, and she will circulate MCG material to Robin.

ACTION. All the CICCC members supported the proposal to exchange material.

The Safety Case will probably be developed in about Feb 2003.

 

13.5 CICCC comments on the Marstel Works Approval.

George said that Terminals might be making a submission based on the proposed close proximity of the propylene oxide tanks. They are having discussions at the moment in an attempt to resolve this matter.  

Bill said that Maribyrnong City Council are using the Meinhardt Report as their submission.  

Michael said that one or two individual community reps on the Marstel CC might write a submission.  

The CICCC will not make a submission. Individual Community and Environmental representatives, alone or in concert, may decide to make submissions.

 

CLOSE.  

    Time 9.55 pm

  

NEXT MEETINGS  

   Thursday 14 March 2002

   Thursday 11 April 2002

 

 

 

CICCC ATTACHMENTS TO DRAFT MINUTES

 

14 February 2002   

Attachment    1    Article - ‘The Age’ 10/02/02

Attachment    2    Terminals P/L Monthly Operations & Occurrence Reports for Nov 2001, Dec 2001 & Jan 2002.

Attachment    3    CICCC New VECS Proposal

Attachment    4    CICCC Acrylate Tank Upgrade

Attachment    5    DNV Report from Alan Ross

Items posted to those without e-mail facilities include

ABC Background Briefing Transcript 9 Dec 2001

e-mail       Peter Brotherton 2/1/02 & Cameron 4/1/02

e-mail      14/12/01 Tim Gunning

e-mail       City Maribyrnong / Jim Clements correspondence.

e-mail      John Luppino 14/12

e-mail       Peter Brotherton - sitting fees 13 Feb 02

  Get this as a Microsoft Word document