COODE ISLAND COMMUNITY CONSULTATIVE COMMITTEE
Thursday 10 October2002
CICCC / Chairperson
City of Maribyr, GM City Dev /committee
State Man./Terminals Pty Ltd / committee
community rep./ CICCC committee
community rep./ committee
community rep./ CICCC committee
Dr Peter Brotherton
Combined Enviro. Groups / committee
community rep./ committee
Bronwyn Brookman Smith
MH Div / WorkSafe
Env. Protection Authority / ex off comm
WorkCover / ex off comm
Env. Protection Authority/ex off comm
Sales Manager, Terminals P/L
Melbourne Ports Corporation
Melb University – PhD student
ITEM 1. WELCOME BY THE CHAIR
* Robin welcomed the committee members and other people attending the CICCC.
ITEM 2. APOLOGIES
* Apologies were received from Carlo Fasolino, Jeff Hibbert and Marg
ITEM 3. CONFIRMATION OF THE DRAFT AGENDA
* The draft agenda was adopted with the addition of an item dealing with letters of appreciation to recent past CICCC members.
ACTION. Write letters of appreciation to Allen Hugli and Michael Ragen noting with thanks their commitment to attend meetings regularly, and their open and frank participation during meetings, and to Cameron Fitzgerald for his contribution to the Committee over the last two years.
ITEM 4. PROPOSED $1.5 MILLION MARINA DEVELOPMENT OPPOSITE THE BP SITE – NICK EASY – MELBOURNE PORT CORPORATION
* Nick said that the marina proposal has been the subject of discussions for 2 years between Local and State Government authorities and Kivelos Nominees. The MPC support the idea in principle but have yet to view the final plans and receive final approvals from the relevant government authorities.
The site is the Kivelos Nominees site on the western bank of the river (between the river and Maribyrnong Street, and extending from Footscray Road to Lyons Street. Kivelos have fishing (scalloping) interests.
The site has some contaminated soil which is presently being remediated. When developed it will provide moorings for 15 – 20 boats, a public access slipway and other amenities. There is no residential component to the proposed development, as regulated by two separate planning schemes. Kivloss Nominees also want to develop the block of land behind them which belongs to the Department of Natural Resources and Environment (DNRE). The City of Maribyrnong Planning Scheme covers this block of land.
* Ian said that the proposed marina site is opposite the BP site (Marstel P/L) and he wonders why this new marina development proposal was not mentioned when the Marstel proposal was first being discussed. In the near future Marstel will be storing major hazard materials – propylene oxide and benzene on that BP site. He said the marina will be ‘a place of assembly’ as described in the Dangerous Goods Regulations.
Zoe said that the regulated EPA buffer zone hazardous chemical storage was 1km and that Coode Island was 800m from residential developments. She said the proposed marina will be within this limit.
Robin asked if shops and cafes were included in the Dangerous Goods definition as ‘places of assembly’. He stated that they were not included as “Places of Assembly” under Planning definitions.
Bronwyn said that with the changing regulatory regime the applicable definitions were somewhat unclear.
Nick said that the development would be non-residential and in answer to Michael’s question he said he was not aware of any rules regarding people residing on their boats while moored at the marina. He said that new conditions could be included as part of the new MPC lease arrangements associated with the marina.
George said Terminals P/L activities would not be affected by the marina. Terminals is situated further south of the proposed marina.
* Nick said that the River One proposal which was planned for a position further south on the river will not be proceeding.
* Nick said that the Port of Melbourne has an area of 493 hectares which is managed by MPC. It is regulated by a unique planning scheme that allows for the future growth of this port site. In effect it means that many proposals do not need planning permits unlike the case for proposals in the rest of the State. However this current scheme is under review and a new format-planning scheme for the Port will be available soon for public comment. It will be a ‘more holistic charter’ incorporating the land and water management of the area. The Department of Infrastructure will require new legislation to administer the new scheme. He agreed that some planning scheme things do need to be looked at in more details and he said he supported Zoe’s comments about the buffer zones for residents.
* Robin said that the CICCC wish to have input into the new planning proposal scheme for the port before the MPC develops it for exhibition. He said that the CICCC have already made comment to government about the Department of Finance report on Safety Cases by Matthew Clancy. He said the present legislation covering the planning scheme for the Melbourne Port precinct gave very wide latitude even when a permit was required. For instance advertising of any new development proposals in the area is not a compulsory requirement. As an example the Terminals P/L upgrade was not publicly advertised. The new proposed marina does not require a permit, as it would if it were developed elsewhere in Victoria. This makes the Melbourne Port area scheme very different to that pertaining to the rest of Victoria. The CICCC have already written to the Minister for Planning to make these points. He said that the new Managing Director of the MPC has already supported the need for improved public consultation and this matter of the Planning Scheme review will provide an opportunity to show his commitment to consultation.
* Peter said that the Melbourne Port area was of State significance and that all stakeholders should have the opportunity to be involved in the discussions about planning matters for the port. Historically the City of Melbourne and the City of Footscray, who service the port area have not been made fully aware by MPC of what has been planned for the port.
ACTION. Robin will provide Nick with a copy of the letter from the CICCC to the Minister for Planning, and the report on his meeting with the Department of Treasury and Finance. Also the non-reply from the Minister will be followed up.
* Ian said that the MPC have recently annexed off and fenced a 100m area along the riverbank so that public access to the river is now very restricted. He said this action by the MPC is an example of something that probably would not have occurred if the port area were included in the planning regulations that pertain to the rest of the State.
Ian described the land behind the proposed marina site as land on which ‘factoryettes’ in old buildings have been constructed. They have been recently selling for more than half a million dollars each. He wondered if in future they might be used in conjunction with the proposed marina.
* John said he was pleased to report that the MPC have been consulting more with the City of Maribyrnong in recent times.
Nick said that MPC plan in future to do more of the following
o Improve consultative processes (they presently regularly attend the Marstel CCC meetings). MPC say they plan to facilitate a MPC forum. It will improve consultations with the community.
o Set up a local community forum to discuss matters affecting the development of the port.
o Distribute information to 20,000 households in the area by way of a newsletter
o Conduct letterbox drops
Peter Brotherton mooted the need for wider representation on the proposed MPC forum.
Ian said he had recently been disappointed to receive a MPC newsletter which contained information about port developments and future plans already decided on by the MPC without the necessary and appropriate community input.
Robin said he was presently organising a date to invite Dr Chris Whitaker from the MPC to the CICCC meeting to discuss the CICCC needs regarding information flows from the MPC. In particular the CICCC require timely information about issues like ports planning policy, developments and any future Planning Scheme
ACTION. Nick said he will relay the details of this meeting to the MPC and come back to the CICCC in the future.
ITEM 5. BRIEF REPORT FROM AGENCIES AND TERMINALS ON KEY ISSUES
* Quentin said that Terminals have been continuing with the tank integrity report work. There was an odour report from P&O and the source of it was still a matter of investigation, though it did not originate from the Terminals’ facility. There have not been any odour complaints made against Terminals in recent months.
* George said that in March the EPA amended Terminals licence and Terminals have since actioned those changes by embarking on the following-
o Environmental Improvement Plan
o Environmental Management Plan
o Tank Integrity Report
o Storm Water Report.
The essence of the above matters are captured in the EIP and the more specific details can be found in the specific reports.
* George said the new owners have arrived on the site this month. Fred Johnson (the President of ST Services, the terminaling part of Kaneb Pipeline Operating partnership) will attend the next CICCC meeting in November. In the meantime George is managing Terminals P/L Australia wide.
* See Attachment 1.
George said that Terminals have written to the EPA explaining that they do not agree with every comment the EPA have made about the Terminals EIP document.
* George tabled the Soil Delineation Report. He reported that 340 boreholes had been drilled on the contaminated site to enable the collection of soil samples for analysis as described in the Soil Delineation Report. The report is also available on CD to whom ever may require it.
* The Melbourne City Council had discussions with Terminals this month about whether Coode Island should be transferred to the City of Maribyrnong. The City of Melbourne does not support such a boundary shift. Further discussions will be had about possible compensation payments to the City of Maribyrnong for the large amount of work they shoulder in relation to the Coode Island area.
John said that the state Minister for Local Government will ultimately decide on the any future local government boundary changes.
* See Attachment 2.
Bronwyn tabled the WorkSafe monthly report.
The MHF licence is being modified to allow greater flexibility. In the meantime Terminals continue to seek approval from the department to change tank use, as necessary. When the Safety Case is implemented these changes will be more streamlined, resulting in some decisions (which involve similar product tank storage) being made internally.
* See Attachment 3
George said that they have had some problems with the pilot valve not activating automatically on the automatic deluge system for the carbon beds. However, it has worked well on previous occasions when the beds have overheated. The fault is being repaired now.
* George gave a presentation using photographs to show the CICCC how Terminals go about lifting and moving their large storage tanks.
ACTION. The monthly Operational Reports will in future include a report on the present status of the EIP discussions.
ACTION. Defer the EMP amendment matter to the next meeting.
ITEM 6. SOIL REMEDIATION MONITORING RESULTS
See Attachment 4.
* George said that the associated report about the soil on the east side of the site was tabled at the last meeting. The delineation study has cost Terminals $371,000. The 384 holes were bored to a depth of 1.5 metres while the samples were taken at 3 different levels within that length. They tested for
o Hydrocarbon substances, and if they were found the sample was sent for more detailed laboratory testing
o Heavy metal content.
There are approximately 3,600 cubic metres of contaminated soil (prescribed waste) to go be removed and carted to the Cranbourne/Lyndhurst site or to Tullamarine. This volume of contaminated soil is a smaller amount than first estimated by the experts. A further 3,200 cubic metres of uncontaminated fill, and 4,100 cubic metres of low level contaminated fill will be transported to other receiving sites. Anthony Lane and Associates are an EPA accredited auditor overseeing the whole process. It will cost Terminals $200 per tonne to store the material on another site or $400 to have the soil recycled. There will be fewer odours as the material will be put straight into trucks and removed from the site. The cost of the removal of contaminated spoil is being shared, with contributions from Terminals, government and industry.
* Peter Brotherton said that Anthony Lane and Associates had acted as peer reviewers on the CSR landfill proposal and were well regarded by environmental groups who had been involved in that process.
Robin said it was ‘good news for all’ that experts of such standing were managing the removal of the contaminated soil.
* George said that the management for the ground water on the western side of the Terminals P/L site is a separate management matter.
ITEM 7. CHANNEL DEEPENING EES (JOHN LUPPINO)
* John said he first heard of the Victorian Channel Authorities proposal to deepen the channels into Port Melbourne in early September 2002. This initiative is apparently essential if the Melbourne Port is to remain a worldwide competitive port facility. World shipping lines now move larger loads and so require deeper channels into the ports. The Melbourne Port presently handles 1.3 million containers p/a and with deeper channels as proposed the port will handle an estimated 5 million containers by 2007. Large ships will use other ports if they can not berth at the Melbourne Port.
The Environmental Effects Statement guidelines were released for public comment in August 2002. There are issues that potentially affect the community because the community live in close proximity to the port where some new infrastructure will be required to service the changing uses of the port. The City of Maribyrnong made a submission noting specifically the possible ecological effects on the Maribyrnong and Yarra Rivers. There are opportunities in the future for the community to comment further on this proposal.
ACTION. CICCC to invite the Victorian Channel Authority to brief them about the deepening of the channels.
* In answer to Faye’s question Michael said that the top pinnacles of the underwater hills will be removed to deepen the channels, and the already dredged channels will be deepened.
* Robin said he has been informed that consultant predictions indicate that the tidal range in the bay will increase at high tide by 2 cm and decrease at low tide by 2cm if the channels are deepened. After it is deepened there will be a greater volume of water coming into the bay with each tide change. There are some concerns that these changes, in conjunction with storm surges, may give rise to significant changes around the shoreline in the bay.
ACTION. The next CICCC Press Release will give support to the City of Maribyrnong concerns as expressed in their recent submission to the Victorian Channel Authorities .
ACTION. The CICCC will investigate other sources of information about the possible effects of the channel-widening plan.
* See the web site www.melbourne2030.vic.gov.au
John tabled a new report ‘Melbourne 2030, Planning for Sustainable Growth’ which shows a 30 year plan for land use growth in the Melbourne Metropolitan area. He said there is no mention of Major Hazard Facilities in the document. Submissions from the community can be made until 23 February 2003.
* Robin said that the CICCC should make a submission. The document states that there will be a further 650,000 new households established within the next 30 years. They will be concentrated in growth areas and in higher density housing schemes. Footscray is listed as a transit city that will be more densely populated than others.
ACTION. Robin will draft a CICCC response during the next 2 months.
ITEM 8. THE TERMINALS P/L ENVIRONMENT IMPROVEMENT PLAN
8.1 General comments on the EIP
See Attachment 5 & 6
ACTION. Defer to next month when the EPA/Terminals discussions have been finalised, and community members have provided their input.
8.2 Further advice re Best Available Practice for tank stripping
Deferred to next meeting.
8.3 Stormwater management & segregating stormwater from operational areas
* George spoke about the stormwater segregation plans for the Terminals P/L site. He said that Terminals have operational areas such as the truck fills operational areas that are more likely to have some product spillage that the non-operational areas such as driveways and buildings etc. Currently, all the drainage systems from each area are mixed together so clean rain water from buildings for instance is mixed with contaminated drainage from the truckfills resulting in a far larger quantity of contaminated waste. It is planned to segregate these systems allowing lean runoff to be kept separate from contaminated runoff, thereby reducing the waste that has to be disposed off site. He said all the pipes on the site that carry waste material will be kept above the ground. This will protect the soil from possible seepage contamination from pipes that are out of sight underground. Roofs will cover all the areas where product is loaded, so that rainwater does not mix with any spilled product. Sumps will collect any spilled product and the material will be transported in sealed pipes to above ground tanks. The trucking area waste removal system will take any spilt product away from the area quickly.
First flush pits will be provided for driveway areas as per the Terminals P/L Botany site, which can holds 400,000 litres of runoff before diverting it to Botany Bay. It will collect any sump oil drips and other impurities that are washed off the driveways. Hence its name “the first flush” containment. This is always tested for contaminants. The top and bottom of the liquid is tested before being released to the local storm water system. The costs of these improvements at Port Botany were $500,000 and the Coode island costs will be more.
ACTION. George will e-mail the Stormwater Management Report to the CICCC community representatives. For summary of this report See Attachment 7.
George said that Recommendation 10 in the Stormwater Report (Purchase a Total Organic Carbon meter to measure/monitor bund water before it is released) is expensive and will cost Terminals $80,000, plus the costs of housing the equipment. Terminals are looking for suitable field equipment so that a full time operator will not be required.
* The Committee discussed the need for an Implementation Status Report to provide ongoing information about the implementation of items in the EIP, and the possibility of the Implementation Report being put on the CICCC web site.
8.4 Shipping emergency shutdowns
*George said that at all times, staff members carry a special radio suitable to use in flammable areas (cost of $1,200 each). The radios are able to receive alarm signals and it is intended to use this feature to transmit alarms enabling quick action to shut down any transfers before any tank overflows occur. The alarm, when sounded, will signal the operators on the site to shut down all operations on the site including the ships berthed at the Terminals Wharf. The problems on the site are picked up by the automated monitoring panel which automatically sends the alarm to all personnel on the site to shut down all operations. The high level alarms are triggered automatically by high tank levels, problems with the fire system, and problems with the vapour emission control system.
ACTION. DCS alarm occurrences will be reported in the Terminals Monthly Operational Reports to the CICCC.
* Faye asked if the alarm is activated automatically by a loss in pressure.
George said that the vapour control emission sensor will pick up such a loss and only shut down if there is a detected increase in pressure.
ITEM 9. CONFIRMATION OF THE MINUTES OF THE PREVIOUS MEETING
8 AUGUST 2002.
The Draft Minutes were adopted.
ITEM 10. ACTION ITEMS FROM THE PREVIOUS MEETING
10.1 Further advice on the Safety Case (terrorist attack) -HSE Subcommittee
10.2 Future structure options for Coode Island committee
See Attachment 8
* Robin said that he has circulated by e-mail to everyone the Marstel response to the CICCC paper for discussion. Marstel acknowledge the papers content but feel it is too early to be considering a merger with the CICCC. They note that the Coode Island Users Group (CIUG) plan to produce a newsletter that Marstel P/L and Terminals P/L could contribute to. Robin said such a newsletter may lack credibility with the community if it originates from the operators.
George said that the CIUG were still divided about the usefulness of such a newsletter.
The committee discussed the need or otherwise for a CICCC newsletter. It was noted that the press had picked up the recent CICCC Press Releases. They had published on the front pages, information about the following issues –
o The sewer
o The new combustors at the Terminals site
o The Terminals Tank Integrity Report
Other suggestions made by the CICCC for increasing public awareness of Terminals activities on Coode Island included future –
o School group tours through the Terminals site, maybe on the PACIA open sites day
o School projects that include parent involvement and learning about the facility
o Letter box drops
o Hand delivered pamphlet drops and discussions with interested local residents
o Setting up an e-mailing mailout group of interested locals and others
o Advertise the above e-mail list capacity of the CICCC on the CICCC web site
o Send a regular newsletter to those on the e-mail list.
o Send out reminders to those on the e-mail list that the web site has updated information on specific topics of interest.
ACTION. The above topic will be further discussed at the next CICCC meeting.
ACTION. George will e-mail to everyone a copy of the Terminals Geelong site company leaflet, which is circulated to the nearby community.
ACTION. All future Press Releases from the CICCC will include a request to the press to include in the article the CICCC web site address.
ACTION. The CICCC will send a letter to all schools in the area, publicising the CICCC web site.
ACTION. Robin will send a letter of acknowledgment to Marstel.
10.3 Further advice on the Bentley Chemplax paraffin oil spill
ACTION. Add this to the Agenda for the next meeting.
ITEM 11. CORRESPONDENCE OUT
ITEM 12. CORRESPONDENCE IN
ITEM 13. OTHER BUSINESS
13.1 Progress of the OESC Pilot Project
ACTION. Invite Robin Betts to the next CICCC meeting for an updated report.
13.2 CICCC web site update
* Robin reported that the CICCC web site has been thoroughly reviewed and brought up-to-date.
13.3 Women’s Planning Network
* Ann said that the Minister for Planning will launch the Women’s Planning Network on 22 October 2002. Details can be found at
13.4 HSE Sub committee membership.
ACTION. Ian Thomas will ask Zoe to attend the CICCC HSE sub committee meetings.
ITEM 14. AGENDA FOR THE NEXT MEETING (14 November 2002)
See the above ACTION ITEMS above.
Thursday 14 November 2002
Thursday 12 December 2002
CICCC ATTACHMENTS TO DRAFT MINUTES
10 October 2002
Attachment 1 Correspondence – Terminals P/L to the EPA , 3 October 2002.
Attachment 2 WorkSafe Report, October 2002
Attachment 3 Terminals Monthly Report – September 2002
Attachment 4 Soil Remediation Details
Attachment 5 Extract from Terminals Draft EIP.
Attachment 6 Stormwater Segregation Report
Attachment 7 AWN Consultants summary of the Stormwater Management Plan
Attachment 8 Copies of recently published press releases