Adopted Minutes

Thursday 13 September 2001



Robin Saunders

CICCC Chair person

Trevor Perkins

commander /MF&ESB/ex off comm

Deborah Macfarlane

community rep./ CICCC committee

Carlo Fasolino

Op. Manager Terminals / committee

Ian Thomas

community rep./ committee

Ted Towson

community rep./ committee

Dr Peter Brotherton

Combined Enviro. Groups / committee

George Horman

Terminals Pty Ltd / committee

Bill Horrocks

City of Maribyr. Councillor/committee

Michael Isaachsen

community rep./ committee


Matthew Wylie

WorkCover/ex off committee

Jim Clements

Environ. Protec Auth / ex off comm

Cameron Fitzgerald

Environ. Protec Auth / ex off comm

Allen Hugli

Chief Financial Officer, Burns, Philp &

Company Limited/CICCC Committee

Michael Ragen

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


Theo Pykoulas

M.E.R.O. City of Maribyrnong

Eddie Knight

Hobsons Bay City Council

Vanessa Richardson

minute taker


The chairperson welcomed the committee members and those attending their first             CICCC meeting- Allen Hugli, Michael Ragen and Eddie Knight. 

            Apologies were received from Gordon Harrison, John Luppino and Faye Simpson.


The draft agenda was adopted with Item 11 deferred to the next meeting and             Marstel P/L will be discussed at Item 5.


            Eddie said that their council had a big discussion about their Emergency Management   protocols at their last council meeting. They have produced a fridge magnet (see      attachment with previous CICCC minutes) which has been given to all residents living   within 1-1.5kms of a petro-chemical complex. It has been revised recently. There are       3 such complexes in the HBCC area.

The HBCC Emergency Management Committee meet every 3 months.

In regard to the recent Mobil petrol spill in the Maribyrnong River on 5 July 2001 he said that HBCC were also concerned that they had not received timely information about the subsequent odours that members of the community were phoning to enquire about. In future they too would like that information even though such a spill may not be deemed ‘hazardous’ to the community. They are now developing such a process.

He advised the CICCC of the emergency communication measures taken at the Altona complex—where there is an environment phone line. It is managed by the             complex           and has information about detected odours in the area. A siren sounds only when a     real varified emergency exists and testing of that central community siren is carried             out every Sunday.

He said the Altona petrochemical complex had a centralised system whereby they were informed 3 minutes after an incident. At a briefing at Dowe some weeks ago, an American visitor advised about an American system where residents could phone in to a central control point for information about a complex, including emergency matters.

Trevor said that the CICCC were given the details about the Dowe system some weeks ago.

Eddie said that they do not have the problem of lots of unknown sirens sounding, as can be the case for residents near Coode Island.

Ian said he lives nearby in the area and he cannot tell the meaning of the different sirens he hears.

Eddie said that the HBCC want their residents to feel confident that –

  1. they will definitely be contacted with appropriate information if there is an                     emergency, &/or
  2. given information about something that they are concerned about like an             unfamiliar odour.

Theo said he would be attending the HBCC Emergency Management meetings so that both councils can coordinate and cooperate in the development of the required future systems development. He said that Robin Betts, Office of the Emergency Services Commissioner, said she would be pleased to attend the CICCC to report on their recent program developments.

ACTION. Robin will contact Robin Betts and invite her to make a presentation at the next CICCC meeting.

Robin thanked Eddie for attending and addressing the meeting. Ian Thomas, as a Hobsons Bay Resident and former Councillor, expressed special appreciation of Eddie’s attendance and presentation.


See Attachment 2

Peter Brotherton said that in the letter to Peter Reddie he had tried to convey to Peter that his involvement had been instrumental to the success of the CICCC. He added that in his opinion the CICCC was the best committee of its kind devised by a major hazardous chemical company and community representatives.

In the letter to Peter CICCC members said that they would like to meet socially with Peter Reddie to reflect more personally.

Robin thanked Peter for writing the draft.

ACTION. Robin will finalise and send the letter.


Matthew said that work was progressing with the development of methodology for the Terminal’s Safety Case required under WorkCover’s Major Hazard Facility regulations, with a focus on Terminals’ Geelong plant.

George said that the content of the material is very technical and involves fully assessing many ‘what if’ scenarios. He said that given the complexity, it would be best if the detail were shared with CICCC members at one of the Company workshops run to develop the Safety Case. CICCC community members will be invited to sit in on one of the reviews. They will start this process on the Coode Island site within the next 1-2 months.

Matthew met recently with Allen Hugli (Terminals P/L) and attended a recent meeting with Marstel P/L.

In answer to Ian’s question Mathew said that he has not consulted with Marstel about technical processes yet and so he could not comment on that aspect of their management.

See Attachment 1.

Cameron said he has been working with some CICCC members to develop a proposal for air monitoring in the residential area around Coode Island. Suitable sampling areas are now being considered by the group who will meet again next week. Acrylates will be monitored. There are 3 possible processes for monitoring the emissions –

  1. OPSIS (this will cost over $30,000)
  2. Evacuated canister
  3. Carbon canister (absorption)

Terminals will have to start on this soon as the court ordered that the project be completed by 1st November 2001 or as approved by the EPA. The sampling period will be 2 months.

Ian Thomas commented that, given that Terminals’ circumstances had changed, EPA should approach the Court to seek removal of the Court Order.

Peter Brotherton said the evacuated canister is the better proposal. He suggested that residents be kept well informed throughout the monitoring period. A draft report would be useful to comment on at the conclusion of the 2 month period.

Robin suggested the report of results be combined by EPA with the results of the OPSIS and other monitoring of theirs in the past 12 months, in line with the provisions of the Court Order.

Trevor has not yet met with Marstel, but he has attended one of the large community meetings facilitated by Marstel.

The program that Robin Betts is developing will have application for the whole state and not just for the Pilot Scheme at Coode Island.

Allen said that his role at Terminals is a short term appointment at the helm and that he is not General Manager or CEO for Terminals. He has been a director for Terminals P/L for the past 3 years and is the Chief Financial Officer for Burns Philp.

George said that Terminals have had a relatively quiet month. They are still waiting on clarification of the Government’s position on a range of issues at Coode Island.

In answer to Peter’s question George said Terminals have been grappling for years with the ramifications of the government’s ever changing decisions about the operations on Coode island.    He said that Minister Brumby’s announcement that the Marstel proposal can be accomplished within set timelines will not be achieved.

Allen said Terminals is moving forward on the basis of what the Government has announced.

Marstel Proposal

Ian Thomas referred to notes prepared by Joan Thomas at the previous Marstel meeting.

Peter Brotherton asked if Tim Gunning had said he wanted all new faces on the Marstel CCC? Michael said that Tim did not say that.

Theo questioned whether the CICCC should be discussing this issue and asked if the Terms of Reference included the examination of another company’s Works Approval application.

Robin said that two of the CICCC members had requested the inclusion of this topic on the agenda tonight. He added that the CICCC Terms of Reference were quite broad and other companies at Coode island had attended meetings, and their operations and planning were the subject of discussion.

Peter said that the CICCC Community Representatives had attended 2-5 of the recent Marstel meetings. They (and HazMAG and the Combined Environment Groups) have offered advice to Marstel about what may be useful for this new CCC to consider. He said these groups have grave concerns about the process proposed by Marstel P/L. He said he will further challenge Marstel to improve their principles and practice for community consultation as was submitted to them before the last meeting.

Bill asked who sets the principles for the Marstel CCC?

Jim said that the legislation is reasonably silent about process. It states that there are 21 days for the community to respond after the Works Approval (WA) has been lodged and accepted by the EPA. The responses to the EPA are in submission form. It also states that the EPA may hold a conference of the parties.

In answer to Peter’s question Jim said that the EPA had previously suggested extra discussions be held with the community before the WA is initially submitted to the EPA. This had occurred when Terminals developed their WA.

Peter said the way Marstel are addressing the development of their WA is not good enough. The community groups who signed off on the ‘principles list’ presented to Marstel feel very strongly about them.

Jim said Marstel were working in line with the legislative requirements.

Deborah asked Jim if he was aware of case law in regard to definitions of ‘community consultation’?

Jim said that case law does not apply. He said that the EPA has encouraged Marstel to consult and it was the government who added the requirement for a community representative committee in their recent press release.

Deborah said that as a resident living near Coode Island she has concerns about all developments on the island including the new Marstel proposal. She said it is important that Marstel have local Coode Island residents on their CCC and not just a few from another Marstel committee in Altona. She added that if this matter is fought out in the courts, the delays will be longer.

Jim said that the WA does not require community consultation but that it is beneficial for Marstel to have such ‘a process’.

Ian reminded Jim that Cameron had encouraged the CICCC community representatives to attend the Marstel meetings after they had decided not to attend.

Bill said that the Maribyrnong City Council (MCC) are advocating for one committee for the whole of Coode Island. While he chaired the first meeting he said he was not going to say it was a great process but assured the CICCC that the City of Maribyrnong consulting engineers would look at the Works Approval application by Marstel during the 21 day period for community submissions. Bill said that the CICCC cannot dictate to Marstel and that anyone can join the Marstel CCC.

Peter said that the present Marstel CCC was ‘mickey mouse’ and did not allow for ‘robust debate’.

Robin added that the 21 day period was an inappropriate time frame for adequate community involvement. He said in contrast Terminals had responded very well to the community’s concerns and

  1. Spent 3 months and 5 meetings with the CICCC before submitting their WA                  application
  2. Then there was additional time allowed for submissions, beyond the                   statutory 21 days.
  3. Terminals gave a copy of the final WA to all the CICCC members, and               made it generally available to the public, while putting the Summary document                     on their web site. Other Companies rarely, if ever, provide such detailed                            information, and EPA doesn’t have the legislative power to require such                         disclosure.

He added that other statutory processes also left a lot to be desired in regard to good community consultation. For example, within the area of the Melbourne Port, the Planning Scheme did not require the public advertisement of any planning permit. This was a matter of concern to both the CICCC and the City of Maribyrnong. He said the CICCC have spent the last 3 years trying to improve WorkCover’s understand of what constitutes good community consultation. They also made 2 submissions on this topic to WorkCover and WorkCover assured the CICCC that the consultation on the safety case process would be over and above what was required statutorily.

Peter suggested that Bill contact Jane Fuller and get the details of the conversation that she had with Tim Gunning. Jane developed the consultative process procedure for the CICCC in its formative period.

Bill said it was a pity that those groups who had given Marstel the set of principles had walked out of the meeting.

Deborah said that they told Marstel that their involvement in the meeting was conditional on the basis of the adoption of the principals as defined in their document.

Michael said it was unfortunate that they had left what was the first Marstel Working Group meeting. He said it was the Working Group who were to make the rules and set the principles. He said they looked at the ‘Document of Principles” and everyone agreed that it made good sense and that they will probably be influenced by the suggestions. Many of the group members said they did not want to receive a ‘sitting fee’ on the Marstel CICC.


The draft minutes were adopted without amendment.


Allen said that in recent weeks he has been considering the different scenarios for the two western sites. They have been negotiating with customers. They plan to stay on Coode Island but they still don’t have long term leases finalised.

He met with the EPA and Huntsman to discuss license details for the storage of benzene.

George said that the VEC (Vapour Emission Control) systems are under capacity as previously detailed. He said Terminals keeps ‘getting kneecapped by the government every time they try to move forward to improve this system.’ As a result they have decided not to handle benzene, as Terminals cannot guarantee EPA licence compliance without a large expenditure of capital which was not viable for the short-term tenure.

He said that Terminals had not been in a position to order the scrubber to control the acrylate vapours. Terminals were considering removing ethyl acrylate for the interim until a new VECs was in place.

Jim said that Terminals have their license agreement to follow as a guide to what is required by the government.

George said they would comply with the license but that they have not heard from government in regard to when Terminals must vacate the east side of Mackenzie Road. Options for establishing VECS for benzene and acrylates are being considered. It is almost as cheap to put in a VECS to handle all products as it is to put in a system just for benzene. He said his preference is to spend time and money on the long term solutions and not on the short term ones.

Robin summarised by saying that a vapour emission system for benzene and other materials on the west side would offer the best outcome for Terminals.

George agreed. He said that they currently handle 20-25 benzene parcels per year. He said they have not been notified by government of the date in which they have to vacate the east side of McKenzie Road. He thinks it will be 18 -20 months (Jan 2004) before the site can be fully cleared and cleaned up.

Deborah said that Marstel’s proposed ‘fast tracking’ of the development was equated with ‘poor community consultation processes.’

Ian Thomas commented that, were he Terminals, he would consider developing both PO and benzene on the B West and C West sites. 


Allen said that Terminals have a close estimate of how long it will take them to clean up the site but that it was not appropriate for them to comment about how long it would take Marstel to implement their redevelopment. To meet the expiry date of the lease on the western side of Mackenzie Road (1st January 2004) Terminals would need to demolish the existing plant by May 2002 to provide sufficient time for the contaminated soil remediation. The lease may be extended by six months.

If an extension is granted the future maintenance procedures will need to be replanned. The scope and scale of the Safety Case will also be changed and they may have to construct a pipe under the roadway to connect to a new VECS on the western side of Mackenzie Road. The lease for Site B is currently extended month by month and Site C is leased until 1 January 2004


Matthew said that he cannot comment on this at this stage because he does not have     enough detail. Marstel are developing their safety case and liasing with WorkCover to             do this.

Jim Clements of EPA told the Committee that the Marstel draft Works Approval             application was originally expected to have been lodged last week. Marstel has             withdrawn its announced timetable, and EPA is unaware when Marstel will submit             their draft application. He said it could be up to 6 months before the Marstel WA is            submitted.


            10.1 MPC Environment Improvement Plan

            Sometime ago the CICCC received a detailed letter which outlined the plan.

Matthew said that this week the Department of Infrastructure had released tho ‘Ports Reform Project’ document. It addresses matters concerning all ports in the state.             ‘Safety’ and ‘landuse around the ports’ are some aspects that are covered. They are       seeking consultation and comments from stakeholders.

ACTION. Action on this matter will be deferred by the CICCC for a couple of months.      

            10.2 Maribyrnong City Council’s Community Engagement Procedures (follow up       action on Newsletter and possible public forum)

            The CICCC discussed the need for a newsletter for local residents.

Issues to be addressed include:

  • how often the newsletter will be circulated
  • regularly reference to it in the Maribyrnong City Council newspaper articles, and             advise where it can be obtained.

Jim tabled 5 examples of similar newsletters from other communities living close to         major hazard complexes. All five were funded by the Companies concerned. He said      the EPA is happy to contribute articles to the CICCC newsletter.

ACTION Deborah will work on the production of a newsletter. Peter Brotherton said he will look at the drafts and offer advice as required. Deborah will report on the planning process for the newsletter at the next CICCC meeting. 

The potential for Maribyrnong City Council to assist with the costs of the newsletter       was raised. Bill offered to investigate this matter.

ACTION. Bill will investigate resourcing assistance from the Maribyrnong City Council.


ACTION. This will be discussed at the next meeting    

ITEM 12.

            CORRESPONDENCE OUT          

  • Letters to surrounding chemical facilities on emergency communication

George said this item needs to be worked on now.

Robin pointed out that the Office of the Emergency Services Commissioner and the       MCC have taken on the roles required to develop this with encouragement from the       CICCC.

See Attachment 3.

Theo said that 8 companies plus have been invited to discuss the issue of emergency       communication by Maribyrnong City Council as part of the Pilot Project with the           Office of the Emergency Services Commissioner.

  • Invitation to Hobsons Bay City Council

Eddie attended tonight’s meeting.

  • Invitation to Marstel to contribute funding of the Worst Case Scenario Consultancy.

The CICCC commended Terminals for their commitment to funding this consultancy.

ACTION. Robin to send the letter to Marstel in the next few days.

  • Request to Victoria Channel Authority for follow up.

No response received yet.

ITEM 13.


  • Letter on Emergency Management from John Luppino
  • Correspondence on Court Order

            See Attachment 4

  • Website usage—reached 1300 visits in the first week of August, the highest level yet       recorded.

See Attachment 5.

  • Channel deepening

See Attachment 6.


See Attachment 7 and 8

Carlo said that nearly all their operations staff have completed Level 1 Certificate Training and they have started Level 2. Level 4 is only for Supervisors. Carlo and other site managers have also completed a course that accredits them to assess the course work of the operators. Operators spend about one morning every 4 weeks on the course and they are assessed at the end. The requirement for the completion of the course is written into the workers agreements with Terminals at the Geelong and Coode Island sites. They are still trying to encourage a couple of the older workers to complete the course.

George said that the training framework is specific to Terminals. The competencies include being able to manage unexpected problems that may occur on the site.

Carlo said that Terminals at Coode Island had completed a relatively quiet month. The OPSIS has not detected any emissions attributable to Terminals.


See Attachment 9


See all the above ACTION ITEMS above.


17.1 HazMAG/VUT Research Project.

See Attachment 10

            Robin said that he had been interviewed for this report.

17.2 Review of the sitting fees.

            A proposal from the CICCC members to increase fees from $133.00 to $150.00 has       will be provided to Terminals for consideration.

ACTION. Peter to forward this to George.

            17.3 ‘Fire’ celebrations.

            A successful meeting and BBQ on 21st August was held to celebrate the 10th anniversary of on the explosion and fires on Coode Island and was enjoyed by all who attended.



Time 10.00pm



Thursday 11 October 2001

Thursday 8 November 2001



13 September 2001

Attachment    1          Map showing Possible Air Emission Testing Zones

Attachment    2         Letter to Peter Reddie, 13 September 2001

Attachment    3          Correspondence, Maribyrnong City Council

Attachment    4          Court Order and correspondence from EPA.

Attachment    5          History of the CICCC web site usage

Attachment    6          Correspondence from VCA, 4 September 2001

Attachment    7          Terminals Certificate Training Program

Attachment    8          Terminals Monthly Operations & Occurrence Report, August 2001.

Attachment    9          HSE Subcommittee meeting minutes

Attachment    10        HazMAG/VUT Research Project Report

Items posted to those without e-mail facilities include

  1. Correspondence to Hobsons Bay, 10 August 2001
  2.         Maribyrnong City Council correspondence , 24 August 2001
  3. Orders made by the Melbourne Magistrates Court 7 June 2001
  4. Correspondence to Allen Hugli from EPA, 24 August 2001
  5. Correspondence from Victoria University, 14 August 2001
  6. Correspondence to VCA, 10 August 2001
  7.         CICCC Press Release August 2001