COODE ISLAND
COMMUNITY
CONSULTATIVE
COMMITTEE
Adopted Minutes
Meeting on Thursday 14th October 2004
|
PRESENT |
|
|
Robin CICCC / |
Carlo State |
|
Ian Thomas: Community |
Quentin Cooke: Env. |
|
Deborah Community |
Bronwyn MH Div / |
|
Faye Simpson Community |
Margaret Pacia |
|
Michael Community |
Jody West Minute Taker |
|
Chris Watt Melbourne |
Theo Pykoulus |
|
|
Richard Marks |
ITEM 1. WELCOME
BY THE CHAIR
Robin Welcomed
everyone
ITEM 2. APOLOGIES
Colleen Hartland, George Horman, Peter LaRose, Peter Brotherton
ITEM 3. CONFIRMATION
OF DRAFT AGENDA
Adopted
ITEM 4. REPORTS
FROM AGENCIES & TERMINALS
WORKSAFE
Presented
by: Bronwyn Brookman-Smith
Bronwyn: Current activities
with Terminals Pty Ltd included the Annual Inspection on 6 & 7 September.
Terminals performed very well at the audit. 10
Controls & 3 Safety Management System Elements were tested from the Safety
Case. Controls are what prevents hazards from occurring eg: fire systems,
maintenance systems etc and how often they are tested and trained.
Safety
Management System Elements are the Maintenance & Inspection Programs eg:
Craning, Fire Pumps etc. Worksafe look at the whole regimen to make sure that
Terminals are planning & reviewing the results.
Robin: When
saying “that Terminals did well” what do you mean?
Bronwyn: That they were
mainly fully functional aside from some of the record keeping eg: In the safety
case procedure the pipes had to be checked 6 monthly, but it was being done
annually. Things like that.
There
are 2 types of grades:
“No”:
meaning not doing at all or dosen’t exist in procedures
“In
part”: meaning they’re doing something put not completely like
doing something annually but the Safety Case Manual says it should be 6
monthly.
One
problem that was highlighted was that for the shipping discharge plan the two
people who had wrote the program, knew the operation, but there was no training
for other staff, so if the 2 people are away or new people in the future were
required to do it, that they would be able to ensure the functionality
continued. Terminals have come back to Worksafe with what they will do to
address this issue.
Worksafe
also visited the site on 13 September regarding extending the operation of the
East Side past 2004
To
extend the East Side past end of 2004 there needs to be an appropriate
maintenance plan to ensure integrity of tanks and this will be supplied by
Terminals to Worksafe.
Health
& Safety Week 24-29 October 2004 (see Handouts).
2
events by Major Hazards
26.10.04
“Community Preparedness” at the Altona Civic Centre
27.10.04
“Monitoring Safety Cases” at the Altona Civic Centre
Theo: Worthwhile
initiate by Worksafe and is a positive step in recognizing the achievement of
the Major Hazard Facilities.
Robin: Does
that reflect that the MHFs are doing well?
Theo: Yes.
I look forward to what innovative idea’s come out of this.
Bronwyn: A summary of
proceedings will be published on the website.
Robin: Acknowledged
& thanked Bronwyn for her contribution to the CICCC on behalf of Worksafe
and advised that Bronwyn had resigned from her position with Worksafe and is
heading off to a new role within the National Offshore Petroleum Safety
Authority (NOPSA).
ACTION: Worksafe
to advise on proceedings from the two MHF events at the next meeting.
TERMINALS
PTY LTD
Presented
by: Carlo Fasolino
Carlo: Successful
in Butadiene application at Geelong. Hopefully up and running by end of next
year. The Planning Permit went into the City of Greater Geelong.
ACTION: Carlo to advise
details of the Planning Permit process at the next meeting, particularly if the
planning permit application will be advertised to allow third party appeals.
Carlo:
The
Marstel facility at Coode Island is not complete. Terminals is running down
stock levels now. Tanks need to be gas free by 01.05 as we need 12 months to
remediate and get Environmental sign off by the end of Jan 2005.
Robin: What
is the “Gap” prospect?
Carlo: Not
certain when Marstel will be operational. There are talks to amend the lease
so we don’t need environment sign-off.
Ian: Can
the committee have an account of the Marstel meeting?
Quentin: Completion
of project is indeterminate, and Marstel are nominating a date of November 17
to be finished construction (Practical Completion), then commissioning. Issues
with painting of tanks, and some other things now expect Commissioning by 23.11.04.
Ian: Joan
advised 23.11.04 might not be met, and Commissioning might go into the Xmas
break.
Quentin: Not
confident that the completion date will be completed.
Bronwyn: There are
processes for Safety Case under review, with a decision to be made next week
and the Licence Panel (internal) to consider Safety Case and Licence. The
Safety Case has been going for a few months now and the panel sits and
determines if the Licence is to be granted. If it is granted then that takes
over from Registration. If the decision is not to grant a licence then the
company has the right to appeal. The company is advised of this before the
registration runs out.
Ian: Is
there any indication that they won’t?
Bronwyn: It can’t
be granted if you don’t control the site which Marstel doesn’t.
Carlo: Process
of East Side Closure. There is a gap now. Plan to amend lease so
environmental sign-off is after P&O take the site. This will allow
remediation to go further back. .
12
Months has been allowed to do remediation and get sign-off from external
auditor.
Bronwyn: There is a
condition in the lease for the sign-off.
Ian: I
suggest everything gets put in writing.
Carlo: Acrylonitrile
tank cleared and is now storing Mineral Turpentine.
We
have just had the Kaneb key managers meeting.
DOW
came out for a 2 day site audit.
Commissioned
8 tanks in Plant B & we have started moving tanks from East Side to Plant C
West Side..
Bronwyn: What will they
hold?
Carlo: A
range of solvents for our Customers.
Faye: How
do you check there are no leaks in the tanks?
Carlo: When
the tank goes down on the new base, repairs are made, a full check as per10
year inspection is done and the underside is painted. The tank is dropped and
then filled full of water and held for 24 hours. Any longer than that and
tanks will rust. The tanks hold 860,000 litres of water.
Robin: When
the tanks were lifted were there any leaks?
Carlo: Have
found no evidence on the 2 tanks we have moved so far
Chris: Can
you re-use the water.
Carlo: No,
we have tried but is hard to pump water from tank to tank.
EPA
Presented
by: Quentin Cooke
Quentin: There
are been many interesting things happening with Terminals, which is why I took
the opportunity to go to the site and update the improvement action report.
Still significant work going on.
Talk
of proposal for relocating Phenol storage tank and considering whether it needs
a works approval.
Proposal
for Tank 314 to move to another position, asked opinion and didn’t have
an issue with this relocation. It will make further room on West side and the
MFB will comment on this.
Deborah: Why are you
moving the tank?
Carlo: Need
to upgrade the base and re-aligning will make room for other tanks in the
future.
Deborah: With Marstel
would it mean that ultimately there would be more chemicals stored on the site?
Carlo: No,
there will be less because we have reduced our site and Marstel only have 11
tanks.
Deborah: Is what P&O
are storing hazardous?
Bronwyn: They handle dangerous
goods but they are only in the containers. Ethyl acrylate is now being imported
in 20 tonne Isotainers. P&O Ports is not a MHF site, but ias covered by the
Dangerous Goods Act.
Deborah: Is that taken
into consideration in the review?
Bronwyn: They have their
own rules and international rules that they must abide by. Covered by the IMDG
when goods leave the port, they go to a warehouse or container park. In the
1994 Risk Assessments, P&O had the same amount of Dangerous Goods as
Terminals.
Robin: I
always thought that P&O had a small amount they were holding.
Bronwyn: It is
considered transient.
Deb: What
happens if there is an accident – do they pose a risk to Terminals?
Bronwyn: The potential
is limited because the containers come in and go out. There are 3 types of
storage: Drums, Isotainers & Tanks.
Robin: How
much are brought in Isotainers?
Carlo: 12,000
tonnes per year appox.
Bronwyn: They come
through other docks such as Patricks at Webb dock & East Swanston and
P&O at West Swanston.
Ian: Would
like more explanations on Phenol. Terminals held a special meeting and my
recollection was that it had fallen over.
Carlo: Orica
has now approached us to store on the East Side.
Robin: Terminals
sent a letter to EPA seeking seeking an exemption from requiring a works
approval (from Frank Fleer). Copies of the letter were sent to CICCC members by
email.
Ian: What
have the EPA decided with regard to a Works Approval.
Quentin: A
decision has not been made by the EPA, it is likely that it will not be
required.
Ian: I
would like to know positively.
MELBOURNE
FIRE BRIGADE
Presented
by Chris Watts
Chris: From
an operational perspective there have been no significant changes. Department
is doing business with Marstel in regard to advice they seek.
Items
of interest are the discussions with Port of Melbourne (Joe Buffone, the
Emergency Management Coordinator). It is significant in that the Emergency
Plan was on the CEO’s desk for signing. EPA, WorkSafe and MFB raised
points to be covered, notes were made and the document has been returned for a
further consultation phase.
There
has been discussion on the road changes, staging area’s and alternative
access. Considerations have been taken on board by Port of Melbourne. Discussions
held with Worksafe & Terminals and neighboring tenants and it was accepted
that the MFB will access and occupy any space they require with the cooperation
of the tenants.
Port
of Melbourne have opened up their emergency plan and are in consultation with
MFB and a number of other authorities.
Theo: Attended
a meeting with other councils and Port of Melbourne to get resources in quickly
with council involvement and out into the community.
Michael: How
will it be communicated?
Theo: 2/3rds
of the communications system is set up to alert the community and getting
all the major players together.
Bronwyn: The Port of
Melbourne have a Community Forum and that is how they will do it.
Chris: Comments
going back to the Port of Melbourne, the Port previously existed as an
authority and had power within their own right. They’re now sharing
resources.
In
discussion about resource sharing the MFB offered to do a foam survey and will
report to CICCC the findings.
ACTION Chris
to report on the foam survey when it is completed.
Ian: Is
more space between tanks better?
Carlo: No,
it is the access to the tanks not the space between the tanks which is the
issue.
Bronwyn: Tank layout on
an existing site there is a requirement for more controls for mitigation,
rather than space as opposed to a new site.
Robin: Moving
tank 314 between 2 other tanks will clean up the site and give room for future expansion.
In due course you will write to the MFB for their advice.
Carlo: Yes
and effect on adjacent tanks will be part of the process.
Chris: The
MFB gives advice and the message back to the community would be that the design
consultation meets requirements.
Robin: CICCC
would like the MFB to let us know.
Chris: It
is a business arrangement between Terminals MFB and there is business
confidentiality.
Bronwyn: EPA &
Worksafe make the Licence a public issue. The MFB comes under the Dangerous
Goods Legislation.
Michael: Is
the client obligated to seek advice from the MFB.
Chris: Are
you inferring that Terminals are not telling the committee the truth?
Robin: If
it is tabled and Chris is at the meeting we would like confirmation from the
MFB. The CICCC has a very imperfect knowledge and not knowing what is
required. We approach an authority to find out the responsibilities of the
agency. We want you to tell us the significant things happening at Termnals.
Terminals knows what agencies will be saying and what happens.
Chris: MFB
is not a regulator and only has a business relationship with the VWA.
Robin: So
Terminals will inform the CICCC of any advice from the MFB and the CICCC will
give the MFB the opportunity to advise.
Chris: The
two NOT NEGOTIABLES are: (1) Firefighter Safety and (2) Breach of Public
Safety. Sometimes this costs business more money but we like to all go home and
sleep without anxiety.
Ian: The
status is the seeking of that advice is no longer a legal obligation.
Robin: What
happens if Terminals do not take MFB’s advice.
Chris: It
is on record as having received the advice and it is provided to the regulator
even though isn’t mandatory.
Bronwyn: MFB make a
recommendation and the Company can sometimes give an alternate. Worksafe goes
back to MFB to see if they achieve the same outcome.
Robin: Have
you ever had an unsatisfactory recommendation?
Bronwyn: MFB advice is
sought under the Dangerous Goods legislation and is assessed under that
legislation.
Robin: Does
the Freedom of Information apply to the MFB?
Chris: It
more than like would, I don’t know conclusively.
Ian: Don’t
believe that this sort of thing would really happen. Sites are now well
controlled, maybe it will show weaknesses of the smaller organisations.
Robin: Does
it happen that you give advice and the smaller companies don’t take it?
Chris: Yes.
The MFB do not have the capacity to train our staff to be a site inspector.
The building code is a life safety code. It is fraught with dangers, eg:
recent school fires, where they have lost money and treasures, however the
building code was about life safety, maybe in the future the VWA will come back
to life and property.
MARIBYRNONG
CITY COUNCIL
Presented
by: Theo Pykoulos
Theo: Emergency
Communications Victoria approached the City of Maribyrnong to assist in
improving response times for getting to incidents.. We are looking at standard
forms of coding so that there is a data base (e.g: placarding, reading
reference and guide etc) of access points and other information.
Places
like Vic Uni, Highpoint have a number of entry points, and the location of the
best access point can be confusing if specific information about an emergency
is not given.
Last
month in relation to the development at 99 Moreland, Council arranged for late
objections to be heard by VCAT. Mediation set down for 29.10.2004, as a
preliminary to the Hearing.
ITEM 5. REVIEW
OF IMPROVEMENT ACTION REPORT
Refer handout.
Carlo: Suggest
due to timing that we go through the incomplete items and then any questions.
Robin: Draw
the committee’s attention to the heading to include Terminals content
updated and the bottom of Page 7. If you recall it now gives it a form of
identification. The committee was given a moment to review and comment.
Chris: Remove
MFB as a regulator.
Robin: Is
the committee happy with this wording?
Chris: Will
the next report delete completed actions.
Robin: No,
all actions will remain for an overall picture.
Robin: Committee
decided that MFB not required.
ACTION: Carlo
to amend:
Page
3 and make Status & Regulatory Sign-off clearer & separate.
Page
4 Update Sediment & Litter Traps
Page
5 ensure that there are no abbreviations eg: TOC, TDI & EMP
Page
6 Amend status of Combustion Heat Recovery Feasibility Study to include
“Report received by EPA”.
ACTION: Quentin
to advise on the Report Received for Combustion Heat Recovery Feasibility Study.
ACTION: Robin
to include report in the Press Release.
ITEM 6. TARGETS/OBJECTIVES
FOR THE 2ND EIP 2005-2007
Carlo: Due
to time, handout given and to be discussed further at next meeting.
ACTION: Carlo to send a
copy of Summary Targets to Robin via email
ACTION: Carlo to give
background of form and advise at next meeting.
ITEM 7. ACTION ITEMS
REPORT ON INVESTIGATIONS INTO COMBUSTOR & COMPRESSED AIR
ALARMS (TERMINALS)
Carlo: Installed
pressure transmitters, connected to computer control system, if air pressure
drops it sets off an alarm.
REDUCED RISK CONTOURS FOLLOWING CESSATION OF ACRYLONITRILE
(TERMINALS)
Robin: Will
there be a subsequent QRA done
Carlo: Maybe
reconsider after the remediation but nothing in the pipeline.
Ian: Propylene
Oxide risk assessement was done and not a risk. Suggest that if this is
qualified then it is not required.
Robin: Nearside
risk didn’t decrease because Acryonitrile was still there.
Ian: No
distant effect because Propylene Oxde is so dangerous it was capable of a offsite
event.
Robin: What
is left at the Terminals site to have a major risk profile?
Carlo: Nothing
Robin: Terminals
risk is significantly less because danger is removed. Community should know
this.
Carlo: Maybe
toward next year, but not high on the agenda, as we have other priorities.
Ian: Talking
Marstel as brown field site, its tanks are closer to Footscray, than Terminals
would be. Suggest a QRA would only be of use to public if it was Terminals
& Marstel combined with the two companies doing it together.
Carlo: No
– confidentiality issues to be sorted out.
Michael: If
it is just done by Terminals then it is public knowledge anyway.
Bronwyn: No-one can work
out how to put it together without the background.
Faye: Request
Worksafe to release an updated risk profile for the island.
Bronwyn: There is a Port
Buffer study being done by the Port of Melbourne.
Deborah: What about an
independent report?
Bronwyn: Port of
Melbourne are now taking more responsibility and they are doing the Buffer
study.
Deborah: It is a Worksafe
matter to me.
Carlo: The
previous ones were done under other reasons.
Ian: This
committee requests that Terminals communicate with Marstel. An answer of No is
not of any use and increase the antagonism of our committee.
Faye: Can
Workcover do it?
Ian: It
is not reasonable for us to request Worksafe, it is reasonable for us as a
committee that Worksafe return that information under the MHF guidelines.
Robin: Rather
than make a decision, Terminals will have a reflection of this and maybe move towards
what Ian is supporting.
Theo: Council
Planners are not involved. Council has no authority to do it.
Bronwyn: Technically
with changes at Terminals, there is nothing in Plant B that can impact with
Marstel site. It will not be warranted unless the 2 sites have an impact on each
other.
Carlo: If
we do a QRA and we have anything that will affect Marstel we will consult with
Marstel.
Bronwyn: The Buffer
study is underway. Stage 1 is completed.
Ian: Has
the study been submitted to CICCC
Robin: No,
there is not good communication from the Port of Melbourne.
Ian: Can
we ask for a presentation and seek a further Q&A. Any study done by the
Port of Melbourne would be an absolute farce. What they have done is allow
dangerous things to be permitted.
ITEM 8. REVIEW OF MEETING
FREQUENCY
Deborah: I think that 3
months is too long. If someone misses a meeting then it is too long between.
Carlo: Can’t
comment, need to review costs.
Robin: Terminals
worked with committee to match budget, there is some flexibility in it.
Ian: Kaneb
have enormous reserves and to think that a few extra thousand dollars will make
an impact is daft. We need to ask Kaneb to increase the budget.
Carlo: Well
if the committee wants to have more meetings within the budget requirements
that is fine by Terminals.
Deborah: $2000 is not
worth quibbling over considering the time between meetings is too long.
Robin: Important
that Terminals be given the opportunity to consider that with 5 meetings the
committee is dissatisfied and does not think that is good enough.
Deborah: It’s
funny how when Kaneb want something done the money is there and then when it
suits Kaneb it’s not.
Robin: We
have in fact had 7 meetings this year. There has been a squeeze on the
finances and the committee would like it reconsidered.
ACTION: Terminal
to review and report back at next meeting
ITEM 9. REPORT FROM COUNCIL
– TRUCK IMPACTS OF LOCAL STREETS
Theo: It’s
unfortunate that our Manager is not aware of all the details and we would refer
the CICCC to the Department of Infrastructure because of internal issues being
raised. The Council is looking at the issue from a planning perspective.
Robin: The
Committee was advised by the City of Maribyrnong that they would keep the
Committee advised and now a black hole has occurred. We would like to know
about the impact of truck movements.
Theo: There
is a committee that has been set up called The Docks, Rail & Markets Precinct
Working Group, who have set down a tentative meeting and issues are being
brought to the table. I can find out from John Lippino, and pass on the
details. Council is not a main player in this.
Robin: We
would like a report from the City of Maribyrnong on what studies are being
conducted.
Theo: I
will take notice and get back to the CICCC with factual information and perhaps
send an email prior to the next meeting.
Quentin: There
was a report from the Yarraville Transport Group chaired by Bruce Mildenhall
and the concern is trucking through the Yarraville area. The Group is trying
to reduce that traffic flow through the area. You can refer to the DOCKS
website.
ITEM 10. CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED
Robin: Tim
Holding MP, Minister for Manufacturing and Export (with responsibility for
Coode Island) responded to the Committee’s letter concerning butadiene
storage at Coode Island. The Minister’s letter set out the approval
processes should the butadiene proposal be pursued at Coode Island.
Following
the CICCC further advice on the Maxwell Review, Bob Stensholt MP sent a
standard letter of acknowledgement to the CICCC.
ITEM 11. DRAFT MINUTES
Adopted
with one minor editing change.
ITEM 12. NEXT SCHEDULED MEETING
9th
December 2004
PROPOSED
2005 DATES:
24th
February 2005 / 12th May 2005 / 28th July 2005 /13th
October 2005 /
8th
December 2005
ACTION: Terminals
to review the number of meetings and report back at the next meeting
MEETING CLOSED: 9.50pm