CFA Geelong

Barry Foss (Operations Officer)

Worksafe

Geoff Cooke

Community Representative

Ralph Taylor

EPA

Dirk Dukker (EPA Environment Protection Officer)

Quentin Cook (EPA Melbourne)

Friends of Point Lillias and Corio Bay

Col Edwards

Geelong Community for Good Life

Sue McLean

Joe Cicero

Geelong Community Forum

Sue Kelly-Turner

Geelong Environment Council

David Henshaw

Geelong Grammar School

John Apted (Director of Planning)

Multiple Chemical Sensitivity Group

John Wilson

North Shore Residents Group

Margrette Lewis

Northern Community Consultative Group

Paul Dakin

Bill Aitken

Ports Chemical Action Group

Jack Moor

Special Monitors of Geelong

Franceska Dezalak

June Ryan

Catherine Jones

Terminals Pty Ltd

George Horman (Managing Director)

Carlo Fasolino (State Manager)

Gary O[not equal]ÄôSullivan (Operations Manager, Corio)

Geoff Millard (HSE Manager)

Angelo Smarelli

Dr David Barton

Ports Chemical Action Group

Peter Linaker

Northern Community Consultative Group

Terry Croke

Terminals Pty Ltd

Jeff Hibbert, Terminal Engineeer

City of Greater Geelong

Cr Tony Ansett

Steve Sodemaco (Co-ordinator Health)

EPA

Anne Marie McCarthy (Community Relations Officer

Alexander Jovcic (Manager)

Geelong Greens

Elsie McTeer

Northern Community Consultative Group

Peter Tyler

Bernie Bliss

Joyce Bliss

Bruce Coles

Mr J Arnott

Geelong Environment Council

Joan Lindross

North Shore Residents Group

Dale Jennings, Secretary

Jim Anderson President

Tom Gartland (V.P. Alternate)

Anton van Doornik (Treasurer Alternate)

Chris Collins

Doreen Rafferty

Sonia Hammil

Item 1

Welcome: Introduction by Chair

Robin

Welcomed committee and determined a target finish time with consensus from the committee of 9-9.30 pm.

Item 2

Apologies, Confirmation of Draft Agenda

Robin

Read email apology from Kas Szakiel, commercial Manager of Toll Port of Geelong as follows:

Unfortunately I will not be able to attend.

In fact I am not sure that the issues relating to Terminals are directly related to those relevant to Geelong Port as the port operator. Consequently I wish to withdraw from the Committee as a formal member.

I am, however, happy to attend on behalf of Geelong Port in the event that clarification of the Port's position is required at any of your Committee meetings. Please let me know any circumstances where this occurs.

Col

Strongly objected and stated Kas should be at the meeting as Toll own the pier and that crown land had been illegally taken by Toll and leased to Terminals.

Bill

Asked that it be recorded in the minutes and that a letter expressing disappointment be written to Kas.

Franceska

Agreed with Col.

Col

Again stressed the issue of the ownership of the land and asked where the title deeds are.

Robin

Sought advice on the desired details of the letter from the committee, and sought confirmation that committee members expressed disappointment and would like Kas to attend the next meeting to discuss the land ownership issue.

Catherine

Added he should attend all meetings.

Sue Mc

Asked if Kas had been appointed by Toll.

Robin

Explained he had written to Toll Port and advised them of the Terminals GCCC and asked them for a representative.

George

Stated that a list of interested stakeholders had been compiled and from that list Toll was approached.

Sue Mc

Also suggested writing, confirmed by Robin.

ACTION

Robin to write to Toll requesting their attendance at meetings.

Robin

Asked for other apologies (none forthcoming).

Sue Mc

Raised the issue of outstanding action items from the first meeting, in particular that George find out from Dow and BASF more about the Geelong carpet industry and stressed that the action had not been attended to sufficiently.

Robin

Described the Action Summary Sheet that would be appended to minutes in future to keep track of it being worked through.

Sue

Asked who put the agenda together and stressed that the committee needed some input to ensure action items are attended to.

Robin

Suggested the issue would be addressed in item 10 (date and draft agenda of next meeting).

George

Stated he had been trying to get someone from Dow to attend the meeting. Dow had phoned him that day to say they would not be coming and that they do not wish to discuss commercial issues. George had tried to get a presentation on latex but Dow had put the kibosh on meetings and would not be coming.

ACTION

George to try to get someone from BASF to attend the meeting.

Col

Stated if Dow had put the kibosh on meetings we (the committee) should put the kibosh on the butadiene issue.

Robin

Stressed to the committee that Terminals was there in good faith and that Dow not attending was everyone[not equal]Äôs business. Suggested getting someone from PACIA.

George

Said he understood why Dow didn[not equal]Äôt want to discuss commercial issues as companies don[not equal]Äôt share competitive information between them

Sue Mc

Raised the issue of PACIA and the principle of the community right to know. Stated she was suspicious as to why Dow won't come to the meeting. Stated that Dow is responsible for the misinformation about the carpet industry in Geelong. Asked why Dow won[not equal]Äôt explain the need for butadiene in Geelong based on the community right to know principles.

Robin

Asked if George could reflect to Dow the community[not equal]Äôs feelings.

George

Disappointed Dow wouldn[not equal]Äôt come. Stated Terminals is a member of PACIA and suggested the committee write to them.

Sue Mc

Recommended writing to Dow to express disappointment at them not being willing to give information to the committee. Suggested requesting PA CIA come and speak to the committee.

Robin

Suggested the committee pursue Dow, George pursue BASF and then fall back to PACIA if all else fails.

Sue Mc

Asked how long that would take. Stressed that the committee had wanted this to be addressed for the last two months. That it was a big issue, that misinformation had been given about the carpet industry in Geelong in Terminals[not equal]Äô application to the City of Greater Geelong, stating Godfrey Hirst is a main user of latex manufactured from butadiene and there was an implication that jobs may be lost if the butadiene proposal does not go ahead. Stated that it also appeared in the VCAT application in the last month.

George

Unsure about the wording. Stated Dow[not equal]Äôs biggest customer is Godfrey Hirst in Geelong and that BASF[not equal]Äôs major customer is Brintons.

Robin

Stated it (i.e. correcting any information given to VCAT which was now known to be potentially incorrect) was a question of good faith.

George

Said he was happy to find out the specifics and deal with it.

Sue Mc

Said the works approval application and submission to VCAT both contained this inaccurate information.

George

Stressed that he didn[not equal]Äôt believe the issue was important. The issue was if and how Terminals are going to store butadiene and that Dow and BASF want to keep their latex plants going. He was not aware of the wording in the documents being referred to.

Robin

Pointed out that for some community members it was an issue of credibility. That Sue was raising the issue that something not quite correct is being perpetuated.

George

Stated the community was perpetuating incorrect information about issues of butadiene.

Sue Mc

Stated the campaign run in the media was that if butadiene was denied there would be job losses in Geelong.

George

Said if they (Godfrey Hirst) can[not equal]Äôt get latex they will close.

Sue Mc

Requested that statement be recorded in the minutes.

Paul

Suggested writing to Godfrey Hirst to ask how much butadiene based latex they use.

Robin

Suggested writing to ask them to advise in writing how much butadiene based latex they use

ACTION

Robin to write to Godfrey Hirst asking them to advise the committee in writing how much butadiene based latex they use.

George

Suggested he would be happy to recant or modify the statement if there has been misinformation.

Catherine

Stated she had involvement with chemically sensitive people who had to rip up latex carpets. They had to get alternatively made carpet and would like George[not equal]Äôs statement retracted.

Sue Mc

Stated latex carpet is not the only product.

Franceska

Said of course George would say that he wants to keep Terminals going.

George

Stressed that Terminals had been asked to put the facility in and he did not know what alternative there is. The companies informed George that if there is no latex they couldn[not equal]Äôt make carpet.

Robin

Suggested a letter to Dow, a copy to PACIA and a letter to Godfrey Hirst.

John

Stated Dow and Godfrey Hirst are happy to sit back and let Terminals be the scapegoat so they can get what they want.

Robin

Requested the committee move on and asked Dr David Barton to give his presentation.

Item 3

Presentation from Dr Barton on Butadiene Health Issues.

Peter

Moved to reject the statements of Dr Barton at this committee. Peter went on to give information on his background and to state he had heard Dr Barton at the 20BA Conference and that his point of view was opposed to that of the EPA. He stated there were no scientific references and he believed that scientific references should be provided to confirm the validity of the information. Moved to reject the information.

Robin

Suggested letting Dr Barton have a say stating that Peter had already put him on notice.

Peter

Said he had reproached Dr Barton a month ago and that he is now repeating his information again. He suggested that to debate the content afterwards was pointless.

Robin

Assured Peter it would not be debated afterwards but while Dr Barton was there.

Bill

Requested information is presented prior to the presentation.

Katie

Stated it had been emailed the Thursday prior but not mailed, as it wouldn[not equal]Äôt have been received in time.

Sue Mc

Stated that from the last meeting it was moved that when presentations relied on expert advice it should be presented prior.

Robin

Read the point from minutes aloud to the meeting.

Peter

Suggested Dr Barton withdraw from the presentation because his information could not be supported by scientific references.

Robin

Again suggested hearing the presentation and raising the issues to give Dr Barton the right of reply.

Dr Barton

Began by reiterating the purpose of the presentation. He said he had been engaged by Terminals and was asked to provide a presentation on relevant health issues concerning Butadiene to this committee. He said the outline that was circulated to members was simply dot points he would use for the presentation and he stressed it was not a scientific paper he was presenting as that was not what he was asked to do. The presentation was to let all parties look at the issues and to provide an open forum. He said he was happy to go home and did not want to present to people who seemed to have closed minds on the issue.

Peter

Stated that he found that comment offensive.

Dr Barton

Replied that he was not directing the comment to Peter, unless Peter thought he was (in that category).

Robin

Intervened and requested that people speak in moderate tones. He stated that it is through dialogue and debate that closed minds are opened and encouraged Dr Barton to continue with this in mind, and requested Committee members to listen to what is presented with an open mind.

Dr Barton

Said that he felt he needed to defend what he was presenting.

Jon

Told Dr Barton that he was expecting the community to accept the information he was putting out just because he says it is so. Jon expressed that the community wants information put forward to them so it can be checked.

Robin

Reassured the committee that Dr Barton was aware of that but that he was taking his lead from the brief provided for him by Terminals detailing what they wanted.

Dr Barton

Began to read through the dot points on the outline from the overhead screen.

Jon

Asked how much butadiene you would get from smoking a cigarette.

Dr Barton

Could not give an exact answer but agreed it would be greater than the background amount.

Sue M

Asked whether there would be a difference in short term exposure levels due to changed working hours, i.e. those other than eight hours, five days a week. She asked whether four days of ten hours or five days of eight hours would be worse.

Dr Barton

Agreed that the figures would have to be adjusted for people working twelve-hour shifts. He said there was some allowance in the Threshold Limit Values, which are based on a time weighted, average. He stressed that people working in the industry use this as a guide rather than the absolute figure but he said there would be a lower level TLV to compensate for longer hours of exposure. Employers can be prosecuted for higher exposure.

Peter

Stressed that Dr Barton was not using the EPA figures, in particular the 0.037 ambient level. He said the combustor at Terminals has to achieve lower levels. The ambient level is the one that protects the community.

Dr Barton

Agreed that there are other standards that relate to other occupation exposure. The figures he detailed came from the QEST consultants (the risk assessment company).

Bill

Asked if you were to walk away from an exposure to butadiene if your clothes would pick up the vapour and if so, could a match then light the vapour.

Dr Barton

Said butadiene has a 20,000 parts per million explosive point.

Bill

Asked if clothes picked up butadiene, what would the flashpoint be.

Geoff M

Barry

Both stated the flash point is 20,000 ppm, it would be a gas at that stage.

Sue M

Said the notes stated health issues at inadvertent release and asked exactly what was meant by inadvertent release and where the figures had come from.

Dr Barton

Said QEST had done the modelling.

George

Mentioned QRA

Sue

Stated QRA didn[not equal]Äôt mention modelling.

George

Stated QRA modelling was done on an extreme worst-case scenario, a complete rupture of a sphere with the entire contents spilling into the bund under the most extreme weather conditions.

Sue M

Said it may be unlikely, but it is a requirement of risk assessment and that the notes do not specify or state where the information comes from. She again asked about the modelling.

Jon

Said Geelong Grammar School had had some modelling done and felt a Terminals leak could be up to six time that of the modelling. He requested details of the upper limit of the modelling

Geoff

Stated the computer package used was Safetti. It was a D N V (Det Norske Veritas [not equal]Äî a large international company which specialises in Quantitative Risk Assessments) global package developed using the best data and that it was a good modelling program. He could not give a figure to the upper limit for the modelling and said to his knowledge there was no limit.

Robin

Asked George how much butadiene would be stored on site.

George

Stated four million litres would be stored on site and that he would take it on notice and find out more about the upper limit for the modelling.

ACTION

George to find out about the upper limit used in the modelling of an inadvertent release of butadiene.

Col

Asked how much butadiene gas could be taken in by clothing and asked about the volatility of the gas.

Geoff M

Said it would not be in the flammable range in the form of gas.

George

Said it would be the same as propane gas or LPG. Propane was more volatile.

Geoff

Stated butadiene has a lower volatility than propane.

Barry

Discussed the flammability ranges of LPG, petrol etc.

Col

Declared butadiene is a carcinogenic poison and that he didn[not equal]Äôt want it in Geelong.

Robin

Summarised that the condition in the QRA is where a percentage of butadiene in the general atmosphere is below the explosive point and if it was in clothes people could get away but the butadiene in their clothes would not be explosive.

Dr Barton

Stated that the level around a person would be less than 20,000 ppm if they walked away.

Peter

Stated that he felt Dr Barton was strongly biased. That he felt the public consisted of more people than just rubber workers, that there were other members of the public. That wheelchair bound people could not just walk away. He stated there was a requirement to know how long exposure to butadiene would last in the event of an accident either from a passing tanker or from a bleve (boiling liquid expanding vapour explosion) from the main sphere; people don[not equal]Äôt know how long they would be exposed for.

Geoff M

Stated a bleve would be an intense fireball lasting about 20 seconds. The threat would be heat radiation and not vapour concentration. The QEST modelling was based on around one hour of exposure.

Peter

Asked if Geoff was quoting QEST.

Geoff

Stated at the EPA 20/30 conference QEST used modelling to give the consequences of flash fires etc.

Peter

Asked if they referred to combusted or uncombusted product.

Geoff

Stated the duration of exposure under the worst-case scenario would be less than one hour.

Sue

Asked for clarification, as the figures were not clear [not equal]Äì were they relating to a cold rupture or a bleve.

George

Stated they were modelled on an unignited cold rupture. He stated he would be happy to invite QEST along to explain the modelling.

Sue M

Questioned if Dr Barton[not equal]Äôs information was based on QEST[not equal]Äôs modelling. She asked if Dr Barton had accepted what was put forward in QEST[not equal]Äôs modelling.

Geoff M

Replied yes.

Peter

Stated he was interested in how long the blow would last.

Geoff M

Gave a specific answer of one hour[not equal]Äôs duration. Suggested if Peter wanted further. clarification Terminals should get QEST to present

ACTION

George to follow up presentation from QEST

John

Said he was horrified there was no information on the 12.5% of the Australian population who suffer from multiple chemical sensitivity. He said the number could be higher and yet we write these people off with modelling. He said he recently spoke to a family who said if they get chemical on their clothes it could put them into a coma and asked how they would then walk away to safety if there were an incident. He also asked how a dizzy, confused driver would get to safety.

Dr Barton

Responded that the 12.5% figure was hard to justify and substantiate and that the EPA standards cannot be set on these figures. He stated butadiene is not implicated in asthma or anaphylactic attacks.

Paul

Queried butadiene not affecting asthmatics stating that the information suggested it affected airways.

Dr Barton

Responded by saying certain agents present problems to asthmatics but butadiene was not one of these specific agents implicated for asthmatics. He said it is an irritant to airways for everyone and this includes asthmatics.

Paul

Stated Geelong is one of the heaviest polluted cities with the largest group of asthmatics. He also brought attention to the number of elderly living in Norlane and suggested they would have trouble getting away in the event of an incident. He pointed out there are seven schools within a two kilometre radius of Terminals and that there are not enough services to evacuate these quickly.

George

Stated that regarding asthmatics and pollution, the Terminals facility would not be adding to the problem except when the combustor was running two to three times per year He said the butadiene released through the combustor would be very very low. and that here we were talking about a catastrophic event. He said able-bodied people on the whole were working around the Terminals facility. He said people would not be affected so severely that they wouldn[not equal]Äôt be able to walk away. He then drew attention to the fact that the results from the modelling done by Terminals and that done by the City of Greater Geelong had come out to be quite similar.

Robin

Suggested the committee allow Dr Barton to finish his presentation.

Col

Asked George how much it would cost to put the combustor in.

George

Replied $300,000 - $400,000.

Col

Stated that was a lot of money just to use two to three times per year and suggested Terminals would be burning everything they could get in there.

George

Referred the comment to Quentin from the EPA.

Catherine

Stated that the EPA had given the cement works permission to burn dangerous substances for a great number of years.

Quentin

Responded that Terminals would be given a specific licence, quite specific about what could and could not be burnt. It would not be a permit to burn anything else unless Terminals made another application.

Col

Suggested that George probably had five more applications waiting.

June

Asked what other chemicals are stored.

George

Replied MEK

Gary

Replied Shell solvent IA50, MEK, Isopropyl alcohol, Shell solvent D70, Caustic soda, VCM (vinyl chloride monomer), gas condensate and a tank of optimax.

Robin

Asked why butadiene had to be burnt at all.

George

Explained that it comes in as a liquid. The ships purge the line with butadiene vapour and that there would be 50 psi in the pipes that would have to be reduced to atmospheric pressure. To release the pressure it would have to go through the combustor. George stated there was no proposal to put in a second combustor.

Quentin

Stated that at other sites combustors serve a number of tanks so it was a concern whether the Terminals combustor would service a number of sites but he would not contemplate connecting VCM to it. Quentin also stated that 98% of the time the combustor would be sitting idle so it would be logical to consider if it was useful for the rest of the time.

George

Thanked Quentin for his input (tongue in cheek).

Bill

Asked what studies have been done about what happens when 100% of butadiene is not burnt, i.e. when 4% butadiene is in the plume, what happens to it.

George

Made reference to the model of Ausplume from the EPA. Stated it has to be at or less than 33 parts per billion at ground level. The class three indicator has to use the best available technology. He then clarified what Terminals would be running at. George stated the plume would be within the EPA guidelines at ground level, not in the stack.

Bill

Asked what the percentage of the stack would be. He also stated that when not burning butadiene, the once a month trial would still have gas particles as the combustor is LPG gas fired.

George

Stated that natural gas would be burned for 20 to 30 minutes.

Carlo

Suggested it would be the same as running the stove in the house, that there are no particles from natural gas.

Joe

Requested that Terminals show at the next meeting how the combustor would be heated up.

Jon

Asked whether Terminals would use their combustor to help others with their problems.

George

Stated it was designed for burning vapours only. That no one would be bringing vapours over for Terminals to combust. He stated it was a small device, not of great capacity.

Margrette

Said she had been listening to experts who say what a small threat to the local community it would be. She stated the experts don[not equal]Äôt live in the local area. She said her son fell ill from an unidentified source recently and fell into a coma and that he is now a paraplegic. Margrette pointed out that this is a residential area and that the residents should not have to put up with such a threat. She said there was an increased rate of asthma in Victoria from pollution. She said something in the air had caused her son[not equal]Äôs condition and that it was all very well to say butadiene is a minimal threat but that there has to be another way, instead of putting a threat on the community.

George

Replied that he would be devastated to learn if Margrette[not equal]Äôs son[not equal]Äôs condition was a result of something Terminals had done. He said the company prides itself on looking out for its workers as they are the ones handling the chemicals. George stated that Terminals monitors the air and if something is picked up, operations are stopped. There have been no legal claims for people being exposed to chemicals in the time Terminals have been operating. He said he would be devastated if Terminals were responsible for what happened to Margrette[not equal]Äôs son.

Franceska

Declared that the men at Terminals were promoting toxic chemicals and that is hurting our future. She suggested they get another job and get out of the toxic chemical industry.

Paul

Stated that in the US butadiene will only be produced to order that it will not be stored.

June

Suggested it was a similar story to agent orange and that Australia is really a dumping ground for toxic chemicals.

Col

Handed Robin a statement to be put with the minutes.

ACTION

Statement to be included with the minutes and mailed out.

ACTION

John Wilson to email it to Katie.

Robin

Summarised: Geoff, George and Dr Barton to provide information requested by the committee with references and further details of QRA (Quantative Risk Assessment).

ACTION

Geoff, George and Dr Barton to provide information requested by the committee with references and further details of QRA (Quantative Risk Assessment.)

Peter

Made further comment on Dr Barton[not equal]Äôs presentation saying that the fundamental reason rubber workers have good health after 25 years is that they are healthy male workers in the industry but suggested you may not conclude that all the community have nothing to fear from butadiene. Peter stated that there is research that shows butadiene is cytotoxic and genotoxic. He said tests couldn[not equal]Äôt be carried out on humans because they are unethical but modern methods for example IVF, skin grafts and biopsies have been used to show metabolites of butadiene are cytotoxic and genotoxic to human cells cultivated in the laboratory. Peter went on to say that for these reasons he stated Dr Barton is not diligent in his research and that is why Peter recommended the committee not receive the information of Dr Barton and that the committee should reject his statement.

John

Revealed further evidence on butadiene causing cancer by quoting from the New Jersey health department.

Robin

Requested that the statement be made available to the committee.

ACTION

John to email the statement to Katie for inclusion with the minutes.

Peter

Moved to reject the statements from Dr Barton.

Sue M

Seconded the move.

Robin

Suggested a consensus rather than a motion. Robin said that regarding expressing no confidence and rejecting what Dr Barton said that Dr Barton would be providing a report detailing from where he had obtained his information.

Sue

Asked Robin if he was rejecting the ability of the committee to make a motion.

Robin

Replied he was trying to get the same point but by consensus, that it was broadly agreed by community representatives.

Peter

Stated the committee did not have Dr Barton[not equal]Äôs references. He demanded that references be provided and stated that appropriate medical references are essential.

Franceska

Noted that some of the committee had read John Wilson[not equal]Äôs information and after hearing Dr Barton[not equal]Äôs information twice were aware that it did not correlate with the statement: the update on butadiene from the New Jersey health department. Franceska commented on the benefit to the committee of everyone having a copy of the statement.

Paul

Queried what the committee receives by email and mail stating that it is a huge amount of information to download. He requested it all by mail.

Peter

Reiterated his request that the committee reject the statement of Dr Barton.

Jon

Said he was happy to hear what Dr Barton had to say but would like to see the references. He was not happy to say he would reject it straight away, would like to get more information.

Bill

Stated Dr Barton[not equal]Äôs information should lie on the table until the next meeting and be looked at then, once people had had a chance to see references.

Robin

Stated the community representatives, with two exceptions, supported what Peter said and rejected the information of Dr Barton.

Peter

Stated that Dr Barton took no notice when he had raised the issue previously.

Sue K T

Proposed that in future all documentation be mailed to every person regardless of email or not.

Catherine

Requested information be mailed on recycled paper.

Gary

Said it would be sent to a printer.

George

Said if Terminals were getting someone to print it, they could not agree to what paper would be used.

Robin

Stated that all government reps. would still get information by email but that community reps should receive it by post.

ITEM 4

Worksafe Presentation [not equal]Äì report on the spill

Robin

Suggested the worksafe presentation be done and then the committee take stock of the time and arrange the next agenda.

Geoff C

Stated he had no references and no presentation notes. He went on to give a brief report of the incident saying that back on 17^th March Terminals received a package of isopropyl alcohol [not equal]Äì a flammable liquid. There was an error in the calculation of what the tank would hold and the backup dipping check failed also causing the tank to overflow.

Catherine

Asked Geoff if he believed the details he was giving and asked how a dipstick could fail.

Geoff M

Suggested the report was about the next stage of the incident.

Geoff C

Went on to detail the improvement notice issued by Worksafe as the control measures had not worked and were not adequate. Terminals had to come up with additional controls and they had one month to comply. Terminals were to consider a hierarchy of controls. It was practicable for Terminals to improve procedural controls, which Terminals have now done. They now have a better way of doing calculations so there is less chance of error. Dipping and checking is done with a safe fill level. The procedural controls at Terminals have now been improved.

Sue M

Asked about management systems.

Geoff C

Said he was referring to procedural controls that were lower level systems but because both could still fail, Terminals have committed to installing an alarm.

Peter

Asked if the dipstick correlated with computer operations.

Geoff

Replied there is no computer

Peter

Said it was shocking that the two controls were not correlated.

Geoff C

Went on to detail the alarm system saying it would go off at the safe fill level. It would be a last stop. If the alarm went off the procedural operations had failed. If the alarm went off operators would have twenty minutes to contact the ship and stop an overflow. Geoff went on to say that WorkSafe had formed the opinion that Terminals had complied with the improvement notice. Regarding the alarm, Geoff said Terminals had committed to it and would get an alarm in by March next year (for one alarm).

Paul

Asked if there would be a March inspection.

Geoff

Said Worksafe would verify they had the alarm.

Paul

Asked what would happen if the alarm was not in by March, he asked if another improvement notice would be issued.

Geoff

Replied that if a company makes an undertaking and doesn[not equal]Äôt follow through, WorkSafe may consider prosecution. He said he could issue an improvement notice now to tie Terminals to that date but the practicability of timing had to be considered.

Franceska

Asked how many men were supervising the procedural controls.

Gary

Said four operators, one at the ship and three at the terminal.

June

Stated she was angered at the number of employees, that eleven was not enough workers for a company the size of Terminals.

George

Explained why it would take a long time to get alarms installed (need to get access to the inside of the tank, at a time when it was empty).

Sue M

Asked what evidence there was that there had been an improvement to calculation procedures and lower procedure levels in general

Geoff C

Replied there is now a spreadsheet (Excel password protected) that shows the calculations.

Sue M

Asked what level the safe fill level in the tank was, how far from the top.

Gary

Replied in was 600-750mm (2 foot) from the top and at that level the discharge rate would have slowed down (due to back pressure).

George

Drew a diagram on the whiteboard showing the safe fill level of a tank. He said the alarm would be audible at the berth through the hand held radios. He said you could drive down within the 20 minutes. He also said the isopropyl alcohol tank is nitrogen blanketed so there is no oxygen in the tank and it cannot catch fire. He said tanks weren[not equal]Äôt nitrogen blanketed at Coode Island at the time of the 1991 explosion and fires.

Jack

Asked why not have a backpressure valve like a petrol pump.

George

Said this particular tank could not be filled with a nozzle. He said deep well pumps could close a valve. He said valves could be closed from the wharf and all the way through.

Peter

Stated it should be a fail-safe system so ships stop pumping if the signal stops.

George

Replied the ships are not equipped for fail safe, they are not connected into automatic systems.

John

Said it would be better to have a two stage warning system, to build in a warning just prior to the alarm going off. He said it should be an alarm that is audible and has flashing lights that flash outside as well as inside.

George

Stated that Terminals employees have to walk the lines and check the tank as they believe that is the best way. He said they would rather have supervising than rely on technology.

Geoff M

Said there would be two critically independent systems that could result in shutting operations down: the operations system and the alarm system. He said it was important the systems be reliant and independent.

Joe

Asked Gary about the spreadsheet system.

Gary

Said the discharge plan states cubic metres and tonnes. He said to prepare the discharge plan the excel spreadsheet for the tank receiving calculations included the cubic metres, tonnes and available ullage. Actions to prevent a recurrence attached to minutes.

Joe

Asked which tanks would be getting the high level alarms.

George

Said two tanks with smaller volumes would get the alarms.

ACTION

Gary to provide typical calculations for tank filling.

Joe

Asked if there would be a worker on a tank in adverse weather conditions.

Gary

Stated all shipping operations are suspended during tempests where the winds are over 40 knots.

Col

Asked about lightening strikes and where deflectors were.

George

Said there were no deflectors as the tanks were Faraday tanks, which are earthed.

Col

Asked what radios are used at Terminals.

Gary

Replied GP320[not equal]Äôs, UHF.

Col

Said it was illegal for ships to use their radios when tied at port.

Gary

Stated ships are supplied with one of Terminals[not equal]Äô radios, which are designed for use in hazardous zones.

ITEM 5

Confirmation of draft minutes of 11 April 2005.

Robin

Stated there had been a problem with the mail out of minutes and deferred the item until the next meeting as some people had only just received the minutes that evening.

Paul

Suggested deferring the rest of the agenda to the next meeting.

Peter

Requested the date and draft agenda be set for the next meeting.

Robin

(after much debate) Set the next meeting date for Tuesday 7^th June 2005. Venue to be confirmed by Gary. Robin also suggested that the agenda already overflowed from being deferred from previous meetings and suggested the committee not add to it.

ACTION

Gary to confirm venue for next meeting.

Col

Raised the issue of workers at Terminals recently seen with haz suits on.

Gary

Explained they were contractors removing insulation fibreglass fibre from pipe lagging.

Robin

Declared the meeting closed at 10pm.

Next meeting Tuesday 7^th June 2005 Venue to be confirmed