Item 1

Welcome by Chair

Robin

Welcomed DHS representatives Stuart Müller, Julie Eikner and Eileen McCormack as well as CFA representatives Bob Barry and Bob Smith.

Item 2

Apologies, confirmation of Draft Agenda

Apologies given from Tony Ansett, Barry Foss, Terry Croke, Gordon Alderson, Susie Alderson and Jack Moor (the last three arrived later).

Sue Mc

Asked whether DHS would make a comment on the EPA works approval process.

Robin

Replied that Quentin Cook (EPA), Workcover and DHS would all be presenting. Went on to welcome Barry Seaton from Dow. He stated the committee were concerned to get the facts about what butadiene is used for and invited Barry to speak.

Item 3

Presentation from Barry Seaton, Dow Logistics Manager

Barry

Introduced himself as the Logistics Manager for Dow chemicals. He stated that the butadiene project involved Dow and BASF as both have plants in Altona.

Sue K-T

Asked whether Barry had notes on his speech.

Barry

Said he had no notes, he was going to speak on the topic of butadiene. He said he would be able to answer some things but would get more information if needed. He went on to say that in Altona Dow and BASF have latex plants. Qenos have been suppliers of butadiene in the past but now that they are changing from liquid to gas feed they will no longer produce butadiene as a by-product.

Sue Mc

Asked whether Qenos supplied 100% of their needs.

Barry

Believed Dow imported for a brief time when there was a problem with Qenos but only a small amount.

Sue Mc

Asked when Qenos is no longer producing butadiene later this year would Dow import or what would be done.

Robin

Requested that Barry roll an answer into his presentation and that questions be saved to the end.

Barry

Stated that Qenos would be shutting down production in October and that Dow would shut its plant down in the same time period. There were two options: to import butadiene or to import latex and Dow would use those options to get them through that period. He stated that butadiene is used to make latex for carpet and for paper. Dow supplied the carpet industry while BASF also supplied the paper industry. He stated the largest carpet maker is Godfrey Hirst in Geelong and constitutes 20% of Dow's latex business.  Feltex is another manufacturer in Melbourne. Dow exports little, they supply primarily for the local market.  Brintons in Geelong is a customer of BASF.  He stated there is no alternative for the industry and that the industry has been using latex for carpets for 50 years. 

Col

Asked why the community have to tolerate such a toxic chemical in Geelong. He asked Barry where he lived.

Barry

Replied the other side of Melbourne.

Col

Said the community was very annoyed and wanted Barry's company to know how annoyed they were to have toxic chemicals dumped in their backyard. He said he would like Dow to withdraw their application to store butadiene in Geelong. He asked Barry to take that back to his company and say it is not wanted in Geelong. He also stated that any offer of jobs was a load of bunk.

June

Asked about Barry's statement that latex started being used for carpet manufacture fifty years ago. She asked if it was a cheap way of making carpet; i.e. that instead of weaving, they just stick it on.

Barry

Stated carpet was mass manufactured not hand made now and that the latex made a good liner. He said latex was an economical product that bound the product well.

June

Stated she was concerned about children crawling around on it.

Barry

Stated latex was not a toxic product.

Robin

Sought clarification asking Barry to explain why if butadiene goes into latex and is toxic, why latex isn't dangerous.

Barry

Stated it reacted to form something that is not a dangerous product. He said butadiene and styrene go into latex and latex is not dangerous.

Ralph

Asked regarding economics and safety, how Dow evaluates whether to import butadiene or latex.

Barry

Said latex can be hard and expensive to import. The long-term advantage is that Dow can give better service to its customers if latex is made here.

Ralph

Stated latex was 50% water and innocuous.

Barry

Said it was innocuous but not easy to import. He said it made ships and tanks dirty. In the short term they (Dow) would import butadiene.

Franceska

Raised the issue whether latex does or does not gas off or give off any chemicals. She referred to a television program with Jana Wendt on 1 May where one mother said her child was allergic to latex, that latex sends some children into anaphylactic shock.  She stated the community doesn't want Dow's stuff here but want Dow to start thinking about natural alternatives.

Barry

Took her point.

Paul

Stated that the USA has cut out 95% use of butadiene and asked if the US is cutting it out, shouldn't Dow look for other alternatives too.

Barry

Stated Dow supplies what industry demands. He said it was up to carpet manufacturers to ask for other products.

Paul

Said the use of butadiene has decreased everywhere except in Australia according to a US health website.

ACTION

Paul Dakin to provide further information re the website quoted.

Bill

Referred to Highcraft who now operate from South Australia and make more carpet than Godfrey Hirst and asked Barry who supplies them with latex. He also mentioned the latex used for tyre manufacture.

Barry

Said Dow doesn't supply South Australia. He said if it is locally supplied latex then Dow and BASF would be the only suppliers. He said they are the only two latex producers in Australia and that Dow have been in the latex business for thirty years.

John

Concerned about companies coming down to Geelong who don't know enough about products. John stated he was a representative for Multiple Chemical Sensitivity victims and went on to discuss the 12.5% of the population or 2.4 million Australians who are allergic to latex. He said it comes down to an economic decision to make a cheaper product.  He said older people have to be concerned about children and grand children.  In his belief Geelong has a large number of MCS victims. He said if it is not good enough for Melbourne it is not good enough for Geelong.

Robin 

Said he would take that as a statement.

Barry

Point taken.

John

Stated that to say Godfrey Hirst is a percentage user doesn't mean anything. He said the community needed to know tonnages to know how much latex companies are using.

Barry

Said he can't give out confidential information.

Robin

Asked Barry what the total annual tonnage of latex Dow makes now.

Barry

Replied not quite 10,000 tonnes.

Robin

Pointed out that if Godfrey Hirst uses 20% of their product that equates to around 2,000 tonnes per year.

Catherine

Disputed the use of the term "your latex". She said latex is a natural product and Dow's isn't. She stated latex is toxic, that she knows people who have stripped carpet from houses because of allergies. She asked Barry which country Dow would get butadiene from when Qenos stopped producing it.

Barry

Listed several options: Singapore, Thailand, Korea and the Middle East.

Robin

Asked Barry what he knew about natural latex.

Barry

Replied he knew natural latex came from trees, that it is a polymer in water and that latex manufacturers try to duplicate it. That synthetic latex is a more consistent product. The price of natural latex can fluctuate. Synthetic latex has a higher resistance to bacteria.

June

Asked what goes into synthetic latex.

Barry 

Replied butadiene and styrene 60:40.

Sue M

Asked if Dow in Melbourne as a member of Pacia had an environmental plan and wanted more information about why Dow have gone with the option of building a facility to store butadiene.  She asked to hear the details of what the company policy was regarding environmental and social issues over economic issues.

Barry

Stated butadiene is a hazardous chemical but that it can be safely stored and handled if the facility has been designed correctly like at Qenos.

Sue M

Disputed this saying Qenos has had two incidents in the past.

Barry

Was unaware of this.

Sue M 

Asked if Dow would provide information on the environmental policy used to assess the two options of importing of a class 3 chemical verses importing latex. Made in a triple bottom line approach.

ACTION

Barry to get back to the committee with a response on Dow's environmental policy used to assess the two options of importing of a class 3 chemical verses importing latex.

Col

Asked if it was a safer alternative to store butadiene in Geelong. Asked where the economies were in moving a carcinogenic chemical from Geelong to Melbourne then back to Geelong.

Barry

Stated there were a lot of details that go into the economic decisions.

Robin

Clarified Col's question, that when you import butadiene into Geelong, truck it to Melbourne then truck latex back to Geelong, what is the economics in that decision given the hazardous potential.

Joe

Referred to Dow's options of importing butadiene or latex as an interim measure and queried the fact that they have no large storage facilities. He also asked what would stop their customers importing latex for themselves.

Barry

Said Dow didn't have storage for latex but they could get it. He said Dow offered better service as a provider but customers do have an option to import.

Joe

Asked what was keeping Dow viable.

Barry

Replied it was the fast reliable supply and that Dow and BASF have good reliable service.

Elsie

Asked why a company like Dow had to come to a meeting like this one to get information on the product. She said butadiene was not a new product and that research indicated a link to cancer. She asked what the company's policy was on doing research on chemicals they were using/importing and why they hadn't done any research. She also asked what would happen when one of Dow's trucks overturned on the highway, stating it was not the sort of product that should be transported up a busy highway.

Barry

Responded by saying that Dow was strong on research and safety. He said just because he didn't know about the product didn't mean Dow didn't know. He said Dow was the safest chemical company in the world.

ACTION

Dow to back up the statement "Dow is the safest chemical company in the world". 

Barry

He stated that regarding transport, there are standards that deal with equipment and transport that would be followed.

Elsie

Stated she hoped Dow would tell other drivers that too.

George

Compared other products and said you can't have a standard for just one. He said it is not just down to Dow, it is an issue for governments to regulate as latex is in carpet.  He asked should we import everything, made by lesser standards than us maybe. He said in making anything, styrene for example, we all touch money.

Jon

Asked about the term "local" latex producers and if there were any other manufacturers in Australia.

Barry

Said local referred to Australia and that Dow and BASF were the only two.

Jon

Asked if carpets need high quality latex or if they can use the natural product.

Barry 

Said that synthetic was a more consistent product.

Sue Mc

Suggested Godfrey Hirst would better answer that question, that it was an unfair question to ask Dow. Went on to comment on the fact that although it is not up to Dow regarding what products we use (for carpet) it should be up to Dow ethically regarding what they use. She asked what Dow's responsibility was. She went further to say there are no details given on storage capacity for butadiene.

Barry

Said Dow and BASF used 6,000 tonnes of butadiene (annual consumption for latex plants) so they plan to import 6,000 tonnes.

Robin

Summarised by saying between Dow and BASF they need 6,000 tonnes of butadiene a year, which they get from Qenos now and hope to get from Terminals in the future. In the meantime they may import it but if they can't they may shut down latex production. 

Sue

Queried Dow's current butadiene storage capacity.

Barry

Replied almost none because they get it over the fence from Qenos, don't have their own storage facilities.

Bill

Raised the issue of marine safety law worldwide with regard to the shipping of butadiene. Asked if it was feasible to bring it into Geelong when there is availability and facilities at Coode Island to store it. Bill stated that it seems like Coode Island is moving to Geelong.

Barry

Stated that Coode Island has a definite future and is staying where it is.

John 

Commented that George had made a comment to excuse butadiene and asked does one wrong mean everything that is wrong becomes right. He stated Dow has a choice to store butadiene in Geelong or to import it but insists on storing it here.

Robin

Thanked Barry for attending the meeting and said that the people on this committee are more informed than most on the issue of butadiene and that Barry had done well to answer to so much.

Barry

Stated he was happy to answer further questions.

Item 4

Toll Victorian Ports advice

Robin

Gave detail about the response from Kas Szekiel by mail/email and that the final response was that he would not attend this meeting. He also said he had phoned Kas twice to put pressure on him to attend the meeting but the result was still that Toll Ports would not attend the meeting. He said that some members of this committee attend the Toll Ports meeting and he hoped they could report back to this meeting,

Sue KT

Said the Toll CC meets bi-monthly and she would endeavour to present a report at the next meeting and bi-monthly after that.

Robin

Stated he was not happy with the response from Toll.

Sue Mc

Thanked Robin for his excellent letter to Kas. She said she didn't think it was Sue K-T's responsibility to report on Toll's position. She said Toll has no process of reporting back to the broader community and it was not up to the committee to report on a company.

Sue K-T

Said she would not be reporting on Toll's position. She had an undertaking to report back to the community. She could not report on the land issue but on details presented to the consultative committee.

Robin

Suggested a further letter to Toll.

George

Suggested Terminals could make contact with Toll as well and talk them into attending. He said there were new people at Toll who maybe didn't know.

ACTION

Terminals to make contact with Toll Victorian Ports to encourage them to come to the Terminals GCCC meeting.

Bill

Suggested Toll send a copy of their minutes to this committee to take pressure off community reps.

ACTION

Robin to write to Toll to follow up points, following advice on George's initiative. 

Jon

Asked when land is annexed off, could crown land be claimed by adverse possession.

Steve

Said it only applied to council land.

Robin

Added also private land, not land owned by the state or crown.

Item 5

Presentation by Quentin Cook on EPA Butadiene Works Approval assessment process and conditions.

Robin

Introduced and thanked Quentin for organising extra reps. from DHS.

Quentin

Introduced himself saying he was an EPA officer in the west metro region. He has been in the chemical industry for the past 28 years, including five years at a petro-chemical operation in Indonesia, and a lot of the remaining time at Altona. He had been at EPA for four years, and he's spent a lot of his time assessing EPA works approvals for the chemical industry. Quentin used overheads to speak from (attached as part of minutes). 

June

Queried the maximum extent achievable in the last point.

Quentin

Said there were amounts specified for emissions. When building a facility the aim was for emissions to be less than the standard and as low as possible.

John

Queried the classification of butadiene as a class 3 carcinogen.

Julie

Stated the class 3 indicator was quoted from the Air Quality Management SEPP (State Environment Protection Policy) page 16. (Available on the EPA website) Information from the IARC (International Agency for Cancer Research).

Bill

Asked about the background conditions in the air stating Geelong has the highest number of children with asthma. He was concerned that no other factors had been taken into account in the assessment, like other chemicals in the air [^] the cocktail effect.

Quentin

Stated the cocktail effect was a consideration, that the model didn't take that into account.

Bill

Stated that the consideration of existing medical problems had not been taken into account either.  Bill also raised the issue of ships breaking away from their moorings at the pier in adverse weather conditions.

Franceska

Asked how a government body could give a works approval to a class 3 product. She stated that people's health and well being should be considered above money. She stated the community were horrified that the EPA were not listening to them and asked how the EPA could just rubber-stamp something like that.

Alex

Stated that this was an issue of policy. He said there are certain things in government that agencies have to answer to. He said the EPA could only make a decision under the law they are working under. He said the EPA could only make decisions in the area they are responsible for.

Franceska

Asked where was the EPA's duty of care.

Sue Mc

Stated there was a disagreement between the community and the EPA. She referred to the section in the EPA legislation known as the precautionary principle. She said it was not about making a decision that meets SEPP requirements but rather taking a precautionary approach to protect the environment and health. She stated it was an obligation of the EPA to protect people.

Peter

Asked about the DHS (Department of Human Services) position.

Julie

Stated that she had it there in writing.

Dirk

Referred to the section of the Act that has reference to DHS having veto power on works approvals: 19B clause 5, Part B.

Col

Said that the whole system would have to start again and asked whether it would be 21B and whether the whole system would have to be gone through again.

Bill

Stated that people without computers had not received information on the 20B conference.

Quentin 

Asked if a copy of the report could be organised.

Sue Mc

Said Peter Davis (Conference Chair) had said he would send a copy of the report but that had not been done.

Robin

Asked for a show of hands to confirm how many of those who were at the 20B conference wanted a copy of the report.

ACTION

Alex to organise copies of the 20B Conference report to be sent to Bill Aitken, Catherine Jones, Col Edwards, Franceska Dezalak, Sue Kelly-Turner, Jack Moor, Joe Cicero and John Wilson.

John

 Said the issue of advertising by Government agencies had been raised but not resolved.  He said advertising had only been in The Geelong Advertiser which was discriminatory to the non-reader as they were unable to get the information. He requested advertising also be placed in The Echo, The Independent and The Geelong News.

Quentin

Said the Works Approval process was advertised extensively in the local media, in a number of newspapers.

Sue Mc

Requested clarification for the next meeting.

ACTION

Quentin to clarify which local newspapers had received advertising.

Sue

Stated Quentin was referring to a 1990 document and asked if there had been any amendments in terms of buffer distances as the upgrades in classes of chemicals had been given over the years since then.

Quentin

Said the SEPP 2001 Protected Environment Management had suggested further updating of buffer distances but these hadn't occurred yet. The current distances were from the 1990 document (AQ 2/86 July 1990).

Paul

Raised three issues:

1) In terms of the DHS, he stated we are dealing with a hospital that doesn't understand asthmatics (he referred to the three recent deaths of asthmatics in Geelong hospital). He stated that chemicals pose problems for asthmatics.

2) He stated we are only looking at the small picture so far and that the big picture was if a catastrophe occurred in the northern suburbs. He asked what would happen and what would be the effect on the residents.

3) He asked when the committee would get answers on behalf of the northern suburbs community.

Paul then stated that he does not want butadiene in Geelong.

Quentin

Went on with his presentation.

Robin 

Requested questions be only directed to Quentin (not DHS or Workcover until they were presenting.)

Peter

Stated 1000 metres was the minimum buffer level and asked what the circumstances would be where more than the minimum would be applied.

Quentin

Stated the buffer in Coode Island is 700metres. For the EPA to acquiesce to a lesser distance requires careful assessment of technology etc. He stated there was an existing history here of the operations and what has been the impact on the community from the existing facility.

Peter 

Asked if carcinogenic reasons would result in a higher buffer level citing the US standard ERPG2 1620 metres on the hazard rate estimated today.

Quentin

Stated the EPA was considering a range of issues like air emissions.

Peter

Said he was confused about best practice with regard to things at the Terminals site to be done to best practice to reduce incidents.

Quentin

Talked about what sort of facilities lead to minimum emissions and waste minimisation. He stated Terminals work to best practice.

Peter

Asked if documents would be available for the community to see.

Quentin

Approached Terminals to see if documents could be made public.

George

Said that regarding the Section 22 notices and Terminals replies, he was not sure how to make them available as Terminals don't have a website. He stated the documents could be made available.

ACTION

Carlo organise the 20B document and notices/replies to be made available.

Gordon

Asked what the nearest sensitive use taken into account was.

Dirk

Stated the corner of Station St and St Georges Road which was the nearest residential area, at a distance of 1080 metres, boundary to boundary.

Gordon

Asked about Geelong Grammar School and Avalon College and how far away these schools were and if they were sensitive locations.

Alex

Clarified residential zoning.

Robin

Asked Dirk to find out the distances, how much further away are GGS and Avalon College.

ACTION

Dirk to inform committee of the distances of Geelong Grammar and Avalon College from the Terminals site (for comparison with the distance to residential areas).

Alex

Asked the purpose of this.

Robin

Stated it was to answer the question relating to protection of sensitive uses, and to confirm that the residential area was the closest sensitive use.

Gordon

Stated it was the EPA and Workcover's responsibility to work out the distance between the cracker at Shell and terminals. He asked if the plant had to shut down if the combustor was out of order.

Quentin

Replied yes.

George

Stated only regarding butadiene, not the rest of the facility.

Gordon

Asked Quentin if that was correct.

Quentin

Replied yes, the works approval was what he was answering to.

Gordon

Asked about the hazard operation (HAZOP) study on unloading operations.

Quentin

Stated that was Terminal's responsibility. The EPA's position was that it would require a study from the proponent.

Gordon

Asked if Terminals had provided that.

Quentin

Replied not at this stage but prior to commission.

George

Stated that the EPA and Worksafe overlap a bit. The HAZOP isn't signed off until you are ready to commission. The HAZOP is one part of the requirement to prove that everything in design is in accordance with quality control. The EPA want to see something acceptable to Worksafe and implemented. He said every process from ship unloading to loading of the trucks is part of the HAZOP. Trucking people would also attend the HAZOP.

Gordon

Asked with regard to the butadiene works approval, who protects the community by setting down design criteria for size of ships, waves and wind with regard to what is given to the HAZOP group for the ship unloading. Asked who had done that.

Quentin

Not the EPA.

Geoff  M

Replied it was in the operator's procedures but he was not sure where the figures had come from.

Gary

Stated Toll have certain requirements too.

Gordon

Asked if the design criteria are the same as for VCM.

Gary

Stated VCM have more stringent criteria.

Carlo

Outlined the procedure for now and with butadiene. He said the ships stopped unloading at 35 knot wind speeds and the hoses were disconnected at 45 knot wind speeds.

Geoff C

Said he had no knowledge if Victorian Workcover had considered the criteria.

Geoff M

Stated that it came under the safety case, it was not to do with EPA approval.

Gordon

Asked why the EPA would grant approval on works unless those design criteria were established.

Robin

Suggested Geoff Millard's answer would be the only one Gordon would get at this stage.

Gordon

Asked whether the safety case was gone through before or after the works approval.

Quentin

After.

Gordon

Asked what if the safety case upgrade was not accepted.

Geoff C

Said the licence would not be renewed.

Sue Mc

Said the EPA have a responsibility to the community with respect to loading and unloading.

Alex

Said there was an overlap between Workcover and the EPA in the process.  The HAZOP process identifies these and would cover these.

Sue Mc

Stated that the specific question of who sets the limits had not been answered with respect to the safety operational guidelines.

Robin

Said that Carlo had said Terminals state what they will do and put it into the safety case.

Carlo

Stated when Terminals do the HAZOP they take the legislation and see if it is appropriate. Criteria are set somewhere, probably in the Port Guidelines.

ACTION

Carlo to follow up the operating rules and what the design parameters are, and advise the Committee.

Gordon

Said Carlo was talking about operational issues. He asked what the design conditions were, for example the criteria that applied to the flexible hose.

Alex

Said that was part of the HAZOP process.

Carlo

Said the wind criteria were to do with the moorings, in case the ship moved off, that the hose had nothing to do with it.

Gordon

Said the hose could break and spill butadiene.

Joe

Stated that Shell chemicals say they recommend using articulated arms so as not to risk humans. He said the product was received from a foreign source and no one was sure of the condition of the product. He went on to describe the Shell best practice of using flares and went on to discuss pressure and temperatures of the tanks.

George

Stated that the pressure of the proposed tank had been increased from 220 to 350k Pag and that the temperature did not matter. That the refrigeration was there for product quality.

Joe

Asked about butadiene saying that was a different chemical.

Gary

Said VCM and butadiene both have insulated lines and the same order of heat increase.

George

Stated that money would be spent on design once Terminals had the permit to build. That it was a detailed design process.

June

Asked if the storage of natural latex was as difficult or dangerous as butadiene.

Quentin

Stated that in his opinion natural latex was not as difficult and synthetic latex was easier than butadiene.

Alex

Stated that Quentin's response was off the cuff and that the works approval was for butadiene.

Geoff M

Said it was unfair to ask the EPA without notice as they had not done research on chemical latex and were not experienced with latex.

Sue M

Referred to Quentin's notes that said the HAZOP and P and ID's were approved by EPA and said that Quentin had said the EPA hadn't got those yet.

Quentin

Suggested changing the wording to "to be approved" (Wording changed for addition to the minutes.)

Sue M

Asked why public zones weren't considered as sensitive areas and asked how the EPA considers areas.

Quentin

Said guidelines refer to what is /is not sensitive use. Not recreational areas but places where people spend a lot of time i.e. where they sleep. Quoted from the EPA Information Bulletin AQ 2/86 Page 2 Recommended Buffer Distances for Industrial Residual Air Emissions. "Residential areas and zones (whether occupied or not), hospitals, schools, caravan parks and other similar uses involving the presence of individual people for extended periods, except in the course of their employment or for recreation."

Sue Mc

Asked when the EPA determined sensitive areas if it included motels not in the residential zone.

Robin

Asked what the distance was from the boundary of the motel to the boundary of Terminals.

ACTION

Quentin (or possibly Dirk in conjunction with the other distances) to inform the committee of the distance from the property boundary of Terminals to the property boundary of the motel site near Shell roundabout.

Ralph

Stated he was confused with the approval sequence with HAZOP's and P and ID's. He asked if it was written that the EPA requires a HAZOP study to be done on the entire site.

Quentin

Stated the whole scope of the application would be covered.

Ralph

Asked if the EPA approved the P & ID's. He asked further about the entire piping on site.

Quentin 

Said the P & ID's were required for equipment that had not been purchased yet.

Ralph 

Asked if the EPA requests the P & ID for the whole facility but don't approve them.

Quentin

Said the EPA see what they are going to install (i.e. combustor) and then approve it.

Ralph

Asked if the spheres and the whole site were encompassed.

Quentin

Stated that the major focus was waste management.

Ralph

Asked what would happen if the relief valves were operating at maximum capacity.

Quentin 

Replied it (butadiene) would go to atmosphere. He said the relief valve was sized to ensure vessels would not rupture in a fire situation.

Robin

Clarified that the relief valve would never be needed because it would be sufficient to take a build up of gas through the combustor.

George

Said the valves were an end of line relief device to protect the vessel itself. He said with the sphere, if the valve is required to be opened, it is on the basis of fire to protect from explosion. He said it was there as a last resort. The pressure valve is to prevent reaching that situation. He said it was better to have the relief valve go off than the vessel to rupture. If the pressure is going up it can be piped to the combustor.

Carlo

Said spheres would be filled to a safe fill capacity.

Joe

Asked George how a valve could be controlled not to freeze up.

Geoff M

Explained that it would not freeze inside.

Bill

Asked Terminals if they would be updating the figures on the works approval (i.e. pressure of the sphere) and asked how he could get a VCAT submission in with different figures for evidence.

George

Said the change in pressure had been factored in.

Bill

Referred to the height of the combustor stack.

Robin 

Asked who could make the appeals.

Sue Mc

Stated that today was the last day to lodge appeals.

Gordon

Referred Quentin to page 8 of 8 of the EPA works approval, stating that the plan presented by Terminals outlined the site of new works. He asked if there was a separate works approval for loading/unloading arms, that the facility at the end of the jetty was the most critical part. He asked if the drawing (on the works approval) would have included the unloading facility and did it include the scope of the works.

Alex

Stated the approval did not include other issues ongoing on the jetty. It was not a complete diagram. He said it did not limit the scope as it was covered elsewhere.

Gordon

Raised concern that the drawing did not include a vital part of the proposal.

Alex

Disagreed saying other areas had covered that. For example the risk assessment.

Gordon

Felt the drawing invalidated the approval.

Robin

Stated it was possible for the EPA to answer questions and to go on record to show the works approval included the piping at the end of the jetty, if this was the case.

ACTION

EPA to clarify in writing that the works on the jetty were in fact included in the Works Approval, and that the drawing does not limit their ambit.

Gordon

Stressed that in his view the fact that the jetty was not included in the drawing invalidated the EPA works approval.

Stuart

Introduced himself and ran through the DHS requirements with respect to applications.

Julie

Detailed the assessment of the works approval application citing the main areas that were considered:

[apple] The high level of community concern

[apple] The council's formal objection

[apple] The health impact assessment commissioned by Council and carried out by David Dunt from Melbourne Uni. (Julie did state that the DHS did not have that document at the time of the assessment.)

[apple] The technical aspects of the works approval application.

Julie went on to state that based on the technical aspects the DHS did not object. She described the statement "That public health be endangered." as meaning a threat to life. She said the DHS submission was lengthy in providing recommendations.  Some of the broader issues were incorporated in to the recommendations. 

After the submission had been given to the EPA the health assessment became ready. The DHS letter dated 12 April had been sent to the EPA prior to the Dunt report.  Julie stated that because the DHS didn't have the Dunt report it was considered appropriate that if it was considered at a VCAT hearing then recommendations would be considered by DHS and EPA.  However the Dunt report was not considered at the VCAT hearing.

Peter

Stated the hearing had been postponed to August 18.

Julie

Stated there were other issues to be considered. EPA asked if DHS were objecting or not objecting. (That letter was not included in the handout) 

Sue Mc

Asked if the committee could have a copy of further correspondence.

Robin

Asked if the EPA's letter of 26 April could be made available.

Alex

Would advise.

ACTION

Alex to see if the EPA could make available its letter of 26 April

Elsie

Raised the issue that public health was considered a minor partner in this.

Alex

Stated that the works approval process has clear time lines. He said the EPA was under a statutory time frame that they must respond within.

Julie

Stated the David Dunt report would not change the decision of the DHS.

Elsie

Stated that recent research indicated that butadiene is a public health issue and there were implications for public health services.

Julie

Stated there are limits set out in policy, levels set in there that are protective of public health. She said predicted levels of emissions are seven times lower than the acceptable limits in the SEPP (AQM) policy.

Elsie

Stated it seemed like local people and council were being disenfranchised in the process.  She asked how much liaison and research had been done with local health services. She said Geelong has increased levels of childhood illnesses like asthma.

Sue Mc

Asked about the cumulative effect of other emissions. She stated that the DHS could take a holistic approach. She asked what parameters of decision making the DHS went through and how much they took into account other class three chemicals in the area.

Robin 

Requested that due to time, the committee stop now. He asked if the DHS were able or willing to come back at a later date to cover broader issues.

Julie

Finished by saying that page three of the original submission on 12 April recommended extra monitoring that would take in background emissions.

Sue Mc

Asked what assessment the EPA had done of the already existing air quality.

Julie

Stated that overall, this specific Works Approval process has highlighted difficulties when issues external to the Works Approval applications need to be considered (i.e. planning and Workcover issues) or there is significant community concern. The possibility of an Environmental Effects Statement process being applied to applications of this nature should be considered so that the community is engaged appropriately. 

Steve

Stated that David Dunt is the most eminent person in the field and that Julie was a scientist.  He said there are other variables and time factors were too short to do research.

Robin

Finished up the meeting, suggesting the next meeting continue with the agenda from Item 7 and that any new items be added at the end.

Sue Mc

Extended thanks on behalf of the committee to Geoff Cooke, Quentin Cook and EPA representatives, and the DHS representatives saying their attendance and contributions were appreciated.

Robin

Declared the meeting closed at 11.25 pm.