Geelong Community for Good Life

Sue McLean

Joe Cicero

Geelong Community Forum

Sue Kelly-Turner

Terminals Pty Ltd

George Horman (Managing Director)

Gary O'Sullivan

Carlo Fasolino (State Manager)

Community Representative

Peter Linaker

CFA Geelong

Ian Beswick

Worksafe

Geoff Cooke

Community Representative

Greg Postuma

Northern Community Consultative Group

Bill Aitken

EPA

Anne Marie McCarthy

Green Party

Catherine Jones

Geelong Community for Good Life

Gordon Alderson

Northern Community Consultative Group

Paul Dakin

Community Members

Kitty Van Wees-Miller

Ben and Carl Yan

Terminals Pty Ltd

Jeff Hibbert

Multiple Chemical Sensitivity Group

John Wilson

Community Representative

Ralph Taylor

ITEM 1

Welcome by Chair

Robin

Welcomed committee to the meeting and welcomed back Kitty Van Wees-Miller and the two Melbourne University Masters students she brought along with her, Ben and Carl.

ITEM 2

Apologies, confirmation of Draft Agenda

Apologies were received from Ralph Taylor, John Wilson and Jeff Hibbert.  Robin mentioned that David Henshaw had emailed Katie stating his wish to resign from the committee.  David represented the Geelong Environment Council and Robin will seek another representative to be present.

ACTION

Robin to contact Joan Lindros from the Geelong Environment Council to seek another representative to attend meetings.

The draft agenda was confirmed with the mention that Item 5A was not Business Arising but urgent business.  Robin invited Carlo to discuss Item 9 immediately after Item 4, as Carlo needed to leave the meeting early.

ITEM 3

Confirmation of Draft Minutes

Minutes were accepted providing the following changes be made:

Page 5 in Gary's first comment is changed to "[sigma].fault of the power supply lines".

Page 4 in Sue McLean's first comment state that Sue had asked Terminals to provide some documentary evidence to demonstrate they had used their best endeavour.

ITEM 4

Draft EIP (Terminals' outline to be expanded: comment by EPA, Committee)

Carlo

Thanked both Sue McLean and Sue Kelly Turner for their comments towards improving the EIP.  He went on to respond to the Geelong Community for Good Life suggestions and read through an overhead presentation.

Sue Mc

Requested there be an additional location for background monitoring of butadiene on the Terminals site fence line.  She stressed there would then be a benchmark that could be compared in future monitoring.  She also asked if monitoring would take into account the wind direction.

ACTION

Terminals to consider an additional location for background monitoring of butadiene on the Terminals site fence line.

Sue Mc

Queried whether community members could observe both the background monitoring and the monitoring when butadiene ships are unloading.

Carlo

Stated that AWM would carry out the monitoring on certain properties and that Terminals would not be given much notice of this.

ACTION

Terminals to find out when Frank Fleer will do the monitoring and email this information to community members.  Terminals also to change the wording in the EIP to "inform the TGCCC when monitoring is to be done."

Peter

Stated in atmospheric chemistry that butadiene has a half-life of some two hours (or more depending on conditions), and that the 24 hour canister method of the EPA which Frank Fleer supports is defective, which was discussed at length at VCAT (and noted in the Butadiene judgement).

Sue Mc

Stated she was concerned that Terminals were not testing for all chemicals when testing for groundwater contamination.  She said that heavy metals do not get picked up in the testing and that Shell has stored these and they get passed through to the Terminals site.

Bill

Said the Terminals site is more porous as it is reclaimed land.  He said there should be a new target for Terminals to look at where contaminated ground water is running to.

Gary

Pointed out this was assuming contaminants had got into the Terminals site.

George

Said the text of the EIP explained the ins and outs of groundwater monitoring but suggested Geoff Millard could do a presentation on groundwater monitoring.

ACTION

Terminals to present a report of groundwater monitoring results to the committee and also in the Annual Report.

ACTION

Terminals to alter the wording in the EIP to "In cases where tanks are jacked up for inspection or maintenance, liners will be put underneath."

Paul

Stated his concern and belief that road transport from Terminals should be at night, not any time during the day.

Gordon

Asked if the EIP would keep rolling on.

Carlo

Said the EIP was updated but rolled on every three years.

Sue Mc

Asked if the word "Shell" could be removed from the section on groundwater contamination.  This was agreed by Terminals.

George

Thanked the contributors of suggestions and comments.

Sue Mc

Suggested one thing missing from the EIP was the investigation of the reduction of water usage or recycling at the Terminals site.

Anne Marie

Agreed it would be an ideal item to include in the EIP.

Gordon

Stated Barwon Water was to build a water recycling plant near Shell and thought maybe a pipe could run from Terminals.

Robin

Asked the committee if they intended to sign off on the EIP.  The general consensus was that they did intend to do so.

ACTION

Carlo to draft up a final version of the EIP with a view to having it signed off by the committee.

ITEM 9

Emergency Communication (arrangements for Special Meeting 14 August 2006)

Carlo

Ran through the format of the evening as well as the scenarios to be put forward.

Sue Mc

Asked how the scenarios/agenda were going to address the issue of how the community would be notified.  She asked under what circumstances and how this notification would occur and when on the night that would be addressed.

George

Said the meeting was more to get an understanding of the Emergency Services' priorities first and then to discuss notification of the community from there.

Sue Mc

Suggested time would be needed for a separate discussion about the notification of the community.

Robin

Suggested the scenario would point out the deficiencies with respect to notification and making progress with that would happen over a period of time.

Sue Mc

Expressed the need of the community to know a short term plan until the long-term plan had been devised.

Gordon

Asked if the end point aim was to have an effective communication network in the community like at Coode Island.

Robin

Said at Coode Island a pilot programme had proved the system worked but the system had not yet been implemented.

Peter

Stated his desire that the Chair of the Emergency Communications meeting would adopt a workshop approach as he believed that would be effective.

Sue KT

Asked if it would be useful to record the exercise in order to capture everything and get the most out of it.

ACTION

Carlo to investigate recording the Emergency Communications meeting.

ITEM 5

Business Arising from Minutes

The committee went through each of the Action items from the summary:

11/2 Geoff Millard on QEST information - pending - September Meeting

12/4 Steve Sodamaco (COGG) absent.

Bill

Requested someone from the Environment Department represent the COGG at meetings as it was more logical.

Robin

Said he had met with Stuart Walker of the COGG that day.  He said Stuart was supportive of the TGCCC but pointed out the city had a list of 63 community groups and committees that would like Council representation.  He was concerned a junior officer may find such a robust committee as the TGCCC difficult to handle.  Stuart accepted an invitation to attend the TGCCC meeting on October 9 and present an overview of the Council's strategic direction in land and port planning.  He also said he would investigate the rotation of Council Officers to represent CoGG at TGCCC.  Robin felt this was a good response from the Council at this stage.

12/5 A letter has been sent to Kevin Garde.  Direct follow-up contact needed to ensure appropriate Council representation at the Emergency Management forum.

12/7 Future item

12/13 Bitumen odours

George

While the presentation had already been done, George said he had spoken to the EPA because the bitumen storage proposal had been modified.  It was now the hope that all vapour would be returned to the ship during unloading using the existing line.  He said vapour would also be returned to the tank during truck filling.  He said this process would mean the use of the combustor would be minimal or not at all.  George stated that if this process worked as planned there would be no emissions and that a Works Approval would no longer be required.  He said Terminals was currently in negotiation with the EPA.

Sue Mc

Said an EPA Officer had already stated a Works Approval is required.  She asked George if the EPA was withdrawing from that statement or if he could clarify his comment.

George

Said he could not see why a Works Approval was needed and the EPA was going to review its decision.

Anne Marie

Stated that odour was the initial reason for a Works Approval but Terminals devised the new process hoping to prevent odour being emitted.  She said Terminals had applied for an exemption and the proposal had been received by the EPA and would be assessed by a team of people.

Peter

Stated the Works Approval was the Council's guarantee that the community would be protected and he queried Terminals' method of procedure.

Sue Mc

Requested information that would have been in the Works Approval and information in the exemption be made available to the committee.

Gordon

Asked George why Terminals would seek an exemption but not a Works Approval.

George

Stated it cost less.

Bill

Queried where the evidence was that it was a better plan and asked the advantage of it.  He asked where the odours would go.

George

Said odours would be kept in the system in an enclosed arrangement.

Bill

Said the risk management factor would have to have increased because of the input and return system.

Joe

Said he was surprised the exemption had been put it when it was unknown whether ships would have the facilities to take back vapours.  He said this was out of Terminals' control.

George

Said every ship has an air inlet.

Joe

Asked what guarantee Terminals have that the ship would not vent to atmosphere for the bitumen product.  He said the worst-case scenario would be that Terminals had to use the combustor regardless because ships would not accept vapour return.

Robin

Asked when the EPA considered the request to waive the Works Approval would they factor in the likelihood ships would not accept vapour return.

Anne Marie

Said they would.

Gordon

Said Terminals system for returning truck vapour should be given to Mobil as it was the biggest problem at Mobil Altona.

George

Sketched on the whiteboard the return system on a truck.  Some community members felt this was a very innovative process and commended it.

Sue Mc

Asked if the EPA were happy to make available to the committee the information in the Works Approval exemption.

ACTION

Anne Marie to take back to the EPA the request that the EPA make available to the TGCCC the information in the Butadiene Works Approval and any Works Approval Exemption.

Catherine

Expressed concern about what ships would do with vapour emissions out at sea.

13/1 Gary has contacted Chemtrans and the new manager is prepared to come to the September meeting.  Gary to follow up further.

13/2 Done

13/3 Progressed, continuing.

13/6 No change

14/3 EPA's definition of an EIP

Anne Marie

Handed out copies of Section 31 C of the Act saying there are two different types of EIP; a statutory EIP required as part of a Works Approval or licence and a voluntary EIP.  The committee thanked Anne Marie in the knowledge of staff shortages at the EPA.

14/5 To be dealt with later in the meeting.

15/1 Robin reported earlier on his meeting with Stewart Walker at the COGG.

15/2 Done

15/3 Hazop minutes

Robin

Stated this was a good opportunity to raise the confidentiality agreement.

George

Agreed some wording of the Confidentiality Agreement was not quite correct.  He said the reason for the agreement was to protect Terminals intellectual rights.  He said the Hazop formed part of the design but the agreement was just meant to have people say they would not make information recorded in the minutes public.  He suggested any concerns with the Hazop be raised directly with Geoff Millard.

Sue Mc

Said Geoff assured the committee that the Hazop minutes would be provided.  She said the biggest problem with the Confidentiality Agreement was that an individual had to sign on behalf of the committee.  She said attendees at the Hazop had taken their own minutes and the information would probably be the same.

George

Stated Terminals notes from the Hazop are a legal document.   He said they are full of confidential and sensitive information.  Under the Worksafe Act Terminals are responsible for making the site safe and secure.  The concern with the Hazop notes is if someone gets access to information and uses it wrongfully then it is Terminals' responsibility.

Geoff

Confirmed that someone could find out this information if they wanted to anyway but there was no requirement for Terminals to make this information available.  He said it was second to none what Terminals were doing allowing the public to sit in on a Hazop but the minutes and safety case could be accessed as a public document anyway.

Joe

Thanked Terminals in general saying the Hazop process was interesting.  He said drawings were provided at the Hazop but that he just wanted to follow through to check that the job had been done properly as he had to provide the committee with a report.

George

Said he was happy to look at changes to the Confidentiality Agreement.

Joe

Thanked Terminals for being at the coalface saying they were turning new ground by allowing community members so much involvement.

Gordon

Supported Joe's comments.

Bill

Said he thought anyone attending meetings was supposed to keep things in confidence and said there needed to be a degree of trust both ways.

Peter

Stated his belief that a 5-6 page confidentiality agreement meant panic and that lawyers were involved.  He suggested restraint against unreasonable disclosure was more suitable.

George

Stated he could probably refine the agreement to three pages.  He said he would not require people who attend the Hazop to sign a confidentiality agreement at that stage, only when they were viewing the finished legal document.

Sue Mc

Asked if there was a problem with having a copy of it.

Gary

Pointed out it was a security issue and left the site vulnerable if the document were to be stolen or fall into the wrong hands.

Gordon

Said he was amazed that Terminals had let the community attend the Hazop at all as the information shared was detailed and confidential.  He noted it was an extraordinary circumstance for Terminals to be so open saying that other companies would not be this way.  He asked the community not to destroy that trust shown by Terminals so that the good relationship could continue.

Joe

Said his concern with the agreement was that the wording required the authorisation of the committee.

Gary

Said he felt the community still did not trust Terminals.

Sue KT

Thanked Terminals saying she had learned a great deal by attending one day of the Hazop.  She said she would not make a report as the process was so involved.  She said she did not know why people wanted a copy as she understood it could be dangerous if a hard copy fell into the wrong hands.  She said she was satisfied with what she had seen so far.

George

Asked how the committee would handle the confidentiality issue in the future.

ACTION

Robin to provide the committee with the Coode Island confidentiality procedures from their website.

ACTION

Terminals to rework the Confidentiality Agreement and email to committee members.

Robin

Stated that time was slipping by and urged the committee to jump straight to Item 7 as a matter of urgency.

ITEM 7

Review of Interim Chair

Robin

Requested the committee to review the position of the interim Chair to determine if they would like Robin to continue or like to appoint a new Chair for the committee.  Robin left the meeting room and Gordon accepted the Chair in Robin's absence for the purpose of the discussion at hand.

Gordon

Requested the committee discuss Robin's position.

Bill

Suggested the committee retain Robin as Chair but also select a vice Chair as this had not yet been done.   He said this was the opportunity to get that structure in place.

Peter

Moved that Robin Saunders be invited to Chair the TGCCC for the next twelve months.

Sue Mc

Seconded the motion.

Gordon

Asked Peter to speak his motion.

Peter

Suggested Robin was the ideal person in the role, being happy with what he does, has an extensive background for the task, and is exceedingly diplomatic.

Committee

Were all in favour of the motion so it was carried.

Gordon

Robin was asked to return, and on being informed of the wishes of the committee, was welcomed by Gordon to the chair as Committee Chairman, and resumed the meeting.

Robin

Suggested the community reps. select one of their number to act as a Chair for September as he would be absent from that meeting.  Robin noted the time was getting late.

Anne Marie

Stated that staff numbers at the EPA were very tight at present and said there would be delays in returning phone calls etc.  She said Alexander Jovcic had resigned and that Colin McIntosh form Wangaratta had taken over his position.

ITEM 8

Housekeeping - Website

Robin

Requested input from the committee on the reports to appear on the website.

Peter

Proposed three rules for proceeding with the Website:

That the website manager be the Editor, directed by the Chair;

That the Chair may add, remove and update items, as the Committee may direct;

That each item should have a head giving its currency, date etc. to inform readers.

Robin

Said he was happy to live by those rules, and suggested they be accepted by the Committee.  There was no opposition to Peter's suggestion which was adopted.  Sought the endorsement of the committee to put 16 reports on the website.  The committee agreed.

Robin

Declared the meeting closed at 9.40pm

The next meeting will be a special Emergency Communications Meeting and will take place on Monday 14 August 2006 at 6.30pm at the Corio Library meeting room, Cox Rd Norlane.