Environment Protection Authority
Environment Protection Authority Annual Report
1 July 2011 to 30 June 2012
Environment Protection Authority Annual Report 1 July 2011 to 30 June 2012
For further information please contact:
Information Officer Environment Protection Authority Street address: 250 Victoria Square, Adelaide SA 5000 Postal address: GPO Box 2607, Adelaide SA 5001
Telephone: (08) 8204 2004 Facsimile: (08) 8124 4670 Free call (country): 1800 623 445 Website:
ISSN 1322-1662
ISSN 978-1-921495-29-8
September 2012
© Environment Protection Authority
This document may be reproduced in whole or part for the purpose of study or training, subject to the inclusion of an acknowledgment of the source and to its not being used for commercial purposes or sale. Reproduction for purposes other than those given above requires the prior written permission of the Environment Protection Authority.
Printed on recycled paper
CONTENTS
LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL ...... 1 STATEMENTS FROM THE PRESIDING MEMBER AND CHIEF EXECUTIVE...... 3 EPA PERFORMANCE DURING 2011–12...... 8 HIGHLIGHTS AND MAJOR INITIATIVES DURING 2011–12...... 10 INTRODUCTION TO THE ORGANISATION...... 11 EPA BOARD ...... 14 BUSINESS SUCCESS AND SUSTAINABILITY ...... 24 MORE EFFECTIVE RELATIONSHIPS...... 28 IMPROVED REGULATION...... 33 A REPUTATION FOR EXCELLENCE...... 57 SUPPORTING OUR PEOPLE ...... 63 OTHER STATUTORY INFORMATION...... 67 APPENDIX 1 ORGANISATIONAL INFORMATION ...... 72 APPENDIX 2 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND ACCOMPANYING NOTES ...... 81 APPENDIX 3 PUBLICATIONS RELEASED OR UPDATED DURING 2011–12...... 111 APPENDIX 4 FREEDOM OF INFORMATION STATEMENT ...... 113 APPENDIX 5 KPI REPORTING...... 117 ABBREVIATIONS...... 119
List of figures
Figure 1 CDL annual return rates ...... 26 Figure 2 Annual lead concentrations at Port Pirie monitoring sites ...... 34 Figure 3 Trends in sulphur dioxide against National Environment Protection Standards at the EPA Oliver Street site in Port Pirie ...... 35 Figure 4 Site works currently being undertaken at ABC facility...... 38 Figure 5 Emergency responses by compliant category...... 55 Figure 6 Adelaide’s air quality index for the 2011 calendar year...... 58
Figure 8 Annual exceedences of the Air NEPM PM10 standard at Whyalla monitoring sites ...... 59 Figure 9 Greenhouse gas emissions...... 70 Figure 10 Hazard and incident reports–annual trends ...... 80
List of tables
Table 1 Percentage return rates for beverage containers ...... 25 Table 2 Return rates 2011–12 for the various container types and prior to the 10c refund increase ...... 26 Table 3 Perceptions of EPA service quality and satisfaction (2008 ratings provided in brackets)...... 29 Table 4 Trends in sulphur dioxide exceedences of the one-hour National Environment Protection Standard ...... 35 Table 5 Assessment of development applications...... 42 Table 6 Mining application reviews (non-uranium and uranium) ...... 46 Table 7 Environment protection orders...... 50 Table 8 Finalised prosecutions 2011–12 ...... 51 Table 9 Finalised civil penalties 2011–12 ...... 52 Table 10 Number of reports received by the EPA ...... 54 Table 12 Freedom of Information applications and Public Register requests...... 67 Table 13 Section 7 enquiries ...... 67 Table 14 Performance against annual energy use targets ...... 68 Table 15 EPA vehicle fleet...... 69 Table 16 Energy use and greenhouse gas emissions...... 69 Table 17 Total number of employees ...... 72 Table 18 Employee gender balance ...... 72 Table 19 Number of persons separated from or recruited to EPA...... 72 Table 20 Number of persons on leave without pay...... 73 Table 21 Number of employees by salary bracket...... 73 Table 22 Status of employees in current position...... 73 Table 23 Number of executives by gender, classification and status ...... 74 Table 24 Average days of leave taken per FTE employee...... 74 Table 25 Number of Aboriginal and/or Torres Strait Islander employees...... 74 Table 26 Number of employees by age bracket and gender...... 75 Table 27 Cultural and linguistic diversity of employees ...... 75 Table 28 Number of employees with ongoing disabilities requiring workplace adaptation...... 75 Table 29 Types of employee disabilities...... 76 Table 30 Number of employees using voluntary flexible working arrangements by gender...... 76 Table 31 Documented review of individual performance development plan...... 76 Table 32 Leadership and management training expenditure ...... 76 Table 33 Accredited training packages by classification...... 77 Table 34 Positions with customer service reflected in job and person specifications...... 77 Table 35 Occupational health, safety and welfare (OHSW) statistics...... 77 Table 36 Meeting the organisation’s safety performance targets ...... 78 Table 37 Workers compensation expenditure ...... 79 Table 38 Account payment performance...... 81 Table 39 Use of consultants—controlled entity...... 81 Table 40 Overseas travel...... 82
LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL
The Hon. Paul Caica, MP Minister for Sustainability, Environment and Conservation Parliament House North Terrace ADELAIDE SA 5000
Dear Minister
It is with pleasure that I present you with the Annual Report of the Environment Protection Authority for the period 1 July 2011 to 30 June 2012. This report has been prepared in accordance with the requirements of the Environment Protection Act 1993 and the Public Sector Act 2009.
The two annual reports, representing the carriage of the Environment Protection Act 1993 and the administration of the Radiation Protection and Control Act 1982, are combined as one in this annual report.
Yours sincerely
Dr Campbell Gemmell Chief Executive Environment Protection Authority
26 September 2012
1
Environment Protection Authority Annual Report 1 July 2011– 30 June 2012
STATEMENTS FROM THE PRESIDING MEMBER AND CHIEF EXECUTIVE
From the Presiding Member
It is my pleasure, on behalf of the EPA Board, to present the EPA Annual Report for 2011–12. This will be my last report, as my time as the Presiding Member of the EPA Board concludes in August 2012 and, because of other commitments, I have not sought renewal for another term. During my time, I have been impressed by the depth and breadth of the EPA’s work, and the outcomes we have collectively achieved.
For the last four years, I have had the privilege of leading the EPA Board and being part of an organisation full of energetic, passionate and committed people who are all striving to make South Australia a more sustainable place in which to live. We have also begun the process of transforming the EPA into a modern regulator, proactively protecting and promoting a sustainable South Australia, while managing the balance between the environment and corporations and communities.
This financial year has been dominated by change and growth, both on a corporate level and in meeting our environmental goals. Greater effort has been expended in providing the public with more timely and readily accessible information. From waiving public register fees, to placing EPA licences and notifications on the web, we are continuing our journey of achieving one of our primary goals to become a more transparent regulator.
During my tenure as Presiding Member, I have had the privilege of overseeing key reforms and programs such as:
• establishing the Illegal Dumping Unit to detect and manage unauthorised waste activities across South Australia
• completing a major contribution to the review of the environmental impact assessment of the proposed Olympic Dam mine expansion
• initiating aquatic ecosystem condition reporting for South Australian waters
• developing a policy for complaints management and the internal review of decisions
• implementing the Code of practice for vessel and facility management (marine and inland waters), including new greywater management requirements for all vessels operating on SA waters
• launching the Healthy Waters program
• implementing the site contamination provisions of the Environment Protection Act 1993
• managing EPA’s contribution to South Australia’s response to the impact on the River Murray of the worst drought faced by this state, in particular the Lower Lakes.
The Board has also focused on addressing and bringing greater professionalism and robustness to the internal functions of the EPA by establishing committees which provide direction and input, and ensuring effective business and financial management in the EPA. This has included audit and risk management systems, through the development of a new Audit and Risk Management Committee, financial systems, through the development of a new Finance Committee, and the organisation’s planning review process.
Importantly, the Board has made a commitment to a culture of open engagement with the community and stakeholders. Since 2008, it has held many targeted meetings with industry stakeholders as well as discussions in regional and metropolitan areas (including visits to Mawson Lakes, Mount Gambier, Port Lincoln and, most recently, Port Adelaide). The purpose of these meetings was to discuss the EPA’s role and at the same time determine how the EPA can add value to the community while continuing its
3 Environment Protection Authority Annual Report 1 July 2011– 30 June 2012 regulatory function. At the Port Adelaide and Lefevre region consultation session in September 2011, the Board met with a wide variety of stakeholders, including community members, to understand more about the region’s emerging environmental issues. The Board also toured the Lefevre Peninsula to gain a perspective on urban planning issues.
From a strategic planning perspective, the EPA has made great progress in the development of its next high-level strategic plan for 2012–15. As a first step, this year the Board oversaw the review of the previous Strategic Plan 2009–2012. Through this process we have gathered a substantial amount of largely positive feedback from a range of different stakeholders, which we have used to shape the new plan. We will continue to analyse this feedback to determine our priority initiatives over the next three years.
As part of the planning process for the new plan, the EPA’s annual round-table conference was held in June 2012. This event provided some of the organisation’s key stakeholders with an opportunity to voice their expectations and aspirations for both South Australia’s environment and the future direction of the EPA. It was particularly pleasing to see the level of participant engagement and their passion for the health of our environment for future generations.
Finally, I would like to thank the EPA Board for their professionalism and dedication and also the EPA Executive for their support and hard work over the past four years. In particular, I'd like to thank the Minister for Sustainability, Environment and Conservation, the Hon. Paul Caica, for his unwavering support in underpinning our efforts to transform the EPA into a modern regulator. I would also like to thank ZeroWaste SA, Department for Water and the Department for Environment and Natural Resources—our work cannot be effective without a strong collaboration with these and many other partners.
I welcome the appointment of our new CE, Dr Campbell Gemmell. He is an experienced and professional EPA CE, having most recently led the Scottish EPA (SEPA). He is an articulate and passionate professional, dedicated to the environment and, in particular, to leading a modern regulator of committed and satisfied staff. I know I leave the EPA in a very safe pair of hands.
In departing, I wish you all the best and I see a very positive future ahead for the EPA under the leadership of Dr Campbell Gemmell and the Board.
Cheryl Bart, AO Presiding Member EPA Board
4 Environment Protection Authority Annual Report 1 July 2011– 30 June 2012 From the Chief Executive
I am pleased to present the Environment Protection Authority (EPA) Annual Report for 2011–12. This report provides me with my first opportunity to present EPA statutory information, highlights and major initiatives to you.
This annual report is our progress report; it acknowledges our milestones and achievements and recognises where improvement is required.
I envisage the EPA becoming a more effective regulator, one which supports and recognises those who do the right thing, and acts swiftly to enforce the law for those who do not. The EPA will continue to strengthen its regulatory approach by providing clear expectations on regulatory requirements through licence condition reform, offering guidance and support to those willing to do the right thing and rewarding those striving to go beyond compliance. For those who choose to act illegally the EPA will seek to ensure timely enforcement actions are taken. As an organisation, we are also arranging ourselves to focus on significant environmental harms and pressures resulting from insufficient management of waste, soil and water contamination, poor air quality, urban development planning and the mining sector.
A key aspect of becoming a more effective regulator is through the EPA taking swifter and more robust enforcement action against people who flout environmental laws. Over the last financial year, the EPA made four successful prosecutions and negotiated three civil penalties which resulted in monetary fines. This is an area on which we will continue to focus in the coming 12 months, particularly through the work of the Illegal Dumping Unit (IDU) which was formally launched by the Minister on 30 January 2012. The purpose of this unit is to identify and investigate illegal landfills, illegal dumping of hazardous wastes, and illegal dumping of commercial quantities of waste such as construction, demolition and industrial waste. Since commencing, the unit has conducted 23 active investigations into alleged illegal dumping activities and has issued four expiation notices, three environment protection orders and one clean up order.
As well as a focus on our regulatory business, the EPA has led a broad range of programs and managed significant environmental issues over the past year. Site contamination has also been a significant issue during the year. Changes have been made to how we deal with new notifications and this has resulted in improved public notification of contaminated sites. This report mentions some of the sites the EPA has identified and is managing.
Like many other government agencies, the EPA contributed significant effort (over 3000 hours) into reviewing the Olympic Dam Environment Impact Statement (EIS). The EPA actively contributed to cross- government work to develop the state government’s recommendations and response to the EIS.
In the coming year, we will seek to strengthen our relationships with stakeholders so that the EPA becomes more widely recognised and trusted by the community. We will also make a commitment to working alongside these stakeholders to enable us to understand and address emerging environmental issues across the state. Engaging with our stakeholders will become increasingly important, and whilst ensuring we implement policy and deliver environment protection, we need to shift our approach from an ‘announce and defend’ mentality to one of ‘converse and decide’.
I recognise the important role of the EPA across government in influencing and contributing to public policy as well as our ongoing efforts in engaging a range of stakeholders, including the community, to work collaboratively to tackle the big environmental issues in the state.
We will also implement a significant change management program, commencing 1 July 2012, to build the capacity and flexibility of our organisation. The program will also ensure that, within the backdrop of the resource constraints we all face, we have the appropriate expertise, systems and culture to deliver our goals and meet the needs and expectations of the community, government and the environment.
5 Environment Protection Authority Annual Report 1 July 2011– 30 June 2012
The EPA has continued to commit to its own environmental improvement program, Sustainability@Work. The organisation has made some improvements through commitments such as battery recycling and reducing printing volumes. I am keen to see the EPA continuing its commitment to managing our own environmental impacts with dedicated efforts in resource reduction and efficiency, good waste management practices and an overall reduced environmental footprint.
I would like to take this opportunity to acknowledge the work of Ms Helen Fulcher, who was instrumental, with the EPA Board, in initiating a number of important reforms for the EPA. The Presiding Member’s statement details these achievements. I would also like to acknowledge and thank both Cheryl Bart AO, for her leadership and direction during her time as Presiding Member, noting especially how supportive she has been to me in my first seven months and Tony Circelli for his hard work during the transition between Helen Fulcher and myself, where he played a valuable role in maintaining service, momentum and stability within the EPA.
Dr Campbell Gemmell Chief Executive Environment Protection Authority
6 Environment Protection Authority Annual Report 1 July 2011– 30 June 2012
Reconciliation statement
The EPA acknowledges the traditional custodians on whose ancestral lands it carries out its business, and that it respects their spiritual relationship with their country. The EPA also acknowledges the deep feelings of attachment and the relationship that Aboriginal peoples have to the country.
In fulfilling its functions, the EPA is cognisant of the cultural and natural heritage of the traditional owners and strives to achieve positive outcomes wherever these matters are concerned.
7 Environment Protection Authority Annual Report 1 July 2011– 30 June 2012
EPA PERFORMANCE DURING 2011–12
During 2011–12, the EPA has continued to develop its Performance Measurement Framework and Reporting System. Below is a snapshot of some of the EPA’s key performance outcomes. Each area is also discussed in more detail in the pages referenced.
• 192 site contamination authorisation notifications were processed Page 39
• 141 site contamination technical files were reviewed Page 39
• 3993 responses were provided to enquiries under Section 7 of the Land and Business Page 67 (Sales and Conveyancing) Act 1994
• 40 responses were provided to planning statements of intent and development plan Page 42 amendment referrals
• 10,437 enquiries and 2,726 complaints were received by the EPA Page 53
• 526,000 page views occurred on the EPA website -
• 163 sets of information were added to the website, including a comprehensive suite of Page 61 aquatic ecosystem condition reports
• 37 requests under the Freedom of Information Act were received Page 67
• 97% of development application responses were provided within statutory timeframes Page 42
• 100% of aquaculture licence application responses were delivered on time Page 46
• 283 inspections of high-risk licensed sites and 456 inspections of beverage container Page 49 outlets took place
• A total of 35 investigations were activated Page 50
• EPA mentioned in the media on 875 occasions -
• 81.4% of beverage containers were returned through the beverage container refund Page 25 scheme
• 5% reduction in volumes of solid waste to landfill compared with 2002 volumes was - recorded
• A continued decrease in significant air pollutants including nitrogen dioxide and Page 57 particulate matter (10 µm) was recorded at EPA monitoring sites
• 100% of OHSW planned inspections were completed Page 77
• Two major IT system development projects are on-track and on-budget -
• 82% of annual staff performance reviews were completed -
8 Environment Protection Authority Annual Report 1 July 2011– 30 June 2012
Through the government budget process, the EPA is required to provide information against performance targets to the government as part of the annual Agency Statement. The suite of key performance indicators (KPIs) and the most recent data is attached in Appendix 5.
9 Environment Protection Authority Annual Report 1 July 2011– 30 June 2012
HIGHLIGHTS AND MAJOR INITIATIVES DURING 2011–12
The highlights and major initiatives of the EPA during 2011–12 include:
• Increased transparency, with significant effort focused on providing easily accessible information to the public. This involved the:
− upload of an index of site contamination audit reports to the EPA website
− upload of licences to the EPA’s website
− waiver of approximately 80% of public register fees.
• Launch of the Illegal Dumping Unit (IDU) on 30 January 2012, whose role is to investigate the illegal disposal of large-scale industrial waste. Since its initiation, the unit has:
− reviewed 119 complaints and enquiries in relation to illegal dumping
− undertaken 23 active investigations into illegal activities
− issued four expiation notices, three environment protection orders and a clean up order.
• Continued implementation of the Environment Protection (Waste to Resources) Policy 2010 across South Australia.
• Completion of the woodsmoke behaviour change program, SmokeWatch Mount Gambier.
• Introduction of aquatic ecosystem condition reports, which gauge the health of South Australia’s inland and marine waters.
• Extensive review of and input to the Olympic Dam environmental impact assessment.
• Partnership with portfolio agencies to address the issue of acid sulphate soils in the Lower Murray region.
• Finalisation of 20 enforcement actions (three civil penalties and four prosecutions in the Environment Resources and Development Court, with the remaining 13 matters dealt with by other compliance actions).
• Audit of medical waste sector, which covered the handling, transport, treatment and disposal of medical waste.
• Review of licence conditions applied to wastewater treatment plants and community wastewater management systems across South Australia.
• Well-coordinated response during the Mulhern’s fire incident, which occurred 13 March 2012. As a result of EPA responsiveness, impacts to nearby wetlands were significantly minimised.
• Continued development of a modernised internal organisational Performance Measurement Framework.
10 Environment Protection Authority Annual Report 1 July 2011– 30 June 2012
INTRODUCTION TO THE ORGANISATION
EPA role
The Environment Protection Authority (EPA) is South Australia’s leading environment protection regulator and is responsible for the protection of air and water quality and the control of pollution, waste, noise and radiation. The EPA influences and regulates human activities in order to protect, enhance and restore the environment.
EPA vision
A clean, healthy and valued environment that supports social and economic prosperity for all South Australians now and in the future.
EPA organisation chart
11 Environment Protection Authority Annual Report 1 July 2011– 30 June 2012 New chief executive
During the 2011–12 financial year the EPA had a change of leadership. Ms Helen Fulcher, who began her tenure as Chielf Executive in 2008, retired on 31 August 2011. Mr Tony Circelli acted in the role from 1 September 2011 until 29 January 2012.
On 30 January 2012, Dr Campbell Gemmell began his term as the new Chief Executive of the EPA.
Governance structure
12 Environment Protection Authority Annual Report 1 July 2011– 30 June 2012
The EPA is a statutory authority, with a Board responsible for the carriage of the Environment Protection Act 1993 (EP Act). The Board must comprise between seven and nine appointed members, whose skills, knowledge and experience collectively meet the requirements of Board membership, as defined by the EP Act. The Board delegates specified powers to others in order to achieve the objectives of the EP Act. While the EP Act is committed to the Minister for Sustainability, Environment and Conservation, the Minister does not have the power to direct the Board in making decisions in relation to licensing and environmental authorisations or enforcement of the EP Act, or in making recommendations to the Minister.
The EPA is also an administrative unit created under the Public Sector Act 2009, through which it performs other functions for government, including administration of the Radiation Protection and Control Act 1982 (RPC Act).
Under the EP Act, the chief executive of the administrative unit is also the chief executive of the statutory authority and a member of the Board ex officio, although not entitled to vote at a meeting of the Board. The chief executive is responsible to the Board for giving effect to its policies and decisions, making the service of staff and facilities of the administrative unit available to the EPA for the performance of its functions. These are reflected in the EPA Strategic Plan 2009–2012, which is linked to the priorities of South Australia’s Strategic Plan and provides a framework for the work of the EPA.
13 Environment Protection Authority Annual Report 1 July 2011– 30 June 2012
EPA BOARD
EPA Board membership
The Board is the governing body of the EPA for matters related to the EP Act and provides strategic direction, develops environmental policy and monitors performance.
Ms Chery l Bart AO Mr Stephe n H ai ns M s M egan D yson Mr Allan Hol mes M s J ane Yuil e Ms Li nda Bow es M r Ro b Fow l er Mr Ter ry Groom D r Cam pbel l Gem mel l Pr esi di ng M em ber Deputy Presiding Mem ber Member Member Mem ber Me mber Member Mem ber Member Members of the EPA Board are appointed by the Governor of South Australia. They are chosen for their qualifications, experience and expertise relevant to:
• Environmental protection and management or − Allan Holmes natural resources management
• Industry, commerce or economic development − Cheryl Bart
− Linda Bowes
− Andrew Fletcher (until 20 April 2012)
− Terry Groom (from 21 April 2012)
• Local government − Stephen Hains
• Reduction, reuse, recycling and management of − Stephen Hains waste or the environmental management industry
• Management generally and public sector − Allan Holmes management − Jane Yuile
• Environmental law − Megan Dyson
• Environmental conservation and advocacy on − Rob Fowler environmental matters on behalf of the community
Various prescribed bodies are consulted in the appointment process for Board members. This wide spectrum of expertise gives the EPA the capacity to make integrated and balanced decisions on the complex problems and issues that threaten the environment.
Outgoing members of the Board
Mr Andrew Fletcher
Mr Fletcher was appointed to the Board for his ‘practical knowledge of, and experience in, industry, commerce or economic development’. His term with the Board commenced 21 April 2005 and concluded on 20 April 2012. The EPA thanks Mr Fletcher for his valuable contribution to the Board and his commitment to the protection of the environment of South Australia.
14 Environment Protection Authority Annual Report 1 July 2011– 30 June 2012
Ms Helen Fulcher
Ms Fulcher was appointed as Chief Executive of the EPA in August 2008 and she retired from the position in August 2011. While Chief Executive, Ms Fulcher was also an ex officio member of the Board. The EPA thanks Ms Fulcher for assisting the Board in implementing its policies and programs.
EPA Board Committee listing
Section 17 of the EP Act allows the EPA Board to establish committees or subcommittees to advise or assist in carrying out the functions of the Board or as required by the Regulations.
Five committees reported to the Board during 2011–12:
• Finance Committee
• Audit and Risk Management Committee
• Planning Review Committee
• Site Contamination Auditor Accreditation Committee
• Funding Sustainability Committee.
Finance Committee
The Finance Committee was established by the Board in June 2009. This committee oversees the financial reporting and budget management of the EPA and works towards the continuous improvement of the monthly financial information provided to the Chief Executive and Board.
Audit and Risk Management Committee
The Audit and Risk Management Committee was established by the Board in March 2009. This committee oversees implementation of the risk management framework, which was set up to identify activities of high risk, monitor systematic controls to mitigate risks and achieve overall compliance with Board and agency policies. The committee meets at least quarterly.
Planning Review Committee
The Planning Review Committee was established in August 2011 to review the EPA’s involvement in the South Australian planning system and to report to the Board on the need for any adjustments to current procedures, approaches and resourcing within the EPA, given its statutory and whole-of-government obligations. The committee will complete its term in late 2012.
Site Contamination Auditor Accreditation Committee
The Site Contamination Auditor Accreditation Committee was established in August 2008 to advise the Board on the accreditation of site contamination auditors. The committee is required to meet annually.
Funding Sustainability Committee
In September 2010, the committee informed the Board of the significant work that had gone into developing a sustainable funding model for the EPA, including the positive outcomes for the EPA, particularly in terms of an enhanced understanding of EPA’s functions and operations, and their associated costs. The Board recommended that the committee continue to operate to provide advice through the process to implement the savings measures announced as part of the 2010–11 Budget. With the program complete, the Board approved the dissolution of the committee at its 18 October 2011 meeting.
15 Environment Protection Authority Annual Report 1 July 2011– 30 June 2012 General and special meetings
Consultation program 2011–12
The Board held a community and stakeholder consultation series in the Port Adelaide region on 14 September 2011 and also conducted its annual round-table in June 2012. As in previous years, these sessions gave the Board an opportunity to hear directly from its stakeholders about the environment protection issues they considered important.
Port Adelaide region, 14 September 2011
On 14 September the Board travelled to the Port Adelaide region and conducted four targeted consultation sessions. The sessions were held with EPA licensees, representatives from Port Adelaide Enfield Council, community groups and the Lefevre Air Quality Strategy Reference Group. Following a bus tour of the Lefevre Peninsula to gain an understanding of the interface between residential and industrial areas, and buffer zones, the Board hosted an open consultation with its Port Adelaide region stakeholders.
Some of the topics raised and discussed at the sessions included: the need for more consistent regulation; how the EPA uses its risk-based approach to determine its regulatory focus and approach; and the focus of the EPA’s resources in areas of the greatest risk to the environment and human health.
Other issues raised included: the public perception of the EPA and how its role needs to be communicated more effectively; access to accurate and timely information; the role of community liaison groups and how they can add most value; planning issues and the interface between residential and industrial areas; air quality in Lefevre Peninsula; and the increased use of road and rail transport leading to pollution on the peninsular.
Round-table, 14 June 2012
The annual EPA round-table conference is a legal requirement under the EP Act (section 19) and is an important part of the Board’s engagement and consultation with its stakeholders.
The round-table conference was held on 14 June 2012 and attended by 40 invited representatives from industry, the community, and local and state governments. The theme of the conference was ‘2020 Vision for the EPA’ a topic intended to generate discussion on the preferred future of the state’s environment and the possible strategies that would support achieving that future.
After hearing from the Board's Presiding Member, Cheryl Bart AO, Minister Caica, Dr Campbell Gemmell and futurist Dr Peter Ellyard, the group used a consultation system called Zing Technology that allowed multiple keyboards to feed information into a central computer with real-time viewing of all responses on a screen. The EPA Board posed questions to participants that explored the current status of the environment, visions of a preferred environmental future for South Australia and how the EPA could assist in achieving that preferred future.
The key responses and themes associated with the participants’ preferred future included:
• an understanding that the SA environment is pristine and is recognised as such internationally
• the importance of being sustainable in all that we do
• the acceptance of new and green technologies
• the acceptance and implementation of the concept of ZeroWaste
• a recognition that, while we continue to enjoy the important things, we go about them differently, achieving them in a sustainable manner.
16 Environment Protection Authority Annual Report 1 July 2011– 30 June 2012
The responses and themes concerning EPA's role in this future focused on:
• ensuring greater community involvement and multi-agency collaboration
• having a significant role in climate change mitigation
• shifting EPA's focus from reacting to being proactive through education, support and engagement
• being able to adapt quickly to support green industry
• providing clear rules and being tough on offenders as well as recognising those who operate well and go beyond compliance.
Participants were given the opportunity to sign up for further consultation sessions. The feedback received during the conference will also be considered in light of the EPA's draft Strategic Plan for 2012–2015. A report on the round-table conference is also available on the EPA website
Strategic priorities
EPA contributing to South Australia’s Strategic Plan priorities
The EPA contributes to the revised 2011 priorities of South Australia’s Strategic Plan (SASP) in the following ways:
• Our community: the EPA continues to strengthen its engagement with regional and local communities, business and governments in order to share information and deliver high-quality programs and services that contribute to strong and vibrant communities.
• Our prosperity: good environmental regulation can enhance business competitiveness and reduce business risk. The EPA supports economic development through cost-effective environmental regulation and by reducing the administrative burden on business, while promoting the efficient use of environmental resources to ensure both cost savings to business and a reduced impact on the environment.
• Our environment: in managing the impacts of pollution and waste, the EPA considers the principles of sustainability in decision making, developing and implementing policy, and delivering regulatory and non-regulatory programs. It uses a risk-based and outcome-focused approach to support the transition to more sustainable practices by business, government and the community.
• Our health: through its regulatory and non-regulatory programs and services, the EPA identifies environments or communities under threat or pressure from unacceptable pollution and waste impacts and develops strategies to mitigate identified risks.
• Our education: the EPA offers broad education to provide guidance and supports licensees and others in understanding compliance requirements. The EPA also supports local government in environment protection matters.
• Our ideas: better environmental regulation has a vital role to play in correcting market failure, promoting fairness and stimulating innovation in meeting environmental standards. The EPA will consider all innovative approaches to achieving the required environmental standards.
SASP targets for EPA
The EPA contributed to the following targets in 2011–12 through the projects listed below:
• Target 32 Customer and client satisfaction with government services
− The EPA is currently reviewing the outcomes of its 2012 stakeholder survey against the baseline of the 2008 survey.
17 Environment Protection Authority Annual Report 1 July 2011– 30 June 2012
− The EPA also conducted the site contamination communications survey to evaluate the effectiveness and appropriateness of communications protocols associated with communicating with communities impacted by site contamination.
• Target 33 Government planning decisions The EPA works with other government agencies on the 30-Year Plan for Greater Adelaide and Water for Good. It also coordinated and led the Environment and Conservation Portfolio’s contribution to the assessment of the Olympic Dam expansion.
• Target 67 ZeroWaste The EPA implements and monitors policies and programs that aim to continue reducing waste to landfill, including new landfill bans and resource recovery provisions outlined in the Environment Protection (Waste to Resources) Policy 2010.
Further information on each of these projects can be found later in this report.
EPA strategic priorities
The EPA Strategic Plan 2009–12 was released in August 2009. It provides the framework for the organisation’s direction in the context of supporting the achievement of South Australia’s Strategic Plan targets.
The EPA’s strategic priorities for 2009–12 are:
• Business success and sustainability: the EPA will support business to reduce environmental impacts and use resources better through the promotion of good environmental practice.
• More effective relationships: the EPA will achieve better results for the environment of South Australia by building more effective relationships with industry, licensees, local communities and government.
• Improved regulation: working with its stakeholders, the EPA will continue its efforts to reduce red tape for regulated parties. In this way, innovative and cost-effective solutions to protect, restore and enhance the quality of our environment will be further encouraged and progressed.
• A reputation for excellence: the EPA understands that improving access to its services and clarifying their scope saves time and reduces frustration in its stakeholders. The EPA strives to build a proactive and service-oriented culture and to be at the forefront of leading regulatory practices.
• Supporting our people: by supporting its people and continuing to improve its processes and efficiency in times of financial constraint, the EPA will develop the organisation to meet growing demands.
The Strategic Plan is available on the EPA website at
The environmental goals describe the EPA’s particular outcomes and purpose. These are:
• Clean and healthy air: maintaining and improving air quality, with a focus on regional air quality issues, to minimise health impacts and costs.
• Land and water that is fit for purpose: protecting South Australia’s water bodies and land from the adverse impacts of pollution and waste that might reduce their value for current and future generations.
• Communities protected from unacceptable noise: protecting the community from exposure to unacceptable noise levels.
• Sustainable use of resources: reducing costs to business and environmental impacts by promoting the efficient use of resources and waste minimisation.
18 Environment Protection Authority Annual Report 1 July 2011– 30 June 2012
• Communities protected from unacceptable radiation: protecting the community from the health risks associated with ionising and non-ionising radiation.
A new EPA strategic plan is due to be released in late 2012 for the period 2012 to 2015.
EPA contributing to the seven strategic priorities of the government
The EPA contributes to the seven strategic priorities as listed below:
Clean green food as our competitive edge
• The EPA has improved its capability to monitor and assess the quality of the state’s water resources, which are fundamental to marine and inland food production.
• The EPA recognises good environmental performance that can provide businesses with a competitive edge.
• The EPA continues to work with the food industry to reduce emissions and waste and incorporate new technologies.
• The EPA provides early advice and direction at the planning phase for developments, including for key food sectors like the aquaculture industry.
• SA is recognised as a leader in resource recovery, including through the EPA’s regulation of the state’s container deposit legislation, the ban on plastic shopping bags, and progressive landfill bans on television sets, whitegoods, tyres, green waste and a number of other recoverable resources.
Creating a vibrant city
Poor and variable ambient air quality (also including noise, dust, odour and vibration issues), proximity to an incompatible land use, contaminated land, contaminated groundwater, inadequate flood and surface stormwater management and under-managed water abstraction can all prevent good quality environments and living conditions.
• The EPA provides advice to planning authorities for managing urban interface issues as early as possible during the planning phase.
• The EPA influences the planning conditions on development to mitigate/avoid environmental pressures.
• The EPA holds significant air quality data and is planning to expand monitoring and public reporting of air quality, including in the CBD, to complement the existing metropolitan air monitoring network.
• The EPA oversees the remediation of contaminated land to enable historically polluted and often abandoned land to be safely developed. This increases the available supply of land for housing and other uses.
• The EPA regulates water quality because clean water is crucial to a vibrant city. Water quality is also influenced by the related areas of land contamination, waste issues, water allocations and groundwater conditions.
Realising the benefits of the mining boom for all South Australians
Mining activity has the potential to affect surface waters and hydro-geologic conditions as well as impact upon air quality, the management of wastes and radioactivity in the environment.
• The EPA regulates mining, and associated activities, working closely with the Department for Manufacturing, Innovation, Trade, Resources and Energy (DMITRE) and others, to manage environmental and radiation issues and minimise ongoing legacy issues.
19 Environment Protection Authority Annual Report 1 July 2011– 30 June 2012
• The EPA seeks to expand regional service delivery, including in areas affected by the expansion of mining activities, and will be exploring how additional mining revenue (through EPA licensing and other cost-recovery sources) may contribute to funding these services.
Growing advanced manufacturing
• The EPA encourages best practice from licensed manufacturers, this being an essential part of its overall regulatory compliance approach. Regulatory practices give rise to technologies for process management and pollution and resource control that may have innovation and technology transfer potential.
• Associated with this, the EPA ensures swift, firm enforcement for those that choose not to comply, who otherwise undermine better operators and who can damage the green credentials for the industry as whole.
• The EPA regulates in a targeted, proportionate, consistent manner to provide predictability for businesses and potential savings for consumers. For more mature and progressive licensees, EPA uses an outcome-focused approach that encourages innovation, while adopting a more prescriptive approach for those with a culture of non-compliance.
• The EPA provides (up to 50%) fee discounts for licensees who demonstrate outstanding environmental performance.
Renewing our neighbourhoods to make them safe and healthy
Effective environmental and radiation regulation that targets important pollution (air and water) and waste and resource use issues helps to protect our communities and improve quality of life.
• The EPA uses a range of tools (legislative and other) to ensure the protection of the community from pollution and waste.
• The EPA oversees a system to identify, assess and remediate historically contaminated sites, to protect communities from the harmful effects of pollution, and to ensure that new urban developments are suitable for housing and other sensitive land uses.
• The EPA undertakes air and water monitoring, along with broader state of the environment reporting, to identify pressures and emerging trends that threaten our environments and people.
• The EPA oversees and assists councils wherever possible to manage local environmental nuisance issues.
An affordable place to live for everyone
• The EPA’s effective deployment of good regulatory practice assists to reduce the cost of goods and services and to reduce business risk and uncertainty.
• Through regulation of industrial pollution the EPA reduces the risk of harm to the health of communities, which in turn lowers pressure on health costs.
• The EPA oversees the remediation of contaminated land, providing greater certainty for development and the opportunity for affordable housing developments and the realisation of urban consolidation objectives.
• The EPA regulates in a targeted, proportionate, consistent manner to provide predictability for businesses and potential saving of on-costs to consumers.
• The EPA provides (up to 50%) fee discounts for licensees who demonstrate outstanding environmental performance.
20 Environment Protection Authority Annual Report 1 July 2011– 30 June 2012
Every chance for every child
• EPA management of environmental issues contributes to children having safe and healthy living and recreational areas.
• Industry is regulated to manage the long-term impacts on health and the environment.
• Through the planning system, the EPA encourages the proper assessment of any historically contaminated sites, particularly where a change of use to a more sensitive use is sought, such as a residence, child-care centre, pre-school and primary school. This ensures that vulnerable groups in our community, such as children, are sufficiently protected from exposure to pollution and chemicals.
Relationships with other organisations
During 2011–12 the EPA worked closely with a range of state government agencies, both within the Environment and Conservation Portfolio and throughout other government departments.
Once again, the EPA provided assistance to the Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR) by undertaking water quality monitoring in the Lower Lakes regions. The information collected has helped to gauge the health and success of recovery of the Lower Lakes.
Officers of the EPA contributed to the Murray–Darling Basin Authority’s proposed Basin Plan by assessing water quality aspects. The EPA also had representation on expert reference groups such as the SA Inter- Agency Reference Group, the Premier’s Task Force and the Basin Plan Working Group.
Like many other government agencies, the EPA contributed significant effort (over 3000 hours) into reviewing the Olympic Dam environmental impact statement (EIS). The EPA actively contributed to cross- government work to develop the state government’s recommendations and response to the EIS.
As in previous years, the EPA worked closely with ZeroWaste SA to enforce the plastic bag ban in South Australia. Both agencies have worked closely on the implementation of the Environment Protection (Waste to Resources) Policy 2010 by identifying alternative waste disposal options and initiatives. Both agencies have also collaborated on the National Waste Policy agenda, including electronic waste (e-waste) management and SA’s contribution to options and consultation of national packaging schemes. More information on the National Waste Policy can be found on page 25 of this document.
On a broader scale, the EPA’s emergency response function allows officers to work closely alongside other government agencies such as the Department for Transport, Energy and Infrastructure (DTEI), SafeWork SA, the Department of Health (DoH) and DENR.
The current focus on site contamination has meant that the EPA and DoH staff work actively together to ensure that identified potential or actual contaminated sites are managed appropriately.
Agency statement objectives
Implement the Environment Protection (Waste to Resources) Policy 2010 (Waste EPP) and related resource recovery specifications
The Waste EPP commenced operation on 1 September 2010 and comes into effect in stages over three years. The Waste EPP supports South Australia’s Strategic Plan 2011 target of reducing waste to landfill by 35% by 2020 and the objectives of South Australia’s Waste Strategy 2011–2015 by promoting resource recovery and the diversion of waste from landfill.
Under the Waste EPP, from 1 September 2012, various identified wastes produced in metropolitan Adelaide must not be sent to landfill unless they have first been subjected to a resource recovery process. In addition, a range of materials are progressively being banned from disposal to landfill. 21 Environment Protection Authority Annual Report 1 July 2011– 30 June 2012
To support these requirements, the EPA has been working to develop guidance and information on what materials will be accepted at resource recovery facilities, the processes required to be followed at resource recovery facilities, and how banned wastes should be handled within the waste and resource recovery industry and by other key generators and transporters of waste.
To support the development of appropriate guidance materials, a report was commissioned by the EPA and ZeroWaste SA to provide an analysis of the resource recovery facilities servicing metropolitan Adelaide. The key outcomes and directions arising from this research were presented to the waste and resource recovery industry in January and February 2012. Draft guidelines on the assessment of resource recovery facilities, resource recovery processing requirements, and handling wastes banned from landfill were released for consultation in May–June 2012.
During the first stage of implementation, additional landfill bans came into effect across South Australia for vehicles, whitegoods and, where aggregated for resource recovery, polypropylene and low-density polyethylene plastic packaging. Reminder notifications for these bans were circulated to industry stakeholders. The EPA, working with ZeroWaste SA, has also been preparing an education program relating to the bans due to take effect from 1 September 2012.
Implementation processes will continue through into 2013. Implementation during 2012–13 will involve further communication with stakeholders, education on upcoming landfill bans, and the finalisation of the guidelines released for consultation.
Improve the accessibility of information held by the EPA
The EPA is committed to making the environmental information it holds more accessible to the public via its website.
The public register directory was added to the website in April 2011 as part of a broader plan to progressively improve the accessibility of environmental information held on the public register.
Since June 2011, the EPA has successfully added the following information to the public register directory:
• current environmental licences issued by the EPA
• an index of all post-2009 site contamination audit reports and notifications received by the EPA.
The inclusion of post-2009 site contamination audit reports and notifications adds to the existing index of site contamination notifications (actual or potential groundwater contamination) that the EPA has received since new site contamination provisions in the EP Act came into effect on 1 July 2009.
This initiative has made it easier for the public to find out what information is held by the EPA and facilitates more timely access to that information. The information contained on the online register is searchable by suburb/town, which enables members of the public to determine whether the EPA holds any environmental information relevant to their local community.
To coincide with the upload of new environmental information, background information is now available on the website in the form of ‘Frequently Asked Questions’ (FAQs). The FAQs have been written in user- friendly language to provide context and to explain the EPA’s crucial role in regulating licensees and managing site contamination in South Australia.
In addition to improvements to the website, the fee structure for accessing public register information was changed in October 2011 to ensure that members of the public are able to access documents at a significantly reduced cost—and often at no cost.
22 Environment Protection Authority Annual Report 1 July 2011– 30 June 2012
The EPA will continue to build on the information available in the online public register directory. Improvements will be prioritised and be based on the level of public interest and the ease of implementation.
More information on public register fees can be found on page 62 of this report.
Finalise the Lefevre Peninsula Strategy as pilot for the State Air Quality Plan
The EPA initiated a collaborative program with several key government agencies and the City of Port Adelaide Enfield to undertake the first stage of an air quality strategy focused on the Lefevre Peninsula region. The aim of the project is to provide the basis for the expansion of a strategic program for air quality to other areas of the Adelaide metropolitan area and other population centres in the state.
A review of the program in early 2012 recommended that, in view of a range of policy developments at state and national levels, the larger state project should be accelerated, with the aim of providing an overarching strategic management framework for air quality in South Australia. The South Australian Framework for Air Quality Management is in its early stages of development and will focus on a set of regions, each with a strategy tailored to its unique requirements.
The substantial work already undertaken during the Lefevre project will be incorporated and further developed in a strategy for northwest Adelaide, one of five regions covering Greater Adelaide. Other regions will incorporate the industrial centres of Port Pirie, Port Augusta and Whyalla in the Upper Spencer Gulf and Mount Gambier in the South East. A ‘rural’ region will encompass the broader air quality issues associated with centres for agricultural, forestry and remote mining activities.
A draft South Australian Framework for Air Quality Management is expected to be available during 2012– 13.
Continue to progress improvements to the EPA licensing system
The Licensing Administration Modernisation Project (LAMP) commenced in September 2010 with the aim of modernising the IT systems relating to licensing, waste levy auditing, waste tracking and the recording of old waste management commission records. Modernising these processes is expected to result in significant savings for the EPA and business, since many tasks which are currently performed manually will be automated. This will lead to increased and improved online services, eg electronic forms and payment options.
The project is being delivered in stages and is progressing as planned. It is expected that the system will be brought into operation during 2013, following data migration, testing and training.
23 Environment Protection Authority Annual Report 1 July 2011– 30 June 2012
BUSINESS SUCCESS AND SUSTAINABILITY
Context
We will support business to reduce environmental impacts and use resources better, through the promotion of good environmental practice.
The EPA takes a firm but fair approach: it works with industries to help them reduce their environmental impacts, but when there is a risk of harm to the environment, the EPA will act quickly and decisively.
Given that there are a variety of environmental risks and compliance behaviours, the EPA uses a tailored
approach, employing a range of strategies to achieve the best regulatory outcomes. Much is achieved through the provision of advice and guidance, partnering with other organisations, education and its core
regulatory role.
Innovative licensing
The EPA offered two special types of licences during 2011-12. Sustainability licences were available to those companies who demonstrated a significant voluntary commitment to improving their environmental sustainability.
Accredited licences are available to those licensees who demonstrate excellence in environmental management and perform beyond compliance. No accredited licences were granted during 2011–12.
Sustainability licences
To be awarded a sustainability licence, organisations must demonstrate a positive compliance attitude and commitment to open engagement with their neighbours and local community.
During the third year of the sustainability licence program, Whyalla City Council was the fifth organisation received a sustainability licence.
Throughout 2011–12, the EPA has also been developing sustainability licences with a number of organisations who are proactively maintaining compliance and seeking to be more sustainable. These organisations have a strong and open relationship with the EPA and encourage a strong internal culture of reducing their impact on the environment and the surrounding community.
A key component of a sustainability licence is the focus on outcome-based licence conditions, expressed in plain English. This has also been a key element in the broader reform of standard mandatory licences and has resulted in the commencement of a review of mandatory licence conditions that has taken advantage of what has been learnt from the sustainability licence program.
In late 2011–12, the EPA commenced a review of its ‘beyond compliance’ programs. This has included streamlining processes through the use of an efficient desktop assessment tool, as well as considering how best to structure and offer beyond compliance programs to provide maximum value to more licensees and in promoting strong compliance and beyond compliance business culture.
Funding for the Sustainability Licences initiative ceased on 30 June 2012.
24 Environment Protection Authority Annual Report 1 July 2011– 30 June 2012 National Sustainability Agenda
The National Waste Policy was agreed by all Australian environment ministers in November 2009 and sets Australia's waste management and resource recovery direction to 2020. The EPA has been involved in the implementation of the National Waste Policy (NWP) across all levels of the program. A number of priority NWP programs are also significant priorities for SA. Together with ZeroWaste SA, the EPA represents SA on a number of working groups focused on developing and implementing detailed policies and operational approaches to better waste management.
Priority areas that have progressed over the last 12 months include the development and implementation of the Product Stewardship Act 2011, which focuses in the first instance on collection schemes for television sets, computers and light globes containing mercury; and the national packaging scheme options consultation process. The EPA and ZeroWaste SA have had significant input into these programs, which connect strongly with the SA Strategic Plan, State Waste Strategy 2012–15 and the Waste EPP.
FluoroCycle is an example of a national scheme that the EPA contributes to through the Waste EPP. The scheme aims to increase the recycling of lamps that contain mercury and reduce the amount of mercury entering the environment. The objective of FluoroCycle is to prohibit the disposal of fluorescent lighting and any other lighting that contains mercury from metropolitan Adelaide from 1 September 2012. This ban is scheduled to extend statewide from 1 September 2013. As a Foundation Signatory to the Scheme, the EPA is also now recycling its mercury-containing lamps at all EPA site locations.
Further information on the EPA’s sustainable practices can be found on page 67 of this document.
Container deposit legislation (CDL)
In January 2012 the Northern Territory introduced a container deposit scheme closely based on the South Australian model. An intergovernmental agreement between South Australia and the Northern Territory is now in place for the provision of mutual assistance and, where possible, alignment of the administration and ongoing development of the respective schemes.
The Standing Council for Environment and Water committed to undertaking a Regulatory Impact Statement (RIS) to assess potential options for increasing recovery of packaging materials and decreasing litter from packaging materials. The RIS looks at a number of options, including product stewardship arrangements and container deposit schemes (CDS). The RIS was released for consultation between 7 December 2011 and 27 March 2012. Work is now progressing for the development of a decision RIS. South Australia has been actively involved in each stage of the development of the RIS, particularly in relation to assessment of a national CDS. South Australia’s CDS continues to support very high return rates of beverage containers (Figure 1). The September 2008 refund increase to 10 cents continues to be a catalyst for increased return rates. Table 2 shows the return rates for the various container types for 2011–12 and prior to the 10 cent refund increase.
Table 1 Percentage return rates for beverage containers
Year % Return
2007–08 69.9
2008–09 75.8
2009–10 80.1
2010–11 80.4
2011-12 81.4
25 Environment Protection Authority Annual Report 1 July 2011– 30 June 2012
Beverage Container Annual Return Rates
84 82 81.4 80.1 80.4 80 78 75.8 76
74 Total
72 70.6 Percentage 69.9 70 68 66 64 2006/07 2007/08 2008/09 2009/10 2010/11 2011/12 Year
Figure 1 CDL annual return rates
Table 2 Return rates 2011–12 for the various container types and prior to the 10c refund increase
Container type Return rates 2011–12 Prior to refund increase
Glass 84.4 78.5
Aluminium 87.8 77.3
Polyethylene terephthalate (PET) 78.0 63.6
High-density polyethylene (HDPE) 58.6 49.2
Liquid paperboard cartons (LPD) 57.7 35.4
Draft Adelaide Coastal Water Quality Improvement Plan
In spring 2011, the draft Adelaide Coastal Water Quality Improvement Plan (ACWQIP) was made available for public comment on the EPA website and sent in hard copy to key stakeholder and community organisations. In total, 105 comments were received on the document, 74 via an online feedback form and 31 via written letters or email documents. Comments were supportive of the ACWQIP’s vision, environmental values and eight strategies.
The focus of the ACWQIP is on reducing the nutrient and sediment loads entering Adelaide’s coastal waters from industrial and wastewater treatment plant discharges and via stormwater. The eight strategies of the ACWQIP link to other key activities of the SA government on stormwater, such as work under the Adelaide and Mount Lofty Ranges Regional Natural Resources Management Plan, Water for Good, the Stormwater Management Strategy and the Blueprint for Urban Stormwater Management. The draft ACWQIP is now being finalised for the implementation phase to commence in 2012–13.
26 Environment Protection Authority Annual Report 1 July 2011– 30 June 2012 Mount Lofty Ranges Watershed Water Quality Improvement Plan
The Mount Lofty Ranges Watershed Water Quality Improvement Plan (WQIP) has progressed over the last 12 months, with greater clarification obtained on the needs of stakeholders. A working draft WQIP was completed by December 2011 as per the requirements of Water for Good, which highlighted high-priority catchments according to the level of risk, proximity to reservoirs and quality of aquatic ecosystems.
The draft also flagged possible actions, limitations and projects for the longer term to improve water quality in the Mount Lofty Ranges. Engagement with the rural sector has continued, with information relating to the WQIP being reviewed directly by industry representatives as the plan is developed.
A new version of the Mount Lofty Ranges Watershed WQIP is currently being prepared and will endeavour to answer the many questions raised in the stakeholder review process. The EPA is continuing to develop a greater understanding of impediments to change and future expectations, and is fostering significant working relationships between the EPA, the Department of Planning, Transport and Infrastructure (DPTI), Adelaide and Mount Lofty Ranges Natural Resources Management Board, the Department for Water (DfW), SA Water and local government.
The EPA is also working to expand the role of the current Water for Good Action 49 Steering Committee to cover Actions 50, 51 and 52, ensuring greater coordination between agencies and those actions focused on the Mount Lofty Ranges.
EPA licensed wastewater treatment plants
In 2011–12 the EPA provided advice on a number of proposed new developments in the state, with the long-term aim of ensuring that all planned development includes the provision of sustainable wastewater treatment. To support important state strategies, including the Water for Good plan, the EPA is working to ensure that recycled water is maximised where practicable.
In addition, the EPA has been liaising closely with existing licensees who provide wastewater treatment to facilitate improvements in the quality of water discharged to the environment and improved understanding of potential impacts through more targeted monitoring and evaluation.
As a result of this work, the EPA has recently undertaken a review of the licence conditions applied to wastewater treatment plants and community wastewater management systems across the state. A new set of risk-based conditions has been developed, which will be progressively applied to EPA licences to ensure clear and effective regulation through a standardised and consistent approach to management and monitoring.
A focus for future regulation will be ensuring firstly that the performance of the metropolitan wastewater treatment plants is optimised and secondly determining the long-term goals for reducing nutrient discharge from these facilities. This work will continue in 2012–13, along with a review of high-risk regional areas. In consultation with key stakeholders, the EPA will determine agreed objectives, actions and timeframes for implementation
27 Environment Protection Authority Annual Report 1 July 2011– 30 June 2012
MORE EFFECTIVE RELATIONSHIPS
Context
We will achieve better results protecting and enhancing South Australia’s environment by building more effective relationships with industry, licensees, the community and local government.
The EPA works with industry, other parts of the government and the community to reduce risks to the environment and promote proactive compliance behaviours.
The EPA supports the objective in South Australia’s Strategic Plan of improving wellbeing through working with key agencies to develop a preferred approach to managing local noise and air quality issues.
Stakeholder engagement
The appointment of the EPA’s new Chief Executive Campbell Gemmell presented a valuable opportunity to engage with a wide range of stakeholders. There was keen interest from the media, licensees, community groups, peak industry and professional associations, and state and local government to meet Dr Gemmell and to hear about his international experience in environmental regulation and his initial observations of South Australian environmental protection. A program of media interviews and speaking engagements marked the first 100 days of his appointment.
Other significant community engagement activities throughout 2011–12 built on the previous year’s focus on improving community access to EPA information. The online public register directory on the EPA website, initiated in April 2011 with an index of groundwater contamination notifications, has been progressively expanded with the addition of all 2100 EPA licenses and an index to site contamination audit notifications and reports. The publication of applications for EPA licences and environment protection orders will follow in the latter half of 2012. The online public register directory, together with the move to waive certain fees for copies of public register documents, enables members of the public to easily obtain information about the environmental issues in their local community with the potential to impact on them.
Participation in community groups associated with key licensed sites provides the EPA with the opportunity to effectively engage with community members on a range of local environmental issues. These include: Adelaide Brighton Cement (ABC) Reference Group, Penrice Osborne Community Consultative Group, Residents of Inner North West Adelaide Incorporated, Owens-Illinois Community Consultation Group, Linwood Quarry Joint Working Group, Strathalbyn Community Consultative Group, Mitcham Rail Taskforce, Whyalla Environment Consultation Group, Balefill Management Consultative Committee, Northern Adelaide Waste Management Authority (NAWMA) and the Southern Region Waste Resource Authority (SWARA) Residents Meeting.
Staff capability to engage effectively with a wider range of community groups has been developed through:
• staff training with a focus on risk communication where EPA officers completed the three-day Flinders University Risk Communications course presented by former US EPA risk communication expert Alvin Chunn
• staff information sessions to raise awareness of engagement and present case studies of current good practice (including EPA case studies). The first session was held in early 2012—with Dean Brown, AO who discussed community engagement in the Lower Lakes region—and further sessions planned for the calendar year.
28 Environment Protection Authority Annual Report 1 July 2011– 30 June 2012
EPA sponsorship and participation in key stakeholder events has also continued to strengthen strategic relationships:
• Waste Management Association of Australia – National Landfill and Transfer Stations conferences
• Boating Industry Association of South Australia – Adelaide Boat Show
• Environmental Health Australia (South Australian Branch) – 2012 State Conference
• Local Government Association – 2012 Local Government Showcase and General Meeting.
Market research
Market research surveys are an effective way to measure and evaluate the subjective qualities of the EPA’s reputation, influence and service delivery. They provide insights into stakeholder perceptions, valuable feedback for identifying areas for improvement and quantifiable performance indicators. Two major surveys were conducted by the EPA during 2011–12.
2012 stakeholder survey
The EPA’s 2012 stakeholder survey was undertaken on behalf of the EPA by the Ehrenburg–Bass Institute for Marketing Science in April and May. Comparison with the benchmark survey conducted in 2008 has identified emerging trends and issues and areas of business that can be improved as well as evaluating customer service satisfaction in line with Target 32 of South Australia’s Strategic Plan 2011.
This year four stakeholder groups were surveyed—licensed business stakeholders, radiation licensees, callers to the EPA enquiries and complaints hotline, and local government officers (not surveyed in 2008). The report indicated that the 2012 results were very consistent with those of 2008, as shown in Table 3 which sets out the results for service attributes that are aligned with the Common Measurement Tool (CMT) survey tool used across the public sector to measure South Australian citizens’ satisfaction with government services.
Table 3 Perceptions of EPA service quality and satisfaction (2008 ratings provided in brackets)
Licensed Enquiry/complaints Local Service quality* Radiation businesses callers government
Fairness 7.9 (7.8) 7.6 (7.0) 8.7 (8.0) 8.1
Knowledge and 7.7 (7.7) 6.7 (6.8) 8.4 (7.8) 7.8 competence
Information 7.7 (7.6) 6.5 (6.0) 8.6 (7.9) 7.5
Accessibility 7.5 (7.3) 5.9 (6.2) 8.5 (7.8) 7.4
Overall service quality 7.5 (7.4) 6.3 (6.0) 8.4 (7.7) 7.5
Timeliness 7.4 (7.4) 6.1 (5.9) 8.3 (7.8) 7.4
Extra mile/courtesy 7.1 (7.2) 5.8 (5.7) 8.1 (7.1) 7.2
Overall satisfaction** 72 (71) 63 (61) 80 (76) 71
* Service qualities were rated on a scale of 0–10.
** Overall satisfaction is rated on a scale of 0–100.
29 Environment Protection Authority Annual Report 1 July 2011– 30 June 2012
Many of the findings are reported as an average (mean score) out of 10. Based on benchmark figures from other government organisations, scores of less than 7 can be considered as areas requiring improvement, scores ranging from 7 to 8 are seen as a reasonable performance, and scores of 8 and over are seen as a strong performance. These broad guidelines are based on service quality and satisfaction research the researchers have undertaken over many years at all levels of government.
Areas identified for improvement include the enquiry/complaints callers and the service qualities of ’timeliness‘ and ’courtesy‘ across all stakeholder groups.
When asked about their working relationship with the EPA, a majority in all stakeholder groups suggested that their relationship was either ’quite good‘ or ’very good‘. Further supporting this, large majorities of the samples for each stakeholder group said that their last service encounter had resulted in getting what they were looking for (slightly lower for enquiry callers).
When asked how the last service encounter had faired compared to expectations, the bulk of respondents said that it had been ’as expected‘, with many also reporting that the service was better than they had expected.
In each stakeholder group the most preferred contact method matched the most commonly used contact method. There has been a significant shift towards the use of the EPA website for all stakeholders, particularly licensed businesses and enquiry/complaints line callers. For all stakeholder groups, telephone and email are the two most preferred methods of contact.
The overall satisfaction rating of 72 (out of 100) is both consistent with the 2008 rating of 71 and is comparable to that of other government organisations, suggesting a reasonable performance with room for improvement.
Site contamination communications survey
During 2011 the EPA announced seven separate and unrelated groundwater contamination investigations: Birkenhead, Edwardstown–South Plympton, Solomontown–Port Pirie, Southern Edwardstown, South Road–Edwardstown, Glenelg East and Elizabeth.
Public perception that the EPA lacked openness and transparency in the context of the Edwardstown– South Plympton investigations led to the implementation of three measures to improve these perceptions: further enhancement of our communications protocols regarding public notification of site contamination (soil or groundwater); related information being made available through the EPA website; and a more proactive approach to media liaison.
The site contamination communications survey was conducted in March 2012 to evaluate the effectiveness and appropriateness of the communications protocols and to assess the impact on public perception of the EPA, particularly in relation to the management of site contamination.
The survey involved door-to-door sampling of 200 residences in the Edwardstown area (covering the three investigation areas of Edwardstown–South Plympton, Southern Edwardstown and South Road– Edwardstown) and 400 telephone interviews with a statewide sample of the general public.
The survey sought information from each of the two samples on awareness of site contamination, information sources and preferences, levels of concern, perceived responsibilities, and levels of trust and satisfaction. Key findings included:
• 73% of residents in Edwardstown recalled seeing or hearing something about investigations into any sites in South Australia in the previous 12 months that are or might be contaminated compared with 52% of the general public.
30 Environment Protection Authority Annual Report 1 July 2011– 30 June 2012
• Preferred sources of information for Edwardstown residents are letterbox drop/mail (81%), local newspaper (Messenger: 51%), TV (50%) and The Advertiser (47%). For the general public these are TV (72%), letterbox drop/mail (65%), The Advertiser (47%) and the local newspaper (Messenger 41%).
• On a scale of 0 to10, average levels of concern for Edwardstown residents dropped from 5.3 on initially hearing about the contamination, to 4.4 after receiving more information. The average level of concern for the general public who were aware of any contamination was three out of 10. It should be noted that these questions were being asked six to 12 months after the initial announcement of site contamination in Edwardstown and recall of actual levels of concern may have reduced with the passage of time.
• Also on a scale of 0 to 10, respondents were reasonably confident that they could trust information from the EPA (Edwardstown residents 6.3 and the general public 7.4).
• Overall satisfaction with the way that the EPA keeps people informed on site contamination issues is low: general public 5.6 and Edwardstown residents 4.1.
The EPA will continue its work to improve public trust in and satisfaction with its communications on site and groundwater contamination, and use the survey findings to inform future communications.
SmokeWatch
The final year of the three-year SmokeWatch Mount Gambier program concluded in December 2011. The program combined air quality monitoring, and community education and engagement. It was designed to encourage householders to undertake efficient woodheating practices.
SmokeWatch Mount Gambier was a collaborative partnership between the EPA, City of Mount Gambier, Department of Health, Firewood Association of Australia and the Australian Home Heating Association. Since its launch in 2009 it has gained the support of several local businesses, schools and community organisations.
Highlights of the 2011 program included:
• the provision of wood moisture meters to the local library to lend to residents
• the development of a self-assessment tool for woodheater users
• a community information workshop providing results of air quality monitoring in Mount Gambier and an opportunity for residents to ask questions about air quality in Mount Gambier and how to improve wood heating efficiency.
It is evident that community awareness of air quality issues has been raised, and enhanced monitoring throughout the program has provided information on the sources of particle pollution, including the contribution of domestic wood smoke.
The 2011 campaign report will be available online in 2012–13. The EPA is currently working with partners and supporters to review the three-year program and provide recommendations for potential future activities to promote the key messages.
Pursuing better regulation across government As well as focusing on building regulatory capacity and capability within the organisation, the EPA has taken a leadership role in engaging other regulatory groups across the state government with the aim of establishing broader networking opportunities, building capability and sharing resources. A significant event to support this endeavour was bringing Professor Malcolm Sparrow, an internationally renowned academic on the subject of better practice regulatory approaches, to Adelaide for a workshop in May 2012. The workshop was attended by over 50 senior regulators from across the state government, representing 10 regulatory agencies. The learning gained from the workshop will continue to be applied by individual
31 Environment Protection Authority Annual Report 1 July 2011– 30 June 2012 organisations, and most importantly, cross-agency networks will be encouraged to pursue regulatory problems where there is shared agency responsibility.
The EPA has also been active in pursuing better regulatory practice across jurisdictions through a range of programs. It is a key participant in Australasian Environmental Law Enforcement Regulators neTwork (AELERT). Through this network EPA is leading and supporting a number of better regulation programs including the consideration and development of effective environmental regulation performance measures, the development and delivery of training and professional development for regulatory officers and collaborative efforts to better combat illegal waste activities across borders. AELERT also supports the Council of Australian Governments’ (COAG) policy priority to harmonise environmental regulation, through which EPA provides significant input. Focus areas under this program for 2011–12 included risk-based regulatory approaches, site contamination management and waste management, all of key importance to the EPA.
EPA will continue to support, and lead where appropriate, government programs to continue to develop and pursue better regulatory approaches and practices. We recognise the significant gains and benefits that can be delivered through this approach, including establishing linked and consistent regulatory regimes across departments and states wherever possible, which in turn can lead to reduced regulatory burden and ultimately better environmental outcomes.
32 Environment Protection Authority Annual Report 1 July 2011– 30 June 2012
IMPROVED REGULATION
Context
Working with our stakeholders, we will continue our efforts to reduce red tape for business. Together, we will develop innovative and cost-effective solutions to protect, restore and enhance the quality of our environment.
The EPA’s role as a regulator is to promote the objects of the Environment Protection Act 1993 and the Radiation Protection and Control Act 1982 and to secure compliance with these acts. While the legislation sets the basis of the EPA’s functions, how the EPA allocates resources and exercises its discretion is an essential component of its regulatory style, which the law does not determine.
Over the past 12 months, EPA has continued to strengthen and clarify its regulatory approach. This has supported the organisation’s pursuit of risk-based and proportional decision making, both in terms of proactive compliance programs and dealing with non-compliance.
The EPA adopts a firm and fair approach. It strives to be transparent and accountable in the regulatory process. This approach applies equally to preventative approaches to support compliance and reactive
approaches to deliver enforcement. It endeavours to ensure that environmental risks are managed and harms controlled. In undertaking its regulatory role, the EPA is responsible for promoting the principles of
ecologically sustainable development.
The EPA attempts to maximise the number of people in the regulated community who take proactive responsibility for their environmental compliance and performance. This requires good compliance support. At the other end of the spectrum, the EPA drives strong enforcement to create a credible deterrent to maximise the compliance of poor performers. The EPA continues to examine Australian and international regulatory approaches to inform ongoing improvement of its regulatory strategy.
Significant licensees
The EPA licenses activities of environmental significance and imposes conditions that are appropriate for controlling the environmental risks and harms and provides advice and guidance on compliance and conducts audits of industry sectors. It then undertakes inspections to assess compliance, taking enforcement action where required to achieve compliance with the EP Act. To further environmental improvements, the EPA works with licensees to develop environment improvement programs (EIPs).
In seeking to reduce harm, the EPA takes a risk-based approach. It works with the community and industry to identify impacts and gathers and assesses data to develop a sound scientific basis for identifying risks and understanding potential harms. It allocates resources to manage the activities that present the greatest risk. The EPA then seeks to achieve positive outcomes, reduce environmental and radiation risks, protect people’s health, and increase community confidence. An overview of some of the key projects progressed in 2011–12 is given in the following pages.
The EPA seeks to achieve the best outcomes by striving to be predictable, consistent and even-handed, and to take the right action at the right time. In 2011–12 the EPA introduced programs to provide better structure to inspections, regulatory decision making and the records of regulatory actions. This enables the EPA to better audit its compliance actions and provides licensees with prompt and structured records of inspection outcomes.
33 Environment Protection Authority Annual Report 1 July 2011– 30 June 2012
Nyrstar
Nyrstar operates one of the world’s largest lead-smelting facilities in Port Pirie. Historically, the smelter has been the source of the well-documented lead contamination in the township and high levels of blood lead in the local community.
The tenby10 program, a five-year partnership between Nyrstar, the state governmentt and the local council, concluded at the end of 2010. While this program made significant progress in reducing the number of children with lead levels above 10 micrograms (µm) per decilitre from 60% to 25%, the blood lead levels of some children were still above the National Health and Medical Research Council recommended blood lead levels.
The EPA has continued to oversee Nyrstar’s compliance with current lead emission reduction programs, to ensure that all available measures are in place to reduce current emissions, with existing plant technology, as far as practicably possible.
During 2011–12, the EPA comprehensively reviewed and strengthened Nystar’s EPA licence by including additional and challenging requirements on the company, with the aim of substantially reducing emissions from the smelter and the blood lead levels in the community.
5.00 Pt Pir ie Wes t
Oliver Street 4.00
3 Ellen Street
g/m Frank Green Park µ 3.00 NEPM Standard 0.5µg/m³
2.00 Data are at ambient conditions Concentration 1.00
0.00 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 Year
Figure 2 Annual lead concentrations at Port Pirie monitoring sites
Data shows trends in lead concentration generally decreasing with time (Figure 2). The EPA continues to work with the Nyrstar smelter on ways to further reduce lead concentrations at Port Pirie.
The EPA also conducts monitoring for sulphur dioxide at Port Pirie according to the requirements of the National Environment Protection (Ambient Air Quality) Measure. Table 4 shows the trends in sulphur dioxide exceedences of the one-hour National Environment Protection Standard.
Table 4 also shows exceedences of the National Environment Protection Standards for sulphur dioxide at the EPA’s Port Pirie monitoring station. The goal for the one-hour and 24-hour standards is that they should not be exceeded more than once per year.
34 Environment Protection Authority Annual Report 1 July 2011– 30 June 2012
Table 4 Trends in sulphur dioxide exceedences of the one-hour National Environment Protection Standard
Year Number of exceedences of the one-hour Number of exceedences of the 24-hour standard for sulphur dioxide (0.2 ppm) standard for sulphur dioxide (0.08 ppm)
2003 21 1
2004 31 0
2005 29 0
2006 33 0
2007 35 0
2008 28 0
2009 29 2
2010 35 0
2011 40 0
Figure 3 shows the annual average sulphur dioxide concentration at the monitoring station in Port Pirie does not exceed the Air NEPM annual standard of 0.02 ppm. More information on South Australia’s air quality can be found on page 57 of this report.
0.025 Annual Average NEPM Annual Standard 0.02ppm
0.020
0.015
0.010
0.005
0.000 Annual Averageconcentration (ppm) 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 Year
Figure 3 Trends in sulphur dioxide against National Environment Protection Standards at the EPA Oliver Street site in Port Pirie
Kimberly–Clark Australia & New Zealand
Kimberly–Clark Australia & New Zealand (KCA) operates a large pulp and paper mill on two sites near Millicent in the southeast of South Australia under an indenture agreement that concludes in October 2014.
During 2011–12 the EPA and KCA continued to discuss and progress the process and requirements for an EPA authorisation, which the company plans to achieve in 2014.
35 Environment Protection Authority Annual Report 1 July 2011– 30 June 2012
KCA made a business decision to close the Tantanoola Pulp Mill in November 2011, which had a substantial impact on employment in the region. The wastewater stream from the Tantanoola Mill had been particularly high in nutrients, and in discussions between KCA and the EPA this has been a substantial issue requiring attention as the end of the indenture nears.
The latest wastewater analyses, four months after the Tantanoola Mill closure, show a vast reduction in nutrients in the wastewater. The requirements of the remaining wastewater stream from the KCA Millicent Mill site remain unchanged. The EPA and KCA are now reviewing the details of KCA plans, given the changed and improved chemistry of the overall wastewater stream.
Shell Bitumen, Birkenhead
In 2006, a number of facilities on the Lefevre Peninsula were identified by the EPA as potential sources of odour, including the major fuel storage terminals, and the bitumen processing and blending plants. In response to this issue, the EPA worked with each facility to develop environment improvement programs (EIPs) to reduce odour to within EPA criteria. To date, all facilities have met their obligations to implement improvement actions.
Of particular note, the Shell Company of Australia Limited made a commitment to reducing its odour contribution by installing a thermal oxidiser, which destroys odorous compounds emitted during the loading of bitumen into the facility.
Following successful installation and commissioning of the equipment in 2011, the company has:
• submitted an odour modelling report to the EPA, demonstrating compliance with odour criteria as per EPA requirements
• developed a detailed contingency plan outlining actions in the event that the thermal oxidiser is not operational during a loading event (due to a fault or maintenance activity for example)
• used a specialist in the field as well as trained and tested its own staff in odour monitoring to enable them to conduct monitoring in the community, should contingency action be required.
The EPA is confident that, not only does Shell have a greater understanding of its potential impact on the community; it has taken the appropriate steps to eliminate and manage those potential impacts in line with EPA requirements.
Penrice Quarry, Penrice/Angaston
During 2011–12 the EPA attended quarterly meetings of the Penrice Community Consultation Group, formed to provide the community with a mechanism to provide feedback on the quarry’s operating plan and rehabilitation program. Membership of the group includes an independent chair and local community members, with the Barossa Council, the Department of Primary Industries and Regions South Australia (PIRSA) and Penrice Soda Holdings Ltd (Penrice) representatives. The EPA attends these meetings to provide clarification on environmental management issues.
Throughout 2011–12 Penrice continued to implement its dust management plan, required by the EPA as part of its EIP established in 2010. This dust management plan has helped reduce nuisance dust issues. Furthermore, the EPA has worked with DMITRE and Penrice this year on the installation of three new dust monitors, which have provided continuous, real-time information, helping to further contain Penrice's dust mitigation activities under the dust management plan.
Although extensive noise monitoring and modelling completed in 2010 showed compliance with the Environment Protection (Noise) Policy 2007, the EPA requested a noise management plan from Penrice to
36 Environment Protection Authority Annual Report 1 July 2011– 30 June 2012 facilitate noise management. In addition to this the EPA continues to work closely with Penrice, DMITRE and with consultants to identify appropriate improvements to further reduce noise impacts on its neighbours.
With the upgrades Penrice has implemented through the EIPs and dust and noise management plans, there has been a significant decrease in community complaints to the EPA.
Adelaide Brighton Cement
EPA licence conditions for Adelaide Brighton Cement (ABC) include the implementation of an EIP to manage onsite activities, and meet specific monitoring and reporting requirements.
The current EIP targets continuous improvement of the environmental performance of the company, with a focus on reducing ambient dust levels, noise levels and the visual impact of the site. It was developed in consultation with the ABC Community Liaison Group (ABC CLG) and is valid until December 2015.
The improvements completed in the last year under the current licence include:
• Dust reduced by minimising drag-out of materials on trucks, using dust suppressant on stockpiles, upgrading of buildings and conveyors identified as dust sources, installation of shadecloth on boundary fencing, upgrading and paving /greening of unsealed areas.
• Noise monitoring and modelling completed with targeted noise attenuation work undertaken to reduce noise impacts on the local community.
• Continuous improvements to the filtration systems of the plant to ensure that the emission of particulates, nitrous oxides, sulphur oxides and carbon dioxide are kept to a minimum at all times.
The EPA has been working closely with ABC during 2011–12 on the planning and progression of the development of a new cement mill and ship loading facility on site (Figure 4). It is expected that the installation will reduce dust emissions further as raw materials will not have to be kept in open stockpiles nor will they need to be moved in the open. In addition, dust emissions from ship loading cement will be removed.
37 Environment Protection Authority Annual Report 1 July 2011– 30 June 2012
Figure 4 Site works currently being undertaken at ABC facility
The EPA remains actively engaged with the community and attends each quarterly ABC CLG meeting. The EPA reports to the group on air quality monitoring, community complaints and licence requirements, including EIP objectives.
Medical waste sector audit
In 2012, the EPA undertook an industry sector audit covering the handling, transport, treatment and disposal of medical waste.
The introduction of the Environment Protection (Waste to Resources) Policy 2010 (Waste EPP) saw medical waste treatments, in addition to incineration, being accepted, as long as they met the industry code of practice. However, alternative methods to incineration have the potential to create a range of environmental compliance issues within the industry as they allow fewer elements of the waste stream to be treated, therefore requiring more stringent segregation and diligence from the producer and transporters.
38 Environment Protection Authority Annual Report 1 July 2011– 30 June 2012
This level of segregation is directly relevant to producers and transfer stations, as certain waste from many of these facilities is currently treated by autoclave or sent interstate for a range of different treatments, some of which are not available in South Australia.
The scope of the audit was to determine the level of compliance with the EPA medical waste guideline, the industry code of practice and licence conditions. The areas of the waste industry audited were producers, transporters, treatment facilities and depots. The activities and processes the audit investigated included segregation, storage, handling and training/induction of staff. The audit of sites occurred in April 2012. A summary of the findings and outcomes from the audit have been collated, with the audit resulting in clearer and more comprehensive guidance for and expectations of compliance for the sector.
Findings from the audit showed source segregation in response to approved alternative treatment methods was satisfactory and improving. The audit also identified that while treatment and disposal of medical waste was generally done well by the industry, there was improvement to be made with respect to spill management, storage requirements and site security in some cases.
As a result of the audit, a review of licences across the sector will be carried out with updated conditions put in place, where required, to achieve consistency and ensure compliance across the industry sector.
Site contamination 2011–121
Site contamination continued to be a priority focus area for the EPA over 2011–12. As well as overseeing a number of specific contaminated areas, EPA continued to strengthen systems, communications and tools and input into national research organisations.
Accomplishments for the financial year included:
• increased transparency and availability of site contamination information through the web and print media
• where possible, identification of the person who caused the contamination and a requirement for them to fund the work associated with public notification and initial risk assessment
• the first criminal prosecution for causing serious environmental harm from a leaking fuel storage tank.
1 Under the Environment Protection Act 1993,
• site contamination audit means a review carried out by a person that– (a) examines assessments or remediation carried out by another person in respect of known or suspected site contamination on or below the surface of a site; and (b) is for the purpose of determining any one or more of the following matters: (i) the nature and extent of any site contamination present or remaining on or below the surface of the site; (ii) the suitability of the site for a sensitive use or another use or range of uses; (iii) what remediation is or remains necessary for a specified use or range of uses.
• liability for site contamination means– (a) liability to be issued with an order under Part 10A in respect of the site contamination; or (b) liability to pay an amount ordered by the Court under Part 11 in respect of the site contamination.
• notifications of harm to groundwater are notifications pursuant to section 83A.
39 Environment Protection Authority Annual Report 1 July 2011– 30 June 2012
• accreditation of a fourth person as a site contamination auditor under the SA scheme. Other persons have been accredited through mutual recognition processes.
• contribution to the revision of the Site Contamination National Evironment Protection Measure, which establishes a nationally consistent approach to the assessment of site contamination.
• contribution to the significant national and international achievements of the Cooperative Research Centre for Contamination and Remediation of the Environment (CRC CARE).
From July 2011 to May 2012 the EPA received:
• 53 notifications of commencement of site contamination audit
• 35 site contamination audit reports
• 9 notifications of termination of site contamination audit
• 6 agreements for the transfer of liability for site contamination
• 100 notifications of harm to groundwater.
Edwardstown
In August 2009, the EPA was notified by owner Colonial First State of groundwater contamination at the former Hills Industries site in Edwardstown. At the EPA’s reques, further work was undertaken and groundwater contamination was progressively identified outside the former Hills site.
Initial assessments carried out on the site showed that at the time there was no risk to human health as a result of the contamination. As a result of further delineation of the contaminant plume, the EPA was notified in February 2011 of a substantial groundwater plume extending up to one kilometre away into shallower groundwater. At the same time, the EPA received a risk assessment report that concluded that there may be a risk to human health—where the groundwater is shallow.
A total of 4000 tonnes of perchlorethylene (PCE) contaminated soil, contributing to the source of the groundwater contamination, has been excavated and treated at the Integrated Waste Service’ (IWS) multipurpose waste treatment facility (MWTF) at Dublin. This was undertaken with the endorsement of the independent site contamination auditor and following the EPA’s approval of the treatment work plan (TWP).
The EPA has required further testing to determine the full nature and extent of the contamination. This testing is being completed by the site contamination consultant URS as part of the progression of an independent site contamination audit.
URS work included indoor air and soil vapour assessments aimed at assessing the presence and use of underground building structures and householder bore water access in a limited area within the residential EPA investigation area. In March 2012, a resident survey was undertaken to identify these locations to provide data to the auditor in order to resolve uncertainties in the risk assessment component of the audit report.
Hills Holdings have engaged a site contamination auditor to review all investigations undertaken in order to provide a site contamination audit report. As part of the audit, a site contamination audit statement will also be prepared. The statement will summarise the findings of the audit. The audit will provide certainty in relation to identifying whether further remediation is required.
The EPA will keep the local community informed of progress via its webpage as further information becomes available. Residents in the affected area have received a letter from the EPA advising them not to use bore water until further notice.
40 Environment Protection Authority Annual Report 1 July 2011– 30 June 2012
The EPA is participating in ongoing discussions with local government and DPTI in relation to the progression of the City of Marion’s Castle Plaza Development Plan Amendment. Land associated with the former Hills Industry site is being audited to confirm the suitability of the range of uses as part of this process.
Solomontown
Since December 2010, the EPA has been undertaking assessments at locations near the former South Australian Gas Company (SAGASCO) gasworks at Solomontown in Port Pirie.
The EPA’s initial investigation identified the types of chemicals typically associated with old gasworks activities; these include benzene, total petroleum hydrocarbons, naphthalene and ammonia.
Passive soil vapour tests conducted in late December 2010 and early January 2011 found elevated levels of chemicals underground in road verges and footpaths. These chemicals can present a risk to human health if they migrate through the soil and into houses.
Follow-up indoor air testing identified some elevated levels of the chemicals inside residential properties. As a precautionary measure, the EPA installed indoor air purification equipment in five homes where benzene had been detected at levels exceeding or approaching the World Health Organization (WHO) guideline value.
The EPA undertook follow-up indoor air and active soil vapour testing at the residential properties during 2011 and early 2012 to determine whether chemicals identified underground were migrating through the soil into the homes. A vapour risk specialist was engaged to independently review the investigation work undertaken by the Authority.
The EPA will continue to advise the local residents of the findings of its investigations and to work with Health SA to manage site contamination at Solomontown.
Elizabeth
In February 2011, the EPA received a notification of groundwater contamination at a site in Elizabeth. The information identified trichlorethene (TCE) at concentrations that exceed the recommended guideline value for potable groundwater. The EPA received a second notification in late October 2011. The additional groundwater investigations undertaken by the owner indicated that the groundwater contamination extended off the property into a commercial/industrial zone. At this time, the extent of the contamination had been identified as along Hogarth Road, Elizabeth South.
More recent investigations undertaken by the owner in late 2011 and early 2012 have found concentrations of TCE in groundwater beneath residential properties north of Hogarth Road. Since that time, the owner has engaged a site contamination auditor, accredited by the EPA, to assess the site and the contamination that extends off the site.
The EPA will continue to oversee all the assessment and remediation undertaken at the site and liaise with the owner to ensure on-site and off-site risks are managed.
Port Stanvac
In May 2011, the EPA approved a voluntary site contamination assessment proposal, pursuant to section 103I of the EP Act, for the former Port Stanvac Refinery site. Under the terms of the proposal, Mobil is required to undertake specified assessment works at the site over a two-year period. It is possible that additional assessment work may be required following the conclusion of this agreement.
41 Environment Protection Authority Annual Report 1 July 2011– 30 June 2012
Mobil has engaged EDS Australasia Pty Ltd, a United Kingdom-based demolition contractor, to undertake the demolition of the refinery infrastructure to ground level only. Demolition works are planned to commence in June 2012 and continue for approximately 15 months. Remediation will occur following the demolition and completion of assessment works.
Hendon
In December 2011, the EPA undertook an historic file review for a property at 3–5 Phillips Crescent, Hendon. The file contained two reports indicating numerous potentially contaminating activities, with contamination subsequently detected across the site. This site has previously been used for ammunition works, electrical component manufacturing, circuit board manufacturing and possibly electroplating. The site is currently used as a paint sales office and warehouse.
Following discussions with the current site owner, a third report was identified. The report was dated October 1992 and provided to the EPA by the current site owner in May 2012. This report described off-site groundwater contamination in the form of chlorinated hydrocarbons.
The EPA has been unable to identify the person or persons responsible for causing the contamination. As a result in May 2012, the EPA advised approximately 2900 residences in the area not to use their groundwater for any purpose until further notice.
People with groundwater wells or underground structures, such as cellars and basements were asked to contact the EPA. The risks associated with the contaminated groundwater are being assessed.
Development assessment
The EPA provides advice or direction to local councils and the Development Assessment Commission (DAC) in response to development application referrals for activities of environmental significance, as prescribed in the Development Regulations 2008. This year a total of 392 applications were assessed (Table 5), with 97% of all responses being provided within statutory timeframes.
During 2011–12 the EPA provided advice to councils/DAC on approximately two-thirds of all development applications referred to the EPA and direction to councils/DAC on the remaining third. Where the EPA has the power of direction on development applications, the EPA can direct that proposals are refused or that certain conditions are attached to any approval to ensure that the environment and the community are protected.
This year the EPA advised councils/DAC that seven development applications should be refused and directed the refusal of one development application.
Table 5 Assessment of development applications
Development 2010–11 2011–12 Description application type No On time (%) No On time (%)
Schedule 8 Item 9 Wind farms 2 100 59* 98
Schedule 8 Item ‘Non-complying’ development 39 97 35 97 10(a) in a water-protection area
Schedule 8 Item Schedule 21: Activities of 75 92 59 95 10(b) environmental significance
42 Environment Protection Authority Annual Report 1 July 2011– 30 June 2012
Development 2010–11 2011–12 Description application type No On time (%) No On time (%)
Schedule 8 Item 11 Schedule 22: Activities of 101 96 110 96 major environmental significance
Regulation 29 Land division 85 84 92 96
Section 49 Crown development by state 24 83 37 100 agencies
Totals/averages 326 91 392 97
* The EPA actually assessed seven wind farm proposals during 2011–12. However, as the Wattle Range Council chose to officially refer each of the proposed wind turbines that formed part of the Woakwine Wind Farm proposal as separate development applications, the total number of wind farm development applications assessed by the EPA was artificially high.
Significant development applications
The EPA provided advice or direction on the following significant development applications:
• an upgrade to Adelaide Brighton Cement’s Birkenhead plant, involving a new cement mill and relocation of the existing southern stockpiles, a proposed slag drying plant and associated 1500-tonne slag stockpile
• the Hornsdale wind farm with 105 wind turbines and one substation between Jamestown and Tarcowie
• the Woakwine wind farm with 149 wind turbines between Cape Jaffa and Lake Bonney in the South East
• an abattoir at Warnertown near Port Pirie to process up to 72 000 camels and 720 000 goats per year
• a common user mineral-exporting facility at Lucky Bay, involving the transhipment of crushed minerals from trucks to hard stand areas to barges for ultimate transfer to large vessels in the Spencer Gulf
• an expansion of the iron ore-exporting capacity at OneSteel’s Whyalla operations, involving new rail lines and ship-loading facilities
• a new heat-treatment oven at the Bradken foundry at Kilburn
• a reverse osmosis plant and baghouse sludge dewatering plant at the Nyrstar lead smelter in Port Pirie
• the disposal of intermediate contaminated waste material from the Adelaide Oval redevelopment to a site at Gillman
• a blast and paint facility at the Australian Submarine Corporation site at Outer Harbor.
Assessment of major developments and projects
The Minister for Planning refers major developments and projects with potential environmental impacts to the EPA for assessment and advice on potential environmental impacts, regardless of whether an activity contained in Schedule 1 of the EP Act is involved or not. Documentation relating to the following major developments or projects were referred to the EPA during 2011–12:
• Olympic Dam expansion project: the EPA contributed to the preparation of the draft SA Government Assessment Report for the project during the first quarter of 2011–12. More details on the EPA’s involvement with assessment of this project are provided below.
43 Environment Protection Authority Annual Report 1 July 2011– 30 June 2012
• Port Spencer (Sheep Hill) Deep Water Port Facility on Eyre Peninsula: in April 2012, the EPA prepared a response to the public environmental report during the public consultation period.
• Port Bonython Bulk Export Facility: in April 2012, the EPA provided formal comments to the Department of Planning, Transport and Infrastructure (DPTI) on draft guidelines for the preparation of a public environmental report for this project.
Olympic Dam expansion
In 2005, the South Australian and Commonwealth Governments declared that the proposed major mining and processing expansion at Olympic Dam would require approval as a major development under the Development Act 1993 and as a controlled action (nuclear action) under the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (Cth).
The principal components of BHP Billiton’s proposed expansion include:
• converting the current underground mine to an open-cut mine and processing copper, uranium, gold and silver (up to 1 million tonnes of copper per year), and constructing an associated metallurgical plant, tailings storage facility and rock storage facility
• sourcing and supplying additional water from bore fields within the Great Artesian Basin and constructing a seawater desalination plant at Port Bonython
• sourcing and supplying additional energy via a transmission line from the existing state electricity grid and/or an on-site gas-fired power station
• constructing, relocating and upgrading transport infrastructure, including rail, road, airport, barge- landing facility and port (in Darwin)
• supplying additional infrastructure and services associated with expanded accommodation needs at Roxby Downs and other local towns.
BHP Billiton issued a draft environmental impact statement (EIS) for public comment in May 2009, releasing a final version of its supplementary EIS on 13 May 2011.
The EPA provided considerable assistance with the preparation of the state government’s assessment report on the project, which was released at the same time as the conditions of development approval, gazetted on 10 October 2011. Of the 157 conditions of development approval, 42 had been recommended by the EPA.
The EPA also contributed to negotiations between the state government and BHP Billiton in relation to the Roxby Downs (Indenture Ratification) Act (Amendment of Indenture) Amendment Bill 2011, which passed the Legislative Council on 29 November 2011. The Olympic Dam and Stuart Shelf Indenture is a Schedule to the amended Roxby Downs (Indenture Ratification) Act 1982.
Major road projects
Road project proposals do not require development approval or any type of statutory referral to the EPA. However, DPTI chooses to simulate the major development assessment process under the Development Act 1993 when preparing and finalising plans for major road projects. This type of agency and public consultation provides DPTI with the opportunity to amend and improve its detailed design plans and minimise major road project impacts on communities and the environment. During 2011–12, the EPA worked with DPTI to provide comment on project impact reports for the following proposed road projects:
• Northern Connector
• South Road planning study
44 Environment Protection Authority Annual Report 1 July 2011– 30 June 2012
• Southern Expressway Duplication.
The EPA’s comments focused primarily on matters related to impacts from stormwater management, air and noise emissions during the construction and operation of these major roads, and site contamination.
Development policy
The EPA regularly reviews proposed amendments to council development plans by assessing statements of intent (SOIs), development plan amendments (DPAs) and council strategic directions reports (Section 30 of the Development Act 1993). The EPA’s advice to councils and the Minister for Planning seeks to ensure:
• that suitable environmental investigations are undertaken prior to confirming whether any proposed rezoning is appropriate
• the incorporation of planning policies into DPAs (and ultimately council development plans) to ensure that future development does not have adverse environmental impacts
• that appropriate environment protection strategies are incorporated into council strategic directions reports to guide future amendments to council development plans.
During 2011–12, the EPA assessed 15 statements of intent, six ministerial development plan amendments, 15 local council development plan amendments and 12 local council strategic direction reports.
The EPA provided advice on the following significant statements of intent/development plan amendments:
• Bowden Urban Village Ministerial DPA
• City of Marion – Castle Plaza DPA
• Cities of Marion and Holdfast Bay – Seacliff Park Mixed Density and Neighbourhood Activity Centre SOI
• Tanunda East Residential Expansion DPA
• Statewide Wind Farms Ministerial DPA
• Port Augusta West DPA.
The EPA also contributes to the development of structure plans and regional planning strategies that form part of the South Australian Planning Strategy, established under the Development Act 1993. During the year, the EPA provided advice about the following structure plans and regional planning strategies:
Structure plans:
• Murray Bridge Structure Plan
• Virginia Structure Plan
• Andamooka Structure Plan
• Adelaide Metropolitan Inner Rim Structure Plan (Version 2)
• North West Corridor Structure Plan (Version 2)
• Playford North Structure Plan
• Angle Vale Structure Plan.
Region plans:
• Eyre and Western Region Plan.
45 Environment Protection Authority Annual Report 1 July 2011– 30 June 2012 Aquaculture
Licence and lease applications
The Aquaculture Act 2001, which became operational in July 2002, is administered by the Department of Primary Industries and Regions South Australia (PIRSA). In accordance with provisions of Section 59 of the Aquaculture Act 2001, all licence applications and amendments must be referred to and approved by the EPA before the licence can be granted. During 2011–12, 53 licence applications were assessed within the statutory timeframe of six weeks.
Aquaculture zone policies
The EPA addresses and responds to the statutory requirements of the Development Act 1993, the establishment of aquaculture zone policies and general policies prescribed under the Aquaculture Act 2001, and general aquaculture issues. During 2011–12, the EPA provided comment on the following aquaculture policies as drafted by PIRSA:
• Draft Aquaculture (Zones – Tumby Bay) Policy 2011
• Draft Aquaculture (Zones – Lower Eyre Peninsula) Policy 2011.
Environmental surveys
The EPA regularly conducts environmental surveys of aquaculture industry operations, which aim to increase industry awareness of the environmental obligations these operations have under the EP Act. In addition, the surveys also provide information on potential environmental issues which can then assist the EPA with their assessment of licence applications and the provision of advice on PIRSA aquaculture zone policies. During 2011–12, the EPA completed 34 environmental surveys of aquaculture facilities located across South Australia.
Mining applications
The EPA ensures mining applications take into account the objects of the EP Act. It works with Department for Manufacturing, Innovation, Trade, Resources and Energy (DMITRE) who is the principal mining regulator in SA.
The EPA reviews mining lease applications submitted to DMITRE under the Mining Act 1971 that takes into account the objects of the EP Act (Table 6).
Table 6 Mining application reviews (non-uranium and uranium)
Company Project Action taken by EPA in 2011–12
Iron Clad Wilcherry Licence and works approval issued
Murray Zircon Mindarie Licence issued
Southern Iron Peculiar Knob Licence and works approval issued
Oz Minerals Carrapatenna Feasibility and/or approvals process assistance
Rex Minerals Hillside Feasibility and/or approvals process assistance
Lincoln Minerals Gum Flat Feasibility and/or approvals process assistance
Centrex Metals Wilgerup Feasibility and/or approvals process assistance
46 Environment Protection Authority Annual Report 1 July 2011– 30 June 2012
Company Project Action taken by EPA in 2011–12
Uranium SA Samphire Advice to DMITRE (formally PIRSA) and consultants on retention lease application
Eyre Iron Fusion Assistance to project and consultant
National and state policy
Contribution to the Standing Council on Environment and Water
The COAG Standing Council on Environment and Water is a council of ministers responsible for environment and water from the Commonwealth, all states and territories and New Zealand. The Australian Local Government Association is also represented. The Commonwealth Minister responsible for the environment chairs the council.
The council was established in 2011 following a COAG review of the ministerial council system. It also incorporates the National Environment Protection Council (NEPC), which has two primary functions: to make National Environment Protection Measures (NEPMs), and to address and report on the implementation and effectiveness of NEPMs in participating jurisdictions.
The Standing Council on Environment and Water's Priority Issues of National Significance, as agreed by COAG are:
1 Pursuing seamless environmental regulation and regulatory practice across jurisdictions: the Seamless Environmental Regulation Thematic Oversight Group (TOG) is responsible for promoting the harmonisation of legislation and regulation across Australia. A working group has been established to:
− clarify reform proposals to be developed in relation to national standards, and
− gain agreement about the critical issues to be addressed in streamlining the operations of NEPC, the NEPM-making process (or whether that is the best process) and the operations of the national Secretariat.
The EPA is represented on both the Seamless Environmental Regulation TOG and the working group.
2 Progressing national water reform, including through the implementation of the National Water Initiative (NWI), the outcomes of the forthcoming COAG review of the NWI, and other COAG commitments on water led by Department for Water (DfW).
3 Implementing the National Waste Policy (NWP): the NWP began in 2010, with a focus on 16 key strategies to be implemented over five-year period. The strategies focus on areas such as developing robust product stewardship and extended producer responsibility frameworks; improving management of waste, including supporting resource reuse and recovery market development; defining key waste types consistently across the country; and improving data collection and analysis to support decision- making. The EPA is represented on the Waste and Chemicals TOG and a variety of working groups.
4 Implementing a national partnership approach to the conservation and management of land, waters, the marine environment and biodiversity at the landscape and ecosystem levels, and to building resilience in a changing climate.
5 Developing and implementing a National Plan for Clean Air to improve air quality and community health and wellbeing.
The council is supported by a chief executive-level Senior Officials' Committee (SOC) from participating jurisdictions. The role of the SOC is to carry out the work plan agreed by ministers in line with the COAG- agreed strategic priorities.
47 Environment Protection Authority Annual Report 1 July 2011– 30 June 2012
The CE of the EPA is a member of both SOC and the NEPC Committee. The EPA is also represented on thematic oversight groups relating to three of the council's priority issues: seamless environmental regulation, the National Waste Policy and the National Plan for Clean Air.
Air National Environment Protection Measures (NEPM) Variation and National Plan for Clean Air
The statutory 10-year review of the Air NEPM was completed in early 2011. Due to the review of ministerial councils during 2011, no significant progress was made towards a variation process. However, the recommendations of the review for tightening a number of the standards and undertaking structural reform of the Air NEPM prompted jurisdictions to begin consideration of a National Plan for Clean Air.
The aim was to provide a framework for implementing changes to the Air NEPM in relation to any air pollution sources that may be amenable to a nationally consistent approach. Motor vehicles and some domestic sources such as wood heaters and small engines were included in initial matrices for emissions abatement. The National Plan project commenced in December 2010 with the first workshop, to consider the abatement actions and programs with the potential to be part of the plan, held in Melbourne. The plan is structured around two stages over the next two years, to the end of 2014. The primary focus for Stage 1 is on particles (PM10 and PM2.5), with some progression of proposals for ozone, nitrogen dioxide and sulphur dioxide.
Working groups are in place to oversee air quality impact assessment including health effects, broad monitoring and reporting requirements, and air quality impact mitigation. The latter encompasses emissions abatement, air quality improvement and economic analysis, with the aim of developing programs that offer significant net benefits to Australian communities. Several consultancies have commenced and include a health review (developing exposure–response characteristics for particles, ozone, nitrogen dioxide and sulphur dioxide), an economic analysis of likely changes to existing standards and their abatement actions, and an investigation of options for an additional system for reducing the population’s exposure to emissions and establishing goals for Australia. All are due to report in 2012–13.
Stage 2 is dependent on decisions arising out of Stage 1, but is projected to include detailed requirements for evaluating air quality against revised standards, implementation of an exposure reduction system, the development of reporting protocols and a performance framework against which jurisdictions can measure progress in improving air quality and reducing community risks, particularly in Australia’s major urban areas.
Five-year rolling review of legislation
Following an announcement by the Premier in 2009 of a rolling five-year review of all business regulation, agencies submitted work plans for implementing their reviews to the Competitiveness Council.
During 2011–12, the EPA continued the review of a number of pieces of legislation in accordance with the plan, including:
• Schedule 1 of the EP Act: work has continued on the review of Schedule 1 with updates on terminology to reflect modern practice and with a substantial review of the waste provisions nearing completion. It is envisaged that these amendments will come into operation in the 2013–14 financial year.
• Environment Protection (Water Quality) Policy 2003: a draft Water Quality EPP has been completed. The EPA will undertake statutory consultation with industry and the community in accordance with requirements in the EP Act. This will occur in the second half of 2012.
• Environment Protection (Air Quality) Policy 1994: the EPA has completed the review of the Air Quality Policy and is in the process of requesting a draft of the reviewed policy to be prepared for consultation. Once drafted the EPA will undertake statutory consultation with industry and the community.
48 Environment Protection Authority Annual Report 1 July 2011– 30 June 2012
• Environment Protection (Burning) Policy 1994: the EPA intends to consolidate its air-related legislation into a single policy document. As such it has reviewed the Burning Policy as part of the review of the Air Quality Policy. The Burning Policy would be subsumed as part of the reviewed Air Quality Policy and would cease to operate as a standalone document.
Red tape reduction
A key feature of the state government’s economic development strategy is to significantly reduce the red tape facing businesses. The EPA’s commitment to best practice environmental regulation is consistent with this strategy.
The EPA’s contribution to the government’s first red tape reduction plan realised a direct saving to business of $2 million per annum. As part of the government’s second red tape reduction plan, the EPA made a commitment to generating a further $2 million per annum of savings for business.
The EPA did not achieve its savings target by April 2012 due to delays in the start of the EPA's most significant initiative, the licence administration reform project. A new system is expected to be operational in the first half of 2013 and the benefits of this initiative will then be realised by businesses.
Red tape reduction initiatives successfully completed included:
• legislative amendments relating to the accreditation of third party testers of radiation apparatus, resulting in savings for industry of around $120 000 per year
• a redesign of the EPA website, which improved its functionality, providing savings of around $115 000
• the consolidation of all Regulations under the EP Act, with the aim of reducing the time required to understand regulatory requirements, resulting in savings to business of around $83 000.
Consultation on desalination fees
Following on from the state government's decision to implement significant reforms to the licensing requirements relating to desalination, which include the licensing of desalination plants that discharge waste to land, the EPA has proposed a new licence fee structure associated with this activity. During 2011–12, the EPA undertook an extensive consultation process on the proposed fee structure.
Further changes to schedule of the EP Act for activities of environmental significance
Schedule 1 of the EP Act identifies activities of environmental significance that require an environmental authorisation from the EPA. The review of activities in Schedule 1 made significant progress during 2011–12, with about 75% of all activities reviewed and in the process of legislative amendment. The implementation plan has these amendments coming into effect in the 2013–14 financial year. The remaining activities require further assessment of any regulatory impacts, which is scheduled to be completed by early 2014.
Compliance and enforcement
Compliance inspections
The EPA has approximately 2 100 environment licences and, in accordance with its compliance and enforcement guidelines, undertakes a risk-based approach to ensuring compliance with environmental requirements. During 2011–12 the EPA inspected 283 high-priority sites, with a range of resultant actions, including verbal and formal written warnings and environment protection orders (EPOs). For a small number of more serious cases of non-compliance, the EPA commenced civil or criminal prosecutions under the EP Act. 49 Environment Protection Authority Annual Report 1 July 2011– 30 June 2012
Environment protection orders
Environment protection orders (EPOs) can be issued by authorised officers under section 93(1) of the EP Act:
a for the purpose of securing compliance with:
i the general environmental duty; or
ii mandatory provisions of an environment protection policy; or
iii a condition of an environmental authorisation; or
iv a condition of a beverage container approval; or
v any other requirement imposed by or under this Act; or
b for the purpose of giving effect to an environment protection policy.
Police officers are authorised under the EP Act and use EPOs to deal with complaints about noise (for example, loud music) from domestic premises.
Some local government officers are authorised under the EP Act, but this authority is limited to the council area where they are employed. The majority of EPOs issued by councils relate to breaches of the Water Quality Policy with regard to stormwater issues from building sites.
Table 7 Environment protection orders
EPOs recorded 2009–10 2010–11 2011–12
EPA 25 15 21
Police 128 53 20
Councils 23 8 0
Total 176 76 41
Civil enforcement and prosecutions
More serious incidents of non-compliance may result in civil or criminal prosecutions under the EP Act.
The EPA has a dedicated Investigations Branch which examines breaches of the EP Act and the RPC Act in accordance with established compliance and enforcement criteria. Prosecutions pursued by the EPA are conducted by the Crown Solicitor’s Office and the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions.
The EPA conducted a total of 35 investigations in 2011–12, including 14 incidents and 21 matters carried over from 2010–11. Of the 35, 20 have been finalised as follows:
• Four matters were finalised in the Environment, Resource and Development Court (Table 8).
• Three matters were dealt with by way of a negotiated civil penalty (Table 9).
• The remaining 13 matters were dealt with by other compliance actions:
− two matters referred to other jurisdictions (local government)
− four expiation notices
50 Environment Protection Authority Annual Report 1 July 2011– 30 June 2012
− two warning letters
− one EPO
− four matters discontinued due to insufficient evidence.
One matter is currently before the Environment Resources and Development (ER&D) Court and has yet to be concluded. This matter relates to breaches of the container deposit legislation.
As of June 2012 there were:
• six matters under active investigation.
• one matter being negotiated under the civil penalties policy.
• four matters under review at the Crown Solicitor’s Office to determine the sufficiency of evidence.
• three matters awaiting resolution subject to compliance requirements.
Table 8 Finalised prosecutions 2011–12
Name Charges Penalty
Karlene Furber Breach a mandatory provision of an environment Convicted without penalty. protection policy, section 34(1) of the EP Act and Ordered to pay prosecution clause 17(1)(2) of the Environment Protection costs of $500 and victim of (Water Quality) Policy 2003. crime levy of $160
Pasquale Papalia Intentionally or recklessly contravened mandatory $6000 provision of an environment protection policy, Ordered to pay prosecution section 34(1) of the EP Act and clause 10(1) of the costs of $800 and victim of Environment Protection (Waste to Resources) crime levy of $260 Policy 2010.
Lochert Bros Pty Ltd Causing serious environmental harm by polluting $50 000 the environment, section 79(2) of the EP Act.
Middleton Operate a waste depot without an environmental $7500 Developments Pty authorisation, section 36(1) of the EP Act. Ltd
As an alternative to criminal prosecution for less serious offences under the EP Act, the EPA may negotiate a civil penalty directly with the individual or corporation which the EPA believes has committed the offence, or may apply to the ER&D Court for an order that the person(s) pay an amount as a civil penalty to the EPA.
EPA-negotiated civil penalties are developed in compliance with its policy for calculation of civil penalties under the EP Act.
51 Environment Protection Authority Annual Report 1 July 2011– 30 June 2012
Table 9 Finalised civil penalties 2011–12
Name Charges Penalty
United Water Overflow of approximately 800 kilolitres of sludge On 5 October 2011 the EPA International Pty from United Water Anstey Hill water treatment and United Water International Ltd plant to an adjacent creek as a result of a failed settled on a penalty of $2 475 level sensor. plus $4070 for technical costs
United Water Escape of approximately 1 megalitre of untreated On 13 June 2012 the EPA and International Pty sewage to an adjacent open stormwater culvert United Water International Ltd due to a collapsed sewer main on Stebonheath settled on a penalty of $4350 Road, Penfield. plus $434.90 for technical costs
United Water Discharge of 0.3 megalitres of untreated sewage On 19 June 2012 the EPA and International Pty from Reliance Road pumping station into local United Water International Ltd stormwater system which ultimately discharged settled on a penalty of $2175 onto Hallett Cove Beach as a result of pumps running out of fuel due to a power failure.
Illegal Dumping Unit
Illegal dumping has been a significant problem for both the community and government for some time. In response, the South Australian government established a new unit within the EPA specifically to tackle this issue. The Illegal Dumping Unit was launched on 30 January 2012.
The unit targets the illegal dumping of hazardous waste, controlled waste and commercial quantities of construction and demolition waste. It also ensures a consistent approach is taken to compliance and enforcement, and provides operational support where needed.
Since commencing the unit has:
• reviewed 119 complaints and enquiries in relation to illegal dumping. A total of seven have been finalised as follows:
− three expiation notices
− three environment protection orders
− one clean up order.
• conducted a total of 23 investigations into illegal dumping activities. A total of nine have been finalised as follows:
− two matters referred to local government
− one expiation notice
− one warning letter
− three discontinued due to insufficient evidence to identify offenders
− two matters filed as no offences disclosed.
• no matters have progressed to the Crown or ER&D Court at this time.
The unit is actively engaged with other state government agencies and local government and assists with training and operational support to help prevent and investigate illegal dumping. Through the Australasian
52 Environment Protection Authority Annual Report 1 July 2011– 30 June 2012
Environmental Law Enforcement Regulators neTwork (AELERT), a National Waste Operations Group has been established to explore common cross-border issues and identify measures to harmonise the approach taken nationally to deal with illegal waste issues.
AELERT illegal dumping workshop
During February 2012, AELERT hosted two workshops in EPA offices which focused on ‘Investigating and preventing illegal dumping’ and ‘Statement taking and investigative interviewing’. Both courses attracted staff from 11 different organisations including; local and regional councils, representatives from illegal dumping units in Western Australia, Victoria, Queensland, New South Wales and South Australia.
Through AELERT, a National Waste Operations Group has been formed to provide a forum to bring together state and territory waste regulators for the purpose of examining the movement, treatment and disposal of waste from a national perspective and provide an avenue for the national coordination of waste compliance strategies and activities. These activities will support the objectives of individual jurisdictions through the sharing of intelligence and operational experiences.
The group will also draw on work from participating jurisdictions to develop and adapt guidelines, codes and documents to work towards the establishment of consistent regulatory practice approaches to waste management. A work plan has been established to enable participation in beneficial project/research activities; sharing intelligence and opportunity for operations across jurisdictions. In June a member of the EPA spent a week with NSW EPA working on an operation with its illegal waste group.
Plastic bag legislation compliance
The EPA administers the Plastic Shopping Bags (Waste Avoidance) Act 2008. A number of minor breaches were detected in 2011–12 during regular compliance inspections and mainly arose from small itinerant businesses originating from interstate, typically at metro and regional show events.
Pollution reporting and enquiries
The EPA continues to maintain a pollution reporting and enquiries line (telephone 8204 2004, free call non- metro 1800 623445) to receive calls about environmental concerns. Table 10 summarises the numbers and types of pollution reports received during 2011–12, and Table 11 details the number and types of general enquiries.
Depending on the nature of the complaint, the EPA’s response may be to:
• provide verbal or written information to the caller
• register a formal report for follow-up by an authorised officer
• refer the information provided by the caller to another state or local government agency for action.
For 2011–12 only 3% of pollution reports received have progressed through the staged process to Stage 3 which requires investigation by an Authorised Officer.
53 Environment Protection Authority Annual Report 1 July 2011– 30 June 2012
Table 10 Number of reports received by the EPA
Type of report 2009–10 2010–11 2011–12
Air quality 646 711 867
Air and noise 63 64 184
Noise 1186 1241 986
Marine pollution 37 19 26
Site contamination NA* 28 39
Water 116 138 174
Waste 156 153 165
Other 187 155 285
Total 2391 2509 2726
* Reports associated with site contamination were not recorded separately prior to 2010–11. Table 11 Number of enquiries received by the EPA
Type of enquiry 2010–11 2011– 12
Air quality 249 326
Noise 329 354
Water quality 228 236
Waste 299 323
Complaint & enquiry follow-up for repeat calls 902 637
Site contamination 158 251
Licensing 1008 955
Staff request 1588 1032
Other 1311 891
Total 6072 5005
Note: The EPA commenced recording enquiries in 2010–11, and comparative figures for previous years are not available.
Emergency response
The EPA responds to emergency pollution incidents when notified through the emergency 24-hour number. Emergency responses are of three types:
• whole-of-government procedure as outlined in the State Emergency Management Plan. This applies to spills or leaks of hazardous substances onto land or into non-marine waters, and is coordinated by emergency services (police, fire and technical advice coordinators).
• national response plan, which deals with oil or chemical spills at sea, and is coordinated by the Marine Group of Department of Planning, Transport and Infrastructure (DPTI).
54 Environment Protection Authority Annual Report 1 July 2011– 30 June 2012
• other environmental incidents that do not trigger either of the above emergency response systems. This includes incidents reported by EPA licence-holders and some incidents reported by members of the public through the pollution reporting line, which requires an immediate assessment by the EPA.
During 2011–12, the EPA responded to 114 incidents through its emergency pollution incident response system, a 6% decrease in calls from the previous year. The majority of the calls came from EPA licence- holders and members of the public, and were dealt with by the provision of advice relating to containment and clean-up. Examples included:
• spill of 29 drums of high-concentration liquid fertiliser on the South Road extension next to the Barker Inlet wetlands
• fire in a 50 000-litre bio-diesel tank at A&R Fuels, Elder Rd, Largs Bay
• fire in a chemical storage shed at Transpacific, Wingfield
• fire in sheds of Alternate Fuel Company Pty Ltd – Resourceco, Wilkins Road, Wingfield
• major fire incident in the waste oil facility at Mulhern’s, Wingfield.
55
50
45
40
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0 Air Quality Illegal Marine Noise Other Radiation Site Spills Waste Water DumpingPollution Contamination
Figure 5 Emergency responses by compliant category
Major incident
Mulhern’s fire
A major oil-fuelled fire occurred at the Mulhern Waste Oil Removal facility in Wingfield on 13 March 2012. Combined emergency services responded to the incident. An officer from the EPA Emergency Response Team was on-site at all times to provide support.
The Mulhern site is licensed by the EPA and at the time of the fire there was an estimated 700 000 litres of waste oil and hydrocarbons stored on the site.
The facility was destroyed by the fire, and smoke was dispersed across the metropolitan area. However, the most significant environmental risk caused by the fire was the contaminated fire water. A large volume of contaminated water entered the stormwater system that connects with the nearby Dry Creek Wetlands.
EPA worked with the Metropolitan Fire Service, DPTI and Port Adelaide Enfield Council to contain the water in the stormwater system and remove it with vacuum trucks.
55 Environment Protection Authority Annual Report 1 July 2011– 30 June 2012
Unfortunately, heavy rains on 14 March 2012 resulted in some oil and stormwater being pushed from the containment area into the Dry Creek Wetlands. An estimated 1000 litres of oil was discharged into the wetlands, which was subsequently cleaned up.
When considering the volume of oil on-site and the size and intensity of the fire, the amount of water used to extinguish it, and unexpected heavy rain, the early action by emergency response parties ensured that the environmental impacts were limited. Unfortunately, a small number of birds were harmed but the EPA expects no long-term impacts on the aquatic ecosystem.
56 Environment Protection Authority Annual Report 1 July 2011– 30 June 2012
A REPUTATION FOR EXCELLENCE
Context
The EPA is South Australia’s leading environmental regulator. The Authority holds scientific and technical expertise and has influenced key state and national government policies and outcomes.
We understand that improving access to our services and clarifying their scope saves time and reduces frustration for our stakeholders. We strive to build a proactive and service-oriented culture and to be at
the forefront of leading regulatory practices.
Adelaide air quality data
The current long-term monitoring program in metropolitan Adelaide has now been in place since 2001 and is based on the original requirements of the National Environment Protection (Ambient Air Quality) Measure 1998 (‘Air NEPM’, amended in 2004). At the time, the Air NEPM focused strongly on the technical aspects of reporting broad ambient air quality against a set of national ‘compliance’ standards, specifically avoiding local sources. Since then extensive research in Australia and overseas has pointed to the need to supplement this approach with a more detailed understanding of patterns of exposure to communities from significant urban sources such as major roads, domestic sources and industries.
Modern approaches to developing standards and addressing air quality issues are based on risk management, and fine particles are of specific interest. In South Australia, a recent study has shown clear associations between daily fine-particle concentrations and hospital admissions for cardio-respiratory conditions (Hansen et al 2012). The EPA is also collaborating in a three-year study with the Department of Health and Ageing and the University of Adelaide investigating links between health and distances from major roads in northwest Adelaide. This is part of a strategic program by the EPA to understand the impacts of various sources of air pollutants and to provide direction for its management over the next two or three decades, while supporting population and economic growth targets for the state.
The Air NEPM itself has undergone a comprehensive statutory review in recent years and, in response to its recommendations, a National Plan for Clean Air is being developed to provide guidance for addressing those air quality issues that are amenable to national approaches. Examples include motor vehicle emissions and product standards for appliances such as domestic wood heaters and small garden engines. A major component of the plan is a proposed population exposure reduction approach for Australia to complement the current compliance standards.
A major park of EPA’s strategic programs for air quality is the development of a South Australian Statement on Air Quality Management as a joint project with key government agencies and regional groups of councils. Work has commenced on a broad framework for Greater Adelaide and on regional strategies based on areas identified in the 30-Year Plan for Greater Adelaide. This builds on work already undertaken during a pilot program in Lefevre Peninsula over 2010–12.
In the next year or two, EPA intends to establish new monitoring stations in the Adelaide CBD and on the Lefevre Peninsula to underpin this strategic program.
57 Environment Protection Authority Annual Report 1 July 2011– 30 June 2012
Fair, 1.5% Good, 41.9% Poor, 0.0% Very Poor, 0.0%
Very good, 56.6%
Figure 6 Adelaide’s air quality index for the 2011 calendar year
The pie chart of Adelaide’s air quality index (Figure 6) describes the general air quality in the Adelaide metropolitan area over the 2011 calendar year. This is a combined summary of the air pollutant levels of particles, ozone, nitrogen dioxide, carbon monoxide and sulphur dioxide monitored. Air quality in Adelaide is considered Good or Very Good for 98.5% of the time.
Generally, during dry conditions and when winds are high, dust blown from regional areas may combine with other forms of particle pollution, such as those from industry, motor vehicles, bushfires and sources in the metropolitan area, to cause dust levels above the Air NEPM standards. However, improved rainfall and humidity have been major factors in reducing these levels in 2011 (Figure 7). The metropolitan monitoring network provides a comprehensive picture of particle concentrations across Adelaide.
14 Netley
Elizabeth 12 Christie Downs 3 Kensingston 10 g/m Birkenhead
8
6 NEPM Goal
4 Exceedences of 50 Exceedences of
2 * NOTE
0 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011
Note: *No exceedences of the Air NEPM Standard or Goal occurred in 2011.
Figure 7 Annual exceedences of the Air NEPM PM10 standard at Adelaide monitoring sites
58 Environment Protection Authority Annual Report 1 July 2011– 30 June 2012
Air monitoring in Whyalla
35
Walls Street (non 30 3 NEPM s ite) Schulz Reserve g/m 25 ( NEPM s ite) µ NEPM Goal 20
15
10
Exceedences of 50 of Exceedences 5
0 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 Year Notes: Compliance with the Air NEPM is assessed at Schulz Reserve only Monitoring at Walls Street commenced 02/07/2004 Monitoring at Schulz Reserve commenced 27/04/2007
Figure 8 Annual exceedences of the Air NEPM PM10 standard at Whyalla monitoring sites
The Whyalla monitoring network provides a picture of particle concentrations at residential and near- industry sites across Whyalla. Exceedences of the Air NEPM Standard or Goal have reduced in recent years due to improved industry emissions and wetter weather (Figure 8).
Air monitoring in Mount Gambier
Air quality monitoring at the Gordon Education Centre and the Mount Gambier Showgrounds continued over the 2011 winter season, and into spring to capture warm weather data. Monitoring in 2011 confirmed previous results and provided additional information on sources and particle make-up. Reports are available on the EPA website.
Particle concentrations adjusted in accordance with Air NEPM (Technical Paper 10) showed numerous exceedences of the Air NEPM standards during winter, resulting in poor winter air quality. The data also showed a decrease in PM10 particles between 2011 and 2010 winter monitoring. Overall, winter patterns of fine particle pollution continued to be entirely consistent with the dominance of wood smoke in cold winter nights. Episodes of coarser particles from sources at both ends of Mount Gambier were recorded and were possibly contributed by industries in the region.
Spring monitoring in 2011 showed a decrease in fine particles from residential areas and improved air quality, with no exceedences of Air NEPM standards during this period. There was, however, an increase in both PM2.5 and PM10 particles from the industrial sector.
Motor vehicle air emissions
Motor vehicle emissions are the major contributors of hazardous pollutants in urban airsheds. According to the National Pollutant Inventory’s (NPI) latest reporting year (2010–11), motor vehicles contributes 20% of particulate matter (PM10), 67% of oxides of nitrogen (NOx), 40% of sulphur dioxide (SO2) and 80% of carbon monoxide (CO) in the Adelaide airshed (or Adelaide metropolitan region). Consequently, the EPA is working on a number of different research projects to understand their impact on the airshed, including the
59 Environment Protection Authority Annual Report 1 July 2011– 30 June 2012 development of a model for reducing the exposure of the population to emissions. The EPA is also involved in quantifying the impact on air quality of the government’s future programs and development targets such as the railway electrification and the reduction in vehicle kilometres travelled by motorists under the 30-Year Plan for Greater Adelaide.
During 2012, the EPA extended its collaboration with the University of South Australia to support a PhD project aimed at further improving calculations of motor vehicle emissions in the inventory database and producing the framework for reducing the population’s exposure to traffic emissions. The EPA also partnered with the University of Adelaide and the Department of Health in a project investigating the co-benefits of alternative transportation on air quality and public health.
EPA involvement in South Australian response to proposed Murray–Darling Basin Plan
Officers of the EPA took part in the multi-organisation process to assess the Murray–Darling Basin Authority’s Proposed Basin Plan, resulting in the government response to the draft plan. Aspects of water quality were the focus for EPA involvement, which included representation on expert reference groups, the SA Inter-Agency Reference Group, the Premier’s Task Force and the Basin Plan Working Group.
Key components of the Proposed Basin Plan to which the EPA contributed included the environmental watering plan (Chapter 7); the water quality and salinity management plan (Chapter 8); water resource plan requirements (Chapter 9); and monitoring and evaluating the effectiveness of the plan (Chapter 12).
Key issues addressed by the EPA included the need for water level targets in the lower reaches of the River Murray to address risks of future acid sulphate soil development in the Lower River Murray Reclaimed Irrigation Area; this was informed by the EPA’s work in this area during the recent drought. There was a similar need for water level and water quality targets in the Lower Lakes to reduce the risk of a future recurrence of the water quality problems resulting from the salinity and acid sulphate soils induced by the drought. The EPA was highly involved with this issue as a result of its monitoring, applied science and regulatory work.
Managed aquifer recharge
The EPA has continued to collaborate with the Department for Water (DfW) on improving the ongoing compliance management and streamlining of the regulatory approach to managed aquifer recharge (MAR). The MAR web portal was established on the Water for Good website in January 2012. This site serves as a first point of contact for MAR and provides introductory and background information. It also introduces the regulatory instruments administered by the EPA, DfW and SA Health that are applied to MAR in South Australia.
Much of the web portal information has been drawn from the previous draft MAR Code of Practice developed by the EPA. The detailed information from this document, aimed at proponents and operators of MAR schemes, has been rewritten into a draft document, MAR Guide: Planning, Building and Operating a MAR Scheme, which will be posted on the web portal once it is completed. A draft agreement between EPA and DfW regarding the ongoing management has also been prepared by both agencies to formalise roles and responsibilities. Both documents are expected to be finalised, agreed and approved in the 2012–13 financial year.
Vessel and facility management
During 2011–12, the EPA progressed with a number of initiatives associated with the implementation of the Code of practice for vessel and facility management (marine and inland waters). Key areas include:
60 Environment Protection Authority Annual Report 1 July 2011– 30 June 2012
• continued implementation of wastewater management requirements for all vessels operating on South Australia’s marine and inland waters
• ongoing work with industry to develop and improve the reliability of wastewater treatment solutions as an alternative to retention and pump-out
• expansion of the industry inspection trial to allow EPA licensed slipways and accredited marine surveyors to inspect and assess vessels operating on inland waters for compliance with the black and grey water requirements, according to the code of practice
• introduction of a compliance and enforcement program to assist in the implementation and successful completion of the EPA’s vessel wastewater requirements as per the code of practice
• ongoing discussions with the DPTI with the aim of incorporating the new EPA grey water regulations for commercial vessels in future DPTI biannual vessel surveys
• ongoing work with the houseboat industry and houseboat operators to successfully develop and improve the reliability of ‘world-first on-board greywater treatment technology’.
Setting environmental values for Lake Bonney, South East
Consistent with the National Water Quality Management Strategy, the EPA is obtaining community agreed environmental values for the quality of the water in Lake Bonney in the South East. This process will allow the EPA to develop water quality management goals for the lake and will assist with managing the future licensing of the two major dischargers—the Kimberly–Clark Australia & New Zealand Millicent paper mill and SA Water’s Millicent wastewater treatment plant. The work will also provide guidance for the dairy activities along the eastern edge of the lake, the other significant source of discharges to the lake.
On completion of the consultation process for establishing the environmental values for the lake and its catchment, the EPA will provide a final report to the community and will seek to amend Table 2 of Schedule 1 of the Environment Protection (Water Quality) Policy 2003 to reflect the community agreed environmental values.
Aquatic ecosystem condition reports
EPA surface water quality monitoring and evaluation uses multiple lines of evidence including biological and ecological measures, as well as traditional water chemistry, to assess aquatic ecosystem condition. Aquatic ecosystem condition reports (AECRs) have been designed to be broadly informative about the condition of South Australian aquatic ecosystems and to support associated environmental management decision making. The reports present aquatic ecosystem condition on a six-level scale: Excellent, Very Good, Good, Fair, Poor and Very Poor.
The reports were released in October 2011 and covered inland waterways in six natural resources management regions (NRMRs). The majority of inland waterways have been rated as Fair or Poor on the ecosystem condition scale, with the key pressures on these ecosystems identified as excess nutrients and sediments being washed off urban and agricultural catchments. It has taken more than 170 years of European settlement for the waterways to reach their current condition, making improving them significantly a long-term challenge.
Management responses to these results included the development and implementation of various strategies by state and local governments, NRMRs and industry. The next set of AECRs will be released by in late 2012 and include reports on South Australia’s nearshore marine ecosystems and inland waterways. Improvements to the AECRs are also being undertaken to further enhance their value as a communication tool to support environmental decision making.
61 Environment Protection Authority Annual Report 1 July 2011– 30 June 2012 Changes to public register fees
The fees for accessing information on the EPA public register are outlined in the Environment Protection Regulations 2009. However, it may, in certain cases (where ministerial approval has been given for a particular kind of case), reduce or waive the payments of these fees.
The Minister for Sustainability, Environment and Conservation, in accordance with section 116(a) of the EP Act, has approved four categories of instances where the EPA is able to waive or reduce fees for people accessing information on the EPA public register. These are:
• information that is recorded on the public register which is accessible via the website
• documents recorded on the public register (other than documents that are available via the website), which are provided electronically to the public
• documents provided in print to persons who have a direct personal interest in the matter described in the document and where that person would, in the opinion of the EPA, face financial hardship in paying the full fee
• documents recorded on the public register that are provided to a landowner or tenant of a residential property, where that document directly relates to the residential land they own or occupy.
The EPA has determined that, where documents on the public register are held electronically and the applicant can identify the document sought, then it will be provided at no cost. Where the applicant is unable to specify a document, then they will need to pay the public register access costs to assist in this identification. Again, once identified, the document will be provided at no cost if held electronically.
In instances where financial hardship is determined or a document is requested by an owner or tenant of residential land impacted by the contents of the document, then that document will be made available at no cost to those applicants, whether in electronic or hard copy.
To assess the impact of this initiative, a review was undertaken comparing two six-month periods, one before the introduction of this initiative and one after, to determine:
• any change in the number of requests made for public register information
• any variation in the number of pages being requested
• changes to the fees charged for access to this information.
The findings for each of these areas are:
October 2010–March 2011 October 2011–March 2012
Requests for information 117 117
Pages requested 4,305 26,869
Fees charges $6,593 $133
While the number of requests has remained static, the volume of each request has increased, indicating that people are now electing to get full copies of documents more often. Changes are in line with predictions for a decline in revenue associated with the reduced fees being charged for access to public register documents.
These changes will help ensure that members of the public are able to access public register documents at a significantly reduced cost, and often, at no cost.
62 Environment Protection Authority Annual Report 1 July 2011– 30 June 2012
SUPPORTING OUR PEOPLE
Context
As at 30 June 2012 the EPA employed 218 staff (full-time equivalent) in Adelaide and Mount Gambier.
Effective delivery of the EPA’s priorities relies on staff working cohesively, supported by efficient and effective processes. Supporting and developing our people to do their best work, individually and in teams, is fundamental to staff satisfaction and morale. Good processes are the result of people thinking
about continuous improvement and taking the time to make regular tasks easier, faster and more efficient. Systems reform expands on this continuous-improvement model to support a schedule of more
significant changes.
We acknowledge the effort, drive and dedication of our staff and support their development. We continuously improve our systems and undertake comprehensive reviews when major step change is required.
We provide strategic direction and align activities to those strategic priorities, so that we work towards common goals. We evaluate our work and report on progress to demonstrate the effectiveness of our efforts, particularly that we have adopted the most appropriate and effective approach. This also supplies evidence for making the adjustments that improve processes.
Our aim is to continue to have engaged, highly skilled, energised, committed, results-driven high achievers with superior team attitudes, and through the capability of our people and EPA professional development we will achieve this. Our capability in finance will enable us to fulfil our aim of being appropriately funded and strategically financed to support the efficient and reliable processes required to meet the urgent and vital needs of our customers and stakeholders. We welcome feedback to help us improve our performance.
The EPA complies with state government policies and standards for recruitment and staff management.
It provides staff with training and support to enable them to better meet growing demands.
Leadership and management development framework
The EPA has implemented a leadership development program designed to meet the unique needs of leaders. The program includes a range of initiatives focused on supporting senior leaders as well as identifying and developing emerging leaders across the organisation.
The EPA has continued its skills gap analysis for new senior managers, based on senior management competencies.
In support of other elements of the organisation’s leadership development program, the EPA explored partnerships across the Environment and Conservation portfolio with a view to offering suitable programs. To this end the EPA has implemented four programs in partnership with the Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR). The programs included:
• Emerging leaders program aimed at long-term succession planning, retention and beginning the first stage of development for future leaders.
• Leadership development program targeting supervisors and team leaders and offering a range of courses to build leadership skills.
63 Environment Protection Authority Annual Report 1 July 2011– 30 June 2012
• Senior women’s program to enable senior women to achieve lasting success and fulfilment in their careers.
• Mentoring program for all EPA staff which links to more experienced personnel who can provide support and advice to other staff and assist in their personal and professional development.
Learning and development
Strong and relevant management is at the heart of every great organisation. Linked to leadership and management development is the integration of appropriate tools that define our work roles and assist with performance development and review.
The EPA has been working on a simpler format for the job and person specifications over the last two years. The biggest challenge was to make the document concise and succinct and reduce the number of essential selection criteria to a meaningful level. Doing this provides an improved and efficient process for applicants, and streamlines the recruitment process for selection panels, while still retaining the ability to identify and prioritise relevant skills. This year the EPA has started the process of converting the job and person specifications into role and context statements with links to relevant competencies.
While the EPA has successfully increased employee participation in performance and development reviews (P&DR) over the last two years, the current performance management system and practice is not necessarily achieving its full potential. The EPA has commenced refreshing the P&DR tool format and support documentation aimed at establishing the vital few actions that will make the biggest positive impact on the practice, and again linking with relevant competencies.
Both these areas will be cornerstones of the new EPA Strategic Workforce Plan, to be formalised upon implementation of the new EPA Strategic Plan.
In additional support of skill and capability development, a range of sources are used for the EPA annual training needs analysis which informs the annual corporate leadership and development plan. Development activities delivered throughout the year included workshops on writing skills, project management, time and task management, authorised officer, procurement and auditor training. A range of environment forums and information sessions were scheduled which inform and instruct staff on the core business and process. All activities were well attended and provided a range of people opportunity to gain knowledge on new topics.
The EPA has also engaged with other regulatory agencies within SA and interstate through the Australasian Environmental Law Enforcement and Regulators neTwork (AELERT) to share training resources and to investigate the potential for e-learning mechanisms. This will improve the consistency of regulatory officer training and decrease training costs. The first outcome of this collaboration is a trial of the AELERT 2-day ’credible regulators‘ course in July 2012 as a replacement for the current regulatory officer training course. EPA is also working closely with other regulatory agencies across state and local government to maximise integration and consistency in training competencies through this program.
Occupational Health Safety Welfare and Injury Management (OHSW&IM) system
The EPA was evaluated by WorkCover in October 2011. This is the second WorkCover evaluation and although the EPA’s OHSW&IM system does not yet fully conform to the WorkCover performance standards for self-insurers, the feedback received from the evaluator was constructive and positive with improvement in the organisation shown since the 2009 evaluation.
The EPA has an ongoing commitment to meet the full WorkCover performance standards and implemented a range of improvements and initiatives during 2011–12. One major initiative was the establishment of the
64 Environment Protection Authority Annual Report 1 July 2011– 30 June 2012
OHSW&IM Monitoring and Reporting framework, which identified seven key areas, each with objectives, performance indicators and targets.
Key OHSW&IM achievements realised in 2011–12 included:
• Commitment, accountability and organisational safety culture
− 19 policies and associated procedures, and a document control system, were implemented.
• Hazard and risk management
− An online hazard and risk assessment tool (the risk management system–RMS) was launched, which enabled each manager to assess over 230 hazards. Across the organisation a combined total of 4986 risks were identified by the managers.
− 15 additional safe operating procedures for plant, equipment and tasks were developed and implemented.
• Rehabilitation and injury management
− The EPA implemented a revised injury management system, which includes a claims pack for managers to use should an injury to an employee occur.
• OHSW&IM training and development
− An OHSW&IM training matrix and position profiles, which identifies the specific training needs for staff, was piloted.
− The RMS was used to identify OHSW training needs.
− The current level of commitment to ensuring that the EPA has a safer working environment should see the organisation with a conforming system at the mid-term WorkCover evaluation review in February 2013.
Improving EPA's performance framework
Over the past 12 months, the EPA has continued to refine its corporate performance framework, particularly through a focus on developing performance measures that better demonstrate effectiveness in the compliance and enforcement and organisational capabilities areas. Significant progress has also been made to transition the performance framework reporting process to a dashboard style report that shows the clear linkages between the operational programs and performance measures with the strategic priorities and outcomes.
A comprehensive management report is provided to the EPA Executive and Board on a quarterly basis to demonstrate progress against targets in three broad management areas; operational, environmental and organisational. The report also highlights areas where targets have been exceeded, as well as where progress is not tracking well, or targets are not being met. This provides valuable information on which to make informed management decisions regarding prioritisation and resource allocation throughout the year.
Given the EPA's focus on improving its performance framework, it is also leading a project at the national level to provide guidance regarding the most appropriate performance measures to demonstrate effective environmental regulation. The project is being coordinated through AELERT and has focused on three key objectives in stage 1 of the project plan: determining where Australian and New Zealand regulators are currently positioned in terms of using performance measures to demonstrate effective; the theory and application across Australia and internationally; and the gaps evident comparing best practice theory and deployment across Australia and New Zealand.
The EPA has led a first-stage survey of all members of AELERT (some 80 environmental regulators) to determine where organisations are currently positioned, as well as conducted research on programs in
65 Environment Protection Authority Annual Report 1 July 2011– 30 June 2012 place internationally. Further work will progress over the next six months to provide published guidance to all AELERT members on the most useful and effective performance measures, as well as opportunities to benchmark across organisations and jurisdictions.
Improve electronic and paper records management to ensure a consistent approach
Records Management Action Plan
In May 2010 the EPA completed a records management survey. The survey measured the EPA’s records management practices against the requirements of the State Records Act 1997. A Records Management Action Plan was completed in November 2011 to address gaps identified in the survey.
New Information Management Project
Part of the Records Management Action Plan is based on the implementation of a new electronic information and records management system for the EPA. It is based on DENR's new intranet ‘iShare’ project but is designed to meet the EPA's specific business needs. DENR is managing this project for the EPA and has engaged two contractors who worked on the iShare project. The platform will be built during this financial year, with work starting from mid–2012 to migrate data to the new system.
Improve information technology systems
During 2011–12 the EPA implemented a number of major IT projects. The major highlights included:
• Enhancements to the General Environmental Information System (GENI) to enable EPA to implement the required Sustainable Budget Commission (revenue measure) initiative: − enable the Radiation Protection Branch to implement the new Radiation Licence to Possess. − enable the Sustainability & Local Government Branch to administer the new container deposit legislation application and annual fees. • Enhancements to the Complaints and Reports of Environmental Significance (CARES) system to: − allow for details to be taken from interstate callers
− improve performance measurement capabilities.
• Completed the implementation of an environmental monitoring database system. • Completed the development and implementation of the JADE Case Management system to better track and manage cases progressing through the investigation process. • Implemented the JIRA system – a management control system for tracking, managing and reporting on IT service requests. • Approval of the EPA Information Security Policy–a first step towards compliance with the SA Government's Information Security Management Framework (ISMF) version 3.
66 Environment Protection Authority Annual Report 1 July 2011– 30 June 2012
OTHER STATUTORY INFORMATION
Freedom of information and the public register
During 2011–12, 37 freedom of information (FOI) applications and 252 public register requests were received (Table 12).
Table 12 Freedom of Information applications and Public Register requests
Applications 2009–10 2010–11 2011–12
Freedom of information 30 40 37
Public Register 223 233 252
The EPA has a statutory obligation under the Land and Business (Sale and Conveyancing) Act 1994 to provide information relating to environment protection (Table 13).
Table 13 Section 7 enquiries
Section 7 enquiries/responses 2009–10 2010–11 2011–12
Automatic enquiries to the Lands Titles Office 50 065 47 599 41 209 database involving the perusal of the Section 7 information maintained by the EPA
Manual enquiries requiring an EPA search made upon 4 964 4 825 3 993 requests by the Lands Titles Office
Direction by the Minister
According to section 111(2)(b) of the EP Act, the Minister to whom the EP Act is committed has given no direction to the Authority during the period of this report.
Whistleblowers Act
Nil return.
Energy efficiency action plan report
Priority area 1: energy management
EPA currently focuses on the three priority areas of energy, fleet management and waste.
The rationalisation of EPA accommodation, the main source of energy consumption, was finalised in October 2009 with the completion of the radiation laboratory fitout in leased premises within the city. The centralisation of staff into 250 Victoria Square, a 6-star building with a 5-star fitout, resulted in a marked reduction in energy consumed for office accommodation which has been maintained in the past year.
A NABERS Energy rating assessment has recently been completed for the EPA tenancy resulting in an initial rating assessment of 5.5, formal confirmation is pending. The SA Water House base building operations has achieved a 5-star rating in the past year.
67 Environment Protection Authority Annual Report 1 July 2011– 30 June 2012
Table 14 Performance against annual energy use targets
Total for EPA EPA office location Air monitoring sites
Energy GHG Energy GHG Business Energy Energy GHG Expenditure use emissions use emissions measure use per m2 use emissions ($) (GJ) (tonnes) (GJ) (tonnes) (m2) (GJ) (tonnes)
Base year
2000–01 2084 $79 259 671 1844 592 5277 0.35 240 79
MJ per m2 348
2001–02 1849 $69 402 595 1647 527 5277 0.31 203 67
2002–03 2078 $76 377 669 1784 573 5277 0.34 295 97
2003–04 1910 $70 055 614 1643 526 5277 0.31 268 88
2004–05 1950 $78 303 628 1675 537 5397 0.31 275 91
2005–06 1828 $73 672 588 1582 506 5690 0.28 246 81
2006–07 1887 $78 125 606 1610 515 5690 0.28 277 91
2007–08 1848 $79 959 431 1608 375 5690 0.28 240 56
2008–09 1856 $89 224 433 1548 361 5173 0.30 308 72
2009–10 1247 $60 580 291 1097 214 5173 0.21 150 77
2010–11 1175 $58 524 274 877 204 5173 0.17 298 69
2011–12 1067 $76 469 249 845 199 5173 0.17 222 50
MJ per m2 170
Target (2014) 1563 503 1383 444 0.32
Note: Business measures in 2004–05 and 2005–06 increased due to an additional space taken on Level 2 of SA Water House (Grenfell Street) Building. This table has been amended to reflect previous incorrect charging and energy use, as well as the transfer of Radiation Protection Branch from DoH. In 2007–08, the emissions conversion factor was changed, and is now based on direct emissions only, in line with the National Greenhouse Accounts (NGA) Factors produced by the Department of Climate Change. Prior years’ emission conversions did not differentiate between direct and indirect emission as these were not available at the time.
Base figures have been amended from previous years due to the inclusion of energy use of the Air and Noise Laboratory located at Netley. Energy utilisation was not been included in the past, as separate measurement of power consumption was not available until this year. Energy use and emission figures have been adjusted based on the 2011–12 years consumption.
Priority area 2: waste management
One of EPA’s environmental goals for is for ‘the sustainable use of resources—reducing costs to business and environmental impacts by promoting the efficient use of resources and waste minimisation’.
68 Environment Protection Authority Annual Report 1 July 2011– 30 June 2012
In support of this concept within the office environment in 250 Victoria Square, all waste management and recycling is managed in partnership with the lessor’s building management. Containers for all waste are provided within utilities rooms and kitchens, and are collected regularly by cleaning staff, recording quantities and contents recycled where possible. Streams of waste collected include:
• co-mingled recyclable waste
• organic food waste
• white paper and confidential paper destruction
• general dry waste.
As a means of encouraging staff to consider recycling and appropriate disposal of waste, only paper recycling bins are provided at work stations.
Toner cartridges from photocopying machines and printers, batteries and light bulbs are also collected and recycled.
Priority area 3: travel and fleet management
EPA reviews vehicle utilisation and vehicle mix annually, and at each three-year lease renewal, consideration is given to environmental aspects of the replacement vehicles available, in addition to ensuring the vehicle meets the business requirements of staff (Table 15).
Tables 15–16 and Figure 9 show a breakdown of EPA energy data for usage and greenhouse emissions.
Table 15 EPA vehicle fleet
Number of vehicles as at 30 June Vehicle types 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012
Diesel only 3 3 4 6 9 9 11
Electric/unleaded (hybrid) 0 0 0 1 2 2 2
Unleaded only 6 10 10 12 9 8 10
LPG only 7 3 2 2 3 3 1
Combined dual fuel 19 19 15 9 2 2 2 (unleaded and LPG)
Total long-term hire vehicles 35 35 31 30 25 24 26
Table 16 Energy use and greenhouse gas emissions
2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012
Energy (GJ) 2082 1939 1883 1883 1902 1950 1643
CO2 emissions (tonnes) 154 144 126 123 126 126 111
Note: During 2007–08, the emissions conversion factor was changed, and is now based on direct emissions from the vehicle only, in line with the National Greenhouse Accounts (NGA) factors produced by the Department of
69 Environment Protection Authority Annual Report 1 July 2011– 30 June 2012
Climate Change. Prior years’ emission conversions did not differentiate between direct and indirect emission, as these were not available at the time.
It is noted fuel consumption decreased by approximately 8800 litres in the past year, however statistics are unavailable at this time to assess if this has been a result of the change of vehicle or fuel types or a reduction in the amount of travel undertaken during the year.
GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS (CO2)
120
100
80
60
40 EMISSIONS (TONNES) EMISSIONS
20
0
Unlea ded L PG Elec t r ic / Diesel Unleaded FUEL TY PES
2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 2009-2010 2010-2011 2011-2012
Figure 9 Greenhouse gas emissions
Greening of Government Operations (GoGo) Framework
In accordance with the requirements of the cross-government Energy Efficiency Action Plan, the EPA's annual energy usage is detailed above. The EPA's internal program Sustainability @ Work also focuses on monitoring and reducing the usage of materials such as batteries, printing materials and in turn, the amount of waste produced by the organisation.
Sustainability@Work
The EPA continues to demonstrate a leadership role in best practice environmentally sustainable behaviour in the workplace to other businesses and communities in the state.
The EPA’s Sustainability@Work (S@W) Team meets on a bi-monthly basis to discuss sustainable practices in the workplace, including promoting initiatives, ensuring actions are implemented and working towards instilling a culture to reduce the EPA’s environmental footprint.
In 2011–12 the EPA implemented the second year of its three-year Environment Action Plan focusing on energy, water, waste, transportation and green purchasing. The S@W Team implemented the actions in its plan with the assistance of EPA staff.
Key achievements for 2011–12 include:
Waste
• Battery recycling: a battery-recycling service was officially implemented for EPA staff to use at 250 Victoria Square. To date a total of 35 kg of batteries have been sent for recycling.
• Fluorescent tube recycling for the whole of the EPA: the EPA is now a signatory to the FluoroCycle Scheme, a scheme that aims to increase the recycling of lamps containing mercury and reduce the
70 Environment Protection Authority Annual Report 1 July 2011– 30 June 2012
amount of mercury entering the environment. As part of its commitment to the scheme, the EPA is now recycling all of its waste mercury containing lamps (mainly fluorescent tubes) at all EPA locations.
• Beverage container recycling bins: improvements have been made to the beverage container bin collection service through the purchase of sealed 120-litre plastic bins to assist with the increasing collection of beverage containers. Plastic biodegradable liners have also been installed.
Printing
• All printers/photocopiers at the EPA 250 Victoria Square are set to print to double-sided. The EPA Board and Executive now use iPads to view attachments to meeting papers, substantially cutting down on large documents having to be printed for each member.
• The S@W team have been running a number of initiatives to encourage staff to think before they print and reduce the amount of colour printing including the following:
− Staff awareness through statistics comparing colour and black and white annual printing volumes and costs with suggestions to set default printers to a black and white machine.
− World Environment Day Morning Tea: a paper display set up to provide a visual message to staff about the amount of paper used in our printers and messages around ‘Is printing necessary’. Also, information about the cost of printing and advice on how to change printer settings. − Promoting an install default to ‘Mailbox’ setting on staff computers and assisting staff to do this so that all printing goes directly to a ‘Mailbox’ on the printer/photocopier resulting in a reduction in unnecessary printing.
Green purchasing
• Wherever possible, the EPA uses service providers who follow sustainable principles and use recyclable materials.
TravelSmart
• Walk to Work Day was held on 16 September 2011 and, to celebrate, the S@W team provided a breakfast for those who walked to work, some of whom walked up to eight kilometres.
• The 10 000 Step Program ran from 19 September until 14 October 2011, with 20 participants. An award was given to the individual with the most improved daily average steps, with another to the individual with the highest number of steps over the program.
• The EPA Bicycle User Group and S@W celebrated Ride to Work Day on 17 October 2011, with the EPA's Bike to Work Week held between 26 and 30 March 2012. Activities included information sessions on bicycle maintenance, legal facts about cycling on roads, and how to ride safely. Both events were wrapped up with a healthy breakfast for all participants.
71 Environment Protection Authority Annual Report 1 July 2011– 30 June 2012
APPENDIX 1 ORGANISATIONAL INFORMATION
Disability Action Plan
During 2011–12 the EPA surveyed staff to obtain demographic data to improve the organisation’s reporting accuracy and also monitored the number of staff with ongoing disabilities requiring workplace adaptation. The EPA has more than doubled its workforce with a disability over the past three years and is well in line with the South Australian Strategic Plan Target 50 of increasing by 10% the number of people with a disability employed in South Australia by 2020.
Equal Employment Opportunity
The EPA has increased its Aboriginal employment over the past two years, primarily through the use of the National Indigenous Cadetship Program. The EPA has partnered with the Department of Environment and Natural Resources to access Indigenous and Aboriginal support networks and staff cultural awareness training.
Traineeships
The EPA continues to participate in the Government Youth Traineeship program where opportunities arise.
EPA workforce statistics
The following tables provide a representation of the EPA’s workforce, and identify some changes in recent years.
Table 17 Total number of employees
2010–11 2011–12
Persons 232 232
FTEs 216.02 218.22
Table 18 Employee gender balance
2010–11 2011–12
Gender % persons % FTEs % persons % FTEs
Male 53.88 56.81 53.88 56.39
Female 46.21 43.19 46.12 43.61
Table 19 Number of persons separated from or recruited to EPA
2010–11 2011–12
Separated from the agency* 28 39
Recruited to the agency 27 43
* This includes TVSPs.
72 Environment Protection Authority Annual Report 1 July 2011– 30 June 2012
Table 20 Number of persons on leave without pay
As at 30 June 2011 As at 30 June 2012
On leave without pay 8 9
Table 21 Number of employees by salary bracket
2011–12
Salary Bracket Male Female Total
$0–$51 599 4 14 18
$51 600–$65 599 17 23 40
$65 600–$84 099 70 53 123
$84 100–$106 199 30 16 46
$106 200+ 4 1 5
TOTAL 125 107 232
Table 22 Status of employees in current position
FTEs
Ongoing Short-term Long-term Other (casual) Total contract contract
Male 101.86 9 11.8 0.4 123.06
Female 77.75 11.7 4.71 1 95.16
TOTAL 179.61 20.7 16.51 1.4 218.22
Persons
Ongoing Short-term Long-term Other (casual) Total contract contract
Male 103 9 12 1 125
Female 87 13 6 1 107
TOTAL 190 22 18 2 232
73 Environment Protection Authority Annual Report 1 July 2011– 30 June 2012
Table 23 Number of executives by gender, classification and status
Ongoing Tenured Untenured Other Total Classification contract contract (casual)
Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female
SAES1 0 0 0 0 3 1 0 0 3 1
CEO 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0
TOTAL 0 0 0 0 4 1 0 0 4 1
Table 24 Average days of leave taken per FTE employee
Leave type 2008–09 2009–10 2010–11 2011–12
Sick leave 8.46 8.81 8.70 8.23
Family carer’s leave 0.90 0.94 1.47 1.41
Miscellaneous special leave 0.34 0.50 0.55 0.62
Table 25 Number of Aboriginal and/or Torres Strait Islander employees
Male Female Total % of agency Target*
Aboriginal/Torres Strait 1 0 1 0.43 2% Islander people
* Target from South Australia’s Strategic Plan
74 Environment Protection Authority Annual Report 1 July 2011– 30 June 2012
Table 26 Number of employees by age bracket and gender
Age bracket Male Female Total % of total 2012 Workforce Benchmark* %
15−19 0 0 0 0 5.6%
20−24 2 6 8 3.45 9.9%
25−29 9 13 22 9.48 10.6%
30−34 15 21 36 15.52 10.4%
35−39 15 18 33 14.22 10.7%
40−44 24 13 37 15.95 11.7%
45−49 20 11 31 13.36 11.4%
50−54 18 13 31 13.36 11.0%
55−59 14 9 23 9.91 9.2%
60−64 7 2 9 3.88 5.6%
65+ 1 1 2 0.86 4.0%
TOTAL 125 107 232 100 100.0
* Source: Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS) Australian Demographics Statistics, 6291.0.55.001 Labour Force Status (ST LM8) by sex, age, state, marital status−employed−total from February 1978 Supertable, South Australia at May 2009.
Table 27 Cultural and linguistic diversity of employees
% of SA Male Female Total % of agency community*
Number of employees born 29 19 48 20.69 20.3% overseas
Number of employees who speak language(s) other than 15 14 29 12.5 16.6% English at home
* Benchmarks from ABS Publication Basic Community Profile (SA) Cat No. 2001.0, 2006 census.
Table 28 Number of employees with ongoing disabilities requiring workplace adaptation
2010–11 2011–12
Male Female Total % of agency Male Female Total % of agency
6 3 9 3.9 5 3 8 3.4
75 Environment Protection Authority Annual Report 1 July 2011– 30 June 2012
Table 29 Types of employee disabilities
Disability Male Female Total % of agency
Disability requiring workplace 5 3 8 3.4 adaption
Physical 5 3 8 3.4
Intellectual 0 0 0 0
Sensory 2 1 3 1.3
Psychological/psychiatric 1 0 1 0.4
Table 30 Number of employees using voluntary flexible working arrangements by gender
Arrangement Male Female Total
Purchased leave 3 4 7
Flexitime 118 93 211
Compressed weeks 1 7 8
Part-time job share 4 13 17
Working from home 1 6 7
Table 31 Documented review of individual performance development plan
Occurrence of review Total workforce 2010–11 Total workforce2011–12
Review within the past 12 months 80.17% 77.16
Review older than 12 months 12.93% 15.09
No review 6.9% 7.76
Table 32 Leadership and management training expenditure
Category of expenditure 2010–11 2011–12
Total training and development expenditure ($) 480 452.01 589 074.21
Total leadership and management development expenditure ($) 62 995.90 90 522.30
% of total expenditure 2.50 2.93
% total leadership and management expenditure 0.33 0.45
76 Environment Protection Authority Annual Report 1 July 2011– 30 June 2012
Table 33 Accredited training packages by classification
Classification Number of accredited training packages
ASO3 1
ASO4 2
ASO5 2
PO1 1
PO2 4
PO3 1
Table 34 Positions with customer service reflected in job and person specifications
Positions %
% of positions with customer service reflected in the job and person specification 19.44
% of positions without customer service reflected in the job and person specification 80.56
Occupational health, safety, welfare and injury management
The EPA has continued to improve its Occupational Health Safety Welfare and Injury Management System (OHSW&IM) and focus on compliance and injury prevention strategies. During the 2011–12 period the EPA developed a risk management system that helped it to identify and risk assessed over 250 hazards and over 1000 risks.The EPA also implemented 16 new policies and procedures and revised another three. Additionally 15 safe operating procedures (SOPS) were revised or developed.
The EPA was evaluated by WorkCover in 2011. In response to the evaluation, the EPA has undertaken continuous improvement initiatives which will be incorporated into the 2012 OHS&W Action Plan.
Table 35 Occupational health, safety and welfare (OHSW) statistics
2009–10 2010–11 2011–12
1 OHSW legislative requirements
Number of notifiable occurrences pursuant to OHSW 3 1 4 Regulations Division 6.6
Number of notifiable injuries pursuant to OHSW Regulations 0 0 1 Division 6.6
Number of notices served pursuant to OHSW Act sections 35, 0 0 0 39 and 40 (default, improvement and prohibition notices)
2 Injury management legislative requirements
Total number of employees who participated in the 2 1 6 rehabilitation program
Total number of employees rehabilitated and reassigned to 0 0 0 alternative duties
77 Environment Protection Authority Annual Report 1 July 2011– 30 June 2012
2009–10 2010–11 2011–12
Total number of employees rehabilitated back to their original 1 1 2 work
Number of open claims as at 30 June 4 4 4
Percentage of workers compensation expenditure over gross 0.24% 0.067% 0.24% annual remuneration
1 The four notifiable occurrences are due to 3 potential asbestos exposures from a construction waste depot that was processing asbestos against the licence requirements, the other occurrence was from a ceiling tile falling during summer (expansion joints now fitted). One notifiable incident was an employee being hospitalised due to work exacerbating a pre-existing medical condition. All incidents reported to SafeWork SA with no further action taken by SafeWork SA.
2 Three of the open claims are all on full hours with medical expenses only, one claim is resolved open only due to awaiting third party recovery action.
Table 36 Meeting the organisation’s safety performance targets
Base Performance: 12 months to end Final 2009–10 of June 2012 target
numbers Actual Notional Variation numbers or % quarterly or % target†
1 Workplace fatalities 0 0 0 0 0
2 New workplace injury claims 2 4 2 2 2
3 New workplace injury claims 5.48 11.54 4.94 6.61 4.11 frequency rate
4 Lost Time Injury Frequency Rate 2.74 8.66 2.47 6.19 2.06
5 New psychological injury claims 3.66 5.77 3.29 2.47 2.74
6 Rehabilitation and return to work:
a Early assessment within 2 0.00% 75% 80% -5% 80% days
b Early intervention within 5 100% 100% 90% 10% 90% days
c Days Lost <= 10 Days 50% 33.33% 60% -26.67% 60%
7 Claim determination:
a Claim determination in 10 50% 50% 75% -25% 75% business days
b Claim still to be determined 0% 25% 3% 22% 3% after 3 months
78 Environment Protection Authority Annual Report 1 July 2011– 30 June 2012
Base Performance: 12 months to end Final 2009–10 of June 2012 target
numbers Actual Notional Variation numbers or % quarterly or % target†
8 Income maintenance payment for recent injuries:
a 2010–11 Injuries (at 24 $1419.50 $3252.25 –$1832.63 months development) b 2011–12 Injuries (at 12 $26 960.96 $3685.25 +$23 275 months development)
The EPA had an increase in income maintenance with three claims having lost time for a day or more.
Table 37 Workers compensation expenditure
Variation % Change Expenditure 2010–11 ($m) 2011–12 ($m) ($m) + (–) + (–)
Income maintenance 0.0014 0.027 +0.025 +5.19%
Lump sum settlements redemptions 0 0 0 0 (section 42)
Lump sum settlements permanent 0 0 0 0 disability (section 43)
0.0093 0.017* +0.0077 +45.29% Medical/hospital costs combined (0.0111)* 0.017* +0.0059* +34.70%
Other 0.00070 0.00124 +0.00054 +43.55%
Total claims expenditure 0.0126 0.0450 +0.0324 +72%
* with medical report costs included
79 Environment Protection Authority Annual Report 1 July 2011– 30 June 2012
3 Year Incident Trends 2011-2012
35
30
25 2009/2010 20 2010/2011 15 2011/2012 3 year total 10 Number of Occurrences 5
0
l s s g t s ld a al ion ll in s t co ss Fa ject dl du nce / To nance n / a t logic Other e e dalism & a o ological gr t n s onomics h g n w Ob l Ha g bst Bi A Va a u t / ct Er smoke S to he n , Trip ta nu s/ s Psyc rity p n u li ou Exp Clie ure/ Mai c S Vehicle AccidentsMa d l e Co S Equipment Strorage Hit by moving object Fai zar Ha to fumes/gand a g/Equip d sure ls Bl o Exp mica
to Che re osu xp E Incident Mechanism
Figure 10 Hazard and incident reports–annual trends
Note: The annual trends have remained constant with similar numbers of incident being reported across the three years. A reduction in building failure issues is due to the teething and heating problems of the tenancy being improved. The increased number of vehicle accidents is due to including damage reports and body repairs in this report.
80 Environment Protection Authority Annual Report 1 July 2011– 30 June 2012
APPENDIX 2 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND ACCOMPANYING NOTES
Account payment performance
The state government benchmark of achieving 90% of the number of invoices paid within 30 days was achieved in 2011-12 (see Table 38).
Table 38 Account payment performance
Percentage of Percentage of Number of Value in A$ of Particulars accounts paid accounts paid accounts paid accounts paid (by number) (by value)
Paid by the due date* 5719 91.62 8 663 698 86.64
Paid within 30 days or 346 5.54 1 014 539 10.15 less from due date
Paid more than 30 177 2.84 321 195 3.21 days from due date
* The due date is defined as per section 11.7 of Treasurer’s Instruction 11 ‘Payment of Accounts’. Unless there is a discount or a written agreement between the public authority and the creditor, payment should be within 30 days of the date the invoice is first received by the public authority.
Contractual arrangements
During the 2011–12 financial year, the EPA did not enter into any contractual arrangement where the total value of an individual contract exceeded $4 million.
Instances of fraud
There have been no instances of fraud detected in the EPA during this financial year.
Use of consultants
Table 39 provides information on the use of consultants.
Table 39 Use of consultants—controlled entity
Number of Number of Number of Value of 2009−10 2010−11 2011−12 consultancies consultancies consultancies consultancies expenditure expenditure expenditure 2009−10 2010−11 2011−12
Below $10 000 2 2 1 13 900 16 800 2 200
$10 001− − − 1 − − 13 500 $50 000
Above $50 000 − − − − − −
Total 2 2 2 13 900 16 800 15 700
81 Environment Protection Authority Annual Report 1 July 2011– 30 June 2012
Below $10 000
Number of consultants in this category: 1 Value of consultants in this category: $2200
OZ Train Staff interviews and needs assessment report for the EPA
Between $10 001—$50 000
Number of consultants in this category: 1 Value of consultants in this category: $13 500
Morton Philips Fees for review of the OCE and executive team
Above $50 000
Number of consultants in this category: Nil Value of consultants in this category: Nil
Table 40 Overseas travel
Number of Destination/s Reason for travel Total cost to employees agency
1 Lyon, France To attend the 1st International Chiefs of Environmental $11 941.00 Compliance and Enforcement Summit
1 Barcelona, Presented paper at seminar regarding desalination and $2411.75 Spain the environment
2 Glosgow, Radiation Conference $2327.00 Scotland
1 Chiba, Japan Attended workshop regarding radiation protection in $0 emergency situations
1 Tauranga, New Attended Rena grounding incident at the request of the $0 Zealand Australian Maritime Safety Authority
82 Environment Protection Authority Annual Report 1 July 2011– 30 June 2012
83 Environment Protection Authority Annual Report 1 July 2011– 30 June 2012
84 Environment Protection Authority Annual Report 1 July 2011– 30 June 2012
85 Environment Protection Authority Annual Report 1 July 2011– 30 June 2012
86 Environment Protection Authority Annual Report 1 July 2011– 30 June 2012
87 Environment Protection Authority Annual Report 1 July 2011– 30 June 2012
88 Environment Protection Authority Annual Report 1 July 2011– 30 June 2012
89 Environment Protection Authority Annual Report 1 July 2011– 30 June 2012
90 Environment Protection Authority Annual Report 1 July 2011– 30 June 2012
91 Environment Protection Authority Annual Report 1 July 2011– 30 June 2012
92 Environment Protection Authority Annual Report 1 July 2011– 30 June 2012
93 Environment Protection Authority Annual Report 1 July 2011– 30 June 2012
94 Environment Protection Authority Annual Report 1 July 2011– 30 June 2012
95 Environment Protection Authority Annual Report 1 July 2011– 30 June 2012
96 Environment Protection Authority Annual Report 1 July 2011– 30 June 2012
97 Environment Protection Authority Annual Report 1 July 2011– 30 June 2012
98 Environment Protection Authority Annual Report 1 July 2011– 30 June 2012
99 Environment Protection Authority Annual Report 1 July 2011– 30 June 2012
100 Environment Protection Authority Annual Report 1 July 2011– 30 June 2012
101 Environment Protection Authority Annual Report 1 July 2011– 30 June 2012
102 Environment Protection Authority Annual Report 1 July 2011– 30 June 2012
103 Environment Protection Authority Annual Report 1 July 2011– 30 June 2012
104 Environment Protection Authority Annual Report 1 July 2011– 30 June 2012
105 Environment Protection Authority Annual Report 1 July 2011– 30 June 2012
106 Environment Protection Authority Annual Report 1 July 2011– 30 June 2012
107 Environment Protection Authority Annual Report 1 July 2011– 30 June 2012
108 Environment Protection Authority Annual Report 1 July 2011– 30 June 2012
109 Environment Protection Authority Annual Report 1 July 2011– 30 June 2012
110 Environment Protection Authority Annual Report 1 July 2011– 30 June 2012
APPENDIX 3 PUBLICATIONS RELEASED OR UPDATED DURING 2011–12
Corporate publications
EPA Annual Report 1 July 2010 to 30 June 2011 (includes reporting under the Radiation Protection and Control Act 1982)
Round-table 2011 summary report
Guidelines
Landfill gas and development near landfills – advice for planning authorities and developers
Waste derived fill specifications 2012
Information sheets
Chemical storage and disposal
Adelaide Coastal Water Quality Improvement Plan—Have your say
Strategies for water quality improvement for Adelaide's coastal waters
Community vision and environmental values for Adelaide's coastal waters
Penalties for illegal dumping
Public consultations
Lake Bonney South East environmental values
Waste to Resources Policy guidelines:
• Introductory paper for the proposed guidelines
• Guidelines on the assessment of resource recovery facilities
• Guidelines on resource recovery processing requirements
• Guidelines on handling wastes banned from landfill
Proposed licence fee structure for the operation of desalination plants that discharge waste to marine waters
Proposed licence fee structure for the operation of desalination plants that discharge waste to inland waters and land
Proposed changes to the licensing, registration and accreditation arrangements under the Radiation Protection and Control Act 1982 (RPC Act) and the associated fees to apply in 2012.
Waste derived fill specifications 2012
Adelaide Coastal Water Quality Improvement Plan
Amendment to Schedule 2 of the Environment Protection (Waste to Resources) Policy 2010 to exclude certain rural areas of the Adelaide Hills Council area from the application of clause 11
111 Environment Protection Authority Annual Report 1 July 2011– 30 June 2012
National Pollutant Inventory
2012 NPI Newsletter
Brochures
Monitoring the nearshore marine environment
EPA water quality monitoring in the Lower Lakes region
Illegal dumping—it will cost you
Adelaide Coastal Water Quality Improvement Plan
EPA aquatic ecosystem conditions report
Reports
Air quality in the Lower Lakes during a hydrological drought
Aquatic ecosystem condition reports: 2008 panel assessment of creeks and rivers in the Mount Lofty Ranges, Murray–Darling Basin, Northern & Yorke and Kangaroo Island regions
Aquatic ecosystem condition reports: 2009 panel assessment of creeks and drains in the South East NRM region
Aquatic ecosystem condition reports: 2010 panel assessment of creeks and rivers in the Eyre Peninsula NRM region
Aquatic ecosystem condition reports: 2010 panel assessment of creeks and rivers in the Eyre Peninsula NRM region
112 Environment Protection Authority Annual Report 1 July 2011– 30 June 2012
APPENDIX 4 FREEDOM OF INFORMATION STATEMENT
The following details are provided as part of the information statement of the EPA under the provisions of section 9 of the Freedom of Information Act 1991.
Organisation structure and functions
The EPA is South Australia’s leading environmental regulator. It is responsible for the protection of air and water quality and for the control of pollution, waste, noise and radiation, to ensure the protection and enhancement of the environment. The EPA’s organisational structure and functions are set out in this annual report.
Board and committees
Information on the EPA’s boards and committees is set out in this annual report.
Effect of organisation functions on members of the public
The EPA encourages environmental responsibility throughout the business and community sectors and works collaboratively towards achieving a healthy environment alongside economic prosperity.
The role and objectives of the EPA are detailed throughout this annual report and are published in the EPA Strategic Plan 2009–12.
Public participation in environment policy
The public is invited to participate in development of environment protection policy (EPP) through:
• public consultation sessions during the development of specific EPPs and other policy initiatives
• annual round-table conference
• regional round-table meetings
• specific issue forums.
The EPA also supported a number of programs to assist business and industry, community volunteers, teachers and students to become involved in protecting and enhancing the environment.
Public consultation undertaken during 2011–12 is detailed in this annual report.
Description of kinds of documents held by the EPA
Publications produced by the EPA can be accessed through the department’s website at www.epa.sa.gov.au or requested, free of charge, by telephoning the Customer Service Desk on (08) 8204 2004. A list of 2011–12 EPA publications is set out in this annual report (Appendix 3). Other types of documents produced by the EPA include:
• administrative records
• asset maintenance records
• records and annual reports of boards and committees
• corporate and strategic planning records
• correspondence files
• financial records
113 Environment Protection Authority Annual Report 1 July 2011– 30 June 2012
• occupational health and safety records
• personnel records
• policy documents
• procedures and reference manuals
• survey and environmental reports and records.
Please note that some charges for Freedom of Information documents may apply however EPA has been working to reduce these costs.
Documents available for inspection (or purchase) from the EPA under section 109 of the EP Act include:
• applications for environmental authorisations
• environmental authorisations
• beverage container approvals
• details of prosecutions and other enforcement action the EP Act.
Policy documents
In relation to corporate policy, the EPA refers to DENR corporate policies, except in instances where specific EPA policies have been develop. The following list details existing EPA internal operating policies.
IOP001 Guideline for the preparation of an internal office policy or procedure for the EPA
IOP002 Procedure for obtaining advice on sampling
IOP003 Procedure to be followed when requesting and receiving legal advice
IOP004 Learning and development policy and procedure
IOP010 Induction
IOP011 Guideline in preparing EPA board papers
IOP012 Vaccination protocol for field-staff
IOP015 Responding to environmental emergencies & major pollution incidents
IOP016 Threshold criteria – matters for EPA board consideration
IOP017 Guideline for the preparation of a cabinet submission
IOP018 Hazard incident injury reporting, investigation & management
IOP019 Mobile telephone policy
IOP021 Vehicle management
IOP022 Management of desk telephones
IOP023 Filling of positions during restructure
IOP024 Role & responsibilities of the Emergency Response Team
114 Environment Protection Authority Annual Report 1 July 2011– 30 June 2012
IOP025 Volumetric survey assessment
IOP026 Manifest audit process for liquid waste
IOP027 Weigh data audit process for solid waste
IOP028 A system for managing industry compliance audits
IOP029 Civil penalties
IOP031 Accredited licensing system
IOP032 EPA risk management policy
IOP033 The development and application of licence project plans
IOP034 EPA delegations policy
IOP035 Environment protection prders
IOP036 Assessment of waste or recycling depots and activities producing listed waste for limited purposes
IOP037 Checking licensee information for fee setting
IOP038 Licence fee structure reform: the system and opportunities for fee reduction
IOP039 When to charge a flat fee component for a licence
IOP040 Assessment of applications to produce and/or use refuse derived fuel
IOP042 Assessment of railway operations for limited purposes
IOP043 Managing contraventions and referring matters to the Investigations Branch
IOP044 Unauthorised waste activity – EPA response
IOP045 Management of bona fide, leave and timekeeping records
IOP046 Provision of public transport tickets for EPA business travel
IOP047 Flexitime
IOP048 Waste Levy Reduction for Recycling and Diversion
IOP049 Asset management for whole of Environment Protection Authority (EPA)
IOP050 Ensuring that the execution of instruments of delegation, and the use of the EPA seal, is legally correct, under the Environment Protection Act 1993
IOP051 Complaints management policy
IOP052 Managing significant projects in RCD
IOP053 Guideline for producing EPA publications and webpages
115 Environment Protection Authority Annual Report 1 July 2011– 30 June 2012
IOP054 RecFind Files and using the Occurrence Tables
IOP055 Sponsorship policy and procedures
IOP056 Leave without pay to work in an organisation external to the public sector (draft).
IOP057 EPA Compliance Enforcement Strategy Committee (CESC) – Functions & Guidelines
116 Environment Protection Authority Annual Report 1 July 2011– 30 June 2012
APPENDIX 5 KPI REPORTING
The following measures are reported annually in the EPA Agency Statement which is released with the State Budget papers. This generally occurs prior to 30 June, but for this report 2011–12 figures are used as well as the previous year’s actual financial year figures. Please note that lead data are only available to 23 June 2012 (at the time of writing). As mentioned on page 65, the EPA is placing significant effort into improving its performance measures and targets, and this effort will be better reflected in future reporting periods.
Measures in the EPA Agency Statement include: air quality at monitoring sites across Adelaide and in Whyalla and airborne lead at monitoring sites in Port Pirie; development plan amendment (DPA) and development application (DA) responses processed within statutory timeframes; and the number of inspections of EPA licensed premises.
The below data show good air quality was evident across Adelaide and Whyalla while estimated airborne lead levels show a decrease at all sites with three of four sites’ levels being within target limits. DPA and DA responses were close to target in 2011–12 and the target for 2012–13 has been revised to acknowledge the increasing complexity of DA responses. Licensed site inspection numbers reflect the EPA’s continued focus on more complex, higher risk sites. Each area is also discussed in more detail in the pages referenced.
2012−13 2011−12 2011−12 2010−11 Further Target Actual Target Actual info
Improved air quality as indicated by the number of days per calendar year where the air
quality NEPM PM10 particle standard of 50 micrograms of particles per cubic metre air is exceeded at the following sites:
− LeFevre No more 0 No more 0 day Page 23 than 5 days than 5 days
− Christie Downs No more 0 No more 0 days Page 57 than 5 days than 5 days
− Elizabeth No more 2 No more 0 days Page 57 than 5 days than 5 days
− Netley No more 0 No more 0 days Page 57 than 5 days than 5 days
Improved air quality in Port Pirie as measured by the annual average concentration for airborne lead:
− Frank Green Park Not to 0.11 Not to 0.13 µg/m3 Page 34 exceed 0.5 exceed 0.5 µg/m3 µg/m3
117 Environment Protection Authority Annual Report 1 July 2011– 30 June 2012
2012−13 2011−12 2011−12 2010−11 Further Target Actual Target Actual info
− Port Pirie Ellen Street Not to 1.96 Not to 1.79 µg/m3 Page 34 exceed 1.6 exceed 1.80 µg/m3 µg/m3
− Port Pirie Oliver Street Not to 0.26 Not to 0.23 µg/m3 Page 34 exceed 0.5 exceed 0.5 µg/m3 µg/m3
− Pirie West Primary School Not to 0.36 Not to 0.33 µg/m3 Page 34 exceed 0.5 exceed 0.5 µg/m3 µg/m3
Improved air quality in Whyalla No more 1 No more than 0 days Page 59 as indicated by a decrease in the than 5 days 5 days number of exceedences of the
air quality NEPM PM10 particle standard (50 micrograms of particles per cubic metre air), measured at Schulz Reserve
% of development plan 100% 95% 100% 100% Page 42 amendment responses made within statutory timeframes
% of development application 96% 97% 100% 90% Page 42 responses and approvals made within statutory timeframe
Ensure activities of licensees comply with the Act, through:
− the number of inspections 650 574 650 654 – of licensed premises, audits and other environmental measures
118 Environment Protection Authority Annual Report 1 July 2011– 30 June 2012
ABBREVIATIONS
ABC Adelaide Brighton Cement
ACWQIP Adelaide Coastal Water Quality Improvement Plan
AECRs Aquatic Ecosystem Condition Reports
AELERT Australasian Environmental Law Enforcement Regulators neTwork
Air NEPM National Environment Protection (Ambient Air Quality) Measure
CDL Container Deposit Legislation
CO carbon monoxide
COAG Council of Australian Governments
CRC CARE Cooperative Research Centre for Contamination and Remediation of the Environment
DAC Development Assessment Commission
DENR Department of Environment and Natural Resources
DMITRE Department for Manufacturing, Innovation, Trade, Resources and Energy
DfW Department for Water
DPTI Department of Planning, Transport and Infrastructure
EIS environmental impact statement
EIP environment improvement program
EPA Environment Protection Authority
EP Act Environment Protection Act 1993
EPHC Environment Protection and Heritage Council
EPO environment protection order
ER&D Environment Resources and Development Court
FAQs Frequently Asked Questions
IDU Illegal Dumping Unit
KCA Kimberly–Clark Australia & New Zealand
LAMP Licensing Administration Modernisation Project
MAR Managed Aquifer Recharge
NEPM National Environment Protection Measure
119 Environment Protection Authority Annual Report 1 July 2011– 30 June 2012
NPI National Pollutant Inventory
NRMR natural resource management region
NWI National Water Initiative
NOx oxides of nitrogen
OHSW&IM Occupational Health Safety Welfare and Injury Management System
PM10 particulate matter less than 10 micrometres (µm) in diameter
PM2.5 particulate matter less than 2.5 micrometres (µm) in diameter
RMS Risk Management System
RPC Act Radiation Protection and Control Act 1982
S@W Sustainability at Work
SASP South Australia’s Strategic Plan
SCEW Standing Committee for Environment and Water
SLAT Sustainability Licence Assessment Tool
SO2 sulphur dioxide
SOC Senior Officials Committee
SOI Statement of Intent
SWARA Southern Region Waste Resource Authority
TCE trichlorethene
µg/m3 micrograms per cubic metre
Waste EPP Environment Protection (Waste to Resources) Policy 2010
WQIP water quality improvement plan
ZWSA ZeroWaste SA
120
Environment Protection Authority
Annual Report on the Administration of the Radiation Protection and Control Act 1982
1 July 2011 to 30 June 2012
Annual Report on the administration of the Radiation Protection and Control Act 1982 1 July 2011 to 30 June 2012
For further information please contact:
Information Officer Environment Protection Authority Street address: 250 Victoria Square, Adelaide SA 5000 Postal address: GPO Box 2607, Adelaide SA 5001
Telephone: (08) 8204 2004 Facsimile: (08) 8124 4670 Free call (country): 1800 623 445 Website:
ISSN 1322-1662
ISBN 978-1-921495-24-3
September 2012
© Environment Protection Authority
This document may be reproduced in whole or part for the purpose of study or training, subject to the inclusion of an acknowledgment of the source and to it not being used for commercial purposes or sale. Reproduction for purposes other than those given above requires the prior written permission of the Environment Protection Authority.
CONTENTS
LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL ...... 1 FOREWORD ...... 2 INTRODUCTION ...... 3 STRATEGIC DIRECTIONS...... 4 KEY PROJECTS AND INITIATIVES ...... 5 RADIATION PROTECTION COMMITTEE ...... 12 REGISTRATIONS AND LICENSING...... 14 EXEMPTIONS GRANTED UNDER THE RPC ACT ...... 18 RADIATION INCIDENTS AND ACCIDENTS ...... 20 NATIONAL ACTIVITIES ...... 22 INTERNATIONAL ACTIVITIES ...... 24 TRAINING AND CONFERENCES...... 25 OTHER STATUTORY MATTERS...... 26 ABBREVIATIONS...... 27
List of figures
Figure 1 Number of registration applications for dental, medical and veterinary X-ray apparatus for 2000–12...... 10
List of tables
Table 1 Personal licences and registrations under the RPC Act ...... 14
LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL
The Hon. Paul Caica, MP Minister for Sustainability, Environment and Conservation Parliament House North Terrace ADELAIDE South Australia 5000
Dear Minister
I am pleased to present the Annual Report on the Administration of the Radiation Protection and Control Act 1982 for the period 1 July 2011 to 30 June 2012, for tabling in Parliament in accordance with section 22 of the Act.
Yours sincerely
Dr Campbell Gemmell Chief Executive Environment Protection Authority
26 September 2012
1 Annual Report on the administration of the Radiation Protection and Control Act 1982
FOREWORD
I am pleased to present the Annual Report on the Administration of the Radiation Protection and Control Act 1982 (RPC Act) for 2011–12. This report summarises the key projects, initiatives and achievements of the EPA in exercising its regulatory powers and functions under the RPC Act during the period.
In 2011–12 the EPA made significant progress in its review of the RPC Act and introduction of new authorisations consistent with the provisions of the National Directory for Radiation Protection, including a licence to possess a radiation source, a facilities licence, and provision for accreditation of third party service providers. Significant progress was also made in the introduction of the third party accredited testing program for diagnostic X-ray equipment.
The EPA responded to a large number of enquiries regarding regulatory requirements, radiation exposures and health risks, and provided high quality advice to the public, industry and government on radiation protection matters.
The EPA assessed radiation risks and methods of radiation management for the Olympic Dam (OD) expansion environmental impact statement and the revised OD environment management plan, and continued surveillance and assessment of radiation risks and management of South Australia's uranium and mineral sands mines.
The radiation laboratory remained a valuable resource for the EPA, licensees and other stakeholders requiring accurate measurement and verification of radiation parameters, and calibration of radiation monitoring equipment. The EPA collaborated with the Australian Radiation Protection and Nuclear Safety Agency (ARPANSA) and the Supervising Scientist Division (Northern Territory) to enhance analytical measurements and techniques, and collaborated with the University of Adelaide in support of scientific research in radiation physics being conducted by a postgraduate student at the laboratory.
At the national level, the EPA continued its involvement in the development of national radiation protection codes of practice and standards published by ARPANSA and developed by the ARPANSA Radiation Health Committee, which is chaired by the EPA Director Regulation and Compliance.
In 2012–13 the EPA will focus its radiation protection efforts on the implementation of new licences under the RPC Act, including the transition of registrations in the mining area and licences to mine and mill radioactive ores to a licence for mining and mineral processing, the licence to possess a radiation source and facilities licences; finalising the review of the RPC Act; and reviewing the regulations under the RPC Act. In these endeavours, proactive engagement with industry and the South Australian community will remain a priority.
I sincerely thank the EPA staff for their concerted efforts and the members of the Radiation Protection Committee for their active contribution and valued advice during this year.
Dr Campbell Gemmell Chief Executive Environment Protection Authority 26 September 2012
2 Annual Report on the administration of the Radiation Protection and Control Act 1982
INTRODUCTION
This report provides information on the administration of the Radiation Protection and Control Act 1982 (RPC Act) during the financial year 2011–12 by the Environment Protection Authority (EPA), when carrying out its RPC Act functions.
The RPC Act is committed to the Minister for Sustainability, Environment and Conservation, who has delegated roles, functions and powers under the Act and its Regulations (pursuant to section 8) to the Chief Executive (CE) of the EPA. The CE further delegates responsibilities for administration and enforcement of the RPC Act to officers of the EPA.
The purpose of the RPC Act is to ensure the health and safety of people and to protect the environment from the harmful effects of radiation. The Act provides for the control of activities related to radioactive substances and radiation apparatus. Section 22 of the RPC Act requires the EPA to present a report to the Minister on the administration of the RPC Act at the end of each financial year for tabling in both houses of the South Australian Parliament.
The EPA gives administrative support to the Radiation Protection Committee, which is an expert advisory body established under section 9 of the RPC Act. The Committee advises the minister and the EPA about the granting of licences under the RPC Act, radiation protection matters that it considers significant, and matters that have been referred to the Committee.
When carrying out its RPC Act functions, the EPA manages the review of legislation and the adoption of national standards, codes of practice and agreements for radiation protection. It also manages sources of radiation through registration and inspections of radiation sources and practices, and licensing individuals who use or handle radioactive substances or operate radiation apparatus (X-ray machines or cosmetic tanning units).The EPA also licenses mining and mineral processing operations such as uranium mines and mineral sands mines.
Officers of the Radiation Protection Branch of the EPA, who are appointed as authorised officers under section 16 of the RPC Act, undertake surveillance of sources of radiation used in South Australia to ensure compliance with the RPC Act and its Regulations. Officers of the Investigations Branch of the EPA have also been appointed as authorised officers under the RPC Act. These officers investigate alleged breaches of the RPC Act and Regulations.
As at 30 June 2012, the Radiation Protection Branch had 12.85 full-time equivalent (FTE) scientific and technical staff, and two FTE clerical staff responsible for administration of the RPC Act.
3 Annual Report on the administration of the Radiation Protection and Control Act 1982
STRATEGIC DIRECTIONS
Strategic planning for radiation protection and control
The goal of the EPA in carrying out its RPC Act functions is to protect the environment and the community from unacceptable radiation. This goal forms part of the EPA Strategic Plan 2009–2012.
During 2011–12, the work focused on:
1 Maintaining systems to effectively regulate an expanding uranium mining industry through a regulatory framework in consultation with other departments and operators that allows cost-effective, risk-based and equitable regulation of uranium mines.
2 Maintaining effective legislation that incorporates national and international standards by developing proposals for updating the RPC Act and associated Regulations.
3 Implementing the National Directory for Radiation Protection (National Directory).
4 Implementing the national Code of Practice for the Security of Radioactive Sources.
5 Ensuring compliance with requirements to safely manage radioactive sources and waste.
6 Progressing the introduction of third party accredited testing of dental and medical X-ray machines.
4 Annual Report on the administration of the Radiation Protection and Control Act 1982
KEY PROJECTS AND INITIATIVES
Managing South Australia's mining development
In 2011–12, the EPA continued to contribute to the management of South Australia's uranium and mineral sands mining during a period of significant increase in exploration and development. The EPA assessed licences and other mining and mineral processing applications, provided guidance to explorers, and worked with operators, other state government agencies and the Commonwealth to ensure that proposed and current operations effectively meet their environment and health protection obligations.
A significant licensing project during 2011–12 was the assessment of the supplementary environmental impact statement (EIS) for the BHP Billiton Olympic Dam Expansion proposal and the subsequent development of the approval conditions for radiation issues.
The EPA worked with the Department of Manufacturing, Innovation, Trade, Resources and Energy (DMITRE) to improve the uranium mining regulatory framework. A significant project is the development of guidelines for joint EPA/DMITRE regulatory processes which is nearing completion following the first round of public comment submitted in December 2011.
The EPA has also been actively involved with the Uranium Council (UC), which comprises Commonwealth and State governments, and industry groups. The UC seeks to harmonise regulatory arrangements across jurisdictions, ensure an effective and transparent regulatory regime, and provide effective and efficient coordination between the relevant regulatory agencies. The EPA contributed to the work of the UC in assessing the training and skills needs for an expanded uranium mining industry in Australia and also in the preparation of guidelines for uranium industry and government engagement.
Changes to the RPC Act
During 2011–12 the RPC Act was amended to bring into force relevant provisions of the Statutes Amendment (Budget 2010) Act 2010 (Budget Act). The amendments to the RPC Act included:
• changing the licence to mine or mill radioactive ores (section 24) to either a licence to test for developmental purposes (section 23A) or a licence to carry out mining or mineral processing (section 24),
• introducing a facilities licence (section 29A) that applies to radiation facilities of a prescribed class where very high energy radiation sources are used or large quantities of radioactive minerals are used or stored,
• introducing a licence to possess a radiation source (section 33A) that must be held by owners of registrable X-ray apparatus, sealed radioactive sources and premises, and owners of cosmetic tanning units in commercial use, and
• providing for accreditation of third party service providers (Division 3B), which can include accreditation of persons who test radiation equipment for compliance with the requirements for registration under the RPC Act, or providers of training courses for licensing persons to use or handle radioactive substances or to operate radiation apparatus.
These provisions came into force on 1 March 2012, with the exception of the requirement to hold a licence to possess a radiation source (section 33A) which came into force on 1 July 2012.
The RPC Act was also amended on 20 October 2011 to delete sub-sections 28(2)(a) and 29(3)(a) that were originally meant to exempt persons working on sites licensed to mine or mill radioactive ores under section 24 from the requirement to hold a licence to use or handle radioactive substances (section 28) and to
5 Annual Report on the administration of the Radiation Protection and Control Act 1982 exempt these licensed operations from the requirement to also be registered as premises (section 29). This action was required to address an unintended consequence of the introduction of the new ‘licence to possess’ (section 33A) and ‘facilities licence’ (section 29A).
In addition to changes to the RPC Act included in the Budget Act, the EPA proposed amendments to the RPC Act to complete the necessary changes to meet national agreements for radiation protection and to enhance the provisions for administration and enforcement of the Act.
By the end of 2011–12 the EPA had prepared drafting instructions for the proposed changes to the RPC Act to meet the national obligations and enhance the provisions for administration and enforcement. The changes included:
• prescribing the Objects of the Act, Radiation Protection Principles and General Duty consistent with requirements of the National Directory published by ARPANSA,
• conforming with Council of Australian Governments requirements for security of radiation sources, and in particular providing for administration and enforcement of the Code of Practice for Security of Radioactive Sources published by ARPANSA
• prescribing a number of new provisions to improve enforcement mechanisms and bring the RPC Act into line with provisions under the Environment Protection Act 1993
• prescribing a new section to provide for a new risk-based offence of causing a radiation risk or serious radiation risk.
At the end of the period, the drafting instructions for the review of the RPC Act remained in the Cabinet Process.
Review of fees for licences and registrations under the RPC Act
As a consequence of the State Budget 2010–11, and reflecting the outcomes of the Sustainable Budget Commission process, the EPA was required to recover the costs associated with the administration of the licences and registrations granted under the RPC Act. To this end the EPA conducted a comprehensive review of the work involved in administering the licences and registrations, and determined what fees should apply.
Throughout the process the EPA used the Department of Primary Industries and Resources’ Cost Recovery Policy, the Australian Government Cost Recovery Guidelines, and the guidelines developed by the Sustainable Budget Commission to calculate the new fees. The proposed fees for licences and registrations would bridge a significant gap between the cost of administering the licences and registrations and the revenue from the fees that existed at that time.
The EPA consulted stakeholders by writing to approximately 5300 people who held licences to operate X-ray apparatus or use or handle radioactive substances, and 950 owners of radiation sources and facilities to advise them of the proposed fees and new licences under the RPC Act. Owners of radiation sources and facilities were invited to information sessions to explain the fees and new provisions for licences and accreditations under the RPC Act. The information sessions were held on 10 and 11 October 2011 and were attended by 15 stakeholders.
Letters were also sent to mining and mineral processing companies, relevant government departments, and professional and industry bodies to advise them of the increase in fees and the new licences and invite them to meet with senior staff of the EPA to discuss the proposed fees and new licences. Officers of the EPA met with key stakeholders including representatives of the companies that held licences to mine or mill radioactive ores, the South Australian Chamber of Mines and Energy, the Australian Medical Association
6 Annual Report on the administration of the Radiation Protection and Control Act 1982
(SA), and the EPA responded to approximately 35 queries from a variety of stakeholders, with many seeking clarification, particularly regarding the requirements for the new licence to possess a radiation source. Changes to the Regulations under the RPC Act
The following regulations were gazetted on 2 February 2012 to give effect to the changes to the RPC Act and an increase in fees for licences and registrations:
• Radiation Protection and Control (Ionising Radiation) Variation Regulations 2012
• Radiation Protection and Control (Non-Ionising Radiation) Variation Regulations 2012.
These regulations came into operation on 1 March 2012, with the exception of regulations 180E and 180F of the Radiation Protection and Control (Ionising Radiation) Variation Regulations 2012 in relation to the licence to possess a radiation source (section 33A), which came into operation on 1 July 2012.
The expiry of the Radiation Protection and Control (Ionising Radiation) Regulations 2000 (IR Regulations) was postponed for one year from 1 September 2011 under the provisions of the Subordinate Legislation (Postponement of Expiry) Regulations 2011 that were published in the SA Government Gazette on 25 August 2011.
Introduction of the licence to possess a radiation source
The EPA committed significant resources to the development of guidance information for stakeholders and changes to the radiation licensing database in preparation for the introduction of the new licences to possess a radiation source (s33A).
The licence is being phased in during 2012–13 where people and organisations in possession of registered radiation sources prior to 1 July 2012 are not required to make an application for the licence until the date on which renewal of their registrations falls due during the 2012–13 financial year. Owners of commercial cosmetic tanning units were required to apply for the licence to possess a radiation source on or before 31 July 2012.
Code of Practice for the Security of Radioactive Sources
During 2011–12 the EPA finalised drafting instructions for proposed changes to the RPC Act that included making provisions for implementation of the requirements of the Code of Practice for the Security of Radioactive Sources (Security Code), published by the ARPANSA.
The EPA also held discussions with the Department of Premier and Cabinet and South Australian Police (SAPOL) on the requirements of the security background checks required under the Security Code.
Radioactive waste management
The EPA maintained its surveillance of radioactive waste material and required businesses to submit an annual audit of radioactive material in their possession and provide details of their radioactive sources and whether they are regarded as waste.
The EPA approved annual radioactive waste management plans (RWMP) of organisations that use or store unsealed radioactive material pursuant to regulations 137 and 138 of the IR Regulations. These organisations included:
• university campuses
7 Annual Report on the administration of the Radiation Protection and Control Act 1982
• pathology laboratories
• hospitals
• private nuclear medicine facilities
• veterinary clinics
• a water testing company
• scientific laboratories.
The EPA also approved two geophysical investigations and two research projects that involved the use of radionuclides in tracer studies.
During the period, ARPANSA sought responses from relevant jurisdictions to questions from participating countries in relation to the Australian National Report 2011 under the Joint Convention on the Safety of Spent Fuel Management and on the Safety of Radioactive Waste Management.
Mining waste
Radioactive tailings and residues from mining or mineral processing activities are managed in accordance with industry best practice and authorisations and approvals granted under the Code of Practice on Radiation Protection and Radioactive Waste Management in Mining and Mineral Processing (2005). The code is applied to all mining or mineral processing operations licensed or registered under the RPC Act.
Radiation emergency response
The EPA is responsible for providing expert advice to the combatant authority, the fire services, in responding to incidents and emergencies involving radioactive material. During 2011–12 there was one incident that required attendance by the EPA.
On 12 August 2011 the EPA was contacted by the Metropolitan Fire Service (MFS) to attend a metals recycling depot at Gillman where a portal radiation monitor had detected radioactivity in two pieces of magnesium alloy that were later found to be parts of aircraft engines containing radioactive thorium. Officers of the EPA attended the incident and measured radiation levels near the material and found low dose rates that would not have caused a health risk to anyone who had been in close contact with the metal. It was agreed that the material could be safely stored at the depot until it was returned to its original owner.
On 12 June 2012, officers of the EPA visited New South Wales (NSW) to observe an emergency response exercise, Ex FLARE 3, which was a controlled exercise designed to test and analyse the state’s response to a release of radiological material within a complex structure from a radiological dispersal device (RDD). The exercise conducted at the Army’s Holsworthy Barracks gave the officers of the EPA a valuable insight into communications and command and control for responding to an RDD incident.
Officers of the EPA participated in the following emergency response-related committees:
• State Chemical, Biological, Radiological and Nuclear (CBRN) Committee
• State CBRN Committee–Scientific Advisory Group
• State CBRN Committee–Training Advisory Group.
The EPA also provided training to emergency service personnel for responding to incidents and emergencies involving radioactive substances, as outlined later in this report.
8 Annual Report on the administration of the Radiation Protection and Control Act 1982
Regulation of solaria
The Radiation Protection and Control (Cosmetic Tanning Units) Regulations 2008 (Tanning Units Regulations) and the Radiation Protection and Control (Non-ionising Radiation) Regulations 2008 (NIR Regulations) have been in force since 14 March 2008 and 1 March 2009, respectively.
The Tanning Units regulations require solaria businesses to comply with the Australian and New Zealand Standard AS/NZS 2635:2008–Solaria for cosmetic purposes, and the NIR Regulations require operators of cosmetic tanning units to be licensed under section 31(1)(b) of the RPC Act. In order to obtain a licence, applicants are required to demonstrate appropriate knowledge of the health effects of UV radiation and the regulatory requirements for solaria by passing a licence examination prepared and administered by the EPA.
From 1 July 2012 owners of radiation sources are required to hold a Licence to possess a radiation source under section 33A of the RPC Act. Solaria owners were amongst the first owners of radiation sources required to hold such a licence. In 2011–12 the EPA prepared guidance information for solaria owners on the requirements for the licence and the underpinning radiation management plan, and contacted all owners to advise them of their obligations under the RPC Act.
The EPA visited several solaria businesses to consult with owners/managers on the requirements of the Licence to possess a radiation source and remind them of the obligations under the Tanning Units Regulations. Many solaria businesses expressed concern that South Australia would follow the NSW government’s proposal to ban the use of cosmetic tanning units that use ultraviolet radiation.
At the end of 2011–12 there were 27 businesses operating tanning units, compared with 35 in 2010–11 and 45 in 2009–10. During the same period, there was a total of 75 licensed operators compared with 101 licensed operators in 2010–11.
South Australian Health and Medical Research Institute (SAHMRI) Cyclotron
The South Australian Health and Medical Research Institute (SAHMRI) is located next to the new Royal Adelaide Hospital site. The SAHMRI notified the EPA in August 2011 of its intention to install a cyclotron to produce nuclear medicine isotopes. It is anticipated that the cyclotron will be installed and ready for commissioning in 2013.
The EPA has worked with SAHMRI planning and development officers, contractors and radiation shielding designers to discuss radiation safety requirements and compliance with the RPC Act and Regulations.
During 20–22 June 2012 EPA officers visited the NSW and Queensland radiation regulators, and the Macquarie University and Royal Brisbane Hospitals to observe the operational and regulatory requirements in those jurisdictions.
Third party accredited testing of dental and medical X-ray apparatus
The numbers, complexity and use of dental and medical imaging apparatus have increased significantly in South Australia over the last several years. While individual years vary according to factors such as the economy, machine replacement cycles and uptake of new technologies, Figure 1 shows a significant upward trend in applications to register these apparatus. Changes to the Medicare system flagged by the Commonwealth Government (for example, placing a life span of 10 years for apparatus) is likely to see further increases in applications for new apparatus in coming years.
While proving a challenge to regulatory inspection and registration, this indicates more availability of new medical technology to patients and medical practitioners in South Australia.
9 Annual Report on the administration of the Radiation Protection and Control Act 1982
Dental, Medical & Veterinary X-ray Apparatus Applications
400
350
300
250
200
150
100
50 Number of Registration Applications of Registration Number Trendline 0
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 -0 -0 -0 -0 -0 -0 -0 -0 -0 -1 -1 -1 00 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 Financial Ye ar
Figure 1 Number of registration applications for dental, medical and veterinary X-ray apparatus for 2000–12
To reflect national approaches for compliance testing X-ray apparatus and to enhance the registration of dental and medical X-ray apparatus under section 32 of the RPC Act through third party compliance testing, the EPA established a project to introduce third party accredited testing of dental and medical X-ray apparatus.
The third party testing program is being implemented in four stages:
• Stage 1 covers dental plain radiography X-ray units.
• Stage 2 covers fixed, portable and mobile X-ray units used for medical, chiropractic and veterinary plain radiography.
• Stage 3 covers computed tomography (CT), orthopantomogram (OPG), fluoroscopy and mammography X-ray apparatus.
• Stage 4 covers dental cone beam CT apparatus.
The EPA completed Stage 1 of the project in 2008–09 and commenced Stage 2 towards the end of 2009– 10.
During 2011–12 the EPA focused on enhancing Stage 2 with regard to the skills of accredited testers and prepared detailed work books to assist testers in checking these apparatus for compliance. Third party testing of apparatus in Stages 1 and 2 continued during 2011–12. The EPA proposes to introduce Stages 3 and 4 during 2012–13.
Community information and advice
The EPA continued to provide support to the community in the area of non-ionising radiation.
Sources of non-ionising radiation include mobile telephones and base stations, powerlines, lasers and solaria used for cosmetic purposes. The harmful effects from exposure to high levels of non-ionising
10 Annual Report on the administration of the Radiation Protection and Control Act 1982 radiation are well known, but it is less clear whether there are harmful effects from chronic low-level exposure.
The EPA responded to a large number of enquiries from the public on the potential risks from exposure to the extremely low-frequency magnetic fields associated with electricity in homes and powerlines. It continued to make available to the public a simple-to-use, magnetic-field-strength meter, which has proved very useful for educating the public and allaying the fears and concerns of parents regarding the potential risks to children from exposure to magnetic fields.
The EPA advises government, industry and the public about radiation safety for non-ionising radiation, and continually reviews ongoing research on this issue.
Laboratory and technical services
The radiation laboratory provides a valuable resource for the EPA and a variety of stakeholders with its facilities for radiation monitoring and surveillance, calibration of radiation survey equipment including radon and radon progeny monitors, and analysis of environmental samples using gamma spectroscopy and liquid scintillation techniques.
During 2011–12 the laboratory staff actively participated in EPA radiation monitoring projects and preparation for emergency response, and undertook continuous improvement of laboratory methods including upgrading and automating equipment to improve efficiencies and precision of environmental and occupational sample analysis. The EPA also fostered collaboration with ARPANSA and Supervising Scientist Division (Northern Territory) to enhance analysis of environmental radiation, radon and radon decay products, and calibration of monitoring equipment.
The laboratory facilities were available to uranium mining companies and radiation consultants for whom the EPA provided assistance for equipment calibrations, cross-comparison and cross-calibration of laboratory methods, and analysis of samples such as high volume air sampler filters, soil, water and vegetation as well as spills investigations.
The laboratory facilities were also used for educational purposes, including training in radiation monitoring for emergency response officers from Metropolitan Fire Service (MFS), SA Ambulance Service, SA Police (SAPOL), and research projects conducted by students from the University of Adelaide.
11 Annual Report on the administration of the Radiation Protection and Control Act 1982
RADIATION PROTECTION COMMITTEE
The functions and legislative responsibilities of the Radiation Protection Committee (the Committee), as set out in section 12 of the RPC Act, are to:
• advise the Minister in relation to the formulation of Regulations under this Act
• advise the Minister in relation to the granting of licences under this Act, including the conditions to which they should be subject
• investigate and report on any other matters relevant to the administration of this Act at the request of the Minister or of its own motion.
The Committee plays an important role in advising the Minister and the EPA on all aspects of radiation protection in mining of radioactive ores, and medical, industrial, scientific and public uses of ionising and non-ionising radiation.
The Committee consists of 10 members, one of whom is the Presiding Member, appointed by the Governor of South Australia. The Presiding Member must be an officer or employee of the department of the Minister to whom the RPC Act is committed (ie the EPA). The specific membership qualifications and expertise relevant to the administration of the RPC Act are prescribed in section 9 of the RPC Act. Section 10 provides that the Governor may appoint a suitable person to be a deputy member of the Committee.
The EPA provides the Committee with administrative support and seeks the Committee’s advice on strategic issues and issues related to the expertise of its members.
Meeting outcomes
During 2011–12, the Committee met on three occasions and considered many of the matters addressed in this report. The Committee provided expert advice on strategic issues and matters brought to the Committee for advice and discussion.
Strategic issues discussed at the meetings included:
• 2013 State of the Environment Report (SoE Report)
• EPA’s Strategic Plan
• radon dose modelling research.
The Committee considered that a section on radiation in the SoE Report would provide an excellent opportunity to educate the public about ionising and non-ionising radiation use in the state, put radiation risk into context, and address the confusion, fear, and misunderstandings some have about the different radiation types.
On the EPA Strategic Plan, the Committee suggested that the plan should mention the EPA's responsibilities in relation to radiation health, and acknowledge the SA community as a stakeholder.
The Committee was provided with a very informative presentation on radiation dose modelling research from an expert in this field.
Other matters on which the Committee provided expert advice included:
• Olympic Dam annual dose & environment reports
• nuclear medicine specialist authorisation of exposures for treatments using ionising radiation
12 Annual Report on the administration of the Radiation Protection and Control Act 1982
• approval of research involving the use of ionising radiation on humans
• radiation protection principles
• regulatory options for controls on routine operations and incidents at a uranium mine,
• review of the Radiation Protection and Control (Ionising Radiation Regulations) 2000 and the Radiation Protection and Control (Transport of Radioactive Substances) Regulations 2003.
Members and deputy members of the Committee also participated in a working group established to consider closure criteria for the Port Pirie and Radium Hill legacy sites.
Membership
The current three-year term of the Committee commenced on 26 May 2011 and expires on 25 May 2014. The members and deputy members at commencement of the reporting period are listed below.
Members Section of Act Deputy Members
HM Fulcher (Presiding Member) s9(2)(a) K Baldry
Dr S Constantine s9(2)(b) Dr MJ Nottage
C Kapsis s9(2)(c) LM Ricote
SM Paulka s9(2)(d) K Taylor
Dr GS Laurence s9(2)(e) PJ Collins
J Fitch s9(2)(f) Dr E Bezak
Dr ID Kirkwood s9(2)(g) Dr MI Kitchener
GG Marshall s9(2)(h) A Eadie
Dr PJ Sykes s9(2)(i) Dr MT Lardelli
T Circelli s9(2)(j) JV Burckhardt
The appointment of Ms Fulcher as Presiding Member and Mr Baldry as her deputy expired on 31 August 2011. Mr Circelli, an officer of the EPA, presided over two meetings of the Committee and Mrs Fitch presided over the third, pending the appointment of a Presiding Member.
13 Annual Report on the administration of the Radiation Protection and Control Act 1982
REGISTRATIONS AND LICENSING
Personal radiation licences and registrations of equipment and premises are renewed annually. Table 1 presents the number of current personal licences and registrations under the RPC Act as at 30 June 2012, and the number of new applications for licences and registrations approved during 2011–12.
Table 1 Personal licences and registrations under the RPC Act
Number Section of Number currently Type of licence or registration approved RPC Act licensed/registered 2011–12
Licence to use or handle radioactive 28 969 193 substances
Licence to operate ionising radiation 31(1)(a) 4564 657 apparatus
Licence to operate a non-ionising radiation 31(1)(b) 75 29 apparatus (cosmetic tanning units)
Registration of ionising radiation apparatus 32 2067 290
Registration of sealed radioactive sources 30 626 37
Registration of premises in which unsealed 29 151 5 radioactive substances are handled or kept
Total 8452 1211
The number of applications received for registration of medical, dental, chiropractic and veterinary X-ray apparatus during 2011–12 was 292 compared with 235 in 2010–11. The ongoing increase in applications in this area is mainly due to practices upgrading X-ray equipment, eg to digital and computer radiography X-ray machines.
It is estimated that during the period, there were approximately 7,500 radiation workers in South Australia. This number includes workers licensed under sections 28 and 31 of the RPC Act, and workers who are not required to hold a licence but employed in occupations that involve potential exposure to radiation. The latter include workers at Olympic Dam, Beverley and Honeymoon uranium projects, workers in Type C premises, users of industrial radiation gauges, operators of fully enclosed industrial X-ray units who work under the supervision of an appropriately licensed person, operators of cabinet X-ray units and people assisting with medical, dental and veterinary X-ray procedures.
Where required under the provisions of the RPC Act, radiation doses of radiation workers are monitored using approved personal dosimeters supplied by a number of businesses. The suppliers provide the employers of radiation workers and the EPA with the results of personal monitoring. All doses received by radiation workers were well below the occupational limits prescribed in the Regulations under the RPC Act.
Licences to mine and mill radioactive ores
Licences to mine and mill radioactive ores, issued under section 24 of the RPC Act, are currently held by:
• BHP Billiton (Olympic Dam Corporation) Pty Ltd (Olympic Dam operations): Licence No. LM1
14 Annual Report on the administration of the Radiation Protection and Control Act 1982
• Heathgate Resources Pty Ltd (Beverley uranium project): Licence No. LM4
• Uranium One Australia Pty Ltd (Honeymoon uranium project): Licence No. LM5
• Oban Energy Pty Ltd (Oban uranium field leach trial project): Licence No. LM6
The licences are subject to conditions that include compliance with the ARPANSA Code of Practice for Radiation Protection and Radioactive Waste Management in Mining and Mineral Processing (Mining Code).
The EPA oversees the regulatory compliance of uranium mining activities by auditing companies’ monitoring results and conducting inspections and independent monitoring. Each licensed company also provides quarterly occupational and environmental radiation monitoring data, including dose assessments, to the EPA. These reports are examined, compared with the EPA’s monitoring results, where appropriate, and reviewed with company officers at quarterly meetings.
Olympic Dam operations
During 2011–12, BHP Billiton (Olympic Dam Corporation) Pty Ltd submitted the BHP Billiton Annual Radiation Report and LM1 Annual Licence Report for 2010–11. These reports were reviewed by the Radiation Protection Committee on 8 December 2011. These reports included an assessment of the adequacy and effectiveness of radiation protection measures. The dose summary indicated that the mean dose for all designated workers in the mine and processing plant was 2.9 millisieverts (mSv) and 2.0 mSv, respectively, compared with the 20 mSv average annual limit for radiation workers. The maximum individual dose received was 7.1 mSv (35% of the 20 mSv limit).
The company also submitted the BHP Billiton Annual Report of the Environmental Management and Monitoring Program for 2010–11. The report confirmed that the radiological effects of the operation remain small and confined to the mining lease area. It also confirmed that the annual radiation dose to members of the public living in the Olympic Dam Village and Roxby Downs was less than the detection limit for the methods used (5% of the 1 mSv annual limit for members of the public).
During 2011–12 officers of the EPA visited the site for radiation review meetings and inspections. An officer also visited the site for a week to observe operational radiation monitoring and radiation safety practices at the mine and processing plant.
The process of developing an EIS for the BHP Billiton expansion project began in 2005. The EPA participated in the assessment of the Draft and Supplementary EISs and the development of relevant approval conditions. The Olympic Dam Expansion project was approved by the South Australian Government on 10 October 2011, subject to 157 conditions. At the end of the period the decision on whether the project would proceed remained subject to a decision of the BHP Billiton Board.
Beverley uranium project
Heathgate Resources Pty Ltd‘s Beverley uranium project is located approximately 600 km north of Adelaide. The company’s licence to conduct uranium mining operations at the site was renewed by the EPA for a further 12 months from 4 August 2011.
During 2011–12 year, Heathgate Resources completed construction and commissioning of the Pannikan Satellite Plant which is part of the Beverley North project, located approximately 9 km from the existing Beverley site.
15 Annual Report on the administration of the Radiation Protection and Control Act 1982
Honeymoon uranium project
Uranium One Australia Pty Ltd’s Honeymoon uranium project site is located approximately 75 km northwest of Broken Hill. The company’s licence to conduct uranium mining operations at the site was renewed by the EPA for a further 12 months from 6 October 2011.
In April 2011, authorisation was granted by the EPA to commence commissioning of the plant and well field. Mining commenced in July 2011 with the first drum of uranium produced in September 2011.
Beverley Four Mile uranium project
On 26 May 2009, the EPA received an application under section 24 of the RPC Act from Quasar Resources and Alliance Craton Explorer Joint Venture for a licence to carry out mining or mineral processing at the Beverley Four Mile Project. The proposed mine is a uranium in-situ recovery operation. A mining lease (under the Mining Act 1971) was issued on 26 April 2012. An EPA licence will be issued once the joint venture partners finalise the scope and timings of the initial stages of the project.
Oban uranium project
Oban Energy Ltd (a subsidiary of Curnamona Energy Ltd) was originally granted a licence for developmental testing of processes at its Oban site, northwest of Broken Hill, in July 2010. During the period, Oban Energy Ltd completed trials at the site and decided not to progress to full scale mining. Oban Energy Ltd applied to renew the licence and has entered into a decommissioning and rehabilitation phase.
Transport of uranium ore concentrate
Uranium ore concentrate from the Olympic Dam, Beverley, Honeymoon and Energy Resources Australia Ranger (Northern Territory) mines is transported by road to Outer Harbor, in accordance with the Regulations for the safe transport of radioactive substances. It is then exported from Outer Harbor for shipment overseas.
Transport of uranium ore concentrate from the Olympic Dam, Beverley, Honeymoon and Ranger mines was conducted without incident in the reporting period.
Registration of mining operations
Some mining operations do not involve radioactive ore, but may generate process streams and wastes that are classed as radioactive materials. Where there is sufficient radiological risk to warrant regulation, these operations have been registered as premises under section 29 of the RPC Act. Conditions of registration are similar to those attached to licences issued under section 24 of the RPC Act to protect people and the environment from radiological hazards. The primary condition is compliance with the Mining Code.
However, the amendment of the RPC Act to change the licence to mine or mill radioactive ores (section 24) to a licence to carry out mining or mineral processing has provided a licensing authority for mining operations that do not involve radioactive ores but may generate process streams and wastes that are defined as radioactive materials. Such operations that are registered as premises will now need to apply for a licence to carry out mining or mineral processing when the renewal of the registration falls due.
Mining and mineral processing operations registered under the RPC Act at the end of the period were:
• Australian Zircon Mindarie mineral sand operation in the Western Murray Basin
• Iluka Resources Ltd mineral sand operation west of Ceduna
16 Annual Report on the administration of the Radiation Protection and Control Act 1982
• Prominent Hill Prospect copper mine near Coober Pedy.
Registration of former uranium mining and milling sites
The sites of the former Radium Hill uranium mine and the Port Pirie Treatment Plant, which in the past processed uranium ore from Radium Hill, have been registered as premises under section 29 of the RPC Act since 2003. The registered occupier of the sites is the Minister for Mineral Resources Development but the day-to-day management was the responsibility of the Department of Primary Industries and Resources South Australia (PIRSA) until it was inherited by the Department for Manufacturing, Innovation, Trade, Resources and Energy (DMITRE), established during the reporting period. These sites will require a Facility Licence (s29A) when renewal of the registrations falls due.
Conditions attached to the registrations require the development of appropriate long-term management plans for the sites and site characterisation for both sites. Work continued during the reporting period on setting radiological close-out criteria for the sites. A working group of the Radiation Protection Committee and the EPA considered close-out criteria and options for on-going management of Radium Hill. The EPA submitted the recommendations to DMITRE.
Maralinga
The former British atomic weapons test site at Maralinga (Section 400 land parcel) remained registered as premises under the RPC Act, in the name of Maralinga Tjarutja. The site includes burial trenches containing radioactive materials, which were constructed during the Commonwealth Government’s Maralinga Rehabilitation Project, completed in 2000. The EPA conducts regular visits to Maralinga to inspect the condition of the work conducted as part of the rehabilitation project. This site will also require a Facility Licence (section 29A) when renewal of the registration falls due.
The Maralinga Land and Environment Management Committee which consists of one representative each from Maralinga Tjarutja, the Commonwealth Government and the EPA met on-site in October 2011. The Committee oversees the site management activities and long-term radiation monitoring and surveillance of the site.
Representatives of the ARPANSA and the Commonwealth Department of Resources, Energy and Tourism, the EPA and a legal representative of the Maralinga Tjarutja met with the Maralinga Tjarutja community at Oak Valley in June 2012 where the community was presented with the findings of the ARPANSA studies on Radioactivity Enhancement Factors of Maralinga Soils and the Maralinga and Oak Valley Dose Assessment–2011.
17 Annual Report on the administration of the Radiation Protection and Control Act 1982
EXEMPTIONS GRANTED UNDER THE RPC ACT
Under section 44 of the RPC Act, the Minister or delegate is empowered to grant exemptions from any specified provision of the RPC Act, provided such action would not endanger the health or safety of any person. The authority to grant exemptions has been delegated to the CE of the EPA, and further delegated to the Director Regulation and Compliance, and Manager Radiation Protection Branch.
After careful consideration the following exemptions from provisions of the RPC Act and Regulations were granted, subject to conditions specified in exemption notices published in the South Australian Government Gazette on the date indicated:
• 4 August 2011 – Conditional exemptions from the requirement of regulation 40 of the IR Regulations, which specify practitioners who may authorise exposures or treatments using ionising radiation was granted to two nuclear medicine specialists, permitting them to authorise specified treatments of patients with radionuclides.
• 8 September 2011 – Conditional exemptions from the requirement of regulation 40 of the IR Regulations, which specify practitioners who may authorise exposures or treatments using ionising radiation was granted to three nuclear medicine specialists, permitting them to authorise specified treatments of patients with radionuclides.
• 6 October 2011 – A conditional exemption was granted from the requirement of regulation 45 of the IR Regulations that research involving the use of ionising radiation on a human must be approved by the Minister.
• 8 December 2011 – A conditional exemption from the requirement of regulation 104(8) of the IR Regulations (the requirements of the size of the viewing window of the X-ray shield) was granted to owners of fixed X-ray apparatus used for medical, veterinary or chiropractic radiography.
• 8 December 2011 – A conditional exemption from the requirement of regulation 93(3)(c) of the IR Regulations (the requirement that the minimum distance between the focal spot of the X-ray tube and the patient’s entrance surface is 300mm) was granted to owners of fixed X-ray apparatus used for veterinary diagnostic plain radiography.
• 9 February 2012 – A conditional exemption from the requirements of regulation 40 of the IR Regulations (authorised exposure of persons to ionising radiation for diagnosis or treatment) was granted to permit diagnostic radiographers to perform specified plain radiography authorised by a (named) nurse practitioner at an emergency department.
• 19 April 2012 – Three conditional exemptions from the requirements of regulation 40 of the IR Regulations (authorised exposure of persons to ionising radiation for diagnosis or treatment) were granted to permit diagnostic radiographers to perform specified plain radiography authorised by the (named) nurse practitioner at an emergency department.
• 19 April 2012 – Conditional exemptions from the requirements of regulation 91(10) of the IR Regulations were granted to two medical centres to permit a NOMAD dental X-ray apparatus to be used as a handheld apparatus.
• 28 June 2012 – A conditional exemption from section 33A ‘Licence to possess a radiation source’ was granted to persons in possession of an unregistered ionising radiation source for which an application was made to the EPA on or before 30 June 2012 to register it in accordance with the RPC Act.
• 28 June 2012 – A conditional exemption from section 33A ‘Licence to possess a radiation source’ was granted to owners of registered radiation sources for which an application was made to the EPA on or before 30 June 2012 to register it in accordance with the RPC Act.
18 Annual Report on the administration of the Radiation Protection and Control Act 1982
• 28 June 2012 – A conditional exemption from section 33A ‘Licence to possess a radiation source’ was granted to persons in possession of a cosmetic tanning unit on or before 30 June 2012.
19 Annual Report on the administration of the Radiation Protection and Control Act 1982
RADIATION INCIDENTS AND ACCIDENTS
The Regulations under the RPC Act require employers of radiation workers, owners of X-ray apparatus or sealed radioactive sources, and occupiers of premises where unsealed radioactive substances are used or handled to report any radiation accidents promptly to the EPA. Radiation accidents include situations where the control of a radiation source has been lost or a person has received or may have received an accidental exposure to ionising radiation. The EPA investigates radiation accidents and incidents to determine the cause and any remedial action that could be taken to prevent a recurrence.
During 2011–12 the EPA received 16 reports of radiation incidents involving medical practices and 1 incident that involved an industrial radiation source. None of these is known to have resulted in an adverse health outcome. Appropriate steps have been taken at radiology and nuclear medicine departments and practices to prevent a recurrence of such incidents. Details of accidents and incidents involving exposure or potential exposure to radiation are provided to ARPANSA for the Australian Radiation Incidents Register and the details are confidential.
A summary of the types of accidents and incidents, in each category, is given below.
Radiology
A total of 10 incidents involved radiology departments, mainly through incorrect procedures being followed such as checking patient ID or clinical notes. The doses involved were low and ranged from 3 microsieverts (µSv) for a DEXA examination to 28 µSv from two chest X-rays.
Radiation therapy
Five incidents were reported from radiotherapy departments primarily caused by incorrect staff procedures, in particular failure to notice changes in the radiation prescription by the radiation oncologist. Overall, the doses to the patients were not significantly different, but were delivered using an incorrect number of fractions. In all medical cases, staff were reminded to use correct patient ID procedures as well as ensuring that the clinical notes are reviewed appropriately prior to any procedures being undertaken.
Nuclear medicine
One incident involved a paediatric nuclear medicine procedure. An incorrect radiopharmaceutical and quantity of radioisotope was administered resulting in a dose significantly higher than was intended. Quick action by a medical physicist averted some additional dose. The patient’s parents were counselled by a nuclear medicine physician and changes to the paediatric protocols were to be implemented.
Industrial radiography
One incident involved an industrial radiography source. A person was exposed to an industrial radiography source for approximately 2 minutes when they entered an area with limited signage and no bunting tape. The report highlighted that communication between the workers and the contracted radiographers had failed and neither party had been working to safe operating procedures. The radiation exposure consequences were estimated to be small.
Uranium mining incidents
Uranium mining operations in South Australia are required to record and report incidents and events (for example, spills of process materials) as part of approved radiation management plans and in accordance with the ‘Bachmann Criteria’, established for uranium mines in South Australia. During the period, six
20 Annual Report on the administration of the Radiation Protection and Control Act 1982 incidents were publicly reported under the approved incident reporting procedures for uranium mines. There were no environmental or health impacts arising from the incidents.
Details of environmental spill events reported for Olympic Dam, Beverley and Honeymoon under the Bachmann Criteria are available via the DMITRE website.
21 Annual Report on the administration of the Radiation Protection and Control Act 1982
NATIONAL ACTIVITIES
To ensure that South Australia’s regulation of activities involving radiation keeps pace with international and national best practice, the EPA takes part in international and national activities. The EPA’s involvement in these activities during 2011–12 is summarised below.
Radiation Health Committee
The Radiation Health Committee (RHC) was established under the Australian Radiation Protection and Nuclear Safety Act 1998 (ARPANS Act). The RHC develops policies and prepares draft publications for the promotion of uniform national standards of radiation protection throughout Australia and its states and territories, and provides advice on matters relating to radiation protection to the Chief Executive Officer of ARPANSA and the Radiation Health and Safety Advisory Council.
Membership of the RHC includes a radiation control officer representing each of the states and territories. The South Australian representative is the EPA Director Regulation and Compliance, who chairs this committee.
The EPA submitted a proposal to the RHC for development of nationally consistent approaches to management of sites contaminated with radiological material. If approved by the Committee, this project will further strengthen EPA links with other jurisdictions.
Summaries of meetings of the RHC may be found on the ARPANSA website at:
Radiation Health and Safety Advisory Council
The Radiation Health and Safety Advisory Council (RHSAC) is established under the ARPANS Act. It advises the Chief Executive Officer of ARPANSA on a range of matters, including emerging issues, matters of major concern to the community and the adoption of codes, standards, recommendations and policies on radiation protection and nuclear safety. During 2011–12, EPA Director Regulation and Compliance and a member of the South Australian Radiation Protection Committee were members of the council.
Summaries of meetings of the RHSAC can be found on the ARPANSA website at:
National Directory for Radiation Protection
The National Directory for Radiation Protection was republished in July 2012 following Heath Ministers’ endorsement of Amendment 5 that had been approved by the RHC. This amendment:
1 clarifies the radiation protection principles and, in particular, the justification principle, that apply to ionising radiation
2 adopts the Code of Practice for Radiation Protection in Veterinary Medicine, which ARPANSA published in July 2009 as Radiation Protection Series No. 17 (RPS 17)
3 adopts the Code of Practice for Radiation Protection in the Application of Ionising Radiation by Chiropractors, which ARPANSA published in November 2009 as Radiation Protection Series No. 19 (RPS 19), and
4 corrects several typographical and editorial matters in Schedule 13, National incident reporting framework.
Annual Report on the administration of the Radiation Protection and Control Act 1982
During the period, the RHC approved Amendment 6 to the National Directory dealing with registration requirements for X-ray analysis equipment. It was proposed that these requirements would be included in schedule 9 of the National Directory, subject to endorsement of Health Ministers.
As noted previously in this report, during the period the EPA was engaged in implementing new authorisations under the RPC Act, consistent with the provisions of the National Directory, including a licence to possess a radiation source, a facilities licence, and provision for accreditation of third party service providers. The EPA also prepared drafting instructions for proposed changes to the RPC Act including prescribing the Objects of the Act, Radiation Protection Principles and a General Duty, consistent with requirements of the National Directory.
Australian National Radiation Dose Register (ANRDR)
Work on implementing the Australian National Radiation Dose Register (ANRDR) is proceeding. In order for South Australian data to be included in the register, the EPA has approved requests from BHP Billiton, Heathgate Resources and Uranium One to confidentially release the Olympic Dam, Beverley and Honeymoon uranium worker information to ARPANSA. During the period worker dose information from the Olympic Dam and Beverley uranium mines was submitted to the register.
ARPANSA hosted the first annual ANRDR Workshop at the EPA offices in Adelaide on 15 June 2012. The workshop was organised to engage with radiation safety officers in the uranium mining industry and with relevant government bodies and enable discussion of ANRDR issues, methodologies used for radiation dose assessments and plans for improvement of the register.
Interstate technical visits
Officers of the EPA visited the offices of the Supervising Scientist in Darwin on two occasions. The first visit was made during 29–30 November 2011, when two officers visited to observe the Supervising Scientist radiation measurement and monitoring facilities and attend the 27th meeting of the Alligator Rivers Region Technical Committee as observers. The officers also visited the ERA Ranger Uranium mine during 1–2 December 2011 to observe the mining operations and radiation protection facilities.
During 31 January–2 February 2012, officers of the EPA radiation laboratory visited the Supervising Scientist Division in Darwin to discuss new methods for radiation monitoring, in particular liquid scintillation alpha spectroscopy, and improvements in techniques to calibrate radiation monitoring equipment.
On 2 December 2011, officers of the EPA visited ARPANSA to attend a workshop on regulation and the methods of monitoring radon and radon decay products. This workshop led to a follow-up visit from ARPANSA to the EPA radiation laboratory to discuss cross comparison and calibration of monitoring equipment most frequently used for radon and radon decay product monitoring.
Two Australian workshops were held in March for the uranium mining industry, and state and Commonwealth regulators related to the assessment of risk to the environment from radiation. An officer of the EPA attended the Perth workshop during 26–29 March 2012. The workshop instructed attendees on the use and application of the Environmental Risk from Ionising Contaminants: Assessment and Management (ERICA) Tool, a software system designed to assess radiological risk to terrestrial, freshwater and marine biota.
23 Annual Report on the administration of the Radiation Protection and Control Act 1982
INTERNATIONAL ACTIVITIES
Asia Region ALARA Network
The Asia Region ALARA (as low as reasonably achievable) Network (ARAN) was formed in Daejeon, Republic of Korea, in December 2007. The main objectives of ARAN include:
• supporting the development of a sustainable regional network that facilitates information, findings and data exchange and practical and cost-effective implementation of the principle of optimisation of radiation protection in participating countries, and
• maintaining, enhancing and developing competence and skills in radiation protection, with special emphasis on the implementation of the ALARA principle for occupational exposures during routine operations.
Australia’s representative on the ARAN Steering Committee is the EPA Director Regulation and Compliance.
In November 2011 the EPA Director Regulation and Compliance, who is also Vice Chair of the Asia Network, represented Australia at a regional network workshop in Chiba, Japan on radiation exposures in emergency situations. His travel was funded by the federal government. The workshop was attended by 15 regional countries and part-sponsored by the International Atomic Energy Agency.
The workshop included discussion of the response to the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power reactor accident and presentations from the army and fire service first responders. It included expert presentations on Fukushima and Chernobyl, and tours of the Japanese emergency response facilities. The workshop made recommendations for member countries and the International Atomic Energy Agency regarding the protection of workers from radiation in emergencies.
International Radiation Protection Association (IRPA) Conference
Two EPA officers attended the 13th International Radiation Protection Association (IRPA) Congress in Glasgow, Scotland in May 2012 as representatives of South Australia and the Australasian Radiation Protection Society (ARPS) in a bid to host the 15th IRPA Congress in Adelaide in 2020. The Australian bid was unsuccessful, coming second to South Korea. Brazil was also a contender. Attendance at the meeting was funded by the Adelaide Convention Centre, the ARPS and the EPA.
24 Annual Report on the administration of the Radiation Protection and Control Act 1982
TRAINING AND CONFERENCES
Emergency response training
During 2011–12 the EPA provided training for members of the MFS and SAPOL in emergency procedures for first responders to radiation incidents. The training included hands-on demonstration of the types of radiation that may be involved in radiation incidents and the capabilities of the laboratory services provided by the EPA.
During 25–26 October 2011 officers of the EPA also completed the Chemical Biological Radiological Incident and Emergency Management Course run at the State Fire Training Centre, Brukunga.
Conferences
The EPA Director Regulation and Compliance and four officers of EPA Radiation Protection Branch attended all or part of the 36th Annual Meeting of the Australasian Radiation Protection Society in Melbourne on 16–19 October 2011. The EPA presented two papers.
An officer of the EPA Radiation Protection Branch attended the Global Initiative to Combat Nuclear Terrorism Public Messaging Seminar and DISCEX i–Hermes held in Sydney NSW during 7–8 November 2011 as well as the IAEA Radiological Crime Scene Management and Introduction to Nuclear Forensics regional workshop held in Canberra during 19–23 March 2012.
25 Annual Report on the administration of the Radiation Protection and Control Act 1982
OTHER STATUTORY MATTERS
The EPA provides resources for administration of the RPC Act and, therefore, statutory reporting requirements concerning the following issues are contained in the EPA Annual Report 2011–12:
• financial performance of the Radiation Protection Committee
• account payment performance
• contractual arrangements
• occupational health, safety and welfare
• use of consultants
• human resources
• staffing
• equal employment opportunity
• disability action planning
• energy efficiency action plan reporting
• freedom of information
• overseas travel
• sustainability reporting.
Annual Report on the administration of the Radiation Protection and Control Act 1982
ABBREVIATIONS
ALARA as low as reasonably achievable
ARAN Asia Region ALARA Network
ARPANS Act Australian Radiation Protection and Nuclear Safety Act 1998
ARPANSA Australian Radiation Protection and Nuclear Safety Agency
CBRN chemical, biological, radiological and nuclear
ARPS Australasian Radiation Protection Society
CT computed tomography
DMITRE Department of Manufacturing, Innovation, Trade, Resources and Energy
EIS environmental impact statement
EPA Environment Protection Authority
IAEA International Atomic Energy Agency
Joint Convention Joint Convention on the Safety of Spent Fuel Management and on the Safety of Radioactive Waste Management (IAEA).
MFS Metropolitan Fire Service
Mining Code Code of Practice for Radiation Protection and Radioactive Waste Management in Mining and Mineral Processing (ARPANSA)
µSv microsievert mSv millisievert
National Directory National Directory for Radiation Protection: Edition 1 (ARPANSA)
NIR Regulations Radiation Protection and Control (Non-ionising Radiation) Regulations 2008
NORM naturally occurring radioactive material
OPG orthopantomogram
PIRSA Department of Primary Industries and Resources South Australia
RDD radiological dispersal device
RHC Radiation Health Committee (ARPANSA)
RHSAC Radiation Health and Safety Advisory Council (ARPANSA)
RPC Act Radiation Protection and Control Act 1982
RWMP radioactive waste management plans
SAPOL South Australian Police
Security Code Code of Practice for Security of Radioactive Sources (ARPANSA)
27 Annual Report on the administration of the Radiation Protection and Control Act 1982
Tanning Units Radiation Protection and Control (Cosmetic Tanning Units) Regulations 2008 Regulations
UC Uranium Council
28