Marine Dumping Consent Application and Impact Assessment

MARINE DUMPING CONSENT APPLICATION AND IMPACT ASSESSMENT

Scuttling of Dong Won 701 Fishing Vessel Within an Authorised Location South-east of Otago Harbour

Prepared for: DW New Zealand Limited 145 Dawson Street Timaru Port Timaru 7910

SLR Ref: 740.10102.00000-R01 Version No: -v1.0 December 2019 DW New Zealand Limited SLR Ref No: 740.10102.00000-R01-v1.0.docx Marine Dumping Consent Application and Impact Assessment December 2019 Scuttling of Dong Won 701 Fishing Vessel Within an Authorised Location South-east of Otago Harbour

PREPARED BY

SLR Consulting NZ Limited Company Number 2443058 6/A Cambridge Street Richmond, Nelson 7020 New Zealand (PO Box 3032, Richmond 7050 New Zealand) T: +64 274 898 628 E: [email protected] www.slrconsulting.com

BASIS OF REPORT

This report has been prepared by SLR Consulting NZ Limited (SLR) with all reasonable skill, care and diligence, and taking account of the timescale and resources allocated to it by agreement with DW New Zealand Limited (the Client). Information reported herein is based on the interpretation of data collected, which has been accepted in good faith as being accurate and valid.

This report is for the exclusive use of the Client. No warranties or guarantees are expressed or should be inferred by any third parties. This report may not be relied upon by other parties without written consent from SLR.

SLR disclaims any responsibility to the Client and others in respect of any matters outside the agreed scope of the work.

DOCUMENT CONTROL

Reference Date Prepared Checked Authorised 740.10102.00000-R01-v1.0 18 December 2019 SLR Consulting NZ Limited Rob Lieffering Dan Govier

Page 2

DW New Zealand Limited SLR Ref No: 740.10102.00000-R01-v1.0.docx Marine Dumping Consent Application and Impact Assessment December 2019 Scuttling of Dong Won 701 Fishing Vessel Within an Authorised Location South-east of Otago Harbour

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The vessel Dong Won 701 (the vessel) is an 81 m long, New Zealand flagged fishing vessel owned by the New Zealand company DW New Zealand Limited (DWNZ). The home port of the vessel is Timaru and the vessel has fished within various Fisheries Management Areas of New Zealand waters. In April 2018 the vessel suffered a serious fire which caused extensive damage, resulting in around 50 per cent of the vessel being ‘gutted’ thereby rendering it unusable and uneconomic to restore. The vessel is currently berthed at PrimePort, Timaru.

Several options have been considered by DWNZ for the vessel. The only viable option is to tow it to one of the five ‘authorised locations’ within the exclusive economic zone (EEZ) and to scuttle (sink) it using explosives. The authorised location (dump site) proposed to be used is located 25 nautical miles (NM) southeast of Otago Harbour.

The proposed activity falls under the definition of ‘dumping’ with the Exclusive Economic Zone and Continental Shelf (Environmental Effects) Act 2012 and requires a marine dumping consent from the Environmental Protection Authority (EPA).

Considerable cleaning and preparation work will occur on the vessel prior to it being towed the dump site. This work will involve removing much of the salvageable material which will be taken onshore and either recycled or re-used. Material that is unable to be recycled or re-used will be disposed of to landfill or to facilities authorised to accept such material. In addition, contaminated water and fuel will be removed from the vessel and the tanks cleaned using Simple Green (a degreaser without harmful bleach or ammonia). The vessel contains some asbestos and this will be removed by specialist handlers and disposed of at a facility authorised to accept such material.

Ash material from the fire will be put into the cleaned lower fuel tanks and encapsulated by cement which will be pumped into the tanks as ballast which is necessary to make the vessel safe for towing to the dump site. DWNZ will engage an independent recognised surveyor as published on the Maritime New Zealand (MNZ) website to approve the tow plan and to confirm the vessel is safe for the voyage to the dump site. This confirmation will be provided to MNZ in advance of the tow.

The vessel will be scuttled using explosive charges. DWNZ has engaged explosive handing experts to plan and execute the scuttling plan. Four explosive charges are proposed to be placed at strategic positions on the inside of the hull and two very small charges will be fitted to the seacock valves – all the charges will be placed in the vessel, but not be armed, while the vessel is still at PrimePort, Timaru.

A ‘Notice to Mariners’ will be issued by Land Information New Zealand (LINZ) to advise other marine users that the proposed activity will be taking place and this notice will also impose a temporary exclusion zone around the site, restricting other vessels coming near the towing and explosive operations.

Page 3

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Once in position at the dump site (being within 1 NM radius of 46°00′S 171°13′E, this being the centre of the dump site), the explosives experts will board the vessel using a small tender from the towing tug and arm the explosives, including fitting the detonator. Once armed, the explosives experts will disembark the vessel using the small tender and board the towing tug which will move 200 m directly off the bow of the vessel (which will still be connected under tension via the tow rope). Once it has been determined that no marine mammals have been detected within the specified mitigation zone (discussed below) the explosive experts will initiate the blast sequence. The first explosives that will detonate are the two very small charges on the seacock valves, followed by the four main charges, all with 25 ms delays. Detonation of the very small charges on the seacock valves will result in water slowly entering the vessel and the four main charges will result in blast holes just above the waterline. The vessel will initially sink slowly as water flows through the seacock valves and the vessel will be continue to be connected to the towing tug via the tow rope until water starts entering the blast holes, after which the tow rope will be released and rapid flooding of the vessel will occur, causing the it to sink rapidly. It is expected that the vessel will sink stern first and disappear under the water within 20 minutes of water entering the blast holes.

Calculations have been undertaken to determine underwater noise effects based on the explosive charges that will be detonated. The calculated noise levels have been compared to known thresholds for the specific marine mammal species that could be in the area – these being thresholds that would prevent permanent injury to marine mammals. A 600 m mitigation zone has been established (based on the hearing sensitivities of the marine mammals that may be present) to ensure adverse effects on marine mammals are avoided to the greatest practicable degree.

DWNZ will use a qualified marine mammal observer on the towing tug to observe whether there are any marine mammals within the 600 m mitigation zone - if any marine mammals are observed within the mitigation zone, then the detonation will not commence until the marine mammals have moved beyond the mitigation zone or the mitigation zone has been shown to be clear of marine mammals for 30 minutes.

Once the vessel has filled with water it will sink very quickly through the water column (stern first) before landing on the seabed. This will result in the crushing of any benthic structures or organisms present in the area where it lands. However, the footprint of the vessel will occupy only a small area of seabed within the authorised dump site and, as such, these effects are assessed as being negligible.

The proposed activity will have very short-term effects on any other marine vessels that may otherwise transit through, or close to, the dump site – these effects lasting a matter of hours while the vessel is being set up for scuttling. While the vessel is en-route to the dump site it will be like any other maritime vessel and the towing operations will be carried out in accordance with all maritime requirements (i.e. Maritime Rules Part 22: Collision Prevention).

A fisheries assessment has been undertaken which shows that limited fishing occurs in and around the dump site. No trawling has taken place there over the past five years – presumably because the area is identified as an authorised dump site (shown as an Explosives Dumping Ground on the New Zealand Nautical Charts) and trawlers avoid the area. Based on the limited fishing activity over the past five years at the dump site and the fishing methods employed there, no adverse effects on commercial fishing activities due to the presence of the vessel on the seabed will occur.

Page 4

CONTENTS

1 INTRODUCTION ...... 12 1.1 Background ...... 12 1.2 Structure of this Application ...... 14 2 LEGISLATIVE FRAMEWORK ...... 15 2.1 Exclusive Economic Zone and Continental Shelf (Environmental Effects) Act 2012 ...... 15 2.1.1 Introduction...... 15 2.1.2 Section 20 Restrictions ...... 15 2.1.3 The Use of Explosives is an Integral Part of the Dumping Activity ...... 16 2.1.4 Section 20G Restrictions ...... 16 2.2 Exclusive Economic Zone and Continental Shelf (Environmental Effects – Discharge and Dumping) Regulations 2015 ...... 17 2.3 Information Requirements ...... 18 2.4 Other Regulatory Approvals Required ...... 19 2.5 Other Marine Management Regimes ...... 19 2.5.1 Health and Safety at Work Act 2015 ...... 19 2.5.2 Resource Management Act 1991 ...... 19 2.5.3 Maritime Transport Act 1994 ...... 20 2.5.4 Biosecurity Act 1993 ...... 20 2.5.5 Other Relevant Marine Management Regimes ...... 20 2.5.6 International Conventions ...... 21 3 PROJECT DESCRIPTION ...... 23 3.1 Overview of Activities ...... 23 3.2 The Vessel and Current Condition ...... 23 3.3 Proposed Preparation of the Vessel ...... 24 3.3.1 Interior of Vessel and Decks ...... 24 3.3.2 Exterior of Vessel ...... 27 3.3.3 Placement of Explosive Charges ...... 28 3.4 Transport of Vessel to Dump Site ...... 28 3.5 Scuttling of the Vessel at the Dump Site ...... 29 3.6 Assessment of Alternatives...... 30 3.6.1 Introduction...... 30 3.6.2 Alternative Dumping Locations ...... 31 3.6.3 Alternative Methods for Dumping ...... 31 3.6.4 Opportunities to Reuse or Recycle ...... 32

Page 5

CONTENTS 4 EXISTING ENVIRONMENT ...... 34 4.1 Dumping History ...... 34 4.2 Physical Environment...... 36 4.2.1 Meteorology ...... 36 4.2.2 Currents ...... 36 4.2.3 Waves ...... 38 4.2.4 Water Quality ...... 39 4.2.5 Bathymetry and Seabed Substrate ...... 39 4.3 Biological Environment ...... 41 4.3.1 New Zealand Marine Environment Classification ...... 41 4.3.2 Benthic Invertebrates ...... 44 4.3.3 Fish ...... 49 4.3.4 Cephalopods ...... 54 4.3.5 Marine Reptiles ...... 54 4.3.6 Marine Mammals ...... 54 4.3.7 Seabirds ...... 68 4.4 Sensitive Environments ...... 76 4.5 Protected Species ...... 83 4.6 Cultural Environment ...... 83 4.6.1 Kāi Tahu Ki Otago Natural Resource Management Plan 2005 ...... 84 4.6.2 Statutory Acknowledgement Areas ...... 85 4.6.3 Taonga Species ...... 85 4.6.4 Customary Fishing and Iwi Fisheries Interests ...... 86 4.6.5 Interests under the Marine & Coastal Area (Takutai Moana) Act 2011 ...... 88 4.7 Socio-Economic Environment ...... 90 4.7.1 Commercial Fishing ...... 90 4.7.2 Recreational Fishing ...... 92 4.7.3 Marine Farming ...... 92 4.7.4 Commercial Shipping ...... 93 4.8 Historic Heritage and Archaeological Sites ...... 94 5 EXISTING INTERESTS AND ENGAGEMENT ...... 95 5.1 Identification of Existing Interests ...... 95 5.1.1 Lawfully Established Existing Activities ...... 95 5.1.2 Existing Marine Consents ...... 96 5.1.3 Existing Resource Consents ...... 96 5.1.4 Historical Claim under the Treaty of Waitangi Act 1975 ...... 97

Page 6

CONTENTS 5.1.5 Contemporary Claim under the Treaty of Waitangi Act 1975 ...... 97 5.1.6 Protected Customary Right or Customary Marine Title ...... 98 5.1.7 Summary of Existing Interests ...... 98 5.2 Engagement with Existing Interests...... 99 5.2.1 Deepwater Group ...... 99 5.2.2 Southern Inshore Fisheries Management Company Limited ...... 99 5.2.3 Ngāi Tahu...... 99 5.2.4 Te Ohu Kaimoana ...... 99 5.2.5 Ngāi Tahu Seafood Limited ...... 100 5.3 Engagement with other Papatipu Rūnanga and Stakeholder Groups ...... 100 5.3.1 Engagement with Iwi and Papatipu Rūnanga ...... 100 5.3.2 Engagement with Other Stakeholders...... 100 6 IMPACT ASSESSMENT – POTENTIAL ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS ...... 102 6.1 Introduction ...... 102 6.2 Environmental Risk Assessment Methodology ...... 102 6.3 Proposed Activities ...... 105 6.3.1 Use of Explosives ...... 105 6.3.2 Vessel Sinking Through the Water Column and Landing on the Seabed ...... 111 6.3.3 Effects on Water Quality ...... 115 6.3.4 Effects on Persons that have an Existing Interest ...... 117 6.3.5 Biosecurity ...... 119 6.3.6 Effects on Human Health ...... 120 6.3.7 Cumulative Effects ...... 121 6.3.8 Effects outside of the Exclusive Economic Zone ...... 121 6.4 Measures to Avoid, Remedy or Mitigate Adverse Effects ...... 122 6.5 Risk Assessment and Effects Summary ...... 123 7 PROFFERED CONDITIONS ...... 126 8 CONCLUSION ...... 127 9 REFERENCES ...... 128

Page 7

CONTENTS

DOCUMENT REFERENCES

TABLES Table 1 Fish Species Potentially Present Within the Dump Site ...... 50 Table 2 Fish Species Potentially Spawning in and around the Dump Site ...... 51 Table 3 Criteria Used to Assess the Likelihood of Cetacean Species Being Present in or around the Dump Site ...... 55 Table 4 Likelihood of Occurrence of Marine Mammals in or around the Dump Site ...... 58 Table 5 Beaked Whale Ecology of Relevance to the Dump Site ...... 62 Table 6 Seabirds that are most likely to be Present in and around the Dump Site ...... 70 Table 7 EEZ Permitted Activity Regulations Schedule 6 Sensitive Environment Classification ...... 77 Table 8 Applications under the Marine and Coastal Area (Takutai Moana) Act 2011 near the Dump Site ...... 89 Table 9 Criteria for Assessing Potential Consequence Levels. Adapted from MacDiarmid et al. (2012) ...... 103 Table 10 Criteria for Assessing Consequence Likelihood. Following MacDiarmid et al. (2012) ...... 103 Table 11 Overall Risk of Residual Impacts. Following MacDiarmid et al. (2012) ...... 104 Table 12 Risk Ranking Description ...... 104 Table 13 Impulsive Noise Event PTS levels for Marine Mammals ...... 106 Table 14 Hearing frequency of Marine Mammals Likely or Possible in and Around the Dump Site ...... 107 Table 15 Distance from Vessel to PTS Level...... 108 Table 16 Summary Assessment of Risks and Environmental Impacts associated with this Application ...... 124

FIGURES Figure 1 Location Map ...... 13 Figure 2 Current Condition of Dong Won 701 ...... 24 Figure 3 Indicative Voyage Route for the Dong Won 701 ...... 29 Figure 4 New Zealand Nautical Chart Showing Dump Site as Explosives Dumping Ground ...... 34 Figure 5 Ocean Circulation around the New Zealand Coastline ...... 37 Figure 6 Mean Non-Tidal Surface Current Speed along the Southland and Otago Coastline ...... 38 Figure 7 Pock Marks in the Dump Site ...... 40 Figure 8 New Zealand Marine Environment Classification ...... 42 Figure 9 BOMEC Classification ...... 43 Figure 10 Previous Benthic Study Areas Relative to the Dump Site ...... 45 Figure 11 Locations of Peebles (2013) Infauna Study Sites in Relation to the Dump Site ...... 47 Figure 12 Known distribution (shaded) of habitat-forming bryozoans offshore Otago Peninsula...... 48 Figure 13 Marine Mammal Sightings in Offshore Otago Waters ...... 56

Page 8

CONTENTS Figure 14 Marine Mammal Stranding Events between Oamaru to Kaka Point ...... 57 Figure 15 Most Abundant Seabird Groups Throughout New Zealand’s EEZ Based on Observer Records Between January 2004 and June 2009 ...... 69 Figure 16 Sooty Shearwater Migration Tracks from New Zealand Breeding Colonies ...... 72 Figure 17 Boundary of the Dunedin Coast IBA (shaded red) ...... 74 Figure 18 Boundary of the Southern South Island IBA (shaded red) ...... 75 Figure 19 Rohe Moana, Mātaitai, and Taiapure in and around the Dump Site ...... 87 Figure 20 Fisheries Management Areas Surrounding the Dump Site ...... 90 Figure 21 New Zealand Commercial Trawl Fishing Catch from all Trawl Events for the Period 1 October 2007 – 30 September 2013 ...... 91 Figure 22 General Shipping Routes in the Vicinity of the Dump Site ...... 93 Figure 23 Archaeological Sites along New Zealand’s Lower East and Southeast Coast ...... 94

APPENDICES Appendix A Legal Opinion on the Use of Explosives Appendix B Section 52 Biosecurity Act Permission Appendix C FV Dong Won 701 Proposed Disposal Brief Appendix D Report on Hull Coatings Appendix E Biofouling Inspection Report Appendix F Biofouling Survey Report Appendix G Blast Plan Appendix H Noise Assessment Appendix I Proffered Conditions Appendix J Simple Green Safety Data Sheet

Page 9

CONTENTS

ABBREVIATIONS AND DEFINITIONS AIS Automatic Identification System BOMEC Benthic Optimised Marine Environment Classification CMA Coastal marine area – line of Mean High Water Springs to 12 NM D&D Regulations Exclusive Economic Zone and Continental Shelf (Environmental Effects – Discharge and Dumping) Regulations 2015 DNB Devonport Naval Base DOC Department of Conservation Dump site ‘Authorised location’ for dumping under the D&D Regulations DWNZ DW New Zealand Limited EBS Environmental Baseline Survey EEZ Act Exclusive Economic Zone and Continental Shelf (Environmental Effects) Act 2012 EEZ Exclusive Economic Zone EPA Environmental Protection Authority ERA Environmental Risk Assessment FMA Fisheries Management Area FNZ Fisheries New Zealand GSB Great South Basin HSW Act Health and Safety at Work Act 2015 IA Impact Assessment IBA Important Bird Areas IUCN International Union for Conservation of Nature MACA Act Marine and Coastal Area (Takutai Moana) Act 2011 MARPOL International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from Ships 1973 as Modified by the Protocol of 1978 MEC Marine Environment Classification MITS Marine Invasive Taxonomic Service MMO Marine Mammal Observer MMR Marine Management Regime MPI Ministry for Primary Industries MTA Maritime Transport Act 1994 MNZ Maritime New Zealand

Page 10

CONTENTS NIWA National Institute of Water and Atmospheric Research NM Nautical Mile NMFS United States National Marine Fisheries Service NZCPS New Zealand Coastal Policy Statement Permitted Activities Regulations Exclusive Economic Zone and Continental Shelf (Environmental Effects – Permitted Activities) Regulations 2013 Pk SPL Peak Sound Pressure Level PTS Permanent Threshold Shift RIS Regulatory Impact Statement RMA Resource Management Act 1991 SEL Sound Exposure Level The vessel Dong Won 701 UNCLOS United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea 1982

Page 11

1 Introduction

1.1 Background

The vessel Dong Won 701 (the vessel) is an 81 m long, New Zealand flagged fishing vessel owned by the New Zealand company DW New Zealand Limited (DWNZ)1. The home port of the vessel is Timaru and the vessel has fished within various Fisheries Management Areas (FMA) of New Zealand waters. The vessel is currently berthed at PrimePort, Timaru. In April 2018 the vessel suffered a serious fire which caused extensive damage, resulting in around 50 per cent of the vessel being ‘gutted’ thereby rendering it unusable and uneconomic to restore.

The proposed activity falls under the definition of ‘dumping’ with the Exclusive Economic Zone and Continental Shelf (Environmental Effects) Act 2012 (EEZ Act) and requires a marine dumping consent from the Environmental Protection Authority (EPA).

This document constitutes DWNZ’s application for the required marine dumping consent as well as the impact assessment (IA) required to be provided in accordance with section 39 of the EEZ Act.

1 Where ‘DWNZ’ is referred to in this document it can mean the company or any of its agents working on its behalf.

Page 12

Figure 1 Location Map

Page 13

1.2 Structure of this Application

Section 2 of this document describes the legislative framework that this IA has been prepared in accordance with. This section explains how all relevant regulatory requirements will be complied with.

Section 3 provides a description of the vessel, its proposed preparation prior to being scuttled, the indicative tow route to the dump site, the proposed scuttling process, and assessment of alternatives.

Section 4 describes the existing environment in and around the dump site. This includes the physical, biological, sensitive, coastal, cultural, socio-economic, and historic heritage environments.

Section 5 considers the existing interests in and around the dump site as well as the engagement process that has been undertaken.

Section 6 presents the IA. This section assesses the actual and potential effects of the proposal and describes the methods that will be used to avoid, remedy, or mitigate these effects. This includes determining the potential zone of impact from the use of explosives. This section also presents an assessment of the risk of the proposed activities using an Environmental Risk Assessment (ERA) framework.

Section 7 presents a commentary on the conditions proffered by the applicant.

Section 8 provides the conclusions of the IA.

Section 9 presents the references cited in this document.

There are several appendices (Appendix A to Appendix J) which contain reports and information that have been utilised and referred to throughout this document.

Page 14

2 Legislative Framework

This application is to undertake a dumping activity restricted by section 20G of the EEZ Act. The following sections detail the requirements of the EEZ Act and the Exclusive Economic Zone and Continental Shelf (Environmental Effects – Discharge and Dumping) Regulations 2015 (D&D Regulations).

In addition, a description of other relevant marine management regimes (MMR) is presented.

2.1 Exclusive Economic Zone and Continental Shelf (Environmental Effects) Act 2012

2.1.1 Introduction

The EEZ Act came into force in June 2013 and established the first comprehensive environmental consenting regime for activities within New Zealand’s EEZ and continental shelf. Section 10(1) of the EEZ Act defines the purpose of the EEZ Act:

(1) The purpose of this Act is –

(a) to promote the sustainable management of the natural resources of the exclusive economic zone and the continental shelf; and

(b) in relation to the exclusive economic zone, the continental shelf, and the waters above the continental shelf beyond the outer limits of the exclusive economic zone, to protect the environment from pollution by regulating or prohibiting the discharge of harmful substances and the dumping or incineration of waste or other matter.

(2) In this Act, sustainable management means managing the use, development, and protection of natural resources in a way, or at a rate, that enables people to provide for their economic well- being while –

(a) sustaining the potential of natural resources (excluding minerals) to meet the reasonably foreseeable needs of future generations; and

(b) safeguarding the life-supporting capacity of the environment; and

2.1.2 Section 20 Restrictions

Sections 20(1) to (4) of the EEZ Act provides for restrictions (emphasis added) ‘…on activities other than discharges and dumping’. However, these provisions are not relevant to the proposed dumping of the vessel by virtue of section 20(5)(b) of the EEZ Act.

Page 15

Specifically, sections 20(3) and 20(4)(c) restrict the ‘causing of an explosion’ unless authorised by a marine consent. However, section 20(5)(b) expressly states that the foregoing section 20 restrictions (which include the causing of an explosion) do not apply to, inter alia, the dumping of waste or other matter (including ships2). Therefore, as a matter of construction, section 20(5)(b) prevails over sections 20(3) and 20(4)(c) of the EEZ Act.

2.1.3 The Use of Explosives is an Integral Part of the Dumping Activity

DWNZ is proposing to use explosives to scuttle the vessel. The use of explosives is an integral part of the method to scuttle the vessel. That is, it is part of the overarching dumping activity and, as such, comes under definition of ‘dumping’ in the EEZ Act. A separate marine consent is not required for the use of explosives to scuttle the vessel.

DWNZ has obtained a legal opinion from Matthew Casey QC on this issue. A copy of that opinion is included in Appendix A. In the opinion Mr Casey reviews the relevant statutory framework and other relevant matters. He concludes that the entire application, including use of explosives, is to be assessed as part of a single dumping activity and is therefore classified as non-notified. A separate marine consent for use of explosives to scuttle the vessel is not required. Rather than summarising the position here, DWNZ relies on the opinion and the EPA is specifically referred to the analysis set out in the opinion on this issue.

We consider the non-notified status of the dumping activity in the following section.

2.1.4 Section 20G Restrictions

Section 20G(2) of the EEZ Act restricts the dumping of waste or other material (including ships) into the sea within the EEZ unless any of the following apply as outlined in section 20G(3)(a)-(c): • Regulations allow the dumping to be authorised by a marine consent3 and the dumping is authorised by a marine consent; or • The dumping is authorised by an emergency dumping consent and complies with any regulations for emergency dumping made under section 29B of the EEZ Act; or • The dumping is in accordance with section 248 or 249 of the Maritime Transport Act 1994 (MTA).

In this case the dumping is not an emergency and is not in accordance with section 248 or 249 of the MTA. However, there are regulations which allow the dumping of the vessel to be authorised by a marine consent. The applicable regulations are discussed in Section 2.2 below.

2 The EEZ Act uses the term ‘ship’ whereas the D&D Regulations use the term ‘vessel’. These terms are understood to mean the same. 3 The EEZ uses the term ‘marine consent’ as a generic term to cover several types of consent that may be granted, including marine dumping consents.

Page 16

2.2 Exclusive Economic Zone and Continental Shelf (Environmental Effects – Discharge and Dumping) Regulations 2015

The D&D Regulations came into force on 31 October 2015 and regulate discharges and dumping in the waters of the EEZ, above the continental shelf, and above the continental shelf beyond the outer limits of the EEZ.

Regulation 3 of the D&D Regulations establishes five ‘authorised locations’ within the EEZ around New Zealand, which are referred to in other regulations. It is authorised location (e) of regulation 3 of the D&D Regulations within which the vessel is proposed to be dumped. That location is defined as:

(e) within a circle of 4 nautical miles radius centred on position 46°00′S 171°13′E (25 nautical miles south-east of Otago Harbour)

This authorised location is shown in Figure 1.

Regulation 32 of the D&D Regulations states:

32 Dumping in authorised location classified as non-notified activity

Dumping in an authorised location of any of the following is classified as a non-notified activity under the Act: ….. (b) vessels.

Regulation 32 confirms the activity of dumping of a vessel within any authorised location is classified as a non- notified activity under the EEZ Act. Such applications are not publicly notified and no submissions may therefore be lodged on them. The EPA processes such applications ‘in-house’ and decisions on such applications are made under delegated authority by an EPA staff member. Such activities have an activity status of ‘discretionary’ according to the definition of ‘non-notified activity’ in section 4 of the EEZ Act.

In summary, DWNZ is applying for a marine dumping consent from the EPA pursuant to section 38(1) of the EEZ Act to dump the vessel within the authorised location located off the Otago coast.

As part of preparing the D&D Regulations, the Government prepared a Regulatory Impact Statement (RIS) which states that material dumped in authorised dumping sites is likely to have negligible effect on existing interests as these dumping sites are too deep to be used for other purposes that come into contact with the seafloor, such as trawling. Although the status of this dump site is as an ‘authorised location’, the RIS states the full suite of potential effects must be considered without any qualification as to whether an activity is notified or non- notified. As such, Section 6 provides a comprehensive assessment of the actual and potential effects associated with the scuttling of the vessel.

Page 17

2.3 Information Requirements

Sections 38 and 39 of the EEZ Act and regulation 36 of the D&D Regulations set out what information is required to be submitted with an application for a marine dumping consent, namely:

Section 38 EEZ Act: • A completed application form (in the prescribed form); • A full description of the proposal; and • An IA prepared in accordance with section 39 and any requirements prescribed in regulations.

Section 39 EEZ Act: • A description of the activity (or activities) for which consent is sought; • A description the current state of the area where it is proposed that the activity will be undertaken and the environment surrounding the area; • Identification of persons whose existing interests are likely to be adversely affected by the activity; • Identification of the effects of the activity on the environment and existing interests; • Identification of the effects of the activity on the biological diversity and integrity of marine species, ecosystems, and processes; • Identification of the effects of the activity on rare and vulnerable ecosystems and habitats of threatened species; • A description of any consultation undertaken with persons whose existing interests are likely to be adversely affected by the activity and specification of those persons who have given written approval to the activity; • Copies of any written approvals to the activity; • Specification of any possible alternative locations for, or methods for undertaking, the activity that may avoid, remedy, or mitigate any adverse effects; • Specification of the measures, including any measures required by another MMR and any measures required by or under the Health and Safety at Work Act 2015 (HSW Act), that could be taken to avoid, remedy, or mitigate the adverse effects identified (including measures that are intended to be taken); • A description of the effects of the activity on human health; • Specification of any practical opportunities to reuse, recycle, or treat the waste or other matter; and • Regulation 36 of the D&D Regulations specifies three additional matters that must be provided in the IA for dumping activities. Two of these are already listed above (the last two bullets) and third requires the IA to include a description of any alternative method of disposal that could be used.

The Application Form which accompanies this document summarises how these requirements are met in this document.

Page 18

2.4 Other Regulatory Approvals Required

No other regulatory approvals are required for scuttling the vessel at the proposal location.

2.5 Other Marine Management Regimes

As discussed in Section 2.3, the IA must include identification of measures required by other MMRs and any measures required by or under the HSW Act that may have the effect of avoiding, remedying, or mitigating the adverse effects of the activity on the environment or existing interests. These are discussed in the following sections.

2.5.1 Health and Safety at Work Act 2015

The HSW Act is the principal legislation for managing health and safety at work in New Zealand. This MMR is relevant for this Application as the use and storage of explosives is regulated under the Health and Safety at Work (Hazardous Substances) Regulations 2017. These regulations prescribe the minimum knowledge and practical competency requirements that a handler must meet to qualify for a compliance certificate as a Certified Handler/Shot-firer.

In addition, under the Health and Safety at Work (General Risk and Workplace Management) Regulations 2016 a ‘Person Conducting a Business or Undertaking’ (PCBU) has a duty to ensure, so far as is reasonably practicable, that the workplace is without risks to the health and safety of any person.

2.5.2 Resource Management Act 1991

The vessel will be towed from PrimePort to the dump site and a small portion of the route will be within the territorial waters which are classified as coastal marine area (CMA) under the Resource Management Act 1991 (RMA). The passage of vessels is not a restricted activity in section 12 of the RMA unless such passage contravenes a rule in a regional coastal plan.

The proposed passage of the vessel from PrimePort to the dump site will pass through coastal water under the jurisdiction of Environment Canterbury (refer Figure 3). The passage of the vessel does not contravene any rule in Chapter 8 of the Regional Coastal Environment Plan for the Canterbury Region and is therefore a permitted activity.

2.5.2.1 New Zealand Coastal Policy Statement 2010

The New Zealand Coastal Policy Statement (NZCPS) was developed to provide policies to achieve the purpose of the RMA in relation to the coastal environment of New Zealand. The consideration of the provisions within the NZCPS comes down to the potential effects that an activity may have within CMA waters.

The dump site is located approximately 9 km from and the CMA/EEZ boundary and no adverse effects are predicted to occur within the CMA. Therefore, it is considered that no weighting should be given to the provisions within the NZCPS for the purposes of this Application.

Page 19

2.5.3 Maritime Transport Act 1994

The MTA regulates maritime activities in New Zealand waters to enable the implementation of New Zealand’s obligations under international maritime agreements and conventions. This is achieved through maritime rules and marine protection rules which are administered by Maritime New Zealand (MNZ). These rules include, but are not limited to, procedures relating to ship operations, health and safety of ships’ personnel, navigation safety, the management of operational wastes from vessels and offshore platforms, and oil pollution prevention and procedures for responding to oil spills.

2.5.4 Biosecurity Act 1993

The Biosecurity Act 1993 provides the legal framework for the Ministry for Primary Industries (MPI), and others, to help keep harmful organisms out of New Zealand and to control the spread of invasive marine organisms that may be present in New Zealand waters.

Biofouling exists on the hull of vessel and this is discussed in Section 3.3.2.2. The hull survey undertaken in September 2019 confirmed that an unwanted organism (Undaria pinnatifida) is present. Section 52 of the Biosecurity Act 1993 states:

52 Communication of pest or unwanted organism

No person shall knowingly communicate, cause to be communicated, release, or cause to be released, or otherwise spread any pest or unwanted organism except—

(a) in the course of and in accordance with a pest management plan; or

(b) as provided in an emergency regulation made under section 150; or

(d) as permitted either generally or specifically by a chief technical officer.

DWNZ has obtained a ‘permission’ under section 52 of the Biosecurity Act 1993 to ‘communicate’ (effectively move) the unwanted organism. A copy of that permission is included in Appendix B.

2.5.5 Other Relevant Marine Management Regimes

The EEZ Act includes a list of other legislation incorporated into the broad definition of a MMR. The relevant Acts are briefly addressed below in regard to how the regimes provide further measures to avoid, remedy, or mitigate the adverse effects of the activity on the environment and existing interests. • Fisheries Act 1996 – the Fisheries Act governs fisheries management throughout New Zealand’s territorial sea and EEZ. The purpose of this Act is to provide for the utilisation of fisheries resources while ensuring sustainability. An assessment of the fishing activities that are undertaken around the dump site is outlined in Section 4.7.1. The Act itself does not provide mitigation measures to avoid, remedy, or mitigate effects on the environment and existing interests from the activities within this Application. However, the management of the fisheries under the Act has provided useful baseline information in determining the potential effects from this Application, and those existing interests in and around the dump site;

Page 20

• Marine and Coastal Area (Takutai Moana) Act 2011 (MACA Act) – the MACA Act acknowledges the importance of the marine and coastal area to all New Zealanders while providing for the recognition of the customary rights of iwi, hapū and whānau in the CMA. Iwi, hapū, or whānau groups may be granted recognition of two types of customary interest under the Act: 1) Customary Marine Title; and 2) Protected Customary Rights. Applications for such interests are currently being considered by the Crown but none have been granted in the vicinity of the dump site. Such applications apply only to waters within the CMA, not the EEZ, therefore this Act is not directly relevant to this Application; • Marine Mammals Protection Act 1978 – the Marine Mammals Protection Act provides for the protection, conservation and management of marine mammals. This Act has been considered when assessing the effects from this application on marine mammals and the development of measures to avoid, remedy and mitigate these effects, as seen throughout Section 6; • Marine Reserves Act 1971 – the Marine Reserves Act was developed to provide for the setting up and management of areas of the sea and foreshore as marine reserves for the purpose of preserving them in their natural state as the habitat of marine life for scientific study. It is considered that this Act does not provide any measures to avoid, remedy or mitigate potential effects from this application as there are no marine reserves in or immediately adjacent to the dump site; and • Wildlife Act 1953 – the Wildlife Act deals with the protection and control of wild animals and birds and the management of game. A discussion on the potential effects from the various activities associated with this Application on animals and birds is found throughout Section 6.

The following MMRs (as defined by section 7(2) of the EEZ Act) are not considered relevant to this Application: • Continental Shelf Act 1964; • Crown Minerals Act 1991; • Defence Act 1990; • Fiordland (Te Moana o Atawhenua) Marine Management Act 2005; • Hauraki Gulf Marine Park Act 2000; • Kaikōura (Te Tai o Marokura) Marine Management Act 2014; and • Submarine Cables and Pipelines Protection Act 1996.

2.5.6 International Conventions

In addition to the New Zealand legislation discussed above, there are international conventions and regulations which are important to consider when assessing effects on the environment and existing interests. These include: • International Regulations for the Prevention of Collisions at Sea 1972 – these Regulations set out the navigational rules to be followed by ships and vessels at sea to prevent collisions and are implemented by the MTA and its associated rules and regulations. These Regulations will assist in avoiding, remedying or mitigating potential effects from this Application as they will be important in maintaining safe operating procedures to ensure collisions do not occur during the towing of the vessel to the dump site and also while it is at the dump site awaiting scuttling;

Page 21

• International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from Ships 1973 as Modified by the Protocol of 1978 (MARPOL) – MARPOL is the main international convention covering prevention of pollution of the marine environment by ships from operational or accidental causes. The Annexes of MARPOL that New Zealand is a party to are given effect to by current legislation, including the RMA, MTA, and the EEZ Act; • United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea 1982 (UNCLOS) – UNCLOS lays down a comprehensive regime of law and order in the world’s oceans and seas establishing rules governing all uses of the oceans and their resources. UNCLOS is in force through current legislation, such as the MTA and the EEZ Act, along with their relevant rules and regulations. These pieces of legislation provide measures to avoid, remedy and mitigate effects from this proposal and are discussed elsewhere in this Legislative Framework section; and • The Convention on the Prevention of Marine Pollution by Dumping of Wastes and Other Matter 1972 (commonly referred to as “the London Convention”) which New Zealand is a signatory to. In 1996, the "London Protocol" was agreed to and further modernised the London Convention and, eventually, replaced it. The London Protocol was updated in 2006. Under the London Protocol all dumping is prohibited, except for specified categories of waste that may be considered for dumping, which includes vessels (listed in Annex 1 of the London Protocol). Section 11 of the EEZ Act confirms that New Zealand’s international obligations have been taken into account in the drafting of the EEZ Act. The dumping of vessels within the five authorised locations was deemed by the Minister, at the time the D&D Regulations were promulgated, to recognise New Zealand’s obligations under the London Convention.

Page 22

3 Project Description

3.1 Overview of Activities

DWNZ is proposing to scuttle the vessel using explosives at the dump site shown in Figure 1. This section outlines details of the proposed activities including details of the vessel, its current condition, its proposed preparation prior to being towed to the dump site, the indicative voyage route from PrimePort to the dump site, and the logistics associated with the scuttling.

3.2 The Vessel and Current Condition

The vessel is a New Zealand registered ship which was built in 1971. It is an 81 m long steel stern fishing trawler with a deadweight of 1,304 t and was used for fishing up until April 2018.

A serious fire occurred in April 2018 which caused extensive damage to the vessel, particularly to the forward storage spaces, bridge, factory, hydraulic winch control room, and accommodation compartments. The fire also resulted in damage to various loose items, including fishing gear, nets, floats, ropes, wires, and packaging. The engine room remained effectively free of fire damage meaning the engines, generators, machinery spares, service tanks, and other equipment there remain intact.

An estimated 350,000 L of water mixed with hydrocarbons (diesel and light fuel oil) remains onboard. Water mixed with ash and other materials are present in the bilge system.

The vessel is in a ‘light ship’ condition, meaning that it is not suitable for a sea voyage in its current state.

Representative photographs of the current state of the vessel are shown in Figure 2 (Photo A: the vessel at PrimePort; Photos B and C: accommodation and officers mess; and Photo D: melted rope and net material on deck).

Page 23

Figure 2 Current Condition of Dong Won 701

3.3 Proposed Preparation of the Vessel

3.3.1 Interior of Vessel and Decks

DWNZ proposes to prepare the vessel for disposal prior to towing it to the dump site. The preparation works are described in detail in the ‘FV Dong Won 701 Proposed Disposal Brief’ report included in Appendix C. Some of the vessel’s machinery has already been removed for reuse, namely the Cummins 220 D5e generator from below the main deck, and the hasher and head/tail cutting machinery from the factory compartment.

The preparation works proposed to be undertaken include: • Removal of all loose material and objects (nets, floats, etc). These will be recycled or disposed of at landfill; • Chemical consumables such as aerosol cans will be removed and reused or disposed of onshore; • All packaging material (packs of large cardboard boxes and plastic materials) will be removed for recycling; • Removal of all hatch covers which will be replaced by temporary covers to keep rain out. These covers will be removed prior to scuttling;

Page 24

• All deck timbers will be removed and recycled; • Exposed and accessible areas of the winch assemblies that are coated with grease will be removed by hand and wiped out using Simple Green4; • Overhead wires and rigging that can safely be removed will be taken onshore for either re-use or disposal; • Engine oils from the engine room will be removed and oily areas of the room will be washed down with a degreaser (Simple Green); • Asbestos within the engine room and lagging on the deck above the engine room will be removed by a specialist handling company; • The refrigerant gases have already been purged; • All loose or partially incinerated items will be removed and disposed of at landfill; • Any intact light fittings will be removed and taken onshore; • Contaminated bilge water and pooled water within the engine room will be pumped out for disposal at a facility authorised to accept or treat such water; • Hydraulic lines will be drained and, where possible, flushed out with Simple Green; • Service tanks will be drained and cleaned out with Simple Green; • Fuel storage tanks, excluding the bottom tanks, will be drained and where accessible steam cleaned, or high-pressure water cleaned. Where access is restricted Simple Green wash will be used; • The bottom tanks will be accessed by cutting openings into them and their contents removed for recycling and/or disposal onshore. The tank linings will be subject to three washes with Simple Green and either steam cleaned, or water blasted; • Ash and fines will be pushed into the cleaned bottom tanks where it will be mixed and encapsulated in concrete, which will be pumped in for ballast; and • Diaphragm pumps will be used to remove all pooled liquids from the vessel to the greatest practicable degree. Any small amounts of liquid that may be present in the bottom tanks will be absorbed into the cement.

The preparation works described above will remove as much of the oils and greases as is practicable, however surfaces where such oils or greases are present may still have a small film of residual oil/grease. The amount of residue left on the vessel is impossible to predict but is expected to be very small. Where practicable, all cleaned pipes and lines will have air blown through them and a flushing foam ball passed through them to remove as much of the residue that may be left following cleaning. Any pipes that are not sufficiently intact for flushing will be cut and drained where this is practicable, however it is noted that most of the pipework on the vessel is intact.

4 Simple Green is a degreaser without harmful bleach or ammonia.

Page 25

The following components will remain on the vessel: • Residual oil, lubricants and grease contained within fixed plant; • Ash encapsulated by concrete within the bottom fuel tanks; • Additional concrete/sand introduced for ballast; • The main plant in the engine room including non-floatable metal engine spares; • The winch wires on the two main winches; • Copper wiring throughout the vessel; • Fire suppression cylinders; • Lights and fittings; • Any rigging that is unsafe to remove; • Non-floatable electrical cabinetry; • Melted and burnt materials which have fused to the structure which are not able to be separated or floatable; • Refrigerant pipework which is purged of any gases/liquids – these pipes will have a small amount of residue on their inside walls from the ammonia gas, however the amounts left are negligible; • Fixed plywood flowing in the fish hold; and • Insulation foam.

DWNZ will engage the services of an ‘Independent Recognised Surveyor’ (as published on the MNZ website) to check that the vessel has been cleaned and prepared in accordance with the ‘FV Dong Won 701 Proposed Disposal Brief’ report included in Appendix C. An Independent Recognised Surveyor is a person recognised by MNZ as being suitably qualified and experienced to conduct inspections, surveys, or examinations of marine vessels to assess, monitor, and report on their condition.

Remedial work will be undertaken on the vessel and an independent recognised surveyor will be engaged to confirm the vessel is fit for passage.

The following items will be recycled as far as practicable during the preparation of the vessel: • Aerosol consumables will be available to be reused on other vessels; • Decking timbers; • Oily/fuel mixed water will be separated at a recycling facility after collection; • Cardboard packing materials; • Fishing buoys; • Anodes will be available for reuse on other vessels; • Loose tools; and • Loose copper tubing.

Page 26

3.3.2 Exterior of Vessel

3.3.2.1 Antifouling Coatings

The vessel has had a variety of coatings applied to it over its life. A report summarising these is included in Appendix D.

The vessel was last in dry dock in November 2016 and the paints and coatings applied during that time are all approved by the EPA for use in New Zealand. The service life of the last applied anti-fouling coating is in the order of 24 months, meaning that the active ingredients of current coatings (copper and zinc) are more than likely to be ‘spent’ or inactive – this is evidenced by the amount of biofouling currently present on the hull (discussed in greater detail in Section 3.3.2.2 of this report). The submerged coatings are not proposed to be removed as this can only be done safely with containment out of the water in a dry dock facility. DWNZ understands that none of the other vessels that have been scuttled around New Zealand have had their coatings removed prior to being dumped.

Those coatings applied above the water line and on the superstructure of the vessel are typically designed not to contain leaching properties. The condition of these coatings differs across the vessel due to time lapse, exposure, and fire damage. These coatings are not proposed to be removed due to the health, safety, and environmental risks including, but not limited to, working at heights, working over water, and dust controls.

In summary, no work is proposed in respect of removing any of the coatings on the hull as they present little risk.

3.3.2.2 Biofouling

A full survey of the submerged portion of the vessel’s hull was undertaken in January 2018 whilst it was in Bluff Harbour. A copy of that inspection report is included in Appendix E. That inspection confirmed that there some algae on the hull but that it was ‘very clean’. Between the time of the Bluff inspection (January 2018) and the fire in April 2018 the vessel did not leave New Zealand waters.

During the time the vessel has been berthed at PrimePort it has incurred significant biofouling. The hull of the vessel has been surveyed in September 2019 by divers to determine the extent of biofouling and whether any unwanted marine organisms are present. The results of that survey are included in Appendix F.

During the September 2019 inspection, commercial divers collected biofouling samples from the general hull and niche areas with the assistance of biosecurity scientists from the National Institute of Water and Atmospheric Research (NIWA) viewing the diver’s live video feed. The majority of the material collected was processed and identified on-site by the NIWA biosecurity scientists. Of the other non-indigenous marine biota identified on-site during the inspection, all species have been previously recorded in the Port of Timaru previously and none are new to New Zealand, however one unwanted organism (Undaria pinnatifida) is present on the hull.

A total of 25 samples that were considered to be unfamiliar to the on-site scientists or suspected of being non- indigenous species worthy of formal identification were appropriately preserved and submitted to the Marine Invasives Taxonomic Service (MITS) for identification.

Of the samples identified by MITS, four non-indigenous species have not previously been recorded in the Port of Timaru previously. However, these species are all established in New Zealand, in other ports (i.e. not new to New Zealand species).

Page 27

DWNZ does not propose to remove the biofouling that exists on vessel. DWNZ has discussed the presence of the unwanted organism (Undaria pinnatifida) with MPI and has obtained a ‘permission’ under section 52 of the Biosecurity Act 1993 to move this organism to the dump site – a copy of that permission in included in Appendix B.

3.3.3 Placement of Explosive Charges

Explosives experts have been engaged by DWNZ to design, set up, supervise, and carry out the detonation of the explosives that will be used to scuttle the vessel. These explosives experts hold the required certification under the Health and Safety at Work (Hazardous Substances) Regulations 2017 which prescribe the minimum knowledge and practical competency requirements that a handler must meet to qualify for a compliance certificate as a Certified Handler/Shot-firer.

Four 25 kg explosive charges are proposed to be used to scuttle the vessel and these will be placed, but not armed, while the vessel is still berthed at PrimePort – the detonator will not be connected until the vessel is at the dump site. The four charges will be set inside the vessel on the inside of the vessel’s outer plating with sandbags being packed around the charges to focus the blast outwards. The position of the four explosive charges will be above the waterline at the following positions, with the final positions determined during placement depending on ease of access both in terms of the placement of the charges and running the detonation cord circuit: • One charge in the engine room; • Two charges amidship above fish hold No. 2; and • One charge below the bridge above fish hold No. 1.

A blast plan is included in Appendix G. The explosives are designed to focus the blast energy ‘outwards’ into the hull plating. The four charges will have slight delays (25 milliseconds (ms)) and will result in the stern of the vessel sinking first. The charges will be positioned so that the bottom of their resultant blast holes on the outside of the vessel are above the waterline. The seacock vales will also be fitted with very small explosive charges (a combined weight of ~220 g of Powergel) while the vessel is still berthed in PrimePort – these very small charges will be detonated immediately before the four main charges to allow water to slowly flood into the vessel.

3.4 Transport of Vessel to Dump Site

Once the vessel has been prepared and certified to be seaworthy by an independent recognised surveyor, it will be towed to the dump site using a towing tug when weather and sea-state conditions are appropriate. The upper limits for towing will be a swell of 2.0 m and windspeed of 20 – 25 knots. The anticipated tow speed will be around 5 knots and no personnel will be on board the vessel during the voyage.

The indicative voyage route is shown in Figure 3. The indicative voyage route has been selected to achieve compliance with Condition 3 of the permission issued by MPI under section 52 of the Biosecurity Act 1993 (a copy of which is included in Appendix B) – this condition requires the vessel to be transported in water depths ≥400 m as soon as practically possible once it clears the Timaru Harbour control area.

Page 28

Figure 3 Indicative Voyage Route for the Dong Won 701

3.5 Scuttling of the Vessel at the Dump Site

Upon arrival at the dump site, the vessel will be positioned at its proposed scuttling location. DWNZ intends to scuttle the vessel within a 1 NM radius of 46°00′S 171°13′E, this being the centre of the dump site. The vessel will be under the control of the towing tug via the tow rope right up to the time the water enters the blast holes, thereby minimising the risk of vessel drift from the proposed scuttling location to the greatest practicable degree.

A ‘Notice to Mariners’ will be issued by Land Information New Zealand to advise other marine users that the proposed activity will be taking place and this notice will also impose a temporary exclusion zone around the site, restricting other vessels coming near scuttling operations.

Once the vessel is at the centre of the dump site the explosive experts will utilise a small tender to board the vessel and arm the pre-positioned explosives, including fitting the detonator. The explosive experts will then disembark the vessel by the tender and board the towing tug which will move 200 m directly off the bow of the vessel (which will still be connected under tension to the towing tug by way of the tow rope).

Page 29

Monitoring for the presence of marine mammals will be undertaken within a specified 600 m mitigation zone before the explosives are detonated (the mitigation zone is discussed in Section 6.3.1.1 of this report). Once it has been determined that no marine mammals have been detected within the specified mitigation zone the explosive experts will initiate the blast sequence. The first explosives that will detonate are the very small charges on the seacock valves, followed by the four main charges, all with 25 ms delays. The very small charges on the seacock valves will result in water slowly entering the vessel and the four main charges will result in blast holes just above the waterline. The vessel will initially sink slowly as water flows through the open seacock valves, but rapid flooding will occur as soon as enters the large holes causing the vessel to sink rapidly. As stated above, the vessel will be under the control of the towing tug via the tow rope right up to the time the water enters the blast holes to minimise drift. It is expected that the vessel will sink stern first and disappear under the water within 20 minutes of the water entering the blast holes.

The personnel responsible for the scuttling will wait 30 minutes after the vessel sinks to confirm no floating debris is present. Any material observed will be recovered and returned to shore for disposal.

The vessel may drift from the point where the tow rope is released from the towing tug. The amount of drift will depend on a variety of factors including current speed/direction, wave height/direction, and wind strength/direction. These factors may be cumulative or they may counteract each other (e.g. if the wind direction is opposite to the current direction). To provide an example of how far the vessel may drift in the 20 minutes from the time it is released from the towing tug to its disappearance under the water, if the net drift speed is 4 knots (~2.06 m/s) it would result in the vessel drifting approximately 2.5 km (1.33 NM) from the point the vessel is released. Under this scenario the vessel would still sink well within the dump site, even if the tow rope is released from the vessel at the edge of the 1 NM radius target area at the centre of the dump site.

Once the vessel is below the water it will descend very quickly due to its mass, density, and shape and it is expected to reach the seabed in the order of one to two minutes after disappearing under the water. Subsurface currents are not expected to affect the descending vessel to any significant degree given the mass of the vessel and its rapid rate of descent. The final landing spot of the vessel is expected to be within 100 m of the point where it disappeared under the water.

The tow master, utilising GPS and photographs, will record the coordinates of the detonation location and last visible surface position of the vessel. The towing tug is equipped with a multi-beam sounder and this will be used to confirm the location of the vessel on the seabed. This information will be reported to the EPA confirming completion of the programme with supply of the final location of the ship.

3.6 Assessment of Alternatives

3.6.1 Introduction

Section 39(1)(i) of the EEZ Act requires an IA to specify any possible alternative locations for, or methods for undertaking the activity that may avoid, remedy, or mitigate any adverse effects. Regulation 36(b) of the D&D Regulations includes a similar requirement in that, for marine dumping consents, the IA must describe any alternative method of disposal that could be used. Further, section 39(2)(b) of the EEZ Act requires an IA for a marine dumping consent to specify any practical opportunities to reuse, recycle, or treat the waste or other matter5. This section presents information to fulfil these requirements.

5 This being the same requirement outlined in regulation 36(c) of the D&D Regulations.

Page 30

3.6.2 Alternative Dumping Locations

The D&D Regulations identify five authorised locations within the EEZ where dumping of vessels is a non-notified discretionary activity. Three of these sites are located off the coast of the North Island and considered to be too distant from PrimePort for safe towing of the vessel. One authorised location is 55 NM north-east of Lyttelton, this being ~150 NM from PrimePort. The proposed dump site is 24 NM south-east of Otago and is the shortest route from PrimePort (~100 NM).

Dumping of the vessel could potentially also take place within the CMA but this would require a coastal permit from the respective regional council as there are no permitted activity rules that allow such dumping within Canterbury or Otago coastal waters; in addition, unlike in the EEZ, there are no designated sites within the Canterbury or Otago coastal waters for dumping vessels.

The vessel could also be taken on the high seas (i.e. beyond the extended continental shelf) but would require a very long tow journey. In New Zealand, waste disposal on the high seas from New Zealand registered vessels is administered by MNZ under the MTA and associated rules. There are no designated dumping sites on the high seas. According to the MNZ website6, any application for dumping on the high seas will require a greater level of environmental impact assessment and clear justification why sites within New Zealand’s jurisdiction cannot be used.

3.6.3 Alternative Methods for Dumping

The proposed dumping method is to use explosives, and this is the only viable method for scuttling the vessel so that it sinks quickly to the seabed at the scuttling location. There are various options available in terms of the placement location of the explosive charges to scuttle the vessel, including their placement either inside or outside the vessel and above or below the waterline.

The placement of charges on the outside of the vessel could be undertaken using limpet charges that are attached to the external hull by way of magnets, however these types of charges would need to be installed at the dump site and would require divers to be in the water. This introduces additional health and safety issues compared to the proposed use of pre-installed Powergel. In addition, these charges would result in significantly greater underwater noise effects as the explosions would occur within the water column. Placement of the explosive charges within the vessel is preferred as these can be set (but not armed) while the vessel is berthed at PrimePort.

6 https://www.maritimenz.govt.nz/commercial/environment/marine-dumping.asp

Page 31

DWNZ initially proposed to place the explosive charges inside the vessel below the waterline, however the underwater noise predicted to be generated by this option was significantly greater (an order of magnitude) than placing the charges inside the vessel above the waterline. DWNZ has therefore chosen this latter option so as to ensure the underwater noise effects associated with the use of explosives are mitigated to the greatest degree practicable.The only practical alternative to using explosives to scuttle the vessel would be to utilise openings to flood the vessel; however, the vessel needs to be watertight and structurally fit for the tow from PrimePort to the dump site and so openings cannot be cut into the hull before leaving the berth. The only way this type of scuttling could therefore occur would be by opening hatches and using the onboard valve systems to ‘flood’ the vessel. This approach is considered to present significant safety risks as it would depend solely on the opening of hatches and valves which would require personnel to be on board the vessel and within small compartments for periods of time during the scuttling process, which is extremely unsafe and not recommended. Also, the flooding of the vessel by opening hatches and valves will be much slower than using explosives, meaning that any prevailing current and wind conditions (or change to these conditions during the flooding) could cause the vessel to drift off location and possibly even drift outside the dump site before sinking.

3.6.4 Opportunities to Reuse or Recycle

Overseas many vessels are dismantled at wrecking facilities; however, New Zealand does not have a ship wrecking industry.

The only dry dock facility which is close to Timaru and could possibly consider dismantling the vessel is the dry dock at Lyttelton. DWNZ has made inquiries with Stark Brothers Limited regarding the possibility of using the Lyttelton dry dock but it advised:

“While Stark Bros undertook the deconstruction of the cargo ship MV Jaguar in 2012 (65 m length x 10 m beam with GRT of 1044 tonnes) being a cargo ship with a relatively flat bottom, cargo holds with no insulation, it was a very different ship to the FV Dong Won 701.

The logistics and associated costs of stabilising the Dong Won 701 in the dry dock during deconstruction would be significant, as nothing is allowed to fall or be dropped into the dry dock, and a digger / nibbler is also not allowed to operate within the dry dock due to potential damage to the stone structure of the dry dock.

Unfortunately, Stark Bros Ltd would not be interested in deconstructing the FV Dong Won 701 in the Lyttelton Dry Dock.

For your reference the Lyttelton Dry Dock is currently heavily booked as follows:

Claymore 2 27th July – 10th August 2019 (the Dong Won 701 could fit with this vessel)

It is then fully booked between 10th August – 24th December 2019

and then from 6th January – 23rd February 2020.

We do not believe the Lyttelton Dry Dock presents a viable option for the deconstruction of the FV Dong Won 701”.

Page 32

DWNZ also made inquiries with the Devonport Naval Base (DNB) which also has a large dry dock that could accommodate the vessel. DNB advised7 that it was not interested in decommissioning the vessel and therefore this is not an option. DNB stated it would not have time to fit the vessel within its dry dock program as the long period required for decommissioning would prevent DNB carrying out its core ship repair activities. DNB also pointed out that there would be challenges making the vessel safe to work on as it was broken down which creates a difficulty for any dry dock decommissioning. Further, there are risks involved with towing the vessel on a voyage to Auckland which means that this location is not a viable option.

DWNZ was aware that the vessel ‘Rangatira’ was recently (2018) dismantled at PrimePort and Evans Bay, adjacent to the Port. The Rangatira was much smaller than the vessel which is the subject of this Application, the Rangatira being 50 m in length and weighing 520 t compared to vessel which is 82 m in length and weighs 1,300 t.

DWNZ made enquiries on whether dismantling of the vessel at the berth at PrimePort was viable; however, this proved to be problematic and is not considered viable. This option would require dismantling of all of the vessel down to the tank top at the berth. This material would be taken away from the berth and disposed of or recycled. The remaining hull would then have be towed to a suitable slip and pulling it ashore onto the ground and dismantling the remainder ashore. While the vessel is at the berth, there is the potential for parts to fall into the water and/or cause pollution or the whole vessel could turn over and sink at the berth. There would be additional risk with the tow of the remainder of the vessel to the slip where it could be pulled ashore as it could break up during the tow. The risks associated with this option are significant and unacceptable to DWNZ and the commercial terms were not satisfactory. PrimePort indicated it would require a cash bond and indemnities for any work. Overall, DWNZ considers that dismantling at the berth is too risky, both from an environmental and a health and safety perspective.

DWNZ has considered the option of towing the vessel offshore for dismantling at a wrecking yard in India and Korea. An application would need to be made and a permit obtained from the EPA in terms of the Basel Convention. DWNZ investigated this and also met with EPA to discuss its requirements. The vessel is small by international standards and not of great value to most wrecking yards. It was not possible to obtain interest from a suitable wrecking yard, which would meet the requirements of the Basel Convention. In addition, this option would involve a very long tow to a destination in Asia. There would be a risk that the vessel could become disconnected during the tow due to adverse weather or swell conditions and the vessel might possibly even sink due to those conditions during the voyage.

After consideration of all the above options, DWNZ concluded that the best practicable option for the vessel was dumping it at the authorised dump site as proposed in this Application.

While the condition, fire damage, and age of the vessel limits the options for recycling and treatment, as much of the salvageable material will be recovered prior to dumping, as outlined in Section 3.3.1.

7 DWNZ had discussions with Mr Keith Drake, Business Development Manager, Babcock International Group, Devonport – Babcock operates the Devonport dry dock.

Page 33

4 Existing Environment

4.1 Dumping History

The dump site is described in Section 3 of the D&D Regulations as being within a circle of 4 NM radius centred on position 46°00′S 171°13′E (25 NM south-east of Otago Harbour). This location was selected, together with another four sites around New Zealand, as it was an existing ‘dumping ground’ when the D&D Regulations were promulgated. The dump site is identified on the New Zealand nautical charts as an “Explosives Dumping Ground” (Figure 4).

Figure 4 New Zealand Nautical Chart Showing Dump Site as Explosives Dumping Ground

Source: Chart NZ 64 Banks Peninsula to Otago Peninsula

Page 34

This Explosives Dumping Ground is listed in the Annual New Zealand Notices to Mariners, which are standing notices published in the New Zealand Nautical Almanac. Section 14 of the Annual Notices to Mariners specifically covers “Ammunition Dumping in the Waters Around New Zealand” and it states:

1. Before the present regulations establishing five ammunition dumping areas in depths over 600 metres were brought into force in 1955, it was the practice to dump ammunition in any suitable area off the New Zealand coast adjacent to the loading point providing the depth was greater than 200 metres.

And

3. The areas referred to in paragraph 1 above are defined as being within a radius of 5 nautical miles of the following positions:

….

(e) 46° 00’S., 171° 13’E

In is noted that the Explosives Dumping Ground circle is slightly larger than the authorised location specified in Section 3 of the D&D Regulations (i.e. 5 NM radius on the chart cf. 4 NM radius in the D&D Regulations).

The RIS for the D&D Regulations notes that:

The authorised dumping grounds were used historically for dumping explosives and are already modified.

The following government departments and ministries have been contacted with the aim of determining the extent and nature of the historical dumping that has occurred at the dump site: • New Zealand Defence Force8; • Archives New Zealand; • MNZ; • New Zealand Police National Dive Squad; • Ministry for the Environment; and • EPA.

The following is a summary of the outcome of these inquiries: • Dumping of firearms, live ammunition, and projectiles has historically occurred within New Zealand coastal waters but record keeping was poor;

8 Prior to the late 1980s the Ministry of Defence and the New Zealand Defence Force were one entity under the title of Ministry of Defence. Following the separation, the New Zealand Defence Force maintains information relating to operational matters including historic records.

Page 35

• The New Zealand Defence Force advised that searches have not produced any information held by it regarding the dump site and it has no information whether munitions were dumped there – it stated that it is possible that relevant information may have been transferred to Archives New Zealand and provided a list of four files which might contain relevant information (discussed in the next bullet point); • Archives New Zealand – An extensive search of relevant files was undertaken at Archives New Zealand. This search did not reveal any specific information on munitions dumping at the dump site (information on dumping at the other four authorised locations was found); • MNZ does not have any records of permits being issued by it or the Maritime Safety Authority to dump any waste within the dump site since 2000; • The Ministry for the Environment, which provided support to the Minister in researching and preparing the RIS for the D&D Regulations, advised that it had no information regarding the history of the dump site; and • The EPA has not granted any marine dumping consents to allow any wastes or vessels to be disposed of at the dump site nor have any burials at sea taken place there.

In summary, information on the history of the dump site for dumping wastes is essentially non-existent but it is reasonably certain that no wastes have been dumped at the site since 2000. However, given its designation as an Explosives Dumping Ground on the New Zealand Nautical Charts, the presence of munitions cannot be dismissed entirely.

4.2 Physical Environment

4.2.1 Meteorology

The dump site is located off the coast of the ‘Southern New Zealand’ climate zone which includes Dunedin and Invercargill. Most of the climate within this zone is characterised by cool coastal breezes with an absence of shelter from unsettled weather moving over the sea from the south and southwest (NIWA, 2019a).

There are no wind data available for the dump site; however, in 2017, Shell commissioned MetOcean Solutions Limited to undertake a desktop analysis of the metocean conditions within the Great South Basin (GSB) which spans approximately from offshore Dunedin to west of Balclutha but sits further offshore than the dump site (MOS, 2017, cited in SLR (2019)). Near-surface wind conditions were extracted at hourly intervals from a hindcast reanalysis from 1979 to 2015. This hindcast modelling found the annual mean wind speed was 8.52 m/s, with June the windiest month (mean wind speed of 9.16 m/s) and December the least windy month (mean wind speed of 7.84 m/s).

4.2.2 Currents

New Zealand lies in the pathway of eastward-flowing currents driven by winds that blow across the South Pacific Ocean (Brodie, 1960; Te Ara, 2019a). Consequently, New Zealand is exposed to the southern branch of the South Pacific sub-tropical gyre driven by the southeast trade winds to the north and the westerly flowing Roaring Forties to the south (Gorman et al., 2005; Te Ara, 2019a).

New Zealand’s coastal current regime is dominated by wind-driven flows, low-frequency flows, and tidal currents. The net current flow is a combination of these components and is often further influenced by local bathymetry.

Page 36

Figure 5 shows the main ocean currents occurring around New Zealand. The dominant current within the dump site is the Southland Current which flows in a north-east direction along the south east-coast of the South Island and can be observed up to 130 km from shore (Te Ara, 2019a; Heath, 1985; Sutton, 2003).

Figure 5 Ocean Circulation around the New Zealand Coastline

Source: Te Ara, 2019a.

Page 37

Non-tidal current modelling commissioned by EOS (2014) showed the extent of the Southland Current (Figure 6), where speeds of up to 2.3 m/s (average 0.6 m/s) are predicted to occur along parts of the Otago coastline. Mid- water and deep-water currents exhibit a similar pattern to surface currents although they are weaker and more constrained to the coast and along the edge of the continental shelf (EOS, 2014). Current speeds are lower further out to sea so are expected to be less than this in the dump site.

There is likely to be great variability in subsurface currents in and around the dump site due to the complex bathymetry in and around the site.

Figure 6 Mean Non-Tidal Surface Current Speed along the Southland and Otago Coastline

Reproduced (geo-referenced) using image from EOS, 2014

4.2.3 Waves

There is no wave information available for the dump site; however, MOS (2017, cited in SLR (2019)) reported the mean annual significant wave height in the GSB to be 3.17 m with 1st and 99th percentile exceedance levels of 1.55 m and 6.98 m respectively. Wave heights were highest in May and June, and lowest in December, and the predominant wave direction was from the southwest quarter. As the dump site is situated further inshore than the GSB, it is unlikely that waves will exceed these heights.

Page 38

4.2.4 Water Quality

There are no water quality data available from within the dump site. However, water column concentrations of total petroleum hydrocarbons, polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons, and metals (arsenic, cadmium, chromium, copper, lead, mercury, nickel, zinc) were all below analytical detection limits in the nearby GSB (ERM, 2013, cited in SLR, 2019). Mean total organic carbon concentrations were 597.1 mg/m3 and the concentration of total suspended solids was 0.26 g/m3, both which are not considered to be high.

Dissolved oxygen concentrations were also measured and were found to range from 250.87 to 253.89 mmol/kg in surface waters, 205.00 to 245.07 mmol/kg in mid waters, and 158.63 to 196.55 mmol/kg in bottom waters. The reduction in dissolved oxygen with increasing depth reflects the lack of photosynthetic processes below the photic zone and the reduced circulation with surface water and the atmosphere. The results are indicative of cold, clean and well mixed offshore waters (World Ocean Review, 2010) and are aligned with levels of surface water dissolved oxygen elsewhere around New Zealand, which generally range from 250 – 300 mmol/kg.

The dump site is situated closer to the South Island coast than the GSB from which the above results are from. As such, the water quality at the dump site may not be as pristine; however, it is still expected to be high as the dump site is a considerable distance offshore and is unlikely to be significantly influenced by anthropogenic impacts or riverine inputs.

4.2.5 Bathymetry and Seabed Substrate

4.2.5.1 Bathymetry

The continental shelf extends for approximately 20 NM off the coast of Dunedin and beyond this, a series of submarine canyons known as the Otago Fan Complex incise the continental slope for an approximately 200 km long section of the eastern South Island Continental shelf (Mitchell & Neil, 2012). Submarine canyons along the Otago Fan Complex feed into a series of tributaries that form the western edge of the Bounty Trough. The canyons act as sediment conduits between the near-shore sediment transport system and the deep Bounty Channel (Mitchell & Neil, 2012). The dump site is located between the Saunders Canyon and the Hoopers Canyon, both of which are situated inshore of the dump site (refer Figure 11).

The dump site is located on the continental slope; the most inshore section of the dump site is on the 600 m depth contour, while the seaward extent of the dump site is located in water depths close to 1,250 m. Most of the dump site is at depths between 750 m and 1,200 m (Figure 1). The dump site is located over part of an unnamed canyon which acts as a tributary of a much larger channel (known as the North Channel) that flows in an easterly direction towards the Bounty Trough.

Mitchell and Neil (2012) highlighted the presence of pockmarks within the dump site which are likely to be related to the expulsion of fluid, such as gas or groundwater, at the seabed. It is possible that these fluid systems contribute to destabilising slopes. Pockmarks are known to occur between 500 and 850 m depth over large areas of the seafloor around the continental slope of New Zealand. They can be up to 200 m wide and exhibit ~20 m relief (Mitchell & Neil, 2012). Figure 7 shows that pockmarks are present in the northwest region of the dump site, and, to a lesser extent, the southwest region.

Page 39

Figure 7 Pock Marks in the Dump Site

Page 40

4.2.5.2 Substrate

Seabed samples collected at sites in and around Saunders and Papanui canyons show that the most commonly found sediment grain sizes were between <63 µm and 250 µm (i.e. mud/silt/fine sand) while sediments at sites on the slope tend to be between 63 µm and 125 µm (i.e. mud/silt/very fine sand) (Peebles, 2013). Based on this information it is considered likely that the substrate at the dump site will be composed predominately of mud, silt, and very fine sand.

4.3 Biological Environment

4.3.1 New Zealand Marine Environment Classification

The New Zealand Marine Environment Classification (MEC) covers New Zealand’s CMA and EEZ, providing a spatial framework for structured and systematic management. Geographic domains are divided into classes that have similar environmental and biological characters (Snelder et al., 2005). Classes are characterised by physical and biological factors such as depth, solar radiation, sea‐surface temperatures, waves, tidal current, sediment type, seabed slope and curvature. The MEC is useful in providing a general understanding of what marine species could be present within an area, specifically when data are limited.

According to the MEC classification, the dump site lies entirely within Class 63 (Figure 8), which is an oceanic, shelf and sub‐tropical front environment that is extensive on the continental shelf including much of the Challenger Plateau and the Chatham Rise. Waters are moderate in depth (~754 m) and experience moderate annual radiation, wintertime sea surface temperatures, and chlorophyll‐α concentration. Characteristic fish species include orange roughy, Johnson’s cod, Baxter’s lantern dogfish, hoki, smooth oreo, and javelin fish. The most commonly represented invertebrate families are Carditidae, Pectinidae, Dentaliidae, Veneridae, Cardiidae, Serpulidae, and Limidae.

The Benthic Optimised Marine Environment Classification (BOMEC) (Leathwick et al., 2012) is another method used to classify New Zealand’s marine environment and was designed to specifically assess the impacts of bottom trawling on benthic organisms. It can also be used to assess the potential impacts from other human activities at the sea floor on demersal fish communities (Leathwick et al., 2012) and as such, it is also relevant for this Application.

BOMEC uses generalised dissimilarity modelling, which can deal with sparse data and distributions of very large numbers of species. The model takes into account the MEC layers as well as sediment type information and distributional data for eight groups of benthic organisms (Leathwick et al. 2012). As such, BOMEC provides a more sophisticated approach than the MEC.

According to the BOMEC classification, the dump site lies entirely within ‘Class M’ waters, which occupy lower slope depths off the South Island’s east coast (Figure 9). Water temperature, salinity and productivity are generally lower in this class compared to classes in similar water depths across more northerly locations (Leathwick et al., 2012); concentrations of dissolved organic matter and suspended particulate matter are also relatively low in Class M waters. The average depth of Class M waters is 883.7 m and the average sediment grain size Is 0.13 mm (Leathwick et al., 2012).

Page 41

Figure 8 New Zealand Marine Environment Classification

Page 42

Figure 9 BOMEC Classification

Page 43

4.3.2 Benthic Invertebrates

New Zealand has a large diversity of marine invertebrates. This is attributable to the variable seafloor relief and New Zealand’s ancient geological history. From the intertidal to the deep-sea trenches, each habitat hosts a unique combination of species which are adapted to the local environmental conditions (i.e. temperature, currents, salinity, local geology, food availability etc.). Benthic invertebrate communities are strongly correlated with the sediment type occurring in the area (Rowden et al., 2012).

No specific benthic survey has been undertaken at the dump site itself, however the benthic infauna that may be present can be predicted utilising the results of three recent studies conducted nearby. These three studies being: • 2013 Master’s thesis study undertaken by Peebles (2013) immediately to the northwest of the dump site; • 2013 Environmental Baseline Survey (EBS) conducted by NIWA within the GSB reported in ERM (2013), cited in SLR, 2019, the closest part of this survey area being approximately 90 km southeast of the dump site; and • 2019 EBS conducted by NIWA within the GSB, reported in Beaumont et al. (2019), the closest part of this survey area being approximately 50 km southeast of the dump site.

The locations of these three study areas are shown in Figure 10. While the 2013 and 2019 EBSs are quite some distance from the dump site and had greater water depths, they did include similar bathymetric features as appear to be present in the dump site (i.e. canyons) and, as such, provide an indication of the benthic species that may be present within the dump site.

Page 44

Figure 10 Previous Benthic Study Areas Relative to the Dump Site

Page 45

4.3.2.1 Benthic Infauna

Peebles (2013) examined the infaunal assemblages present at Saunders and Papanui Canyons, which form the southern half of the Otago canyon network, and the adjacent slope area. Samples were collected from four locations inside each canyon (SC1-4 and PC1a-3) and from three locations on the slope adjacent to each canyon (SCA-C and PCA-C). The collected organisms provide an insight into the faunal distributions found in these canyons and nearby areas which include the dump site (Figure 11).

In total, Peebles (2013) collected 4,032 individual organisms from the 14 stations. Amphipods, polychaetes, ophiuroids, decapods, and isopods comprised more than 75% of collected individuals in both canyon environments. The remaining 25% was primarily composed of alcyonaceans, foraminifera, mesogastropods, bivalves, bryozoans, and the sponge Stylocordyla borealis. The infaunal community of the adjacent slope environment was characterised by amphipods, polychaetes, ostracods, decapods, ophiuroids, and foraminifera; together, these comprised 85% of the collected individuals. Sipunculans, gastropods, bivalves and the sponge Stylocordyla borealis accounted for the remaining 15%. Both the canyon and slope environments had crustaceans (primarily amphipods), polychaetes, and ophiuroids forming a large majority (75–90%) of collected individuals. The remaining 10–25% consisted of mainly alcyonaceans and mesogastropods in the canyon areas and foraminifera and sipunculans on the slope (Peebles, 2013).

Page 46

Figure 11 Locations of Peebles (2013) Infauna Study Sites in Relation to the Dump Site

Page 47

In the Otago shelf area, from 70 m water depth to the shelf break, large, heavily calcified bryozoans are abundant. These dominate an area of about 110 km2 on the midshelf, providing habitat at a range of scales. The presence of these bryozoans indicates a stable substratum, low levels of sediment input, relatively high mean water flow, and productive waters (Wood & Probert, 2013). The known distribution of habitat forming bryozoans is shown in Figure 12, this area being inshore of the Saunders and Papanui Canyons and therefore does not include the dump site.

Figure 12 Known distribution (shaded) of habitat-forming bryozoans offshore Otago Peninsula.

Source: Wood & Probert (2013)

The 2019 EBS conducted by NIWA within the GSB (Beaumont et al., 2019) examined the infaunal communities at a number of sites (with the closest site being approximately 50 km southeast the dump site). This survey found that polychaetes were the most numerous taxonomic group, being widespread through the area surveyed. Other taxonomic groups found in this survey included Cnidaria, Crustacea, Echinodermata, Hydrozoa, Acari, Paripulida, Gromiida, Mollusca, Bryozoa, Pycnogonida, Porifera, Sipunculida, Nematoda, Nemertea, and Platyhelminthes. The highest abundances recorded during this survey were within a tributary channel, while the lowest occurred in a main channel. In addition, the highest number of taxonomic groups was observed within a broad slope basin environment, compared to the lowest number of taxonomic groups being found in a main channel site.

Page 48

The 2013 EBS conducted by NIWA within the GSB found that they were dominated by foraminifera (unicellular shelled/chambered protists) and annelids (predominantly polychaete worms). Where coarser grained channel deposits and shelly shelf deposits were present, foraminifera also dominated, followed by crustaceans, annelids (largely polychaete worms) and nematode worms. Infauna abundances were found to be highest across the soft foraminiferal mud sediments (143 organisms per sample), and lowest in the muddy sands (ERM, 2013, cited in SLR, 2019).

4.3.2.2 Benthic Epifauna

The 2013 EBS conducted by NIWA within the GSB (ERM, 2013, cited in SLR, 2019) examined benthic epifaunal communities using a towed imaging system which captured imagery of epifauna communities along a series of transects. Organisms larger than approximately 50 mm were identified to the lowest practicable taxonomic level.

Highest numbers of individuals were observed in areas of coarser grained channel deposits and lowest epifauna abundances occurred in the softer mud sediments. Along the coarser grained channel deposits, the most abundant epifauna communities were dominated by sponges, particularly those from the genus Suberites, and echinoderms including brittle stars (Ophiomusium lymani). Organisms from the phylums Chordata (bony fish) and Cnidaria (including sea-squirts and corals) dominated the coarser grained and shelly shelf sediments. Soft mud sediment areas were characterised by cnidarians (particularly anemones and corals) and foraminifera (particularly xenophyophores). No threatened or endangered taxa were observed on any transects and no reef building cold-water coral species were observed.

The 2019 EBS conducted by NIWA within the GSB (Beaumont et al., 2019) also examined video and still imagery for further analysis of benthic epifauna community structure over broad slope basins, channel sites and seamount features (not discussed further in this application due to the absence of similar habitats in the dump site). The broad slope basin habitats were dominated by ophiuroids, Porifera, Actinaria (anemones), echinoids, gastropods, holothurians, terebellid worms, large agglutinated foraminifera, bryozoans and scaphopods. Channel sites included areas of hard substrate relatively barren of encrusting fauna, while sponges and gorgonians encrusted other areas of hard substrate. Sponges, sea pens, and echinoderms dominated the muddy/sandy sediments of the channel floor, with carnivorous sponges observed at some channel floor sites.

Epifaunal assemblages in the Otago canyon network have been described by Probert et al. (1979) revealing that polychaetes, sponges, gastropods, anomurans, and bryozoans are commonly found major taxa throughout the canyon areas. The lower canyon areas are characterised by bivalves and asteroids (Probert et al., 1979).

Previous deep-water sampling that has occurred in areas near the dump site (as reviewed in Consalvey et al., 2006) has found red coral (which could represent Stylasterid hydrocorals such as Errina spp., gorgonian coals such as Corallium spp., Paragorgia spp., and Sibogagorgia spp., and possibly some Scleractinian stony corals such as Solenosmilia, Goniocorella, and Oculina) located in waters to the south of the dump site.

4.3.3 Fish

The east coast of New Zealand’s South Island provides habitats for many demersal and pelagic species ranging from shallow to deep waters. A large proportion of New Zealand’s fish are categorised as ‘widespread’ (approximately 30% of described species), in that they occur across all three major oceans or in the Pacific and Atlantic oceans; however, there is also a large proportion of fish that are classified as endemic (approximately 22% of described species) (Roberts et al., 2015).

Page 49

Table 1 lists the fish species potentially present in the dump site. This information was collated from the Ministry of Primary Industries New Zealand fish guides (McMillan et al., 2011a; 2011b; 2011c) and more than 35 years of trawl surveys as reported in Anderson et al. (1998), Bagley et al. (2000), Hurst et al. (2000a, 2000b), and O’Driscoll et al. (2003). The number of fish species within New Zealand’s EEZ is 1,262 (Roberts et al., 2015); therefore, Table 1 is not intended to provide an exhaustive list of all species that may be present within the dump site, but lists the main species based on published literature. The potential for fish species to be present in the dump site was assessed based on water depths, with only those species caught in water depths of 600 m – 1250 m considered for inclusion.

During the 2013 EBS conducted by NIWA within the GSB (ERM, 2013, cited in SLR, 2019), drop-camera sampling revealed various species of rattail, shark, and eel present at the sampling locations. Taxonomic identification to species level was not carried out during this survey.

Table 1 Fish Species Potentially Present Within the Dump Site

Species – Common name Arrow squid 1 Javelinfish 1,2 Ridge scaled rattail 1,2 Banded bellowsfish 1,2 Johnson’s cod 1,2 Robust cardinalfish 2 Banded rattail 1,2 Kaiyomaru rattail 1,2 Rough skate 1 Basking shark 3 Lanternfish (Myctophidae spp.) 1 Rudderfish 1,2 Basketwork eel 1,2 Leafscale gulper shark 1,2 Sandfish 2 Baxter’s dogfish 1,2 Lighthouse fish 1,2 Scaly dragonfish (Stomias spp.) 2 Bigeye cardinalfish 1,2 Ling 1,2 School shark 2 Black dragonfish (Idiacanthus spp.) 1,2 Long barbel rattail 1 Sea perch (Helicolenus spp.)1,2 Black javelinfish 1,2 Longnose deepsea skate 2 Seal shark 1,2 Black oreo 1,2 Longnose spookfish 1,2 Serrulate rattail 1,2 Blackspot rattail 2 Longnose velvet dogfish 1,2 Shovelnose dogfish 1,2 Bluenose 2 Lookdown dory 1,2 Silver warehou 1,2 Blobfish 1,2 Lucifer dogfish 2 Silverside 1,2 Blue shark 1,2 Lyconus spp.2 Sleeper ray (Typhlonarke spp.) Blue warehou 1 Mahia rattail 1,2 Small banded rattail2 Bollons’s rattail 1,2 Mako shark 1,2 Small-headed cod 1,2 Brown chimaera 2 Moonfish 1,2 Smallscaled brown slickhead 1,2 Catshark (Apristurus spp.) 1,2 Murray’s rattail 2 Smooth deepsea skate 1,2 Codheaded rattail 2 Notable rattail 1,2 Smooth oreo 1,2 Cookie-cutter shark 2 Oblique banded rattail 2 Smooth skate 1,2 Common roughy 1 Oliver’s rattail 1,2 Southern bluefin tuna 1,2 Dawson’s catshark2 Orange roughy 1,2 Southern blue whiting 1,2 Dark ghost shark 1 Owston’s dogfish 2 Southern boarfish 2

Page 50

Dark toadfish 1 Pacific spookfish 1,2 Spineback 1,2

Dealfish 2 Pale ghost shark 1,2 Spiny dogfish 1,2 Deepsea flathead 2 Pale toadfish 1,2 Swollenhead conger 1, 2 Electric ray 1 Plunket’s shark 2 Tubeshoulder 2 Finless flounder 1,2 Pointynose blue ghost shark 2 Violet cod 1,2 Four-rayed rattail 1,2 Porbeagle shark 1,2 Violet squid 1 Gemfish 1 Prickly deepsea skate 1,2 Viperfish 1,2 Giant stargazer 1,2 Prickly dogfish 1,2 Warty squid 1 Hairy conger 1,2 Ragfish 2 White pointer shark (great white) 2 Hake 1,2 Ray’s bream 1,2 White rattail 1,2 Hoki 1,2 Red cod 1 White warehou 1 Humpback rattail 2 Ribaldo 1,2

1 Trawl surveys (Anderson et al., 1998; Bagley et al., 2000; Hurst et al., 2000a, 2000b; O’Driscoll et al., 2003) 2 McMillan et al., 2011a, 2011b, 2011c 3 Francis, 2017

Species potentially spawning/pupping within the dump site have been provided in Table 2 based on Morrison et al. (2014), Hurst et al. (2000b) and O’Driscoll et al. (2003). Spawning and pupping areas of New Zealand’s fishes are generally not well known as such data are typically difficult to obtain (Hurst et al., 2000b). Detailed information on spawning activity is only well known for a few commercially important species such as orange roughy, hoki, and snapper. Data on the presence of spawning and pupping locations usually relies on reported catch of spent or ripe-running females from research trawls (Hurst et al., 2000b).

Black oreo was the only species identified by O’Driscoll et al. (2003) as potentially spawning within the dump site. Although the Chatham Rise is the only confirmed spawning area for black oreo, spawning of this species has also been recorded off the southeast coast of the South Island, where fish in spawning condition have been observed between September and February (O’Driscoll et al., 2003). Species potentially spawning in and around the dump site are provided in Table 2, with an indication of spawning season also provided where available.

Table 2 Fish Species Potentially Spawning in and around the Dump Site

Species Likely spawning area of relevance to dump site Likely spawning season Red gurnard Most areas around New Zealand December – February School Otago shark Rig Otago Blue cod East coast South Island and Southland Summer and Autumn Red cod East coast South Island Late winter/early spring. Second peak in Autumn Barracouta East coast South Island and Southland November – February Rough skate East coast South Island Source: Hurst et al. (2000b); O’Driscoll et al. (2003)

Page 51

4.3.3.1 Protected Fish Species

Eight species of fish are listed as protected in Schedule 7A of the Wildlife Act 1953. These species are: basking shark, deepwater nurse shark, great white shark, manta ray, oceanic white-tip shark, spiny-tailed devil ray, spotted black grouper, and whale shark. Great white sharks, basking sharks, and oceanic white-tip sharks are also protected under the Fisheries Act 1996 which prohibits New Zealand flagged vessels from taking these species, even beyond the EEZ. Two of these species, namely the great white shark and the basking shark, have the potential to occur within the dump site.

Great white sharks occur widely in New Zealand waters from the subtropical Kermadec Islands to the subantarctic Campbell Island (Francis et al., 2015). Juveniles and adults are known to occur in shallow coastal waters, while sub-adults and adults also utilise waters of the open ocean and around offshore islands and banks (DOC, 2019a). Recent genetic analysis estimates the total abundance of great white sharks in eastern Australia and New Zealand to be ca. 280 – 650 adults with a total population size of ca. 2,500 – 6,750 (Hillary et al., 2018). Due to their long gestation period, low productivity, late maturity, and long lifespan, replenishing lost individuals from a great white shark population is difficult (Francis et al., 2015). Great white sharks became a protected species in New Zealand waters in 2007 and are classified as being ‘Nationally Endangered’ under the New Zealand Threat Classification System (Duffy et al., 2017).

A 10-year great white shark tagging and tracking project undertaken by NIWA and DOC began in 2005 and followed the moment of 95 sharks mostly tagged around Stewart Island and the Chatham Islands. The large- scale migrations of great white sharks were examined using pop-up tags implanted into dorsal fin muscle which recorded depth, temperature and location for up to year. The results showed that migrations occurred from March to September, with individuals moving from aggregation sites at Stewart Island and the Chatham Islands to the tropical and sub-tropical Pacific where they spent at least 5 – 7 months before returning, usually to their original tagging location (Duffy et al., 2012). During their large journey north, New Zealand great white shark populations travelled up to 150 km per day, averaging about 5 km per hour or 100 km per day. The sharks spent two-thirds of their time at the surface, and the other third making repeated dives at depths of 200 – 800 m (NIWA, 2019b).

The tracking data show that the sharks travelled in a remarkably straight line on their migrations, with individuals from the Stewart Island population generally heading northwest of New Zealand, whereas the Chatham Islands sharks generally headed north. There has been no documented direct movement of great white sharks between the Chatham Islands and the east coast of the South Island (Duffy et al., 2012; Francis et al., 2015). Therefore, any great white sharks present at the dump site have likely come from the Stewart Island aggregation sites.

Outside of migration periods, tagging has shown that great white sharks remain over the continental shelf and rarely swim deeper than 100 m (Bonfil et al., 2010). Data from the NIWA/DOC tagging project showed that great white sharks spent 95.6% of their time in water shallower than 50 m and, when near aggregation sites, they rarely ventured deeper than 100 m (Francis et al., 2012). The water depth in the dump site is ~600 – 1200 m which is well beyond this depth.

Basking sharks are known to be more common in colder waters south of 39°S, so there is the potential that these pelagic filter-feeders could occur within the dump site. Basking sharks often inhabit oceans with water depths greater than 600 m, where they may remain for months (Francis, 2017). In New Zealand waters, basking sharks are typically caught as by-catch near or beyond the edge of the continental shelf (Francis & Duffy, 2002). Basking sharks are considered ‘Nationally Vulnerable’ under the New Zealand Threat Classification System (Duffy et al., 2017).

Page 52

4.3.3.2 Freshwater Eels

There are two main species of freshwater eel in New Zealand waters: the endemic long-finned eel (Anguila dieffenbachii) and the short-finned eel (A. australis schmidtii). Long-finned and short-finned eels both occur in freshwater river systems along the South Island’s east coast, with a commercial fishery also occurring along the lower South Island’s east coast. The New Zealand Threat Classification System classifies long-finned eels as ‘At Risk - Declining’ and short-finned eels as ‘Not Threatened’ (Dunn et al., 2018). Both species are commercially harvested and managed under New Zealand’s Quota Management System (Jellyman, 2012). Eels have a catadromous life history and carry out oceanic spawning at great distances from their typical freshwater habitat (Jellyman, 2012). There is limited information regarding the marine component of their lifecycle; however, three distinct migrations have been observed in New Zealand: • Elvers (juvenile two-year-old eels) move from the marine environment into freshwater habitats from October to December, where they remain for the next four to five years (Cairns, 1950); • Following the influx of the elvers, the four- to five-year-old eels begin an upstream migration. This migration occurs annually in January (Cairns, 1950); and • Sexually mature adult eels (known to Māori as tuna heke or tuna whakaheke) migrate to spawning grounds between February and April. Although the exact location and migration route for spawning is not definitively known (as eel spawning has never been observed), adults move to the sub-tropical Pacific Ocean and deep ocean trenches (DOC, 2019b) near Fiji and New Caledonia are thought to be important spawning grounds. Short-finned and long-finned eels breed only once at the end of their life (DOC, 2019b) so there is no southern migration of adults returning to New Zealand.

A fourth, unobserved migration occurs when leptocephalus larvae (transparent leaf-shaped eel larvae) reach New Zealand waters by drifting on ocean currents. They then morph into eel-shaped ‘glass eels’ and move into river mouths and estuaries (Te Ara, 2019b), where they are generally sedentary during their first year in fresh water (Jellyman, 1977). Following a year spent in river mouths and estuaries the glass eels commence their freshwater life-cycle as elvers (see first bullet point, above).

Attempts to track four long-finned eels leaving Te Waihora/Lake Ellesmere using GPS trackers began in May 2000 (Jellyman, 2006); however, the results from these experiments were limited. Three of the tagged eels moved east along the Chatham Rise and the fourth eel’s tag did not transmit until three weeks into the tagging experiment. Upon the start of transmission, the fourth eel was located in Hawke’s Bay, but made a southerly change in direction and travelled south along the Chatham Rise. The tagged eels moved significant vertical distances in the water column and swam at speeds ranging from 26 to 31 km per day (Jellyman, 2006).

A second tracking study of eels tagged in Te Waihora began in May 2001, with ten tagged eels released. Only three tags returned significant information. As with the eels tracked in 2000, those tagged in 2001 carried out regular daily vertical movements within the water column, with two eels frequently swimming to depths of 800 m or more. A tag was retrieved 160 km northeast of New Caledonia, providing the first evidence that spawning grounds for long-finned eels is in the tropics.

Due to their known presence in lower South Island freshwater systems, and lack of information on their marine distribution during their migrations for spawning, the presence of long-finned and short-finned eels within the dump site cannot be ruled out, although adults will only be present in marine waters during migrations between February and April.

Page 53

4.3.4 Cephalopods

Four groups of cephalopods are represented in New Zealand waters: squid (order Teuthida), octopus (order Octopoda), vampire squid (order Vampyromorphida) and cuttlefish (order Sepiida). Octopus and squid are an invaluable food source for a number of bird, mammal, and fish predators, and are typically short lived (1 – 2 years), fast growing and only spawn once before dying (MFish, 2008).

Octopus prefer reef habitats and inshore coastal zones and as such, the dump site is not considered to be an important habitat for octopuses. The majority of squid, vampire squid and cuttlefish species are pelagic and inhabit open water habitat. The cuttlefish, Sepioloidea pacificais, has more of an inshore distribution occurring in soft sediments around coastal New Zealand (Marinelife, 2017).

The New Zealand squid fishery focusses on two species of arrow squid: Gould’s arrow squid (Nototodarus gouldi) and Sloan’s arrow squid (N. sloanii). These species are found across the continental shelf in water depths up to 500 m but are most commonly caught in waters less than 300 m (MPI, 2017). N. sloanii is primarily found along New Zealand’s south-east coast and has been reported on the west coast of the North Island as far north as Cape Egmont where it comprises less than 10% of the arrow squid catch. In comparison, N. gouldi is found off the west and east coasts of the North Island and the central, north-west, and north-east coasts of the South Island as far south as Banks Peninsula (Smith et al., 1987). Waters directly within the dump site are not important areas for the New Zealand squid fishery which is largely focussed around deep-water trawls from southern and sub-Antarctic fishing grounds (Deepwater Group, 2019).

4.3.5 Marine Reptiles

Eight species of marine reptiles have been recorded in New Zealand, but they generally occur in the warmer, temperate waters that flow along the northern and north-eastern coastlines, typically in the summer months. Leatherback turtles have, however, been encountered as far south as Fiordland on the West Coast of the South Island, where they would likely have followed the remnants of the warmer currents which flow eastward across the Tasman Sea and then split to head south down the West Coast. Water temperatures on the southeast coast of the South Island are cooler still due to the influence of colder currents from the south (e.g. the Southland Current) and it is highly unlikely that any marine reptiles will be present within the dump site.

4.3.6 Marine Mammals

Marine mammals include cetaceans (whales, dolphins, and porpoises) and pinnipeds (seals). Cetaceans are particularly elusive creatures which are notoriously difficult to study, predominately due to their large home ranges and the extended periods of time they spend submerged.

Knowledge of marine mammal distribution is typically amassed over long temporal periods using a combination of data collection techniques (e.g. stranding data, opportunistic sightings, systematic survey data, and published literature). As such, it is important to assess multiple data sources when considering marine mammal distributions in any one location. This approach has been used to predict which marine mammal species may be present within the dump site. Data sources for this assessment included: • Sightings data from within the dump site (obtained from the Department of Conservation (DOC) marine mammals sightings database representing sightings from 1969 – May 2019); • Stranding data from the coastline in proximity to the dump site (Oamaru to Kaka Point) (obtained from the DOC marine mammals stranding database representing strandings from 1862 – June 2019); and

Page 54

• Knowledge of migration paths and habitat preferences of each species which overlap with or are in close proximity to the dump site (obtained from published literature).

Figure 13 provides a summary of all marine mammal sightings from the DOC marine mammal sightings database in the offshore Otago area (including the 15 NM area of interest used in this assessment) and Figure 14 shows the DOC marine mammal stranding records along the coastline between Oamaru to Kaka Point used.

Caution should be exercised when interpreting sightings datasets from multiple sources. Importantly, the lack of sightings data in an area does not strictly indicate an absence of marine mammals; rather, this typically reflects a lack of observation effort which may be caused by a low level of boat activity in the area, infrequent dedicated surveys with few or no sightings, or the relative inaccessibility of the area in question.

Similarly, stranding data must also be interpreted with care. Although stranding data gives a broad indication of species occurrence, dead animals can wash ashore well away from where they died. Sick or diseased animals may also be outside their normal distributional range prior to death.

It is important to note that each point shown in Figure 13 and Figure 14 represents a sighting/stranding entry within the DOC database. Each entry can be either an individual sighting/stranding, or a group of any number of marine mammals (e.g. a pod of dolphins). Therefore, each point does not represent the actual number of marine mammals; instead, the figures provide an indication of the distribution of marine mammals. Furthermore, a large number of sightings were recorded in the database without identification to species level. For example, many were recorded simply as ‘unidentified baleen’. These records were not included in the analysis for this Application.

The number of sightings or stranding events for each species is provided in Table 4. The criteria used to assess the likelihood of a species being present in the dump site are presented in Table 3. For the purposes of this Application it is only those species assessed as being ‘likely’, ‘possible’, or ‘occasional visitors’ to the dump site that are considered relevant and an ecological summary for those species is provided in the sub-sections below.

Table 3 Criteria Used to Assess the Likelihood of Cetacean Species Being Present in or around the Dump Site

Criteria Description Likely Species that are represented in the DOC sightings and/or stranding record from the dump site and which are not classified as ‘Vagrant’, or ‘Data Deficient’ in the New Zealand Threat Classification System (Baker et al., 2019). Possible Species that are represented in the DOC sightings and/or stranding record from the dump site and which are classified as ‘Data Deficient’ in the New Zealand Threat Classification System (Baker et al., 2019). Occasional Species that are represented in the DOC sightings and/or stranding record from the dump site but are Visitor listed as ‘Migrant’ in the New Zealand Threat Classification System (Baker et al., 2019). Note that this criterion does not preclude some ‘Migrant’ species from being assessed as being ‘likely’ to occur in the dump site. Rare Visitor Species that are present in the DOC sightings and/or stranding record from the dump site, or reportedly occur in the dump site, or whose known range is directly adjacent to the dump site but are listed as ‘Vagrant’ in the New Zealand Threat Classification System (Baker et al., 2019). Unlikely Those species not represented in the DOC sightings and/or stranding record from the dump site. Note: Where only very small numbers of sightings or stranding’s present in the DOC Stranding’s and Sighting Databases, likelihood determination has been adjusted to take any additional information into consideration.

Page 55

Figure 13 Marine Mammal Sightings in Offshore Otago Waters

Page 56

Figure 14 Marine Mammal Stranding Events between Oamaru to Kaka Point

Page 57

Table 4 Likelihood of Occurrence of Marine Mammals in or around the Dump Site

International Union for New Zealand Conservation DOC Stranding database DOC Sightings database Conservation of Nature DOC Sightings database Status Likely presence in the Common Name Scientific Name Qualifier 1 (IUCN) Conservation Status (No. of reports in (No. of events near dump (No. of reports within dump site surrounding waters 2,3) (Baker et al., 2019) site2) dump site) www.redlist.org

Bottlenose dolphin Tursiops truncatus Nationally endangered De, PF, SO, Sp Least concern ✓ (13)  ✓ (1) Likely Bryde's whale Balaenoptera edeni Nationally critical CD, DP, SO Least concern   ✓ (2) Likely → Unlikely4 Common dolphin Delphinus delphis Not threatened DP,SO Least concern   ✓ (1) Likely → Unlikely4 Dusky dolphin Lagenorhynchus obscurus Not threatened S?O Data deficient ✓ (16)  ✓ (16) Likely False killer whale Pseudorca crassidens Naturally uncommon DP, T?O Data deficient ✓ (1)  ✓ (2) Likely Gray's beaked whale Mesoplodon grayi Not threatened S?O Data deficient ✓ (9)   Likely Killer whale Orcinus orca Nationally critical DP, S?O Data deficient ✓ (4)  ✓ (4) Likely Leopard seal Hydrurga leptonyx Naturally Uncommon De, SO Least concern ✓ (1)   Likely → Rare Visitor4 Long-finned pilot whale Globicephala melas Not threatened DP, S?O Data deficient ✓ (15) ✓ (1) ✓ (10) Likely New Zealand fur seal Arctocephalus forsteri Not threatened Inc, SO Least Concern ✓ (4) ✓ (2) ✓ (46) Likely New Zealand sea lion Phocarctos hookeri Nationally Vulnerable CD, RR Endangered ✓ (7)   Likely → Unlikely4 Southern right whale Eubalaena australis Recovering OL, RR, SO Least concern   ✓ (4) Likely Hector's dolphin Cephalorhynchus hectori Nationally vulnerable CD, DP, PF Endangered ✓ (23)  ✓ (1) Likely → Unlikely4 Andrew's beaked whale Mesoplodonhectori bowdoini Data deficient S?O Data deficient ✓ (2)  ✓ (1) Possible Antarctic minke whale Balaenoptera bonaerensis Data deficient DP, SO Near threatened ✓ (3)   Possible Arnoux's beaked whale Berardius arnuxii Data deficient S?O Data deficient ✓ (1)   Possible Cuvier's beaked whale Ziphius cavirostris Data deficient SO Least concern ✓ (5)   Possible Dwarf minke whale Balaenoptera acutorostrata Data deficient DP, SO Least concern ✓ (3)   Possible Fin whale Balaenoptera physalus Data deficient TO Endangered ✓ (2)  ✓ (1) Possible Hector's beaked whale Mesoplodon hectori Data deficient S?O Data deficient ✓ (1)   Possible Humpback whale Megaptera novaeangliae Migrant SO Least concern ✓ (1)  ✓ (2) Occasional visitor Balaenoptera musculus Pygmy blue whale Data deficient S?O Not assessed  5 ✓ (2)5 Possible brevicauda Pygmy sperm whale Kogia breviceps Data deficient DP, S?O Data deficient ✓ (5)   Possible Sei whale Balaenoptera borealis Data deficient TO Endangered   ✓ (2) Possible Shepherd's beaked whale Tasmacetus shepherdi Data deficient SO Data deficient ✓ (1)  ✓ (3) Possible Short-finned pilot whale Globicephala macrorhynchus Data deficient S?O Data deficient ✓ (1)   Possible → Rare Visitor4 Southern right whale dolphin Lissodelphis peronii Data deficient DP,S?O Data deficient ✓ (1)  ✓ (2) Possible Sperm whale Physeter macrocephalus Data deficient DP, TO Vulnerable ✓ (8)  ✓ (17) Possible Strap-toothed whale Mesoplodon layardii Data deficient S?O Data deficient ✓ (12)   Possible 1 Qualifiers to the New Zealand Threat Classification System are as follows: secure overseas (SO), uncertain whether the taxon is threatened overseas (S?O), threatened overseas (TO), uncertain whether the taxon is threatened overseas (T?O), data poor (DP), conservation dependent (CD), sparse (Sp), range restricted (RR), increasing (Inc), designated (De), one location (OL), population fragmentation (PF). 2 Stranding data from Oamaru to Kaka Point. 3 Sighting data included within the dump site and within a 15 NM area of interest around the dump site to represent ‘surrounding waters.’ (this area is shown in Figure 13). 4 Likelihood determination has been adjusted to take into consideration other distributional knowledge. 5 The number of sightings of blue whales is difficult to interpret as the DOC Sighting Database records most sightings as Balaenoptera musculus (i.e. without subspecies identification). Based on the recent findings of Torres et al. (2013), it is likely that the majority of sightings are of Balaenoptera musculus brevicauda (pygmy blue whales).

Page 58

4.3.6.1 Baleen Whales (suborder Mysticeti)

4.3.6.1.1 Southern right whale (Eubalaena australis)

Southern right whales are slow-moving whales that can reach 15 – 18 m in length. They have a seasonal distribution and spend summer months feeding in latitudes between 40 and 50 °S (Oshumi & Kasamatsu, 1986) before moving north in late autumn to coastal breeding grounds (Braham & Rice, 1984). Southern right whales feed predominantly on zooplankton, particularly dense euphausiid (krill) and copepod aggregations (Tormosov et al., 1998; Rowantree et al., 2008) in the upper 100 m of the water column (Braham & Rice, 1984).

Southern right whales are the only baleen whale known to breed in New Zealand waters. During winter months calving occurs in coastal waters around mainland New Zealand whereas in summer they migrate to the Southern Ocean (sub-Antarctic and Campbell Islands) to feed. Mother/calf pairs have been recorded from Otago coastal waters in winter (Patenaude, 2003); however, Port Ross in the sub-Antarctic Auckland Islands supports the densest breeding aggregation of this species around New Zealand (Rayment et al., 2012).

While no strandings of southern right whales have been reported near the dump site and there have been no sightings within the dump site, four sightings have occurred in the surrounding waters. Based on the criteria in Table 3 and the data in Table 4 it is considered likely that southern right whales will be present within the dump site.

4.3.6.1.2 Minke whales (Balaenoptera acutorostrata and Balaenoptera bonaerensis)

Worldwide, there are two species of minke whale and one sub-species: the northern minke (Balaenoptera acutorostrata) (confined to northern hemisphere), the Antarctic or southern minke (Balaenoptera bonaerensis) (confined to the southern hemisphere including New Zealand waters) and a sub-species, the dwarf minke (Balaenoptera acutorostrata) (present in New Zealand waters).

The DOC sighting and stranding data indicate that the distribution of minke whales extends around mainland New Zealand and throughout New Zealand’s sub-Antarctic waters.

Three Antarctic minke whales and four dwarf minke whales have stranded on the coastline near the dump site. No minke whale sightings have been reported within the dump site or in the surrounding waters. Based on the stranding data, it is considered possible that minke whales will be present within the dump site.

4.3.6.1.3 Sei whale (Balaenoptera borealis)

Adult sei whales range in length from 15 – 18 m and weigh 20 – 25 tonnes. They are among the fastest swimming cetaceans and tend to prefer warmer water temperatures (8 – 18 °C) than other baleen whales (Mizroch et al., 1984a; Horwood, 2009). Sei whales from the South Pacific migrate to sub-Antarctic feeding grounds during late summer, spending the remainder of the year in sub-tropical waters (Miyashita et al., 1995). They usually occur in offshore, deep waters beyond the continental slope (Horwood, 2009) where they feed at the surface on krill, copepods, and small fish (Baker, 1999). Berkenbusch et al. (2013) indicates that sightings of this species around New Zealand may be more common during summer and autumn months.

There have been two sightings of sei whales near the dump site but no sightings within the dump site and no recorded strandings of this species along the nearby coastline. Based on the criteria in Table 3 and the data in Table 4 it is considered possible that sei whales will be present within the dump site.

Page 59

4.3.6.1.4 Fin whale (Balaenoptera physalus)

The fin whale is the second largest marine mammal, second only to the blue whale, reaching up to 27 m in length (Mizroch et al., 1984b; Shirihai & Jarrett, 2006). Fin whales, like other baleen whales, migrate to high latitudes (between 50–65°S) to feed in summer (Miyashita et al., 1995), and return to warmer waters at lower latitudes in winter to breed. They are not commonly observed in New Zealand coastal waters (Dawson, 1985).

Two fin whale strandings have been reported from the coastline near the dump site and one sighting has been reported in waters surrounding the dump site. No sightings have occurred within the dump site. Based on the criteria in Table 3 and the data in Table 4 it is considered possible that fin whales will be present within the dump site.

4.3.6.1.5 Blue whales (Balaenoptera musculus)

Two subspecies of blue whale are known from New Zealand waters: the pygmy blue whale (B. musculus brevicauda) and the Antarctic blue whale (B. musculus intermedia). These two subspecies display differences in the length of their tail stock, length of their baleen and blowhole shape (Todd, 2014; Shirihai & Jarrett, 2006). In the field, they are difficult to distinguish and scientists often rely on acoustics or genetic sampling to confirm identification of animals to sub-species level (Samaran et al., 2010; Attard et al., 2012).

Blue whales are present around most of New Zealand including the east coast of the South Island (Berkenbusch et al., 2013). Krill make up the majority of their diet which they capture via lunge feeding at the surface or to depths of 100 m. Blue whales vocalise at a low frequency (average of 0.01 – 0.110 kHz but some calls have a precursor of 0.4 kHz) (McDonald et al., 2001; Miller et al., 2013) resulting in their vocalisations being able to travel hundreds of kilometres through the water. Blue whale calls can reach levels of up to 188 dB re 1ɥPa m-1 (Aroyan et al., 2000; Cummings & Thompson, 1971).

There have been two sightings of pygmy blue whales in the waters surrounding the dump site. No strandings have been reported near the dump site and no sightings have occurred within the dump site. Based on the criteria in Table 3 and the data in Table 4 it is considered possible that pygmy blue whales will be present within the dump site.

4.3.6.1.6 Humpback whale (Megaptera novaeangliae)

Humpback whales are baleen whales belonging to the rorqual family. They are listed at ‘migrant’ under the New Zealand Thread classification System (Baker et al., 2019). Humpback whales undertake the longest migration of any mammal (Jackson et al., 2014), feeding in the circumpolar waters of the Antarctic in summer and migrating to breeding grounds in sub-tropical or tropical waters in winter (Dawbin, 1956). Individuals from the ‘Southwest Pacific Ocean’ population migrate northwards up the east coast of the South Island from May to August (Gibbs & Childerhouse, 2000). The southward migration routes are less well known but offshore movement down the east coast of New Zealand tends to occur from September to December (NZGeo.com, 2016).

There have been two sightings of humpback whales in the waters surrounding the dump site and one stranding has been reported along the nearby coastline. Based on the criteria in Table 3 and the data in Table 4 it is considered that humpback whales may be occasional visitors to the dump site.

Page 60

4.3.6.1.7 Bryde’s whale (Balaenoptera edeni) Bryde’s whales are baleen whales which generally occupy coastal habitats but can live in the open ocean. They prefer warmer waters and have a latitudinal range extending from 40°N to 40°S (Reikkola, 2013). In New Zealand, Bryde’s whales are observed off the coast generally north of the Bay of Plenty.

There have been two sightings of Bryde’s whales near the dump site but no sightings within the dump site and no recorded strandings of this species along the nearby coastline. Based on the criteria in Table 3 and the data in Table 4 it is considered likely that Bryde’s whales will be present within the dump site; however, this likelihood determination has been adjusted to unlikely based on the distribution of this species, as discussed above.

4.3.6.2 Toothed Whales (suborder Odontoceti)

4.3.6.2.1 Sperm whale (Physeter macrocephalus)

Sperm whales have a wide geographical and latitudinal distribution but are predominantly found in deep waters (> 1,000 m) in the open ocean over the continental slope (Berkenbusch et al., 2013). In New Zealand they are resident/semi-resident in Kairoura.

Although all whales have significant cultural importance in New Zealand, sperm whales in particular are regarded as chiefly figures of the ocean realm and are commonly recognised as taonga (treasure) to all Māori.

Eight sperm whale strandings have been reported from the coastline near the dump site, and 17 sightings have been reported in the waters surrounding the dump site but no sightings within the dump site. Based on the criteria in Table 3 and the data in Table 4 it is considered possible that sperm whales will be present within the dump site.

4.3.6.2.2 Pygmy sperm whales (Kogia breviceps)

Pygmy sperm whales can grow up to 3.5 m in length and weigh up to 400 kg. They are seldom seen at sea on account of their low profile in the water and lack of a visible blow; for this reason, little information is available on this species. They are, however, known to be a deep-water species (Taylor et al., 2012).

Little is known of the acoustics of pygmy sperm whales. However, data collected from live stranded animals has indicated the existence of two types of vocalisations: high frequency clicks which range from 500 Hz to 12 kHz and ‘grunts’ of approximately 3 kHz.

No sightings of pygmy sperm whales have been recorded within, or in the vicinity of, the dump site; however, four strandings of pygmy sperm whales have been reported along the coast inshore of the dump site. Based on the criteria in Table 3 and the data in Table 4 it is considered possible that pygmy sperm whales will be present within the dump site.

4.3.6.2.3 Beaked whales (Family Ziphiidae)

Due to limited sightings at sea, very little is known about the distribution of beaked whales within New Zealand’s EEZ. Thirteen species of beaked whales are present in New Zealand (Baker et al., 2016); however, it is difficult to identify specific habitat types and behaviours for each individual species as most of the information comes from stranded whales and, in some cases, this provides the only knowledge that they exist within New Zealand waters. Recent expeditions off the Otago coast have, however, resulted in sightings of Shepherd’s beaked whales in the waters of the Taiaroa and Saunders Canyons (Gibb, 2016).

Page 61

Table 5 outlines the beaked whale species that have stranded inshore of the dump site or have been observed at sea in the vicinity and provides a brief account of the ecology of each species. In general, beaked whales are deep divers and feed predominately on deep-water squid and fish species (Berkenbusch et al., 2013). They are mostly found in small groups in cool, temperate waters with a preference for deep ocean waters or continental slope habitats at depths down to 3,000 m. From the assessment provided in Table 5, the following conclusions can be drawn for the proposed dumping activity: • Gray's beaked whale is likely to be present within the dump site; and • Strap-toothed whale, Cuvier’s beaked whale, Andrew's beaked whale, Shepherd's beaked whale, Hector’s beaked whale and Arnoux's beaked whale could possibly be present within the dump site.

Table 5 Beaked Whale Ecology of Relevance to the Dump Site

Species No. of stranding No. of Ecology events near sightings near dump site dump site Gray's beaked whale 9 0 A Southern hemisphere species with a circumpolar (Mesoplodon grayi) distribution south of 30°. Many sightings are from Antarctic and sub-Antarctic waters. Many stranding records are from coastline of New Zealand implying they may be fairly common here. Occurs in deep waters beyond the shelf edge (Taylor et al., 2008a). Strap-toothed whale 12 0 Occur between 35-60°S in cold temperate waters. (Mesoplodon layardii) Stranding seasonality suggest this species may migrate. Prefer deep waters beyond the shelf edge. Probably not as rare as other Mesoplodon sp. (Taylor et al., 2008b). Feeds on squid (Sekiguchi et al., 1996). Cuvier's beaked whale 5 0 Thought to have the largest range of any beaked (Ziphius cavirostris) whale; found in deep waters (> 200 m) of all oceans in both hemispheres. Thought to prefer steep bathymetry near the continental slope in water depths greater than 1,000 m. Feed mostly on squid and dive up to 40 minutes. Global abundance is likely to be well over 100,000 (Taylor et al., 2008c). Genetic studies suggest little movement of individuals between ocean basins (Dalebout et al., 2005). Andrew's beaked whale 2 1 Found between 32°S and 55°S in the southern (Mesoplodon bowdoini) hemisphere. Presumed to inhabit deep, offshore waters (Pitman, 2002). Based on the global stranding record, New Zealand might represent an area of concentration (Taylor et al., 2008d).

Page 62

Species No. of stranding No. of Ecology events near sightings near dump site dump site Shepherd's beaked whale 1 3 A circumpolar distribution in cold temperate waters (Tasmacetus shepherdi) is presumed. All stranding events have occurred south of 30°S, the majority from New Zealand. Thought to be relatively rare. Occur in deep water usually well offshore. Diet contains fish, squid and crabs (Taylor et al., 2008e). Note that this species has recently been seen in waters of the Taiaroa and Saunders Canyons in coastal Otago (Gibb, 2016). Hector’s beaked whale 1 0 A southern hemisphere species found south of the (Mesoplodon hectori) Tropic of Capricorn. Majority of records are from New Zealand waters. Unlike most beaked whales, it is thought that this species may behave inquisitively around boats. Despite this behaviour there has only been one confirmed live sighting, suggesting Hector’s beaked whales are naturally rare. Feeds primarily on deepwater squid off the continental shelf (WDC, 2019). Arnoux's beaked whale 1 0 Circumpolar distribution in deep, cold temperate (Berardius arnuxii) and sub-polar waters. Considered to be naturally rare throughout its range; however, higher densities may occur seasonally in Cook Strait (Taylor et al., 2008f). New Zealand has the highest number of stranding recorded for this species (Jefferson et al., 1993).

4.3.6.2.4 Hector’s dolphin (Cephalorhynchus hectori hectori and C. hectori maui)

Hector’s dolphins are endemic to New Zealand waters and at 1.2 – 1.5 m in length they are one of the smallest cetaceans in the world. There are two sub-species of Hector’s dolphin: South Island Hector’s dolphin (C. hectori hectori) and Maui’s dolphin (C. hectori maui). Maui’s dolphins are restricted to the west coast of the North Island (Slooten et al., 2005) and will therefore not be present within or around the dump site.

The East Coast South Island Hector’s dolphin population is relevant to the dump site and this population extends from Farewell Spit to Nugget Point. It is estimated to consist of around 9,000 individuals (Mackenzie & Clement, 2014). Animals belonging to this population shift their distribution on a seasonal basis, with dolphin abundances being higher south of Banks Peninsula in winter, while during other seasons dolphin abundance is greater to the north.

They use echolocation clicks (including ‘cries’ or ‘squeals’) to locate prey and to communicate. These vocalisations are centred around frequencies of 120-125 kHz (Thorpe & Dawson, 1990).

Hector’s dolphins generally show a preference for shallow, murky waters and display high site fidelity. They are frequently found near the mouths of rivers and have small home ranges of approximately 30 – 50 km along shore (Bräger et al., 2003; Rayment et al., 2009; Dawson & Slooten, 1988).

Page 63

Mackenzie & Clement (2014) reported on a survey programme specifically designed to sample the East Coast South Island Hector’s dolphin population which completed two aerial surveys over summer 2012/2013 and winter 2013. The survey area, which spanned from Farewell Spit to Nugget Point and covered approximately 42,677 km2, was stratified into eight coastal sections with offshore substrata of 0-4 NM (inner), 4-12 NM (middle) and 12-20 NM (outer). The results showed that almost half of the East Coast South Island population in summer and three-quarters in winter occurred beyond 4 NM from the coast with some sightings occurring on or near the 20 NM survey boundary (Mackenzie & Clement, 2014). However, the results also showed that the maximum depth at which sightings of Hector’s dolphins occurred was 150 m in summer and 100 m in winter. This supports Slooten et al., (2006) who reported that Hector’s dolphins are generally regarded as a coastal species occurring within the 100 m isobaths.

The closest boundary of the dump site lies approximately 24 NM from the coast which is outside the core coastal distribution of Hector’s dolphins. Furthermore, the shallowest part of the dump site has a depth of approximately 600 m, which is considerably greater than the depth distribution of Hector’s dolphins.

No sightings of Hector’s dolphins have been recorded within the dump site. There has been one sighting in the surrounding waters and there are 23 stranding events reported along the nearby coastline. Based on this information, one could conclude that it is possible that Hector’s dolphins could occur within the dump site; however, as discussed above, this species is not known to frequent waters that are deeper than 150 m and, given the shallowest part of the dump is 600 m deep, the likelihood determination for Hector’s dolphins occurring in the dump site has been adjusted to unlikely.

4.3.6.2.5 Common dolphin (Delphinus delphis)

Common dolphins are distributed around the entire New Zealand coastline, generally remaining within a few kilometres of the coast (Berkenbusch et al., 2013). The total abundance of the New Zealand population is unknown (Berkenbusch et al., 2013) although based on the frequency of sightings it is likely that numbers are substantial. Common dolphins occur in water depths ranging from 6 – 141 m (Constantine & Baker, 1997) and are highly social, often forming large groups consisting of thousands of individuals (Stockin, 2008). Common dolphins feed on a variety of prey which are generally under 10 cm in length; the primary prey species of common dolphins in New Zealand are jack mackerel, anchovy, and arrow squid (Meynier et al., 2008).

There have been no live sightings of common dolphins recorded within the dump site and no stranding events have been reported along the nearby coastline. However there has been a single sighting of this species in waters surrounding the dump site. Based on the criteria in Table 3 and the data in Table 4 it is considered likely that common dolphins will be present within the dump site; however, as was done for the Hector’s dolphin discussed in the previous section, this likelihood determination has been adjusted to unlikely based on the distribution of this species being typically restricted to much shallower coastal waters than occurs within the dump site.

4.3.6.2.6 Pilot whales (Globicephala macrorhynchus and G. melas)

There are two species of pilot whale: the long-finned pilot whale (G. melas) and the short-finned pilot whale (G. macrorhynchus). Of these, long-finned pilot whales are most likely to occur in New Zealand waters as short- finned pilot whales prefer warmer sub-tropical habitat (Berkenbusch et al., 2013). Pilot whales are highly social, often travelling in large groups of over 100 individuals (DOC, 2019c) and sightings occur in New Zealand waters during all seasons (Berkenbusch et al., 2013). These whales commonly strand on New Zealand coasts and stranding rates peak in spring and summer (O’Callaghan et al., 2001). Pilot whales feed predominantly on cephalopods (Olson, 2009).

Page 64

No sightings of short-finned pilot whales have been made in or around the dump site and only one stranding event has been documented for this species inshore of the dump site. Based on the criteria in Table 3 and the data in Table 4 it is considered possible that short-finned pilot whales will be present within the dump site; however, this likelihood determination has been adjusted to rare visitor based on this species preferring warmer sub-tropical waters.

Long-finned pilot whales are more frequently encountered, with one sighting inside the dump site, 10 sightings in the surrounding waters, and 15 stranding events along the nearby coastline. Based on this information, it is considered likely that long-finned pilot whales will occur within the dump site.

In addition, 11 sightings of pilot whales that were not identified to species level have been made in waters surrounding the dump site. Given the bias towards long-finned pilot whales in both the sighting and stranding records, long-finned pilot whales are the more likely of the two species to be present during the proposed dumping activity.

4.3.6.2.7 Dusky dolphin (Lagenorhynchus obscurus)

The dusky dolphin is a compact medium-sized dolphin which can measure up to 2.1 m in length. Dusky dolphins are a Southern Hemisphere species present year-round in New Zealand waters (Berkenbusch et al., 2013). They occur in waters above the continental slope and shelf in water depths less than 2,000 m, usually in the cooler waters of the South Island and lower North Island, spending more time in offshore waters during winter months (Wűrsig et al., 2007). Little is known about dusky dolphin movements, but photo-identification data confirms that individuals travel up to 1,000 km between locations around the South Island (Wűrsig et al., 2007).

Dusky dolphins produce bi-modal echolocation signals with a low frequency peak at 40-50 kHz and a high frequency peak at 80 to 110 kHz. These frequencies are amongst the highest recorded in the field for dolphins (Au & Wűrsig, 2004).

Sixteen sightings of dusky dolphins have been made in waters surrounding the dump site and 17 stranding events have been documented for this species inshore of the dump site. Based on the criteria in Table 3 and the data in Table 4 it is considered likely that dusky dolphins will be present within the dump site.

4.3.6.2.8 Southern right whale dolphin (Lissodelphis peronii)

Southern right whale dolphins are thought to be circumpolar and common throughout their range (Lipsky, 2002). They prefer deep, offshore waters (Lipsky, 2002) where they feed on a variety of fish and squid (Jefferson et al., 2008). There have been few sightings of southern right whale dolphins in New Zealand waters although large groups (500 – 1,000) have been reported with the majority of sightings occurring off Otago and further south (Berkenbusch et al., 2013).

Two southern right whale dolphin sightings have been reported near the dump site and one stranding has been reported from the coastline near the dump site. Based on the criteria in Table 3 and the data in Table 4 it is considered possible that southern right whale dolphins will be present within the dump site.

Page 65

4.3.6.2.9 Killer whale (Orcinus orca)

Killer whales are the largest member of the dolphin family; males can grow to 6 – 8 m and weigh in excess of six tonnes. Small groups of killer whales are typically found around New Zealand where they travel an average of 100 – 150 km per day (Visser, 2000). The resident New Zealand killer whale population is small (mean = 119 ± 24 SE) with broad distribution patterns around both North and South Islands (Visser, 2000). Killer whales form social groups ranging from larger temporary aggregations of over 20 individuals (Ford, 2009) to small, stable family units (Berkenbush et al., 2013).

Killer whales are known to echolocate and to produce tonal sounds (whistles). The whistles of wild killer whales have been noted to possess an average dominant frequency of 8.3 kHz and to generally last 1.8 s (Thomsen et al., 2001). Variations of these whistles (described as dialects) have been documented between pods (Deecke et al., 2000). In addition, the use of echolocation has also been demonstrated to vary between orca groups, depending on the target prey species of a particular group (Barrett-Lennard et al., 1996).

Four killer whale sightings have occurred in waters surrounding the dump site and four strandings have been reported from the coastline near the dump site. Based on the criteria in Table 3 and the data in Table 4 it is considered likely that southern right whale dolphins will be present within the dump site.

4.3.6.2.10 False killer whale (Pseudorca crassidens)

False killer whales are widespread in tropical and warm temperate waters (Baird, 2009). They are mostly found in deep, offshore waters but also occasionally over the continental shelf (Berkenbusch et al., 2013).

Two false killer whale sightings have occurred in waters surrounding the dump site and one stranding has been reported from the coastline near the dump site. Based on the criteria in Table 3 and the data in Table 4 it is considered likely that false killer whales will be present within the dump site.

4.3.6.2.11 Bottlenose dolphin (Tursiops truncatus)

Bottlenose dolphins range from 2.4 – 4 m in length and weigh 250 – 650 kg. They occur globally in cold temperate and tropical seas, with New Zealand representing the southernmost extent of their range (DOC, 2019d). Bottlenose dolphins occur in shallow coastal regions, including inshore waters, estuaries and lagoons (Berkenbusch et al., 2013) and although considered a coastal species, their distribution does extend to some offshore areas around oceanic islands (Jefferson et al., 2008).

There has been one sighting of a bottlenose dolphin in the waters surrounding the dump site and 13 recorded strandings along the coastline near the dump site. Based on the criteria in Table 3 and the data in Table 4 it is considered likely that bottlenose dolphins will be present within the dump site.

4.3.6.3 Pinnipeds

New Zealand fur seals, New Zealand sea lions, and leopard seals are the only pinniped species that may occur in the dump site.

Page 66

4.3.6.3.1 New Zealand fur seal (Arctocephalus forsteri)

New Zealand fur seals are native to both New Zealand and Australia and are the most commonly occurring pinniped within New Zealand waters where they are widespread around rocky coastlines on the mainland and offshore islands. New Zealand fur seals forage for food along continental shelf breaks up to 200 km offshore but are generally distributed inshore, in water depths of less than 100 m. They are known to dive for up to 12 minutes (~ 200 m) to feed on fish (small mid-water fish, conger eels, barracouta, jack mackerel and hoki), squid and octopus. Females tend to forage over continental shelf waters up to 78 km from breeding colonies (Harcourt et al., 1995), with males using deeper continental shelf breaks and pelagic waters (Page et al., 2005).

Numerous breeding colonies occur across the Otago region where they are spread over 200 km of coastline from Moeraki in North Otago to Cosgrove Island, The Catlins (Lalas & Bradshaw, 2001). From pup production data at these colonies, the Otago population size for this species is estimated to be 20,000 to 30,000 fur seals (Lalas, 2008).

There have been two sightings of New Zealand fur seals within the dump site, 46 sightings in waters surrounding the dump site, and two recorded strandings on the nearby coastline. Based on the criteria in Table 3 and the data in Table 4 it is considered likely that New Zealand fur seals will be present within the dump site.

4.3.6.3.2 New Zealand sea lion (Phocarctos hookeri)

The New Zealand sea lion, also known as Hooker's sea lion, is one of the world’s rarest pinnipeds. It is endemic to New Zealand and historically, has inhabited the entire New Zealand coastline down to the New Zealand sub- Antarctic Islands (Childerhouse & Gales, 1998). Today, the breeding range of New Zealand sea lions is largely restricted to the sub-Antarctic although recolonization of mainland New Zealand and Stewart Island has recently begun (Childerhouse & Gales, 1998). Two percent of all sea lion pups are now born at Stewart Island and on the Otago and Catlins coasts (DOC, 2017).

Female New Zealand sea lions are the deepest and longest diving of all the otariids (eared seals) and spend approximately 53% of their time at sea submerged (Chilvers et al., 2006). Auckland Island sea lions typically forage along the continental shelf and shelf edge (Chilvers et al., 2005) with their diet consisting of a variety of benthic and pelagic species (Meynier et al., 2010). In contrast, female sea lions at Otago Peninsula typically forage closer to the coast with barracouta and jack mackerel contributing the greatest biomass to their diets (Auge et al., 2011).

No sightings of New Zealand sea lions have been made in or around the dump site; however, there have been seven recorded strandings on the nearby coastline. Based on the criteria in Table 3 and the data in Table 4 it is considered likely that New Zealand sea lions will be present within the dump site. This likelihood determination has, however, been adjusted to unlikely as the majority of their foraging along the Otago coast is predicted to occur inshore of the dump site.

4.3.6.3.3 Leopard seal (Hydrurga leptonyx)

The leopard seal is a dark blue-grey Antarctic seal which can reach up to 3.8 m in length. Throughout the austral spring and summer leopard seals are typically found around the Antarctic pack ice; however, come autumn and winter they disperse northwards away from Antarctic waters towards the Southern Ocean where they are occasionally observed along New Zealand’s coastline. Leopard seals breed between November and January on the Antarctic pack ice and lactation is thought to last one month.

Page 67

There have been no sightings of leopard seals within the dump site or in the surrounding waters according to the DoC database but one stranding has been recorded on the nearby coastline. Based on the criteria in Table 3 and the data in Table 4 it is considered likely that New Zealand leopard seals will be present within the dump site; however, this likelihood determination has been adjusted to rare visitor as leopard seals are considered to be naturally uncommon (Baker et al., 2019).

4.3.7 Seabirds

Seabirds are birds which spend some part of their life-cycle feeding over open marine water. Worldwide, seabirds are more threatened than any other comparable bird groups (28% are threatened globally) and pelagic (open ocean) seabirds are at higher risk than coastal seabirds as a result of their comparatively small clutch size (Croxall et al., 2012).

There are 86 species of seabirds which breed in New Zealand waters, including albatross, cormorants, shags, fulmars, petrels, prions, shearwaters, terns, gulls, penguins and skuas (Farr Biswell, 2007). Approximately 60% of New Zealand’s seabirds regularly forage more than 50 km from shore, while the remainder feed over inshore waters and are only occasionally sighted away from land (Taylor, 2000).

Knowledge of the at-sea distribution of New Zealand’s seabird species is limited and generally restricted to targeted studies and observations from commercial fishing vessels (Richard et al., 2011). Since 2004, independent fisheries observers working off commercial fishing vessels have been making regular counts of the number of seabirds surrounding fishing vessels. These data are coordinated by DOC and groomed by Dragonfly Science (Richard et al., 2011); however, they must be interpreted with some caution. This is because counts are made while on-board actively fishing vessels therefore sightings will favour those species that are known to approach and follow fishing vessels. The most abundant seabird groups, based on observer records, throughout New Zealand’s EEZ between January 2004 and June 2009 are shown in Figure 15.

A range of references (e.g. Scofield & Stephenson, 2013; Robertson et al., 2017; New Zealand Birds Online, 2019) have been used to identify the seabirds that are most likely to be observed in and around the dump site. Like many marine mammals, seabirds have a large home range so their presence within the dump site is not guaranteed and is likely to be transient. DOC has assessed each New Zealand seabird species and assigned a threat classification. A summary of the seabirds which are most likely to be in and around the dump site are presented in Table 6 including their threat classifications (both the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) and New Zealand threat status).

Page 68

Figure 15 Most Abundant Seabird Groups Throughout New Zealand’s EEZ Based on Observer Records Between January 2004 and June 2009

Source: Richard et al., 2011

Page 69

Table 6 Seabirds that are most likely to be Present in and around the Dump Site

Common name Scientific name IUCN threat New Zealand threat status status (Robertson et al., 2017) Antipodean albatross Diomedea antipodensis antipodensis Vulnerable Nationally critical Gibson’s albatross Diomedea antipodensis gibsoni Not assessed Nationally critical Salvin’s mollymawk Thalassarche salvini Vulnerable Nationally critical Yellow-eyed penguin Megadyptes antipodes Endangered Nationally endangered Campbell Island mollymawk Thalassarche impavida Vulnerable Nationally vulnerable Hutton’s shearwater Puffinus huttoni Endangered Nationally vulnerable Sooty shearwater/Muttonbird Puffinus griseus Near threatened Declining White-capped/shy Thalassarche cauta steadi Not assessed Declining mollymawk Northern giant petrel Macronectes halli Least concern Recovering Broad-billed prion Pachyptla vittata Least concern Relict Cook’s petrel Pterodroma cookii Vulnerable Relict Fairy prion Pachyptila turtur Least concern Relict Fluttering shearwater Puffinus gavia Least concern Relict Grey-backed storm petrel Garrodia nereis Least concern Relict Mottled petrel Pterodroma inexpectata Near threatened Relict White-faced storm petrel Pelagodroma marina maoriana Least concern Relict Antarctic prion Pachyptila desolata Least concern Naturally uncommon Brown skua/southern skua Catharacta antarctica lonnbergi Least concern Naturally uncommon Buller’s mollymawk Thalassarche bulleri bulleri Not assessed Naturally uncommon Buller’s shearwater Puffinus bulleri Vulnerable Naturally uncommon Chatham Island mollymawk Thalassarche eremita Vulnerable Naturally uncommon Grey petrel Procellaria cinerea Near threatened Naturally uncommon Fulmar prion Pachyptila crassirostris crassirostris Least concern Naturally uncommon Northern royal albatross Diomedea sanfordi Endangered Naturally uncommon Snare’s petrel Daption capense australe Not assessed Naturally uncommon Southern royal albatross Diomedea epomophora Vulnerable Naturally uncommon Antarctic/Southern fulmar Fulmarus glacialoides Least concern Migrant Arctic skua Stercorarius parasiticus Least concern Migrant Cape petrel Daption capense capense Least concern Migrant Pomarine skua/jaeger Coprotheres pomarinus Least concern Migrant Snowy albatross Diomedea exulans Vulnerable Migrant Southern giant petrel Macronectes giganteus Least concern Migrant

Page 70

Common name Scientific name IUCN threat New Zealand threat status status (Robertson et al., 2017) Wilson’s storm petrel Oceanites oceanicus Least concern Migrant Black-browed mollymawk Thalassarche melanophris Least concern Coloniser Australasian gannet Morus serrator Least concern Not threatened Grey-faced petrel Pterodroma gouldi Least concern Not threatened White-chinned petrel Procellaria aequinoctialis Vulnerable Not threatened White-headed petrel Pterodroma lessonii Least concern Not threatened

4.3.7.1 Foraging and Movements of Particularly Important Species

Due to their significant cultural importance to the people of Ngāi Tahu and the Otago region, further details on the foraging behaviours of sooty shearwaters, yellow-eyed penguins, and royal albatrosses are discussed below.

4.3.7.1.1 Sooty Shearwater

Sooty shearwaters are common south of Banks Peninsula and are known to congregate in flocks of tens of thousands in the waters around Stewart Island and the lower South Island. At sea, increased sooty shearwater abundance has been observed in areas with rich zooplankton communities (particularly in the subantarctic) and foraging sites have been correlated to areas of increased upwelling, primary production and prey availability. In addition, foraging site fidelity has been demonstrated in this species with individuals returning to the same sites over successive years (Raymond et al., 2010).

Sooty shearwater breeding colonies are distributed around the south of New Zealand and Stewart Island. Stewart Island and its outliers host numerous sooty shearwater breeding colonies as does the Otago coastline (12 mainland colonies with up to 620 burrows (Hamilton et al., 1997)).

Sooty shearwaters breed in New Zealand in the austral summer, migrate to the North Pacific in autumn, and return to New Zealand in spring (Spear & Ainley, 1999). While at New Zealand breeding colonies, breeding birds follow a cycle of foraging trips, alternating between long (11 – 14 day) and short (1 – 2 day) voyages (Shaffer et al., 2009). Sooty shearwaters typically travel to cold oceanic waters of the Polar Front during the longer foraging trips, while the birds will remain in warmer neritic waters along New Zealand’s shelf during the shorter foraging trips.

Following the breeding season, some sooty shearwaters are known to undergo migrations to the North Pacific (Figure 16) from approximately 35°N to the Bering Sea (Shaffer et al., 2006; Scofield & Stephenson, 2013). This Pacific migration phase is understood to last 192 ± 17 days (Shaffer et al., 2006), during which time the birds follow a figure-eight track thought to be influenced by wind circulation and the Coriolis effect (Shaffer et al., 2006). Birds travel northwards between March-May and return to New Zealand breeding colonies in September- December (Spear & Ainley, 1999).

During short foraging trips, sooty shearwaters travel 515 km (± 248 km) from the colony (Shaffer et al., 2009), and are therefore likely to utilise waters of the dump site during these foraging trips.

Page 71

Figure 16 Sooty Shearwater Migration Tracks from New Zealand Breeding Colonies

Source: Shaffer et al., 2006 Note: Light blue = interpolated geolocation tracks of sooty shearwaters during breeding; yellow = start of migration and northward transit; orange = wintering grounds and southward transit.

4.3.7.1.2 Yellow-eyed Penguins

The endemic yellow-eyed penguin (Megadyptes antipodes) occurs off the south-east of the South Island, Stewart Island, Campbell Island and Auckland Islands (New Zealand Birds Online, 2019). They breed along the southeast coast of the South Island and their breeding locations include four distinct areas: the Catlins, Otago Peninsula, North Otago and Banks Peninsula (New Zealand Birds Online, 2019). Their breeding locations are inshore of the dump site.

Yellow-eyed penguins can cover large distances during foraging trips (Wilson, 1995). Foraging behaviour of yellow-eyed penguins from colonies in Oamaru (Mattern et al., 2007) and the Otago Peninsula (Moore, 1999) was investigated using GPS tracking devices fitted to penguins. Mattern et al. (2007) recorded penguins travelling up to 20 km from the coast, while Moore (1999) recorded foraging trips up to 57 km from Otago Peninsula colonies. Mattern et al. (2007) further looked at the penguin’s foraging strategy and reported that this species feeds exclusively on the seabed., diving to depths of up to 120 m to obtain bottom-dwelling fish species, cephalopods, and crustaceans (New Zealand Birds Online, 2019). Based on this foraging depth it is unlikely that yellow-eyed penguins will be present in the dump site waters.

Page 72

4.3.7.1.3 Royal Albatross

There are two species of royal albatross: the northern royal albatross and the southern royal albatross. The southern is marginally larger than the northern and the two species can be distinguished at sea by differences in the patterns on their wings. Both species are commonly seen throughout the Southern Ocean and most commonly in New Zealand waters during the winter (Parkinson, 2006; New Zealand Birds Online, 2019).

Royal albatross breed exclusively in New Zealand and egg laying takes place between October and December. The northern royal albatross breeds on the Chatham Islands and at Taiaroa Head on the Otago Peninsula, whereas the southern royal albatross breeds mainly on the subantarctic Auckland and Campbell Islands with a few birds hybridising with its northern counterpart at Taiaroa Head.

Royal albatross cover large distances during foraging trips over the continental shelves and up to shelf edges (up to 190,000 km in a year) (DOC, 2019e; New Zealand Birds Online, 2019). Waugh et al. (2005) carried out GPS tracking of incubating northern royal albatrosses from the Otago Peninsula. Foraging birds were found to favour areas around the shelf breaks off the east coast of the South Island, particularly around areas associated with commercial fishing activity. Incubating birds spent an average of 8.2 days at sea, travelled approximately 2,000 km, and ranged an average distance of 529 km from the colony. While a large number of birds foraged along the Chatham Rise and Mernoo Bank, foraging activity also occurred in the vicinity of the dump site, with waters within 100 km of the colony considered to be particularly important (Waugh et al., 2005). Tracked southern royal albatrosses from Campbell Island colonies showed similar foraging destinations (Waugh et al., 2002). Waugh and Weimerskirch (2003) suggest that royal albatrosses forage over shallower water depths than other albatross species (i.e. wandering albatross), preferring waters shallower than 1,500 m.

Satellite tracking of the foraging range of northern royal albatross suggests birds move within 1,000 km of breeding sites (including Taiaroa Head on the Otago Peninsula) over the continental shelf and shelf edge (Robertson et al., 2003). Most northern royal albatross winter off southern South America (Scofield & Stephenson, 2013) with juvenile northern royal albatross flying north from the Taiaroa Head colony on their migration to the coast of Chile (Thomas et al., 2010). As such, only adult northern royal albatross are expected to utilise the dump site waters.

4.3.7.2 Important Bird Areas

Forest and Bird (2014a) have identified a number of areas within New Zealand as ‘Important Bird Areas’ (IBA) which have been recognised as internationally important for bird conservation. These IBAs have not been officially protected under legislation; rather, their function is to help focus and facilitate conservation action for a network of sites that are significant for the long-term viability of naturally occurring bird populations (Forest & Bird, 2014a).

Only the sites at sea (seaward extensions and pelagic areas) are of relevance to the dump site. Seaward extensions are those areas out from colonies that are important to seabirds, including parts of the marine environment that are used by the colony for feeding, maintenance behaviours and social interactions. The boundaries of these areas are typically limited to the foraging range, depth, and/or habitat preferences of the species concerned; however, the extensions also cover the passage of pelagic species in and out of their colonies (Forest & Bird, 2014a). The Dunedin Coast IBA lies inshore of the dump site and its boundary does not extend as far out as the dump site (shaded red in Figure 17). This site has been identified based on the presence of nesting sites.

Page 73

Figure 17 Boundary of the Dunedin Coast IBA (shaded red)

Source: Forest & Bird (2014a)

The Southern South Island IBA covers the coastline from just south of Timaru down to past Stewart Island, and extends seaward past the North Otago, Dunedin coast and South Otago IBAs towards the dump site (Forest & Bird, 2014a). The Southern South Island IBA meets the following global criteria: • A1 – regular presence of threatened species: i.e. more than threshold numbers of one of more globally threatened species; • A4ii – supports more than 1% of the global population of one or more species; and • A4iii – supports more than 10,000 pairs of seabirds.

The Southern South Island IBA is of particular importance as a foraging area for yellow-eyed penguin, Stewart Island shag, Fiordland penguin, northern royal albatross, white-capped albatross, Salvin’s albatross, Buller’s albatross, Hutton’s shearwater, and sooty shearwater. It is also important for the passage of all of these species, excluding yellow-eyed penguins and Fiordland penguins (Forest & Bird, 2014b). The dump site does not overlap with the Southern South Island IBA, but it is located adjacent to, and in close proximity to, this area (shaded red in Figure 18).

Page 74

Figure 18 Boundary of the Southern South Island IBA (shaded red)

Source: Forest & Bird (2014a)

Page 75

4.4 Sensitive Environments

Schedule 6 of the Exclusive Economic Zone and Continental Shelf (Environmental Effects – Permitted Activities) Regulations 2013 (Permitted Activities Regulations) describes 13 sensitive biogenic environments which were identified by the Ministry for the Environment in consultation with NIWA.

The ‘sensitivity’ of an environment is defined as the tolerance of a species or habitat to damage from an external factor combined with the time taken for its subsequent recovery from damage sustained as a result of the external factor. The rarity of a particular habitat was also taken into account when considering its tolerance; an external factor is more likely to damage a higher proportion of a population or habitat as rarity increases, therefore a rare habitat has a lower tolerance rating (MacDiarmid et al., 2013).

The 2019 EBS conducted by NIWA within the GSB (Beaumont et al., 2019) included an assessment of the presence of sensitive environments. The following sensitive environments were observed during the 2019 EBS at levels that triggered the thresholds within the Permitted Activity Regulations: • Stoney coral thickets or reefs; • Xenophyophores; and • Brachiopods.

In addition to the three sensitive environments listed above, other species’ representative of a sensitive environment were observed but were not at densities to trigger the thresholds identified within the Permitted Activity Regulations. Nevertheless, these observations were taken into account in the following assessment of the likelihood of these being present in the dump site.

Table 7 provides details on the environments considered sensitive under the Permitted Activities Regulations and the indicators used to identify their presence. An assessment of the potential presence of each sensitive environment within the dump site is also provided based on the criteria in Table 10.

Page 76

Table 7 EEZ Permitted Activity Regulations Schedule 6 Sensitive Environment Classification

Sensitive Indicator of existence of sensitive environment Likelihood of sensitive environment occurring in the dump site Environment Beds of large bivalve A bed of large bivalve molluscs exists if living and dead In New Zealand, beds of large bivalves are confined mainly to the continental molluscs specimens – shelf and depths of less than approximately 250 m (Rowden et al., 2012). Suspension feeders are well represented off south-eastern and southern-most • Cover 30% or more of the seabed in a visual imaging survey; New Zealand where surface sediments consist chiefly of modern terrigenous or clean sands and coarser-grained relict terrigenous or biogenic sediment, or • Comprise 30% or more by weight or volume of the catch in a both (McKnight 1969, Rowden et al., 2012). Individual large bivalves were sample collected using towed gear; or observed infrequently during 2019 EBS conducted by NIWA within the GSB (Beaumont et al., 2019) at a seamount site approximately 100 km from the • Comprise 30% or more by weight or volume in successive dump site. However, due to its depth (~750 m – 1,200 m), the likelihood of point samples. beds of large bivalve molluscs occurring within the dump site is considered remote. Brachiopods A brachiopod bed exists if one or more live brachiopods – Brachiopods occur at all depths from the intertidal to the abyss. They predominantly attach to hard in areas of significant water movement, free of • Are found per m² sampled using towed gear; or fine sediment (Lee & Smith 2007, MacFarlan et al., 2009). The majority of • Are found in successive point samples. species occur at depths less than 500 m (MacFarlan et al., 2009). The 2019 EBS conducted by NIWA within the GSB (Beaumont et al., 2019) observed live brachiopods in still images at a seamount site located approximately 100 km from the dump site at densities which triggered the threshold for a sensitive environment. It is considered unlikely that a brachiopod bed will exist within the dump site due to its water depth and that there are no known seamounts within the dump site similar to the type seen within the GSB during the 2019 EBS.

Page 77

Sensitive Indicator of existence of sensitive environment Likelihood of sensitive environment occurring in the dump site Environment Bryozoan thickets A bryozoan thicket exists if – Habitat-forming bryozoans are most common in temperate continental shelf environments (<200 m) on stable substrata in places where water movement • Colonies of large frame-building bryozoan species cover at is relatively fast and consistent (MacDiarmid et al., 2013). On the Otago shelf, least 50% of an area between 10 m² and 100 m²; or bryozoan thickets of small groups of colonies reaching 15 cm in height occur 2 • Colonies of large frame-building bryozoan species cover at at a mean cover of 4% across an area of ~500 km (Batson, 2000; Batson & least 40% of an area that exceeds 10 km²; or Probert 2000; Jones 2006). The 2019 EBS conducted by NIWA within the GSB (Beaumont et al., 2019) observed occasional large frame-building bryozoans • A specimen of a large frame-building bryozoan species is on hard substrates, but not at densities which would trigger the sensitive found in a sample collected using towed gear; or environment classification. • One or more large frame-building bryozoan species is found The known distribution of habitat-forming bryozoans is inshore of the in successive point samples. Saunders and Papanui Canyons and does not include the dump site (see Section Error! Reference source not found.). The likelihood of bryozoan thickets occurring within the dump site is therefore considered rare. Calcareous tube A tube worm thicket exists if – Calcareous tube worm thickets are likely to be rare in New Zealand’s EEZ worm thickets (MacDiarmid et al., 2013). The best described thickets are built by Galeolaria • One or more tube worm mounds per 250 m² are visible in a hystrix, a species which is endemic to southern Australia and New Zealand seabed imaging survey; or (Day & Hutchings, 1979) and extends from the Taranaki Coast down to Stewart • Two or more specimens of a mound-forming species of tube Island (Morton & Miller 1973; Hare, 1992; Smith et al., 2005; Davidson et al., worm are found in a point sample; or 2010). Thickets have been found in shallow water sheltered locations at depths of up to 30 m throughout New Zealand. No calcareous tube worm • Mound-forming species of tube worm comprise 10% or more mounds/thickets were observed during the 2019 EBS conducted by NIWA by weight or volume of a towed sample. within the GSB (Beaumont et al., 2019). There is no evidence of any calcareous tube worm thickets within the dump site and it is considered unlikely that they will exist in this location.

Page 78

Sensitive Indicator of existence of sensitive environment Likelihood of sensitive environment occurring in the dump site Environment Chaetopteridae A chaetopteridae worm field exists if worm tubes or epifaunal Phyllochaetopterus socialis is a cosmopolitan species of Chaetopteridae worm worm fields species – occurring in coastal and shelf waters off New Zealand. Fields of P. socialis are best known from the east coast of the South Island. Benthic sampling data • Cover 25% or more of the seabed in a visual imaging survey of (see Section Error! Reference source not found.) around from sampling sites 500 m² or more; or in the vicinity of the dump site have not recorded any Chaetopteridae worms. • Make up 25% or more of the volume of a sample collected No Chaetopteridae worm fields were observed during the 2019 EBS conducted using towed gear; or by NIWA within the GSB (Beaumont et al., 2019). It is considered unlikely that Chaetopteridae worm fields will be present within the dump site. • Are found in two successive point samples. Deep-sea A sensitive hydrothermal vent exists if a live specimen of a Deep-sea hydrothermal vents occur to the north of New Zealand along the hydrothermal vents known vent species is found in visual imaging survey or any Kermadec Volcanic Arc (GNS, 2019), well away from the dump site. In sample. See Schedule 6 for a list of known vent species. addition, no hydrothermal vents were observed during the 2019 EBS conducted by NIWA within the GSB (Beaumont et al., 2019). Therefore, it is unlikely that deep-sea hydrothermal vents will be present in the dump site. Macro-algae beds A macro-algae bed exists if a specimen of a red, green, or brown Beds of macro-algae occur on hard rocky substrates within the photic zone to macro-algae is found in a visual imaging survey or any sample. depths of about 200 m (MacDiarmid et al., 2013). Macro-algae beds will not be present within the dump site as they rely on sunlight for photosynthesis which will not occur at the seabed within the dump site due to the water depths there (~750 m – 1,200 m). Methane or cold A methane or cold seep exists if a single occurrence of one of High resolution multi-beam mapping has identified pockmarks within the seeps the taxa listed in Schedule 6 is found in a visual imaging survey dump site (see Section 4.2.5). These features are likely to be the result of fluid or any sample. expulsion at the seabed, possibly gas or groundwater (Mitchell & Neil, 2012); although no specific testing has been undertaken. It is therefore possible that methane or cold seeps could be present within part of the dump site.

Page 79

Sensitive Indicator of existence of sensitive environment Likelihood of sensitive environment occurring in the dump site Environment Rhodolith (maerl) A rhodolith bed – Rhodolith beds are known to occur in coastal localities at North Cape, Bay of beds Islands, Kapiti Island, Marlborough Sounds, and Foveaux Strait. It is likely they • Exists if living coralline thalli are found to cover more than 10% also occur in the EEZ at localities characterised by strong currents within the of an area in a visual imaging survey; photic zone (to depths of 200 m depending on water clarity), particularly • Is to be taken to exist if a single specimen of a rhodolith around the margins of reefs or elevated banks (MacDiarmid et al., 2013). No species if found in any sample. rhodoliths were observed during the 2019 EBS conducted by NIWA within the GSB (Beaumont et al., 2019). Based on this, the likelihood of rhodolith beds occurring within the dump site is considered remote. Sea pen fields A sea pen field exists if - Sea pens occur on soft sediments in deeper water of the continental shelf, slope, and abyssal plains where turbulence is unlikely to dislodge them and • A specimen of sea pen is found in successive point samples; or where there is a current to ensure a flow of plankton across their feeding • Two or more specimens of sea pen per m² are found in a visual polyps (MacDiarmid et al., 2013). Sea pens were observed during the 2019 imaging survey or a survey collected using towed gear. EBS conducted by NIWA within the GSB (Beaumont et al., 2019); however, the density observed was below the threshold to become a sensitive environment (average density of 0.33/m2). There are no reports of sea pens occurring within the dump site however it is possible that sea pen fields may be present.

Page 80

Sensitive Indicator of existence of sensitive environment Likelihood of sensitive environment occurring in the dump site Environment Sponge gardens A sponge garden exists if metazoans of classes Demospongiae, Sponges are common anchored in or detached as ‘rollers’ on shelf sediments, Hexactinellida, Calcerea, or Homoscleromorpha – and down to abyssal and trench (hadal) depths of several kilometres (MacDiarmid et al., 2013). The dump site is not included as one of the • Comprise 25% or more by volume or successive point examples of known sponge gardens in the New Zealand EEZ as listed in samples; or MacDiarmid et al. (2013). The 2019 EBS conducted by NIWA within the GSB • Comprise 20% or more by volume of any sample collected (Beaumont et al., 2019) observed sponges at all sites, and sometimes in high using towed gear; or abundances. However, the maximum percentage cover in any one still image was below the sensitive environment threshold. • Cover 25% or more of the seabed over an area of 100 m² or The closest known sponge garden is allocated in the Itagi Shelf biogenic more in a visual imaging survey. bryozoan habitat at 30 – 300 m where sponges have been classified to have low species diversity, high morphological diversity, low to medium density, medium percentage cover and a non-uniform and clumped distribution. The likelihood of sponge gardens occurring within the dump site is considered possible. Stony coral thickets A stony coral reef or thicket exists if – Previous deep-water sampling in areas near the dump site (as reviewed in or reefs Consalvey et al., 2006) has found Scleractinian stony corals such as • A colony of a structure-forming species covers 15% or more of Solenosmilia, Goniocorella, and Oculina) located in waters to the south of the the seabed in a visual imaging survey of 100 m² or more; or dump site (see Section 0). In addition, the 2019 EBS conducted by NIWA within • A specimen of a thicket-forming species is found in two the GSB (Beaumont et al., 2019) observed stony corals, both live branching successive point samples; or and intact dead colonies which met the threshold for a sensitive environment. It is therefore considered possible that stony coral thickets or reefs may occur • A specimen of a structure-forming species is found in a sample within the dump site. collected using towed gear.

Page 81

Sensitive Indicator of existence of sensitive environment Likelihood of sensitive environment occurring in the dump site Environment Xenophyophore beds A xenophyophore bed exists if average densities of all species of Xenophyophores tend to be particularly abundant below areas of high surface xenophyophore found (including fragments) equal or exceed one productivity (Hayward et al., 2012). Sampling locations within the New specimen per m² sampled. Zealand EEZ include the eastern, northern and western continental slopes of New Zealand, and the Chatham Rise at depths of 500-1,300 m (Tendal & Lewis 1978, Hayward et al., 2012). The 2019 EBS conducted by NIWA within the GSB (Beaumont et al., 2019) concluded that xenophyophores are quite common and well distributed in muddy sediments across the area surveyed. It is not known whether xenophyophores beds occur within the dump site, but based on the available information from surrounding areas it is considered likely that such beds are present within the dump site.

Page 82

4.5 Protected Species

There are several deep-water taxa possibly occurring within and around the dump site which are protected under Schedule 7A of the Wildlife Act 1953. Beaumont et al. (2019) observed three such species within the GSB, namely: • Gorgonian coals (all species within the order Gorgonacea); • Hydrocorals (all species within the family Stylasteridae); and • Stony corals (all species within the order Scleractinia).

Gorgonian corals were observed during the 2019 EBS conducted by NIWA within the GSB (Beaumont et al., 2019) at a seamount site (approximately 100 km from the dump site) and in some channel locations where exposed bedrock and/or boulder fields were found. As a channel feature transects the dump site (Figure 7), gorgonian corals are likely to be present within the dump site.

Like the gorgonian corals, hydrocorals were observed during the 2019 EBS conducted by NIWA within the GSB (Beaumont et al., 2019) at a seamount site and some of the channel sites. Therefore, due to the fact there is a channel feature within the dump site, hydrocorals are likely to be present within the dump site.

Stony corals were observed across the area surveyed during the 2019 EBS conducted by NIWA within the GSB (Beaumont et al., 2019), sometimes at densities higher than observed elsewhere in New Zealand’s EEZ. However, this may be a reflection of the lack of deep-water sampling that has occurred in deep-water regions of New Zealand. Based on the abundances seen in multiple habitat types in the GSB, it is likely that stony corals are present within the dump site.

4.6 Cultural Environment

The marine environment is highly valued by all Māori communities and plays an important role in historic and present-day culture. The values placed on the marine environment stem in particular from the importance of coastal waters as a valuable source of kaimoana (seafood), raranga (weaving) materials, and rongoā (traditional medicines). The marine environment is also regarded as a sacred and spiritual pathway which provides a means of transportation and communication (Nga Uri O Tahinga Trust, 2012). Many of Aotearoa’s ika (marine fauna) play important roles in legends. In particular, Māori have a deep spiritual connection with whales and dolphins, which are believed to provide safety at sea and guided the founding waka (canoes) on their great journey to Aotearoa from ancestral homelands in the Pacific.

Māori believe in the importance of protecting Papatūānuku (the earth) including the footprints and stories left by ancestors. In accordance with this, the role of kaitiakitanga (guardianship) is passed down between generations. Kaitiakitanga is central to the preservation of wāhi tapu (sacred places or sites) and taonga (treasures).

The traditional coastal takiwā (territory) of Ngāi Tahu is from the boundary of Pari-nui-o-Whiti (White Cliffs) south of Blenheim on the east coast, and northernmost boundary at Kahurangi on the west coast. Ngāi Tahu’s takiwā covers the entire Te Waipounamu (the South Island) coast south of these eastern and western boundaries (Ngāi Tahu Seafood, 2019).

Page 83

Ngāi Tahu have a number of settlements located at, or in close proximity to the coast, where kaimoana (seafood) provides one of the major forms of sustenance. Abundant kaimoana has long been targeted at offshore fishing grounds, including trolling behind waka for makaa (barracouta), and longline fishing for ling, hapuka, and cod. Inshore reefs were also targeted for koura (lobster/crayfish), while tōroa (albatross and mollymawks), kekeno (fur seals), and the occasional whale were also harvested. The ability of Otago hapū to provide sweet shellfish such as tuaki and pipi to guests was a way of increasing the mana (status) of the community (Kāi Tahu ki Otago, 2005). It is this relationship with the marine environment, and wider natural environment, that was at the heart of Te Kerēme (the Ngāi Tahu Claim), with the settlement giving expression to this relationship (Ngāi Tahu, 2019).

This section provides a brief overview of the iwi (tribes), hapū (sub-tribes), and whānau (families) along the stretch of coastline inshore of the dump site and describes any marine attributes of particular cultural interest within their rohe (territory/boundary). The coastline inshore of the dump site is of relevance to Ngāi Tahu and Ngāi Tahu Whānau. Under the Ngāi Tahu Claims Settlement Act 1998, this includes ‘individuals who descend from the primary hapū of Waitaha, Ngāti Mamoe, and Ngāi Tahu, namely Kāti Kurī, Kāti Irakehu, Kāti Huirapa, Ngāi Tuahuriri, and Kai Te Ruahikihiki’.

Ngāi Tahu is comprised of 18 regional Papatipu Rūnanga within Te Waipounamu that uphold mana of their people over the land, the sea and the natural resources. These 18 Papatipu Rūnanga are represented by Te Rūnanga o Ngāi Tahu.

A summary of DWNZ’s engagement with Papatipu Rūnanga as part of this Application is provided in Section 5.2.

4.6.1 Kāi Tahu Ki Otago Natural Resource Management Plan 2005

The Kāi Tahu Ki Otago Natural Resource Management Plan 2005 is the principal planning document for Kāi Tahu ki Otago. This Resource Management Plan utilises the boundaries of the Otago Regional Council to provide a focus for the plan; however, these boundaries do not delineate those of the custom and tradition of whānau and hapū (Kāi Tahu ki Otago, 2005).

The purpose of this Resource Management Plan is to: • Provide the principal planning document for Kāi Tahu ki Otago; • Provide information, direction and a framework to achieve a greater understanding of the natural resource values, concerns and issues of Kāi Tahu ki Otago; • Provide a basis from which Kāi Tahu ki Otago participation in the management of the natural, physical and historic resources of Otago is further developed; and • Provide the basis, but not substitute, for consultation and outline the consultation expectations of Kāi Tahu ki Otago.

The Resource Management Plan contains a number of key issues, objectives, and policies for a variety of values within the Otago Region. The main value relevant to this application is the Coastal Environment, which is included within Chapter 5.8 of the Resource Management Plan. This chapter is then split further into four main sub-chapters, each of which includes issues, objectives and policies associated with them: Taku Tai Moana Me Wai Māori, Wāhi Tapu o te Taku Tai Moana, Mahika Kai (Kaimoana) & Biodiversity, and Cultural Landscapes.

The majority of the policies within the Taku Tai Moana Me Wai Māori sub-chapter relate to discharges within the coastal environment and there is only one relating to dumping which seeks all dumping to be within authorised landfills and not coastal waters.

Page 84

Although the Resource Management Plan is focused on the boundaries of Otago Regional Council, the provisions within the Plan have been taken into account during the development of this Application. This document has been discussed with Papatipu Rūnanga during engagement (Section 5.2).

4.6.2 Statutory Acknowledgement Areas

Statutory Acknowledgements are acknowledgements by the Crown of a statement of Ngāi Tahu’s particular cultural, spiritual, historical, and traditional association with specified areas (Ngāi Tahu, 1999).

The Te Tai o Arai Te Uru Statutory Acknowledgement area is located landward of the dump site and consists of the CMA of Moeraki, Dunedin, and Molyneaux constituencies of the Otago Region. Te Tai o Arai Te Uru was occupied in succession by Waitaha, Ngāti Māmoe, and Ngāi Tahu. Through conflict and alliances, Waitaha, Ngāti Māmoe, and Ngāi Tahu have merged in the whakapapa (genealogy) of Ngāi Tahu Whānui (ORC, 2012). Following a period of conflict between Waitaha, Ngati Māmoe, and Ngāi Tahu, a united series of hapū established permanent or semi-permanent settlements along the coast that relied heavily on coastal resources for mahika kai (food gathering).

Reefs along the coast are customary fishing grounds and provided a range of kaimoana (seafood). Blueskin Bay was also of particular importance as it was historically a kohanga (breeding ground) for southern right whales which were hunted for their meat.

Otago’s coast was a major highway and trade route, with pounamu (greenstone) and tītī (muttonbirds) traded north, and kumara, taro, waka, stone resources, and carvings traded south. Often between-settlement movements were also carried out by sea. Numerous tauranga waka (landing places) occurred along the coastline, and wherever a tauranga waka was found there was usually a nohoanga (settlement), fishing ground, kaimoana resource, or stands of rimurapa (bull kelp).

Tūpuna had a huge knowledge of the marine environment and weather patterns which was passed on from generation to generation. Traditional knowledge has continued to be passed on by whānau and hapū and is considered taonga to current generations.

4.6.3 Taonga Species

Schedule 97 and Schedule 98 of the Ngāi Tahu Claims Settlement Act 1998 outlines taonga (treasured, prized, or valued) bird, plant, marine mammal, fish, and shellfish species.

The marine mammals which are taonga that may be present in and around the dump site are: kekeno (New Zealand fur seal), parāoa (sperm whale), pāpoka/whakahao (New Zealand sea lion/Hooker’s sea lion), paikea (humpback whale), and tohorā (southern right whale). Information on these species is included in Section 4.3.6.

The seabirds which are taonga that may be present in and around the dump site are: hoiho (yellow-eyed penguin), kororā (little penguin), tītī (sooty shearwater, Hutton’s shearwater, fairy and broad-billed prion, white- faced storm petrel, and Cook’s and mottled petrel), and toroa (albatrosses and mollymawks). Information on these species is included in Section 4.3.7.1.

Inclusion of these species in the Ngāi Tahu Claims Settlement Act 1998 is acknowledgement by the crown of Ngāi Tahu’s cultural, spiritual, historic, and traditional association with the listed species.

Page 85

Whales are of particular importance to Ngāi Tahu and are significant features in Ngāi Tahu creation, migration and settlement traditions. The beaching of whales was considered an act of the gods providing the gift of life for people. This is reflected in the whakataukī proverb “He taoka no Takaroa, I waihotia mo tātou, ke te tohora ki uta – this whale cast on the beach, is the treasure left to us all, by the great god Takaroa” (MKT, 2013).

4.6.4 Customary Fishing and Iwi Fisheries Interests

Kaimoana provides sustenance for tangata whenua, it is an important food source for whānau, and is vital for provision of hospitality to manuhiri (guests) (Wakefield & Walker, 2005). Traditional management of the marine environment entails a whole body of knowledge on the sea’s natural resources, their seasonality and the manner in which they can be harvested. This customary wisdom is held sacred by tangata whenua and only passed on to those who will value it.

Under the Māori Fisheries Act 2004, recognised iwi were allocated fisheries assets such as fishing quota. Each iwi were also assigned income shares in Aotearoa Fisheries Limited. Aotearoa Fisheries Limited harvests, procures, farms, processes, and markets kaimoana in New Zealand and internationally, and is managed and overseen by Te Ohu Kai Moana (the Māori Fisheries Commission). For quota associated with fisheries that are classified as ‘deepwater’, all iwi were assigned quota based on population size and relative length of coastline within their rohe. Quota for fisheries considered to be ‘inshore’ was allocated only to iwi whose rohe overlapped with the management area of the stock.

Separate from, and in addition to, commercial fisheries assets provided under the Māori Fisheries Act 2004, iwi within the South Island hold customary fishing rights under the Fisheries (South Island Customary Fishing) Regulations 1999. These regulations were developed as a result of the Treaty of Waitangi (Fisheries Claims) Settlement Act 1992 and the Ngāi Tahu Claims Settlement Act 1998. Under these regulations, tangata whenua may issue permits to harvest kaimoana in a way that exceeds levels permitted in standard practice in order to provide for hui (a gathering or meeting), tangi (funeral) or as koha (a gift, donation or contribution). The sale of any kaimoana harvested under the customary permit is prohibited. The applicant/holder of a customary permit does not have to be affiliated to any iwi; however, only iwi may authorise a permit within their rohe moana.

The allocation of customary fishing rights is undertaken by tangata kaitiaki/tiaki in accordance with tikanga Maori. Tangata kaitiaki/tiaki are individuals or groups appointed by local tangata whenua and confirmed by the Minister of Fisheries. Their role is to authorise customary fishing with their rohe moana. Under the regulations, customary fishing rights can be exercised by commercial fishing vessels on behalf of the holder of the customary fishing right. Customary fishing rights are in addition to recreational fishing rights and do not remove the right of tangata whenua to catch their recreational limits under the amateur fishing regulations.

In addition to the above, the Fisheries (Amateur Fishing) Regulations 2013 impose restrictions on the taking of fish, aquatic life, or seaweed, unless they are taken for the purposes of a hui or tangi and are in accordance with an authorisation issued under regulation 51 of the Fisheries (Amateur Fishing) Regulations 2013.

There are three types of customary fishing areas recognised under the legislation: rohe moana, mātaitai, and taiapure. Customary fishing areas of relevance to the dump site are described below and shown in Figure 19.

Further discussion on customary fishing rights is outlined within Section 5.1.5.1.

Page 86

Figure 19 Rohe Moana, Mātaitai, and Taiapure in and around the Dump Site

4.6.4.1 Rohe Moana

Rohe moana may be established under the Fisheries (Kaimoana Customary Fishing) Regulations 1998 as recognised traditional food gathering areas for which Kaitiaki (customary managers) can be appointed to manage kaimoana collection in accordance with traditional Māori principles. They allow for the establishment of management controls, the issuing of permits for customary take, the enforcement of penalties for management breaches, and for restrictions to be established over fisheries areas in order to prevent stock depletion or overexploitation. The intention of a rohe moana is for the better provision for the recognition of Rangatiratanga (sovereignty) and of the right secured in relation to fisheries by Article II of the Treaty of Waitangi. The legally recognised boundaries of each rohe moana typically mirror the landward boundary of the CMA. However, Ngāi Tahu has a rohe moana which includes the dump site (Figure 19).

4.6.4.2 Mātaitai Reserves

Mātaitai reserves are areas where tangata whenua manage all non-commercial fishing through the establishment of bylaws. Such areas recognise traditional fishing grounds and are established in order to provide for customary practices and food gathering. Commercial fishing is excluded from within Mātaitai Reserves; however, recreational fishing is allowed. Mātaitai reserves can be declared under the Fisheries (Kaimoana Customary Fishing) Regulations 1998 and are managed by tangata whenua appointed tangata tiaki/kaitiaki.

Page 87

There are two gazetted mātaitai reserves on the Otago coast (Figure 19); that being the Otakou Mātaitai and Waikouaiti Mātaitai. Both are well away from the dump site, the closest being the Otakou Mātaitai at approximately 37 km from the nearest boundary of the dump site, and therefore not of relevance to this Application.

4.6.4.3 Taiāpure

A taiāpure can be established in an area that has customarily been of significance to an iwi or hapū as either a food source or for cultural or spiritual reasons. A taiāpure allows tangata whenua to be involved in the management of both commercial and non-commercial fishing in their area but does not stop all fishing. The East Otago Taiāpure (Figure 19) is located approximately 46 km from the dump site and therefore not of relevance to this Application.

4.6.4.4 Ngāi Tahu Seafood Limited

Ngāi Tahu Seafood Limited is a wholly owned subsidiary of Ngāi Tahu Holdings Corporation, the commercial arm of Te Rūnanga o Ngāi Tahu (the governing body overseeing the activities of Ngāi Tahu) (Ngāi Tahu Seafood Limited, 2019). Ngāi Tahu Seafood Limited was established following recommendations of the Waitangi Tribunal in order to manage the fishing quota Ngāi Tahu received following their settlement with the crown (Ngāi Tahu Seafood Limited, 2019).

Ngāi Tahu Seafood Limited manages its own fisheries assets as well as the fisheries settlement assets owned by Ngāi Tahu Fisheries Settlement Limited. Key species managed under Ngāi Tahu Seafood are kōura (rock lobster/crayfish), paua, rāwaru (blue cod), tio (Bluff oysters), and kūtai (greenshell mussels). Fishing quota for other species is also held by Ngāi Tahu Seafood, with the majority of seafood offered by Ngāi Tahu Seafood caught against Ngāi Tahu quota by Ngāi Tahu fishers (Ngāi Tahu Seafood Limited, 2019).

4.6.5 Interests under the Marine & Coastal Area (Takutai Moana) Act 2011

The MACA Act acknowledges the importance of the marine and coastal area to all New Zealanders while providing for the recognition of the customary rights of iwi, hapū, and whānau in the CMA. Iwi, hapū, or whānau groups may be granted recognition of two types of customary interest under the MACA Act. These are 1) Customary Marine Title, and 2) Protected Customary Rights, as summarised below, which has drawn on information sourced from the Crown Agency developed in 2018, Te Arawhiti (2019) to oversee the New Zealand Government’s work in a post-Treaty settlement era.

Customary Marine Title recognises the relationship of an iwi, hapū or whānau with a part of the common marine and coastal area. Public access, fishing and other recreational activities are allowed to continue in Customary Marine Title areas; however, the group that holds Customary Marine Title maintains the following rights: • A ‘Resource Management Act Permission Right’ allowing the group to say yes or no to activities that need Resource Consents or permits in the area; • A ‘Conservation Permission Right’ allowing the group to say yes or no to certain conservation activities in the area; • The right to be notified and engaged with when there is an application for a marine mammal watching permit in the area; • The right to be engaged with about changes to relevant Coastal Policy Statements;

Page 88

• A wāhi tapu protection right allows the group to seek recognition of a wāhi tapu and restrict access to the area if required to protect the wāhi tapu; • The ownership of minerals other than petroleum, gold, silver and uranium found in the area; • The interim ownership of taonga tūturu found in the area; and • The ability to prepare a planning document that sets out the group’s objectives and policies for the management of resources in the area.

Protected Customary Rights may be granted to allow for customary activities such as the collection of hāngi stones or launching of waka in the CMA.

Table 8 outlines the applications made under the MACA Act in the vicinity of the dump site, along with the distances away from the dump site. It is noted that at the time of submission of this Application, these applications are still being processed and/or decided. Further, given the distance of the application areas from the dump site, the proposed activities will not affect the rights being sought.

Table 8 Applications under the Marine and Coastal Area (Takutai Moana) Act 2011 near the Dump Site

Applicant Region Recognition Sought Application Area Distance from Dump Site Paul and Natalie Otago Customary Marine From Heyward Point in the North to Black 9 km Karaitiana Title and Protected Head in the South, extending out 12 Customary Rights nautical miles. This includes Hoopers and Papanui Inlets. Within the Otago Harbour the area corresponding with the Mataitai Reserve is included. The application area includes the common marine and coastal area that abuts land at Te Rauone and Harwood. Te Rūnanga o Ngāi South Customary Marine The Ngāi Tahu Takiwā, as defined in 9 km Tahu on behalf of Island Title section 5 of the Te Rūnanga o Ngāi Tahu Ngāi Tahu Whānui Act 1996. The Ngāi Tahu Takiwā includes all of the lands, islands and coasts of Te Waipounamu in an area south of points on both coasts (Kahurangi Point on the west coast and Parinui o Whiti (White Bluffs) on the east coast).

Page 89

4.7 Socio-Economic Environment

4.7.1 Commercial Fishing

The dump site lies within Fisheries Management Area 3 (South East (Coast)), which covers most of the east coast of the South Island, from the mouth of the Clarence River south to Slope Point (Figure 20).

Commercial fishing in the vicinity of the dump site is concentrated around coastal fisheries and deep-water fisheries along the shelf edge (Figure 21).

Figure 20 Fisheries Management Areas Surrounding the Dump Site

Page 90

Figure 21 New Zealand Commercial Trawl Fishing Catch from all Trawl Events for the Period 1 October 2007 – 30 September 2013

Source: FNZ, 2019a

Page 91

Fisheries New Zealand (FNZ) provided an analysis of the commercial fishing events within the dump site over the period from the start of 2014 to August 2019. Fishing ‘events’ that crossed the boundaries of the dump site (i.e. event started or ended inside the dump site boundary) were included in this analysis; however, it is noted that only those events that reported by latitude and longitude were able to be included in the analysis, therefore some events were unable to be included (FNZ, 2019b).

FNZ (2019b) reported 14 fishing events within the boundaries of the dump site during the period analsyed. No fishing events occurred during 2015, 2017, and 2018. Fishing methods included set nets (including gill net) and surface/midwater longline – no bottom trawling occurred within the dump site, presumably due to the water depths and the fact that the area is identified as an Explosives Dumping Ground on the New Zealand Nautical Charts (discussed in Section 4.1). The species targeted during this period were school shark and southern bluefin tuna, with an estimated greenweight of 9,648.3 kg (which included bycatch), the majority of which was made up of southern bluefin tuna catch (6,381.5 kg).

4.7.2 Recreational Fishing

Unlike the commercial fishing industry, recreational fishers are not managed under a quota system, but instead are regulated under daily catch limits and minimum legal sizes established by MPI to preserve fish stocks from over-exploitation and conserve them for future generations. Recreational fishing is popular along the coastline of South Canterbury, Otago, and Southland but tends to be restricted to inshore waters with the vast majority of fishing effort occurring in water depths shallower than 100 m.

Some of the most popular and targeted species for recreational fishers operating inshore of the dump site include pāua, rock lobster, cockles, blue cod, flatfish, red gurnard, red cod, hapūku, blue moki, butterfish, and trumpeter (SMPF, 2018).

Improving technology and bigger, faster recreational boats means recreational fishers are increasingly pushing further offshore, but recreational fishing is unlikely to occur within the dump site itself due to the considerable water depth, the distance offshore (approximately 39 km), the lack of any shelter from the large seas and strong winds that can be present in this area, and that the area is identified as an Explosives Dumping Ground on the New Zealand Nautical Charts.

4.7.3 Marine Farming

New Zealand King Salmon Limited is investigating the feasibility of offshore salmon farming off the Otago coast, and has applied for coastal permits to deploy monitoring buoys within the CMA at three sites, one being 16 km southeast of Coal Point, South Otago, one 12 km southeast of Shag Point, and one 20 km off the coast of Oamaru (Edwards, 2018a). New Zealand King Salmon Limited is seeking these consents for a period of 10 years to allow the installation of up to six monitoring buoys in each location (Edwards, 2018b). Although considered ‘offshore’, these monitoring and potential marine farm locations are within the CMA and therefore are a considerable distance from the dump site and will not be affected by this Application.

Page 92

4.7.4 Commercial Shipping

There are no dedicated shipping channels into/out of or between New Zealand’s ports and, as a result, vessels travelling to/from or between ports will generally take the most direct or shortest route possible, providing it is safe to do so. However, MNZ recommends that commercial vessels should stay a minimum of 5 NM off the mainland, any charted points of danger, or any offshore islands.

Figure 22 provides an overview of the marine traffic in and around the dump site, based on the tracking data of vessels that have automatic identification system (AIS) enabled from www.marinetraffic.com. In general, the highest proportion of shipping activity occurs in close proximity to the coast, but ships occasionally venture through the dump site.

Figure 22 General Shipping Routes in the Vicinity of the Dump Site

Page 93

4.8 Historic Heritage and Archaeological Sites

The Heritage New Zealand Pouhere Taonga Act 2014 and the Protected Objects Act 1975 protect areas, sites, structures and objects with archaeological, historical, cultural, or heritage values. Heritage New Zealand records all archaeological sites and structures of heritage and cultural significance in the ‘Central Index of Archaeological Sites’. The records held within this database (as illustrated by Figure 23) are extensive, however none of these sites will be impacted by this Application.

Figure 23 Archaeological Sites along New Zealand’s Lower East and Southeast Coast

Source: ArchSite, 2019

Page 94

5 Existing Interests and Engagement

5.1 Identification of Existing Interests

The EEZ Act defines ‘existing interests’, in relation to New Zealand, the EEZ, or the continental shelf (as applicable), as the interest a person has in:

(a) any lawfully established existing activity, whether or not authorised by or under any Act or regulations, including rights of access, navigation, and fishing:

(b) any activity that may be undertaken under the authority of an existing marine consent granted under section 62:

(c) any activity that may be undertaken under the authority of an existing resource consent granted under the Resource Management Act 1991:

(d) the settlement of a historical claim under the Treaty of Waitangi Act 1975:

(e) the settlement of a contemporary claim under the Treaty of Waitangi as provided for in an Act, including the Treaty of Waitangi (Fisheries Claims) Settlement Act 1992:

(f) a protected customary right or customary marine title recognised under the Marine and Coastal Area (Takutai Moana) Act 2011.

The extent of the dump site (Figure 1) outlined in this Application was used to identify existing interests which may be affected by this Application. Any interest within, or in close proximity to, the dump site which could foreseeably be impacted by the activities subject to this application and which satisfies one or more of the above criteria is discussed below.

5.1.1 Lawfully Established Existing Activities

Part (a) of the definition of existing interests states that a person that has any interest in an existing activity that is lawfully established, whether or not authorised by or under any Act or regulation, is considered as having existing interests. The lawfully established existing activities in and around the dump site are commercial fishing and maritime traffic; therefore, any person(s) that has an interest in those activities is considered to have an existing interest. For this Application the only relevant activities under this category are commercial fishing and shipping.

The commercial fishing activities that occur in and around the dump site are discussed within Section 4.7.1. DWNZ’s consultation with commercial fisheries of relevance to the dump site has focused on the Deepwater Group, Southern Inshore Fisheries Management Company Ltd (Southern Inshore), along with Te Ohu Kaimoana and Ngāi Tahu Seafoods which are discussed further in Section 5.1.5. The Deepwater Group is a non-profit organisation that works in partnership with the MPI and involves more than 50 seafood companies, while the Southern Inshore is an established commercial stakeholder organisation that has the mandate to represent a range of stocks that occur primarily in the South Island.

Page 95

Section 4.7.4 provides an assessment on the commercial shipping relevant to this Application which includes Figure 22 showing an overview of the maritime traffic in and around the dump site, based on tracking data from vessels which have AIS enabled. This figure shows that the dump site is not an area that is subject to high traffic volumes.

In addition to the above, the EEZ Act permits various activities, including marine scientific research, prospecting and exploration, seismic surveys and space vehicle launches. There are no known permitted activity applications within or in proximity to the dump site, based on a review that has been undertaken on the EPA website of the publicly available permitted activity applications.

Based on the assessment above, the Deepwater Group, Southern Inshore, Te Ohu Kaimoana, and Ngāi Tahu Seafoods Limited are considered as having an existing interest in relation to this Application under part (a) of the definition of existing interests.

It is noted that the dump site is almost entirely within Petroleum Exploration Permit 38264 issued to Beach Energy Resource NZ (Holdings) Limited. However, there are no existing authorised activities associated with this Permit.

5.1.2 Existing Marine Consents

Part (b) of the definition of existing interests states that a person that has an interest in any activity that may be undertaken under the authority of an existing marine consent granted under section 62 of the EEZ Act is considered as having an existing interest.

A review has been undertaken on the publicly available marine consent decision reports on the EPA website. This review found that there are no current marine consents within or close proximity to the dump site9. Therefore, as no person(s) hold an interest in any activity authorised by an existing marine consent, there are no person(s) identified as having an existing interest under part (b) of the definition.

5.1.3 Existing Resource Consents

Part (c) of the definition of existing interests states that a person that has an interest in any activity that may be undertaken under the authority of an existing resource consent, granted under the RMA, is considered as having an existing interest. The jurisdiction of the RMA extends to 12 NM from the line of mean high water springs. As the nearest point of the dump site is located approximately 9 km further offshore than the jurisdiction of the RMA, there are no person(s) identified as having an existing interest under part (c).

9 As discussed in Section 4.1, the site is noted on the New Zealand Nautical Charts as an Explosives Dumping Ground. Information obtained from the EPA indicates that there are no current marine dumping consents (or deemed consents) for the New Zealand Defence Force at the dump site.

Page 96

5.1.4 Historical Claim under the Treaty of Waitangi Act 1975

Part (d) of the definition of existing interests states that a person that has an interest in any settlement of a historical claim under the Treaty of Waitangi Act 1975 is considered as having an existing interest.

The Ngāi Tahu Claims Settlement Act 1998 gives effect to the Ngāi Tahu Deed of Settlement through various methods, including cultural redress aimed at restoring the ability for Ngāi Tahu to give practical effect to its kaitiaki responsibilities. This was done through various instruments recognising Ngāi Tahu’s mana in relation to a range of sites and areas and included the establishment of statutory acknowledgement areas. One such statutory acknowledgement area is of relevance to the dump site, that being the Te Tai o Arai Te Uru (the Otago CMA) which is discussed further in Section 4.6.2.

This statutory acknowledgement area is located within the CMA, with its closest point approximately 9 km landward of the dump site. As this statutory acknowledgement area will not be affected by this Application, it is considered that there are no persons that have an existing interest in relation to this Application under part (d) of the definition.

5.1.5 Contemporary Claim under the Treaty of Waitangi Act 1975

Part (e) of the definition of existing interests states that a person that has an interest in any settlement of a contemporary claim under the Treaty of Waitangi as provided for in an Act, including the Treaty of Waitangi (Fisheries Claims) Settlement Act 1992, is considered as having an existing interest. The potential for a person to have an existing interest under this part fall into two categories: customary fishing rights and fishing quota holders, both of which are discussed below.

5.1.5.1 Customary Fishing Rights

Customary fishing rights are held by iwi under the Fisheries (Kaimoana Customary Fishing) Regulations 1998, and South Island iwi hold rights under the Fisheries (South Island Customary Fishing) Regulations 1999; both of which stem from the Treaty of Waitangi (Fisheries Claims) Settlement Act 1992 and the Ngāi Tahu Claims Settlement Act 1998. These regulations provide for the customary harvesting of kaimoana for special occasions in which iwi may issue permits to harvest kaimoana in a way that exceeds levels permitted in standard practice in order to provide for hui, tangi or as a koha. This is managed in several different ways, including: • Rohe moana; • Mātaitai reserves; • Taiāpure; • Temporary closures and restrictions on fishing methods; and • Fisheries bylaws.

An assessment of these customary fishing rights is included within Section 4.6.4. There are two mātaitai reserves and one taiāpure located in the coastal area inshore approximately 37 km from the dump site and will not be affected by this Application.

However, the dump site is completely encompassed by Ngāi Tahu’s rohe moana. As such Ngāi Tahu is considered as having an existing interest.

Page 97

5.1.5.2 Fishing Quota Holders

The Maori Fisheries Act 2004 establishes a regime for allocating fisheries settlement assets, including income shares in Aotearoa Fisheries Limited (now trading as Moana New Zealand) and quota to iwi recognised under the Act. This Act also established Te Ohu Kaimoana, whose role it is to advance the interest of iwi individually and collectively, through the development of fisheries, fishing, and fisheries-related activities in order to: • Ultimately benefit the members of iwi and Maori generally; • Further the agreements made in the Deed of Settlement; • Assist the Crown to discharge its obligations under the Deed of Settlement and the Treaty of Waitangi; and • Contribute to the achievement of an enduring settlement of the claims and grievances referred to in the Deed of Settlement.

The duties and functions of Te Ohu Kaimoana include the allocation and transfer of settlement assets to mandated iwi organisations, appointing the directors of Aotearoa Fisheries Limited, and protecting and enhancing the interests of iwi and Maori in relation to fisheries, fishing and fisheries-related activities.

Although the commercial fisheries assessment (Section 4.7.1) shows very little fishing activity within the dump site (due to its classification as a restricted area as a munitions dump), there is still a potential that quota holders can fish the area, utilising mid-water fishing methods. As such, both Aotearoa Fisheries Limited and Te Ohu Kaimoana are considered to have an existing interest in the dump site.

In addition to the above, Ngāi Tahu Seafood Limited is considered as having an existing interest as it manages its own fisheries assets as well as the fisheries settlement assets owned by Ngāi Tahu Fisheries Settlement Limited.

5.1.6 Protected Customary Right or Customary Marine Title

Part (f) of the definition of existing interests states that a person that has an interest in a protected customary right or customary marine title recognised under the Marine and Coastal Area (Takutai Moana) Act 2011 as having an existing interest.

An assessment of the protected customary rights and customary marine titles has been undertaken within Section 4.6.5. As seen within Table 8, there are two such areas in the broad vicinity of the dump site; however, both are located approximately 9 km from the nearest edge of the dump site. Due to this separation distance, it is considered that there are no parties that hold an interest in a protected customary right or customary marine title, and hence have an existing interest under part (f) of the definition, in relation to this application.

5.1.7 Summary of Existing Interests

Based on the definition of existing interests within section 4 of the EEZ Act, those parties that have an existing interest in relation to this application are: • The Deepwater Group; • Southern Inshore Fisheries Management Company Limited; • Ngāi Tahu; • Te Ohu Kaimoana; and

Page 98

• Ngāi Tahu Seafood Limited.

5.2 Engagement with Existing Interests

Engagement with persons that have an existing interest in relation to this Application are summarised below.

5.2.1 Deepwater Group

DWNZ has engaged with the Deepwater Group as part of the preparation for this Application. A cover letter (via email) was provided with all the details of the proposed activity which was accompanied by an ‘Consultation Information Pack’ providing further details of the proposed activity. An offer to meet with the Deepwater Group or any of its members was also extended.

DWNZ advised the Deepwater Group, by way of email, details regarding the timeline of the application, the coordinates of the dumping location, and details of the other industry members that had been engaged with.

No concerns were raised by any of the Deepwater Group’s members after they were briefed and provided copies of the Information Sheet and no requests to meet to discuss the proposed activity were received.

5.2.2 Southern Inshore Fisheries Management Company Limited

DWNZ has engaged with the Southern Inshore Fisheries Management Company Limited who was provided the Consultation Information Pack and an invitation to discuss the proposal was extended. In response the Southern Inshore Fisheries Management Company Limited requested to see (and were provided with) the fisheries assessment, in particular the set net plots.

Feedback provided by Southern Inshore Fisheries Management Company was that the proposed dump site was too deep for any of its inshore fishers to be impacted to any great degree. However, it was noted that there has been some catch history over the last couple of years within and around the dumping location where there could be some overlap.

Additional maps of inshore commercial net fishing effort were provided to assist in the assessment of the application against fishing interests in the area.

5.2.3 Ngāi Tahu

DWNZ has engaged with Ngāi Tahu through Aukaha10. DWNZ provided the Consultation Information Pack and an invitation to discuss the proposed activity was extended. Aukaha passed on the information and the invitation to meet to Ngāi Tahu, however no request to meet was received.

5.2.4 Te Ohu Kaimoana

DWNZ has engaged with Te Ohu Kaimoana and provided the Consultation Information Pack and an invitation to meet to discuss the proposed activity further either via phone or in person. Te Ohu Kaimoana were appreciative of the receiving the information, but no request to meet was received.

10 Ngāi Tahu employs a stand-alone commercial consultancy, called Aukaha, to advocate for its environmental and cultural aspirations in resource management and to facilitate consultation with papatipu rūnanga.

Page 99

Te Ohu Kaimoana forwarded the Consultation Information Pack to Aukaha who it considered would be more appropriate to comment on the proposal as Aukaha assists the papatipu rūnanga in Otago on various matters such as consent applications.

5.2.5 Ngāi Tahu Seafood Limited

DWNZ has not specifically engaged with Ngāi Tahu Seafood Limited as it is a member of the Deepwater Group (discussed earlier) and owned by Ngāi Tahu, both of which have been consulted with separately.

5.3 Engagement with other Papatipu Rūnanga and Stakeholder Groups

DWNZ has undertaken consultation with various parties in addition to those who have an existing interest, including papatipu rūnanga and other stakeholders as outlined within the following sections.

5.3.1 Engagement with Iwi and Papatipu Rūnanga

The papatipu rūnanga located inshore of the dump site hold special interest in this offshore area through their exercise of mana whenua and mana moana, as discussed within Section 4.5. In recognition of their role as kaitiaki, DWNZ has engaged with the following groups: • Te Rūnanga o Ngāi Tahu; • Te Rūnanga o Ōtākou; and • Aukaha.

5.3.2 Engagement with Other Stakeholders

In addition to iwi and papatipu rūnanga, the following parties have also been contacted in relation to this Application: • EPA – this consultation is ongoing throughout the consenting process for this Application, and will continue at the conclusion of the approvals process through any compliance that may be required for this Application; • DOC – Head Office – this consultation involved developing measures to be put in place to ensure there will be no effects on marine mammals from the proposed blasting activities. DOC was provided with the Consultation Information Pack detailing the proposed activity and following review of this requested to see the noise calculations that were undertaken to assess the potential effects from underwater sound levels arising from the blasting activities. This report was provided to DOC for its review and no further questions were raised; • DOC – Dunedin – similar to the above, engagement with the regional office has resulted in ensuring measures are in place to avoid effects on marine mammals. The DOC Dunedin office was provided with the Consultation Information Pack and when followed up to see if any further questions or comments were required, it was stated that the DOC Head Office were assessing whether there were any requirements for further discussion or comment; • Environment Canterbury – this consultation has been undertaken in regards of its requirements within its Regional Pest Management Plan for unwanted biofouling organisms and any rules around the removal of these within the CMA;

Page 100

• MNZ – as the previous regulators for marine dumping activities, MNZ has been contacted for information on what has previously been disposed of at the dump site in terms of munitions. In addition, MNZ has been consulted regarding its requirements for the tow of the vessel to the dump site; • Ministry of Defence/New Zealand Defence Force – the Ministry of Defence/New Zealand Defence Force has been contacted to obtain any information on previous dumping of munitions activities it may hold; • Archives New Zealand - been contacted to obtain any information on previous dumping of munitions activities it may hold; • MPI – this consultation has involved two avenues, one in relation to the fisheries assessment that has been undertaken, and the other in relation to biofouling contained on the vessel , including obtaining the permission under section 52 of the Biosecurity Act 1993 to move an unwanted organism (refer Appendix B); and • Beach Energy Resources NZ (Holdings) Limited – the dump site is also located completely within Petroleum Exploration Permit 38264 which is operated by Beach Energy Resources NZ (Holdings) Limited. The proposed dumping may impact on any future drilling programmes they may have within the Petroleum Exploration Permit. DWNZ consulted with Beach Energy Resources NZ (Holdings) Limited who advised it had no comments or concerns, mainly because the dump site is a large distance from where Beach Energy Resources NZ (Holdings) Limited is proposing drill any well.

Page 101

6 Impact Assessment – Potential Environmental Effects

6.1 Introduction

This section presents an assessment of the potential effects on the environment and existing interests that may arise from the proposed scuttling of the vessel at the dump site. The assessment is based on a qualitative ERA which takes into account the potential consequence of an effect occurring as well as the likelihood of such an effect occurring.

6.2 Environmental Risk Assessment Methodology

An ERA has been undertaken to identify the relative significance of the potential effects of the dumping of the vessel based on a likelihood and consequence approach.

The joint Australian & New Zealand International Standard Risk Management – Principles and Guidelines, (AS NZS ISO 31000:2018) (ISO, 2018) have been used to develop the ERA. In particular, the ERA methodology used in this application has been adapted from MacDiarmid et al. (2012) which sets out a risk assessment framework for activities in New Zealand’s EEZ and extended continental shelf. Guidance from Clark et al. (2017) has also been used to refine the ERA methodology so that it is specific and relevant to this application.

To summarise, the main steps undertaken for this ERA process are: • Identify the potential sources of environmental risk (including magnitude, scale, frequency and intensity); • Assess the potential consequences for each risk across all potential environmental receptors (with the operational procedures and proposed mitigation measures in place) - based on the criteria in Table 9; • Assess the likelihood of an environmental consequence occurring for each receptor - based on the criteria in Table 10; • Assign an overall classification of risk for any residual impacts, being the consequence score multiplied by the likelihood score – the resultant risk categories are presented in Table 11 and the respective rank descriptions described in Table 12; and • Assign a predicted magnitude of environmental effect as set out in the right-hand column of Table 12.

Page 102

Table 9 Criteria for Assessing Potential Consequence Levels. Adapted from MacDiarmid et al. (2012)

Consequence Scale of Effect Duration of Effect Effect on Populations, Protected Species (Wildlife Act 1953), Effect on Socio-Economic Receptors Effect on Habitat & Ecosystem Function level Sensitive Environments (Schedule 6 (Table 7)) and Recovery Period 0 – Negligible Highly localised Short-term and No predicted adverse effects to populations. Immediate recovery. No No disruptions to normal activities. No predicted effects on natural Undetectable, affecting <1% of original habitat effect (<1 km2). intermittent/temporary. protected species or sensitive environments impacted. resources or local communities. area. Ecosystem function unaffected.

1 - Minor Localised effect (1-5 Short-term but occurring Possible adverse effect to populations, but not sufficient enough to be Short-term disruptions to normal activities (weeks to months). Possible Measurable but localised, affecting 1-5% of original km2). frequently but ceases when detectable. Rapid recovery would occur (weeks to months). Some minor adverse effects to natural resources and/or local communities. habitat area. Minor changes to ecosystem function. activity ceases. individuals of protected species or sensitive environments may be impacted. 2 - Moderate Medium scale effect Medium term but ceases Detectable impacts to populations. Could affect seasonal recruitment Medium term disruptions to normal activities (months). Moderate adverse Potential impacts more widespread, affecting 5- (5-100 km2). when activity ceases. but does not threaten long-term viability. Recovery probably measured effect to natural resource and/or local communities. 20% of original habitat area. Moderate changes to in months to years. Some population level effects may become apparent ecosystem function. for protected species or sensitive environments.

3 - Severe Large scale effect Long-term but ceases when Impacts to populations are severe and may limit capacity for population Long-term disruptions to normal activities (years). Severe adverse effect to Widespread impacts, affecting 20-60% of original (100-500 km2). activity ceases increase. Recovery measured in multiple years. Population level impacts natural resources and local communities. habitat area. Severe changes to ecosystem are detectable for protected species or sensitive environments. function. 4 - Major Very large scale Long-term and continues Long-term viability of populations is clearly affected. Local extinctions are Extensive disruptions to normal activities (years-decades). Highly Activity may result in major changes to ecosystem effect (500-1,000 after activity ceases. a real possibility if activity continues. Recovery period of decades. significant and major adverse effects to natural resources and potentially or region, affecting 60-90% of original habitat area. km2). Serious conservation concerns for protected species or sensitive affecting national communities. Major changes to ecosystem function. environments. 5 - Catastrophic Regional effect Permanent. Local extinctions are expected in the short-term. Long-term recovery Very extensive disruptions to normal activities (decades). Catastrophic, Activity will result in critical changes to ecosystem (>1,000 km2). greater than decades and possibly never recovers. Very serious widespread and potentially irreparable damage to natural resources. or region, affecting virtually all original habitat. conservation concerns for protected species or sensitive environments. Massive negative and potentially irreversible effects on local and national Total collapse of ecosystem. communities, which may not be able to maintain pre-effect livelihood.

Table 10 Criteria for Assessing Consequence Likelihood. Following MacDiarmid et al. (2012)

Level/Score Description Likelihood of exposure 1 Remote Highly unlikely but theoretically possible. 2 Rare May occur in exceptional circumstances. 3 Unlikely Uncommon, but has been known to occur elsewhere. 4 Possible Occurred in a minority of similar studies or projects. 5 Likely Likely to occur and has generally occurred in similar projects. 6 Certain Could be expected to occur more than once during project delivery.

Page 103

Table 11 Overall Risk of Residual Impacts. Following MacDiarmid et al. (2012)

Consequence Level 0 – Negligible 1 – Minor 2 – Moderate 3 – Severe 4 – Major 5 – Catastrophic 1 – Remote Negligible Low Low Low Low Low (0) (1) (2) (3) (4) (5)

2 – Rare Negligible Low Low Moderate Moderate Moderate (0) (2) (4) (6) (8) (10) 3 – Unlikely Negligible Low Moderate Moderate High High (0) (3) (6) (9) (12) (15) 4 – Possible Negligible Low Moderate High High Extreme (0) (4) (8) (12) (16) (20) 5 – Likely Negligible Low Moderate High Extreme Extreme

Likelihoodof Consequence (0) (5) (10) (15) (20) (25) 6 – Certain Negligible Moderate High Extreme Extreme Extreme (0) (6) (12) (18) (24) (30)

Table 12 Risk Ranking Description

Risk Ranking Potential Impact Predicted Magnitude of Environmental Effect Extreme Extreme Risk – unacceptable for project to continue under Very Significant. (18-30) existing circumstances. Requires immediate action. Equipment could be destroyed with large environmental impact as a result of the activity. High High Risk (intolerable risk) – where the level of risk is not Significant. (12-16) acceptable and control measures are required to move the risk to lower the risk categories. Medium environmental impact from the activity. Moderate Moderate Risk – requires additional control measures where Minor. (6-10) possible or management/communication to maintain risk at less than significant levels. Small environmental impact from the activity. Where risk cannot be reduced to ‘Low’ control measures must be applied to reduce the risk as far as reasonably practicable. Requires continued tracking and recorded action plans. Low Low Risk – where the level of risk is broadly acceptable and Less than Minor. (1-5) generic control measures are already assumed in the design process but require continuous monitoring and improvement. Negligible Negligible Risk – no intervention or further monitoring is Negligible. (0) required. Negligible environmental impact.

Page 104

6.3 Proposed Activities

The potential and actual effects associated with the proposed activities are assessed in the following sections: • Use of explosives (Section 6.3.1); • Vessel sinking through the water column and landing on the seabed (Section 6.3.2); • Effects on persons that have an existing interest (Section 6.3.3); • Biosecurity (Section 6.3.5); • Effects on human health (Section 6.3.6); and • Cumulative effects (Section 6.3.7).

6.3.1 Use of Explosives

As discussed in Section 3.3.3, explosives are proposed to be used to scuttle the vessel. Such explosives create sound pressure waves, sometimes also referred to as underwater noise, which can travel large distances underwater. Increases in underwater noise can result in a range of potential impacts on marine fauna depending on the energy levels, frequencies, and duration of the source noise.

The following sections assess the potential impacts of the use of explosives on marine mammals and other marine fauna. Marine mammals are considered separately because they can be particularly sensitive to noise effects.

6.3.1.1 Marine Mammals

Marine mammals are highly vocal and dependent on sound for almost all aspects of their lives (Weilgart, 2007). In the event that a marine mammal is exposed to high intensity underwater noise at close range, lethal and sub- lethal physiological effects may occur (Gordon et al., 2003). Marine mammals are particularly sensitive to noise effects and potential impacts on them include: • Physical effects: trauma to body tissues or auditory damage leading to permanent or temporary hearing loss; • Auditory masking: increasing background noise levels which affects an animal’s ability to detect relevant sounds such as when finding prey, navigating, or in social communications; • Behavioural: causing avoidance or attraction responses, which may lead to disruption of normal functions; and • Disturbance or reduction in prey species.

Page 105

The softest sound that an animal can hear at a specific frequency is called the threshold of hearing at that frequency. If an animal is exposed to sound below the threshold of hearing, the animal cannot hear the sound. The animal can accommodate sounds that are above the threshold of hearing until a certain combination of intensity and duration is reached. Above this limit, the animal’s hearing threshold will be elevated. This means that the softest sound that the animal can hear is louder than it was before exposure to the sound, or they have lost the ability to hear the softest sounds they could hear before. The shift can either be temporary or permanent. A temporary shift is reversible, meaning the threshold will return to near normal levels and this loss of sensitivity is called a temporary threshold shift (TTS). As the sound exposure increases yet further, a higher level will eventually be reached at which the threshold shift will be permanent, and the effect is called a permanent threshold shift (PTS). PTS can occur as a result of repeated occurrences of TTS, or it can occur catastrophically as a result of a single exposure to a very intense sound.

In terms of assessing the effects associated with a ‘one-off’ explosion to scuttle the vessel it is considered appropriate to assess the risks of permanent injury to marine mammals rather than any temporary shift in hearing thresholds – such temporary effects are reversible and are considered appropriate to consider in situations where the noise is proposed to occur over a long duration or over large areas (such as the case for, say, seismic surveys). In this case permanent injury is defined as PTS or permanent damage to hearing.

There are two criteria that are used to assess potential effects of underwater noise. The first is the peak sound pressure level (Pk SPL) and the second is the cumulative sound exposure level (SEL24hr) within a defined period of up to 24 hours. In this case the noise event would be very short, seconds rather than hours.

Not all marine mammals have equal hearing capabilities in terms of absolute hearing sensitivity and frequency band of hearing. The thresholds applied in this case are those from the ‘Technical Guidance for Assessing the Effects of Anthropogenic Sound on Marine Mammal Hearing (Version 2.0) - Underwater Thresholds for Onset of Permanent and Temporary Threshold Shifts’ published by the United States National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS). The relevant PTS levels are shown in Table 13.

Table 13 Impulsive Noise Event PTS levels for Marine Mammals

PTS levels – impulsive noise events

Marine mammal hearing group Pk SPL Weighted SEL24hr dB re 1µPa dB re 1µPa2·S Low-frequency cetaceans 219 183 Mid-frequency cetaceans 230 185 High-frequency cetaceans 202 155 Phocid Pinnipeds in water 218 185 Otariid Pinnipeds in water 232 203

Table 13 identifies high-frequency cetaceans as being the most sensitive to underwater noise, both in terms of Pk SPL and SEL24hr. Marine mammals in this hearing group consist of true porpoises, Kogia (pygmy and dwarf sperm whales), river dolphins, cephalorhynchid (which includes Hector’s dolphin), Peale's dolphin, and the Hourglass dolphin. These species, with the exception of pygmy sperm whales, have either not been found in or around the dump site, or are very unlikely to be present (discussed in Section 4.3).

Table 14, which is based on Table 4, presents a list of the marine mammals that are either likely, possible, or occasional visitors in and around the dump site – this table also identifies which hearing frequency group each of these mammals falls into.

Page 106

Table 14 Hearing frequency of Marine Mammals Likely or Possible in and Around the Dump Site Likely presence in the Common Name Scientific Name Hearing frequency group dump site Bottlenose dolphin Tursiops truncatus Likely Mid-frequency cetacean Dusky dolphin Lagenorhynchus obscurus Likely Mid-frequency cetacean False killer whale Pseudorca crassidens Likely Mid-frequency cetacean Gray's beaked whale Mesoplodon grayi Likely Mid-frequency cetacean Killer whale Orcinus orca Likely Mid-frequency cetacean Long-finned pilot whale Globicephala melas Likely Mid-frequency cetacean New Zealand fur seal Arctocephalus forsteri Likely Otariid pinniped Southern right whale Eubalaena australis Likely Low-frequency cetacean Andrew's beaked whale Mesoplodon bowdoini Possible Mid-frequency Antarctic minke whale Balaenoptera bonaerensis Possible Low-frequency cetacean Arnoux's beaked whale Berardius arnuxii Possible Mid-frequency cetacean Cuvier's beaked whale Ziphius cavirostris Possible Mid-frequency cetacean Dwarf minke whale Balaenoptera acutorostrata Possible Low-frequency cetacean Fin whale Balaenoptera physalus Possible Low-frequency cetacean Hector's beaked whale Mesoplodon hectori Possible Mid-frequency cetacean Humpback whale Megaptera novaeangliae Occasional visitor Low-frequency cetacean Pygmy blue whale Balaenoptera musculus Possible Low-frequency cetacean Pygmy sperm whale Kogiabrevicauda breviceps Possible High-frequency cetacean Sei whale Balaenoptera borealis Possible Low-frequency cetacean Shepherd's beaked whale Tasmacetus shepherdi Possible Mid-frequency cetacean Southern right whale dolphin Lissodelphis peronii Possible Mid-frequency cetacean Sperm whale Physeter macrocephalus Possible Mid-frequency cetacean Strap-toothed whale Mesoplodon layardii Possible Mid-frequency cetacean

Noise calculations were undertaken to determine appropriate offset distances to prevent permanent injury to marine mammals. A short report outlining the results of the noise calculations is included in Appendix H. The Pk SPL thresholds are unweighted, while the cumulative SEL thresholds consider marine mammal auditory weighting functions (i.e. the sensitivity of the animals to noise at particular frequencies within their hearing range).

The results of the noise calculations are shown in Table 15 (the distances presented are rounded, the actual calculated distances are included in Appendix H). All distances to the permanent injury thresholds are controlled by the Pk SPL, rather than either of the SEL parameters.

Page 107

Table 15 Distance from Vessel to PTS Level

Distance (m) from Vessel to PTS Level

Marine mammal hearing group Pk SPL Weighted SEL24hr dB re 1µPa dB re 1µPa2·S Low-frequency cetaceans 80 70 Mid-frequency cetaceans 20 6 High-frequency cetaceans 560 80 Phocid Pinnipeds in water 90 45 Otariid Pinnipeds in water 20 6

Based on these noise calculations a 600 m mitigation zone is proposed to be used for marine mammals (the 560 m distance for high-frequency cetaceans has been rounded upwards to 600 m). DWNZ will use a qualified marine mammal observer (MMO) on the towing tug to determine whether any marine mammals are present within the 600 m mitigation zone for at least 30 minutes before the explosives are detonated – the qualified MMO will begin observations at least two hours before the intended detonation time. Detonation of the explosives that will be used to scuttle the vessel will be delayed if any marine mammals are visually observed within the 600 m mitigation zone in the 30 minutes prior to the proposed detonation time.

In the event that a delay is triggered due to the presence of any marine mammals within the 600 m mitigation zone, detonation procedures will only commence if either of the following are met: • All the marine mammals that were visually observed within the mitigation zone have been confirmed, through visual observation, to have moved beyond the mitigation zone; or • No marine mammals have been visually observed within the mitigation zone for 30 minutes.

A Marine Mammal Observation Protocol has been prepared to reflect the above commitments and will be implemented during the scuttling – a copy of this protocol is attached to the proffered conditions presented in Appendix I.

The implementation of these procedures will ensure adverse effects of the use of explosives on marine mammals will be avoided to the greatest practicable extent.

Activity Consequence Likelihood Risk Predicted Magnitude of Environmental Impact Use of explosives to 1 – Minor 3 – Unlikely 3 – Low Less than minor scuttle the vessel – Individuals of protected Uncommon, but has been effects on marine species may be impacted known to occur elsewhere mammals

Consequence – The use of explosives can result in potential effects on marine mammals, including those which may be protected species. However, utilisation of proposed mitigation measures, including the use of a qualified MMO, will reduce the potential effects on marine mammals as far as practicable. Nevertheless, the consequence is considered to be minor as protected species may be affected.

Page 108

Likelihood – The use of a qualified MMO to visually detect marine mammals within the 600 m mitigation zone will reduce the likelihood of an effect occurring from the use of explosives. As a result, it is considered that the likelihood is unlikely.

With the implementation of the proposed mitigation measures the overall environmental risk of adverse effects occurring on marine mammals from the use of explosives is assessed as low, with the predicted magnitude of environmental impact being less than minor.

6.3.1.2 Other Marine Fauna and Seabirds

Underwater noise can result in adverse effect on marine fauna other than marine mammals including zooplankton, benthic invertebrates, cephalopods, fish, and seabirds. As with marine mammals, these fauna groupings may experience physical effects (body trauma or auditory damage), behavioural changes, disturbance or reduction to prey, or masking of biological sounds and communication. Due to the ‘one off’ nature of the use of explosives to scuttle the vessel, only physiological effects (i.e. body trauma or permanent auditory damage) are considered further.

6.3.1.2.1 Other Marine Fauna

Results from explosive blast studies have indicated that the very fast, high-level acoustic exposure from explosions can cause physical damage and/or mortality wounds in fish (Hastings & Popper, 2005). The most sensitive area in fish bodies to damage from explosives is the gas-filled swim-bladder (Wright & Hopky, 1998), which may tear or rupture when exposed to gas oscillations induced by high sound pressure levels (Hastings & Popper, 2005); the swim-bladder ruptures in almost all fish killed by explosives (Lewis, 1996). The kidneys, liver, spleen, and sinus venous (a cavity within the heart) may also rupture and haemorrhage in response to a nearby explosion (Wright & Hopky, 1998), and bone fractures have been recorded in blast-killed fish (Ronquillo, 1950). The degree of damage is related to the type of explosive, size and pattern of the charge, method of detonation, distance from the point of detonation, water depth, and species, size and life stage of the affected fish (Wright, 1982); fish with swim bladders are more likely to suffer damage than those without, with evidence suggesting little or no damage occurs to fish without a swim bladders except at very short ranges (Stephenson et al., 2010; Halvorsen et al., 2012). Overall, the extent of fish kills decreases with increasing distance of the fish from the explosive source (Popper & Hastings, 2009). There have been no studies investigating whether detonations that do not kill fish have impacts on short or long-term hearing loss, other aspects of physiology (e.g. cell membrane permeability, metabolic rate, etc.), and/or behaviour (Hastings & Popper, 2005).

Traumatic brain injury is a form of tissue damage caused by exposure to high-level, transient sounds; in fish this is referred to as ‘acoustic stunning’ and is commonly used to the advantage of fishermen using explosives to stun and bring fish to the sea surface for collection. Acoustic thresholds required to elicit acoustic stunning are undefined (Popper & Hastings, 2009).

There is little information as to the effects of explosives on larvae and small juvenile fish. Although Wright (1982) suggested larval fish are less sensitive to injury than juveniles and adults, past evidence suggests an increased sensitivity to explosives with decreasing fish size (for example Munday et al., 1986; O’Keefee, 1984; Wiley et al., 1981). Govoni et al. (2008) carried out controlled experiments to determine the sensitivity of larval and small juvenile fish to shock wave exposure. The authors found larval and recently transformed juvenile fish to be more vulnerable to underwater shock waves than large juveniles and adult fish, with larval fish and small juveniles killed by the shock wave.

Page 109

Popper et al. (2014) developed guidelines for the threshold levels required during the detonation of explosives to cause physiological damage to fish, and fish eggs and larvae. For all fish (i.e. with and without a swim bladder), Popper et al. (2014) set a mortality and potential mortal injury threshold of 229 – 234 dB peak. Mortality and potential mortal injury in fish eggs and larvae is predicted to occur a threshold of >13 mm s-1 peak velocity. The noise calculations presented in the report included in Appendix H show the peak noise likely to be generated during the scuttling of the vessel will be 257 dB re 1µPa, this being greater than the mortality threshold suggested by Popper et al. (2014), meaning that mortality or injury of fish is very likely to occur if such fish are within close proximity of the vessel during detonation of the explosives.

While no studies have determined the effects of explosives on cephalopods, damage to sensory hair cells of statocysts (responsible for the animal’s sense of balance) has been observed in squid subject to acoustic emissions from a seismic source (Andre et al., 2011). Although the sounds produced by seismic surveys differ to that produced during the detonation of explosives, the observation of physiological trauma in squid provides evidence that cephalopods may experience physiological effects in the presence of loud anthropogenic noise, such as those produced during the detonation of explosives.

Studies into the effects of explosives on marine invertebrates have suggested that benthic invertebrates such as clams, oysters, and crabs are highly resistant to shock from the detonation of explosives (O’Keeffe & Young, 1984); although some mortality events has been observed in blue crabs (Callinectes sapidus), American oysters (Crassostrea virginica), and white shrimp (Penaeus setiferus) in close proximity (i.e. within at most 50 m) to detonated explosives (as referenced in Lewis, 1996). Benthic invertebrates present within the dump sites will not be affected by the detonation of explosives on account of the water depths within the dump sites (i.e. 600 – 1,200 m).

6.3.1.2.2 Seabirds

Yelverton et al. (1973) and Richmond and Jones (1974) investigated the effects of underwater explosions on birds, using ducks as the chosen model to represent diving and swimming birds. All ducks within a range of 8.5 m were killed by the detonation, with no deaths reported at distances greater than 11 m from the explosion, although some injury did occur at this distance. All ducks killed had extensive internal trauma (i.e. haemorrhaging, organ and eardrum rupture) (Yelverton et al., 1973; Richmond & Jones, 1974).

6.3.1.2.3 Summary

Based on the above literature, there is potential for mortality or injury of marine fauna to occur through the use of explosives; however, the dump site is not expected to support large aggregations of fish, zooplankton, or cephalopods. Therefore, only those individuals in proximity to the detonated explosives will suffer mortality or injury and no there will be no predicted effects to populations.

Activity Consequence Likelihood Risk Predicted Magnitude of Environmental Impact Use of explosives to 0 – Negligible 5 – Likely 0 – Negligible Negligible scuttle the vessel – No predicted effects to Likely to occur and has effects on other marine populations and no generally occurred in fauna. protected species similar projects impacted.

Page 110

Activity Consequence Likelihood Risk Predicted Magnitude of Environmental Impact Use of explosives to 1 – Minor 4 – Possible 4 – Low Less than minor scuttle the vessel – Individuals of some Occurred in a minority of effects on seabirds. protected species may be similar studies or projects affected but population effects are not sufficient enough to be detectable

Consequence – As outlined above, the use of explosives could cause mortality or injury to marine fauna, including some protected seabird species. However, due to the short-term one-off nature of the use of explosives, and the fact that the dump site is not expected to support large aggregations of seabirds, the consequence of the activity is considered to be minor. For other marine fauna the consequence of effects is expected to be negligible as no protected species are expected to be impacted.

Likelihood – the use of explosives has been seen to injure marine fauna in previous studies and is anticipated to injure any marine fauna if they are in close proximity to the blast, as such the likelihood of effects on other marine fauna from the causing of an explosion is assessed as likely and for seabirds it is considered possible.

The overall environmental risk of adverse effects occurring on other marine fauna from the use of explosives is assessed as negligible, with the predicted magnitude of environmental impact being negligible, however the risks to seabirds are assessed as being minor and the environmental impact is predicted to be less than minor.

6.3.2 Vessel Sinking Through the Water Column and Landing on the Seabed

Once the vessel sinks below the water it will drop rapidly downwards through the water column and will land on the seabed. The passage of the vessel and its landing on the seabed will impact the immediate benthic environment under the area where it lands and potentially also pelagic environments. These impacts are discussed in the subsections below.

6.3.2.1 Pelagic Effects

The potential pelagic ecological effects related to the scuttling have been identified as: 1. Direct contact with pelagic organisms during its descent to the seafloor; 2. Disruption to normal animal behaviours; and 3. Displacement of animals from preferred areas of habitat.

It is possible that the vessel could directly strike and injure or kill pelagic fauna during its descent to the seafloor. However, fish and other pelagic fauna generally demonstrate avoidance behaviours to disturbance and as such are likely to temporarily vacate the area while the vessel descends. Behavioural responses of fish to disturbance vary depending on species traits, but include startle responses, modification in schooling patterns and swimming, freezing, and changes in vertical distribution in the water column. As discussed in Section 6.3.1.1, it is unlikely that any cetaceans will be present within the dump site during the scuttling; however, if they are, they will also likely temporarily avoid the area (Wűrsig et al., 1998). Disruption of normal animal behaviour is of concern when it occurs frequently or over a prolonged period and affects critical behaviours such as feeding, breeding and resting. For the vessel, faunal displacement responses will be highly localised and temporary and as such, no lasting effects are predicted.

Page 111

Zooplankton can be affected by high concentrations of suspended sediments via the clogging of respiratory surfaces and/or feeding apparatus and impaired prey detection (Arendt et al., 2011). However, most species are able to tolerate relatively high levels of suspended sediment concentrations at least for a short period, and thus populations rapidly recover following disturbance events. In relation to this application, if any impacts to zooplankton occur, they will be short-term due to the one-off nature of the scuttling and zooplankton populations are highly transient and will move through the dump site with the currents. Zooplankton also have rapid generation times of days to months.

Activity Consequence Likelihood Risk Predicted Magnitude of Environmental Impact Scuttling of the vessel - 0 – Negligible 3 – Unlikely 0 – Negligible Negligible effects on the pelagic Individuals of species may Uncommon, but has been environment. be affected but known to occur elsewhere population effects are not sufficient enough to be detectable

Consequence – there is a potential for pelagic species to be directly hit by the vessel on its descent. However, due to the one-off nature of the activity, and the fact that pelagic species will demonstrate avoidance behaviour, these effects will not be sufficient enough to be detectable. As a result, the consequence of this activity is considered to be negligible.

Likelihood – the likelihood that an impact would occur on pelagic species from the vessel sinking through the water column would depend on those species being directly under it at the time of scuttling, and not avoiding the vessel. The potential for this to occur is considered to be unlikely.

The overall environmental risk of adverse effects occurring on the pelagic environment from the scuttling of the vessel, and the predicted magnitude of environmental impact is assessed as being negligible.

6.3.2.2 Benthic Effects

The potential benthic effects related to the vessel landing on the seabed are: 1. Loss of, or physical disturbance to, seabed habitat; 2. Crushing and/or smothering of benthic fauna; and 3. Physiological impacts including clogging of respiratory surfaces and feeding structures due to the settlement of resuspended sediment from the temporary sediment plume created when the vessel impacts the seafloor.

Page 112

The benthic community directly below where the vessel settles will be unavoidably lost and fauna living on the seabed will be crushed. Fauna living deeper in the sediment which survive the initial impact will probably die over time due to smothering effects whereby oxygen levels in the sediment below the vessel will reduce until the sediment becomes anoxic and unsuitable for fauna to survive. However, the area affected will be small (max. 1,100 m2) and the community directly beneath where the vessel settles and that in the surrounding sediments are unlikely to differ significantly. As such, only a small portion of a much larger habitat will be lost. Although there is no evidence of any protected species or sensitive environments, other than methane/cold seeps (see Section 4.4) at the dump site, it is likely that some protected species and/or some sensitive environments may be present in the area beneath where the vessel settles on the seafloor and these species and environments would likely be destroyed.

No direct impacts on sediment biota are predicted beyond the immediate footprint of the vessel on the seafloor; however, a temporary sediment plume is likely to be created when the vessel impacts on the seabed and that plume may impact the benthic fauna a relatively small distance away from where it lands when the suspended sediment settles back on the seafloor (how far such effects may occur is uncertain but is expected be no more than 50 or so metres either side the vessel). These effects may include smothering of fauna, clogging of feeding and respiratory structures, and choking of biota. However, open water ecosystems are dynamic and often in a state of perpetual change with periodic disturbances due to natural events such as storms. Such disturbances are not necessarily detrimental to benthic systems as they can maintain diversity by resetting communities. As such, benthic communities are often in a state of transition because of seabed disturbance by wave and current activity. The temporary sediment plume produced will be localised and the layer of sediment that settles on the seabed is likely to be thin (a few centimetres at the most). Essink (1999) reports that negative effects of deposited sediment on benthos are reduced when the layer of deposited sediment does not exceed 20 – 30 cm. Wilber et al. (2007) proposed the deposited sediment layer not to exceed 15 cm (in thickness) to avoid adverse effects on fauna. The sediment thicknesses reported in these studies are considerably higher than the thickness predicted around the vessel.

Due to the thin layer of sediment predicted to settle on the seabed, colonization of these sediments is likely to occur via the vertical migration of buried individuals (Essink, 1999; Wilber et al., 2007). Other colonisation mechanisms include horizontal immigration of post-larval individuals from the surrounding communities and larval recruitment from the water column (Bolam & Rees, 2003). However, these mechanisms are usually only relevant when the amount deposited is too great to allow species to survive burial (Stronkhorst, 2003; Bolam et al., 2006) which is not the case for the vessel.

Benthic fauna rely on in-situ production and the flux of organic carbon for food. As the sediment plume is unlikely to have any significant effects on primary production and other organisms living in the water column (see Section 6.3.2.1), there are not predicted to be any flow-on trophic to benthic organisms which exceed natural variability.

Section 4.4 identified potential sensitive environments and protected species are likely to be found within the dump site, particularly along the walls of the canyon which intersects the dump site. Adverse effects on protected species and/or sensitive environments will be significant within the dump site to the extent they are present in the area in and around where the vessel lands on the seabed, however no such effects will occur outside that limited area of impact or outside the dump site. It should be noted that protected species and sensitive environments are likely to be present elsewhere in the dump site, as well as outside of it. The likelihood of specific adverse effects, limited as they are to a small area in and around where the vessel lands, will not be of such scale as to be catastrophic for populations given that there will, in all probability, be a general distribution of such species throughout the area surrounding the dump site.

Page 113

The small area of the seabed that the vessel will occupy until such time it fully breaks down will be impacted immediately and will likely last as long as significant parts of the vessel still occupy that area. As the vessel breaks down over time, the benthic communities will gradually recolonise the sediment immediately beneath and adjacent to the impacted site. Over the extended period it will take for the vessel to rust and breakdown, periodic collapse of components and areas of the vessel will occur giving rise to temporary and localised effects, such as: • The disturbance of any epifauna that have colonised the collapsing component of adjacent part of the vessel; • The disturbance of any macrofauna in sediments that may be disturbed by a collapsing component or part of the vessel; and • The temporary increase in turbidity in the water column arising from any collapse.

Overall, the likelihood of adverse effects occurring on the benthic environment is assessed as being certain due to the smothering and crushing effects on fauna directly below where the vessel settles. The consequence of any adverse effects is dependent on whether there are any protected species and/or sensitive environments present where the vessel impacts the seabed – if neither are present the consequence is assessed as being negligible and if they are present the consequence is assessed as being minor – in both cases it is acknowledged that these effects will be permanent, but they will be highly localised and there will be no detectable effects on populations. The overall risk and magnitude of adverse effects is therefore assessed as being negligible but could be moderate (for the area beneath the vessel) with a resultant magnitude of adverse effects of minor if the vessel lands on protected species and/or sensitive environments.

Activity Consequence Likelihood Risk Predicted Magnitude of Environmental Impact Scuttling of the vessel - 0 – Negligible 6 – Certain 0 – Negligible Negligible effects on the benthic No sensitive environments Effects on benthic environment (no would be affected and organisms are certain to protected species area of effects very small occur in the area where and/or sensitive (<1 km2) the vessel impacts the environment present). seabed. Scuttling of the vessel - 1 – Minor 6 – Certain 6 – Moderate Minor effects on the benthic Individuals of species and Effects on benthic environment if vessel sensitive environments organisms are certain to lands on protected may be affected if the occur in the area where species and/or sensitive vessel lands on such an the vessel impacts the environment(s). environment, but seabed. population effects are not sufficient enough to be detectable

Consequence – the impact of the vessel as it lands on the seabed will result in impacts on the benthic environment over a very small area and, as such the consequence of effects is considered to be negligible if no protected species and/or sensitive environments are present. However, there is a chance that the vessel could land on protected species and/or sensitive environments, but due to the limited area of disturbance, population effects would not be sufficient enough to be detectable. As a result, the consequence should the vessel land on protected species and/or sensitive environments is considered to be minor.

Page 114

Likelihood – the vessel impacting on the benthic environment will certainly result in adverse effects within the immediate footprint area where the vessel lands. Therefore, the likelihood of effect is considered to be certain.

The overall environmental risk of adverse effects occurring on the benthic environment from the scuttling of the vessel is likely to be negligible, with the predicted magnitude of environmental impact also being negligible. However, the risks could be moderate if the vessel lands on protected species and/or sensitive environments, with the predicted magnitude of environmental impact being minor.

6.3.2.3 Positive Effects

Once settled on the seabed, the vessel will become an artificial reef (i.e. hard substrata) in a benthic environment that is thought to be dominated by mud, silt, and very fine sand. Sessile and sedentary epifauna such as sponges, gastropods, bivalves, and bryozoans can be expected to colonise the surfaces of the vessel over time with the composition of the communities reflecting the vessel’s final resting depth. Artificial reefs also provide habitat and shelter for fish and are important for aggregations of biodiversity and enhanced productivity.

6.3.3 Effects on Water Quality

The scuttling of the vessel may result in effects on the water quality within the dump site from any residual substances onboard the vessel and through the physical breakup of the vessel over time. The following sections provides an assessment of the two pathways for actual and potential effects on water quality.

6.3.3.1 Immediate Effects through the Water Column

Section 3.3.1 provides a description of how the vessel will be prepared prior to being towed to the dump site. This preparation work includes the use of a product named ‘Simple Green’ to clean various surfaces and machinery/equipment. Although this substance is advertised as being ‘non-toxic and biodegradable’, an assessment of the ecotoxicological effects and fate in the environment has been undertaken because some of this substance will remain onboard the vessel in trace amounts (as residual films) after the cleaning operations.

According to the Safety Data Sheet (Appendix J), Simple Green is predominantly made up of water (≥85%) with a variety of additives included to aid in the degreasing intents of the product. One such additive is identified as ‘Isothiazolinone Preservative’ (CAS Number: 55965-84-9) which is present at <0.1% concentration. Isothiazolinone Preservative is hereafter referred to as the ‘active ingredient’ as this particular substance drives the potential for ecotoxicological effects of Simple Green.

According to the National Industrial Chemicals Notification and Assessment Scheme website, the active ingredient readily partitions to water, and has a low octanol-water coefficient (log Kow = -0.49 – 0.53). This means that if any volume of this active ingredient is present in a solution (which may be the case here), it will not bioaccumulate in any populations of marine organisms that may ingest or come into contact with it. The active ingredient is considered to be inherently biodegradable (>20% in 28 days) but not readily biodegradable (>70% in 28 days). The implication being that, while the active ingredient is not bio-accumulative, its low rate of biodegradability means it theoretically could be present in the environment long enough to exert chronic effects on some organisms if they are in contact with ecotoxic concentrations for an extended period (>24 hours). However, the small volumes of Simple Green that would be present on the vessel would not be sufficient to cause any measurable ecotoxic effects to aquatic organisms, as the residual amounts present would be rapidly diluted to below ecotoxic concentrations as the vessel travels through the water column and then settles on the sea bed.

Page 115

It should be noted that there will be no pool, or single volume of Simple Green present on board the vessel, and that it, along with the active ingredient (Isothiazolinone Preservative) are fully water soluble. This means that any remaining volumes which will be present in thin residual layers (film) across any surface area of the vessel in which it is applied, will dilute rapidly once it comes into contact with the water column. The fact that any remaining volumes of the substance will be present in thin residual layers will further speed up the rate of diffusion into the water column and the rapid dilution of the substance to below ecotoxic concentrations.

Although Simple Green will be utilised for degreasing and general cleaning, trace amounts of oily residue will also remain on the vessel prior to scuttling as it is not possible to guarantee complete removal of all oils and greases that may be present on the vessel. Nevertheless, the oily residue located on the vessel will be in trace amounts within the machinery, and any resultant release into the marine environment is not anticipated to result in any measurable effects.

Activity Consequence Likelihood Risk Predicted Magnitude of Environmental Impact Effects on water quality 0 – Negligible 2 – Rare 0 – Negligible Negligible – immediate effects Individuals of species may May occur in exceptional through the water be affected but circumstances. column. population effects are not sufficient enough to be detectable

Consequence – there is a potential for the water quality, and consequently also aquatic organisms, to be affected by residual substances that will be present onboard the vessel. However, due to the anticipated residual amount of Simple Green and any oily residue being left on the vessel, and the rapid dilution of Simple Green to below ecotoxic concentrations, the potential for aquatic organisms to be in contact with the substance for the extended period of time required to have a measurable effect is significantly reduced. As a result, the consequence of this activity is considered to be negligible.

Likelihood – the likelihood that an impact occurs on the water quality, and any associated aquatic organisms, from any residual substances onboard the vessel is significantly reduced due to the rapid dilution expected during the decent to the seabed. It is expected that these impacts would only occur in exceptional circumstances; therefore, the likelihood is rare.

The overall environmental risk of adverse effects occurring on the water quality from any substances remaining on the vessel, and the predicted magnitude of environmental impact is assessed as being negligible.

6.3.3.2 Long-term Effects from Degradation

A conservative estimate for the rate of steel corrosion in the marine environment is 200 µm/year (Aisha H. Al- Moubaraki, 2015). The thickness of the vessel’s hull is in the order of 8 mm (sides) to 16 mm (bottom). Using the 8 mm thickness, it will take approximately 40 years for the thinner parts of the hull to fully corrode. Any thicker pieces of steel will take even longer to breakdown. Iron oxide (CAS Number: 1309-37-1) is the main by-product of metal corrosion and is not ecotoxic to aquatic organisms and will therefore not adversely affect the marine environment as it is slowly released into the environment from the rusting vessel.

Page 116

Given the long period of time it will take for any metal components of the vessel to corrode, any harmful substance that are enclosed within the vessel will very slowly diffuse as the metal that has been containing it becomes increasingly more porous over time due to corrosion. This level of diffusion will not result in any harmful substances that are dumped as part of vessel scuttling entering the environment in ecotoxic concentrations.

Small fragments such as paint flecks and fragments of steel or other materials will enter the sediments as a result of the initial dumping event and as a result of the long-term breakdown of the vessel. These particles will eventually breakdown in the saline marine environment. Should any of these particles become incorporated into the subsurface sediments due to bioturbation or other processes, they may take longer to breakdown due to the lower levels of oxygen within the subsurface sedimentary environment. Aerobic breakdown processes such as oxidation are generally assumed to occur at 10% of the rate that occurs in the more oxygenated environment of the sediment-water column interface. Even when this is taken into consideration the effects of chemical leaching into the surrounding environment due to the breakdown of these fragments will be immeasurable.

Activity Consequence Likelihood Risk Predicted Magnitude of Environmental Impact Effects on water quality 0 – Negligible 1 – Remote 0 – Negligible Negligible – long-term effects from Individuals of species may Highly unlikely but degradation. be affected but theoretically possible. population effects are not sufficient enough to be detectable

Consequence – the degradation of the vessel will occur over an extended period of time (approximately 40 years) which will result in immeasurable impacts on the water quality and surrounding environment from the slow diffusion. These impacts will be highly localised around the decaying vessel with a very small quantity of substances being released into the marine environment. Therefore, the resulting consequence is considered to be negligible.

Likelihood – the likelihood that an impact occurs on the water quality, and any associated aquatic organisms, from the very gradual degradation of the vessel will be highly unlikely due to the extended period of time in which the degradation would occur and the resultant ecotoxicity concentrations at which the diffusion would occur. Although, as it is theoretically possible that an impact could occur, the likelihood is considered to be remote.

The overall environmental risk of adverse effects occurring on the water quality from any degradation of the vessel, and the predicted magnitude of environmental impact is assessed as being negligible.

6.3.4 Effects on Persons that have an Existing Interest

Section 5.1 identifies the five persons who are considered to have an existing interest, as per the definition contained within section 4 of the EEZ Act. The actual or potential effects on the persons that have an existing interest in the dump site are twofold, those associated with: • Temporary exclusion of the dump site while the scuttling activity occurs; and • The physical presence of the vessel once settled on the seafloor.

Page 117

The following sections provide an assessment of the two pathways for actual and potential effects on those parties that have an existing interest.

6.3.4.1 Temporary Exclusion

While the scuttling is being undertaken, the use of the area, including for fishing activities, will be restricted. However, this will be of a temporary duration, with the use of the area being available for use immediately after the operations have been completed.

An assessment of the commercial fishing events within the dump site has been provided by FNZ (Section 4.7.1) over the last five years (2014 – 2019). During this period, 14 fishing events occurred within the dump site, utilising set nets and surface/midwater longline methods targeting school shark and southern bluefin tuna, respectively. The spatial/temporal overlap between the proposed activity and the commercial fishing activities need to be considered when assessing the potential impacts. The chance that the area is utilised for fishing over the same period of time that the scuttling activities are proposed to occur is considered very minor due to the small number of fishing events within the dump site over the last five years and the short timeframe that the proposal will take to complete. Therefore, it is considered rare that the proposed activity will impact commercial fishers’ ability to catch their quota.

DWNZ has undertaken consultation with the relevant commercial fishing interests and papatipu rūnanga (as outlined within Section 5) and no specific concerns were raised in terms of effects on commercial fishing. Activity Consequence Likelihood Risk Predicted Magnitude of Environmental Impact Temporary exclusion on 0 – Negligible 2 – Rare 0 – Negligible Negligible persons that have an Highly localised, short- May occur in exceptional existing interest term/temporary, no circumstances disruption to normal activities

Consequence – Due to the rare use of the dump site by commercial fishers (Section 4.7.1), and the short-term duration of the activities, there will be no disruption to normal activities associated with the temporary exclusion of the area. In addition, the area in which the exclusion would take place is highly localised in a wide offshore marine environment. As a result, the consequences from the temporary exclusion on persons that have an existing interest would be negligible.

Likelihood – The likelihood that the temporary exclusion of the area having effects on persons that have an existing interest would only occur during a spatial/temporal overlap with commercial fishers. As commercial fishers rarely utilise the dump site, the likelihood that a spatial and temporal overlap between them and the proposed scuttling of the vessel is rare.

The overall environmental risk of adverse effects occurring on persons that have an existing interest from temporary exclusions, and the predicted magnitude of environmental impact is assessed as being negligible.

Page 118

6.3.4.2 Physical Presence of Scuttled Vessel

The final result of the proposed scuttling will result in the vessel permanently situated on the seafloor within the dump site. Under normal circumstances this could result in an impediment to fishing activities, with the potential for damage to fishing equipment if caught on the vessel. However, as the dump site is within an area labelled as ‘Explosives Dumping Ground’ on the New Zealand Nautical Charts and the commercial fishing industry largely avoids using fishing techniques which interact with the seafloor within the dump site already. This is evidenced by data provided by MPI which confirms the fishing methods used in the last five years related to set nets and surface/midwater longline – no bottom trawling has occurred. Therefore, the likelihood of an effect occurring on fishing interests from the presence of the vessel on the seabed is considered to be remote.

The Kāi Tahu Ki Otago Natural Resource Management Plan 2005 includes a policy in relation to dumping being undertaken in a council-designated landfill. While not directly relevant to offshore dumping, it is noted the dump site is within one of five authorised locations which are considered to be of similar intent.

Activity Consequence Likelihood Risk Predicted Magnitude of Environmental Impact Physical presence of 0 – Negligible 1 – Remote 0 – Negligible Negligible vessel on persons that Highly localised and no Highly unlikely but have an existing interest disruption to normal theoretically possible. activities

Consequence – Due to the rare use of the dump site and the fact that commercial fishing activities do not utilise bottom trawl techniques when they do use the area, it is considered that there will be no disruption to normal activities. In addition, the area of physical presence is highly localised (i.e. approximately 1,100 m2). As a result, the consequences from the physical presence of the vessel on persons that have an existing interest would be negligible.

Likelihood – The likelihood of an effect occurring is remote because any commercial fishing that occurs in the dump site does not utilise bottom trawl techniques so the likelihood of any adverse effects on commercial fishing is highly unlikely (but theoretically possible).

The overall environmental risk of adverse effects occurring on persons that have an existing interest from the physical presence of the vessel, and the predicted magnitude of environmental impact is assessed as being negligible.

6.3.5 Biosecurity

As discussed in Section 3.3.2.2, a dive survey of the hull of the vessel was undertaken in September 2019. That survey confirmed the non-indigenous marine biota identified on-site during the inspection are all established in New Zealand – that is, none are new to New Zealand. However, one ‘unwanted organism’ (Undaria pinnatifida) was found on the hull.

DWNZ is not proposing to remove the biofouling currently on the vessel and has discussed the presence of the unwanted organism (Undaria pinnatifida) that is present on the hull with MPI.

Page 119

It is highly unlikely that the unwanted organism recorded during the survey of the vessel will survive at the water depths of the dump site (600-1,200 m); however, movement of the vessel to the dump site may result in dislodgement of the unwanted organism during transit. These risks have been assessed as part of the permission granted by MPI under section 52 of the Biosecurity Act 1993 and, subject to compliance with the conditions imposed on the permission, these risks are considered to be acceptable. Given that MPI has already assessed the risks as being acceptable, no ERA has been undertaken.

6.3.6 Effects on Human Health

The potential pathway for effects of the activity on human health are two-fold: through direct exposure during the use of explosives; and through exposure to fish species potentially contaminated by residual harmful substances left on the vessel. Both of these pathways are discussed in further detail below.

Direct exposure to the use of explosives can result in a number of effects on both the general public and those members undertaking the explosives. However, the use of explosives is strictly managed under other MMRs; and as such, it is considered that it is not appropriate to assess these effects under this Application as they would be managed more effectively through the legislation promulgated specifically for the management of these risks. In addition to being managed by other MMRs, the potential for direct exposure to the explosives operations for the general public will be mitigated naturally by the separation distance between the proposed scuttling operation and the coast (approximately 39 km from the centre of the dump site).

The second pathway for potential effects on human health is from the consumption of fish which may be contaminated by any harmful substances remaining onboard the vessel when it is scuttled. As outlined within Section 3.3, the vessel will be prepared as much as possible to reduce the likelihood of any harmful substances escaping once it is scuttled. In addition to this, for human health to be affected through this pathway, commercial fisheries would be required to catch pelagic fish which have been subject to any contamination for extended periods of time. As the commercial fisheries is limited in the area (Section 4.7.1), and the likelihood of any harmful substances remaining onboard the vessel is remote, the potential effects associated with this pathway are considered to be negligible.

Activity Consequence Likelihood Risk Predicted Magnitude of Environmental Impact Effects on human 0 – Negligible 1 – Remote 0 – Negligible Negligible health. Highly localised effect Highly unlikely but theoretically possible

Consequence – Any potential effects on human health will be highly localised around the scuttling operation, with effects from the noise being in close proximity to the explosives, and the potential for contamination of fish species highly restricted to any residue left on the vessel. As a result, the consequences from the scuttling of the vessel on human health would be negligible.

Likelihood – The likelihood of any effects on human health is assessed as being remote due to the distance offshore, and the other MMRs which regulate the risks associated with the use of explosives. In addition, due to the small number of commercial fishing operations within the dump site, the chance for any contaminated fish to be caught and consumed is remote.

The overall environmental risk of adverse effects occurring on human health, and the predicted magnitude of environmental impact is assessed as being negligible.

Page 120

6.3.7 Cumulative Effects

The potential for cumulative effects is considered with regards to two groups of activities: 1) the additive effects of the various activities on each environmental receptor, and 2) other activities occurring within and surrounding the dump site. These are addressed below.

6.3.7.1 Potential Cumulative Effects from the Activities associated with the Scuttling of the Vessel

There are three separate effects associated with this Application that need to be considered in terms of the potential cumulative effects; 1) underwater noise from the causing of an explosion, 2) the descent of the vessel through the water column, and 3) the subsequent settling of the vessel on the seafloor. Specifically, the following discussion assesses how two or more of these effects may affect common receptors.

Pelagic receptors (such as fish, cephalopods etc.) have the potential to be adversely effected by the noise generated from the explosives and also affected by the descending vessel through the water column. These effects on the pelagic environment have been considered separately within Sections 6.3.1.2 and 6.3.2.1. The magnitude of effects from the descending the vessel (Section 6.3.2.1) has been assessed as negligible; the addition of these negligible effects on the noise effects caused by explosives (being less than minor under Section 6.3.1.2) will not result in a magnitude of effect greater than ‘less than minor’.

Benthic receptors may be affected by the noise of the explosion and will also be affected by the physical crushing of the vessel as it impacts the seafloor. In terms of timing of these two effects, the noise effects will occur ahead of the crushing effects, meaning that any benthic organisms living where the vessel impacts the seabed may be affected by the noise, but it will then be killed by crushing. Therefore, any noise effects will not result in greater effects than mortality. The overall magnitude of cumulative effects on benthic environments will be no greater than that assessed for benthic environments under Section 6.3.2.2, which is considered to be minor.

6.3.7.2 Potential Cumulative Effects from Other Activities within and surrounding the Dump Site

Potential cumulative effects from the scuttling operations and those effects from activities within and surrounding the dump site are very limited, due to the limited use of the area by other activities. Sections 4.7.1 and 4.7.4 provide an assessment of the commercial fishing and commercial shipping activities that utilise the area around and within the dump site. Potential effects from these activities, in combination with those associated with this Application are effectively limited to the noise generated from the ships traversing near the area, in addition to the noise generated from the causing of an explosion. Due to the limited use of the area, and the one-time, short-term explosion from this Application, it is considered that the magnitude of any potential cumulative effects is negligible.

6.3.8 Effects outside of the Exclusive Economic Zone

Section 39(d) of the EEZ Act requires the identification of effects of the activity on the environment and existing interests, including those that may occur in New Zealand or in the sea above or beyond the continental shelf beyond the outer limits of the EEZ. As this requirement includes effects that may occur in New Zealand, an assessment has been undertaken on the potential effects from the scuttling of the vessel within the CMA.

Due to the significant distance away from the EEZ boundary (approximately 9 km to the closest boundary of the dump site), and the relatively small spatial extent of the impacts from the proposed activity, it is considered that there will be no effects outside of the EEZ.

Page 121

Activity Consequence Likelihood Risk Predicted Magnitude of Environmental Impact Effects outside of the 0 – Negligible 1 – Remote 0 – Negligible Negligible EEZ. Highly localised Highly unlikely but theoretically possible

Consequence – The effects associated with the scuttling of the vessel are all highly localised around the point at which the scuttling occurs. The separation distance between the dump site and the closest point outside of the EEZ is approximately 9 km. As a result, the consequences from the proposed scuttling activities outside of the EEZ would be negligible.

Likelihood – The likelihood of effects occurring outside of the EEZ from the proposed scuttling operations is remote due to the large separation distance between the proposed activities and the closest boundary of the EEZ.

The overall environmental risk of adverse effects occurring outside of the EEZ, and the predicted magnitude of environmental impact is assessed as being negligible.

6.4 Measures to Avoid, Remedy or Mitigate Adverse Effects

The proposed scuttling of the vessel will be undertaken in accordance with the project description contained within Section 3, including the specifications outlined within the appendices. The ERA undertaken on the proposed activities within Section 6.3 has been based on an extensive suite of measures to avoid, remedy, or mitigate the potential effects on the environment and existing interests. This suite of measures is summarised below: • The vessel will be cleaned and prepared in accordance with the document entitled “FV Dong Won 701 – Proposed Disposal Brief” and will not be towed to the dump site or dumped until an experienced independent recognised surveyor has inspected the vessel and submitted a written statement to the EPA to confirm it has been prepared in accordance with that brief; • A ‘Notice to Mariners’ will be issued by Land Information New Zealand (LINZ) to advise other marine users that the proposed activity will be taking place and this notice will also impose a temporary exclusion zone around the site, restricting other vessels coming near the towing and explosive operations. The area will be available for use immediately after the operations have been completed; • The vessel will only be dumped on a day when the weather, swell, and sea conditions at the dump site allow for control of the vessel both prior to, and during, the dumping process; • Visual detection of marine mammals in and around the vessel will be undertaken by a qualified MMO in accordance with the Marine Mammal Observation Protocol to ensure no marine mammals are observed within the 600 m mitigation zone before the explosive charges are detonated. The detonation of the explosives will not commence until all sighted marine mammals are seen to move out of the mitigation zone or are not observed for a 30 minute period; • The vessel will remain under the control of the towing tug until water begins entering the blast holes so as to minimise the risk of drift; • DWNZ will remain at the dump site for a minimum of 30 minutes following the scuttling of the Dong Won to observe whether the scuttling activity has resulted in any floating debris. Any debris that are observed shall be retrieved, recorded and taken onshore to a facility that is authorised to accept such material; and

Page 122

• All personnel (e.g. explosive experts, tow master) involved with the scuttling will have the appropriate training and qualifications (where appropriate).

6.5 Risk Assessment and Effects Summary

This Application has been prepared to: • Gain an understanding of the existing environment within the dump site and the surrounding area; • Predict any potential effects that the activity may have; • Assess the environmental risks associated with the proposal; • Predict the actual and potential impacts/effects that the dumping activity may have on the environment and existing interests; and • Assist in identifying measures that can be implemented to avoid, remedy, or mitigate any significant environmental effects.

This Application has been prepared using the best currently available information, including that information provided for within Appendix A to Appendix J. The assessment of potential effects on the environment and existing interests, and the significance of these effects, has drawn on reported literature and in accordance with the EEZ Act and other relevant MMRs. As part of this assessment, an ERA was completed (Section 6); the outcome of which has been summarised in Table 16.

Page 123

Table 16 Summary Assessment of Risks and Environmental Impacts associated with this Application

Consequence Likelihood Risk Predicted Magnitude of Environmental Impact Use of explosives to scuttle 1 – Minor 3 – Unlikely 3 – Low Less than minor the vessel – effects on marine mammals Use of explosives to scuttle 0 – Negligible 5 – Possible 0 – Negligible Negligible the vessel – effects on other marine fauna Use of explosives to scuttle 1 – Minor 4 – Possible 4 – Low Less than minor the vessel – effects on seabirds Scuttling of the vessel - 0 – Negligible 3 – Unlikely 0 – Negligible Negligible effects on the pelagic environment Scuttling of the vessel - 0 – Negligible 6 – Certain 0 – Negligible Negligible effects on the benthic environment (no protected species and/or sensitive environment present) Scuttling of the vessel - 1 – Minor 6 – Likely 6 – Moderate Minor effects on the benthic environment if vessel lands on protected species and/or sensitive environment(s) Effects on water quality – 0 – Negligible 2 – Rare 0 – Negligible Negligible immediate effects through the water column. Effects on water quality – 0 – Negligible 1 – Remote 0 – Negligible Negligible long-term effects from degradation. Temporary exclusion on 0 – Negligible 2 – Rare 0 – Negligible Negligible persons that have an existing interest Physical presence of vessel 0 – Negligible 1 – Remote 0 – Negligible Negligible on persons that have an existing interest Effects on human health 0 – Negligible 1 – Remote 0 – Negligible Negligible

Effects outside of the EEZ 0 – Negligible 1 – Remote 0 – Negligible Negligible

Page 124

This overall assessment confirms that the potential effects are, at worst, minor (this being if the vessel lands on any protected species and/or a sensitive environment) and this conclusion aligns with the Minister for the Environment’s conclusion that such activities have a low probability of significant effects on the environment or existing interests and, as such, qualify to be classified as non-notified activities. Section 29D of the EEZ Act requires the Minister to be satisfied that an activity has a low probability of significant adverse effects on the environment or existing interests before making regulations that provide of such an activity to be classified as non-notified. The RIS11 prepared in support of the D&D Regulations confirms that the dumping activities associated with this application have a low probability of significant effects on the environment or existing interests.

11 https://www.mfe.govt.nz/sites/default/files/media/Marine/RIS-for-discharge-and-dumping-activities.pdf

Page 125

7 Proffered Conditions

DWNZ has prepared a set of proffered conditions which are included in Appendix I. It is noted that the EPA has not issued any marine dumping consents for vessels since the D&D Regulations came into force, meaning there are no example consent conditions for this type of activity. Despite this, MNZ has historically issued a number of permits to dump vessels under the MTA and Marine Protection Rule – Part 180.9 and these permits contain a number of ‘standard’ conditions which DWNZ has reviewed and used in its proffered conditions.

This section presents a summary of the key proffered conditions and the rationale behind their drafting.

Condition 2 specifies a lapsing date of 31 December 2021. While DWNZ intends to scuttle the vessel as soon as possible after the marine dumping consent is granted and the vessel is cleaned and prepared, this date will give some flexibility should unforeseen delays occur.

Condition 5 requires the vessel to be cleaned in accordance with the Disposal Brief contained in Appendix C of this Application. Condition 6 then requires an independent assessment by a recognised surveyor to ensure the cleaning has been completed satisfactorily before the vessel is towed to the dump site.

Condition 8 identifies the location within the dump site that the vessel is to be scuttled. A one nautical mile radius is specified to provide DWNZ with some flexibility in terms of the final scuttling location.

Condition 9 requires DWNZ to ensure the contractor it appoints to carry out the tow of the vessel holds marine insurance that covers the tow of the vessel from the berth to the dump site.

Condition 10 requires DWNZ to engage a qualified MMO to determine if there are any marine mammals in and around the vessel. The MMO must comply with the Marine Mammal Observation Protocol.

Condition 11 outlines the delay requirements and detonation recommencement criteria should any marine mammals be visually observed within the 600 m mitigation zone. This mitigation zone is based on the noise calculations and marine species that are likely to be present, as discussed in Section 6.3.1.1. This is a key condition in terms of mitigating potential effects on marine mammals.

Condition 12 requires DWNZ to remain at the dump site for at least 30 minutes after the scuttling of vessel and to retrieve any debris that is observed. Any collected debris must then be taken onshore to a facility that is authorised to accept such material.

Condition 13 requires details of the dumping to be recorded and provided to the EPA. This includes the location (latitude and longitude) of the vessel where it was last sighted as well as its location on the seabed.

It is considered that the proffered conditions, both singularly and in total, appropriately avoid, remedy, or mitigate potential adverse effects on the environment and existing interests identified by this IA.

Page 126

8 Conclusion

DWNZ is applying for a marine dumping consent under section 38 of the EEZ Act. This Application is to permit activities associated with the dumping of the vessel which suffered a serious fire causing extensive damage to the vessel.

An ERA has been undertaken to identify the relative significance of the potential effects from the dumping of the vessel on the environment and existing interests. The ERA is a qualitative assessment which has taken into account the potential consequence of an effect occurring, as well as the likelihood of such an effect occurring following the implementation of mitigation measures.

In assessing the effects from the dumping of the vessel on the environment and existing interests, the following considerations are of importance: • The dump site is one of five authorised locations within the EEZ for the dumping of specific matter, including vessels; • The proposed dumping activities, including the use of explosives, will be a short-term, one-off activity which will be located a significant distance from shore; • Prior to the dumping operations being undertaken, the vessel will be cleaned and prepared in accordance with the “FV Dong Won 701 – Proposed Disposal Brief”; • A qualified MMO will keep a watch for New Zealand fur seals and all other marine mammals to ensure they are not observed within the 600 m mitigation zone prior to the detonation of the explosives; • The vessel will remain under the control of the towing tug until water begins entering the blast holes so as to minimise the risk of drift; • Biofouling risks have been assessed by MPI through its consideration of the ‘permission’ granted under section 52 of the Biosecurity Act 1993 to move the unwanted organism that was found on the hull of the vessel; and • There are strict health and safety requirements under the HSW Act in respect to the handling, transport, and detonation of the explosive charges; and • Consultation has been undertaken with persons who have an existing interest. None of the parties consulted raised any major concerns regarding the proposed activity.

The ERA undertaken shows that the environmental risks on most receptors are negligible and the potential greatest risks are associated with benthic effects in the very small area (~1,100 m2) where the vessel impacts the seabed – these risks have are assessed as negligible but could be moderate (for the area underneath the vessel) if the vessel lands on protected species and/or a sensitive environment with the predicted magnitude of such effects on any such protected species and/or sensitive environments being minor.

Given the above points, in combination with the full suite of mitigation measures outlined in Section 6.4 and the proffered conditions in Appendix I, it is considered that there are no reasons why the marine dumping consent sought should not be granted.

Page 127

9 References

Agnew, P., 2014. ‘Demographic parameters, foraging and responses to environmental variation of little penguins [Eudyptula minor]’. Dunedin (NZ): University of Otago. https://ourarchive.otago.ac.nz/bitstream/handle/10523/5754/ AgnewPhilippaM2015PhD.pdf?sequence=1. Aisha H. Al-Moubaraki, A. A.J. 2015. ‘Corrosion of C-Steel in the Red Sea: Effect of Immersion Time’. International Journal of Electrochemical Science, 4252-4278. Anderson, O.F., Bagley, N.W., Hurst, R.J., Francis, M.P., Clark, M.R., McMillan, P.J., 1998. ‘Atlas of New Zealand fish and squid distributions from research bottom trawls’. NIWA Technical Report 42, pp. 300. Andre, M., Soler, M., Lenoi, M., Dufrot, M., Quero, C., Alex, M., Antoni, L., Van Der Schar, M., Lopez-Bejar, M., Morell, M., Zaugg, S., Houegnigan, L, 2011. ‘Low-Frequency Sounds Induce Acoustic Trauma In Cephalopods’. Frontiers in Ecology and ArchSite, 2019. ‘New Zealand Archaeological Association – Archaeological Site Recording Scheme’. https://archsite.eaglegis.co.nz/NZAAPublic Arendt, K.E., Dutz, J., Jonasdottir, S.H., Jung-Madsen, S., Mortensen, J., Møller E.F., Nielsen, T.G., 2011. ‘Effects of suspended sediments on copepods feeding in a glacial influenced sub-Arctic fjord’. Journal of Plankton Research 33: 1526–1537. Aroyan, J. L., McDonald, M. A., Webb, S. C., Hildebrand, J. A., Clark, D., Laitman, J. T., Reidneberg, J. S., 2000. ‘Acoustic models of sound production and propagation’. In: Hearing by Whales and Dolphins (ed. by W. W. L. Au, A. N. Popper & R. N. Fay), pp. 409-469. Springer, New York, U. S. Attard, C. R., Beheregaray, L. B., Burton, L. K., Jenner, K. C., Gill, P. C., Jenner, M. N., Morrice, M. G., Moller, L. M., 2012. ‘Genetic identity of blue whales (Balaenoptera musculus) in Geographe Bay, Western Australia: progress report’. Au, W. W. L., Würsig, B., 2004. ‘Echolocation signals of dusky dolphins (Lagenorhynchus obscurus) in Kaikoura, New Zealand’. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 115: 2307. Auge, A.A., Lalas, C., Davis, L.S., Chilvers, B.L., 2011. ‘Autumn diet of recolonising female New Zealand sea lions based at Otago Peninsula, South Island, New Zealand’. New Zealand Journal of Marine and Freshwater Research 46(1): 97-110. Bagley, N.W., Anderson, O.F., Hurst, R.J., Francis, M.P., Taylor, P.R., Clark, M.R., Paul, L.J., 2000. ‘Atlas of New Zealand fish and squid distributions from midwater trawls, tuna longline sets, and aerial sightings’. NIWA Technical Report No: 72, pp. 167. Baird, R.W., 2009. ‘False killer whale Pseudorca crassidens’. In: W. F. Perrin and B. G. Würsig and J. G. M. Thewissen (Ed.), Encyclopaedia of marine mammals, pp. 405–406. Academic Press, United States Baker, A.N., 1999. ‘Whales & Dolphins of New Zealand & Australia: An identification guide’. Victoria University Press, Wellington, New Zealand Baker, C.S., Boren, L., Childerhouse, S., Constantine, R., van Helden, A., Lundquist, D., Rayment, W., Rolfe, J.R., 2019. ‘Conservation status of New Zealand marine mammals’. New Zealand Threat Classification Series 29. 18 p. Baker, C.S., Chilvers B.L., Childerhouse, S., Constantine, R., Currey, R., Mattlin, R., van Helden, A., Hitchmough, R., Rolfe, J., 2016. ‘Conservation status of New Zealand marine mammals, 2013’. New Zealand Threat Classification Series 14. Department of Conservation, Wellington. Barrett-Lennard, L.G., Ford, J.K.B., and Heise, K.A., 1996. ‘The mixed blessing of echolocation: differences in sonar use by fish-eating and mammal-eating killer whales’. Animal Behaviour 51: 553–565. Batson, P.B., 2000. ‘The Otago shelf bryozoan thickets: aspects of their distribution, ecology and sedimentology’. Master of Science thesis, University of Otago, New Zealand. Batson, P.B., Probert, P.K., 2000. ‘Bryozoan thickets off Otago Peninsula. New Zealand Fisheries Assessment Report 2000/46’. Ministry of Fisheries, Wellington, New Zealand.

Page 128

Beaumont, J., Orpin, A., Bradley, A., Carter, M., Davey, N., Fenwick, M., Hale, R., Halliday, J., Leduc, D., Miller, A., Mills, S., Neill, K., Nodder, S., Olsen, G., Pallentin, A., Peart, R., Spong, K., Tracey, D., Walkington, M. 2019. ‘Benthic-survey data summary, Canterbury Great South Basin. Field results from RV Tangaora voyage TAN1902’. Prepared for OMV Great South Basin Limited, June 2019. Berkenbusch, K., Abraham, E.R., Torres, L.G., 2013. ‘New Zealand marine mammals and commercial fisheries’. New Zealand Aquatic Environment and Biodiversity Report No. 119. Ministry for Primary Industries, Wellington, New Zealand. 113 p. Bolam, S. G., Rees, H. L., Somerfield, P., Smith, R., Clarke, K. R., Warwick, R. M., Atkins, M., Garnacho, E., 2006. ‘Ecological consequences of dredged material disposal in the marine environment: a holistic assessment of activities around the England and Wales coastline’. Marine Pollution Bulletin 52(4): 415–426. Bolam, S., Rees, H., 2003. ‘Minimizing Impacts of Maintenance Dredged Material Disposal in the Coastal Environment: A Habitat Approach’. Environmental management 32: 171-188. Bonfil, R., Franics, M.P., Duffy, C., Manning, M.J., O’Brien, S., 2010. ‘Large-scale tropical movements and diving behaviour of white sharks Carcharodon carcharias tagged off New Zealand’. Aquatic Biology, 8: 115 – 123. Bräger, S., Harraway, J.A., Manly, B.F.J., 2003. ‘Habitat selection in a coastal dolphin species (Cephalorhynchus hectori)’. Marine Biology 143: 233–244. Braham, H., Rice, D., 1984. ‘The right whale, Balaena glacialis’. Marine Fisheries Review. Brodie, J.W., 1960. ‘Coastal surface currents around New Zealand’. New Zealand Journal of Geology and Geophysics 3: 235- 252. Cairns, D., 1950. ‘New Zealand freshwater eels’. Tuatara, 3(2): 43 – 52. Chiaradia, A., Ropert-Coudert, Y., Kato, A., Mattern, T., Yorke, J., 2007. ‘Diving behaviour of little penguins from four colonies across their whole distribution range: bathymetry affecting diving effort and fledging success’. Marine Biology 151: 1535– 1542. Childerhouse, S., Gales, N., 1998. ‘Historical and modern distribution and abundance of the New Zealand sea lion, Phocartos hookeri’. New Zealand Journal of Zoology 25: 1 – 16. Chilvers, B.L., Wilkinson, I.S., Duignan, P.J., Gemmell, N.J., 2006. ‘Diving to extremes: are New Zealand sea lions (Phocarctos hookeri) pushing their limits in a marginal habitat?’ Journal of Zoology 269(2): 233 – 240. Chilvers, B.L., Wilkinson, I.S., Duignan, P.J., Gemmell, N.J., 2005. ‘Summer foraging areas for lactating New Zealand sea lions Phocarctos hookeri’. Marine Ecology Progress Series 304: 235 – 247. Consalvey, M., MacKay, K., Tracey, D., 2006. ‘Information review for protected deep-sea coral species in the New Zealand region’. Prepared for Department of Conservation, NIWA Client Report: WLG2006-85, 59pp. Constantine, R., Baker, C., 1997. ‘Monitoring the commercial swim-with-dolphin operations in the Bay of Islands’. DOC, Wellington, New Zealand. Croxall, J.P., Butchart, S.H.M., Lascelles, B.E.N., Stattersfield, A.J., Sullivan, B.E.N., Symes, A., Taylor, P., 2012. ‘Seabird conservation status, threats and priority actions: a global assessment’. Bird Conservation International 22: 1-34. Cummings, W.C., Thompson, P.O., 1971. ‘Underwater sounds from the blue whale, Balaenopetera musculus’. Journal of the acoustical society of America 50: 1193-1198. Dalebout, M.L., Robertson, K.M., Frantzis, A., Engelhaupt, D., Mignucci-Giannoni, A.A., Rosario-Delestre, R.J., Baker, C.S., 2005. ‘Worldwide structure of mtDNA diversity among Cuvier's beaked whales (Ziphius cavirostris): Implications for threatened populations’. Molecular Ecology 14: 3353-3371. Davidson, R.J., Richards, L.A., Duffy, C.A.J., Kerr, V., Freeman, D., D’Archino, R., Read, G.B., Abel, W., 2010. ‘Location and biological attributes of biogenic Sensitive marine benthic habitats defined 23 habitats located on soft substrata in the Marlborough Sounds’. Prepared by Davidson Environmental Ltd for Department of Conservation and Marlborough District Council. Survey and monitoring report no. 575.

Page 129

Dawbin, W.H., 1956. ‘The migrations of humpback whales which pass the New Zealand coast’. Transactions of the Royal Society of New Zealand, 84(1): 147 – 196. Dawson, S., 1985. ‘The New Zealand whale & dolphin digest’. Brick Row Publishing Co. Ltd, Hong Kong. Dawson, S.M., Slooten, E., 1988. ‘Hector’s dolphin Cephalorhynchus hectori: distribution and abundance’. Report of the International Whaling Commission Special Issue 9: 315–324. Day, J.H., Hutchings, P.A., 1979. ‘An annotated checklist of Australian and New Zealand Polychaeta, Archiannelida, and Myzostomida’. Records of the Australian Museum 32: 80–161 Deecke, V., Ford, J., Spong, P., 2000. ‘Dialect change in resident killer whales: implications for vocal learning and cultural transmission’. Animal behaviour 60: 629-638. Deepwater Group, 2019. ‘Squid (SQU)’. http://deepwatergroup.org/species/squid/ DOC, 2007. ‘Whales in the South Pacific’. https://www.doc.govt.nz/Documents/conservation/native-animals/marine- mammals/whales-in-the-south-pacific.pdf DOC, 2017. ‘New Zealand sea lion/Rāpoka threat management plan 2017 - 2022’. Joint paper of the Department of Conservation and the Ministry for Primary Industries, 19p. DOC, 2019a. ‘White sharks’. https://www.doc.govt.nz/nature/native-animals/marine-fish-and-reptiles/sharks- mango/white-shark/ DOC, 2019b. ‘Eels’. http://www.doc.govt.nz/nature/native-animals/freshwater-fish/eels/ DOC, 2019c. ‘Pilot whales’. http://www.doc.govt.nz/nature/native-animals/marine-mammals/dolphins/pilot-whales/ DOC, 2019d. ‘Bottlenose dolphin’. http://www.doc.govt.nz/nature/native-animals/marine-mammals/dolphins/ bottlenose-dolphin DOC, 2019e. ‘Royal Albatross/Toroa’. https://www.doc.govt.nz/nature/native-animals/birds/birds-a-z/albatrosses/royal- albatross-toroa/ Duffy, C., Francis, M., Dunn, M., Finucci, B., Ford, R., Hitchmough, R., Rolfe, J., 2017. ‘Conservation status of New Zealand chondrichtyans (chimaeras, sharks and rays), 2016’. New Zealand Threat Classification Series 23, 17p. Duffy, C.A.J., Francis, M.P., Manning, M.J., Bonfil, R., 2012. ‘Chapter 21: Regional population connectivity, oceanic habitat, and return migration revealed by satellite tagging of white sharks, Carcharodon carcharias, at New Zealand aggregation sites’. In ‘Global perspectives on the biology and life history of the white shark’, Ed. Domier, M.L., CRC Press, USA. Dunn, N.R., Allibone, R.M., Closs, G.P., Crow, S.K., David, B.O., Goodman, J.M., Griffiths, M., Jack, D.C., Ling, N., Waters, J.M., Rolfe, J.R., 2018. ‘Conservation status of New Zealand freshwater fishes, 2017’. New Zealand Threat Classification Series 24, 15p. Edwards, J., 2018a. ‘King Salmon to apply for third monitoring site’. Otago Daily Times news article dated 13 December 2018. https://www.odt.co.nz/business/king-salmon-apply-third-monitoring-site Edwards, J., 2018b. ‘Salmon could become dominant industry, says King CEO’. NZ Herald news article dated 12 December 2018. https://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=12175355 EOS, 2014. Toroa 3D Marine Seismic Survey: Marine Mammal Impact Assessment. Prepared for Woodside Energy (New Zealand 55794) Limited. Report 720.10001.00002-R0. 18 December 2014. ERM, 2013. ‘Environmental Baseline Survey Report – Shell Great South Basin Exploratory Drilling, New Zealand’. ERM Report 0173800EBS_RP01_F, 307p. Essink, K., 1999. ‘Ecological effects of dumping of dredged sediments; Options for management’. Journal of Coastal Conservation 5: 69-80. Farr Biswell, S., 2007. A fisher's guide to New Zealand seabirds. FNZ, 2019a. ‘Fishery maps’. https://www.mpi.govt.nz/law-and-policy/legal-overviews/fisheries/fishery-maps/

Page 130

FNZ, 2019b. ‘Official Information Act Request’. OIA19-0492, dated 4 September 2019. Ford, J.K.B., 2009. ‘Killer whale Orcinus orca’. In, W. F. Perrin and B. Würsig and J. G. M. Thewissen (Ed.), Encyclopedia of marine mammals, pp. 650–657. Academic Press, United States. Forest & Bird, 2014a. ‘New Zealand Seabirds: Important Bird Areas and Conservation’. The Royal Forest and Bird Protection Society of New Zealand, Wellington, New Zealand, pp. 72. Forest & Bird, 2014b. ‘New Zealand Seabirds: Sites at Sea, Seaward Extensions, Pelagic Areas’. The Royal Forest and Bird Protection Society of New Zealand, Wellington, New Zealand, pp.91. Francis, M., 2017. ‘Review of commercial fishery interactions and population information for New Zealand basking shark’. Prepared for Department of Conservation, NIWA Client Report No: 2017083WN, 44p. Francis, M., Duffy, C., Lyon, W., 2015. ‘Spatial and temporal habitat use by white sharks (Carcharodon carcharias) at an aggregation site in southern New Zealand.’ Marine and Freshwater Research. 66. 10.1071/MF14186. Francis, M.P., Duffy, C., 2002. ‘Distribution, seasonal abundance and bycatch of basking sharks (Cetorhinus maximus) in New Zealand, with observations on their winter habitat’. Marine Biology 140: 831 – 842. Gibb, J., 2016. ‘Sighting of beaked whale a first’. Otago Daily Times, 10 July 2016. Gibbs, N., Childerhouse, S., 2000. ‘Humpback whales around New Zealand’. Conservation Advisory Science Notes No. 257. Department of Conservation, Wellington, New Zealand. 27 p. GNS, 2019. ‘Hydrothermal vents’. https://www.gns.cri.nz/Home/Learning/Science-Topics/Ocean-Floor/Undersea-New- Zealand/Hydrothermal-Vents Gorman, R., Chiswell, S., Smith, M., 2005. ‘Marine weather and sea conditions of the Great South Basin’. National Institute of Water and Atmosphere. Halvorsen, M.B., Casper, B.C., Matthews, F., Carlson, T.J., Popper, A.N., 2012. ‘Effects of exposure to pile driving sounds on the lake sutrgeon, Nile tilapia, and hogchoker’. Proceedings of the Royal Society B, 279: 4705 – 4714. Hamilton, S.A., Moller, H., Robertson, C.J.R., 1997. Distribution of Sooty Shearwater (Puffinus griseus) breeding colonies along the Otago Coast, New Zealand, with indication of countrywide population trends. Notornis, 44. Harcourt, R.G., Schulman, A., Davis, L.S., Trillmich, F., 1995. ‘Summer foraging by lactating female New Zealand fur seals (Arctocephalus forsteri) off Otago Peninsula, New Zealand’. Canadian Journal of Zoology 73: 687 – 690. Hare, J., 1992. ‘Paterson Inlet marine benthic assemblages’. Report of Coastal Investigations, Technical Series 3. Southland Conservancy, Department of Conservation. 88 p. Hastings, M.C., Popper, A., 2005. ‘Effects of sound on fish’. Final Report # CA05-0537, Project P476 Noise Thresholds for Endangered Fish, 85p. Hayward, B.W., Tendal, O.S., Carter, R., Grenfell, H.R., Morgans, H.E.G., Scott, G.H., Strong, C.P., Hayward, J.J., 2012. ‘Phyllum Foraminifera: foraminifera, xenophyphores’. In: Gordon DP (ed), New Zealand inventory of biodiversity, Volume 3, Kingdoms Bacteria, Protozoa, Chromista, Plantae, Fungi. Canterbury University Press, Christchurch. Heath, R.A., 1985. ‘A review of the physical oceanography of the seas around New Zealand — 1982’. New Zealand Journal of Marine and Freshwater Research 19: 79-124. Hillary, R. M., Bravington, M. V., Patterson, T. A., Grewe, P., Bradford, R., Feutry, P., Gunasekera, R., Peddemors, V., Werry, J., Francis, M. P., Duffy, C. A. J., Bruce, B. D. 2018. ‘Genetic relatedness reveals total population size of white sharks in eastern Australia and New Zealand’. Scientific Reports. 8. 10.1038/s41598-018-20593-w Horwood, J., 2009. ‘Sei whale Balaenoptera borealis’. In: Perrin,W.F., Würsig, B.G., Thewissen, J.G.M. (Eds.), Encyclopaedia of marine mammals, pp. 1001–1003. Academic Press, United States Hoskins, A.J., Dann, P., Ropert-Coudert, Y., Kato, A., Chiaradia, A., Costa, D.P., Arnould, J.P.Y., 2008. ‘Foraging behaviour and habitat selection of the little penguin Eudyptula minor during early chick rearing in Bass Strait, Australia’. Marine Ecology Progress Series 366: 293–303.

Page 131

Hurst, R.J., Bagley, N.W., Anderson, O.F., Francis, M.P., Griggs, L.H., Clark, M.R., Paul, L.J., Taylor, P.R., 2000a. ‘Atlas of juvenile and adult fish and squid distributions from bottom and midwater trawls and tuna longlines in New Zealand waters’. NIWA Technical Report 84. Hurst, R.J., Stevenson, M.L., Bagley, N.W., Griggs, L.H., Morrison, M.A., Francis, M.P., Duffy, C.A., 2000b. ‘Areas of Importance for Spawning, Pupping or Egg-laying, and Juveniles of New Zealand Coastal Fish’. NIWA Technical Report, Final Research Report for Ministry of Fisheries Research Project ENV1999/03, Objective 1, 271pp. Jackson, J.A., Steel, D.J., Beerli, P., Congdon, B.C., Olavarria, C., Leslie, M.S., Pomilla, C., Rosenbaum, H., Baker, C.S., 2014. ‘Global diversity and oceanic divergence of humpback whales (Megaptera novaeangliae)’. Proceedings of the Royal Society B, 281(1786): 20133222. Jefferson, T.A., Leatherwood, S., Webber, M.A., 1993. ’Marine Mammals of the World: FAO Species Identification Guide’. United Nation Environment Programme and Food and Agricultural Organization of the UN. Jefferson, T.A., Webber, M.A., Pitman, L., 2008. ‘Marine mammals of the world: a comprehensive guide to their identification’. Elsevier 573 p Jellyman, D., 1977. ‘Summer upstream migration of juvenile freshwater eels in New Zealand’. New Zealand Journal of Marine and Freshwater Research, 11(1): 61 -71. Jellyman, D., 2006 ‘Native freshwater fish: Tagging along when longfins go spawning’. Water & Atmosphere. 14(1). Jellyman, D., 2012. ‘The Status of Longfin Eels in New Zealand – An Overview of Stocks and Harvest’. NIWA Client Report No: CHC2012-006, prepared for Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment, pp. 78. Jones, E., 2006. ‘Bryozoan thickets on Otago shelf, New Zealand: a quantitative assessment of the epibenthos using underwater photography’. Master of Science thesis, University of Otago, New Zealand. Kāi Tahu Ki Otago, 2005. ‘Kāi Tahu Ki Otago Natural Resource Management Plan 2005’. Accessed from https://www.aukaha.co.nz/files/137/file/kai-tahu-ki-otago-natural-resource-mgmt-plan-05-pdf Lalas, 2008. Recolonisation of Otago, southern New Zealand, by fur seals and sea lions: unexpected patterns and consequence. In: Proceedings of the Conserv-Vision Conference, University of Waikato, 2-4 July 2007. University of Waikato, New Zealand. Lalas, C., Bradshaw, C.J.A., 2001. ‘Folklore and chimerical numbers: review of a millennium of interaction between fur seals and humans in the New Zealand region’. New Zealand Journal of Marine and Freshwater Research 35: 477-497. Leathwick J.R., Rowden A., Nodder S., Gorman R., Barsley S., Pinkerton M., Baird S.J., Hadfield M., 2012. ‘A Benthic- optimised Marine Environment Classification (BOMEC) for New Zealand waters’. New Zealand Aquatic Environment and Biodiversity Report No. 88. Ministry of Fisheries, Wellington. Lee, D., Smith, F., 2007. ‘Brachiopods or lamp shells (Phylum Brachiopoda)’. In: A. MacDiarmid (ed) The treasures of the sea: a summary of the biodiversity in the New Zealand marine ecoregion. WWF–New Zealand, 193 p. http://www.treasuresofthesea.org.nz/ Lewis, J.A., 1996. ‘Effects of underwater explosions on life in the sea’. Ship Structures and Materials Division Aeronautical and Maritime Research Laboratory, DSYO-GD-0080, 48p. Lipsky, J.D., 2002. ‘Right whale dolphins Lissodelphis borealis and L. peronii’. In: W. F. Perrin, B. Würsig and J. G. M. Thewissen (eds), Encyclopedia of Marine Mammals, pp. 1030-1033. Academic Press MacDiarmid, A., Bowden, D., Cummings, V., Morrison, M., Jones, E., Kelly, M., Neil, H., Nelson, W., Rowden, A., 2013. ‘Sensitive marine benthic habitats defined’. Prepared for Ministry for the Environment, NIWA Client Report No: WLG2013- 18. MacFarlan, D.A.B., Bradshaw, M.A., Campbell, H.J., Cooper, R.A., Lee, D.E., MacKinnon, D.I., Waterhouse, J.B., Wright, A.J., Robinson, J., 2009. ‘Phylum Brachiopoda – lamp shells’. In: Gordon, D P (ed), The New Zealand inventory of biodiversity. Volume 1 Kingdom Animalia: Radiata, Lophotrochozoa, and Deuterostomia. Canterbury University Press, Christchurch. MacKenzie, D.L., Clement, D.M., 2014. ‘Abundance and distribution of ECSI Hector’s Dolphins’. NZ Aquatic Environment and Biodiversity Report No. 123. Ministry for Primary Industries, Wellington, New Zealand.

Page 132

Marchant, S., Higgins, P.J., (eds) 1990. ‘Handbook of Australian, New Zealand, and Antarctic birds. Vol.1. Ratites to ducks’. Melbourne, Oxford University Press. MarineLife, 2019. http://www.marinelife.ac.nz/ Mattern, T., Ellenberg, U., Houston, D.M., Davis, L.S., 2007. ‘Consistent foraging routes and benthic foraging behaviour in yellow-eyed penguins’. Marine Ecology Progress Series 343: 295 – 306. McDonald, M.A., Calambokidis, J., Teranishi, A.M. & Hildebrand, J.A., 2001. ‘The acoustic calls of blue whales off California with gender data’. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 109: 1728-1735. McKnight, D.G., 1969. ‘Infaunal benthic communities of the New Zealand continental shelf’. New Zealand Journal of Marine and Freshwater Research 3: 409–444. McMillan, P.J., Francis, M.P., James, G.D., Paul, L.J., Marriott, P.J., Mackay, E., Wood, B.A., Griggs, L.H., Sui, H., Wei, F., 2011a. ‘New Zealand Fishes. Volume 1: A Field Guide to Common Species Caught by Bottom and Midwater Fishing’. New Zealand Aquatic Environment and Biodiversity Report No. 68, pp. 329. McMillan, P.J., Francis, M.P., Paul, L.J., Marriott, P.J., Mackay, E., Baird, S-J., Griggs, L.H., Sui, H., Wei, F., 2011b. ‘New Zealand fishes. Volume 2: a field guide to less common species cause by bottom and midwater fishing’. New Zealand Aquatic Environment and Biodiversity Report No 78, p184. McMillan, P.J., Griggs, L.H., Francis, M.P., Marriott, P.J., Paul, L.J., Mackay, E., Wood, B.A., Sui, H., Wei, F., 2011c. ‘New Zealand Fishes. Volume 3: A Field Guide to Common Species Caught by Surface Fishing’. New Zealand Aquatic Environment and Biodiversity Report No. 69, pp. 147. Meynier, L., Morel, P.C.H., Chlivers, B.L., Mackenzie, D.D.S., Duignan, P.J., 2010. ‘Quantitative fatty acid signature analysis on New Zealand sea lions: model sensitivity and diet estimates’. Journal of Mammalogy 91(6): 1484 – 1495. Meynier, L., Stockin, K.A., Bando, M.K.H., Duignan, P.J., 2008. ‘Stomach contents of common dolphins (Delphinus sp.) from New Zealand waters’. New Zealand Journal of Marine and Freshwater Research 42: 257 – 268. MFish, 2008. ‘Species under consideration for introduction into the Quota Management System on 1 October 2009: information briefs and risk analyses’. Report Prepared by the Ministry of Fisheries 10 June 2008. http://www.fish.govt.nz/NR/rdonlyres/2F8696DC-9AF4-45D0-B59C-0CAA97104E45/0/Informationbriefsandrisk analysesforspeciesunderconsiderationforQMSintroductionon1October2009.pdf Miller, B.S., Collins, K., Barlow, J., Calderan, S., Leaper, R., McDonald, M., Ensor, P., Olson, P., Olavarria, C., Double, M.C., 2013. ‘Blue whale songs recorded around South Island, New Zealand: 1964-2013’. Journal of the acoustical society of America 135: 1616-1623. Miller, E., Lalas, C., Dawson, S., Ratz, H., Slooten, E., 2013. ‘Hector’s dolphin diet: the species, sizes and relative importance of prey eaten by Cephalorhynchus hectori investigated using stomach content analysis’. Marine Mammal Science 29(4): 606 – 628. Mitchell, J., Neil, H., 2012. ‘OS20/20 Canterbury – Great South Basin. TAN1209 Voyage Report. Prepared for Land Information New Zealand. NIWA client report WLG2012-35. Miyashita, T., Kato, H., Kasuya, T., 1995. ‘Worldwide map of cetacean distribution based on Japanese sighting data’. Volume 1. National Research Institute of Far Seas Fisheries, Shizuoka, Japan. 140p. Mizroch, S.A., Rice, D., Breiwick, J.M., 1984b. ‘The fin whale. Balaenoptera physalus’. Marine Fisheries Review 46: 20-24. Mizroch, S.A., Rice, D.W., Breiwick, J.M., 1984a. ‘The sei whale, Balaenoptera physalus’. Marine Fisheries Review 46 (4): 20-24. MKT, 2013. ‘Mahaanui Iwi Management Plan 2013’. Published in February 2013 by Ngāi Tūāhuriri Rūnanga, Te Hapū o Ngāti Wheke (Rāpaki), Te Rūnanga o Koukourārata, Ōnuku Rūnanga, Wairewa Rūnanga, and Te Taumutu Rūnanga. Moore, P.J., 1999. ‘Foraging range of the yellow-eyed penguin Megadyptes antipodes’. Marine Ornithology 27: 49-58.

Page 133

Morrison, M.A., Jones, E.G., Parsons, D.P., Grant, C.M., 2014. ‘Habitats and areas of particular significance for coastal finfish fisheries management in New Zealand: a review of concepts and life history knowledge, and suggestions for furture research’. New Zealand Aquatic Environment and Biodiversity Report No. 125., 201pp. Morton, J., Miller, M., 1973. ‘The New Zealand seashore’. 2nd Edition. Collins, Auckland. 653 p. MOS, 2017. ‘Metocean Summary – wind, hydrodynamic and wave ambient and extreme statistics in the Great South Basin, New Zealand’. Report prepared for Shell New Zealand Ltd. MPI, 2012. ‘East Otago Taiāpure’. Fisheries Regulations Brochure, accessed from http://www.puketeraki.nz/ site/puketeraki/files/images/Brochure.pdf MPI, 2019. ‘Fishery - Squid’. http://fs.fish.govt.nz/Page.aspx?pk=5&tk=1&fpid=48 Munday, D.R., Ennis, G.L., Wright, D.G., Jefferies, D.C., McGreer, E.R., Mathers, J.S., 1986. ‘Development and evaluation of a model to predict effects of buried underwater blasting charges on fish populations in shallow water areas’. Canadian Technical Report of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences, No. 1418. New Zealand Birds Online, 2019. http://nzbirdsonline.org.nz/ Nga Uri O Tahinga Trust, 2012, “Tahinga Environmental Management Plan”. Ngāi Tahu Seafood Limited, 2019. https://www.ngaitahuseafood.com/ Ngāi Tahu, 1999. ‘Statutory Acknowledgements – A guide for local authorities’. Accessed from https://www.mfe.govt.nz/sites/default/files/stat-acknowledgments-may99.pdf Ngāi Tahu, 2019. ‘Te Ao Tūroa – Environmental Kaitiakitanga’. https://ngaitahu.iwi.nz/environment/ NIWA, 2019a. ‘Climate data and activities – Southern New Zealand’ https://www.niwa.co.nz/education-and-training/ schools/resources/climate/overview/map_south NIWA, 2019b. ‘White sharks’. https://www.niwa.co.nz/coasts-and-oceans/research-projects/white-sharks NZGeo.com, 2016. ‘The Humpback Highway’. New Zealand Geographic, Issue 140, Jul – Aug 2016. Accessed from https://www.nzgeo.com/stories/the-humpback-highway/ O’Callaghan, T.M., Baker, A.N., Helden, A., 2001. ‘Long-finned pilot whale strandings in New Zealand – the past 25 years’. Science poster no. 52, Department of Conservation, Wellington, New Zealand. http://www.doc.govt.nz/Documents/science-andtechnical/SciencePoster52.pdf. O’Driscoll, R.L., Booth, J.D., Bagley, N.W., Anderson, O.F., Griggs, L.H., Stevenson, M.L., Francis, M.P., 2003. ‘Areas of importance for spawning, pupping, or egg-laying and juveniles of New Zealand deepwater fish, pelagic fish, and invertebrates’. NIWA Technical Report 119, 377p. O’Keeffe, D.J., 1984. ‘Guidelines for predicting the effects of underwater explosions on swimbladder fish’. Silver Spring, Maryland: Naval Surface Weapons Centre, Final Report. NSWC TR 82-326. Olson, P.A., 2009. ‘Pilot whales Globicephala melas and G. macrorhynchus’. In: Encyclopaedia of marine mammals, pp. 847 – 852. Academic Press, United States. ORC, 2012. ‘Regional Plan: coast for Otago’. Accessed from https://www.orc.govt.nz/media/1458/regional-plan-coast-for- otago.pdf Oshumi, S., Kasamatsu, F., 1986. ‘Recent off-shore distribution of the southern right whale in summer’. Reports of the International Whaling Commission Special Issue 10: 177-186. Page, B., McKenzie, J., Goldsworthy, S.D., 2005. ‘Inter-sexual differences in New Zealand fur seal diving behaviour’. Marine Ecology Progress Series 304: 249 – 264. Parkinson, B., 2006. ‘Field guide to New Zealand Seabirds’. Holland Publishers (NZ) Ltd, Auckland. Patenaude, N.J., 2003. ‘Sightings of southern right whales around ‘mainland’ New Zealand’. Science for Conservation 225, Department of Conservation, Wellington, New Zealand 15 p.

Page 134

Peebles, B.A., 2013. ‘Otago Submarine Canyons: Mapping and Macrobenthos’. Masters Thesis. University of Otago. Pelletier, L., Chiaradia, A., Kato, A., Ropert-Coudert, Y., 2014. ‘Fine-scale spatial age segregation in the limited foraging area of an inshore seabird species, the little penguin’. Oecologia 176: 399-408. Pitman, R.L., 2002. ‘Mesoplodont whales Mesoplodon spp’. In: W.F. Perrin, B. Würsig and J.G.M. Thewissen (eds), Encyclopaedia of Marine Mammals, pp. 738-742. Academic Press. Popper, A.N., Hastings, M.C., 2009. ‘The effects of anthropogenic sources of sound on fishes’. Journal of Fish Biology, 75: 455 – 489. Popper, A.N., Hawkins, A.D., Fay, R.R., Mann, D.A., Bartol, S., Carlson, T.J., Coombs, S., Ellison, W.T., Gentry, R.L., Halvorsen, M.B., Løkkeborg, S., Rogers, P.H., Southall, B.L., Zeddies, D.G., Tavolga, W.N., 2014. ‘Sound exposure guidelines for fishes and sea turtles: a technical report prepared by ANSI-accredited standards committee S3/SC1 and registered with ANSI’. Probert, P.K., Batham, E.J., Wilson, J.B., 1979. ‘Epibenthic macrofauna off southeastern New Zealand and mid-shelf bryozoan dominance’. New Zealand Journal of Marine and Freshwater Research 13: 379-392 Rayment, W., Davidson, A., Dawson, S., Slooten, E., Webster, T., 2012. ‘Distribution of southern right whales on the Auckland Island calving grounds’. New Zealand Journal of Marine and Freshwater Research 46(3): 431-436. Rayment, W., Dawson, S., Slooten, E., Bräger, S., Fresne, S.D., Webster, T., 2009. ‘Kernal density estimates of alongshore home range of Hector’s dolphins at Banks Peninsula, New Zealand’. Marine Mammal Science 25: 537-556. Raymond, B., Shaffer, S.A., Sokolov, S., Woehler, E.J., Costa, D.P., Einoder, L., Hindell, M., Hosie, G., Pinkerton, M., Sagar, P.M., Scott, D., Smith, A., Thompson, D.R., Vertigan, C., Weimerskirch, H., 2010. ‘Shearwater foraging in the Southern Ocean: the roles of prey availability and winds’. PLoS ONE, 5(6):e10960, doi:10.1371/journal.pone0010960. Reikkola, 2013. ‘Mitigating collisions between large vessels and Bryde’s whales in the Hauraki Gulf, New Zealand’. BSc (Hons) Thesis, University of Auckland, New Zealand Richard, Y., Abraham, E.R., Thompson, F.N., Berkenbusch, K., 2011. ‘Counts of seabirds around commercial fishing vessels within New Zealand waters’. Unpublished report prepared for the Department of Conservation. https://seabird- counts.dragonfly.co.nz/seabirds-around-fishing-vessels.pdf Richmond, D.R., Jones, R.K., 1974. ‘Safe distances from underwater explosions for mammals and birds’. In Young, G.A. (Ed), Proceedings of the first conference on the environmental effects of explosives and explosions, May 30 – 31, 1973. Technical Report 73-223, pp. 113 – 118). Roberts, C.D., Stewart, A.L., Struthers, C.D. (Eds)., 2015. ‘The fishes of New Zealand. Volume 1: Introduction and supplementary matter’. Te Papa Press, Wellington, Vol 1: S1 – S256. Robertson, C.J.R., Bell, E.A., Sinclair, N., Bell, B.D., 2003. ‘Distribution of seabirds from New Zealand that overlap with fisheries worldwide’. Science for Conservation 233, published by the Department of Conservation, New Zealand. Robertson, H.A., Baird, K., Dowding, J.E., Elliott, G.P., Hitchmough, R.A., Miskelly, C.M., McArthur, N., O’Donnell, C.F.J., Sagar, P.M., Scofield, P., Taylor, G.A., 2017. ‘Conservation Status of New Zealand Birds, 2016’. New Zealand Threat Classification Series 19. Department of Conservation, Wellington, 23p. Ronquillo, I.A., 1950. ‘Anatomical evidence in cases of fish killed by explosives’. Bulletin of the Fisheries Society of the Philippines, 1: 52 - 56. Rowantree, V.J., Valenzuela, L.O., Fraguas, P.F., Seger, J., 2008. ‘Foraging behaviour of southern right whales (Eubalaena australis) inferred from variation of carbon stable isotope ratios in their baleen’. Report to the International Whaling Commission, SC/60/BRG23. Rowden, A.A., Berkenbusch, K., Brewin, P.E., Dalen, J., Neill, K.F., Nelson, W.A., Oliver, M.D., Probert, P.K., Schwarz, A.M., Sui, P.H., Sutherland, D., 2012. ‘A review of the marine soft-sediment assemblages of New Zealand’. New Zealand Aquatic Environment and Biodiversity Report No. 96. Samaran, F., Adam, O., Guinet, C., 2010. ‘Discovery of a mid-latitude sympatric area for two Southern Hemisphere blue whale subspecies’. Endangered Species Research 12: 157-165.

Page 135

Scofield, P., Stephenson, B., 2013. ‘Birds of New Zealand: A photographic Guide’. Auckland University Press, Auckland, New Zealand. Sekiguchi, K., Klages, N.T.W., Best, P.B., 1996. ‘The diet of strap-toothed whales (Mesoplodon Layardii)’. Journal of Zoology (London) 239: 453-463. Shaffer, S.A., Tremblay, Y., Waeimerskirch, H., Scott, D., Thompson, D.R., Sagar, P.M., Moller, H., Taylor, G.A., Foley, D.G., Block, B.A., Coasta, D.P., 2006. ‘Migratory shearwaters integrate oceanic resources across the Pacific Ocean in an endless summer’. Proceedings of the National Academy of Science of the Unites States 103: 12799-12802. Shaffer, S.A., Weimerskirch, H., Scott, D., Pinaud, D., Thompson, D.R., Sagar, P.M., Moller, H., Taylor, G.A., Foley, D.G., Tremblay, Y., Costa, D.P., 2009. ‘Spatiotemporal habitat use by breeding sooty shearwaters Puffinus griseus’. Marine Ecology Progress Series 391: 209-220. Shirihai, H., Jarrett, B., 2006. ‘Whales, Dolphins and Other Marine Mammals of the World’. Princeton, Princeton University Press: 56-58. Slooten, E., Dawson, S.M., Rayment, W.J., Childerhouse, S.J., 2005. ‘Distribution of Maui’s dolphin, Cephalorhyncus hectori maui’. New Zealand Fisheries Assessment Report 2005/28. 21 p. Slooten, E., Rayment, W., Dawson, S., 2006. ‘Offshore distribution of Hector’s dolphins at Bank’s Peninsula, New Zealand: Is the Banks Peninsula Marine Mammal Sanctuary large enough?’ New Zealand Journal of Marine and Freshwater Research 40: 333-343. SLR, 2019. ‘Marine Discharge Consent Application – Deck Drainage Great South Basin’. Prepared for OMV GSB Limited (SLR Report 740.10083.00000-R01-v1.0) Smith, A.M., Mcgourty, C.R., Kregting, L., Elliot, A., 2005. ‘Subtidal Galeolaria hystrix (Polychaeta: Serpulidae) reefs in Paterson Inlet, Stewart Island, New Zealand’. New Zealand Journal of Marine and Freshwater Research 39: 1297– 1304. Smith, P.J., Mattlin R.H., Roeleveld, M.A., Okutanp, T., 1987. ‘Arrow squids of the genus Nototodarus in New Zealand waters: Systematics, biology, and fisheries’. New Zealand Journal of Marine and Freshwater Research, 21(2): 315-326, DOI: 10.1080/00288330.1987.9516227 SMPF, 2018. ‘South-east Marine Protection Forum 2018. Recommendations to the Minister of Conservation and the Minister of Fisheries: Recommendations towards implementation of the Marine Protected Areas Policy on the South Island’s south-east coast of New Zealand.’ Department of Conservation Wellington, 314p. Snelder, T., Leathwick, J., Dey, K., Weatherhead, M., Fenwick, G., Franis, M., Gorman, R., Grieve, J., Hadfield, M., Hewitt, J., Hume, T., Richardson, K., Rowden, A., Uddstrom, M., Wild, M., Zeldis, J., 2005. ‘The New Zealand Marine Environment Classification’. Prepared for the Ministry for the Environment, 80pp. Southall, B.L., Bowles, A.E., Ellison, W.T., Finneran, J.J., Gentry, R.L., Greene, C.R., Kastak, D., Ketten, D.R., Miller, J.H., Nachtigall, P.E., Richardson, W.J., Thomas, J.A., Tyack, P.L., 2007. ‘Marine mammal noise exposure criteria: Initial scientific recommendations’. Aquatic Mammals 33: 411-521. Spear, L.B., Ainley, D.G., 1999. ‘Migration routes of sooty shearwaters in the Pacific Ocean’. The Condor, 101: 205-218. Stephenson, J.R., Gingerich, A.J., Brown, R.S., Pflugrath, B.D., Deng, Z., Carlson, T.J., Langeslay, M.J., Ahmann, M.H., Johnson, R.L., Seaburg, A.G., 2010. ‘Assessing barotrauma in neutrally and negatively buoyant juvenile salmonids exposed to simulated hydro-turbine passage using a mobile aquatic barotrauma laboratory’. Fisheries Research, 106(3): 271 – 278. Stockin, K.A., 2008. ‘The New Zealand common dolphin (Delphinud sp.) – Identity, ecology and conservation’. Massey University, a thesis submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Zoology, 265pp. Stronkhorst, J., Ariese, F., van Hattum, B., Postma, J. F., de Kluijver, M., Den Besten, P. J., et al., 2003. ‘Environmental impact and recovery at two dumping sites for dredged material in the North Sea’. Environmental Pollution 124(1): 17– 31. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0269-7491(02)00430-X. Sutton, P.J.H., 2003. ‘The Southland Current: A subantarctic current’. New Zealand Journal of Marine and freshwater Research 37: 645-652.

Page 136

Taylor, B.L., Baird, R., Barlow, J., Dawson, S.M., Ford, J., Mead, J.G., Notarbartolo di Sciara, G., Wade, P., Pitman, R.L., 2008a. ‘Mesoplodon grayi. The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species 2008: e.T13247A3428839’. http://dx.doi.org/10.2305/IUCN.UK.2008.RLTS.T13247A3428839.en. Taylor, B.L., Baird, R., Barlow, J., Dawson, S.M., Ford, J., Mead, J.G., Notarbartolo di Sciara, G., Wade, P., Pitman, R.L., 2008b. ‘Mesoplodon layardii. The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species 2008: e.T13249A3429897’. http://dx.doi.org/10.2305/IUCN.UK.2008.RLTS.T13249A3429897.en. Taylor, B.L., Baird, R., Barlow, J., Dawson, S.M., Ford, J., Mead, J.G., Notarbartolo di Sciara, G., Wade, P., Pitman, R.L., 2008c. ‘Ziphius cavirostris. The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species 2008: e.T23211A9429826’. http://dx.doi.org/10.2305/IUCN.UK.2008.RLTS.T23211A9429826.en Taylor, B.L., Baird, R., Barlow, J., Dawson, S.M., Ford, J., Mead, J.G., Notarbartolo di Sciara, G., Wade, P., Pitman, R.L., 2008d. ‘Mesoplodon bowdoini. The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species 2008: e.T13242A3425144’. http://dx.doi.org/10.2305/IUCN.UK.2008.RLTS.T13242A3425144.en. Taylor, B.L., Baird, R., Barlow, J., Dawson, S.M., Ford, J., Mead, J.G., Notarbartolo di Sciara, G., Wade, P., Pitman, R.L., 2008e. ‘Tasmacetus shepherdi. The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species 2008: e.T21500A9291409’. http://dx.doi.org/10.2305/IUCN.UK.2008.RLTS.T21500A9291409.en. Taylor, B.L., Baird, R., Barlow, J., Dawson, S.M., Ford, J., Mead, J.G., Notarbartolo di Sciara, G., Wade, P., Pitman, R.L., 2008f. ‘Berardius arnuxii. The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species 2008: e.T2762A9478212’. http://dx.doi.org/10.2305/IUCN.UK.2008.RLTS.T2762A9478212.en. Taylor, B.L., Baird, R., Barlow, J., Dawson, S.M., Ford, J.K.B., Mead, J.G., Notarbartolo di Sciara, G., Wade, P., Pitman, R.L., 2012. ‘Kogia breviceps’. The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species 2012: e. T11047A176921922. http://dx.doi.org/10.2305/IUCN.UK.2012.RLTS.T11047A17692192.en. Taylor, G.A., 2000. ‘Action plan for seabird conservation in New Zealand. Part A, Threatened seabirds’. Department of Conservation, Biodiversity Recovery Unit, Wellington, N.Z. Te Ara, 2019. ‘Ocean currents and tides’. https://teara.govt.nz/en/ocean-currents-and-tides/page-1 Te Ara, 2019b. ‘Eels’. https://teara.govt.nz/en/eels Tendal, O.S., Lewis, K.B., 1978. ‘New Zealand xenophyophores: upper bathyal distribution, photographs of growth position and a new species’. New Zealand Journal of Marine and Freshwater Research 12: 197-203. Thomas, B., Minot, E.O., Holland, J.D., 2010. ‘Fledging behaviour of juvenile northern royal albatrosses (Diomedea sanfordi): a GPS tracking study’. Notornis 57: 135-147. Thomsen, F., Franck, D., Ford, J.K.B., 2001. ‘Characteristics of whistles from the acoustic repertoire of resident killer whales (Orcinus orca) off Vancouver Island, British Columbia’. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 109(3): 1240-1246. Thorpe, C.W., Dawson, S.M., 1990. ‘Automatic measurement of descriptive features of Hector’s dolphin vocalisations’. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 89(1): 435-44 Todd, B., 2014. ‘Whales and Dolphins of Aotearoa New Zealand’. Te Papa Press, Wellington, New Zealand. Tormosov, D.D., Mikhaliev, Y.A., Best, P.B., Zemsky, V.A., Sekiguchi, K., Brownell Jr., R.L., 1998. ‘Soviet catches of Southern Right Whales Eubalaena australis, 1951–1971. Biological data and conservation implications’. Biological Conservation 86: 185-197. Torres, L.G., Smith, T.D., Sutton, P., MacDiarmid, A., Bannister, J., Miyashita, T., 2013. ‘From exploitation to conservation: habitat models using whaling data predict distribution patterns and threat exposure of an endangered whale’. Diversity and Distributions 19: 1138-1152. Visser, I.N., 2000. ‘Orca (Orcinus orca) in New Zealand waters’. PhD Dissertation, University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand. Wakefield, A.T., Walker, L., 2005. ‘Maori methods and indicators for marine protection: Ngati Kere interests and expectations for the Rohe Moana’. New Zealand Department of Conservation, Ngati Kere and Ministry for the Environment, Wellington, New Zealand. 66 p.

Page 137

Waugh, S., Filippi, D., Fukuda, A., Suzuki, M., Higuchi, H., Setiawan, A., Davis, L., 2005. ‘Foraging of royal albatrosses, Diomedea epomophora, from the Otago Peninsula and its relationships to fisheries’. Canterbury Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Science 62: 1410-1421. Waugh, S.M., Weimerskirch, H., 2003. ‘Environmental heterogeneity and the evolution of foraging behaviour in long ranging greater albatrosses’. Oikos, 103: 374-384. Waugh, S.M., Weimerskirch, H., Troup, C., Filippi, D.P., 2002. ‘Foraging zones of southern royal albatross’. Condor 104: 662-667. WDC, 2019. ‘Species guide - Hector’s beaked whale Mesoplodon hectori’. https://au.whales.org/species-guide/hectors- beaked-whale Wilber, D.H., Clarke, D.G., Rees, S.I., 2007. ‘Responses of benthic macroinvertebrates to thin-layer disposal of dredged material in Mississippi Sound, USA’. Marine Pollution Bulletin 54(1): 42–52. Wiley, M.L., Gaspin, J.B., Goertner, J.F., 1981. ‘Effects of underwater explosions on fish with a dynamical model to predict fishkill’. Ocean Science and Engineering, 6: 223 – 284. Wilson, R.P., 1995. ‘Foraging ecology’. Pp. 81-106 in Williams, T.D. (Ed.): The Penguins. Oxford University Press, Oxford. Wood, A.C.L., Probert, P.K., 2013. ‘Bryozoan-dominated benthos of Otago shelf, New Zealand: its associated fauna, environmental setting and anthropogenic threats’. Journal of the Royal Society of New Zealand 43(4): 231-249. World Ocean Review, 2010. ‘Ocean chemistry – Oxygen in the ocean’. https://worldoceanreview.com/en/wor-1/ocean- chemistry/oxygen/ Wright, D.G., 1982. ‘A discussion paper on the effects of explosives on fish and marine mammals in the waters of the Northwest Territories’. Can. Tech. Rep. Fish. Aquat. Sci., 1052: v + 16p. Wright, D.G., Hopky, G.E., 1998. ‘Guidelines for the use of explosives in or near Canadian fisheries waters’. Canadian Technical Report of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences, 2107: iv +34p. Wűrsig, B., Duprey, N., Weir, J., 2007. ‘Dusky dolphins (Lagenorhynchus obscurus) in New Zealand waters. Present knowledge and research goals’. DOC Research and Development Series 270: 1-28. Würsig, B., Lynn, S., Jefferson, T., Mullin, K., 1998. ‘Behavior of cetaceans in the northern Gulf of Mexico relative to survey ships and aircraft’. Aquatic Mammals 24: 41-50. Yelverton, J.T., Richmond, D.R., Fletcher, E.R., Jones, R.K., 1973. ‘Safe distances from underwater explosions for mammals and birds’. Report DNA 3114T, Washington, DC: Defense Nuclear Agency.

Page 138

APPENDIX A

Legal Opinion on the Use of Explosives

740.10102.00000-R01-v1.0.docx Page 1 of 1

MATTHEW CASEY QUEEN’S COUNSEL

27 August 2019

Michael McCarthy Lowndes PO Box 7311 Auckland 1141

Dong Won – Dumping

1. The proposal is for the fishing vessel Dong Won 701 (Dong Won) to be scuttled off the East Coast of the South Island, in a location specifically authorised for the dumping of specified wastes, including vessels. The Dong Won is to be sunk by the use of explosives. We have been asked to consider whether:

(a) The only consent required under the Exclusive Economic Zone and Continental Shelf (Environmental Effects) Act 2012 (EEZ Act) is a marine dumping consent for ‘dumping’, which is a non-notified activity; or

(b) The use of explosives to scuttle the vessel is an activity separate from the dumping, requiring a discretionary marine consent as a publicly notifiable activity.

2. Although the position is not entirely clear, on balance we consider the correct legal position is that the entire application, including the use of explosives, is to be assessed as part of the single ‘dumping’ activity and therefore classified as ‘non-notified’.

Statutory Context

3. Section 4 of the EEZ Act includes several definitions of activities. Of particular relevance are the definitions of ‘non-notified activity’ and ‘publicly notifiable activity’. A publicly notifiable activity is defined as a discretionary activity other than emergency dumping or a non-notified activity. A non-notified activity is defined in turn as, inter alia, a discretionary activity that is described in regulations as non-notified. Part 2 of the Act imposes restrictions and prohibitions on activities in the EEZ.

4. While applications for consent for non-notified activities are considered by the Environmental Protection Authority (EPA), applications for publicly notifiable s 20 activities are required to be notified for public submissions, and are considered by a board of inquiry (s 52 EEZ Act).

5. Section 20G EEZ Act (in Part 2) imposes restrictions on dumping waste or other matter (including ships1). It states that these materials may be dumped if there are regulations which allow the dumping to be authorised by a marine dumping consent, and such a consent is obtained.

6. The Exclusive Economic Zone and Continental Shelf (Environmental Effects – Discharge and Dumping) Regulations 2015 (D&D Regulations) allow for the dumping of waste or other matter to be authorised by a marine dumping consent, and (at reg 32) classify the dumping of vessels in an ‘authorised location’ as a non-notified activity. The dumping of the Dong Won is proposed to occur in an ‘authorised location’ (25 nautical miles south-east of Otago Harbour) as defined in reg 3 and is therefore, prima facie, a non-notified activity.

1 We note that the EEZ Act uses the term ‘ship’ whereas the D&D Regulations use the term ‘vessel’. We regard these terms as interchangeable.

Ph: (09) 337 0400 | Fax: (09) 337 0800 | Mob: 021 375 113 | Email: [email protected] P O Box 317, Shortland Street, Auckland 1140, New Zealand Level 3, Walker Wayland Centre, 68 Shortland Street, Auckland www.casey.co.nz M ATTHEW C ASEY QC Page | 2

7. Section 20 EEZ Act imposes restrictions on ‘activities other than discharges and dumping’ and lists a number of activities that cannot be undertaken without a marine consent. One of the listed activities is ‘the causing of an explosion’ in the sea of the exclusive economic zone.

8. Section 36 EEZ Act provides that if regulations do not classify an activity as permitted, discretionary or prohibited then it is a discretionary activity. There are no regulations classifying the activity status of causing an explosion at sea, so it is discretionary, nor are there any regulations classifying it as a non- notified activity. Causing an explosion at sea is therefore a ‘publicly notifiable activity’ as defined in s 4 EEZ Act, as set out above.

9. Section 20(5) EEZ Act echoes, in part, the heading of s 20 in providing that the specified restrictions in this section do not apply to the dumping of waste or other matter. The question is whether the use of explosives in the process of dumping the Dong Won is a separate activity, captured by ss 20(3) and 20(4), or is an integral part of the dumping and so is excluded from the operation of s 20 by s 20(5), and is covered by s 20G.

Analysis

10. We have reviewed the email chain between the EPA and Dr Lieffering of SLR Consulting NZ Ltd to understand the arguments raised to date. We have been unable to find any caselaw which directly assists. The previous approach under the Maritime Transport Act 1994 did not, as we understand it, specifically regulate explosions at sea. Dumping was regulated under part 180 of the Marine Protection Rules which did not refer to the use of explosives and have not assisted in the interpretation of the current regime.

11. We have also considered the Resource Management Act 1991 (RMA) which regulates dumping (defined similarly to the EEZ Act,2 including the dumping of ships (s 15A(2)). We have not found any particular assistance in terms of any caselaw on the dumping of ships under the RMA.

12. Our analysis is primarily based on interpreting the EEZ Act and D&D Regulations, with some assistance from the Regulatory Impact Statement (RIS) prepared for the D&D Regulations, titled “Regulatory Impact Statement for the Activity classification of burial at sea, and discharge and dumping activities under the EEZ Act”.

13. Below we set out arguments for the competing interpretations before commenting further.

Arguments in favour of dumping encompassing explosion

14. ‘Dumping’ is defined in s 4 EEZ Act as follows (emphasis added):

(a) means— (i) any deliberate disposal into the sea of waste or other matter from ships, aircraft, and structures at sea; and (ii) any deliberate disposal into the sea of ships, aircraft, and structures at sea; and (iii) any storage of waste or other matter in the seabed and the subsoil of the seabed from ships, aircraft, and structures at sea; and (iv) any abandonment or toppling at site of structures at sea for the sole purpose of deliberate disposal; but (b) does not include—

2 In the RMA, dumping means,— (a) in relation to waste or other matter, its deliberate disposal; and (b) in relation to a ship, an aircraft, or an offshore installation, its deliberate disposal or abandonment;— but does not include the disposal of waste or other matter incidental to, or derived from, the normal operations of a ship, aircraft, or offshore installation, if those operations are prescribed as the normal operations of a ship, aircraft, or offshore installation, or if the purpose of those operations does not include the disposal, or the treatment or transportation for disposal, of that waste or other matter; and to dump and dumped have corresponding meanings.

M ATTHEW C ASEY QC Page | 3

(i) the disposal into the sea of waste or other matter incidental to, or derived from, the normal operations of ships, aircraft, and structures at sea and their equipment, other than waste or other matter transported by or to ships, aircraft, and structures at sea, operating for the purpose of disposal of such matter or derived from the treatment of such waste or other matter on such ships, aircraft, and structures; or (ii) placement of matter for a purpose other than the mere disposal of the matter, but only if the placement is not contrary to the aims of the 1996 Protocol to the London Convention; or (iii) abandonment in the sea of matter (for example, cables, pipelines, and marine research devices) placed for a purpose other than the mere disposal of it; and (c) does not include the disposal or storage of waste or other matter directly arising from, or related to, the exploration, exploitation, and associated offshore processing of seabed mineral resources

15. The definition suggests it is intended to capture the activity of dumping in the round, that is, including the action which brings about the final dumped state. The word ‘dumping’ itself is a verb, and the definition uses a number of terms which would suggest the means by which dumping is carried out are a part of the activity, such as ‘deliberate disposal’, ‘abandonment’ and ‘toppling’.

16. Viewing the activity of ‘dumping’ quite broadly is consistent with the inclusion of s 20(5) EEZ Act, which, as noted above, states that the restrictions specified in s 20 do not apply to dumping. The drafters must have contemplated there would be some overlap between the list of activities otherwise regulated by s 20 and the activities excluded from that list by s 20(5). The clear intention is that, where a listed activity comes within one of the activities in s20(5), it will be regulated and managed as part of the latter and not the former.

17. By way of example, s 20(2)(f) relates to ‘the deposit of any thing … on … the seabed’, and would require a marine consent under s 20(1). However, the deposit of something on the seabed is a necessary component of the dumping of waste or other matter and s 20(5) means the earlier provision in the section does not apply. In the same way, where the use of explosives is a component of the dumping of a ship, s 20(5) applies to exclude the need for that aspect of the activity to be the subject of a separate marine consent.

18. Importantly, the full range of effects of the dumping, including of the use of explosives, must still be assessed as part of the non-notified application. The assessment will need to address alternative methods for undertaking the activity, and conditions can be imposed to address potential effects associated with the use of explosives. The application can be refused if the EPA is not satisfied that effects will be appropriately addressed (s 62 EEZ Act).

19. Particularly in light of s 20(5), we consider that if it had been intended that separate consents might be required for some aspects of a dumping proposal, this would have been explicitly stated, either in the EEZ Act or the D&D Regulations. The absence of such provision suggests s 20(5) was intended to encompass all aspects of the dumping activity.

20. The RIS notes (at p 53):

By classifying the dumping of vessels…differently depending on whether they are dumped in an authorised dumping ground, an incentive is created for operators to dump these types of waste in areas where they will have a lesser impact on the environment and existing interests.

The marine consent process will enable the EPA to thoroughly assess the effects of the activity and to consider cumulative effects.

21. The incentive for operators to dump vessels in authorised locations would be undermined if the method of disposal was treated as not part of the principal activity of dumping. If the operator was required to obtain a separate marine consent for the use of explosives, it is likely the applications would be determined by a board of inquiry, with the associated costs and time delays (s 44 EEZ Act). We consider that this was not the intent of the Minister in making the dumping of vessels within authorised locations a non-notified activity in the D&D Regulations.

M ATTHEW C ASEY QC Page | 4

Arguments against dumping encompassing explosion

22. We have sought to identify the arguments against the use of explosives being included in the overarching ‘dumping’ activity and therefore requiring public notification, but generally these are less persuasive.

23. The email from Ms Couzens of the EPA dated 19 August 2019 states:

Unlike the Non-Notified Regulations, the Discharge and Dumping Regulations do not say anything further about the status of any section 20 activities intended to be used to carry out a dumping activity. You will note that section 20 does not apply to dumping activities but the definition of dumping is quite narrow applying only to the deliberate disposal of waste into the sea.

24. First, for the reasons set out above, we do not agree that the definition of dumping is particularly narrow, or that it excludes the method by which the dumping is to be carried out.

25. Secondly, we have considered the Exclusive Economic Zone and Continental Shelf (Environmental Effects – Non-notified Activities) Regulations 2014 (Non-notified Regs), and do not find anything in those regulations that contradicts our position that the method of dumping is to be assessed as part of the overarching activity. The Non-notified Regs provide that activities in s20(2) or 20(4) EEZ Act that are involved in exploration drilling for petroleum are classified as non-notified activities, and give examples of those activities as being the placement of structures, removal of natural material or the causing of vibrations, such as through seismic surveying. In our view, the Non-notified Regs are essentially applying the s 20(5) approach to various activities associated with exploration drilling for petroleum that are listed in s 20 EEZ Act. The fact that the D&D Regulations do not include a similar provision to apply to dumping is unsurprising, as it is already included in s 20(5) EEZ Act. We consider the approach in the Non-notified Regs is consistent with, and supports, our view that s 20 activities are excluded for the broad activity of dumping, which includes the method by which dumping is carried out.

26. Section 44 EEZ Act provides for the situation where more than one application for a marine consent has been made in relation to a single proposal and sets out how related applications are to be processed. If one of the related applications is required to be publicly notifiable but others are not, the EPA will defer its decision-making role to the board of inquiry so that all applications can be dealt with together. The Act therefore contemplates ‘bundling’ and that one or more marine consents may be required for the different aspects of a proposal.3 While that might be the general approach, it is subject to the specific provision in s 20(5), where the proposed activity is one of the three categories listed in that sub- section. Section 44 EEZ Act does not detract from the point made above, that s 20(5) is intended to exclude from the list of activities that require a separate marine consent, those that form part of the overarching activity of ‘dumping waste or other matter’.

27. Finally, it might be argued that the use of explosives is a different type of activity, which has different effects to what were considered during the D&D Regulations making process. There is no discussion of the use of explosives in the RIS, nor is the use of explosives associated with dumping specifically contemplated in the D&D Regulations. Section 33(3) EEZ Act provides that before making regulations, the Minister must take into account a number of matters including the effects on the environment of allowing an activity. There does not appear to have been any consideration of the effects on the environment of the use of explosives associated with dumping and so it might be argued that such effects were to be assessed as a separate activity, rather than as part of a dumping proposal.

3 We note this is a general comment, rather than comment on how the Dong Won proposal might be processed if separate consents were later considered necessary. We understand such consents might be processed separately on a case by case basis. We note the EEZ Act does not contain any provisions that mirror s 91 RMA which enables a consent authority to postpone processing of an application an application if it considers other resource consents will also be required in respect of the proposal and it is appropriate, for the purpose of better understanding the nature of the proposal, that applications for any one or more of those other resource consents be made before proceeding further.

M ATTHEW C ASEY QC Page | 5

28. However, there remains the requirement for the EPA to consider all effects associated with dumping as part of considering the non-notified application. The Minister cannot be expected to have considered every permutation or method by which dumping might be undertaken within the scope of the D&D Regulations.

Assessment of competing arguments

29. We consider the argument that the use of explosives to scuttle the Dong Won is a part of the overarching dumping activity is more likely to be correct, particularly having regard to the following case-specific matters:

(a) The assessment of alternative methods that indicates the use of explosives is the only reasonably practicable method to dump the vessel given the health and safety risks of divers having to open internal hatches, and the risk of the vessel drifting out of the authorised area if it sinks too slowly (Email Dr Lieffering to Ms Couzens, 13 August 2019). This makes the use of explosives an integral part of the ‘dumping’ in the same way as some of the other matters listed in s 20 would also inevitably be a component of dumping. This is particularly so if the dumping cannot reasonably be carried out without the use of explosives; and

(b) A full assessment of the effects of the use of explosives will be undertaken and appropriate mitigation measures will be identified. We understand there have been discussions with the Department of Conservation, and various assessments will be made in this regard.

30. It will not always be the case that the use of explosives is a necessary component of dumping a vessel, but in the case of the Dong Won, there is a good argument that it is. In accordance with s 20(5) then, the proposal should be assessed on the basis of the overarching ‘dumping’ activity with a corresponding non- notified classification, rather than the use of explosives requiring a separate marine consent that would be assessed separately to the dumping activity.

Yours faithfully

Matthew Casey / Asher Davidson DDI: (09) 337 0400 Email: [email protected]

APPENDIX B

Section 52 Biosecurity Act Permission

740.10102.00000-R01-v1.0.docx Page 1 of 1

15 October 2019

Sol Fergus On behalf of: DW New Zealand Ltd 145 Dawson St Timaru Port Timaru 7910

Dear Sol,

Biosecurity Act 1993 section 52 permission GRANTED

The Ministry for Primary Industries (MPI) has assessed your application for section 52 permission under the Biosecurity Act 1993 to knowingly communicate the Unwanted Organism Undaria pinnatifida, Asian kelp. The Chief Technical Officer (MPI) has considered your request and has granted the permission with conditions.

Please find enclosed the permission conditions made under sections 52(d) of the Biosecurity Act 1993. Please distribute a copy of the permission conditions to anyone acting under your direction or control.

Yours sincerely

Abraham Growcott Senior Adviser Surveillance and Incursion Investigation Group Ministry for Primary Industries

APPENDIX C

FV Dong Won 701 Proposed Disposal Brief

740.10102.00000-R01-v1.0.docx Page 1 of 1

PROJECT

FV Dong Won 701

Proposed Disposal Brief

Version 6.0

NEW ZEALAND DIVING AND SALVAGE LTD 8 December 2019 134 GRACEFIELD ROAD, PO BOX 30-392, LOWER HUTT 5040 EMAIL: [email protected] PHONE: 64 4 568 2505 FAX: 64 4 568 2123 www.nzds.co.nz

New Zealand Diving and Salvage Ltd V.6.0 Project: Dong Won 701 Proposed Disposal Brief Date: 8 December 2019

CONTENTS

1 INTRODUCTION...... 4 2 WASTE CATEGORIES ...... 4 3 STATUS OF CASUALTY ...... 4 4 HEALTH, SAFETY, QUALITY AND ENVIRONMENTAL ...... 6 4.1 MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS ...... 6 4.2 APPLICABLE LEGISLATION ...... 7 5 PREPARATION PLAN ...... 7 5.1 LOOSE AND FLOATABLE MATERIALS ...... 7 5.2 WINCHES, WIRE / RIGGING, ENGINES AND GENERATORS ...... 7 5.2.1 Winches ...... 7 5.2.2 Wire / Rigging ...... 8 5.2.3 Engines and Generators ...... 9 5.3 HAZARDOUS MATERIAL – ASBESTOS...... 10 5.4 FIRE SUPPRESSANT SYSTEM ...... 11 5.5 REFRIGERANTS ...... 11 5.6 PARTIALLY BURNT MATERIAL ...... 11 5.7 ASH ...... 12 5.8 LIGHTING / COPPER MATERIALS ...... 12 5.8.1 Lighting ...... 12 5.8.2 Copper Materials ...... 12 5.9 INSULATIONS ...... 13 5.10 COATINGS ...... 14 5.11 BULK LIQUIDS ...... 14 5.11.1 Hydraulics Fluids ...... 14 5.11.2 Service Tanks ...... 14 5.11.3 Fuel Storage Tanks Excluding the Bottom Tanks ...... 14 5.11.4 Bottom Fuel Storage Tanks ...... 14 5.11.5 Elimination of explosive potential ...... 15 5.11.6 Tank Plan ...... 16 5.11.7 In-Water Inspection ...... 17 5.11.8 Hull Integrity Survey ...... 17 5.11.9 Biosecurity / Biofouling Inspection ...... 17 5.12 STABILITY ...... 17 6 STATE OF READINESS ...... 17 7 TOW PLAN ...... 18 7.1 DUMPING SITE ...... 18 7.2 TOW ROUTE ...... 18 7.3 TOW CONDITIONS ...... 19 8 SCUTTLING ...... 19 9 PHOTOGRAPHS ...... 20

NEW ZEALAND DIVING AND SALVAGE LTD Page 2 of 29 Commercial in Confidence New Zealand Diving and Salvage Ltd V.6.0 Project: Dong Won 701 Proposed Disposal Brief Date: 8 December 2019

10 APPENDIX A – SAFETY DATA SHEETS ...... 25 11 APPENDIX B – NZDS BIOFOULING SURVEY REPORT DATED 12 SEPTEMBER 2019 ...... 26 12 APPENDIX C – NIWA LETTER DATED 30 SEPTEMBER 2019 ...... 27 13 APPENDIX D – PREPARATION AND CLEANING CHECKLIST ...... 28 14 APPENDIX E – HAZARDOUS MATERIALS AND WASTE ...... 29

NEW ZEALAND DIVING AND SALVAGE LTD Page 3 of 29 Commercial in Confidence New Zealand Diving and Salvage Ltd V.6.0 Project: Dong Won 701 Proposed Disposal Brief Date: 8 December 2019

1 INTRODUCTION The casualty FV Dong Won 701 (DW701), is a 1,304 dwt, 81m steel stern trawler which was constructed in a Japanese shipyard in 1971. It is currently moored alongside in the Port of Timaru. It is in a derelict and light condition having suffered a major fire event in April 2018.

New Zealand Diving and Salvage Limited (NZDS) has been engaged by the owners DW New Zealand Limited (DWNZ) to prepare and dispose of the vessel at sea in an authorised dumping site.

In order to obtain approval from the New Zealand regulator, the Environment Protection Authority (EPA), the vessel will need to be placed into an acceptable condition with the matters of hazardous materials, waste and potential sources of waste addressed. It is understood that the Client will be making the application to the EPA for the approval and that this brief will form part of the application.

This brief is provided as an outline of the processes that will be applied in the preparation of the vessel pre- tow, the tow and disposal sequence.

2 WASTE CATEGORIES NZDS has prepared a separate document “Hazardous Material and Waste” to identify the materials of interest as provided for in the following guidelines and documents. a. Marine Environment Protection Committee (MEPC) 68/21 Annex 17 Resolution MEPC.269(68) 2015 Guidelines for the Development of the Inventory of Hazardous Materials; and b. identify materials that are categorised as waste in accordance with the document; Imports and Exports (Restrictions) Prohibition Order (No 2) 2004 (SR2004/202) • Schedule 1 Stockholm chemicals • Schedule 2 Rotterdam chemicals • Schedule 3 Matters relating to hazardous waste and waste. - Part 1 Categories of waste - Part 2 Hazardous constituents - Part 3 Hazardous characteristics c. Annex 7 2016 Revised Specific Guidelines for the Assessment of Vessels – LC38/16. Appendix Pollution Prevention Plan: clauses 4 and 5; d. MEPC 71/17 Annex 21 Resolution MEPC.295(71) 2017 Guidelines for the implementation of MARPOL Annex V.

3 STATUS OF CASUALTY The fire caused significant damage to a large portion of the vessel where it gutted the entire contents and integrity of compartments from frame 55 forward. The affected areas were inclusive of the forward storage spaces, bridge, factory, hydraulic winch control room, accommodation on the upper, main and lower decks. All combustible material within these areas were consumed, leaving ash, steel furniture frames, engineering and machine parts and various general materials. There is no bulkhead or deckhead linings intact from the bridge down into the lower decks of the accommodation compartments.

The intensity of the fire was significant enough to buckle the steel decks on the forward section of the vessel, melt aluminium shelving, doors and various synthetic materials on the open decks like rope and nets.

NEW ZEALAND DIVING AND SALVAGE LTD Page 4 of 29 Commercial in Confidence New Zealand Diving and Salvage Ltd V.6.0 Project: Dong Won 701 Proposed Disposal Brief Date: 8 December 2019

The forward and midship fish holding which are located below the accommodation and bow section also suffered some fire damage (heat, smoke and water). Extensive smoke damage is present from the bow to the midship sections of the vessel and aft to the forward engine room where the bulkhead remains intact.

Smoke damage is evident throughout the aft balance of the compartment spaces. The engine, steering room compartments remain effectively free of fire damages and as such the engines, generators, machinery spares, service tanks and other equipment remain intact.

A relatively small quantity of asbestos lagging is fitted around the exhaust manifolds and some piping. This is an expected feature of a vessel of this age.

In addition to the burnt remains of fittings, fixtures and other materials, there is variety of loose items including fishing gear, nets, floats, ropes, wires and packaging. These items are typically held on the main deck, stored in fish holds and other compartments of which have had some degree of impact from the fire.

Some remedial work has previously been performed which included efforts to recover fuel bunkers. The main part of the fuel bunkers has been pumped off the vessel with minor amounts remaining in each of the tanks as noted in the tank schedule.

An estimate of approximately 350,000 litres of water mixed with hydrocarbons (diesel and LFO) remains on board in the tanks as per that noted in the tank schedule. The firefighting response has also left water mixed with ash and other materials present in the bilge system.

With consideration to biosecurity and towage, a biofouling inspection was conducted on the 12th September 2019. A report on findings was produced by NIWA and will be provided with the application to the EPA. During this inspection the rudder was observed to be positioned 15° to starboard.

The vessel’s “light ship” condition places its current stability status as not suitable for a sea voyage.

NEW ZEALAND DIVING AND SALVAGE LTD Page 5 of 29 Commercial in Confidence New Zealand Diving and Salvage Ltd V.6.0 Project: Dong Won 701 Proposed Disposal Brief Date: 8 December 2019

General Arrangement of DW 701 showing fire damage and winch locations

Bridge Upper Deck

Main Deck Lower Deck

Fish Hold

Deck names for purposes of this brief

4 HEALTH, SAFETY, QUALITY AND ENVIRONMENTAL 4.1 Management Systems All operational activities will be performed under the NZDS management systems, policies and procedures which are accredited by Lloyds Register Quality Assurance for Quality Management ISO 9001:2015 and Occupational Health and Safety OHSAS 18001:2007.

All operations will be carried out in compliance with industry standards, best practices, guidelines and conform to ISO 14001 Environmental Management.

NEW ZEALAND DIVING AND SALVAGE LTD Page 6 of 29 Commercial in Confidence New Zealand Diving and Salvage Ltd V.6.0 Project: Dong Won 701 Proposed Disposal Brief Date: 8 December 2019

4.2 Applicable Legislation • Health and Safety at Work Act 2015 • Health and Safety at Work (General Risk and Workplace Management) Regulations 2016 • Transport Act 1962 • Resource Management Act 1991 • Environmental Act 1996 • Maritime Transport Act 1994 Health and Safety in Employment Pressure Equipment, Cranes, and Passenger Ropeways Regulations 1999 (PECPR Regulations)

5 PREPARATION PLAN 5.1 Loose and Floatable Materials General loose materials such as signage, nets, synthetic lines, loose wire, floats and storage containers will be removed from the main trawl, forward and aft decks including open lockers. The timber decking on the trawl deck will be uplifted and removed. The timber will be made available for recycling.

There are a variety of aerosol consumables and lubricating agents of which the bulk are stored in the engine room. These will all be recovered and disposed of on land. Aerosol and lubricating agents that are in their original packaging, labelled and not expired will be made available for other users or otherwise disposed of appropriately. Sacrificial zinc anode spares that are stored in the engine room are to be removed and recycled.

The fish holds have large packs of cardboard packaging and plastic materials which will be recovered and recycled. Factory equipment that is not fixed to the structure such as measuring scales and benches will be removed for disposal.

The existing hatch covers will be removed to shore and replaced with temporary tarpaulin covers to assist in keeping the rain out during these undertakings. The covers will remain in place for the towing phase and be removed once the vessel is at the approved site prior to sinking. This also includes the temporary plywood covers currently fitted to the burnt-out windows and doorways that have been put in place to make it weather tight.

5.2 Winches, Wire / Rigging, Engines and Generators 5.2.1 Winches Deck winches, wire ropes, gears, generators, engines, rollers, pully blocks and other equipment contain a range of grease, oils and lubricants to maintain them in good working order. Exposed grease is highly visible around most of the exposed gears and drum components on the winch assemblies.

There are seven winches located on the upper deck inclusive of the anchor winch. Four others are located on the main deck. The main lubricating products used for the winch components are XHP222, EP2 and 375. These products are not classified as hazardous materials and a copy of the materials safety data sheets (MSDS) are provided separately.

NEW ZEALAND DIVING AND SALVAGE LTD Page 7 of 29 Commercial in Confidence New Zealand Diving and Salvage Ltd V.6.0 Project: Dong Won 701 Proposed Disposal Brief Date: 8 December 2019

There are components of the winch assemblies that are exposed, coated in grease and are accessible without disassembling. These exposed areas will have the grease removed by hand and wiped out using Simple Green. The use of high-pressure cleaning will not provide any further advantage due to the limited access into these assemblies.

With reference to the following paragraph it is our considered view that the balance of any lubricating agents within these assemblies remains in place.

The 2015 guidelines: clause 4.5.3 “If any liquids and gases listed in table C of appendix 1 are integral in machinery and equipment on board a ship their approximate quantity and location should be listed in part III of the inventory. However, small amounts of lubricating oil, anti-seize compounds and grease which are applied to or injected into machinery and equipment to maintain normal performance do not fall into this provision”.

The following images are representative of the exposed and accessible areas around the winch assemblies.

5.2.2 Wire / Rigging Winch wires are often impregnated with a lubricant and additional lubricants may be applied to maintain their condition during their service life. The wire lubricant utilised on this vessel is comparable to that of XHP222. There is approximately 2,500m of 30mm diameter wire on each of the two main winches located on the main/trawl deck. The other winches hold varying lengths and diameters.

NEW ZEALAND DIVING AND SALVAGE LTD Page 8 of 29 Commercial in Confidence New Zealand Diving and Salvage Ltd V.6.0 Project: Dong Won 701 Proposed Disposal Brief Date: 8 December 2019

Recycling of the winch wires particularly those on the two main winches was explored with Environment Canterbury for the purpose of erosion controls. Having discussed the functionality of the winches with the DWNZ engineer the ability of removing the wires is significantly limited and considered unachievable as the winches have been static for an extended period. The fire destroyed the onboard hydraulic control room removing the ability to operate and turn them.

An independent hydraulic power source option would require provision of a large unit, lifting it on to the deck of the vessel, hydraulic specialists, and the potential running of hydraulic lines from the wharf to the vessel over water presenting an additional environmental risk. For these reasons the wires will not be removed.

As shown in images 1 and 3 there is a range of overhead rigging lines. All rigging that is accessible without the need to mechanically lift people will be recovered for disposal. The recovery method will be to cut these lines and pull them back through their attachment points, guiding eyes or pulley blocks. Any rigging not recovered will remain on board.

5.2.3 Engines and Generators DWNZ have already removed the following plant for reuse. The Cummins 220 D5e generator from below the main deck, hasher and head / tail cutting machinery from the factory compartment.

The main plant in the engine room and associated spares are for a Japanese unit manufactured in 1971. NZDS has made enquiries through New Zealand based shipping agents Sea Resources Limited to explore the possibility of recycling the unit and spares. The response was that they are simply too old to warrant any interest. There is significant cost in the consideration of recovering this unit including the recovery of this size plant, the need to cut access through several decks and the ability to operate heavy lifting plant on a wharf that won’t take the point loading.

The engine room is a congested space filled with fixed plant, pipe work, plant spares and cabinetry. The access to certain plant is achievable via removable steel plate floor panels and is limited at best. Surfaces with oily residues or grease will be wiped down with a multi-purpose degreaser Simple Green.

Lubricating reservoirs and service tanks will be drained of their contents and recovered for disposal. Service tanks are inclusive of those located in the steering room.

Liquids accumulated in bilges and plant bundings will be pumped out and washed down with Simple Green.

List of the main plant that is fixed and will remain in the engine and steering rooms. • Main Engine Akasaka 6DHS1ss B200PS 25R/M Eng. No. 7182 • Governor Woodward – Type: UG-8L RPM: 366~1390 • Fuel Feed Pump – Type: TOP-3RD-1050D, Nippon Oil Pump Co, Ltd • Nozzle Cooling Oil Pump – Type: TOP-3RD- 20SD, Nippon Oil Co, Ltd • Main LO Pump – Type: HGR-125D-M, S-702774 75m3/h • Aux” LO Pump – Type: HGR-125B, S-702786 62m3/h • C.P.P Pump – Type: Kawasaki-IMO 38-4N2YA • Kawasaki B-870/SF-300. Kawasaki Heavy Industries, Ltd

NEW ZEALAND DIVING AND SALVAGE LTD Page 9 of 29 Commercial in Confidence New Zealand Diving and Salvage Ltd V.6.0 Project: Dong Won 701 Proposed Disposal Brief Date: 8 December 2019

• Dynamo Engine – Niigata 6L16X 360PS 1200RM. Eng” No. 6185, 6186 and 6187 • Governor Motor – Type: 4115B. 40w-440V GEAR 100:1. Sasaki Electric Co, Ltd • A/E Turbo Charge- Niigata-Napier C-045 • Fresh water-cooling pump – VCS 125-H Suriyokuri Co • Condenser sea water pump – Type: JP-150B(H.C m/s) • Fuel oil transfer gear pump – Type; GRD. 80-M Suriyokuri • Main Engine sea water cooling pump – Type: JNP-170B • Fresh water generator – AFGU-3. Atras-Sasakura Osaka. 10ton/day

Top left: Oil service tank that can be accessed and drained. Others: Engine room compartment showing pipework and plant set in the floor.

5.3 Hazardous Material – Asbestos A 2015 asbestos assessment by K2 Environmental Ltd confirmed the presence of Chrysotile Asbestos predominantly in the engine room with some lagging on the deck above. It also indicated that there was possible presence within pipe gaskets including those that are listed as a non-asbestos type, the core of fire doors / walls and the Bakelite switches, fuses and alarm casings. Post fire April 2018 ASBEX NZ Ltd (Analytix) provided a bulk analysis certificate with results for 24 residue swab samples that were taken from the focsle, accommodation rooms, galley and lower deck area with no asbestos detected.

The remaining asbestos in the engine room will be removed by a specialist handling company.

NEW ZEALAND DIVING AND SALVAGE LTD Page 10 of 29 Commercial in Confidence New Zealand Diving and Salvage Ltd V.6.0 Project: Dong Won 701 Proposed Disposal Brief Date: 8 December 2019

5.4 Fire Suppressant System The fire suppressant system compromises of seven cylinders containing Ansul Sapphire product NOVEC 1230 and a separate small trigger cylinder of nitrogen. The material safety data sheet for the Novec 1230 states that the material is considered non-hazardous it has a zero-ozone depletion potential, global warming potential of one and atmospheric lifetime of five days. It is electrically non-conductive or corrosive and does not leave residues. Wormald who are listed as the service agents and installers have not been able to provide any further information regarding the system.

The 2017 service certificate no. 512073 was provided by DWNZ and indicates that several of the cylinders had rust issues. Contact with Fire Safety Equipment in Auckland estimated that the cylinders with a full charge may possibly be in the range of 130 – 170kg each. The cylinders are attached by a threaded valve assembly at the top and held into the cabinets by steel straps.

There is possible value in any remaining Novec fluid however due to the position of the cylinders in lockers on the lower deck, their anticipated weights, limited lifting aids and recorded condition; the benefit of recovery and recycling is considered not suitable. DWNZ have estimated that a charge of approximately 60 – 70% may remain in the system. Due to the difficulty in removing the cylinders and the fact that the substance is non-hazardous, has no ozone depletion potential and has an atmospheric lifetime of 5-days, these cylinders will remain on the vessel.

5.5 Refrigerants The ammonia refrigeration gases have been purged and remain open. This is inclusive of the three reservoirs in the engine room. No further work will be performed regarding these.

5.6 Partially Burnt Material Loose, floatable and partially incinerated items such as cooking utensils, kitchen consumables, food, household waste, welding materials plastics, synthetic rope, clothing, rubber, grease, lubricants, fire extinguishers, hydraulic fluids, aluminium, batteries, paint tins, thinners, signage wire coils, copper tubing, glass, electrical appliances, chair frames and general stores will be removed and disposed of at land fill.

Engineering spares which can be comfortably handled and do not require heavy lifting or additional access will be removed from the various store areas.

Copper tubing and engineering spares

NEW ZEALAND DIVING AND SALVAGE LTD Page 11 of 29 Commercial in Confidence New Zealand Diving and Salvage Ltd V.6.0 Project: Dong Won 701 Proposed Disposal Brief Date: 8 December 2019

5.7 Ash The ash material and fines will be pushed into the cleaned bottom fuel tanks where it will be mixed and encapsulated in the cement ballast.

5.8 Lighting / Copper Materials 5.8.1 Lighting Polychlorinated biphenyl (PCBs) Worldwide restrictions began in 2004 and in Japan domestic control began in 1973. The vessel was built in Japan 1971 and therefore it is possible that PCB material was utilised during its construction and fit out. Possible sources of PCBs may include fluorescent lighting ballasts, wire insulations, capacitators and power transformers coolant.

The DWNZ engineer has advised that the transformers are not liquid cooled and would not hold PCBs.

Except for the occasional intact light, the bulk of the fluorescent lighting systems were in the accommodation compartments of which were destroyed. It is understood that the lighting systems over the years have had various upgrades including the LED systems which are fitted to the main deck, factory and various store compartments. Occasional halogen lights exist in the deck and in the factory area. Filament bulbs were fitted along the external of the superstructure of which all have been significantly affected by fire.

Where light fittings are intact and can be reached the plastic components and light bulbs will be recovered and disposed of on land. The remaining spotlights do not hold any value in recycling and in many positions are too high for efficient and safe recovery without additional processes.

Plastic lighting assemblies

5.8.2 Copper Materials Copper systems within the ship structure: Copper compounds are identified in the 2004 Prohibition Order Schedule 3 Part 2: Hazardous Constituents.

The electrical systems on board do comprise of an extensive and typical network of cabling including copper cored. This network is integrated through the vessel structure and is in various conditions. The copper within the intact wiring remains encapsulated within the insulated protective coating. It is significantly difficult to determine the quantity of the wiring and would require significant effort to pull all the wiring.

NEW ZEALAND DIVING AND SALVAGE LTD Page 12 of 29 Commercial in Confidence New Zealand Diving and Salvage Ltd V.6.0 Project: Dong Won 701 Proposed Disposal Brief Date: 8 December 2019

There is some copper pipework that carried water for accommodation and refrigeration services. The quantity of this is undetermined and that which ran through the accommodation areas was severely damaged.

Annex 7 pollution prevention plan 3.(2), (2)… there may be high value components available, such as non- ferrous metals (e.g. copper, aluminium……..) Removal from the vessel for reuse should be based on a balance between their age, condition, demand, cost of removal and presence of any hazardous constituents.

These materials will remain on the vessel as the value in this situation and opportunity for recycling is outweighed by the undetermined quantity, general condition and cost of removal.

5.9 Insulations Blast freezers are constructed from laminated sandwich panels which have a basic composition of foam sandwiched between metal skins. The floor above the bottom fuel tanks in the fish hold comprises of refrigerant pipework and timber frames with the insulation foam set in between them and then covered with a plywood floor.

It is understood that the foam is a polyurethane type that is standard for use in fishing vessel applications. The foam on the floor is an expanding spray type and under a microscope would have a honeycomb structure. Communications with Polymer Group Ltd confirmed that the foam would compress under pressure and become water saturated before we reached the planned resting depths. They informed that producing a foam that could withstand water saturation and pressure beyond 200ft would require a specific and non-standard production.

To clean the bottom tanks access will be made through this flooring the disturbed and loose material will be the recovered and disposed of on land.

Pink showing the location of the insulation foam on the floor of the fish holds and the approximate location of the freezing units

NEW ZEALAND DIVING AND SALVAGE LTD Page 13 of 29 Commercial in Confidence New Zealand Diving and Salvage Ltd V.6.0 Project: Dong Won 701 Proposed Disposal Brief Date: 8 December 2019

Freezer unit with insulated door open

5.10 Coatings Information on the various coatings is provided in a separate document. The information available for the DW701 coatings and in particular; those on the submerged hull date back to 2010. They are readily available, and EPA approved for application and use in New Zealand. NZDS is not aware of any requirement for the removal coatings for any of the vessels scuttled since 2004 and recorded by Maritime New Zealand. There is no plan in this case to unnecessarily disturb or remove any of the coatings.

5.11 Bulk Liquids 5.11.1 Hydraulics Fluids Visible and intact hydraulic lines will be drained through the low point valves or through the cutting of the line at a low point. Any fluids will be collected into a container for transfer to a waste tank. Where possible the lines will be flushed using Simple Green with the wash water collected in the same way as the waste.

The hydraulic fluids listed as stores and for use are; Shell Tellus S2 products VX 15, VX 68, MX 68 M 100.

5.11.2 Service Tanks Service tanks will be drained of contents and flushed out with Simple Green the waste and wash water will be collected and disposed of in the same way as the fluid lines. A service tank will usually have a drain valve at or near the lowest point of a tank and therefore gravity will be used drain them.

5.11.3 Fuel Storage Tanks Excluding the Bottom Tanks These tanks will be drained of contents and where accessible steam cleaned and / or high-pressure water cleaned. Where access is restrictive a Simple Green wash will be applied. These tanks are identified on the tank plan provided.

5.11.4 Bottom Fuel Storage Tanks Sections of the plywood flooring and foam will be removed and recovered ashore for disposal. Where required refrigerant pipework will be cut and the open ends plugged to stop any contaminants form the cleaning process entering the pipework. The removed sections of pipe will be recovered ashore for recycling and / or disposal.

NEW ZEALAND DIVING AND SALVAGE LTD Page 14 of 29 Commercial in Confidence New Zealand Diving and Salvage Ltd V.6.0 Project: Dong Won 701 Proposed Disposal Brief Date: 8 December 2019

5.11.5 Elimination of explosive potential Each tank will be filled with water and the tank breathers sealed to remove the opportunity of liquid loss overboard. Any tanked water from the firefighting activities and stored water on the vessel will be used as a source for this process. A gas blanket of nitrogen will be introduced above the surface of the liquid inside the tank to eliminate any flammable gas pockets.

A series of cold cuts using hydraulic powered rotary tools with a water spray will be used to create large openings into the tanks. The introduced water and free residues will be removed and recovered for recycling and disposal.

The tank linings will be subjected to a series of three washes with Simple Green used where applicable; • long wand steam cleaning will be used to wash down the walls and gussets of the tanks, • high powered water blaster with an entrained bilge wash detergent will be used to wash, and • a steam cleaner will complete the wash process with the materials then pumped ashore for disposal.

The tanks will be left open for inspection to confirm there cleaning standard. On completion of this the ash material, ballast cement and sand will be inserted in stages to maintain stability and allowed to set in place.

Timber frame with cooling pipe on top of F.O.T. Application of the insulating foam

NEW ZEALAND DIVING AND SALVAGE LTD Page 15 of 29 Commercial in Confidence New Zealand Diving and Salvage Ltd V.6.0 Project: Dong Won 701 Proposed Disposal Brief Date: 8 December 2019

5.11.6 Tank Plan

Showing arrangement of tanks across the deck levels

F.O.T Fuel Oil Tank F.W.T Fresh Water Tank H.O.T Hydraulic Oil Tank LFO Light Fuel Oil L.O.T Lube Oil Tank R.O.T Refrigeration Oil Tank FPT Fore Peak Tank DIST W.T Distilled Water Tank L.O.S.T Lube Oil Service Tank R.T Rudder Trunk K.O.T Oil Tank

NEW ZEALAND DIVING AND SALVAGE LTD Page 16 of 29 Commercial in Confidence New Zealand Diving and Salvage Ltd V.6.0 Project: Dong Won 701 Proposed Disposal Brief Date: 8 December 2019

5.11.7 In-Water Inspection An in-water inspection was performed on the 12th September 2019 to confirm the condition of the submerged hull for the surveyor and to perform a biosecurity assessment of the marine biofouling.

5.11.8 Hull Integrity Survey A typical integrity inspection will comprise of a visual of the submerged hull plating, niche areas, bilge keels, rudder and propeller systems. In addition to the visual and subject to the surveyor requirements the surveyor may request the use of non-destructive testing equipment. Confirmation of the rudder position and where required realignment and fixing into place for the tow will be performed.

5.11.9 Biosecurity / Biofouling Inspection The onsite inspection followed a planned route from the rudder following a line towards the bow on one side along the bottom and down the following side. Except for penetration into sea chest cavities all other niche areas were included in this inspection. Video and photographs were taken along the route of items of interest and samples collected where necessary for further identification processes.

Decision to not entre the sea chest is based on the potential challenges of removing the grates, divers penetrating cavities will require additional safety considerations, due to the tight environment the risk of disturbing marine organisms has an increased potential of spore release.

A separate biosecurity report has been prepared by NIWA will be provided with the application to the EPA.

5.12 Stability A Naval Architect will provide an instruction for the ballasting of the vessel following a review of the vessel’s stability requirements post removal of material and the it’s lightened condition. The main ballast requirement is planned to be introduced in the cleaned bottom storage tanks. A mixture of clean sand and cement will be used. Additional ballast maybe placed in other tanks or configured in the form of cement block placements.

The introduced cement will encapsulate any residues and the ash that has been relocated from the fire damaged upper decks. The cement will form a new plug to the holes that were created to gain access.

6 STATE OF READINESS The vessel will need to be confirmed seaworthy and fit for safe passage for the tow to the approved dumping area. All hull openings will be sealed for the period of the tow. To assist with the sink process vent control options will be considered during the planning phases and where appropriate large holes will be cut into void sections of the hull. If deemed necessary, the vent holes will aid in a rapid flooding of the vessel to assist in the rapid sinking of the DW701.

The use of the mentioned cement into predetermined tanks will improve the stability, stiffness and seaworthiness of the vessel particularly for the towage. A Naval Architect will be engaged to assess the ballast requirements to ensure vessel stability and provision of supporting the surveyor sign off pre-towage.

NEW ZEALAND DIVING AND SALVAGE LTD Page 17 of 29 Commercial in Confidence New Zealand Diving and Salvage Ltd V.6.0 Project: Dong Won 701 Proposed Disposal Brief Date: 8 December 2019

The ship will be a “cold tow” with no personnel onboard or power and propulsion. The vessel owner will arrange for an independent surveyor to confirm that the vessel is fit for passage and that instruction can be given for towing activities.

7 TOW PLAN The dump site is an authorised site charted as an Explosives Dumping Ground it is the most southern location provided of the five listed sites and closest to the Port of Timaru, this providing the shortest tow route required. The target settling position is within the 4 nautical mile radius of the charted dump zone at coordinates 46°00’S, 171°13’E approx. 25 NM south-east of Otago and in a water depth of >600m.

7.1 Dumping Site

7.2 Tow Route The tow route is expected to follow a deep water >500m contour line to the site some 10+NM off the coastline and away from shipping lanes. The anticipated route will be plotted on the vessel plotter / GPS and any deviations made will be to accommodate conditions at the time.

NEW ZEALAND DIVING AND SALVAGE LTD Page 18 of 29 Commercial in Confidence New Zealand Diving and Salvage Ltd V.6.0 Project: Dong Won 701 Proposed Disposal Brief Date: 8 December 2019

7.3 Tow Conditions Subject to weather data and forecasts the upper limits for towing operations will be swell 2.0m – wind 30 knots. The anticipated tow speed will be 4.8 – 5 knots.

8 SCUTTLING Explosive handling specialists OCEL of Christchurch have been engaged to design, prepare, set and detonate purpose designed charge packages. A blast plan will be provided separately and confirm the size, type, positioning and detonation process which will utilise electronic time delays. This design is to focus the blast energy into the hull plating starting from the engine room area moving forward to enable the rapid take on of water.

Upon arrival into the approved dumping site, the tow master will position the DW701 in the centre of the dump site and stay connected to ensure the vessel’s position is maintained.

The explosive specialists with NZDS support personnel will utilise a small tender vessel to board the ship and arm the pre-positioned charges. Once NZDS personnel have retreated from the vessel and it is confirmed there are no marine mammals are present within the 600m mitigation zone around the vessel and all other

NEW ZEALAND DIVING AND SALVAGE LTD Page 19 of 29 Commercial in Confidence New Zealand Diving and Salvage Ltd V.6.0 Project: Dong Won 701 Proposed Disposal Brief Date: 8 December 2019

pre-fire conditions met, detonation can occur. As per the blast plan, the Dong Won 701 will be held in position and under control up until the vessel can be observed visually lower in the water and it is certain the sinking has begun. Once it is confirmed the vessel has started to sink, a small charge will be initiated to shear the towline connecting the tug and DW701. This process will ensure that vessel drift is minimised as far as practicable.

Post detonation and sinking, the team will wait 30 minutes to confirm no floating debris are present. Any material observed will be recovered and returned to shore for disposal.

The tow master utilising navigational aids and photographs will record the site of the detonation and last visible surface position of the casualty. The towing tug is equipped with a multibeam sounder and this will be used to confirm the location of the DW701 on the seabed. This information will be reported to the EPA confirming completion of the programme with supply of the final location of the ship.

On arriving to the dumping site, a sustained watch will be held for marine mammal and surface activity.

9 PHOTOGRAPHS

Image 1: Main deck looking FWD trawl winches and rope in view

Image 2: FWD deck loose rope, wire and fire damaged netting

NEW ZEALAND DIVING AND SALVAGE LTD Page 20 of 29 Commercial in Confidence New Zealand Diving and Salvage Ltd V.6.0 Project: Dong Won 701 Proposed Disposal Brief Date: 8 December 2019

Image 3: AFT main deck with loose items and view of timber floor for removal

Image 4: Wheelhouse

Image 5: Typical fire damage mess area

NEW ZEALAND DIVING AND SALVAGE LTD Page 21 of 29 Commercial in Confidence New Zealand Diving and Salvage Ltd V.6.0 Project: Dong Won 701 Proposed Disposal Brief Date: 8 December 2019

Image 6: Engineering Stores

Image 7: Typical fire damage within the accommodation compartments

Image 8: Accommodation and Officers Mess STBD

NEW ZEALAND DIVING AND SALVAGE LTD Page 22 of 29 Commercial in Confidence New Zealand Diving and Salvage Ltd V.6.0 Project: Dong Won 701 Proposed Disposal Brief Date: 8 December 2019

Image 9: Melted netting and rope

Image 10: Main trawl winch exposed gear grease

Image 11: Inside funnel

NEW ZEALAND DIVING AND SALVAGE LTD Page 23 of 29 Commercial in Confidence New Zealand Diving and Salvage Ltd V.6.0 Project: Dong Won 701 Proposed Disposal Brief Date: 8 December 2019

Image 12: Main engine compartment

Image 13: Winch control room

NEW ZEALAND DIVING AND SALVAGE LTD Page 24 of 29 Commercial in Confidence New Zealand Diving and Salvage Ltd V.6.0 Project: Dong Won 701 Proposed Disposal Brief Date: 8 December 2019

10 APPENDIX A – SAFETY DATA SHEETS

NEW ZEALAND DIVING AND SALVAGE LTD Page 25 of 29 Commercial in Confidence New Zealand Diving and Salvage Ltd V.6.0 Project: Dong Won 701 Proposed Disposal Brief Date: 8 December 2019

11 APPENDIX B – NZDS BIOFOULING SURVEY REPORT DATED 12 SEPTEMBER 2019

NEW ZEALAND DIVING AND SALVAGE LTD Page 26 of 29 Commercial in Confidence New Zealand Diving and Salvage Ltd V.6.0 Project: Dong Won 701 Proposed Disposal Brief Date: 8 December 2019

12 APPENDIX C – NIWA LETTER DATED 30 SEPTEMBER 2019

NEW ZEALAND DIVING AND SALVAGE LTD Page 27 of 29 Commercial in Confidence New Zealand Diving and Salvage Ltd V.6.0 Project: Dong Won 701 Proposed Disposal Brief Date: 8 December 2019

13 APPENDIX D – PREPARATION AND CLEANING CHECKLIST

Preparation 1. Removal of all loose debris and material for recycling or disposal by the Service Provider from the decks and open compartments and the fish holds (materials fixed in place and / or melted hard onto the vessel will not be considered to be loose); 2. Removal of all deck timbers for recycling; 3. Where light fittings are intact and can be reached the plastic components and light bulbs will be recovered and disposed of on land. 4. Removal of identified overhead rigging wires required to be removed by the EPA Permit (without requiring work to be conducted at height); 5. Removal of existing hatch covers, replaced with temporary covers for the towing operation; 6. Wash down of oily areas with degreaser (Simple Green); 7. Pumping out contaminated bilge water from the engine room and removing for disposal by the Service Provider; 8. Fire debris (ash, furniture frames), which poses nil to minimal environmental risk, will be secured in the bottom forward fish hold, sealing the hatch to prevent material escaping and floating during the sinking; 9. Recovering accessible liquids from the fuel tanks and holds and dispose ashore; 10. Open bunker tanks using cold cut method and wash down hydrocarbon residues from tank internals and dispose of ashore and clean bunker tanks to required standard under EPA Permit; 11. Fill tanks with sand cement mix under instruction of naval architect (cost of naval architect paid by DWNZ) to achieve stability of the vessel for the towing operation; 12. Remove all asbestos from the engine room compartments and dispose of asbestos ashore. 13. Secure compartments for the towing and sinking stages – place temporary plywood covers on doors and broken windows to ensure vessel is watertight for towing.

NEW ZEALAND DIVING AND SALVAGE LTD Page 28 of 29 Commercial in Confidence New Zealand Diving and Salvage Ltd V.6.0 Project: Dong Won 701 Proposed Disposal Brief Date: 8 December 2019

14 APPENDIX E – HAZARDOUS MATERIALS AND WASTE

NEW ZEALAND DIVING AND SALVAGE LTD Page 29 of 29 Commercial in Confidence

Product Name: MOBILUX EP 2 Revision Date: 20 Jun 2018 Page 5 of 10

______level which is adequate to protect worker health, an approved respirator may be appropriate. Respirator selection, use, and maintenance must be in accordance with regulatory requirements, if applicable. Types of respirators to be considered for this material include:

No protection is ordinarily required under normal conditions of use and with adequate ventilation.

For high airborne concentrations, use an approved supplied-air respirator, operated in positive pressure mode. Supplied air respirators with an escape bottle may be appropriate when oxygen levels are inadequate, gas/vapour warning properties are poor, or if air purifying filter capacity/rating may be exceeded.

Hand Protection: Any specific glove information provided is based on published literature and glove manufacturer data. Glove suitability and breakthrough time will differ depending on the specific use conditions. Contact the glove manufacturer for specific advice on glove selection and breakthrough times for your use conditions. Inspect and replace worn or damaged gloves. The types of gloves to be considered for this material include: Nitrile,Viton No protection is ordinarily required under normal conditions of use.

Eye Protection: If contact is likely, safety glasses with side shields are recommended.

Skin and Body Protection: Any specific clothing information provided is based on published literature or manufacturer data. The types of clothing to be considered for this material include: No skin protection is ordinarily required under normal conditions of use. In accordance with good industrial hygiene practices, precautions should be taken to avoid skin contact.

Specific Hygiene Measures: Always observe good personal hygiene measures, such as washing after handling the material and before eating, drinking, and/or smoking. Routinely wash work clothing and protective equipment to remove contaminants. Discard contaminated clothing and footwear that cannot be cleaned. Practise good housekeeping.

ENVIRONMENTAL CONTROLS Comply with applicable environmental regulations limiting discharge to air, water and soil. Protect the environment by applying appropriate control measures to prevent or limit emissions.

SECTION 9 PHYSICAL AND CHEMICAL PROPERTIES

Note: Physical and chemical properties are provided for safety, health and environmental considerations only and may not fully represent product specifications. Contact the Supplier for additional information.

GENERAL INFORMATION Physical State: Solid Form: Semi-fluid Colour: Yellow Odour: Characteristic Odour Threshold: N/D

IMPORTANT HEALTH, SAFETY, AND ENVIRONMENTAL INFORMATION Relative Density (at 15 °C): 0.918 Flammability (Solid, Gas): N/A Flash Point [Method]: >204°C (400°F) [EST. FOR OIL, ASTM D-92 (COC)]

Product Name: MOBILUX EP 2 Revision Date: 20 Jun 2018 Page 6 of 10

______Flammable Limits (Approximate volume % in air): LEL: N/D UEL: N/D Autoignition Temperature: N/D Boiling Point / Range: > 316°C (600°F) Decomposition Temperature: N/D Vapour Density (Air = 1): N/D Vapour Pressure: < 0.013 kPa (0.1 mm Hg) at 20 ºC Evaporation Rate (n-butyl acetate = 1): N/D pH: N/A Log Pow (n-Octanol/Water Partition Coefficient): > 3.5 Solubility in Water: Negligible Viscosity: 150 cSt (150 mm2/sec) at 40 ºC Oxidizing Properties: See Hazards Identification Section.

OTHER INFORMATION Freezing Point: N/D Melting Point: N/D DMSO Extract (mineral oil only), IP-346: < 3 %wt

NOTE: Most physical properties above are for the oil component in the material.

SECTION 10 STABILITY AND REACTIVITY

STABILITY: Material is stable under normal conditions.

CONDITIONS TO AVOID: Excessive heat. High energy sources of ignition.

INCOMPATIBLE MATERIALS: Strong oxidisers

HAZARDOUS DECOMPOSITION PRODUCTS: Material does not decompose at ambient temperatures.

POSSIBILITY OF HAZARDOUS REACTIONS: Hazardous polymerization will not occur.

SECTION 11 TOXICOLOGICAL INFORMATION

INFORMATION ON TOXICOLOGICAL EFFECTS

Product Name: MOBILUX EP 2 Revision Date: 20 Jun 2018 Page 7 of 10

______Serious Eye Damage/Irritation: No end point May cause mild, short-lasting discomfort to eyes. Based on data for material. assessment of the components. Sensitisation Respiratory Sensitization: No end point data Not expected to be a respiratory sensitizer. for material. Skin Sensitization: No end point data for Not expected to be a skin sensitizer. Based on assessment of the material. components. Aspiration: Data available. Not expected to be an aspiration hazard. Based on physico- chemical properties of the material. Germ Cell Mutagenicity: No end point data Not expected to be a germ cell mutagen. Based on assessment of for material. the components. Carcinogenicity: No end point data for Not expected to cause cancer. Based on assessment of the material. components. Reproductive Toxicity: No end point data Not expected to be a reproductive toxicant. Based on assessment for material. of the components. Lactation: No end point data for material. Not expected to cause harm to breast-fed children. Specific Target Organ Toxicity (STOT) Single Exposure: No end point data for Not expected to cause organ damage from a single exposure. material. Repeated Exposure: No end point data for Not expected to cause organ damage from prolonged or repeated material. exposure. Based on assessment of the components.

OTHER INFORMATION

IARC Classification: The following ingredients are cited on the lists below: None.

--REGULATORY LISTS SEARCHED-- 1 = IARC 1 2 = IARC 2A 3 = IARC 2B

SECTION 12 ECOLOGICAL INFORMATION

The information given is based on data available for the material, the components of the material, and similar materials.

ECOTOXICITY Material -- Not expected to be harmful to aquatic organisms.

MOBILITY Base oil component -- Low solubility and floats and is expected to migrate from water to the land. Expected to partition to sediment and wastewater solids.

PERSISTENCE AND DEGRADABILITY Biodegradation:

Product Name: MOBILUX EP 2 Revision Date: 20 Jun 2018 Page 8 of 10

______Base oil component -- Expected to be inherently biodegradable

BIOACCUMULATION POTENTIAL Base oil component -- Has the potential to bioaccumulate, however metabolism or physical properties may reduce the bioconcentration or limit bioavailability.

SECTION 13 DISPOSAL CONSIDERATIONS

Disposal recommendations based on material as supplied. Disposal must be in accordance with current applicable laws and regulations, and material characteristics at time of disposal.

DISPOSAL RECOMMENDATIONS Product is suitable for burning in an enclosed controlled burner for fuel value or disposal by supervised incineration at very high temperatures to prevent formation of undesirable combustion products.

Empty Container Warning Empty Container Warning (where applicable): Empty containers may contain residue and can be dangerous. Do not attempt to refill or clean containers without proper instructions. Empty drums should be completely drained and safely stored until appropriately reconditioned or disposed. Empty containers should be taken for recycling, recovery, or disposal through suitably qualified or licensed contractor and in accordance with governmental regulations. DO NOT PRESSURISE, CUT, WELD, BRAZE, SOLDER, DRILL, GRIND, OR EXPOSE SUCH CONTAINERS TO HEAT, FLAME, SPARKS, STATIC ELECTRICITY, OR OTHER SOURCES OF IGNITION. THEY MAY EXPLODE AND CAUSE INJURY OR DEATH.

SECTION 14 TRANSPORT INFORMATION LAND (ADG) : Not Regulated for Land Transport

SEA (IMDG): Not Regulated for Sea Transport according to IMDG-Code

Marine Pollutant: No

AIR (IATA): Not Regulated for Air Transport

SECTION 15 REGULATORY INFORMATION

This material is not considered hazardous according to Australia Model Work Health and Safety Regulations.

Product is not regulated according to Australian Dangerous Goods Code.

No Poison Schedule number allocated by the Standard for the Uniform Scheduling of Medicines and Poisons (SUSMP)

Product Name: MOBILUX EP 2 Revision Date: 20 Jun 2018 Page 9 of 10

______established under the Therapeutic Goods Act.

REGULATORY STATUS AND APPLICABLE LAWS AND REGULATIONS

Listed or exempt from listing/notification on the following chemical inventories (May contain substance(s) subject to notification to the EPA Active TSCA inventory prior to import to USA): AICS, DSL, ENCS, IECSC, KECI, PICCS, TCSI, TSCA

SECTION 16 OTHER INFORMATION

KEY TO ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS:

N/D = Not determined, N/A = Not applicable, STEL = Short-Term Exposure Limit, TWA = Time-Weighted Average

KEY TO THE H-CODES CONTAINED IN SECTION 3 OF THIS DOCUMENT (for information only): H315: Causes skin irritation; Skin Corr/Irritation, Cat 2 H318: Causes serious eye damage; Serious Eye Damage/Irr, Cat 1 H401: Toxic to aquatic life; Acute Env Tox, Cat 2 H411: Toxic to aquatic life with long lasting effects; Chronic Env Tox, Cat 2

THIS SAFETY DATA SHEET CONTAINS THE FOLLOWING REVISIONS: Composition: Component Table information was modified. Section 09: Boiling Point ºC(ºF) information was modified. Section 09: Colour information was modified. Section 09: n-Octanol/Water Partition Coefficient information was modified. Section 09: Relative Density information was modified. Section 09: Vapour Pressure information was deleted. Section 09: Viscosity information was deleted. Section 12: Ecological data - Header information was deleted. Section 12: Environmental tox table in section 12 information was deleted. Section 15: National Chemical Inventory Listing information was modified. Section 15: Special Cases Table information was deleted. Section 16: MSN, MAT ID information was modified.

------The information and recommendations contained herein are, to the best of ExxonMobil's knowledge and belief, accurate and reliable as of the date issued. You can contact ExxonMobil to insure that this document is the most current available from ExxonMobil. The information and recommendations are offered for the user's consideration and examination. It is the user's responsibility to satisfy itself that the product is suitable for the intended use. If buyer repackages this product, it is the user's responsibility to insure proper health, safety and other necessary information is included with and/or on the container. Appropriate warnings and safe-handling procedures should be provided to handlers and users. Alteration of this document is strictly prohibited. Except to the extent required by law, re- publication or retransmission of this document, in whole or in part, is not permitted. The term, "ExxonMobil" is used for convenience, and may include any one or more of ExxonMobil Chemical Company, Exxon Mobil Corporation, or any affiliates in which they directly of indirectly hold any interest.

------DGN: 2009890DAU (1027423)

Product Name: MOBILUX EP 2 Revision Date: 20 Jun 2018 Page 10 of 10

______------Prepared by: Exxon Mobil Corporation EMBSI, Clinton NJ USA Contact Point: See Section 1 for Local Contact number

End of (M)SDS Safety Data Sheet Classified as hazardous The content and format of this SDS is in accordance with HSNO Approved Code of Practice (No. HSNO CoP 8-1 09-06): Preparation of Safety Data Sheets. Shell Tellus S2 VX 15

Version 1.1 Revision Date 21.10.2016 Print Date 02.03.2017

SECTION 1. PRODUCT AND COMPANY IDENTIFICATION

Product name : Shell Tellus S2 VX 15

Product code : 001F8430

Manufacturer or supplier's details Supplier : Tyreline Distributors Limited (NZBN – 9429039316608) 87 Kahikatea Drive, Hamilton 3206, New Zealand Telephone : 0800 673 375 Telefax : +64 7 843 3582

Emergency telephone : 0800 734 607 (ALL HOURS) number

Recommended use of the chemical and restrictions on use Recommended use : Hydraulic oil

SECTION 2. HAZARDS IDENTIFICATION

HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCE. NON-DANGEROUS GOODS. Classified as hazardous according to criteria in the Hazardous Substances (Minimum Degrees of Hazard) Regulations 2001., Not classified as Dangerous Goods for transport, according to NZS 5433:2012 Transport of Dangerous Goods on Land.

Hazard classification Hazardous Substances : 6.1E Classification

GHS Classification Aspiration hazard : Asp. Tox.1

GHS label elements Hazard pictograms :

Signal word : Danger

Hazard statements : PHYSICAL HAZARDS: Not classified as a physical hazard under GHS criteria. HEALTH HAZARDS: H304 May be fatal if swallowed and enters airways. ENVIRONMENTAL HAZARDS: Not classified as an environmental hazard under GHS criteria.

1 / 15 800010026144 NZ

Safety Data Sheet Classified as hazardous The content and format of this SDS is in accordance with HSNO Approved Code of Practice (No. HSNO CoP 8-1 09-06): Preparation of Safety Data Sheets. Shell Tellus S2 VX 15

Version 1.1 Revision Date 21.10.2016 Print Date 02.03.2017

Precautionary statements : Prevention: No precautionary phrases.

Response: P301 + P310 IF SWALLOWED: Immediately call a POISON CENTER/doctor. P331 Do NOT induce vomiting.

Storage: P405 Store locked up.

Disposal: P501 Dispose of contents/ container to an approved waste disposal plant.

Hazardous components which must be listed on the label: Contains Distillates (Fischer - Tropsch), heavy, C18-50 - branched, cyclic and linear. Other hazards which do not result in classification Prolonged or repeated skin contact without proper cleaning can clog the pores of the skin resulting in disorders such as oil acne/folliculitis.Used oil may contain harmful impurities.High- pressure injection under the skin may cause serious damage including local necrosis.Not classified as flammable but will burn.

SECTION 3. COMPOSITION/INFORMATION ON INGREDIENTS

Chemical nature : Highly refined mineral oils and additives. The highly refined mineral oil contains <3% (w/w) DMSO- extract, according to IP346.

Hazardous components

Chemical name CAS-No. Classification Concentration [%] Distillates (Fischer - 848301-69-9 Asp. Tox.1; H304 85 - 95 Tropsch), heavy, C18-50 – branched, cyclic and linear For explanation of abbreviations see section 16.

SECTION 4. FIRST-AID MEASURES

If inhaled : No treatment necessary under normal conditions of use. If symptoms persist, obtain medical advice.

In case of skin contact : Remove contaminated clothing. Flush exposed area with water and follow by washing with soap if available.

2 / 15 800010026144 NZ

Version 1.1 Revision Date 21.10.2016 Print Date 02.03.2017 If persistent irritation occurs, obtain medical attention.

When using high pressure equipment, injection of product under the skin can occur. If high pressure injuries occur, the casualty should be sent immediately to a hospital. Do not wait for symptoms to develop. Obtain medical attention even in the absence of apparent wounds.

In case of eye contact : Flush eye with copious quantities of water. If persistent irritation occurs, obtain medical attention.

If swallowed : If swallowed, do not induce vomiting: transport to nearest medical facility for additional treatment. If vomiting occurs spontaneously, keep head below hips to prevent aspiration. If any of the following delayed signs and symptoms appear within the next 6 hours, transport to the nearest medical facility: fever greater than 101° F (38.3°C), shortness of breath, chest congestion or continued coughing or wheezing.

Most important symptoms : If material enters lungs, signs and symptoms may include and effects, both acute and coughing, choking, wheezing, difficulty in breathing, chest delayed congestion, shortness of breath, and/or fever. The onset of respiratory symptoms may be delayed for several hours after exposure. Defatting dermatitis signs and symptoms may include a burning sensation and/or a dried/cracked appearance. Ingestion may result in nausea, vomiting and/or diarrhoea.

Local necrosis is evidenced by delayed onset of pain and tissue damage a few hours following injection.

Protection of first-aiders : When administering first aid, ensure that you are wearing the appropriate personal protective equipment according to the incident, injury and surroundings.

Notes to physician : Treat symptomatically. Call a doctor or poison control center for guidance.

High pressure injection injuries require prompt surgical intervention and possibly steroid therapy, to minimise tissue damage and loss of function. Because entry wounds are small and do not reflect the seriousness of the underlying damage, surgical exploration to determine the extent of involvement may be necessary. Local anaesthetics or hot soaks should be avoided because they can contribute to swelling, vasospasm and ischaemia. Prompt surgical decompression, debridement and evacuation of foreign material should be performed under general anaesthetics, and wide exploration is essential.

3 / 15 800010026144 NZ

Version 1.1 Revision Date 21.10.2016 Print Date 02.03.2017 SECTION 5. FIRE-FIGHTING MEASURES

Suitable extinguishing media : Foam, water spray or fog. Dry chemical powder, carbon dioxide, sand or earth may be used for small fires only.

Unsuitable extinguishing : Do not use water in a jet. media

Specific hazards during : Hazardous combustion products may include: firefighting A complex mixture of airborne solid and liquid particulates and gases (smoke). Carbon monoxide may be evolved if incomplete combustion occurs. Unidentified organic and inorganic compounds.

Specific extinguishing : Use extinguishing measures that are appropriate to local methods circumstances and the surrounding environment.

Special protective equipment : Proper protective equipment including chemical resistant for firefighters gloves are to be worn; chemical resistant suit is indicated if large contact with spilled product is expected. Self-Contained Breathing Apparatus must be worn when approaching a fire in a confined space. Select fire fighter's clothing approved to relevant Standards (e.g. Europe: EN469).

SECTION 6. ACCIDENTAL RELEASE MEASURES

Personal precautions, : Avoid contact with skin and eyes. protective equipment and emergency procedures Environmental precautions : Use appropriate containment to avoid environmental contamination. Prevent from spreading or entering drains, ditches or rivers by using sand, earth, or other appropriate barriers.

Local authorities should be advised if significant spillages cannot be contained.

Methods and materials for : Slippery when spilt. Avoid accidents, clean up immediately. containment and cleaning up Prevent from spreading by making a barrier with sand, earth or other containment material. Reclaim liquid directly or in an absorbent. Soak up residue with an absorbent such as clay, sand or other suitable material and dispose of properly.

Additional advice : For guidance on selection of personal protective equipment see Chapter 8 of this Safety Data Sheet. For guidance on disposal of spilled material see Chapter 13 of this Safety Data Sheet.

4 / 15 800010026144 NZ

Version 1.1 Revision Date 21.10.2016 Print Date 02.03.2017

SECTION 7. HANDLING AND STORAGE

General Precautions : Use local exhaust ventilation if there is risk of inhalation of vapours, mists or aerosols. Use the information in this data sheet as input to a risk assessment of local circumstances to help determine appropriate controls for safe handling, storage and disposal of this material.

Advice on safe handling : Avoid prolonged or repeated contact with skin. Avoid inhaling vapour and/or mists. When handling product in drums, safety footwear should be worn and proper handling equipment should be used. Properly dispose of any contaminated rags or cleaning materials in order to prevent fires.

Avoidance of contact : Strong oxidising agents.

Storage Other data : Keep container tightly closed and in a cool, well-ventilated place. Use properly labeled and closable containers.

Store at ambient temperature.

Packaging material : Suitable material: For containers or container linings, use mild steel or high density polyethylene. Unsuitable material: PVC.

Container Advice : Polyethylene containers should not be exposed to high temperatures because of possible risk of distortion.

SECTION 8. EXPOSURE CONTROLS AND PERSONAL PROTECTION

Components with workplace control parameters Components CAS-No. Value type Control Basis (Form of parameters / exposure) Permissible concentration Oil mist, mineral Not Assigned WES-TWA 5 mg/m3 NZ OEL (Mist) Further information: Sampled by a method that does not collect vapour. Oil mist, mineral Not Assigned WES-STEL 10 mg/m3 NZ OEL (Mist) Oil mist, mineral Not Assigned TWA 5 mg/m3 US. ACGIH ((inhalable Threshold fraction)) Limit Values Oil mist, mineral Not Assigned TWA (Mist) 5 mg/m3 New

5 / 15 800010026144 NZ

Version 1.1 Revision Date 21.10.2016 Print Date 02.03.2017 Zealand. Workplace Exposure Standards for Atmospheric Contaminant s Oil mist, mineral Not Assigned (Mist) 10 mg/m3 New Zealand. Workplace Exposure Standards for Atmospheric Contaminant s Oil mist, mineral Not Assigned TWA (Mist) 5 mg/m3 OSHA Z-1 Not Assigned TWA 5 mg/m3 ACGIH (Inhalable fraction) Biological occupational exposure limits No biological limit allocated.

National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH), USA: Manual of Analytical Methods http://www.cdc.gov/niosh/

Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), USA: Sampling and Analytical Methods http://www.osha.gov/

Health and Safety Executive (HSE), UK: Methods for the Determination of Hazardous Substances http://www.hse.gov.uk/

Institut für Arbeitsschutz Deutschen Gesetzlichen Unfallversicherung (IFA) , Germany http://www.dguv.de/inhalt/index.jsp

L'Institut National de Recherche et de Securité, (INRS), France http://www.inrs.fr/accueil

Engineering measures : The level of protection and types of controls necessary will vary depending upon potential exposure conditions. Select controls based on a risk assessment of local circumstances. Appropriate measures include: Adequate ventilation to control airborne concentrations.

6 / 15 800010026144 NZ

Version 1.1 Revision Date 21.10.2016 Print Date 02.03.2017 Where material is heated, sprayed or mist formed, there is greater potential for airborne concentrations to be generated.

General Information: Define procedures for safe handling and maintenance of controls. Educate and train workers in the hazards and control measures relevant to normal activities associated with this product. Ensure appropriate selection, testing and maintenance of equipment used to control exposure, e.g. personal protective equipment, local exhaust ventilation. Drain down system prior to equipment break-in or maintenance. Retain drain downs in sealed storage pending disposal or subsequent recycle. Always observe good personal hygiene measures, such as washing hands after handling the material and before eating, drinking, and/or smoking. Routinely wash work clothing and protective equipment to remove contaminants. Discard contaminated clothing and footwear that cannot be cleaned. Practice good housekeeping.

Personal protective equipment Protective measures Personal protective equipment (PPE) should meet recommended national standards. Check with PPE suppliers.

Respiratory protection : No respiratory protection is ordinarily required under normal conditions of use. In accordance with good industrial hygiene practices, precautions should be taken to avoid breathing of material. If engineering controls do not maintain airborne concentrations to a level which is adequate to protect worker health, select respiratory protection equipment suitable for the specific conditions of use and meeting relevant legislation. Check with respiratory protective equipment suppliers. Where air-filtering respirators are suitable, select an appropriate combination of mask and filter. Select a filter suitable for the combination of organic gases and vapours [Type A/Type P boiling point >65°C (149°F)].

Hand protection Remarks : Where hand contact with the product may occur the use of gloves approved to relevant standards (e.g. Europe: EN374, US: F739) made from the following materials may provide suitable chemical protection. PVC, neoprene or nitrile rubber gloves Suitability and durability of a glove is dependent on usage, e.g. frequency and duration of contact, chemical resistance of glove material, dexterity. Always seek advice from glove suppliers. Contaminated gloves should be replaced. Personal hygiene is a key element of effective hand

7 / 15 800010026144 NZ

Version 1.1 Revision Date 21.10.2016 Print Date 02.03.2017 care. Gloves must only be worn on clean hands. After using gloves, hands should be washed and dried thoroughly. Application of a non-perfumed moisturizer is recommended.

For continuous contact we recommend gloves with breakthrough time of more than 240 minutes with preference for > 480 minutes where suitable gloves can be identified. For short-term/splash protection we recommend the same, but recognize that suitable gloves offering this level of protection may not be available and in this case a lower breakthrough time maybe acceptable so long as appropriate maintenance and replacement regimes are followed. Glove thickness is not a good predictor of glove resistance to a chemical as it is dependent on the exact composition of the glove material. Glove thickness should be typically greater than 0.35 mm depending on the glove make and model.

Eye protection : If material is handled such that it could be splashed into eyes, protective eyewear is recommended.

Skin and body protection : Skin protection is not ordinarily required beyond standard work clothes. It is good practice to wear chemical resistant gloves.

Thermal hazards : Not applicable

Environmental exposure controls General advice : Take appropriate measures to fulfill the requirements of relevant environmental protection legislation. Avoid contamination of the environment by following advice given in Chapter 6. If necessary, prevent undissolved material from being discharged to waste water. Waste water should be treated in a municipal or industrial waste water treatment plant before discharge to surface water. Local guidelines on emission limits for volatile substances must be observed for the discharge of exhaust air containing vapour.

SECTION 9. PHYSICAL AND CHEMICAL PROPERTIES

Appearance : liquid

Colour : clear Odour : Slight hydrocarbon Odour Threshold : Data not available pH : Not applicable pour point : -42 °C / -44 °FMethod: ISO 3016

Initial boiling point and boiling : > 280 °C / 536 °Festimated value(s)

8 / 15 800010026144 NZ

Version 1.1 Revision Date 21.10.2016 Print Date 02.03.2017 range Flash point : 200 °C / 392 °F Method: ISO 2592

Evaporation rate : Data not available Flammability (solid, gas) : Data not available

Upper explosion limit : Typical 10 %(V)

Lower explosion limit : Typical 1 %(V)

Vapour pressure : < 0.5 Pa (20 °C / 68 °F) estimated value(s) Relative vapour density : > 1estimated value(s) Relative density : 0.820 (15 °C / 59 °F)

Density : 820 kg/m3 (15.0 °C / 59.0 °F) Method: ISO 12185

Solubility(ies) Water solubility : negligible Solubility in other solvents : Data not available

Partition coefficient: n- : Pow: > 6(based on information on similar products) octanol/water Auto-ignition temperature : > 320 °C / 608 °F

Viscosity Viscosity, dynamic : Data not available Viscosity, kinematic : 350 mm2/s (-20 °C / -4 °F) Method: ASTM D445

15 mm2/s (40.0 °C / 104.0 °F) Method: ASTM D445

3.7 mm2/s (100 °C / 212 °F) Method: ASTM D445

Explosive properties : Not classified

Oxidizing properties : Data not available

9 / 15 800010026144 NZ

Version 1.1 Revision Date 21.10.2016 Print Date 02.03.2017 Conductivity : This material is not expected to be a static accumulator. Decomposition temperature : Data not available

SECTION 10. STABILITY AND REACTIVITY

Reactivity : The product does not pose any further reactivity hazards in addition to those listed in the following sub-paragraph.

Chemical stability : Stable.

Possibility of hazardous : Reacts with strong oxidising agents. reactions Conditions to avoid : Extremes of temperature and direct sunlight.

Incompatible materials : Strong oxidising agents.

Hazardous decomposition : Hazardous decomposition products are not expected to form products during normal storage.

SECTION 11. TOXICOLOGICAL INFORMATION

Basis for assessment : Information given is based on data on the components and the toxicology of similar products.Unless indicated otherwise, the data presented is representative of the product as a whole, rather than for individual component(s).

Information on likely routes of : Skin and eye contact are the primary routes of exposure exposure although exposure may occur following accidental ingestion.

Acute toxicity Product: Acute oral toxicity : LD50 rat: > 5,000 mg/kg Remarks: Expected to be of low toxicity:

Remarks: Aspiration into the lungs may cause chemical pneumonitis which can be fatal.

Acute inhalation toxicity : Remarks: Not considered to be an inhalation hazard under normal conditions of use.

Acute dermal toxicity : LD50 Rabbit: > 5,000 mg/kg Remarks: Expected to be of low toxicity:

Skin corrosion/irritation Product:

10 / 15 800010026144 NZ

Version 1.1 Revision Date 21.10.2016 Print Date 02.03.2017 Remarks: Expected to be slightly irritating., Prolonged or repeated skin contact without proper cleaning can clog the pores of the skin resulting in disorders such as oil acne/folliculitis.

Serious eye damage/eye irritation Product: Remarks: Expected to be slightly irritating.

Respiratory or skin sensitisation Product: Remarks: Not expected to be a skin sensitiser.

Chronic toxicity Germ cell mutagenicity Product: : Remarks: Not considered a mutagenic hazard. Carcinogenicity Product:

Remarks: Not expected to be carcinogenic.

Material GHS/CLP Carcinogenicity Classification Distillates (Fischer - No carcinogenicity classification. Tropsch), heavy, C18-50 – branched, cyclic and linear

Reproductive toxicity

Product: : Remarks: Not expected to impair fertility., Not expected to be a developmental toxicant.

STOT - single exposure Product: Remarks: Not expected to be a hazard.

STOT - repeated exposure

11 / 15 800010026144 NZ

Version 1.1 Revision Date 21.10.2016 Print Date 02.03.2017 Product: Remarks: Not expected to be a hazard.

Aspiration toxicity Product: Aspiration into the lungs when swallowed or vomited may cause chemical pneumonitis which can be fatal.

Further information Product: Remarks: Used oils may contain harmful impurities that have accumulated during use. The concentration of such impurities will depend on use and they may present risks to health and the environment on disposal., ALL used oil should be handled with caution and skin contact avoided as far as possible.

Remarks: High pressure injection of product into the skin may lead to local necrosis if the product is not surgically removed.

Remarks: Slightly irritating to respiratory system.

SECTION 12. ECOLOGICAL INFORMATION

Basis for assessment : Ecotoxicological data have not been determined specifically for this product. Information given is based on a knowledge of the components and the ecotoxicology of similar products. Unless indicated otherwise, the data presented is representative of the product as a whole, rather than for individual component(s).(LL/EL/IL50 expressed as the nominal amount of product required to prepare aqueous test extract).

Ecotoxicity Product: Toxicity to fish (Acute : toxicity) Remarks: Expected to be practically non toxic: LL/EL/IL50 > 100 mg/l

Toxicity to crustacean (Acute : toxicity) Remarks: Expected to be practically non toxic: LL/EL/IL50 > 100 mg/l

Toxicity to algae/aquatic : plants (Acute toxicity) Remarks: Expected to be practically non toxic: LL/EL/IL50 > 100 mg/l

12 / 15 800010026144 NZ

Version 1.1 Revision Date 21.10.2016 Print Date 02.03.2017 Toxicity to fish (Chronic : Remarks: Data not available toxicity) Toxicity to crustacean : Remarks: Data not available (Chronic toxicity) Toxicity to microorganisms : Remarks: Data not available (Acute toxicity)

Persistence and degradability Product: Biodegradability : Remarks: Expected to be not readily biodegradable., Major constituents are expected to be inherently biodegradable, but contains components that may persist in the environment.

Bioaccumulative potential Product: Bioaccumulation : Remarks: Contains components with the potential to bioaccumulate.

Partition coefficient: n- : Pow: > 6Remarks: (based on information on similar products) octanol/water Mobility in soil Product: Mobility : Remarks: Liquid under most environmental conditions., If it enters soil, it will adsorb to soil particles and will not be mobile. Remarks: Floats on water. Other adverse effects no data available Product: Additional ecological : Product is a mixture of non-volatile components, which are not information expected to be released to air in any significant quantities., Not expected to have ozone depletion potential, photochemical ozone creation potential or global warming potential. Poorly soluble mixture., May cause physical fouling of aquatic organisms.

SECTION 13. DISPOSAL CONSIDERATIONS

Disposal methods Waste from residues : Recover or recycle if possible. It is the responsibility of the waste generator to determine the toxicity and physical properties of the material generated to determine the proper waste classification and disposal methods in compliance with applicable regulations. Do not dispose into the environment, in drains or in water

13 / 15 800010026144 NZ

Version 1.1 Revision Date 21.10.2016 Print Date 02.03.2017 courses

Waste product should not be allowed to contaminate soil or ground water, or be disposed of into the environment. Waste, spills or used product is dangerous waste.

Contaminated packaging : Dispose in accordance with prevailing regulations, preferably to a recognized collector or contractor. The competence of the collector or contractor should be established beforehand. Disposal should be in accordance with applicable regional, national, and local laws and regulations.

Local legislation Remarks : Disposal should be in accordance with the New Zealand Hazardous Substances Disposal Regulations 2001. Treat the substance using a method that changes the characteristics or composition of the substance so that the substance is no longer a hazardous substance.

SECTION 14. TRANSPORT INFORMATION

National Regulations Land Transport Rule: Dangerous Goods 2012 - NZS 5433 Not regulated as a dangerous good International Regulations

IATA-DGR Not regulated as a dangerous good

IMDG-Code Not regulated as a dangerous good Transport in bulk according to Annex II of MARPOL 73/78 and the IBC Code Pollution category : Not applicable Ship type : Not applicable Product name : Not applicable Special precautions : Not applicable Special precautions for user Remarks : Special Precautions: Refer to Chapter 7, Handling & Storage, for special precautions which a user needs to be aware of or needs to comply with in connection with transport.

Additional Information : MARPOL Annex 1 rules apply for bulk shipments by sea.

14 / 15 800010026144 NZ

Version 1.1 Revision Date 21.10.2016 Print Date 02.03.2017 SECTION 15. REGULATORY INFORMATION

Safety, health and environmental regulations/legislation specific for the substance or mixture

R-phrase(s) : Not classified.

S-phrase(s) : Not classified.

New Zealand Workplace Exposure Limits 2002 (WES). New Zealand Standard 5433:2012 Transport of Dangerous Goods on Land. Other international regulations The components of this product are reported in the following inventories: EINECS : All components listed or polymer exempt. TSCA : All components listed.

SECTION 16. OTHER INFORMATION

Full text of H-Statements H304 May be fatal if swallowed and enters airways. Full text of other abbreviations Asp. Tox. Aspiration hazard

Abbreviations and Acronyms : The standard abbreviations and acronyms used in this document can be looked up in reference literature (e.g. scientific dictionaries) and/or websites.

Further information Other information : A vertical bar (|) in the left margin indicates an amendment from the previous version.

This information is based on our current knowledge and is intended to describe the product for the purposes of health, safety and environmental requirements only. It should not therefore be construed as guaranteeing any specific property of the product.

15 / 15 800010026144 NZ

Safety Data Sheet Not classified as hazardous The content and format of this SDS is in accordance with HSNO Approved Code of Practice (No. HSNO CoP 8-1 09-06): Preparation of Safety Data Sheets. Shell Tellus S2 M 100

Version 1.3 Revision Date 05.01.2016 Print Date 02.03.2017

SECTION 1. PRODUCT AND COMPANY IDENTIFICATION

Product name : Shell Tellus S2 M 100

Product code : 001D7746

Manufacturer or supplier's details Supplier : Tyreline Distributors Limited (NZBN – 9429039316608) 87 Kahikatea Drive, Hamilton 3206, New Zealand Telephone : 0800 673 375 Telefax : +64 7 843 3582

Emergency telephone : 0800 734 607 (ALL HOURS) number

Recommended use of the chemical and restrictions on use Recommended use : Hydraulic oil

SECTION 2. HAZARDS IDENTIFICATION

NON-HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCE. NON-DANGEROUS GOODS. Not classified as hazardous according to criteria in the Hazardous Substances (Minimum Degrees of Hazard) Regulations 2001., Not classified as Dangerous Goods for transport, according to NZS 5433:2012 Transport of Dangerous Goods on Land.

Hazard classification GHS Classification Not a dangerous substance or mixture according to the Globally Harmonised System (GHS).

GHS Label element Hazard pictograms : No Hazard Symbol required

Signal word : No signal word

Hazard statements : PHYSICAL HAZARDS: Not classified as a physical hazard under GHS criteria. HEALTH HAZARDS: Not classified as a health hazard under GHS criteria. ENVIRONMENTAL HAZARDS: Not classified as an environmental hazard under GHS criteria.

Precautionary statements : Prevention: No precautionary phrases.

1 / 14 800001015769 NZ

Version 1.3 Revision Date 05.01.2016 Print Date 02.03.2017 Response: No precautionary phrases.

Storage: No precautionary phrases.

Disposal: No precautionary phrases.

Other hazards which do not result in classification Prolonged or repeated skin contact without proper cleaning can clog the pores of the skin resulting in disorders such as oil acne/folliculitis.Used oil may contain harmful impurities.High- pressure injection under the skin may cause serious damage including local necrosis.Not classified as flammable but will burn.

SECTION 3. COMPOSITION/INFORMATION ON INGREDIENTS

Chemical nature : Highly refined mineral oils and additives. The highly refined mineral oil contains <3% (w/w) DMSO- extract, according to IP346.

Hazardous components

SECTION 4. FIRST-AID MEASURES

General advice : Not expected to be a health hazard when used under normal conditions.

If inhaled : No treatment necessary under normal conditions of use. If symptoms persist, obtain medical advice.

In case of skin contact : Remove contaminated clothing. Flush exposed area with water and follow by washing with soap if available. If persistent irritation occurs, obtain medical attention.

In case of eye contact : Flush eye with copious quantities of water. If persistent irritation occurs, obtain medical attention.

If swallowed : In general no treatment is necessary unless large quantities

2 / 14 800001015769 NZ

Version 1.3 Revision Date 05.01.2016 Print Date 02.03.2017 are swallowed, however, get medical advice.

Most important symptoms : Oil acne/folliculitis signs and symptoms may include formation and effects, both acute and of black pustules and spots on the skin of exposed areas. delayed Ingestion may result in nausea, vomiting and/or diarrhoea.

Local necrosis is evidenced by delayed onset of pain and tissue damage a few hours following injection.

Protection of first-aiders : When administering first aid, ensure that you are wearing the appropriate personal protective equipment according to the incident, injury and surroundings.

Notes to physician : Treat symptomatically.

High pressure injection injuries require prompt surgical intervention an d possibly steroid therapy, to minimise tissue damage and loss of function. Because entry wounds are small and do not reflect the seriousness of the underlying damage, surgical exploration to determine the extent of involvement may be necessary. Local anaesthetics or hot soaks should be avoided because they can contribute to swelling, vasospasm and ischaemia. Prompt surgical decompression, debridement and evacuation of foreign material should be performed under general anaesthetics, and wide exploration is essential.

SECTION 5. FIRE-FIGHTING MEASURES

Suitable extinguishing media : Foam, water spray or fog. Dry chemical powder, carbon dioxide, sand or earth may be used for small fires only.

Unsuitable extinguishing : Do not use water in a jet. media

Specific extinguishing : Use extinguishing measures that are appropriate to local methods circumstances and the surrounding environment.

3 / 14 800001015769 NZ

Version 1.3 Revision Date 05.01.2016 Print Date 02.03.2017 relevant Standards (e.g. Europe: EN469).

SECTION 6. ACCIDENTAL RELEASE MEASURES

Local authorities should be advised if significant spillages cannot be contained.

SECTION 7. HANDLING AND STORAGE

Avoidance of contact : Strong oxidising agents.

Product Transfer : This material has the potential to be a static accumulator. Proper grounding and bonding procedures should be used during all bulk transfer operations.

Storage

4 / 14 800001015769 NZ

Version 1.3 Revision Date 05.01.2016 Print Date 02.03.2017 Other data : Keep container tightly closed and in a cool, well-ventilated place. Use properly labeled and closable containers.

Store at ambient temperature.

Packaging material : Suitable material: For containers or container linings, use mild steel or high density polyethylene. Unsuitable material: PVC.

Container Advice : Polyethylene containers should not be exposed to high temperatures because of possible risk of distortion.

SECTION 8. EXPOSURE CONTROLS AND PERSONAL PROTECTION

Components with workplace control parameters Components CAS-No. Value type Control Basis (Form of parameters / exposure) Permissible concentration Oil mist, mineral Not Assigned TWA 5 mg/m3 US. ACGIH ((inhalable Threshold fraction)) Limit Values Oil mist, mineral Not Assigned TWA (Mist) 5 mg/m3 New Zealand. Workplace Exposure Standards for Atmospheric Contaminant s Oil mist, mineral Not Assigned (Mist) 10 mg/m3 New Zealand. Workplace Exposure Standards for Atmospheric Contaminant s Biological occupational exposure limits No biological limit allocated.

5 / 14 800001015769 NZ

Version 1.3 Revision Date 05.01.2016 Print Date 02.03.2017 National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH), USA: Manual of Analytical Methods http://www.cdc.gov/niosh/ Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), USA: Sampling and Analytical Methods http://www.osha.gov/ Health and Safety Executive (HSE), UK: Methods for the Determination of Hazardous Substances http://www.hse.gov.uk/ Institut für Arbeitsschutz Deutschen Gesetzlichen Unfallversicherung (IFA) , Germany http://www.dguv.de/inhalt/index.jsp L'Institut National de Recherche et de Securité, (INRS), France http://www.inrs.fr/accueil

Where material is heated, sprayed or mist formed, there is greater potential for airborne concentrations to be generated.

Personal protective equipment Protective measures Personal protective equipment (PPE) should meet recommended national standards. Check with PPE suppliers.

6 / 14 800001015769 NZ

Version 1.3 Revision Date 05.01.2016 Print Date 02.03.2017 Check with respiratory protective equipment suppliers. Where air-filtering respirators are suitable, select an appropriate combination of mask and filter. Select a filter suitable for the combination of organic gases and vapours [Type A/Type P boiling point >65°C (149°F)].

Eye protection : If material is handled such that it could be splashed into eyes, protective eyewear is recommended.

Skin and body protection : Skin protection is not ordinarily required beyond standard work clothes. It is good practice to wear chemical resistant gloves.

Thermal hazards : Not applicable

7 / 14 800001015769 NZ

Version 1.3 Revision Date 05.01.2016 Print Date 02.03.2017 vapour.

SECTION 9. PHYSICAL AND CHEMICAL PROPERTIES

Appearance : Liquid at room temperature.

Colour : amber Odour : Slight hydrocarbon Odour Threshold : Data not available pH : Not applicable pour point : -24 °C / -11 °FMethod: ISO 3016

Initial boiling point and boiling : > 280 °C / 536 °Festimated value(s) range Flash point : 250 °C / 482 °F Method: ISO 2592

Evaporation rate : Data not available Flammability (solid, gas) : Data not available

Upper explosion limit : Typical 10 %(V)

Lower explosion limit : Typical 1 %(V)

Vapour pressure : < 0.5 Pa (20 °C / 68 °F) estimated value(s) Relative vapour density : > 1estimated value(s) Relative density : 0.891 (15 °C / 59 °F)

Density : 891 kg/m3 (15.0 °C / 59.0 °F) Method: ISO 12185

Solubility(ies) Water solubility : negligible Solubility in other solvents : Data not available

Partition coefficient: n- : Pow: > 6(based on information on similar products) octanol/water Auto-ignition temperature : > 320 °C / 608 °F

Viscosity Viscosity, dynamic : Data not available

8 / 14 800001015769 NZ

Version 1.3 Revision Date 05.01.2016 Print Date 02.03.2017 Viscosity, kinematic : 100 mm2/s (40.0 °C / 104.0 °F) Method: ASTM D445

11.1 mm2/s (100 °C / 212 °F) Method: ASTM D445

1790 mm2/s (0 °C / 32 °F) Method: ASTM D445

Explosive properties : Not classified

Oxidizing properties : Data not available

Conductivity : This material is not expected to be a static accumulator. Decomposition temperature : Data not available

SECTION 10. STABILITY AND REACTIVITY

Reactivity : The product does not pose any further reactivity hazards in addition to those listed in the following sub-paragraph.

Chemical stability : Stable.

Possibility of hazardous : Reacts with strong oxidising agents. reactions Conditions to avoid : Extremes of temperature and direct sunlight.

Incompatible materials : Strong oxidising agents.

Hazardous decomposition : Hazardous decomposition products are not expected to form products during normal storage.

SECTION 11. TOXICOLOGICAL INFORMATION

Information on likely routes of : Skin and eye contact are the primary routes of exposure exposure although exposure may occur following accidental ingestion.

Acute toxicity Product:

9 / 14 800001015769 NZ

Version 1.3 Revision Date 05.01.2016 Print Date 02.03.2017 Acute oral toxicity : LD50 rat: > 5,000 mg/kg Remarks: Expected to be of low toxicity:

Acute inhalation toxicity : Remarks: Not considered to be an inhalation hazard under normal conditions of use.

Acute dermal toxicity : LD50 Rabbit: > 5,000 mg/kg Remarks: Expected to be of low toxicity:

Skin corrosion/irritation Product: Remarks: Expected to be slightly irritating., Prolonged or repeated skin contact without proper cleaning can clog the pores of the skin resulting in disorders such as oil acne/folliculitis.

Serious eye damage/eye irritation Product: Remarks: Expected to be slightly irritating.

Respiratory or skin sensitisation Product: Remarks: Not expected to be a skin sensitiser.

Chronic toxicity Germ cell mutagenicity Product: : Remarks: Not considered a mutagenic hazard. Carcinogenicity Product:

Remarks: Not expected to be carcinogenic.

Remarks: Product contains mineral oils of types shown to be non-carcinogenic in animal skin- painting studies., Highly refined mineral oils are not classified as carcinogenic by the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC).

Material GHS/CLP Carcinogenicity Classification Highly refined mineral oil No carcinogenicity classification.

Reproductive toxicity

10 / 14 800001015769 NZ

Version 1.3 Revision Date 05.01.2016 Print Date 02.03.2017 Product: : Remarks: Not expected to impair fertility., Not expected to be a developmental toxicant.

STOT - single exposure Product: Remarks: Not expected to be a hazard.

STOT - repeated exposure Product: Remarks: Not expected to be a hazard.

Aspiration toxicity Product: Not considered an aspiration hazard.

Remarks: High pressure injection of product into the skin may lead to local necrosis if the product is not surgically removed.

Remarks: Slightly irritating to respiratory system.

SECTION 12. ECOLOGICAL INFORMATION

Ecotoxicity Product:

11 / 14 800001015769 NZ

Version 1.3 Revision Date 05.01.2016 Print Date 02.03.2017 Toxicity to fish (Acute : toxicity) Remarks: Expected to be practically non toxic: LL/EL/IL50 > 100 mg/l

Toxicity to crustacean (Acute : toxicity) Remarks: Expected to be practically non toxic: LL/EL/IL50 > 100 mg/l

Toxicity to algae/aquatic : plants (Acute toxicity) Remarks: Expected to be practically non toxic: LL/EL/IL50 > 100 mg/l

Toxicity to fish (Chronic : Remarks: Data not available toxicity) Toxicity to crustacean : Remarks: Data not available (Chronic toxicity) Toxicity to microorganisms : Remarks: Data not available (Acute toxicity)

Bioaccumulative potential Product: Bioaccumulation : Remarks: Contains components with the potential to bioaccumulate.

12 / 14 800001015769 NZ

Version 1.3 Revision Date 05.01.2016 Print Date 02.03.2017 aquatic organisms at concentrations less than 1 mg/l.

SECTION 13. DISPOSAL CONSIDERATIONS

Disposal methods Waste from residues : Waste product should not be allowed to contaminate soil or ground water, or be disposed of into the environment. Waste, spills or used product is dangerous waste.

Disposal should be in accordance with applicable regional, national, and local laws and regulations. Local regulations may be more stringent than regional or national requirements and must be complied with.

SECTION 14. TRANSPORT INFORMATION

National Regulations Land Transport Rule: Dangerous Goods 2012 - NZS 5433 Not regulated as a dangerous good International Regulation

IATA-DGR Not regulated as a dangerous good

Additional Information : MARPOL Annex 1 rules apply for bulk shipments by sea.

13 / 14 800001015769 NZ

Version 1.3 Revision Date 05.01.2016 Print Date 02.03.2017

SECTION 15. REGULATORY INFORMATION

Safety, health and environmental regulations/legislation specific for the substance or mixture R-phrase(s) : Not classified.

S-phrase(s) : Not classified.

SECTION 16. OTHER INFORMATION

Abbreviations and Acronyms : The standard abbreviations and acronyms used in this document can be looked up in reference literature (e.g. scientific dictionaries) and/or websites.

Further information Other information : A vertical bar (|) in the left margin indicates an amendment from the previous version.

14 / 14 800001015769 NZ

Version 1.0 Revision Date 15.06.2016 Print Date 02.03.2017

SECTION 1. PRODUCT AND COMPANY IDENTIFICATION

Product name : Shell Tellus S2 MX 68

Product code : 001F8440

Manufacturer or supplier's details Supplier : Tyreline Distributors Limited (NZBN – 9429039316608) 87 Kahikatea Drive, Hamilton 3206, New Zealand Telephone : 0800 673 375 Telefax : +64 7 843 3582

Emergency telephone : 0800 734 607 (ALL HOURS) number

Recommended use of the chemical and restrictions on use Recommended use : Hydraulic oil

SECTION 2. HAZARDS IDENTIFICATION

Hazard classification GHS Classification Not a dangerous substance or mixture according to the Globally Harmonised System (GHS).

GHS label elements Hazard pictograms : No Hazard Symbol required

Signal word : No signal word

Precautionary statements : Prevention: No precautionary phrases.

1 / 15 800010026153 NZ

Version 1.0 Revision Date 15.06.2016 Print Date 02.03.2017 Response: No precautionary phrases.

Storage: No precautionary phrases.

Disposal: No precautionary phrases.

SECTION 3. COMPOSITION/INFORMATION ON INGREDIENTS

Chemical nature : Highly refined mineral oils and additives. The highly refined mineral oil contains <3% (w/w) DMSO- extract, according to IP346.

: * contains one or more of the following CAS-numbers: 64742- 53-6, 64742-54-7, 64742-55-8, 64742-56-9, 64742-65-0, 68037-01-4, 72623-86-0, 72623-87-1, 8042-47-5, 848301-69- 9.

Hazardous components

Chemical name CAS-No. Classification Concentration [%] Interchangeable low Not Assigned Asp. Tox.1; H304 0 - 90 viscosity base oil (<20,5 cSt @40°C) * For explanation of abbreviations see section 16.

SECTION 4. FIRST-AID MEASURES

General advice : Not expected to be a health hazard when used under normal conditions.

If inhaled : No treatment necessary under normal conditions of use. If symptoms persist, obtain medical advice.

In case of skin contact : Remove contaminated clothing. Flush exposed area with water and follow by washing with soap if available. If persistent irritation occurs, obtain medical attention.

2 / 15 800010026153 NZ

Version 1.0 Revision Date 15.06.2016 Print Date 02.03.2017 When using high pressure equipment, injection of product under the skin can occur. If high pressure injuries occur, the casualty should be sent immediately to a hospital. Do not wait for symptoms to develop. Obtain medical attention even in the absence of apparent wounds.

In case of eye contact : Flush eye with copious quantities of water. If persistent irritation occurs, obtain medical attention.

If swallowed : In general no treatment is necessary unless large quantities are swallowed, however, get medical advice.

Local necrosis is evidenced by delayed onset of pain and tissue damage a few hours following injection.

Protection of first-aiders : When administering first aid, ensure that you are wearing the appropriate personal protective equipment according to the incident, injury and surroundings.

Notes to physician : Treat symptomatically.

High pressure injection injuries require prompt surgical intervention an d possibly steroid therapy, to minimise tissue damage and loss of function. Because entry wounds are small and do not reflect the seriousness of the underlying damage, surgical exploration to determine the extent of involvement may be necessary. Local anaesthetics or hot soaks should be avoided because they can contribute to swelling, vasospasm and ischaemia. Prompt surgical decompression, debridement and evacuation of foreign material should be performed under general anaesthetics, and wide exploration is essential.

SECTION 5. FIRE-FIGHTING MEASURES

Suitable extinguishing media : Foam, water spray or fog. Dry chemical powder, carbon dioxide, sand or earth may be used for small fires only.

Unsuitable extinguishing : Do not use water in a jet. media

3 / 15 800010026153 NZ

Version 1.0 Revision Date 15.06.2016 Print Date 02.03.2017

Specific extinguishing : Use extinguishing measures that are appropriate to local methods circumstances and the surrounding environment.

SECTION 6. ACCIDENTAL RELEASE MEASURES

Local authorities should be advised if significant spillages cannot be contained.

SECTION 7. HANDLING AND STORAGE

Advice on safe handling : Avoid prolonged or repeated contact with skin. Avoid inhaling vapour and/or mists. When handling product in drums, safety footwear should be

4 / 15 800010026153 NZ

Version 1.0 Revision Date 15.06.2016 Print Date 02.03.2017 worn and proper handling equipment should be used. Properly dispose of any contaminated rags or cleaning materials in order to prevent fires.

Avoidance of contact : Strong oxidising agents.

Product Transfer : This material has the potential to be a static accumulator. Proper grounding and bonding procedures should be used during all bulk transfer operations.

Storage Other data : Keep container tightly closed and in a cool, well-ventilated place. Use properly labeled and closable containers.

Store at ambient temperature.

Packaging material : Suitable material: For containers or container linings, use mild steel or high density polyethylene. Unsuitable material: PVC.

Container Advice : Polyethylene containers should not be exposed to high temperatures because of possible risk of distortion.

SECTION 8. EXPOSURE CONTROLS AND PERSONAL PROTECTION

5 / 15 800010026153 NZ

Version 1.0 Revision Date 15.06.2016 Print Date 02.03.2017 Workplace Exposure Standards for Atmospheric Contaminant s Oil mist, mineral Not Assigned TWA (Mist) 5 mg/m3 OSHA Z-1 Not Assigned TWA 5 mg/m3 ACGIH (Inhalable fraction) Biological occupational exposure limits No biological limit allocated.

Monitoring Methods Monitoring of the concentration of substances in the breathing zone of workers or in the general workplace may be required to confirm compliance with an OEL and adequacy of exposure controls. For some substances biological monitoring may also be appropriate. Validated exposure measurement methods should be applied by a competent person and samples analysed by an accredited laboratory. Examples of sources of recommended exposure measurement methods are given below or contact the supplier. Further national methods may be available. National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH), USA: Manual of Analytical Methods http://www.cdc.gov/niosh/ Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), USA: Sampling and Analytical Methods http://www.osha.gov/ Health and Safety Executive (HSE), UK: Methods for the Determination of Hazardous Substances http://www.hse.gov.uk/ Institut für Arbeitsschutz Deutschen Gesetzlichen Unfallversicherung (IFA) , Germany http://www.dguv.de/inhalt/index.jsp L'Institut National de Recherche et de Securité, (INRS), France http://www.inrs.fr/accueil

Where material is heated, sprayed or mist formed, there is greater potential for airborne concentrations to be generated.

6 / 15 800010026153 NZ

Version 1.0 Revision Date 15.06.2016 Print Date 02.03.2017 Retain drain downs in sealed storage pending disposal or subsequent recycle. Always observe good personal hygiene measures, such as washing hands after handling the material and before eating, drinking, and/or smoking. Routinely wash work clothing and protective equipment to remove contaminants. Discard contaminated clothing and footwear that cannot be cleaned. Practice good housekeeping.

Personal protective equipment Protective measures Personal protective equipment (PPE) should meet recommended national standards. Check with PPE suppliers.

7 / 15 800010026153 NZ

Version 1.0 Revision Date 15.06.2016 Print Date 02.03.2017 Glove thickness should be typically greater than 0.35 mm depending on the glove make and model.

Eye protection : If material is handled such that it could be splashed into eyes, protective eyewear is recommended.

Skin and body protection : Skin protection is not ordinarily required beyond standard work clothes. It is good practice to wear chemical resistant gloves.

Thermal hazards : Not applicable

SECTION 9. PHYSICAL AND CHEMICAL PROPERTIES

Appearance : liquid

Colour : clear Odour : Slight hydrocarbon Odour Threshold : Data not available pH : Not applicable pour point : -24 °C / -11 °FMethod: ISO 3016

Initial boiling point and boiling : > 280 °C / 536 °Festimated value(s) range Flash point : 230 °C / 446 °F Method: ISO 2592

Evaporation rate : Data not available Flammability (solid, gas) : Data not available

Upper explosion limit : Typical 10 %(V)

Lower explosion limit : Typical 1 %(V)

8 / 15 800010026153 NZ

Version 1.0 Revision Date 15.06.2016 Print Date 02.03.2017 Vapour pressure : < 0.5 Pa (20 °C / 68 °F) estimated value(s) Relative vapour density : > 1estimated value(s) Relative density : 0.860 (15 °C / 59 °F)

Density : 860 kg/m3 (15.0 °C / 59.0 °F) Method: ISO 12185

Solubility(ies) Water solubility : negligible Solubility in other solvents : Data not available

Partition coefficient: n- : Pow: > 6(based on information on similar products) octanol/water Auto-ignition temperature : > 320 °C / 608 °F

Viscosity Viscosity, dynamic : Data not available Viscosity, kinematic : 68 mm2/s (40.0 °C / 104.0 °F) Method: ASTM D445

8.9 mm2/s (100 °C / 212 °F) Method: ASTM D445

1000 mm2/s (0 °C / 32 °F) Method: ASTM D445

Explosive properties : Not classified

Oxidizing properties : Data not available

Conductivity : This material is not expected to be a static accumulator. Decomposition temperature : Data not available

SECTION 10. STABILITY AND REACTIVITY

Reactivity : The product does not pose any further reactivity hazards in addition to those listed in the following sub-paragraph.

Chemical stability : Stable.

Possibility of hazardous : Reacts with strong oxidising agents.

9 / 15 800010026153 NZ

Version 1.0 Revision Date 15.06.2016 Print Date 02.03.2017 reactions Conditions to avoid : Extremes of temperature and direct sunlight.

Incompatible materials : Strong oxidising agents.

Hazardous decomposition : Hazardous decomposition products are not expected to form products during normal storage.

SECTION 11. TOXICOLOGICAL INFORMATION

Information on likely routes of : Skin and eye contact are the primary routes of exposure exposure although exposure may occur following accidental ingestion.

Acute toxicity Product: Acute oral toxicity : LD50 rat: > 5,000 mg/kg Remarks: Expected to be of low toxicity:

Acute inhalation toxicity : Remarks: Not considered to be an inhalation hazard under normal conditions of use.

Acute dermal toxicity : LD50 Rabbit: > 5,000 mg/kg Remarks: Expected to be of low toxicity:

Serious eye damage/eye irritation Product: Remarks: Expected to be slightly irritating.

Respiratory or skin sensitisation Product: Remarks: Not expected to be a skin sensitiser.

Chronic toxicity

10 / 15 800010026153 NZ

Version 1.0 Revision Date 15.06.2016 Print Date 02.03.2017 Germ cell mutagenicity Product: : Remarks: Not considered a mutagenic hazard. Carcinogenicity Product:

Remarks: Not expected to be carcinogenic.

Material GHS/CLP Carcinogenicity Classification Highly refined mineral oil No carcinogenicity classification.

Reproductive toxicity

Product: : Remarks: Not expected to impair fertility., Not expected to be a developmental toxicant.

STOT - single exposure Product: Remarks: Not expected to be a hazard.

STOT - repeated exposure Product: Remarks: Not expected to be a hazard.

Aspiration toxicity Product: Not considered an aspiration hazard.

11 / 15 800010026153 NZ

Version 1.0 Revision Date 15.06.2016 Print Date 02.03.2017 environment on disposal., ALL used oil should be handled with caution and skin contact avoided as far as possible.

Remarks: High pressure injection of product into the skin may lead to local necrosis if the product is not surgically removed.

Remarks: Slightly irritating to respiratory system.

SECTION 12. ECOLOGICAL INFORMATION

Ecotoxicity Product: Toxicity to fish (Acute : toxicity) Remarks: Expected to be practically non toxic: LL/EL/IL50 > 100 mg/l

Toxicity to crustacean (Acute : toxicity) Remarks: Expected to be practically non toxic: LL/EL/IL50 > 100 mg/l

Toxicity to algae/aquatic : plants (Acute toxicity) Remarks: Expected to be practically non toxic: LL/EL/IL50 > 100 mg/l

Bioaccumulative potential

12 / 15 800010026153 NZ

Version 1.0 Revision Date 15.06.2016 Print Date 02.03.2017 Product: Bioaccumulation : Remarks: Contains components with the potential to bioaccumulate.

SECTION 13. DISPOSAL CONSIDERATIONS

SECTION 14. TRANSPORT INFORMATION

13 / 15 800010026153 NZ

Version 1.0 Revision Date 15.06.2016 Print Date 02.03.2017 National Regulations Land Transport Rule: Dangerous Goods 2012 - NZS 5433 Not regulated as a dangerous good International Regulation

IATA-DGR Not regulated as a dangerous good

Additional Information : MARPOL Annex 1 rules apply for bulk shipments by sea.

SECTION 15. REGULATORY INFORMATION

Safety, health and environmental regulations/legislation specific for the substance or mixture

R-phrase(s) : Not classified.

S-phrase(s) : Not classified.

SECTION 16. OTHER INFORMATION

Full text of H-Statements H304 May be fatal if swallowed and enters airways. Full text of other abbreviations

14 / 15 800010026153 NZ

Version 1.0 Revision Date 15.06.2016 Print Date 02.03.2017 Asp. Tox. Aspiration hazard

Abbreviations and Acronyms : The standard abbreviations and acronyms used in this document can be looked up in reference literature (e.g. scientific dictionaries) and/or websites.

Further information Other information : A vertical bar (|) in the left margin indicates an amendment from the previous version.

15 / 15 800010026153 NZ

Version 1.0 Revision Date 17.05.2016 Print Date 02.03.2017

SECTION 1. PRODUCT AND COMPANY IDENTIFICATION

Product name : Shell Tellus S2 VX 68

Product code : 001F8434

Manufacturer or supplier's details Supplier : Tyreline Distributors Limited (NZBN – 9429039316608) 87 Kahikatea Drive, Hamilton 3206, New Zealand Telephone : 0800 673 375 Telefax : +64 7 843 3582

Emergency telephone : 0800 734 607 (ALL HOURS) number

Recommended use of the chemical and restrictions on use Recommended use : Hydraulic oil

SECTION 2. HAZARDS IDENTIFICATION

Hazard classification GHS Classification Not a dangerous substance or mixture according to the Globally Harmonised System (GHS).

GHS label elements Hazard pictograms : No Hazard Symbol required

Signal word : No signal word

Precautionary statements : Prevention: No precautionary phrases.

1 / 15 800010026148 NZ

Version 1.0 Revision Date 17.05.2016 Print Date 02.03.2017 Response: No precautionary phrases.

Storage: No precautionary phrases.

Disposal: No precautionary phrases.

SECTION 3. COMPOSITION/INFORMATION ON INGREDIENTS

Chemical nature : Highly refined mineral oils and additives. The highly refined mineral oil contains <3% (w/w) DMSO- extract, according to IP346.

: * contains one or more of the following CAS-numbers: 64742- 53-6, 64742-54-7, 64742-55-8, 64742-56-9, 64742-65-0, 68037-01-4, 72623-86-0, 72623-87-1, 8042-47-5, 848301-69- 9.

Hazardous components

SECTION 4. FIRST-AID MEASURES

General advice : Not expected to be a health hazard when used under normal conditions.

If inhaled : No treatment necessary under normal conditions of use. If symptoms persist, obtain medical advice.

In case of skin contact : Remove contaminated clothing. Flush exposed area with water and follow by washing with soap if available. If persistent irritation occurs, obtain medical attention.

2 / 15 800010026148 NZ

Version 1.0 Revision Date 17.05.2016 Print Date 02.03.2017 When using high pressure equipment, injection of product under the skin can occur. If high pressure injuries occur, the casualty should be sent immediately to a hospital. Do not wait for symptoms to develop. Obtain medical attention even in the absence of apparent wounds.

In case of eye contact : Flush eye with copious quantities of water. If persistent irritation occurs, obtain medical attention.

If swallowed : In general no treatment is necessary unless large quantities are swallowed, however, get medical advice.

Local necrosis is evidenced by delayed onset of pain and tissue damage a few hours following injection.

Protection of first-aiders : When administering first aid, ensure that you are wearing the appropriate personal protective equipment according to the incident, injury and surroundings.

Notes to physician : Treat symptomatically.

High pressure injection injuries require prompt surgical intervention an d possibly steroid therapy, to minimise tissue damage and loss of function. Because entry wounds are small and do not reflect the seriousness of the underlying damage, surgical exploration to determine the extent of involvement may be necessary. Local anaesthetics or hot soaks should be avoided because they can contribute to swelling, vasospasm and ischaemia. Prompt surgical decompression, debridement and evacuation of foreign material should be performed under general anaesthetics, and wide exploration is essential.

SECTION 5. FIRE-FIGHTING MEASURES

Suitable extinguishing media : Foam, water spray or fog. Dry chemical powder, carbon dioxide, sand or earth may be used for small fires only.

Unsuitable extinguishing : Do not use water in a jet. media

3 / 15 800010026148 NZ

Version 1.0 Revision Date 17.05.2016 Print Date 02.03.2017

Specific extinguishing : Use extinguishing measures that are appropriate to local methods circumstances and the surrounding environment.

SECTION 6. ACCIDENTAL RELEASE MEASURES

Local authorities should be advised if significant spillages cannot be contained.

SECTION 7. HANDLING AND STORAGE

Advice on safe handling : Avoid prolonged or repeated contact with skin. Avoid inhaling vapour and/or mists. When handling product in drums, safety footwear should be

4 / 15 800010026148 NZ

Version 1.0 Revision Date 17.05.2016 Print Date 02.03.2017 worn and proper handling equipment should be used. Properly dispose of any contaminated rags or cleaning materials in order to prevent fires.

Avoidance of contact : Strong oxidising agents.

Product Transfer : This material has the potential to be a static accumulator. Proper grounding and bonding procedures should be used during all bulk transfer operations.

Storage Other data : Keep container tightly closed and in a cool, well-ventilated place. Use properly labeled and closable containers.

Store at ambient temperature.

Packaging material : Suitable material: For containers or container linings, use mild steel or high density polyethylene. Unsuitable material: PVC.

Container Advice : Polyethylene containers should not be exposed to high temperatures because of possible risk of distortion.

SECTION 8. EXPOSURE CONTROLS AND PERSONAL PROTECTION

5 / 15 800010026148 NZ

Version 1.0 Revision Date 17.05.2016 Print Date 02.03.2017 Workplace Exposure Standards for Atmospheric Contaminant s Oil mist, mineral Not Assigned TWA (Mist) 5 mg/m3 OSHA Z-1 Not Assigned TWA 5 mg/m3 ACGIH (Inhalable fraction) Biological occupational exposure limits No biological limit allocated.

Where material is heated, sprayed or mist formed, there is greater potential for airborne concentrations to be generated.

6 / 15 800010026148 NZ

Version 1.0 Revision Date 17.05.2016 Print Date 02.03.2017 Retain drain downs in sealed storage pending disposal or subsequent recycle. Always observe good personal hygiene measures, such as washing hands after handling the material and before eating, drinking, and/or smoking. Routinely wash work clothing and protective equipment to remove contaminants. Discard contaminated clothing and footwear that cannot be cleaned. Practice good housekeeping.

Personal protective equipment Protective measures Personal protective equipment (PPE) should meet recommended national standards. Check with PPE suppliers.

7 / 15 800010026148 NZ

Version 1.0 Revision Date 17.05.2016 Print Date 02.03.2017 Glove thickness should be typically greater than 0.35 mm depending on the glove make and model.

Eye protection : If material is handled such that it could be splashed into eyes, protective eyewear is recommended.

Skin and body protection : Skin protection is not ordinarily required beyond standard work clothes. It is good practice to wear chemical resistant gloves.

Thermal hazards : Not applicable

SECTION 9. PHYSICAL AND CHEMICAL PROPERTIES

Appearance : liquid

Colour : clear Odour : Slight hydrocarbon Odour Threshold : Data not available pH : Not applicable pour point : -30 °C / -22 °FMethod: ISO 3016

Initial boiling point and boiling : > 280 °C / 536 °Festimated value(s) range Flash point : 230 °C / 446 °F Method: ISO 2592

Evaporation rate : Data not available Flammability (solid, gas) : Data not available

Upper explosion limit : Typical 10 %(V)

Lower explosion limit : Typical 1 %(V)

8 / 15 800010026148 NZ

Version 1.0 Revision Date 17.05.2016 Print Date 02.03.2017 Vapour pressure : < 0.5 Pa (20 °C / 68 °F) estimated value(s) Relative vapour density : > 1estimated value(s) Relative density : 0.860 (15 °C / 59 °F)

Density : 860 kg/m3 (15.0 °C / 59.0 °F) Method: ISO 12185

Solubility(ies) Water solubility : negligible Solubility in other solvents : Data not available

Partition coefficient: n- : Pow: > 6(based on information on similar products) octanol/water Auto-ignition temperature : > 320 °C / 608 °F

Viscosity Viscosity, dynamic : Data not available Viscosity, kinematic : 68 mm2/s (40.0 °C / 104.0 °F) Method: ASTM D445

10.5 mm2/s (100 °C / 212 °F) Method: ASTM D445

Explosive properties : Not classified

Oxidizing properties : Data not available

Conductivity : This material is not expected to be a static accumulator. Decomposition temperature : Data not available

SECTION 10. STABILITY AND REACTIVITY

Reactivity : The product does not pose any further reactivity hazards in addition to those listed in the following sub-paragraph.

Chemical stability : Stable.

Possibility of hazardous : Reacts with strong oxidising agents. reactions Conditions to avoid : Extremes of temperature and direct sunlight.

Incompatible materials : Strong oxidising agents.

9 / 15 800010026148 NZ

Version 1.0 Revision Date 17.05.2016 Print Date 02.03.2017

Hazardous decomposition : Hazardous decomposition products are not expected to form products during normal storage.

SECTION 11. TOXICOLOGICAL INFORMATION

Information on likely routes of : Skin and eye contact are the primary routes of exposure exposure although exposure may occur following accidental ingestion.

Acute toxicity Product: Acute oral toxicity : LD50 rat: > 5,000 mg/kg Remarks: Expected to be of low toxicity:

Acute inhalation toxicity : Remarks: Not considered to be an inhalation hazard under normal conditions of use.

Acute dermal toxicity : LD50 Rabbit: > 5,000 mg/kg Remarks: Expected to be of low toxicity:

Serious eye damage/eye irritation Product: Remarks: Expected to be slightly irritating.

Respiratory or skin sensitisation Product: Remarks: Not expected to be a skin sensitiser.

Chronic toxicity Germ cell mutagenicity Product: : Remarks: Not considered a mutagenic hazard.

10 / 15 800010026148 NZ

Version 1.0 Revision Date 17.05.2016 Print Date 02.03.2017 Carcinogenicity Product:

Remarks: Not expected to be carcinogenic.

Material GHS/CLP Carcinogenicity Classification Highly refined mineral oil No carcinogenicity classification.

Reproductive toxicity

Product: : Remarks: Not expected to impair fertility., Not expected to be a developmental toxicant.

STOT - single exposure Product: Remarks: Not expected to be a hazard.

STOT - repeated exposure Product: Remarks: Not expected to be a hazard.

Aspiration toxicity Product: Not considered an aspiration hazard.

Remarks: High pressure injection of product into the skin may lead to local necrosis if the

11 / 15 800010026148 NZ

Version 1.0 Revision Date 17.05.2016 Print Date 02.03.2017 product is not surgically removed.

Remarks: Slightly irritating to respiratory system.

SECTION 12. ECOLOGICAL INFORMATION

Ecotoxicity Product: Toxicity to fish (Acute : toxicity) Remarks: Expected to be practically non toxic: LL/EL/IL50 > 100 mg/l

Toxicity to crustacean (Acute : toxicity) Remarks: Expected to be practically non toxic: LL/EL/IL50 > 100 mg/l

Toxicity to algae/aquatic : plants (Acute toxicity) Remarks: Expected to be practically non toxic: LL/EL/IL50 > 100 mg/l

Bioaccumulative potential Product: Bioaccumulation : Remarks: Contains components with the potential to bioaccumulate.

12 / 15 800010026148 NZ

Version 1.0 Revision Date 17.05.2016 Print Date 02.03.2017 Partition coefficient: n- : Pow: > 6Remarks: (based on information on similar products) octanol/water Mobility in soil Product: Mobility : Remarks: Liquid under most environmental conditions., If it enters soil, it will adsorb to soil particles and will not be mobile. Remarks: Floats on water. Other adverse effects no data available Product: Additional ecological : Product is a mixture of non-volatile components, which are not information expected to be released to air in any significant quantities., Not expected to have ozone depletion potential, photochemical ozone creation potential or global warming potential. Poorly soluble mixture., May cause physical fouling of aquatic organisms. Mineral oil is not expected to cause any chronic effects to aquatic organisms at concentrations less than 1 mg/l.

SECTION 13. DISPOSAL CONSIDERATIONS

SECTION 14. TRANSPORT INFORMATION

National Regulations Land Transport Rule: Dangerous Goods 2012 -

13 / 15 800010026148 NZ

Version 1.0 Revision Date 17.05.2016 Print Date 02.03.2017 NZS 5433 Not regulated as a dangerous good International Regulation

IATA-DGR Not regulated as a dangerous good

Additional Information : MARPOL Annex 1 rules apply for bulk shipments by sea.

SECTION 15. REGULATORY INFORMATION

Safety, health and environmental regulations/legislation specific for the substance or mixture R-phrase(s) : Not classified.

S-phrase(s) : Not classified.

SECTION 16. OTHER INFORMATION

Full text of H-Statements H304 May be fatal if swallowed and enters airways. Full text of other abbreviations Asp. Tox. Aspiration hazard

Abbreviations and Acronyms : The standard abbreviations and acronyms used in this document can be looked up in reference literature (e.g.

14 / 15 800010026148 NZ

Version 1.0 Revision Date 17.05.2016 Print Date 02.03.2017 scientific dictionaries) and/or websites.

Further information Other information : A vertical bar (|) in the left margin indicates an amendment from the previous version.

15 / 15 800010026148 NZ

Product Name: MOBILGREASE XHP 222 Revision Date: 13 Mar 2018 Page 1 of 10

______

SAFETY DATA SHEET

SECTION 1 PRODUCT AND COMPANY IDENTIFICATION

PRODUCT Product Name: MOBILGREASE XHP 222 Product Description: Base Oil and Additives Product Code: 2015A0202530, 2015A0202530, 530436-00, 97E898 Intended Use: Grease

COMPANY IDENTIFICATION Supplier: EXXON MOBIL CORPORATION 22777 Springwoods Village Parkway Spring, TX 77389 USA 24 Hour Health Emergency 609-737-4411 Transportation Emergency Phone 800-424-9300 or 703-527-3887 CHEMTREC Product Technical Information 800-662-4525 MSDS Internet Address www.exxon.com, www.mobil.com

SECTION 2 HAZARDS IDENTIFICATION

This material is not hazardous according to regulatory guidelines (see (M)SDS Section 15).

Other hazard information:

HAZARD NOT OTHERWISE CLASSIFIED (HNOC): None as defined under 29 CFR 1910.1200.

PHYSICAL / CHEMICAL HAZARDS No significant hazards.

HEALTH HAZARDS High-pressure injection under skin may cause serious damage. Excessive exposure may result in eye, skin, or respiratory irritation.

ENVIRONMENTAL HAZARDS No significant hazards.

NFPA Hazard ID: Health: 0 Flammability: 1 Reactivity: 0 HMIS Hazard ID: Health: 0 Flammability: 1 Reactivity: 0

NOTE: This material should not be used for any other purpose than the intended use in Section 1 without expert advice. Health studies have shown that chemical exposure may cause potential human health risks which may vary Product Name: MOBILGREASE XHP 222 Revision Date: 13 Mar 2018 Page 2 of 10

______from person to person.

SECTION 3 COMPOSITION / INFORMATION ON INGREDIENTS

This material is defined as a mixture.

Hazardous Substance(s) or Complex Substance(s) required for disclosure Name CAS# GHS Hazard Codes Concentration* BENZENAMINE, N-PHENYL-, REACTION PRODUCTS 68411-46-1 1 - < 5% H402, H412 WITH 2,4,4-TRIMETHYLPENTENE ZINC DIALKYL DITHIOPHOSPHATE 68457-79-4 1 - < 2.5% H315, H318, H401, H411

* All concentrations are percent by weight unless material is a gas. Gas concentrations are in percent by volume.

As per paragraph (i) of 29 CFR 1910.1200, formulation is considered a trade secret and specific chemical identity and exact percentage (concentration) of composition may have been withheld. Specific chemical identity and exact percentage composition will be provided to health professionals, employees, or designated representatives in accordance with applicable provisions of paragraph (i).

SECTION 4 FIRST AID MEASURES

INHALATION Under normal conditions of intended use, this material is not expected to be an inhalation hazard.

SKIN CONTACT Wash contact areas with soap and water. If product is injected into or under the skin, or into any part of the body, regardless of the appearance of the wound or its size, the individual should be evaluated immediately by a physician as a surgical emergency. Even though initial symptoms from high pressure injection may be minimal or absent, early surgical treatment within the first few hours may significantly reduce the ultimate extent of injury.

EYE CONTACT Flush thoroughly with water. If irritation occurs, get medical assistance.

INGESTION First aid is normally not required. Seek medical attention if discomfort occurs.

SECTION 5 FIRE FIGHTING MEASURES

EXTINGUISHING MEDIA Appropriate Extinguishing Media: Use water fog, foam, dry chemical or carbon dioxide (CO2) to extinguish flames.

Inappropriate Extinguishing Media: Straight Streams of Water

FIRE FIGHTING Fire Fighting Instructions: Evacuate area. Prevent runoff from fire control or dilution from entering Product Name: MOBILGREASE XHP 222 Revision Date: 13 Mar 2018 Page 3 of 10

______streams, sewers, or drinking water supply. Firefighters should use standard protective equipment and in enclosed spaces, self-contained breathing apparatus (SCBA). Use water spray to cool fire exposed surfaces and to protect personnel.

Hazardous Combustion Products: Aldehydes, Incomplete combustion products, Oxides of carbon, Smoke, Fume, Sulfur oxides

FLAMMABILITY PROPERTIES Flash Point [Method]: >204°C (400°F) [EST. FOR OIL, ASTM D-92 (COC)] Flammable Limits (Approximate volume % in air): LEL: N/D UEL: N/D Autoignition Temperature: N/D

SECTION 6 ACCIDENTAL RELEASE MEASURES

NOTIFICATION PROCEDURES In the event of a spill or accidental release, notify relevant authorities in accordance with all applicable regulations. US regulations require reporting releases of this material to the environment which exceed the applicable reportable quantity or oil spills which could reach any waterway including intermittent dry creeks. The National Response Center can be reached at (800)424-8802.

PROTECTIVE MEASURES Avoid contact with spilled material. See Section 5 for fire fighting information. See the Hazard Identification Section for Significant Hazards. See Section 4 for First Aid Advice. See Section 8 for advice on the minimum requirements for personal protective equipment. Additional protective measures may be necessary, depending on the specific circumstances and/or the expert judgment of the emergency responders.

For emergency responders: Respiratory protection: respiratory protection will be necessary only in special cases, e.g., formation of mists. Half-face or full-face respirator with filter(s) for dust/organic vapor or Self Contained Breathing Apparatus (SCBA) can be used depending on the size of spill and potential level of exposure. If the exposure cannot be completely characterized or an oxygen deficient atmosphere is possible or anticipated, SCBA is recommended. Work gloves that are resistant to hydrocarbons are recommended. Gloves made of polyvinyl acetate (PVA) are not water-resistant and are not suitable for emergency use. Chemical goggles are recommended if splashes or contact with eyes is possible. Small spills: normal antistatic work clothes are usually adequate. Large spills: full body suit of chemical resistant, antistatic material is recommended.

SPILL MANAGEMENT Land Spill: Allow spilled material to solidify and scrape up with shovels into a suitable container for recycle or disposal. Scrape up spilled material with shovels into a suitable container for recycle or disposal.

Water Spill: Stop leak if you can do it without risk. Confine the spill immediately with booms. Warn other shipping. Skim from surface.

Water spill and land spill recommendations are based on the most likely spill scenario for this material; however, geographic conditions, wind, temperature, (and in the case of a water spill) wave and current direction and speed may greatly influence the appropriate action to be taken. For this reason, local experts should be consulted. Note: Local regulations may prescribe or limit action to be taken.

ENVIRONMENTAL PRECAUTIONS Prevent entry into waterways, sewers, basements or confined areas. Product Name: MOBILGREASE XHP 222 Revision Date: 13 Mar 2018 Page 4 of 10

______

SECTION 7 HANDLING AND STORAGE

HANDLING Prevent small spills and leakage to avoid slip hazard.

Static Accumulator: This material is not a static accumulator.

STORAGE Do not store in open or unlabelled containers.

SECTION 8 EXPOSURE CONTROLS / PERSONAL PROTECTION

NOTE: Limits/standards shown for guidance only. Follow applicable regulations.

No biological limits allocated.

ENGINEERING CONTROLS

The level of protection and types of controls necessary will vary depending upon potential exposure conditions. Control measures to consider: No special requirements under ordinary conditions of use and with adequate ventilation.

PERSONAL PROTECTION

Personal protective equipment selections vary based on potential exposure conditions such as applications, handling practices, concentration and ventilation. Information on the selection of protective equipment for use with this material, as provided below, is based upon intended, normal usage.

Respiratory Protection: If engineering controls do not maintain airborne contaminant concentrations at a level which is adequate to protect worker health, an approved respirator may be appropriate. Respirator selection, use, and maintenance must be in accordance with regulatory requirements, if applicable. Types of respirators to be considered for this material include: No protection is ordinarily required under normal conditions of use and with adequate ventilation.

For high airborne concentrations, use an approved supplied-air respirator, operated in positive pressure mode. Supplied air respirators with an escape bottle may be appropriate when oxygen levels are inadequate, gas/vapor warning properties are poor, or if air purifying filter capacity/rating may be exceeded.

Hand Protection: Any specific glove information provided is based on published literature and glove manufacturer data. Glove suitability and breakthrough time will differ depending on the specific use conditions. Contact the glove manufacturer for specific advice on glove selection and breakthrough times for your use conditions. Inspect and replace worn or damaged gloves. The types of gloves to be considered for this material include: No protection is ordinarily required under normal conditions of use. Product Name: MOBILGREASE XHP 222 Revision Date: 13 Mar 2018 Page 5 of 10

______Eye Protection: If contact is likely, safety glasses with side shields are recommended.

SECTION 9 PHYSICAL AND CHEMICAL PROPERTIES

GENERAL INFORMATION Physical State: Solid Form: Semi-fluid Color: Dark Blue Odor: Characteristic Odor Threshold: N/D

IMPORTANT HEALTH, SAFETY, AND ENVIRONMENTAL INFORMATION Relative Density (at 15 °C): 0.88 Flammability (Solid, Gas): N/A Flash Point [Method]: >204°C (400°F) [EST. FOR OIL, ASTM D-92 (COC)] Flammable Limits (Approximate volume % in air): LEL: N/D UEL: N/D Autoignition Temperature: N/D Boiling Point / Range: > 316°C (600°F) Decomposition Temperature: N/D Vapor Density (Air = 1): N/D Vapor Pressure: < 0.013 kPa (0.1 mm Hg) at 20 °C Evaporation Rate (n-butyl acetate = 1): N/D pH: N/A Log Pow (n-Octanol/Water Partition Coefficient): > 3.5 Solubility in Water: Negligible Viscosity: >200 cSt (200 mm2/sec) at 40 °C | >16 cSt (16 mm2/sec) at 100°C Oxidizing Properties: See Hazards Identification Section.

OTHER INFORMATION Freezing Point: N/D Melting Point: N/D DMSO Extract (mineral oil only), IP-346: < 3 %wt Product Name: MOBILGREASE XHP 222 Revision Date: 13 Mar 2018 Page 6 of 10

______NOTE: Most physical properties above are for the oil component in the material.

SECTION 10 STABILITY AND REACTIVITY

REACTIVITY: See sub-sections below.

STABILITY: Material is stable under normal conditions.

CONDITIONS TO AVOID: Excessive heat. High energy sources of ignition.

MATERIALS TO AVOID: Strong oxidizers

HAZARDOUS DECOMPOSITION PRODUCTS: Material does not decompose at ambient temperatures.

POSSIBILITY OF HAZARDOUS REACTIONS: Hazardous polymerization will not occur.

SECTION 11 TOXICOLOGICAL INFORMATION

INFORMATION ON TOXICOLOGICAL EFFECTS

Hazard Class Conclusion / Remarks Inhalation Acute Toxicity: No end point data for Minimally Toxic. Based on assessment of the components. material. Irritation: No end point data for material. Negligible hazard at ambient/normal handling temperatures. Ingestion Acute Toxicity: No end point data for Minimally Toxic. Based on assessment of the components. material. Skin Acute Toxicity: No end point data for Minimally Toxic. Based on assessment of the components. material. Skin Corrosion/Irritation: No end point data Negligible irritation to skin at ambient temperatures. Based on for material. assessment of the components. Eye Serious Eye Damage/Irritation: No end point May cause mild, short-lasting discomfort to eyes. Based on data for material. assessment of the components. Sensitization Respiratory Sensitization: No end point data Not expected to be a respiratory sensitizer. for material. Skin Sensitization: No end point data for Not expected to be a skin sensitizer. Based on assessment of the material. components. Aspiration: Data available. Not expected to be an aspiration hazard. Based on physico- chemical properties of the material. Germ Cell Mutagenicity: No end point data Not expected to be a germ cell mutagen. Based on assessment of for material. the components. Carcinogenicity: No end point data for Not expected to cause cancer. Based on assessment of the material. components. Reproductive Toxicity: No end point data Not expected to be a reproductive toxicant. Based on assessment for material. of the components. Lactation: No end point data for material. Not expected to cause harm to breast-fed children. Specific Target Organ Toxicity (STOT) Product Name: MOBILGREASE XHP 222 Revision Date: 13 Mar 2018 Page 7 of 10

______Single Exposure: No end point data for Not expected to cause organ damage from a single exposure. material. Repeated Exposure: No end point data for Not expected to cause organ damage from prolonged or repeated material. exposure. Based on assessment of the components.

OTHER INFORMATION

Contains: Base oil severely refined: Not carcinogenic in animal studies. Representative material passes IP-346, Modified Ames test, and/or other screening tests. Dermal and inhalation studies showed minimal effects; lung non-specific infiltration of immune cells, oil deposition and minimal granuloma formation. Not sensitizing in test animals. C.I. Solvent blue: Positive in the Ames and Mouse Lymphoma mutagenicity assay. Middle distillates: Carcinogenic in animal tests. Lifetime skin painting tests produced tumors, but the mechanism is due to repeated cycles of skin damage and restorative hyperplasia. This mechanism is considered unlikely in humans where such prolonged skin irritation would not be tolerated. Did not cause mutations In Vitro. Inhalation of vapors did not result in reproductive or developmental effects in laboratory animals. Inhalation of high concentrations in animals resulted in respiratory tract irritation, lung changes and some reduction in lung function. Non-sensitizing in test animals.

The following ingredients are cited on the lists below: None.

--REGULATORY LISTS SEARCHED-- 1 = NTP CARC 3 = IARC 1 5 = IARC 2B 2 = NTP SUS 4 = IARC 2A 6 = OSHA CARC

SECTION 12 ECOLOGICAL INFORMATION

The information given is based on data available for the material, the components of the material, and similar materials.

ECOTOXICITY Material -- Not expected to be harmful to aquatic organisms.

MOBILITY Base oil component -- Low solubility and floats and is expected to migrate from water to the land. Expected to partition to sediment and wastewater solids.

PERSISTENCE AND DEGRADABILITY Biodegradation: Base oil component -- Expected to be inherently biodegradable

BIOACCUMULATION POTENTIAL Base oil component -- Has the potential to bioaccumulate, however metabolism or physical properties may reduce the bioconcentration or limit bioavailability.

Product Name: MOBILGREASE XHP 222 Revision Date: 13 Mar 2018 Page 8 of 10

______

SECTION 13 DISPOSAL CONSIDERATIONS

Disposal recommendations based on material as supplied. Disposal must be in accordance with current applicable laws and regulations, and material characteristics at time of disposal.

REGULATORY DISPOSAL INFORMATION RCRA Information: The unused product, in our opinion, is not specifically listed by the EPA as a hazardous waste (40 CFR, Part 261D), nor is it formulated to contain materials which are listed as hazardous wastes. It does not exhibit the hazardous characteristics of ignitability, corrositivity or reactivity and is not formulated with contaminants as determined by the Toxicity Characteristic Leaching Procedure (TCLP). However, used product may be regulated.

SECTION 14 TRANSPORT INFORMATION

LAND (DOT): Not Regulated for Land Transport

LAND (TDG): Not Regulated for Land Transport

SEA (IMDG): Not Regulated for Sea Transport according to IMDG-Code

Marine Pollutant: No

AIR (IATA): Not Regulated for Air Transport

SECTION 15 REGULATORY INFORMATION

OSHA HAZARD COMMUNICATION STANDARD: This material is not considered hazardous in accordance with OSHA HazCom 2012, 29 CFR 1910.1200.

Listed or exempt from listing/notification on the following chemical inventories: AICS, DSL, KECI, PICCS, TCSI, TSCA Product Name: MOBILGREASE XHP 222 Revision Date: 13 Mar 2018 Page 9 of 10

______

SARA 302: No chemicals in this material are subject to the reporting requirements of SARA Title III, Section 302

SARA (311/312) REPORTABLE GHS HAZARD CLASSES: None.

SARA (313) TOXIC RELEASE INVENTORY:

Chemical Name CAS Number Typical Value ZINC DIALKYL 68457-79-4 1 - < 2.5% DITHIOPHOSPHATE

The following ingredients are cited on the lists below:

Chemical Name CAS Number List Citations NAPHTHENIC ACIDS, ZINC 12001-85-3 15 SALTS SEVERELY HYDROTREATED 64742-54-7 17, 18, 19 HEAVY PARAFFINIC DISTILLATE SEVERELY HYDROTREATED 64742-54-7 19 HEAVY PARAFFINIC DISTILLATE ZINC DIALKYL 68457-79-4 13, 15, 17, 18, 19 DITHIOPHOSPHATE ZINC NEODECANOATE 27253-29-8 15

--REGULATORY LISTS SEARCHED-- 1 = ACGIH ALL 6 = TSCA 5a2 11 = CA P65 REPRO 16 = MN RTK 2 = ACGIH A1 7 = TSCA 5e 12 = CA RTK 17 = NJ RTK 3 = ACGIH A2 8 = TSCA 6 13 = IL RTK 18 = PA RTK 4 = OSHA Z 9 = TSCA 12b 14 = LA RTK 19 = RI RTK 5 = TSCA 4 10 = CA P65 CARC 15 = MI 293

Code key: CARC=Carcinogen; REPRO=Reproductive

SECTION 16 OTHER INFORMATION

N/D = Not determined, N/A = Not applicable

KEY TO THE H-CODES CONTAINED IN SECTION 3 OF THIS DOCUMENT (for information only): H315: Causes skin irritation; Skin Corr/Irritation, Cat 2 H318: Causes serious eye damage; Serious Eye Damage/Irr, Cat 1 H401: Toxic to aquatic life; Acute Env Tox, Cat 2 H402: Harmful to aquatic life; Acute Env Tox, Cat 3 Product Name: MOBILGREASE XHP 222 Revision Date: 13 Mar 2018 Page 10 of 10

______H411: Toxic to aquatic life with long lasting effects; Chronic Env Tox, Cat 2 H412: Harmful to aquatic life with long lasting effects; Chronic Env Tox, Cat 3

THIS SAFETY DATA SHEET CONTAINS THE FOLLOWING REVISIONS: Composition: Component Table information was modified. Section 06: Accidental Release - Spill Management - Land information was modified. Section 09: Melting Point C(F) information was modified. Section 11: Chronic Tox - Component information was modified. Section 11: Other Health Effects Header information was modified. Section 11: Other Health Effects information was deleted. Section 15: List Citations Table information was modified. Section 15: National Chemical Inventory Listing information was modified. Section 15: Special Cases Table information was added. Section 15: Special Cases Table information was deleted. Section 16: HCode Key information was modified. Section 16: MSN, MAT ID information was modified. Section 16: Standard phrases for California Proposition 65 information was deleted. ------The information and recommendations contained herein are, to the best of ExxonMobil's knowledge and belief, accurate and reliable as of the date issued. You can contact ExxonMobil to insure that this document is the most current available from ExxonMobil. The information and recommendations are offered for the user's consideration and examination. It is the user's responsibility to satisfy itself that the product is suitable for the intended use. If buyer repackages this product, it is the user's responsibility to insure proper health, safety and other necessary information is included with and/or on the container. Appropriate warnings and safe-handling procedures should be provided to handlers and users. Alteration of this document is strictly prohibited. Except to the extent required by law, re- publication or retransmission of this document, in whole or in part, is not permitted. The term, "ExxonMobil" is used for convenience, and may include any one or more of ExxonMobil Chemical Company, Exxon Mobil Corporation, or any affiliates in which they directly or indirectly hold any interest.

------

Internal Use Only MHC: 0B, 0B, 0, 0, 0, 0 PPEC: A

DGN: 2006153XUS (1027429)

Product Name: MOBILTAC 375 NC Revision Date: 30 Apr 2015 Page 1 of 11

______

SAFETY DATA SHEET

SECTION 1 PRODUCT AND COMPANY IDENTIFICATION

PRODUCT Product Name: MOBILTAC 375 NC Product Description: Hydrocarbons and Additives Product Code: 201560404015, 611178-00, 977026 Intended Use: Gear oil

COMPANY IDENTIFICATION Supplier: EXXON MOBIL CORPORATION 22777 Springwoods Village Parkway Spring, TX. 77389 USA 24 Hour Health Emergency 609-737-4411 Transportation Emergency Phone 800-424-9300 or 703-527-3887 CHEMTREC Product Technical Information 800-662-4525 MSDS Internet Address http://www.exxon.com, http://www.mobil.com

SECTION 2 HAZARDS IDENTIFICATION

This material is not hazardous according to regulatory guidelines (see (M)SDS Section 15).

Other hazard information:

HAZARD NOT OTHERWISE CLASSIFIED (HNOC): None as defined under 29 CFR 1910.1200.

PHYSICAL / CHEMICAL HAZARDS No significant hazards.

HEALTH HAZARDS High-pressure injection under skin may cause serious damage. Excessive exposure may result in eye, skin, or respiratory irritation.

ENVIRONMENTAL HAZARDS No significant hazards.

NFPA Hazard ID: Health: 1 Flammability: 1 Reactivity: 0 HMIS Hazard ID: Health: 1 Flammability: 1 Reactivity: 0

Product Name: MOBILTAC 375 NC Revision Date: 30 Apr 2015 Page 2 of 11

______SECTION 3 COMPOSITION / INFORMATION ON INGREDIENTS

This material is defined as a mixture.

Hazardous Substance(s) or Complex Substance(s) required for disclosure Name CAS# Concentration* GHS Hazard Codes ASPHALT (PETROLEUM) 8052-42-4 30 - 60% None HYDROTREATED LIGHT DISTILLATE 64742-47-8 5 - 10% H226, H304, H336, H401, H411 HYDROTREATED MIDDLE DISTILLATE (PETROLEUM) 64742-46-7 5 - 10% H227, H304, H332, H315, H401, H411 NAPHTHENIC ACIDS, ZINC SALTS 12001-85-3 1 - 5% H315, H319(2A), H401, H411

* All concentrations are percent by weight unless material is a gas. Gas concentrations are in percent by volume.

SECTION 4 FIRST AID MEASURES

INHALATION Remove from further exposure. For those providing assistance, avoid exposure to yourself or others. Use adequate respiratory protection. If respiratory irritation, dizziness, nausea, or unconsciousness occurs, seek immediate medical assistance. If breathing has stopped, assist ventilation with a mechanical device or use mouth-to-mouth resuscitation.

EYE CONTACT Flush thoroughly with water. If irritation occurs, get medical assistance.

INGESTION First aid is normally not required. Seek medical attention if discomfort occurs.

SECTION 5 FIRE FIGHTING MEASURES

EXTINGUISHING MEDIA Appropriate Extinguishing Media: Use water fog, foam, dry chemical or carbon dioxide (CO2) to extinguish flames.

Product Name: MOBILTAC 375 NC Revision Date: 30 Apr 2015 Page 3 of 11

______Inappropriate Extinguishing Media: Straight Streams of Water

FIRE FIGHTING Fire Fighting Instructions: Evacuate area. Prevent runoff from fire control or dilution from entering streams, sewers, or drinking water supply. Firefighters should use standard protective equipment and in enclosed spaces, self-contained breathing apparatus (SCBA). Use water spray to cool fire exposed surfaces and to protect personnel.

Unusual Fire Hazards: May generate irritating and harmful gases/vapors/fumes when burning. Hazardous material. Firefighters should consider protective equipment indicated in Section 8.

Hazardous Combustion Products: Sulfur oxides, Hydrogen sulfide, Oxides of carbon, Incomplete combustion products, Smoke, Fume

FLAMMABILITY PROPERTIES Flash Point [Method]: >121°C (250°F) [ASTM D-92] Flammable Limits (Approximate volume % in air): LEL: N/D UEL: N/D Autoignition Temperature: N/D

SECTION 6 ACCIDENTAL RELEASE MEASURES

For emergency responders: Respiratory protection: half-face or full-face respirator with filter(s) for organic vapor and, when applicable, H2S, or Self Contained Breathing Apparatus (SCBA) can be used depending on the size of spill and potential level of exposure. If the exposure cannot be completely characterized or an oxygen deficient atmosphere is possible or anticipated, SCBA is recommended. Chemical goggles and face shield are recommended if contact of eyes with hot product or vapours is possible. Small spills: normal work clothes are usually adequate. Large spills: full body suit of chemical and thermal resistant material is recommended. Work gloves (preferably gauntlet style) that provide adequate chemical resistance. Note: gloves made of polyvinyl acetate (PVA) are not water-resistant and are not suitable for emergency use. If contact with hot product is possible or anticipated, heat-resistant and thermally insulated gloves are recommended.

SPILL MANAGEMENT Land Spill: Eliminate all ignition sources (no smoking, flares, sparks or flames in immediate area). Absorb or cover with dry earth, sand or other non-combustible material and transfer to containers.

Water Spill: Stop leak if you can do it without risk. Confine the spill immediately with booms. Warn other shipping. Skim from surface.

Product Name: MOBILTAC 375 NC Revision Date: 30 Apr 2015 Page 4 of 11

______Water spill and land spill recommendations are based on the most likely spill scenario for this material; however, geographic conditions, wind, temperature, (and in the case of a water spill) wave and current direction and speed may greatly influence the appropriate action to be taken. For this reason, local experts should be consulted. Note: Local regulations may prescribe or limit action to be taken.

ENVIRONMENTAL PRECAUTIONS Prevent entry into waterways, sewers, basements or confined areas.

SECTION 7 HANDLING AND STORAGE

HANDLING Hydrogen sulfide (H2S) may be given off when this material is heated. Do not depend on sense of smell for warning. Prevent small spills and leakage to avoid slip hazard. Material can accumulate static charges which may cause an electrical spark (ignition source). When the material is handled in bulk, an electrical spark could ignite any flammable vapors from liquids or residues that may be present (e.g., during switch-loading operations). Use proper bonding and/or ground procedures. However, bonding and grounds may not eliminate the hazard from static accumulation. Consult local applicable standards for guidance. Additional references include American Petroleum Institute 2003 (Protection Against Ignitions Arising out of Static, Lightning and Stray Currents) or National Fire Protection Agency 77 (Recommended Practice on Static Electricity) or CENELEC CLC/TR 50404 (Electrostatics - Code of practice for the avoidance of hazards due to static electricity).

Static Accumulator: This material is a static accumulator.

STORAGE The container choice, for example storage vessel, may effect static accumulation and dissipation. Store in a cool, dry place with adequate ventilation. Keep away from incompatible materials, open flames, and high temperatures. Do not store in open or unlabelled containers.

SECTION 8 EXPOSURE CONTROLS / PERSONAL PROTECTION

EXPOSURE LIMIT VALUES

Exposure limits/standards (Note: Exposure limits are not additive)

Substance Name Form Limit / Standard NOTE Source ASPHALT (PETROLEUM) [benzene Inhalable TWA 0.5 mg/m3 N/A ACGIH solubles] fraction. HYDROTREATED LIGHT DISTILLATE Non-Aerosol TWA 200 mg/m3 Skin ACGIH [total hydrocarbon vapor] HYDROTREATED MIDDLE Mist. TWA 5 mg/m3 N/A OSHA Z1 DISTILLATE (PETROLEUM)

NOTE: Limits/standards shown for guidance only. Follow applicable regulations.

No biological limits allocated.

ENGINEERING CONTROLS

Product Name: MOBILTAC 375 NC Revision Date: 30 Apr 2015 Page 5 of 11

______The level of protection and types of controls necessary will vary depending upon potential exposure conditions. Control measures to consider: Adequate ventilation should be provided so that exposure limits are not exceeded.

PERSONAL PROTECTION

Respiratory Protection: If engineering controls do not maintain airborne contaminant concentrations at a level which is adequate to protect worker health, an approved respirator may be appropriate. Respirator selection, use, and maintenance must be in accordance with regulatory requirements, if applicable. Types of respirators to be considered for this material include: No special requirements under ordinary conditions of use and with adequate ventilation.

For high airborne concentrations, use an approved supplied-air respirator, operated in positive pressure mode. Supplied air respirators with an escape bottle may be appropriate when oxygen levels are inadequate, gas/vapor warning properties are poor, or if air purifying filter capacity/rating may be exceeded.

Hand Protection: Any specific glove information provided is based on published literature and glove manufacturer data. Glove suitability and breakthrough time will differ depending on the specific use conditions. Contact the glove manufacturer for specific advice on glove selection and breakthrough times for your use conditions. Inspect and replace worn or damaged gloves. The types of gloves to be considered for this material include: No protection is ordinarily required under normal conditions of use.

Eye Protection: If contact is likely, safety glasses with side shields are recommended.

SECTION 9 PHYSICAL AND CHEMICAL PROPERTIES

GENERAL INFORMATION Physical State: Solid

Product Name: MOBILTAC 375 NC Revision Date: 30 Apr 2015 Page 6 of 11

______Form: Semi-fluid Color: Black Odor: Characteristic Odor Threshold: N/D

IMPORTANT HEALTH, SAFETY, AND ENVIRONMENTAL INFORMATION Relative Density (at 15 °C): 0.96 [ASTM D1298] Flammability (Solid, Gas): N/A Flash Point [Method]: >121°C (250°F) [ASTM D-92] Flammable Limits (Approximate volume % in air): LEL: N/D UEL: N/D Autoignition Temperature: N/D Boiling Point / Range: > 170°C (338°F) Decomposition Temperature: N/D Vapor Density (Air = 1): N/D Vapor Pressure: N/D Evaporation Rate (n-butyl acetate = 1): < 1 pH: N/A Log Pow (n-Octanol/Water Partition Coefficient): > 3.5 Solubility in Water: Negligible Viscosity: 5000 cSt (5000 mm2/sec) at 40 °C Oxidizing Properties: See Hazards Identification Section.

OTHER INFORMATION Freezing Point: N/D Melting Point: N/A

SECTION 10 STABILITY AND REACTIVITY

REACTIVITY: See sub-sections below.

STABILITY: Material is stable under normal conditions.

CONDITIONS TO AVOID: Excessive heat. High energy sources of ignition.

MATERIALS TO AVOID: Strong oxidizers

HAZARDOUS DECOMPOSITION PRODUCTS: Material does not decompose at ambient temperatures.

POSSIBILITY OF HAZARDOUS REACTIONS: Hazardous polymerization will not occur.

SECTION 11 TOXICOLOGICAL INFORMATION

INFORMATION ON TOXICOLOGICAL EFFECTS

Hazard Class Conclusion / Remarks Inhalation Acute Toxicity: No end point data for Minimally Toxic. Based on assessment of the components. material. Irritation: No end point data for material. Elevated temperatures or mechanical action may form vapors, mist, or fumes which may be irritating to the eyes, nose, throat, or lungs.

Product Name: MOBILTAC 375 NC Revision Date: 30 Apr 2015 Page 7 of 11

______Ingestion Acute Toxicity: No end point data for Minimally Toxic. Based on assessment of the components. material. Skin Acute Toxicity: No end point data for Minimally Toxic. Based on assessment of the components. material. Skin Corrosion/Irritation (Rabbit): Data Negligible irritation to skin at ambient temperatures. Based on test available. data for the material. Test(s) equivalent or similar to OECD Guideline 404 Eye Serious Eye Damage/Irritation (Rabbit): Data May cause mild, short-lasting discomfort to eyes. Based on test available. data for the material. Test(s) equivalent or similar to OECD Guideline 405 Sensitization Respiratory Sensitization: No end point data Not expected to be a respiratory sensitizer. for material. Skin Sensitization: No end point data for Not expected to be a skin sensitizer. Based on assessment of the material. components. Aspiration: Data available. Not expected to be an aspiration hazard. Based on physico- chemical properties of the material. Germ Cell Mutagenicity: No end point data Not expected to be a germ cell mutagen. Based on assessment of for material. the components. Carcinogenicity: No end point data for Not expected to cause cancer. Based on assessment of the material. components. Reproductive Toxicity: No end point data Not expected to be a reproductive toxicant. Based on assessment for material. of the components. Lactation: No end point data for material. Not expected to cause harm to breast-fed children. Specific Target Organ Toxicity (STOT) Single Exposure: No end point data for Not expected to cause organ damage from a single exposure. material. Repeated Exposure: No end point data for Not expected to cause organ damage from prolonged or repeated material. exposure. Based on assessment of the components.

OTHER INFORMATION For the product itself:

Repeated and/or prolonged exposure may cause irritation to the skin, eyes, or respiratory tract. Contains: Asphalt (bitumen): May contain low levels of polycyclic aromatic compounds (PACs), some of which are suspected of causing cancer under conditions of poor industrial hygiene and prolonged repeated contact. These PACs may also be inhaled. Inhalation studies at high concentrations of fumes resulted in bronchitis, pneumonitis, fibrosis and cell damage. Avoid contact with the asphalt emissions. Middle distillates: Carcinogenic in animal tests. Lifetime skin painting tests produced tumors, but the mechanism is due to repeated cycles of skin damage and restorative hyperplasia. This mechanism is considered unlikely in humans where such prolonged skin irritation would not be tolerated. Did not cause mutations In Vitro. Inhalation of vapors did not result in reproductive or developmental effects in laboratory animals. Inhalation of high concentrations in animals resulted in respiratory tract irritation, lung changes and some reduction in lung function. Non-sensitizing in test animals.

The following ingredients are cited on the lists below: None.

Product Name: MOBILTAC 375 NC Revision Date: 30 Apr 2015 Page 8 of 11

______

--REGULATORY LISTS SEARCHED-- 1 = NTP CARC 3 = IARC 1 5 = IARC 2B 2 = NTP SUS 4 = IARC 2A 6 = OSHA CARC

SECTION 12 ECOLOGICAL INFORMATION

The information given is based on data available for the material, the components of the material, and similar materials.

ECOTOXICITY Material -- Not expected to be harmful to aquatic organisms.

MOBILITY More volatile component -- Highly volatile, will partition rapidly to air. Not expected to partition to sediment and wastewater solids. High molecular wt. component -- Low solubility and floats and is expected to migrate from water to the land. Expected to partition to sediment and wastewater solids.

PERSISTENCE AND DEGRADABILITY Biodegradation: Low molecular wt. component -- Expected to be inherently biodegradable High molecular wt. component -- Expected to be persistent. Atmospheric Oxidation: More volatile component -- Expected to degrade rapidly in air

BIOACCUMULATION POTENTIAL Majority of components -- Has the potential to bioaccumulate, however metabolism or physical properties may reduce the bioconcentration or limit bioavailability.

SECTION 13 DISPOSAL CONSIDERATIONS

Disposal recommendations based on material as supplied. Disposal must be in accordance with current applicable laws and regulations, and material characteristics at time of disposal.

DISPOSAL RECOMMENDATIONS Protect the environment. Dispose of used oil at designated sites. Minimize skin contact. Do not mix used oils with solvents, brake fluids or coolants. Suitable routes of disposal are supervised incineration, preferentially with energy recovery, or appropriate recycling methods in accordance with applicable regulations and material characteristics at the time of disposal.

Product Name: MOBILTAC 375 NC Revision Date: 30 Apr 2015 Page 9 of 11

______does not exhibit the hazardous characteristics of ignitability, corrositivity or reactivity and is not formulated with contaminants as determined by the Toxicity Characteristic Leaching Procedure (TCLP). However, used product may be regulated.

SECTION 14 TRANSPORT INFORMATION

LAND (DOT): Not Regulated for Land Transport

LAND (TDG): Not Regulated for Land Transport

SEA (IMDG): Not Regulated for Sea Transport according to IMDG-Code

Marine Pollutant: No

AIR (IATA): Not Regulated for Air Transport

SECTION 15 REGULATORY INFORMATION

OSHA HAZARD COMMUNICATION STANDARD: This material is not considered hazardous in accordance with OSHA HazCom 2012, 29 CFR 1910.1200.

Listed or exempt from listing/notification on the following chemical inventories: AICS, DSL, ENCS, IECSC, KECI, PICCS, TSCA

EPCRA SECTION 302: This material contains no extremely hazardous substances.

SARA (311/312) REPORTABLE HAZARD CATEGORIES: None.

SARA (313) TOXIC RELEASE INVENTORY:

Chemical Name CAS Number Typical Value NAPHTHENIC ACIDS, ZINC 12001-85-3 1 - 5% SALTS

Product Name: MOBILTAC 375 NC Revision Date: 30 Apr 2015 Page 10 of 11

______The following ingredients are cited on the lists below:

Chemical Name CAS Number List Citations ASPHALT (PETROLEUM) 8052-42-4 1, 13, 16, 17, 18 HYDROTREATED LIGHT 64742-47-8 1, 17, 18 DISTILLATE HYDROTREATED MIDDLE 64742-46-7 4, 17, 18 DISTILLATE (PETROLEUM) NAPHTHENIC ACIDS, ZINC 12001-85-3 13, 15, 17, 19 SALTS

Code key: CARC=Carcinogen; REPRO=Reproductive

SECTION 16 OTHER INFORMATION

N/D = Not determined, N/A = Not applicable

KEY TO THE H-CODES CONTAINED IN SECTION 3 OF THIS DOCUMENT (for information only): H226: Flammable liquid and vapor; Flammable Liquid, Cat 3 H227: Combustible liquid; Flammable Liquid, Cat 4 H304: May be fatal if swallowed and enters airways; Aspiration, Cat 1 H315: Causes skin irritation; Skin Corr/Irritation, Cat 2 H319(2A): Causes serious eye irritation; Serious Eye Damage/Irr, Cat 2A H332: Harmful if inhaled; Acute Tox Inh, Cat 4 H336: May cause drowsiness or dizziness; Target Organ Single, Narcotic H401: Toxic to aquatic life; Acute Env Tox, Cat 2 H411: Toxic to aquatic life with long lasting effects; Chronic Env Tox, Cat 2

THIS SAFETY DATA SHEET CONTAINS THE FOLLOWING REVISIONS: Updates made in accordance with implementation of GHS requirements.

Product Name: MOBILTAC 375 NC Revision Date: 30 Apr 2015 Page 11 of 11

______

------

Internal Use Only MHC: 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1 PPEC: A

DGN: 2009223XUS (555018)

Introduction

3M™ Novec™ 1230 Fire Protection Fluid, dodecaﬂuoro-2-methylpentan-3-one,

(CF3CF2C(O)CF(CF3)2), is a clear, colorless and low odor fluid, one of a long line of 3M products designed as a replacement technology for ozone depleting substances (ODSs). Novec 1230 fluid is an effective fire extinguishing agent in standard fire scenarios where halons historically have been used and where halon alternatives are now being used.

Typical Applications Novec 1230 fluid can effectively be applied in streaming, localized flooding, total flooding, inerting and explosion suppression applications in the following areas: • Data Processing Centers • Military Aviation • Transportation • Telecommunications - Flightlines - Merchant Marine - Cellular Sites - Crash Rescue Vessels - Switching Centers Vehicles - Mass Transit Vehicles • Commercial Aviation • Military Systems • Recreation - Aboard Aircraft - Combat Vehicles - Pleasure Craft - Airport Crash Rescue - Marine Engine Rooms - Race Cars Vehicles • Oil & Gas Exploration - Platform Helipads - Storage Tank Rim Seals

Material Speciﬁcations

Properties Novec 1230 Fluid Dodecaﬂuoro-2-methylpentan-3-one 99.0 mole %, minimum Nonvolatile residues 0.05 g/100 ml, maximum Acidity and water content Speciﬁcations are under development.

Fire Extinguishing Performance The extinguishing performance of Novec 1230 fluid has been shown in small- and large- scale tests. The initial effectiveness has been demonstrated in military applications such as on flightlines and in standard fire scenarios as part of an Underwriters Laboratories and Factory Mutual listing. 3M™ Novec™ 1230 Fire Protection Fluid Features

Novec 1230 fluid’s environmental profile, toxicity characteristics, and fire performance make it a sustainable solution as a halon replacement alternative to Halons, HFCs and PFCs. An advantage of a liquid agent is that it can be shipped in drums and totes rather than pressurized cylinders. That means that you can air freight Novec 1230 fluid in bulk quantities if needed for refills instead of the very limited quantities of gases that can be air shipped.

If a leak occurs in the extinguisher or system after superpressurization, the N2 can easily be vented and the agent retained while repairing the cylinder seal or gasket. With gases, the agent would be lost. The liquid is pourable, low in viscosity and easy to handle. It can easily be pumped with hand or electric pumps. Novec 1230 fluid can be used both as a streaming agent (e.g., hand-held extinguishers) or as a total flooding agent in fixed systems. Novec 1230 fluid is compatible with a wide range of materials of construction. It is stable in storage.

Properties Description

Not for Typical Physical Properties Novec 1230 Fluid specification purposes Chemical Formula CF3CF2C(O)CF(CF3)2 Molecular Weight 316.04 All values determined Boiling Point @ 1 atm 49.0°C (120.2°F) at 25¡C (77¡F) unless Freezing Point -108°C (-162.4°F) otherwise specified Critical Temperature 168.66°C (335.6°F) Critical Pressure 18.65 bar (270.44 psi) Critical Volume 494.5 cc/mole (0.0251 ft3/lbm) Critical Density 639.1 kg/m3 (39.91 lbm/ft3) Density, Sat. Liquid 1.60 g/ml (99.9 lbm/ft3) Density, Gas 1 ATM 0.0136 g/ml (0.851 lbm/ft3) Specific Volume, Gas 1 ATM 0.07333 m3/kg (1.175 ft3/lb) Specific Heat, Liquid 1.1030 kJ/kg°C (0.2634 BTU/lb°F) Specific Heat, Vapor @1 ATM 0.891 kJ/kg°C (0.2127 BTU/lb°F) Heat of Vaporization @ boiling point 88.1 kJ/kg (37.9 BTU/lb) Liquid Viscosity @ 0°C/25°C 0.56/0.39 centistokes Solubility of Water in Novec 1230 Fluid <0.001 % by wt. Vapor Pressure 0.40 bar (5.85 psig) Dielectric Strength ~60 kV

Novec 1230 Safety and Use Concentration Comparison

All data other than Properties Halon 1301 HFC-227ea Novec 1230 Inert Gas CO those for Novec 1230 ﬂuid 2 were compiled from Boiling point °C (°F) -57.8 (-72.04) -16.4 (2.48) 49.0 (120.2) -196.0 (-320.8) Sublimes at published sources. low temps Use Concentration 5% 7.5-8.7% 5-6% 38-40% 30-75% NOAEL* 5% 9% 10% 43% <5% Safety Margin nil 3-20% 67-100% 7-13% Lethal at Design Concentrations * No Observed Adverse Effect Level for cardiac sensitization (halocarbons) and oxygen depletion (inert gas). Novec 1230 ﬂuid offers outstanding margins of human safety when compared to halon and to all viable alternatives.

2 3M™ Novec™ 1230 Fire Protection Fluid Properties Description (Continued)

Not for speciﬁcation Novec 1230 Fluid purposes Vapor Pressure vs. Temperature 2000

1800

1600

1400 (kPa) 1200

1000

800

Vapor Pressure 600

400

200

0 -50 -25 0 25 50 75 100 125 150 175 200 Temperature (°C)

Novec 1230 Fluid Liquid Density vs. Temperature

1. 7

1.6 8

1.6 6

1.6 4 (g/ml) 1.6 2

1.6 Density 1. 5 8

1.56

1.5 4

1.5 2 051015 20 25 30 35 40 45 50

Temperature (°C)

3 3M™ Novec™ 1230 Fire Protection Fluid Advantages of a Liquid Instead of Gas

Not for The following graph displays the unique properties that differentiate Novec 1230 fluid specification from other agents. Over a wide range of temperatures, a high boiling material like purposes Novec 1230 fluid, when superpressurized with nitrogen in a cylinder, does not vary significantly in storage pressure like the lower boiling gasses. Note the pressure delta of only 10 bar for Novec 1230 fluid, whereas with some low boiling gases, there can be as much as a 33 bar delta over the same temperature range. The maximum fill density for Novec 1230 fluid is 1.8 times greater than lower boiling gases over the -40°C to 80°C range. This is important in applications where there is an expected wide range of temperatures, such as military vehicles, aircraft, or aboard ships that may enter tropical or arctic waters. Pressure vs. Temperature Comparison Super Pressurization @ 25 Bar 50.0 HFC-227ea 45.0 0.80 kg/l 40.0

35.0

30.0 [bar] Novec 1230 25.0 1.44 kg/l 20.0 HFC-236fa 1.04 kg/l Pressure 15.0

10.0

5.0

0.0 -60 -40 -20 0 20 40 60 80 100

Source: NFPA 2001 and 3M Labs

Although most applications will not be in this temperature range, the following chart illustrates that Novec 1230 ﬂuid is able to effectively vaporize over the expected range of design concentrations at very low ambient temperatures, even though it is a high boiling ﬂuid. Expected Range of Use Concentration 10 Novec 1230 Fluid Range of Use 0 C) °

( -10 -20 -30 -40 Lowest Ambient Temperature -50 -60 024681012141618 Concentration (% v/v) Source: Tropodegradeable Halocarbons and Main Group Element Compounds April 1999, Halon Options Technical Working Conference - NMERI

Source: NMERI and 3M Labs

4 3M™ Novec™ 1230 Fire Protection Fluid Materials Compatibility

Compatibility of “O” Rings with Novec 1230 Fluid Exposure Time: 1 Week@ 25¡C, 100¡C

Elastomer Exposure Change in % Change % Change Type Temp. Shore A Hardness in Weight in Volume

Neoprene 25°C -1.8 -0.6 -1.2 100°C -2.2 +2.3 +0.8 Butyl rubber 25°C -2.7 +0.2 +0.1 100°C -4.0 +4.3 +4.2 Fluoroelastomer 25°C -6.2 +0.7 +0.6 100°C -12.6 +9.5 +10.6 EPDM 25°C -4.7 +0.6 +0.3 100°C -5.7 +3.3 +2.4 Silicone 25°C N/A +3.1 +2.8 100°C -5.4 +6.0 +5.1 Nitrile 25°C -0.7 -0.3 -0.5 100°C +2.5 +4.6 +0.7

Effects of Boiling Novec 1230 Fluid on Various Metals

Metals Effect Aluminum Alloy 6262 T6511 A Brass Alloy UNS C36000 A AISI Type 304L stainless steel A AISI Type 316L stainless steel A Copper UNS C12200 A ASTM A 516, Grade 70 carbon steel A

A. No discoloration or destruction of ﬂuid or metal at temperature indicated, 10 days minimum exposure, 49°C.

5 3M™ Novec™ 1230 Fire Protection Fluid Environmental Health and Safety

A study conducted by MIT examined the atmospheric loss mechanisms for Novec 1230 fluid. The authors of this study determined that this compound does not react with hydroxyl radical (OH) but that substantial decay occurs when exposed to UV radiation. The authors measured the UV cross-section for Novec 1230 fluid, finding a maximum wavelength of absorbance at 306 nm. Since this compound shows significant absorbance at wavelengths above 300 nm, photolysis in the lower atmosphere will be a significant sink for this compound. The authors conclude that, “In fact, the absorption spectrum is similar to that of acetaldehyde, a species whose lifetime against solar photolysis is about 5 days. The absorption cross sections of Novec 1230 fluid are somewhat larger; hence, we expect the atmospheric lifetime of Novec 1230 fluid against solar radiation to be of the order of 3-5 days.” Recent laboratory measurements of the photodissociation rate of Novec 1230 fluid found it to be equivalent to that for acetaldehyde, within experimental error. Hence, an atmospheric lifetime of 5 days is appropriate for Novec 1230 fluid. The potential for Novec 1230 fluid to impact the radiative balance in the atmosphere (i.e., climate change) is limited by its very short atmospheric lifetime and low global warming potential (GWP). Using a measured IR cross-section and the method of Pinnock et. al., the instantaneous radiative forcing for Novec 1230 fluid is calculated to be 0.50 Wm-2ppbv-1. This radiative forcing and a 5-day atmospheric lifetime results in a GWP value of 1 using the WMO 1999 method and a 100-year integration time horizon. Compounds with such short atmospheric lifetimes do not pose a risk with respect to potential climate change. Novec 1230 fluid is expected to rapidly degrade to fluorinated alkyl radicals similar to those produced by other fluorochemicals. Studies of the atmospheric chemistry of these radical species and their degradation products have concluded that they have no impact on stratospheric ozone. This, combined with its very short atmospheric lifetime, leads to the conclusion that Novec 1230 fluid has an ozone depletion of zero. Before using this product, please read the current product Material Safety Data Sheet (available through your 3M sales or technical service representative) and the precautionary statement on the product package. Follow all applicable precautions and directions.

6 3M™ Novec™ 1230 Fire Protection Fluid Environmental Properties Comparison

Not for Properties Novec Halon Halon HFC- HFC- HCFC specification 1230 1211 1301 227ea 236fa Blend B purposes Ozone Depleting 0.0 4.0 12.0 0.0 0.0 0.014 Potential (ODP) All data other than Global Warming 1 1300 2 6900 2 3500 9400 120 3 those for Novec 1230 Potential–IPCC 20011 fluid were compiled Atmospheric 0.014 11.0 65 33 220.0 1.4 from published Lifetime (years) sources SNAP (Yes/No) Yes 4 No No Yes Yes Yes/ Phase-out 1 IPCC Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Method 100 Year (ITH) 2 Global Warming Potential 1998 WMO Method 100 Year (ITH) 3 Data based on HCFC-123 only—also contains CF4 4 U.S. EPA has expressed its intent to approve. Commercial sale of Novec 1230 fluid is permitted. Toxicity Profile Novec 1230 fluid is a fluorinated ketone. It is safe for its intended use when used as directed. Acute toxicity testing completed shows that Novec 1230 fluid is low in toxicity. The effective toxicity exposure limit is greater than 100,000 ppm (>10% v/v) for both the acute 4-hour inhalation exposure and the acute cardiac sensitization No Observed Adverse Effect Level, or NOAEL. The acute cardiac sensitization Lowest Observed Adverse Effect Level, or LOAEL, is greater than 100,000 ppm (>10% v/v). See the Toxicity Properties Comparison table below.

Toxicity Properties Comparison

Not for Properties Novec Halon Halon HFC- HFC- HCFC speciﬁcation 1230 1211 1301 227ea 236fa Blend B purposes Physical State @ 25°C Liquid Gas Gas Gas Gas Liquid LC-50 4-hour acute > 10 1 20 >80 > 80 > 80 3.2 inhalation (UNO) (15 min) (% v/v) NOAEL / LOAEL 10.0/ 1.0/ 5.0/ 9.0/ 10.0/ 1.0/ Cardiac sensitization >10.01, 3 2.02 7.5 10.5 15.0 2.0 (% v/v)

1Huntingdon, UK results, 2000 2NOAEL–Dupont data, EC-50 (LOAEL)–Beck, Clark and Tinston data, 1973 & 82 3Although a test conducted at a high cardiac sensitization dose of 15% was not fully completed, no cardiac sensitization or deaths were observed.

Packaging and Availability

Novec 1230 ﬂuid is currently available in 2645 lb. (1200 kg) intermediate bulk containers (IBCs), 353 lb. (160 kg) drums and 11 lb. (5 kg) glass sample jugs. A cylinder containing Novec 1230 ﬂuid superpressurized with nitrogen varies only 150 psi over a temperature range of 220°F (105°C). Also, because it is packaged in IBCs and drums, it can be air freighted without the restrictions on gaseous alternatives.

7 3M™ Novec™ 1230 Fire Protection Fluid Resources & Distribution

3M™ Novec™ 1230 Fire Protection Fluid is supported by global sales, technical and customer service resources, with technical service laboratories in the U.S., Europe, Japan, Latin America and Southeast Asia. Users benefit from 3M’s broad technology base and continuing attention to product development, performance, safety and environmental issues. Extensive O.E.M. policies and equipment design guidelines have been prepared for system retrofit, installers and equipment manufacturers in support of Novec 1230 fluid. For additional technical information on Novec 1230 fluid in the United States, or for the name of a local distributor, call 3M Performance Materials Division, 800 810 8513. For other 3M global offices, and information on additional 3M products, visit our web site at www.3m.com/specialtymaterials

United States Europe 3M Canada Company Sumitomo 3M Limited Asia Pacific and 3M Specialty Materials 3M Specialty Materials Specialty Materials 33-1, Tamagawadai 2-chome Latin America 3M Center, Building 223-6S-04 3M Belgium N. V. P.O. Box 5757 Setagaya-ku, Tokyo Call (U.S.) 651 736 7123 St. Paul, MN 55144-1000 Haven 1005, Canadastraat 11 London, Ontario 158-8583 Japan 800 810 8513 B-2070 Zwijndrecht N6A 4T1 813 3709 8250 800 810 8514 (Fax) 32 3 250 7874 800 364 3577 Important Notice to Purchaser: The information in this publication is based on tests that we believe are reliable. Your results may vary due to differences in test types and conditions. You must evaluate and determine whether the product is suitable for your intended application. Since conditions of product use are outside of our control and vary widely, the following is made in lieu of all express or implied warranties (including the warranties of merchantability or fitness for a particular purpose): Except where prohibited by law, 3M’s only obligation and your only remedy, is replacement or, at 3M's option, refund of the original purchase price of product that is shown to have been defective when you received it. In no case will 3M be liable for any direct, indirect, special, incidental, or consequential damages (including, without limitation, lost profits, goodwill, and business opportunity) based on breach of warranty, condition or contract, negligence, strict tort, or any other legal or equitable theory. 3 3M Specialty Materials 3M Center, Building 223-6S-04 St. Paul, MN 55144-1000 4141 (HB) www.3m.com/specialtymaterials Issued: 01/02 ©2002 3M 98-0212-2565-5 PRODUCT OVERVIEW

Using water alone as a fire suppressant in areas where electronics operate and SAPPHIRE® Fire high-value assets are stored could be as devastating as fire itself. Protect these Suppression Systems assets with an ANSUL® SAPPHIRE clean-agent system, custom-engineered to quickly suppress fires without causing harm to equipment, people or the environment.

Choose a Revolutionary Fire Suppression Agent The SAPPHIRE system utilizes the 3MTM NovecTM 1230 fire protection fluid – a Multiple levels of protection clear, colorless and low odor clean agent that instantly vaporizes upon discharge, absorbing heat and providing total flooding of protected spaces. n Total flooding of hazard areas The system is especially suited for suppressing fires in occupied spaces, in areas n No damage to valuable assets where an electrically non-conductive medium is required, where electronic systems n Wide range of applications cannot be shut down in an emergency and where cleanup of other agents poses a problem. n Effective on Class A, B and C fires People and Environment Friendly Novec 1230 provides a wide safety margin because it is used at concentrations of People and only 4 to 6% by volume which are well below the 10% concentration maximum for environment friendly safe exposure. In accordance with NFPA 2001, it is safe for occupied spaces. n Low odor clean agent The agent has zero ozone depletion potential, an atmospheric lifetime of just five n Safe for occupied spaces days and a global warming potential of 1.0, making it the most environment-friendly at design concentration chemical clean agent. n Zero ozone layer depletion State-of-the-Art Detection and Control Even before a fire reaches the flame stage, SAPPHIRE systems can detect and suppress it. This state-of-the-art detection and control system combines exclusive AUTOPULSE microprocessor control panels with highly sensitive smoke, heat and flame detectors.

When fire is detected, AUTOPULSE control panels will sound alarms, close doors, shut down equipment and release the fire suppression system. The system provides automatic detection, day and night, in conjunction with manual pull stations. APPLICATIONS FOR The Ultimate Fire Suppression Solution SAPPHIRE SYSTEMS The ANSUL brand promises a full range of quality fire protection solutions — from Aviation facilities automatic detection and suppression systems to a complete line of wheeled and hand portable fire extinguishers and more. Plus, our extensive network of Authorized Commercial/naval vessels ANSUL Distributors provides factory-trained professionals to serve our customers Computer and electronic virtually anywhere in the world. control rooms A Passion for Protection Critical military systems Dedicated customer support. Extensive product portfolio. Engineering excellence. Trusted, proven brands. Johnson Controls offers all of these attributes, plus a passion Data processing centers for protection. It’s what drives us to create solutions to help safeguard what matters Medical facilities most – your valued people, property and business. Museums Offshore platforms Power generation plants Tape storage and vaults Telecommunication sites

Johnson Controls n One Stanton Street, Marinette, WI 54143-2542, USA n Tel: +1 715 735 7411 www.ansul.com n © 2017 Johnson Controls. All rights reserved. n Form No. F-2013129-01 Safety Data Sheet: Simple Green® Industrial Cleaner & Degreaser Version No. 13275-18B Date of Preparation: 18-October-2018 Supersedes: 01-August-2018 Meets requirements of HSNO CoP 8-1 09-06, amended 2017

Section 1: PRODUCT & COMPANY IDENTIFICATION

Product Name: Simple Green® Industrial Cleaner & Degreaser Additional Names:

Manufacturer’s Part Number: Please refer to section 16

Supplier: CIPL PTY Ltd. Telephone: + 64 21 950 283 8b Rarere Road Email: [email protected] Takapuna, Auckland, New Zealand 0622 Website: www.simplegreennz.com Emergency Phone: 0800 764 766

Recommended Uses: Heavy-Duty Cleaner & Degreaser for all rinsable water safe surfaces.

Section 2: HAZARDS IDENTIFICATION

This product is not classified as Hazardous according to the criteria of Hazardous Substance (Minimum Degrees of Hazard / Classification/Identification) Regulations 2001 and the Globally Harmonized System of Classification and Labelling of Chemicals (GHS). HSNO Classification: Does not classify as hazardous GHS Classification: Does not classify as hazardous

Signal Word: Does not classify as hazardous, no signal word required Pictogram: Does not classify as hazardous, no pictograms required. Hazard Statement : Does not classify as hazardous, no hazard statements required Precautionary Statements: Does not classify as hazardous, no precautionary statements required.

Section 3: COMPOSITION/INFORMATION ON INGREDIENTS

Ingredient CAS Number Percent Range Water 7732-18-5 ≥ 85% Ethoxylated Alcohol 68439-46-3 ≤ 5% Sodium Citrate 68-04-2 ≤ 5% Tetrasodium N,N-bis(carboxymethyl)-L-glutamate 51981-21-6 ≤ 1% Sodium Carbonate 497-19-8 ≤ 1% Citric Acid 77-92-9 ≤ 1% Fragrance Proprietary Mixture ≤ 1% Colourant Proprietary Mixture ≤ 1% Isothiazolinone Preservative 55965-84-9 < 0.1%

Section 4: FIRST AID MEASURES

If Inhaled: If adverse effect occurs, move to fresh air. If on skin: If adverse effect occurs, rinse skin with water. If in eyes: If adverse effect occurs, rinse the eye with large quantities of cool water; continue 10-15 minutes or until the material has been removed; be sure to remove contact lenses, if present, and to lift upper and lower lids during rinsing. Get medical attention if irritation persists. If ingested: Drink plenty of water to dilute. Mild stomach or intestinal upset may occur due to detersive properties. For advice, contact a Poisons Information Centre on 0800 734 607 or a doctor. Workplace First Aid Facilities: Eye Wash Station or treatment recommended. Advice to Doctor: Treat symptomatically.

Page 1 of 5

Safety Data Sheet: Simple Green® Industrial Cleaner & Degreaser Version No. 13275-18B Date of Preparation: 18-October-2018 Supersedes: 01-August-2018 Meets requirements of HSNO CoP 8-1 09-06, amended 2017

Section 5: FIRE FIGHTING MEASURES

Suitable Extinguishing Media: Use dry chemical, CO2, water spray or “alcohol” foam. Avoid high volume jet water. Hazards from combustion products: None known. Specific hazards arising from chemical: In event of fire created carbon oxides may be formed. Precautions for fire-fighters and special protective clothing: Firefighters should wear self-contained breathing apparatus and full fire-fighting turn-out gear.

Section 6: ACCIDENTAL RELEASE MEASURES

Personal Precautions: Use Personal Protection Recommended in Section 8

Environmental Precautions: Prevent runoff from entering drains, sewers or waterways.

Method for Containment of large and small releases: Dike or soak up with inert absorbent material.

Method for Clean Up of large and small releases: Dilute with water and rinse into sanitary sewer system or dispose into suitable container.

Hazardous Substance (Emergency Management) Regulations 2001 requirements: none.

Section 7: HANDLING AND STORAGE

Precautions for safe handling: Before use carefully read the product label. Use of safe work practices are recommended to avoid eyes or skin contact and inhalation. Observe good personal hygiene, including washing hands before eating. Prohibit eating, drinking and smoking in contaminated area (eg. If container is damaged). Ensure adequate ventilation. Keep out of reach of children. Keep away from heat, sparks, open flame and direct sunlight. Do not pierce any part of the container.

Conditions for safe storage: Store in cool, dry, well-ventilated area, removed from oxidizing agents, acids and foodstuffs. Ensure containers are adequately labeled and protected from physical damage when not in use. Do not store at temperatures above 109oF (42.7oC). If separation occurs, mix the product for reconstitution.

Section 8: EXPOSURE CONTROLS / PERSONAL PROTECTION

Workplace Exposure Standards: No components listed with Work Safe New Zealand WES / TWA / STEL. Engineering Controls: Not applicable

Individual Protection Measures / Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) Eye Contact: Use any type of protective glasses or eyewear if splashing or spray-back is likely. Respiratory: Use in well ventilated areas with adequate airflow. Skin Contact: Prolonged exposure or dermal sensitive individuals should use any type of protective gloves such as nitrile. General Hygiene Considerations: Wash thoroughly after handling and before eating or drinking.

Section 9: PHYSICAL AND CHEMICAL PROPERTIES

Appearance: Green liquid Odour: Added sassafras odour Physical State: Liquid Odour Threshold: Not determined Boiling Point ASTM D-1120: 101oC (213.8oF) Flash Point ASTM D-93: non-flammable Freezing Point ASTM D-1177: 0 - 3.33oC (32 - 38oF) Flammability: Non flammable Specific Gravity ASTM D-891: 1.01 – 1.03 Autoignition Temperature: Non flammable Evaporation Rate ASTM D-1901: ½ Butyl Acetate @ 25oC Decomposition Temperature: 109oF Page 2 of 5

Section 9: PHYSICAL AND CHEMICAL PROPERTIES - continued

Vapor Pressure ASTM D-323: 0.60 PSI @77oF, 2.05 PSI @100oF Density ASTM D-4017: 8.42 – 8.59 lb/gal Vapor Density: Not determined Water Solubility: 100% pH ASTM D-1293: 8.5 – 10.0 Partial Coefficient: not determined VOCs: SCAQMD 304-91 / EPA 24: 0 g/L 0 lb/gal 0 % CARB Method 310**: 2.5 g/L 0.021 lb/gal 0.25% **Water & fragrance exemption in calculation SCAQMD Method 313: Not tested Nutrient Content: Phosphorous 0.00% Information on flammable materials: Volume of ingredients in product prevent it from becoming flammable

Section 10: STABILITY AND REACTIVITY

Chemical Stability: Stable under normal conditions 21oC (70oF) and 14.7 psig (760 mmHg) Reactivity: Non-reactive Conditions to avoid: Excessive heat or cold. Incompatible materials: Do not mix with oxidizers, acids, bathroom cleaners or disinfecting agents. Hazardous decomposition products: Normal products of combustion – CO, CO2. Possibility of hazardous reactions: None known

Section 11: TOXICOLOGICAL INFORMATION

Acute Acute Toxicity: Oral LD50 (rat) > 5 g/kg body weight Dermal LD50 (rabbit) > 5 g/kg body weight Calculated via OECD Harmonized Integrated Classification System for Human Health & Environmental Hazards of Chemical Substances and Mixtures

Chronic There have been no reports of health effects arising from long term exposure to the ingredients found within this product.

– Possible Routes of exposure Non-irritant per Dermal Irritection® assay modeling. No animal testing performed. Skin corrosion/irritation: Eye damage/irritation: Minimal irritant per Ocular Irritection® assay modeling. No animal testing performed Germ Cell Mutagenicity: No ingredients trigger or classify under this category. Carcinogenicity: No ingredients trigger or classify under this category. Reproductive toxicity: No ingredients trigger or classify under this category. STOT-Single Exposure: No ingredients trigger or classify under this category. STOT-repeated exposure: No ingredients trigger or classify under this category. Aspiration hazard: No ingredients trigger or classify under this category.

Likely routes of exposure: Inhalation – Overexposure may cause headache. Skin contact – not expected to cause irritation. Eye contact – may cause minimal eye irritation. Ingestion – May cause upset stomach.

Symptoms related to the physical, chemical and toxicological characteristics: no symptoms expected under typical use conditions. Delayed and immediate effects and or chronic effects from short term exposure: no symptoms expected under typical use conditions. Delayed and immediate effects and or chronic effects from long term exposure: headache, dry skin, or skin irritation may occur. Interactive effects: Not known.

Page 3 of 5

Section 12: ECOLOGICAL INFORMATION

Acute Ecotoxicity: Does not classify under the criteria of HSNO or GHS. Chronic Ecotoxicty: Does not classify under the criteria of HSNO or GHS.

Environmental Effect Levels: None

Aquatic Toxicity: Low, based on toxicology profile

Terrestrial Toxicity: Low, based on toxicology profile

Persistence and degradability: Similar formulas have achieved 100% biodegradation under OECD 301D and OECD 302B testing Mobility: No data Bioaccumulation: No data

Section 13: DISPOSAL CONSIDERATIONS

Used Product: Used product may contain chemicals that will classify this waste as hazardous. Be sure to assess used product contaminants. Deposit used product in a landfill (if solidified), incinerator, or a sewage facility for treatment and disposal; or, discharge product into the environment so that, after reasonable mixing, the concentration of the substance in an environmental medium does not exceed any tolerable exposure limits.

Contaminated objects : Rinseable-recyclable objects can be rinsed and offered for recycling or disposed of in landfills. Non- rinseable objects should be disposed of to landfills.

Empty Containers: Triple-rinse with water and offer for recycling if available in your area.

Never dispose of used degreasing rinsates into lakes, streams, and open bodies of water or storm drains.

Section 14: TRANSPORT INFORMATION

NZTA: Not classified as dangerous good according to the Transport of Dangerous Goods on Land (NZS5433). IMO / IDMG: Not classified as Dangerous ICAO/ IATA: Not classified as Dangerous ADR/RID: Not classified as Dangerous

U.N. Number None Allocated Proper Shipping Name: Cleaning Compound, Liquid NOI DG Class None Allocated Marine Pollutant: No Subsidiary Risks None Allocated HAZCHEM Code: None Packing Group None Allocated Special Precautions for Users: None.

Page 4 of 5

Section 15: REGULATORY INFORMATION

Group Standard Classification Cleaning Products (Subsidiary Hazard) Group Standard 2006, as amended 2017 HSNO Approval NO.: HSR002530 Ingredient HSNO Approval Number Water Ethoxylated Alcohol HSNO approval HSR003338 Sodium Citrate May be used as a single component chemical under an appropriate group standard Tetrasodium N,N-bis(carboxymethyl)-L-glutamate May be used as a single component chemical under an appropriate group standard Sodium Carbonate HSNO Approval: HSR003265 Citric Acid HSNO Approval: HSR003138

In accordance with CLEANING PRODUCTS (SUBSIDIARY HAZARD) GROUP STANDARD 2006, as amended 2010, the product label need not meet the labeling requirements of this group standard if it complies with the relevant current labeling requirements of Australia, USA or EU when it is imported.

NZIoC: All chemicals registered on New Zealand Inventory of Chemicals

Section 16: OTHER INFORMATION

Manufacturer’s Part Numbers SG13025 - 750 millilitre SG13001 - 1 litre SG13002IND - 2.5 litre SG13003IND - 4 litre SG13004 - 20 litre SG13034 - 208 litre SG13275 - 1041 litre

Prepared / Revised By: CIPL Pty Ltd Reason for Revision: update to company contact information

DISCLAIMER: The information provided with this SDS is furnished in good faith and without warranty of any kind. Personnel handling this material must make independent determinations of the suitability and completeness of information from all sources to assure proper use and disposal of this material and the safety and health of employees and customers. Sunshine Makers, Inc. assumes no additional liability or responsibility resulting from the use of, or reliance on this information.

Page 5 of 5

New Zealand Diving and Salvage Ltd V.6.0 Project: Dong Won 701 Proposed Disposal Brief Date: 8 December 2019

11 APPENDIX B – NZDS BIOFOULING SURVEY REPORT DATED 12 SEPTEMBER 2019

NEW ZEALAND DIVING AND SALVAGE LTD Page 26 of 29 Commercial in Confidence

DONG WON 701 BIOFOULING SURVEY

REPORT NUMBER: DWBS01 120919

DW NEW ZEALAND LTD

12 SEPTEMBER 2019

TIMARU, NEW ZEALAND

Approved Released

………………...... ………………......

Sol Fergus Emma White

Consultant Business Manager

1. INTRODUCTION

A New Zealand Diving and Salvage Ltd (NZDS) dive team led by Dive Supervisor Mr. C. Cowan attended FV Dong Won 701 on the 12th day of September 2019 alongside at PrimePort, Timaru. A NIWA representative Mr. C. Woods was in attendance throughout the survey to provide direction for sampling process.

The survey was undertaken using a diver handheld CCTV system and Go-Pro Hero camera for photographs. Due to turbidity visibility was considered poor at approximately 100-500mm throughout the survey. At instruction from Mr. Woods all photos were taken at a set measurement of 300mm from the target.

A total of twenty-five samples were taken off the vessel for identification processing.

2. SCOPE OF WORK

In-Water Survey and Sampling – NZDS • Perform a biofouling survey of the submerged hull and niche areas • Collect samples as per the direction of the attending marine biologist • Survey does not include penetration into sea chest cavities or opening of grates • Provide a report inclusive of video and photographic references

Scientific Marine Services – NIWA • Provision of a marine biologist to attend the survey operations and coordinate the survey and sampling plan • Sort collected samples onsite and where necessary prepare for formal identification process • Where required and agreed perform formal identification of collected samples through the Marine Invasive Taxonomic Service (MITS) • Provision of statement regarding the biofouling’s survivability at the dump site and / or their potential ability to influence the ecosystem

Vessel Steering Gear – NZDS • Confirm position of the rudder

3. RESULTS

a. General Fouling The observed general fouling was inclusive but not limited to sea tulips, grasses, algae, bivalves, bryozoans, calcareous material and arthropods.

NEW ZEALAND DIVING AND SALVAGE LTD Page 2 of 6 DWBS01 120919

b. Rudder Two samples were taken on the rudder which was observed to be 60% covered with heavy fouling.

The rudder position was at an approximate 15 degrees to starboard and had two attachment padeyes located in the centre which sat approximately 700mm on both port and starboard.

c. Propeller/Boss Cone/Shaft The vessel was fitted with a three (3) bladed propeller which had heavy fouling covering 100% of the entire assembly. Two (2) samples were collected.

d. Bilge Keels The vessel was fitted with one (1) section of bilge keel on each side with a collection taken from both. The fouling was observed to be heavier on the edges and welds with about 40% coverage.

e. Intakes The vessel had sets of three (3) grills located aft on port and starboard. The congestion of the grills was approximately 80% on the starboard and 95% on the port. Samples were taken from each.

f. Hull Several collections were taken from around the hull including the waterline, transom, bow, flat bottom and keel. It was observed to have approximately 30% growth over it with it being worse from the waterline down to the bilge keel, 10m aft of the bow and on the transom.

Sporadic patches of heavier growth were observed scattered across the flat bottom which were heavy on the dry dock support strips.

g. Biofouling Identifications The collected samples were processed and sorted on the surface by Mr. Woods. Samples of interest and those that required further processing were sent to the Marine Invasive Taxonomic Service in Wellington. NIWA will produce a separate report regarding the results of these findings.

4. PHOTOGRAPHS AND VIDEO FOOTAGE

The following are photographic excerpts from the accompanying video footage. A USB accompanies this report and contains the video footage.

NEW ZEALAND DIVING AND SALVAGE LTD Page 3 of 6 DWBS01 120919

Image 1 Port Waterline (WL) 4m from Bow Image 2 Port WL 10m from Bow

Image 3 Keel 25m from Bow Image 4 Amidships Flat Bottom

Image 5 Amidships Image 6 Starboard Bilge Keel Amidships

NEW ZEALAND DIVING AND SALVAGE LTD Page 4 of 6 DWBS01 120919

Image 7 Propeller Blade Image 8 Propeller Shaft

Image 9 Starboard WL 14m from Bow Image 10 Draft Mark Starboard

Image 11 Starboard Anode WL Bow Image 12 Transom WL

NEW ZEALAND DIVING AND SALVAGE LTD Page 5 of 6 DWBS01 120919

Image 13 Starboard Seachest Image 14 Rudder and Pintle

NEW ZEALAND DIVING AND SALVAGE LIMITED

134 GRACEFIELD ROAD, SEAVIEW, LOWER HUTT PO BOX 30 392, LOWER HUT, 5040, NEW ZEALAND P: +64 4 568 2505 | E: [email protected] | W: www.nzds.co.nz

NEW ZEALAND DIVING AND SALVAGE LTD Page 6 of 6 DWBS01 120919 New Zealand Diving and Salvage Ltd V.6.0 Project: Dong Won 701 Proposed Disposal Brief Date: 8 December 2019

12 APPENDIX C – NIWA LETTER DATED 30 SEPTEMBER 2019

NEW ZEALAND DIVING AND SALVAGE LTD Page 27 of 29 Commercial in Confidence

30 September 2019

Serena Cox NIWA 301 Evans Bay Parade Greta Point Wellington

Dear Sol Fergus, NZDS

On 12th September 2019, NIWA undertook a wharf-side vessel inspection of the Dong Won 701, whilst berthed in the Port of Timaru. It is our understanding this vessel underwent a full hull inspection in the Port of Timaru, during January 2018 in preparation for heading to the Subantarctic islands, and was cleared by the Department of Conservation (DOC) at that time as having a clean hull, free of biofouling (as required under the coastal management plan). The vessel then undertook trips within domestic waters between January and April 2018. In April 2018, the vessel then caught fire in the Port of Timaru and has remained in that port until now.

During the wharf-side vessel inspection, divers collected biofouling samples from the general hull and niche areas with the assistance of NIWA Biosecurity scientists viewing the diver’s live video feed. The majority of the material collected was processed and identified on-site by the NIWA Biosecurity scientists. A total of 25 samples that were considered to be unfamiliar to the on-site scientists or suspected of being non- indigenous species worthy of formal identification were appropriately preserved and submitted to the Marine Invasives Taxonomic Service for identification.

Of the samples identified by MITS, four non-indigenous species have not previously been recorded in the Port of Timaru previously (see Table of identifications). However, these species are all established in New Zealand, in other ports (i.e., not new-to-NZ species). These four species are a colonial ascidian Diplosoma listeranium, a hydroid Ectopleura crocea, an amphipod Monocorophium sextonae and a colonial ascidian Botrylloides sp.

There has not been a lot of sampling undertaken along the east coast of the South Island for marine non- indigenous species and commensurately, pertinent records of presence/absence are lacking. The last baseline survey of marine biota (indigenous and non-indigenous) undertaken in the Port of Timaru was in 2002 and then repeated in 2004; no further sampling of this scale or on-going surveillance for non- indigenous species has been undertaken in this port since. Therefore, it is not possible to know whether these three confirmed non-indigenous species have been present in the Port of Timaru for some time, but simply not recorded. D. listeranium and E. crocea have been recorded from Lyttelton and Dunedin harbours previously and M. sextonae has been recorded from Lyttleton previously. It is possible, given the proximate confirmed locations, that these species are already established in the Port of Timaru. The additional colonial ascidian Botrylloides sp. cannot currently be identified to species level (based on morphology alone) as it will require molecular analysis. Based on initial feedback from the ascidian taxonomist, it may be the non-indigenous B. giganteum, which if actually established in Timaru, will represent a large range extension for this species. However, this species is known from several other localities in New Zealand.

301 Evans Bay Parade, Hataitai, Wellington 6021 | Phone +64 4 386 0300 Private Bag 14901, Kilbirnie, Wellington 6241

Of the other non-indigenous marine biota identified on-site during the inspection, all species have been previously recorded in the Port of Timaru previously and none are new-to-NZ.

We can confirm that none of the species identified from samples removed from the Dong Won are currently listed on the Ministry for Primary Industries Notifiable Organisms Order 2016 or Unwanted Organisms Register.

It is highly unlikely that any of the species recorded from this vessel will survive at 600m, where a proposed dump site is located. However, movement of this vessel to the dump site may result in dislodgement of biofouling during transit. As mentioned above, while it is possible these non-indigenous species previously undetected in the Port of Timaru on the Dong Won 701 already exist as biofouling organisms within the port, we cannot confirm this (without conducting an appropriate survey within the port) and would recommend the lower risk option of towing the vessel directly to deeper water, before the southerly transit to the offshore dump site. It is not known if any of these non-indigenous species are established in the Port of Ōamaru. If B. giganteum is indeed confirmed, this does have the potential to spread to other eastern coastal sites if dislodged during a more coastal transit path.

Yours sincerely

Serena Cox Marine Biologist

New Zealand Diving and Salvage Ltd V.6.0 Project: Dong Won 701 Proposed Disposal Brief Date: 8 December 2019

13 APPENDIX D – PREPARATION AND CLEANING CHECKLIST

NEW ZEALAND DIVING AND SALVAGE LTD Page 28 of 29 Commercial in Confidence New Zealand Diving and Salvage Ltd V.6.0 Project: Dong Won 701 Proposed Disposal Brief Date: 8 December 2019

14 APPENDIX E – HAZARDOUS MATERIALS AND WASTE

NEW ZEALAND DIVING AND SALVAGE LTD Page 29 of 29 Commercial in Confidence

PROJECT FV Dong Won 701 Hazardous Material and Waste

PHONE: 64 4 568 2505

FAX: 64 4 568 2123

www.nzds.co.nz NEW ZEALAND DIVING AND SALVAGE LTD 134 GRACEFIELD ROAD, PO BOX 30-392, LOWER HUTT 5040 EMAIL: [email protected] PHONE: 64 4 568 2505 www.nzds.co.nz

New Zealand Diving and Salvage Ltd Ver.2.0 Project: Dong Won 701 Waste and IHM Date: 17 September 2019

CONTENTS 1. Introduction ...... 3 2. Scope ...... 3 3. Disclaimer ...... 3 4. Vessel Status ...... 4 5. Convention and Protocol Considerations ...... 4 6. Methodology ...... 5 7. Observations and Findings ...... 8 8. Photographs ...... 15 9. Appendices ...... 19

NEW ZEALAND DIVING AND SALVAGE LTD 2 Commercial in Confidence New Zealand Diving and Salvage Ltd Ver.2.0 Project: Dong Won 701 Waste and IHM Date: 17 September 2019

1. INTRODUCTION

1.1. The casualty FV Dong Won 701 is a 1,304 dwt, 81m steel stern trawler constructed in 1971. It is currently lying alongside in the port of Timaru. It is in a derelict condition after suffering a major fire in the forward section of the ship.

1.2. New Zealand Diving and Salvage Limited (NZDS) have been engaged by the owners DW New Zealand Limited to undertake and report on the hazardous material and waste for the purpose of identifying materials that have the following properties; restricted for import and export, potentially hazardous to health and the environment through a recycling process and potentially hazardous to the marine environment resulting from disposal at sea.

2. SCOPE

2.1. Prepare an inventory of hazardous and categorized waste materials for the purpose of supporting known options for the recycling and disposal of the vessel.

2.2. Identify hazardous materials as provided for in the guideline document; Marine Environment Protection Committee (MEPC) 68/21 Annex 17 Resolution MEPC.269(68) 2015 Guidelines for the Development of the Inventory of Hazardous Materials.

2.3. In addition to 2.2, identify materials that are categorised as waste in accordance with the document; Imports and Exports (Restrictions) Prohibition Order (No 2) 2004 (SR2004/202) • Schedule 1 Stockholm chemicals • Schedule 2 Rotterdam chemicals • Schedule 3 Matters relating to hazardous waste and waste. - Part 1 Categories of waste - Part 2 Hazardous constituents - Part 3 Hazardous characteristics

3. DISCLAIMER

3.1. Our report is prepared solely for DW New Zealand Limited with the purpose of assisting in the identification of hazardous materials and all waste materials with the potential to cause harm to the environment which may remain on or as part of the casualty vessel DW 701. The information within this document is intended to give reasonable detail regarding the known and identifiable materials noted a present from information made available from the owners, direct communications with the clients engineer, third party reports produced post fire, physical ability to access spaces safely during the site visit, and items which were easily identifiable onboard.

NEW ZEALAND DIVING AND SALVAGE LTD 3 Commercial in Confidence New Zealand Diving and Salvage Ltd Ver.2.0 Project: Dong Won 701 Waste and IHM Date: 17 September 2019

4. VESSEL STATUS

4.1. As a result of an onboard fire in April 2018, the vessel suffered significant fire damage which gutted the entire contents and integrity of compartments from frame 55 forward. The affected areas were inclusive of the forward storage spaces, bridge, factory, hydraulic winch control room, accommodation on the upper, main and lower decks.

4.2. The intensity of the fire was significant enough to buckle the steel decks on the forward section of the vessel, melt aluminium shelving, doors and loose materials on deck inclusive of rope and nets.

4.3. Smoke damage is evident throughout the aft balance of compartment spaces. The engine, steering room compartments remain effectively free of fire damages and as such the engines, generators, machinery spares, service tanks and other equipment remain intact.

4.4. Post fire the vessel has had a quantity of bulk liquids removed from the various tanks, deck items, tools and spares. Various methods have been undertaken to weather proof the openings and the fire damaged superstructure.

4.5. The ammonia refrigeration gases have been purged and remain open. This is inclusive of the three reservoirs in the engine room. All gas cylinders except for the engine room fire suppression system have been removed.

4.6. As expected, there is a significant amount of burnt and partially burnt material throughout the affected area. The exact origins of this material are assumed.

5. CONVENTION AND PROTOCOL CONSIDERATIONS

5.1. The 2015 Guidelines for the Development of the Inventory of Hazardous Materials provide ship-specific information on the hazardous materials present onboard, with the intent of protecting health and safety interests and preventing environmental harm at ship recycling facilities.

5.2. Appendix 1 Table C Potentially Hazardous Items of the 2015 Guidelines refer to incinerator ash as a separate classification as it may include hazardous substances or heavy metals. There is no further commentary to the classification of ash resulting from an un/controlled incineration.

5.3. MEPC 71/17 Annex 21 Resolution MEPC.295(71) 2017 Guidelines for the implementation of MARPOL Annex V. Clause 2.11.1 “Ash and clinkers from shipboard incinerators should be considered as operational waste and, therefore as garbage that is not eligible for discharge into the sea”.

5.4. 2015 guidelines: clause 4.5.3 “If any liquids and gases listed in table C of appendix 1 are integral in machinery and equipment on board a ship their approximate quantity and location should be listed in part III of the inventory. However, small amounts of lubricating oil, anti-

NEW ZEALAND DIVING AND SALVAGE LTD 4 Commercial in Confidence New Zealand Diving and Salvage Ltd Ver.2.0 Project: Dong Won 701 Waste and IHM Date: 17 September 2019

seize compounds and grease which are applied to or injected into machinery and equipment to maintain normal performance do not fall into this provision”.

5.5. ANNEX 17 RESOLUTION MEPC.269(68) (adopted on 15 May 2015) 2015 GUIDELINES FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE INVENTORY OF HAZARDOUS MATERIALS Organotin compounds include tributyl tins (TBT), triphenyl tins (TPT) and tributyl tin oxide (TBTO). Organotin compounds have been used as anti-fouling paint on ships' bottoms and the International Convention on the Control of Harmful Anti-Fouling Systems on Ships (AFS Convention) stipulates that all ships shall not apply or re-apply organotin compounds after 1 January 2003, and that, after 1 January 2008, all ships shall either not bear such compounds on their hulls or shall bear a coating that forms a barrier preventing such compounds from leaching into the sea. The above-mentioned dates may have been extended by permission of the Administration bearing in mind that the AFS Convention entered into force on 17 September 2008.

5.6. Hazardous Waste definition in brief – Imports and Exports (Restrictions) Prohibition Order (No 2) 2004 (SR2004/202). Inclusive of those covered in the 2015 Guidelines, hazardous waste means any waste that either falls into Part 1 or 2 of Schedule 3. It also holds inclusions to the exportation and importation from an OECD member country.

5.7. Regarding disposal of waste at sea; Annex 7 Revised Specific Guidelines for the Assessment of Vessels – LC38/16. Appendix Pollution Prevention Plan: clauses 4 and 5 indicate multiple potential sources of pollution from a marine point of view that should be addressed when considering management options. These are inclusive but not limited to; • sacrificial anodes • generators • fire-extinguishing/fighting • oil sumps equipment • compressors • engines • floatable material

6. METHODOLOGY

6.1. The methodology consisted of the following five steps: 1. Collection of available information regarding the vessel and its contents. 2. Review of information and identification of materials of interest. This was inclusive of those that did not necessarily trigger a hazardous material but are classed as waste that may have a negative effect potential on the marine environment. 3. Visual plan and site visit. 4. Sampling of materials where applicable. 5. Observations and findings.

6.2. Step 1. Requested Information

MPEC 68/21 Annex 17 4.2.5. “The shipowner should identify, research, request and procure all reasonably available documentation regarding the ship. Information that will be useful includes maintenance conversion and repair documents; certificates, manuals, ship’s plans, drawings and technical specifications; product information data sheets (such as Material Declarations); and hazardous material inventories or recycling information from sister ships. Potential sources of information could include previous shipowners, the ship builder, historical societies, classification society records and ship recycling facilities with experience working with similar ships”.

NEW ZEALAND DIVING AND SALVAGE LTD 5 Commercial in Confidence New Zealand Diving and Salvage Ltd Ver.2.0 Project: Dong Won 701 Waste and IHM Date: 17 September 2019

• Fire investigation report • Copper pipe systems Lighting (including list of specific systems compartments affected by • Refrigeration gases and stores the fire) • Black / grey water tanks • Tank schedules, contents and • Fire suppression systems if capacities applicable and other than • Material declarations water (material safety data sheets) – • Information regarding this includes stores materials removed post fire • Hazardous material registers (fuels, oils, lubes, gases, • General locality of stored liquids, chemicals etc) materials (fuels, oils, lubes, • Hull and superstructure gases, liquids, chemicals etc) coatings data • Vessel plans and drawings • Ballast materials other than including pipe works for fuels, water (E.g. Lead) oils and lubes • Exhaust system last clean • Anode stores

6.3. Step 1: Supplied Information

Description Drawing(s) Report / Email Photograph(s) Certificate K2 Environmental Ltd – Asbestos 1 Assessment 15 December 2015 ASBEX NZ Ltd – 23 April 2018 1 DW 701 cooling fresh water and 1 bilge system DW 701 GIA 1 DW 701 Tank Plan 1 DW 701 Mid-Section 1 DW 701 Ammonia 1 Fish Hold Insulation Construction 5 Marine Focus – Fuel Removal 1 1 Summary 18 / 23 Sep 2018 Marine Focus – De-bunkering 1 update 18 Sep 2018 ABLE SHIPS – DF701 Ballasting 23 1 Sep 2018 International – Interspec Technical 1 Specification v2 2016 Anti-fouling Certificate – November 1 2016 DW701 110V Lighting System 14 (Japanese) MSDS – Fuel, oils, lubricants and 84 stores MSDS – Anti-fouling coatings 23 2016 Coating Certificate, Daily Communications 24 -26 3 November & Technical Specification

NEW ZEALAND DIVING AND SALVAGE LTD 6 Commercial in Confidence New Zealand Diving and Salvage Ltd Ver.2.0 Project: Dong Won 701 Waste and IHM Date: 17 September 2019

2014 Coating Certificate, Daily Inspection Report 25 – 27 4 November, Technical Specification & BV Cert 2012 LR Register Cert 1 2010 Coastal Coating Report 1 2008 Coastal Coating Report 1 Vessel Hazard Register 1 Dong Won – Email response to 1 queries – 7 Jan 2019

6.4. Step 2: Review of information and identification of materials.

Information including the active ingredients, CAS no1. were reviewed and tabled for comparison of the following documents: MEPC 68/21 2015 Guidelines Appendix, Imports and Exports Restrictions Prohibition Order (No 2) 2004 Schedule 1 Stockholm Chemicals, Schedule 2 Rotterdam Chemicals and Schedule 3 Parts 1,2 and 3. Annex 7 Revised Specific Guidelines for the Assessment of Vessels – LC38/16.

6.5. Step 3: Visual plan and site visit.

The plan was prepared with the following considerations; general safety, identification of no- go areas, confined spaces, structural integrity of compartments post fire, expectations of what materials were still on board, provision of a client engineer familiar with the vessel.

6.6. Step 3: For reference and reporting purposes, locations of materials were recorded in the following manner; • Port, Starboard, Aft, Forward, Bow • Bridge, Upper deck / Officers’ accommodation, Main/Trawl Deck and Accommodation, Lower Deck and Factory, Hold and Engine Room. • Frame Numbers - these refer to the frame or ribs of the vessel and begin with No. 1 at the most aft frame, increasing sequentially while moving towards the bow of the vessel.

6.7. Step 3: The visit was conducted on the 27 and 28th January 2019, with the team guided by the client engineer. Photographs were taken as a visual recording of points of interest.

6.8. Step 3: Day 1 (27th January 2019) was confined to the external deck areas only beginning Aft and moving forward. Except for the hydraulic winch control room, no other entry or penetration into compartments was undertaken. Areas of interest were the burnt and partially burnt materials, loose materials, exposed grease and gear lubricants on winches and wires.

6.9. Step 3: Day 2 (28th January 2019) covered all accessible internal areas except for the holding bunker/fresh water tanks, bridge and small compartments sealed for weather proofing and/or considered a confined space.

1 CAS Registry Number is a unique numerical identifier assigned by the Chemical Abstract Service.

NEW ZEALAND DIVING AND SALVAGE LTD 7 Commercial in Confidence New Zealand Diving and Salvage Ltd Ver.2.0 Project: Dong Won 701 Waste and IHM Date: 17 September 2019

6.10. Step 3: Day 2 items of interest included locality and confirmation of remaining chemical consumables, mapping of the various store compartments, and noting items which were likely to be stored at the time of the fire. Lighting components, fire suppression systems, exposed pipe work material and contents, refrigeration system for the main fish hold, flooring material and insulation around the fish hold and freezing facilities.

6.11. Step 5: Observations and findings are reported in three formats: 1. Observations of potential pollution sources affecting the marine environment; 2. Categorisation of waste as provided in the Imports and Exports 2004 Prohibition Order and; 3. Inventory of hazardous materials as indicated in the 2015 Guidelines.

6.12. Step 5: Ship plans and supporting photographs indicate the locality of the identified materials. Reference to quantities of materials are indicative and are based on the information provided or estimated.

7. OBSERVATIONS AND FINDINGS

Potential Sources of Pollution to the Marine Environment 7.1. The 2015 Guidelines and 2004 Prohibition Order require the identification of all hazardous materials that may have a potential negative effect on health and the environment in association with recycling facilities and the imports and export provisions of countries. With consideration of Annex 7 Revised Specific Guidelines for the Assessment of Vessels – LC38/16 Appendix Pollution Prevention Plan: clauses 4 and 5 the following items are a potential source pollution when not recycled and disposed of at sea.

7.2. Ash and clinkers: Ash and clinkers resulting from an onboard and controlled incinerator process are “…. operational waste and, therefore as garbage that is not eligible for discharge into the sea”. The remaining material resulting from the uncontrolled fire consists of burnt, partially burnt material and ash which is both melted into the structure and in loose forms spread throughout the affected compartments.

7.3. The fire damaged contents are varied and considered to include but not be limited to; upholstery, timber, bedding, wall / ceiling coverings, insulations, cooking utensils, kitchen consumables, food, household waste, engineering / machine spares, welding materials plastics, synthetic rope, clothing, rubber, grease, lubricants, fire extinguishers, hydraulic fluids, aluminium, paints, thinners, wiring, copper, glass, lighting systems, electrical appliances, electrical and navigational equipment.

7.4. Copper within the ship structure: Copper compounds are identified in the 2004 Prohibition Order Schedule 3 Part 2: Hazardous Constituents. The electrical systems on board are a network of copper cored cabling.

7.5. The client engineer advised that copper tubing was prominent throughout the accommodation compartments of the vessel as a water carrier.

NEW ZEALAND DIVING AND SALVAGE LTD 8 Commercial in Confidence New Zealand Diving and Salvage Ltd Ver.2.0 Project: Dong Won 701 Waste and IHM Date: 17 September 2019

7.6. Winches: Deck winches, wire ropes, gears, generators, engines, rollers, pully blocks and other equipment contain a range of grease, oils and lubricants to maintain them in good working order. Exposed grease is highly visible around most of the exposed gears and drum components on the winch assemblies.

7.7. There are seven winches located on the upper deck inclusive of the anchor winch. Four others are located on the main/trawl deck. The main products used for the winch components are XHP 222, EP2 and 375.

7.8. Winch wires are often impregnated with a grease and additional grease may be applied to maintain their condition. The wire lubricant utilised on this vessel is comparable to that of XHP222. There is approximately 2,500m of 30 diameter wire on each of the two main winches located on the main/trawl deck. The other winches hold varying lengths and diameters.

7.9. Insulation Foam: The blast freezers are constructed from laminated sandwich panels which have a basic composition of foam sandwiched between metal skins. The floor above the bottom fuel tanks in the fish hold comprises of refrigerant pipework and timber frames with the insulation foam set in between them and then covered with a plywood floor. It is understood that the foam is a polyurethane type that is standard for use in fishing vessel applications. The foam on the floor is an expanding spray type and under microscope would have a honeycomb structure.

7.10. The foam is well contained within the structure of the floor and fixed freezer plants and communications with Polymer Group Ltd confirmed that the foam would compress under pressure and become water saturated before it reached the planned resting depths of the dump site. They informed that producing a foam that could withstand water saturation and pressure beyond 200ft would require a specific and non-standard production.

Hazardous Materials/ Waste and Waste 7.11. Refrigerants: The ammonia system has been purged and remains open, inclusive of the three reservoirs in the engine room. A pungent ammonia odour is present in the accommodation area on the main deck, factory area around the blast freezers and in the holds, particularly No 2.

7.12. Sampling was not performed during the site visit as the balance of materials on board were immediately identifiable through the supporting documentation and/or input from the client engineer. The burnt material as commented in 7.3. is varied and whether the contents are hazardous or otherwise is unconfirmed. The range of possible materials that were burnt, located in various compartments and affected by firefighting efforts have created a considerable mix which transcends four decks.

7.13. Asbestos: A reported assessment conducted by a third party in 2015 confirmed the presence of Chrysotile Asbestos predominantly in the engine room with some lagging on the deck above. The engineer informed that since this report, asbestos has been removed and replaced with an alternative material whenever repairs have been performed. As this made it difficult to quantify any remaining asbestos, the original values provided in the third-party report have been utilised.

NEW ZEALAND DIVING AND SALVAGE LTD 9 Commercial in Confidence New Zealand Diving and Salvage Ltd Ver.2.0 Project: Dong Won 701 Waste and IHM Date: 17 September 2019

7.14. The 2015 third party report indicates the possible presence of asbestos within pipe gaskets including those that are listed as a non-asbestos type, the core of fire doors / walls and the Bakelite switches, fuses and alarm casings.

7.15. Post fire a third party analysed 24 fire residue swab samples on the 26 April 2018 with no asbestos detected. The swabs were taken from the focsle, accommodation rooms, galley and lower deck area.

7.16. Polychlorinated biphenyl (PCBs) Worldwide restrictions began in 2004 and in Japan domestic control began in 1973. The vessel was built in 1971 in Japan and therefore it is considered possible that PCB material was utilised during its construction and fit out. Possible sources of PCBs may include fluorescent lighting ballasts, wire insulations, capacitators and power transformers coolant.

7.17. The client engineer advised that the transformers are not liquid cooled and therefore no further investigation was performed.

7.18. The bulk of any fluorescent lighting systems were in the accommodation area of which was destroyed. LED systems are fitted to the main/trawl deck, factory and various store compartments. Occasional halogen lights exist in the deck and in the factory area. Filament bulbs were fitted along the external of the superstructure of which all have been affected by fire.

7.19. Consumables: Unused consumable materials contained within aerosol cans, drums and plastic containers are not listed. They are easily accessible and can be manually removed and discarded appropriately.

7.20. Coatings: The details of the coatings applied to the external hull plating for the period 2008 – 2016 are provided in a separate document “Coatings Summary”. The 2016 technical information indicates that the vessel had a TBT-Free Self-Polishing Copolymer Antifouling applied. Surface preparation included spot work to remove dirt, grease and oily residues.

7.21. Applications for the period 2008 - 2014 indicate that the submerged hull and outer topside plating were exposed to various abrasive surface preparation methods. These preparation methods suggest that any historical coatings applied before 2008 would likely have been removed.

7.22. The records show that all coatings applied from 2008 were free of organotin compounds.

7.23. The active planned service life of the 2016 antifouling coating was stated as 24 months from November 2016. The active copper and zinc components of these systems could be considered depleted and inactive.

Categorisation of Waste – 2004 Prohibition Order Schedules 1, 2 and 3

NEW ZEALAND DIVING AND SALVAGE LTD 10 Commercial in Confidence New Zealand Diving and Salvage Ltd Ver.2.0 Project: Dong Won 701 Waste and IHM Date: 17 September 2019

Materials contained in the ship’s structure and equipment

7.24. Coatings

Anti- Fouling - Hull No. Name of Active Ingredients CAS No. Approx. Remarks *(Imports and Exports Paint Qty (Restrictions) Prohibition Order No 2 2004. Schedules 1, 2 and 3 Parts 1, 2 and 3) Interspeed Copper(i)oxide; Zinc 112945-52-5, * Schedule 3; Part 1: (14). 6400 oxide; Xylene; Rosin; 100-41-4, 12122- Part 2: copper compounds, 1 Black_BQA Zineb; Ethyl Benzene; 67-7, 8050-09-7, 62 L Zinc compounds, Ethers. 649 Amorphous fumed 1330-20-7, 1314- Part 3: (3a). silica 13-2, 1317-39-1 Interspeed Copper(i)oxide; Zinc 112945-52-5, * Schedule 3; Part 1: (14). 6400 oxide; Xylene; Rosin; 100-41-4, 12122- Part 2: copper compounds, 2 Red_BQA6 Zineb; Ethyl Benzene; 67-7, 8050-09-7, 411 L Zinc compounds, Ethers. 44 Amorphous fumed 1330-20-7, 1314- Part 3: (3a). silica 13-2, 1317-39-1 Epoxy Resin; Phenol, 21645-51-2, Interplus * Schedule 3; Part 1: (14 methylstyrenated; 7631-86-9, 100- 1180 White (C)). Part 2: Acidic solutions 3 Ethyl Benzene; 41-4, 68512-30-1, 94 L Part or acids in solid form. Part 3: Amorphous Silica; 1330-20-7, A_EHB000 (3), (7). Aluminium hydroxide 25068-38-6 Solvent naphtha Intergard (petroleum); Epoxy 25068-38-6, 95- 263 Light Resin; 1,2,4- 63-6, 100-51-6, * Schedule 3; Part 1: (14). 4 57 L Grey Part trimethylbenzene; 108-67-8 Part 3: (2b). A_FAJ034 Benzyl alcohol; 1,3,5- trimethylbenzene Coating – Hull Topsides Xylene; PROPENOIC ACID, 2-METHYL-, POLYMER WITH BUTYL 1344-28-1, 7631- Intersheen 2-PR; Solvent naphtha 86-9, 100-41-4, * Schedule 3; Part 1: (14). 579 Base (petroleum), light 95-63-6, 64742- Part 2: Acidic solutions or 5 Light_LAA1 aromatic; 1,2,4- 95-6, 25987-66-0, acids in solid form. Part 3: 31 trimethylbenzene; 1330-20-7 (3), (7). Ethyl Benzene; Amorphous Silica; Aluminium Oxide Xylene; PROPENOIC ACID, 2-METHYL-, POLYMER 100-41-4, 95-63- 206 L Intersheen * Schedule 3; Part 1: (14). WITH BUTYL 2-PR; 6, 64742-95-6, 579 Part 2: Acidic solutions or 6 Solvent naphtha 25987-66-0, medium acids in solid form. Part 3: (petroleum), light 1330-20-7 Base (3), (7). aromatic; 1,2,4- trimethylbenzene; Ethyl Benzene Xylene; PROPENOIC 100-41-4, 95-63- Intersheen ACID, 2-METHYL-, * Schedule 3; Part 1: (14). 6, 64742-95-6, 579 POLYMER Part 2: Acidic solutions or 7 25987-66-0, White_LAB WITH BUTYL 2-PR; acids in solid form. Part 3: 1330-20-7 000 Solvent naphtha (3), (7).

(petroleum), light

NEW ZEALAND DIVING AND SALVAGE LTD 11 Commercial in Confidence New Zealand Diving and Salvage Ltd Ver.2.0 Project: Dong Won 701 Waste and IHM Date: 17 September 2019

aromatic; 1,2,4- trimethylbenzene; Ethyl Benzene Interplus Information not 8 77 L Information not available 356 available Cobalt carboxylate, 2- 101377-55-3, Interlac 665 Butanone oxime, 64742-82-1, * Schedule 3; Part 1: (14). Base Amorphous Silica, 9 7631-86-9, 1344- Unknown Part 3: (2b). Light_CLA1 Naphtha (petroleum), 28-1, 96-29-7, 31 hydrodesulfurized 13586-82-8 heavy, Alkyd resin ALKYD POLYMER, Naphtha (petroleum), hydrodesulfurized 21041-93-0, heavy, Solvent naphtha 61789-51-3, 136- (petroleum), light 52-7, 136-53-8, Interlac 665 aromatic, Xylene, 22464-99-9, * Schedule 3; Part 1: (14). 10 White_CLB Kerosine (petroleum), 1333-86-4, 8008- Unknown Part 3: (2b). 000 Carbon black, 20-6, 1330-20-7, Zirconium carboxylate, 64742-95-6, Zinc carboxylate, 64742-82-1 COBALT 2-ETHYL HEXANOATE, Cobalt, Cobalt (II) Hydroxide * Schedule 3; Part 1: (14 (c)). Part 3: (3 (a)). 64742-82-1 - Maybe used as a single component chemical under appropriate group standard; Naphtha (petroleum), 96-29-7 - NZIoC Approval 64742-82-1, 96- Interlac 665 hydrodesulfurized status: HSR001191; 13586- 29-7, 13586-82-8, 11 Yellow_CLB heavy; Alkyd resin; Unknown 82-8 - Maybe used as a 101377-55-3 134 Cobalt carboxylate; 2- component in a product

Butanone oxime covered by a group standard but it is not approved for use as a chemical in its own right; 101377-55-3 - Not in New Zealand Inventory of Chemicals

7.25. Bunkers, fuels, oils, lubricants

Lubricants and Oils – Power Plant and Machinery No. Name of Active Ingredients CAS No. Approx. Remarks *(Imports and Exports Material Qty (Restrictions) Prohibition Order No 2 2004. Schedules 1, 2 and 3 Parts 1, 2 and 3) Hydrotreated (mild) heavy paraffinic distillate Hydrotreated 64742-54-7, * Schedule 3; Part 1: (9), RADIX EP 2 (severe) heavy 64742-10-5, 1 (11). paraffinic distillate, 7620-77-1

Hydroxyoctadecanoic Acid, Extracts, Petroleum, SHELL Oil mist, mineral * Schedule 3; Part 1: (9), 2 REFRIG OIL (11).

NEW ZEALAND DIVING AND SALVAGE LTD 12 Commercial in Confidence New Zealand Diving and Salvage Ltd Ver.2.0 Project: Dong Won 701 Waste and IHM Date: 17 September 2019

S2 FR-A 68 en Distillates (Fischer - SHELL Tropsch), heavy, C18- * Schedule 3; Part 1: (9), TELLUS S2 848301-69-9 3 50 – (11). VX15 en branched, cyclic and

linear SHELL * Schedule 3; Part 1: (9), Oil mist, mineral 4 TELLUS S2 (11).

M100 en 64742-53-6, 64742-54-7, 64742-55-8, 64742-56-9, SHELL Interchangeable low 64742-65-0, * Schedule 3; Part 1: (9), TELLUS S2 5 viscosity base oil 68037-01-4, (11). MX 68 en 72623-86-0,

72623-87-1, 8042-47-5, 848301-69- 9 64742-53-6, 64742-54-7, 64742-55-8, 64742-56-9, SHELL 64742-65-0, Interchangeable low * Schedule 3; Part 1: (9), TELLUS S2 68037-01-4, 6 viscosity base oil (11). VX 68 en 72623-86-0,

72623-87-1, 8042-47-5, 848301-69- 9

SHELL Dialkyl thiophosphate 68411-46-1, * Schedule 3; Part 1: (9), 7 CORENA S4 ester, Alkaryl amine 268567-32-4 (11). R46 en 64742-53-6, 64742-54-7, 64742-55-8, N-phenyl-1- SHELL 64742-56-9, naphthylamine, TURBO T 68 64742-65-0, * Schedule 3; Part 1: (9), 8 Interchangeable low en 68037-01-4, (11). viscosity base oil 72623-86-0,

72623-87-1, 8042-47-5, 848301-69-9 2,6-Di-Tert- Butylphenol, Alkyl 64742-65-0, Dithiophosphate, MOBIL DTE 64742-54-7, Hydrotreated Light * Schedule 3; Part 1: (9), 10 EXCEL 64742-55-8, 9 Paraffinic Distillates, (11). 32 255881-94-8, Petroleum, Severely 128-39-2 Hydrotreated Heavy

Paraffinic Distillate, Solvent Dewaxed

NEW ZEALAND DIVING AND SALVAGE LTD 13 Commercial in Confidence New Zealand Diving and Salvage Ltd Ver.2.0 Project: Dong Won 701 Waste and IHM Date: 17 September 2019

Heavy Paraffinic Distillate MOBIL * Schedule 3; Part 1: (9), Triphenyl Phosphate 115-86-6 10 RARUS SHC (11).

1026 Grease and Lubricants – Deck Machinery (Winches, Rollers) MOBILUX * Schedule 3; Part 1: (9), Zinc Dialkyl 68457-79-4 11 EP 2 (11). Part 2: Zinc compounds Dithiophosphate

Benzenamine, N- Phenyl-, Reaction MOBIL Products 68457-79-4, * Schedule 3; Part 1: (9), GREASE 12 With 2,4,4- 68411-46-1 (11). Part 2: Zinc compounds XHP 222 Trimethylpentene, Zinc

Dialkyl Dithiophosphate Naphthenic Acids, Zinc Salts, Hydrotreated 8052-42-4, MOBIL TAC Middle Distillate 64742-47-8, * Schedule 3; Part 1: (9), 13 375 NC (Petroleum), 64742-46-7, (11). Part 2: Zinc compounds Hydrotreated Light 12001-85-3 Distillate, Asphalt (Petroleum) Bunkers Tank Name Locations No. 1 FOT Port and Starboard See tank plan * Schedule 3: Light Fuel 14 No 2. FOT Port and Starboard 15,000 L Part 1: (9a,b), Part 3: (2a,b), Oil No. 5 FOT Centre (3b), (7), (9a,b) Part 4 (g) No. 2 FOT Port and Starboard See tank plan * Schedule 3: 15 Diesel No. 3 FOT Port, Centre and Starboard 25,000 L Part 1: (9a,b), Part 3: (2a,b), No. 4 FOT Port, Centre and Starboard (3b), (7), (9a,b) Part 4 (g)

7.26. Waste Water

Waste Water No. Name of Tank Name / Locations Approx. Remarks *(Imports and Exports Material Qty (Restrictions) Prohibition Order No 2 2004. Schedules 1, 2 and 3 Parts 1, 2 and 3) Waste Water See tank plan * Schedule 3: No. 2 FOT Port and Starboard 1 mixed with Part 1: (9a,b), Part 3: (13), No. 3 FOT Port bunker (14) fuels

Hazardous Materials 2015 Guidelines

7.27. Chrysolite Asbestos

Ship Particulars Name of Vessel Dong Won 701 Distinctive Numbers or Letters ZMSO Port of Registry New Zealand IMO Number 7114513 Name and address of shipowner DW New Zealand td 145 Dawson Street, Timaru Port, Timaru Date of Construction 1971

NEW ZEALAND DIVING AND SALVAGE LTD 14 Commercial in Confidence New Zealand Diving and Salvage Ltd Ver.2.0 Project: Dong Won 701 Waste and IHM Date: 17 September 2019

Hazardous Materials contained in the ship structure and equipment that are listed in 2015 guidelines Appendix 1 table A and B. No. Type Location Materials Approx. Qty Remarks *(Imports and Exports (classification in (m² (Restrictions) Prohibition Order No appendix 1) 2 2004. Schedules 1, 2 and 3 Parts 1, 2 and 3) Upper Deck 1 Swab 20 Accommodation Area Engine room port side 2 Lagging 40 – thick strand *Schedule 2; Rotterdam Engine room port side Chemicals, Schedule 3; Part 3 Lagging A-1 20 – thin strand 2: Asbestos (dust or fibres). 4 Gasket Engine room 5 Part 3: (9a,b), (13) 5 Swab Engine room 20 Upper deck (above 6 Lagging 5 engine room) Supporting Documentation / Evidence 1. Asbestos labelling, engineer’s comments and visibility of material in place 2. K2 Environmental Ltd: Asbestos Assessment 15th December 2015 (the type, quantities and locations are sourced from the executive summary it is recommended for full context the entire report is understood) 3. Analytix – Bulk Analysis Certificate 26 April 2018

8. PHOTOGRAPHS

Image 1: 375 grease in the exposed gears od main winch Image 2: Grease in stern roller

NEW ZEALAND DIVING AND SALVAGE LTD 15 Commercial in Confidence New Zealand Diving and Salvage Ltd Ver.2.0 Project: Dong Won 701 Waste and IHM Date: 17 September 2019

Image 3: Melted netting and rope Image 4: Fire damaged wiring upper deck accommodation area

Image 5: Burnt out paint stores Image 6: Fuel under floor boards in the generator room port side

Image 7: Coolant pipe work with pooled water in Hold No.2 Image 8: Stores with spare cabling and extinguisher

NEW ZEALAND DIVING AND SALVAGE LTD 16 Commercial in Confidence New Zealand Diving and Salvage Ltd Ver.2.0 Project: Dong Won 701 Waste and IHM Date: 17 September 2019

Image 9: Machine stores pistons and engine parts Image 10: Asbestos lagging – Engine Room

Image 11: Port side upper deck small winches Image 12: Accommodation main deck wiring and electrical boxes

Image 23: Consumables stores - Engine Room Image 14: Hydraulic pipework between main deck winches and accommodation

NEW ZEALAND DIVING AND SALVAGE LTD 17 Commercial in Confidence New Zealand Diving and Salvage Ltd Ver.2.0 Project: Dong Won 701 Waste and IHM Date: 17 September 2019

Image 35: LED light and hydraulic service tank STBD Image 16: FWD stores compartment with burnt and partially burnt material

Image 47: Foam Installation in the fish hold (historical) Image 18: Hydraulic lines to deck winch

Image 59: Blistered paint on superstructure Image 20: Fire damage in factory / packing area

NEW ZEALAND DIVING AND SALVAGE LTD 18 Commercial in Confidence New Zealand Diving and Salvage Ltd Ver.2.0 Project: Dong Won 701 Waste and IHM Date: 17 September 2019

9. APPENDICES

• Fire damage and winch locations • Tank plan • Asbestos location plan as reported in 2015 • Appendix 1 of the (MEPC) 68/21 Annex 17 Resolution MEPC.269(68) 2015 Guidelines for the Development of the Inventory of Hazardous Materials. • Schedules 1, 2 and 3 Part 1, 2 and 3 of the Imports and Exports (Restrictions) Prohibition Order (No 2) 2004 (SR2004/20

NEW ZEALAND DIVING AND SALVAGE LTD 19 Commercial in Confidence

APPENDIX D

Report on Hull Coatings

740.10102.00000-R01-v1.0.docx Page 1 of 1

PROJECT FV Dong Won 701

Coatings Summary

NEW ZEALAND DIVING AND SALVAGE LTD 134 GRACEFIELD ROAD, PO BOX 30-392, LOWER HUTT 5040 EMAIL: [email protected] PHONE: 64 4 568 2505 FAX: 64 4 568 2123 www.nzds.co.nz

New Zealand Diving and Salvage Ltd V.2.0 Project: Dong Won 701 Coatings Date: 10 September 2019

1. INTRODUCTION The vessel Dong Won 701 (DW701) was constructed in a Japanese shipyard in 1971. In the absence of historical records, it is not unreasonable to assume that a range of coatings have been applied to the vessel through the course of its service life. The owners have provided a history of the coatings systems that have been applied since 2008 to 2016 which is the last recorded application.

This document provides a summary brief of the information provided and an explanation of the two type of known antifouling systems that have been applied and their specific active ingredients of which can be categorised as waste of interest.

2. VESSEL TERMINOLOGY Topside – the area above the waterline Vertical Side – the vertical wall from the waterline to the turn of the bilge

Bilge Keel – fin attached along the side of the vessel to assist with stabilisation. Often positioned near the turn of the bilge when the vertical side and curve to the flat bottom meet Flat Bottom – the flat area under the vessel bottom meet

3. SUMMARY FOCUS NZDS understands that the material safety data sheets provided for the various coatings are specific to their liquid and uncured form and therefore do not always represent what potential effects the coatings may pose post application. The superstructure and interior coating information is limited, and it is not uncommon for the upkeep of these areas to performed during down periods of vessel operations while at sea and in port with no recorded kept.

As anti-fouling coatings are applied to the submerged section of the hull this typically requires a planned and recorded activity. That is motivated by needs such as the booking of the slip or dry dock facilities and the application of an appropriate and approved anti-fouling system. The antifouling coatings by their design have active ingredients that work to prevent or slow down the establishment of marine biofouling build up. The recorded anti-fouling coatings applied on this vessel since 2008 confirm that they did not contain hazardous organotin compounds. They do list as containing active copper and zinc elements designed to function post application. It is for these reasons along with the available records that this summary is predominately focussed on the submerged hull coatings.

Page 2 of 10 NEW ZEALAND DIVING AND SALVAGE LTD Commercial in Confidence New Zealand Diving and Salvage Ltd V.2.0 Project: Dong Won 701 Coatings Date: 10 September 2019

4. COATING REGIME SUMMARY The records and correspondence with DWNZ engineer indicate that the vessel was dry docked regularly within a 24-month period. This tied in with the vessels regular lay up period and service life of the submerged hull antifouling coatings.

3.1. Coating Records Coating records for the vessel have been provided by DWNZ and include the following; • 2016. November, Coating Certificate November • 2016. November 24 – 26 Daily communications for the period • 2016. July, Technical Specification • 2014. November, Coating Certificate • 2014. November 25 - 27 Daily Coating Inspection report • 2014. November Technical Specification Report • 2014. BV Cert • 2012. April Lloyd’s Register Certificate TBT- Free Antifouling • 2010. October Coastal Coating Report Dataplan • 2008. December Coastal Coating Report Dataplan

3.2. Superstructure, Outer Decks and Interiors Communications with the DWNZ indicted that painting in these areas was performed annually by the crew during the lay-up period around December. Except of the wooden deck the maintenance included chipping and painting of the main deck, bridge deck, handrails, derrick and masts.

3.3. Outer Hull Plating, Above Water and Submerged 2008 Indicates the vessel had a combination of high-pressure jet and abrasive blasting applied to the vertical sides and flat bottom as part of the surface preparation pre- painting. There is photographic evidence that indicates at minimum sections of the hull plating were taking back to exposed steel. This suggests that any previous coatings were removed completely in these areas.

Page 3 of 10 NEW ZEALAND DIVING AND SALVAGE LTD Commercial in Confidence New Zealand Diving and Salvage Ltd V.2.0 Project: Dong Won 701 Coatings Date: 10 September 2019

2010 Indicates the hull areas had a range of coating delamination and areas of excessive coating film builds. The surface preparation involved full abrasive blasting back to exposed steel of the top side outer plating above the waterline. Spot abrasive blasting of the vertical sides and flat bottom. The inspection also recommended that the flat bottom be fully stripped at the next docking. The next docking on the current regime was listed as October 2012.

2012

Page 4 of 10 NEW ZEALAND DIVING AND SALVAGE LTD Commercial in Confidence New Zealand Diving and Salvage Ltd V.2.0 Project: Dong Won 701 Coatings Date: 10 September 2019

No information was made available regarding this docking. There is an approval certificate issued on the 20 April 2012 by Classification Society Lloyd’s Register to the coating manufacturer for the anti-fouling system Interspeed 642. This is the same system used in 2014. It is assumed that the docking took place but there is no evidence to support that the flat bottom was stripped back.

2014 A certificate was issued by the coating manufacturer to certify the vessel was coated with an Interspeed 642 system. This system is a TBT-Free Controlled Depletion Polymer Antifouling. Coatings were applied to the topsides, vertical sides and flat bottom. The draft marks, signwriting and sea chest were also coated. Anti-fouling system 24 month in service period.

Coating Schemes Product Colour Volume (lt) Intergard 263 Light grey 60 Interplus 1180 White 100 Interplus 356 Light Grey 100 Intersheen 579 Black 160 Interspeed 642 Red 420 Interspeed 642 Black 70

2016 A certificate was issued by the coating manufacturer to certify the vessel was coated with an Intersmooth 7460HS SPC system which is a TBT-Free Self-Polishing Copolymer Antifouling Coating. Surface preparation included instruction to use blow down, degreasing and scrapping methods to remove surface contamination including dust, grit, oily residues and marine biofouling.

Coatings were applied to the topsides, vertical sides and flat bottom. The anti-fouling system has a 24 month in service period.

Coating Schemes Product Colour Volume (lt) Intergard 263 Light grey 57.1 Interplus 1180 White 93.9 Interplus 356 Light Grey 77.1 Intersheen 579 Base Ultra Deep 205.7 Interspeed 6400 Red 410.7 Interspeed 6400 Black 61.6

4. ACTIVE INGREDIENTS (WASTE MATERIALS) 2014 Anti-Fouling System Interspeed 642 Red and Black contains; • Copper Oxide (CAS No. 1317-39-1) • Diuron (CAS No. 330-54-1)

Page 5 of 10 NEW ZEALAND DIVING AND SALVAGE LTD Commercial in Confidence New Zealand Diving and Salvage Ltd V.2.0 Project: Dong Won 701 Coatings Date: 10 September 2019

2016 Anti-Fouling System Intersmooth 7460HS SPC Red and Black contains; • Copper Oxide (CAS No. 1317-39-1) • Copper Pyrinthione (CAS No. 14915-37-8)

4.1 Applied Coatings 2016 Coatings are tabulated and listed with consideration of the following document; Imports and Exports (Restrictions) Prohibition Order (No 2) 2004 (SR2004/202) • Schedule 1 Stockholm chemicals • Schedule 2 Rotterdam chemicals • Schedule 3 Matters relating to hazardous waste and waste. - Part 1 Categories of waste - Part 2 Hazardous constituents - Part 3 Hazardous characteristics

Categorisation of Waste – 2004 Prohibition Order Schedules 1, 2 and 3

Materials contained in the ship’s structure and equipment

Anti- Fouling - Hull No. Name of Active Ingredients CAS No. Approx. Remarks *(Imports and Exports Paint Qty (Restrictions) Prohibition Order No 2 2004. Schedules 1, 2 and 3 Parts 1, 2 and 3) Interspeed Copper(i)oxide; Zinc 112945-52-5, * Schedule 3; Part 1: (14). 6400 oxide; Xylene; Rosin; 100-41-4, 12122- Part 2: copper compounds, 1 Black_BQA Zineb; Ethyl Benzene; 67-7, 8050-09-7, 62 L Zinc compounds, Ethers. 649 Amorphous fumed 1330-20-7, 1314- Part 3: (3a). silica 13-2, 1317-39-1 Interspeed Copper(i)oxide; Zinc 112945-52-5, * Schedule 3; Part 1: (14). 6400 oxide; Xylene; Rosin; 100-41-4, 12122- Part 2: copper compounds, 2 Red_BQA6 Zineb; Ethyl Benzene; 67-7, 8050-09-7, 411 L Zinc compounds, Ethers. 44 Amorphous fumed 1330-20-7, 1314- Part 3: (3a). silica 13-2, 1317-39-1 Epoxy Resin; Phenol, 21645-51-2, Interplus * Schedule 3; Part 1: (14 methylstyrenated; 7631-86-9, 100- 1180 White (C)). Part 2: Acidic solutions 3 Ethyl Benzene; 41-4, 68512-30-1, 94 L Part or acids in solid form. Part 3: Amorphous Silica; 1330-20-7, A_EHB000 (3), (7). Aluminium hydroxide 25068-38-6 Solvent naphtha Intergard (petroleum); Epoxy 25068-38-6, 95- 263 Light Resin; 1,2,4- 63-6, 100-51-6, * Schedule 3; Part 1: (14). 4 57 L Grey Part trimethylbenzene; 108-67-8 Part 3: (2b). A_FAJ034 Benzyl alcohol; 1,3,5- trimethylbenzene Coating – Hull Topsides Xylene; PROPENOIC 1344-28-1, 7631- Intersheen ACID, 2-METHYL-, 86-9, 100-41-4, * Schedule 3; Part 1: (14). 579 Base POLYMER WITH BUTYL 95-63-6, 64742- Part 2: Acidic solutions or 5 206 L Light_LAA1 2-PR; Solvent naphtha 95-6, 25987-66-0, acids in solid form. Part 3: 31 (petroleum), light 1330-20-7 (3), (7). aromatic; 1,2,4-

Page 6 of 10 NEW ZEALAND DIVING AND SALVAGE LTD Commercial in Confidence New Zealand Diving and Salvage Ltd V.2.0 Project: Dong Won 701 Coatings Date: 10 September 2019

trimethylbenzene; Ethyl Benzene; Amorphous Silica; Aluminium Oxide Xylene; PROPENOIC ACID, 2-METHYL-, POLYMER 100-41-4, 95-63- Intersheen * Schedule 3; Part 1: (14). WITH BUTYL 2-PR; 6, 64742-95-6, 579 Part 2: Acidic solutions or 6 Solvent naphtha 25987-66-0, medium acids in solid form. Part 3: (petroleum), light 1330-20-7 Base (3), (7). aromatic; 1,2,4- trimethylbenzene; Ethyl Benzene Xylene; PROPENOIC ACID, 2-METHYL-, POLYMER 100-41-4, 95-63- Intersheen * Schedule 3; Part 1: (14). WITH BUTYL 2-PR; 6, 64742-95-6, 579 Part 2: Acidic solutions or 7 Solvent naphtha 25987-66-0, White_LAB acids in solid form. Part 3: (petroleum), light 1330-20-7 000 (3), (7). aromatic; 1,2,4- trimethylbenzene; Ethyl Benzene Interplus Information not 8 77 L Information not available 356 available Cobalt carboxylate, 2- 101377-55-3, Interlac 665 Butanone oxime, 64742-82-1, * Schedule 3; Part 1: (14). Base Amorphous Silica, 9 7631-86-9, 1344- Unknown Part 3: (2b). Light_CLA1 Naphtha (petroleum), 28-1, 96-29-7, 31 hydrodesulfurized 13586-82-8 heavy, Alkyd resin ALKYD POLYMER, Naphtha (petroleum), hydrodesulfurized 21041-93-0, heavy, Solvent naphtha 61789-51-3, 136- (petroleum), light 52-7, 136-53-8, Interlac 665 aromatic, Xylene, 22464-99-9, * Schedule 3; Part 1: (14). 10 White_CLB Kerosine (petroleum), 1333-86-4, 8008- Unknown Part 3: (2b). 000 Carbon black, 20-6, 1330-20-7, Zirconium carboxylate, 64742-95-6, Zinc carboxylate, 64742-82-1 COBALT 2-ETHYL HEXANOATE, Cobalt, Cobalt (II) Hydroxide * Schedule 3; Part 1: (14 (c)). Part 3: (3 (a)). 64742-82-1 - Maybe used as a single component chemical under Naphtha (petroleum), appropriate group standard; 64742-82-1, 96- Interlac 665 hydrodesulfurized 96-29-7 - NZIoC Approval 29-7, 13586-82-8, 11 Yellow_CLB heavy; Alkyd resin; Unknown status: HSR001191; 13586- 101377-55-3 134 Cobalt carboxylate; 2- 82-8 - Maybe used as a

Butanone oxime component in a product covered by a group standard but it is not approved for use as a chemical in its own right; 101377-55-3 - Not in New

Page 7 of 10 NEW ZEALAND DIVING AND SALVAGE LTD Commercial in Confidence New Zealand Diving and Salvage Ltd V.2.0 Project: Dong Won 701 Coatings Date: 10 September 2019

Zealand Inventory of Chemicals

5. HOW THE ANTI-FOULING SYTEMS AND THEIR ACTIVE INGREDIENTS WORK The systems applied this vessel since 2008 are EPA approved systems for their application. The certificates issued by the coating manufacturer and classification societies Bureau Veritas and Lloyd’s Register certify the system meet the following compliances.

• International Maritime Organisation (IMO) Antifouling System Convention 2001 (AFS/CONF/26) • IMO Convention on the Control of Harmful Anti-fouling Systems on Ships 2001 • IMO MEPEC. 195(61) – Guidance for compliant anti-fouling systems 5.1. Controlled Depletion Polymer System (CDP) This is the system applied in 2014. CDP systems are reported as reliable up to three years. The dissolution is slow, similar to the way soap dissolves in water due to the rosin content which is slightly soluble in water. The action of water over the surface reduces the thickness of the coating resulting in a fresh layer of biocide presented.

Sourced: AkzoNobel Antifouling 101 5.2. Self-Polishing Polymer (SPC) SPC system was the last applied coating to the vessel in 2016. The system works as it has a film that contains an acrylic copolymer that reacts with seawater which only occurs at the surface. The chemical reaction controls and sustains the release of biocides. As this is a chemical reaction rather than physical it maintains the same rate of release. Which provides a working system regardless of the vessels activity.

Page 8 of 10 NEW ZEALAND DIVING AND SALVAGE LTD Commercial in Confidence New Zealand Diving and Salvage Ltd V.2.0 Project: Dong Won 701 Coatings Date: 10 September 2019

Sourced: AkzoNobel Antifouling 101

6. GENERAL COMMENTS The service life of the last applied anti-fouling coating has expired some 8-9 months based on a 24-month period of November 2016.The current condition of the hull is assumed to be colonised by a range of marine biofouling. Biofouling can be seen from the surface along the waterline and the hull condition will be confirmed by an in-water inspection.

The active ingredients within the current coating are assumed to be spent or inactive due to the passing of the service life and the established fouling. Any presently attached fouling is anticipated to be rendered non-viable once the vessel is sunk due to the light deprivation at the wreck site depth of >600m.

The Maritime New Zealand record of 15+ vessels scuttled since 2004 including the dive wreck site HMNZS Wellington were all sunk with their respective coatings left in place.

Consideration of removing the above waterline coatings either alongside at the port or in a dry dock facility would require significant containment, safety efforts and cost.

Use of dry dock facilities within New Zealand has been considered with responses expressing a lack of unwillingness to accommodate. There is the unnecessary risk of towing the vessel to one of these facilities with eth closet in Christchurch. Due to the unknown biofouling state there is a potential marine biosecurity transfer risk.

Removal of coatings above the waterline and within the structure would require abrasive blasting, manual and mechanical techniques which require environmental containment systems to capture particle fines. There are additional safety factors inclusive of working at heights and over water which also add to the containment challenges. Due to the 2018 fire

Page 9 of 10 NEW ZEALAND DIVING AND SALVAGE LTD Commercial in Confidence New Zealand Diving and Salvage Ltd V.2.0 Project: Dong Won 701 Coatings Date: 10 September 2019

which gutted the interior light sources, ventilation and potential explosive dust build up will be required considerations.

Removal of the coatings from the submerged hull can only be done safely with containment outside of the water and in a dry dock facility. Attempts underwater would be done using labour intensive methods such as grinding or high-pressure jetting / grit blasting. There would be significant issues with controlling the process and the ability to collect and filter the material.

Page 10 of 10 NEW ZEALAND DIVING AND SALVAGE LTD Commercial in Confidence

APPENDIX E

Biofouling Inspection Report

740.10102.00000-R01-v1.0.docx Page 1 of 1

APPENDIX F

Biofouling Survey Report

740.10102.00000-R01-v1.0.docx Page 1 of 1

30 September 2019

Serena Cox NIWA 301 Evans Bay Parade Greta Point Wellington

Dear Sol Fergus, NZDS

On 12th September 2019, NIWA undertook a wharf-side vessel inspection of the Dong Won 701, whilst berthed in the Port of Timaru. It is our understanding this vessel underwent a full hull inspection in Bluff, during January 2018 in preparation for heading to the Subantarctic islands, and was cleared by the Department of Conservation (DOC) at that time as having a clean hull, free of biofouling (as required under the coastal management plan). The vessel then undertook trips within domestic waters between January and April 2018. In April 2018, the vessel then caught fire in the Port of Timaru and has remained in that port until now.

301 Evans Bay Parade, Hataitai, Wellington 6021 | Phone +64 4 386 0300 Private Bag 14901, Kilbirnie, Wellington 6241

Of the other non-indigenous marine biota identified on-site during the inspection, all species have been previously recorded in the Port of Timaru previously and none are new-to-NZ.

We can confirm that no species identified from samples removed from the Dong Won are currently listed on the Ministry for Primary Industries Notifiable Organisms Order 2016. One marine algae was identified and that is currently listed on the MPI Unwanted Organisms Register. This algae is already established in Timaru.

Yours sincerely

Serena Cox Marine Biologist

APPENDIX G

Blast Plan

740.10102.00000-R01-v1.0.docx Page 1 of 1

OCEL - OFFSHORE & COASTAL ENGINEERING LIMITED

OCEL House 14 Richardson Terrace PO Box 877 Christchurch 8140 New Zealand Tele (03) 3790444 Fax (03) 3790333 EMail:[email protected]

17th December 2019. NZ Diving & Salvage Ltd., 134 Gracefield Road, LOWER HUTT 5010.

Attention: Mr. Sol Fergus - Consultant

BLAST PLAN FOR FV DONG WON 701

It is proposed that the Fishing Vessel Dong Won 701 be disposed of in deep water at an EPA approved disposal location off the East coast of the lower South Island. The vessel would be first cleaned of any contaminants then towed to the proposed dump location and scuttled using explosive charges to open holes in the hull just above the water line to expedite the sinking of the vessel. The vessel’s seacocks would be opened using small charges placed inside the valves to initiate the sinking, increasing the vessel’s draught to the point where water pours in through the holes blasted in the hull greatly accelerating the sinking process. All the charges would be fired at the same time but there would actually be 25 millisecond delays between individual charges. By blasting holes above the waterline the injurious effects of underwater explosions on large cetaceans are significantly mitigated. The scuttling operation would be run by NZ Diving & Salvage a NZ company with a successful track record in this type of work.

1. Charge Type and Quantity – up to 100 kg of Powergel explosive. This water gel explosive is readily available and is less toxic than earlier nitroglycerine explosives such as Dynamite. It is safe and easy to use and water resistant. Plastic explosive is more efficient in cutting steel but is not carried in stock in NZ. Powergel has proven to be a very versatile explosive capable of most blasting tasks.

2. Charge Delays – Individual charges will have 25 millisecond delays between them to limit the weight of explosive detonated at any particular instant. Four x 25 kg plaster charges will be used inside the vessel. The plaster charges will be set up inside the hull equally disposed on both sides of the vessel before the vessel leaves port. The 25 kg charges have proved effective on previous scuttling work. The four charges will be set below the main deck, above the following compartments and above the waterline: • One charge in the engine room. • Two charges will be set amidships (longitudinally) above fish hold no. 2. • One charge below the bridge above fish hold no.1.

3. Placement of Charges – Each charge will be securely supported and held against the inside of the ship’s hull above the waterline using the main deck as reference level. The charges will be set to blast outwards through the hull on both sides of the vessel. Having the charges on both sides of the vessel precludes the possibility of an air pocket just above the waterline. The precise positions will be set at the time of charge placement depending on ease of access both to place the charges and run the detonating cord circuit. The vessel’s fuel tanks will be filled with concrete to encapsulate any contaminants. No charges will be set that could potentially disrupt the concrete. The plaster charges will be formed using 20 litre tapered buckets packed with Powergel cartridges. The buckets in the shape of a truncated cone will have the larger diameter top of the bucket against the hull plate and be initiated from the top to approximate a shaped charge. Sandbags will be packed around the buckets to tamp the plaster charges which will be forced against the inside of the hull by tensioned straps.

4. Air Blast Safety Distance – Because the charges are set to blast outwards through steel above the waterline a safety exclusion zone of 1 km will be established directly out from either side of the vessel.

5. Detonation Process -The charges will be detonated by detonating (det.) cord the individual charges being connected to a det. cord trunkline. Millisecond (25 ms) delays would be fitted in the trunkline between charges to ensure sequential rather than instantaneous detonation for all the charges. The trunkline will be brought up to an accessible firing point location on the stern ramp of vessel. A detonator activated wirelessly from the support vessel or tug would be taped to the end of the trunkline as the final action on the vessel before it was abandoned. Until the detonator is attached the charges are safe. The remote detonation device has two independent buttons for safety, the same as for a conventional exploder, that have to be simultaneously pressed to detonate the detonator.

6. Transportation Plan – The vessel would be towed to site unmanned and would be boarded on location by the two man blasting team to check the explosives and det. cord circuit, attach the detonator to the det. cord trunkline and attach the detonator wires to the wireless receiver for remote initiation, prior to the blasting supervisor and the blasting assistant leaving the vessel for the last time. Fitting the detonator would be the last act. The seacock valves will be fitted with small explosive charges in port on the same det. cord circuit as the other charges so that all are detonated simultaneously, albeit with 25 millisecond delays between.

7. Initiating the Sinking – The sinking would be initiated by blasting the vessel seacocks in the engine room to open the valves and start flooding. The other charges detonated at the same time - albeit with a barely audibly perceptible 25 milliseconds delay between individual charges – when the blasting supervisor depresses both buttons on the exploder, will blow holes in the side of the vessel above the waterline. The charges will be detonated remotely by the blasting supervisor from the tug which will be 200 m directly off the bow of the Dong Won 701, directly in front, following confirmation that no marine mammals are present in the 600 m mitigation zone around the vessel. The tug will remain connected to the tow line to control drift until the time when water begins entering the hull through the blast holes.

8. Sinking – Det. cord wrapped around the tow line where it connects to the Dong Won 701 will be used to sever the tow line. The det. cord wrap will be on a separate circuit to the other charges and will be detonated when water begins entering the hull through the blast holes. This allows the Dong Won 701 to be held under control and on station right up to the point that the water begins entering the hull through the blast holes. It is anticipated based on past experience that the vessel would sink stern first within 15 to 20 minutes of the time water begins entering the hull through the blast holes and would descend directly to the seabed.

Yours faithfully Offshore & Coastal Engineering Limited

G C Teear CPEng 34736

APPENDIX H

Noise Assessment

740.10102.00000-R01-v1.0.docx Page 1 of 1

SLR Consulting (Canada) Ltd. Suite 200 – 1620 West 8th Avenue Vancouver, BC V6J 1V4

Tel: 604-738-2500 Fax: 604-738-2508

Memorandum

To: Rob Lieffering From: Briony Croft

Company: SLR Consulting New Zealand Ltd cc: Date: 15 October 2019

Subject: NZ Diving and Salvage Ltd

Underwater noise impacts of scuttling the Dong Won 701 - explosives above water line

1.0 INTRODUCTION

It is proposed that the fishing vessel Dong Won 701 be disposed of in deep water off the East coast of the lower South Island of New Zealand. The vessel would be scuttled by using explosive charges to open the hull above the water line. Open hatches would allow water to gradually flood the vessel, which would lower slowly until the water enters the blast holes initiating rapid sinking. This scuttling method is proposed to mitigate the potential underwater noise impacts of scuttling using explosive charges below the waterline.

The explosives proposed would be 100 kg of Powergel, in the form of four x 25 kg charges placed inside the hull and detonated with 25 millisecond delays (sequential detonation). This memorandum identifies the potential underwater noise impacts and offset distances to prevent permanent injury to marine mammals. Permanent injury in this case is defined as Permanent Threshold Shift (PTS), or permanent damage to hearing. The thresholds applied are adopted from NMFS (2018)1.

2.0 IMPACT THRESHOLDS

NMFS (2018) propose PTS-onset criteria for impulsive noise events such as explosive detonations or impact piling which incorporate a dual-criteria approach based on both peak sound pressure level (Pk SPL) and cumulative sound exposure level (SEL) within a defined time period of up to 24-hours. In this case the noise event would be very short, seconds rather than hours. These PTS thresholds are shown in Table 1. The Pk SPL thresholds are unweighted, while the

1 National Marine Fisheries Service. 2018 Revisions to: Technical Guidance for Assessing the Effects of Anthropogenic Sound on Marine Mammal Hearing (Version 2.0): Underwater Thresholds for Onset of Permanent and Temporary Threshold Shifts. U.S. Dept. of Commer., NOAA. NOAA Technical Memorandum NMFS-OPR-59.

SLR 1 CONFIDENTIAL SLR Consulting NZ SLR Project No.: 740-10102 Phase 0020 Underwater noise – scuttling the Dong Won 701 4 September 2019 cumulative SEL thresholds consider marine mammal auditory weighting functions, ie the sensitivity of the animals to noise at particular frequencies within their hearing range.

Table 1 Impulsive noise event PTS thresholds for marine mammals (NMFS, 2018)

PTS threshold levels – impulsive noise events Marine mammal hearing group Pk SPL Weighted SEL24hr dB re 1µPa dB re 1µPa2·S Low-frequency (LF) cetaceans 219 183 Mid-frequency (MF) cetaceans 230 185 High-frequency (HF) cetaceans 202 155 Phocid Pinnipeds in water (PW) 218 185 Otariid Pinnipeds in water (OW) 232 203

This assessment estimates anticipated Pk SPL and weighted SEL for comparison with the NMFS (2018) thresholds to determine offset distances to prevent marine mammal injury.

3.0 DISCUSSION OF NOISE GENERATION MECHANISM

Underwater noise from in-water blasting can include components across a wide frequency range, with the fundamental cause of the peak noise pressure pulse being the shock wave generated by the rapid expansion of gas upon detonation underwater. The shorter the duration of the impulse, the more high frequency noise is generated. It is expected that by placing the charges above the waterline, the magnitude of the peak noise pressure pulse would be considerably reduced, since there would be no rapid expansion of gas underwater on detonation. Instead, the effect of the charges would be to excite vibration of the hull, which would then transmit noise into the water. The noise generating mechanism would be impulsive or impact excitation of the steel hull of the vessel.

The noise radiated underwater from impact excitation of sheet steel structures such as sheet or tubular piles and vessel hulls is typically dominated by low frequency components with more than 90% of the energy expected to be at frequencies less than 2000 Hz.

4.0 ESTIMATION OF UNDERWATER NOISE LEVELS

For underwater blasing, calculation of underwater Pk SPL and SEL source levels is commonly undertaken using established empirical formulas based on the charge weight of explosive per delay, and the number of charges. The charge per delay is used to calculate the Pk SPL since the delay between charges is designed to stagger the individual impulses. Even for short delays (25 milliseconds in this case) the result is a lower peak noise level than if all charges were detonated simultaneously.

In this situation with charges above the waterline, empirical underwater blasting formulae do not apply although they may still represent an upper limit for conservative assessment purposes. For this study, it is assumed that locating the charges above the waterline would result in a considerable reduction in source peak noise levels, but would have less effect on the source SEL levels since similar energy in total might still be radiated from the hull.

SLR 2 CONFIDENTIAL SLR Consulting NZ SLR Project No.: 740-10102 Phase 0020 Underwater noise – scuttling the Dong Won 701 4 September 2019

4.1 Estimation of Peak SPL Source Levels

An estimation is made of the maximum possible energy input to the hull on the basis of explosive energy. Powergel explosive has a relative weight strength of 119% relative to ANFO (weight strength of 880 calories per gram, ISEE Blasters Handbook, 2011). Therefore Powergel has an absolute weight strength of approximately 1042 calories per gram, resulting in a maximum explosive energy per 25kg charge of 26180 kCal.

Considering that the excitation of the hull by explosives may be comparable to impact piling, an approximate maximum source noise level is estimated using an empirical relationship between source noise level SL (dB RMS re 1µPa) and impact hammer energy H in kilojoules for impact steel pile driving from Hildebrande (2009)2:

푆퐿 = 205.9 + 10.2log⁡(퐻)

The resulting energy-based estimate of the maximum rms source noise level due to excitation of the hull is 257 dB re 1µPa, which is taken to be a reasonable estimate of the peak source level considering the very short duration of the event. This peak source level is comparable to the highest peak impact piling source levels reported during installation of offshore wind turbines, involving driving piles 5m in diameter or more3.

4.2 Estimation of SEL Source Levels

For this study, source SELs in Pa.s are estimated using the following underwater blasting formula (Barett, 1996)4 with adjustments for the Powergel explosive relative weight strength:

퐼 = 6 × 103 × 푊0.63 × 푅−0.89

This formula conservatively assumes that all the energy generated from an underwater blast would also be transferred into the water from the hull of the ship, even with the charges placed above the waterline. The resulting source SEL per charge is 214 dB re 1µPa.s.

5.0 ESTIMATION OF DISTANCES TO IMPACT THRESHOLDS

Distances to the NMFS impact thresholds have been estimated using the NMFS calculation spreadsheet5 as shown in Figure 1, with assumed transmission loss relationship of 20log(distance) and a frequency weighting factor adjustment of 2 kHz.

2 Hildebrand, J.A. (2009) Anthropogenic and natural sources of ambient noise in the ocean. Marine Ecology Progress Series, Vol. 395:5-20. 3 OSPAR Commission (2009) Overview of the impacts of anthropogenic underwater sound in the marine environment. 4 Barett R W (1996) 'Guidelines for the safe use of explosives underwater'. MTD Publication 96/101, Marine Technology Directorate, ISBN 1-870553-23-3. 5 https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/webdam/download/82835622

SLR 3 CONFIDENTIAL SLR Consulting NZ SLR Project No.: 740-10102 Phase 0020 Underwater noise – scuttling the Dong Won 701 4 September 2019

Figure 1 NMFS Calculation Estimate Spreadsheet

The resulting estimated distances to the permanant injury noise thresholds (PTS) are controlled by peak noise effects and are summarized approximately as follows:

• Low-frequency (LF) cetaceans: 80 m • Mid-frequency (MF) cetaceans: 20 m • High-frequency (HF) cetaceans: 560 m • Phocid pinnipeds in water (PW): 90 m • Otariid pinnipeds in water (OW): 20 m

Briony Croft, Ph.D., P.Eng. Principal Engineer, Acoustics

SLR 4 CONFIDENTIAL

APPENDIX I

Proffered Conditions

740.10102.00000-R01-v1.0.docx Page 1 of 1

SCHEDULE 1: DW NEW ZEALAND LIMITED MARINE DUMPING CONSENT EEZXXXXXX CONDITIONS

Definitions

Terms used in this Schedule of Conditions shall have the following meanings:

Consent Holder has the meaning given in section 4 of the EEZ Act. Dump Site means the point where the vessel is to be scuttled (sunk) as defined by Condition 8. EEZ Act means the Exclusive Economic Zone and Continental Shelf (Environmental Effects) Act 2012. EPA means the Environmental Protection Authority as defined in section 4 of the EEZ Act. Qualified Marine means a person who has completed specific training, provided by an Mammal Observer appropriately qualified person, or has logged at least 12 weeks of marine mammal observer experience in New Zealand waters, to the satisfaction of the EPA. Vessel means the fishing vessel Dong Won 701. Working Day has the same meaning as defined in section 4 of the EEZ Act.

Conditions

1. Subject to compliance with these consent conditions, the activity authorised by this marine dumping consent shall be undertaken in general accordance with the operational descriptions contained in the following: a) The document entitled “Marine Dumping Consent Application and Impact Assessment – Scuttling of Dong Won 701 Fishing Vessel Within an Authorised Location South-east of Otago Harbour” (Report reference number 740.10102.00000-R01-v1.0) prepared by SLR Consulting NZ Limited, dated December 2019; and b) XXXXX [any further information request responses] Where there is any conflict between the contents of any of the above documents and the conditions of this consent, then the conditions shall prevail.

2. Pursuant to section 85 of the EEZ Act, this marine dumping consent shall lapse on 31 December 2021 unless it has been given effect to prior to that date or the EPA grants an extension to the date in accordance with section 85(1)(b) of the EEZ Act.

3. The Consent Holder shall advise the EPA, in writing, of the date that it intends to scuttle (sink) the vessel at least 10 working days beforehand, or any shorter timeframe agreed to by the EPA.

4. The Consent Holder shall ensure that personnel directly involved in the exercise of this marine dumping consent are informed of their obligations and responsibilities in exercising this consent.

5. The Consent Holder shall clean and prepare the vessel in accordance with the document entitled “FV Dong Won 701 – Proposed Disposal Brief” included as Appendix B of the document referred to in Condition 1(a).

6. The vessel shall not be towed to the dump site or scuttled (sunk) until the Consent Holder has submitted a written statement to the EPA which confirms that the vessel has been cleaned and prepared in accordance with the requirements of Condition 5. The Consent Holder shall engage a suitably qualified and experienced independent recognised surveyor (as published on the Maritime New Zealand website) to inspect the vessel and to prepare the statement required by this condition.

7. The vessel shall only be scuttled (sunk) on a day when the weather, swell, and sea conditions at the dump site allow for control of the vessel both prior to, and during, the dumping process.

8. The Consent Holder shall ensure the vessel is scuttled (sunk) within a circle of one nautical mile radius centred on position 46°00′S 171°13′E.

9. The Consent Holder shall ensure the contractor it appoints to carry out the tow of the vessel holds marine insurance that covers the tow of the vessel from the berth to the dump site. The marine insurance to include cover if the vessel sinks at a position which is not within the dump site and the Director of Maritime New Zealand gives a lawful direction under section 100A of the Maritime Transport Act 1994 that the vessel, at that location, is a hazard to navigation and must be secured and removed. The limit of such cover will be US$500,000,000. The Consent Holder shall provide a copy of the certificate of marine insurance to the EPA at least 10 working days prior to commencement of the tow

10. Visual detection of marine mammals in and around the dump site shall be undertaken by a Qualified Marine Mammal Observer (refer definitions) in accordance with the Marine Mammal Observation Protocol included as Appendix 1 to this marine dumping consent.

11. Detonation of the explosives that will be used to scuttle (sink) the vessel shall be delayed if any marine mammal is visually observed within 600 metres of the vessel (the mitigation zone) in the 30 minutes prior to the proposed detonation time.

In the event that a delay is triggered by the above, detonation procedures shall only commence if either of the following are met:

i) All the marine mammals that were visually observed within the mitigation zone have been confirmed, through visual observation, to have moved beyond the mitigation zone; or

ii) No marine mammals have been visually observed within the mitigation zone for 30 minutes.

12. The Consent Holder shall remain at the dump site for a minimum of 30 minutes following the sinking of the vessel to observe whether the activity has resulted in any floating debris. Any debris that is observed shall be retrieved and taken onshore to a facility that is authorised to accept such material. The Consent Holder shall keep photographic records of any debris collected and shall provide these records to the EPA within five working days of the dumping.

13. The Consent Holder shall record the time and date that the vessel is scuttled (sunk) and the position (latitude and longitude) of the vessel where it is last sighted and its location on the seabed. A copy of these records shall be provided to the EPA, in writing, within five working days of the dumping.

Advice Notes 1. The Consent Holder is reminded of its obligations under the Marine Mammals Protection Act 1978. 2. The Consent Holder is reminded of its obligations under the Wildlife Act 1953. 3. The Consent Holder is reminded of its obligations under the Biosecurity Act 1993. 4. The Consent Holder is reminded of its obligations under the Maritime Transport Act 1994.

Appendix 1: Marine Mammal Observation Protocol

MARINE MAMMAL OBSERVATION PROTOCOL

Scuttling of Dong Won 701 Fishing Vessel

Prepared for: DW New Zealand Ltd 145 Dawson Street TIMARU 7940

SLR Ref: 740.10102-R01 Version No: -v1.0 December 2019 DW New Zealand Ltd SLR Ref No: 740.10102-R01-v1.0.docx Marine Mammal Observation Protocol December 2019 Scuttling of Dong Won 701 Fishing Vessel

PREPARED BY

BASIS OF REPORT

This report has been prepared by SLR Consulting NZ Limited (SLR) with all reasonable skill, care and diligence, and taking account of the timescale and resources allocated to it by agreement with DW New Zealand Ltd (the Client). Information reported herein is based on the interpretation of data collected, which has been accepted in good faith as being accurate and valid.

SLR disclaims any responsibility to the Client and others in respect of any matters outside the agreed scope of the work.

DOCUMENT CONTROL

Reference Date Prepared Checked Authorised 740.10102-R01-v1.0 18 December 2019 Helen McConnell Rob Lieffering Dan Govier

Page 2

DW New Zealand Ltd SLR Ref No: 740.10102-R01-v1.0.docx Marine Mammal Observation Protocol December 2019 Scuttling of Dong Won 701 Fishing Vessel

1 INTRODUCTION ...... 4 1.1 Purpose of the Marine Mammal Observation Protocol ...... 4 1.2 Project Background ...... 4 1.3 Overview of Dumping Process ...... 4 2 MARINE MAMMAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT ...... 7 3 OBSERVATIONAL PROTOCOL ...... 9 3.1 Mitigation Zones for Delayed Detonation ...... 10 3.2 Pre-Detonation Observations/Monitoring ...... 10

DOCUMENT REFERENCES

TABLES Table 1 Hearing frequency of Marine Mammals Likely or Possible in and Around the Dump Site ...... 8 Table 2 Impulsive Noise Event PTS Levels for Marine Mammals ...... 8 Table 3 Distance from Vessel to PTS Level...... 9 Table 4 Operational Duties of Qualified MMOs ...... 9

FIGURES Figure 1 Location of Dump Site ...... 6

Page 3

DW New Zealand Ltd SLR Ref No: 740.10102-R01-v1.0.docx Marine Mammal Observation Protocol December 2019 Scuttling of Dong Won 701 Fishing Vessel

1 Introduction

1.1 Purpose of the Marine Mammal Observation Protocol

The purpose of this Marine Mammal Observation Protocol (MMOP) is to outline the procedures that will be implemented to minimise the risk of marine mammals becoming injured (particularly with regard to hearing damage) during the scuttling of the Dong Won 701 Fishing Vessel.

1.2 Project Background

The vessel Dong Won 701 (the vessel) is an 81 m, New Zealand flagged fishing vessel owned by the New Zealand company DW New Zealand Limited (DWNZ). The home port of the vessel is Timaru and the vessel has fished within various Fisheries Management Areas (FMA) of New Zealand waters. The vessel is currently berthed at PrimePort, Timaru. In April 2018 the vessel suffered a serious fire which caused extensive damage, resulting in around 50 per cent of the vessel being ‘gutted’ thereby rendering it unusable and uneconomic to restore.

Several options have been considered by DWNZ for the vessel. The only viable option is to tow it to one of the five ‘authorised locations’ within the exclusive economic zone (EEZ) and to scuttle it using explosives. The authorised location (dump site) proposed to be used is located 25 nautical miles (NM) southeast of Otago Harbour and is shown in Figure 1.

1.3 Overview of Dumping Process

The explosives are designed to focus the blast energy ‘outwards’ into the hull plating. The four charges will have slight delays (25 milliseconds (ms)) and will result in the stern of the vessel sinking first. The charges will be positioned so that the bottom of their resultant blast holes on the outside of the vessel are above the waterline. The seacock vales will also be fitted with very small explosive charges while the vessel is still berthed in PrimePort – these very small charges will be detonated immediately before the four main charges to allow water to slowly flood into the vessel.

Page 4

DW New Zealand Ltd SLR Ref No: 740.10102-R01-v1.0.docx Marine Mammal Observation Protocol December 2019 Scuttling of Dong Won 701 Fishing Vessel

Once it has been determined that no marine mammals have been detected within the mitigation zone specified in this MMOP and the required criteria of this MMOP have been met, the explosive experts will initiate the blast sequence. The first explosives that will detonate are the very small charges on the seacock valves, followed by the four main charges, all with 25 ms delays. The very small charges on the seacock valves will result in water slowly entering the vessel and the four main charges will result in blast holes just above the waterline. The vessel will initially sink slowly as water flows through the open seacock valves, but rapid flooding will occur as soon as enters the large holes causing the vessel to sink rapidly. As stated above, the vessel will be under the control of the towing tug via the tow rope right up to the time the water enters the blast holes to minimise drift. It is expected that the vessel will sink stern first and disappear under the water within 20 minutes of the water entering the blast holes.

Page 5

DW New Zealand Ltd SLR Ref No: 740.10102-R01-v1.0.docx Marine Mammal Observation Protocol December 2019 Scuttling of Dong Won 701 Fishing Vessel

Figure 1 Location of Dump Site

Page 6

DW New Zealand Ltd SLR Ref No: 740.10102-R01-v1.0.docx Marine Mammal Observation Protocol December 2019 Scuttling of Dong Won 701 Fishing Vessel

2 Marine Mammal Impact Assessment

An assessment of the potential effects on marine mammals has been conducted as part of the Marine Dumping Consent Application. The key findings from this are summarised below.

Multiple data sources were used to predict which marine mammal species may be present within the dump site, including: • Sightings data from within the dump site (obtained from the Department of Conservation (DOC) marine mammals sightings database representing sightings from 1969 – May 2019); • Stranding data from the coastline in proximity to the dump site (Oamaru to Kaka Point) (obtained from the DOC marine mammals stranding database representing strandings from 1862 – June 2019); and • Knowledge of migration paths and habitat preferences of each species which overlap with or are in close proximity to the dump site (obtained from published literature).

The marine mammal species that may be present in and around the dump site are summarised in Table 1.

The impact assessment identified that the greatest risk to marine mammals during the scuttling process is from the underwater noise generated by the explosive charges.

In terms of assessing the effects associated with a ‘one-off’ explosion to scuttle the vessel it is considered appropriate to assess only the risks of permanent injury to marine mammals. In this case permanent injury is defined as the permanent threshold shift (PTS) or permanent damage to hearing. Not all marine mammals have equal hearing capabilities in terms of absolute hearing sensitivity and frequency band of hearing. The thresholds applied in this case are those from the ‘Technical Guidance for Assessing the Effects of Anthropogenic Sound on Marine Mammal Hearing (Version 2.0) - Underwater Thresholds for Onset of Permanent and Temporary Threshold Shifts’ published by the United States National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS). The relevant PTS thresholds are shown in Table 2.

Table 2 identifies high-frequency cetaceans has being the most sensitive to underwater noise, both in terms of Pk SPL and SEL. The only marine mammal from this hearing group that could be present in or around the dump site is the pygmy sperm whale.

Noise calculations have been made to determine the appropriate offset distance to prevent permanent injury to marine mammals. The results of these calculations are shown in Table 3. All distances to the permanent injury thresholds are controlled by the Pk SPL, rather than either of the SEL parameters.

Page 7

DW New Zealand Ltd SLR Ref No: 740.10102-R01-v1.0.docx Marine Mammal Observation Protocol December 2019 Scuttling of Dong Won 701 Fishing Vessel

Table 1 Hearing frequency of Marine Mammals Likely or Possible in and Around the Dump Site

Likely presence in the Common Name Scientific Name Hearing frequency group dump site

Bottlenose dolphin Tursiops truncatus Likely Mid-frequency cetacean Dusky dolphin Lagenorhynchus obscurus Likely Mid-frequency cetacean False killer whale Pseudorca crassidens Likely Mid-frequency cetacean Gray's beaked whale Mesoplodon grayi Likely Mid-frequency cetacean Killer whale Orcinus orca Likely Mid-frequency cetacean Long-finned pilot whale Globicephala melas Likely Mid-frequency cetacean New Zealand fur seal Arctocephalus forsteri Likely Otariid pinniped Southern right whale Eubalaena australis Likely Low-frequency cetacean Andrew's beaked whale Mesoplodon bowdoini Possible Mid-frequency Antarctic minke whale Balaenoptera bonaerensis Possible Low-frequency cetacean Arnoux's beaked whale Berardius arnuxii Possible Mid-frequency cetacean Cuvier's beaked whale Ziphius cavirostris Possible Mid-frequency cetacean Dwarf minke whale Balaenoptera acutorostrata Possible Low-frequency cetacean Fin whale Balaenoptera physalus Possible Low-frequency cetacean Hector's beaked whale Mesoplodon hectori Possible Mid-frequency cetacean Humpback whale Megaptera novaeangliae Occasional visitor Low-frequency cetacean Balaenoptera musculus Pygmy blue whale Possible Low-frequency cetacean brevicauda Pygmy sperm whale Kogia breviceps Possible High-frequency cetacean Sei whale Balaenoptera borealis Possible Low-frequency cetacean Shepherd's beaked whale Tasmacetus shepherdi Possible Mid-frequency cetacean Southern right whale dolphin Lissodelphis peronii Possible Mid-frequency cetacean Sperm whale Physeter macrocephalus Possible Mid-frequency cetacean Strap-toothed whale Mesoplodon layardii Possible Mid-frequency cetacean

Table 2 Impulsive Noise Event PTS Levels for Marine Mammals

PTS levels – impulsive noise events

Page 8

DW New Zealand Ltd SLR Ref No: 740.10102-R01-v1.0.docx Marine Mammal Observation Protocol December 2019 Scuttling of Dong Won 701 Fishing Vessel

Table 3 Distance from Vessel to PTS Level

Distance (m) from Vessel to PTS Level

3 Observational Protocol

As no New Zealand guidelines exist for the use of explosives around marine mammals, the Department of Conservations ‘2013 Code of Conduct for Minimising Acoustic Disturbance to Marine Mammals from Seismic Survey Operations’1 (Code of Conduct) has been used as a key reference document.

A qualified Marine Mammal Observer (MMO) shall be used during the scuttling process. The MMO shall be qualified according to the criteria outlined in the Code of Conduct and a summary of MMO duties are presented in Table 4. The maximum on-duty shift for an MMO shall not exceed 12 hours per day.

The MMO shall schedule their shifts and breaks in such a way as to manage their fatigue levels appropriately so focus on the required monitoring can be maintained.

Table 4 Operational Duties of Qualified MMOs

MMO Duties Continually scan the water surface in all directions around the acoustic source for presence of marine mammals, using a combination of naked eye and high-quality binoculars from optimum vantage points for unimpaired visual observations. Determine distance/bearing and plot positions of marine mammals whenever possible during sightings using GPS, sextant, reticle binoculars, compass, measuring sticks, angle boards or other appropriate tools. Record/report all marine mammal sightings, including species, group size, behaviour/activity, presence of calves, distance and direction of travel (if discernible). Record sighting conditions (Beaufort sea state, swell height, visibility, fog/rain and glare) at the beginning and end of the observation period, and whenever there is a significant change in weather conditions. Record any mitigation measures taken.

1 DOC, 2013. ‘2013 Code of Conduct for Minimising Acoustic Disturbance to Marine Mammals from Seismic Survey Operations’. In Department of conservation (DOC) (Ed.) Wellington, New Zealand: Department of Conservation.

Page 9

DW New Zealand Ltd SLR Ref No: 740.10102-R01-v1.0.docx Marine Mammal Observation Protocol December 2019 Scuttling of Dong Won 701 Fishing Vessel

3.1 Mitigation Zones for Delayed Detonation Detonation of the explosives that will be used to scuttle the vessel shall be delayed if any marine mammals are visually observed within the 600 m mitigation zone in the 30 minutes prior to the proposed detonation time.

In the event that a delay is triggered due to the presence of any marine mammals within the 600 m mitigation zone, detonation procedures shall only commence if either of the following are met:

i) All the marine mammals that were visually observed within the mitigation zone have been confirmed, through visual observation, to have moved beyond the mitigation zone; or

ii) No marine mammals have been visually observed within the mitigation zone for 30 minutes.

3.2 Pre-Detonation Observations/Monitoring

Detonation of the explosive shall only occur if the following observations/monitoring has been undertaken: • One qualified MMO present on the tow vessel shall undertake visual observations of the 600 m mitigation zone at least two hours prior to the proposed detonation time.

Page 10

ASIA PACIFIC OFFICES

BRISBANE CANBERRA DARWIN GOLD COAST Level 2, 15 Astor Terrace GPO 410 Unit 5, 21 Parap Road Level 2, 194 Varsity Parade Spring Hill QLD 4000 Canberra ACT 2600 Parap NT 0820 Varsity Lakes QLD 4227 Australia Australia Australia Australia T: +61 7 3858 4800 T: +61 2 6287 0800 T: +61 8 8998 0100 M: +61 438 763 516 F: +61 7 3858 4801 F: +61 2 9427 8200 F: +61 8 9370 0101

MACKAY MELBOURNE NEWCASTLE PERTH 21 River Street Suite 2, 2 Domville Avenue 10 Kings Road Ground Floor, 503 Murray Street Mackay QLD 4740 Hawthorn VIC 3122 New Lambton NSW 2305 Perth WA 6000 Australia Australia Australia Australia T: +61 7 3181 3300 T: +61 3 9249 9400 T: +61 2 4037 3200 T: +61 8 9422 5900

F: +61 3 9249 9499 F: +61 2 4037 3201 F: +61 8 9422 5901

SYDNEY TOWNSVILLE TOWNSVILLE SOUTH WOLLONGONG 2 Lincoln Street Level 1, 514 Sturt Street 12 Cannan Street Level 1, The Central Building Lane Cove NSW 2066 Townsville QLD 4810 Townsville South QLD 4810 UoW Innovation Campus Australia Australia Australia North Wollongong NSW 2500 T: +61 2 9427 8100 T: +61 7 4722 8000 T: +61 7 4772 6500 Australia F: +61 2 9427 8200 F: +61 7 4722 8001 T: +61 404 939 922

AUCKLAND NELSON 68 Beach Road 6/A Cambridge Street Auckland 1010 Richmond, Nelson 7020 New Zealand New Zealand T: +64 27 441 7849 T: +64 274 898 628

APPENDIX J

Simple Green Safety Data Sheet

740.10102.00000-R01-v1.0.docx Page 1 of 1

Safety Data Sheet: Simple Green® All-Purpose Cleaner  Version No. 13000-18A Date of Preparation: 18-October-2018 Supersedes: 10-April-2017 Meets requirements of HSNO CoP 8-1 09-06

Section 1: PRODUCT & COMPANY IDENTIFICATION

Product Name: Simple Green® All-Purpose Cleaner Additional Names: Simple Green® All-Purpose Cleaner & Degreaser

Manufacturer’s Part Number: Please refer to section 16

Supplier: CIPL PTY Ltd. Telephone: + 64 21 950 283 8b Rarere Road Email: [email protected] Takapuna, Auckland, New Zealand 0622 Website: www.simplegreennz.com Emergency Phone: 0800 764 766

Recommended Uses: Concentrated cleaner and degreaser for water safe rinsable surfaces.

Section 2: HAZARDS IDENTIFICATION

Section 3: COMPOSITION/INFORMATION ON INGREDIENTS

Section 4: FIRST AID MEASURES

Workplace First Aid Facilities: Eye Wash Station or treatment recommended. Advice to Doctor: Treat symptomatically.

Page 1 of 5

Safety Data Sheet: Simple Green® All-Purpose Cleaner  Version No. 13000-18A Date of Preparation: 18-October-2018 Supersedes: 10-April-2017 Meets requirements of HSNO CoP 8-1 09-06

Section 5: FIRE FIGHTING MEASURES

Section 6: ACCIDENTAL RELEASE MEASURES

Personal Precautions: Use Personal Protection Recommended in Section 8

Environmental Precautions: Prevent runoff from entering drains, sewers or waterways.

Method for Containment of large and small releases: Dike or soak up with inert absorbent material.

Method for Clean Up of large and small releases: Dilute with water and rinse into sanitary sewer system or dispose into suitable container.

Hazardous Substance (Emergency Management) Regulations 2001 requirements: none.

Section 7: HANDLING AND STORAGE

Section 8: EXPOSURE CONTROLS / PERSONAL PROTECTION

Workplace Exposure Standards: No components listed with Work Safe New Zealand WES / TWA / STEL. Engineering Controls: Not applicable

Section 9: PHYSICAL AND CHEMICAL PROPERTIES

Appearance: Green liquid Odour: Added sassafras odour Physical State: Liquid Odour Threshold: Not determined Boiling Point ASTM D-1120: 101oC (213.8oF) Flash Point ASTM D-93: Non flammable Freezing Point ASTM D-1177: 0 - 3.33oC (32 - 38oF) Flammability: Non flammable Specific Gravity ASTM D-891: 1.01 – 1.03 Autoignition Temperature: Non flammable Evaporation Rate ASTM D-1901: ½ Butyl Acetate @ 25oC Decomposition Temperature: 109oF Page 2 of 5

Safety Data Sheet: Simple Green® All-Purpose Cleaner  Version No. 13000-18A Date of Preparation: 18-October-2018 Supersedes: 10-April-2017 Meets requirements of HSNO CoP 8-1 09-06

Section 9: PHYSICAL AND CHEMICAL PROPERTIES - continued

Section 10: STABILITY AND REACTIVITY

Section 11: TOXICOLOGICAL INFORMATION

Chronic There have been no reports of health effects arising from long term exposure to the ingredients found within this product.

– Possible Routes of exposure Non-irritant per Dermal Irritection® assay modeling. No animal testing performed. Skin corrosion/irritation: Eye damage/irritation: Non- irritant per Ocular Irritection® assay modeling. No animal testing performed Germ Cell Mutagenicity: No ingredients trigger or classify under this category. Carcinogenicity: No ingredients trigger or classify under this category. Reproductive toxicity: No ingredients trigger or classify under this category. STOT-Single Exposure: No ingredients trigger or classify under this category. STOT-repeated exposure: No ingredients trigger or classify under this category. Aspiration hazard: No ingredients trigger or classify under this category.

Page 3 of 5

Safety Data Sheet: Simple Green® All-Purpose Cleaner  Version No. 13000-18A Date of Preparation: 18-October-2018 Supersedes: 10-April-2017 Meets requirements of HSNO CoP 8-1 09-06

Section 12: ECOLOGICAL INFORMATION

Acute Ecotoxicity: Does not classify under the criteria of HSNO or GHS Chronic Ecotoxicty: Does not classify under the criteria of HSNO or GHS

Environmental Effect Levels: None

Aquatic Toxicity: Low, based on OECD 201, 202, 203 + Microtox: EC50 & IC50 ≥100 mg/L

Terrestrial Toxicity: Low, based on toxicology profile

Persistence and degradability: Readily Biodegradable per OECD 301D, Closed Bottle Test Mobility: No data Bioaccumulation: No data

Section 13: DISPOSAL CONSIDERATIONS

Unused Product: Deposit product in a landfill (if solidified), incinerator, or a sewage facility for treatment and disposal; or, discharge product into the environment so that, after reasonable mixing, the concentration of the substance in an environmental medium does not exceed any tolerable exposure limits. Used Product: Used product may contain chemicals that will classify this waste as hazardous. Be sure to assess used product contaminants. Deposit used product in a landfill (if solidified), incinerator, or a sewage facility for treatment and disposal; or, discharge product into the environment so that, after reasonable mixing, the concentration of the substance in an environmental medium does not exceed any tolerable exposure limits.

Contaminated objects : Rinseable-recyclable objects can be rinsed and offered for recycling or disposed of in landfills. Non- rinseable objects should be disposed of to landfills.

Empty Containers: Triple-rinse with water and offer for recycling if available in your area.

Never dispose of used degreasing rinsates into lakes, streams, and open bodies of water or storm drains.

Section 14: TRANSPORT INFORMATION

Section 15: REGULATORY INFORMATION

Group Standard Classification Product not classifiable as any hazard under HSNO standards Ingredient HSNO Approval Number Water Ethoxylated Alcohol HSNO approval HSR003338 Sodium Citrate May be used as a single component chemical under an appropriate group standard Tetrasodium N,N-bis(carboxymethyl)-L-glutamate May be used as a single component chemical under an appropriate group standard Sodium Carbonate HSNO Approval: HSR003265 Page 4 of 5

Safety Data Sheet: Simple Green® All-Purpose Cleaner  Version No. 13000-18A Date of Preparation: 18-October-2018 Supersedes: 10-April-2017 Meets requirements of HSNO CoP 8-1 09-06

Section 15: REGULATORY INFORMATION – continued

Ingredient HSNO Approval Number Citric Acid HSNO Approval: HSR003138 Fragrance Colourant Isothiazolinone Preservative May be used as a single component chemical under an appropriate group standard

NZIoC: All chemicals registered on New Zealand Inventory of Chemicals

Section 16: OTHER INFORMATION

Manufacturer’s Part Numbers SG13103 - 59ml SG13022 - 650ml SG13005R - 3.78L SG13034 - 208L SG13100 - 118ml SG13033 - 946ml SG13004 - 20L SG13275 - 1040L

Prepared / Revised By: CIPL PTY LTD Reason for Revision: Update to Company Contact information

Page 5 of 5

ASIA PACIFIC OFFICES

F: +61 3 9249 9499 F: +61 2 4037 3201 F: +61 8 9422 5901

AUCKLAND NELSON 68 Beach Road 6/A Cambridge Street Auckland 1010 Richmond, Nelson 7020 New Zealand New Zealand T: +64 27 441 7849 T: +64 274 898 628