Technical Assistance Consultant’s Report
Project Number: 48480 December 2017
Nauru: Sustainable and Climate-Resilient Connectivity Project Financed by the Asian Development Fund
Prepared by Cardno Emerging Markets Fortitude Valley, QLD, Australia
For Ministry of Finance Implementing agency
This consultant’s report does not necessarily reflect the views of ADB or the Government concerned, and ADB and the Government cannot be held liable for its contents. (For project preparatory technical assistance: All the views expressed herein may not be incorporated into the proposed project’s design.
GRANT 6005-NAU: UXO Clearance, Geotechnical Investigations, Surveys and Detailed Engineering Services Final Interim Report – UXO Assessment Report
Figure 4 : Four Separate ERW Remediation Environments (from Appendix D - Part B ERW Risk Assessment and Mitigation Plan - Plate 2)
31. ERW Remediation in Area 1, which is bordered by the Waterfront Road in the west and the project boundaries in all other directions, is problematic due to existing structures and building detritus. These structures and the surrounding detritus will interfere with the operation of detection equipment and severely limit its use. Removal of all structures and debris under the direction of Explosive Ordnance Disposal (EOD) Technician and then a 100% area coverage Geophysical ERW Survey or a 100% area coverage Analogue ERW Survey depending on the surface conditions post structure removal is recommended. On completion of the survey the data would be processed and a team of EOD Technicians would investigate every discrete ferrous anomaly to determine whether it is ERW or otherwise. Dependent on the Senior EOD Technician’s judgment, all ERW would be either removed, rendered safe and removed, or disposed of in place. This is considered impractical at this early stage of the project to be generally undertaken in the port area where reinforced concrete floor slabs exist in buildings which are scheduled for demolition in the near future. In areas where geotechnical testing is necessary, it is recommended. 32. Area 2 comprises the beach and reef zones. The eastern section which abuts Area 1 was not able to be processed into valid data due to the presence of building and other domestic detritus. There is a significant amount of metallic debris in the area (above and below ground) as indicated in Figure 5 below. At this early stage of the project removal of debris and further
GRANT-6005 NAU - Final Interim Report - UXO Assessment Report.docx 21 September 2016 Page 12 of 20 GRANT 6005-NAU: UXO Clearance, Geotechnical Investigations, Surveys and Detailed Engineering Services Final Interim Report – UXO Assessment Report
investigation are not warranted for locations other than for borehole positions, but these can be relocated to avoid positions of anomalies.
Figure 5 : Northern Section Area 2 - Processed Magnetic Data Plot (from Appendix D - Part B ERW Risk Assessment and Mitigation Plan)
33. Area 3 is the crossover zone on the edge of the reef between land and marine and is an especially difficult area. It is too shallow for a towed marine survey and water surge provides a difficult working environment for divers. To clear this area, divers are recommended with underwater magnetometers be used. However for the drilling of boreholes, relocation of the borehole to an adjacent position is suggested. 34. Area 4 is the offshore area where no construction would be required and needs no further consideration. 3.2.3 ERW Risk Matrix 35. Due to the problematic conditions present on the site, high levels of non-ordnance related ferrous waste, the surf zone, and the small size, yet still hazardous nature of some ordnance types, there will always remain a small residual risk of ERW contamination on the site. 36. A qualified EOD Technician should be engaged as an ERW Safety Officer and should be present on-site for any construction phase of the ADB Nauru Port Development Project. The ERW Safety Officer would provide advice regarding ERW remediation certification and ERW mitigation requirements, conduct small area clearance for unanticipated works outside the ERW remediation certified area, and also provide an immediate response to any ERW finds. The Project Risk Matrix is presented below.
Figure 6 : Project Risk Matrix (from Appendix D - Part B ERW Risk Assessment and Mitigation Plan)
GRANT-6005 NAU - Final Interim Report - UXO Assessment Report.docx 21 September 2016 Page 13 of 20 GRANT 6005-NAU: UXO Clearance, Geotechnical Investigations, Surveys and Detailed Engineering Services Final Interim Report – UXO Assessment Report
37. However any intrusive work conducted during the investigative stages of this project would require the presence of an EOD Technician to conduct small area ERW avoidance searches.
GRANT-6005 NAU - Final Interim Report - UXO Assessment Report.docx 21 September 2016 Page 14 of 20 GRANT 6005-NAU: UXO Clearance, Geotechnical Investigations, Surveys and Detailed Engineering Services Final Interim Report – UXO Assessment Report
4 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
38. ERW remediation is difficult in Area 1 where existing structures and obstacles interfere with the operation of detection equipment and severely limit its use. Dependent on the Senior EOD Technician’s judgment, all ERW would be either removed, rendered safe and removed, or disposed of in place. This is considered impractical at this early stage of the project to be generally undertaken in the port area where reinforced concrete floor slabs exist in buildings which are scheduled for demolition in the near future. In areas where geotechnical testing is necessary, it is recommended. 39. Area 2 comprises the beach and reef zones where there is a significant amount of metallic debris in the area (above and below ground). At this early stage of the project removal of debris and further investigation are not warranted for locations other than for borehole positions, but these can be relocated to avoid positions of anomalies. 40. Area 3 is the crossover zone on the edge of the reef between land and marine and is too shallow for a towed marine survey and water surge provides a difficult working environment for divers. To clear this area, it is recommended that divers with underwater magnetometers be used as the project proceeds beyond the preliminary stage. However for the drilling of boreholes, relocation of the borehole to an adjacent position is recommended. 41. Area 4 is the offshore area where no construction would be required and needs no further consideration. 42. A senior EOD Technician has been approved to attend geotechnical drilling to provide monitoring of any ERW present.
GRANT-6005 NAU - Final Interim Report - UXO Assessment Report.docx 21 September 2016 Page 15 of 20 GRANT 6005-NAU: UXO Clearance, Geotechnical Investigations, Surveys and Detailed Engineering Services Final Interim Report – UXO Assessment Report
Appendix A: UXO Survey Extent
GRANT-6005 NAU - Final Interim Report - UXO Assessment Report.docx 21 September 2016 Page 16 of 20 NORTH
NAURU EXISTING
DATE PLOTTED: 11 August 2016 3:35 PM BY : ERWIN FRANCISCO DATE PLOTTED: 11 August 2016 3:35 PM BY : AIWO PORT
PORTION 208 SITE LOCATION PLAN NTS
NAURU EXISTING AIWO PORT
LOCALITY PLAN SCALE 1:10000
0 15 30 45 60 75m NOTE: GENERAL LAYOUT PLAN SCALE 1:750 @A1 PORTION 208 IS INDICATIVE LOCATION AND OUTLINE ONLY AND 0 200 400 600 800 1000m SHALL BE VERIFIED DURING ACTUAL TOPOGRAPHIC SURVEY. SCALE 1:750 SCALE 1:10000 @A1
Drawn Date Client MR 28/06/2016 NAURU Cardno Limited All Rights Reserved. ® Checked Date Project NAURU PORTS DEVELOPMENT PROJECT Status This document is produced by Cardno Limited solely for the Designed Date FOR CONCEPT APPROVAL benefit of and use by the client in accordance with the NOT TO BE USED FOR CONSTRUCTION PURPOSES WHUPVRIWKHUHWDLQHU&DUGQR/LPLWHGGRHVQRWDQGVKDOOQRW Verified Date DATUM Scale Size assume any responsibility or liability whatsoever to any third Cardno (Qld) Pty Ltd | ABN 57 051 074 992 Title WGS84 AS SHOWN A1 party arising out of any use or reliance by third party on the /HYHO6W3DXO¶V7HUUDFH AIWO PORT Approved Drawing Number Revision content of this document. Fortitude Valley, QLD 4006 UXO SURVEY EXTENT BOUNDARY 1 28/06/2016 ISSUED AS DRAFT TO CLIENT FOR DISCUSSION Tel: 07 3369 9822 Fax: 07 3369 9722 Rev. Date Description Des. Verif. Appd. Web: www.cardno.com.au AC86100-PD-0102 A XREF's: Contours CAD File: W:\ACM941036 Nauru Port Development Project - PDA\(3) Design & Documentation\CAD\Sketch6.dwg CAD File: GRANT 6005-NAU: UXO Clearance, Geotechnical Investigations, Surveys and Detailed Engineering Services Final Interim Report – UXO Assessment Report
Appendix B: UXO Site-Specific Environmental Management Plan (SEMP)
GRANT-6005 NAU - Final Interim Report - UXO Assessment Report.docx 21 September 2016 Page 17 of 20 Government of Nauru
UXO - Site Specific Environmental Management Plan (SEMP)
GRANT Number: 6005-NAU Date: 28 July 2016
Nauru: Port Development Project– Project Design Advance (48480-002) UXO Clearance, Geotechnical Investigations, Surveys and Detailed Engineering Services
Prepared for: Government of Nauru Asian Development Bank Nauru Port Authority
Prepared By: Cardno Emerging Markets (Australia) Pty Ltd Level 11, 515 St Paul's Terrace, Fortitude Valley, Queensland 4006 Australia Milsearch Pty Ltd Level 1, Unit 4-5, 30 Mawson Place, Mawson, ACT, Australia, 2607
GRANT 6005-NAU: UXO Clearance, Geotechnical Investigations, Surveys and Detailed Engineering Services UXO – Site Specific Environmental Management Plan (SEMP)
ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS 2 1 INTRODUCTION 3
1.1 PROJECT BACKGROUND 3 1.2 SCOPE OF WORKS 3 1.3 SUMMARY OF THE SEMP 5 2 ENVIRONMENTAL AND OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH AND SAFETY (OH&S) POLICY 6
2.1 ENVIRONMENTAL POLICIES 6 2.2 ENVIRONMENTAL AND OH& S PROJECT OBJECTIVES 6 2.3 ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT REQUIREMENTS 7 3 ORGANIZATIONAL ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES 8
3.1 ORGANIZATIONAL CHART 8 3.2 ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES 8 4 ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PLAN 9 5 GRIEVANCE REDRESS MECHANISM (GRM) 15 APPENDIX A: MILSEARCH PROJECT HEALTH, SAFETY AND ENVIRONMENTAL PLAN – NAU53916 – ADB PORT DEVELOPMENT PROJECT NAURU 17 APPENDIX B: MONITORING AND REPORTING CHECKLIST 18
GRANT- 6005 NAU - UXO SEMP-Rev5.docx 28 July 2016 Page 1 of 19 GRANT 6005-NAU: UXO Clearance, Geotechnical Investigations, Surveys and Detailed Engineering Services UXO – Site Specific Environmental Management Plan (SEMP)
ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS
ADB - Asian Development Bank
DCIE - Department of Commerce, Industry and Environment
DGPS - Differential Global Positioning System
EHSG - Environmental Health and Safety Guidelines
EIA - Environmental Impact Assessment
EMP - Environmental Management Plan
ERW - Explosive Remnants of War
GRM - Grievance Redress Mechanism
GoN - Government of Nauru
HS&E - Heath, Safety and Environment
IEE - Initial Environmental Examination
NPA - Nauru Port Authority
NESD - National Emergency Services Department
NPDP - Nauru Port Development Project
OH&S - Occupational Health and Safety
PAD - Planning Aid Division
PDA - Project Design Advance
PPTA - Project Preparatory Technical Assistance
PRIF - Pacific Regional Infrastructure Facility
SEMP - Site Specific Management Plan
ToR - Terms of Reference
UXO - Unexploded Ordnance
NOTE In this report, “$” refers to US dollars unless otherwise stated
GRANT- 6005 NAU - UXO SEMP-Rev5.docx 28 July 2016 Page 2 of 19
UXO CLEARANCE, GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATIONS, SURVEYS AND DETAILED ENGINEERING SERVICES GRANT 6005-NAU
1 INTRODUCTION
1.1 Project Background
1. The Asian Development Bank (ADB) through technical assistance from the Pacific Regional Infrastructure Facility (PRIF) is assisting the Government of Nauru (GoN) to upgrade and improve the infrastructure and services of the Nauru Port and the Nauru Port Authority (NPA). 2. Through the ADB a number of reports have been commissioned pertaining to the redesign of the port and its land based structures and includes the potential environmental impacts that require suitable environmental management actions developed and implemented to ensure the project meets the ADB safeguard requirements and laws and regulations of Nauru. 3. In particular, the potential presence of Unexploded Ordnances (UXO) resulting from World War II hostilities within the port site and the structural competency (geotechnical assessment) of the port site. Both actions need to be assessed before the Project Preparatory Technical Assistance (PPTA) phase of the project is initiated. This report focuses only on the environmental safeguard requirements associated with UXO assessment component.
1.2 Scope of Works
4. The specific scope of works as identified in the ADB objectives of the Project Design Advance (PDA) is to undertake an “Assessment of unexploded ordnance (UXO) – ahead of any investigation/survey works to ensure safety of personnel”. 5. Milsearch Pty Ltd has detailed the procedures and protocols it will undertake to assess the NPA site for the potential presences of UXO based on the projects original Terms of Reference (ToR). Details of this approach and actions to be undertaken includes; i. Project Planning – the generation of all project specific safety and operational documentation; ii. Focused Historical Review – all World War II activities related to Nauru, characterization of likely Explosive Remnants of War (ERW) contamination; iii. Survey – a 100% coverage of all available areas of the project footprint; iv. Risk Assessment – based on the results of the Historical Review and the Geophysical Survey data Milsearch will create a Risk Matrix; v. Explosive Remnants of War (ERW) Risk Mitigation Management Plan developed – an overarching life of project plan using the Risk Matrix to ensure that the hazard of ERW is considered with all activities and the appropriate risk mitigation actions are taken; vi. Consolidated Report – a two part report with Part A providing the methodology and results of the Historical Review and the Geophysical Survey, and Part B consisting of the ERW Risk Mitigation Management Plan and Risk Matrix
Nauru: Port Development Project (48480-002) UXO Clearance, Geotechnical Investigations, Surveys and Detailed Engineering Services Site Specific Environmental Management Plan
6. The detailed process for the Geophysical Survey (step 3 above) includes the following: i. Milsearch will deploy a 2-person team employing Geometrics G858 digital technology to conduct the 100% coverage, Geophysical Survey of all available areas of the project footprint. One team member will be nominated as the on-site Project Manager. The Project Manager will be a qualified Level 4 Explosive Ordnance Disposal Technician. Both team members however will be fully qualified and highly experienced in ERW survey procedures and the operation of the Geometrics Dual Sensor G858 Magnetometer. ii. The Geometrics Dual Sensor G858 Magnetometer has been selected over Electromagnetic (EM) detection systems due to the conductive saline environment of the project footprint. iii. The Team is expected to spend six days on-site. The Geophysical Survey would be Project Managed on-site by Mr. Mark Reynish. iv. The true density of contamination within the identified area is unknown; however there is a high probability that hazardous ERW contamination is present within the project footprint. The minimum target size for the Geophysical Survey will be driven by the results of the Historical review. v. In order to validate the Historical Review process, and to assess the future remediation requirement, Milsearch would conduct a 100% coverage, Geophysical Survey of all available areas of the project footprint. vi. In conducting the survey operation, Milsearch shall ensure the following 100% survey methodology is undertaken: Prior to undertaking the search operations, the Milsearch Project Manager, utilizing a sub-meter accurate Differential Global Positioning System (DGPS), will record and mark the client agreed search boundary points; To achieve control, the search polygon may be broken into 50m blocks and marked as such with temporary wooden markers; All available areas of the project footprint shall be systematically and progressively subjected to a 100% digital survey along parallel transect lanes utilizing the Geometrics G858 magnetometer; Areas which cannot be surveyed due to existing structures, cadastral issues, or other impediments will be clearly demarked and DGPS recorded as a limitation to the survey coverage; The data from the survey will be processed and interpreted by the Milsearch Chief Geophysicist Torbjorn von Strokirch; vii. The interpreted data will be provided as a DGPS plotted map and an accompanying Anomaly Sheet(commonly referred to as a ‘Dig’ Sheet); viii. The ‘Dig’ Sheet provides DGPS Coordinates, estimated ferrous mass, and estimated depth of all anomalies which fall into the target size and require investigation; ix. Part A to the Consolidated Report will, as a minimum, contain: A description of the search and equipment and methodologies employed during the project; A full color geophysical plots of anomalies which require investigation; ‘Dig” Sheets for all anomalies which require investigation; A description of the conduct and effectiveness of the internal and external (if conducted) Quality Management of the survey; x. An electronic map showing: The boundary of the areas subjected to survey; Areas where effective survey could not be conducted;
GRANT- 6005 NAU - UXO SEMP-Rev5.docx 28 July 2016 Page 4 of 19 Nauru: Port Development Project (48480-002) UXO Clearance, Geotechnical Investigations, Surveys and Detailed Engineering Services Site Specific Environmental Management Plan
Relevant photographs, and Any further recommendations. 7. If UXO are located during the assessment the following actions as detailed in the pre-construction IEE and in the tender proposal will be initiated. This includes; i. All work will cease and the site will be cleared of all unnecessary personnel; ii. The appropriate initial safety distance will be evacuated and secured; iii. The National Emergency Services Department (NESD) will be contacted and informed of the munitions type and location; iv. The President’s office will be contacted and informed; v. The Nauru Police force will be contacted, and informed of the munition type and location (the police may be used to secure the site and evacuate residences as required); vi. The Australia High Commissioner will be contacted and alerted of the situation; vii. If required a formal request for assistance from the Australia High Commissioner to mobilize military EOD assets may be made; viii. The Nauru Rehabilitation Corporation (NRC) will also be informed whom may also be used to assist; ix. The Milsearch PM can provide professional advice in order to assist with the UXO identification, condition/hazard assessment, and best course of action (safe to move or destroy in place) decision process; and x. Milsearch will not be responsible for the final action.
1.3 Summary of the SEMP
8. Therefore, this report details the Site Specific Environmental Management Plan (SEMP) approach and details mitigation and monitoring actions Milsearch Pty Ltd will deploy during the assessment of the Nauru Port site for the presence of UXO. 9. Milsearch has read and fully understand the environmental safeguard requirements of the project in relation to the UXO assessments and has subsequently designed the assessment approach to ensure compliance with the project Pre – Construction Initial Environment Examination (IEE) management and mitigation Environmental Management Plan (EMP). This includes the twelve (12) potential pre- construction management actions detailed in the report. 10. The actions presented in this SEMP are to be implemented to minimize any adverse environmental impacts resulting from the assessment and to articulate the roles and responsibilities of these actions on site. These actions will ensure the pre- construction IEE conclusions of no identifiable environmental significant impacts are justified.
GRANT- 6005 NAU - UXO SEMP-Rev5.docx 28 July 2016 Page 5 of 19 Nauru: Port Development Project (48480-002) UXO Clearance, Geotechnical Investigations, Surveys and Detailed Engineering Services Site Specific Environmental Management Plan
2 ENVIRONMENTAL AND OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH AND SAFETY (OH&S) POLICY
2.1 Environmental Policies
11. Milsearch considers no phase of operations or administration to be of greater importance than injury and illness prevention for all staff and ensuring environmental integrity is maintained and compliance is attained. 12. Milsearch Environmental and Occupational Health and Safety (OH&S) policies and specific plan for this project has been detailed in a separate report (see Appendix A). This report details the company’s corporate commitment to ensuring a safe and health work environment whilst preventing potential impacts to the environment. Information detailed in this report reflects this commitment and forms a subsidiary document to the SEMP. The environmental and OH&S policies shall be communicated through formal and informal meetings to all employees throughout the course of the assessment. 13. The assessments scope of works associated with this project will be undertaken in a manner that meets or exceeds the intent of: i. Relevant Jurisdictional HS&E Legislation, regulations, advisory standards, Codes of Practice (CoP) and guidance notes; ii. Australian HS&E Legislation, regulations, advisory standards, COP and guidance notes; iii. Milsearch Health and Safety Policy; iv. Milsearch Environmental Policy; v. Milsearch Integrated Management System; and vi. Current or site specific Health, Safety and Environmental requirements.
2.2 Environmental and OH& S Project Objectives
14. Consistent with the Milsearch Environmental and OH&S policies, the objectives and expectations for this project include: i. Develop, implement and maintain an effective and efficient Environmental Management Plan; ii. Identify and comply with environmental regulations, law and contractual requirements; iii. Ensure minimum impact to the surrounding environment and community (zero damage to property); iv. Increase environmental awareness amongst all employees; v. To give OHS&E priority over all Project activities and to intervene when an unsafe act or unsafe condition is observed; vi. Zero harm to Milsearch employees, subcontractors, including employees of subcontractors, communities and visitors; vii. To identify and implement HS&E legislation, regulations and codes of practice applicable to this project; viii. To establish and maintain operational procedures that identify hazards associated with the work carried out and to implement effective mitigation measures;
GRANT- 6005 NAU - UXO SEMP-Rev5.docx 28 July 2016 Page 6 of 19 Nauru: Port Development Project (48480-002) UXO Clearance, Geotechnical Investigations, Surveys and Detailed Engineering Services Site Specific Environmental Management Plan
ix. To provide adequate emergency response to incidents and to ensure all incidents are properly investigated and reported and appropriate corrective/preventative actions are taken and evaluated; x. To outline key performance indicators to monitor performance and report HS&E matters to all relevant Project stakeholders; xi. To ensure roles and responsibilities are clearly identified and communicated to individual Project employees; xii. To establish Project specific training requirements to enable all stakeholders to be competent to perform tasks safely, to be aware of and understand HS&E hazards and risks associated with their work activities and he control measures necessary to manage them; xiii. To engage subcontractors who share the values outlined in this Project HS&E Plan; xiv. To implement an audit program to ensure compliance and continuous improvement; and xv. To create and nurture a positive HS&E culture that empowers and supports Project employees in accordance with this Project HS&E Plan.
2.3 Environmental Management Requirements
15. Milsearch requirements for environmental management are based on the ADB Nauru Port per construction IEE and the company’s environment and social policies. They include: i. Prevent contamination of, and harm to the environment; ii. No activity results in breach of the provisions of the legislation or authorities’ requirements associated with the project; iii. Compliance with the Client’s requirements as stipulated in the contract; iv. Recognition of environmentally sensitive issues and implement controls; v. Review the processes, activities and tasks to establish suitable risk management strategies and controls; vi. Use Site Inductions, Specific Training and Tool Box Talks to communicate the environmental requirements to all personnel; vii. Develop and implement appropriate environmental project instructions, were relevant; viii. Establish relationships with other contractors on the site; ix. Ensure personnel are qualified to perform the work assigned to them; and x. Periodic review of implementation to assess compliance with SEMP.
GRANT- 6005 NAU - UXO SEMP-Rev5.docx 28 July 2016 Page 7 of 19 Nauru: Port Development Project (48480-002) UXO Clearance, Geotechnical Investigations, Surveys and Detailed Engineering Services Site Specific Environmental Management Plan
3 ORGANIZATIONAL ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES
3.1 Organizational Chart
Figure 1: UXO Team Organizational Chart
3.2 Roles and Responsibilities
16. Implementation of internationally recognized good environmental and OS&H practices forms the basis of Milsearch approach to this contract and is reflected in the SEMP. 17. Milsearch’s Senior Operations Manager, Alan McKeown is the Project Director for this Project. He will be providing overview and direction to the project team. Dallas Evans is the appointed Project Quality Manager. He will be administering the Company Integrated Management System, ensuring that Milsearch maintains their current certification under the AS/NZS ISO 9001 Quality Management Systems, Occupational Health and Safety Management OHSAS 18001 and Environmental Management under the AS/NZS ISO 14001. Torbjorn von Strokirch is the Project Geophysicist who will be having overall responsibility for all technical aspects of the Geophysical Survey. The geophysical survey will be project managed by Mark Reynish and John Allen will be the Magnetometer Operator throughout the duration of the geophysical survey. 18. The designated staff member responsible for oversight of Milsearch’s OHS protocols and requirements will be the project team leader, Barry McFadyen. He will also be responsible for ensuring that the SEMP is implemented appropriately and provision of updates to the client.
GRANT- 6005 NAU - UXO SEMP-Rev5.docx 28 July 2016 Page 8 of 19 Nauru: Port Development Project (48480-002) UXO Clearance, Geotechnical Investigations, Surveys and Detailed Engineering Services Site Specific Environmental Management Plan
4 ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PLAN
19. The UXO Environmental Monitoring Plan (EMP) (Table 1 below) is based on the ADB Port project’s IEE for pre-construction EMP activities. This report documented that the Nauru Port Development Site (NPDS) is a “highly modified industrial area which has no significant impacts or value on neither native biodiversity nor individual terrestrial, or coastal/marine ecosystems of Nauru” and reports that there “are no rare, endangered or threatened terrestrial or marine flora or fauna recorded within the project area of influence, nor does the proposed site area have any impacts on communities or individual food security”. 20. The UXO assessment will be undertaken within the entire port site, which includes both the coastal land, foreshore and intertidal exposed reef flat as detailed in section 1.2 above. 21. The assessment in summary requires 2 individuals to walk over the site carrying equipment. There will be no intrusions to the ground nor any vegetation removal. Therefore the UXO assessment has almost no impact on the environment of the site. There will be no removal of UXO is located, however the site will be clearly marked and exclusion measures should be implemented. The exclusion measures may include a barrier to prevent access to the location only. 22. Of the twelve potential Environmental impacts identified in the IEE nine (9) are directly relevant to the UXO site assessment and are addressed below, including specific actions Milsearch will undertake to ensure minimal environmental impacts will arise from the assessment. The original table format used by the IEE project is retained. 23. The Environmental Monitoring Checklist to be used is shown in Appendix B.
GRANT- 6005 NAU - UXO SEMP-Rev5.docx 28 July 2016 Page 9 of 19
Table 1: SEMP Matrix incorporating the activities, impacts, mitigation measures required to address the impacts, and monitoring requirements for the UXO assessment for the Nauru Port Development Project
Environment Mitigation Measures Monitoring Plan al Issue Project Measures and Actions Responsible to Monitor Frequency & Responsible Activities Implement Parameter Verification to Monitor
PRE-CONSTRUCTION (DESIGN) PHASE The initial on ground site assessment undertaken during Protection of Environment Before DCIE to the pre-construction IEE clearly indicates the NPDP site Sensitive & al Approval if contract work evaluate if is located on highly modified industrial land and therefore Ecological any sensitive begins. any sensitive there was no significant sensitive or natural ecological Important areas are ecological areas present. Areas/Sites located. sites are Nevertheless Milsearch through its environmental policy located. and professional due diligence will during its initial site
inspection identify and report any potential environmentally sensitive / natural areas within the Milsearch. NPDP. Cardno to monitor. If any site is located the following actions will be undertaken; Locate optional construction sites/activities away from A briefing note to them. be provided once Ensure construction personnel are aware of locations of preliminary sensitive areas and avoid them and assessment If the proposed construction passes close to these completed areas, include temporary fences to restrict machines indicating yes or no and activities from encroaching in the area. if any ecological sites were located. The initial on ground site assessment undertaken during Encroachment Environment Before DCIE to the pre-construction IEE clearly indicates the NPDP site on known al Approval if contract work evaluate if has no known cultural and/or historic sites. Cultural & any cultural begins. any sensitive Nevertheless Milsearch through its environmental policy and/or ecological and professional due diligence - will during its initial site Nauru: Port Development Project (48480-002) UXO Clearance, Geotechnical Investigations, Surveys and Detailed Engineering Services Site Specific Environmental Management Plan
Environment Mitigation Measures Monitoring Plan al Issue Project Measures and Actions Responsible to Monitor Frequency & Responsible Activities Implement Parameter Verification to Monitor Historical inspection identify and report any cultural and/or historic Milsearch. historic sites sites are sites. sites within the NPDP. are located. located.
If any site is located the following actions will be undertaken; Cardno to Do not damage any existing or newly discovered cultural A briefing note to monitor. and/or heritage sites. be provided once Regularly consult with local people and government preliminary during design phase activities regarding any presence of assessment archaeological monuments completed indicating yes or no if any sites were located. Ensure PAD & DCIE approved the SEMP before work is Development PAD, DCIE Environment Before DCIE and initiated for the UXO site assessment. Consent and al Approval contract work Cardno If UXO located during assessment detail information as Permit begins. highlighted in section 1.2 and await further instructions Acquisition from client and government on how to proceed. The removal of any UXO is outside the scope of this assessment.
Not relevant for the UXO on site assessment. Climate Change Adaptation Measures evaluated and incorporated into the design.
GRANT- 6005 NAU - UXO SEMP-Rev5.docx 28 July 2016 Page 11 of 19 Nauru: Port Development Project (48480-002) UXO Clearance, Geotechnical Investigations, Surveys and Detailed Engineering Services Site Specific Environmental Management Plan
Environment Mitigation Measures Monitoring Plan al Issue Project Measures and Actions Responsible to Monitor Frequency & Responsible Activities Implement Parameter Verification to Monitor No design work required for this assessment, however General Contractor On-site During Cardno due diligences is to be undertaken during assessment to Ecological Milsearch inspections assessment ensure minimal disturbance of surrounding ecosystems. Principles contract. Environmental best practices are to be exercised. Applied to Design. Milsearch corporate environmental and OH&S policies Environmental Milsearch Monitor Before Cardno suitable to implement, manage, and monitor ly Responsible compliance contract work environmental and safety issues associated with the UXO Procurement. against begins. assessment. SEMP. Milsearch herein has developed the projects SEMP based on the projects pre-construction EMP. Funds have been secured through the project to oversee Environmental Milsearch Monitor Before Cardno the SEMP implementation for the UXO assessment, Capacity compliance contract work including workers orientation on SEMP provisions. Development against begins. SEMP. Assessment of entire terrestrial and intertidal shallow UXO Milsearch Monitor During Cardno water marine (reef flat, crest) areas of the NPDP site by Detection, compliance contract work. means of a 2 person team employing Geometrics G858 Management – against digital technology to conduct the 100% coverage. and Removal SEMP. Strict adherence to Nauru Government UXO safety and management guidelines and Milsearch Environment and OH&S policies and procedures. No removal of UXO to be undertaken – if located follow procedures outlined in the SEMP, herein. Confirmation from UXO assessment that all NPDP sites are safe (no UXO) before constructions phase of NPDP can be undertaken.
GRANT- 6005 NAU - UXO SEMP-Rev5.docx 28 July 2016 Page 12 of 19 Nauru: Port Development Project (48480-002) UXO Clearance, Geotechnical Investigations, Surveys and Detailed Engineering Services Site Specific Environmental Management Plan
Environment Mitigation Measures Monitoring Plan al Issue Project Measures and Actions Responsible to Monitor Frequency & Responsible Activities Implement Parameter Verification to Monitor Not relevant for the UXO on site assessment. Geotechnical Assessment of Site Suitability. Milsearch has provided its corporate Environmental and Port Project Milsearch Monitor Before Cardno OH&S policies, guidelines, and protocols (annex 1). Occupational compliance contract work Including: Health and against begins. . Allocation of responsibility for safety inspections to a Safety SEMP. designated, qualified and experienced Health and Safety Officer (HSO) within the Contractor’s staff; . Education and Training of staff and/or workers on safety precautions, including implementing emergency procedures applicable to this assessment will be undertaken; . Provision of protective clothing and equipment to workers as appropriate; . Equipment operators are properly licensed and trained; . First aid and sanitation facilities have been arranged for staff at the site performing the assessment. . Emergency evacuation procedures and site specific regular safety checks of equipment have been developed. . Provision of hazard warning signs at the all construction sites; and . A Contractor (Milsearch) will maintain a register of accidents detailing date, circumstances, severity, action taken and outcomes. The projects GRM is to be developed by the Cardno Potential risks team not Milsearch. due to public
GRANT- 6005 NAU - UXO SEMP-Rev5.docx 28 July 2016 Page 13 of 19 Nauru: Port Development Project (48480-002) UXO Clearance, Geotechnical Investigations, Surveys and Detailed Engineering Services Site Specific Environmental Management Plan
Environment Mitigation Measures Monitoring Plan al Issue Project Measures and Actions Responsible to Monitor Frequency & Responsible Activities Implement Parameter Verification to Monitor not well Milsearch will comply with the projects GRM. informed on the Grievance Redress Mechanism (GRM) and how it is operated. All assessment activities undertaken within the grounds Social Milsearch Monitor Before and Cardno of NPDP and therefore no disruption to non-port Disruption and compliance during business, communities or individuals. Public Health against contract work Milsearch will consult and work with port staff during the and Safety SEMP. begins. assessment including staff awareness of activities. Risks. Milsearch will implement its environmental and OH&S protocols and ensure professional codes of conduct at all times. Consider erecting temporary barriers to prevent NPA staff entering areas during the of assessment, Consider erecting suitable signage to inform NPA staff of the activities and requirements/protocols to follow during the assessment.
GRANT- 6005 NAU - UXO SEMP-Rev5.docx 28 July 2016 Page 14 of 19
5 GRIEVANCE REDRESS MECHANISM (GRM)
24. A Grievance Redress Mechanism (GRM) will be established to receive, evaluate and facilitate the resolution of affected people’s concerns, complaints and grievances about the environmental and social performance of the Project. The GRM is to be based on accepted practices in Nauru including previous experience on ADB projects and provides an accessible, time-bound and transparent mechanism for the affected persons to voice and resolve social and environmental concerns linked to the Project. 25. A NPDP GRM has been established to address any concerns, complaints and grievances arising during the course of implementing all aspects of the project including the UXO assessment. Members of the public may perceive risks to themselves or their property, or have concerns about the environmental performance of the project. These issues may relate to any aspects of the UXO assessment and therefore they will have rights to file complaints for the contractor (Milsearch) and/or Ministry of Finance/Cardno to address promptly and sensitively, and for complaints to be made without retribution. 26. The GRM for the UXO assessment includes the following; i. The Contractor (Milsearch) will maintain a register of any community grievances and that register will record the grievance and the resolution measures taken. Cardno’s Team Leader, Barry McFadyen will also be the Liaison Officer (LO) who will be frequently on site and will receive and register complains in the first instant. The register will be made available for inspection by all authorized representatives of the project and government. ii. There will be a dedicated landline number installed by the NPDP. This compliant spread sheet will also be made available for inspection by the authorized representatives of the project and employer. iii. Any land grievances associated with the UXO assessment will follow the same procedure of communication where the complaint will be registered by the Liaison Officer or by contacting the dedicated landline established by the project.
27. For all general GRM associated with the UXO assessment the following mechanisms will be used for all grievances (diagrammatically represented in Figure 2). i. All minor land related grievances that can be resolved immediately on the site. Other land related grievances would be handled separately. The focus of the GRM is to resolve issues in a customarily appropriate fashion at the community stakeholder level. ii. Community concerns, complaints and grievances will be taken and registered into the Complaints log by the Liaison Officer. Should the LO or an individual not be satisfied with any aspect of their communication in relation to issue on site, the matter will then be taken to the Cardno's site manager (Team Leader). If the Site Manager cannot resolve the issue, then it will be referred to the projects Team Leader or higher, until the grievance is resolved. iii. It is unlikely that non-land related grievances would progress beyond the Site Manager level for resolution. Should a grievance proceed to the Project Management Level and resolution not be achieved at that level, then the Team Leader would have no option but to withdraw the Contractor (Milsearch) from the site and for the grievance to be handled through legal processes.
GRANT- 6005 NAU - UXO SEMP-Rev5.docx 28 July 2016 Page 15 of 19
iv. The Milsearch will maintain a register of any community grievances and that register will record the grievance and the resolution measures taken. Any authorized representatives of the Cardno will make the register available for inspection. Milsearch will inform the Team Leader of all grievances received including those that have been resolved.
Individual or group
Liaison Officer Resolution
No resolution
Site Manager
Team Leader
Project Management
Figure 2: General Grievance Mechanism Flow Chart for the PVUDP
28. For the UXO assessment GRM the following mechanisms will be used for all grievances: i. A consent between NPA, Nauru government and key community stakeholders (including landholders) has been signed in which the stakeholders have agreed to the UXO assessment being undertaken. Any minor land related grievances associated with the Contractor’s site assessment would be handled using the mechanism shown above. Any other land related grievances are not the responsibility of the Contractor (Milsearch) or Cardno field staff (Liaison Officer, Site Manager or Team Leader) to resolve. ii. Land related grievances, other than minor grievances described above, would be managed in accordance with the relevant legislation. The following principles have been developed to ensure the successful UXO assessment implementation, these include; Mechanisms and procedures will provide for two-way communication; Culturally and gender appropriate communication and consultation mechanisms will be used; Existing communications methods will be used where they meet the individual communication need; Complaints handling procedures will be established and will provide a process for dissatisfied complainants to take their complaints to a higher level; Communication and consultation will be treated as a routine procedures; and Communications procedures will be refined as necessary throughout the life of the PVUDP. GRANT- 6005 NAU - UXO SEMP-Rev5.docx 28 July 2016 Page 16 of 19
Appendix A: Milsearch Project Health, Safety and Environmental Plan – NAU53916 – ADB Port Development Project Nauru
GRANT- 6005 NAU - UXO SEMP-Rev5.docx 28 July 2016 Page 17 of 19 PROJECT HEALTH, SAFETY & ENVIRONMENT PLAN
NAU53916 – ADB Port Development Project Nauru
Prepared By
Milsearch Pty Ltd Level 1, Unit 4-5, 30 Mawson Place, Mawson, ACT, Australia, 2607 ABN: 44 007 106 881
Ph: (02) 6286 8299 Fax: (02) 6286 8266 www.milsearch.com.au Document Status Version 1 Document Control
Role Name Date Signature
Prepared by Alan McKeown MIExpE 22 July 2016
Authorised by Mike Ransom MIExpE 22 July 2016
Document History
Version Issue Date Description/Changes 1 DRAFT 19 July 2016 For Peer Review 1 22 July 2016 Amendment to Section 6.
Distribution of Copies
Copy Date Issued Issued To Format Quantity 1 22/07/2016 Matt Box (Cardno) PDF 1 2 3 4
Any changes to this Plan that are not editorial in nature will not be permitted unless approved by the Project Director or their delegate. All editorial changes are to be in accordance with the Milsearch Document Control Procedure (P-101).
Project Reference: NAU 53916 Version 1 [22 July 2016] Page 1 of 26 Table of Contents
Document Control ...... 1 Document History ...... 1 Distribution of Copies ...... 1 List of Tables...... 3 List of Plates ...... Error! Bookmark not defined. List of Figures ...... 3 1.1 General ...... 4 1.2 Purpose ...... 4 1. Commitment and Accountability ...... 4 2.1 Health, Safety and Environmental Policy ...... 4 2.2 Project Health, Safety and Environmental Objectives ...... 5 2.3 Milsearch HS&E Management ...... 6 2.4 Project Health and Safety Organisation ...... 6 2.5 Training and Competency ...... 9 2.6 Health, Safety an Environment Plan Induction ...... 9 2.7 Incident Management ...... 9 2. HS&E Performance and Management ...... 11 3.1 Regulatory Requirements ...... 11 3.2 Positive Performance Indicators and HS&E Objectives ...... 11 3.3 Consultation and Communication ...... 13 3.3.1 Project Management HS&E Meetings ...... 13 3.3.2 HS&E Alerts and HS&E Briefings ...... 14 3. HS&E and Risk Management ...... 14 4.1 Legal and Other Requirements ...... 14 4.2 Additional Project Requirements ...... 14 4.3 Project Site HS&E Rules ...... 15 4.4 Site Layout and Orientation ...... 15 4.5 Daily Tool Box Talk ...... 17 4.6 Fitness for Duty ...... 17 4.7 Housekeeping ...... 18
Project Reference: NAU 53916 Version 1 [22 July 2016] Page 2 of 26 4.8 Personal Protective Equipment ...... 18 4.9 Smoking ...... 18 4.10 General Hazards ...... 18 4.11 Management of Change ...... 22 5 Emergency Management ...... 22 5.1 What to do in an Emergency ...... 22 5.2 Hospital / Medical Facility Information ...... 23 5.3 Work Health and Safety Regulators ...... 23 6 Injured Marine life ...... 23 7 HS&E Functional Management System Documentation ...... 23 Annex A - Emergency Action Plan ...... 24 Annex D – HS&E Documents ...... 26
List of Tables
TABLE 1: ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES ...... 6 TABLE 2: POSITIVE PERFORMANCE INDICATORS AND HS&E OBJECTIVES ...... 12 TABLE 3: GENERAL HAZARDS AND PREVENTATIVE MEASURES...... 19 TABLE 4: EMERGENCY CONTACTS...... 25
List of Figures
FIGURE 1: MEDICAL EMERGENCY RESPONSE FLOW CHART ...... 24
Project Reference: NAU 53916 Version 1 [22 July 2016] Page 3 of 26 Introduction
The provisions of this Health, Safety and Environment Plan (Project HS&E Plan) are mandatory for all Milsearch personnel and employees of Milsearch subcontractors. The implementation of this Project HS&E Plan ensures the delivery of the following core Milsearch HS&E principles to our employees and employees of our sub-contractors.
We are empowered to stop unsafe acts; We take respo si ility for our o a d each other’s safety; We plan our work in order to avoid unsafe situations; We improve from lessons learnt; and Our sub-contractors support our vision and principles.
1.1 General
Milsearch is totally committed to upholding and enforcing these principles that form the backbone of our Health, Safety and Environment (HS&E) Management System. The Project Manager retains the right to suspend/stop work for any infraction of this Project HS&E Plan. This may result in disciplinary action taken against Milsearch employees or employees of Milsearch engaged sub-contractors.
This Project HS&E Plan is to be read and implemented in consultation with other Project Management Plans, where applicable, Client specific HS&E requirements and other Milsearch specific HS&E Management System documentation.
1.2 Purpose
This Project HS&E Plan aims to identify the processes to be implemented for the management of HS&E within the agreed Project scope. The Project HS&E Plan has been developed to:
Meet the re uire e ts of Milsearch’s HS&E Policy’s; Align with and deliver on the performance requirements of our HS&E Management System; Describe the processes in place to effectively manage the HS&E operational elements of the Project; and Meet any other HS&E requirements included in the Project, (e.g. legal, client, etc.). 1. Commitment and Accountability
2.1 Health, Safety and Environmental Policy
It is the policy of Milsearch to provide a safe work environment for all its employees. Milsearch considers no phase of operations or administration to be of greater importance than injury and illness prevention. Safety
Project Reference: NAU 53916 Version 1 [22 July 2016] Page 4 of 26 takes precedence over expediency. Milsearch believes every accident and every injury is avoidable. Every reasonable step will be taken to reduce the possibility of injury, illness or accident.
This Project HS&E Plan has been developed to facilitate works undertaken which have the potential to impact health, safety and the environment. The projects works will be undertaken in a manner that meets or exceeds the intent of:
Relevant Jurisdictional HS&E Legislation, regulations, advisory standards, Codes of Practice (CoP) and guidance notes; Australian HS&E Legislation, regulations, advisory standards, COP and guidance notes; Milsearch Health and Safety Policy; Milsearch Environmental Policy; Milsearch Integrated Management System; and Current or site specific Health, Safety and Environmental requirements.
2.2 Project Health, Safety and Environmental Objectives
Consistent with the Milsearch Health and Safety and also, Environmental Policies, the HS&E objectives and expectations for this Project are:
To give HS&E priority over all Project activities and to intervene when an unsafe act or unsafe condition is observed; Zero harm to Milsearch employees, subcontractors, including employees of subcontractors and visitors; Zero impact to the surrounding environment and community and zero damage to property; To identify and implement HS&E legislation, regulations and codes of practice applicable to this project; To establish and maintain operational procedures that identify hazards associated with the work carried out and to implement effective mitigation measures; To provide adequate emergency response to incidents and to ensure all incidents are properly investigated and reported and appropriate corrective/preventative actions are taken and evaluated; To outline key performance indicators to monitor performance and report HS&E matters to all relevant Project stakeholders; To ensure roles and responsibilities are clearly identified and communicated to individual Project employees; To establish Project specific training requirements to enable all stakeholders to be competent to perform tasks safely, to be aware of and understand HS&E hazards and risks associated with their work activities and he control measures necessary to manage them; To engage subcontractors who share the values outlined in this Project HS&E Plan;
Project Reference: NAU 53916 Version 1 [22 July 2016] Page 5 of 26 To implement an audit program to ensure compliance and continuous improvement; and To create and nurture a positive HS&E culture that empowers and supports Project employees in accordance with this Project HS&E Plan.
2.3 Milsearch HS&E Management
Milsearch is certified under International Standards (ISO) and AS/NZS and as required by these standards is committed to continual improvement.
Milsearch is certified to the following Health, Safety and Environmental Standards:
OHSAS 18001: Occupational Health and Safety Management Systems; and ISO 14001: Environmental Management Systems.
Milsearch Project Management Systems are also certified to ISO 9001: Quality Management Systems.
U der Milsearch’s Health, Safety and Environmental Management System, all Milsearch employees, are required to participate in the operation and continual improvement of the system.
2.4 Project Health and Safety Organisation
It is essential that Project roles and responsibilities are clearly defined. Table 1 describes the Project roles and their respective health and safety responsibilities.
All Project personnel are responsible for performing job tasks in a safe manner by abiding with the requirements of this Project HS&E Plan.
Table 1: Roles and Responsibilities
Role Responsibility Project Director Responsible for all HS&E matters relating to this project, and maintaining (Alan McKeown) regular liaison with the Project Manager and Client representative; Ensure that only trained and competent people are assigned Project roles; Ensure sufficient planning and resources are assigned to the project; Validate and approve Project specific F-128 (Register of Risks) Validate and approve Project specific F-156 Safe Work Method Statements (SWMS); Verify compliance with this Project HS&E Plan with Milsearch expectations and requirements; and Ide tify a d co u icate cha ges i Milsearch’s HS&E requirements. Project Manager Manage the daily communications, cost tracking and deliverables; (Mark Reynish) Has the Primary responsibility for overseeing the implementation of the project HS&E Plan, and satisfying corporate, contractual and legislative requirements in relation to the project; Project HS&E Plan review; Overall responsibility for site operations;
Project Reference: NAU 53916 Version 1 [22 July 2016] Page 6 of 26 Role Responsibility Ensure all Project personnel are aware of their HS&E responsibilities and are familiar with the contents of this Project HS&E Plan; Ensure only trained and competent employees are assigned project based work and all required training is completed; Ensure the F-128 Register of Risks is developed and reviewed and approved by the PD or their suitably appointed delegate (refer P-117); Ensure the F-156 Safe Work Method Statements (SWMS) are developed for each site activity undertaken on the Project and reviewed and approved by the PD or their suitably appointed delegate; In conjunction with the Site Safety Officer (SSO) if appointed, at the frequency prescribed in the Project Quality Objectives Table (F-115), conduct site inspections using the Site OHS Inspection Checklist (F-168B); In conjunction with the SSO, at the frequency prescribed in the Project Quality Objectives Table (F-115), ensure all planned HS&E audits are completed; In consultation with the SSO, conduct accident investigations and to ensure that corrective actions identified are implemented and appropriate; Implementation of the site Emergency Response Plan; All subcontractors engaged by Milsearch to undertake Project work have completed a F-167 Contractor OHS&E Questionnaire and have been approved on the F-125 Approved Suppliers Register (Refer to P-110 Approved Supplier procedure); Conflict resolution; HS&E performance reports are provided to the PD as required; and Stop-action authority. Site Safety Officer Project HS&E Plan review and concurrence; (SSO) Project HS&E Plan modification/deviation concurrence; PM/SSO will be a Project HS&E Plan compliance confirmation; Joint role for Project Safety inspections and audits; NAU 53916 Recording and reporting accidents or injuries in accordance with project specific (Mark Reynish) policies; Site Investigation procedures; Maintaining the training registers and records; Issuing a copy of this Plan and relevant SWMS to each sub-contractor; Issuing a copy of each amendment of this Plan and relevant SWMS to each sub- contractor; Conducting daily safety meetings with Milsearch and Sub-contractor field personnel; At the frequency prescribed in the Project Quality Objectives Table (F-115), monitor Project work practices to ensure compliance with the appropriate SWMS. All non- conforming work practices shall be reported to the Project Manager; At the frequency prescribed in the Project Quality Objectives Table (F-115), conduct site inspections using the Site WHS Inspection Checklist (F-168B). Any issues arising out of the Site Inspection shall be reported to the Project Manager; Ensuring that employees and visitors to the site are inducted in accordance with the OH&S and Environmental Induction Brief; Conducting the training required by this Plan; Ensuring that all injuries/illnesses/accidents and near misses are investigated in accordance with this Plan; Conducting accident investigations and reviewing accident investigation reports to ensure that corrective actions identified are implemented and appropriate.
Project Reference: NAU 53916 Version 1 [22 July 2016] Page 7 of 26 Role Responsibility Ensuring that employees have and use the proper tools, training and equipment; Ensuring that employees understand the PPE requirements for all phases of the project and are compliant with these requirements; Ensure that adequate quantity of appropriate PPE is available and that the PPE complies with Work Safe Australia standards; Providing the Project Manager with guidance on the requirements and effectiveness of this Plan; Overseeing and coordinating all communications with Commonwealth, State and local safety and health agencies; Monitoring areas of responsibility to ensure that changing conditions do not result in human, situational, or environmental factors capable of causing accidents. Developing and implementing corrective actions to eliminate or mitigate hazards; Monitoring the effectiveness of this Plan, making recommendations to improve it; Monitoring and interpreting changes relating to health and safety in the contract, relevant regulations, techniques, technology, project execution and work practices; Routinely evaluating this Plan in relation to these changes and reporting the results to the Project Manager with recommended changes to ensure this Plan is current; Evaluating health and safety equipment needs for the project and reporting these results with recommended changes to the Project Manager; Ensuring all HS&E monitoring devices are operating in accordance with this Project HS&E Plan (Drager BAC Test equipment); Ensuring that the medical surveillance requirements, if any, within this Plan are identified and implemented; Implementing any monitoring programs in accordance with this Plan (daily BAC testing of 100% of all personnel); Developing and/or providing input on all health and safety-related policies and procedures; Providing technical advice on HS&E issues to the Project Manager; Counselling and, if necessary, disciplining employees who ignore safety rules and practices despite having received and acknowledged training; Maintaining the incident and accident register and notifying appropriate agencies when incidents occur; Assist the Project Manager with day-to-day tasks that arise; Reporting of activities undertaken; Directing sub-contractors; Ensuring that housekeeping in all areas is up to the required level; SMWS review and concurrence; and Stop-action authority.
Subcontractors Not Applicable
All Project Personnel Meeting the requirements of this Project HS&E Plan and cooperating with the Project Manager and SSO to ensure a safe work environment for themselves and others is maintained; Complying with this Project HS&E Plan while performing work. No person may work in a manner that conflicts with the requirements of the safety precautions expressed in
Project Reference: NAU 53916 Version 1 [22 July 2016] Page 8 of 26 Role Responsibility this Plan. After due warnings, Milsearch will dismiss from the site any person who violates safety procedures; Complying with all health and safety practices; Performing all work in a safe and efficient manner; Using required personal protective equipment (PPE); Providing feedback and suggestions to the Project Manager on omissions and modifications to this Project HS&E Plan; Seeking training in any area where questions exist as to the safest and most effective way to work or use equipment; Understanding the policies and procedures specified in this Plan, and to seek clarification of those areas where their understanding is incomplete; Notifying the Project Manager of unsafe conditions and acts; and Reporting all injuries, illnesses, accidents, and near misses immediately.
2.5 Training and Competency
Milsearch responses that all Project employees must receive the necessary HS&E training to ensure adequate understanding of this Project HS&E Plan and critical hazards with the Project. In accordance with P-112 - Competency and Training Procedure, Project Managers are to verify Project specific training requirements before the commencement of work on the Project. They are to ensure that all Project employees (including subcontractors when required) illustrate completion and currency of training associated with the hazards of the Project.
All training records are to be maintained on the F-214 Register of Qualifications.
2.6 Health, Safety an Environment Plan Induction
Project Managers or their appointed delegate will coordinate mandatory inductions into this Project HS&E Plan for all Project employees. The induction will convey essential Project information including:
Information on the requirement and expectations included in this project HS&E Plan; Information on the specific roles and responsibilities of Project employees working under this Project HS&E Plan; and Communication of key Project risks and controls identified in the Project HS&E Risk Assessment.
Site specific induction will not be required for will be provided by the Project Manager.
The Project Manager or there appointed delegate shall also ensure the Induction training records are maintained on the F-113 Site Induction Register.
2.7 Incident Management
Milsearch commits to prompt action in the event that Project employees fail to comply with internal and client HS&E expectations. The process for managing disciplinary action is described within the Milsearch
Project Reference: NAU 53916 Version 1 [22 July 2016] Page 9 of 26 Employee Handbook. System and Project related HS&E issues and non-conformances (including subcontractors) will be recorded in the F-171 Register of Injury and Incident Reports and the F-124 Register of NCR, CPAR and Complaints.
I the u likely e e t that a i cide t is dee ed notifiable incident the following reporting protocol must be implemented to ensure that all necessary regulatory authorities are notified within a timely manner.
A notifiable incident is defi ed as a e e t hich results i :
The death of a person; A person requiring medical treatment within 48 hours of exposure to a substance; A person requiring immediate medical treatment for a serious injury or illness such as but not limited to: o Amputation; o Head injury; o Eye injury; o Electric shock; o Spinal injury; o Loss of bodily function; o Serious laceration; o Broken or fractured limb; A Dangerous incident that exposes an employee in the immediate vicinity to an immediate risk such as (but not limited to): o Failure of Pathfinders to visually locate surface ordnance; o Other activities occurring in ERW contaminated areas in close proximity to project personnel such as logging and road works; and o Transit incident caused by either the Milsearch vehicle or other road user. The proposed protocol for dealing with and reportable incident is:
Provide assistance/first aid to injured employees and notify onsite first aid personnel and external health and emergency departments if required; Make the scene of the incident safe; All works are to cease and where possible, preserve the incident site for subsequent investigation; Initial investigation to be conducted by the most senior Milsearch person present or delegated to the SSO; Notify the Project Director; Project Manager to notify the Client; and
Project Reference: NAU 53916 Version 1 [22 July 2016] Page 10 of 26 The Project Manager or delegate is to notify the appropriate Lao regulators and follow their advice regarding written/online notification. Environmental Incidents - An environmental incident is not only necessarily when an event caused by Milsearch or its sub-contractors, but one that occurs on a site under Milsearch’s control or management.
Environmental incidents for the project NAU 53916 Site Visit could involve (but are not be limited to) the following: Any adverse health or well-being impacts on persons due to activities by Milsearch or its sub- contractors causing adverse environmental conditions; and Unauthorised damage or interference to vegetation, threatened species, endangered ecological communities or critical habitat. The proposed protocol for dealing with a reportable incident is:
All works are to cease and where possible, preserve the incident site for subsequent investigation; Initial investigation to be conducted by the project Manager/Site Safety Officer, recording the findings on the F-248 Environmental Incident Report; Notify the Project Director; Project Manager to notify the Client. 2. HS&E Performance and Management
3.1 Regulatory Requirements
Milsearch will identify and comply with all relevant HS&E related legislation and any Project specific requirements (e.g. client or site specific) during the Project planning phase.
New or amended legal and other requirements material will be identified through on-line subscription notifications and implications will be evaluated and as required, replicated within this Project HS&E Plan, relevant SWMS and communicated accordingly.
3.2 Positive Performance Indicators and HS&E Objectives
Positive Performance Indicators (PPIs) are measures of actions or initiatives introduced to prevent workplace injury and disease.
HS&E performance measurement has traditionally focused on measuring the outcomes of poor HS&E practices. PPIs are proactive measures that are used to control loss or damage.
PPIs can be used as a gauge of good practice by measuring how well arrangements for workplace health and safety are performing.
Project Reference: NAU 53916 Version 1 [22 July 2016] Page 11 of 26 The Project Manager is to pay particular attention to achieving the outcomes listed in Table 2 below – HS&E Positive Performance Indicators.
Table 2: Positive Performance Indicators and HS&E Objectives
PPI or Objective Measure Milsearch Benchmark Hazard Assessment Checklist Hazard assessment completed at the start of Planning for each 100% (F-192) project. Register of Risks Register completed and risk treatments planned, e.g. SWMS, 100% (F-128) redesign of work. Safe Working Method Employees are to be briefed on the relevant SWMS before work 100% Statements (SWMS) commences. Completed after consultation and before work (F-156) starts. Signed by all using the SWMS. SWMS – Subcontractor Reviewed by Project Manager before work starts. N/A Site OHS Inspection Checklist - Percentage of inspections completed as per F-115 Project 100% Project Quality Objectives Table. (F-168A) Site Specific Induction Brief – Percentage of employees given the brief before they start work 100% Employees as per Project HS&E Plan. Site Specific Induction Brief – Percentage of subcontractor employees given the brief before N/A Subcontractors they start work as per Project HS&E Plan. HS&E Training Percentage of employees/ managers that have completed OHS 100% training appropriate to their HS&E responsibilities. Toolbox Talks Percentage of toolbox talks completed as identified in the 100% Project HS&E Plan. Hazard Rectification Percentage of reported hazards rectified within the time set by 100% the Project Manager but in less than one working day. Incident Reporting Percentage of incidents handled as per P-115 Incident 100% Incident Management Management. Procedure (P-115) Incident Reporting – Senior Percentage of incidents reported and acknowledged by senior 100% Management management within one working day. Death and Serious Injury No death or serious injury to occur to employees, visitors and 100% public. Alcohol and Drugs No breaches of Policy 07 Alcohol and Drugs. 100% (Policy 07) OH&S Induction Briefing All personnel have received the briefing before commencing 100% work. Safety Consciousness All personnel can state their right to stop work if safety is at risk. 100%
Clear communications of Project HS&E expectations and performance will be provided to all Project employees through:
Project Reference: NAU 53916 Version 1 [22 July 2016] Page 12 of 26 The Project HS&E Plan; The Project induction process; SWMS and daily Tool Box meetings; Position, role, hazard based jurisdiction or client specific training; As required, scheduled Project HS&E meetings; Project HS&E Plan reviews; Incident reports and investigation outcomes; Audits; and HS&E alerts and HS&E briefings.
3.3 Consultation and Communication
In accordance with Policy 02 - OHS and R Policy, Project employees will be regularly consulted about their work activities and the potential HS&E hazards or risks that may be present.
HS&E issues raised by the Project team (including subcontractors) will be recorded in the ‘egister of NC‘’s, CPA‘’s a d Co plai ts (F-124) and considered by the Project Manager in a transparent and consultative manner. Project employees will be provided with feedback and the outcomes of any decision reported to the Project management team.
3.3.1 Project Management HS&E Meetings
Milsearch recognises that a fundamental aspect to establishing and maintaining a positive HS&E culture on the Project is efficient communication and consultation with Project employees. All Project employees under the control of Milsearch will be provided with clear direction and guidance with regard to HS&E expectations. This will be provided through HS&E meetings as described below. Additional meetings to these described below may be required by the Client.
Pre-mobilisation meeting. Where possible, a pre-mobilisation meeting will be completed prior to e ployee’s o ilisi g to site. All on-site senior Milsearch staff, and where necessary, relevant stakeholder personnel will attend these meetings. The intent of the meeting is to ensure that critical HS&E, logistical and technical elements have been considered and where applicable implemented. Records of these meetings are to be maintained within the Project Daily Dairy, including any decisions or outcomes. For the Milsearch Project NAU 53916 Site Visit this will occur via telecom from the Milsearch HO.
Daily Tool Box Meeting. A Daily Planning Meeting will be held before any works commence on site and documented on the F-161 Daily Planning Meeting-Tool Box. All site based Project employees (including subcontractors and visitors) will attend this daily tool box talk for the purpose of discussing:
Previous day’s activities and HS&E issues (if any); Scheduled activities of the day;
Project Reference: NAU 53916 Version 1 [22 July 2016] Page 13 of 26 Any changes to the site specific scope of work; Any HS&E atters rele a t to the day’s acti ities; Any relevant HS&E alerts or lesson learnt reports; Provide feedback from any hazard, observations, near misses and incident reports; and Records of these meetings will be maintained within the Project records folder.
3.3.2 HS&E Alerts and HS&E Briefings
HS&E alerts will be distributed and/or awareness sessions will be held for all Project employees in the event there is:
Serious potential incident/near miss; A serious incident (e.g. MTI, LTI, Major Environment, Significant Environment); HS&E developing trend based on incident or hazard reports, suggestions or observations; and A HS&E briefing will be distributed where there is a: o Relevant change to Project scope or this Project HS&E Plan; o New HS&E legislation impacting the Project; o Client request to circulate an internal HS&E (or contract) alert to the Project management team. 3. HS&E and Risk Management
4.1 Legal and Other Requirements
Electronic externally hosted HS&E legal requirement subscriptions provide Project teams with quick and easy access to legal and other requirements on a hazard by hazard basis. These are to be used by employees when developing risk management documentation such as F-128 Register of Risks and F-156 Safe Work Method Statements (SWMS).
4.2 Additional Project Requirements
Permit, licenses and approval requirements will be identified, managed and listed on the Project F-128 Register of Risks (where required) and individually listed on SWMS prior to work commencing on those activities.
Where required by client, jurisdiction or other appropriate requirement, Milsearch will develop a Project specific Environmental Management Plan, Security Risk Assessment, specific registers, etc.
Project Reference: NAU 53916 Version 1 [22 July 2016] Page 14 of 26 Otherwise, the Project Manager will ensure that the SWMS identify the controls (conditions) required to ensure the parameters of these requirements are adhered to. This includes obtaining and/or renewing approvals, licenses and permits.
4.3 Project Site HS&E Rules
All Project employees (including subcontractors) under Milsearch control will comply with and be communicated the site HS&E rules outlined below and in SWMS and any amendments will be communicated via the tool box talks. The Milsearch Project team will also adhere to site HS&E rules developed by the client or site controller. All Project members will implement the following Milsearch rules:
1) Project HS&E Plan. Comply with the requirements of the Project HS&E Plan, associated processes and client requirements; 2) Risk Management. Follow all HS&E risk controls identified in the Project F-128 Register of Risks and/or SWMS; 3) Daily Tool Box Talks/Inductions. Attend induction and all Daily Tool Box talks prior to the commencement of work; 4) Training. Hold the relevant certificates of competency, licenses and training to safely undertake the activity; 5) Incident/Hazard Reporting. Report all incidents/hazards (including near miss incidents) immediately to the Project Manager (F-170 Incident Report Form) and submit to Head Office via the PD. Head office will record in the incident in the F-171 Register of Injury and Incident Reports; 6) HS&E Breaches. Correct identified HS&E breaches of legislative requirements without delay; 7) Alcohol and Other Drugs (AOD). All Milsearch employees must be fit for work in accordance with the requirements of Policy 07 - Alcohol and Drugs. All employees must adhere to the AOD programs adopted by the client or Site Controller, where applicable; 8) Plant/Machinery and Equipment. Is only to be used for its intended purpose by licensed operators a d i accorda ce ith a ufacturer’s i structio s; 9) Personal Protective Equipment (PPE). All Project employees will wear PPE as per the requirements of the SWMS; 10) Housekeeping. High standards of housekeeping are to be maintained to create safe access and egress, including access to emergency equipment, remove slip and trip hazards and ensure the safe storage of materials; and 11) Horseplay and Practical Jokes. Never engage in any horseplay or practical jokes that may put people’s safety at risk. 4.4 Site Layout and Orientation
The Project Manager is responsible for determining the layout and positioning of site facilities as follows;
Site Office (Not applicable, administrative work will be conducted from the hotel);
Project Reference: NAU 53916 Version 1 [22 July 2016 Page 15 of 26 Toilet Facilities (to be confirmed); First Aid Kits and facilities; Traffic Routes (secure transport provided by Cardno); Smoking Areas; Fire Fighting Equipment and fire muster locations; Vehicle Parking Areas(transport provided by Cardno); and Emergency muster points. The location of the facilities above and the emergency procedures shall be briefed to all employees, subcontractors and site visitors by Milsearch.
F-156 Safe Work Method Statements
F-156 Safe Work Method Statements (SWMS) are developed in consultation with the Project team and are approved by the Project Director or their delegate for all site activities.
SWMS under the control of Milsearch identifies the following information:
Work activity; Sequential task steps; Hazard identification and potential risks; Risk rating for identified hazards; Risk control measures; Allocation of responsibilities for control implementation; Necessary training; Legislative compliance requirements; Details of statutory and non-statutory certificates, permits and approvals; Emergency arrangements; Personnel and environmental protective equipment; For the Milsearch Project NAU 53916, there will be no sub-contractor generated SWMS. All SWMS will be subject to the Milsearch PD approval. Approval and communication acknowledgement of the SWMS. It is the responsibility of the Project Manager to confirm that Project employees have completed the relevant training and have the required protective equipment in accordance with the SWMS prior to commencing activities on the site.
SWMS are to be reviewed by the Project Manager at the end of each week or if the activity, work environment, equipment or employees change. All updates to SWMS are to be authorised by the Project Director or their delegate and communicated to all relevant stakeholders via a daily Tool Box talk.
Project Reference: NAU 53916 Version 1 [22 July 2016] Page 16 of 26 A copy of all signed SWMS and Daily Tool box talks can be found on the Project file.
4.5 Daily Tool Box Talk
Daily Tool Box talks (pre-work assessments) is the daily consultative methodology used by Milsearch to review the SWMS, identify new HS&E hazards or altered conditions that may affect the safe delivery of site activities and communicate this information to the Project team under the control of Milsearch.
The Project Manager or their delegate is responsible to deliver the Daily Tool Box talk in consultation with employees under the control of Milsearch (including subcontractors and visitors).
A Tool Box talk is to be undertaken each day prior to commencing any work and at any other times during the day where site conditions have altered (e.g. due to weather conditions, incident occurring or external controls affecting site, etc.) and captured on the SWMS (part 4).
4.6 Fitness for Duty
Milsearch is committed to providing a healthy and safe workplace and will take all practicable actions to identify, evaluate and control those factors in the workplace which cause, or have the potential to cause injury or ill health.
Fit for duty means that an individual is in a satisfactory physical, mental and emotional state to perform assigned duties competently and in a manner that does not compromise or threaten the safety and health of themselves or others.
Milsearch employees and sub-contractor employees who work under the influence of controlled substances, drugs, or alcohol may prove to be dangerous or otherwise harmful to themselves, other employees, clients, the co pa y, the co pa y’s assets a d i terests, or the public. Milsearch does not tolerate illegal drug use, or a y use of drugs, co trolled su sta ces, or alcohol that i pairs a e ployee’s or su -contractor employees work performance or behavior. Onsite prohibitions include:
Use or possession of intoxicating beverages while performing work; Abuse of prescription or non-prescription drugs; Use or possession of illegal drugs or drugs obtained illegally; Sale, purchase, or transfer of legal, illegal or illegally obtained drugs; and Arrival at work under the influence of legal or illegal drugs or alcohol.
All Milsearch employees and sub-contractor employees are to be aware of the Milsearch Alcohol and Drug Policy (Policy 7). This policy will be made available at the initial induction brief and held by the Project Manager. Project employees suspected of being under the influence of alcohol or illegal drugs will be referred to the Project Manager and excluded from tasks related to the Project.
Project Reference: NAU 53916 Version 1 [22 July 2016] Page 17 of 26 4.7 Housekeeping
A strong focus will be placed on the housekeeping on Project sites and regular inspections of housekeeping will be carried out. Rubbish is to be placed in designated sealed containers and emptied on a programmed basis. Containers are not to be overfilled and rubbish will not be allowed to accumulate in or around the Project works area.
Milsearch’s Project Ma ager reser es the right to stop ork here housekeepi g is dee ed to e elo the required standard.
4.8 Personal Protective Equipment
In controlling hazards, Personal Protective equipment (PPE) is the least favored and effective option and must be accompanied by adequate training and education.
All PPE must be worn in the manner in which designers/manufacturers intended and as per the instruction received, in the use, care and maintenance, at the time of issue.
The PPE requirements for all Project employees will be identified during the Project Risk Assessment and outlined in the task specific SWMS. (Refer to the P-116 Personal Protective Equipment)
All PPE requirements are subject to Milsearch SSO approval. 4.9 Smoking
Smoking is prohibited in any area/room/vehicle on site that is enclosed (has a roof and three sides) and in which direct tobacco smoke or environmental tobacco smoke (ETS, smoke that is exhaled from cigarettes that is inhaled by another person) may affect the health of other people.
Smoking is also prohibited when:
Refuelling vessel, small boats, vehicles, or equipment. Working on batteries or servicing any engine, hydraulic system etc. Where any flammable substance is present. Working near dangerous goods.
Smoking will be permitted in a designated outdoor smoking area. These areas must be no less than 10 metres from any building entrances, windows or air-conditioning vents. Adequate waste receptacles will be provided, which will be determined for each Project and identified during the induction process. There is no smoking permitted in Milsearch vehicles.
4.10 General Hazards
The following hazards associated with this Project work may include but are not limited to:
Project Reference: NAU 53916 Version 1 [22 July 2016] Page 18 of 26 Unexploded ordnance; Road transits; Physical security; Manual handling; Heat stress; and Slips trips and falls.
Mitigation strategies to prevent exposure to the identified hazards are identified within the Register of risks and SWMS related to each task.
A summary of the general hazards and their preventative measures are described in Table 3 below.
Table 3: General Hazards and Preventative Measures
Hazard Description Preventative Measure(s) UXO During the survey Reinforce ERW Hazard during safety briefs and daily toolbox meetings; phase of project NAU Project ERW works will be carried out in accordance with NAU 53916 53916 it is not SWMS and Milsearch Lao SOP. planned to have any PM to be qualified International Mine Action Standards (IMAS) physical contact with equivalent Explosive Ordnance Disposal Technician Level 4 (EODTL4) UXO. However accidental If UXO is located contact with UXO All work will cease and the site will be cleared of all unnecessary during the survey is personnel; possible and could The appropriate initial safety distance will be evacuated and result in serious secured; injury or death. The National Emergency Services Department (NESD) is to be contacted and informed of the munition type and location; The President’s office is contacted and informed; The Nauru Police force is contacted, and informed of the munition type and location (the police may be used to secure the site and evacuate residences as required); The Australia High Commissioner is to be contacted and alerted of the situation; If required a formal request for assistance from the Australia High Commissioner to mobilise military EOD assets may be made; The Nauru Rehabilitation Corporation (NRC) may also be used to assist; The Milsearch PM can provide professional advice in order to assist with the UXO identification, condition/hazard assessment, and best course of action (safe to move or destroy in place) decision process; and Milsearch will not be responsible for the final action.
Project Reference: NAU 53916 Version 1 [22 July 2016] Page 19 of 26 Hazard Description Preventative Measure(s) Driving Transport Provided by Cardno
Exposure to Extreme heat and In addition to the controls required for exposure to environmental heat, elements. humidity the following must be applied in extreme heat or humidity: Conditions expected Regular breaks to be taken. for NAU 53916 are: Employees should drink 150mL every 15 minutes during activity. Temp 26 - 31ᴼC If someone is suffering from heat-related illness: Humidity 80 – 90% o Move the person to a cool area; Cloud Cover o Give the person small amounts of cool (not cold) water; Intermittent Rain o DO NOT leave the person unattended; o Immediately seek qualified medical assistance if the person does not recover or their condition does not improve. Heat stress - Wearing Heat Stress Management Plan; PPE can increase the Adequate potable water or other re-hydration beverages are to be risk of a worker made available to workers conducting heat stressful operations to developing heat protect such workers from heat-related injuries; stress. The temperature of the drinking water should be at or below 24oC. Heat stress hygiene (Achieved by refrigeration or shading water supply) Note: Ensure that practices are any ice is not contaminated; particularly Water is to be supplied in a hygienic manner not from a shared important because container like a drinking fountain where the water is delivered in an they reduce the risk upward direction. Supply disposable cups; that an individual Workers will be closely observed for heat stress; may suffer a heat- The monitoring methods, symptoms, and preventive measures for heat related disorder. stress should be communicated to project personnel during the health The key elements are and safety induction; fluid replacement, self-determination of exposures, health status monitoring, maintenance of a healthy life-style, and adjustment of expectations based on acclimatisation state. Inclement weather Mo e a ay fro the ater’s edge. Bei g ear ater is e tre ely (electrical storms) dangerous during a lightning storm. Use the 30 second rule: if the time between a lightning flash and the resulting thunder is 30 seconds or less (9.7 km or less), get to shelter immediately. Find Shelter. Substantial, frequently inhabited buildings (those grounded with plumbing, electrical systems, and, if possible, lightning rods) are best.
Project Reference: NAU 53916 Version 1 [22 July 2016] Page 20 of 26 Hazard Description Preventative Measure(s) If you ca ’t fi d a su sta tial structure, get i a car ith a etal roof and sides. If the car is struck, the metal body will conduct the electricity around you, not through you. Make sure all windows are rolled up and doors are closed. Be careful not to lean against any metal -- if you do, the lightning will be conducted into your body if it strikes the car. Do not use the radio. Avoid small structures, such as stand-alone public restrooms. Open covering and rain shelters are also not suitable. These structures will attract lightning and provide no protection, making them more dangerous to be around. Standing under a tree is a very bad choice. Lightning strikes tall objects, and if the tree you are standing under is struck, you may be struck as well or injured by the tree. Stay inside at least 30 minutes after the last strike. Do ’t go out just because the rain is starting to let up. There is still a significant risk of lightning strikes from a departing storm. UV radiation (sun Seek shade wherever possible. light) Wear long sleeve clothing, long pants and a wide brim hat when working outside. Apply SPF 30+ sunscreen 20 minutes prior to commencing work and then at least every 2 hours. Wear appropriate sunglasses with protection at the front and sides of the face. Ordinary sunglasses are suitable at the discretion of the PM if there is no risk of impact or dust, otherwise UV rated safety eyewear must be worn as part of the PPE requirement for the Task. mosquitos Wear appropriate clothing long sleeves and pants; Use high Deet content Insect repellent on skin and clothing. Be aware of, and immediately report Malaria/Dengue symptoms such as fever, headache, backache (flu like symptoms); and Be especially careful duri g the dusk to da ’ period. Slips, Trips and Falls High potential for trip hazards when walking across coral; Ensure you pay attention to your foot placement; and Wear appropriate shoes. Manual General Prior to conducting a manual task, an assessment to determine Handling & whether it is hazardous ust e u dertaki g. If the a ual ha dli g Strain Injury task is hazardous the a risk assess e t i accorda ce to the “afe Work Australia Code of Practice for Hazardous Manual Tasks needs to be completed; Warm up and stretch prior to work; Use 2 people to share the workload, take breaks regularly; and Where possible and practical, use mechanical means. Injury from lifting Refer Milsearch SWMS-02 Manual Handling; heavy items. Warm up and stretch prior to work; Avoid bending/lifting; Use SMART lifting technique: o Size up the load,
Project Reference: NAU 53916 Version 1 [22 July 2016] Page 21 of 26 Hazard Description Preventative Measure(s) o Move close to the load, o Always bend your knees, o Raise the object by using your legs, and o Turn by moving your feet.
Electrical Use of electrical Refer to the P-124 Electrical Equipment Management Procedure. shock equipment (if any) Electrical equipment registers must be maintained detailing a record of the inspection and the condition of the piece of equipment at the time of the inspection; Be particularly aware of appliances at the hotel; Electrical shock hazards may exist during equipment failure. Electrical shock hazards will be minimized by use of the Lockout/Tagout program, refer WI-65 - Lockout Tag-Out. Safe Work Methods Statements are required for work carried out on or near energized electrical installations or services.
4.11 Management of Change
All Project employees are required to formally assess the impact of changes to the Project and changes in the work environment. Any changes to the Project, project employees, equipment, site conditions etc. will have the HS&E implications assessed and approved by the Project Manager.
Any such changes should be discussed at the next scheduled Daily Tool Box talk and/or prior to re- commencement of work. Changes will be incorporated into the Project HS&E documentation.
5 Emergency Management
5.1 What to do in an Emergency
If an emergency occurs, the person and or the persons involved in the emergency must raise the alarm as quickly as possible and follow the emergency response flow chart which is located at Annex A to this plan.
Emergency Contact Details are located in Annex B.
During an emergency, it is important to note the following details:
Nature and Location of the emergency; Number of personnel involved and their status; Assistance that is required; and Only current qualified first aid personnel are to provide appropriate emergency first aid.
Project Reference: NAU 53916 Version 1 [22 July 2016] Page 22 of 26 5.2 Hospital / Medical Facility Information
The details for the nearest Hospital or Medical Facility for this Project is described in Annex B.
5.3 Work Health and Safety Regulators
Not Applicable for Nauru. Employees will be fully covered under Milsearch insurance policies.
6 Injured Wildlife
Wild animals become stressed by handling, so you should seek expert advice before handling an injured animal. If you find a sick or injured animal, try to minimise the amount of exposure the injured animal has to people and loud noises. Do not attempt to feed or treat it unless you have specialist knowledge or training.
There are no Nauru Marine Wildlife rescue/reporting authorities or organisations.
7 HS&E Functional Management System Documentation
The functional Milsearch HS&E Management System documents that directly relate to this Project are listed in Annex C.
Project Reference: NAU 53916 Version 1 [22 July 2016] Page 23 of 26 Annex A - Emergency Action Plan
Figure 1: Medical Emergency Response Flow Chart
Project Reference: NAU 53916 Version 1 [22 July 2016] Page 24 of 26 Annex B – Emergency Contacts Emergency Contacts
Table 4: Emergency Contacts
Organisation/Name Position/Role Contact QBE Assist Milsearch Medical +61 8523 2523 (24/7) Insurance +61 8523 2530 (Fax) (State Company Name) [email protected] Emergency Services Police 110 RON Hospital 111 Fire 112 Preside t’s Office +674 557 3133 Nauru Rehabilitation Corporation (NRC) TBC National Emergency Services Department TBC (NESD) International SOS Primary (Sydney) +61 2 9032 2911 +61 2 9372 2468 International SOS Secondary (Singapore) +65 6338 7800 Australian High Commission MQ45 & MQ43 NPC OE +674 557 3380 Aiwo District Republic of Nauru 24-hour Consular Emergency Centre +61 2 6261 3305
Project Reference: NAU 53916 Version 1 [22 July 2016] Page 25 of 26 Annex D – HS&E Documents HS&E Functional Management System Documentation
The functional Milsearch HS&E Management System documents that directly relate to this Project are listed below.
Document Title Number Policy 01 Risk Management Policy - Version 4 Policy 02 OHS and R Policy - Version 8 - Current Policy 06 Workplace Harassment and Bullying Policy - Version 3 Policy 07 Alcohol and Drugs Policy - Version 4 Policy 10 Personal Protection Equipment - Version 2 Policy 11 Environmental Policy Statement - Version 3 P-115 Incident Management Procedure P-116 PPE Management Procedure P-117 Risk Assessment and Management Procedure P-137A or B Induction Procedure WI-37 Visual Surface Search and Clearance of ERW WI-38 Immediate Action on Finding Conventional ERW or EO F-124 Register of NCR, CPAR and Complaints F-128 Register of Risks F-161 Daily Planning Meeting – Toolbox Talk F-164 Vehicle Safety Checklist F-170 Incident Report F-174 Record of first Aid Kit Inventory Checks F-189 Checklist for Site Specific Induction F-191 Register of Access Control F-192 Hazard Assessment Checklist F-198 Project Daily Work Diary F-199 Emergency Flowchart F-248 Environmental Incident Report
Project Reference: NAU 53916 Version 1 [22 July 2016] Page 26 of 26
Appendix B: Monitoring and Reporting Checklist
GRANT- 6005 NAU - UXO SEMP-Rev5.docx 28 July 2016 Page 18 of 19
GOVERNMENT OF NAURU NAURU PORT DEVELOPMENT PROJECT ADB GRANT 6005 – NAU: UXO Clearance, Geotechnical Investigations, Surveys and Detailed Engineering Services (48480 – 002)
Environmental Monitoring Checklist – Nauru Port Site UXO Assessment
Reviewers Name:
Date:
COMPLIANCE Target ACTION REQUIRED AS PER CONTRACT Further Action Achieved Remarks Required? Y/N CONTRACTOR: - Milsearch – Nauru Port Site UXO Assessment.
1. Protection of Initial visual site inspection to identify and report Sensitive & any potential environmentally sensitive / natural Ecological areas within the NPDP site. Important Areas/Sites If any site is located the following actions will be undertaken; . Locate optional construction sites/activities away from them. . Ensure construction personnel are aware of locations of sensitive areas and avoid them and COMPLIANCE Target ACTION REQUIRED AS PER CONTRACT Further Action Achieved Remarks Required? Y/N . If the proposed construction passes close to these areas, include temporary fences to restrict machines and activities from encroaching in the area.
2. Encroachment Initial visual site inspection to identify and report on known Cultural any cultural and/or historic sites within the NPDP & Historical sites. site.
If any site is located the following actions will be undertaken; . Do not damage any existing or newly discovered cultural and/or heritage sites. . Regularly consult with local people and government during design phase activities regarding any presence of archaeological monuments
3. Development Ensure approved of the SEMP before work is Consent and initiated for the UXO site assessment. Permit Acquisition If UXO located during assessment ensure detailed information as highlighted in section 1.2 of the SEMP is provided.
All work at this site location is stopped await further instructions from client and government on how to proceed. COMPLIANCE Target ACTION REQUIRED AS PER CONTRACT Further Action Achieved Remarks Required? Y/N
4. Environmentally Ensure Milsearch corporate environmental and Responsible OH&S policies detailed in the SEMP are being Procurement. implement and managed at the site during the UXO assessment.
5. Environmental Ensure the SEMP specific environmental actions Capacity are fully implemented during the UXO assessment, Development including workers orientation on SEMP provisions.
6. UXO Detection Ensure UXO assessment includes the entire and Management terrestrial and intertidal shallow water marine (reef flat, crest) areas of the NPDP site.
Ensure strict adherence to Nauru Government UXO safety and management guidelines and Milsearch Environment and OH&S policies and procedures have been implemented.
If any UXO are located ensure strict conformity to the actions detailed in the SEMP. UXO are not to removed or tampered with – these actions are outside the specific TOR of Milsearch.
Upon completion of the assessment ensure official confirmation form Milsearch based on the UXO assessment that the Nauru Port facility site has is safe (no UXO) and constructions phase of NPDP can be undertaken. COMPLIANCE Target ACTION REQUIRED AS PER CONTRACT Further Action Achieved Remarks Required? Y/N
7. Port Project Ensure Milsearch has implemented its corporate Occupational Environmental and OH&S policies, guidelines, and Health and Safety protocols as detailed in the SEMP. This specifically includes compliance to: . Allocation of responsibility for safety inspections to a designated, qualified and experienced Health and Safety Officer (HSO) within the Contractor’s staff; . Education and Training of staff and/or workers on safety precautions, including implementing emergency procedures applicable to this assessment will be undertaken; . Provision of protective clothing and equipment to workers as appropriate; . Equipment operators are properly licensed and trained; . First aid and sanitation facilities have been arranged for staff at the site performing the assessment. . Emergency evacuation procedures and site specific regular safety checks of equipment have been developed. . Provision of hazard warning signs at the all construction sites; and . A safety register for accidents detailing date, circumstances, severity, action taken and outcomes is marinated and available upon request. COMPLIANCE Target ACTION REQUIRED AS PER CONTRACT Further Action Achieved Remarks Required? Y/N 8. Potential risks Ensure Milsearch is compliant to the SEMP GRM due to public not protocols and procedures. well informed on the Grievance Regular informal and formal discussions with key Redress stakeholders identify issues and/or grievance and Mechanism (GRM) address through positive actions. and how it is operated.
9. Social Disruption Visual inspection of project sites to ensure public and Public Health access in the vicinity of the assessment site is and Safety Risks. safe, and all public and Nauru Port staff project signs are clearly marked, accessible and readable.
Barriers are constructed with appropriate signage to prevent general public and Nauru Port staff access to the active assessment areas within the site.
Liaise with NPA staff and community to highlight concerns and action required by the contractor to undertake.
GRANT 6005-NAU: UXO Clearance, Geotechnical Investigations, Surveys and Detailed Engineering Services Final Interim Report – UXO Assessment Report
Appendix C: UXO Environmental Monitoring Checklist – Reviewed by Team Leader
GRANT-6005 NAU - Final Interim Report - UXO Assessment Report.docx 21 September 2016 Page 18 of 20
GRANT 6005-NAU: UXO Clearance, Geotechnical Investigations, Surveys and Detailed Engineering Services Final Interim Report – UXO Assessment Report
Appendix D: UXO Consolidated Report
GRANT-6005 NAU - Final Interim Report - UXO Assessment Report.docx 21 September 2016 Page 19 of 20 REPUBLIC OF NAURU ADB PORT DEVELOPMENT PROJECT (STAGE 1)
MILSEARCH CONSOLIDATED REPORT
Part A Section 1 ERW FOCUSED HISTORICAL DTR Part A Section 2 ERW GEOPHYSICAL SURVEY REPORT Part B ERW RISK ASSESSMENT AND RISK MITIGATION MANAGEMENT PLAN
Milsearch Pty Ltd Level 1, Unit 5, 30 Mawson Place Mawson, ACT, Australia, 2607 ABN: 44 007 106 881
Ph: (02) 6286 8299 Fax: (02) 6286 8266 www.milsearch.com.au
Project No: NAU 53916
Document Status Version 2
Reliability Achieved Through Knowledge, Safety, and Quality
MILSEARCH CONSOLIDATED REPORT
Documentation History and Status Version Issue Date Changes Approved By Signature 1 30 August 2016 Alan McKeown 2 31 August 2016 Part A, Sect 2 Page 6 – typo Alan McKeown Part A, Sect 2 Page 7 – typo Part A, Sect 2 Page 10 – re-word
Part A, Sect 2 Page 10 – typo Part A, Sect 2 Page 10 – typo Part A, Sect 2 Page 10 – typo Remove Copyright Part B, Page 6, 8, 17 - re-word
Distribution of Copies Copy Date Issued Issued To Format Quantity 1 30 August 2016 Cardno Pty Ltd PDF 1 2 3
Document Details Project Reference: NAU 53916 Document Title: NAU 53916 Republic Of Nauru ADB Port Development Project (Stage1) Milsearch Consolidated Report Client: Cardno Pty Ltd Project Manager: Alan McKeown, Senior Operations Manager Last Saved: 01 Aug 2016 Author: Michael Taarnby (LTCOL retd) Torbjorn von Strokirch (Bachelor of Science (Hons)) Alan McKeown (MIExpE) Document Version: Version 2 Copy 1
Milsearch Project Reference: NAU 53916
REPUBLIC OF NAURU ADB PORT DEVELOPMENT PROJECT (STAGE 1)
MILSEARCH REPORT - PART A
FOCUSED HISTORICAL REVIEW AND GEOPHYSICAL SURVEY IN RELATION TO EXPLOSIVE REMNANTS OF WAR CONTAMINATION
Milsearch Pty Ltd Level 1, Unit 5, 30 Mawson Place Mawson, ACT, Australia, 2607 ABN: 44 007 106 881
Ph: (02) 6286 8299 Fax: (02) 6286 8266 www.milsearch.com.au
Project No: NAU 53916
Document Status Version 1
Reliability Achieved Through Knowledge, Safety, and Quality Page 1 of 64
SECTION 1 - FOCUSED HISTORICAL REVIEW
Documentation History and Status Version Issue Date Changes Approved By Signature 1 12 August 2016 1 Alan McKeown
Distribution of Copies Copy Date Issued Issued To Format Quantity 1 12 Aug 2016 Cardno Pty Ltd PDF/Word 1 2 3
Document Details Project Reference: NAU 53916 Document Title: Republic of Nauru ADB Port Development Project (Stage 1) - Milsearch Report - Part A Focused Historical Review and Geophysical Survey in Relation to Explosive Remnants of War Contamination Client: Cardno Pty Ltd Project Director: Alan McKeown, Senior Operations Manager Last Saved: 01 Aug 2016 Author: Michael Taarnby (LTCOL retd) Document Version: Version 1 Copy 1
Milsearch Project Reference: NAU 53916 Page 2 of 64
DISCLAIMER
DISCLAIMER This Document is an important legal document. The use of this report is governed by and subject to this disclaimer. Milsearch Client The e tity that co issio ed this report, a d ho is Milsearch Australia Pty Li ited’s Milsearch client is Cardno Pty Ltd the Clie t . Purpose of This Report This report was commissioned for the purpose of detailing the activities undertaken by Milsearch on the Clie t’s “ite a d the results of those acti ities The Purpose . Disclaimer Milsearch accepts no responsibility or liability for any use of this report or any reliance upon this report by any person, other than the use of the whole report by the Client consistent with the Purpose. Milsearch accepts no responsibility or liability to any person who relies upon a part of this report. This report must at all times be considered in its entirety.
Milsearch Project Reference: NAU 53916
LIST OF ACRONYMS AND DEFINITIONS
Acronyms and Definitions that may be used in this report:
Area of Interest (AoI): The geographic area encompassed by this study – i.e., the study area. Armour Piercing (AP): Describes weapons specifically designed to penetrate armour. Bottom or Ground Sea Mines: Mines which lay on the seabed. Generally these mines are influence operated but may be contact in shallow water used to target landing craft. Contact Sea Mine: An explosive device which requires the target to contact it in order to function. This is as opposed to influence mines which function when influenced by the target. Desk Top Review (DTR) An Historical Review of military activities focussed on ordnance types and likely remaining contamination. Explosive Ordnance (EO): All munitions containing explosives or chemical agents. This includes bombs and warheads; guided and ballistic missiles; artillery shells, mortars, rockets and small arms ammunition; all mines, torpedoes, depth charges and demolition charges; pyrotechnics, clusters and dispensers; cartridge and propellant actuated devices; electro-explosive devices; clandestine and improvised explosive devices; and all similar or related items or components explosive in nature. Explosive Ordnance Disposal: The detection, identification, field evaluation, rendering safe and final disposal of unexploded ordnance. It may also include the rendering safe and/or disposal of explosive ordnance, which may have become hazardous by damage or deterioration. Explosive Ordnance Disposal Book (EODB): US military publications dealing with Explosive Ordnance Disposal procedures. Explosive Ordnance Waste (EOW): Inert material remnant from the initiation or functioning of explosive ordnance. Explosive Remnants of War (ERW): Unexploded Ordnance (UXO) and Abandoned Explosive Ordnance (AXO). (CCW protocol V). (IMAS-04-10 Glossary of mine action terms, Second Edition, Clause 3.100.) General Purpose (GP) Refers to general purpose high explosive bombs as opposed to specific purpose bombs such as incendiary, propaganda leaflet etc. Influence Sea Mines: Sea mines which function when influenced by the target. Influences used to function sea mines can be: 1. Acoustic/Seismic; 2. Magnetic; 3. Pressure, and 4. Combination of above influences. Moored Sea Mines: Floating mines which are moored in position. Nautical Miles (nmi) 1,852 metres Semi Armour Piercing (SAP): Describes a weapon which has a dual role of penetrating armour and a general purpose function. Unexploded Ordnance (UXO): Explosive ordnance that has been primed, fused, armed, or otherwise prepared for action, and have been fired, dropped, launched, projected or placed in such a manner as to constitute a hazard to operations, installation, personnel, or materiel but remains unexploded either by malfunction, design, or any other cause.
Milsearch Project Reference: NAU 53916 Page 4 of 64
PART A - SECTION 1
FOCUSED HISTORICAL REVIEW
1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Plate 1: Project Area of Interest
Milsearch Pty Ltd (Milsearch) was contracted by Cardno Pty Ltd (Cardno) to conduct a focused historical desk top review (DTR) of all World War II activities related to Nauru. This was conducted in conjunction with a geophysical Explosive Remnants of War (ERW) survey of all available areas within the project footprint. The focused historical DTR and the ERW Survey were conducted in order to produce an ERW Risk Assessment and ERW Risk Mitigation Management Plan for the proposed Nauru Port Facility redevelopment project.
The focused historical DTR commenced on 25 July, and included multiple on-site visits to the National Australian Library (NLA), the National Archives of Australia (NAA), the Australian War Memorial (AWM), and global on-line sources. Additionally aerial photographs were obtained from Washington DC based historian, Mr. Kevin Morrow. Concurrently, the geophysical ERW survey personnel and their equipment commenced mobilisation to Nauru. The geophysical ERW survey of all accessible project footprint areas commenced on 01 August and the geophysical ERW survey team de-mobilised over the period 08 to 12 August 2016.
Historical records clearly indicate that NAURU, and the project footprint area in particular, were repeatedly bombed by air and sea throughout WW2. First by German naval raiders in 1940, then by Japanese naval and air forces between 1941 and 1942, and then heavily and continuously by Allied naval and air forces from mid-1943 through to the end of the war in support of Allied operations in the South West Pacific Area (SWPA). A substantial Japanese military force was assembled on Nauru, and the island was defended with the full range of weaponry available to the Japanese Imperial Forces ranging from small arms, grenades and machine guns, up to and including Coastal Defence naval guns, light and medium tanks, and fighter and medium bomber aircraft.
As a result of repeated, frequent, and at times continual military activity from 1940 through to the end of the war, the likelihood of encountering hazardous ERW contamination during the ADB Port Development Project is considered by Milsearch to be extremely high. In order to mitigate this risk, Milsearch recommends that a 100% ERW remediation solution is conducted prior to Project commencement.
Annex C details a listing of ERW which may be found within the Nauru Port facility AoI.
Milsearch Project Reference: NAU 53916 Page 5 of 64
Part A – Section 1 Table of Contents
DISCLAIMER AND COPYRIGHT NOTICE ...... 3 LIST OF ACRONYMS AND DEFINITIONS ...... 4 1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ...... 5 2.0 INTRODUCTION ...... 7
3.0 NAURU DURING WWII – AN OVERVIEW ...... 8 4.0 THE GERMAN ATTACKS...... 9 4.1 THE KOMET BOMBARDMENT OF NAURU ...... 10 4.2 SHIPS SUNK ...... 10 5.0 JAPANESE OCCUPATION OF NAURU ...... 10 6.0 THE AMERICAN OFFENSIVE ...... 11 7.0 SUMMARY ...... 15 8.0 CONCLUSIONS ...... 15 ANNEX A - ALLIED AND AXIS MILITARY ACTION AGAINST NAURU ...... 17
ANNEX B – ACTION REPORT 0010 ...... 23 ANNEX C – MUNITIONS IDENTIFICATION GUIDE ...... 28 ANNEX D – BIBLIOGRAPHY...... 64 List of Tables
TABLE 1: ALLIED AIRCRAFT PAYLOAD TYPES ...... 17 TABLE 2: ALLIED NAVAL ARMAMENT ...... 18 TABLE 2: CHRONOLOGICAL LIST OF MILITARY EVENTS (NOT EXHAUSTIVE) ...... 19
LIST OF FIGURES
FIGURE 1: PROPOSED NAURU PORT DEVELOPMENT CONCEPT ...... 7 FIGURE 2: 75MM T13E1 CANNON MOUNTED IN THE NOSE OF THE B-25 MITCHELL ...... 17
LIST OF PLATES PLATE 1: PROJECT AREA OF INTEREST ...... 5 PLATE 2: USAAF BOMBING NAURU NOV 1943, B24 LIBERATOR VIEWING AIRSTRIP AND ADMINISTRATIVE AREA STRIKES ...... 12 PLATE 3: POST BOMB RAID DAMAGE, NAURU HARBOUR AREA ...... 13 PLATE 4: BOMBING OF INDUSTRIAL AREA, NAURU ISLAND, USED IN FEBRUARY 1944 ISSUE OF IMPACT ...... 13 PLATE 5: BOMBS DROPPING DIRECTLY OVER THE PROJECT AOI ...... 14
Milsearch Project Reference: NAU 53916 Page 6 of 64
2.0 INTRODUCTION
The Republic of Nauru was subject to both naval and aerial bombardment by both Axis and Allied forces during the War in the Pacific. To this day Nauru remains, in areas, heavily contaminated with hazardous Explosive Remnants of War (ERW). ERW contamination poses a severe threat to a variety of activities including the safety of personnel and successful completion of infrastructure projects such as the Nauru Port Development Project.
In order to mitigate this risk a focused historical Desk Top Review (DTR) of readily available historical material to establish the likelihood and nature of ERW being present on the site of the proposed Nauru Port Facility development has been undertaken.
Particular attention has been given to ordnance types used in the initial capture of the island, the Japanese defence of the island, and the subsequent aerial and naval bombardments by Allied forces. In o ert ith Milsear h’s geophysi al sur ey of the Area of I terest AOI , this histori al re ie is designed to contribute to the project risk assessment and the subsequent development of an ERW Risk Management Plan, by characterizing the likely ERW contamination by location, type, ground penetration, and ferrous metal content.
Figure 1: Proposed Nauru Port Development Concept
Milsearch Project Reference: NAU 53916 Page 7 of 64
3.0 NAURU DURING WWII – AN OVERVIEW
In December 1940 the German raider Komet used naval gunfire to target Nauru's phosphate mining facilities, oil storage depots, ship-loading facilities, and together with German raider Orion sank five allied merchant ships off Nauru.
The attacks on Nauru’s shippi g a d o er ial i frastru ture were the most effective operations conducted by German raiders in the Pacific Ocean during World War II. They disrupted supplies of phosphate to Australia, New Zealand and Japan, which impacted agricultural production in these countries. In response, Allied naval vessels were deployed to protect Nauru and nearby Ocean Island, and to escort shipping in the South Pacific. Small garrisons were also established to protect the two islands1.
In August 1942, nine Japanese planes attacked the island. That same night two of their cruisers bombarded the administration settlement. The following day the island surrendered to the Japanese.
On 26th August 1942, three Japanese cruisers arrived and a landing force established a Headquarters in the Commission's office building. Two days later, 208 of their marine corps arrived, with this force being increased in early October by 300 more marines. Towards the close of 1942, the Japanese had commenced constructing a landing strip for their planes. By the end of January 1943, the airstrip was adequate for Japanese bombers and fighters to use. As part of implementing an island defence plan, 152mm Coastal Defence (CD) artillery guns were sited around the coastline, and 12.7mm anti-aircraft guns were also installed by the Japanese.
On 7 March 1943, Captain Takenao Takenouchi arrived to take command of the garrison (known as 67 Naval Guard Force); he, however, was ill and bed-ridden throughout his tenure, and command was effectively held by Lt. Hiromi Nakayama, who had led the initial landing force. On 13 July, Captain Hisayuki Soeda arrived to replace Takenouchi as commander of 67 Naval Guard Force, a position he held until the end of the war.2
US forces responded with a neutralising and denial campaign against the Japanese garrison on Nauru, employing heavy bombing air raids from early 1943 until the end of the war. Before the end of 1943, all Japanese planes on Nauru had been destroyed and the airfield put out of action. In addition to air attacks allied warships commenced regular naval bombardment of Japanese positions on the island. These bombardments continued until the surrender of the Japanese on 13 September 1945. A total of 2,681 Japanese soldiers and marines, together with 1,054 Japanese and Korean workers were on the island at surrender.
1 Gill, G. Hermon (1957). Royal Australian Navy 1939–1942. Australia in the War of 1939–1945. Series 2 – Navy. Volume 1. Canberra: Australian War Memorial. OCLC 848228.
2 Yuki Tanaka. "Japanese Atrocities on Nauru during the Pacific War : The murder of Australians, the massacre of lepers and the ethnocide of Nauruans.
Milsearch Project Reference: NAU 53916 Page 8 of 64
4.0 THE GERMAN ATTACKS
The German attacks on Nauru refer to the two attacks in December 1940. These attacks were conducted by auxiliary cruisers (armed merchant raiders) between 6 and 8 December and on the 27th of the month. The raiders sank five Allied merchant ships and inflicted serious damage o Nauru’s economically important phosphate-loading facilities. Despite the significance of the island to the Australian and New Zealand economies, Nauru was not defended and the German force did not suffer any losses. The two attacks on Nauru disrupted supplies of phosphate to Australia, New Zealand and Japan, which reduced agricultural production in these countries. In response, Allied naval vessels were deployed to protect Nauru and nearby Ocean Island and escort shipping in the South Pacific. Small garrisons were also established to protect the two islands. The raider captains intended to land a shore party and bombard Nauru's shore installations at dawn on 8 December, but bad weather forced them to concentrate on the ships that were off the island. On the evening of 7 December, Komet—which had gone ahead to reconnoiter and was disguised as the Japanese merchant ship Manyo Maru, sank the Norwegian merchant ship Vinni (5,181 long tons (5,264 t))3 approximately 7.8nmi south of Nauru. While the raider was spotted from the shore, her disguise was successful and she was assumed to be a merchant ship bound for Japan.4 Orion joined Komet off Nauru in the early hours of 8 December, and attacked and damaged Triadic (6,378 long tons (6,480 t)) and sank Triaster (6,032 long tons (6,129 t)). Komet then tried to sink Triadic with scuttling charges, but this was unsuccessful and Orion sank the merchant ship with gunfire. Komet later sank the British steamer Komata (3,900 long tons (4,000 t)). Following these attacks, the two raiders and Kulmerland withdrew and assembled 17nmi east of Nauru. As the weather precluded a landing on the island, it was decided that Komet and Kulmerland would go to Ailinglaplap in the Marshall Islands where Komet would refuel while Orion operated north-west of Nauru. Following this the ships would meet off the island and make another attempt to land a raiding party.4 5 When the German force reassembled off Nauru on 15 December, the weather continued to be too bad to permit a landing and the attack on Nauru was broken off. Further attacks on shipping were judged impractical as the raiders had intercepted radio messages ordering vessels bound for Nauru and Ocean Island to disperse. Instead, the three German ships proceeded to the Australian-administered island of Emirau to disembark the 675 prisoners they were carrying.4 While Weyher refused to release any of the European ethnic prisoners on board Orion as he believed that "trained officers and crews are as much a problem for Britain as shipping itself", the ships landed 343 Europeans and 171 Chinese and South Pacific-ethnic people.6
3 "MS Vinni's Story, Victim of Komet". Warsailors.com. Retrieved 2008-09-05 4 Gill op cit (1957), p. 281 5 “Mid-Pacific Outposts , Ellis, A. Sir 1946, AWM ID 016270 6 Waters, Sydney David (1956). The Royal New Zealand Navy. The Official History of New Zealand in the Second World War 1939– 1945. Wellington: Historical Publications Branch. p. 145
Milsearch Project Reference: NAU 53916 Page 9 of 64
4.1 The Komet Bombardment of Nauru
The Nauruan Administrator, Lieutenant Colonel Chambers, reported details of the 27th Dec 1940 bombardment by the Ma yo Maru (later identified as the Komet) to the Australian Prime Minister7 on 28th Dec 1940. The attack commenced at approximately 0630 and lasted for nearly two hours. The Komet essentially promenaded up and down the SW coast of the island firing continuous salvos of its t i . a al gu s a d or pompom guns at the phosphate processing facilities, the port, and administration zones. This message noted that the oil fuel storages were destroyed, and that the phosphate loading cantilever damaged.
4.2 Ships Sunk
by Komet 1940-12-06 Triona 4,413 Gross register tonnage (GRT) 1940-12-07 Vinni 5,181 GRT 1940-12-07 Komata 3,900 GRT
by Komet together with Orion 1940-12-08 Triadic 6,378 GRT 1940-12-08 Triaster 6,032 GRT
5.0 JAPANESE OCCUPATION OF NAURU
The first Japanese attack on Nauru took place on 9 December 1941; three planes flying from the Marshall Islands bombed the wireless station at Nauru, but failed to cause any damage. The Nauruans warned by observers on Ocean Island 350 kilometres to the east, managed to seek shelter before the attack. The following day, another plane made a second attempt on the radio station. The third day, four planes made a low-altitude strike and finally destroyed it. During these three days, 51 bombs were dropped on or close to the station. The Administrator of the island, LTCOL Chalmers, sent a message to Canberra stating that he thought the Japanese hadn't destroyed the phosphate production facilities as they intended to occupy the island for its resources.8
The Japanese occupation of Nauru covered the three year period from 26 August 1942 to 13 September 1945. With the onset of the war, the islands that flanked Japan's South Seas possessions became of vital concern to Japanese Imperial General Headquarters, and in particular to the Imperial Navy, which was tasked with protecting Japan's outlying Pacific territories.
The Japanese hoped to exploit the island's phosphate resources, and to build up their military defences in the area. They were unable to relaunch phosphate mining operations, but succeeded in transforming Nauru into a powerful stronghold, which United States forces chose to bypass during their re-conquest of the Pacific. The most important infrastructure built by the Japanese was an airfield, which was the target of repeated Allied air strikes.
The war deeply affected the local population. The Japanese enforced a harsh regime, particularly on Chinese labourers whom they saw as being at the bottom of the racial hierarchy. Forced labour and brutal treatment were commonplace. They decided to deport the majority of Nauru's indigenous population to the Truk islands, hundreds of kilometres away, where mortality was extremely high. Still overpopulated with troops and imported
7 Natio al Ar hi es of Australia, Atta k o Nauru a d Nauru “hippi g, NAA ID 8 Wikipedia, WW Nauru : Garrett, Jemima (1996). Island exiles. Sydney: ABC books. p. 200. ISBN 0-7333-0485-0. pp. 13–20
Milsearch Project Reference: NAU 53916 Page 10 of 64
labourers, the island was subject to food shortages, which worsened as the Allies' island-hopping strategy left Nauru completely cut off.9 Operation RY was the name given by the Japanese to their plan to invade and occupy Nauru and Ocean Islands. The operation was originally set to be executed in May 1942, immediately following Operation MO (the invasion of New Guinea and the Solomon Islands), and before Operation MI (the attack on Midway). The first attempt to occupy Nauru began on 11 May, when an Imperial Japanese invasion force consisting of a cruiser, two mine-layers and two destroyers, with Special Naval Landing Force units, under the command of Rear Admiral Shima Kiyohide, departed Rabaul. The task force was attacked by the United States Navy submarine S-42, leading to the loss of the minelayer Okinoshima. Attempts by the rest of the task force to continue with the operation were called off after Japanese reconnaissance aircraft sighted the American aircraft carriers USS Enterprise and Hornet heading towards Nauru. A second invasion force departed Truk on 26 August, and three days later, a company of the 43rd Guard Force (Palau) conducted an unopposed landing on Nauru, and assumed occupation duties. They were joined by the 5th Special Base Force Company, which departed Makin Island on September 15 and arrived at Nauru two days later. Allied forces received unexpected eyewitness confirmation of the extent of Japanese forces deployed on Nauru despite the American air and naval bombing campaign to neutralise the island. On 28 June 1945 two Japanese Labour Battalion workers (Nauru Setsueitai) from Nauru were picked up in mid ocean between Nauru and Truk Island by an allied merchantman, after they spent several weeks at sea attempting to get to Truk by raft. Their interrogation records noted that the Japanese forces on Nauru were largely intact, consisting of some 3250 soldiers, and 1500 labour workers. The island was well defended with deep tunnel systems and bunkers, ringed with twin barrel 150mm Coastal Defence guns and smaller caliber guns and anti-air systems, 8 x Type 97 tankettes and 12 x medium tanks.10
6.0 THE AMERICAN OFFENSIVE
During 1943, the garrison on Nauru continued to improve its defences against assault, unaware that American Forces, whilst preparing for OPERATION GALVANIC – the occupation of the Gilbert Islands, had already de ided to ypass the isla d due to U“N Ad iral Ni itz’s o je tio to the inclusion of an assault on Nauru. Noting the military importance of Nauru’s airstrip a d Japa ese garriso that ould otherwise remain to the rear of the American advance towards Tarawa, it was resolved to invoke vigorous actions to deny the Japanese use of their airstrip.11 12 13 Although spared a pitched battle, Nauru would be subject to regular aerial bombardment, while Allied warships made it increasingly difficult for supply ships to get through to the island.
9 Stanley C. Jersey (2004-02-29). "The Battle for Betio Island, Tarawa Atoll" 10 National Archives of Australia, Defence – Recapture of Nauru and Ocean Island, NAA ID 102255 – Interrogation records of Fukujuri NAMAMI and Hoichi HASHIMOTO 11 History of United States Naval Operations in World War II: Vol. 7 Aleutians, Gilberts, and Marshalls, AWM ID 038495, S.E. Morison, pp83-85 12 The Ar y Air For es i World War , Vol , The Pa ifi – Guadal a al to “aipa , Edited by W.F. Craven & J.L. Cate, AWM: R940.544973 A741v4, pp290-292 13 “The History Place – Timeline of the Pacific War , http://www.historyplace.com/unitedstates/pacificwar/timeline.htm
Milsearch Project Reference: NAU 53916 Page 11 of 64
The first USAAF air-raid against Nauru was led by US General Hale on 20 April 1943, staging from Funafuti Airbase in the southern Gilbert Islands. GEN Hale led a for e of B ’s a d deli ered x 1000lb General Purpose (GP) bombs, and 45 x 500lb fragmentation bombs. The raid encountered heavy anti-air fire and fighter interceptors. USAAF forces continued with regular bombing raids against Nauru for the balance of 1943, and beginning in mid-November 1943, in support of their campaign in the Gilberts, pounded Nauru heavily for six weeks, effectively destroying the airfield and much of the Japanese forces supporting infrastructure. From December 1943 through January 1945, smaller-scale air raids continued on a regular basis.14 Supplementing USAAF air-raids, USN forces routinely took the opportunity to strike Nauru, with the aim of neutralising the island and in particular its airfield.15 A comprehensive listing of both Axis and Allied actions against Nauru are detailed at Annexes A and B. In Annex A, Allied and Axis Military Actions against Nauru, detailed payload capacities/configurations for the 90 plus air raids USAAF B24 and B25 aircraft used against Nauru are listed. Details of the naval weapon systems aboard the major USN vessels that also regularly shelled Nauru are also shown. Together, the USAAF and USN raids on Nauru would constitute the bulk of military explosive ordnance dropped on Nauru.
Plate 2: USAAF Bombing Nauru Nov 1943, B24 Liberator viewing Airstrip and Administrative area Strikes
14 Craven & Cate, op cit, p286 15 S.E. Morison, op cit, pp189 and 307
Milsearch Project Reference: NAU 53916 Page 12 of 64
Plate 3: Post Bomb Raid Damage, Nauru Harbour Area
Plate 4: Bo i g of I dustrial Area, Nauru Isla d, Used i Fe ruary 1944 issue of I pa t
Milsearch Project Reference: NAU 53916 Page 13 of 64
Plate 5: Bombs Dropping Directly over the Project AoI
Milsearch Project Reference: NAU 53916 Page 14 of 64
7.0 SUMMARY
Nauru was actively militarily engaged throughout WWII. It was first attacked by German naval raider for es i De e er , duri g hi h the isla d’s ad i istrati e a d port fa ilities a d British Phosphate Company ore loading facilities were heavily shelled by the German raider Komet.
Allied forces subsequently stationed a modest garrison force on Nauru, only to withdraw them during a general evacuation of most non-Nauruans from the island shortly before the Japanese invasion in August 1942.
Following the Japanese invasion in August 1942, most remaining Islanders were relocated from Nauru whilst the Japanese fortified and prepared to defend the island. A substantial military force was assembled comprising some 3,500 professional soldiers and 1,500 labourers. The island was defended with the full range of weaponry available to the Japanese Imperial Forces ranging from small arms, grenades and machine guns, up to and including ringing the island with 150mm twin barrelled Coastal Defence naval guns. The Japanese quickly established an airfield on the southern side of the island and deployed fighter and medium bomber aircraft.
Though the Allies decided not to retake Nauru, it was conscious of the threat to it of having such a powerful enemy force to its rear as it advanced northwards through the then Gilbert Islands on its island hopping campaign towards Japan. Accordingly, Nauru endured some 18 months of extensive aerial and naval bombardment to neutralise its threat to the Allied advance in the South West Pacific.
8.0 CONCLUSIONS
During WWII Nauru was shelled by German forces and the ADB Nauru Port Development Project AoI was targeted at this time by naval gunfire. Damage was sustained to the Nauru port administrative area.
The island was subsequently first garrisoned by allied forces, albeit of modest size, and then by a substantial Japanese military force for three years along with their complement of military hardware and ordnance, including a full suite of small arms weaponry, heavy coastal defence and anti-air batteries, light and medium armoured vehicles, and fighter and medium bomber aircraft.
As a consequence, Nauru endured continuous Allied shelling and bombing by air and sea for nearly two years, as the allies neutralised the Japanese built airstrip, destroyed all the Japanese aircraft, and the isla d’s supporti g administrative infrastructure, and in particular the ADB Nauru Port Development Project AoI was severely damaged. There is little doubt that substantial Explosive Remnants of War (ERW) is likely to remain within the ADB Nauru Port Development Project AoI.
The likelihood of encountering hazardous ERW contamination during the ADB Port Development Project is considered by Milsearch to be extremely high. In order to mitigate this risk, Milsearch recommends that a 100% ERW remediation solution is conducted prior to Project commencement.
Annex C, provides a detailed listing of what ERW may be found within the AoI.
Milsearch Project Reference: NAU 53916 Page 15 of 64
List of Annexes:
Annex A. Milsearch Summary Report: Allied and Axis Military Actions against Nauru.
Annex B. Reference Action Report 0010, USN Naval Bombardment of Nauru Island, 8 December 1943, by Charles M Paty Jr (revised 3 Nov 2000).
Annex C. Munitions Identification Guide.
Annex D. Bibliography.
Milsearch Project Reference: NAU 53916 Page 16 of 64
Annex A - Allied and Axis Military Action Against Nauru
Table 1: Allied Aircraft Payload Types
Aircraft Type Weapons Carried Notes
B-24D Liberator Bombs Various: 100lb, 300lb, 500lb, The number and combination of bombs to be 600lb, 1,000lb, 1,100lb, & 2,000lb. carried is interchangeable.
The maximum load for the B-24 is 8,600lbs. B-24J Liberator Bombs Various: 500lb, 1,000lb, 2,000lb, & 4,000lb. Bombs include: fragmentation, Armor Piercing (AP), Semi Armor Piercing (SAP), and General Purpose (GP). B-25 Mitchell 75mm T13E1 cannon 2,150lb Torpedo The 75mm Cannon ammunition consists of 15lb projectiles HE and various. Bombs Various: 500lb, 1,000lb, & 1,600lb
Allied Missions (Press Release)
12 x B-25 aircraft left Butaritari on Thursday the 29th June 1944. After gaining height while circling above the lagoon and formatting up into four flights of three planes each, the Group set a course of 329 degrees true and headed for Nauru. Eight of the twelve B-25s on this particular flight were the G model of which only 200 were built, making it a very rare bird. These G’s were the most heavily armed plane ever built for their size because of the 75mm Cannon installed in the nose.
The guns at Cliff Lodge, the guns on Command Ridge, the guns at the rubbish dump and the guns at both ends of the airfield were the targets for the four groups that day. The bomb load for each plane was 1200lbs of general purpose high explosive 100 pounders.
Figure 2: 75mm T13E1 Cannon Mounted in the Nose of the B-25 Mitchell
Milsearch Project Reference: NAU 53916 Page 17 of 64
CINCPAC PRESS RELEASE NO. 186, DECEMBER 5, 1943 A group of Liberators of the Seventh Army Air Force raided Nauru on December 4. An oil dump was set afire. There was no air interception, although three enemy planes departed the area as our planes arrived. All of our aircraft returned. One was slightly damaged by antiaircraft fire.
CINCPAC COMMUNIQUÉ NO. 24, DECEMBER 9, 1943 Strong forces of the Pacific Fleet attacked Nauru Island with carrier aircraft and ship bombardment on December 8 (West Longitude Date) details are not now available.
CINCPAC PRESS RELEASE NO. 192, DECEMBER 12, 1943 Our battleships and carriers which bombarded Nauru Island on December 8 (West Longitude Date) started large fires throughout the target area and destroyed nine planes on the ground and one in the air. We lost two aircraft. One of our destroyers received one hit from enemy shore batteries suffering minor damage.
CINCPAC PRESS RELEASE NO. 210, DECEMBER 25, 1943 Navy medium bombers of Fleet Air Wing Two made a low altitude attack on Nauru at dusk on Christmas Eve (East Longitude Date) setting Installations on fire. One of our planes is missing.
CINCPAC RELEASE NO. 214, DECEMBER 29, 1943 Navy medium bombers of Fleet Air Wing Two which raided Nauru on the morning of December 29 (West Longitude Date) destroyed an ammunition dump and started several fires. Several of our planes suffered minor damage. One Navy Liberator while on a search mission in the Marshalls on December 27 damaged a tanker.
Table 2: Allied Naval Armament
Vessel Type Weapons Carried
USS Indiana - South Dakota-class Battleship 9 × 16" Mark 6 guns 20 × 5" guns 24 × 40mm guns 16 × 20mm cannons
USS North Carolina - North Carolina-class Battleship 9 × 16" Mark 6 guns 20 × 5 guns 16 × 1.1 anti-aircraft guns (later replaced by 15 quad 40mm antiaircraft guns and 46 single 20mm cannons)
Milsearch Project Reference: NAU 53916 Page 18 of 64
USS Alabama
On 8 December 1943, Alabama, along with five other fast battleships, carried out the first Pacific gunfire strike conducted by that type of warship. Alabama's guns hurled 535 rounds into enemy strong points, as she and her sister ships bombarded Nauru Island, an enemy phosphate-producing center, causing severe damage to shore installations there. She also took the destroyer USS Boyd (DD-644), alongside after that ship had received a direct hit from a Japanese shore battery on Nauru, and brought three injured men on board for treatment. http://www.navy.mil/navydata/ships/battleships/alabama/bb60-al.html
South Dakota, with five other battleships, formed another task group on 6 December to bombard Nauru Island. A joint aerial attack and shore bombardment severely damaged enemy shore installations and airfields there. South Dakota retired to Efate on 12 December 1943 for upkeep and rearming. http://www.navy.mil/navydata/nav_legacy.asp?id=125
American Missions against Nauru and Nauru Airfield http://www.pacificwrecks.com/airfields/nauru/missions-nauru.html#us
Table 3: Chronological List of Military Events (not exhaustive)
Date Event Details
December 27, 1940 German Raider Komet bombards the island (particularly the Phosphate Mine).
December 1940 Throughout December, Komet and Orion sank five Allied merchant ships off Nauru.
August 25, 1942 Nine Japanese twin-engine bombers attack Nauru destroying a medical clinic.
January 28, 1943 (7th AF) One B-24 flies photographic reconnaissance over Nauru.
February 9, 1943 (13th AF) Lost on a reconnaissance mission over Nauru is B-17F "My Lovin' Dove" 41- 24450, crew rescued 50 days later.
March 26, 1943 (7th AF) B-24's bomb the airfield on Nauru Island.
April 20, 1943 (7th AF) 22 B-24's, from Funafuti, carry out a photo-bombing mission over Nauru. Several direct hits on runways and the dispersal areas are claimed.
(Note: The Army Air Forces in WWII, Vol , The Pa ifi – Guadal a al to “aipa , Edited by W.F. Craven & J.L. Cate, AWM: R940.544973 A741v4, Lists this raid as the first raid by USAAF against Nauru, and not the 26 Mar 1943 listing above)
Milsearch Project Reference: NAU 53916 Page 19 of 64
June 19, 1943 (7th AF) During the night of 18/19 Jun, B-24's bomb Nauru Island.
June 28, 1943 (7th AF) A bombing mission against Nauru is hampered by engine trouble and bad weather, only two B-24s bomb the target with unobserved results.
September 18, 1943 (7th AF) B-24's bomb Naru Airfield and attack a phosphate plant and radio station on Nauru.
November 21, 1943 (7th AF) B-24's from Funafuti Atoll and Nanumea in the Ellice bomb Nauru in the Gilberts.
November 28, 1943 (7th AF) 11 B-24's from Nanumea bomb Nauru.
December 4, 1943 (7th AF) 8 B-24's from Funafuti attack Nauru.
December 8, 1943 (USN) A striking force of two carriers, six battleships including USS Massachusetts BB- 59, and 12 destroyers bombed and bombarded enemy installations on Nauru. Shot down by anti-aircraft fire over Nauru are F6F Hellcat 26088 and TBF Avenger 47589.
January 27, 1944 (7th AF) Six B-25's bomb Nauru.
March 12, 1944 (7th AF) B-24s bomb Nauru.
May 12, 1944 (7th AF) Twelve B-25s bomb Nauru.
May 16, 1944 (7th AF) B-25s bomb Nauru.
June 2, 1944 (7th AF) B-25s bomb Nauru.
June 3, 1944 (7th AF) B-25s bomb Nauru.
June 5, 1944 (7th AF) B-25s bomb Nauru.
June 8, 1944 (7th AF) B-25s bomb Nauru.
June 10, 1944 (7th AF) B-25s bomb Nauru.
Milsearch Project Reference: NAU 53916 Page 20 of 64
June 13, 1944 (7th AF) B-25s bomb Nauru.
June 17, 1944 (7th AF) B-25s bomb Nauru.
June 18, 1944 (7th AF) B-25s bomb Nauru.
June 26, 1944 (7th AF) B-25s bomb Nauru.
June 29, 1944 (7th AF) B-25s bomb Nauru, lost is B-25G "Coral Princess" 42-64977.
July 6, 1944 (7th AF) B-25s bomb Nauru.
July 13, 1944 (7th AF) B-25s bomb Nauru.
July 23, 1944 (7th AF) B-25s bomb Nauru.
July 31, 1944 (7th AF) B-25s bomb Nauru.
August 6, 1944 (7th AF) B-25s bomb Nauru.
August 12, 1944 (7th AF) B-25s bomb Nauru
August 21, 1944 (7th AF) B-25s bomb Nauru.
August 24, 1944 (7th AF) B-25s bomb Nauru.
August 29, 1944 (7th AF) B-25s bomb Nauru.
September 2, 1944 (7th AF) B-25s bomb Nauru.
September 5, 1944 (7th AF) B-25s bomb Nauru.
September 9, 1944 (7th AF) B-25s bomb Nauru.
September 12, 1944 (7th AF) B-25s bomb Nauru.
Milsearch Project Reference: NAU 53916 Page 21 of 64
September 17, 1944 (7th AF) B-25s bomb Nauru.
September 20, 1944 (7th AF) B-25s bomb Nauru.
September 22, 1944 (7th AF) B-25s bomb Nauru.
September 26, 1944 (7th AF) B-25s bomb Nauru.
October 1, 1944 (7th AF) B-25s bomb Nauru.
October 5, 1944 (7th AF) B-25s bomb Nauru Airfield runways and gun positions.
October 10, 1944 (7th AF) Twelve B-25s bomb Nauru Airfield runways and adjacent AA positions.
October 13, 1944 (7th AF) B-25s bomb Nauru.
October 17, 1944 (7th AF) B-25s bomb Nauru.
October 22, 1944 (7th AF) B-25s bomb Nauru.
October 26, 1944 (7th AF) 15 B-25s bomb Nauru Airfield area.
October 30, 1944 (7th AF) B-25s bomb Nauru.
Milsearch Project Reference: NAU 53916 Page 22 of 64 ANNEX B - Action Report 0010
Revised 3 Nov 2000 The Bombardment of Nauru Island
8 December 1943
Task Unit 50.8.5
Reference Action Report 0010
Narration by Charles M Paty Jr
This bombardment was a part ofthe original "Galvanic" operation which was the planned recovery of the Gilbert Islands. The plan originally called for the invasion and occupation of Nauru Island.
Nauru is an oval shaped coral island about 40 miles (65 kilometers) south ofthe equator with an area of only 8 square miles.' The island was a phosphate mining center and was riddled with holes and caves. There was a small indigenous population (about 9000 in 1992).
The rep~blk ~f,Nauru inBA t h e c e n t r a l J > a c if i¢ , is . , t h e
i t,hlrfl ,sflJaH~st¢PIJ~'{tl,y;ip tlie\\I9r1d. , ¥ o s t o r ' t b ~ 'i~ . { " '> lin d . is·i;1!Pla~e~uth:at:'\.i:'', ,,',-contahisdep(,lsits:df.'· ... ' pfwsphates; ':. ":' ' f . - • - • •
;!"!
I "People and Places" by World Book Inc, 1992
Page 23 of 64 ANNEX B - Action Report 0010
A number of Army Air Force bombing and reconnaissance raids revealed a small Japanese garrison and fortifications plus a small landing strip. As the operation plan progressed through various staff reviews it was determined that the Nauru invasion and occupation was not a worth while part of the plan. It was therefore decided to delete the invasion and substitute a heavy bombardment by fast battleships in order to neutralize the landing strip and other fortifications.
Following the Tarawa operation, theIHGFEDCBANorth Carolina headed South and refueled from the fleet tanker NECHES {A047] on 28 Nov 1943.
At 2304 on 7 December, the North Carolina crossed the equator at 168°-35.8' E. and maintained a base course of350°, speed 18 knots, This ship was in column 1000 yards astern ofthe Washington (BB56).
2 Page 24 of 64 ANNEX B - Action Report 0010
..~ i . BA ~ ~ - - - - - I
...
I' Id II II oa •• jihgfedcbaZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHGFEDCBA
3
Page 25 of 64 ANNEX B - Action Report 0010
On the morning of the 8th the sea was calm and surface wind was S knots from 020 true. Visibility was excellent. At 0420 radar contact was made with the island of Nauru, 170° True, 22 miles. At 0448 Task Unit SO.8.Sleft the formation and at OS2Scrossed the Equator, North to South at 167°10'.S" E. Changing course the ship again crossed the Equator going South to North at 167°-09' .S" E. At OS40the ship went to General Quarters. OSSOthe Carriers launched attack groups. At 0603 the battleships formed in column, distance IS00 yards, with theIHGFEDCBANORTHCAROLINA number two in the column following the WASHINGTON ( B B 5 6 ) . Three destroyers took station in the van and three in the rear ofthe column. At 0600 we arrived off the Island of Nauru. We were in company with Battleship Divisions 6, 8 and 9 plus six destroyers.
At 0604BAM fire was seen against one of the battleship observation aircraft. At 0607 the island was sighted visually. During the approach this ship again crossed the Equator going North to South. At 0619 we launched one OS2U float plane with Lt. Dowdle as pilot and Paska, ARM3c as radioman. This was followed at 0629 by catapulting Ens. Burns and his radioman, Hill, I W, ARM3c. Nauru contained a Japanese airfield and had been bombed by Navy aircraft in recent weeks. Ships aircraft noted that one "Betty' and two fighters took off from strip #2 at 064S. No enemy aircraft were encountered during this action although there was some anti-aircraft fire at our observation planes. At 0701 an all battleship salvo of 16" commenced bombardment. This was a salvo of S4 16" guns resulting in enormous amount of weight and explosive falling on the island at one time. We closed the range to 10000 yard and commenced firing the secondary battery at the air strip at 071S. Ceased firing main and secondary battery at 0729. Secured from General Quarters at 0813 and recovered our observation air craft at 0844.
The BOYD(DD 544) was directed to pickup two pilots who had crashed near the island and she left the formation at 103S. She was damaged by shore battery fire during this rescue. At 1213 Japanese Bomber "Betty' sighted on the horizon bearing 120° True. The MONTEREY (CVL26) reported the "Betty' was shot down by their combat air patrol. At ISOSset boiler condition 32.
All battleships had launched two OS2U aircraft, one to spot shot fall and one antisubmarine patrol. The ALABAMA ( B B 6 0 ) OS2U did a little strafing of it's own, setting fire to some barracks. We fired 13S rounds ofl6" projectiles and 403 rounds ofS" projectiles.
4 Page 26 of 64 ANNEX B - Action Report 0010
TbeIHGFEDCBAUSSINDIANA ( B B 5 8 ) ruing a salvo during tbe bombardment of Nauru. Tbis pboto taken from SKY ONE on the USSNORTHCAROLINA looking aft. The balance oftbe battlesbip column are ruing 16" salvos at random. This pboto is "Enclosure G" ofAction Report #0010.
Following is a summery of ammunition expenditure on targets:
Main Battery
9 Rounds on Oil Storage tanks and Barracks in grid area B3 45 Rounds into fuel storage and troop concentrations Northwest of landing strip #1 in area B2 and C2 27 Rounds on to radar station and reported gun emplacements on top of cliff in grid position D727 and D827 27 Rounds on to revetments, storage dumps, gun positions, and control tower south of landing strip # 1 27 Rounds on underground fuel storage, revetments and defense installations adjacent to, and north oflanding strip #1
Secondary Battery
130 Rounds on landing strip and adjacent installations in grid areas C2, DI and D2 273 Rounds on landing strip and adjacent installations in grid areas Oland 02
This concluded a successful bombardment of the target area by all battleships, this was not a significant target. It did provide an excellent training for the fast battleships in operating together in an operation of this type.
5 Page 27 of 64 4
US Mk 1 20mm HEI NEQ: 12gm
Length with fuse: 82mm Total weight: 132gm
Carry bag for Mk1 20mm HE
Page 28 of 64 5
JAP Type 96 model 2, 25mm HE ammunition NEQ: 23g
Length without fuse: 91 mm Total weight of projectile: 200 gm Length of cartridge: 164 mm Diameter of cartridge base: 42 mm
Page 29 of 64 6
US M51B1 37mm AP with Cap NEQ: Nil
Length with cap and windshield: 162mm Length w/o cap and windshield: 118mm Total weight: 872gm
Page 30 of 64 7
US M59 37mm AP with Cap NEQ: Nil
Length: 117mm Total weight: 867gm
Page 31 of 64 8
US M63 37mm HE NEQ: 39gm
Length: 150mm Total weight: 735gm
Page 32 of 64 9
US Mk 1 Mod 5 40mm NEQ: 68gm
Length: 180mm Total Weight: 900gm
Page 33 of 64