application for licence amendment€¦ · 2 licence: l4474/1976/14 ir-t04 decision report template...

Licence: L4474/1976/14

IR-T04 Decision Report Template v2.0 (July 2017) i

Application for Licence Amendment

Division 3, Part V Environmental Protection Act 1986

Licence Number L4474/1976/14

Applicant

Fremantle Port Authority

ABN 78 187 229 472

File Number DEC1712/5

Premises Kwinana Bulk Jetty

Port Road

KWINANA BEACH WA 6167

Lot 4552 on Deposited Plan 220690 and portion of Lot 497 on plan 35196

Date of Report 16 September 2019

Status of Report Final

Amendment

Report

1

Licence: L4474/1976/14

IR-T04 Decision Report Template v2.0 (July 2017)

Table of Contents

1. Definitions of terms and acronyms ................................................................... 2

2. Purpose and scope of assessment ................................................................... 4

2.1 Amendment description .......................................................................................... 4

2.2 Amendment History ................................................................................................ 5

3. Location and siting ............................................................................................. 5

3.1 Residential and sensitive Premises ........................................................................ 5

4. Risk assessment ................................................................................................. 7

4.1 Determination of emission, pathway and receptor .................................................. 7

4.2 Consequence and likelihood of risk events ............................................................. 9

4.3 Acceptability and treatment of Risk Event ............................................................. 10

4.4 Risk of Dust Emissions ......................................................................................... 10

4.5 Risk of Noise Emissions ....................................................................................... 11

4.6 Risk of Discharges to Water ................................................................................. 12

5. Applicant’s comments ...................................................................................... 13

6. Conclusion ........................................................................................................ 13

Appendix 1: Amended Licence ................................................................................ 15

Appendix 2: Summary of Licence Holder Comments ............................................ 16

Table 1: Definitions ................................................................................................................ 2

Table 2: Licence amendments .............................................................................................. 5

Table 3: Receptors and distance from activity boundary .......................................................... 5

Table 4: Environmental receptors and distance from activity boundary ........................... 6

Table 5: Risk assessment during operations ............................................................................ 7

Table 6: Risk rating matrix ....................................................................................................... 9

Table 7: Risk criteria table ........................................................................................................ 9

Table 8: Risk treatment table ................................................................................................. 10

Table 9: Assigned noise levels for KIA industrial receptors .................................................... 12

2

Licence: L4474/1976/14


1. Definitions of terms and acronyms

In this Amendment Report, the terms in Table 1 have the meanings defined.

Table 1: Definitions

Term Definition

AACR Annual Audit Compliance Report

ACN Australian Company Number

AER Annual Environment Report

AS 4156.6 – 2000 Australian Standard AS 4156.6 – 2000: Determination of Dust/moisture Relationship for Coal.

Category/ Categories/ Cat.

Categories of Prescribed Premises as set out in Schedule 1 of the EP Regulations

CS Act Contaminated Sites Act 2003 (WA)

Decision Report refers to this document.

Delegated Officer an officer under section 20 of the EP Act.

Department means the department established under section 35 of the Public Sector Management Act 1994 and designated as responsible for the administration of Part V, Division 3 of the EP Act.

DWER Department of Water and Environmental Regulation

As of 1 July 2017, the Department of Environment Regulation (DER), the Office of the Environmental Protection Authority (OEPA) and the Department of Water (DoW) amalgamated to form the Department of Water and Environmental Regulation (DWER). DWER was established under section 35 of the Public Sector Management Act 1994 and is responsible for the administration of the Environmental Protection Act 1986 along with other legislation.

EPA Environmental Protection Authority

EP Act Environmental Protection Act 1986 (WA)

EP Regulations Environmental Protection Regulations 1987 (WA)

EPBC Act Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (Cth)

Existing Licence The Licence issued under Part V, Division 3 of the EP Act and in force prior to the commencement of, and during this Review

Licence Holder Fremantle Port Authority

3

Licence: L4474/1976/14


mᶟ cubic metres

Minister the Minister responsible for the EP Act and associated regulations

MS Ministerial Statement

mtpa million tonnes per annum

NEPM National Environmental Protection Measure

Noise Regulations Environmental Protection (Noise) Regulations 1997 (WA)

Occupier has the same meaning given to that term under the EP Act.

PM Particulate Matter

PM10 used to describe particulate matter that is smaller than 10 microns (µm) in diameter

Prescribed Premises

has the same meaning given to that term under the EP Act.

Premises refers to the premises to which this Decision Report applies, as specified at the front of this Decision Report

Primary Activities as defined in Schedule 2 of the Revised Licence

Review this Licence review

Revised Licence the amended Licence issued under Part V, Division 3 of the EP Act following the finalisation of this Review.

Risk Event As described in Guidance Statement: Risk Assessment

UDR Environmental Protection (Unauthorised Discharges) Regulations 2004 (WA)

µg/m3 micrograms per cubic metre

µg/L micrograms per litre

4

Licence: L4474/1976/14


2. Purpose and scope of assessment

This amendment is made pursuant to section 59 of the Environmental Protection Act 1986 (EP Act) to amend the Licence issued under the EP Act for a prescribed premises as set out below. This notice of amendment is given under section 59B(9) of the EP Act.

This notice is limited only to an amendment for Category 58.

The following guidance statements have informed the decision made on this amendment:

Guidance Statement: Regulatory Principles (July 2015)

Guidance Statement: Setting Conditions (October 2015)

Guidance Statement: Land Use Planning (February 2017)

Guidance Statement: Licence Duration (August 2016)

Guidance Statement: Decision Making (February 2017)

Guidance Statement: Risk Assessment (February 2017)

Guidance Statement: Environmental Siting (November 2016)

2.1 Amendment description

Under the existing Licence (L4474/1976/14) the Licence Holder loads and unloads the following bulk materials:

Ammonia sulfate Potash

Cement clinker Silica sands

Granulated slag Soya bean meal

Gypsum Sulfur

Phosphates Urea

On 12 April 2019 2019, the Licence Holder applied for an amendment to L4474/1976/14 under the provisions of the EP Act to authorise the:

Increase in Potash imports from 150,000 tpa to 400,000 tpa; and

Increase Soya Bean Meal imports from 60,000 tpa to 150,000 tpa.

from the Kwinana Bulk Jetty.

The Premises comprises two shipping berths and associated infrastructure including conveyor systems and transfer towers. The two berths are known as Kwinana Bulk Berth 3 (KBB3) and Kwinana Bulk Berth 4 (KBB4). KBB4 is equipped with a Siwertell auger-type continuous unloader. This is a fully enclosed unloading system. KBB3 is equipped with two bulk material hoppers. When vessels are unloaded on KBB4, it is undertaken using either the Siwertell or ships grabs into hoppers. Table 2 lists the documents submitted during the assessment process.

It is important to note that whilst the tonnages for the two commodities has increased, the overall annual tonnage of material handled at the Premises will remain at 3,485,800 tonnes.

During this amendment, the CEO has also initiated an amendment to the type and style of the licence during June 2019 and has issued a revised licence incorporating all of the recent amendment notices. The obligations of the Licence Holder have not changed in making this amendment. During consolidation of amendment notice/s; DWER has not undertaken any addition risk assessment of the Premises.

5

Licence: L4474/1976/14


The CEO has:

Incorporated Amendment Notices #1 and 2, issued in 2018 and 2019 respectively and as listed below in the instrument log table;

Updated in that style and appearance of the Licence.

The Amended Licence is located in Attachment 1 of this Amendment Report.

2.2 Amendment History

Table 2 provides the amendment history for L4474/1976/14.

Table 2: Licence amendments

Instrument Issued Amendment

L4474/1976/14 26 July 2016 Licence review

L4474/1976/14 8 June 2018 Amendment Notice 1: An amendment was applied for to include the export of 624,000 tpa of silica sands as well as the increase in tonnages of cement clinker imports, phosphate imports, potash imports and urea imports. It also included the installation and operation of two bulk material hoppers on KBB3 Berth.

L4474/1976/14 16 January 2019

Amendment Notice 2: The licence was amended via a DWER initiated amendment to include Trial conditions to the Existing Licence

L4474/1976/14 DATE Amendment to licence to increase the imports of potash and soya bean meal.

The Amendment includes a CEO initiated consolidation of Amendment Notices 1 and 2 into the Licence. During the consolidation DWER has not undertaken any additional risk assessment.

3. Location and siting

3.1 Residential and sensitive Premises

The distances to residential and sensitive receptors are detailed in Table 3.

Table 3: Receptors and distance from activity boundary

Residential and sensitive premises Distance from Prescribed Premises

Closest residential premises (zoned residential) Approximately 2,100 m to the south-west of KBB4 Berth and 2,350 m from KBB3 Berth

Commercial premises – Kwinana Beach Lunch Bar

(zoned industrial)

Approximately 670 m south-east of KBB4

Public open space – Park

(zoned parks and recreation)

Approximately 550 m east of KBB4

Industrial neighbours Industrial zoning is immediately adjacent to the premises with the closest office buildings located approximately 1,200 m north-east of the ship-loading facilities.

6

Licence: L4474/1976/14


Figure 1: Proximity of the Premises to industrial and residential receptors

Table 4 below lists the relevant environmental receptors in the vicinity of the Prescribed Premises which may be receptors relevant to the proposed amendment.

Table 4: Environmental receptors and distance from activity boundary

Environmental receptors Distance from Prescribed Premises

Cockburn Sound (proclaimed State Environmental Policy Area)

Within and directly adjacent to the premises boundary

Resource enhancement wetland - unnamed 2,350 m to the east

Conservation Category wetland – unnamed 2,350 m to the east

7

Licence: L4474/1976/14


4. Risk assessment

4.1 Determination of emission, pathway and receptor

In undertaking its risk assessment, DWER will identify all potential emissions pathways and potential receptors to establish whether there is a Risk Event which requires detailed risk assessment.

To establish a Risk Event there must be an emission, a receptor which may be exposed to that emission through an identified actual or likely pathway, and a potential adverse effect to the receptor from exposure to that emission. Where there is no actual or likely pathway and/or no receptor, the emission will be screened out and will not be considered as a Risk Event. In addition, where an emission has an actual or likely pathway and a receptor which may be adversely impacted, but that emission is regulated through other mechanisms such as Part IV of the EP Act, that emission will not be risk assessed further and will be screened out through Table 5.

The identification of the sources, pathways and receptors to determine Risk Events are set out in Table 5 below.

Table 5: Risk assessment during operations

Risk Event

Consequence rating

Likelihood rating

Risk Reasoning Source/Activities

Potential emissions

Potential receptors

Potential pathway

Potential adverse impacts

Cat 58

Bulk material

loading or unloading

Storage, stockpiling, reclaiming and loading of potash

Dust:

associated with the handling of bulk material using mobile hoppers, conveyors and other ship loading equipment

Residential receptors

Air/wind dispersal

Health and amenity impacts

Moderate Possible Medium Refer to risk assessment below

Spills and stormwater:

associated with increase in bulk material handling

Aquatic organisms of Cockburn Sound

Direct discharge Surface water runoff

Reduced water quality resulting in declining ecosystem health

Major Unlikely Medium Refer to risk assessment below

8

Licence: L4474/1976/14


Storage, stockpiling, reclaiming and loading of soya bean meal

Dust:

associated with the handling of bulk material using mobile hoppers, conveyors and other ship loading equipment


Air/wind dispersal

Health and amenity impacts

Moderate Unlikely Medium Refer to risk assessment below

Spills and stormwater:

associated with increase in bulk material handling

Aquatic organisms of Cockburn Sound

Direct discharge Surface water runoff

Reduced water quality due to increase in sedimentation resulting in declining ecosystem health

Major Unlikely Medium Refer to risk assessment below

Storage, stockpiling, reclaiming and loading of potash and soya bean meal

Noise:

associated with additional vehicle movements, hoppers, conveyors and operation of ship loading equipment


Air/wind dispersal

Impacts to amenity

Minor Rare Low Refer to risk assessment below

9

Licence: L4474/1976/14


4.2 Consequence and likelihood of risk events

A risk rating will be determined for risk events in accordance with the risk rating matrix set out in Table 6 below.

Table 6: Risk rating matrix

Likelihood Consequence

Slight Minor Moderate Major Severe

Almost certain Medium High High Extreme Extreme

Likely Medium Medium High High Extreme

Possible Low Medium Medium High Extreme

Unlikely Low Medium Medium Medium High

Rare Low Low Medium Medium High

DWER will undertake an assessment of the consequence and likelihood of the Risk Event in accordance with Table 7 below.

Table 7: Risk criteria table

Likelihood Consequence

The following criteria has been

used to determine the likelihood of

the Risk Event occurring.

The following criteria has been used to determine the consequences of a Risk Event occurring:

Environment Public health* and amenity (such as air

and water quality, noise, and odour)

Almost

Certain

The risk event is

expected to occur

in most

circumstances

Severe onsite impacts: catastrophic offsite impacts local scale: high level

or above

offsite impacts wider scale: mid-level

or above

Mid to long-term or permanent impact to

an area of high conservation value or

special significance^

Specific Consequence Criteria (for

environment) are significantly exceeded

Loss of life

Adverse health effects: high level or

ongoing medical treatment


public health) are significantly

exceeded

Local scale impacts: permanent loss

of amenity

Likely The risk event will probably occur in

most circumstances

Major onsite impacts: high level offsite impacts local scale: mid-level

offsite impacts wider scale: low level

Short-term impact to an area of high

conservation value or special

significance^


environment) are exceeded

Adverse health effects: mid-level or

frequent medical treatment


public health) are exceeded

Local scale impacts: high level

impact to amenity

Possible The risk event could occur at

some time

Moderate onsite impacts: mid-level offsite impacts local scale: low level

offsite impacts wider scale: minimal


environment) are at risk of not being met

Adverse health effects: low level or

occasional medical treatment


public health) are at risk of not being

met

Local scale impacts: mid-level

impact to amenity

Unlikely The risk event will probably not occur

in most

circumstances

Minor onsite impacts: low level offsite impacts local scale: minimal

offsite impacts wider scale: not

detectable


environment) likely to be met


public health) are likely to be met

Local scale impacts: low level impact

to amenity

Rare The risk event may only occur in

exceptional

circumstances

Slight onsite impact: minimal Specific Consequence Criteria (for

environment) met

Local scale: minimal to amenity


public health) met

^ Determination of areas of high conservation value or special significance should be informed by the Guidance Statement: Environmental Siting.

10

Licence: L4474/1976/14


* In applying public health criteria, DWER may have regard to the Department of Health’s Health Risk Assessment (Scoping) Guidelines. “onsite” means within the Prescribed Premises boundary.

4.3 Acceptability and treatment of Risk Event

DWER will determine the acceptability and treatment of Risk Events in accordance with the Risk treatment table 8 below:

Table 8: Risk treatment table

Rating of Risk Event

Acceptability Treatment

Extreme Unacceptable. Risk Event will not be tolerated. DWER may refuse application.

High May be acceptable.

Subject to multiple regulatory controls.

Risk Event may be tolerated and may be subject to multiple regulatory controls. This may include both outcome-based and management conditions.

Medium Acceptable, generally subject to regulatory controls.

Risk Event is tolerable and is likely to be subject to some regulatory controls. A preference for outcome-based conditions where practical and appropriate will be applied.

Low Acceptable, generally not controlled.

Risk Event is acceptable and will generally not be subject to regulatory controls.

4.4 Risk of Dust Emissions

Potash

Potash is a granular material composed of Potassium Chloride. It is not considered to be a toxic risk to public health. Fugitive dust, in the form of PM10 however, may increase due to the increase in volume of potash being handled. The Licence Holder has advised that potash will be unloaded via the ship’s grab into trucks (via hoppers) or by the Siwertell and the two bulk material hoppers prior to being transferred to the southern KBB4 conveyor or the CSBP conveyor at KBB3.It will then be conveyed directly offsite. The Licence Holder has provided the controls used for dust during use of the Siwertell. These controls include:

Siwertell is self-contained and fully enclosed, fitted with dust extraction system on the conveyor and water sprays;

Sweeper trucks to remove dust, spilt or accumulated material from the berth and jetty neck and all trafficable areas within the prescribed premises;

Monitor weather and control discharge rates during adverse weather conditions;

Onsite inspections during unloading When potash is unloaded from the ships hatch to hoppers, the following controls are in place to control dust emissions:

11

Licence: L4474/1976/14


Sweeper trucks to remove any spilt dust or accumulated material;

Stevedore monitors and controls grab to reduce dust spillage;


Onsite inspections during unloading; and

Bulk material hoppers are utilized and fitted with dust extraction system, dust grid and truck loading chute.

It has been determined that the consequence of dust emissions will remain at moderate as they may cause mid-level impacts to amenity. Given the distance to receptors and the proposed controls, the likelihood of amenity or health impacts from dust from the increase in potash handling remains as possible. The overall risk rating is therefore Medium.

Soya Bean Meal Soya Bean Meal is a light-weight dry product, consisting of fine and course particles. It is not considered to be a toxic risk to public health. Fugitive dust, in the form of PM10 however, may increase due to the increase in volume of potash being handled. The Licence Holder has advised that Soya Bean Meal is unloaded by the ship’s grab into trucks via hoppers prior to being taken directly offsite. When Soya Bean Meal is unloaded from the ships hatch to hoppers, the following controls are in place to control dust emissions:

Sweeper trucks to remove any spilt dust or accumulated material;

Stevedore monitors and controls grab to reduce dust spillage;


Onsite inspections during unloading;

Bulk material hoppers are utilized and fitted with dust extraction system, dust grid and truck loading chute.

It has been determined that the consequence of dust emissions will remain at moderate as they may cause mid-level impacts to amenity. Given the distance to receptors and the proposed controls, the likelihood of amenity or health impacts from dust from the increase in soya bean meal handling remains as possible. The overall risk rating is therefore Medium.

4.5 Risk of Noise Emissions

An increase in volumes of material handled at the Premises will result in the generation of noise from additional truck movements and the mobilization/operation of loading equipment.

The Premises nearest noise sensitive receptors are located within the KIA and are therefore assigned a higher acceptable noise level than other industrial receptors under the Environmental Protection (Noise) Regulations 1997

12

Licence: L4474/1976/14


Table 9: Assigned noise levels for KIA industrial receptors

Receptor Time of day Assigned level (dB)

LA10 LA1 LAmax

Industrial and utility premises in the KIA (industrial receptors A, B and C)

All hours 75 85 90

Industrial and utility premises other than those in the KIA

All hours 65 80 90

Source: EP Noise Regulations

Increased annual loading rates are expected to increase the frequency of loading during night time hours, when residential receptors are at their most sensitive to noise. The consequence will remain as minor, as there may be low level amenity impacts. It is expected that the noise criteria will continue to be met. The nearest residential receptors are approximately 2,100 m from the Premises. It is not expected they will be significantly impacted by noise unless in exceptional circumstances. Therefore, the likelihood of noise impacts to amenity is rare, giving an overall risk rating of low.

4.6 Risk of Discharges to Water

Potash Potash is a soluble material, and in the event of a spill it has the potential to raise nutrient concentrations within the Cockburn Sound. Whilst the volume of potash exports is increasing, the volume of a potential spill would still be expected to remain the size of the grab bucket (approximately 10 – 15 m3 – noting that the 15 m3 grab size is utilized when operating the bulk material hoppers.). The result of such spill may result in a reduction of oxygen levels at a local scale, reducing the ability for marine life to survive. The Licence Holder has the following controls in place to reduce the risk of direct discharges to water whilst unloading product as well as spillage of potash on the ships deck resulting in discharge to surface water:

Sweeper trucks to remove spilt material from berth and jetty neck;

Bunded and sealed berth with drainage containment and sump systems;

Contaminated stormwater/wastewater is contained in holding tanks or pumped directly into trucks for disposal;

Ship loading/unloading is inspected by licensee personnel;

Annual monitoring of Cockburn Sound undertaken in accordance with Licence condition; and

Deflector plates used to cover the grab swing zone during unloading. The consequence of a potash spill into the marine environment would be considered a mid-level impact at a local scale and is therefore considered a major consequence.

13

Licence: L4474/1976/14


Based on the Licence Holder controls in place, the likelihood of the impact occurring remains as unlikely. Therefore the overall risk rating remains as medium. The Existing Licence has conditions specifying that bulk granular material must not spill, or cause to be spilt, into the marine environment. It specifies routine inspection and cleaning of under floor spill tray along conveyor CV01 and CV02. It also requires the Licence Holder to remove any build-up of bulk granular material that may land on the berth’s edge during loading. The Licence Holder is required to ensure that deflector plates are in place during operation of all grab buckets. Soya Bean Meal Increasing the volume of Soya Bean Meal increases the risk of spillage and the risk of contamination of stormwater. Soya Bean Meal is an insoluble product containing no hazardous ingredients. However, if a spill occurred the marine environment would be impacted by increased sedimentation. The Licence Holder considers that existing water quality management controls are adequate for the management of this risk. These controls include:

Sweeper trucks removing spilt material from berth and jetty neck;

All spilt cargo onto ships deck to be cleaned using dry methods only;

Bunded and sealed berth with drainage containment and sump system;

Contaminated stormwater/wastewater contained in holding tanks or pumped directly into trucks (from containment system) for disposal.

Inspections to occur by licensee personnel during ship loading/unloading;

Cockburn Sound monitoring undertaken as per licence conditions;

Deflector plates placed to sufficiently cover the grab swing zone when unloading products.

The consequence of a soya bean meal spill into the marine environment would be considered a mid-level impact at a local scale and is therefore considered a major consequence. Based on the Licence Holder controls in place, the likelihood of the impact occurring remains as unlikely. Therefore the overall risk rating remains as medium.

5. Applicant’s comments

The Licence Holder was provided with the draft Decision Report and draft amended Licence on 20 August 2019. The Licence Holder provided comments which are summarised, along with DWER’s response, in Appendix 2.

6. Conclusion

This Amendment authorises the:

Increase in potash import from 150,000 to 400,000 tonnes per annum; and

Increase in soya bean meal from 60,000 to 150,000 tonnes per annum.

The Existing Licence tally’s the total tonnages of each of the commodities, however, it was determined the Licence will specify the individual tonnage and not the increase in overall total tonnage. The annual tonnage will remain at 3,485,800 tonnes.

14

Licence: L4474/1976/14


The risk assessment has determined the key emissions arising from the increase in commodities of potash and soya bean meal are dust, noise and discharges to water. The Delegated Officer has determined that the Licence Holder controls for the handling of bulk product and existing licence conditions are adequate to manage potential emissions for the increase in these commodities. Schedule 2 has been updated to reflect the increase in tonnage.

15

Licence: L4474/1976/14


Appendix 1: Amended Licence

16

Licence: L4474/1976/14


Appendix 2: Summary of Licence Holder Comments

The Licence Holder was provided with the draft Amendment Report on 20 August 2019 for review and comment. The Licence Holder responded on 10 September 2019. The following comments were received on the draft Amendment Report.

Condition Summary of Licence Holder comment DWER response

Definitions – CEO Fremantle Ports notes the change to the CEO details. Noted

Condition 1 The formatting of this condition differs to the formatting presented in the existing licence (issued 29 July 2016), which may change the interpretation of the condition. Fremantle Ports suggests the condition is presented inline with the previous version, as below:

1. The Licensee must comply with the EP Act and all regulations prescribed under the EP Act applicable to

the Premises, including:

(a) the duties of an occupier under s 61; (b) the duty to notify the CEO of Discharges of

waste under s 72; and

(c) not causing, or doing anything that is likely to cause, an offence under the EP Act,

except where the Licensee does something in

accordance with a Condition which expressly states

that a defence under s 74A of the EP Act may be

available.

Formatting has been reverted to exactly as was in the existing licence to ensure no change in interpretation of the condition.

Condition 2 Fremantle Ports recommends that reference to ‘Table 5’ in this condition should be changed to ‘Table 6’ in line with Fremantle Ports’ comments noted below against ‘Table 5: Infrastructure and equipment controls table.’

All table numbering in the document has been corrected.

17

Licence: L4474/1976/14



Condition 5 Fremantle Ports recommends that reference to ‘Condition 7’ in this condition be changed to ‘Condition 4’, to align with the relevant condition.

All condition numbering and referencing has been rectified.

Condition 6 Fremantle Ports recommends the following text is added to the end of this condition to align with the existing licence (issued 29 July 2016):

‘If the Licensee proves that it has acted in accordance with this Condition, it may be a defence under s 74A of the EP Act to proceedings for offences under the EP Act (including offences under section 56).’

Omitted from draft in error during amalgamation process. Text has been reinstated.

Condition 11 Fremantle Ports recommends that reference to ‘Condition 9’ in this condition be changed to ‘Condition 6’, to align with the relevant condition.


Condition 17 As Condition 17 was met and closed by your Department on 9 May 2019, Fremantle Ports recommends this condition be removed from the licence. Please refer to the attached letter from DWER (Your ref: DER2018/001046) to Fremantle Ports closing out Condition 17.

Construction conditions removed as per correspondence.

Condition 20 Condition 20 is only partly presented. Fremantle Ports requests that the remainder of the condition be added as follows ‘…with Condition 19, whichever comes first. A Trial may only recommence upon notification of a Trial amendment, in accordance with Condition 18(g).’

The draft amendment had a section of the Trial Notification conditions deleted in error. All Trial Conditions have been reinstated to the Licence with correct numbering and referencing.

(Conditions 21-23 – Amendment 2)

The Trial Conditions are only partly presented. Fremantle Ports requests that the additional Trial Conditions (Conditions 21-23 of Amendment 2) are added to the licence.

The draft amendment had a section of the Trial Notification conditions deleted in error. All Trial Conditions have been restored with correct numbering and referencing.

18

Licence: L4474/1976/14



Table 3: Emission Table

Fremantle Ports recommends that the duplicated headings (including Column 1, Column 2, Emission Type and Exclusions/Limitations/Requirements) are removed from Table 3.

The duplicated heading has been removed.

Table 3: Infrastructure and equipment

Fremantle Ports recommends that ‘Table 3: Infrastructure and equipment’ be changed to ‘Table 4: Infrastructure and equipment’, to avoid duplication of Table 3 and to be in sequential order with preceding tables.


Table 4: Bulk materials volumes assessed

Fremantle Ports recommends that ‘Table 4: Bulk materials volumes assessed’ be changed to ‘Table 5: Bulk materials volumes assessed’ to avoid duplication of Table 4 and to be in sequential order with preceding tables.



Fremantle Ports notes the increase in Potash and Soya Bean tonnages to 400,000 tonnes and 150,000 tonnes respectively.

Noted


Fremantle Ports notes that the ‘Total volume handled’ and ‘3,485,800 tonnes’ has been deleted and marked as strikethrough text. Fremantle Ports recommends that the total volume handled remains at 3,485,800 and is aware that the cumulative total of all tonnage limits exceeds 3,485,800.

Noted. The figure will remain as is. A sentence in the Amendment Report has been added in section 2.1 to explain that whilst the total volume of commodities exceeds that figure, the annual total volume handled will remain at 3,485,800 tonnes.

Table 5: Infrastructure and equipment controls table

‘Table 5: Infrastructure and equipment controls table’ should be changed to ‘Table 6: Infrastructure and controls table’ to avoid duplication of Table 5 and to be in sequential order with preceding tables.


Schedule 2: General Category 58A should be added to the general description Category 58A has been added in both paragraphs.

19

Licence: L4474/1976/14



Description (2nd & 3rd paragraph)

(2nd paragraph) and infrastructure and equipment (3rd paragraph) sections.

Schedule 2: General Description (Bulk Materials loaded and unloaded section, 2nd paragraph)

Fremantle Ports requests that ‘silica sands’ is added to the bulk products currently handled through KBJ, in line with Amendment Notice 1.

Silica sands has been added.

Schedule 3: (Infrastructure and Equipment)

Fremantle Ports recommends adding the title ‘Schedule 3: Infrastructure and Equipment’ to the licence, immediately following ‘Table 4: Bulk materials volumes assessed’ and preceding ‘Table 5; Infrastructure and equipment controls table.’

Schedule 3 was deleted from the draft in error during the amalgamation. It has been reinstated.

Schedule 3: Monitoring

Fremantle Ports recommends ‘Schedule 3: Monitoring’ is changed to ‘Schedule 4: Monitoring’

The Schedule numberings have been corrected.

Pages 4, 10 & 11 ‘Trial’ is misspelt on pages 4, 10 and 11 Spelling errors rectified.

Condition numbering Conditions 7-9 are missing from the licence. Fremantle Ports recommends that the Licence conditions be renumbered in sequential order to remove any absent conditions.


General Comments – Amendment Report

2.1 Amendment description (paragraph 4)

Fremantle Ports notes the amalgamation of Amendment Notice 1 and Amendment Notice 2 into the licence.

Noted.

Table 5 (row 1) Fremantle Ports requests the reference to ‘phosphate’ in ‘Storage, stockpiling, reclaiming and loading of phosphate’ is changed to ‘potash’ in line with the risk assessment of

The incorrect reference to ‘phosphate’ has been corrected to ‘potash’.

20

Licence: L4474/1976/14



potash.

Section 4.6 (Potash) – second paragraph

Fremantle Ports notes the size of grab buckets ranges from ‘approximately 10 -15 m3 noting that the 15 m3 grab size is utilised when operating the bulk material hoppers.

Noted – the reference ’10 – 12 m3’ has been amended to ’10 – 15 m3’ for grab bucket size with the additional note that 15m3 grab size is utilised when operating the bulk material hoppers.

application for licence amendment€¦ · 2 licence: l4474/1976/14 ir-t04 decision report template...

Documents