Gladstone Stewardship Assessmentghhp.org.au/assets/documents/reports/4601 Gladstone... · Last...

Gladstone Stewardship Assessment

2015-16

Prepared for

Gladstone Healthy Harbour Partnership

3 November 2016

Gl a d s t on e S t ew ar d s hi p As s e s sm e nt 20 1 5 -1 6

© E CO LO G ICA L A U S T RA L IA P T Y LT D ii

DOCUMENT TRACKING

Item Detail

Project Name Gladstone Stewardship Assessment

Project Number 4601

Project Manager

Miles Yeates

(07) 3503 7197

GPO Box 2040, Brisbane Q 4001

Prepared by Miles Yeates

Reviewed by Ailsa Kerswell

Approved by Ailsa Kerswell

Status Final

Version Number 1

Last saved on 17 November 2016

Cover photo Gladstone from the air (Ailsa Kerswell)

This report should be cited as ‘Eco Logical Australia 2016. Gladstone Stewardship Assessment – 2015-

16. Prepared for the Gladstone Healthy Harbour Partnership.’

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

This document has been prepared by Eco Logical Australia Pty Ltd with support from the Gladstone

Healthy Harbour Partnership. The authors gratefully acknowledge the participation of various companies

and organisations that contributed information to assist in the assessment of environmental stewardship.

Disclaimer

This document may only be used for the purpose for which it was commissioned and in accordance with the contract between

Eco Logical Australia Pty Ltd and the Fitzroy Basin Authority. The scope of services was defined in consultation with the

Gladstone Healthy Harbour Partnership and Fitzroy Basin Authority, by time and budgetary constraints imposed by the client,

and the availability of reports and other data on the subject area. Changes to available information, legislation and schedules

are made on an ongoing basis and readers should obtain up to date information.

Eco Logical Australia Pty Ltd accepts no liability or responsibility whatsoever for or in respect of any use of or reliance upon

this report and its supporting material by any third party. Information provided is not intended to be a substitute for site specific

assessment or legal advice in relation to any matter. Unauthorised use of this report in any form is prohibited.

Template 29/9/2015


© E CO LO G ICA L A U S T RA L IA P T Y LT D iii

Contents

1 Introduction ................................................................................................................................. 4

2 Methods ....................................................................................................................................... 5

3 Results and Discussion ............................................................................................................. 6

References ............................................................................................................................................... 7

Appendix A Report Cards ....................................................................................................................... 8

Abbreviations

Abbreviation Description

DEHP Department of Environment and Heritage Protection

ELA Eco Logical Australia

GHHP Gladstone Healthy Harbour Partnership


1 Introduction

Eco Logical Australia Pty Ltd (ELA) was commissioned by the Gladstone Healthy Harbour Partnership

(GHHP) to assess environmental stewardship within the Gladstone region for the 2015-16 financial year.

The results have informed the preparation of an annual Reef Report Card for the Gladstone region, which

is published by GHHP each year. The purpose of this report is to provide a concise summary of the

findings of the stewardship assessment, for publication on the GHHP website.

The scope of the stewardship assessment for 2015-16 included the following industries:

Port – port authorities, plus terminal operators that completed dredging and shipping

activities

Heavy Industry – large industrial facilities such as coal terminals, mineral refineries and LNG

facilities

Urban – local governments, airports, urban developers and master-planned communities

Stewardship assessments were completed in accordance with methods developed by ELA and Adaptive

Strategies (2015), which are based on the nation-wide State of the Environment Report management

effectiveness framework. The stewardship assessment method and associated frameworks for each

industry were first applied in the Gladstone region in 2015.

Stewardship has been defined as ‘responsible planning and management actions’ and is intended for this

purpose to capture information on management efforts by industries, port operators and local

governments to maintain or improve Gladstone Harbour health.


2 Methods

The assessment of stewardship was conducted in accordance with the detailed methods described in

ELA and Adaptive Strategies (2015) for Port and Heavy Industry, and ELA and Adaptive Strategies (2016)

for Urban. Both reports are available on the GHHP website.

In summary, the following keys steps were implemented to assess environmental stewardship:

An implementation plan was developed with GHHP which identified key stakeholders within

the industries being assessed

Relevant contacts (e.g. Environmental Manager) at each company or organisation were

contacted and invited to participate in the stewardship assessment, through the completion

of a confidential survey and the provision of supporting information about their environmental

management practices

The responses provided in completed surveys were assessed and scored in accordance

with stewardship frameworks developed for each industry.

Information in the public domain was also assessed and considered where relevant to the

assessment of environmental stewardship (e.g. annual reports of companies or regulatory

agencies).

Compliance data (with confidential information removed) was provided by the Department

of Environment and Heritage Protection (DEHP), noting the number of inspections

completed for each industry and the level of compliance with legislation or approval

conditions (i.e., the results of the inspection). A compliance rate for each industry was

calculated.

Stewardship scores were generated for management themes and activity groups in accordance with the

relevant industry framework method. Stewardship was assessed on a scale comprising four levels: Very

Effective, Effective, Partially Effective and Ineffective. The lowest of the three management theme scores

was utilised as the overall stewardship rating for the industry.

Summary report cards were prepared for each industry, providing information on the stewardship rating

and associated scoring, highlights for the industry and areas requiring improvement. The results of

individual companies or organisations were not reported and remain confidential.


3 Results and Discussion

Report cards for the Port, Heavy Industry and Urban sectors are provided in Appendix A. A summary of

the stewardship assessment results is provided below.

Industry Stewardship Rating

Port Effective

Heavy Industry Effective

Urban Partially Effective

Results of the Gladstone stewardship assessment in 2015-16 were similar to those obtained in 2014-

2015 for Port and Heavy Industry. There is a high degree of environmental regulation within these

industries, and effective environmental management strategies are in place. Companies often work

together in partnerships to pool their resources and implement programs that are of mutual benefit to

participants and the environment. There was some room for improvement in compliance rates, and non-

compliances were minor in nature.

The Urban ‘industry’ was assessed for the first time in 2015-2016. The stewardship rating of Partially

Effective indicates that there is room for improving the environmental management of urban

environments. Examples highlighted by the assessment include the need for improved development and

implementation of environmental management plans and increasing the low rate of compliance with

environmental legislation and approval conditions.


References

ELA and Adaptive Strategies (2015). Gladstone Healthy Harbour Partnership Stewardship Reporting

Project. Report prepared for the Gladstone Healthy Harbour Partnership. Eco Logical Australia and

Adaptive Strategies.

ELA and Adaptive Strategies (2016). Urban Stewardship Framework. Report prepared by the Great

Barrier Reef Regional Report Card Partnerships. Eco Logical Australia and Adaptive Strategies.


Appendix A Report Cards

Industry Summary Report 2015-16 FY


Port

There is only one port authority in Gladstone Harbour - Gladstone Ports Corporation (GPC). Several other companies, however, undertake activities that could be classified as ‘port activities’, namely ship loading/unloading, shipping and dredging. All activities undertaken by the port authority, as well as all dredging and shipping activities undertaken by any company, are included in the port stewardship framework.

The Port of Gladstone is one of Australia’s largest ports. A throughput of 116 million tonnes was achieved during the 2015-16 financial year, with no serious shipping incidents. The results were generated from the combined data from the port authority and five other companies who undertook shipping or dredging activities during the 2015-16 financial year.

Key findings

Overall, port stewardship was scored as effective in the planning and implementation management themes and very effective in the outcome management theme. Across the activity groupings, administration, operations and shipping all scored effective. Development was assessed as very effective, noting that this was based on the outcomes of many small site upgrades, rather than large capital projects.

Breakdown of port stewardship ratings

Activity group Management theme

Planning Implementation Outcome

Administration 3.7 (effective) 3.8 (very effective) 3.7 (effective)

Operations 3.5 (effective) 3.5 (effective) 3.5 (effective)

Development 4.0 (very effective) 4.0 (very effective) 4.0 (very effective)

Shipping 3.8 (very effective) 3.1 (effective) 3.8 (very effective)

OVERALL 3.7 (effective) 3.4 (effective) 3.8 (very effective)

Scale: >3.75 very effective, 3.00 – 3.75 effective, 2.00 – 2.99 partially effective, <2.00 – ineffective

Background on the framework and evaluation methodology is provided below.

Strengths and innovation

A compliance rate of 90% was achieved from 10 inspections of port sites by officers of the Department of Environment and Heritage Protection (DEHP).

A key element in achieving an effective rating for the port sector is the extra non-regulatory activities undertaken to deliver positive outcomes for harbour health.

The port sector contributes to ecosystem monitoring and research programs, including a long-term study of environmental values within and adjacent to Port



Curtis. Information collected through this program is valuable to ensure the protection and/or restoration of environmental values, including local threatened species such as turtles, dolphins, dugongs and shorebirds.

The port authority and companies involved in port activities make an important contribution to the care and health of Gladstone Harbour through their extension programs and leading practice activities. These are usually voluntary undertakings above and beyond what is required by environmental approvals, and some come with considerable monetary commitment.

Areas needing improvement

The stewardship framework relies heavily (although not entirely) on compliance with the existing regulatory framework. This assumes that the legislation and regulatory processes themselves are adequate to provide good environmental outcomes i.e. that the regulatory framework is ‘effective’.

The stewardship reporting framework

Stewardship is defined as ‘responsible planning and management actions’. The framework describes and evaluates environmental management efforts around and in Gladstone Harbour. It captures information on management efforts to maintain or improve harbour health and water quality. It is based on the nation-wide State of the Environment Report management effectiveness framework.

Stewardship is rated on a scale from ‘very effective’ through to ‘ineffective’ based on a range of criteria covering administrative, operational and development activities during various management phases (planning, implementation and outcome).

Evaluation

Based on consultation with industry personnel, review of environmental authorities and industry knowledge, a list of key activities that may influence ecosystem health and water quality undertaken by the port authority, and relating to shipping and dredging, was developed. These activities were then a basis for the development of criteria against which the management effectiveness (i.e. stewardship) of organisations could be evaluated.

Evaluation used company data collected via self-reporting (survey) and compliance data from DEHP. Each survey answer was translated into a numerical value to facilitate averaging of scores across activity groupings and management themes. Scores were then combined to produce scores (and corresponding ratings) for each company. The scores for the individual themes of planning, implementation and outcome were averaged and then assigned a stewardship rating of:

>3.75 very effective (maximum score is 4),

3.00 – 3.75 effective,

2.00 – 2.99 partially effective,

<2.00 – ineffective.

The overall stewardship rating awarded to the industry was derived from the lowest (i.e., the least effective) of the planning, implementation and outcome results.

The full report on scoring methods can be accessed at http://ghhp.org.au/uploads/reports/GHHP%20Stewarship%20Reporting%20Project%20Report_v2%20FINAL.pdf

http://ghhp.org.au/uploads/reports/GHHP%20Stewarship%20Reporting%20Project%20Report_v2%20FINAL.pdf




Industry (heavy)

Most of the Fitzroy region’s heavy industry is located at Gladstone Harbour. There is a range of heavy industry activity, including LNG processing, alumina refining and aluminium smelting, cement and chemical manufacture, and Queensland’s largest coal-fired power station. These industries are highly regulated and are required to have effective environmental practices in place to protect ecosystem health and water quality.

The stewardship results were generated from the combined data from eight out of the 10 major industry companies that undertook operational activities in 2015-16 around Gladstone Harbour.

Key findings

Overall, heavy industry stewardship in Gladstone Harbour was rated as effective. This was consistent across each of the management themes. The development activity group was rated as very effective across all management themes.

Breakdown of heavy industry stewardship ratings



Administration 3.6 (effective) 3.8 (very effective) 3.4 (effective)

Operations 3.1 (effective) 2.9 (partially effective) 3.8 (very effective)

Development 4.0 (very effective) 4.0 (very effective) 3.9 (very effective)

OVERALL 3.6 (effective) 3.5 (effective) 3.7 (effective)




The results, and close consideration of individual company responses, indicate limited areas where targeted improvements are required.

A key element in achieving an effective rating for the heavy industry sector is the extra non-regulatory activities that companies undertake to deliver positive outcomes for harbour health. Examples include membership of the Gladstone Healthy Harbour Partnership and coordinated scientific monitoring and research programs within the region.

Companies make an important (and sometimes overlooked) contribution to the care and health of Gladstone Harbour through their extension programs and leading practice activities. These are usually voluntary undertakings above and



beyond what is required by environmental approvals, and some come with considerable monetary commitment.

The implementation of management measures required by approval conditions has resulted in benefits to harbour health, such as securing new protected areas as offset sites which are important habitat for threatened species.


A compliance rate of 75% was achieved from 20 inspections of heavy industry sites by officers of the Queensland Department of Environment and Heritage Protection (DEHP). This compliance rate is in the partially effective range. All non-compliances were minor, and most commonly related to a small breach of approval conditions or a limited release to the environment.





Evaluation

A list of key activities undertaken by heavy industry that may influence ecosystem health and water quality was developed based on consultation with industry personnel, review of environmental authorities and industry knowledge. These activities were then a basis for the development of criteria against which the management effectiveness (i.e. stewardship) of companies could be evaluated.

Evaluation used company data collected via self-reporting (survey) and compliance data from the Queensland Department of Environment and Heritage Protection (DEHP). Each survey answer was translated into a numerical value to facilitate averaging of scores across activity groupings and management themes. Scores were then combined to produce scores (and corresponding ratings) for each company. The scores for the individual themes of planning, implementation and outcome were averaged and then assigned a stewardship rating of:






The full report on scoring methods can be accessed at

Summary Report 2015-16 FY


Urban

Urban land uses occur predominantly within Gladstone and small towns located inland and along the coast. Urban development within the Gladstone region is concentrated along the coastal zone.

The stewardship results were generated from a range of information sources, including surveys completed by urban land developers and local government, discussions with the operators of large urban facilities, compliance data from the Queensland Department of Environment and Heritage Protection (DEHP) and relevant publications related to urban stewardship of the Gladstone region.

Key findings

The overall result for urban stewardship in the Gladstone region was partially effective for the 2015-16 FY. This rating was influenced by a low compliance rate from inspections of urban sites by DEHP officers. The management theme of planning was assessed to be very effective, with the outcome management theme assessed as effective.

Breakdown of port stewardship ratings



Administration 3.4 (effective) 3.4 (effective) 3.0 (effective)

Operations 4.0 (very effective) 1.0 (ineffective) 4.0 (very effective)

Development 4.0 (very effective) 4.0 (very effective) 3.5 (effective)

OVERALL 3.8 (very effective) 2.8 (partially effective) 3.5 (effective)




The Gladstone Regional Council is a partner of the Reef Guardian Program, which showcases environmentally sustainable practices in the Great Barrier Reef catchment. Council’s participation reflects a long-term commitment to protect and conserve the health and resilience of the Reef.

There was a high degree of awareness within companies and local government of environmental management practices related to the improvement of water quality and Reef health. Typical investments included participation in Clean Up Australia Day events, recycling of wastewater to avoid discharges to local



waterways, partnering with the Green Army to improve environmental outcomes and the creation of floating wetlands to improve water quality.

There was a high degree of community engagement in environmental management practices affecting urban environments. Commitment to these programs was generally long-term and resulted in successful outcomes.


A compliance rate of 55% was achieved from 58 inspections of urban sites by DEHP officers. This compliance rate is in the ineffective range, and had a significant influence on the overall stewardship rating. Non-compliances were most commonly related to a breach of approval conditions, an insufficient management plan or a release to the environment. This is an area where significant improvement is required.





Evaluation

A list of key activities undertaken by urban stakeholders that may influence ecosystem health and water quality was developed based on consultation with industry personnel, review of environmental authorities and industry knowledge. These activities were then a basis for the development of criteria against which the management effectiveness (i.e. stewardship) of companies or organisations could be evaluated.

The evaluation process used data collected via self-reporting (survey) and compliance data from DEHP. Each survey answer was translated into a numerical value to facilitate averaging of scores across activity groupings and management themes. Scores were then combined to produce scores (and corresponding ratings) for each company or organisation.

The development assessment and planning frameworks of the local government in the region contributed to 50% of the overall score. The remaining 50% of scores came from companies or public operators of urban infrastructure (including Councils).

The scores for the individual themes of planning, implementation and outcome were averaged and then assigned a stewardship rating of:








The full report on scoring methods can be accessed at http://ghhp.org.au/uploads/reports/GHHP%20Stewarship%20Reporting%20Project%20Report_v2%20FINAL.pdf



HEAD OFFICE

Suite 2, Level 3

668-672 Old Princes Highway

Sutherland NSW 2232

T 02 8536 8600

F 02 9542 5622

SYDNEY

Suite 1, Level 1

101 Sussex Street

Sydney NSW 2000

T 02 8536 8650

F 02 9542 5622

HUSKISSON

Unit 1, 51 Owen Street

Huskisson NSW 2540

T 02 4201 2264

F 02 9542 5622

CANBERRA

Level 2

11 London Circuit

Canberra ACT 2601

T 02 6103 0145

F 02 9542 5622

NEWCASTLE

Suites 28 & 29, Level 7

19 Bolton Street

Newcastle NSW 2300

T 02 4910 0125

F 02 9542 5622

NAROOMA

5/20 Canty Street

Narooma NSW 2546

T 02 4302 1266

F 02 9542 5622

COFFS HARBOUR

35 Orlando Street

Coffs Harbour Jetty NSW 2450

T 02 6651 5484

F 02 6651 6890

ARMIDALE

92 Taylor Street

Armidale NSW 2350

T 02 8081 2685

F 02 9542 5622

MUDGEE

Unit 1, Level 1

79 Market Street

Mudgee NSW 2850

T 02 4302 1234

F 02 6372 9230

PERTH

Suite 1 & 2

49 Ord Street

West Perth WA 6005

T 08 9227 1070

F 02 9542 5622

WOLLONGONG

Suite 204, Level 2

62 Moore Street

Austinmer NSW 2515

T 02 4201 2200

F 02 9542 5622

GOSFORD

Suite 5, Baker One

1-5 Baker Street

Gosford NSW 2250

T 02 4302 1221

F 02 9542 5622

DARWIN

16/56 Marina Boulevard

Cullen Bay NT 0820

T 08 8989 5601

F 08 8941 1220

BRISBANE

Suite 1, Level 3

471 Adelaide Street

Brisbane QLD 4000 T 07 3503 7192

F 07 3854 0310

ADELAIDE

2, 70 Pirie Street

Adelaide SA 5000

T 08 8470 6650

F 02 9542 5622

1300 646 131

www.ecoaus.com.au

http://www.ecoaus.com.au/

Gladstone Stewardship Assessmentghhp.org.au/assets/documents/reports/4601 Gladstone... · Last...

Documents

Transcript of Gladstone Stewardship Assessmentghhp.org.au/assets/documents/reports/4601 Gladstone... · Last...