maybel

8/8/2019 maybel

1/13

1

Barwon Water Responses to the Concerns and Questions Raisedthrough the 20B Conference Report

Please note that the format of Barwon Waters responses have been tailored to fit with the format andflow of questions and concerns as they have been summarised in the 20B Conference Chairpersons

Report. Barwon Waters responses are provided in blue text.

4.1 Concerns RaisedThere were many concerns raised at the 20B conference and in public submissions. Some of theseissues are relevant to the works approval application and some go beyond EPAs role.

4.1.1 Access to recycled water (6)20B IssuesThis theme overlaps with Shells benefit from the plant and featured prominently in both writtenfeedback and in group conversations. The key concerns raised here related to fair and equitableaccess to the plants recycled water by industry and community. The perception at the conference isthat Shell will be the sole beneficiary at the expense of other industry (e.g. MC Herd) and community(e.g. Stead Park).

In Submissions1. The main concern was that Shell is perceived be the sole beneficiary of recycled water from

the plant;2. It was alleged that early in the project the communication indicated that industry and

community would benefit from the recycled water and that it appears Shell will now be thesole beneficiary;

3. A fear that home owners and other water users will be expected to pay higher prices for thewater was also raised.

Questions/Concerns and Responses

Note: This issue does not relate to the requirements of the Works Approval

1. The main concern was that Shell is perceived be the sole beneficiary of recycled waterfrom the plant;

The project is currently sized to provide recycled water to replace potable water use at theShell Refinery. It will also provide recycled water to community sporting fields at Stead Park.This means the plant will save up to 5 per cent of Geelongs drinking water, or water used in10,000 homes every year. This will contribute to greater water security across the Geelongregion. This drinking water saving, in addition to other water recycling by Barwon Water issignificant in securing water for Geelongs future.

The facility will be a win-win by cutting treated water discharges into Bass Strait andresponsibly treating increased sewage from the citys expanding northern suburbs.

150 jobs will be created during construction, with flow-on benefits across the region.

Further, the plant will have the potential to provide future recycled water to other customers

subject to demand, availability and additional investment. Barwon Water is also increasingthe amount of recycled water available to the community with the new Class A recycledwater plant at Black Rock. These projects are in line with Barwon Waters strategy to securewater for the region through new water sources, recycling and conservation.

2. It was alleged that early in the project the communication indicated that industry andcommunity would benefit from the recycled water and that it appears Shell will now bethe sole beneficiary;

Early in the project, there was consideration that other industrial and recycled watercustomers could be found for the NWP. At the time of finalising the project, Shell was theonly industrial customer willing to sign up to the project. Barwon Water also receivedsufficient funding from the government to make the project a reality.

The plant is being designed to allow future expansion, as waste water flows increase with

population growth and recycled water demand increases.

8/8/2019 maybel

2/13

2

3. A fear that home owners and other water users will be expected to pay higher pricesfor the water was also raised.

Shell is contributing a significant portion of funding for the project ($45M, i.e. 50%) Shell will be fully paying for the cost of treatment of its trade waste and for the recycled water

it receives.

Barwon Water is only contributing funding that would otherwise be required to improve thesewerage capacity in the northern suburbs. However, the NWP was established to be themost cost effective option out of the alternatives that were considered to meet future growth.

4.1.2 Shells benefit from the plant (5)20B Issues

1. In addition to the Access to recycled water theme, the perception from many atthe conference was that Shells responsibility for dealing with waste is beinghanded back to the community through Barwon Water.

2. The other concern related to corporate welfare - the public funding privateindustry.

In Submissions3. Similar concerns were raised with a perception that the business relationship

between Shell and Barwon Water is problematic and that this project does notequate to good value for money.



1. Shells responsibility for dealing with waste is being handed back to the communitythrough Barwon Water

Barwon Water will own and operate the Northern Water Plant. Barwon Water has the

expertise and experience to manage waste water treatment processes and currentlymanages the treatment of Shell trade waste through the Black Rock Water ReclamationPlant. Shell is paying its share of costs related to its treatment requirements, while thecommunity benefits from the recycled water plant asset and drinking water saved.

Shell, like other industries, is required to meet conditions under its trade waste agreement(licence).

2. The other concern related to corporate welfare - the public funding private industry.

The Northern Water Plant project provides the most economical and sustainable solution tomeeting future growth and reducing Shells reliance on valuable drinking water. Thealternative solution for Barwon Water would have involved upgrading the main trunk sewerthrough Geelong, involving a significantly higher cost and major public disruption. The NWPis the best value for money solution for the corporation and, in turn, the community.

The importance of the project has been recognised by both State and Federal Governments.Government funding ($9.2M State, $20M Federal) is a reflection of the desire to find realsolutions to the national water shortage and fulfils a 2007 election commitment to the region.

3. Similar concerns were raised with a perception that the business relationshipbetween Shell and Barwon Water is problematic and that this project does not equateto good value for money.

The Northern Water Plant project takes advantage of a synergy that exists between BarwonWater and Shell.Barwon Waters key drivers for the project include:

- Providing a significant water recycling opportunity in northern Geelong- Meeting the demand for sewerage infrastructure in northern Geelong and Lara arising

from future population growth- Developing an integrated water supply system to address the challenges of climate

change and population growth.Shells key drivers include:

8/8/2019 maybel

3/13

3

- Increasing the level of treatment of refinery trade waste- Substituting potable water with recycled water within the refinery

4.1.3 Results from the Pilot Plant (5)This group of concerns are also linked closely to the questions relating to Design andBest Practice of the Plant in 4.2 below.20B Issues

1. The subject of public access to the pilot plant results at Oyster Cover appeared tobe contentious and was the subject of a Resolution later in proceedings. At thecore, the community participants were questioning the validity of the pilot plantresults and have concerns that worst case scenarios have not been factored intothe design.

In Submissions

2. Lack of access to pilot plant results was also identified in many of thesubmissions.



1. Validity of pilot plant results/testing worst case scenarios

The pilot trial was conducted to confirm the proposed treatment process for the NorthernWater Plant was appropriate and would meet expectations. The trial incorporated the keytreatment process planned for the Northern Water Plant and received a mix of waste streamsrepresentative of the inflows into the full scale plant. Barwon Water would not spend moneyon a pilot trial if this was not capable of simulating actual inflows to be experienced by theNorthern Water Plant.

In conjunction with the pilot, computer modeling was undertaken using results from the pilot.This simulated extreme events that cannot be physically trialled. Historical data was also fedinto this modelling and provided confidence that the plant will be able to deal with extremeconditions. The pilot commenced operation in December, 2009, and performance was notaffected by a shutdown to Shell operations, which occurred in October-November 2009.Barwon Water would not have operated the pilot plant during a shutdown, as this would nothave been representative of normal conditions.

There is no EPA requirement for pilot testing as part of the Works Approval process, Thiswas undertaken by the contractor to manage its own risk in relation to ensuring theperformance of the treatment processes.

2. Lack of access to pilot plant results was also identified in many of the submissions.

The technology used in the trials is the intellectual property of the contractor and subject tocommercial confidentiality. This was a specific condition of the contract because a range ofother products are held by competitors. The technology used in the pilot trial is the soleproperty of the contractor at this time. Barwon Water will own the design of the facility andthe pilot plant data once the plant is fully operational and has proven its performance.

What can be said of the trial results at this time, however, is

The biological treatment process in the pilot demonstrated consistent removal ofhydrocarbons present in the waste water to the contracted limits for biological treated water(e.g. benzene

8/8/2019 maybel

4/13

4

4.1.4 Barwon Waters community engagement processes (4)20B Issues

1. The key concern appeared to relate to differences between the initial planningpermit application (to City of Greater Geelong) and the current works approval

application. Participants felt that these changes in scope of the project had notbeen communicated effectively during the consultation process.2. There was also a perception that the works approval application had already

been approved when participants attended a Barwon Water community forum inMarch, 2010.

In Submissions3. The same concerns were raised with examples provided such as, notably an

open storage lagoon is contained in the planning permit application.


1. & 3. Differences between the initial planning permit application (to City of GreaterGeelong) and the current works approval application. Participants felt that thesechanges in scope of the project had not been communicated effectively during theconsultation process.

Initially the design included an Emergency Storage Lagoon (ESL) which was originallyincluded in the planning permit application. The ESL was designed to receive the contents ofthe biological treatment system in the event of a plant failure. However, following submissionof the planning permit application, Barwon Water and the designers concluded this lagoonwas not required. This also removes a source of odour that would otherwise requiretreatment.

Council was provided with a revised design, as part of a planning permit amendment, andmembers of the community who provided submissions to the planning permit applicationwere notified of the change.

Barwon Water has not undertaken any targeted consultation on the removal of the ESL asthis is seen as a positive improvement overall, with no concerns anticipated from the widercommunity.

Important Note: The Emergency Storage Lagoon and Wet Weather Storage Lagoon aredifferent items and should not be confused. For further details on the Wet Weather lagoon,please refer to responses under section 4.2.1.

2. There was also a perception that the works approval application had already beenapproved when participants attended a Barwon Water community forum in March,2010.

Barwon Waters Community Information Bulletin in February, 2010, stated a Works ApprovalApplication had been made to the EPA and was open for public comment during February,2010. At the time of going to print with the bulletin (Jan 2010) it was anticipated that theWorks Approval Application would be lodged in February. Due to a delay with finalising theWorks Approval Application with the EPA, this was not formally submitted until May 2010.

The EPA publically advertised for comment and feedback during May 2010.

4. One of the comments raised at the 20B conference and noted in the table at the end ofthe Chairpersons Report relates to a concern that Barwon Water only reports goodnews.

Barwon Water attends bi-monthly meetings of the Corio Norlane Development AdvisoryBoard (CNDAB), which represents a number of community interest groups from the northernsuburbs. A number of concerns have been raised by CNDAB members and have beenresponded to during the past 18 months. The main concerns relate to odour managementand community benefits from the project.

A concern raised in March, 2010, related to some residents being unclear that the NWPwould be treating domestic sewage from the northern suburbs as well as trade waste from

Shell. In response to this concern, Barwon Water hosted an information kiosk at the Corio

8/8/2019 maybel

5/13

5

Shopping Centre over four days in May, 2010. It was advertised in the Geelong Advertiserand the Geelong Independent, as well as on the Barwon Water website. Staff working at thekiosk highlighted the sources of domestic sewage inflows and trade waste to the plant andspoke to visitors about how odour would be managed.

More than 100 people stopped by the kiosk over the four days. A report detailing theirfeedback and comments was presented at the CNDAB meeting in April 2010.

In addition, earlier media releases and Community Information Bulletins stated clearly thatthe plant would be treating sewage and trade waste from Geelongs northern suburbs.

4.1.5 The Works Approval process (4)20B Issues

1. Like in the public submissions, the core perception is that this works approvalapplication is not in accordance with the principles in the Environment ProtectionAct 1970. The accountability of the project was raised as a concern regarding theoverall costs, environmental factors and a lack of balance between Shells needsand community needs.

In Submissions2. Again, the perception is that the works approval application fails to conform to the

intent of principles contained within the Environment Protection Act 1970. Theseprinciples are listed in detail within many of the submissions.


EPA will respond to this concern.

4.1.6 Ownership of the Land at the site of the plant (3)20B Issues

1. The core concern related to public infrastructure should be located on public landand not private land.In Submissions

2. Of further concern was the possibility that Shells funding component may bewithdrawn if a new owner is found for the Shell site.



1. The core concern related to public infrastructure should be located on public land and

not private land. Barwon Water will take ownership of the site land as part of the project.

2. Of further concern was the possibility that Shells funding component may bewithdrawn if a new owner is found for the Shell site.

Shell has made a substantial commitment to this Project and to the substitution of potableuse with recycled water.Shell has made no indication to Barwon Water that the Refinery isup for sale. Even so, the Barwon Water / Shell agreement includes conditions to protectBarwon Waters interests in the event the Refinery is closed or sold.

4.1.7 Contamination (3)20B Issues

1. The first issue here relates to the existing contaminated soil and groundwater at

the proposed site and questions were raised about how that will be managed.

8/8/2019 maybel

6/13

6

2. The second is a concern is about heavy metals and other contaminants in theindustrial wastewater from Shell that will be treated by the proposed treatmentplant.

3. A third issue discussed here and in submissions related to commitment that Shellcease its discharge of water into Corio Bay.

In Submissions4. It was felt that the works approval application lacked information about soil andground water contamination;

5. Concerns that in the recycling of Shells waste, there is a lack of informationabout how heavy metals are to be handled.


1. & 4. Questions were raised about how contamination will be managed/lack ofinformation about soil and groundwater contamination

Section 10 of Works Approval Application provides detail on soil and groundwatercontamination and how this will be managed. A Statement of Environmental Audit is also

included as Appendix H. As part of the agreement with Barwon Water, a full investigation was completed into the

condition of the soil and groundwater at the site. This investigation was independentlychecked by an Auditorappointed by the EPA.

The investigation identified no prior use of the site by the refinery and no contaminationissues from the Refinery next door.

The EPA Auditor concluded that: The site is suitable for the beneficial uses associated withan industrial use of the land and, in particular, for the use of the land as water reclamationplant.

2. & 5. Related to heavy metals and other contaminants in the industrial wastewater fromShell that will be treated by the proposed treatment plant.

Heavy metals in the waste water are left in the solid material that comes from the biological

system. These solids are termed biosolids. Biosolids produced at the NWP will be requiredto comply with the requirements of the EPA (refer Section 6.4.2 of the Works ApprovalApplication).

Importantly, sampling during the pilot trial confirmed that biosolids meet the regulatoryrequirements.

Biosolids will be transported to Black Rock and treated at the Biosolids Facility. Treatedbiosolids from Black Rock will be reused as agricultural fertiliser.

3. A third issue discussed here and in submissions related to commitment that Shellcease its discharge of water into Corio Bay.

Note: This question does not relate to the requirements of the Works Approval

During the consultation meeting, it was noted early documents from 2005 referred to theinclusion of runoff water from the Shell Refinery. At that time, the scope of waste water

inputs to the NWP was to include:-- Process waste water from the Refinery (trade waste),- Some of the site run-off water from the Refinery (rain water and condensation from the

refinery process),- Domestic sewage from Northern Geelong.

Following detailed investigations in late 2007, runoff water on the Refinery was found to betoo salty for treatment in the Northern Water Plant. The scope was therefore amended byincreasing the quantity of domestic sewerage into the plant. This change allowed the projectto meet its intended recycled water targets.

Run off water from the Refinery will continue to be collected and treated at the Refinery anddischarged to Corio Bay in accordance with Shells operating licence.

When the NWP was first conceived, consideration was made to supply water to allow Shellto convert from sea water cooling to evaporative cooling. During development of the NWP,

the impact of drought conditions were better understood and it became evident this was not aviable use of water.

8/8/2019 maybel

7/13

7

4.2 Questions RaisedIn addition to broader concerns, more specific issues were raised and questions askedthat relate to the detail of the works approval application and the plant design andlocation.

4.2.1 Odour, Noise and Flood Risk (7)20B Issues

1. The key concern here related to the possible odour and air emissions from theuncovered Lagoons.

2. This also relates to personal health concerns in the local community, particularlyin relation to storm and flooding events. A recommendation was made by 1 groupto tackle this issue:

3. EPA to address odour concerns raised by residents by EPA being involved inthe development of a Neighbourhood Environment Improvement Plan (NEIP).

In Submissions4. There was a concern that the works approval application lacked research into the

impacts of possible sea level rise;5. Concerns that the health of local community will be affected negatively and the

information provided in the design does not go far enough.


1. Key concern here related to the possible odour and air emissions from the uncoveredLagoons.Odour

The design of the plant is required to meet the regulations for odour set by the EPA (refer tothe Works Approval). These regulations require that no odour is detectable at the boundary

of the site. Extensive modelling in accordance with EPA standards confirms the plants abilityto meet the strict requirements for no odour at the boundary. The plant has been designed so that areas with potential for odour will be fully covered, with

air extracted by an enclosed system and then treated on site. (refer to the Works Approvalfor details)Air Emissions Hydrocarbon compounds

Modelling also confirms air emissions from the plant for benzene, toluene, xylene andphenols are 10 times lower than the Victorian regulations for air quality emissions.

2. This also relates to personal health concerns in the local community, particularly inrelation to storm and flooding events.Storm Flows

The Northern Water Plant will receive wet weather flow during storm events. This will helpBarwon Water prevent overflows in the main sewer system. This storm flow is treated to aClass C quality and stored in the wet weather lagoon. Once the storm event passes theClass C water will be discharged back to sewer. This storage does not require covering asClass C water does not present an odour issue.

Class C water is used mostly for irrigation including on golf courses, farms, sporting ovals,tree lots.

Barwon Waters Black Rock Water Reclamation Plant has a similar storage for Class C waterand interested parties would be welcome to visit if they have concern regarding potentialodour.

It is anticipated that the wet weather lagoon will be used 3-4 times during a 5 year periodbased on historical data.

Please note that:-- no raw sewage will be stored in the wet weather lagoon at any time. It is not possible for

raw sewerage to be stored in the lagoon at the site.- Public health wont be affected by use of the wet weather storage lagoon.- Recycled water customers will be supplied with Class A water from the Northern Water

8/8/2019 maybel

8/13

8

Plant. Class C water will only be produced and stored temporarily during a storm event,Flooding Events

The site layout is designed to meet flood levels. Barwon Water will complete a flood impact assessment for Geelong City Council to

demonstrate how onsite stormwater is managed and affects of stormwater downstream fromthe site will be managed.

3. EPA to address odour concerns raised by residents by EPA being involved in thedevelopment of a Neighbourhood Environment Improvement Plan (NEIP).

This is a question for the EPA, please refer to their responses.

4. There was a concern that the works approval application lacked research into theimpacts of possible sea level rise;


Sea level rise is a long-term planning issue that has the potential to affect many assetowners.

The impacts of sea level rise are considered by the Geelong City Council through theirplanning processes.

While Barwon Water is not required to investigate sea level rise for this project, BarwonWater is responsive to stakeholders such as Geelong City Council and the Department ofPlanning and Community Development on this issue.

5. Concerns that the health of local community will be affected negatively and theinformation provided in the design does not go far enough.

Refer to responses above.Noise

Major sources of noise at the plant are related to the mechanical equipment required for thetreatment process. This mechanical equipment will be housed within the treatment plantbuildings with acoustic enclosures provided for the noisiest equipment.

Environmental noise assessments completed for the Works Approval confirmed that thelevels at the plant meet Victorian regulatory requirements.

4.2.2 Questions about design and best practice of the proposal (5)20B IssuesThe key question from participants was, Is this plant an example of best practice? Theconcerns related to the design and location of the proposed plant:

1. Lack of detail in relation to the technical design;2. Has the proponent researched and visited other plants?;3. Location was an issue due to its proximity to the refinery, and a long distance

from future residential development and location in the floodplain. Refer also toresponse under section 4.2.1

In Submissions4. Concerns that no plans for the recycling of stormwater;

5. Questions raised about flow rates and bio-reactor digestion;6. Concerns about how the plant will handle shock loads and wet weather;7. no pilot plant results from Oyster Cove refer to response under section 4.1.3


1. Lack of detail in relation to the technical design

The design details have been included in accordance with the Works Approval Applicationguidelines.

Significant time and resources have been invested in the design of the Northern Water Plant,with a design team of over 30 professionals involved on the project for a period of 12 months.

In addition, the design has been fully reviewed by an independent design expert appointed

by Barwon Water to check the following:- Contractors design assumptions are sound;

8/8/2019 maybel

9/13

9

- Technical standards and design standards are consistent with appropriate industrystandards; and

- The project objectives are being met through the Contractors design and performancespecifications.

2. Has the proponent researched and visited other plants?


In submitting tenders for NWP project, bidders were scored on their previous experience andtrack record in designing and constructing similar water treatment plants. Reference checkswere also made at the time.

In addition, Barwon Water has visited similar treatment plants in Australia and spoken withthe owners of these plants.

3. Location was an issue due to its proximity to the refinery, and a long distance fromfuture residential development and location in the floodplain.

Note: This issue does not relate to the requirements of the Works Approval In the early stages of the project, four sites were assessed and evaluated based on distance

to residential areas, distance to the refinery, cost of site location etc. The current site wasfound to be the best alternative. Refer to section 4 of the Works Approval Application forfurther details. Refer also to response under section 4.2.1 regarding flood concern.

4. Concerns that no plans for the recycling of stormwater (assuming this relates tocouncil stormwater)

Note: This issue does not relate to the requirements of the Works Approval The Northern Water Plant is not designed to treat stormwater from roads and pathways

currently managed by council. The Northern Water Plant is designed to treat wet weatherflows from the sewers.

5. Questions raised about flow rates and bio-reactor digestion;6. Concerns about how the plant will handle shock loads and wet weather;

The biological treatment process can treat wet weather flows. The biological treatment system is also designed to take variation in quality from the sewer

and from Shell.

Barwon Water has developed agreed trade waste quality acceptance limits with Shell. If

Shell discharges water beyond these limits, Barwon Water will shut down Shells tradewaste.

Shell has 3 days storage onsite in the event of a problem with the trade waste quality, whichthe NWP will not receive if above these limits.

7. No pilot plant results from Oyster Cove

Note: This issue does not relate to the requirements of the Works Approval refer to response under section 4.1.3

8. One of the comments raised at the 20B conference and noted in the table at the end ofthe Chairpersons Report relates to a concern regarding fault lines, seismic studiesgeothermal information


The structural design review takes into account the ground conditions as part of complyingwith Australian Standard 1170.4 Earthquake loading standard.

4.2.3 Links with the Master Plan and future expansion plans (4)20B Issues

1. These concerns were broadly about future water security in Geelong. Participantsalso identified that the Northern Water Treatment Plant was not included in theCentral Region Water Strategy and their question was how does it qualify as partof the master plan in providing sustainable water for our future?

2. In addition a number of groups asked if the plant could be scaled up or expandedto meet future growth.

In Submissions

8/8/2019 maybel

10/13

10

3. Concern that this plant does not require Shell to cease discharges into Corio Bayrefer response to 4.1.7, Q3.


1. Northern Water Treatment Plant was not included in the Central Region Water Strategyand their question was how does it qualify as part of the master plan in providingsustainable water for our future?

Note: This issue does not relate to the requirements of the Works Approval The Northern Water Plant was identified as an alternative option in the Central Region

Sustainable Water Strategy; refer Chapter 6 page 60 and Chapter 7 page 69. The strategynotes that the project is under investigation and pending assessment of the commercialviability.

2. In addition, a number of groups asked if the plant could be scaled up or expanded tomeet future growth.


The plant is being designed to allow future expansion on the current site. The site areaallows for a doubling in size. If Barwon Water seeks to expand the facility, a separate WorksApproval Application would be made at that time.

The facility is being designed to operate for 20 years. However, this is in essence the firstphase of this plants life. As it currently stands, there is just enough sewage flow available tomeet the current recycled water demands (during dry weather periods). Based on expectedgrowth in the northern suburbs, future sewerage flows is expected to grow in the short tomedium term. Sufficient sewerage flows may be available in 14-15 years to enable adoubling of the plant.

If the plant is scaled up, Barwon Water will seek additional community and industrial uses forrecycled water.

3. Concern that this plant does not require Shell to cease discharges into Corio Bay


Refer to response under section 4.1.7, question 3.

4.2.3 Value for money (4)20B IssuesThese concerns were closely tied with the theme Shells benefit from the plant. Therewere questions relating to a perceived lack of detail on the cost of the project and valuefor money.

1. When clarifying this group of concerns, the chair summarized the core questionas, if this is how much money we have, is it the best use for the outcomes being

delivered? Is this proposed project the best bang-for-buck?


1. if this is how much money we have, is it the best use for the outcomes beingdelivered? Is this proposed project the best bang-for-buck?


As previously stated, Shell is contributing 50% of the project cost. The Northern Water Plant was found to be the preferred option in providing the most

economical and sustainable solution to Barwon Waters objectives. The contribution by Shelland the government funding has enabled the project to become a reality.

4.2.5 Energy use of the plant (3)20B Issues

8/8/2019 maybel

11/13

11

1. This was the one theme where other opportunities were identified. Some participantsexpressed a desire for alternative energy sources (e.g. solar, wind, tidal) to power theplant. Another opportunity was to tap the wasted energy from Shell Refinery processes(e.g. flare energy) and use it to power part of the plant. It was pointed out that any use ofalternative sources should be in addition to existing renewable energy targets.


1. Some participants expressed a desire for alternative energy sources (e.g. solar, wind,tidal) to power the plant. Another opportunity was to tap the wasted energy from ShellRefinery processes (e.g. flare energy) and use it to power part of the plant

A treatment plant designed to produce high quality water products for reuse requires energyinput for the various processes.

A key focus through the design process has been minimising the energy requirements andmaximising efficiency. As a result, several approaches to the design and operation of theplant have been identified and will minimise energy usage. Refer Section 9.2 of the WorksApproval Application.

The use of waste heat from Shell was considered by the design team. It was ruled out,however, based on preliminary assessments that identified very high costs and safety issuesin linking the NWP with the Refinery.

Barwon Water is currently investigating alternative energy sources as part of its GreenhouseGas Reduction Strategy.

4.3 Summary of the main concerns received by the EPA in public submissionsEPA Victoria provided the chairperson with a summary of the main concerns containedin the public submissions they have received. During their analysis of thesesubmissions, the main topics that emerged included:

Odour and VOC emissions Insufficient design information Difference between planning permit application and works approval application Public health and environmental impacts Location of the treatment plant in flood plain Existing potential soil and groundwater contamination

4.4 Points of clarification requested by community participants4.4.1 EPA role in land use planning processAt the beginning of the 20B Conference, a few community representatives wereconcerned about some information written under the heading EPA does not have thepower to do something about. The information related to EPAs role in the land useplanning process through the planning permit referral process.4.4.2 EPA Role in assessing the cost of the projectThroughout the 20B Conference, there were comments and questions about the EPAsrole in assessing the cost of the project. When questioned further, it appears that somecommunity representatives believe that the EPA, under section 1B, should take intoaccount social, environmental and economic values when considering the worksapproval application.

Refer to EPAs responses

4.5 Other requests and resolutions4.5.1 Request for an update

8/8/2019 maybel

12/13

12

An update was requested from Shell and EPA Victoria on the implementation ofShells Water Master Plan.

Refer to EPAs responses

4.5.2 Request for more detail1. Provide community with a more detailed description of the Water Treatment Plantdisplay. What do the various terms like Type 1, 2 & 3 water in display?


1. Provide more detailed description of the Water Treatment Plant display. What do thevarious terms like Type 1, 2 & 3 water in display?

All recycled water produced at the Northern Water Plant will be treated to a Class A standard,which is safe for use with human contact (e.g. watering sports fields), but is not suitable fordrinking, bathing or swimming.

The Class A water produced at the Northern Water Plant has been categorised into threetypes relating to the use of water, the level of salt.

a. Type 1 water will be used in the refinery boilers and will be very low in salt. Theboilers require a very high quality, low salt water for its operation.

b. Type 2 water will be fed into the refinery fire water systems. This water will have amedium salt content.

c. Type 3 water will be used for irrigation at Stead Park. This will also have a mediumsalinity. Type 3 water will be blended with the Type 1 and Type 2 water to ensure thesalt level is suitable for irrigation. The table below highlights the different types ofClass A water.

Table 1: Recycled Water Produced at the Northern Water Plant (taken from section 5.4 of WorksApproval Application)

4.5.3 Resolutions1. Three resolutions were moved by Sue McLean (supported by Peter Linaker anda majority in favour)That the applicant/proponent (Barwon Water) provide:i. the results of the pilot plant trials to the communityii. the results of the sewerage study from 2009iii. an explanation of the Barwon Water modelling It is not clear what isbeing requestedThe community requested that this information be provided by Barwon Water

at least 2 weeks prior to the next meeting on August 3, 2010.

8/8/2019 maybel

13/13

13



1. Three resolutions were moved by Sue McLean (supported by Peter Linaker and amajority in favour)

i. the results of the pilot plant trials to the community The results of the pilot plant contain intellectual property of the designing contractor and is

subject to commercial confidentiality. The reason it is commercially confident is that there aredifferent market products and technologies being used in the pilot plant that are not ownedby Barwon Water. Barwon Water is legally not entitled to release this information.

ii. the results of the sewerage study from 2009 Barwon Water is seeking approval from the authors of the Geelong Sewerage Management

Strategy Study shortly (2007) as requested by the community. It is expected this report willbe made available prior to the next 20B conference meeting.

iii. an explanation of the Barwon Water modelling Computer modeling was undertaken in conjunction with the pilot trial. This modeling

simulated extreme events that cannot be physically trialled. Results from the pilot trial wereused to develop the model and therefore this modelling also contains intellectual property ofthe designing contractor.

maybel

Documents

Transcript of maybel