environment protection authority annual report · environment protection authority annual report 1...

Environment Protection Authority

Environment Protection Authority Annual Report 1 July 2009 to 30 June 2010


For further information please contact:

Information Officer


GPO Box 2607

Adelaide SA 5001

Telephone: (08) 8204 2004

Facsimile: (08) 8124 4670

Free call (country): 1800 623 445

Website: <www.epa.sa.gov.au>

Email: <[email protected]>

ISSN 1322-1662

ISBN 978-1-921495-03-8

September 2010

© Environment Protection Authority

This document may be reproduced in whole or part for the purpose of study or training, subject to the inclusion of an

acknowledgment of the source and to it not being used for commercial purposes or sale. Reproduction for purposes other

than those given above requires the prior written permission of the Environment Protection Authority.

Printed on recycled paper

http://www.epa.sa.gov.au/

mailto:[email protected]

CONTENTS

LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL................................................................................................................................................1

PRESIDING MEMBER’S STATEMENT ...............................................................................................................................2

EPA CHIEF EXECUTIVE STATEMENT...............................................................................................................................4

HIGHLIGHTS AND MAJOR INITIATIVES............................................................................................................................6

INTRODUCTION TO THE ORGANISATION........................................................................................................................7

EPA BOARD COMMITTEES AND MEETINGS ...................................................................................................................9

STRATEGIC ORGANISATIONAL PRIORITIES ................................................................................................................16

BUSINESS SUCCESS AND SUSTAINABILITY ................................................................................................................21

MORE EFFECTIVE RELATIONSHIPS...............................................................................................................................28

IMPROVED REGULATION ................................................................................................................................................34

A REPUTATION FOR EXCELLENCE................................................................................................................................59

SUPPORTING OUR PEOPLE............................................................................................................................................62

OTHER STATUTORY INFORMATION ..............................................................................................................................65

APPENDIX 1 ORGANISATIONAL INFORMATION......................................................................................................69

APPENDIX 2 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND ACCOMPANYING NOTES ...............................................................77

APPENDIX 3 PUBLICATIONS RELEASED OR UPDATED DURING 2009–10...........................................................81

APPENDIX 4 FREEDOM OF INFORMATION STATEMENT......................................................................................112

ABBREVIATIONS.............................................................................................................................................................115

List of figures

Figure 1 Main applications for an urban air emissions inventory ....................................................................................25

Figure 2 Adelaide’s air quality index 2009.......................................................................................................................26

Figure 3 Annual exceedences of the Air NEPM PM10 standard at Adelaide monitoring sites .........................................27

Figure 4 Emergency response—complaint category ......................................................................................................31

Figure 5 Exceedences of the national PM10 standard at Walls Street and Schulz Reserve. The PM10 standard is 50

μg/m3 averaged over 24 hours, with a goal of no more than five exceedences per year. ................................35

Figure 6 Annual averaged particulate lead concentrations at Port Pirie monitoring sites ...............................................37

Figure 7 South Australian confirmed landfill gas status June 2010.................................................................................44

Figure 8 Seacliff, Marino, Kingston Park landfill gas sampling area ...............................................................................46

Figure 9 CDL annual return rates....................................................................................................................................48

Figure 10 Proportion of unleaded fuel used in dual-fuel vehicles ......................................................................................68

Figure 11 Greenhouse gas emissions ...............................................................................................................................68

Figure 12 Hazard and incident reports—annual trends .....................................................................................................75

List of tables

Table 1 Percentage change for key air emissions based on NPI data......................................................................24

Table 2 Percentage change for key water emissions based on NPI data .................................................................25

Table 3 Number of complaints received by the EPA .................................................................................................32

Table 4 Number of enquiries received by the EPA....................................................................................................33

Table 5 Percentage return rates for beverage containers .........................................................................................48

Table 6 Return rates 2009–10 (and comparison with 2008-09) for the various container types and prior to refund

increase ........................................................................................................................................................49

Table 7 Assessment of development applications .....................................................................................................50

Table 8 Mining application reviews (non-uranium and uranium) ...............................................................................52

Table 9 Environment impact reports and statement of environmental objectives reviews ........................................52

Table 10 Environment Protection Orders ....................................................................................................................56

Table 11 Finalised prosecutions 2009–10...................................................................................................................58

Table 12 Finalised civil penalties.................................................................................................................................58

Table 13 FOI applications, Public Register .................................................................................................................65

Table 14 Section 7 enquiries .......................................................................................................................................65

Table 15 Performance against annual energy use targets..........................................................................................66

Table 16 EPA vehicle fleet ..........................................................................................................................................67

Table 17 Energy use and greenhouse gas emissions.................................................................................................67

Table 18 Total number of employees ..........................................................................................................................69

Table 19 Employee gender balance............................................................................................................................69

Table 20 Number of persons separated from or recruited to EPA ..............................................................................70

Table 21 Number of persons on leave without pay .....................................................................................................70

Table 22 Number of employees by salary bracket ......................................................................................................70

Table 23 Status of employees in current position........................................................................................................70

Table 24 Number of executives by gender, classification and status..........................................................................71

Table 25 Average days of leave taken per FTE employee..........................................................................................71

Table 26 Number of Aboriginal and/or Torres Strait Islander employees....................................................................71

Table 27 Workforce diversity–number of employees by age bracket and gender.......................................................71

Table 28 Cultural and linguistic diversity of employees...............................................................................................72

Table 29 Number of employees with ongoing disabilities requiring workplace adaptation..........................................72

Table 30 Types of employee disabilities......................................................................................................................72

Table 31 Number of employees using voluntary flexible working arrangements by gender .......................................72

Table 32 Documented review of individual performance development plan ...............................................................72

Table 33 Leadership and management training expenditure ......................................................................................73

Table 34 Accredited training packages by classification .............................................................................................73

Table 35 Positions with customer service reflected in job and person specifications .................................................73

Table 36 Occupational health, safety and welfare (OHSW) statistics .........................................................................73

Table 37 Meeting the organisation’s safety performance targets................................................................................74

Table 38 Workers compensation expenditure .............................................................................................................75

Table 39 Account payment performance.....................................................................................................................77

Table 40 Use of consultants—controlled entity ...........................................................................................................77

Table 41 Use of consultants—administered entity ......................................................................................................78

Table 42 Overseas travel ............................................................................................................................................79

1

LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL

The Hon Paul Caica, MP

Minister for Environment and Conservation

Parliament House

North Terrace

ADELAIDE

South Australia 5000

Dear Minister

It is with pleasure that I present you with the Annual Report of the Environment Protection Authority for the period 1 July

2009 to 30 June 2010. This report has been prepared in accordance with requirements of the Environment Protection Act

1993 and the Public Sector Act 2009.

The two annual reports representing the carriage of the Environment Protection Act 1993 and administration of the

Radiation Protection & Control Act 1982 are combined as one within this annual report.

Yours sincerely

Helen Fulcher

Chief Executive


30 September 2010

2

PRESIDING MEMBER’S STATEMENT

I am delighted to present the Environment Protection Authority (EPA) Annual Report for 2009–10. The past 12 months

have again presented the EPA with numerous opportunities and challenges in striving to protect and restore the

environment.

In May 2010, the EPA celebrated the 15th anniversary of the proclamation of the Environment Protection Act 1993 (EP

Act) and the establishment of the EPA and its Board. Over this time, it is evident the EPA has established itself as the

state’s leading independent environmental regulator. Our regulatory approach is based around being firm but fair, and we

strive to be innovative and to use best available science and expertise to solve environmental challenges. Wherever

appropriate the EPA will take a collaborative approach to managing environmental risk.

A key EPA strategic priority is business success and sustainability. In November 2009, the EPA launched its first

Sustainability Licence which was awarded to New Castalloy. A Sustainability Licence combines a voluntary agreement

with a reformed statutory licence (with mandatory conditions). The resultant licence recognises the company’s

commitment to improve environmental sustainability and work with the local community as well as the EPA’s obligation to

reduce red tape wherever possible. The New Castalloy foundry in North Plympton was a worthy recipient of the inaugural

licence. Previously in conflict with the EPA and its neighbours, the company is now a consistent and outstanding

environmental performer in the areas of compliance, community engagement and sustainability. Sustainability Licences

have set the environmental performance bar to a new level and we are currently working with other companies to reach

that level.

In May 2010, the Yalumba Wine Company was rewarded for its environmental efforts by becoming the first business in

South Australia to receive the Accredited Sustainability Licence. This licence combines the new Sustainability Licence

and the existing Accredited Licence, providing a financial incentive through reduced licence fees.

The EPA’s vision in developing these licences has resulted in new ways to support licensees to deliver better and more

sustainable outcomes for the environment, business and the community.

A highlight in June 2010 was the annual EPA Round-table which focused on the theme of ‘getting the balance right’. The

EP Act challenges the EPA to find the right balance between economic, environmental and social factors. The Board

sought the views of stakeholders on whether the EPA has this right balance and their ideas on how we can improve. EPA

transparency was raised as a key point. For example, stakeholders would like to be better informed on the EPA’s

decisions following consultation and how the decisions will impact the environment, economy and community.

A major achievement was finalising of the Environment Protection (Waste to Resources) Policy 2010, after several years

in development and extensive community consultation.

The EPA continued to contribute to key government policy priorities including Water for Good, where it is the lead agency

for two actions, and The 30-Year Plan for Greater Adelaide by providing advice in a number of areas including noise and

air quality associated with new development.

A new-look EPA website was launched in October 2009 which features new information and sections, as well as a new

search engine and an improved publications database. A number of initiatives to reduce red tape and to improve public

access to information were also implemented, including streamlining five sets of environment protection regulations into

one document under the EP Act. This has improved access to the legislation and provided greater ease of use.

I would like to take this opportunity to thank the Honourable Jay Weatherill for his role as the Environment and

Conservation Minister for the first part of the financial year and to welcome the Honourable Paul Caica as the incoming

Minister. I would also like to thank the South Australian Government for its continued support for the initiatives and role of

the EPA.

The work of the EPA Board over the past year has been outstanding and I would like to thank each of the Board

members for their passion and commitment. I would also like to thank the Chief Executive, Helen Fulcher,

EPA management and staff for their commitment, professionalism and leadership during the year.

As South Australia’s leading environmental regulator, the EPA looks forward to continue working with the community and

industry for a sustainable future.

Cheryl Bart

Presiding Member

Environment Protection Authority Board

3

EPA CHIEF EXECUTIVE STATEMENT

Over the past 12 months, I have had the pleasure of leading an organisation that is committed and professional about its

role, and committed to improving its regulatory performance and maximising its influence to promote the principles of

ecologically sustainable development. I would like to reflect here on what has been achieved in our day-to-day business

over this period.

In response to a growing demand for services beyond those of a traditional environmental regulator, the EPA has worked

to become a more collaborative regulator where appropriate, working with business to protect and enhance the

environment, while achieving wellbeing for the community. In situations where enforcement is necessary, in 2009-10 our

revised Compliance and Enforcement Statement was launched, setting out the principles and tools the EPA applies in

relation to non-compliance.

The success of the Code of practice for vessel and facility management (marine and inland waters) 2008 was recognised

by being awarded the 2009 Premier’s Award for public sector excellence under the category of Fostering Creativity and

Innovation. This code introduced greywater management requirements for all vessels operating on South Australian

inland waters, and became the first jurisdiction worldwide to introduce the on-board grey water treatment option. The EPA

worked closely with government and industry stakeholders to support its development and commercialisation, generating

interest both nationally and internationally.

This year, the EPA launched the Waste to Resources (Environment Protection) Policy 2010 which comes into effect on 1

September 2010. This means that a list of products including television screens and computer

monitors will incrementally be banned from being dumped in landfills and diverted into a system of recovery, reuse and

recycling that will coincide with the digital TV switchover and a national collection scheme run by industry. The Waste

Management Reform Project finalised a series of documents to provide clear policies and procedures in the resource

recovery area.

In its key role of by providing clear and consistent independent advice scientists and practitioners from right across the

EPA have contributed to the environmental impact statements for both the Adelaide Desalination Plant and BHP Billiton

Olympic Dam Expansion at Roxby Downs.

The EPA has assisted local communities affected by environmental risk, including our management of a comprehensive

monitoring program of suspected high levels of landfill gas in the Seacliff area. This involved door knocking 158 houses,

with the Metropolitan Fire Service and council representatives to explain the risks and test individual houses. We have

also continued to contribute data and technical expertise to community groups concerned around licensed facilities such

as at Port Adelaide, Angaston, Hallett Cove, Marino and Whyalla.

This annual report structures reporting around the EPA’s strategic priorities.

Helen Fulcher

Chief Executive


4


Reconciliation statement

The Environment Protection Authority would like to acknowledge the traditional custodians on whose

ancestral lands the EPA carries out its business, and that it respects their spiritual relationship with their

country. The EPA also acknowledges the deep feelings of attachment and relationship of Aboriginal

peoples to the country.

In fulfilling its functions, the EPA is cognisant of the cultural and natural heritage of traditional owners, and

strives to achieve positive outcomes wherever these matters are concerned.

5

HIGHLIGHTS AND MAJOR INITIATIVES

The following is a list of some of the EPA’s key highlights and major initiatives for 2009–10 and shows where further

information on each of these can be found throughout this report.

The highlights, projects and programs below see the EPA:

promoting environment regulation and policy based on innovative and appropriate management options in order to

support a more sustainable future. These projects are designed to keep regulation and policy relevant and effective.

carrying out its key purpose to reduce risks to the environment and human health by working closely with industry,

the community and government.

gaining more understanding of environments under stress and to inform policy by being involved in various research

and monitoring programs.

Page

Governance milestones 13

Completion of Environment Protection (Waste to Resources) Policy 2010 17

Full implementation of site contamination provisions of the Environment Protection Act 1993 17

Innovative licensing 21

Waste Management Reform Project 23

2009 Premier’s Award for public sector excellence 59

River Murray and Lower Lakes drought response 60

6


INTRODUCTION TO THE ORGANISATION

Environment and Conservation Portfolio

In 2009–10 the Environment and Conservation Portfolio consisted of four agencies: the Department for Environment

and Heritage (DEH); the Department of Water, Land and Biodiversity Conservation (DWLBC); Zero Waste SA

(ZWSA); and the Environment Protection Authority (EPA), which had primary responsibility for the management of the

state’s natural resources.

EPA governance

The EPA is an independent statutory authority, with a Board responsible for the carriage of the Environment

Protection Act 1993 (EP Act). The Board comprises seven to nine appointed members whose skills, knowledge and

experience collectively meet the requirements of Board membership as defined by the EP Act, and the Chief

Executive. The Board delegates specified powers to others in order to achieve the objects of the EP Act. While the EP

Act is committed to the Minister for Environment and Conservation, the minister does not have the power to direct the

Board in making regulatory decisions or in its role in enforcement, or in making recommendations to the minister.

The EPA is also an administrative unit created under the Public Sector Act 2009, in which capacity it performs other

functions for government, including administration of the Radiation Protection and Control Act 1982 (RPC Act).

Under the EP Act, the Chief Executive of the administrative unit is also the Chief Executive of the statutory authority

and a member of the Board ex officio, although not entitled to vote at a meeting of the Board. The Chief Executive

makes the services of staff and facilities of the administrative unit available to the Authority for the performance of its

functions, and is responsible to the Board for giving effect to its policies and decisions. These are reflected in the EPA

Strategic Plan 2009–12, which is linked to the priorities of South Australia’s Strategic Plan and provides a strategic

framework for the work of the EPA.

EPA Board membership

The Board is the governing body of the EPA for matters related to the EP Act, and provides strategic direction,

develops environmental policy and monitors performance.

7


8

Members of the EPA Board are appointed by the Governor of South Australia. They are chosen for their qualifications,

experience and expertise relevant to:

environmental protection and management or natural resources

management

Allan Holmes

industry, commerce or economic development Cheryl Bart

Linda Bowes

Andrew Fletcher

local government Stephen Hains

the reduction, reuse, recycling and management of waste or the

environmental management industry

Stephen Hains

management generally and public sector management Allan Holmes

Jane Yuile

environmental conservation and advocacy on environmental matters on

behalf of the community

Cheryl Hill

environmental law Megan Dyson

Various prescribed bodies are consulted in the appointment process for Board members. This wide spectrum of

expertise gives the EPA the capacity to make decisions on the complex problems and issues that threaten the

environment.


9

EPA BOARD COMMITTEES AND MEETINGS

EPA Board Committee listing

Section 17 of the EP Act allows the EPA Board to establish committees or subcommittees to advise or assist in carrying

out the functions of the Board or as required by Regulations.

Six committees reported to the Board over 2009–10:

Finance Committee

Audit and Risk Management Committee

Local Government Committee (dissolved in December 2009)

Environment Protection (Waste to Resources) Policy Committee (dissolved in November 2009)

Funding Sustainability Committee

Site Contamination Auditor Accreditation Committee

Finance Committee

The Finance Committee was established by the Board in June 2009. This Committee oversees the financial reporting and

budget management of the EPA and works towards continuously improving the monthly financial information provided to

the Chief Executive and Board.

Audit and Risk Management Committee

The Audit and Risk Management Committee was established by the Board in March 2009. This Committee oversees

implementation of the Risk Management Framework that exists to identify activities of high risk, monitor systematic

controls to mitigate risks and achieve overall compliance with Board and agency policies. The Committee meets at least

quarterly.

Local Government Committee

The Local Government Committee was dissolved in December 2009. It was established by the EPA Board in June 2005

as a forum for formal discussion and resolution of issues between the EPA and local government, and as a mechanism

for involving local government in the EPA policy development process. The Committee also provided advice to the Board

and the Local Government Association State Executive Committee. Membership comprised representatives from local

government, the Local Government Association of SA (LGA) and the EPA.

A strong collaborative relationship between the EPA and local government continues to be a priority for both spheres of

government. To this end, a High Level Group (with representatives from LGA, EPA, Department of Health (DoH) and the

Board) has proposed the establishment of a Strategic Level Forum for effective continuing engagement between the

EPA, local government and other government agencies.

The Board agreed to move to this new approach.

Environment Protection (Waste to Resources) Policy Committee

The Environment Protection (Waste to Resources) Policy Committee was dissolved in November 2009. It was

established by the Board in December 2007 as a forum for formal discussion and resolution of issues in relation to

regulation of waste to resources. The Committee also gave consideration to the draft Environment Protection (Waste to

Resources) Policy and associated documents and provided advice to both the ZWSA and EPA Boards.


10

The Environment Protection (Waste to Resources) Policy 2010 (Waste EPP) was authorised by the Governor on

18 February 2010 and gazetted on the same day. It is to become operative on 1 September 2010.

Funding Sustainability Committee

In September 2009, the Funding Sustainability Committee was established by the Board to provide advice on achieving

sustainable funding for the EPA and government projects that directly affect the EPA’s financial sustainability.

Site Contamination Auditor Accreditation Committee

The Site Contamination Auditor Accreditation Committee was established in August 2008 to advise the Board on the

accreditation of site contamination auditors. The Committee is required to meet annually.

General and special meetings

During 2009–10, the Board met formally on 13 occasions. As well as these meetings, the Board also held a planning

session on 16 September 2009, two consultation sessions with stakeholders, and hosted past Board members and

representatives of EPA prescribed bodies at a lunch, held to celebrate the 15th anniversary of the EPA.

Consultation program 2009–10

The Board initiated a number of consultation sessions with stakeholders over 2009–10. As in past years, these proved

extremely beneficial to all participants, and gave the Board an opportunity to hear directly from stakeholders about

environment protection matters they considered important. This program of consultation helped refine the EPA’s

priorities. The following consultations were undertaken during 2009–10.

Mount Gambier—19 October 2009

The Board held a consultation session in Mount Gambier on 19 October 2009, which was well attended by industry, local

government and community stakeholders.

Topics raised and discussed at the consultation included landfill closures, waste issues, water filtration and desalination

plants; Lake Bonney water quality; water quality monitoring along with access to EPA reporting and monitoring

information, and environmental nuisance issues; licence fee rationale; forest wood waste burning; stormwater

contamination of council roads and reserves; and the EPA’s expectation on providing advice to council development

processes.

Environment Groups—26 November 2009

The Board held a consultation session with representatives from various environment groups, including the Australian

Conservation Foundation, People’s EPA, Environmental Defenders’ Office, Friends of Gulf St Vincent, Adelaide Brighton

Cement Community Liaison Committee and the Clean Air Society of Australia and New Zealand.

At the consultation the Board sought feedback on the draft EPA Guiding Principles for Community Engagement and

discussed the new EPA Sustainability Licence and what it meant for the community.

Those attending had the opportunity to raise other issues with the Board.

15th anniversary of the EPA—1 May 2010

Following the 18 May 2010 Board meeting, a lunch was held for current and past Board members and representatives of

EPA prescribed bodies to mark the 15th anniversary of the EPA.

The Presiding Member addressed the gathering of 30 people, saying that over the last 15 years the EPA had developed

and established itself as the state’s leading environmental regulator with a reputation for being firm but fair; collaborative;


11

innovative, and respected for its scientific and technical expertise. She spoke about the strong and independent

leadership of the EPA over those 15 years, and acknowledged the efforts of those present.

Round-table—9 June 2010

The annual EPA Round-table conference is a legal requirement under the EP Act (section 19) and is an important part of

the EPA Board’s engagement and consultation with its stakeholders.

A Round-table consultation was held on 9 June 2010 with participants from across industry, community, local government

and state government. The session, opened by the Minister and Presiding Member, focused on the theme ‘getting the

balance right’. The EP Act challenges the EPA to find the right balance between economic, environmental and social

factors and the Board sought the view of its stakeholders on whether the EPA has this right balance.

Topics discussed included:

whether environmental, social and economic considerations can be quantified in a common currency

examples of how successfully the EPA has balanced environmental, economic and social considerations well over

the years

how businesses could be assisted in addressing and weighing up environmental, economic and social dimensions

how the EPA can make the balance between these dimensions transparent.

There was a robust debate with the panel of guest speakers: Julie Pettett, Chief Executive of the Conservation Council of

SA; Jim White, General Manager Business Sustainability from OneSteel and Wayne Gibbings, Chief Executive from the

Land Management Corporation, facilitated by Niki Vincent, Chief Executive Officer from the Leaders Institute of SA.

A full exchange of ideas also took place between Board members, stakeholders and EPA senior staff.


EPA organisation chart

Environment Protection Act 1993

Radiation Protection and Control Act 1982

Helen Fulcher EPA Chief Executive

Cheryl Bart AO EPA Board Presiding Member

Hon Paul Caica Minster for Environment

and Conservation

Susan Churchman People, Policy and Systems

Keith Baldry Regulation and Compliance

Peter Dolan Science and Assessment

Tony Circelli Strategy and Sustainabililty

EPA restructure

On 1 February 2010, the EPA implemented a new internal structure designed to complement core operations with a

stronger focus to meet emerging and future agendas. Undertaking the restructure has strengthened the EPA, making it

influential in terms of working through influencing other stakeholders, shoring up the focus on revenue and continuing to

reinforce its focus on sustainability.

12


13

The restructure saw the EPA change from five to four divisions—People, Policy and Systems, Regulation and

Compliance, Science and Assessment, and Strategy and Sustainability.

One of the drivers for change was the need to invest significantly more in support for EPA staff. By merging branches that

were previously in a number of divisions, People, Policy and Systems Division is able to provide strong people and

capability management support for its staff, focusing more on organisational development and better systems

development. It is also targeting on good internal and external policy, and good governance.

The Regulation and Compliance Division is responsible for the provision of regulatory and compliance services for the

EPA. The division works with the EP Act and associated Regulations to manage the compliance of a diverse range of

industry across South Australia. It is also responsible for the administration and enforcement of the RPC Act and its

regulations that provide for the protection of the environment, and workers and the public from the harmful effects of

radiation.

The Science and Assessment Division is responsible for the monitoring and evaluation of the state of the environment,

the provision of scientific advice and environmental data, and the assessment of development proposals and

aquaculture. It manages legacy pollution issues (site contamination) to ensure human health and the environment are

adequately protected.

The Strategy and Sustainability Division has an outward looking role, in understanding the EPA’s organisational context,

emerging opportunities and pressures. This is coupled with delivery of inward focused services, to best position the

organisation through development of corporate priorities, and through the delivery of specific regulatory, corporate and

reform services. The division leads on strategic and corporate planning services for the EPA, including performance

assessment.

EPA vision

A clean, healthy and valued environment that supports social and economic prosperity for all South Australians now and

in the future.

EPA values

To guide our values and behaviours at work, the EPA has embraced the new Code of Ethics for the SA Public Sector

2010. A summary is provided below:

democratic values—helping the government, under the law, to serve the people of South Australia

service, respect and courtesy—serving the people of South Australia

honesty and integrity—acting at all times in such a way as to uphold the public trust

accountability—holding ourselves accountable for everything we do

professional conduct standards—exhibiting the highest standards of professional conduct.

Governance milestones

Further development and strengthening of the EPA’s governance framework occurred over 2009–10 with the finalisation

of the EPA Financial Management Compliance Framework and putting in place the foundations for the development of

the EPA’s internal audit program.

Financial Management Compliance Framework

The EPA Financial Management Compliance Framework (FMCF) documents the EPA’s approach to complying with

Treasurer’s Instructions 2 and 28, to ensure the agency has in place a financial management compliance framework and

program.


14

The EPA FMCF consists of the following elements:

control environment

process level controls

financial management compliance program

Internal audit

In May 2010, 15 EPA staff participated in a two-day internal audit training program. The purpose of this program was to

assist the EPA to develop its internal audit capacity. Internal audit is an independent, objective assurance and consulting

activity designed to add value and improve an organisation’s operations.

As well as taking their newly acquired skills back into their work role these staff members will be committing up to five

days annually to undertake audits within the EPA. These audits will be scheduled to address the most significant risk

issues facing the EPA and findings will be reported back to Executive, and the Audit and Risk Management Committee.

The EPA has also established a dedicated position for an internal auditor who will lead the internal audit program and

coordinate these activities.

Collaborative approach with ZWSA

The Chief Executives and senior staff of EPA and ZWSA met formally on a number of occasions in 2009–10 to discuss a

range of waste management issues and matters of mutual interest to both organisations.

A detailed Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) was developed in late 2008 in relation to roles and functions of the two

agencies and this is now being reviewed.

EPA and ZWSA coordinated the following activities:

developing and implementing the Waste to Resources Environment Protection Policy 2010 (to be launched

1 September 2010)

cross-agency management protocol for unauthorised waste activities

national issues, including plastic bags and product stewardship

national waste policy

waste reform project.

ZWSA and EPA officers also maintain frequent informal contact on a range of matters relating to waste and recycling.

The EPA and ZWSA Boards have three members in common with expertise in: environment protection and management

or natural resources management; or environmental conservation and advocacy on environmental matters on behalf of

the community and environmental law.

Sustainability@Work

The EPA has a leadership role in demonstrating best practice in environmentally sustainable behaviour in the workplace

to other businesses and communities in the state. While its offices are in 250 Victoria Square which is a six-star green

building, it is recognised that continuous improvement is needed to become a sustainable organisation.

In November 2009, the Chief Executive launched the Statement on Sustainable Behaviour in the Workplace and the

Sustainability@Work (S@W) Team was formed. This team is a band of enthusiastic, volunteer staff who are leading by

example to promote initiatives and instill culture to reduce the EPA’s environmental footprint.

The team has drafted a three-year Environment Action Plan focussing on energy, water, waste and green purchasing for

discussion with all staff.


15

The plan includes such actions as gaining access to stairs so staff may walk from the ground floor to their higher-floor

offices; establishing a robust waste-recycling program; and establishing a more environmentally sensitive policy for

purchase and disposal of assets.

S@W subcommittee—EPA TravelSmart Working Group

The EPA TravelSmart Working Group, which has been implementing the three-year TravelSmart Workplace Plan (TWP)

has been integrated into the S@W Team so there is a single team working on sustainable issues in the organisation.

Sustainable transport actions that have continued include:

the sale of discounted public transport tickets for staff and their families

a 10,000 Step program encouraging staff to increase the distance they walk every day

a Bicycle User Group to encourage cycling

staff participation in National Walk to Work Day and Ride to Work Day.


16

STRATEGIC ORGANISATIONAL PRIORITIES

EPA contributing to South Australia’s Strategic Plan objectives

The promotion of the principles of sustainability is enshrined as an object under the EP Act, and the EPA is required to

take account of these principles in its decision-making, and program and service delivery. In using its powers and

functions to manage and influence human behaviour to achieve more sustainable practices, the EPA contributes to the

objectives of South Australia’s Strategic Plan by:

Growing prosperity—Good environmental regulation can enhance business competitiveness and reduce business

risk. The EPA supports economic development through cost-effective environmental regulation and reducing the

administrative burden on business, while promoting the efficient use of environmental resources to deliver both cost

savings to business and reduced impact on the environment.

Improving wellbeing—Through its regulatory and non-regulatory programs and services, the EPA identifies

environments or communities under threat or pressure from unacceptable pollution and waste impacts, and develops

strategies to mitigate identified risks.

Attaining sustainability—In managing the impacts of pollution and waste, the EPA considers the principles of

sustainability in decision making, developing and implementing policy, and delivering regulatory and non-regulatory

programs. It uses a risk-based and outcome-focused approach to support the transition to more sustainable practices

by business, government and the community.

Fostering creativity and innovation—Better environmental regulation has a vital role to play in correcting market

failure, promoting fairness and stimulating innovation in meeting environmental standards. The EPA will consider all

innovative approaches to achieving required environmental standards.

Building communities—The EPA continues to strengthen its engagement with regional and local communities,

business and governments so as to share information and deliver high-quality programs and services that contribute

to strong and vibrant communities. In so doing, the EPA seeks to ensure that it remains a relevant and credible

organisation, and that its services are accessible to all its stakeholders and the wider community.

Expanding opportunity—The EPA continues to seek opportunities to improve the environmental and economic

sustainability of business and to better inform the community and business of the EPA’s roles and responsibilities. It

also continues to support its staff through appropriate workforce planning and development strategies.

EPA strategic priorities

The EPA Strategic Plan 2009–2010 was released in August 2009. It provides the framework for the organisation’s

direction over the next three years in the context of supporting the achievement of South Australia’s Strategic Plan

targets.

The timely release of the plan allowed the new direction and strategic priorities of the organisation to be reflected in

operational planning from July 2009. The EPA’s strategic priorities for 2009–12 are:

Business success and sustainability—The EPA will support business to reduce environmental impacts and use

resources better, through the promotion of good environmental practice.

More effective relationships—The EPA will achieve better results for the environment of South Australia by building

more effective relationships with industry, licensees and local government.

Improved regulation—Working with its stakeholders, the EPA will continue its efforts to reduce red tape for

business. This way, innovative and cost-effective solutions to protect, restore and enhance the quality of our

environment will be developed.


17

A reputation for excellence—The EPA understands that improving access to its services and clarifying their scope

saves time and reduces frustration for its stakeholders. The EPA strives to build a pro-active and service-oriented

culture, and to be at the forefront of leading regulatory practices.

Supporting our people—By supporting its people and continuing to improve its processes and efficiency in times of

financial constraint, the EPA will develop the organisation to meet growing demands.

The Strategic Plan is available on the EPA website at <www.epa.sa.gov.au/about_epa/strategic_plan>.

The EPA’s environmental goals were revised to better describe the EPA’s particular outcomes and purpose, and are:

Clean and healthy air—Maintaining and improving air quality, particularly focusing on regional air quality issues, to

minimise health impacts and costs

Land and water that is fit for purpose—Protecting South Australia's water bodies and land from the adverse

impacts of pollution and waste that might reduce their value for current and future generations

Communities protected from unacceptable noise—Protecting the community from exposure to unacceptable

noise levels

Sustainable use of resources—Reducing costs to business and environmental impacts by promoting the efficient

use of resources and waste minimisation

Communities protected from unacceptable radiation—Protecting the community from health risks associated with

ionising and non-ionising radiation.

EPA Environment and Conservation Portfolio 2009–10 targets

Complete Environment Protection (Waste to Resources) Policy 2010

The Waste EPP is due to come into effect on 1 September 2010. The EPP will support South Australia’s Strategic Plan

2007 target of reducing waste to landfill by 25% by 2014, by providing a regulatory underpinning for South Australia’s

Waste Strategy, and promoting resource recovery and the diversion of waste from landfill.

Different parts of the Waste EPP will come into effect in stages over the following three years. The EPA and ZWSA will

be working together to support the implementation of the Waste EPP, including the provision of guidance on what

facilities may be approved as resource recovery facilities and on resource recovery processing requirements. The EPA

will consult with the waste industry and local government to develop these guidelines. The EPA and ZWSA are also

working with local government and the waste industry to broaden community and industry awareness of landfill bans and

obligations under the Waste EPP.

Fully implement site contamination provisions of the Environment Protection Act 1993

On 1 July 2009, the site contamination provisions prescribed by the Environment Protection (Site Contamination)

Amendment Act 2007 and in November 2009 the Environment Protection Regulations 2009 came into force. This

resulted in the full implementation of South Australia’s site contamination legislation.

The first year of operation of these provisions has resulted in remarkable outcomes including:

98 notifications of actual or potential harm to groundwater having been received which allowed the EPA to manage

the risks associated with the chemical substances that can migrate through groundwater, beneath many properties.

an organisation having transferred liability for site contamination to the purchaser of the site. This is internationally

unique legislation that allows the EPA to recognise such transfers.

29 persons having been accredited as site contamination auditors

six site contamination audit reports received.


18

The EPA has not issued any site contamination assessment or remediation orders. Before the commencement of the

legislation, a considerable number of persons refused to take responsibility for site contamination. Since commencement,

all such persons have, without the need for orders, voluntarily undertaken the work required by the EPA.

A risk prioritisation model was developed by the EPA to manage sites with the highest risk.

The site contamination module within General Environmental Information or GENI (EPA-wide database system for

recording and tracking information) was developed and has been successfully implemented.

Commitments made, during consultation on the site contamination legislation, in relation to amendments to the

Development Act 1993 to require the use of site contamination auditors for specific circumstances remain outstanding.

Implement revised state ambient water quality monitoring program and water quality report cards

The EPA has been undertaking a comprehensive review of the state’s ambient water quality monitoring program. This

review has been completed for creeks, lakes and wetlands and coastal waters. As a result, the focus of the monitoring

program has shifted towards multiple lines of evidence, which incorporates biological and ecological measures as well as

traditional water chemistry to assess ecosystem condition. The review of groundwater monitoring is currently evaluating

the viability of ecosystem values in groundwater, while a monitoring program is being developed for other environmental

values in groundwater.

The revised monitoring program is intended to be accessed through a dynamic web-based interactive map displaying

monitoring locations overlaid on natural resource management regions. The web portal is under development.

Complete identification of agreed environmental values for water quality in Adelaide and Mount Lofty Ranges and SA Murray–Darling Basin Natural Resources Management regions

This work forms part of Water for Good Action 63 which states the EPA will develop environmental values for priority

water bodies across the state by 2014. For additional information please refer to Water for Good (page 38).

Under the banner of Healthy Waters, the EPA is furthering its environmental goal of ‘Land and water that is fit for

purpose’ through various projects. The Healthy Waters project is jointly funded and undertaken by the EPA in partnership

with the Australian Government, complementary state natural resource management (NRM) programs, Adelaide and

Mount Lofty Ranges Resource Management Board (AMLR NRM) Board, South Australian Water Corporation (SA Water),

and the Stormwater Management Authority. This project aims to identify agreed environmental values (EVs) for water

quality in the AMLR NRM region.

EVs are the values a community might have for the use of water (eg ecosystem, irrigation, drinking water). Water Quality

Objectives (WQOs) are the physical or chemical descriptions that technically describe waters that are consistent with EVs

(eg salinity up to 1000 milligrams per litre).

This project also forms the target-setting phase of the development of a Water Quality Improvement Plan (WQIP) for the

Mount Lofty Ranges Watershed. This phase forms part of the EPA-led Action 49 in the Water for Good strategy. The EPA

has committed $550 000 to support its lead actions for Water for Good over the next three years to 2012.

The project is almost complete, with a final round of stakeholder consultation to be undertaken before the public

consultation process begins in late 2010.

To date, the work has been well accepted by key stakeholders. The AMLR NRM Board intends to use the information

generated by the project to underpin a regional report card process in late 2010.

Similar work is planned for the SA Murray–Darling Basin. While the current drought conditions and the related flow, water

and sediment quality issues in the Lower Lakes preclude effective stakeholder consultation for EVs in this area, work has


19

progressed in the Dawesley Creek catchment in conjunction with SA Water. The EPA will continue to develop a program

for other parts of the Murray–Darling Basin NRM region with its NRM Board.

Implement the adoption of Adelaide Coastal Water Quality Improvement Plan

The EPA is the lead agency for the development of the Adelaide Coastal Water Quality Improvement Plan (ACWQIP) to

address recommendations from the Adelaide Coastal Waters Study (ACWS). The ACWS found land-based discharges of

industrial and sewerage-sourced wastewater, along with stormwater, are responsible for the loss of more than 5000

hectares of seagrass and the poor amenity of water quality along Adelaide’s coast.

Key stakeholders are supporting the development of the ACWQIP and embracing the challenges of reducing flows of

stormwater and have endorsed the plan’s target for a 75% reduction in the nitrogen load from wastewater. As a result,

over time the Adelaide coast will sustain the protection and eventual regrowth of seagrass.

Public feedback on the draft ACWQIP will be sought in late 2010.

Gazettal of managed aquifer recharge code of practice

The Code of practice for managed aquifer recharge (MAR) was delayed in 2009–10 due to competing priorities and has

not been finalised for the expected gazettal. However, the principles of the new code and the risk-based management

framework on which it is based (drawn from the Australian Guidelines for Water Recycling 2000) have been applied to

the development and management of new and existing MAR schemes in Adelaide. The draft code of practice will be

released for public consideration in late 2010.

Develop and implement a plan to act on recommendations from EPA’s review on licence systems and processes

The EPA has continued to implement initiatives that will improve the efficiency and effectiveness of its licensing system.

Improvements include the development of multi-site licences and plain English licence conditions. These initiatives have

been incorporated into and complement the newly created Sustainability Licence (refer to page 21) and Certificates of

Compliance.

The program of improvements has been included in the EPA’s red-tape reduction plan, which demonstrates a

commitment to continually focus on implementing system and process improvements in licensing administration.

The planned replacement of the EPA licensing system, as outlined in the EPA’s Information and Communications

Technology (ICT) Strategy, will also provide an opportunity for further implementation of review recommendations. For

information, refer to ICT Strategic Plan on page 62.

Remake the Environment Protection (General) Regulations 1994 and Environment Protection (Fees and Levy) Regulations 1994

The Environment Protection (General) Regulations 1994 (General Regulations) and Environment Protection (Fees and

Levy) Regulations 1994 (Fees and Levy Regulations) were both due to expire on 1 September 2009 in accordance with

the provisions of section 16B of the Subordinate Legislation Act 1978.

During the review conducted prior to expiry, the opportunity to consolidate the existing five sets of Environment Protection

regulations was identified. The new Regulations incorporate the General Regulations, the Fees and Levy Regulations,

the Beverage Container Regulations, the Site Contamination Regulations and the Exempt Classes of Persons and

Activities Regulations.

Consolidating all regulations into one document has had benefits for both the EPA and its stakeholders. The legislation is

more accessible because all regulations are held together in a single document, and is easier to use as the order of the


20

regulation parallels the conferral of the head power under the EP Act. All the requirements listed out in a single set of

regulations lessens the risk of information being overlooked.

Review of Schedule 1—activities of environmental significance

The licensing of certain business operations is an important function of the EPA. Licensing allows regulatory

requirements to be applied to environmentally significant activities that present a risk. Part A of Schedule 1 of the EP Act

defines activities of environmental significance that require a licence.

The EPA currently administers approximately 2100 licences for activities of environmental significance. Although there

have been minor amendments to this Schedule since it was first developed, the definitions and activities have generally

remained unchanged since 1993.

The review is intended to update Schedule 1 to reflect current industrial practices, resolve issues relating to definitions,

remove activities no longer considered a risk and capture emerging activities.

A redrafted Schedule is intended to be released for stakeholder consultation in the last half of 2010. Once consultation

has closed, the feedback will be incorporated into a final submission to government early 2011.

State of the environment reporting

In November 2009, the South Australian Government released a comprehensive response to the South Australian State

of the Environment Report 2008, accepting all but three of the report’s 43 recommendations. The response was generally

positive about the report and included valuable information about existing and planned projects and programs within the

areas covered.

The next report is due by 2013 and the EPA is considering options to improve it, including better aligning it with other

state and national environmental reporting.


21

BUSINESS SUCCESS AND SUSTAINABILITY

The EPA takes a firm but fair approach, it works with industries to help them reduce their environmental impacts, but

when there is a risk of harm to the environment, the EPA will act quickly and decisively.

Innovative licensing

The EPA has two types of licences designed for better performers. The Sustainability Licence recognises a commitment

to improvement in environmental sustainability while the accredited licence rewards excellence in environmental

management. These licences can also be combined to create an EPA accredited sustainability licence.

The EPA has issued one sustainability licence, one accredited licence and one accredited sustainability licence over the

past year.

Sustainability Licence

Since the 2009 Round-table the EPA has been working on the sustainability licence concept with licence-holders from the

manufacturing, local government, winemaking, waste management, composting and university sectors, as well as a state

government utility.

Supported by this consultation, the Sustainability Licence was created. Like the Victorian EPA Corporate Licence upon

which it is based, the South Australian version combines a voluntary, unenforceable, environmental sustainability

agreement with a reformed statutory licence to reduce red tape.

In November 2009, New Castalloy was a very worthy recipient of the first Sustainability Licence. Over recent years New

Castalloy has moved from being in conflict with the EPA and their neighbours to become an outstanding environmental

performer, in the areas of compliance, community engagement and sustainability.

The sustainability licence concept has proven popular with the participating licensees and has generated interest and

support from a number of other licensees and industry associations. Another sustainability licence with a regional

manufacturer is expected and six more are at various stages of development. Another 17 licensees have expressed

interest.

Accredited Licence

Accredited Licences are only granted where excellence in environmental systems leads to proven, superior

environmental performance. Licence-holders are rewarded with reduced fees and a simpler 10-year licence.

In October 2009, Constellation Wines were awarded an Accredited Licence for their Berri Estate Winery. The winery is

one of Australia’s largest volume wineries, where there is a strong commitment from management and staff to protect

and enhance their local environment. Constellation Wines has a commitment to corporate social responsibility which

includes comprehensive continuous improvement and sustainability programs.

Accredited Sustainability Licence

In May 2010, The Yalumba Wine Company was awarded the EPA’s first Accredited Sustainability Licence for their

Angaston and Oxford Landing wineries. Brian Walsh, acting Chief Executive Officer of Yalumba explains their position on

sustainability and the EPA’s partnering role:

‘As we all know sustainability is all about environmental, financial and social responsibility.

We try to be careful and diligent farmers, caring for our natural resources, so that we can continue to

harvest high-quality grapes for generations to come. We try to minimise waste of wine, water, energy,


22

packaging or time as it costs money and is irresponsible. We try to engage our employees and business

partners in doing the right thing.

The exciting enhancement in this instance is the approach and encouragement of the EPA, where there is

recognition that organisations with existing high performance still want to improve and the EPA is working

on support and incentive frameworks such as the Accredited Sustainability Licence to help facilitate.

This acknowledges past performance, but brings with it future obligations and challenges that will continue

to stretch us via the continuous improvement pathway. This is about moving beyond compliance and

looking for new ways to show leadership and ultimately gain competitive advantage.’

This positive approach provides a fine example for other South Australian businesses, demonstrating that environmental

sustainability and business success and sustainability do not have to oppose each other. They can be achieved in

tandem.

For more information, check out the brochure at

<www.epa.sa.gov.au/xstd_files/Licensing/Brochure/brochure_SustLicence.pdf>.

New Castalloy awarded the first Sustainability Licence

New Castalloy is located in North Plympton, South Australia, and is the manufacturer of motorcycle wheels and hubs

for the global market of the iconic Harley–Davidson brand.

New Castalloy runs a foundry in a difficult environment, with residential neighbours close by. Not that long ago their

non-compliant noise and odour emissions placed them in conflict with the EPA and their local community. However,

they have made remarkable progress in compliance and sustainability and those relationships have turned around.

New Castalloy has taken the excellence they apply to their manufacturing operations and applied the same

commitment to compliance and sustainability. It realises that compliance, environmental sustainability and good

community relationships are not an unnecessary burden, they are fundamental for ongoing business success and

business sustainability.

The secret to this success lies in the commitment of all New Castalloy staff, from shop floor employees to

management, with people at all levels showing leadership and a commitment to excellence.

As at November 2009, New Castalloy has reduced:

water use by 48.5% since 2005

electricity use by 13% in the last two years

gas use by 22% in the last two years

waste to landfill by 59% in the last two years

liquid waste by 70% in the last two years.

New Castalloy’s achievements have not just been in sustainability, they now comply with all environmental legislation,

and community complaints have dropped by 95% in two years.

The EPA recognises that New Castalloy is one of a select group of licensees, and both will continue to work together

to pursue better environmental and community outcomes.

www.epa.sa.gov.au/xstd_files/Licensing/Brochure/brochure_SustLicence.pdf


23

Business Sustainability Alliance

In October 2009, the Business Sustainability Alliance (BSA) member agency chief executives (EPA, ZWSA, Department

of Trade and Economic Development, Department of the Premier and Cabinet and Innovate SA) met to review the

progress and reinforce support for the continued integration of sustainability services through the BSA. Officers from the

BSA agencies have continued to refine and integrate their programs. An example of this is the review of the Environment

Improvers Program which is delivered by Business SA for the EPA. The program is now shortened with more outcome-

focused content which is more relevant to businesses.

While the innovative Ecomapping training package was recognised in the Premier’s Innovation Awards 2009, the EPA

recognised a need to further tailor and target the package. The next iteration evolved in early 2010 with the trial of a more

intensive training package. In collaboration with SA Food Centre and Innovate SA, Ecomapping was used as a starting

point for six food related businesses to identify water and energy improvements, followed by mentoring in writing a

Retooling for Climate Change grant that will potentially provide up to 50% of the capital cost for equipment upgrades. The

EPA is investigating the potential for Ecomapping to be used by the aquaculture industry as evidence of their

environmental responsibility as required by Department of Primary Industries and Resources of South Australia (PIRSA).

The EPA and the BSA had displays at the Cleantech conference at the Adelaide Convention Centre in early 2010 as a

showcase in this emerging industry sector.

Waste Management Reform Project

In 2009–10, the EPA completed work on the Waste Management Reform Project. This project was initiated in response

to the EPA Board’s recognition of the need for clear policies and procedures in the resource recovery area, especially

when considering the increase in diversion of waste from landfill.

The EPA promotes sustainable waste management and recognises that particular waste streams may be suitable for

reuse. To support the beneficial reuse of waste, while recognising the potential risk to the environment and human health

that may arise from the inappropriate use of waste, the Waste Management Reform Project produced a series of

documents that:

provide a consistent and transparent regulatory approach to the resource recovery sector

ensure waste derived products are beneficial and not solely an avoidance of the waste levy or avoiding disposal at

authorised premises

provide mechanisms to support and promote a message that the recycling industry is sound, has appropriate rigour,

quality assurance and is not polluting the environment

recognise there is a risk associated with the production and use of waste derived products resulting in the use of a

risk-based approach to minimise or prevent harm to the environment

provide assurance to customers that products are fit for purpose (that is they are not in receipt of a waste)

provide a rigorous mechanism which enables waste to no longer be considered a waste.

To complement the work previously undertaken, the following work was completed:

publication of the Standard for the production and use of waste derived fill, which describes the principles and factors

that need to be considered for the EPA to support any proposal to produce and use waste derived fill

publication of the Standard for the production and use of waste derived soil enhancer, which describes the principles

and factors that need to be considered for the EPA to support any proposal to produce and use waste derived soil

enhancer

completion of the Waste EPP which comes into effect on 1 September 2010 (refer to page 17)

drafting of the Waste Classification Guideline, which describes the requirements for the assessment, classification

and disposal of solid waste to landfill in South Australia.


24

National Pollutant Inventory

The National Pollutant Inventory (NPI) provides the community, industry and government with free information about

substance emissions and transfers in Australia. The NPI website <www.npi.gov.au> shows emission estimates for 93

toxic substances and the source and location of those emissions. The NPI is a cooperative program implemented by the

Commonwealth, state and territory governments.

Portfolio NPI key performance indicators

Managing environmental risk of significant point sources of pollution—air

Table 1 shows the percentage change in the pollution load for key air emissions from authorisation holders reporting to

the NPI (in both financial years of 2003–04 and 2008–09). This measure is based upon data reported and the percentage

difference between total emissions from facilities from 2003–04 to 2008–09. All substances showed a decrease in

emissions, ranging from 1% decrease for sulfur dioxide to 35% decrease for total volatile organic compounds. These

decreases can be attributed to decreased stack emissions, decreased production, cleaner production activities and

pollution control equipment.

Table 1 Percentage change for key air emissions based on NPI data

AIR EMISSIONS

Total tonnes per financial year

Substance Number

of reporters

2003–04 2008–09

Difference over 5 years (%)

Carbon monoxide 114 72 354 68 935 -5

Lead and compounds 75 51 48 -6

Oxides of nitrogen 114 41 681 40 588 -3

Particulate matter 10 µm 112 17 805 15 494 -13

Sulfur dioxide 117 76 110 75 495 -1

Total volatile organic compounds 175 13 190 8 559 -35

Managing environmental risk of significant point sources of pollution—water

Table 2 shows the percentage change in the pollution load for key water emissions, from authorisation holders reporting

to the NPI (in both financial years of 2003–04 and 2008–09). This measure is based upon data reported and the

percentage difference between total emissions from 2003–04 to 2008–09. All substances showed a decrease in

emissions. The differences ranged from a 7% decrease for total phosphorus to 37% for lead and compounds. These

decreases can be attributed to improved operation, upgrades which decrease emissions and a decrease in sewage

volumes due to water restrictions.

http://www.npi.gov.au/


Table 2 Percentage change for key water emissions based on NPI data

WATER EMISSIONS

Total tonnes per financial year

Substance Number

of reporters

2003–04 2008–09

Difference over 5 years (%)

Copper and compounds 7 3 2 -27

Lead and compounds 7 6 4 -37

Zinc and compounds 4 27 22 -18

Total nitrogen 7 2071 1657 -20

Total phosphorus 8 412 382 -7

Motor vehicle air emissions inventory for Adelaide

An emissions inventory estimates pollution from all sources within a region, called an ‘airshed’. It provides critical

information to assess community exposure levels through feeding the information directly into air quality models to predict

effects of these emissions on air quality. In combination with population and health information, it assists in understanding

the impacts of air pollution on human health and points to options for managing environmental, social and economic risks

over the long term.

EmissionsInventory

Long term airshed modelling

Short term airshed modelling

Monitoring Plan

Strategic Adviceand Policy

Emissions Map Risk Management

Five main applications for an urban air emissions inventory

what-if analysisforecasting

predictive modellingplanning

Emissions Map: geographic distribution of emissions, can be an important aid in land use planning by identifying parts of the region that are likely to be subject to high levels of pollution, and the location of pollution sources in relation to sensitive areas.Strategic advice/policy: An emissions inventory can help in estimating the cost of introducing controls, and identifying who should bear those costs.Monitoring Plan: An emissions inventory will indicate, for example, where the highest concentrations of pollution are likely to be found, or which areas are the most representative. It can thus help to ensure that monitoring equipment is appropriately located.Short term airshed modelling: to predict short term air quality overview at ground level. They could be used to alert authorities to possible air pollution incidents, and to determine strategies for avoiding them.Long term airshed modelling: to assess trend in air quality. Just by altering the input to the emissions inventory in a way that simulates future conditions, it is possible to make predictions about the impact on air quality.

Figure 1 Main applications for an urban air emissions inventory

The EPA completed Stage 1 of a program to develop a comprehensive air emissions inventory for South Australia, with

the development of a motor vehicle emissions inventory for main roads within the sate in 2008. This program is part of a

continuing collaboration between the EPA, Department of Transport, Energy and Infrastructure (DTEI) and DoH, in

association with the University of South Australia. As reported last year, some of the techniques being developed for the

motor vehicle emissions inventory are quite novel, and the project is attracting interest from other Australian jurisdictions.

25


Further work is projected to refine the database and undertake modelling of impacts of traffic emissions on air quality and

population exposure for residents near these roads. A primary aim is to assist our understanding of how traffic contributes

to air quality in the Adelaide metropolitan area now and to provide some insights into how changes in population, vehicle

numbers and technology, and traffic patterns will influence air quality in Adelaide in the future. This will provide scientific

evidence to inform strategic planning for managing air quality and community risk over coming decades.

Adelaide air quality data

Poor3%

Good45%

Fair11%

Very Good41%

Figure 2 Adelaide’s air quality index 2009

The pie chart of Adelaide’s air quality index shown in Figure 2 describes the general air quality in the Adelaide

metropolitan area. This is a summary of air pollutant levels that were monitored in the Adelaide metropolitan region. For

details on the air quality index, please visit the EPA website <www.epa.sa.gov.au>.

Air quality in Adelaide can be considered good or very good 86% of the time. Overall, this year’s results are similar to

those of 2008. The poorer air quality is mainly due to elevated PM10 particle concentrations.

Generally during dry conditions and when winds are high, dust blown from regional areas can combine with other forms

of particle pollution, such as those from industry, motor vehicles, bushfires and sources in the metropolitan area, to cause

dust levels above the National Environment Protection (Ambient Air Quality) Measure or Air NEPM standards.

26



0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009

Year

Nu

mb

er

of E

xce

ed

en

ces

Netley

Elizabeth

Christies Beach

Kensingston

Le Fevre PS

NEPM Standard

Figure 3 Annual exceedences of the Air NEPM PM10 standard at Adelaide monitoring sites

The metropolitan monitoring network provides a comprehensive picture of particle concentrations across Adelaide.

Results for 2008 and 2009 are similar at all sites, with the exception of Elizabeth (see Figure 3), where there has been a

marked increase in number of exceedences. In contrast, only two exceedences were recorded at Kensington in 2009.

Adelaide has not complied with the national PM10 standard for the last five years. PM10 levels in exceedance of the Air

NEPM standard (ie greater than five in figure 3) are due to a combination of dry conditions and human activities such as

vehicle use, industry and other dust causing activities.

27


28

MORE EFFECTIVE RELATIONSHIPS

The EPA works with industry, other parts of the government and the community, to reduce risks to the environment and

promote sustainability.

EPA in the community

The EPA actively engages with local stakeholders across South Australia on a wide range of activities, seeking

community input and involvement in decisions and policies, and working with communities to address environmental

issues of concern.

A project began this year to enhance the EPA’s community engagement practice and demonstrate the organisation’s

commitment to working with communities. A list of broad engagement principles was developed and discussed with

representatives of community and environmental groups in November 2009. This feedback has been incorporated into a

kit being developed for staff, and into an engagement strategy to be delivered in 2010–11.

Increasingly, the EPA is requiring that its licensees not only to perform well environmentally, but also engage effectively

with their local communities. The criteria for the EPA’s Sustainability Licence require industries to demonstrate a

commitment to community engagement.

Landfills and waste management continue to be issues of interest to the community, and the EPA attended a number of

community consultative forums, as well as liaising with the community in the Seacliff area after high levels of landfill gas

were detected at the site of a former landfill.

The Healthy Waters project provided an opportunity for communities, including indigenous groups, in the Adelaide Mount

Lofty Ranges area to contribute to the EVs for water bodies in their region, while the Smokewatch program encouraged

more efficient use of wood heaters in the state. Displays at major events such as the Royal Adelaide Show, Science

Week, Boat Show, Public Sector Week and LGA conference provided opportunities for the community to learn about

environmental issues and speak directly with EPA staff.

Local government project

In July 2009 the EPA formed a high level group of chief executives and directors from the Local Government Association

(LGA), EPA Board, DoH and the EPA to identify ways of promoting agency partnerships that better serve the community.

The primary focus of this group is to identify how the EPA and local government can deliver a seamless and effective

environment nuisance protection service to the community. The high level group will continue work in this area in

2010–11.

SmokeWatch Mount Gambier and fine particle monitoring

The SmokeWatch program launched in Mount Gambier in March 2009, continued into the winter months with a report

published in October 2009 detailing the campaign’s results for its first year.

The aim of SmokeWatch is to reduce wood smoke pollution caused by the inefficient use of domestic wood heaters in the

City of Mount Gambier district, by encouraging more efficient use of wood heaters and building the capacity of the local

community to take ownership of wood smoke pollution issues.

The program is a collaboration between the EPA, the City of Mount Gambier, the Australian Home Heating Association,

the Firewood Association of Australia and DoH. A number of local businesses, schools and organisations have also

supported the program and promoted key messages.

SmokeWatch Mount Gambier is a unique program combining both behaviour change and air monitoring campaigns so

the two components reinforce the messages about air quality and what the community can do to improve it.


29

In 2009–10 the community was made aware of the program and the issue of wood smoke and its potential health effects

through:

a community information session

a range of communication materials

publication of weekly air monitoring data through the local newspaper and daily results on the EPA website

learning opportunities for local school teachers and students.

Results from the monitoring undertaken from June to September 2009 confirmed previous results of poor winter air

quality in Mount Gambier. In particular, they highlighted major contributions of wood smoke to high fine particles

concentrations, particularly during cold, still weather conditions overnight.

Phase 2 of SmokeWatch Mount Gambier began in April 2010 with a range of community engagement activities to provide

residents with an opportunity to contribute ideas and concerns, and to take an active role in the program. Feedback from

the community engagement activities will be used to inform future program activities. Air monitoring started in May 2010

to capture impacts of wood burning during autumn.

LeFevre Pilot Air Quality Strategy

The EPA has initiated a collaborative project to develop a pilot air quality strategy for LeFevre Peninsula. This project

forms the first phase in the development of a comprehensive South Australian Air Quality Strategy, which is a key target

of the State of Environment Report 2008 (target R1.1).

The project covers the Port Adelaide–LeFevre Peninsula area, chosen for the diversity and dynamism of current

development programs in the area, encompassing residential, transport and industrial projects.

The 18-month project began in June 2010 with the establishment of a steering committee chaired by the EPA, with

members drawn from the City of Port Adelaide Enfield, DoH, DTED and DTEI. The community and other stakeholders will

be involved through a local reference group to provide advice on the strategy and associated documents.

A broad-based strategy will guide management of air quality and minimisation of community risks over the next two

decades, in harmony with economic development and population growth as projected in The 30-Year Plan for Greater

Adelaide.

Adelaide Watershed Water Quality Improvement Plan

The Adelaide Watershed WQIP forms the next component of the National Water Quality Management Strategy, following

from the Environmental Values (EVs) and Water Quality Objectives (WQOs) set by the Healthy Waters project, which has

shown there is a current gap between the existing water quality and the reasonable aspirations of the community.

The watershed is under pressure from population growth, increased demand and climate change, placing water quality at

greater risk. A plan is needed to manage these threats, so that water quality can be protected and improved for existing

and future demands.

This can be achieved, as agreed by the community, through the following water quality improvement projects both during

and beyond the life of the project:

behaviour change in the watershed and metropolitan community

clearly defined and understood stakeholder responsibilities for water quality management

action planning so the watershed continues to be an effective barrier to risks to end-of-system drinking water quality,

while also protecting and improving the environment within the catchment


30

further development of a cross agency collaboration to identify, oversee and evaluate water quality improvement

projects on

rural surface runoff and groundwater

urban stormwater

licensed discharges

impacts of flows

Managed aquifer recharge and recycled water schemes (in support for Water for Good)

Managed aquifer recharge (MAR) schemes are of increased strategic significance as a part of the federal and state

government strategies and initiatives regarding water management, including Water for Good and associated projects.

The number of MAR schemes in Adelaide has continued to grow over the last year. The focus on sourcing alternative

water resources to sustain Adelaide’s long-term water needs continues and the capture and reuse of stormwater and

increased utilisation of treated wastewater remains a high priority. Aquifers can provide a storage medium provided they

are suitable for the purpose.

While MAR has been undertaken in Adelaide for over 10 years, the performance of schemes is uncertain until

established and many unknowns remain in the short- and long-term impact of schemes. The EPA has taken a

collaborative approach with the proponents of MAR schemes, together with other agencies including DWLBC, NRM

Boards and DoH, to seek the best possible outcomes for all. The EPA is leading a project to streamline the regulatory

processes and reduce the regulatory burden on MAR scheme operators. The aim is to protect the health and safety of

the community along with the agreed environmental values associated with groundwater.

The EPA has been developing a new risk-based code of practice (CoP) for MAR, and this is due to be issued in 2010–11.

The new CoP will be applicable to all potential MAR schemes across South Australia, including treated wastewater. The

new code is based upon the Australian Guidelines for Water Recycling that has been produced under the National Water

Quality Management Strategy.

As part of the implementation of these initiatives and development of a CoP, the EPA has been reviewing its

requirements for development applications, works approvals and licences so managers of MAR schemes adequately

assess and manage the risks associated with these schemes.

Emergency response

The EPA responds to emergency pollution incidents when notified through the its emergency 24-hour pager number.

Emergency responses are of three types:

whole-of-government procedure as outlined in the State Emergency Management Plan which incorporates spills or

leaks of hazardous substances onto land or into non-marine waters, and is coordinated by emergency services

(police, fire and technical advice coordinators)

national response plan, which deals with oil or chemical spills at sea, and is coordinated by the Marine Group of DTEI

other environmental incidents that do not trigger either of these emergency response systems, including incidents

reported by EPA licence-holders, and some incidents reported by members of the public through the pollution

complaints line that requires an immediate assessment by the EPA.

During 2009–10, the EPA responded to 121 incidents through its emergency pollution incident response system, a 13%

increase in calls from the previous year (Figure 4). The bulk of the calls came from EPA licence-holders and members of

the public. Examples included:


large fire at Plastics Granulating Services in Cromwell Street, Kilburn. Approximately five megalitres of fire

wastewater entered stormwater drains and subsequently Barker Inlet wetlands. Issues with air-borne smoke and dust

settling over neighbourhood also arose.

diesel spill at Malvern due to a low speed-collision between two trucks rupturing one truck’s fuel tank

escape of 10,000 litres of effluent at Schumacher Street, Wingfield into stormwater system due to pump failure

fire at Rand Refrigeration, Wingfield with concerns of fire wastewater entering stormwater drain and subsequently

Barker Inlet wetlands.

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

55

60

Noise SiteContamination

Spills Air Quality MarinePollution

Other Waste Water

Figure 4 Emergency response—complaint category

31


32

Pollution complaints reports and enquiries

The EPA continues to maintain a pollution complaints reports and enquiries line (telephone 8204 2004, free call non

metro 1800 623 445) to receive calls about environmental concerns (see Table 3).

Depending on the nature of the complaint, the EPA’s response may be to:

provide verbal or written information to the caller

register a formal complaint for follow-up by an authorised officer

refer the information provided by the caller to another state or local government agency for action.

Table 3 Number of complaints received by the EPA

Type of complaint 2007–08 2008–09 2009–10

Air quality 994 762 646

Air and noise 74 86 63

Noise 939 1029 1186

Marine pollution 14 33 37

Water* 101 104 116

Waste 182 168 156

Other 95 149 187

Total 2399 2331 2391

* Most water complaints are handled directly by local government.

Enquiries hotline

In March 2010 the EPA began to record enquiries (see Table 4).

Depending on the nature of the enquiry, the EPA’s response may be to:

provide general information to the caller (verbal advice or mailing of information) or

assign the enquiry to an EPA specialist and/or authorised officer for follow up.


33

Table 4 Number of enquiries received by the EPA

Type of enquiry April 2010–June 2010

Air quality 55

Noise 118

Water quality 24

Waste 69

Complaint and enquiry follow-up 271

Site contamination 65

Licensing 238

Staff request 445

Other eg bottle deposits 477

Total 1762


34

IMPROVED REGULATION

The EPA is transparent and consistent in its decision making. The EPA works with business, industry, government and

the community to reach innovative and creative solutions to protect, restore and enhance the quality of the environment.

Partnership with industry

OneSteel–Whyalla

Throughout 2009–10, and despite the global financial crisis, OneSteel has progressed projects to continue the reduction

of the company’s environmental impact on the Whyalla community that started with Project Magnet (converted the

steelworks to operating with magnetite ore, with exports paying for the cost of conversion).

Key highlights for 2009–10 were:

the closure and remediation of the northern stockpile previously used to store export haematite ore and a source of

red dust

the demolition of numbers 1 and 2 screening plants as part of the continuing removal of Pellet Plant equipment made

redundant by Project Magnet

the storage and export of 200 000 million tonnes (MT) Iron Knob ore from the blast furnace wharf without any

adverse environmental impact

the continuation of the refurbishment program for the electrostatic precipitator in the basic oxygen steel (BOS)

making furnace.

The EPA continued to monitor fine particulates levels at two sites in Whyalla. The Walls Street site is close to industry

and used to assess its impact. The Schulz Reserve site is use to assess general PM10 levels in the township and for

NEPM reporting. Figure 5 shows the average PM10 concentrations against the Air NEPM standard. Analysis of this and

weather data indicates that the regional weather has a significant influence on the level of fine particulates observed at

Whyalla. For example, the levels of fine particulate material observed in the January to March 2010 quarter is significantly

lower than previous years as this quarter was cooler and more humid than previous years.

The EPA considers that the haematite export facility built as part of Project Magnet sets new benchmark standards for

bulk mineral storage and export projects.


0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009Year

Exc

eed

ence

s o

f 50

g/m

3

Walls StreetSchulz ReserveNEPM Standard

Note that in 2004, monitoring began at Walls Street in the mid-year, so data are available only for the

latter half of the year.

Figure 5 Exceedences of the national PM10 standard at Walls Street and Schulz Reserve. The PM10 standard

is 50 μg/m3 averaged over 24 hours, with a goal of no more than five exceedences per year.

OneSteel Whyalla Steelworks—Case study

OneSteel operates a fully integrated iron and steel works immediately north of the town of Whyalla. While activity

commenced on this site in 1901, steel making did not commence until 1965. OneSteel operate under the Whyalla

Steel Works Act 1958 (the Indenture). The Environmental Authorisation that covers this site is attached to the

Indenture as Schedule 3.

Nuisance dust

Until the end of 2007, OneSteel’s operations resulted in significant amenity loss for the residents of Eastern Whyalla

caused by haematite emissions (red dust), and this led to the formation of the Whyalla Red Dust Action Group

(WRDAG).

At the end of 2007 OneSteel converted the Pellet Plant from a dry haematite feed to a magnetite slurry feed and

commissioned the new export ore receival, storage and loading system. The transition to magnetite feed had an

immediate impact on the generation of nuisance dust and allowed the EPA and OneSteel to agree to a program of

capital works to eliminate specific sources of nuisance dust. These were decontamination and dismantling of

redundant haematite handling equipment, decontamination and revegetation of the Northern Stockpile area and

refurbishment of the three BOS electrostatic precipitators.

The first two projects are substantially complete and the third BOS electrostatic precipitator is scheduled to be

refurbished in 2012. The impact of all this work has been the elimination of the red dust problem and a gradual

reduction of the long-term staining so long associated with Eastern Whyalla. The amenity improvement has resulted

in WRDAG voluntarily disbanding.

Fine dust

The EPA operates two fine particulate (PM10) monitoring stations at Whyalla; one at Walls Street which focuses on

OneSteel’s impact, while the other at Schulz Reserve looks at the background levels. Of concern to the EPA was the

large number of days over the Air NEPM target for PM10.

The EPA’s initial view was that this was solely attributable to OneSteel’s operation, however analysis of the data

35


36

showed the problem was more complex.

Trend analysis for the both the Walls Street data and Schulz Reserve data showed a common underlying trend

impacting on both sites. Examination of meteorological data showed that the regional weather was a major

determinant in observed PM10 figures at both monitoring sites.

This model has allowed the EPA and OneSteel to better understand this issue and answer such questions as: Why

were there only two high PM10 readings in the first three months of 2010 when the EPA would expect a minimum of

six?’ The answer is that this summer it was cooler at Whyalla and more humid than previous years.

That is not to say that the OneSteel site is not a source of PM10. The EPA and OneSteel are continuing to explore the

most appropriate method for measuring the benefit of ongoing dust-reduction projects.

Adelaide Brighton Cement—Birkenhead

During 2009–10, the EPA continued its involvement with the Adelaide Brighton Cement (ABC) Community Liaison Group.

Membership included representatives from the local community, local council, ABC and the EPA. The group continued to

provide an interface for all parties to identify and address issues of environmental concern.

The latest ABC licence (2007) was reviewed during 2009–10 and changes were made to several licence conditions with

significant input to the process from the community. The licence condition changes were to enable a more logical and

informative way of reporting ambient and stack emission monitoring results. The changes will allow ABC to report more

useful information about overall plant performance in regard to air emissions.

The company continued to undertake site works to reduce dust and noise emissions from the Birkenhead facility by

progressing the compliance actions in its environment improvement program (EIP) of February 2009. The EPA recently

reviewed the program in liaison with ABC to ensure continuous improvement in environmental performance. Work

undertaken during 2009–10 included the identification of noise sources from site operations, the removal of asbestos and

the improvement of building structures to reduce dust emissions.

ABC is continuing to address community concerns about fugitive dust emissions, including planning to install a state-of-

the-art truck-wash facility with installation to be completed in 2010.

Linwood Quarry–Marino/Hallett Cove

During 2009–10 the EPA continued to participate in six-monthly Boral Ltd (Boral), Linwood Quarry community meetings,

and six-monthly meetings of the Joint Working Group. The Joint Working Group membership included an independent

chair, and local community (both Marino and Hallett Cove), City of Marion Council, Boral, EPA and PIRSA

representatives.

The EPA undertook numerous inspections of the quarry during 2009–10, and identified dragout as an area for

improvement. This improvement requirement is being delivered through an EIP. The approved EIP will result in extensive

upgrades to the existing truck-wash by the end of the 2010.

Penrice Quarry–Penrice/Angaston

During 2009–10 the EPA continued to participate in the monthly Penrice Community Consultation Group meetings.

Membership included an independent chair, local community, council and Penrice Soda Holdings Ltd (Penrice)

representatives. The EPA and PIRSA are invited guests.

To better understand offsite impacts associated with the quarry operations, the EPA undertook both PM10 and noise

monitoring.


Penrice’s EPA licence requires continual reduction in dust emissions. This requirement is being delivered via an EIP.

Improvements to date include a new dust suppression system on the aggregate plant, the sealing of the main internal

road, application of suppressants on product stockpiles and the installation of a dust monitoring system to monitor dust

for process control purposes.

Penrice attempted to address community concerns related to noise. An extensive noise monitoring and modelling

program was completed, which identified improvements to further reduce noise impacts on neighbours.

Nyrstar–Port Pirie

Nyrstar operates one of the world’s largest lead smelting facilities in Port Pirie. Historically, the smelter has been the

source of the well-documented lead contamination in the township and unacceptably high levels of blood lead in the local

community.

During 2009–10, the EPA continued its significant involvement as a key partner in the tenby10 child blood lead reduction

program, which aims to ensure that at least 95% of children aged under five years in Port Pirie achieve a blood lead level

(BLL) of less than the World Health Organisation’s goal of 10 micrograms per decilitre, by the end of 2010. The EPA

continued to provide valuable input into the tenby10 Executive, Working Party and the whole-of-government Case

Management Program.

The major impact of Nyrstar’s operations continues to centre around fugitive airborne emissions of lead and the impact

this has on BLLs. A key feature of Nyrstar’s revised EPA Licence (developed during 2008) reflects the need to work

towards sustained reductions in airborne lead in support of the tenby10 goal. This requirement is mandated in the licence

though an EIP which is updated regularly with agreed compliance actions aimed at reducing emissions. The Blast

Furnace fume capture system, improvements to the operation of the Slag Fuming and Sinter Plants and the intermediate

materials elimination program (Quit the Pit) are examples of successful actions undertaken to date.

Whilst significant improvements in airborne lead levels were achieved during the period 2007–09, EPA monitoring

revealed there was a reversal of the lead in air trend between July and December 2009. Figure 6 (below) shows the

annual averaged particulate lead concentrations at Port Pirie monitoring sites. DoH data from June 2010 indicated a

similar reversal in BLLs which may be attributable in part to the increased lead in air. The EPA continues to work closely

with Nyrstar to understand why this occurred and to ensure future agreed EIP actions support ongoing reductions of lead

in air. As a result, in June 2010 Nyrstar was advised by the EPA of a formal investigation into the increase in airborne

lead at Port Pirie and any link with operations at the site.

0.00

1.00

2.00

3.00

4.00

5.00

2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009

Year

Conce

ntratio

n

g/m

3

PtPirie West Primary School

Oliver Street

Ellen Street

Frank Green Park

NEPM Standard

Figure 6 Annual averaged particulate lead concentrations at Port Pirie monitoring sites

37


38

Water Quality

Review of the Environment Protection (Water Quality) Policy 2003

The Environment Protection (Water Quality Policy) 2003 (Water Quality EPP) has been in operation since October 2003.

It was the first of the new environment protection policies designed to extend the provisions of the EP Act into specific

aspects of the environment (water, air, noise and waste).

For the past six years the Water Quality EPP has provided the basis for the regulation and management of the quality of

SA’s inland, underground and marine waters. It is a flexible document that allows standards to be changed without undue

delay and can create specific controls to deal with particular situations. It is also used regularly by local government as

part of the general stormwater management programs. However, experience over the past six years suggests that some

central clauses in the policy are not achieving the best outcomes and are in need of review.

A discussion paper was prepared canvasing changes to a number of clauses, in response to which 20 submissions were

received. Most were in support of the changes proposed. Considerable work has been undertaken during 2009–10

culminating in the development of drafting instructions reflecting the results of this preliminary consultation. Additional

consultation with industry, governments and the general public will occur 2010–11.

Water for Good

Water for Good outlines the actions to be taken to ensure SA’s water supplies are secure, safe and reliable, and the

protection of water quality is an integral part of this water security.

The Water for Good actions where the EPA is a partner, address issues such as desalination, the use of wastewater and

other recycled water, water quality data and reporting, and the reviewing of planning policies and other measures used to

protect water resources in the Mount Lofty Ranges Watershed. The EPA also contributes to Water for Good actions

addressing stormwater and wastewater master plans, management of the Lower Lakes, and regional demand and supply

plans.

The EPA is the lead agency for two of the actions in Water for Good Actions 49 and 63.

Action 49—Develop water quality improvement plans for the Mount Lofty Ranges (MLR) Watershed by 2011 and

other critical water catchments across the state by 2017

The EPA is currently developing a WQIP for the MLR Watershed. This process follows on from the Healthy Waters

project covering the whole Adelaide and MLR NRM Region. Healthy Waters identified water quality requirements for

different purposes in specific water bodies, eg drinking water, protecting aquatic ecosystems or irrigation supply. In

addition, the WQIP has begun the process of identifying risks to water quality, existing actions being used for its

protection, gaps in water quality management, and strategies to address these gaps.

To ensure community needs are incorporated into the plan, stakeholders (agencies, SA Water, Adelaide and MLR NRM

Board, industry and local government) have formed a steering committee which has identified outcomes needed, a

behaviour change focus and objectives to inform the project business plan. This plan has been approved by the Water

Security Council. In 2010–11, a broader range of interested organisations and people will be approached to help ensure

the plan is a practical one that will be effectively implemented.

This work follows the development of the Adelaide Coastal WQIP as described on page 19.

Other WQIPs will be developed with stakeholders on a priority basis (and subject to the provision of funding) during the

work to undertake Action 63 of Water for Good.


39

Action 63—The Environment Protection Authority will develop environmental values for priority water bodies

across the state by 2014

This action is a precursor to Action 49 in that EVs and WQOs must be established prior to the development of a WQIP.

The Healthy Waters project is continuing to identify EVs for surface and ground waters in Adelaide and MLR NRM region.

The work is described separately in this report.

The EPA is identifying priority water bodies in conjunction with other stakeholders such as SA Water, NRM boards,

PIRSA and DWLBC. Dawesley Creek EVs will be required to support PIRSA’s plans for Brukunga rehabilitation: some

work has already been done by PIRSA and EPA, but further cooperative approaches are required involving other

stakeholders.

EVs for rest of SA Murray–Darling Basin region, in particular the Lower Lakes, tributaries and the Coorong, will be set

despite challenges presented by drought and unreliable water flows over the next few years.

The EPA response to Water for Good action 63 includes developing links with other NRM Boards across South Australia

and working with them to integrate the development of EVs in the strategic and business plans for their regions.

Review of National Water Quality Management Strategy

The main policy objective of the National Water Quality Management Strategy (NWQMS) is to achieve sustainable use of

Australia’s water resources by protecting and enhancing their quality while maintaining economic and social

development.

Since 1992 a suite of NWQMS documents have been developed that provides the framework for water quality

management to protect human and environmental health in all the jurisdictions across Australia. The documents have

formed the basis for the water-related policies, codes of practice and guidelines developed by the EPA.

The bulk of the NWQMS documents were produced in the 1990s with additional guidelines (eg Australian Guidelines for

Water Recycling) and some updates undertaken since. The need for significant review and revision of a number of the

guidelines was acknowledged at the national level to ensure the documents remain relevant, taking into account research

discoveries, technological advances, changing settings and new approaches.

This revision and review are now underway and the EPA is involved in the process as a member of the review steering

committee and working groups for the Australian and New Zealand Guidelines for Fresh and Marine Water Quality, the

Australian Guidelines for Water Quality Monitoring and Reporting, and the Guidelines for Groundwater Protection. This

involvement ensures that South Australian learning is contributed and the resulting guidelines are relevant to the state.

Murray–Darling Basin Plan

The Murray–Darling Basin Authority (MDBA) is drafting a basin plan to improve management of water resources and

water quality. The EPA has been contributing to the drafting of the basin plan. The major contributions have been in

providing water quality monitoring data and scientific knowledge on the River Murray and Lower Lakes. Drought and poor

water resource management in the Murray–Darling basin have led to severe environmental impacts on the lower River

Murray, Lower Lakes and the Coorong.

Wastewater lagoon guideline

The draft Guidelines for wastewater dagoons was released for public consultation in March 2010. This guideline replaces

the Wastewater and evaporation lagoon construction guideline (2004).

The new guideline adopts a risk-based approach to determine the minimum lining, construction quality assurance and

leakage detection requirements for wastewater lagoon construction for the protection of human health and the


40

environment. When completed, it is expected the guideline will facilitate transparency and consistency in the EPA

assessment of wastewater lagoon proposals.

It is expected this guideline will be incorporated into the Water Quality EPP, which is under review.

Wastewater overflow code of practice

The Code of practice for wastewater overflows (Wastewater Code) provides guidance and in some cases instruction to

assist wastewater system operators to prevent the occurrence of overflows whenever possible and to minimise frequency

and volume of such overflows.

The Wastewater Code was drafted in consultation with SA Water, United Water and local government to support the

objects of the Water Quality EPP and assist the wastewater industry in complying with its provisions.

The Wastewater Code has been incorporated through amendment of the Water Quality EPP which was approved by the

Minister for Environment and Conservation and published in the South Australian Government Gazette on 29 October

2009.

Community wastewater management systems

The EPA plays an important environmental advisory and regulatory role in the management of local government

community wastewater management systems (CWMS), via EPA authorisations, development assessments and

membership of the Local Government Association CWMS Management Committee. Through these measures the EPA is

leading the improvement of the environmental performance and sustainability of CWMS schemes.

Given ageing or a lack of systems within townships across the state, the EPA has helped influence the federal and state

governments to subsidise upgrades to existing systems or build new systems where previously none existed. The

resulting key environmental benefits include preventing or minimising groundwater and surface water contamination, and

advancing the National Water Initiative and South Australia’s Water for Good plan for increasing reuse of treated

wastewater. With the EPA’s efforts forming part of a whole-of-government approach, the majority of the projects funded

under the National Water Initiative (known as the Statewide Recycling Water project) will be completed in 2010, resulting

in up to eight gigalitres (GL) per annum of recycled water (of the targeted 12 GL per annum by 2050) being made

available for irrigation. Furthermore, the higher regulatory burden once required for the ageing systems will also be

reduced.

National and State Policy Reform

Red-tape reduction

A major reduction in red tape facing businesses is a key feature of the government’s economic development strategy.

The EPA’s commitment to best practice environmental regulation is consistent with this strategy.

The EPA’s contribution to the government’s first red-tape reduction plan was a direct saving to businesses of $2 million

per annum. As part of the government’s second red-tape reduction plan, the EPA is committed to generating a further

$2 million per annum of savings for businesses by April 2012. This will largely be delivered by streamlining administration

of licensing under the EP Act and through reforms to radiation protection and control licences and permits under the RPC

Act.

These reforms are part of a continuing improvement program for licensing under the EP Act that has previously included

the introduction of an integrated pollution control licensing system, additional incentives for improved environmental

performance, major reforms to the licence fee structure and the introduction of a tiered licensing system with licences that

pose the least risk being subject to fewer inspections and less demanding licence conditions.


41

Reforms to radiation protection and control licences and permits are at an early stage, focusing on a review of regulations

under the RPC Act including the regulation of uranium mining.

Other initiatives completed during 2009–10 included a redesign of the EPA’s website and the consolidation of five sets of

Regulations under the EP Act. These initiatives have reduced time spent by businesses accessing required information,

with estimated savings for industry of about $170 000 per annum.

Five-year rolling review of regulation

In November 2009, the EPA Board endorsed a work plan for delivering the EPA contribution to the government’s five-

year rolling review of regulation. The plan includes the review of the EP Act, the RPC Act, Environment Protection

Regulations, and a number of codes and guidelines.

The regulatory review work plan is incorporated into business plans and is supported by an implementation guidance

document. A total of 23 EPA officers have received training by the Office of Best Practice Regulation to undertake

regulatory impact assessments.

Contribution to the Environment Protection and Heritage Council (EPHC)

The EPA continues to coordinate South Australia’s participation in the Environment Protection and Heritage Council

(EPHC), incorporating the National Environment Protection Council (NEPC). EPHC comprises the Commonwealth

Minister for Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts (representing the Commonwealth), one Minister from each state/

territory and New Zealand, and the President of the Australian Local Government Association. The Minister for

Environment and Conservation represents South Australia.

The EPHC was established in June 2001 and NEPC was established under the Commonwealth National Environment

Protection Council Act 1994 and the mirror act in South Australia, the National Environment Protection Council (South

Australia) Act 1995. NEPC, through the NEPC Acts, has the capacity to prepare enforceable national environment

protection measures (NEPMs). Each state and territory is required to report annually on the implementation of the various

NEPMs within their jurisdictions.

NEPC and EPHC are supported by respective standing committees. The Chief Executive of the EPA is the South

Australian representative on the standing committees and also chairs the National Chemicals Environmental

Management (NChEM) Working Group of EPHC. Some of the most significant achievements of EPHC during 2009–10

have been the completion and release of the National Waste Policy, the National Waste Report, and a product

stewardship scheme for televisions and computers. It also completed, and submitted for approval to the Council of

Australian Governments (COAG), implementation plans in response to three recommendations by the Productivity

Commission in its report on plastics and chemicals.

Through EPHC, South Australia initiated an investigation into the options for managing the environmental impacts of

beverage containers, including a national container deposit system. The EPA also participated in the review of a number

of NEPMs, including those for Ambient Air Quality, Air Toxics, and the Movement of Controlled Wastes.

Review of the National Environment Protection (Ambient Air Quality) Measure

The statutory 10-year review of the National Environment Protection (Ambient Air Quality) Measure (Air NEPM) is in its

final stages. A first discussion paper was released in 2007, dealing with structure, policy and performance aspects of the

measure.

A second paper is due to be considered by the EPHC at its meeting in July 2010 and if endorsed, will be released for

broad consultation. This paper addresses the national environment protection standards and goals for the Air NEPM

pollutants in the light of current health knowledge. It points to possible tightening of some standards such as those for

ozone and PM2.5 and considers whether changes to the suite of pollutants may be needed. However, a full consideration

of these would be required if the EPHC decides to initiate any variations to the Air NEPM.


42

A national consultancy has been established to develop a method for benefit–cost analyses (BCA) for variations to the Air

NEPM. It is anticipated this methodology will be submitted to the National Review Working Group by August 2010, with a

preliminary BCA focusing on the most likely variations.

Mid-term review of the National Environment Protection (Air Toxics) Measure

The National Environment Protection (Air Toxics) Measure (Air Toxics NEPM) began in April 2004 to acquire data in a

nationally consistent manner for jurisdictions to assess air quality and to provide data for the establishment of national air

toxics standards in the future. The air toxics used as indicators are benzene, toluene, formaldehyde, xylenes, and benzo

(a) pyrene.

To test the progress of the implementation of the Air Toxics NEPM, a mid-term review has been conducted to:

summarise monitoring conducted and proposed by jurisdictions

examine what the data shows

look for difficulties in implementation

suggest any changes that might be required at this stage.

Data available since commencement of the Air Toxics NEPM allowed the review to make findings and minor

recommendations designed to improve and facilitate further implementation of the NEPM. A draft report was prepared in

mid-2009 and once approved by EPHC will be available through their website <www.ephc.gov.au>. It is expected that

modifications to the Air Toxics NEPM will allow jurisdictions more flexibility in collecting air toxics data and implementing

this NEPM.

South Australia has conducted and reviewed a desktop study of emissions as required by the Air Toxics NEPM.

However, some air toxics monitoring has been conducted associated with hot spot programs but not strictly in

accordance with the NEPM. This is similar to most other jurisdictions across Australia where a variety of monitoring

methods have been used.

Targeted review of the licence fee system

The EPA introduced a new licence fee system (LFS) on 1 July 2008 and implemented this system over 2008–09. The

EPA committed to reviewing the system after its first year of operation and this review is now complete.

During the first year of implementation, the EPA received very few complaints from licensees about the LFS. This

provided confidence in the new LFS. However, it was recognised that there may be further refinements that could be

made. The principles on which LFS is based—user pays (the cost of the EPA’s regulatory effort for each industry sector)

and polluter pays (fees charged on loads of emitted pollutants)—were considered sound and not included within the

review.

The review was aimed at determining possible refinements to the LFS while keeping in mind the LFS objectives of being

based on the user pays and polluter pays principles. It comprised an internal assessment comparing the LFS model with

the actual fees charged and a survey which provided an opportunity for stakeholders to provide comment on their

concerns about the LFS.

The review identified a number of issues that were divided into two categories:

short-term, urgent issues which focus on resolving outstanding anomalies in the LFS such as clarifying the fee that

applies in certain situations. The EPA has begun the process of amending the LFS to address these issues and

make it fairer and more transparent.

Longer-term issues that relate to the fundamental principles of the model such as reassessing the regulatory effort

used to set the fee levels. The EPA will use information from the review to inform any broader legislative reviews.

http://www.ephc.gov.au/


43

Progressive implementation of Landfill Guidelines

It has been three years since the publication of the Guidelines for the environmental management of landfill facilities

(municipal solid waste and commercial and industrial general waste) 2007 (Landfill Guidelines). The Landfill Guidelines

were applied to all new landfill developments from 2 January 2007 and by 1 July 2008 proponents were to have either

closed non-compliant landfills or to have put in place an EPA-approved closure plan for implementation. The EPA has

continued to work closely with local government and private landfill operators in order to ensure the requirements of the

Landfill Guidelines are met in accordance with the implementation schedule.

A date of 1 July 2010 was scheduled by which all new landfills are to comply with the Landfill Guidelines and by which

existing landfills were to be compliant or have a compliance date agreed with the EPA.

Further progress has been made on the continued implementation of the Landfill Guidelines. Since the release of the

Landfill Guidelines, of the 186 operational landfills:

53 landfills were closed prior to 1 July 2008

96 landfills are intending to close between 1 July 2008 and 1 July 2010

10 landfills are intending to close and cap sites by 1 July 2010 but will also remain operational with compliant landfill

cells operating from 1 July 2010 onwards

28 landfills are intending to remain operational post 1 July 2010.

The EPA will continue to work with the 28 landfill operators to ensure a continuous improvement approach towards waste management in line with the Waste EPP.


Figure 7 South Australian confirmed landfill status June 2010

Landfill gas

A key environmental and human health risk associated with landfill is the generation and offsite emission of landfill gas

(LFG) which can continue for many decades after closure. Risks include accumulation in confined spaces leading to the

potential for asphyxiation and/or explosion, and contribution to accelerated climate change.

The EPA wrote to the larger landfills to request they undertake a site-specific risk review of LFG management measures.

The EPA is receiving and reviewing these plans to ensure the sites have appropriate procedures in place and landfill

operators are taking on their responsibilities in this regard. To support this, the EPA provided advice in circulars and in

presentations to the LGA.

The EPA provides advice on developments in relation to the importance of maintaining appropriate buffers as a key risk-

management measure and LFG risk assessment and audit to ensure encroachment of development only occurs where

the land is confirmed to be suitable for the proposed use. The EPA is developing an information sheet to provide more

detail to developers and planners.

44


45

South Australia’s modern landfills are highly engineered with effective LFG management systems that include, in some

cases, the extraction of methane gas to generate power.

Seacliff/Marino/Kingston Park landfill gas investigation—Case study

On Friday 12 February 2010 the EPA was advised by a site contamination auditor of a significant hazardous

circumstance (as required by the EPA’s Guidelines for the site contamination audit system) at an audit site in the

Seacliff area. The notification related to the presence of methane gas, at depth, at or above potentially explosive

levels both on and off the audit site, including in two reserves (Les Scott and John Mathwin Reserves) in the City of

Holdfast Bay district.

Landfill gas is formed from the breakdown of putrescible waste over time, and at certain concentrations is potentially

explosive (the explosive range of methane, for example, is five to 15 percent (by volume) in the presence of at least

12 percent oxygen). The rate of generation of landfill gas will depend on the nature of the waste, the time since the

waste was deposited and conditions in the landfill, such as moisture and oxygen levels. The migration of landfill gas

through soils will depend on the rate of generation of gas as well as the soil geology of the sub-surface/capping in the

vicinity of the waste. Landfill gas can migrate substantial distances from where the waste was deposited and will

follow the path of least resistance. The gas has the potential to accumulate in confined spaces such as service

trenches, basements and isolated rooms.

Typically a landfill will cease generating landfill gas approximately 30 years from the cessation of landfilling activities.

However, this timeframe will vary depending on the factors described above. The landfill gas that was discovered

related to waste that was deposited in the area by the former Brighton Council, between approximately 1950s and

late 1970s to early 1980s.

Upon becoming aware of the presence of the methane gas, the EPA immediately carried out a qualitative risk

assessment to determine the level of response that was warranted. Although the likelihood of a gas explosion was

considered to be extremely low, the consequence was determined to be potentially high and it was determined that

further onground action was required to rule out the potential risk of harm to the people frequenting the area.

Key stakeholders including the Cities of Marion and Holdfast Bay, Metropolitan Fire Service (MFS), Department for

Education and Community Services (DECS), Minister for Environment and Conservation and the local member of

parliament were consulted with on the issue. A joint response involving EPA, MFS and both local councils (the

response team) was planned and implemented whereby testing for the presence of landfill gas was offered at all

properties within 100 metres of the former landfill. This sampling commenced on the fourth working day after the EPA

was alerted to the issue by the site contamination auditor.

Householder agreement was received to test approximately half of the 158 properties in the potentially affected area.

Landfill gas was not found at any of the tested properties. The public response was positive and a number of

residents provided EPA staff with historical site information. The EPA is now following up with the City of Holdfast

Bay, as the successor of the former Brighton Council responsible for placing the waste, to ensure that the former

landfill is properly assessed and managed to minimise potential future risk of harm to people frequenting the area.

The site plan identifies the area of landfill gas assessment undertaken (within the red boundary) by the response

team and the approximate lateral extent of the area of where landfilling activities occurred (within the blue boundary,

the solid line is the known extent and the dashed line is the estimated extent of the waste).


Seacliff/Marino/Kingston Park Landfill Gas Investigation—Case study

Figure 8 Seacliff, Marino, Kingston Park landfill gas sampling area

Waste management in unincorporated areas of SA

The EPA is leading a cross-agency working group comprising a number of key stakeholders representing various local

and state government agencies as well as non-government agencies to develop a waste management strategy for the

unincorporated areas of South Australia.

The working group has developed a funding model and scope for an investigation into existing waste management

practices that will inform improved waste management in the unincorporated areas of the state.

Key objectives for the waste management strategy are to:

46


47

promote the waste hierarchy and responsible waste management practices taking into account regional differences

by:

encouraging waste avoidance and minimisation rather than disposal to landfill

increasing the rate of resource recovery and recycling

educating remote communities on sustainable waste management practices.

investigate current and future funding allocations for waste management services and infrastructure, and highlight

potential synergies between remote communities’ waste management services

provide sound recommendations for targeted areas for funding that would be of maximum benefit to the communities.

The development of the waste management strategy for the unincorporated areas of South Australia will support the

promotion and implementation of sustainable waste management practices within these areas of South Australia.


Container deposit legislation

Container deposit legislation (CDL) compliance officers conducted 537 retail inspections to detect and remove non

compliant containers in 2009-10.

The refund increase from 5 cents to 10 cents in September 2008 was a catalyst for continued increase in return rates for

beverage containers. The return rate for 2009-10 was 80.1%, compared with 75.8% in 2008-09, and 69.9% in 2007-08,

which preceded the refund increase.

Table 5 Percentage return rates for beverage containers

Year % Return

2006–07 70.6

2007–08 69.9

2008–09 75.8

2009–10 80.1

Annual Return Rates

69.570.6

69.9

75.8

80.1

64

66

68

70

72

74

76

78

80

82

2005/06 2006/07 2007/08 2008/09 2009/10

Year

Per

cen

tag

e

Total

Figure 9 CDL annual return rates

Approximately 619 million beverage containers were returned to collection depots during 2009–10. This is approximately

43 million more containers returned during 2009–10 compared with 2008–09. Approximately 49 800 tonnes of beverage

containers were sent to super collectors for recycling. Liquid paperboard had the greatest increase, with the return rate

increasing by 89% compared with 2008–09 (see Table 6).

Since the fund increase to 10 cents, approximately 1.125 billion containers have been recovered for recycling which is

approximately 91 300 tonnes that may have otherwise ended up as landfill or litter.

48


49

Table 6 Return rates 2009–10 (and comparison with 2008-09) for the various container types and prior to

refund increase

Container type % Return Comparison with 2008-09 Prior to refund increase

Glass 84.3% +5.2% +5.8%

Aluminium 85.6% +2.7% +8.3%

Polyethylene terephthalate or PET 73.9% +3.5% +10.3%

Liquid paperboard 58.1% +8.5% +22.79

High-density polyethylene or HDPE 61.3% +10.4% +12.1%

Plastic bag legislation compliance

The EPA administers the Plastic Shopping Bags (Waste Avoidance) Act 2008. In 2009–10 the EPA detected a small

number of minor breaches from opportunistic interstate traders that had not been subject to the same level of legislation

promotion as South Australian traders. No formal compliance action was taken in these instances, other than the non-

compliant bags were removed from distribution.

Development assessment

The EPA coordinates the assessment of development applications of environmental significance referred by local

government or the Development Assessment Commission (DAC). This year a total of 364 applications were assessed by

the EPA (see Table 7) with 96% of all responses being provided within the statutory timeframe as prescribed by the

Development Act 1993 and the associated Development Regulations. The EPA provides advice on development

applications and, in certain cases, can direct that proposals be refused or certain conditions be attached to ensure the

environment and community are protected.


50

Table 7 Assessment of development applications

2008–09 2009–10 Development

application type Description

No. On time

(%) No.

On time (%)

Schedule 8 Item 9 Wind farms 7 100 1 100

Schedule 8 Item 10(a) ‘Non-complying’ development in a water-protection area

72 100 44 93

Schedule 8 Item 10(b) Schedule 21: Activities of environmental significance

95 93 81 96

Schedule 8 Item 11 Schedule 22: Activities of major environmental significance

179 99 139 98

Regulation 29 Land division 68 94 57 96

Section 49 Crown development by state agencies

30 90 42 90

Totals/averages 451 96 364 96

Assessment of major developments and projects

The EPA also assesses proposals declared by the Minister for Urban Development and Planning to be of major

environmental, social or economic importance. These major developments and projects must be referred to the EPA if

they include an activity of environmental significance, as prescribed in Schedule 1 of the EP Act. However, the minister

refers most major developments and projects to the EPA for assessment and advice on potential environmental impacts

associated with such development proposals. Documentation relating to the following major projects referred to the EPA

during 2009–10 for assessment are:

Buckland Park township

Cape Bauer ecotourism resort and rural residential development

Mannum Waters marina and residential development

Olympic Dam Expansion

Port Stanvac (Adelaide) Desalination Plant

Mixed-use development at Anzac Highway/Marion Road, Plympton

Shopping centre and residential apartment complex at 88 O’Connell Street, North Adelaide.

Development policy

The EPA regularly reviews proposed amendments to council development plans by assessing Statements of Intent

(SOIs), development plan amendments (DPAs) and Section 30 Development Act reviews, to encourage both councils

and the Minister for Urban Development and Planning to adopt development assessment policies that result in

sustainable development and protection of the environment. During the year, the EPA assessed 31 SOIs, five ministerial

DPAs, 46 local council DPAs and one local council Section 30 review.

The EPA also contributes to the development of regional planning strategies and master plans that form part of the South

Australian Planning Strategy established under the Development Act. The planning strategy provides guidance to


51

councils in reviewing their development plans and, therefore, has a direct impact on local development. During the year,

the EPA contributed to the development of the following regional planning strategies, master plans and better

development plan libraries:

The 30-Year Plan for Greater Adelaide

Structure Plans—State Significant Areas

Limestone Coast Region Plan

Water Security Plan—Water For Good

Better Development Plan Library Version 5

Whyalla Structure Plan

Port Pirie Master Plan

Port Augusta Structure Plan.

Aquaculture

The Aquaculture Act 2001 became operational in July 2002. The administration of this Act is the responsibility of the

Department of Primary Industries and Resources of South Australia (PIRSA). However, the Aquaculture Act stipulates

statutory requirements that must be met by the EPA, such as assessment and provision of comments on aquaculture

licence applications, variations of licence conditions and lease conversions. During the reporting period, 48 licence

applications and one lease conversion were assessed.

The EPA also addresses and responds to the statutory requirements of the Development Act and to general aquaculture

issues. It is represented on the Aquaculture Advisory Committee, which advises the minister responsible for

administering the Aquaculture Act.

Mining applications

The EPA reviews mining lease applications submitted to PIRSA under the Mining Act 1971.

Nine Extractive Mineral Referrals were received in 2009–10. The EPA reviewed 6 Environmental Impact Reports (EIR)

and draft Statement of Environmental Objectives (SEO) as referred to the EPA via the Petroleum and Geothermal Energy

Act 2000.


52

Table 8 Mining application reviews (non-uranium and uranium)

Company Project Action taken by EPA in 2009–10

Hillgrove Copper Pty Ltd Kanmantoo Copper Review of works approval and licence applications

Polymetals (Operations) Pty Ltd

White Dam Gold Review of licence application

OneSteel Manufacturing Pty Ltd

Iron Chieftain Advice to PIRSA re mining lease & miscellaneous purposes licence applications

Heathgate Resources Pty Ltd Beverley North, field leach trial Review of retention lease application and advice to PIRSA

Heathgate Resources Pty Ltd Beverley North, production proposal Review of mining lease application/public environment report, advice to PIRSA

Uranium One Australia Pty Ltd Honeymoon Uranium Mine Project, groundwater/ raffinate treatment plant (construction only)

Review of works approval

Table 9 Environment impact reports and statement of environmental objectives reviews

Company Project Action taken by EPA in 2009–10

KJM Contractors Pty Ltd Cooper Basin logistic support hub Reviewed EIR/SEO and advice to PIRSA

Geodynamic Pty Ltd Innamincka trial 1-MW geothermal power plant

Reviewed EIR/SEO and advice to PIRSA

APA Group Moomba to Sydney ethane pipeline Reviewed existing EIR/SEO and advice to PIRSA

Santos Cooper Basin production and processing operations

Reviewed existing EIR/SEO and advice to PIRSA

Santos Cooper Basin drilling and well operations

Reviewed existing EIR/SEO and advice to PIRSA

KJM Contractors Pty Ltd Cooper Basin logistic support hub Reviewed EIR/SEO and advice to PIRSA

Olympic Dam expansion

The Olympic Dam Expansion project is the largest development project that has ever been proposed in South Australia.

Not only does the project incorporate a new open-cut mine with a predicted life of 100 years, but it also involves the

construction of considerable associated infrastructure to support the mining operation (eg a desalination plant, smelting

facilities, rail lines, airport, landing facility, electricity transmission, gas and water pipelines, port facilities, worker camp,

expanded Roxby Downs township).

During the latter months of 2008–09 the EPA worked intensively in conjunction with DEH and ZWSA to review the

Olympic Dam Expansion Environmental Impact Statement. The EPA’s consolidated comments on the environmental


53

impact statement (EIS) were completed in July 2009. Comments were incorporated into a whole-of-state government

submission on the EIS which was made public through the Department of Planning and Local Government (DPLG) in

August 2010.

The EPA, along with DEH and ZWSA, raised 122 specific comments and questions about the EIS with the most

significant concerns relating to the desalination plant, groundwater impacts, radiation, tailings storage, greenhouse gas

emissions, air quality impacts, noise impacts and waste management.

Adelaide Desalination Plant

The Adelaide Desalination Project is regulated by the EPA in two distinct phases for the 2009–10:

the construction phase

the operational phase

as two closely related but separate projects as they have different environmental management issues and require

different types of regulation.

The EPA has taken a collaborative approach to regulating the project and worked closely with AdelaideAqua and SA

Water throughout this period. This has been done to ensure that the highest standards of environmental management

and regulation are applied to all phases of the project.

As well as working with the applicants to effectively regulate any environmental impacts, the EPA has worked with

interstate environmental regulators. EPA staff visited similar large-scale seawater reverse osmosis desalination plants in

Western Australia and Queensland, and met with the environmental regulators to learn from their experience how to

improve the way the Adelaide desalination plant is regulated and the environment can be protected.

High environmental standards were set in the development approval stage and have been included in the design and

construction project requirements.

The construction phase is subject to several EPA environmental authorisations with conditions that must be complied

with. The dredging works in particular were subject to extremely stringent environmental criteria to protect the marine

environment. The innovative methods of offshore drilling and dredging met these conditions and environmental impacts

were minimised.

The operational phase of the desalination plant has ye to start. However, work is being undertaken on the EPA licence

and regulatory structure. The applicant applied for a licence in December 2009 and the EPA advertised that it had

received the application in January 2010 to seek public input on the licence conditions.

The licence will set tight compliance criteria to achieve a high standard of environmental protection for the Gulf St

Vincent. There are also stringent monitoring requirements on the licensee to prove that the discharge will be according to

the modelling demonstrated, and that the environment will be protected.

The EPA is committed to open and transparent regulation and as such has committed to making the monitoring data from

the operational desalination plant available to the general public.

The 30-Year Plan for Greater Adelaide—EPA role

The 30-Year Plan for Greater Adelaide establishes a vision and plan for the growth and development of the greater

Adelaide region over the next three decades whilst protecting the region’s environment, heritage, and character. This

plan was released for public and agency consultation in August to September 2009. It was finalised and approved by the

state government in February 2010.


54

The EPA assisted the DPLG with preparation of The 30-Year Plan and ensured matters relating to protection of the

environment were included in the final version. The EPA Board’s Local Government Committee also successfully worked

with the LGA to highlight the potential for increased levels of complaints, particularly in relation to noise, that may arise

from higher-density residential living through transit oriented developments (TOD) and infill development.

Consequently, The 30-Year Plan contains policies to:

address site contamination and the potential noise and air quality impacts associated with high density development

ensure development is undertaken a sufficient distance from landfills

protect vulnerable catchments in the Mount Lofty Ranges Watershed from high risk development.

Study of wind turbine impacts

Development of renewable energy sources is a state strategic goal. South Australia generates more electricity from wind

than all the other Australian states combined. Wind farms provide approximately 20% of the state's power, with the

percentage projected to grow in future years.

In view of the number of applications for both new wind farms and expansion of existing facilities, potential noise

exposure has become a priority in assessing their environmental impacts.

In July 2009 the EPA finalised and published its Wind farms environmental noise guidelines, after a multi-stage

consultation process with industry, acoustic companies and communities, backed by an extensive research program.

This document aims to help developers, planning and enforcement authorities, government agencies, acoustic

consultants and the broader community assess environmental noise impacts from wind farms.

In addition to its continued study into noise impacts from wind farms and practical methods for their measurement and

evaluation, the EPA has contributed to the noise chapter of Draft National Wind Farm Development Guidelines released

for public comments in October 2009, and continues to participate in a joint State and Commonwealth program to finalise

the document.

To extend its efforts in this area the EPA has initiated joint research projects with academic and industrial organisations

to develop advanced methods of wind farms noise monitoring and objective assessment of noise characteristics such as

tonality. This is especially important in areas where there are multi-stage developments or where few wind farms have

been established. Discriminating between contributions from different noise sources and ensuring accurate prediction of

noise impacts from wind farms are both important in shaping regulatory controls, as these facilities are usually located in

quiet, rural areas. Building on other recent studies, joint research is in progress with the University of Adelaide to improve

the accuracy with which wind farm impacts are evaluated. Earlier research results have been published in proceedings of

the recent conference: Acoustics 2009–Research to Consulting.

The EPA continues to monitor the performance and effectiveness of the noise guidelines as part of its long-term priority

to reduce community risks from noise.

Rail noise guideline for new operations

Railway noise is not covered in the Noise Environment Protection Policy, being specifically exempted in accordance with

Schedule 1 of the EP Act. The EPA’s draft Guidelines for assessment of noise from new rail operations (2010) have been

developed to provide a consistent process for assessing impacts on sensitive land uses of noise and vibration from new

rail operations.

The document also includes measures for assessing the effect of existing rail operations on new noise-sensitive

developments, including TODs. While TODs can provide significant social and environmental benefits, it is important that

such developments are appropriately designed to an acceptable level of amenity.


55

Rail operations are licensed activities; however, current licences may not have included impacts of more recent

developments adjacent to existing railways. In these cases, risks of high-noise exposure can be a potential problem for

new communities.

The draft guidelines aim to cover best available practice for rail noise and vibration prediction and assessment of noise

control, including proposals for:

upgrading existing railways or constructing new ones

construction of new sensitive developments in the adjacent zone

provision of a basis for checking compliance and resolving complaints.

The draft guidelines address:

regulatory requirements for railway owners, rolling stock operators and relevant developers

noise and vibration criteria for purpose of the development assessment and compliance

recommended noise and vibration prediction routines

recommended noise and vibration measurement practices

broad summaries of rail noise and vibration mitigation measures.

The draft guidelines were released for comment in June 2010.

Compliance and enforcement

Review of the EPA’s compliance and enforcement guidelines

The powers and duties given to the EPA by the environmental legislation it administers are significant. They include a

variety of tools to ensure all reasonable and practicable measures are taken to protect, restore and enhance the quality of

the environment. Much of this is achieved through providing advice and guidance, partnering with other organisations,

education and regulation. However, in some circumstances, the EPA will use its enforcement powers.

Its primary aim is that use of compliance and enforcement tools will ensure its actions are consistent, fair and effective,

and will provide assurance to the community that the EPA is working to fulfil its role of protecting the environment.

To support delivery of this aim, in November 2009 the EPA released its Compliance and enforcement statement

<www.epa.sa.gov.au/what_we_do/compliance_and_enforcement_statement> and supporting Compliance and

enforcement regulatory options and tools <www.epa.sa.gov.au/xstd_files/Licensing/Guideline/cem.pdf>. The statement

sets out the principles and policy the EPA will apply in relation to compliance and enforcement, while the document

provides more detailed information on the tools the EPA may use to manage non-compliance and the circumstances

under which the tools may be applied. These two documents replace the earlier Compliance and enforcement guidelines.

As part of the EPA’s Compliance and enforcement statement, the EPA has committed to the following policy:

The EPA will not ignore any criminal or negligent act by any person which threatens or damages the environment or

which undermines the regulatory regime.

The EPA will have regard to and seek to further the objects of the EP Act, including taking into account social,

environmental and economic factors, when making regulatory decisions.

Environmental legislation provides the EPA with a variety of regulatory tools and the ability to exercise discretion to

determine which tool is appropriate for particular circumstances. The suite of enforcement tools includes criminal

prosecution, and administrative and civil proceedings. The various tools may be used in conjunction with one another

where necessary.

In determining an appropriate course of action, the EPA will consider a variety of factors including, but not limited to:

http://www.epa.sa.gov.au/what_we_do/compliance_and_enforcement_statement

http://www.epa.sa.gov.au/xstd_files/Licensing/Guideline/cem.pdf


56

the seriousness of the contravention, for example the nature and extent of the impact, harm or potential harm to

the environment or the potential to undermine the regulatory regime

the extent and speed of remediation action required

the compliance history.

The EPA also recognises that, when working within the compliance and enforcement model, there may be times when

decisions and actions are disputed. In such cases there are a number of options a proponent can pursue, including

discussing the matter with the EPA, lodging a formal complaint or progressing the matter to the Environment Resources

and Development Court or the State Ombudsman. More information on this is published in the EPA’s Compliance and

Enforcement – Firm but Fair brochure <www.epa.sa.gov.au/xstd_files/Licensing/Brochure/brochure_cems.pdf>.

Compliance Inspections

EPA has approximately 2100 licences and in accordance with its Compliance and Enforcement guidelines undertakes a

risk based approach to ensure compliance with environmental requirements. During 2009-10 the EPA undertook 961

inspections with a range of actions resulting, including verbal and formal written warnings, issuing Environment Protection

Orders (EPOs) and for a small number of more serious cases of non-compliance, EPA commenced civil or criminal

prosecutions under the EP Act.

Environment Protection Orders

Environment Protection Orders (EPOs) can be issued by authorised officers under section 93(1) of the EP Act:

(a) for the purpose of securing compliance with:

(i) the general environmental duty; or

(ii) mandatory provisions of an environment protection policy; or

(iii) a condition of an environmental authorisation; or

(iv) a condition of a beverage container approval; or

(v) any other requirement imposed by or under this Act; or

(b) for the purpose of giving effect to an environment protection policy.

Police officers are authorised under the EP Act, and use EPOs to deal with complaints about noise (eg loud music) from

domestic premises.

Some local government officers are authorised under the EP Act, but this authority is limited to the council area in which

they are employed. The majority of EPOs issued by councils relate to breaches of the Environment Protection (Water

Quality) Policy 2003 with regard to stormwater issues from building sites.

Table 10 Environment Protection Orders

EPOs recorded 2007–08 2008–09 2009–10

EPA 15 22 25

Police 139 144 128

Councils 53 7 23

Total 207 173 176

www.epa.sa.gov.au/xstd_files/Licensing/Brochure/brochure_cems.pdf


57

One such example of a successful outcome from the issuing of an EPO involved an ongoing noise complaint with a

refrigeration freight business which was operating between 3 and 4am opposite a residential area.

The EPA informed the company, both in person and in writing, not to undertake activities at the site which produced an

unsatisfactory level of noise and which was non-compliant with the Environment Protection (Noise) Policy 2007 (Noise

EPP).

The EPA then followed this up by issuing an EPO. The business and residents are now working cooperatively to address

the issue. The business still operates and the residents are no longer being woken up in the early hours of the morning.

Civil enforcement and prosecutions

More serious incidents of non-compliance may result in civil or criminal prosecutions under the EP Act.

The EPA has a specialised Investigations Branch which probes breaches of the EP Act and the RPC Act. Prosecutions

taken by the EPA are conducted by the Crown Solicitor’s Office and the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions.

The EPA has conducted a total of 44 prosecutions in 2009-10 including 21 incidents this financial year, and 23 matters

carried over from 2008–09. Of the 44, 25 have been finalised as follows:

two matters have been finalised in the Environment, Resource and Development Court

one matter has been finalised in the Port Adelaide Magistrates Court

two matters have been dealt with by way of a negotiated civil penalty

the remaining 20 matters were dealt with by other compliance actions, including the provision of advice, issuing of

EPOs or Clean-up Orders and expiation notices.

There are three matters before the ERD Court that are yet to be concluded. Two matters relate to environmental harm,

and one relates to breach of an EPA licence. As of June 2010 there are:

11 matters under active investigation

five matters under review at the Crown Solicitor’s Office to determine the sufficiency of evidence.


58

Table 11 Finalised prosecutions 2009–10

Name Charges Penalty

Mulhern's Waste Oil Removal Pty Ltd *

Polluting the environment causing serious environmental harm

S79(2) of EP Act and nine counts of contravening conditions of

environmental authorisation s45(5) of EP Act.

$415 000.00

South Australian Water Corporation

Polluting the environment causing material environmental harm s80(2) of EP Act.

$30 000.00

York Civil Pty Ltd ** Breach of s8(1) of the Protection of Marine Waters (Prevention of Pollution from Ships) Act 1987.

$69 404.00

* On 3 April 2009 Mulhern’s was convicted and ordered to pay $460 800. Mulhern’s subsequently appealed this decision and on 20 November 2009 their appeal was upheld in the Supreme Court and the fine was reduced to $145 000. On 28 April 2010 the Full Bench of the Supreme Court upheld the application from the EPA to appeal this decision and Mulhern’s were convicted and ordered to pay $415 000.

** This matter was handled by the Department of Transport, Energy and Infrastructure.

EPA-negotiated civil penalties are developed in compliance with its Policy for Calculation of Civil Penalties under the

Environment Protection Act 1993 (2006).

The EPA as an alternative to criminal prosecution may negotiate a civil penalty directly with an individual or corporation

with whom the EPA is satisfied has committed the offence or may apply to the ER&D Court for an order that the

person(s) pay to the EPA an amount as a civil penalty.

Table 12 Finalised civil penalties

Name Charges Penalty

Resourceco Pty Ltd Breach of licence condition by disposal of waste in onsite batters between March to August 2006

On 25 May 2010 the ER&D Court granted orders for a penalty of $133 000* and that Resourceco publicly apologise to the EPA, the industry and the community

Bradken Foundry On 17 September 2008 a fire onsite produced a large black plume of thick smoke that caused environmental nuisance.

On 23 April 2010 the EPA and Bradken settled a penalty of $3750**

* The total amount of the order was for $150 000; of this $17 000 was for technical costs.

** Total amount of settlement was $10 518; of this $6768 was for technical costs.


59

A REPUTATION FOR EXCELLENCE

The EPA is South Australia’s leading environmental regulator, has scientific and technical expertise and has influenced

key state and national government policies and outcomes.

Vessel wastewater management

During 2009–10, the EPA embarked on a number of initiatives associated with the implementation of the Code of practice

for vessel and facility management (marine and inland waters). Key areas included the introduction of wastewater

management requirements for all vessels operating on South Australia’s marine and inland waters, grey water treatment

solutions and the publication of an Australian Standard for grey water treatment systems on vessels.

The success of this program was highlighted by the EPA winning the 2009 Premier’s Award for public sector excellence

under the category of Fostering Creativity and Innovation (refer to case study).

Liaison with interstate boating associations and authorities is continuing, with the adoption of EPA grey water

management requirements and treatment technology for vessels well advanced at a national level.

Grey water—Case study

The EPA, through the development of its Code of practice for vessel and facility management (marine and inland

waters) in 2008, has introduced greywater management requirements for all vessels operating on South Australian

inland waters, and is the first jurisdiction worldwide to introduce the ‘on-board’ grey water treatment option.

Grey water from vessels on the River Murray (eg houseboats) has previously been discharged in an untreated state

back into the river, creating significant environmental and public health risks. It is estimated that should this discharge

be treated it could return 500 million litres per year of treated grey water back into the river at a quality better than that

of natural river water.

The Code of practice has stimulated development of world first grey water treatment technology. The EPA worked

closely with government and industry stakeholders to support its development and commercialisation, generating

interest both nationally and internationally. As of June 2010, there were two products commercially available

(including Newtreat Pty Ltd, winner of the 2009 Water Industry Alliance Innovation Award), which have been

recognised to meet the EPA requirements and a third product under development. A significant economic opportunity

for South Australia is expected as these innovations are adopted both locally and elsewhere for protecting our

environment.

As part of a national approach, the EPA, in a collaborative agreement with Standards Australia, developed an

Australian Standard for grey water treatment systems on vessels to ensure all systems meet a minimum quality

standard. The agreement is an example of the EPA’s ability to work with stakeholders to bring together relevant skills,

expertise and resources to jointly deliver an innovative solution to meet the needs of industry, government and the

community. The standard was published in September 2009 and has resulted in both the NSW and Victorian

governments considering adoption of the standard and EPA-led innovations in the near future.

The success of the grey water projects was recognised by two significant awards in 2009. The EPA Water Quality

Branch was awarded the 2009 Premier’s Award for public sector excellence under the category of Fostering

Creativity and Innovation, and the EPA-chaired grey water treatment systems standards development committee was

awarded the 2009 Standards Australia Committee Award for outstanding service to standardisation.


60

River Murray and Lower Lakes drought response

Drought conditions and overuse of water resources in the Murray–Darling Basin continue to threaten water quality in the

lower River Murray (below Lock 1) and Lower Lakes.

The EPA is undertaking monitoring and scientific assessment of water quality in the Lower Lakes. This involves sampling

over 20 sites on a regular basis and additional sites associated with acidification events (eg Currency Creek). The

program provides advance warning of water quality issues (eg. acidification) to enable the state government to undertake

management actions to avoid adverse impacts on the environment and communities. Regular water quality reports are

also made available to the public on the EPA’s website1.

During 2009–10 the EPA also managed the Lower Lakes Acid Sulfate Soil Research Program in close collaboration with

the DEH. This was a $1.4-million research program to better understand acid sulfate soil risks in the Lower Lakes to help

inform management actions. The key messages arising from the research program are:

An extensive and severe long-term acid sulfate soil hazard exists in the Lower Lakes.

Acidity is being generated rapidly in drying sandy and clayey lake margins, increasing the risk of waterbody

acidification when re-wetted.

The exposure of clay-rich sediments in the deeper inundated regions must be avoided.

The use of freshwater as a management option to keep sediments submerged is a lower risk than seawater.

The EPA’s involvement in water quality monitoring and acid sulfate soil research in the Lower Lakes is providing critical

information to enable the state government to formulate effective management actions.

Cross-agency management protocol for unauthorised waste activities and illegal dumping

In 2007 major stakeholders from the waste and resource recovery sector in South Australia raised concerns with the EPA

that they are commercially disadvantaged by unauthorised waste activities2 and illegal waste dumping3.

In consideration of these concerns the EPA worked with state and local government agencies (NRM Boards, DWLBC,

DPLG, and seven local councils) to develop a cross-agency management protocol for the management of unauthorised

waste activities and illegal waste dumping on a statewide level.

The protocol allows for consistent and effective enforcement of appropriate legislation by all parties in responding to

illegal dumping and unauthorised waste activities. The protocol is currently being employed by participating agencies with

final agreement being sought in 2010–11.

1 <www.epa.sa.gov.au/environmental_info/water_quality/monitoring_programs_and_assessments/lower_lakes> 2 Schedule 1 of the EP Act, regards depots that receive, store, treat or dispose of any waste require an environmental

authorisation in accordance with section 36 of the EP Act. Where activities are undertaken without the relevant planning and EPA approvals or water-affecting permits, these are considered unauthorised waste activities.

3 Illegal waste dumping refers to the disposal of waste on public, private or crown land where the intent is not to operate a

waste depot but rather to avoid disposal costs at an authorised waste depot.

http://www.epa.sa.gov.au/environmental_info/water_quality/monitoring_programs_and_assessments/lower_lakes


61

Ecomapping to EMAS—Case study

The EPA has actively assisted businesses to use techniques such as EcomappingTM to engage their employees to

improve their environmental performance and to create an internal culture to drive better sustainability outcomes. For

instance, early in 2010, the EPA assisted six food-related businesses to use EcomappingTM to identify energy

improvement opportunities and apply for federal government grants.

In March 2010, Heinz Werner-Engel, the European creator of EcomappingTM, visited South Australia to address

businesses on the latest European environmental trends and the new version of European Eco-Management and

Audit Scheme (EMAS III). This has become an EU voluntary standard that is applicable globally, and likely to be the

new environmental benchmark for products entering the EU. It requires businesses to satisfy the requirements of

ISO14001 plus additional requirements such as public reporting, employee engagement, environmental improvement

and legal compliance. Adoption of EMAS III will require auditing of its use by European EPA auditors.

Werner-Engel recognised the close alignment of EMAS III with EPA’s Accredited and Sustainability Licences. For this

reason, South Australia is being considered to host some of the first trials to assist businesses outside Europe to gain

EMAS accreditation. There are a number of SA businesses who have already expressed an interest in being involved

in these trials.

According to Werner-Engel, the EPA’s use of Accredited and Sustainability Licences (refer to page 21) is aligned with

European trends in environmental management. The use of simple tools, such as EcoMappingTM together with

recognition systems, supports the EPA’s initiatives as well as providing affordable market access tools for small

businesses.


62

SUPPORTING OUR PEOPLE

The EPA complies with state government policies and standards for recruitment and staff management. The EPA

provides its staff with training and support to enable them to better meet growing demands.

Induction process review

During 2009 a cross-divisional working group was formed to review both the formal and informal induction sessions for

new employees. Mechanisms to review the induction process included a survey evaluation of the formal session and

employee focus groups.

Outcomes of the review were:

a revised induction policy and procedure, including checklists

compliance with recent WorkCover recommendations for induction for new starters, managers, volunteers and work

experience

implementation of an online Induction booklet

an update of the formal induction presentation.

Learning and development policy and procedure

A number of learning and development policies were reviewed in 2010 in light of the need to:

improve skills in plain English writing

establish external benchmarking with portfolio learning and development policies and procedures

respond to recent feedback from the WorkCover evaluation for more detailed policy information about training

provide greater ease of access to information.

As a result of this review, a number of policies were consolidated into an EPA learning and development policy and

procedure, making access to information easier for staff.

Information and communications technology strategic plan

The Strategic Plan for the EPA outlines a vision for ‘a clean, healthy and valued environment that supports social and

economic wellbeing for all South Australians now and in the future’. The Information and Communications Technology

(ICT) strategy aimed at supporting this vision and its associated strategic priorities was developed to ‘provide the tools for

EPA to be successful’. The purpose is to provide future direction for investment in ICT. This plan is based on an analysis

of the EPA’s business directions and the ICT needs that were identified.

Information technology system improvements

The site contamination module of GENI system was enhanced to include the renewal and annual returns processing for

auditor accreditations. Major effort went into enhancing the site contamination orders processing and management

reports for this module.

The section 7 (environmental information relating to property) module of GENI was enhanced significantly to include the

changes to the Land and Business (Sale and Conveyancing) Regulations 1995, Environment Protection (Site

Contamination) Amendment Act 2007 and the Environment Protection Regulations 2009.

The first phase of the changes involved responding to questions arising when a current environmental authorisation

related to land. These changes were implemented in March 2010. The development for the next phase, which involves


63

responding when an inactive authorisation relates to land has been completed, will be implemented in August 2010.

Major enhancements also included building of the invoicing module for automated raising of invoices and integrating this

with financial systems.

The CDL module of GENI was enhanced to include inspections for implementing the plastic bags legislation.

Development Applications and Radiation Licensing modules were improved to cater for changing business and legislative

needs.

Online applications and invoice payments application e–ELF (electronic Environment Licensing Forms) was significantly

redesigned to cater for the changes in the Environment Protection Regulations 2009 by including application fees and

renewal fees.

To meet the recommendations from the customer services review a new enquiries module was built in Complaints and

Reports of Environmental Significance (CARES). This module is used by the call centre and EPA staff to record and

manage the enquiries.

A business case for improving the processes and services relating to environmental licensing, waste auditing, waste

tracking and revenue processes associated with these functions, as well as transparent public dissemination of

information, has been developed.

The EPA was restructured and the number of divisions reduced from five to four. This involved amalgamations and

movement of a number of branches that go to make up the divisions. The ICT changes to help the organisation operate

in the new structure were completed.

OHS&W WorkCover review

WorkCover SA provided its findings from its evaluation of the EPA carried out for the first time in 2009. The EPA received

a Level 1B rating under the WorkCover Code of Conduct for Self-Insured Employers. Level 1B means the EPA has an

OHS&W and Injury Management System that is non-conforming, and has been given a two-year renewal period by

WorkCover with a 12-month period to close out non-conformances.

A comprehensive implementation plan to address the 12 non-conformances has been implemented. As well, a

partnership plan has been developed between the EPA and the WorkCover evaluator to review progress and provide

feedback. The EPA will then be evaluated again by WorkCover in 2011.

Training

A series of development programs to develop and enhance management skills were delivered. Topics included Plain

English Skills, Managing Wellbeing in a Crisis Year, Conduct & Ethics, Equal Opportunity Training–Nipping the Problems

in the Bud, Performance Management Discussions–Managing the Tough Stuff, and Recognising and Rewarding Good

Work and Achievements of Staff.

Staff were offered a comprehensive array of training including business case skills development, and internal auditing, all

designed to develop and reinforce existing skills. A mandatory training program for Authorised Officers has been

implemented to ensure officers maintain a consistent level of knowledge and skills, particularly while working in the field.

In addition, internally developed Environment Forums for all staff were provided on items linked closely to our

environmental challenges and office procedures. These forums enable networking and communication within all areas of

the EPA.

On 26 and 27 May 2010, the EPA Emergency Response Team (ERT) along with staff from Radiation Protection Branch

and South East undertook a two day information and training program at Belair. They were joined by officers of the

Country and Metropolitan Fire Services to develop an understanding of the operational capability and expectations of the

EPA responders during hazardous materials events. The theory and discussions which occurred were reinforced by


64

desktop exercises using two real-life case studies of a large fire at a Burton Pool factory and a hazardous gas and

substance incident at Michell’s Elizabeth, both of which had ERT involvement. The ability to review the events resulted in

a better understanding by all of the role and responsibility of all parties.

Recognition of EPA expertise—Case study

EPA staff knowledge and expertise is highly regarded across Australia and internationally. One staff member is

currently working at the Pacific Islands Applied Geoscience Commission (SOPAC) for 18 months. SOPAC was

established as a United Nations Development Programme Regional Project in 1972 and assesses deep-sea minerals

and hydrocarbon potential; ocean and onshore mineral resource potential; coastal protection and management;

geohazard assessment; water, wastewater, sanitation, energy and disaster risk management.

The EPA, through the development of the Code of practice for vessel and facility management (marine and inland

waters), has introduced grey water management requirements for all vessels operating on South Australian inland

waters, and is the first jurisdiction worldwide to introduce the ‘on-board’ grey water treatment option. The new code,

and the EPA’s expertise in this area, have stimulated development of ‘world first’ grey water treatment technology.

The EPA worked closely with government and industry stakeholders to support its development and

commercialisation, generating interest both nationally and internationally.

The EPA has actively assisted businesses to use techniques such as EcomappingTM to engage their employees to

improve their environmental performance and to create an internal culture to drive better sustainability outcomes. For

instance, early in 2010, the EPA assisted six food-related businesses to use EcomappingTM to identify energy

improvement opportunities and apply for federal government grans. Due to the recognised expertise of EPA staff in

EcomappingTM and environmental management systems, South Australia is being considered to host some of the first

trials to assist businesses outside of Europe to gain EMAS III accreditation.


65

OTHER STATUTORY INFORMATION

Freedom of Information and the Public Register

During 2009–10, 29 freedom of information (FOI) applications and 223 Public Register requests were received.

Table 13 FOI applications, Public Register

Applications 2007–08 2008–09 2009–10

Freedom of Information 23 18 30

Public Register 154 121 223

The EPA has a statutory obligation under the Land and Business (Sale and Conveyancing) Act 1994 to provide

information relating to environmental protection (See table 14).

Table 14 Section 7 enquiries

Section 7 enquiries/responses 2007–08 2008–09 2009–10

Automatic enquiries to the Lands Titles Office database involving perusal of the Section 7 information maintained by the EPA

58 960 49 608 50 065

Manual enquiries requiring an EPA search made upon request by the Lands Titles Office

3 694 3 040 4 964

Direction by the minister

In accordance with section 111(2)(b) of the EP Act, it is reported that the EPA has been given the following direction

during 2009–10:

Amend draft Environment Protection (Waste to Resources) Policy 2010 by including a requirement that, in

order to facilitate proper management of waste, a metropolitan council must provide a weekly general

kerbside waste collection service (other than for recyclable waste or vegetative matter) in respect of

residential premises within its area.

Whistleblowers Act

Nil return.

Energy efficiency action plan report

Priority area 1: energy management

EPA currently focuses on the three priority areas of energy, fleet management and waste.

The rationalisation of EPA accommodation, the main source of energy consumption, was finalised in October 2009 with

the completion of the radiation laboratory fitout in leased premises within the city. The centralisation of staff following

closures of Kent Town, Stirling and Grenfell Street offices, to 250 Victoria Square, a six-star building with a five- star

fitout, resulted in a reduction of occupied space from 5280 m2 in 2007–08 to 4762.5 m2. The impact of the shift is

demonstrated this year with a marked reduction in energy consumed for office accommodation.


66

Table 15 Performance against annual energy use targets

Total for EPA EPA office location Air monitoring sites

Energy

Use (GJ)

Expenditure ($)

GHG Emissions(tonnes)

Energy Use (GJ)

GHG Emissions(tonnes)

Business Measure

(m2)

Energy Use per

m2

Energy Use (GJ)

GHG Emissions (tonnes)

Base year

2000–01 1934 $79 259 636 1694 557 4867 0.35 240 79

MJ per m2 348

2001–02 1699 $69 402 560 1497 492 4867 0.31 203 67

2002–03 1928 $76 377 634 1634 538 4867 0.34 295 97

2003–04 1760 $70 055 579 1493 491 4867 0.31 268 88

2004–05 1800 $78 303 593 1525 502 4987 0.31 275 91

2005–06 1678 $73 672 553 1432 471 5280 0.27 246 81

2006–07 1737 $78 125 571 1460 480 5280 0.28 277 91

2007–08 1698 $79 959 396 1458 340 5280 0.28 240 56

2008–09 1706 $89 224 398 1398 326 4763 0.29 308 72

2009–10 1097 $60 580 256 947 179 4763 0.20 150 77

MJ per m2 200

Target (2014) 1450

477

1271

417

0.26

Note: Business measures in 2004–05 and 2005–06 increased due to an additional space taken on Level 2 of SA Water House

(Grenfell Street) Building. This table has been amended to reflect previous incorrect charging and energy use, as well as the

transfer of Radiation Protection Branch from DoH. In 2007–08, the emissions conversion factor was changed, and is now based

on direct emissions only, in line with the National Greenhouse Accounts (NGA) Factors produced by the Department of Climate

Change. Prior years’ emission conversions did not differentiate between direct and indirect emission as these were not available

at the time.

Priority area 2: waste management

One of EPA’s environmental goals for 2009 was ‘the sustainable use of resources—reducing costs to business and

environmental impacts by promoting the efficient use of resources and waste minimisation’.

In support of this concept within the office environment in 250 Victoria Square, all waste management and recycling is

managed in partnership with the Lessors Building Management. Containers for all waste are provided within utilities

rooms and kitchens, and are collected regularly by cleaning staff, recording quantities and contents recycled where

possible. Streams of waste collected include:

co-mingled recyclable waste

organic food waste


67

white paper and confidential destruction paper

general dry waste.

As a means of encouraging staff to consider recycling and appropriate disposal of waste, only paper recycling bins are

provided at work stations.

All toner cartridges from photocopying machines and printers were also collected and recycled. This year 332 cartridges

(226 kg) were diverted from landfill for a total 1685 kgs since the initiative began in April 2002.

Priority area 3: travel and fleet management

EPA has continued to review vehicle utilisation and vehicle mix over the past year and as a result a further reduction in

the size of the fleet occurred in May 2010, with the return or non-renewal of five leased vehicles from Fleet SA. At each

lease renewal, consideration is given to environmental aspects of replacing vehicles, in addition to ensuring the vehicle

meets the business requirements of staff (Table 16). The ratio of commercial (4x4) to passenger vehicles has changed in

the past year reflecting an increased requirement for monitoring and field work in non-residential areas. Tables 16-17

and Figures 10-11 show a breakdown of EPA energy data for usage and greenhouse emissions.

Table 16 EPA vehicle fleet

Number of vehicles

Vehicle types 30 June

2005 30 June

2006 30 June

2007 30 June

2008 30 June

2009 30 June

2010

Diesel only 3 3 3 4 6 9

Electric/unleaded (hybrid) 2 0 0 0 1 2

Unleaded only 8 6 10 10 12 9

LPG only 3 7 3 2 2 3

Combined dual fuel (unleaded and LPG) 21 19 19 15 9 2

Total long-term hire vehicles 37 35 35 31 30 25

Table 17 Energy use and greenhouse gas emissions

2004–05 2005–06 2006–07 2007–08 2008–09 2009–10

Energy (GJ) 2082 2082 1939 1883 1883 1902

CO2 emissions (tonnes) 155 154 144 126 123 126

Note: During 2007–08, the emissions conversion factor was changed, and is now based on direct emissions from the vehicle

only, in line with the National Greenhouse Accounts (NGA) factors produced by the Department of Climate Change. Prior years’

emission conversions did not differentiate between direct and indirect emission, as these were not available at the time.


PROPORTION OF UNLEADED FUEL USED IN DUAL FUEL VEHICLES

0.00%

5.00%

10.00%

15.00%

20.00%

25.00%

30.00%

35.00%

2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10

Financ ial Year

PER

CEN

TA

GE

Figure 10 Proportion of unleaded fuel used in dual-fuel vehicles

The current EPA vehicle management policy incorporates a maximum of 20% unleaded fuel to be used in dual fuel

vehicles (Figure 10). Signage was installed in all dual fuel vehicles in the past year which encourages drivers to switch to

alternative fuel at the start of their journey.

GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS (CO2)

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

Unleaded LPG Electric/

Unleaded

Diesel

FUEL TYPES

EMIS

SIO

NS

(TO

NNES

)

2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 2009-2010

Figure 11 Greenhouse gas emissions

68


69

APPENDIX 1 ORGANISATIONAL INFORMATION

Human resources and development

The Human Resources and Development Branch (HRD) of the EPA supports the achievement of the agency’s goals by

providing human resource management, broad organisational development and employee health, safety and welfare

advice and support. This includes planning, learning and development programs, policies, information, advice and

business systems. EPA payroll services are provided by DEH.

Disability Action Plan

The HRD Branch is currently investigating the development of a Disability Action Plan to ensure the promotion of

independence for both employees and customers with disabilities.

Equal employment opportunity

All agency chief executives are responsible for implementing the Cultural Inclusion Framework to make the public service

accessible to, and inclusive of, Aboriginal people and their culture. A steering committee, established by EPA Executive,

has completed a baseline assessment utilising the current draft reporting for the Cultural Inclusion Framework. An action

plan was developed and implemented recommending a number of activities. A range of activities relating to assisting

indigenous employment have been implemented, including access to the Aboriginal Employment Register.

Traineeships

The EPA continues to participate in the Government Youth Traineeship program where opportunities arise.

EPA workforce statistics

Tables 18–35 provide a representation of the EPA’s workforce, and identify some changes in recent years.

Table 18 Total number of employees

2008–09 2009–10

Persons 234 222

FTEs 220.6 210

Table 19 Employee gender balance

2008–09 2009–10

Gender % persons % FTEs % persons % FTEs

Male 55.98 58.12 54.50 56.33

Female 44.02 41.88 45.50 43.67


70

Table 20 Number of persons separated from or recruited to EPA

2008–09 2009–10

Separated from the agency 24 47*

Recruited to the agency 46 35

* This includes TVSPs.

Table 21 Number of persons on leave without pay

As at 30 June 2009 As at 30 June 2010

On leave without pay 20 21

Table 22 Number of employees by salary bracket

2009–10

Salary Bracket Male Female Total

$0 - $49 199 3 13 16

$49 200–$62 499 18 35 53

$62 500–$80 099 68 36 104

$80 100–$100 999 29 15 44

$101 000+ 3 2 5

TOTAL 121 101 222

Table 23 Status of employees in current position

FTEs

Ongoing Short-term

contract

Long-term

contract

Other (casual) Total

Male 98.91 11.4 7.8 0.2 118.31

Female 72.03 13.2 6.48 0 91.71

TOTAL 170.94 24.6 14.28 0.2 210.02

Persons

Ongoing Short-term

contract

Long-term

contract

Other (casual) Total

Male 100 12 8 1 121

Female 80 14 7 0 101

TOTAL 180 26 15 1 222


71

Table 24 Number of executives by gender, classification and status

Ongoing Tenured Contract

Untenured Contract

Other (Casual)

Total

Classification

Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female

SAES1 – – – – 3 1 – – 3 1

CEO – – – – – 1 – – – 1

TOTAL – – – – 3 2 – – 3 2

Table 25 Average days of leave taken per FTE employee

Leave type 2006–07 2007–08 2008–09 2009–10

Sick leave 6.26 8.50 8.46 8.81

Family carer’s leave 0.81 0.71 0.90 0.94

Miscellaneous special leave 0.47 0.54 0.34 0.50

Table 26 Number of Aboriginal and/or Torres Strait Islander employees

Male Female Total % of agency Target*

Aboriginal/Torres Strait Islander people

0 0 0 0 2%

* Target from South Australia’s Strategic Plan

Table 27 Workforce diversity–number of employees by age bracket and gender

Age bracket Male Female Total % of total South Australian

Workforce Benchmark* %

15−19 0 0 0 0 6.5

20−24 1 4 5 2.25 10.3

25−29 11 13 24 10.81 11.1

30−34 12 20 32 14.41 10.7

35−39 22 10 32 14.41 11.7

40−44 20 18 38 17.12 11.4

45−49 15 15 30 13.51 11.9

50−54 22 10 32 14.41 10.3

55−59 9 8 17 7.66 8.2

60−64 8 3 11 4.95 5.3

65+ 1 0 1 0.45 2.6

TOTAL 121 101 222 100 100

* Source: Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS) Australian Demographics Statistics, 6291.0.55.001 Labour Force Status (ST LM8) by sex, age, state, marital status−employed−total from February 1978 Supertable, South Australia at May 2009.


72

Table 28 Cultural and linguistic diversity of employees

Male Female Total % of agency % of SA

community*

Number of employees born

overseas 29 20 49 22.07 20.3

Number of employees who

speak language(s) other than

English at home

13 15 28 12.61 16.6

* Benchmarks from ABS Publication Basic Community Profile (SA) Cat No. 2001.0, 2006 census.

Table 29 Number of employees with ongoing disabilities requiring workplace adaptation

2008–09 2009–10

Male Female Total % of agency Male Female Total % of agency

1 0 1 0.42 1 0 1 0.5

Table 30 Types of employee disabilities

Disability Male Female Total % of agency

Physical 1 0 1 0.50

Total 1 0 1 0.50

Table 31 Number of employees using voluntary flexible working arrangements by gender

Arrangement Male Female Total

Purchased leave 1 3 4

Flexitime 116 89 205

Compressed weeks 1 5 5

Part-time job share 12 39 51

Working from home 1 2 3

Table 32 Documented review of individual performance development plan

Occurrence of review Total workforce

2008–09

Total workforce

2009–10

Review within the past 12 months 30.43% 82.43%

Review older than 12 months 54.94% 9.01%

No review 14.62% 8.56%


73

Table 33 Leadership and management training expenditure

Category of expenditure 2008–09 2009–10

Total training and development expenditure ($) 552 357.58 458 498.18

Total leadership and management development expenditure ($) 49 471.72 61 465.36

% of total expenditure 3.11 2.27

% total leadership and management expenditure 0.28 0.30

Table 34 Accredited training packages by classification

Classification Number of accredited training packages

AS05 1

TGO5 1

Table 35 Positions with customer service reflected in job and person specifications

Positions %

% of positions with customer service reflected in the job and person specification 22.18

% of positions without customer service reflected in the job and person specification 77.82

Occupational health, safety, welfare and injury management

The EPA has continued to implement and improve the occupational health, safety and welfare and injury management

system (OHSW&IM) throughout 2009–10. A revised OHSW&IM plan for 2010–11 has been drafted to include distinct

programs with core actions in line with the WorkCover evaluation of non-conformances. This will enable the EPA’s

OHSW&IM system to improve and mature for future evaluations and provide a solid platform and impetus to carry the

EPA forward to meet the anticipated implementation of the Model Work Health and Safety Act 2010 from January 2011.

Table 36 Occupational health, safety and welfare (OHSW) statistics

2007–08 2008–09 2009–10

1 OHSW legislative requirements

Number of notifiable occurrences pursuant to OHSW

Regulations Division 6.6 – 1 3

Number of notifiable injuries pursuant to OHSW Regulations

Division 6.6

– – –

Number of notices served pursuant to OHSW Act sections 35,

39 and 40 (default, improvement and prohibition notices)

– – –


74

2007–08 2008–09 2009–10

2 Injury management legislative requirements

Total number of employees who participated in the

rehabilitation program – 2 2

Total number of employees rehabilitated and reassigned to

alternative duties

– 1 –

Total number of employees rehabilitated back to their original

work

– 1 1

Number of open claims as at 30 June – 2 4

Percentage of workers compensation expenditure over gross

annual remuneration

0.001% 0.054% 0.24%

Table 37 Meeting the organisation’s safety performance targets

Base 2005–06

Performance: 12 months to end of June 2010*

Final target

Numbers

or % Actual Notional

quarterly target**

Variation Numbers or %

1. Workplace fatalities 0 0 0 0 0

2. New workplace injury claims 3 3 2 1 2

3. New workplace injury claims frequency rate

7.54 8.26 6.04 2.23 6.04

4. Lost Time Injury Frequency Rate*** – 2.75 0.00 2.75 0.00

5. New psychological injury claims – 1 0 1 0

6. Rehabilitation and return to work:

a. Early assessment within 5 days

b. Early intervention within 5 days

c. RTW within 5 business days

33.33%

–

100.00%

33.33%

100.00%

50.00%

80.00%

80.00%

75.00%

-46.67%

20.00%

-25.00%

80.00%

80.00%

75.00%

7. Claim determination:

a. Claim determination in 10 business days

b. Claim still to be determined after 3 months

100.00%

–

33.33%

33.33%

75.00%

3.00%

-41.67%

30.33%

75.00%

3.00%

8. Income maintenance payment for recent injuries:

2008–09 Injuries (at 24 months development)

2009–10 Injuries (at 12 months development)

–

–

$553.25

$5,951.00

$7,015.57

$0.00

-$6,462.32

$5,951.00


* Except for Target 8, which is YTD. For Targets 5, 6c, 7a and 7b, performance is measured up to the previous quarter.

** Based on cumulative reduction from base at a constant quarterly figure.

*** Lost Time Injury Frequency Rate for new lost-time injury/disease for each one million hours worked. This frequency rate is calculated for benchmarking and is used by the WorkCover Corporation.

Of significance the areas that require improvement to meet the Safety in the public sector targets include early reporting and determination of claims. On the positive side once a claim is reported, all have been assessed for early intervention within five days.

7B is significantly higher than the target, due to one (33.33%) of the three claims being disputed by the EPA and therefore undetermined for more than three months.

Table 38 Workers compensation expenditure

Expenditure 2008–09 2008–09

($m)

2009–10

($m)

Variation

($m) + (-)

% Change +

(-)

Income maintenance 0.005 0.023 +0.019 +20.38%

Lump sum settlements redemptions

(s42)

– – – –

Lump sum settlements permanent

disability (s43)

– – – –

Medical/hospital costs combined 0.002 0.014 +0.012 +13.18%

Other 0.002 0.002 0 0

Total claims expenditure 0.01 0.042 +0.005 +23.09%

Annual Trends 07/08, 08/09, 09/10

02468

10121416

Clien t A

ggre ssion

B ldg/Equip Failure/ M

a inte .

Security

/ Vanda lism

Slip, T

rips & Falls

Contact w O

bjec ts

Vehic le Acciden ts

Manual Handlin

g

Ergonomics

Exposu

re to fu

mes/gas/smok

Exposu

re to C

hemicals

Exp to

heat/cold

Equipmen t Stro

rage

Biological

Hit by m

oving objec t

Psych

o logical

Other

Mechanism of Injury/Incident

Nu

mb

er o

f O

ccu

ran

ces

2007/2008

2008/2009

2009/2010

Figure 12 Hazard and incident reports—annual trends

Items for noting: The total number of hazard/incident/injury reports decreased by four in 2009–10, from the 35 recorded in the

2008–09 financial year, to 31 recorded in the 2009–10 financial year.

There were four mechanisms which have shown an increase in 2009–10. These are Building/equipment failure/maintenance

increased by five; Slips trips and falls increased by three; Hit by moving objects increased by one, and Other increased by one

from the 2008–09 financial year.

75


76

Of significance the new building had some unforeseen problems which included Heating Ventilation and Airconditioning (HVAC)

system inefficiencies and poor insulation which were contributing factors in the three Notifiable Dangerous Occurrences. These

notifiable occurrences were due to partial ceiling collapses, caused by the aluminium fixtures holding up the ceiling panels to

expand due to the high temperatures. Permanent controls were put in place to stop any recurrences and no injuries were

sustained. The majority of slips, trips and falls occurred when the floors of the wet areas were sealed incorrectly during cleaning

causing them to become slippery, with measures taken immediately to remove the hazard and ensure no recurrence. ‘Other’

incidents showed an increase due to a gap in systems for overseas travel, catastrophic bushfire day zone travel and first aid.

These systems have been reviewed and actions identified for rectification.

On a positive, six incident mechanisms in 2009–10 showed a decreased in occurrences, these are Security and vandalism from

one to zero; Contact with objects from four to one; Vehicle accidents from three to two; Ergonomic three to zero; and Exposure

to fumes/gas/smoke from five to zero.

The main attributed factor to reducing Contact with objects was due to rectifying some initial problems with the new building.

Exposure to fumes/gas/smoke reduced as a result of better contractor management. The reduction of Ergonomic incidents can

be attributed to; a higher focus by the EPA on ergonomic and workstation set-up implemented in March 2009. Implementation

included staff training of ergonomic workstation inspections and techniques for good posture and providing this information on

the intranet (HUB) for easy access by staff.


77

APPENDIX 2 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND ACCOMPANYING NOTES

Account payment performance

The state government benchmark of achieving 90% of the number of invoices paid within 30 days was not achieved in

2009-10 (see Table 39) due to some invoices never received by EPA causing payments to be more than 30 days.

Table 39 Account payment performance

Particulars Number of

accounts paid

Percentage of

accounts paid

(by number)

Value in A$ of

accounts paid

Percentage of

accounts paid

(by value)

Paid by the due date* 4979 86.89 7 910 671 74.58

Paid within 30 days or

less from due date

532 9.28 2 229 828 21.02

Paid more than 30

days from due date

219 3.82 466 722 4.40

* The due date is defined as per section 11.7 of Treasurer’s Instruction 11 ‘Payment of Accounts’. Unless there is a discount or a written agreement between the public authority and the creditor, payment should be within 30 days of the date the invoice is first received by the public authority.

Contractual arrangements

During the 2009–10 financial year, the EPA did not enter into any contractual arrangements where the total value of an

individual contract exceeded $4 million.

Instances of fraud

There have been no instances of fraud detected in the EPA during this financial year.

Use of consultants

Tables 40 and 41 provide information about the use of consultants for controlled and administered entities.

Table 40 Use of consultants—controlled entity

Value of

consultancies

let

Number of

consultancies

2007−08

Number of

consultancies

2008−09

Number of

consultancies

2009−10

2007−08

expenditure

2008−09

expenditure

2009−10

expenditure

Below

$10 000

3 1 2 3 300 9 600 13 900

$10 001−

$50 000

1 - - 15 320 -

Above

$50 000

- - - - -

Total 4 1 5 18 620 9 600 13 900


78

Below $10 000

Number of consultants in this category: 2 Value of consultants in this category: $13 900

Golder Associates Review and report on SKM modelling

Starr Solutions Noise Nuisance Review

Between $10 001—$50 000

Number of consultants in this category: Nil Value of consultants in this category: Nil

Above $50 000


Table 41 Use of consultants—administered entity

Value of

consultancies

let

Number of

consultancies

2007−08

Number of

consultancies

2008−09

Number of

consultancies

2009−10

2007−08

expenditure

2008−09

expenditure

2009−10

expenditure

Below

$10 000

- - - - - -

$10 001–

$50 000

- - - - - -

Above

$50 000

1 - - 64 995 - -

Total 1 - - 64 995 - -

Below $10 000


Between $10 001 and $50 000


Above $50 000



79

Table 42 Overseas travel

Number of employees Destination/s Reason for travel Total cost to agency

1 East Timor To meet and mentor Augusto

Pinto, Director Environment in East

Timor, as part of an SA

Government environmental skills

building program.

$500

Remainder paid by

DPC

1 Brazil To attend the IAEA UPSAT

Radiation Conference

Nil

1 Colombia Government and industry mission

to Bogota, Colombia, to meet with

Colombian government officials

concerning the transport of

uranium oxide concentrate (UOC)

from Australia through the

Colombian port of Cartagena. The

purpose of the mission was to put

forward a case to gain approval to

use the port for trans-shipment of

UOC destined for east US and

Europe.

Nil


80


81


82


83


84


85


86


87


88


89


90


91


92


93


94


95


96


97


98


99


100


101


102


103


104


105


106


107


108


109


APPENDIX 3 PUBLICATIONS RELEASED OR UPDATED DURING 2009–10

Corporate publications

EPA Annual Report I July 2008 to 30 June 2009 (includes reporting under the Radiation Protection and Control

Act 1982)

EPA Strategic Plan 2009

EPA Corporate Operational Plan 2009–2012

EPA Board Round-table 2009 Report

110

Guidelines

Environmental noise guidelines for wind farms

Radiation protection guidelines on mining in South Australia: mineral exploration

Compliance and enforcement regulatory options and tools

Standard for the production and use of Waste Derived Fill

Standard for the production and use of Waste Derived Soil Enhancer

Information sheets

Adelaide Coastal Waters Fact Sheet: importance of seagrass

Adelaide Coastal Waters Fact Sheet: seagrass health

Adelaide Coastal Waters Fact Sheet: changes in the urban environment

Adelaide Coastal Waters Fact Sheet: physical environment

Adelaide Coastal Waters Fact Sheet: inputs to Adelaide’s coastal waters

Water and air quality monitoring in Lake Albert

Frequently asked questions: acid sulfate soils

Lower Lakes and rainwater tank sampling preliminary report

Wastewater management requirements for vessels on marine waters

Frequently asked questions: wastewater management requirements for vessels in marine waters

Odour reduction on Le Fevre Peninsula

Site contamination: Information for licensees

Site contamination: transfer of liability

Site contamination: overview of the site contamination audit system

Site contamination: implementing the conditions of a site contamination report

Site contamination: information about site contamination audit reports and audit statements

Noise management for outdoor music events

Current criteria for the classification of waste including Industrial and Commercial Waste (Listed) and Waste Soil

Frequently asked questions: draft guidelines for the assessment of noise from rail operations

Schedule of environment management fees

Maps of Resource Efficiency Licence Fee (REF) component zones

Maps of Environment Management Licence Fee (EMF) component zones


Dioxins and dioxin-like organic contaminants (dioxins, furans and polychlorinated biphenyls) in Lake Bonney, South East

Codes of practice

Code of practice for wastewater overflow management (including Wastewater incident notification and

communication protocol)

111

Public consultations

Draft guidelines for the assessment, classification and disposal of solid waste

Draft guideline for wastewater lagoons

Draft guidelines for construction specifications and reports for landfills, leachate ponds, composting facilities and wastewater lagoons

Adelaide Desalination Plant licence application

Draft guidelines for the assessment of noise from rail operations

National Pollutant Inventory

South Australia summary report 2007–08

Audit report and audit checklist

2010 newsletter

Reporting requirements brochure

Brochures

Who We Are and What We Do

Compliance and Enforcement: Firm but Fair

Sustainability Licences

Waste Derived Fill

Waste Derived Soil Enhancer

Reports

Lower Murray Reclaimed Irrigation Area (LMRIA) Rehabilitation Project environmental monitoring final report

Development of the Murraylands E2/WaterCast Catchment Model

Sources and volumes of water and pollutants entering Lower Murray Reclaimed Irrigation Area (LMRIA) drainage channels

Ambient water quality of Boston and Proper Bays


112

APPENDIX 4 FREEDOM OF INFORMATION STATEMENT

The following details are provided as part of the information statement of the EPA under the provisions of section 9 of the

Freedom of Information Act 1991.

Organisation structure and functions

The EPA is South Australia’s primary environmental regulator. It is responsible for the protection of air and water quality,

and the control of pollution, waste, noise and radiation, to ensure the protection and enhancement of the environment.

The EPA’s organisational structure and functions are set out in this annual report.

Boards and committees

Information on the EPA’s boards and committees is set out in this annual report.

Effect of organisation functions on members of the public

The EPA encourages environmental responsibility throughout the business and community sectors, and works

collaboratively towards achieving a healthy environment alongside economic prosperity.

The role and objectives of the EPA are detailed throughout this annual report and are published in the EPA Strategic Plan

2009–2012.

Public participation in environment policy

The public is invited to participate in development of environment policy through:

public consultation sessions during the development of specific EPPs and other policy initiatives

the annual Round-table conference

regional Round-table meetings

specific issue forums.

The EPA also supports a number of programs to assist business and industry, community volunteers and South

Australian teachers and students to become involved in protecting and enhancing the environment.

Public consultation and community monitoring programs undertaken in 2009–10 are detailed in this annual report.

Description of kinds of documents held by the EPA

Publications produced by the EPA can be accessed through the department’s website at

<www.epa.sa.gov.au/about_epa/publications_and_resources> or requested, free of charge, by telephoning the Customer

Service Desk on (08) 204 2004. A list of 2009–10 EPA publications is set out in this annual report (Appendix 3).

Other types of documents produced by the EPA include:

administrative records

asset maintenance records

records and annual reports of boards and committees

corporate and strategic planning records

correspondence files

financial records


113

occupational health and safety records

personnel records

policy documents

procedures and reference manuals

survey and environmental reports and records.

Please note that standard freedom-of-information charges for these documents may apply.

Documents available for purchase from the EPA in accordance with section 109 of the EP Act include:

applications for environmental authorisations

environmental authorisations

development authorisations

beverage container approvals

details of prosecutions and other enforcement action under the EP Act.

Policy documents

In relation to corporate policy, the EPA refers to existing DEH corporate policy, except in instances where specific EPA

policy has been developed. Enquiries about such policy should be directed to DEH. The following list details existing EPA

internal operating policies.

IOP001 Guideline for the preparation of an internal office policy or procedure for the EPA

IOP002 Procedure for obtaining advice on sampling

IOP003 Procedure to be followed when requesting legal advice

IOP004 Learning and Development Policy and Procedure

IOP010 Induction

IOP011 Guideline in preparing EPA Board papers

IOP012 Vaccination protocol for field-staff

IOP014 WinTAP—Windows Time Allocation Program for EPA

IOP015 Responding to environmental emergencies and major pollution incidents

IOP016 Threshold criteria—Matters for EPA Board consideration

IOP017 Guideline for the preparation of a cabinet submission

IOP018 Hazard incident injury reporting, investigation and management

IOP019 Allocation and use of mobile telephones

IOP020 Mobile telephone—Reimbursing personal call costs

IOP021 Vehicle management

IOP022 Management of desk telephones

IOP023 Filling of positions during restructure

IOP024 Role and responsibilities of the Emergency Response Team

IOP025 Volumetric survey assessment

IOP026 Manifest audit process for liquid waste


114

IOP027 Weigh data audit process for solid waste

IOP028 A system for managing industry compliance audits

IOP029 Civil penalties

IOP031 Accredited licensing system

IOP032 EPA risk management policy

IOP033 Development and application of licence project plans

IOP034 The exercise of delegated authority

IOP035 Environment Protection Orders

IOP036 Assessment of waste or recycling depots and activities producing listed waste for limited purposes

IOP037 Checking licensee information for fee setting

IOP038 Licence fee structure reform: the purpose of fee changes and opportunities for fee reduction

IOP039 When to charge a flat fee component for a licence

IOP040 Assessment of applications to produce and/or use refuse derived fuel

IOP041 EPA Fraud and Corruption Prevention Policy

IOP042 Assessment of railway operations for limited purposes

IOP043 Referral of matters to Investigations Unit—DRAFT

IOP044 Unauthorised Waste Activity—EPA Response IOP

Access to organisation documents

Requests for access to documents or amendment of personal records in the possession of the EPA should be directed in

writing to:

Freedom of Information Coordinator


GPO Box 2607

ADELAIDE SA 5001

Telephone: (08) 8204 9128

Policy documents may be inspected at Level 9, 250 Victoria Square, Adelaide between 9 am and 5 pm, Monday to

Friday.

http://hub2.deh.sa.gov.au/epa/business/pdfs/delegated_authority.pdf

http://hub2.deh.sa.gov.au/epa/business/pdfs/iop035_epo.pdf

http://hub2.deh.sa.gov.au/epa/business/pdfs/iop036_waste.pdf


115

ABBREVIATIONS

ABC Adelaide Brighton Cement

ACWQIP Adelaide Coastal Water Quality Improvement Plan

ACWS Adelaide Coastal Waters Study

BCA benefit–cost analysis

BLL blood lead level

BSA Business Sustainability Alliance

CARES (database of) Complaints and Reports of Environmental Significance

CCI Coastal Catchment Initiative

CE Chief Executive

COAG Council of Australian Government

CoP code of practice

DAC Development Assessment Commission

DEH Department for Environment and Heritage

DoH Department for Health

DPA development plan amendment

DPLG Department of Planning and Local Government

DTED Department of Trade and Economic Development

DTEI Department of Transport, Energy and Infrastructure

DWLBC Department of Water, Land and Biodiversity Conservation

EIP environment improvement program

EIS environmental impact statement

EMAS European Eco-Management and Audit Scheme

EP Act Environment Protection Act 1993

EPA Environment Protection Authority

EPHC Environment Protection and Heritage Council

EPO Environment Protection Order

ERD Court Environment Resources and Development Court

EVs environmental values

GENI General Environmental Information System database for recording and tracking information

GL gigalitres

ICT information and communication technology

IT information technology

LFG landfill gas


116

LFS licence fee system

LGA Local Government Association

LMC Land Management Corporation

LMRIA Lower Murray Reclaimed Irrigation Area

MAR managed aquifer recharge

MDBA Murray–Darling Basin Authority

NChEM National Framework for Chemicals Environmental Management

NEPC National Environment Protection Council

NEPM National Environment Protection Measure

NPC National Packaging Covenant

NPI National Pollutant Inventory

NRM natural resource management

NWQMS National Water Quality Management Strategy

OHS&W occupational health, safety and welfare

PIRSA Department of Primary Industries and Resources SA

PM2.5 particulate matter less than 2.5 micrometres in diameter

PM10 particulate matter less than 10 micrometres in diameter

ppm parts per million

RPC Act Radiation Protection and Control Act 1982

SA Water South Australian Water Corporation

S@W Sustainability at Work

SOI Statement of Intent

TOD transit oriented development

TWP TravelSmart Workplace Program

μg/m3 Micrograms per cubic metre

μm micrometre

Waste EPP Environment Protection (Waste to Resources) Policy 2010

Water Quality EPP Environment Protection (Water Quality) Policy 2003

WQOs water quality objectives

ZWSA ZeroWaste SA


Annual Report on the administration of the Radiation Protection and Control Act 1982

1 July 2009 to 30 June 2010


1 July 2009 to 30 June 2010

For further information please contact:

Information Officer


GPO Box 2607

Adelaide SA 5001

Telephone: (08) 8204 2004

Facsimile: (08) 8124 4670

Free call (country): 1800 623 445

Website: <www.epa.sa.gov.au>

Email: <[email protected]>

ISSN 1322-1662

ISBN 978-1-921495-03-8

September 2010

© Environment Protection Authority

This document may be reproduced in whole or part for the purpose of study or training, subject to the

inclusion of an acknowledgment of the source and to it not being used for commercial purposes or sale.

Reproduction for purposes other than those given above requires the prior written permission of the

Environment Protection Authority.

Printed on recycled paper


mailto:[email protected]

CONTENTS

LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL ........................................................................................................................ 1

FOREWORD ................................................................................................................................................. 3

INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................................................... 5

STRATEGIC DIRECTIONS........................................................................................................................... 6

KEY PROJECTS AND INITIATIVES ............................................................................................................ 7

RADIATION PROTECTION COMMITTEE ................................................................................................. 11

REGISTRATIONS AND LICENSING.......................................................................................................... 13

EXEMPTIONS GRANTED UNDER THE RPC ACT ................................................................................... 17

RADIATION INCIDENTS AND ACCIDENTS ............................................................................................. 18

NATIONAL ACTIVITIES ............................................................................................................................. 19

INTERNATIONAL ACTIVITIES .................................................................................................................. 20

TRAINING AND CONFERENCES.............................................................................................................. 21

ABBREVIATIONS....................................................................................................................................... 23

List of tables

Table 1 Personal licences and registrations under the RPC Act ............................................................ 13

1

LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL

The Hon Paul Caica, MP

Minister for Environment and Conservation

Parliament House

North Terrace

ADELAIDE

South Australia 5000

Dear Minister

I am pleased to present the Annual Report on the administration of the Radiation Protection and Control Act

1982 for the period 1 July 2009 to 30 June 2010, for tabling in parliament in accordance with section 22 of

the Radiation Protection and Control Act.

Yours sincerely

Helen Fulcher

Chief Executive


30 September 2010

3

FOREWORD

The EPA radiation protection functions serve to protect people and the environment from the harmful effects of radiation and provide a high-quality service to its licensees. As well as assessing licence applications, relevant staff respond to many enquiries from the public regarding radiation safety issues. The EPA obtains advice from the Radiation Protection Committee on licences and conditions to which they are subject, and other aspects of radiation protection.

Other areas of the EPA’s responsibility include: assessment and inspections of uranium mining operations, X-ray apparatus, sealed radioactive sources and premises in which unsealed radioactive substances are handled; investigations of radiation accidents and incidents; assisting in the development of national standards and codes of practice for radiation protection; regulation of solaria; assessment and licensing of radiation users; providing expert advice on radiation incident response; and promoting good radiation protection practices among users of radiation.

In order to address the increasing number of X-ray machines, in 2008–09 the EPA introduced a system for accreditation of people who may conduct third-party tests on X-ray machines and issue a certificate of compliance to enable registration. The system is being introduced in stages to allow for preparation of protocols for testing different types of dental and medical X-ray machines and accreditation of the testers. The first stage of the project, which involved the development of protocols for testing and accrediting testers of Plain Dental X-ray machines, was completed in 2008–09. During 2009–10 the EPA progressed with Stage 2 of the project which involved basic medical, chiropractic and veterinary X-ray units.

In 2009-10, applications for mining and mineral processing approvals continued to increase. The EPA is working with other agencies, such as the Department of Primary Industries and Resources SA, to develop more effective and efficient regulatory regimes in order to manage the expansion of mining and mineral processing.

In December 2009 an important milestone was reached with the ownership of the former British atomic weapons test site at Maralinga when the Commonwealth returned the Maralinga site to the South Australian Government for addition to the Maralinga Tjarutja freehold lands. This was the culmination of several years’ work of the Maralinga Consultative Group, which had representation from the Commonwealth Government, South Australian Government (including the EPA) and traditional owners: the Maralinga Tjarutja. The Consultative Group’s tasks included developing a detailed long-term management plan for the site (the Maralinga Land and Environment Management Plan) which includes radiation monitoring and environmental surveillance of the site.

At the national level, the EPA contributed to the development of radiation protection codes of practice and standards that are published by the Australian Radiation Protection and Nuclear Safety Agency (ARPANSA) and developed by the ARPANSA Radiation Health Committee, which is chaired by the Director of the EPA Regulation Compliance Division.

The EPA also hosted several groups of international visitors seeking information on uranium mining practices and the regulatory approach used in SA.

I thank the members of the Radiation Protection Committee for their contribution and valued advice and the staff for the continued application of their expertise during this year..

Helen Fulcher

Chief Executive


30 September 2010


5

INTRODUCTION

This report provides information on the administration of the Radiation Protection and Control Act 1982

(RPC Act) during the year 2009–10 by the Environment Protection Authority (EPA), when carrying out its

RPC Act functions.

The RPC Act is committed to the Minister for Environment and Conservation, who has delegated roles,

functions and powers under the RPC Act and its Regulations (pursuant to section 8 of the RPC Act) to the

Chief Executive (CE) of the Environment Protection Authority (EPA). The CE further delegates

responsibilities for administration and enforcement of the RPC Act to officers of the EPA.

The purpose of the RPC Act is to protect the environment, and the health and safety of people against the

harmful effects of radiation. It provides for the control of activities related to radioactive substances and

radiation apparatus. Section 22 of the RPC Act requires the EPA to present a report to the minister on the

administration of the RPC Act following each financial year, for tabling in each House of Parliament.

The EPA gives administrative support to the Radiation Protection Committee, which is an expert advisory

body established under section 9 of the RPC Act. The committee advises the minister and the EPA about

the granting of licences under the RPC Act, radiation protection matters that it considers significant, and

matters that have been referred to the committee.

When carrying out its RPC Act functions, the EPA manages the review of legislation and adoption of

national standards, codes of practice and agreements for radiation protection. It also manages sources of

ionising radiation through registration and inspections of radiation apparatus, sealed radioactive sources

and premises where unsealed radioactive substances are kept or handled, as well as licensing individuals

who use or handle radioactive substances or operate radiation apparatus, and licensing uranium mines.

Officers of the Radiation Protection Branch of the EPA who are appointed as authorised officers under

section 16 of the RPC Act, undertake surveillance of sources of radiation used in South Australia to ensure

compliance with the RPC Act and its Regulations. Officers of the Investigations Branch have also been

appointed as authorised officers under the RPC Act. These officers investigate alleged breaches of the

RPC Act and Regulations.

As at 30 June 2010, the Radiation Protection Branch had 11 scientific and technical staff, and two clerical

staff responsible for administration of the RPC Act.


STRATEGIC DIRECTIONS

Strategic planning for radiation protection and control

The goal of the EPA in carrying out its RPC Act functions is to protect the environment and the community

from unacceptable radiation. This forms part of the EPA Strategic Plan 2009–2012.

During 2009–10, the work focused on:

1 Strategies that enable the control of doses of radiation to the public, such that they are as low as

reasonably achievable by:

contributing to the development of competency criteria and evaluating competencies for users of

radiation

developing strategies to address the increasing doses from new medical imaging technologies.

2 Systems to effectively regulate an expanding uranium mining industry through a regulatory framework

in consultation with other departments and operators that allows cost-effective, risk-based and equitable

regulation of uranium mines.

3 Effective legislation that incorporates national and international standards through developing proposals

for updating the RPC Act and associated Regulations.

4 Implementing the National Directory for Radiation Protection.

5 Implementing the national Code of Practice for Security of Radioactive Sources.

6 Progressing the introduction of third-party accredited testing of dental and medical X-ray machines.

6


KEY PROJECTS AND INITIATIVES

Third-party accredited testing of dental and medical X-ray apparatus

The numbers, complexity and use of medical imaging apparatus have increased significantly in South

Australia over the past several years. To deal with this increase, the EPA established a project to introduce

third-party accredited testing of dental and medical X-ray apparatus. The project involves the development

of protocols for testing dental and medical X-ray apparatus, and for accrediting suitably qualified people to

conduct the tests. The objective of the project is to enable third-party compliance testing and approval of

registration of compliant apparatus under section 32 of the RPC Act.

Third-party testing program is being implemented in four stages:

1 Stage 1 covers dental plain radiography X-ray units.

2 Stage 2 covers fixed and mobile X-ray units used for medical, chiropractic and veterinary plain

radiography.

3 Stage 3 covers Computed Tomography (CT), fluoroscopy and mammography X-ray apparatus.

4 Stage 4 covers orthopantomography (OPG) and Cone Beam Computed Tomography (CBCT)

apparatus.

The EPA has completed the first two stages of the project which involved the development of protocols for

testing and accrediting testers of Plain Dental X-ray apparatus (completed in 2008–09) and development of

protocols for testing and for accrediting testers of fixed and mobile X-ray units used for medical, chiropractic

and veterinary plain radiography. Third-party testing of the latter began at the end of the 2009–10 period

with a significant uptake expected in 2010-11.

The EPA proposes to introduce Stages 3 and 4 during 2011–12.

Information about the accredited testing of X-ray apparatus and the procedure for applying for accreditation

can be found on the EPA website.

Laboratory and technical services

During 2009–10 the EPA completed the fitout of a new radiation laboratory and radioactive source store in

Adelaide. The EPA’s previous radiation laboratory at Kent Town was de-commissioned with as much of the

fittings and equipment as practical being reused in the new laboratory. The new laboratory includes a

gamma calibration rig for calibrating radiation survey meters, gamma spectroscopy equipment, a dark room

for processing exposed X-ray film, a radon chamber used for calibrating equipment to measure radon and

radon decay product in air concentrations, a Type C radionuclide premises, and a store for radioactive

sources. The new laboratory was commissioned in November 2009.

Managing South Australia's mining development

During 2009–10, the EPA continued to contribute to the management of South Australia's uranium and

mineral sands mining through a period of significant increase in exploration and development. The EPA

assessed licences and other mining and mineral processing applications, provided guidance to explorers

and worked with operators, other state agencies and the Commonwealth to ensure proposed and current

operations meet their environment and health protection obligations effectively.

7

http://www.epa.sa.gov.au/environmental_info/radiation/regulation_of_x-ray_machines/third_party_acceditation


The EPA is working with the Department of Primary Industries and Resources South Australia (PIRSA) to

improve the uranium mining regulatory framework. It has been actively involved with the Uranium Industry

Framework (UIF) comprising Commonwealth and state governments, and industry groups. The UIF seeks

to harmonise regulatory arrangements across jurisdictions, ensure an effective and transparent regulatory

regime and ensure effective and efficient coordination between relevant regulatory agencies. The UIF is

also considering the training and skills needs for an expanded uranium mining industry in Australia.

Population dose reduction strategy in diagnostic imaging

During 2009–10, the EPA progressed its strategy for reducing doses to patients from medical imaging and

promoted best practice through sharing knowledge with, and providing advice to, operators, owners and

suppliers of X-ray equipment. It also made available quality assurance test equipment to radiation safety

professionals to undertake tests to achieve dose reduction in diagnostic imaging.

Secure storage and use of radioactive sources

The EPA conducted inspections and audits of radioactive material to ensure its safe storage and use.

In April 2007, the Council of Australian Governments agreed to recommendations about the secure storage,

possession, use and transport of radioactive material to minimise the risk of such material being misused by

terrorists. The Code of practice: Security of radioactive sources (Security Code) was published by the

Australian Radiation Protection and Nuclear Safety Agency (ARPANSA) in January 2007. Implementation

of the Security Code within all jurisdictions of Australia began on 1 July 2009.

In August 2009, the EPA informed owners of registered sealed radioactive sources detailing responsibilities

under the Security Code. Owners of Category 1–3 security enhanced sources were required to submit a

source security plan to the EPA by the end of December 2009 outlining their physical and procedural

security arrangements for assessment by security advisors from ARPANSA. The letter to owners of sources

also advised that additional conditions requiring compliance with the Security Code would be placed on the

registration of those sources.

In May 2010, the EPA along with ARPANSA, conducted site inspections of radioactive material stores

containing Category 2 or 3 security enhanced sources. There were no Category 1 sources in South

Australia. Advice on the requirements of the Security Code was provided to the owners of Category 2 or 3

security enhanced sources.

The EPA has continued working in conjunction with ARPANSA to develop an automated update on security

Category 2 sources to the National Sealed Source Register (NSSR). In February 2010, information from all

of the Category 2 security enhanced sources was uploaded to the NSSR. It is proposed that the NSSR will

eventually be expanded to include security Category 3 sources.

Radioactive waste management

The EPA conducted inspections and audits of radioactive waste material to ensure its safe storage. In

addition to site visits, the EPA requires businesses to complete an annual audit of radioactive material in

their possession and provide the EPA with details of the radiation source, its activity, its location and if it is

regarded as waste.

During 2009–10 the EPA approved radioactive waste management plans (RWMP) of organisations that use

or store unsealed radioactive material. These organisations included:

universities (3)

8


pathology laboratories (4)

hospitals (4)

private nuclear medicine facilities (5)

veterinary clinics (2)

water testing company (1)

scientific laboratories (4).

The approval of the RWMPs for some organisations included an approval to dispose of very low-level

radioactive waste via fume hoods, incineration, or the sewerage system.

Radioactive tailings and residues from mining or mineral processing activities are managed in accordance

with industry best practice and authorisations and approvals granted under the Code of practice on

radiation protection and radioactive waste management in mining and mineral processing (2005). The code

is applied to all mining or mineral processing operations licensed or registered under the RPC Act.

Regulation of solaria

In 2008, the Radiation Protection and Control (Cosmetic Tanning Units) Regulations 2008 (Tanning Units

Regulations) and the Radiation Protection and Control (Non-ionising Radiation) Regulations 2008 (NIR

Regulations) were released under the RPC Act.

The Tanning Units Regulations came into operation on 14 March 2008 and require solaria businesses to

comply with the Australian and New Zealand Standard AS/NZS 2635:2008: Solaria for cosmetic purposes.

The NIR Regulations came into effect on 1 March 2009 and require owners and operators of cosmetic

tanning units to be licensed under section 31(1)(b) of the RPC Act. In order to obtain a licence, applicants

are required to demonstrate appropriate knowledge of the health effects of UV radiation and regulatory

requirements for solaria by passing a licence examination prepared and administered by the EPA.

At the end of the 2009–10 financial year, there were 45 businesses operating tanning units compared with

48 operating at the end of the 2008–09 financial year. Similar to 2008–09, there were 102 licensed

operators.

In 2009–10, the EPA in collaboration with the Cancer Council SA and the Flinders University School of

Public Health commenced work on a project to conduct a quantitative study of compliance with the Tanning

Units Regulations. The study includes the measurement of ultraviolet radiation output from tanning units,

and a qualitative study of solaria owners, operators and clients. The project is expected to be completed by

December 2010.

The information gained from the study will be unique as there have been no studies in Australia looking at

compliance post-regulations and little information on the output of tanning units is available. This study will

identify any barriers to compliance and why people use solaria.

Community information and advice

The EPA provided significant support to the community in the area of non-ionising radiation.

Sources of non-ionising radiation include mobile telephones and base stations, powerlines, lasers and

solaria used for cosmetic purposes. The harmful effects from exposure to high levels of non-ionising

radiation are well-known, but whether there are harmful effects from chronic low-level exposure is less

clear.

9


10

The EPA responded to a large number of enquiries from the public on the potential risks from exposure to

extremely low-frequency magnetic fields associated with electricity in homes and powerlines. The EPA

continued to make available to the public a simple-to-use, magnetic-field-strength meter, which has proved

very useful for educating the public and allaying fears and concerns of parents regarding potential risks to

children from exposure to magnetic fields.

The EPA advises the government, industry and the public about radiation safety for non-ionising radiation,

and continually reviews ongoing research on this issue.

Review of the Radiation Protection and Control Act

The review of the RPC Act is primarily aimed at implementing national agreements for radiation protection

legislation including the adoption of: provisions of the National Directory for Radiation Protection (National

Directory) published by ARPANSA; the recommendations of the report, National competition policy review

of radiation protection legislation; and requirements of the Code of practice: Security of radioactive sources.

During 2009–10, the EPA continued with the development of proposals to amend the RPC Act.

Competency criteria for users of radiation

During 2009–10, an officer of the EPA chaired a national working group developing competency criteria for

radiation users. The national Industry Skills Council for government industry, Government Skills Australia,

completed units of competency in nine key areas. It is intended that these will be adopted nationally.

Radiation emergency response

The EPA is the agency responsible for providing expert advice to the combatant authority, the fire services,

in incidents and emergencies involving radioactive material. During 2009–10, there were no such incidents

attended by the EPA.

Officers of the EPA participated in the following emergency response-related committees:

State Chemical, Biological, Radiological and Nuclear (CBRN) Committee

State CBRN Committee—Scientific Advisory Group

Health Emergency Management Advisory Committee

Health Emergency Management Response Sub Committee.

The EPA provided training to emergency service personnel for responding to incidents and emergencies

involving radioactive substances, as outlined later in this report.


RADIATION PROTECTION COMMITTEE

The Radiation Protection Committee consists of 10 members, one of whom is the Presiding Member of the

committee, appointed by the governor pursuant to section 9 of the RPC Act. The Presiding Member must

be an officer or employee of the department of the minister to whom the RPC Act is committed (the EPA).

The specific membership qualifications and expertise relevant to the administration of the RPC Act are

prescribed in section 9 of the RPC Act.

Section 10 of the RPC Act provides that the governor may appoint a suitable person to be a deputy member

of the committee.

The EPA provides the committee with administrative support and seeks the committee’s advice on strategic

issues and issues related to the expertise of its members. The functions and legislative responsibilities of

the committee, as set out in section 12 of the RPC Act, are to:

advise the minister in relation to the formulation of Regulations under this Act

advise the minister in relation to the granting of licences under this Act, including the conditions to which

they should be subject

investigate and report on any other matters relevant to the administration of this Act at the request of

the minister or of its own motion.

Membership

The three-year term of the current committee members expires on 31 December 2010. As at 30 June 2010,

the members and deputy members, in relation to the section of the RPC Act under which they were

appointed, are listed below.

Members Section of Act Deputy members

Ms Helen Fulcher (Presiding Member) s9(2)(a) –

Dr S Constantine s9(2)(b) Dr MJ Moss

Ms LM Ingram s9(2)(c) Ms SJ Hartman

Ms SM Paulka s9(2)(d) Ms K Taylor

Dr GS Laurence s9(2)(e) Mr PJ Collins

Mrs J Fitch s9(2)(f) Dr E Bezak

Dr MI Kitchener s9(2)(g) Dr BE Chatterton

Vacant s9(2)(h) Vacant

Dr PJ Sykes s9(2)(i) Dr MT Lardelli

Mr T Circelli s9(2)(j) Vacant

The member appointed under s9(h), Serge Caplygin, resigned from the Committee on 3 January 2010. The

position remained vacant for the remainder of the period.

11


12

Meeting outcomes

During 2009–10, the committee met on four occasions and considered many of the matters addressed in

this report. The committee also discussed and provided expert advice on a number of strategic issues,

including the use of information from the Australian Radiation Incidents Register to promote radiation safety

awareness and prevent radiation incidents, and medical physicist skills shortages.

Members and deputy members of the committee also participated in working groups established to consider

the review of the RPC Act and advised the EPA on proposed amendments to radiation protection legislation

and on licences and exemptions granted under the RPC Act, radiation protection training and accreditation,

closure criteria for Port Pirie and Radium Hill legacy sites, and applications for licences under section 24 of

the RPC Act to mine or mill radioactive ores.


REGISTRATIONS AND LICENSING

Personal radiation licences and registrations of equipment and premises are renewed annually. Table 1

presents the number of current personal licences and registrations and the number of new applications for

licences and registrations under the RPC Act, as at 30 June 2010.

Table 1 Personal licences and registrations under the RPC Act

Type of licence or

registration

Section of RPC

Act

Number

currently

licensed/

registered

Number subject

to new

application

Number

approved

2009–10

Licence to use or handle radioactive substances

28 971 34 203

Licence to operate ionising radiation apparatus

31(1)(a) 4186 56 598

Licence to operate a non-ionising radiation apparatus (cosmetic tanning units)

31(1)(b) 109 7 40

Registration of ionising radiation apparatus

32 1783 519* 293

Registration of sealed radioactive sources

30 624 111 51

Registration of premises in which unsealed radioactive substances are handled or kept

29 169 17 13

Total 7842 744 1198

* The number 519 primarily results from a significant increase in applications for registration of dental and

medical ionising radiation apparatus over the last two to three years.

The number of applications received for registration of dental and medical ionising radiation apparatus four

years ago was 158 compared with some 320 applications received during 2008–09, and 334 applications

received during 2009–10. This increase is mainly due to medical dental, chiropractic and veterinary

practices upgrading X-ray equipment with modern equipment, including digital and computer radiography X-

ray machines.

In addition to people holding personal radiation licences, it is estimated that 2000–3000 people, who are not

required to be licensed, were employed in occupations involving exposure to ionising radiation. These

include workers at Olympic Dam, Beverley and Honeymoon uranium projects, workers in Type C premises,

operators of cabinet X-ray units and fully enclosed industrial X-ray units, users of industrial radiation gauges

and people assisting with medical, dental and veterinary X-ray procedures.

Where required under the provisions of the RPC Act, radiation doses of radiation workers are monitored

using approved personal dosimeters supplied by a number of businesses. The suppliers provide the

employers of radiation workers and the EPA with the results of personal monitoring. All doses of radiation

workers recorded were below the occupational limits prescribed in the Regulations, and both the average

and median of doses received by all workers were well below occupational limits.

13


Licences to mine and mill radioactive ores

Licences to mine and mill radioactive ores, issued under section 24 of the RPC Act, are currently held by:

BHP Billiton (Olympic Dam Corporation) Pty Ltd (Olympic Dam operations), Licence No. LM1

Heathgate Resources Pty Ltd (Beverley uranium project), Licence No. LM4

Uranium One Australia Pty Ltd (Honeymoon uranium project), Licence No. LM5

Oban Energy Pty Ltd (Oban uranium field leach trial project).

The licences are subject to conditions that include compliance with ARPANSA’s Code of practice on

radiation protection and radioactive waste management in mining and mineral processing.

The EPA oversees regulatory compliance of uranium mining activities by auditing companies’ monitoring

results and conducting inspections and independent monitoring. Each licensed company also provides

quarterly occupational and environmental radiation monitoring data, including dose assessments, to the

EPA. These reports are examined, compared with the EPA’s monitoring results where appropriate, and

reviewed with company officers at quarterly meetings.

Olympic Dam operations

During 2009–10 BHP Billiton (Olympic Dam Corporation) Pty Ltd submitted the BHP Billiton Annual

Radiation Report and LM1 Annual Licence Report for 2008–09. These reports were reviewed by the

Radiation Protection Committee on 3 December 2009. The LM1 report included an assessment of the

adequacy and effectiveness of radiation protection measures. The dose summary indicated that the

average dose for all designated workers in the mine and processing plant was 3.4 millisieverts (mSv) and

2.7 mSv, respectively, compared with the 20–mSv average annual limit for radiation workers. The maximum

individual dose received was 13.1 mSv (66% of the 20–mSv limit).

The company also submitted the BHP Billiton Annual Report of the Environmental Management and

Monitoring Program for 2008–09. The report confirmed that the radiological effects of the operation remain

small and confined within the mining lease area. It also confirmed that the annual radiation dose to

members of the public living in Olympic Dam Village and Roxby Downs was less than the detection limit for

the methods used (5% of the 1–mSv annual limit for members of the public).

Officers of the EPA visited the site on four occasions for radiation review meetings, inspections and as

sponsors of International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) scientific visitors.

The process of developing an environmental impact statement (EIS) for the BHP Billiton expansion project

began in 2005. The EPA is participating in the assessment of the EIS, which was released for public

comment for the period 1 May to 7 August 2009.

Beverley uranium project

Heathgate Resources Pty Ltd‘s Beverley uranium project is located approximately 600 km north of

Adelaide. The company’s licence to conduct uranium mining operations at the site was renewed for a

further 12 months from 4 August 2009.

In late 2009, Heathgate Resources commenced work on gaining the state and Commonwealth approvals

necessary to conduct in-situ leach uranium mining operations at the Beverley North prospect, located

approximately 9 km from the existing Beverley site.

14


Honeymoon uranium project

Uranium One Australia Pty Ltd Honeymoon uranium project site is located approximately 75 km northwest

of Broken Hill. The company’s licence to conduct uranium mining operations at the site was renewed for a

further 12 months from 6 October 2009.

In April 2009, authorisation was granted by the EPA to commence construction of the plant and well field.

Construction continued during 2009–10 with commissioning expected to commence in late 2010.

Beverley Four Mile uranium project

On 26 May 2009, the EPA received an application under section 24 of the RPC Act from Quasar Resources

and Alliance Craton Explorer Joint Venture for a licence to mine or mill radioactive ores at the Beverley Four

Mile Project. The proposed mine is a uranium in-situ recovery operation. At the end of 2009–10, the

granting of a licence was pending resolution of Joint Venturer discussions concerning the future operation

of the mine.

Oban uranium project

The licence granted to Oban Energy Ltd (a subsidiary of Curnamona Energy Ltd) for developmental testing

of processes at its Oban site, northwest of Broken Hill, was renewed on 19 May 2010. The operators

applied to conduct a uranium in-situ recovery field trial at the Oban site. Construction approval for the field

leach trial (FLT) plant and well field was expected to be granted by the EPA in mid-2010.

Transport of uranium ore concentrate

Uranium ore concentrate from Olympic Dam and Beverley mines is transported by road to Outer Harbor, in

accordance with the Regulations for the safe transport of radioactive substances. It is then exported either

directly from Outer Harbor or transported via rail to Darwin for shipment overseas.

Transport of uranium ore concentrate from the Olympic Dam and Beverley mines was conducted without

incident in the reporting period.

Registration of mining operations

Some mining operations do not involve radioactive ore, but may generate process streams and wastes that

are defined as radioactive materials. Where there is sufficient radiological risk to warrant regulation, these

operations are registered as premises under section 29 of the RPC Act. Conditions of registration are

similar to those attached to licences issued under section 24 of the RPC Act, to protect people and the

environment from radiological hazards. The primary condition is compliance with ARPANSA’s Code of

practice on radiation protection and radioactive waste management in mining and mineral processing.

Mining and mineral processing operations registered under the RPC Act are:

Australian Zircon Mindarie mineral sand operation in the Western Murray Basin

Iluka Resources Ltd mineral sand operation west of Ceduna

Prominent Hill Prospect copper mine near Coober Pedy.

15


Registration of former uranium mining and milling sites

The sites of the former Radium Hill uranium mine and the Port Pirie Treatment Plant that in the past

processed uranium ore from Radium Hill have been registered as premises under section 29 of the RPC

Act since 2003. The registered occupier of the sites is the Minister for Mineral Resources Development.

Conditions attached to the registrations require the development of appropriate long-term management

plans for the sites and site characterisation of both sites. Site characterisation work continued during the

reporting period.

Maralinga

At 1 July 2009, the former British atomic weapons test site at Maralinga (Section 400 land parcel) was

Commonwealth Government land, and a licensed facility (Maralinga Facility Licence FV0043) under the

Australian Radiation Protection and Nuclear Safety Act 1998. The site includes burial trenches containing

radioactive materials, which were constructed during the Commonwealth Government Maralinga

Rehabilitation Project, completed in 2000.

On 18 December 2009, the Maralinga Tjarutja and the South Australian and Commonwealth governments

attended a ceremony at the Maralinga Village for the return of the Maralinga lands to the traditional owners.

The Commonwealth Government returned the Maralinga site, including Maralinga Village and the airfield, to

the South Australian Government for addition to the Maralinga Tjarutja freehold lands. This was a significant

achievement for the Maralinga Tjarutja, which had for many years campaigned for the clean-up and return

of the lands.

In the lead up to the hand-back, the Maralinga Consultative Group, which has representation from the

Commonwealth and South Australian governments (including the EPA carrying out its RPC Act functions),

and traditional owners (Maralinga Tjarutja) developed a detailed management plan, which will provide for

long-term radiation monitoring and surveillance of the site.

The Maralinga site is now registered as a premises under the RPC Act in the name of Maralinga Tjarutja.

16


EXEMPTIONS GRANTED UNDER THE RPC ACT

Under section 44 of the RPC Act, the minister or delegate is empowered to grant exemptions from any

specified provision of the RPC Act, provided such action would not endanger the health or safety of any

person. The authority to grant exemptions has been delegated to the CE of the EPA, and further delegated

to Director Regulation and Compliance, and Manager Radiation Protection Branch.

After careful consideration the following exemptions from provisions of the RPC Act and regulations were

granted, subject to conditions specified in exemption notices that were published in the South Australian

Government Gazette:

A conditional exemption from Regulation 18 of the Radiation Protection and Control (Ionising Radiation)

Regulations 2000 (the requirement for employers to provide personal radiation monitors to employees)

was granted to employers of persons who are involved in the use of radiation gauges containing a

source of ionising radiation, whose annual effective dose would not exceed 1 mSv as a result of any

involvement in the use or operation of radiation gauges..

Two conditional exemptions from the requirements of Regulation 40 were granted to permit diagnostic

radiographers to perform plain radiography authorised by Physician Assistants at the Queen Elizabeth

Hospital.

An exemption from Regulation 91(10) was granted for University of Adelaide to allow the ownership and

use of a NOMAD Hand Held Dental X-ray that is used for forensic odontology purposes only. Special

licence and registration conditions apply.

17


18

RADIATION INCIDENTS AND ACCIDENTS

The Regulations under the RPC Act require employers of radiation workers, owners of X-ray apparatus or

sealed radioactive sources, and occupiers of premises where unsealed radioactive substances are used or

handled to promptly report to the EPA any radiation accidents. Radiation accidents include situations where

the control of a radiation source has been lost or a person has received or may have received an accidental

exposure to ionising radiation. The EPA investigates radiation accidents and incidents to determine the

cause and any remedial action that could be taken to prevent a recurrence. During the period the EPA

received 12 reports of radiation accidents or incidents. None of these is known to have resulted in an

adverse health outcome. A summary of the types of accidents and incidents, in each category, is given

below.

Nuclear medicine: 2 incidents

In one incident the patient was given a radiopharmaceutical due to mistaken identity, and in the other a

member of staff spilled a quantity of radiopharmaceutical in a nuclear medicine department.

Radiation therapy: 1 incident

In this incident brachytherapy sources inadvertently dislodged from a patient during treatment.

Diagnostic radiology: 9 incidents

Four incidents involved unnecessary CT scans, 2 due to mistaken identity, 1 due to duplication of a request

form, and 1 due to the misinterpretation of prior clinical information. One incident involved an unnecessary

orthopantomographic examination due to mistaken identity. One incident involved a CT scan of patient who

was later found to be pregnant. There were two incidents where CT images of patients were inadvertently

deleted resulting in the radiologist’s report not being available to support the patient’s care. There was one

incident where a patient who received radiography of their pelvis was later found to be pregnant.

Details of accidents and incidents involving exposure or potential exposure to radiation are provided to

ARPANSA for the Australian Radiation Incidents Register. These details are confidential.

Uranium mining incidents

Uranium mining operations in South Australia are required to record and report incidents and events (for

example, spills of process materials) as part of approved radiation management plans and in accordance

with the ‘Bachmann Criteria’ established for uranium mines in South Australia. During the period, two

incidents were publicly reported under the approved incident reporting procedures for uranium mines. There

were no environmental impacts or hazards to workers arising from the incidents.

Details of events reported for Olympic Dam, Beverley and Honeymoon under the Bachmann Criteria, are

available through the PIRSA website.

http://www.pir.sa.gov.au/minerals/sa_mines/approved_mines


NATIONAL ACTIVITIES

To ensure that South Australia’s regulation of activities involving radiation keeps pace with international and

national best practice, the EPA takes part in international and national activities to the extent that resources

permit. The EPA’s involvement in these activities during 2009–10 is summarised below.

Radiation Health Committee

The Radiation Health Committee (RHC) is established under the Australian Radiation Protection and

Nuclear Safety Act 1998 (ARPANS Act). The RHC develops policies and prepares draft publications for the

promotion of uniform national standards of radiation protection throughout Australia and its states and

territories, and advises on matters relating to radiation protection to the Chief Executive Officer of

ARPANSA and the Radiation Health and Safety Advisory Council.

Membership of the RHC includes a radiation control officer representing each of the states and territories.

The South Australian representative is EPA’s Director Regulation and Compliance, who chairs the RHC.

Summaries of meetings of the RHC may be found on the ARPANSA website at:

<www.arpansa.gov.au/AboutUs/Committees/rhcmt.cfm>.

Radiation Health and Safety Advisory Council

The Radiation Health and Safety Advisory Council (RHSAC) is established under the ARPANS Act. It

advises the Chief Executive Officer of ARPANSA on a range of matters, including emerging issues, matters

of major concern to the community and the adoption of codes, standards, recommendations and policies on

radiation protection and nuclear safety. During 2009–10 EPA Director Regulation and Compliance and a

member of the South Australian Radiation Protection Committee were members of the council.

Summaries of meetings of the RHSAC can be found on the ARPANSA website at:

<www.arpansa.gov.au/AboutUs/Committees/rhsacmt.cfm>.

National Directory for Radiation Protection

During 2009–10 the EPA provided advice to the Department of Health with regard to Amendment 4, to

adopt uniform regulatory requirements to control the use of solaria for cosmetic purposes. This amendment

was endorsed by Health Ministers in April 2010.

The National Directory was republished by ARPANSA in April 2010 to include this and another three

amendments that had previously been endorsed by Health Ministers.

Australian National Radiation Dose Register (ANRDR)

Work on implementing the ANRDR is proceeding with an official launch of the project expected in the

second half of 2010. The EPA has approved a request from BHP Billiton to release the Olympic Dam

uranium worker information to ARPANSA, and is examining the approval process required to ensure the

confidentiality of that information.

19


INTERNATIONAL ACTIVITIES

The involvement of EPA staff in international meetings and hosting international scientific visits was

requested by the IAEA and Australian Safeguards and Non-Proliferation Office (ASNO) because of the

status and reputation that South Australia has nationally and internationally in uranium mining and radiation

protection regulation. The EPA has been involved on an in-kind basis, with all financial outlay being covered

by other agencies.

During the reporting period, the EPA hosted IAEA technical missions from Norway, China and Mongolia

seeking information on uranium mining practices and details of the regulatory approach used in SA.

IAEA Mission to Caetité, Brazil—January 2010

An officer of the EPA participated in an International Atomic Energy Agency mission to assess uranium

mining at Caetité in Brazil against international standards. The mission involved assessment of environment

protection (in particular protection of surface and underground waters), radiation protection, waste

management, social licensing and management of regulation. Other members of the mission were from

Czech Republic, Canada, France and the IAEA in Austria.

Mission to Colombia—March 2010

An officer of the EPA participated in an Australian government and uranium industry mission to Colombia in

March 2010, to meet with Colombian government officials concerning the transport of uranium oxide

concentrate (UOC) from Australia through the Colombian port of Cartagena. The EPA officer’s participation

was as a principal regulator of radiation safety who could explain regulatory and radiation safety aspects of

transport of UOC.

Asia Region ALARA Network

The Asia Region ALARA Network (ARAN) was formed in Daejeon, Republic of Korea, in December 2007.

The main objectives of ARAN include:

supporting the development of a sustainable regional network, which facilitates information, findings

and data exchange, and practical and cost-effective implementation of the principle of optimisation of

radiation protection in participating countries

maintaining, enhancing and developing competence and skills in radiation protection, with special

emphasis on the implementation of the ALARA (as low as reasonably achievable) principle for

occupational exposures during routine operations.

Australia’s representative on the ARAN Steering Committee is the EPA Director Regulation and

Compliance.

An EPA officer represented Australia at the IAEA sponsored ARAN meeting held in Beijing in October 2009

on radiation protection in naturally occurring radioactive material (NORM) producing industries.

The Asia Region ALARA Network (ARAN) workshop on radiation exposures in medicine will be held in

Adelaide In October 2010.

20


21

TRAINING AND CONFERENCES

Emergency response training

Under the auspices of the National Counter Terrorism Committee (NCTC), the Chemical Biological

Radiological and Nuclear Security Sub Committee (CBRN SSC) conducted a scenario workshop in each

jurisdiction of Australia in the first half of 2010.

Officers of the EPA attended the workshop conducted in Adelaide on 27–28 April 2010. Two counter

terrorism scenarios were tested during the workshop; the first being a chemical incident, the second a

biological incident.

The objective of the scenario workshop was to assist jurisdictions to:

enable a better understanding of their CBRN Counter Terrorism capability and capacity

identify any assumptions underpinning the actual or required capability

understand the areas in which a jurisdiction would or should seek external assistance, and determine

whether the supplier of assistance understands the requirement and could meet that expectation

assist jurisdictions in making informed decisions regarding actual or required CBRN capability and

capacity

identify possible areas for ongoing national collaboration.

An officer of the EPA also gave a presentation on radiation emergency response at an EPA Emergency

Response Training Seminar held 26–27 May 2010.

Advanced Safety officer Training

Two officers of the EPA attended a five-day advanced radiation safety officer training course conducted by

the Australian Nuclear Safety and Technology Organisation from 3–7 May 2010.

Conference presentations

In October 2009, three officers of the EPA presented at the annual conference of the Australasian Radiation

Protection Society in Fremantle, Western Australia. The main focus of the conference was on radiation

protection in the mining and minerals processing industry. Officers gave presentations on the ‘Regulation of

uranium mining in South Australia’ and ‘Incident reporting at South Australian uranium mines’.

Also in October 2009 an officer attended the RANZCR/AIR/FRO/ACPSEM Combined Scientific Meeting

2009 in Brisbane, Queensland. The theme of the meeting was ‘Collaboration: Working and Learning

Together’.

In June 2010, two officers attended the AusIMM International Uranium Conference 2010 in Adelaide, South

Australia. The theme of the conference was ‘The Decade for Development’.


OTHER STATUTORY MATTERS

The EPA provides resources for administration of the RPC Act and, therefore, statutory reporting

requirements concerning the following issues are contained in the EPA Annual Report 2009–10:

financial performance of the Radiation Protection Committee

account payment performance

contractual arrangements

occupational health, safety and welfare

use of consultants

human resources

staffing

equal employment opportunity

disability action planning

energy efficiency action plan reporting

freedom of information

overseas travel

sustainability reporting.

22

Annual Report on the administration of the Radiation Protection and Control Act

23

ABBREVIATIONS

ACPSEM Australasian College of Physical Scientists and Engineers in Medicine

AIR Australian Institute of Radiography

ALARA as low as reasonably achievable

ARAN Asia Region ALARA Network

ARPANS Act Australian Radiation Protection and Nuclear Safety Act 1998

ARPANSA Australian Radiation Protection and Nuclear Safety Agency

AusIMM Australian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy

CBCT Cone Beam Computed Tomography

CBRN chemical, biological, radiological and nuclear

CT computed tomography

EIS environmental impact statement

EPA Environment Protection Authority

FRO Faculty of Radiation Oncology

IAEA International Atomic Energy Agency

mSv millisievert

National Directory National Directory for Radiation Protection: Edition 1

NIR Regulations Radiation Protection and Control (Non-ionising Radiation) Regulations 2008

NORM naturally occurring radioactive material

NSSR National Sealed Source Register

OPG orthopantomography

PIRSA Department of Primary Industries and Resources South Australia

RANZCR Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Radiologists

RHC Radiation Health Committee

RHSAC Radiation Health and Safety Advisory Council

RPC Act Radiation Protection and Control Act 1982

RWMP radioactive waste management plans

Security Code Code of practice: Security of radioactive sources

Tanning Units Regulations

Radiation Protection and Control (Cosmetic Tanning Units) Regulations 2008

the Standard Australian and New Zealand AS/NZS 2635:2002: Solaria for cosmetic purposes

UIF Uranium Industry Framework