ENVIRONMENT PROTECTION AUTHORITY - EPA · environment protection and management. In the last twelve...

ENVIRONMENT PROTECTION AUTHORITY

Annual Report 2003–2004

LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL

EPA Annual Report 2003–2004 i

The Hon John Hill MPMinister for Environment and ConservationParliament HouseNorth TerraceAdelaide SA 5000

Dear Minister

It is with pleasure that I present to you the Annual Report of the Environment Protection Authority for the period 1 July 2003 to 30 June 2004. This report has been prepared in accordance with the requirements of the Environment Protection Act 1993 and the Public Sector Management Act 1995.

Yours sincerely

Dr Paul VogelChief Executive and ChairEnvironment Protection Authority

30 September 2004

EPA Annual Report 2003–2004

This report provides an overview of the work of the Environment Protection Authority (EPA) as the body responsible for administering the EnvironmentProtection Act 1993 (the Act) and the Radiation Protection and Control Act 1982 (the RPC Act) for the period 1 July 2003 to 30 June 2004.

Under the Act, the EPA’s responsibilities cover a broad range of activities. These include regulation of activities that pose a risk to the environment, the development of Environment Protection Policies, environmental monitoring and evaluation, programs and investigations that promote ecological sustainability principles, and consultation with all levels of government, the private sector and the community in matters relating to environment protection and management.

In the last twelve months the EPA Board has consolidated its role as governing body, setting the direction for the EPA towards achieving the EPA’s vision of a clean, healthy and valued environment that supports social and economic prosperity for South Australians.

During its fi rst full year of operation, the Board established and implemented a comprehensive stakeholder and regional consultation program, providing it with relevant and timely information on the important issues facing communities and their environments.

The EPA Strategic Plan for 2004–07 was released on 16 June 2004. This document provides focus and direction for EPA policies and programs and it is intended that, by the end of the year, this document will be reviewed using information gained from its consultation program.

The EPA Board has been investigating the contribution of the EPA in the continuing sustainability agenda, the focus of the 2004 EPA Round-table. In addition to its regular consultation program the EPA Board met with Adelaide Thinker in Residence, Professor Peter Cullen to hear his views about water quality and use issues. As a result of this session, the EPA is focusing greater attention on urban planning issues in the Adelaide Hills Water Catchment.

The State of the Environment Report was released in November 2003, highlighting some challenges and opportunities for environmental management in South Australia. Water use and quality, marine and coastal environments, as well as climate change and species loss were identifi ed in the report as key environmental priorities for South Australia; the EPA Board provided key recommendations for each priority.

Further, as a result of the many confl icting land use issues, the EPA remains concerned about the inadequacy of integration between land use planning and environmental impact assessment by planning authorities. The EPA looks forward to the government’s response to this and other issues raised in the 2003 State of the Environment Report.

For its part, the EPA’s priorities include building its environmental policy development capability, implementing best practice (smart) environmental regulation, adopting a risk-based approach to environmental management using the best available information, and developing targeted community engagement and business sustainability strategies.

There was continued progress in the last twelve months by the EPA in areas such as environmental monitoring, auditing and licensing operations, proactive ‘beyond-compliance’ programs, and in developing better environmental legislation to manage and protect the environment. I thank all staff and all our stakeholders who, during the course of the year, committed their time and efforts to these programs aimed at protecting and enhancing our environment.

Finally, I wish to acknowledge the contributions made by Jill Fitch and Stephen Walsh QC. Jill Fitch retired as Director of Radiation Protection and Control after more than 27 years of excellent service and dedication. Stephen retired as inaugural Chair of the EPA Board last year, having worked in that capacity for over 9 years; he has now retired from his position on the Board. His skills and experience at managing complex and diffi cult issues have been widely recognised, and I wish both Stephen and Jill all the best for the future.

The Board of the EPA and its staff look forward to the opportunities ahead in working cooperatively with our stakeholders towards achieving a sustainable South Australia.

Dr Paul VogelChief Executive and ChairEnvironment Protection Authority

FOREWORD

iii

µg/m3 micrograms per cubic metreARPANSA Australian Radiation Protection and Nuclear Safety AgencyCARES Complaints and Reports of Environmental Signifi canceCDL container deposit legislation; correctly, beverage container provisions of the Environment Protection ActCE Chief ExecutiveCMS Community Mediation ServicesCQMS Central Queensland Mining SuppliesCSIRO Commonwealth Scientifi c and Industrial Research OrganisationCWMB catchment water management boardDEH Department for Environment and HeritageDHS Department of Human ServicesDWLBC Department of Water, Land and Biodiversity ConservationEIP Environment Improvement Programe-ELF electronic environment licensing formELF extremely low frequency EPA Environment Protection AuthorityEPO Environment Protection OrderEPP Environment Protection PolicyERD Court Environment, Resources and Development CourtFTE full time equivalentGoGO Greening of Government OperationsGP general practitioners

HRD human resource development KESAB Keep South Australia BeautifulL&D learning and developmentLEMP landfi ll environmental management planLGA Local Government AssociationLMRIA Lower Murray Reclaimed Irrigation AreaMoU memorandum of understandingNEPC National Environment Protection CouncilNEPM National Environment Protection MeasureNPC National Packaging CovenantNPI National Pollutant Inventory ODS ozone depleting substancesOHSW occupational health, safety and welfare P&DR performance and development review PIRSA Department of Primary Industries and Resources, South AustraliaPM10 particles of less than 10 microns in diameterppm parts per millionRN registered nurseRPC Act Radiation Protection and Control Act 1982SARDI South Australian Research and Development InstituteSoE Report State of the Environment Report for South Australiathe Act Environment Protection Act 1993WPO Watershed Protection Offi ce ZWSA Zero Waste SA

ABBREVIATIONS

iv EPA Annual Report 2003–2004

Letter of Transmittal i

Foreword iii

Abbreviations iv

Snapshot—Major Initiatives and Highlights 2

Introduction 4

State of the Environment Report 10

Air 11

Noise 16

Water 18

Waste 24

Partnerships—Community and Industry Involvement 28

Compliance and Enforcement 30

Key Point Source Pollution Programs 36

Legislative and Policy Framework 40

Organisational support 43

Annual Report on the Administration of the Radiation Protection and Control Act 1982 53

Appendix 1—Financial Statements and Accompanying Notes 68

Appendix 2—Publications Released or Updated in 2003–2004 98

Appendix 3—Freedom of Information Statement 101

Appendix 4—Other Statutory Information 104


State of the Environment Report

The State of the Environment Report, released in November 2003, detailed key environmental challenges facing South Australia. The Environment Protection Authority (EPA) Board has developed recommendations for communities, industry and all levels of government for each priority —water use and quality, marine and coastal environments, climate change, and species loss.

EPA Board consultation

During its fi rst full year of operation, the Board established and implemented a comprehensive stakeholder and regional consultation program that is substantially broader than the requirement under the Act. The consultative program for the 2003-04 year gave the Board an opportunity to hear the views of stakeholders, including relevant and timely information on important issues facing communities and their environments; this assisted the Board in for its role of developing strategic directions and setting priorities for the EPA. The Board is developing a Governance Charter that will set out its roles, responsibilities and protocols.

Environment protection(water quality) policy

The Environment Protection (Water Quality) Policy 2003 (Water Quality EPP), which came into operation on 1 October 2003, aims to achieve the sustainable management of our waters by protecting or enhancing water quality while allowing economic and social development. The Water Quality EPP provides South Australia with a consistent approach to the management of water quality and brings the state in line with the National Water Quality Management Strategy.

Site contamination

Site contamination may result from a wide range of industrial, agricultural and commercial activities, including the disposal or intensive use of chemicals or wastes in urban and rural areas. A public consultation draft Bill on site contamination was in preparation at the end of June 2004. The EPA has received commitment from the South Australian Government to resource future management of the proposed legislation.

Container deposit legislation

The EPA conducted market research of 803 respondents by telephone in 2003-04 to determine the level of community awareness and acceptance for South Australia’s Container Deposit Legislation scheme. The research found that the overwhelming majority (97%) of respondents agreed that the CDL scheme is good for our environment and 92% agreed that extending the scheme to cover additional beverages containers, such as fruit drinks and fl avoured milk containers, was a good idea.

Community programs

The EPA has had a successful year in delivering targeted community programs aimed at raising community awareness and encouraging participation at the local level. These programs, including AirWatch, WaterCare, Frog Census and Waterwatch, collectively involve over 60,000 South Australians and help communities come together to create positive change for the environment.

The EPA also conducted targeted awareness programs on specifi c issues of concern to the community, such as the wood heater campaign. While wood smoke is recognised as having an impact on air quality, research for this campaign found that more than half of all wood heater owners in South Australia had never been exposed to information on how to use their wood heater effectively. The campaign thus specifi cally targeted the South Australian wood heating community to change their attitude and behaviour about the environmental impact of wood heaters.

SNAPSHOT—MAJOR INITIATIVES AND HIGHLIGHTS

2


Snapshot—Major Initiatives and Highlights

Industry awareness programs

The EPA continued to work with industry and small business to raise environmental awareness and encourage best practice, with programs such as the ‘Greening the Supply Chain’ assistance scheme. The Small Business Eco-effi ciency Training Program helped businesses across South Australia to improve business effi ciencies while reducing environmental impacts. Workshops were held in regional locations including Mount Gambier and Berri as well as in metropolitan locations.

Mount Lofty Ranges catchment

The EPA Board met Adelaide Thinker in Residence, Professor Peter Cullen, to hear his views about water quality and water use issues. His views support the EPA’s greater attention to urban planning issues in the Mount Lofty Ranges catchment. A major study of water quality risks associated with possible future winery, cellar door and restaurant developments in the watershed was completed in 2003-04.

Water projects

The Stormwater Pollution Projects (see www.catchments.net) provide an important link between the EPA, catchment water management boards, local government, industry and community. Project offi cers visit unlicensed businesses, conduct environmental site reviews, provide advice, identify areas of concern and encourage best stormwater management practices.

The Port River Projects, a joint initiative of the EPA and Commonwealth Government aimed at improving water quality in the Port waterways, consulted the community to identify environmental values, identify point and non-point discharge sources, and provide better information to guide management responses and to direct funding and enforcement.

Audits

Since 2002 the EPA has been auditing major industrial sites. These audits are aimed at ensuring compliance with licence conditions, mandatory policies and the general duty of care under section 25 of the Environment Protection Act 1993 (the Act).

Responding to a major diesel spill into Torrens Lake in July 2003, the EPA began an audit of licensed premises and a number of unlicensed premises that may present an environmental risk to the River Torrens.

Two years after the 2001-02 environmental management audits of wineries and distilleries in SA, the EPA inspected these facilities during the 2004 vintage period. Many have already fully implemented the action items outlined in individual environment improvement programs and irrigation management plans previously approved by the EPA. The EPA expects that, by the end of 2004, the infrastructures required for wastewater system upgrades will be completed by the remaining facilities.

Compliance and enforcement

In 2004, the EPA issued 79 environment protection orders and conducted 30 investigations into pollution incidents. Six matters were completed in the Environment, Resources and Development Court, fi ve of which resulted in guilty verdicts.

The EPA also works in partnership with all levels of government to achieve compliance and enforcement— for instance, by supporting local government-based authorised offi cers. The refi nement of the support package continues to be a focus for the EPA.

An increasing number of councils are currently involved in delivering environment protection regulatory services through informal partnership with the EPA in a variety of ways. These include implementation of the Environment Protection (Burning) Policy, use of the EPA’s incident recording CARES database, investigation and resolution of complaints relating to water pollution using the Water Quality EPP, and exercise of delegations from the EPA associated with the issuing of environment protection orders.

3


INTRODUCTIONThe Environment Protection Authority (EPA) is South Australia’s primary environmental regulator. It has responsibility for protection of air and water quality, control of pollution, waste and noise, and protection and enhancement of the environment.

The staff of the EPA administer the Environment Protection Act 1993 (the Act), and are assisted by South Australia Police and local government offi cers who have been appointed as authorised offi cers under the Act. The Radiation Protection and Control Act 1982 (the RPC Act) is also administered by the EPA but, due to existing government arrangements which are currently under review, the reporting requirements for the RPC Act for this reporting period must be undertaken in a separate report.

Signifi cant administrative responsibilities under the Act include: licensing prescribed activities of environmental signifi cance; monitoring air, water quality, waste and noise; and investigating incidents that cause, or could potentially cause, serious or material environmental harm. There are also other compliance and enforcement operations under the Act. The EPA continues to undertake community engagement and monitoring programs, as well as continued policy development and legislative review.

The EPA is part of the Environment and Conservation Portfolio of South Australia. The portfolio also includes the Department for Environment and Heritage (DEH), the Department for Water Land and Biodiversity Conservation (DWLBC) and Zero Waste South Australia (ZWSA).

• The Department for Environment and Heritage (DEH) manages the state’s public land, held in the conservation reserve system and as Crown lands. It has a primary role in environment policy, biodiversity conservation, heritage conservation, environmental sustainability and animal welfare, and is a custodian of information and knowledge about the state’s environment.

• The Department of Water, Land and Biodiversity Conservation (DWLBC) provides advice and regulatory support to government and the community for natural resource management and facilitates the allocation and sustainable management of natural resources.

• Zero Waste South Australia has the primary objective of promoting waste management practices that, as far as possible, eliminate waste or its consignment to landfi ll, advance the development of resource recovery and recycling, and arise from an integrated strategy for the state.

The EPA participates in a number of cross-portfolio networking groups and works with the other agencies in the portfolio to investigate opportunities for effi cient delivery of programs and policies.

At 30 June 2004, there were 1925 licences issued under the Act for industries ranging from large cement manufacturers, electricity generators and wastewater treatment plants to foundries, abattoirs and shipyards. Licences are assigned to environment protection offi cers who inspect

the licensed premises, negotiate environmental improvements and, where necessary, carry out enforcement actions. The EPA also has a specialised operational enforcement team for more serious offences.

Some EPA powers are delegated to local government to deal with matters not licensed under the Act. The EPA assists these offi cers in training, the provision of meters, and ongoing technical and legal support. It is currently working with local government to investigate opportunities for expanding the role of local government in environmental protection with a lower degree of environmental risk—generally those matters not licensed under the Act. SA Police continue to use the powers under the Act to help them manage local nuisance issues, particularly domestic noise.

EPA strategic plan 2004-2007

Under the new governing arrangements for the EPA established in 2003, the EPA Board is responsible for setting the strategic directions for the organisation. The EPA Annual Report 2002-03 introduced draft strategic directions that were presented to participants at the 2003 EPA Round-table. In 2003-04, these strategic directions, revised in light of stakeholder feedback, were consolidated to form part of the EPA’s Strategic Plan for 2004-2007. The Strategic Plan has been endorsed by the Board and is publicly available on the EPA website: www.epa.sa.gov.au.

4


EPA vision

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

Strategic goals

• Air that is healthy to breathe, sustains and improves our ecosystems and preserves our natural and cultural resources.

• Rivers, lakes, estuaries, streams, creeks, groundwater and marine waters that sustain the widest possible range of environmental values.

• Land that is free from unacceptable contamination and is suitable for its current and intended use.

• Communities that are free from unacceptable environmental harm; in particular, protection of human health and ecosystems from the risk of exposure to hazardous substances and radiation.

• Sustainable use of natural resources and the management of waste.

• Communities that are well informed and actively engaged on important environmental issues.

Strategic directions

1. Ensure consistent, effective and fair application of the Environment Protection Act 1993 and the RadiationProtection and Control Act 1982 to support the transition to sustainability.

2. Encourage environmentally sustainable behaviour and practices by the community, industry and government through the development and implementation of a complementary mix of best practice tools for environmental protection.

3. Ensure high quality environmental information is available to inform policy formulation, development of sustainability criteria and risk-weighted decision-making.

4. Adopt a strategic and coordinated approach to the resolution of emerging environmental and sustainability issues.

5. Provide impartial, competent and timely advice on the implementation of environment and radiation protection policy and contribute to the management of national and international environment and radiation protection issues.

6. Work with all sectors of society and all levels of government to support and encourage involvement in environment and radiation protection.

7. Build and maintain a culture of excellence and credibility, through our people management and development, information and knowledge management, decision-making and business processes.

Key strategies and priority actions for 2004-05 have also been developed under each strategic direction to guide the EPA in meeting its future needs and challenges. Along with the ongoing functions of the organisation, these key strategies and priority actions form part of Divisional Business Plans for 2004-05.

Key performance indicators

Details of established key performance indicators were included in the Portfolio Statements 2004-05, Budget Paper 4, Volume 3 (available at www.statebudget.sa.gov.au).

EPA Board and its activities

Amendments to the Act proclaimed on 10 April 2003 established a new EPA Board consisting of nine members with increased responsibilities to govern the administration of the Act and activities of the EPA. This is achieved by requiring the EPA Chief Executive (CE) to be directly accountable to the Board, to be subject to its control and direction, and to give effect to its policies and decisions. In the previous arrangement the CE was accountable directly to the minister and not to the Board; thus the Board and the CE were jointly accountable in managing the EPA (albeit with different functions). The governing arrangements further establish that the CE chairs meetings of the Board, an arrangement based on the successful institutional arrangement of the Victorian EPA (since the mid-1970s).

The new governing arrangements responded to the Parliamentary Environment, Resources and Development Committee review of the EPA’s effectiveness and a review of best practice models currently in place around Australia. The new arrangements provide the EPA Board with arguably the most comprehensive set of environment protection regulatory powers and penalties in Australia, along with the, broadest level of independence for an environmental regulator in Australia.

The Board recognises both the opportunity to use these changes to further the objects of the Act and the challenge to ensure that it observes effective corporate governance in delivering on the functions stated under section 13 of the Act.

5

EPA Mission: To protect and restore the environment as the basis for a sustainable future

Introduction


Meetings and strategic planning

During 2003-04, the Board met formally on 14 occasions. In addition, the Board met in June 2004 to start a review of the EPA’s Strategic Plan and its strategic priorities. It also used this opportunity to refl ect on its fi rst full year of operation, to consider both the intended changes to the EPA’s governance arrangements and areas that may need further attention as well as to identify priorities for future governance activities. From this discussion, the Board determined that an EPA Board Governance Charter will be developed, articulating the role of the Board and EPA, its key relationships and its continued commitment to stakeholder consultation.

Stakeholder consultation

During its fi rst full year of operation, the Board established and implemented a comprehensive stakeholder and regional consultation program. The Board’s consultative program for the 2003-04 year gave it an opportunity to hear the views of stakeholders, receive relevant and timely information on important issues facing communities and their environments, and be more informed in developing strategic direction and setting priorities for the EPA. The Board has thus continued to undertake a program for consultation substantially broader than the requirement under the Act to facilitate the Round-table conference.

The Board has also foreshadowed a commitment to prepare a consultation and communication plan, which clearly demonstrates the Board’s intention to listen and understand the key strategic issues facing industry, the community and all levels of government. The plan will also detail the corporate consultation program for the Board and EPA and how it intends to use the information gained.

Consultation program 2003-04

Upper Spencer Gulf Regional Visit, 12-13 November 2003The Board held two consultation sessions during its Upper Spencer Gulf regional visit, the fi rst in Whyalla and the second on the following day in Port Pirie (attended by approximately 50 and 30 persons respectively). The Whyalla session largely focused on the red dust emissions from OneSteel, but also on issues such as wastewater management in Whyalla. The Port Pirie session focused on a range of issues including lead and sulfur dioxide emissions from Pasminco (now Zinifex Ltd), waste management issues facing regional councils and odour management issues relating to the Conroy’s Port Pirie abattoir.

During the visit, the Board also met with management of OneSteel, Pasminco and Northern Power Station (Port Augusta) and toured their respective operations.

South East Regional Visit, 8-9 April 2004The Board held a consultation session in Mount Gambier (8 April) where a variety of issues raised by the approximately 60 attendees included: protection of the local marine environment from wastewater; environmental quality of Lake Bonney; development in the Blue Lake Water Catchment Zone; resourcing issues facing local government in administering the Act; and waste management issues facing the region including regulatory diffi culties faced by councils in burning green waste at their waste depots.

The Board also visited Engelbrecht Cave and Lake Bonney and held discussions with senior representatives of Kimberly-Clark Australia and the South East Catchment Water Management Board.

Consultation with Local GovernmentOn 12 August 2003, the Board met with representatives of Salisbury, Elizabeth and Tea Tree Gully councils to discuss issues of common interest, including emerging waste management issues and sharing environment protection responsibilities under the Act. It also took the opportunity to visit a number of innovative environmental management initiatives (e.g. aquifer storage recovery program at Parafi eld Airport, and water retention, treatment and re-use at the Mawson Lakes development) located in the Salisbury Council area.

On 9 March 2004, the Board met with representatives of the Port Adelaide-Enfi eld Council to discuss issues such as the Port Redevelopment Project, and pollution impacts on the Port River. In conjunction with this visit, the Board toured the Port River to see at fi rst hand the pressures upon the river and the locality of current and future sites important to the health of the Port River system.

Stakeholder Network SessionsThe Board began consultation with targeted sections of the community, fi rst with representatives of key business groups and large EPA-licensed premises (14 October 2003) and then with key environmental and community advocate groups (20 February 2004).

Round-table 2004The Round-table conference is a required consultative measure under the Act. At this year’s conference the focus of discussion was on the EPA’s contribution to sustainability including opportunities and challenges for the EPA. A more detailed account of the Round-table can be found in the ‘Partnerships’ section of this report.

6


EPA Board Members

Dr Paul VogelEPA Chief Executive Dr Vogel was appointed in late 2002 and became ex-offi cio Chair of the Board at the commencement of the new governing arrangements for the EPA. In his previous position as Director of the Environmental Policy Unit within the Western Australian Department of the Premier and Cabinet he provided high level, strategic policy advice to the Premier and Cabinet Ministers on a broad array of environmental issues with a focus on sustainability. Before this he had spent six years as a Director with the WA Department of Environmental Protection in water and air quality protection and natural resource management. Dr Vogel brings to the Board ‘qualifi cations and experience relevant to environmental protection and management or natural resources management’ and ‘qualifi cations and experience relevant to management generally and public sector management’.

Mr Stephen HainsMr Hains was a member (and Deputy Chair) of the former EPA Board (called the Authority), appointed in November 2002 for his ‘practical knowledge of, and experience in, local government’ as well as for his ‘practical knowledge of, and experience in, the reduction, re-use, recycling and management of waste or the environmental management industry’. He was appointed to the new Board at its proclamation. Mr Hains

has been City Manager of the City of Salisbury since 1991. During 2003-04, Mr Hains spent seven months as the Chief Executive of the Department of Business, Manufacturing and Trade which he was responsible for restructuring into the new Department of Trade and Economic Development. Mr Hains has also been appointed, as a member of the EPA Board, to the Board of Zero Waste SA, and is Chair of the EPA Local Government Subcommittee (of the EPA Board), which is drafting a formal agreement to support the shared provision of environment protection services to the South Australian community. Mr Hains is also a member of the Northern Adelaide and Barossa Catchment Water Management Board and Chair of the Barker Inlet Port Estuary Committee.

Ms Linda BowesMs Bowes was appointed to the Board for her ‘practical knowledge of, and experience in, industry, commerce or economic development’. She is the current Chief Executive of the SA Wine Industry Association, having been appointed to this position in 1994. Ms Bowes also has wide expertise and specialist knowledge in areas such as corporate management, strategic planning, legislative analysis and policy development.

Mr Mike ElliottMr Elliott, who was appointed to the Board for his ‘practical knowledge of, and experience in, environmental conservation and advocacy on environmental matters on behalf

of the community’, is the Director of Northern Adelaide Partnerships at University of South Australia. Before this he had been leader of the SA Democrats Party since 1993 and was a member of the Legislative Council from 1985 to 2002.

Ms Megan DysonMs Dyson was appointed to the Board for her ‘legal qualifi cations and experience in environmental law’. She is a sole legal practitioner and policy consultant in the area of environmental law and policy, including advising the Murray-Darling Basin Commission on legal issues relating to environmental fl ows and the South Australian Government on a number of mainly water-related environment matters.

Mr Allan HolmesMr Holmes was appointed to the Board for his ‘qualifi cations and experience relevant to environmental protection and management or natural resources management’, as well as ‘qualifi cations and experience relevant to management generally and public sector management’. He is Chief Executive of the Department for Environment and Heritage, appointed in 2000. He previously held senior executive positions in the South Australian public service as Director National Parks and Wildlife, Director Heritage and Biodiversity Division, and Director Natural Resources Group.

7

Introduction


Dr Simon StoneDr Stone was appointed to the Board for his ‘practical knowledge of, and experience in, industry, commerce or economic development’. He is currently a consultant to the Aquaculture Industry, is a Director of Thoroughbred Racing SA Inc and serves on a number of government advisory committees related to conservation and wildlife. He was the former chief executive offi cer of SA Aquaculture Management Pty Ltd and has served in a variety of senior management roles within the banking, IT and telecommunications sectors.

Ms Ann Shaw RungieMs Shaw Rungie was appointed to the Board for her ‘qualifi cations and experience relevant to environmental protection and management or natural resources management’. She is a Director of QED Pty Ltd and consults in the fi elds of environmental policy, strategy and change management. She has a wide range of experience in project management, public consultation, facilitation, strategic planning and environmental management. Much of her work is in environmental and natural resources policy, particularly in the water industry, and with major infrastructure projects. She is also a former Chair of the SA Water Resources Council.

Mr Victor FarringtonMr Farrington has over 30 years of experience in environmental management and engineering. He has worked in consultancy, industry and government, and is currently Senior Principal Environmental Engineer with URS Australia. His experience has included environmental assessment and approvals documentation for a wide range of projects, including major planning and transport projects; water resource management; industrial, mining and petroleum sector projects; power stations and distribution systems; and major infrastructure projects including roadways, railways, marine facilities and airports. He has worked in Australia, Hong Kong, the United Kingdom, India, Indonesia, Taiwan and Thailand. Mr Farrington was appointed to the Board for his ‘practical knowledge of, and experience in, the reduction, re-use, recycling and management of waste in the environmental management industry’.

Mr Max HarveyAs EPA deputy Chief Executive Mr Harvey is appointed under the Act as Chair of the Board during temporary absences of the Chief Executive. Mr Harvey is the Director of the EPA’s Operations Division and has held a number of senior management positions in the EPA and its predecessors over the last 20 years. He has senior management experience in the fi elds of waste management and environmental compliance and enforcement.

Retiring Member of the BoardMr Stephen Walsh QCMr Walsh was the inaugural Chair of the EPA Board, having fi rst been appointed in September 1994 as ‘a person with qualifi cations and experience relevant to environmental protection and management or natural resources management’. After the April 2003 legislative changes affecting the governing arrangements of the EPA and its Board, Mr Walsh was retained as a member of the new EPA Board to ensure effective continuity of the EPA’s operations and policies. His term concluded on 31 December 2003.

The EPA is sincerely grateful to Mr Walsh for his tireless efforts in establishing the EPA and in managing the often diffi cult issues with dedication and skill. His signifi cant expertise in mediation skills found regular application in resolving environmental management issues, as well as providing sound chairmanship for the Authority. The EPA wishes Mr Walsh every success for his future endeavours.

8


Introduction

Offi ce of the Chief ExecutiveTony Circelli

• Corporate Governance• EPA Board Secretariat• EPHC Secretariat• Government Business Coordination

• Legal• Northern Zone• Southern Zone• South East Region• Murray Bridge• Technical Support• Licensing and Operations Services• Investigations

OperationsMax Harvey

• Diagnostic X-rays• Radiation Health• Mining and Environment• Laboratory and Technical Administration

Radiation ProtectionJill Fitch (retired)

Keith Baldry (appointed)

SA GovernmentPremier and Cabinet

Minister for Environment and ConservationHon John Hill MP

EPA Board

Chief ExecutiveDr Paul Vogel

• Atmosphere and Noise• Aquaculture• Waste and Pollution Prevention• Water and Catchments• Planning and Local Government Support

Pollution AvoidancePeter Dolan

• Air Quality• Community Monitoring and Education• Water Quality• Industry Monitoring Assessment• Port River Project Watershed Protection

Monitoring and EvaluationDr John Cugley

• Policy• Communications• Corporate Reporting• Process Improvement• Strategic and Business Planning• Reference Centre

Policy and Strategic ServicesCath Watkins

• Administration• Financial Accounting• Management Accounting• Human Resource Development• Information Technology

Corporate and Business SupportJohn O’Daly

The organisation

9


STATE OF THE ENVIRONMENT REPORTIn particular, attention is drawn to the recommendations in the report relating to the failure of SA’s current land use planning system. The EPA recommended an urgent review of environmental impact assessment to ensure a more integrated, strategic approach to managing the impacts of development.

The Government will release a formal response to the SoE Report’s 116 recommendations in mid-2004.

For its part, the new Board’s priorities include building its environmental policy development capacity, implementing best practice environmental regulation, adopting a risk-based approach to environmental management using the best available information, and developing targeted community engagement and business sustainability strategies.

The EPA, through its governing Board, oversaw the report preparation process, and used the expertise of the SoE Report Steering Committee (representing both private and public sectors) and the project team, from the Offi ce of Sustainability, Department for Environment and Heritage (DEH), in coordinating and compiling this report.

The SoE Report 2003 and a more detailed Supplementary Report are available at: www.environment.sa.gov.au/soe2003.

The State of the Environment Report for South Australia (SoE Report) is a responsibility of the EPA under section 112 of the Environment Protection Act. The EPA is required to prepare and publish an SoE Report at least once every fi ve years. The most recent SoE Report, completed during the year and released on 24 November 2003, provides an overview of the current state or condition of South Australia’s environment and the pressures upon it. The report identifi es trends over time as a basis for assessing the effectiveness of efforts in dealing with these environmental pressures and in measuring our progress towards achieving a healthy environment that supports a prosperous economy and a vibrant and cohesive society.

The SoE Report highlights four major environmental priorities for the State: water use and quality; marine and coastal environment; climate change; and species loss. Further, it articulates three key areas for achieving change: improved land use planning processes; reliable, consistent and accurate information; and targeted community engagement programs and more effective working partnerships. These are the issues and challenges that South Australia must address as a matter of priority if it is to see sustained change.

10


these requirements are intended to apply generally to airsheds (‘ambient’ air quality) rather than near known sources of pollution (‘local’ or ‘hotspot’ air quality), they are nonetheless a critical consideration when determining the allowable emissions from major sources of air pollution. In the event that local air quality is found to be above the NEPM requirements, the EPA develops site-specifi c solutions to ensure that the activities causing the problem are required to reduce emissions within a reasonable period. Often this is through an environment improvement program (EIP) approved by the EPA and enforced through the relevant company’s licence.

The areas where the EPA has identifi ed exceedences of the Air NEPM are highlighted in this section. Details of site-specifi c programs are provided in the ‘Compliance and Enforcement’ section of this report. The national and state environment protection systems are also explained in the ‘Legislation and Policy Framework’ section.

In major urban centres, air pollution is a by-product of daily domestic, commercial and industrial activities. The National Environment Protection (Ambient Air Quality) Measure (Air NEPM) sets ambient community exposure standards for six common pollutants and requires each state to measure and assess the exposure of the public to those pollutants.

South Australia has had good air quality most of the time and air quality in Adelaide has signifi cantly improved over the last 10 years—a positive trend that has been confi rmed by the EPA’s monitoring network. Ambient air quality monitoring in Adelaide has determined that levels of carbon monoxide, nitrogen dioxide, ozone, sulfur dioxide and lead are very low and well within Air NEPM standards. Particle concentrations are also low most of the time but occasionally dust storms elevate particle levels in Adelaide. In Mount Gambier a number of sources, including domestic wood combustion heaters, raise particle levels during the winter months. In the industrial centre of Port Pirie, lead from the smelter continues to be a major problem; at the eastern end of Whyalla, particle concentrations at monitoring sites near the OneSteel pellet plant are not at acceptable levels and are of concern.

National environment protection measure

The Air NEPM sets air quality standards and goals which each state and territory in Australia has committed to meet by 30 June 2008. Although

South Australia’s air quality

The following provides a summary of Adelaide’s air quality and the long-term trends. Further information on pollutants will be available on the EPA web site: www.epa.sa.gov.au/.

AdelaideIn 2003, Adelaide’s air quality, as determined by the air quality index (a twice-daily update of Adelaide’s air quality over the previous 24 hours), was ‘very good’ 40% of the time, ‘good’ 54% of the time, fair 4% of the time, poor 1% of the time and very poor for <1% of the time. Figure 1 illustrates these results using data from the Elizabeth, Netley and Kensington monitoring sites.

Figure 1. Adelaide’s Air Quality Index for 2003

AIR

11


Figure 2. Daily average PM10 Netley site, 2003

Figure 3. Daily average PM10 Kensington site, 2003

Figure 4. Daily average PM10 Whyalla Hummock Hill site, 2003

Figure 5. Daily average particulate lead concentrations at two sites in Port Pirie, 2003

Fair or worse air quality was mostly caused by elevated levels of particulate matter measured as particles of less than 10 microns in diameter (PM10). In 2003 the Air NEPM Standard of 50 µg/m3 (micrograms per cubic metre) as a 24-hour average was exceeded on six occasions at Netley and three at Kensington. The Air NEPM goal for particulate matter measured as PM10 is no more than fi ve exceedences per year.

In relatively dry winters, such as the one in 2003, Adelaide can be subjected to dust storms driven by strong winds. During the worst of these 2003 storms, on 11 July, the daily average PM10

levels recorded at Kensington, Netley and Gawler were 119, 86 and 52 µg/m3

respectively, all in excess of the Air NEPM standard. The Air Quality Index on this day described air quality as very poor and is represented by the July concentration peaks in Figures 2 and 3, which show daily average PM10

concentration compared with the NEPM standard at Netley and Kensington for 2003. Some exceedences of the standard were not associated with dust storms. Other pollutants, such as ozone, sulfur dioxide, nitrogen dioxide and carbon monoxide were all below the NEPM Standards at sites that are deemed representative of Adelaide’s metropolitan areas.

WhyallaAt the eastern end of Whyalla, particles measured as PM10 continue to be a concern.

Figure 4 describes variations in daily average particle concentrations from the industrial monitoring site at Hummock Hill in Whyalla where sampling is conducted once every three days. By comparison, PM10

monitoring at Civic Park towards the western end of Whyalla had no measurements exceeding the NEPM standard of 50 µg/m3.

A site has recently been established at Walls Street, in a residential area at the eastern end of Whyalla. Results of particle monitoring from this site will be used to test industry performance and compliance.

12


Port PirieConcentrations of airborne lead in Port Pirie continue to be measured at levels exceeding the NEPM Standard of 0.5 µg/m3 as an annual average. In 2003, the annual average lead concentration at Port Pirie West Primary School was 0.72 µg/m3, 0.59 µg/m3 at Oliver Street and 0.19 µg/m3 at Frank Green Park1.

At the Ellen Street site, close to the smelters, the annual average was 3.44 µg/m3. This is not a NEPM site (as it is not in a residential area) and the NEPM standard should not be applied here, but it serves to show the decrease of lead levels with distance from the smelters.

Daily average lead at the sites (measured once every six days) for 2003 is shown in Figures 5 and 6. Concentrations in Adelaide, by comparison, are close to zero and monitoring has been discontinued.

To monitor impacts from the smelter, sulfur dioxide was measured at the Oliver Street site. In 2003 the maximum hourly average concentration was 0.487 ppm (parts per million). The NEPM standard of 0.20 ppm was exceeded on 27 occasions (see Figure 7). There was one exceedence of the sulfur dioxide 24-hour average of 0.08 ppm.

Diesel NEPM

The National Environment Protection (Diesel Vehicle Emissions) Measure(Diesel NEPM), which was endorsed by the National Environment Protection Council (NEPC) in June 2001, has the desirable environmental aim of reducing pollution from in-service diesel vehicles.

The Diesel NEPM aims to achieve this through a range of optional strategies. The states have discretion as to which of these strategies are implemented. The selection of appropriate strategies will require proper weight being given to environmental, economic, social and equity considerations.

13

Air

Compared to larger Australian cities, Adelaide generally has good air quality, and Air NEPM standards are rarely breached. Therefore, current air quality is not a ‘trigger’ for change in managing diesel emissions in South Australia.

However, diesel vehicles contribute disproportionately to the urban air environment and this, coupled with continued annual growth in fuel consumption by the diesel fl eet, provides the ‘trigger’ for the reduction of emissions from in-service diesel vehicles.

While the Environment and Heritage Portfolio takes responsibility for leading South Australia’s response to NEPMs, it is often other state government departments that implement and develop the relevant strategies. The Department of Transport and Urban Planning, with assistance from the EPA and other key stakeholders, is seeking Commonwealth Government funding for a testing and repair program; this could be lead to establishing an ongoing test facility and an associated education program for diesel mechanics, and a project to convert a range of public transport buses to operate on bio-diesel.

Figure 7. Sulfur dioxide daily averages in Port Pirie, 2003

Figure 6. Daily average particulate lead concentrations at two sites in Port Pirie, 2003 (note the change in scale from Figure 5 to illustrate the date more clearly)

1 Oliver Street and Frank Green Park are NEPM sites.


Fuel Quality EPP

The South Australian Environment Protection (Motor Vehicle Fuel Quality) Policy 2002 (Fuel Quality EPP) was confi rmed in 2002. It is the fi rst environment protection policy in South Australia to be introduced on an interim basis and involved considerable consultation with the vehicle fuel supply industry and the Commonwealth Government.

With the introduction of the Fuel Quality EPP, South Australia now has some of the most stringent fuel standards in Australia. The interim EPP will be superseded, except for summer volatility limits, when Commonwealth fuel standards take effect in 2006.

Without the Fuel Quality EPP, closure of the Port Stanvac refi nery in August 2003 would have led to replacement of low air toxic index petrol with overseas blends of potentially signifi cantly higher overall toxicity. To date, all fuel suppliers have complied with the EPP, as verifi ed by regular EPA audits of fuel shipments arriving from interstate and overseas. The rate of compliance was helped by the major refi ners’ accelerated programs to meet future national standards.

National pollutant inventory

The National Pollutant Inventory (NPI) provides information on the types and volumes of pollutants emitted to the environment (air, land and water). Each year industrial companies around Australia are required to determine if they need to report to the NPI. Levels of pollutants from industrial and commercial sources are reported annually to their relevant state EPA. Levels of pollutants from diffuse sources (aggregate emissions) such as motor vehicles and households are calculated by government agencies and have been since fi rst calculated for the 1998-99 reporting period. Data updated for the 2002-03 period will be released in January 2005. NPI data is available at www.npi.gov.au.

As its fi rst priority the EPA has been working to ensure that all licensed facilities required to report are doing so. South Australia presently has 342 facilities reporting, an increase of 31% from the previous year.

The EPA actively supports the Commonwealth’s proposal to move to online web-based industry reporting. Validation of the last year’s data was particularly important as it was a key resource in the review of the current licensing fee system for South Australia. The NPI data was assessed against existing monitoring data submitted by companies as a condition of their licences.

Air Quality EPP

The Board of the EPA has approved a process to review the current Environment Protection (Air Quality) Policy 1994 (Air EPP) that largely refl ects the content of the old Clean Air Act 1984, superseded when the Environment Protection Act was introduced.

The current Air EPP is primarily focused on managing and monitoring stack emissions from factories. While this remains an important component of the policy, increasing emphasis on the health impacts of air pollution and relative contribution of air pollution sources has created the need to extend the scope of the policy.

An internal EPA working group reviewed the current policy and assessed the types of issues, tools and approaches that may be included in a revised policy. These were presented to a number of key stakeholders in a discussion paper and workshop in early 2004.

The feedback from this process is being assessed by the EPA and will be used to further consider the review of the policy. A draft Air Quality EPP should be available for public consultation in 2005.

Greenhouse

The EPA continued to contribute to the activities of the South Australian Greenhouse Committee, the interagency group representing state government interests in greenhouse gas reduction and adaptation strategies. In July 2003, secretariat duties were transferred from EPA to the Offi ce of Sustainability, which convenes the committee. The offi ce initiated a review of the process and scope of the SA Greenhouse Plan, and the governance arrangements associated with its development and implementation.

The National Greenhouse Gas Inventory 2002 released by the Commonwealth Government in mid-2004, showed, on a national basis, transport was responsible for 14.4% of emissions, stationary energy 47.6% and agriculture 19.2%. The 4.8% of total emissions attributed to industrial processes did not take into account the sector’s use of fuel combustion; the sector would have to consider that use in any emission reduction programs. Total net missions in 2002 were 1.5% higher than in 2001 and 1.3% higher than in 1990.

Ozone

Progress continued with the Commonwealth Government proposal to replace current state legislation controlling sale and use of ozone depleting substances (ODS), and accreditation of related trades personnel. The Ozone Protection and Synthetic Greenhouse Gas Amendment Act was passed in December 2003 but draft Regulations have indicated an implementation date of 1 January 2005.

For the 5700 ODS state authorisations which expired on 31 May 2004, the EPA issued renewal notices to ensure that the existing ozone protection system continues until the Commonwealth scheme is implemented. The Commonwealth draft regulations allow continuation of current state ozone accreditations for two years from the date of the Regulations, or until their

14


expiry, whichever occurs fi rst. The state regulations will be reviewed for revocation once the Commonwealth system has been fi nalised.

Wood heaters

Wood smoke is an issue of concern to the community and its impact on air quality, human health and amenity is well recognised. Wood heaters are a popular means of home heating but they can cause unnecessary pollution if not operated effectively or if damp wood is used.

EPA research found more than half of all wood heater owners in South Australia had never been exposed to information on how to use their wood heater effectively. Nearly 70% did not visually inspect their chimney for excess smoke on a regular basis while the wood heater was operating.

In response to this research, the EPA conducted an awareness campaign about the environmental impact of wood heater use, specifi cally targeting the South Australian wood heating community to change their attitudes and behaviours.

The campaign used print advertisements in the metropolitan and regional press. Information packs including a DVD and VHS explanatory fi lm, an information brochure and ‘check your chimney’ postcard were available free from www.epa.sa.gov.au/woodsmoke, the Australian Home Heating Association and participating local councils. The EPA also provided information packs to all public libraries in South Australia. The campaign received signifi cant radio and press coverage that amplifi ed consumer interest. The campaign and its success will be evaluated through follow-up market research and in-house data collection from the EPA in July and August 2004.

NRG Flinders

In 2002, the minister announced the launch of the NRG Flinders scheme, which provides a rebate of $1000 for the installation of Australian Standard-certifi ed solar hot water systems on housing within the area administered by the Port Augusta City Council. On behalf of the state government the EPA negotiated the payment by NRG Flinders of $1 million over fi ve years for solar energy installations, as part of the utility’s long-term environmental obligations.

The scheme enables a reduction in the environmental impact that would otherwise be caused by coal-based electricity generation for domestic purposes and extends the scope of the Port Augusta City Vision. The South Australian Housing Trust has installed solar hot water systems in 100 of its houses, so that residents in public housing can also benefi t. Port Augusta City Council, the local administrator of the scheme in partnership with the EPA, readvertised the scheme in the local press in June 2004.

To date, 222 applications have been received from households including 87 from the Housing Trust, with NRG Flinders contributing $291,510 total in rebates.

15

Air


Virtually all activity generates noise. The response to noise can be as wide and varied as the number of activities that produce it. Noise is defi ned as a pollutant under the Act and approximately 30% of all calls to the EPA Help Desk relate to noise pollution complaints.

Currently the Environment Protection (Machine Noise) Policy 1994 and theEnvironment Protection (Industrial Noise) Policy 1994 provide the legislative basis for regulating noise under the Act.

A draft Environment Protection (Noise) Policy (Noise EPP) is being developed to replace the two existing noise policies. It aims to bring clarity and consistency to environmental noise regulation with clear and concise rules for a large range of noise sources, such as construction activities, wind farms, frost fans, airconditioning units and industrial premises.

Offi cers of the Atmosphere and Noise branch have verifi ed the criteria and methodology used in the EPA’s Wind Farms: Environmental Noise Guidelines,researched the factors that infl uence rail noise—particularly high pitch rail squeal and fl anging; and monitored specifi c industries to support ‘hot spot’ investigations of noise complaints.

Noise monitoring

Long-term noise monitoring at fi ve locations in South Australia was undertaken to assess noise from various activities including transport services, wind farms and industrial operations in addition to general background noise. The equipment now in use by the EPA records actual noise peaks, which can then be reviewed to differentiate between sources and determine whether the peak was caused by the source under investigation. Wind farm noise monitoring was supplemented with weather monitoring.

Train noise

Train noise impacts include the rumble associated with locomotives, the general rolling noise associated with wagon pass-by, and noises described as fl anging, wheel squeal and wheel howl. Other factors such as idling trains, shunting activities, signal crossings and warning signals generate noise impacts, particularly where residential development is close and dense adjacent to the rail corridor.

The most annoying noise—squeal from interactions between the wheels and rail, typically on curves—is most prominent from freight trains passing through the Adelaide Hills region.

A joint study, by the EPA, rail track owners and rolling stock operators, into the contributing factors to rail squeal and fl anging recorded the noise characteristic of each axle on passing wagons over a period of 62 days using a complex trackside monitoring and identifi cation system. As all wagons are ‘tagged’ by the industry, it was possible to identify each individual axle that squealed.

The data was received late in the reporting year and a comprehensive report is expected late in 2004. The research has not found the actual cause of squeal, so the means to rectify it has yet to be determined. Nevertheless, preliminary analysis shows that less than 20% of axles generate squeal and only 1% cause extreme squeal levels, so that a rectifi cation program, once formulated, could be focused on a relatively small fraction of the total wheels in service.

NOISE

16


Wind farm noise

Heightened interest in electricity generation from renewable sources led to numerous discussions with proponents and referral to the EPA of four development applications for windfarms, which were assessed using the EPA’s Wind Farms: Environmental Noise Guidelines.

Standards Australia drew heavily upon these South Australian guidelines in developing its draft standard Acoustics—Measurement, Prediction and Assessment of Noise and Wind Turbine Generators, which was released for public comment in June 2004.

Standards Australia also expressed interest in the South Australian research on wind effects on the microphone used for recording noise for wind farm-related purposes. Almost a full year’s data was logged as part of the investigation into microphone ‘fl oor level’ effects under different weather conditions.

The guidelines will be incorporated into the provisions of the new Noise EPP, rather than continue as a stand-alone guide.

17

Noise EPP

The EPA sought public comment on the draft Noise EPP which will replace the two existing noise policies (see above) and provide increased clarity and consistency in environmental noise regulation. The draft was revised after consideration of submissions from community, government and industry stakeholders, and has been released for further consultation with key stakeholders and prescribed bodies until early August 2004. Linking the maximum permitted noise levels to the range of urban planning zones is one of the basic principles embodied in the draft, which also provides for implementation of codes of practice and guidelines for specifi c noise issues.

Noise


• nutrient and bacterial pollution of the lower River Murray

• nitrate and pesticide pollution of South East groundwaters

• the degradation of Lake BonneySouth East.

Water Quality EPP

The Environment Protection (Water Quality) Policy 2003 (Water Quality EPP) came into operation on 1 October 2003. Its main objective is to achieve the sustainable management of our waters by protecting or enhancing water quality while allowing economic and social development. The EPP provides South Australia with a consistent approach to the management of water quality and brings the state in line with the National Water Quality Management Strategy.

The Water Quality EPP was released with broad general advertising in newspapers and newsletters, after targeted communication with local government, other state government agencies and catchment water management boards (CWMBs) throughout the state.

Since the launch, the Local Government Support Unit has provided ongoing training and support for authorised offi cers within local government on applying the policy. A trial has been initiated in partnership with the metropolitan CWMBs and Local Government Association (LGA) promoting local government compliance with the

South Australia’s waters hold nationally and internationally important ecosystems, provide drinking water for the state’s population, and sustain our primary and manufacturing industries. Our waters are also a focus for water-based recreational activities and eco-tourism. Pollution and salinity pressures, and reduced stream fl ow, compromise these values. Much of the pollution originates from diffuse sources including stormwater and agricultural runoff.

The SoE Report 2003 identifi ed salinity as the most serious water quality issue facing South Australia, particularly its impacts on River Murray ecosystems, irrigation and drinking water supplies. Reduced fl ows and increasing salinity are stressing ecosystems and irrigation in many of the state’s other rivers and streams.

Development in the Mount Lofty Ranges has resulted in signifi cant pressures on water quality in the rivers and streams, particularly in the watershed which provides much of Adelaide’s water supplies, an issue highlighted by Adelaide Thinker in Residence, Professor Peter Cullen.

Other signifi cant pollution pressures on the state’s waters include:

• degradation of water quality, seagrasses and mangroves in the Port River-Barker Inlet and Adelaide’s coastal waters

• heavy metal pollution in Upper Spencer Gulf

Water Quality EPP and the Stormwater Pollution Prevention Code of Practice for Local, State and Federal Government through independent auditing and the development of targeted training packages.

A range of associated communication products about how to comply with the Water Quality EPP have also been developed for local government, industry, business and community. These will be used in regional communication programs, which began in June 2004 and will continue throughout 2004-05.

Codes of practice

Codes of Practice assist industry by describing what a person undertaking a specifi c activity needs to do in order to comply with the Water Quality EPP. A number of industry and activity based codes of practice were initiated during 2003-04 including:

• wastewater overfl ow management

• environmentally responsible pesticide use

• marina and boating management

• materials handling on wharves

• industry, retail and commercial stormwater management.

Consultation on these codes will be integrated with the regional communication programs on the Water Quality EPP throughout 2004-05.

WATER

18


Water monitoring

The EPA monitors the state’s waters to provide information on their condition and to identify important trends and issues. Initiatives in 2003-04 saw EPA monitoring programs integrated with other government programs across much of the state, and this process continues as an important step in natural resource management and supports the state government’s Living Coast Strategy.

A review of the fi rst year of results in a signifi cantly expanded program highlighted agricultural impacts on the state’s groundwater and rivers and streams, with only fi ve of the 54 river and stream sites monitored considered to have good quality. The expanded program will enable changes associated with changing management practices to be monitored. A pesticide sediment snapshot of the state’s waters was completed, with results due to be published later in 2004. The fi rst state biological assessment of river health from over 600 sites throughout the state has been completed, and the results have been published in a series of eight regional brochures. The EPA now has a detailed database on the aquatic invertebrates, water quality and habitat condition from most of our waterways, which can be used for prosecution and compliance work as well as environmental reporting for state and national purposes.

Results from the expanded monitoring program also indicated that the southern, Encounter Bay and Adelaide beaches are in good condition for swimming but nutrients may be compromising ecosystem health. Beach monitoring data is available on the EPA web site: www.environment.sa.gov.au/reporting/coast/beach.html.

Adelaide Coastal Waters Study

The coastal waters and ecosystems of Adelaide have been severely affected by industrial, sewage, and stormwater discharges—extensive loss of seagrass (at least 4000 hectares over the last

30 years), increases in sand movement, degradation of reef systems, algal blooms and poor water quality. Many of these issues are interlinked and attempting to manage one in isolation can affect others.

The Adelaide Coastal Waters Study aims to develop knowledge and tools to sustainably manage Adelaide’s coastal waters. It aims to identify causes of ecosystem modifi cation and the actions required to halt and reverse the degradation. The study will focus on seagrass loss, water quality degradation and seafl oor instability. Seagrasses were chosen as the primary ecological indicator because they are a sensitive indicator of environmental change.

The study, a $3 million project led by the EPA and involving a number of key stakeholders, will deliver:

• information and knowledge

• options for management action

• a program to assess the effectiveness of these actions

• communication of results to stakeholders and the community.

Research work on the study is coordinated by CSIRO and involves SARDI, Adelaide and Flinders universities, and other local and interstate researchers. The study is broken down into a number of discrete but tightly connected research tasks and is expected to be completed by June 2006. Early fi ndings show that nutrient loads from wastewater treatment plants have declined substantially in recent years, but remain considerably greater than from stormwater outlets and river discharges.

Mount Lofty Ranges Watershed Protection Offi ce

The EPA’s Watershed Protection Offi ce (WPO), which was established in 2000 and became operational in September of that year, has completed four years of a fi ve-year strategy endorsed by

Cabinet to address water quality issues in the Mount Lofty Ranges watershed.

The watershed, covering an area of 1640 km2, encompasses Adelaide’s reservoir catchments and provides 60% (on average) of Adelaide’s water supply. The area is home to 50,000 residents in urban areas, rural townships and allotments, and only 10% of the area is closed to human activity. Land uses include horticulture, viticulture, market gardens, dairying, forestry, horse keeping and grazing. The development pressure increases water quality problems and risks, and is an ongoing challenge for the watershed.

Pollution sources in the watershed are usually diffuse. The watershed will always be a multiple-use catchment imposing a relatively high degree of risk to water quality. Protection and improvement of water quality in the watershed requires a long-term commitment that extends far beyond works already achieved.

In its work of improving water quality, reducing risks and securing the water resources of the watershed, the WPO collaborates with other agencies, organisations and groups working in the region including Department of Water, Land and Biodiversity Conservation (DWLBC), SA Water, Department of Human Services (DHS), Primary Industries and Resources SA (PIRSA), Planning SA, the Bureau of Meteorology, integrated natural resource management boards, CWMBs, local councils, industries and community groups.

19

Water

Facts about the Mount Lofty Ranges watershed• It provides 60% (on average)

of Adelaide’s water supply.

• 90% of the land is privately owned.

• There are 50,000 residents.

• It covers 1640 km2 in area.

• 90% of runoff occurs in July–September.

• It has a low water yield to catchment

area ratio.

• It contains approximately 9100 farm

dams (with more than 31 GL storage

capacity).

• It covers parts of nine council areas.


Figure 8. Mount Lofty Ranges watershed

20


Key program achievements for 2003-04

• A major study of water quality risks associated with possible future winery, cellar door and restaurant developments in the watershed was completed. The study, conducted by consultants and overseen by a steering committee with representation from CSIRO, EPA, Planning SA, Department of Trade and Economic Development, Tourism SA and the Adelaide Hills Wine Region Inc, concluded that new developments of this type within the watershed are appropriate subject to certain location, design and management criteria and improved development controls tailored to the watershed.

• The WPO administered 23 licences for Schedule 1 activities including sewage treatment works, septic tank effl uent disposal systems, waste depots, large quarries, abattoirs and wineries.

• The offi ce continued auditing operating dairies in the watershed against the Act, the Water Quality EPP and the Milking Shed Effl uent Code of Practice.

• The WPO prepared responses to 96 development applications in the watershed referred to EPA for advice or direction in accordance with the requirements of the Development Regulations 1993.

• Information and monitoring data has been collated to assist in the development of a catchment based model.

• The Myponga Watercourse Restoration Project continued to help landowners in the Myponga Riparian Group with on-ground watercourse restoration works on their properties.

• The WPO continues to manage the Chemical Users Project, which introduces the general community, particularly urban and lifestyle landholders within the watershed, to responsible and safe chemical use.

• Wastewater within the watershed poses a major potential risk. In association with other partners, the EPA has continued to support the Waste Control Systems Management Strategy Project managed by the Adelaide Hills Council to follow up on failed septic systems identifi ed in last year’s audit.

• Voluntary environmental arrangements such as environmental management systems in agriculture advanced in 2003-04.

• To investigate feasible options to combat high nutrient inputs into drinking water reservoirs from the Upper Cox Creek catchment, a new study was initiated in collaboration with SA Water and the Onkaparinga CWMB.

Stormwater pollution prevention

The EPA hosts and partially funds the position of Coordinator Stormwater Pollution Prevention Projects. This valuable role links the EPA, CWMBs, stormwater pollution prevention projects, local government, unlicensed industry and small business. It has been used in the unlicensed business sector as a mechanism of education and infl uence, highlighting the implications of the Water Quality EPP and associated codes of practice.

The Torrens, Patawalonga, Northern Adelaide and Barossa, and Onkaparinga CWMBs fund the Stormwater Pollution Prevention Projects, which are hosted by local government across metropolitan Adelaide. Eight projects employing 16 people were supported and funded this year.

Project offi cers visit unlicensed businesses, conduct environmental site reviews, provide advice, identify areas of concern and encourage adoption of best stormwater management practices. The projects share a common goal to have all businesses complying with relevant environmental legislation on stormwater management, using an integrated approach of awareness

raising and enforcement in the event of non-compliance.

A project web page, hosted by the CWMBs at www.catchments.net, introduces the projects; it links to individual local government project web sites and to stormwater management information and fact sheets for industry, business and mobile business operators. Information from these fact sheets has been adopted by the EPA as part of the Water Quality EPP communication strategy for the unlicensed business sector.

Whole-of-project initiatives endorsed by the CWMBs for development and implementation this year include a business recognition scheme, which acknowledges small industry and business with improved stormwater management practices, and the development of a practical and informative educational video on how the small business and industry sector can tackle stormwater pollution at the source.

The CWMBs have also engaged a consultant to undertake a project scoping study of the Stormwater Pollution Prevention Projects which will:

• investigate revenue and saving opportunities for local government as a result of supporting the projects

• assess delivery models and recommend a preferred project model

• identify options for assessing behaviour change within the unlicensed business sector after the projects.

Water

21

28 EPA Annual Report 2003–2004

Barcoo outlet

EPA monitoring of the beaches near the Barcoo Outlet has indicated that beach water quality deteriorates following typical winter and summer rain events but generally does not pose a signifi cant health risk to swimmers. The DHS has indicated that the water quality following major summer storms may be unacceptable but is not considered a high risk for swimming because the source of the contaminating organisms is not human sewage.

The EPA review of this monitoring program has been used as the basis for advice to swimmers on the Adelaide beaches. This joint EPA, DHS, local government and CWMB initiative has placed guidance signage at Adelaide beaches and the Patawalonga Lake. A fi nal report is due for publication in late 2004.

Lake Bonney South East

The EPA, Department for Trade and Economic Development and Kimberly-Clark Australia are funding a project over 2003-06 to assess the current state of Lake Bonney SE and identify actions that can be taken to improve the health of the lake. The EPA Board visited the site and held discussions with Kimberly-Clark Australia during the year.

Lake Bonney SE—a large coastal lake about 10 km south of Millicent in the South East of South Australia—has, like most of the South East region, been extensively altered since European settlement, particularly by the effects of drainage schemes and various land use impacts.

Large volumes of wastewater from pulp and paper mills have, for over 60 years, also adversely affected the health of the lake. In recent times technological upgrades and modifi cations to the mills have signifi cantly improved the quality of wastewater discharged to the lake.

Lake Bonney SE is characterised by poor biological diversity in phytoplankton, zooplankton, macroinvertebrates, fi sh and aquatic plants. Despite recent improvements, water in the lake remains highly coloured, turbid (cloudy) and eutrophic (high in nutrients), and contains high concentrations of organic matter and elevated levels of organochlorine compounds. The causal factor(s) of the poor condition of the lake are unclear. It may be the toxicants and highly coloured components in the wastewater from the pulp and paper mills in the past. High turbidity and strong winds in the area may also result in poor light penetration in the water and shoreward erosion, which thereby limit opportunities for diverse communities of plants and animals to thrive in the lake. The past decade was also very dry in the South East, resulting in low lake levels and higher than usual salinity concentrations, factors that may also contribute to the current low biological diversity of the lake.

Lower Murray reclaimed irrigation areas

Water quality monitoring in the River Murray has indicated increased levels of contaminants, such as nutrients and pathogens, associated with discharges from farms in the Lower Murray Reclaimed Irrigation Area (LMRIA)2.The degree of contamination poses a risk to the environment, drinking water supplies and recreational users. The EPA, in partnership with several government agencies and lower River Murray irrigators—largely dairy farmers between the towns of Mannum and Wellington—is implementing a program of restructuring and rehabilitation in the LMRIA to improve water quality in the river. This wider program involves structural works to minimise water usage and drainage returns to the river, farm management improvements and water quality monitoring.

The EPA’s responsibility in the LMRIA is to improve water quality in the river by reducing the impact of irrigation drainage water containing various contaminants. By 2008, the EPA will require farmers to retain runoff irrigation water on the farm and also capture the fi rst portion of any storm runoff. Until then the EPA aims to improve environmental outcomes by implementing a staged program that protects the environment while still enabling the farming industry to be viable. The EPA is coordinating or involved in several activities:

• An EIP is being developed for each farm in the LMRIA. Each will detail actions, targets and timeframes for improving on-farm management practices. An environmental authorisation will be issued to enable landholders to continue using fl ood irrigation while complying with specifi c environmental improvement conditions.

• A dairy farm audit, throughout the LMRIA, is assessing and enforcing compliance with the Milking Shed Effl uent Code of Practice and Water Quality EPP.

• A drainage water reuse trial, conducted on one farm in the LMRIA, reduced drainage returns and water usage by over 50% during the trial. The outcomes and recommendations of this trial will be communicated to other farms in the area.

• A large-scale water quality monitoring program is beginning this irrigation season to measure the amount of pollutants being discharged from irrigated areas and assess the effects of the farm rehabilitation process and farm management practices.

Information from these programs will be used to develop best practice information for farms in the LMRIA.

2 Ambient Water Quality monitoring of the River Murray 1990-99


EPA Port River projects

The EPA has been successful in obtaining $1.22 million in funding from the Commonwealth for six projects, with a total cost of $1.6 million, focusing on Port River waterways.

A key project is the development of a water quality improvement plan for the Port Waterways, beginning with consulting the community and asking what their environmental values are for the Port River. The plan will then work towards nutrient pollution reductions to meet the water quality requirements for those values. As a part of this process the EPA is sampling at various strategic locations to gain better information on nutrient pollution from the catchments that discharge into the Port River and Barker Inlet. The EPA is also developing a three-dimensional model to aid in the modelling and prediction of water quality from point and catchment sources. This will provide more accurate information to better direct funding and enforcement towards the most pertinent pollution sources. It will indicate required discharge load limits for licensees and facilitate more effective load reductions in Port waterways.

To assist licensees in managing the costs of meeting these limits, the EPA is conducting a feasibility study into developing a tradeable nutrient discharge rights scheme to allow trading of discharge rights between point sources and catchment sources. Such a scheme will allow for money to be spent to reduce pollution at the cheapest and most effective sites. A tradeable discharge rights instrument is unlikely to be feasible at present in the Port River but this may be reviewed in the next few years.

A Code of Practice for Materials Handling on Wharves and a Code of Practice for Marinas and Boating Management are currently being developed by the EPA in consultation with industry. These codes will be statutory requirements that will help reduce pollution from wharves and boating facilities.

Sea dumping

The EPA is negotiating with the Commonwealth to secure arrangements to regulate South Australian coastal waters, and is developing amendments to the Environment Protection (Sea Dumping) Act 1984 to enable effective regulation of instances of sea dumping.

Aquaculture

The Aquaculture Act 2001, which began in July 2002, has now completed its second year of operation. Its administration requires signifi cant input by the EPA.

The EPA assesses and provides comment on aquaculture licence applications, variation of licence conditions and lease conversions, all of which are managed by PIRSA.

The EPA is represented on the Aquaculture Advisory Committee, which advises the minister responsible for administering the Aquaculture Act on any matter relating to aquaculture.

A dedicated Aquaculture Unit of three staff services EPA requirements specifi ed within the Aquaculture Act, as well as statutory requirements of the Development Act 1993 and any general aquaculture issues that may arise.

In addition, within 2003-04 the EPA has:

• participated in a collaborative arrangement with the Western Australian EPA to develop a framework for environmental monitoring and management of marine based aquaculture in coastal environments in South Australia

• facilitated the development (progressing) of an environmental management system for the inland aquaculture sector

• begun developing guidelines for the use of chemicals in aquaculture

• prepared draft position papers or guidelines on:– the use of treated timber in aquaculture– local government assessment of aquaculture activities– the use of antifoulants in aquaculture– aquaculture management and the Water Quality EPP

• worked with various aquaculture industry sectors toward the development of codes of practice

• participated in the development of the research paper Assessing Environmental Regulatory Arrangements for Aquaculture prepared by the Productivity Commission

• assessed and provided comment or advice on a range of non-statutory issues associated with aquaculture to both the EPA and other units within the portfolio.

Table 1. Aquaculture assessments 2003-04

Number % completed within statutory time frame

Licence and licence variation applications 53 99

Development applications 24 100

Environmental monitoring programs 9 n.a.

Operational and zone policies 8 n.a.

Lease conversions 0 n.a.

Aquaculture Advisory Committee meetings attended 5 n.a.

Water

23


WASTEIn South Australia most waste is consigned of to landfi ll but contains many items that can be recycled or reused. This will change as industry adopts better waste management systems and continuous improvement.

Disposal of waste is not the only management option and this is being realised. The cost of disposal is increasing as landfi ll operating standards improve and transport costs rise. Industry is beginning to appreciate that disposal as a sole waste solution incurs signifi cant costs. This is providing South Australia with a great opportunity to improve on resource recovery.

In regional South Australia the issues are similar—improved management of smaller regional waste sites and mechanisms for calculating the actual cost of landfi ll mean local government is reassessing waste management options in regional areas. Cooperation and regionalisation of waste infrastructure and waste management systems are being considered and implemented, and the viability of resource recovery is being reconsidered.

Specifi c waste types, such as electronic goods, due to the quantities involved, need to be considered at a national level to allow their economical management and treatment. The EPA has been working with other jurisdictions (and the Commonwealth), through the Environment Protection and Heritage Council’s Waste Working

ZWSA was established in July 2003 as part fulfi lment of government policy for a new legislative framework under which the state can work with local government and industry to drive a new and integrated strategy for waste reduction, waste minimisation, recycling and waste disposal.

In establishing ZWSA, the state government has recognised the distinct advantages of separating elements of waste management from the EPA.

The EPA has developed a strong working relationship with ZWSA to promote the management of waste in line with the waste hierarchy and to improve waste management in the South Australian community. The EPA has a predominantly regulatory role, while ZWSA has waste management roles and responsibilities.

A growing economy and increasing population create a rising demand for goods and services provided by businesses, industries and governments. The main drivers of waste generation in South Australia are economic growth, urban consolidation, household formation trends with fewer people in more dwellings, under-provision of garden waste and other recycling services, and community attitudes.

As the community as a whole becomes more aware of its impact on the environment and more sensitive to ecologically sustainable development, particularly intergenerational equity, there is an expectation to better manage waste; the community is looking to government for that leadership and direction. The EPA, along with Zero Waste SA (ZWSA), is working with industry, government and the community to achieve this.

Figure 9. The waste hierarchy

Avoidance

24


The EPA assessed the proposed revision and endorsed the changes based on the additional data provided. This advice was forwarded to the Minister for Environment and Conservation, who approved the amendment in accordance with the Wingfi eld Waste Depot Closure Act.

Expansion of beverage container provisions

Legislative amendmentsThe government has approved the drafting of amendments to the beverage container provisions of the Environment Protection Act (commonly known as container deposit legislation or CDL). A draft Bill is being prepared to:

• defi ne the objects of the CDL system, including litter management and recycling

• clarify existing defi nitions

• provide for a distinctive beverage container refund system logo

• provide for a new system of container approvals

• further regulate key stakeholders

• introduce provisions to address the movement of containers into South Australia from other states

• incorporate transitional arrangements applying to all parties during periods of legislative change.

Stakeholder consultation on the draft Bill is expected in late 2004, and the legislation should be introduced to Parliament in early 2005.

Litter impacts from beverage containersInitial evidence suggests that regulatory changes to CDL that took effect on 1 January 2003 (expanding the scheme to a much broader range of beverages) is having a positive effect on beverage container litter. The May 2004 litter monitoring report conducted by KESAB revealed the lowest count of beverage container

Group, on waste tyres, electronic equipment and hazardous waste management. The group is developing a national approach to the management of these wastes, based on extended producer responsibility, with more targeted waste types to follow.

Waste management practices continue to improve. However, it is important that the EPA, in collaboration with other agencies such as ZWSA, continues down this path of better management and behavioural change—waste is not something to be disposed of and left as a legacy for future generations; it is a resource to be managed and used today.

Wingfi eld Waste Management Centre

The Wingfi eld Waste Depot Closure Act 1999 provides for the closure of the Adelaide City Council’s waste depot at Wingfi eld by 31 December 2004. The closure plan required the operator to develop a landfi ll environmental management plan (LEMP) to address environmental management during operation and after closure.

The operator designed the site to manage a 1-in-100-year storm event. This design approach was considered very conservative, given that a 1-in-20-year storm event is the accepted requirement for an LEMP.

Adelaide City Council has since entered into an agreement with Wastecare SA to establish a resource recovery centre and waste transfer facility on the western portion of the unfi lled landfi ll. The proposal is considered an important development for future waste management in metropolitan Adelaide.

To enable the development of the transfer facility, the council submitted an amended LEMP which provides for a 1-in-20-year storm event. The proposal was based on more accurate data, new control measures and a revised site plan to take better account of expected land uses.

carton litter and the lowest overall beverage container count since the current monitoring process began in 1998.

Two major EPA projects during 2003-04 related to CDL.

The fi rst project examined the complex sorting arrangements between key industry stakeholders—collection depots and super collectors. Super collectors are companies that act as agents for the beverage manufacturers by ensuring that empty beverage containers are recycled. They broker the payment of handling fees and the reimbursement of monies to collection depots for refunds paid to consumers. The EPA is currently analysing the results of this project.

The second project conducted market research to determine the level of community awareness and acceptance for the CDL scheme. The telephone research gained key fi ndings from a sample base of 803 respondents as follows:

• The overwhelming majority (97%) of respondents agreed that the CDL is good for our environment, with most (87%) in strong agreement.

• Most (92%) of the respondents agreed that extending the scheme (January 2003) to cover additional beverage containers such as fruit drink and fl avoured milk containers was a good idea (75% strongly agreed with this statement).

• 88% of the respondents agreed that CDL has been effective in reducing litter.

• 92% of the respondents agreed that CDL had been effective in encouraging and promoting recycling and reuse of container materials.

• 86% of the respondents thought that CDL had been effective in reducing the number of beverage containers going into landfi ll.

Waste

25


Small Business Eco-effi ciency Training Program

The Small Business Eco-effi ciency Training Program has continued to train businesses across South Australia in 2003-04 to enable them to improve business effi ciencies while reducing impacts on the environment. Workshops (Table 2) have been held in regional locations including Mount Gambier and Berri, and in metropolitan locations including Lonsdale, Port Adelaide, Prospect, Adelaide and Unley.

The program delivers courses to small businesses that provide information and tools to help small business to improve environmental performance and minimise operating costs by cleaner production methods, recycling and reusing.

Greening The Supply Chain Assistance Scheme

Greener Business AllianceThe Greener Business Alliance Report on the project with Yalumba Wines was completed along with 10 case studies. The report is now available at: www.epa.sa.gov.au.

The project successfully demonstrated the benefi ts of implementing eco-effi ciencies into business supply chains. While many of the benefi ts resulting from this project will take time to be fully realised, already suppliers have collectively realised cost savings of over $85,000 per annum, and Yalumba $30,000 per annum. The project has also strengthened relationships between Yalumba and its suppliers, and increased their awareness of environmental management.

Country Landfi lls Training Course

The second Country Landfi ll Training Course, held in Coonawarra over two days in November 2003, aimed to help country landfi ll operators understand their obligations under the Act and identify some practical methods for addressing their responsibilities.

The workshop, which was arranged by the LGA and conducted with assistance from the EPA, had three major themes: planning, environmental management and operations of landfi lls.

Presentation topics on day one covered site selection, layout and design for landfi ll sites, burning and fi re risks on landfi ll sites, safe handling of hazardous materials, licence conditions, and landfi ll environmental management plans. Regional approaches for establishing necessary infrastructure were discussed. The fi eld trips on day two to landfi ll sites in Naracoorte, Padthaway and Frances included demonstrations of desirable techniques for different aspects of landfi ll operation.

The workshop was well received by participants and another has been planned for early 2005.

Waste levyThe provisions of the Environment Protection (Fees and Levy) Regulations 1994 require all licensed waste depots to report the mass of solid and liquid waste received for disposal.

The EPA receives waste levy returns from 51 licensed waste depots across the state, reporting about 1.16 million tonnes of solid waste and 48,000 kilolitres of liquid waste annually. A further 166,000 tonnes annually is determined by a population formula of 0.40 tonnes per head, available to 44 councils whose estimated annual waste does not exceed 10,000 tonnes.

During the year offi cers made 83 visits to 41 licensed waste depots across the state to monitor compliance. They also:

• ensured that weighbridges were installed and used at waste depots

• assessed volumetric surveys against weigh data produced for 13 depots receiving more than 10,000 tonnes annually

• conducted surveillance audits of vehicles entering waste depots

• audited weighbridge records and monthly returns submitted for the purposes of waste levy payments

• assessed computer generated reports for waste depots to monitor trends.

Highlights during 2003-04 included:

• In July 2003 the Waste Depot Levy (per tonne of solid waste) was doubled to pay for the establishment of the Offi ce of Zero Waste SA. ZWSA receives 50% of the Waste Depot Levy from solid waste received at waste depots.

• A regional waste depot ceased using the population formula and began weighing all waste received for disposal and completing volumetric surveys. It was determined that 10,000 tonnes had been exceeded the previous fi nancial year.

Table 2. Small Business Eco-effi ciency Workshops

Performance indicators 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04

No. of participants 385 550 364

No. of businesses participating 310 273 238

No. of workshops 44 30 28

26


Used packaging

The Environment Protection (Used Packaging Materials) Policy 2001 (the implementation in South Australia of the Used Packaging NEPM) gave ‘brand owners’, who could be signifi cant contributors to the waste stream, a choice to sign the National Packaging Covenant (NPC) or comply with the requirements of the Used Packaging NPC/EPP.

As at 30 June 2004, South Australia had recorded 92 signatories to the NPC.

The South Australian Jurisdictional Recycling Group started the following projects:

• the best practice kerbside recyclying program, an incentive project to reward and encourage councils to implement best practice kerbside collection systems in SA.

• a review of recycling activity in South Australia, investigating current recycling activity in South Australia and identifying future expansion priorities.

• a transport logistics study for rural and regional South Australia to investigate options for increasing recycling rates in rural and regional parts of South Australia.

In November 2003 the EPA undertook a brand owner audit (required annually by the Used Packaging NEPM) to identify companies that are signifi cant contributors to the waste stream.

The EPA also presented at several forums and workshops throughout the year on the NPC, delivering information on national and state-based projects of the National Kerbside Recycling Group and the state-based Jurisdictional Recycling Group.

In April 2004, the Environment Protection and Heritage Council agreed to an interim extension of the covenant to April 2005, in order to allow the National Packaging Covenant Council time to develop a detailed proposal for future arrangements.

Industry Association ProjectThe EPA has entered into a partnership with the South Australian Wine Industry Association to establish a 12-month industry-based project to help address the knowledge gap between wine industry members and environmental reporting requirements of wine retailers. Research will be undertaken into retailers’ issues in relation to the supply chain. The major environmental and social aspects associated with the products and services of wine industry suppliers will be identifi ed.

Further opportunities for Greening the Supply Chain will be pursued in other industry sectors during 2004-05.

Alternatives to landfi ll

In 2002-03 the Alternatives to Landfi ll project investigated the cost of alternative waste technologies, in particular compared to landfi ll. The reports are available at www.epa.sa.gov.au. As a second part of the project, a cost model using Mirosoft Excel was developed to help determine the actual cost of landfi lling wastes for individual sites.

The results from the project and the model have been presented in several forums since their release in the second half of 2003. This has included a specifi c hands-on session for council staff in the use of the landfi ll model, which has been well received by councils. It is a useful tool for them to estimate the cost of their current waste operations and calculate the costs of alternative waste management methods, such regional approaches to waste management.

The council also agreed to extend the NEPM to July 2005 thereby providing the legislative underpinning for the interim extension of the Covenant Waste-to-Resources Plan.

Site contamination

Site contamination is a signifi cant issue that must be recognised and considered for the purchase, sale, lease, development and redevelopment of all land, property and business. When site contamination has occurred, it should be addressed by appropriate assessment, remediation and management to ensure that the land is suitable for its current or intended use. A major issue of concern is the development or redevelopment of land to a sensitive land use (such as residential, childcare, preschool or primary school)where site contamination has occurred or is suspected.

Site contamination may result from a wide range of industrial, agricultural and some commercial activities, including the disposal or intensive use of chemicals or wastes in urban and rural areas.

Existing environment protection legislation is inadequate to manage site contamination, particularly specifi c issues that emerge such as the ‘mothballing’ of the Port Stanvac Oil Refi nery.

The EPA and state government have developed a draft Site Contamination Bill to amend the Environment Protection Act to specifi cally address site contamination. It is anticipated that this draft Bill will proceed to public consultation phase during 2004.

Waste

27


Education, monitoring and participation programs are effective tools in raising the community’s awareness and ownership of, and involvement in, the management of environmental issues and in encouraging environmentally sustainable behaviour. By engaging with a wide range of community groups and organisations, the EPA empowers the community and industry sectors with knowledge and skills to take an active role in protecting their local environment.

Round-table

Each year, as part of its consultation program, the EPA holds an annual stakeholder consultation session known as the EPA Round-table. In addition, the Board participated in several regional Round-table conferences—in Mount Gambier, Whyalla–Port Pirie, and Port Augusta. The Round-table consultation process is a legislative responsibility of the EPA.

The specifi c purpose of the 2004 Round-table was to gain stakeholder perspectives and input into the EPA’s contribution to the sustainability agenda and to other emerging issues of relevance to the EPA. This year’s event was considerably smaller than previous years to allow for focused discussion and better engagement between participants and to produce clearer, actionable outcomes.

The full report on proceedings and outcomes from the June 2003 Round-table is available on the EPA web site at: www.epa.sa.gov.au/pdfs/rtable2003.pdf.

Community programs

Involving the community in awareness raising and action programs is critical to ensuring long-term sustainable management of our environment. Awareness is an effective tool in bringing about change—and for achieving environmental understanding of values and attitudes, improving skills and changing unsustainable behaviour.

The EPA’s Community Programs—WaterCare, Waterwatch, Frog Census and AirWatch—collectively involve over 60,000 individuals across South Australia. The EPA values the important contribution of the many community networks and stakeholder groups that participate in these programs and are a key to their ongoing success.

WaterCareWaterCare is a whole-of-government initiative that aims to raise awareness about South Australia’s water resources issues and promote their sustainable use and management. The program is a joint initiative of the EPA, DWLBC, DEH, South Australia’s CWMBs and SA Water.

WaterCare is designed to unify government communications on water issues and provide a vehicle to deliver water related messages and campaigns under the WaterCare brand.

Throughout the year extensive market research was conducted to enable the development of a state-wide public awareness campaign, including television and print advertising and supporting editorial and promotional activity. The campaign, scheduled to

begin in September 2004 and continue to the end of June 2005, has the main objectives of:

• reminding all South Australians that the state’s water resources are precious

• increasing the understanding that South Australia’s water issues are long-term

• increasing the understanding that individual behaviour has a direct impact on water resources.

Waterwatch Waterwatch is a highly successful South Australian community awareness and engagement program that has been operating for just over a decade. The program continues to expand and, at the end of 2003, encompassed over 500 community and school groups with approximately 40,000 participants. In addition, six regional Waterwatch programs now operate across the state.

Waterwatch is part of a successful national program that encourages all members of the community to become actively involved in protecting and managing their waterways and catchments. It provides hands-on involvement in water education and increases awareness and understanding through community water monitoring.

Community support for Waterwatch was demonstrated at the 2003 Waterwatch Awards, where groups and stakeholders celebrated the 10-year anniversary of Waterwatch in South Australia. There were 32 entries from across the state and 250 people

PARTNERSHIPS—COMMUNITY AND INDUSTRY INVOLVEMENT

28


attended the ceremony. The awards provided recognition and incentives to groups that had contributed throughout the year.

Saltwatch 2004 (held in May) was also a successful event, with over 2000 participants monitoring water at 150 sites across the state. The data from this event is currently being analysed as part of a report that will cover Saltwatch results from 2001 to 2004.

The EPA has been a strong supporter of the Waterwatch SA program, along with the Commonwealth Natural Heritage Trust, CWMBs, councils and other regional program proponents. Up until December 2003 the EPA hosted the Waterwatch SA state offi ce. This offi ce is now closed but contact can still be made with the program through the EPA. Following natural resource management reform and the subsequent change in Commonwealth funding arrangements, the EPA funded a review to determine its most effective future role.

The EPA will now continue to provide elements of state support for the Waterwatch network including:

• state-wide promotion, marketing and events

• maintenance of the Waterwatch SA web site

• fi nancial and technical support for programs such as Saltwatch and Aquatic Snapshot under the Quality Assurance and Quality Control (QA/QC) program

• setting of state-wide standards and policy for QA/QC.

In future, the EPA will endeavour to maintain a positive and benefi cial relationship with the Waterwatch network and key stakeholders.

Frog CensusFrog Census is a highly successful South Australian community engagement program that has been fully funded and supported by the EPA. From 1994 to 2003 over 2000 individuals, schools and community groups have made more than 17,000 recordings and monitored frogs at over 3500 sites.

Frog Census increases public awareness of the health of South Australian rivers and streams by assessing the distribution and abundance of frogs, which are bio-indicators of the health of waterways and the effects of pollution. Volunteers take recordings of frogs calling from waterways during Frog Week in September, when most species in the southern parts of the state are expected to be calling.

Data that is collected each year from Frog Census is used to inform stakeholders, including local government and CWMBs, about the health of waterways and was incorporated into the 1998 and 2003 SoE Reports.

In response to numerous public enquires about frogs and water quality the EPA produced the booklet Frog Ponds for Gardens—How to set up a pond that provides suitable conditions for local frogs in South Australia.

Promotion of Frog Census 2004 for September is under way. Data from 2003 is being entered into the EPA Environmental Data Management System and will be reported on in a review of the Frog Census program from 1994 to 2004.

AirWatchAirWatch is an established national school program that aims to raise awareness of air quality issues by monitoring local environments and increasing community understanding of, and willingness to adopt, practices that protect local air quality. AirWatch is funded by the EPA in South Australia.

Achievements during the year include:

• a sponsorship arrangement between the EPA AirWatch and Channel 9 to broadcast primary students’ weather and visual air quality data weekly on the Channel 9 weather report with Keith Martin

• a further 10 (85 in all) schools recruited to the AirWatch program with 35 schools registered on the AirWatch web site

• AirWatch professional development and AirWatch education sessions for primary and secondary school teachers

• ongoing support of the AirWatch Steering Committee chaired by Mrs Anita Aspinall

• presentations in partnership with other programs at the Adelaide Zoo and Cleland Reserve, such as ‘Frogs need clean air too’ and ‘Canopy creatures need clean air too’.

EPA web site

The EPA’s web site (www.epa.sa.gov.au) provides information on the main interest areas of air and water quality, noise, radiation protection, waste reduction and eco-effi ciency, and the EPA’s role in environmental planning. It describes licensing requirements and links to copies of environmental legislation and policies. Almost all EPA publications are available for download from the publications page (www.epa.sa.gov.au/pub.html). This information is provided free of charge.

In May 2004, the EPA updated its web site to improve navigation and refl ect the EPA’s corporate image, at the same time launching a subscription service. By registering their e-mail address, subscribers can receive a monthly newsletter with links to items of interest on the web site, along with advice about public consultations and updates to legislation and guidelines.

Partnerships-Community and Industry Involvement

29


the principles promoted in the objects of the Act. Action may begin with warning letters and end, if necessary, with prosecution.

The EPA has commenced the preparation of guidelines for compliance and enforcement. Selected stakeholder consultation has taken place and the fi nal document is expected by the end of 2004.

Development assessment

The EPA’s Planning Section coordinates assessment of development applications of environmental signifi cance referred to the EPA by councils or the Development Assessment Commission. Since the referral process began in mid-1995, the EPA has assessed nearly 5000 development applications, an average of around 600 applications per year.

This year, 567 applications were assessed. The EPA can infl uence and, in certain cases, direct the refusal of proposals or attachment of certain conditions to ensure the protection of the environment and communities and encourage sustainable development.3

The following major projects were referred to the EPA during the year for assessment:

• Holdfast Shores Development Stage 2B

• Irish Pub, Moseley Square

• IWS Dublin Balefi ll Contaminated Soil and Liquid Treatment Plant

• Jeffries Composting Works

• Hindmarsh Square Apartment Complex

• Ceduna Keys Marina

• Beringer Blass Wine Bottling and Storage Facility.

Planning policy

The Planning Section also provided advice on proposed changes to local government development plans, through the assessment of council and ministerial plan amendment reports. EPA assessment of proposed planning schemes encourages the development of planning policies which result in enhanced environment and community protection as well as sustainable development. The Planning Section also assessed other planning policy documents, such as the Planning Strategy, and worked closely with Planning SA in the early stages of the development of ministerial plan amendment reports. During the year, a total of 69 planning policy documents were assessed.

The Environment Protection Act is the primary pollution control legislation in South Australia. Broadly, it aims to:

• ensure that measures are taken to protect, restore and enhance the quality of the environment according to the principles of ecologically sustainable development

• promote these ecologically sustainable development principles.

Under the Act everyone has a ‘general environmental duty’ to prevent pollution of the environment. This means that industry and the community (including local and state government) must care for the environment and prevent any harm to it.

The EPA is responsible for administering and enforcing the Act and its subordinate legislation, including EPPs. It does this in a number of ways, from cooperation through to enforcement, all of which are important in ensuring compliance with environmental law.

The Act provides the EPA with numerous enforcement tools and with the discretion to determine:

• when enforcement is required

• which enforcement measures are appropriate for particular circumstances.

The EPA determines whether or not to pursue a particular enforcement action by carefully examining and balancing a wide variety of social, environmental and economic factors, consistent with

COMPLIANCE AND ENFORCEMENT

3 The EPA has directive power in relation to schedule 22 referrals, activities which require a licence under the Act and for certain activities within the River Murray Water Protection Area.

30


Local government support

The provision of support to local government-based authorised offi cers and the refi nement of the support package continues to be a focus for the EPA.

An increasing number of councils are involved in delivering environment protection regulatory services in informal partnership with the EPA; these can be by:

• implementation of the Burning EPP

• control of audible bird scaring devices, based on EPA guidelines

• use of the EPA’s incident recording database, CARES

• investigation and resolution of complaints relating to water pollution using the Water Quality EPP

• exercise of delegations from the EPA associated with the issue of environment protection orders (EPOs).

Three councils (City of Whyalla, Adelaide Hills Council and City of West Torrens) have taken responsibility for the regulation of all non-licensed activities in their respective areas.

The introduction of proposed amendments to the Act, including the availability of suitable cost recovery mechanisms, is seen as critical to the achievement of the long-term goal of improved environment protection services for the South Australian community. As part of this process a subcommittee of the EPA Board composed of members from the Board and local government has been formed.

The subcommittee is drafting a formal agreement to outline responsibilities, to identify EPA support and the local government role in formulating and implementing environment protection programs, information, policies and legislation, and to establish a hand-over or escalation procedure.

CARES

The Complaints and Reports of Environmental Signifi cance (CARES) database has been operating for two years. CARES user groups, of both EPA and local government offi cers, have made suggestions that have led to CARES being modifi ed to provide better searching capability, multiple incident management functions, and a wider and more comprehensive range of reports. Overall, there was a 19% increase in complaints received by the EPA during 2003–04 over the previous year. Figure 10 gives a breakdown of the types of complaints.

Community mediation

The EPA receives many complaints of a less serious nature through its pollution complaints line, which is serviced by the Customer Service Desk. The EPA continues to recommend mediation as a means of resolving pollution complaints, particularly those arising from domestic activities. In many cases, enforcement of the Act could be seen as heavy handed and does little to help relations between neighbours.

The EPA has an arrangement with Community Mediation Services (CMS) to assist in managing pollution complaints arising from residential and some non-licensed commercial premises. CMS can provide trained and skilled mediators to help resolve disputes. The EPA provided fi nancial assistance to CMS for the production of brochures on the benefi ts of mediation and how to become involved in the process.

From an EPA perspective, the option of mediation has provided a mechanism to help a complainant resolve a confl ict. However, there is no data currently available for assessing the success of this process. During 2004–05 the EPA will undertake a survey of customer satisfaction with its Customer Service Desk to assist in evaluating the service.

Table 3 Referred development applications completed

Development Description 2002–03 2003–04applicationtype No. On time (%) No. On time (%)

Schedule 22 Activities of major 206 79.5 172 79.1 environmental signifi cance

Schedule 21 Activities of environmental 234 77.8 184 90.2 signifi cance

Schedule 8 ‘Non-complying’ development 85 82.5 79 65.8 in a water protection area

Section 49 Crown development 23 52.2 19 89.5 by state agencies

Non-scheduled Non-statutory referrals 69 88.2 113 82.3 by planning authorities

Total 617 79.4 567 81.8

Compliance and Enforcement

31


Emergency response

The EPA responds to emergency pollution incidents when notifi ed through the EPA’s emergency 24-hour pager number. Emergency responses are of three types:

• whole-of-government procedure, known as the Blue Book, which deals with spills or leaks of hazardous substances onto land or into non-marine waters, and is coordinated by Emergency Services (Police, Fire, technical adviser)

• national response plan, which deals with oil or chemical spills at sea, coordinated by the Marine Group of the Department for Transport and Urban Planning

• 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 require an immediate assessment by the EPA.

During 2003–04, the EPA responded to 133 incidents through its emergency pollution incident response system, an increase of 49 incidents over the previous year. Most calls emanated from licence holders and emergency services (Figure 11) and often involved an oil spill or a transport incident (Figure 12), as shown in these examples of signifi cant incidents.

• A diesel spill (of approximately 15,000 litres) escaped from a fuel system at the Adelaide rail yards and fl owed to the Torrens Lake via a stormwater system.

• Numerous calls were received from concerned residents complaining of a hydrocarbon odour in the Peterhead–Largs Bay area, Lefevre Peninsula. A system was put in operation for calls to be sent to the Emergency Response Team to allow an immediate response. The source of the odour was identifi ed and measures taken to reduce the odour.

Table 4 Freedom of Information applications and Public Register requests

2001–02 2002–03 2003–04

Freedom of Information 15 11 48Public Register 149 158 138

32

Figure 10 CARES complaints

Figure 11 Source of calls received by the Emergency Response Team


• Contaminated fi re water from a shop fi re at Blackwood entered a creek.

• A truck rollover at Warooka resulted in spill of approximately 1000 litres of diesel.

• Pump failure at Kilburn industrial premises resulted in sulfuric acid escaping from a tanker.

Freedom of Information and Public Register

In 2003–04, 48 Freedom of Information applications and 138 Public Register requests were received (Table 4). Public Register enquiries that do not require documentation are treated as informal requests and are not recorded. It is estimated that there were up to 400 such enquiries made during the year.

Pollution complaints line

The EPA maintains a pollution complaints line—8204 2004, or Freecall 1800 623 445 for callers outside the metropolitan area—to receive calls from the public on environmental concerns (Table 5). Depending on the nature of the call, the EPA’s response may:

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

• register a formal complaint for follow up by an authorised offi cer

• where applicable, refer the caller to other agencies and bodies.


33

Table 5 Number of complaints received by EPA

Type of complaint 2001–02 2002–03 2003–04

Air quality 2357 1842 2049Air and noise n.a. n.a. 158Noise 1657 1400 1655Marine pollution 33 18 33Other 263 62 263Water* 372 175 368Waste 263 483 369

Total 4945 3980 4895

* Most water complaints are handled directly by local government.

Table 6 Inspections of licensed premises

Performance indicators-Quantity 2000–01 2001–02 2002–03 2003–04

No. of inspections of 1,315 1,381 1,082 1,021licensed premises

No. of authorisations 1,859 1,855 1,964 1,986

No. of active ozone authorisations 4,300 5,699 3,956 3,570(accreditations and exemptions)

No. of section 7 enquiries/responses *A: 51,053 *A: 57,204 *A: 54,579 *A: 54,848(as required under Land and Business *M: 1,180 *M: 1,370 *M: 1,727 *M: 1,838(Sale and Conveyancing) Act 1994)

*A-automatic enquiries to the Lands Titles Offi ce database involve perusal of the section 7 information maintained by the EPA. M-manual enquiries require an EPA offi cer search made upon request by the Lands Titles Offi ce.


Inspections of licensed premises

People who undertake potentially polluting activities require an environmental authorisation from the EPA, in the form of a licence, exemption or works approval. Holders of an authorisation must comply with the conditions attached to that authorisation.

In certain circumstances the EPA has the power to vary the conditions of, or suspend, cancel or disqualify, an environmental authorisation. This means that the holder of the authorisation must immediately cease the activity for which they hold the authorisation.

During 2003–04, EPA offi cers made 1021 inspections of licensed premises, audited the premises against requirements of the Act and conditions of licence and, where necessary, negotiated site environmental improvements (Table 6).

Compliance with requirements under the Act is most commonly achieved by the EPA through cooperative approaches with licensees, resulting in cost effective environmental improvement, and engendering a positive attitude on the part of licensees toward long-term compliance.

34

Table 7 Cases completed in ERD Court 2003-04

Offender name Charges

Chiltern Woods Pty Ltd Conducting a prescribed environmental activity Midfi eld Meat Pty Ltd of signifi cance without an EPA authorisation—s36 of the ActRelates to a cattle feedlot where approx. 800 head per day of cattle Both companies convicted, were housed near Mount Gambier fi ned $34,000between June 2001 and July 2002

Gino Pacitti, Hindmarsh Tiers Milking Shed Effl uent EPP

Alleged to have allowed milking shed Breach of mandatory effl uent to enter a watercourse policy—s34(2) of the Act(Hindmarsh River) Guilty plea. Conviction recorded, fi ned $700 plus $150 costs

SA Water Corporation Caused environmental nuisance—s82 of the Act.

Escape of sewage from burst main Guilty plea. Conviction recorded, into Port Lincoln marina fi ned $13,500

Rural City of Murray Bridge Breach of licence conditions—s45(5) of the Act.

Breach of licence conditions for Convicted and fi ned $31,996Brinkley Road landfi ll; continuing escape of litter from the depot

Shannon Michael Kernick Breach of mandatory policy—s34(1) of the Act.

Continued overfl ow of dairy Conviction recorded, effl uent to roadside verge fi ned $5000 plus $150 costsand neighbouring property

Graeme John Mooney Radiation Protection & Control Act

Use of an X-ray machine at Failing to register an X-ray unita Port Lincoln Veterinary Clinic Unlicensed person

Convicted and fi ned $2500

Table 8 Environment protection orders

EPOs recorded 2001–02 2002–03 2003–04

EPA 79 141 79Police/other 261 264 309



Enforcement and investigations

The Investigations Branch conducted 30 investigations into pollution incidents, including four matters from the previous year. Of these, seven matters are still under investigation. In eight of the matters investigated insuffi cient evidence was available to pursue any charges in relation to the Act. Eight matters were dealt with by way of EPOs and or expiation notices. Charges have been laid in three matters which are currently before the Environment, Resources and Development (ERD) Court, including the alleged spill of diesel into the Torrens Lake system. Charges in one matter, which relate to Protection of Marine Waters (Prevention of Pollution from Ships) Act 1987, have been laid in the Magistrates Court. The Crown Solicitor’s Offi ce is reviewing three other matters to determine whether suffi cient evidence is available against any person in relation to offences against the Act.

Six matters were completed in the ERD Court; one resulted in a ‘not guilty’ verdict. Matters for which ‘guilty’ verdicts were recorded are shown in Table 7.

Environment protection orders

Environment protection orders (EPOs) (Table 8) can be issued by authorised offi cers under s93 (1) of the Act for the following criteria:

(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 offi cers are authorised under the Act and use EPOs to deal with noise complaints from domestic premises.

Figure 12 Emergency pollution incident response system-incident types

35


KEY POINT SOURCE POLLUTION PROGRAMS

Penrice Soda Products

Penrice has a set of environmental management strategies in place with the EPA to deal with both air quality issues (particularly dust particles) and water quality issues (particularly ammonia and suspended solids).

The company’s solids recycling plant, commissioned in April 2001, has contributed to a signifi cant reduction in suspended solid concentrations discharged into the Port River. Dust emissions reduction has also shown some improvement during 2003 with many projects completed under the Site EIP and Milk of Lime Exemption EIP.

Strategies include a fi ve-year Marine and Site EIP to be completed by 31 October 2006, a four-year Ammonia Reduction EIP to be completed by 31 December 2006, an ongoing Coastal Waters Monitoring Program with independent verifi cation, and an annual Marine Impact Assessment beginning 1 June 2002.

Penrice have met EPA licence compliance and EIP objectives by:

• meeting agreed milestones over the period 2002–04 (220 tonne ammonia reduction) with the implementation of the approved Ammonia Reduction EIP (Phase 2 includes a feasibility study of best available technology economically available for treatment of nutrients in the waste stream)

• continued reporting (30-day moving average) of suspended solids concentration in the marine discharge

showing no exceedence above 500 ppm and normal operation below 100 ppm

• starting monitoring and reporting of ammonia and nutrient concentration levels in the marine discharge

• fi ndings of the independent environmental Marine Impact Assessment (Study 2, May 2003) progress report showing no evidence of increased environmental harm.

OneSteel

During 2003 the level of dust measured at the boundary of the OneSteel steelworks in Whyalla remained high, and at levels similar to those measured in 2002. Fine particle levels (measured as PM10) exceeded 50 µg/m3

on 22 recorded occasions at Hummock Hill—which, taking into account the number of sampling days, normalises to approximately 70 days over the year.

Additional monitoring was started in the community adjacent to the steelworks in July 2003 in order to better defi ne the potential for health impacts from exposure to the dust that is present in the community at the eastern end of Whyalla.

Fourteen exceedences of the National Ambient Air Quality Standard (as outlined in the Air NEPM) were recorded at this site to 30 June 2004. This new site has been designated as the site to measure the performance of OneSteel with respect to dust emissions and their impact on the community.

Substantial work was undertaken during 2003–04 in conjunction with the DHS to improve the understanding of the contribution that OneSteel makes to dust levels measured next to the steelworks. This work has shown that OneSteel is the major contributor to dust levels at the eastern end of Whyalla on days when the dust level exceeds 50 µg/m3.

The EPA has developed a comprehensive suite of licence conditions that will require OneSteel to meet stringent standards for dust levels measured in the community and to operate its plant and equipment in a manner that minimises offsite dust impacts. Although not required by the Act, the EPA consulted the local community on the content of these licence conditions.

OneSteel submitted a document to the EPA in October 2003 outlining the steps that it would take to reduce offsite dust impacts. The company has begun implementing the commitments in the document. The most signifi cant, Project Magnet, aims to make redundant the dry processing equipment at the pellet plant by importing a magnetite slurry concentrate from the mine site for direct feed to the pellet plant. This process change would be expected to substantially reduce process emissions from the pellet plant and reduce offsite dust impacts.

As part of Project Magnet, OneSteel is also proposing to increase its iron ore exports through its port facilities. At 30 June the EPA had not been provided with the full details of Project Magnet

36


Key Point Source Pollution Programs

and so is not yet able to comment on the extent of dust reduction that is expected from implementing the project.

At 30 June the OneSteel Board was assessing the overall viability of Project Magnet, but had undertaken that, irrespective of the Project Magnet decision, the crushing and screening operations would be relocated from the pellet plant to the mine.

Castalloy (Ion Automotive Pty Ltd, North Plympton)

Castalloy fi nalised its EIP in July 2003 after considerable discussion and negotiation with the EPA. The EIP included removal of key odorous processes to Wingfi eld (Cast Metals Precinct) and modifi cations of other processes at North Plympton to manage odour and noise emissions.

The Board of the EPA was presented with the EIP at its August 2003 meeting and accepted the plan.

In October 2003 Castalloy notifi ed the EPA that it was withdrawing its EIP and would be presenting an alternative plan that would refl ect a signifi cant change in direction by the company.

Shortly after this time the EPA ordered the company to cease the production of a new automotive component for which it had not sought relevant approvals. It was alleged that production of this new component was causing increased emissions, and hence adverse impacts on the local community. The order was appealed in the ERD court.

In the absence of a new EIP, the EPA renewed Castalloy’s licence late in 2003 and attached stringent noise and odour standards which were to be met by 30 June 2004.

This licence was also appealed in the ERD Court and these two appeals are still not resolved. However, as part of the negotiations the company did offer to carry out some works by the

end of 2004. These works are designed to reduce odour and noise impacts on the community and have received in-principle support from the EPA. It is acknowledged that these works will not achieve the required EPA noise and odour standards but those standards are part of the items under appeal.

Hensley Industries

In July 2003 a different company, Central Queensland Mining Supplies (CQMS), lodged a development application to establish a redeveloped foundry on the Torrensville site of Hensley Industries.

The EPA indicated that if the proposed CQMS foundry was to be approved, it would need to demonstrate best practice management of its emissions and that residual emissions would not pose an unacceptable health risk to the adjacent community.

As part of the development application process, the EPA sought a considerable amount of technical information from CQMS to support its development application. The EPA also formed a technical review team, including an external health professional, to evaluate the information that it fi nally received from the applicant. A large amount of time was committed to the technical assessment in order to ensure the fairest and most equitable evaluation, having regard to the objects of the Act.

In December 2003 the development application was withdrawn. CQMS cited the high capital cost to meet the stringent environmental requirements set for the project, as well as other project timing issues, as determining factors in its decision to withdraw.

As a result of the discontinued development application process, the company discontinued its foundry operations at Torrensville on 31 March 2004, consistent with the 2003 Deed of Agreement and Court Order.

The EPA confi rmed that no licensable activities were being carried out after

31 March 2004, and Hensley Industries formally vacated the site on 30 June 2004 after completely dismantling the foundry equipment.

Adelaide Brighton Cement

The EPA maintains a continuous improvement management strategy with Adelaide Brighton Cement for the ongoing management and minimisation of both point source and fugitive emissions from the Birkenhead facility.

Adelaide Brighton Cement has committed to undertaking actions through an EIP that will achieve compliance with the requirements of licence and the general environmental duty.

The EPA and Adelaide Brighton Cement have put signifi cant effort and resources into the trialing of alternative fuels and raw materials for use in their cement kilns at both Birkenhead and Angaston.

The process approved by the EPA to trial the use of alternative fuels and raw materials was developed in consultation with Adelaide Brighton Cement in 2001–02, and is included as a condition on Adelaide Brighton Cement’s licence.

The trials involve extensive gathering of emissions data to assess against established baseline data for the process.

The use of alternative fuels in cement manufacturing is helping Adelaide Brighton Cement reduce its effects on the environment and improve its overall environmental performance. Alternative fuels and raw materials provide a waste management solution for the community and reduce the use of non-renewable resources.

37


Zinifex

Zinifex (formerly Pasminco) is one of the world’s largest integrated zinc and lead companies. At the Zinifex Port Pirie site the main EPA focus has shifted from wastewater treatment to reducing the emissions from the raw and roast fume areas of the plant. US research has confi rmed DHS studies that oxidised forms of lead are more bioavailable and more likely to show up in children’s blood.

The EPA continues to assist DHS in its efforts to reduce the lead levels in blood as its top priority. Zinifex is currently preparing a plan aimed at a reduction in lead levels. Implementation of the plan is likely to take fi ve years.

National Piggery Guidelines

The Australian pork industry body, Australian Pork Limited, has been pro-active in developing National Environmental Guidelines for Piggeries.The guidelines were produced with assistance from a large range of people including consultants, producers, and the environmental and primary industries agencies from most jurisdictions in Australia, including the EPA. The guidelines are a compilation of the best available knowledge for the management of the potential environmental impact of piggeries in Australia.

It is proposed that the guidelines will be formally released in August 2004. The South Australian pork industry, PIRSA and the EPA will consider the fi nal guidelines to determine if they should be adopted for South Australia and replace the current SA environmental guidelines. If adopted, there will need to be a short addendum describing the development approval procedure and the applicable legislation in the state.

EPA–PIRSA Memorandum of Understanding

In June 1999 a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) between the EPA and the Petroleum and Minerals Groups of PIRSA was signed regarding environmental regulation of the petroleum and mineral industry. The stated purpose of the MoU was to provide a framework for PIRSA and the EPA to work effi ciently and effectively in the environmental regulation of the mining and petroleum industries in South Australia.

A review of the MoU began in March 2003 with meetings between EPA and the Petroleum and Minerals Groups of PIRSA to gain a greater understanding of respective legislation before developing a revised MoU. It is proposed that the revised agreement would be an overarching MoU with administrative arrangements for petroleum, minerals and mining, milling and treatment of radioactive ores.

The administrative arrangements will provide clarifi cation to all parties of their responsibilities under the relevant administered legislation, the establishment of criteria to enable consultation on the environmental assessment of petroleum and mining operations, and a process for imposing consistent obligations for the petroleum and mineral industry.

The EPA and the Petroleum Group of PIRSA signed an administrative agreement in November 2003. The EPA and the Minerals Group of PIRSA will negotiate and fi nalise an administrative agreement in the latter half of 2004.

SA Water environment improvement programs

SA Water is currently committed to implementing 17 EIPs in cooperation with the EPA. These EIPs aim to minimise the impact of wastewater treatment plants on the environment, consistent with the requirements under the Act and, where applicable, the Environment Protection (Marine) Policy 1994.

To date, SA Water has completed eleven EIPs and, when all have been completed, total capital expenditure will amount to $292 million. Monitoring programs will be used to gauge the success of the various upgrades in reducing or eliminating environmental harm.

Garden Island

The waste depot Garden Island was closed for the reception of waste in February 2001.

During a compulsory ERD Court conference in August 2001, agreement was reached between the previous operator Western Region Waste Management Authority (Western), the landowner Land Management Corporation and the EPA to enter into an environmental performance agreement for closure, rehabilitation and post-closure activities for Garden Island.

The closure plan for this landfi ll was developed and accepted in principle by all parties in 2002; it addressed the main closure, landscaping and monitoring requirements for the site.

This was followed by drafting of the capping implementation plan, detailing all technical issues for rehabilitation works on the site as well as setting timeframes and outlining responsibilities for different stages of works. All aspects of the plan have been discussed and negotiated, and have now been accepted by all stakeholders.A draft of the environment

38


Key Point Source Pollution Programs

performance agreement, refl ecting milestones, responsibilities and timeframes as negotiated in both the closure and capping implementation plans, is now subject to fi nal negotiation on these matters as well as on fi nancial commitments by Western and the Land Management Corporation.

Mobil Refi nery, Port Stanvac

Mobil Oil Australia ceased operations at its Adelaide refi nery at Port Stanvac in July 2003. Since this time production facilities at the site have been ‘mothballed’ to allow for a possible restart in the future. Work is continuing to mothball the remaining crude storage tanks and it is expected that this will be completed by 31 December 2004.

Mobil has engaged a contaminated land environmental auditor to oversee the environmental assessment of the refi nery site and is continuing to communicate the results to the EPA.

Audit program for 2003–04

Since 2002 the EPA has being carrying out audits of major industrial sites. These audits are aimed at ensuring compliance with licence conditions, mandatory policies and the general duty of care under section 25 of the Act. During the 2003–04 reporting period, the EPA carried out the following audits.

The EPA audited WMC’s Olympic Dam Operations, near Roxby Downs, approximately 600 km north of Adelaide. The audit did not identify any major environmental problems but did identify some minor issues associated with routine operations. These will be addressed through an EIP.

The two Adelaide liquid waste treatment facilities (Collex and Cleanaway) were audited. A number of minor issues were identifi ed and are being managed through changes to licence conditions. All nine South Australian timber

preservation plants that used copper chrome arsenate were audited and the fi ndings are currently being evaluated.

River Torrens auditResponding to a major diesel spill into Torrens Lake in July 2003, the EPA is auditing licensed premises and a number of unlicensed premises that may present a future environmental risk to the River Torrens.

The audit aims to look at the potential risk of stored liquids spilling into surface and underground drains and polluting the Torrens.

The audit began in late 2003 and will be completed by December 2004. It is highlighting some consistent problems in the potential to pollute the stormwater system through poor chemical spill management—poor staff training, failure to bund chemical storage areas and inadequate spill management equipment.

Winery audit fi ndingsFollowing the outcomes of the 2001–02 environmental management audits of wineries and distilleries in South Australia, several requirements were incorporated in the EPA authorisations for these wineries and distilleries. A number of these facilities were required to develop EIPs and/or irrigation management plans to improve their waste management systems.

Two years after the audits, the EPA annual site inspection of these facilities during the 2004 vintage period showed that many had already fully implemented the action items outlined in individual EIPs and irrigation management plans previously approved by the EPA. The EPA expects that, by the end of 2004, the infrastructure required for wastewater system upgrade will be completed by the remaining facilities.

The public report, Wineries and the Environment—An Audit of the Environmental Management Performance of SA Wineries, August 2002, summarises the fi ndings of the audits and can be viewed at www.epa.sa.gov.au/pdfs/winery.pdf.

39


The EPA, under the Minister for Environment and Conservation, is responsible for administration of the Environment Protection Act 1993 (the Act). Other Acts administered by the EPA include:

• Radiation Protection and Control Act 1982

• National Environment Protection Council (South Australia) Act 1995

• Wingfi eld Waste Depot Closure Act 1999.

The EPA also has regulatory responsibilities under Acts within the jurisdiction of other state government agencies, such as the Aquaculture Act 2001 and Development Act 1993.

The Environment Protection Act was assented to in October 1993 and came into operation on 1 May 1995. Changing community values and a better understanding of both environmental impact and contemporary approaches to environmental management require an ongoing commitment to continually review and update the Act. Since it came into operation, parts of the Act have been amended, subordinate legislation such as EPPs has been introduced, and a number of areas where the Act could be improved have been identifi ed.

In early 2003, the Act was amended to establish the new EPA and increased penalties. At about that time, the draft Environment Protection (Miscellaneous) Amendment Bill 2003 was released for public consultation. The draft Bill (see below) proposes to introduce provisions arising from a comprehensive review of the Act.

The new EPA has established a Policy and Strategic Services Division to coordinate the development of policy and legislative amendments. This will ensure that the EPA continues to have the most effective legislative tools to achieve the objects of the Act. For initiatives relating to legislative review of the RPC Act, please refer to the 2003–04 Radiation Protection Annual Report.

National policy

The National Environment Protection Council (NEPC), which is part of the Commonwealth Environment Protection and Heritage Council, is a statutory body with law making powers established by the Commonwealth National Environment Protection Council Act 1994. Mirror legislation has been established in each state and territory jurisdiction (in South Australia, the National Environment Protection Council Act (South Australia) Act 1995). Members of the NEPC are the Commonwealth Environment Minister and ministers appointed by fi rst minister from each participating jurisdiction.

The NEPC’s two primary functions are to:

• make national environment protection measures (NEPMs)

• assess and report on their implementation and effectiveness in participating jurisdictions.

The objective of NEPMs prepared by the NEPC is to ensure that Australians enjoy the benefi ts of equivalent protection from air, water and soil pollution, and that decisions by businesses are not distorted and markets not fragmented by variations in environmental standards between jurisdictions.

While the NEPC can make NEPMs, the respective NEPC Acts do not contain implementation mechanisms. These are addressed by each jurisdiction separately, according to their appropriate legislation. In South Australia, NEPMs automatically operate as environment protection policies (EPPs) under the Act (section 28A). NEPMs relating to Ambient Air Quality, Diesel Emissions and Used Packaging have been previously discussed in the ‘Air’ and ‘Waste’ sections of this report.

LEGISLATIVE AND POLICY FRAMEWORK

40


Legislative and Policy Framework

Air Toxics NEPM

At its meeting on 16 April 2004, the NEPC endorsed an Air Toxics NEPM focused on benzene, toluene, xylene, formaldehyde and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons. These air toxics have been shown to be responsible for a range of health problems, including asthma, respiratory illnesses and cancer.

The NEPM will provide improved Australian data on these pollutants, and act as a source of information for policy makers and the public on important air quality issues. The NEPM will also provide a database for future studies of the risks posed by these air toxics to the health of all Australians.

Environment protection policies

An EPP is one of a number of legislative tools provided for by the Act to address environment protection matters. An EPP can be made for any purpose directed towards securing the objects of the Act. EPPs provide mid-level enforcement mechanisms below prosecutions for serious or material environment harm and also provide a mechanism for managing diffuse pollution. This may include setting out requirements or mandatory provisions that will be enforceable under the Act.

When the Act came into operation on 1 May 1995, parts of the repealed legislation, including Regulations, were translated into the following transitional EPPs, which were put in place during 1994 and 1995:

• Environment Protection (Air Quality) Policy 1994 (refer to ‘Air’ section of this report)

• Environment Protection (Burning) Policy 1994

• Environment Protection (Industrial Noise) Policy 1994 (refer to ‘Noise’ section of this report)

• Environment Protection (Machine Noise) Policy 1994 (refer to ‘Noise’ section of this report)

• Environment Protection (Marine) Policy 1994

• Environment Protection (Waste Management) Policy 1994.

Since that time the following EPPs have been authorised:

• Environment Protection (Milking Shed Effl uent Management) Policy 1997

• Environment Protection (Vessels on Inland Waters) Policy 1998

• Environment Protection (Motor Vehicle Fuel Quality) Policy 2002 (refer to the ’Air’ section of this report)

• Environment Protection (Water Quality) Policy 2003 (repealing the Milking Shed Effl uent Management EPP and Vessels on Inland Waters EPP, and incorporating their relevant provisions as codes of practice; refer to the ‘Water’ section of this report).

Regional Impact Assessment Statement

The preparation of a Regional Impact Assessment Statement is a recent requirement of the Cabinet submission process. No such statements were prepared during 2003–04.

Licensing reform

Licensing reform continued in 2004 with a review of the current licensing framework and development of alternative models. Options that include the use of a load-based licensing component for at least part of the fee structure are under consideration. A load-based component seeks to more accurately refl ect the true costs of the environmental impacts of licensed activities, and encourage licensees to make more use of available incentives for improved environmental performance.

As licence fees were last reviewed around 10 years ago when various other Acts were amalgamated into the Environment Protection Act, a comprehensive review of licence fees has been included in the scope of the licensing reform project. Conceptual fee structures are being evaluated and a proposed fee structure will be developed for consultation with stakeholders.

41


• The Bill clarifi es the EPA’s power to continue to control and supervise sites where environmental concerns continue, even though the activities which require a licence are no longer being undertaken on that site. Clarifying the EPA’s power to continue to monitor and regulate closed sites previously subject to a prescribed activity is essential to ensuring the management of public health and other environmental impacts on and around problematic closed sites.

• Consistent with the recommendations of the ERD Committee Parliamentary inquiry, changes to the process of making EPPs are proposed to achieve a more effi cient and effective process for developing such policies.

• The Bill aims to clarify the role of local councils in administering the Act so that better service may be provided to the community. They will be able to volunteer a greater role in enforcing the Act by becoming ‘administering agencies’ for non-licensed activities. The Bill proposes a range of non-mandatory cost recovery tools to help administrative agencies recover the cost of administering the Act.

The Bill was released for public consultation in 2003; resulting submissions were considered and recommendations for amendments to the Bill were prepared.

The Board considered the proposed amendments and the minister was advised of the EPA’s recommendations.

The Bill is due to be considered by Parliament later in 2004.

Draft Environment Protection (Miscellaneous) Amendment Bill 2004

The draft Bill proposes amendments stemming from a number of general reviews of the Act since 1999, including the following.

• The Bill will empower the EPA to negotiate a civil penalty for a contravention of the Act, or apply to the ERD Court for an order that a person pay to the EPA an amount as a civil penalty. The civil penalties will only be applicable to less serious contraventions and strict liability offences, leaving existing criminal provisions in the Act to deal with more serious offences.

• Amendments to several offences under the Act are being proposed to strengthen the power of the EPA and administering agencies such as local councils to protect the environment. Of particular importance is a proposed change to the offence of environmental nuisance to make the offence one of strict liability. Additionally, the protection against self-incrimination for corporations is proposed to be limited for most purposes in the Act, such that information sought by and provided to the EPA from a corporation may be admissible in evidence in proceedings for an offence under the Act.

42

The Bill will empower the EPA to negotiate civil penalties…for less serious contraventions and strict liability offences.


ORGANISATIONAL SUPPORTThe Corporate and Business Support (CABS) Division supports the EPA in the areas of administration and facilities management, fi nancial and budget management, human resource services and development, and information technology development and maintenance.

The division also has a number of corporate responsibilities in providing input into whole-of-government processes and reporting requirements on behalf of the EPA.

Minor restructures

From 1 July 2003, it was agreed that the team of four staff, carrying out investigative functions under the Water Resources Act 1997, that transferred from DWLBC to the EPA on 1 July 2002 would return to that department.

Five staff were also transferred from the EPA to the newly created Offi ce of Zero Waste SA from 1 July 2003.

Finance and administration

The past year has proven very challenging, with changes to staffi ng roles and the adoption of increased responsibilities resulting from the separation from DEH in 2002.

During 2003–04, the focus was on introducing major reforms to the internal budget processes, and included the development of Budget Strategy Planning Process Guidelines along with a comprehensive budget

manual outlining all government budget processes and how they affect those accountable for budget allocations. On completion of each reform, training programs were delivered across the EPA with the intention of increasing both awareness and responsibility for budget management throughout the EPA.

Business effi ciency was also an area of concentrated effort with a number of reviews aimed at ensuring our resources were used in the most effi cient way possible. These reviews focused on motor vehicles, mobile phones and some offi ce consumables, with a review of desktop phones well under way. The results of the reviews, and subsequent implementation, have already achieved savings in excess of $70,000 per annum. It is anticipated the reviews will continue until all major expense categories have been reviewed and the EPA is operating as effi ciently as possible.

Another key initiative involved accommodation, with relocation of staff to the new Murray Bridge premises, safety enhancements to the Air Quality Laboratory at Netley, and modifi cations at Kent Town and within the main CBD building. Additional accommodation was leased to allow for additional staffi ng requirements for the site contamination initiative.

The 2004–05 year will be signifi cant for Finance and Administration Branch initiatives, with a number of strategies programmed over a three-year period. They fall broadly within the following four key objectives:

• establishing and implementing an effi cient and effective fi nancial management framework

• implementing effective business and greening initiatives across the EPA

• providing an effi cient and effective administrative framework

• developing informative communication about fi nance and administration functions.

Some of the more specifi c fi nance strategies include: an increased focus on risk management and the subsequent development of risk action plans; implementation of better practice balance sheet management with a focus on provisions and cash alignment policy requirements; review and subsequent implementation in 2005–06 of an appropriate reporting framework for Executive, the Board and the minister; and implementation of strategic planning and analysis tools for both budget and fi nancial management.

Energy and fl eet management, along with accommodation, will again be a focus area for 2004–05. It is also anticipated that a records management review will be undertaken to ensure an effi cient and consistent methodology is adopted throughout the EPA.

Information Technology

A comprehensive Information Technology Strategic Plan for the EPA was developed in consultation with EPA Executive and key staff members. The plan provides a vision and direction for all staff and stakeholders

43


Consultantsof the IT capabilities being pursued to assist business activity performance. Its implementation approach lists all projects to be undertaken for 2003–06.

The EPA won a Government Technology Productivity Silver Award for the e-ELF (electronic environment licensing form) system in September 2003. The awards, for Commonwealth, state and local government agencies, are for improved productivity and service through the use of technology. Clients of the EPA can submit application forms for licensing and make secure payments of invoices online using the e-ELF system. In the last fi nancial year e-ELF facilitated about 375 applications and 25% of all renewal applications.

Signifi cant effort went into gathering requirements, analysis and design for the GENI (general environmental information) system. This system, which is currently being developed, will include radiation licensing, CDL, environmental licensing, and monitoring modules.

ELMO (electronic reporting of monitoring data), another new initiative currently being developed, will enable some licensees to submit their monitoring data online to the EPA. The user requirements, analysis and design stages for this system have been completed. The CARES database is now being used by 10 councils and another government agency. Some of its features have been improved and expanded.

Desktop support has continued with the annual PC replacement program. As part of a greening initiative, the EPA has begun to progressively replace all cathode ray tube monitors with thin fi lm transistor monitors which use around 60% less power.

Fraud

There have been no instances of fraud detected in the EPA during this fi nancial year. While there have been no signifi cant new strategies implemented to control and prevent fraud in 2002–03, a fi nancial risk assessment is planned in 2004–05 incorporating the development of risk action plans.

Table 9 Controlled entity consultancies

Value of consultancies let No. of consultancies Expenditure 2002–03 2003–04 2002–03 2003–04

Below $10,000 24 12 92,877 40,730$10,001–50,000 12 5 209,087 100,827Above $50,000 1 5 128,906 335,008Total 29 22 430,870 476,565

Below $10,000No. of consultants in this category: 12 Value of consultants in this category: $40,730

$10,001–50,000

No. of consultants in this category: 5 Value of consultants in this category: $100,827

Flinders Consulting Pty Ltd Leachate generating potential and specifi cations for windrow composting liners

Eco Management Services Winery Risk Assessment Study in the Mount Lofty Ranges

S Kelsey Review of EPA OHS&W systems and development of compliance action plan

Hudson Howells Investigation and report on the status of sorting in the collection industry

University of South Australia Stormwater Management Guidelines for the South East of South Australia

Above $50,000

No. of consultants in this category: 5 Value of consultants in this category: $335,008

Eco Management Services Pty Ltd Nutrient Offset Program in the Port waterways

Primary Industries SA South East dairy industry effl uent management program

McGregor Tan Research Strategic planning and marketing of the plastic bag survey results

BDA Group Development of a nutrient offset market based instrument

CSIRO Environmental impacts of acid in-situ leach mining process

Table 10 Administered entity consultancies

Value of consultancies let No. of consultancies Expenditure 2002–03 2003–04 2002–03 2003–04

Below $10,000* - - - -$10,001–50,000* - - - -Above $50,000 1 1 765,916 795,790Total 1 1 765,916 795,790

* Note that the consultants identifi ed in these ranges for 2002–03 have been incorporated into the Controlled Entity results for 2003–04 as they related solely to funds from the Environment Protection Authority, which for reporting purposes is now considered a controlled entity in line with audit requirements.

Above $50,000No. of consultants in this category: 1 Value of consultants in this category: $795,790

Consultant: CSIRO Project: Adelaide Coastal Waters Study

44


Organisational Support

Contractual arrangements

During the 2003–04 fi nancial year the EPA did not enter into any contractual arrangements where the total value of an individual contract exceeded $4 million.

Accounts payment performance

The accounts payable performance target for the Environment and Conservation Portfolio of paying 85% of invoices before the due date has not been achieved in 2003–04. This is predominantly due to staff turnover throughout the year.

Employment and other human resource matters

During 2003–04 a key human resource focus has been to build sound processes and systems. This has included a major re-engineering of processes, streamlining forms, and establishing fl ow charts and guidelines for users about underpinning policy and legislation. Contracts, delegations and advertising systems have been reviewed and improved. New tools, guidelines and templates have been developed to assist managers and applicants in the recruitment and selection process. These improvements will serve as a solid foundation for continuing to build tools and educate managers in good human resource practices in the coming fi nancial year.

Table 11 Accounts payable performance

Particulars Number of Percentage of Value in $A of Percentage of accounts paid accounts paid accounts paid accounts paid (by number) (by value)

Paid by the due date* 7,197 81% 8,711,667 73%

Paid within 30 days or 1,380 15% 2,489,894 21%less from due date

Paid more than 30 days 356 4% 806,332 7%from due date

* Note: The due date is defi ned as per section 11.2 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 thirty days of the date of the invoice or claim.

Employee numbers, gender and status

Table 12 Employee statistics

2002–03 2003–04 2002–03 2003–04 Number % male % female

Persons 203 219 54.79 45.21FTEs 195.66 214.45 55.56 44.44No. of persons separated 31from the agency No. of persons recruited 49to the agency No. of vacancies fi lled 26 70 No. of persons on leave 5 1 without pay at 30 June

45

Figure 13 Number of staff leaving 2003–04

Turnover is the ratio of staff who have left the EPA to the number of employed staff. Total turnover for 2003–04 is 10.05%.

Number of staff leaving EPA (reason and division) for period 1 July 2003—30 June 2004


Table 13 Number of employees by salary bracket

Salary bracket Male Female Total

$0–38,000 5 22 27$38,001–$49,000 15 17 32$49,001–$64,000 70 47 117$64,001–$83,000 25 13 38$83,001+ 5 0 5

TOTAL 120 99 219

46

Table 14 Status of employees in current position

FTEs Ongoing Short-term Long-term Casual Total contract contract

Female 60.93 23.17 11 0.2 95.30Male 89.15 16.00 14 0 119.15

Total 150.08 39.17 25 0.2 214.45

Table 15 Number of executives by status in current position, gender and classifi cation

Classifi cation Ongoing Contract Contract Total tenured untenured

(Gender) M F M F M F M F Total

ExecA 0 0 3 0 0 0 3 0 3ExecC 0 0 1 0 1 0 2 0 2

Total 0 0 4 0 1 0 5 0 5

Table 16 Average days leave taken per full time equivalent employee

Leave type 2000–01 2001–02 2002–03 2003–04

Sick leave taken n.a. n.a. 5.84 5.95Family carer’s leave taken n.a. n.a. 0.54 0.56Special leave with pay n.a. n.a. 0.28 0.48

Executives

Leave management

FTEs

Ongoing Short-term Long-term Casual Total contract contract

Female 63 24 11 1 99Male 90 16 14 0 120

Total 153 40 25 1 219

Persons



Workforce diversity

Recognising the value of workforce diversity and the benefi ts inherent in a workforce that is representative of the community it serves, the following section provides information on the composition of the EPA workforce.

Indigenous employeesAn Aboriginal person is defi ned as a person who:

• is a descendant of an indigenous inhabitant of Australia

• identifi es as Aboriginal.

A Torres Strait Islander is one who is a descendant or a traditional inhabitant of the Torres Strait Islands.

Age profi le

Table 17 Number Of Employees By Age Bracket And Gender

Age Bracket Female Male Total % Of Total SA Workforce*

15–19 0 0 0 0 7.3 20–24 4 1 5 2.28 10.7 25–29 26 10 36 16.44 10.2 30–34 22 19 41 18.72 11.2 35–39 14 18 32 14.61 11.4 40–44 17 11 28 12.79 13.3 45–49 5 15 20 9.13 12.0 50–54 5 25 30 13.7 10.7 55–59 5 18 23 10.5 7.7 60–64 1 3 4 1.83 3.6 65+ 0 0 0 0 2.0

Total 99 120 219 100 100

* As At March 2004 From ABS Supertable LM8

Table 18 Number of Aboriginal and/or Torres Strait Islander employees

Male Female Total % of agency Strategic benchmark*

Aboriginal/Torres 1 0 1 0.46 2.0%Strait Islander

* Benchmark from State Strategic Plan

Table 19 Cultural and linguistic diversity

Male Female Total % of agency SA community*

No. of employees 15 25 18.26 20.3%born overseas

No. of employees 1 1 0.91 15.5%who speak language(s) other than English at home

TOTAL 16 26 19.18

* ABS Publication Basic Community Profi le (SA) Cat No. 2001.0

Table 20 No. of employees with ongoing disabilities requiring workplace adaptation

Male Female Total % of agency

No. of employees 2 1 3 1.37

Cultural and linguistic diversity

Disability

47


Voluntary fl exible working arrangements

EPA staff have access to fl exitime working conditions, and a number of staff work part-time and in job-share arrangements. In addition, several employees use purchased leave.

Human resource development

The EPA’s planned approach to human resource development (HRD) has continued during 2003–04. The Learning and Development (L&D) Plan for the year aligned with the objectives in the Corporate and Business Support Division’s Business Plan, which in turn aligned with the EPA Strategic Plan. The L&D Plan incorporated information from individual development plans, which were completed as part of the 2002–03 performance and development reviews (P&DR). The capability-based approach to the P&DR provided a useful summary of skill profi les and skill gaps of employees, which was incorporated into a skills gap analysis paper. Data from the Offi ce for the Commissioner for Public Employment Workforce Perspectives survey and from exit interviews were also analysed and fi ndings incorporated into ongoing HRD planning.

HRD policies were reviewed, providing an up-to-date framework within the EPA to ensure access and equity to opportunities, to encourage consideration of a fl exible range of development approaches and to assist managers in taking a planned approach to developing their staff.

HRD initiatives from 2003–04:

• A Contact Offi cer Network was established and meets quarterly to build skills and maintain the momentum in ensuring that ‘harassment, discrimination and workplace bullying will not be tolerated in the EPA’.

• A 360 Degree Feedback program was established for all managers, with half the managers undertaking the process in 2003–04 and the

Table 21 No. of employees using voluntary fl exible working arrangements by gender

Male Female Total

Purchased leave 1 2 3Flexitime 112 93 205 Compressed weeks 0 1 1Part-time job share 1 2 3Working from home 2 5 7

Table 22 Documented individual performance development plan

Salary % with plan negotiated % with plan older % no plan bracket within past 12 months than 12 months

$0–38000 72.8 13.6 13.6$38,001–49,000 76.3 13.2 10.5$49,001–64,000 60.5 32.5 7.0$64,001–83,000 76.5 23.5 0$83,001+ 100.0 0 0

Total 67.9 25.0 7.1

Table 23 Training expenditure as a percentage of total remuneration expenditure by salary bands

Salary bracket Target 2003–04 Actual 2003–04 Target 2004–05

$0–38,000 2% 3.50% 3.0%$38,001–49,000 2% 3.35% 3.0%$49,001–64,000 2% 2.88% 3.0%$64,001–83,000 2% 2.50% 3.0%$83,001+ 2% 2.36% 3.0%

Total 2% 2.85% 3.0%

second half to undertake the program in 2004–05. The valuable feedback from staff members, colleagues and supervisor was incorporated into the P&DR discussion between the manager and their supervisor to identify development priorities and action plans.

• A quarterly Managers Leadership series was established, offering managers timely information on topical issues such as giving feedback and managing poor performance.

• Project management templates were developed, and training conducted at Certifi cate III and Diploma level.

• Environment Forums have continued on a monthly basis, with their scope broadened to include a mix of internal and external presenters.

• The recruitment and selection process has been re-engineered to include the development of tools to assist applicants and selection panels.

• The new payroll system (CHRIS) has been implemented effectively, including introduction of managers and employee kiosks.

• HR forms have been reviewed and redesigned. They include fl ow charts and guidelines for users on the underpinning policies and legislation.

• Employment contracts, delegations and advertising systems have been reviewed and improved.

• Occupational health, safety and welfare management has been improved through an internal audit of systems, the resulting recommendations setting the agenda

48


for the newly appointed OHS&W Coordinator.

Evaluation of training programs is an integral part of the learning cycle and a mechanism for assessing the EPA’s investment in HRD. Course participants complete evaluation forms at the end of each course, and the performance management system provides information on the extent to which staff have gained the skills and capabilities necessary to be more effective in their positions after development activities. A formal review of the P&DR process was conducted in January (including focus groups and surveys) and changes incorporated before the P&DR rollout for 2003–04.The following tables provide statistical measures of inputs to assist in assessing EPA’s investment in HRD.

Equal employment opportunity programs

The EPA has worked in liaison with the Public Service Disability Recruitment Coordination Services and has considered referrals for vacant positions.

Aboriginal reconciliation

As part of the South Australian Government’s recognition of the interests of Aboriginal people through the reconciliation process, the EPA would like to acknowledge the profound connection to land by Aboriginal people and communities across the state.

To increase awareness of Aboriginal heritage and culture, the EPA has been working together with the DEH Aboriginal Partnerships Unit to deliver cultural awareness training for all EPA staff. A Native Title and Aboriginal Heritage awareness session is scheduled for early in the new fi nancial year.

Table 24 OHS&W statistics

2003–04 2002–031 OHS&W legislative requirements

Number of notifi able occurrences pursuant to OHSW 1 – Regulations Division 6.6

Number of notifi able injuries pursuant to OHSW – – Regulations Division 6.6

Number of notices served pursuant to OHSW Act – – s35, s39 and s40

2 Injury management legislative requirements – –

Total number of employees who participated 1 1 in the rehabilitation program

Total number of employees rehabilitated – – and reassigned to alternative duties

Total number of employees rehabilitated 1 1 back to their original work

3 WorkCover action limits

Number of open claims as at 30 June – 2

Percentage of workers compensation 0.05% 0.05% expenditure over gross annual remuneration

4 Number of claims

Number of new workers compensation claims 1 2 in the fi nancial year Number of: fatalities – – lost time injuries – 1 injuries needing medical treatment 1 1

Total number of whole working days lost 10 5

5 Cost of workers compensation

Cost of new claims for fi nancial year $2219 $2201 Cost of all claims excluding lump sum payments $7117 $5291

Amount paid for lump sum payments s42 – – (s42, s43, s44) s43 – – s44 – –

Total amount recovered from external sources (s54) – Budget allocation for workers compensation 6 Trends Injury frequency rate for new lost-time injury/ 2.1 2.7 disease for each million hours worked

Most frequent cause (mechanism) of injury Work pressure Sound & pressure

Most expensive cause (mechanism) of injury Work pressure Sound & pressure7 Meeting the organisation’s strategic targets OHS&W Review completed in 2003–04 and strategic action plan to be developed in 2004–05

49



Occupational health, safety and injury management

The EPA has continued to implement the DEH occupational health, safety and welfare (OHS&W) system for incident reporting and investigation and procedures, practices and performance targets throughout 2003–04. The EPA’s OHS&W Committee has continued to meet regularly throughout the year.

Recommendations from the review of OHS&W systems in 2003–04 will drive the agenda of the new OHS&W Coordinator, who will start early in the new fi nancial year. An OHS&W Coordinator within the agency will allow the EPA to tailor OHS&W systems and processes to agency requirements.

Energy effi ciency action plan report

As part of the Environment and Conservation Portfolio, the EPA has a lead role in the adoption of sound environmental management practices.

A number of key environmental practices have been monitored throughout 2003–04, with some being monitored within DEH in line with the Greening Environment and Conservation Program initiative. The practices monitored throughout the year have identifi ed signifi cant achievements and the intention is for additional monitoring in 2004–05, which will enable more informed decisions and practices to be implemented.

In line with the Greening of Government Operations (GoGO) Framework, there are currently three priority areas for which the EPA has developed performance indicators.

Energy Management

Signifi cant energy management achievements

Energy management systemThe installation of a new energy management system was completed in September 2003. This system operates to ensure that lights within the CBD building are turned off after 6 pm each day. This will help minimise energy use and therefore the cost of electricity being consumed. An initiative implemented to complement the energy management system was to ensure all offi ces had sensor lights installed. The sensor lights monitor movement within the offi ce and will turn off lights after 15 minutes of sensing no movement.

Table 25 Performance against annual energy use targets

Energy use Expenditure GHG emissions (GJ) ($)

Base Year 2000–01 1,502 61,542 4942001–02 1,336 54,561 4402002–03* 1,879 74,420 6182003–04 1,697 67,532 558Target (2003–04) 1,744 72,751 574Target (2014) 25% reduction of base year 1,379 57,484 454

* 2002–03 incorporates the Radiation Protection Branch at Kent Town which transferred from DHS. The target has been revised to incorporate a 25% reduction in the Kent Town energy use also.

Information technology equipmentAs part of the personal computer replacement program, new thin fi lm transistor screens for desktop computers were purchased. A phased approach was adopted, with approximately half the desktop conventional cathode ray tube type screens being replaced, with the intention to replace 99% of these in the next year or so. Table 26 represents the energy reduction as a result of this initiative along with an average 27% reduction in greenhouse gas emissions.̇

Table 26 Energy management of IT equipment

2002–03 2003–04 CRT screens CRT screens TFT screens Total

Number of desktop PCs 255 133 122 255Energy used (GJ) 135 70 27 97CO2 emissions (tonnes) 44 23 9 32

CRT—cathode ray tube; TFT—thin fi lm transistor; PC—personal computer

50



Other recycled productsOther recycled products such as glass, plastics, tins, milk and juice cartons, accounted for 8520 litres of waste recycled from EPA offi ces in the CBD building. Recycling statistics were separated into categories for the fi rst time in 2003–04.

Other (non recycled) productsOrganic waste in the form of food scraps is being collected in-house to be composted rather than sent to landfi ll. Over the past 12 months, approximately 882 kilograms has been composted from the SA Water building.

Printing consumablesGiven the success of the recycling initiative provided by Close the Loop Limited, it is intended that it be expanded to the decentralised offi ces of the EPA from August 2004. The company provides this service at no cost and recycles all cartridges used in printers, photocopiers and fax machines with zero waste being sent to landfi ll. Reports provided by the company are summarised in Table 27 and show the amount that has been diverted from landfi ll since the initiative’s inception in April 2002.

Waste managementPaper recyclingPaper recycling statistics were only measured for the CBD building in 2003–04, although from 2004–05, statistics will be received from all decentralised offi ces to ensure an all-encompassing measure.An increase in recycling has been apparent in 2003–04 with 37.6

tonnes being diverted from landfi ll in comparison to 31.6 tonnes in 2002–03, a 16% increase. Figure 16 compares the weight of paper recycled on a monthly basis in 2002–03 and 2003–04. In full time equivalent (FTE) terms, recycling increased by an average of 12% from one year to the next, with 15.4 kg per FTE being recycled in 2003–04.

Figure 14 Paper diverted from landfi ll from the EPA CBD offi ces

Table 27 Recycling of printing consumables

2001–02 2002–03 2003–04 Total

Quantity diverted (no. of items) 10 209 231 450Amount diverted (kg) 8.61 183.65 212.31 404.57

Fluorescent tubesThe EPA recycles fl uorescent lighting tubes through a company called Chemsal which accepts the tubes, then treats and disposes of them in a safe manner, given they contain a small amount of mercury which is toxic to the human nervous system. This program was established in about September 2003, and has successfully recycled approximately 324 tubes in 2003–04 at a cost of about $194. The crushed glass is recovered and re-used in glass making activities.

51

Travel and fl eet management

The EPA continued to operate in line with its policy requirement that all new long-term lease vehicles from Fleet SA are to be either dual fuel, or single LPG systems where such factory fi tted systems were available. Within the SA Government Energy Effi ciency Action Plan, there is also a requirement to increase the LPG vehicle fl eet from 10% to 20% by 2005, a level the EPA has already exceeded. Table 28 indicates a number of effi ciencies in fl eet management over the past three years. Firstly, there has been a slight decline in the number of vehicles, with the possibility of further reductions during 2004–05. Vehicles that operate using LPG as their only source represent 5.4% of the total vehicle fl eet; vehicles using more energy effi cient fuel options have increased by 30.3%, (from 51.3% in 2002 to 81% in 2004).

Table 29 outlines the decline in EPA vehicle fl eet energy use and resulting greenhouse gas emissions over the past two years. Fewer vehicles are in service but the statistics also show the use of unleaded fuel has reduced by 28% from 2002–03 to 2003–04.

Figure 15 refl ects the proportion of greenhouse gas emissions by fuel type and demonstrates that while emissions from LPG vehicles are increasing, unleaded fuel emissions account for only 39% (reduced from 54% in 2002–03) of the total fuel used by EPA vehicles.

Table 28 Effi ciencies in fl eet management

Vehicle types As at 30 June 2002 As at 30 June 2003 As at 30 June 2004

Diesel only Nil 4 3Electric/unleaded (hybrid) 1 3 3Unleaded only 19 6 4LPG only Nil Nil 2Combined dual fuel 19 24 25(unleaded and LPG)Total long-term 39 37 37hire vehicles

Table 29 Vehicle fl eet energy use and greenhouse gas emissions

2002–03 2003–04

Energy (GJ) 2566 2288CO2 emissions (tonnes) 194 170

Figure 15 Greenhouse gas emissions from fl eet vehicles


Environment Protection Authority

Annual Report on the administration of the Radiation Protection and Control Act 1982July 2003–June 2004

Environment Protection AuthorityGPO Box 2607Adelaide SA 5001Telephone: (08) 8204 2004Facsimile: (08) 8204 9393Freecall (country): 1800 623 445E-mail: [email protected] Web site: www.epa.sa.gov.au

September 2004

53


Letter of Transmittal 55

Foreword 56

Introduction 57

Radiation Protection Committee 58

Legislative and regulatory developments 58

Radiation incidents and accidents 60

Audit of radioactive material storage 60

Equine Radiography Project 61

Non-ionising radiation 61

Maralinga rehabilitation 62

Licences to mine and mill radioactive ore 62

Registration of equipment and premises, and licensing of users 64

International activities 65

National activities 66

Appendix—Conferences attended 67

Abbreviations 67

54

LETTER OF TRANSMITTALThe Hon John Hill MPMinister for Environment and ConservationParliament HouseNorth TerraceAdelaide SA 5000

Dear Minister

I am pleased to provide the Annual Report on the administration of the Radiation Protection and Control Act 1982 for the period 1 July 2003 to 30 June 2004, for tabling in Parliament in accordance with section 22 of the Act.

ChairSouth Australian Health Commission

Date: 13 September 2004

55

56

This report provides information on the administration of the Radiation Protection and Control Act 1982 (the RPC Act) for the year 2003–04. The RPC Act is administered by the staff of the Radiation Protection Division of the Environment Protection Authority (EPA). The division supports and seeks advice on radiation protection matters from the Radiation Protection Committee, established under section 9 of the RPC Act. The committee, in return, advises the division on those matters.

Before its transfer on 1 July 2002, the division operated within the Environmental Health Branch, Department of Human Services. The transfer corresponded with the EPA becoming a separate administrative agency in the Government of South Australia. The division has successfully amalgamated into the EPA, and continues to enhance its role of protecting people and the environment from the harmful effects of radiation.

The major project completed by the division during the year was the audit of radioactive material storage in South Australia. The government engaged the EPA to undertake the audit, which began in September 2002 and inspected over 100 facilities and premises where radioactive material was stored. It gave a comprehensive view of the status of radioactive material under the state’s legislative control. The report on the audit, published in September 2003, contained recommendations from the fi ndings of the inspections for future management of radioactive waste. The division continues to act

on the recommendations to ensure appropriate controls are maintained for storing radioactive material and managing radioactive waste.

The ongoing work of the division includes provision of a high-quality service to our clients; inspections related to the registration and safe use of X-ray apparatus, sealed radioactive sources and premises in which unsealed radioactive substances are handled; investigation of radiation incidents; auditing of licence holders; and training and education of general practitioners and registered nurses who operate X-ray units in rural and remote areas of the state.

I would like to thank the staff of the division for their continued outstanding efforts during this extremely busy year, and the members of the committee for their contribution and valued advice.

I also wish to acknowledge the outstanding contribution to radiation protection at state, national and international levels made by Mrs Jill Fitch, who managed and directed the division for more than 27 years before her retirement in February 2003. Mrs Fitch’s contribution to the fi eld of radiation protection was recognised by the award of the Public Service Medal in June 2003.

Dr Paul VogelChief ExecutiveENVIRONMENT PROTECTION AUTHORITY

FOREWORD

57

The purpose of the Radiation Protection and Control Act 1982 (RPC Act) is to provide for the control of activities related to radioactive substances and radiation apparatus, and for protection against the harmful effects of radiation. Section 22 of the RPC Act requires the South Australian Health Commission to present to the minister, for tabling in Parliament, a report on the administration of the RPC Act following each fi nancial year.

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 to the Chief Executive of the EPA and offi cers of the EPA’s Radiation Protection Division, the principal unit responsible for administering the RPC Act. The Director of the division reports to the Chief Executive of the EPA.

Offi cers of the division who are appointed as authorised offi cers under the RPC Act inspect radiation apparatus, radioactive sources, premises where unsealed radioactive substances are kept or handled, and sites where radioactive ores are processed or have been processed in the past. They undertake surveillance of all sources and types of radiation used in South Australia to ensure compliance with the RPC Act and its regulations.

At 30 June 2004 the division had 14 positions (13.25 full-time equivalents)—12 scientifi c and technical staff, and two administrative and clerical staff.

INTRODUCTION

RADIATION PROTECTION COMMITTEE

Review of the RPC Act

During the year, the EPA engaged a consultant to assess the provisions of the current RPC Act and make recommendations to the EPA on the RPC Act’s review. The consultant considered prior work of the Radiation Protection Committee’s Working Group on the Review of the RPC Act and recommendations of the National Competition Policy Review of Radiation Protection Legislation. The consultant’s draft report on the

review of the RPC Act was considered by the committee’s working group and the EPA received the fi nal report in June 2004. It will be used to prepare drafting instructions for a new or revised RPC Act.

Several amendments to the RPC Act were also proposed to facilitate the administration of the roles and functions of the RPC Act within the current Environment and Conservation Portfolio, or any other portfolio. The proposed amendments were contained in the Statutes Amendment

(Environment and Conservation Portfolio) Bill 2004, which had not been presented to Parliament by the end of the reporting period.

Regulations for safe transport of radioactive material

New regulations for the safe transport of radioactive material, the Radiation Protection and Control

Section 9 of the RPC Act provides for a Radiation Protection Committee with 10 members; one of these is the chairman, who is either a member of the SA Health Commission or an offi cer or employee of the department of the minister to whom the RPC Act is committed. The other members are to have specifi c qualifi cations or expertise relevant to the administration of the RPC Act.

The division provides support for the statutory committee whose functions, as set out in section 12 of the RPC Act, are to:

(a) advise the minister in relation to the formulation of regulations under the RPC Act

(b) advise the minister in relation to the granting of licences under the RPC Act, including the conditions to which they should be subject

(c) investigate and report on any other matters relevant to the administration of the RPC Act at the request of the minister or the Commission or of its own motion.

Table 1 Radiation Protection Committee members

Members Section of the RPC Act Deputy members

Dr P Vogel (Chairman)* s9(2)(a)

Dr TM Cain* s9(2)(b) (Dr CW Lott*)

Mr C Kapsis s9(2)(c) (Ms GA Upton)

Mr KG Smith s9(2)(d) (Dr PJ Storer)

Dr GS Laurence s9(2)(e) (Dr TD Utteridge)

Dr KH Lokan s9(2)(f) (Ms J Shearer)

Dr MI Kitchener s9(2)(g) (Dr BE Chatterton)

Mr S Caplygin s9(2)(h) (Ms T Reif)

Dr PJ Sykes* s9(2)(i) (Dr MT Lardelli)

Mr P Dolan s9(2)(j) (Ms S Douglas-Hill)

58

The majority of the members and deputy members of the committee were appointed for a term of three years on 26 July 2001. The section of the RPC Act under which each was appointed is listed in Table 1.

The committee met fi ve times during the year and considered matters summarised in the remainder of this section.

LEGISLATIVE AND REGULATORY DEVELOPMENTS

59

(Transport of Radioactive Substances) Regulations 2003, were proclaimed by the Governor in Executive Council and published in the gazette on 18 December 2003. The division consulted widely with industry, unions and government agencies in formulating and developing the regulations that adopt the Code of Practice for the Safe Transport of Radioactive Material 2001, published by the Australian Radiation Protection and Nuclear Safety Agency (ARPANSA) in September 2001.

Exemptions granted under the RPC Act

Under section 44 of the RPC Act, the minister or his delegate is empowered to grant exemptions from any specifi ed provision of the RPC Act, provided such action would not endanger the health or safety of any person. After careful consideration, the following exemptions were approved, subject to specifi ed conditions:

• On 21 August 2003, a conditional exemption from Regulation 40 of the RPC (Ionising Radiation) Regulations (authorisation regarding treatment with radionuclides) was granted to Dr Evelyn Mei Yin Yap, BMBS, FRACR, and Dr Michael William James Hayward, MBBCh, FRCS, FRCR permitting them to authorise specifi ed treatment of patients with radionuclides.

• On 21 August 2003, a conditional exemption from Regulation 40 of the RPC (Ionising Radiation) Regulations was granted to Dr Andrew Charles Biggs, MBBS, FRANZCR permitting him, in addition to other radionuclides in his previous exemption, to authorise other specifi ed treatment of patients with 4 GBq of Y-90.

• On 2 October 2003, a conditional exemption from the requirements of Regulation 40 of the RPC (Ionising Radiation) Regulations (authorisation for the purposes of diagnostic radiography) was granted to diagnostic radiographers at Flinders Medical Centre, Lyell McEwin Health Service, Noarlunga Health Services, The Queen Elizabeth Hospital, and Women’s and Children’s Hospital, provided an

approved registered nurse who works in the respective health services’ emergency departments authorises diagnostic radiography of extremities only.

• On 30 October 2003, a conditional exemption from Regulation 18 of the RPC (Ionising Radiation) Regulations (provision of personal radiation monitors) was granted to Halliburton Australia for staff involved in the use of radiation gauges.

• On 11 December 2003, a conditional exemption from Regulation 18 of the RPC (Ionising Radiation) Regulations was granted to the Courts Administration Authority for the Sheriff’s Offi ce Adelaide for staff operating a cabinet X-ray apparatus.

• On 15 January 2004, a conditional exemption from Regulation 18 of the RPC (Ionising Radiation) Regulations was granted to Flinders Medical Centre for staff operating an HP Faxitron cabinet X-ray unit in the histopathology laboratory.

• On 19 January 2004, a conditional exemption from the requirements of Regulation 40 of the RPC (Ionising Radiation) Regulations (authorisation for the purposes of diagnostic radiography) was granted to diagnostic radiographers in cases where the exposure is directed and authorised by Luke Andrew Christofi s while he is performing duties as a nurse practitioner at an emergency department.

• On 4 March 2004, a conditional exemption from Regulation 18 of the RPC (Ionising Radiation) Regulations was granted to Pasminco Port Pirie Smelter for staff in the slag fuming plant operating a Phillips Model PW 4025 X-ray fl uorescence analyser.

• On 24 June 2004, a conditional exemption from Regulation 18 of the RPC (Ionising Radiation) Regulations was granted to the Royal Adelaide Hospital for staff in the Endocrine and Metabolic Unit operating a DEXA, Model Norland 01600.

Prosecution resulting from breaches of the RPC Act

A veterinary surgeon appeared in the Port Lincoln court on 10 February 2004 charged with the following breaches of the RPC Act: (a) having an unregistered X-ray apparatus, (b) three counts of operating the X-ray apparatus without a licence, and (c) one count of making a false declaration. The veterinarian pleaded guilty to all of the charges. The magistrate convicted the veterinarian and imposed a total fi ne of $2905.20.

Radiation Protection CommitteeLegislative and regulatory developments

60

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 division any accidents where a radiation source is no longer under control or a person has received or may have received an accidental exposure to ionising radiation. The division investigates all radiation accidents and incidents to determine the cause and any remedial action that could be taken to prevent a recurrence.

During the period the following incidents were reported to the division.

• On 2 February 2004 the EPA was notifi ed that a caesium-137 sealed radioactive source had been lost from a truck travelling on a 70 km stretch of road from Innamincka to a well site in the Cooper Basin. The loss was discovered when the truck arrived at the well site on 31 January 2004. The source was normally contained in a shielded radiation gauge installed on the truck. An offi cer of the EPA travelled to Innamincka to provide technical advice and assist in the search. The source was found on 3 February 2004, approximately 40 km from Innamincka. Its encapsulation remained intact and no contamination was detected on the source or in the area where the source was located. The owner investigated the cause of the incident and took appropriate remedial action to prevent a recurrence.

• On 21 June 2004 the EPA received notifi cation of an incident that occurred at a hospital involving a patient undergoing superfi cial X-ray treatment of a cancer. The patient had received a radiation dose of 60% more than the prescribed dose to the treated area. After hospital staff discovered the problem on 22 April 2004, the hospital conducted an immediate investigation of the cause of the incident and implemented procedures to prevent a recurrence. The EPA has begun an investigation into the incident.

Details of accidents and incidents involving exposure or potential exposure to radiation are provided to ARPANSA for the National Register of Radiation Accidents and Incidents.

AUDIT OF RADIOACTIVE MATERIAL STORAGE

In September 2002, offi cers of the division began an audit of all radioactive material stored in South Australia, with a particular emphasis on waste, to determine the nature and volume of radioactive material and whether it is safely and securely stored. The audit and its report were completed in September 2003.

The audit revealed 134 sites where radioactive material was stored or used, of which 80 contained radioactive wastes. The total radioactive waste requiring long-term management, with the exception of mining waste and very low-level radioactive waste from laboratories, had a volume of approximately 22 cubic metres.

The report on the audit contained 20 recommendations associated with the fi ndings of the audit, and nine key recommendations for the future management of radioactive material.

The EPA continues to implement actions to address the recommendations of the report. In response to one of the key recommendations, the EPA developed plans to engage a contractor during 2004–05 to conduct a study of the feasibility of establishing facilities for safe interim storage, handling and packaging of radioactive waste pending the establishment of appropriate facilities for its long-term management.

The audit revealed 134 sites where radioactive material was stored or used

61

EQUINE RADIOGRAPHY PROJECT

In late 2002 and early 2003 the division’s Diagnostic X-rays Group began investigations and monitoring of a protocol for radiography of yearling horses before sale. Monitoring of this project continued at three sites during the year and is ongoing. The most recent monitoring session involved two days at a stud farm where 14 horses were X-rayed. A total of

552 X-ray views were taken. Radiation doses to operators were recorded and compared with those of previous sessions. Radiation monitoring results at one practice indicated that improvements in technique were required to minimise the exposure to staff assisting in the procedure. The fi ndings and recommendations from the project were presented in

NON-IONISING RADIATION

The RPC Act provides for the control of both ionising and non-ionising radiation, although no regulations on non-ionising radiation have been made as yet. However, the division advises the government, industry and the public on radiation safety of non-ionising radiation sources and recommends compliance with relevant standards, guidelines and codes of practice. The division responded to a large number of telephone enquiries from the public on the possible health effects of exposure to sources of non-ionising radiation. It continually reviews ongoing research into the effects of non-ionising radiation and updates its public information as necessary.

Power lines

ARPANSA is continuing to develop a standard specifying limits on human exposure to extremely low frequency (ELF) electric and magnetic fi elds, such as those produced by power lines. An offi cer of the division is a member of ARPANSA’s ELF consultative group that is helping develop this standard. The division continues to lend (free of charge) magnetic fi eld meters that allow members of the public to measure magnetic fi eld strengths

in their homes and workplaces. This service has been very popular and, together with information on the EPA web site which links to the World Health Organization’s ELF fact sheet, has enabled people to make informed choices on their magnetic fi eld exposure.

Mobile phone technology

The specifi c absorption rate, a measure of the rate at which a person absorbs energy from a given mobile phone, is now available for every new mobile telephone sold in Australia. Public enquiries about specifi c absorption rate values are now directed to manufacturers’ web sites.

The current practice of installing mobile phone towers at various sites has increased public concern. The division continues to follow this issue closely.

Entertainment lasers

During the previous reporting period, the division seized an entertainment laser alleged to have caused an eye injury to a spectator. An investigation by the division found that the laser was not being operated in accordance with the relevant code of practice at the time of the injury. The owner sought to recover the laser and was required to give assurance that, if returned, the laser would only be operated in accordance with the code. The laser was returned to its owner when the division was satisfi ed with the assurance, and that the owner was familiar with the requirements of the code.

The division wrote to individuals and companies involved in the use of entertainment lasers in South Australia (including laser owners, operators and venue managers) to alert them of the potential hazards of these lasers and the responsibilities of users under the code. A copy of the code was included.

The development of regulations for controls on sources of non-ionising radiation, including lasers, is a priority project of the EPA.

a paper at the Australian Institute of Radiography Annual Scientifi c Conference in March 2004.

The division will continue to work closely with the equine veterinary industry to ensure safe practices are employed.

Regulation of sources of non-ionising radiation is a priority for the EPA

Radiation incidents and accidentsAudit of radioactive material storage

Equine Radiography ProjectNon-ionising radiation

MARALINGA REHABILITATION

The former British atomic weapons test site at Maralinga (Section 400) is currently on Commonwealth land and is licensed under the Australian Radiation Protection and Nuclear Safety Act 1998 (Maralinga Facility Licence FV0043). The site includes burial trenches containing radioactive materials, constructed during the Maralinga Rehabilitation Project completed in 2000.

While the Commonwealth’s rehabilitation project for the former atomic weapons test sites at Maralinga and Emu has been completed, the division remains involved in planning for the long-term management of these sites. The Maralinga Consultative Group, on which the EPA is represented, has representatives of the Commonwealth and South Australian governments and the traditional owners, Maralinga–

Tjarutja. The group is negotiating the proposed return of the site to the state, and then to Maralinga–Tjarutja. In particular, the group is examining a number of issues including the current radiological state of the site, responsibilities for continuing management of the site, procedures for handing back the land to Maralinga–Tjarutja, and indemnity issues.

Negotiations continued this year on developing the Maralinga Land and Environment Management Plan, which will defi ne the statutory framework, responsibilities, management tasks, and monitoring and reporting practices for the organisations responsible for the ongoing management of the former test sites at Maralinga and Emu.

Negotiations also continued on the terms of a deed between the Commonwealth, South Australia and Maralinga-Tjarutja, which formalises the return of Section 400 to the state and Maralinga-Tjarutja, and the proposed registration of the site under the RPC Act.

The management plan calls for long-term monitoring of radiological conditions at Maralinga by ARPANSA. An offi cer of the division participated in an ARPANSA fi eld survey at Maralinga from 20 August to 3 September 2003. This provided an opportunity to assess monitoring options available to the division and compare current ARPANSA monitoring techniques.

LICENCES TO MINE AND MILL RADIOACTIVE ORE

Three current licences to mine and mill radioactive ores, issued under section 24 of the RPC Act, have been issued to:

• WMC (Olympic Dam Corporation) Pty Ltd

• Heathgate Resources Pty Ltd

• Southern Cross Resources Australia Pty Ltd.

The licences are subject to conditions that include compliance with the Commonwealth Code of Practice on Radiation Protection in the Mining and Milling of Radioactive Ores 1987 andthe Code of Practice on Management of Radioactive Wastes from the Mining and Milling of Radioactive Ores 1982.

Transport of uranium ore concentrate to Outer Harbor is conducted in accordance with the regulations for the safe transport of radioactive substances.

The division conducts routine surveillance of uranium mining activities by auditing the companies’ monitoring results and conducting independent monitoring. Each licensed company provides quarterly occupational and environmental radiation monitoring data, including dose assessments, to the EPA. These reports are examined by divisional offi cers, compared with division monitoring results where appropriate, and reviewed with company offi cers at regular quarterly meetings.

Olympic Dam operations

WMC (Olympic Dam Corporation) Pty Ltd holds a licence (LM1) under the RPC Act to mine or mill radioactive ores. Licence conditions stipulate annual reporting on the existing and proposed development of the project and details of the wastes produced. The LM1 Report for 2002–03 was received on 29 August 2003 and was examined by the Radiation Protection Committee. The report included an annual dose assessment summary and assessment of the adequacy and effectiveness of radiation protection measures.

62

The dose summary indicated that the average dose for all designated workers in the mine and the processing plant was 13% of the prescribed annual occupational dose limit (20 mSv per year averaged over a period of fi ve consecutive years). The maximum individual dose received was assessed to be 45% of the limit.

The Annual Report of the Environmental Management and Monitoring Program for 2002, presented to the Radiation Protection Committee on 24 October 2003, contained results of environmental radiation monitoring and confi rmed that the radiological effects of the operation continue to be confi ned within the mining lease. In particular, any addition to the annual radiation dose to members of the public living in Olympic Dam Village and Roxby Downs was assessed to be less than the detection limit for the methods used (5% of the 1 mSv prescribed annual dose limit for members of the public).

There were fi ve incidents this period, reported under the approved incident reporting procedures for uranium mines.

• On 15 October 2003 approximately 110 m3 of acidic process liquor solution (0.029% uranium concentration) was spilt within the hydrometallurgical plant. The material was contained in the immediate area, drained to ponds on site and eventually returned to the process circuit.

• On 18 October 2003 high wind gusts washed approximately 130 m3 of evaporation liquor over the wall of an evaporation pond, into a containment bund. Residual copper (concentration 0.26%) and uranium (concentration 0.022%) remained in the weakly acidic solution.

• On 15 December 2003 approximately 145 m3 of process liquor (0.0036% uranium concentration) was spilled when a newly installed fi breglass reinforced pipe split. The material was contained in the immediate area, cleaned up and returned to the process circuit.

• On 8 February 2004 a leak from a failed pinch valve on the tailings disposal line caused a spill of 25 m3 of tailings. Approximately 2 m3 sprayed beyond the bunding which surrounds the tailings line corridor. The tailings were allowed to dry before being removed and disposed of in the tailings dam.

• On 21 May 2004 around 460 m3 of pregnant liquor solution (0.014% uranium concentration) spilled due to a failure in the pipeline. All spilled liquor was contained in the site containment system and returned to the process circuit.

None of the above incidents resulted in any injury to workers or represented a hazard to the environment.

Offi cers of the division visited the project on seven occasions for radiation review meetings, inspections and/or workplace monitoring. Routine transport of uranium or concentrate from Olympic Dam to Outer Harbor continued without incident.

Beverley Uranium Project

Heathgate Resources Pty Ltd, operators of the Beverley project 600 km north of Adelaide, hold a licence (LM4) under the RPC Act to conduct commercial uranium mining operations. This licence was renewed for a further 12 months from 4 August 2003.

The Annual Reports of the Occupational and Environmental Radiation Monitoring Programs for 2002 were presented in September and examined by the Radiation Protection Committee.

Worker radiation doses reported for the 2003 calendar year indicate the average annual dose for workers at the Beverley mine was approximately 4% of the 20 mSv annual limit recommended for designated employees.

There was one incident during the 2003–04 year which was reportable under the approved reporting procedures. Heathgate Resources advised in April 2004 that routine well fi eld monitoring indicated sulfate levels had exceeded the reporting levels in one monitoring bore at the edge of the ore zone. The increased sulfate levels indicated a possible excursion of mining fl uid from the ore zone and corrective action began immediately to draw mining fl uids back to the ore zone. Although the bore remained on excursion at 30 June 2004, the increased sulfate concentration is not considered to represent a hazard to the environment nor to members of the public.

Transport of product continued without incident. Divisional offi cers visited the site twice during this reporting period.

Honeymoon Uranium Project

Southern Cross Resources Pty Ltd holds a licence (LM3) to mine and mill at its Honeymoon site, 25 km from the NSW border near Broken Hill. The licence, which was renewed on 9 February 2004 for a period of one year, does not permit the recovery of uranium from the ore zone.

The Honeymoon site remains on care and maintenance and offi cers of the division visited the site once during this period. A licence under the RPC Act that permits commercial operations will be required before the operations outlined in the environmental impact statement can begin.

Maralinga rehabilitationLicences to mine and mill radioactive ore

63

The RPC (Ionising Radiation) Regulations provide an option for one- or three-year registrations of ionising radiation apparatus, sealed radioactive sources and premises where unsealed radioactive substances are used or stored. Licences to operate ionising radiation apparatus and licences to use or handle radioactive substances are renewed annually.

During the year, 101 ionising radiation apparatus, four sealed radioactive sources and 13 premises where unsealed radioactive substances are used or stored, were registered for the fi rst time. All were inspected for compliance with the regulations before registration was granted. Registration was renewed for 1064 apparatus, 184 sealed sources and 63 premises.

The numbers of apparatus, sealed sources and premises registered in accordance with the RPC Act, as at 30 June 2004, are given in Table 2.

At 30 June 2004, 3895 people held licences to use ionising radiation. During the year, new licences were issued to 430 applicants, and 3313 licence renewals were processed; 152 licences fi rst issued during the previous year remained current and did not require renewal. In addition, it is estimated that 2000–3000 people not required to hold licences were employed in occupations involving exposure to ionising radiation. These include workers at Olympic Dam, Beverley and Honeymoon uranium projects, workers in Type C laboratories, 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.

When required under the provisions of the RPC Act, radiation workers’ radiation doses were monitored using

approved personal dosimeters. All radiation workers’ doses recorded were below the occupational limits prescribed in the regulations, and the average and median of doses received by all workers were well below occupational limits.

Radioactive waste management

Applications for approval of annual radioactive waste management plans for users of unsealed radioactive substances for the period 1 October 2003 to 30 September 2004 were considered and approvals granted to 22 organisations. Applicants included hospitals, universities, pathology laboratories, commercial laboratories and Commonwealth and state government laboratories.

Approval to dispose of unsealed radioactive waste was granted when the waste and the disposal method complied with the requirements of the National Health and Medical Research Council Code of Practice for the Disposal of Radioactive Waste by the User 1985.Methods for disposal of very low level radioactive waste include incineration, disposal via sewers and fume-hoods, and landfi ll burial.

Landfi ll burial has been on hold since 10 July 2003 when the Adelaide City Council stopped accepting the waste at its Wingfi eld Waste Depot. The

waste that had been normally disposed of by landfi ll burial remained in storage at premises that are registered under the RPC Act. The EPA continues to investigate options for landfi ll burial.

Registration of former uranium mining and milling sites

The former Radium Hill uranium mine, 100 km south-west of Broken Hill, was developed in the early 1950s and operated until its closure in the early 1960s. The northern end of the remaining tailings dam at Radium Hill has been used as a repository for low level radioactive waste since April 1981 when it was gazetted under the Crown Lands Act 1929 and placed under the care, control and management of the (then) Minister of Mines and Energy.

A Port Pirie treatment plant processed uranium ore from Radium Hill between 1953 and 1962, operated by the (then) Mines Department of SA. An estimated 200,000 tonnes of radioactive tailings remain in tailings dams at Port Pirie, on land owned by the state government, under the care of the Minister for Mineral Resources Development.

Some remediation work had been conducted over the last 20 years by PIRSA at both the Radium Hill mine

Table 2 Apparatus, sealed sources and premises registered in accordance with RPC Act

Type Section of RPC Act Number registered

Ionising radiation apparatus 32 1773

Sealed radioactive sources 30 621

Premises where unsealed radioactive 29 172substances are handled or kept

64

REGISTRATION OF EQUIPMENT AND PREMISES, AND LICENSING OF USERS

site and the Port Pirie plant and tailings dams. The division provided advice on the radiological aspects of this work and conducted occasional inspections and monitoring. However, neither site had been subject to specifi c control under the RPC Act.

In 2002, Australia signed the international Joint Convention on the Safety of Spent Fuel Management and on the Safety of Radioactive Waste Management. The convention requires that appropriate steps be taken to review the safety of any radioactive waste facility existing at the time the convention enters into force and ensure that, if necessary, all reasonably practicable improvements are made to upgrade the safety of such a facility.

To ensure South Australia could comply with the requirements of the convention, the Radium Hill and Port Pirie sites were registered on 28 February 2003 as premises under section 29 of the RPC Act. The registered occupier of the sites is the Minister for Primary Industries and Resources SA. Conditions attached to the registration were designed to permit the development of appropriate long-term management plans.

In particular, the conditions of registration required a preliminary investigation of both sites and a report of this ‘Phase I’ study to be presented within 12 months. Both have been completed. The division reviewed the Phase I reports and prepared draft conditions of registration for next stage of site characterisation work for endorsement by the Radiation Protection Committee.

It is proposed that Phase II of site investigations will include a more detailed site characterisation incorporating modelling, additional studies and investigations, which will better enable decisions to be made on remediation methods and options.

Reporting procedures for incidents at uranium mines

In early May 2002, the state government announced an independent review of reporting procedures for incidents at uranium mines.

The review, conducted by Mr Hedley Bachmann, made recommendations on incident recording and reporting procedures, the revision of secrecy/

confi dentiality clauses of relevant legislation, and mechanisms for improving information fl ow to state and Commonwealth government agencies and the public. The report was submitted to the government on 30 August 2002.

The recommended recording and reporting mechanisms came into effect on 28 February 2003, approved as part of the radiation management plans for uranium mining operations. The requirement for radiation management plans arises from conditions attached to the licence to mine or mill radioactive ores granted under section 24 of the RPC Act.

One of the recommendations of the review was that the procedures be reviewed after 12 months from the date of their adoption. The review, which had started but was not completed during the period of this report, is taking into account changes in mine operations, technical diffi culties encountered during the fi rst year of the application of the recording and reporting procedures, and the appropriateness of the reporting and recording trigger levels.

INTERNATIONAL ACTIVITIES

To ensure that South Australia’s regulation of radiation activities keeps pace with international best practice, the division takes part in international activities to the extent that resources permit.

During the year the division participated in a review of draft guidance documents of the International Atomic Energy Agency circulated by ARPANSA. Such documents, when fi nalised, are often used in developing Australian policies and practices for radiation protection.

International Activities

65

NATIONAL ACTIVITIES

Radiation Health Committee

The Radiation Health Committee, established under the Australian Radiation Protection and Nuclear Safety Act 1998, advises the CEO of ARPANSA and the Radiation Health and Safety Advisory Council on matters relating to radiation protection, and develops policies and prepares draft publications for the promotion of uniform national standards of radiation protection throughout the Commonwealth and its states and territories. The National Uniformity Implementation Panel (Radiation Control) is a working group of the committee.

An offi cer of the division, Mr Graeme Palmer, who has been appointed to the committee, attended three meetings of the committee and the panel held during the year. Items discussed at the meetings included:

• certifi cation of personal radiation monitoring services

• security of radioactive sources

• intervention in emergency situations involving radiation exposure

• a standard for limiting exposure to extremely low frequency electric and magnetic fi elds

• a standard for occupational exposure to ultraviolet radiation

• development of codes of practice and safety guides for radiation protection

• Joint Convention on the Safety of Spent Fuel Management and on the Safety of Radioactive Waste Management

• implementation of recommendations of the National Competition Policy Review of Radiation Protection Legislation

• National Directory for Radiation Protection.

The division also participated in working groups and consultative groups that develop and contribute to development of codes of practice and policies for inclusion in the National Directory.

Radiation Health and Safety Advisory Council

The Radiation Health and Safety Advisory Council, also established under the Australian Radiation Protection and Nuclear Safety Act, advises the CEO 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.

The Acting Director of the division, Mrs Jill Fitch, was one of two state radiation control offi cers appointed to the council until her retirement in February 2004. Another offi cer of the division, Mr Andrew Johnston, was subsequently appointed as a member of the council.

The council met three times during the year and discussed issues that included:

• naturally occurring radioactive material

• a national strategy for security of radioactive sources

• an indicator of sustainable development for radioactive waste management

• medical radiation exposure in paediatric CT scanning

• mobile telephones and exposure of children to radio frequency fi elds

• the status and regulatory issues in constructing the replacement reactor

• current research in ultraviolet radiation exposure

• progress on the National Directory for Radiation Protection.

Joint Convention on Safety of Spent Fuel and Radioactive Waste Management

In July 2003, ARPANSA fi nalised the Australian National Report on the JointConvention on the Safety of Spent Fuel Management and on the Safety of Radioactive Waste Management. Each state and territory contributed to the report and was given the opportunity to provide comments on the fi nal draft. Australia ratifi ed the joint convention on 5 August 2003 and was thus able to participate in the fi rst joint convention review meeting held in November 2003.

Training and education

As an important part of its role in endeavouring to ensure safe use of radiation in South Australia, the division continued to participate in education and training programs conducted by a number of organisations, including the University of South Australia, The University of Adelaide and the Royal Adelaide Hospital. Lectures on radiation protection legislation, and the principles and practices of ionising and non-ionising radiation protection, were given to various occupational users of radiation and to groups receiving training in occupational health and safety.

66

ABBREVIATIONS

Rural and remote X-ray operators

The division conducted four one-week basic diagnostic radiography courses for general practitioners (GPs) and registered nurses (RNs) requiring licences to perform limited radiographic procedures. These courses were conducted at the University of South Australia, School of Medical Radiation, which is incorporated in the School of Health Sciences.

Several in-service training sessions in basic radiography were presented at a number of rural sites for licensed GPs

and RNs working in locations with limited or no immediate access to specialist radiology services. This training is considered crucial for maintaining appropriate standards of radiography by GPs and RNs in remote locations, and facilitating access to appropriate radiological services while minimising medical radiation exposure to the rural population.

The courses continue to be conducted over four (basic) or fi ve (intermediate) days. The structure of the course was changed as a direct result of X-ray fi lm audits conducted throughout the state for non-radiographer operated sites, and feedback from the courses.

The range of radiography previous performed by licensed GPs and RNs included limited full body radiography. The new course limits operators to perform radiography of the limbs, chest, pelvis and cervical spine, and provides more supervised clinical practical opportunities before students return to their workplaces. This has proven to be benefi cial in assimilation of the course material.

One offi cer attended the annual conference of the Australasian Radiation Protection Society (ARPS) in Hobart, Tasmania in October 2003. A range of radiation protection issues relevant to the regulatory functions of the division were discussed at the conference, including topics on Radioactive Waste Management; Emergency Preparedness and Response; Industrial/Medical Uses of Radiation, and Environmental Radioactivity and Mining and Milling of Radioactive Ores. A conducted tour of a dedicated

radioactive sources storage facility at the University of Tasmania was also attended.

The Acting Director (at her own expense) and another offi cer of the division attended the International Conference on the Protection of the Environment from the Effects of Ionizing Radiation held in Stockholm during October 2003. The conference was organised by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) with the aim of promoting the development of a

coherent international policy on the protection of the environment from the effects of ionising radiation.

Two offi cers of the division attended the Australian Institute of Radiography National Conference at the Cairns Convention Centre in March 2004. Both presented oral papers—one on the equine radiography project and the other on remote and rural radiography fi lm and screen mismatch.

APPENDIX—CONFERENCES ATTENDED

ARPANSA Australian Radiation Protection and Nuclear Safety AgencyCT computed tomographyELF extremely low frequencyEPA Environment Protection Authority

GP general practitionermSv millisievertNHMRC National Health and Medical Research CouncilNUIP(RC) National Uniformity Implementation Panel (Radiation Control)

PIRSA Department of Primary Industries and Resources, South AustraliaRHC Radiation Health CommitteeRN registered nurseSAR specifi c absorption rate

National ActivitiesAppendix—Conferences attended

Abbreviations

67

Training sessions were held for licensed GPs and RNs at rural sites with limited access to specialist radiology services


APPENDIX 1—FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND ACCOMPANYING NOTES

STATEMENT OF FINANCIAL PERFORMANCEFor the year ended 30 June 2004 Note 2004 2003 $’000 $’000

EXPENSES FROM ORDINARY ACTIVITIES Employee benefi ts 4 15,605 13,779 Supplies and services 5 8,513 7,659 Grants and contributions 6 7,626 1,394 Depreciation 7 996 923 Net loss from disposal of non-current assets 8 282 - Other 9 7 29

Total expenses from ordinary activities 33,029 23,784 REVENUES FROM ORDINARY ACTIVITIES Fees and charges 10 18,294 11,357 Grants and contributions 11 1,765 2,318 Interest 12 645 507 Assets received free of charge 13 188 213 Net gain from disposal of non-current assets 8 - 3 Other 14 567 237

Total revenues from ordinary activities 21,459 14,635 NET COST OF SERVICES FROM ORDINARY ACTIVITIES 11,570 9,149 SOUTH AUSTRALIAN GOVERNMENT REVENUES AND EXPENSES Revenues 15 8,725 10,504

Total South Australian Government revenues and expenses 8,725 10,504 NET RESULT BEFORE RESTRUCTURING (2,845) 1,355 Net gain/(loss) from administrative restructure 16 (1,625) 7,772 NET RESULT AFTER RESTRUCTURING (4,470) 9,127 TOTAL CHANGES IN EQUITY OTHER THAN THOSE RESULTING FROM TRANSACTIONS WITH THE STATE GOVERNMENT AS OWNERS (4,470) 9,127

68


STATEMENT OF FINANCIAL POSITIONAs at 30 June 2004 Note 2004 2003 $’000 $’000

CURRENT ASSETS Cash 17 6,286 10,057 Receivables 18 992 921 Inventories 19 - 2 Other 21 75 114

Total current assets 7,353 11,094 NON-CURRENT ASSETS Receivables 18 72 138 Financial assets 20 5 3 Property, plant and equipment 22 3,391 3,115

Total non-current assets 3,468 3,256 TOTAL ASSETS 10,821 14,350 CURRENT LIABILITIES Payables 23 1,582 1,020 Provisions for employee benefi ts 24 1,094 804 Other 25 67 78

Total current liabilities 2,743 1,902 NON-CURRENT LIABILITIES Payables 23 421 420 Provisions for employee benefi ts 24 3,000 2,901

Total non-current liabilities 3,421 3,321 TOTAL LIABILITIES 6,164 5,223 NET ASSETS 4,657 9,127

EQUITYAccumulated funds 26 4,657 9,127

TOTAL EQUITY 4,657 9,127

Restrictions on contributions 28 Expenditure commitments 29

Appendix 1 - Financial statements and accompanying notes

69


STATEMENT OF CASH FLOWSFor the year ended 30 June 2004 Note 2004 2003 $’000 $’000

CASH FLOWS FROM OPERATING ACTIVITIES PAYMENTS Employee benefi ts (14,997) (13,040)Supplies and services (8,008) (7,238)Grants and contributions (7,626) (1,395)

Total payments (30,631) (21,673)

RECEIPTS Fees and charges 18,175 11,532 Grants and contributions 1,765 2,318 Interest 662 484 Loan repayments 70 78 Other 567 255

Total payments 21,239 14,667 SA GOVERNMENT CASH FLOWS RECEIPTS Recurrent appropriations 8,718 10,501 Contingency funds 7 3

Total payments 8,725 10,504 NET CASH FROM/(USED IN) OPERATING ACTIVITIES 27 (667) 3,498 CASH FLOWS FROM INVESTING ACTIVITIES Purchase of property, plant and equipment (1,297) (577)Proceeds from sale of property, plant and equipment 1 3

NET CASH FROM/(USED IN) INVESTING ACTIVITIES (1,296) (574) CASH FLOWS FROM FINANCING ACTIVITIES Net receipts/payments from administrative restructures (1,808) 7,133

NET CASH FROM/(USED IN) FINANCING ACTIVITIES (1,808) 7,133 NET INCREASE/(DECREASE) IN CASH HELD (3,771) 10,057 Cash at the beginning of the reporting period 10,057 -

CASH AT THE END OF THE REPORTING PERIOD 6,286 10,057

70


NOTES TO AND FORMING PART OF THE FINANCIAL STATEMENTSFor the year ended 30 June 2004

1 OBJECTIVES OF THE ENVIRONMENT PROTECTION AUTHORITY

(a) Strategic contextThe Environment Protection Authority (the EPA) is the State Government’s environmental regulator with key roles to:

• review, develop and draft environmental protection policies and national environment protection measures

• authorise activities of environmental signifi cance through an authorisation system aimed at the control and minimisation of pollution and waste

• conduct compliance investigation and institute environmental monitoring and evaluation programmes

• provide advice and assistance regarding best environmental management practice.

The EPA has a key advocacy and engagement role across Government and with the people of South Australia’s business and communities to achieve a healthy and valued environment.

(b) Financial arrangementsThe Department for Environment and Heritage (DEH) provides some professional, technical and administrative support to the EPA. The identifi able direct costs of providing these services are met by the EPA. In addition, certain services are provided by DEH at no charge to the EPA and have not been recognised in the fi nancial statements as it is impractical to determine a value for these items. The costs of these services include salaries and overheads relating to the provision of various administrative services. A Service Level Agreement was signed on 31 May 2004 between DEH and the EPA relating to the future provision of these services.

The EPA’s sources of funds consist of monies appropriated by Parliament together with income derived primarily from fees, levies and licences to the public and industry. These include:

• environment and radiation protection licences

• waste levies from landfi ll depots

• fi nes and penalties

• section 7 enquiries.

The fi nancial activities of the EPA are primarily conducted through deposit accounts with the Department of Treasury and Finance (DTF) pursuant to section 8 and section 21 of the Public Finance and Audit Act 1987. The deposit accounts are used for funds provided by Parliamentary appropriation together with revenues from services provided and from fees and charges.

(c) Reporting entityThe EPA was established by proclamation under the Public Sector Management Act 1995 in the Government Gazette dated 27 June 2002. The administrative unit was established from the Environment Protection Agency functions transferred from DEH and the Radiation Protection Branch functions transferred from the Department of Human Services. Employees relating to these functions were transferred effective from 1 July 2002. (Refer Note 2 (c)).


71


The administrative unit was established as a separate body to the statutory authority in 1995 under the Environment Protection Act 1993 (the Act) that is also called the Environment Protection Authority. Subsequent amendments to the Act in April 2003 (section 14B) introduced a governing board to the EPA, being the Board of the Environment Protection Authority (consisting of 9 members), to which the Chief Executive of the administrative unit is accountable. Through this governing arrangement, the statutory authority (through its governing board) is responsible for the operations of the administrative unit. Also in existence is the Radiation Protection Committee consisting of 10 members. The Committee is responsible for the formulation of regulations under the Radiation Protection and Control Act 1982 (the RPC Act).

The Environment Protection Fund (Fund) is established under Section 24 of the Act. The purpose of the Fund is to provide funds which may be applied to education, training, investigations, research and pilot programs in relation to the protection, restoration or enhancement of the environment and to facilitate assistance in relation to an environment performance agreement.

The Fund meets the accounting criteria of a controlled entity of the EPA. Consequently, the assets and the liabilities of the Fund are recognised by the EPA in the Statement of Financial Position, and the Fund’s revenues and expenses have been recognised in the EPA’s Statement of Financial Performance. The transactions of the Fund are disclosed in Note 32.

The EPA performs functions related to EPA and administered activities. The EPA Financial Statements include the assets, liabilities, revenues and expenses controlled or incurred by the EPA in its own right. As administered items are insignifi cant to the EPA’s overall fi nancial performance and position, they have been disclosed in schedules of administered item revenues, expenses, assets, liabilities and cash fl ows which the EPA administers on behalf of the SA Government, industry and the Minister for Environment and Conservation, but does not control. (Refer Note 33)

The administered items schedules detail the administered items’ revenues, expenses, assets, liabilities and cash fl ows and as such the principles of consolidation have not been applied in preparing these fi nancial statements as the defi nition of an economic entity has not been satisfi ed. The administered items are:

• Adelaide Coastal Waters Study Steering Committee.Details of the administered items’ activities are contained in Note 33 along with the associated schedules of revenues, expenses, assets, liabilities and cash fl ows.

2 SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES

(a) Basis of accountingThe EPA’s fi nancial statements are a general purpose fi nancial report that has been prepared on an accrual basis pursuant to the Public Finance and Audit Act and in accordance with:

• the requirements of the Act

• Statements of Accounting Concepts

• applicable Australian Accounting Standards (AAS)

• other authoritative pronouncements of the Australian Accounting Standards Board (AASB)

• Urgent Issues Group (UIG) Consensus Views

• Treasurer’s Instructions and Accounting Policy Statements issued pursuant to the Public Finance and Audit Act.

Where there are inconsistencies between the above requirements, the legislative provisions have prevailed.

In the absence of a specifi c accounting standard, other authoritative pronouncement of the AASB or UIG Consensus View, consideration is given to the order of preference of other pronouncements as outlined in AAS 6 ‘Accounting Policies’.

72



73

The fi nancial statements, including administered items, have been prepared on the accrual basis of accounting. Accordingly, revenues are recognised when they are earned or when the EPA has control over them rather than when they are received, and expenses are recognised when they are incurred rather than when they are paid. Some revenues are recognised when cash is received as this is when the EPA gains control of these revenues. These revenues include items such as licence fees, fi nes and penalties.

The fi nancial statements have been prepared in accordance with the historical cost convention, with the exception of certain types of physical non-current assets which are valued at fair value, in accordance with APS guidance. Cost is based on the fair values of the consideration given in exchange for assets.

The fi nancial statements detail the revenues, expenses and fi nancial position of the EPA as a single entity and accordingly all intra EPA transactions and balances have been eliminated.

(b) Administrative restructuresEffective from 1 July 2003, the Zero Waste SA reporting entity was established by proclamation in the Government Gazette dated 26 June 2003 as a separate administrative unit under the Public Sector Management Act, resulting in a transfer of functions and staff from the EPA during the 2003–04 fi nancial year. (Refer Note 16)

On 1 July 2002, the EPA was established and the employees of the former DEH division known as the Environment Protection Agency and the employees of the Department of Human Services’ former Radiation Protection Branch of the Public and Environmental Health service were transferred. As at 1 July 2002 the Environment Protection Fund, which was formerly treated as an administered entity of DEH, was also transferred to the EPA. At the time of transfer the Fund no longer satisfi ed the accounting criteria of an administered entity.

(c) Revenue recognitionGovernment appropriationsAll government appropriations are recorded as revenue in the Statement of Financial Performance at the time control passes to the EPA. In general, the EPA gains control of appropriations upon receipt of the funds.

Other revenueAll other revenues recorded in the Statement of Financial Performance are recognised when the EPA obtains control over the future economic benefi ts in the form of increases in assets or reductions in liabilities. With respect to licence fees and fi nes and penalties revenue, the EPA obtains control upon receipt.

The EPA is not economically dependent on one individual for its revenue; however, the amount of revenue earned from transactions with our customer base can be infl uenced by the South Australian economy.

(d) CashCash in the Statement of Financial Position and the Statement of Cash Flows is comprised of cash on hand (including petty cash and cashier fl oats) and monies held by DTF in special deposit accounts.

(e) ReceivablesReceivables are recognised and carried at the original invoiced amount less a provision for any doubtful debts. An estimate for doubtful debts is made when collection of the full amount is no longer probable, whereas bad (uncollectable) debts are written off as incurred.

(f) InventoriesItems held for use by the EPA are accounted for at cost unless it is apparent that they are obsolete or surplus to requirements in which case they are written off. Items held for sale are accounted for at the lower of cost or net realisable value.

As at 30 June 2003, the EPA deemed its inventory holdings to be obsolete and they have been written down to a nil value.


(g) Property, plant and equipmentThe Statement of Financial Position includes all property, plant and equipment controlled by the EPA.

Assets disclosed at valuationIn accordance with the requirements of Accounting Policy Statement 3 ‘Revaluation of Non-Current Assets’ (APS 3), independent revaluations of classes of non-current assets only need to be undertaken where there existed an asset within a class that satisfi ed the criteria specifi ed in APS 3. That is, there existed an asset within the class with an original acquisition cost of at least $1 million and a useful life greater than three years. As no asset classes satisfi ed the revaluation criteria in APS 3, independent revaluations have not been undertaken by the EPA.

Assets deemed to be at fair valueThe EPA’s non-current assets are deemed to be at fair value as determined by Accounting Policy Statement 3 ‘Revaluation of Non-Current Assets’ as issued by DTF. Accordingly, all items of property, plant and equipment controlled by the EPA have been brought to account at cost of acquisition and have been reduced to refl ect the portion of economic benefi ts consumed since the asset was acquired.

Other property, plant and equipment disclosure information

Intellectual property, databases and information systemsThe EPA controls a number of databases, registers, information systems and other intellectual property that were developed in-house and are used to store and manage intellectual property owned and controlled by the EPA. While the development and maintenance of these databases involves on-going costs to the EPA, the data has not been recognised in the fi nancial statements as assets, as it has not been possible to reliably measure the future economic benefi ts to the EPA.

OtherThe recoverable amount test prescribed in AASB 1010 ‘Recoverable Amount of Non-Current Assets’ has not been applied as the EPA is a not-for-profi t entity whose service potential is not related to the ability to generate net cash infl ows.

Property, plant and equipment provided free of charge is recorded as an asset at its fair value at the time control passes to the EPA. Assets received in this way are disclosed as revenue in the Statement of Financial Performance and Note 13.

Items of property, plant and equipment with an individual value of less than $2000 are expensed in the Statement of Financial Performance at the time they are acquired.

(h) Depreciation of non-current assetsAll non-current assets with an initial cost greater than $2000 having a limited useful life are systematically depreciated over their useful lives in a manner which refl ects the consumption of their service potential. Depreciation is provided for on a straight line basis, with the following depreciation periods:

• computing equipment 3 years

• application software 3-15 years

• plant and equipment 3-20 years

• moveable vehicles 10-14 years

• furniture and fi ttings 5-11 years

• buildings and improvements 5-50 years

74



75

In accordance with AAS 4 ‘Depreciation’, an annual review of the appropriateness of depreciation rates and associated useful lives is undertaken. The results of the annual review indicated that the depreciation rates and associated useful lives were appropriate and as such no adjustments were required.

(i) LeasesThe EPA makes a distinction between fi nance leases, which effectively transfer from the lessor to the lessee substantially all the risks and benefi ts incidental to ownership of the leased assets, and operating leases under which the lessor effectively retains substantially all of the risks and benefi ts incidental to ownership.

Finance leasesThe EPA has not entered into any fi nance leases.

Operating leasesOperating lease payments are charged to the Statement of Financial Performance in the periods in which they are incurred. Details of operating lease commitments are disclosed in Note 29.

(j) PayablesThose amounts which represent liabilities for goods and services provided to the EPA are identifi ed as payables.

(k) Provisions for employee benefi tsIn accordance with AASB 1028 ‘Employee Benefi ts’, a provision is made for the EPA’s liability for employee benefi ts arising from services rendered by employees to reporting date. These provisions represent the amounts which the EPA has a present obligation to pay to employees for services provided.

Sick leaveNo provision is made for sick leave as experience indicates that on average sick leave taken each reporting period is less than or equal to the accruing sick leave entitlement in each reporting period. This experience is expected to recur in future reporting periods such that it is improbable that existing accrued sick leave entitlements will be used by employees in the reporting period.

Annual leaveA provision has been made for the unused component of annual leave, including annual leave loading, based on the remuneration rates expected to apply when the leave is taken and related on-costs as at reporting date. The expected remuneration rates are calculated as the current remuneration rate plus a salary infl ation factor of 4%. This calculation is consistent with the EPA’s experience of employee retention and leave taking.

Long service leaveIn calculating long service leave benefi ts the EPA uses a benchmark of seven years, based on an actuarial assessment undertaken by DTF of a signifi cant sample of employees throughout the South Australian public sector. The long service leave entitlement estimated to be paid within 12 months of balance date is calculated by multiplying employee benefi ts by the remuneration rates expected to apply when the leave is taken and related on-costs as at reporting date. The expected remuneration rates are calculated as the current remuneration rate plus a salary infl ation factor of 4%. This calculation is consistent with the EPA’s experience of employee retention and leave taking.

Employee on-costsIn general, related on-costs of payroll tax and superannuation have been calculated by applying the standard applicable rates to leave balances as at 30 June. Superannuation on-costs are included for part only of the long service leave provision in recognition that it is estimated that 45% of the provision will be paid as a lump sum payment on cessation of employment and will not be subject to employer superannuation contributions. (Refer Note 23)

SuperannuationContributions are made by the EPA to several superannuation schemes operated by the South Australian Government. These contributions are treated as an expense when they are incurred. There is no liability for payments to benefi ciaries as they have been assumed by the superannuation schemes. Any liability outstanding at reporting date relates to any contribution due but not yet paid to the superannuation schemes and is treated as a payable not an employee benefi t.


Workers compensationThe workers compensation liability recognised for the employees of the EPA is based on an apportionment of an actuarial assessment of the whole-of-government workers compensation liability conducted by Taylor Fry Consulting Actuaries based on 31 May data. Taylor Fry Consulting Actuaries extrapolate this data to 30 June. For the 2003-2004 fi nancial year the EPA has refl ected a workers compensation provision of $0.071 million (2003: $0.091 million). (Refer Note 24)

The actuarial assessment conducted by Taylor Fry Consulting Actuaries is based on the ‘payment per claim incurred’ (PPCI) valuation method. The assessment has been conducted in accordance with AAS 26 ‘Financial Reporting for General Insurance Activities’ and the WorkCover Guidelines for Actuarial Assessments. The liability covers claims incurred but not yet paid, incurred but not reported and the anticipated direct and indirect costs of settling those claims. The liability for outstanding claims is measured as the present value of the expected future payments refl ecting the fact that all the claims do not have to be paid out in the immediate future.

(l) Tax statusThe activities of the EPA are exempt from Commonwealth income tax but other Commonwealth taxes such as Fringe Benefi ts Tax (FBT), Goods and Services Tax (GST) and other state taxes including Payroll Tax are applicable.

(m) Accounting for Goods and Services Tax (GST)DEH prepares a business activity statement on behalf of the EPA under the grouping provisions of the GST legislation. Under these provisions, DEH is liable for the payments and entitled to the receipts associated with GST. As such, the GST applicable to the EPA forms part of the receivables and payables recorded in the Statement of Financial Position and the GST cashfl ows recorded in the Statement of Cash Flows of DEH.

Any GST incurred by the EPA as a purchaser that is not recoverable from the Australian Taxation Offi ce (ATO) is, however, recognised as part of an item of expense.

(n) Impact of adopting Australian equivalents to international fi nancial reporting standardsAustralia will be adopting Australian equivalents to international fi nancial reporting standards (AIFRS) for reporting periods commencing on or after 1 January 2005. The EPA will adopt these standards for the fi rst time in the published fi nancial report for the year ended 30 June 2006.

Managing the processIn accordance with Treasurer’s Instruction 19 ‘Financial Reporting’, the EPA’s Chief Executive is responsible for ensuring that the annual fi nancial statements comply with generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP). The EPA has analysed the exposure drafts issued by the AASB and has identifi ed a number of potential issues that may need to be addressed. The EPA is developing a plan to manage the transition to the new standards. The plan will require the identifi cation of:

• major areas of accounting and reporting differences resulting from adoption of the new standards

• potential changes required to fi nancial systems

• key dates for monitoring and reviewing progress.

The EPA is keeping abreast of changes by:

• monitoring the release of updated AIFRSs, pending accounting standards, Treasurer’s Instructions and accounting policy statements

• reviewing the updated authoritative pronouncements to determine the potential impact on the EPA

• attending whole-of-government reference group meetings as well as information forums organised by professional accounting bodies and DTF.



77

Expected key differences in accounting policies

Accounting policies, changes in accounting estimates and errorsPending accounting standard AASB108 ‘Accounting Policies, Changes in Accounting Estimates and Errors’ requires voluntary changes in accounting policy and correction of errors to be accounted for retrospectively by adjusting the opening balance of accumulated surplus/(defi cit) for the earliest period presented and restating comparative information.

Current GAAPs require the effect of voluntary changes in accounting policy and correction of errors to be recognised as revenues or expenses in the reporting period in which the change is made and the retrospective effect to be disclosed in the notes to the fi nancial report. That is, comparative information is not restated, it is presented as reported in the previous reporting period. The current GAAP requirements are complied with by the EPA.

Non-current assets held for resalePending accounting standard AASB5 ‘Non-Current Assets Held for Resale’ requires an entity to measure a non-current asset classifi ed as held for sale at the lower of its carrying amount and fair value less costs to sell.

Currently, the EPA does not separately recognise non-current assets held for disposal; instead, it follows the general measurement requirements of individual standards such as AASB1041 ‘Revaluation of Non-Current Assets’ and APS 3 ‘Revaluation of Non-Current Assets’ that allows the EPA to carry non-current assets on a fair value basis.

InventoriesPending accounting standard AASB102 ‘Inventories’ requires inventories held for distribution by non-profi t entities to be measured at the lower of cost and current replacement cost whereas current GAAPs require all inventories to be measured at the lower of cost or net realisable value. The current GAAP requirements are complied with by the EPA.

Property, plant and equipmentPending accounting standard AASB116 ‘Property, Plant and Equipment’ is proposing that non-current assets be re-valued on an individual basis (as opposed to current class basis). It is anticipated an APS will continue to require revaluation on a class basis and current thresholds (greater than $1 million and estimated useful life is greater than 3 years) will continue to apply.

Employee benefi tsPending accounting standard AASB119 ‘Employee Benefi ts’ requires liabilities for long-term employee benefi ts to be measured at present value.

The EPA currently measures long-term employee benefi ts at nominal amounts in accordance with AASB1028 ‘Employee Benefi ts’.

Impairment of assetsIn accordance with pending accounting standard AASB136 ‘Impairment of Assets’ the EPA will be subjecting all assets to some form of impairment testing, whereas, under existing GAAPs many types of current assets and some types of non-current assets are not subject to impairment testing.

ProvisionsPending accounting standard AASB137 ‘Provisions, Contingent Liabilities and Contingent Assets’ requires the recognition of provisions relating to the retirement or disposal of long-lived assets. The EPA does not currently recognise a provision for the retirement or disposal of long-lived assets.


(i) Targeted voluntary separation packages (TVSPs) TVSP amounts paid by the EPA are included within salaries and wages expenses.

During the year a total of four (2003: NIL) employees of the EPA accepted packages in line with the State Government’s policy.

The TVSP component of termination payments totalled $0.34 million (2003: $0). These costs were met from a central fund administered by the Offi ce for the Commissioner for Public Employment (OCPE). A total of $0.34 million (2003: $0) has been recovered relating to 2003-2004.

In addition, accrued annual leave, leave loading and long service leave entitlements amounting to $0.18 million (2003: $0) were paid to employees who received a TVSP.

Notes 2004 2003 $’000 $’000

Salaries and wages (i) - 10,877Superannuation 1,387 1,147Annual leave 246 128Payroll tax 764 722Long service leave 108 518Workers compensation 6 (72)Sitting fees boards and committees 76 64 Other 559 395

Total 15,605 13,779

4 EMPLOYEE BENEFITS

(o) Comparative fi gures Comparative fi gures have been adjusted to conform to changes in presentation in these fi nancial statements where required.

The comparative fi gures in the ‘Administered Items’ fi nancial statements have been amended to refl ect the fi nal audited fi gures of administered entities for the previous fi nancial period. As a result, there may be differences when comparing the comparative fi gures to those published in the report of the Auditor-General for the previous fi nancial period. (p) Rounding All amounts have been rounded to the nearest thousand dollars ($’000) and expressed in Australian currency.

3 PROGRAMS OF THE EPA

The EPA is funded by appropriation for the provision of environment protection, policy and regulatory services. In line with the objective of establishing the EPA to focus on environment protection activities, the EPA conducts its services through a single program, Environment and Radiation Protection. The purpose of this program is to achieve a clean, healthy and valued environment that supports social and economic prosperity for all South Australians.

78


Employee remuneration The number of employees whose remuneration exceeded $100,000 was: 2004 2003

$110,000–$119,999 1 -$120,000–$129,999 2 -$130,000–$139,999 - 1$140,000–$149,999 - 1$220,000–$229,999 1 -

Total number of employees 4 2 2004 2003 $’000 $’000

Total remuneration received or due and receivable by employees whose remuneration exceeded $100,000 601 275

Remuneration includes salary, employer’s superannuation costs, use of motor vehicles in accordance with prescribed conditions and associated FBT and contract termination payments, but does not include any amounts payable due to retirement under the TVSP arrangements.

During 2002-2003, the EPA had two employees whose remuneration exceeded $100,000. In the current reporting period there were four employees whose remuneration exceeded $100,000. Those employees included two former manager positions which were reclassifi ed to Executive level following a review conducted by the Offi ce of the Commissioner for Public Employment. Average number of employees During the reporting period the EPA had an average of 208 employees (2003: 203).

79

During the current reporting period remuneration was paid to seven members of the Board of the Environment Protection Authority and eight members of the Radiation Protection Committee. Also paid in the current period was remuneration relating to the previous fi nancial period for fi ve retired members of the Board of the Environment Protection Authority. In the previous reporting period a change in the governing body resulted from amendments to the Act. In April 2003 the Environment Protection Authority (fi ve members) was dissolved and the Board of the Environment Protection Authority was established.

Remuneration of board members The number of board members whose remuneration received or due and receivable fell within the following bands:

2004 2003

$Nil 2 - $1–$10,000 17 3 $10,001–$20,000 3 8 $20,001–$30,000 - 1

Total number of board members 22 12


5 SUPPLIES AND SERVICES

Notes 2004 2003 $’000 $’000

Accommodation and property management services 1,618 1,553 Materials and consumables 329 322 Vehicles 352 401 Travel and accommodation 209 198 Contractors 2,292 1,302 Consultant fees (i) 477 516 Fees for service 75 - Computing 449 492 Minor plant and equipment 121 100 Printing and publishing 301 304 Cost of goods sold 2 12 Postage, courier and freight 44 42 Advertising 175 181 Scientifi c and technical services 1,108 901 Telephone expenses 309 318 Audit fees 63 59 Equipment repairs and maintenance 58 35 Books, periodicals and newspapers 27 44 Entertainment 16 5 Equipment hire 6 30 Media monitoring 67 232 Pollution data monitoring 5 1 Photocopying and preservation 9 10 Conference and seminar presentation 82 73 Insurance 23 - Transportation 87 79 Legal fees 11 47 Customer call centre costs 83 - Hazardous waste storage and disposal costs 97 316 Other 18 86

Total 8,513 7,659 (i) The number and amount of consultant fees fell within the following bandwidths:

Note 2004 2003 $’000 $’000

Below $10,000 12 44 88 Between $10,000 and $50,000 4 76 299 Above $50,000 6 357 129

Total number and amount of consultant fees 22 477 516

80


6 GRANTS AND CONTRIBUTIONS

Note 2004 2003 $’000 $’000

State government (i) 5,920 671 Local government 1,488 186 Private industry and community 76 340 Other 142 197

Total 7,626 1,394

(i) State government grants and contributions

Note 2004 2003 $’000 $’000

Zero Waste SA * (i) 5,432 -Environment and Heritage 409 450 Onkaparinga Catchment Water Management Board 79 -South Australian Housing Trust - 137 Crystal Brook Primary School - 34 River Murray Catchment Water Management Board - 33 Water, Land and Biodiversity Conservation - 17

Total 5,920 671 * As per section 113 of the Act, the Authority earns and collects 100% of waste levies but is then required to transfer 50% of the levies collected to Zero Waste SA as per section 17 of the Zero Waste Act, 2004. This transfer represents the payment of waste levies monies to Zero Waste SA during 2003-04 in accordance with the Act. In the current reporting period, the waste levies transferred amounted to $5.14 million with the balance of $0.19 million being interest earned on the waste levies collected prior to transfer to Zero Waste SA.

7 DEPRECIATION

2004 2003 $’000 $’000

Buildings and improvements 5 5 Moveable vehicles 5 4 Computing equipment 259 256 Application software 40 24 Furniture and fi ttings 65 65 Plant and equipment 622 569

Total 996 923

8 NET GAIN/(LOSS) FROM DISPOSAL OF NON-CURRENT ASSETS

2004 2003 $’000 $’000

Proceeds from disposal of non-current assets 1 3Less: written down value of non-current assets 283 -

Total (282) 3


81


9 OTHER EXPENSES

2004 2003 $’000 $’000

Bad and doubtful debts 7 7 Capital works in progress write-off - 22

Total 7 29

10 FEES AND CHARGES

2004 2003 $’000 $’000

Fines and penalties 60 139 Waste levies 11,580 6,131 Fees and licences 5,957 4,735 Section 7 enquiries 286 275 Fee for service 346 - Sale of goods 1 2 Sale of services 64 75

Total 18,294 11,357

11 GRANTS AND CONTRIBUTIONS

2004 2003 Notes $’000 $’000

Commonwealth government (i) 646 1,378 State government (ii) 438 697 Private Industry 666 200 Other 15 43

Total 1,765 2,318

(i) Commonwealth government grants and contributions

2004 2003 $’000 $’000

Natural Heritage Trust - 628Environment Australia 500 750Other 146 -

Total 646 1,378

82


(ii) State government grants and contributions

2004 2003 $’000 $’000

Primary Industries and Resources SA - 160Transport and Urban Planning - 30Environment and Heritage 101 50Eyre Peninsula Catchment Water Management Board - 5River Murray Catchment Water Management Board 10 25Onkaparinga Catchment Water Management Board 52 75South East Catchment Water Management Board 30 50Patawalonga and Torrens Catchment Water Management Boards 130 188Trade and Economic Development 40 30Wildlife Conservation Fund - 4Northern Adelaide and Barossa Catchment Water Management Board 75 80

Total 438 697

12 INTEREST

2004 2003 $’000 $’000

Interest on funds held 645 507

Total 645 507

13 ASSETS RECEIVED FREE OF CHARGE

2004 2003 $’000 $’000

Land and improvements 170 -Plant and equipment - 154Transfers received assets 17 -Other 1 59

Total 188 213

14 OTHER REVENUE

2004 2003 $’000 $’000

Salaries and wages recoveries 561 145Sponsorships, donations, commissions and bequests - 57Other 6 35

Total 567 237


83


15 SA GOVERNMENT REVENUES

2004 2003 $’000 $’000

Revenues Recurrent appropriation 8,718 10,501Contingency funds 7 3

Total SA Government revenues 8,725 10,504

16 NET GAIN/(LOSS) FROM ADMINISTRATIVE RESTRUCTURE

Assets

2004 2003 $’000 $’000

Cash 1,808 - 1,808 -

Liabilities

Payables 20 - Provisions for employee benefi ts 163 -

183 -

Net gain/(loss) from administrative restructure (1,625) -

Assets

2004 2003 $’000 $’000

Cash - 7,133 Receivables - 1,323 Inventory - 13 Financial assets - 4 Property, plant and equipment - 3,270 Other - 166 - 11,909

The Zero Waste SA reporting entity was established with effect from 1 July 2003, resulting in the transfer of functions, staff, assets and liabilities from the EPA. The realignment resulted in a net loss of $1.625 million due to the transfer of thefollowing assets and liabilities:

On 1 July 2002, the EPA was established and the employees of the former DEH division known as the Environment Protection Agency and the employees of the Department of Human Services’ former Radiation Protection Branch of the Public and Environmental Health service were transferred. As at 1 July 2002 the Environment Protection Fund, which was formerly treated as an administered entity of DEH, was also transferred to the EPA. At the time of transfer the Fund no longer satisfi ed the accounting criteria of an administered entity. The transfer resulted in a net gain of $7.772 million due to the transfer of the following assets and liabilities:

84


Liabilities

Payables - 1,007 Provisions for employee benefi ts - 3,130

- 4,137

Net gain/(loss) from administrative restructure - 7,772 Net gain/(loss) from administrative restructures (1,625) 7,772

17 CASH

2004 2003 $’000 $’000

Authority deposit account 3,506 5,536Environment Protection Fund deposit account 1,671 3,466 Accrual appropriation 1,103 1,049 Advance accounts 4 -Cash in transit 1 -Cash on hand 1 6

Total 6,286 10,057

18 RECEIVABLES

2004 2003Current: $’000 $’000 Debtors 950 847 Loans 46 74 Interest 17 36 Other 1 2 Less: provision for doubtful debts 22 38

Total 992 921

Non-current:

Debtors 4 5 Loans 91 133 Less: provision for doubtful debts 23 -

Total 72 138

19 INVENTORIES

2004 2003Current: $’000 $’000

Finished goods held for resale - 2

Total - 2


85


20 FINANCIAL ASSETS

2004 2003 $’000 $’000

Equity in listed entities 5 3

Total 5 3

21 OTHER ASSETS

2004 2003Current: $’000 $’000 Prepayments 75 114

Total 75 114

22 PROPERTY, PLANT AND EQUIPMENT

2004 2003 $’000 $’000

(a) Buildings and improvements

At cost 369 124 Less: accumulated depreciation 88 22

Total buildings and improvements 281 102

(b) Plant and equipment

Moveable vehicles: At cost 78 74 Less: accumulated depreciation 47 41

Total moveable vehicles 31 33

Computing equipment: At cost 1,400 1,422 Less: accumulated depreciation 1,008 995

Total computing equipment 392 427

Application software: At cost 719 359 Less: accumulated depreciation 65 24

Total application software 654 335

86


Furniture and fi ttings: At cost 824 713 Less: accumulated depreciation 254 190

Total furniture and fi ttings 570 523

Plant and equipment: At cost 4,046 3,863 Less: accumulated depreciation 2,588 2,168

Total plant and equipment 1,458 1,695

Capital works in progress:

At cost 5 -

Total capital works in progress 5 -

Total plant and equipment 3,110 3,013

Total property, plant and equipment 3,391 3,115

Reconciliation

A reconciliation of the carrying amount of each class of property, plant and equipment is displayed in the table below.

Land, Buildings Moveable Computing Application & Improvements Vehicles Equipment Software $’000 $’000 $’000 $’000 Gross carry amount Balance at 30 June 2003 124 74 1,422 359Additions 245 4 222 79Capital works in progress additions - - - 281Transfers within government - - (133) -Disposals - - (111) -Other - - - -

Balance at 30 June 2004 369 78 1,400 719

Accumulated depreciation Balance as at 30 June 2003 (22) (41) (995) (24)Depreciation expense (65) (5) (259) (40)Transfers within government - - 138 -Disposals - - 106 -Other (1) (1) 2 (1)

Balance as at 30 June 2004 (88) (47) (1,008) (65) Net Book Value As at 30 June 2003 102 33 427 335

As at 30 June 2004 281 31 392 654


87


23 PAYABLES

2004 2003Current: $’000 $’000

Creditors 832 705 Accruals 568 175 Employee benefi t on-costs (i) 182 140 1,582 1,020 Non-current:

Employee benefi t on-costs (i) 421 420

Costs that are a consequence of employing employees, but which are not employee benefi ts, such as payroll tax and superannuation on-costs, are recognised as liabilities and expenses when the employee benefi ts to which they relate are recognised. The employee benefi t on-costs associated with each type of employee benefi t are as follows: 2004 2003Current: $’000 $’000

Accrued payroll tax Annual leave 47 40 Long service leave 5 6 Accrued salaries and wages 8 3

Total 60 49

Superannuation Annual leave 100 78 Long service leave 7 8 Accrued salaries and wages 15 5

Total 122 91 Total current employee benefi t on-costs 182 140

Non-current:

Accrued payroll tax Long service leave 176 174

Total 176 174

Superannuation Long service leave 245 246 245 246 Total non-current employee benefi t on-costs 421 420

88


24 PROVISIONS FOR EMPLOYEE BENEFITS

2004 2003Current: $’000 $’000

Annual leave 850 632 Long service leave 89 97 Workers compensation 21 24 Accrued salaries and wages 134 51

Total 1,094 804

Non-current:

Long service leave 2,950 2,834 Workers compensation 50 67

Total 3,000 2,901 Costs that are a consequence of employing employees, but which are not employee benefi ts, such as payroll tax and superannuation on-costs, are recognised as liabilities and expenses when the employee benefi ts to which they relate are recognised. These employee benefi t on-costs are recognised as Payables in Note 23 as they do not accrue to employees. The aggregate current liability from employee benefi ts and related on-costs is $1.28 million (2003: $0.94 million).

The aggregate non-current liability from employee benefi ts and related on-costs is $3.42 million (2003: $3.32 million).

25 OTHER LIABILITIES

2004 2003Current: $’000 $’000

Deposits held 50 50 Unearned revenue - 16 Other 17 12

Total 67 78


89


26 EQUITY

Equity represents the residual interest in the net assets of the EPA. The State Government holds the equity interest in the EPA on behalf of the community.

Accumulated funds Total $’000 $’000

2004Balance at 1 July 9,127 9,127 Surplus/(defi cit) for the year (4,470) (4,470)

Balance at 30 June 4,657 4,657 2003 Balance at 1 July - - Surplus for the year 9,127 9,127

Balance at 30 June 9,127 9,127

27 RECONCILIATION OF NET CASH PROVIDED BY/(USED IN) OPERATING ACTIVITIES TO NET COST OF SERVICES

2004 2003 $’000 $’000NET CASH PROVIDED BY/(USED IN) OPERATING ACTIVITIES (667) 3,498

Adjustments Cash fl ows from government (8,725) (10,504)Depreciation and amortisation (996) (923)Assets received free of charge 188 213 Assets written off - (22)

Net gain/(loss) on sale of assets (282) 3

NET CASH PROVIDED BY/(USED IN) OPERATING ACTIVITIES (CONT’D) (667) 3,498

Changes in assets and liabilities Increase/(decrease) in receivables 5 (271)Increase/(decrease) in inventories (2) (11)Increase/(decrease) in other assets (37) (46)Decrease/(increase) in payables (513) (360)Decrease/(increase) in employee benefi ts (552) (575)Decrease/(increase) in other liabilities 11 (151)

NET COST OF SERVICES FROM ORDINARY ACTIVITIES (11,570) (9,149)

90


28 RESTRICTIONS ON CONTRIBUTIONS RECEIVED

The EPA is engaged in a variety of funding programs involving state and Commonwealth sources who provide monies to the EPA on the premise that these funds are expended in a manner consistent with the terms of the agreement. At reporting date the EPA had the following outstanding funding commitments:

2004 2003 $’000 $’000

Environment Protection 1,530 2,249

29 EXPENDITURE COMMITMENTS

Operating lease commitments: The total value of future non-cancellable operating lease commitments not provided for and payable as at the end of the reporting period are detailed below. These amounts have not been brought to account in the fi nancial statements.

2004 2003 $’000 $’000

Not later than one year 1,391 1,572 Later than one year but not later than fi ve years 4,115 5,720 Later than fi ve years - 583

Total (including GST) 5,506 7,875

Included in the operating lease commitments above is $0.5 million (2003: $0.7 million) which is the GST component of the operating lease payments.

The operating leases held by the EPA are mainly property leases with penalty clauses equal to the amount of the residual payments remaining for the lease terms. The leases are payable one month in advance and the EPA has the right of renewal. There are no existing or contingent rental provisions.


91


30 FINANCIAL INSTRUMENTS DISCLOSURE

(a) Accounting policies and terms and conditions affecting future cash fl ows:

Financial assets Cash deposits are recognised at their nominal amounts and interest is credited to revenue as it accrues. The EPA invests surplus funds with the Treasurer at call. Interest is earned on the average monthly balance at rates based on the DTF 90-day bank bill rate and interest is paid at the end of each quarter. The average effective interest rate for the reporting period was 4.87 percent (2003: 4.60%).

Debtors (trade accounts receivable) are generally settled within 30 days, are carried at amounts due and credit terms are net 30 days. A provision is raised for any doubtful debts based on a review of all outstanding amounts at balance date and bad debts are written off in the period in which they are identifi ed.

Loans are recognised at the nominal amounts lent and collectability of amounts outstanding is reviewed at balance date with provision being made for bad and doubtful loans. That is, where collection of the loan or part thereof is judged to be less likely rather than more likely. Loan repayments may be waived at the discretion of the minister. Interest is credited to revenue as it accrues in accordance with the fi xed interest rate loan repayment schedule. Similarly, principal repayments also occur in accordance with the loan repayment schedules and the principal is repaid in full at maturity.

Financial liabilities Creditors (trade accounts payable), including accruals not yet billed, are recognised when the EPA becomes obliged to make future payments as a result of a purchase of assets or goods and services at their nominal amounts and are generally settled within 30 days.

Borrowings are recognised when issued at the amount of the net proceeds due and carried at cost until settled. Interest is recognised as an expense on an effective yield basis.

All fi nancial assets and liabilities are unsecured.

(b) Interest rate risk exposure:

The EPA’s exposure to interest rate risk and the effective weighted average interest rate for classes of fi nancial assets and fi nancial liabilities is set out on opposite page.

92


(c) Net fair value of fi nancial assets and liabilities:

The net fair value of cash and cash equivalents and non-interest bearing monetary fi nancial assets and fi nancial liabilities approximates their carrying value.

Financial assets Cash 6,286 6,286 10,057 10,057 Loans 137 137 207 207 Debtors 926 926 852 852 Financial assets 5 5 3 3

7,354 7,354 11,119 11,119

Financial liabilities Creditors 2,003 2,003 1,440 1,440

31 AUDITORS’ REMUNERATION

Services provided by the Auditor-General’s Department with respect to the audit of the EPA totalled $0.063 million (2003: $0.059 million) for the reporting period.

32 THE ENVIRONMENT PROTECTION FUND

The following is a summary of the amounts included in the Fund. In refl ecting these amounts in the EPA’s fi nancial statements transaction between the Fund and the EPA have been eliminated. (Refer note 1(c))

Weighted Floating More Non average interest 1 year 1 to 5 than interest2004 effective rate rate or less years 5 years bearing Total

% $’000 $’000 $’000 $’000 $’000 $’000

Financial assets Cash 4.87 6,286 - - - - 6,286 Loans N/A - - - - 137 137 Debtors N/A - - - - 926 926 Financial assets N/A - - - - 5 5

6,286 - - - 1,068 7,354

Financial liabilities Creditors N/A - - - - 2,003 2,003

2003

Financial assets Cash 4.60 10,057 - - - - 10,057 Loans N/A - - - - 207 207 Debtors N/A - - - - 852 852 Financial assets N/A - - - - 3 3

10,057 - - - 1,062 11,119

Financial liabilities Creditors N/A - - - - 1,440 1,440


93


2004 2003Statement of fi nancial performance for period ended 30 June 2004 $’000 $’000

EXPENSES FROM ORDINARY ACTIVITIES Employee benefi ts 670 629 Supplies and services 482 439 Grants and contributions 250 1,163 Net loss from disposal of non-current assets 5 - Other 1 -

Total expenses from ordinary activities 1,408 2,231 REVENUES FROM ORDINARY ACTIVITIES Fees and charges 1,049 1,822 Grants and contributions 30 - Interest and dividends 143 175 Other 16 23

Total revenues from ordinary activities 1,238 2,020 NET COST OF SERVICES FROM ORDINARY ACTIVITIES 170 211 NET RESULT BEFORE RESTRUCTURING (170) (211)

Net gain/(loss) from administrative restructure (refer note 16) (1,808) - NET RESULT AFTER RESTRUCTURING (1,978) (211)

2004 2003STATEMENT OF FINANCIAL POSITION AS AT 30 JUNE $’000 $’000

CURRENT ASSETS Cash 1,671 3,466 Receivables 62 259

Total current assets 1,733 3,725 NON-CURRENT ASSETS Property, plant and equipment - 5

Total non-current assets - 5 TOTAL ASSETS 1,733 3,730 CURRENT LIABILITIES Payables 24 27 Other 50 16

Total current liabilities 74 43

NON-CURRENT LIABILITIES Other - 50

Total non-current liabilities - 50

TOTAL LIABILITIES 74 93 NET ASSETS 1,659 3,637

94


33 ADMINISTERED ITEM OF THE EPA

(a) Reporting entity and strategic contextThe major objective of the Adelaide Coastal Waters Study Steering Committee (the Committee) is to carry out an integrated ecological study of the marine environment off metropolitan Adelaide. The study is referred to as the Adelaide Coastal Waters Study (ACWS) and focuses on the issues of loss of seagrass, declining water quality, algal blooms, beach closures, sand loss and wide scale movement, sediment on reef systems, mangrove dieback and problems caused by exotic organisms.

(b) Administered item fi nancial arrangementsThe Committee’s sources of funds consist of monies contributed or to be contributed by Mobil Australia, Ports Corp, SA Water Corporation, Onkaparinga, Torrens and Patawalonga Catchment Water Management Boards, TXU Torrens Island, the Department of Transport and Urban Planning, the Department of Primary Industries and Resources, the Coast Protection Board and the EPA.

The fi nancial activities of the Committee are conducted through the EPA’s special deposit account with the Department of Treasury and Finance (DTF) pursuant to Section 8 of the Public Finance and Audit Act. Prior to the establishment of the EPA as an independent administrative unit on 1 July 2002, these activities were conducted through the Department for Environment and Heritage (DEH) special deposit account.

The EPA and DEH continue to provide fi nancial services to the Committee. Offi cers of the EPA and DEH provide technical and administrative support to the Committee at no charge. Certain facilities are also provided at no charge to the Committee including the use of plant and equipment and offi ce accommodation.

(c) Administered item summary of signifi cant accounting policiesThe administered item schedules of activities detail the administered item revenues, expenses, assets, liabilities and cash fl ows. In general, the Administered Item adopts the accounting policies of the EPA, as detailed in Note 2, deviations from these policies are as follows:

Provisions for employee benefi tsIn general, the administered item utilises the services of the EPA’s and DEH’s employees rather than recruiting and appointing employees in its own right. In the majority of cases, the services provided by the employees are provided free of charge. If, however, the services provided by the employees are directly attributable to the activities of an administered item and can be reliably measured the services are charged to the administered item on a fee-for-service (cost recovery) basis. Further, the provision for the liability for employee benefi ts arising from services rendered by employees is not recognised in the administered items’ schedules as the EPA and DEH are obligated to pay employees for services provided. Accordingly, the provisions for employee benefi ts are recognised in the EPA’s and DEH’s fi nancial statements.

Details of the administered item revenues, expenses, assets, liabilities and cash fl ows are provided in the following schedules.

Schedule 1(A): Administered Revenues and Expenses for the Year Ended 30 June 2004Schedule 1(B): Administered Revenues and Expenses for the Year Ended 30 June 2003Schedule 2(A): Administered Assets and Liabilities as at 30 June 2004Schedule 2(B): Administered Assets and Liabilities as at 30 June 2003Schedule 3(A): Administered Cash Flows for the Year Ended 30 June 2004Schedule 3(B): Administered Cash Flows for the Year Ended 30 June 2003


95

EPA Annual Report 2003–2004 97


APPENDIX 2—PUBLICATIONS RELEASED OR UPDATED IN 2003–2004

Publication No. Title

EPA Information

EPA 089/04 Acid rainEPA 423/03 Air conditioner noise EPA 074/04 Container Deposit Legislation—a South Australian environmental success storyEPA 335/04 Eco-effi ciency EPA 424/03 Environmental noise EPA 345/04 Industry and community consultation EPA 090/04 Photochemical smogEPA 230/03 Wood-burning heaters and how to use them effectively

EPA Guidelines

EPA 108/03 Abrasive blast cleaning EPA 245/03 Air conditioning and pipework systems—wastewater removalEPA 386/03 Air quality impact assessment using design ground level pollutant concentrations (DGLCs) EPA 118/03 Animal processing worksEPA 080/04 Bunding and spill managementEPA 484/03 Burning in the open on domestic and non-domestic premisesEPA 214/04 Carpet and upholstery cleaning wastewater EPA 194/03 Closure and post-closure plans for major landfi lls EPA 328/03 Community consultation for waste management and recycling facilities EPA 427/03 Concrete batching EPA 279/03 Development proposal assessment for venues where music may be played EPA 378/04 Disposal of used hydrocarbon absorbent materialsEPA 181/04 Disposal of swimming pool backwash waterEPA 396/03 Dredging and earthworks drainage EPA 121/03 Environment management of foundriesEPA 420/03 Environment Improvement Programs—a drafting guide for licenseesEPA 122/03 Exhaust ventilation in commercial and institutional kitchensEPA 244/03 Fire protection services pipework systems—wastewater removal EPA 014/03 Independent verifi cation of monitoring programs EPA 109/03 Joineries—dust and noise controlEPA 197/03 Landfi ll environment management plans EPA 247/03 Liquid biosolids from domestic septic tanks—disposal onto agricultural land EPA 292/03 Liquid waste classifi cation test EPA 469/03 Lower Murray Reclaimed Irrigation AreasEPA 044/03 Medical waste—storage, transport and disposal EPA 302/03 Minor landfi ll proposal plans EPA 373/03 Odour assessment using odour source modelling EPA 388/03 Pollutant management for water well drillingEPA 079/03 Pressure for water-blasting activities EPA 013/03 Protection for voluntary environmental audits EPA 189/03 Reclaimed water irrigation of pasture for grazing of cattle and pigs EPA 100/03 Spray painting booths—control of air and noise emissions EPA 329/03 Used foundry sand (UFS)—classifi cation and disposal EPA 188/03 Use of water treatment solids (WTS)EPA 123/03 Ventilation of fi breglass works EPA 351/03 Waste levy regulations EPA 414/03 Wastes containing asbestos—removal, transport and disposal EPA 416/03 Waste tracking form

98


EPA 415/03 Waste transport certifi cate EPA 183/03 Waste tyres EPA 509/04 Wastewater lagoon construction EPA 510/04 Wineries and distilleries

Water Quality Policy series

Oct 2003 Frequently Asked Questions Fast Facts Easy Ways to Save WaterEPA 488/03 Aquaculture and the Environment Protection (Water Quality) PolicyEPA 477/03 Local Government and the Environment Protection (Water Quality) PolicyEPA 476/03 Milking Shed Effl uent and the Environment Protection (Water Quality) PolicyEAP 474/03 Setting Water Quality Objectives Using the Environment Protection (Water Quality) PolicyEPA 473/03 The Environment Protection (Water Quality) Policy 2003—an overviewEPA 475/03 Vessels on Inland Waters and the Environment Protection (Water Quality) Policy

Stormwater Management Series

EPA 492/03 Auto DismantlersEPA 493/03 Auto Servicing and Mechanical Repair Workshops EPA 494/03 Car Yards EPA 495/03 Concrete CuttersEPA 496/03 Crash RepairersEPA 181/04 Disposal of Backwash Water from Swimming Pools (was IS 13)EPA 547/04 Disposal of Soaps and DetergentsEPA 548/04 Fruit and Vegetable ProcessingEPA 497/03 Garden ShopsEPA 542/04 Home and Mobile D-I-Y HandypersonsEPA 498/03 Landscape Gardening and Garden MaintenanceEPA 519/04 Laundries and Dry Cleaning PremisesEPA 521/04 Marinas, Boat Sheds and SlipwaysEPA 499/03 Metal FabricatorsEPA 540/04 Mobile Car DetailersEPA 549/04 Mobile Concrete CuttersEPA 543/04 Mobile Dog Washing UnitsEPA 545/04 Mobile MechanicsEPA 546/04 Mobile Waste Bin CleanersEPA 520/04 MortuariesEPA 541/04 PaintersEPA 500/03 PrintersEPA 501/03 Radiator Repair PremisesEPA 504/03 Retail Food BusinessesEPA 544/04 Roof RestorersEPA 506/04 Service Stations EPA 505/03 Shopping CentresEPA 502/03 Small Business and IndustryEPA 491/03 Stormwater PollutionEPA 503/03 Transport CompaniesEPA 517/04 Wash Bays

Appendix 2—Publications Released or Updated in 2003–2004

99


Codes of Practice

EPA 273/04 Code of Practice for Aquifer Storage and Recovery

Annual Reports

Environment Protection AuthorityEPA 468/03 Annual Report 2002–2003

Radiation ProtectionEPA 489/03 Annual Report 2002–2003

Round-table ConferenceEPA 483/03 Round-table Conference Report 2003

Public Consultation Drafts

EPA 507/03 Draft Code of Practice for Wastewater Overfl ow Management (Closed for comment 12 December 2003)EPA 470/03 Draft Code of Practice for Environmentally Responsible Pesticide Use (Closed for comment on 15 October 2003)

Mount Lofty Ranges Watershed Protection Offi ce

EPA 479/03 Audit of Milking Shed Effl uent Management in Mount Lofty Ranges WatershedEPA 442/03 Mount Lofty Ranges WPO Status Report 2003

Other publications

EPA 486/04 Gulf St Vincent Metropolitan Costal Waters—Ambient Water Quality Monitoring Report No 2: 1995–2002EPA 254/04 Water Quality of Adelaide’s Metropolitan Costal Waters—a community summary (Summarises the Gulf St Vincent Report No 2)EPA 467/03 Frog Census Report: 2002EPA 478/03 Frog Ponds for GardensEPA 554/04 Handbook for Pollution Avoidance on Commercial and Residential Building Sites EPA 526/03 State of the Environment Report for South Australia 2003—SummaryEPA 527/03 State of the Environment Report for South Australia 2003

Appendix 2—Publications Released or Updated in 2003–2004

100


APPENDIX 3—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 theFreedom of Information Act 1991 (SA).

Organisation structure and functions

From 1 July 2002 the EPA became a separate administrative unit under the Environment and Conservation Portfolio. The EPA is South Australia’s primary environmental regulator. It has responsibility 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 organisation 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 2004–07 Strategic Plan.

Public participation in environment policy

The public is invited to participate in development of environment policy through:

• public consultation sessions during the development of specifi c EPPs

• the annual Round-table Conference

• regional Round-table meetings

• specifi c 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 2003–04 are detailed in this annual report.

Description of kinds of documents held by EPA

Publications produced by the EPA can be accessed through the department’s web site at www.epa.sa.gov.au/pub.html, or requested, free of charge, by telephoning the Customer Service Desk on 8204 2004. A list of 2003–04 EPA publications is set out in this annual report.

101


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 fi les

• fi nancial records

• 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 Environment Protection Act include:

• applications for environmental authorisations

• environmental authorisations

• development authorisations

• beverage container approvals

• details of prosecutions and other enforcement action under the Environment Protection Act.

Policy documents

In relation to corporate policy the EPA refers to existing DEH corporate policy except in instances where specifi c 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 offi ce policy or procedure for the EPA

• IOP002 Procedure for obtaining advice on sampling

• IOP003 Procedure to be followed when requesting legal advice

• IOP004 Overseas travel by EPA staff

• IOP005 Conference attendance by EPA staff

Appendix 3—Freedom of Information Statement

102


• IOP006 Guidelines for training and development expenditure

• IOP007 Licence renewal process for A-Class licences- Attachment 0: Designation of licences as Class ‘A’ or Class ‘B’—Licence Consolidation- Attachment 1: Licence renewal process fl ow chart for ‘A’ licences - Attachment 2: Licence renewal process for A-Class licences, guidance notes for licence coordinators - Attachment 3: Full process

• IOP008 Guidelines for study assistance

• IOP009 Accessing human resource development activities

• IOP010 Induction - Attachment 1: Process for induction of new employees - Attachment 2: Induction checklist - Attachment 3: Reference lists

• IOP011 Guideline for preparing EPA Board papers - Attachment 1: Required paper format and guidance notes - Attachment 2: Agenda item proforma

• IOP012 Vaccination protocol for fi eld staff

• IOP013 Licensing requirements for the transport and disposal of recyclable/reusable wastes

• IOP014 WinTAP: Windows Time Allocation Program for EPA- Attachment 1: TOIL Record Sheet

• IOP015 Responding to environmental emergencies & major pollution incidents- Attachment 1

• IOP016 Threshold criteria—Matters for EPA Board Consideration

• IOP017 Guideline for the preparation of a Cabinet submission - Attachment 1: Cabinet submission development process fl ow chart - Attachment 2: Cabinet submission process checklist - Attachment 3: Guideline—When is a Cabinet submission required? - Attachment 4: Guideline—Notifi cation of intention to draft a Cabinet submission - Attachment 5: Instructions for using Cabinet submission templates - Attachment 6: Preparing Cabinet submissions.

Access to organisation documents

Requests under the Freedom of Information Act for access to documents or amendment of personal records in the possession of EPA should be directed in writing to:

Freedom of Information CoordinatorEnvironment Protection AuthorityGPO Box 2607ADELAIDE SA 5001Telephone: 8204 2000

103


APPENDIX 4—OTHER STATUTORY INFORMATION

Overseas travel

Direction by the minister

Pursuant to Section 111(2)(b) of the Act, the minister to whom the Act is committed has given no direction to the Board during the period to which the report related.

Boards and committees listing

• Board of the Environment Protection Authority

• Radiation Protection Committee

• Winery Development Water Quality Risk Assessment Study in the Mount Lofty Ranges Watershed Steering Committee (was dissolved in May 2004).

Number of employees Destination(s) Reasons for travel Total cost to agency*

1 Wellington, New Zealand To attend the Environment $2970.23 Protection Heritage Council Meeting

1 Italy/Germany To attend International Waste $6737.92 Management and Landfi ll symposium and eight site visits to waste treatment plants

1 Stockholm, Sweden To attend the International Conference $2037.31 on the Protection of the Environment from the effects of Ionizing Radiation

*Salary costs for staff not included in these fi gures

104

Environment Protection AuthorityGPO Box 2607Adelaide SA 5001Telephone: (08) 8204 2004Facsimile: (08) 8204 9393Freecall (country): 1800 623 445E-mail: [email protected] site: www.epa.sa.gov.au

ISSN 1322–1663September 2004

Printed on recycled paper

Environment Protection AuthorityAnnual Report 2003–2004

ENVIRONMENT PROTECTION AUTHORITY - EPA · environment protection and management. In the last twelve...

Documents

Transcript of ENVIRONMENT PROTECTION AUTHORITY - EPA · environment protection and management. In the last twelve...