ALBANY PORT
EXPANSION PROJECT
Compliance Assessment Plan
Ministerial Statement 846
May 2013
APA Port Expansion Project Compliance Assessment Plan
Page 14
ALBANY PORT EXPANSION PROJECT
COMPLIANCE ASSESSMENT PLAN
Ministerial Statement 846
Prepared by
The Albany Port Authority
Rev 3. May 2013
APA Port Expansion Project Compliance Assessment Plan
Page 1
Revisions history
DISTRIBUTION
Version
REVIEW
Author
Recipients
No. Copies/format
Date
Reviewer
Date
B.Parker
11/4/2013
A
R.Goetze
P.Mackey
1 x electronic
9/04/2013
B
R.Goetze
OEPA
1 x electronic
22/04/2013 OEPA
Rev1
R.Goetze
OEPA
1 x electronic
P.Mackey
1 x hard copy
Rev2
R.Goetze
OEPA
1 x electronic
9/5/2013
OEPA
10/5/2013
Rev3
R.Goetze
OEPA
1 x electronic
10/5/2013
OEPA
14/5/2013
APA Port Expansion Project Compliance Assessment Plan
8/5/2013
OEPA
P.Mackey
30/4/2013
8/5/2013
Page 2
Contents
1.
2.
3.
Introduction .................................................................................................................................... 4
1.1
Background ............................................................................................................................. 4
1.2
Purpose and Scope.................................................................................................................. 5
Assessment and Reporting.............................................................................................................. 6
2.1
Audit Table .............................................................................................................................. 6
2.2
Frequency of compliance reporting ...................................................................................... 14
2.3
Approach and timing of compliance assessments ................................................................ 14
2.4
Retention of compliance assessments.................................................................................. 17
2.5
Reporting non-compliances and corrective measures ......................................................... 17
2.6
Table of contents .................................................................................................................. 18
2.7
Public availability of reports.................................................................................................. 18
References .................................................................................................................................... 19
Appendix A - Ministerial Statement 846.......……………………………………………………………………………………………………….
Appendix B - Statement of Compliance……………………………………………………………………………………………………………….
APA Port Expansion Project Compliance Assessment Plan
Page 3
1.
Introduction
1.1 Background
The Albany Port Expansion Project (the Expansion Project) involves the dredging of
approximately 12 million cubic metres (Mm³) of sediment to facilitate access of Cape size vessels
and meet the needs of Southdown Joint Venture’s (SDJV’s) Southdown Magnetite Project.
Dredging will be undertaken to widen and deepen the existing shipping channel into Princess
Royal Harbour and to extend the shipping channel into King George Sound. A combination of a
Trailer Suction Hopper Dredge (TSHD) and Cutter Suction Dredge (CSD) will be used.
A portion of the dredged material will be used for reclamation of up to 9 hectares of land to
construct an additional berth adjacent to the port while the remainder will be disposed offshore
in deep water at the entrance of King George Sound.
The key components of the Expansion Project are provided in Table 1.1. A detailed description of
the proposal is provided in Section 1 of the Public Environmental Review document (Ecologia,
2007). For a description of water, mussel and sediment quality monitoring, please refer to the
Water Quality Monitoring Program (WQMP, Oceanica, 2013).
Table 1.1 Key components of the Expansion Project.
COMPONENT
Dredging
Total area to be dredged
Total duration of dredging
Stage 1 Dredging
Stage 2 Dredging
Land Reclamation (Berth 7)
Total area to be reclaimed
Construction of sea wall
DESCRIPTION
247.7 hectares (ha) including all channel batters. 47.3 ha of
which is an existing channel and has been dredged.
32 weeks
Dredging of 300,000 m³ for reclamation area by Cutter Suction
Dredge (CSD). 12 weeks.
Dredging of 11.7 Mm³ by Trailer Suction Hopper Dredge (TSHD).
20 weeks.
Up to 9 ha of land to be reclaimed at a height of + 4 m CD
Construction of a 900 m continuous rock armoured sea wall,
lined with geotextile filter cloth. This component of the works
will be managed under the CEMP.
Offshore disposal area
Disposal location
Placement of approximately 11.7 million m³ of dredged material
in deep water (-35 m CD) within an area of 250 ha located in
King George Sound
APA Port Expansion Project Compliance Assessment Plan
Page 4
1.2 Purpose and Scope
This Compliance Assessment Plan is submitted in order to fulfil Ministerial Conditions 4.1 and 4.2
of Ministerial Statement 846 (Appendix A) as outlined below.
Ministerial Condition 4.1 – The proponent shall prepare and maintain a compliance assessment
plan to the satisfaction of the CEO of the Office of the Environmental Protection Authority.
Ministerial Condition 4.2 – The proponent shall submit to the CEO of the Office of the
Environmental Protection Authority, the compliance assessment plan required by condition 4-1
prior to the commencement of the implementation of the proposal. The compliance assessment
plan shall indicate:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
The frequency of compliance reporting;
The approach and timing of compliance assessments;
The retention of compliance assessments;
Reporting of potential non-compliances and corrective actions taken;
The table of contents of compliance reports; and
Public availability of compliance reports.
APA Port Expansion Project Compliance Assessment Plan
Page 5
2.
Assessment and Reporting
2.1 Audit Table
An audit table has been prepared for Ministerial Statement 846 (Table 2.1).
The audit table contains each condition, procedure or commitment separated into audit
elements for auditing purposes, and includes the following attributes:





Audit code: Ministerial statement reference number
Subject: The environmental subject/issue
Requirement: What the proponent must do
How: The way the requirement must be undertaken /Performance Criteria
Evidence: Information or data collected to verify compliance, i.e report/letter/site
inspection requirements




Phase: Project phase
When: Specific timing and/or location
Status: Notes about the fulfilment of compliance
Further Information: Supporting information to verify compliance status
Note that the table is only a summary of conditions in Statement 846 and that the Statement
should be referred to directly for matters requiring additional clarification or information on
procedural matters.
APA Port Expansion Project Compliance Assessment Plan
Page 6
Table 2.1: Audit Table
Audit
Code
846:M1.1
Subject
Action
Proposal Implementation
The proponent shall implement the proposal as documented and
described in schedule 1 of this statement subject to the conditions
and procedures of this statement.
846:M2.1
Proponent Nomination
and Contact Details
846:M2.2
Proponent Nomination
and Contact Details
846:M3.1
Time Limit of
Authorisation
The proponent for the time being nominated by the Minister for
Environment under sections 38(6) or 38(7) of the Environmental
Protection Act 1986 is responsible for the implementation of the
proposal.
The proponent shall notify the Chief Executive Officer (CEO) of the
Office of the Environmental Protection Authority of any change of the
name and address of the proponent for the serving of notices or other
correspondence within 30 days of such change.
The authorisation to implement the proposal provided for in this
statement shall lapse and be void five years after the date of this
statement if the proposal to which this statement relates is not
substantially commenced.
The proponent shall provide the CEO with written evidence which
demonstrates that the proposal has substantially commenced on or
before the expiration of five years from the date of this statement.
846:M3.2
Time Limit of
Authorisation
846:M4.1
Compliance Reporting
846:M4.2
Compliance Reporting
The proponent shall prepare and maintain a compliance assessment
plan to the satisfaction of the CEO of the Office of the Environmental
Protection Authority.
The proponent shall submit to the CEO of the Office of the
Environmental Protection Authority, the compliance assessment plan
required by condition 4-1 prior to the commencement of the
implementation of the proposal. The compliance assessment plan
shall indicate: 1. the frequency of compliance reporting; 2. the
approach and timing of compliance assessments; 3. the retention of
compliance assessments; 4. reporting of potential non-compliances
and corrective actions taken; 5. the table of contents of compliance
reports; and 6. public availability of compliance reports.
846:M4.3
Compliance Reporting
The proponent shall assess compliance with conditions in accordance
with the compliance assessment plan required by condition 4-1.
846:M4.4
Compliance Reporting
846:M4.5
Compliance Reporting
The proponent shall retain reports of all compliance assessments
described in the compliance assessment plan required by condition 41 and shall make those reports available when requested by the CEO
of the Office of the Environmental Protection Authority.
The proponent shall advise the CEO of the Office of the
Environmental Protection Authority of any potential non-compliance
within seven days of that non-compliance being known.
846:M4.6
Compliance Reporting
The proponent shall submit a compliance assessment report annually
from the date of commencement of proposal implementation
addressing the previous twelve month period or other period as
agreed by the CEO of the Office of the Environmental Protection
Authority. The compliance assessment report shall: 1. be endorsed by
the proponent’s CEO or a person delegated to sign on the CEO’s
behalf; 2. include a statement as to whether the proponent has
complied with the conditions; 3. identify all potential non-compliances
and describe corrective and preventative actions taken; 4. be made
publicly available in accordance with the approved compliance
assessment plan; and 5. indicate any proposed changes to the
compliance assessment plan required by condition 4-1.
APA Port Expansion Project Compliance Assessment Plan
How
Provide details of
implementation of key proposal
characteristics as described in
schedule 1 of Statement 846
Proponent nominated to
implement the proposal
Written correspondence
providing the change in name
and/or address of the proponent
Evidence
Details provided in Annual
Compliance Assessment
Report
Proponent details as listed
on Ministerial Statement
846 or as communicated
to the OEPA
Letter to the CEO of the
OEPA notifying change of
contact name and
address of the proponent
Written correspondence
Provide evidence that
demonstrates substantial
commencement
Written correspondence
Letter notifying the CEO
of the OEPA that the
proposal has substantially
commenced
Prepare Compliance
Assessment Plan utilizing OEPA
guidelines
Submit Compliance Assessment
Plan indicating: 1. frequency of
reporting, 2. approach and
timing of compliance
assessments. 3. Retention of
compliance assessments. 4.
Reporting of potential and
actual non-compliances and
corrective actions taken. 5.
Table of contents of compliance
reports and 6. Public availability
of compliance reports.
Compliance assessment will be
undertaken in accordance with
the Compliance Assessment
Plan
Retain and make available
reports of all compliance
assessments in accordance with
Compliance Assessment Plan
Compliance assessment.
Written correspondence
describing the non-compliance
will be sent to the CEO of the
OEPA
Submit annual Compliance
Assessment Reports which 1.
Are endorsed by the proponent’s
CEO, or approved delegate, 2.
Include statements of
compliance, 3. Identify all
potential and actual noncompliances and
corrective/preventative actions,
4. Are made publically available
and 5. Indicate any proposed
changes to the compliance
assessment plan required by
Compliance Assessment
Plan
Phase
When
Overall
Ongoing
Overall
Ongoing
Overall
Within 30 days of such change
Construction
On or before 18 November 2015.
Construction
On or before 18 November 2015.
Overall
Prior to implementation of the proposal
and as required thereafter.
PreConstruction
At least 6 months prior to the first
compliance report required by condition
4-6 or prior to ground disturbing activity,
whichever is sooner.
Overall
Ongoing (as per requirements of CAP)
Overall
Ongoing and when requested by the
CEO
Overall
Within seven business days of the
potential non-compliance being known
Overall
The First CAR to be submitted 15 months
from date of commencement of proposal
implementation, then annually from the
date of submission of the first compliance
assessment report. Report due 31 April
Annually.
Status
Further
Information
Compliance Assessment
Plan
Compliance Assessment
Report
Compliance Assessment
Report
Letter to CEO of the
OEPA advising of noncompliance.
Compliance Assessment
Report
Compliance Assessment
Report
Page 7
846:M5A.1
846:M5A.2
Water Quality Monitoring
Program
Water Quality Monitoring
Program
Prior to the commencement of dredging activities, the proponent shall
prepare and implement a Water Quality Monitoring Program as a
component of the proponent’s Dredging and Land Reclamation
Management Plan to the requirements of the CEO of the Office of the
Environmental Protection Authority on the advice of the Department of
Health and Department of Environment and Conservation
The Water Quality Monitoring Program shall be prepared in
consultation with the City of Albany, Department of Health,
Department of Environment and Conservation, Department of Water,
Department of Fisheries; and local stakeholders including, but not
limited to, the commercial fishing and aquaculture industries, tour
operators, recreational and conservation interests
condition 4-1.
Prepare and implement Water
Quality Monitoring Program to
the requirements of the CEO
Initiate Albany Dredging
Reference Group (ADRG) to
include local government,
regulators and key
stakeholders/community
members as indicated in
condition 5A-2.
ADRG to review draft Water
Quality Monitoring Program.
Water Quality Monitoring
Report
Preconstruction
Prior to the commencement of dredging
activities
Overall
Prior to the commencement of dredging
activities, Ongoing
Overall
Prior to the commencement of dredging
activities, Ongoing
Letter to CEO of the
OEPA advising of trigger
level exceedance and
contingency measures to
be implemented.
Overall
Prior to the commencement of dredging
activities, Ongoing
Records of dredge
activities to be provided to
OEPA/DEC.
Overall
Must not dredge area described in
Schedule 1 between 1 November and 28
February in any year.
Overall
Ongoing
Preconstruction
Prior to the commencement of dredging
Dredging and Land
Reclamation Management
Plan
Albany Dredging
Reference Group Minutes
and Chairman’s Reports
Written Correspondence
846:M5A.3
846:M5A.4
846:M5.1
846:M5.2
846:M5.3
Water Quality Monitoring
Program
Water Quality Monitoring
Program
Marine Benthic
Communities
Marine Benthic
Communities - Seagrass
communities
Marine Benthic
Communities - Seagrass
communities
The Water Quality Monitoring Program shall be prepared and
implemented to achieve the Environmental Quality Objectives
specified in Environmental Protection Authority (February 2000) and
the requirements of conditions 5, 7, 8 and 10 of this Statement and
shall include: a. A map defining the levels of Ecological Protection
that will apply for the duration of dredging and disposal activity and
following the completion of this activity; b. Environmental quality
indicators and associated ‘trigger’ levels based on the guidelines and
recommended approaches in the Australian and New Zealand
Guideline for Fresh and Marine Water Quality (ANZECC &
ARMCAMZ, 2000) and the Environmental Quality Reference
Document for Cockburn Sound (EPA, 2005) for assessing
performance against the Environmental Quality Objectives; c.
Protocols and schedules for reporting performance against the
Environmental Quality Objectives; d. Contingency measures to be
implemented in the event that monitoring demonstrates that the
environmental quality ‘trigger’ levels have been exceeded at any point
during the dredging and disposal program; and e. Details of the
consultation process undertaken in accordance with condition 5A-2
including details of the parties consulted, the manner of consultation
and the outcomes of consultation.
If the Water Quality Monitoring Program requiring in condition 5A-1
demonstrates that the environmental quality ‘trigger’ levels are not
met, the proponent shall immediately report to the CEO of the Office
of the Environmental Protection Authority with the contingency
measures to be implemented
The proponent shall not dredge the shipping channel using a trailer
suction hopper dredge as described in Schedule 1 of this statement
between 1 November and 28 February in any year.
The proponent shall ensure that the implementation of the proposal
does not cause the permanent loss of seagrass, either through direct
or indirect impacts, other than the seagrass located within the zones
of permanent loss in: i. King George Sound, as shown in Figure 4 in
Schedule 1 of this statement (not to exceed 16.6 hectares); and ii.
Princess Royal Harbour, as shown in Figure 5 in Schedule 1 of this
statement (not to exceed 0.8 hectares), unless authorised by the
Minister for Environment. Note: ‘Permanent loss’ is defined as the
mortality of, or long-term serious damage to, seagrass communities
Prior to the commencement of dredging, the proponent shall establish
a monitoring program to monitor underwater light attenuation and
seagrass health (by way of seagrass shoot density) using permanent
relocatable quadrats, to allow for repeated measures over time,
APA Port Expansion Project Compliance Assessment Plan
Prepare and implement Water
Quality Monitoring Program to
meet requirements of conditions
5, 7, 8 and 10.
Prepare maps.
Describe environmental quality
indicators and ‘trigger’ levels,
protocols for reporting
performance, and contingency
measures for when a ‘trigger’
level is exceeded and
consultation process undertaken
as indicated in condition 5A-2.
Written correspondence
Compliance Assessment
No dredging will occur using a
trailer suction hopper dredge as
described in Schedule 1 and
Condition 5-1
Implement Water Quality
Monitoring Program
Include monitoring of seagrass
to ensure no permanent loss
through direct or indirect impacts
(other than that within the zone
of permanent loss) in WQMP.
Ensure seagrass loss does not
exceed 16.6 ha in KGS or 0.8
hectares in PRH.
Develop marine benthic
community seagrass and light
monitoring sites (reference and
impact) inside Princess Royal
Water Quality Monitoring
Report.
Compliance Assessment
Report.
Compliance Assessment
Report.
Compliance Assessment
Report.
Water Quality Monitoring
Report
Aerial
photography/satellite
imagery
Water Quality Monitoring
Program (Marine Benthic
Communities)
Page 8
846:M5.4
Marine Benthic
Communities - Seagrass
communities
846:M5.5
Marine Benthic
Communities - Seagrass
communities
846:M5.6
846:M5.7
846:M5.8
846:M5.9
846:M5.10
Marine Benthic
Communities - Seagrass
communities
Marine Benthic
Communities - Seagrass
communities
Marine Benthic
Communities - Seagrass
communities
Marine Benthic
Communities - Seagrass
communities
Marine Benthic
Communities - Reef
communities
before, during and after the implementation of the proposal. This
monitoring program is to establish the frequency and locations of
monitoring. The monitoring locations shall be established in Princess
Royal Harbour and King George Sound but outside the zones of
permanent loss in condition 5-2 and include: a. impact monitoring
sites - at locations where seagrass is found and where water clarity
has the potential to be affected by dredging operations; and b.
reference monitoring sites - which are similar to each impact
monitoring site in all respects including water depths and the
presence of seagrass and where water clarity does not have the
potential to be affected by dredging operations, to the requirements of
the CEO of the Office of the Environmental Protection Authority. The
monitoring program is to include protocols and procedures which are
consistent with the Environmental Protection Authority’s Manual of
Standard Operating Procedures for Environmental Monitoring against
the Cockburn Sound Environmental Quality Criteria (March 2005) or
any other appropriate protocol acceptable to the CEO of the Office of
the Environmental Protection Authority
Prior to the commencement of dredging the proponent shall
commence implementing the monitoring program required by
condition 5-4 to the satisfaction of the CEO of the Office of the
Environmental Protection Authority
Prior to the commencement of dredging, the proponent shall submit a
report on pre-dredging underwater light attenuation and seagrass
shoot density data from the locations required by condition 5-4. In the
th
report the proponent shall establish the: a. calculated median, 20
st
and 1 percentile of pre-dredging seagrass shoot density for each
th
st
impact monitoring site; and b. calculated median, 20 and 1
percentile of pre-dredging seagrass shoot density for each reference
monitoring site
During dredging, the proponent shall monitor underwater light and
seagrass health in accordance with the monitoring program required
by condition 5-4, to ensure that the following seagrass health criterion
is met during the dredging operations. a. The median seagrass shoot
st
density for each impact monitoring site is greater than the 1
percentile of pre-dredging seagrass shoot density determined for
each impact monitoring site.
In the event that monitoring required by conditions 5-4 and 5-5
indicate that the seagrass health criterion in condition 5-7 is not being
met, or that the proponent is unable to undertake seagrass health
monitoring during dredging, the proponent shall: a. report such
findings including evidence which allows the determination of the
cause of the decline in seagrass health; and b. immediately cease
and relocate dredging activities. The proponent shall report the above
to the CEO of the Office of the Environmental Protection Authority
within 4 days of the decline in seagrass health being identified
Following the completion of dredging, the proponent shall
demonstrate that the median seagrass shoot density at impact sites is
th
greater than or equal to the 20 percentile of pre-dredging seagrass
shoot density for each impact site as determined in accordance with
condition 5-6 (a) for at least two consecutive years
The proponent shall report to the CEO of the Office of the
Environmental Protection Authority the total loss of seagrass
communities: a. 2 months; b. 12 months, and c. 24 months, following
the completion of the implementation of the proposal to demonstrate
that the requirements of condition 5-2 have been met. The reports
shall include co-ordinates and a map showing the areas of seagrass
losses caused by the proposal
The proponent shall ensure that the proposal does not cause the
mortality of, or long-term serious damage to, the high relief reef
communities at Gio Batta Patch and Michaelmas Reef in King George
Sound as shown in Figure 3 of schedule 1.
APA Port Expansion Project Compliance Assessment Plan
Harbour and King George
Sound but outside the zones or
permanent loss as described in
Condition 5-2.
Commence implementation of
Water Quality Program required
under condition 5-3 which is
inferred by condition 5-4
Complete baseline survey
monitoring of light attenuation
and seagrass shoot density as
described in condition 5-5.
Implement continuous
underwater light logging and
seagrass monitoring as
described in condition 5-6
Immediately cease dredging
activities in accordance with
condition 5-7.
Written correspondence
Implement monitoring of
seagrass shoot density for at
least two consecutive years
upon the completion of
dredging.
Prepare seagrass shoot density
reports to be submitted in
Compliance Assessment Report
Compile seagrass direct and
indirect loss reports and provide
to the CEO of the OEPA as
described in condition 5-9.
Written Correspondence
Monitor reef communities at Gio
Batta Patch, Herald Rocks and
Michaelmas Reef as described
in condition 5-10.
Compliance Assessment
Reports
Water Quality Monitoring
Program (Marine Benthic
Communities)
Results and data of
baseline survey presented
in Water Quality
Monitoring Program.
Albany Port Expansion
Baseline Monitoring –
Water Quality and
Seagrass Health Report
Water Quality Monitoring
Program (Marine Benthic
Communities),
Weekly underwater light
reports and monthly
seagrass health reports
(to be published on APA
website)
Letter to the CEO of the
OEPA detailing decline in
seagrass loss and
termination/relocation of
dredging activities within 4
days of the decline in
seagrass health being
identified.
Compliance Assessment
Report.
PreConstruction
Prior to the commencement of dredging
PreConstruction
Prior to the commencement of dredging
Construction
During dredging
Overall
Within 4 days of the decline in seagrass
health being identified
Overall
Following the completion of dredging
Overall
Report at 2 months, 12 months and 24
months following the completion of
proposal.
Overall
Ongoing
Water Quality Monitoring
Reports (Marine Benthic
Communities)
Seagrass reports.
Letter to the CEO of the
OEPA demonstrating
requirements of condition
5 have been met.
Reef Community Reports
to be submitted to the
CEO of the OEPA.
Page 9
846:M5.11
846:M6.1
846:M6.2
846:M6.3
846:M7.1
846:M7.2
846:M7.3
846:M7.4
Marine Benthic
Communities - Reef
communities
Seagrass Rehabilitation
and Monitoring
Seagrass Rehabilitation
and Monitoring
Seagrass Rehabilitation
and Monitoring
Marine Water and
Sediment Quality
(Mercury and Other
Contaminants)
Marine Water and
Sediment Quality
(Mercury and Other
Contaminants)
Marine Water and
Sediment Quality
(Mercury and Other
Contaminants)
Marine Water and
Sediment Quality
(Mercury and Other
To verify that the requirements of condition 5-11 are met the
proponent shall: a. submit a proposed monitoring program to measure
the cover, diversity and abundance of high relief reef communities at
Gio Batta Patch and Michaelmas Reef to the requirements of the
CEO of the Office of the Environmental Protection Authority; b.
undertake baseline survey of the reef communities prior to the
commencement of dredging; c. undertake surveys following the
completion of dredging; and d. submit a report with results of the
surveys in items b) and c) above to demonstrate that the
requirements of condition 5-11 has been met.
Prior to the commencement of dredging and reclamation the
proponent shall commence the rehabilitation of a minimum of 1
hectare of seagrass in Princess Royal Harbour using seagrass donor
material from the zone of loss in Figure 5 of Schedule 1 at a planting
density that achieves 75% average cover in those areas within 10
years following planting at a location(s) to the requirements of the
CEO of the Office of the Environmental Protection Authority on advice
of the Department of Water and the Department of Environment and
Conservation. The species to be used in seagrass rehabilitation shall
include Posidonia sinuosa and Posidonia australis.
The proponent shall design and implement a monitoring program for
the seagrass rehabilitation required by condition 6-1 within 1 year of
completion of construction activities. The monitoring program shall
include monitoring of the survival and shoot density of rehabilitated
seagrass annually for the four years following rehabilitation to confirm
that survival and growth are sufficient to attain 1 hectare of seagrass
meadow of 75% average cover within 10 years following planting
The proponent shall report to the Office of the Environmental
Protection Authority on the progress of seagrass rehabilitation
required by condition 6-2 annually for four years following planting,
and then every two years thereafter until it can be demonstrated to
the satisfaction of the CEO of the Office of the Environmental
Protection Authority on advice of the Department of Water and
Department of Environment and Conservation that the requirement of
condition 6-1 has been met
The proponent shall ensure that the dredging of the portion of the
shipping channel shown in Figure 6 of Schedule 1 is undertaken in a
manner that does not cause any overflow of turbid water into the
environment from the dredge vessel.
From commencement of dredging of the shipping channel in King
George Sound and the disposal of material at the offshore disposal
ground, the proponent shall ensure that contaminant levels in the
vicinity of the dredge channel and the disposal ground in water and
sediment are below the ANZECC/ARMCANZ 2000 guidelines and the
Guidelines for Managing Risks in Recreational Water (National Health
and Medical Research Council, 2008) for mercury and other
contaminants including silver, tributyltin oxide and other heavy metals,
polychlorinated biphenyls and organochlorines. The guideline for
mercury in water is 0.1 micrograms per litre and mercury in sediment
is 0.15 milligrams per kilogram.
Prior to the commencement of dredging the proponent shall develop
and submit a monitoring program to monitor mercury and other
contaminants in sediments and water to the requirements of the CEO
of the Office of the Environmental Protection Authority on advice of
the Department of Environment and Conservation and Department of
Health. The monitoring program shall include the frequency and
locations of monitoring sites to be established
The proponent shall implement the monitoring program required by
condition 7-3, prior to, during, and following the completion of
dredging and disposal activities
APA Port Expansion Project Compliance Assessment Plan
Develop and implement
monitoring program for reef
communities as described in
condition 5-11.
Written Correspondence.
Replant a minimum of 1 ha of
seagrass in Princess Royal
Harbour as per condition 6-1.
Design and implement a
seagrass rehabilitation
monitoring program in
accordance with the
requirements of condition 6.
Monitor seagrass rehabilitation
progress annually as per
condition 6.
The Compliance Assessment
Reports shall include the results
of the seagrass monitoring.
The portion of the shipping
channel shown in Figure 6 shall
be dredged in a manner that
does not cause any
overflow of turbid water.
The material will be removed by
accurately locating the dredge
suction head using differential
GPS and selectively dredging to
a depth of two meters.
Conduct water and sediment
quality monitoring of toxicants
within the dredge plume during
both Stage 1 and Stage 2
dredging.
Develop and submit monitoring
program for
toxicants/contaminants in
accordance with the
requirements of condition 7.
Implement Water Quality
Monitoring Program (Water and
Sediment Quality)
Compliance Assessment
Reports
Water Quality Monitoring
Reports (Marine Benthic
Communities).
Overall
b) Prior to the commencement of
dredging, Ongoing
Overall
Prior to the commencement of dredging
and reclamation
Overall
Within 1 year of completion of
construction activities
Overall
Annually for four years following planting,
and then every two years thereafter until
it can be demonstrated the requirements
of 6-1 have been met to the satisfaction
of the CEO
Overall
Ongoing
Overall
From commencement of dredging of the
shipping channel in King George Sound
and the disposal of material at the
offshore disposal ground
PreConstruction
Prior to the commencement of dredging
Overall
Ongoing
Reef Community Reports
to be submitted to the
CEO of the OEPA.
Compliance Assessment
Report
Transplanting/Harvesting
video footage.
Seagrass transplantation
results/report.
Seagrass Rehabilitation
and Monitoring
Management Plan
Compliance Assessment
Reports
Area of sediment removed
without overflow
verified by hydrographic
surveys.
Compliance Assessment
Reports
Report on water and
sediment quality on a ten
day working basis.
Report to be submitted to
the OEPA
Water Quality Monitoring
Program (Water and
Sediment Quality)
Reports on water and
sediment quality.
Page 10
Contaminants)
846:M7.5
846:M7.6
846:M7.7
846:M7.8
846:M8.1
846:M8.2
Marine Water and
Sediment Quality
(Mercury and Other
Contaminants)
The proponent shall undertake sediment quality monitoring for
mercury and other contaminants bi-annually for two years following
the completion of dredging activities to ensure ANZECC/ARMCANZ
2000 criteria referred to in condition 7-2 are being met
Marine Water and
Sediment Quality
(Mercury and Other
Contaminants)
The proponent shall submit monitoring results required by: a.
condition 7-2 every 2 weeks from the commencement of Stage 2
dredging activities; and b. condition 7-5 within 2 months following the
completion of dredging and every 12 months following the completion
of dredging for two consecutive years. to the CEO of the Office of the
Environmental Protection Authority.
In the event that monitoring indicates that the requirement of condition
7-2 is not being met or not being likely to be met: 1. the proponent
shall report such findings to the CEO of the Office of the
Environmental Protection Authority within 2 days of the exceedance
being identified; 2. the proponent shall provide evidence which allows
determination of the cause of the exceedance; 3. if determined by the
CEO of the Office of the Environmental Protection Authority to be a
result of activities undertaken in implementing the proposal, the
proponent shall submit actions to be taken to remediate the decline
within 2 days of the determination being made to the CEO of the
Office of the Environmental Protection Authority; and 4. the proponent
shall implement actions to remediate the exceedance of the criteria in
condition 7-2 upon approval of the CEO of the Office of the
Environmental Protection Authority on advice of the Department of
Environment and Conservation and shall continue until such time the
CEO of the Office of the Environmental Protection Authority
determines that the remedial actions may cease.
The proponent shall make the monitoring reports required by
conditions 7-6 publicly available in a manner approved by the CEO of
the Office of the Environmental Protection Authority
Marine Water and
Sediment Quality
(Mercury and Other
Contaminants)
Marine Water and
Sediment Quality
(Mercury and Other
Contaminants)
Sentinel Mussel
Monitoring
Sentinel Mussel
Monitoring
846:M8.3
Sentinel Mussel
Monitoring
846:M8.4
Sentinel Mussel
Monitoring
846:M8.5
Sentinel Mussel
Monitoring
The proponent shall ensure that the implementation of the proposal
does not compromise the environmental objective for the
maintenance of seafood safe for human consumption in King George
Sound and Oyster Harbour.
To verify the requirements of condition 8-1, prior to the
commencement of dredging the proponent shall develop and submit a
Sentinel Mussel Monitoring Program to the requirements of the CEO
of the Office of the Environmental Protection Authority on advice of
the Department of Fisheries, Department of Health and the
Department of Environment and Conservation. The monitoring
program is to include protocols and procedures which are consistent
with the Western Australian Shellfish Quality Assurance Program
(February 2004). The Sentinel Mussel Monitoring Program shall
operate in the vicinity of Mistaken Island within King George Sound
and at other location as agreed with the CEO of the Office of the
Environmental Protection Authority
Subject to the requirements of conditions 8-4 and 8-5, the proponent
shall implement the Sentinel Mussel Monitoring Program required by
condition 8-2 prior to, during and for at least 12 months following the
completion of dredging
Prior to the commencement of dredging activities the proponent shall
deploy sentinel mussels and harvest and analyse these mussels after
six weeks to determine background concentrations of mercury.
Immediately prior to dredging the proponent shall deploy sentinel
mussels and harvest these mussels after six weeks for monitoring of
contaminant levels in Clause 2 of Standard 1.4.1 Contaminants and
Natural Toxicants of the Australia and New Zealand Food Standards
APA Port Expansion Project Compliance Assessment Plan
Undertake sediment quality
monitoring for
mercury/contaminants biannually for two years following
dredging.
Submit sediment quality
monitoring results as required
per condition 7-6.
Reports to be submitted to
the OEPA
Overall
Bi-annually for two years following the
completion of dredging activities
Overall
Results submitted every 2 weeks from
the commencement of Stage 2 dredging
activities
Overall
Within 2 days of the exceedance being
identified
Overall
Within 7 days of a request for monitoring
reports being made
Overall
Ongoing
PreConstruction
Prior to the commencement of dredging
Overall
Prior to, during and for at least 12 months
following the completion of dredging
Results of sentinel mussel
monitoring submitted to
the CEO of the OEPA,
DoH and DoF prior to
dredging and every six
weeks during
implementation of Stage
2.
Preconstruction
Prior to the commencement of dredging
Water Quality Monitoring
Report (Toxicants in
Seafood).
Preconstruction
Immediately prior to dredging
Compliance Assessment
Reports
Fortnightly sediment
quality reports.
Bi-annual sediment quality
reports.
Written Correspondence
Letter to the CEO of the
OEPA reporting on
exceedance of
contaminants in
water/sediment
Make reports publically available
online.
Reports published on APA
website.
Sentinel mussels will be
deployed and monitored for
toxicants at two of the WA
Shellfish Quality Assurance
Program Mussel Water Quality
Sampling Locations.
Water Quality Monitoring
Reports (Toxicants in
Seafood)
Compliance Assessment
Reports
Develop and submit a Sentinel
Mussel Monitoring Program to
meet the requirements of
condition 8-1 and 8-2.
Water Quality Monitoring
Program (Toxicants in
Seafood)
Implement Water Quality
Monitoring Program (Toxicants
in Seafood)
Compliance Assessment
Reports
Sentinel mussels will be
deployed 6-7 weeks prior to the
commencement of dredging and
harvested after six weeks.
The mussels will be sent to a
NATA accredited laboratory to
be analysed for toxicants,
including mercury.
Sentinel mussels will be
deployed prior to the
commencement of dredging and
harvested as described in
Page 11
846:M8.6
846:M8.7
846:M8.8
846:M8.9
Sentinel Mussel
Monitoring
Sentinel Mussel
Monitoring
Sentinel Mussel
Monitoring
Sentinel Mussel
Monitoring
846:M8.10
Sentinel Mussel
Monitoring
846:M9.1
Introduced Marine
Species and Dredging
Equipment
846:M9.2
Introduced Marine
Species and Dredging
Equipment
Code and other contaminants on the advice of the Department of
Health. Fresh sentinel mussels shall then be deployed at six week
intervals, then harvested and analysed as above, and this regime
continued during dredging and for at least six months following
completion of dredging. The sample size and analysis of samples
shall consist of at least five mussels each time.
If the level of mercury in sentinel mussels at any site harvested under
condition 8-5 exceeds a trigger level of 0.4 mg/kg (mean value), or if
the level of any other contaminant in sentinel mussels at any site
harvested under condition 8-5 exceeds the trigger level for that
contaminant as specified in the Sentinel Mussel Monitoring Program:
a. the proponent shall report such findings to the CEO of the Office of
the Environmental Protection Authority, Department of Health and
Department of Fisheries within 24 hours of the exceedance being
identified; b. the proponent shall provide evidence which allows
determination of the cause of the exceedance; c. if determined by the
CEO of the Office of the Environmental Protection Authority to be a
result of activities undertaken in implementing the proposal, the
proponent shall submit actions to be taken to remediate the cause of
the exceedance within 2 days of the determination being made to the
CEO of the Office of the Environmental Protection Authority; and d.
the proponent shall implement actions to remediate the exceedance
of the trigger level upon approval of the CEO of the Office of the
Environmental Protection Authority on advice of the Department of
Health and Department of Fisheries and shall continue until such time
the CEO of the Office of the Environmental Protection Authority
determines that the remedial actions may cease.
Subject to the requirements of condition 8-6, the proponent shall
ensure that the environmental objective of the maintenance of
seafood safe for human consumption is met, and in doing so ensure
contaminant levels in sentinel mussels do not exceed the standards
specified in the Table to Clause 2 of Standard 1.4.1 Contaminants
and Natural Toxicants of the Australia and New Zealand Food
Standards Code and standards for other contaminants on the advice
of the Department of Health
If the level of one or more of the contaminants in sentinel mussels
harvested under conditions 8-4 or 8-5 exceeds the levels set by
condition 8-7, the proponent is to report that exceedance to the CEO
of the Office of the Environmental Protection Authority, the
Department of Fisheries and the Department of Health as soon as
possible, but in any event, not later than 24 hours of the exceedance
being identified
The proponent shall submit the results of the monitoring programme
required by condition 8-2 to the CEO of the Office of the
Environmental Protection Authority, the Department of Health and the
Department of Fisheries; 1. prior to the commencement of dredging;
2. every 6 weeks during the implementation of Stage 2 dredging; and
then at such intervals as required by the Sentinel Mussel Monitoring
Program required by condition 8-2.
The proponent shall make the monitoring reports required by
conditions 8-9 publicly available in a manner approved by the CEO of
the Office of the Environmental Protection Authority
Prior to the arrival of any dredging and other marine equipment and
vessels associated with the proposal, the proponent shall prepare a
Marine Pests Management Strategy capable of detecting and
managing any introduced marine pest to the requirements of the CEO
of the Office of the Environmental Protection Authority on advice of
the Department of Fisheries
Prior to commencement of dredging and within 48 hours following
entry of dredging and other marine equipment and other vessels
associated with the proposal within the Albany Port Authority area as
shown in Figure 1 in Schedule 1 of this statement, the proponent shall
arrange and undertake an inspection by an appropriately qualified
expert to ensure that: 1. there is no sediment on or within the
dredging equipment; 2. ballast water (if any) has been managed
according to the Australian Quarantine Inspection Service ballast
water requirements; and 3. any fouling organisms on or in the
dredging equipment do not present a risk to the ecosystem integrity of
the marine waters of Albany harbours as shown in Figure 1 in
APA Port Expansion Project Compliance Assessment Plan
Condition 8-5.
Mussels will be sampled and
analysed as described in
Condition 8-5.
Results of sentinel mussel
monitoring submitted to
the CEO of the OEPA,
DoH and DoF.
Investigation to determine cause
of exceedance.
Submit actions to be taken to
remediate the cause of the
exceedance within 2 days if
found to be a result of proposal
activitites as described in
Condition 8-6.
Implement remediation actions
under circumstances detailed in
condition 8-6.
Overall
Within 24 hours of the exceedance being
identified.
Within 2 days of the determination being
made to the CEO.
Overall
Ongoing
Overall
No later than 24 hours of the exceedance
being identified
Overall
Prior to the commencement of dredging
and then every 6 weeks during the
implementation of Stage 2 dredging.
Overall
Within 7 days of a request for monitoring
reports being made
Overall
Prior to the arrival of any dredging and
other marine equipment and vessels
associated with the proposal
Preconstruction
Prior to the commencement of dredging
and within 48 hours following entry of
dredging and other marine equipment
and other vessels associated with the
proposal within the Albany Port Authority
area
Letter to the CEO of the
OEPA, DoG and DoF on
exceedance of mercury in
sentinel mussels within 24
hours.
Laboratory reports.
Report findings to the CEO,
Dept of Health, and Dept of
Fisheries within 24 hours of the
exceedance being identified
Written Correspondence
Ensure seafood is maintained
for the safe consumption by
humans by monitoring and
reporting toxicant levels in
sentinel mussels.
Written correspondence
Submit results to CEO of the
OEPA, DoH and DoF as
described in Condition 8-9.
Make reports publically
available,
Prepare a Marine Pests
Management Strategy prior to
arrival of any marine equipment
as described in Condition 9-1.
Qualified expert to undertake
inspection of vessels to meet
requirements of Condition 9-2.
Compliance Assessment
Report
Letter to the CEO of the
OEPA, DoG and DoF on
exceedance of
contaminants in sentinel
mussels within 24 hours.
Reports/laboratory results
on sentinel mussel
monitoring.
Reports published on APA
website.
Marine Pests
Management Strategy
Shipping/vessel
schedule/logs.
Inspection Report/Results.
Page 12
846:M9.3
846:M9.4
846:M9.5
846:M10.1
Introduced Marine
Species and Dredging
Equipment
Introduced Marine
Species and Dredging
Equipment
Introduced Marine
Species and Dredging
Equipment
Maintenance of
aquaculture
846:M10.2
Maintenance of
aquaculture
846:M10.3
Maintenance of
aquaculture
846:M10.4
Maintenance of
aquaculture
Schedule 1 of this statement.
The proponent shall manage any sediment or fouling organism found
as a consequence of the inspection required by condition 9-2, in
accordance with the Marine Pests Management Strategy required by
condition 9-1, prior to the commencement of dredging, to the
requirements of the CEO of the Office of the Environmental Protection
Authority on advice of the Department of Fisheries.
In the event that the dredging equipment is to be transferred from the
Albany Port Authority area to another location within Western
Australian territorial waters following completion of dredging and
disposal activities, the proponent shall undertake an investigation
employing an appropriately qualified marine scientist to identify the
presence of / the potential for introduced marine pest species in
accordance with the Marine Pests Management Strategy required by
condition 9-1.
In the event that any introduced marine pest species are detected, the
proponent shall implement the Marine Pests Management Strategy
required by condition 9-1 prior to the dredge equipment being moved
from the Albany Port Authority area to ensure that introduced marine
pest species are not transferred to other locations within Western
Australian territorial waters to the requirements of the CEO of the
Office of the Environmental Protection Authority on advice of the
Department of Fisheries
The proponent shall ensure that the implementation of the proposal
does not cause the Environmental Quality Objective for the
‘Maintenance of aquaculture’ to be compromised at the aquaculture
operations in the vicinity of Mistaken Island
Prior to the commencement of dredging the proponent shall develop a
monitoring program for measuring turbidity which includes turbidity
trigger levels for management and contingency actions in order to
demonstrate the requirements of condition 10-1 are being met
The proponent shall implement the monitoring program and monitor
turbidity against the turbidity trigger levels required by condition 10-2
In the event the monitoring required by condition 10-3 indicates that
the requirements of condition 10-1 are not being met or are not likely
to be met, the proponent shall immediately provide and implement
proposed management measures to the satisfaction of the CEO of the
Office of the Environmental Protection Authority on advice of the
Department of Fisheries and the Department of Water
APA Port Expansion Project Compliance Assessment Plan
Manage any sediment or fouling
organism as required by
condition 9-3.
Qualified marine scientist to
undertake inspection of dredging
equipment for marine pests prior
to departure.
Implement Marine Pest
Management Strategy and liaise
with OEPA/DoF if marine pest
species are detected.
Continually log underwater light
and measure total suspended
solids at site within the vicinity of
Mistaken Island.
Develop monitoring program for
turbidity
Implement Water Quality
Monitoring Program (Turbidity)
prior to commencement of
dredging.
Provide and implement
management measures in the
event of non-compliance as
specified in condition 10-4.
Written correspondence.
Written correspondence
with CEO of OEPA and
DoF on any sediment or
fouling organism found
during inspection.
Overall
Prior to the commencement of dredging
Overall
In the event that dredging equipment is to
be transferred from the Albany Port
Authority Area, Ongoing
Overall
In the event that any introduced marine
pest species are detected, Ongoing
Overall
Ongoing
PreConstruction
Prior to the commencement of dredging
Overall
Ongoing
Overall
In the event that monitoring required by
condition 10-3 indicates that the
requirements of condition 10-1 are not
being met or are not likely to be met,
Ongoing
Inspection report/results.
Inspection report/results.
Written correspondence
with CEO of OEPA and
DoF on any detected
marine pest species.
Water Quality Monitoring
Report (Turbidity)
Turbidity results submitted
to CEO of the OEPA, DoH
and DoF
Water Quality Monitoring
Program (Turbidity)
Water Quality Monitoring
Report(Turbidity)
Turbidity results submitted
to CEO of the OEPA, DoH
and DoF
Remediation/management
plan.
Letter to the CEO of the
OEPA, DoF and DoW.
Page 13
2.2 Frequency of compliance reporting
The first compliance report shall be submitted 15 months from the date of commencement of
proposal implementation. At the time of preparing this Compliance Assessment Plan, the only
component of the proposal that has been implemented is the rehabilitation of 1 hectare of
seagrass in Princess Royal Harbour (Condition 6). This component was completed on January 31,
2012 and therefore the first Compliant Assessment Report is expected to be submitted by April
31, 2013 however extension has been granted for the first Compliance Assessment Report to be
submitted 31 July 2013. Each subsequent report shall be submitted annually by 31 April reporting
from the period 31 January to 31 January.
2.3 Approach and timing of compliance assessments
The Albany Port Authority shall on an annual basis assess compliance with all conditions of
Ministerial Statement 846 as outlined in the Audit Table provided as Table 2.1.
In summary, the compliance assessment will:
 Review each condition listed in the Compliance Audit Table, and determine Albany Port
Authority’s compliance.
 Address any non-compliance identified during the compliance assessment process in more
detail.
 Include the identification of any remedial actions taken to mitigate the impacts of noncompliance.
 Identify any contingency measures that have been implemented to reduce the potential for
any identified non-compliance reoccurring.
Where a condition of Ministerial Statement 846 requires implementation of an Environmental
Monitoring Program, the assessment of compliance status shall also:

Detail whether each of the requirements specified in the Environmental Monitoring
Program have been, are being, have not or are not being fulfilled;

review the performance of the Environmental Monitoring Program in achieving
environmental outcomes required; and

review the effectiveness of the Environmental Monitoring Program in verifying whether
objectives are met or in adequately monitoring the relevant factors.
Compliance with the conditions of Statement 846 will be assessed as outlined in the Approach
and Timing Table below (Table 2.2).
APA Port Expansion Project Compliance Assessment Plan
Page 14
Table 2.2: Approach and Timing Table
Audit Code (refer
to Audit Table)
846:M1.1
846:M2.2
846:M3.1 & M3.2
846:M4.1 & M4.2
846:M4.3
846:M4.4
846:M4.5
846:M4.6
846:M5A.1,
M5A.2 & M5A.3
846:M5A.4
846:M5.1 & M5.2
846:M5.3, M5.4 &
M5.5
846:M5.6
846:M5.7
846:M5.8
846:M5.9
846:M5.10
846:M5.11
846:M6.1
846:M6.2
846:M6.3
846:M7.1
Assessment
To be summarised in Project Status section of
each Compliance Assessment Report
Correspondence with OEPA
Correspondence with OEPA
Correspondence with OEPA and Compliance
Assessment Plan
Compliance Assessment Report
Availability of all compliance reports on
request
Correspondence with OEPA
Compliance Assessment Report
Development of Albany Dredging Reference
Group, Water Quality Monitoring Program
approved by the CEO and provision of WQMP
Reports.
Correspondence with OEPA
Water Quality Monitoring Program section of
Compliance Assessment Report
Records of dredge activities
Approved Water Quality Monitoring Program
(Marine Benthic Communities), Compliance
Assessment Report. And Albany Port
Expansion Baseline Monitoring – Water
Quality and Seagrass Health Report
Underwater light reports and seagrass health
reports
Correspondence with OEPA
Seagrass Communities section of Compliance
Assessment Report
Correspondence with OEPA and seagrass
assessment reports
Reef Communities section of each
Compliance Assessment Report
Water Quality Monitoring Program (Marine
Benthic Communities) and Reef Community
reports to be included in each Compliance
Assessment Report
Monitoring and assessment of transplanted
seagrass in Princess Royal Harbour
Seagrass Rehabilitation and Monitoring
Management Plan
Seagrass Communities section of each
Compliance Assessment Report
Compliance Assessment Reports
APA Port Expansion Project Compliance Assessment Plan
Timing
Annually
Within 30 days
On or before 18 November 2015
Submission of Compliance Assessment Plan prior to
proposal implementation or at least 6 months prior to the
first compliance report requirement.
Annually
Annually
Within 7 days of known non-compliance
Annually
Prior to the commencement of dredging activities.
Annually.
Immediately after an exceedance in water quality ‘trigger’
levels becomes known.
Annually
Prior to the commencement of dredging activities.
Annually.
During dredging on a weekly basis for light reports and a
monthly basis for seagrass health.
Within 4 days of the decline in seagrass health being
identified.
Annually following the completion of dredging.
Reporting at 2 months, 12 months and 24 months following
the completion of proposal.
Annually.
Prior to the commencement of dredging and following the
completion of dredging, ongoing.
Prior to the commencement of dredging and reclamation.
Program to be implemented within 1 year of completion of
construction activities and monitoring to occur annually for
10 years.
Annually for four years following planting and then every
two years until the requirements of M6.1 have been met.
Annually
Page 15
846:M7.2
Reports on water and sediment quality
submitted to the OEPA
846:M7.3
846:M7.4
846:M7.5
846:M7.6
846:M7.7
846:M7.8
846:M8.1
846:M8.2
846:M8.3
846:M8.4
846:M8.5
Water Quality Monitoring Program (Water
and Sediment Quality)
Water and Sediment Quality section of each
Annual Compliance Assessment Report
Sediment Quality monitoring for mercury and
other contaminants in Compliance
Assessment Report.
Sediment quality monitoring results in
sediment quality report.
Correspondence with OEPA
Monitoring reports published on APA website
upon request
Water Quality Monitoring Program (Toxicants
in Seafood) reports included in Compliance
Assessment Report
Approved Water Quality Monitoring Program
(Toxicants in Seafood)
Sentinel Mussel Monitoring section of each
Compliance Assessment Report.
Sentinel Mussel Monitoring results submitted
to OEPA, DoH and DoF.
Water Quality Monitoring Report (Toxicants
in Seafood)
846:M8.6
Correspondence with OEPA, DoH and DoF
846:M8.7
846:M8.8
846:M8.9
846:M8.10
846:M9.1
Sentinel Mussel Monitoring section of each
Compliance Assessment Report.
Correspondence with OEPA, DoH and DoF
Sentinel Mussel Monitoring Reports
Sentinel mussel monitoring reports published
on APA website upon request
Marine Pests Management Strategy
846:M9.2
Introduced Marine Species Inspection Report
846:M9.3
846:M9.4
Correspondence with OEPA and DoF
846:M9.5
Marine Pests Management Strategy and
correspondence with OEPA and DoF
Water Quality Monitoring (Turbidity) Report
submitted to OEPA, DoH and DoG
Water Quality Monitoring (Turbidity) Program
Water Quality Monitoring (Turbidity) Program
results submitted to OEPA, DoH and DoF
846:M10.1
846:M10.2
846:M10.3
846:M10.4
Introduced Marine Species Inspection Report
Correspondence with OEPA, DoF and DoW
and remediation/management plan.
APA Port Expansion Project Compliance Assessment Plan
Reports on a ten day working basis from the
commencement of dredging of the shipping channel in King
George Sound and the disposal of material at the offshore
disposal ground.
Prior to the commencement of dredging
Annually
Bi-annually for two years following the completion of
dredging activities.
Results to be submitted every 2 weeks from the
commencement of Stage 2 dredging activities.
Within 2 days of the exceedance being identified
Within 7 days of a request for monitoring reports being
made
Ongoing, annual Compliance Assessment Report.
Prior to the commencement of dredging
Prior to, during and for at least 12 months following the
completion of dredging.
Prior to the commencement of dredging
Immediately prior to dredging
Correspondence within 24 hours of the exceedance being
identified and remedial action within 2 days of the
determination being made to the CEO.
Annually.
No later than 24 hours of the exceedance being identified.
Prior to the commencement of dredging and every 6 weeks
during implementation of Stage 2 dredging.
Within 7 days of a request for monitoring reports being
made.
Prior to the arrival of any dredging and other marine
equipment and vessels associated with the proposal.
Prior to the commencement of dredging and within 48
hours following entry of dredging and other marine
equipment and other vessels associated with the proposal
within the Albany Port Authority Area.
Prior to the commencement of dredging
In the event that dredging equipment is to be transferred
from the Albany Port Authority, ongoing.
In the event that any introduced marine pest species are
detected, Ongoing.
Ongoing
Prior to the commencement of dredging
Ongoing
In the event that monitoring required by Condition 10-3
indicates that the requirements of condition 10-1 are not
being met or are not likely to be met, Ongoing.
Page 16
2.4 Retention of compliance assessments
The Albany Port Authority will retain all compliance assessment reports for the life of the project
and a minimum of seven years following the end of the life of the proposal. The life of the
proposal is considered to continue until all implementation conditions of the proposal have been
met to the satisfaction of the CEO of the OEPA and all decommissioning and/or closure has been
completed.
The retention of compliance assessment reports includes the retention of all supporting
documentation and analysis used to support/verify the stated compliance status as determined
by the compliance assessment which will also be retained for reference purposes.
2.5 Reporting non-compliances and corrective measures
The Albany Port Authority will provide written notification to the CEO of the Office of the
Environmental Protection Authority of potential non-compliance within 7 days of that noncompliance being identified in accordance with Condition 4-5 of Ministerial Statement No.846.
All potential non-compliances will be identified and reported in the associated annual compliance
assessment report. The report will include a detailed description of what corrective and/or
preventative actions were taken once an investigation into the non-compliance has been
completed.
In the event of a non-compliance or potential non-compliance, an email will be sent to the OEPA
Compliance Branch ([email protected]) within 48 hours of the non-compliance
becoming known. A follow up hard copy letter will also be sent to the OEPA Compliance Branch
Environment Officer responsible for Ministerial Statement 846 to confirm the occurrence of any
non-compliance or potential non-compliance. This will be accompanied by a report within 7 days
that will detail the following information:

The implementation condition or procedure that was non-compliant or potentially noncompliant.

The date (s) on which the non-compliance or potential non-compliance occurred.

If the non-compliance or potential non-compliance was reported and if so, how and on
what date.

A description of the non-compliance or potential non-compliance accounting for the
location, extent of, impacts associated with and cause of the occurrence (if available at
the time)
If the non-compliance or potential non-compliance requires additional investigation or details of
the non-compliance remain unknown after 7 days a further report will be provided to the OEPA
Compliance Branch Environment Officer. All potential non-compliances will be identified and
reported in the associated annual compliance assessment report. The report will include a
detailed description of what corrective and/or preventative actions were taken once an
investigation into the non-compliance has been completed. It will also include a detailed
description of what measures (if any) were in place to prevent non-compliance and what
amendments have been made to those measures to prevent re-occurrence.
APA Port Expansion Project Compliance Assessment Plan
Page 17
The information reported will be inclusive of all parts of Section 3 of Post Assessment Form 2 for
Statement of Compliance (Appendix B).
All details and reports of any non-compliances or potential non-compliances will be retained on
record by the Albany Port Authority. This includes correspondence between the Albany Port
Authority and the OEPA Compliance Branch, annual Compliance Assessment Reports and any
relevant monitoring results and/or data.
2.6 Table of contents
The table of contents to be included in each compliance assessment report will, at a minimum,
include the following:







Executive summary - including a brief overview of the proposal’s implementation status
and a compliance summary.
Introduction – including background details regarding the proposal, including key
components.
Purpose and scope – including the reasoning behind the development of the CAR and the
proposal elements in which it addresses.
Project status – including a detailed description of the implementation status of each
proposal component as well as any significant issues and/or achievements.
Compliance Summary – including details of the declared compliance status of each
condition presented in the CAP Ministerial 846 Audit Table.
Environmental Monitoring – including details of each proposal component that has been
implemented (i.e Seagrass monitoring) as well as supporting information/documentation
and/or data.
References – including details of any reports or information that has been cited.
2.7 Public availability of reports
The Albany Port Authority will make the annual compliance reports publically available upon
request in accordance with the OEPA’s Post Assessment Guideline for Making Information
Publically Available (OEPA 2012a). Information and documents required to be made publically
available by an implementation condition of Ministerial 846 will be made publically available to
stakeholders, including members of the public on request and within 7 days of receiving the
request. In addition, all reports will be posted on the Albany Port Authority’s website at
www.albanyport.com.au.
Where information and/or documents are to be submitted to the OEPA, they will be submitted to
the General Manager and marketed to the attention of the Manager, Compliance Branch as:


1 x electronic copy (provided on CD or thumb drive)
1 x hard copy
APA Port Expansion Project Compliance Assessment Plan
Page 18
3.
References
Ecologia Environment (2007), Albany Iron Ore Project Public Environmental Review, Albany Port
Expansion Proposal EPA Assessment No. 1594, prepared by Ecologia Environment for
Albany Port Authority, September 2007.
Oceanica (2013) Albany Port Expansion Project Water Quality Monitoring Program, Report No.
874_003/1, prepared by Oceanica Consulting Pty Ltd for the Albany Port Authority, May
2013.
OEPA (2012a), Post Assessment Guideline for Making Information Publicly Available, Post
Assessment Guideline No.4, Office of the Environmental Protection Authority, August
2012.
OEPA (2012b), Post Assessment Guideline for Preparing an Audit Table, Post Assessment
Guideline No.1, Office of the Environmental Protection Authority, August 2012.
OEPA (2012c), Post Assessment Guideline for Preparing a Compliance Assessment Report, Post
Assessment Guideline No.3, Office of the Environmental Protection Authority, August
2012.
OEPA (2012d), Post Assessment Guideline for Preparing a Compliance Assessment Plan, Post
Assessment Guideline No.2, Office of the Environmental Protection Authority, August
2012
APA Port Expansion Project Compliance Assessment Plan
Page 19
Appendix A – Ministerial Statement 846
STATUS OF THIS DOCUMENT
This document has been produced by the Office of the Appeals Convenor as an electronic version of the original
Statement for the proposal listed below as signed by the Minister and held by this Office. Whilst every effort is
made to ensure its accuracy, no warranty is given as to the accuracy or completeness of this document.
The State of Western Australia and its agents and employees disclaim liability, whether in negligence or
otherwise, for any loss or damage resulting from reliance on the accuracy or completeness of this document.
Copyright in this document is reserved to the Crown in right of the State of Western Australia. Reproduction
except in accordance with copyright law is prohibited.
Published on: 18 November 2010
Statement No. 846
STATEMENT THAT A PROPOSAL MAY BE IMPLEMENTED
(PURSUANT TO THE PROVISIONS OF THE
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION ACT 1986)
ALBANY PORT EXPANSION PROJECT
Proposal:
The proposal is for the dredging of 12 million cubic metres of
sediments to widen and deepen the existing shipping channel into
Princess Royal Harbour and to extend the shipping channel into
King George Sound to allow access of cape-size vessels to the
Port. Dredged material will be disposed offshore at a location in
King George Sound.
A portion of the dredged material will be used for reclamation of
up to 9 hectares of Princess Royal Harbour to construct a new
berth (Berth 7). The proposal is documented in schedule 1 of this
statement.
Proponent:
Albany Port Authority
Proponent Address:
85 Brunswick Road,
ALBANY WA 6330
Assessment Number:
1594
Appeal Determination:
Appeals 8 to 13 of 2010
Report of the Environmental Protection Authority: Report 1346
The proposal referred to in the above report of the Environmental Protection Authority may be
implemented. The implementation of that proposal is subject to the following conditions and
procedures:
1
Proposal Implementation
1-1 The proponent shall implement the proposal as documented and described in schedule 1
of this statement subject to the conditions and procedures of this statement.
2
Proponent Nomination and Contact Details
2-1 The proponent for the time being nominated by the Minister for Environment under
sections 38(6) or 38(7) of the Environmental Protection Act 1986 is responsible for the
implementation of the proposal.
2-2 The proponent shall notify the Chief Executive Officer (CEO) of the Office of the
Environmental Protection Authority of any change of the name and address of the
proponent for the serving of notices or other correspondence within 30 days of such
change.
3
Time Limit of Authorisation
3-1 The authorisation to implement the proposal provided for in this statement shall lapse and
be void five years after the date of this statement if the proposal to which this statement
relates is not substantially commenced.
3-2 The proponent shall provide the CEO with written evidence which demonstrates that the
proposal has substantially commenced on or before the expiration of five years from the
date of this statement.
4
Compliance Reporting
4-1 The proponent shall prepare and maintain a compliance assessment plan to the satisfaction
of the CEO of the Office of the Environmental Protection Authority.
4-2 The proponent shall submit to the CEO of the Office of the Environmental Protection
Authority, the compliance assessment plan required by condition 4-1 prior to the
commencement of the implementation of the proposal. The compliance assessment plan
shall indicate:
1 the frequency of compliance reporting;
2 the approach and timing of compliance assessments;
3 the retention of compliance assessments;
4 reporting of potential non-compliances and corrective actions taken;
5 the table of contents of compliance reports; and
6 public availability of compliance reports.
4-3 The proponent shall assess compliance with conditions in accordance with the compliance
assessment plan required by condition 4-1.
4-4 The proponent shall retain reports of all compliance assessments described in the
compliance assessment plan required by condition 4-1 and shall make those reports
available when requested by the CEO of the Office of the Environmental Protection
Authority.
2 of 19
4-5 The proponent shall advise the CEO of the Office of the Environmental Protection
Authority of any potential non-compliance within seven days of that non-compliance
being known.
4-6 The proponent shall submit a compliance assessment report annually from the date of
commencement of proposal implementation addressing the previous twelve month
period or other period as agreed by the CEO of the Office of the Environmental
Protection Authority. The compliance assessment report shall:
1 be endorsed by the proponent’s CEO or a person delegated to sign on the CEO’s
behalf;
2 include a statement as to whether the proponent has complied with the conditions;
3 identify all potential non-compliances and describe corrective and preventative actions
taken;
4 be made publicly available in accordance with the approved compliance assessment
plan; and
5 indicate any proposed changes to the compliance assessment plan required by
condition 4-1.
5A
Water Quality Monitoring Program
5A-1 Prior to the commencement of dredging activities, the proponent shall prepare and
implement a Water Quality Monitoring Program as a component of the proponent’s
Dredging and Land Reclamation Management Plan to the requirements of the CEO of
the Office of the Environmental Protection Authority on the advice of the Department of
Health and Department of Environment and Conservation.
5A-2 The Water Quality Monitoring Program shall be prepared in consultation with the City
of Albany, Department of Health, Department of Environment and Conservation,
Department of Water, Department of Fisheries; and local stakeholders including, but not
limited to, the commercial fishing and aquaculture industries, tour operators,
recreational and conservation interests.
5A-3 The Water Quality Monitoring Program shall be prepared and implemented to achieve
the Environmental Quality Objectives specified in Environmental Protection Authority
(February 2000) and the requirements of conditions 5, 7, 8 and 10 of this Statement and
shall include:
a) A map defining the levels of Ecological Protection that will apply for the duration of
dredging and disposal activity and following the completion of this activity;
b) Environmental quality indicators and associated ‘trigger’ levels based on the
guidelines and recommended approaches in the Australian and New Zealand
Guideline for Fresh and Marine Water Quality (ANZECC & ARMCAMZ, 2000)
and the Environmental Quality Reference Document for Cockburn Sound (EPA,
2005) for assessing performance against the Environmental Quality Objectives;
3 of 19
c) Protocols and schedules for reporting performance against the Environmental
Quality Objectives;
d) Contingency measures to be implemented in the event that monitoring demonstrates
that the environmental quality ‘trigger’ levels hav e been exceeded at any point
during the dredging and disposal program; and
d) Details of the consultation process undertaken in accordance with condition 5A-2
including details of the parties consulted, the manner of consultation and the
outcomes of consultation.
5A-4 If the Water Quality Monitoring Program requiring in condition 5A-1 demonstrates that
the environmental quality ‘trigger’ levels are not met, the proponent shall immediately
report to the CEO of the Office of the Environmental Protection Authority with the
contingency measures to be implemented.
5
Marine Benthic Communities
5-1 The proponent shall not dredge the shipping channel using a trailer suction hopper dredge
as described in Schedule 1 of this statement between 1 November and 28 February in
any year.
Seagrass communities
5-2 The proponent shall ensure that the implementation of the proposal does not cause the
permanent loss of seagrass, either through direct or indirect impacts, other than the
seagrass located within the zones of permanent loss in:
i.
King George Sound, as shown in Figure 4 in Schedule 1 of this statement (not to
exceed 16.6 hectares); and
ii.
Princess Royal Harbour, as shown in Figure 5 in Schedule 1 of this statement (not to
exceed 0.8 hectares),
unless authorised by the Minister for Environment.
Note: ‘Permanent loss’ is defined as the mortality of, or long-term serious damage to,
seagrass communities.
5-3 Prior to the commencement of dredging, the proponent shall establish a monitoring
program to monitor underwater light attenuation and seagrass health (by way of seagrass
shoot density) using permanent relocatable quadrats, to allow for repeated measures
over time, before, during and after the implementation of the proposal. This monitoring
program is to establish the frequency and locations of monitoring. The monitoring
locations shall be established in Princess Royal Harbour and King George Sound but
outside the zones of permanent loss in condition 5-2 and include:
a) impact monitoring sites - at locations where seagrass is found and where water
clarity has the potential to be affected by dredging operations; and
b) reference monitoring sites - which are similar to each impact monitoring site in all
respects including water depths and the presence of seagrass and where water clarity
does not have the potential to be affected by dredging operations,
4 of 19
to the requirements of the CEO of the Office of the Environmental Protection Authority.
The monitoring program is to include protocols and procedures which are consistent
with the Environmental Protection Authority’s Manual of Standard Operating
Procedures for Environmental Monitoring against the Cockburn Sound Environmental
Quality Criteria (March 2005) or any other appropriate protocol acceptable to the CEO
of the Office of the Environmental Protection Authority.
5-4 Prior to the commencement of dredging the proponent shall commence implementing the
monitoring program required by condition 5-4 to the satisfaction of the CEO of the
Office of the Environmental Protection Authority.
5-5 Prior to the commencement of dredging, the proponent shall submit a report on predredging underwater light attenuation and seagrass shoot density data from the locations
required by condition 5-4. In the report the proponent shall establish the:
th
st
th
st
a) calculated median, 20 and 1 percentile of pre-dredging seagrass shoot density for
each impact monitoring site; and
b) calculated median, 20 and 1 percentile of pre-dredging seagrass shoot density for
each reference monitoring site.
5-6 During dredging, the proponent shall monitor underwater light and seagrass health in
accordance with the monitoring program required by condition 5-4, to ensure that the
following seagrass health criterion is met during the dredging operations.
a) The median seagrass shoot density for each impact monitoring site is greater than
st
the 1 percentile of pre-dredging seagrass shoot density determined for each impact
monitoring site.
5-7 In the event that monitoring required by conditions 5-4 and 5-5 indicate that the seagrass
health criterion in condition 5-7 is not being met, or that the proponent is unable to
undertake seagrass health monitoring during dredging, the proponent shall:
a) report such findings including evidence which allows the determination of the cause
of the decline in seagrass health; and
b) immediately cease and relocate dredging activities.
The proponent shall report the above to the CEO of the Office of the Environmental
Protection Authority within 4 days of the decline in seagrass health being identified.
5-8 Following the completion of dredging, the proponent shall demonstrate that the median
th
seagrass shoot density at impact sites is greater than or equal to the 20 percentile of
pre-dredging seagrass shoot density for each impact site as determined in accordance
with condition 5-6 (a) for at least two consecutive years.
5-9 The proponent shall report to the CEO of the Office of the Environmental Protection
Authority the total loss of seagrass communities:
a) 2 months;
b) 12 months, and
c) 24 months,
5 of 19
following the completion of the implementation of the proposal to demonstrate that the
requirements of condition 5-2 have been met.
The reports shall include co-ordinates and a map showing the areas of seagrass losses
caused by the proposal.
Reef communities
5-10 The proponent shall ensure that the proposal does not cause the mortality of, or long-term
serious damage to, the high relief reef communities at Gio Batta Patch and Michaelmas
Reef in King George Sound as shown in Figure 3 of schedule 1.
5-11 To verify that the requirements of condition 5-11 are met the proponent shall:
a) submit a proposed monitoring program to measure the cover, diversity and
abundance of high relief reef communities at Gio Batta Patch and Michaelmas Reef
to the requirements of the CEO of the Office of the Environmental Protection
Authority;
b) undertake baseline survey of the reef communities prior to the commencement of
dredging;
c) undertake surveys following the completion of dredging; and
d) submit a report with results of the surveys in items b) and c) above to demonstrate
that the requirements of condition 5-11 has been met.
6
Seagrass Rehabilitation and Monitoring
6-1 Prior to the commencement of dredging and reclamation the proponent shall commence
the rehabilitation of a minimum of 1 hectare of seagrass in Princess Royal Harbour using
seagrass donor material from the zone of loss in Figure 5 of Schedule 1 at a planting
density that achieves 75% average cover in those areas within 10 years following
planting at a location(s) to the requirements of the CEO of the Office of the
Environmental Protection Authority on advice of the Department of Water and the
Department of Environment and Conservation.
The species to be used in seagrass rehabilitation shall include Posidonia sinuosa and
Posidonia australis.
6-2 The proponent shall design and implement a monitoring program for the seagrass
rehabilitation required by condition 6-1 within 1 year of completion of construction
activities. The monitoring program shall include monitoring of the survival and shoot
density of rehabilitated seagrass annually for the four years following rehabilitation to
confirm that survival and growth are sufficient to attain 1 hectare of seagrass meadow of
75% average cover within 10 years following planting.
6-3 The proponent shall report to the Office of the Environmental Protection Authority on the
progress of seagrass rehabilitation required by condition 6-2 annually for four years
following planting, and then every two years thereafter until it can be demonstrated to
the satisfaction of the CEO of the Office of the Environmental Protection Authority on
6 of 19
advice of the Department of Water and Department of Environment and Conservation
that the requirement of condition 6-1 has been met.
7
Marine Water and Sediment Quality (Mercury and Other Contaminants)
7-1 The proponent shall ensure that the dredging of the portion of the shipping channel shown
in Figure 6 of Schedule 1 is undertaken in a manner that does not cause any overflow of
turbid water into the environment from the dredge vessel.
7-2 From commencement of dredging of the shipping channel in King George Sound and the
disposal of material at the offshore disposal ground, the proponent shall ensure that
contaminant levels in the vicinity of the dredge channel and the disposal ground in water
and sediment are below the ANZECC/ARMCANZ 2000 guidelines and the Guidelines
for Managing Risks in Recreational Water (National Health and Medical Research
Council, 2008) for mercury and other contaminants including silver, tributyltin oxide
and other heavy metals, polychlorinated biphenyls and organochlorines. The guideline
for mercury in water is 0.1 micrograms per litre and mercury in sediment is 0.15
milligrams per kilogram.
7-3 Prior to the commencement of dredging the proponent shall develop and submit a
monitoring program to monitor mercury and other contaminants in sediments and water
to the requirements of the CEO of the Office of the Environmental Protection Authority
on advice of the Department of Environment and Conservation and Department of
Health. The monitoring program shall include the frequency and locations of monitoring
sites to be established.
7-4 The proponent shall implement the monitoring program required by condition 7-3, prior
to, during, and following the completion of dredging and disposal activities.
7-5 The proponent shall undertake sediment quality monitoring for mercury and other
contaminants bi-annually for two years following the completion of dredging activities
to ensure ANZECC/ARMCANZ 2000 criteria referred to in condition 7-2 are being met.
7-6 The proponent shall submit monitoring results required by:
a)
condition 7-2 every 2 weeks from the commencement of Stage 2 dredging
activities; and
b)
condition 7-5 within 2 months following the completion of dredging and every 12
months following the completion of dredging for two consecutive years.
to the CEO of the Office of the Environmental Protection Authority.
7-7 In the event that monitoring indicates that the requirement of condition 7-2 is not being
met or not being likely to be met:
1.the proponent shall report such findings to the CEO of the Office of the
Environmental Protection Authority within 2 days of the exceedance being
identified;
7 of 19
2.the proponent shall provide evidence which allows determination of the cause of the
exceedance;
3.if determined by the CEO of the Office of the Environmental Protection Authority to
be a result of activities undertaken in implementing the proposal, the proponent shall
submit actions to be taken to remediate the decline within 2 days of the
determination being made to the CEO of the Office of the Environmental Protection
Authority; and
4.the proponent shall implement actions to remediate the exceedance of the criteria in
condition 7-2 upon approval of the CEO of the Office of the Environmental
Protection Authority on advice of the Department of Environment and Conservation
and shall continue until such time the CEO of the Office of the Environmental
Protection Authority determines that the remedial actions may cease.
7-8 The proponent shall make the monitoring reports required by conditions 7-6 publicly
available in a manner approved by the CEO of the Office of the Environmental
Protection Authority.
8
Sentinel Mussel Monitoring
8-1 The proponent shall ensure that the implementation of the proposal does not compromise
the environmental objective for the maintenance of seafood safe for human consumption
in King George Sound and Oyster Harbour.
8-2 To verify the requirements of condition 8-1, prior to the commencement of dredging the
proponent shall develop and submit a Sentinel Mussel Monitoring Program to the
requirements of the CEO of the Office of the Environmental Protection Authority on
advice of the Department of Fisheries, Department of Health and the Department of
Environment and Conservation.
The monitoring program is to include protocols and procedures which are consistent with
the Western Australian Shellfish Quality Assurance Program (February 2004).
The Sentinel Mussel Monitoring Program shall operate in the vicinity of Mistaken
Island within King George Sound and at other location as agreed with the CEO of the
Office of the Environmental Protection Authority.
8-3 Subject to the requirements of conditions 8-4 and 8-5, the proponent shall implement the
Sentinel Mussel Monitoring Program required by condition 8-2 prior to, during and for
at least 12 months following the completion of dredging.
8-4 Prior to the commencement of dredging activities the proponent shall deploy sentinel
mussels and harvest and analyse these mussels after six weeks to determine background
concentrations of mercury.
8-5 Immediately prior to dredging the proponent shall deploy sentinel mussels and harvest
these mussels after six weeks for monitoring of contaminant levels in Clause 2 of
Standard 1.4.1 Contaminants and Natural Toxicants of the Australia and New Zealand
Food Standards Code and other contaminants on the advice of the Department of
8 of 19
Health. Fresh sentinel mussels shall then be deployed at six week intervals, then
harvested and analysed as above, and this regime continued during dredging and for at
least six months following completion of dredging. The sample size and analysis of
samples shall consist of at least five mussels each time.
8-6 If the level of mercury in sentinel mussels at any site harvested under condition 8-5
exceeds a trigger level of 0.4 mg/kg (mean value), or if the level of any other
contaminant in sentinel mussels at any site harvested under condition 8-5 exceeds the
trigger level for that contaminant as specified in the Sentinel Mussel Monitoring
Program:
a) the proponent shall report such findings to the CEO of the Office of the
Environmental Protection Authority, Department of Health and Department of
Fisheries within 24 hours of the exceedance being identified;
b) the proponent shall provide evidence which allows determination of the cause of the
exceedance;
c) if determined by the CEO of the Office of the Environmental Protection Authority to
be a result of activities undertaken in implementing the proposal, the proponent shall
submit actions to be taken to remediate the cause of the exceedance within 2 days of
the determination being made to the CEO of the Office of the Environmental
Protection Authority; and
d) the proponent shall implement actions to remediate the exceedance of the trigger
level upon approval of the CEO of the Office of the Environmental Protection
Authority on advice of the Department of Health and Department of Fisheries and
shall continue until such time the CEO of the Office of the Environmental Protection
Authority determines that the remedial actions may cease.
8-7 Subject to the requirements of condition 8-6, the proponent shall ensure that the
environmental objective of the maintenance of seafood safe for human consumption is
met, and in doing so ensure contaminant levels in sentinel mussels do not exceed the
standards specified in the Table to Clause 2 of Standard 1.4.1 Contaminants and
Natural Toxicants of the Australia and New Zealand Food Standards Code and
standards for other contaminants on the advice of the Department of Health.
8-8 If the level of one or more of the contaminants in sentinel mussels harvested under
conditions 8-4 or 8-5 exceeds the levels set by condition 8-7, the proponent is to report
that exceedance to the CEO of the Office of the Environmental Protection Authority, the
Department of Fisheries and the Department of Health as soon as possible, but in any
event, not later than 24 hours of the exceedance being identified.
8-9 The proponent shall submit the results of the monitoring programme required by
condition 8-2 to the CEO of the Office of the Environmental Protection Authority, the
Department of Health and the Department of Fisheries;



prior to the commencement of dredging; 
every 6 weeks during the implementation of Stage 2 dredging; and 
9 of 19
then at such intervals as required by the Sentinel Mussel Monitoring Program required
by condition 8-2.
8-10 The proponent shall make the monitoring reports required by conditions 8-9 publicly
available in a manner approved by the CEO of the Office of the Environmental
Protection Authority.
9
Introduced Marine Species and Dredging Equipment
9-1 Prior to the arrival of any dredging and other marine equipment and vessels associated
with the proposal, the proponent shall prepare a Marine Pests Management Strategy
capable of detecting and managing any introduced marine pest to the requirements of the
CEO of the Office of the Environmental Protection Authority on advice of the
Department of Fisheries.
9-2 Prior to commencement of dredging and within 48 hours following entry of dredging and
other marine equipment and other vessels associated with the proposal within the Albany
Port Authority area as shown in Figure 1 in Schedule 1 of this statement, the proponent
shall arrange and undertake an inspection by an appropriately qualified expert to ensure
that:
1.
there is no sediment on or within the dredging equipment;
2.
ballast water (if any) has been managed according to the Australian Quarantine
Inspection Service ballast water requirements; and
3.
any fouling organisms on or in the dredging equipment do not present a risk to the
ecosystem integrity of the marine waters of Albany harbours as shown in Figure 1
in Schedule 1 of this statement.
9-3 The proponent shall manage any sediment or fouling organism found as a consequence of
the inspection required by condition 9-2, in accordance with the Marine Pests
Management Strategy required by condition 9-1, prior to the commencement of
dredging, to the requirements of the CEO of the Office of the Environmental Protection
Authority on advice of the Department of Fisheries.
9-4 In the event that the dredging equipment is to be transferred from the Albany Port
Authority area to another location within Western Australian territorial waters following
completion of dredging and disposal activities, the proponent shall undertake an
investigation employing an appropriately qualified marine scientist to identify the
presence of / the potential for introduced marine pest species in accordance with the
Marine Pests Management Strategy required by condition 9-1.
9-5 In the event that any introduced marine pest species are detected, the proponent shall
implement the Marine Pests Management Strategy required by condition 9-1 prior to the
dredge equipment being moved from the Albany Port Authority area to ensure that
introduced marine pest species are not transferred to other locations within Western
Australian territorial waters to the requirements of the CEO of the Office of the
Environmental Protection Authority on advice of the Department of Fisheries.
10 of 19
10
Maintenance of aquaculture
10-1 The proponent shall ensure that the implementation of the proposal does not cause the
Environmental Quality Objective for the ‘Maintenance of aquaculture’ to be
compromised at the aquaculture operations in the vicinity of Mistaken Island.
10-2 Prior to the commencement of dredging the proponent shall develop a monitoring
program for measuring turbidity which includes turbidity trigger levels for management
and contingency actions in order to demonstrate the requirements of condition 10-1 are
being met.
10-3 The proponent shall implement the monitoring program and monitor turbidity against the
turbidity trigger levels required by condition 10-2.
10-4 In the event the monitoring required by condition 10-3 indicates that the requirements of
condition 10-1 are not being met or are not likely to be met, the proponent shall
immediately provide and implement proposed management measures to the satisfaction
of the CEO of the Office of the Environmental Protection Authority on advice of the
Department of Fisheries and the Department of Water.
Notes
1. Where a condition states “on advice of the Depa rtment of Environment and
Conservation”, the Department of Environment and Conservation will provide that advice
to the Office of the Environmental Protection Authority for the preparation of written
notice to the proponent.
2. The Office of the Environmental Protection Authority may seek advice from other
agencies or organisations, as required.
3. The Minister for Environment will determine any dispute between the proponent and the
Office of the Environmental Protection Authority over the fulfilment of the requirements
of the conditions.
4. Environmental Protection Authority (2000) Perth’s coastal waters: Environmental values
and objectives - the position of the EPA, a working document, February 2000, Report 17,
Department of Environmental Protection, Perth, WA.
Hon Donna Faragher JP MLC
MINISTER FOR ENVIRONMENT; YOUTH
11 of 19
Schedule 1
Albany Port Expansion Proposal (EPA Assessment No. 1594)
The proposal consists of the dredging of 12 million cubic metres of sediments to widen and
deepen the existing shipping channel into Princess Royal Harbour and to extend the shipping
channel into King George Sound to allow access of cape-size vessels to the Port. Dredged
material will be disposed offshore at a location in King George Sound.
A portion of the dredged material will be used for reclamation of up to 9 hectares of Princess
Royal Harbour to construct a new berth (Berth 7). Construction of the seawall will involve the
importation of core and armour material by road transport. Pile driving activities will be
required to construct the new berth.
The location of the proposal is shown in Figure 1. The constructed elements of the proposal
are shown in Figure 2. The offshore disposal site is shown in Figure 3.
The key characteristics of the proposal are shown in Table 1 below.
Table 1 - Key Proposal Characteristics
Key Aspect
Dredging
Dredge methods
Total quantity of dredge material to
be generated
Total area to be dredged
Total maximum duration
Independent CSD Dredging
(Stage 1 dredging)
Total quantity of dredge material to
be generated
Stage 1 duration
TSHD Dredging (Stage 2 dredging)
Total quantity of dredge material to
be generated
Stage 2 duration
Berth and Channel Characteristics
Berth pocket depth
Maximum channel depth
Land Reclamation Area
Area
Height
Construction of sea wall
Clearing
Description
Cutter Suction Dredge (CSD) for the berth pocket and
reclamation batter. Trailer Suction Hopper Dredge (TSHD)
for the shipping channel. No blasting is required.
3
12 million cubic metres (Mm ).
247.7 hectares (ha) including all channel batters.
47.3 ha of which is an existing channel and has been
dredged.
32 weeks.
3
~300,000 m for reclamation area by CSD.
12 weeks independent of the TSHD (or Stage 2 dredging) at
any time of the year.
3
11.7 Mm dredged by TSHD.
20 weeks.
-17.8 metres (m) Chart Datum (CD), as shown in Figure 2.
-19.2m CD, as shown in Figure 2.
Up to 9 ha.
+4m CD.
Continuous rock armoured sea wall, lined with geotextile
filter cloth.
Nil.
12 of 19
Key Aspect
Length of rocky shoreline to be
reclaimed
Seawall length
Surface drainage
Rock armour material
Offshore Disposal Area
Disposal location
Description
~360m.
~900m in total and ~570m along the berth edge.
Reclamation area will be filled and graded to achieve
internal drainage until adequate stormwater system is
constructed for the intended use.
Granite rock
In deep water within King George Sound as shown in Figure
3 of this statement.
250 ha. Diameter is 1800 metres.
Finished depth to the top of the disposal site is -35m CD.
Disposal footprint
Disposal depth
Disturbance Footprint
TotalAlbanyPortExpansion
506.7 ha
Proposal marine disturbance footprint
Figures (attached)
Figure 1. Location map showing Albany Port Expansion proposal, land reclamation at
Semaphore Point, shipping channel, Albany Port Authority Area, Princess Royal
Harbour and King George Sound
Figure 2. Layout of land reclamation area at Semaphore Point and berth pocket, turning basin
and approach channel
Figure 3. Location of offshore disposal site between Bald Head and Breaksea Island
Figure 4. Zone of permanent loss coinciding with seagrass in King George Sound Figure
5. Zone of permanent loss coinciding with seagrass in Princess Royal Harbour Figure 6.
Area which requires dredging to be undertaken with no overflow.
13 of 19
14 of 19
15 of 19
16 of 19
17 of 19
18 of 19
19 of 19
Appendix B – Statement of Compliance
Proposal and Proponent Details
Proposal Title
Enter the proposal title as it appears on the Ministerial Statement.
Statement Number
Enter the Ministerial Statement Number
Proponent Name
Enter the proponent name as it appears on the Ministerial
Statement.
Proponent’s Australian
Company Number
(where relevant)
Statement of Compliance Details
Reporting Period
Click to enter start date to Click to enter end date
Implementation phase(s) during reporting period (please tick  relevant phase(s))
Pre-construction
Construction
Operation
Decommissioning
Audit Table for Statement addressed in this Statement of Compliance is provided at Attachment:
2
An audit table for the Statement addressed in this Statement of Compliance must be provided as Attachment
2 to this Statement of Compliance. The audit table must be prepared and maintained in accordance with the
Office of the Environmental Protection Authority’s (OEPA) Post Assessment Guideline for Preparing an Audit
Table, as amended from time to time. The ‘Status Column’ of the audit table must accurately describe the
compliance status of each implementation condition and/or procedure for the reporting period of this
Statement of Compliance. The terms that may be used by the proponent in the ‘Status Column’ of the audit
table are limited to the Compliance Status Terms listed and defined in Table 1 of Attachment 1.
Were all implementation conditions and/or procedures of the Statement complied with within the reporting
period? (please tick  the appropriate box)
No (please proceed to Section 3)
Yes (please proceed to Section 4)
Details of Non-compliance(s) and/or Potential Non-compliance(s)
The information required Section 3 must be provided for each non-compliance or
potential non-compliance identified during the reporting period covered by this
Statement of Compliance.
Non-compliance/potential non-compliance
0-1
Which implementation condition or procedure was non-compliant or potentially non-compliant?
Was the implementation condition or procedure non-compliant or potentially non-compliant?
On what date(s) did the non-compliance or potential non-compliance occur (if applicable)?
Was this non-compliance or potential non-compliance reported to the General Manager, OEPA?
Yes
 Reported to OEPA verbally
 Reported to OEPA in writing
Date __________
Date __________
No
What are the details of the non-compliance or potential non-compliance and where relevant, the extent of
and impacts associated with the non-compliance or potential non-compliance?
What is the precise location where the non-compliance or potential non-compliance occurred (if
applicable)? (please provide this information as a map or GIS co-ordinates)
What was the cause(s) of the non-compliance or potential non-compliance?
What remedial and/or corrective action(s), if any, were taken or are proposed to be taken in response to
the non-compliance or potential non-compliance?
What measures, if any, were in place to prevent the non-compliance or potential non-compliance before it
occurred? What, if any, amendments have been made to those measures to prevent re-occurrence?
Please provide information/documentation collected and recorded in relation to this implementation
condition or procedure:


in the reporting period addressed in this Statement of Compliance; and
as outlined in the approved Compliance Assessment Plan for the Statement addressed in this
Statement of Compliance.
(the above inform ation may be provided as an attachment to this Statement of Compliance)
For additional non-compliance or potential non-compliance, please
duplicate this page as required.
Proponent Declaration
I, ………………………………………............................………., (full name and position title)
declare that I am authorised on behalf of …………………………………………. (being the
person responsible for the proposal) to submit this form and that the information contained in
this form is true and not misleading.
Signature:......................................................
Date:.....................................
Please note that:
 it is an offence under section 112 of the Environmental Protection Act 1986 for a person
to give or cause to be given information that to his knowledge is false or misleading in a
material particular; and

the General Manager of the OEPA has powers under section 47(2) of the Environmental
Protection Act 1986 to require reports and information about implementation of the
proposal to which the statement relates and compliance with the implementation
conditions.
Submission of Statement of Compliance
One hard copy and one electronic copy (preferably PDF on CD or thumb drive) of the
Statement of Compliance are required to be submitted to the General Manager, OEPA,
marked to the attention of Manager, Compliance Branch.
Please note, the OEPA has adopted a procedure of providing written acknowledgment of
receipt of all Statements of Compliance submitted by the proponent, however, the OEPA
does not approve Statements of Compliance.
Contact Information
Queries regarding Statements of Compliance, or other issues of compliance relevant to a
Statement may be directed to Compliance Branch, OEPA:
Manager, Compliance Branch
Office of the Environmental Protection Authority
Postal Address: Locked Bag 33
CLOISTERS SQUARE WA 6850
Phone:
(08) 6467 5600
Email:
[email protected]
Post Assessment Guidelines and Forms
Post assessment documents can be found at www.epa.wa.gov.au in the following locations:

Post Assessment Guidelines: Home>Policies and Guidelines>Post Assessment Guidelines;

Post Assessment Forms: Home>Post Assessment Forms.
ATTACHMENT 1
Table 1 Compliance Status Terms
Compliance
Status Terms
Abbrev
Definition
Notes
Compliant
C
Implementation of the proposal has been This term applies to audit elements with:
carried out in accordance with the
 ongoing requirements that have been
requirements of the audit element.
met during the reporting period; and
 requirements with a finite period of
application that have been met during
the reporting period, but whose status
has not yet been classified as
‘completed’.
Completed
CLD
A requirement with a finite period of
application has been satisfactorily
completed.
This term may only be used where:
 audit elements have a finite period of
application (e.g. construction activities,
development of a document);
 the action has been satisfactorily
completed; and
 the Office of the Environmental
Protection Authority (OEPA) has
provided written acceptance of
‘completed’ status for the audit
element.
Not required at
this stage
NR
The requirements of the audit element
were not triggered during the reporting
period.
This should be consistent with the ‘Phase’
column of the audit table.
Potentially
Non-compliant
PNC
Possible or likely failure to meet the
requirements of the audit element.
This term may apply where during the
reporting period the proponent has
identified a potential non-compliance and
has not yet finalized its investigations to
determine whether non-compliance has
occurred.
Non-compliant
NC
Implementation of the proposal has not
been carried out in accordance with the
requirements of the audit element.
This term applies where the requirements
of the audit element are not “complete”
have not been met during the reporting
period.
In Process
IP
Where an audit element requires a
management or monitoring plan be
submitted to the OEPA or another
government agency for approval, that
submission has been made and no
further information or changes have
been requested by the OEPA or the other
government agency and assessment by
the OEPA or other government agency
for approval is still pending.
The term ‘In Process’ may not be used for
any purpose other than that stated in the
Definition Column.
The term ‘In Process’ may not be used to
describe the compliance status of an
implementation condition and/or
procedure that requires implementation
throughout the life of the project (e.g.
implementation of a management plan).