Crib Point Jetty Upgrade

Port of Hastings Development Authority

Environmental Risk Assessment

IS228500-EP-RP-002

21 September 2018
 Environmental Risk Assessment

Crib Point Jetty Upgrade

Project No: IS228500

Document Title: Environmental Risk Assessment
Document No.: IS228500-EP-RP-002
Client Name: Port of Hastings Development Authority
Project Manager: Anna Batters
Author: Shelley Ada / Lauren Bradshaw
File Name: IS228500-EP-RP-002-Crib Point Jetty Upgrade Environmental Risk Assessment-Final-
21122017.docx

Jacobs Australia Pty Limited

Floor 11, 452 Flinders Street

Melbourne VIC 3000
PO Box 312, Flinders Lane
Melbourne VIC 8009 Australia
T +61 3 8668 3000
F +61 3 8668 3001
www.jacobs.com

© Copyright 2017 Jacobs Australia Pty Limited. The concepts and information contained in this document are the property of Jacobs. Use or
copying of this document in whole or in part without the written permission of Jacobs constitutes an infringement of copyright.

Limitation: This document has been prepared on behalf of, and for the exclusive use of Jacobs’ client, and is subject to, and issued in accordance with, the
provisions of the contract between Jacobs and the client. Jacobs accepts no liability or responsibility whatsoever for, or in respect of, any use of, or reliance
upon, this document by any third party.

Jacobs Authorisation

Description By Review Approved

Environmental Risk Assessment S.Ada A.Batters A.Batters

Port of Hastings Development Authority

Authorisation
Revision Date Reason for issue Approved by Signed
00 15/06/2018 Initial Release Malcolm Geier (CEO)

01 18/06/2018 Corrections made for version Malcolm Geier (CEO)

control
02 19/06/2018 Corrections made for version Malcolm Geier (CEO)
control
03 21/09/2018 Amended version Malcolm Geier (CEO)

IS228500-EP-RP-002 i
 Environmental Risk Assessment

Contents
1. Introduction ....................................................................................................................................... 1
1.1 Project Overview ................................................................................................................................ 1
1.2 Purpose of this Report ........................................................................................................................ 1
2. Context .............................................................................................................................................. 2
2.1 Project Description ............................................................................................................................. 2
2.2 Regional Setting ................................................................................................................................. 2
2.3 Environmental Setting......................................................................................................................... 0
2.4 Scope of Works .................................................................................................................................. 3
2.5 Construction Methodology .................................................................................................................. 4
2.5.1 Berth 2 Infrastructure .......................................................................................................................... 4
2.5.2 Jetty Head ........................................................................................................................................... 4
2.5.3 Fenders .............................................................................................................................................. 5
3. Risk Assessment Framework ......................................................................................................... 6
3.1 Risk Criteria ........................................................................................................................................ 6
3.2 Risk Assessment Scope ..................................................................................................................... 7
4. Environmental Risk Assessment.................................................................................................... 8

IS228500-EP-RP-002 ii
 Environmental Risk Assessment

1. Introduction
1.1 Project Overview

The Port of Hasting Development Authority (PoHDA) is proposing to undertake upgrade works to the Crib Point
Jetty located within Western Port and on the adjacent land owned by PoHDA on Victoria’s Mornington
Peninsula (Figure 2.1). The jetty is controlled and managed by PoHDA.

PoHDA has engaged Jacobs Group (Australia) Pty Ltd (Jacobs) to undertake an environmental risk
assessment of the Jetty Upgrade to understand environmental risks and protection measures required for
input to an Environmental Management Plan. This Environmental Risk Assessment has been updated
following the receipt of the below approvals in readiness for the commencement of works associated with the
project.

PoHDA has received the following approvals:

 Use and development of coastal crown land (Section 38(1) Coastal Management Act, 1995). This EMP has
been developed to support the Coastal Management Act consent and has been endorsed by the Department of
Environment, Land, Water and Planning (DELWP) as part of this process
 Crown land consent under the Land Act 1958.

PoHDA have engaged an Owner’s Engineer team to design and manage PoHDA’s berth upgrade works
(Owners Team). The Owners team will utilise a number of third-party providers as required to carry out the
works.

A risk assessment approach has been used to identify and communicate the potential environmental risks and
impacts associated with the Jetty Upgrade. The outcome of the risk assessment is to reduce the risks to the
environment through the deployment of management and mitigation measures to be implemented in the
construction of the Jetty Upgrade.

1.2 Purpose of this Report

This report details the risk assessment methodology and outcomes of the environmental risk assessment,
including proposed management and mitigation measures to reduce environmental risk of the Jetty Upgrade to
acceptable levels.

IS228500-EP-RP-002 1
 Environmental Risk Assessment

2. Context
This section describes the context for the environmental risk assessment undertaken to inform the proposed
Jetty Upgrade. The context is the setting within which the project is being developed and the risks have been
evaluated. To determine the relevant context for the risk assessment an overview of the key design and
construction assumptions is provided.

2.1 Project Description

PoHDA is proposing to undertake upgrade works to the Crib Point Jetty located within Western Port and on
the adjacent land managed by PoHDA on Victoria’s Mornington Peninsula. The jetty is controlled and
managed by PoHDA and accordingly, the works to the jetty will be managed by PoHDA and undertaken
under the Coastal Management Act approval dates.

The works associated with the Jetty Upgrade project (the subject of this EMP) will consist of:
 Strengthening / modifications to the existing berthing and mooring dolphins
 Strengthening / modifications to the existing pipe neck structure
 Strengthening / modifications to the existing pier head
 Installation of four mooring dolphins
 Installation of two berthing dolphins
 Construction of new service platform
 Possible replacement of an existing berthing dolphin
 New dolphin access catwalks
 New Navigational Aid / Security Pile markers.
 Geotechnical investigations including borehole samples and any other required investigation works.

The Project design is subject to change whilst detailed design is being undertaken.

The Crib Point Jetty is located in Western Port, 65km south-east of Melbourne (Victoria) on the Mornington
Peninsula (Figure 2-1). The jetty is situated on the Western Port coastline within the Shire of Mornington
Peninsula. PoHDA, as Port Operator, is responsible for managing the operations of the Crib Point Jetty,
including maintaining the associated port infrastructure. The jetty itself and the adjoining landside site is located
within the Port Zone. The Project Site and an extensive area to the north, west and south is within the Bushfire
Management Overlay in the Mornington Peninsula Planning Scheme. The Project Site and surrounding area,
including key features is provided in Figure 2-1 and Figure 2-2.

2.2 Regional Setting

The Crib Point Jetty is located within Western Port bay, a large tidal bay opening into the Bass Strait which
incorporates around 260 kilometres of coastline. The bay features two large islands; French Island,
predominantly agricultural, and Phillip Island, known for its tourism industry. Hastings and Crib Point are key
urban centres on the coastline of Western Port bay and for more than 50 years have hosted a number of
industrial sites, including petroleum refining and storage as well as gas and steel processing facilities.
Hastings also features the main boat landing point in the bay. A submarine, HMAS Otama, is moored near
Crib Point and further south is HMAS Cerberus, a naval base.

Western Port bay is also used for recreational activities such as fishing and boating. It has been listed as an
international Ramsar site since 1982 with international significance for migratory birds1. The high environmental,
social and economic worth of Western Port bay is recognised further through the declaration of Western Port
bay as an UNESCO Biosphere reserve and the presence of several Marine National Parks within the Ramsar
site (Churchill Island, French Island and Yaringa).

There are a small number of community facilities and services, and places of special interest near the jetty.
IS228500-EP-RP-002 2
 Environmental Risk Assessment

They include parks and reserves, which provide recreational opportunities for local communities and visitors
and contribute to environmental and amenity values. Woolleys Beach Reserve 2 is located immediately south of
the jetty and extending to Stony Point (Figure 2.2). It features dense bushland supporting a variety of
indigenous flora and fauna, BBQ, picnic facilities, and a boardwalk.

1
http://www.environment.gov.au/cgi-bin/wetlands/ramsardetails.pl?refcode=19.
2
http://cribpointstonypointforeshore.com.au/foreshore-reserve

IS228500-EP-RP-002 3
 Environmental Risk Assessment

Figure 2:0: Western Port Ramsar Site (Western Port Ramsar Site Strategic Management Plan, Department of Sustainability and
Environment, East Melbourne, Victoria, Department of Sustainability and Environment, 2003

IS228500-EP-RP-002 4
 Environmental Risk Assessment

Figure 2:1 Location Overview

IS228500-EP-RP-002 1
 Environmental Risk Assessment

Adjacent
Land site

Crib Point Jetty

upgrade works to
Berth 2

Figure 2.2 : Project Site

IS228500-EP-RP-002 2
 Environmental Risk Assessment

Figure 2.3 : Jetty Upgrade Works (works are located within the ‘new lease boundary’)

IS228500-EP-RP-002 3
 Environmental Risk Assessment – Crib Point Jetty
Upgrade

Figure 2.4 : View of Crib Point Jetty from the west Figure 2.5 : View of Crib Point jetty from the south-east and
land where the shore flange will be located.

2.3 Environmental Setting

Western Port Ramsar Wetland

The jetty largely falls within the defined boundary of the Western Port Ramsar Wetland site, which is
designated as a wetland of international significance as shown in Figure 2.0. The Ramsar site covers 59,950
hectares of Western Port including Crib Point. Western Port is one of eleven Ramsar sites in Victoria and is the
third most important area for wading birds in Victoria. All Ramsar sites are Matters of National Environmental
Significance under the Commonwealth Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (EPBC
Act).

Western Port is an unusually diverse but compact marine environment. It comprises vast intertidal mudflats with
saltmarsh, seagrass and mangrove habitats as well as steep subtidal sloping banks with seagrass and deep
channels that connect the north of the bay with the oceanic waters of Bass Strait in the south.

The ecosystem components associated with the habitats are closely connected by their relatively close spatial
proximity and the strong tidal currents that transport water back and forth through the channels and over and off
the intertidal flats.

These characteristics contribute to the listing of a large part of Western Port as a Ramsar wetland of
international significance and the allocation of distinct areas as National Parks. Many of the animal and plant
species are not specifically protected or listed for conservation value, but the combination mangroves and
seagrasses, saltmarsh, fish, birds, crustaceans, worms and other strange invertebrates all form the Western
Port marine ecosystem that is highly valued by the public.

Marine Ecology
A marine ecosystem review has been undertaken by CEE3 and the findings are relevant within the context of
the Jetty Upgrade. The review covers relevant Commonwealth and Victorian legislation for marine protected
areas, protected marine species (flora and fauna, excluding birds and
3 CEE (2017), AGL Gas Import Jetty Project, Marine Ecosystem Regulatory Review. AGL Energy Limited. Working Draft A, 7 November 2017

IS228500-EP-RP-002 0
 Environmental Risk Assessment – Crib Point Jetty
Upgrade

terrestrial fauna) and listed processes that may be relevant to the project. Various marine species, habitats and
ecological communities are protected by the EPBC Act and the Victorian Flora and Fauna Guarantee Act 1988
(FFG Act). In some cases, species or places are listed on both the EPBC and FFG Acts.

Through an assessment of marine EPBC Act matters of national environmental significance and FFG Act listed
species, it was identified that 33 threatened marine species (excluding birds) and one marine community that
the Acts list may occur in Western Port.

The review found that many of the marine species in the State and Commonwealth Acts were relatively widely
distributed, that Western Port represented a small component of their range and that Western Port was not
recognised as a significant aggregation, breeding or feeding location or migratory path for most EPBC identified
species and many FFG listed species (excluding water birds).

Of the 33 threatened marine species identified as potentially occurring in Western Port, the EPBC listed species
include four endangered species and four vulnerable species:
 Endangered marine species: Blue Whales, Southern Right Whales, Leatherback Turtles and Loggerhead
Turtles. Assessment against the EPBC Act Policy Statement 1.1 - Significant Impact Guidelines,
determined that the Project is not expected to impact on these endangered species as there are no
apparent direct or indirect pathways that are likely to affect population size; area of occupancy; population
continuity; critical habitat, breeding cycle; or species recovery.
 Vulnerable marine species: Humpback Whales; Great White Shark, Australian Grayling and Green
Turtle. Further assessment of these species is currently in process and the findings will allow assessment
against the EPBC Act Policy Statement 1.1 - Significant Impact Guidelines.

The review identified an additional three FFG listed species as follows:

 Pale Mangrove Goby (Mugilogobius paludis): listed as on the FFG Act as threatened and has been
recorded near Crib point. The formal status of this species is uncertain and there is the suggestion that the
species is synonymous with a more common species (M platynotus).
 Western Port ghost shrimp (Eucalliax tooradin): is known from a total of five individuals. Four were
collected subtidally in grab samples offshore from Crib Point in 1965 and since then have not been
recorded in Western Port (Figure 8). The habitat where it was found at Crib Point comprised shallow,
subtidal fine sand. It was also found in Swan Bay, a primarily shallow seagrass ecosystem.
 Ghost shrimp (Michelea microphylla): is known from only one specimen collected in sandy gravel in 19 m
water depth offshore from Crib Point in 1965. It is very rare as it has not been found anywhere else since
1965, including the comprehensive sampling program for the Western Port Bay Environmental Study in the
1970s.

The marine habitat near the mooring and berthing dolphins comprises mixed soft sediments that are likely to
range from fine sand and silt to medium mobile sands. Water depth is greater than 12 m, which is greater than
the maximum depth range of 7 m depth for seagrasses in Western Port. Other than at the footprint of the
piles/dolphins, the works do not involve removal of habitat within the Western Port Ramsar boundary.

In relation to a proposal by Victorian Regional Channels Authority (VRCA) to flatten the area of seabed in the
vicinity of Berth 2 of Crib Point Jetty, CEE was engaged by VRCA to investigate the presence of threatened
ghost shrimps in this vicinity1. The investigation was designed by experienced marine biologists from CEE in
consultation with Dr J Watson (Marine Science and Ecology) and Dr G Poore from the Museums of Victoria.
The surveying was conducted on 13 July 2018. No threatened species of ghost shrimp were found during the
survey.

Aboriginal heritage

The Port Land adjacent to the jetty has previously been subject to a detailed inspection, including survey and
auger testing4 . This inspection determined that the “area has undergone significant ground disturbance as
defined by the Aboriginal Heritage Regulations 2007”. It was also reported that no surface evidence of

1 CEE (2018) Threatened ghost shrimp survey Berth 2 Crib Point Jetty Risk from bed levelling of isolated high points. Report to VRCA, August 2018.
IS228500-EP-RP-002 1
 Environmental Risk Assessment – Crib Point Jetty
Upgrade

Aboriginal cultural remains was observed, and therefore it is unlikely that Aboriginal cultural material exists on
the site as surface indicators were not present.

4
Jones, Z. (2015). Allotment 2040, The Esplanade, Crib Point: Cultural Heritage Assessment and Implications for Development. Fitzroy, Port of
Hastings Development Authority.

IS228500-EP-RP-002 2
 Environmental Risk Assessment – Crib Point Jetty
Upgrade

A due diligence assessment by Jacobs5 reported that there are no recorded Aboriginal Places located within
Port Land. This follows a search of the Victorian Aboriginal Heritage Register, which included a radial search of
3km. With this area a single Aboriginal Place is located approximately 650 m north west of the jetty (Jacks
Beach; VAHR 7921-0369), which includes shell midden and surface scatter components.

Historical heritage

A recent study by Jacobs6 , determined there to be one historical heritage place located in the vicinity of the jetty,
which is listed on the Victorian Heritage Register (VHR), the Mornington Peninsula Planning Scheme Heritage
Overlay (HO), and the Register of the National Estate (RNE): Former BP Refinery Administration Building (VHR
H1016/HO240/RNE 103692). There are three historical heritage sites within proximity to (within 1 km of) the
jetty, which comprise one item listed on the HO – Woolley’s Cool Room (HO322); one on the Victorian Heritage
Inventory (VHI) – William (Bill) Woolley’s Homestead (H7921-0112); and one on the National Trust (NT) register
– HMAS Otama (B6683). There are no places within or in proximity to the jetty on the Commonwealth Heritage
List (CHL), the National Heritage List (NHL), or the World Heritage List (WHL).

The Former BP Refinery Administration Building is located on the Esplanade, to the west of the Port Land and
approximately 400 metres from the head of the Crib Point Jetty. No Jetty Upgrade works including laydown
areas are proposed within the site of or within at least 100 metres of this building.

Flora and Fauna

Western Port is an unusually diverse but compact marine environment. It comprises vast intertidal mudflats with
saltmarsh, seagrass and mangrove habitats as well as steep subtidal sloping banks with seagrass and deep
channels that connect the north of the bay with the oceanic waters of Bass Strait in the south.

A flora and fauna assessment including field survey of the Port Land (adjacent to the jetty), was conducted by
PKA in 20157. The study reported that “the vegetation and habitat quality of the study area is relatively low as a
consequence of prior site management. It is dominated by a range of native and exotic vegetation established
as part of site rehabilitation and natural regeneration. In its current state the biodiversity values of the site do not
make a significant contribution to the sustainable conservation of biodiversity in the vicinity.”

A desktop terrestrial flora and fauna assessment by Jacobs8 determined the study area appears to support areas
of native vegetation (approximately 2 ha of Heathy Dry Woodland and scattered native trees) and an area
cleared of native vegetation (approximately 1 ha).

The assessment also included review of threatened fauna within and in proximity to the study area. A search of
the Victorian Biodiversity Atlas and the EPBC protected matters was conducted to determine which species
have recorded observations within the search area (site plus 5 km buffer). Due to the diversity of habitat types
and the presence of a Ramsar-listed wetland within the 5 km search area, there are a large number of records
returned by the EPBC and VBA database search tools. These records were individually assessed to determine
the likelihood of the species being present on the works site, and/or being affected by the site works. The
Jacobs assessment concluded that the project is not expected to impact on migratory birds due to the lack of
suitable habitat within the study area. Further, the Southern Brown Bandicoot (Isoodon obesulus obesulus) has
suitable habitat present within and around the study area, however, a previous targeted survey9 (PKA, 2016)
failed to reveal the species at the time of survey within suitable habitat at the site.

5
Jacobs (2017), AGL Gas Import Jetty Project, Aboriginal Heritage Due Diligence Assessment. Report for AGL Energy Limited. Draft, 7 December
2017.
6
Jacobs (2017), AGL Gas Import Jetty Project, Historic Heritage Assessment. Report for AGL Energy Limited. Draft, 7 December 2017
7
PKA, 2015, Ecological (Flora & Fauna) Assessment Crib Point Jetty, Port of Hastings. Report for Port of Hastings. 23 December 2015.
8 Jacobs (2017), AGL Gas Import Jetty Project, Desktop Flora and Fauna Assessment. Report for AGL Energy Limited. Draft, 23 November 2017.
9
PKA, (2016) Southern Brown Bandicoot (Isoodon obesulus obesulus) survey at Crib Point Jetty, Port of Hastings. Report for Port of Hastings.

IS228500-EP-RP-002 3
 Environmental Risk Assessment – Crib Point Jetty
Upgrade

Contaminated Land

Previous investigations of the Port Land adjacent to the jetty10 11 have identified contamination of soil, sediment
and groundwater beneath the Project Site. This is predominantly related to metals, with some hydrocarbons and
perfluoralkyl substances (in the presence of perfluoroctanesulfonic acid) identified in isolated areas. Fill soil is
present across the site up to depths of approximately 1 metre, with soil contamination predominantly identified
within this unit. Groundwater is present at depths around 6.8 to 7.5 metres and is unlikely to be encountered as
part of the proposed Project.

10
Jacobs, 2017, Baseline Environmental Contamination Investigation, Factual Report, prepared for Port of Hastings Development Authority, 1 June
2017
11
PPK, 1998. Statements of Environmental Audit, Port of Hastings Sites (No. 78J155A-pr29999d M7314). PPK Environment & Infrastructure Pty Ltd,
South Melbourne.

IS228500-EP-RP-002 4
 Environmental Risk Assessment – Crib Point Jetty
Upgrade

2.4 Construction Methodology

The following construction activities are outlined as per the information provided as part of the project’s
preliminary design. These activities are subject to change upon completion of detailed design.

Berth 2 Infrastructure

One of the main existing infrastructure elements which limits the capability of Berth 2 is the Pier Head
itself. It is heavily dilapidated and requires a great amount of remediation works; likely total
replacement of Pier Head 2. All other concrete elements will undergo in-situ concrete repair
remediation, as outlined below:
 Installation of a supporting manifold:
- To allow the installation of the new loading arms, a new manifold will be installed around the
middle of the pier head.
 Replacement of old quick release hooks:
- Quick-release hooks will be installed at various locations to replace the existing
decommissioned units.
 Installation of berthing and mooring dolphins:
- 4 x mooring dolphins and 2x berthing dolphins and a possible replacement of an existing
berthing dolphin will be made from either pre-fabricated structural steel or reinforced
concrete components and installed atop tubular steel piles which would be driven into the
seabed. Engagement depth and pile sizes are yet to be determined. Each dolphin will be
contained with hand railing, rope railing, lighting, power supply, access ladder and life
jackets. If constructed from reinforced concrete, additional concrete may be placed using
concrete pump and trucks, while structural steel components would be grouted to the piles.
- Each dolphin will require foundations to be piled into the seabed. The preferred method of
piling is driven steel piles, whereby each tubular steel pile is driven in to the ground using a
drop hammer. The piles will be handled, pitched and secured on to the seabed by a crane/rig
mounted either on a jack-up barge or floating barge restrained by mooring lines. Initially the
piles will be vibrated until refusal or until the pile reaches a certain depth above the final
embedment depth. The piling will then be completed by driving the piles with a drop hammer.
- Geotechnical conditions may require further action for installing the piles. This may require
the piling contractor to drill, chisel or bore into the seabed to achieve the required
embedment. It is also possible that if adequate embedment cannot be achieved, then some
of the piles may need to be anchored to the bedrock. Following the completion of the piling
works and trimming of piles to their approximate level, a temporary works platform will be
installed by clamping it to the piles. The platform will allow workers to install bracing to the
pile group to then allow the precast berthing and mooring dolphin units to be installed.

Jetty Head

Complete Replacement with Steel Deck with pre-cast concrete panels on top of deck

The first stage for complete jetty head replacement will be to remove the existing jetty head. The
contracting company will need to install a capture device underneath the jetty head to ensure
appropriate management of falling material.

The process for removing the existing jetty head would be to divide the jetty head into sections. Each
reinforced concrete section would be cut away from the remaining structure, one section at a time,
including 1-2m off the top of the foundation piles that lie within a section. A mechanical cut would be
suitable for separation of the foundation pile and the reinforced concrete sections. When completely
separated, each section will be lifted and removed by a crane mounted barge. The foundation piles
would next be prepared for installation of the deck structure.

The new steel deck can be prefabricated in smaller sections, brought to site via dumb barge, lifted by
IS228500-EP-RP-002 5
 Environmental Risk Assessment – Crib Point Jetty
Upgrade

crane mounted barge one at a time onto the existing and new foundation piles and welded together on
site. If feasible, the entire steel deck can be prefabricated in one section offsite and lifted into place in
a single lift.

Fenders

New fenders for the berthing dolphins will be prefabricated off site and brought by dumb barge to site.
These will then be installed via crane mounted barge to the face of the berthing dolphins once fully
constructed. Any fixings required to be cast into the berthing dolphin to allow the fenders to be
mounted will be installed during the pre-casting works offsite.

IS228500-EP-RP-002 6
 Environmental Risk Assessment – Crib Point Jetty
Upgrade

3. Risk Assessment Framework

The risk assessment criteria below have been adopted for this risk assessment to identify key risk categories
associated with the proposed works. A rating (i.e. very low, low, medium, high, very high) has been assigned to
each risk in order to identify priority management actions.

The level of risk can be defined as a combination of:

 The likelihood of an event occurring; and
 The magnitude of potential consequences if the event were to occur.

The likelihood and consequence criteria and risk assessment matrix are defined in the following section.

3.1 Risk Criteria

To assess the level of likelihood, qualitative measures were defined as shown in Table 3.1.

Table 3.1: Qualitative measures of likelihood

Measure of likelihood Description

Rare The event is very unlikely to occur but may occur in exceptional circumstances.

Unlikely The event may occur under unusual circumstances but is not expected.

Possible The event might occur at some time under normal circumstances.

Likely The event will probably occur in most circumstances.

Almost certain The event is almost certain to occur in most circumstances.

To assess consequence, the qualitative descriptions were separated into biophysical / environmental
consequences and socio-economic consequences, as shown in Table 3.2.

Table 3.2: Qualitative measures of consequence

Level Qualitative description of biophysical/ Qualitative description of socio-economic

environmental consequence consequence

Negligible No detectable change in a local environmental setting. No detectable impact on economic, cultural,
recreational, aesthetic or social values.

Minor Short term, reversible changes, within natural Short term, localised impact on economic, cultural,
variability range, in a local environmental setting. recreational, aesthetic or social values.

Moderate Long term but limited changes to local environmental Significant and/or long term change in quality of
setting that are able to be managed. economic, cultural, recreational, aesthetic or social
values in local setting. Limited impacts at regional
level.

Major Long term, significant changes resulting in risks to
human health and/or the environment beyond the local
environmental setting. Eventual recovery of ecological
systems possible but not necessarily to the same pre-
incident conditions.
Significant, long term change in quality of economic,
cultural, recreational, aesthetic or social values at
local, regional and State levels. Limited impacts at
national level.

Severe Irreversible, significant changes resulting in
widespread risks to human health and/or the
environment at a regional scale or broader. Loss of
biodiversity on a regional scale. Loss of ecological
functioning with little prospect of recovery to pre-
incident conditions.
Significant, permanent impact on regional economy
and/or irreversible changes to cultural, recreational,
aesthetic or social values at regional, State and
national levels.

IS228500-EP-RP-002 7
 Environmental Risk Assessment – Crib Point Jetty
Upgrade

The degree of risk was established by considering the components of likelihood and consequence in the matrix
shown in Table 3.3.

Table 3.3: Risk Rating Matrix

Consequence Rating

Negligible Minor Moderate Major Severe

Rare Very Low Very Low Low Medium Medium

Likelihood Rating

Unlikely Very Low Low Low Medium High

Possible Low Low Medium High High

Likely Low Medium Medium High Very High

Almost Certain Low Medium High Very High Very High

Development of management and mitigation measures has focussed on risks categorised as medium or higher.
For very low and low risks, no management measures have been proposed and the residual risk is therefore the
same as the initial risk.

3.2 Risk Assessment Scope

The scope of the risk assessment includes the construction phase of the project, but excludes the operation of
ships utilising the jetty. The Project Site is shown in Figure 2.2. This excludes the proposed mooring of the
FSRU and operation of the cargo ships.

The following assumptions have been made in relation to construction activities:

 This risk assessment only relates to the works for the construction of the Jetty Upgrade project.
 A construction laydown area and staff facilities/amenities will be provided on the Project Site (adjoining
landside area). Whilst the layout of the landside area is not yet known, it is assumed that the construction
laydown area and staff facilities/amenities required for the Jetty Upgrade project would be easily
accommodated within the existing cleared area (void of native vegetation).
 Car parking for construction personnel will be provided within the Project Site (adjoining landside area) or
at another designated site subject to requisite investigation/approval.
 There will be no sewage discharges associated with the works and toilet facilities provided during
construction will be portable.
 The potential cumulative impacts of construction activities on the landside area associated with the Crib
Point to Pakenham Gas Pipeline Project have not been assessed as design and construction details are
not yet known.

IS228500-EP-RP-002 8
 Environmental Risk Assessment – Crib Point Jetty
Upgrade

4. Environmental Risk Assessment

A risk workshop was convened on 14 December 2017 and attended by representatives from PoHDA, AGL,
Poten & Partners (Owner’s Engineer), Worley Parsons/Advisian, Jacobs, Consulting Environmental Engineers
(Marine Ecologist) and the Victorian Regional Channels Authority.

A draft environmental risk assessment and accompanying report was disseminated prior to the workshop. The
workshop provided a forum to relay the project description and context, confirm risk assessment methodology
and discuss each risk and reach consensus on risk ratings, mitigation measures and residual risks.

The environmental risk assessment is provided in Table 4.1.

IS228500-EP-RP-002 9
 Environmental Risk Assessment

Table 4.1 : Crib Point Jetty Upgrade – Environmental Risk Assessment

Risk
Initial rating Residual rating
No.

Consequence

Consequence
Management / mitigation

Risk rating

Risk rating
Likelihood

Likelihood
Aspect Identified risk Impacts
measures

1. Coastal management Construction works increase Stability issues on the coast.

coastal erosion rates through Increase in sediment transport.

Negligible

Negligible
Possible

Possible
presence of any additional

Low

Low
vessels/barges; new jetty
infrastructure and runoff from
the landside area.
2. Coastal management Local and regional coastal Stability issues on the coast.

Negligible

Negligible
Possible

Possible
hydrodynamics effects of Increase in sediment transport.

Low

Low
additional jetty infrastructure.

3. Flora and fauna values Construction of offshore Adverse impact to seabed Work methods developed to
components (piles, biota. Temporary loss of minimise potential impacts.
foundations) results in marine habitat. Minimise construction

Negligible

Negligible
Very Low

Very Low
Unlikely

disturbance to seabed biota
within the construction
footprint.
4. Flora and fauna values Localised, temporary
increases in turbidity from jetty
works (pile driving).
Unlikely
impacts through appropriate
management plan and
optimising seabed footprint.
Avoiding any unnecessary
disturbance of seabed.
Adverse impact to marine Work methods developed to
species, including cetaceans minimise potential impacts.
(dolphins and whales) and Minimise construction

Unlikely

Unlikely
Minor

Minor
seabed biota. Temporary loss impacts through appropriate

Low

Low
of marine habitat. management plan and
optimising seabed footprint.
Avoiding any unnecessary
disturbance of seabed.

IS228500-EP-RP-002 9
 Environmental Risk Assessment

Risk
Initial rating Residual rating
No.

Consequence

Consequence
Management / mitigation

Risk rating

Risk rating
Likelihood

Likelihood
Aspect Identified risk Impacts
measures

5. Flora and fauna values Underwater noise from pile Adverse impact to marine Work methods developed to
driving and other construction species, including cetaceans minimise potential impacts.

Medium

Unlikely
equipment used. (dolphins and whales) and Minimise construction

Likely
Minor

Minor

6. Flora and fauna values Airborne noise from
generators, pile drivers and
other construction equipment
Low
seabed biota. impacts through appropriate
management plan.
Appropriate noise
monitoring.
Adverse impact to migratory Work methods developed to
birds in the local area. minimise potential impacts.
Minimise construction

Possible

Possible
Minor

Minor
used. impacts through appropriate

Low

7. Flora and fauna values Introduction of marine pests /
introduced species to the local
environment via vessels used
for the construction activities.
Low
management plan.
Appropriate noise
monitoring. Use appropriate
construction methodology.
Modification to natural marine Normal controls on visiting
ecosystem composition. vessels in accordance with
the following:
Port Phillip certification
requirements, and
“Australian Ballast Water

Moderate

Possible

Medium

Unlikely
Management

Minor

Low
Requirements”, Department
of Agriculture and
Water Resources
(Commonwealth).

IS228500-EP-RP-002 10
 Environmental Risk Assessment

Risk
Initial rating Residual rating
No.

Consequence

Consequence
Management / mitigation

Risk rating

Risk rating
Likelihood

Likelihood
Aspect Identified risk Impacts
measures

8. Flora and fauna values Construction activities cause Adverse impact to flora and Work methods developed to

Unlikely

Unlikely
Minor

Minor
adverse effect to the native fauna values and habitat. minimise potential impacts

Low

Low
vegetation within the landside to native vegetation.
area.
9. Water quality, Flora and fauna Accidental spills and Adverse impact to water Management procedures

Moderate

Possible

Medium

Unlikely
discharges of concrete slurry, quality. Adverse impact on (including containment of

Minor

paint or other liquids during
construction.
10 Water quality, Flora and fauna Accidental oil/fuel spills from
Low
water quality and marine biota. concrete slurry), spill
Loss of marine habitat. response procedures.
Reputational damage. Containment facilities.
Adverse impact to water Management procedures,

Possible

Possible
generators and cranes over quality. Adverse impact on spill response procedures.

Minor

Minor
Low

the water, maintenance and
chemical stores.
11 Water quality, Flora and fauna Hydro-demolition works have
the potential to cause water
Low
water quality and marine biota. Containment facilities.
Loss of marine habitat.
Reputational damage.
Adverse impact to water Work methods developed to
quality. Adverse impact on minimise potential impacts.

Possible

Possible
quality effects (turbidity, etc.). water quality and marine biota. Including use of containment

Minor

Minor
Low

Low
Loss of marine habitat. measures and capture
device underneath the jetty
and monitoring as per Work
Method Statement.
12 Aboriginal heritage values Offshore works have the Impact to Aboriginal heritage.

Moderate

Moderate
potential to disturb unrecorded Reputational damage.

Rare

Rare
Low

Low
submerged sites.

IS228500-EP-RP-002 11
 Environmental Risk Assessment

Risk
Initial rating Residual rating
No.

Consequence

Consequence
Management / mitigation

Risk rating

Risk rating
Likelihood

Likelihood
Aspect Identified risk Impacts
measures

13 Aboriginal heritage values Any disturbance of the soil Impact to Aboriginal heritage.
within the landside area has Reputational damage.
the potential to disturb
unrecorded Aboriginal
sites/artefacts. (Disturbance of

Moderate

Moderate
the soil is unlikely given that

Rare

Rare
Low

Low
the proposed use of the
landside area is only for
temporary construction
laydown and staff amenities.
No excavations would be
anticipated. Site has also
been previously disturbed.)
14 Soil contamination Excavation of the soil within Exposure to contaminated soils
the landside area has the (metals, with some
potential to disturb hydrocarbons and perfluoralkyl
contaminated soil. substances). Potential human
(Disturbance of the soil is health effects.

Very Low

Very Low
unlikely given that the

Minor

Minor
Rare

Rare
proposed use of the landside
area is only for temporary
construction laydown and staff
amenities. No excavations
would be anticipated.
Disturbance of contaminated
material is not expected).
15 Historical heritage values Earthworks, pile driving (etc.) Impact to historical heritage -

Very Low

Very Low
associated with the Jetty BP Refinery Administration
Minor

Minor
Rare

Rare
Upgrade have the potential to Building. Reputational damage.
disturb potential post-
European sites.

IS228500-EP-RP-002 12
 Environmental Risk Assessment

Risk
Initial rating Residual rating
No.

Consequence

Consequence
Management / mitigation

Risk rating

Risk rating
Likelihood

Likelihood
Aspect Identified risk Impacts
measures

16 Public amenity Construction works (dust, Local community impacted. Minimise construction
noise, spills, construction Reputational damage. impacts through appropriate

Medium

Unlikely
vehicle traffic) may impact management plan. Follow

Likely
Minor

Minor

Low
local amenity. EPA Publication 1254:
Noise Control Guidelines.
Work according to specified
construction working hours.
17 Public safety Recreational craft risk or Accident with recreational Normal security controls not
any commercial craft risk craft/commercial craft near permitting recreational

Medium

Medium
jetty upgrade operations, vessels within 100m of the

Rare
Severe

Severe
potential human jetty will remain and VRCA

Rare
injury/death and impacts to harbor control measures.
environment from spill.

18 Solid waste management Impact to the marine Adverse impact to water Work methods developed to
environment if solid wastes fall quality. Loss of marine habitat. minimise potential impacts.

Possible

Possible
into the water through Including use of containment

Minor

Minor
Low

demolition works and other
remediation activities.
19 United fuel pipeline operation Accidental impact (e.g.
collision, impact from
Low
measures and capture
device underneath the jetty
and monitoring as per Work
Method Statement.
Potential human health Strict controls working in
impacts. Adverse impact to vicinity of fuel pipeline, in

Medium

Medium
Unlikely

Unlikely
vibration, other) to the existing water quality and marine flora accordance with necessary

Major

United fuel pipeline (will
remain operational throughout
construction).
20 Bushfire Construction activities cause
Major
and fauna. Loss of marine approvals and work method
habitat. Impacts to United statement.
operations. Reputational
damage.
Adverse impacts to natural Bushfire management plan.

Medium

Medium
Major

Major
increased risk of bushfire. environment, homes and Rare

Rare
Bushfire Management Overlay human health as a result of
applies to jetty area. bushfire.
21 Flora and fauna values, Water Construction activities cause Potential impact to values of Combination of mitigation

Negligible

Very Low
Unlikely

Unlikely
quality adverse effect on Western Western Port Ramsar Wetland. measures will address any
Minor

Low

Port Ramsar Wetland values. potential impacts as outlined

in the previous risks.

IS228500-EP-RP-002 13