Liquefied Petroleum Gas (LPG) Extraction Project: Consultative Environmental Review

EPA IJbrary/Information
Centre
REFERENCE ONLY
rOT LOAN
Please do not remove
North West Shelf Gas Proje
LIQUEFIED PETROLEUM GAS

(LPG) EXTRACTION PROJECT
CONSULTATIVE ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
- - --
-
- 4. .'
cr 4'• . '
- .
_8' 1C ..
-- j 8..
'
O..-4.,{. •.
- - -.--- -.
-.-
-T'T - -, '-- -
--.--. _ - :2 -- -._-
-
, f)
A&((- ve
\JL
Halpern 17A
Glick
Maunsell
- NOT FOR LOAN
I/A
THIS CONSULTATIVE ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
for
ADDITIONAL FACILITIES TO LIQUEFIED
PETROLEUM GAS (LPG) EXTRACTION PROJECT
WITHIN EXISTING ONSHORE TREATMENT PLANT
BURRUP PENINSULA (782)
was prepared for

WOODSIDE OFFSHORE PETROLEUM PTY LTD
by
HALPERN GLICK MAUNSELL PTY LTD
Consulting Engineers and Environmental Scientists
1 Ord Street West Perth WA 6005
LIBRARY
DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECT
WESTRALIA SQUARE
141 ST. GEORGES TERRACE, PERTH
Cover Photograph
(Courtesy of Kevron Aerial Surveys Pty Ltd):
A view of the W'oodside Onshore Gas Treatment Plant
looking east from Mermaid Sound.
It is proposed to establish the liquefied petroleum
gas export facility on the foreground shoreline.
Woodside Document No: ENV-0221

INVITATION
The Environmental Protection Authority (EPA) invites people to make a

submission on this proposal.
This Consultative Environmental Review (CER) covers the extension of Woodside

Offshore Petroleum Pty Ltd's existing domestic gas (Domgas)/iiqucfied natural
gas (LNG) facility to incorporate the production of liquefied petroleum gas
(LPG) as part of the phased construction of the Burrup Peninsula Onshore Gas
Treatment Plant. In accordance with the Environmental Protection Act a CER
has been prepared which describes this proposal and its likely effects on the
environment. The CER is available for a public review period of 4 weeks from
Tuesday 27 April 1993 and closing on Tuesday 25 May 1993.
Following receipt of comments from government agencies and the public, the
EPA will prepare an assessment report with recommendations to the government,
taking into account issues raised in the submissions.
Why write a submission?
A submission is a way to provide information, express your opinion and put

forward your suggested course of action - including any alternative approach.
it is useful if you indicate any suggestions you have to improve the
proposal.
All submissions received by the EPA will be acknowledged. Submissions may be

fully or partially utilised in compiling a summary of the issues raised or,
where complex or technical issues are raised, a confidential copy of the
submission (or part thereof) may be sent to the proponent. The summary of
issues raised is normally included in the EPA's assessment report. Submitters
would not be identified to the proponent without the submitter's permission.
Why not join a group?
If you prefer not to write your own comments, it may be worthwhile joining
with a group interested in making a submission on similar issues. Joint
submissions may help to reduce the workload for an individual or group, as
well as increase the pool of ideas and information. If you form a small group
(up to 10 people) please indicate all the names of the participants. If your
group is larger, please indicate how many people your submission represents.
Developing a submission
You may agree or disagree with, or comment on, the general issues discussed
in the CER or the specific proposals. It helps if you give reasons for your
conclusions, supported by relevant data. You may make an important
contribution by suggesting ways to make the proposal environmentally more
acceptable.
When making comments on specific proposals in the CER:
clearly state your point of view;
indicate the source of your information or argument if this is

applicable; and
suggest recommendations, safeguards or alternatives.
By keeping the following points in mind, you will make it easier for your
submission to be analysed:
Attempt to list points so that the issues raised are clear. A

summary of your submission is helpful.
Refer each point to the appropriate section, chapter or

recommendation in the CER.
If you discuss sections of the CER, keep them distinct and separate,
so there is no confusion as to which section you are considering.
Attach any factual information you wish to provide and give details
of the source. Make sure your information is correct.
Remember to include:
your name
your address
date.
The closing date for submission is Tuesday 25 May 1993
Submissions should be addressed to:
Chairman
Environmental Protection Authority
Westralia Square
141 St George's Tee
PERTH WA 6000
Attention: Mr Shanc Sadleir
If you have any questions on how to make a submission please phone the
Project Officer, Mr Shane Sadleir, on (09) 222 7034.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
I. SPECIAL TERMS AND ABBREVIATIONS 1
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS 3
INTRODUCTION 5
3.1 Background
3.2 Proponent
3.3 Responsible Authority
3.4 Scope of Proposed Project
3.5 Location
3.6 Timing
3.7 Alternatives Considered
3.8 Purpose and Structure of the CER
3.9 Approvals Process
PROPOSED LOCATION AND SITE DESCRIPTION 9
4.1 Location
4.2 Zoning
4.3 Nearest Urban Areas
4.4 Site Description
4.4.1 Terrestrial Flora and Fauna
4.4.2 Marine Biotic Assemblages
4.4.3 Aboriginal Heritage
4.5 Effects of Historic Dredging Operations
4.6 Current Marine Monitoring Programme
PROJECT DESCRIPTION 13
5.1 Description of Process

5.2 Proposed Construction Activities
5.2.1 Construction Timetable and Site Layout
5.2.2 Construction of LPG Facilities
5.2.3 Construction of the Jetty
5.3 Workforce
5.4 Services
5.4.1 Water Supply
5.4.2 Transport Effects
5.4.3 Electricity
5.4.4 Effluent
5.5 Greenhouse Gas Emissions
5.6 Buffer Zones
TABLE OF CONTENTS
(conlinued)
Page
QUANTITATIVE RISK ASSESSMENT 17
6.1 Introduction
6.2 Risk Standards and Criteria
6.3 Objectives of the Quantitative Risk Assessment
6.4 Discussion of Major QRA Findings
6.5 Main QRA Conclusions
POTENTIAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS

AND THEIR MANAGEMENT 21
7.1 Identification of Issues

7.1.1 Construction Phase
7.1.2 Operation Phase
7.2 Management of Potential Environmental Impacts
COMMITMENTS 29
8.1 Preconstruction
8.2 During Construction
8.3 Post Construction
REFERENCES 31
APPENDICES
Consultative Environmental Review Guidelines

Aboriginal Site Survey
Separately bound
Quantitative Risk Assessment

(Prepared by DNV Technica, North Sydney, Australia)
LIST OF FIGURES
Location Plan and Proposed Facilities for LPG Export

Onshore Plant Complex. Main Biotic Assemblages
Chemical and Ecological Monitoring Mermaid Sound (CHEMMS)
Sampling Sites
Onshore Gas Plant Schematic
LPG Export Project Facilities - General Layout
Onshore Treatment Plant and Buffer Zone Lease
Cumulative Quantitative Risk Assessment - LNG and LPG Plants
1. SPECIAL TERMS AND ABBREVIATIONS
CER Consultative Environmental Review
CFCs Chioro-Fluoro-Carbons. A class of chemicals which are

suspected of being major contributors to the destruction of
the atmospheric ozone layer.
CHEMMS Chemical and Ecological Monitoring of Mermaid Sound.
Domgas Domestic Gas - scheme gas for Western Australia.
EEMUA Engineering Equipment and Materials Users Association.
EIS/ERMP Environmental Impact Statement/Environmental Review and Manage-

ment Programme.
EPA Environmental Protection Authority.
FAR/SS Field Auxiliary Room/Substation for power distribution.
Fractionation A process used to separate the light hydrocarbon mixture into

Unit its component compounds by fractional distillation.
ha Hectare.
Hydrostatic A procedure where a vessel is filled with a fluid, normally

Test water, and raised to its design pressure. The purpose of the
test is to assure that the vessel will safely withstand the
operating pressure when it is put into service.
LNG Liquefied Natural Gas. LNG is the name given to the methane
portion of natural gas which has been liquefied by cooling to
minus 1610C.
LO-X Foam Low expansion foam for fire fighting.
LPG Liquefied Petroleum Gas. LPG is the name given to the propane
and/or butane fraction of natural gas that is collected as a
by-product in the production of LNG.
Butane is used as a raw material for manufacturing synthetic

rubber, an additive to high octane liquid fuels, a fuel, a
propellant in aerosols, and as a food additive.
Propane is used as a household, industrial and automotive fuel

and as an aerosol propellant.
m Metre.
Mangal Mangrove system.
Page 1
Pickle Liquors A solution used to clean a metal of all oxide layers and
welding scale.
Propagule Seed of a mangrove.
ppm Parts per million (milligram per litre)
QRA Quantitative Risk Assessment.
Scrub Column A device for separating methane from heavier hydrocarbons.
Slugcatcher A horizontal separator which allows the separation of a

liquid/gas mixture into two phases - liquid and gas.
Stabiliser A vertical column which allows the removal of dissolved gases

from a liquid stream.
Woodside Woodside Offshore Petroleum Pty Ltd is the Operator Company

for the North West Shelf Joint Venture, the Participants of
which are:
Woodside Petroleum Ltd,

Shell Development (Australia) Pty Ltd,
BHP Petroleum (North West Shelf) Pty Ltd,
BP Developments Australia Ltd,
Chevron Asiatic Ltd, and
Japan Australia LNG (MIMI) Pty Ltd.
Page 2
2. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS
The existing liquefied natural gas/domestic gas (LNG/Domgas) facility on the

Burrup Peninsula will be extended for the production of liquefied petroleum
gas (LPG). The addition of this unit operation was envisaged when the
Woodside facility was originally proposed, and it was disclosed by 1980
addenda to the EIS/ERMP"2'3'4'5. In 1980 the offshore field was not
producing sufficient propane or butane to justify the installation of the LPG
facility. This phase was therefore deferred. Offshore development has
continued and the Goodwyn field is about to come 'on line'. In the near
future Woodside is planning to add the Wanaea and Cossack fields. This
increase in gas production have made the installation of the LPG facility
economically viable. Woodside considers this project as a continuation of its
phased construction at the Onshore Gas Treatment Plant located at Withnell
Bay on the Burrup Peninsula.
The Project will involve the installation of two storage tanks, a chiller
unit, fire protection equipment, an auxiliary substation and associated
infrastructure within the existing process area and a new ship jetty parallel
with, and to the north of, the existing jetty. No extension of the Plant
boundary is required.
The core portions of this phase of development at the Onshore Gas Treatment
Plant were described in 1980' and subjected to public review6.
In 1980 it was suggested that LPG would be loaded to ships from the LNG/
condensate jetty and that the process equipment would be water cooled. It is
now envisaged that a new jetty will be required and that air cooled process
equipment will be used. The core portions of the process remain unchanged.
In recognition of the significant time lag between the 1980 submissions and
the proposed beginning of construction, the change from sea water to air
cooling and the addition of a new jetty to the scope, the Project has been
presented for public review through the submission of this Consultative
Environmental Review (CER).
The existing Gas Treatment Plant occupies 231ha on a lease at Withnell Bay,
near Dampier on the Burrup Peninsula about 1,300km north of Perth. During
construction more than 12 years ago some 6.28 million cubic metres of rock
and soil were moved to make the site level, so the area within the lease has
undergone major disturbance. The portions of Plant constructed to date
consist of a Domgas Plant, an LNG Plant, LNG storage facilities, condensate
storage facilities, a ship jetty, ship loading equipment, and administration
buildings.
Construction of the existing Plant required the installation of a

'construction camp' that has subsequently been removed and the area rehabil-
itated. The work force for the proposed LPG extension project will be housed
in existing accommodation in either Karratha or Dampier. No construction camp
is envisaged.
The marine biotic assemblages in the vicinity of the proposed new jetty are
oyster-barnacle, coral and mollusc-cchinoderm. The potential impacts
identified are physical damage to corals as a result of construction
activities and an increased siltation on corals through dredging operations
and increased shipping activity. These potential impacts are considered to be
localised and minor.
Page 3
Since 1985 Woodside has undertaken regular monitoring of the marine environ-
ment in the vicinity of the Gas Treatment Plant. To date this chemical and
ecological monitoring programme (CHEMMS) has found only minor project-related
effects. It is proposed to monitor the effects of the LPG development as part
of this programme.
An Aboriginal Site Survey, commissioned for this CER (Appendix II), confirmed
the location of two 'heritage sites' that were previously identified. The
intention is to install the LPG Unit process and jetty without damaging these
sites.
The risk associated with the existing Gas Treatment Plant's operation is well
within acceptable limits38'39. A risk study, commissioned for this CER
(Appendix III), indicates that the installation of the LPG process will cause
little change in the overall risk to the public arising from the Gas
Treatment Plant. The cumulative risk is well within EPA criteria for the
categories of land use currently designated for the area. No change to the
existing buffer zones surrounding the plant will be required.
Other potential environmental impacts of the development are identified

together with their proposed management. A number of commitments are made by
Woodside with respect to the Project including the preparation of a manage-
ment plan for the onshore disposal of dredge spoil.
It is concluded that the potential environmental impacts of this project are

minor. Besides the special measures mentioned, other potential impacts can be
adequately monitored and managed within Woodside's current operating
procedures and environmental management programme.
Page 4
3. INTRODUCTION
3.1 BACKGROUND
In May 1979 Woodside Petroleum Development Pty Ltd submitted an Environmental

Impact Statement/Environmental Review and Management Programme (EIS/
ERMP)', for the phased construction of a natural gas production and
processing facility at Withnell Bay on the Burrup Peninsula. Environmental
impacts were assessed and as a result of these stud jes an environmental
management programme was established by Woodside from that time. In March
1980 the EIS/ERMP was amended to include the possibility of producing
liquefied petroleum gas (LPG) at the site. The first phase of the Project
began in early 1982 with the construction of the domestic gas train (Domgas).
The LNG phase of the work was begun in late 1985 with additional capacity
installed from late 1989. Installation of the LPG facilities was deferred as
it was not economically viable at the time. The facility currently consists
of:
a Domgas Plant providing scheme gas to Western Australia;
an LNG Plant and storage facilities capable of providing 7 million

tonnes of LNG for export;
condensate (liquid hydrocarbon) storage facilities for domestic and

overseas markets;
a ship jetty and ship loading equipment; and
administration buildings.
At the moment, LPG is separated out of the LNG gas stream and used in the LNG
refrigeration process. Excess LPG is mixed with the Domgas stream for
consumption in Western Australian scheme gas.
When the Goodwyn field comes on line in early 1994 the capacity of the
existing Plant to utilise all of the LPG components of the hydrocarbon stream
will be limited. It is now the intention of Woodside to implement the
construction and operation of the LPG portion of the facility.
3.2 PROPONENT
Woodside Offshore Petroleum Pty Ltd

GPO Box D188
PERTH 6001
Inquiries should be directed to:

Mr Adrian Chegwidden
Principal Environmental Scientist
(09) 224 4111
Page 5
3.3 RESPONSIBLE AUTHORITY
Environmental Protection Authority

141 St George's Terrace
PERTH 6000
Inquiries should be directed to:

Mr Shane Sadleir
Environmental Officer
(09) 222 7034
3.4 SCOPE OF PROPOSED PROJECT
Woodside proposes to construct an LPG storage and shipping facility that

consists of the following components:
pipework to connect the new unit process to the existing LNG facility;
pipework to connect the existing condensate system to the new jetty;
two double walled storage tanks of 50,000m3 each;
a refrigeration unit for cooling the LPG vapours;
a ship jetty for berthing ocean going LPG carriers;
pipe work for delivery of product to the ship jetty;
ship loading and vapour collection equipment;
connection to the existing LNG jetty low expansion foam fire

protection equipment (LO-X); and
a field auxiliary room for instrumentation and a substation for

power supply.
In summary, the proposed LPG facility will not separate and produce LPG
because this is already done within the existing LNG plant. The new facility
will only store and ship the excess LPG that is already being produced in the
LNG plant.
3.5 LOCATION
The proposed facilities are to be built within the existing Onshore Gas
Treatment Plant lease on the Burrup Peninsula (Figure 1).
3.6 TIMING
Start Date: late 1993

Duration of construction phase: 2 years
Page 6
Proposed
export jetty
Proposed
LPG storage
I facilities
Proposed
LPG chiller unit
~~ A
Refer Figure 5 for more detail
mdi
0
CN
Mermaid
Sound
ishore"... Wkhnell
4 + - -.
Bay
uIaLmenL -.
Plant Lease
No Name Creek
King Nic.kol
Bay Bay
N FIGURE ii
LOCATION PLAN AND PROPOSED FACILITIES

FOR LPG EXPORT
Environment VÔVWOODSIDE OFFSHORE PETROLEUM PTY. LTD. January 1993 I
Rev. 0
A. Chegwidden A.C.N. OO8SO97 C21 100.8093s1
I
3.7 ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED
Since commencing gasfield operations at North Rankin, Woodside has proceeded

with the offshore developments (Goodwyn, Wanaea, Cossack) which will increase
the quantity of LPG fractions which must be processed. The processing options
which have been examined are to:
produce commercially viable quantities of LPG by installing the LPG

facility in the Onshore Gas Treatment Plant;
flare the LPG fraction. Woodside considers the flaring option to be

both economically and environmentally unsound; and
reinject the LPG fraction into the North Rankin 'A' reservoir for
future use. This is expensive through the need to 'double handle'
the fraction.
Woodside has elected to proceed with the LPG processing facility as proposed
in the 1980 addenda to the EIS/ERMP.
3.8 PURPOSE AND STRUCTURE OF THE CER
The purpose of this CER is to describe the existing environment and the LPG
process in sufficient detail to allow the potential impacts of the Project to
be identified and assessed and to allow formulation of proposals for the
mitigation or management of such impacts. Descriptions of the environment,
including biological, ethnographic and social, are restricted to the area of
potential impact, namely:
the proposed development area within the confines of the existing

LNG facilities;
the seabed in the vicinity of the proposed new LPG berth including
areas that may be impacted by sediment plumes originating during
dredging operations;
the area between the existing LNG/condensate export jetty and the
proposed LPG jetty, particularly in relation to areas of Aboriginal
heritage;
the dredge spoil disposal area at No Name Creek; and
the area immediately adjacent to the Onshore Gas Treatment Plant

where some additional risk may be experienced.
Comprehensive descriptions of the local and rqgional environment can be found

in a number of publications covering the area l,r,s,ls,lr.
Section 4 of this CER provides a description of the development area, Section

5 details the LPG process and associated works and Section 6 provides a
summary of the Quantitative Risk Assessment conducted for the Project. Potent-
ial environmental impacts and their management are discussed in Section 7 and
a list of proponent's commitments is provided in Section 8.
Page 7
EPA Guidelines applicable to this CER are provided in Appendix I and the
Aboriginal site survey is provided in Appendix II. The Quantitative Risk
Assessment is separately bound in Appendix III.
3.9 APPROVALS PROCESS
After submission to the EPA the CER is made available for public review.
Written submissions from interested or involved groups and from relevant
Government agencies are sought during a four week public review period. At
the conclusion of this period the EPA collates the submissions and provides
the proponent with an opportunity to respond to the issues raised. Both the
public submissions and the proponent's responses are then incorporated into
the EPA's assessment of the proposal. The EPA's assessment report provides
advice to the Minister for the Environment who then sets ministerial
conditions, usually based on the EPA's recommendations.
In addition to obtaining approval from the Minister under the Environmental

Protection Act (1986) the proposal will have to comply with various other
legislation including:
Aboriginal Heritage Act (1972-1980);

Mines Regulation Act (1974);
Dampier Port Authority Act (1985);
Occupational Health, Safety and Welfare Act (1984); and
North West Gas Development (Woodside) Agreement Act (1979).
Page 8
4. PROPOSED LOCATION AND SITE DESCRIPTION
4.1 LOCATION
The existing Onshore Gas Treatment Plant occupies 231ha on a lease at

Withnell Bay, near Dampier on the Burrup Peninsula about 1,300km north of
Perth (Figure 1).
4.2 ZONING
The Burrup Peninsula is classified under two Ministerial Temporary Reserves

over which the Minister for Resources Development has effective control.
Woodside leases are all prescribed under a Ratified Agreement - which is an
Act of Parliament.
The Department of Land Administration considers that the tenure of all land
adjacent to the Onshore Gas Treatment Plant and not under specific lease to
Woodside (laydown area lease and quarry lease) is vacant Crown Land.
The Pilbara 21 Report9 has been prepared and presents concepts for land
use on the Burrup Peninsula. It is currently unclear as to how this study
will be considered by Government as a basis for future planning.
The construction of LPG facilities will not change the impact of the Onshore
Gas Treatment Plant on the current or proposed land uses of the Burrup
Peninsula.
4.3 NEAREST URBAN AREAS
Dampier: 10km SSW

Karratha: 14km SSE
4.4 SITE DESCRIPTION
4.4.1 Terrestrial Flora and Fauna
The site proposed for construction of the LPG facilities is within the
existing plant boundary and is situated on fill material. It is designated
for industrial development and consequently no formal flora or fauna surveys
were required.
4.4.2 Marine Biotic Assemblages
In the vicinity of the project area a number of biotic assemblages exist

which have the potential to be affected by the proposed construction of the
LPG berth"13. The location of these assemblages, shown in Figure 2,
are:
Page 9
LEGEND
Inter - tidal assemblages
sand
10 oyster barnade assemblage; rock & limestone

[] mollusc - coral assemblage; rock
Sub - tidal assemblages

mollusc - coral assemblage; limestone
coral assemblage; rock

0 200m
[j] mollusc - echinoderm assemblage; shell grit
LNG LOADP4G
JE1TY -
MERMAID SOUND
SLUGCATCHER
'I
k-, /0 40
(\/ ,/.oA
---- o
'-
'0
o'
L-
oyster-barnacle: occurring on intertidal solid substrates between
mean sea level and high neap tide. This is the main intertidal
assemblage along the western shore of Burrup Peninsula;
mollusc-coral: colonises low tidal rock substrates but is not a

major assemblage in the project area;
coral: inhabits subtidal rock substrates and is another of the major

assemblages along the west coast of Burrup Peninsula; and
mollusc-echinoderm: on unconsolidated sediments in shallow subtidal

and low intertidal areas in protected embayments. It is composed of
a wide diversity of organisms and is the main assemblage in the
project area.
A number of other biotic assemblages also occur in proximity to the project

area:
crustacea-mollusc: on unconsolidated intertidal sediments. Occurs in

embayments and on beaches along the west coast of Burrup Peninsula;
mangal: in protected embayments in the intertidal zone between mean

sea level and the high tide mark. These occur at only four localised
areas along the west coast of Burrup Peninsula;
mollusc-coral: colonises low tidal limestone substrates and is not a

major assemblage in the vicinity of the project area; and
seagrass: colonises shallow subtidal unconsolidated sediments. These

occur sparsely in nearshore sediments along the west coast of Burrup
Peninsula.
Of the biotic assemblages identified above the mollusc-echinoderm assemblage

may be affected the most as a result of direct habitat removal during
dredging. The mollusc-coral and coral assemblages could also be affected
through an increased sediment load in the water.
The mollusc-echinoderm assemblage is widespread throughout the Dampier

Archipelago and the removal of a relatively small area through dredging will
not noticeably affect the ecology of the Archipelago.
Studies conducted in association with past dredging operations (Section 4.5

and documentS22'25'26'27'28) have shown that corals can be affected
through an increase in turbidity (sediment) levels resulting in direct
siltation. However it has been found that impacts were minor, temporary and
localised, restricted to a distance of 1.5km from the nearest point of
operation, and relatively insignificant when compared with the physical
damage associated with cyclones36 such as Orson in 1989.
4.4.3 Aboriginal Heritage
An Aboriginal Site Survey was undertaken at the Gas Treatment Plant during
February and March 199316. The full report is included in Appendix II
and summarised below.
Page 10
The survey covered an area of approximately 30ha within Woodside's LNG lease.
A total of 13 archaeological sites have been previously recorded from the
survey area. Eleven of these sites have been cleared and all of Woodside's
obligations under the Aboriginal Heritage Act have been met.
Two archaeological sites remain in the survey area, namely P1561 and P1601,
both of which are located on the coastline. P1561 is considered of high
significance consisting of 165 engravings, 4 grinding patches and 1 standing
stone. It is recommended by the Consultants that the site be preserved. P1601
is considered to be of moderate to high significance consisting of 65 engrav-
ings and one grinding patch. The LNG jetty approaches were constructed on the
southern boundary of site P1601 and consequently the site has been partially
cleared. The Consultant has recommended that the Western Australian Museum be
consulted if any disturbance to the sites is required.
Both sites are well protected by a cyclone fence with access gained only
through a padlocked gate.
Mindful of the need to preserve Aboriginal sites whenever possible, Woodside

intends to locate the LPG jetty and associated infrastructure in such a
manner that damage to the above two sites is avoided.
4.5 EFFECTS OF HISTORIC DREDGING OPERATIONS
Dredging and spoil dumping operations for the LNG shipping channel commenced
in October 1986 and ceased in April 1988. Between October 1986 and June 1987
approximately 1.65 million m3 of dredge spoil was pumped to the No Name
Creek reclamation area. It was anticipated that the total suspended solids
concentration in the dredge spoil tailwater passing through the settlement
pond into No Name Bay would not exceed 25,000ppm. This level was exceeded and
a quantity of spoil was unintentionally deposited into No Name Bay.
During 1988 and early 1989 cyclonic activity caused localised collapse of the
shipping channel which required maintenance dredging during August and
September 1989. This dredge SDoil was disnosd nffshnrt'
The expected environmental effects of dredging operations can be implied from

environmental monitoring associated with the above dredging programmes25 '
26,27,28
In summary22, the results of dredging and marine spoil disposal showed

that:
all dredging and offshore spoil dumping activities caused only

temporary and localised increase in water turbidity levels;
recolonisation of spoil grounds by benthic biota occurred within a

few months of completion of dredging;
dredging and dumping operations carried out between 1986 and 1988
resulted in a minor reduction in coral numbers and percentage Cover
of live corals within a 1.5km radius of dredging activities; and
Page 11
during the period of maintenance dredging and dumping, no sediment-
ation on corals or coral mortality was observed at any of the
monitored sites.
An environmental assessment of dumping spoil in No Name Creek and the impact

of spoil deposition on the macrofauna and mangroves of No Name Bay has been
carried out since January 1986. All results are presented in various reports
29,3031,32 Natural regeneration of mangroves is occurring and
Woodside is augmenting this with a rehabilitation programme involving the
planting of Rhizophora propagules.
4.6 CURRENT MARINE MONITORING PROGRAMME
Since 1985 Woodside has undertaken regular monitoring of the marine environ-
ment in the vicinity of the Gas Treatment Plant'8"9'20'21'22'23'24.
This chemical and ecological monitoring programme (CHEMMS) is a Woodside
initiative. Figure 3 shows the location for CHEMMS and associated monitoring
sites around the Dampier Archipelago.
The original programme as defined in 1985 was developed to monitor any

effects that effluents originating from the Plant may have on the chemistry
and biota of Mermaid Sound. This programme ran from June 1985 to November
1987 and culminated in a final report in March 198818. The programme
was subsequently reviewed with modifications, such as increasing the number
of sampling stations. The revised programme was carried out for a further two
years with a technical report being submitted in December 199019.
Review of the first five years of data indicated that plant effluent had
little or no effect on the chemistry or biota of Mermaid Sound. Monitoring
did indicate that increased sedimentation, originating from No Name Bay, past
dredging operations and increased shipping activities, was having a localised
adverse effect on subtidal corals in the immediate vicinity of the Plant.
Based on this information the objective of the CHEMMS programme was redefined
with greater focus being placed on determining the effects of sedimentation
on subtidal coral assemblages. This revised programme commenced in July 1991
and is due to run for three years on a bi-annual basis. Results of the
November 1991 and May 1992 survey are provided in the second annual
report23 and summarised in the 1992 Interim Report24.
Currently the CHEMMS programme monitors corals, rocky shore animals, trace
metals and hydrocarbons in rock oysters, trace metals in sediments, and hydro-
carbons and nutrients in sea water. Metal concentrations in sediments and
oysters from the Woodside King Bay Supply Base are also determined.
To date the CHEMMS programme has found only minor project-related effects. Of
relevance in this context is the effect of increased sedimentation in the
immediate vicinity of the shipping channel and turning basin and in No Name
Bay.
Page 12
SITE LEGEND:
CHEMMS - A range of investigations including corals,

rocky shore animals, sediments and oysters
for metals and hydrocarbons and water for
nutrients.
C — - Coral growth study transects
K - Oysters for metals and polynuclear aromatic
hydrocarbons.
Most sites have been occupied since 1985.
Indian
Ocean
KENDRFW
ISLAND
Mermaid
Sound
IN CONZINC
,ISLAND
4 C14
/ 'p
WiIhnelI
CHEM S 4 Bay
CHEMMS 2
2
L
K5
No Name Cru CHEMMS 1
Onshore
Treatment
Plant Lease
CHEMriS2] Mckol
King B Bay
N
+
AMPIE
5km )
iisa FIGURE 3
/
CHEMICAL AND ECOLOGICAL MONITORING MERMAID SOUND
(CHEMMS) SAMPLING SITES
Environment April 1993
A. Chegwidden
VAYWOODSIDE OFFSHORE PETROLEUM PlY. LTD. Rev
U A.C.N.oO85OG7 C21 100-4997s
I
5. PROJECT DESCRIPTION
5.1 DESCRIPTION OF PROCESS
Woodside is currently processing liquid and gaseous hydrocarbons from the

North Rankin field. These products are piped from the field 134km to the
Onshore Gas Treatment Plant through a one metre diameter subsea pipeline.
When the Goodwyn field comes on line its hydrocarbons will be directed by
subsea pipeline to the North Rankin 'A' Platform and combined with the North
Rankin field products for processing in the Gas Treatment Plant (Figure 4).
The product from a gas well is a mixture of water, gaseous hydrocarbons and
liquid hydrocarbons. The water is removed from the mixture at the offshore
facility and 'dried' hydrocarbons are directed onshore for processing. When
the two phase product (liquid and gas mixed together) arrives at the Gas
Treatment Plant it first goes to a 'slugcatcher' where the gas and liquid are
allowed to separate.
The liquid portion is further processed in a unit called a 'stabiliser' where

an additional small quantity of gas is collected. The liquid product from the
stabiliser, 'the condensate', is one of the products of the Gas Treatment
Plant.
The gaseous product from the 'slugcatcher' is a mixture of low molecular

weight hydrocarbons; primarily methane, ethane, propane and butane, some
carbon dioxide and traces of water vapour. After treatment to remove the
traces of water and some of the heavier hydrocarbons, the gas is distributed
through a pipeline network to Western Australia as scheme gas.
The Gas Treatment Plant was designed to produce liquefied natural gas (LNG)
as one of its primary products. LNG is primarily the methane portion of the
'slugcatcher' gas. To produce LNG it is necessary to remove almost everything
that is not methane. First carbon dioxide and water vapour are removed. The
gas is then cooled to a temperature where some of the heavier hydrocarbons
(ethane and above) condense but the methane remains a gas. The gas is further
treated in the 'scrub column' to remove the heavier hydrocarbons. The methane
is then cooled to minus 161°C where it condenses. The liquid methane is
the LNG product.
The heavier hydrocarbons (ethane, propane, butane) are separated from each
other in a 'fractionation unit'. The fractionation unit produces several main
products:
a mixture of ethane and methane which is combined with the Domgas;
ethane which is used as refrigerant in the process. Excess ethane is

combined with the Domgas;
liquid propane. Part of the propane product is used as refrigerant

in the process and part is blended back into the Domgas to maintain
specifications. In future, excess propane will be sold as LPG;
Page 13
From Offshore
Condensate Domgas LPG LPG LNG

Product Product Product Product Product
(Proposed for (Proposed for
Export) Export)
FIGURE 4
ONSHORE GAS PLANT SCHEMATIC

I Environment Ty W000SIDE OFFSHORE PETROLEUM PTY. LTD. ApnI 1993 I
A. Chegwidden A.C.N.008945097 C21 100-8188s Rev.O
liquid butane. Part of the butane is blended with the Domgas to
maintain specifications. In future excess butane will be sold as
LPG; and
small quantities of condensate.
Woodside does not envisage the installation of equipment which would allow
the loading of road tankers with LPG. All transport of LPG in this proposal
will be by ship.
5.2 PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES
5.2.1 Construction Timetable and Site Layout
Construction is due to commence during late 1993 with Plant commissioning

targeted for late 1995. As yet no details are available on the phasing of the
individual components of the project.
The proposed site layout is shown in Figure 5.
Woodside currently uses the LNG jetty to load condensate to tankers. The
proposed LPG jetty is also being designed with the capacity to load
condensate. This will afford Woodside added flexibility in organising the
logistics of product loading. The risk assessment conducted for the LPG
project has included the option of condensate loading from the LPG jetty.
5.2.2 Construction of LPG Facilities
Preparation of the construction site will require the removal of a small rock
outcropping and final levelling of the construction area. It is believed that
all of this work can be accomplished with standard earth moving equipment.
The LPG facility will Contain two cryogenic storage tanks (50m diameter; 25m
high). The tanks consist of a concrete containment shell surrounding a steel
tank with an aluminium roof. The space between the concrete containment shell
and the metallic inner shell will be insulated with either formed in-place
foam or prefabricated shapes. No special construction techniques will be
required.
The chiller, interconnecting piping, electrical and instrumentation wiring

and minor buildings will be installed using standard construction techniques.
All construction will be conducted in accordance with EEMUA Standards.
Page 14
5.2.3 Construction of the Jetty
The jetty will be approximately 500m long. Several construction options have
been reviewed with the most favoured being a - piled trestle jetty similar to
the existing product (LNG and condensate) loading jetty. Preliminary design
indicates approximately 12 spans and 60 piles will be required. An advantage
of this open structure is that it allows unrestricted flow of water along the
coast compared to a back-filled earth and rock jetty.
Piles of about 0.5m diameter will be driven into drilled pilot holes. No
blasting will be required.
A cutter-suction dredge will be used to prepare the berthing pocket.

Approximately 700,000m3 of spoil will be removed and disposed of
onshore at the No Name Creek reclamation area.
5.3 WORKFORCE
During construction approximately 300 people will be employed. No construct-

ion camp will be needed since the construction workforce will be housed in
Karratha or Dampier. Once commissioned it is not envisaged that there will be
any increase in the permanent staff at the Gas Treatment Plant.
5.4 SERVICES
5.4.1 Water Supply
it is anticipated that the need for additional usage of water from the
existing public supply will be minimal.
5.4.2 Transport Effects
There will be a minimal increase in onshore transport. Offshore there will be

approximately 20 additional ship visits per year.
5.4.3 Electricity
The increase in electricity requirements will be generated by existing

Onshore Gas Treatment Plant equipment.
5.4.4 Effluent
The area of new pavement from which stormwater could flow will be very small
and any rainwater runoff that could contain hydrocarbons will be
appropriately treated prior to discharge to Mermaid Sound.
No additional process or sewage effluent will be generated.
Page 15
5.5 GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS
The existing facility uses a number of gas turbines to drive process

compressors. Other gas turbines are used to generate electricity on-site.
These two components make up the total plant power demand.
The proposed LPG facility will not require the installation of any new
electrical power generation facilities. There will however be an increased
load on the existing electricity generation facilities. This increased load
represents a 1% increase on the present total plant power demand.
Consequently, there will be an incremental increase of approximately 1% in
the generation of greenhouse gas emissions.
5.6 BUFFER ZONES
The existing 231ha lease at Withnell Bay is uniformly surrounded on its

southern and eastern perimeters by a 93ha buffer zone. The northern and
western perimeters are surrounded by water, as illustrated in Figure 6.
Currently a 500m exclusion zone exists around the LNG jetty, and a similar
exclusion zone will be required around the new jetty.
Page 16
N
MERMAID
SOUND
CD Withnell Bay
- Boat
Protected Area Launching
500m from Loading Jetty \ Area
'S
S.
TREATMENT PLANT COMPLEX LEASE

-. 231ha I
,,
Woodside //
Visitors Centre / / 4'
No Name Bay - ____ - ____ -
,
TREATMENT PLANT BUFFER ZONE LEASE /
93ha -
BURRUP
PENINSULA
500m
Figure 6
ONSHORE TREATMENT PLANT

AND BUFFER ZONE LEASE
I environment April 1993
'Jf WOODSIDE OFFSHORE PETROLEUM PTY. LTD.
A. Chegwidden A.C.N.008945097 Bli 100-8218s I Rev.O
6. QUANTITATIVE RISK ASSESSMENT
6.1 INTRODUCTION
A Quantitative Risk Assessment (QRA) is a systematic approach to the analysis

of what can go wrong in complex industrial systems. The normal conditions of
operation of the system are defined and then the following questions asked:
What accidental events can occur in the system?

How frequently could each event occur?
What are the consequences of each event?
What are the total risks (frequencies x consequences) of the system?
What is the significance of the calculated risk levels?
Once a system has been analysed, if the risks are assessed to be too high
according to some criteria, the system can be modified in various ways to
attempt to reduce the risks to a more tolerable level, and the risk levels
recalculated. The process may therefore be viewed as iterative, where the
design of the system may be changed until it complies with the needs of
society. By objectively quantifying the risks from each part of the system,
QRA enables the most effective measures to reduce risks to be identified.
In its overall scheme, the methodology used follows the 'classical' form of
quantitative risk analysis and involves the following steps:
system definition: information on the facility is collected and

assimilated;
hazard identification: site events and external events are

identified which may lead to the release of hazardous material;
frequency estimation: the frequency (ie likelihood per year of

occurrence) of each of the accidental events is estimated, based on
historical failure data;
consequence modelling: all the possible consequences of each event

are estimated;
risk calculation: the frequencies and consequences of each event are

combined to determine the risk of fatality, arising from the
facility, at a number of locations;
risk assessment: the risks calculated are compared with the EPA risk
criteria. If required, measures which reduce the risks are developed
at this stage.
The details of the QRA are presented in Appendix III and summarised below.
Page 17
6.2 RISK STANDARDS AND CRITERIA
The EPA uses the following criteria for the assessment of the risk of
statistical fatality outside the plant boundary of a new industrial
installation:
Risk Criteria for New Facilities
a risk level in residential zones of one in a million or less is so

small as to be acceptable to the EPA;
a risk level in 'sensitive developments' such as hospitals, schools,

child care facilities and aged care housing developments of between
one half and one in a million per year is so small as to be
acceptable to the EPA;
risk levels from industrial facilities should not exceed a target of

fifty in one million per year at the site boundary for each individ-
ual industry, and the cumulative risk level imposed upon an industry
should not exceed a target of one hundred in a million per year; and
a risk level for any non-industrial activity located in the buffer

zones between industrial facilities and residential zones of ten in
a million per year or lower is so small as to be acceptable to the
EPA.
Cumulative Risk Criteria
As can be seen the criteria apply not only to the risk arising from the
proposed new LPG facility but also to the cumulative risk arising from the
LPG and the existing facilities. The EPA states that "no extra risk would be
acceptable where the cumulative risk of existing industry, combined with
assessed risk of the proposed new industry, exceed the risk levels proposed
for new industry". Hence, when building a new facility it is necessary to
show that all industry (new and old) in the area meets the new industry
criteria. The Onshore Gas Treatment Plant currently in operation is the
existing facility to consider when looking at cumulative risk.
6.3 OBJECTIVES OF THE QUANTITATIVE RISK ANALYSIS
The specific objectives of the Project to be addressed by the Consultant were

to:
identify the hazardous incidents which relate to the proposed LPG
facilities and their operation, and which have the potential to
cause far field effects;
assess the significance of each incident in terms of its offsite

impact;
Assess and quantify the offsite levels of fatality risk due to the
plant and its operation, presenting imposed iso-risk levels for
fatality (risk contours) for the criteria set by the EPA;
Page 18
assess the cumulative risk for any major industry in the area (ie
the proposed LPG facilities and existing Onshore Gas Treatment
Plant);
consider the tolerability of the risk levels versus the EPA

criteria; and
provide clear, concise report of the analysis which includes an

interpretation of the results in terms of land use.
The Project objectives are fully discussed in Appendix III.
6.4 DISCUSSION OF MAJOR QRA FINDINGS
The results of the analysis are presented in Appendix III as risk Contours.
Onsite risk incidents that do not impact beyond the plant boundaries have not
been included as these incidents cannot impact upon the public under normal
circumstances.
Only two of the criteria Contours extend from the main Treatment Plant Lease
into the Buffer Lease (see Figure 7). The first, the one half in a million
per year (5x10 7) risk Contour, is the EPA's criterion for the maximum
tolerable level of risk for 'sensitive developments' such as hospitals,
schools, child care facilities and aged care housing developments. The
second, the one in a million per year (lx10 6) risk contour, is the
EPA's criterion for the maximum tolerable level of risk for residential
zones. There are no residences, areas zoned for residential use nor
'sensitive developments' in the vicinity on the site and none falls within
the risk contours. The closest residential area is Dampier which is 10km
away.
The EPA's criterion for industrial activities is such that the risk at the
site boundary should not exceed fifty in a million per year (5x10 5).
This requirement is met at Woodside's site. For non-industrial use areas
between industry and residential zones the EPA's criterion is that the risk
should not exceed ten in a million per year (1x10 5). Again this
requirement is met by Woodside's site.
6.5 MAIN QRA CONCLUSIONS
The main conclusions of the study as they relate to the CER are:
the site meets the EPA's published risk criteria;
the offsite risk from the proposed new LPG extraction facilities is
small compared with that of the existing facilities. It contributes
about 17% of the total risk, from the LPG and Onshore Gas Treatment
Plant facilities, at the Visitors' Centre (the nearest public
access);
Page 19
IX -,'
MERMAID
'•'
SOUND
\ N
4. N \c••
N4 CD
'?9 N
N •:
S .'..
N
I /K Withnell Bay
Boat
Launctiing
Area
Protected Area
, 500m from Loading Jetty/( ,. *
Propos
1/2 in a Million -,—

per year (5x10 .7)
/ ° COMP LEX LEASE
- z -
1 in a Million
V
per year (5x10)
Vise
BaY /
n a Million
year (5x10 5 )
100 in a Million
50 in a Million
J per year (5x10) I
per year (5x10 5 )
Port
Authority
Jetty
/1 N
BURRUP
PENINSULA
Supply
Base 500m
Figure 7
CUMULATIVE QUANTITATIVE RISK ASSESSMENT

LNG & LPG PLANTS
Environment April 1993
W& WOODSIDE OFFSHORE PETROLEUM PTY. LTD.
A.Chegwidden A.CN.008945097 1311 100-8219s Rev.0
the proposed new LPG extraction facilities produce no offsite risk
(on land) above the lowest EPA risk criterion level (1/2 in a
million per year, 5x10 7);
the risk levels at the boat launching area in Withnell Bay are too
low to be of any concern, below 1/2 in a million per year; and
the risk to fishermen fishing in Mermaid Sound is negligible. The

risk along the ship channel is between 1/2 and 1 in a million per
year which is tolerable.
Page 20
7. POTENTIAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
AND THEIR MANAGEMENT
A review of the environmental consequences of the proposed facility has been

undertaken. The following items have been identified as being potential
concerns and these will be addressed individually in this section.
7.1 IDENTIFICATION OF ISSUES
Disposal of rock and soil generated from site preparation.
Disposal of solid wastes, primarily steel scrap, generated during

construction.
Disposal of insulating wastes, generated during construction or

fabrication.
Release of gases from the 'formed-in-place' insulation used on the

storage tanks.
Disposal of sanitary wastes generated by the construction force.
Disposal of the fluids (water, possibly containing corrosion

inhibitors) used to hydrostatically test the storage tanks.
Disposal of pickle liquors used to clean the small diameter pipework.

Disposal of dredge spoil generated during the construction of the
ship jetty.
Disturbance of corals and other biotic assemblages in the immediate

vicinity of the jetty construction.
An increase in the road traffic going to the construction Site.

An increased risk of accident during the construction phase due to
an increased workforce in the production area.
Disturbance of Aboriginal Sites.
Noise generated by the construction and piling activities reaching

nuisance levels in Dampier or Karratha.
Page 21
Increases in the quantity of combustion products generated from the

flaring of storage tank 'boiloff'.
Increases in the quantity of combustion products generated from

flaring of vapours collected during ship loading.
Increases in the amount of flue gas released from the on-site power
plant.
Increases in the quantity of silt generated by the propwash of ships

entering or leaving the loading jetty.
Modification of the near shore water flow patterns.
Increased sound pressure levels on the Plant site.
Increased risk of accident due to an increase in the number of

combustible-containing storage vessels and transfers, and an
increase in the amount of ship traffic.
Increased risk of hydrocarbon release due to an increase in plant

and infrastructure.
Generation and disposal of aqueous effluent and solid waste from the
process.
Impact on social activities in the areas adjacent to the Plant site.
7.2 MANAGEMENT OF POTENTIAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS

Disposal of Rock and Soil Generated from Site Preparation
The area that is proposed for the installation of the LPG storage
tanks contains a small quantity of rock which must be removed. In
addition, small amounts of soil will be removed while routing piping
under the site roads. All surplus fill removed from this area will
go to an area of No Name Creek which Woodside currently uses for
storage of fill material.
Disposal of Solid Wastes, Primarily Steel Scrap, Generated during Construction

(see Commitment 8.2.4)
Woodside envisages the production of a quantity of construction

debris that will require disposal off-site. As the fabrication plan
for the LPG facility has not been finalised it is not possible to
estimate the quantity of 'inert' scrap that will be generated during
the construction. A majority of the debris will be high quality
steel or aluminium scrap that is suitable for recycle. There will be
a lesser quantity of steel, aluminium, wood, paper and plastic
Page 22
debris that is not suitable for recycle and these will be disposed
of in accordance with existing procedures. Woodside has always
committed to consult with the local Roebourne Shire authorities and
follow their guidelines in the disposal of all waste.
Disposal of Insulating Wastes, generated during Construction or Fabrication

(see Commitments 8.2.5, 8.2.6)
Woodside envisages the use of significant quantities of low

temperature insulating material such as polyurethane foam shapes and
fibreglass. Some of the insulation will be cut to size on-site while
other insulating materials will be shipped to site 'pre-formed'. The
insulating materials are inert and non-toxic but they are persistent
in that they do not degrade under landfill conditions. As the
fabrication plan for the LPG facility has not been finalised it is
not possible, at this time, to estimate the quantity or location of
insulating scrap that will be generated during construction and
fabrication. Woodside commits to follow existing procedures, consult
with local authorities and follow guidelines in the disposal of
insulating waste. Woodside further commits to work with its
suppliers and subcontractors to minimise the quantity of waste and
assure that the wastes generated are disposed of in an environ-
mentally friendly manner.
Release of Gases from the 'Formed-in-Place' Insulation used on the Storage Tanks
Woodside is committed to the Draft Environmental Protection (Ozone

Protection) Policy'0 and will specify insulating materials
that do not use CFCs as the foaming agent.
Disposal of Sanitary Wastes generated by the Construction Force
The Gas Treatment Plant uses a packaged sewage plant for the
treatment of sanitary wastes generated by the permanent work forcc.
The increased Site population during the construction phase of the
project could overload the capacity of this unit. Woodside will
therefore contract with a local supplier of portable sanitation
units for use by the construction work force.
Disposal of the Fluids (water, possibly containing corrosion inhibitors) used

to Hydrostatically Test the Storage Tanks (see Commitments 8.1.3, 8.2.7)
At this time it is not certain if the storage tanks will be hydro-

statically tested with potable or sea water, nor is it clear if the
water will require treatment with corrosion inhibitors to protect
the tanks. Woodside therefore commits to develop a plan, in
consultation with the EPA, for treatment (if required) and disposal
of the hydrostatic test water. Upon acceptance of this plan,
Woodside will seek authorisation from EPA for the one time discharge
of these waters.
Page 23
The disposal plan is envisaged to be similar to the plan
successfully executed during the hydrostatic testing of the LNG
tanks constructed during 'Phase III'.
Disposal of Pickle Liquors used to Clean the Small Diameter Pipework

Small diameter piping on and around the compressor units will

require 'pickling' before being placed in service. The pickle
solution is envisaged to be ammoniated citric acid. Woodside commits
to work with its subcontractors to assure that spent pickle liquor
is either recycled or disposed of in an environmentally friendly
manner.
During the previous 'Phase III' construction disposal of undiluted

spent pickle liquors directly into the environment is reported to
have caused a 'fish kill'. In recognition of past problems Woodside
favours the recycle of pickle liquors where possible. If this is not
feasible or practical the liquors will be pretreated in a manner
which makes them suitable for disposal.
Disposal of Dredge Spoil generated during the Construction of the Ship Jetty
(see Commitments 8.1.1, 8.1.4, 8.1.5)
The preparation of the berthing pocket at the end of the jetty

will
require the removal of approximately 700,000m3 of spoil. This
spoil will be disposed of onshore. Woodside proposes to use an
area
adjacent to No Name Creek as a dredge spoil disposal area. This
is
the same area that was used to receive the dredge spoil from
the
construction of the LNG shipping channel. The physical
characteristics of the dredge spoil were studied for the
construction of the LNG jetty" and the effects of fines
escape from the spoil area has been documentedl2,22,25,26,27,28.
Woodside commits to develop and implement a dredge spoil
management plan in consultation with EPA. The dredge spoil
management plan will address the causes for the escape of fines that
occurred from the impoundment area during the dredging for the LNG
jetty and propose methods to assure that a similar accident does not
occur during the dredging for the LPG jetty.
Woodside considered the offshore disposal of dredge spoil but has

rejected this idea on two grounds:
With offshore disposal it is difficult to manage the environ-

mental impacts; and
The dredge spoil is a useful commodity. From time to time

Woodside has a requirement for clean inert fill. The nearest
source of clean fill is from the bed of the Fortescue River
approximately 100km south of the Gas Treatment Plant. This
material has, in the past, been trucked to site. Woodside
proposes to store the dredge spoil in No Name Creek and
reclaim clean fill from this stockpile as required, thus
eliminating the need to disturb sensitive habitats.
Page 24
Disturbance of Corals and other Biotic Assemblages in the Immediate Vicinity
of the Jetty Construction (see Commitments 8.2.1, 8.3.1, 8.3.3)
Corals have the potential to be affected in two ways:
Through physical disturbance as a result of pile driving

activities: the coral assemblages (mollusc-coral on rock and
coral on rock, see Figure 2) in the vicinity of the jetty are
confined to a narrow zone, less than lOOm wide, immediately
adjacent to the shore. Physical disturbance to corals is
unavoidable but has been minimised through the selection of a
piled jetty over the Construction of, say, a solid limestone
causeway.
Through an increase in sedimentation during dredging

activities: studies conducted in association with past
dredging operations (Section 4.5) have shown that
sedimentation has a relatively minor effect on coral numbers
and percentage cover. Effects are temporary and restricted to
a radius of 1.5km from the point of operation.
During this dredging programme, which will occur over a period

of approximately 12 weeks, the effects of a temporary increase
in suspended sediment load will be monitored as part of the
CFIEMMS programme.
The major assemblage that will be impacted by dredging operations

will be the mollusc-echinoderm assemblage. Impacts centre on the
physical removal of substrate and the continued reworking of the top
layer of sediment as a result of shipping activities. This
assemblage dominates the project area and Mermaid Sound and the
localised loss of a small portion is minor in ecological terms.
An Increase in the Road Traffic Going to the Construction Site
The construction work force is envisaged to be approximately 300

people. There will be an increased traffic load on the sealed
highway leading from Karratha to the construction site. It is
believed that the environmental impact of the road use will be
minimal.
An Increased Risk of Accident during the Construction Phase due to an

Increased Workforce in the Production Area
Woodside has established safety and work practice procedures

for
performing construction or maintenance work while the Gas
Treatment
Plant is operating. The effectiveness of these procedures were
demonstrated during the construction of the third LNG train
and
other facilities during the recent 'Phase III' construction.
These
procedures will be implemented during the construction of the
LPG
facility.
Page 25
Disturbance of Aboriginal Sites (see Commitment 8.2.2)
An Aboriginal Site Survey16 identified two archaeological

sites at or near the proposed construction area. Woodside has
exercised due care in planning the site layout to preserve the
archaeological sites in the development area. Initially the jetty
was to have been constructed further south. The take-off point of
the jetty from the shore has currently been selected so that
disturbance to these sites can be avoided.
However, should disturbance to any sites be required or should

additional Sites be uncovered during construction activities then
Woodside commits to consult with the Aboriginal Sites Department of
the Western Australian Museum and with appropriate Aboriginal
custodians.
Noise generated by the Construction and Piling Activities reaching Nuisance

Levels in Dampier or Karratha (see Commitment 8.2.3)
The anticipated noise level during the construction phase will be

minimal with the possible exception of 'pile driver noise'. Pile
driver noise tends to be a sharp repetitive sound which after a
period of exposure can be quite annoying. It is felt that the
physical distance between the construction site and the nearest
residential area, which is Dampier 10km away, will attenuate the
noise to negligible levels. This was not a problem during
construction of the LNG jetty. If the noise levels prove to be a
problem Woodside is obligated, under the noise abatement statutes of
Western Australia40, to devise corrective action.
Increases in the Quantity of Combustion Products generated from the Flaring

of Storage Tank 'Boiloff' (see Commitment 8.3.2)
It is planned that boiloff from the new storage tanks will be

collected and recycled into the process. Flaring of the boiloff
under normal operating conditions is not required. If a plant upset
occurs boiloff will be directed to one of the existing flares. This
will be a short duration episode which is not expected to occur for
more than a few hours per year.
Increases in the Quantity of Combustion Products generated from Flaring of

Vapours collected during Ship Loading (see Commitment 8.3.2)
It is envisaged that vapours collected during ship loading will be

collected and recycled into the process. Flaring of the vapours
under normal operating conditions is not required. If a plant upset
occurs the vapours will be directed to one of the existing flares.
This will be a short duration episode which is not expected to occur
for more than a few hours per year.
Page 26
Increases in the Amount of Flue Gas released from the On-Site Power Plant
The LPG facility uses several electrically driven compressors in the

gas handling train. The electricity is produced on-site in gas
turbine generators which have sufficient reserve capacity to supply
the proposed unit operations. No new power generation capacity will
be installed. The existing equipment will be operated at a capacity
that is closer to its design and permitted capacity and will result
in an incremental increase in the actual (not the permitted) emiss-
ions from the facility.
Increases in the Quantity of Silt generated by the Propwash of Ships entering

or leaving the Loading Jetty (see Commitments 8.2.1, 8.3.1, 8.3.3)
The operation of the LPG facility will result in an additional 20

LPG shipments per year with a concomitant increase in sediment being
re-entrained by prop wash. Woodside currently operates an on-going
monitoring programme to access the health of marine organisms in
Mermaid Sound33'34'35'36 and concludes from these studies that
seabed damage from periodic natural events (cyclonic activity)
greatly exceeds the minor effect of shipping induced turbidity.
Woodside will continue the monitoring programme (CHEMMS) to assess
the health of the seabed in Mermaid Sound.
Modification of the Near Shore Water Flow Patterns
The seabed in the immediate vicinity of the proposed LPG jetty has
been thoroughly studied"13'14'15 and various jetty construct-
ion options have been reviewed. The most favoured option is a piled
trestle jetty similar to the existing LNG loading jetty. This design
would mean the minimum disturbance to the local environment during
installation and allow continued free near shore water flow.
Increased Sound Pressure Levels on the Plant Site (see Commitment 8.3.2)
Engineering specifications will be used to limit noise from equip-

ment. The resultant noise levels will have no significant impact on
the noise profile of the existing facility.
Increased Risk of Accident due to an Increase in the Number of Combustible-

Containing Storage Vessels and Transfers, and an Increase in the Amount of
Ship Traffic (see Commitments 8.3.2, 8.3.5)
The risk assessment conducted for this CER37 addresses this

problem with the conclusion that the cumulative risk for the
proposed new LPG facility and for the existing LNG facility is
acceptable when compared with the EPA's risk criteria.
Page 27
Increased Risk of Hydrocarbon Release due to an increase in Plant and infra-
structure (see Commitment 3.3.4)
The new shipping berth and associated infrastructure will be covered

by Woodside's oil spill contingency plan.
Generation and Disposal of Aqueous Effluents and Solid Wastes from the Process
No waste of these types will be generated from this process.
Impact on Social Activities in the Areas Adjacent to the Plant Site
No significant impact is envisaged because no additional risk will

be transferred from the site leases to the adjacent offsite areas.
Page 28
8. COMMITMENTS
The following commitments are made by Woodside with respect to this project:
8.1 PRECONSTRUCTIoN
8.1.1 Develop and implement a dredge spoil management plan in consultation

with EPA. The dredge spoil management plan will address the causes
for the escape of fines that occurred from the impoundment area in
No Name Creek during the dredging for the LNG shipping channel and
propose methods to assure that a similar accident does not occur
during the dredging for the LPG jetty.
8.1.2 Specify insulating materials that do not use CFCs as the foaming
agent.
8.1.3 Develop a plan in consultation with the EPA for treatment (if
required) and disposal of the hydrostatic test water.
8.1.4 Jetty design will be in accordance with Department of Marine and

Harbours regulations.
8.1.5 Dredging operations will be conducted at all times to the

satisfaction of the Dampier Harbour Master and the EPA.
8.2 DURING CONSTRUCTION
8.2.1 Monitor the environmental impacts of the proposed dredging operation

to the satisfaction of the EPA through the existing CHEMMS
programme.
8.2.2 Exercise due care in planning the Site layout and during
construction to preserve the archaeological sites in the development
area and to consult with the Western Australian Museum and
appropriate Aboriginal custodians should site disturbance be
required or new sites identified.
8.2.3 If the construction noise levels prove to be a problem to the

adjacent residential areas, Woodside recognises its obligation to
devise corrective action under the noise abatement statutes of
Western Australia. This will be to the satisfaction of the EPA.
8.2.4 Consult with the local authorities and follow local guidelines in
the landfill disposal of inert construction waste.
8.2.5 Consult with local authorities and follow local guidelines in the
disposal of insulating waste.
8.2.6 Work with its suppliers and subcontractors to minimise the quantity
of waste and assure that the wastes generated are disposed of in an
environmentally friendly manner.
Page 29
8.2.7 Upon acceptance of the hydrostatic test water disposal plan,
Woodside will seek authorjsation from EPA for the discharge of these
waters.
8.2.8 Work with its subcontractors to assure that spent pickle liquor is
either recycled or disposed of in an environmentally friendly
manner. This will be conducted to the satisfaction of the EPA.
8.3 POST CONSTRUCTION
8.3.1 Results of the CHEMMS programme will be forwarded for review to EPA
in accordance with existing reporting procedures.
8.3.2 Operate the new equipment using established practices and procedures
including those for environmental management and safety to the
satisfaction of the Department of Minerals and Energy and the EPA.
8.3.3 Continue the monitoring programme (CHEMMS) to assess the impact of

Woodside's activities in Mermaid Sound.
8.3.4 The new jetty and infrastructure will be incorporated into

Woodside's emergency response plan.
8.3.5 The exclusion zone around the existing LNG jetty is 500m and the new
LPG jetty will have a similar exclusion zone.
Page 30
9. REFERENCES
Draft Environmental Impact Statement and Environmental Review and

Management Programme
Woodside Petroleum Development Pty Ltd, May 1979
EPA File Reference No 662.69 Woo (907745)
North West Shelf Development Project: Report and Conclusion

WA EPA, 1979
EPA File Reference No 662.69 Wes
Supplement to Draft Environmental Impact Statement and Environmental

Review and Management Programme
Woodside Petroleum Development Pty Ltd, June 1979
EPA File Reference No 662.69 Woo
Environmental Implications of Producing Liquefied Petroleum Gases

(LPG): Addendum to Draft EIS, May 1979
Woodside Petroleum Development Pty Ltd, March 1980
Safety of Onshore and Marine Operations at Withnell Bay:

Implications of the Production of LPG
Woodside Petroleum Development Pty Ltd, 1980
North West Shelf Development Project Production of Liquefied

Petroleum Gas: Report and Recommendations
WA EPA, 1980
EPA File Reference No 662.69 Wes
Vegetation & Floristics of the Burrup Peninsula

Blackwell & Cala, 1979
Vertebrate Fauna Study of Burrup Peninsula

Tingay, A and SR, 1979
EPA File Reference No 662.69 Tin
Pilbara 21 Final Strategy Report, June 1992
Draft Environmental Protection (Ozone Protection) Policy

Environmental Protection Authority, January 1993
Report on Dredge Spoil Stability and Advection Studies

Woodside Offshore Petroleum Pty Ltd, November 1986
EPA File Reference No 627.74(941) Woo (901270)
The Effect of Dredge Spoil on the Sedimentology and Biology of No

Name Bay
EPA File Reference No ENV-0122 (910453)
Page 31
Marine Environmental of Dampier Archipelago
Meagher & LeProvost 1979
Marine Biological Monitoring Programme Burrup Peninsula, WA, Phase 1

LeProvost, Semeniuk & Chalmer 1980
EPA File Reference No 577.472(26) Lep
Marine Biological Monitoring Programme Burrup Peninsula, WA, Phase 2

LeProvost, Semeniuk & Chalmer 1981
EPA File Reference No 577.472(26) Lep
Report on an Archaeological Investigation at LNG Plant, Burrup

Peninsula
Harris and Quartermaine, March 1993
Appended to this CER
A Surveillance of Birds Utilising the Intertidal Flats of King Bay,

Dampier Archipelago, Western Australia in February 1982
LeProvost Semeniuk & Chalmer 1982
Chemical and Ecological Monitoring of Mermaid Sound, Final Report

LeProvost, Semeniuk & Chalmer, March 1988
Chemical and Ecological Monitoring of Mermaid Sound, Annual Report

Woodside Offshore Petroleum Pty Ltd, December 1990
The Chemical and Ecological Monitoring of Mermaid Sound, Triennial

Report, September 1988-1991
The Chemical and Ecological Monitoring of Mermaid Sound, Annual

Report, September 1991-1992
Detailed Report on Environmental Investigations and Monitoring

North West Shelf Development (Woodside) Agreement, September
1991
Chemical and Ecological Monitoring of Mermaid Sound, November 1991

and May 1992 Surveys, Second Annual Report
LeProvost Environmental Consultants, October 1992
Interim Report on Environmental Investigations and Monitoring

North West Shelf Development (Woodside) Agreement, September
1992
State Environmental Monitoring Programme Final Report - LNG Shipping

Channel Dredging Report
LeProvost Semeniuk & Chalmer, December 1988
Environmental Monitoring Programme LNG Shipping Channel - Spoil

Dumping Permit
EPA File Reference No 143177, Vol 29
Page 32
Maintenance Dredging 1989, Mermaid Sound, Western Australia. State
Environmental Monitoring Programme
LeProvost Semeniuk & Chalmer, March 1990
LNG Shipping Channel - Spoil Dumping Permit, Mermaid Sound, Western

Australia. Environmental Monitoring Programme to November 1989
LeProvost Semeniuk & Chalmer, March 1990
Monitoring the Physical Environment of No Name Bay. The Surveys of

January and July 1986
The Effects of Dredge Spoil on the Sedimentology and Biology of No

Name Bay
Woodside Offshore Petroleum Pty Ltd, January 1989
The Effects of Dredge Spoil on the Sedimentology and Biology of No

Name Bay, September 1988 - December 1989
Woodside Offshore Petroleum Pty Ltd, December, 1989
Sedimentology and Biology of No Name Bay, January - December 1990

Woodside Offshore Petroleum Pty Ltd, December 1990
Chemical Ecological Monitoring of Mermaid Sound: Second Annual

Report
LeProvost, Semeniuk & Chalmer, 1986
EPA File Reference No 622.271.5.004.8(941) Lep
Annual Reports to EPA
Dispersion of Turbidity Clouds induced by Shipping Activities in

Mermaid Sound: A Preliminary Assessment
van Senden and Button, July 1992
The Environmental Monitoring of Natural Events and Industry Activity

in Mermaid Sound, Dampier Archipelago
Iva Stejkal, The APEA Journal, pg 420-427, 1992
Quantified Risk Assessment for the Proposed LPG Extraction

Facilities on the Burrup Peninsula
Technica, March 1993
Appended to this CER
Criteria for the Assessment of Risk from Industry.

Environmental Protection Authority, Bulletin 611,
February 1992
Proposed Gas Reception, LPG Production and Shipment at South

Withnell Bay, Western Australia. Assessment of Site Suitability with
respect to Safety. Report prepared for the Minister for Industrial
Development, Government of Western Australia. L4062
Cremer and Warner Ltd, August 1979
Environmental Protection Act (1986)

Noise Abatement (Neighbourhood Annoyance) Regulations
Page 33
APPENDIX I
CONSULTATIVE ENVIRONMENTAL
REVIEW GUIDELINES
GUIDELINES FOR THE CONSULTATIVE ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
for
LIQUEFIED PETROLEUM GAS (LPG) EXTRACTION PROJECT
within the
EXISTING ONSHORE TREATMENT PLANT LEASE ON THE BURRUP
PENINSULA
by
WOODSIDE OFFSHORE PETROLEUM PTY LTD
OVERVIEW
In Western Australia all environmental reviews are about protecting the environment. The
fundamental requirement is for the proponent to describe what it proposes to do, to discuss the
potential environmental impacts of the proposal, and then to describe how those environmental
impacts are going to be managed so that the environment is protected.
If the proponent can demonstrate that the environment will be protected then the proposal will be
found environmentally acceptable. If the proponent cannot show that the environment would be
protected, then the Environmental Protection Authority (EPA) will recommend against the
proposal.
Throughout the process it is the aim of the EPA to advise and assist the proponent to improve or
modify the proposal in such a way that the environment is protected. Nonetheless, the
environmental review in Western Australia is proponent driven, and it is up to the proponent to
identify the potential environmental impacts and design and implement proposals which protect
the environment.
The main environmental impact for this proposal is the level of risk imposed on the surrounding
land uses.
GENERAL COMMENTS FOR DOCUMENT PREPARATION
The Consultative Environmental Review (CER) should facilitate public review of the key
environmental issues. These guidelines identify issues that should be addressed within the CER.
The CER is intended to be a brief document: its purpose should be explained, and the contents
should be concise and accurate as well as being readily understood. The risk assessment should
be a separate appendix to the CER.
The CER should have the following objectives:
to place this project in the context of the regional environment and the progressive
development of resources in the region, including any cumulative impact of this development:
to explain the issues and decisions which led to the choice of this project at this place at this
time;
to set out the environmental impacts that the project may have; and
for each impact, to describe any environmental management steps the proponent believes
would avoid, mitigate or ameliorate that impact.
The primary function of a CER is to provide the basis for the EPA to advise the Government on
protecting the environment. An additional function is to communicate clearly with the public so
that EPA can obtain informed public comment.
The CER should focus on the major issues for the area and anticipate the questions that members
of the public will raise. Data describing the environment should be directly related to the
discussion of the potential impacts of the proposal and should then relate directly to the actions
proposed to manage those impacts.
Where specific information has been requested by a Government Department or the Local
Authority, this should be included in the document.
Guidelines on the format and content of the report given below are for guidance to the proponent.
The responsibility for the identification of all environmental impacts rests primarily with the
proponent as is the responsibility to demonstrate how the impacts will be managed so that the
environment is protected. Changes to the format which will enhance the proponent's ability to
demonstrate that the environment will be protected are acceptable.
SUMMARY
The CER should contain a brief summary of:
salient features of the proposal:

tech no logy/storage options considered;
description of receiving environment , both biophysical and social;
analysis of potential impacts and their significance;
environmtnta1 reporting, management programmes, safeguards and commitments: and
conclusions.
2. INTRODUCTION
The CER should include in the introduction an explanation of the following:
identification of proponent and responsible authorities:

background and objectives of the proposal;
brief details of the scope and timing of the proposal;
relevant statutory requirements and approvals; and
scope, purpose and structure of the CER.
NEED FOR THE PROPOSAL
The CER should set out the reasons for developing this proposal at this place and time.
including evaluation of alternative locations.
4. PROPOSED LOCATIONS
For all components of the proposal, proposed locations are to be described, including:
cadastral information;
adjacent land uses detailing existing land uses together with actual and future planned
land uses, including the Pilbara 21 Study land use proposal;
location of structures to be built on the sites;
location of proposed jetty and pipeline routes for the export of LPG;
a description of the Aboriginal heritage of the project areas; and
a description of any significant biological attributes of the project areas.
PROCESS DESCRIPTION
There should be a clear description of the project. Diagrams should be used where
appropriate. A process flowsheet for the operation should be included.
6. POTENTIAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS AND MANAGEMENT
This section should describe the overall effect on the environment by the proposal. Impacts
should be quantified where possible, and criteria for making assessments of their
significance should be discussed.
Issues to be addressed in the CER include:

risk levels
- risk assessment conducted in accordance with the EPAs Bulletin 611 and
the EPA's "Guidelines for a Preliminary Risk Analysis".
air emissions:
- fugitive, operating and plant upset emission controls;
management of impacts of the LPG export facilities including:
- port facilities and shipping channel; and

- LPG export pipeline.
extent of buffer zones and methods for conu-ol of land uses within the buffer zones to
prevent incompatible land uses occurring in the future.
7. CONCLUSION
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
GUIDELINES
A copy of these guidelines should be included in the document.
REFERENCES
All references should be listed.
COMMITMENTS
Where an environmental problem has the potential to occur the proponent should cover this
potential problem with a commitment to rectify it. Where appropriate, the commitment should
include:
who will do the work;

what is the nature of the work;
when the work will be carried out;
to whose satisfaction the work will be carried out; and
(when appropriate) where the work will be carried out.
Commitments should be numbered.
GLOSSARY
A glossary should be provided in which all technical terms, and unfamiliar abbreviations and
units of measurement are explained in everyday language.
HOW TO MAKE A PUBLIC SUBMISSION
The CER should include instructions to the public how it can make a submission. These
instructions should be at the beginning of the document.
23/93 1 10293GPE-Woodside LPG plant guidelines

WESTERN AUSTRALIA
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AUTHORITY
GUIDELINES FOR A PRELIMINARY RISK ANALYSIS
General:
The Environmental Protection Authority may, in accordance with the Environmental

Protection Act, 1986, require the proponent for a proposal which may have a significant
impact on the environment, to undertake an environmental impact assessment. If that
proposal has associated hazards which present risks to life (hereinafter referred to as risk)
the Authority may request as part of the environmental impact assessment a 'Preliminary
Risk Analysis' (PRA) be conducted.
The PRA will be an integral part of the decision making process used by the EPA to
determine the suitability of a proposal. Proposals for which a PRA may be required
include those which involve the manufacture, storage or transport of dangerous goods,
rezoning of land which may result in the exposure of more people to higher risks or for
any other proposal which may increase the risk to an individual.
These guidelines provide an overview of the issues to be addressed in a PRA. The

guidelines primarily address a proposal for the construction of a new hazardous industry.
however the approach can be used for other types of proposals (rezoning of land etc).
The guidelines are not comprehensive or prescriptive and it is the responsibility of the
proponent to ensure that any risk consultant employed by the proponent addresses all
associated issues.
The amount of detail required by the EPA for a particular proposal will vary with the
nature and complexity of the proposal. For a proposal for a small factory handling a
highly toxic chemical may require a more detailed PRA than a large development in
which materials of low hazard are to be handled. The proponent and the appointed risk
consultant should discuss and agree on the details of the PRA to be completed with the
EPA and its advisers both before and during the preparation of the PRA.
The analysis must be transparent to the extent that the EPA and its advisers can both
judge the adequacy of the analysis and are also in a position to be able to audit the
analysis. This will often require the provision of commercially sensitive information,
and arrangements will be made to ensure the confidentiality of that information is
maintained. The proponent, and risk consultants, should be aware that the PRA is a
legally binding document. Should Government approval be given for a proposal to
proceed, the "as-built" plant, operation or development, must achieve essentially the
same or lower levels of risk than presented in the PRA. The risk analyst must be
independent of the proponent and have demonstrated experience with the type of plant
being proposed. The analyst must demonstrate this autonomy and capability to the
satisfaction of the EPA prior to accepting the commission. The consultant must include a
formal certification of the accuracy and veracity of work completed in the PRA.
All PRA's submitted to the EPA must as a minimum have the following contents in the
order specified below. This will simplify the review of submissions and result in faster
review times.
PRELIMINARY RISK ASSESSMENT
1. SUMMARY
The document must contain a clear and concise summary of the PRA, and include a
statement on whether the results of the analysis comply with the EPA risk criteria or, if
relevant, other criteria.
2. INTRODUCTION
Background.
Aims and objectives.
Description and analysis of the project.
Description of the risk analysis techniques used.
Risk standards and criteria used.
3. PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Location and environment of the proposed site, including:
- Map of the location of the proposed site, detailing existing, actual and future
planned land use of the site and surrounding area as defined by the District
Town Planning Scheme of a Local Authority and or the Metropolitan Regions
Scheme
- Susceptibility to natural disasters (earthquakes, floods, cyclones, sink holes

etc);
Location with respect of other hazardous industry;
Location of required and existing transportation routes; and
- Proposed route of services to the site (including electricity lines, fuel pipelines
and process liquid and gas pipelines). The extent of service supply route
information should be commensurate with the development stage of the
proposal. However the EPA consider that preliminary discussions with the
supply Authority and necessary easements should have been determined in
principle prior to submission to the EPA.
Process description, including:
- Brief description of the process;
- General arrangements showing plant layout; and
- Simplified process flow diagrams.
Hazards associated with the proposal, including:
- Hazardous materials (list of materials and their hazardous properties):
- Hazards associated with the plant technology;
- History of safety performance of similar facilities;

-2-
- Statement of the engineering codes and standards proposed by the company and
used by the consultant to assess the likely reliability of the plant; and
- Review and report on the safety standards incorporated into the conceptual
engineering design.
(iv) Any other factors or concerns of the consultant that are in the potential impact zone
of the proposed development shall be considered in the risk analysis and included
in the report.
4. HAZARD ASSESSMENT
The techniques of a hazard assessment differ in detail from one proposal to another,
however, the following approach must always be followed:
- Hazard identification (of a complete set of failure cases which could cause
death);
- Consequence analysis (to determine the area which may result in death due to
over pressure, radiation exposure or toxic gas exposure as a consequence of a
failure);
- Frequency analysis (to estimate the probability of each failure case); and
- Quantified Risk Assessment (to cumulatively add the probabilities of failures

which may result in death at varying distances and directions to produce contours
of levels of imposed risk).
In the presentation of the hazard analysis the following information should be detailed in
either the body of the report or as appendices:
Hazard identification
- Failure cases of major process vessels (including details of operating

temperature and pressure, inventory, storage and bunding details. types of
failure considered, release rate, duration of the release, release mass etc):
- Failure cases of storage vessels (including details of operating temperature

and pressure, inventory, storage and bunding details, types of failure
considered, release rate, duration of the release, release mass etc):
- Failure cases of piping, including service pipes including details of operating

temperature and pressure, inventories, types of failures considered. release
rate, duration of the release, release mass etc); and
Details shall be provided of the methods used for grouping of failure cases.
Domino effects must be be considered.
By the end of this section potential sources of release shall be identified. itemised
(and if appropriate grouped) and summarised.
Consequence analysis
- Description of methods/models used in calculating consequences of

incidents, including input data and assumptions. The Appendices should
contain a more comprehensive description of the methods including values of
and references for all coefficients;
-3.
Where the consequence analysis involves gas dispersion modelling, details
are required on topography and meteorology (wind speed and direction,
atmospheric stability, surface roughness length and any other parameter
relevant to risk analysis). If the wind speed-direction-stability information
used has been condensed from more detailed information, the method of
reduction should be described and justified in an Appendix; and
- Details are required on toxicity, radiation exposure or over pressure values

(together with references) used in the consequence analysis. Probit
equations (and references) are also to be presented.
Computer printouts of the results should be included in the Appendices.
Frequency analysis
- A table provided of generic or unit failure frequencies used Lfully

referenced. The EPA may request that the proponent provides the relevant
literature to verify the applicability of failure frequencies used;
- If the PRA incorporates the use of safety devices the failure rate per demand
must be included in the analysis; and
Quantified Risk Assessment
- A table of incidents should be presented;
- Individual risk contours should be presented for the following risk values
10' 10' 10-6' 10-7 and 10-8 deaths per person per year; and
An error analysis should be included in the Appendix indicating the accuracy or range of all of
the input variables and models used, including, failure frequency data, impact or toxicity data,
consequence models and fmaliy confidence limits on the risk contours.
5. RISK ANALYSIS
Incorporation of the risk levels from this proposal into any cumulative risk analysis
for the area is required. This applies particularly to the Kwinana Industrial Area,
the Kemerton Industrial Park, and North Fremantle. The state government has
historically in some cases assisted in this matter.
Report the results of the risk values determined in the hazard assessment and
compare them to the EPA guidelines on risk criteria or other relevant criteria.
Regardless of whether there is compliance with the EPA or other risk criteria
discuss how the incidents contributing most to risk, or having the most serious
consequences, may be controlled. Relevant factors to consider may include the
installation of safety devices, alternative methods and volumes of storage, modified
layout, specific recommendations on aspects to be incorporated in emergency
planning, etc. Any risk reduction measure which was incorporated as part of the
analysis shall be fully documented.
6. CONCLUSIONS
Summary of results of risk analysis and conclusions as to site acceptability with special
mention of any recommendations and assumptions which influence acceptability.
10/07/9 1
144/87 10079 IGPE

me
APPENDIX II
ABORIGINAL SITE SURVEY

ABORIGINAL SITE SURVIEr]
REPORT ON AN ARCHAEOLOGICAL INVESTIGATION

AT LNG PLANT,
BURRUP PENINSULA
Prepared for Woodside Offshore Petroleum Pty Ltd
By Jacqueline Harris and Gary Quartermaine
March, 1993
ENV - 0220
REPORT ON AN ARCHAEOLOGICAL INVESTIGATION
AT LNG PLANT,
BURRUP PENINSULA
Prepared for Woodside Offshore Petroleum Ply Ltd
By Jacqueline Harris and Gary Quartermaine
March, 1993
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page No.
tO INTRODUCTION
1.1 Background to Survey I

1.2 Location I
1.3 Environment 1
1.4 Ethnography 3
1.5 Previous Archaeological Research 3
2.0 METHODS
2.1 Obligations under the Act 7

2.2 Survey Methodology 7
2.3 Site Definitions 8
2.4 Classifications of sites 8
3.0 RESULTS 10
4.0 CONCLUSIONS
4.1 Discussion 13
4.2 Recommendations 14
5.0 BIBLIOGRAPHY 15
6.0 APPENDICES
6.1 Obligations under the Act

6.2 Notes on the Recognition of Aboriginal Sites
FIGURE 1 : Locality Plan
FIGURE 2 : Project Area
FIGURE 3 Location of Previously Recorded Sites

lB IN11(ODUCI1ON
An archaeological site identification and avoidance study and survey for

Aboriginal heritage significance was commissioned by Woodside Offshore
Petroleum Pty Ltd (WOP) at the Onshore Treatment Plant Lease on Bun-up
Peninsula The archaeological research and survey was conducted in Februaiy/
March, 1993 by Jacqueline Harris on behalf of Quartermaine Consultants.
Fieldwork was undertaken in the company of Adrian Chegwidden, Principal
Environmental Scientist and Jenny Millar, an Honours student worker in
Environmental Studies.
The purpose of this study was to facilitate an investigation into locating a

proposed Liquid Petroleum Gas (LPG) Extraction Prcject as an extension of the
existing Liquid Natural Gas (LNG) Plant. This study is to form part of a
Consultative Environmental Review proposal. WOP is proposing to establish
an LPG Extraction Project consisting of a chilling plant, two LPG storage tanks
and a jetty within the existing LNG Plant lease, using LNG's infrastructure.
The work was done in two phases:

The assemblage of data from previous studies in the region, including
information from Western Australian Museum (WAM) Aboriginal site files,
previous survey and salvage reports, maps and environmental data
A survey of the project area in order to locate and identify previously
recorded sites within the designated survey area.
Bun-up Peninsula lies 1650 kms north of Perth on the northwest coast in the
Pilbara region. The survey area lies on the western side of the Peninsula within
the LNG plant lease of WOP between Withnell and No Name Bays. (Fig. 1) In
WAM's Dampier Salvage Programme, the area is referred to as the coastal,
coastal plain and near coastal uplands of Tartaruga. The survey area consists of
some 30 hectares bounded by the coastline running from the jetty to the
northernmost point of Skinny Dip Beach, Road 65 and Road 1. (Fig. 2)
An Environmental Review and Management Report, produced by Woodside

Petroleum Development in 1979, contains comprehensive detail of the local
environment. A brief summary pertinent to this report follows.
in
Ken&ew
J/
Remary
aay 0
Island 0'
MaJus Islands
Mermaid Sound
Conzinc
Bay
Bay
Nickol
Mermaid Strait Bay
ar4c —1
1 16 3
5km
FIGURE 1 I
DAMPIER ARCHIPELAGO I
GENERAL LOCATION MAP I
Enronment VOVWOODSIDE OFFSHORE PETROLEUM PlY. LTD. March 1993 I I
A. Chegwidden A.C.M. 008 945097 C21 100 -8175s Rev. 0
MERMAID SOUND
ING LOADDIG
JEITY -
4D Area investigated for Aboriginal sites
for the CER - LPG project
- Withnel! Bay
/L
CONDENSATE
STORAGE TANKS
Skinny Dip Beach
El)I 2L TOT FLASH TANK
SLUGCATCHER
I __jl
LNGTRADLL4..
GENERATOR11 II I II
ING TRMN2
0 U] U]] LJ 1=1 []I STABUSA11ON UNI S

ll TRMNS4&5
RAOAflON
AT STABIUSATION FURNACES
I
[PI11 I [: L
LNGTRAIN3 PROCESS
SERVICES 'I
/
ARE FIGHTING r—.-,
TRAINING GROUND
ADAMNISTRATION
AREA
C.)
1's)
No Name Bay
cn
,-
-
(0
C) - / 500m I
C
fTl
o
2
Climate
Situated in an arid-tropical semi-desert region, the climate of Burrup Peninsula
is characterised by a tropical cyclonic system of rainfall in summer and a
southern rainfall system in winter. Winter is moderately warm with average
temperatures of 23° while summer is hot with average temperatures of 31°. As
a result of low rainfall per annum averaging 350 mm and rapid run-off due to
impermeable rock and shallow soil, there is a deficit of water on the Peninsula
Thus rockholes and freshwater soaks provide the most reliable but ephemeral
water source for humans and animals (WPD 1979, Vinnicombe 1987).
Geoloi
The rugged rocky terrain of Burrup Peninsula consists of Proterozoic igneous
bedrock The numerous boulder outcrops, the signature of the Burrup, have
been formed as result of erosion of overlying sediment, exposing the igneous
rock to intense fracturing and weathering. Granophyre outcrops tend to occur
on the western side of the Peninsula while dolerite, diorite, greenstone and
gabbro occur on the the eastern side (WPD 1979). While the coastline is
characterised by rock platforms and storm boulder beaches interspersed with
sandy embayments in protected areas, the hinterland exhibits steep-sided
valleys and ephemeral watercourses which culminate at sand dunes and
mudflats. Rockpools frequently occur at the watersheds of deep valley systems.
(WPD 1979, Green 1982).
Vegetation
Located in the Fortescue Botanical District and classed as Eremaean, Burrup
Peninsula contains vegetation from both Southwestern and Northern
Kimberley Provinces (Beard 1975, WPD 1979). Generally the vegetation can be
considered predominantly Hussock Grasslands mixed with Tall Open
Shrublands; however the area supports a diversity of micro-habitats (WPD
1979). In coastal areas calcareous beach sands, interspersed with sand and
mudflats, support succulent low shrubland communities, including seven
species of mangals, while the shallow siliceous sands of the coastal plain
support tussock and hummock grass steppe. Within the inland valleys sits
taller vegetation such as Coolibah, Kurrajong and native fig trees while inland
plains support trees, shrub steppes, acacias and spinifex (WPD 1979, Green 1982,
Beard 1975).
Land Integrity
The survey area, LNG lease or Tartaruga, has been used extensively for
infrastructure and plant works associated with the collection and processing of
gas. While the majority of the survey area bounded by access roads has been
bulldozed, flattened or severely altered, there nevertheless remains a few small
pockets of natural rock outcrops. On the coastal side of the perimeter road, the
3
landscape displays numerous pipelines, some buildings, and heaps of rock

debris. Adjacent to these workings is a high security fence protecting the
immediate rocky coastline.
A comprehensive account of the ethnography and ethnohistory of Dampier

Archipelago has been described in an unpublished paper by Gara (n.d) as well
as in relevant chapters of Green's (1982), Turner's (1981) and Harris' (1988)
theses. A brief note pertinent to this study follows.
A small clan of Aborigines, named Yaburara, formerly inhabited the Dampier

Archipelago and part of the adjacent mainland at the time of European contact.
In a short period of some 30 years alter 1840, when Europeans commenced
development in the form of whaling pearling and pastoralism, the Yaburara
were either scattered, acculturated, subjected to labour raids, intmduced diseases
or massacred. It is now assumed that the clan is extinct.
The neighbouring groups adjoining Yarburara territoly, the Mardudunera and

Ngaluma, used to periodically visit the islands in accordance with cultural
traditions for the purpose of trade, reciprocal rights and seasonal movement.
The descendants of these two Aboriginal groups, some of whom live in
Roebourne and Onslow, have assumed responsibility for Burrup Peninsula and
are regularly consulted by W.A.M. in matters of Aboriginal heritage within the
area
Numerous archaeological investigations have been conducted in the Dampier

Archipelago as a result of industrial development. The first survey was
conducted in 1962 by Crawford when the area was under consideration as an
industrial port. Eight years later Dix and Wright surveyed construction sites in
the southwest of Burrup Peninsula for Hammersley Iron and Dampier Salt.
Their work culminated in a salvage programme including excavation by
Lorbianchet and Jones (Lorblanchet 1977).
In the 70s Vinli (1977) and Randolph conducted archaeological reconnaissances

in the northern, southern and western portion of Burrup Peninsula as well as
in several other islands in the Archipelago. With the discovery of natural gas
in the North West shelf, W.A. Museum undertook several preliminary
surveys for Woodside Offshore Petroleum (DAS 1979a, DAS 1979b, DAS 1979c,
DAS 1980a, DAS 1980b).
4
In 1980 WOP commissioned Department of Aboriginal Sites (DAS) to conduct a

Dampier Salvage Programme which entailed recording and mapping sites in
priority areas of Burrup Peninsula where development would occur as well as
salvaging sites that would be impacted by development (DAP 1984, Vinnicombe
1987). As a consequence of the natural gas project, several other studies
occurred (Kirkby 1981, Pickering 1982a, Pickering 1982b). Furthermore, as a bi-
product of the vast amount of research material collected from Dampier
Salvage Programme, several unpublished archaeological theses have been
produced on the area (Green 1982, Turner 1981, Veth 1982, Harris 1988, Mattner
1989).
The major archaeological investigation, Dampier Salvage Programme, which

concentrated in areas to be directly affected by Woodside operators, covered 15010
of Burrup Peninsula. For archaeological survey purposes, the areas to be
affected were divided into 7 catchment areas. Of these, No.3 Tartaruga, where
it was proposed to locate the LNG plant, was subject to an intensive, total
survey. Tartaruga encompassed 5 sq kms and extended from Withnell Bay to
No Name Bay and inland to the commencement of the drainage system which
flows into Noname Creek
A total of 720 Aboriginal sites were located in the survey area Of these, 113 sites
were found in Tartaruga of which the majority, 89, were engraving sites.
Overall, engraving sites were the most numerous sites recorded numbering 544
separate sites. Apart from engravings, other cultural features found in
descending order of frequency were occupation sites displaying flaked stone or
shells, stone features such as standing stones, walls or pits, grinding grooves
and rockshelters. Many of the sites contained more than one cultural
component. Vinnicombe (1987) concludes that a locational analysis
demonstrates that site distribution patterns are determined by accessibility to
food and water resources.
When each geographic zone is compared separately grinding activity has a

higher proportion at Tartaruga than in the other zones. This may reflect the
extensive area of Near Coastal Plain where Triodia (spinifex) is in abundance.
Seeds from spinifex were ground for flour by Aboriginal people (Vinnicombe
1987). However, grinding patches in association with engravings may have
been used to sharpen stone implements that were used in the execution of the
engravings (O'Connor 1987).
5
Of the total area surveyed, the majority of engravings, open artefact sites,
grinding patches and stone features are located on the inland plain.
Vinnicombe (1987) feels that the inland plain occupies a transition between the
two principal ecotones, coastal and inland, and thus the high number of
habitation camps located in the inland plain, are best situated to exploit all
resourtes from each zone.
While the density of sites is particularly high, i.e. 34 per km sq, Vinnicombe
(1987) stresses that excepting for some middens, habitation sites suggested
transient occupation. As is the case throughout Western Australia, the major
habitation sites are located near seasonal water sources. Thus the scenario
suggested by the evidence is of Aboriginal people moving throughout the
landscape in all ecological zones in search of food and raw material.
Furthermore, the comprehensive gallely of engravings, depicting a variety of
themes and styles, serve to reflect on a complex religious system that was
incorporated in the Aborinal peoples' daily lives.
Thirty-two radiocarbon dates taken from excavations and auger samples give a
range of Aboriginal habitation from 7,000 B.P. years to 100 B.P. years. This span
coincides with the last sea level rise around 6.000-7,000 years ago (Vinnicombe
1987). Archaeological sites recorded at Burrup Peninsula are consistent with the
types of sites documented in the wider Pilbara region.
The earhest dated occupation from the Pilbara region is in excess of 20,000 years
BP. The evidence was retrieved from two rockshelter deposits near Newman
(Maynard 1980, Troilett 1982) and one at Pannawonica (Hughes &
Quartermaine 1992). In Carnarvon region a rockshelter at North-West Cape
(Morse 1988) and a stratified open site at Shark Bay (Bowdler 1990a, 1990b) have
recently recovered evidence for occupation dated 34,000 years BP and 25,000
years BP respectively. Other dates obtained from the region are more recent and
have provided a temporal marker for specific tool types. These indude a date of
2,500 years BP from a trapezoidal microlith (Brown & Mulvaney 1983), 3,800
years BP for a gum backed elouera (Troilett 1982) and 3,600 years BP from a
midden dating microliths in association with shellfish (Lorblanchet 1977).
Prehistoric stone tool industries in the South-West have been classified into
eaiiy and late phases. (Dortch 1977). The early phase industries have only been
documented from a few well-dated sites. They include small thick flake
scrapers, bipolar cores, notched dentio.ilated pieces, flakes from discoidal cores,
and single and multi-platform cores. These artefacts have been manufactured
from a variety of lithic materials.
Later phase stone industries, generally found in archaeological contexts dating
from 4,000 years ago, include the addition of geometric microliths, backed
blades, and a variety of adze flakes, which are part of the Australian "small tool
tradition" (Dortch 1977, Mulvaney 1975). However, within the Dampier
Salvage Programme, the small tool tradition was little evident in artefact
assemblages collected (Vinnicombe 1987, Veth 1982). This serves to support the
transient nature reflected at occupation sites.
7
211 MIffHOL
The Western Australian Aboriginal Heritage Act, 1972-80, makes prosion...

for the preservation on behalf of the community of
places and objects customarily used by or traditional to the
original inhabitants of Australia or their descndants, or
associated therewith, and for other purpose inddental thereto."
The Act defines the obligations of the community relating to sites (see
Appendices).
An archaeological survey is aimed at identifying the effects of proposed

disturbance of the physical environment on historic and prehistoric Aboriginal
sites. The consultant is obliged to submit site documentation on appropriate
forms for lodgement and submission to the Department of Aboriginal Sites,
W.A. Museum, for any newly recorded Aboriginal sites.
1k'a ' ;•;-A
The survey design involved the following stages of operation.
I) Background research - This involved familiarisation with W.A. Museum

site files, survey reports, plus maps and environmental information for the
area to be surveyed. It also entailed establishing the staus of previously
recorded archaeological sites from Museum and Woodside files.
ii) Survey strategy - opportunistic and systematic sampling stategies were
implemented within the proposed area of development. (Fig. 2)
Firstly, a general reconnaissance was undertaken over the total area in a slow
moving vehicle with the vehicle stopping at each vantage point or cleared area.
Secondly, within the area bounded by sealed roads where industrial
development was intense, an opportunistic sampling strategy was
implemented. This involved purposive meandering over small plots of
partially disturbed land in between the industrial plant structures. Outside the
boundary fence on the coastline, purposive meandering strategies were again
employed over the rocky outcrops. WAM 1:2,000 archaeological site plans
assisted the purposive meandering strategies.
Visibility was high throughout as, within the disturbed industrial plant area,
there was little to no vegetation and on the coastline there was only a narrow
stretch of spinifex between the cyclone fence and the rock strewn coast as the
majority of previously recorded sites were engraving sites, the ground visibility
factor played a minor role.
2.3 5Le Defirdkxm
Aboriginal material culture is based, to a large extent, on non-durable materials,
such as wood, bark, fibre and skins, that have a limited life in the archaeological
record. Stone tools, conversely, remain as often the only evidence of
prehistoric activity. Bone, either as a tool, as refuse, or as a burial falls
somewhere between these extremes. Lofgren (1975) describes spears, spear-
throwers and clubs for men and digging sticks, wooden carrying dishes and
grindstones for women, as the basic implements of Aboriginal life. Therefore,
stone artefact sites reflect only one aspect of Aboriginal material culture which
utilised a wide range of materials from the natural environment.
For the purpose of this investigation, an archaeological site is defined as" any
place containing traces of past human activity" (Fagan 1980). This is manifested
in a number of different site components which may occur singularly or with
one or more of the others to form an archaeological site. The most common of
these are surface artefact scatters, quarries, art sites, stone arrangements,
rockshelters with evidence of occupation, grinding patches, shell middens,
burials and marked trees. An artefact scatter is recorded as a site if it contains
three or more artef acts in association. Areas of solitary artefacts, called Isolated
Finds, are reported but not recorded as Aboriginal sites.
The above definition of archaeological sites is a scientific definition. The

assessment as to whether such sites are covered by the provisions of the WA.
Aboriginal Heritage Act 1972-80, Section 5, is made for the Trustees of the W.A.
Museum by the Aboriginal Cultural Material Committee. Such assessment is
undertaken as part of a Section 18 application for site disturbance. When sites
are discussed in this report, it is in the context of the scientific definition and
not Section 5 of the above Act
•
The significance of an archaeological site is determined by its ability to address
regional and specific research questions and by its representativeness (Raab &
Klinger 1977). For example, unique sites are more significant than commonly
occurring sites, and sites with stratified deposits are more significant than
unstratified sites. Significance is a mutable quality, changing as more sites are
recorded, questions are answered or new directions in research arise.
In the major salvage programme of 1981 all archaeological sites in the survey
area were given an appropriate significance assessment. Thence, according to
the special requirements of Woodside's industrial programme and/or the
archaeological significance of the site (DAP 1984), each site was classified as
Preserved In Situ, Cleared or Partially Cleared
At a meeting dated 10/11th April, 1984 between Woodside and W.A.M. the
following definitions were agreed to in relation to the classification
terminology applied to the sites by WAM
Preserved in Situ (PIS] means that site/ complex is preserved in situ and
that formal application to disturb is required under the Aboriginal Heritage Act.
In most cases, these sites are behind protective fences erected by W.O.P.
Cleared and Partially Cleared

These terms mean that all of W.O.P.'s obligations under the Aboriginal
Heritage Act have been met and that the area can legally be utilised by
Woodside.
In those areas where sites or parts of site complexes remain WOP undertakes to
endeavour to retain all such sites and that in the event that disturbance may be
necessary, WOP undertakes to consult with WAM.
hi WOPki4iCIV hc
Cleared and partially cleared means that WOP has met its obligations under the
Aboriginal Heritage Act. The site, if disturbed, has been done with WAM
approval. Part of the site or site complex may be extant and WOP will
endeavour not to disturb the site during the completion of construction. Any
disturbance will only be done after consultation with WAM. When the
temporary lease reverts to its previous vesting then that part of the site
remaining effective reverts to PIS and formal application must be made under
the Aboriginal Heritage Act before it can be disturbed.
QuEmdeaRWOPkases
Cleared means that the site has been surveyed, salvaged (if possible) and then
used as part of the early survey and construction access. All WOP obligations
under the Aboriginal Heritage Act have been met
Partially cleared means that approval to disturb part of the site was given (as
part of early access requirement) but that some of the site/ site complex is extant
The remaining portion is effectively Preserved in Situ to all parties and formal
application must be made under the Act for any future disturbance.
10
31) R1Ut1S
Thirteen archaeological sites have been previously recorded in the survey area.
(Fig. 3) Nine of these sites have an engraving component solely or in
association with other cultural features. A description of each site follows with
its present status according to DAS and Woodside files and reports (DAP 1984).
P1561 Stahn FIS

Map Ref. 12,000 Sheet No. 25.04 Grid 476 000 7 723 200
This site consists of 165 engravings, 4 grinding patches and I standing stone.
The features are located along a granophyre outcrop aligned NE-SW on the
coastline. The extent of the site is 130 m long x 40m wide. The engravings
exhibit a wide variety of forms and motifs. As a result of the sit&s proximity to
the sea some of the engravings are somewhat weathered. All features have
been fully recorded and photographed.
Vinnicombe (1987:10) advises that the boundaries of the LNG plant were
adapted to avoid this significant site. The site is well protected by a cyclone
fence in front of which are numerous pipelines. Access is gained through a
padlocked gate.
P15L Stahm (]cuI

Map Ref 12,000 Sheet No.26.04 Grid 4761807723210
This site consists of an open scatter comprising stone artefacts and

Acanthciptleura shells as well as two grinding patches. The site is located on a
low sand dune adjacent to Skinny Dip Beach and measures 50m NS x 70m EW.
Artefacts were visible in both sedimented and blow-out sand deposits. Five
shallow lm x Im test pits were excavated across the site. Two radiocarbon dates
obtained from shell revealed an age of around 1,500 BP and 2,200 BP.
After salvaging the site was destroyed by the constniction of roadworks.
1111)1 S1ir PaitiIy CuI

Map Ref 12,000 Sheet No. 2503 Grid 4757807 722 970
This site contains 65 engravings and one grinding patch. It is located along a
granophyre outcrop along the coastline. The outcrop is aligned NE-SW and
measures 300m long x 90m wide. The engravings, being similarly located as
those at P1561, are somewhat weathered. Three boulders have been salvaged
from the site. A jetty now juts out from the site's southern boundary. As with
P1561, the same cyclone fence protects this site from intrusion. All engravings
have been fully recorded and photographed
II
AV
Scale 1 4000
200m -
LEGEND 2
t '
ts
A Stone feature f
Grinding patch V
SS\\(
2 '5 • 1
o
5f
__-z:2ISO
lie
m
0
- /
POI
00 £
2801 --- t/ S
/
323 ii P23238( S
f//
. • L "P7O9
C/) 78 / -
-.
s_S30
S O\
/
/ °38Q
C C '
37
m
11
I4 9.hc (uJ
Map Ref 12,000 Sheet No.26.04 Grid 476 100 7 723 150
This site consists of eight engravings located on three small outcrops situated
along the coastal dune. The outcrop measures 80m x 100m. The engravings
were photographed and recorded and two boulders were salvaged. The site has
been deregistered and destroyed from roadwork construction.
Map Ref 12,000 Sheet No.2503 Grid 475 790 7 722 900
This site consists of nine engravings, four stone pits and two standing stones.
The site measures 10m x 60m. All features were photographed and recorded.
The site has been deregistered and destroyed from construction works.
Map Ref 12,000 Sheet No. 25.03 Grid 4758707722 870
This site contains a small open scatter of stone artefacts and Terebralia and
Melo shells. It was located on a claypan and measured 10m x 10m. The 20
stone artefacts were mostly primary flakes made from porphyritic granophyre.
No collection was made as the site was considered of average significance;
however the site was photographed and surveyed. A major access road now
runs across the site
P2S11 Stab= (]iwJ

This site contains one grinding patch measuring 44cm x 30cm on a cracked and
fissured rock The site has been surveyed and photographed. The area has
been bulldozed and levelled
r( 6 Jtr Qcamd
This site contains one engraving measuring Im x 1m. It has been surveyed and
photographed. The site was considered of average significance and has been
deregistered. The site has been destroyed by Road 1 which now cuts through
the site.
12
!23'4 7 Rah c1
Map Ref 12,000 Sheet No. 26.03 Grid 476 390 7 722 940
This site contains one stone pit measuring 2m x 2m located on a scree slope. It
has been surveyed and photographed The site was deregistered and has been
destroyed by industrial works.
Fk 8 9ic (red
This site contains one engraving of incised lines measuring 2m x 2m. It has
been surveyed and photographed. The site was deregistered and has been
destroyed by industrial wo&s.
r2323, 9 Sbd= (ed

This site contains one engraving of a stick woman measuring 2m x 2m. It has
been surveyed and photographed. The site was deregistered and has been
destroyed by bulldozing and levelling.
PJ 10 9thr (]ied
Map Ref 12,000 Sheet No. 2604 Grid 476 2707 723 090
This site contains one engraving of an emu, meandering line and tracks within
a cluster. The engraving measures 2m x 2m. It has been surveyed and
photographed The site was deregistered and has been destroyed by earthworks.
y137 ii SL4r- OJ
Map Ref 12,000 Sheet No.2603 Grid 476 100 7 722 790
This site contains four engravings depicting a stick man, human face, pecks and
an human footprint. The engravings measures 20m x 20m. It has been
surveyed, photographed and two boulders were salvaged. The site was
deregistered and has been destroyed by earthworks.
13
40 WNQUSIONS
41 Dboussim
An archaeological site identification and avoidance investigation was
commissioned by Woodside Offshore Petroleum Pty Ltd at the Onshore
Treatment Plant Lease on Burrup Peninsula. The purpose of this study was to
facilitate an investigation into locating a proposed Liquid Petroleum Gas
Extraction Project as an extension of the existing Liquid Natural Gas Plant.
The survey area lies on the western side of the Peninsula within the LNG plant
lease of WOP between Withnell and No Name Bays in an area referred to as the
coastal, coastal plain and near coastal uplands of Tartaruga. The area consists of
some 30 hectares bounded by the coastline from the jetty to the northernmost
point of Skinny Dip Beach, Road 65 and Road 1.
The project area has been used extensively for infrastructure and plant
associated with the collection and processing of gas. While the majority of the
survey area bounded by access roads has been bulldozed, flattened and severely
altered, there nevertheless remains a few small pockets of natural rock
outcrops. On the coastal side of the perimeter road, the landscape displays
numerous pipelines, buildings, and piles of rock debris. Adjacent to these
works is a high security fence protecting the immediate rocky coastline.
After a general reconnaissance, an opportunistic and systematic sampling

strategy was implemented within the survey area to adequately cover the
industrial plant and coastline. Visibility was at a high throughout as there was
little to no vegetation, particularly in the industrial zone.
Thirteen archaeological sites have been previously recorded in the survey area.
Nine of these sites have an engraving component solely or in association with
other cultural features such as open scatters, stone features and grinding
patches.
The present status of each site as established by DAS is as follows:

Preserved in Situ- P1561
Partially Cleared - P1601
Cleared - P1562, P2324, P2325, P2323.6, P2323.7, P2323.8, P2323.9, P2323.10,
P2323.11, P2569, P2571.
Thus, only two archaeological sites remain in the survey area, namely Fl 561
and P1601 WhiCh are both located on the coastline.
14
,
The recommendations which follow are based on field observations and
research from previously recorded sites in the survey area and region. They are
also based on the assumption that the term 'Permanent Lease "applies to the
LNG plant area and immediate coastline which is held under lease until 2025
but is renewable after that date.
It is recommended that Site P1561 be preserved as it is considered of high

significance. Should Woodside seek permission to disturb the site, an
application under Section 18 of the Aboriginal Heritage Act 1972-80 must be
submitted. Excepting for a site plan, no further recording should be required as
the site has been fully documented
Because Sites P1562, P2324, P2325, P2323.6, P2323.7, P2323.8, P2323.9, P2323.10,
and P2323.11 have been cleared, destroyed and deregistered and Sites P2569 and
P2571 have been cleared and destroyed, it is recommended that no further
archaeological work is necessary and that development may plDceed in these
areas.
Site P1601 is considered of moderate to high significance. However, it has

been partially cleared. Should Woodside seek permission to disturb the site,
consultation must be undertaken with WAM. No further recording should be
necessary as the site has been fully documented
Should Woodside find it necessary within the planning stage to disturb any
of the two remaining archaeological sites, P1561 and P1 601, it is recommended
that consultation take place with the appropriate Aboriginal custodians.
It is recommended that Woodside take adequate measures to inform any

project personnel of their obligation to report any archaeological material,
should this be encountered during ground disturbance, as outlined under
Section 15 of the Aboriginal Heritage Act 1972-80.
15
j V
ITO i:.
Beard J.S. 1975 Vegetation Surveys of Western Australia. U.W.A. Press. Perth.
Bowdier, S. 1990a. Before Dirk Hartog: prehistoric archaeological research in

Shark Bay, Western Australia. Australian Archaeology 30,46-57
Bowdier, S. 1990b. The Silver Dollar site, Shark Bay: an interim report,
Australian Aboriginal Studies 2,60-63.
Brown S.H. & Mulvaney KJ. 1983 Test pit excavations Aboriginal Sites P4527,
P4523, and P5315 Perth-Darn National Highway, Newman-Port
Hedland Section. Report to MRD, Perth.
Department of Aboriginal Sites, WA Museum (DAS) 1979a. (B.J. Wright)

Dampier Archaeological Liquified Natural Gas Project: a survey for
Aboriginal sites. Unpublished report
Department of Aboriginal Sites, W.A. Museum (DAS) 1979b. (V. Novak)

Aboriginal sites: King Bay Area. Unpublished report
Department of Aboriginal Sites, W.A. Museum (DAS) 1979c. (J. Darke)

Aboriginal sites: Quarry, communications station and access roads.
Unpublished report.
Department of Aboriginal Sites, W.A. Museum (DAS) 1980a. (B.J. Wright) A

proposal for the archaeological investigation of, and preservation of
Aboriginal sites in the Dampier Archipelago. Unpublished report.
Department of Aboriginal Sites, WA Museum (DAS) 1980b. (J. Qarke)

Aboriginal sites in the vicinity of a proposed access road- Dampier to
King Bay. W.A. Unpublished report.
Department of Aboriginal Sites, W.A. Museum (DAP) 1984. Dampier

Archaeological Project: survey and salvage of Aboriginal sites on
portion of the Burrup Peninsula for Woodside Petroleum Pty Ltd.
Catchment areas, geomorphic zones and tabulations. D.A.S. W.A.
Museum, Perth.
16
Dortch C.E. 1977 Early and late stone industrial phases in Western Australia in
Wright R.V.S. (ed) Stone Tools as Cultural Markers A.I.A.S.
Canberra 104-132
Fagan B. 1980 People of the Earth Little Brown and Company. Boston.
Gara T.J. (n.d.) The Aborigines of the Dampier Archipelago: an ethnohistoiy of

the Yarburara. W.A.M. Perth.
Green, N. 1982 They draw rude figures on stone: engravings at King Bay.
Unpublished M.A. thesis. Dept of Anthropology and Prehistoiy,
AN.U. Canberra
Harris, J. 1988. An excavation report of Georges Valley Shell Midden, Burrup

Peninsula. Unpublished B.A. Hons thesis. Dept of Prehistoiy,
U.W.A Perth.
Hughes P.J. & Quartermaine G. 1992 Investigations of Aboriginal

Archaeological Sites in the Mesa J Development Area, Pannawonica.
Report prepared for Robe River Iron Associates.
Kirby, 1.1981. Archaeological survey for Department of Resources

Development: Burrup Peninsula. DAS. W.A. Museum: Perth.
Lorbianchet M. 1977 Report on an excavation of a shell midden at Skew Valley,

Dampier. W.A. W.A. Museum Report.
Lofgren ME. 1975 Patterns of Life Western Australian Museum

Information Series No.6
Mattner, CJ. 1989 Simulations of Regional Sampling Designs on the Burrup

Peninsula, W.A. Unpublished BSc. Hons thesis. Dept of
Archaeology, U.WA Perth.
Maynard L 1980 A Pleistocene date from an occupation deposit in the hibara

region, Western Australia. Australian Archaeology 10:3-8.
Morse, K. 1988 Mandu Mandu Rockshelter Pleistocene human coastal

occupation of North West Cape, Western Australia Archaeology tn
Oceania. 23:81-88
Mulvaney, D.J. 1975 The Prehistoly of Australia. Penguin. Melbourne.

17
O'Connor R 1987. Woodstock and Abydos Reserves Management Plan. Report

prepared for DAS, Perth
Pickering M. 1982a An archaeological survey of the Dampier to Perth Natural

Gas Pipeline Route. Section 1, Burrup Peninsula to Yannarie
River. DAS. W.A. Museum.
Picketing M. I 982b An archaeological survey of the Dampier to Perth Natural

Gas Pipeline Route. Section 1, Burrup Peninsula to Yannarie River.
Supplemental)' Report No.1; access roads and construction sites.
DAS. WA Museum.
Raab LM. & Klinger T.C. 1977 A critical appraisal of "significance" in contract
archaeology. American Antiquity 42: 629-634
Troilett G. 1982 Report on Ethel Gorge Salvage Report. WA. Museum Report
Turner, J. 1981. Murujuga: aspatial analysis of the engraved rock of Withnell

Bay. Unpublished B.A Hons thesis. Dept of Anthropology, U.W.A
Perth.
Veth, P.1982. testing the behavioural model: the use of open site data
Unpublished BA Hons thesis. Dept of Anthropology, U.WA Perth.
Vinnicombe, P. 1987 Dampier Archaeological Project Resource Document,

Survey and Salvage of Aboriginal Sites, Burrup Peninsula, Western
Australia. 1987. W.AM. Perth.
Virili, E. 1977. Aboriginal sites and rock art of the Dampier Archipelago, in P.J.
Ucko (ed) Form in Indigenous Art: schematisation in the art of
Aboriginal and Prehistoric Europe. AlAS. Canbeffa.
Woodside Petroleum Development Pty lid (WPD) 1979 Draft environmental

impact statement and environmental review and management
programme.
APPENDIX I
OBLIGATIONS RELATING TO SITES UNDER THE ABORIGINAL HERITAGE
ACT 1972-1980
"Report of Findings
15. Any person who has knowledge of the existence of anything in the nature
of Aboriginal burial grounds, symbols or objects of sacred, ritual or ceremonial
significance, cave or rock paintings or engravings, stone structures or arranged
stones, carved trees, or of any place or thing to which this Act applied or to
which this Act might reasonably be suspected to apply shall report its existence
to the Trustees, or to a police officer, unless he has reasonable cause to believe
the existence of the thing or place in question to be already known to the
Trustees.
Excavation of Aboriginal Sites

16. (1) Subject to Section 18, the right to excavate or to remove any thing from
an Aboriginal site is reserved to the Trustees.
(2) The Trustees may authonse the ently upon and excavating of an
Aboriginal site and the examination or removal of any thing on or under the
site in such manner and subject to such conditions as they may direct.
Offences Relating to Aboriginal Sites

17. Aperson who-
excavates, destroys, damages, conceals or in any way alters any Aboriginal
site; or
in any way alters, damages, removes, destroys, conceals, or who deals with
in a manner not sanctioned by relevant custom, or assumes the possession,
custody or control of, any olect on or under an Aboriginal site, comimts an
offence unless he is acting with the authonsation of the Trustees under Section
16 or the consent of the Minister under Section I&
Consent To Certain Uses

18. (1) For the purposes of this section, the expression "the owner of any land"
includes a lessee from the Crown, and the holder of any mining tenement or
mining privilege, or of any right or privilege under the Petroleum Act 1967, in
relation to the land.
(2) Where the owner of any land gives to the Trustees notice in writing that
he requires to use the land for a purpose which, unless the Minister gives
his consent under this section, would be likely to result in a breach of Section 17
in respect of any Aboriginal site that might be on the land, the Trustees shall, as
soon as they are reasonably able, form an opinion as to whether there is any
Aboriginal site on the land, evaluate the importance and significance of any
such site, and submit the notice to the Minister together with their
recommendation in writing as to whether or not the Minister should consent
to the use of the land for that purpose, and, where applicable; the extent to
which and the conditions upon which his consent should be given.
(3) Where the Trustees submit a notice to the Minister under subsection
(2) of this section he shall xnsider their recommendation and having regard to
the general interest of the community shall either-
Consent to the use of the land the subject of the notice, or a specified
part of the land, for the purpose required, subject to such conditions, if any, as
he may specify; or
wholly decline to consent to the use of the land the subject of the notice
for the purpose required, and shall forthwith inform the owner in writing of
his decision.
Where the owner of any land has given to the Trustees notice
pursuant to subsection (2) of this section and the Trustees have not submitted it
with their recommendation to the Minister in accordance with that subsection
the Minister may require the Trustees to do so within a specified time, or may
require the Trustees to take such other action as the Minister considers
necessaiy in order to expedite the matter, and the Trustees shall comply with
any such requirement.
Where the owner of any land is aggrieved by a decision of the Minister
made under subsection (3) of this section he may, within the time and in the
manner perscribed by rules of court, appeal from the decision of the Minister to
the Supreme Court which may hear and determine the appeal.
In determining an appeal under subsection (5) of this section the Judge
hearing the appeal may confirm or vaty the decision of the Minister against
which the appeal is made or quash the decision and substitute his own decision
which shall have effect as if it were the decision of the Minister, and may make
such an order as to the costs of the appeal as he sees fit
Where the owner of the land gives notice to the Trustees under
subsection (2) of this section, the Trustees may, if they are satisfied that it is
practicab'e to do so, direct the removal of any object to which this Act applies
from the land to a place of safe custody.
Where consent has been given under this section to a person to use
any land for a particular purpose nothing done by or on behalf of that person
pursuant to, and in accordance with any conditions attached to, the consent
constitutes an offence against this Act."
Notes on the Recognition of Aboriginal Sites
There are various types of Aboriginal Sites and these notes have been prepared
as a guide to the recognition of those sites that may be located in the suivey
area
An Aboriginal Site is defined in the Aborinal Heritage Act 1972-80 in Section
5 as:
Any place of importance and significance where persons of Aboriginal
descent have, or appear to have, left any object, natural or artificial used for, or
made for or adapted for use for, any purpose connected with the traditional
cultural life of the Aboriginal people, past or present;
Any sacred, ritual or ceremonial site, which is of importance and special
significance to persons of Aboriginal descent;
Any place which, in the opinion of the Trustees is or was associated with
the Aboriginal people and which is of historical, anthropological,
archaeological or ethnographical interest and should be preserved because of its
importance and significance to the cultural heritage of the state
Any place where objects to this Act applies are traditionally stored, or to
which, under the provisions of this Act, such objects have been taken or
removed.
Habitation Sites
These are commonly found throughout Western Australia and usually contain
evidence of tool-making seed grinding and other food processing cooking
painting engraving or numerous other activities. The archaeological evidence
for some of these activities is discussed in detail under the appropnate heading.
Habitation sites are usually found near an existing or former water source such
as gnamma hole; rock pool, spring or soak They are generally in the open, but
they sometimes occur in shallow rock shelters or caves. It is particulady
important that none of these sites be disturbed as the stratified deposits which
may be found at such sites can yield valuable information about the inhabitants
when excavated by archaeologists.
Seed Grinding
Polished or smoothed areas are sometimes observed on/near horizontal rock
surfaces. The smooth areas are usually 25cm wide and 40 or 50cm long. They
are the result of seed grinding by the Aboriginal women and indicate aspects of
a past economy.
Habitation Structures
Aboriginal people sheltered in simple ephemeral structures, generally
made of branches and sometimes grass. These sites are rarely preserved for
more than one occupation period. Occasionally iocks were pushed aside or
were used to stabilise other building materials. When these rock patterns are
located they provide evidence of former habitation sites.
Middens
When a localised source of shellfish and other foods have been exploited from
a favoured camping place, the accumulated ashes, hearth stones, shells, bones
and other refuse can form mounds at times several metres high and many
metres in diameter. Occasionally these refuse mounds or middens contain
stone, shell or bone tools. These are most common near the coast but examples
on inland lakes and river banks are not unknown.
Stone Artef act Factory Sites

Pieces of rock from which aitef acts could be made were often carried to camp
sites or other places for final production Such sites are usually easily
recognisable because the manufacturing process produces quantities of flakes
and waste material which are dearly out of context when compared with the
surrounding rocks. All rocks found on the sandy coastal plain, for example,
must have been transported by human agencies. These sites are widely
distributed throughout the state.
Quarries
When outcrops of rock suitable for the manufacture of stone tools were
quarried by the Aborigines, evidence of the flaking and chipping of the source
material can usually be seen in situ and nearby. Ochre and other mineral
pigments used in painting rock surfaces, artefacts and body decoration are
mined from naturally occunng seams, bands and other deposits. This activity
can sometimes be recognised by the presence of wooden digging sticks or the
marks made by these implements.
Marked Trees
Occasionally trees are located that have designs in the bark which have been
incised by Aborigines. Toeholds, to assist the climber, were sometimes cut into
the bark and sapwood of trees in the hollow limbs of which possums and other
athorial animals sheltered Some tree trunks bear scars where sections of bark
or wood have been removed to make dishes, shields, spearthrowers and other
wooden artefacts. In some parts of the state wooden platforms were built in
trees to accomodate a coipse during complex rituals following death.
Burials
In the north of the state it was formeily the custom to place the bones of the
dead on a ledge in a cave after certain rituals were completed. The
bones were wrapped in sheets of bark and the skull placed beside this. In otther
parts of Western Australia the dead were buried, the burial position vaiying
accoTthng to the customs of the particular area and time. Natural erosion, or
mechanical earthmoVing equipment occasionally exposes these burial sites.
Stone Structures
If one or more stones are found partially buried or wedged into a position
which is not likely to be the result of natural forces, then it is probable that the
place is an Abonginal site and that possibly there are other important sites
nearby. There are several different types of stone arrangements ranging from
simple cairns or piles of stones to more elaborate designs. Low weirs which
trap fish when tides fall are found in coastal areas. Some rivers contain similar
structures that trap fish against the current. It seems likely that low stone slab
structures in the south-west jarrah forests were built to provide suitable
environments in which to trap some small animals. Low walls or pits were
sometimes made to provide a hide or shelter for hunting.
Elongated rock fragments are occasionally erected as a sign or warning that a

special area is being approached Heaps or alignments of stones may be
naturalistic or symbolic representations of animals, people or mythological
figures.
Paintings
These usually occur in rockshelters, caves or other sheltered situations which
offer a certain degree of protection from the weather. The best known examples
in Western Australia occur in the Kimberley region but paintings are also
found throughout most of the State. Several coloured pigments may have
been used at a site. Stencilling was a common painting technique used
throughout the state. The negative image of an object was created by spraying
pigment over the object which was held against a walt
Engravings
This term describes designs which have been carved, pecked or pounded into a
rock surface. They form the predominant art form of the Pilbara region but are
known to occur in the Kimberleys in the north to Toodjay in the south. Most
engravings occur in the open but some are situated in rock shelters.
Caches
It was the custom to hide ceremonial objects in niches and other secluded
places. The removal of objects from these places, the taking of photographs of
the places or objects or any other interference with these places is not permitted.
Ceremonial Grounds
At some sites the ground has been modified in some way by the removal of
surface pebbles, or the modeling of the soil, or the digging of pits and trenches.
In other places there is no noticeable alteration of the ground surface and
Aborigines familiar with the site must be consulted concerning its location.
Mythological Sites
Most sites already described have a place in Aboriginal mythology. In addition
there are many Aboriginal sites with no man-made features which enable them
to be recognised They are often natural features in the landscape linked to the
Aboriginal account of the formation of the world during the creative
"Dreaming" period in the distant past. Many such sites are located at focal
points in the creative journeys of mythological spirit beings of the Dreaming
Such sites can only be identified by the Aboriginal people who are familiar with
the associated traditions.
(?3
crr ..e LOAN
APPENDIX III
QUANTITATIVE RISK ASSESSMENT
This Appendix is a separately bound volume and is

available from Woodside at no cost upon request
PROTECTIG
DEPARTMENT OF ENVRONM
WESTRAI ic;iAR
141 ST. GEOR(P fLi!U:, PERTH

Liquefied Petroleum Gas (LPG) Extraction Project: Consultative Environmental Review

Caricato da

Informazioni sul documento

Titolo originale

Copyright

Formati disponibili

Condividi questo documento

Condividi o incorpora il documento

Opzioni di condivisione

Hai trovato utile questo documento?

Questo contenuto è inappropriato?

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

Liquefied Petroleum Gas (LPG) Extraction Project: Consultative Environmental Review

Caricato da

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

EPA IJbrary/Information

LIQUEFIED PETROLEUM GAS

was prepared for

Woodside Document No: ENV-0221

The Environmental Protection Authority (EPA) invites people to make a

This Consultative Environmental Review (CER) covers the extension of Woodside

Why write a submission?

A submission is a way to provide information, express your opinion and put

All submissions received by the EPA will be acknowledged. Submissions may be

Why not join a group?

clearly state your point of view;

indicate the source of your information or argument if this is

suggest recommendations, safeguards or alternatives.

Attempt to list points so that the issues raised are clear. A

Refer each point to the appropriate section, chapter or

The closing date for submission is Tuesday 25 May 1993

Submissions should be addressed to:

Attention: Mr Shanc Sadleir

I. SPECIAL TERMS AND ABBREVIATIONS 1

SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS 3

PROPOSED LOCATION AND SITE DESCRIPTION 9

5.1 Description of Process

QUANTITATIVE RISK ASSESSMENT 17

POTENTIAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS

7.1 Identification of Issues

Consultative Environmental Review Guidelines

Quantitative Risk Assessment

Location Plan and Proposed Facilities for LPG Export

CER Consultative Environmental Review

CFCs Chioro-Fluoro-Carbons. A class of chemicals which are

CHEMMS Chemical and Ecological Monitoring of Mermaid Sound.

Domgas Domestic Gas - scheme gas for Western Australia.

EEMUA Engineering Equipment and Materials Users Association.

EIS/ERMP Environmental Impact Statement/Environmental Review and Manage-

EPA Environmental Protection Authority.

FAR/SS Field Auxiliary Room/Substation for power distribution.

Fractionation A process used to separate the light hydrocarbon mixture into

Hydrostatic A procedure where a vessel is filled with a fluid, normally

LO-X Foam Low expansion foam for fire fighting.

Butane is used as a raw material for manufacturing synthetic

Propane is used as a household, industrial and automotive fuel

Mangal Mangrove system.

Propagule Seed of a mangrove.

ppm Parts per million (milligram per litre)

QRA Quantitative Risk Assessment.

Scrub Column A device for separating methane from heavier hydrocarbons.

Slugcatcher A horizontal separator which allows the separation of a

Stabiliser A vertical column which allows the removal of dissolved gases

Woodside Woodside Offshore Petroleum Pty Ltd is the Operator Company

Woodside Petroleum Ltd,

The existing liquefied natural gas/domestic gas (LNG/Domgas) facility on the

Construction of the existing Plant required the installation of a

Other potential environmental impacts of the development are identified

It is concluded that the potential environmental impacts of this project are

In May 1979 Woodside Petroleum Development Pty Ltd submitted an Environmental

a Domgas Plant providing scheme gas to Western Australia;

an LNG Plant and storage facilities capable of providing 7 million

condensate (liquid hydrocarbon) storage facilities for domestic and

a ship jetty and ship loading equipment; and

Woodside Offshore Petroleum Pty Ltd

Inquiries should be directed to:

Environmental Protection Authority

Inquiries should be directed to: