GLOBAL RESPONSIBILITY - bhp.com

GLOBAL RESPONSIBILITY

BHP BILLITON

HEALTH SAFETY ENVIRONMENT AND COMMUNITY REPORT 2001

BHP Billiton Limited ABN 49 004 028 077. Registered in Australia. Registered Office: 600 Bourke Street Melbourne Victoria 3000 Australia.

BHP Billiton Plc Registration Number 3196209. Registered in England and Wales. Registered Office: 1-3 Strand London WC2N 5HA United Kingdom

About this Report

This Health, Safety, Environment and Community

(HSEC) Report for BHP Billiton is presented in

four sections.

Section One includes a message from the CEO

and Managing Director, Paul Anderson, and

Deputy CEO, Brian Gilbertson, and provides a

profile of the Company, its Charter, HSEC Policy,

standards and systems, and HSEC targets.

Section Two presents a summary of the HSEC

performance of BHP Billiton Limited (formerly

BHP Limited) for 2000/01, together with the rele-

vant Appendices and Auditor’s verification state-

ment.

Section Three presents a summary of the HSEC

performance of BHP Billiton Plc (formerly Billiton

Plc) for 2000/01, together with the relevant

Appendix and Auditor’s statement.

Section Four presents the finalists and winners

of the HSEC Awards for 2001, with brief descrip-

tions of their projects.

The HSEC performance summaries are necessari-

ly presented separately, as during 2000/01 BHP

Billiton Limited and BHP Billiton Plc were operat-

ing independently, with their own HSEC policies

and reporting systems.

Under the terms of the Dual Listed Companies

(DLC) merger concluded on 29 June 2001, BHP

Billiton Limited and BHP Billiton Plc continue to

exist as separate companies, but operate as a

combined group known as BHP Billiton.

The global headquarters of the combined BHP

Billiton Group and the headquarters of BHP

Billiton Limited are located in Melbourne

Australia. BHP Billiton Plc is located in London,

United Kingdom.

Entities in the DLC structure that are referred to

throughout this Report are as follows:

• BHP Billiton and BHP Billiton Group refers to

the combined entity including both BHP Billiton

Limited and subsidiary companies and BHP

Billiton Plc and subsidiary companies.

• BHP Billiton Limited Group refers to the parent

entity that is BHP Billiton Limited (formerly BHP

Limited before the DLC merger) and its sub-

sidiary companies.

• BHP Billiton Plc Group refers to the parent enti-

ty that is BHP Billiton Plc (formerly Billiton Plc

before the DLC merger) and its subsidiary com-

panies.

• BHP Billiton Limited refers to the parent entity

that was formerly BHP Limited before the DLC

merger.

• BHP Billiton Plc refers to the parent entity that

was formerly Billiton Plc before the DLC merger.

BHP Billiton is continuously improving its report-

ing systems and endeavours to present useful

and accurate information. However, some

reporting systems are still being developed and

anyone seeking to rely on any representation

made in this report should first verify the infor-

mation with the Group.

Our cover: The Co Llullaillaco volcano pro-vides a dramatic backdrop as consultantRodrigo Bartolo tests salar water levelsnear the Escondida copper mine in Chile.

CONTENTSSECTION ONEOUR MESSAGE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1

BHP BILLITON CHARTER . . . . . . . . . . . . .3

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY . . . . . . . . . . . . . .5

BHP BILLITON PROFILE . . . . . . . . . . . . . .7

HSEC POLICY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .8

HSEC POLICY, STANDARDSAND SYSTEMS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .9

HSEC TARGETS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .14

SECTION TWOBHP BILLITON LIMITED PERFORMANCE SUMMARY . . . . . . . . .16

BHP BILLITON LIMITED APPENDICES . .40

BHP BILLITON LIMITED AUDITOR’SVERIFICATION STATEMENT . . . . . . . . . .45

SECTION THREEBHP BILLITON PLC PERFORMANCE SUMMARY . . . . . . . . .46

BHP BILLITON PLC APPENDIX . . . . . . . .61

BHP BILLITON PLC AUDITOR’S STATEMENT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .62

SECTION FOURBHP BILLITON HSEC AWARDS . . . . . . . .63

FEEDBACK FORM

BHP BILLITON LOCATIONS

BHP BILLITON CORPORATE CENTRES

WWW.BHPBILLITON.COM

Since the publication last year of theHealth, Safety, Environment andCommunity Reports for BHP Limited and Billiton Plc, a significant change has occurred. Our two companies havemerged under a Dual Listed Companiesstructure to create one of the world’slargest diversified resources groups.

One thing that has not changed, however, is our shared commitment toenvironmental and social responsibility.While an outstanding feature of BHPBilliton is our diversification, bothgeographically and in our range of assets,we are unified in our global approach tocorporate social responsibility.

The trend towards globalisation andindustry consolidation has also continuedduring the past year and our merger is areflection of this fact. Along with theshareholder benefits delivered throughglobalisation, global companies have aresponsibility to apply consistently highenvironmental and social standards for the benefit of other stakeholders. Our commitment is reflected in the BHP Billiton Charter.

Underpinning the Charter is our Health,Safety, Environment and Community(HSEC) Policy, ‘Working Responsibly at BHP Billiton’, which in turn is supported by detailed HSEC Management Standards.The Policy and Management Standardswere in place throughout the new Groupfrom our very first day of operation.

A further reflection of our commitment to sustainable development is that health,safety and environment governanceresides at the highest level. The Health,Safety and Environment Committee is asub-committee of the Board of Directors.The Committee is chaired by a non-executive Director of the Group, andmembers include health, safety andenvironment experts who are otherwisecompletely independent of the Group.

HSEC functional management iscoordinated and monitored through theHSEC Forum, chaired by the Vice PresidentHealth, Safety and Environment. TheForum steers the activities of our HSECprofessionals located within each of ourCustomer Sector Groups. This is acollaborative approach focusing oncontinuous performance improvement.

Paul Anderson, Chief Executive Officer and Managing Director (right),with Brian Gilbertson, Deputy ChiefExecutive Officer.

BHP BILLITON HEALTH SAFETY ENVIRONMENT AND COMMUNITY REPORT 2001 1

A UNIFIED APPROACH

OUR MESSAGE

2 BHP BILLITON HEALTH SAFETY ENVIRONMENT AND COMMUNITY REPORT 2001

Through the merger integration process, HSEC Policy developmentrevealed shared philosophies andcommitments, all of which have beenretained or strengthened. Of particularnote are the following areas:

• Zero harm to people and theenvironment — our goal

We have set health and safety targetsthat continually reduce the risk ofharm to our employees, to contractorsand to visitors to our sites. We alsohave unified our approach to reducingthe environmental impacts of our activities.

• Consistent HSEC managementsystems

Recognising that we are a globalcompany with operations throughoutthe world, our Policy prescribesconsistent HSEC management systemswherever we operate, while enablingeach site to respond effectively tolocal issues.

• Human rights

We are committed to supporting thefundamental human rights of peoplewith whom we work, consistent withthe United Nations UniversalDeclaration of Human Rights.

• Community programs

We seek opportunities to share thesuccess of our operations with thecommunities in which we operate. Our target is to contribute, inaggregate, 1 per cent of our pre-taxprofit on a rolling three-year averageto sustainable communitydevelopment programs.

In addition, the Policy reinforces ourapproach to risk management, regularreviews, assessments and reporting.

We have set five-year targets to keep ourfocus on improved performance, and toallow others to monitor our progresstowards sustainable development. Thosetargets are presented in this Report.

Looking back over the year under review,we have achieved much during a period of great change, but a lot of work remainsto be done. With great regret, we reportthat 16 people lost their lives whileworking at BHP Billiton Limited or BHP Billiton Plc during the year. We areworking relentlessly to achieve our goal of zero fatalities, and several newinitiatives have been implemented to help us meet this objective.

Many other challenges remain as wecontinue the process of integrating our operations around the globe, while endeavouring to exceed the targets we have set to improve our HSEC performance. We will continue to be open and transparent about the way we report our progress.

This Report, in our transition year, mustnecessarily include separate performancesummaries for the two companies.However, we reiterate that therequirements of our HSEC Policy andManagement Standards apply to all BHPBilliton sites and operations throughoutthe world. Just as we are unified in ourcommitment, so too are we now unified in our reporting, as we strive towardscontinued progress in our HSECperformance across the Group.

Paul AndersonChief Executive Officer and Managing Director

Brian GilbertsonDeputy Chief Executive Officer

OUR MESSAGE CONTINUED


BHP BILLITON CHARTER

Paul Anderson Chief Executive Officer and Managing Director


Our purpose is to create value through the discovery, development and conversion of natural resources, and the provision of innovative customer and market-focused solutions.

To prosper and achieve real growth, we must:

Actively manage and build our portfolio of high quality assets and services.

Continue the drive towards a high performance organisation in which every individual accepts responsibility and is rewarded for results.Earn the trust of employees, customers, suppliers, communities and shareholders by being forthright in our communications and consistently delivering on commitments.

We value:

Safety and the Environment – An overriding commitment to health, safety, environmental responsibility and sustainable development.

Integrity – Doing what we say we will do.

High Performance – The excitement and fulfilment of achieving superior business results and stretching our capabilities.

Win-Win Relationships – Having relationships which focus on the creation of value for all parties.

The Courage to Lead Change – Accepting the responsibility to inspire and deliver positive change in the face of adversity.

Respect for Each Other – The embracing of diversity, enriched by openness, sharing, trust, teamwork and involvement.

We are successful in creating value when:

Our shareholders are realising a superior return on their investment.

Our customers and suppliers are benefiting from our business relationships.

The communities in which we operate value our citizenship.

Every employee starts each day with a sense of purpose and ends each day with a sense of accomplishment.

WE ARE BHP BILLITON, A LEADING GLOBAL RESOURCES COMPANY

29 June 2001


Elena Calderon at the ore preparationunit at Cerro Matoso nickel mine inColombia.


EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

BHP Billiton was formed on 29 June 2001,through the Dual Listed Companies (DLC)merger of BHP Limited and Billiton Plc.

This Report presents a profile of BHPBilliton and its unified approach to Health,Safety, Environment and Community(HSEC) policies and systems. The Reportnecessarily contains separate performancesummaries for BHP Billiton Limited(formerly BHP Limited) and BHP Billiton Plc(formerly Billiton Plc) for 2000/01 as thecompanies were managed independentlyduring this period.

BHP Billiton remains committed tosustainable development as reflected inthe BHP Billiton Charter, and HSECresponsibilities are integral to the way wedo business. Underpinning the Charter isour HSEC Policy, which in turn is supportedby detailed HSEC Management Standards.

The new HSEC Policy and associatedmanagement standards were developed by dedicated teams of HSEC professionalsfrom the two companies to ensure bestpractices were shared and priority issuesand cultural sensitivities addressed. The Policy and management standardsreflect a consolidation of the strongestcommitments from both companies and there are no instances wherecommitments have been relaxed. Inaddition to ensuring that BHP Billitonstarted operating with a clear Policy (andmanagement standards) in place, theintegration process ensured that theCompany’s HSEC function was alignedaround the key elements and priorities.

The Charter, HSEC Policy and HSECManagement Standards were rolled out onthe first day of operation of the mergedcompany and promote a commitment toact with honesty, integrity and fairness indealings with our stakeholders. They arebacked by a rigorous program of integratedHSEC audits and assessments of HSEC risksfor new projects and existing operations.

BHP Billiton has affirmed its commitmentto maintaining and promoting dialoguewith stakeholders in the resources industryand remaining responsive to the globalcommunity’s concerns and aspirations. Weare an active member of the Global MiningInitiative, which was established toresearch and promote sustainabledevelopment in mining.

A further demonstration of ourcommitment to sustainable development is that HSE governance resides at thehighest level — the HSE Committee, a sub-committee of the Board of Directors.

The Company’s Forum on CorporateResponsibility brings togetherrepresentatives of our senior managementteam, the leaders of several key non-government organisations and communityopinion leaders to discuss and debatesocial and environmental matters.

We have set five-year targets to keep ourfocus firmly centred on improvedperformance, and to allow others tomonitor our progress towards sustainabledevelopment and advancement to ourultimate goal of zero harm to people and

the environment. The targets specify ourobjectives around management standardimplementation; legal compliance; riskmanagement; health and safety; energyuse; greenhouse gas emissions; water use;land management; product stewardshipand community interactions.

As can be seen in the detailed performancesummaries for BHP Billiton Limited andBHP Billiton Plc, good progress has beenmade in a number of areas includingimplementation of management standardsand certification to ISO 14001, communitydevelopment programs, reducingsignificant environmental incidents andreducing greenhouse gas emissions.Progress, however, has been inconsistentin the safety area and, regrettably, duringthe year 16 people lost their lives whileworking for us.

Resolution of our involvement in the Ok Tedi copper mine progressed to thepoint where the shareholders reachedagreement regarding the Company’s exit.Our shareholding will be transferred to adevelopment program that will providesocial benefits to the people of Papua NewGuinea and particularly the WesternProvince, while responsibly managing theenvironmental impacts.

Next year, our HSEC Report will include a unified performance summary for the BHP Billiton Group, operating under asingle HSEC Policy and set of HSECManagement Standards.

6 BHP BILLITON HEALTH SAFETY ENVIRONMENT AND COMMUNITY REPORT 20016 BHP BILLITON HEALTH SAFETY ENVIRONMENT AND COMMUNITY REPORT 2001

Environmental engineer Huzen Suryawardana isin charge of rehabilitation at the Satui coalproject in South Kalimantan, Indonesia.


BHP BILLITON PROFILEOverviewBHP Billiton is one of the largest diversifiedresource groups in the world, with aportfolio of high-quality, long-life assets.

The Company was formed on 29 June 2001,following shareholder and governmentapproval of the Dual Listed Companies(DLC) merger between BHP Limited andBilliton Plc. Under the terms of the DLCmerger, BHP Billiton Limited and BHPBilliton Plc have identical Boards ofDirectors and are run by a unifiedmanagement team. Both companies haveretained their separate corporate identitiesand maintained their stock exchangelistings. The BHP Billiton Group reports ona fiscal year basis ending 30 June.

BHP Billiton has an annual turnover of around US$19 billion, attributable profitof approximately US$2 billion, and anenterprise value of over US$35 billion (July 2001). Key financial information ispresented in Figure 1. At 29 August 2001,the number of shareholders was 298 000.Around 60 000 people are employed by the Group.

The headquarters of the Group are inMelbourne, with a major corporatemanagement centre in London and otheroffices in Johannesburg and Houston.

Customer Sector Groups

The major operating assets are groupedaround customer sectors, with a focus onunderstanding our markets and customersso as to provide them with innovativesolutions. Each Customer Sector Group(CSG) manages a range of relatedoperations, so that production, processing,marketing and delivery are morestreamlined. The CSGs are:

• Aluminium (bauxite, alumina,aluminium)

• Base Metals (copper, silver, lead, zinc)

• Carbon Steel Materials (iron ore,metallurgical coal, manganese)

• Stainless Steel Materials (nickel,chrome)

• Energy Coal (coal)

• Petroleum (oil, gas, liquefied natural gas)

• Steel (flat and coated products)

BHP Billiton operates in more than 35countries (see map at the back of thisReport). The Company’s diversity in termsof major commodities and markets ispresented in Figures 2 and 3.

BHP Billiton has a presence in every keymining geographic area. Sales are largelybalanced between the key markets, withcustomers drawn from a diverse base.

Figure 1: Key Financial Informationfor the BHP Billiton Group

Year ended 30 June 2001 US$m

Group turnover* 19 079

Earnings Before Interest and Tax (EBIT)- excluding exceptional items 3 627 - including exceptional items 2 539

Attributable profit*- excluding exceptional items 2 189 - including exceptional items 1 529 Net operating assets* 21 712

Taxation paid 587

Dividends paid 751

*Including share of joint ventures and associates

Figure 2: Earnings Before Interest and Tax (EBIT) by Customer Sector Group (excluding exceptionals)Year ended 30 June 2001

Petroleum

Steel

Aluminium

Base Metals

Carbon Steel MaterialsStainless Steel Materials

Energy Coal

Figure 3: Turnover by Geographical Market Year ended 30 June 2001

North America

Southern Africa

Rest of World

Australia

Europe

Japan

South Korea

Other Asia


WORKING RESPONSIBLY AT BHP BILLITON: OUR HEALTH, SAFETY, ENVIRONMENT AND COMMUNITY POLICY

Wherever we operate we will:

Develop, implement and maintain management systems for health, safety, environment and the community that are consistent with internationally recognised standards and enable us to:

identify, assess and manage risks to employees, contractors, the environment and communities;

strive to achieve leading industry practice;

meet and, where appropriate, exceed applicable legal requirements;

set and achieve targets that include reducing and preventing pollution;

develop our people and provide resources to meet our targets;

support the fundamental human rights of employees, contractors and the communitiesin which we operate;

respect the traditional rights of indigenous peoples;

care for the environment and value cultural heritage; and

advise on the responsible use of our products.

Seek opportunities to share our success by:

working with communities to contribute to social infrastructure needs through the development and use of appropriate skills and technologies; and

developing partnerships that focus on creating sustainable value for everyone.

Communicate with, and engage, employees, contractors, business partners, suppliers, customers, visitors and communities to:

build relationships based on honesty, openness, mutual trust and involvement; and

share responsibility for meeting the requirements of this policy.

We will review regularly and report publicly our progress and ensure this policy remains relevant to the needs of our stakeholders. We will be successful when we achieve our targets toward our goal of zero harm and are valued by the communities in which we work.

Paul Anderson Chief Executive Officer and Managing Director


At BHP Billiton, we are committed to sustainable development. Health, safety, environment and community responsibilities are integral to the way we do business.

We commit to continual improvement in our performance, efficient use of natural resources and aspire to zero harm to people and the environment.

29 June 2001


IntroductionBHP Billiton is one of the first companies in the world to combine health, safety,environment and community matters inone policy and one set of managementstandards. As a consequence, wherever weoperate, all these matters are addressed inour decision-making processes, alongsideother business considerations.

Knowing that much of our success as a global company depends on howeffectively we work with our employeesand the communities in which we operate,we see the HSEC Policy as being central toour future success. The policy underpinsour management systems worldwide andsets the foundation from which weoperate. It is based on the principlescontained in our Charter. This means that, while we strive to deliver strongfinancial returns to shareholders, we donot lose sight of our wider responsibilitiesto our stakeholders.

Structure and responsibilitiesAt every level in the organisation, from theBoard through to the site operations, linemanagers are ultimately responsible forhealth, safety, environment and communitymatters. Within Corporate and theCustomer Sector Groups, and at theoperational level, line managers aresupported by functional personnel whoprovide specialist advice and support inmanaging all aspects of HSEC.

As shown in Figure 4, BHP Billiton’s peakHealth, Safety and Environmentgovernance body, the HSE Committee, is asub-committee of the Board. Membershipof the committee comprises one executiveDirector, two non-executive Directors (oneof whom is committee Chairman) andrecognised international experts in thefields of safety, occupational andcommunity health, and the environment.Their task is to overview the minimisationof HSEC risk and the implementation ofperformance improvements across ourbusinesses. They exercise a ‘hands-on’approach to dealing with strategicallysignificant HSEC issues and even undertakeindependent reviews and evaluations usingexternal resources.

HSEC management across the Company is coordinated and monitored through thepeak functional body, the HSEC Forum.Corporate representatives, HSEC functionalheads from each of the Customer SectorGroups, line managers and sustainabledevelopment staff are involved in settingdirection for the function; identifyingpriority issues to be addressed throughnetwork task groups; monitoring HSECperformance and building consensus forthe way forward. Development of HSECpractices and the response to issues ofCompany-wide significance are managedthrough specialist networks made up of committed personnel from the groupsand operations.

HSEC POLICY, STANDARDS AND SYSTEMS

Figure 4: HSEC Organisation Structure

HSEC Forum

HSE Committee

HSEC Networks

Corporate HSEC

CSG HSECrepresentatives

HSEC personnel

CustomerSector Groups

ExecutiveCommittee

Sites

BHP Billiton Board


HSEC POLICY, STANDARDS AND SYSTEMS CONTINUED

Standards and systemsAs an indication of the commitment toresponsible standards in the areas ofhealth, safety, environment and thecommunity, the HSEC ManagementStandards were among the firstmanagement initiatives introduced whenBHP Billiton was formed. Following asignificant amount of development work,they were in place from the Group’s firstday of operation.

The Standards were developed to ensureconsistent interpretation andimplementation of the HSEC Policy. Theyform the basis for the development andapplication of HSEC management systemsat all levels of the Group. The scope of theStandards covers all operational aspectsand activities that have the potential to affect, positively or negatively, the health and safety of people, theenvironment, or the community. They coverthe entire life cycle of our assets, fromexploration through to commissioning,operation, decommissioning, closure and rehabilitation.

The objectives of the Standards are to:

• provide a risk-based HSEC managementsystem framework, broadly consistentwith ISO 14001, OHSAS 18001, SA 8000and other internationally recognisedstandards, supporting theimplementation of the Charter and theHSEC Policy across the Group;

• clearly set out and formalise theexpectations of the Group for theprogressive development andimplementation of more specific anddetailed HSEC management systems at all levels of the Group;

• provide auditable criteria againstwhich HSEC management systemsacross the Group can be measured;and

• provide a basis from which to drivecontinuous improvement towardsleading industry practice.

The requirements of the Standards apply to all BHP Billiton sites and operationsthroughout the world. These includefacilities that are owned or operated by us; development projects, acquisitionsand divestments; and major activities by contractors on our sites or under our management.

Where we have no operationalresponsibility but have an equity stake, or where significant BHP Billiton assets areinvolved, the Standards are made availableto the operator so that comparable HSECmanagement standards can be applied.

There are 21 HSEC ManagementStandards, each of which includes a set of clear performance requirements. TheStandards are to be reviewed annually by the HSEC Forum and, if required, revised and reissued. The Standards are listed in Figure 5.

Figure 5: HSEC ManagementStandards

1 Policy, Leadership and Commitment

2 Responsibility and Authority

3 Risk Management

4 Legal and Other Requirements

5 Planning and Objectives

6 Projects and Major BusinessTransactions

7 Plant and Equipment Integrity

8 Management of Change

9 Training, Awareness and Competence

10 Suppliers and Contractors

11 Human Rights and Indigenous Affairs

12 Communication, Consultation andParticipation

13 Product Stewardship

14 Documentation, Records and DocumentControl

15 Work Procedures and OperationalControl

16 Emergency Preparedness and Response

17 Performance Measurement, Monitoringand Reporting

18 Incident and Non-ConformanceInvestigation and Management

19 Safe Behaviour

20 Health and Occupational Hygiene

21 Audit, Self-Assessment andManagement Review

Hierarchy of systems anddocumentsThe BHP Billiton Charter, HSEC Policy andHSEC Management Standards aremandatory at all our sites and operations,under a hierarchical management systemwhere systems and documents must meetand support the requirements of those ofhigher levels, as shown in Figure 6.

Part of the global community BHP Billiton is committed to maintainingand promoting dialogue with stakeholdersin the resources industry and remainingresponsive to the global community’sconcerns and aspirations.

Last year, we established the Forum onCorporate Responsibility (FCR), whichbrings together representatives of oursenior management team, the leaders ofseveral key non-government organisationsand community opinion leaders to discussand debate social and environmentalmatters. Members of the FCR have anopportunity to provide advice and challengethe views of our senior management onbroader sustainable development andcorporate social responsibility issues. While the Company is not bound by itsadvice, the FCR does provide a means fordirect and open dialogue with members of the wider community.

We are also a member of the GlobalMining Initiative (GMI), which wasestablished in late 1998 to research andpromote sustainable development in mining.

The GMI work program includes theMining Minerals and SustainableDevelopment study, an independentdetailed analysis of the industry’sperformance in its transition to sustainable

development. An independentorganisation, the International Institute forEnvironment and Development (IIED), hasbeen commissioned to oversee this study.The IIED has sought to engagestakeholders from many countries,including non-government organisations,governments, specialist experts, variousUnited Nations agencies, and industry. Themain study is scheduled to provide resultsin time for the Earth Summit +10 in 2002.

BHP Billiton is also a member of the World Business Council for SustainableDevelopment (WBCSD), a coalition of 150 international companies that share acommitment to the environment and to theprinciples of economic growth andsustainable development.

We are involved with a wide range of otherindustry groups, participating inmeaningful discussions and debate onhealth, safety, environmental andcommunity issues. These include theInternational Council on Mining andMetals (ICMM) and various associationsand bodies in countries in which weoperate, such as the Business Council ofAustralia, the Minerals Council of Australia,the UK’s Business in the Environment

program, and the South African NationalCoordinating Committee on Climate Change.

We collaborate with governments, non-government organisations and academicinstitutions worldwide to undertake andsupport research on improving health,safety, environmental and communityperformance. For instance, we are activelyworking on a malaria control program with the governments of Mozambique, South Africa and Swaziland, in partnershipwith the World Health Organization.

Our individual businesses are also activethrough their sectoral organisations atnational and international levels.


Charter

HSEC Policy

HSEC Management Standards

Company-wide Procedures and Guidelines

Business-based HSEC Management Systems

Operational HSEC Procedures

Figure 6: Hierarchy of Systems and Documents


Local farmers in Montelibano, Colombiaattending a workshop on the use of a newbio-fertiliser, as part of a community programsupported by Cerro Matoso nickel mine.


HSEC POLICY, STANDARDS AND SYSTEMS CONTINUED

Stakeholder dialogueOur Charter, HSEC Policy and HSECManagement Standards all promote acommitment to acting with honesty,integrity and fairness in dealings with ourstakeholders — shareholders, employees,contractors, customers, suppliers and thecommunities in which we operate.

The Standards require that processes be in place to identify internal and externalstakeholders and to collaborativelydetermine their HSEC concerns,information needs and aspirations forcommunity development. To facilitateunderstanding and informed discussion,they also require that local context andcultural factors are taken into consideration.

We also seek to consult with governments,authorities and other organisations in orderto contribute to the development of publicpolicy, relevant legislation, improved industryperformance and educational initiatives.

Any concerns or complaints related to HSEC aspects of our operations arerecorded as incidents and are investigated,according to the level of risk involved and the extent of concern. Conflictresolution is initially undertaken throughdirect consultation with stakeholders ortheir intermediaries.

The Standards also require that theeffectiveness of our communication,consultation and participation processes be regularly reviewed incollaboration with stakeholders to effectcontinual improvement.

Business ethicsTo support the values, principles andprocedures defined in our Charter, HSECPolicy and HSEC Management Standards,we have developed a Charter DiscussionGuide for everyday use by employees, and

a Guide to Business Conduct, which setsout our approach to business integrity.

The Guide to Business Conduct applies toall our employees, regardless of theirspecific job or location. It provides cleardirections and advice on conductingbusiness internationally, interacting withgovernments, communities and businesspartners, and general workplace behaviour.It also states our position on such issues as conflicts of interest, financialinducements and bribery.

Resolution of business conduct issues willbe decentralised, taking into account theincreased diversity of countries, culturesand languages across assets. In the eventthat issues cannot be resolved at a locallevel, next points of contact will beregional delegates located inJohannesburg, Melbourne and Houston.The final point of escalation will be via theCorporate office and an Ethics Panel.

Indigenous relationsWe aim to work cooperatively withindigenous peoples to ensure that ourpresence provides lasting benefits andcauses as little disruption as possible totheir communities. We will ensure werespect the rights of indigenous peoples tokeep their culture, identity, traditions andcustoms. We strive to ensure that hostcommunities benefit from our operationsbeing sited there.

Indigenous relations principles areembedded in our Charter, HSEC Policy andHSEC Management Standards. The HSECPolicy specifically states, ‘Wherever weoperate we will . . . respect the traditionalrights of indigenous peoples . . . and valuecultural heritage’.

Our HSEC Management Standards detail the performance expectations for all operations in this area.

AuditingOur HSEC Management Standards includea requirement for an auditing process tobe implemented to check that theStandards are being applied and to verifyperformance. The audits are designed toaddress the degree of implementation ofour HSEC management systems, and theireffectiveness in meeting the Group’s needsand those of the business being audited.Recommendations for improvement are tobe made if required.

We are also putting in place a system ofannual self-assessments at each site. These are to be based on the requirementsof the HSEC Management Standards,together with other requirements specific to the business or site. Based on these self-assessments, an annualStatement of Assurance is to be preparedby each business.

New corporate programs and proceduresfor conducting HSEC audits are to includethe scope and method; the protocol;required auditor competencies andresponsibilities; requirements for reportingresults to management; responsibilities for follow-up on recommendations andcorrective actions, including timeframe; and frequency of audits and assessmentsbased on the significance of risks andprevious results.

Annual management reviews are also to be conducted at each business level to determine the continuing suitability,adequacy and effectiveness of HSECmanagement systems.


HSEC targets have been established forBHP Billiton commencing 1 July 2001, as set out in Figure 7. This HSEC Reportpresents a review of the performanceresults achieved to 30 June 2001 by BHPBilliton Limited and BHP Billiton Plc asseparate companies. These are detailed inthe Performance Summary sections.

As stated in our HSEC Policy, our ultimategoal is zero harm to people and theenvironment. Targets are set at all levels of the organisation to measure ourprogress towards this goal.

The health and safety targets we set aredesigned to drive the continual

improvement of our performance and to progressively reduce the risk of harm to our employees, contractors and visitorsto our sites.

With regard to the environment, we use a risk-based approach in the managementof our operations, activities, services andproducts, with the objective of ensuringour environmental impacts are neitherserious nor long-lasting. We alsoparticipate in collaborative researchactivities to improve industry processes,practices and technologies that will reduceour impacts on the environment and mayhelp us achieve our goal of zero harm.

HSEC TARGETS

Safety is a priority on board the ‘Griffin Venture’ FPSO (floatingproduction, storage and offloadingvessel) offshore from Onslow on thenorth-west coast of Australia.


Figure 7: BHP Billiton HSEC Targets

Category BHP Billiton Target (Baseline – 1 July 2001 to 30 June 2002)

Management Systems All sites to have undertaken self-assessments against the BHP Billiton HSEC Management Standards by 30 June 2002, and have plans to achieve full conformance against the Standards by 30 June 2005.

All sites to achieve ISO 14001 Certification by 30 June 2003.

Legal Compliance Zero fines and prosecutions.

Risk Management Risk registers in accordance with the BHP Billiton Risk Management Manual to be in place at all sites by31 December 2002; and within BHP Billiton businesses and Corporate by 30 June 2003.

Health and Safety Zero fatalities.

50 per cent reduction in injury frequency rate (excluding First Aid treatments) at sites by 30 June 2007.

All sites to complete a baseline survey on occupational exposure hazards and establishment of anoccupational hygiene monitoring and health surveillance program by 30 June 2003.

Reduction of occupational exposures below internationally accepted limits by 30 June 2004 and 20 per cent reduction in incidence of occupational disease by 30 June 2007.

Environment Zero significant incidents (i.e. rated 3 and above) on the BHP Billiton Consequence Severity Ranking Table.

Energy All sites to have energy conservation programs in place with specific targets by 30 June 2003.

Greenhouse All sites to have greenhouse gas management programs in place by 30 June 2003.

Aggregate Group target for reduction in greenhouse gas emissions per unit of production to be set by 30 June 2002.

Water All sites to have water management plans in place by 30 June 2003.

Aggregate Group target of 10 per cent reduction in fresh water consumption per unit of production by 30 June 2007.

Waste All sites to have waste minimisation programs in place by 30 June 2003.

Aggregate Group target of 20 per cent reduction in waste (excluding waste rock, tailings, coal reject andslag) per unit production by 30 June 2007.

Land Management All sites to have land management plans in place by 30 June 2003 to protect and enhance agreed beneficial uses.

Product Stewardship Life cycle assessments prepared for all major BHP Billiton minerals products by 30 June 2004(incorporating participation in industry programs as appropriate).

Community Public HSEC performance reporting at a local level (including incidents, community complaints andrelevant site specific emissions) by 30 June 2002.

All sites to have a Community Relations Plan in place by 30 June 2002.

No transgressions within the Group’s activities of the principles embodied within the United NationsUniversal Declaration of Human Rights.

Aggregate contribution to community programs, including in-kind support, of a target of 1 per cent pre-tax profits, calculated on a three-year rolling average.

These targets apply to BHP Billiton operated facilities only.

Note: Some targets have already been achieved at some facilities.

HSEC TARGETS CONTINUED

BHP BILLITON LIMITEDPERFORMANCE SUMMARY


Huan Galleguillos, shift foreman, at

Escondida copper mine, Chile.

This section of the Report provides a summary of the HSEC

performance of BHP Billiton Limited (formerly BHP Limited) for the

year 2000/01, and is followed by the relevant Appendices and

Auditors’ verification statement. Amounts included are presented

in Australian Dollars (A$).

This section does not include details of the performance of BHP

Billiton Plc (formerly Billiton Plc), which is covered in a later section

commencing on page 46.

IntroductionThe performance of BHP Billiton Limited in the areas of health, safety, environmentand community (HSEC) has been driven by the company’s commitment tocontinuously improve overall businessperformance, as these areas are integral to the company’s values andsuccess measures.

This section describes some of the keyaspects of BHP Billiton Limited’s HSECperformance in 2000/01, and includes adiscussion of performance trends in keyareas as well as case studies that describe significant HSEC initiatives,projects and programs.

The performance by several of BHP BillitonLimited’s sites and their contributions tohealth, safety, environment and thecommunity have been recognised byexternal groups and organisations duringthe period. A list of these awards can befound at the BHP Billiton web site,www.bhpbilliton.com.

Risk management, audit andreviewsThe development and adoption of rigorousand consistent approaches to managementof HSEC risks as components of overallbusiness risk continued over the year. HSECrisks were routinely assessed as part ofBHP Billiton Limited’s planning andapproval processes for new capital projectsand major upgrades.

BHP Billiton Limited’s Health, Safety andEnvironmental Risk ManagementGuidelines were further developed andpiloted at a number of site-basedworkshops to assist sites to identify HSErisks, establish risk registers and developmitigation plans. The majority of sitesreported having environment risk registers(or risk registers that include HSE risks)either already in place or underpreparation. However, there were somevariations noted in the quality of the riskregisters and the extent to which thesehave been used to drive the developmentof HSEC plans and programs at the sites.

Environmental audits and reviewsconducted across BHP Billiton Limitedvaried in scope, duration and frequency

but generally focused on managementsystems, regulatory compliance andinternal improvement programs. Inaddition to the audit activities describedbelow for BHP Billiton Limited’s mainbusinesses, all sites completed self-assessments against the BHP BillitonLimited Environmental ManagementStandards and Safety ManagementStandards during the past year.

In summary:• Petroleum’s HSEC audit program

focused on compliance against internalmanagement standards and legalrequirements, and included a small number of specialist audits and reviews in areas such as waste and community development.

• Steel continued with its program tofollow up management system auditsagainst the requirements of ISO 14001using an external independent auditor, as part of the objective of obtainingcertification of management systems by 2002.

• Transport and Logistics’ integrated safety,environment and quality managementsystem was the subject of an ongoingprogram of internal and externalindependent audits. This programincluded vessels being audited againstrelevant maritime standards to maintaintheir operating certification.

• All Minerals’ sites undertook self-auditsas part of the progressiveimplementation of managementstandards, and ongoing maintenance andcontinual improvement of theirenvironmental management systems. Inaddition to due diligence audits forpotential acquisitions, there were only afew business-level environmentalmanagement system audits conductedduring the year. The business-level auditprogram had been deferred pending theintroduction of the Company-wideintegrated HSEC audit program.

Last year, BHP Billiton Limited’s Canningtonoperation invited the North QueenslandConservation Council (NQCC) to conductan independent audit of the silver/lead/zincmine’s environmental performance andlong-term sustainability. The NQCC

evaluated the processes, personnel, valuesand performance of the mine, rail and port facilities.

Undertaken in a spirit of partnership, theappraisal project was given the title‘Broadening our Horizons’. This year, theCannington operation has been acting onthe key recommendations arising from thedetailed audit. This has includeddeveloping product life cycle analysis andstewardship protocols in collaboration withnon-government organisations, fosteringgreater community involvement in riskassessment and review, and undertakingfurther environmental research.

This commitment to improvingenvironmental performance anddeveloping positive relationships with the local community has beenrecognised by the ‘Broadening ourHorizons’ project winning a PrimeMinister’s Award for Excellence inCommunity Business Partnerships.

The Cannington/NQCC audit process hasbeen adopted as a model for communityinvolvement in the rehabilitation process at the Beenup mine site in south-westWestern Australia. A rehabilitation plan,approved by the State Government, hasbeen in place at Beenup since closure ofthe mineral sands mine in 1999. TheBeenup Consultative Committee, whichcomprises representatives from localcommunity and business groups,conservation bodies, local councils andBHP Billiton Limited, has been providingcommunity input into the closure process.

This year, BHP Billiton Limited soughtinterest from the Committee to conduct an independent community audit on theprogress of work against the rehabilitationplan, based on the Cannington appraisalproject. The Committee has beenevaluating the proposal and consideringsubmissions from consultants to undertakethe audit.


Dendrobium coal projectIn the Illawarra region of New SouthWales, Australia, BHP Billiton Limitedowns and operates underground coalmines and is developing a proposal fora new mine, named the DendrobiumProject after a local orchid. A feature ofthe project has been the high level ofstakeholder and communityinvolvement in the environmentalimpact statement (EIS) process. It hashelped shape the design of the mine.

The mine is required so that our PortKembla Steelworks can continue to besupplied from Illawarra with a primemetallurgical coal that is integral to theblend used by the steelworks. Supplies ofthis type of coal (from our Elouera mine)will be exhausted by 2004. The onlyalternative would be to import the coalfrom Queensland or overseas, which wouldimpact on the economic performance ofthe Port Kembla operation.

Through the EIS process, community,government and environmental consultantinput has been integral to the designdevelopment, with stakeholder input being incorporated into the project as it has progressed.

The numerous activities to identifystakeholder concerns and allow input have included a project website, variouscommunity forums, letterbox drops ofproject newsletters to residents,newspaper articles, and informationbooths at shopping centres. During the EIS public exhibition period, a shop front in the main shopping mall was staffed sixdays a week by project teamrepresentatives. The input has beencaptured on a database to ensure that allissues are analysed and followed up.

As a forum for community involvement,the Dendrobium Consultative Group wasestablished in October 2000. Membersinclude representatives of localconservation and community actiongroups, residents, regional councillors andBHP Billiton Limited. Other stakeholdercommunication has included fortnightlyworkshops involving the Wollongong CityCouncil, Environment Protection Authority,Department of Mineral Resources andDepartment of Urban Affairs and Planning.

Issues and concerns raised during theconsultation process included road and rail traffic, noise and vibration, groundinstability and subsidence, hydrologicalimpacts, and socio-economic impacts.

These concerns and other input from the community and government agencieshas resulted in significant changes beingmade to the project including:

• during construction of the accesstunnels, removing coal via a tunnelrather than trucking throughresidential areas;

• relocating the coal wash emplacementto a non-residential area;

• minimising emissions from the energycoal drier by using gas as a fuel sourcerather than energy coal;

• upgrading the rail system to reducetrain noise and the number of trainmovements, particularly at night;

• changing shift times to minimise trafficduring local school start and finishtimes; and

• implementing a driving code ofpractice for employees, contractorsand suppliers.

BHP Billiton Limited sees continuingcommunity consultation as a criticalelement of ongoing project development.


Left to right: Doug Boleyn – Contracts Manager,Tony Ryan – Engineering Manager, Libby Ferrari– Environmental & Community RelationsCoordinator, Peter Whittall – Mine Manager,Wendy Tyrrell – Environment Manager IllawarraCoal, and Keith Partridge – Project Manager,discuss the Dendrobium Project.

CASE STUDIES

Health and Safety

Management systems

The BHP Billiton Limited SafetyManagement Standards were originallyreleased in 1998 to address a range ofgeneric management areas, such asperformance measurement and reporting,as well as specific safety issues. Theseincluded managing hazardous materialsand critical safety risks. Each business has been required to demonstrate that the management systems in use at itsoperations comply with the performancerequirements of the 23 SafetyManagement Standards. Assurance thatthe operational safety managementsystems satisfied the Standards has beenprovided through a combination ofcompliance statements based on self-assessments and a hierarchicallystructured audit program.

Beyond the requirement to have robustsafety management systems, a number ofBHP Billiton Limited’s operations, and Steelsites in particular, placed increasingemphasis on addressing behaviouralaspects of safety. Programs aimed atinvolving employees in safety behaviouralaudits proved to be very effective inraising safety awareness and, as aconsequence, improving performance.

BHP Billiton Limited’s approach to safetyand health management increasinglyadopted risk management practices toidentify, assess and mitigate operationalsafety and health risks at its facilities.Safety Cases based on quantitative riskassessments of critical safety risks are wellestablished in the oil and gas industry.These same techniques were also appliedto assess process safety risks in newMinerals operations, such as the HotBriquetted Iron (HBI) plant in PortHedland, Western Australia, and the newunderground development at the San Juancoal mine in New Mexico.

Another feature of BHP Billiton Limited’ssafety management initiatives was theadoption and promotion of a standardtechnique for the investigation ofsignificant incidents and near misses, theIncident Cause Analysis Method (ICAM).


Mario Zurek (left) and Steve Kazantsis at the BHP Coated Steel Australia Service Centre inSunshine, Victoria, undertake safety audits to keep their workplace safe.

Towards zero harm: aninitiative to involve allemployees in undertakingsafety audits

In June 2000, BHP Steel began aprogram aimed at involving its 12 000 employees in undertaking sitesafety audits. The initiative is based on the premise that the best people toidentify hazards and unsafe practices inthe workplace are the workersthemselves. It’s a matter of helping eachother to achieve the goal of zero harm.

When the BHP Steel safety managementteam met in mid 2000 to determinepriority programs for the coming year, thedecision was made to focus on increasinginvolvement in safety auditing. It has ledto one of the most ambitious safetyinitiatives ever undertaken by thebusiness — to have 100 per cent ofemployees undertaking at least one sitesafety audit per quarter. Up to that point,only around 10 per cent of BHP Steelemployees were undertaking audits,which were seen as the domain ofsupervisors or managers.

An awareness and good practice sharing program has been rolled out, with resource kits being supported bytraining sessions. While the goals arecommon, the leaders and OccupationalHealth & Safety (OH&S) committees ateach site can implement the program in a way that suits local operations.

The results to date have beenoutstanding. Within just six months, 60 per cent of employees had undertakenat least one audit within a quarter. Afterthe first 12 months, the figure had risento over 90 per cent. The target now is toachieve, and maintain, 100 per centinvolvement and to work towardsimproving auditing quality. The responsehas been so positive that many sites arechoosing to do audits more frequentlythan one per person per quarter.

One site that has reached the 100 percent goal is the BHP Coated SteelAustralia Service Centre in Sunshine,Victoria. The OH&S Committee hasorganised a safety audit roster so thatwithin each month each of the 70 staffand operators conducts an audit. First-time auditors are provided with coaching.This type of audit generally takes at leasthalf an hour and is seen as ‘aconversation about safety’, focusing onpotential hazards, risks associated withthe task being undertaken and healthissues. Following the audit, a supervisorreviews the report.

In the OH&S meeting room is a map of theplant on which incidents and areas ofconcern are represented by dot stickers. A cluster of dots identifies ‘hot spots’, andthese become a focus for further auditsand implementation of preventativemeasures. Safety performance hasimproved, with a record number of dayswithout injury being achieved.


Demonstrating a case for safe operation — The Griffin Venture FPSOBHP Billiton Limited operates theGriffin Venture FPSO (floatingproduction, storage, and offloadingvessel) offshore from Onslow on thenorth-west coast of Australia. TheCompany has prepared an update ofthe operating Safety Case, and thishas incorporated many enhancementsfor the workforce, to improve itsclarity and accessibility.

Each offshore facility in Australia musthave a Safety Case accepted by the localregulator. This is a series of documentsthat shows how well the facilityunderstands the risks to which itsworkers are exposed and how it hasdeveloped its operations and safetyprograms to manage those risks. TheGriffin Venture has been through theprocess of updating the Safety Caseduring the last year.

One of the main objectives of the updatewas to promote understanding andimplementation of the Safety Case aspart of the operational decision-makingon the facility. This will help the GriffinVenture workforce manage hazards ontheir facility.

In producing this fourth revision of theSafety Case, a new initiative is anelectronic version that has beendeveloped to accompany the document.Compiled onto a CD-ROM, it breaks newground by giving the operationspersonnel a powerful new tool tointerrogate the Safety Case, either whileon the facility or on shore. The CD-ROMhas been designed to be quick andsimple to navigate, making the SafetyCase details easier to understand thanthe sometimes dry presentation of theprinted document.

As our workforce becomes accustomedto this new presentation of the operatingSafety Case, we will gather feedbackfrom them to determine how use of suchcontemporary tools can be applied tofurther enhance safety management onthe Griffin Venture and at other BHPBilliton Limited facilities.

CASE STUDY

The adoption of ICAM in turn supportedinitiatives to communicate and share thelessons learned regarding the root causesand contributory factors in significantincidents and near misses.

Safety performance

Figure 8 shows BHP Billiton Limited’srecord of fatalities for the period 1994/95to 2000/01.

Regrettably, six people (three employeesand three contractors) lost their lives inseparate accidents at BHP Billiton Limitedoperations during the year. Two of the sixfatalities were associated with mobileequipment (as were all five contractorfatalities last year), and this remains a keyarea of concern for the organisation goingforward. Efforts concentrated on raisingpeople’s awareness of the issue andaddressing attitudinal and behaviouralaspects of the safe operation of mobileequipment, including light vehicles. (Seecase study: ‘Mobile equipment safetyinitiative’ in ‘ICAM safety investigations’.)

Safety performance across BHP BillitonLimited continued to improve during2000/01, meeting the Company’s target of20 per cent per annum reduction in LostTime Injury Frequency Rate (LTIFR). This isillustrated in Figure 9, which shows theLTIFR for employees and contractors overthe last seven years. In 2000/01, the LTIFRfor employees was 2.89, down from 3.60the previous year, while the LTIFR foremployees and contractors combined was2.49, down from 3.45 the previous year.Much of the improvement can beattributed to the greater attention given todemonstrating personal commitment tosafety at all levels, and to specificinitiatives designed to increase employees’awareness of safety issues and to seektheir involvement in developing innovativeways of addressing these issues.

Fata

litie

s

Figure 8: Fatalities 1994/95 to 2000/01

94/95 95/96 96/97 97/98 98/99 99/00 00/01

Employees

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

Contractors

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

94/95 95/96 96/97 97/98 98/99 99/00 00/01

Inju

ries

per m

illio

n ho

urs

wor

ked

Employees

Employees and Contractors

Figure 9: Lost Time InjuryFrequency Rate (LTIFR)1994/95 to 2000/01

ICAM safety investigations

A new approach to safety occurrenceinvestigation is being introducedthroughout BHP Billiton Limited. The Incident Cause Analysis Method(ICAM) has been designed as a uniforminvestigation and data analysis methodthat is easy to apply and can quicklyidentify the root causes of an incident.The principal objective of ICAM is to prevent recurrence and to advance safety. ICAM is a logical process that addresseshazards and risks rather than humanfailings. This approach gains the support of employees and allows practical safetyimprovements to be implemented.

Most sites are now utilising ICAM toinvestigate incidents above Level 4 (thosethat could cause a fatality or severeirreversible disability or impairment). A simplified version, Minicam, applies tolower level incidents and near misses.

Introducing ICAM to a site involvesbriefings and training sessions foremployees and contractors. A suite oftraining tools is supplied, together withsupport material including acomprehensive ICAM IncidentInvestigation Guide and a Minicam Guide. An ICAM intranet website has also been established.

ICAM is aligned with today’s businesspractices and complies with BHP Billiton’sSafety Management Standards. Consideredcurrent best practice, the methodology hasbeen adopted by other companies in theresource sector and in other industries,such as aviation and road and rail transport.

Mobile equipment safety initiativeICAM has been utilised in an extensivestudy of incidents involving mobileequipment, the major cause (nearly 40 percent) of fatalities across BHP Billiton Limited.

Most fatalities involved light vehicles,followed by rolling stock, forklifts and haultrucks. Common factors were seat beltsnot being worn and drivers falling asleep.A disturbing finding is that the studyrevealed general complacency and passivetolerance of minor safety infringements.Also highlighted was the number ofinnocent bystander fatalities (50 per centof victims), indicating that everyone,regardless of their role, is potentially at risk.

We are establishing network groups acrossthe Company to focus on mobileequipment safety issues, with the objectiveof instituting effective control mechanismsspecific to site circumstances and needs.

Load restraint innovation

Improving safety in the transport of products is a continual process.Through goal-oriented teamwork, a combined taskforce from ourTransport and Logistics and Steelbusinesses has developed aninnovative solution for the roadtransport of steel coils, providingeasier and safer loading andunloading, greater product protectionand improved load restraint. After investigating various vehicles, thetaskforce chose a B-double carrier (primemover with two trailers) and developed asliding canopy that opens and closes witha concertina action. Unlike curtain-sidedtrucks, this allows loading and unloadingby overhead cranes as well as by forklifts.

The height of the sliding canopy wasminimised to neatly fit the largest coil. Thismeans the canopy weighs less and provideslower wind resistance than for aconventional tautliner vehicle. Sliding thecanopies closed is a simple one-personoperation that can be managed from theground and takes around five minutes,compared with up to an hour for fitting twoconventional tarpaulins.

As securing and covering a load no longerinvolves climbing on the truck to fit heavytarpaulins, the chance of backstrain and

falls is reduced. Working in wet and windyweather is also less hazardous. For thosetimes when access to the deck is required,tubular steel ladders have been fitted tothe trailers.

To restrain the coils efficiently and reliably,an innovative system of purpose-designedracks was devised. Called RoboRacks (aftertaskforce member Mike Robertson whodeveloped the concept), the racks areadjustable and removable. They greatlyreduce the potential for mistakes andinjuries related to securing and unchainingloads, one of the biggest contributors todriver Lost Time Injury rates. A coil of up to16 tonnes mass can be secured with asingle chain that only needs to be hand-tightened. Previously up to four tensionedchains were required per coil.

The sliding canopy trucks with RoboRackshave been widely hailed in the transportindustry. Six of the units are in operationon the Port Kembla–Sydney run, four onthe Western Port–Melbourne run and onein Brisbane on a local shuttle run. TheRoboRack system has also been adaptedfor rail, with 40 platforms carrying largesteel coils between BHP Billiton Limitedsteel plants in Thailand and Malaysia. Aswell as being considered for use at otherBHP Billiton Limited sites, the concept isbeing adopted by other sectors of theindustry for use in Australia and overseas.

CASE STUDIES

One of the new B-double carriers fitted withthe innovative sliding canopies and RoboRacks,loaded with steel coils at Port KemblaSteelworks, New South Wales, Australia.


Community

Social performance

BHP Billiton Limited has recognised theimportance of collecting and reportingsocial and community data to betterunderstand and manage the social aspects of its operations. However, datacollection continued to be challenging interms of comprehensive social metrics.Options for improved systems continued to be investigated.

One area identified for improvement wascommunity key performance indicators(KPIs). Only a few sites had locallynegotiated KPIs (other thannumber/resolution of complaints),although some sites did pro-actively setKPIs in terms of local or indigenousemployment. (See case study: ‘Aboriginalemployment initiative’.)

Recognising that social performanceextends well beyond operations, last yearBHP Billiton Limited made a commitmentto uphold the fundamental human rightsof people with whom the Company works,consistent with the principles contained inthe United Nations Universal Declarationof Human Rights. In coming to terms withthis commitment, the Company continuedto collect data on child labour; wages andworking hours; indigenous and localemployment; diversity and gender;Community Relations Plans andcomplaints; community consultation andinteraction; and economic benefits, suchas taxes, royalties and communitycontributions. Data on business ethicswere also collected.


Zamzama communityprogram

The Zamzama gas field in southernPakistan commenced test production inMarch 2001, following the discovery ofgas in 1998. As part of the environmentalimpact assessment process, a communityprogram was initiated to meet a broadrange of local needs. The fledglingZamzama community affairs team islearning from current projects to ensurefuture investment is focused onsustainable outcomes for the community. The Zamzama gas field (BHP BillitonLimited 47.5 per cent) is located north ofKarachi near the towns of Dadu and Johi.The community development program isaimed at alleviating some of the problemsfaced by the people in the arid andimpoverished region around the site.

In developing the program, the primaryneeds of local communities were assessedin collaboration with the provincialgovernment, local non-governmentorganisations and other community-basedorganisations. Priority needs wereidentified as drinking water, health care,education, and support for the social andeconomic advancement of women.

Based on this information, the Zamzamacommunity affairs team initiated a broadprogram supporting a range of projects. A health clinic, employing a doctor andten local support staff, has beenestablished to service 20 villages in theregion. A micro-credit scheme providesloans for local women to develop income-generating initiatives and to benefit from

training in such aspects as operating a small business, marketing and sellingproducts. Other projects have supportedschools and child developmentorganisations.

To address the desperate requirement fordrinking water, the Zamzama communityaffairs team set about installing acommunity well in a neighbouring village.While worthwhile and well-intentioned,the initiative provides a valuable lesson indeveloping sustainable projects — theZamzama team discovered that technical‘solutions’ will not always meet localneeds in a sustainable way.

Initially the solution seemed simple —build a shallow well with a hand-operatedpump. It was only when drilling beganthat the problem became betterunderstood. The water at shallow depthwas found to be contaminated, requiringa deeper aquifer to be tapped. It was thennecessary to install a power supply tooperate a submersible pump. Theresultant deep well and its associatedtechnologies may be an unsustainablesolution for the community.

As Zamzama moves from the developmentphase to production, more funds will becomeavailable to expand the community program.The Zamzama community affairs team,having undertaken a review of its currentprojects, is looking to increase the level ofcommunity development expertise withinthe team. Their goal is to ensure ongoingsustainability of each project in the expandedcommunity program — providing continuingbenefits to the people of the region.

CASE STUDY

A young villager at Mithoo Khan Lashari in southern Pakistan delights in the cool water fromthe new well (developed under the Zamzama community program) as it flows along an openchannel to irrigate the local vegetable garden.


Ok Tedi SustainableDevelopment Program

BHP Billiton Limited is a 52 per centshareholder in the Ok Tedi copper minein the Western Province of Papua NewGuinea. As has been well documented,mine tailings and waste rock have beendelivered directly to the river systemafter initial attempts to constructconventional waste retention structuresfailed in 1983/84. The environmentalimpacts associated with this practicehave exceeded initial predictions and,given the topography, seismic activityand extremely high rainfall in the region,a means of significantly mitigatingfurther impacts has not been found. Our preferred course of action wouldhave been to close the mine early,however, this option has not beenaccepted by the PNG Government or theother private shareholder. We havetherefore decided to exit our shareholdingthrough the creation of a developmentprogram that will provide social benefitsto the people of PNG and particularlythe Western Province, while responsiblymanaging the environmental impacts.

The PNG Government is of the view thatthe social and financial benefits of themine will continue to outweigh theenvironmental impacts. Community groupsin the Western Province support theGovernment view.

Through the establishment of a dedicatedSustainable Development Program (theProgram), BHP Billiton Limited wishes tosupport effective and sustainablecommunity development in the region.The Program will have both short-term andlong-term (beyond mine life) components.

The Program’s funding guidelines willprescribe the type of projects that will beeligible for funding. It is anticipated thatapproved projects will fall within the broadcategories of health and education, foodproduction and agribusinesses, forestryand small to medium-sized enterprises.

Projects could be delivered throughcontractors, third-party service providers orlocal organisations such as churches, localgovernment and non-governmentorganisations. The Program’s fundingguidelines will govern the proportion ofincome that will be distributed each yearto approved projects.

The Program will be managed by anindependent Board comprisinginternationally recognised people of highstanding in business or social development.An independent review process will verifythat projects are being delivered inaccordance with approved proposals.

The discharge of tailings to the riversystem that has led to our withdrawal fromOk Tedi was not the proposed method ofwaste disposal when the mine was being

developed. Construction of a conventionaltailings dam was well advanced before twomassive landslides made completionimpossible. Subsequent engineeringinvestigations concluded that the area’stopography, high rainfall, seismic activityand geotechnical instability meant a damcould not be constructed to acceptablesafety standards in the vicinity of the mine.

Shareholders were left with the choice ofdisposing of the waste via the rivers orstopping further development of the mine.The decision to proceed at the time wasbased on evidence that the downstreamaquatic ecosystem was well adapted torecovering from natural inputs of massiveamounts of sediment. Predictedenvironmental impacts were based on thebest available knowledge at the time. Agoverning factor in the decision not tostop development was the significanteconomic and social benefits the minewould bring to the people of PNG.

By establishing the Program, BHP BillitonLimited’s equity in Ok Tedi Mining Limited(OTML) will continue to contribute suchbenefits to the country.

Another positive outcome of the Ok Tediproject is that it has helped shape theprinciples of our environment andcommunity policies, and led to therequirement that our capital project reviewprocesses have rigorous social andenvironmental assessments. BHP BillitonLimited has also publicly stated that itwould no longer consider investing in newprojects using riverine tailings disposal.

Although it has not been possible toresolve the fundamental issue of minewaste retention, OTML has continued to pursue opportunities to minimise theimpact of continued operations. A dredging operation in the lower Ok Tediis continuing with localised benefits and research continues at the mill toimprove the recovery of copper in theprocessing operations.

CASE STUDY

A flotation test cell at Ok Tedi’s Folomian oreprocessing plant, where a research team isinvestigating the removal of sulphides fromthe mill tailings stream.


Aboriginal employmentinitiative

BHP Billiton Iron Ore began mining the Mt Whaleback iron ore body in thePilbara in the mid 1960s and nowoperates several mines in this remoteregion of Western Australia. As part of its new Investment in AboriginalRelationships Program, BHP Billiton Iron Ore has made a commitment to increase Aboriginal employment in its operations and the widercommunity to 12 per cent by 2010.

This goal reflects the proportion ofindigenous people in the Pilbarapopulation. Of the 45 000 people, some 12 per cent are Aboriginal. Most live in the larger towns, such as PortHedland, Newman, Nullagine and MarbleBar, or in small Aboriginal communities.With current levels of indigenousemployment at BHP Billiton Iron Ore at around 3 per cent, this is a significantundertaking.

Backed by a considerable increase infunding by BHP Billiton Iron Ore, theInvestment in Aboriginal RelationshipsProgram is a long-term initiative thatrecognises Aboriginal communities as keystakeholders. While driven by the

BHP Billiton Charter and HSECManagement Standards, the program isbased on local issues and opportunities.Senior management personnel have beeninvolved in developing the program andare committed to its implementation. It willbe subjected to BHP Billiton Limited’sformal validation and auditing processes.

The program focuses on education,training and employment. An indigenoustraineeship scheme is being developed,with several new administrative and tradeapprenticeship positions to be madeavailable each year at Newman, PortHedland and Perth. Further support forAboriginal trainees and employees is being provided through the employment of a specialist trainer as a mentor.Contractors are also being encouraged to develop indigenous employment and training programs.

In conjunction with the EducationDepartment and local indigenouscommunity members, BHP Billiton Iron Oreis developing and supporting educational,vocational and life skills programs aimed atincreasing the retention and success ofindigenous students at high school, as wellas the number of Aboriginal studentsadvancing to tertiary education. Workplace

experience and access to role models isalso being provided.

Other initiatives include expansion of BHPBilliton Iron Ore’s cross-cultural trainingprogram to include all members of theworkforce in Newman and Port Hedland.Through this program, employees learnmore about the history and culture of local Aboriginal groups and explore cross-cultural issues. Local Aboriginalstakeholders play a key role in theseprograms as presenters.

To further demonstrate commitment to the Investment in Aboriginal RelationshipsProgram, in April 2001 BHP Billiton Iron Oresigned a Memorandum of Understandingwith the Federal Government’s Departmentof Employment, Workplace Relations andSmall Business, undertaking to increaseemployment opportunities for indigenouspeople as outlined in the program. Thisagreement supports an earlier undertakingwith the Federal Government by BHPBilliton Limited, as a signatory to theCorporate Leaders for IndigenousEmployment program.

CASE STUDY

Graeme Hunt, President BHP Billiton Iron Ore,with (left to right) Newman apprentice WilliamEgan, Port Hedland trainee Larissa Thompsonand Port Hedland apprentice Arthur Ramirez.

Employees

Demographics

The number of BHP Billiton Limitedemployees at 30 June 2001 was 27 675,fewer than the previous year, primarily due to the public listing of OneSteel.Contractor numbers totalled 28 051 (full-time equivalents), a marginal increaseon the previous year.

Child labour

BHP Billiton Limited continued to monitorpractices in relation to this issue. Allemployees were above the minimum legalage of employment. The age of theyoungest employees was 17 years. Theseemployees were apprentices whose ageswere above the minimum legal workingage, working at Ok Tedi in Papua NewGuinea and a number of Minerals sites inAustralia, including Goonyella Riverside,Hay Point Coal Terminal, Mt Whaleback,Nelson Point Terminal and Peak Downs.

Wages and working hours

Wages payments and working hours weremonitored so that fairness and equityissues could be assessed. Records showthat all employees earned the minimumwage or above in countries where theCompany operates.

The average working week for employeesranged from 35 hours at the operations inAlgeria and Australia (Illawarra Coal, SouthBlackwater, Peak Downs and Saraji Mines)to 56 hours at the Cannington operation inQueensland, Australia (based on 12-hourshifts, 14 days on, 7 days off).

Indigenous and local employment

Indigenous employment remainedimportant in ensuring that localcommunities share the benefits of BHPBilliton Limited operations. Sites did notformally collect data on racial or ethnicbackground; but based on voluntary self-classification by employees, it wasestimated that indigenous peoplecomprised approximately 12 per cent of the workforce.

As reported last year, some operationswere obligated to monitor and report theirperformance against agreed targets. Thisyear, for example, the Navajo Coal Mine inNew Mexico, United States, increased thenumber of its employees that areindigenous (from the local Navajo nationcommunity) from 85 per cent in the lastreporting period to 95 per cent.

In terms of local employment, some sitesactively set out to recruit from the localarea. For example, Blackwater Mine inQueensland, Australia, achieved its targetof recruiting 100 per cent of its apprenticesfrom the local population.

Gender

The number of women remained a smallpercentage of the overall workforce at 7 per cent, which is consistent with othercompanies in the resources industry. In Australia, BHP Billiton Limited has been required by legislation to reportannually on Equal Opportunity for Women in the Workplace.

Primary issues for this reporting periodincluded:

• average salaries for females are belowthat of males;

• representation of females in seniormanagement positions is lower thanthat of males; and

• average turnover of female employeesis higher than that of males.

Measures to counter these imbalancesincluded policy development, training,development, and research initiatives toidentify underlying causes. BHP BillitonLimited’s affirmative action and equalemployment opportunity policies continuedto be revised and updated as required.


Illegal coal mining inKalimantanBHP Billiton Limited has an 80 per centinterest in three energy coal projects,located at Senakin and Satui in SouthKalimantan and at Petangis in EastKalimantan. Since development of themines began, the coal resource has beensubjected to significant intrusion byillegal miners. As much as 5 milliontonnes of coal have been illicitly takenfrom our Senakin and Satui concessions.

In recent times, the problem has reachedunprecedented levels in Indonesia. Morethan 60 000 illegal miners are estimated tooperate across the country, twice thenumber of people employed in legaloperations. As well as coal, they areextracting gold, diamonds and tin.

The illicit mining is at its worst in SouthKalimantan, with our coal projects beingamong the most seriously affected. Morethan 81 illegal mine sites have beenreported along the Satui coal seam. Theproblem involves a substantial loss ofresource and revenue for BHP BillitonLimited and also deprives local

communities and the IndonesianGovernment of income that would havebeen gained through royalties and revenuesharing. Another serious issue is thedamage to the environment caused by theraiders, who have no regard forenvironmental standards or regulations.

Local indigenous groups are not theperpetrators; they are large operatorsbacked by wealthy and powerful intereststhought to be working in collusion withcorrupt bureaucrats and military officials.They enter our Contract of Work areas,seek out exposed coal seams and bring inexcavators and bulldozers that rip out thecoal to a depth of about 25 metres — asdeep as their equipment can reach. Aftertrucking out the mined coal, the illegaloperators depart. No rehabilitation of thesite is attempted.

The extracted coal is transported byhundreds of trucks on public roads,stockpiled along the banks of the region’smain waterways, and carried by barge fromnumerous illegal ports. It is then shipped bybarge to customers in Java and Sulawesi ortransferred to ships destined for overseasmarkets. Buyers of the coal are usually

aware of its origins or illegality, but turn ablind eye as the illicit operators andgovernment officials falsify permits, qualityclassifications and export documents.

Our dilemma is that little direct action canbe taken by BHP Billiton Limited. Weoperate under Contracts of Work issued bythe Indonesian Government, which grant usan exclusive right to extract the coal in thatarea. From a legal perspective, the coal isowned by the government; and under thecontract, they have the obligation (and wedo not have the right) to expel the illegalminers. The Indonesian Governmentacknowledges the widespread existence ofillicit mining, and points to state-ownedbusinesses that are also affected. Thegovernment has issued orders instructingofficials to deal with the problem.

CASE STUDY

Company employee Bayu Wicaksono surveysenvironmental damage at an illegal mine siteat the Satui coal project in SouthKalimantan, Indonesia.



Community

Community Relations Plans and complaints

A total of 31 BHP Billiton Limited sites hada Community Relations Plan in place, eitherinformal or formal. This represented 58 percent of the total number of sites and was amarginal increase from the previous year.

Complaints mechanisms were in place at46 sites (87 per cent). Complaints varied,but most reflected issues around dust,noise, odour, land access, vehiclemovements in residential areas, and otherlocally relevant issues. There was avariance in terms of formal tracking andresolution, as this was generally doneinformally and on a case-by-case basis.

Consultation and interaction

A total of 45 sites (85 per cent) had a BHP Billiton Limited representativeresponsible for community relations. Many of these people also had otherresponsibilities, and some sites in the samearea used one representative. While noyear-to-year comparison can be made asno data were recorded in 2000, the figureindicates that sites were dedicatingresources to improve performance in this area.

A formal or informal consultation processwas in place at 38 sites (72 per cent),representing a slight increase on last year,even though several sites and developmentprojects with consultation forums weredivested. These consultation processesvaried, from formal public forums and localcommunity meetings to one-on-onediscussions and meetings.

Taxes and royalties

During the period, BHP Billiton Limitedsites and operations paid a total of A$609 million in taxes and A$456 millionin royalties throughout the world, lowerthan the previous year, reflectingdepressed commodity prices. Royalties areeffectively an economic rent paid on thebasis of the value of products generated byBHP Billiton Limited businesses. They helpensure host countries share in theCompany’s success.

Community contributions

Community support programs are operatedat sites and at the corporate level of BHPBilliton Limited. In 2000/01, BHP BillitonLimited’s contributions to community-based organisations totalled A$19.3million, which represents 0.97 per cent ofBHP Billiton Limited’s pre-tax profit on athree-year average. It includes in-kindassistance in the form of products orequipment, although this is the first timein-kind data have been collected and it isincomplete. Contributions to the EscondidaFoundation in Chile and the Fly RiverDevelopment Trust in Papua New Guineaare included in the amount.

Business ethics

The BHP Billiton Limited Business ConductHelpline dealt with more than 290 individualissues from employees worldwide.Significant issues reported and actionedincluded inappropriate use of e-mail andthe Internet, compliance with Companypolicy on avoidance of conflicts of interest,and fraud, as shown in Figure 10.

During the year, the Global BusinessConduct Forum reviewed BHP BillitonLimited’s Guide to Business Conduct. Thenew Guide includes revised reportingprocedures for handling conduct breachesand takes into consideration changes incompetition law, employment law, humanrights, and the handling of foreignpayments (to reinforce the Company’szero-tolerance stance on corruptpayments). BHP Billiton Limited is amember of Transparency InternationalAustralia and funded the development ofthat organisation’s National Integrity Auditand Business Integrity Systems audit.

Figure 10: Business Conduct Helpline

Issues

2000/01 %

Misuse of information technology 19

General inquiries 18

Conflict of interest 10

Individual conduct 9

Discrimination and harassment 8

Travel and accommodation 8

Policy, including compliance 7

Theft, fraud, corruption 7

Business conduct 6

Gifts 4

Safety 2

Shares/stock 2


CASE STUDIES

Contributing to communityaid programs in Vietnam

BHP Steel Building Products has recentlybeen involved with the Red Cross andAusAid in a number of significantcommunity programs in Vietnam,contributing steel products for themanufacture of more than 11 000 low-cost buildings, mostly as a responseto emergency situations.

In the Mekong Delta, frames and roofs for

as many as 3 000 flood-resistant houses

have been supplied, following flooding in

southern provinces. The frames are

designed so that the walls can be built in

the local style to maintain cultural integrity.

Also in the Mekong Delta, a prototype

for a new school building was developed

for a community program by AusAid and

the Red Cross. Materials for construction

of more than 260 of the buildings have since

been supplied.

In the central province of Hue, 400 homes

have been completed at Ha Tinh, where

flash flooding caused devastation in late

2000. Materials for around 40 other buildings

have been supplied to central provinces for

emergency use in the flood season.

BHP Steel Building Products has also

sponsored production of the Red Cross

Workplace Safety Manual, which has been

distributed to around 100 000 companies

throughout Vietnam.

Steel recycling initiative in Shanghai

BHP Steel Building Products in Shanghai,

China, has developed an innovative

scheme for recycling strips of steel left

over from Zincalume® and Colorbond®

coil after edge slitting. Once perceived

as scrap, the strips are now being

recycled as a high-quality component

in suitcase manufacture.

The strips have been found to be

particularly useful for securing the handles

of the suitcases. They are an ideal width,

can easily be cut to size and punched, and

have good corrosion resistance properties.

Arrangement for their supply to a local

suitcase manufacturer has been negotiated

through the facility’s contracted scrap

merchant. Previously, the strips were

collected along with other scrap and supplied

to steel-makers for recycling as furnace feed.

However, being a low-value item, they

were taken reluctantly by the merchant.

It is a true win-win situation. For the suitcase

manufacturer, the strips are seen as a high-

value component that has helped simplify

the production process, while for BHP Steel

Building Products and the scrap merchant,

the financial return is significantly higher.

Zhu Xinzhong, manager of Xinzhong SuitcaseAccessory Company, with fabricated steeloff-cuts used in the manufacture of suitcases.

Le Huynh Ngoc Ngan, Le Huynh Bang Chi and Le Thi Bao Ngoc at their new school, constructed as part of a BHP Steel Building Productscommunity program in Vietnam.


CASE STUDY

‘Revive our Wetlands’community program

BHP Billiton Limited has been activelydeveloping its community programs,with a focus on establishing sustainablepartnerships that foster communityengagement and employeevolunteerism. A major initiative inAustralia was launched in March 2001,with the commencement of a three-yearpartnership program with ConservationVolunteers Australia (CVA).

Titled ‘Revive our Wetlands’, the programaims to protect and revitalise 100 ofAustralia’s most important wetlands bybuilding the skills and knowledge of localcommunities. Wetlands are among themost important life support systems onearth and are vital for ecologicalsustainability. Since European settlement, it is estimated that more than half ofAustralia’s wetlands have been destroyed.The wetlands targeted in the ‘Revive’program include coastal wetlands, riversystems, lakes, watercourses, alpinemarshes and floodplains.

Over the three-year program, thousands ofvolunteers will be involved in local wetlandsconservation activities, such as plantingnative grass species, fencing, removingweeds, clearing rubbish and buildingwalking tracks and boardwalks. Thoseparticipating will include students, families,retirees, BHP Billiton Limited employees andother interested community members.

CVA is Australia’s largest conservationorganisation, annually managing volunteersin more than 1 500 projects. BHP BillitonLimited is providing A$1.5 million in fundingand in-kind support to the ‘Revive’program, enabling the design of amonitoring system, employment of awetlands environmental officer in eachstate, and documentation of the projects.

A pilot project for the ‘Revive’ program wasundertaken in Queensland at the TownsvilleTown Common, a world-renownedconservation park and habitat forthousands of migratory birds. The 3 245-hectare site is a few kilometres fromthe centre of Townsville. Inappropriate landuse in the past, exotic weed invasion andlimited staffing and maintenance resources

led to the area becoming severelydegraded. A one-year program commencedin early 2000 to identify and undertakepriority tasks for preservation andrestoration, source local volunteers, andestablish a plan with Queensland Parks andWildlife Services for ongoing sustainabilityand management of the site. The results ofthe pilot were very encouraging, withextensive involvement and a real sense ofproject ownership by the community.

While the details of the ‘Revive’ agreementand program were being developed, BHPBilliton Limited provided support for CVA inan initiative that enabled young Australiansto participate in CVA World ConservationPrograms. Thirteen young conservationistswere selected to participate in an exchangeprogram with the Californian ConservationCorps, the world’s largest conservationcorps, providing them with unique trainingin practical conservation management.

Mick Roche (right) and Christine Williamsonof BHP Billiton Limited’s Canningtonoperation, with Dave Watson, Project Officerfor the Common Interest Program at TownCommon, a pilot project for the ‘Revive ourWetlands’ community program.

CASE STUDY


Response to Liverpool Bayoil spill assists ISO 14001certification

The Liverpool Bay oil and gas field islocated in the Liverpool approaches ofthe Irish Sea. Improvements to HSECsystems and procedures have assistedthe Liverpool Bay facilities in achievingISO 14001 certification in environmentalmanagement.It has taken two years and enormouscommitment for the 500-strong LiverpoolBay team to gain ISO 14001 certificationvia Lloyd’s Register Quality Assurance. Theoil and gas field is located near popularholiday resorts in view of millions ofpeople and in an area of biodiversitycomprising vulnerable wildlife habitats.

An oil spill occurred in June 1998 as oil wasbeing offloaded from an offshore storageinstallation to a shuttle tanker. BHP BillitonPetroleum pleaded guilty to the spillcharge and in November 2000 was fined£40 000.

In this normally routine operation, oil is transferred to the shuttle tanker via a loading hose, which is fitted part wayalong its length with a marine breakaway

coupling. In the event of tanker drift or a surge in oil pressure, the coupling is designed to ‘break away’ to protect the hose. As the coupling parts, self-closing petals at the break points sealoff the ends of the hose. In such an event,a very small amount of spillage may occuras the petals close.

The incident resulted from two mechanicalfailures. A spike in oil pressure occurredwhen a valve on the manifold connectingthe hose to the shuttle tanker suddenlyshut off due to a failure in the valvelocking system. The surge in oil pressurecaused the coupling to break away, but thepetals did not seal the hose adequately,and 55 000 litres of oil escaped.

Audits of the vessels, systems andprocedures were immediately undertaken.Mechanically, the solution has been toinstall two new systems. To cater for tankerdrift, the breakaway coupling has beenreplaced with a ‘quick connect/disconnect’system with positive activated valves thatseal the hose ends. Secondly, on theoffshore storage installation, a surge reliefsystem has been installed that, in theevent of a pressure spike, allows the oil toflow safely back into the holding tanks.

Operationally, new guidelines for high-riskareas have been formulated and issued,including Contractor and Supplier Selectionand Management Guidelines and IncidentNotification and Reporting to the PolicyCommittee Procedures.

Both the onshore and offshore facilities atLiverpool Bay have subsequently beenawarded ISO 14001 certification. Theongoing principle behind ISO 14001 is todemonstrate continuous improvement, toset environmental standards andobjectives every year and to demonstrateto independent assessors that the businesshas delivered on those improvements ateach annual audit.

While the 1998 incident was regrettable,Liverpool Bay has gone on to prove that it can gain this global certificationunder rigorous criteria in one of the most environmentally sensitive fields in the industry.

The sun sets on an offshore drilling unitoperating in the Liverpool Bay oil and gasfield located in the Irish Sea off the Welshcoast.

Environment

Standards and systems

BHP Billiton Limited’s EnvironmentalManagement Standards were introduced in1999. They comprise 20 Standards coveringgeneric management activities (such asplanning and objectives; management ofchange; and reviews, audits andinspections) as well as eight Guidelinesthat cover environmental issues ofCompany-wide significance (includingenergy and greenhouse; natural andcultural heritage; and wastes, emissionsand hazardous materials). These internalstandards were consistent with therequirements of externally recognisedstandards and codes, including ISO 14001(the international standard forenvironmental management systems) andthe Australian Minerals Industry Code forEnvironmental Management.

BHP Billiton Limited was a signatory to theCode for Environmental Managementwhen it was launched by the MineralsCouncil of Australia in 1996, andcontributed to its review and revision in 2000. The Code is a significant step by the minerals industry to address itsenvironmental performance and publicaccountability. Signatories to the Codecommit to:

• accepting environmental responsibilityfor all our actions;

• strengthening our relationships withthe community;

• integrating environmentalmanagement into the way we work;

• minimising the environmental impactsof our activities;

• encouraging responsible productionand use of our products;

• continually improving ourenvironmental performance; and

• communicating our environmentalperformance.

Other obligations under the Code includeproduction of an annual environment report,which has been met through thepublication of this HSEC Report. To assessprogress in implementing the Code

principles, an annual Code implementationsurvey must also be completed and verifiedby an accredited auditor. This year, BHPBilliton Limited scored 61 per cent on self-assessment, which, while indicating theneed for improvement, comparedfavourably with the signatory average of46 per cent.

Annual site-based self-assessments using atiered scale have been conducted tomonitor implementation of theEnvironmental Management Standards.The results of the self-assessments indicatewhere gaps in performance against eachStandard and Guideline existed and whereimprovements were required.

The results of the site-level self-assessmentshave been consolidated into an overallaggregate average score for each BusinessGroup and are shown in Figure 11. Theapparent reduction in the level of self-assessed compliance with the Standards inthe Steel division arose due to thesubstantial change in Steel assets followingthe public listing of OneSteel, and does notindicate a worsening in compliance with theStandards by the remaining Steel operations.

BHP Billiton Limited has been workingtowards a target of obtaining ISO 14001certification at all of its major assets.Consistent with this aim, by June 2001 foursites had their environmental managementsystems certified against ISO 14001. (See case study: ‘Response to LiverpoolBay oil spill assists ISO 14001 certification’.)

Spending on the environment

The estimated environmental expenditureby BHP Billiton Limited for 2000/01 wasapproximately A$117 million. The amountincludes the direct functional costs,including labour and consultants’ fees, ofrunning various environmental programsand studies across the organisation. It doesnot, however, include the various process oractivity costs that have environmentalconsequences, such as treatment ofatmospheric emissions, discharges to water,waste management or rehabilitation, and itdoes not include any provision for closure.


0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

% C

ompl

ianc

e

1999/00 2000/01

Figure 11: Self Assessed ComplianceAgainst the EnvironmentalManagement Standards1999/00 to 2000/01

Minerals Steel Petroleum Transport andLogistics


Environmental incidents, fines andprosecutions

No significant environmental incidentswere reported by any of BHP Billiton Limited’soperations during the reporting period2000/01. This compares with six significantincidents during 1999/00 and 17 significantincidents during 1998/99. This resultexceeded the Company target of a reductionin the number of significant environmentalincidents of 20 per cent per annum.

The trend in the number of significantenvironmental incidents over the last fouryears for each Business Group is shown in Figure 12.

Environmental incidents include oil spillsand other accidental discharges ofhydrocarbons to the environment. Figure 13 shows the total amount of hydrocarbons spilled and discharged to marine and fresh waters since 1995/96.

During 2000/01, the total reported volumeof hydrocarbons accidentally discharged towater was 8 030 litres, up from 6 320 litres

during the previous year. Even though thisresult was within the Company’s originaltarget of 30 per cent per annum reductionrelative to the base year of 1995/96, thetarget of continuous reduction in the totalvolume of oil spilled was not achieved.

Minerals and Transport and Logistics eachreported increases in the total volume ofhydrocarbons spilled to water during theperiod, while Petroleum and Steel bothreported improved performance withdecreased accidental discharges.

Despite aiming to comply with all applicablelaws and regulations, BHP Billiton Limitedreceived 19 environment-related finestotalling A$135 683 during 2000/01. Thisrepresented an increase in the number offines but not in the value of fines comparedto the previous year. (In 1999/00, BHP BillitonLimited received 16 fines totalling A$212 490.)

Figure 14 shows the trends in the numberof prosecutions and the total cost of finesover the last six years.

Figure 13: Accidental Discharges of Hydrocarbons to Water 1995/96 to 2000/01

0

50 000

100 000

150 000

200 000

250 000

300 000

350 000

400 000

00/0199/0098/9997/9896/9795/96

Hydrocarbons discharged

Target (30% reduction)

Litr

es D

isch

arge

d

Figure 14: Fines and Prosecutions 1995/96 to 2000/01

0 0

200 000

400 000

600 000

800 000

1 000 000

5

10

15

20

25

95/96 96/97 97/98 98/99 99/00 00/01

Fine

s (A

$)

No.

of P

rose

cutio

ns

Fines (A$) No. of Prosecutions

Note: A successful prosecution without a fine isreported as a prosecution. Fines reported arethose imposed during the reporting period, eventhough they may relate to incidents in prior years.

Tota

l No.

of S

igni

fican

t Inc

iden

ts

97/98

98/99Steel

99/00

00/01

97/98

98/99

Minerals

99/00

00/01

97/98

98/99

Petroleum

99/00

00/01

97/98

98/99

Transport and Logistics

99/00

00/01

Severity Rating 3

0

5

10

15

20

Severity Rating 4 Severity Rating 5

Figure 12: Reported Environmentally Significant Incidents1997/98 to 2000/01

Note: A significant incident is an incident with consequences rated as severity 3 or above, based onthe BHP Billiton Incident Severity Rating System (where 1 is the lowest severity and 5 is the highest).


A summary of individual prosecutions andfines is presented in Appendix A. Thelargest fine of £40 000 (A$108 000) wasreceived in November 2000 by the LiverpoolBay operations in the United Kingdom andrelated to a crude oil spill of 55 000 litresthat occurred in June 1998.

Resource use

Land

The areas of land disturbed andrehabilitated by BHP Billiton Limited’soperations each year are shown inFigure 15, together with the estimatedtotal area of disturbed land. Note that the area of land disturbed does not includeland affected by over-bank flooding anddie-back from the Ok Tedi operations (in excess of 630 square kilometres). A summary of land disturbance andrehabilitation data is presented inAppendix B.

As a result of new mine developments,expansions to existing operations and thenet effect of acquisitions and disposals,BHP Billiton Limited disturbed more landthan it rehabilitated. Taking responsibilityfor this increasing net disturbance hasunderpinned the importance of theCompany’s ‘whole-of-life’ approach toplanning, developing and operating itsfacilities. The approach has involved keystakeholders in determining the form anduse of land following the closure of itsoperations and has ensured that adequateprovisions are made to meet rehabilitationobligations, in line with accountingpractices and regulatory requirements.

The responsibility for rehabilitation ofdisturbed sites and the remediation of sitesthat have become contaminated as a resultof past operations can be dealt with in avariety of ways. As well as undertaking thework either directly or on a contractualbasis, BHP Billiton Limited in some casestransferred liabilities for disturbed andcontaminated sites under commercialarrangements.

These arrangements required the Companyto undertake rigorous due diligence reviewsof its properties and to assess the capacityof potential buyers to take on the

responsibilities of cleanup and rehabilitationconsistent with agreed post-mining landuse. Details of site condition were disclosedduring divestment negotiations, and effortswere made to minimise the retention of anyongoing or long-term liabilities.

BHP Billiton Limited’s North Americancopper operations were placed on care and maintenance, with a minor amount of cathode copper still being produced atthe Pinto Valley and San Manuel facilities.All options are being reviewed for thefacilities, including closure.

Biodiversity

BHP Billiton Limited’s activities affected thenatural environment in a variety of ways.While the Company’s aim was to minimiseits impacts on ecosystems, the extraction,processing, storage and transporting ofresources presented both challenges andopportunities to the way BHP BillitonLimited’s operations have approachedbiodiversity issues.

There were many positive aspects forbiodiversity arising from BHP BillitonLimited’s activities. In the Minerals andPetroleum businesses, for example,environmental impact assessments

conducted in some remote locations (both onshore and offshore) yieldedstudies that are considered to be valuablecontributions to scientific literature, as wellas allowing the operations to managebiodiversity risks effectively.

The presence of BHP Billiton Limited’soperations provided the opportunity toparticipate in local and regional efforts toprotect natural resources and to providesuitable habitat for threatened orendangered species. For example, thecapping of disused bores by BHP BillitonLimited’s Cannington operation in northQueensland is helping to preserve theartesian basin. As another example, forseveral years the Gregory coal mine inQueensland has provided an undisturbedarea on the mining lease for research toassist the recovery plan for the endangeredBridled Nail-tailed Wallaby.

Transport and Logistics took a leading rolewithin the shipping industry in developingoperational approaches to protectingmarine environments from the effects ofanti-fouling paints and the introduction ofexotic marine organisms. (See case study:‘A pro-active approach to improving theenvironmental performance of shipping’.)

Figure 15: Land Disturbance and Rehabilitation 1995/96 to 2000/01

New

ly D

istu

rbed

or R

ehab

ilita

ted

(Hec

tare

s)

Tota

l Dis

turb

ed (H

ecta

res)

0

1 000

2 000

3 000

4 000

5 000

6 000

0

20 000

10 000

30 000

40 000

50 000

60 000

Rehabilitated Newly Disturbed Total Disturbed

95/96 96/97 97/98 98/99 99/00 00/01

A pro-active approach toimproving the environmentalperformance of shipping

BHP Billiton Limited has been an active

participant in several developments

aimed at minimising the impact of

shipping on biodiversity, including trials

of new anti-fouling paints for ships' hulls.

Anti-fouling paints deter marine growth frombuilding up on hulls. This can help to impedethe spread of unwanted aquatic organismsthat can become pests in the Australianmarine environment. With less hull fouling,ships are faster, more fuel-efficient andrequire dry-docking less frequently, reducingoperating costs significantly. However,current anti-fouling paints contain thebiocide tributyltin (TBT), which can beharmful to some marine species.

In May 2001, one of our ships, the IronMonarch, set off from Brisbane with itshull bearing patches of new TBT-freepaints, as part of a two-year cooperativeproject involving the Federal Government;the maritime, paint and coating industries;and other shipowners.

The trials were initiated by EnvironmentAustralia under Australia’s Oceans Policywith major funding drawn from the NaturalHeritage Trust. They are managed by theAustralian Shipowners Association and willbe monitored regularly by the DefenceScience and Technology Organisation.

Other vessels operating in Australianharbours and in offshore waters will beincluded in the trials. This will allow a widerange of TBT-free anti-fouling paints to betested under normal commercial conditions,both to gain industry confidence and tohelp meet registration requirements beforean international ban on TBT paints,proposed by the International MaritimeOrganisation (IMO), comes into effect.

Given the impending IMO ban, it isessential that work to register effectiveand environmentally safe alternatives beprogressed as soon as reasonably possible.Such a ban would also need to be globallyimplemented. For example, 97 per cent ofships passing through Australian ports arenot Australian registered.

Another issue requiring a globallycoordinated approach is environmentalimpacts from ballast water. Water taken onboard for ballasting may contain unwantedaquatic organisms and pathogens that,upon discharge, may be harmful to thereceiving environment. As well as requiringour vessels to comply with IMO guidelines,we have supported industry research intoballast water treatment and management.We have also operated under a voluntarycompliance agreement with the AustralianQuarantine Inspection Service prior to theintroduction of a mandatory reportingregime that came into force on 1 July 2001.

Air pollution caused by ship exhausts isalso becoming a major issue for theshipping industry, and the IMO is lookingto limit emissions of oxides of sulphur andnitrogen. Our newest ship, the bulk carrierPacific Triangle, incorporates an innovativeengine design that reduces emissions ofoxides of nitrogen by approximately 30 per cent.

CASE STUDY

The steel products carrier ‘Iron Monarch’ istaking part in trials to test new TBT-free anti-fouling hull paints.



Energy

BHP Billiton Limited’s energy production hasbeen in the form of fossil fuels, includingcoal and coke, oil, gas, LNG and otherpetroleum products. Energy production databased on the Company’s interests in bothnon-operated joint ventures and Company-managed operations are presented in theEnvironmental Data Tables in Appendix B.Overall energy production levels havecontinued to rise each year despite theoffsetting effect of asset divestments.

BHP Billiton Limited’s energy consumptionfor the period from 1992/93 to 2000/01 isshown in Figure 16. Overall energy usedecreased this year. This was mainlyattributable to the public listing of OneSteel assets.

As shown in Figure 17, coal and cokecontinued to provide almost half of BHPBilliton Limited’s energy requirements, while gas, at 22 per cent of the energyconsumption, represented an increasingproportion of the Company’s total energyneeds. Distillate, fuel oil and purchasedelectricity contributed roughly equalproportions of the remainder of the fuel mix.A summary of energy data is presented inAppendix B.

Since 1995/96, BHP Billiton Limited hastracked its overall performance in energyintensity (i.e. energy consumption per unitof production) using an internal metriccalled the Energy Intensity Index. Thisperformance measure is calculated for therange of BHP Billiton Limited’s majorproducts and is based on the ratio of eachyear’s total energy consumption divided bythe energy consumption in the base year(1995/96) adjusted for the yearly variationsin production levels.

BHP Billiton Limited’s overall EnergyIntensity Index is shown in Figure 18.Overall, the Company’s Energy IntensityIndex improved by around 16 per cent,compared with the base year of 1995/96.The estimated improvement in the Index of 3 per cent since 1999/00 met the targetof reducing energy intensities on a year-by-year basis. In recent years, this trend can be attributed to a combination of factors, including energy purchasingarrangements and structural changes suchas closures, divestments and acquisitions, as well as technical improvements in process efficiencies.

Figure 17: Energy Use by Fuel Type 2000/01

DistillateOther (e.g. petrol, LPG)Coal & CokeFuel & Process Oil

ElectricityNatural Gas & Coal Seam Methane

Peta

joul

es

Figure 16: Energy Use 1992/93 to 2000/01


50

0

100

150

200

250

300

350

Petroleum

Minerals

Steel

95/9694/9593/9492/93 96/97 97/98 98/99 99/00 00/01

Ener

gy C

onsu

mpt

ion

Per U

nit o

f Pro

duct

ion

Figure 18: Energy Intensity index 1995/96 to 2000/01

0.4

0.6

0.8

1.0

95/96 96/97 97/98 98/99 99/00 00/01


Water

Figure 19 shows the trends in waterconsumption by BHP Billiton Limited’smajor businesses, as well as total waterconsumption levels during the past sixyears. Data includes fresh water andground water extracted for use on site.

Even though BHP Billiton Limitedeffectively maintained the long-term trendtowards reduced use of water,consumption increased marginally acrossthe Company’s operations during the lastyear. Most sites had relatively stable waterconsumption levels, and site-specificinitiatives to recycle water resourcesresulted in decreased water consumptionat a number of operations.

The main reason for the observed increasewas the additional 5 000 megalitres inwater consumption at Escondida (Chile)during the last 12 months, which in turnwas attributable to the construction of thePhase 4 mine expansion, as well as a slightincrease in ore production from theexisting facilities. A summary of waterconsumption data is presented inAppendix B.

Emissions

Greenhouse gases

BHP Billiton Limited’s worldwide greenhousegas emissions for the period from 1992/93to 2000/01 are shown in Figure 20.

The main greenhouse gases associatedwith BHP Billiton Limited’s operations arecarbon dioxide and methane. Carbondioxide emissions are mainly associatedwith chemical reduction processesincluding iron and steel making and theuse of fluxes, fuel combustion processesincluding power generation, and, to asmall extent, venting from coal mines.

Methane emissions result from coal miningand oil and gas production; and in the pastyear, these represented approximately 14 per cent of BHP Billiton Limited’s totalgreenhouse emissions on a carbon dioxideequivalent (CO2-e) basis.

Tonn

es C

O2

Equi

vale

nt (M

illio

ns)

Figure 20: Greenhouse Gas Emissions 1992/93 to 2000/01

0

10

20

30

40


Petroleum

Minerals

Steel

95/9694/9593/9492/93 96/97 97/98 98/99 99/00 00/01

Note: Total greenhouse gas emissions include carbon dioxide and methane (with a Global Warming Potential of 21).

Figure 19 : Water Consumption for Key Businesses, and BHP Billiton Limited Total 1995/96 to 2000/01

0

25 000

50 000

75 000

100 000

125 000

150 000

175 000

200 000

Minerals Steel BHP Billiton Limited Total

Wat

er U

se (M

egal

itres

)

95/96

96/97

97/98

98/99

99/00

00/01

Note: Water consumption includes town water, ground water and run-off. It does not includeconsumption from mine dewatering.Petroleum did not consume more than 1 900 megalitres of water in any of the reported years.Transport and Logistics did not consume more than 100 megalitres of water in any of thereported years. For complete water consumption details for all businesses see Appendix B.

Total greenhouse emissions in 2000/01 were27.3 million tonnes of carbon dioxideequivalent, 3.9 million tonnes less than theprevious reporting period and 10.9 milliontonnes lower than the peak in 1995/96. Asummary of greenhouse gas emissions datais presented in Appendix B.

BHP Billiton Limited has measured itsgreenhouse performance in terms of itsgreenhouse emissions per unit ofproduction for each of its major productgroups. The overall greenhouse intensityperformance has been tracked andreported using an internal measurereferred to as the Greenhouse IntensityIndex. This is based on the ratio of eachyear’s total greenhouse gas emissionsdivided by the emissions in the base year(1995/96) adjusted for yearly variations inthe production levels of BHP BillitonLimited’s key commodity groups.

Figure 21 shows BHP Billiton Limited’sGreenhouse Intensity Index between1995/96 and 2000/01. Over this period,various initiatives, including projects andactions under Australia’s GreenhouseChallenge program, general processimprovements, and divestments andclosures of less-efficient operations, haveresulted in an overall reduction in theCompany’s Greenhouse Intensity Index ofapproximately 16 per cent.

The estimated improvement during the last12 months of around 4 per cent satisfied

the Company-wide target of year-by-yearreduction in greenhouse intensities. Thisrecent reduction was attributable in part tothe change in Steel assets following thepublic listing of OneSteel but also reflectsthe increasing proportion of less carbon-intensive fuels, such as natural gas.

The Port Hedland Hot Briquetted Iron (HBI)plant also had a minor influence on thisresult, as production increased significantlywhile only modest rises in energyconsumption occurred.

Oxides of sulphur and nitrogen

Oxides of sulphur (SOx) and oxides ofnitrogen (NOx) in sufficient concentrationscan adversely impact local air quality,potentially affecting human health and theenvironment. Local emission objectiveshave been set and controlled at the sitelevel either to meet environmental licencelimits determined by regulators or to beconsistent with good environmental andindustry practice.

BHP Billiton Limited’s total SOx emissionsto air are shown in Figure 22 with furtherdetail in Appendix B. The reportedemissions are estimated, based onmonitored emissions from major pointsources, plus the estimated emissions fromcombustion of fuels. Emissions of SOx

during the year increased marginallycompared with 1999/00. This slightincrease was primarily associated withhigher production from Minerals andTransport and Logistics, which in turn waspartially offset by reduced emissions fromthe restructured Steel business.

Figure 23 (and Appendix B) shows BHP Billiton Limited’s estimated NOx

emissions to atmosphere, based oncombustion of fuels and any monitoredemissions from major point sources. Totalestimated emissions of NOx have reducedby almost 20 per cent since 1996/97 butlevelled out over this year. Increases inemissions from Minerals and from Transportand Logistics have been offset by reductionsin Steel’s estimated emissions in the sameperiod. Summaries of NOx emissions dataare presented in Appendix B.G

reen

hous

e Em

issi

ons

Per U

nit o

f Pro

duct

ion

Figure 21: Greenhouse Intensity Index 1995/96 to 2000/01

0.495/96 96/97 97/98 98/99 99/00 00/01

0.6

0.8

1.0


Tonn

es

95/96 96/97 97/98 98/99 99/00 00/010

10 000

20 000

30 000


40 000

50 000

60 000

70 000

80 000

Petroleum

Minerals

Steel

Emissions to Air

Tonn

es

0

20 000

40 000

60 000

80 000

100 000

120 000

95/96 96/97 97/98 98/99 99/00 00/01


Petroleum

Minerals

Steel


Other emissions to air

BHP Billiton Limited’s operations have alsoregularly monitored and controlled a rangeof other substances and emissions to theatmosphere. These include:

• ozone-depleting substances, the useand disposal of which are controlled byinternational treaties and variousnational laws and regulations;

• dust emissions, which as well as beinga nuisance, can be a potential healthhazard due to chemical compositionand other physical properties, such asparticle size; and

• a range of organic compounds such asbenzene and dioxin. These are by-products of various industrial andcombustion processes that havepotential health effects because oftheir toxicity.

Where the potential to impact humanhealth has been identified, BHP BillitonLimited undertook studies to assess healthrisks and shared the results of thesestudies with communities through publicforums, information provided to regulatorsand communications with non-governmentorganisations. (See case study: ‘PortKembla Steelworks Health Risk Assessment’.)

Waste

Figure 24 shows the Company-wideaggregated data for general and hazardouswaste for the last three years. The qualityof data has continued to improve over thisperiod as a result of changes to wasteestimation and reporting techniques.

Reported levels of general and hazardouswaste have decreased steadily since1998/99. This result was mainlyattributable to the closure and sale ofassets but was also influenced by site-specific waste reduction initiatives andchanges in reporting practices. For example,BHP Billiton Limited suspected that somesites may have previously misreportedmaterials (such as used oil for recycling) aseither hazardous or general waste. Asummary of waste data is presented inAppendix B.

Waste rock (overburden) and tailings frommining and ore-processing operations arenormally stored on site in secure locationsthat minimise the risk of release ofcontaminants. These areas arerehabilitated as part of normal operationsand mine closure. Materials discharged towaste rock and tailings storage facilitiesare therefore excluded from the calculationof total waste.

Figure 24: General and Hazardous Waste 1998/99 to 2000/01

0

50 000

100 000

150 000

200 000

250 000

300 000

350 000

98/99 99/00 00/01

Tonn

es

General

Hazardous

Note: Hazardous waste is waste that is notaccepted at normal landfills. It may includeasbestos, hydrocarbons, radioactivematerial, heavy metals, solvents, thinners,acids, alkalis, fly ash, sludge and pesticides.


Port Kembla SteelworksHealth Risk Assessment

BHP Steel has completed Stage Two ofa Health Risk Assessment (HRA) ofairborne emissions from Port KemblaSteelworks in New South Wales,Australia. The primary objectives of theHRA were to assess the potential healthrisk to the surrounding community andto determine BHP Steel’s contributionto ambient conditions, as a basis forprioritising and managing pollutionreduction initiatives. The results showadverse health risks are unlikely to becaused by emissions from the plant.

The HRA was conducted by anindependent consultant and based on theCalifornia Air Pollution Control OfficersAssociation (CAPCOA) modelrecommended by the EnvironmentProtection Authority (EPA) of New SouthWales. The model enables a comparisonand ranking of the different operationalareas of the plant.

An HRA community group was formed tocontribute to the study and to monitorprogress. Members of the group representedlocal communities, council, regionalhealth professionals and the NSW EPA.

The HRA was conducted in two stages.Stage One, completed in December 1999,assessed emissions from the Sinter Plant.Stage Two, covering the rest of the plant,was completed in March 2001.

The Stage One Sinter Plant study foundthat the incremental lifetime risk of cancerin the worst case scenario was three ina million. This level is above therecommended NSW EPA guideline of one ina million, though well below the limit ofone in 10 000 regarded by the EPA asunacceptable. A project has commenced toreduce emissions from the Sinter Plant, ata cost of A$94 million.

The Stage Two results estimated theincreased lifetime risk of developing cancerfor the local community, as a result ofexposure to air emissions from the

Steelworks, is 1 in 50 000. This is incomparison with the known cancer rate for the Illawarra population, being 1 in 3as stated by the NSW Cancer Council. In a practical sense, the risk is consideredso small that no additional cases of cancerabove normal rates are expected withinthe community.

Adverse health effects other than cancerwere also evaluated, using a Hazard Index.A calculation of less than 1.0 is consideredacceptable by regulators. The calculatedhazard risk from the Steelworks was 0.67,meaning adverse health risks are unlikelyto occur.

The Stage Two results have been fullydocumented in a draft report that has beenreleased for public comment.

CASE STUDY

The findings of the Health Risk Assessment are

assisting the further development of pollution

reduction measures at Port Kembla Steelworks.

APPENDIX A – BHP BILLITON LIMITED FINES AND PROSECUTIONS

During the period 2000/01, BHP Billiton Limited incurred 19 fines totalling the equivalent of A$135 683. These fines are described in thetable below.

A successful prosecution without a fine is reported as a prosecution.

Fines reported are those imposed during the reporting period, even though they may relate to incidents in prior years.

BHP BILLITON LIMITEDBUSINESS FINES AND PROSECUTIONS

Minerals • La Plata Mine, New Mexico Coal, United States, in July 2000 received a fine of US$1 210 regardingan Office of Surface Mining inspection in March 2000, and subsequent Notice of Violation relatingto road use and maintenance, and sediment control measures.

• Tower Mine, Illawarra Coal, NSW, Australia, in March 2001 received two fines of A$1 500 each forfailure to comply with EPA licence conditions regarding recording of water flow rates.

• Appin Mine, Illawarra Coal, NSW, Australia, in June 2001 received a A$1 500 fine for failure tocomply with EPA licence conditions regarding recording of water flow rates.

Steel • Chullora Service Centre, NSW, Australia, in August 2000 received a A$1 500 fine for contravening alicence condition (late submission of certificate).

• Port Kembla Steelworks, NSW, Australia, in October 2000 received three fines of A$1 500 each forsinter plant stack opacity exceedences.

• Port Kembla Steelworks, NSW, Australia, in February 2001 received 10 fines of A$1 500 each. Theserelated to various offences, including failure to carry out emission surveys, fugitive dust emissions,emissions from a blocked standpipe cap, and sinter plant stack opacity exceedences.

Petroleum • Liverpool Bay, United Kingdom, in November 2000, received a fine of £40 000 (A$108 000)following an oil spill of 345 barrels (55 000 litres) in June 1998.

Transport and Logistics • None


BHP BILLITON LIMITEDAPPENDICES


Accidental Discharges of Hydrocarbons to Water

* Does not include diesel leak to soil at Ok Tedi.# Includes Iron Baron incident of 362 200 litres.† Petroleum figure includes 55 500 litres discharged at Liverpool Bay (offshore).

Land – Rehabilitation and Disturbance

The ‘Total Disturbed’ areas are also affected by changes due to acquisitions and divestments, as well as ‘Newly Disturbed’and ‘Rehabilitated’.

Water

Water consumption includes town water, ground water and run-off. It does not include consumption from dewatered mine pits.

WATER CONSUMPTION (MEGALITRES) 95/96 96/97 97/98 98/99 99/00 00/01

Minerals 127 300 145 700 128 500 114 000 72 000 79 800

Transport and Logistics Not Reported 60 20 90 100 100

Petroleum Not Reported 1 300 1 100 400 1 000 1 900

Steel 33 700 32 000 31 800 30 800 29 300 23 300

TOTAL 161 000 179 060 161 420 145 290 102 400 105 100

HYDROCARBONS DISCHARGED (LITRES) 95/96 96/97 97/98 98/99 99/00 00/01

Minerals 0 0 0* 7 280 5 800 7 629

Transport and Logistics 362 200# 410 80 30 100 255

Petroleum 10 500 11 980 1 190 55 620† 350 142

Steel 50 0 0 40 70 4

TOTAL 372 750 12 390 1 270 62 970 6 320 8 030

LAND AREA (HECTARES) 95/96 96/97 97/98 98/99 99/00 00/01

Rehabilitated 2 430 1 910 2 240 1 850 1 520 1 350

Newly Disturbed 2 980 4 130 3 170 3 050 2 040 3 200

Total Disturbed 45 300 55 550 54 980 57 820 56 100 58 700

APPENDIX B – BHP BILLITON LIMITED ENVIRONMENTAL DATA TABLES

Data in these tables are aggregate figures based on site data reported by BHP Billiton Limited’s managed businesses for the BHP BillitonLimited financial year 2000/01. Totals may differ due to rounding of data. Production data can be found in BHP Billiton Limited’s Reportto Shareholders 2001 – Description of Businesses and Financial Statements. During a review of Land Rehabilitation and Disturbancedata, an error was identified in last year’s reported total area of land disturbance that has been corrected in this year’s report.

BHP BILLITON LIMITED APPENDICES CONTINUED


Energy

For petroleum products: Production reported is BHP Billiton Limited’s share of production from joint ventures and 100 per cent ofproduction from controlled entities.

# Decrease primarily due to Ferrous Minerals now purchasing electricity instead of generating its own.* Increase primarily due to higher production from the Hot Briquetted Iron plant.† Decrease due to sale of Elang, Challis and Jabiru during 1998/99.^ Decrease due to closure of Newcastle primary operations.

2000/01: Minerals’ energy use increased due to inclusion of Samarco iron ore operation.2000/01: Steel’s energy use reduced due to public listing of OneSteel.

ENERGY PRODUCTION (PETAJOULES) 95/96 96/97 97/98 98/99 99/00 00/01

Crude oil and condensate 406 409 444 574 591 610

Natural gas 236 227 224 262 275 323

LNG, LPG, ethane 97 101 110 74 104 100

Black coal 1 497 1 547 1 686 1 725 1 743 1 959

TOTAL 2 237 2 284 2 464 2 635 2 712 2 993

ENERGY USE (PETAJOULES – INCLUDES ELECTRICAL ENERGY OF PURCHASED ELECTRICITY) 95/96 96/97 97/98 98/99 99/00 00/01

Minerals 62.0 65.3 64.5 56.0# 65.5* 80.1

Transport and Logistics 19.2 19.2 20.2 19.0 17.2 18.2

Petroleum 44.8 31.6 22.2 18.7 11.4† 13.1

Steel 217.0 211.0 213.0 203.0 182.5^ 139.0

TOTAL 343.0 327.1 319.9 296.7 276.5 250.5

ENERGY USE BY FUEL TYPE Coal & Natural Gas & Electricity Fuel & Distillate Other2000/01 (PETAJOULES) Coke Coal Seam Process Oil (petrol

Methane LPG, etc) Total

Minerals 5.4 23.4 16.5 7.8 26.2 1.0 80.1

Transport and Logistics 0.0 0.0 0.1 17.0 0.9 0.2 18.2

Petroleum 0.0 11.3 –0.3 0.0 1.7 0.4 13.1

Steel 109.9 20.3 7.7 0.6 0.3 0.2 139.0

TOTAL 115.3 55.0 24.0 25.4 29.0 1.8 250.5



Emissions – Greenhouse Gases

# BHP Billiton Limited purchased Magma Copper in 1995/96.* Increase primarily due to higher Hot Briquetted Iron plant production.^ Decrease due to sale of Elang, Challis and Jabiru during 1998/99.

2000/01: Minerals carbon dioxide emissions increased due to inclusion of Samarco iron ore operation.2000/01: Steel carbon dioxide emissions decreased due to public listing of OneSteel.

* The high value in 1995/96 methane emissions can be attributed to flaring from the Griffin facility.Fluctuations in subsequent years are due to commissioning of facilities, flaring of gas and disposal of assets.

GWP = Global Warming Potential


METHANE (TONNES) 95/96 96/97 97/98 98/99 99/00 00/01

Minerals 255 700 197 700 268 500 231 100 187 000 177 500

Transport and Logistics 0 0 0 0 0 0

Petroleum 52 000* 11 300 5 400 12 000 5 000 7 700

Steel 2 900 3 200 3 100 3 500 2 500 1 900

TOTAL 310 600 212 200 277 000 246 600 194 500 187 100

TOTAL GREENHOUSE GASES(MILLION TONNES CO2 EQUIVALENT) 95/96 96/97 97/98 98/99 99/00 00/01

Carbon Dioxide 31.7 31.0 30.9 28.7 27.1 23.3

Methane (GWP = 21) 6.5 4.5 5.8 5.2 4.1 3.9

TOTAL 38.2 35.5 36.7 33.9 31.2 27.3

CARBON DIOXIDE (MILLION TONNES) 95/96 96/97 97/98 98/99 99/00 00/01

Minerals 5.9# 6.2 6.4 5.9 6.3* 7.3

Transport and Logistics 1.4 1.4 1.5 1.4 1.3 1.3

Petroleum 2.8 2.1 1.4 1.0^ 0.8 0.9

Steel 21.6 21.3 21.6 20.4 18.7 13.9

TOTAL 31.7 31.0 30.9 28.7 27.1 23.3



Emissions – Oxides of Sulphur

* Decrease due to closure of San Manuel and sale of Hartley Platinum during 1999/00.^ Decrease primarily due to the sale of the Jabiru, Elang and Challis during 1998/99.# Decrease primarily due to the closure of Newcastle primary operations in September 1999.

2000/01: Steel emissions reduced due to public listing of OneSteel.

Emissions – Oxides of Nitrogen

* Decrease primarily due to closure of Newcastle primary operations in September 1999.2000/01: Steel emissions reduced due to public listing of OneSteel.

Waste

Reported waste does not include recycled materials, waste rock (overburden) or tailings.

NOx (TONNES) 95/96 96/97 97/98 98/99 99/00 00/01

Minerals 44 200 44 000 46 200 41 500 42 400 44 300

Transport and Logistics 25 800 26 000 28 600 23 400 23 300 24 500

Petroleum 15 800 15 800 3 700 2 400 2 500 4 800

Steel 16 800 19 000 19 900 19 700 15 700* 9 600

TOTAL 102 700 104 800 98 500 87 000 83 900 83 200

WASTE (TONNES) GENERAL HAZARDOUS98/99 99/00 00/01 98/99 99/00 00/01

Minerals 88 400 68 100 92 100 4 600 1 100 1 500

Transport and Logistics 5 500 4 100 10 100 0 800 1 900

Petroleum 5 300 1 600 1 200 1 100 800 500

Steel 261 500 214 900 128 300 55 900 27 500 1 700

TOTAL 360 700 288 700 213 700 61 600 30 200 5 600

SOx (TONNES) 95/96 96/97 97/98 98/99 99/00 00/01

Minerals 14 800 17 700 23 200 17 900 9 200* 10 900

Transport and Logistics 30 700 31 000 34 000 28 900 27 800 29 500

Petroleum 1 700 1 600 700 650 200^ 400

Steel 15 100 14 100 14 700 13 500 10 300# 8 900

TOTAL 62 300 64 300 72 600 60 950 47 500 49 700

BHP BILLITON LIMITED APPENDICES CONTINUED


BHP BILLITON LIMITED AUDITOR’S VERIFICATION STATEMENT


Fanie van der Merwe at Optimum Colliery,

South Africa.

BHP BILLITON PLCPERFORMANCE SUMMARY

This section of the Report provides a summary of the HSECperformance of BHP Billiton Plc (formerly Billiton Plc) for theyear 2000/01, and is followed by the relevant Appendix andAuditor’s statement. Amounts included are presented in US Dollars (US$).

This section does not include details of the performance ofBHP Billiton Limited (formerly BHP Limited), which is coveredin an earlier section commencing on page 16.


IntroductionBHP Billiton Plc remained committed to making sustainable development a cornerstone of its business activities. This section describes key aspects of BHP Billiton Plc’s approach to HSECmanagement and performance this year, and includes a discussion ofperformance trends in key areas as well as case studies that describe significantHSEC initiatives, projects and programs.

Over the year, the Group worked hard to improve its corporate HSE and socialreporting and management systems inorder to capture more valuable information.These efforts, coupled with the feedbackreceived from stakeholders on last year’sreport, have led to the inclusion of moredata and analysis of liquid emissions andwaste, the introduction of new reportingindicators such as financial benefits andland management and closure planning, aswell as more information on occupationaland community health. In an effort toimprove transparency, a further developmentis performance reporting based on theGroup’s attributable share (percentage ofthe managed operation owned), forselected key performance indicators.

For the third year running, the Companyimproved its performance in the UK’sBusiness in the Environment Index ofCorporate Environmental Engagement,comparing favourably with the FTSE 100and Resources Group averages. Ratingsimproved in both the management andperformance categories, including strategicenvironmental management performance,energy, transport, global warming, wasteand water. Opportunities for improvementwere identified in the areas ofcommunication with stakeholders, productstewardship and resource consumption.These will be particular focus areas for theforthcoming reporting period.

In this performance section, safety dataincludes all BHP Billiton Plc managed and non-managed sites, including those in which BHP Billiton Plc has interests,whether as subsidiaries, joint ventures orjoint arrangements. This data includesemployees and contractors.

Occupational health data covers BHPBilliton Plc employees and contractors at managed sites.

Community and environmental data coversall BHP Billiton Plc managed sites, withdata omissions noted as appropriate.

External awards

This year BHP Billiton Plc received34 external health, safety, environmentand community awards. These included:

• Minesafe International 2000: Top TeamAward — ‘Emergency Response SkillsCompetition’, for Worsley aluminarefinery, Australia

• The Benjamin Teplizky Award —‘Outstanding Commitment to Safetyand Sustainable Development’, forCerro Colorado copper mine, Chile

Information on the other awards can be found on the BHP Billiton website,www.bhpbilliton.com.

Risk management, auditsand reviewsRisk management and policy compliancewithin the BHP Billiton Plc Group weresupported by a series of international bestpractice guidelines, which were appliedacross the operational life cycle, fromsocio-economic and cultural issues totailings and waste management. Theseguidelines were based on priority issuesidentified in part through BHP Billiton Plc’sreporting standards, which werestrengthened and extended during theyear, particularly in respect of keyindicators for environmental andcommunity issues.

Internal and external HSE reviews andaudits on the basis of risk and compliancewere regularly undertaken, with HSE issuesat project and operational levels beingintegrated into management systems.

A further indication of BHP Billiton Plc’scommitment to improving riskmanagement was a series of health, safetyand environment reviews that wereundertaken this year by Corporate HSEprofessionals and members of the HSECommittee of the Board. These reviews

Pioneering biotechnologyIn a world first, BHP Billiton Plc ispioneering the use of thermophilemicro-organisms in recoveringminerals from complex sulphide ores.At Pering mine in South Africa, theCompany has commissioned a testfacility using the world-class BioCop®bio-leaching process on an industrialscale. The results to date have beenvery encouraging.

The test reactor at the Pering mine wasinitiated in February 2000, followingsuccessful trials of the BioCop® processby BHP Billiton Plc and Codelco (equalpartners in Alliance Copper Ltd) at aprototype plant at Chuquicamata, Chile.Patents are pending for the technology.

The initial trials in Chile demonstratedthe industrial viability of the thermophileprocess for the treatment of base metal sulphide concentrates, replacingthe traditional ‘roasting’ process that can produce unwanted airborneenvironmental emissions.

The Pering facility is designed to treat asulphide concentrate feedstock at a rateof around 22 tonnes per day in a single300-cubic-metre reactor. The reactor isconstructed of concrete and lined withlayers of ceramic tiles, acid-resistantgrout and a polymer membrane. Thisnovel design has numerous benefits,such as excellent corrosion resistance at high temperatures and high chloridelevels and the ability to operate in areasof high seismic activity (an essentialattribute in Chile).

The testing at Pering is scheduled to be completed by the end of 2001.

Pering mine, South Africa.

CASE STUDY

Safe behaviour at KhutalaColliery

The desire to be world-class in termsof health and safety performance ledto the introduction of a series ofbehavioural intervention programsacross the workforce at KhutalaColliery in South Africa. Theseprograms comprise theoreticaltraining modules, supported bypractical intervention exercises, atboth group and individual level.All new employees at Khutala Collieryare required to undergo a two-daytraining program focusing on health andsafety issues.

This is followed by a three-dayintervention program to equip employeeswith problem-solving skills. To furtherreinforce the message of workplacesafety, they are introduced to theirhealth and safety responsibilities througha behaviour-based safety training program.

The theory learned in these programs is reinforced through practical on-the-job training. The hands-ontraining provides an opportunity foremployees to convert their workplacesafety knowledge into action.

Long-term plans are in place to ensurethat each work team is able to manageitself in a mature and sustainablemanner into the future.

Following the inception of this approach,the Lost Time Injury Frequency Rate atKhutala Colliery reduced from 4.95 inDecember 1999 to 2.71 in June 2001,representing a 45 per cent improvementover the 18-month period. Similarly, thecases per million man hours workedduring the same period reduced from30.07 to 15.1, improving the Total InjuryFrequency Rate at the colliery by 49 per cent.


identified a number of managementissues, including the need for:

• extensive work to supportenvironmental health issues ofrelevance to BHP Billiton Plcbusinesses;

• implementation of high-quality waste,land management and closure plansfor minerals processing plants; and

• evaluation of the recent regulatorydevelopment regarding persistentorganic substances (especially dioxins,furans and perfluorocarbons) forprocessing plants, and its impact onthe Company’s long-term strategy.

BHP Billiton Plc has strived to maintain ahigh standard of corporate citizenship overthe life cycle of operations and iscommitted to stakeholder engagement aspart of working towards sustainabledevelopment. To this end, the Companyhas engaged with local communities inthree ways: community events, meetingsand information dissemination, all ofwhich are recorded.

Health and Safety

Management systems

BHP Billiton Plc operations are nowworking towards implementation of safetyand occupational health managementsystems to the OHSAS 18001 commonstandard. Good progress towards theimplementation and certification of thisstandard was made in 2000/01, especiallyby the Ingwe operations in South Africa.

In addition to national legislative standards,specific standards from internationalbodies were used by BHP Billiton Plc tomeasure performance and ensure bestpractice. Such bodies included theAmerican Conference of Governmental Industrial Hygienists (ACGIH), the UKHealth and Safety Executive, the WorldHealth Organization, and InternationalLabour Organisation.

Safety programs and initiatives

To allow BHP Billiton Plc’s health and safetyperformance to be measured againstindustry averages, the Company brought

together a working group of majorresources companies in 1999 and agreedto a set of common indicators anddefinitions as a benchmark for definingdifferent levels of severity of accidents.

Since then, a website has been establishedto allow members of the working group toinput their performance data and, viatwice-yearly reports, compare their resultswith the average for the group. Thisinitiative was the subject of a presentationat the Annual Minesafe Convention held inPerth, Australia in September 2000.

Safety performance

Safety issues were identified and managedthrough detailed incident reviews andadherence to BHP Billiton Plc’s incident and accident reporting system. The aimwas to spread best practice throughout the BHP Billiton Plc Group and ensure a common approach to safetymanagement. (See case study ‘Safebehaviour at Khutala Colliery’.)

As shown in Figure 25, performance (asmeasured by the Lost Time InjuryFrequency Rate, which includes restrictedwork cases) deteriorated compared to theprevious year.

CASE STUDY

Training program, Khutala Colliery, South Africa.

These figures represent a total of723 incidents, compared to 606 the previousyear, with a severity ratio (average numberof days lost) of 24. The majority of losttime injuries were related to materialshandling and mobile equipment.

Fatal accidents

Despite the safety systems in place,regrettably, ten people lost their lives atwork last year.

Endeavours to make BHP Billiton Plc sitessafer places to work were ongoing throughthe year, reflecting the Company’scommitment to eliminating loss of life.Fatalities since 1996/97 are shown in Figure 26. The HSE Committee studied allfatalities and ‘high potential’ incidents.This included reviewing the investigationreport from the operation and following upthe proposed remedial actions. The fatalityfrequency rate, as shown in Figure 27,marginally improved this year.

Occupational health

Occupational health programs and initiatives

BHP Billiton Plc recognised the importanceof work-related health issues and the needto ensure that significant hazards areeffectively managed.

The principal health hazards associatedwith the Company's operations have beennoise, fumes and dust from coal and metaloxides. Monitoring and medical surveillancepractices have been established at alloperations, and reporting at BHP BillitonPlc Group level has allowed priority areasto be identified and targeted.

Although a number of trials werecompleted during the year for the use offoam as a dust suppression agent wherecontinuous miners are used, the results didnot prove there were advantages over theestablished use of water spray andscrubbing techniques. Benchmarking ofthose operations achieving consistentlyexcellent results was undertaken, toidentify best practices.

A noisy environment is one where noiselevels exceed the adopted occupationalexposure limit (OEL) standard of 85 dB(A)over an eight-hour shift. Continuousefforts have been made to minimise noiseat source through engineering processes,while also attempting to minimiseexposures through other measures such asprovision of personal protective

equipment, administrative controls and theintroduction of remote equipment control.

Occupational health performance

During the year, 11 922 people (full-timeemployees and contractors) worked inareas where, for all or part of their shifts,the concentration of airborne respirabledust was determined to be above theacceptable occupational exposure limit. To ensure that their personal doses did not exceed internationally acceptablepersonal exposure limits, these peoplewere provided with personal protectivebreathing equipment. As an addedmeasure, medical surveillance geared to the early detection of respiratorydisorders was conducted on those peoplepotentially exposed.

During the same period, 49 185 people(full-time employees and contractors)worked in noisy environments for all or part of their shifts. They also wereprovided with appropriate personalprotective equipment to reduce theirequivalent noise exposure to below therecommended limit of 85 dB(A). Allpersons potentially at risk were madeaware of the health hazards and trained inthe use of personal protective equipment.

In spite of these measures, a total of 1 234occupational health cases were reportedduring the year. This figure includes full-time employees and contractors. Duringthe previous year, there were 363 cases,but this represented employees only. Theincrease in numbers is largely due to theexpansion of the surveillance program toinclude contractors.

Programs aimed at reducing atmosphericcontaminants and industrial noise areongoing, to ultimately eliminate the needfor additional protection in the workplace.

CommunityBHP Billiton Plc remained committed tomaintaining a high level of communitydevelopment. There was an emphasis onfinding ways to successfully integrate thesocial development programs of theCompany’s Development Trusts and



operations with national and regionalpriorities. This was an essential aspect of BHP Billiton Plc’s social and communityphilosophy, as the socio-economic andenvironmental priorities of the developing world differ from those in the developed world.

Community health

BHP Billiton Plc’s health initiatives werenot limited to the Company’s sites oroperations. Outreach programs wereundertaken in the wider community, oftenin collaboration with others. Over the pastfour years, the Company has steadilyincreased its activities in this area, buildingsocial capital and aiming to make a realdifference to the communities in which theCompany works.

A particular focus during the year wasepidemic and endemic disease. Inpartnership with appropriate expertagencies, BHP Billiton Plc participated inprojects to curb the spread of suchillnesses, in particular malaria andHIV/AIDS. (See case study: ‘Malaria control in Mozambique’.)

HIV/AIDS places a burden on both economicdevelopment and society, particularly insouthern African areas. BHP Billiton Plc’sHIV/AIDS strategy addressed key areas,such as social issues (including migrantlabour and housing policy), employee careand support, education, and condomdistribution. Company businesses alsoparticipated in intra-mining initiatives, suchas the ‘Powerbelt Project’ in the coalmining area of Mpumalanga in South Africa.

Legislation in most areas prevents testingfor HIV/AIDS and also, in some regions,the assessment of fitness prior toemployment. BHP Billiton Plc’s policy, in accordance with International LabourOrganisation guidelines, has been not to discriminate against current orprospective HIV-positive employees.

A further challenge for employers insouthern Africa is controlling the costsinvolved in meeting legislativerequirements to provide medical aid to employees and their often numerousdependents. While this can be an oneroustask, voluntary testing for HIV/AIDS

CASE STUDY

The President of South Africa, Mr ThaboMbeki (right), testing insecticide sprayequipment as part of the malaria controlprogram supported by the Mozal smelter inMozambique.

Malaria control in MozambiqueThe Mozal aluminium smelter projectin Mozambique is in an area wheremalaria is endemic, but the communitydoes not have adequate resources todevelop infrastructure and facilities to deal with the problem. BHP BillitonPlc’s Mozal Development Trust issupporting the Lubombo SpatialDevelopment Initiative (LSDI), which was established to tacklemalaria infection and improve socialand economic conditions for the local community.

The LSDI, named after the LubomboMountains that straddle Mozambique,Swaziland and South Africa, aims tocreate sustainable employment andequality of economic opportunity. Thiswill assist the governments of the threecountries to develop the region into aglobally competitive economic zone.

In October 1999, the Lubombo MalariaProtocol and a tri-national malariaprogram were launched with the supportof the Mozal Development Trust. Thisprogram is targeting under-developedareas in southern Mozambique and in theborder areas of South Africa andSwaziland, with the aim of reducing newmalaria infections. The program providestourist information (including malaria riskmaps and prophylaxis guidelines) and issupporting the development of a regionalmalaria information system with a viewto assisting the development of tourismand business.

By June 2001, following a programutilising controlled public health sprayingtechniques, average malaria infectionrates had been reduced by 40 to 50 percent in treated areas. Before the programcommenced, baseline surveys showedmalaria infection rates in children of 60 to 90 per cent, varying by area. The effectiveness of the malaria controlprogram over the next five years will be assessed by the incidence of malariaand its effect on tourism, job creation and risk perceptions.

A number of other initiatives have beenpromoted by the Mozal DevelopmentTrust, including:

• The building of a school using locallabour and recycling materials, suchas packaging timber, from the Mozalsmelter operation.

• Upgrading of local clinics to providebetter health care in the region. Ateam of 50 health workers has alsobeen trained in the fight againstHIV/AIDS and provided with bicyclesto assist in their work as communityhealth advisers.

• The development of a business skillstraining program for local traders,helping them to develop theirbusiness by identifying and respondingto local needs and improving thepresentation of their goods.


Enhancing the quality ofeducation in Kwa-ZuluNatal, South Africa

In 1996, a unique arrangementbetween a non-governmentorganisation, a governmentdepartment and a corporation wasforged. The Zululand Chamber ofBusiness Foundation, the RegionalDepartment of Education and BHPBilliton Aluminium initiated thePartnership in Education Network(PEN) to enhance the quality ofeducation in township and ruralschools. The result was a majorincrease in the matriculation pass rateat participating schools, surpassing theregional rate.The PEN project is developing an educationsystem for 38 township and rural schools(ten secondary schools and their sisterprimary schools) with the objective ofaligning the quality of education with thebest standard of urban schools in theregion.

The objectives of the 12-year project are:

• to improve the matriculation pass ratewithin the PEN schools from 39 per cent to 80 per cent; and

• to develop an education system withskilled teams of school principals andteachers to continue the success of theproject beyond its 12-year duration.

The project takes a holistic approach, withconsideration given to the spectrum ofeducational issues. This includes suchneeds as water supply, shelter, sanitation,office equipment, computers and resourcecentres, as well as the training needs ofgoverning bodies, parent organisations,teachers, principals and department heads.The teacher development program includesworkshops focusing on mathematics,science and biology as well as an HIV/AIDSEducator/Counsellor training program.

The project has involved all levels ofstakeholders, including the Department of Education, industry, parents andteachers in the process of planning andimplementing strategies for school qualityimprovement. The project was designedafter a comprehensive audit and extensiveconsultation with the community to ensurethat it accurately addressed local needs.

The outcomes of the project are measurablethrough a database that captures thedetails of each student at the PEN schoolsand keeps track of their progress.

Numerous partnerships have beenestablished with organisations that canprovide support for the project. Existingpartnerships are in place, for example,with communications and informationtechnology hardware and software suppliersto link the schools to the Internet.

To ensure that a consistent and highstandard of education is maintained, theproject focuses on the training of teachers,principals and governing bodies. Businessand management training courses are alsooffered to encourage a culture of self-sustainability and entrepreneurship withinthe education system.

The success of the project is clearlyindicated by the matriculation results beingachieved at the participating schools. Atthe inception of the project four years ago,the matriculation pass rate was 39 per cent. It has improved markedly to67 per cent, substantially higher than theregional rate of 47 per cent and theprovincial rate of 58 per cent.

A teacher participating in the PEN schoolsproject initiated by BHP Billiton Aluminium, South Africa.

CASE STUDY


(undertaken in collaboration with tradeunions) has indicated that the incidencetrend within BHP Billiton Plc is up to 50 per cent lower than national statistics.

Community contributions

In addition to direct expenditure from the Billiton Development Trust of US$5.2 million, BHP Billiton Plc operationsdirectly supported community programsthrough financial contributions and in-kind support. Based on data receivedfrom the sites, this additional expenditureexceeded US$4.4 million. It should,however, be noted that systems toeffectively capture such expenditure arestill under development.

Financial benefits for 2000/01 totalled US$2 095 million across the regions asshown in Figure 28. Such benefits includethe amount spent on the purchase ofgoods and services, remuneration, all non-pecuniary employee benefits (e.g.pensions, medical aid, transport, food,housing and other allowances), local taxes,corporation tax, other taxes and royalties.

Socio-economic benefits

The number of BHP Billiton Plc employeesas at 30 June 2001 was approximately 33 000. Contractor numbers totalledapproximately 23 500 (full-time equivalents).

The socio-economic contribution of BHPBilliton Plc businesses to the regions inwhich they operate was two-fold. Firstly, in the traditional sense, the Companyprovided direct employment, non-financialbenefits to employees, bought local goodsand services, and paid income taxes andexport taxes.

The support an organisation provides to both micro and macro economies isoften not analysed. By attempting toquantify the financial contribution, aninsight can be gained into the socio-economic benefits of BHP Billiton Plc’smining and processing activities.

Therefore, to complement the Company’sapproach to sustainability reporting, a newreporting parameter was introduced this yearto capture these ‘financial benefits’ on aregional basis, as shown in Figure 28. At thesame time, this analysis does not intend toinfer anything about the relative distributionof such benefits through fiscal policies.

Secondly, as far as possible, BHP BillitonPlc applied the principle of employing local people and providing them withfurther training. In 2000/01, a total of448 community development initiativeswere also put in place, increasing from222 the previous year. These programs and projects were initiated in partnershipwith governments and non-governmentorganisations wherever possible.

Working with communities and partnersprovides the opportunity to identifypriorities and effective ways to foster self-sustaining economic growth, enhancesocial welfare and improve environmentalprotection. The two areas in which BHPBilliton Plc significantly increased itsinvolvement in line with development andwelfare priorities were small business andcommunity health programs.

Compared with last year, the number ofsmall business initiatives undertaken byBHP Billiton Plc Group operations almostdoubled, while the number of communityhealth initiatives (including programs onHIV/AIDS and malaria) tripled.

Environment

Management systems

BHP Billiton Plc remained committed toimplementing sound environmentalmanagement standards and reducingenvironmental risks throughout itsoperations. As shown in Figure 29, theCompany exceeded the target set in1999/00 for 60 per cent of operations(included in the BHP Billiton Plc portfolio at

that time) to achieve ISO 14001 certificationin 2000/01. This compares to 53 per centwhen the acquired assets and newinvestments of 2001 are included.

In 1999/00, mining operations laggedbehind processing plants in terms ofcertification as part of improvingenvironmental performance. However, fouroperations achieved certification this year,including two Coal operations.

The management system at OptimumColliery in South Africa was upgraded tointegrate procedures with unit standardsand standard-based assessment. Theresulting risk-based system, which is bothpro-active and preventative, resulted insimultaneous triple certification of ISO 9002,ISO 14001 and OHSAS 18001.

Environmental compliance

All BHP Billiton Plc operating companieswere expected to comply, as a minimum,with regulatory requirements and todisclose all environmentally relatedincidents and breaches of legal complianceaccording to the impact or potentialimpact that they may have. This includednon-compliance incidents that occurred

Note: Two operations nearing closure notincluded in data.

following consultation with, and thepermission of, regulatory authorities.

As knowledge-sharing is a useful tool inimproving performance, it was BHP BillitonPlc’s practice that, following review andmitigation procedures, information aboutincidents was disseminated throughout theBHP Billiton Plc Group.

The various levels of environmentalincidents and non-compliance for reportingpurposes are defined in Figure 30.

No fines or penalties were incurred in2000/01, as has been the case since BHP Billiton Plc's inception in 1997.

As shown in Figure 31, no massive or major (Level I and II) incidents wererecorded this year, in line with BHP BillitonPlc’s commitments.

Of the 870 incidents recorded in 2000/01(compared to 508 in 1999/00), 34 werelocalised (Level III) incidents (compared to 12 in 1999/00). The commitment of zerospills was not met. Nine of the incidentswere spill related, resulting in 27 300 litresof oil, 18 000 litres of diesel andapproximately 62 tonnes of manganesesulphate solution being spilt to theenvironment.

The explanation for the rise in reportedsignificant incidents is threefold. Firstly,transparency in reporting within the BHP Billiton Plc Group improved. Secondly,environmental legislation in developingcountries has become more stringent.Thirdly, a number of repetitive incidentsoccurred, particularly as a result of heavyrains and gaseous emissions due tooperational problems. Air pollution was anissue for Chrome operations in particularand was associated with registration

certificate non-compliance and technicaldifficulties mainly relating to maintenanceand upgrading.

Details of all the localised incidents recorded in 2000/01, including the nature of the impacts and mitigation, are provided on the BHP Billiton website,www.bhpbilliton.com.

With the exception of noise, all thelocalised incidents this year fell intocategories similar to last year, namely airpollution, water pollution, and spillages of fuel and other liquids.

To better understand administration issuesrelating to changing legislation andregulation surrounding permittingprocesses, compliance monitoring alsoincluded the number of permitsoutstanding in the BHP Billiton Plc Group.There were a number of permitting non-compliances from operations, due to timelags associated with the introduction ofnew legislation.

Complaints

As part of BHP Billiton Plc’s approach tocommunity relations, it has been Companypolicy to record and mitigate all complaintsthat are received. As shown in Figure 32, atotal of 123 complaints were recorded thisyear (compared to 110 last year) of which92 per cent were resolved (compared to75 per cent last year). This year saw asignificant rise in the number of odour-related complaints as a result of improvedconsultation and communication processesat certain sites. It was also Company policythat complaints regarding any aspect ofoperations should be resolved promptlyand this will continue to be the case.


Figure 30: Reporting definitions of environmental incidents and non-compliance

Level I: Massive non-compliance, with severe adverse and possible irreparabledamage, or affecting a large area with major legal implications.

Level II: Major non-compliance excursions with severe damage; costly to repair.

Level III: Localised non-compliance excursions with limited loss of material withknown toxicity, which may lead to limited legal and public concern.

Level IV: Minor non-compliance and impact.

Level V: Incidents with environmental impact not covered by legislation,particularly spills and other incidents as per defined volumes.


Ecological conservation andmanagement strategy forthe Yabulu refinery siteIn north Queensland, Australia, theYabulu refinery land-holding covers 2 454 hectares. Yabulu is part ofQueensland Nickel (QNI), a whollyowned subsidiary. Much of the areaaround the laterite nickel refinery ismanaged as a habitat buffer zone,supporting a wide variety ofecosystems. The QueenslandEnvironmental Protection Agency (EPA)has classified the refinery lands as beingof conservation significance. Workingwith the EPA and local communities,QNI has developed an Environment and Conservation ManagementStrategy (ECMS) to define and conserve these ecosystems.

The refinery, located adjacent to HalifaxBay approximately 30 kilometres north-west of Townsville, was commissioned in1974 and is a major producer of high-quality nickel and cobalt products.

Refinery operations have protected manyof the ecosystems in the land-holding fromagricultural and residential development,which has impacted on areas immediatelysurrounding the land-holding.

Central to the ECMS is the minimisation of potential impacts of refinery operationson the buffer zone. This is achievedthrough a comprehensive program oftailings and waste water management,emissions monitoring and ongoingrestoration activities.

To gain a better understanding of thenatural values contained within the bufferzone, QNI has commissioned severalleading public research institutions tocomplete detailed studies of theecosystems present. The studies began in1997 and have been updated on an annualbasis. Several distinct ecosystems havebeen identified, including sand dunes,mangroves and salt flats, open forest, andeucalypt and melaleuca woodlands. Thereis also a wide variety of species of plantsand animals, with a diversity and richness

comparable to other undisturbed landsalong the Queensland coast. The ECMSprovides for protection of importantmangrove communities, fish and otherwildlife habitats and breeding areas.

Community involvement is also a keycomponent of QNI’s commitment to the conservation and management of the ecosystems. This includes consultation regarding future refinerydevelopment proposals and thedistribution of regular reports on currentenvironmental performance. Anenvironmental education program is alsoconducted to show how communities canbenefit from buffer zone lands at the sametime as the overall environmental impactto the site is being reduced.

CASE STUDY

Part of the habitat buffer zone at theYabulu refinery in north Queensland,Australia, including stands of melaleuca,eucalypt and pandanus trees.


Resource use

Land management and rehabilitation

BHP Billiton Plc’s mining and associatedactivities have required varying amounts ofland to be disturbed during developmentand production. As shown in Figure 33, atotal of 1 728 hectares of land wasdisturbed in 2000/01 (much of which wasattributable to open cast operations)compared to 2 125 hectares last year. A total of 770 hectares of land wasrehabilitated this year, which exceeded thetarget of 650 hectares.

A commitment was also made to gathermore accurate information on the totalarea of land disturbed that is available forrehabilitation. In 2000/01, the Companyassessed that 13 000 hectares of itsdisturbed land was not available forrehabilitation until closure.

As BHP Billiton Plc operates a significantnumber of mining and processing plants at various stages of the life cycle,rehabilitation will be addressed in stages.A summary of land disturbance andrehabilitation data is presented inAppendix C.

Environmental management programsacross the BHP Billiton Plc Group includedprojects aimed at restoring a wide range ofremaining natural habitats and ecosystems.(See case study: ‘Ecological conservationand management strategy for the Yabulurefinery site’.) Where possible, land is alsorestored for sustainable agricultural use.

Developing sustainable ventures followingmining can provide many challenges.Minnaar Colliery in South Africa is anexample of the way in which BHP BillitonPlc practised sustainable closure byrehabilitating a mining-disturbed area.

In this case, the rehabilitation of open castareas and discard dumps provided moreland for farming activities.

As Minnaar Colliery also had undergroundworkings, shafts had to be closed. In thelate 1990s, coal from the discard dumpswas also sold as part of the reclamationprocess. Due to the size of the dump andthe flatness of the slopes, no contourswere installed and so the land is ideal forgrazing or pasture. It is hoped that whenthe site is deemed stable by governmentauthorities, this area, which previously hadno productive land-use, can be managedas good quality pasture.

The site is also sustainable in terms ofmine water management. Excess minewater is consumed by a local farmer forpivot irrigation of alternate summer andwinter crops. This means the mine water isno longer decanted into the Olifants Rivercatchment area, and has become a waterresource for the farmer.

Closure and land managementplanning

A baseline assessment of the closure and land management planning status for BHP Billiton Plc Group operations has been undertaken using five bestpractice elements. These includeinformation on risk and liability assessment associated with closure,financial liability determination, legalrequirements, biodiversity issues, andconsultation procedures.

The closure planning status of operationsconsequently has been categorised on the basis of the information received, as shown in Figures 34 and 35.

Figure 35: Land Management and Closure Planning Status

The quality of BHP Billiton Plc closure plans were rated according to the following criteria.

CATEGORY I: Where all 5 questions were answered positively.

CATEGORY II: Where 4 out of 5 questions were answered positively.

CATEGORY III: Where 3 out of 5 questions were answered positively.

Where 2 out of 5 or less questions were answered positively then the closure plan wasnot categorised.


Water recycling at OptimumCollieryOptimum Colliery is an open cast minesituated approximately 35 kilometressouth-east of Middelburg, in the KleinOlifants River catchment area in SouthAfrica. Large quantities of waste water aregenerated within the mined areas anddischarged into the catchment. To minimisethe use of potable water and to reduce theamount of waste water discharged, themine has implemented a new watermanagement strategy.

The mine and its associated activitiesrequire around 13 000 cubic metres ofwater per day. Until December 1997, up to9 000 cubic metres of waste water flowedinto the streams of the Klein Olifants Rivercatchment daily. To address this problem, awater management strategy wasimplemented to focus on:

• effectively separating clean and dirtywaters;

• developing an operational watermanagement plan;

• recycling the waste water for re-use inthe operation; and

• participating in a controlled releasescheme to discharge waste water in anacceptable manner, complying with therelevant legislation.

The mine’s operational water managementplan focuses on flood prevention and thereclamation of water from the operationalcuts for re-use in mining activities. Waterfrom the operational cuts, as well as returnwater from the processing plants, ispumped into a centralised storage facilitywhere it can be recycled for use in coalprocessing, the washbays at workshops,dust suppression along haul roads and theestate gardens.

Prior to 1997, a portion of the waste watergenerated via the spoils and operationalpits was released directly into thesurrounding streams. The regulatedscheme for the controlled release ofaffected water, in which Optimum nowparticipates, has enabled the mine tocomply with the National Water Act. Over 9 million cubic metres of affectedwater have been released via theregulated scheme. Releases occur onlyduring high-flow situations in thesurrounding streams, not during the drywinter and spring months. Thissignificantly benefits water quality in theKlein Olifants River and the Middelburgdam downstream of the mine.

CASE STUDY

Fanie van der Merwe monitors the waterquality at a dam that supplies water forthe dust suppression system at OptimumColliery, South Africa.


This approach helps to indicate the BHP Billiton Plc Group’s performance in terms of progress from a Category IIIapproach to a Category I (best practice)approach, where all five elements havebeen comprehensively implemented or completed.

Seven operations, five of which are in themining sphere, fall into Category I status,a further eight have Category II status andanother four have Category III status. Theresults also indicated that landmanagement and closure for processingplants required further attention. Theseissues are important for the Company. Oneof the ways in which BHP Billiton Plc hasbeen improving land management and thepreservation of biodiversity is throughprograms such as those at the Yabulurefinery, Australia.

Water consumption

BHP Billiton Plc remained committed to theoptimal use of resources in its drivetowards sustainable development. Beingmindful that water can be a locally scarceresource, the Company monitoredconsumption accordingly.

A total of 55.2 million cubic metres ofwater was consumed in 2000/01, comparedto 51.6 million cubic metres last year.

In terms of attributable share, 47.7 millioncubic metres of water was consumed.These figures refer to total waterconsumption by BHP Billiton Plc, whichincludes all external sources of water used,such as purchased water, ground water,and water abstracted from rivers. They donot include recycled water.

In terms of efficiency, performancedecreased from 0.54 cubic metres pertonne of final product in 1999/00 to0.65 cubic metres per tonne of finalproduct this year. Many sites improvedtheir efficiency this year, but this was offsetby low production within commodities withhigh-intensity use.

Improving water management was seen asimportant in terms of eco-efficiency. As anindication of BHP Billiton Plc’s commitmentto improvement, 83 per cent of operationshad a water balance plan in place and77 per cent had undertaken a waterbalance within the last three years.

Good progress was made in terms of water recycling and the Company met itscommitment to increase the use ofrecycled water. (See case study: ‘Waterrecycling at Optimum Colliery’.) A total of99.7 million cubic metres (attributableshare 88.7 million cubic metres) of waterwas recycled in 2000/01, which is over30 million cubic metres more than lastyear. The total amount equates to 1.17cubic metres per tonne of final product for 2000/01.

Consumption of water and recycled water is shown in Figure 36. A summary of water consumption data is presented inAppendix C.

Liquid discharges

BHP Billiton Plc monitored suspended anddissolved solids in water, with the aim ofminimising these emissions. New watertreatment plants such as the onecommissioned at Yabulu, Australia, havebeen designed with this goal in mind.

As shown in Figure 37, BHP Billiton PlcGroup operations discharged36 851 tonnes of suspended solids off sitethis year, compared to 48 845 tonnes in1999/00. The amount of total dissolvedsolids discharged off site was47 336 tonnes, compared with 104 515tonnes in 1999/00. The significant fall intotal dissolved solids was due to theimplementation of a recycled water systemat Yabulu and improved practiceselsewhere. A summary of liquid dischargesdata is presented in Appendix C.


Energy

With BHP Billiton Plc’s processing activitiesbeing energy intensive, and withacquisitions in Base Metals and Aluminiumand new production, total energyconsumption increased as expected.

As shown in Figure 38, approximately 139 010 terajoules of energy (equal to 1 639 megajoules per tonne of finalproduct) was consumed this year, of which27 per cent came from new capacity andacquired operations. This compares with105 240 terajoules of energy (equal to 1 103 megajoules per tonne of finalproduct) in 1999/00.

In terms of attributable share, total energyconsumption for 2000/01 equalled 127 836 terajoules.

Operations consumed 73 800 terajoules ofelectricity and 65 210 terajoules of fossilfuels in 2000/01. A small number ofoperations also produced some of theirown energy. A summary of energy data ispresented in Appendix C.

Emissions

Greenhouse gases

In 2000/01, BHP Billiton Plc Groupoperations emitted an estimated 17 milliontonnes of CO2 equivalent, equal to0.197 tonne of greenhouse gas per tonneof final product. In 1999/00, an estimated21.6 million tonnes of CO2 equivalent was emitted, equal to 0.2 tonne ofgreenhouse gas per tonne of final product, as shown in Figure 39. This year’slower total emissions figure is a result ofimproved estimation methodology.

In terms of attributable share, emissionsequalled a total of 15 million tonnes of CO2

equivalent. A summary of greenhouse gasemissions is presented in Appendix C.

Sulphur dioxide

In 1999/00, BHP Billiton Plc Groupoperations improved their estimationmethodologies and on this basis emitted31 000 tonnes of sulphur dioxide, equal to0.3 kilogram of sulphur dioxide per tonneof final product. This year, 40 227 tonnesof sulphur dioxide, equal to 0.47 kilogramper tonne of final product, were emitted,as shown in Figure 40. Mozal inMozambique and Worsley in WesternAustralia (as newly added capacity)accounted for over 15 000 tonnes.

In terms of attributable share in 2000/01,emissions equalled 33 586 tonnes ofsulphur dioxide. A summary of sulphurdioxide emissions data is presented inAppendix C.


Recycling of aluminium spentpot lining in South AfricaSpent pot lining is a waste materialgenerated from the aluminium smeltingpot-delining process. It is regarded ashazardous material because of its highsoluble salt content (especially fluoride).BHP Billiton Plc’s smelters are constantlylooking at avenues to safely treat andmanage the substance without negativeimpacts on the environment. A landmarkagreement has provided a solution.

Safely disposing of spent pot lining is achallenge faced by all aluminium smelters.Over the past four years, our Hillside andBayside aluminium smelters in South Africahave been working with Pretoria PortlandCement to develop a ‘one-stop’ solution.

In August 2000, the three organisationsentered into an agreement that allows asafe, cost-effective and environmentallyresponsible means of managing the spent

pot lining. This is a win-win situation,whereby a hazardous waste material fromthe smelters represents for the cementcompany a useable raw material thatprovides energy savings.

When the spent pot lining is introducedinto the cement kiln operations at hightemperatures, contaminants aredissociated and the fluorides are bound with calcium that is present in the cement or lime, rendering thesubstance non-hazardous.

To process the spent pot lining in theirplant, Pretoria Portland Cement had toseek permits from the Department ofEnvironment and Tourism and theDepartment of Water Affairs and Forestry.This involved a rigorous process of provingthat the processing had no negativeimpact on ground water, emissions to air,employee health and safety, or the qualityof the final product. For Pretoria Portland

Cement, it meant changes to plantoperations and processes to ensure safeintroduction and processing of thematerial. Pretoria Portland Cement isISO 14001 compliant, as is Hillside.

Sound environmental management wasalso a central requirement in theagreement between Pretoria PortlandCement and Hillside and BaysideAluminium. Their innovative arrangementhas provided a successful solution formanaging a critical waste stream in thealuminium industry.

CASE STUDY

Spent pot lining from aluminium smelters in South Africa is removed and sent for recycling into useable raw material for cement manufacturing.


Fluoride

Fluoride is emitted during the productionof aluminium at smelters. The health ofhumans and ecosystems can be affectedthrough exposure to high concentrations offluoride. Last year, BHP Billiton Plcoperations emitted 1 713 tonnes offluoride, equal to 2.52 kilograms offluoride per tonne of final product. Thisyear, the Mozal smelter in Mozambique,using similar technology to Hillside inSouth Africa, came on line and BHP BillitonPlc operations emitted a total of 1 795tonnes of fluoride, equal to 2.2 kilogramsof fluoride per tonne of final product, asshown in Figure 41. This result was betterthan the target of 2.42 kilograms per tonneof final product.

In terms of attributable share, emissionsequalled 1 745 tonnes of fluoride. Asummary of fluoride emissions data ispresented in Appendix C.

Waste

BHP Billiton Plc recognises the importanceof efficiently managing waste, both on siteand off site. (See case study: ‘Recycling ofaluminium spent pot lining in SouthAfrica’.) In 2000/01, 91 per cent of theCompany’s operations had wastemanagement plans in place and 74 percent had waste minimisation strategieswith reduction targets in place.

The Company continued to monitor theamount of hazardous waste (as classed bythe Basel Convention) produced byoperations. As shown in Figure 42, 507 093 tonnes of hazardous waste wasproduced in 2000/01 (by largest volumeper operation aggregated across the BHPBilliton Plc Group), compared with 595 760tonnes last year. A summary of hazardouswaste data is presented in Appendix C.

Waste rock (overburden) and tailings frommining and ore-processing operations arenormally stored on site in secure locationsthat minimise the risk of release ofcontaminants. These areas arerehabilitated as part of normal operationsand mine closure. Materials discharged towaste rock and tailings storage facilitiesare therefore excluded from the calculationof total waste.


Land

Water

Liquid Discharges

Energy

APPENDIX C – BHP BILLITON PLC ENVIRONMENTAL DATA TABLES

Data in these tables are aggregate figures based on site data reported by BHP Billiton Plc’s managed sites for the BHP Billiton Plcfinancial year 2000/01. Totals may differ due to the rounding off of data. Production data can be found in the BHP Billiton Plc Reportto Shareholders 2001. Guidance notes are included to provide further clarification of the data where appropriate.

Gaseous Emissions

Fluoride emissions relate to aluminium smelters only.

Figures from the Mozal smelter for the first six months of 2001 forgreenhouse gases and fluoride are not included, as systems wereunder development.

Hazardous Waste

Hazardous waste refers to the waste generated by sites, by

largest volume, as defined by the Basel Convention.

Reported waste does not include recycled materials, waste rock(overburden) or tailings.

ENERGY (TERAJOULES) 99/00 00/01

Electricity Not Reported 73 800

Fossil Fuels Not Reported 65 210

Total Energy Not Reported 139 010

EMISSIONS 99/00 00/01

Total Greenhouse Gases (Million Tonnes CO2-e) 21.6 17

Total Sulphur Dioxide (Tonnes) 31 000 40 227

Total Fluoride (Tonnes) 1 713 1 795

HAZARDOUS WASTE (TONNES) 99/00 00/01

Hazardous Waste 595 760 507 093

WATER (MILLIONS OF CUBIC METRES) 99/00 00/01

Total Water Consumption 51.6 55.2

Total Recycled Water Consumption 64.1 99.7

LIQUID DISCHARGES (TONNES) 99/00 00/01

Total Suspended Solids Off Site 48 845 36 851

Total Dissolved Solids Off Site 104 515 47 336

LAND (HECTARES) 99/00 00/01

Land Disturbed 2 125 1 728

Land Rehabilitated 573 770

Total water consumption includes external sources of water, i.e. purchased water, ground water and water abstracted fromrivers. It does not include consumption of recycled water, which is shown separately.

BHP BILLITON PLCAPPENDIX


AUDITOR’S STATEMENT TO THE DIRECTORS OF BHP BILLITON PLC

BHP BILLITON PLC AUDITOR’S STATEMENT

We have read the performance summaryrelating to the BHP Billiton Plc Groupwithin the BHP Billiton Health, Safety,Environment and Community (‘HSEC’)Report 2001 as set out on pages 46 to 60 and Appendix C (‘the report’) andperformed certain work on its contents inrelation to BHP Billiton Plc Group sites.

The directors of BHP Billiton Plc haveprepared the report and they areresponsible for the information andassessments set out within it. In particular,the directors have selected the performancedata presented in the report and areresponsible for establishing appropriateperformance management and internalcontrol systems for measuring, collatingand reporting the performance data.

It is our responsibility to review the reportand other information as described in ourapproach below and to report our findingsto the directors of BHP Billiton Plc.

ApproachThere are no statutory requirements in theUK relating to the preparation, publicationand review of HSEC reports. To ensure therigour of the review, our approach drewupon both financial auditing andenvironmental audit principles, standardsand expertise. We have assembled a multi-disciplinary team of subject specialists andassurance experts to:

• review the BHP Billiton Plc Group HSE Reporting Standards (the ‘HSEStandards’)

• review the collation at the head office inJohannesburg of certain specifiedperformance data (the ‘selected data’ –listed below) from source data reportedby sites (without attempting to verify thesource data itself) to ensure that thecollation process does not give rise to amaterial error or mis-statement; and

• review the design of the InformationManagement procedures and controlssupporting implementation of the HSEStandards in respect of the selected dataat selected sites (listed below).

The selected sites and the selected datawere chosen for our review by BHP BillitonPlc management following discussion withKPMG. In performing our review of the

BHP Billiton Plc Group’s InformationManagement systems we applied KPMG’srisk based approach to assurance overthose systems.

Basis of conclusionsOur work consisted of the following:

• We reviewed and compared the HSEStandards to the standards that wereapplied to the year ending 30 June 2000.We also discussed the application of HSE Standards for the selected data with management at the selected sites.

• We reviewed the transfer of data fromsites’ reports to the BHP Billiton Plcdatabase, which included checking datasubmitted by sites to data within the BHPBilliton Plc database for the year ended30 June 2001.

• Visits to the five selected sites. Thesewere Hillside Smelter, Pering Mine,Middelburg Mine, Hotazel Mines andYabulu Refinery. They represented five of the eight commodities.

The selected data at the selected sites were: number of new cases ofoccupational disease or illness casesreferred (identified); number of new cases of occupational disease or illnesscases registered ‘compensatable’ (i.e.confirmed as requiring compensation); lost time injury frequency rate; fatalities;ISO 14001 certification; total waterconsumption; total energy consumption;environmental incidents of non-compliance; and number of communityhealth programs.

As agreed with the directors of BHP BillitonPlc, we did not consider the adequacy,appropriateness and completeness of thereporting requirements contained withinthe HSE Standards nor did we assess theimplementation of operational HSEprocedures and controls. Although we havenot reviewed all the data included in thereport, we have evaluated the consistencyof the report with the selected data.

ConclusionsIn our opinion, the selected data set outwithin the BHP Billiton Plc Group report inrespect of the year ended 30 June 2001have been accurately collated at

Johannesburg head office from the sourcedata. In our opinion, the information in thereport is, where relevant, consistent withthis collated data.

With the exception of those matters listedbelow, on the basis of our review nothingcame to our attention to suggest that forthe selected data at the selected sites, datareported for the year ending 30 June 2001of BHP Billiton Plc has been mis-stated.

Reporting standardsIn our opinion there are areas of confusionin the interpretation of the HSE standards,in particular for new cases of occupationaldiseases or health and environmentalincidents of non-compliance.

Limited review of procedures and controlsDuring our work, nothing came to ourattention to suggest that the selected siteshad not, in respect of the selected data,designed systems to meet the reportingrequirements contained within the HSEStandards with the exception of Peringwhere the systems in relation to new casesof occupational disease or illness andenvironmental incidents of non-compliancedo not contain adequate assurancemechanisms and we cannot thereforeconfirm completeness of this datareported.

November 2001


BHP BILLITON HSEC AWARDS

The BHP Billiton HSEC Awards recognise those employees who openly embody the values expressedin our Charter and go beyond what is required in their day-to-day job to care for their fellowemployees, the community and the environment.

Awards were presented in three categories: Health and Safety, Community, and Environment.Nominations were assessed by a separate judging panel for each category, comprisingrepresentatives from BHP Billiton and non-government, government and education sectors.

Having received more than 140 nominations from around the world, the judges selected a shortlist offinalists in each category. From these were chosen the winning and highly commended projects. Thenon-profit environment or community group nominated by each short-listed finalist received adonation of US$5 000 (winners), US$2 500 (highly commended) or US$500 (finalists). In recognition oftheir initiative, each winning and highly commended nominee received a specially designed trophy,and each finalist received a certificate.

We congratulate all the nominees for the high standard of their contributions.


HEALTH AND SAFETY

Winners

Mark McCamley and Keith McQualter— BMA Gregory Crinum Mine,Queensland, Australia

The winning project by Mark and Keith, onbehalf of the Crinum Mine ProductionDepartment, involves the installation ofremote control fire doors and a delugesystem in the conveyor roadway of anunderground coal mine. The innovationenables a fire to be contained andextinguished from remote locations, bothunderground and on the surface. The firedoors isolate the conveyor drive head andloop take-up area, which is the high-riskzone of the conveyor. When the fire doorsclose, another ventilation door opens,directing smoke into the return airway andprotecting miners who are working furtherinto the panel of the mine.

For those working underground, theremote control fire doors and delugesystem provide a hard barrier protectionagainst smoke and gas from a fire. Thismeans they do not have to rely solely onpersonal protective equipment such asoxygen self-rescuers.

Able to be designed, built and installed on site, the protection system is industrybest practice in underground coal mines.Previously no off-the-shelf systems existed for use in an undergroundhazardous environment.

This innovation could save lives. Thecontaminants and gases produced by a fire underground can be lethal. It is abetter solution than mine workers relyingon personal protective equipment after the event.

Highly commended

Gerry Gibb — BHP Billiton CorporateSafety, Victoria, Australia

Gerry worked with safety representativesfrom BHP Billiton Limited businesses andwith the assistance of the AustralianTransport Safety Bureau to develop the Incident Cause Analysis Method(ICAM), which is a tool used for incidentinvestigation.

By applying ICAM, the organisationalfactors that lead to incidents and near miss events can be identified. The lessonslearned can assist in developing preventionstrategies and improving safety systems.

Gerry played a key role in overseeingdevelopment of the ICAM process,formulating the training program andmanaging its introduction to BHP BillitonLimited businesses.

Steve Pratt — BHP Billiton IllawarraCoal, New South Wales, AustraliaDiesel-powered equipment has been usedextensively in Australian underground coalmines. Employees have expressed concernabout health effects, such as unpleasantodours and eye and respiratory tractirritation, arising from exposure to dieselexhaust emissions.

Steve chaired a major research projectaimed at reducing exposure to emissions.Key results have included the introductionof low emission fuel and development ofvehicle emission controls.

The project is a major step forward inimproving the working environment inunderground coal mines and has greatlyreduced the risk of adverse health effectsfrom the use of diesel equipment.

Barry Fraser and Graham Mayo —Port Kembla Steelworks, New SouthWales, Australia

The project by Barry and Graham hasresulted in two major developments in themanagement of stave leaks in blastfurnace cooling systems. The first is amethod for determining the location ofleaks by using an ultrasonic detector. Thesecond is a method of isolating leakswithout shutting down the blast furnace.The new methods allow leak detection tobe not only more effective but also safer,as shutting down the furnace can behazardous, particularly if water from a leakis entering the furnace.

Costas Politis — Marine LogisticServices, the ‘Iron Sturt’

When the Iron Sturt was converted to carrysulphuric acid, the vessel was fitted withoverflow tanks. These have been subject tobuild-up of heavy acid salts and slurry.Twice yearly, crew members would donacid suits and enter each tank to scrape,shovel and lift out buckets of the heavyresidue. Entering the tanks and carryingout the work were high-risk activities.

Costas and his team developed a solutionof replacing the mild steel overflow tankswith stainless steel tanks fitted with aninternal spray washing system. Thestainless steel is more durable andresistant to acid residue build-up and thetanks can now be washed at the beginningof an acid discharge. This flushes out anyacid residue remaining from the previoussea voyage. The crew is no longer involvedin heavy lifting activities, and exposure toacid residue has been eliminated.

HSEC AWARDS CONTINUED


Finalists

Alberto Pacheco on behalf of theplant team — Tintaya Copper Mine,Peru

An investigation of hand accidents at theplant revealed that some employees wereusing their hands as tools. Alberto and histeam developed ‘The Sixth Finger’, a multi-purpose tool based on a screwdriver thathas become a mandatory item of personalprotective equipment, significantlyreducing the risk of finger injuries.

Keith Brassell, Keith Derbyshire andAdriaan Viviers — ZululandAnthracite Colliery, South Africa

Keith and his colleagues developed aventilation model for training purposes atunderground mines. Their innovationconsists of a scale model of a typical boardand pillar layout, which can be re-arrangedto suit various training scenarios. Thesimulation provides a more realisticsituation in which training courseparticipants can see the consequences of their actions.

Mike Robertson — Transport andLogistics, New South Wales, Australia

Aiming to minimise mobile equipmentaccidents, Mike developed a new set ofSafety Guidelines for the loading andunloading of trucks, presented in a simple,practical format.

Wally Galus, Peter Susovich andShane Moloney — Transport andLogistics, Victoria, Australia

Wally, Peter and Shane developed the‘Galus Grip’, a simple restraining devicethat facilitates the safe transportation ofslit coil on vehicles.

Graeme Thomas — BHP Billiton HBI,Port Hedland, Western Australia

Graeme initiated trials of Voltage ReducingDevices (VRDs), in order to reduce the riskof electric shock and electrocution whileusing electric welding machines. Sincetrials began of a purpose-designedprototype VRD, there have been no electricshocks at HBI.


COMMUNITYThe Community Awards were judged intwo categories: Category A, which coveredprojects undertaken by employees thatwere unrelated to the Company’s businessprograms, and Category B, which coveredprojects that were Company – sponsoredbut where the practitioner had exceededexpectations by spending hours above andbeyond a normal work commitment toimplement the project.

Winner — Category A

Anthony Quin — BHP BillitonCorporate, Victoria, Australia

In a private initiative, Anthony co-foundedSt Joseph’s South Yarra Emergency HousingAssociation Inc, of which he is Treasurer.The Association’s mission is to provide low-cost accommodation for Melbourne’shomeless people and for people who areon the waiting list for public housing butfor whom no places are available.

After operating an emergency shelter forpeople on the streets in need of short-termaccommodation and finding that the shelterwas occupied all year round, the Associationdecided to take on a larger project.

Making clever use of resources, an emptyschool building in South Yarra wasconverted into four units that are now fullyoccupied. The Association plans to extendthe project to include a further two unitsand to look for other opportunities.

Anthony was a finalist in the 2000Environment and Community Awards, atwhich stage the Association had beenincorporated and was seeking funds for anew housing project. Since then, $150 000has been collected through fundraising tocomplete phase one of the project.

In addition to fundraising, Anthony’sinvolvement has included enlistingmembers for the management committee,incorporating the organisation, formulatingconstruction and funding plans, setting up proper referral systems, seekingvolunteer support and ensuring anappropriate management system is inplace so that the project becomessustainable and the Association continuesto achieve its objectives.

Winner — Category B

Helena Russell — Gag Island NickelProject, Irian Jaya, Indonesia

PT Gag Nikel (PTGN) is developing a nickelproject in remote Gag Island off the north-west coast of Irian Jaya. Around 700people live on the island. PTGN is pro-actively initiating and supporting a rangeof community development programs.These include education, health andincome-generating programs to improvethe welfare of people and provide both thecompany and community with cross-cultural and technical skills to facilitategood communications and foster abeneficial working relationship.

As PTGN Community Relations Manager,Helena has made a lasting contribution tothis work over the past two years. Herdedication to the project is demonstratedby the fact that she lives on site for theduration of each work period.

The impact of the programs that Helenahas managed have been primarily aimed atcapacity building. The Gag Island peopleare already demonstrating an ability toovercome the ‘tyranny of distance’ byhelping to create as well as participate inthe micro-development programs thatHelena has put forward.

Understanding the cultural setting andgradually introducing alternatives to lessappropriate traditions, such as theimbalance of opportunity for girls andwomen, has been a demanding task forHelena. She has been instrumental inestablishing formal lines of communicationwith the community through establishmentof the Gag Island Consultative Committee.

One of the most important outcomes ofHelena’s work is the sense of communityownership of the various improvementsthat have occurred on Gag Island.

Highly Commended

Jose Herrera — San Juan Coal, LaPlata Mine, New Mexico, United States

Jose has shown outstanding personalcommitment to disadvantaged youth in his community by establishing a publicgymnasium at the rear of his residence and devoting 16 years of his life tooperating it in his spare time. Jose trainsabandoned or unsupervised children in theart of boxing, building their confidence andself-esteem.

Boet du Plessis — Middelburg Mine,Ingwe Coal, South Africa

Boet has undertaken numerous projects tohelp the many needy and less fortunateindividuals who live in his community. Hehas been involved in a range of activitiesout of work hours, including setting up asafe house for victims of crime, a mobilehealth clinic and a home for disabled people.

Roberto Arriagada Godoy on behalfof the Shift A team — MineraEscondida Ltda, Chile

A group of parents became concernedabout the lack of recreational activities inthe community, believing it increased the



risk of their children resorting to drugs.They wished to create an activity thatwould allow young people to be occupied,entertained and educated about drugs.Roberto and his colleagues founded the‘Say No to Drugs’ sports and educationprogram. Around 500 young people haveparticipated in the sporting aspects of theprogram, while nearly 3000 students haveundertaken the drugs education program.

Finalists

Jan Craig, Alice McGlashan and BillChadburn — Port Kembla Steelworks,New South Wales, Australia

Jan, Alice and Bill organised an appeal thatraised $50 000 to create a garden terracearea at the Palliative Care Unit recentlyopened at Port Kembla Hospital.

Mary-Anne Druitt — BMA GregoryCrinum Mine, Queensland, Australia

BMA Gregory Crinum Mine has donated afour-bedroom brick home to the DomesticViolence Service of Emerald, Queeensland.Prior to this donation, there were no safehouses for domestic violence victims in thearea. Mary-Anne played a key role inidentifying an appropriate house andraising funds to cover ongoing maintenanceand running costs.

Colonel Zulfiqar Ali Khan — ZamzamaGas Plant, Pakistan

Colonel Zulfiqar helped develop acommunity health clinic that providesprofessional consultation and affordablemedicine for the treatment of commonillnesses and maternity-related problems,runs awareness programs on preventativehealth care and family planning, andoperates medical camps during calamitiessuch as drought and epidemics.

Richard Hinde on behalf of TheBoddington Mine EmergencyResponse Team — Worsley Alumina,Western Australia

Richard and his team are dedicated tocommunity service. In addition to being amember of the Emergency Response Team(ERT) at the mine, each belongs to at leastone local emergency service, including the State Emergency Service, St John’sAmbulance and the rural fire brigade.Emergency response groups are crucial to the wellbeing of small ruralcommunities. Much of the team’s ERTtraining is done in their own time.

Edward Modise on behalf of the plant team – Western Chrome Mines,Mooinooi, South Africa

Western Chrome Mines is located within a poor farming district. Edward andhis colleagues organise for three localschools to be provided with bread and fruittwice a week. Around 750 students benefitfrom the project, which has also helped toimprove the level of school attendance.


ENVIRONMENTWinner

Wendy Hird — Port KemblaSteelworks, New South Wales,Australia

Wendy initiated a landmark recycled wateragreement between BHP Steel and SydneyWater. In the biggest industrial re-usescheme in the country, BHP Steel is to take20 million litres of recycled water per day forindustrial use at the steelworks for the next15 years. The water is to be produced at astate-of-the-art sewage treatment plant.

BHP Steel Port Kembla is the single biggestconsumer of water in the Wollongong area.By taking the recycled water, the steelworksis reducing the amount of waste watergoing to ocean outfalls, while at the sametime saving a natural resource by reducingthe consumption of fresh water. Theoperations are to use the recycled waterfor cooling, dust suppression and a rangeof industrial and environmental applicationsfor which salt water cannot be used.

The scheme will allow BHP Steel to more than halve its usage of fresh water,and will also reduce Wollongong’s totalwater consumption by up to 24 per cent.The agreement is an excellent example of the Company’s efforts to manageresources wisely and to re-use and recyclewherever possible.

Highly Commended

Sebastiao Carlos Machado —Samarco, Anchieta, Brazil

Upset by fishing boats discharging oil intothe sea, Sebastiao launched the Salvamar(Save the Sea) project. Every month, localfishermen would each discharge abouteight litres of oil into the sea. The localcommunity was unaware of the harm to

the environment resulting from thisdisposal of oily waste. Sebastiao’s projectteam is organising the installation of conducting an environmental educationprogram and oil collection tanks at the pierswhere the fishermen berth their boats. The waste oil is sent to a recycling unit.

Domingos Campos Neto — Alumar,Maranhao, Brazil

Domingos represents a team thatdeveloped ash capping, an innovativemethod for rehabilitating residue disposalareas. The process is based on therecycling of waste materials such as boilerash and biological sludge, and theapplication of biotechnology using soilmicro-organisms to promote plant growth.Preliminary research at a test site hasidentified the growth of more than 100plant species following ash capping.

Tim Ramsey — San Juan Coal, La PlataMine, New Mexico, United States

As a reclamation specialist, Tim has beeninvolved in numerous environmentalresearch and reclamation projects. Herecently received the 2001 Reclamationistof the Year award at the 18th AnnualNational Conference of the AmericanSociety for Surface Mining and Reclamation.A few of his accomplishments include thedesign of a more efficient irrigation systemat San Juan and Navajo Mine, the designand incorporation of water harvestingfeatures into the reclamation program atNavajo Mine, and direct responsibility forthe reclamation and revegetation of over800 hectares at the New Mexicooperations and 350 hectares in Indonesia.

Tim has shared his knowledge by writingnumerous publications and conductingworkshops at environment conferencesaround the world.

Finalists

James Glasston, Jeff Parker and RonAllum — San Manuel Operations,Arizona, United States

James, Jeff and Ron initiated thedevelopment of a transfer station for localwaste such as cardboard, newspapers,liquids, tyres, tin and aluminium cans.

Lou Caruana, Bob McNeill and PeterHanbury — Port Kembla Stevedoring,New South Wales, Australia

Lou, Bob and Peter trialled and developedthe replacement of hardwood dunnagewith kiln-dried pine timber. The pine, fromre-growth plantations, replaces hardwoodthat was cut from natural forests.

Shudong Zhu and Jane Li — SteelBuilding Products, Shanghai, China

Shudong and Jane developed a schemewhere steel off-cuts, which were previouslydisposed of as low-value scrap, are nowsupplied as high-value raw material for usein the suitcase industry.

Mark Piggott — BHP Billiton Iron Ore,Nelson Point Operations, WesternAustralia

Mark managed the rehabilitation of amangrove habitat near the port facility,with the aim of re-establishing a stableecosystem and encouraging the return oflocal fauna.

Michiel Brand, Anton Fouche and RobHounsome — Hillside Aluminium,Richards Bay, South Africa

By developing a stakeholder-focusedproject charter as part of the EnvironmentalImpact Assessment process, Michiel, Antonand Rob ensured that social andenvironmental concerns raised by thecommunity in relation to proposedexpansion of the smelter could beaddressed in detail.


BHP BILLITON HEALTH, SAFETY, ENVIRONMENT AND COM-MUNITY REPORT 2001 FEEDBACK FORMComplete this form and receive a BHP Billiton pen. We value your feedback. Please let us know what you think so we can continue toimprove the way we inform you about our health, safety, environment and community performance.

Q1. I am interested in BHP Billiton’s health, safety, environmentaland community performance as an (please tick)

Employee

Shareholder

Customer

Member of the same industry

Regulatory body

Media representative

Community or environmental group

Financial analyst

SRI analyst

Resident near a BHP Billiton operation

Academic/student

Other, please specify________________________________

Q2. Please rank the three sections you found most useful (1=best, 2=second, 3=third).

Our Message

Executive Summary

HSEC Policy, Standards and Systems

HSEC Targets

Case Studies

Performance Summaries

Auditors’ Verification Statements

Appendices

Q3. Please indicate your view of the following features of theReport (please tick your choice).

(3a) Openness and honesty

very good good fair poor very poor

(3b) Layout and design


(3c) Writing style


(3d) Amount of information provided


(3e) Overall rating


Q4. If you could change something about this Report, whatwould you change (please tick)

More data

Less data

More case studies

More photos

More community emphasis

More environmental emphasis

More health and safety emphasis

Shorter report

Other, please specify________________________________

Q5. In your opinion, how could BHP Billiton improve itssafety/environmental and/or social performance?

Q6. Other comments?

If you would like to receive a BHP Billiton pen, please provide yourname and address:

Name:_________________________________________________

Address:____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Thank you for your feedback!Fax this form to: (613) 9609 3048, orPost it to: Reply Paid

BHP Billiton Health, Safety and EnvironmentGPO Box 86A Melbourne,Victoria 8060, Australia

2939

12

4

3738

16

4519

27

25

2152

28

46

40

1441

53

35

36

47

48

5

732

26

9

50

62

3 26

2626

26

49

26

26

2626

26

26

26

26

26 26

43

11

20823

1310, 56

122 15

34

1824

17

locations Customer Sector Group – Aluminium

Continent Site/Asset Description Map Ref No

Africa Hillside/Bayside, Two wholly owned aluminium 51South Africa production smelters.

Africa Mozal, 47% stake in the Mozal 9Mozambique aluminium smelter.

Australasia Worsley, 86% share in the integrated Worsley 17Australia alumina refinery/bauxite mine.

South America Alumar, Alumina refining plant and 35Brazil aluminium smelter.

South America BMS, Billiton Maatschappij Suriname 36Suriname (BMS) alumina refining plant.

South America Valesul Aluminio 46% interest in aluminium smelter. 41SA, Brazil

Customer Sector Group – Base Metals


Africa Pering, Copper mine. 59South Africa

Australasia Cannington, A silver, lead and zinc deposit 20Australia in north-west Queensland.

North America Highland Valley 33.6% stake in Highland Valley 29Copper, Canada Copper mine in British Columbia.

North America Selbaie, Wholly owned open pit operation 37Canada producing zinc concentrate and

by-products including gold and silver.

North America Smith’s Ranch, Uranium mine in Wyoming. 44USA

South America Escondida, 57.5% ownership in one of the largest 14Chile copper mines in the world.

South America Antamina, 33.75% stake in a copper-zinc 21Peru mine in Peru.

South America Cerro Colorado, Mine in north Chile produces 28Chile copper cathodes and concentrates.

South America Alumbrera, 25% interest in Alumbrera copper 42Argentina concentrate producer, with gold by-products.

South America Tintaya, 99.5% interest in Tintaya that produces 52Peru copper concentrate within the ‘Skarn

Belt’ of south-eastern Peru.

Customer Sector Group – Carbon Steel Materials


Africa Samancor, 60% share of Samancor Limited, 7South Africa integrated producer of chrome

and manganese ores and ferroalloys.(Also part of Stainless Steel Materials Customer Sector Group.)

Australasia Bowen Basin, Queensland coal mines producing 8Australia high quality metallurgical coal for

steel production.

Australasia Boodarie Iron, Hot briquetted iron asset. 58 Australia

Australasia GEMCO, 60% stake in Groote Eylandt Mining 11Australia Co Pty Limited producing manganese ore.

Australasia Illawarra Coal, Five underground coal mines. 10Australia

Australasia Iron Ore operations, The Pilbara iron ore mines rank amongstAustralia the world’s best long-life iron ore assets. 24

Australasia TEMCO, 60% held in Tasmanian Electro 15Australia Metallurgical Company Pty Limited

(TEMCO). Produces manganese alloys.

South Samarco, 50% interest in Samarco, an efficient 53America Brazil low-cost producer of iron ore products.

Customer Sector Group – Stainless Steel Materials


Africa Samancor, 60% share of Samancor Limited, 7South Africa integrated producer of chrome

and manganese ores and ferroalloys.(Also part of Carbon Steel Materials Customer Sector Group.)

Australasia Yabulu, The Yabulu refinery is one of the 23Australia major lateritic nickel-cobalt processing

plants in the world.

South Cerro Matosa, Integrated ferro-nickel mining and 27America Colombia smelting complex in north Colombia.

Customer Sector Group – Energy Coal


Africa Ingwe, Largest coal producer in South Africa. 5South Africa

Australasia COAL, Coal Operations Australia Ltd (COAL) 13Australia has two operations in Australia.

Australasia Indonesia Coal Open pit coal mine in the Kalimantan region of Borneo. 55

North New Mexico Coal, Three open pit thermal coal in the 12America USA Four Corners region of New Mexico.

South Carbones One-third interest in Carbones del America del Cerrejon, Cerrejon, steaming coal. 19

Colombia

South Cerrejon One-third of a 50% stake in the largest 25America Zona Norte Coal, open pit coal mine in Latin America.

Colombia

Customer Sector Group – Petroleum


Africa Gabon Petroleum asset. 47

Africa Angola Petroleum asset. 48

Asia Algeria Petroleum’s exploration portfolio includes test areas in Algeria. 50

Asia Pakistan Petroleum’s exploration portfolio 49includes test areas in Pakistan.

Australasia North West Shelf One of Australia’s largest resources projects, producing LNG and domestic gas. 18

Australasia Bass Strait 50% share with Esso (the operator). 22The Bass Strait operations produces oil,condensate, LPG, natural gas and ethane.

Europe Liverpool Bay Five gas fields in the Irish Sea. 6

North Gulf of Mexico Several producing assets in the 16America Gulf of Mexico.

South Bolivia Petroleum’s exploration portfolio includes America both production and test areas in Bolivia. 46

South Trinidad Petroleum’s exploration portfolio 45America includes test areas in Trinidad.

Customer Sector Group – Steel


Australasia Port Kembla, Flat steel products centred in Port Kembla. 56Australia

Australasia Taharoa Mine, The site of the Taharoa mine has been 31New Zealand leased from its Maori owners for 70 years.

Leased commenced in 1972.

Australasia Waikato North Iron sand mine operated by Head Mine, New Zealand Steel that has an 30New Zealand exclusive 100-year lease.

World Multiple 27 operations worldwide.locations The BHP Steel business will be

publicly listed in 2002. 26

Marketing Offices

Continent Location Map Ref No

Asia Singapore 43

Europe The Hague 3

Corporate Centres

Continent Location Map Ref No

Africa Johannesburg 32

Asia Beijing 57

Australasia Adelaide 34

Australasia Melbourne (Head Office) 1

Europe London 2

North America Houston 33

North America Toronto 38

North America Vancouver 39

South America Santiago 40

Other Assets


Africa Richards Bay 50% stake in world’s largest 54Minerals, producer of titanium slag.South Africa

North America Ekati, Diamond mine in the north-west 4Canada territories of Canada.

30

33

54, 51

31

42

55

26

5744

59

58


Australia

600 Bourke Street

Melbourne VIC 3000

Telephone +61 3 9609 3333

Facsimile +61 3 9609 3015

United Kingdom

1–3 Strand

London WC2N 5HA

Telephone +44 207 747 3800

Facsimile +44 207 747 3900

South Africa

6 Hollard Street

Johannesburg 2001

Telephone +27 11 376 9111

Facsimile +27 11 838 4716

USA

1360 Post Oak Boulevard, Suite 150

Houston, TX 77056

Telephone +1 713 961 8500

Facsimile +1 713 961 8400

BHP BILLITON CORPORATE CENTRES