www.engineersaustralia.org.au/ircnt

Northern Territory Infrastructure Report Card 2010 ISBN 978-0858259942 © Engineers Australia, November 2010. All rights reserved. Other than brief extracts, no part of this publication may be produced in any form without the written consent of the publisher. All Report Cards can be downloaded from www.engineersaustralia.org.au/irc Acknowledgements This publication was only possible with the support of members of Engineers Australia, other building and infrastructure professionals, and representatives from government departments, industry, and business and professional associations. NT Infrastructure Report Card Committee Len Chappell TFIEAust CEngT Dave McHugh FIEAust CPEng Prof David Lilley FICE FIStructE FIEAust CPEng Prof Eric Valentine FIEAust CPEng Kevan Blake MIEAust CPEng Peter Hagan FIEAust CPEng

Report Card contributors Owen Peake Hon FIEAust CPEng Jas Deo OMIEAust CEngO Eric Valentine FIEAust CPEng

Northern Division project staff Bronwyn Russell, Director

National Project Director Project Director: Leanne Hardwicke, Director, National and International Policy, Engineers Australia

Consultant Principal Author: Athol Yates MIEAust, Australian Security Research Centre Project Team: Professor Priyan Mendis FIEAust CPEng, Henry Pike, Barbara Coe, Trudy Southgate and Minh

Duc Nguyen

Northern Division 14 Shepherd Street Darwin NT 0800 Tel: 08 8981 4137 Fax: 08 8941 3449 www.engineersaustralia.org.au/northern

Australian Security Research Centre International Affairs House Level 1 32 Thesiger Court Deakin ACT 2605 Tel: 02 6161 5143 Fax: 02 6161 5144 www.securityresearch.org.au

Contents

Communiqué ............................................................................................................... i 

Ratings summary .................................................................................................... vii 

Overview ..................................................................................................................... 1 Rating process and description ................................................................................................. 1 Territory-wide issues ................................................................................................................. 2 Cross sector challenges ............................................................................................................ 6 

Transport .................................................................................................................... 9 1  Roads ...................................................................................................................... 11 

1.1  Summary ...................................................................................................................... 11 1.2  Infrastructure overview ................................................................................................. 11 1.3  Performance ................................................................................................................. 18 1.4  Future challenges ......................................................................................................... 23 1.5  Report Card rating ........................................................................................................ 24 

2  Rail ........................................................................................................................... 25 2.1  Summary ...................................................................................................................... 25 2.2  Infrastructure overview ................................................................................................. 25 2.3  Performance ................................................................................................................. 28 2.4  Future challenges ......................................................................................................... 29 2.5  Report Card rating ........................................................................................................ 29 

3  Ports ........................................................................................................................ 31 3.1  Summary ...................................................................................................................... 31 3.2  Infrastructure overview ................................................................................................. 31 3.3  Performance ................................................................................................................. 37 3.4  Future challenges ......................................................................................................... 38 3.5  Report Card rating ........................................................................................................ 39 

4  Airports ................................................................................................................... 41 4.1  Summary ...................................................................................................................... 41 4.2  Infrastructure overview ................................................................................................. 41 4.3  Performance ................................................................................................................. 49 4.4  Future challenges ......................................................................................................... 50 4.5  Report Card rating ........................................................................................................ 50 

Water ........................................................................................................................ 53 5  Potable water .......................................................................................................... 55 

5.1  Summary ...................................................................................................................... 55 5.2  Infrastructure overview ................................................................................................. 55 5.3  Performance ................................................................................................................. 63 5.4  Future challenges ......................................................................................................... 70 5.5  Report Card rating ........................................................................................................ 71 

Contents

6  Wastewater .............................................................................................................. 73 6.1  Summary...................................................................................................................... 73 6.2  Infrastructure overview ................................................................................................ 73 6.3  Performance ................................................................................................................ 81 6.4  Future challenges ........................................................................................................ 83 6.5  Report Card rating ....................................................................................................... 84 

7  Stormwater .............................................................................................................. 85 7.1  Summary...................................................................................................................... 85 7.2  Infrastructure overview ................................................................................................ 85 7.3  Performance ................................................................................................................ 91 7.4  Future challenges ........................................................................................................ 93 7.5  Report Card rating ....................................................................................................... 94 

8  Irrigation .................................................................................................................. 95 

Energy ...................................................................................................................... 97 9  Electricity ................................................................................................................. 99 

9.1  Summary...................................................................................................................... 99 9.2  Infrastructure overview ................................................................................................ 99 9.3  Performance .............................................................................................................. 110 9.4  Future challenges ...................................................................................................... 114 9.5  Report Card Rating .................................................................................................... 114 

10  Gas ......................................................................................................................... 117 10.1  Summary.................................................................................................................... 117 10.2  Infrastructure overview .............................................................................................. 117 10.3  Performance .............................................................................................................. 121 10.4  Future challenges ...................................................................................................... 122 10.5  Report Card Rating .................................................................................................... 122 

Telecommunications ............................................................................................ 123 11.1  Summary.................................................................................................................... 123 11.2  Infrastructure overview .............................................................................................. 124 11.3  Performance .............................................................................................................. 133 11.4  Future challenges ...................................................................................................... 137 11.5  Report Card Rating .................................................................................................... 138 

Appendices ............................................................................................................ 139 Appendix A: Rating methodology ................................................................................. 140 Appendix B: Units and acronyms ................................................................................. 142 Appendix C: Glossary .................................................................................................... 144 Appendix D: References ................................................................................................ 148 

i

COMMUNIQUÉ

Infrastructure in the Northern Territory underpins the community’s quality of life and economic prosperity. Territorians deserve high quality transportation and communications systems, water and energy supply. These services are essential to support the economic, environmental and social aspirations of its current and future population and to improve Indigenous communities. In 2005, Engineers Australia took the initiative to raise community awareness about the importance of infrastructure in the 2005 Northern Territory Infrastructure Report Card. The 2005 report gave a strategic overview of various infrastructure sectors and provided an independent assessment of the fitness for purpose of the Territory’s key assets. The Report Card found that much of the infrastructure at that time was adequate in terms of being fit for its current purpose. Five years on, we are again examining the state of the Territory’s infrastructure to see what progress has been made and what still needs to occur. The Territory is highly influenced by global economic conditions. Over the past five years, the Territory’s economy has been driven by substantial investment in the mining and energy and construction sectors and major resource projects have been completed or are underway. This economic growth has driven demand for infrastructure services. As well, the Territory has the highest Indigenous population in Australia. Indigenous communities experience considerable disadvantage. The 2008 National Indigenous Reform Agreement addressing the disparities between urban and rural/remote communities is welcomed, as is the Working Future Strategy and other strategies and programs such as the Strategic Indigenous Housing and Infrastructure Program to address disadvantage. These programs and agreements will result in infrastructure improvements, which will improve the economic, environmental and social amenity for these communities and the Territory overall. Overall, the Territory’s infrastructure requires major improvements, with a small number of infrastructure sectors being rated as good. While improvements are planned or underway in all infrastructure sectors, many of these initiatives are either not funded or not expected in the short-term. The adequacy of infrastructure in the future will depend significantly on three key factors: the speed and magnitude of the resource sector’s growth; the magnitude and location of population growth; and the ability of the Territory Government and infrastructure owners to access investment funds and invest in anticipation of demand growth. Ratings are given below for the current and past Northern Territory and National Report Cards.

Communiqué

ii

Infrastructure type NT 2010 NT 2005 National 2005 National 2001

Roads overall National roads Territory roads Local roads

C B C- D+

Not rated B- C (sealed) C- (unsealed) C (sealed) D (unsealed)

C C+ C C-

Not rated C C- D

Rail C+ A C- D-

Ports C+ B+ B- (barge landings)

C+ B

Airports B- A- (major airports) B+ (community airports) B- (outstation and pastoral airstrips)

B B

Potable water C- B- (metropolitan) B- C

Wastewater C- C (metropolitan) C (remote communities)

C+ C-

Stormwater B- C+ C- D

Irrigation Not rated B C- D-

Electricity C- B- C+ B-

Gas A- A C+ C

Telecommunications C- Not rated Not rated B

The Territory faces significant challenges in providing transport due to its low population density, diverse transport needs, vast area and Wet Season impact. As a consequence, most transport services and its supporting infrastructure would be considered inadequate when measured against standards in the rest of the nation. Given the gap between what is required and funding constraints, it is very important that a strategic approach to transport planning and provision occurs as seen in the Territory 2030 Strategic Plan. There has been increased investment in the National Highway Network and Territory-managed roads and the highways are of a high standard. Improved flood immunity of National highways and Territory-managed roads, and progress in asset management data collection for local roads is supported. Major changes are required for the Territory’s road network and there is considerable disparity between road types and between urban and non-urban areas. In particular, there has been a failure to achieve the road safety target established in the road safety strategy, continual Wet Season disruption to many roads and major deficiencies along a number of secondary and local roads. Rail infrastructure is adequate for the current level of rail traffic and there is an increase in confidence in the future viability of the Darwin to Adelaide railway following its purchase by GWA. Improvements are still required for the future, including the interface with the Port of Darwin and track condition south of Alice Springs. A significant increase in bulk minerals traffic will require additional passing loops and improvements to the track to cope with heavier trains. There have been a number of derailments and level crossing incidents, and rail infrastructure south of Alice Springs is of a lesser quality, which will need to be addressed. Port infrastructure has seen some improvements, particularly through the development of the East Arm Wharf Facilities Masterplan 2030, the upgrade of Port of Darwin’s City Wharf facilities including the Frances Bay Mooring Basin and the Fisherman’s and Stokes Hill Wharves, the construction of the new passenger ship terminal, and upgrade of several

Communiqué

iii

barge landings, support infrastructure and collection of asset information. However, there remains a backlog of maintenance and renewals for some Port of Darwin assets and there is a need for further supporting infrastructure at several barge landings. Major airports in the Territory have been upgraded since 2005, but many regional airports have limited infrastructure, which reflects their passenger numbers. Some improvements have been made to the airside infrastructure of some regional airports, but not for land-side infrastructure. Some remote aerodromes are in very poor condition and are unserviceable during the Wet Season. Potable water infrastructure has improved in a number of urban and remote communities, such as the underway expansion of Darwin’s water supply and improvements in disinfection technology. However, there are a few locations where water supplies still do not meet microbiological water quality guidelines and many locations where they do not meet physical and chemical water quality guidelines. Untreated sewage is still discharged into Darwin Harbour. Upgrading to improve the capacity and performance of the Ludmilla wastewater treatment plant and to extend the East Point outfall is well underway. The Larrakeyah outfall closure is timed for late 2011.The Alice Springs Water Re-use project to recycle wastewater for horticulture and irrigation has been commissioned and was the winner of the Engineers Australia Northern Division’s Engineering Excellence Award. Future challenges remain in the provision and asset management of sewerage infrastructure to growing Indigenous communities and maintaining water quality in Darwin Harbour. Generally, there is an adequate level of service from stormwater systems and appropriate levels of stormwater system operational maintenance, but there is a growing gap between renewals and needs. There has been an increase in gross pollutant traps and other water quality improvement devices and Water Sensitive Urban Design principles have been introduced into land-use and water management policy and practice in the Darwin Region. However, there is still a lack of asset and performance information on stormwater assets, and insufficient collection of stormwater quality and quantity data. The Territory has seen a significant expansion in electricity generation capacity to address the continual growth in electricity demand, but peak demand has risen faster than energy growth. There have been major power outages in the Darwin-Katherine system due to the lack of maintenance on the aging infrastructure. Challenges facing the electricity sector include raising electricity prices to cost-reflective levels, implementing and maintaining a quality asset maintenance scheme, renewing aging infrastructure, implementing significant demand management measures to constrain peak growth in demand, delivering the asset investment and maintenance projects on time and budget, and consideration of alternative electricity generation sources. Since 2005, the source of domestic gas from the Amadeus fields has been replaced with the Blacktip field and there have been improvements to domestic security of supply from the Blacktip field, Amadeus Basin fields, and the Darwin Liquefied Natural Gas plant. The existing transmission pipelines are of a high quality and there is a reliable supply of gas for the next 25 years. Challenges include the vulnerability of loss of supply and the very limited reticulated gas supply. While there have been some improvements in telecommunications infrastructure, these have been patchy. Construction of a fibre optic backhaul link to Darwin, Katherine, and

Communiqué

iv

Tennant Creek is providing competitive backhaul between Darwin and the rest of Australia and there has been incremental improvement in providing broadband to remote communities. Access to broadband is poor away from metropolitan areas, substantial gaps in telecommunication services exist across the Territory and there is limited mobile phone coverage along main highways and remote areas. Inadequate infrastructure has major economic and social consequences. Engineers Australia remains concerned that: Long-term integrated infrastructure planning is patchy, particularly coordination across

land use and infrastructure modes, such as between road and rail, and across stakeholders, such as the three levels of government, the private sector and the community.

Increasing infrastructure needs due to the growth in population and the economy will not be met due to lack of resources, which then inhibits economic expansion.

The gap between projected and planned renewals for local governments is growing. The significant challenges to improving infrastructure in Indigenous communities will be

constrained by lack of funding. The growing shortages of engineering skills will result in delayed and higher cost

projects.

Recommendations Engineers Australia recommends the following to improve the infrastructure of the Northern Territory so as to meet the needs of its community in the future: 1. A coordinated long-term transport infrastructure plan be developed that involves the

Australian, Northern Territory and local governments as well as the private sector. 2. The recent increase in road maintenance continue and provision be made for

replacing aged road assets. 3. Road, marine and air access to regional and remote communities be progressively

upgraded. 4. Local governments build asset management systems for all assets, and the

maintenance and renewal information from these systems become a key input into financial allocations to local governments.

5. The Northern Territory Government plays a greater role in facilitating infrastructure expansion by coordinating demand from multiple commercial activities and governments with infrastructure providers.

6. Ports focus on improving their environmental outcomes and the Port of Darwin implements its forward plans to meet and encourage demand.

7. Darwin Airport addresses capacity issues and facilitates airline hubbing and economic growth.

8. The Australian and Northern Territory Governments keep regional and remote airstrips viable.

9. The Power and Water Corporation and the Northern Territory Government implement demand management strategies to reduce potable water consumption, and develop water source expansion plans for areas where water consumption will exceed supply in the medium to long-term.

10. The water quality health issues for all water supplies be addressed. 11. The wastewater upgrade and expansion works be completed to allow the closure of

the Larrakeyah outfall that discharges raw sewage into the Darwin Harbour. 12. The Power and Water Corporation implement the remedial asset management

program and long-term action plans as recommended in the Independent Enquiry into

Communiqué

v

Casuarina Substation Events and Substation Maintenance across Darwin report to improve security of service.

13. Electricity and water/wastewater tariffs be set at a level that will ensure financial sustainability.

14. The Australian and Northern Territory Governments to continue to invest in the development of alternative energy sources such as solar technology and wind generation.

15. Telecommunication shortfalls be addressed by rolling out the National Broadband Network across the Territory and eliminating mobile phone blackspots in urban and fringe areas, and along heavily trafficked roads like highways.

Communiqué

vi

vii

RATINGS SUMMARY

The following summarises the 2010 NT Infrastructure Report Card ratings.

Infrastructure type Grade Comment

Roads overall National roads Territory roads Local roads

C B C- D+

These ratings recognise that there is considerable disparity between road types and between urban and non-urban areas and that major changes are required to some of the Territory’s road network. National roads have improved, and while localised failures are increasing due to pavement aging, they are being addressed through ongoing intervention programs. The quality of the major Territory roads has slowly improved, but other Territory roads have declined due to increased traffic loads and lack of maintenance. Local road quality has deteriorated in many places outside urban areas, as road maintenance and resealing work have been postponed. There is a significant backlog of sealing/resealing work, and projects to provide all weather access on both Territory and local roads. While urban areas are well served by roads, most remote and some regional communities have roads that are less than adequate.

Rail C+ This rating recognises that the existing rail infrastructure is adequate for the current level of rail traffic. However, areas for improvement include the interface with the Port of Darwin and the track condition south of Alice Springs. A significant increase in bulk minerals traffic will require additional passing loops and improvements to the track to cope with the heavier bulk minerals trains.

Ports C+ This rating recognises that while there have been improvements at the Port of Darwin’s facilities, its East Arm Wharf facilities face challenges with regard to maintenance, capacity, bulk materials handling and environmental issues. Barge landings and their supporting infrastructure are rudimentary and have not kept up with growing needs.

Airports B- This rating recognises that both Alice Springs and Darwin airport infrastructure is adequate for existing passenger and freight demand, and both have detailed expansion plans, although funding for developments is uncertain. The regional airports have limited infrastructure, which reflects their passenger numbers, and although airside infrastructure has generally improved, this has not been the case for land-side infrastructure. Some remote aerodromes are in very poor condition and some are unserviceable during the Wet Season. Given the scale of the problems and the limited resources of the NT Government and local governments, the prioritisation approach for upgrading remote aerodromes based on the community’s reliance on air travel is appropriate.

Potable water C- This rating recognises that there have been significant infrastructure improvements to water supplies at a number of urban and remote communities, as well as the identification of water supply system deficiencies across the Territory. However, there are a few locations where water supplies do not meet microbiological water quality guidelines and many locations where they do not meet physical and chemical water quality guidelines.

Wastewater C- This rating recognises that raw sewage is still entering Darwin Harbour and localised problems arise from treated wastewater disposal in Darwin. However the quality of underground wastewater infrastructure in urban areas across the Territory is generally good, as are most urban wastewater treatment facilities. Wastewater infrastructure in remote communities remains a challenge and is becoming more of a problem as the remote population grows.

Ratings Summary

viii

Infrastructure type Grade Comment

Stormwater B- This rating recognises that in new urban areas, stormwater systems are of a much higher quality, reflecting new design standards. There is a lack of condition information on stormwater assets in all urban areas, and in many areas, a gap is appearing between replacement funding and need. While the benefits of Water Sensitive Urban Design are recognised, there has been very limited application of this to date.

Irrigation Not rated Not rated

Electricity C- This rating recognises that while there has been an improvement in generation capacity for the Darwin-Katherine region, concerns exist about the quality of distribution infrastructure and its asset management. Advances have been made in increasing the capacity and security of electricity supply to Indigenous communities.

Gas A- This rating recognises that the gas transmission network remains in good condition and supply security has improved, with gas now being available from three sources.

Telecommunications C- This rating recognises that telecommunication services in urban areas are generally adequate. However, broadband blackspots still exist. While several backhaul projects have significantly improved telecommunication services for some remote and regional communities, many non-urban communities do not have adequate telecommunication services. The lack of universal mobile phone services along highways remains a challenge.

1

OVERVIEW

Rating process and description The objective of the Report Card is to rate the quality of economic infrastructure. Engineers Australia has been rating infrastructure since 1999. In 1999, 2001 and 2005, national report cards were published. Report Cards on Australian States and Territories have also been published. This Report Card revises and expands on the 2005 edition of the Northern Territory Infrastructure Report Card. The purposes of the Report Cards are to: Raise awareness of politicians, media, business and the public that infrastructure underpins the

community’s quality of life and that inadequate infrastructure impedes economic and social growth, and reduces environmental and societal sustainability

Generate debate on the adequacy of the infrastructure (including condition, distribution, funding and timing) required to meet society’s needs

Increase appreciation of the value of developing an integrated and strategic approach to the provision of infrastructure

Raise awareness of the new challenges facing Australia’s infrastructure due to climate change, change in demographics, demand increases, resilience and sustainability

Improve the policy, regulation, planning, provision, operation and maintenance of infrastructure. This Report Card provides a strategic overview of the Territory’s infrastructure that other organisations can use when they undertake detailed analysis of particular infrastructures. It also provides a benchmark that the community can use to identify need and evaluate alternative infrastructure priorities over time. Ratings have been based on an assessment of asset condition, asset availability and reliability, asset management, sustainability (including economic, environmental and social issues) and resilience. The assessment includes evaluating infrastructure policy, regulation, planning, provision, operation and maintenance. (See Appendix A: Rating methodology for details.) The assessment was carried out through research and consultation. Interviews were held with relevant stakeholders and documents were analysed. The assessment has relied on publicly available information and has, in line with its aims, focused on strategic issues, supplemented by quantitative performance measures where these were readily available. A number of industry associations were consulted and Engineers Australia provided input through its experts. Ratings used are comparable with those of past Report Cards. The rating scale is detailed below.

Overview

2

Rating scale

Letter grade

Designation Definition*

A Very good Infrastructure is fit for its current and anticipated future purposes

B Good Minor changes required to enable infrastructure to be fit for its current and anticipated future purposes

C Adequate Major changes required to enable infrastructure to be fit for its current and anticipated future purposes

D Poor Critical changes required to enable infrastructure to be fit for its current and anticipated future purposes

F Inadequate Inadequate for current and anticipated future purposes *Fitness for purpose is evaluated in terms of the needs of the community, economy and environment using criteria of sustainability, effectiveness, efficiency and equity.

Territory-wide issues Past investment in the Territory’s infrastructure

The figure below illustrates the investment in economic infrastructure over a 25-year period. Economic infrastructure covers roads, bridges, railways, ports, electricity generation and transmission facilities, water and sewerage facilities and telecommunications facilities. The Territory’s investment levels have tracked parallel to the national levels except during the 2001/2005 period when a number of projects such as the Alice Springs–Darwin railway were undertaken. Index of economic infrastructure expenditure in the Territory and nationally (real prices, base year index is 1988/89, base is 100 for national expenditure)1

Major factors influencing the Territory’s infrastructure demand Population growth, economic growth and improvements in Indigenous communities are the key drivers of infrastructure demand in the Territory. Climate change also has the potential to have an impact on infrastructure. Population The figure below shows the Territory’s population projections along a high and low future growth path. It shows that the Territory’s population will expand from around 217,000 in 2007 to 261,500 (20% increase) in 2051 under low growth assumptions, or 525,400 (140% increase) under high

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

1988

-89

1989

-90

1990

-91

1991

-92

1992

-93

1993

-94

1994

-95

1995

-96

1996

-97

1997

-98

1998

-99

1999

-00

2000

-01

2001

-02

2002

-03

2003

-04

2004

-05

2005

-06

2006

-07

2007

-08

2008

-09

Pop

ulat

ion

Nor

mal

ised

Inde

x (A

ust 1

988-

89 B

ase) NT

AUSTRALIA

Overview

3

growth assumptions. A growing population will accelerate the demand for all water, electricity, transport and telecommunication services. Defining characteristics about the Territory’s population are: It has the smallest population of all jurisdiction and accounts for about 1% of Australia’s

population It has the lowest population density of any jurisdiction Its population growth is about double that of other jurisdictions About 30% of its population is Indigenous More than 50% of the Territory’s population lives in the Darwin Region and a further quarter

lives in the five main regional centres of Alice Springs, Katherine, Tennant Creek, Jabiru and Nhulunbuy.2

NT recent and projected population using high and low growth assumptions3

Economic growth The table below shows the Territory’s Gross State Product. Economic growth increases demand directly by businesses for infrastructure services, and indirectly by consumers due to their raised standard of living. There is considerable variation in economic activity year to year, a function of the fact that the Territory is highly affected by global economic conditions, due to its relatively small size and commodity-focused base.4 The Territory’s Gross State Product5

2006/07 2007/08 2008/09 2009/10 Estimate

2010/11 Forecast

Gross State Product 6.7% 3.9% 2.6% 0.4% 3.6%

Over the past five years, the Territory’s economy has been driven by substantial investment in the mining, energy and construction sectors, fuelled by rising commodity prices. Major resource projects completed or underway include the Rio Tinto Alcan G3 refinery expansion on the Gove Peninsula, construction of the Darwin LNG Pty Ltd liquefied natural gas (LNG) plant at Wickham Point and the development of the East Arm Wharf precinct.6 Mining has become the largest industry in the Territory. Over the past five years, the real value of Territory mining production is estimated to have grown by 40.3%. Mining accounted for 26.5% of Gross State Product in 2008/09.7 While the continual growth in resources looks likely due to strong international demand for Territory commodities (particularly from China and Japan), production levels will vary with global supply and demand and exchange rate movements. In addition, production is dominated by a small number of large operations meaning that an impact at one operation can have significant employment and

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

2003

2005

2007

2009

2011

2013

2015

2017

2019

2021

2023

2025

2027

2029

2031

2033

2035

2037

2039

2041

2043

2045

2047

2049

2051

Thou

sand

s

Overview

4

economic consequences on the others. There are a large number of potential new resource developments, and potential and existing projects are identified in the figure below. Onshore mineral and energy resources8

Indigenous developments More than 40,000 Indigenous people live in the Territory’s regional and remote areas. Indigenous Australians experience considerable disadvantage with limited opportunities for employment, and access to education and health services. Consequently, their literacy and numeracy rates are low and overall health is poor.9 To address this, in June 2007 the Australian Government introduced the Northern Territory Emergency Response (NTER). This was a set of measures designed to protect children, make communities safe, and build a better future for people living in Indigenous

Overview

5

communities and town camps in the Territory. A series of Indigenous-specific National Partnership Agreements have since been agreed to by Australian governments through COAG. These commit governments to a common framework of outcomes, and progress measures and policy directions. The agreements are: National Partnership on Closing the Gap in Indigenous Health Outcomes National Partnership on Remote Indigenous Housing Closing the Gap: National Partnership Agreement on Indigenous Early Childhood Development National Partnership on Indigenous Economic Participation National Partnership Agreement on Remote Service Delivery Closing the Gap: National Partnership Agreement on Remote Indigenous Public Internet Access Closing the Gap Northern Territory National Partnership Agreement.

In November 2008, all Australian governments agreed to the National Indigenous Reform Agreement (NIRA), which commits all jurisdictions to achieving the Closing the Gap targets and defines an integrated strategy for achieving the targets in urban and regional areas, as well as in remote Australia. It establishes principles for investment in remote locations which include: Remote Indigenous communities and communities in remote areas with significant populations

are entitled to standards of services and infrastructure broadly comparable with that in non-Indigenous communities of similar size, location and need elsewhere in Australia

Priority for enhanced infrastructure support and service provision should be to larger and more economically-sustainable communities where secure land tenure exists, allowing for services outreach to and access by smaller surrounding communities.10

Significant infrastructure investment is being driven by the above programs and agreements. The NT Government has also developed a strategy that links with the above to improve the lives of Territorians living in remote areas. Called the Working Future strategy, its key focus is to develop 20 key communities as regional hubs and then transition them into functioning towns. This involves providing them with new and refurbished housing and key infrastructure, including roads, transport systems and broadband access. The 20 Territory Growth Towns are Maningrida, Gunbalanya, Gapuwiyak, Ramingining, Wadeye, Milingimbi, Yuendumu, Hermannsburg, Borroloola, Ngukurr, Yirrkala, Papunya, Galiwin’ku, Numbulwar, Lajamanu, Elliott, Nguiu, Angurugu/Umbakumba, Daguragu/Kalkarindji, and Ali Curung. Each of the Growth Towns has or is developing a Local Implementation Plan (LIP), an agreement between all three levels of government and the local people about what will be done to improve services, infrastructure, local economy and social well-being over the next five years.11 Another important part of Working Future is the development and implementation of new policy supporting outstations/homelands. A key program to implement improvements is the Strategic Indigenous Housing and Infrastructure Program (SIHIP). Announced in April 2008 by the Australian and NT Governments, it provides $647 million and is designed to deliver 750 new houses and more than 2,500 housing upgrades. An additional 230 new houses will be built to replace homes due to be demolished. An initial $5 million from this program was made available in 2007/08 for essential services infrastructure, predominantly the acquisition of generation plant, sewerage upgrading and water metering.12 Figures are not available for more recent years.

Climate change Climate change impacts in the Territory forecast by CSIRO and the Bureau of Meteorology are listed in the table below.

Overview

6

Climate change impacts in the Territory forecast by CSIRO and the Bureau of Meteorology*13

Council Present average (1971/2000)

2030 average (mid emissions)

2070 average (low emissions)

2070 average (high emissions)

Darwin

Annual temperature (ºC) 27.8 28.8 (28.5-29.2) 29.5 (29.0-30.1) 31.0 (30.1-32.2)

No. days over 35ºC 11 44 (28-69) 89 (49-153) 227 (141-308)

Annual rainfall (mm) 1847 1,847 (1,718-1,960) 1,829 (1,644-2,032) 1,829 (1,459-2,217)

Alice Springs

Annual temperature (ºC) 21.0 22.2 (21.8-22.6) 22.9 (22.3-23.7) 24.7 (23.6-26.2)

No. days over 35ºC 90 109 (102-118) 122 (112-138) 155 (132-182)

Annual rainfall (mm) 326 306 (270-342) 297 (241-352) 270 (182-378) * Estimates for periods centred on 2030 and 2070 are shown as a best estimate, with a likely range (10th to 90th percentile) in brackets. Values for 2030 are shown for an IPCC mid-range emission scenario (A1B) since results are relatively insensitive to the choice of scenario over the next few decades. Values for 2070 are shown for two IPCC emission scenarios – low (B1) and high (A1FI) – since results are sensitive to the scenarios later in the 21st century.

The impacts of climate change on infrastructure will vary by location, and negative ones include: Reduction in the yearly amount of water entering dams, placing greater emphasis on water

demand reduction and manufactured water Higher temperatures causing degradation of road and building materials, damage to building

foundations and gas and water pipes, and increased flooding and bushfire risk An increase in storm intensity causing structural damage due to increased wind speed and rain

and hail intensity, and damage from flash-flooding Sea level rise exacerbating coastal erosion, coastal inundation, saline intrusion, and the

intensity and frequency of storm surges, all of which damage coastal infrastructure and affect coastal freshwater floodplains

Significant increases in peak Wet Season energy demand due to air-conditioning need, and this may increase the risk of blackouts.

Cross sector challenges While each chapter identifies sector-specific challenges to the provision of infrastructure, below are challenges that cross multiple infrastructure sectors. Need for strategic planning, coordination and integration. Efficient infrastructure provision

requires sound strategic planning, coordination and integration. This involves coordination across land-use and infrastructure modes, such as between road and rail, and across stakeholders, such as the three levels of government, the private sector and the community. Such an approach increases the likelihood of decisions being made that complement one another, rather than undermine all. However, implementing such an approach is both time consuming and costly. The challenge is ensuring that such an approach occurs in the shortest possible time and at the lowest cost.

Increasing infrastructure needs. The growth in population and the economy will see a significant increase in demand for expanded and new infrastructure. However, the NT Government has very limited resources due to its small revenue base. As a consequence, infrastructure provision often lags demand, and if this continues, the economy may be inhibited from expanding to its full potential. Innovative means of funding infrastructure, including greater contributions from the Australian Government and industry, may be required.

Increasing quality of asset management. Asset management relies on sound data on the quality, performance and quality of assets. Data on much of the Territory’s local government-owned infrastructure is inadequate. This is being addressed by a number of local governments and involves data collection as the first stage towards building asset management strategies. For example, Darwin City Council has established a single Corporate Asset Register and is populating it using tools such as mobile loggers.14

Overview

7

Growing gap between projected and planned renewals for local governments. There is a growing gap between projected and planned renewals in a number of local governments. For example, the Darwin City Council identified that it will have a possible renewal/rehabilitation works funding shortfall of around $3.7 million by 2019, and a possible $37 million deficit by 2027.15 As a result of the growing gap, Darwin City Council’s Corporate Asset Management Plan notes that ‘the current expenditure levels on new capital works may be unsustainable with the identified existing asset base needs for maintenance, refurbishment and/or renewal’.16 The City of Palmerston notes that failure to adequately and comprehensively assess the long-term life and replacement/renewal timing is one of the most confronting issues for the future of the council and its financial stability.17

Improving infrastructure in Indigenous communities. There are significant challenges in improving infrastructure in Indigenous communities and in the Growth Towns in particular. These include:

Rapidly growing population. In some remote areas Indigenous population growth has been substantial and up to 14% per annum.18 This means that supply has to expand substantially just to meet population growth.

Limited ability of users to pay for infrastructure. Due to economic disadvantage and limited opportunities for employment, it is not possible to instigate a user-pays policy to fund the infrastructure expansion.

Remoteness. The remoteness and small size of service locations means that the unit cost of provision is very high.

Variable quality of legacy infrastructure. Existing infrastructure is extremely varied with some of it inadequate, unreliable and not meeting modern standards. This variability means that tailored and expensive infrastructure solutions are required for each location.

Resolution of land title issues where public infrastructure is being constructed on Aboriginal Land Trusts.

Cross-cultural understanding. The actual infrastructure required in each community depends on their expectations and needs. Identifying these requires involving Indigenous people in decision-making.

Coordinating defence needs. The Australian Defence Force and the Department of Defence are users of infrastructure rather than developers. Due to the size of Defence, its needs need to be factored into planning for infrastructure and this relies on increased collaboration between the military and infrastructure providers.

Implementing demand management. Managing demand for infrastructure services has become critical as a way of reducing the need for new infrastructure and increasing the efficiency of existing infrastructure. Its benefit is demonstrated in the outcomes of the demand management practices implemented by the electricity and water sectors in other jurisdictions.

Addressing the growing skills shortages. In the Territory, an engineering skills shortage in some infrastructure areas already exists. Further shortages will arise not only due to the increased demand for staff to work on infrastructure projects across the nation, but also due to the large numbers of engineering practitioners retiring over the next decade, and an inadequate supply of graduates. The consequence of this shortage will be delayed and higher cost projects.

Addressing the consequences of ‘fly in–fly out’ workforces. ‘Fly in–fly out’ workforces result in highly transient populations in regional areas. While ‘fly in–fly out’ is important to the success of many current resource projects, these workers do not contribute to the community base in the same way that locally-resident workers do. Consequently, while an area may have a large number of workers, they do not have the community services that would be expected from such a population. They can distort the local economy and infrastructure needs compared to other regional towns, for example by requiring larger airports and community facilities, both provided by local governments. Effort needs to be made to increase the attraction of these towns for residential workers to create a more balanced economic base and community. The infrastructure demands caused by ‘fly–in fly out’ workers also need to be recognised by the Territory and Australian Governments when allocating grants to local governments.

Overview

8

Significant increases in the cost of infrastructure. The last five years have seen major increases in infrastructure construction costs due to increased compliance cost, competition from the resource sector, a small pool of construction contractors, and input price increases.

Conclusion The Territory’s infrastructure has mostly been rated as still requiring major improvements, with a smaller number of infrastructure sectors being assessed as good. The assessment notes that while improvements are planned or underway in all infrastructure sectors, many of these initiatives are either not funded or not expected in the short-term. The adequacy of infrastructure in the future will depend significantly on three key factors – the speed and magnitude of the resource sector’s growth, the magnitude and location of population growth, and the ability of the NT Government and infrastructure owners to access investment funds and invest in anticipation of demand growth.

9

TRANSPORT

The Territory faces significant challenges in providing transport due to its low population density, diverse transport needs, vast area and the impact of the Wet Season. As a consequence, most transport services and their supporting infrastructure would be considered inadequate when measured against standards in the rest of the nation. With the Territory’s limited funds, difficult choices have to be made to support and invest in certain transport links. Given the gap between what is required and funding constraints, it is very important that a strategic approach to transport planning and provision occurs to maximise the return on the transport investment. This strategic approach can be seen in the release last year of the Territory 2030 Strategic Plan. The table below identifies its transport-related targets and actions. Transport-related targets and actions from the Territory 2030 Strategic Plan19

Target Action

Territorians and suburbs, cities, towns and regions are connected by appropriate infrastructure

• Increase the number of all-weather roads to Territory towns and communities

• Increase the number of all-weather airstrips in the Territory • Improve community access to regional transport, both public and

private

Improve regional air and land transport services to support access to health and community services

• Improve access to regional air services • Improve the range of land transport services

Improve driver, passenger, rider and pedestrian safety on the Territory’s roads

• Reduce the Territory’s fatality rate to the national rate by 2030 • Reduce the Territory’s injury rate to the national rate by 2030

Identify new solutions to the key infrastructure challenges in the Territory by 2010 for rural roads and highways

• Release of a plan for rural roads and highways by 2010

Increase the number of aviation passengers and shipping movements in the Territory

• Increase the number of domestic and international aviation passengers by 50% by 2014 for Darwin Airport

• Increase the number of domestic and international aviation passengers by 20% by 2014 for Alice Springs Airport

• Deliver increased accessibility, with airlines offering services throughout the day; three services on most Australian capital city pairs throughout the day to Darwin by 2030

• Double the number of international shipping links by 2025

Improve regional air services to allow business development in regional centres

• Improve access to regional air services

Investigate the viability of a rail line from Tennant Creek to Mt Isa

• Program developed by 2010

Reduce the impact on the environment through reducing reliance on private motor vehicles

• Increase the number of Territorians cycling or walking to work • Increase the number of public servants cycling or walking to work • Increase the number of additional kilometres of bicycle paths built

in the Territory • Increase the number of Territorians sharing private transport to

work • Increase the number of Territorians using public transport • Improve the availability, cost and convenience of public transport

Transport

10

A range of supporting strategic plans that has been or is being developed include the: NT 10-year Infrastructure Strategy (expected in 2011) East Arm Wharf Facilities Masterplan 2030 (released in 2010) 15-year Strategic Land Use Plans for Darwin and Alice Springs 10-year strategic plan for the industrial estates at East and Middle Arm Integrated Regional Transport Strategy (IRTS) (expected in 2011) 10-year NT Government road strategy (expected in 2011).

Of the above, the IRTS is the most significant for remote and regional towns as it will drive the development of reliable transport services and road access to better link remote towns and urban centres. It will also influence the future development of remote and regional towns and communities, because those with better transport links are more likely to prosper. The IRTS will recommend initiatives and programs to be put in place to improve and expand marine, road and air transport services to remote communities, including the provision of regular passenger services where viable and appropriate. It will provide a 10-year service delivery model that will target the specific needs of each of the five defined regions in the Territory: Darwin Region (comprised of Darwin and the shires of Top End, Tiwi Islands, and West

Arnhem) East Arnhem Region (comprised of the East Arnhem Shire) Katherine Region (comprised of the shires of Victoria–Daly and Roper Gulf and the Katherine

Town Council) Barkly Region (comprised of the Barkly Shire) Alice Springs Region (comprised of Alice Springs Town Council, Central Desert Shire and

MacDonnell Shire).20 Key Territory and Australian Government agencies involved in transport planning and management are: Department of Lands and Planning (DLP) (NT Government). The DLP has the responsibility

for developing and providing the strategic planning and growth frameworks, strategies and infrastructure plans required to sustainably develop the Territory. Important areas of focus include comprehensive analysis of growth trends to inform government decision-making, a strategic land-use plan for the greater Darwin Region, Territory-wide residential and industrial land release programs, planning for the City of Weddell, and a new regional transport framework.21

Department of Construction and Infrastructure (DCI) (NT Government). The DCI plays a lead role in constructing and maintaining government infrastructure across the Territory.

Department of Infrastructure and Transport (DIT) (Australian Government). The DIT is responsible for national infrastructure planning and co-ordination, land transport, transport safety and security, civil aviation and airports, and maritime transport.

Department of Regional Australia, Regional Development and Local Government (Australian Government). This department is responsible for regional development, regional Australia policy and co-ordination, and matters relating to local government.

The Local Government Association of the Northern Territory (LGANT). The LGANT is the single peak body representing local government in the Territory. Its Infrastructure Division is involved in all forms of transport, and assists members by providing services such as project and program management, administering contracts on councils’ behalf, and providing engineering advice where needed.22

11

1 Roads

1.1 Summary

Infrastructure type NT 2010 NT 2005 National 2005 National 2001

Roads overall C Not rated C Not rated

National roads B B- C+ C

Territory roads C- C (sealed) C- (unsealed)

C C-

Local roads D+ C (sealed) D (unsealed)

C- D

These ratings recognise that there is considerable disparity between road types and between urban and non-urban areas and that major changes are required to some of the Territory’s road network. National roads have improved, and while localised failures are increasing due to pavement aging, they are being addressed through ongoing intervention programs. The quality of the major Territory roads has slowly improved, but other Territory roads have declined due to increased traffic loads and lack of maintenance. Local road quality has deteriorated in many places outside urban areas, as road maintenance and resealing work have been postponed. There is a significant backlog of sealing/resealing work, and projects to provide all weather access on both Territory and local roads. While urban areas are well served by roads, most remote and some regional communities have roads that are less than adequate. Since the last Report Card, the major road sector developments have been: Road sealing, pavement widening and flood immunity works across the Territory A significant increase in maintenance funding on both national highways and Territory-managed

roads Improvement in road safety through rest areas, overtaking lanes, shoulder seal widening, and

railway crossing projects. Recently completed and in-progress major infrastructure projects include: National network projects, e.g. the Victoria Highway floodplain upgrade, the upgrading of the

last of the bridges on the Stuart Highway south of Alice Springs to meet national standards, and the Tiger Brennan Drive extension link from the Stuart Highway to the port

Territory road projects, e.g. Park Road, Tanami Highway and Cox Peninsula Road. Challenges to improving road infrastructure in NT include: Balancing competing interests for road funding given the Territory’s small funding capacity Increasing the quantum of road funding Improving roads in and around the Growth Towns to an appropriate standard Aging road pavements.

1.2 Infrastructure overview

1.2.1 System description There are about 36,000km of roads in the Territory, with the major categories being: National Land Transport Network roads (henceforth known as national highways) (2,700km)

Transport

12

NT Government-managed roads (henceforth known as Territory-managed roads), arterial roads and secondary/local roads (19,300km)a

Local roads managed by local governments and the LGANT (14,167km). The network also includes bridges, roadside infrastructure and paths shared with pedestrians, known as shared paths. The Territory road network is displayed in Figure 1.1. Figure 1.1: The Territory’s classified road network23

a Note that the figure excludes the National Highway Network which is managed by the NT Government.

Roads

13

National highways The national highways provide the only sealed road links between the Territory and the rest of Australia. The Territory is served by three national highways that link to Queensland (Barkly Highway), South Australia (Stuart Highway) and Western Australia (Victoria Highway). The Australian Government has primary financial responsibility for the national highway system through the National Land Transport Network (formerly AusLink) Program. The Australian Government does not have direct road management responsibility; instead, the DLP manages it with funding provided by the Federal Government. Despite being major highways constructed to high immunity standards, they can experience reliability problems in extreme flood events such as the extended closure of the Barkly Highway in early 2009 due to flood damage. Territory-managed roads There are about 22,000km of NT Government-managed roads. 12% of these roads are national highways, 19% are classified as arterial roads, and 69% are classified as secondary or local roads. About 70% of the Territory-managed roads are unsealed (15,500km) and about 6,900km (44%) of these unsealed roads may be subject to closures or weight restrictions during the Wet Season.24 These roads include highways, urban and rural main roads, and declared tourist and beef roads. These roads carry the bulk of private travel, freight and commercial travel, and on-road public transport. Local roads managed by local governments and the LGANT There are 14,167km of roads managed by local governments, which include 2,175km of roads managed by the LGANT. Local roads are primarily for distributing traffic within local areas and grow as population and developments increase. They are made up of: Kerbed 861km Sealed 1,168km Gravel 1,979km Formed 2,109km Unformed 7,944km.25

The roads managed by the LGANT will be progressively transferred to the shires. Table 1.1 identifies the characteristics of local government roads for local government areas as identified in Figure 1.2. Table 1.1: Local Government road characteristics26

Council Kerbed Sealed Gravel Formed Unformed Cycle Paths

Total Road Length (km)

Council Area (km²)

Municipality of Darwin

410.58 18.96 57.05 486.59 141.75

Tiwi Islands Shire 3.23 27.55 220.85 236.80 437.00 925.43 7,500.84

Municipality of Palmerston

143.67 12.33 0.33 43.76 200.09 56.40

Municipality of Litchfield

13.90 539.90 166.00 18.60 6.50 744.90 3,072.37

Belyuen Shire 2.35 14.00 67.70 84.05 41.60

Coomalie Shire 1.99 47.56 106.75 8.12 164.45 1,512.14

Wagait Shire 12.73 12.73 5,368

West Arnhem Shire

17.75 41.52 295.05 38.70 751.70 8.43 1,153.15 49,698.26

East Arnhem Shire 22.24 49.98 171.28 215.51 778.50 1,237.51 33,302.42

Victoria Daly Shire 10.55 87.50 362.31 246.60 412.14 3.05 1,122.15 167,575.00

Transport

14

Council Kerbed Sealed Gravel Formed Unformed Cycle Paths

Total Road Length (km)

Council Area (km²)

Municipality of Katherine

44.31 97.32 0.80 20.72 16.60 179.75 7,421.00

Roper Gulf Shire 9.08 47.27 224.48 154.70 538.55 1.00 975.08 185,175.81

Barkly Shire 34.22 21.35 19.58 53.42 485.76 6.95 621.25 322,693.27

Municipality of Alice Springs

146.33 65.08 15.83 2.37 23.69 253.30 327.43

Central Desert Shire

3.13 41.00 18.72 338.00 1,710.10 2,110.95 282,089.76

MacDonnell Shire 44.54 44.87 284.60 1,347.20 1,721.21 268,784.20

Trust Account (LGANT)

0.45 11.69 270.41 497.59 1,394.70 2,174.84 NA

Totals 861.43 1,168.63 1,979.29 2,109.01 7,944.04 168.03 14,167.43 1,329,397.93

Figure 1.2: Map of local government areas27

NT Government-managed roads and local government roads servicing remote communities within Aboriginal Land Trusts include many roads without formal road reserves. Where no road reserves exist, permits are required for access on aboriginal land. Data on the local government managed roads databases for these roads is limited and is the target of a data update commenced in 2009

Roads

15

by the NT Government. There are many other access tracks/roads within the Aboriginal Land Trusts servicing outstations that are private roads and not maintained by governments. There is no data available for these private roads. Bridges There are two major issues affecting bridges: their strength, and the likelihood of the bridges becoming impassable due to flood (flood immunity). A good national highway target for flood immunity is annual average closure times of less than 12 hours, subject to economic and social criteria. There has been an ongoing program to upgrade all bridges to meet higher mass limit standards and the Territory’s last at-risk bridge at Illawarra Creek will be upgraded in 2010/11. On the Territory’s local roads, there are no bridges. Causeways are the dominant form of river crossing road infrastructure.28 When local roads currently managed by the Territory are transferred to local governments, the local governments may inherit some bridges. Cycle paths In 2005, the (then) Department of Infrastructure, Planning and Environment undertook a review of the Darwin and Palmerston arterial cycle path network. The review found that approximately 70km of cycle paths provided a good standard of arterial cycle network and recommended upgrading crossing facilities, installing signs, and planning for the ongoing development of the cycle network for the Darwin and Palmerston region. Some recent developments in the arterial cycle path network include completion of the Frances Bay Drive cycle path, completion of the Berrimah Road cycle path, construction of the Vanderlin Drive cycle path (nearly complete) and the soon-to-commence Palmerston to Howard Springs cycle path. In 2009, the Department of Lands and Planning, in partnership with Darwin and Litchfield Shire Councils in Darwin, and with Alice Springs Town Council, undertook reviews of the cycle path networks. The purpose of the reviews was to audit the existing networks and prioritise future maintenance, minor and capital works. The reviews have found that the cycle path networks are generally of a good standard and the reviews will help in developing the priorities for the ongoing maintenance and development of the cycle path networks in the Territory.29 Cycle paths are included in the Territory Grants Commission road returns. Local governments with cycle paths are listed in Table 1.1. All cycle paths in the Territory are shared paths.

1.2.2 Policy and governance In regard to the policy, planning, construction and maintenance of the Territory’s road networks: National highways are planned and managed by the NT Government, primary funded by the

Australian Government Territory-managed roads are planned, managed and primarily funded by the NT Government Local government roads are planned, managed and primarily funded by local government.

Key roads Acts are: Control of Roads Act. This Act relates to the Territory-managed road network. Local Government Act. This Act relates to local government roads. Commercial Passenger (Road) Transport Act, the Traffic Act and the Motor Vehicles Act. These

Acts define the operational requirements and standards for transport services. The Australian Government has limited powers under the Constitution to regulate transport. However, it is involved in facilitating national regulatory consistency in roads, developing national transport networks, and providing specific road funding programs. Until 2009, Australian Government road funding was provided principally under the AusLink (National Land Transport)

Transport

16

Act 2005 and, to a much lesser extent, under the Local Government (Financial Assistance) Act 1995 and the Federation Fund. However, in 2009, the Australian Government replaced the term AusLink in its land transport infrastructure funding program with the term Nation Building Program.b Key Australian Government road funding components are: National Projects. These are targeted projects of the National Land Transport Network and the

Off-Network program designed to improve efficiency and safety. In the Territory over the 2008/09 to 2013/14 period, National Projects funding totalled $21.27 million for ongoing projects, $220.3 million for new projects, $52 million for off-network projects and $127.9 million for road maintenance programs.30

Roads to Recovery. This program addresses the problem of local roads reaching the end of their economic life, and their replacement being beyond the capacity of local government. Territory councils have a commitment of $28 million and the NT Government a commitment of $23 million for Territory unincorporated roads for the period 1 July 2009 to 30 June 2014.31

Black Spot Program. This program improves the physical condition or management of hazardous locations with a history of crashes involving death or serious injury. Territory black spot funding for the six-year period between 2008/09 to 2013/14 amounts to $8.3 million.32

Boom Gate Program. This was a stimulus package investment totalling $2.5 million. Heavy Vehicle Safety Productivity Program. This was an investment of $2.3 million over the

period 2009/10 to 2010/11. Financial Assistance Grants for roads. Annual Financial Assistance Grants for roads paid

directly to local government totalled $13.842 million in 2009/10. The future development of the national highways in the Territory are informed by three 2007 strategies of the National Land Transport Network. These are: Adelaide–Darwin Corridor Strategy Brisbane–Darwin Corridor Strategy Perth–Darwin Corridor Strategy.

These multi-government studies provide guidance to decision-makers and project proponents formulating network initiatives, and, most importantly, inform development of the next and subsequent National Land Transport Plans. The developments identified in the corridor strategies formed the basis for new projects arising from the signing of the National Partnership Agreement for the National Network Program in 2009/10. The NT Government’s priority for road investment is to: Provide better flood protection to allow roads to remain open longer during the Wet Season, as

well as reducing weight restrictions and improving safety on these roads Connect remote communities Improve traffic flow in urban hubs.

Road safety strategy in the Territory is managed by the Road Safety Coordination Group. Its responsibilities include the development of a road safety strategy and the implementation of road safety reform.33

1.2.3 Sector trends Increased investment in road maintenance Expenditure on maintaining Territory-managed roads has been increasing over the last few years as seen in Table 1.2. In the 2010/11 budget, an additional $3 million per year for the next four

b The name change was announced at the Special Council of Australian Governments meeting on 5 February 2009, Council of Australian Governments, Communiqué, 5 February 2009, webpage, http://www.coag.gov.au/coag_meeting_outcomes/2009-02-05/index.cfm, accessed 27 September 2010.

Roads

17

years has been allocated to funding for repairs and maintenance on Territory-managed roads, bringing it to a total of $60 million being spent on road maintenance in 2010/11.34 The investment is well above inflation and this expenditure is a recognition of past shortfalls in maintenance funding. Table 1.2: Repair and maintenance expenditure on Territory-managed roads ($’000)35

2005/06 2006/07 2007/08 2008/09 2009/10 2010/11

Infrastructure development

1,945 1,457 0 9172 9631 8 241

National highways

15,720 15,590 15,329 17,140 20,000 20,000

Territory roads 32,080 35,904 41,904 54,000 57,119 60,119

Total repairs and maintenance

57,700 58,837 64,737 80,312 86,750 88,360

Growing demand for improved roads Demand for improved roads is arising from three main sectors – resources, cattle and tourism – and from a desire for community access. There has been significant growth in road traffic due to mineral developments. These include not only bulk material haulage, but also vehicles carrying equipment and personal for resource developments. The export of cattle also generates significant road traffic. Cattle exports are severely limited in the Wet Season by the lack of good all-weather roads and bridges. The inadequate road infrastructure is recognised as the greatest obstacle to increasing the food output of the North.36 The NT Cattlemen’s Association has stated that ensuring that bush roads operate during the Wet Season will become particularly critical over the next seven years (2010/2017) as northern producers try to ship cattle to Indonesia to meet the expected demands brought by the shift in Ramadan closer to the Wet Season. (Ramadan is moving back by approximately two weeks per year and will coincide with the Territory’s Wet Season by about 2017.) Road is the principal means by which tourists travel around the Territory, and there is an increasing expectation that tourism sites, such as national parks, can be accessed by non-4-wheel drives all year round. Remote communities are expecting improved access to their communities all year round and on better quality roads. A recent large funding package to improve roads in the Territory is the $82 million Community, Beef and Mining Roads Improvement Program. The Australian Government is contributing $52 million to this package with $30 million being funded by the NT Government. The package funded under the Nation Building Program from mid-2009 to mid-2013. Seven road projects have Australian Government contributions as follows: Upgrade of the Tanami Road ($6 million) Sealing of the Buntine Highway ($7 million) Upgrade of the Plenty Highway ($8 million) Improving flood immunity on Port Keats Road ($11 million) Upgrade of the Central Arnhem Road ($15 million) Construction of a high level bridge over the McArthur River at Borroloola ($3 million) Upgrade of the Maryvale Road and Hugh River Stock Route ($2 million).

Transport

18

Work under the program includes building high level bridges, sealing of roads, pavement strengthening and widening, and improving approaches to crossings. The improvements will allow roads to remain open longer during the Wet Season, as well as reducing weight restrictions.37 Improvement in road asset information Commencing in 2009, the Department of Lands and Planning has been undertaking a detailed assessment of rural and remote local government roads including logging road lengths, types, state of repair, and some scoping of the likely investments needed to bring these assets up to an appropriate standard. The initial focus of the work has been on roads in and around each of the Territory Growth Towns, including roads that link with outstations, homelands and small communities.38 This information is needed to inform local governments of the existing quality and needs of these roads, and provides the basis for the amount of funding needed bring the roads up to an appropriate standard, and the long-term funding commitment required to ensure that the road quality is sustainable. This data will be central to obtaining additional funds from the Australian Government and prioritising road works, and is expected to become available later this year.

1.3 Performance Road safety Figure 1.3 shows the number of annual road deaths in the Territory over the last 15 years. The annual Territory road toll has ranged between 31 and 75. The 2009 year had a below-average number of deaths. The reason for this is unknown, but may be due to the decline in road travel following the economic downturn.39 Figure 1.3: Road deaths in the Territory (2010 data is from January to August)40

The quality of road infrastructure influences road safety. According to the Australian Transport Council, ‘improving the safety of roads is the single most significant achievable factor in reducing road trauma’. It notes that ‘road investment improves road safety through general road improvements – typically, ‘new’ roads are safer than ‘old’ roads – as well as through treatment of black spots’.41 However, the question in the Territory is the degree to which poor road infrastructure contributes to fatalities, and the role that behavioural factors have in contributing to fatal crashes. The following statistics on contributing factors in fatalities indicate that behaviour issues play a dominant role. 55% of all drivers, riders and pedestrians killed, and 15% of those seriously injured, had blood

alcohol concentration (BAC) equal to or greater than the legal limit of 0.05. 62% of vehicle occupants killed in crashes, and 16% of those seriously injured, were not

wearing seat belts. 73% of the people killed in crashes, and 64% of those seriously injured, were males.

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

Roa

d de

aths

per

ann

um

Roads

19

Excessive speed is a major factor in at least 21% of fatal crashes. 73% of all fatalities, and 52% of serious injuries, occur in rural localities.42

Examining normalised road deaths in the Territory indicates that its fatality profile is significantly different from other jurisdictions. Table 1.3 provides roads deaths per 100,000 population and shows that the Territory’s nine-year average is double that of the next highest jurisdiction. However, if a comparison is made with other rural/remote areas, it is believed that the Territory’s death rate is not significantly higher than other jurisdictions. Table 1.3: Road deaths per 100 000 population43

NSW VIC QLD SA WA TAS NT ACT Australia

2001 7.97 9.24 8.93 10.12 8.68 12.93 25.28 5.01 8.95

2002 8.46 8.16 8.67 10.12 9.29 7.83 27.58 3.10 8.73

2003 8.08 6.70 8.14 10.25 9.22 8.58 26.49 3.38 8.15

2004 7.60 6.89 7.97 9.02 8.98 12.01 17.32 2.75 7.86

2005 7.52 6.85 8.26 9.53 8.08 10.49 26.65 7.87 7.98

2006 7.28 6.57 8.19 7.46 9.86 11.23 19.94 3.89 7.72

2007 6.30 6.36 8.58 7.82 11.12 9.12 27.00 4.10 7.61

2008 5.35 5.70 7.64 6.17 9.63 7.84 34.12 4.05 6.72

2009 6.52 5.34 7.51 7.33 8.81 12.73 13.79 3.42 6.89

Nine-year average 7.23 6.86 8.21 8.64 9.29 10.30 24.24 4.17 7.84

Table 1.4 provides road deaths per 100 million vehicle kilometres travelled, and shows that the Territory’s nine-year average is nearly three times that of the next highest jurisdiction. Table 1.4: Road deaths per 100 million vehicle-kilometres travelled44

NSW VIC QLD SA WA TAS NT ACT Australia

2001 0.85 0.87 0.83 1.01 0.79 1.31 2.85 0.50 0.88

2002 0.89 0.75 0.79 0.99 0.83 0.77 3.08 0.31 0.84

2003 0.84 0.61 0.74 0.98 0.81 0.83 2.92 0.33 0.78

2004 0.76 0.61 0.70 0.85 0.77 1.12 1.87 0.26 0.73

2005 0.76 0.61 0.73 0.92 0.69 0.99 2.95 0.74 0.74

2006 0.74 0.59 0.73 0.73 0.86 1.06 2.44 0.37 0.73

2007 0.64 0.58 0.76 0.76 0.97 0.85 2.99 0.39 0.72

2008 0.55 0.53 0.68 0.61 0.85 0.74 3.79 0.39 0.64

2009 0.68 0.51 0.69 0.74 0.80 1.21 1.57 0.34 0.67

Nine-year average 0.74 0.62 0.73 0.84 0.81 0.98 2.71 0.40 0.74

In 2006 and 2007, the national highways (Stuart, Barkly and Victoria Highways) were assessed for safety by the ARRB Group for the Australian Automobile Association. They used a star rating and any road that scored three stars or below was considered to be in need of remedial action to lift its safety performance. The rating system was based on assessing the roads’ engineering features such as sealed shoulders, skid resistance of pavements and degree of roadside clearance of obstacles. While the information is now several years old, it is unlikely that there has been a significant change as the network has not deteriorated or improved markedly since then. The analysis shows that 0% of the network is rated one or two stars, 37% is three-star, 63% is four-star. No part of the Territory’s network was rated five stars.45 Figure 1.4 shows the results graphically.

Transport

20

Figure 1.4: Star ratings for the Territory components of national highways46

When the network is analysed by considering traffic volumes—which tend to be low, it shows that the risk of being involved in a crash in the Territory is relatively high. This analysis is shown in Figure 1.5, which is based on casualty crashes per 100 million vehicle-kilometres. The existing road safety strategy, Northern Territory Road Safety Strategy 2004–2010, had the target of reducing fatalities to no more than 15 per 100,000 population in 2010 (a 40% reduction based on 2004).47 It achieved this only once in the six years of the strategy. One of four key elements of the strategy relates to infrastructure. It is to develop a safer road network by ensuring that the planning, design, construction, development, maintenance and management of the road network enhance and support good road safety principles and practices. Specific infrastructure projects that have improved safety include a series of overtaking lanes installed on the Stuart Highway in 2006, rest areas and truck stops being added, and seal widening projects. A new 10-year road safety strategy (covering 2010 to 2020) is currently being developed.

Roads

21

Figure 1.5: Individual risk rating48

It should be noted that the above two assessments use different methodologies and the results are not necessarily comparable. Road quality, condition and availability of data Table 1.5 identifies the user satisfaction with the Territory’s roads. It is based on Territory road users’ perceptions of a number of attributes related to the road system, including road features, safety issues, environment, social issues and traffic management. It shows a static level of satisfaction. Table 1.5: User Satisfaction Index49

2006/07 2007/08 2008/09 2009/10 2010/11 (estimate)

User Satisfaction Index 70% 70% 70% 70% 70%

Ride comfort is measured by the International Roughness Index (IRI). When the IRI is less than 4.2, travellers consider it a smooth ride. Table 1.6 identifies the proportion of the Territory’s road network defined as smooth. There is no ride quality information on local government roads. Table 1.6: Ride quality on Territory roads50

Ride Quality: % <4.3 IRI 2006/07 2007/08 2008/09 2009/10 2010/11 (estimate)

National highways 99% 99% 99% 99% 99%

Territory-managed roads 93% 93% 93% 93% 93%

Transport

22

The number of roads with a seal age of less than 10 years old has remained static over the last five years for both the national highways and Territory-managed roads. For national highways, 50% of roads have a seal age of less than 10 years, and just 33% of Territory-managed roads have a seal age of less than 10 years.51 Table 1.7 shows the total length of road upgrades over the last five years. It should be noted that the lane kilometres will vary from year to year depending on the projects commenced in a given year. Table 1.7: Length of Territory roads upgraded52

Lane kms 2006/07 2007/08 2008/09 2009/10 2010/11

Sealed roads upgraded 226 75 127 77 83

Unsealed roads upgraded 68 99 303 100 27

Performance summary The ride quality of the Territory’s roads appears to be reasonable and remains consistent across the years as seen in Table 1.6. A Minerals Council of Australia’s report found that the ‘overall condition of the Territory road network has deteriorated during the past decade. While some roads have been upgraded to better serve mining and tourism industries, repairs and maintenance expenditure has fallen below the level required to maintain the network. As a result, the reliability of roads has declined and their damaging impact on vehicles has increased’.53 It needs to be noted that the resources sector imposes heavy traffic loads that can accelerate pavement damage, and that heavy mining vehicles often travel on roads not designed for those loads. The NT Cattlemen’s Association estimates that some $2 billion is required over the long-term to upgrade Territory-managed roads to cater for increased demand for stock to fill Wet Season markets and to support the live export trade. Priority cattle roads for upgrades include the Plenty, Sandover, Tanami, Tablelands and Buntine Highways.54 Upgrades to Stuart, Victoria and Barkly Highways are also required to make them more reliable for increased mineral freight and resource development. The NT Government has recognised the need for additional road maintenance and this is reflected in an increase budget allocation over the last five years (refer to Table 1.2). National highways within the Territory have been systematically undergoing improvements to bring them up to national standards. These roads are in quite good condition. Data provided in this report indicates that the pavements are generally in good condition and provide a smooth ride above national target standards. Reliability on these highways can sometimes be poor in periods of very high rainfall. The major works to overcome flooding problems on the Victoria, Stuart and Barkley highways will reduce the number of road closures caused by flooding. The sealed component of the Territory-managed roads is in reasonable condition. However, a significant proportion of the road pavement is nearing the end of its operational life and will require rehabilitation over the next 10 to 20 years. In addition, improving year-round access is required to major arterials such as Port Keats Road and Tanami Road. Maintenance and upgrading of the unsealed network remains a challenge, especially given the fact that the roads are generally located in the more remote areas and cater for low traffic volumes. Many of the roads have very poor gravel coverage and are susceptible to Wet Season influences.

Roads

23

The sealed component of the local government road system is generally located within urban or town areas, and is in reasonable condition. However, the pavements in many areas are now quite old and starting to show signs of deterioration. The majority of these roads are located in remote areas where funding for maintenance and upgrading is very limited. Because of the overall lower standard of these roads, Wet Season influences can interrupt access for considerable periods, especially on the unsealed road network. Access to many of the major tourist attractions in the northern part of the Territory, such as Kakadu and Litchfield, is sometimes closed to vehicles during the Wet Season, which limits the opportunity for tourist development. Asset management for roads and bridges on the national highways is quite good, with data being readily available. Asset management data for the remainder of the Territory-managed roads is not as detailed as that for the national highways, however, it is rapidly improving. Asset management is slowly being implemented by local governments, but the smaller remote councils do not have the resources or funding to implement such systems. Currently, the only source of asset information for roads within the remote council areas is unreliable. This information includes details regarding road location, road length and the type of construction. Very little information exists for local roads situated outside of the local government areas. Local governments are in the process of developing road hierarchy methodologies. The most advanced is Darwin City Council, which has a comparable system to that of major councils interstate.55 Compared with other States and Territories, traffic volumes on rural roads and national highways in the Territory are quite low and therefore do not affect travel times. In urban areas outside Darwin, volumes are also relatively low when compared to interstate figures, and generally only influence travel times over a very short instance during the peak periods. In Darwin, only minor delays are experienced during the peak periods on a few major arterial roads. By interstate standards, these delays would be considered as being acceptable. In the Darwin urban area, link improvements such as the Tiger Brennan Drive extension will improve traffic amenity to the East Arm Wharf precinct and surrounding region. Based on strength criteria, all bridges on national highways and all but one on Territory roads meet the higher mass limit standards. The road infrastructure servicing Indigenous communities is generally at a less than adequate standard to facilitate or encourage economic development on Indigenous land and enterprises within these communities. Many of these roads do not need to be sealed, but desperately need adequate maintenance funding to provide an appropriate level of service for the people utilising them. The focus on Territory Growth Towns’ road upgrades will improve some roads. However, it should be noted that while most of these roads are currently funded under the umbrella of the NT Government or local government road funding, many fall outside these road networks and are not funded at all.

1.4 Future challenges The future challenges to achieving improvements in road infrastructure are: Balancing competing interests for road funding given the Territory’s small funding

capacity. There are many competing interests for road funding, notably from the resource, agricultural and tourism sectors, as well as from remote and regional communities. The demands are well in excess of the NT Government’s financial capacity and, consequently, all road needs cannot be met. Therefore, trade-offs have to be made between economic efficiency and equity, and between urban and regional/remote needs.

Increasing the quantum of road funding. While funding for the maintenance of Territory-managed roads has increased in the last few years, due to the extensive size of the Territory’s road network significant funding additional funding is required to bring key arterial and

Transport

24

secondary roads up to all-weather standards. In addition, funding needs to increase to local governments so that they can reduce the gap between what funds are required to maintain and improve local roads, and what is available from their own resources.

Improving roads in and around the Growth Towns to an appropriate standard. The asset information collection work undertaken by the DLP has identified the investments needed to improve the standard of roads in and around the Growth Towns. This work is likely to be significant given the dire state of many local roads.

Aging road pavements. Much of the Territory’s roads were built in the 1960s and they are starting to reach their end of life. Consequently, they will need to be renewed or require increased maintenance treatment over the next two decades. Addressing this problem will require considerable funding.

1.5 Report Card rating

Infrastructure type NT 2010 NT 2005 National 2005 National 2001

Roads overall C Not rated C Not rated

National roads B B- C+ C

Territory roads C- C (sealed) C- (unsealed)

C C-

Local roads D+ C (sealed) D (unsealed)

C- D

These ratings recognise that there is considerable disparity between road types and between urban and non-urban areas and that major changes are required to some of the Territory’s road network. National roads have improved, and while localised failures are increasing due to pavement aging, they are being addressed through ongoing intervention programs. The quality of the major Territory roads has slowly improved, but other Territory roads have declined due to increased traffic loads and lack of maintenance. Local road quality has deteriorated in many places outside urban areas, as road maintenance and resealing work have been postponed. There is a significant backlog of sealing/resealing work, and projects to provide all weather access on both Territory and local roads. While urban areas are well served by roads, most remote and some regional communities have roads that are less than adequate. Positives that have contributed to the ratings are: Increased investment on national highways and Territory-managed roads Good quality national highways Improved flood immunity of national highways and Territory-managed roads Progress in asset management data collection for local roads.

Negatives that have contributed to the ratings are: Failure to achieve the road safety target established in the road safety strategy Continual Wet Season disruption to all roads Major deficiencies along many secondary and local roads.

25

2 Rail

2.1 Summary

Infrastructure Type NT 2010 NT 2005 National 2005 National 2001

Rail C+ A C- D-

This rating recognises that the existing rail infrastructure is adequate for the current level of rail traffic. However, areas for improvement include the interface with the Port of Darwin and the track condition south of Alice Springs. A significant increase in bulk minerals traffic will require additional passing loops and improvements to the track to cope with the heavier bulk minerals trains. Since the last Report Card, the major rail sector developments have been: Significantly increased volume of bulk freight carried along the Darwin to Adelaide railway The purchase of FreightLink by Genesee & Wyoming Australia The introduction of Rail Safety Act 2010 based on the National Model Bill.

Recently completed and in-progress major infrastructure projects include: Rail discharge facilities at the Port of Darwin Track infrastructure investment along the Darwin to Alice Springs railway.

Challenges to improving rail infrastructure in NT include: Upgrading the line for heavy bulk freight Expansion of rail infrastructure in line with resource growth Ongoing monitoring of level rail crossing safety.

2.2 Infrastructure overview 2.2.1 System description

The Territory’s rail infrastructure comprises the standard gauge NT component of the Darwin to Adelaide railway as illustrated in Figure 2.1. The railway is primarily a freight line. As of June 2010, the line carried six intermodal freight train services per week between Adelaide and Darwin, and 24 bulk train services per week between mine sites and the Port of Darwin. It carried one passenger service – the Ghan between Adelaide and Darwin, which runs a twice-weekly return trip during the peak season. This line was built in two stages. The first stage was completed in 1980 and consisted of the 824km Tarcoola (SA) to Alice Springs section. The second stage was the 1,420km Alice Springs–Darwin section, which was completed in October 2003 at a cost of $1.2 billion and began operating in January 2004.56 This segment was built with a significant contribution by the Australian Government. The track owner and the provider of rail haulage is FreightLink. FreightLink was purchased in 2010 by Genesee & Wyoming Inc. With the completion of the purchase expected to be in November 2010, the line will be operated as part of Genesee & Wyoming Australia (GWA), based in Adelaide. GWA has managed FreightLink’s above-rail operations since 2004.

Transport

26

Figure 2.1: The Darwin to Adelaide railway57

FreightLink’s above-rail business currently handles approximately 60,000 carloads per year using 23 locomotives and 430 railcars. It has two business components: General freight, composed primarily of long-haul, domestic intermodal traffic to the Territory Bulk minerals, composed primarily of customers in the mining industry who ship iron ore, copper

and manganese. In 2009, FreightLink’s revenues were composed of general freight (62%), bulk minerals (33%), and other revenues (5%).58 It carries about 90% of the general freight between Adelaide and Darwin.59 The railway has acted as a catalyst for the development of the Territory’s resources sector by offering a cost-effective method of transporting large quantities of ore. It has four minerals projects as bulk freight clients. These are: OM (Manganese) Ltd. Commencing in 2006, manganese ore is transported from the Bootu

Creek mine to the Port of Darwin. Territory Iron. Commencing in 2007, iron ore is transported from Frances Creek to the Port of

Darwin. BHP Billiton. Commencing in 2008, copper concentrate is transported from the Olympic Dam to

the Port of Darwin. Oz Minerals. Commencing in 2009, copper concentrate is transported from the Prominent Hill

mine to the Port of Darwin. The railway is important to Defence as it carries significant amounts of military equipment between Darwin and SA each year to allow military training to continue in the south, as training is not possible in the north during the Wet Season. In 2007 and 2008, FreightLink invested around $8 million to provide additional track infrastructure along the corridor and in Darwin, with additional

Rail

27

leased locomotives and wagons to support the expansion of the minerals business.60 Since the purchase of FreightLink, there has been no disruption of services. While the new owners have not detailed any infrastructure enhancement projects, GWA has stated that it will invest in new infrastructure and maintenance, which will reduce delays and interruptions to rail services.61

2.2.2 Policy and governance The NT Government sees its role as facilitating the rail network as part of developing the Territory into a major resources and logistic hub. To assist the development of rail, the NT Government stated in 2010 that it will investigate new rail projects including a Mount Isa to Tennant Creek rail link.62 There is no rapid transit system in Darwin, but it has been discussed for many years. In 2010, the NT Government stated that it will investigate a Darwin rapid transit system.63A rapid transit corridor is protected.

2.2.3 Sector trends Growth in bulk materials freight The Adelaide to Darwin railway has the potential to unlock major new mining projects that would otherwise not be economical. This is because it offers a cost-competitive, reliable form of transport from mines to the Port of Darwin. Potential mining developments that are close to the rail line are shown in Figure 2.2. Several of these projects may be best served by building spur lines such as the Olympic Dam project and the Wonarah phosphate deposits east of Tennant Creek. Other mines will be serviced by road transport from the mine to a bulk loading facility at a rail siding on the mainline. If a new line was built from Mount Isa to join the main line, it would provide rail from the Phosphate Hill mine near Mount Isa and for bulk zinc concentrate movements out of Mount Isa. Figure 2.2: Existing and potential mines near the Darwin to Alice Springs railway64

A major increase in freight volumes will require more passing loops on the single track railway and improvements in the bulk material handling at the Port of Darwin. If the current mining projects under consideration proceed, FreightLink estimates that about $100 million of mainline crossing loop investment will be required to allow substantially more train paths to operate on the corridor. At the Port of Darwin, rail-based bottom discharge facilities feeding stockpile and rail served bulk

Transport

28

storage sheds have been constructed to support existing business. However, with the expansion in mineral exports and the need to service Capesize ships, additional and more sophisticated rail infrastructure will be required. It is estimated that $300 million is required to be invested in port infrastructure to cater for predicted bulk minerals exports and to provide access to larger bulk vessels.65

2.3 Performance On the Darwin to Adelaide railway, there are sufficient train paths to meet existing freight demand, and the port-rail interface at the Port of Darwin is currently adequate. As demand increases with the emergence of new resource projects, such as the Olympic Dam mine expansion, additional passing loops will be required to accommodate additional train movements. Compared to the rest of the interstate standard gauge railway, the Darwin to Adelaide railway performs well in terms of average train speed and on-time reliability. This is a function of fewer trains operating along the corridor, the fact that it is a relatively new railway, and the upgrading of the rail and turnouts. Wet weather and extreme weather events in particular can affect the railway, as was seen in January 2010 when the track was temporarily closed north of Alice Springs by flood waters. However, the flood design standards of the railway between Tarcoola and Darwin are higher than many parts of the remaining interstate network, reflecting its more recent construction. Flood outages are therefore less frequent than some other more vulnerable parts of the interstate rail network. About 100km of track between Tarcoola and Alice Springs consists of light 40kg/m rail66 (the rest of the railway uses 50kg/m rail) and much of this will need to be replaced over the next 10 years. Similarly, this section of the railway will require the upgrade of turnouts to the standard installed on the new Alice Springs to Darwin section and the replacement of a small number of derailment-damaged concrete sleepers. The quality of the rail network is partially reflected in the number of derailments. The Territory’s rail network experienced 13 derailments between January 2001 and June 2009. Converting this figure to derailments per million km travelled, the Territory’s level of derailments per distance travelled is the second highest of all Australian States and Territories, as seen in Table 2.1. Table 2.1: Train derailments per million km travelled, 1 January 2001 to 30 June 200967

Period NSW Qld WA Tas Vic NT SA Total

January 2001–June 2009

0.90 0.96 0.82 10.20 0.53 1.61 1.27 0.91

Level crossings can be controlled through either passive or active control systems. Passive control systems alert road users of an approaching level crossing through signs and road markings. Active traffic control systems alert road users through flashing lights and sounds that are triggered by approaching trains. For high risk level crossings, Active Advanced Warning Systems can be installed that alert road users of approaching trains up to 200 metres before the crossing. There have been only seven road vehicle collisions at Territory level crossings between 1 January 2001 and 30 June 2009, which reflects the limited rail network compared to other Australian jurisdictions.68 As part of the Federal Economic Stimulus package, the Australian Government provided $2.5 million over 2008/09 and 2009/10 to fund the installation of boom gates and other safety measures at three high risk rail level crossing sites in the Territory, all in Alice Springs. Work on the upgrades started in mid-2009 and finished in 2010.69 In addition to Australian Government funds, $6.4 million of NT Government money has been spent on crossing upgrades ($4.26 million in 2008/09 and $2.2

Rail

29

million in 2009/10). The rail crossing at Berrimah Road will be grade-separated as part of the Tiger Brennan Drive project. All crossings meet National standards. While currently the freight movements through Alice Springs are not causing significant delays to road traffic at the level crossings, the Alice Springs Council suggests that by 2015 it may be necessary to re-route the railway line through the town due to increasing disruption arising from more trains.70 In 2010, the NT Government introduced the Rail Safety Act 2010 that establishes a safety regulatory regime for all rail owners and operators in the Territory that aligns with the rail safety legislation based on the National Model Bill.

2.4 Future challenges The future challenges to achieving improvements in rail infrastructure are: Upgrading the line for heavy bulk freight. When the railway was originally built it was

expected that there would be more intermodal freight trains than have materialised. Conversely, the number of bulk mineral trains has exceeded expectations. Heavy bulk trains are more likely to cause pavement compression and lead to track misalignment issues, particularly following heavy rain. Significant increases in heavy bulk transport will require the existing infrastructure to be upgraded or operational restrictions imposed.

Expansion of rail infrastructure in line with resource growth. The expansion of bulk minerals exports will be the key driver of future rail use. While the rail network and Port of Darwin can accommodate existing bulk mineral traffic, a significant increase in volume will require infrastructure augmentation.

Ongoing monitoring of level rail crossing safety. With the increase in rail traffic, an effort is needed to monitor the response of motor vehicle drivers to increased frequency of level crossing closures in case this increases accidents.

2.5 Report Card rating

Infrastructure Type NT 2010 NT 2005 National 2005 National 2001

Rail C+ A C- D-

This rating recognises that the existing rail infrastructure is adequate for the current level of rail traffic. However, areas for improvement include the interface with the Port of Darwin and the track condition south of Alice Springs. A significant increase in bulk minerals traffic will require additional passing loops and improvements to the track to cope with the heavier bulk minerals trains. Positives that have contributed to the rating are: Adequate rail infrastructure for existing train path demand Increase in confidence in the future viability of the Darwin to Adelaide railway following its

purchase by GWA. Negatives that have contributed to the rating are: The number of derailments and level crossing incidents Lesser quality of rail infrastructure south of Alice Springs.

Transport

30

31

3 Ports

3.1 Summary

Infrastructure Type NT 2010 NT 2005 National 2005 National 2001

Ports C+ B+ B- (Barge landings)

C+ B

This rating recognises that while there have been improvements at the Port of Darwin’s facilities, its East Arm Wharf facilities face challenges with regard to maintenance, capacity, bulk materials handling and environmental issues. Barge landings and their supporting infrastructure are rudimentary and have not kept up with growing needs. Since the last Report Card, the major port sector developments include: Significant growth in bulk mineral exports and LNG from Territory ports Improved land-use planning to accommodate the expansion of the East Arm Wharf Transfer of commercial port activities from central Darwin wharfs to the East Arm Wharf

precinct. Recently completed and in-progress major infrastructure projects include: Darwin Liquefied Natural Gas Facility The cruise ship terminal at Fort Hill Wharf The bulk liquids storage and distribution facility at the East Arm Wharf precinct Land reclamation and improvements to bulk commodity handling at the East Arm Wharf precinct Construction of Tiger Brennan Drive providing the East Arm Wharf precinct access (see Roads

section). Challenges to improving port infrastructure in NT include: Providing staged developments of the East Arm Wharf Provision of infrastructure at the Port of Darwin in line with demand and as part of the supply

chain Sustainable funding of barge landings Addressing the bulk loading problems at the Port of Darwin.

3.2 Infrastructure overview This section focuses on major ports and coastal community barge landings as they are an integral part of the Territory’s transport system. It does not cover stevedoring services, whose primary role is to load and unload ships, nor shipping lines. This section also does not consider boat ramps, but it should be noted that a review of boat ramps in the Territory was completed in 2009.71

3.2.1 System description The Territory’s port infrastructure consists of: One major port, operated by Darwin Port Corporation 14 coastal community barge landings Three single-user ports – Alyangula port, Port of Gove and Bing Bong port.

Port of Darwin The Port of Darwin is the Territory’s main port and is a multi-user, mixed cargo and marine services port. It is a naturally-occurring deep water port. The port facilitates livestock exports, dry bulk

Transport

32

imports and exports, offshore oil and gas support vessels, petroleum imports, container trade, and cruise and naval vessel visits. The Port of Darwin consists of a number of facilities located within the Darwin Harbour area. Figure 3.1 identifies the major elements of the Port of Darwin, and Table 3.1 describes them. The port’s main commercial facilities are located in the East Arm Wharf precinct. This precinct is located at the end of the Adelaide to Darwin Railway, making it a significant transport and logistics centre for the Territory. The port is wholly owned by the NT Government and operated by the Darwin Ports Corporation, a Government Business Division. The Corporation’s role is to control, develop and manage all waters and land within the port and to facilitate marine-related activities and industries. The Corporation operates under the Darwin Port Corporation Act. Figure 3.1: Map of the Port of Darwin72

Table 3.1: Main facilities of the Port of Darwin

Element Activities73 Details

East Arm Wharf precinct

See below See below

Stokes Hill Wharf

• Tug berths • Customs berth • Retail shops • Function centre • Tourism • Recreational and fishing vessels • Super yachts

This wharf is a concrete-decked, steel-piled multi-user berth currently used by ships less than 180m on the outer wharf and less than 70m on the inner wharf. The outer wharf supports tugs, charter vessels and the north Australian fishing and pearling fleet while the inner half is used by smaller vessels such as oceanographic research vessels, prawn trawlers, pleasure craft and tugs.74 There are plans to strengthen/repair sections of Stokes Hill Wharf, and this will safeguard this infrastructure.

Ports

33

Element Activities73 Details

Fort Hill Wharf

• Some commercial and service use

• Cruise ships • Naval vessels • Tug boats • Pilot vessels • Roll-on roll-off facility

This wharf is a 300m concrete-decked multi-user berth used to service cruise ships and naval vessel visits. In November 2008, a new $5.4 million Fort Hill Wharf passenger terminal was commissioned. The cruise ship market is important to the Territory for while they usually only stay for less than half a day, they bring large numbers of tourists. In 2010, 29 cruise ship visits are expected to dock in Darwin.75 In 2010, $700,000 was allocated to provide a pontoon at Fort Hill Wharf to improve safety access to pilot and cruise vessels.76

Darwin Fishing Harbour Mooring Basin

• Commercial fishing • Fishing vessels • Pearling vessels • Oversize/private/recreational

vessels

This basin provides secure sheltered moorings for the Northern fishing fleet adjacent to supply and repair facilities. It is tide free and controlled by a lock.77

Fisherman’s Wharf and Hornibrook’s Wharf

• Commercial fishing • Small vessel refuelling • Fishing vessel loading and

unloading78

This wharf is 200m long and can accommodate up to eighteen 30m vessels, berthed three abreast.79 In 2010, Hornibrook’s Wharf was allocated $1.5 million for its rehabilitation.80

This East Arm Wharf precinct consists of 600m of land-backed berths and a 154m bulk liquids berth. It has a dry bulk materials handling facility with a panamax-capable ship loader. It has a berth in Frances Bay used for the handling of general cargo, live cattle, bulk imports and containerised trade. It has a 154m mooring dolphin, allowing tankers to unload directly into the bulk liquids storage and distribution facility. The precinct is connected through a 16m wide railway access causeway to the Darwin to Adelaide railway. An 850m rail spur serves a dry bulk materials handling facility centred around a 1,300tph rail bottom dump station with adjacent stockpile areas. This facility currently receives six intermodal freight trains and 24 bulk train services per week. It has a rail link to the container terminal, which was commissioned in February 2004. The port also provides ancillary port services include harbour towage and pilotage. Harbour tugs assist some vessels to manoeuvre in restricted waters and to enter and leave berths. Pilotage includes the navigation of vessels within ports by a licensed pilot to ensure safety and efficiency of passage.81 A long-running concern of the East Arm Wharf precinct has been the lack of certainty about its ability to accommodate future growth in demand. To address this, the East Arm Wharf Facilities Masterplan 2030 was released in April 2010. It identifies future land use and infrastructure as seen in Figure 3.2. This document provides a vision for the next 20 years, but does not provide timelines or project details. The Masterplan’s land-use vision consists of: Developing a long continuous berth line so that efficiencies can be gained by fully utilising the

entire quay length, rather than being limited to discrete allocated berths Separating, where possible, cargo handling and storage activities that may adversely impact on

other cargoes Maintaining the connectivity to the existing container terminal facilities Building a bulk materials rail unloading loop and stockyard that maximises stockpile lengths and

areas Limiting dredging in hard rock, particularly at the eastern extremities of the existing Port and

adjacent to South Shell Island.82

Transport

34

Figure 3.2: Map of the East Arm Wharf Facilities83

In 2009/10, the NT Government committed $100 million for capital infrastructure development at the East Arm Wharf and the Australian Government contributed $3.2 million to the funding for studies on all-tides access and an investigation of the infrastructure requirements for vessels greater than Panamax.84 The Australian Government made a 2010 election commitment to provide $50 million for a rail interchange to allow increased capacity of minerals shipment on the rail line from Adelaide to the port. Expansion activities currently underway include a $15 million project to reclaim land behind the bulk loading facility, known as Pond F, and a $9.5 million project to upgrade and seal the eastern reclaimed area on the wharf to provide additional hardstand. These projects, and the $35 million, 2.5 kilometre overland conveyor to link bulk commodity ore stockpiles to the East Arm Wharf’s loader, will expand the Wharf’s bulk materials capabilities. Depending on demand and funding availability, in the medium term the port will: Improve the safety and efficiency of bulk handling infrastructure through dust control and

management Develop a marine management and training centre to improve the efficiency and safety in the

delivery of vessel traffic services within the Port of Darwin Establish a Marine Supply Base at East Arm to support the growing number of rig tender

vessels servicing the offshore oil and gas industry in the Timor Sea. Expressions of interest to develop such a base closed in October 2010.

The port services two types of vessels: Trading vessels. These are normally commercial vessels carrying cargo or passengers, and

include tankers, livestock carriers, bulk cargo vessels, container and general cargo vessels, offshore support vessels, barges and cruise vessels.

Non-trading vessels. These include naval vessels, research and pleasure craft, fishing and fishing industry supply vessels and pearling industry support vessels.

The last few years have seen the number of vessels increase with the largest increases being in bulk vessels carrying mineral exports, fuel tankers, offshore support vessels and livestock

Ports

35

vessels.85 Specifically over the last two years, the total number of vessel calls has increased by 896 vessels or 19%. The number of trading vessels has increased by 372 vessels or 30%. Bulk vessel calls have increased by 157% and liquid bulk tanker calls have increased by 22%. Offshore support vessel calls have increased by 213 calls or 70%.86 Trade volumes have also increased significantly over the last two years as seen in Table 3.2. Bulk ore exports have increased by 440% over this period.87 Table 3.2: Trade statistics, Port of Darwin88

Trade (tonnes) 2006/07 2008/09 % change

Import 819,415 1,255,314 53%

Export 641,749 2,519,324 293%

Total 1,461,164 3,774,638 158%

The last five years have seen significant changes in the port’s throughput. Prior to 2005, its exports were primarily metal products, livestock and petroleum. LNG exports commenced in February 2006 when the Darwin Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG) plant was commissioned at its purpose-built terminal at Wickham Point. The Conoco–Philips facility caters for ships ranging in size from 125,000 to 145,000 cubic metres, carrying the LNG to Japan.89 In the last two years, a significant increase in dry bulk cargo has occurred, principally due to OZ Minerals exporting copper concentrate from its Prominent Hill mine in SA, and BHP Billiton’s Olympic Dam export of copper concentrate. Offshore oil- and gas-related port activity has also increased following offshore developments in the region. The East Arm Wharf Facilities Masterplan 2030 identifies that trade is forecast to rise to 15 million tonnes by 2012 in the most-likely scenario, from 4 million tonnes in 2008/09. A high-growth, but less likely, forecast scenario predicts that trade will increase to 45 million tonnes by 2016.90 The growth in port usage will come from increased dry bulk and gas exports and in the support of offshore development. Currently, iron ore and manganese are exported at the combined rate of about 1.5Mtpa. The current facilities have capacity for up to 2.5Mtpa. Trade volumes will grow considerably if the expansion of BHP Billiton’s Olympic Dam operations occurs, as this would increase the volume of copper concentrate per year to 1.6Mtpa, and if the Wonarah phosphate mine proceeds, it would generate 1Mtpa of freight initially, rising to 3Mtpa.91 As of October 2010, the mine proponent is seeking capital for development, meaning that the mine could not start commercial production for at least 12 to 18 months. (Further mineral projects are discussed in the Rail section.) A major increase of bulk material will require additional rail unloading facilities, stockpile expansion, conveyors, and a second shiploader.92 If INPEX’s Ichthys $23 billion offshore gas project proceeds, it will involve building a gas processing facility at Middle Arm. As oil and gas developments increase in the Arafura Sea, the Timor Sea and waters off the coast of WA, the Port of Darwin’s involvement in supporting the offshore industry is also likely to increase. This will require expanding the offshore oil and gas rig tender berth facilities that handle exploration and operations vessels, such as through increasing the ability to load fuel and water, and providing cargo services and short-term storage for pipes and other mining equipment. While cattle exports from the port have grown consistently over the last five years, the future is less certain due to the recent decision by Indonesia to impose weight restrictions on live-export cattle to the country.

Transport

36

Coastal community barge landings There are 14 barge landings in the coastal communities along the Territory coastline and on the Tiwi Islands. These barge landings are the primary marine access points for foodstuffs, fuel and goods to be transported to remote and island communities. Barge landings are typically five to 10 metres in width and are graded concrete slabs on beach or river landing points. Features of the landings include fuel lines and connection valves, navigation markers, rock protection at the sides, lighting, and fenced or unfenced compounds adjacent to the landings. These structures are relatively simple, and generally cater for a wide range of conditions and tides. Barge landings are located at:93

The barge landings are essential as they allow for the delivery of the bulk of perishable and other supplies during the Wet Season as roads become impassable. In addition, by carrying bulk and general cargo by barge, less heavy vehicles travel the roads connecting these remote communities, thereby putting less pressure on the vulnerable road networks. Barge services operate weekly or fortnightly and are mostly provided by Perkins Shipping, which was sold to Toll Holdings in 2009.94 In 2004, a comprehensive review of the condition and service capability of all the barge landings was undertaken. The Cardno Willing Barge Landing Serviceability Report found that barge landings were in a reasonable state of repair, with the exception of Wurrawi–Goulburn Island, which needs to be replaced due to disrepair, and Gapuwiyak–Lake Evella, which needs to be upgraded from a beach landing to a concrete landing. It recommended upgrading lighting, navigational aids, hardstand repairs and upgrades and rock protection works, and replacing fuel valves and pipework at various barge landings. The report also recommended the replacement of several barge landings within the next 10 years, as the landings are close to reaching their design life span of approximately 30 years. Starting in 2010/11 and continuing for the next three years, a $6.2 million upgrade will occur of barge landing facilities at Nguiu, Gapuwiyak, Ramingining, Maningrida and Galiwinku. The work involves rebuilding a barge ramp or a hardstand area and improving freight handling by providing better storage of goods so that freight can be unloaded at any time during the day and night, and to better protect goods during the Wet Season.95 Single-user ports There are three single-user ports that primarily service large mining activities. They are: Alyangula port. The port is used by the Groote Eylandt Mining Company (GEMCO) to export

manganese. Its fixed head bulk loading wharf is capable of loading 40,000 tonnes vessels, and it has a small barge wharf. It exports about 3.5 million tonnes of manganese per year.

The Port of Gove. The port is just outside Nhulunbuy and is mainly used by Rio Tinto Alcan to export bauxite and alumina. The Port of Gove has the capacity to accommodate vessels up to 110,000 tonnes displacement and is one of the busiest regional shipping points in Australia, handling about 150 ships per year. It is a natural deep-water port situated on both sides of Dundas Point. On the north side is the alumina and bauxite ship-loading terminal and on the south-side is a cargo wharf. The port facility is connected to the refinery by a 3km conveyor. Ships are piloted into harbour by company-owned tugboats. The port exports about six million tonnes of bauxite and nearly 2.5 million tonnes of alumina per year.

Wadeye Minjilang Warruwi Maningrida Milyakburra

Milingimbi Ramingining Gapuwiyak Galiwinku Umbukumba

Numbulwar Tiwi Islands: Milikapiti Nguiu Pirlangimpi

Ports

37

Bing Bong Port. The port at Borroloola is mainly used to export mixed lead-zinc concentrate from Xstrata-owned McArthur River Mine. Road trains transport the concentrate to the port where it is stockpiled. When a bulk carrier arrives, the concentrate is barged by a small bulk carrier, the 3,200 tonne Aburri, 12 to 30km out to deep water where it is loaded onto ocean-going ships.96 The loading/docking facility at Bing Bong serves as the home port for the Aburri. The port is connected via a 3km dredged channel to deeper water. The port exports about 785,000 tonnes of silver and 320,000 tonnes of zinc-lead concentrate each year.97 98

3.2.2 Policy and governance The NT Government plays two key roles in the Territory ports sector. Primarily, as the shareholder of the Port of Darwin, the Government is responsible for ensuring that the port is managed efficiently and effectively in the best interests of the people of the Territory. A 2009 review of the port found that while competition within the Port’s infrastructure services was low, there was no suggestion that the Corporation had abused any market power it may have, given that prices are only marginally above operational costs.99 The NT Government would like to see the Port of Darwin become a strategic hub for the export of resources and as a supply base for off-shore oil and gas projects. The Government also oversees the broader strategic planning of how ports and port developments fit within the Territory’s transport supply chains and connecting infrastructure. Coastal community barge landings are managed and owned by DLP. As part of the Local Government Reforms being pursued by the NT Government, it is anticipated that the responsibility for barge landings will be transferred to Local Government Councils in the medium to long-term.100 In 2010, communitarian infrastructure was installed at the Darwin Trailer Boat club to facilitate the operation of an Australian Volunteer Coast Guard flotilla in Darwin in anticipation of the group becoming operational later this year.

3.3 Performance Port performance is influenced by its infrastructure as well as other factors such as the regulatory arrangements, competition, stevedoring and towage arrangements, and port management.101 Infrastructure at the East Arm Wharf precinct is generally in good condition due to its young age, however, it has notable elements that are aging and require major maintenance in the short to medium term. Examples of aging infrastructure include the Ro–Ro facility which is structurally unsound and would require significant remedial structural work to return it to service. To improve asset management, the Corporation is introducing a new asset management system across the Port to guide the acquisition, operation, maintenance, renewal and disposal of assets.102 Other assets that need improvement are the road structures within the port facility.103 However, the key concern about the precinct is that it will not have the ability to expand to meet rising demand. The Minerals Council of Australia expects that it may need twice the current capacity if it is to handle the expected volumes that can come from the current up-cycle in commodities.104 Funding this investment is difficult for the port due to its low profitability, and the Darwin Ports Corporation is well aware of the need to have a commercial pricing methodology that ensures its long-term commercial viability. An estimated $300 million would be required to upgrade the port to cater for the predicted growth in bulk minerals exports and provide the capability to load Capesize bulk vessels.105 An area for improvement at the Port of Darwin, and other single-user ports, is environmental control. 2009 saw a number of environmental concerns about port operations including:

Transport

38

Pollution of the Darwin Harbour with copper concentrate, contaminated stormwater containing high levels of zinc, copper and cobalt, and clinker dust, all from the East Arm Wharf precinct

Alumina hydrate dust being washed or blown into Melville Bay from the Rio Tinto Alcan facility Spilling of manganese ore from a ship-loading conveyor into Milner Bay at GEMCO’s Groote

Eylandt facility. A contributing factor in all of the discharges has been ineffective infrastructure that has allowed dust and contaminated runoff to enter the environment. For example, in the case of the East Arm Wharf precinct, the loader was not designed to accommodate the powder-like copper concentrate, meaning that fugitive dust could be created during transport. To address this problem in the 2008/09 Territory Budget, $35 million was allocated to improve environmental safety standards in bulk-loading at the East Arm Wharf precinct. This work was not undertaken in that financial year, but is currently occurring. Other problems including contaminated water from loading infrastructure not properly captured and stored, allowing it to seep into waterways. To provide better monitoring of environmental issues at the ports, the NT Government has committed to increasing the number of environmental protection officers to better monitor port operations. In 2008/09, the NT Government undertook a survey of barge landings as part of the baseline audit of infrastructure relevant to the NT Government’s Growth Town Policy. These findings have not been made public. Port security The Port of Darwin is a Security Regulated Port. All Security Regulated Ports have security plans that aim to safeguard maritime transport and facilities against unlawful interference. The security regulatory environment is governed by the Commonwealth’s Maritime Transport and Offshore Facilities Security Act 2003 and Offshore Facilities Security Regulation 2003, which reflect the International Ship and Port Facility and Security (ISPS) Code. Over the last few years, the port has increased security measures such as participating in information-sharing forums between government agencies and regulated port users, building new and upgraded fencing and gates, restricting access to sensitive areas, undertaking background checking of port workers through the introduction of the Maritime Security Identification Card (MSIC), and increasing the volume of closed circuit television (CCTV) surveillance.

3.4 Future challenges The challenges in achieving improvements in port infrastructure are: Providing staged developments of the East Arm Wharf. The East Arm Wharf Facilities

Masterplan 2030 provides a vision and development intentions, but does not provide staged development plans. Additional information needs to be provided on capacity constraints and criteria for capital/investment decision-making to instil confidence in potential port users of the future facilities, and to rail and other elements of supply chains. Funding for the developments is uncertain.

Provision of infrastructure at the Port of Darwin in line with demand and as part of the supply chain. The port is one element of a supply chain, with other elements being rail and mines. The entire chain needs to be optimised to maximise transport efficiency. Ideally, the development of additional capacity should be delivered when it is required, rather than building excess capacity years in advance of when it is needed, or creating additional capacity well after it is required. Ensuring that the port expands in line with demand is challenging due to the number of parties involved in the supply chains and the fact that export demand increases faster than infrastructure can be delivered.

Ports

39

Sustainable funding of barge landings. With the potential transfer of the barge landings to local governments, funding for their operation, maintenance, renewals and expansions must be provided. Landing charges, if levied, have very limited ability to recover the cost of providing the essential service.

Addressing the bulk loading problems at the Port of Darwin. Bulk loading problems exist at the East Arm Wharf precinct due to the nature of the bulk loading equipment and the materials being transferred. The planned upgrades will assist with this.

3.5 Report Card rating

Infrastructure Type NT 2010 NT 2005 National 2005 National 2001

Ports C+ B+ B- (Barge landings)

C+ B

This rating recognises that while there have been improvements at the Port of Darwin’s facilities, its East Arm Wharf facilities face challenges with regard to maintenance, capacity, bulk materials handling and environmental issues. Barge landings and their supporting infrastructure are rudimentary and have not kept up with growing needs. Positives that have contributed to the rating are: Development of the East Arm Wharf Facilities Masterplan 2030 Upgrade of the Port of Darwin’s City Wharf facilities including the Frances Bay Mooring Basin

and the Fisherman’s and Stokes Hill Wharves Construction of the new passenger ship terminal Compilation of current asset information on the Territory’s landing barges Upgrade of several barge landings and support infrastructure Improvements in the road connections to the East Arm Wharf precinct.

Negatives that have contributed to the rating are: A number of Port of Darwin assets requiring significant maintenance and renewal Environmental problems at a number of ports, notably arising from problems with bulk handling

facilities Inadequate supporting infrastructure at several barge landings, notably hardstand areas,

lighting and secure storage.

Transport

40

41

4 Airports

4.1 Summary

Infrastructure Type NT 2010 NT 2005 National 2005 National 2001

Airports B- A- (Major airports) B+ (Community airports) B- (Outstation and pastoral airstrips)

B B

This rating recognises that both Alice Springs and Darwin airport infrastructure is adequate for existing passenger and freight demand, and both have detailed expansion plans, although funding for developments is uncertain. The regional airports have limited infrastructure, which reflects their passenger numbers, and although airside infrastructure has generally improved, this has not been the case for land-side infrastructure. Some remote aerodromes are in very poor condition and some are unserviceable during the Wet Season. Given the scale of the problems and the limited resources of the NT Government and local governments, the prioritisation approach for upgrading remote aerodromes based on the community’s reliance on air travel is appropriate. Since 2005, the major aviation sector developments have been: Improvements at major, regional and remote airports Development of an NT Government aviation strategy focused on major airports.

Recently completed and in-progress major infrastructure projects include: Numerous upgrades at Darwin Airport Numerous upgrades at regional and remote airports.

Challenges to improving airport infrastructure in NT include: Ensuring that regional airports and remote aerodromes remain viable Funding the infrastructure expansion at the Darwin airport.

4.2 Infrastructure overview

4.2.1 System Description Aviation infrastructure consists of fixed assets on airport land, including runways, terminals, buildings (i.e. aeronautical and non-aeronautical industrial, commercial and retail buildings), roads, drainage systems and fencing. This section does not address the approximately 200 remote airstrips serving homelands, outstations and pastoral properties. These airstrips are not maintained by the NT Government, and generally do not amount to more than a flat graded area. These strips service very small communities, typically in the range of 25 to 75 persons. Air travel is vital for the Territory as it is essential in supporting the community and the economy. For many remote inland communities, air travel provides the sole link with outside areas during the Wet Season as roads become impassable. Remote airports provide public transport as well as delivery of fresh food, medical supplies, mail, educational materials and urgent supplies. From an economic perspective, air services are vital for tourism and supporting resource developments. Major airports with regular interstate scheduled passenger services are located in Darwin, Alice Springs, Yulara (Ayers Rock) and Nhulunbuy (Gove). There are no curfews at Darwin, Alice Springs and Yulara making them accessible 24 hours a day. Resource developments are

Transport

42

particularly dependent on the Gove and Groote Eylandt airports, which have regular passenger services. ‘Fly in–fly out’ operations centred on Darwin include the McArthur River mine and the Newmont Tanami operations. Table 4.1 identifies the passenger statistics for the Territory’s major airports in the last four years. Table 4.1: Passenger statistics for the Territory’s airports106

Total Revenue Passengers

Airport 2005/06 2006/07 2007/08 2008/09

Alice Springs 605,073 624,326 627,425 674,215

Ayers Rock 377,812 382,910 361,965 317,311

Bathurst Island 0 0 0 18,091

Darwin 1,219,378 1,403,685 1,562,216 1,538,938

Elcho Island 8,720 4,528 6,277 7,922

Gove 108,198 121,126 130,737 125,147

Groote Eylandt 22,342 30,898 36,564 35,836

Maningrida 22,313 12,181 10,782 11,919

International freight data has decreased from 167 tonnes in 2005/06 to a negligible amount in 2008/09.107 Domestic freight data is held by cargo terminal operators and is not generally available. The categories of airports are: Main airports – Darwin and Alice Springs Regional airports maintained by the NT Government Remote/community aerodromes maintained by the NT Government.

Darwin Airport Darwin Airport is located in the northern suburbs of Darwin, 13km from the city centre. The airport is owned and operated by Darwin International Airport Pty Ltd (DIA), a subsidiary of Airport Development Group (ADG), under a 50-year lease from the Australian Government, with an option for a further 49 years. The lease began in 1998.108 The airport is the largest in the Territory and a key transport hub for the north of Australia. It is a multi-purpose airport with international and domestic air services, but also has significant general aviation and charter flights activity. Darwin International Airport is a key commercial, military and recreational facility for the Territory. The airport’s direct civilian contribution of economic activity to the Territory economy constitutes some 2% of the Northern Territory Gross State Product. The airport currently employs 960 people in civil airport operations-related activity and an additional 680 people in other airport businesses. Total employment will grow to 3,600 by 2030.109 Darwin Airport is a joint-user facility with the civilian airport and the Royal Australian Air Force Base Darwin co-located and sharing many of the facilities on-site. The responsibilities of the Department of Defence and DIA are outlined in a Joint User Deed. These responsibilities include: Both runways are under the direct control of the Department of Defence There is a cost-sharing arrangement for the use of the runways and taxiways by civil aircraft Both the Department of Defence and DIA are responsible for providing and maintain their own

facilities Air Traffic Control services and facilities are provided by the Department of Defence Control of environmental impacts is the responsibility of the Department of Defence.110

Airports

43

Infrastructure at Darwin Airport is divided between the civilian DIA and RAAF Base Darwin. The infrastructure that is the responsibility of the RAAF Base, and therefore outside the scope of this Report Card, includes: The main 3,354m runway The secondary 1,534m runway A comprehensive taxiway system that facilitates movement between the runways and apron

areas An air traffic control tower and related infrastructure.111

Infrastructure within the DIA includes the main Regular Public Transport (RPT) apron, general aviation aprons and the terminal building. The RPT apron at Darwin can accommodate up to 14 large aircraft with all the bays operating as common-user facilities. Four of the bays are accessed by aerobridges to the terminal. Only one of the bays is capable of servicing A380-sized aircraft. There are three general aviation areas at Darwin Airport, designed for all aviation that is not involved in commercial airline activity. These areas provide 89,000m2 of hangers and 74,000m2 of aircraft parking space for fixed wing and rotary wing aircraft.112 The Airport’s Master Plan (approved in August 2010), stated that by 2030, passenger movements will increase from 1.8 million to approximately 4 million. Under these forecasts, no runway extensions will be required before 2030. However, the taxiway system will require enhancements to support the increased passenger and general aviation traffic.113 International inwards freight will increase from 127 tonnes to nearly 800 tonnes, and outwards freight will increase from 171 tonnes to over 600 tonnes. Combined airline and general aviation aircraft movements will grow from 88,000 movements to some 130,000 movements/year.114 Recent infrastructure development projects at Darwin Airport include: A $1.4 million expansion to the apron aircraft parking positions in 2005 The adoption of an $11 million 100% checked bag screening system in 2005 $2 million establishment of new airport commercial development spine road, Osgood Drive, in

2006 A $4 million expansion of aircraft apron Bay 1 to accommodate A380 aircraft in 2007 A $12 million resurfacing of the main runway in 2007 Commencement of construction of two additional parking positions to give greater capacity

during peak periods at the cost of $5.5 million.115 Of the DIA lease area of 311 hectares, 26% is available for non-aeronautical commercial development. The development, known as AXIS 12˚130˚, was launched in March 2010.116 Figure 4.1 shows the planned layout for Darwin Airport in 2030.

Transport

44

Figure 4.1: Planned layout for Darwin Airport in 2030117

Alice Springs Airport Alice Springs Airport is located 14km south of Alice Springs. The airport is owned and operated by Alice Springs Airport Pty Ltd (ASA), a subsidiary of Airport Development Group (ADG), under a 50-year lease from the Australian Government, with an option for a further 49 years. The airport is the major air transport hub for central Australia and services the local tourism industry, the local and surrounding communities and the Joint Defence Research Facility at Pine Gap.118 The airport serves as a freight base for United States Air Force military cargo planes. The airport’s runway infrastructure consists of a 2,438m high strength main runway and a 1,133m secondary low strength runway. These runways are connected to the airport’s apron area through a system of taxiways. The apron at Alice Springs Airport can service up to six B737-sized aircraft and a B777 aircraft simultaneously.119 The airport has also been certified for the A380.

Airports

45

It is forecast that passenger movements will increase from 674,215 in 2008/09 to approximately 940,000 by 2029. The existing runway system is considered adequate to facilitate the expected growth with only the apron and terminal areas requiring further development during this period. A 2,000 hectare area has been set aside for non-aeronautical development at the airport.120 Alice Springs airport can provide equipment such as mobile stairs to all types of aircraft (lower deck of A380 only).121 Regional airports Major regional airports are: Ayers Rock Airport. This airport is owned by Ayers Rock Resort and services both fixed and

rotary winged aircraft. Tennant Creek Airport. This airport is leased by the Australian Government to the Airport

Development Group. It does not have regular passenger transport (RPT) services, instead relies on charter services. The lack of regular services is hampering mining operations at Tennant Creek.122 The main runway is 1,959 metres long by 30 metres wide and can normally accommodate most commuter aircraft. The second runway is 1,057 metres long by 18 metres wide. Low intensity runway lighting is available, which are pilot-operated on PAL 120.6. The terminal apron can normally accommodate up to three aircraft below 5,700 kg in weight.123

Nhulunbuy Airport. This airport is operated and owned by Rio Tinto Alcan and maintained by Nhulunbuy Corporation Ltd. The new airport ($8 million) was officially opened in 2005, and has the capacity to handle 100,000 passengers per year. The runway is 1,150 metres long to allow larger Boeing 737–400 series aircraft to fly safely into Gove.

RAAF Base Tindal is situated at Katherine and is owned and maintained by the Department of Defence, with the airport’s civil aviation facilities being owned and maintained by Katherine Town Council. Civil operations are only a minor part of the airport, and are confined to the northern end of the main runway. Remote/community aerodromes As of September 2010, there are 72 regional aerodromes that the NT Government maintains and these are listed in Table 4.2. Airports that are registered aerodromes are subject to regular inspections, and are required to meet minimum standards set down by CASA. Table 4.2: Regional aerodromes maintained by the NT Government124

Category Aerodromes

Alice Springs region Ampilatwatja, Aputula (Finke), Areyonga, Atitjere (Harts Bluff), Kaltukatjara (Docker River), Kintore, Mt Liebig, Ntaria (Hermannsburg), Nyrippi, Papunya, Santa Teresa, Utopia (Urapuntja), Willowra, Yuelamu (Mt Allan) and Yuendumu

Darwin Region Belyuen, Maningrida, Minjalang (Croker Island), Nauiyu (Daly River), Nguiu (Bathurst Island) Oenpelli (Gunbalanya), Palumpa, Peppimenarti, Pirlangimpi (Garden Point), Wadeye (Port Keats) Milikapiti (Snake Bay) and Warruwi (Goulburn Island)

Gove region Galiwinku (Elcho Island), Gapuwiyak (Lake Evella), Milingimbi, Milyakburra (Bickerton Island), Numbulwar and Ramingining

Katherine region Amanbidji (Kildurk Station), Barunga, Beswick, Bulla Camp, Delara–Weemol, Kalkarindji, Lajamanu (Hooker Creek), Manyallaluk (Eva Valley), Minyerri (Hodgson Down), Ngukurr (Roper River), Pigeon Hole, Rittarangu (Urapunga), Robinson River and Yarralin

Tennant Creek region Ali Curung (Warrabri), Canteen Creek, Elliot and Wangalinji (Clean Skin)

NT Government aerodromes Batchelor, Borroloola, Bullita, Cape Don, Keep River, Kidman Springs, Roper Bar, Smith Point, Ti-Tree, Timber Creek and Wauk (Murganella)

Highway emergency aerodromes Barrow Creek, Barkly Homestead, Erldunda, Henbury and Kulgera

Pastoral aerodromes Kings Creek Station and Laramba (Napperby)

Transport

46

Recent aerodrome upgrades and reconstruction work has occurred at: Palumpa Peppimenarti Eva Valley Nyrippi Papunya Miliyakburra Warruwi (South Goulburn).125

Upgrades undertaken or being undertaken between 2009/10 and 2010/11 are: Lajamanu airstrip – upgrade ($2.5 million) Pigeon Hole aerodrome – relocate and upgrade aerodrome to provide an all-weather operation

and upgrade emergency runway lighting system and signal area, and provide shade structure ($2.5 million)

Minjilang (Croker Island) aerodrome Upgrade to provide all-weather capability ($1.3 million) Palumpa aerodrome – reseal airstrip ($182,000) Canteen Creek airstrip – upgrade and seal to provide near all-weather operation ($2.5 million) Utopia airstrip – upgrade and seal to provide near all-weather operation ($2.5 million) Yarralin airstrip – upgrade and seal to provide near all-weather operation ($2.5 million)126

There has been volatility in air service to these airports in recent years, primarily because of changes in demand due to the global economic crisis and demand by the resource sector. The general thin loadings on some of these routes result in marginal profitability for operators.127 The NT Government allocated $1.9 million in its 2010/11 Budget to assist with the upgrading of aerodromes in remote and isolated communities to facilitate non-commercial essential community air services.

4.2.2 Policy and governance The NT Government’s vision for aviation services is identified in the Aviation Futures 2015 blueprint released in April 2010. Its core objectives are to increase and sustain air services to the Territory, designed to increase the choice and affordability of air services available. Its targets include a 50% increase in passenger traffic to Darwin and a 20% increase to Alice Springs by 2014. Its priorities over the next five years include: The expansion of the Darwin International Aviation Hub Attracting a full service international airline Developing increased regional, domestic and international linkages across the Territory.128

The Aviation Futures 2015 document does not address regional airport infrastructure to any great degree, but the NT Government is intending to develop a complementary strategy on transport requirements within the Territory that which address regional airport infrastructure needs and the development of air services to regional and remote centres, including to Tennant Creek and Katherine.129 All airports are governed by the Commonwealth Air Navigation Act 1920 and the Aviation Transport Security Act 2004. Airports leased from the Australian Government come under the Airports Act 1996. Airports owned by the Australian Government are subject to additional Government legislation provisions, and are not subject to other Territory legislation. On-airport planning at Australian Government-leased airports is defined by an airport’s master plan. Master plans must be developed by new airport operators within a prescribed period to cover the next twenty years and must be reviewed and updated at no more than five-yearly intervals.

Airports

47

Master plans are required to be approved by the Minister for Infrastructure. Major development plans are required for certain types and scale of developments, such as runway extensions, terminal expansions and capital works over $10 million. While the use of master plans is the basis for planning considerations on airports, these stop at airport boundaries and have little, if any, influence off-airport.130 The regulations and planning policies that influence off-airport planning decisions vary depending on whether or not they are Australian Government-leased airports, defence airports or airports that come under the Territory planning regimes. All airports not owned by the Australian Government are subject to Territory legislation. The NT Government advises airport operators and local governments on the appropriate use of the Territory planning provision overlays covering airport environments. In December 2009, the Australian Government released the National Aviation Policy White Paper. This will drive an improvement in the better-integrated planning at Australian Government-leased airports by: Requiring each capital city airport to establish a Planning Coordination Forum, to act as the

vehicle leading the ongoing discussions between the airports and the three levels of government on issues including the master plans, the airport’s program for proposed on-airport developments, regional planning initiatives, off-airport development approvals and significant ground transport developments that could affect the airport and its connections

Requiring airports to produce more detailed master plans that will have to contain: Additional detail on proposed use of land in the first five years of a master plan, including

information on planning for each non-aviation precinct, the number of jobs likely to be created, anticipated traffic flows, and the airport’s assessment of the potential impacts on the local and regional economy and community

The inclusion of a ground transport plan in the master plan The inclusion of a more detailed analysis of how the master plan aligns with State, Territory

and local government planning laws, as well as a justification for any inconsistencies. Requiring all airports to establish and lead Community Aviation Consultation Groups to ensure

that local communities have direct input on airport planning matters, with appropriate arrangements for engagement with other industry stakeholders such as airlines and Airservices Australia where necessary

Prohibiting incompatible developments on federal airport sites, such as residential developments and schools, unless exceptional circumstances exist

Developing a number of initiatives to safeguard both airports and communities from inappropriate off-airport developments that could threaten public safety and the future viability of aviation operations; these would include working with the jurisdictions on national land-use planning regimes near airports.131

Key multi-jurisdictional bodies and government agencies are: Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA). CASA is an independent statutory authority

established in 1995 under the Civil Aviation Act 1988 to regulate aviation safety in Australia and the safety of Australian aircraft overseas.

Airservices Australia. Airservices Australia is the monopoly provider of air traffic management and fire fighting services at Australia’s major civil airports.

Department of Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development and Local Government. The Department has a policy advisory role in aviation and provides advice to the Government on the Australian Government’s aviation agencies’ strategic direction, their financial and operational performance, and their governance framework. The Department also has a role in leading the development and publication of major future air traffic policy directions to give effect

Transport

48

to the Government’s decisions, as well as leading and coordinating the implementation review processes.

Department of Lands and Planning (NT Government). The Department is involved in providing aviation policy advice to the NT Government, supporting the expansion of air services in the Territory and coordinating a multi-departmental Northern Territory Aviation Committee.132

4.2.3 Sector trends Increasing passenger movements Demand for air travel to and from the Territory is expected to grow at a faster rate than other Australian States due to the high economic growth rate in the Territory, primarily associated with the growth in low-cost airlines across Australia and Asia. Resource developments will also increase demand. The Bureau of Infrastructure, Transport and Regional Economics (BITRE) predicts that passenger movements through all airports will increase by 4% per annum over the next 20 years resulting in a doubling of passenger movements over the period. Darwin Airport’s passenger movements are forecast to increase from just under two million passengers to approximately four million by 2030. The forecast aircraft movements during that period are displayed in Figure 4.2.133 Figure 4.2: Forecast aircraft movements at Darwin Airport134

Transfer of remote aerodromes to local governments The NT Government intends to transfer aerodromes to local governments.135 This has two pre-conditions. Firstly, a sufficient level of recurrent funding needs to be provided to local governments for them to operate and maintain the airstrips and satisfy CASA requirements. Consequently, the NT Government has committed in 2010 to providing $3.5 million over four years for Airstrip Reporting Officers to meet safety requirements at CASA-certified remote air strips. This arrangement covers most Territory Growth Towns. Secondly, long-term land tenure for public use is required. From May 2010, the Department of Lands and Planning has commenced a process of assessing the infrastructure standards and land tenure status at remote airstrips throughout the Territory to achieve this.136

Airports

49

4.3 Performance The current airport infrastructure at Darwin is considered adequate overall, but will need to expand to support the growing passenger numbers. There is concern that the terminal and apron will be inadequate for the increasing amount of passenger and freight traffic. The ability to service A380 Airbus passenger aircraft through improvements to the apron and terminal infrastructure is important to servicing the international market. The infrastructure at the Alice Springs Airport is adequate following the expansions of the last few years. The runway located at Ayers Rock Airport is only 30m wide and therefore is only capable of being utilised by narrow-bodied aircraft, i.e. B737–800 and A320–20 aircraft. This restricts the number of passengers that can be flown in to the airport at any one time. Proposals have been tabled for the widening of the runway to accommodate wide-bodied aircraft such as Boeing 767s, however, economic factors have weighed against this capital expenditure to date. It is anticipated that market forces, for example increased passenger numbers, will be the catalyst for this upgrade. The NT Government has an ongoing commitment for upgrades at regional airports and remote aerodromes maintained by the NT Government, with works including the sealing of existing gravel strips, gradient improvements, and drainage improvements. Remote aerodromes are prioritised for improvement to an all-weather standard or sealed level, following consideration of their importance in relation to community reliance upon aircraft for medivac, travel during the Wet Season, and distance from health and other services. Issues related to these airstrips include the requirement for regular regrading to be undertaken, and some require fencing to reduce animal hazards. Security Following the terrorist incidents on 11 September 2001, the Australian Government introduced additional security requirements, notably through the Aviation Transport Security Act 2004 and the Aviation Transport Security Regulations 2005, at Australian airports including: Increased Australian Federal Police presence at airports 100% checked bag screening for all international flights Screening of all domestic checked bags at major airports Limiting liquids, aerosols and gels on international flights.137

While security requirements are determined by the Australian Government, airports have the ability to enhance their operational effectiveness via coordination with police, security operators, and airlines. The additional security measures, notably the requirement of 100% checked bag screening, contributed to the increase in airports’ costs during 2004/5. Costs incurred included the equipment to screen passengers and checked baggage, and the installation of overt and covert closed-circuit television security cameras.138 Future security priorities of airports will be to: Extend security along the supply chain to address the security risk of freight Expand the counter-terrorism focus of security measures to address other forms of criminal

behaviour at airports. 4.3.4 Environmental sustainability Alice Springs and Darwin International Airports have Airport Environment Strategies, as required by Australian Government-leased airports, and must prepare and maintain an Airport Environment Strategy (AES). The main intent of an AES is to demonstrate to the Australian Government, key stakeholders and the surrounding community, how an airport will manage environmental issues on the airport for that five-year period. The Act requires that an airport undertakes consultation with

Transport

50

key stakeholders and the community prior to submission of the AES to the Government. Environmental issues on the leased airports are administered principally by Australian legislation, the Airports Act 1996, the Airport (Environment Protection) Regulations 1997 and the Airport (Building Control) Regulations 1997. The Airport Building Controller (ABC) and the Airport Environment Officer (AEO) are the on-site regulatory representatives for DITRDLG who administer the Act and Regulations on behalf of the Australian Government. The AESs address the following issues and proposed monitoring and mitigation strategies: Air quality Soil quality Water quality Noise emissions Flora and fauna Waste management Heritage considerations Ground transport Dangerous goods and hazardous materials.

Other airports in the Territory are not required to have an Airport Environment Strategy, however, they are required to comply with the relevant planning acts and regulations relating to environmental protection. This may entail completion of an Environmental Impact Assessment in some form prior to major capital works being conducted.

4.4 Future challenges The challenges in achieving improvements in airport infrastructure are: Ensuring that regional airports and remote aerodromes remain viable. Given the

importance of regional and remote aerodromes to their communities, it is essential that their airports remain operational. This can be difficult for those communities that do not have the resources to do this.

Funding the infrastructure expansion at the Darwin airport. Darwin airport submitted a $30 million terminal and apron expansion project to be considered by Infrastructure Australian for funding support. While the project was included in Infrastructure Australia’s 2008 interim list of priority infrastructure proposals, it was not selected as one of its infrastructure priority projects in May 2009. An alternative method of funding the expansion needs to be developed.

4.5 Report Card rating

Infrastructure Type NT 2010 NT 2005 National 2005 National 2001

Airports B- A- (Major airports) B+ (Community airports) B- (Outstation and pastoral airstrips)

B B

This rating recognises that both Alice Springs and Darwin airport infrastructure is adequate for existing passenger and freight demand, and both have detailed expansion plans, although funding for developments is uncertain. The regional airports have limited infrastructure, which reflects their passenger numbers, and although airside infrastructure has generally improved, this has not been the case for land-side infrastructure. Some remote aerodromes are in very poor condition and some are unserviceable during the Wet Season. Given the scale of the problems and the limited resources of the NT Government and local governments, the prioritisation approach for upgrading remote aerodromes based on the community’s reliance on air travel is appropriate.

Airports

51

Positives that have contributed to the rating are: Appropriate aviation infrastructure at major airports Good quality master plans of the airports Continual NT Government support for the upgrading of regional and remote aerodromes.

Negatives that have contributed to the rating are: Inadequate land-side infrastructure at regional airports The number of poor quality remote aerodromes.

Transport

52

53

WATER

Strategic water developments The NT Government’s long-term water-related targets and actions are specified in the Territory 2030 Strategic Plan (2009) and listed below. They focus on developing a long-term plan for infrastructure, improving the water supply to remote communities, improving water source management and introducing demand management initiatives. Water-related targets and actions from the Territory 2030 Strategic Plan139

Target Action

Undertake long-term infrastructure planning for roads, power, water, sewerage and telecommunications

• Release a long-term rolling Infrastructure Plan

Improve environmental health in remote communities to a standard similar to rural and urban communities by 2020

• Increase access to potable and fluoridated drinking water, reliable electricity, waste water management, adequate food storage and preparation facilities and effective waste management systems

Manage the Northern Territory’s natural resources according to the principles of ecologically sustainable development

• Maintain or improve the health of Territory rivers. • Maintain or improve the landscape health in all Territory

catchments • Develop plans for sustainable water use • Increase the number of native vegetation management plans in

place in water catchments throughout the Territory subject to development pressure

Reduce the amount of water that Territory households use by 20% by 2015 and a further 10% by 2020, compared to 2009 consumption levels

• Continue tracking household water usage levels • Educate and encourage Territorians to think about water usage

responsibly

Ensure efficient use of water by business and industry

• Develop targets for industry and business

Energy and water efficiency in residential and commercial buildings in the Territory to meet standards in the Building Code of Australia

• Develop standards for energy and water efficiency of dwellings, as per pending Council of Australian Governments (COAG) national targets

• Develop standards for energy and water efficiency for commercial office buildings, as per pending COAG national targets

The principal tool to manage water resources is the Water Allocation Plan. These are developed through scientific assessments and community consultation, and specified under the Water Act. They determine the: water allocations for towns, agriculture and industry water allocations for the environment designed to protect river/groundwater ecology strategies to achieve water use efficiency, including arrangements for water trading information about the reliability of water allocations a monitoring and reporting program to ensure that the plan is working.140

To date, Water Allocation Plans have been declared for three regions (Tindall Limestone Aquifer (Katherine), Alice Springs and Ti Tree) with another seven under development (Howard East, Berry Springs, Tindall Limestone Aquifer (Mataranka), Oolloo Aquifer, Western Davenport, Tiwi and Great Artesian Basin). The location of the completed and under development Water Allocation Plans are detailed in the figure below.

Water

54

Water allocation planning areas141

55

5 Potable water

5.1 Summary

Infrastructure Type NT 2010 NT 2005 National 2005 National 2001

Potable water C- B- Metropolitan B- C

This rating recognises that there have been significant infrastructure improvements to water supplies at a number of urban and remote communities, as well as the identification of water supply system deficiencies across the Territory. However, there are a few locations where water supplies do not meet microbiological water quality guidelines and many locations where they do not meet physical and chemical water quality guidelines. Since the last Report Card, the major potable water sector developments in the Territory have been: Increasing the capacity of water supplies and transmission in Greater Darwin Developing the data to prioritising water infrastructure improvements in remote communities

and outstations/homelands Implementing Power and Water Corporation’s (PWC) strategy for Safe Water for remote

communities Increase in water tariffs in urban supply areas Applying the users pays policy to some customers in remote communities Water infrastructure reviews undertaken for Territory Growth Towns through the Strategic

Indigenous Housing and Infrastructure Program. Recently completed and in-progress major infrastructure projects include: Raising the Darwin River Dam wall to increase water storage capacity Continuing assessment of the recommissioning of the Manton Dam Building additional water transmission infrastructure in Greater Darwin to meet demand growth Upgrading the Roe Creek Borefield in Alice Springs and other bores around the Territory Upgrading the disinfection systems in many remote communities.

Challenges to improving potable water infrastructure in NT include: Reducing water demand Addressing deficiencies in urban water supplies Improving remote communities water supplies Identifying the impact of climate change.

5.2 Infrastructure overview

5.2.1 System description Potable water systems in the Territory can be divided into urban, remote communities and outstation/homeland systems. Urban and remote communities are provided by PWC or its subsidiary, Indigenous Essential Services Pty Ltd (IES). Outstation/homeland systems are largely self-managed with partial funding and support from Department of Housing Local Government and Regional Services

Water

56

Urban systems Potable water is provided to urban areas by PWC. It is licensed to retail water in 5 major and 13 minor service areas across the Territory. Major areas are Greater Darwin (includes Palmerston and rural areas), Katherine, Tennant Creek, Alice Springs and Yulara. Minor ones are Batchelor, Adelaide River, Pine Creek, Kings Canyon, Borroloola, Timber Creek, Daly Waters, Elliott, Newcastle Waters, Ti-Tree, Larrimah and Mataranka. PWC also supplies water to Cox Peninsula-Wagait Beach under a Restricted Service Area category. The licensed areas are identified in Figure 5.1. Figure 5.1: PWC potable water licensed areas*142

* Only water supply licence areas are shown and remote Indigenous communities are not shown.

Potable water

57

PWC potable water statistics are listed in Table 5.1. Table 5.1: PWC potable water statistics143

2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009

System Capability (ML/day) 336 336 336 322 322 322

Production (ML) 54,447 58,436 54,797 56,842 57,823 60,707

Length of Mains (km) 2,010 2,003 2,019 2,090 2,130 2,173

Sales (ML) 50,468 51,225 49,379 51,481 52,206 53,291

Customers (i.e.Services) 39,192 39,780 42,970 44,225 44,702 46,295

Most urban areas rely on groundwater as their principal water source with the exception of Darwin, Katherine and Pine Creek, as seen in Table 5.2. In the north of the Territory, the groundwater may only be a few years old due to the rapid recharge of aquifers while in the south, water can be over 10,000 years old and is therefore considered a non-renewable source as it is not being recharged rapidly. Table 5.2: Water source for urban areas144

Urban area Source of water

Adelaide River Ground water

Alice Springs Ground water (Roe Creek Borefield)

Batchelor Ground water

Borroloola Ground water

Daly Waters Ground water

Darwin Surface water (Darwin River Reservoir) + Ground water (10%)

Elliott Ground water

Katherine Surface water (Katherine River) + Ground water (20%)

Kings Canyon Ground water

Larrimah Ground water

Mataranka Ground water

Newcastle Waters Ground water

Pine Creek Surface water (Copperfield Reservoir) + Ground water (40%)

Tennant Creek Ground water (Kelly Well, Kelly Well West and Cabbage Gum Borefields)

Timber Creek Ground water

Ti Tree Ground water

Yulara Ground water

Potable water for Greater Darwin is primarily provided from the Darwin River Dam. This is a 205km2 large area, low depth dam that experiences significant evaporation. Water is drawn down through the year, with the majority of use in the Dry Season (May to October) and recharged during the Wet Season (November to April). Currently the dam wall is being increased in height by 1.3m, increasing its capacity by 20% (i.e. 9,000ML/year). The dam is in a closed catchment, resulting in the only water treatment being needed is disinfection. (If a treatment plant was required, it would cost about $40 million.)145 The other source of Darwin’s water is the McMinns/Howard East borefield which provides up to 10% of Darwin’s supply. The availability of groundwater increases supply diversity for Darwin. To further increase supply diversity, PWC is intending to recommission the Manton Dam. While PWC has a license to extract 7,000ML/year146 from the dam, it does not do so currently as its water quality is compromised as the dam is used for recreational purposes. To use it, a water treatment plant would be required. Other water infrastructure in Greater Darwin includes: 18 water storage tanks holding 200ML 1,200 km of water pipelines holding 17ML 10 water pumping stations.147

Water

58

In addition to the two dam enhancement projects described above, other recent or ongoing infrastructure projects in Darwin are the: Darwin CBD Water Supply Enhancement project. It involves installing 1.2km of pipe along the

south-side of the Esplanade and Daly Street, 9km of mains along Dinah Beach Road, Duke Street, Burt Street, Day Street and McMinn Street with direct drilling under Daly Street bridge, McMinn Street and Tiger Brennan Drive.148

Palmerston augmentation works that include a new Palmerston south elevated tank along with 1000mm water transmission pipeline mains.

Channel Island water-main upgrades associated with the development of Middle Arm and the security of supply to Channel Island Power Station to meet increased demand in the Channel Island/ Wickham Point area.149

Alice Springs’ potable water is sourced from the Amadeus rock aquifers – 80% from the Roe Creek Borefield that tap the Mereenie Sandstone aquifer and 20% from bores that tap the Pacoota, Shannon and Goyder aquifers. The water that is stored in Mereenie Aquifer is very old, dated at between 10,000 and 32,000 years old. The Mereenie Aquifer is estimated to hold about five million megalitres of water suitable for drinking, but only one and a quarter million megalitres of this is of high quality. Consumption of the water is much higher that recharge resulting in the water levels at the Roe Creek Borefield dropping about a metre every year.150 Because of its depth, the pumping costs of extracting the water is expensive. Regular maintenance on bores is required, and consideration is being given to relocating the Roe Creek Borefield. Tennant Creek’s water supply is unique in Territory’s urban centres as it is not sterilised. Tennant Creek residents voted not to chlorinate their water supply in 2004.151 Other water infrastructure projects include: Drilling additional bores at the Roe Creek Borefield in Alice Springs, at Daly Waters and Kings

Canyon in 2008/09 Commissioning new gas-powered bore at Yulara, that has boosted production capacity and

eliminating the need to store diesel fuel on site.152 Remote communities systems PWC supplies water to 72 Indigenous communities across the Territory.153 These are supplied by PWC’s subsidiary, IES. IES has an agreement with the NT Government, through the Department of Housing, Local Government and Regional Services for the reliable and equitable delivery of essential services to these communities.154 The statistics of IES’s potable water services are detailed in Table 5.3, and the location of service provision is shown in Figure 5.2. Table 5.3: Statistics of IES supplied potable services155

2003/04 2004/05 2005/06 2006/07 2007/08 2008/09 2009/10

Total Sourced Water (ML/day) 9,970 10,104 9,733 9,250 9,846 9,848 9,792

Length of Mains (km) 639 647 649 649 649 652 654

Customers (Service numbers) 522 530 524 527 1,108 1,948 2,497

Potable water

59

Figure 5.2: Location of remote communities potable water systems156

Remote communities typically have a population from 100 to 3,000 but this number fluctuates depending on seasonal and cultural/social factors. Together the infrastructure assets of remote communities consist of 200 production bores, 160 water storage tanks and 600km of water

Water

60

distribution systems.157 Historically, significant infrastructure investment in water services has been delivered through various funding programs, which has resulted in high and low levels of investment and significant legacy infrastructure issues, especially in the larger communities identified as Territory Growth Towns. Over the last 2 years water infrastructure reviews undertaken for Territory Growth Towns through the Strategic Indigenous Housing and Infrastructure Program, have identified significant water infrastructure upgrades for the next 3 years. Over 90% of communities depend solely on groundwater. For most of the non-coastal areas, the water is highly mineralised, resulting in higher concentration of natural physical, chemical, and radiological characteristics. This occurs because the water extracted has been in the aquifers for centuries or millennia. In a number of communities, the microbiological quality of the water has not conformed to guidelines. As low microbiological quality water has acute and immediate health implications, addressing this problem has been the priority of the NT Government and PWC. This has led to PWC improving disinfection technology in remote communities. Over the last five years, PWC has upgraded manual calcium hypochlorite dosing systems to automated sodium hypochlorite systems that can be continuously monitoring online. For the Northern and Katherine region communities that are at higher risk of microbiological contamination, PWC has installed a second disinfection barrier - Ultra Violet (UV) disinfection, which involves exposing water to radiation from UV light so as to disrupt microorganisms at that single point.158 Much of the remote communities water supplies do not meet physical and chemical quality guidelines. This normally does not pose an immediate health risk, but do over the long-term and can cause secondary problems in the short and medium term. Examples of problems include: High levels of iron, total dissolved solids and sodium lead to poor palatability and this reduces

the amount of water consumed. Consequently the consumer will increase the consumption of other drinks, including sugar-based drinks.

High hardness levels (caused by high levels of calcium) leads to excessive scaling of pipes. This reduces infrastructure life, which can lead to non-operational water systems for extended periods as housing hardware maintenance is difficult.

The health risk arising from the failure to achieve physical and chemical quality guidelines does not arise over the short-term, but over a lifetime of exposure, which is about 70 years. It should be noted that many of the groundwater sources have already been used for 20 to 30 years.159 Consistent with the Australian Drinking Water Guidelines, the NT Government and PWC are in the process of developing Water Management Plans to improve water quality management and upgrading systems on a prioritised basis. Operational Water Plans are being prepared for all communities and these identify the system risks and ensure that barriers are in place to eliminate or minimise their impacts. PWC and the Department of Health and Community Services have also developed a risk assessment framework for communities whose physical and chemical water quality characteristics exceed health and or aesthetic guideline values.160 It has led to the prioritisation of 20 communities whose water contains high concentrations of antimony, arsenic, barium, fluoride, hardness, iron, nitrate, selenium, total dissolved solids, and uranium. Commencing in 2010/11 a three to five year program is expected to be developed to address these problems via two main ways: identifying alternative water supplies or installing water treatment technology. Technology that is likely to be deployed includes Electrodialysis Reversal (EDR) and Reverse Osmosis (RO). To minimise the cost of deployment of these technologies, the technologies may be packaged in standardised modules suitable for different flow rates and water qualities. They will all have SCADA technology allowing for remote monitoring.161

Potable water

61

Outstation/homeland systems There are approximately 550 outstations and homeland communities which are largely self-managed with partial funding and support from Department of Housing Local Government and Regional Services. Water supply problems that these communities face include: Some sites do not have an adequate quantity or quality of water available The per capita costs for water treatment and distribution systems are expensive to install and

maintain Some systems are not well maintained due to challenges in having skilled operation and

maintenance inputs available within the community Generally, the implementation of water treatment technologies to improve the quality of water available is cost prohibitive and alternative options are being investigated. In 2008 the Department of Housing, Local Government and Regional Services commissioned a study into the water quality on outstations/homelands. It assessed the physical, chemical and radiological health risks associated with the water supply sources of approximately 450 outstations/homelands. The water quality sampling has been completed in high risk site and a health risk assessment has been completed.162 Potable water pricing In PWC’s urban areas, the potable water tariff is a single flat tariff which is unusual in Australia where the majority of tariffs are step tariffs. The tariff is uniform across the Territory, and compared to other jurisdictions, the price of water is the second lowest as seen in Figure 5.3. The price charged for potable water does not cover the cost of its provision. For example, in the major service areas, the deficits are Darwin ($1.592 million), Katherine ($4.305 million), Tennant Creek ($1.66 million) and Alice Springs/Yulara ($7.144 million).163 The NT Government also pays over $5 million a year to PWC for Community Service Obligations (CSOs) relating to water provision in the major service areas but even with this subsidy, provision costs exceed income. Following from the Reeves inquiry into PWC’s financial viability, the NT Government announced 20% increases in potable water tariffs for 2009, 2010 and 2011. After 2011, the NT Government have indicated that prices will rise by CPI but it is likely that the increases will be actually much higher. Until 2007, very few potable services customers supplied by IES were charged. Those charged were predominantly NT Government facilities and employee housing. In 2007/08, the user-pays policy was extended to potable water customers other than domestic Indigenous households, and in 2008/09 extended to Shire Councils for Shire Council employee housing and facilities. Consequently number of customers for potable water services has increased from 524 in 2006 to 1,948 in 2009.164 Between 2009/10 and 2011/12, PWC is expecting a 25% increase each year in revenue water due to installing water meters.165

5.2.2 Policy and governance Key water legislation is: Water Act. This Act governs the licences for water extraction for potable supplies. Department

of Natural Resources, Environment, the Arts and Sport (NRETAS) administers the Water Act. Water Supply and Sewerage Services Act. This Act has a key role in setting minimum

standards for drinking water quality and ensuring the protection of the public. Public Health Act. This Act has a key role in setting guidelines for the protection of public health. Waste Management and Pollution Control Act. This Act establishes the regulatory requirements

to manage waste to avoid pollution. The Act prescribes a number of environmental offences, and requires that pollution incidents be reported.166

Environmental Assessment Act. This Act requires referral of major new projects by PWC to the Environment Protection Agency for assessment.

Water

62

Figure 5.3: Average annual residential water tariffs forecast at 1 July 2010* (based on 266kl per annum consumption)167

Based on 266kl per annum * The tariff comparisons are as at 1 April 2010, and incorporate tariff increases announced by utilities and Regulators’ Draft and Final Decisions. The chart reflects the expected residential water tariff at 1 July 2010. From 1 July 2010, residential water tariffs in the Territory will increase by 20%. The actual tariffs in other jurisdictions may be different from the above due to recent tariff decisions.

The main regulatory controls for water service providers are: Operating Licences. PWC must obtain and comply with operating licences from the Utilities

Commission. Wastewater Discharge Licences. PWC must obtain and comply with wastewater discharge

licences from NRETAS. Water resource access agreements. NRETAS determines the PWC’s level of water extraction

from surface and groundwater sources. Drinking water quality standards. The Department of Health and Families’ Environmental Health

Program establishes requirements for drinking water management and monitoring based on the Australian Drinking Water Guidelines 2004 (ADWG). PWC has a Memorandum of Understanding with the Department defining the requirements for compliance with the microbiological, health, chemical and radiological parameters specified in the ADWG.168

PWC’s yearly Statement of Corporate Intent (SCI) defines the direction of the organisation for the following three years and is negotiated with its Shareholding Minister. It defines PWC’s strategies, risks, investment plans and performance targets. For remote communities’ water supplies, the SCI commits PWC to implement the Strategy for Safe Water. This involves improving the quality of drinking water supplied in the nominated Indigenous communities, consistent with the ADWG. Given that the Australian Government has selected 20 Territory Growth Towns plus an additional five to be centres for regional service delivery and transition, these communities are the ones where infrastructure upgrades are likely to occur in the near future.169

5.2.3 Sector trends Addressing consumption growth Alice Springs and Darwin have the largest water consumption per capita of any Australian major urban centre and unlike most other major urban areas across Australia, consumption has not declined significantly over the last five years. Water consumption rates are shown in Table 5.4. The high consumption growth is reflective of low water prices, a single flat tariff structure, and consumer perceptions of the availability of water and outdoor water use during the dry season. For Darwin in the short to medium term, the high water usage rate is not generally a concern as the Darwin River

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

ACT SA Qld NSW VIC NT WA

cent

s/kl

Average All

Effect of Regulators' Draft and Final Decisions in 2010/11

Effect of Announced Tariff Increases in 2010/11

Residential Tariff as at 1 April 2010

Potable water

63

Dam can provide sufficient low cost, high quality water. However within a few decades, demand may exceed supply meaning that either consumption per capita has to reduce or additional water sources have to be obtained. Another factor that may influence supply is climate change. The CSIRO has estimated that the amount of water available for use from the Darwin River Dam may be reduced by up to 10% over the next 50 years.170 Table 5.4: Water consumption rates of Darwin, Alice Springs and selected other cities (kl/property)171

Utility 2003/04 2004/05 2005/06 2006/07 2007/08 2008/09

Darwin 441 444 443 483 480 491

Alice Springs na na 535 536 563 532

Sydney Water 224 211 203 199 182 198

Perth 285 277 268 281 268 277

Brisbane 258 264 185 153 128 133

5.3 Performance Key parameters to assess infrastructure performance are the levels of services, water quality indicators and water complaints. Indicators of levels of service include water breaks, water loss and average duration of interruptions. Figure 5.4 shows that compared to similar-sized utilities, Darwin’s level of breaks is high. Compared to similar sized utilities, Alice Springs’ mains breaks is the highest in its class for the last three reported years.172 Figure 5.4: Water main breaks per 100km of water main for utilities with between 20,000 and 50,000 connected properties173

Water losses occur due to leakage from pipes, fittings and water services, and pipe breaks. In the most recently reported period, PWC lost 12.2%174 of its total production (i.e. the difference between the water produced and the water sold). For Darwin, water loss per connected property is the highest of similar sized Australian utilities as seen in Figure 5.5. In 2008/09, Alice Springs performance was mid-range. The increase in water losses for Darwin in 2008/09 is a reflection of the increases in water main breaks that year. A leak reduction program is ongoing in Darwin and Alice Springs. Installation of pressure reducing valves to avoid areas of excessive pressure has recently been implemented in Palmerston and a review of the system benefits will be completed by 2013. The Alice Springs water supply system is currently under review to determine the most effective pressure management solution.175

Water

64

Figure 5.5: Water losses for utilities between 20,000 and 50,000 connected properties (litres/service connection/day)176

PWC is pursuing a range of initiatives to reduce water loss including targeting water theft, undergrounding fire hydrants and improving leak detection through the use of its ultrasonic leak detection van. The duration and frequency of unplanned water supply interruptions provide an indicator on condition of the water network and the network management. Table 5.5 shows that the average duration of unplanned interruption is below the target. Table 5.5: Unplanned interruptions performance figures for PWC177

2004/05 2005/06 2006/07 2007/08 2008/09 2009/10 2010/11 target178

Average duration of unplanned interruption (hours)

Darwin 0.90 0.79 0.94 0.9 1.2 na 1.5

Alice Springs 1.81 1.67 1.96 1.7 1.4 na 2.0

Average frequency of unplanned interruption (per 1,000 customers)

Darwin 175 157 120 160 200 na na

Alice Springs n/a 172 286 133 114 na na

Figure 5.6 shows that compared to similar sized utilities, the average duration of unplanned interruption in Darwin is low. It is also mid range in Alice Springs.179 Figure 5.6: Average duration of an unplanned interruption- water (minutes) for utilities with between 20,000 and 50,000 connected properties180

Potable water

65

Water systems have their water continuously monitored and assessed in accordance with the ADWG. The monitoring covers biological, microbiological, physical and chemical parameters of the water supplied, using samples from dams, treatment plants, local reservoirs, and the garden taps of consumers. The key performance measure for microbiological water quality is the bacteria count of Escherichia coli (E. coli). The presence of E. coli means that water may be contaminated with faecal material. The ADWG’s requirement for E. coli is that ‘at least 98% of scheduled samples contain no E. coli’.181 A limitation of using the E. coli indicator is that while total coliforms are the most sensitive, they are the least specific indicator group for faecal contamination. Water recently contaminated by faeces will always contain coliforms, but as some coliforms also occur naturally in soil and vegetation, coliforms may sometimes be present in water in the absence of faecal contamination. Coliforms other than those of faecal origin can be present in drinking water as a result of the presence of biofilms on pipes and fixtures or contact with soil as a result of fractures or repair works.182 Figure 5.7 shows the performance in major service areas centres. Figure 5.7: Percentage of samples taken in major service areas centres in which no E. coli were detected from 2004-08183

Figure 5.8 shows the performance in minor service areas centres. Figure 5.8: Percentage of samples taken in minor centres in which no E. coli were detected from 2004-08184

PWC also monitors N. Fowleri which is a small, free-living thermophylic amoeba found in damp soil and warm water, and can cause fatal primary amoebic meningoencephalitis. It also monitors the level of Burkholderia pseudomallei, the organism that causes the disease melioidosis (commonly

96.5%

97.0%

97.5%

98.0%

98.5%

99.0%

99.5%

100.0%

100.5%

Alice Springs Darwin Katherine Tennant Creek

Yulara

2007/2008

2006/2007

2005/2006

2004/2005

94%

95%

96%

97%

98%

99%

100%

101% 2007/20082006/20072005/20062004/2005

Water

66

known as Nightcliff Gardener’s Disease). Up to 2007/08, no samples tested from PWC’s major and service areas centres were identified with this. All water supplies are protected by a number barriers to minimise the potential for water supply contamination. Table 5.6 summarises the current barriers in place in the major and minor service area centres to ensure the supply of safe drinking water. It identifies that Tennant Creek has the fewest protective barriers and is thus an area of concern.185 Table 5.6: Water quality barriers in major and minor service areas centres186

Notes: White indicates no barrier. Light grey a partial barrier and dark grey indicates full barrier. N/A – Not Applicable

With respect to the physical and chemical properties of water, Table 5.7 shows there are a number of areas where urban water supplies exceed guideline values. Table 5.7: Major and service areas centres where health, aesthetic and other parameters exceeded guideline values (2007/08)*187

Exceeded parameters

Alice Springs Iodide, Hardness

Darwin Chlorine (free)

Tennant Creek Fluoride, Iodide

Daly Water Iodide, Selenium, Chloride, Hardness, Sodium, Total dissolved solids

Adelaide River Ion, Manganese

Batchelor Hardness

Borroloola pH

Elliot Hardness, Total dissolved solids

Larrimah Hardness, Total dissolved solids

Mataranka Hardness, Iron, Total dissolved solids

Newcastle Waters Hardness

Pine Creek Chlorine (free)

Ti-Tree Hardness

Timber Creek Hardness * Data was not available for several parameters in a number of minor centres

As each of the parameters pose a different level of risk to the consumer, PWC in consultation with the Department of Health and Community Services has developed a risk score for each water system. It is based on combining likelihood and consequences. Weightings include relatively

Potable water

67

significant health impact being given 10, relatively minor health impact being given 5 and relatively significant aesthetic impact being given 5. Table 5.8 gives the relative risk score for all systems and identifies that Tennant Creek, Kings Canyon and Daly Waters have the highest risk scores due to elevated levels of iodide and also for Tennant Creek fluoride. Table 5.8: Relative risk scoring for all centres 2007/08188

Rank Location Relative Risk Score

1 Tennant Creek 31.0

2 Kings Canyon 28.1

3 Daly Waters 23.0

4 Mataranka 18.1

5 Pine Creek 11.3

6 Timber Creek 10.0

7 Larrimah 9.3

8 Alice Springs 7.5

9 Elliott 6.0

10 Newcastle Waters 5.5

11 Ti Tree 5.5

12 Adelaide River 0.0

13 Batchelor 0.0

14 Borroloola 0.0

15 Cox Peninsula 0.0

16 Darwin 0.0

17 Katherine 0.0

18 Yulara 0.0

Water quality complaints reflect consumer concern over the visual and palatable aspects of potable water. As seen in Table 5.9 complaints in Darwin have risen significantly. Table 5.9: Water quality complaints 2003-08 (Total number of complaints)189

Location 2003/04 2004/05 2005/06 2006/07 2007/08

Darwin 76 121 112 147 373

Alice Springs 8 3 8 5 1

Katherine DNA 6 7 2 na

Total 84 130 127 154 374

PWC stated that the nature of discoloured water complaints concerning the Darwin water supply is largely governed by changes in water quality and demand associated with the Wet and Dry Seasons. Darwin River Reservoir is subject to stratification with deeper water having lower aesthetic quality. When the lower strata gets transported to the surface due to strong winds, cloudy days, or seasonal changes, it gets drawn into the supply system. This water then precipitates out iron and manganese compounds that appear unsightly. While not posing a health risk, PWC works to avoid this situation, primarily through mains flushing. Another source of complaints are odour and taste problems. These are mainly related to fluctuating high chlorine levels which arises due to changing water demand and reflects the chlorine residual in the reticulation network. Cloudy water complaints arise mainly from the presence of dissolved air in the water which occurs after water mains repairs, and floating particles complaints arise from harmless white algae. PWC’s approach to these issues includes flushing and education.190

Water

68

Potable water on remote communities There are significant challenges facing potable water supply in remote communities. As seen in Table 5.10, in 2008/09 there were eight communities where E- coli compliance did not meet microbiological guidelines. This is an improvement on the 12 communities in 2007/08 and 16 in 2006/07.191 The table also shows that the chemical water quality in 15 communities was equal to or exceeded the health guidelines.192 It should be noted that not all the physical and chemical guideline exceedances will make the water less palatable, for instance low pH water will still taste good. Bore supplies in many remote areas are of limited capacity, and supply water with substandard quality parameters including hardness, salinity, acidity, and/or levels of heavy metals, fluoride and arsenic. As a consequence, infrastructure, including domestic fixtures, can suffer rapid deterioration from corrosion, as well as provide consumers with poor tasting water. Table 5.10: Remote communities that experience microbiological quality, physical and chemical parameter exceedence (2008/09)*

Region Communities where E- coli compliance failure occurred

Description of physical and chemical issues193

Communities where physical and chemical guideline exceedences occurred (parameter of exceedence)194

Northern Region

Palumpa Pilangimpi Wadeye

As most of the Northern Region communities are within 100km of the coastline, water supplies have both low hardness and pH levels. They also have low average fluoride levels and currently fluoride is not added to the water supplies.

• Acacia Larrakia (hardness) • Angurugu (pH) • Belyuen (pH) • Galiwinku (iron, pH) • Gapuwiyak (pH) • Gunbalanya (pH) • Maningrida • Marngarr • Milikapiti (pH), • Millingimbi (pH), • Milyakburra (pH), • Minjilang (pH), • Nauiyu Nambiyu (arsenic, iron, manganese,

turbidity) • Nguiu (pH), • Numbulwar (hardness, iron, manganese, turbidity) • Oenpelli • Palumpa (iodine) • Peppimenarti (iron, manganese) • Pirlangimpi (pH) • Ramingining • Umbakumba (pH), • Wadeye (pH), • Warruwi (pH), • Yirrkala (pH),

Potable water

69

Region Communities where E- coli compliance failure occurred

Description of physical and chemical issues193

Communities where physical and chemical guideline exceedences occurred (parameter of exceedence)194

Katherine Region

The groundwater in the Katherine Region has been highly mineralised, resulting in higher concentration of natural physical, chemical, and radiological characteristics. Typically in the Katherine region, the aesthetic water qualities in communities are within the recommended pH range of 6.5-8.5 pH units. About half the communities have higher total dissolved solids and hardness levels than recommended.

• Amanabidji (hardness, sodium, total dissolved solids)

• Barunga (iron) • Beswick (antimony, arsenic, hardness) • Binjarri (hardness) • Bulla (hardness, iron, manganese) • Bullman (hardness) • Daguragu (hardness) • Djilkminggan (chloride, hardness, iodine, sodium,

total dissolved solids) • Eva Valley (pH) • Jodetluk • Kalkarindgi (hardness) • Kybrook Farm • Lajamanu (hardness, iodine, total dissolved solids) • Minyerri (iron, manganese, turbidity) • Ngukurr (Barium, chloride, hardness, iron, total

dissolved solids) • Pigeon Hole (hardness, iron, true colour, turbidity) • Rittarangu (hardness) • Robinson River (hardness, total dissolved solids) • Weemol (hardness) • Yarralin (hardness)

Barkly Region

Ali Curung Willowra

The groundwater in the Barkly Region has been highly mineralised, resulting in higher concentration of natural physical, chemical, and radiological characteristics. In some instances the physical and chemical quality of the water may exceed the recommended levels, such as total dissolved solids and hardness.

• Ali Curung (fluoride, nitrate, hardness, iodine, sodium, total dissolved solids)

• Alpurrurulum (fluoride, hardness, iodine, total dissolved solids)

• Canteen Creek (iodine, total dissolved solids) • Imangara (hardness) • Nturiya (uranium, chloride, hardness, iodine,

sodium, total dissolved solids) • Tara (chloride, hardness, iodine, sodium, total

dissolved solids) • Willowra uranium, hardness, iodine, total dissolved

solids) • Wilora (uranium, chloride, hardness, iodine,

sodium, total dissolved solids) • Wutunugurra

Water

70

Region Communities where E- coli compliance failure occurred

Description of physical and chemical issues193

Communities where physical and chemical guideline exceedences occurred (parameter of exceedence)194

Southern Region

Areyonga Nyirripi Papunya

The groundwater in the Southern Region has been highly mineralised, resulting in higher concentration of natural physical, chemical, and radiological characteristics. The groundwater in the region is characterised by high total dissolved solids and high hardness levels, which impact the palatability of the water and can cause moderate to severe scaling problems with infrastructure.

• Alcoota • Ampilatwatja (hardness, iodine, total dissolved

solids) • Apatula • Areyonga (hardness, total dissolved solids) • Atitjere (hardness, total dissolved solids) • Engawala (hardness, iodine, total dissolved solids) • Finke • Haasts Bluff (chloride, hardness, iodine, total

dissolved solids) • Harts Range • Hermannsburg (hardness, total dissolved solids) • Imanpa (hardness, sodium, total dissolved solids) • Kaltukatjara (hardness) • Kintore (nitrate, hardness, total dissolved solids) • Laramba (uranium, hardness, total dissolved

solids) • Mount Leibig (hardness, total dissolved solids) • Nyirripi (fluoride hardness, total dissolved solids) • Papunya (uranium, hardness, sodium, total

dissolved solids) • Pmara Jutunta (nitrate, hardness, total dissolved

solids) • Santa Teresa (hardness) • Titjikala (hardness, total dissolved solids) • Wallace Rockhole (hardness, total dissolved solids) • Yuelamu • Yuendumu (hardness, total dissolved solids)

Due to the increasing age of much of the distribution infrastructure in remote communities, water main breaks may be becoming more frequent, resulting in increasing interruptions to water supplies.

5.4 Future challenges The challenges in achieving improvements in potable water infrastructure in NT are: Reducing water demand. The Territory’s per capita water consumption is one of the highest of

all Australian urban centres. Reducing demand, rather than increasing supply, is a much more cost effective way in addressing water constraints. In addition, as some of the ground water supplies are non-renewable, unless demand is reduced communities may not be viable into the future.

Addressing deficiencies in urban water supplies. There are a number of urban centres where water quality does not meet AWDG guidelines. While only Tennant Creek is at significant risk from microbiological contamination due to its lack of disinfection, many other centres have water that exceeds physical and chemical guidelines. Addressing these will require significant investment in water treatment plants, which may not be possible in the medium term.

Improving remote communities’ water supplies. While the aim of the NT Government is to ensure that remote communities have access to high quality water, this may be difficult to achieve in the medium term as there is a large number of small communities with aesthetic water quality problems (scale and TDS) that will require significant infrastructure investment to improve the quality.

Identifying the impact of climate change. Climate change has the potential to significantly impact on potable water supply. For instance climate change is anticipated to have shorter but more intense rainfall periods resulting in higher volumes of run-off and lowering the recharge

Potable water

71

capacity of aquifers. In addition, increased storm surges and severe cyclones may cause disruptions and outages to the water supply, and sea-level rise may result in saltwater intrusion into northern aquifers.

5.5 Report Card rating

Infrastructure Type NT 2010 NT 2005 National 2005 National 2001

Potable water C- B- Metropolitan B- C

This rating recognises that there have been significant infrastructure improvements to water supplies at a number of urban and remote communities, as well as the identification of water supply system deficiencies across the Territory. However, there are a few locations where water supplies do not meet microbiological water quality guidelines and many locations where they do not meet physical and chemical water quality guidelines. Positives that have contributed to the rating are: Diversity of supply of Darwin’s water supply Increase in capacity of Darwin’s water supply High quality water supplying Darwin, eliminating the need for water treatment plants Disinfection improvement of remote communities water supplies Development of Community Water Plans Identification of water quality issues on outstations/homelands.

Negatives that have contributed to the rating are: Microbiological risks to Tennant Creek water system due to a lack of disinfection Failure to meet AMDG guidelines in a number of urban water and many remote community

water supply systems Excessive consumption of water and lack of demand management actions High level of pipeline breakages and water loss in Darwin and Alice Springs.

Water

72

73

6 Wastewater

6.1 Summary

Infrastructure Type NT 2010 NT 2005 National 2005 National 2001

Wastewater C- C Metropolitan C Remote communities

C+ C-

This rating recognises that raw sewage is still entering Darwin Harbour and localised problems arise from treated wastewater disposal in Darwin. However the quality of underground wastewater infrastructure in urban areas across the Territory is generally good, as are most urban wastewater treatment facilities. Wastewater infrastructure in remote communities remains a challenge and is becoming more of a problem as the remote population grows. Since the last Report Card, the major sewerage and recycled water sector developments in the Territory have been: Significant reduction in effluent overflows to the Ilparpa Swamp in Alice Springs Commencement of a project to close the Larrakeyah macerator and outfall Expansion and upgrade of sewerage systems in response to growing demand and increasingly

stringent discharge licences Wastewater infrastructure reviews undertaken for Territory Growth Towns through the Strategic

Indigenous Housing and Infrastructure Program Recently completed and in-progress major infrastructure projects include: Alice Springs Water Re-use project to recycle waste water for horticulture and irrigation On-going sewer relining project Sewer trunk works through the CBD to divert the Larrakeyah catchment to Ludmilla (in

progress) Upgrades to the capacity and performance of the Ludmilla wastewater treatment plant (in

progress) Extension of the East Point outfall to improve dispersion of treated wastewater (in progress) Commencement of the Angurugu Waste Stabilisation Ponds, Sewerage Pump Station, and

Effluent Disposal System (in progress) Commencement of the Palumpa Sewerage Pump Station and partial conversion of the existing

Septic Tank Effluent Pump Scheme (in progress) Challenges to improving wastewater infrastructure in NT include: Providing sewerage infrastructure in line with high levels of growth in Indigenous communities Upgrading infrastructure to comply with future discharge licences Maintaining water quality in Darwin Harbour.

6.2 Infrastructure overview

6.2.1 Wastewater systems Sewerage infrastructure consists of sewers, pump stations and wastewater treatment facilities. The section does not cover on-site wastewater systems (i.e. septic tank installations) or those small number of wastewater systems owned and operated by private entities, including mining operations and tourist resorts, and the Australian Government, including Defence bases and national parks.

Water

74

Sewage is produced by domestic households and by businesses/industrial operations (where it is known as trade waste). Sewerage systems are made up of reticulation mains, service branch lines, maintenance holes (manholes), pump stations, trunk sewers and sewage treatment plants. Most sewers flow under gravity, with these sewers designed so that there is sufficient slope to stop build-up that may lead to blockages. Wastewater systems in the Territory can be divided into urban area and remote communities’ wastewater systems. Both are provided by PWC or its subsidiary, IES, as the Territory’s monopoly wastewater service provider. Urban area wastewater systems PWC is licensed to provide wastewater services in 10 areas across the Territory. Major areas are Greater Darwin (including Palmerston and rural areas), Katherine, Tennant Creek, Alice Springs and Yulara, and minor areas are Batchelor, Adelaide River, Pine Creek, Kings Canyon and Borroloola. The service areas are identified in Figure 6.1. The Territory’s most common sewage treatment system is the waste stabilisation ponds (WSP) process. It uses a host of complex, diverse and interrelated natural biological processes to treat sewage, with a combination of aerobic and anaerobic bacteria purifying it. The WSP process uses algae to generate oxygen through photosynthesis. The WSP process operates very effectively in tropical environments. Other treatment processes used in the Territory include chemically-assisted sedimentation (CAS), dissolved air flotation (DAF), microfiltration and activated sludge.195 The types of treatment processes and their discharge locations are identified in Table 6.1. Table 6.1: Types of treatment processes and discharge techniques used in the Territory196

Location Inflow (Ml/Year)

Treatment Process

Discharge To

Darwin Harbour

Estuary Freshwater Body

Evaporation

Adelaide River Not Available

WSP Y* Y

Alice Springs 2,913.95 WSP Y Y

Batchelor Not Available

WSP Y

Berrimah 242.98 WSP Y Y

Borroloola Not Available

WSP Y

Humpty Doo 53.64 WSP Y

Katherine 913.42 WSP Y* Y

Kings Canyon Not Available

WSP Y

Larrakeyah 1267.12 Maceration Y

Leanyer/Sanderson 7300.60 WSP Y Y

Ludmilla 5579.89 CAS Y

Palmerston 3159.06 WSP Y Y

Pine Creek 61.66 WSP Y Y

Tennant Creek 393.06 WSP Y

Yulara 246.11 Activated sludge

Y

Wastewater

75

Figure 6.1: PWC sewerage service areas*197

* Only sewerage supply licence areas are shown and remote Indigenous communities are not shown.

A description of the Territory’s major wastewater treatment facilities is contained in Table 6.2.

Water

76

Table 6.2: The Territory’s major wastewater treatment facilities198

Location Description

Adelaide River Sewage from the town of Adelaide River is treated in a three-pond system. These ponds occasionally discharge during high rainfall events. Otherwise, the high evaporation rate is sufficient to cater for the small inflows.

Alice Springs Sewage from Alice Springs is treated in four sets of ponds, each built at different times. The oldest system lies in the western end of the Commonage. Newer ponds were constructed progressively on the west side of the original pond site. Effluent is discharged through evaporation, irrigation at Blatherskite Park and transported to the Arid Zone Research Institute for Soil Aquifer Treatment (SAT). Prior to 2008, excess effluent would overflow to Ilparpa Swamp but this has since been significantly reduced with commissioning of the SAT system. Effluent is now treated at a DAF plant prior to irrigation at Blatherskite Park or transfer to the SAT system.

Batchelor Sewage from the town of Batchelor is treated in a four pond system. Due to high evaporation rates and the large storage capacity of the ponds, no discharge occurs to the environment.

Berrimah The Berrimah WSPs are a small set of three ponds running in series. Domestic sewage from the suburb of Berrimah and industrial wastewater from the Darwin Business Park is treated here. Discharge is to an estuary.

Borroloola Sewage from the town of Borroloola is treated in a set of three ponds. The effluent is used to irrigate pasture on site or is allowed to evaporate.

Humpty Doo The Humpty Doo WSPs treat sewage from Humpty Doo. The treated effluent is sprayed to land near to the ponds to facilitate evaporation.

Katherine Sewage from Katherine is treated in a set of nine ponds. The treated water is discharged either to land through irrigation or to the Katherine River. No effluent is discharged into the Katherine River during the Dry Season. Discharge to the river occurs only during the Wet Season when it can be mixed with floodwaters.

Kings Canyon A four pond set of WSPs at Kings Canyon treats all the sewage from the Kings Canyon Resort and surrounding community. The treated water is used to irrigate a tree lot on the site. Due to high evaporation rates and the large storage capacity of the ponds, no effluent is discharged outside the facility.

Leanyer Sanderson

The Leanyer Sanderson WSPs are the largest set of ponds in the Territory. They treat most of the sewage from the northern suburbs of Darwin. Two sets of five ponds each operate in parallel. Some of the treated water is pumped to Northlakes where, after more advanced treatment, it is used to irrigate the Darwin Golf Course and the Marrara sporting ovals. The remaining treated water is discharged into the estuary of Buffalo Creek.

Ludmilla Ludmilla Wastewater Treatment Plant treats sewage coming from Nightcliff, Winnellie and most of the inner city. The treatment process includes grit removal and solids screening, chlorination, and chemical assisted sedimentation. Sludge is transferred to the Leanyer-Sanderson site where it is buried. The treated water is discharged via a pipeline to Darwin Harbour.

Larrakeyah The sewage from the CBD and the suburb of Larrakeyah is macerated; that is, larger solids are broken down, and discharged at a deepwater outfall into Darwin Harbour.

Northlakes The Northlakes Water Reclamation Plant takes water from the Leanyer Sanderson WSPs for further treatment. Chemicals are added to separate solids, mostly algae, from the water. Dissolved air is used to float the solids to the surface of the water where they are removed. Micro-filtration then removes fine particles to produce water for use on the Darwin Golf Course and Marrara sporting ovals.

Palmerston Palmerston WSPs treat all the sewage from Palmerston. This site also receives some tradewaste, mostly grease trap waste, and much of the septic tank waste from the rural and un-sewered areas. A set of five ponds operating in series treats this waste before discharge to the estuary. An additional small pond was constructed to receive and pre-treat the trade waste before transfer to the main ponds.

Pine Creek Sewage from Pine Creek is treated in a three pond set. These ponds occasionally discharge into the nearby creek during high rainfall events. Otherwise, the high evaporation rate is sufficient to cater for the small inflows.

Tennant Creek Tennant Creek’s sewage is treated in a set of multiple ponds. Due to high evaporation rates and the large storage capacity of the ponds, no discharge occurs to the environment.

Yulara The Yulara activated sludge plant treats the sewage from the Ayers Rock Resort complex as well as the town. The plant uses mechanical aeration (activated sludge process) to degrade organic matter and to purify the sewage. Effluent from this plant is polished in a set of ponds. The treated effluent irrigates land adjacent the ponds.

Wastewater

77

PWC wastewater statistics are listed in Table 6.3. Table 6.3: PWC wastewater statistics199

2003/04 2004/05 2005/06 2006/07 2007/08 2008/09 2009/10

Total sewage collected (ML) 20,579 15,626 19,329 18,897 19,745 19,549 22,182*

Length of sewer mains (km) 997 1,007 1,014 1,036 1,042 1,083 1,075

Customers (i.e. services) 45,612 46,296 48,123 48,661 51,217 53,661 50,800 * Excludes Adelaide River, Batchelor, Borroloola and Kings Canyon due to lack of metering.

Remote communities’ wastewater systems 56 sewerage systems are managed by PWC’s subsidiary, IES across the 72 remote Territory communities and 66 nominated outstations. IES has an agreement with the NT Government, through the Department of Housing, Local Government and Regional Services for the reliable and equitable delivery of essential services to these communities.200 The statistics of IES’s wastewater services are detailed in Table 6.4, and the location of service provision is shown in Figure 6.2. Table 6.4: IES’s wastewater services201

2003/04 2004/05 2005/06 2006/07 2007/08 2008/09 2009/10

Volume of sewage treated (ML) 2,636 2,732 3,508 3,552 3,835 3,940 3,917

Length of sewer mains (km) 296 302 302 303 303 305 307

Customers (i.e. services) 401 407 420 420 426 432 465

Wastewater in these communities either flows to the WSPs via a reticulated system or is collected from on-site systems.202 Current infrastructure developments at remote communities are: Commencement of the Angurugu Waste Stabilisation Ponds, Sewerage Pump Station, and

Effluent Disposal System (in progress) Commencement of the Palumpa Sewerage Pump Station and partial conversion of the existing

Septic Tank Effluent Pump Scheme (in progress).

6.2.2 Recycled water systems Recycled water is water derived from sewerage systems that is treated to a standard appropriate for its intended use. The selection and management of recycled water systems in the Territory aligns with the 2006 Australian Guidelines for Water Recycling: Managing Health and Environmental Risks. This is based on a risk management approach that incorporates the concept of producing recycled water of a quality that is ‘fit-for-purpose’. Uses for recycled water include irrigation, industrial processes and non-potable domestic uses. Benefits of recycled water include reducing the volume of nutrient-rich water entering coastal and riverine ecosystems, and supplying nutrient-rich solids for agricultural purposes. Recycled water is not used as a potable water supply anywhere in the Territory. In the last few years, the NT Department of Health and Families has published a series of guidelines and fact sheets to provide information about of recycled water. These have included Design of Sewage Ponds and Recycling (2009), Standards for Microbiological Quality of Recycled Water for Irrigating Food Crops (2009) and Guidelines for Management of Recycled Water Systems (2009). The major users of recycled water are listed in Table 6.5. Table 6.5: Summary of recycled water schemes in the Territory203

Scheme Application Volume Recycled (Ml)

Northlakes Darwin Golf Course 308.61

Marrara Marrara sports ovals 132.77

Blatherskite Park Open space & sports ovals 791.78

Alice Springs Horticulture Yet to draw down from SAT system

Water

78

Figure 6.2: Location of remote communities’ wastewater systems204

PWC recycled about 11.5% of its water in 2008/09 and Figure 6.3 shows the reuse rate over the last few years. This recycled water comes from the urban area wastewater systems as no recycling occurs in the remote communities.

Wastewater

79

Figure 6.3: PWC recycled water volume205

The most recent major recycled water development has been the Water Reuse in the Alice project. This has involved taking water from the Alice Springs Water Reclamation Plant which has been supplying Blatherskite Park with recycled water since January 2008 and also transporting recycled water by pipeline to the Arid Zone Research Institute (AZRI), 8km south of Alice Springs, where it is delivered to SAT to further improve its quality. SAT is an infiltration process when water enters underground aquifer storage via SAT basins. The water in the aquifer can then be retrieved and used later. Horticultural trials using the recycled water are due to commence in 2010/11. Wastewater pricing In PWC’s urban sewage areas, the wastewater tariff is based on a fixed annual charge. The tariff is uniform across the Territory. For residential properties and vacant blocks, it is currently $513.65. It applies whether the service is connected or not, and regardless of the number of sanitary fittings in each residence.206 Following from the Reeves inquiry into PWC’s financial sustainability, the NT Government announced 20% increases in sewerage tariffs for 1 July 2009, 2010 and 2011. The annual residential sewerage bills in the NT compared with other jurisdictions is shown in Figure 6.4. Figure 6.4: Average annual residential sewerage bill as at 1 April 2010 and announced charge increases for 2010/11207

The tariff comparisons are as at 1 April 2010, and incorporate tariff increases announced by utilities and the Regulators’ Draft and Final Decisions. The chart above shows expected annual residential sewerage bills at 1 July 2010. From 1 July 2010 residential sewerage tariffs in the Territory will increase by 20%. The increases forecast in other jurisdictions based on the Regulators’ Draft Decisions may differ from the Final Decision or may not be fully passed on to customers.

Given the different cost of provision for sewerage services in the Territory and the uniform sewerage tariff, there is cross subsidy between the different systems. The provision of sewerage

0

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

2,500

2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009

ML

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

WA ACT NT NSW SA VIC Qld

$ pa

Average AllEffect of Regulators' Draft and Final Decisions in 2010/11Effect of Announced Tariff Increases in 2010/11Residential Tariff as at 1 April 2010Average AllEffect of Regulators' Draft and Final Decisions in 2010/11

Water

80

services in Darwin generates a surplus of $3.8 million but a deficit in Katherine ($2.1 million), Tennant Creek ($0.7 million) and Alice Springs/Yulara ($0.5 million).208 The NT Government also pays over $60 million a year to PWC for water and wastewater for CSOs. Until 2007, very few sewerage services customers supplied by IES were charged. Those charged were predominantly NT Government facilities and employee housing. In 2007/08, the user-pays policy was extended to sewerage customers other than domestic Indigenous households, and in 2008/09 extended to Shire Councils for Shire Council employee housing and facilities. However, the number of customers for sewerage services only increased marginally from 420 in 2006 to 465 in 2010.209

6.2.3 Policy and governance There is no formal Territory-wide sewerage strategy. Instead, PWC has a strategy for Darwin and is developing one for Indigenous communities. The Darwin Sewerage Strategy was first developed in 1994 and its main feature was to close the Larrakeyah outfall and to upgrade the Ludmilla Wastewater Treatment Plant to treat the diverted sewage flows, with much of the treated effluent used to irrigate open space.210 Currently under development is a wastewater management strategy for remote communities. The strategy aims to provide direction and action plans for the management of these systems. It will include an assessment of the current wastewater systems to prioritise the implementation, operational management, water-quality monitoring programs, infrastructure investment and compliance and regulatory requirements.211 Key wastewater legislation is: Water Act. This Act governs discharge licences for treated wastewater. While the Water Act

prohibits the pollution of water, it allows for authorised waste discharge. The authorisation takes the form of a waste discharge licence that regulates the quantity and quality of wastewater discharged to receiving waters in the Territory for which environmental values (beneficial uses) have been formally declared. The licence may also set conditions for reduction in volume, water recycling and treatment, and asset management. NRETAS administers the Water Act.

Waste Management and Pollution Control Act. This Act establishes the regulatory requirements to manage waste to avoid pollution. The Act prescribes a number of environmental offences, and requires that pollution incidents including sewage overflows be reported within 24 hours.212

The Controller of Water Resources issues discharge licences and has done so for PWC for Berrimah, Katherine, Larrakeyah, Leanyer/Sanderson, Ludmilla, Palmerston and Alice Springs. PWC’s other wastewater facilities (i.e. those at Adelaide River, Batchelor, Borroloola, Humpty Doo, Kings Canyon, Pine Creek, Tennant Creek and Yulara) do not require a discharge licence. This is because they either discharge into an area that has not been declared as having environmental value, or no wastewater is discharged off the site because of large storage capacity, high evaporation rates or on-site irrigation.213 The NT Government sets standards for sewerage services. It also determines the sewerage tariff.

6.2.4 Sector trends Continuance of upgrading as a result of increased demand and increased environmental requirements Upgrades to sewerage infrastructure are occurring as a result of anticipated increased demand arising from economic development and population growth, and to comply with environmental

Wastewater

81

regulations. The largest sewerage infrastructure project underway is the works associated with the closure of the Larrakeyah sewage outfall. This project will eliminate untreated sewage discharges to the Darwin Harbour from the Larrakeyah sewage outfall and needs to be completed by October 2011 to satisfy discharge licence requirements. Work still to be completed (at September 2010) includes: building a new truck sewer adjacent to Larrakeyah macerator to divert flows upgrade of Doctors Gully and Dinah Beach sewerage pump stations to cater for diverted flows building a new rising main from Doctors Gully Sewerage Pump Station building a new trunk main across the city using micro-tunnelling to take diverted flows from

Mitchell Street to Dinah Beach increased treatment capacity at Ludmilla Wastewater Treatment Plant future duplication of the East Point effluent rising main future extension of the East Point outfall.

Other infrastructure projects include: Expanding the wastewater treatment facilities at Leanyer/Sanderson to accommodate the

increased demand from development in the Lee Point area. This involves the upgrade of the Leanyer Wastewater Treatment Plant to improve performance, provide capacity for future growth, improve odour control and to meet more stringent discharge parameters expected in future licences.

Design and construction of a fully reticulated sewerage system in Borroloola. Upgrading the Katherine Waste Water Treatment Plant treatment pond so as to meet current

and projected sewerage loads and to reduce the effluent discharge into the Katherine River.214 The need to improve the quality of effluent being discharged to Buffalo Creek and the Lee Point area has arisen because NRETAS has identified as a moderate to high environmental risk the quality of effluent being discharged to Buffalo Creek and the Lee Point area, and this has been a consideration in the upgrade of the Leanyer/Sanderson facilities.215 216 Changes in future discharge licences may drive additional capital investment projects by PWC so that it complies with new conditions. The discharge licences for the Darwin, Katherine and Alice Springs areas expire at the end of 2011.217 The project at Katherine has been triggered by changes in the wastewater discharge licence.

6.3 Performance Sewerage performance measures relate to: Frequency of mains sewer spills and blockages Duration of service failures Compliance with discharge licences.

Sewer spills occur when the sewerage system cannot contain the sewage flow, typically caused by fats and tree roots (in the Dry Season, exotic and native trees seek out the moisture in sewer pipes), or when stormwater enters in a sufficiently large volume to overwhelm the sewerage system. Most overflows in the tropical north occur because of stormwater inflow and infiltration during monsoon rain. The number of overflows is low as seen in Table 6.6. It is also low compared to similar sized wastewater systems interstate.218 Table 6.6: Sewerage overflows in the Territory219

2003/04 2004/05 2005/06 2006/07 2007/08 2008/09 2009/10

Number of overflows 7 10 4 7 7 9 7

Water

82

For similar sized utilities, Darwin’s and Alice Springs’ sewerage systems (which are the only ones reported in the National Water Commission’s National Performance Report project) report a low number of sewer main breaks and chokes compared to similar utilities nationwide. This is seen in Figure 6.5 which shows the Darwin system’s performance along with that from similar sized utilities. Figure 6.5: Sewer main breaks and chokes per 100km of sewer main (for utilities with between 20,000 and 50,000 connected properties)220

Table 6.7 identifies average hours off supply for unplanned interruptions per customer. It shows achievement of the 2011/12 target in all years. Table 6.7: Average minutes off supply for unplanned interruptions per customer for PWC221

2005/06 2006/07 2007/08 2008/09 2009/10 2011/12 target222

Darwin 48 57 56 74 64 120

Alice Springs 100 118 100 85 133 150

PWC’s sewage treatment facilities are required to comply with its discharge licences as set out in Table 6.8. Discharge licences prescribe quantitative discharge limits for several measurements including dry and wet weather flow, pH, biochemical oxygen demand (BOD), suspended solids, Escherichia coli (E.coli), total nitrogen, free ammonia and total phosphorus.223 Wastewater collection systems in the Territory are generally of adequate capacity and are in good condition. The exception is for older systems, particularly in Darwin, where the sewers have deteriorated and the capacity is compromised by high infiltration/inflow during rain events. An ongoing sewer relining program is rehabilitating these older sewers to extend their useful life and to reduce infiltration. Pumping stations in major centres are generally of adequate capacity and level of maintenance. WSPs represent appropriate technology for the climatic and socio-economic conditions encountered in the Territory. However, there is potential need for better control of nutrient and suspended solids discharged to the waterways. This will require substantial investment in higher levels of treatment. This is particularly important where on-site or other acceptable disposal options are not feasible. Extreme wet weather flows, which result in infiltration and stormwater inflows to the sewer system, remain a concern across all areas in the Top End. Wastewater disposal in the Darwin Region remains a matter for concern. While high dilution factors available due to tidal movements are a mitigating factor, the existence of significant raw sewage and primary treated effluent outfalls within Darwin Harbour falls short of current nationally-accepted standards. The soon to be completed closure of Larrakeyah outfall will assist greatly with this.

Wastewater

83

Table 6.8: Annual environmental mass loading as required by Waste Discharge Licences224

Discharge Location

Waste Discharge Licence No.

Suspended Solids

(tonnes)

Volatile Suspended

Solids (tonnes)

Ammonia (tonnes)

Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen (tonnes)

Total Phosphorus

(tonnes)

BOD* (tonnes)

Berrimah WDL 69 24.9 23.1 0.69 3.78 1.37 6.63

Katherine WDL 73 30.6 30.1 1.08 4.94 1.42 28.3

Larrakeyah WDL 70 275 253 36.5 57.6 12.1 191

Leanyer Sanderson

WDL 72 717 599 12.2 78.8 42.6 241

Ludmilla WDL 71 482 332 87.6 122 28.1 287

Palmerston WDL 68 181 170 40.1 69.1 17.8 62.3

Alice Springs EP7 outlet

WDL 139 36.3 33.3 0.56 4.77 1.44 15.8

Alice Springs EP10 Outlet

WDL 139 96.3 83.4 0.37 9.59 2.18 20.9

Alice Springs Ponds B/C outlet

WDL 139 0.28 0.22 0.06 0.10 0.03 0.16

* The amount of dissolved oxygen consumed in five days by biological processes

For remote communities’ wastewater systems, PWC notes that effluent discharge to the environment and sewage overflows remain a significant challenge as regulatory obligations increase. In addition it notes that effluent collection systems, where septic tanks are retained and deemed the responsibility of the customer or house owner, are proving problematic in the absence of routine maintenance.225 Some remote community treatment systems are overloaded. This often results in uncontrolled discharge of effluent to the environment. This is particularly a challenge in the Wet Season when infiltration rates are high. A significant amount of asbestos cement pipework is currently in use in many communities, with much of this in poor condition, increasing infiltration issues. Poor historical plumbing legacy issues are being progressively addressed by current and recent housing programs.

6.4 Future challenges The challenges to achieving improvements in wastewater and recycled water infrastructure are: Providing sewerage infrastructure in line with high levels of growth in Indigenous

communities. The growth rate in Indigenous communities is very high and will require expansion in infrastructure and improvements in asset management.

Upgrading infrastructure to comply with future discharge licences. It is likely that future discharge licences will have more stringent environmental requirements. Meeting these may require expensive upgrades to infrastructure, especially in the remote communities.

Maintaining water quality in Darwin Harbour. Raw sewage is still entering Darwin Harbour which is not acceptable. Even once the Larrakeyah outfall is closed, nutrient loadings from Darwin’s wastewater treatment facilities may still cause water-quality problems. In addition, there are localised problems of treated wastewater disposal in Darwin that need to be addressed, such as at Buffalo Creek.

Water

84

6.5 Report Card rating

Infrastructure Type NT 2010 NT 2005 National 2005 National 2001

Wastewater C- C Metropolitan C Remote communities

C+ C-

This rating recognises that raw sewage is still entering Darwin Harbour and localised problems arise from treated wastewater disposal in Darwin. However the quality of underground wastewater infrastructure in urban areas across the Territory is generally good, as are most urban wastewater treatment facilities. Wastewater infrastructure in remote communities remains a challenge and is becoming more of a problem as the remote population grows. Positives that have contributed to the rating are: Upgrading of wastewater systems in response to new regulatory requirements Closure of the Larrakeyah outfall and expansion of the Ludmilla wastewater treatment facility

and complementary infrastructure Development of a wastewater management strategy for remote communities.

Negatives that have contributed to the rating are: Raw sewage entering Darwin Harbour Problems in capacity and operation of remote community sewerage systems.

85

7 Stormwater

7.1 Summary

Infrastructure Type NT 2010 NT 2005 National 2005 National 2001

Stormwater B- C+ C- D

This rating recognises that in new urban areas, stormwater systems are of a much higher quality, reflecting new design standards. There is a lack of condition information on stormwater assets in all urban areas, and in many areas, a gap is appearing between replacement funding and need. While the benefits of Water Sensitive Urban Design are recognised, there has been very limited application of this to date. Since the last Report Card, the major stormwater sector developments in the Territory have been: Increased attention to improving stormwater asset data Development of Water Sensitive Urban Design (WSUD) concepts and practice for the Darwin

Region Developing a Gross Pollutant Trap master plan for the Darwin City Council Darwin City Council commencement of an annual inspection program to identify stormwater

asset maintenance requirements. Challenges to improving stormwater infrastructure in NT include: Implementing WSUD in the tropical north Expanding WSUD principles to arid regions Improving the quality of information on stormwater infrastructure The need to reduce the environmental impact of stormwater into Darwin Harbour.

7.2 Infrastructure overview This section focuses on urban stormwater infrastructure as it relates to runoff from local areas via gutters, pipes, open drains and overland flows. It does not consider infrastructure relating to mainstream flooding caused by the passage of floodwaters down a catchment, or to coastal flooding.

7.2.1 System description Stormwater is rainfall that runs off urban areas, typically roofs, roads and impervious man-made surfaces. Stormwater infrastructure comprises: Engineered pipes, culverts, channels and retarding basins Natural creeks, waterways and wetlands Stormwater water-quality management and re-use infrastructure.

The engineered stormwater system is made up of: Minor drainage systems, consisting of kerbs and gutters, side entry pits and underground pipes.

Except in unusual circumstances, they are designed to convey runoff for rainfalls up to the ten-year Average Recurrence Interval (ARI). That is, runoff from a rainfall event that only occurs once in every ten years on average. For local roads, it is two years, distributors five years, arterial roads 10 years and primary arterial roads are to be trafficable for 1 in 100-year events to ensure that there are mass evacuation routes.

Water

86

Major drainage paths, including include overland flow, natural river and creek systems, roadways, and other open areas. They are intended to carry a major flood, typically up to a 100-year ARI.

Concrete-based stormwater assets have long lives, typically between 20 and 80 years, as seen in Table 7.1. Table 7.1: Stormwater asset and design life226

Asset Design life

Stormwater pipes Lined channels Stormwater sumps Manholes Dams Weir structures Gross pollutant traps Retarding basins

50–80 years 50–80 years 20–50 years 20–50 years 50+ years 50–80 years 20–50 years 50–100 years

Stormwater infrastructure contributes to a number of quite different objectives including: Runoff control. The infrastructure should carry away rainfall from a site so that it does not cause

erosion or other environmental damage, and not cause flooding elsewhere. Flood control. The infrastructure should carry away large volumes of water following the

overflow of the minor drainage system, preventing local flooding. Water quality. The infrastructure should remove pollutants that enter the stormwater system.

Pollutants originate from many different sources and range from fuel and oil from roads, to litter dropped on streets and sediment from building sites.

Water reuse. The infrastructure could provide a source of water suitable for non-potable uses. Urban amenity. The infrastructure could provide a source of water for urban ponds, lakes and

parks, however, in areas with a Dry Season, its use is very limited. Waterway health. Runoff from unmodified catchments is normally released over a longer period

of time and has lower peak discharges than in modified catchments, resulting in healthier water environments in unmodified catchments. The infrastructure should deliver water to waterways that mimic natural conditions as far as possible in terms of quantity and quality. Particularly important is ensuring a slow flow of the stormwater in open unlined channel systems. This results in the quantities of suspended solids and nutrients being reduced as these settle out or are absorbed, and erosion damage is reduced.

Rainfall intensities in the tropical Top End are high. However, there is rapid dissipation of surface water and minimum long-term interruption to communities from flooding. This is because most urban catchments in the Darwin Region tend to be fairly short, meaning that flood waters rarely develop and if they do, they are drained rapidly. The five main urban centres (Darwin, Palmerston, Katherine, Tennant Creek and Alice Springs) have significant stormwater assets. In most small Territory communities there is little or no pipe drainage or any other formal drainage infrastructure. Instead stormwater is discharged as sheet flow along natural surface drainage paths. Road longitudinal drainage, if present, is generally in the form of table drains. The majority of roads are constructed with two-way crossfall and with table drains that discharge into offlet drains that carry the water away from the roads. Where flows are concentrated, roadway crossings will often be floodways, but may occasionally be culverts if sufficient natural ground slope is available to provide outfalls.

Stormwater

87

Darwin Region Darwin City Council’s stormwater assets consists of about 400km of underground pipes, 22km of open unlined drains, 15km of open lined drains, 9,500 pits and 300 culverts. Its replacement value in 2008 was calculated to be $264 million. Stormwater assets constitute about 40% of the Council’s total infrastructure asset replacement value of $657 million.227 Its 2010/11 budget has $370,000 allocated to stormwater capital improvements and new works.228 This will be mostly spent on stormwater upgrades, lining open unlined drains (OUDs) and installing new gross pollutant traps.229 The Council has two priorities for stormwater. They are to manage flooding and safety issues, and minimise impacts from pollutants entering the system.230 Infrastructure activities to achieve these priorities include upgrading existing pipe and culvert systems, installing gross pollutant traps to collect waste as it enters or before it leaves the system, installing subsoil drainage in areas where underground water close to the surface has damaged pavements and caused slippery footpath conditions, installing erosion protection devices where required, and undertaking minor repairs and routine maintenance. Recent Council developments have included: Developing a master plan to identify the location of gross pollutant traps Commencing in 2008/09 an annual inspection program to identify immediate maintenance

requirements and long-term liabilities. This is done by person-entry methods and by using CCTV.231

The community places a high importance on stormwater as a key local government service. This is seen in the 2009 Annual Community Satisfaction Report of the Darwin City Council. It found that the community rated stormwater drainage as 4.4 out of 5 in terms of importance. In the community survey, stormwater was rated the sixth most important activity of Council as seen in Figure 7.1. The City of Palmerston has about 85km232 of stormwater pipes and drains. Its stormwater drainage system was valued at $24.43 million in 2010.233 Given that the City’s infrastructure asset was valued at around $150 million,234 stormwater assets constitute about 16% of the City’s assets. Operating expenditure in 2010/11 is expected to be about $325,000 most of which will be spent on cleaning and rehabilitation.235 Its capital expenditure in 2010/11 is expected to be $1,075,000236 which will be spent predominately on building trunk drains and stormwater upgrades. An objective of the City is to develop a system of stormwater drainage retardation and cleansing by 2013.237 The City specifies its stormwater service standards as ‘achieving a cost of cleaning and desiltation for stormwater drains of $1,000/km in 2010/11’.238 The key stormwater-related documents in the Darwin Region are the: Darwin Harbour Strategy. Produced by the Darwin Harbour Advisory Committee and released in

2010, it sets out goals, principles and guidelines for all users and stakeholders of Darwin Harbour and its catchment that should be integrated in their sustainability-related planning. It states that residential, commercial and industrial developments are to apply Water Sensitive Urban Design principles tailored to the wet-dry tropics and employ strategies to increase water efficiency and manage demand. It also states that stormwater collection systems are to be designed and managed to minimise pollution of receiving waters, protect the structure of waterways, optimise the protection of property and where and when possible provide grey water reuse, and ensure public health and safety.239

Stormwater Management Strategy. Released as a draft in 2006, it has not yet been finalised. It seeks to provide the overarching guidelines for the management of stormwater in the Darwin Harbour Catchment. It outlines the ownership and responsibility of stormwater management, the key management objectives, actions to implement the objectives, and the steps for the

Wa

88

7.2

ater

deDa

Wad

Figure

* The qall impo

AliceAlice Alice whichmaint

2.2 WateThe astormto remsystedamaincreastorm

evelopment oarwin Harbou

Water Quality ddress key w

e 7.1: The level

question was ‘Rateortant’.

e Springs Springs’ stoSprings Tow

h constitutestenance of C

er Sensitive approach to

mwater systemove stormwems are costlaging effectsased focus o

mwater qualit

of stormwateur.240 Protection P

water-quality

l of importance

e the level of impo

ormwater infrwn Council h about 2% of

Council’s infra

Urban Desimanaging stms is on min

water as quicly to build an to the receiv

on minimisingy. Central to

er manageme

Plan (WQPP)risks to the v

e given by the c

ortance of each of

astructure was budgetedf its $13,490astructure.

gn tormwater in nimising locackly as possibnd maintain, aving waters. g the stormw achieving th

ent plans for

). This plan isvalues of the

community to

f the following serv

was valued atd about $290,000245 budge

the Territoryl flooding risble, resultingare a safety In Darwin, o

water impactshis has been

individual su

s under devee Darwin Har

Darwin City Co

vices on a 1 to 5 s

t $33,175,0000,000244 on maet on infrastr

y is slowly evk, and conse

g in large opehazard, and

over the last fs on the receimplementin

ub-catchmen

elopment andbour and its

ouncil’s servic

scale, where 5 is v

0 as of Juneaintaining storucture deve

volving. Curreequently, sysen drains. Thin some cas

five years theeiving watersng Water Sen

nts and regio

d will identifycatchment.24

ces*242

very important and

2009.243 In 2ormwater aslopment and

ently, the focstems are dehese stormwses may causere has beens and improvinsitive Urban

ons of

y and 41

d 1 is not at

2010/11, ssets, d

cus of esigned ater se n ing n Design

Stormwater

89

(WSUD). WSUD involves techniques to treat, store, and infiltrate stormwater runoff onsite rather than simply facilitating rapid discharge of stormwater to the environment. WSUD measures include rainwater tanks, green roofs, infiltration systems, permeable pavements, urban water harvesting, swales and constructed wetlands. The guiding principles of WSUD are to: Protect existing natural features and ecological processes Maintain natural hydrologic behaviour of catchments Protect water quality of surface and ground waters Minimise demand on the reticulated water supply system Minimise wastewater discharges to the natural environment Integrate water into the landscape to enhance visual, social, cultural and ecological values.246

There are significant limitations to WSUD in the tropics. For example, infiltration systems are not viable for areas that remain waterlogged for many months of the year. WSUD is becoming more important for the Territory because it can reduce the environmental impact of stormwater and, in dry areas, provide a new source of water. For Darwin, it is becoming important for environmental reasons. Currently, stormwater runoff from Darwin’s urban areas is reportedly resulting in high loads of sediments, nutrients and heavy metals entering Darwin’s waterways. This in turn causes localised degradation.247 As the population grows, so does the area of impervious surfaces, and hence the total volume of stormwater. If the quality of the stormwater does not improve, then the increased volume of this low quality stormwater will result in larger areas of degradation in the Darwin Harbour. To ensure that development in the Darwin Region is underpinned by a commitment to WSUD, a project ran from 2006 to June 2009 to develop WSUD-supportive policy, tools and resources.248 Called the Water Sensitive Urban Design Strategy for Darwin Harbour, it is a joint project between the DLP and NRETAS, supported by funding from the Commonwealth Coastal Catchments Initiative.249 It developed a series of WSUD fact sheets, design manuals and guidelines. These documents are only relevant to the wet-dry tropics. While major components of the project have been completed, policies and provisions for WSUD have not been incorporated into all NT Government planning policies, strategic plans and development approval processes, or into relevant local government instruments. This has resulted in WSUD being applied only to some greenfield developments and retrofitted into some existing urban areas, rather than into all, which is the goal of the strategy. Final WSUD performance targets have not been established for the wet tropics. Table 7.2 provides the preliminary WSUD objectives. Local governments have not yet committed to supporting WSUD in the greater Darwin area. The City of Palmerston was the first council invited to participate in the development of the Bellamack subdivision and was a founding member of the Project Control Group (PCG) which addressed all planning and design issues including the various components of WSUD. Although they support the overall program, they have not yet committed to taking over the WSUD infrastructure. WSUD has not yet been included in the Territory Planning Scheme as the required investigations have not been undertaken of WSUD for the arid zone (Alice Springs and Tennant Creek). An opportunity to advance WSUD in the arid centre may become available through the development of part of the AZRI in Alice Springs. A section of the AZRI site has been set aside for the new residential subdivisional development of Kilgariff and this should be planned and designed in accordance with best practice.250 Other WSUD developments are: A demonstration project underway at Bellamack to trial WSUD in the wet-dry tropics. The

development is progressing with a third pipe system and bioretention basins being installed.

Water

90

Developments in Palmerston East progressing with bioretention basins being constructed. The establishment by the PWC of a water-recycling plant adjacent to the Kilgariff site, which

offers an opportunity to link to the development along with other WSUD initiatives. WSUD principles are being integrated into the planning and concept design work for the new

city of Weddell. Table 7.2: Summary of preliminary WSUD objectives for the wet dry tropics251

WSUD Objective Performance Measure/Target

Stormwater quality Stormwater discharged from development areas to achieve a: • 75% reduction in the mean annual load of Total Suspended Solids (TSS) • 60% reduction in the mean annual load of Total Phosphorus (TP) • 45% reduction in the mean annual load of Total Nitrogen (TN) • 90% reduction in the mean annual load of Gross Pollutants.

Waterway stability Waterway stability refers to the protection of creeks and rivers from erosion associated with stormwater flows from urban areas. No waterway stability objective has been established as part of the strategy but one may be adopted in the future depending on the practicality and achievability of the objective.252

Potable water conservation No mandatory potable water conservation objective has been specified in the strategy, however, a 20% water conservation target is considered technically feasible and is suggested as an interim target. Key activities to reduce potable water demand to meet this target would focus on: • Reducing the garden irrigation demand for potable water by adopting low

water-use landscapes in public parks and encouraging low water-use gardens on private allotments

• Reducing the indoor demand for potable water through encouraging the adoption of dual flush toilets and other water-efficient fixtures and appliances

• Encouraging the adoption of rainwater tanks* • Maximising the use of treated wastewater and groundwater for non-

potable end uses, in particular landscape irrigation which constitutes 65% of residential water demand.

* Limited use in tropics

7.2.3 Policy and governance The main legislative instruments and guidelines governing stormwater management in the Territory are: Water Act. This Act governs the use of water, including surface and groundwater. It allows

Beneficial Use Declarations to be made in relation to particular water bodies. A Beneficial Use Declaration defines the environmental values that apply to the body of water, and associated water-quality objectives. Beneficial Use Declarations have been made for Darwin Harbour, including aquatic ecosystem protection, recreational water quality and aesthetic environmental values.

Waste Management and Pollution Control Act. This Act governs stormwater pollution as it regulates activities that have the potential to cause environmental harm.253

Planning Act. This Act governs new developments and, under it, conditions can be placed on them including stormwater management conditions.

Local Government Act. This Act states that local government is specifically responsible for stormwater drainage, and as the approval authority for stormwater drainage in their respective local government areas, councils have the right to request developers to design and build drainage infrastructure to the council’s standards at the developers cost.

Stormwater: Draft Management Strategy for the Darwin Harbour Catchment. This guideline governs the management of stormwater in the Darwin Harbour Catchment.

Guidelines for Preventing Biting Insect Problems for Urban Residential Developments or Subdivisions in the Top End of the NT. This document provides guidance for stormwater design to reduce the risk of breeding sites for biting insects.

Stormwater

91

The main organisations involved in stormwater management, policy and regulation, and their stormwater responsibilities are: Department of Land and Planning. The Department’s units have responsibility for stormwater

management in their respective areas. The Department is responsible for stormwater drainage located outside of local government area boundaries, and for drainage connected with major road corridors within local government areas.

Department of Natural Resources, Environment, the Arts and Sport (NRETAS). The Department is responsible for catchment management and for assessing the quality and quantity impacts of stormwater on river health at local and regional levels.

Local governments. Local government bodies are responsible for stormwater drainage management and drainage infrastructure in urban and rural residential areas within local government area boundaries.

Darwin Harbour Advisory Committee. The Committee advises on land use, planning, development and the use of natural resources within the Darwin Harbour region with a focus on sustainable development and long-term protection of the Darwin Harbour. The Committee has a strategic role in stormwater management.

Mining companies. Mining companies may provide drainage services for remote mine sites and related communities.

Private land owners. The stormwater infrastructure on private land is the responsibility of the land owners.

Private developers. Developers are responsible for constructing the stormwater network to the approved standard of the local government within their developments, to the standards of the relevant agencies.

Design capacity standards are generally determined by the local responsible authority in terms of a permitted flooding frequency for residential lots, and traffic accessibility standards for roads and highways. National road authority standards are generally applied to the level of serviceability for national highways. Protection of water quality, in terms of permitted discharges to the environment in the Northern Territory, is only governed by the subjective conditions of the Water Act. No specific limitation on pollutant content in stormwater discharges is imposed by legislation, and no discharge licences apply to stormwater discharges in the Territory. Property owners must capture and dispose of their own stormwater and not allow it to flow into neighbouring properties. Guidelines from other jurisdictions are used for evaluation of water quality in receiving waters.

7.3 Performance Performance measures for stormwater systems relate to their: Ability to convey minor storm events and safely convey major storm events or

eliminate/minimise flooding and consequential damage to private property or critical infrastructure

Ability to maintain the long-term sustainability of natural systems from a water-quality perspective, by minimising the discharge of pollutants and generally improving the quality of stormwater discharge

Structural health, including integrity, age and maintenance quality. Assessing the performance of the stormwater system is difficult for three reasons. Firstly, it cannot be evaluated in isolation as it is affected by land use and building development policies. Secondly, there is no consolidated data on stormwater assets and performance, such as the quality of stormwater runoff entering our natural waterways. This is partly because unlike health-related water systems such as potable water and sewerage systems, there is no legislative or policy requirement for management bodies to report on the status or performance of stormwater systems.

Wa

92

ater

Thirdby Dameanwhichwith tImpro Th

ou No

its The oCounThe 2(3.8 owas 3surve Figure

* The qvery dis

While M

cacadu

ly, there is litarwin City Coning that the h are incompthe City of Paovement Prohere was no utlet structureo condition ds stormwater

only identifiedncil and it rela2009 Annualout of a maxi3.9.257 The Coey, stormwate

e 7.2: The level

question was ‘Ratessatisfied’.

e the qualitatost stormwa

apacity. Therapacity perspue to urban in

ttle availableouncil on its stormwater d

plete or unsualmerston’s s

ogram includedetailed spaes data could ber assets.255

d recent perfates to the col Community imum of 5). Houncil’s satiser came out

l of satisfaction

e your level of sati

tive informatiter infrastrucre is no informpective with snfill, the insta

e data on indstormwater adata was bapported or estormwater ded: atial database

e found relati

formance daommunity’s s

y SatisfactionHowever, thisfaction targeat No. 6 in te

n given by the

isfaction with the s

ion on stormwcture in majomation to sugstormwater inances of exis

ividual stormassets was ased on recorxtrapolated f

data as ident

e of stormwa

ing to the sto

ata for stormwsatisfaction w

n Report founs level of satet for stormwerms of com

community to

standard of each s

water is limitor centres is iggest that thnfrastructuresting stormw

mwater netwoassessed as rds, procedufrom a limitedtified in its 20

ater infrastruc

ormwater net

water was puwith the stannd high levelstisfaction had

water is at leamunity satisf

Darwin City C

service, on a scale

ted, the followin fair conditi

here are signe. Despite thewater systems

orks. For exa‘being uncerres, investigd sample.254 010 Asset Ma

cture includin

twork, and th

ublished by tdard of storms of satisfactd declined siast 4 out of 5faction as se

Council’s servic

e of 1 to 5, where

wing observaion, and has ificant problee increase ins not being a

ample, the dartain’ in 2009ations and aSpecific probanagement

ng pits and in

here is no ag

he Darwin Cmwater draintion with stornce 2005 wh

5. In the comeen in Figure

ces*258

5 is very satisfied

ations can bean adequate

ems from a hn impervious able to cope w

ata held 9, nalysis blems

nlet and

ge data of

City nage.256 mwater hen it munity 7.2.

d and 1 is

e made: e level of hydraulic areas with the

Stormwater

93

flow are very small. The Darwin City Council assesses the amended useful life of its stormwater assets to be between 70 and 90 years.259 This means that the vast majority of infrastructure will not require renewal for several decades.

Data on stormwater assets condition has not improved in the last five years. There is increased recognition for the need for stormwater asset management plans. For

example, the City of Palmerston intends to develop one, once it has implemented one for roads.260

There has been increased emphasis on water-quality management as seen in the increased provision of retention facilities, ponds and lakes, and structural devices to improve water quality (for example gross pollutant traps and sediment traps). Darwin City Council, the City of Palmerston and Alice Springs Town Council all have programs in place for retro-installation or improvement of gross pollutant traps.

Stormwater discharge is still causing problems in the Darwin Region. For example, nutrient-rich stormwater is the likely cause of algal staining and pitting of the dolomitic layers of the cliffs and is contributing to the bio-erosion occurring in these areas.261

Major diversion drains and levee banks around the outskirts of Tennant Creek are effective for protection from major rainfall and flood events.

In regional and remote communities, stormwater infrastructure is varied and in most areas only surface drainage is provided. Remote communities in the Top End of the Territory, where rainfall intensities are high, also use surface flows for the majority of drainage. This results in more frequent local flooding, occasional erosion damage to lots and civil roadworks, and sedimentation of pits and roadways after heavy rain. These problems could be alleviated through the installation of more sophisticated drainage systems, however, the associated capital cost is seldom considered to be justified. Most remote inland communities are on relatively flat ground, with only occasional rain and no opportunity for underground drainage. Hence, most drainage is via surface flow with road crossings by floodway. This can result in minor local flooding should there be heavy rain, however, the impact is generally minimal.

In flat areas, sheet flow is common which is an overland flow consisting of a thin, continuous film of water over the ground. Sheet flow does not channel water and does not cause major flooding, erosion or sedimentation. Over time, the flood water is absorbed into the soil or evaporates. This form of natural drainage has advantage over engineered drainage in that it does not require maintenance, and removes water traps that breed biting insects that cause disease.

The Strategic Indigenous Housing and Infrastructure Program (SIHIP) program is normalising town camps into suburbs of the community with all associated infrastructure that suburbs have, including drainage.

7.4 Future challenges The challenges to achieving improvements in stormwater infrastructure are: Implementing WSUD in the tropical north. To effectively implement WSUD in the Darwin

Region, it requires strong NT Government leadership, clearly-stated WSUD design objectives and supporting strategic land-use planning (i.e. structure planning and master planning), infrastructure planning and development assessment decision-making. While some elements of these requirements are in place today, some are not. WSUD techniques employed in the tropical north also need to be customised for its rainfall, meaning that they will be significantly different from those used in southern Australia.

Expanding WSUD principles to arid regions. WSUD has had limited application in arid regions in the Territory. It has considerable potential in arid areas but it will require research and experiments to determine appropriate practice.

Improving the quality of information on stormwater infrastructure. There is very little asset and performance information on stormwater assets. Given that they are worth hundreds of millions of dollars and provide an essential community function, data needs to be produced as the first stage towards improving their asset management.

Water

94

The need to reduce the environmental impact of stormwater into Darwin Harbour. Stormwater into the harbour is causing localised degradation, and, given the growing runoff arising from the increase in impervious areas because of a growing population, water-quality impacts of stormwater need to be addressed before the problems grow.

7.5 Report Card rating

Infrastructure Type NT 2010 NT 2005 National 2005 National 2001

Stormwater B- C+ C- D

This rating recognises that in new urban areas, stormwater systems are of a much higher quality, reflecting new design standards. There is a lack of condition information on stormwater assets in all urban areas, and in many areas, a gap is appearing between replacement funding and need. While the benefits of Water Sensitive Urban Design are recognised, there has been very limited application of this to date. Positives that have contributed to the rating are: Generally adequate level of service from stormwater systems Appropriate levels of stormwater system operational maintenance but a growing gap between

renewals and needs An increase in gross pollutant traps and other water-quality improvement devices The introduction of WSUD principles into land-use and water management policy and practice

in the Darwin Region. Negatives that have contributed to the rating are: Lack of asset and performance information on stormwater assets Insufficient collection of stormwater quality data Inadequate renewal plans in place Inadequate stormwater pollution guidance Slow speed of WSUD implementation.

95

8 Irrigation

Irrigation covers the application of water to cultivated land or open space for the growth of vegetation or crops. It does not include garden and park irrigation, as this water use is addressed under the Potable and Wastewater sections of this report. Currently, there are no irrigation schemes in the Territory, however, there are a small number of individual operations including: River-sourced water, mostly in the Katherine region (Katherine River) for horticulture/market

gardens and the Darwin Region (Daly River and Adelaide River) for mixed farming Groundwater-sourced water, mostly in the Darwin Region for tropical fruits/market gardens,

Alice Springs for citrus/grapes, and in the Ti Tree/Pine Hill areas for grapes/market gardens. Irrigation infrastructure on these farms consists of centre pivot systems or drip/micro sprinklers, bores, pumps and piping. No flood irrigation is utilised in the Territory. While there is potential for expansion in both groundwater-sourced and river-sourced irrigation, the challenges of the wet-dry season cycle in the north (affecting natural recharge and base river flows) and the limited and finite groundwater resource in the arid centre, means that any growth would have to be carefully managed. It is planned that the Ord River Irrigation Area will eventually expand into the Territory but there is no timetable for this development. Given the absence of irrigation scheme infrastructure in the Territory, irrigation has not been rated.

Water

96

97

ENERGY

The key Territory domestic energy sector organisations are: Power and Water Corporation (PWC). PWC is a vertically-integrated electricity supplier that

also provides water supply and sewerage services. PWC is owned by the NT Government and is also subject to oversight by a Shareholding Minister under the Government Owned Corporations Act. It provides power to more than 80,000 customers262, has assets worth more than $1 billion and is one of the largest businesses in the Territory with more than 900 staff.263 PWC’s Generation, Network and Retail units operate as separate businesses with internal transactions between units subject to oversight and regulation by the Utilities Commission.

Indigenous Essential Services Pty Ltd (IES). IES is a subsidiary of PWC that provides electricity to 72 Indigenous communities and 82 outstations throughout the Territory. IES has an agreement with the NT Government, through the Department of Housing, Local Government and Regional Services, to provide power and other essential services to these communities.264

Utilities Commission (NT Government). The Utilities Commission is an independent industry regulator that oversees those industries declared to be regulated industries. The Commission is responsible for the promotion and safeguard of competition and fair and efficient market conduct or, in the absence of a competitive market, the simulation of competitive market conduct and the prevention of the misuse of monopoly power. Its key roles in the electricity sector are to:

Set standards for electricity reliability, quality and customer service in accordance with the Electricity Standards of Service Code

Regulate electricity network services. Department of Resources (NT Government). The Department is responsible for monitoring

individual pipelines under various acts.

Energy

98

99

9 Electricity

9.1 Summary

Infrastructure Type NT 2010 NT 2005 National 2005 National 2001

Electricity C- B- C+ B-

This rating recognises that while there has been an improvement in generation capacity for the Darwin-Katherine region, concerns exist about the quality of distribution infrastructure and its asset management. Advances have been made in increasing the capacity and security of electricity supply to Indigenous communities. Since the last Report Card, the major electricity sector developments in the Territory have been: Continual growth in electricity demand with peak demand rising faster than energy growth Significant expansion in generation capacity Major power outages in the Darwin–Katherine system, notably the September and October

2008 incidents in the Casuarina Zone Substation and a black start incident on 30 January 2010 when all customers on the system lost power for between one and ten hours

Five-year, $1.5 billion investment in building, upgrading and maintaining facilities, and recruitment and training. This is the largest investment in essential services in the Territory’s history.

Recently completed and in-progress major infrastructure projects include: Weddell Power Station Owen Springs Power Station Undergrounding of powerlines.

Challenges to improving electricity infrastructure in NT include: Raising electricity prices to cost-reflective levels Renewing aging infrastructure Implementing significant demand management measures to constrain peak growth in demand Delivering the asset investment and maintenance projects on time and on budget Consideration of alternative electricity generation sources.

9.2 Infrastructure overview

9.2.1 System description Electricity infrastructure refers to stationary electricity networks that comprise interconnected electricity transmission and distribution systems, together with connected generating systems, facilities and loads. It includes non-renewable and renewable generation, but excludes mobile generators. The Territory’s physical electricity infrastructure comprises: Generation. Transmission networks. By strict definition, the Territory does not have any transmission

networks as its highest voltage is 132kV. However, for the purposes of this report, voltages 132kV and above are treated as transmission networks.

Distribution networks.

Energy

100

Figure 9.1 illustrates the infrastructure components of an electricity network. Figure 9.1: Infrastructure components of the electricity network265

NT electricity systems Electricity systems in the Territory can be divided into the three categories of: Market-based power systems Indigenous community power supplies Power supplies to remote mining towns.

The major electricity infrastructure is shown in Figure 9.2. Market-based power systems There are three market-based systems: Darwin–Katherine, Tennant Creek and Alice Springs.c The statistics of each are listed in Table 9.1. Table 9.1: Statistics of the market-based power systems for 2008/09 (at 30 June 2009)266

Darwin–Katherine Alice Springs Tennant Creek

Connections (customer numbers) 58,319 12,109 1,709

Generation (rated) capacity (MW) 370 63 17

Peak demand (MW) 267 54.4 7.3

Electricity sent out (GWh for 2008/09) 1,341 216 26

Network line length (km) 4,773 603 373

Generation licensees PWC Generation NGD (NT) P/L Cosmo Power P/L LMS Generation P/L

PWC Generation Central Energy Power

PWC Generation

Network licensees PWC Network PWC Network PWC Network

Retail licensees PWC Retail PWC Retail PWC Retail

c They are called market systems because they theoretically operate as a market with multiple buyers and sellers as evidenced by third party access to networks and customer contestability.

Electricity

101

Figure 9.2: The territory generation, power networks and electricity retail locations*267

** Retail licences for remote Indigenous communities are not shown.

The generation capacity of each system is listed in Table 9.2. About 82% of total generation capacity in the market systems is located in the Darwin–Katherine system, with about 48% at the Channel Island Power Station. The dominant fuel is natural gas and this is discussed in the Gas section.

Energy

102

Table 9.2: Power stations in the market systems at 30 June 2009268

Region and power station Operator Capacity (MW) Fuel

Darwin Katherine*

Channel Island PWC 232 Natural gas or liquid fuel

Weddell PWC 86 Natural gas or liquid fuel

Berrimah PWC 30 Natural gas

Katherine PWC 21 Natural gas or liquid fuel

Pine Creek NGD (NT), Cosmo Power 35 Natural gas or liquid fuel

LMS Shoal Bay LMS Generation 1 Landfill methane drainage

Total 405

Alice Springs**

Ron Goodin PWC 63 Natural gas or liquid fuel

Brewer Central Energy Power 9 Natural gas or liquid fuel

Total 72

Tennant Creek

Tennant Creek PWC 17 Natural gas or liquid fuel

Total capacity 494 * For the Darwin Katherine system, between 2010/11 and 2011/12, 12.1MW of capacity is to be added at the Katherine power station, 30MW of capacity is to be added at the Weddell power station, and the 30MW of capacity at the Berrimah power station is to be retired from service by 2011/12. ** For the Alice Springs system, between 2010/11 and 2011/12, 32.1MW of capacity is to be added at the Owen Springs power station in 2010/11, and 14MW of capacity at the Ron Goodin Power station is to be retired or relocated.

Significant developments since the last report card have been: Increase in generation capacity Response to the 2008 outages at the Casuarina Zone Substation.

Increase in generation capacity The growth in energy demand in the Darwin–Katherine region has resulted in PWC building their largest electricity generation project in 20 years – the Weddell Power Station. The project has a staged development with the first stage being completed in 2008. It involved installing two 43MW generating units, with the third and final generator expected to be commissioned in 2011/12. The completed Weddell Power Station will cost $127 million.269 The growth in demand in Alice Springs resulted in the Owen Springs Power Station at Brewer Estate being commissioned in 2010. This project involves the relocation of the 4MW Taurus gas turbine (2009) from the Ron Goodin Power Station, and the construction and commissioning of three dual-fuel 10.9MW generation units in 2010. Associated work included: A new 11/66kV switching yard at Owen Springs – initially containing two, and ultimately four,

transformers to step power up to 66,000 volts for transmission Two 66kV overhead transmission lines, each 16km long Two 66kV underground transmission cables, each 9km long An upgraded zone substation at Lovegrove which will step power down from 66kV to 22kV and

11kV for distribution into the Alice Springs power grid.270 The entire project and all associated works are expected to cost about $160 million.271 Response to the 2008 outages at the Casuarina Zone Substation In September and October 2008, a number of electrical equipment failures at the Casuarina Zone Substation resulted in widespread disruption to Darwin’s northern suburbs. The most significant outage resulted in more than 11,000 customers losing power for up to 20 hours.272 Due to the impact of these outages, the NT Government established an independent inquiry headed by Merv Davies to investigate not only these events but also PWC’s operational response and electrical

Electricity

103

substation maintenance practices in Darwin. The final report, the Independent Enquiry into Casuarina Substation Events and Substation Maintenance across Darwin was released in 2009. The principal recommendations were to: Implement condition-based maintenance in substations as quickly as possible by acquiring

information, support and clarifying accountabilities Bed down organisational changes Deliver improved systems and processes, including supporting policies and policy

documentation Develop substations’ maintenance planning and works program Report on maintenance delivery, asset condition, risks and failures Enhance workforce capability, training, numbers and equipment Review incident management and investigations, and complete some outstanding investigations Undertake an overall remedial program, including taking immediate action to replace the

Casuarina Zone Substation 11kV switchboard. PWC has accepted all of the recommendations and is implementing change via the Remedial Asset Management Program (RAMP) and the Long Term Action Plan. RAMP involves assessing the condition of all PWC zone substation assets and managing necessary remedial and maintenance works based on the assessed risks and criticality, and was due by the first quarter of 2010. Any outstanding remedial and maintenance work is to be included in the Power Networks’ Five-Year Business Plan. While substantial refurbishment has taken place, it has taken longer than forecast as more work was required than expected. The RAMP team is still predicting completion of condition testing and remedial maintenance work on the higher risk equipment by the end of 2010.273 The Long Term Action Plan aims to embed a new strategic direction into the operation of PWC covering: The maintenance cycle and move towards condition-based maintenance Accountability and organisational structural changes Documentation of policy, procedures, and work instructions Reporting of maintenance activity and asset condition Training and development of Power Networks staff Incorporating improvements into the Power Networks Business Plan.274

Of the above, one of the most important has been the move to a more ‘condition-based’ approach to maintenance. In the decades prior to 2008, maintenance had shifted from a traditional approach involving routine preventive maintenance to a minimalist one, dominated by corrective and breakdown tasks. Merv Davies noted that:

This shift is considered to have come about as the inevitable outcome of attempts by those responsible for delivering maintenance to cope with competing demands and budgets constraints, in an environment which required little or no systemic reporting of either asset condition or maintenance works delivery. And an asset and works management system that so poorly served and demoralised the delivery workforce that it was ultimately switched off. Along with this shift there has been a gradual erosion of workplace skills and custodial pride in the condition of the assets. Given the age and likely condition of PWCs substation assets a new approach to Substation maintenance is required. This has been recognised by the current PWC management.275

Energy

104

An essential requirement for the response is having accurate asset management information. Prior to the Casuarina failure, PWC was initiating the Asset Management Capability (AMC) project that is now providing such information. The project involves rolling out improvements to the PWC’s asset management systems, processes and practices. Work being undertaken includes refining the Corporate Asset Management Strategy and policy, establishing consistent asset management roles and structures across PWC, cleansing and converting available asset information, and roll-out, including training in new processes and supporting Asset Management and Geographic Information Systems.276 Indigenous community power supplies PWC, through IES, provides electricity to Indigenous communities and outstations throughout the Territory. Electricity is supplied from the: 56 community power stations (predominantly operated on distillate fuel) with an installed

capacity of 56MW. These 100kW to 2,000kW electricity generation plants provide a supply reliability of 99.5% in extremely variable conditions, often with limited local technical support.277

PWC grid for 12 communities Nhulunbuy power grid for two communities in East Arnhem GEMCO power grid on Groote Eylandt for Angurugu.278

Over 90% of IES-supplied electricity is generated from distillate. Electricity supply is supplemented by an installed capacity of 785kW of solar power using solar dish technology at Hermannsburg (192kW), Yuendumu (240kW), Lajamanu (288kW) and flat plate photovoltaic solar technology at Bulman (55kW) and Jilkminggan (10 kW).279 Table 9.3 provides statistics on IES infrastructure and Figure 9.3 identifies the locations of Indigenous communities’ power supplies. Table 9.3: Statistical summary of IES provided infrastructure280

Units 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009

Generation

Installed capacity(including solar) MW 42 45 48 51 56 60

Installed capacity – solar MW - - 0.5 0.7 0.7 0.8

Electricity generated (including solar) GWh 79 85 94 95 97 106

Electricity generated – Solar MWh - - 1.0 1.6 1.0 0.8

Electricity sent out (including solar) GWh 73 79 86 86 89 109^

Purchases from private suppliers GWh 7 7 7 8 8 8

Distribution (22/11kV & below)

HV overhead km 321 341 344 373 349 473

HV underground km 1 1 1 1 5 5

LV overhead km 243 248 253 278 278 278

LV underground km 1 1 1 1 4 3

SWER all voltages km 87 87 87 87 87 87

Sales MWh 58,023 58,893 60,019 60,574 63,665 104,501#

Customers (i.e. services) No. of 6,717 6,818 7,213 7,373 7,421 7,540 ^ For 2008/09, includes electricity sent out to IES communities purchased from Power and Water power grids. This has not been included in previous years. # For 2008/09, includes all prepayment and credit meter sales. Previous years’ data does not include all prepayment meter sales.

Electricity

105

Figure 9.3: Indigenous communities’ power supply locations281

All IES electricity customers pay the same tariff as other electricity customers, however, there is a slight surcharge for prepayment meter which reflects their lack of a fixed charge. About 80% of customers use prepaid systems.

Energy

106

The major challenge facing electricity supplies in Indigenous communities is accommodating the growing electricity demand. This demand is arising due to the activities underway to improve Indigenous communities’ standards of service and infrastructure, notably under the SIHIP, Closing the Gap of Indigenous Disadvantage plan of action, and the 20 Growth Towns policy.282 As a consequence of the construction of new housing and the provision of additional services (e.g. police, education, health), electricity demand in these communities is expected to rise by 8.5% per year for the next three years.283 New or expanded generation plants are being built to meet higher demand. For example, the SIHIP funded $3.07 million for the purchase of new generator plants in Yuendumu, Galiwinku, Gapuwiyak, Gunbalanya, Milingimbi and Maningrida which were installed in 2008.284 Other infrastructure recent developments in Indigenous community supply have been: The replacement of the prepaid power token system with prepayment meters with ‘wide card’

metering.285 A 10-year grid connections program, starting in 2007/08, which involves the transfer of

communities to mainstream power network systems or connecting community power systems to form regional grid systems. This reduces maintenance costs and fuel costs. The first community connected under this program was Jilkminggan when in 2007 it was connected to the Darwin–Katherine power grid through a $1.05 million, 26km interconnection. Its community power station was then decommissioned.286 In 2008 the Wallace Rockhole community in the Alice Springs region was connected to the Hermannsburg–Intjartnama line, and the Irrultja community was connected to the Atheley community’s power station. In the Katherine region, the Ngukurr to Rittarangu interconnect was completed in May 2009.287

Upgrading of the Vern Pech Power Station (formerly the Maningrida Power Station) in 2007 which increased the number of generators to four, providing 4.5MW of installed capacity and established a new power station control centre, distribution board and station controls.288

Commissioning of the new $1.4 million Pigeon Hole Power Station in November 2007.289 Upgrading fuel storage at a number of power stations (e.g. Willowra and Goulburn) so that they

do not need to be refuelled during the Wet Season.290 Power supplies to remote mining towns Remote resource companies are responsible for the generation and supply of electricity for their own operations. However, if a resource operation is close to a network, they have the option of obtaining electricity under commercial arrangements. There are a number of resource operations with significant generation capacity such as Alcan, Gemco, Energy Resources of Australia and Granites Gold (Newmont). Large resource power enterprises provide electricity to mining townships at Nhulunbuy, Alyangula and Jabiru. Electricity tariffs As of June 2009, Territory electricity tariffs were below the national average for a fixed amount of power as seen in Figure 9.4. Prices increased by 18% in July 2009, 5.0% in July 2010 and are expected to increase 2.5% in each of the next two years.291 However, this increase is trivial compared to price increases in other jurisdictions which have increased by up to 40% over two years. Consequently, over the next two years, it is expected that Territory electricity prices will become some of the cheapest in Australia. This is despite the fact that the Territory’s electricity cost of provision is one of the highest in the country due to its long distances, remote locations, the need for reserve capacity, and limited operational scale. In remote locations, revenue from selling electricity, water and sewerage services covers about 20% of the cost of delivering these services.292 The low cost of electricity is a contributing factor to PWC operating at a loss. The confidential 2009 Reeves report into PWC’s financial sustainability recommended that power prices rise by 40% over the next three years to achieve sustainability.

Electricity

107

Although there is full retail contestability in the supply of electricity, there are no organisations beside PWC that offer retail services. The last tranche of customers (i.e. small to medium businesses and residential customers) became contestable on 1 April 2010 but these are protected by their current tariff arrangements for a two-year grace period.293 Figure 9.4: Residential electricity tariff comparison and announced tariff increases for 2010/11 as at 1 April 2010294

Based on 5,000 kWhs per annum for VIC, SA, NT, WA, QLD and NSW, and 7,500 kWhs per annum for TAS and ACT. Tariff comparisons are based on average annual consumption of 5,000 kWh, with the exception of Tasmania and the Australian Capital Territory being based on an average consumption of 7,500 kWh per annum (ESAA average).Tariffs include a variable consumption charge and fixed daily charge component. The tariff comparisons are as at 1 April 2010, and incorporate tariff increases announced by utilities and Regulators’ Draft and Final Decisions. The chart above reflects expected residential electricity tariffs at 1 July 2010. From 1 July 2010 residential electricity tariffs in the Northern Territory will increase by 5%. The increases forecast in other jurisdictions based on Regulators’ Draft Decisions may differ from the Final Decision or may not be fully passed through to customers. In addition, a number of States are likely to announce tariff increases as part of their forthcoming 2010-11 Budget announcements.

PWC does not provide a premium for solar power supplied from customer sites fed into the grid, with the exception of Alice Springs. PWC offers a flat buyback rate (i.e. gross rate) of 19.23 cents per kWh which is the same as their standard meter consumption tariff. Table 9.4 provides statistics on feed-in tariff rates in other Australian jurisdictions. Table 9.4: Feed-in tariff rates in other Australian jurisdictions295

Jurisdiction Current status Nature of scheme* Rate Duration

NSW Commenced in January 2010 Gross 60c/kWh 7 years

VIC Commenced 1 November 2009 Net 60c/kWh 15 years

QLD Commenced 1 July 2008 Net 44c/kWh 20 years (subject to review)

WA Commencing 1 August 2010 Net 47c/kWh (minimum) 10 years

ACT Commenced in March 2009 Gross 50.05c/kWh reducing to 45.7c/kWh in July 2010

5 years

SA Commenced on 1 July 2008 Net 44c/kWh 20 years * Nature of the scheme options: Gross tariffs, where the consumer is paid for all the electricity their system generates; and net tariffs, where the consumer is only paid for the generated electricity they export to the grid, not for the proportion of generated electricity they use themselves.

9.2.2 Policy and governance Under the Electricity Act 1994, the Utilities Commission issues licences for generation, transmission, distribution and retail activities. The Utilities Commission sets standards for electricity reliability, quality and customer service in accordance with the Electricity Standards of Service Code.296 It also regulates electricity network prices in accordance with the Electricity Networks (Third Party Access) Code. The current regulatory period which specifies the network tariffs and

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

NSW SA WA Qld TAS NT VIC ACT

cent

s/kW

h

Average AllEffect of Regulators' Draft and Final Decisions in 2010/11Effect of Announced Tariff Increases in 2010/11Residential Tariff as at 1 April 2010

Energy

108

charges relating to the use of PWC’s networks runs from 1 July 2009 for five years. The Utilities Commission has developed the Electricity Ring-Fencing Code to ensure that the monopoly businesses (i.e. PWC’s Generation, Power Networks and Franchise Retail) do not discriminate against a competitor of their related contestable businesses. The Indigenous communities and remote mining towns are not subject to the institutional and regulatory frameworks above. The NT Government is developing an Indigenous communities’ Energy Source Strategy which has the aims of: Minimising long-term service delivery costs Meeting community demand growth in an economic and environmentally-sustainable manner Making efficient use of emerging technologies and the availability of gaseous fuels Preparing for the financial impacts of climate change.297

9.2.3 Sector trends Growing electricity demand Electricity growth over the last decade is shown in Figure 9.5. The average growth in the Darwin–Katherine system has been 2.0% per year since 1999/00, 1.2% a year in Alice Springs, and an average annual decline of 0.2% since 2001/02 in Tennant Creek.298 Growth is driven by population, economic and industrial (i.e. resource, engineering and construction) activity growth. From an infrastructure supply perspective, the rate of peak demand is more important than average demand, as infrastructure is sized to meet peak demand. The rate of peak demand has been 2.5% in the last two years compared to between 1.77% and 2.23% for average demand growth in the Darwin–Katherine system. The peak demand growth for 2010/11 is expected to be 7.86%.299 The actual growth may be significantly different from this, depending on the industrial developments that proceed. The speculative nature of the resource developments makes it very difficult for generation and transmission augmentation to be built prior to commitment by the resource developer. Figure 9.5: Electricity sent out from July 1999 to June 2009 (monthly)300

Electricity

109

Asset investment program In 2007/08, PWC started a five-year $1.5 billion asset investment program targeting aging and deteriorating assets across both water and power services. The program was accelerated following the failures at Casuarina Zone Substation in September and October 2008. As seen in Table 9.5, the average amount spent between 2005/06 to 2008/09 was just $127.8 million per year. Table 9.5: PWC capital and repairs/maintenance expenditure 2005/6 to 2008/09301

$ millions 2005/06 2006/07 2007/08 2008/09 Average 2005/06 to 2008/09

Capital investment 60.4 98.2 156.1 196.4 127.8

Repairs and maintenance 41.2 40.9 41.3 51.8 43.8

As seen in Table 9.6, the average amount spent between 2009/10 to 2012/13 has risen to $310.4 million per year. Table 9.6: PWC capital investment program 2009/10 to 2012/13302

$M 2009/10 Forecast

2010/11 Budget

2011/12 Projection

2012/13 Projection

Average 2009/10 to

2012/13

Total (excluding remote operations)

365.6 379.4 264.7 231.9 310.4

Remote operations 32.3 19.2 11.0 16.4 19.725

Total (including remote operations)

397.9 398.6 275.6 248.2 330.075

The scale of investment is very large considering that PWC’s asset base is $1 billion, and this reflects the fact that there has been significant under-investment in the past. Under the Generational Investment Strategy (February 2010), future identified projects include: Installation of two generation units to provide additional coverage and security of supply during

the Channel Island Power Station (CIPS) refurbishment which involves extending the life of generation sets 1 to 6

Planning for a new future baseload power station that will be required after 2012/13 Installation of the Set 3 at Weddell Power Station The augmentation of Tennant Creek Power Station by the addition of three 2.5MW dual fuel

reciprocating engine generator sets Installation of generation Sets 3 and 4 at Berrimah Power Station to provide reliable, safe and

cyclone-secure capacity to supply emergency services Augmentation of Katherine Power Station by the addition of a Set 4 (Titan 8MW). Life extension

works are also due on the Katherine Power Station’s Mars units 1, 2 and 3.303 For transmission and distribution systems, future identified projects include: The Darwin City Zone Substation will be refurbished by constructing a building to house new

11kV switchboards, replacing all 66kV circuit breakers and one zone transformer. Construction of the indoor 66/11kV Lee Point (Leanyer) Zone Substation, including a dual 66kV

circuit from the existing Berrimah to Casuarina 66kV transmission circuit. The construction of this zone substation will also provide an alternative source of supply to areas currently supplied from the Casuarina Zone Substation.

Design and construction of the new Snell Street Zone Substation will occur in 2010/12, and includes construction of a conventional outdoor 66/11kV zone substation with three transformers. The existing Snell St Zone Substation has reached the limit of its economical life and there is an increasing risk of equipment failure in the substation.

Energy

110

The Norris Bell Zone Substation project involves the construction of a new substation with two 66kV lines, two 66/22kV 15MVA zone transformers and a third 66/11kV transformer at Owen Springs Power Station.

The Frances Bay Zone Substation expansion aims to ensure that a secure supply of electricity is available to the Darwin CBD at all times.

The Channel Island Power Station 132kV switchyard extension is required to improve the capability to export power from the augmentation of generating capacity.304

9.3 Performance The market systems are assessed in this section but due to the lack of detailed performance information, it has not been possible to assess the Indigenous community or remote resource power supply systems. The performance of PWC has to be judged within the context of the challenging environment in which it operates. Particular problems it faces include lightning, tropical storms, fruit bats and vegetation falling on lines. A complicating factor is that its networks are islands with no connection between them, meaning that they cannot rely on multiple sources of generation and a meshed network to ensure continuity of supply, as occurs in the National Electricity Market jurisdictions. Generation Performance measures for generation are: System Average Interruption Duration Index (SAIDI). The sum of the duration of each

sustained customer interruption (in minutes), divided by the total number of distribution customers. SAIDI excludes momentary interruptions (one minute or less duration).

System Average Interruption Frequency Index (SAIFI). The total number of sustained customer interruptions, divided by the total number of distribution customers. SAIFI excludes momentary interruptions (one minute or less duration).

Figure 9.6 provides adjusted SAIDI figures, which exclude the effects of severe weather events or other unusual and unanticipated events that adversely affect reliability. This provides a better insight into the underlying quality of the system. The figures show that there is considerable variation in the annual average duration of generation outages. Figure 9.6: Electricity generation SAIDI (adjusted) 1999/00 to 2008/09305

Electricity

111

Figure 9.7 shows that the average frequency of outages experienced by each customer has been declining in all areas. Figure 9.7: Electricity generation SAIFI 1999/00 to 2008/09306

In 2010, the Utilities Commission investigated whether there was adequate generation infrastructure to meet forecast generation peak demand in the period 2009/10 to 2018/19. Using low, baseline and high growth scenarios, it determined that generation capacity in each system using current security of supply criteria (N-2, or the loss of two largest units of generation capacity) appears adequate to meet forecast peak demand in the medium term to 2011/12 and in the long-term to 2018/19. The exception is the Darwin–Katherine system where projected generation capacity is adequate until 2012/13 under the high peak demand growth scenario, and until 2014/15 under the baseline peak demand growth scenario; and the Alice Springs system, where projected generation capacity is adequate until 2016/17 under the high peak demand growth scenario.307 Transmission/Distribution Performance for the transmission and distribution network also uses SAIDI and SAIFI. Quality of supply is another indicator of performance. Quality of supply factors consist of voltage (e.g. sustained overvoltage and undervoltage), voltage variation (e.g. fluctuations, dips, switching transients), current (e.g. direct current, harmonic content and inter-harmonics) and other qualities (e.g. signalling reliability, noise and interference, level of supply capacity). Quality of supply factors are not reported in the Territory. Figure 9.8 shows that the average duration of outages since 1999/00 declined in Katherine and Tennant Creek until 2006/07 when it started to increase as it did in the other systems. The main reason that SAIDI was not met in 2008/09 was the event at the Casuarina Zone Substation. Vegetation and animals also were a major cause of unplanned outages that year.308 The 2009/10 SAIDI target is 195 for Darwin, 195 for Katherine, 95 for Tennant Creek and 95 for Alice Springs.309

Energy

112

Figure 9.8: Electricity networks SAIDI (adjusted) 1999/00 to 2008/09310

Figure 9.9 shows that the trend in network SAIFI performance in the Territory is similar to SAIDI performance, with the average frequency of outages since 1999/00 declining in Katherine and Tennant Creek, but increasing in Alice Springs and Darwin. Compared nationally, PWC has SAIFI slightly greater than the national average.311 The 2009/10 SAIFI target is 3.9 for Darwin, 4.9 for Katherine, 4.9 for Tennant Creek and 2.5 for Alice Springs.312 Figure 9.9: Electricity networks SAIFI (adjusted) 1999/00 to 2008/09313

The Utilities Commission, in its review of the adequacy of PWC’s networks, could not reach a conclusion on their adequacy. This was because while PWC provided the Utilities Commission with capacity, forecast peak demand and reserve margin data for substations in Darwin–Katherine, Tennant Creek and Alice Springs, the Utilities Commission did not independently test the network peak demand forecasts provided by PWC, and has not assessed the capacity of network assets relative to forecast network peak demand. The Utilities Commission concluded that it ‘does not have sufficient data on the condition of network assets, and the associated capability of these assets to meet demand and maintain security of supply to provide a full assessment’.314 However, it

Electricity

113

should be noted that S.45 of the Electricity Reform Act requires the Utilities Commission to develop its own forecasts of overall electricity load and generating capacity. The program to underground powerlines is continually reducing the frequency and impact of interruptions. Currently, about 2,435km, or 30%, of the 8,108km transmission and distribution networks is underground.315 Environmental sustainability The environmental sustainability direction of PWC flows from the Territory 2030 Strategic Plan (2010) and the Climate Change Policy (2009). The electricity-related targets established in the Territory 2030 Strategic Plan are listed in Table 9.7. Table 9.7: Territory 2030 Strategic Plan electricity-related targets and actions316

Target Action

By 2020, wholesale electricity purchasers in the Territory will meet their national 20% renewable energy target from Territory sources

• Establish targets for the percentage of principal power grids that comprise renewable energy sources

• Establish targets for the percentage of remote power grids that comprise renewable energy sources

• Establish targets for the proportion of renewable electricity generated by production and by consumption in the Territory

• Educate Territorians about all available renewable energy incentives

• Encourage the development of renewable energy sources such as geothermal and solar

• By 2020, the Territory will have the highest proportion of households in Australia producing power, either for their own use or for sale to the grid

• Continue momentum for energy efficiency in Alice Springs once the Alice Solar City program ends in 2013

By 2015, reduce greenhouse gas emissions intensity from power generation at the PWC’s Channel Island and Weddell power stations by 10% compared to 2009 levels

• 10% reduction in emissions by 2015

By 2020, the Territory will have replaced diesel as the primary source of power generation in remote towns and communities, using renewable and low-emission energy sources instead

• Reduction in greenhouse gas emissions

In addition to the above, PWC has committed itself to achieving a renewable energy target of around 300GWh per annum by 2020.317 Ways it will be advancing sustainability include: Reducing the level of greenhouse gas emissions through higher efficiency power generation Enhancing water sustainability through moderation of water demand and an appropriate use of

recycled water Deploying alternative energy sources, particularly to displace diesel as a primary fuel for power

generation in remote communities Assessing the means to reduce PWC’s ecological footprint318 Assisting consumers to reduce their electricity consumption through the Virtual Energy Audit

tool A rebate program to help consumers in older homes replace electric hot water systems with

solar hot water systems (Solar Hot Water Retrofit program).319

Energy

114

Renewable technologies, notably solar, have a long history of use in the Territory. A major project underway is the development of a 1MW solar farm in Alice Springs as part of the Alice Springs Solar Cities project which involves energy efficiency, cost-reflective energy pricing, demand management, encouraging solar hot water installations, and roof-top solar panels. Other renewable sources, notably geothermal and wind, have not been pursued to any degree. The passing of legislation in 2010 allowing geothermal research may lead to the development of geothermal power.

9.4 Future challenges The challenges to achieving improvements in electricity infrastructure are: Raising electricity prices to cost-reflective levels. The current tariffs do not provide true

cost-reflective pricing. Prices may need to be raised to allow PWC to become financially sustainable. If this is done, consideration needs to be given to their social impacts. If tariffs do not rise, then PWC will incur larger debts and its future program of asset investment and maintenance will be jeopardised.

Renewing aging infrastructure. Much of the Territory’s transmission and distribution infrastructure is nearing the end of its design life, and the five-year works program identifies the work required. However, if population growth and electricity demand rises faster than predicted, this work will need to be brought forward, causing substantial financial and logistical challenges for PWC.

Implementing significant demand management measures to constrain peak growth in demand. Peak demand is currently growing faster than average demand. Peak growth in demand needs to be reduced to the level of average growth in demand, which will increase asset utilisation and lower the need for new infrastructure. Achieving a significant reduction in demand, particularly given air-conditioning demand on hot days, will be a major challenge and will necessitate the roll-out of smart meters to enable time-of-use pricing regimes.

Delivering the asset investment and maintenance projects on time and on budget. Due to the scale of the investment program, the limited size of the PWC workforce and private sector resources in the Territory, and the competition faced by PWC for skilled workers from the resource sector, there may be insufficient resources to achieve PWC’s ambitious program of work. The ongoing development and recruitment of technical and professional staff will be critical to delivering the program.

Consideration of alternative electricity generation sources. Non-traditional energy sources need to be considered as part of the generation mix including geothermal, nuclear and wind.

9.5 Report Card Rating

Infrastructure Type NT 2010 NT 2005 National 2005 National 2001

Electricity C- B- C+ B-

This rating recognises that while there has been an improvement in generation capacity for the Darwin-Katherine region, concerns exist about the quality of distribution infrastructure and its asset management. Advances have been made in increasing the capacity and security of electricity supply to Indigenous communities. Positives that have contributed to the rating are: Expansion in generation capacity Significant program of works to improve distribution systems Improvements in electricity supply to Indigenous communities Duel fuel capability of many generation plants.

Electricity

115

Negatives that have contributed to the rating are: Electricity supply reliability problems in the PWC networks Existence of numerous single points of failure in parts of the PWC networks Slow rate of undergrounding distribution lines in major urban areas Management of at-risk distribution infrastructure Electricity tariffs not being sufficiently high to ensure PWC’s financial sustainability.

Energy

116

117

10 Gas

10.1 Summary

Infrastructure Type NT 2010 NT 2005 National 2005 National 2001

Gas A- A C+ C

This rating recognises that the gas transmission network remains in good condition and supply security has improved, with gas now being available from three sources. Since 2005, major gas sector developments have been the: Replacement in the source of domestic gas of the Amadeus fields with the Blacktip field Improved domestic security of supply with the supply available from the Blacktip field, the

Amadeus Basin fields, and the Darwin Liquefied Natural Gas plant. Recently completed and in-progress major infrastructure projects include: Construction of the Bonaparte, Blacktip and Wickham Point Interconnect pipelines Construction of the Blacktip onshore gas plant near Wadeye.

10.2 Infrastructure overview

10.2.1 System description Domestic gas infrastructure comprises the following components: production, transmission and distribution. This section does not cover the production of gas for export, nor landfill gas. In the Territory, gas is principally used for the generation of electricity at the following power stations: Berrimah (PWC) Brewer Estate, Alice Springs (Central Energy Power) Channel Island, Darwin (PWC) Cosmo Howley (Energy Development Limited) Elliot (PWC) Katherine (PWC) McArthur River (Energy Development Limited) Owen Springs (PWC) Pine Creek (Energy Development Limited) Ron Goodin, Alice Springs (PWC) Tennant Creek (PWC) Weddell (PWC) Yulara (PWC).

PWC has two wholly-owned subsidiary companies involved in natural gas: Darnor Pty Ltd. Darnor holds a 2.5% equity in NT Gas Pty Ltd, the lessee operator of the

Amadeus Basin to Darwin gas pipeline and a 2.5% of the units in the Amadeus Gas Trust. Darnor Pty Ltd derives its income from gas sales to third party customers.

Gasgo Pty Ltd. Gasgo was created to facilitate administration of the gas contracts related to the Amadeus Basin to Darwin Pipeline and gas sales agreements from the central Australian gas fields. When those arrangements expire in July 2011, the company will be dissolved.

Energy

118

PWC is assessing further opportunities to replace diesel fuel electricity generation with natural gas, including supply to a number of remote communities, and also to identify new markets for natural gas sales.320 It has identified Wadeye and Hermannsburg as the first remote communities for direct connection to natural gas. Wadeye is in close proximity to the new Bonaparte Gulf Pipeline, while Hermannsburg is located near the Palm Valley to Alice Springs Pipeline. PWC supplies gas to Origin Energy Limited and NT Gas Distribution Pty Limited, who respectively reticulate natural gas in the Alice Springs and Darwin reticulation systems. The size of the domestic gas market is small due to the negligible heating load requirement, and as many homes in Darwin have solar hot water systems, gas would only be used for cooking. PWC transports compressed natural gas to Yulara and has commissioned a feasibility study into building a pipeline from Mereenie to the Yulara Power Station. Production For the last 25 years, natural gas production for domestic consumption has been provided solely from the Amadeus Basin gas fields located at Mereenie and Palm Valley. However, the decline in production from these fields resulted in development of the Eni Australia BV (Eni) owned and operated Blacktip gas field in the Bonaparte Gulf. Gas from this field is brought 100km via a sub-sea pipeline to an onshore gas plant near Wadeye, where it is processed and gas transported to Darwin via the Bonaparte Pipeline. The Blacktip gas field is expected to provide 98% of the fuel needed to generate electricity for the next 25 years. The Palm Valley contract with PWC for gas will expire in about January 2012, and its contract with Mereenie ceased on 5 September 2010. Gas from the Darwin Liquefied Natural Gas (DLNG) plant can also supply gas if required via the Wickham Point Interconnect Pipeline. Transmission pipelines and storage There are 13 gas and oil transmission pipelines in the Territory, with a total length in excess of 3,081km. These are illustrated in Figure 10.1 and the details are listed in Table 10.1. The two most important recent domestic pipeline developments have been the construction of the Bonaparte Gas Pipeline (BGP) and the Wickham Point Interconnect Pipeline. The 286km Bonaparte Gas Pipeline (BGP) was completed in December 2008 and takes Blacktip gas from the onshore gas plant near Wadeye to join the Amadeus Basin to Darwin Pipeline at Ban Ban Springs. This pipeline is expected to be the main source of natural gas supply domestically for the next 25 years. The 12km Wickham Point Interconnect Pipeline connects the Darwin Liquefied Natural Gas plant to the Amadeus Basin to Darwin Pipeline. It was used to supply gas in 2009 for several months as the Blacktip gas supply was not fully operational. It will provide supply backup in case of a disruption of the Blacktip gas supply.

Gas

119

Figure 10.1: The Territory’s domestic gas transmission network321

Table 10.1: Territory oil and gas pipelines322

Licence Number

Name Length Details

1 Palm Valley Pipeline 140km Main line completed 1983, 6km Owen Springs lateral completed 2009; supplies natural gas to Alice Springs area. Internal diameter – 8 inch; Maximum operating pressure – 7,000kPa

4 Amadeus Basin to Darwin Pipeline

1660km Completed in 1986. Supplies natural gas to Darwin, Katherine, Tennant Creek and other centres either directly or through connecting pipelines. Length – 1,660km; internal diameter – mainly 14 inch; maximum operating pressure – 9,650kPa (with the exception of the 116km Mereenie lateral (10 inch) which is designed for 10,150kPa)

Energy

120

Licence Number

Name Length Details

7 Brewer Estate Pipeline

10.2km Completed in October 1988. Supplies natural gas to facilities at Brewer Estate south of Alice Springs. Length – 10.2km; internal diameter – 4 inch; maximum operating pressure – 7,000kPa

10 Elliott Pipeline 4km Completed in 1990. Supplies natural gas from the Amadeus Basin to Darwin Pipeline to the Elliott Power Station. Length – 4km; internal diameter – 4 inch; maximum operating pressure – 9,650kPa

15* Kleenheat Pipeline 280m Completed in 1992. The pipeline is used for transferring LPG from tankers in Darwin Harbour to Kleenheat Gas’s storage facility on Channel Island. Length – 280m; internal diameter 150mm LNG line and 80mm return vapour line; maximum operating pressure – 3,100kPa

17 McArthur River Mine Pipeline

330km Completed in 1995. Supplies natural gas from the Amadeus Basin to Darwin Pipeline at Daly Waters to the McArthur River Mine. Length – 330km; internal diameter – 150mm; maximum operating pressure – 10,200kPa

18 Berrimah Pipeline 19km Completed in 1996. Carries natural gas from the Amadeus Basin to Darwin pipeline at Weddell to Berrimah to supply commercial customers. Length – 19km; internal diameter – 160mm; maximum operating pressure – 5,000kPa

20* Bayu Undan Pipeline 501km Completed in 2005. Carries natural gas from the Bayu-Undan gas and condensate field in the Joint Petroleum Development Area of the Timor Sea to the Darwin LNG plant in Darwin Harbour. Length – 501km; internal diameter – mainly 26 inch; maximum operating pressure – 19,000kPa. Of the 501km, 92km are administered under the Energy Pipelines Act (NT), 367km are administered under the Offshore Petroleum Act (Commonwealth, WA and NT) and the remaining 42km are administered by the National Petroleum Authority of Timor Leste.

21 Bonaparte Pipeline 286km Completed in 2008. Carries natural gas from Eni Gas Plant at Wadeye to the Amadeus Basin to Darwin Pipeline at Ban Ban Springs. Length – 286km; internal diameter – 300mm; maximum operating pressure - 15,300kPa

22 Weddell Interconnect Pipeline

1.2km Completed in 2007. Supplies natural gas from the Amadeus Basin to Darwin Pipeline to Weddell Power Station. Length – 1.2km; internal diameter 300mm; maximum operating pressure – 9,650kPa

23 Blacktip Gas Pipeline 110km Completed in 2009. Carries natural gas and condensate from the Blacktip field in the Bonaparte Gulf to Wadeye for processing prior to sale. Length – 110km; internal diameter – 18 inch; maximum operating pressure – 14,800kPa. Of the 110km, 2km are administered under the Energy Pipelines Act (NT) and the remainder is administered under the Offshore Petroleum Act (Commonwealth, WA and NT).

24* Blacktip Condensate Pipeline

9km Completed in 2009. Will carry condensate from the Eni Gas Plant at Wadeye to an offshore tanker loading facility. Length – 9km; internal diameter – 12 inch; maximum operating pressure – 4,245kPa. Of the 9km, 2km are administered under the Energy Pipelines Act (NT) and the remainder is administered under the Offshore Petroleum Act (Commonwealth and NT).

25 Wickham Point Interconnect Pipeline

12km Completed in 2009. Carries natural gas from the Darwin LNG Plant to the Weddell Power Station. Length – 12km; internal diameter – 12 inch; maximum operating pressure – 9,650kPa

* Designed for oil and gas export

A number of pipelines have been proposed over the last decade. One was the Trans Territory Pipeline which was proposed to carry gas from the from the Blacktip field to the Alcan Gove alumina operations. This was cancelled in 2005, and the Gove power station remains fuelled by heavy oil.323 Other potential pipelines are the: Darwin to Moomba (linking Bayu–Undan) PNG to Queensland Gas Pipeline: Gove Lateral Project.

Gas

121

Distribution There is minimal reticulation of gas for domestic or light industry use within the Territory. In Darwin, it is limited to an industrial suburb at Berrimah, and liquefied petroleum gas is reticulated to the hotels on the Esplanade at Darwin. A residential area of Alice Springs is also reticulated. Other domestic gas users rely on bottled gas.

10.2.2 Policy and governance The Department of Resources is responsible for the monitoring of individual pipelines under the NT Petroleum Act, NT Petroleum (Submerged Lands) Act, Commonwealth Petroleum (Submerged Lands) Act and the Energy Pipelines Act. The National Gas (Northern Territory) Act 2008 came into operation on 1 July 2008 and replaced the Gas Pipelines Access (Northern Territory) Act 1998. The new Act references the National Gas Law and National Gas Rules covering natural gas transmission and distribution pipelines in all States and Territories.

10.3 Performance Production Production from the Blacktip field was contracted to be in operation from 1 January 2009. However, due to difficulty in sourcing components on time, and extreme weather conditions, production was delayed and the first gas from the field used for electricity generation did not commence until October 2009. This gas was not processed to the required specification, and it was only in early 2010 that the plant reached full production specifications.324 The quality of gas from the Blacktip field is expected to meet the Territory’s long-term domestic gas requirements. The Utilities Commission considers that until at least 2018/19, gas supply contract volumes from the Blacktip and Amadeus Basin fields, and from the Darwin Liquefied Natural Gas plant, are able to supply sufficient fuel to meet forecast electricity generation requirements without resorting to obtaining additional gas or using liquid fuels.325 Transmission pipelines There is very little public information available on the operational performance of transmission networks. Even if there was, it is extremely difficult to develop meaningful comparative performance measures for transmission pipelines as each is unique in terms of its distance, diameter, age and condition, operational characteristics such as number of compressors, receipt points and delivery points, the market serviced, and the environment through which the pipeline passes. One performance measure that provides an indication of the adequacy of the infrastructure is its ability to provide additional gas and its reliability. All the high pressure gas transmission pipelines in the Territory are quite new. Pipelines can be expected to have safe operating lives in excess of 50 years. The oldest pipeline system, the Palm Valley to Alice Springs Pipeline, was built in 1984. Historically, gas supply to generation plants has been very reliable. There have only been four occasions since 1987 when gas has not been supplied to a power station in the Darwin–Katherine system. They were in May 1999, December 2004 and in November and December 2009.326 Security of the gas supply has been improved with the availability of three separate sources of gas, and supplies being fed in from different ends of the Amadeus Basin to Darwin Pipeline. Many of PWC’s power stations have dual fuel generation facilities, providing an added level of electricity supply security.

Energy

122

10.4 Future challenges The challenge to achieving improvements in gas infrastructure is to ensure that the risk management of loss of supply is effective. While the existence of three sources of gas supply and linepack, plus the duel fuel capability of many generators reduces supply risk, it is still possible for major interruptions to occur.

10.5 Report Card Rating

Infrastructure Type NT 2010 NT 2005 National 2005 National 2001

Gas A- A C+ C

This rating recognises that the gas transmission network remains in good condition and supply security has improved, with gas now being available from three sources. Positives that have contributed to the rating are: Existing high quality transmission pipelines Reliable supply of gas for the next 25 years Improved domestic security of supply due to gas being available from three sources.

Negatives that have contributed to the rating are: Vulnerability of loss of supply Limited reticulated gas supply.

123

TELECOMMUNICATIONS

11.1 Summary

Infrastructure type NT 2010 NT 2005 National 2005 National 2001

Telecommunications C- Not rated Not rated B

This rating recognises that telecommunication services in urban areas are generally adequate. However, broadband blackspots still exist. While several backhaul projects have significantly improved telecommunication services for some remote and regional communities, many non-urban communities do not have adequate telecommunication services. The lack of universal mobile phone services along highways remains a challenge. In 2007, Engineers Australia rated telecommunications in the Telecommunications Infrastructure Report Card 2007. It used Local Government Statistical Divisions as the geographical basis for rating fixed and mobile infrastructure. Below are its ratings.

Statistical Division Name Fixed Infrastructure Rankings (2007)

Mobile Infrastructure Rankings (2007)

Darwin D E

Northern Territory Balance F F

Developments since the 2007 Telecommunications Infrastructure Report Card have included: Increased demand for high speed broadband services Continual growth in mobile phone ownership Construction of non-Telstra fibre optical cables connecting Darwin to the rest of Australia

(expected to be completed in 2011) Increased capability of mobile telephone networks including increases in coverage, reliability,

function and capacity Increase in the number of remote communities connected to broadband Commencement of the Commonwealth Indigenous Communications Program Progress in developing the National Broadband Network (NBN).

Completed and in-progress infrastructure projects include: Arnhem Land fibre cable Telstra’s marine cable to Groote Eylandt NBN connection to 3,000 premises in the Casuarina area Fibre optic cable between Darwin and Mt Isa as part of the Darwin to Brisbane backhaul Fibre optic cable between Tennant Creek and Tarcoola (SA) providing a second backhaul cable

between Darwin and Adelaide. Challenges to improving telecommunications infrastructure in NT include: Increasing the availability of telecommunication services Strengthening the resilience of the telecommunications backbone Supplying high speed data services to developers of resource projects Selecting optimal technologies.

Telecommunications

124

11.2 Infrastructure overview

11.2.1 System description Telecommunications infrastructure consists of infrastructure that delivers customer access networks (CAN) and backhaul transmission networks. The key elements rated in this chapter are: Fixed line CAN infrastructure Mobile CAN infrastructure Backhaul infrastructure. Backhaul infrastructure connects telecommunication aggregation points

to major nodes in capital cities or regional centres, and provides high-capacity links between capital cities, or from regional centres to capital cities. Backhaul is provided by fibre or microwave technologies, and while fibre-based infrastructure provides the highest bandwidth, its construction is more capital intensive.

The provision of telecommunications services operates within a market structure comprising: Carriers. Owners of networks used to supply carriage services to the public. Carriage service providers. Organisations that use a carrier service to supply

telecommunications services to the public using a carrier-owned network. Internet service providers (ISPs) are carriage service providers.

Content service providers. Organisations that supply radio and TV broadcasting and on-line services to the public.

This chapter does not address content service provision or private telecommunication systems that have no impact on public telecommunications. Table 11.1 lists the infrastructure that this section assesses. Table 11.1: Infrastructure assessed in the Report Card327

Type Purpose Technologies

Customer Access Network (CAN) • Fixed line • Mobile • Fixed wireless

Connects customers to an aggregation point

• Copper twisted pairs • DSL Access Multiplexers (using twisted pairs,

possibly in the form of ULL or LSS) • Coaxial access part of hybrid fibre-coaxial

(cable TV) systems • Access fibre networks (fibre to the

premises/home) • Cellular 2G, 2.5G and 3G mobile networks • WiMAX technologies

Backhaul Connects aggregation points to major nodes in capital cities or regional centres, and provides high-capacity links between capital cities, or from regional centres to capital cities

• Transmission fibre • Fibre trunks • Microwave links • Satellite links

Fixed line CAN infrastructure The fixed line CAN represents the link between the telephone exchange and the customer. Fixed line infrastructure includes twisted pair copper wire, and fibre-to-the-home/premises, and it provides telephony, data transfer and internet connections. Copper wire has been the standard medium for connecting fixed line services to end-user premises but this is being replaced with optical fibre. The fixed line CAN owner in the Territory is Telstra. Fibre to the Home (FTTH) has been deployed in the suburb of Lyons with further deployments under construction in Johnston and Bellamack.

Telecommunications

125

Mobile CAN infrastructure Mobile CAN infrastructure provides mobile telephone, data and multimedia services to mobile handsets. There are three mobile carriers operating in the Territory. These networks use either 2G/2.5G or 3G services. 2G/2.5G (henceforth referred to as GSM) networks in the Territory are operated by: Telstra Optus Vodafone.

3G networks in the Territory are operated by: Telstra’s Next G Network Optus/Vodafone (shared network).

The GSM networks were primarily designed for voice services but are capable of supporting data services at a lower rate than 3G networks. The 3G network allows much higher data transfer rates than the GSM networks, allowing consumers to access a wider range of applications. The 3G technology allows carriers to offer a wider range of services to consumers and achieve a more efficient use of spectrum that allows for greater network capacity. 3G networks provide access to data and the internet through either a mobile handset or a data card that is inserted into a computer. The 3G networks can provide peak download speeds of up to 14.4Mbps and upload speeds of up to 1.9Mbps. Telstra’s Next G can provide peak download speeds of 42Mbps in Darwin and Alice Springs with peak upload of 5Mbps with other Next G areas in the NT having peak download speeds of up to 20Mbps. However, it should be noted that mobile broadband capacity is typically shared among multiple simultaneous users and is therefore subject to contention. Figure 11.1 shows that the growth in mobile phones has been substantial over the last decade. The number of mobile phones has exceeded the number of fixed-line phones from 2000. Figure 11.1: Take-up of fixed-line and mobile phones (Australia-wide)328

While the primary use of mobile phones and other devices is voice, increasingly, non-voice services are providing a greater share of total revenue. The main uses of mobile phones are: Short Message Service (SMS) and Multimedia Message Service (MMS) Email Web browsing and other data services Personal aids, including personal digital assistants (PDAs), GPS-enabled navigation and USB

drives

0

5

10

15

20

25

1999

/00

2000

/01

2001

/02

2002

/03

2003

/04

2004

/05

2005

/06

2006

/07

2007

/08

Mill

ions

of s

ervi

ces

Mobile phone

Fixed-line phone

Te

12

elecommunic

6

M M

The gphon2012alloca BroaBroadADSLBroadfollowbroadthe TDSL/A Figure

Figur Figure

The aqualitphysi

Wire

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

Dig

ital D

ata

Spe

ed M

bps

cations

obile TV andobile comme

growth in moes for applic, mobile netwation.

adband dband is a clL, ADSL2+ adband speed

wed by wireledband techno

Territory, the ADSL, follow

e 11.2: Type of

re 11.3 illustr

e 11.3: Digital d

above speedty of the line/ical location,

Cable,

eless, 23%

Di

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

00

DigitaService O

d video streaerce, interact

obile broadbaations that reworks will be

lass of data tand VDSL), Hd is continuiness networksologies is shsplit is likely

wed by FTTH

f broadband co

rates the spe

data speed com

ds are peak s/connection, distance fro

16%

al-up, 7%Satellite, 2

l Data Obligation

AD

aming tive services

and speed is equire large

e capable of s

transmissionHFC cable anng to increass. Australia-wown in Figurto be very s

H and wireles

onnection, Aus

eed comparis

mparison333

speeds. The number of s

om an exchan

2%Don't

9%

DSL2

ADSL

NBN Fibre connection to

93% of Australians in t

future

Broadband T

and location

significant aamounts of dspeeds of 10

n technologiend wireless (e, with the fa

wide, the percre 11.2. Whilimilar. The dss.

tralia-wide332

sons for diffe

actual speedsimultaneousnge/node, an

D

know, %

L2+

o

the

Technologies

n-based serv

and likely to adata in near 00Mbps330 giv

es, including (such as WiMaster speedscentage of ce there is no

dominant bro

rent broadba

d experiences users, trafficnd broadban

DSL/ADSL, 43%

N

c

vices.329

accelerate threal-time. It

ven sufficient

optic-fibre (FMAX, HSPA as being deliveonnections u

o public data adband conn

and technolo

ed by users dc congestiond speed cap

NBN wireless ansatellite

connection to 7%of Australia

he update of is expected tt bandwidth

FTTx), xDSL and LTE).331 ered by fixedusing differenthat is speci

nection in the

ogies.

depends on tn on the interps applied by

nd

%

mobile that by

(such as

d line, nt fic for e NT is

the rnet, y internet

Telecommunications

127

providers. While higher speeds are often in excess of what is currently needed by customers, over time, new applications will invariably be developed that will utilise the high speed. Those areas that are not connected by fibre or twisted wire, generally rely on 250kbps satellite link that is prone to failure during cyclones and during stormy weather. Fixed wireless Fixed wireless is a technology that provides broadband and phone services without the use of mobile phone infrastructure or local wireless routers. It involves using a wireless modem or card in a computer to connect to the internet as seen in Figure 11.4. Wireless broadband is usually more affordable than mobile wireless (e.g. 3G phone subscribers), however, it has a smaller network coverage. Its quality of service is limited by the spectrum available, radio interference and distance from transmitter. Figure 11.4: Fixed wireless broadband334

Backhaul infrastructure Existing backhaul in the Territory includes: Darwin to Adelaide Darwin to Perth (via Port Hedland)335 Darwin to Brisbane via Three Ways Darwin to Jabiru to Nhulunbuy (Arnhem Land Fibre Project) A marine fibre optic cable linking Groote Eylandt to the mainland. This Telstra project is

expected to be completed in late 2010.336 Darwin to other regional centres such as Borroloola, Yulara, Yuendumu.

In progress backhaul projects includes: Darwin and Mt Isa as part of the Darwin to Brisbane backhaul link (expected to be completed in

September 2011). This project is part of the Backhaul Blackspots Initiative by the Australian Government. It involves a 3,800km fibre optic cable with Territory access points in Casuarina, Howard Springs, Katherine, Nightcliff, Noonamah, Palmerston, and Tennant Creek.337

Tennant Creek to Tarcoola (SA) (expected to be completed in June 2011). This link is owned by Nextgen Networks and was announced in April 2010.

The main telecommunication project developed since 2007 is the Arnhem Land Fibre Project. This $34 million project was announced in September 2008 by Telstra, the NT Government (which invested $6.8 million),338 Rio Tinto Alcan and the Northern Land Council. It involved building 800km of optical fibre cable and associated infrastructure from Jabiru to Nhulunbuy. This cable connected five mainland Aboriginal communities on the route. During 2009, an additional 190km of fibre optic

Telecommunications

128

cable coupled with radio stations was installed to provide high speed broadband access to four additional island communities.339

11.2.2 Policy and governance The Australian Government’s strategic vision for telecommunications reflects that while telecommunications can be an enormous contributor to the economy and to the lifestyle, health and safety of the community, provision and innovation are primarily driven by market forces. The NT Government’s aim in the area of telecommunications is to improve services through negotiation with relevant stakeholders in areas that are currently inadequately serviced.340 The Territory 2030 Strategic Plan identifies the following goals to be achieved by 2030: To increase the proportion of Territory households with broadband internet access341 To ensure that all major towns and communities have access to high-speed broadband on the

same terms as the rest of Australia as a matter of priority342 To increase the number of business premises with fibre access of 100Mbps and 12Mbps to the

national average To increase the number of Territory schools with fibre access to the national average To increase the number of Territory Growth Towns with access to Australian parity broadband

(i.e. cost of service to be equivalent to that in eastern coast urban areas) To increase the number of Territory health clinics with fibre access of 100Mbps to the national

average To increase the number of computers available in libraries with free-of-charge broadband

access to the national average.343 There are no specified targets associated with each goal. The cost in collecting relevant data, and the limited ability of the NT Government in influencing the outcomes, present challenges in defining specific goals. Another goal from the Territory 2030 Strategic Plan is to develop a plan for high-speed broadband by 2012.344 The plan will primarily focus on how the Territory can best leverage the NBN. A policy objective of both the Australian and NT Governments is to encourage the uptake of telecommunications and the development of telecommunications goods and services. The key to achieving this is a supportive regulatory framework and selective intervention when markets fail to deliver competition or appropriate services. Key national priorities, as defined in the Australia’s Digital Economy: Future Directions paper (2009), are to address Australia’s lower take-up rate of internet use and business adoption of e-commerce compared to international peers, provide national broadband infrastructure via the National Broadband Network, free up spectrum by the switchover to digital television, reallocation/renewal of licences for various spectrum bands, and refining Australia’s communications framework.345 Australia’s telecommunications industry is subject to a regulatory framework defined by the Telecommunications Act 1997. Its core aim is to promote the long-term interests of end-users of telecommunications services. The framework relies on industry self-regulation to develop codes and standards in all areas that apply to the sector. However, Government regulators have power to intervene if industry self-regulation is not working effectively in specific instances. The key types of framework documents developed under self-regulation are: Industry Codes, which are rules or guidelines governing particular aspects of

telecommunications, developed by industry Industry Standards, which are rules or guidelines similar to industry codes, but determined by

the Australian Communications and Media Authority (ACMA) Technical Standards that cover the technical parameters of customer equipment, such as

cables and networks.346

Telecommunications

129

Two other key elements of the regulatory framework are the: Telecommunications (Consumer Protections and Service Standards) Act 1999, which legislates

a number of consumer protection matters, particularly the Universal Service Regime, the National Relay Service, and continued access to untimed local calls

Trade Practices Act 1974, which includes two telecommunications-specific parts, Parts XIB and XIC, covering anti-competitive conduct provisions and a telecommunications-specific access regime respectively.d

The radio spectrum framework is defined in the Radiocommunications Act 1992 that sets out the tools to manage the spectrum including frequency planning, licensing and technical standards. In September 2009, the Australian Government announced that it would be making major telecommunication reforms, as it stated that the existing telecommunications anti-competitive conduct and access regimes are cumbersome and provide insufficient certainty for investment.347 The proposed reforms involve: A structural separation of Telstra that primarily involves separating the network

operations/wholesale functions from the retail functions Streamlining the competition regime to provide more certain and quicker outcomes for

telecommunications companies Strengthening consumer safeguards, notably the Universal Service Obligation, Customer

Service Guarantee and Priority Assistance Removing redundant and inefficient regulatory red tape.348

Key multi-jurisdictional bodies and government agencies are: Department of Business and Employment (NT Government). This agency is responsible for

information technology services across government agencies, and for developing telecommunications and broadcasting policy, including establishing strategies to improve telecommunications services, particularly to remote communities in the Territory. A key activity of the agency is to obtain Australian Government funding for telecommunications services in the Territory, including telecommunications infrastructure in remote areas and wholesale competition through a second fibre optic cable connecting the Territory to other jurisdictions.349

Northern Territory Information Communication Technology Industry Development Group (NT ICT IDG). This group is a partnership between the NT Government and ICT Industry to develop communication within the industry and grow the Territory’s ICT Industry.

Department of Broadband, Communications and the Digital Economy (DBCDE) (Australian Government). The DBCDE has a leading role in outlining the strategic direction of the telecommunications sector, and providing advice on all regulatory policy aspects of the telecommunications and radiocommunications sectors. Its Telecommunications Industry Division also provides advice on legislative and administrative arrangements for Telstra and Australia Post.

Australian Communications and Media Authority (ACMA). ACMA is a regulator of the Australian communications industry, with specific responsibilities for the regulation of broadcasting, the internet, radiocommunications, and telecommunications consumer and technical matters.

Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC). The ACCC regulates competition in the telecommunications industry with specific responsibilities for the administration of regulation of anti-competitive conduct, and the approval and arbitration of access codes developed by the industry.

Telecommunications Industry Ombudsman (TIO). The TIO provides an independent dispute resolution forum for complaints made by residential and small business consumers of

d The access rules under this legislation provide a framework for determining the services to which content service providers have a right to access for the purpose of providing their own competing services, and the cost at which such services will be provided to them.

Telecommunications

130

telecommunications services. The TIO is funded through charges levied on carriers and service providers on the basis of complaints received against them.

Communications Alliance Ltd. The Communications Alliance is the peak communications industry body and has primary responsibility for developing technical, operational and consumer industry codes and standards for the industry.350

To aid the development of the Territory’s ICT industry, in 2006 the NT – ICT Industry Strategic Plan was released. The plan establishes a vision and goals as agreed to by the industry for the next five years and proposes the strategies required for their achievement. Its goals to do this include to: Provide support for the local industry Ensure the availability of skilled resources Develop collaboration and clustering opportunities Ensure the maximum share of ICT inputs to major developments in the Territory Encourage creation and commercialisation of IP Enhance telecommunications services throughout the Territory.

Over the next 12 months, a revised strategy will be developed and it is highly likely that the majority of the above goals will be included in it as they are as relevant today as they were in 2006. The NT Government recognises that it has to play a major role in developing telecommunication infrastructure due to the lack of private sector provision. Consequently, it has contributed to a number of telecommunication projects that provide the infrastructure necessary for the services it requires. One example is the 2010, $20 million telecommunications contract between the NT Government and Amcom Pty Ltd which will require Amcom to extend its existing networks in Darwin and Alice Springs to provide data carriage services to government agencies and schools.351 352 Another example is the Territory’s contribution to develop local remote community fibre optic links to enable the development of the Telehealth Network and Advanced Shared Electronic Care Plan, both elements of the Health eTowns Program.

11.2.3 Sector trends Growth in internet connections The number of Territory consumers with internet connections continues to rise as seen in Figure 11.5. The graph illustrates that growth has declined in the last year. The number of consumers is likely to rise even further as services become available in unserved areas as the roll-out of the NBN commences. Figure 11.5: Total ISP subscriptions in the Territory353

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Jun-

06A

ug-0

6O

ct-0

6D

ec-0

6Fe

b-07

Apr

-07

Jun-

07A

ug-0

7O

ct-0

7D

ec-0

7Fe

b-08

Apr

-08

Jun-

08A

ug-0

8O

ct-0

8D

ec-0

8Fe

b-09

Apr

-09

Jun-

09A

ug-0

9O

ct-0

9D

ec-0

9Fe

b-10

Apr

-10

Jun-

10

Tota

l IS

P S

ubsc

riptio

ns ('

000)

Telecommunications

131

Some 32% of Territory residents have an ISP subscription, which is below the national average of 43% as seen in Table 11.2. Two issues should be noted in interpreting this figure. Firstly it excludes mobile broadband data plans which are an increasingly common way in which people are accessing broadband. Secondly most ISP subscriptions are on a household basis and as such each subscription provides access to more than one person. Consequently it is unlikely that the proportion of population with ISP subscriptions will ever exceed 60%. Table 11.2: Population with ISP subscriptions, June 2010

State Population (thousands)354

People with ISP subscriptions (thousands)355

Proportion of population with ISP subscriptions

New South Wales 7,099.7 3,013 42%

Victoria 5,427.7 2,411 44%

Queensland 4,406.8 1,987 45%

South Australia 1,622.7 638 39%

Western Australia 2,236.9 971 43%

Tasmania 502.6 193 38%

Northern Territory 224.8 72 32%

Australian Capital Territory 351.2 213 61%

Australia 21,874.9 9,498 43%

Roll-out of Australian Government broadband infrastructure In response to the increasing demand for high-speed broadband services, and the need to provide broadband services in regional and other areas with limited access, the Australian Government has initiated a number of projects to develop broadband networks. National Broadband Network In early 2009, the Australian Government announced that it would be building the National Broadband Network (NBN). The NBN aims to connect 93% of Australian homes, schools and workplaces with 100Mbps broadband services through fibre-to-the-premises (FTTP) connections. The remaining 7% will be provided with 12Mbps next generation wireless and satellite broadband services. The roll-out is expected to be complete in eight years. The network will be built and operated by NBN Co which was established by the Australian Government for the project. Investment in the company will, according to preliminary estimates, total up to $43 billion over eight years. Funding for the company will come primarily from the Australian Government through the Building Australia Fund, which will be the majority shareholder. The Australian Government expects private sector investment in the company through the issuing of Aussie Infrastructure Bonds (AIBs). The Australian Government intends to sell its interest in the company after the network is built and fully operational. The Australian Government claims that the NBN will lead to significant reform in the telecommunication industry as it will create a complete separation between the infrastructure provider and retail service providers. This separation is expected to lead to greater retail competition and lower prices. Roll-out of the network will begin in the Territory in the second quarter of 2011, with connection to approximately 3,000 premises in Casuarina. This site will be used as a test to determine the final design and construction elements of the eight-year network roll-out. Fibre in greenfield estates The Australian Government has announced that as part of the NBN, all greenfield developments that receive planning approval after 1 July 2010 will require fibre-to-the-premises infrastructure.

Telecommunications

132

This initiative is designed to ensure that homes built in new developments or major redevelopments are connected via fibre infrastructure. In December 2009, the Australian Government released an exposure draft of a bill to implement the changes.e Backhaul Blackspots Initiative To enhance broadband access in regional Australia, in April 2009 the Australian Government announced the Backhaul Blackspots Initiative. This program provided $250 million to be used to immediately address backbone blackspots in regional Australia. In June 2009, the Australian Government announced that a backbone route through rural Queensland and the Territory had been named as one of six initial locations in the first round of the program. This route will also provide access points at Tennant Creek, Katherine, Berrimah, Casuarina, Howard Springs, Nightcliff, Noonamah, Palmerston and Darwin. The Territory section of the project’s 3,835km route is displayed in Figure 11.6. The contract for the initiative was awarded to Leighton Holdings-owned Nextgen Networks in December 2009 and was announced as part of the first building blocks of the National Broadband Network.356 Figure 11.6: Regional Backbone Blackspot Project in the Territory357

Provision to remote communities A major focus of the NT and Australian Governments over the last decade has been to improve telecommunication services to remote communities. In 2003, the NT Government developed a Remote Areas Telecommunications Strategy 2003–2008 aimed at improving services. The document focused on ways to provide improved telecommunications services to 200 permanent Indigenous communities with a population of 50 or more. (There are about 700 identified Indigenous communities located throughout the Territory and

e The proposed Act is called Telecommunications Legislation Amendment (Fibre Deployment) Act 2010. Department of Broadband, Communications and the Digital Economy, Fibre in Greenfields Estate webpage, http://www.dbcde.gov.au/broadband/national_broadband_network/fibre_in_greenfield_estates, accessed 4 January 2009.

Telecommunications

133

these include outstations and seasonally occupied locations.) The plan identified the goal of having a total of 120 remote communities in 2008 regularly using advanced communications. These connections would result in about 80% of the Indigenous population living in remote areas being reached.358 The NT Government considers that this was achieved, but notes that the challenge continues to be encourage high value use of communications such as education. The most recent initiative has been the Australia Government’s Indigenous Communications Program. This program commenced in 2009/10 and has been allocated $30 million over four years to improve services in remote Indigenous communities. The program provides essential telephone services, basic public internet access facilities and computer training for many remote Indigenous communities. Specifically it will provide: A fixed or mobile satellite community telephone to about 300 remote Indigenous communities

that do not currently have access to a public telephone Ongoing monitoring and maintenance of about 550 Indigenous community telephones,

comprising around 300 new phones and 250 existing phones Expanded public internet access and delivery of computer training in up to 120 remote

Indigenous communities that have limited or no public access to internet facilities.359

11.3 Performance Assessing the level of service and asset quality of telecommunications infrastructure requires evaluating not only infrastructure issues, such as coverage and capacity, but also market issues such as pricing and packages offered. While some of this information is publicly available, much of it is commercially sensitive and not published by the telecommunication owners and providers.

11.3.1 Fixed line CAN infrastructure performance Fixed line telephone provision is meant to be universal as it is a requirement for Telstra, under the Australian Government’s Universal Service Obligation (USO), to ensure that standard telephone services are reasonably accessible to all people in Australia on an equitable basis.f The cost of supplying loss-making services that are required to fulfil the USO is shared among all carriers. Telephony is generally physically available in the remote communities (i.e. almost all communities with more than 50 residents have terrestrial telephone with smaller ones mostly serviced via community phones which are satellite pay phones) however services may not be available in individual houses due to unpaid bills. This arises because there may be multiple users of the phone resulting in large bills that cannot be paid by the person to whom the phone service is registered. Provision of broadband in the Territory varies due to the economics of providing broadband. ADSL technology provides the majority of broadband connections and uses Telstra’s copper phone network to provide the connection between the exchange and the home. While theoretically all homes with phone lines can access ADSL, due to limitations with the exchanges and phone lines, this is not always possible. For example, as at July 2010, of Telstra’s 83 ADSL-enabled exchanges, seven had no ports available for ADSL services, meaning that no additional ADSL customers can be served.g Even if there were ports available at the exchange for connections, customers still may not be able to access ADSL because they are: Located too far from an exchange, because the quality of ADSL decreases with distance Have a technology problem, such as having a large pair gain system already on their line,

resulting in no additional capacity being available.360

f The details of Telstra’s fulfilling its obligations as universal service provider is contained in the Telstra policy statement and marketing plan approved by ACMA. These are available from http://www.telstra.com.au/abouttelstra/commitments/uso.cfm. g Based on ADSL Enabled Exchanges report and the Proposed ADSL Enabled Exchanges report produced by Telstra Wholesale as of 28 July 2010, http://www.telstrawholesale.com/products/data/adsl-reports-plans.htm, accessed 27 September 2010.

Telecommunications

134

There are some areas of Darwin and other urban areas that are not able to access a reasonable broadband service. Figure 11.7 shows the ADSL-enabled status of Telstra’s exchanges in the Territory. It illustrates that a large number of exchanges are not ADSL-enabled. As identified above, over 8% of those which are ADSL enabled have no excess capacity. The large number of regional Telstra exchanges that are not ADSL-enabled is a logical consequence of the fact that ADSL only works within 6km of the exchange. Regional exchanges probably cover much larger areas with the fixed copper telephone network and only a fraction of those users will be within 6km. In Darwin, Alice Springs and other larger towns, there are several other telecommunication providers that offer ADSL services through their own infrastructure, either installed in a Telstra exchange or as a stand-alone facility. These include internode, iiNet and Agile. However, until a second fibre optic cable is provided, all service providers use Telstra infrastructure for backhaul. Remote communities generally do not have fibre meaning that they can only access broadband via satellite services. There are approximately 66 communities within the Territory with the majority having broadband via fixed or mobile access. Figure 11.7: ADSL-enabled status of Telstra’s exchanges in the Territory (Red marks indicate ADSL-enabled exchanges)*361

* The map has a number of omissions due to its scale. For examples, it does not include Nguiu on Bathurst Island, Arnhem Land Islands, or Mataranka.

Telecommunications

135

11.3.2 Mobile CAN infrastructure performance The coverage provided by 3G and GSM networks is extensive in populated areas as seen on the following pages by the coverage maps of the three networks. None of the mobile phone carriers states the percentage of the population that their system covers in the Territory. Despite the wide coverage, the Territory continues to experience blackspots along highways and at small population centres. The asset quality of the mobile phone infrastructure is generally good due to its young age, and its capacity continues to increase in line with demand. People who live beyond 3G or GSM terrestrial mobile coverage can obtain a subsidised satellite phone under the Australian Government’s Satellite Phone Subsidy Scheme. Some 2,200 people living in the Territory took up the subsidy between 2002 and 2009, which equates to 14% of the national figure of those eligible for subsidised satellite phones.362 Figure 11.8 shows Telstra’s 3G and GSM network coverage map. Figure 11.8: Telstra’s 3G and GSM network coverage map, March 2010363

Figure 11.9 shows Optus’s 3G and GSM network coverage map.

Telecommunications

136

Figure 11.9: Optus’s 3G and GSM network coverage map, July 2010364

Figure 11.10 shows Vodafone’s 3G and GSM network coverage map. Figure 11.10: Vodafone’s 3G and GSM network coverage map, July 2010365

Telecommunications

137

Mobile phone services attract the major service complaints compared to fixed line and broadband services. A measure of customer satisfaction for fixed line, mobile and broadband, based on complaints, is provided by the Telecommunications Industry Ombudsman. It records the number of complaints for telecommunications services. The main areas of concern are billing and payment. The highest increase in complaints was among mobile phone users (79% rise), followed by internet (57%), landline (40%) and mobile premium services (13%). Figure 11.11 identifies the nature and location of complaints to the Ombudsman in the Territory over a 12-month period. Figure 11.11: Location of complaints in the Territory, September 2009366

11.3.3 Backhaul infrastructure Currently, there is limited backhaul infrastructure across the Territory, consisting of one route south to Adelaide from Darwin, one route east to Perth and via Three Ways (Tennant Creek) to Brisbane. If one of these is cut, traffic can be re-routed via the others. The Territory’s backhaul is provided by one service provider that is claimed to result in high broadband prices.367 The completion of the two new backhaul cables connecting the Territory with the rest of the country will introduce competition to the Territory, as well as increasing resilience. While smaller communities on the backhaul cable routes will have access to backhaul, those that are a distance away will not. Given the small numbers of users at these sites, it has not been commercially viable to build backhaul spurs to them. The NBN will be the most likely mechanism by which these communities become connected.

11.4 Future challenges The challenges to achieving improvements in telecommunications infrastructure in the Territory are: Increasing the availability of telecommunication services. Given the low population density

across most of the Territory, there is no business case for commercial organisations to provide telecommunication services in low density locations. Consequently, it falls to government to provide the services. Both the Australian Government, via the NBN and the Indigenous Communications Program, and the NT Government are funding new telecommunication infrastructure but their resources are limited. An additional approach that should be pursued is to facilitate Territory-based industry and the community to consolidate their requirements so that shared funding infrastructure can be built more rapidly, such as with the Arnhem Land Fibre Project.

Telecommunications

138

Strengthening the resilience of the telecommunications backbone. The telecommunications network has become an essential service and its loss causes significant economic and social consequences. As telecommunications become embedded into more aspects of commercial and everyday life, ensuring its resilience and robustness becomes increasingly important. This requires reducing single points of failure and other vulnerabilities, and preventing accidental disruptions such as by cutting through cables with a backhoe.

Supplying high speed data services to developers of resource projects. The move to increased automation and remote operations at resource development level requires high speed data links between it and its remote control centre. The provision of these high speed data services at remote sites is the responsibility of the developers themselves. Laying fibre optic cable to remote areas can be very expensive as it requires long spurs from existing fibre.

Selecting optimal technologies. There are many technologies that telecommunications companies can deploy. All have tradeoffs in areas such as cost, risk, capability and compatibility. The selection of technologies is critical to prevent stranding of assets, particularly for smaller telecommunication companies that do not dominate the market, and for those wishing to be compatible with the NBN.

11.5 Report Card Rating

Infrastructure type NT 2010 NT 2005 National 2005 National 2001

Telecommunications C- Not rated Not rated B

This rating recognises that telecommunication services in urban areas are generally adequate. However, broadband blackspots still exist. While several backhaul projects have significantly improved telecommunication services for some remote and regional communities, many non-urban communities do not have adequate telecommunication services. The lack of universal mobile phone services along highways remains a challenge. Positives that have contributed to the rating are: Construction of a fibre optic backhaul link to Darwin, Katherine, and Tennant Creek providing

competitive optic fibre backhaul between Darwin and the rest of Australia Incremental improvement in providing broadband to remote communities Indigenous Communications Program which is providing basic telephone and internet access

for many remote Indigenous communities Expected reduction in differences in telecommunication services between the Territory and the

rest of the country following the completion of the competitive backhaul and roll-out of the NBN NT Government considers that it has a major role in driving investment in telecommunications.

Negatives that have contributed to the rating are: Access to broadband is generally poor away from metropolitan areas and away from the main

backhaul and other fibre cables Substantial gaps in telecommunication services exist across the Territory Limited mobile phone coverage along main highways and remote areas.

139

APPENDICES

140

Appendix A: Rating methodology

The rating methodology is designed to provide a standardised approach to developing evidence-based rating of infrastructure that is credible, defendable, and explainable. The Report Card’s rating scheme is predicated on the principle that infrastructure policy, regulation, planning, provision, operation and maintenance are optimal if the infrastructure meets the current and future needs of the community, economy and environment in terms of sustainability, effectiveness, efficiency and equity. The infrastructure rating principles are based on the view that: Infrastructure needs to be optimised in a systems context that requires:

complementarity in national, State/Territory and local government decisions best-practice governance arrangements across the infrastructure policy, regulation, planning,

provision, operation and maintenance activities competitive and efficient markets (which includes infrastructure reflecting the true cost of

provision, including externality costs and benefits) a minimum set of sector legislation, regulation and standards the efficient use of existing infrastructure and resources (requires long-term focus on

maintenance, renewals and demand management) a sustainability approach, which gives due regard to economic, social and environmental

factors planning that is based on data, evidence and informed decision-makers working in

partnership with stakeholders. Infrastructure should be planned, designed, built, operated and maintained in a sustainable,

cost-effective, efficient and equitable manner over its life-cycle, which is typically 30 to 100 years depending on the infrastructure.

Decisions on infrastructure need to recognise that it both shapes and is shaped by the social, economic and environmental objectives set by the community.

Infrastructure decisions should balance the costs and benefits on the economy, society and environment by simultaneously optimising the following objectives:

economic growth, efficiency and effectiveness health, safety and security access and social justice environmental responsibility liveability, connectivity and amenity.

Infrastructure should be provided by both the public and private sectors to optimise taxpayer and infrastructure stakeholder best value.

Governments and infrastructure organisations should have the relevant skills to effectively oversee the provision of infrastructure, whether the actual infrastructure policy, regulation, planning, provision, operation and maintenance are done by the public or private sector.

Infrastructure decisions should reflect current and anticipated challenges, such as demographic shifts, aging, climate change adaptation, greenhouse gas mitigation and resilience.

Infrastructure decisions should be accountable and transparent.

Rating scheme The rating scheme is based on a cascading structure that details, at various levels of granularity, the key elements deemed to be essential to optimal infrastructure policy, regulation, planning, provision, operation and maintenance.

Appendix A: Rating methodology

141

The scheme has two high level Categories – future infrastructure and existing infrastructure. For each of these, there are three Components, which further divide into Element Blocks and finally Foundation Elements. This is illustrated in the figure below.

Rating scale Ratings given are based on the scale in the table below:

Letter grade

Designation Definition*

A Very good Infrastructure is fit for its current and anticipated future purposes

B Good Minor changes required to enable infrastructure to be fit for its current and anticipated future purposes

C Adequate Major changes required to enable infrastructure to be fit for its current and anticipated future purposes

D Poor Critical changes required to enable infrastructure to be fit for its current and anticipated future purposes

F Inadequate Inadequate for current and anticipated future purposes * Defined as infrastructure meeting the current and future needs of the community, economy and environment in terms of sustainability, effectiveness, efficiency and equity.

142

Appendix B: Units and acronyms

Units J Joule, a unit of energy

W Watt (1W = 1 joule/second), a unit of power

Wh watt-hour (1Wh = 3600J), a unit of electricity energy

V Volt, a unit of voltage

l Litre, a unit of volume

Prefixes m milli, meaning 10-3

k kilo, meaning 103 (thousand)

M mega, meaning 106 (million)

G giga, meaning 109 (billion)

T tera, meaning 1012 (trillion)

P peta, meaning 1015 (quadrillion)

Acronyms ARTC Australian Rail Track Corporation

ABC Airport Building Controller

ACCC Australian Competition and Consumer Commission

ADG Airport Development Group

ADWG Australian Drinking Water Guidelines 2004

AEMC Australian Energy Market Commission

AEO Airport Environment Officer

AER Australian Energy Regulator

AES Airport Environment Strategy

AGO Australian Greenhouse Office

AMC Asset Management Capability

ARI Average Recurrence Interval

ASA Alice Springs Airport Pty Ltd

AZRI Arid Zone Research Institute

BAC Blood Alcohol Concentration

BGP Bonaparte Gas Pipeline

BITRE Bureau of Infrastructure, Transport and Regional Economics

BOD Biochemical Oxygen Demand

CAN Customer Access Networks

CAS Chemically-Assisted Sedimentation

CASA Civil Aviation Safety Authority

CBD Central Business District

CCTV Closed Circuit Television

CIPS Channel Island Power Station

COAG Council of Australian Governments

CPRS Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme

CSOs Community Service Obligations

DAF Dissolved Air Flotation

DCI Department of Construction and Infrastructure

DIA Darwin International Airport Pty Ltd

DIRN Defined Interstate Rail Network

DIT Department of Infrastructure and Transport

Appendix B: Units and acronyms

143

DITRDLG Department of Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development and Local Government, formally (DOTARS)

DLNG Darwin Liquefied Natural Gas

DLP Department of Lands and Planning

E. coli Escherichia coli

EDR Electrodialysis Reversal

Eni Eni Australia BV

GEMCO Groote Eylandt Mining Company

GPG Gas power generation

GWA Genesee & Wyoming Australia

IES Indigenous Essential Services Pty Ltd

IRI International Roughness Index

IRTS Integrated Regional Transport Strategy

ISPS International Ship and Port Facility and Security

ISPs Internet service providers

ITS Intelligent Transport Systems

KPI Key Performance Indicator

LGANT The Local Government Association of the Northern Territory

LIP Local Implementation Plan

LNG Liquefied Natural Gas

LPG Liquid Petroleum Gas

MMS Multimedia Message Service

MRET Mandated Renewable Energy Target (scheme)

MSIC Maritime Security Identification Card

MW Megawatts

NBN National Broadband Network

NEM National Electricity Market

NTER Northern Territory Emergency Response

NRETAS Department of Natural Resources, Environment, the Arts and Sport

NWC National Water Commission

NWI National Water Initiative

OUD Open Unlined Drain

PCG Project Control Group

PDA Personal Digital Assistant

PWC Power and Water Corporation

RAMP Remedial Asset Management Program

RET Renewable Energy Targets

RO Reverse Osmosis

RPT Regular Passenger Transport

RPT Regular Public Transport

SAIDI System Average Interruption Duration Index

SAIFI System Average Interruption Frequency Index

SAT Soil Aquifer Treatment

SCI Statement of Corporate Intent

SIHIP Strategic Indigenous Housing and Infrastructure Program

SMS Short Message Service

TEU Twenty-foot Equivalent Unit Container

TN Total Nitrogen

TP Total Phosphorus

TSS Total Suspended Solids

WQPP Water Quality Protection Plan

WSP Waste Stabilisation Ponds

144

Appendix C: Glossary

Roads Road infrastructure: Road infrastructure consists of:

the road pavement—the structure that carries traffic other structures—bridges, pathways, barriers, walls roadside assets—including engineering features such as traffic signs and guideposts, cuttings and embankments, and environmental features such as vegetated areas situated within the boundaries of the road reserve

roadside traffic signs—which regulate speed, warn of hazards and provide information pavement markings—designating the edges of the road and traffic lanes and providing directional and warning information.

Road maintenance: Pavement maintenance can be divided into the following classes: routine maintenance which is reactive, addressing minor defects. This includes fixing potholes and rough patches on the pavement.

periodic maintenance to resurface and reseal the pavement to prevent water infiltrating the pavement structure, to address some aspects of surface roughness and to improve the traction of the pavement surface.

rehabilitation which involves a more significant treatment to improve the structural condition of the pavement and bring the surface back to within an acceptable level of roughness and traction.

Rail

Above rail: Those activities required to provide and operate train services such as rolling stock provision (i.e. trains, carriages), rolling stock maintenance, train crewing, terminal provision, freight handling and the marketing and administration of the above services.

Below rail: Those activities associated with the provision and management of rail infrastructure, including the construction, maintenance and renewal of rail infrastructure assets, and the network management services required for the safe operation of train services on the rail infrastructure, including train control services and the implementation of safe working procedures.

Rail infrastructure: Consists of both above and below rail infrastructure.

Standard gauge: The distance of 1,435mm (4’8½”) between two rails.

Ports

Berth: The wharf space at which a ship docks. A wharf may have two or three berths, depending on the length of incoming ships.

Break Bulk Cargo: Cargo that is not containerised, e.g. timber, paper, steel, vehicles, vehicle components.

Common-User Facility: A port facility not dedicated to a particular use and available for short-term hire.

Container: A metal container designed for cargo transport. Most containers are either 20 feet (six metres) or 40 feet (twelve metres) long and referred to 20 TEU or 40 TEU respectively.

Container terminal: A specialised facility where ocean container vessels dock to discharge and load containers.

Dead Weight Tonnage (DWT): Maximum weight of a vessel including the vessel, cargo and ballast.

Pilot: A licensed navigational guide with thorough knowledge of a particular section of a waterway, whose occupation is to steer ships along a coast or into and out of a harbour. Local pilots board the ship to advise the captain and navigator of local navigation conditions.

Stevedores: Labour management companies that provide equipment and hire workers to transfer cargo between ships and docks.

Twenty Foot Equivalent Unit (TEU): A unit of measurement equal to the space occupied by a standard twenty foot container.

Airports

Airport Master Plan: Airport Master Plans are a requirement of the Airport Acts 1996 and are prepared by major Australian airports every five years to provide a clear direction for the growth and development of the airport.

Airport Operator: The airport lessee or owner.

Curfew: A restriction on flights that can take off or land from specified airports at designated times.

General aviation: All civil operations other than Regular Public Transport operations.

Leased federal airports: The 21 Australian airports covered by the Airports Act 1996 where the Airport Operators lease the airport land from the Australian Government.

Appendix C: Glossary

145

Non-aeronautical developments: Non-aviation commercial developments, such as retail outlets and office buildings, on airport sites.

Regular Public Transport operation (RPT): An operation of an aircraft for the purposes of an air service that is provided for a fee payable by persons using the service, is conducted in accordance with fixed schedules to or from fixed terminals over specific routes, and is available to the general public on a regular basis (synonymous with ‘scheduled services’).

Water

Annual Exceedance Probability (AEP): The statistical likelihood of occurrence of a flood of a given size or larger in any one year, usually expressed as a percentage.

Carrier (irrigation): A conduit for the supply or drainage of water. The key types are lined channel (an earthen channel lined with a low permeability material), unlined channel (an earthen open channel without internal lining), natural waterway (a stream or other naturally-formed watercourse), and pipe (a closed conveyance or carrier regardless of material, size or shape that conveys water, typically for supply service).

Catchment: An area of land where run-off from rainfall goes into one river system.

Consumptive use: The use of water for private benefit consumptive purposes including irrigation, industry, urban, stock and domestic use.

Effluent: Treated sewage that flows out of a sewage treatment plant.

Greywater: Water from the kitchen, laundry and bathroom. It does not include toilet waste.

Headworks: Dams, weirs and associated works used for the harvest and supply of water.

Indirect Potable Reuse (IPR) water: Recycled water used as a source of potable water, typically by injecting it into a water reservoir.

Integrated urban water cycle management: The integrated management of all water sources so that water is used optimally within a catchment resource, in a state and national policy context. This approach promotes coordinated planning, sustainable development and management of the water, land and related resources linked to urban areas, and the application of Water Sensitive Urban Design principles.

Irrigation: The artificial application of water to land for the purpose of agricultural production.

Potable: Suitable for drinking.

Recycled water: Water derived from sewerage systems or industry processes, treated to a standard appropriate for its intended use.

Reticulation: The network of pipelines used to take water into areas of consumption; includes residential districts and individual households.

Run-off: Precipitation or rainfall that flows from a catchment into streams, lakes, rivers or reservoirs.

Sewage: The waste and wastewater discharged into sewers from homes and industry.

Sewerage: Infrastructure system for the collection, removal, treatment and disposal of sewage.

Stormwater: Urban rainfall that runs off roofs, roads and other surfaces where it flows into gutters, streams, rivers and creeks or is harvested.

Third pipe systems: A reticulated pipe network that distributes recycled water for use in gardens, etc.

Trade waste: Industrial and commercial liquid waste discharged into the sewerage system.

Urban runoff: Water deposited by storms or other sources that passes through stormwater drains or is harvested. Urban runoff may contain substantial level of pollutants such as solid wastes, petroleum-based compounds, heavy metals, nutrients, pathogens, sediment, organic chemicals, pesticides, insecticides and other lawn care and cleaning materials.

Wastewater: Water that, following capture or use by the community, does not currently have a form of beneficial recycling; includes greywater, sewage and stormwater.

Water allocation: The specific volume of water allocated to water access entitlements in a given season, defined according to rules established in the relevant water plan.

Water businesses: Organisations charged with supplying water to towns and cities across the State for urban, industrial and commercial use. They administer the diversion of water from waterways and the extraction of groundwater.

Water Sensitive Urban Design (WSUD). The integration of urban planning with the management, protection and conservation of the urban water cycle, ensuring that urban water management is sensitive to natural hydrological and ecological processes. This involves the integration of water cycle management into urban planning and design so that it minimises the risks to the water bodies that supply water or receive the stormwater or recycled water.

Wholesale market: A competitive market where a commodity such as water can be sought from multiple suppliers.

Appendix C: Glossary

146

Electricity Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme (CPRS): The CPRS is the Australian Government’s emissions trading scheme

which has two distinct elements, the cap on carbon pollution and the ability to trade.

Contingency events: Events that affect the power system’s operation. Their categories are: credible contingency events, events whose occurrence is considered ‘reasonably possible’ in the circumstances. For example, the unexpected disconnection or unplanned reduction in capacity of one operating generating unit, or the unexpected disconnection of one major item of a transmission plant.

non-credible contingency event, events whose occurrence is not considered ‘reasonably possible’ in the circumstances. Typically, a non-credible contingency event involves simultaneous multiple disruptions, such as the failure of several generating units at the same time.

Demand-side management (DSM): The planning, implementation and monitoring of utility activities designed to encourage consumers to modify patterns of electricity usage, including the timing and level of electricity demand.

Generator (Baseload and peaking): Baseload generators provide the continuous ongoing electricity supply while peaking generators provide supplemental power to meet energy demand peaks.

Interconnector: Transmission line/s that connects transmission networks in adjacent regions.

Load shedding: Reducing or disconnecting load from the power system either by automatic control systems or under instructions from the AEMO.

Reliability of supply: The likelihood of having sufficient capacity (generation or demand-side response) to meet demand.

Reliability Standard: The requirement that there is sufficient generation and bulk transmission capacity so that, over the long term, no more than 0.002% of the annual energy of consumers in any region is at risk of not being supplied, i.e. the maximum USE is 0.002%.

Unserved energy (USE): The amount of energy that cannot be supplied because there are insufficient supplies (generation) to meet demand.

Gas

Coal seam methane (CSM): Methane absorbed into the solid matrix of coal beds, and then extracted.

Linepack: Gas maintained in a gas transmission line to maintain pressure but also as a buffer to provide an uninterrupted flow of gas to customers.

Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG): Natural gas that has been converted temporarily for ease of storage or transport. LNG takes up about 1/600th the volume of natural gas in the gaseous state.

Natural gas: Gaseous fossil fuel consisting primarily of methane but including significant quantities of ethane, butane, propane, carbon dioxide, nitrogen, helium and hydrogen sulphide.

Unaccounted for gas (UAFG): The difference between metered injected gas supply and metered and allocated gas at delivery points. UAFG comprises gas losses, metering errors, timing, heating value error, allocation error and other factors.

Telecommunications

2G: Second generation mobile telecommunications, digital mobile service that provides voice communications and a low level of data transmission.

3G: Third generation mobile telecommunications, digital mobile service that provides voice communications, high-speed data transmission and internet access.

Asymmetrical digital subscriber line (ADSL): A technology that converts telephone lines to paths for high-speed data services; enhancements to this technology include ADSL2 and ADSL2+.

Backhaul networks: Backhaul transmission networks connect the central point of an access network (such as telephone exchange, HFC hub or mobile tower) to the rest of the network. Backhaul transmission is provided on either optical fibre or microwave. The majority of backhaul transmission networks are provided by Telstra and Optus with other operators including AAPT, Amcom, Ergon, Nextgen, PIPE Networks, Primus, QLD Rail and Soul. While there is competition in backhaul networks between all capitals and within many inter-exchange routes, many regional routes are served by Telstra alone.

Bandwidth: The maximum data transmission rate, measured in bits per second (bps)

Broadband: ‘Always on’ high data speed connection. Technologies used to deliver broadband include ADSL, HFC, fibre-optic cable, wireless and satellite.

Broadband over power line (BPL). A communications technology that uses electricity networks for the transmission of data, voice and video.

Customer Access Network (CAN): The link between the telephone exchange and the consumer.

Code division multiple access (CDMA): A digital standard that separates calls from one another by code.

Digital subscriber line (DSL): A transmission technology that enables digital data services. DSL describes several technologies including ADSL, ADSL2 and ADSL2+.

Appendix C: Glossary

147

DSLAM (Digital Subscriber Line Access Multiplexer). Technology located at exchanges or in roadside cabinets that take the copper lines from a customer premises and convert signals on/off them into a high speed pipeline to the internet.

Fibre-to-the-x (FTTx): A generic term for the configuration of a broadband network that uses optical fibre to replace all or part of the usual metal connection to the consumer. (FTTB) Fibre-to-the-building: fibre reaches the boundary of the building. (FTTH) Fibre-to-the-home: fibre reaches the boundary of the living space. (FTTK) Fibre-to-the-kerb: fibre reaches typically within 300m of the consumer’s premises. (FTTN) Fibre-to-the-node: fibre reaches a street cabinet typically further than 300m from the consumer’s premises.

Global system for mobile communication (GSM): A digital cellular standard operated by Telstra, Optus and Vodafone.

Hybrid fibre coaxial cable (HFC): A telecommunication connection that consists of optical fibre on major routes and coaxial cable connections to consumers.

Long Term Evolution (LTE). LTE is an advanced mobile telecommunications standard and considered a pre-4G system.

Microcell: An antenna and associated box that supplements the mobile network in heavy usage areas. A microcell may minimise the need for a larger facility.

Public switched telecommunications network (PSTN): The network of the world’s public circuit-switched telephone networks.

Speed: Typical speeds are kilobits per second (kbps) and Mbps (Megabits per second).

Telecommunication facility: Any part of the infrastructure of a telecommunications network; or any line, equipment, apparatus, tower, mast, antenna, tunnel, duct, hole, pit, pole or other structure or thing used, or for use, in or in connection with a telecommunications network.

Voice over internet protocol (VoIP): A protocol for transmitting voice over data networks, also known as ‘Voice over DSL’.

WiMAX (Worldwide Interoperability for Microwave Access). A wireless digital communications system which can provide broadband wireless.

148

Appendix D: References

1 Engineers Australia, 2009, Engineering Construction on Infrastructure: Northern Territory, updated by Andre Kaspura in October 2009. 2 Government of Northern Territory, 2010, Budget 2010-11, Budget Paper No. 2, p. 29. 3 Australian Bureau of Statistics, 2009, Australian Demographic Statistics, Bulletin 3101.0, March Quarter 2009, Tables 4 and 9, pp. 15

and 22. 4 Government of Northern Territory, 2010, Budget 2010-11, Budget Paper No. 2, p. 9. 5 Government of Northern Territory, 2010, Budget 2010-11, Budget Paper No. 2, p. 9. 6 Government of Northern Territory, 2010, Budget 2010-11, The Economy, p. 89. 7 Government of Northern Territory, 2010, Budget 2010-11, Budget Paper No. 2, p. 101. 8 Government of Northern Territory, 2010, Budget 2010-11, Northern Territory Economy, p. 104. 9 Government of Northern Territory, 2009, Territory 2030 Strategic Plan, p. 20. 10 Department of Families, Housing, Community Services and Indigenous Affairs, Closing the Gap: National Indigenous Reform

Agreement, webpage, http://www.facs.gov.au/sa/indigenous/progserv/ctg/Pages/NIRA.aspx, accessed 28 September 2010. 11 Working Future, Territory Growth Towns hear budget details first hand, webpage,

http://www.workingfuture.nt.gov.au/enews/020610/index_020610.html, accessed 28 September 2010. 12 PWC, 2009, Indigenous Essential Services Report 2007 - 08, pp. 14-15. 13 Source CSIRO and the Bureau of Meteorology, 2010, Climate Change in Australia: Summary,

http://www.climatechangeinaustralia.gov.au/resources.php, accessed 10 September 2010. 14 Darwin City Council, 2009, Corporate Asset Management Plan, p. 11. 15 Darwin City Council, 2009, Corporate Asset Management Plan, pp. 6-7. 16 Darwin City Council, 2009, Corporate Asset Management Plan, pp. 4-5. 17 City of Palmerston, 2010, Municipal Plan 2010/2015, p. 53. 18 PWC, 2009, Indigenous Essential Services Report 2007–08, p. 7. 19 Government of Northern Territory, 2009, Territory 2030 Strategic Plan, pp. 24-27. 20 Northern Territory Government, NT Integrated Regional Transport Strategy, Factsheet: Project Summary, p. 2. 21 Department of Lands and Planning, Latest News, webpage, http://www.dlp.nt.gov.au/, accessed 27 September 2010. 22 Local Government Association of the Northern Territory, Infrastructure, webpage, http://www.lgant.asn.au/infrastructure, accessed 16

September 2010. 23 NT Government, Declared Roads webpage, http://www.nt.gov.au/transport/ntroads/roads/documents/ntmapallroads.pdf, accessed 2

August 2010. 24 Government of Northern Territory, 2010, Budget 2010-11, The Economy, p. 157. 25 Northern Territory Grants Commission, 2009, Annual Report 2008-09, p. 24. 26 Northern Territory Grants Commission, 2009, Annual Report 2008-09, p. 24. 27 Northern Territory Grants Commission, 2009, Annual Report 2008-09, p. 50. 28 Information supplied by Local Government Association of the Northern Territory, 15 September 2010. 29 Information supplied by NT Government. 30 Department of Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development and Local Government, 2009, Major Road and Rail Projects delivered

in NT through the Nation Building Program 2008-09 to 2013-14, http://www.nationbuildingprogram.gov.au/publications/administration/pdf/MOU_List_NT_19_08_2009.pdf, accessed 10 September 2009.

31 Department of Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development and Local Government, 2009, Nation Building Program Roads to Recovery: Allocations for the Period 1 July 2009 to 30 June 2014, http://www.nationbuildingprogram.gov.au/publications/reports/pdf/RTR_funding_allocations_2009_14.pdf, accessed 10 September 2009.

32 Department of Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development and Local Government, 2009, Land Transport Funding webpage, http://www.nationbuildingprogram.gov.au/funding/allocations/funding_allocations_consolidated.aspx#2009_to_14, accessed 10 September 2009.

33 Local Government Association of the Northern Territory, Road Safety, webpage, http://www.lgant.asn.au/infrastructure/road-safety, accessed 16 September 2010.

34 NT Government, 2010, Budget 2010/11 Budget Paper 3, p. 238. 35 RTA, 2009, Annual Report, p. 6. 36 Northern Australia Land and Water Taskforce, 2009, Northern Australia Land and Water Science Review 2009: Sustaining growth of

the northern beef industry (Chapter 5). 37 Department of Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development and Local Government, NT Community, Beef and Mining Roads

Package, webpage, http://www.nationbuildingprogram.gov.au/projects/ProjectDetails.aspx?Project_id=nt001, accessed 16 September 2010.

38 Northern Territory Coordinator General for Remote Services Report, 2010, Progress Report December 2009 to May 2010, p. 12. 39 Information from Vehicle Accident Database, Department of Lands and Planning. 40 Department of Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development and Local Government, September 2009, Monthly Bulletin webpage,

http://www.bitre.gov.au/publications/73/Files/RDA_Aug_2010.pdf, accessed 2 September 2010. 41 Australian Transport Council, National Road Safety Strategy 2001-2010, p. 6. 42 NT Road Safety Council, 2004, Northern Territory Road Safety Strategy 2004-2010, p. 8. 43 Bureau of Infrastructure, Transport and Regional Economics, 2010, Road Deaths Australia: 2009 Statistical Summary, p. 23. 44 Bureau of Infrastructure, Transport and Regional Economics, 2010, Road Deaths Australia: 2009 Statistical Summary, p. 23. 45 Australian Road Assessment Program, September 2007, Safer Roads Save Lives, p. 15. 46 Australian Road Assessment Program, September 2007, Safer Roads Save Lives, p. 16. 47 NT Road Safety Council, 2004, Northern Territory Road Safety Strategy 2004-2010, p. 9. 48 Australian Road Assessment Program, September 2007, Safer Roads Save Lives, p. 37. 49 Department of Planning and Infrastructure, Annual Report 2005/06 to 2008/09 (various). 50 Department of Planning and Infrastructure, Annual Report 2005/06 to 2008/09 (various). 51 Department of Planning and Infrastructure, Annual Report 2005/06 to 2008/09 (various). 52 Department of Planning and Infrastructure, Annual Report 2005/06 to 2008/09 (various).

Appendix D: References

149

53 ACIL Tasman, 2009, Vision 2020 Project: The Australian Minerals Industry’s Infrastructure Path to Prosperity - Northern Territory, A

report for the Minerals Council of Australia, p. 13. 54 Northern Territory Cattlemen’s Association, July 2010, Cattlenews, Cattlemen pursue alternatives as live trade uncertainty, p. 3. 55 Information supplied by Local Government Association of the Northern Territory, 15 September 2010. 56 Essential Services Commission of South Australia, Tarcoola-Darwin Rail Overview, webpage, http://www.escosa.sa.gov.au/sa-rail-

overview/tarcoola-darwin-rail-overview.aspx, accessed 24 February 2010. 57 Adapted from Government of SA, 2007, Infrastructure in South Australia: Five Yearly Report to the Council of Australian

Governments, p. 26. 58 Genesee & Wyoming Inc. Signs Agreement to Acquire FreightLink; Expands Rail Operations in South Australia and the Northern

Territory, webpage, http://www.gwrr.com/investors/PressReleaseText.asp?compid=64426&releaseID=1436084, accessed 16 September 2010.

59 ACIL Tasman, 2009, Vision 2020 Project: The Australian Minerals Industry’s Infrastructure Path to Prosperity - Northern Territory, A report for the Minerals Council of Australia, p. 14-16.

60 ACIL Tasman, 2009, Vision 2020 Project: The Australian Minerals Industry’s Infrastructure Path to Prosperity - Northern Territory, A report for the Minerals Council of Australia, p. 14-16.

61 Genesee & Wyoming Inc., FreightLink Acquisition, webpage, http://www.gwrr.com/operations/railroads/australia/genesee_wyoming_australia/freightlink_acquisition.be, accessed 27 September 2010.

62 Government of Northern Territory, 2009, Territory 2030 Strategic Plan, p. 10. 63 Government of Northern Territory, 2009, Territory 2030 Strategic Plan, p. 10. 64 Adapted from the FreightLink, 2008, Submission to Infrastructure Australia, p. 8. 65 FreightLink, 2008, Submission to Infrastructure Australia, pp. 5-7. 66 Department of Transport and Regional Services, 2007, Adelaide–Darwin Corridor Strategy, p. 11. 67 Australian Transport Safety Bureau, Australian Rail Safety Occurrence Data 1 January 2001 to 30 June 2009, p. 4. 68 Australian Transport Safety Bureau, Australian Rail Safety Occurrence Data 1 January 2001 to 30 June 2009, p. 10. 69 Department of Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development and Local Government, webpage,

http://www.nationbuildingprogram.gov.au/projects/ProjectDetails.aspx?Project_id=RAIL013, accessed 24 September 2010. 70 Alice Springs Town Council, Chief Executive’s Office, submission,

http://www.territory2030.nt.gov.au/doc/submissions/Nr77_Alice_Springs_Town_Council.pdf, accessed 27 September 2010. 71 Department of Planning and Infrastructure, 2009, Report for Northern Territory Boat Ramps Review. 72 Darwin Port Corporation, 2009, Annual Report 2008/2009, p. 19. 73 Darwin Port Corporation, 2009, Annual Report 2008/2009, p. 17. 74 Port of Darwin, Stokes Hill Wharf (East and West), webpage, http://www.nt.gov.au/dpa/port_darwin/port_stokeshill.html, accessed 16

September 2010. 75 Government of Northern Territory, 2010, Budget 2010-11, The Economy, p. 149. 76 Government of Northern Territory, 2010, Budget 2010-11, The Infrastructure Program, Budget Paper No. 4, p. 46. 77 Port of Darwin, Darwin Fishing Harbour and Mooring Basin, webpage, http://www.nt.gov.au/dpa/port_darwin/port_fishingharbour.html,

accessed 16 September 2010. 78 Darwin Port Corporation, 2009, Annual Report 2008/2009, pp. 16-17. 79 Port of Darwin, Darwin Fishing Harbour and Mooring Basin, webpage, http://www.nt.gov.au/dpa/port_darwin/port_fishingharbour.html,

accessed 16 September 2010. 80 Government of Northern Territory, 2010, Budget 2010-11, The Infrastructure Program, Budget Paper No. 4, p. 46. 81 NT Government, 2009, Review of the regulatory framework for the Port of Darwin, p. 9. 82 Darwin Port Authority, 2010, East Arm Wharf Facilities Masterplan 2030: Summary, p. 2. 83 Northern Territory Government, East Arm Wharf, Masterplan, http://www.nt.gov.au/dpa/masterplan/images/map-aerial-large.jpg,

accessed 16 September 2010. 84 Darwin Port Corporation, 2009, Annual Report 2008/2009, p. 9. 85 Darwin Port Corporation, 2009, Annual Report 2008/2009, p. 55. 86 Darwin Port Corporation, 2009, Newsletter December, p. 1. 87 Darwin Port Corporation, 2009, Newsletter December, p. 1. 88 Darwin Port Corporation, 2009, Newsletter December, p. 1. 89 Conoco Phillips, Darwin LNG, Darwin Liquefied Natural Gas Plant, webpage,

http://www.conocophillips.com.au/en/business/production/dlng/pages/index.aspx, accessed 16 September 2010. 90 Darwin Port Authority, 2010, East Arm Wharf Facilities Masterplan 2030: Summary. 91 ACIL Tasman, 2009, Vision 2020 Project: The Australian Minerals Industry’s Infrastructure Path to Prosperity - Northern Territory, A

report for the Minerals Council of Australia, p. 17. 92 ACIL Tasman, 2009, Vision 2020 Project: The Australian Minerals Industry’s Infrastructure Path to Prosperity - Northern Territory, A

report for the Minerals Council of Australia, p. 17. 93 Local Government Association of the Northern Territory, Barge Landings, webpage, http://www.lgant.asn.au/infrastructure/barge-

landings, accessed 16 September 2010. 94 Government of Northern Territory, 2010, Budget 2010-11, The Economy, p. 158. 95 Northern Territory Government, Budget 2010, Delivering a Working Future, p. 3. 96 Ports Directory, Port of Bing Bong, webpage, http://www.ports-directory.com/Shipping-Ports/5559-Port-of-Bing-Bong/View-

details.html, accessed 16 September 2010. 97 Northern Territory Department of Primary Industry, Fisheries and Mines, 2005, Northern Australia Transport Infrastructure Study

Report, p. 79. 98 NT Business Review, Territory copper exports to boom, 5 June 2010. 99 NT Government, 2009, Review of the regulatory framework for the Port of Darwin, p. 9. 100 Department of Planning and Infrastructure, 2009, Annual Report 2008/09, p. 84. 101 Darwin Port Corporation, 2009, Annual Report 2008/2009, p. 12. 102 Darwin Port Corporation, 2009, Annual Report 2008/2009, p. 12. 103 Minerals Council of Australia, Media Release, October 2009, Ministerial Statement Begs Question of Infrastructure, p.1. 104 Minerals Council of Australia, Media Release, October 2009, Ministerial Statement Begs Question of Infrastructure, p.1. 105 FreightLink, 2008, Submission to Infrastructure Australia, pp. 5-7. 106 BITRE, Airport Traffic Data, webpage, http://www.bitre.gov.au/Info.aspx?NodeId=96, (Airport Traffic Data 1985/86 to 2008/09 (xls

format)), accessed 7 November 2009. 107 BITRE, Airport Traffic Data, webpage, http://www.bitre.gov.au/Info.aspx?NodeId=96, (Airport Traffic Data 1985/86 to 2008/09 (xls

format)), accessed 7 November 2009.

Appendix D: References

150

108 Darwin International Airport, 2010, Preliminary Draft Master Plan, p. 18. 109 Darwin International Airport, 2010, Preliminary Draft Master Plan, p. 7. 110 Darwin International Airport, 2010, Preliminary Draft Master Plan, p. 19. 111 Darwin International Airport, 2010, Preliminary Draft Master Plan, p. 49. 112 Darwin International Airport, 2010, Preliminary Draft Master Plan, p. 50. 113 Darwin International Airport, 2010, Preliminary Draft Master Plan, pp. 7-8. 114 Darwin International Airport, 2010, Preliminary Draft Master Plan, p. 7. 115 Darwin International Airport, 2010, Preliminary Draft Master Plan, pp. 19-20. 116 Darwin International Airport, 2010, Preliminary Draft Master Plan, p. 9. 117 Adapted from Darwin International Airport, 2010, Preliminary Draft Master Plan, p. 11. 118 Alice Springs Airport, Alice Springs Airport’s 2009 Preliminary Draft Master Plan, webpage,

http://www.alicespringsairport.com.au/Commercial/ASAMasterPlan/tabid/266/Default.aspx, accessed 16 September 2010. 119 Alice Springs Airport, Alice Springs Airport’s 2009 Preliminary Draft Master Plan, webpage,

http://www.alicespringsairport.com.au/Commercial/ASAMasterPlan/tabid/266/Default.aspx, accessed 16 September 2010. 120 Alice Springs Airport, 2009, Preliminary Draft Master Plan and Environmental Strategy, p. 5. 121 Alice Springs Airport, Airside Information, webpage,

http://www.alicespringsairport.com.au/Commercial/ASAMasterPlan/tabid/266/Default.aspx, accessed 16 September 2010. 122 ACIL Tasman, 2009, Vision 2020 Project: The Australian Minerals Industry’s Infrastructure Path to Prosperity - Northern Territory, A

report for the Minerals Council of Australia, pp. 17-18. 123 Tennant Creek Airport, Runway Information, webpage,

www.tennantcreekairport.com.au/AirportInformation/RunwayInformation/tabid/221/Default.aspx, accessed 16 September 2010. 124 Local Government Association of the Northern Territory, Airport, webpage, http://www.lgant.asn.au/infrastructure/airstrips, accessed

16 September 2010. 125 Department of Planning and Infrastructure, 2009, Annual Report 2008/09, p. 7, 10 & 107. 126 Government of Northern Territory, 2010, Budget 2010-11, The Infrastructure Program, Budget Paper No. 4, p. 8. 127 Tourism NT, 2010, Aviation Futures 2015, p. 9. 128 Government of Northern Territory, 2010, Budget 2010-11, The Economy, p. 162. 129 Tourism NT, 2010, Aviation Futures 2015, p. 13. 130 Department of Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development and Local Government, 2008, National Aviation Policy Green Paper:

Flight Path to the Future, p. 169. 131 Department of Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development and Local Government, 2009, National Aviation Policy White Paper:

Flight Path to the Future, pp. 158-167. 132 Northern Territory Government, Aviation, webpage, http://www.nt.gov.au/transport/policy/aviation.shtml, accessed 16 September

2010. 133 Darwin International Airport, 2010, Preliminary Draft Master Plan, p. 40. 134 Darwin International Airport, 2010, Preliminary Draft Master Plan, p. 40. 135 Department of Planning and Infrastructure, 2009, Annual Report 2008/09, p. 84. 136 Northern Territory Coordinator General for Remote Services Report, 2010, Progress Report December 2009 to May 2010, p. 10. 137 New legislation, notably the Aviation Transport Security Act 2004 and the Aviation Transport Security Regulations 2005. 138 ACCC, Airport Monitoring Report 2007/08,

http://www.accc.gov.au/content/item.phtml?itemId=865718&nodeId=6b2473b4c9a4133729df9f9f5c500798&fn=Airport%20monitoring%20report%202007%E2%80%9308%E2%80%94chapter%206,%20Melbourne.pdf, accessed 23 October 2009.

139 Government of Northern Territory, 2009, Territory 2030 Strategic Plan, pp. 34-61. 140 Natural Resources, Environment, The Arts and Sport, Water Allocation Planning, webpage,

http://www.nt.gov.au/nreta/water/manage/water_allocation.html, accessed 5 October 2010. 141 Adapted from Northern Territory Government, Water Allocation Planning Areas, map,

http://www.nt.gov.au/nreta/water/manage/pdf/NT_Water-Allocation-Areas-A4.pdf 142 Adapted from an image supplied by PWC. 143 PWC, 2009, Annual Report 2009, p. 23. 144 PWC, 2010, Drinking Water Quality Report – Major and Minor Urban Centres 2008, p. 5. 145 PWC, 2010, Darwin River Dam – A Pristine Environment Fact Sheet, p. 1. 146 PWC, 2006, Darwin Water Story, p. 13. 147 PWC, 2006, Darwin Water Story, p. 11. 148 PWC, Major Projects, webpage, http://www.powerwater.com.au/about_us/major_projects, accessed 14 October 2010. 149 PWC, 2010, 2010-11 Statement of Corporate Intent, p. 25 150 PWC, 2008, Mereenie Aquifer – Alice Springs. 151 PWC, 2008, Water Infrastructure, pp. 1-2. 152 PWC, 2009, Annual Report 2009, p. 20. 153 PWC, 2010, Drinking Water Quality Report – Major and Minor Urban Centres 2008, p. 2. 154 PWC, 2010, 2010-11 Statement of Corporate Intent, p. 7. 155 PWC, 2009, Annual Report 2009, p. 25. 156 Adapted from various maps within PWC, 2010, Indigenous Communities of the Northern Territory Drinking Water Quality 2009

Annual Report. 157 PWC, 2010, Indigenous Communities of the Northern Territory Drinking Water Quality 2009 Annual Report, p. 14. 158 PWC, 2010, Indigenous Communities of the Northern Territory Drinking Water Quality 2009 Annual Report, p. 15. 159 PWC, 2009, Indigenous Essential Services 2007-08 Annual Report, p. 11. 160 PWC, 2009, Indigenous Essential Services 2007-08 Annual Report, p. 12. 161 PWC, 2010, Indigenous Communities of the Northern Territory Drinking Water Quality 2009 Annual Report, p. 12. 162 PWC, 2009, Assessment of Water Quality in Northern Territory Outstations/Homelands, p. 1. 163 PWC, 2009, Annual Report 2009, p. 41. 164 PWC, 2009, Annual Report 2009, p. 25. 165 PWC, 2010, 2010-11 Statement of Corporate Intent, p. 13. 166 PWC, 2007, Environment Report 2007, p. 10. 167 PWC, 2010, 2010-11 Statement of Corporate Intent, p. 28. 168 PWC, 2009, Drinking Water Quality Annual Report 2008-09, p. 13. 169 PWC, 2010, Indigenous Communities of the Northern Territory Drinking Water Quality 2009 Annual Report, p. 9. 170 PWC, 2006, Darwin Water Story, p. 12. 171 National Water Commission, 2009, National Performance Report 2008–09: Urban water utilities, Part A, pp. 27-31.

Appendix D: References

151

172 National Water Commission, 2009, National Performance Report 2008–09: Urban water utilities, Part A, p. 38. 173 National Water Commission, 2009, National Performance Report 2008–09: Urban water utilities, Part A, p. 38. 174 PWC, 2009, Annual Report 2009, p. 31. 175 PWC, 2010, Asset Management Plan, p13. 176 National Water Commission, 2009, National Performance Report 2008–09: Urban water utilities, Part A, p. 42. 177 PWC, 2009, Annual Report 2009, p. 17. 178 PWC, 2010, 2010-11 Statement of Corporate Intent, p. 19. 179 National Water Commission, 2009, National Performance Report 2008–09: Urban water utilities, Part A, p. 48. 180 National Water Commission, 2009, National Performance Report 2008–09: Urban water utilities, Part A, p. 47. 181 ActewAGL, 2009, Monthly Water and Wastewater Report, June, p. 3. 182 ActewAGL, 2009, Monthly Water and Wastewater Report, June, p. 3. 183 PWC, 2010, Drinking Water Quality Report – Major and Minor Urban Centres 2008, p. 13. 184 PWC, 2010, Drinking Water Quality Report – Major and Minor Urban Centres 2008, p. 14. 185 PWC, 2010, Drinking Water Quality Report – Major and Minor Urban Centres 2008, p. 7. 186 PWC, 2010, Drinking Water Quality Report – Major and Minor Urban Centres 2008, p. 7. 187 PWC, 2010, Drinking Water Quality Report – Major and Minor Urban Centres 2008, pp. 22-24. 188 PWC, 2010, Drinking Water Quality Report – Major and Minor Urban Centres 2008, p. 12. 189 PWC, 2010, Drinking Water Quality Report – Major and Minor Urban Centres 2008, p. 16. 190 PWC, 2010, Drinking Water Quality Report – Major and Minor Urban Centres 2008, p. 16. 191 PWC, 2010, Indigenous Communities of the Northern Territory Drinking Water Quality 2009 Annual Report, p. 4, and reports from

2009 and 2008. 192 PWC, 2010, Indigenous Communities of the Northern Territory Drinking Water Quality 2009 Annual Report, p. 4. 193 PWC, 2010, Indigenous Communities of the Northern Territory Drinking Water Quality 2009 Annual Report, p. 2. 194 PWC, 2010, Indigenous Communities of the Northern Territory Drinking Water Quality 2009 Annual Report, pp. 25-28 & 39-48. 195 PWC, 2008, Wastewater Treatment, Reuse and Discharge Report 2006, p. 6. 196 PWC, 2008, Wastewater Treatment, Reuse and Discharge Report 2006, p. 7. 197 Adapted from an image supplied by PWC. 198 PWC, 2008, Wastewater Treatment, Reuse and Discharge Report 2006, pp. 8-9. 199 PWC, 2009, Annual Report 2009, p. 23. 200 PWC, 2010, 2010-11 Statement of Corporate Intent, p. 7. 201 PWC, 2009, Annual Report, p. 25. 202 PWC, 2010, Indigenous Essential Services Report 2007 - 08, p. 8. 203 PWC, 2008, Wastewater Treatment, Reuse and Discharge Report 2006, p. 15. 204 Adapted from an image supplied by PWC. 205 PWC, 2009, Annual Report 2009, p. 31. 206 PWC, 2010, How much does it cost for power, water and sewerage? p. 2. 207 PWC, 2010, 2010-11 Statement of Corporate Intent, p. 29. 208 PWC, 2010, Annual Report 2010. 209 PWC, 2010, Annual Report 2010. 210 PWC, 2008, Wastewater treatment, reuse and discharge report 2006/7, pp. 11-13 211 PWC, 2010, 2010-11 Statement of Corporate Intent, p. 11. 212 PWC, 2007, Environment Report 2007, p. 10. 213 PWC, 2007, Environment Report 2007, p. 11. 214 PWC, 2010, 2010-11 Statement of Corporate Intent, pp. 25-26. 215 PWC, 2010, 2010-11 Statement of Corporate Intent, pp. 25-26. 216 PWC, 2010, 2010-11 Statement of Corporate Intent, pp. 25-26. 217 PWC, 2010, 2010-11 Statement of Corporate Intent, p. 22. 218 National Water Commission, 2010, National Performance Report 2008–09: Urban water utilities, Part A, p. 70. 219 PWC, 2009, Annual Report 2009, p. 33. 220 National Water Commission, 2010, National Performance Report 2008–09: Urban water utilities, Part A, p. 41. 221 PWC, 2009, Annual Report 2009, p. 17. 222 PWC, 2010, 2010-11 Statement of Corporate Intent, p. 19. 223 PWC, 2007, Environment Report 2007, p. 11. 224 PWC, 2008, Wastewater Treatment, Reuse and Discharge Report 2006, p. 20. 225 PWC, 2010, Indigenous Essential Services Report 2007 - 08, p. 8. 226 Department of Territory and Municipal Services, 2005, Asset Management Plan 2004-07, Executive Summary, p. 4. 227 Darwin City Council, 2009, Corporate Asset Management Plan, p. 16. 228 Darwin City Council, 2010, 2010/2011 City of Darwin Municipal Plan, p. 30. 229 Darwin City Council, 2010, 2010/2011 City of Darwin Municipal Plan, p. 31. 230 Darwin City Council, 2010, 2010/2011 City of Darwin Municipal Plan, p. 30. 231 Darwin City Council, 2009, Ten Year Financial Plan 2009/10 to 2019/20, p. 4. 232 City of Palmerston, 2010, Asset Management Improvement Program, p. 53. 233 City of Palmerston, 2010, Municipal Plan 2010/2015, p. 126. 234 City of Palmerston, 2010, Municipal Plan 2010/2015, p. 53. 235 City of Palmerston, 2010, Municipal Plan 2010/2015, p. 108. 236 City of Palmerston, 2010, Municipal Plan 2010/2015, p. 116. 237 City of Palmerston, 2010, Asset Management Improvement Program, p. 5. 238 City of Palmerston, 2010, Municipal Plan 2010/2015, p. 137. 239 Darwin Harbour Advisory Committee, 2010, Darwin Harbour Strategy, p. 22. 240 Natural Resources, Environment and the Arts, 2006, Stormwater Draft Management Strategy for the Darwin Harbour Catchment, p.

3. 241 Department of Planning and Infrastructure, 2009, Water Sensitive Urban Design: Implementation Framework For Darwin: Discussion

Paper – Final, p. 10. 242 Adapted from Darwin City Council, 2009, Annual Community Satisfaction Report, p. 24. 243 Alice Springs Town Council, 2009, Annual Report 2008/2009, p. 35. 244 Alice Springs Town Council, 2010, Municipal Plan 2010/11–2011/12–2012/13–2013/14, pp. 22-23. 245 Alice Springs Town Council, 2010, Municipal Plan 2010/11–2011/12–2012/13–2013/14, p. 8.

Appendix D: References

152

246 Northern Territory Lands Group, Water Sensitive Urban Design, webpage,

http://www.nt.gov.au/lands/planning/wsud/about/introduction.shtml, accessed 27 September 2010. 247 Northern Territory Lands Group, Water Sensitive Urban Design, webpage,

http://www.nt.gov.au/lands/planning/wsud/about/index.shtml, accessed 27 September 2010. 248 Northern Territory Lands Group, Water Sensitive Urban Design, Strategy for Darwin Harbour, webpage,

http://www.darwinwsud.nt.gov.au/, accessed 27 September 2010. 249 Northern Territory Lands Group, Water Sensitive Urban Design, Strategy for Darwin Harbour, webpage,

http://www.darwinwsud.nt.gov.au/, accessed 27 September 2010. 250 Information supplied by the Department of Lands and Planning, 28 September 2010. 251 Department of Planning and Infrastructure, 2009, Water Sensitive Urban Design: Implementation Framework For Darwin: Discussion

Paper - Final, p. 4. 252 Department of Planning and Infrastructure, 2009, Darwin WSUD Fact Sheet 1 - Introduction WSUD, p. 2. 253 Department of Planning and Infrastructure, 2009, Water Sensitive Urban Design: Implementation Framework for Darwin: Discussion

Paper - Final, p. 9. 254 Darwin City Council, 2009, Corporate Asset Management Plan, p. 49. 255 City of Palmerston, 2010, Asset Management Improvement Program, p. 20. 256 Darwin City Council, 2009, Ten Year Financial Plan 2009/10 to 2019/20, p. 4. 257 Darwin City Council, 2009, Annual Community Satisfaction Report, p. 27. 258 Adapted from Darwin City Council, 2009, Annual Community Satisfaction Report, p. 27. 259 Darwin City Council, 2009, Corporate Asset Management Plan, p. 40. 260 City of Palmerston, 2010, Asset Management Improvement Program, p. 48. 261 Darwin City Council, Coastal Erosion, webpage, http://www.darwin.nt.gov.au/climate-change/Land/Coastal%20Erosion, accessed 27

September 2010. 262 PWC, 2009, Annual Report 2009, p. 23. 263 PWC, 2010, Annual Report 2010, p.9. 264 PWC, 2010, 2010-11 Statement of Corporate Intent, p. 7. 265 EnergyAustralia, 2009, Network Management Plan, p. 12. 266 Utilities Commission, 2010, Power System Review 2008-09, p. 13. 267 Image supplied by PWC. 268 Utilities Commission, 2010, Power System Review 2008-09, p. 24. 269 Northern Territory Government, November 2007, Media Release, New Top End power station nearing completion, webpage,

http://www.newsroom.nt.gov.au/index.cfm?fuseaction=printRelease&ID=3257, accessed 27 September 2010. 270 PWC, Owen Springs Power Station, webpage,

http://www.powerwater.com.au/about_us/major_projects/owen_springs_power_station, accessed 27 September 2010. 271 Northern Territory Government, September 2010, Media Release, Final testing begins on $160 million Owen Springs Power Station

Project, webpage, http://www.newsroom.nt.gov.au/index.cfm?fuseaction=viewRelease&id=7404&d=5, accessed 30 September 2010.

272 PWC, Mervin Davies Report FAQs, webpage, http://www.powerwater.com.au/newsroom/media_releases_folder/2009/mervyn_davies_report_faqs, accessed 8 October 2010.

273 PWC, July 2010, Mervyn Davies’ Inquiry: Power and Water’s Fifth Progress Report Summary, p.3. 274 PWC, July 2010, Mervyn Davies’ Inquiry: Power and Water’s Fifth Progress Report Summary, p.7. 275 PWC, 2009, Independent Enquiry into Casuarina Substation Events and Substation Maintenance across Darwin: Final Report, pp. 3-

4. 276 PWC, 2010, 2010-11 Statement of Corporate Intent, p. 9. 277 PWC, 2009, Indigenous Essential Services Annual Report 2007-08, p. 8. 278 PWC, 2009, Indigenous Essential Services Annual Report 2007-08, p. 8. 279 PWC, 2009, Indigenous Essential Services Annual Report 2008, p. 14 280 PWC, 2010, Annual Report 2010, p. 24. 281 Image supplied by PWC. 282 PWC, 2010, 2010-11 Statement of Corporate Intent, p. 13. 283 PWC, 2010, 2010-11 Statement of Corporate Intent, p. 13. 284 PWC, 2009, Indigenous Essential Services Annual Report 2008, pp. 14-15. 285 PWC, 2009, Indigenous Essential Services Annual Report 2008, p. 8. 286 PWC, 2009, Indigenous Essential Services Annual Report 2009, p. 14. 287 PWC, 2010, Annual Report 2010. 288 PWC 2009, Indigenous Essential Services Annual Report 2008, p. 14. 289 PWC 2009, Indigenous Essential Services Annual Report 2008, p. 15. 290 PWC 2009, Indigenous Essential Services Annual Report 2008, p. 15. 291 PWC, 2010, 2010-11 Statement of Corporate Intent, p. 13. 292 PWC, 2010, Annual Report 2010. 293 PWC, 2010, 2010-11 Statement of Corporate Intent, p. 7. 294 PWC, 2010, 2010-11 Statement of Corporate Intent, p. 27. 295 Independent Competition and Regulatory Commission, 2009, Electricity Feed-in Renewable Energy Premium: Determination of

Premium Rate, Issues Paper, p. 21. 296 PWC, 2010, Annual Report 2010. 297 PWC, 2009, Indigenous Essential Services Annual Report 2008, p. 15. 298 Utilities Commission, 2010, Power System Review 2008-09, p. 18. 299 PWC, 2010, 2010-11 Statement of Corporate Intent, p. 12. 300 Utilities Commission, 2010, Power System Review 2008-09, p. 18. 301 PWC, 2010, Annual Report 2010. 302 PWC, 2010, 2010-11 Statement of Corporate Intent, p. 25. 303 PWC, 2010, 2010-11 Statement of Corporate Intent, pp.24-25. 304 PWC, 2010, 2010-11 Statement of Corporate Intent, pp.24-25. 305 Adapted from Utilities Commission, August, Review of Electricity Standards of Service for the Northern Territory Draft Report, p. 20. 306 Adapted from Utilities Commission, August 2010, Review of Electricity Standards of Service for the Northern Territory Draft Report, p.

18. 307 Utilities Commission, 2010, Power System Review 2008-09, p. 3. 308 PWC, 2010, Annual Report 2010.

Appendix D: References

153

309 PWC, 2010, 2010-11 Statement of Corporate Intent, p. 19. 310 Adapted from Utilities Commission, August 2010, Review of Electricity Standards of Service for the Northern Territory Draft Report, p.

18. 311 PWC, 2010, Annual Report 2010. 312 PWC, 2010, 2010-11 Statement of Corporate Intent, p. 19. 313 Adapted from Utilities Commission, August 2010, Review of Electricity Standards of Service for the Northern Territory Draft Report, p.

19. 314 Utilities Commission, 2010, Power System Review 2008-09, p.3. 315 PWC, 2010, Annual Report 2010. 316 Government of Northern Territory, 2009, Territory 2030 Strategic Plan, pp. 36-63 317 PWC, 2010, 2010-11 Statement of Corporate Intent, p.10. 318 PWC, 2010, 2010-11 Statement of Corporate Intent, p.10 319 PWC, 2010, Annual Report 2010. 320 PWC, 2009, Annual Report 2009, p. 22. 321 Adapted from Government of Northern Territory, 2010, Budget 2010-11, Budget Paper The Economy, p. 105. 322 Department of Resources – Minerals and Energy, Northern Territory Oil and Gas Pipelines, webpage,

http://www.nt.gov.au/d/Minerals_Energy/index.cfm?Header=Pipelines#23, accessed 27 September 2010. 323 ACIL Tasman, 2009, Vision 2020 Project: The Australian Minerals Industry’s Infrastructure Path to Prosperity – Northern Territory, A

report for the Minerals Council of Australia, p. 9. 324 Utilities Commission, 2009, 2008-09 Power System Review, p. 4. 325 Utilities Commission, 2009, 2008-09 Power System Review, p. 4. 326 Utilities Commission, 2009, 2008-09 Power System Review, p. 4. 327 Engineers Australia, 2007, Telecommunications Infrastructure Report Card, p. 1. 328 ACMA, 2009, Convergence and Communications Report 1, p.8. 329 AMTA, 2008, Australian Mobile Telecommunications Industry: Economic significance and contribution, p. 6. 330 ACMA, 2008, Top Six Trends in Communications and Media Technologies, p. 5. 331 ACMA, 2008, Top Six Trends in Communications and Media Technologies, p. 4. 332 ACMA, 2009, Convergence and Communications Report 2, p.13. 333 Created from Department of Broadband, Communications and the Digital Economy, National Broadband Network: 21st century

broadband webpage, http://www.dbcde.gov.au/funding_and_programs/national_broadband_network, accessed 16 November 2009. ACMA, Digital Data Service Obligation webpage, http://www.acma.gov.au/scripts/nc.dll?WEB/STANDARD/1001/pc=PC_1722, accessed 16 November 2009.

334 ACMA and ACCC, 2008, Communications Infrastructure and Services Availability in Australia, p. 10 335 Optus, Optus Wholesale International Backhaul, p. 2. 336 Government of Northern Territory, 2010, Budget 2010-11, The Economy, p. 162. 337 Northern Territory Government, Broadband Backbone, Arnhem Land Fibre Project, webpage,

http://www.growingnt.nt.gov.au/growing_territory/broadband_backbone.html, accessed 27 September 2010. 338 Department of Business and Employment, 2009, Annual Report 2008-2009, p. 22. 339 Telstra, New Generation Networks, webpage, http://www.telstra.com.au/abouttelstra/corporate-responsibility/society/next-generation-

networks/, accessed 27 September 2010. 340 Department of Business and Employment, Telecommunications webpage,

http://www.nt.gov.au/dbe/it/communications/telecomms.html, accessed 28 July 2010. 341 Northern Territory Government, 2009, Territory 2030 Strategic Plan, p. 24. 342 Northern Territory Government, 2009, Territory 2030 Strategic Plan, p. 71. 343 Northern Territory Government, 2009, Territory 2030 Strategic Plan, p. 35. 344 Government of Northern Territory, 2009, Territory 2030 Strategic Plan, p. 24. 345 Department of Broadband, Communications and the Digital Economy, 2009, Digital Economy: Future Directions, pp. 4-13. 346 ACMA, Telecommunications Regulation webpage, http://www.acma.gov.au/WEB/STANDARD/1001/pc=PC_1593, accessed 7

September 2009. 347 Minister for Broadband, Communications and the Digital Economy, Historic reforms to telecommunications regulation media release,

15 September 2009, webpage, http://www.minister.dbcde.gov.au/media/media_releases/2009/088, accessed 29 March 2010. 348 Draft legislation was released on 13 September 2009. Minister for Broadband, Communications and the Digital Economy, Media

Release, Historic reforms to telecommunications regulation, webpage, http://www.minister.dbcde.gov.au/media/media_releases/2009/088, accessed 27 September 2010.

349 Department of Business and Employment, 2009, Annual Report 2008-2009, p. 62. 350 ACMA, Telecommunications regulation, webpage, http://www.acma.gov.au/WEB/STANDARD.PC/pc=PC_1593, accessed 7

September 2009. 351 Government of Northern Territory, 20010, Budget 2010-11, The Economy, p. 160-61. 352 Amcom Telecom, February 2010, Company Announcements, Amcom signs $20 million contract with Northern Territory Government,

webpage, http://www.amcom.com.au/Libraries/Media_Releases/Amcom_signs_20_million_contract_with_Northern_Territory_Government_-_8_February_2010.sflb.ashx, accessed 27 September 2010.

353 Australian Bureau of Statistics, 8153.0 - Internet Activity, Australia, Jun 2009, Subscribers by states and territories by ISP size, for ISPs with more than 1,000 active subscribers.

354 Australian Bureau of Statistics, 1345.4 – Qld Stats, Jan 2010, webpage, http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf/Products/1345.4~Jan+2010~Main+Features~Demography?OpenDocument, accessed 22 February 2010.

355 Australian Bureau of Statistics, 8153.0 - Internet Activity, Australia, Jun 2010. 356 Minister for Broadband, Communications and the Digital Economy, 6,000km regional broadband backbone for National Broadband

Network media release, 4 December 2009, webpage http://www.minister.dbcde.gov.au/media/media_releases/2009/109, accessed 4 December 2009.

357 Adapted image, National Broadband Network, Darwin, Emerald and Longbeach, http://www.dbcde.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0019/123580/Darwin-Emerald-Longreach-Map.pdf.

358 NT Government, 2003, Remote Areas Telecommunications Strategy 2003 - 2008, p. 13. 359 Government of Northern Territory, 2010, Budget 2010-11, The Economy, p. 160-161. 360 ACCC & ACMA, 2008, Communications Infrastructure and Services Availability in Australia, p.5. 361 Adsl2exchanges, Provider exchanges webpage, http://www.adsl2exchanges.com.au/providerexchanges.php?Location=QLD,

accessed 20 May 2010.

Appendix D: References

154

362 Information provided by DBCDE, 10 November 2009. 363 Adapted from Telstra, webpage, http://www.telstra.com.au/mobile/networks/coverage/state.html, accessed 22 July 2010. 364 Optus, Optus Dual Band Network Coverage – Northern Territory, webpage,

http://www.optus.com.au/aboutoptus/About+Optus/Network+Coverage/Optus+Network+Coverage+Maps/NT#, accessed 22 July 2010.

365 Vodafone, webpage, http://maps02.pdslive.com.au/VCATPublic/app, accessed 22 February 2010. 366 Telecommunications Industry Ombudsman, TIO Talks Summer 2009 – Maps, p. 1. 367 Government of Northern Territory, 2010, Budget 2010-11, The Economy, p. 162.