P O L I C Y I M P A C T A S S E S S M E N T

VARIATIONS TO STATE ENVIRONMENT PROTECTION

POLICY (AIR QUALITY MANAGEMENT) AND STAT E

ENVIRONMENT PROTECTION POLICY (AMBIENT A IR

QUALITY)

POLICY IMPACT ASSESSMENT

VARIATIONS TO STATE ENVIRONMENT PROTECTION POLICY (AIR QUALITY MANAGEMENT) AND STATE ENVIRONMENT PROTECTION POLICY (AMBIENT AIR

QUALITY)

EPA Victoria 40 City Road, Southbank Victoria 3006 AUSTRALIA

January 2002

Publication 826 ISBN 0 7306 7615 3

© EPA Victoria

i

F O R E W O R D

Clean air is fundamentally important to Victoria’s social, economic and environment health – our ‘triple bottom

line’.

We have seen real improvements in Victoria’s air quality in the last 20 years, mainly due to reductions in

emissions from industry, motor vehicles and domestic sources, such as backyard burning.

Despite these improvements, recent scientific studies confirm that air pollution is still associated with impacts on

the health and well being of people in Melbourne. In addition, the improvements that have been achieved in

overall air quality are not necessarily reflected in the local air quality being experienced in parts of Victoria. Some

people continue to be affected by local sources of offensive odour, and the cumulative impact of diffuse sources

of emissions can be significant in some areas. In recent years global atmospheric issues, such as the enhanced

greenhouse effect and depletion of the ozone layer, have become important too.

There is no room for complacency. While we can count on technological development to contribute to reducing

emissions, the pressure on Victoria’s air quality is only likely to increase due to the growing population and

economic activity in the State. Victoria’s air quality needs to be managed in an integrated manner that takes into

account the latest scientific information and trends in environmental management to ensure Victoria’s triple

bottom line is protected and enhanced.

We also have a requirement to meet the national air quality goals, specified under the National Environment

Protection Measure for ambient air quality, by 2008.

The State environment protection policy (Air Quality Management) sets out the statutory policy framework for

managing emissions into the air environment in Victoria. The framework has been developed to ensure that:

• the environmental quality objectives of the State environment protection policy (Ambient Air Quality) – the

nationally agreed ambient air quality goals and standards – are met;

• our air quality continues to improve and we achieve the cleanest air possible, having regard to the social and

economic development of Victoria; and

• Victorian and national measures to address the enhanced greenhouse effect and depletion of the ozone

layer are supported.

ii

The policy has been extensively reviewed and updated to meet these aims. The review took into account the

views of many interested stakeholders in the community, industry and government. This Policy Impact

Assessment (PIA) provides an explanation of the provisions in the policy, the rationale behind the provisions, and

the key impacts, both positive and negative, of adopting the new policy.

BRIAN ROBINSON

CHAIRMAN

iii

E X E C U T I V E S U M M A R Y

Why is Air Quality Important?

There are many reasons why air quality is an important issue for all of us.

The air we breathe is fundamental to our health and well being. This is especially true for people who are

susceptible to air pollution: the young, the elderly, asthmatics, and people with lung or heart-related illnesses.

Offensive odours seriously affect the lives of many people. EPA receives more complaints about offensive odours

than any other issue.

Poor visibility due to air pollution detracts from our ability to appreciate the environment around us.

As well as the health and well being of people, the quality of our air influences the health and well being of other

forms of life too. Certain air pollutants can also affect materials, buildings and other structures.

For all these reasons, poor air quality can significantly affect the ‘liveability’ of an area and its attractiveness as a

place to invest and live.

What is Victoria’s Air Quality Like?

Generally speaking, Victoria’s air quality is good and has improved in the last 20 years. EPA Victoria routinely

monitors air quality in Melbourne, Geelong and the Latrobe Valley for a variety of pollutants. The results of this

monitoring show general improvements in air quality in these regions over this time.

The improvements have only come about as a result of the combined efforts of the community, industry and

government. Emissions have been reduced from a variety of sources to bring about the improvement in air

quality. The improvements have mainly resulted from tighter emission controls on motor vehicles and cleaner

motor vehicles fuels, the adoption of cleaner production processes in industry, and controls on such activities as

backyard burning.

Despite the improvements we still have breaches of some of our air quality standards in these regions. Also,

recent research conducted by EPA Victoria has found that at current air pollution levels in Melbourne, statistically

significant associations exist between daily mortality and hospital admissions for respiratory and cardiovascular

disease and ambient levels of particles, nitrogen dioxide, ozone and carbon monoxide.

In addition, the air quality in some local areas in Victoria is not as good as it is in others due to the contribution of

significant local sources of emissions. Communities are still clearly expressing the view that they want cleaner air

in their neighbourhoods.

iv

How is Victoria’s Air Quality Protected?

Victoria’s approach to environment protection, and its environmental management systems and practices, are

based on the provisions of the Environment Protection Act 1970. One of the most important instruments for

environmental management under the Act is the State environment protection policy (SEPP).

SEPPs establish a statutory policy framework for protecting the environment. SEPPs are statutory instruments

which must be followed by EPA and other government agencies in developing and implementing their own

strategies, plans and programs, and must be complied with by all individuals and organisations (whether public

or private) in Victoria.

The air environment in Victoria is currently protected by two SEPPs. These were created in February 1999 by

dividing the State environment protection policy (The Air Environment) - the first SEPP for the air environment,

made in 1981 and subsequently amended several times - into two policies:

The State environment protection policy (Ambient Air Quality) or ‘SEPP (AAQ)’

The State Environment Protection Policy (Air Quality Management) or ‘SEPP (AQM)’

The SEPP (AAQ) contains the indicators, standards, goals, and monitoring and reporting protocol of the National

Environment Protection Measure for Ambient Air Quality (or ‘Ambient Air Quality NEPM’), which was made by the

National Environment Protection Council in June 1998. When it was made in 1999, the SEPP (AAQ) also carried

forward three ambient air quality objectives of the State environment protection policy (The Air Environment) that

were not replaced by the provisions of the Ambient Air Quality NEPM, namely for visibility reducing particles and

the two 8-hour ozone objectives.

The SEPP (AQM) carried forward all of the remaining provisions of the State environment protection policy (The Air

Environment) as it stood in February 1999. The remaining provisions were not amended when the two new

policies were created. The SEPP (AQM) sets the framework for managing emissions to the air environment. These

emissions are managed in such a way as to ensure that the air quality objectives of the SEPP (AAQ) are met.

EPA has reviewed both SEPPs. All of the provisions of the SEPP (AQM) have been reviewed. For the SEPP (AAQ),

only those ambient air quality objectives that were not replaced in adopting the Air NEPM were reviewed.

Why have SEPP (Air Quality Management) and SEPP (Ambient Air Quality) been updated?

It is critical that the SEPP (AAQ) and SEPP (AQM) reflect the latest developments in environmental management to

ensure that the community’s aspiration for the cleanest air possible, having regard to the State’s social and

economic development, is achieved. Emissions to the air environment must also be managed to ensure that the

objectives of the SEPP (AAQ) are met.

In June 1999 EPA determined that the SEPP (AQM) would be varied, and that all of its provisions would be re-

examined in developing a draft of the varied policy. The following issues were considered central to the review:

v

• recent developments in environmental management at State, national and international levels;

• significant developments in environmental management technologies and associated practices, in particular

the move towards cleaner production in industry;

• recent progress in environmental research;

• new scientific information on the impacts of hazardous air pollutants that had become available since the

last policy review;

• continuing developments in the modelling of air pollution;

• the provisions in the Act for the review of SEPPs; and

• changes to local government boundaries that affect the definition of Air Quality Control Regions.

What changes have been made?

Principles of Environment Protection

With the introduction of a set of guiding principles into the Environment Protection Act 1970 early in 2001, the

policy has been amended to reflect those principles. The incorporation of these principles in the policy reflects

national agreements and important shifts and developments in environmental management in recent years. The

principles include the integration of economic, social and environmental considerations; shared responsibility;

product stewardship; wastes hierarchy; and integrated environmental management.

Greater Emphasis on Non-Industrial Sources of Emissions

When the first SEPP for the air environment was introduced in 1981, there was a strong focus on controlling

emissions from industrial sources. Since then, significant advances have been made in reducing emissions from

industry.

Although industry remains an important source of emissions, and is still comprehensively addressed in the new

SEPP (AQM), in recognition of the fact that there are many other significant sources of emissions there is much

greater emphasis on other sources.

Motor vehicles are still the major overall source of many air pollutants, especially in Melbourne. The SEPP (AQM)

reinforces EPA’s participation in national processes to set emissions standards for new vehicles and improve fuel

quality, and also puts in place a range of new initiatives to improve the in-service performance of motor vehicles.

Measures to reduce emissions by investigating and encouraging alternatives to using motor vehicles and new

cleaner technologies are also provided.

vi

Solid fuel heating, such as wood heating or open fires, can be a major source of some pollutants in the cooler

months. The SEPP (AQM) puts in place a range of measures to help reduce emissions from these domestic

sources.

A variety of burning practices in the open can also have impacts on air quality from the smoke they generate, and

new tools for cooperatively addressing this with stakeholders have been introduced, and effective tools currently

in place have been reinforced.

More Hazardous Pollutants Managed to a Higher Level of Control

The number of pollutants recognised as being the most hazardous – the ‘Class 3 indicators’: those that are

carcinogenic, mutagenic, teratogenic, highly toxic or highly persistent – has been increased from eight to 26. This

is in light of recent developments in the understanding of the health effects of these pollutants.

The requirement under the SEPP (AQM) is that emissions of these pollutants be reduced to the maximum extent

achievable.

All the design criteria in the policy for emissions from new premises have been updated in light of recent

information on the health effects of these pollutants. Some important pollutants that fall into less hazardous

categories, but nevertheless are still important to manage, have also been incorporated into the policy for the first

time, such as PM 10 and PM2.5.

Greater Flexibility in Managing Emissions

As indicated above, emissions of Class 3 indicators must be reduced to the maximum extent achievable under

the policy. This is a slight change from the previous SEPP (AQM), which required these pollutants to be reduced to

the maximum extent achievable by technology.

The reduced emphasis on expensive ‘end-of-pipe’ technology means that industry will be encouraged to consider

examining opportunities higher up the wastes hierarchy to reduce emissions, such as avoiding the creation of

hazardous emissions in the first place.

The benefits of applying this ‘cleaner production’ approach to emissions management are well documented and

can have benefits both in terms of reduced emissions and more cost-effective solutions.

Risk Assessment

An important environmental management tool the SEPP (AQM) formally incorporates for the first time is risk

assessment. The ability to conduct a risk assessment will enable emissions generators to better assess the

impact of their emissions on the surrounding environment.

vii

This will have benefits for industry by enabling environmental management investment to be better targeted to

where it is most needed, and for local communities by enabling a better appraisal of the impacts of industry in

their area to be conducted.

New Health-Based Local Air Quality Standards

For the first time in the SEPP (AQM), health-based standards that can be used for monitoring local air quality have

been introduced. These ‘intervention levels’ are air quality standards that have been developed for a set of

pollutants that have many sources. They are intended to be used in neighbourhoods where the cumulative impact

of a variety of sources may be causing local air quality problems.

Intervention levels will be one of the criteria used to assess whether a Neighbourhood Environment Improvement

Plan (NEIP) needs to be developed to improve air quality in a neighbourhood.

These intervention levels will not be used to assess the impacts of single sources of pollutants. The normal tools

under the Environment Protection Act 1970, such as licences and pollution abatement notices, will continue to be

used to control emissions from such sources.

Better Management of Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Industry

Consistent with the emerging trend of better integration of environmental management, the SEPP (AQM) now

incorporates consideration of emissions of greenhouse gases with other emissions management. When

companies apply to EPA for a works approval in future, they will be required to consider their emissions of

greenhouse gases, and energy consumption that leads to the generation of greenhouse gases, as part of that

works approval.

This will lead to benefits for industry too as it is well recognised that investment in energy efficient processes and

technology generally has very quick pay back periods, and thereafter results in significant savings.

Protocols for Environmental Management

Another new tool introduced into the policy is the Protocol for Environmental Management (PEM). PEMs will deal

with the detail of air quality management and will be able to be readily updated to reflect the latest developments

in environmental management practice and science.

PEMs will be developed with stakeholders and provide an opportunity for public comment to ensure that a range

of perspectives are taken into consideration in their development.

State Environment Protection Policy (Ambient Air Quality)

As indicated previously, three ambient air objectives of the 1981 State environment protection policy (The Air

Environment) were not replaced by the provisions of the Air NEPM, and were included in the SEPP (AAQ) in

February 1999 without review. These were the visibility objective and two 8-hour ozone objectives for protection

viii

of vegetation. In June 1999, EPA determined that these objectives should be reviewed at the same time as the

review of the SEPP (AQM).

It has been decided to retain the visibility objectives as visibility remains one of the key indicators by which the

community assesses air quality. It has been decided to remove the two 8-hour ozone objectives as they were

based on information that is no longer considered to be relevant for the protection of vegetation in Victoria, and

other objectives give an indication of this protection.

What will the impacts be?

The 1981 SEPP has helped to drive significant improvements in air quality in Victoria during the past 20 years.

Despite these improvements, air pollution is still of concern to many Victorians and recent studies show that air

pollution has an impact on people’s health in Melbourne. The pressure on our air environment is only expected

to increase as Victoria’s economy and population base continues to grow, particularly in Melbourne and other

major urban centres.

In this context, the proposed variations to SEPP (Air Quality Management) retain the successful general approach

of the 1981 SEPP and update it in a number of important ways to ensure continued improvements in air quality in

Victoria.

In particular, the proposed variations update the 1981 policy framework to ensure that air quality management in

Victoria reflects the:

• improved scientific information that has become available during the past 20 years, including improved

knowledge about the health impacts of various pollutants;

• changes in industry practices during the past 20 years; and

• emergence of important global air quality issues such as global warming and ozone depletion that were little

understood in 1981.

There are a variety of factors that affect the behaviour of people and organisations who generate air pollutants.

For example, while in 1981 most companies may have been solely motivated by a desire to comply with air quality

laws, many companies are now motivated by a variety of factors to reduce air emissions. The SEPP has been

updated to recognise and capitalise on the multiple factors that can drive air quality improvements. Furthermore,

the SEPP provides considerable flexibility to manage air emissions from a variety of sources on a case-by-case

basis.

In impact assessment terms, this means that it is not possible to cleanly attribute benefits and costs to the

proposed SEPP. For example, EPA cannot argue that all the benefits from reduced industrial air emissions flows

from the adoption of the SEPP. Similarly, it is not possible to specify that all the costs of industrial emission

actions can be attributed to the SEPP.

ix

Where possible, case studies and range estimates are provided in this PIA to illustrate the nature and scale of

impacts. The impacts are summarised in Chapter 5.

Overall, the SEPP will set the framework for continued improvements in air quality achieved through cost-effective

means for industry and the broader community.

T A B L E O F C O N T E N T S

FOREWORD............................................................................................................................................... I

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ............................................................................................................................... III

WHY IS AIR QUALITY IMPORTANT? ................................................................................................................... III

WHAT IS VICTORIA’S AIR QUALITY LIKE? ............................................................................................................ III

HOW IS VICTORIA’S AIR QUALITY PROTECTED? ..................................................................................................... IV

WHY HAVE SEPP (AIR QUALITY MANAGEMENT) AND SEPP (AMBIENT AIR QUALITY) BEEN UPDATED?...................................... IV

WHAT CHANGES HAVE BEEN MADE?...................................................................................................................V

WHAT WILL THE IMPACTS BE?....................................................................................................................... VIII

GLOSSARY

1 INTRODUCTION...................................................................................................................................1

1.1 THE IMPORTANCE OF AIR QUALITY ..........................................................................................................1

1.2 STATE ENVIRONMENT PROTECTION POLICY.................................................................................................1

What is a State environment protection policy? ......................................................................................1

Which SEPPs protect air quality? ......................................................................................................... 2

1.3 REASONS FOR THE POLICY REVIEW......................................................................................................... 3

1.4 POLICY DEVELOPMENT PROCESS............................................................................................................5

1.5 POLICY IMPACT ASSESSMENT .............................................................................................................. 6

2 AIR QUALITY IN VICTORIA .................................................................................................................... 8

2.1 AIR POLLUTANTS OF CONCERN IN VICTORIA............................................................................................... 8

Common Air Pollutants....................................................................................................................... 8

Air Toxics ......................................................................................................................................... 9

2.2 SOURCES OF AIR POLLUTANTS.............................................................................................................. 9

2.3 CURRENT AIR QUALITY ..................................................................................................................... 14

Regional Air Quality .......................................................................................................................... 14

Local Air Quality ............................................................................................................................... 17

Global Air Quality ............................................................................................................................. 17

2.4 FUTURE AIR QUALITY ....................................................................................................................... 18

3 POLICY OPTIONS .............................................................................................................................. 19

3.1 OPTION 1: DO NOTHING.................................................................................................................... 19

3.2 OPTION 2: MAINTAIN THE CURRENT POLICY STRUCTURE BUT REVISE THE SCHEDULES

TO THE SEPP (AIR QUALITY MANAGEMENT)....................................................................................................... 19

3.3 OPTION 3: VARY THE POLICIES – PREFERRED OPTION...................................................................................20

3.4 IMPACTS OF EACH OF THE ALTERNATIVE OPTIONS ........................................................................................21

Option 1: Do Nothing ........................................................................................................................21

Option 2: Maintain the current policy structure but revise the schedules to the SEPP (Air Quality

Management) ..................................................................................................................................22

4 POLICY CHANGES AND ASSESSMENT OF POLICY IMPACTS ......................................................................24

4.1 STATE ENVIRONMENT PROTECTION POLICY (AIR QUALITY MANAGEMENT)............................................................24

Structure of the SEPP (AQM) ..............................................................................................................24

Assessment of the Impacts of the Policy Clauses ..................................................................................25

4.2 STATE ENVIRONMENT PROTECTION POLICY (AMBIENT AIR QUALITY)..................................................................87

Objective for visibility reducing particles .............................................................................................87

Objectives for photochemical oxidants ...............................................................................................88

Assessment of the impacts of the policy variations ...............................................................................89

5 SUMMARY OF IMPACTS .....................................................................................................................90

G L O S S A R Y

AQIP Air Quality Improvement Plan

BACT Best Available Control Technology

BAP Best Available Practices

BAU Business as Usual

BPEM Best Practice Environmental Management

CFCs Chlorofluorocarbons

CO Carbon Monoxide

CO2 Carbon Dioxide

EPA Environment Protection Authority

GEM Guideline for Environmental Management

MEA Maximum Extent Achievable

MEAT Maximum Extent Achievable by Technology

MVEC Motor Vehicle Environment Committee

NEIP Neighbourhood Environment Improvement Plan

NEPC National Environment Protection Council

NEPM National Environment Protection Measure

NGS National Greenhouse Strategy

NRTC National Road Transport Commission

NO2 Nitrogen Dioxide

NOX Oxides of Nitrogen

O3 Ozone

PAH Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons

PEM Protocol for Environmental Management

PIA Policy Impact Assessment

PM2.5 Particulate Matter of an aerodynamic diameter less than 2.5 micrometres

PM10 Particulate Matter of an aerodynamic diameter less than 10 micrometres

SEPP State environment protection policy

SEPP (AAQ) State Environment Protection Policy (Ambient Air Quality)

SEPP (AQM) State Environment Protection Policy (Air Quality Management)

SO2 Sulphur Dioxide

UNFCCC United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change

VGS Victorian Greenhouse Strategy

VOC Volatile Organic Compounds

1

1 I N T R O D U C T I O N

1.1 The Importance of Air Quality

The quality of the air that we breathe is important to

all Victorians. Air pollution can have adverse

impacts on our health, our enjoyment and

appreciation of our surroundings, the health of the

living environment, and the integrity and

appearance of materials and the built environment.

Air quality is also an important indicator of the

‘liveability’ of a city, town or region and its potential

to attract tourism and business investment. Air

quality is consistently ranked as the main

environmental concern within urban communities.

Victorians place a high value on air quality and want

the cleanest air possible that is consistent with

achieving the State’s economic and social

development goals. This challenge needs to be

viewed from two perspectives. On the one hand,

many of the activities that generate emissions of air

pollutants have important economic and social

benefits (for example, the economic productivity of

industry, and the high mobility afforded by motor

vehicle usage). On the other hand, air pollution may

have economic and social costs associated with

health-related and other impacts. Recent research

conducted by EPA Victoria (Melbourne Mortality

Study, Ambient Air Pollution and Daily Hospital

Admissions in Melbourne (publication 789)) has

found that at current air pollution levels in

Melbourne, statistically significant associations

exist between daily mortality and hospital

admissions for respiratory and cardiovascular

disease and ambient levels of particles, nitrogen

dioxide, ozone and carbon monoxide.

Much of what we do on a daily basis has an impact

on the air environment. Air quality is strongly

influenced by emissions from those industries (both

large and small) which make the products that we

buy, from the motor vehicles that we drive, and from

the fuels that we use to heat our homes. The

impacts of these sources on air quality are

particularly strong in cities such as Melbourne and

in larger regional centres. Improving air quality

requires action by all sectors of the community,

including government, industry, communities and

individuals.

1.2 State Environment Protection Policy

What is a State environment protection policy?

Victoria’s approach to environment protection, and

its environmental management systems and

practices, are based on the provisions of the

Environment Protection Act 1970. This Act

established the Environment Protection Authority

(EPA) and defines its powers, duties and functions.

The Act’s provisions include statutory powers,

instruments and measures to:

• manage environmental quality;

• establish environmental standards and criteria;

• regulate emissions, discharges and wastes; and

• prevent and clean up pollution.

Some of the most important instruments for

environmental management include State

environment protection policies (SEPPs), industrial

waste management policies, regulations, works

approvals, licences and pollution abatement

notices.

2

SEPPs establish a statutory framework for protecting

the environment. The Governor in Council declares

SEPPs, on the recommendation of EPA. These

policies:

• identify the beneficial uses of the environment

(including particular segments such as the air

environment, or a particular water body or

catchment) that are to be protected;

• establish environmental indicators and

associated environmental quality objectives to

establish if the environment is being protected;

and

• define programs for attainment of these

objectives so that identified beneficial uses are

adequately protected.

Attainment programs usually specify a range of

approaches, measures and instruments for policy

implementation, and often require the compliance

and cooperation of government agencies, industry

and the community to manage sources of pollution,

reduce environmental impacts and improve

environmental quality.

SEPPs are statutory instruments which must be

followed by EPA and other government agencies in

developing and implementing their own strategies,

plans and programs, and must be complied with by

all individuals and organisations (whether public or

private) in Victoria. SEPPs are developed through a

consultative process and when declared by

Governor- in-Council, express in law the community’s

expectations for the protection of the environment.

SEPPs provide the management approach and

technical basis for the application of works

approvals, licences and other statutory measures to

manage the environment. The application of these

instruments and measures must always be

consistent with the requirements of SEPPs.

Which SEPPs protect air quality?

Two SEPPs currently protect Victoria’s air

environment. These were created in February 1999

by dividing the State Environment Protection Policy

(The Air Environment) (made in 1981 and

subsequently amended several times) into two

policies:

• The State environment protection policy

(Ambient Air Quality) or ‘SEPP (AAQ)’, and

• The State Environment Protection Policy (Air

Quality Management) or ‘SEPP (AQM)’.

The SEPP (AAQ) contains the indicators, standards,

goals and monitoring and reporting protocol of the

National Environment Protection Measure for

Ambient Air Quality (or ‘Ambient Air Quality NEPM’),

which was made by the National Environment

Protection Council in June 1998. When it was made

in 1999, the SEPP (AAQ) also carried forward three

ambient air objectives of the State Environment

Protection Policy (The Air Environment) that were not

replaced by the provisions of the Air NEPM, namely

for visibility reducing particles and the two 8-hour

ozone objectives.

The SEPP (AQM) carried forward all of the remaining

provisions of the State environment protection policy

(The Air Environment) as it stood in February 1999.

The remaining provisions were not amended when

the two new policies were created. The SEPP (AQM)

sets the framework for managing emissions to the

air environment. These emissions are managed in

3

such a way as to ensure that the air quality

objectives of the SEPP (AAQ) are met.

Both of the current SEPPs identify the following

beneficial uses of the air environment:

• health and well-being of humans;

• life, health and well-being of other forms of life,

including animals and vegetation;

• visibility;

• useful life and aesthetic appearance of

buildings, structures, property and materials;

and

• aesthetic enjoyment and local amenity.

Both SEPPs have been reviewed by EPA. All of the

provisions of the SEPP (AQM) have been reviewed.

However, for the SEPP (AAQ), only those ambient air

quality objectives that were not replaced in adopting

the Air NEPM were reviewed.

1.3 Reasons for the Policy Review

It is critical that the SEPP (AAQ) and SEPP (AQM)

reflect the latest developments in environmental

management to ensure that the community’s

aspiration for the cleanest air possible is achieved.

Emissions to the air environment must also be

managed to ensure that the objectives of the SEPP

(AAQ) are met.

In June 1999, EPA determined that the SEPP (AQM)

would be varied, and that all of its provisions would

be re-examined in developing a draft of the varied

policy. In reaching this determination, EPA drew

upon its experience and involvement in

environmental management at the local, State,

national and international levels. The following

issues were considered central to the review:

• recent developments in environmental

management at State, national and

international levels;

• significant developments in environmental

management technologies and associated

practices;

• recent progress in environmental research;

• new scientific information on the impacts of

hazardous air pollutants that had become

available since the last policy review;

• continuing developments in the modelling of air

pollution;

• the provisions in the Act for the review of SEPPs;

and

• changes to local government boundaries that

affect the definition of Air Quality Control

Regions.

Some of these developments are elaborated on

below.

Approaches to environmental management practice

in Victoria, Australia and overseas have shifted

significantly towards:

• avoiding the creation of wastes through cleaner

production and eco-efficiency, rather than

controlling wastes at the end of a process;

• integrating environmental management across

all environmental media;

• working in partnership with stakeholders, rather

than managing by ‘command and control’;

4

• promoting non-regulatory approaches, such as

best practice guidelines and environmental

management systems, to support regulatory

measures; and

• in the case of air quality, placing greater

emphasis on managing mobile, domestic and

other diffuse sources, as well as point sources.

To achieve the best possible air quality in Victoria, a

philosophy of continuous improvement needs to be

adopted in all aspects of air quality management

and by all Victorians. Also, it is now widely accepted

that the responsibility for managing air quality

should be shared by all levels of government,

business and industry, as well as groups and

individuals. Under the principle of product

stewardship, producers and users of goods and

services (and those who manage their wastes)

should share responsibility for managing

environmental impacts over the life cycle of those

goods and services.

Commonwealth, State and Territory Governments

and the Australian Local Government Association

made the Intergovernmental Agreement on the

Environment in 1992. Under this agreement the

development and implementation of environmental

policies and programs in Australia is to be guided by

an agreed set of policy principles, including

ecologically sustainable development, the

integration of economic and environmental

considerations, and the use of economic measures

in environmental management.

The principle of eco-efficiency, which recognises

that economic, social and environmental goals are

interrelated, is now being pursued in environmental

management in an integrated manner to maximise

overall benefits to society. The use of the waste

hierarchy for environmental management, with its

preference for waste avoidance and minimisation

over waste treatment and disposal, is also now

widely practiced in Australia.

Many of these principles were built into the

Environment Protection Act 1970 early in 2001, and

now guide everything done under the Act.

Research into the health impacts associated with

exposure to air pollution continues to produce

findings of relevance to air quality management.

These findings may be used to classify and prioritise

these substances and to develop criteria for

assessing and managing their potential impacts on

public health and the environment.

Risk assessment is beginning to play a more

significant role in environmental management. The

setting of management priorities, the establishment

of environmental criteria and objectives, and the

assessment of environmental and health impacts all

involve the assessment of risk, even if this is not

formally acknowledged in decision making.

The establishment of the National Environment

Protection Council (NEPC) and the Motor Vehicle

Environment Committee (MVEC) represent a new

direction for Environment Protection in Australia. In

particular the development of NEPMs provides

nationally consistent targets for protection of the

environment.

International and national commitments on

greenhouse gas emissions and ozone-depleting

substances (for example, as expressed through the

National Greenhouse Strategy and the National

Strategy for Ozone Protection) also provide new

directions for the environmental protection in

5

Victoria. National and international commitments in

relation to greenhouse gas emissions are being

reflected and built on in Victoria through the

development of the Victorian Greenhouse Strategy.

Finally, approaches to local and regional air quality

management have developed considerably over the

last two decades, and it is now important to review

and restate the preferred management approaches

in policy terms to ensure that the community’s

aspirations for clean air are achieved.

The above developments have been considered in

this policy review, and are reflected in the provisions

of the SEPP (AQM).

As indicated in section 1.2.2, three ambient air

objectives of the 1981 State environment protection

policy (The Air Environment) were not replaced by

the provisions of the Air NEPM, and were included in

the SEPP (AAQ) in February 1999 without review. In

June 1999 EPA determined that these objectives

should be reviewed at the same time as the review

of the SEPP (AQM).

1.4 Policy Development Process

Following EPA’s determination in June 1999, a

detailed internal review of the SEPP (AQM) was

conducted, and a preliminary draft of a varied SEPP

(AQM) was prepared for public comment. The work

of this review was primarily based on an assessment

of policy development needs arising from the

developments and issues identified in section 1.3

above.

The preliminary draft was released, together with a

draft Air Quality Improvement Plan (AQIP) for the

Port Phillip Region and the Melbourne Mortality

Study, in June 2000. Comments were invited from

the public on the preliminary draft SEPP (AQM) and

the draft AQIP. Twenty-nine submissions were

received on the preliminary draft SEPP (AQM). These

comments were considered in developing the formal

draft SEPP (AQM) and draft PIA. In December 2000

the formal draft SEPP (AQM) and draft PIA were

released for public comment. EPA conducted an

extensive consultative process with more than 80

consultation sessions conducted in Melbourne and

many regional centres. Ninety-three submissions

were received on the draft Policy and draft PIA and

comments contained in these submissions have

been considered in the finalisation of the Policy.

This PIA also addresses the outcome and

implications of EPA’s review of three ambient air

quality objectives in the current SEPP (AAQ). Given

the relative simplicity of the actions proposed by

EPA as a result of this review, no draft policy

document was prepared. However, it should be

emphasised that comments were also invited on

EPA’s proposals for revising SEPP (AAQ).

EPA considered a range of possible policy options

for protecting Victoria’s air environment before

preparing the draft variation. These options were

judged against their ability to achieve the desired

outcome of a flexible and robust framework

consisting of the principles, approaches and

measures for managing air quality at the local,

regional and State levels and addressing global

environmental issues.

Three possible approaches considered were:

Option 1: do nothing and allow the SEPP (AQM) to

continue in its current form;

Option 2: maintain the current policy structure but

revise the Schedules to the SEPP (AQM); and

6

Option 3: vary the policies to reflect developments

over the course of the last decade.

The assessment of these options is provided in

Chapter 3.

EPA considered each of these options and has

varied the SEPP (AQM) to reflect developments over

the course of the last decade, and the SEPP (AAQ) to

update the relevance of the indicators for vegetation

protection and visibility. This option provides a

modern and flexible policy framework for the

management of emissions to the air environment.

In particular, this option provides a mechanism to

drive continuous improvement in air quality and

achieve the cleanest air possible consistent with the

pursuit of Victoria’s economic and social

development goals.

A series of background papers were released with

the draft SEPP (AQM) and draft PIA to explain the

background to some of the policy issues, and the

reasoning behind the proposed variations. These

papers dealt with:

• the classification of air quality indicators, and

the development of design criteria (for

assessing proposals involving new or expanded

sources of emissions) and intervention levels

(for assessing actual impacts on neighbourhood

air quality) for these indicators;

• issues relating to, and possible approaches to,

odour management;

• prescribed burning, waste burning and fire

management;

• the management of emissions of greenhouse

gases and energy use (for which a draft

Guideline for Environmental Management was

also prepared);

• modelling of emissions from point, line and

area-based sources; and

• approaches to assessing the health risks

associated with air pollutants.

Comments were invited on the issues outlined in

these background papers, and on the draft

Guideline for Environmental Management –

Greenhouse and Energy.

All public comments received were evaluated by EPA

and considered in the finalisation of the policies. A

summary of public comments and EPA’s responses

to those comments has been prepared and

distributed to all individuals and organisations that

submitted comments.

1.5 Policy Impact Assessment

A Policy Impact Assessment (PIA) is required for

each new SEPP or SEPP variation. PIAs are intended

to provide information on the need to develop or

vary statutory policy, the nature and meaning of

policy proposals, and their practical impacts and

implications. In particular, PIAs seek to explain the

intended means of implementing a new or varied

policy, and the likely environmental, social and

economic impacts of implementation. The PIA is

also the medium by which the process of policy

development is clearly outlined for the Victorian

community, including the seeking and review of

public comments.

The information in a draft PIA is provided to assist

those who are interested in reviewing a draft policy

to understand and evaluate the possible

7

implications of policy change and to provide

informed comment on policy proposals (should they

wish to do so). A final version of the PIA is produced

when the formal policy proposal is recommended by

EPA to the Governor in Council, after public

comments have been evaluated and any changes

considered necessary have been made to the draft

policy. This PIA has been prepared to accompany

the final SEPP (AQM) when recommended by EPA to

Governor- in-Council for declaration. This PIA

explains the policy changes and associated impacts

and also highlights issues raised through the public

consultation and changes made to the policy to

address these issues.

This PIA contains the following sections:

• information on levels and trends in emissions

and air quality in Victoria (Chapter 2);

• a discussion of the policy and of the policy

options considered (Chapter 3);

• a discussion of the policy variation and its

impacts (Chapter 4); and

• a summary of the impacts of the policy

proposals (Chapter 5).

8

2 A I R Q U A L I T Y I N V I C T O R I A

2.1 Air Pollutants of Concern in Victoria

The air pollutants identified in the SEPP (AQM) fall

into three categories:

• common widespread air pollutants that are

emitted from numerous, widely-distributed

sources or formed as secondary pollutants in

the atmosphere;

• air toxics, which are present in low

concentrations with characteristics such as

toxicity or persistence so as to be a hazard to

human, plant or animal life; and

• air pollutants (such as nuisance coarse dust

and odour) that can be a nuisance and therefore

affect people’s amenity.

In the SEPP (AQM) the common air pollutants are

classified as Class 1 indicators, and the air toxics as

Class 2 and 3 indicators. Class 3 indicators are

those air toxics that are considered to be extremely

hazardous because of their carcinogenic,

mutagenic, teratogenic, highly toxic or highly

persistent properties.

In general, Class 1 indicators are of concern at a

regional level due to the large number of sources of

these pollutants. Class 2 and 3 indicators are mainly

of concern for local air quality, although some Class

3 indicators, such as benzene, can also be of

concern at a regional level due to a number of

widespread sources, for example motor vehicles.

While these distinctions are useful from an air

quality management perspective, it should be

recognised that they are not clear-cut. The Class 1

indicators may also have local impacts in the

vicinity of sources of their emissions.

Some common air pollutants are not actually

emitted directly from sources, but formed in the

atmosphere via chemical reactions between other

pollutants. These pollutants are termed secondary

pollutants. Ozone, the main constituent of

photochemical ‘smog’, is an example of such a

pollutant. Ozone has been defined as an

environmental quality indicator in the SEPP (AAQ).

The background paper released with the draft SEPP

(AQM) PIA – Indicators for Air Quality Management

and Criteria Assessment (EPA Publication 743)

provided details of the Class 1, 2 and 3 indicators

that are defined under the SEPP (AQM).

Common Air Pollutants

The common pollutants identified in the SEPP (AAQ)

include carbon monoxide (CO), photochemical

oxidants (expressed as ozone or O3), airborne

particles (as PM 10), nitrogen dioxide (NO2), sulfur

dioxide (SO2) and lead. Photochemical oxidants are

formed from complex chemical reactions involving

oxides of nitrogen (which are principally nitric oxide

(NO) and nitrogen dioxide (NO2)) and volatile

organic compounds (VOCs). These reactions take

place in the atmosphere under stable atmospheric

conditions and strong solar radiation. Airborne

particles may have a diverse chemical composition

and a range of particle sizes.

9

Ozone in our air and in the ozone layer

Ozone is involved in two atmospheric processes.

A ‘layer’ of ozone occurs naturally in the stratosphere and is essential to human health as it filters out harmful

ultraviolet rays. Action to protect the ozone layer from ozone-depleting substances has been under way for some

time now, and the SEPP (AQM) explicitly supports this action for the first time. An Industrial Waste Management

Policy has been developed to address ozone-depleting substances in Victoria.

Ground level ozone occurs in the troposphere (that is, near the Earth’s surface) and is the principal measure of

photochemical smog. Ozone in the troposphere can be harmful to human health and other aspects of the

environment.

Each form of ozone is the same chemical (O3), but the environmental impact varies depending on whether the

ozone occurs in the stratosphere or in the troposphere.

Air Toxics

The SEPP (AQM) categorises air toxics into Class 2

and Class 3 air quality indicators. Class 2 indicators

are those substances that are considered to pose a

threat to beneficial uses of the air environment by

virtue of their toxicity, bio-accumulation or odorous

characteristics. Class 3 indicators are extremely

hazardous substances that are known to be

carcinogenic, mutagenic, teratogenic, highly toxic or

highly persistent.

Generally speaking, Class 2 and 3 indicators are

emitted into the atmosphere within an airshed at

much lower volumes than the common air

pollutants, but most of them are considered to be

hazardous at much lower concentrations.

Class 2 and 3 indicators are not routinely monitored.

Their management relies largely on minimisation of

their emissions at source. EPA conducts campaign

monitoring for air toxics, usually around potential

‘hot-spots’ such as near industrial complexes or

major roads. A significant amount of data has been

collected in Melbourne and is summarised in the

State of Knowledge Report on Air Toxics

(Environment Australia 2001). The results of this

monitoring are mainly for benzene, 1,3-butadiene,

toluene, xylene, and formaldehyde and indicate that

levels of these pollutants experienced in Melbourne

are quite low by international standards.

2.2 Sources of Air Pollutants

There are many sources of air pollution in Victoria.

Motor vehicles remain the major source of the

common air pollutants, especially NO2 and CO.

Domestic wood heating is a significant source of

particles in cooler months. For the air toxics, both

industry and motor vehicles are significant sources.

Figure 1 illustrates the relative contributions of the

main sources of some common air pollutants or

their precursors (PM 10, PM2.5, CO, NOX) to total

annual emissions in the Port Phillip Region in 1995-

96 (Port Phillip Emissions Inventory, EPA Publication

632). It can be seen that motor vehicles are major

contributors to total emissions of CO and NOX with

83 per cent and 63 per cent of emissions arising

from this source respectively. Heavy vehicles (buses

10

and trucks) contribute 16per cent of CO and 22 per

cent of NOX from all motor vehicles. The contribution

of motor vehicles to NO2 concentrations is clearly

reflected in figure 2. This figure, which shows the

results of regional modelling in Geelong, clearly

illustrates the highest concentrations of NO 2 occur

near major roads, reflecting traffic density. Motor

vehicles are also a significant source of emissions of

PM10 and PM2.5. Industry contributes 23 per cent of

NOX and 36 per cent of PM10 to the total emissions of

these pollutants. Domestic wood heating

contributes 38 per cent of PM10, 45 per cent of PM2.5

and 11 per cent of CO emissions.

Figure 3 shows the relative source contributions for

the air toxics benzene, formaldehyde, vinyl chloride,

1,3-butadiene, PAHs and cadmium and compounds.

Motor vehicles are a major source of benzene, 1,3-

butadiene, formaldehyde and PAHs with 80 per

cent, 76 per cent, 64 per cent and 41 per cent of total

emissions from this source respectively. Motor

vehicles also contribute significantly to total VOCs, a

precursor to ozone. Industrial sources contribute

significantly to emissions of many air toxics

including cadmium and compounds and vinyl

chloride. Approximately 3 per cent of benzene

emissions, 14 per cent of 1,3-butadiene and 4 per

cent of formaldehyde emissions arise from

industrial sources across the Port Phillip Control

Region. Figure 4 shows the spacial distribution of

1,3-butadiene across the Melbourne metropolitan

area. Although levels of 1,3-butadiene are widely

distributed, the contribution from industry in the

western suburbs is clearly seen. Domestic wood

combustion is the major source of particle

emissions and also contributes significantly to

PAHs, formaldehyde and benzene.

The charts showing contributions to PM10 and PM2.5

emissions exclude various sources of ‘fugitive’

emissions, for example, from wind-blown dust, re-

entrained road dust, sea salt and the extractive

industry. These sources are likely to be as

significant as the anthropogenic sources shown.

Particles (PM10)

Other sources9%

Industry36%

Motor vehicles

17%

Wood combustion

38%

Particles (PM2.5)

Industry15%

Wood combustion

45%

Other sources15%

Motor vehicles

25%

Carbon monoxide

Industry1%

Motor vehicles

83%

Other sources5%

Wood combustion

11%

Oxides of nitrogen

Other sources13%

Industry23%

Wood combustion

1%

Motor vehicles

63%

Figure 1: Percentage contributions to annual total emissions in the Port Phillip region, 1995-96

11

Figure 2: Modelled concentrations of nitrogen dioxide (1-hour maximum) in the Geelong region.

300PTH

321GEE

330GRO

Maximum Concentration ( ppb ) NO2

GEE – Geelong South GRO – Grovedale PTH – Point Henry

12

Figure 3: Percentage contributions to annual total emissions in the Port Phillip region, 1995-96

Benzene

Motor vehicles

80%

Other sources9%

Wood combustion

8%

Industry3%

1,3-butadiene

Industry14%

Other sources10%

Motor vehicles76%

Formaldehyde

Industry4%

Wood combustion

24%

Other sources8%

Motor vehicles

64%

Vinyl Chloride

Industry100%

Cadmium and compounds

Industry77%

Wood combustion

5%

Other sources18%

PAHs

Wood combustion

53%Other sources

6%

Motor vehicles

41%

Industry<1%

13

Figure 4: Modelled concentrations of 1,3-butadiene (annual average) in the Melbourne region

027ALP

035DAN

040RMI091FOO210MTC

230PTC

250PAI

260BRI

280BOX

0.000.501.001.502.002.503.003.504.004.505.005.506.006.507.007.508.008.509.009.5010.00

Average Concentration (BTD) (µg m-3)

ALP – Alphington BOX - Box Hill BRI – Brighton

DAN – Dandenong FOO – Footscray MTC - Mount Cottrell

PAI - Paisley PTC - Point Cook RMI - RMIT (City)

14

2.3 Current Air Quality

Regional Air Quality

Air quality in Victoria is generally good and has

improved significantly during the last 20 years. EPA

has been working with industry, local government,

the community and other government agencies to

achieve this outcome. This effort has led to the

significant improvements in air quality observed

over that time. Air monitoring data has shown that

although air quality in the region has improved

significantly during this period there are still

occasional breaches of air quality objectives for

visibility (fine particles) and ozone.

Figures 5 through to 11 illustrate the trends in peak

and average concentrations of air pollutants in the

Melbourne airshed during the last 20 years. The

observed improvement in air quality is mainly due to

the introduction of regulatory controls over a wide

range of industrial emissions, cleaner motor

vehicles and fuels, and controls on backyard

burning. More recently, the progressive adoption of

cleaner processes and technologies by industry has

contributed significantly to these improvements.

EPA monitors air pollution in the Port Phillip Region

(incorporating Melbourne and Geelong) and the

Latrobe Valley on a routine basis. As there are few

significant industrial sources outside these areas,

monitoring of air quality in Victoria has concentrated

in these areas. As part of the obligations under the

Ambient Air Quality NEPM, monitoring in other

regional centres with populations greater than

25,000 (such as Ballarat and Bendigo) has been

undertaken.

Analysis of historical monitoring data has revealed

that the number of days on which the SEPP (AAQ) air

quality objectives have been exceeded has dropped

markedly since the early 1980s. In 2000 there were

no exceedences of the ozone, CO, NO2, SO 2 and lead

objectives in the Port Phillip Region. However, there

were 26 exceedences of the SEPP (AAQ) visibility

objective in this region in 2000.

In addition to monitoring of the common air

pollutants, EPA has also conducted monitoring for

air toxics. These pollutants are not routinely

monitored but monitoring has been conducted on a

campaign basis usually in suspected ‘hot spots’ (for

example, near industrial complexes or at roadsides).

In general the levels of air toxics in Melbourne are

low and are well within international guidelines.

Air quality in Geelong has been monitored since the

1970s and is generally good. However, with a large

population and industry base it sometimes does not

meet the standards expected by the community. In

addition, Geelong is in the Port Phillip Region

airshed and so can be influenced by Melbourne’s air

quality under certain meteorological conditions. Air

quality in Geelong generally meets the objectives

specified in the SEPP (AAQ) except for visibility. The

ozone objectives have not been exceeded since

1993.

15

Figure 5: Maximum 1hr O3 concentration Port Phillip region

0

0.05

0.1

0.15

0.2

0.25

0.3

(ppm

)

Figure 6: Maximum 24-hour PM10Port Phillip region

61.9

52.7

70.4

57.350.8

54.9 57.7

0

20

40

60

80

1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000

Figure 7: Maximum 1hr NO2 concentration Port Phillip region

0

0.05

0.1

0.15

0.2

0.25

0.3

(ppm

)

Figure 8: Maximum 8hr CO concentrations, Port Phillip regions

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

ppm

16

The other region in Victoria where air quality is

monitored on a routine basis is the Latrobe Valley.

Almost all of Victoria’s power generating capacity is

located in the Latrobe Valley (about 120km east of

Melbourne). A number of other industries are also

located in this region. Air quality in the Latrobe

Valley, like the Port Phillip Region, has improved

significantly during the last 20 years. In general,

Figure 9: Maximum 1-hr and 24-hr SO2 Port Phillip region

0

0.05

0.1

0.15

0.2ppm

Melbourne (1 Hour)

Geelong (1 Hour)

Melb and Geel (24-Hour)

Figure 10: Annual Average lead concentations, Alphington and

Collingwood

0.00

0.20

0.40

0.60

0.80

1.00

1.20

ug/m

3

Alphington Collingwood

Figure 11: Maximum 1hr API value Port Phillip region

0.00

2.00

4.00

6.00

8.00

10.00

12.00

14.00

(ppm

)

Max API value SEPP

17

pollution levels are much lower in the Latrobe Valley

than in Melbourne. However, high levels of fine

particles are experienced during the autumn/winter

period due to stable weather conditions and the use

of wood heaters for domestic heating, and also

during late summer and early autumn due to bush

fires and controlled burning conducted for bush fire

prevention. Dust from unsealed roads also

contributes to particle levels in the area. In 2000

there were 11 exceedences of the SEPP (AAQ)

visibility objective.

Local Air Quality

The quality of air at a local level is determined by the

combination of ‘background’ levels of air pollution

and the direct impacts of local emission sources

(such as industrial facilities, major roads and

domestic activities). Highly localised peaks in

pollution may occur over a more gently varying

background level of pollution (which may be very

low at times when atmospheric conditions are not

conducive to the formation or accumulation of

regional pollution).

The air quality objectives and monitoring protocol of

the SEPP (AAQ) have been developed for the

purpose of protecting beneficial uses and assessing

ambient air quality at the regional level. They

acknowledge the temporal and spatial patterns of

air pollution that are likely to occur across an

airshed or region, once the pollutants emitted from

various sources mix, disperse and react in the

atmosphere.

It is impossible to characterise local air quality in

Melbourne and other parts of Victoria with a simple

statement or overall assessment, as there are likely

to be major differences in the types and severity of

impacts in particular localities. Each local area is

different by virtue of the type, size and number of

emission sources, and the physical features of the

area (for example, its land use or topography).

It is increasingly clear that communities are taking a

much greater interest in the quality of the air in their

local area. Now that significant improvements in

regional air quality have been achieved in the Port

Phillip Region, the focus is shifting towards the

improvement of local air quality and the protection

of beneficial uses at the local level. There is a need

to establish methods for assessing and managing

neighbourhood air quality, and to involve local

government, communities, industries and other

stakeholders cooperatively in this endeavour.

Neighbourhood environment improvement plans

provide such a mechanism.

Global Air Quality

Victoria must play its part in addressing issues of

global air quality and in particular, in reducing

emissions to the atmosphere of greenhouse gases

and ozone depleting substances. Australia has one

of the highest per capita rates of greenhouse gas

emissions in the world. Tackling these emissions

requires short, medium and long-term strategies

that move Victoria towards a sustainable future.

During the past 100 years, human activities –

particularly the burning of fossil fuels and land

clearing – have resulted in a steady rise in the level

of greenhouse gas emissions. This has significantly

increased the atmospheric concentration of these

gases, resulting in an ‘enhanced greenhouse effect’,

that is, more of the sun’s heat is trapped, with

consequential impacts on global climate systems. In

late 1995, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate

18

Change concluded that ‘the balance of evidence

suggests a discernible human influence on global

climate’. World leaders have endorsed this view and

agreed that action to reduce greenhouse gas

emissions is necessary. Effective management of

these emissions is an important environmental

priority for Australian Governments, the private

sector and communities.

The ozone layer forms a protective shield from the

harmful effects of incoming ultraviolet radiation.

Fluctuations in ozone levels occur as a result of

natural processes, however, the release of large

quantities of ozone-depleting substances, such as

chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs) and halons, to the

atmosphere has upset the natural processes that

maintain the ozone layer. This has resulted in a

general ‘thinning’ of the ozone layer around the

world, including a seasonal extreme over Antarctica

each spring. Exposure to increased ultraviolet

radiation through ozone-depletion poses a serious

threat to human health and the environment.

2.4 Future Air Quality

As part of the development of the Air Quality

Improvement Plan (AQIP) for the Port Phillip Region,

EPA has been undertaking work to project emissions

of pollutants in the future and model these

emissions to investigate their likely impact on air

quality in the region.

Projections have been made of the common air

pollutants and various air toxics. The projected

emissions take into account all significant sources,

including motor vehicles, industry, wood heating,

other transport sources (air, sea and rail transport),

domestic sources (other than wood heating), and

commercial sources (for example, service stations

and dry cleaning). This work on projections and

modelling of future air quality is still being reviewed

as part of the finalisation of the AQIP for the Port

Phillip Region.

There are a number of trends working for and

against better air quality in the Port Phillip Region.

Victoria is active in the development of a number of

national initiatives, such as the introduction of

tighter emission controls on motor vehicles and new

fuel standards, which will significantly reduce the

emissions of pollutants from individual vehicles.

The predicted growth in the number of vehicles on

the road and increases in total vehicle kilometres

travelled will work to offset these reductions.

Similarly, significant improvements have been made

in the emissions performance of a variety of industry

sectors during the last few decades. This, combined

with the contraction in some industry sectors, is

working to reduce emissions overall from industry.

Some industry sectors are growing in size and

emissions in these areas may be increasing due to

this growth. This is working to increase the overall

level of emissions of some pollutants from industry

and offset improvements seen in the performance of

individual companies.

This tension between improved emissions

performance from a variety of sources, largely due to

developments in technology and processes, and

increasing emissions, largely due to greater

economic activity and increasing population, is one

of the main reasons why Victoria needs a modern,

comprehensive and flexible statutory policy

framework for managing emissions into the air

environment.

19

3 P O L I C Y O P T I O N S

EPA considered three possible policy options for

protecting the air environment of Victoria. All three

options were judged against their ability to meet the

policy aims and are outlined in detail below.

The three approaches considered were:

Option 1: do nothing;

Option 2: maintain the current policy

structure but revise the

schedules to the SEPP (Air

Quality Management); or

Option 3: vary the two policies.

3.1 Option 1: Do nothing

This option would mean that the existing

arrangements for protecting the air environment

would continue with no changes being made to the

statutory framework. The effect of the ‘do nothing’

option is that the SEPP (Air Quality Management)

and SEPP (Ambient Air Quality) would continue in

their existing form with no variation.

The ‘do nothing’ option is not preferred as it fails to

provide a mechanism to address the current

environment protection needs of the air

environment and the expectations of the

community.

Without an updated statutory framework for

managing emissions from industrial and diffuse

sources of pollution to the air environment, the

environmental quality objectives of SEPP (Ambient

Air Quality) are unlikely to be met. This would result

in Victoria having great difficulty meeting its

obligations under the National Environment

Protection Measure for Ambient Air Quality.

As this option relies on a ‘status quo’ approach, it

would not drive continuous improvement in air

quality. Developments that have occurred over the

past two decades in environmental management

systems and practices would not be reflected.

Current priorities and practices in air quality

management, the latest scientific findings

(particularly in relation to the health impacts of

pollutants), technical capabilities and technological

advances of relevance to air quality management

could not be properly addressed or considered.

This option would also fail to meet the community’s

aspiration for a statutory framework that aims to

achieve the cleanest air possible in a manner that

complements other social and economic

aspirations.

This option would also result in a policy framework

that would be unable to respond to environmental

issues of international or national importance.

Without integrated consideration of greenhouse

gases into general emissions management,

Victorian and national measures to address the

enhanced greenhouse effect would be undermined.

3.2 Option 2: Maintain the current policy

structure but revise the schedules to the

SEPP (Air Quality Management)

Option 2 involves no variation to the SEPP (Ambient

Air Quality) and minor changes being made to the

SEPP (Air Quality Management) to reflect recent

scientific and technical developments. Changes

could include the incorporation of developments in

air pollution modelling, new scientific information

20

on the impacts of air toxics and recent progress in

environmental research.

This option would bring the environmental

framework up to date with technical and scientific

advances. The key drawback of this option is that it

does not take into consideration major

developments in environmental management policy,

principles and approaches during the past two

decades, both in Australia and internationally.

Firstly, revising the schedules to the policy would

not enable environmental issues of international or

national importance to be reflected. Without

integrated consideration of greenhouse gases into

general emissions management, Victorian and

national measures to address the enhanced

greenhouse effect would be undermined.

This option would result in the schedules being

updated in line with technical and scientific

advances. However, as the overall framework for

managing emissions contained in the body of the

policy would not be updated, the benefits of just

updating the schedules are limited.

While this option could potentially provide a

mechanism for driving continuous improvement for

point source emissions from industry, the schedules

do not deal with emissions from diffuse sources.

Therefore, Victoria’s obligations under the NEPM

would still be difficult to achieve, as the revisions to

the policy framework would only be aimed at

industrial sources rather than a comprehensive

framework dealing with emissions from all major

sources of air pollution, including motor vehicles,

domestic solid fuel heating and burning in the open.

Without an updated framework addressing all

sources of emissions, the community’s aspirations

for the cleanest air possible, having regard to the

social and economic development of the State,

could not be met. This option is not preferred as it

could not reflect changes in environmental

management practices and approaches, particularly

with regard to the management of mobile, domestic

and other diffuse sources, as well as point sources.

3.3 Option 3: Vary the policies – preferred

option

Option 3 is the preferred option, and has been

pursued in the development of the SEPP (Air Quality

Management), SEPP (Ambient Air Quality) and PIA.

This option allows for the development of a modern

and flexible policy framework for the improvement

of the air environment. It involves varying the SEPP

(Air Quality Management) to incorporate recent

developments in environmental management and

scientific and technical developments. It also

involves varying the vegetation protection indicators

in the SEPP (Ambient Air Quality).

Varying the policies is preferred as it would meet all

the policy aims. In summary this option would:

• reflect changes in approaches to environmental

management practice, including placing greater

emphasis on managing mobile, dome stic and

other diffuse sources, as well as point sources;

• enable the philosophy of continuous

improvement to be adopted and fostered in all

aspects of air quality management;

• include issues of global significance such as the

management of greenhouse gas emissions and

ozone-depleting substances;

21

• incorporate new techniques to assess the

impact of emissions such as the use of risk

assessment; and

• respond to new technical and scientific

information on air quality, and new approaches

to the management of air pollutants reflecting

increased knowledge of their potential impacts

on the beneficial use of the environment

identified in the policy.

This option (including a discussion of impacts) is

discussed in more detail in Chapters 4 and 5.

3.4 Impacts of each of the alternative options

The benefits and costs of each of the alternatives

have been assessed and are outlined below. The

benefits and costs of the preferred approach are

outlined in detail in Chapter 4.

Option 1: Do Nothing

As this option would retain the existing policies to

protect the air environment of Victoria, a statutory

framework would still be in place. There would be no

change to the requirements for the management of

emissions.

The existing policy framework focuses on the

management of industrial pollution and air quality

at a regional level, with limited focus on diffuse

sources. While industrial pollution still needs to be

addressed, mobile and diffuse sources of pollution,

such as motor vehicles and wood combustion for

domestic heating, make a significant and increasing

contribution to air pollution in Victoria particularly in

the Port Phillip air shed. Without a revised policy, it

is unlikely that air quality would continue to

improve. Rather, without changes to the statutory

framework, the increasing pressures on the air

environment from a growing economy and

population may lead to deterioration in Victoria’s air

quality. Localised air quality issues would continue

to place human health and ecosystems at risk.

While industry’s environmental performance has

improved since the 1981 SEPP (The Air Environment)

framework was established, new scientific and

technical information and management approaches

mean that continual improvements in environmental

management can be made by industry. Modern

environmental management practices have shifted

from ‘end-of-pipe’ solutions to avoiding wastes

generated in the first place by examining production

processes and resource inputs for efficiency gains.

The policy framework needs to be updated to reflect

new information and encourage modern

management practices in industry to achieve

continuous improvement. Under the ‘do nothing’

option emission control practices that rely on costly

end-of-pipe technology would continue to be

promoted, resulting in negative impacts for industry

and the environment, such as more costly solutions

to emission control, greater resource usage and

greater waste generation.

Some industries are already applying modern

approaches to emissions management, such as the

principles of product stewardship and shared

responsibility, and achieving benefits for their triple

bottom line (that is, their economic, social and

environmental bottom line). Under this option,

industries that are not currently employing best

practices in the management of their emissions and

other wastes may receive a short-term benefit, as

there would be limited environmental improvements

required and therefore minimal associated costs.

22

These benefits could give industries a short-term

competitive edge against more sustainable

industries that are currently involved in initiatives to

improve their environmental performance. The

short-term economic advantages, however, would

be offset by long-term losses due to declining air

quality and the associated adverse impacts to

community health and amenity.

A number of air pollutants require more stringent

management than other air pollutants as they are

recognised as carcinogens, mutagens, teratogens,

highly toxic or highly persistent. Exposure to these

pollutants may cause significant health effects. New

scientific information regarding the pollutants that

fit into this category has become available since the

1981 SEPP was developed. Under the ‘do nothing’

option, it would not be possible to incorporate this

new information and required ma nagement,

resulting in a potentially significant cost to

community health.

Since the 1981 SEPP (The Air Environment) was put

in place, there has been an increased need to

address emissions with a global impact, such as

greenhouse gases and ozone depleting substances.

These substances are not managed by the existing

policies. The threat of climate change and the

depletion of the ozone layer are serious challenges

facing the world community. As all countries and

communities are vulnerable to climate change and

the impacts of the depletion of the ozone layer, the

Victorian community needs to play its part in

reducing greenhouse emissions and the use of

ozone-depleting substances. Under the ‘do nothing’

option, there would be no opportunity to incorporate

requirements for industry to manage these

pollutants. Actions to reduce emissions of these

greenhouse gases would not be integrated with

action to reduce emissions of other pollutants.

Predicted average savings in CO2 emissions and

other improvements (such as reductions of inputs)

associated with improvements in energy efficiency

would not eventuate. In addition, continuing to not

require management of these pollutants could also

have a negative impact on Victoria’s reputation both

nationally and internationally.

Option 2: Maintain the current policy structure but

revise the schedules to the SEPP (Air Quality

Management)

Incorporating new information on air pollutants and

other technical information, such as approaches to

modelling through a revision of the schedules to

SEPP (Air Quality Management), would provide

benefits by improving air quality and reducing the

risk of exposure to the toxic air pollutants. This

option would also provide some degree of

protection of human health.

This option, however, would mean that new

approaches and principles of environmental

management would not be reflected in the statutory

framework. The policy would have current scientific

information in an outdated framework, encouraging

costly end-of-pipe emission control methods for

more stringent requirements. There would also be

no increased focus on the management of mobile

and diffuse sources of air pollution and

neighbourhood air quality.

There would be significant negative impacts

associated with this option, such as limited

management of mobile and diffuse sources

resulting in an ongoing decline in local and regional

air quality, and greater use of resources as there

23

would be no encouragement to examine processes

for efficiency improvements that decrease

emissions. There would be limited benefits

associated with this option, such as reduced risk of

exposure to air toxics from some new sources.

As with the first option, there would be no

opportunity through a revision of the schedules to

incorporate requirements for industry to address

emissions with a global impact. This could lead to

Victoria being viewed nationally and internationally

as a State that is not prepared to play its part in

addressing global issues.

Actions to reduce emissions of these greenhouse

gases would not be integrated with action to reduce

emissions of other pollutants. Predicted average

savings in CO2 emissions and other improvements

(such as reductions of inputs) associated with

improvements in energy efficiency would not

eventuate.

Costs associated from the recognition of global

issues would be avoided. However, these costs

would be significantly outweighed by the costs

associated with not introducing these provisions.

For example, efficiency gains at the design stage

may not be picked up leading to increased energy

consumption and greenhouse emissions.

24

4 P O L I C Y C H A N G E S A N D

A S S E S S M E N T O F P O L I C Y

I M P A C T S

The purpose of this chapter is to explain the clauses

in the variations to SEPP (Air Quality Management)

and SEPP (Ambient Air Quality) and provide an

assessment of the impacts of those clauses.

The clauses of the policy are listed in order and a

discussion of each clause and its impacts are

provided as part of that discussion. The exception to

this is Clauses 18 to 23 of SEPP (Air Quality

Management), which set out the general and

specific emissions management requirements as

they apply to industry. To provide a more

comprehensive picture of how the policy will apply

to industry and enable a more thorough appraisal of

the overall impact, the discussion and assessment

of these clauses has been drawn together and

linked to other aspects of the policy variation to

SEPP (Air Quality Management).

Summaries of the key issues associated with

clauses that form part of the same general sections

of the policy variation are also provided.

4.1 State Environment Protection Policy (Air

Quality Management)

Structure of the SEPP (AQM)

Given the number and scope of changes, the SEPP

(AQM) has been varied so that it replaces the

existing policy in its entirety, rather than amending it

in a large number of places.

The structure of the varied SEPP (AQM) is as follows:

• a preamble which explains the foundations and

purpose of the draft policy, and what it seeks to

achieve;

• an introductory section which provides the

policy’s formal title, mechanisms for

commencement and revocation of the previous

policy and amendments, scope of application

and list of contents;

• Part I which contains the aims, principles and

intent of the policy, and the beneficial uses that

are to be protected;

• Part II which defines the policy’s environmental

indicators and environmental quality objectives;

• Part III, the attainment program, which includes:

(a) a description of policy responsibilities,

implementation measures and

accountability;

(b) instruments and measures that are

proposed for policy implementation;

(c) requirements for the management and

monitoring of emissions, including

requirements for special

circumstances;

(d) provisions for the monitoring of, and

research into, air quality, and planning

for air quality emergencies; and

(e) approaches to the management of local

and regional air quality, global issues,

vehicle emissions and open and solid

fuel burning;

• Part IV, which contains definitions of terms used

in the draft policy; and

• explanatory notes for the policy

25

Assessment of the Impacts of the Policy Clauses

INTRODUCTORY CLAUSES

Clause 1: Title

Clause 1 names the policy.

Clause 2: Commencement

Clause 2 provides the usual mechanism for its

commencement by publication in the Government

Gazette, following declaration by Governor in

Council.

Clause 3: Revocation of Redundant State

Environment Protection Policy

Clause 3 revokes the previous State environment

protection policy (Air Quality Management) and

amendments.

Clause 4: Application of the Policy

Clause 4 establishes the segment of the

environment to which the policy applies, which is

the outdoor air environment. The policy does not

apply to the air inside buildings and other

structures. The clause also broadens the application

of the policy to include emissions of greenhouse

gases and ozone-depleting substances.

Clause 5: Contents of the Policy

Clause 5 lists the contents of the policy.

Key Points:

Clauses 1 to 5 establish the fundamental provisions for creating the policy and provide a clear introduction.

Clause 4 defines the segment of the environment to which the policy applies and limits action to manage

emissions to the outdoor air environment. However, an important benefit arising from the policy is that action to

improve outdoor air quality may also result in indoor air quality improving. The air outside buildings and

structures invariably passes inside and as such determines indoor air quality to some extent.

The impacts of policy provisions for managing emissions of greenhouse gases and ozone-depleting substances

foreshadowed in Clause 4 are discussed in detail under the clauses specifically dealing with these issues -

Clauses 33 and 34.

PART I – POLICY FRAMEWORK

Clause 6: Policy Aims

Clause 6 defines the aims of the policy.

The first aim of the policy is to ‘ensure that the

environmental quality objectives of the State

environment protection policy (Ambient Air Quality)

are met.’ SEPP (Ambient Air Quality) contains the

provisions of the National Environment Protection

Measure for Ambient Air Quality (Air NEPM), which

was made in June 1998 by the National Environment

Protection Council. The Air NEPM is binding on

Victoria and was formally adopted as part of

Victoria’s SEPP framework in February 1999. Victoria

26

must report annually on its performance against the

provisions of the Air NEPM.

SEPP (Air Quality Management) establishes the

framework for managing emissions to the air

environment in Victoria, and as such is a

fundamental tool for ensuring Victoria meets is

obligations under the Air NEPM.

The second aim of the policy is to ‘drive continuous

improvement in air quality and achieve the cleanest

air possible having regard to the social and

economic development of Victoria.’ Air quality is

consistently rated as an important (or even the most

important) environmental issue by Australians. The

policy establishes the framework for meeting the air

quality aspirations of Victorians, while

accommodating the other social and economic

aspirations of Victorians.

The third aim of the policy is to ‘support Victorian

and national measures to address the enhanced

greenhouse effect and depletion of the ozone layer.’

The policy is an integral part of Victoria’s

Greenhouse Strategy (VGS), and will contribute

significantly to addressing the enhanced

greenhouse effect by integrating consideration of

energy efficiency and the reduction of emissions of

greenhouse gases into general emissions

management through the EPA works approval

process.

Clause 7: Policy Principles

Clause 7 sets out the principles on which policy

development and implementation are to be based.

These principles are the same as those in the

Environment Protection Act 1970, which were

introduced through the Environment Protection

(Liveable Neighbourhoods) Act 2000. The

incorporation of these principles in the policy

reflects national agreements and important shifts

and developments in environmental management in

recent years.

The principles guide everything done in accordance

with the Act. These sustainability principles are

drafted to be specific to environment protection

aims. They reflect the community's expectation of a

safe and healthy environment for Victoria.

The principles are:

• integration of economic, social and

environmental considerations;

• precautionary principle;

• intergenerational equity;

• conservation of biological diversity and

ecological integrity;

• improved valuation, pricing and incentive

mechanisms;

• shared responsibility;

• product stewardship;

• wastes hierarchy;

• integrated environmental management;

• accountability; and

• enforcement.

A number of these principles evolved from

international agreements, such as the 1992 Rio

Declaration of Environment and Development.

Additionally, these principles have been drawn from

a number of influential sources, including the 1992

Inter-Governmental Agreement on the Environment,

the National Strategy for Ecologically Sustainable

27

Development, the National Packaging Covenant, and

Industrial Waste Strategy of 1986.

The principle of integration of economic, social and

environmental considerations is consistent with

integrating the ‘triple bottom line’ approach into

decision making. The ‘triple bottom line’ modifies

traditional accounting measurement, by including

financial, environment and social costs.

The precautionary principle states that in cases

where there is a serious or irreversible

environmental threat, the lack of scientific certainty

should not be used as a reason to postpone

measures to prevent environmental damage. The

second component of the principle provides

practical guidance as to its application, and

essentially requires that a risk management

approach be applied in cases where there is risk of

serious or irreversible damage.

The principle of intergenerational equity reflects the

view that we, as the present generation, have the

duty to ensure that the environment is maintained

and enhanced for our children, and our children's

children.

The principle of conservation of biological diversity

and ecological integrity recognises that biodiversity

conservation is fundamental to our survival, and as

such, should be a fundamental consideration when

EPA makes a decision under the Environment

Protection Act and State environment protection

policies.

The principle of improved valuation, pricing and

incentive mechanisms encompasses issues such as

polluter-pays principles, pricing based on life-cycle

assessments, and market mechanisms for

environment protection.

The principle of shared responsibility has been

drawn from the National Packaging Covenant and

recognises that everybody has a role in the

protection of the environment. The responsibility for

managing air quality is shared by all levels of

government, business and industry, and groups and

individuals.

This principle also encourages the production of

competitively priced goods and services to meet

human needs while progressively reducing the

environmental impact to ensure sustainability - an

objective sometimes referred to as 'eco-efficiency'.

Eco-efficiency requires that goods and services are

produced in a manner that progressively reduces

the resources consumed and waste generated

throughout their life cycle and minimises the

associated environmental and ecological impacts.

This concept flows from the recognition that

economic, social and environmental goals are

interrelated and should be pursued in an integrated

manner to maximise the overall benefits to society.

It reflects the related principle that decision making

should integrate economic and environmental

factors. It also seeks to maximise efficiency in the

production of goods and services to satisfy human

needs and pursue ecologically sustainable

development.

The principle of product stewardship, also from the

National Packaging Covenant, commits producers

and users of goods and services (and those who

manage their associated wastes) to work with

Government to manage the environmental impact of

those goods and services throughout their whole life

cycle, including waste disposal. In other words, this

28

principle encompasses ‘cradle to grave’ approaches

to environment protection.

The National Packaging Covenant has established a

high standard of product stewardship in Australia

for manufacturers of packaging and packaged

products. The covenant requires full consideration

of the waste generating potential of products

throughout their life cycle, from product conception

and design to their ultimate disposal.

The life cycle assessment for a product should

consider product design, production processes,

resource and material inputs, the useful life of the

product, and the management of wastes at each

stage of the cycle. Opportunities to minimise

environmental impacts may be lost if the focus of

environmental management is restricted to the end

use or ultimate fate of a product, at which stage

avoidable impacts may have already occurred or

may be more difficult to prevent.

The principle of the wastes hierarchy has been

drawn from two of Victoria's influential waste

management strategies – the 1986 'Industrial Waste

Strategy' and the 1998 'Zeroing in on Waste

Strategy'. This principle outlines the order in which

wastes should be managed, with avoidance being

the most preferred option and disposal the least

preferred option.

The use of the wastes hierarchy for environmental

management, with its preference for waste

avoidance and minimisation over waste treatment

and disposal, is now widely practiced in Australia. It

provides the fundamental philosophy and outlook

which drives cleaner production programs and

practices.

The principle of integrated environmental

management provides a clear statement of the

acceptance of the general trend towards integration

in environmental decision making. In other words, it

prevents the transfer of problems from one

environmental medium (for example, the air

environment) to another environmental medium (for

example, the water environment).

The principle of accountability recognises that the

community’s aspirations for air quality are a

significant force driving environmental policies and

programs. For these aspirations, and the

mechanisms that express them, to work effectively,

governments have an ongoing role to provide ready

public access to useful and reliable information, use

open and transparent processes for policy and

program development, and maintain good

communications and a constructive dialogue with

the community on air quality matters.

The principle of enforcement reflects the well-

established principles of criminal law. A key

component of this principle is to ensure that there is

adequate deterrence provisions to ensure that those

who do not comply with environmental

requirements do not obtain a competitive advantage

over those who comply with these requirements.

The enforcement principle is also in line with EPA's

Enforcement Policy.

It is appropriate to state these principles in the

policy to reinforce their importance in decision

making. Incorporating the principles in the policy

also assists people to understand the provisions

that make reference to the principles, in particular

clause 18(3)(a), which states that generators of

29

emissions must manage their activities and

emissions in accordance with these principles.

Submissions supporting the usefulness of including

the policy principles were received. One comment

received was: ‘Stating the guiding principles up

front in the document is a good approach.’

Clause 8: Policy Intent

Clause 8 explains the intentions of the policy. It

provides, in a short series of statements, an

overview of Victoria’s policy with respect to air

quality management. It also provides a link between

the aims and principles of the policy on the one

hand and the attainment program on the other. The

policy intent assists in understanding and

interpreting the overall intention of the policy.

Key Points:

The aims of the policy (Clause 6) will be pursued through the attainment program. Implementation of the policy

will be fundamental to meeting Victoria’s goals and objectives under the State environment protection policy

(Ambient Air Quality), which is one of the policy aims. Implementation of the policy will also meet the other policy

aims of providing the clean air Victorians seek, having regard to the community’s other social and economic

aspirations, and assisting Victoria, as part of the Victorian Greenhouse Strategy, to play its part in addressing the

enhanced greenhouse effect.

Implementation of the attainment program will invoke application of the principles built into the Environment

Protection Act 1970 and the impacts of this are discussed below in relation to various clauses. Listing the policy

principles in the policy will assist generators of emissions to implement the policy.

The policy intent (Clause 8) will assist users of the policy to understand and interpret the overall intention of the

policy.

Clause 9: Beneficial Uses

Clause 9 lists the beneficial uses that the policy

seeks to protect.

The beneficial uses specified in the SEPP (AQM)

reflect those in the SEPP (AAQ) and in the former

SEPP (AQM) with two exceptions. The beneficial

uses have been expanded to reflect the policy

principles, including integrated environmental

management, and the management of global issues

in the SEPP (AQM). The two additions are:

• Clause 9(1)(f) defines an additional beneficial

use for the SEPP (AQM), which is the

maintenance of climate systems that are

consistent with human development and well-

being and the protection of ecosystems and

biodiversity; and

30

• Clause 9(2) recognises that some air pollutants

impact on other segments of the environment.

Clause 9(1)(f) recognises the importance of

managing greenhouse gas emissions so that the

earth’s climate systems are protected. This

beneficial use provides the policy foundation for

proposals specified in the SEPP (AQM) and

incorporated PEM.

Clause 9(2) recognises potential impacts of air

pollution on other segments of the environment, for

example, absorption of oxides of nitrogen by surface

waters which may threaten the beneficial uses of

water bodies, as identified in other SEPPs.

Reductions in emissions of these compounds can

therefore reduce nutrient levels in Port Phillip Bay

and Western Port, which will assist in meeting the

environmental quality objectives for these

significant bodies of water. This phenomenon has

been modelled for Port Phillip Bay. If and when

action in relation to air emissions is required, it will

be expressed through regional air quality

management provisions of the policy, such as Port

Phillip Region Air Quality Improvement Plan.

Feedback from consultation on the draft SEPP (AQM)

showed support for the specified beneficial uses. In

particular, there was support for inclusion of Clause

9(1)(f).

The key set of benefits that will flow from the SEPP

in relation to the beneficial uses are health benefits.

The SEPP plays a strong role in driving

improvements in air quality, but other factors

contribute as well (for examples see the section on

industry practices). Similarly, poor air quality is only

one factor that contributes to the incidence of

various diseases.

Air pollution is known to have adverse effects on

human health. Epidemiological studies world wide

have shown that exposure to the common air

pollutants is associated with increases in premature

deaths, hospital admissions and emergency room

visits for respiratory and cardiovascular disease,

exacerbation of asthma and increases in respiratory

symptoms such as cough and wheeze. For some of

the Class 3 indicators in the Policy, such as

benzene, exposure may also be related to increases

in cancer.

The health effects associated with the common

pollutants are observed at air pollution levels

currently experienced in Melbourne and some

regional centres in Victoria. In addition to the direct

health costs associated with these health effects,

there are also costs associated with lost

productivity, not only for the person affected but in

many circumstances also for that affected person’s

carer. This is especially true in the case of children

who form a susceptible group for the effects of air

pollution.

There are groups within the population that are

more sensitive to the effects of air pollution. These

groups include the elderly, people with existing

disease (respiratory and cardiovascular), asthmatics

and children. Legislation has been passed in the

United States that acknowledges children as a

susceptible group to the effects of air pollution. This

legislation ensures that air quality standards are

maintained to protect children’s health. In Australia

we experience the second highest asthma rates in

the world with approximately 12 per cent of the

population suffering from this disease. In children

less than five years of age this figure increases to

approximately 25 to 30 per cent.

31

According to ABS data, approximately 44 per cent of

non-accidental deaths are due to cardiovascular

causes and 80 per cent occur in people greater than

65 years of age. Data from the Department of

Human Services indicates that there are

approximately 7,000 admissions per year to

Melbourne hospitals for asthma, 60 per cent of

which are for children less than 14 years. There are

31,000 admissions per year for cardiovascular

disease, 66 per cent of those occur in the elderly.

For respiratory disease there are 24,000 admissions

per year – 30 per cent occur in children less than 14

years of age and 36 per cent occur in the elderly.

Although air pollution does not cause these

diseases, exposure to air pollution can aggravate

these diseases and significantly impact on the

quality of life experienced by these groups. In some

cases, exposure to air pollution may result in

premature deaths in these sensitive groups.

EPA has recently conducted, in collaboration with

Griffith University and the University of Queensland,

two studies investigating the health effects of air

pollution in Melbourne. The Melbourne Mortality

Study found that at current air pollution levels there

are approximately 300 premature deaths a year

attributable to common air pollutants. A more recent

study investigating the effects of air pollution on

hospital admissions for cardiovascular and

respiratory disease found that approximately 1,000

admissions per year to Melbourne hospitals can be

attributed to air pollution. Recent work from the

World Health Organisation (WHO) indicates that

these types of studies underestimate the potential

number of adverse health outcomes.

Data provided by the Department of Human Services

indicates that these admissions alone cost

Victorians and the health system in the order of $6

million per year. The costs associated with lost

productivity are likely to be much greater. This

estimate does not include ongoing medical costs

such as medication costs and visits to general

practitioners. A recent WHO study has found that air

pollution in Austria, Switzerland and France cost

those countries approximately 50 million Euro per

year, approximately AUD $100 million. Of this total

cost approximately 22 per cent is due to restricted

activity days and productivity loss.

Reductions in air pollution are required to offset the

health costs incurred as a result of air pollution.

Since the implementation of the 1981 SEPP (The Air

Environment) there has been a significant

improvement in Melbourne’s air quality. The revised

SEPP (AQM) provides a modern and flexible

framework to ensure that such improvements

continue to occur and that health impacts of air

pollution and associated costs decrease.

There are no direct impacts from inclusion of these

beneficial uses in the SEPP (AQM). Impacts arising

from specific provisions in the policy designed to

protect the beneficial uses are discussed in relation

to those specific provisions below.

32

Key Points:

The key set of benefits that will flow from the SEPP in relation to the beneficial uses are health benefits. The SEPP

plays a strong role in driving improvements in air quality, but other factors contribute as well. Similarly, poor air

quality is only one factor that contributes to the incidence of various diseases. Improvements in air quality will

have a range of benefits related to improved health in the community.

Clause 9(1) recognises the importance of managing greenhouse gas emissions so that the earth’s climate

systems are protected. This beneficial use provides the policy foundation for proposals in the attainment program

to manage greenhouse gas emissions. The potential impacts of these proposals are discussed in relation to the

relevant clauses below.

Clause 9(2) recognises the potential impacts air pollutants may have on other segments of the environment.

PART II – ENVIRONMENTAL INDICATORS &

ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY OBJECTIVES

Clause 10: Air Quality Indicators

Classification of Air Quality Indicators

Management and protection of the air environment

requires identification of pollutants that are to be

controlled to ensure that the beneficial uses of the

policy are protected. Clause 10 provides for the

classification of air pollutants of concern in Victoria

as Class 1, 2 or 3 air quality indicators. It also

provides for the establishment of design criteria

(previously called ‘design ground level

concentrations’) to assess proposals for new or

expanded sources of emissions to the air

environment and for intervention levels to assess

local and neighbourhood air quality. This clause

also defines an unclassified group of indicators that

impact on amenity and aesthetic enjoyment of the

air environment. There is no substantive change to

these provisions from those in the previous SEPP

(AQM), apart from recognising indicators of amenity

impacts and the establishment of intervention

levels.

As discussed in Chapter 2 a wide range of pollutants

are emitted into the air environment in Victoria. The

pollutants vary widely in terms of their toxicity and

therefore their potentia l to impact on the beneficial

uses of the air environment. To ensure that

appropriate management approaches are

implemented to account for these differences it is

important to classify pollutants into specific

categories. The SEPP (AQM) classifies the indicators

identified into Class 1, 2 and 3 indicators.

A background paper (‘Indicators for Air Quality

Management and Criteria for Assessment’

(publication 743)), was released with the draft SEPP

(AQM) and PIA. The background paper outlined a

number of changes to the existing list of Class 1, 2

and 3 indicators that were made based on the

current understanding into the health impacts of

these pollutants. The most significant change

centred on the Class 3 indicators. Based on the

classification of carcinogens by the IARC

(International Agency for Research into Cancer)and

33

USEPA and the identification of new pollutants of

concern in Victoria, the number of Class 3 indicators

increased from 8 in the former SEPP (AQM) to 26.

This change has a potential impact on industry in

Victoria as Class 3 indicators require a higher level

of emissions management due to the hazardous

nature of these substances. Emissions of Class 3

indicators require control to the Maximum Extent

Achievable (MEA) and the implications of this for

industry is discussed in relation to Clause 20.

Throughout consultation there was general support

for the approach taken to classify the indicators and

for the proposed list of substances, with one

notable exception – formaldehyde. Companies

associated with the production of formaldehyde,

formaldehyde-based resins and the wood panel

industry have indicated that formaldehyde should

not be reclassified from a Class 2 to Class 3

indicator. Specifically, the companies believe that

recent evidence suggests that formaldehyde only

has irritant properties at levels experienced in

ambient air and that the carcinogenic properties

only occur at much higher levels and as a

consequence of irritation of the nasal mucosa. The

companies tendered information in reports that they

believed supported their contention.

EPA has reviewed the information provided by the

companies, the information on which it based its

original re-classification and additional information

from international environment protection agencies.

The National Industrial Chemicals Notification and

Assessment Scheme (NICNAS) has recently initiated

a review of formaldehyde. In addition, the USEPA

National Centre for Environmental Assessment is

also conducting a review of formaldehyde. EPA has

decided to retain formaldehyde as a Class 2

indicator in the policy and will reassess its

classification once the NICNAS and USEPA reviews

are completed.

The wood panel industry and its resin suppliers are

working towards further minimisation of emissions

in response to market demand for low formaldehyde

content in finished product, such as medium density

fibreboard and particleboard. This approach is a

clear application of the wastes hierarchy. The

amount of formaldehyde used in wood panel

products has been reduced significantly during the

last decade.

Many of the Class 2 indicators are highly odorous.

Emissions of these pollutants impact on people’s

amenity at concentrations lower than that for which

their toxicity is of concern. In the previous SEPP

(AQM), no distinction was made between these

pollutants and the Class 2 indicators based on

toxicity. During consultation on the draft SEPP

(AQM) there was significant support to separate the

odorous Class 2 indicators from the toxicity based

indicators. The final SEPP (AQM) has been amended

to reflect this distinction and odorous Class 2

indicators are now referred to as Class 2 odorous

indicators. The toxicity-based Class 2 indicators are

referred to as Class 2 toxicity indicators. This

change to the classification of odorous substances

will not impact on industry.

34

Development of Design Criteria and Intervention

Levels

Design Criteria

In the 1981 SEPP (The Air Environment) the design

ground level concentrations (dglc) used for

assessment of new or expanded sources of

emissions to the environment, were derived by

dividing the Occupational Health and Safety Time

Weighted Average (TWA) by a safety factor of 30.

This procedure resulted in a 3-min dglc that was

used with EPA’s regulatory dispersion model in the

assessment of Works Approval applications. This

approach provided a convenient method for deriving

the dglc’s and resulted in a conservative tool for the

assessment of emissions from individual sites.

Dglc’s have, however, been misapplied over the

years. As well as being used as a modelling tool they

have been used as defacto air quality objectives for

the assessment of monitoring data – a use that is

inappropriate.

In the development of the SEPP (AQM) the term dglc

was renamed ‘design criteria’ to better reflect its

purpose. The approach to the development of the

design criteria, namely the use of the TWA divided

by a safety factor, has been retained. This approach

has been generally well received through

consultation. In the draft SEPP (AQM) it was

proposed to change the averaging time of the

design criteria to 1-hour. Concern was raised by

some industries about doing this. In discussions

with PACIA it was agreed that the 3-minute

averaging time would be retained in the final Policy.

The design criteria have been derived from the

current Worksafe Australia 8-hour TWA values.

Intervention Levels

The SEPP (AQM) also defines intervention levels for

a selected group of air quality indicators.

Intervention levels have been developed specifically

for the purpose of assessing monitoring data on

local air quality in relation to the protection of

beneficial uses of the environment. These

intervention levels are set out in Schedule B.

Intervention levels are numerically greater than

design criteria, as they take into account all sources

of a pollutant in a given area, and are based on the

protection of human health.

Intervention levels differ from design criteria in their

nature and application. Intervention levels will be

used to assess actual measurements of local air

quality. On the other hand, design criteria are

intended only for use in modelling the dispersion of

emissions from specific sources and should not be

used separately from the modelling process, with its

in-built limitations, assumptions and safety factors.

Measurements of local air quality should not be

compared with the results of dispersion modelling,

or vice versa. The design approach for emission

sources is a predictive procedure, and is meant to

provide assurance that the actual impacts of

particular sources will be comfortably within

acceptable levels.

Intervention levels have been developed for a

selected group of air quality indicators with a variety

of sources that could be an issue at a local level.

The development of these proposed intervention

levels has taken the health risks associated with

these indicators into account. On the other hand,

intervention criteria for amenity would usually be

specifically tailored to the task of assessing

35

nuisance or aesthetic impacts in particular

neighbourhood situations.

It is important to emphasise that intervention levels

should be used in situations where the cumulative

impact of a variety of sources of a pollutant is being

investigated. They should not be used to assess the

emissions arising from a single source, such as

emissions of a specific air pollutant from an

industrial premises, or dust from individual farms.

The approaches used to derive the intervention

levels were outlined in the background paper on

indicators released with the draft SEPP (AQM).

There was general support through consultation for

the approaches outlined and no changes have been

made in the final SEPP (AQM).

New Design Criteria or Intervention Levels

If a pollutant is identified that is not classified,

design criteria and intervention levels (if relevant)

will be developed on a case by case basis. EPA may

also need to develop criteria on a case by case basis

for other reasons. For example, if it is decided that

monitoring is required to supplement the emissions

management requirements in a licence for a

premises over which there is concern about the

impact of emissions off-site, relevant criteria for the

assessment of such data will need to be derived. In

such situations the criteria will be developed in

consultation with relevant stakeholders, including

the premises in question, the community and the

public health authority.

The information on which design criteria and

intervention levels are based, including the

occupational health and safety TWA values, may

change from time to time. When significant changes

in this information takes place, EPA will revise the

design criteria or intervention levels as soon as

practicable. EPA will review the information on

which the design criteria and intervention levels are

based on a minimum of a five-year cycle.

Clause 11: Ambient Air Quality Objectives

Clause 11 identifies the environmental quality

objectives for the protection of ambient air quality.

This clause was not included in the draft SEPP

(AQM) but was added to ensure, in accordance with

section 18(1)(d) of the Environment Protection Act

1970, that the environmental quality objectives of

the policy are clear. Addition of this clause will not

have any impacts beyond those associated with

implementation of the SEPP (Ambient Air Quality).

36

Key Points:

Clauses 10 establishes the mechanism for classifying pollutants. Clause 11 establishes the environmental quality

objectives for the policy, which are the objectives of SEPP (Ambient Air Quality).

No direct impacts arise from the provisions in Clauses 10 and 11 to classify air quality indicators and establish

design criteria, intervention criteria (including intervention levels) and environmental quality objectives. These

provisions are essentially the same as those in the previous SEPP (AQM).

The impacts of proposed changes to the actual classifications and design criteria for specific air pollutants are

discussed below in relation to the attainment program, and its requirements for emissions and air quality

management.

PART III – ATTAINMENT PROGRAM

Policy Responsibilities

Clauses 12 to 14 address the policy responsibilities

and commitments of EPA, and describe the current

mechanisms and arrangements that determine or

influence the development of policy for air quality

management in Victoria.

Clause 12: Development of National Measures

Clause 12 acknowledges the recent establishment of

improved arrangements for developing national

policies and approaches to environmental

management in Australia, and the need to consult

with the community and other stakeholders about

the development and implementation of national

measures, policies and strategies. The clause

requires EPA to engage in these national processes

and consult widely on the initiatives that arise as a

result of them.

In the context of air quality management, two

national arrangements stand out as significant:

National Environment Protection Council

The National Environment Protection Council (NEPC)

was established to set national environmental goals

and standards for Australia, through National

Environment Protection Measures (NEPMs). The

objectives of the NEPC are to ensure that:

• the people of Australia enjoy the benefits of

equivalent protection from air, water or soil

pollution and from noise, wherever they live;

and

• decisions of the business community are not

distorted, and markets not fragmented, by

variations between governments in relation to

the adoption or implementation of major

environment protection measures.

NEPMs are broad framework-setting statutory

instruments, defined in the National Environment

Protection Council Act 1994, which outline agreed

national objectives for protecting or managing

particular aspects of the environment. They are, to

all intents and purposes, the national equivalent of

State environment protection policies, and may

consist of any combination of goals, standards,

37

protocols and guidelines. In relation to air quality

the NEPC Act prescribes that NEPMs may relate to

ambient air quality or motor vehicle emissions. The

NEPM for the National Pollutant Inventory is also

relevant to air quality management.

Once made by the NEPC, a NEPM becomes law in

each participating jurisdiction (State or Territory),

unless it is disallowed by either House of the

Commonwealth Parliament. Implementation of

NEPMs is the responsibility of individual

jurisdictions.

The Ambient Air Quality NEPM adopted in June 1998

established ambient air quality objectives for six

common air pollutants: carbon monoxide, nitrogen

dioxide, photochemical oxidants (as ozone), sulfur

dioxide, lead and particles as PM 10 (less than 10

micrometres in aerodynamic diameter). The

standards were developed with the intention of

protecting the health of all Australians. The Ambient

Air Quality NEPM is binding in Victoria, and was

formally adopted as part of Victoria’s SEPP

framework through the SEPP (Ambient Air Quality)

development in February 1999.

Clause 12 acknowledges the importance of the

cooperative development of national measures and

strategies for environment protection, and the

guidance that they provide for Victorian strategies,

plans and programs.

Motor Vehicle Environment Committee

The Motor Vehicle Environment Committee (MVEC)

was established by the NEPC and National Road

Transport Commission (NRTC) to coordinate and

implement a joint work program on vehicle-related

environmental issues, including the development of

new vehicle emission and noise standards.

The objectives of MVEC are to minimise the impact

of motor vehicles on the environment by:

• ensuring continual improvement in motor

vehicle technologies;

• optimising the environmental performance of

the existing fleet; and

• promoting appropriate measures to manage

transport demand.

The MVEC work program involves:

• providing policy advice to the NEPC, NRTC, and

other bodies on motor vehicle emissions and

related matters;

• overseeing relevant projects being undertaken

by transport and environmental agencies, and

monitoring the work of other bodies that is

relevant to the MVEC work program;

• overseeing programs to enhance the capability

to effectively evaluate new technology and

standards, measure new pollutants and

undertake research for future policy-making;

and

• monitoring and evaluating emissions

inventories and projections developed by

agencies.

The significance of the work done by MVEC to air

quality management is specifically reflected in

Clause 35 of the SEPP (Air Quality Management),

which commits Victoria to support the

implementation of vehicle emission standards and

fuel quality requirements introduced by the

Commonwealth Government, and to cooperate with

the NEPC and NTRC in the assessment of new motor

vehicle fuels and emission technologies.

38

Clause 13: Implementation

Clause 13 requires EPA and other agencies with

environmental responsibilities in Victoria to apply

the principles and intent of the policy and any

relevant national measures, policies or strategies in

making decisions and formulating plans and

programs that may affect air quality. This Clause

also lists the various instruments and measures that

are available for policy implementation in Victoria.

Clause 14: Accountability

Clause 14 requires EPA to communicate effectively

and constructively with the community on air quality

matters, and to make its decisions and actions as

open and transparent as possible. It also commits

EPA to a range of actions aimed at ensuring that the

community is reliably informed, its expectations and

priorities are reflected in policies and programs, and

it understands what it can and should do to improve

air quality.

Environmental management priorities are usually

established by taking into account a range of inputs

and other factors, including scientific knowledge

and understanding of the issues, an assessment of

the associated environmental and health risks, and

an evaluation of the feasibility and cost-

effectiveness of management options, as well as the

needs and expectations of the community. The

policy’s commitments to informing and

constructively engaging with the community,

consulting it on its expectations and priorities, and

involving it in policy development, are intended to

ensure that air quality policies and programs are

driven as much as possible by the community’s

aspirations, and that these aspirations are based on

reliable information and advice.

Key Points

Clauses 12 to 14 focus policy and program

development on the areas of highest interest and

priority to the community, ensuring that all

stakeholders and the community in general have a

voice in the development process and there is a

clear indication of the means by which the policy

will be implemented.

Environmental Management Instruments

Clauses 15 to 17 provide for a number of instruments

and tools to facilitate environmental management in

accordance with the Policy.

Clause 15: Protocols for Environmental Management

Clause 15 provides for the development of Protocols

for Environmental Management as incorporated

documents under the policy.

The SEPP is intended to be an overarching

framework for protection of the air environment. It

cannot spell out in detail how this should best be

done, as this often changes. It should provide the

framework under which more detailed guidance can

be given that can quickly reflect the current state of

knowledge and contemporary circumstances.

For example, in the late 1970s and early 1980s

compliance with environmental law was the

overriding motivating factor for industry efforts to

reduce emissions. Therefore the schedules relating

to particular industries were highly prescriptive.

Environmental management in industry is now

driven by a range of factors in addition to

compliance with environmental law. In a 1996

survey of EPA licensees, companies reported that

other factors that now drive environmental

management include:

39

• corporate commitment to environmental

management;

• desire to maintain and develop good

relationships with the local community; and

• cleaner production and eco-efficiency savings.

It is no longer appropriate to set specific and

prescriptive requirements that cannot be easily

updated to reflect new developments in

environmental management practices and provide

industries with the necessary degree of flexibility to

manage their emissions. For example, the

information Schedule F (Minimum Control

Requirements for Stationary Sources) by its nature,

changes and evolves. It can be made redundant by

such things as the development of new technology

and practices, and may need to be updated.

In future, matters of air quality management detail

will be made via Protocols for Environmental

Management (PEMs), which are incorporated

documents under the SEPP. This approach will

provide the flexibility to reflect regularly and quickly

any developments in air quality management that

are necessary to produce continuous improvement

in air quality. These PEMs will be developed in close

consultation with stakeholders. This will be critical

as often it will be the stakeholder groups (for

example, industry) which will have important

information on new developments.

EPA expects that the demand for PEMs dealing with

emissions management requirements in many

industry sectors will be initiated by those industry

sectors themselves, and that those sectors will lead

the development of the PEM. During consultation on

the draft policy a number of industry representatives

have discussed the possibility of developing a PEM.

For example, the mining and extractive industries,

and petroleum industry are two industry sectors that

have already expressed keen interest to develop a

PEM for their sectors.

Of the schedules in the previous policy, only

Schedule F (Minimum Control Requirements for

Stationary Sources) is being converted into a PEM,

as it deals with industry specific requirements. The

current schedule has been rolled over and left

unchanged for the time being. The requirements for

each industry will be reviewed in conjunction with

the industries concerned to update the components

of the new PEM.

Before initiating development of a PEM, EPA will

work with relevant stakeholders to analyse the

nature and significance of the issue being

addressed to establish whether a PEM is the most

appropriate approach, or if other alternatives are

more appropriate. If a PEM is deemed to be

appropriate, EPA will once again work with

stakeholders to develop a plan for development of

the PEM.

Where a PEM is to be developed, a draft PEM will be

released for public comment. The period of public

comment on the draft PEM will be at least equivalent

to the statutory requirement for draft SEPPs and

draft PIAs, or as agreed with stakeholders. EPA will

consider stakeholder input throughout the

development process. Consultation will begin early

in the process and continue throughout. Once a PEM

has been made, a range of actions to explain and

promote the PEM will supplement the consultation

process.

Once consultation on the draft PEM has concluded

and comments taken into account, a final PEM will

40

be recommended to the Authority for approval. Once

the Authority has approved a PEM as an

incorporated document, copies will be tabled in

both Houses of Parliament in accordance with the

Interpretation of Legislation Act 1984.

EPA will maintain a public register of current PEMs to

ensure that access to all the information applicable

under the policy is readily available to anyone who

wants it.

Industry and the broader community will benefit

from this approach by having the latest information

relating to air quality management reflected in

PEMs.

Clause 16: Risk Assessment

Clause 16 makes provisions in relation to the use of

risk assessment in air quality management.

The SEPP (AQM) identifies a more formal role for risk

assessment in air quality management in Victoria.

Assessment of any emissions remaining after

appropriate control and waste minimisation is

applied may be assessed using formal risk

assessment approaches as an alternative to

applying the design criteria. It is proposed that the

Authority may take into account the results of such a

risk assessment in considering application for works

approval and licence.

Applicants for works approvals and licences are

required to show that any predicted emissions

remaining after the application of appropriate

control practices would meet the design criteria

specified in the SEPP (AQM). If these criteria cannot

be met, or if meeting these requirements poses

unreasonable practical or financial burden on a

company, it is proposed that a risk assessment may

be undertaken by the applicant and submitted to

EPA for consideration as part of the works approval

process. Risk assessment is not to be considered as

a substitute for good environmental management,

but should be seen as an additional tool for the

assessment of residual emissions. For Class 3

indicators, industry must demonstrate to EPA that

the control practices applied to emissions reflect

world’s best practice for that specific industry and

therefore the risk posed by residual emissions has

been minimised to levels benchmarked by such

practices worldwide.

In conducting a risk assessment, an evaluation must

be made of the potential hazard posed by the

emissions (for example, identification of potential

health effects), the population exposed (including

identification of sensitive subgroups) and the level

and duration of the exposure (for example, does

exposure occur daily or only intermittently). In

assessing the hazard posed by any residual

emissions it may be necessary to examine a range of

health effects depending on the composition of the

exposed population. For example, for emissions of

benzene both carcinogenic effects and

developmental effects in children should be

considered. Assessment of the exposure of the

population would be obtained by modelling the

distribution of the emissions using an EPA approved

model.

During consultation and in written submissions

there was generally strong support for this approach

and the introduction of risk assessment into air

quality management was welcomed. A background

paper on health risk assessment was released to

promote discussion and comment on this important

issue. Feedback on the inclusion of risk assessment

41

in the SEPP (AQM) was overall positive, for example:

‘We wish to congratulate the Authority for the

inclusion, in Clause 22, of risk assessment as a

method to assess air quality emissions. It is the first

time in Australian that an authority has formally

endorsed risk assessment for air quality purposes’

(Submission No. 26).

However some individual industries were concerned

about the potential costs involved in conducting full

quantitative risk assessments. It is not EPA’s intent

to require quantitative risk assessment in all cases.

In fact, in most cases a qualitative assessment

would provide the information necessary to evaluate

the risk to the local community. In some cases,

however, a quantitative assessment of the risk may

also be required (that is, number of people

affected). EPA will be developing a PEM on risk

assessment that will provide guidelines to

companies as to how to conduct both a qualitative

and quantitative risk assessments.

The ability to use risk assessment tools should be of

benefit to industry as risk assessment provides

greater flexibility in meeting the requirements of the

policy and may avoid the application of expensive

technology to reduce emissions to meet the design

criteria.

The application of risk assessment to emissions

management under Clause 16 is expected to provide

environmental benefits through improved

management of emissions, economic benefits to

emission generators through increased flexibility

and reduced risks associated with plant operations

and emissions management. Health and social

benefits will also be achieved through better

management of the environmental risks that are of

concern to local communities. Many stakeholders

indicated that they wished to be further involved in

the development of the draft PEM for Application of

Risk Assessment. A draft PEM for Application of Risk

Assessment to Air Quality Management will be

developed and released for public comment during

2002.

Clause 17: Separation Distances

Clause 17 provides for the development of a PEM for

separation distances. Separation distances are a

useful tool for decision making related to land use

planning and the siting of industrial and commercial

premises, and support good environmental

management at such premises. They provide a

‘buffer’ between industry and sensitive land uses in

the event of plant upsets and unexpected episodes.

The impacts of pollutants during normal operations

are managed through the application of best

practice and rigorous design requirements.

EPA Victoria developed an information bulletin for

Recommended Buffer Distances for Industrial

Residual Air Emissions in 1986 with a subsequent

revision in 1990 (publication AQ 2/86). Under the

previous SEPP (Air Quality Management), EPA

applies these guidelines through the works approval

and licensing system, and encourages their

application by responsible authorities for land use

planning. The information bulletin is under review

and will be replaced by a Protocol for Environmental

Management for separation distances. The review

includes the development of a new framework and

methodology for application of separation

distances, and will be linked to planning processes

to ensure that appropriate separation distances are

applied and maintained. Incorporation of the PEM

42

under SEPP (Air Quality Management) will link

separation distances more directly to the overall

approach for managing air quality.

The draft PEM for separation distances will be

available for public comment before finalisation.

There are no changes proposed to the current

practice of applying separation distances, so there

are no new impacts. Any changes in actual

separation distances will be available for public

comment during a period of consultation on the

draft PEM.

Key Points:

Clause 15 provides for the creation of Protocols for Environmental Management to be incorporated documents to

the policy. This will simplify the way in which new developments in technology, practices and other new

information can be incorporated into the policy, without reducing the opportunity for stakeholder input, to

provide the best air quality management. It will simplify processes for EPA and expedite the incorporation of new

advances and information in air quality management. This in turn will enable action to improve air quality to

evolve shamelessly in light of the latest information and avoid the need to make significant leaps in requirements

after the policy is reviewed every 10 years.

Clause 16 provides for the use of risk assessment. It will provide generators of emissions with more flexibility in

assessing the impact of their emissions, and communities with more certainty about impacts. It may also save

expenditure by focusing control effort on the areas of greatest risk, rather than the less efficient approach of

requiring all areas to be treated with equal rigour. Quantitative risk assessment is more costly than qualitative

risk assessment, but qualitative risk assessment will be adequate in many occasions.

Clause 17 makes no changes from existing policy or practice, so there are no new impacts.

Management of Emissions

Clauses 18 to 23 set out the general requirements

for managing emissions, particularly as they relate

to industry.

An explanation of the clauses is provided below,

after which follows a discussion of the background

to, and evolution of, the approach to management

of air emissions in industry. A description of how the

policy will be implemented for industry is provided

to set the scene for what the impacts will be. This is

followed by an assessment of the impacts of the

policy variations to industry.

The discussion draws on provisions in the policy,

other than those in Clauses 18 to 23, to give a more

comprehensive picture of how air emissions will be

managed in industry, which in turn will enable a

more thorough and accurate assessment of the

impacts to be made.

This section concludes with a brief assessment of

how the general provisions apply to non-industrial

sources.

Clause 18: General Requirements

Clause 18 proposes a range of new policy

requirements for the management of emissions.

43

Clause 18 (1) defines the meaning of management of

emissions in the policy.

The definition states that emissions should be

minimised in accordance with the principle of the

wastes hierarchy, for which the first priority in

emissions management is to avoid emissions

altogether, before considering other options for

minimising them as far as possible.

In light of the fact that an effective emissions

management regime does not consist simply of

avoidance or minimisation, the definition also

includes the assessment, monitoring, control,

reduction or prohibition of emissions to ensure that

all important aspects of the ability to manage

emissions are available under the policy.

Defining the management of emissions in this way

will ensure that all appropriate and necessary steps

can be taken to meet the policy aims.

Clause 18(2) provides a definition of generators of

emissions for the purposes of the policy.

The definition addresses the activities of those who

directly generate emissions but also reflects the

importance of managing the environmental impacts

of goods and services throughout their life cycles, so

that wastes and emissions can be avoided or

minimised at various stages including their design,

production, marketing, use and ultimate disposal.

The definition is qualified by inclusion of ‘where the

context allows’ to accommodate circumstances

where emissions management and other

requirements in the policy applied to generators of

emissions do not make sense.

The definition will ensure that all activities that

result in the generation of emissions, either directly

or indirectly, can (where the context allows) be

managed.

Clauses 18(3) requires emission generators: to

manage their emissions in accordance with the

aims, principles and intent of the policy; pursue

continuous improvement in their environmental

management practices and environmental

performance; and apply best practice to the

management of their emissions, or if they emit Class

3 indicators, reduce those emissions to the

maximum extent achievable.

Clause 19: Management of New Sources of

Emissions

Clause 19 requires the use of best practice for all

new or substantially modified sources of emissions,

including greenhouse gases and ozone-de pleting

substances.

Clause 20: Management of Class 3 Indicators

Clause 20 requires generators of emissions of Class

3 indicators to reduce those emissions to the

maximum extent achievable (MEA), and allows EPA

to prohibit such emissions if they are a significant

threat to public health. It also provides a

mechanism for the phased implementation of

changes to licence fee requirements associated with

the re-classification of indicators from Class 2 to

Class 3, or the classification of brand new Class 3

indicators.

44

Clause 21: Monitoring of Emissions

Clause 21 allows EPA to require emission generators

to measure and report their emissions and the local

impacts of these emissions. These provisions do not

differ substantively from those in the previous

policy, and reflect current practice.

Clause 22: Management of Emissions from

Stationary Sources

Clause 22 allows for special circumstances in

relation to emissions management for particular

industries to be taken into account. Schedule F of

the previous SEPP (Air Quality Management) is being

rolled over in its entirety into the PEM (Minimum

Control Requirements for Stationary Sources) until

such time as the special circumstances for each

industry group addressed in Schedules F are

reviewed. Schedules G and H from the previous

policy are being rolled over unchanged into new

schedules in the policy. This provision does not

differ from the current policy therefore there are no

new impacts.

The clause also accommodates the circumstances

previously reflected in clause 8(3) in the former

SEPP (Air Quality Management) relating to protection

of the beneficial use of aesthetic enjoyment and

local amenity in areas affected by the discharge of

odorous compounds from wood pulp mills

employing the Kraft process and complying with the

requirements of Schedule F-3 in the former SEPP.

The updated clause reflects the continuous

improvement demonstrated by existing licensed

premises in this category that has also been

committed to in the future through the development

of an environment improvement plan.

Clause 23: Commissioning, Startup and Shutdown

of Equipment

Clause 23 accommodates the special circumstances

that occur during the commissioning, startup and

shutdown of equipment. These provisions do not

differ substantively from those in the current policy

therefore there are no new impacts.

Background

The impacts of clauses 18 to 23 on industry are best

understood by considering how air quality

management in industry has evolved since the

introduction of the first SEPP for the air environment

in 1981, and considering the provisions of the new

policy in light of this. To that end, it is also important

to consider other aspects of the policy relating to

industry, such as the new tools introduced to

support emissions management by industry.

SEPP (The Air Environment) was introduced in 1981.

Since that time significant reductions in emissions

from industry have been achieved without

compromising the development of industry within

Victoria. On the contrary, improved emissions

management in industry has enabled industrial

development to take place by preventing significant

deterioration in air quality.

The general approach taken under the 1981 policy to

managing emissions from industrial sources was the

application of good control practice to emissions

(except for emissions of class 3 indicators, for which

reduction to the maximum extent achievable by

technology applied), and the specification of

emission limits for various pollutants and minimum

control requirements for particular industrial

sectors.

45

New sources of emissions were required to design

their premises to meet design ground level

concentrations. A range of provisions enabled

special circumstances to be accommodated in

assessing a premises’ compliance with the policy

during operation (for example, if compliance would

create waste disposal problems for other segments

of the environment, or during the commissioning,

startup and shutdown of equipment). Equally,

restrictions or additional requirements on emissions

of pollutants could be imposed under certain

circumstances.

As indicated above, this general approach has

proved to be effective at reducing emissions from

industry while still accommodating industrial

development. However, with the passing of time,

new tools for, and better approaches to,

environmental management have emerged that can

augment this general approach to produce better

outcomes for the environment and for the economy.

As such, the new policy continues the general

approach that has proved so effective at reducing

industrial emissions while supporting industrial

development, and introduces a range of new

approaches and tools that will enable more effective

and efficient management of emissions in industry.

Continuity of Approach

In several respects the approach to be taken under

the new policy mirrors that taken under the previous

policy, but is just updated to accommodate recent

developments in environmental management

practices and tools, and new information about air

pollutants and their impacts.

The general approach to emissions management

still applies, although it has been updated from the

application of ‘good control practice’ to the

application of ‘best practice’ management in

accordance with the policy’s aims, principles and

intent, and the pursuit of continuous improvement.

Applicants for works approval will be required to

demonstrate to EPA that their development

proposals incorporate best practice, as well as

applying the general policy principles and

considering the management of greenhouse gases

and energy efficiency (under Clause 33). They will

still have to demonstrate that their new premises

meet the design criteria (the new term for ‘design

ground level concentrations’) for any pollutants they

emit.

Provisions to accommodate special circumstances

in industry and apply additional controls still exist.

New Aspects

• Best Practice (incorporating eco-efficiency),

Continuous Improvement and Policy Principles

Best practice is defined in the policy as: ‘The best

combination of eco-efficient techniques, methods,

processes or technology used in an industry sector

or activity that demonstrably minimises the

environmental impact of a generator of emissions in

that industry sector or activity.’

Generators of emissions should be seeking to

employ what is regarded as the best approach in

their industry sector or activity to the minimisation

of emissions. It is important to note that what is

commonly regarded as the best across an industry

sector will vary for different industry sectors. It does

not imply that what is appropriate for one industry

sector will be appropriate for any other.

46

The definition also explicitly encompasses the

notion of eco-efficiency. Eco-efficiency is defined in

the policy as: ‘Producing more goods and services

with less energy and fewer natural resources,

resulting in less waste and pollution.’ This definition

is drawn from the World Business Council for

Sustainable Development.

Eco-efficiency involves the minimisation of wastes

(including emissions to air) and resource

consumption (including energy use) at each stage of

the life cycle of a product or service. It is closely

related to cleaner production, with its emphasis on

waste avoidance and minimisation, and its potential

for increased efficiency and reduced costs from

energy savings.

The potential benefits for enterprises from

introducing best practice that reflects modern

approaches such as cleaner production and eco-

efficiency arise in a number of ways, including

reduced emissions and consumption of materials

and energy. Cleaner production approaches can also

result in reduced business costs and reduced

process-related emissions. This has been

demonstrated in numerous cases by businesses

working with EPA and other agencies through

cleaner production programs. New business

opportunities, waste disposal savings, and short

pay-back periods for capital expenditure are just

some of the benefits that have been accrued to

these businesses from the application of a cleaner

production approach. A cleaner production case

study illustrating how improved air quality outcomes

can be achieved is provided below.

Cleaner Production Case Study

A company stripping paint from cars managed to

save $100,000 per annum by changing its process.

By using a plastic media to strip the paint back the

company avoided the need for caustic chemicals

and organic strippers, decreased time needed to

strip back the cars, and eliminated gaseous and

liquid waste associated with the old process. The

payback period was two to three years on their

original investment.

This overall approach contrasts with end-of-pipe

technological approaches which are often more

costly and were commonly used in the 1980s.

Continuous improvement acknowledges that what is

achievable in environmental management varies

with the passage of time through the development

of more effective and efficient practices,

technologies and capabilities. It means that

generators of emissions should be regularly

evaluating and, wherever practicable, adopting

measures to reduce emissions and improve air

quality.

As this requirement will be implemented in the

context of policy principles requiring cost-efficiency

and integration of economic, social and

environmental considerations it will not oblige

generators of emissions to implement measures

that are not practicable.

The management approach for industrial sources of

emissions is also now based on the principles

contained in the Environment Protection Act 1970

(which include shared responsibility, product

47

stewardship, the wastes hierarchy and integrated

environmental management).

The management of emissions should focus

primarily on avoidance, and if this is not possible,

minimisation, and then subsequently assess the

need for further reduction, dispersion or monitoring

of emissions to protect and manage local or regional

air quality. Options for the avoidance and

minimisation of emissions should be evaluated for:

• the premises where emissions are generated,

including consideration of product formulation,

the selection and management of production

processes, the selection of material inputs to

production, the marketing, handling and useful

life of products, and the management and

disposal of wastes and by-products; and

• the design, production, marketing and handling

of goods, materials, resources and services that

may be used as production inputs by the

premises, and the management of wastes that

may arise from these activities.

These provisions confirm approaches to

environmental management that have become more

widely adopted in Victoria during the last decade

(for example, application of the wastes hierarchy

and cleaner production), and are now recognised by

industry leaders as the new direction for future

environmental management practice (for example,

eco-efficiency).

These integrated approaches are increasingly being

applied to air quality management and, with the

new emphasis on managing greenhouse gases and

energy efficiency, eco-efficiency is becoming the

integrated environmental management package of

the future.

• Maximum Extent Achievable

Class 3 indicators are pollutants that, because of

their recognised carcinogenic, mutagenic,

teratogenic, highly toxic or highly persistent nature,

should be subject to particularly stringent emission

control - more stringent than for Class 1 or Class 2

indicators.

The former policy requirement to reduce emissions

of Class 3 indicators was to the ‘maximum extent

achievable by technology’ (MEAT). This has meant

that much of the focus has been on reducing

emissions solely with control equipment (that is,

tackling emissions after they have been generated),

rather than examining the processes that generate

emissions to see if they can be avoided through

alternative production processes, or minimised

through reuse, recycling or other measures.

MEAT effectively required the application of world’s

best technology for avoiding or minimising

emissions. For the emissions that remained after

MEAT was applied, dispersion modelling of

emissions was undertaken to ensure that the design

ground level concentrations were met (as with other

air quality indicators). If predicted levels exceeded

design ground level concentrations, even after MEAT

has been achieved, approval for a new development

would not normally have been granted by EPA.

Because of the extremely hazardous nature of Class

3 indicators, the policy requirement to reduce

emissions to the maximum extent achievable has

been retained, although the implication that this

should or would be achieved solely through the

application of ‘technology’ has been removed.

The removal of the reference to ‘technology’ is

consistent with the cleaner production approach

48

being emphasised for management of emissions for

industry through the policy. As with the

management of other classes of air quality

indicators, the new requirement for emission

generators to pursue continuous improvement and

apply the policy principles will further increase the

emphasis away from emission control and towards

waste avoidance, reuse and recycling, and less

reliance on costly technology-based emissions

control. This will require a greater focus on achieving

environmental gains through tackling the processes

and activities that generate wastes and emissions,

rather than controlling emissions solely through

‘end-of-pipe’ solutions such as emission control

technology.

Issues of ‘practicability’ will still be taken into

account for controlling emissions of Class 3

indicators. However, given the serious potential

health impacts of Class 3 indicators, careful

analyses will be expected of the options for reducing

these emissions.

How do you assess what is ‘practicable’?

Decisions with respect to practicability will have regard to technical, logistical and financial considerations.

Technical and logistical considerations include a wide range of issues that will influence the practical feasibility

of an option – for example, whether a particular technology is compatible with an enterprise’s production

processes.

Financial considerations relate to the financial viability of an option. It is not expected that reductions in

emissions be pursued ‘at any cost’. Nor does it mean that the preferred option will always be the lowest cost

option. It is important that the preferred option is cost-effective.

The costs need to be affordable in the context of the relevant industry sector within which the enterprise operates.

This will need to be considered on a case-by-case basis through discussions with EPA.

The relevant financial cost to be considered is ‘net cost’ – for example, investments may involve an up-front cost

but also provide a ‘pay back’ through reduced resource and energy inputs.

The above explanation of practicability is the same

as used in the recently made industrial waste

management policy (prescribed industrial waste).

The very high degree of emissions reduction

inherent in MEA means it may require the

application of new, original or innovative practices

to a particular source. In addition, the particular

circumstances of the premises emitting Class 3

indicators will be taken into account in assessing

what constitutes MEA for that premises to maximise

emissions reduction on a case by case basis.

MEA is defined in the policy as: ‘A degree of

reduction in the emission of wastes from a particular

source that uses the most effective, practicable

means to minimise the risk to human health from

those emissions and is at least equivalent to or

greater than that which can be achieved through the

application of best practice.’

49

There are three features of this definition that

distinguish it from the expectation for management

of emissions of Class 1 or 2 indicators.

The first is it focuses on what can be achieved at a

‘particular source’, rather than across an industry

sector or activity (as is the case for best practice).

This is because the higher expectation for

management of emissions of Class 3 indicators

suggests that greater effort should be put into

investigating the particular circumstances and

opportunities presented in each case rather than

simply considering what applies across the industry.

The second is that it identifies what MEA is by

reference to ‘best practice’. In some cases, best

practice in an industry sector may represent MEA for

a particular premises. What is regarded as best

practice for the general management of emissions

for some industries or activities may not be

sufficient for the management of the more

hazardous Class 3 indicators. MEA suggests that it is

necessary to look beyond what is commonly applied

in an industry to see if other initiatives (especially

those employing higher elements of the wastes

hierarchy) are practicable in the context of the

individual premises in question. It also means that

simple compliance with design criteria for new

proposals is not sufficient and that opportunities to

go beyond this should be investigated and exploited

where practicable.

The third is that the focus is on protection of human

health, rather than other beneficial uses of the

environment. Such is the hazardous nature of Class

3 indicators that greater emphasis may be placed on

their reduction, which could result in outcomes that

may not be as desirable for Class 1 or 2 indicators

(for example, increased energy consumption

through the application of more energy intense

emissions reduction techniques).

These issues have been discussed with

stakeholders during the development of the policy,

especially industry representatives. The definition of

MEA in the policy has been modified to provide

greater clarity about its intent and application.

• Risk Assessment

The policy formally introduces the ability to

undertake a risk assessment as part of a works

approval application for the first time. Risk

assessment will also be available to existing

generators of emissions to use in assessing their

performance.

Risk assessment may be used to assess the

potential risk arising from exposure to any

emissions remaining after MEA (in the case of Class

3 indicators) or best practice (in the case of Class 1

and 2 indicators) has been applied. A risk

assessment could be conducted to evaluate the

potential risk to nearby communities of emissions

from an industrial premises and aid in the

assessment of a works approval. This may lead to

more confidence in the assessment of potential

impacts, and a more realistic outcome in terms of

management requirements for the emission

generator. It may also reveal that there is minimal

environmental impact from the proposal and that

scarce resources should not be wasted for no

environmental gain.

50

• Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Energy

Efficiency

The policy also formally introduces the integration of

greenhouse gas emissions and energy efficiency

considerations as part of the works approval

process for the first time.

With the move towards a more integrated approach

to environmental management in industry, it is

appropriate, and more efficient, to consider all

emissions to the air environment (that is, air

pollutants and greenhouse gases) when developing

proposals for new facilities. To this end it also

makes sense to consider energy efficiency at this

stage, not just direct emissions of greenhouse

gases.

Attention to energy efficiency at the design stage of

new premises is now widely accepted as being part

of best practice in industry.

• Protocols for Environmental Management

Protocols for Environmental Management will be a

key tool for setting out matters of air quality

management detail. For example, greater clarity as

to what represents MEA for certain industries could

be set out in a PEM.

As discussed previously, two key industry sectors

with which EPA has already discussed developing

PEMs as an early priority are the petroleum industry

and the mining and extractive industry.

• Classification of Indicators

The list of Class 3 air quality indicators has been

revised to reflect the substances listed in the most

recent classifications of carcinogenic or highly toxic

materials by the International Agency for Research

into Cancer, USEPA and Worksafe. As a result of this

revision, some Class 2 indicators have been re-

classified as Class 3 indicators, and some new Class

3 indicators have been introduced. The design

criteria for these indicators have also been revised

in light of the latest occupational health and safety

levels from which they have been derived.

The net effect of the revision is that the number of

Class 3 indicators has increased from eight to 26.

• New and Revised Design Criteria

Apart from the new Class 3 indicators highlighted

above, a few new Class 1 and 2 indicators have been

introduced into the policy and new design criteria

developed for these. In addition, the existing

toxicity-based design criteria for the Class 1 and 2

indicators have been reviewed in light of the latest

occupational health and safety levels, or other

levels, from which they are derived.

Implementation in Industry

This section summarises the differences in

implementation of the policy between new industrial

sources and existing industrial sources.

The policy applies to all generators of emissions. For

industrial sources of emissions the approach to

implementation and compliance will depend on

whether the source is a new proposal or an existing

premises, and for existing premises whether it is

licensed or not licensed.

New proposals (and substantial modifications to

existing premises) will be expected to take account

of all relevant provisions of the policy in

applications for works approval. Applicants for

works approval and licensing will be required to

demonstrate that the proposal satisfies

51

requirements for the application of the policy

principles and best practice (or reduction of

emissions to the maximum extent achievable for

Class 3 indicators), and considered greenhouse gas

emissions and energy efficiency in their proposal.

A risk assessment may also be conducted as part of

the application for works approval. This will be

particularly important if a proposal for a new

premises is unable to meet the design criteria even

after applying the appropriate level of emissions

management (for example, for class 3 indicators –

MEA). A risk assessment may be used to

supplement the evaluation by EPA as to whether the

beneficial uses of the environment will be protected.

Existing licensed premises will be required to

comply with the policy. Policy implementation will

occur broadly, but focus initially on premises

emitting Class 3 indicators. Priority will be given to

the most significant sources (taking into account

factors such as the potential impact of emissions

and sensitivity of the receiving environment).

For existing licensed premises to demonstrate

compliance with the policy, EPA expects these

premises will, as part of their normal environmental

management:

• review all processes in light of the new SEPP;

• develop an action plan to comply with the SEPP;

and

• implement the action plan.

Action plans will be developed in liaison with EPA, in

accordance with the company’s business cycle and

environmental improvement program, and in line

with the general requirement for continuous

improvement. EPA will expect companies to give

particular regard to the wastes hierarchy, eco-

efficiency and best practice or, for class 3 indicators,

reduction to the maximum extent achievable.

The timeframe for compliance will vary depending

on the indicator in question and the circumstances

of particular industries and companies. For Class 1

indicators a maximum of five years will apply given

the imperative of the SEPP (Ambient Air Quality)

goals for 2008. For Class 2 and 3 indicators the

timeframe will be negotiable, however it cannot be

greater than 10 years, which is the life of the policy.

Factors such as the investment cycles for industry

sectors will be considered in determining these

timeframes. PEM for specific industry sectors may

address details such as period of compliance or the

meaning of best practice or MEA for a particular

industry sector. For individual companies with

specific issues, the company’s environment

improvement plan will be the most appropriate

mechanism for addressing these issues.

In assessing compliance with all aspects of the

policy, EPA will take into account the practicability

of options for improving performance, including

technical, logistical and financial considerations. It

is not expected that reductions in emissions be

pursued ‘at any cost’. It is important that the

preferred options be cost-effective.

Changes in emissions may be estimated, modelled

and assessed against design criteria to give an

indication of the effectiveness of any proposed

changes. The new design criteria will not be used as

a basis for regulatory enforcement for existing

premises during the implementation phase.

Risk assessment will be an option that existing

licensed premises will be able to use to

52

demonstrate that emissions from their premises do

not compromise protection of the beneficial uses of

the environment.

EPA client managers will work with companies to

facilitate an understanding of the new policy and

ensure that continuous improvement is integrated

into business cycles and incorporated into company

EIPs. Premises with community-based EIPs may

work with their community committees as well as

EPA to develop appropriate action plans and

timelines for improvement.

One issue that emerged through consultation that

was of particular interest to industry was in relation

to the changes to licence fees that would occur as a

result of the re-classification of some Class 2

indicators to Class 3, and the introduction of new

Class 3 indicators. With the higher fee rate for Class

3 indicators, these new classifications would have

resulted in significant increases in fees paid by

some companies.

In recognition of the fact that companies need time

to plan for upgrading their performance to MEA and

then implement their plans it was decided that it

was appropriate to specify a period of time during

which the fee rate for newly classified Class 3

indicators would not apply. This was done by

amending the Environment Protection (Fees)

Regulations to indicate that premises emitting a

newly classified Class 3 indicator would not incur

the new Class 3 fee rate for 24 months after the

classification of the indicator. This was

complemented by the introduction of a clause in the

policy indicating that existing licensees will have 24

months after the classification of a Class 3 indicator

that was not previously classified as such to

develop an environment improvement plan, or

revise their existing environment improvement plan,

to demonstrate how they will comply with the

requirement for MEA.

Such a plan must outline the measures they will put

in place and the time frame in which they intend to

implement those measures. Upon completion of an

agreed plan, companies will be able to apply to EPA

to enter into a fee-reduction agreement during the

time that they are implementing their plan.

Existing licensed premises will also have to consider

their greenhouse gas emissions and energy

efficiency. This is discussed in more detail in

relation to Clause 33.

For non-licensed premises, EPA will work with the

relevant industry groups to develop guidelines for

environmental management that provide guidance

on how to achieve the aims of the policy and comply

with its requirements.

Impacts Associated with Clauses 18 to 23

• General Impacts

The policy has been designed, and will be

implemented, to minimise costs to industry and to

help industry identify cost savings. EPA will liaise

with the approximately 300 premises currently

licensed for emissions to air to ensure that

compliance with the policy occurs as soon as is

practicable.

Any costs to applicants for works approvals

associated with meeting these requirements will be

offset by the benefits of reduced energy

consumption and waste disposal costs, and the

potential for gains in production efficiency.

53

For those smaller premises which do not require

works approval or licensing, the encouragement of

continuous improvement and best practice and the

promotion of guidelines for cleaner production and

energy efficiency will ultimately have positive

impacts, as emission generators will choose to

make changes when it is most advantageous for

them to do so (for example, in conjunction with

plant upgrading or expansion).

Where an existing premises is shown to be causing

an environmental problem, EPA may take the

opportunity of a significant modification to

production processes or operating arrangements to

require best practice to be introduced. These

situations would be assessed on a case-by-case

basis, so it is difficult to estimate either the

individual or overall impacts of this approach.

Integrating the management of wastes, emissions,

energy and resources, and the assessment of

potential impacts on air quality or water quality and

waste management, will enhance the efficiency and

effectiveness of solutions, and hence minimise

costs. Also, the costs of avoidance and prevention

are often less than the costs of remediation, so the

emphasis on avoidance and prevention is likely to

minimise adverse impacts in many cases.

This approach will produce significant gains in

environmental performance and resource efficiency.

However, there may be costs for some premises,

such as those that are causing environmental

problems and have made little progress towards

cleaner production or best practice in recent years.

It is recognised that some businesses have been

relatively slow in adopting cleaner production and

best practice due to real or imagined barriers to

implementation, such as a lack of financial and

human resources, limited access to information on

new technologies and practices (and their potential

benefits), and management scepticism and inertia.

For some businesses the initial costs associated

with shifting to different practices or technologies

may be quite significant, although in many cases

these same practices and technologies offer the

prospect of efficiency gains and cost reductions if

carefully selected and properly implemented.

On the larger scale, the minimisation of wastes,

emissions and resource consumption across

industry sectors and other activities, coupled with

continuous improvement in environmental

performance, will provide more opportunity for

development within a variety of industry sectors and

activities, with the consequent broad benefits this

brings. (A scenario in which Victoria’s regional air

quality goals and objectives were regularly being

breached would be something of a barrier to the

entry of new players in certain industries, who would

be contributing emissions to the environment that

was already receiving them in excess of what

Victoria was committed to achieving).

• General Impacts Associated with Class 3

Indicators

Applying MEA to licensed industrial premises will

require extensive discussion with each premises on

its future plans for upgrading or expanding facilities,

investment cycles, industry trends, likely new

technologies and practices, and a range of other

parameters. The necessity of working in such depth

with a company to assess accurately what MEA

means to that company makes it very difficult to be

54

precise about the likely impact of implementing the

MEA requirements of the policy.

As with existing licensing practice, thresholds for

emissions need to be established to separate those

sources that are required to be licensed from those

that are not. These thresholds would be chosen to

capture all of the significant stationary sources of

Class 3 indicators that are amenable to effective

management through works approval and licensing.

The thresholds for licensing and works approval are

established through the Environment Protection

(Scheduled Premises and Exemptions) Regulations

1996. Currently these regulations specify a

threshold for each of the previous list of Class 3

indicators, rather than ‘Class 3 indicators’ as a

category. As such, some emitters of the new Class 3

indicators at the designated threshold will not be

licensable (those who currently have a licence for

another indicator can be). EPA’s assessment is that

this situation applies to approximately 10

companies. Emissions from any premises in this

category will be controlled by use of a Pollution

Abatement Notice (see later in this section). When

the regulations are remade in 2006, the provisions

for licensing Class 3 indicators will be clarified.

There are three main features of the new policy

approach to managing emissions of Class 3

indicators that should be considered when

evaluating potential impacts.

Firstly, the requirement to reduce emissions to the

MEA, rather than the maximum extent achievable by

technology, allows a broader assessment of the

options and potential outcomes for the avoidance

and minimisation of emissions. Options that are not

solely based on technology can be included in the

assessment, which may lead to better

environmental outcomes. Also, MEA requires the

pursuit of the best outcome for emissions reduction

at each stage of the product life cycle, each stage of

the production process, and each level of the wastes

hierarchy. On the one hand, this approach may lead

to more rigorous requirements (in pursuit of the

lowest possible emissions) than the current policy

approach. On the other hand, it offers a wider range

of options than purely technological solutions, and

hence the possibility of increased efficiencies and

other benefits.

Secondly, risk assessment techniques are now

explicitly available in the policy for the first time and

these may be very useful in assessing and managing

potential emissions of Class 3 indicators. For

example, a quantitative risk assessment usually

provides greater understanding and confidence in

environmental performance and hence in potential

exposure and impact levels. This more rigorous

approach provides greater confidence in outcomes

and allows more flexibility in managing and

monitoring performance, with potential benefits at

the same level of protection for the environment and

local communities.

Thirdly, anything less than the most rigorous

requirements would not be acceptable for these

extremely hazardous substances. The avoidance of

emissions must have a very strong priority in

managing these substances.

• Impacts for New Licensed Premises Associated

with Class 3 Indicators

The number of Class 3 indicators has been

increased (from 8 to 26), with new design criteria for

the re-classified Class 2 and new Class 3 indicators,

55

and new design criteria for existing Class 3

indicators.

Proponents for new works requiring a works

approval will be expected to apply MEA in their

proposals. They will be expected to make a rigorous

examination of opportunities for avoiding the

creation of wastes and opportunities for other waste

minimisation in accordance with the wastes

hierarchy. Proponents will need to liaise closely with

EPA to agree what constitutes MEA in their particular

situation.

The greater rigour expected in the examination of

options for managing emissions of Class 3

indicators compared with Class 1 or Class 2

indicators means that more effort is required up

front as part of the application for works approval,

especially in terms of researching and reviewing

options. This is no different to the situation under

the previous policy, where greater effort was

necessary under the policy requirement for MEAT.

The difference now is that proponents have more

options explicitly available to them to consider,

including process and input changes that are

unrelated to technology. This may take some

increased effort, but provides more flexibility to

proponents and may also provide all sorts of

dividends in terms of reduced waste creation,

management and disposal costs, increases in

production efficiency and reduced energy

consumption.

The ‘cleaner production’ philosophy espoused by

the MEA approach - that is, ‘avoiding the creation of

wastes in the first place makes both good

environmental and economic sense’ - has been

shown to have positive impacts in a variety of case

studies conducted by EPA in a variety of contexts.

In addition to the greater flexibility provided to

proponents by the policy requirement for MEA

compared with MEAT, proponents will also have

available to them for the first time under the policy

the option of conducting a risk assessment, which

EPA may use in making an assessment of the works

approval.

If after applying MEA a proponent models the

emissions remaining and finds that they do not

meet the new design criteria, the proponent may

undertake a risk assessment of the remaining

emissions to see what impact they have on the

beneficial uses of the environment. If the risk

assessment shows that the impact is acceptable the

works may be approved. A PEM on risk assessment

setting out the criteria for a risk assessment under

the policy will be developed as a priority after the

SEPP is made.

This option provides much greater flexibility for

proponents to demonstrate that their proposal

complies with the policy requirement to protect the

beneficial uses of the environment than the

previous policy did.

• Impacts for Existing Licensed Premises

Associated with Class 3 Indicators

The approach to managing emissions of Class 3

indicators for existing licensed premises will be

highly case-specific, which makes providing a

detailed overall assessment of the impact

impossible, without making gross generalisations

that may well distort the real impact. The only way of

making an accurate assessment of the impacts

would be to place highly prescriptive and inflexible

56

requirements on industry. However, this would

impose high cost actions from industry.

Instead, an assessment has been made of the likely

extent of the implications of implementing the policy

for existing licensed and un-licensed premises, and

the associated implications in terms of licence fees,

and examples of the kinds of steps premises will

take have been provided to illustrate the practicable

and cost-effective approach to implementation of

the policy that will be taken with existing licensed

premises.

The assessment of existing licensees has identified

those licensees that EPA believes, or has grounds

for believing, currently emit substances on the list of

Class 3 indicators. This work also includes an

assessment of whether the current practices and

performance of these licensees would satisfy the

MEA requirement (including an assessment of how

they perform against the new design criteria, as a

guide).

From an examination of information in the Port

Phillip Region emissions inventory, National

Pollutant Inventory, EPA’s licence data base and

drawing on the experience of EPA’s client managers,

EPA estimates that there are approximately 110

significant stationary sources of the revised list of

Class 3 indicators, including those licensed to emit

the seven pollutants that were previously on the list

(and still are) as well as the 19 additions to the list.

This does not include fuel storage facilities that emit

benzene, which are discussed below and in the

section on PEMs.

A nominal threshold of 0.1g/min (or 50 kg/year) has

been used in this assessment for determining

whether a source is ‘significant’. This threshold is

drawn from Table B(1)(a)(vi) of the Environment

Protection (Scheduled Premises and Exemptions)

Regulations 1996 which provides the exemption

from works approval for emissions of total organic

compounds listed in category 12(a)(iii) of Table A in

the same regulations.

EPA currently administers about 300 licences for

emissions to the air environment. EPA believes that

about 45 of these specifically licence for emissions

of the revised list of Class 3 indicators. These

include about 20 licences for emissions of previous

Class 3 indicators and 25 licences for emissions of

new Class 3 indicators, including re-classified Class

2 indicators and new Class 3 indicators that were

previously licensed while not classified as an

indicator under the SEPP. (If a substance was known

to be harmful but was not classified as an indicator

under the SEPP and it came to EPA’s attention it was

previously classified by default as a Class 2

indicators).

About another 65 sources are known or believed to

be emitting these substances, but are either not

specifically licensed for the emission of these

substances or not licensed at all. This includes

approximately 25 licensees with emissions of some

Class 3 indicators contained in licensed emissions

of generic groupings of ‘Volatile Organic

Compounds’ or ‘Total Organic Compounds’. EPA will

ask these licensees to identify any Class 3 indicators

that are contained in these generic groupings and, if

present, to quantify them and assess their impacts.

Of the remaining 40, approximately 20 are licensed

but not for one of the new list of Class 3’s or

TOC/VOC and are strongly believed to be emitting a

Class 3 substance. A further 10 are licensed but not

57

for the new Class 3’s or TOC/VOC and for which

there is some suspicion of emission of Class 3

substance but no emission information on which to

base any assessment. The remaining 10 are not

licensed at all but which are strongly believed to be

emitting Class 3 substances.

In early-2001, EPA conducted a questionnaire survey

of licensed premises considered as possible

emitters of substances on the new list of Class 3

indicators. The purpose of the survey was to

establish whether these premises were able to

comply with the requirement for application of MEA

(and how they compared to the design criteria as a

guide) and the impacts of any measures to achieve

compliance. The survey sent to companies also

contained an explanation of what MEA entailed.

Questionnaire responses were received from half of

the licensed premises. These revealed that about 50

per cent of licensees believed that they complied

with the requirement for MEA, 25 per cent were

unsure of their compliance and the remaining 25 per

cent felt they did not comply.

The question of what steps they believe will be

necessary to apply MEA and the anticipated impact

of those steps produced a range of responses.

However, there was a common theme in some

responses, which was that the compliance steps

would be to apply some form of emission control

technology. This ‘end-of-pipe’ approach is not

consistent with the policy principle of the wastes

hierarchy, which seeks to emphasise ways of

avoiding emissions in the first instance (for

example, by reformulating products or redesigning

processes).

In implementing the policy, EPA will be emphasising

waste avoidance in the application of MEA. This

emphasis is fundamental in making progress

towards more sustainable practices. The extent to

which options at the top end of the wastes

hierarchy, such as avoidance, actually exist is

something that will require in-depth assessment on

a case by case basis. This precludes any attempt to

accurately ‘aggregate’ the impact of applying MEA in

this way to affected companies. Aggregating the

impact necessitates making assumptions that may

not hold in reality.

The impact is best understood by understanding the

approach EPA will be taking to the application of the

policy requirement for management of emissions of

Class 3 indicators to MEA. This is:

• MEA will be discussed in-depth with each

licensed premises on a case by case basis,

taking all the environmental, technical,

logistical and financial circumstances of that

premises into account;

• premises will be asked to develop a plan

illustrating how they will apply MEA and the

time frame over which their proposals will be

introduced. The nominal target for compliance

with the policy in relation to MEA will be five

years from the time the policy is made, however

this will be flexible and take into account the

circumstances of individual premises, including

such things as investment cycles and planned

upgrades;

• provision has been made under the

Environment Protection (Fees) Regulations 2001

for fee relief following gazettal of the policy. A

transitional provision has been included in the

58

regulations, which states that where a

classification of a class 3 indicator occurs, no

fee increases will occur for a period of 24

months. This period provides premises with

time to develop their plan without incurring fee

impacts;

• premises will be able to conduct a risk

assessment to supplement their plan of how

MEA is to be applied in their circumstances; and

• premises will be prioritised for attention

according to the impact of their emissions on

the environment. Those posing the greatest

environmental risk will be subject to the earliest

attention.

A variety of licensees were interviewed by

consultants for the purpose of developing case

studies illustrating the impact of the policy for

licensed premises identified as being sources of the

new Class 3 indicators. The case studies provided

below are from this work.

EPA’s comments on these case studies are also

provided to elaborate on this assessment of how the

policy impacts on these premises. EPA’s comments

illustrate how important assessment on a case by

case basis will be to ensure that all the tools at the

premises’ disposal are utilised to optimise the steps

taken to comply with the policy.

The case studies reveal an ‘end-of-pipe’ mind set

still exists in industry for the control of emissions of

Class 3 indicators. This is hardly surprising as the

former policy requirement for MEAT emphasised

technological solutions. Although, since the policy

requirement for MEAT was introduced in 1981,

sections of industry - recognising the benefits - have

moved towards cleaner production of their own

volition. There has also been policy support towards

this move, for example, through the Industrial Waste

Management Policy (Waste Minimisation).

The extent to which emissions reduction

opportunities that are not ‘end-of-pipe’ exist for the

premises in question, and the extent to which any

that are available are practicable, is something that

will have to be worked through in detail with each

premises. It is also important to emphasise the

significance of risk assessment in assisting to make

decisions about what level of investment in

emission control practices is appropriate.

59

Case Study 1: Formaldehyde

A company in Victoria uses formaldehyde as a component of various fabric finishing chemicals to give the desired

fabric characteristics such as 'feel'. Ground Level Concentration modelling a year ago shows that the proposed

Design Criteria (DC) for formaldehyde would be exceeded by a factor of several times. Efforts have been made

since then to substantially reduce formaldehyde usage, but it is not clear if this has been sufficient to achieve the

proposed DC. Formaldehyde emissions are controlled by routing some equipment exhaust gases though a water

scrubber.

If further reduction were required to achieve the proposed DC or the best practice requirement of the policy, effort

would first aim at process and product optimisation to reduce formaldehyde usage. Still further reduction would

require additional scrubber facilities on other equipment at a cost of several hundred thousand dollars. However,

the company strongly feels that such expenditure would probably be better directed to address other

environmental issues at the site.

EPA comment on case study 1:

It is important to remember that modelling against the new design criteria would only be used as a guide to the

premises’ performance, not as a measure for determining compliance with the policy. If any modelling done

showed that the design criteria were being exceeded after all practicable measures for reducing emissions had

been applied, a risk assessment could be used to help assess if the beneficial uses of the environment were being

protected.

The company’s intention to first consider process and product optimisation to reduce formaldehyde usage is

consistent with the policy principle of the wastes hierarchy (that is, seeking to avoid the creation of emissions in

the first instance). The need to invest in additional equipment, such as a scrubber, would depend on the outcome

of the other process changes, and the result of the risk assessment. If a risk assessment showed that the

additional control achieved very little by way of additional protection of the beneficial uses of the environment it is

unlikely that it would be required. The company’s argument that such expenditure could be better directed to other

environmental issues on site would be considered by EPA under the principle of integrated environmental

management.

Case Study 2: Dioxins, Furans, Arsenic, Beryllium, Cadmium, Chromium

A company generates electricity from brown coal using two large steam plants fitted with electrostatic dust

precipitators. The combustion process and trace materials in the brown coal result in small emissions of

polychlorinated dioxins and furans as well as the Class 3 chemicals arsenic, beryllium, cadmium and chromium.

These chemicals have been found to be uniformly distributed in the coal, so that their emissions are expected to

be reasonably consistent.

60

No controls specific to these emissions exist and none are known to exist for this process. No tests have been

conducted on the electrostatic precipitators to determine if they retain these materials, or if operation under

varying conditions results in different retention rates.

The total of all detectable isomers of dioxins and furans has been measured at 55 grams per year. This

measurement is the toxic equivalent of no more than one fifth of a gram per year of the isomer TCDD specified in

the proposed SEPP. Of the other Class 3 chemical emissions, beryllium would have the greatest potential to

exceed the proposed design criteria, based on expected emissions and the design criteria. Expected emissions

are based on coal content. A preliminary assessment indicates beryllium emissions meet the proposed DC.

Further, on this basis, the concentrations of dioxins and furans measured in the stack would be expected to result

in emissions several orders of magnitude below the proposed DC.

EPA comment on case study 2:

Once again, it is important to emphasise that any modelling against the new design criteria would only be used as

a guide to compliance with the policy, and as one of a suite of tools, and not for assessing compliance per se.

The case study illustrates how important it will be for some premises to undertake a deeper analysis of their

emissions to assess the extent to which they may be emitting these hazardous pollutants.

Case Study 3: Acrylonitrile and 1,3-butadiene

A company manufactures a range of dispersions and chemicals for modifying viscosity and to assist processing

and finishing in the carpet, paper, adhesives, textiles and leather industries. Raw materials include the proposed

SEPP Class 3 chemicals acrylonitrile and 1,3-butadiene.

Since 1994, gaseous emissions from the processes and associated scrubbers have been collected and ducted to

an oxidiser for combustion. Scrubber washings are tested for contaminant levels prior to batch discharge as

trade waste. A leak detection and repair program is in place. Liquid products are increasingly sold in bulk,

reducing emissions from drumming operations. Initial modelling indicates the proposed design criteria are met.

The proposal would require the company to measure, model and report on Class 3 chemical emissions at an

estimated cost of $4,000. Additional ongoing monitoring costs of up to $4,000 per annum may also be incurred.

MEA is met by equipment design except that current industry standard leak control hardware (valves and pumps)

would need to be replaced, at a cost of $90,000, for a small and not significant reduction in routine emissions.

The proposed SEPP would require the company to consider ways to achieve more complete reaction of Class 3

chemicals before processes are opened to atmosphere and to demonstrate that the use of these chemicals

cannot be reduced with, for example, the use of less hazardous alternatives.

EPA comment on case study 3:

Once again, it is important to emphasise that any modelling against the new design criteria would only be used as

a guide to compliance with the policy, and as one of a suite of tools, and not for assessing compliance per se.

61

Whether or not the new investment in leak control hardware is warranted would depend on such things as an

assessment of the practicability of implementing it, the emissions reductions achieved, the outcome of a risk

assessment and what additional protection of human health it would achieve. In general, as part of its approach to

MEA, the company would be expected to assess the current leak control hardware and the availability of improved

equipment, and phase in improved equipment as part of normal replacement cycles if warranted.

The company’s proposal to consider ways to achieve more complete reaction of Class 3 chemicals is consistent

with the wastes hierarchy policy principle.

Case Study 4: Toluene Diisocyanate, Diphenylmethane Diisocyanate, Methylene Chloride

A company manufactures polyurethane foam by mixing feedstocks in mixing heads and blowing and curing over

time. The foam blocks produced are either sold for further processing or fabricated in the adjacent company

plant.

The Class 3 material toluene diisocyanate (TDI) is a necessary feedstock for slabstock foam production. This

material is imported from overseas in ISO containers and is fully contained from delivery until the formation of

foam. At this point vapours including very small quantities of TDI are drawn off and neutralised in a scrubber at

an efficiency of 90 to 98 per cent. The remaining vapour is drawn through the stack for dispersion in the

atmosphere. The current GLC is comfortably met but the proposed DC may not be met. To meet the proposed DC,

some combination of increased scrubbing capacity (cost as much as $100,000) and increased stack height and

other changes including increased velocity, combined with possible slower foam throughput rates (with

corresponding increased running time to maintain production rates), may be required. The concept of MEA is only

limited by the funds available for increased scrubbing in this type of system.

Another Class 3 material, diphenylmethane diisocyanate (MDI), is used for moulded foams. This material is

contained up until foam formation and then scrubbed and dispersed via the stack in the same way as TDI.

However the very much lower rate of use of this material compared with TDI, means the proposed DC would

already be met.

The Class 2 material, methylene chloride, is used to blow the foam during formation prior to being discharged via

the stack. The material takes no part in the reactions. Modifications to the stack have ensured the current GLC is

met but emitted concentrations would need to be reduced to meet the proposed DC. Improvement could be

achieved by stack modification (which would also assist TDI above) and by installing different foam making

machinery, which for some grades, would result in making foam more slowly. Such changes may permit

compliance for the grades involved. Some foam plants overseas have converted to liquid CO2 for blowing, but

this technology is not suitable for all grades. It represents MEA where it can be applied. Investment of around $2

million would be required to install CO2 blowing.

During the last three years the company has changed from solvent to water based adhesives, eliminating

emissions of toluene and small quantities of acetone and hexane.

62

EPA comment on case study 4:

Once again, it is important to emphasise that any modelling against the new design criteria would only be used as

a guide to compliance with the policy, and as one of a suite of tools, and not for assessing compliance per se.

The case study again illustrates the value in undertaking a risk assessment to evaluate whether additional -

potentially significant - expenditure on control is warranted.

Companies are expected to keep abreast of what developments take place in their industry with respect to new

processes and approaches to emissions management, and implement them where it is warranted, which must be

assessed on a case by case basis.

• Impacts for Petroleum Storage Depots

Associated with Class 3 Indicators

A large proportion (perhaps 25 per cent) of

emissions of the Class 3 indicator benzene from

stationary sources in the Port Phillip Region arise

from storage of petroleum products (for example,

petrol). With the previous exemption from licensing

for benzene in petrol these emissions have not

previously been licensed, although emission control

equipment such as floating roof tanks was required

by regulations made in the mid-1980s. These

regulations, which only applied to larger storages in

the Port Phillip region, no longer exist.

Based on NPI data, there are about 40 fuel storage

depots that emit at least 50 kilograms per year

(kg/yr) of benzene. The NPI database suggests that

there are about eight large to very large storage

facilities (including those associated with the two

refineries in Victoria), about 15 medium-sized

storages and 40 smaller facilities, many in rural and

regional Victoria.

While the environmental impacts of the larger

facilities have been of interest to EPA and the

relevant companies for some time, there is little

detailed information about the possible impacts

and health risks associated with benzene emissions

from many of the smaller facilities and hence no

reliable basis for determining what additional forms

of control, if any, these facilities may require to

comply.

These impacts and risks are often site specific and

influenced by facility size, product throughput, the

nature of storage and transfer equipment, facility

operations, site location and, very importantly, the

surrounding environment. Further work will be

undertaken with the industry to establish:

• the likelihood of problems with ambient levels

of benzene in the vicinity of various storage

facilities;

• a threshold above which action would be taken

to ensure compliance with the MEA requirement

for benzene (this threshold could be based on

emission levels, storage capacity or product

throughput);

• the controls and measures required to conform

with MEA for both existing and new sources,

and design criteria for new sources; and

• the tools that would be used to ensure

compliance.

Issues such as these are most easily worked

through in an industry-specific PEM that enables

63

EPA, the industry and other relevant stakeholders to

determine the most appropriate course of action.

PEMs can be amended readily to reflect new

developments in environmental management in the

industry, which is preferable to specifying complex

detail in the policy itself.

Environmental improvement works for some of the

larger facilities are already planned, committed or

under discussion with EPA at the present time. The

policy revision has not been a principal ‘driver’ of

these outcomes and deliberations. For small to

medium-sized facilities, individual facilit ies will

have to be assessed on a case-by-case basis, and

identified emission reduction measures will be in

proportion to the reduction in risk that would be

achieved.

• Impacts for Licence Fees Associated with Class

3 Indicators

The Environment Protection (Fees) Regulations 2001

set the fees that are payable under the Act,

including for licensed premises. As Class 1, 2 and 3

indicators are used in determining load based

licensing fees for discharges to the atmosphere, any

changes to the indicators under the policy have

potential fee impacts for industry. Fees for emitting

Class 3 indicators are a factor of 100 times greater

than fees for emitting Class 2 indicators.

Under the draft policy, those premises emitting

substance that have been re-classified from Class 2

to Class 3 indicator would have incurred an

immediate increase in fees payable. Those premises

emitting a new Class 3 indicator would also have

incurred fee impacts once they were licensed to emit

the substance.

Total predicated fee increases arising from the re-

classification of Class 2 indicators to Class 3

indicators was in the order of $1.4 million. These

impacts would have been shared across

approximately 25 premises that are currently

permitted under licence to discharge these

substances to the atmosphere. The magnitude of

these impacts would have varied from premises to

premises with the greatest increase for an individual

premises predicted to be in the range of $400,000,

and the lowest increase less than $100.

In addition, there are approximately 28 current

licensees who emit more than 50kg/yr of at least

one of the new classified Class 3 indicators as a

component of their present Total Organic Carbon

(TOC) or Volatile Organic Compound (VOC)

emissions (Appendix 2). Data derived from the

National Pollutant Inventory (NPI) and Port Phillip

Region Inventory (PPRI) indicate that the total cost to

these licensees would have been approximately

$347,000.

There are approximately 18 licensed premises that

are not presently licensed to emit one or more of the

new Class 3 indicators. Data derived from the NPI

and PPRI indicate that the total cost to these

licensees would have been approximately $50,000.

Data derived from the NPI and PPRI show that there

are approximately nine unlicensed premises

operating within Victoria, which presently emit one

or more of the new class three indicators. Assuming

the data in the NPI and PPRI is accurate these

premises will be required to be licensed. Predicted

costs arising from this include costs involved in

applying for and obtaining a licence, including any

changes required to ensure the premises complies

64

with all licence conditions. In addition, licence fee

costs of $128,000 for each premises were predicted.

In summary, the annual fee costs due to the

proposed reclassification of class 3 indicators that

would have been incurred by industry under the

draft policy were $1,917,000.

During consultation on the draft policy, and the fees

regulations review being undertaken at the same

time, both PACIA and AiG raised concerns about the

implications of this, and queried if there could be

recognition of the need to plan and prepare for

changes under the policy. During discussions it was

agreed to amend the proposals and as a result the

fee impacts outlined above will not be incurred

immediately, and may not be incurred at all, by

licensees.

The Environment Protection (Fees) Regulations 2001

includes provision for a two-year period of fee relief

from the time the policy is made. This period will

provide premises with the opportunity to develop a

plan and investigate ways to reduce emissions,

thereby potentially reducing their eventual fee

impacts. In addition, the Regulations include

provision for licensees emitting the new Class 3

indicators to enter into a fee reduction agreement

with the Authority, thereby further reducing potential

fee impacts to their premises. It is anticipated that

in coming to such an agreement, a licensee would

be expected to meet its emission reduction plans.

EPA will be preparing an information bulletin that

will outline in more detail the requirements that will

be expected before a fee reduction agreement can

be finalised. EPA has committed to working with

PACIA and AiG on the development of this

information bulletin.

The provisions in the fees regulations providing fee

relief have been complemented by provisions in the

policy indicating that premises must prepare a plan

outlining what they intend to do to comply with the

policy upon classification of a substance as a Class

3 indicator for the first time.

In essence, the fee relief provided under the

regulations coupled with the potential for licensees

to enter into fee reduction agreements with EPA

means that there is every likelihood that only a

small proportion of this fee impact will actually

occur, say $250,000.

Existing licensees thought to be emitting new Class

3 indicators currently as a component of a TOC or

VOC emission will incur costs resulting from 12

months sampling and monitoring of VOC’s and or

TOC’s to determine exact emission levels of Class 3

indicators, so that licences can be amended

appropriately. A statutory declaration verifying these

results will also be required. For premises believed

to be emitting a new Class 3 indicator for which they

are not currently licensed in any capacity, may incur

costs relating to monitoring of appropriate stacks

under ‘normal operating conditions’ so that

appropriate emission levels for the new Class 3

indicators can be added to the licence. At about

$1000 per test analysis, the total cost to industry

will be about $30,000.

• Impacts Associated with Key Class 1 Indicators

Existing licensed premises that are major sources of

the Class 1 indicators carbon monoxide (CO),

nitrogen dioxide (NO2) and total suspended particles

(TSP) have been assessed by EPA to identify

whether emissions from their current operations are

likely to present any significant problems.

65

CO is usually emitted with oxides of nitrogen from

combustion sources at emission rates of the same

order of magnitude. NO2 emissions are typically only

about 10 per cent of total oxides of nitrogen

emissions, whereas the design criterion for CO is

over 100 times that for NO 2. Therefore for

combustion sources, NO2 is invariably going to be

the criterion of greater interest (if it is being

managed effectively, then CO should be).

Combustion sources are by far the largest sources of

NO2 (and CO). There are about 70 licensed sources

of oxides of nitrogen in Victoria with emission limits

of 50g/min or more. These larger sources are

dominated by the power stations, but there are

significant emissions from refineries and the

chemical, glass and steel industries.

Discussions held with the power stations indicate

that they do not believe that they will have any

significant problems in complying with the policy.

Assessment of significant sources in the chemical,

glass and steel industries indicates these plants

would not have difficulty complying with the policy

either. Similarly, the two refineries in Victoria are

expected to comply with the policy, based on

licensing and monitoring information currently

available.

Further emissions testing and modelling by some or

many of these premises would be desirable to

assess their performance in more detail.

• Total Suspended Particles, PM10, and PM2.5

About 60 sources are licensed to emit 10g/min or

more of total suspended particles (TSP). The largest

of these sources are the power stations, but they

also include refineries, and chemical, aluminium,

glass, cement and dairy product plants.

EPA has made an assessment of the likely impacts

of the policy for these premises, based on

emissions and licensing data, and recent testing

and modelling and believes that there is likely to be

no significant problems with management of

emissions of TSP, PM 10 and PM2.5.

• Impacts Associated with Key Class 2 Indicators

Only four new Class 2 indicators are introduced into

the policy (antimony, manganese and compounds,

methyl bromide, and wood dust has been divided

into hardwood and softwood), excluding PM2.5

(which is discussed above). EPA has investigated

whether there are major sources of either the new

indicators or 12 existing indicators with more

stringent design criteria, as a guide to assessing

whether there are likely to be any premises that will

be causing environmental problems that make

complying with the policy difficult.

Most of the organic substances in this group of 16

indicators do not have industrial uses or

applications with significant emissions in Victoria.

EPA recognises that some of these substances may

be hidden behind licensed emissions of ‘total

organic compounds’ (TOC) or ‘volatile organic

compounds’ (VOC), as these often contain a mixture

of unknown organic substances. Further emissions

testing by selected licensees may help to

understand the components of their emissions in

more detail, and to help assess if there is any need

for further management of the emissions.

There is very little detailed information about

sources of respirable (that is, less than 2.5 micron in

aerodynamic diameter) wood dust. It is believed

that processes or activities that involve sawing,

cutting, shaping, sanding or other mechanical or

66

abrasive actions will generate at least some

quantities of very fine wood dust. No data is

currently available on the amounts of such

emissions from relevant industries in Victoria

(significant sources probably include sawmills,

joineries, and furniture, building and timber product

manufacturers).

It is also thought that management of emissions of

respirable wood dust is likely to be principally an

occupational health and safety issue, not an

external air environment issue. Techniques for

managing wood dust emissions are very simple and

readily available and affordable.

• Non-Industrial Sources

Although the above discussion only relates to

industrial sources of emissions the principles that

govern the proposed approaches to emissions

management are applicable to other types of

sources.

Continuous improvement and best practice should

be promoted in all areas of air quality management,

including the activities of public and private sector

organisations, the planning of our cities and towns,

the provision of infrastructure, the behaviour of

households, and the actions of individuals. For

example, in addition to industrial sources of

emissions, these principles can and should be

applied to:

• the design and production of a wide range of

goods and services, including motor vehicles

and other mobile sources of emissions,

equipment and appliances, and fuels, solvents

and other products which may produce

emissions;

• the activities of the financial, commercial and

retail sectors in developing, investing in,

marketing and selling goods and services which

may generate wastes and emissions;

• land use, transportation and energy policy and

planning; and

• domestic activities such as home heating,

personal transport, and the purchase and use of

goods and services.

As with the management of emissions from

industrial sources, the focus of these applications

should be to:

• avoid and then minimise wastes and emissions

wherever practicable;

• achieve continuous improvement in

environmental performance; and

• increase energy efficiency.

The various features of this approach are reflected in

the SEPP (Air Quality Management).

Not all sources of Class 3 indicators are managed

through EPA’s licensing and works approval system,

nor would it be efficient or cost-effective to deal with

all sources in this way. Benzene emissions, for

example, are emitted from motor vehicles and

service stations (as well as industry) as benzene is a

component of vehicle fuels. Licensing of large

numbers of these types of sources is obviously not

the most cost-effective approach.

In many cases, emissions of Class 3 indicators have

been managed, either directly or indirectly, through

other instruments such as regulations, best practice

environmental management guidelines or national

standards. This wide range of approaches is

67

expected to be appropriate for managing emissions

of non-stationary sources of Class 3 indicators into

the future as well.

For example, benzene emissions from motor

vehicles are a product of the benzene content of the

fuel. While an Australian Standard is currently the

mechanism by which benzene is limited in fuel (at a

level of 5 per cent), new national standards will be

introduced from 2006 limiting benzene to 1 per cent.

In the meantime, individual jurisdictions will have

the responsibility to set interim standards that help

protect air quality and help facilitate the transition

to the lower limits.

Also, national vehicle emission standards specified

in Commonwealth legislation limit the exhaust and

evaporative emissions of hydrocarbons (which

include benzene), and indirectly reduce vehicular

emissions of other Class 3 indicators such as

1,3-butadiene. New testing requirements for

evaporative emissions will be phased in, with new

emission standards, during the next five years. The

modified tests are expected to be up to 80 per cent

more stringent than the current evaporative tests.

The former SEPP specifically excluded petrol and

liquid mixtures containing 1 per cent or less of

benzene from classification as a Class 3 indicator.

As such, emissions from a variety of potentially

important sources in certain areas, such as fuel

storage tanks, may not have been licensed or

controlled to the appropriate level.

Key Points:

Clauses 18 to 23 set out the general requirements for managing emissions, particularly as they relate to industry.

These provisions will have significant environmental benefits through the avoidance and minimisation of

emissions, including greenhouse gases, and result in improvements in air quality. Benefits may also accrue from

the potential for increased production efficiency, and reduced costs for waste disposal, emissions management,

energy use and resource consumption. Emissions minimisation and air quality improvement will provide greater

opportunities for industrial development, and associated economic and social benefits.

In implementing these provisions EPA will work with existing premises to assess what, if any, work is required to

be done to upgrade performance, and develop a plan for staged compliance over a period of five years (which will

be negotiable depending on the pollutant in question). This will temper any costs associated with premises

upgrading to improve their environmental performance, as they will be able to build improvements into their

business investment cycles.

Implementation of the stringent emissions management requirements for the increased number of Class 3

indicators, will result in substantial benefits by minimising the health risks associated with exposure to these

extremely hazardous pollutants. The requirement to reduce emissions of Class 3 indicators to the ‘maximum

extent achievable’ will have additional benefits in comparison with the current requirement of ‘maximum extent

achievable by technology’, by emphasising a wider variety of techniques and practices for the management of

these indicators, rather than just expensive ‘end-of-pipe’ solutions.

68

The potential for costs being incurred to comply with this requirement may be reduced by the emphasis in the

policy on a wider range of management options than just technology, such as using risk assessment to evaluate

potential emissions and their impacts, and application of other management tools for implementation (for

example, the development of PEMs for the emissions management requirements in particular industries).

Some premises could incur costs, especially those that are currently causing environmental problems and are not

applying the appropriate level of emissions management. There will also be impacts for a small number of

currently licensed facilities, which will be required to upgrade their performance as they will be emitting

substances that have been classified as Class 3 indicators for the first time. However, the implications in terms of

increased fees for these premises will be deferred for a minimum of two years while they develop a plan to

implement the new requirement, and possibly longer if they enter into a fee reduction agreement with EPA.

Cost incurred to meet the requirements for emissions reduction to the maximum extent achievable will be heavily

dependent on the particular circumstances of the premises in question, and it is therefore not possible to

generalise about the impact. Case studies done for EPA indicate that technological measures to reduce emissions

may be required for some premises. However, these measures may be avoidable if cleaner production processes

(which the policy emphasises) are investigated and risk assessments are conducted to evaluate the real risk to

human health.

Management priorities, programs and measures for tackling the recognised new sources of Class 3 indicators will

be chosen to maximise effectiveness and efficiency, and to ensure that any adverse impacts are fairly distributed.

General Management of Air Quality

Clause 24: Monitoring of Air Quality

Clause 24 commits EPA to monitor regional air

quality in accordance with the SEPP (AAQ) and for

other purposes, and allows EPA to initiate or

undertake research or other investigations into

regional air pollution. This clause reflects current

policy, as expressed in both the SEPP (AQM) and

SEPP (AAQ), and existing practice, and no additional

impacts are created by these provisions.

Clause 25: Air Quality Research

Clause 25 commits EPA to encourage, coordinate

and monitor research into air pollution and its

impacts, in conjunction with others as appropriate.

This continues existing practices and no additional

impacts are created by the provisions.

Clause 26: Emergency Abatement Plan

Clause 26 essentially restates the emergency

abatement provisions of Clause 41 of the former

SEPP (Air Quality Management).

It requires EPA to develop, in conjunction with

stakeholders, a plan to be implemented in the event

of an air quality emergency. An air quality

emergency is triggered by the exceedence of alert

levels for a few selected air quality indicators. These

alert levels were previously specified in Schedule I

to the policy and will be specified in a schedule to

the new policy in the future as well. The current alert

levels are being carried forward without change.

This provision will establish a clear plan for the

action to be taken in the event of an air quality

emergency.

69

Key Points:

Clauses 24 to 26 set out the requirements relating to

activity that generally supports air quality

management, including the monitoring of air quality,

research into air quality and planning for air quality

emergencies.

These provisions will enable better management of

air quality to take place through the generation of

better information and planning.

These provisions make no substantive changes to

current policy or practice.

Management of Local Air Quality

Clauses 27 and 28 describe the proposed policy

approach to managing local air quality.

Clause 27: Local Air Quality Management

Clause 27 requires the application by EPA and

planning authorities of protocols for environmental

management on best practice environmental

management, separation distances (where

appropriate) and dispersion modelling in assessing

new development proposals, and provides for the

protection of local amenity from offensive odours

and other emissions. These provisions are

consistent with current policy and practice, although

the existing EPA guidelines on separation distances

are currently under review. Clause 27(2) will ensure

that planning authorities will give consideration to

the PEM for separation distances once it is finalised

when assessing proposed development locations

such that encroachment of sensitive uses within

appropriate separation distances of industry will be

prevented.

Clause 27(4) indicates that the EPA will work with

stakeholders to ensure that the amenity of local

communities is protected from emissions of

offensive odours, dust and other pollutants.

Odour management

The management of offensive odours is a major

issue for premises that generate emissions that may

cause offence, and the people in communities that

are affected by those emissions. This was confirmed

during consultation and through submissions on the

draft SEPP.

In the past, EPA has managed issues relating to

offensive odour by the application of stringent

design criteria for new sources of odorous

emissions, and by working with odorous industries

and local communities to resolve odour problems

from existing sites. This will not change, however

there have been some changes in the policy to

clarify EPA’s position and to bring more confidence

that odour problems will be minimised.

A number of Class 2 air quality indicators are

classified according to their odorous properties.

Each of these chemical substances has its own

odour characteristics and known odour threshold.

The design criteria for class 2 indicators in the

former SEPP (Air Quality Management) are based on

these odour detection thresholds, where they are

more stringent than the toxicity threshold. It is

proposed to roll over these design criteria from the

former SEPP (Air Quality Management) for an interim

period as no odour detection threshold data based

on a single odour measurement method is available

in the literature. EPA Victoria proposes to derive

new odour detection thresholds for these indicators

using the Australian Standard method for odour

measurement (AS4323.3) and incorporate these in

the policy within two to three years.

70

In the new policy, Class 2 indicators have been

divided into Class 2 toxicity and Class 2 odour

indicators for purposes of clarity, where Class 2

odour indicators have design criteria based on the

odour thresholds of each individual substance.

Odorous emissions may also arise from the

presence of a mixture of unidentified substances

(such as those from sewage treatment farms and

intensive animal industries) in the emissions. These

emissions of general odour are not usually

hazardous and are defined in the SEPP (Air Quality

Management) as unclassified air quality indicators

of local amenity and aesthetic enjoyment of the air

environment. A design criterion of the odour

detection threshold (one odour unit) has been

retained for general odours based on protection of

amenity.

EPA recognises the importance of flexibility in

managing issues relating to odour, as there are

many factors involved that may vary significantly

from one situation to another. The new policy spells

out more clearly the use of risk assessment where

design criteria cannot be met to allow special

circumstances to be considered on a case by case

basis. An example of such a risk assessment

approach that has led to a different set of criteria for

odour from broiler farms is given in the Victorian

Code for Broiler Farms published in September

2001. The code includes a number of risk

minimisation and mitigation strategies that will

ensure that the beneficial uses of the environment

will be protected.

For industries involving intensive animal husbandry,

an integrated set of criteria may be applied to

ensure the beneficial uses of the environment are

protected. The provisions for the design of new

intensive animal farming premises set out in the

Victorian Code for Broiler Farms have been written

into Schedule A of the policy.

The Australian Standard method for odour

measurement was published in September 2001.

This method includes good quality control, and

trials have shown a significant increase in the

reproduction of results. The new method is

somewhat more sensitive than the B2 method that

has been used by EPA Victoria for a number of years,

but comparisons between the two methods indicate

that the upper confidence limit of both methods is

the same.

EPA has adopted the new method, although there

will be an interim period where both methods are

acceptable to facilitate the changeover. As noted

above, EPA is taking this opportunity to derive a set

of odour threshold based on one measurement

method. This work is expected to be complete within

two years, at which time Schedule A will be revised

to amend the design criteria.

Measurements of odour levels in ambient air still

have a high level of uncertainty, therefore EPA will

continue to use complaints of offensive odour as a

guide to sources of odour.

Clauses 27 (5) and 27 (6) reflect the new approach

for the assessment and improvement of

neighbourhood environmental quality recently

introduced into the Environment Protection Act 1970

- Neighbourhood Environment Improvement Plans.

The implementation of this approach, including the

initiation of air quality measurements that will be

assessed against intervention levels, is currently

being worked through in a series of pilot NEIPs.

71

These proposals are an extension of EPA’s current

philosophy and approach to the cooperative

management and resolution of local air quality

issues and problems, and recognise the importance

of involving all stakeholders in these endeavours.

The actions and measures required to resolve local

air quality problems should be more effectively

harnessed with this approach, and there will be

considerable benefits in more directly involving

affected communities in the development and

implementation of NEIPs. Under these proposals,

protection agencies may be required to play a

greater role in coordinating the development of

NEIPs, and implementing them through agreements

with other stakeholders and through their own

powers and instruments.

NEIPs will not be used to target individual premises,

such as a factory emitting a specific substance or a

farm generating dust. EPA Victoria will continue to

work with premises with environmental problems on

a case by case basis.

Clause 28: Modelling of Emissions

Clause 28 allows EPA Victoria to require a generator

of emissions to air to model those emissions.

Modelling of emissions is used during the design

phase of a new source to estimate the potential

impact of the proposal for assessment against

design criteria. EPA Victoria may require modelling

of emissions from existing sources to assist with

risk assessments associated with site activities, and

as an aid in determining the most effective means of

reducing emissions. This clause reflects current

policy and practice for modelling emissions to air.

Key Points:

Clause 27 reflects the NEIP provisions now in the Environment Protection Act 1970 and will provide benefits in the

form of the more direct involvement of local communities and other stakeholders in local air quality improvement,

and a more formal, efficient and structured approach to the resolution of neighbourhood air quality problems.

EPA will continue to apply stringent design criteria to new sources of emissions to protect all residential

communities and sensitive land uses from offensive odours, both in country and metropolitan areas, and to help

avoid costly retrofitting or even relocation of premises that are not designed to adequately manage emissions.

EPA will also continue to manage problems from existing premises by responding to complaints and working with

the premises to negotiate a solution acceptable to all stakeholders. The new policy gives greater clarity to odour

issues, in particular by specifying the use of risk assessment where design criteria are not met.

Clause 28 reflects current practice for the modelling of emissions.

72

Management of Air Quality in Control Regions

Clauses 29 to 32 present the policy approach to

management of air quality in air quality control

regions.

Clause 29: Establishment of Air Quality Control

Regions

Clause 29 indicates a new process for establishing

Air Quality Control Regions. It is proposed that EPA

establish or amend these control regions by

publication in the Government Gazette.

In the original SEPP (The Air Environment) 1981, two

control regions were defined in a schedule to the

policy: the Port Phillip Control Region and the

Latrobe Valley Control Region. EPA will continue to

monitor and amend the boundaries of these regions

to ensure that all relevant sources of emissions are

included in the respective emissions inventories

and subsequent airshed modelling.

The boundary of the Port Phillip region has been

amended, as part of the current review process, to

reflect changes to municipal boundaries and the

expansion of urban development, as well as

improved knowledge of the atmospheric processes

characterising the Port Phillip airshed. In particular,

advice from airshed modelling experts from within

EPA and from CSIRO indicated that the region

needed to be enlarged to take into account the

dispersion of emissions from more distant sources,

including biogenic emissions from vegetation and

soils. The revised Port Phillip region reflects the

boundary chosen for the Port Phillip region air

emissions inventory (EPA 1998). The same region

was adopted as part of the Ambient Air NEPM

Monitoring Plan for Victoria, formally approved by

NEPC in February 2001.

The expansion of the Port Phillip Control Region

could result in new stationary sources that would

previously have been established outside the old

control region now being within the new region.

Schedule H in the former policy, which has been

carried through unamended, specifies emission

limits for new stationary sources in control regions

that will apply to any new sources in this area for the

first time. In practice however, it is considered that

any implications for industry would be minimal

because:

• the SEPP (Air Quality Management) now

requires ‘best practice’ across Victoria;

• the IWMP (Waste Minimisation) 1990 has

required the production of wastes to be

minimised since being introduced; and

• the provisions of Schedule H are old and new

technology and processes are now used as a

general guide when EPA sets licence

requirements.

During the next few years, the provisions of the

former Schedule H will be reviewed and updated as

appropriate. The distinction between control regions

and other parts of the State will most likely become

less relevant from the point of view of setting licence

limits.

EPA does not envisage the establishment of any

additional control regions at this stage. There are no

other implications or impacts of this Clause.

Clause 30: Air Quality Management in Control

Regions

Clause 30 allows EPA to require further reductions in

emissions (over and above those which may be

required by Clauses 18 and 19) for regional air

73

quality management purposes, and these

requirements may be defined in an Air Quality

Improvement Plan or a Protocol for Environmental

Management. Clause 20 is not mentioned because

no further reductions should be possible for Class 3

indicators that are subject to the MEA requirement.

The provision for emission reductions is very similar

to Clause 27 of the former SEPP (Air Quality

Management), except that the former clause related

to reductions greater than the emission limits in

Schedule G of the former SEPP (Air Quality

Management), rather than the continuous

improvement and best practice requirements of the

new policy. The outcome of using either of these

provisions would, however, effectively be the same,

as it is the size and scope of any emission

reductions that would determine the actual impacts.

There are no new impacts arising from these

provisions when compared with the previous

equivalent provisions in the former policy. The

clause enables action to be taken to improve or

maintain regional air quality in the event that there

are serious threats to it.

Clause 30 allows EPA to seek emissions offsets

before approving the development of large new

sources in control regions, a provision that was also

in the former policy. To accompany this, the clause

requires EPA to develop a Protocol for Environmental

Management for emissions offsets and emissions

trading to address situations where an air quality

indicator exceeds or is projected to exceed a

regional air quality objective for that indicator. This

PEM will clarify the circumstances when such offsets

and trading apply and the parameters within which

it may occur.

One requirement on the Authority is that in

considering any proposal for offsets or trading it

must be satisfied that the generator of emissions is

complying with the policy and the proposal will

result in the best overall environmental outcome,

not a trade off of emissions from one segment of the

environment to another.

These provisions will provide clarity in requirements

under the policy for, and ensure the best overall

environmental outcome arising from, any emissions

offsets or trading.

Clause 31: Air Quality Improvement Plans for Control

Regions

Clause 31 provides for the development of Air

Quality Improvement Plans for control regions, for

which an equivalent provision exists in Clause 18 of

the former SEPP (AQM) in the form of ‘management

programs’ for control regions. Although greater

detail of the purpose and means of implementation

of the improvement plans are provided in the policy,

which should improve co-ordination of strategies for

improving air quality, there is no substantive

difference between the former and new policies in

the potential impacts of these provisions.

Clause 32: Air Quality Forecasting and Reporting

Clause 32 builds on the provisions of Clauses 48

and 49 of the former SEPP (AQM). It requires EPA to

make and issue forecasts of regional air quality,

whereas the former SEPP (AQM) merely requires the

investigation of predictive methods. This clause also

commits EPA to provide information and issue

reports on air quality to the general public (as in the

current policy), and to advise the community on

ways in which they can minimise their impacts on

air quality. As this clause is consistent with the

74

existing policy and conforms with EPA’s current

activities and practices, no new impacts will arise.

Key Points:

Clauses 29 to 32 establish the framework for

managing air quality on a regional basis, through

the establishment of air quality control regions, the

development of air quality improvement plans,

provisions for managing emissions on a regional

basis, and through the forecasting and reporting of

air quality.

These provisions will have no additional impacts

when compared with current policy and practice.

Management of Global Issues

Clauses 33 and 34 address the need to manage

emissions that may have global environmental

impacts.

Clause 33: Management of Greenhouse Gases

Clause 33 provides for the development of a

comprehensive strategy to manage emissions of

greenhouse gases, and requires generators of these

emissions to manage them in accordance with the

policy principles and Clauses 15 and 16.

This will require applicants for works approvals to

demonstrate that they have considered both

emissions management and energy efficiency in

developing their proposals and preparing their

applications. They will also be encouraged to

consider the greenhouse implications of their

resource inputs and production processes, and the

downstream impacts of their products, under the

product stewardship principle. Existing licence

holders will also be required to examine their

processes for opportunities to improve energy

efficiency and reduce their greenhouse gas

emissions.

EPA has developed a Protocol for Environmental

Management (Greenhouse Gas Emissions and

Energy Efficiency in Industry) to assist in

implementing these provisions through statutory

approvals and the assessment of development

proposals generally. The PEM provides guidance for

businesses to achieve compliance with the SEPP

(AQM), by giving practical application to its policy

principles and requirements as they relate to the

management of greenhouse gas emissions and

energy consumption. Existing licence holders whose

energy consumption results in greater than 100

tonnes of CO2–equivalent emissions per annum will

be required to conduct an energy audit and

implement energy efficiency improvements

identified by the audit that have a financial payback

period of up to three years. Energy efficiency and

greenhouse gas abatement will also be a key

consideration in the assessment of applications for

new works approvals with an estimated energy

consumption greater than 100 tonnes of CO2–

equivalent emissions per annum. Further detail

regarding actions to be taken by applicants and

existing licence holders is detailed in the PEM.

The inclusion of the management of greenhouse gas

emissions in the SEPP (AQM) for the first time has

occurred in response to growing international

concerns about the potential impacts of global

warming. The Third Assessment Report of the

Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change,

released early in 2001, stated there is new evidence

that most of the warming that has occurred during

the last 50 years is attributable to human activities.

75

In November 1998 the Commonwealth and all State

and Territory Governments endorsed a new National

Greenhouse Strategy (NGS). This strategy is the

primary mechanism for meeting Australia’s

international commitments on this matter. To build

on commitments under the NGS, the Victorian

Government is currently developing a

comprehensive greenhouse strategy. This strategy

will review actions already under way, strengthen

implementation of NGS commitments and identify

opportunities for further action to achieve emission

reductions across all activities and sectors and of

the community.

The Victorian Greenhouse Strategy (VGS) Discussion

Paper (released in August 2000) set out the

Government’s commitment to introduce a

requirement for greenhouse and energy issues to be

considered as part of applications for EPA works

approvals and licences, noting that this would be

implemented as part of the revision of the SEPP

(AQM). The inclusion of the management of

greenhouse gas emissions into the SEPP (AQM) is

one of the key actions under the proposed VGS to

address greenhouse gas emissions from industry.

This initiative has been closely integrated with other

measures currently being considered as part of the

development of the VGS.

There are potential benefits for businesses that

introduce technologies and improved production

processes to improve their energy efficiency and

reduce greenhouse gas emissions, while achieving

benefits for the environment.

A reduction in emissions will contribute to Victoria’s

and Australia’s efforts towards greenhouse gas

abatement. Work commissioned through the

development of the VGS estimated that this policy

proposal would result in an average saving of

between 788 kilo-tonnes and 3283 kilo-tonnes of

CO2 emissions per year, during the period 2008-12.

The range reflects a low and high scenario

calculated based on different assumptions for

energy consumption and energy savings achieved

being between 5 and 20 per cent. Other

environmental benefits may be associated with this

proposal and improvement in energy efficiency may

often result in reductions of inputs and other wastes

and emissions generated.

Much of the emissions savings predicted will be as

a result of improvements in energy efficiency and a

reduction of energy consumption. It is therefore

evident that financial savings will also result from

this policy proposal, despite the costs associated

with undertaking work required to comply with the

policy. Work commissioned by EPA found that the

benefits to applicants and existing licensees of

considering their energy efficiency and greenhouse

gas emissions significantly outweigh the costs. The

impacts for applicants and existing licence holders

are set out below.

New Applicants

For new applicants, the analysis estimated the cost

of documenting the information required per

significant works approval at $3,500 and $2000 for

smaller works. This equates to a total direct cost to

industry of $185,000 per year, based on the average

number of works approvals processed per year. The

analysis did not include costs for reviewing or

changing designs to improve energy efficiency or for

making other changes in accordance with the waste

hierarchy, during project development.

76

Attention to energy efficiency in the design stage for

new or modified facilities is the most cost-effective

time to incorporate technologies and practices to

minimise energy consumption and greenhouse

emissions. Expenditure on this activity will

generally pay for itself many times over in a short

period. Estimates from Sustainable Solutions

suggest that efficiency gains of up to 60 per cent

can be obtained with reasonable payback periods.

Existing licence holders

The impacts vary for existing licence holders,

depending on the level of action already taken, the

type of activity, and the level of energy usage. The

analysis categorised the 1117 current EPA licence

holders into 4 categories:

Group A: licence holders already meeting

requirements;

Group B: general industry including waste storage

(of which Group A is a subset);

Group C: landfill operators; and

Group D: sewage, sludge effluent, sludge disposal

and livestock saleyards.

The analysis estimated that 140 licence holders

were already undertaking significant measures that

would meet the requirements of the SEPP (AQM) to

improve energy efficiency and reduce greenhouse

gas emissions through commitments made under

the Commonwealth’s Greenhouse Challenge

program or the Sustainable Energy Authority’s

Energy Smart Business programs. It is therefore

likely that Group A would experience no additional

cost but would achieve ongoing savings as a result

of the policy proposal.

Group B includes all manufacturing processing

works but not landfills, sewage, sludge disposal or

livestock yards. This amounted to 524 licences of

which 140 are considered to already meet the

requirements (Group A). Costs estimated for this

group are based on business undertaking an energy

audit, estimating greenhouse gas emissions,

developing an action plan to reduce emissions and

reporting requirements. Costs are estimated at

$10,000 for the audit, plan and report per licence,

equating to $3.8 million for Victorian industry. The

analysis commissioned by EPA indicated that as a

result of acting on plans developed, licence holders

in Group B will easily recoup these costs in energy

savings, generally in much less than a year, and

often in several months.

A report1 of opportunities for energy savings with

paybacks of less than three years in the plastics and

chemicals industries in Australia in 1999/2000,

involving 23 mid to small sizes operations,

identified opportunities to save 13 per cent overall

on energy costs, amounting to $3 million per year.

The associated greenhouse reductions were 13 per

cent, equivalent to 65,000 tonnes per year of CO 2.

The savings concentrated on better utilisation of

existing services, such as steam, air, water, heating

and cooling, and lighting, on service upgrades and

on replacing or modifying inefficient equipment

such as pumps, fans and electric motors rather than

process improvements. Any process improvements

available would generally represent additional

1 Greenhouse Gas Reduction and Energy Efficiency in the Australian Plastics and Chemicals Industries, Lindsay Rex for Plastics and Chemicals Industries Association, CASANZ Clean Air and Environment Conference, Sydney, November 2000.

77

energy efficiency opportunities. Subsequent studies

at more than 20 additional chemicals and plastics

manufacturing sites in 2000/2001 have produced

similar results.

The analysis commissioned by EPA assumed that

around half of the opportunities identified above,

for example 6 per cent, will be achieved in one to

three years for the 381 Group B licence holders.

Individual licence holder’s annual energy savings

might range from 3 per cent to 20 per cent during

three years of ongoing effort, which is equivalent to

the assumptions made under the VGS analysis.

Table 1 sets out energy cost savings likely to be

available to Group B sites, with paybacks of less

than three years. Many of the opportunities

identified would in fact have paybacks of less than

one year. For smaller sites, shorter-term annual

savings of 7 per cent per year and medium term of

12 per cent are assumed. For medium size and

larger sites, lesser figures are assumed as larger

operations do not generally have the same potential

in percentage terms as smaller sites.

Table 1: Energy Cost Savings Achievable by Group B Sites *

Site Size Small Medium Larger

Annual Energy Cost $100,000 $500,000 $3,000,000

Cost SEPP Proposal (once off)

$5,000 $10,000 $18,000

Period (years) 1 – 3 3 – 5 1 – 3 3 – 5 1 – 3 3 – 5

Annual Energy Cost Savings

7% 12% 6% 11% 5% 10%

Annual Energy Cost Savings

$7,000 $12,000 $30,000 $55,000 $150,000 $300,000

* Cost savings shown are expected to be available with a three-year maximum payback.

As Group C premises are low or almost zero energy

users, opportunities for energy efficiency

improvements are limited. However significant

levels of methane, a powerful greenhouse gas, are

produced by landfills. Estimation of methane

emissions from landfills is usually done by a

desktop study combined with surface flux testing

through to methane testing from bores distributed

around a site.

There are a total of 122 licence holders in this group.

Of these an estimated 30 sites have already

estimated greenhouse emissions and some of these

have energy recovery systems operating. This

leaves an estimated 90 sites. Costs are estimated at

approximately $10,000 per site for methane

emissions. Individual site costs will vary greatly

depending on the certainty and type of information

available on the landfills and thus the estimating

methods employed.

There is potential to generate energy from methane

captured, and therefore generate a financial return

from methane recovery systems. However, the

78

analysis commissioned by EPA did not estimate

costs for developing plans to reduce these

emissions or of the possible returns from such

plans. If methane is recovered and simply burnt,

greenhouse emissions would be reduced but there

would be no financial return.

Group D includes large sewage treatment works to

small septic systems and the sludge disposal.

Except for a small number of larger sewage

treatment works, energy consumption by this group

is negligible and thus overall there is not a

significant opportunity for energy and greenhouse

gas reduction. Many of these sites are likely to fall

below the energy threshold requiring action. Some

opportunities may exist for reduced greenhouse

emissions through energy recovery by burning

methane. There are a total of 502 licensees in this

group.

Energy Management Case Study

Inghams Enterprises processes many products including frozen chicken and turkey, fresh and frozen duck and

oven ready snacks. From humble beginnings in the 1920s, Inghams is now a multi-million dollar organisation.

The Somerville plant of Inghams Enterprises Pty Ltd has installed an innovative refrigeration control system,

which has led to significant energy and financial savings. This new system monitors and fine tunes refrigeration,

matching the amount of energy required to the load by optimising refrigeration temperatures and pressures.

Inghams has also developed an Energy Management System.

Installation of this new refrigeration control system and energy management system has led to significant energy

savings of 966 MWh/annum, 1340 tonnes of CO2/annum, and financial savings of $38,000/annum. Total project

cost was $61,800, with a payback period of 1.6 years.

Greenhouse Best Practice Case Study

For most enterprises, the key to greenhouse best practice will be energy efficiency. Australian Vinyls Corporation

won the 2001 Energy Smart Best Manufacturer Award for introducing best practice energy efficiency measures at

its Laverton and Altona sites. Measures such as optimising compressed air operations, upgrading heat recovery

equipment and improving boiler efficiency have resulted in Australian Vinyls saving more than 14,000 tonnes of

carbon dioxide and $540,000 each year.

Clause 34: Management of Ozone-Depleting

Substances

Clause 34 incorporates the current Victorian

approach to the management of ozone-depleting

substances, including the development of national

approaches and the establishment of controls in

Victoria over the supply, handling, sale and use of

these substances. The inclusion of this clause in the

79

policy, which simply recognises the current

approach and practice, generates no new impacts.

Measures have been under way, both internationally

and at the State and Commonwealth level, for a

number of years to address ozone-depleting

substances (ODSs). This clause requires compliance

with policies already in place and any developed in

the future.

At the international level, the 1985 Vienna

Convention for the Protection of the Ozone Layer was

established after a decade of comprehensive and

intensive scientific research into the causes and

effects of ozone layer depletion. The 1987 Montreal

Protocol on Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer

provided a detailed framework to implement

commitments under the Convention. The Protocol

currently covers halons, chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs),

carbon tetrachloride, methyl chloroform,

hydrobromofluorocarbons,

hydrochlorofluorocarbons and methyl bromide.

In 1989 a National Strategy for Ozone Protection was

endorsed by Australian Governments and the

Government of New Zealand. The strategy provides a

framework to enable Australia to meet its

international obligations under the Montreal

Protocol. Under the framework, the Commonwealth

Government is primarily responsible for the supply

and consumption of ODSs through import, export

and manufacture controls. The State and Territory

governments are responsible for measures to reduce

consumption and emissions of ODSs through

controls on the sale and use of these substances.

In order to minimise the risks of ODSs, specific

management requirements are necessary to ensure

that release of these substances to the atmosphere

are avoided by improved management practices and

the adoption of alternatives. Implementation of the

National Strategy in Victoria has been achieved

through:

• the Environment Protection (Control of Ozone-

depleting Substances) Regulations 1989;

• the Environment Protection (Purchase and Sale

of Products containing Ozone-depleting

Substances) Regulations 1990; and

• the Industrial Waste Management Policy

(Control of Ozone-depleting Substances) 2001.

There is no direct impact associated with Clause 34

as it requires compliance with any policies or other

requirements for ODSs made under the Environment

Protection Act 1970. All policies developed under

the Environment Protection Act 1970 for the

management of ODSs have undergone or will

undergo a similar assessment of policy impacts

where the environmental, social and financial

benefits and costs to society are assessed.

80

Key Points:

Clauses 33 and 34 introduce provisions for the management of greenhouse gases and ozone-depleting

substances into the statutory framework for managing emissions to the air environment for the first time.

The benefits of the new policy approach to the management of greenhouse gases and energy efficiency are

expected to be significant. A reduction in CO2 emissions between 788 and 3283 kilo-tonnes per annum has been

predicted as a result of the new policy provisions. This is a significant benefit to the environment, contributing to

Victoria’s efforts to address climate change. Benefits are also expected to arise for many developers of new

industrial facilities by focusing on energy efficient solutions, with efficiency gains of up 60 per cent possible when

designing new facilities.

The approach of the policy implementation for existing facilities will be to promote the benefits of cost-effective

actions that improve energy efficiency and respond in ways that strengthen their long-term business

sustainability. It is expected that only beneficial impacts will occur.

No new adverse impacts will arise from the implementation of Clause 33 or 34.

Management of Diffuse Sources of Emissions

Clause 35: Management of Motor Vehicles and Fuels

Clause 35 addresses a number of issues relating to

emissions from motor vehicles.

A comprehensive approach to the control of

emissions from motor vehicles requires action in

three general areas:

• the emissions performance of new motor

vehicles – how the design and development of

new motor vehicles, particularly with respect to

their propulsion, emission control and fuel

technology, can reduce emissions;

• the in-service emissions performance of motor

vehicles – how motor vehicle owners and

operators, and the industry that services them,

can reduce emissions through better driving,

maintenance and repair of motor vehicles; and

• the overall level of motor vehicle use – how the

demand for travel by motor vehicle, and hence

level of emissions from motor vehicles, can be

influenced by such things as integrated

transport and land use planning, the

development of alternative modes of travel,

demand management tools and the

implementation of new technologies that

facilitate more effective travel (for example,

intelligent transport systems) or reduce the

need to travel (for example, telecommuting).

The various parts of Clause 35 specifically address

elements of each of these points.

Clause 35(1) reinforces Victoria’s commitment to

national emission standards and design

requirements for new motor vehicles.

Clause 35(2) also reinforces commitments to

national requirements with respect to fuel

81

composition and quality, but also provides for

agreement to be reached between the Authority and

producers and marketers of fuels to additional

initiatives in Victoria, such as reductions in fuel

vapour pressure in summer to reduce evaporative

emissions.

Clause 35(3) simply extends the motor vehicles

emissions assessment approach in the existing

policy to reflect the current approach to

environmental assessment, which is to consider it

over whole-of-life. It also explicitly includes

emissions of greenhouse gases through the

reference to energy efficiency.

Clause 35(4) provides for action in a number of

areas relating to the use and in-service performance

of motor vehicles. Parts (a), (b) and (c) cover the

development of information campaigns and courses

that provide information to, and develop the skills

of, motorists and those in the motor vehicle

maintenance and repair industry to enable them to

drive, service and repair motor vehicles in a way that

reduces emissions. Part (d) commits EPA to

developing programs for monitoring emissions from

motor vehicles and enforcing statutory requirements

for those emissions. This includes the investigation

of new technologies for detecting emissions from

motor vehicles while in use on the road. Part (f)

commits EPA to assessing the viability of inspection

and maintenance programs for motor vehicles.

Clause 35(5) provides for coordinated planning and

action within the Government of Victoria, and in

conjunction with other stakeholders, to ensure that

options to influence the level of motor vehicle use,

and hence emissions, are explored and, where

appropriate, implemented. Part (c) commits EPA to

promoting alternatives to the motor vehicle, such as

public transport, cycling, walking and

telecommuting.

Clause 35(6) commits EPA to a role in facilitating the

uptake of new fuels and transport technologies that

have environmental and energy efficiency benefits.

This includes new motor vehicle propulsion

systems, new fuels and new transport technologies

such as intelligent transport systems.

The previous SEPP (Air Quality Management)

contained a suite of policy clauses relating to motor

vehicle emissions that were outdated in their

content, focus and approach. There have been

significant changes in the national mechanisms and

arrangements for developing and introducing new

vehicle emissions standards, and new national

bodies (such as NEPC, NRTC and MVEC) with key

responsibilities in this area have been formed. A

new program has been established by the

Commonwealth Government for the adoption of

European motor vehicle emission standards leading

up to 2008. This will bring Australia into line with

Europe and North America.

There have also been some significant

developments in the types of issues relating to

motor vehicle emissions. For example, due to the

introduction of unleaded petrol and reductions in

the amount of lead in leaded petrol, lead emissions

have been drastically reduced and hence, this is no

longer a key issue. Sales of leaded fuels actually

ceased in Victoria in 2001. While the core issues of

new vehicle emissions performance and the

composition and quality of fuels and in-service

emissions performance of motor vehicles remain as

important as ever, the focus of efforts to manage

82

emissions from motor vehicles has expanded

towards areas such as travel demand management

and driver behaviour. The issue of greenhouse gas

emissions has also risen to prominence, hence the

need to consider greenhouse gases as well as

emissions of traditional air pollutants.

With the introduction of European motor vehicle

emission control standards now a firm commitment

over the next decade, a key focus for Victoria in the

coming years will be to review the options for

improving the performance of in-service vehicles.

This work has already commenced under the Port

Phillip Region AQIP. Regular servicing of motor

vehicles has a variety of benefits in addition to

emissions reduction, including reduced fuel

consumption costs and increased vehicle reliability.

Minimising emissions through travel demand

management requires inter-agency coordination to

ensure that strategic transport and land use plans

take account of air quality outcomes. This applies to

strategic planning at a metropolitan-wide level (the

Metropolitan Strategy is currently being developed

by DOI) as well as regional and local-scale planning.

The provisions of Clause 35 are not expected to

result in any significant new costs. Clauses 35(1)

and (2) reflect current policy and practice largely

developed in the national arena, while 35(3) simply

develops part of the approach in the existing policy

to reflect our current perspective on assessment of

vehicle types.

Clause 35(4) proposes a range of measures to

manage in-service vehicle emissions. The

development of training courses and information

campaigns relating to vehicle maintenance would

be undertaken within current agency budget

provisions and would be expected to have only

positive impacts.

Working cooperatively with other agencies to

develop land use and transport strategies to reduce

car dependency and promote alternatives to the

motor vehicle, will generally have positive impacts.

The Department of Infrastructure (DOI) is the lead

agency for this work, which is being coordinated

through development of strategic land use and

transport plans such as the Metropolitan Strategy.

The provisions of clause 35(5) seek to ensure that air

quality is factored into planning and decision-

making.

Clause 35(6) in itself will not result in any new costs

or impacts on external stakeholders. To a large

extent, monitoring of new technology and

facilitating its uptake in Victoria will be part of

national programs. Alternative fuels are currently

being assessed in terms of energy efficiency and air

quality under the Victorian Greenhouse Strategy.

Clause 36: Management of Other Mobile Sources

Clause 36 commits EPA to support efforts at the

national and, where appropriate, international level

to control emissions from mobile sources other than

motor vehicles, including aircraft, ships and

locomotives.

Mobile sources such as aircraft, ships and diesel

locomotives are not nearly as significant as motor

vehicles in terms of their contribution to overall

emissions. However, contributions from ships and

jet aircraft are increasing. Emission standards for

ships and aircraft are set internationally. If

emissions standards were to be set for diesel

locomotives, this would need to be coordinated

nationally.

83

There are no new impacts from this provision.

Clause 37: Management of Prescribed Burning

Clause 37 provides for the development, in

consultation with other agencies and stakeholders,

of protocols for environmental management and

other measures to manage the impacts of

prescribed burning.

Prescribed burning is employed on private and public

land for fire protection, silvicultural, ecological and

agricultural purposes. This includes prescribed

burning by public authorities (such as the

Department of Natural Resources and Environment

and the Country Fire Authority), local government

and community based fire brigades as well as by

private land managers (for example, farmers and

forestry companies). Prescribed burning is

employed as an essential fire protection tool to help

reduce the risk of destructive bushfires, for post

harvesting re-establishment in agricultural or

forestry enterprises, and for maintaining the health,

vigor and diversity of natural ecosystems.

Fuel reduction burning is a very wide spread activity

in rural Victoria in summer and autumn, primarily to

achieve fire hazard reduction for farms, townships,

forests and parks. The smoke arising from this may

adversely affect air quality in urban and populated

regional areas, especially in autumn when fuel

reduction programs coincide with stable weather

patterns. The contribution from agricultural waste

burning at this time of the year is also significant.

About half of the annual fuel reduction activity for

fire prevention is undertaken during early to mid-

autumn in country areas by private landowners.

Smoke from burning can affect people’s amenity by

reducing visibility and in some situations may affect

the health of sensitive members of the population.

Concerns about the impacts of smoke arising from

fuel reduction burning, the burning of crop residues

and other burning activities were raised in

submissions and during consultation on the draft

SEPP, particularly in the north-east and south-east

of Victoria. The timing of prescribed burning was

also raised during consultation, as burning in early

autumn can coincide with the Easter holiday period.

Concerns about the impact this has on tourism in

areas affected by smoke were expressed. The

importance of fuel reduction burning to reducing the

risk of wildfires and the value of burning for

agricultural purposes were also raised during

consultation with communities.

NRE has published a Code of Fire Practice for Fire

Management on Public Land that establishes clear

planning, operational and environmental

requirements in relation to fire for the one-third of

Victoria that is public land. In addition, NRE is

developing sophisticated techniques for smoke

trajectory and dispersal modelling in cooperation

with the Bureau of Meteorology. This will assist in

predicting potential smoke impacts arising from

proposed burning operations.

The PEM process provides a collaborative

mechanism for identifying cost-effective steps to

minimise the impacts of prescribed burning on air

quality. EPA will work with stakeholders involved in

prescribed burning to scope the practicability of a

PEM, share knowledge, identify information needs

and develop practical options for better managing

the impacts of prescribed burning to improve air

quality without compromising safety from bushfires,

healthy eco-systems and important land

management objectives.

84

Measures to be considered in a PEM, and through

implementation mechanisms such as the Port

Phillip Region AQIP, include enhanced forecasting

and increased monitoring of air quality, better

communication with the public and more effective

liaison between the EPA and fire authorities to

identify days of high pollution potential during

periods of prescribed burning.

More information on the extent and type of

prescribed burning undertaken across Victoria,

together with data on emission characteristics, is

essential for formulating better management

options and building on existing arrangements and

developments in such areas as air quality prediction

and smoke modelling technology.

EPA will also work with the relevant organisations to

develop and promote practical alternatives to

prescribed burning where alternatives can

demonstrate equivalent benefits, and on ways of

increasing the capacity of land owners to make

informed decisions on prescribed burning to

minimise impacts on air quality.

Clause 38: Management of Waste Burning

Clause 38 addresses the burning of waste in the

open and in incinerators.

The policy states that the burning of waste in the

open must be conducted in accordance with council

local laws. In setting council local laws and

conditions set under those laws, a council must

have regard to the policy. The policy further states

that the burning of industrial waste in the open is

not permitted without written approval from EPA.

The burning of waste in the open purely for

convenience is inconsistent with the aims,

principles and intent of the policy. This is especially

so where practicable alternatives that emphasise

higher elements of the wastes hierarchy (for

example, recycling) are available. Even where a

waste cannot be recycled or put to another purpose,

disposal through appropriate waste management

options (such as taking it to a licensed landfill or

transfer station) is preferable to burning it in the

open in most instances. The open burning of waste

that does occur can cause air quality problems such

as creating a nuisance or reducing visibility.

In the Port Phillip Region, domestic waste burning is

now a less significant source of emissions than it

was in previous decades. Local councils have

banned domestic waste burning in much of

metropolitan Melbourne. A model by-law developed

by EPA formed the basis of many by-laws

implemented by municipalities. Domestic waste

burning that does occur is on the urban fringe and

rural hinterland, and is driven by fire hazard

reduction needs and the absence of waste

collection services.

Given the success municipalities have had in

controlling domestic waste burning in much of

metropolitan Melbourne, and the local

circumstances that often influence open burning, it

is appropriate to make more explicit the leading role

local councils have in making these decisions. Local

councils are in the best position to determine local

needs and aspirations in regard to this issue, and

monitor the implementation of any local controls.

This arrangement essentially makes explicit existing

settings, in which local councils are the main bodies

responsible for controlling the open burning of

85

waste. It will provide the flexibility for local

circumstances to be taken into account.

Industrial waste has great potential to contain

hazardous materials. It is inappropriate for

industrial waste to be burned in the open or in any

other way that has the potential to result in

hazardous emissions being generated, unless it is

carefully controlled. Having the ability for EPA to

control open burning of industrial waste provides

the safeguard the community needs that

inappropriate activity will not take place.

Clause 39: Management of Solid Fuel Heaters

Clause 39 proposes a management framework for

the manufacture, use and operation of solid fuel

heaters. It reinforces compliance with standards for

wood heaters manufactured and installed in Victoria

as specified by the Authority or made under the Act

through other statutory mechanisms.

The clause also outlines EPA’s intentions to

investigate measures, including incentives that will

discourage reliance on non-compliant domestic

solid fuel heaters and open fireplaces. EPA will also

encourage conversion from non-compliant wood

heaters to those that comply and are energy

efficient.

EPA also intends to conduct information and

education campaigns on the correct installation and

operation of wood heaters, the selection and

storage of fuel, and the potential impacts of wood

heaters on air quality.

The impact of wood combustion on air quality is a

significant issue. Domestic wood combustion

contributes about 60 per cent of PM10 emissions and

68 per cent of PM2.5 emissions in the Port Phillip

Region in the cooler months of the year. It also

contributes to emissions of other pollutants

including CO and a number of air toxics. EPA

received submissions confirming that the impact on

air quality of wood heating is an important issue for

the community, and receives complaints every year

over the cooler months about the impacts of smoke

from solid fuel heating, and requests to take further

action to manage emissions from this source.

Despite the adverse impacts of wood smoke and

support for restricting their use in submissions

received, the use of wood heaters is an important

and popular form of heating for the Victorian

community as it is relatively cheap and wood

heaters, if run correctly, are an efficient form of

heating. The Sustainable Energy Authority estimates

that wood heating costs $250 per annum, once the

wood heater is purchased, making it one of the

cheapest forms of heating.

Wood heaters compliant to AS/NZS 4013 have

markedly lower emission rates than non-compliant

wood heaters and open fires. EPA therefore intends

to develop an industrial waste management policy

for solid fuel heating (IWMP) that will require all

heaters manufactured to comply with the relevant

standards.

These provisions will help improve air quality

through education and incentive programs that are

aimed at improving operational practices, reducing

reliance on wood heaters and encouraging changes

to more efficient, less polluting sources of heat. This

should also reduce the burden on local councils

responding to complaints from residents about the

impacts of wood heaters in neighbouring homes.

With improved operating practices through

86

information and education campaigns, there should

be a reduction in the incidence of wood smoke

pollution and the resulting community complaints.

Clause 40: Management of Large Line and Area-

Based Sources of Emissions

Clause 40 provides for the development of protocols

for environmental management to assist in

assessing and managing the impact of emissions

from line and area-based sources, including roads

and mining operations. The PEM will identify the

types of assessment required to ensure that the

beneficial uses of the policy are protected. The PEM

will also set out relevant criteria for assessment of

such operations including design criteria and

approaches to modelling.

Some operations, such as road construction, are

transitory by nature (that is, they are not established

permanently in a location) and as such have special

characteristics. The provisions of Clause 40 require

these special characteristics to be taken into

account in the development of guidelines for putting

in place the best practicable measures to control

emissions.

There was strong support both from industry,

especially the mining industry, and other

government agencies for the development of PEMs

for these types of operations. A PEM for mining and

extractive industries will be developed in 2002 in

consultation with other government agencies, the

Victorian Chamber of Mines and Extractive

Industries Association. A PEM for the assessment of

new road proposals will also be developed in 2002.

Clause 40 should provide more certainty for

industries and activities in this category, and the

communities that these industries and activities

may impact on, by providing greater clarity as to

how the provisions of the policy will apply in their

circumstances.

Key Points:

Clause 35 sets out a comprehensive suite of provisions for managing emissions from motor vehicles. Many of the

measures in Clause 35 reflect and reinforce action that is being undertaken through national fora, such as NEPC

and NRTC. Other measures reflect and reinforce action that is being undertaken at the State level, such as the

development of the Metropolitan Strategy. The other measures relate to programs EPA is currently running or will

initiate.

With respect to the measures occurring in concert with established national and State activity, Clause 35 will have

no additional impacts. The measures to be implemented by EPA will have a variety of beneficial impacts,

including reduced vehicle emissions, improved reliability and, in particular, the decreased cost of running

passenger vehicles, and encouraging more efficient use of transport systems and infrastructure.

Clause 36 commits EPA to monitor and, where appropriate, support national and international measures for the

control of emissions from mobile sources other than motor vehicles.

Clause 37 provides for the introduction of cooperatives approaches to managing the impacts of prescribed

burning on air quality, without compromising the management objectives of prescribed burning. The cooperative

87

approach to the development of measures to manage the impacts will ensure that cost-effective solutions are

implemented.

Clause 38 reinforces the importance of council local laws in controlling the burning of waste in the open, which is

consistent with current practice that has proved effective in areas such as metropolitan Melbourne. More explicit

requirements for the control of the burning of industrial waste in the open will reduce the impact of this

unnecessary practice, although provision remains for EPA to enable it to occur.

Clause 39 will ensure that people who use domestic solid fuel heating are encouraged to use their heaters

correctly, upgrade to compliant wood heaters if possible and minimise the impact of their heating without

compromising their ability to heat their homes by the method of their choice.

Clause 40 will enable the means of assessing and managing the impacts of large line and area-based sources to

be worked out with stakeholders in a cost-effective manner.

PART IV – DEFINITIONS

This Part provides definitions and interpretations of

terms used in the draft policy, and has no direct

impacts.

4.2 State Environment Protection Policy

(Ambient Air Quality)

Three of the ambient air quality objectives in the

SEPP (Ambient Air Quality) have been reviewed

because they were incorporated in that policy

without review when it was declared in February

1999. These are the objective for visibility reducing

particles and the two 8-hour objectives for

photochemical oxidants (as ozone). Prior to the

declaration of this policy, these objectives were

contained in the SEPP (The Air Environment), and

have not been revised since that policy was made in

1981.

The other objectives in the SEPP (Ambient Air

Quality) are drawn from the 1998 National

Environment Protection Measure for Ambient Air

Quality, which was developed by Australian

Governments after a comprehensive review of the

issues and extensive consultation with

stakeholders.

Objective for visibility reducing particles

The current objective for visibility reducing particles

in the SEPP (Ambient Air Quality) is that local visual

distance should not fall below a one-hour average of

20km on more than three days per year. This

objective was established for aesthetic purposes

(that is, to protect the visual appearance of the

atmosphere), and not for health protection. The

SEPP (Ambient Air Quality) contains additional

health-based objectives for particles.

Local visual distance is determined by measuring

the light scattering characteristics of the air with an

instrument called a nephelometer. Monitoring data

for the Port Phillip Region reveals that this objective

was not met on more than 100 days per year during

the early 1980s, reducing to 20 to 40 days per year

during the 1990s.

88

Although its basis is necessarily subjective, the

impact of visibility reducing particles on people’s

amenity is the subject of complaints received by

EPA. Visibility is the primary means by which the

community judges whether or not air quality is good.

As such, this objective is still considered to be

appropriate and relevant to air quality in Victoria.

Also, given the improvement that has been

observed over the past decade and the expectation

of further reductions in future emissions of fine

particles, the objective would appear to be both

realistic and ultimately attainable.

This objective has been retained in the SEPP

(Ambient Air Quality) at the same value.

Objectives for photochemical oxidants

Air quality management for the purpose of

protecting vegetation has occurred but has tended

to be local in nature reflecting the emissions from

certain industrial processes (for example, fluoride).

In addition to the health based objectives, the 1981

SEPP (The Air Environment) included objectives for

ozone based on the protection of vegetation. Two 8-

hour average objectives (0.05 and 0.08 parts per

million) were established in the SEPP (The Air

Environment) under the original policy scheme of

Acceptable and Detrimental Levels for ambient air

quality indicators. Exceedances of three and zero

days per year respectively were allowed at these two

levels. The purpose of these objectives was to

protect vegetation from the adverse effects of

photochemical pollution.

The 8-hour objective of 0.08 parts per million (ppm)

is exceeded in the Port Phillip Region on 10 to 20

days per year, a situation that has not improved

much over the last decade.

1-hour objectives for photochemical oxidants were

established (also at Acceptable and Detrimental

Levels) in the original policy for the protection of

human health. However, following adoption of the

NEPM for Ambient Air Quality, the SEPP (Ambient Air

Quality) contains a 1-hour objective (0.10ppm) and a

4-hour objective (0.08ppm), both for health

protection. The goal associated with these

objectives is that by 2008 there will be no more than

one exceedence per year.

The 8-hour oxidant objectives retained from SEPP

(The Air Environment) have been reviewed to assess

whether they are still necessary and useful for the

protection of vegetation.

A detailed statistical analysis of 20 years of

historical monitoring data for Melbourne shows that,

whenever 4-hour average ozone levels exceed

0.08ppm or 1-hour levels exceed 0.10ppm, 8-hour

levels exceed 0.05ppm. A 4-hour level of 0.08ppm is

approximately equivalent to an 8-hour figure of

0.067ppm, while a 1-hour level of 0.10ppm is

equivalent to an 8-hour figure of about 0.07ppm.

In light of this, it would be appropriate to retain the

8-hour objective of 0.05ppm if it is still considered

relevant and necessary for vegetation protection.

However, this objective was adopted nearly two

decades ago and was based on findings from other

countries for types of vegetation that are now not

considered to be very relevant to the Australian

situation. Reliable data of more relevance to this

issue in Australia have not become available in the

intervening years.

89

As such, both objectives have been removed from

the SEPP (Ambient Air Quality), as they do not

provide a reliable or justifiable basis for protection

of Australian vegetation from photochemical

pollution in Victoria. If information becomes

available that is relevant to Australian vegetation

EPA will revisit this issue.

Assessment of the impacts of the policy variations

As the impact of reduced visibility on people’s

enjoyment of the environment is a source of

complaints received by EPA the objective for

visibility reducing particles will still be a useful and

relevant indicator of air quality for the community.

Measures to meet this objective are part of the

general program for air quality improvement, so

there are no specific costs associated with retaining

this objective.

Because of concerns about the relevance and

usefulness of the two objectives for protection of

vegetation, no strategies or programs have been

developed or implemented for this purpose in

Victoria. Therefore, there are no impacts envisaged

from the proposal to remove these objectives from

the SEPP.

90

5 S U M M A R Y O F I M P A C T S

The 1981 SEPP has helped to drive significant

improvements in air quality in Victoria during the

last 20 years. Despite these improvements, air

pollution is still of concern to many Victorians and

recent studies show that air pollution has an impact

on peoples’ health in Melbourne. The pressure on

our air environment is only expected to increase as

Victoria’s economy and population base continues

to grow, particularly in Melbourne and other major

urban centres.

In this context, the proposed variation to SEPP (Air

Quality Management) retains the successful general

approach of the 1981 SEPP and updates it in a

number of important ways to ensure continued

improvements in air quality in Victoria.

In particular, the proposed variations update the

1981 policy framework to ensure that air quality

management in Victoria reflects the:

• improved scientific information that has

become availa ble during the last 20 years,

including improved knowledge about the health

impacts of various pollutants;

• changes in industry practices during the last 20

years; and

• emergence of important global air quality

issues, such as global warming and ozone

depletion, that were little understood in 1981.

As explained in Chapter 4, there are a variety of

factors that affect the behaviour of people and

organisations that generate air pollutants. For

example, while in 1981 most companies may have

been solely motivated by a desire to comply with air

quality laws, many companies are now motivated by

a variety of factors to reduce air emissions. The

SEPP has been updated to recognise and capitalise

on the multiple factors that can drive air quality

improvements. Furthermore, the SEPP provides

considerable flexibility to manage air emissions

from a variety of sources on a case-by-case basis.

In impact assessment terms, this means that it is

not possible to cleanly attribute benefits and costs

to the SEPP variation. For example, EPA cannot

argue that all the benefits from reduced industrial

air emissions flows from the adoption of the SEPP.

Similarly, it is not possible to specify that all the

costs of industrial emission actions can be

attributed to the SEPP.

The summary of impacts table below provides an

overview of the key impacts of varying the SEPP (Air

Quality Management). The variation to SEPP

(Ambient Air Quality) will have no impacts as the two

8-hour ozone objectives for the protection of

vegetation that are being removed were based on

information that is no longer considered to be

relevant to Victoria.

91

BENEFITS COSTS

Reduced incidences of asthma, cardiovascular

disease and respiratory diseases.

Enhanced emphasis on diffuse (non-industrial)

sources of air emissions and improved mechanisms

for addressing diffuse sources of emissions, in

particular intervention levels for dealing with local

air quality ‘hot spots’.

Greenhouse gas emission reductions and financial

saving from consideration of energy efficiency in

works (ranging from $7,000 per annum for small

firms to $300,000 per annum for large firms and

savings of CO2 emissions of between 788 kilo-

tonnes and 3,283 kilo-tonnes).

Package of measures of $2.65 million to assist

industry to improve energy efficiency and reduce

greenhouse gas emissions.

New tools for industry such as Maximum Extent

Achievable (MEA) emissions control, protocols for

environmental management, and risk assessment

to help industry manage its emissions.

Improved management of Class 3 indicators (the

most hazardous pollutants - those that are

carcinogenic, mutagenic, teratogenic, highly toxic or

bioaccumulate).

A small number of premises are likely to incur costs

to improve their emissions management

performance. Costs will vary on a case-by-base

basis according to the specific emissions

management improvements required.

A smaller number of premises are likely to incur

costs (in the order of $1000) to assess their

emissions to check if they contain a new Class 3

indicator.

Increased EPA licence fees of approximately

$250,000 for class 3 indicators.