Original source · versioned page text
2 David Low Way - Attachment 6 - UXO Assessment - OPEC
Attached to the e-mail Reconfiguration of a Lot (1 lot into 6) - RAL17/0501.
OPEC - 2 David Low Highway, Castaways Beach
Rev 02 – AFU – 10 Aug 2017
BOZ Technical Services Pty Ltd
ABN 14 098 755 072
27 Robinson Place
Currumbin Waters, QLD 4223, Australia
Ph: +61-(0)7-5598-5062
Mobile:+61-(0)488-985062
E-mail: [email protected]
Limited EO/UXO Risk Assessment
2 David Low Highway
Castaways Beach, SE Qld
Client: OPEC Systems
Report Date: 04 Aug 2017
Report Status: Rev 01 – Approved For Use (AFU)
For use only in relation to the specified project
© 2017 Copyright BOZ Technical Services Pty Ltd Page 1 of 22
See the original
The page text is free to read. Viewing or downloading an original file needs an account.
Log in to see the originalSearchable page text hides email addresses. Original files are unchanged and may show email addresses.
Full text of the other 21 pages
Page 2
OPEC - 2 David Low Highway, Castaways Beach
Rev 02 – AFU – 10 Aug 2017
Revision History:
Date Rev Purpose Issued/Endorsed By:
st
04 Aug 2017 01 AFU – 1 Issue Ian Bullpitt, Director, BOZ Technical Services
10 Aug 2017 02 Changes to header & footer; minor Ian Bullpitt, Director, BOZ Technical Services
text changes
DISCLAIMERS & COPYRIGHT NOTICES:
While all reasonable care has been taken in compiling the information in this document, BOZ Technical Services has relied upon
information obtained from/provided by the Client, Third Parties and various external sources believed to be reliable. The information
provided within this document may also include subjective interpretations by BOZ Technical Services and should not be exclusively relied
upon for decisions. Accordingly, BOZ Technical Services gives no warranty as to the accuracy, correctness or completeness of the
information or advice in this document and, to the full extent allowed by law, excludes liability in contract, tort or otherwise, for any loss
or damage sustained by the user, or by any other person or company arising from or in connection with the supply or use of the whole or
any part of the information in this document through any cause whatsoever. Interested parties should make and rely upon independent
enquiries and investigations to satisfy themselves that the information supplied herein is true and correct. All other responsibilities
disclaimed.
This document is commercial-in-confidence for the exclusive use by the Client in relation to the specified Project and is not to be used for
any other purpose. No responsibility is accepted or undertaken to any third parties in relation to this document. Any such use by other
parties is expressly forbidden.
© 2017 Copyright BOZ Technical Services Pty Ltd. Reproduction without permission (other than by the Client) is expressly forbidden.
For use only in relation to the specified project
© 2017 Copyright BOZ Technical Services Pty Ltd Page 2 of 22
Page 3
OPEC - 2 David Low Highway, Castaways Beach
Rev 02 – AFU – 10 Aug 2017
Table of Contents
TERMINOLOGY, ACRONYMS & ABBREVIATIONS............................................................... 4
BACKGROUND ................................................................................................................. 6
Client Details ..................................................................................................................................... 6
Project Details ................................................................................................................................... 6
UXO Consultant ................................................................................................................................. 6
SITE & PROJECT DETAILS .................................................................................................. 7
EO/UXO ASSESSMENT – SCOPE & OBJECTIVES ................................................................. 7
METHODOLOGY .............................................................................................................. 8
Conduct of the Assessment .............................................................................................................. 8
HISTORICAL INFORMATION ............................................................................................. 9
Introduction ...................................................................................................................................... 9
Historical Military Activities .............................................................................................................. 9
WWII.......................................................................................................................................................................... 9
Post-WWII ............................................................................................................................................................... 10
EO/UXO Incidents ........................................................................................................................... 12
EO/UXO REMEDIATION ACTIVITIES ................................................................................ 12
Munitions ‘Clean-Ups’ Post-Firing .................................................................................................. 12
Planned EO/UXO Investigation/Remediation ................................................................................. 13
Agriculture, Construction, Bushfires, etc ........................................................................................ 13
SUMMARY – NATURE & EXTENT OF EO/UXO ................................................................. 14
Munitions Used and Found To Date ............................................................................................... 14
Quantity & Locations of Remnant Munitions ................................................................................. 16
RISK ASSESSMENT & MITIGATIONS ................................................................................ 16
EO/UXO Risk Management Process ................................................................................................ 16
Risk Assessment Matrix .................................................................................................................. 16
Generic UXO Risk Events & Consequences ..................................................................................... 17
Inherent (Unmitigated) Risk Ratings ............................................................................................... 18
Reduction of Risks - Mitigations/Controls ...................................................................................... 19
Mitigated Risk Ratings..................................................................................................................... 19
CONCLUSIONS & RECOMMENDATIONS.......................................................................... 20
Key Conclusions .............................................................................................................................. 21
Recommended Actions ................................................................................................................... 22
For use only in relation to the specified project
© 2017 Copyright BOZ Technical Services Pty Ltd Page 3 of 22
Page 4
OPEC - 2 David Low Highway, Castaways Beach
Rev 02 – AFU – 10 Aug 2017
TERMINOLOGY, ACRONYMS & ABBREVIATIONS
DoD/ADF Department of Defence (Australia)/Australian Defence Force
Munition A complete device charged with explosives, propellants, pyrotechnics, initiating composition,
or nuclear, biological or chemical material for use in military operations.
EO Explosive Ordnance: All munitions containing explosives or chemical agents. This includes
bombs and warheads; guided and ballistic missiles; artillery, mortar, rocket and small arms
ammunition; all mines, torpedoes, depth charges and demolition charges; pyrotechnics,
clusters and dispensers; cartridge and propellant actuated devices; electro‐explosive devices;
clandestine and improvised explosive devices; and all similar or related items or components
explosive in nature.
Inert munition A munition that contains no explosive, pyrotechnic, lachrymatory, radioactive, chemical,
biological or other toxic components or substances.
EOD Explosive Ordnance Disposal: The detection, identification, field evaluation, rendering safe
and final disposal of unexploded ordnance. It may also include the rendering safe and/or
disposal of explosive ordnance, which may have become hazardous by damage or
deterioration.
EOW Explosive Ordnance Waste: Inert material associated with munitions or inert remnant
material from the initiation or functioning of explosive ordnance.
SAA Small Arms Ammunition: all ammunition less than 20mm in calibre and all gauges of shotgun
cartridges.
UXO Unexploded Ordnance: Explosive ordnance that has been primed, fused, armed, or otherwise
prepared for action, and have been fired, dropped, launched, projected or placed in such a
manner as to constitute a hazard to operations, installation, personnel, or materiel but
remains unexploded either by malfunction, design, or any other cause. UXO includes items of
EO that have been removed from their original resting place for any reason, including
souveniring by members of the public.
AXO Abandoned Explosive Ordnance: Explosive ordnance that that has not been used, has been
left behind or dumped by a party, and which is no longer under control of the party that left it
behind or dumped it. Abandoned explosive ordnance may or may not have been primed,
1
fused, armed or otherwise prepared for use (Modified CCW protocol V )
UXO An operation designed to determine, assess and report on all or some of the
Assessment Following: 1. whether an area is affected by UXO; 2. the boundaries of the affected area;
Survey 3. the densities of UXO, including the locations and characteristics of impact areas, within the
affected area; and 4. the residual depths, types and natures of UXO and inert ordnance‐
related items within the affected area.
UXO An operation to reduce the hazards associated with UXO or other EO. UXO remediation may
Remediation be ‘complete’ (100% area search and all EO hazards removed to the maximum projectile
penetration depth) or ‘partial’ (area searched and EO hazards removed to a level that is
acceptable to the appropriate approving authority with regard to the planned use of the land)
UXO Hazard Partial UXO remediation – see previous item
Reduction
1
CCW - the 1980 Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons; Protocol V - Explosive Remnants of War (ERW)
For use only in relation to the specified project
© 2017 Copyright BOZ Technical Services Pty Ltd Page 4 of 22
Page 5
OPEC - 2 David Low Highway, Castaways Beach
Rev 02 – AFU – 10 Aug 2017
Risk Effect of uncertainty on objectives. A function of the probability of the occurrence of an event
and the consequence of that event.
Event Occurrence or change of a particular set of circumstances. Sometimes referred to as an
“incident” or “accident”. An event without consequences can also be referred to as a “near
miss”, “incident”, “near hit” or “close call”.
Incident/ Incident: an event that gives rise to an accident or has the potential to lead to an accident
2
Accident (HSE practitioners often refer to these as being ‘Near Misses’)
Accident: an undesired event which results in harm. (Note: Modified from definition in OHSAS
18001:1999)
Mitigation Risk treatment - process to modify risk. When used in relation to EOD/UXO: A feature that
reduces, limits, or controls the consequences of a munition.
ALARP Relates to management of risk to a point where it is ‘As Low As Reasonably Practicable’
(ALARP)
Qualitative Risk/Probability Terms Used in this Assessment
Defence Alternative
3
Phrase & Defence Description Probability
Score Phrase
Expected to occur in most circumstances.
Guide: Is expected to occur multiple times within a year or incident is clearly
Almost
imminent. Very High
Certain
For Safety Risks: There is significant exposure to the hazard and therefore it is
almost certain that the risk event will occur or incident is clearly imminent.
Probably occur in most circumstances.
Guide: Is expected to occur approximately once per year.
Likely High
For Safety Risks: There is regular exposure to the hazard and therefore, it is likely
that the risk event will occur.
Could occur at sometime.
Guide: Likely to occur approximately once every 5 years.
Possible Medium
For Safety Risks: There is periodic exposure to the hazard and therefore, it is
possible that the risk event will occur.
Not expected to occur.
Guide: Likely to occur approximately once every 5 – 10 years.
Unlikely Low
For Safety Risks: There is sporadic exposure to the hazard and therefore, it is
unlikely that the risk event will occur.
Exceptional circumstances only.
Guide: Likely to occur with less frequency than once every 10 years. Extremely
Rare
For Safety Risks: There is little or no exposure to the hazard and therefore, it is Low
rare that the risk event will occur.
2
IMAS 04.10, ‘Glossary of mine action terms, definitions and abbreviations’, 2nd Ed., Amdt 7, Aug 2014
3
SDD Risk Management Framework Aide Memoire; 7 SEP 2016 V16
For use only in relation to the specified project
© 2017 Copyright BOZ Technical Services Pty Ltd Page 5 of 22
Page 6
OPEC - 2 David Low Highway, Castaways Beach
Rev 02 – AFU – 10 Aug 2017
BACKGROUND
CLIENT DETAILS
Client/Principal: OPEC Systems, ABN 16 095 639 437
Client's Representative:
Principal's contact: Shayne Findlater, Defence Services
Address: 1319 Lytton Rd, Hemmant, QLD
Tel: +61 7 3390 6353
E-mail: [email protected]
PROJECT DETAILS
Name/Title: Private Development – Castaways Beach
Location: 2 David Low Highway Castaways Beach, SE Qld
(Lot 71, MCH2854, LGA 5740, Noosa Shire)
Project Status: Planning Stage
The Site is located within a former military live firing area used by Australian forces (and possibly US)
during WWII. Numerous items of explosive ordnance (EO) have been found near this area in the
past. The possible presence of EO or other military-related hazards is a potential threat to the
Client’s employees, contractors, fire fighters and end-users who may access or utilise the area as
well presenting possible financial, legal, etc risks to development works.
UXO CONSULTANT
Company: BOZ Technical Services Pty Ltd, ABN 14 098 755 972
Address: 27 Robinson Place, Currumbin Waters, Qld 4223
Tel: +61 07 5598 5062
E-mail: [email protected]
BOZ Technical Services is an accredited UXO Consultant with the Defence Environment and Heritage
Panel (DEHP). EO/UXO Assessment Reports prepared by DEHP members are generally accepted by
Local, State and Federal authorities as these contractors work to investigation, assessment and
remediation procedures that are recognised as best practice throughout Australia.
For use only in relation to the specified project
© 2017 Copyright BOZ Technical Services Pty Ltd Page 6 of 22
Page 7
OPEC - 2 David Low Highway, Castaways Beach
Rev 02 – AFU – 10 Aug 2017
SITE & PROJECT DETAILS
The site is located at 2 David Low Highway, Castaways Beach in SE Qld (Lot 71, MCH2854, LGA 5740,
Noosa Shire) and totals approx. 1 ha. The land and existing structures are being developed into
residential lots.
Figure 2 - Site – 2 David Low Highway, Castaways
Figure 1 - Site - General Location Beach
Development works will likely involve demolition of existing structures, de-vegetation and
earthworks associated with new building lots, services & roads.
The Client’s activities throughout the site may include:
Surface - pedestrian and vehicular traffic (employees, contractors, etc);
Ground-Intrusive – de-vegetation, development of roads/tracks, minor cut and/or fill,
construction of building slabs/footings, provision of buried services and the like.
EO/UXO ASSESSMENT – SCOPE & OBJECTIVES
If items of explosive ordnance (EO) exist in this area, the Client’s contractors and end-users could
face various risks through unplanned encounters with any such EO. Accordingly, BOZ Technical
Services was requested to provide a limited EO/UXO Risk Assessment including:
definition of the possible nature, location and extent of possible EO/UXO contamination;
assessment of UXO risks related to the Client’s activities; and
initial recommendations regarding measures to mitigate or reduce risks.
For use only in relation to the specified project
© 2017 Copyright BOZ Technical Services Pty Ltd Page 7 of 22
Page 8
OPEC - 2 David Low Highway, Castaways Beach
Rev 02 – AFU – 10 Aug 2017
The primary objectives of this EO/UXO Risk Assessment were as follows:
Determine the extent to which the Site may be contaminated by military ordnance including
but not limited to:
o explosive ordnance (EO);
o unexploded ordnance (UXO) or abandoned explosive ordnance (AXO);
o explosive ordnance waste (EOW);
o hazardous explosive ordnance components (fuses, etc); and
o hazardous explosive ordnance constituents (residual chemicals, etc).
Provide preliminary advice regarding:
o the nature, location and extent of such contamination;
o the EO/UXO risks faced by the Client; and
o mitigation of risks associated with EO/UXO.
METHODOLOGY
CONDUCT OF THE ASSESSMENT
The EO/UXO Assessment of the Site was conducted in line with AS/NZS ISO 31000:2009 ‘Risk
Management - Principles and Guidelines’ and UXO industry norms which included:
desktop research to identify military activities that occurred in or near the site (units,
timeframes, weapons systems, munitions, etc) – including but not limited to:
o examination of records held by Dept of Defence, Australian War Memorial,
National/State Archives, Qld Govt and other sources;
o obtaining local information; and
o examination of topographic and land use data;
desktop research to identify UXO reports and UXO investigations;
plotting, recording and analysis of all relevant material to:
o identify military activities that may generate munitions-related hazards, and
o determine the possible locations, magnitude and nature of EO contamination;
analysis of the interaction between potential munitions hazards and the Client’s (or other
users’) activities to quantify UXO risks (risk assessment); and
analysis of measures to mitigate or reduce risks to an acceptable level.
Important This Assessment is based on incomplete information – conclusions & recommendations
given herein may significantly change if additional information becomes available.
For use only in relation to the specified project
© 2017 Copyright BOZ Technical Services Pty Ltd Page 8 of 22
Page 9
OPEC - 2 David Low Highway, Castaways Beach
Rev 02 – AFU – 10 Aug 2017
HISTORICAL INFORMATION
INTRODUCTION
Gathering historical information regarding past military usage is vital to the development of an
EO/UXO Risk Assessment which, if done properly, can determine whether further mitigations are
needed or not. If further mitigations are needed, the risk assessment is essential to developing
appropriate and cost-effective solutions that are commensurate with the EO/UXO risk.
In most cases it is rare to develop a complete and accurate picture of all military usage at any
location. This EO/UXO Assessment was not able to examine all historical records related to military
activities at or near the site – records may not exist or extra time would be needed to locate, obtain
and analyse additional material. Despite this limitation, sufficient data was obtained to develop a
reasonably accurate picture of activities around the site. This Assessment has been based on
information obtained to date however readers are cautioned that the historical analysis is
incomplete and additional or new material could have a significant effect on the findings of this
EO/UXO Risk Assessment.
HISTORICAL MILITARY ACTIVITIES
This section describes historical military activities that occurred at or near the site being assessed.
Some of the information provided has little direct bearing on the Site being assessed however is
provided as context or simply ‘for interest’.
Pre-WWII
No military activities have as yet been identified in or near the Site being assessed.
WWII
1942:
o May 1942: Large-scale Australian military deployments into the Sunshine Coast area
(from the coast inland to approx. Nambour) to prepare defences against a perceived
Japanese invasion.
o Sep 1942: First identified military live firing in the Coolum-Noosa area - Infantry
exercises were conducted which included firing of 3” mortars in the vicinity of Mt
Peregian (exercises by 22 Inf Bn, 29/46 Inf Bn & 37/52 Inf Bn).
o TBC 1942: Ordnance QF 25 pdr gun introduced into Australian services to replace the
18 pdr and 4.5” Howitzer.
o Throughout 1942: At least 10-15 separate live firing practices were conducted by
various Australian units in the Coolum-Noosa area. While some of these were either
not close to the Site or were firing out to sea, a number were held in areas near the
Site and included firing of both artillery and infantry weapons.
1943:
o May 1943: On 14th May, the Australian Hospital Ship, the Centaur, was torpedoed &
sunk, by a Japanese submarine 9.3 nautical miles east of Cape Moreton Lighthouse on
Moreton Island. 299 people were killed.
o Throughout 1943: Some 20 separate live firing practices (identified to date) were
For use only in relation to the specified project
© 2017 Copyright BOZ Technical Services Pty Ltd Page 9 of 22
Page 10
OPEC - 2 David Low Highway, Castaways Beach
Rev 02 – AFU – 10 Aug 2017
conducted by various Australian units in the Coolum-Noosa area – including a number
in or relatively close to the Site. Live firing included artillery, anti-tank and infantry
weapons (as well as possibly air dropped bombs).
Figure 3 - 18-pounder gun of 11th Field Brigade on a live shoot on the Sunshine Coast during WWII
1944-1945: No live firing activities have as yet been identified however research to date has
been limited. It is possible that a reduced level of exercises and live firing activities continued
in the Coolum-Noosa area.
Post-WWII
1946-1949: No live firing activities have as yet been identified however research to date has
been limited. It is possible that a reduced level of exercises and live firing activities continued
in the Coolum-Noosa area or that no live firing activities were conducted.
1950:
o May 1950: First identified live firing practice (artillery) in the Coolum-Noosa area since
the end of WWII.
o Coolum-Noosa area was used throughout the year by various military units (primarily
infantry and artillery) – at least 4 x live firing practices have been identified to date
including possibly 18 pdr, 25 pdr and 4.5” howitzer as well as infantry weapons.
1951:
o Australia re-introduced National Service for the Navy, Army and Air Force to boost
manpower in the face of world-wide and regional threats (primarily the Malayan
insurgency and the Korean War).
o At least 10 x identified live firing practices were conducted during the year including
25 pdr artillery, 5.5” artillery, 3” mortars (and possibly 2”), anti-tank (likely 17 pdr),
aircraft bombing & strafing, aircraft-fired rockets, anti-aircraft (likely 40mm fired
seawards) as well as a range of other infantry weapons.
For use only in relation to the specified project
© 2017 Copyright BOZ Technical Services Pty Ltd Page 10 of 22
Page 11
OPEC - 2 David Low Highway, Castaways Beach
Rev 02 – AFU – 10 Aug 2017
1952-1958:
o Regular usage of the Noosa Artillery Range continued including infantry, artillery,
tanks/armoured cars, air-delivered munitions and possibly naval firing. Live firing
practices appear to have been conducted on average approx. 5-10 times each year
and mostly involved artillery weapons. Additional weapons firing possibly included
mortars, shoulder-fired anti-tank, towed anti-tank (17 pdr), aircraft weapons/bombs,
armaments of armoured cars and small arms.
Figure 4 - 'Staghound' armoured cars on exercise at Noosa in 1955. The 'Staghound' mounted
a 37mm gun together with a co-axial .30 inch Browning Machine Gun
o Usage of the Coolum-Noosa live firing range was progressively reduced during this
period. By 1958/9, training and live firing was being conducted in areas and use of the
Noosa-Peregian Beach area was phased out.
1959:
o Jan 1959: The last identified live firing activity shows that firing was limited to an area
between the east and south of Lake Weyba and the coast.
o TBC 1959: Artillery usage of the Noosa-Coolum Firing Range ceased (note however
that the area may still have been used for non-artillery training. For example, at a site
nearer to Peregian, blank military ammunition was found date-stamped ‘1985’
suggesting that the area may have been used for military training after 1985).
o A coast road from Maroochydore to Noosa was constructed (David Low Way) which
required a bridge over the Maroochy River. The coast road was funded by land
subdividers Grant and Burke who then subdivided Peregian Beach and Sunshine
Beach. It is not currently known when the Castaways Beach was developed but
possibly post-1960.
For use only in relation to the specified project
© 2017 Copyright BOZ Technical Services Pty Ltd Page 11 of 22
Page 12
OPEC - 2 David Low Highway, Castaways Beach
Rev 02 – AFU – 10 Aug 2017
Figure 5 - Noosa-Peregian Artillery Range
showing WWII boundary (outer) and Post-WWII boundary (inner)
EO/UXO INCIDENTS
No accidents involving EO/UXO have yet been identified in or the near the Site. However, in the
wider area (Marcus Beach to Sunshine Beach) there have been many instances (min. 30 identified to
date) where contractors encountered UXO during construction or subsequent home owners
uncovered UXO in their backyards. While these did not result in accidents, the majority were likely
unplanned interactions with UXO and thus would typically be classified as ‘Near Misses’.
EO/UXO REMEDIATION ACTIVITIES
MUNITIONS ‘CLEAN-UPS’ POST-FIRING
It has been a long-standing requirement that no live munitions be left after live firing or other
military training activities have been conducted. For example, the following is an extract from
For use only in relation to the specified project
© 2017 Copyright BOZ Technical Services Pty Ltd Page 12 of 22
Page 13
OPEC - 2 David Low Highway, Castaways Beach
Rev 02 – AFU – 10 Aug 2017
‘Routine Orders’ issued by various infantry battalions and brigades who used other military firing
ranges during WWII:
“Under no circumstances will explosives or live ammunition of any kind be left unguarded
in any place to which members of the public have access.
In areas where training with explosives and live ammunition is carried out, the utmost
care will be exercised to ensure that all blinds [UXO] are searched for and destroyed in
accordance with the prescribed safety regulations.”
Example 1: An infantry battalion conducting a 3” mortar shoot at Caloundra in 1944 reported
that 3 x UXO occurred (out of some 350 total rounds fired). 2 of these were found however
the other was not found due to excessive depth – this UXO was reported as ‘missing’ however
it is unclear whether any follow-up ever occurred to locate and dispose of this UXO.
Example 2: During an infantry battalion’s firing practices at Clear Mountain in 1944, a military
engineer was on-hand to deal with any UXO that occurred during each day’s live firing.
While no specific information has yet been found regarding how many UXO (or other EO items) were
addressed during or after live firing, evidence indicates that military units generally strived to find
and remove UXO that occurred. However - based on the number of UXO that have been found in
relatively recent years - it is obvious that efforts to locate and dispose of UXO were not
comprehensive. Based on past research of similar sites, it is relatively common (‘likely’) for
occasional ‘live’ munitions to found at military training and live firing areas.
It is more common (‘almost certain’) for non-hazardous or relatively benign munitions items to be
encountered at military training and live firing areas. While these are generally do not cause death
or serious injury, finds of even non-hazardous munitions items may cause work stoppages or raise
concerns within the workforce or local residents.
PLANNED EO/UXO INVESTIGATION/REMEDIATION
No evidence has as yet been found of any planned or systematic EO/UXO investigation or
remediation activities at or near the Site. Based on the lack of development, it is currently assessed
‘unlikely’ that any investigation or remediation was done previously (however some such work may
have been undertaken when the Site was first developed).
AGRICULTURE, CONSTRUCTION, BUSHFIRES, ETC
A number of activities have occurred at the Site which had the potential to uncover munitions or
otherwise result in their removal from the Site:
Residential Development: Roughly 1/3 of the Site has been developed into residential areas
with tree-clearing, dwellings, road & tracks and landscaping. These activities had the
potential to uncover surface or shallow-buried EO/UXO.
Readers are cautioned that there is no guarantee that all EO items have been found and
disposed through such activities – there are many reported cases in Qld of residents
uncovering UXO in their yards after residential developments and associated building, road,
landscaping etc earthworks have been completed.
For use only in relation to the specified project
© 2017 Copyright BOZ Technical Services Pty Ltd Page 13 of 22
Page 14
OPEC - 2 David Low Highway, Castaways Beach
Rev 02 – AFU – 10 Aug 2017
Road/Track Construction: A number of roads and minor tracks traverse the Site -
construction or periodic maintenance of these may have uncovered occasional EO items
however much of the Site is largely undeveloped and likely seen little to no ground-intrusive
activities associated with roads/tracks since military usage ceased.
Bushfires: A number of bushfires (or controlled burns) have likely occurred over parts of the
Site since military usage ceased. Studies undertaken by BOZ Technical Services found that
many munitions on the surface or partially buried may be detonated during any bushfires
however any fully buried munitions are unlikely to have been affected by such fires.
Overall it is assessed that construction, fires, etc since the Site ceased to be used as a military firing
area may have reduced remnant munitions in developed areas however the extent of EO hazard
reduction in undeveloped areas is likely to be much less. Even in areas that have been developed or
subjected to bushfires, there is a still a possibility of occasional remnant items.
SUMMARY – NATURE & EXTENT OF EO/UXO
MUNITIONS USED AND FOUND TO DATE
The following table summarises munitions known or suspected to have been used in the wider
Peregian-Noosa area (including the Site being assessed) and provides an indication of munitions
usage & potential remnant items within the general area (not necessarily the Site); data is based on
identified weapons as well as EO/UXO found to date (based on limited research):
Table 1 - Assessment of Munitions Usage and Quantity of UXO in or near the Site
Qty UXO in
Munition Type Assessed Usage in Area
Area
Infantry Munitions
Small Arms Ammunition (ball, tracer for rifles & MG) Confirmed –substantial qty Many
Aust WWII Era Hand Grenade
(HE, Prac & Smk) (e.g. 36M - both hand thrown and rifle Confirmed – moderate qty Many
projected; only Smk Gren found to date in wider area)
Aust Projector, Infantry, Anti-Tank (PIAT) Confirmed – suspected small qty Few/None
(Shoulder-Fired Anti-Tank Projectile)
Aust 2” Mortar Possible – possibly moderate qty Many
HE, Smk (HC) and Illum
Aust 3” Mortar Confirmed - moderate qty Many
HE, Smk (WP) and Illum
4.2” Mortar Confirmed - small to moderate qty Few/None
HE, Smk (HC), Illum, Chem
Pyrotechnics
‘Smoke Pot’/Smoke Generator Probable - possibly small qty Few/None
Grenade Simulator & Artillery Simulator Probable - possibly moderate qty Few/None
(e.g. Aust ‘Aldershot Grenade’, US equivalents, etc)
Signal/Illumination Flares Probable - possibly moderate qty Few/None
(Air bursting and parachute)
Explosives (various) Probable - possibly small to moderate
(e.g. Gelignite, TNT, etc. Used for battle simulation as well as Few/None
demolitions training)
qty
Artillery and Anti-Tank Munitions
Aust 2, 6 & 17 pdr Anti-Tank Confirmed - likely moderate qty Few
(HE & AP solid shot – all confirmed fired in wider area)
Aust 37mm Tank (Armoured Car) Probable - likely small qty Few
(HE & Prac)
US 75mm & 105mm Artillery Unlikely – small qty None
(HE, Smk & Illum)
For use only in relation to the specified project
© 2017 Copyright BOZ Technical Services Pty Ltd Page 14 of 22
Page 15
OPEC - 2 David Low Highway, Castaways Beach
Rev 02 – AFU – 10 Aug 2017
Aust Field Artillery (18 pdr, 25 pdr, 4.5” howitzer) Confirmed - moderate-substantial qty Few
(HE, Smk & Illum – all types confirmed in wider area)
Aust Medium Artillery (5.5”) Confirmed - moderate qty Few
(HE confirmed in wider area; Smk & Illum possible)
Aircraft Munitions
Air Dropped Bombs
(HE & Prac – 250lb HE confirmed but 500lb HE & Confirmed - small qty Few
Prac/Smk/Photo Flash all possible)
Air-Fired Rockets Confirmed - small qty Few
(HE & Prac/Solid – 60lb solid confirmed but HE possible)
Figure 6 - UXO Found (Limited Research)
Remnant munitions could be in conditions ranging from benign to highly unstable and become
increasingly sensitive to shock or fire. White Phosphorus (WP) can remain dormant in the soil or
containers for many years but spontaneously ignite when exposed to air (causes severe, deep burns
on flesh) – WP is also toxic if sufficient quantities are inhaled or ingested.
IMPORTANT Information in the table above is based on incomplete data. Major data gaps
exist for the period prior to 1950 and the period from 1990 to 2009.
For use only in relation to the specified project
© 2017 Copyright BOZ Technical Services Pty Ltd Page 15 of 22
Page 16
OPEC - 2 David Low Highway, Castaways Beach
Rev 02 – AFU – 10 Aug 2017
QUANTITY & LOCATIONS OF REMNANT MUNITIONS
The precise location and extent of any remnant UXO contamination cannot presently be determined
– it is possible that UXO may be found throughout the entire Site, in a few ‘clumps’ or, conversely,
no UXO may exist within this specific area. Despite this uncertainty, it is currently assessed ‘likely’
that EO/UXO hazards of various types exist within the area. Available evidence suggests that the
most likely scenarios of significant concern are as follows:
occasional, shallow-buried HE or WP UXO (e.g. mortars and grenades); and
occasional, deeper buried HE or WP UXO (3”/4.2” mortars and [email protected] depth or
more).
(Note: The above does not include various other EO/EOW including occasional unfired pyrotechnics
and SAA on the surface or partially buried as well as quantities of inert EO-related material such as
expended SAA cases, mortar safety caps, exploded parts of munitions, EO packing containers, etc).
RISK ASSESSMENT & MITIGATIONS
EO/UXO RISK MANAGEMENT PROCESS
The Risk Assessment methodology:
is based on various international EO industry standards (e.g. various IMAS and IATG4), US
DoD & EPA guidelines and global EOD industry accepted ‘best practices’;
is broadly in line with the Dept of Defence/Cwlth risk management framework (including
‘Contamination Risk Assessment Tool’/CRAT); and
is consistent with Australian Standards for Risk Management ‘AS/NZS ISO 31000:2009 Risk
management - Principles and guidelines’.
RISK ASSESSMENT MATRIX
Table 2 – Risk Assessment Matrix
↓ Consequence Rating ↓
Likelihood
Insignificant Minor Moderate Major Catastrophic
Rating ↓
Almost
16 Med 10 High 6 Ext 3 Ext 1 Ext
Certain
Likely 19 Med 14 High 9 High 5 Ext 2 Ext
Moderate 22 Low 18 Med 13 High 8 Ext 4 Ext
Unlikely 24 Low 21 Low 17 Med 12 High 7 Ext
Rare 25 Low 23 Low 20 Med 15 High 11 High
4
IMAS – International Mine Action Standards, including EO/UXO activities; IATG - International Ammunition Technical
Guidelines (IATG) including IATG 02.10:2012[E]
For use only in relation to the specified project
© 2017 Copyright BOZ Technical Services Pty Ltd Page 16 of 22
Page 17
OPEC - 2 David Low Highway, Castaways Beach
Rev 02 – AFU – 10 Aug 2017
GENERIC UXO RISK EVENTS & CONSEQUENCES
The main risk events associated with EO/UXO contamination are typically as follows:
Explosion of EO/UXO:
o Self-explanatory however it should be noted that an explosion typically produces a
dangerous blast/shock wave (confined to a relatively small area of <50m diameter)
and potentially lethal fragmentation (which may travel hundreds of metres).
o Could result in injury or death to personnel or damage to assets as well as possible
litigation, regulatory involvement and adverse PR.
o Exposed personnel are most at risk; vehicle and machinery operators may be provided
some protection by the machinery.
o May affect both people on-site (e.g. munition explodes during ground intrusive work
or firefighting) and off-site (e.g. munition is inadvertently transported to recycler and
explosion occurs during recycling).
o Even if no injury occurs, an unplanned explosion would almost certainly trigger a ‘stop
work’ while the incident was investigated. Additional consequences could include full
site shutdown while the area was investigated/remediated, legal action, adverse PR,
increases in insurances as well as other negative consequences.
Encountering EO/UXO/components (without explosion): i.e. circumstances where EO/UXO
are uncovered or otherwise observed without there being an explosion (found by local
resident, field worker, fire fighter, etc). Finding or sighting EO/UXO/components (without an
explosion) has the potential to:
o cause schedule delays due to the need to stop work, deploy an EOD response team,
conduct EO remediation work or undertake investigations;
o incur additional costs related to disposal of EO/UXO, delays costs (extended
delays/stoppages of work), increases in insurances and possible need for full site
remediation;
o raise concerns of workers or users of the site (see ‘Perception of risk’ later); or
o if the finding of a ‘live’ EO/UXO is not properly controlled, this may escalate to
explosion causing fatalities or damages.
Release of or exposure to harmful chemicals: Many munitions contain a variety of chemicals
which may:
o be harmful to people if these chemicals come in contact with flesh (e.g. WP), inhaled,
absorbed or ingested;
Note: White Phosphorus (WP) is used in smoke, incendiary and other munitions. It is highly
flammable and pyrophoric (self-igniting) upon contact with air as well as toxic if ingested or
inhaled in sufficient quantities. It continues to burn until expended or deprived of atmospheric
oxygen and often results in numerous, deep and severe burns. It can remain dormant in
soil/containers for many years and spontaneously ignite when exposed to air.
o if sufficient quantities of these chemicals exist or are released, may contaminate the
soil or water, enter the human food chain or otherwise damage the ecosystem.
For use only in relation to the specified project
© 2017 Copyright BOZ Technical Services Pty Ltd Page 17 of 22
Page 18
OPEC - 2 David Low Highway, Castaways Beach
Rev 02 – AFU – 10 Aug 2017
INHERENT (UNMITIGATED) RISK RATINGS
The inherent (or unmitigated) risk is based on the assumption that no controls are in place. This may
overestimate the risk as it is unlikely that no controls whatsoever are in place. However this
approach then ensures all controls are noted to demonstrate that the risk has been controlled to
ALARP. The main risk events, consequences/impacts and the assessed risk ratings for unmitigated
general scenarios are summarised in Table 3 below:
Table 3 - Risk Ratings - Inherent (Unmitigated) Risk Scenarios
Risk Ratings & Scores
Risk Event Consequence Type Controls Probability Consequence Risk Score &
Term Term Term
4
H&S None Likely Catastrophic
Extreme
17
Environment None Unlikely Moderate
Medium
13
Explosion Reputation None Likely Moderate
High
8
Legal None Likely Major
Extreme
13
Financial/ Schedule None Likely Moderate
High
H&S None N/A N/A N/A
Environment None N/A N/A N/A
18
Reputation None Likely Minor
Find, sight or uncover EO/EOW Medium
(no explosion or release) 18
Legal None Likely Minor
Medium
13
Financial/ Schedule None Likely Moderate
High
21
H&S None Unlikely Minor
Low
25
Environment None Rare Insignificant
Low
Exposure to or release of EO
21
Chemicals Reputation None Unlikely Minor
Low
15
Legal None Rare Major
High
20
Financial/ Schedule None Rare Moderate
Medium
H&S None N/A N/A N/A
Environment None N/A N/A N/A
9
Reputation None Likely Moderate
High
Perception of EO/UXO risk
23
Legal None Rare Minor
Low
9
Financial None Likely Moderate
High
For use only in relation to the specified project
© 2017 Copyright BOZ Technical Services Pty Ltd Page 18 of 22
Page 19
OPEC - 2 David Low Highway, Castaways Beach
Rev 02 – AFU – 10 Aug 2017
REDUCTION OF RISKS - MITIGATIONS/CONTROLS
Due to the relatively high likelihood of dangerous EO/UXO existing on the Site, the full suite of
mitigations is recommended including the following:
Conduct EO/UXO awareness/education for personnel/contractors working at the Site,
selected Client management staff and possibly other key stakeholders as well as implement
a ‘chance UXO find’ protocol/SWP (preventative control and mitigating control). This is an
important control even if areas have been UXO-remediated for the following reasons:
o UXO search/remediation processes are rarely 100% effective – a performance target
of 99.7% is generally accepted within the EO/UXO industry. It is important that those
using remediated sites understand that ‘chance finds’ of occasional EO/UXO could still
occur and be observant during their work.
o EO/UXO awareness/education is also a key control used reduce ‘perceptions of risk’ by
dispelling common myths and misunderstandings regarding EO/UXO.
o A proper EO/UXO Safe Working Procedure (‘Chance Find Procedure’) aims to minimise
unsafe practices in the event that EO/UXO are encountered and reduce the likelihood
that encounters will escalate to more serious consequences.
Conduct visual detector-supported inspection of the entire development footprint to
identify any surface of very shallow-buried EO items.
Undertake 100% UXO investigation/remediation work of all areas where ground-intrusive
work is planned (areas previously subjected to ground intrusive work may be able to be
excluded depending on the nature of any such previous works).
Review insurances and proposed contract clauses to ensure that these adequately address
EO/UXO risks. As discussed previously, legal and contractual issues surrounding remnant
EO/UXO are unclear and largely untested.
Review risk assessment as new data from research and field work comes to hand. Ongoing
re-evaluation of risks is a key aspect of an effective risk management system.
MITIGATED RISK RATINGS
Assuming the recommended mitigations/controls are adopted, the mitigated risk ratings remaining
after risk treatment (residual risk) are as shown in Table 4 (below). In nearly all cases, residual risks
are significantly reduced and normally within ‘tolerable’ levels (i.e. ‘As Low As Reasonably
Practicable’/ALARP):
Table 4 - Mitigated Risk Ratings (Mitigations/Controls Applied)
Risk Ratings & Scores
Risk Event Consequence Type Controls Probability Consequence Risk Score &
Term Term Term
UXO survey
11
H&S Awareness Rare Catastrophic
High
SWP
Note: When using conventional 5x5 Risk Assessment Matrices, it is almost impossible to
Explosion reduce the overall risk rating for UXO-related H&S events into the ‘green’ zone – even if
the probability is rare or almost impossible. This does not mean that the residual risks are
not tolerable but rather illustrates the difficulties that can arise when using relatively
simplistic risk decision tools. Other more sophisticated risk modelling tools may
demonstrate that risks are extremely low (negligible) however there will usually be some
residual risk of a fatality/serious injuries even if full remediation of the Site is undertaken.
For use only in relation to the specified project
© 2017 Copyright BOZ Technical Services Pty Ltd Page 19 of 22
Page 20
OPEC - 2 David Low Highway, Castaways Beach
Rev 02 – AFU – 10 Aug 2017
23
Environment As above Rare Minor
Low
23
Reputation As above Rare Minor
Low
23
Legal As above Rare Minor
Low
23
Financial/Schedule As above Rare Minor
Low
H&S None required N/A N/A N/A
Environment None required N/A N/A N/A
Find, sight or uncover UXO survey
23
Reputation Awareness Rare Minor
EO/EOW Low
SWP
(no explosion or
23
release) Legal As above Rare Minor
Low
23
Financial/ Schedule As above Rare Minor
Low
15
H&S As above Rare Major
High
23
Environment As above Rare Minor
Low
Exposure to or release 23
Reputation As above Rare Minor
of EO Chemicals Low
23
Legal As above Rare Minor
Low
23
Financial/ Schedule As above Rare Minor
Low
H&S None required N/A N/A N/A
Environment None required N/A N/A N/A
UXO survey
23
Reputation Awareness Rare Minor
Perception of Low
SWP
EO/UXO risk
23
Legal As above Rare Minor
Low
23
Financial/ Schedule As above Rare Minor
Low
CONCLUSIONS & RECOMMENDATIONS
The primary objectives of this EO/UXO Risk Assessment were as follows:
Determine the extent to which the Site may be contaminated by military ordnance including
but not limited to:
o explosive ordnance (EO);
o unexploded ordnance (UXO) or abandoned explosive ordnance (AXO);
o explosive ordnance waste (EOW);
o hazardous explosive ordnance components (fuses, etc); and
o hazardous explosive ordnance constituents (residual chemicals, etc)
For use only in relation to the specified project
© 2017 Copyright BOZ Technical Services Pty Ltd Page 20 of 22
Page 21
OPEC - 2 David Low Highway, Castaways Beach
Rev 02 – AFU – 10 Aug 2017
Provide preliminary advice regarding:
o the nature, location and extent of such contamination;
o the EO/UXO risks faced by the Client; and
o options to mitigate risks associated with EO/UXO.
The findings of this Assessment may change if additional information is received or reviewed.
KEY CONCLUSIONS
The key conclusions drawn from the available information are as follows:
There is ample evidence of Army WWII and post-WWII live firing including Australian
mortars, towed & shoulder-fired anti-tank weapons, artillery, grenades, small arms
ammunition, blank ammunition and pyrotechnics. Munitions usage was likely ‘moderate’ to
‘substantial’.
There is also evidence of limited live firing practices involving:
o Air Force rocket firing and air-dropped bombs; and
o Anti-air firing practices.
There is currently no evidence of:
o large-scale munitions disposal (however isolated ‘dumping’ or disposal of small
quantities may have occurred); or
o activities involving persistent or other military chemicals.
The precise location and extent of any remnant UXO contamination cannot presently be
determined from historical research alone – it is possible that UXO may be found throughout
the entire Site, in a few ‘clumps’ or, conversely, no UXO may exist within this specific area.
Despite this uncertainty, it is currently assessed ‘likely’ that EO/UXO hazards of various types
exist within the area.
Many of the Client’s activities have a medium to high probability of interacting with these
residual EO/UXO hazards and many of these interactions – if not mitigated - could
potentially result in moderate to catastrophic consequences (loss of life, serious injury,
incapacitation, illness, legal action or reputation damage).
There are also activities where ‘perception of risk’ may be substantially higher than ‘actual
risk’. Even though ‘perception of risk’ may not cause physical harm, it is still a risk that may
have negative consequences (e.g. reluctance to work in areas, higher insurance costs and
growing public concerns).
For use only in relation to the specified project
© 2017 Copyright BOZ Technical Services Pty Ltd Page 21 of 22
Page 22
OPEC - 2 David Low Highway, Castaways Beach
Rev 02 – AFU – 10 Aug 2017
RECOMMENDED ACTIONS
The following summarises recommended mitigations that should be considered for development of
this Site:
Conduct general UXO education and awareness for personnel working at the Site.
Develop ‘Safe Working Procedures’ for work undertaken to include, for example:
o Restrictions on entry into specific areas (e.g. defining ‘No Go’ areas);
o Protocols to ensure that the number of personnel entering or working near UXO areas
are kept to the minimum necessary to effectively perform the work;
o Definition of safe/unsafe areas, safety distances, ‘Wait Times’, etc;
o Actions to be taken if UXO encountered or observed;
o Medical Response Plan for UXO-related injuries; and
o Reporting and internal investigation requirements.
Undertake 100% surface visual/detector-assisted UXO search to identify any surface or
shallow buried EO items.
Undertake 100% UXO investigation/remediation work of all areas where ground-intrusive
work is planned
Review risk assessment(s) as new data from field work comes to hand or when EO items are
found/reported. Ongoing re-evaluation of risks is a key aspect of an effective risk
management system.
------------------------- END OF DOCUMENT -------------------------
For use only in relation to the specified project
© 2017 Copyright BOZ Technical Services Pty Ltd Page 22 of 22