Organisation Name Category Summary of submission

Organisation Name Manning Gordon Category Eastern Treatment Plant environs Summary of submission The level of odour at the plant is disgraceful, particularly if the wind blows towards us. Why can’t sealed liquid areas be used and the methane, etc. be gathered and recycled in the process? If the spoil is the problem, then council mulch should be mixed throughout and layered to allow the green waste to neutralise the odour. The external appearance of the plant is a disgrace. Why haven’t fences, gardens, mown areas been maintained? Plant a green hedge along all the fence areas to help. Increased processing of waste will add to the ongoing odour problems affecting areas around the plant. This polluting odour negatively impacts on our lives. Locate and tackle these problems as part of the upgrade and also introduce a scientific method of air sampling. It is ludicrous in 2001 that engineers’ noses are the only equipment used in assessing odour complaints. Ornithologists should be consulted to ensure the plan provides net benefits at the ETP e.g. Common Sandpiper habitat - yes, it is artificial - should be preserved. It appears that the Peninsula Project is a step in the right direction in respect to alleviating in general any odour effects from the Eastern Treatment Depot. The EPA license controlling the operations specifically ensures that any odour ‘plume’ is exceptional. From advice received in the area (cnr. Thompsons Road and Lower Dandenong Road, Bangholme), it is rare for an odour situation to develop which means that the area could probably do without the Environmental Significance Overlay. Measures to evaluate greenhouse gas emissions should be evaluated and, if appropriate, emissions reduction measures incorporated into the upgrade. Tertiary filtration will cost more than extending the outfall, but its environmental benefits outweigh the degradation caused by the outfall. We would be more than happy to have water costs increased to accommodate the costs involved. If the increase in wastewater to the ETP is only 0.8 per cent per annum surely incentives for less water consumption together with legislation for on-site treatment of wastewater for all new developments would reverse such a small annual increase. Use some of the profits from your business to speed the process. We don’t want you out of business - we want you to lead the world in sewage treatment, and return dividends. A proper attitude starts at the top. Why can’t water rates be increased to cover the cost of treating and filtering waste water? This submission proposes that the issue needs to be re-set in the broader picture of water, not just sewage and trade waste. The submitter believes that the community as a whole needs to consider the economics and environmental impacts of the agricultural products produced and the markets for these products when making water use Page 1 McConnell H Eastern Treatment Plant environs Norris S Custance & Associates Custance Michael Selwyn Eastern Treatment Plant environs Eastern Treatment Plant environs World Wide Fund for Nature Rouse Roth Andrew Chelle Eastern Treatment Plant environs Economics and regulation Bujeya Darren Economics and regulation Forsyth Geoff & Rosie Graeme & Ruth Jillian Economics and regulation Cople Verhardt Economics and regulation Economics and regulation Organisation Name Strickland Kathie Category Economics and regulation Summary of submission decisions. Protect catchments from human development and/or exploitation. Rewrite the building code to include compulsory introduction of water tanks with all new buildings. Provide financial incentives for the installation of dry toilets in private and public buildings. Upgrade to the highest standard and police regulations on the use and disposal of industrial water. Introduce grease traps or mechanisms in domestic buildings to collect large objects in the water and make the user responsible for the pollution at the source. Melbourne Water last year raised a profit of approximately half a billion dollars through the activities of providing high quality fresh water and removing the used water, usually polluted, for treatment and dumping. Incorporate harsher penalties for polluters and an independent “watch dog” to enquire into the monitoring of effluent and corporate practices of Melbourne Water. Protect catchments from human development and/or exploitation. Rewrite the building code to include compulsory introduction of water tanks with all new buildings. Provide financial incentives for the installation of dry toilets in private and public buildings. Upgrade to the highest standard and police regulations on the use and disposal of industrial water. Introduce grease traps or mechanisms in domestic buildings to collect large objects in the water and make the user responsible for the pollution at the source. The submitter urges Melbourne Water to fund improvements through reduced staff salaries. At present, all wastewater discharged at Boags Rocks is at a total cost to Melbourne Water and us, the rate payers. Melbourne Water could assist prospective major users of the recycled water by providing financial support to offset the user’s initial capital outlay, or a tiered pricing for the supply of water, even if only for the first 5 to 10 years. This would provide a win-win situation: revenue to Melbourne Water and cost reduction for the prospective user. Changes should be made to the way water retailers make their money so that there is less incentive to sell as much as possible. Changes to the Water Act should occur to allow water retailers to act as water saving consultants to the commercial sector. We advocate under Section 32 of the Property Act that houses need to pass a ‘water worthy’ when owners change. Smokebusters programs should be continued. The current options paper notes that many of the improvement options entail a significant cost, but there is no cost/benefit analysis or translation of the project costs into anticipated increases in rates, which may be marginal. There is no discussion of pricing policies as part of the twenty-year strategy and the effect that this may have on re-use/recycling options. There is no discussion of the cost of distributing recycled water. Page 2 Perri Marc Economics and regulation Heggart Strickland Mark Peter Economics and regulation Economics and regulation Cooke Tilley Sam Trevor Economics and regulation Economics and regulation Friends of the Earth Giles Karri Economics and regulation Mornington Peninsula Shire Douglas Bruce Economics and regulation Organisation Sandhurst Club The Australian Greens Name Cook Kelsall Chris Henry Category Economics and regulation Economics and regulation Summary of submission To ensure appropriate and enthusiastic take up of this system, we believe the supply of this water must be competitively priced at below one-third the cost of potable water. The redirection of seven per cent of Melbourne Water’s yearly profits into a future assets account. In the ‘98-‘99 financial year Melbourne Water’s operating profit after income tax was $112.8 million. A savings of seven per cent would accumulate at least $7 million per financial year. On these figures $30 million+ would be at call within five years. This would enable construction of a ‘California Title 22’ filtration system capable of dealing with 120 megalitres per day every five years. We should promote as much information about reducing water use as possible - also help water shortage problems. The biggest gain for the environment will be a public education program that makes the connection between daily habits and the end result of pollution at our ocean beaches. People need to be educated about what gets dumped from their doings towards the water drainage system. The majority of people barely have a basic understanding of the natural water cycle. Try education, not catchy jingoes. Clean Ocean and Melbourne Water need to promote the use of recycled water. I would like to see an education program to the public about recycling water i.e. grey water system, domestic water catchment, storing and using water for the garden. Also the use of a non-flushing compost toilet system as opposed to the conventional flushing system. Imagine a set of television ads promoting the ways the public can improve their home by installing water saving products for new buildings, renovations and existing residents. Lack of public education enables this damage to the aquatic ecosystem at Boags Rocks to still occur. If programs were introduced to inform the public of the Eastern Treatment Plant, tertiary filtration could be funded to help the sustainability of the ecosystems at Boags Rocks. Why not introduce your project to schools and get the children to understand the problem. Eradicate the yuk attitude to recycled water with community-wide public relations/education campaign. …recommence the process of public meetings which was abandoned. The WasteWise program should be viewed by Melbourne Water as a model for a Page 3 Richardson Perkins Erin Graeme Education Education McDonald Perri Dellat Gibbins Laurence Marc Meredith Scott Education Education Education Education Kraska Troy Education Divers Carrum Residents Action Group Liberal Candidate for Flinders Mornington Martin Hunt Douglas Valerie Anne Greg Bruce Education Education Education Education Organisation Peninsula Shire South East Water Community Consultation Group University of the Third Age Name Category Education Summary of submission potential education program. Adopt ‘smart urban water management’ for new developments. Wannan Lord Pec Jeanie Aaron Andrew Anne Education Effluent quality and quantity Effluent quality and quantity Effluent quality and quantity Water restrictions together with a strong advertising campaign may help change public attitudes to recycled water for domestic purposes. I think a tertiary filtration system is the best idea. I would like to see the tertiary treatment option implemented. We are against ocean outfalls and believe all effluent should be reused. Ammonia removal is a very welcome initiative to begin the process. We are hoping this can be achieved in the shortest period possible. Tertiary treatment is the only acceptable method. Aquifer recharging would be viable only if treatment of the effluent was tertiary. Disinfection by UV is most acceptable. I favour tertiary treatment of both stormwater and sewage effluent with the aim of using it for more extensive recycling and irrigation. Treatment needs to be upgraded to tertiary filtration to ensure the survival of this aquatic ecosystem. Why isn’t there an option to close the plant altogether? Although we should be managing our water usage, a successful public campaign will take a long time. Restricting or stopping industrial usage (e.g. don’t allow an extension of the recently extended use by abattoirs) should assist by reducing both volume and chemical/organic matter. World’s best practice should be our aim. Litter, colour, odour, foam, oil and grease are totally unacceptable and not merely 'aesthetic' as the leaflet implies. I would like to see a tertiary filtration system adopted for the proposed upgrade. I would totally support upgrades to the Treatment Plant which would enable greater recycling of water, increased filtration and treatment. Upgrading to tertiary treatment would be effective in reducing the toxicity of the discharged water. I support the improvement of the ETP effluent to Class A quality. The move to class A effluent for the ETP would require a similar upgrade of the Mornington, Rosebud and Hastings plans which discharge to the South Eastern outfall. This would require cooperation between Melbourne Water and South East Water. I think the best way to improve the situation at Boags Rocks would be to close the pipe off. I think treating the effluent any more will just make the place smell worse. Page 4 Westernport Port Phillip Coastal Watch Association Lee Elrington Swift Valle Parry B Ben Brent Bryan Effluent quality and quantity Effluent quality and quantity Effluent quality and quantity Effluent quality and quantity Dickinson Eaton Pollard White Cameron Catherine Chris Colin Effluent quality and quantity Effluent quality and quantity Effluent quality and quantity Effluent quality and quantity Allsep Craig Effluent quality and quantity Organisation Name Bujeya Keith Hopgood Richardson Darren Eileen Elise Erin Category Effluent quality and quantity Effluent quality and quantity Effluent quality and quantity Effluent quality and quantity Summary of submission It’s high time something was done and tertiary filtration would seem to be the way to go. As the sewerage is discharged into the sea at Gunnamatta and St Andrews I find this unacceptable. Tertiary filtration will decrease impacts such as litter and odour and benefit the environment as well as the community. Importance of purifying the effluent to a higher level. The long-term aims of EPA to have no outfalls, potable treated effluent and reduce total water use is right on the money. I think that the government should give Melbourne Water money to make the water clean and that the Clean Ocean Foundation is right. I think it would be good to eventually get rid of the outfall. Improved quality of discharge to the sea is supported. Long-term return of treated effluent to fresh water quality? Water should be at tertiary level, of course. A tertiary treatment plant is the best option as it solves many problems including conserving water and providing a certain amount of jobs. Filtration and recycling should both be undertaken as sensible and workable options. Our personal view is that no wastewater should be released into our waterways unless it is clean. We want the waste treated and recycled. Tertiary filtration is the best option and worth the cost because it will enable more recycling, saving money and energy and won’t harm the environment. Tertiary filtration becomes the preferred alternative. It will improve the quality of the ocean outfall, and is a necessary first step for all of the other usages. I strongly favour the two options of recycling and tertiary filtration. I feel tertiary treatment is one good option. We feel very strongly that Melbourne Water must work towards tertiary filtration and the sooner the better. Although tertiary filtration is the most expensive, it is the most appropriate. Treatment of effluent must be of the highest standard so that all water treated is eventually of drinkable standard. Effluent management needs to be open to tender from those with a genuine need to seek an imaginative solution with a requirement that effluent water be of potable quality by 2012 when the outfall would no longer be required - problem solved. Page 5 Shingler Heriot-Rice Cook Manning Perkins Thomas Caple Burton Collins Taylor Cervi Ashton Ferguson Strickland Erin Finton Frank Gordon Graeme Graeme Graeme & Ruth Harna James Janet P Joe John & Margaret Kate Kathie Effluent quality and quantity Effluent quality and quantity Effluent quality and quantity Effluent quality and quantity Effluent quality and quantity Effluent quality and quantity Effluent quality and quantity Effluent quality and quantity Effluent quality and quantity Effluent quality and quantity Effluent quality and quantity Effluent quality and quantity Effluent quality and quantity Effluent quality and quantity Organisation Name Stanley Kim Category Effluent quality and quantity Summary of submission Tertiary filtration needs to be introduced at the plant no matter the cost because the environment at Boags Rocks is more important than money. Tertiary filtration also allows for a greater amount of effluent to be recycled, reducing the impact on delicate ecosystems. There has to be a solution to stop that amount of sewage being pumped if only people could see what danger our local ocean is in. We would do well to remember that dilution of effluent in our waterways is actually an increase of toxicants in those systems. My suggestion is that we should run a tertiary treatment plant that incorporates water recycling to stop outfall altogether. We are in the year 2001 and should be doing everything possible using our grasp of new technologies to overcome dumping millions of litres of partially treated waste into our next generation’s oceans. I think it would be great to eventually get rid of the outfall. Hopefully you will be able to change the class of the effluent and maybe sell it to farms or industrial use. The only sensible option is tertiary treatment. Don’t understand that you have no options to close the outfall. Why not convert to potable quality? You will be able to resell the water indefinitely. I urge Melbourne Water and all involved to have the foresight to consider the next generation both in terms of the environment and in terms of water conservation and create a world leading treatment system. Tertiary filtration would be the best option. What is more costly in the short term may be more cost-effective in the long term. The outfall at Boags Rocks needs to close. I completely agree with the proposal for tertiary filtration. If we must have one, then nothing less than world’s best tertiary treatment should be undertaken. Both tertiary filtration and water recycling would be a wonderful and much sought after solution to this problem. Melbourne Water should upgrade to tertiary filtration. I want to see the plant upgraded to tertiary or drinkable. Tertiary filtration and waste and waste water re-use, and corresponding responsible solid waste disposal would seem the only way to go about this! Page 6 Campbell Perri Heggart Lloyd Laura Marc Mark Mark Effluent quality and quantity Effluent quality and quantity Effluent quality and quantity Effluent quality and quantity Burns Mackay Smith Gray Matthew Matthew Matthew Mic Effluent quality and quantity Effluent quality and quantity Effluent quality and quantity Effluent quality and quantity Donohoe MacKinnon von Bertouch Pollock Maney Karalis Hosking Steck Michael Michael Mr D Nathan Neil Nik Patricia Peter Effluent quality and quantity Effluent quality and quantity Effluent quality and quantity Effluent quality and quantity Effluent quality and quantity Effluent quality and quantity Effluent quality and quantity Effluent quality and quantity Organisation Name Strickland Peter Category Effluent quality and quantity Summary of submission Treatment of effluent must be of the highest standard so that all water treated is eventually of drinkable standard. Effluent management needs to be open to tender from those with a genuine need to seek an imaginative solution with a requirement that effluent water be of potable quality by 2012 when the outfall would no longer be required - problem solved. I’d like to say that I think you should be doing something more about the outfall even if it’s small at least that’s a start. We strongly support tertiary filtration and water recycling plans. The treatment plant must be upgraded to tertiary filtration. My own preferences are to improve the quality of the discharge to prevent damage to plant and animal reproductive processes by reducing the ammonium content in the effluent. My other preferences for the Eastern Treatment Plant are to produce effluents of higher qualities that can be usefully disposed in other ways and gradually reduce the amount being discharged at Boags Rocks. The current studies to develop a program to produce a tertiary effluent to meet the EPA’s A grade standard can only be applauded. I would desire improvements to reduce nutrient levels in the effluent either at the plant or at pipe end to allow discharge into aquifers and to inland waters. If before sale every house owner was required to obtain a certificate of water tightness of their sewer lines up to the point of connection to the retail water company’s sub-main a significant and steady improvement could be made. I support ammonia reduction treatments and tertiary filtration if it can reduce environmental impacts. The proposed upgrade of the plant is welcome and should be the first step towards the ultimate goal of closing the outfall by such measures as reducing inflows and increased recycling. …improve the quality of the effluent and reduce the quantity discharged to Bass Strait. Tertiary treatment (filtration) of the sewerage at the South Eastern Treatment Plant is considered a mandatory requirement in this, the 21st century. Melbourne Water become the world leader in sewerage treatment. To ensure the survival of a variety of threatened species, the plant must be upgraded to tertiary treatment which will improve water quality, species richness and aesthetic values around Boags Rocks. It would be my wish that eventually the outfall could be reduced significantly. The tertiary filtration option is one which I would support and encourage. I would like to see tertiary treatment. Yes to tertiary treatment, yes to recycling. Page 7 Romaneix Bundred Dyall Hodges Philippa Phillipa Rohan Ron Effluent quality and quantity Effluent quality and quantity Effluent quality and quantity Effluent quality and quantity Baillie Schofield Rosemary Sam & Isabel Shane Effluent quality and quantity Effluent quality and quantity Pianta Effluent quality and quantity Wixey Sharelle Effluent quality and quantity Bridgman Binnie Smith Stuart Tim Val Effluent quality and quantity Effluent quality and quantity Effluent quality and quantity Organisation Name Divers Valerie Diana Category Effluent quality and quantity Effluent quality and quantity Summary of submission Tertiary filtration, it appears, would counter the effect on beaches near Boags Rocks and that is important. Reducing ammonia is an important first step in achieving better quality recycled water. The plan to upgrade the effluent to Class A (tertiary) is welcomed. Strongly support tertiary upgrade to class A effluent as soon as possible and to extent treatment to potable class. The current proposal to reduce ammonia is a most worthwhile initiative but we consider that the project needs to be accelerated. The Central Coastal Board supports the options to upgrade the Eastern Treatment Plant at Carrum and to thus ensure the best long-term outcomes for the environment and the Mornington Peninsula community. We strongly support the proposal to upgrade from secondary to tertiary treatment. Closing the outfall by 2010 should be possible. Reducing the inflow over time and treating the outflow to potable standard will result in no effluent being discharged at Gunnamatta. All that is needed is to amend the Melbourne Water licence to ensure this solution is understood as the best long-term outcome for the environment and the Mornington Peninsula. We support Clean Ocean Foundation’s goal to close the outfall by 2010. Achieve this by reducing the inflow to the Eastern Treatment Plant and increasing treatment standard to make it possible to reuse the water. The preferred option would be tertiary filtration of effluent associated with decreased outfall volume by maximising the water recycling options. …endorse a complete tertiary upgrade of the entire plant using world’s best available technology. The Shire supports the continued upgrade of the Eastern Treatment Plant to full-scale treatment of all effluent. The effects of fresh water toxicity should be further measured and investigated once ammonia concentrations have been significantly reduced. Tertiary filtration is expensive to implement and maintain. Australian Conservation Foundation Carrum Residents Action Group Carrum-Carrum Wetlands Forum Central Coastal Board Haby Martin Ross Wimbush Anne Barry Nicholas Effluent quality and quantity Effluent quality and quantity Effluent quality and quantity Clean Ocean Foundation Effluent quality and quantity Friends of the Earth Giles Karri Effluent quality and quantity Gunnamatta Surf Lifesaving Club Liberal Candidate for Flinders Mornington Peninsula Shire National Seniors Association, Mornington Peninsula Branch Robinson Rural Technology South East Water Community Addison Hunt Douglas Colin Greg Bruce Effluent quality and quantity Effluent quality and quantity Effluent quality and quantity GordonKirkby Mrs D Effluent quality and quantity Robinson Barry Effluent quality and quantity Effluent quality and quantity The current pipeline needs to be phased out over the next 10 years or so. Mothball the existing pipe and pumps and keep as insurance in a very wet year. Do tertiary filtration of all flows. Only way of addressing odour, colour, grease, litter and foam. Page 8 Organisation Consultation Group State Member for Dromana The Australian Greens Name Dixon MP Martin Category Effluent quality and quantity Summary of submission and foam. I strongly support the upgrade of the Eastern Treatment Plant to treat sewage to tertiary level. The environmental and economic benefits of this are worth the initial large capital investment. The further treatment of recycled water to reach a ‘California Title 22’ standard as achieved in South Australia. The South Australian Health Commission (SAHC) in consultation with the EPA adopted higher quality guidelines than the World Health Organisation to meet public health requirements for spray irrigation of crops eaten raw. The SAHC insisted on what is known as the 'California Title 22' in its treatment process train. A ‘Title 22 train’ consists of secondary treatment, coagulation, deep bed sand filtration and disinfections of recycled water. Because water from ‘California Title 22’ has been tested for nearly 30 years in California (home of litigation) it was possible for interested parties to obtain insurance cover at reasonable premium rates against general public and products liability in respect to the use of reclaimed water. Upgrade the treatment plant immediately to provide tertiary treatment. Support upgrade to ETP. Believe surfactants and oils need testing at plant and outfall. Greater focus on point source small industry. e.g. vehicle shops, restaurants. Support upgrade to potable standard. Recommend Eastern Treatment Plant is upgraded to the highest standard of tertiary treatment so that the treated water is up to standards for potable reuse, reducing waste disposal to the environment. Adopting the highest standards now will reduce the need for major, unplanned upgrades to meet changing community expectations. Our children spend a lot of time in the surf at St Andrews and Gunnamatta and although they have not been adversely affected - rashes, etc. - none of us would like to see the practice of pumping treated waste into the sea. Beach users believe health issues are not being addressed satisfactorily. Desktop studies are not satisfactory. A way needs to be found to more adequately test health risks. People have the right to be able to go to the beach and not get sick because of the effluent. The fact that Monash Uni found surfers and swimmers unlikely to be at an increased risk of illness proves how far off we are from cleaning the place up. I’m tired of copping ear and throat infections from the beach. Some of the locals have become ill after swimming at these beaches. Earaches amongst the surfing community have become too common. Page 9 Kelsall Henry Effluent quality and quantity University of the Third Age Westernport Seagrass Partnership Ltd. World Wide Fund for Nature Wannan Carroll Jeanie Peter Effluent quality and quantity Effluent quality and quantity Rouse Andrew Effluent quality and quantity Stratton Family Westernport Port Phillip Coastal Watch Association Lee Anne Health Health Valle Allsep Brent Craig Health Health Keith Thomas Eileen Graeme Health Health Organisation Name Scholten Perri MacKinnon Wells Herman Marc Michael Michael Category Health Health Health Health Summary of submission I get ear infections when surfing. The froth on the water’s edge - you wouldn’t dare to go swimming. I no longer swim at Gunnamatta, Boags Rocks or St Andrews beach after suffering intestinal infections, skin boils and ear, nose and throat infections. The water currently being discharged is definitely a health hazard. The detergent stench is really unbearable some days when the wind is onshore. It’s bad from Cape Schank to Blairgowrie. I know because of how my throat can feel after a surf. It has been shown that sludge is coming through the water, affecting the ears of our surfers who described it as very dirty. Being a long time local surfer who has suffered severe ear infections and sore throats after surfing at Gunnamatta, I would prefer to have no ocean outfall at all. I find it difficult to believe that surfers and swimmers are at no greater risk of microbacterial infections than at any other Melbourne beach, or is this the state of all our beaches? The surfers and swimmers of course go without saying they quite often get ear infections and eye irritations. The local arguments on water quality and health risks to swimmers and surfers at Gunnamatta I find hard to place great credibility in, in view of the extensive and intensive investigations by Monash University Epidemiology Group, who have consistently produced figures to indicate a very low risk in this area. The reference group for the CSIRO investigations received very extensive briefings from the team involved and I am happy to accept their research findings. This does not negate the community feelings to the contrary. With the increasing popularity of local beaches and rapid population growth in the area, the presence of any form of sewage outfall is unacceptable on health and aesthetic grounds. We believe that there should also be a comparison of the water quality of other beaches that do not have outfall drains in close proximity. Melbourne Water should also extend the microbiological assessment of the water by testing for viruses, parasites and bacteria, other than E. coli and faecal streptococci. I very rarely surf or fish this part of the coast for the fact of ear and throat infections. Barnes Pollock Maney Mrs GM Nathan Neil Health Health Health Calvert Hodges Philip & Geraldine Ron Health Health Schofield Sam & Isabel Bruce Health Mornington Peninsula Shire Douglas Health Rye Sports Committee, Peninsula Surfers Kellett Bruce Health Stratton Marine and beach From 10 years ago, we have noticed a difference in the rock pools, Gunnamatta side of Page 10 Organisation Name Family Pec Andrew Anne Category environment Marine and beach environment Marine and beach environment Marine and beach environment Summary of submission Boags Rocks. There doesn’t seem to be as much marine life as before. Surfing there with a south west wind has a distinct smell/odour, slight water discolouration and additional foam in the water making it very unpleasant. Testing should be done by independent authorities who report to EPA directly. This gives the public confidence in the system. Foam must be addressed properly. I walk almost every day on St Andrews beach. I frequently see brown foam and greasy or grey sludge on the beach. I can only assume this comes from the Eastern Treatment Plant. There are days when the effects on St Andrews are severe and I would not be swimming in such water. I have swum at many isolated beaches with water untouched by massive metropolitan sewage outfalls - the experience is totally different. Is the impact being measured further afield than Boags Rocks? For example, the beach at the east end of Gunnamatta beach also appears affected. It is only now that I realise how fragile places like Gunnamatta are. It only takes a little common sense to create a beneficial solution. I urge the Peninsula Project to do everything in its power to improve the area. When I was down at St Andrews beach I noticed that there was an algal bloom over the rock shelf. This could be attributed to the ammonia levels. I am worried about the algae competing with other species for resources starting off a eutrophication process. We don’t want any human impacts to disturb the balance of this marine ecosystem. Surely some short-term adjustments could be made to minimise effects. Structured deposits? When the water is coldest or when there are minimal tides and currents so the effluent can dissipate, doing less damage. With the continued discharge of waste water it is obvious that the quality of the ocean water has deteriorated. The smell out in the water has become more noticeable. Even the color of the white water is not the same as it was. Obviously further degradation of the beautiful coastline through effluent discharge is unacceptable. We have smelt odours, collected fat balls, cotton buds and panty liners on the pristine beach of St Andrews. We would like the pipe removed and the coastline restored. I am very disappointed in the quality of the water at certain times and the rubbish laying on the shore. I see a lot of things I don’t think are right: The smell at times makes me dry retch when jogging, the colour of the water, the black streak I can sometimes see going out to sea from the outfall pipe. It is an absolute shame to destroy a beautiful coastline. Page 11 Westernport Port Phillip Coastal Watch Association Lee Eaton Catherine Grant Dale Marine and beach environment Thomson Keith Richardson Dayne Eileen Erin Marine and beach environment Marine and beach environment Marine and beach environment Thomas Graeme Marine and beach environment Cople Scholten Graeme & Ruth Herman Marine and beach environment Marine and beach environment Organisation Name Ashton John & Margaret Category Marine and beach environment Summary of submission Over the years we have noticed an increase in the water and air pollution along the back beach between the Rye back beach car park and the outfall at Boags Rocks. More visible in the last few years is the grey/black discoloration along the waterline and the excessive amount of brown froth and foam on the waves and along the waterline. Also, more frequently now, the air pollution is very noticeable. Since fresh water is a pollutant when added into sea water, try to add salt into the fresh water and then pump it into the water using salt extracted from salt-contaminated areas. I can see the changes to our beautiful sea life and overall our beach. There are remnants of fat and gunk on the shores of Gunnamatta etc. Need to be more careful on what goes through the outfall. There is nothing alive at the outfall. The outfall is within the Mornington Peninsula National Park and from an ecological perspective, I feel compelled to write that freshwater is not a natural component of this ecosystem. The closest freshwater outfall is the estuary of Main Creek at Bushrangers Bay, east of Cape Schanck. Melbourne Water does not address this issue in their draft. I no longer see a waterline covered in cunjevoi, no abalone or other molluscs. Neptune’s Necklace and bull kelp have completely disappeared. Sometimes I feel that it is more than just the ocean that has been raped of its wonders. Please help return this beautiful coast to its former level of health and diversity. Despite the assurances provided by Melbourne Water and different authorities, at times I’ve found the water quality to be of a very bad standard and have ended up with eye and ear soreness after surfing at Gunnamatta. I have also become increasingly concerned with the increased number of what could best be described as grey ‘fat balls’ that I have seen washing up beaches from Rye all the way around to Somers. The present situation with excess ammonia, litter etc. is not acceptable. The water being discharged has been shown by CSIRO studies to be having an adverse impact on our precious environment. I could cry when I see what this sewer has done to our wildlife. Fish inedible, no plant life for many kilometres, penguins dead along the beach regularly. The smell alone puts you off. Detergents should be banned. Do we need gas masks soon? It was so black seven days ago. They have achieved wonderful results in Cairns, Queensland - can you do it here? We live directly on the St Andrews coastline with the overpowering ammonia stench, drifting plumes of effluent faeces and green algae foam. Page 12 McCaig Campbell McDonald Perri Josh Laura Laurence Marc Marine and beach environment Marine and beach environment Marine and beach environment Marine and beach environment Gray Mic Marine and Beach Environment Donohoe MacKinnon Thiele Michael Michael Mr & Mrs HK Marine and beach environment Marine and beach environment Marine and beach environment Barnes Karalis Mrs GM Nik Marine and beach environment Marine and beach environment Organisation Name Calvert Molzen Schofield Philip & Geraldine Rosemary Sam & Isabel Category Marine and beach environment Marine and beach environment Marine and beach environment Summary of submission The smell and sludge at Boags Rocks makes any visit to the area unpleasant. It’s a disgrace that Melbourne Water has been allowed to degrade a national park. I am also not in favour of using the open sea to discharge the effluent. We have noticed areas of brown discolouration in the surf and occasional unattractive deposits of brown foam left on the beach (between Rye back beach and St Andrews beach) after high tides. It seems reasonable to assume that this pollution emanates from the sewage outfall and is distributed along the shoreline by winds and tides. I visit Gunnamatta quite regularly and have noticed the effects to the waters and to the marine life. Something must be done to the sewage effecting our environment before the ocean is ruined, including the marine life. The marine environment around Boags Rocks is threatened with degradation of quality and species richness due to the discharge. As frequent visitors to St Andrews beach, we are often disturbed by the brown sludge that sometimes floats on the rock pools, the warm kitchen smell on the beach and the rainbow (coloured) foam on the beach and rock pools. These occurrences mainly occur when there is a southern breeze and make our beach rather unpleasant. Tertiary treatment would reduce the impacts I have become so used to seeing, being a frequent user of Gunnamatta, i.e. odours, dirty water, foam - especially when the wind is blowing from the south or southwest. I'm always disgusted and heartbroken to see the green sewage deposits on the shore as well as paddling out through murky, brown, bubbly, poo-tasting/smelling water. A major option could be not using Gunnamatta at all. Monitoring, especially long-term, is extremely important when assessing the effectiveness of any improvements in the treatment processes at Eastern Treatment Plant. Strongly support continued long-term monitoring by CSIRO to ensure ecological sustainability of the east coast. On a south easterly wind day, I can smell the sewer outfall. The sewage’s pungent smell is quite identifiable and noticeable. Walking along the beach, the foam outfall is also evident. I am a keen diver and have often noticed the distinct demarcation of brown water approximately 500 metres offshore whilst travelling by boat east of Cape Schanck. The distinct lack of fish and marine life is also evident. Another alternative is to close Gunnamatta beach. The number of people using or obtaining pleasure from Gunnamatta beach is extremely small compared to the rest of Page 13 Mitchell Sarah Marine and beach environment Marine and beach environment Marine and beach environment Wixey Bridgman Sharelle Stuart Binnie Tim Marine and beach environment Marine and beach environment Marine and beach environment Marine and beach environment Marine and beach environment Marine and beach environment Robinson Smith Australian Conservation Foundation Carrum Residents Action Group Concerned Citizens Haby Trevor Val Diana Martin Pugh Anne Chris Cups Landowners Association of Page Mr SD Marine and beach environment Organisation Victoria Name Category environment Summary of submission the Nepean Peninsula. This pleasure has been jeopardised by the nitrate problem to the aquifer. To close Gunnamatta would be politically possible compared to the political backlash if the nitrate problem is not dealt with. The marine dead zone caused by the discharge of fresh water into a salt water environment is common throughout the world. This is not a reversible condition. I am concerned that CSIRO has understated the ecological damage caused by the outfall at Gunnamatta. The damage is extensive to at least 12 kilometres of our 36 kilometre high-energy coastline from Portsea to Flinders. Gunnamatta is a moonscape. The whole of Gunnamatta stinks all the way to Rye back beach. It’s a disgrace to see the destruction of such a natural resource. Partially treated sewage discharged on Gunnamatta beach has had very significant effects on health, ocean reef systems, fish, sea birds and the coastal environment. Frankston Ladies Probus Friends of the Earth Love Giles Jean Karri Marine and beach environment Marine and beach environment Marine and beach environment Marine and beach environment Rye Sports Committee, Peninsula Surfers Surfrider Foundation in the Mornington Peninsula Kellett Bruce Thiele McIntyre Australian Breastfeeding Association Kimpton Mr & Mrs HK Victoria & Michael Martine Other Other Other If we would look into water revitalisers we may be able to help minimise the pollution. Contact Ecostream in Noosaville, Queensland. In this amazing time of technological wonder, can we not get some experts to come up with some dynamic, new, exciting ideas that improve our world? A brief submission supporting Melbourne Water' s current direction. (no name supplied) Outfall extension This upgrade proposal for the three kilometre piping is a crime. Instead, why not supply more pipes to people with farms who need it and will benefit? It will help the environment, help the farmers and the economy and help your reputations as managers of this state. Extending the outfall should not even be an option. Extending the pipe is a short sighted solution which has limited benefits. We will never accept such a backward step as a lengthening of the outfall. The cost would only be paying for a Band-Aid and a problem out-of-sight-and-nose-and-mind. Extending the outfall is not really going to fix the problem, just shift the problem to a different location. This is a very bad idea - you will have detrimental effects elsewhere. I do not support the extension of the outfall as I think the money would be better spent Page 14 Lord Pec Westernport Port Phillip Coastal Watch Association Lee Aaron Andrew Anne Outfall extension Outfall extension Outfall extension Cameron Dickinson White Chris Colin Outfall extension Outfall extension Outfall extension Organisation Name Category Summary of submission on the other options. It is clear that quality improvement and significant volume reductions (by recycling) are required to address the outfall problems. Bujeya Darren Outfall extension Please don’t extend the pipeline out at Boags Rocks. If you extend the outfall it looks like you are trying to hide the problem. If you also intend to sell 20 per cent or more recycled water by 2010, what is the sense in extending the pipeline? The second option we favour as a joint policy with recycling is to extend the outfall. I can see no point in extending the outfall out to sea because the fresh water can have adverse effects. Extending the pipeline is not an option - this is only transferring the problem, not solving it. Extending the outfall is not an option. We do not want the outfall extended. This proposal puts the problem out of sight - out of mind. It does not matter how far out the pollution is discharged to the ocean, it is still harming the environment. In this age of technology, we think it would be quite feasible to extend the outfall further out to sea coupled with better management of treatment plants to eliminate any solids getting this far. There should be no attempt to lengthen the outfall and so push the problem further out to sea. This may reduce the significant impact occurring in this ecosystem. The outfall should be removed completely i.e. not extended. Extending the outfall is just an ‘out-of-sight, out-of-mind’ option which carries no credibility. The option of simply extending the existing pipeline at Boags Rocks further out to sea to create an ‘out-of-mind, out-of-sight’ scenario is totally unacceptable. If tertiary filtration is not acceptable, surely extending the outfall would remove a number of problems currently being experienced. Some impact on the environment may be better than an adverse affect on humans. No quick fix (extending the pipe) is going to solve this problem. If your outlet is extended it will affect us just the same. I do not agree with extension of the outfall because it may interfere with the inshore and offshore environment of the area. Page 15 Bryceland Richardson Perkins Thomas Caple Burton Ashton Des & Peg Erin Graeme Graeme Graeme & Ruth Harna John & Margaret Kathie Kim Marc Matthew Mic Michael Outfall extension Outfall extension Outfall extension Outfall extension Outfall extension Outfall extension Outfall extension Strickland Stanley Perri Mackay Gray Donohoe Outfall extension Outfall extension Outfall extension Outfall extension Outfall extension Outfall extension MacKinnon Thiele von Bertouch Michael Mr & Mrs HK Mr D Outfall extension Outfall extension Outfall extension Organisation Name Snowdon Mrs Susan Category Outfall extension Summary of submission Definitely opposed to it - it would be more difficult to monitor especially the occasional solids which presently escape into the ocean (condoms and the like). Out of sight should not be out of mind. Please, please do not extend this pipeline out at Boags Rocks. If you extend the outfall it looks like you are trying to hide the problem and are unwilling to recognise its wider detrimental effects, which will haunt us all soon. There should be no attempt to lengthen the outfall and so push the problem further out to sea. The long outfall needs to be built immediately. This is something which has been of concern to us as local residents and regular users of the beach for many years. We would like to make a suggestion that may be of help in your endeavours. Can the discharge pipe be extended further out to sea so that the treated effluent has more of a chance of being dispersed by the ocean currents and wave action before it can reach Gunnamatta or any other beach along that section of the coast. If it is possible to do this, it may be a quick and simple solution to the problem. The proposal to ameliorate the diffusion of the outfall effect by constructing a new below-water outlet up to three kilometres and 32 metres below sea level is opposed on the grounds that the cost benefit would be better used by improving the Eastern Treatment Plant. Extension of the outfall would not be acceptable to the general public. The outfall pipe should be further off the coast, say five kilometres. I don’t think the extension of the outfall should be considered, as it doesn’t reduce the problem, it just shifts it further out. In regards to extending the pipeline, I believe this option is not feasible because it will damage the onshore and offshore environment and not fix the problem. No to extending the outfall. Extension of the outfall is not an attractive alternative but may be necessary in the long term. You claim extending the outfall will reduce impacts - aren’t you just pumping the same waste further out, so we don’t notice it until it builds up to such a point that it becomes an even bigger issue? Under no circumstances should the outfall be extended. This option is putting the Page 16 Steck Peter Outfall extension Strickland Calvert McMillan Peter Philip & Geraldine Roger Outfall extension Outfall extension Outfall extension Hodges Ron Outfall extension Schofield Gibbins Bridgman Birnie Smith Divers McIntyre Sam & Isabel Scott Stuart Tim Val Valerie Victoria & Michael Diana Outfall extension Outfall extension Outfall extension Outfall extension Outfall extension Outfall extension Outfall extension Australian Haby Outfall extension Organisation Conservation Foundation Carrum Residents Action Group Name Category Summary of submission effluent out of sight, out of mind and will have an impact on a currently unaffected marine area. Martin Anne Outfall extension Strongly object to extending outfall because it would move the discharge out of sight out of mind, resulting in failure to adequately monitor effluent levels, cause possible long-term damage to the benthic (seafloor) faunal community and funds would be better spent on cutting edge technology/innovation which could be used to upgrade to tertiary filtration. We are strongly opposed to extending the outfall. This option is not strongly supported because of the considerable expense of extending the outfall and the disruption caused by construction of the outfall both onshore and offshore. An extended outfall could cost between $26 million and $46 million with no guarantee that currents will not return the discharge to shore. Consider re-routing the pipeline to service areas where the water would not damage aquifers, streams or bays. I am not in favour of extending the outfall as a stand alone option as this solves none of the problems and would cause significant impact to the immediate Boags Rocks environment. Ultimately, the objective should be to end ocean outfall. Extending the outfall does not guarantee an acceptable level of protection for the surrounding marine environment. The costly nature of the outfall extension may also exclude, or delay for an unacceptable period, developing management options that use effluent as a resource. The shire does not consider this to be a sustainable option. The outfall extension may incur many environmental problems. Carrum-Carrum Wetlands Forum Central Coastal Board Cups Landowners Association of Victoria Gunnamatta Surf Lifesaving Club Liberal Candidate for Flinders Mornington Peninsula Shire Ross Wimbush Barry Nicholas Outfall extension Outfall extension Page Mr SD Outfall extension Addison Colin Outfall extension Hunt Douglas Greg Bruce Outfall extension Outfall extension National Seniors Association, Mornington Peninsula Branch South East Water Community Consultation Group Westernport Seagrass Partnership Ltd. World Wide Fund for Nature GordonKirkby Mrs D Outfall extension Outfall extension Must deal with the fresh water issues by an appropriate offshore outfall which maximises disposal. Have monitoring program. Tertiary treatment and extension of outfall needs to be examined as next short term (20 year) program. It is untenable to transfer the environmental impact to another ecosystem in the marine environment by increasing the length of the pipe. Page 17 Carroll Peter Outfall extension Rouse Andrew Outfall extension Organisation Name White Colin Category Research and development Summary of submission Relevant research must be undertaken on the impact of the effluent on the health of surfers if any authoritative conclusions are to be drawn. Current comparisons between surfers in the UK and surfers here (who spend much longer in the water) are irrelevant. Californian experience is more likely to have some relevance to Gunnamatta. Research into potable re-use will be necessary to determine the risks but it should commence sooner rather than later. Even with the development of fully integrated recycling schemes utilising effluent from ETP and the regional plants it is unlikely that more than a 20-30 per cent reduction in the volume of effluent discharged to the outfall will be achieved. The only economically viable option to achieve 90-100 per cent reduction in volume is the treatment and indirect re-use of effluent for potable purposes. I believe that Melbourne Water should be implementing R&D programs for future use of effluent. We hope that long term plans and goals are made with strong and transparent research backing even an extra cost to us, the users. It is your responsibility to employ top researchers to create best practice solutions. We recommend that more investigation and effort be put into finding a solution to reducing stormwater flows into the sewerage system. If re-use of treated effluent is to be considered, a long term monitoring program needs to be in place to guarantee public safety. We should look at what community demands will be 20-50 years into the future, rather than just patch up a problem based on today’s beliefs. We hope that long term plans and goals are made with strong and transparent research backing even at extra cost to us, the users. It is most important to choose the solution with the best long-term results. Upgrading from secondary to tertiary treatment will also have immediate short-term advantages. Tertiary treatment is a fundamental step in achieving a long-term sustainable solution. Upgrading to potable standard should also be viewed as a necessary long-term action. One problem we all have is taking a short-term view rather than a strategic long-term view. We need to look out at least 50-100 years. Current water re-use programs should be commended, however usage is only just over one per cent. The water needs to be treated as a resource, not a problem. Tertiary filtration will allow for an increase in recycling, which will allow us to reduce water consumption from our reservoirs. Water is such a valuable resource, therefore our efforts should be concentrated in this direction. Page 18 Hosking Bundred Smith Carrum-Carrum Wetlands Forum Ross Perri Heggart Bundred Central Coastal Board Mornington Peninsula Shire Robinson Rural Technology Wimbush Douglas Robinson Patricia Phillipa Val Barry Marc Mark Phillipa Nicholas Bruce Barry Research and development Research and development Research and development Research and development Timeframe Timeframe Timeframe Timeframe Timeframe Timeframe Swift MacKinnon Ben Michael Water conservation Water conservation Organisation Name Hamer Sir Rupert Karri Jeanie Category Water conservation Water conservation Water conservation Water recycling - agricultural Summary of submission Comprehensive longer-range objectives would include permission to install rainwater tanks in private homes. Composting toilets, water tanks and low flow shower roses should be available for purchase from your water retailer and payments could be paid off your bill. Introduce at least Stage one water restrictions without delay to reduce the demand on already depleted water storages. The government should be promoting the use of this water on farms instead of using fresh, drinkable water to water farm crops. We have a farm and need water desperately for olive trees but Melbourne’s water from the Carrum plant is too expensive and government is not willing to lay pipes near our property for us. The Carrum plant should urge farms to use their water so that fresh water is not used and less water goes out to Bass Strait. We’ve heard that a sugar beet farm to produce ethanol could take up much of the waste product. With that and the four new golf courses on the peninsula hopefully using this product, there seems to be some people who are using their heads to get around the problem. We are particularly excited about the beet farm project. More effluent should be recycled on the Peninsula - either on farming or vineyards. The 370 million litres of sewage and water discharged each day has to be treated and used as irrigation for non-domestic purposes and all relevant businesses, reducing the demand on our precious drinking water. $26-46 million seems a vast amount of money for a short pipe. How about sending fresh irrigation grade water to the Yarra Valley? Last year I purchased water for $1000 per week to irrigate my crops. The best proposal so far is water recycling for agriculture/farms and this should be put into practice very soon. I support the development of integrated effluent recycling schemes. Upgrading the effluent to class A quality is required for the proposed scheme to irrigate vegetables in the Clyde/Koo Wee Rup area and is a prerequisite for the development of any significant reuse schemes on the Mornington Peninsula. The possibility exists for the integration of this scheme into the Pakenham system by upgrading the effluent from that plant to class A also. Support the private consortium and State Government in securing the necessary funding and approvals to enable the Eastern Irrigation Scheme to proceed. Support any viable proposals for similar proposals for similar private/public partnership initiative for recycling schemes on the Mornington Peninsula. Initiate and support integration with the South East Water treatment plants and recycling schemes both at Pakenham and on the Mornington Peninsula. Encourage EPA to support and facilitate any sustainable recycling schemes put to it for Page 19 Friends of the Earth University of the Third Age Giles Wannan (no name supplied) Stratton Family Water recycling - agricultural Rijbeck Roth Adrian Chelle Water recycling - agricultural Water recycling - agricultural Grikscheit Chris Water recycling - agricultural Pollard White Chris Colin Water recycling - agricultural Water recycling - agricultural Organisation Name Bryceland Des & Peg Category Water recycling - agricultural Summary of submission consideration. Obviously, the recycling of the waste product would be the optimum solution. As only a very small amount is presently recycled, it is going to be a long time before this becomes a significant factor in reducing the outfall and the damage it does to the local beaches and the area in general. I applaud your review for the extension of the use of effluent for watering sports fields, agri-use and commercial use, particularly water supply (storage) for fire fighting and cooling. Why hasn’t the remaining water being discharged been redirected to areas inland for irrigation purposes? Encouraging agricultural and recreational sites to use the treated effluent is essential and must be followed up and supported. If the sewerage is to be offered as water for food production, then scientifically, we need to know how much load of each additive the water is carrying before it is used on further food production. The danger being a concentration of these chemicals as the new round of crops is treated at each step according to the practices they engage in. By reducing the aggregate of waste water by utilising technology. ie. the car wash industry can recycle in Western Australia 80-90 per cent of water used in the car wash business. Each industry can reduce their water use and costs by dealing with their type of waste in the responsible manner for the industry. At the moment the treated water being used for irrigation makes the soil ‘soapy’. A lot of farmers would be wary of using this water and possibly fouling their soil. If the treated effluent is upgraded by tertiary filtration, the water would be more desirable. Recycle the water to be acceptable for food growers. Huge market gardens could use this water instead of sucking our bore water dry, which is what is happening at the moment. Use of effluent at places like Koo Wee Rup should be strictly controlled so that nutrient flows into Westernport do not increase. Increase recycling initiatives to reduce dependence on Boags Rocks outfall. I would desire increased efforts to reduce inflow into Eastern Treatment Plant by up to 12 per cent diversion to the Western Treatment Plant by switching the available sewerage system. There are more recycling prospects from Western Treatment Plant due to the large land holdings by Melbourne Water that are currently dry lands and the generally drier climate in the Lara and Little River areas. I also desire increased efforts to reduce inflow into Eastern Treatment Plant by actively seeking to reduce infiltration into the sewerage system. Page 20 Cook Frank Water recycling - agricultural Manning Perkins Verhardt Gordon Graeme Jillian Water recycling - agricultural Water recycling - agricultural Water recycling - agricultural Cervi Joe Water recycling - agricultural Mackay Matthew Water recycling - agricultural Norris Paranaby Hodges Michael Mr R Ron Water recycling - agricultural Water recycling - agricultural Water recycling - agricultural Organisation Name Gibbins Scott Category Water recycling - agricultural Summary of submission As for the Eastern Treatment Plant, I don’t have many ideas except don’t pump it out to sea. It may be treated for re-use in parks in subsoil release or a plantation forest for irrigation. Achieving a substantial reduction in effluent discharged to the ocean by maximising water recycling is and has to be a priority of Melbourne Water and the community. The vision/goal could be that by 2010, 70 per cent of sewerage is to be recycled for irrigation; or by 2010 sewerage outfall to the ocean will be reduced by 70 per cent. Water recycling offers supreme potential for reducing the current waste of a valuable asset in treated effluent. The first objective should be to maximise existing schemes and the proposed scheme in the Koo-Wee-Rup area. A second, longer-term objective, should be to pursue a substantial increase in water recycling schemes for agriculture, municipal open spaces and horticulture. Existing users of potable water would need to be weaned to recycled effluent by lower prices for supply. Considerable capital expenditure would be needed for improved storage and distribution facilities. Aquifer recharge is one possibility for storage, otherwise a suitable above-ground site must be sought. Distribute more recycled sewage/water to farmers, which would make better use of the water and keep beaches cleaner. Surely there must be alternatives to outfalls? In a country full of desert, can we not pump water into the outback and reforest the barren areas? Strongly support legislation to enforce the use of recycled water for irrigation of agricultural, pastoral and recreational land. Improve infrastructure with medium-term strategy to use recycled water to replenish rivers, stream and wetlands. I am particularly concerned with the use of treated sewage effluent as irrigation water on the Nepean Peninsula and/or where this nutrient-rich water could enter, drain or seep into any aquifer, lake, bay or enclosed water, river, creek or stream. Land irrigation and unconventional agriculture: Pakenham, Cranbourne, Blind Bight and Tooradin Treatment Plants should have first rights to sell water locally. Woodlot irrigation: local species and durable saw log species should be encouraged. …drastically reduce the quantity of outfall by introducing a new water recycling program for use on farmland. One issue for Dalmore is urban sprawl. This is an issue for all areas of the peninsula. The amount of water use is fairly small, six to 15 per cent. This is important for a project which has a high capital cost and can only bring marginal benefits. Keep in mind also the shift in the market gardens from the sand-belt to Northern Victoria. The Cardinia Dam could be dedicated to store recycled water, however the quantities would be too great for irrigation in the area. Irrigation water could be sold/used to add value Page 21 Pianta Shane Water recycling - agricultural Hamer Sir Rupert Water recycling - agricultural Robinson McIntyre Carrum Residents Action Group Cups Landowners Association of Victoria Friends of the Earth Martin Trevor Victoria & Michael Anne Water recycling - agricultural Water recycling - agricultural Water recycling - agricultural Page Mr SD Water recycling - agricultural Giles Karri Water recycling - agricultural Liberal Candidate for Flinders Robinson Rural Technology Hunt Robinson Greg Barry Water recycling - agricultural Water recycling - agricultural Organisation Name Category Summary of submission to crops, etc. The water needs to be piped and stored, to be re-used in spring/summer in a lower rainfall area. From this perhaps woodlots could be irrigated on a large scale. The ammonia would not have to be removed if this was the case. Southern Peninsula Indigenous Flora and Fauna Association Collins Jim Water recycling - agricultural A long term improvement would be to increase the re-use of treated sewerage effluent. Irrigation would seem to provide on alternative usage worth considering, but initial calculations seem to indicate that it could cause more problems than it solves. South East Water have been operating a small (three megalitres per day) sewage treatment plant at Pakenham for some years, and their operating experience is relevant for similar usage in the area. with effluent water for irrigation required in the summer only, off season storage was needed. A 200 hectare farm was purchased and a 200 megalitre reservoir covering 30 hectares constructed, with a maximum recommended usage of 30 megalitres/hectare/year the effluent is supplied free to one dairy farm, two fodder farms and one turf farm and one golf course. If the 80ml/day of Melbourne Water effluent was all used for irrigation, it could require the equivalent of 27 such reservoirs, and need to be distributed over 10 square kilometres of land. To minimise the risk of pollution to Westernport Bay the irrigated areas would need to be widely dispersed and the farm run-off collected and re-used or treated to reduce pollutants prior to discharge. As a community we should support appropriate wastewater re-use schemes, however we must require prior evidence that they are appropriate. We need to be aware of the potential risks associated with wastewater re-use. We need to ensure that promoters of re-use have done the appropriate background studies to give us confidence that there is minimal environmental or health risk, and these studies should be available to the public. We need confidence that suppliers will accept that their responsibility and liability extends well beyond supply and extends to the use of their product and its impact and the receiving environments. We need to be convinced that users have been adequately trained and have the will and financial resources to demonstrate that their individual practices have kept risks to themselves, their workers, their neighbours and the general public to a minimum. Wastewater re-use should not lead to real or perceived problems with the quality of the resulting crops. The treatment should be of drinkable quality. Thirty-five businesses using recycled effluent not ‘H2O’ as you suggest, is hardly exciting but what is your best scenario for re-use? I have been told by Melbourne Water staff it is one per cent. Tertiary filtration would be the best of the three. With the recycling and reuse of waer in the home this would hopefully decrease the amount of water to be treated and therefore the cost involved. Is there any reason we couldn’t recycle to drinking quality? We must be prepared to spend large sums of money on recycling our water. A decision should be made now to treat sewage to a potable standard so that it can be re-used and Page 22 Westernport Catchment Implementation Committee Condina Pat Water recycling - agricultural Scally Ann Water recycling - domestic Hindle Chris Water recycling - domestic Bujeya Macmillan Darren Donald & Meg Water recycling - domestic Water recycling - domestic Organisation Name Richardson Manning Collins Erin Gordon James Category Water recycling - domestic Water recycling - domestic Water recycling - domestic Summary of submission not just discharged into the sea. Increase the use of recycled water by adapting separate garden pipeline for watering etc. I do not favour the use of recycled water for drinking - dangerous - unknown. The return of the treated sewage effluent to the reservoirs is the only practical method whereby the total amount can be recycled. If the water quality and the great cost of this alternative are unacceptable to the community then an ocean outfall will remain as the major discharge point, because the total volume of effluent is greatly in excess of all the combined land use alternatives. Most of the water can be reused and recycled for household use and industrial. If the community can reuse the water - not necessarily drink it - it would save a lot of problems. Recycle it and charge everyone if need be. It should be an urgent Melbourne Water priority to encourage the use of tanks for use of grey-water to flush toilets or garden use. We need sustainable waste management. There is no reason for effluent to ever leave a well designed home site. Utilise existing technology for (e.g.) greywater leaching beds and composting toilets. Local councils need to be brought up to speed - high density housing estates are not appropriate for sustainable development. I believe a potable upgrade is necessary. Discharge into aquifers and to inland waters would allow the total outfall to be eliminated over time by discharging large quantities by pipeline into the Latrobe catchment in the vicinity of Cardinia Reservoir. However, I do not think Melburnians are educated enough to allow recycling of potable standards into their pure water supply. Actively encourage large land developers to install local treatment plants, which, because their scale would be much smaller, could treat to much higher standards and encourage third pipe reticulation for non-potable uses. Water recycling offers supreme potential for extending the future supply of potable water by replacing some of its current uses. Comprehensive longer-range objectives would include the diversion of grey water from washing machines and bathrooms for garden watering. Evaluate use of recycled water for selected use in new high density residential areas (e.g. the new Carrum Downs development currently being discussed). This would necessitate a dual water supply, one for human consumption and one for external use, but the longer term cost benefits may justify the initial investment. Solutions could be incentives and legislative lobbying for people to re-use a lot of Page 23 Dellar Meredith Water recycling - domestic Wells Lambert Gale Michael Roger Rohan J Water recycling - domestic Water recycling - domestic Water recycling - domestic Hodges Ron Water recycling - domestic Hamer Sir Rupert Water recycling - domestic Tilley Trevor Water recycling - domestic Smith Val Water recycling - domestic Organisation Name Category Summary of submission waste water on their own properties or creating a showcase to show individuals using individual opportunities i.e. waste wise eco-friendly houses / water usage. Carrum Residents Action Group Carrum Residents Action Group Frankston (over 60) Think Tank Friends of the Earth Martin Main Anne Norma Water recycling - domestic Water recycling - domestic In the long term, acquire infrastructure to facilitate garden tap and toilet flush use of recycled water. Our population is increasing and our drinking water is decreasing. It is madness to dispose of water that could be recycled and help to take the pressure off our drinking water. No recycled water for drinking purposes. Grey water reuse can be a viable sewage reduction method. The study carried out by the CSIRO failed to define and analyse schemes that really would promote and subsidise individual household treatment and disposal of wastewater. Friends of the Earth reject the findings of this study. For the Melbourne area, potable water re-use is not an option, especially at $500 million. For urban use I do not think the use on gardens, etc. with a dedicated pipe system would be economic or practical. The Surfrider Foundation in the Mornington Peninsula represents over 200 members and associates who support the advocacy for a full upgrade of the Eastern Treatment Plant to produce potable standard water by no later than 2005. Melbourne Water could then find 100 per cent alternative uses for this water. In due course, the water could be treated to a class one potable standard which would enable it to be used to supplement our domestic water supplies. Upgrade treatment to standard required by the World Health Organisation for potable water. WWF acknowledges the current public reluctance for treated water to be used for human consumption, but this is likely to change with increasing public awareness of the need for water efficiency measures and growing confidence in water treatment technology. Indirect potable reuse via recirculating the treated water through Cardinia Reservoir is cost effective and enables up to 95 per cent reduction in sewage discharge to the marine environment. More effluent should be recycled through the catchment system now that Devilbend isn’t being used. It might be refilled and stocked with fish and made into a fisheries reserve. I think with the recent drought conditions it is very important to consider reuse and take advantage of possible reuse opportunities rather than wasting a valuable resource to the ocean. Page 24 Wallace Giles Evie Karri Water recycling - domestic Water recycling - domestic Robinson Rural Technology Surfrider Foundation in the Mornington Peninsula The Australian Greens University of the Third Age World Wide Fund for Nature Robinson Barry Water recycling - domestic Water recycling - domestic Kelsall Wannan Rouse Henry Jeanie Andrew Water recycling - domestic Water recycling - domestic Water recycling - domestic Rijbeck Adrian Water recycling - general Pec Andrew Water recycling - general Organisation Westernport Port Phillip Coastal Watch Association Name Lee Anne Category Water recycling - general Summary of submission No mention has been made of the future of smaller treatment plants. These are the way of the future. Recycling is much easier when it applied to one’s own backyard and also means the public is made responsible for what they flush. Recycling is not just for large business ventures. It needs to be done by all the population to be successful. Uptake for recycling purposes will certainly be gradual, but surely treating the water properly will give a more marketable product. If tertiary treatment is adopted then outfall water will be cleaner and the water will also be more suited to recycling and reuse. I would totally support upgrades to the Eastern Treatment Plant which would enable greater recycling of water, increased filtration and treatment. A concept is presented for exploiting under-utilised wastewater resources to support a photosynthesis system which synthesises hydrocarbon liquids as the primary harvestable product. The renewable hydrocarbons would supplement hydrocarbon feed stocks currently sourced from fossil crude oils. In addition, the photosythesis system would recycle the greenhouse gas, carbon dioxide. ...it would be good to recycle. Turn the outflow inland across the grasslands and not out to sea. Then it’s not going to matter. Recycling should be undertaken. We, the people who use the water and contaminate it with detergents or bodily wastes, should be prepared to pay the cost of recycling the water, whatever it takes. We would like the wastewater redirected so it can be safely used for irrigation. I support completely recycling of not only the water but the nutrients. Have you considered treatment of the solid organic wastes by earthworms using the recently developed automated process? I strongly favour the two options of recycling and tertiary filtration. Every effort must be made to recycle all waste as pure water. Water retailers be reorganised to promote only recycled water rather than a greater use of pure water. Our only aim for treatment of sewage and wastewater should be to move towards 100 per cent reuse of liquids and solids. My suggestion is that we should run a tertiary treatment plant that incorporates water recycling to stop outfall altogether. I completely agree with the proposal for water recycling. Parry Dickinson Eaton Hillen Bryan Cameron Catherine Dr Lance Water recycling - general Water recycling - general Water recycling - general Water recycling - general Heriot-Rice Robinson Thomas Caple Finton FX Graeme Graeme & Ruth Henry Water recycling - general Water recycling - general Water recycling - general Water recycling - general Broadbent Water recycling - general Taylor Strickland Perri Heggart von Bertouch Janet P Kathie Marc Mark Mr D Water recycling - general Water recycling - general Water recycling - general Water recycling - general Water recycling - general Page 25 Organisation Name Karalis Nik Category Water recycling - general Summary of submission Our aim within five years should be a total elimination of any waste emission. Melbourne Water should aim to recycle water for non-domestic uses and confirm back a timetable of these events. Every effort must be made to recycle all waste as pure water. Water retailers be reorganised to promote only recycled water rather than a greater use of pure water. We strongly support tertiary filtration and water recycling plans. Water recycling is also very important. Solve salinity in south-west Victoria by closing open irrigation channels to north-west Victoria and pumping potable standard (recycled) water for irrigation (possibly with hydro-electricity plants on the way). Other ideas: grow sugar beet for ethanol, grow Japanese hardwoods for timber, grow hemp for fibre, ethanol, building materials, provide drought relief for farmers. Encourage the introduction of sewer mining near areas where recycled water could readily be used for larger groups of parks and gardens. The submission also proposes a system for reticulating treated effluent from the Eastern Treatment Plant to parks and gardens in the Melbourne metropolitan area. As a dry continent we need more water recycling. But only to use it for trees for building purposes not for orchards, vineyards, hydroponics, etc. In Europe, the water is recycled and the sludge is dried out and sold as fertilizer. Surely this could be one of the considered options. Tertiary treatment would allow for increased effluent reuse. To encourage use of recycled water by local councils for sporting facilities and perhaps private sporting bodies (ie. Golf courses, sports fields, etc.) Melbourne Water could market to these organisations and provide consultancy services and assistance in preparing feasibility studies (cost/benefit analysis, pay-back, etc.) I think it is essential to recycle water, especially as drought and long, hot summers are literally draining our water supply. Water recycling is crucial for the future success of any plan to reduce the impact of Eastern Treatment Plant on the marine environment. Class A water has a much wider range of uses and can replace valuable potable water. It can be used in manufacturing, for market gardens including spray irrigation of salad crops, for vineyards and on golf courses, school and sports ovals. It could probably also be used in fire fighting. The more that water recycling is promoted and used, the less water has to be released at Boags Rocks and the quality of the discharge would not be a target for community groups who feel that the present effluent is a health hazard. Strickland Bundred Dyall Gale Peter Phillipa Rohan Rohan J Water recycling - general Water recycling - general Water recycling - general Water recycling - general Hodges Ron Water recycling - general Molzen Bridgman Birnie Tilley Rosemary Stuart Tim Trevor Water recycling - general Water recycling - general Water recycling - general Water recycling - general Divers Australian Conservation Foundation Haby Valerie Diana Water recycling - general Water recycling - general Page 26 Organisation Carrum-Carrum Wetlands Forum Concerned Citizens Name Ross Push Barry Chris Category Water recycling - general Water recycling - general Summary of submission Recycling is clearly the way to go. Melbourne Water’s target of 20 per cent by 2010 is far too conservative. We recommend a target of 40 per cent. In a society where population increases place added pressure on existing infrastructure, it makes good sense to look to renewable resources. Reclaimable use of grey water should become best practice within our governing bodies. The writer is concerned that a large quantity of treated water held at a local abattoir is a breeding ground for mosquitoes and disease and its release or use for irrigation on neighbouring properties could cause contamination. There are several undeveloped reuse opportunities on the Mornington Peninsula. Most of the opportunities are listed in the draft issues paper, but there are further opportunities requiring development. I will make a detailed proposal to Melbourne Water in the coming months. The proposal will outline ways of achieving the goal of the 20 per cent reuse target for 2010. Promote the use of recycled water and make it cost effective for potential users. Cost of connecting to the pipe has been prohibitive to potential consumers for many years. Increased use (reuse) translates to decreased discharge. Detention storage and sewer mining with local reuse are good ideas. Future storages could be part of wetland re-establishment. There is a threat of blue-green algae and the economics and ecology needs to be assessed. Aquifer storage and recovery: the Bridgewater and Koo Wee Rup aquifers would only be suitable to accept injections if treatment is upgraded to Class A. Preferable if industry is encouraged to recycle water. Third pipe schemes are of variable success and viability. The many developing golf courses in the Cups/Cape Schanck area may be potential candidates for recycled water, particularly if the quality is improved by tertiary treatment, reducing the period between irrigation and course access. Projects that view treated effluent as a resource are strongly encouraged. Our group favours water recycling. It seems a sensible, middle-of-the-road approach. Cranbourne North Residents Eastern Irrigation Mayles RK Water recycling - general Sayers Martin Water recycling - general Frankston Ladies Probus Friends of the Earth Love Jean Water recycling - general Giles Karri Water recycling - general Mornington Peninsula Shire Mornington Peninsula Shire National Seniors Association, Mornington Peninsula Branch Robinson Rural Technology Douglas Bruce Water recycling - general Douglas GordonKirkby Bruce Mrs D Water recycling - general Water recycling - general Robinson Barry Water recycling - general As well as the USA, Israel is also using recharge pumping. However the water quality would need to be high. Also loss of control of water and leakage/land movement are potential problems. Biosolids are an asset that could be sold as fertiliser as is being done in NSW at present. Ideas of where the shit can go instead of the ocean: the many golf courses on the coast, Page 27 Rye Sports Kellett Bruce Water recycling - general Organisation Committee, Peninsula Surfers Sandhurst Club Name Category Summary of submission the vegetable gardens at Boneo, council parks and sports ovals and Seawinds at Arthurs Seat. Cook Chris Water recycling - general We believe having a recycled water system providing irrigation water to the 1,850 residential lots and two golf courses we are developing at Carrum Downs would be an environmental showcase. Re-use won’t fix Boags Rocks. Pre-used oil pipelines to Sale useful? Is power easement useful? Are pine plantations in Yarram area useful users? Koo Wee Rup not an option: uptake (low demand), concern about environmental impact on Westernport head. Will run into drains? For health, environmental and economic reasons, this must be upgraded to class A along similar lines to the Bolivar Sewerage Plant in South Australia. Once this has been achieved, the reclaimed water has a far larger scope for re-use possibilities. Most of the vineyards, golf courses and market gardens are located within close proximity to the existing pipeline, which runs to Boags Rocks. Once water leaving the Eastern Treatment Plant is of a desired quality, it would be relatively simple and inexpensive to access this water source. There are other possibilities for this reclaimed water. For example, a pipeline to Gippsland could create drought-proof regions and additional wetlands, as well as providing water resources for CFA firefighting purposes. Not only would this reduce the amount of water currently being removed from the Gippsland river systems, but could also provide a means of supplementing water flows in rivers such as the Thompson and LaTrobe. Reclaimed water use requires strategic environment assessment. Future salinity issue. South East Water Community Consultation Group The Australian Greens Kelsall Henry Water recycling - general Water recycling - general Westernport Seagrass Partnership Ltd. Carroll Peter Water recycling - general Hodges Ron Water resource planning I would also like to see more effort in forward planning to reduce the quantity being discharged because the current emphasis on recycling is unlikely to reduce the discharge by more than 20 per cent. The assessment of the future of the eastern outfall must be made within the context of whole water cycle management. The Victorian Water Resources Strategy, which is being prepared concurrently with the draft ETP works approval, would be an ideal forum in which to explore outfall management options. It would appear to date that there has been no practical link between the two projects, each evolving as two very separate processes. Want to see Water Resources Strategy. Water planning to be integrated with population and development policy. Recommend a major program to reduce stormwater flow into the sewerage system be Page 28 Mornington Peninsula Shire Douglas Bruce Water resources planning Westernport Seagrass Partnership Ltd. World Wide Fund Carroll Peter Water resources planning Rouse Andrew Water resources planning Organisation for Nature Name Category Summary of submission initiated at the same time as the upgrade to reduce peak flows and close the loop of Melbourne’s water consumption and treatment. Rather than using water once before disposal, it enables water to be reused many times. Strickland Strickland Lambert Tilley Kathie Peter Roger Trevor Water supply Water supply Water supply Water supply More dams are not the solution to water shortages. More dams are not the solution to water shortages. It should be an urgent Melbourne Water priority to encourage the use of private water tanks, to the extent of heavy subsidy for their installation. With the increasing population and growth in residential, retail, industry and sporting/recreation developments we have a real need to either increase the amount of water storage available and/or implement better utilisation of our recycled water resources. Building new dams is no longer acceptable to the community, neither is taking any more water from another catchment. Class A water will become an invaluable resource when Melbourne’s water authorities have to grapple with the task of sourcing more water for a growing population. There should be water tanks in all new buildings and availability at a reasonable price to all existing buildings. Even if all sewage from the eastern and south-eastern suburbs is recycled, an additional major storage will have to be constructed soon. Investigation of suitable dam sites should begin shortly. I feel one way of recycling water would be to build new lagoons at the northern end of Seaford Wetlands. I would like to see at least some of the clean water transferred to Edithvale/Seaford wetlands, Braeside Park. Class A water could be used to enhance wetlands on the Peninsula within Melbourne Water-owned land, such as the south-west corner of Eastern Treatment Plant and along Boundary Road. Enhancing of existing wetlands struggling because of changes in their water regime or the construction of new wetlands would increase the biodiversity of the region. Wetlands can be an important component of sewage reduction, but require high-grade treatment. The construction of wetlands within lands owned by Melbourne Water at the Eastern Treatment Plant will increase the aquatic and aerial biodiversity of the region, as well as provide additional habitat for species protected by the RAMSAR agreement. The Carrum-Carrum Lowlands Forum has four recommendations which will greatly enhance the area as a habitat for waterfowl including many migratory species. Four Page 29 Australian Conservation Foundation Frankston (over 60) Think Tank University of the Third Age Haby Diana Water supply Wallace Wannan Evie Jeanie Water supply Water supply Snowdon Snowdon Australian Conservation Foundation Haby Ken Mrs Susan Diana Wetlands Wetlands Wetlands Friends of the Earth The Australian Greens Giles Kelsall Karri Henry Wetlands Wetlands Organisation Name Category Summary of submission wetlands - Boundary Road Wetland, Land bounded by Eel Race Drain, Boggy Creek and Mornington Peninsula Freeway, Peninsula Aeronautical Radio Control Society Wetland, and land in south west corner of the ETP. Page 30