Standing Committee Meetings – Technical Services · Three Water & Sewerage staff attended the annual WIOA (Water Industry Operators Association) Conference in Rockhampton. Biggenden

2016

BIGGENDEN

North Burnett Regional Council

06 July, 2016

Standing Committee Meetings – Technical Services

North Burnett Regional Council Technical Services Agenda – 06/07/2016

NORTH BURNETT REGIONAL COUNCIL TECHNICAL STANDING COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA – BIGGENDEN – 06 JULY 2016

342

DOCUMENT 766188 Attendees Agenda Item 1 Attendees Welcome Agenda Item 2 Welcome / Housekeeping Apologies Agenda Item 3 Apologies

Declaration Agenda Item 4 Declaration of Interest Deputations Agenda Item 5 Deputations Infrastructure Agenda Item 6 Infrastructure Report 6.1 Technical Services Report 003-012 6.2 Environmental Services Report 013-019 6.3 Wild Dog/Dingo Scalp Bounty Price Report 020-023 6.4 Wild Dog/Dingo Scalp Management Procedure and Bounty Policy 024-032

6.5 B-Double Application Review 033-056

Confidential Agenda Item 7 Confidential Report 7.1 Confidential Report 01 General Business Agenda Item 8 General Business Closure of Meeting Agenda Item 9 Closure of Meeting

INFRA 01 - TECHNICAL SERVICES INTERNAL REPORTS 07/16

Responsible Officer: Trevor Harvey – Manager Technical Services

Report prepared by: Trevor Harvey –Manager Technical Services

PART A WATER AND WASTE WATER

Reporting Period: 16/05/2016 to 15/06/2016

Water Operations:

Monthly Statistics

Water usage at the conclusion of the reporting year returned close to the previous years averages.

Water Consumption Litres/Connection/Day

Biggenden Eidsvold

Gayndah Monto

0

500

1000

1500

2000

25002012/16

2015/16

0

500

1000

1500

2000

25002012/16

2015/16

0

500

1000

1500

2000

25002012/16

2015/16

0

500

1000

1500

2000

25002012/16

2015/16

3

Mount Perry Mulgildie

Mundubbera

Water Maintenance:

General

Water Meter reading commenced during the month for the mid year billing cycle.

The regional project for installation of on-line analysers has been completed in all reticulated water schemes including SCADA connection with trending and alarm outputs. Installation on the two stand alone schemes (Mingo & Paradise) will be completed (with local alarms only) by end of financial year.

Three Water & Sewerage staff attended the annual WIOA (Water Industry Operators Association) Conference in Rockhampton.

Biggenden

The water analysis results from the test bore were received and as a result the development of the test hole to a full production bore has commenced.

An inspection of the clarifier and filter by a structural engineer was completed. It is expected that a report outlining temporary repairs will be received within 4 weeks. Subject to budget approval this work will be scheduled for the next financial year which will delay significant planned capital expenditure on the plant for approximately3 years.

Four service connection breaks were repaired.

0

500

1000

1500

2000

25002012/16

2015/16

0

500

1000

1500

2000

25002012/16

2015/16

0

500

1000

1500

2000

25002012/16

2015/16

4

Eidsvold

Work was of routine nature during the month.

Civil construction for the new WTP has continued with preparations for the pouring of the shed floor and concrete lining of the sludge lagoons 70% complete. This concrete pour is programmed to be completed before the end of June. Off-site manufacture of the vessels is to program. The carbon filters have been completed, the flocculation tank will be completed and the fabrication of the two Lamella separators will occur before the end of June. This project is currently on plan.

Gayndah

Work was of routine nature during the month. Nine service connection breaks were repaired.

The installation and commissioning of the new hydrochloric acid dosing plant was completed.

Monto

One main break and sixteen service connection breaks were repaired. Other work was of routine nature.

Mount Perry


Mundubbera

Two main breaks and four service connection breaks were repaired.

Mulgildie

Mulgildie Artesian Bore Production Mulgildie Artesian Bore Level

Bore characteristics stabilised during the month with the pumping water level remaining close to the top of the bore casing. Closed bore pressure still remains less than 60% of the base line data measured in 2011.


Waste Water Maintenance

General

Nil.

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

30

/11

/20

11

23

/4/2

01

2

4/9

/20

12

13

/11

/20

12

23

/1/2

01

3

13

/3/2

01

3

23

/4/2

01

3

26

/11

/20

13

15

/4/2

01

4

22

/8/2

01

4

16

/12

/20

14

7/5

/20

15

10

/8/2

01

5

1/4

/20

16

Flow (l/s)Pressure (kPa/100)

0

2

4

6

8

10

2/5/2013 2/5/2014 2/5/2015 2/5/2016

Standing Water LevelPumping Water Level

5

Biggenden


Eidsvold


Gayndah


Monto


Mundubbera


6

PART B BUILDINGS AND FACILITIES Reporting Period: 20/05/2016 – 19/06/2016 Prepared by: Melinda Thorburn Maintenance

As of 19 June 2016, there are 65 open tasks to be actioned. Approximately 83 tasks have been received this month. During the month approximately 82 task requests were completed.

CONSTRUCTION Works in Progress Eidsvold SES Shed Fit out:

Shelving is currently being manufactured for placement inside the shed. All other works are complete.

Eidsvold Hall Kitchen Upgrade –

Kitchen has been gutted, new flooring laid and stainless steel benches installed. Cabinetry will be installed in week commencing 20 June 2016 with project on track to be completed and ready for use by end of June 2016.

Eidsvold Cricket Building storage enclosure –

This work has been completed.

Biggenden Swimming Pool:

Quotes have been received and contract has been awarded. Work is to commence shortly.

Biggenden Aged Units – Drainage Assessment and repair

Council works department has completed this work. Biggenden Grandstand replacement

The grandstand has been completed.

Amenities – Monto Lions Park – New Disabled toilet and refurb of existing toilets

Work is currently in progress. A small toilet block has been hired and installed for use while toilets are

unavailable during construction/refurbishment.

Council Facilities – Lock standardisation

7

Purchase Order has been placed for hardware and installation for water and sewerage infrastructure across the region.

Monto Hall – Water damage repair and internal repaint

Contractor is currently painting the interior of the Hall. Painting will be completed by 30 June 2016.

Monto Memorial Park fence replacement

Purchase Order has been placed for the fence replacement and will commence shortly.

Regional - Playground equipment upgrade

New equipment has been ordered and awaiting delivery. Softfall has been delivered and is currently being installed in playgrounds.

Regional Council Housing works – 5 year plan

Work is being finalised as per 5 year Housing plan. Gayndah Hall Floor refurb –

The windows have been freed up and cords replaced; The floor has been sanded and polished and will be available for use from

Monday 27 June 2016. Mt Perry Hall Stumps

Damaged stumps have been replaced. This project is now complete.

8

Part C Asset Management Report Reporting Period: 20/05/2016 – 19/06/2016

Assetic

Continued progress on modules within Assetic is providing good information and improvement to Councils asset registers. The buildings asset register requires finalising in the Monto area and the plant module is now up to date and providing a good snapshot of Councils fleet. A plant analysis spreadsheet that has been developed is providing a secondary point of truth for depreciation values as well as operational costs including summaries of plant groups. Further interrogation of this information is allowing better management of Councils fleet. GIS

General maintenance has been performed with a focus on B-double routes and water assets. Ongoing amendments are being made to the online maps to ensure they reflect the most recent surveys competed by Proterra. This information is critical for the upcoming financial revaluation of our water and waste water infrastructure.

Rural Addressing/Road Renaming

Verification of infrastructure on Herberts Road and Garnetts Road has been completed along with registration of these road names with Department of Natural Resources and Mines.

Additional information has been received from DNRM to outline anomalies between Councils property address database and the DNRM database with approximately 800 addresses. These issues are being investigated through the business system development and the Names and Address Exchange.

A recent customer request regarding rural address issues with on-line driver’s

license renewal has uncovered another issue where Qld Transport address data base is not automatically updated from the DNRM data base. To resolve this issue the customer has to ring Qld Transport and request them to manually over-ride their address data base. In the case of the customer request mentioned above the lag of the Qld Transport data base update has been approximately 18 months.

Data Collection

Bitumen seal inspections will be completed by Friday 24th June allowing condition assessment details to be updated. Once updated, a reseal program and potential pavement rehabilitation proposal can be completed along with an update to Councils financial values for the seal components.

9

Two Way Repeaters/Communication Installation of Digital Radios within Council fleet is ongoing with 41 radios now purchased. Repeater towers are operating at Mt Perry Mountain and the Biggenden Water Tower, with repeater infrastructure also purchased for Mt Gayndah. Installation of this will be completed along with the proposed installation of Quaggy Mountain (Eidsvold) Evans Bend (Coominglah) and Bancroft Towers (Monto). Councils Wireless Wide Area Network (WWAN) has been installed and is also now operating in Gayndah, Biggenden, Mount Perry and Mundubbera. A marginal link to the Bancroft Tower (Monto) has been established, however the link into the Monto office has not yet been completed due to reliability issues and budgets being exhausted for this financial year. Further progress to Eidsvold is delayed due to the Eidsvold water treatment plant project and the AC Rock (Mundubbera) tower being unsuitable to install additional infrastructure. TV Towers Multiple issues have been identified during the most recent maintenance visit at the three retransmission towers including the SBS transmitter at Cania View failing which his been replaced at a total cost of $10,500. Other issues that require attention include upgrading the remote telemetry units ($4500 each) at Bancroft and Cania View to 3G capable units as a result of Telstra turning off the GSM network as well as replacing ageing antennas and coax cable to improve service reliability. Further more, a request has been forwarded to N-Com and Satellite Television & Radio Australia to provide quotes to perform routine maintenance for the next 2 year period. This process is to ensure we are receiving value for money during maintenance and to meet our purchasing requirements. An additional request has been made to Satellite Television & Radio Australia to update the site report documents previously completed to assist in identifying additional ways of improving the service reliability at all three locations. Further information including a components list for financial valuation purposes is also proposed.

10

Plant Procurement

Deliveries

1x Fuso Canter job truck has been delivered to Mount Perry 1x Toro Mower has been delivered to Mount Perry 1x Slasher has been delivered to Eidsvold

Proposed Orders Proposed purchases for early July include,

1x John Deere Grader 1x Cat Backhoe 1x Quad axle float

Disposals The next planned disposal is in Biloela on 6th July 2016.

Vehicles for Disposal include:

1x Holden Colorado 4x4 Dual Cab Utility 1x Isuzu Job Truck 1x Kubota Mower 1x Volvo Grader

11

CAPITAL BUDGET 2015/2016

Capital Projects

Bu

dg

et

Co

mm

itte

d

Exp

en

dit

ure

% C

om

ple

te

Water Infrastructure 2,909,025 2,466,242

Biggenden Raw Water Pump Switchboard replacement

45,000 44,288 100%

Eidsvold WTP replacement 2,100,000 1,783,008 30%

Gayndah Clarifier Refurbishment 75,000 58,266 85%

Gayndah Containerised HCl Dosing Facility 99,000 105,000 100%

Gayndah North pressure supplementation (design)30,000 18,000 55%

Gayndah Supernatant sludge separator 100,000 86,938 75%

Regional Meter, Hydrant, Connections & Mains 373,025 309,568 85%

Regional Statutory System upgrade for DWQMP 57,000 31,341 80%

Mulgildie WTP cooling tower replacement 30,000 29,833 85%

Sewerage Infrastructure 441,000 455,881

Gayndah Rising Main Replacement - Oakey Creek180,328 180,575 100%

Gayndah STP No2 lagoon modification (yr 1 of 2) 100,000 114,606 100%

Regional Sewerage main & manhole replacements160,672 160,700 100%

Buildings & Other Structures 945,600 868,843

Biggenden Aged Facility Drainage Repair 15,000 4,730 80%

Amenities Lions Park Monto refurbish 95,000 87,648 65%

Amenities Beiers Park Demolish 10,000 3,544 100%

Biggenden Caravan Park Caretakers cabin refurb 11,000 9,300 85%

Council Facilities lock standardisation (yr 1) 70,000 69,599 55%

Monto hall repair internal water damage 38,000 47,500 85% Balanced under Q3 adjustment

Eidsvold Hall Kitchen upgrade 55,000 52,889 85%

Gayndah Hall Windows & Floor 30,000 17,431 90%

Mt Perry Hall Stumps 10,000 4,655 100%

Council Housing 5 yr plan repairs 90,000 87,430 85%

Monto Memorial park side fence replacement 10,000 14,309 50% Balanced under Q3 adjustment

Kenny Russell Memorial Bronzing 0 RADF Project overseen by Communities

Regional Playground Upgrades 60,000 38,163 85%

Rubbish Bin Covers (2 per town) 0 0% Removed from Budget at Q2

Eidsvold SES Shed fitout 50,000 47,056 95%

Eidsvold Cricket Building enclosure 15,600 8,000 100%

Signage - Paradise Dam & Mingo Crossing 0 0% Unknown project - Melinda Jones?

Biggenden sportground grandstand repair 25,000 24,500 100%

Swimming Pool Biggenden changeroom upgrade 170,000 121,440 85% Balanced under Q3 adjustment

Swimming Pool Mundubbera Filter replacement 165,000 214,243 100% Balanced under Q3 adjustment

Plant 1,400,000 1,386,898

Cars, Utes, Yellow Plant and appliances 1,200,000 1,598,063 100%

Sale of Plant -404,065 100%

Digital radio vehicle communications system including towers (Yr 1 of 3) 200,000 192,900 95%

JUN

E

JULY

AU

GU

ST

SEP

TEM

BER

OC

TOB

ER

NO

VEM

BER

DEC

EMB

ER

JAN

UA

RY

FEB

RU

AR

Y

MA

RC

H

AP

RIL

MA

Y

12

INFRA 02 ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES REPORTS

07.2016

Responsible Officer: Mike Moller – Acting Manager Environmental Services Report prepared by: Katrina Cekanauskas – Administrative Assistant

1 PURPOSE OF REPORT The purpose of this report is to provide Council with information in relation to reported activities carried out particularly in the areas of Environmental Health, Trade Waste, Vermin and Vector Control, Waste Management/Collection and Natural Resource Management. 2 INTRODUCTION/BACKGROUND The attached reports detail statistical information for the months of May and June 2016 in the areas of Food Business, Vector Management, Waste Management Services, Wandering Livestock and Pest and Weed Management. 3 CORPORATE/OPERATIONAL PLAN In accordance with outcome 4 Increasing the quality of water, land, air and the extent of biodiversity in the region. With particular relevance to sections 4.1 Pest Management, 4.2. Stock Routes, 4.3 Waste Management, 4.4 Environmental Health and 4.6 Natural Resource Management. 4 POLICY IMPLICATIONS

Not applicable. 5 STATUTORY REQUIREMENTS Environmental Protection Act 1994, Food Act 2006, Waste Reduction and Recycling Act 2011,Public Health Act 2005 and Land Protection (Pest and Stock Route Management) Act 2002.

6 FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS Not applicable. 7 RISK MANAGEMENT Not applicable.

13

8 CONSULTATION Reports have been prepared in conjunction with relevant staff. 9 OPTIONS FOR COUNCIL TO CONSIDER

For Councillors information only. 10 OFFICER’S COMMENTS/CONCLUSION For Council’s consideration. 11 ATTACHMENTS For the months May and June 2016.

Environmental Health Monthly Summary Report Natural Resources Management Report

14

Page 1 of 2

Environmental Health Monthly Summary Report

1.1 Food Business Inspections Compliant - MAY

New Food Business 0

Re-inspection 1

Number of complaint inspections 1

Request for Search 0

1.2 Application Assessments - MAY

New Application – Mobile Food Business 0

New Application – Temporary Food Business 0

New Application Fixed 0

Amendment 1

Annual Review – Food Business 0

Food Licence Renewals for 2016/2017 financial year were sent out on 5 May 2016.

2.0 Public / Community Events - Food Notifications

Month Number of notifications

MAY 2016 3

3.0 Local Government Weekly Notifiable Disease Report for North Burnett.

2016 MAY

Gayndah Biggenden Eidsvold Monto Mundubbera

Mount Perry

Campylobacter Enteritis 0 0 0 1 1 0

Ross River Virus 0 0 0 1 0 0

Salmonella Specified 0 0 0 0 0 0

Salmonellosis Unspecified 0 0 0 0 0 1

Cryptosporidiosis 0 0 0 0 0 0

15

Page 2 of 2

4.0 Vector Management

Limited number of mosquitoes during winter. Environmental Services will continue to monitor on a monthly basis during this time.

5.0 Waste Management Services for May 2016

5.1 Kerbside Collection Units - MAY

Domestic 11857

Additional Services 20

Infirmed 116

Commercial and School 4378

Litter Service 728

Not for profit 488

Events

Total Services 17587

6.0 Waste Education Activities

Environmental Services are in the process of applying for a grant under the Keep Australia Beautiful Beverage Container Recycling Program. The aim is to give Council’s recycling areas at the Waste Management Facilities a facelift and promote these throughout the towns.

7.0 Community Event Package

The Community Event Package has been presented to a Council Meeting with further amendments to be made. Graphics are to be finalised for the Community Event Package.

8.0 Environmental Compliance

No inspections undertaken.

16

Page 1 of 3 Doc Id 764335

Natural Resource Management Report

25th May to 17th June 2016

Contents

Pest Survey Program ........................................................................................................................... 1

Biosecurity Act (2014) ......................................................................................................................... 1

Wild Dog / Dingo Management .......................................................................................................... 2

Flying-fox Management and Monitoring ............................................................................................ 2

Department of Transport and Mains Roads ....................................................................................... 2

Other projects and grant funding ....................................................................................................... 2

Forward List of Work for Q4 2015/16 ................................................................................................. 2

Customer Service Requests for calendar year to date ....................................................................... 3

Pest Survey Program The current rotation of properties for the Pest Survey Program commenced on the 1st April 2016 for a period of 3 months. To date the program has been running well and property owners have assisted with the inspections. Letters have been forwarded to all property owners to thank them for their co operation and to advise if any declared plants and animals were found. Duration and location of this survey is broken up into Parish localities as follows:

Parish (Locality) Survey Time

All properties in the North Burnett Regional Council area. 1st July 2015 to 30th June 2016

Aranbanga, Biggenden, Blairmore, Branch Creek, Coominglah,

Coominglah Forest, Dundarrah, Dykehead, Gurgeena, Harrami,

Hawkwood, Mulgildie, Mundubbera, Old Cooranga, Penwhaupell,

Pile Gully, Rawbelle, Riverleigh, Selene, The Limits, Toondahra,

Wahoon, Wetheron, Woodmillar, Yarrol

1st April 2016 to 30th June 2016

Biosecurity Act (2014) All NRM Team personnel have completed training in the Biosecurity Act (2014). Assessments of competence are ongoing with Letters of Appointment and associated ID/Authorisation Cards to be issued accordingly. A policy and procedure is being developed for the implementation of future “Surveillance Programs” (previously referred to as “Pest Survey Programs”) in compliance with the Biosecurity Act (2014).

17


The Biosecurity Act (2014) commenced on the 1st of July, with NBRC needing to redevelop its “Pest Management Plan” into the required “Biosecurity Plan”, along with implementing an associated “Surveillance Program” and “Prevention and Control Program”. Under the Biosecurity Act (2014) NBRC will assume more authority and responsibility in the management of “biosecurity risks” across the North Burnett region, including being the primary administrator of the legislation for the region. (“Biosecurity risks” refers to the management of “Biosecurity Matter” - formerly commonly referred to as “declared pests”, but under the act includes substantially more potential “risks”). Wild Dog / Dingo Management A Report to Council containing information and management options has been presented for consideration. The information and management options relate to management policy, programs and procedures, including scalp bounty pricing and application. Flying-fox Management and Monitoring A Report to Council containing information and management options has been presented for consideration. Presently the Oakey Creek Flying Fox Roost is unoccupied. (0 Flying Foxes) Department of Transport and Mains Roads Funding is currently been sought through the Department of Transport and Mains Roads (TMR). The following opportunities are being considered by TMR:

2016/17 Element 5 – Declared Weed Management along Mains Roads Contract

the control of declared pests not already managed under existing/previous contracted works within mains roads easements

mapping of declared pests using technology such as IPad’s/Smartphones and associated applications/software.

Other projects and grant funding There are presently no other NRM projects or grant funding. Forward List of Work for Q4 2015/16 1. Property inspections under the Pest Survey Program –Declared Plants and Animals 2. Clean road inspections throughout the North Burnett Region 3. Inspections and treatment of declared weeds on Council roads 4. Inspections and treatment of declared weeds on state roads 5. Vector Management inspections and dipping 6. Stock route grazing / travel permits 7. Wandering livestock responses 8. Fortnightly / monthly inspections of public and depot wash down facilities 9. Rubber Vine inspections on creek lines 10. Negotiations to secure future funding opportunities for NRM projects/initiatives 11. Procedure and policy development –

18


a. Biosecurity Plan / Program b. Surveillance Program Property Inspection Policy / Procedure c. Pre Purchase Property Inspections Policy d. Stock Route Grazing / Travelling Policy e. Feral Cat Management Policy

12. Standardisation of NBRC’s LPO vehicles in terms of signage and safety equipment 13. Introduction of blood toxicity testing program for LPO’s 14. Updating and improved utilisation of NBRC website for advertising/publishing NRM

functions/initiatives. Customer Service Requests for calendar year to date

Type of Request Year to Date Total May 2016 Total

Wandering Livestock reports 42 3

Declared Pest Reports a. Council responsible locations b. Community guidance/assistance requests c. Baiting Enquiries d. Equipment Hire

2

20 42 27

0 6

13 8

Approval to Burn 7 7

Stock Route Grazing/Travel Permits 7 2

Other 5 2

19

IINNFFRRAA 0033 WWIILLDD DDOOGG//DDIINNGGOO SSCCAALLPP BBOOUUNNTTYY

PPRRIICCEE 0077..22001166

Responsible Officer: Brendan Pearce, General Manager Engineering and

Environmental Services Mike Moller, Acting Manager Environmental Services Report prepared by: Tom Hayes, Natural Resource Management Officer

1 PURPOSE OF REPORT To inform Council of wild dog/dingo scalp bounties across the greater Wide Bay Burnett region and other nearby regions such that it may be appropriately informed in deciding what bounty should be utilised by NBRC. This report is to be considered in conjunction with an associated report to Council regarding Wild Dog/Dingo Management Policy and Scalp Bounty Procedure. 2 INTRODUCTION/BACKGROUND The management of wild dogs/dingoes is the responsibility of each land owner/occupier. Each land owner/occupier has a “General Biosecurity Obligation” (GBO) to “take all reasonable and practical measures to prevent or minimise the biosecurity risk” (with “due diligence”) of any declared pests/biosecurity risks. (s23 to s28 - Biosecurity Act 2014). This includes wild dogs/dingoes. Council’s role in the management of wild dogs/dingoes is to:

Support the community and Enforce responsibilities in relation to compliance with legislation and

NBRC’s Pest Management/Biosecurity Plan and associated programs. Presently NBRC provides the following in relation to wild dog/dingo management;

$20.00 bounty for all scalps of suitable condition provided to NBRC. Coordinated 1080 baiting programs where participants provide their

own meat and NBRC injects the meat with 1080 poison at no cost to the customer.

Private works to inject meat supplied by the customer with 1080 at no cost to the customer.

Foothold traps available for hire at no cost, subject to the lodging of a $70.00 bond refundable upon return in acceptable condition.

It is widely accepted that where there is a genuine need to manage wild dogs/dingoes, affected land owners/occupiers will take measures regardless of any programs offered by Council, including the price of any bounty paid for wild dog/dingo scalps.

20

Some Councils to the west of NBRC offer scalp bounties up to $50.00 or $100.00 each. However many Councils, including those to the east and within the greater Wide Bay Burnett region, offer either no bounty or a bounty less than that currently offered by NBRC. Please refer to the comparison below: Wild Dog/Dingo Bounty Regional Council Comparison (as at May 2016) North Burnett $20.00 Bundaberg $0.00 Fraser Coast $40.00 (Plan to reduce to $0.00) Gympie $40.00 ($10.00 for pig snouts and tails) South Burnett $31.00 Gladstone $25.00 Banana $30.00 (Previously $10.00) Western Downs $50.00 (Previously $100.00 Southern Downs $100.00 Somerset $25.00 Sunshine Coast $0.00 Noosa $0.00 Collectively, those who are experts in wild dog/dingo management, and/or responsible for overseeing these programs believe that scalp bounties are an inefficient use of available resources that would be better served being redirected to other management initiatives, such as community awareness workshops that more effectively target problematic wild dogs/dingoes. (reference Mary River Environs Wild Dog Group – attended collectively by most Councils and experts in South-East Queensland). 3 CORPORATE/OPERATIONAL PLAN Environment 4.1 Pest Management Implementation of the Pest Management/Biosecurity Plan to ensure effective and efficient pest control.

4.1.2 Maintain and expand existing control measures for feral animals and weeds

4.6 Natural Resource Management Protecting areas of high ecological significance. Areas managed effectively.

4.6.4 Lobby for Federal and State Government Grants with regard to NRM projects, Pest Management initiatives and strategies that protect and preserve the diversity of flora, fauna and aquatic eco systems

4 POLICY IMPLICATIONS Information contained within this report to Council will guide decisions on what wild dog/dingo scalp bounty (if any) is payable within the North Burnett. The outcome of those deliberations will be incorporated into the NBRC Wild Dog/Dingo Scalp Bounty Procedure.

21

All other relevant NBRC policies will be adhered to where applicable. 5 STATUTORY REQUIREMENTS All relevant Standards and Codes are applied where required. Biosecurity Act 2014. NBRC’s Pest Management/Biosecurity Plan and associated programs. 6 FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS Part of the 2016/17 Operational budget, as approved. In 2015/2016 this operational budget was $3,500.00 plus administrative costs. Any increase in scalp bounty price will require significant additional budgetary provisions. For example the Southern Downs Regional Council has a budget of $200,000 per year for the payment of wild dog/dingo scalp bounties. 7 RISK MANAGEMENT Risk management is an integral part of the planning and implementation of NRM Services as delivered by the NRM Stream. If Council offers a wild dog/dingo scalp bounty which artificially creates a financially viable industry, there is a risk that the objective of the bounty will be changed from managing declared pests to individuals making a living from collecting scalps. It is also possible that an increased scalp bounty may result in scalps being transported into the NBRC region from other regions. Alternatively, there is a risk that not offering a bounty will provide less of an incentive for landholders to control wild dogs/dingoes. 8 CONSULTATION The wild dog/dingo scalp bounty price will be incorporated into NBRC’s Wild Dog/Dingo Scalp Bounty Procedure (Doc ID: 742217) and utilised for the payment of any applicable bounty. Approval of the Wild Dog/Dingo Scalp Bounty Procedure is the subject of a separate report to Council requiring resolution. The Wild Dog/Dingo Scalp Bounty price will be published on NBRC’s website. 9 OPTIONS FOR COUNCIL TO CONSIDER Options include:

a.) Reduce the bounty price to $0.00 and redirect all associated financial provisions to providing community awareness workshops targeting problematic animals.

b.) Maintain NBRC’s current wild dog/dingo scalp bounty price of $20.00.

22

c.) Set an alternative wild dog/dingo scalp bounty price and adjust associated program budgets accordingly.

d.) Take no action. The options presented here have been considered against a limited budget, reasonable timeframes, and against relevant Acts, and Regulations. 10 OFFICER’S COMMENTS/CONCLUSION Research and expert advice on wild dogs/dingoes indicates that:

eradication of wild dogs/dingoes is unlikely. indiscriminate pursuit of wild dogs/dingoes is highly ineffective and a

waste of valuable resources. wild dog/dingo attacks generally account for a low percentage of stock

losses (apart from sheep), whereas attacks occur more frequently during times of environmental hardship (eg drought).

A more targeted approach to wild dog/dingo management, based upon targeting problematic animals is the most effective and efficient means of utilising available resources.

Wild dog/dingo scalp bounties are one aspect of their management, however funds used to pay bounties may be more effectively used for other management initiatives, such as community awareness workshops that more effectively target problematic wild dogs/dingoes.

11 ATTACHMENTS Nil. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the report be adopted as received and that Council maintain the current Wild Dog/Dingo Scalp Bounty Price of $20.00 per scalp. Over time, Council may consider reducing the wild dog/dingo scalp bounty to $0.00 with all associated financial resources redirected to community awareness workshops involving targeted wild dog/dingo management.

23

IINNFFRRAA 0044 WWIILLDD DDOOGG//DDIINNGGOO MMAANNAAGGEEMMEENNTT PPOOLLIICCYY &&

SSCCAALLPP BBOOUUNNTTYY PPRROOCCEEDDUURREE 0077..22001166

Responsible Officers: Brendan Pearce, General Manager Engineering and

Environmental Services Mike Moller, Acting Manager Environmental Services Report prepared by: Tom Hayes, Natural Resource Management Officer

1 PURPOSE OF REPORT To inform and seek Council approval of draft policy and procedure associated with the management of wild dogs/dingoes and scalp bounties across the North Burnett region. 2 INTRODUCTION/BACKGROUND The management of wild dogs/dingoes is the responsibility of each land owner/occupier. Each land owner/occupier has a “General Biosecurity Obligation” (GBO) to “take all reasonable and practical measures to prevent or minimise the biosecurity risk” (with “due diligence”) of any declared pests/biosecurity risks. (s23 to s28 - Biosecurity Act 2014). This includes wild dogs/dingoes. Council’s role in the management of wild dogs/dingoes is to:

Support the community and Enforce responsibilities in relation to compliance with legislation and

NBRC’s Pest Management/Biosecurity Plan and associated programs. Presently NBRC provides the following services in relation to wild dog/dingo management:

$20.00 bounty for all scalps of suitable condition provided to NBRC. Coordinated 1080 baiting programs where participants provide their

own meat and NBRC injects the meat with 1080 poison at no cost to the landholder.

Private works to inject meat supplied by the landholder with 1080 at no cost to the landholder.

Foothold traps available for loan at no cost, subject to the lodging of a $70.00 bond refundable upon return in acceptable condition.

It should be noted that Council is under no legal obligation under any legislation to provide these services. 3 CORPORATE/OPERATIONAL PLAN Environment 4.1 Pest Management Implementation of the Pest Management/Biosecurity Plan to ensure effective and efficient pest control.

24

4.1.2 Maintain and expand existing control measures for feral animals and weeds.

4.6 Natural Resource Management Protecting areas of high ecological significance. Areas managed effectively.

4.6.4 Lobby for Federal and State Government Grants with regard to NRM projects, Pest Management initiatives and strategies that protect and preserve the diversity of flora, fauna and aquatic eco systems.

4 POLICY IMPLICATIONS The policy drafted for Council consideration and approval will create a formalised, but new policy for a long standing responsibility and function carried out by Council. All other relevant NBRC policies are adhered to where applicable. 5 STATUTORY REQUIREMENTS All relevant Standards and Codes are applied where required. Biosecurity Act 2014 (from 1st July 2016). NBRC’s Pest Management/Biosecurity Plan and associated Programs. 6 FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS Part of the 2016/17 Operational budget, as approved. In 2015/16 this operational budget was $3,500.00 plus administrative costs 7 RISK MANAGEMENT There are no direct risks to Council other than those financial in nature associated with operating its approved programs. Council is obligated to monitor and enforce its Pest Management/ Biosecurity Plan, associated programs and compliance with the Biosecurity Act 2014. Failure to enforce land owner/occupier responsibilities will breach NBRC’s General Biosecurity Obligation. Land owners/occupiers are at risk through not appropriately managing their responsibilities. 8 CONSULTATION Internal consultation occurs monthly through NRM Stream meetings and fortnightly meetings with the Environmental Services senior staff. Internal awareness training will be required for all applicable NBRC personnel, visitors and contractors. The Wild Dog/Dingo Management Policy and associated Wild Dog/Dingo Scalp Bounty Procedure will be published on NBRC’s website.

25

9 OPTIONS FOR COUNCIL TO CONSIDER Options to consider:

a.) Adopt both the attached Wild Dog/Dingo Management Policy and associated Wild Dog/Dingo Scalp Bounty Procedure.

b.) Adopt either the attached Wild Dog/Dingo Management Policy or associated Wild Dog/Dingo Scalp Bounty Procedure.

c.) Recommend amendments to the attached policy and/or procedure. d.) Maintain NBRC’s current informal wild dog/dingo programs (including

bounty price) as they are presently defined. e.) Take no action.

10 OFFICER’S COMMENTS/CONCLUSION Research and expert advice on wild dogs/dingoes indicates that:

eradication of wild dogs/dingoes is unlikely. indiscriminate pursuit of wild dogs/dingoes is highly ineffective and a

waste of valuable resources. livestock (excluding sheep) can modify behaviours to protect their

young. wild dog/dingo attacks usually account for a low percentage of stock

losses, where attacks occur more frequently during times of environmental hardship (drought).

a more targeted approach to wild dog/dingo management, based upon targeting problematic animals via co-ordinated baiting campaigns is the most effective and efficient means of utilising available resources.

wild dog/dingo scalp bounties are one aspect of their management. 11 ATTACHMENTS

Proposed Wild Dog/Dingo Management Policy (Doc ID: 746979) Proposed Wild Dog/Dingo Scalp Bounty Procedure (Doc ID: 742217)

RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the report be adopted as received and that Council adopt both the attached:

Wild Dog/Dingo Management Policy (Doc ID: 746979) Wild Dog/Dingo Scalp Bounty Procedure (Doc ID: 742217).

26

C:\Users\nataliez.NORTHBURNETT\AppData\Local\Microsoft\Windows\Temporary Internet Files\Content.Outlook\LR78M2JU\Wild Dog and Dingo Management Policy.doc 1 of 3

Policy Title: Wild Dog and Dingo Management Policy

Policy No: Policy Subject: Wild Dog and Dingo Management Policy Directorate: Engineering and Environmental Services Responsible Officer: Chief Executive Officer Authorised by: North Burnett Regional Council Adopted Date: General Meeting – xxxx 2016 Review Date: Authorities: Biosecurity Act 2014 NBRC’s Pest Management/Biosecurity Plan and associated

programs

POLICY: The North Burnett Regional Council (NBRC) recognises the need for society to co-exist with dingoes (Canis lupus dingo) due to their role within natural ecosystems as Australia’s naturalised apex terrestrial predator. Additionally it is widely recognised that the eradication of dingoes is unachievable and NBRC has a responsibility to efficiently utilise available public resources. NBRC also recognises its role to:

Support the community and

Enforce responsibilities in relation to compliance with legislation and NBRC’s Pest Management/Biosecurity Plan and associated programs

To facilitate and support land owners/occupiers in achieving compliance with their responsibilities under the Biosecurity Act 2014 and NBRC’s Pest Management/Biosecurity Plan (and associated programs), NBRC will promote the targeting of problematic animals. This policy will allow the concentration of available public resources to target problematic animals where it can be verified that there are “significant” negative impacts. It will also ensure public resources are utilised in an efficient and effective manner. INTRODUCTION:

General Policy

27


Dingoes (Canis lupus dingo) are the endemic and naturalised apex terrestrial predator in Australia. These predatory animals have long been perceived as a threat to the livelihoods of domestic livestock producers. As a result, dingoes have been declared an invasive animal pest that must be destroyed under the Biosecurity Act 2014. Society and landowners have actively utilised a range of measures in an attempt to eradicate the animal. Scientific evidence and the results to date indicate that:

it is highly unlikely that complete eradication is achievable and

the presence of an apex predator can, under managed circumstances, be beneficial ecologically, environmentally and commercially in the production of domestic livestock. This is because dingoes can control the numbers of competing herbivores such as rabbits and wallabies and other carnivores such as feral cats and foxes.

Additionally, pressures placed on mature/established dingo packs by human efforts to destroy them have resulted in the increasing hybridisation of the dingo with domestic dogs. Domestic dogs (Canis lupus familiaris) that have gone feral (wild dogs) and hybridised individual dingoes are proving to be more likely to be a greater threat to domestic livestock. The latest scientific evidence and expert opinion suggests a need for humans and domestic livestock to co-exist with dingoes, but ensure the problems associated with dingoes are appropriately managed. The appropriate management of dingoes will vary from region to region and circumstance to circumstance, but fundamentally requires emphasis on a more targeted management approach. These management efforts should aim to target wild dogs and problematic dingoes, whilst not actively targeting mature/established dingo packs that are not causing significant negative impacts to landowners or their domestic livestock. Wild dogs and dingoes that are causing significant problems or negative impacts on domestic livestock need to be managed as part of this policy. OBJECTIVES: Wild dogs and problematic dingoes will be managed in order to ensure problems and negative impacts on landholders and domestic livestock are minimised. Where verifiable significant negative impacts are identified, control measures will be undertaken to support affected landholders and communities. NBRC’s Wild Dog and Dingo Management Policy includes and utilises:

Scalp Bounties (Wild Dog and Dingo Scalp Bounty Procedure – Doc ID 742 217, currently before Council for consideration)

Baiting

28


(Wild Dog and Dingo Baiting Procedure – Doc ID 746 731, currently under development for future consideration by Council)

Trapping (Wild Dog and Dingo Trapping Procedure – Doc ID 763 331, currently under development for future consideration by Council)

Domestic Dog and Cat Cage Trapping (Guidelines for the use of a Dog and Cat Trap – Doc ID 753 148, currently under development for future consideration by Council)

Domestic Dog and Cat Registration & Desexing Requirements (Animal Management Local Law 2)

Other techniques as approved by NBRC. Where wild dogs and problematic dingoes cannot be managed under the conventional management techniques of shooting, baiting or trapping (such as within close proximity to residential houses and townships), domestic dog cage trapping and destruction techniques will be applied. The adoption of this policy and associated procedures will ensure the NBRC maintains consistency throughout the region with regard to the management of wild dogs and dingoes. DEFINITIONS: Dingo: A canine/dog (Canis lupus dingo) endemic and naturalised to Australia, which excluding humans, occupies the position of apex terrestrial predator within Australia. This definition applies to all pure and cross breed versions of the breed, where dingo behaviours and appearances remain. “Significant” negative impacts: Non-trivial impacts, where losses/damage exceed minor losses (1 or 2 animals or occasional losses) and genuinely threaten the viability/productivity of healthy normal domestic livestock. (Sick, injured, old or already dying/dead animals are excluded from this definition.) Wild Dog: All breeds and cross breeds of domestic dog (Canis lupus familiaris) that have gone feral and no longer have any notable direct relationship with humans. This definition also includes Canis lupus familiaris hybrids with dingoes where a dingo’s natural behaviours and appearances are not adhered to (including “rogue” animals).

29

Procedure Title: Wild Dog and Dingo Scalp Bounty Procedure Procedure No: Procedure Subject: Wild Dog and Dingo Scalp Bounty Procedure Directorate: Engineering and Environmental Services/Corporate Services Responsible Officer: Chief Executive Officer Adopted Date: Review Date:

OBJECTIVES: To establish a consistent procedure throughout the North Burnett Regional Council for the management Wild Dog and Dingo Scalp Bounties. GUIDELINES:

1. The bounty is set at $20 per scalp. This is subject to change via Council resolution.

2. Wild dogs/dingoes must be caught in the North Burnett Regional Council area and able to be verified as such by the Landholder.

3. Claimants must present a clean and dry bagged scalp (a wet scalp will not

be accepted).

4. The scalp is to be a full length wild dog/dingo scalp from nose tip to tail tip.

5. Complete the Wild Dog/Dingo Scalp Claim Form (booklet in triplicate copy).

White copy submitted for payment (Creditors/Petty Cash).

Yellow copy handed to the claimant at the time of delivery of scalps.

Green copy will remain in the Wild Dog/Dingo Scalp Claim Book.

The authorised person section is to be completed by the Land Protection Officer or other personnel authorised to dispose of the scalp(s) after inspection.

Staff are to write their initials beside the claimant’s signature.

Customer Service Procedure

30

6. Scalps are to be inspected by a Land Protection Officer or other authorised

personnel prior to any payment being approved.

7. If the customer is a regular claimant of bounties and is already set up in the system (set up as a creditor), then stamp the Wild Dog/Dingo Scalp Claim Form (white copy) with the ‘OK to Pay’ stamp, have it signed by an authorised officer and send it to Creditors for reimbursement.

8. If the customer is not a regular claimant or set up in the system, then the

completion of a Supplier Details Form is required – Doc ID 34942. Complete all details on the Wild Dog/Dingo Scalp Claim Form, including the bank details - Account Name, BSB Number, Account Number etc. Stamp the white copy of the claim form with the ‘OK to Pay’ stamp and ask an authorised person to sign where indicated. Forward the completed Supplier Details Form and the Wild Dog/Dingo Scalp Claim Form to Creditors for payment. General ledger number is 7110-7000-0019.

9. Payment of the Wild Dog/Dingo Scalp Bounty will not be paid until the

scalps are formally accepted by the Land Protection Officer or other authorised personnel through signing the applicable Wild Dog/Dingo Scalp Claim Form. Scalps will only be accepted for the bounty payment if they are presented in a suitable clean and dry condition.

10. Disposal/Destruction of scalps is to be carried out by a Land Protection

Officer or other authorised personnel.

11. All scalps received by NBRC will be disposed of/destroyed within appropriately licenced facilities where a receipt/certificate of disposal/destruction will be obtained.

12. All scalp disposal/destruction receipts/certificates will be retained and

stored within Council’s Infoxpert system and appropriately associated with Wild Dog/Dingo Scalp Bounty Forms.

DEFINITIONS: Authorised personnel/officer: An individual specifically tasked/appointed by the NBRC to handle/administer Natural Resource Management matters and/or Wild Dog/Dingo Scalps. Dingo: A canine/dog (Canis lupus dingo) endemic and naturalised to Australia, which occupies the position of apex terrestrial predator within Australia. This definition applies to all pure and crossbreed versions of the breed, where dingo behaviours and appearances remain. Wild Dog: All breeds and crossbreeds of domestic dog (Canis lupus familiaris) that have gone feral and no longer have any notable direct relationship with humans. This definition also includes Canis lupus familiaris hybrids with dingoes where a dingo’s natural behaviours and appearances are not adhered to (including “rogue” animals).

31

Additional Instructions:

Claimants must present a clean and dry scalp from snout to tail (as per below image). Pieces of fur will not be accepted.

To ensure that Council can accept wild dog/dingo scalps it is recommended that the cleaned scalps are salted and allowed to dry until they are of a clean and dry condition, whereby they are unlikely to be a health hazard or offensive in smell (scalps must be 100% dry and clean).

The scalp(s) is/are to be delivered to a Council administrative office within 1 month of collection.

If the scalps are not received as requested they will be rejected and payment will not be issued for scalps that are not presented in the abovementioned condition.

32

Page 1 of 3 Information Notice - Refusal of Application www.nhvr.gov.au

Information Notice - Refusal of Application

Heavy Vehicle National Law

Pursuant to the HVNL, the National Heavy Vehicle Regulator has refused your application for a permit as described below.

Case Number: 37891

Road Manager Consent Number:

67799 (Transport and Main Roads)

67800 (North Burnett Regional Council)

Description of Route:

The following Council Roads to and from the approved network as per Journey Planner ID.

TMR -

Lister Street, (between B-Double Network Lister Street and Gladstone Monto Road)

Gladstone Monto Road, (between Lister Street, Monto and Kalpowar Road, Kalpowar)

TMR – THESE ROADS AS PER THE NOTICE AND NOT REQUIRED FOR CONSENT. FOR YOUR

CONSIDERATION OF THE INTERSECTION ONLY.

Burnett Highway/ Mountain View Road

Burnett Highway/Cannindah Road

Gladstone Monto Road/Cannindah Road

NORTH BURNETT REGIONAL -

Cannindah Road (between B-Double Network Burnett Highway, Mulgildie and Gladstone Monto

Road, Bancroft)

Yarrol Road (between Cannindah Road, Cannindah and Yarrol Cannindah Road, Cannindah)

Mountain View Road (between B-Double Network Burnett Highway, Tellebang and Longs Road,

Splinter Creek)

Longs Road (between Mountain View Road, Splinter Creek and Yarrol Road, Cannindah)

Journey ID Reference:

AJPV-8 Version 2

33


Reason for refusal

Transport and Main Roads Statement of Reasons:

- Burnett Highway & Cannindah Rd intersection is not suitable for B-Double turn paths.

- The Gladstone-Monto Rd has inadequate pavement width for B-double access.

- Splinter Creek no.1 on the Gladstone-Monto Rd at 102km is restricted to all excess mass vehicles

including those operating under guidelines.

- Splinter Creek no.2 on the Gladstone-Monto Rd at 104.258km is restricted to all excess mass

vehicles including those operating under guidelines.

North Burnett Regional Council Statement of Reasons:

Council does not endorse approval of the permit application of Martin Stock Haulage Pty Ltd for 25

metre B-Double vehicles used for livestock transport on the following routes for the nominated

reasons:

a. Route 1- Mountain View Road / Longs Road from Burnett Highway to Cannindah Road

i. Narrow road formation

ii. Excess crossfall at intersections

b. Route 2 - Yarrol Road from Cannindah Road to Longs Road

i. Narrow bridge structure

ii. Narrow road formation

iii. Sharp curve with excess super-elevation

c. Route 3 - Cannindah Road from Burnett Highway to Gladstone-Monto Road


ii. Steep / long grades on unsealed road (4 sites)

iii. Narrow pavement formation

iv. Inadequate intersection standard

Appeals and Reviews

You are entitled to apply to the Regulator to have this decision reviewed, pursuant to Part 11.2 of the Heavy Vehicle National Law. The Regulator must refer your application to the road manager for review. The decision of the road manager on the review is not subject to further review or appeal under this Law. Your review application must be made within 28 days after the date this notice was issued.

34


Declaration

I, Peter Caprioli delegate of the National Heavy Vehicle Regulator provide this notice DATED: 24/05/2016 SIGNED:

Information Notice ISSUED on Tuesday, 24 May 2016

35

1

Natalie Zillman

From: Executive SupportSubject: FW: Road Manager Consent Request Number <73333>Attachments: Internal Review Application.pdf; CN37891 - Refusal Information Notice - Maritns

Stock Hauage Pty Ltd.pdf; statement_of_rm_consent.pdf

Road Manager Consent Request

RCN: 10041306

Number: 41767

Applicant Name: Martins Stock Haulage Pty Ltd

Application Type: General Permit

Pursuant to Division 3 of Part 4.5, Division 4 of Part 4.6 and Division 2 of Part 4.7 of the Heavy Vehicle Law the National Heavy Vehicle Regulator seeks the consent of the North Burnett Regional Council for the purpose of granting an authority to the above applicant for the following vehicle/s:

Vehicle Registration:

Type Make Model Registration Number

Registration State

VIN Number of Axles

Number of Tyres

GVM (KG)

GCM (KG)

ATM (KG)

Axle Specifications:

Sequence Number

Distance Between axle(m)

Tyres per axle

Tyre Size(mm)

Steerable Axle (if applicable)

Ground Contact Width(m)

Gross Mass on Axle(kg)

Vehicle Details:

Vehicle Type: B‐double Vehicle Type Other:

Vehicle Registration Confirmed:

No PBS Number:

Forward Projection (m):

Rear Overhang(m):

Width (Laden)(m):

Width (Unladen)(m):

Length (Laden)(m):

25.00 Length

(Unladen)(m):

Height (Laden)(m):

4.60 Height

(Unladen)(m):

Mass Mass

36

2

(Laden)(kg): (Unladen)(kg):

IAP: N/A IAP Details:

Load Sharing Suspension:

Yes Removed Parts:

Load Details: Live stock

Load Description:

Permit Information:

Period Permit ‐ 3yr Request

NHVR Comments:

Please be advised that under Part 11.2 Section 644 of the HVNL, a review of the reviewable decision must not be decided by— (a) the person who made the reviewable decision; or (b) a person who holds a less senior position than the person who made the reviewable decision.

Additional Vehicle

Information:

Vehicle Conditions

(NHVR):

General Comments:

Internal Review ‐ Case 37891 Original Case: New B‐Double Permit ........................................................................ CUSTOMER: Martins Stock Haulage Pty Ltd ‐ 10041306 4 Hayes Street Scone, New South Wales 2337 CONTACT: Graham Hoare ........................................................................For further information relating to this case please contact Access Facilitator Edith Ferraro on (07) 3309 8634 Alternatively our Road Manager Hotline on 1300 880 493.

Journey ID: AJPV‐8 Version 2

Journey Planner: http://gis.nhvr.gov.au

Route Details:

Route Comments: The following Council Roads to and from the Approved Network: ...................................................................................................... TMR ‐ RMQLD1 Lister Street, (between B‐Double Network Lister Street and Gladstone Monto Road) Gladstone Monto Road, (between Lister Street, Monto and Kalpowar Road, Kalpowar) TMR – RMQLD1 ‐ THESE ROADS AS PER THE NOTICE AND NOT REQUIRED FOR CONSENT.

37

3

FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION OF THE INTERSECTION ONLY. Burnett Highway / Mountain View Road Burnett Highway /Cannindah Road Gladstone Monto Road / Cannindah Road ...................................................................................................... NORTH BURNETT REGIONAL ‐ QLD286 Cannindah Road (between B‐Double Network Burnett Highway, Mulgildie and Gladstone Monto Road, Bancroft) Yarrol Road (between Cannindah Road, Cannindah and Yarrol Cannindah Road, Cannindah) Mountain View Road (between B‐Double Network Burnett Highway, Tellebang and Longs Road, Splinter Creek) Longs Road (between Mountain View Road, Splinter Creek and Yarrol Road, Cannindah)

Period:

From: 01/06/2016 To: 31/05/2019

Expedited Renewal Period

If this request is for the renewal of a current permit pursuant to Division 2 Section 167 of the Heavy Vehicle National Law, the National Heavy vehicle Regulator seeks a response of consent or refusal from the Road Manager within 14 days after receipt of this request.

A Notice of Objection may be lodged within 14 days if the road manager considers there is a reason that the renewal should not be treated as expedited. The Road Manager may request an extension of time of up to 14 days, if application is made for an extension of time within the first 14 days.

If no response is received from the Road Manager within 14 days, consent will be deemed as granted.

A renewal is not required to be expedited if the terms of the proposed authority differ from the previous authority.

Standard Consent Period

For all other consent requests pursuant to section 156 of the Heavy Vehicle National Law, the National Heavy vehicle Regulator seeks a response of consent or refusal from the Road Manager within 28 days after receiving this request.

However, the Road Manager may request, and the Regulator may agree to, a longer period of time, of not more than 6 months after the request is made, if:

A route assessment is necessary for deciding whether to give or not to give the consent or Consultation is required under a law with another entity

Further information about the responsibilities of road manager giving consent under the National Heavy Vehicle Law, please refer to the NHVR Website. www.NHVR.gov.au

Regards,

National Heavy Vehicle Regulator

38

39

40

41

42

43

44

45

46

47

48

49

50

1Road Manager Written Consent

AccessRMW

Road Manager Written Consent

RMW/08/2013

I hereby do not consent to the operation of the vehicle for the nominated section of route: Written Statement for applying conditions or denying consent

AM Decision NumberWritten Statement of Road Managers Consent

Road Manager’s Signature

Date Signed / /

If providing an electronic signature please consent to the following: I accept the electronic signature has the same status as a signed signature.

I hereby consent to the grant of an authorisation (permit) for the operation of the vehicle, as described in the Information Consent, for the section of route relevant towith the following conditions

I hereby consent that the route for operation of the vehicle can be considered for inclusion as a Gazetted route to operate under the National Notice for the vehicle type described in Information Consent

Road Conditions (if space is insufficient please attach documentation to this form)

Travel Conditions (if space is insufficient please attach documentation to this form)

Vehicle Conditions Note: can only be recommendations (if space is insufficient please attach documentation to this form)

Reason

e.g. Road Manager specific council

Privacy StatementThe National Heavy Vehicle Regulator’s privacy practices are regulated by the Information Privacy Act 2009 (Qld). For more information, contact the Office of the Information Commissioner (www.oic.qld.gov.au).

Road Manager Name Title / Position

51

http://www.oic.qld.gov.au

Engineering - B Double Report - Martin 67800 - Cannindah Bancroft

ENGINEERING SECTION REPORT 03

B DOUBLE REPORT – VARIOUS ROADS CANNINDAH AREA – JOURNEY ID AJPV-8 Version 2

Responsible Officer: Mr Tyronne Meredith – Works Engineer Engineering & Environmental Services Report prepared by: Mr Warren Paulger – Consultant Engineer

1 PURPOSE OF REPORT

This report recommends a response from Council to the National Heavy Vehicle

Regulator (NHVR) in relation to a B-Double permit application, seeking to utilise 25m

B-Double vehicles used for cartage of livestock along 3 routes generally in the areas of

Splinter Creek, Cannindah and Bancroft. The application identified the routes but is

not specific regarding the destinations. Without this data the assessment only covers

the nominated road infrastructure and does not include the accesses into destination

properties.

While the various routes also impact Transport and Main Roads (TMR), only the

Council roads are covered in this report with TMR to separately address their

infrastructure and the connections to the Council roads.

2 INTRODUCTION / BACKGROUND

This report, in response to application NHVR Number 67800 and Journey ID mapping

AJPV-8 (Ver. 2), is to consider the suitability of the roads for 25m B-Double

combinations that carrying livestock along the roads as per the application by Martin

Stock Haulage Pty Ltd as described above.

Descriptions of the road segments nominated are as follows:

1. Mountain View Road / Longs Road from Burnett Highway to Cannindah Road

2. Yarrol Road from Cannindah Road to Longs Road.

3. Cannindah Road from Burnett Highway to Gladstone-Monto Road.

A review of the Council B-Double approval spreadsheet covering applications 2008 –

2011 indicates existing approvals for B-Doubles on some of the Council roads in this

application, and subsequent recommended approvals, as follows:

Cannindah Road from Gladstone-Monto Road to Dakiel Rd (Goondicum Mine

access route)

Having no current proposals to restrict or amend this historic ‘approved’ route, and

indeed following the recent upgrade of the Splinter Creek bridge, this segment of the

current proposals has not been ‘rejected’ for this application.

Issues with the intersections and routes impact on adjacent Transport and main

Roads. While a number of TMR intersections are identified in the applications, the

following additional TMR assessments are required:

52


Gladstone-Monto Road ( Burnett Hwy to Kalpowar)

Gladstone-Monto Rd & Cannindah Rd intersection

Burnett Hwy & Cannindah Rd intersection

Burnett Hwy & Mountain View Road intersection

3 CORPORATE PLAN

Outcome 1: Infrastructure To have infrastructure facilities in place that are well planned, affordable and offers a safe environment to the community. Outcome 2: Economic Developing a mix of profitable and innovative businesses which provide sustainable economic growth including a viable primary industry sector. Planning and development for regional growth and change is based on sustainability principles, cultural heritage and community engagement.

4 POLICY IMPLICATIONS None identified at this time.

5 STATUTORY REQUIREMENTS

While not a statutory requirement, this additional B-Double Route assessment has

been evaluated and reported by an experience local government engineer holding

registration under the Professional Engineers Act, Qld. The assessment was

undertaken with reference to and generally in line with the NHVR Interim PBS Road

Classification Guidelines, Austroads Guidelines for Assessing Heavy Vehicle Access to

Local Roads, and also have due regard to the TMR guideline.

6 FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS

In general terms, the expansion of B-Double route access across the North Burnett Regional Council has a financial implication on Council’s operational budget, given the warrant to maintain these roads to a higher level of safety and maintenance than would otherwise warrant. Any required upgrading would place a demand on Council’s capital and/or operational budget. The full cost impact would need further review and would likely be a budget type consideration rather than minor maintenance. See Section 10 below for some initial order of costs associated with potential upgrades to consider the route for approval.

7 RISK MANAGEMENT The focus of any 23/25m B-Double route assessment is based on suitability of the route for the vehicle combination and safety for all road users and in making recommendations to Council, risk to all road users is the prime consideration. This can be evidenced by insufficient sight distances, long steep grade (stopping capacity), structures, cross falls, radii etc. A secondary consideration is the impact on the existing pavements. The vertical loadings per axle / axle group are no greater than other semi-trailers but the impact of the drive axles pulling the additional load can be detrimental to the pavements. This is

53


particularly a concern where the vehicle is pulling up inclines especially out of gullies or floodways where the vehicle tyres can carry water onto unsealed pavements. With general ‘as-of-right’ traffic, the driver accepts responsibility for ensuring the road is suitable for usage. Council undertakes development and maintenance of the roads having due regard for their corporate plan and budget considerations. At no time does Council provide any assurance as to the condition of the road for any component of this traffic. However, in these permit applications, Council is receiving an assessment report and then endorsing or not endorsing the route as being acceptable / unacceptable for the longer B-Double vehicles. With any acceptance, there would be a moral and likely legal expectation or responsibility that Council maintain the route suitable for these vehicles.

8 CONSULTATION There has been no consultation with the applicant or the community in relation to this particular application. The National Heavy Vehicle Regulator will be advised of Council’s position on the application who will then consider all responses and make a determination regarding the application.

9 OPTIONS FOR COUNCIL TO CONSIDER Receive the report and consider the recommendation for adoption.

10 OFFICER’S COMMENTS / CONCLUSION a. Route 1 – Mountain View Road & Longs Road from Burnett Highway to Yarrol

Road

The route includes the full length of Mountain View Rad and the segment of Longs

Road between Mountain View Rd and Yarrol Rd. The link is a generally low

construction standard unsealed road with a number of narrow concrete floodways.

There are a number of infrastructure conditions that are considered inadequate for

the 25m B-Double usage and will result in a recommended ‘refusal’. The defects, and

potential improvements to become adequate, are as follows:

Narrow pavement formation – the road is generally a 3 – 4m gravel standard on a

5m formation. While the Guideline recommends a 7.2m formation, having regard

for the very low traffic volumes, an ‘endorsement’ may be considered if the route

is upgraded to a minimum 6.0m formation width. An order of cost for this

upgrade (approximately 8km) would be in the order of $300,000 to $500,000.

Excess cross-fall – At both the Mountain View Rd & Longs Rd intersection and the

Longs Road & Yarrol Rd intersection, there is one turning leg with a crossfall in

excess of 10%. At this crossfall, with low speed turning and the ‘live’ loading,

there is a risk of overturning of the loaded vehicle. An order of cost to correct

these would be $20,000 to $40,000.

b. Route 2 – Yarrol Road from Cannindah Road to Voss Road

54


Yarrol Rd is generally described as a narrow seal on a narrow formation. No evidence

of previous assessment was identified for approval for 25m B-Double usage. A

summary of the defects, and potential improvements to become adequate, are as

follows:

Narrow Bridge – The Stewart Bridge is 3.6m wide (kerb to kerb) and the minimum

recommended width to be suitable for 25m B-Double operation is 4.0m – one-

way operation. The site is complicated with a curve on the Cannindah Rd

approach. On order of cost to widen the bridge to a minimum 4.0m clear width

would be dependent of the width and construction type.

Narrow pavement formation – the road is generally a 3 – 4m seal standard on a

5m formation. While the Guideline recommends a 7.2m formation, having regard

for the very low traffic volumes, an ‘endorsement’ may be considered if the route

is upgraded to a minimum 6.0m formation width for the full length. An order of

cost for this upgrade would be in the order of $100,000 to $300,000 as it would

also require some extension of cross-road drainage.

Sharp curve with excess cross-fall – A sharp bend in the road has some curve seal

widening but also has excess crossfall. Of itself this site may not result in a

recommendation for ‘refusal’, but is raise for consideration if upgrade work is

being considered on the route. The curve design should be checked with suitable

turning templates and ideally the superelevation reduced to a maximum of 6%.

c. Route 3 – Cannindah Road from Burnett Highway to Gladstone-Monto Road

Cannindah Road is a mix of narrow seal (25%) and gravel construction (75%). Recent

works were undertaken to upgrade the Splinter Creek Bridge to full 2-way operation

standard suitable for 25m B-Double operation.

The seal segments are general on a minimum 7 - 8m formation. The unsealed sections

however are on substandard formation widths for general B-Double usage.

From signage along the route, the road is used by a school bus. The narrow formation,

and absence of constructed set-down / pick up locations, adds a safety concern

associated with B-Double usage that could to be managed by time limiting any

approval.

A summary of the defects, and potential improvements to become adequate, are as

follows:

Narrow pavement formation – the gravel road is generally on a 5m formation.

While the Guideline recommends a 7.2m formation, having regard for the low

traffic volumes, an ‘endorsement’ may be considered if the route is upgraded to a

minimum 6.0m formation width for the full length. An order of cost for this

upgrade would be in the order of $300,000.

Steep Grades – the unsealed road segment has 4 sites where the road grade and

length of the grade are considered unacceptable. The grades are in excess of the

maximum standard nominated but under the “absolute Maximum” grades. The

55


amount of grades exceeds to conditional acceptance of the ‘absolute maximum’

grades. The guidelines seem to address issue for ‘sealed’ roads and the identified

sites are all on gravel segments. Upgrading the grades to seal standard could

allow consideration for general B-Double usage. An order of cost for this upgrade

(approximately 2.2km) would be in the order of $300,000 to $400,000.

Intersection widening – The southern leg of the Cannindah Rd – Yarrol Rd

intersection is curved with a narrow seal on the Cannindah Road leg. The longer

B-Double would have difficulty manoeuvring this turn without widening on the SE

corner – order of cost $50,000.

Narrow Bridge – The Hays Bridge is 6.8m wide (kerb to kerb) and set up for two

lane operation. The minimum recommended width to be suitable for 25m B-

Double operation is 4.0m – one-way operation, or 7.2m for two lane operation.

The site can be brought up to an acceptable standard if the layout is reconfigured

to single lane operation with signage and line marking (similar to Flood Creek

bridge), or by widening the structure to maintain the two lane operation. An

order of cost to convert to one lane operation would be $10,000 - $15,000.

11 RECOMMENDATIONS

It is recommended that “the National Heavy Vehicle Regulator be advised that Council does not endorse approval of the permit application of Martin Stock Haulage Pty Ltd for 25 metre B-Double vehicles used for livestock transport on the following routes for the nominated reasons:

a. Route 1 – Mountain View Road / Longs Road from Burnett Highway to Cannindah

Road

i. Narrow road formation

ii. Excess crossfall at intersections

b. Route 2 – Yarrol Road from Cannindah Road to Longs Road


ii. Narrow road formation

iii. Sharp curve with excess super-elevation

c. Route 3 – Cannindah Road from Burnett Highway to Gladstone-Monto Road


ii. Steep / long grades on unsealed road (4 sites)

iii. Narrow pavement formation

iv. Inadequate intersection standard

56

Documents

Standing Committee Meetings – Technical Services · Three Water & Sewerage staff attended the annual WIOA (Water Industry Operators Association) Conference in Rockhampton. Biggenden