Adjournment - Tullamarine Widening Project Effect on Strathmore School

Ms DUNN: My adjournment matter is for the Minister for Roads and Road Safety. I refer to a recent Age article headed 'CityLink-Tulla widening a “failure of duty of care” for Strathmore school students' health?', published on 6 March and written by Gina McColl. The article suggests that the 1600 students at Strathmore Secondary College are facing increased health risks such as severe asthma and cardiovascular disease due to an overpass being constructed within metres of school classrooms due to the Tullamarine Freeway widening. The action I seek from the minister is that he immediately cease construction on the Tullamarine widening project while full and thorough modelling of the risks of the project to the neighbouring school are undertaken, including installation of pollution monitoring facilities on the site to verify the actual localised pollution that children are exposed to. The article reports that experts declared the project a failure of duty of care, voicing their concerns over the macro modelling that Aecom, a technical consultancy company, has used as part of the Transurban assessment of the project. Experts are concerned that this assessment fails to take into account key factors such as micro-exposures of some communities or the stop-start nature of the traffic on the new bridge. Of concern was the reported response by VicRoads acting director Peter Holcombe Henley, who is quoted as saying, 'At the end of the day, there's a value for money equation'. If the quote is correct, the response by Mr Holcombe Henley is alarming, pitting the cost of a road against the cost to public health. The air pollution modelling done so far has been completely inadequate for a number of reasons. Firstly, the baseline data was extrapolated from air monitoring in Footscray, which is a long way from the school and the very northern end of the project. No actual air monitoring has been done, so this is all just guesswork and cannot be relied upon for accuracy. Secondly, the figures are based on acceptable levels under national environment protection measures that are now outdated, as they were updated in December 2015 to be stricter. Thirdly, there were a limited range of pollutants considered. Critically, PM2.5 was not considered, and it is the smallest and most deadly particulate matter. Also ozone, land and sulphur dioxide were not considered despite their monitoring and reporting being required under the National Environment Protection Council ambient air quality measures. Finally, I make the point that this background data, even if it were taken locally, would not reflect the pollution that will actually be breathed in by the children by the bridge during peak hour. These background air quality assessments are totally inadequate to assess the risk posed to an asthmatic student, as the background data is collected in locations remote from the point source and in relation to particulate matter they are measured over 24 hours, which softens out the peaks in exposure to make it appear to be within acceptable limits.

ANSWER

The modelling undertaken by AECOM Australia is consistent with that required by the Environment Protection Authority (EPA) Victoria. The EPA Victoria's State Environment Projection Policy — Air Quality Management 2001 (SEPP-AQM) specifies that proposed transport corridors must be assessed using one of the regulatory models for near-road modelling or as approved by the EPA Victoria.

The model applied in the assessment, CAL3QHCR, is a steady-state Gaussian dispersion model, designed to determine near-road air pollution concentrations at receptor locations downwind of highways.

The model was specifically approved for use in the CityLink Tulla Widening project by the EPA Victoria.

Modelling shows noise and air pollution will be no more than it currently is. These results have been shared with the college.

SEPP-AQM provides that the background concentrated for the development should be the 70th percentile of one year's observed concentrations. The assessment has applied the 75th percentile, a stricter level than required. Further, the maximum 75th percentile was conservatively applied from not one but five previous years.

The model accounted for hour-by-hour variability in vehicle count, vehicle emissions, fleet composition (both vehicle type and fuel) and meteorology, including identifying and modelling morning and afternoon peak traffic details.

Key assumptions applied in the assessment were specifically chosen to produce conservative predictions and do not account for improvements in technology, such as associated with likely future reductions in vehicle emissions.

The assessment did not account for the positive influence that noise barriers are likely to have on reducing roadside pollutant concentrations.

The model was based on free-flowing traffic along CityLink and on/off ramps connecting with CityLink. The model did not include slow-moving traffic queuing at on-ramps or slow-moving traffic at peak times because the main line CityLink traffic volumes are significantly higher than on/off ramps and would therefore have a higher mass emission of pollution.

Air quality information from Footscray was used because Footscray is the closest EPA Victoria monitoring station to the project. It is worth noting that the Footscray site is located close to the port industrial area as well as Melbourne's central business district, so measured levels at this site are expected to be higher than those likely at Bulla Road. As such, its use in the model is considered conservative.

Modelling of the following pollutants was undertaken: NO2, PM10 and CO. A qualitative assessment of PM2.5 was also made.

PM2.5 is a subset of PM10, which was measured. The emissions of PM2.5 cannot exceed that of PM10. Therefore, because the PM10 levels did not exceed the PM2.5 standard, the PM2.5 levels would not be exceeded. As such, PM2.5 was not originally modelled. A review of modelling data shows that PM10 emissions at Strathmore Secondary College would be approximately 25 per cent lower than the reported maximums in the model. This is because the maximum receptors are generally the receptors closest to the designated section of highway, and the college is set back from the freeway compared to other receptors.

Ozone was not considered because it is not emitted from vehicles during the combustion of vehicle fuel. Sulfur dioxide was not measured because the EPA Victoria report Future air quality in Victoria (2013) identified that sulfur dioxide concentrations were “extremely low in Melbourne, and this is expected to remain the case”. The allowable sulfur content in fuel standards legislated by the Federal Government has and will continue to decrease with time. Lead was not measured because it was effectively phased out of vehicle fuel on 1 January 2002 by the Federal Government.