2.1
The Department of Defence (Defence) seeks approval from the Public Works Committee to proceed with the United States (US) Force Posture Initiatives Northern Territory Training Areas and Ranges Upgrades. The project proposes to deliver works at the following four locations:
Robertson Barracks Close Training Area, adjacent to Robertson Barracks, located approximately 20 kilometres east of Darwin
Kangaroo Flats Training Area, located approximately 64 kilometres south of Darwin
Mount Bundey Training Area, located approximately 134 kilometres southeast of Darwin
Bradshaw Field Training Area, located approximately 580 kilometres southwest of Darwin
2.2
Defence stated that the purpose of the works is to ‘provide essential upgrades to facilities and infrastructure at four existing Defence training areas in the Northern Territory to ensure the Australian Defence Force (ADF) has reliable access to suitable military training areas and weapons ranges to meet military capability.’
2.3
The proposed works are also aimed at enhancing the levels of interoperability between the ADF and its partners through ‘expanded cooperation and increased opportunities for combined training and exercises.’
2.4
The estimated cost of the project is $747.0 million over the four project sites (excluding GST).
2.5
The project was referred to the Committee on 12 May 2021.
Need for the works
2.6
The White Paper on Developing Northern Australia, the subsequent 2016 Defence White Paper and the 2020 Force Structure Plan ‘outlined the Australian Government’s commitment to a strengthened Defence presence in northern Australia’ and ‘confirmed the importance of key enabling capabilities, including military bases and training areas, in supporting the effective operation of the Australian Defence Force’s combat systems.’
2.7
At the public hearing, Defence told the Committee that:
This investment directly supports the implementation of the 2020 Force Structure Plan by enhancing training areas to support emerging capabilities and maintain the ADF's world-class training. The proposed works will enhance interoperability between the ADF and our partners, including the US, through increased opportunities for combined training. The capability needs for the project are providing flexible training areas that are adaptable to support emerging capabilities, are accessible and enabled by supporting infrastructure, support the increased use and broader range of activities for the ADF and our partners, and improve work health and safety conditions. The capacity and capability of existing infrastructure limits effective training, thereby impacting the generation of land capability.
2.8
In their submission to the inquiry, Defence stated that the current age and capacity of facilities and infrastructure at the four locations ‘limit the conduct of effective land combat training as well as the opportunities for joint and combined training of military forces between the Australian Defence Force’ and its partners.
2.9
In addition, Defence noted that the current facilities ‘have limited capacity to respond to any increased demand for use of the training areas,’ and are ‘unable to effectively cater for the recent evolution in Australian Defence Force training requirements and the introduction of new weapons, capabilities and technology.’
Options considered
2.10
Defence stated that the endorsed detailed business case included a ‘comprehensive analysis of the training requirements and how best to address these requirements across each of the four training areas.’
2.11
Defence further stated that:
Generally, the existing weapons ranges were not able to adequately support the new training methodology or foreseeable developments in weapons, targetry technology or simulation. The proposed new weapons ranges, at the core of the Project, will be effective in delivering the required training outcomes and more able to meet future needs, and will include a new generation of targetry systems that are more capable and flexible than existing systems.
2.12
Defence considered three key options to ensure the preferred solution offered value for money for the project:
Option 3: capital facilities and infrastructure priority scope
2.13
Defence stated that Option 1 (do nothing) was not a viable option as ‘the existing facilities were generally obsolete and not fit for purpose’, which ‘significantly constrained training outcomes and impacted on the Australian Defence Force’s capability’. Defence told the Committee that this option did not meet Australia’s commitments under the US Force Posture Agreement.
2.14
Analysis for Option 2 (full scope) ‘proposed a full suite of new or upgraded facilities and infrastructure at each of the four training areas.’ This option was discounted as it was significantly over budget despite achieving all the identified requirements in the training needs.
2.15
Option 3 (Capital Facilities and Infrastructure Priority Scope) was selected as the preferred option as it ‘will provide facilities and infrastructure to support priority Australian Defence Force training requirements, increase opportunities for combined training with our partners, including supporting the aims of the US Force Posture Initiatives.’ Defence also noted that this option will ‘provide Defence with the flexibility needed to meet the expected growing demands on the four training areas.’
2.16
Defence stated that:
By prioritising requirements and the proposed scope, the preferred option balances the needs of the Australian Defence Force in terms of capability and cost to optimise the value outcomes of the Project.
2.17
When questioned about the change in the expected completion date from 2020 to 2024 for the Robertson Barracks site upgrade, Defence told the Committee that the difference was attributed to ‘the development of the first-pass submission that work and design work was predominately done back in 2017.’
2.18
Defence further explained:
Over the ensuing years there was really a step increase in the complexity and the technology of our training systems and our weapons systems, which required that quite a rethink be done on the design that we'd done internally in Defence. In simple terms, it was designed back in 2017 almost with an analogue view of what ranges would be like. We have now progressed to what will very much be digitised ranges, so there's a significant difference. There's no delay as such. It's more that Defence has very deliberately reconsidered the nature of the design that we were going to do to ensure that we were keeping pace with the rapid increase in technology in both the weapons and the training systems.
Scope of the works
2.19
The proposed scope of the United States Force Posture Initiatives Northern Territory Training Areas and Ranges Upgrades is comprised of 15 project elements across the four sites.
Robertson Barracks Close Training Area
2.20
Project element 1 – Administrative and Support Facilities and Infrastructure
constructing a new range control precinct that includes facilities for range management staff and improved access and safety management arrangements;
expanding the existing vehicle wash point;
constructing a driver training area; and
upgrading some elements of the road network and the engineering services infrastructure.
2.21
Project element 2 - Ranges
constructing a new weapons training simulation facility (to supplement the existing facility which is at capacity);
constructing both a new indoor shooting range and a new outdoor shooting range designed for combat training; and
providing permanent power to an existing weapons range in the same area rather than relying on generator power.
2.22
Project element 3 - Urban Operations Facilities
upgrading the existing Urban Operations Training Facility to provide a basic skills training facility for approximately 30 people; and
constructing a new outdoor range designed for urban assault training.
2.23
Project element 4 – Decommissioning and Remediation
decommissioning and removing redundant infrastructure, including three existing weapons ranges made obsolete by this project; and
remediating these sites including, as required, any contamination found.
Kangaroo Flats Training Area
2.24
Project element 5 - Administrative and Support Facilities and Infrastructure
constructing a new range control precinct that includes facilities for range management staff and improved access and safety management arrangements;
constructing a basic medical facility and refurbishing the existing 250 person training camp and kitchen facility;
constructing a light vehicle rinse point; and
upgrading some elements of the road network and engineering services infrastructure, including provision of fixed High Voltage power to the camp and new Range Control facilities.
2.25
Project element 6 - Ranges
constructing three new outdoor weapons ranges designed for various combat training activities and equipped with technically advanced targetry systems; and
relocating the existing demolitions range.
2.26
Project element 7 – Decommissioning and Remediation
decommissioning and removing redundant infrastructure; and
15 existing basic weapons ranges made obsolete by this project, and remediating these sites including, as required, any contamination found.
Mount Bundey Training Area
2.27
Project element 8 - Administrative and Support Facilities and Infrastructure
a new briefing area to the existing range control facilities;
minor upgrades to the existing 250 person tent camp facilities;
upgrading the existing vehicle wash point;
constructing a waste transfer point; and
upgrading some elements of the road network and engineering services infrastructure.
2.28
Project element 9 - Ranges
a new outdoor range for weapon proficiency training on longer range weapons.
2.29
Project element 10 – Urban Operations Facilities
upgrading the existing urban operations training facility to provide an urban area training facility for up to approximately 120 people; and
providing communications coverage to support simulation training.
2.30
Project element 11 – Aviation Facilities
constructing a new arming and refuelling point for helicopters.
Bradshaw Field Training Area
2.31
Project element 12 - Administrative and Support Facilities and Infrastructure
upgrading the existing vehicle wash point;
expanding the current tent training camp and constructing a new training camp further into the training area for 250 personnel;
constructing a new medical facility with helicopter landing site; and
upgrading some of the existing road network and the engineering services infrastructure.
2.32
Project element 13 – Ranges
constructing an outdoor shooting range designed for ensuring weapons are prepared prior to live fire field training.
2.33
Project element 14 – Urban Operations Facilities
constructing a new large scale, complex urban operations training facility suitable for large scale combined training opportunities.
2.34
Project element 15 – Aviation Facilities
extending the Nackeroo Airfield runway;
sealing the runway pavement; and
constructing an aircraft parking apron suitable for two C-17 aircraft and eight MV-22 Osprey aircraft.
Community and stakeholder consultation
2.35
At the public hearing Defence told the Committee that in the lead up to the project Defence undertook extensive community consultation with a large number of the community who came along to the community consultation sessions.
2.36
Defence stated in their Community Consultation Report that the majority of questions received as a result of consultation with key stakeholders and members of local communities were centred around noise concerns, management of run-off, contamination, fire breaks and weed management. In addition, a number of stakeholders asked questions about employment opportunities as part of the initial development and ongoing site maintenance.
2.37
In addition, Defence told the Committee that it has undertaken ‘very extensive consultation with a wide range of the traditional owners that have a stake in the areas in which we're doing this project.’
2.38
Defence further stated that:
As part of the project design, the project has consulted with the Aboriginal Areas Protection Authority, or AAPA, which, under the Northern Territory Aboriginal Sacred Sites Act, is the statutory authority responsible for overseeing the protection of Aboriginal sites throughout the Northern Territory. As part of that, the project goes through a process of applying for a clearance certificate before any works can commence at any of the sites, to ensure that those sacred sites are identified and avoided. Part of Defence's environmental clearance process is that those clearance certificates are in place prior to those works occurring. So the engagement with the Aboriginal Areas Protection Authority has been ongoing, and they were also briefed as part of the community consultation prior to this hearing.
Heritage impacts
2.39
Both the Bradshaw Field Training Area and the Mount Bundey Training Area sites are cited on the Commonwealth Heritage List for their natural heritage values, with Indigenous heritage values documented at all four training areas.
2.40
In addition, the Bradshaw Field Training Area is subject to an Indigenous Land Use Agreement.
2.41
Defence told the Committee that:
…while the proposed works may have little or no impact based on the proposed construction footprints, further on the ground investigations are being undertaken to assess potential impacts to natural heritage values, and to inform mitigation measures such as micro-siting design elements.
2.42
Defence stated that ‘further investigations and assessment, as well as consultation with the Traditional Owners, are being conducted to finalise the management and mitigation measures required to protect these values during the construction phase of the Project.’
Environmental impacts
Fauna and flora
2.43
Defence note that while the works are unlikely to significantly impact any threatened species/communities and migratory species listed under Commonwealth and Northern Territory legislation, the risk has been assessed as medium for the project. To mitigate the impact of the works, Defence stated they will establish no-go areas which will be highlighted in site inductions to minimise residual impacts to flora and fauna in the local area.
2.44
Defence also told the Committee that ‘site habitat removal requirements will be minimised where possible and demarcated by temporary fencing to prevent accidental impacts to surrounding vegetation and habitats.’
2.45
The main risk to flora and fauna, as identified by Defence, is control of the introduction or spread of pest weed species during construction works. Defence stated that this risk can be reduced and ‘managed through a construction environmental management plan’, with plant and equipment to be inspected and washed down before entering and leaving work sites.
Contamination and hazardous materials
2.46
Defence stated that where possible, the reuse of contaminated and excavated soil within the design will minimise waste generation and the need for off-site disposal. In particular, Defence noted that ‘significant metal contamination (lead, copper and zinc) has been identified in surface soil in parts of select small arm ranges that are scheduled to be decommissioned.’
2.47
In addition, low levels of per and poly-fluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) may be encountered in contaminated soils, wastewater, surface water and groundwater during construction at Robertson Barracks Close Training Area.
2.48
Defence stated that contamination and hazardous materials risks will be managed ‘through a standard construction environmental management plan that is compliant with the Defence PFAS Construction and Maintenance Framework’, with bulk earthwork activities to be scheduled outside the wet season to ‘minimise the levels of surface water and associated potential impacts of erosion.’
Cost of the works
2.49
The proposed United States Force Posture Initiatives Northern Territory Training Areas and Ranges Upgrades project has an estimated cost of $747.0 million, exclusive of GST.
2.50
The total project cost includes project, contract management and design fees, construction costs, information and communications technology, furniture, fittings, equipment, and contingencies.
2.51
Defence told the committee that:
Future sustainment costs are expected to increase by $21.2 million annually because of the proposed works due to the costs of additional maintenance, cleaning and utilities services that will be required in the proposed new and upgraded facilities, infrastructure and weapon range targetry.
2.52
Defence provided further details on project costings in its confidential submission and during an in-camera hearing.
2.53
The Committee is satisfied that the costings for the project provided to it have been adequately assessed by the proponent entity.
Revenue
2.54
No revenue is expected to be generated by the project.
Committee comment
2.55
The Public Works Committee acknowledges the critical role that the Robertson Barracks, Kangaroo Flats, Mount Bundey and Bradshaw Field training areas play in supporting emerging capabilities and maintaining world-class training across the Australian Defence Force (ADF).
2.56
The Committee was pleased hear that the proposed works will not only enhance interoperability between the ADF and partners, including the US, but will also support a range of emerging capabilities and improve work health and safety conditions for current ADF members.
2.57
The Committee did not identify any issues of concern with the proposal and is satisfied that the project has merit in terms of need, scope and cost.
2.58
Having regard to its role and responsibilities contained in the Public Works Committee Act 1969, the Committee is of the view that this project signifies value for money for the Commonwealth and constitutes a project which is fit for purpose, having regard to the established need.
2.59
The Committee recommends that the House of Representatives resolve, pursuant to Section 18(7) of the Public Works Committee Act 1969, that it is expedient to carry out the following proposed works: Department of Defence, United States Force Posture Initiatives Northern Territory Training Areas and Ranges Upgrades.
2.60
Proponent entities must notify the Committee of any changes to the project scope, time, cost, function or design. The Committee also requires that a post-implementation report be provided within three months of project completion. A report template can be found on the Committee’s website.