Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities Annual Report 2011–12
Download 5.6 Mb.
|
- Navigate this page:
- Assessments and approvals
- Case Study 3: Regional Rail Link
- Meeting statutory timeframes for assessment approach and approval decisions
- Actions by the Australian Government and actions on Commonwealth land
- Case Study 4: BP seismic survey referral decision under the EPBC Act
- Case Study 5: Chevron Wheatstone approval under the EPBC Act
- Statements of reasons
- Reconsideration of a decision
- Sea dumping
2.2 Environmental impact assessmentThe department works closely with proponents, state, territory and local governments, and other stakeholders, including consultants, to ensure that the requirements of the environmental assessment process under the EPBC Act are understood. The department encourages proponents to discuss projects early in their development so that EPBC Act-related issues can be highlighted and taken into account in a project’s decision making and planning. Projects that most effectively achieve regulatory certainty under the EPBC Act are consistently characterised by:
The EPBC Act provides for a case-by-case assessment by either the Australian Government or an accredited assessor under state and territory processes under a bilateral agreement. (See also the Bilateral Agreements section of this report.) The proponent initiates this process by submitting a referral for a determination on whether a proposed action will have a significant impact on a matter of national environmental significance and, if so, whether further assessment and approval is necessary (which involves a decision on whether the action will be a controlled action). The EPBC Act allows for selection of an assessment approach that is most appropriate to the complexity and scale of the project. After the proposed action is assessed the minister or delegate then decides whether to approve the action. In 2011–12 the statutory timeframes for the three key decision points in the environmental assessment process—a decision on whether the action is a controlled action, an assessment approach decision, and the approval decision—were met 63 per cent of the time. Of the decisions that ran over the statutory timeframe, 70 per cent were made within a further 10 business days of the statutory due date. Detailed statistics relating to EPBC Act referrals, assessments and approvals are in Appendix A.
ReferralsIn 2011–12, 412 actions were referred to the Australian Government for decision on whether approval was required under the EPBC Act. This was a small decrease of 3.7 per cent on the previous year. Thirty-two referrals were the result of compliance actions by the department. Western Australia accounted for the highest proportion of referrals, 24 per cent of the total actions referred. On a national basis referrals relating to residential development, renewable energy generation and supply, energy exploration, mining, natural resources management and tourism, were heavily represented in the total actions referred, reflecting broader trends within Australia’s economy. The possible outcomes of a referral are listed below.
In 2011–12, decisions involving referrals were as follows:
The highest number of controlled action decisions (44) related to mining projects. Thirty referrals were withdrawn before a controlled action decision, 23 were withdrawn after a controlled action decision and 10 lapsed after a controlled action decision. Five reconsideration requests were received during the year and four decisions were made. Assessments and approvalsOnce a project is determined to be a controlled action under the EPBC Act, further assessment of the likely impacts to matters of national environmental significance is undertaken. A decision is made for all controlled action determinations on the approach by which this assessment is conducted (the ‘assessment approach decision’). There are five different levels of assessment. When deciding on the assessment approach the department considers factors such as the scale of the project, the likely impacts, and the amount of information already provided. Each level requires technical information provided by the proponent to be considered and each allows for a public comment period. Comments received during this time are then considered as part of the impact assessment. Where appropriate, assessment by bilateral agreements which accredit a particular state and territory assessment process may be used to reduce duplication of environmental assessment and regulation between the Commonwealth and the states and territories. The assessments of 17 projects were completed under bilateral agreements in 2011–12 and a further 91 projects were under assessment using a bilateral agreement as of 30 June 2012. Following assessment, the minister, or the minister’s delegate, will decide whether to approve the proposed action and the conditions applied to that action. In 2011–12, 75 controlled actions were approved, a decrease (27 per cent) on the 103 controlled actions approved in 2010–11. No controlled actions were not approved in 2011–12. Conditions attached to approvals may include requirements to:
Decisions made, notices issued and invitations to comment under the EPBC Act are published on the department’s website. Case Study 3: Regional Rail LinkThe Regional Rail Link will provide up to 50 kilometres of dual-track rail link from West Werribee to central Melbourne via Sunshine. The project includes a new set of dedicated tracks which will allow regional services to run directly into Melbourne. Regional Rail Link will be funded by the Australian and Victorian governments, with the Australian Government contributing $3.2 million to this project from the Nation Building Program. The department has assessed and approved two sections of the project under different parts of the EPBC Act. Regional Rail Link Section 1 (Moonee Ponds Creek to 2 kilometres beyond Deer Park Bypass) was referred to the minister on 28 June 2011. On 22 February 2012 a delegate of the minister approved this action with conditions under Part 9 of the EPBC Act. Section 2 of the Regional Rail Link project (West of Werribee to Deer Park) was approved under Part 10 Assessment Process of the EPBC Act on 11 June 2010, if undertaken in accordance with the endorsed strategic assessment program for Delivering Melbourne’s newest sustainable communities. Regional Rail Link Section 1 will permanently protect and manage the last known population of the endangered Sunshine diuris (Diuris fragrantissima). The approval of Regional Rail Link Section 1 was achieved through good communication between the department and stakeholders and keeping to tight timelines whilst managing and protecting impacts on matters of national environmental significance. The Regional Rail Link project as a whole demonstrates a collaborative approach and consistent approvals decision process between Part 9 and Part 10 assessment processes of the EPBC Act. This project has led to a refined approach to assessment under the EPBC Act to deliver approvals for a significant Victorian infrastructure project. Meeting statutory timeframes for assessment approach and approval decisionsThe assessment approach and approval decisions made under the EPBC Act are governed by statutory timeframes. Forty-six of the 106 assessment approach decisions were made outside the prescribed statutory timeframes. The majority of late assessment approach decisions were made within 10 business days of the statutory due date. Forty-two of the 73 approval decisions were made outside the statutory timeframe. Further information on statutory timeframes for referral, assessment and approval decisions are provided in Table 14 at Appendix A.
In 2011–12, one controlled action determination was made relating to Commonwealth land and seven controlled action determinations were made relating to actions by Australian Government agencies. The relevant Australian Government agency or employee must inform the minister of such a proposal and the minister must assess the action before advising the agency or employee on how to proceed. In 2011–12, advice was requested on three occasions by the Department of Infrastructure and Transport and the Civil Aviation Safety Authority for proposals involving Commonwealth airports. The minister’s delegate determined that advice was not required for two of those proposals, and the requirements for advice on one proposal was still to be determined as of 30 June 2012. Case Study 4: BP seismic survey referral decision under the EPBC ActOn 4 August 2011 the minister determined that a proposal by BP Exploration (Alpha) Ltd (BP) to undertake a marine seismic survey in Commonwealth waters in the Great Australian Bight (GAB), approximately 400 kilometres west of Port Lincoln, did not require further assessment under the EPBC Act, provided it was undertaken in a particular manner. Marine seismic surveys use a technique that directs acoustic energy (sound) into the rock beneath the sea floor from equipment towed behind a purpose-built seismic vessel. The loudest sound sources used in seismic survey operations are produced by air guns which generate short, intense pulses of sound directed at the seafloor. The proposed survey location posed several challenges. The survey area overlapped a potential feeding area for the endangered blue whale (Balaenoptera musculus) and the endangered southern right whale (Eubalaena australis), the latter of which could potentially migrate through the area to calve at the Head of the Bight. In addition, the survey area partly overlapped with the GAB Commonwealth Marine Park, which meant that approval by the Governor-General was also required for the proposal to proceed. In assessing the referral, the department developed precautionary management measures that ensured that listed threatened and migratory species and the environment of the Commonwealth marine area would not be significantly impacted by the survey. These measures included not undertaking survey operations during the peak southern right whale calving period, and only proceeding with surveys within 300 kilometres of southern right whale calving areas where noise loggers confirmed that sound was below 120 decibels. This is a sound level at which whale behaviour is not expected to be affected. In addition, four marine mammal observers are required on board the seismic vessel to observe for whales, and the sound source is required to be shut down if whales are spotted within 3 kilometres. The department worked with BP to develop approaches to the survey structure and timeframes that would minimise interactions with whales, and to encourage innovative approaches to prevent significant impact on other protected matters. BP was able to commence the survey on schedule using precautionary management measures. On 1 September 2011 the Governor General approved the seismic survey, taking into account the referral assessment and decision as well as the assessment of the proposal against the provisions of the Great Australian Bight Commonwealth Marine Park Management Plan. Case Study 5: Chevron Wheatstone approval under the EPBC ActOn 22 September 2011 the minister approved the Wheatstone project to be undertaken by Chevron Australia Pty Ltd. This project entails the construction and operation of a multi-train liquefied natural gas and domestic gas plant approximately 12 kilometres south-west of the town of Onslow in the Pilbara, Western Australia. The matters protected under the EPBC Act for this project were listed threatened and listed migratory species (such as whales, dolphins, turtles, sawfish and dugongs) and the environment of the Commonwealth marine area. As the project included an offshore facility and pipeline in Commonwealth waters, the project was assessed via a coordinated assessment between the Australian and Western Australian governments, and Chevron prepared a single assessment document for both the state and federal assessment requirements. Due to the scale and complexity of the project, a range of potential impacts needed to be addressed, including impacts:
The 70 conditions imposed by the minister protect listed threatened and migratory species and the Commonwealth marine area from these impacts. The conditions include the requirement to optimise the dredging methodology and to minimise habitat disturbance. They also required an adaptive management approach that uses expert panels using the results of further dugong research to better inform and improve management plans. In addition, Chevron is also required to educate its workforce on the significance of environmental values of the area and their shared responsibility to protect those values, including through a code of conduct, to manage fishing and recreational activities by employees. The conditions of approval include the development of a comprehensive and innovative offsets package. This package requires Chevron to establish a regional Indigenous sea ranger program for the life of the project, to minimise any impacts to marine species and their coastal habitats, and help enforce the code of conduct. The offsets also include funding from Chevron for research into sea grass ecology and the removal of barriers to the movement of sawfish. Statements of reasonsSections 77(4) and 78C(4) of the EPBC Act allow persons to request a statement of reasons about controlled action decisions and reconsideration of controlled action decisions respectively. Under the Administrative Decisions (Judicial Review) Act 1977 (ADJR Act) a statement of reasons can also be requested for administrative decisions made under legislation. In 2011–12, 33 requests were received and 32 statements provided under the ADJR Act and the EPBC Act. (The statutory timeframe for providing one of the statement of reasons requested in 2011–12 carried into 2012–13.) Reconsideration of a decisionReconsideration of a decision is available in limited circumstances and is the only way to revoke and remake a decision. Typically, reconsiderations are undertaken on request when there is substantial new information or a substantial change in the likely effects on matters protected. In 2011–12, four decisions were reconsidered by the minister or his delegate and three decisions were revoked and new decisions made. Sea dumpingThe Environment Protection (Sea Dumping) Act 1981 fulfils Australia’s international obligations under the London Convention and Protocol, which aims to protect and preserve the marine environment from pollution, especially from dumping at sea. During 2011–12, 14 sea dumping permits were issued by the department. Directory: system -> files -> resources resources -> Environmental Best Practice Port Development: An Analysis of International Approaches resources -> The National Heritage List and Commonwealth Heritage List: 1 july 2008 30 june 2013 resources -> Reference list for water related coal seam gas and coal mining research resources -> Michigan Association of Intermediate School Administrators isd sections of Law resources -> Executive Summary 3 Background 4 Developing the National Television and Computer Recycling Scheme 4 resources -> Threat abatement plan for disease in natural ecosystems caused by resources -> Sawfish and River Sharks Multispecies Issues Paper resources -> Wildlife Trade Management Plan – Queensland Crocodile Farming Download 5.6 Mb. Share with your friends:
|