Page 3247 - Week 09 - Tuesday, 18 August 2009
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
In February 2009 a revised EIS was submitted by the proponent. This was assessed by the Planning and Land Authority, whose findings are summarised in an EIS assessment report that I have tabled today. In its assessment, ACTPLA determined that there were a number of matters that needed to be addressed further and, therefore, a notice to address these matters under section 224 of the Planning and Development Act was issued. This section 224 notice and the proponent’s response are both included in the documents I have tabled. The purpose of the EIS assessment report is to determine if the revised EIS has addressed the requirements of the scoping document.
The EIS was assessed in a draft and revised form, including the additional information provided in response to the section 224 notice. Key issues raised during the assessment related to addressing the matters in the scoping document against the heads of consideration; assessment of the residual risk levels; consideration of significant fish species—namely, the Macquarie perch, the Murray cod, the Murray River crayfish and the two-spined blackfish; development of the construction environmental management plan and its subsequent required approvals; traffic management, in particular, in relation to the use of Cotter Road on sensitive noise receivers and user groups; blasting time frames and noise and vibration impacts on nearby residents; downstream issues, including the impact on water quality; and recreational issues, including impacts on users of the Cotter reserve and the locations of sensitive receivers.
The EIS assessment report concluded that the majority of the requirements of the scoping document have been addressed. There were no significant issues outstanding that would require an inquiry panel to be established. I determined, based on information provided to me in the EIS assessment report, that the EIS was a thorough assessment of the potential environmental impacts associated with the project and satisfactorily addressed the requirements of the scoping document. I therefore declared it complete and advised ACTPLA that no further action was required. At this point, I would like to point out that the EIS for the enlarged Cotter Dam is one of the first environmental impact statements to be declared complete under the new Planning and Development Act.
Once the EIS was completed, the proponent was able to lodge a development application. This was submitted on 7 July 2009. This development application is currently undergoing assessment by ACTPLA. Due to the likelihood that the project would have an impact on matters of national environmental significance, including the vulnerable plant species, the vulnerable pink-tailed worm lizard and three species of fish, including the endangered Macquarie perch, the vulnerable Murray cod and the endangered trout cod, a referral was made to the commonwealth Department of the Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts, also known as DEWHA.
The proposal was classified as a controlled action by DEWHA and required assessment by public environment report, or PER, under the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act, also known—because we do not have enough acronyms—as the EPBC Act. Approval is required under the EPBC act before construction can commence. The draft PER was submitted to DEWHA by the proponent on 16 April 2009 and is currently being publicly notified. DEWHA has a time frame of 40 business days from receipt of the final PER.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .