Page 5245 - Week 12 - Thursday, 28 October 2010
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
The risks of environmental harm posed by such activities are assessed throughout the lifespan of the activity. Before authorisations are granted for activities, risk assessments are carried out by the EPA. These assessments examine the economic and social benefits of the activity, the applicant’s environmental record, relevant environment protection policies and the potential of the activity to cause environmental harm. There are also activity-specific requirements imposed by the environmental authorisation to ensure that the potential environmental risks associated with the activity are minimised.
Currently, the Environment Protection Act requires an annual review of any standard environmental authorisation granted for an unlimited period or on any standard or special environmental authorisation granted for longer than one year. The Environment Protection Amendment Bill, this bill, will allow the Environment Protection Authority to review any standard environmental authorisation granted for an unlimited period at more appropriate intervals, and at least once every five years. The authority will still be required to annually review both standard authorisations issued for a specified period of not longer than three years and all special environmental authorisations.
The bill does not affect the current review requirements of accredited environmental authorisations. The bill does not prevent the Environment Protection Authority from reviewing standard environmental authorisations or special environmental authorisations at any time the authorisation is in effect.
Although the bill introduces a new five-year time frame for reviewing standard environmental authorisations issued for an unlimited period, the Environment Protection Authority is anticipating a gradual, incremental increase to this new period. Initially, it is expected that the review period for certain authorisations will be within two years. There may, however, be instances where environmental awareness and technological advances increase the review period to the five-year limit.
The review period for standard environmental authorisations granted for an unlimited period would be based upon a risk assessment of the activity and the authorisation holder’s past environmental performance. The bill will allow the authority to review these environmental authorisations at a more appropriate interval. The bill will also allow the period for activities which are deemed to have a relatively lower risk to be reviewed at a greater interval than those deemed to have a more significant risk.
For example, the operation of a sewage treatment plant which has greater potential impact on a waterway’s ecology, water quality and a greater health risk to the public would be deemed to have greater environmental risk. This activity would have more stringent conditions imposed as well as having a more frequent review period. In comparison, the production of concrete and concrete products would be deemed to have less risk due to technological advances and current industry practices which have resulted in a good environmental record in the ACT.
Introduction of appropriate review periods for activities will reduce costs to both industry and the government. Where reviews are conducted at intervals of longer than one year there will be a reduction in time spent by industry with environment
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video