Page 3863 - Week 11 - Tuesday, 19 September 2017
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
dangerous substances at the placard quantity. Schedule 4 of the Planning and Development Act sets out the type of development that must be assessed in the impact track and involve the production of an environmental impact statement. Clause 14 of the bill inserts a new item 11 into schedule 4. This new item requires a development proposal that involves the storage of dangerous substances at or above a placard quantity to be assessed in the impact track, subject to certain exemptions which I will refer to shortly.
As I noted earlier, there are a number of exceptions to this. The impact track will not apply if the proponent applies for and obtains an environmental significance opinion from the relevant agency to the effect that the proposal is not likely to have a significant environmental impact. In this case, the relevant agency is the planning and land authority itself. An application for an environmental significance opinion in this matter, as for other existing matters, will require an application in writing to the agency, under section 138AA of the act. Clause 12 of the bill amends the existing section 138AA to include this new item as a matter that may be progressed in this way.
Once an application is made, the agency must provide an opinion as to whether it concludes that the proposal is or is not likely to have a significant environmental adverse effect or impact. In making the assessment in this case, the relevant agency is required to consult with a number of entities. This is the effect of clause 13 and new sections 138AA(3) and (4), which list the entities that the planning and land authority must consult when preparing an opinion. The list includes the Environmental Protection Authority and the Work Safety Commissioner, among others. I would also note that the environmental significance opinion is a notifiable instrument and so will be publicly available.
Mr Assistant Speaker, there is a further exemption to this requirement. This exception is of a transitional nature. This requirement will not apply to existing storages of dangerous substances, provided the relevant premises are registered on the placard quantity register, as required by the Dangerous Substances Regulation, before the relevant date. I referred to clause 9 earlier as the clause that removes the standard use exemption from the storage of dangerous substances at the placard quantity. The new section 134(3A), inserted by clause 9, specifically provides that this measure will not apply to operations that already store dangerous substances at the placard quantity, provided the relevant premises are in fact on the register by the relevant date. The relevant date is the date of commencement of clause 9.
The intention is for clause 9 and the related provisions to commence by notice six months after the notification of the amendment act. This transitional exception is in place to ensure that there is not an unacceptable level of uncertainty imposed on existing business operations. This will also result in a situation where continuing an authorised use on a site will not require development approval to continue storing the placard quantity of a dangerous substance. This is because these storage sites are already appropriately regulated, as they are known sites registered under the Dangerous Substances Regulation. This approach also avoids any issues of retrospectivity in applying the new provisions in the bill.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video