statement of reasons for approval of a proposed action ...€¦ · my decision of 22 march 2016,...

DEPARTMENT OF THE ENVIRONMENT

Statement of reasons for approval of a proposed action under the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (Cth)

I, GREG HUNT, Minister for the Environment, provide the following statement of reasons for my decision of 22 March 2016, under section 130(1) and section 133 of the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (the EPBe Act), to further develop the coal seam gas fields of the Gladstone Natural Gas Project (GLNG), including up to 6,100 additional coal seam gas wells and associated infrastructure in central southern Queensland (EPBC 2012/6615) (the proposed action).

A copy of this decision is available on the Department of the Environment's website at: http://epbcnotices.environment.gov.au/ entitylannotation/5b802892-4cf1-e511-a93c- 005056baOOa8/a 71 d58ad-4cba-48b6-8dab-f3091 fc31 cd5?t=1459823396415

Legislation

1. Relevant legislation is set out in Annexure A.

Background

2. On 5 November 2012, Santos Limited (the proponent) referred to the Minister, under section 68 of the EPBC Act, a proposal to further develop the coal seam gas fields of the Gladstone Natural Gas Project (GLNG), including up to 6,100 additional coal seam gas wells and associated infrastructure, in central southern Queensland.

3. The proposed action covers an area of 10,676 km2 across petroleum tenements in the Surat and Bowen Basins. It includes additional coal seam gas production adjacent to and within the already approved 2,650 coal seam gas well Santos GLNG Project area (EPBC 2008/4059).

4. The project. includes progressive development, construction, production, operation, decommissioning and rehabilitation of the gas fields and supporting infrastructure, including:

• up to 6,100 wells and associated well lease equipment; • the hydraulic fracture of between 50-90% of wells depending on the gas field; • fixed above ground gas field facilities, including gas treatment and compression; • water management infrastructure, including management ponds, brine and solid

salt management and disposal facilities, and end-use infrastructure; • above and below ground linear infrastructure, including gas and water gathering

flowlines and transmission pipelines, access roads, and electricity lines; • supporting infrastructure, including borrow pits, quarries, stockpile, lay-down and

storage areas, and maintenance, warehousing and administration facilities; and

• accommodation facilities and associated infrastructure.

5. The referral was available for public comment for 10 business days from 8 November 2012. One public submission was received regarding the potential impacts of the proposed action.

1


6. On 16 November 2012, the Queensland Coordinator-General, Mr Barry Broe declared the proposed action to be a 'significant project' under section 26(1 )(a) of the State Development and Public Works Organisation Act 1971 (Qld). This declaration initiated the statutory environmental impact evaluation procedure of Part 4 of that Act, which required the proponent to prepare an environmental impact statement (EIS) for the proposed action.

7. On 20 November 2012, comments were received from the Queensland Government advising that, in light of the Coordinator-General's decision of 16 November 2012, the proposed action would be assessed in accordance with an assessment process specified in the bilateral agreement in relation to environmental impact assessment (the Bilateral Agreement).

8. On 3 December 2012, the proposed action was determined by a delegate of the then Minister to be a controlled action under section 75 of the EPBC Act, subject to the following controlling provisions:

• sections 16 and 17B «Ramsar) Wetlands of international importance);

• sections 18 & 18A (Listed threatened species and ecological communities); and

• sections 20 & 20A (Listed migratory species).

The proposed action was assessed under the Bilateral Agreement and pursuant to the process set out in paragraph 7 of these reasons.

9. On 22 June 2013, the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Amendment Act 2013 (the 2013 Act) commenced. The 2013 Act amended the EPBC Act by including new provisions in Part 3 (sections 24D and 24E) which prohibit, in certain circumstances, the taking of coal seam gas and large coal mining developments that have, will have, or are likely to have a significant impact on a water resource.

10. On 17 October 2013, I found that the proposed action, being a coal seam gas development, was likely to have a significant impact on water resources and so determined, in accordance with the transitional provisions in the 2013 Ad, that sections 24D and 24E of the EPBC Act were also controlling provisions for the proposed action.

11. In accordance with section 131AB of the EPBC Act, my delegate sought advice jointly with the Queensland Coordinator-General from the Independent Expert Scientific Committee on Coal Seam Gas and Large Coal Mining Development (I ESC) in relation to water related impacts associated with the proposed action. The IESC provided advice on the proposed action on 18 December 2014.

12. The proponent's EIS for the proposed action was made available for public comment between 10 November 2014 and 22 December 2014. The Coordinator-General received 20 agency submissions and 9 public submissions on the draft EIS.

1 Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Amendment Act 2013, Schedule 1, item 23.

2


13. On 26 March 2015, the Queensland Coordinator-General requested that the proponent submit additional information to address the issues raised in the submissions on the EIS and in the IESC advice.

14. The Queensland Coordinator-General provided his evaluation report of the proposed action (Coordinator-General's Report) to the Department on 3 December 2015, recommending the proposed action proceed subject to conditions.

15. Except where discussed in this statement of reasons, I accepted the assessment and findings of the Coordinator-General's Report in relation to the relevant impacts of the proposed action, as well as the effectiveness of proposed measures to avoid, mitigate or compensate for those impacts.

16. On 8 February 2016, I proposed to approve the proposed action subject to conditions, having regard to relevant information.

17. I n accordance with sections 131 and 131 M of the EPBC Act, I invited comments on my proposed decision from:

• the proponent;

• the Minister for Infrastructure and Regional Development, the Hon Warren Truss MP;

• the Minister for Resources, Energy and Northern Australia, the Hon Josh Frydenberg MP; and

• the Minister for Agriculture and Water Resources, the Hon Barnaby Joyce MP.

18. I also notified the Queensland Coordinator-General and the Queensland Department of Environment and Heritage Protection of my proposed decision.

19. On 22 of March 2015, I approved, subject to conditions, the taking of the proposed action under section 130( 1) and section 133 of the EPBC Act for the purposes of the controlling provisions identified in paragraphs 8 and 10 of these reasons.

Evidence or other material on which my findings were based

20. My decision to approve the proposed action was based on consideration of the final approval decision brief prepared by the Assessment and Policy Implementation Branch of the Department (the brief) dated 22 March 2015.

21. The final approval decision brief contained the following attachments:

A. Proposed decision brief and attachments:

M.Queensland Coordinator General's Assessment Report

AB. Finalised assessment documentation and submissions on the draft Environmental Impact Statement.

AC. Legal Considerations

AD. Departmental advice on matters of national environmental significance

3


AE.lndependent Expert Scientific Committee Advice

AF.Approved Conservation Advices, Recovery plans and Threat Abatement Plans

AG. Legislative provisions

AH. Proposed approval decision

AI. Letters to proponent, Commonwealth Ministers and State Agencies

B. Responses to invitation to comment on proposed approval

B1. Comment from the Queensland Coordinator-General B2. Comment from the Queensland Department of Environment and Heritage

Protection B3. Response to invitation to comment - Minister for Resources, Energy and

Northern Australia B4. Response to invitation to comment - Santos Limited B5. Response to invitation to comment - Minister for Agriculture and Water

Resources B6. Response to invitation to comment - Minister for Infrastructure and Regional

Development

C. Approval decision notice

D. Letters advising of my decision

E. Table summarising responses to invitations to comment

F. Approval decision notice showing track changes from proposed approval

Findings on material questions of fact

Ramsar Wetlands of international importance

22. The Narran Lake Nature Reserve is located approximately 550 km downstream of the project boundary. The Coordinator-General concluded that any impacts associated with the project are likely to be localised within and immediately adjacent to the project boundary and these impacts are unlikely to extend downstream to the Narran Lake Nature Reserve.

4


23. I agreed with the Coordinator-General's conclusion and noted that any impacts to the Narran Lake Nature Reserve would occur through surface water impacts. In this regard, I noted that the proponent has not sought approval for the release of coal seam gas produced water into surface waters. Any such release of coal seam gas produced water which is likely to have a significant impact to matters of national environmental significance would require further referral and approval under the EPBC Act.

24. Based on the distance from the project and lack of likely impacts on Ramsar Wetlands of international importance, I found that the proposed action is unlikely to have a significant impact on the Narran Lake Nature Reserve.

Listed threatened species and ecological communities

Impacted species and communities

25. The following listed threatened species and ecological communities were considered during the assessment of project impacts:

• Xerothamnella (Xerothamnella herbacea) - Endangered

• Tylophora linearis - Endangered

• Salt pipewort (Eriocaulon cersonii; - Endangered

• Bertya opponens - Vulnerable

• Oaviesia discolor - Vulnerable

• Slender darling-pea (Swainsona murrayana) - Vulnerable

• Westringia parvifolia - Vulnerable

• Logania diffusa - Vulnerable

• Curly-bark wattle (Acacia cutreniis - Vulnerable

• Acacia grandifolia - Vulnerable

• Calytrix gurulmundensis - Vulnerable

• Bean's ironbark (Eucalyptus beaniana) - Vulnerable

• Homoranthus decumbens - Endangered

• Swamp orchid (Phaius australis) - Endangered

• Aristida annua - Vulnerable

• Hairy-joint grass (Arthraxon hispidus) - Vulnerable

• King bluegrass (Oichanthium queens/andicum) - Endangered

• Bluegrass (Oichanthium setosum) - Vulnerable

5


• Belson's panic (Homopholis belsonil) - Vulnerable

• Fraser's hakea (Hakea frasen) - Vulnerable

• Austral Toad flax (Thesium australe) - Vulnerable

• 'Oollne (Cadel/ia pentastylis) - Vulnerable

• Cycad (Macro:lamia platyrhachis) - Endangered

• Australasian bittern (Botaurus poiciloptilus) - Endangered

• Australian painted snipe (Rostratula australis) - Endangered

• Black-breasted button-quail (Turnix melanogaster) - Vulnerable

• Black-throated finch (Poephilt;1 cincta cincta) - Endangered

• Red goshawk (Erythrotriorchis radiatus) - Vulnerable

• Squatter pigeon (southern) (Geophaps scripta scripta) - Vulnerable

• Star finch (Neochmia ruficauda ruficauda) - Endangered

• Superb parrot (Polytelis swainsonil) - Vulnerable

• Swift parrot (Lathamus discolor) - Endangered

• Plains-wanderer (Pedionomus torquatus) - Vulnerable"

• Murray cod (Maccullochella peelil) - Vulnerable

• Brush-tailed rock-wallaby (Petrogale penicillata) - Vulnerable

• South-eastern long-eared bat (Nyctophilus corbem) - Vulnerable

• Grey-headed flying-fox (Pteropus poliocephalus) - Vulnerable

• Koala (Phascolarctos cinereus (combined populations of Old, NSW and the ACT» - Vulnerable

• Large-eared pied bat (Chalinolobus dwyen) - Vulnerable

• Northern quoll (Dasyurus hallucatus) - Endangered

• Bridled nailtail wallaby (Onychogalea fraenata) - Endangered

• Collared delma (Delma torquata) - Vulnerable

• Dunmall's snake (Furina dunmeui; - Vulnerable

2 This species was listed as critically endangered under the EPBC Act in 2015. Prior to this date it was a listed vulnerable species. Section 158A of the EPBC Act specifies that approval process decisions are not affected by listing events that happen after a section 75 decision has been made. In accordance with this section, my decision was made having regard to its status at the time of the controlled action decision.

6


• Fitzroy River turtle (Rheodytes leukops) - Vulnerable

• Five-clawed worm-skink (Anomalopus mackay/) - Vulnerable

• Ornamental snake (Denisonia maculata) - Vulnerable

• Yakka skink (Egernia rugosa) - Vulnerable

• Brigalow (Acacia harpophylla dominant and co-dominant) ecological community - Endangered

• Coolibah - Black Box Woodlands of the Darling Riverine Plains and the Brigalow Belt South Bioregions ecological community - Endangered

• Semi-evergreen vine thickets of the Brigalow Belt (North and South) and Nandewar Bioregions ecological community - Endangered

• The community of native species dependent on natural discharge of groundwater from the Great Artesian Basin ecological community - Endangered

• Natural Grasslands of the Queensland Central Highlands and the northern Fitzroy Basin ecological community - Endangered

• Weeping Myall Woodlands ecological community - Endangered

26. Based on information provided in the proponent's Environmental Impact Statement, I found that the listed threatened species and ecological communities described at paragraph 25 were likely to be found on the site of the proposed action during surveys, or potential habitat for the species has been determined to occur on the site through habitat mapping undertaken by the proponent.

27. I found that the listed threatened species and ecological communities listed at paragraph 25 are the only listed threatened species and ecological communities likely to be significantly impacted by the proposed action.

Vegetation clearing impacts

28. I found that the maximum amount of habitat for each species or ecological community, as described in Coordinator-General's Report, that was modelled to be impacted by the proposed action is as follows:

EPBe Threatened species Predicted maximum disturoance (ha)

Xerothamnella (Xerothamnella herbacea) 129 Tylophora linearis 975 Salt pipewort (Eriocaulon carsonit) 2,330 Bertya opponens 478 Daviesia discolor 7 Slender darling-pea (Swainsona murrayana) 40 Westringia parvifolia 236 Curly-bark wattle (Acacia curranit) 328

7


Acacia grandifolia 859 Calytrix gurulmundensis 115 Bean's ironbark (Eucalyptus beaniana) 243 Homoranthus decumbens 1,051 Swamp orchid (Phaius australis) 481 Aristida annua 40 Hairy-joint grass (Arthraxon hispidus) 346 King bluegrass (Dichanthium queenslandicum) 40 Bluegrass (Dichanthium setosum) 4 Belson's panic (Homopholis belsonlt; 1937 Austral Toad flax (Thesium australe) 1659 Ooline (Cadellia pentastylis) 232 Cycad (Macrozamia platyrhachis) 2496 Australasian bittern (Botaurus poiciloptilus) 168 Australian painted snipe (Rostratula australis) 168 Black-breasted button-quail (Turnix melanogaster) 233 Black-throated finch (Poephila cincta cincta) 2,745 Red goshawk (Erythrotriorchis radiatus) 15,738 Squatter pigeon (southern) (Geophaps scripta scripta) 4,032 Star finch (Neochmia ruficauda ruficauda) 3,244 Superb parrot (Polytelis swainsonil) 2,136 Swift parrot (Lathamus discolor) 1,987 Plains-wanderer (Pedionomus torquatus) 278 Murray cod (Maccullochella peelil) 73 Brush-tailed rock-wallaby (Petrogale penicil/ata) 166 South-eastern long-eared bat (Nyctophilus corbem) 4,202 Koala (Phascolarctos cinereus (combined populations of Qld, NSW 3,303 and the ACT)) Large-eared pied bat (Chalinolobus dwyen) 1,950 Northern quoll (Dasyurus hallucatus) 4,855 Collared delma (Delma torquata) 2,703 Dunmall's snake (Furina dunmelli; 2,512 Fitzroy River turtle (Rheodytes leukops) 73 Five-clawed worm-skink (Anomalopus mackaY/) 40 Ornamental snake (Denisonia maculata) 279 Yakka skink (Egernia rugosa) 4,144 EPBC Threatened Ecological Communities Predicted maximum

disturbance (ha) Brigalow (Acacia harpophylla dominant and co-dominant) 179 Coolibah - Black Box Woodlands of the Darling Riverine Plains and 124 the Brigalow Belt South Bioregions ecological community Semi-evergreen vine thickets of the Brigalow Belt (North and South) 190 and Nandewar Bioregions Natural Grasslands of the Queensland Central Highlands and the 288 northern Fitzroy Basin Weeping Myall Woodlands 517

8


29. I was advised by the Department that the proponent modelled its estimate of likely impact based on Queensland Regional Ecosystem mapping, high resolution aerial photography and site based data. For threatened fauna, the proponent has undertaken a number of assumptions regarding "core habitat", "essential habitat", "general habitat" and "unlikely habitat" for each protected species.

30. I was advised by the Department that the areas identified in the table above were modelled based on limited on-ground survey effort and, are likely to be further refined through field development and planning when avoidance measures are implemented.

31. I accepted the Department's advice in this regard and took account of this uncertainty in making my decision. To address this uncertainty I included conditions requiring the proponent to undertake pre-disturbance surveys (conditions 4 and 5). The outcome of these surveys will inform the avoidance, mitigation, management and offsetting of impacts to listed threatened species and ecological communities.

32. The proponent has not identified a predicted maximum disturbance limit for the following listed threatened species and communities which have been identified, or potentially occur, within the project area:

• Logania diffusa - Vulnerable

• Fraser's hakea (Hakei frasen) - Vulnerable

• Grey-headed flying-fox (Pteropus poliocephalus) - Vulnerable

• Bridled nailtail wallaby (Onychogalea fraenata) - Endangered

• The community of native species dependent on natural discharge of groundwater from the Great Artesian Basin ecological community - Endangered

33. The proponent has noted the following with respect to the listed threatened species:

• Logania diffusa has not been identified within the project area and was recorded 9 km north of the project area more than 30 years ago;

• Fraser's hakea was considered unlikely to occur as prior identification of this species in south-eastern Queensland may be attributed to a different hakea species;

• potential habitat for the Grey-headed Flying-fox within the project area was found but no camps have been identified; and

• the Bridled nailtail wallaby has been historically observed within the project area but is now thought to be confined to Taunton National Park, outside the project area.

34. In order to address the uncertainty regarding likely impacts to the above species, I have attached a condition to the approval that requires the proponent to inform the Department within 5 days of finding any species for which a maximum disturbance limit has not been identified, and update relevant management plans to address such occurrences (condition 6).

9


35. I have also included measures in the conditions of approval to limit impacts to the Great Artesian Basin springs ecological community, to ensure that no significant impacts occur to it, and therefore no disturbance limit is required (condition 20).

36. I noted that the proponent has modelled 2,330 ha of impact to the Salt Pipewort (Eriocaulon carsonil). This species is generally restricted to vents and tails of mound spring wetlands; however, it can occur on floodplains subject to infrequent inundation. The measures relating to the Great Artesian Basin springs ecological community will also provide protection to the Salt Pipewort that occur in that ecological community. On that basis, the Department advised, and I accepted, that the predicted maximum disturbance to the Salt Pipewort will be reduced following the implementation of those measures.

Avoidance, mitigation and management measures

37. The proponent has committed to a number of measures to avoid and minimise impacts to EPBC Act listed threatened species and ecological communities as a result of the proposed action, as identified in the finalised environmental impact statement. The key tool for avoiding and minimising impacts to listed threatened species and ecological communities is through the use of the constraints protocol summarised in the finalised environmental impact statement. This protocol identifies the level of constraint placed on different project activities based on the ecological value of the habitat which is potentially impacted.

38. To ensure that impacts to EPBC listed threatened species and ecological communities are minimised, I have imposed conditions requiring the proponent to submit its constraints protocol for approval (conditions 7 and 8). These conditions require the proponent to base the level of constraint to reflect the listing status of each listed threatened species or ecological community, the quality of the ecological communities or habitat for each species, the number of different species and ecological communities impacted and the value of the ecological communities or habitat for each species in a regional context.

39. The proponent has committed to implementing other measures, including pest and weed management, translocating individual threatened flora, controlling access routes and implementing appropriate grazing regimes.

40. I have attached further conditions to the approval to ensure that the proponent implements measures to minimise the impacts of mining operations on listed threatened species and ecological communities. In particular, conditions 9 to 10 of my approval require the proponent to develop a Significant Species Management Plan, which must be approved by me, to manage the direct and indirect impacts of the proposed action. The plan includes requirements for:

a. measures to avoid, mitigate and manage impacts to listed threatened species and ecological communities;

b. details of how the constraints protocol has been applied;

10


c. a monitoring program to determine the success of mitigation and management measures; and

d. details of a timeframe for regular review of the approved significant species management plan.

41. As noted in paragraph 23 of these reasons, the proponent has not sought approval to release coal seam gas produced water to surface waters and the State's assessment did not consider the release of coal seam gas produced water to watercourses. Any such release of coal seam gas produced water which is likely to have a significant impact to matters of national environmental significance would require further referral and approval under the EPBC Act. Impacts to aquatic ecology are therefore likely to be limited to the construction of infrastructure within watercourses.

42. The Queensland draft Environmental Authority includes regulation of the impacts to surface water as a result of construction.

Offsets

43. In order to offset the residual significant impact of the proposed action on listed threatened species and ecological communities, I have imposed condition 11 requiring the proponent to offset impacts in accordance with the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 Environmental Offsets Policy (2012).

44. The Coordinator-General recommended a condition requiring the proponent to prepare an Offset Management Plan to detail how it will compensate for authorised unavoidable impacts to EPBC Act listed threatened species and ecological communities.

45. I agreed with the Coordinator-General and included a condition requiring the proponent to prepare an Offset Management Plan detailing how it will compensate for residual significant impacts to EPBC Act listed threatened species and ecological communities (conditions 14 to 19).

46. I was advised by the Department that .offsets for residual significant impacts can be acquitted in stages to reflect the construction stages of the proposed action. This will ensure that offsets take account of the on-ground impacts and are provided within a reasonable time of the impacts occurring.

47. For each stage, the proponent must provide the results of pre-disturbance surveys and how residual significant impacts to listed threatened species and ecological communities have been calculated.

48. I have required that the Offset Management Plan be approved by me prior to the· commencement of project stage 1 and updated prior to the commencement of subsequent project stages.

Cumulative impacts

49. The proponent has undertaken a cumulative assessment of current and future projects in the area and concluded that where there is a potential for cumulative impacts on EPBC Act listed threatened species and ecological communities, these impacts are best

11


managed at the individual project scale through specific mitigation and management measures. These measures are reflected in the proponent's commitments in the finalised environmental impact statement and in my conditions of approval.

Conclusion

50. The Department was of the view that, taking into account the assessment of impacts to listed threatened species and ecological communities provided in the Coordinator General's Report, the potential maximum disturbance scenario, the mitigation and management measures and the recommended proposed conditions of approval, impacts to EPBC Act listed threatened species and ecological communities can be appropriately managed. I agreed with that view.

51. Having regard to the relevant briefing material provided to me by the Department, I found that the proposed action would not have unacceptable impacts on listed threatened species and ecological communities in view of all relevant avoidance, mitigation and compensation (offset) measures.

Listed migratory species

52. Based on information provided in the EIS for the proposed action, the following avian species that are listed migratory species for the purposes of the EPBC Act, were recorded from or considered likely to occur within the project area:

• Black-faced Monarch (Monarcha melanopsis)

• Black-tailed Godwit (Limosa limosa)

• Caspian Tern (Hydroprogne caspia)

• Cattle Egret (Ardea ibis)

• Curlew Sandpiper (Calidris ferruginea)

• Common Greenshank (Tringa nebularia)

• Fork-tailed Swift (Apus pacificus)

• Glossy Ibis (Plegadis falcinellus)

• Great Egret (Ardea modesta)

• Latham's Snipe, Japanese Snipe (Gallinago hardwickil)

• Marsh Sandpiper (Tringa stagnatilis)

• Osprey (Pandion haliaetus)

• Pacific Golden Plover (Pluvialis fulva)

• Rainbow Bee-eater (Merops ornatus)

• Rufous Fantail (Rhipidura rufifrons)

12


• Satin Flycatcher (Myiagra cyanoleuca)

• Sharp-tailed Sandpiper (Calidris acuminate)

• Spectacled Monarch (Symposiachrus trivirgatus)

• White-tailed Tropicbird (Phaeton lepturus)

• White-throated Needletail (Hirundapus caudacutus)

• Wood Sandpiper (Tringa glareola)

53. I noted the Department's advice that, subsequent to the controlled action decision, two further avian species that are likely to be impacted by the proposed action, the Australian painted snipe and White-bellied sea-eagle, were removed from the list of migratory species and are no longer listed migratory species for the purposes of the EPBC Act.

54. The proponent has modelled impacts to migratory species' habitat and identified potential impacts may occur to the following migratory species and their habitat.

EPBe listed migratory species Potential impact area (ha) Cattle Egret (Ardea ibis) 8,162 Glossy Ibis (Plegadis falcinellus) 168 Great Egret (Ardea modesta) 168 Osprey (Pandion haliaetus) 2,687 Rainbow Bee-eater (Merops ornatus) 15,738

55. The proponent has committed to measures to avoid and mitigate impacts to listed migratory species and their habitat in the project assessment documentation and these are summarised in the Coordinator-General's Report.

56. The estimated impacts to listed migratory species are based on the proponent's predictive modelling. Accordingly, I have attached conditions to the approval requiring the proponent to undertake pre-disturbance surveys of all disturbance areas (conditions 4 and 5). Information obtained from pre-disturbance surveys will allow for further avoidance and refinement of the areas of habitat that will be impacted.

57. The Coordinator-General concluded that, taking into account the proponent's proposed avoidance, mitigation and management measures, there is still the potential for residual significant impacts to listed migratory species and their habitat that may require offsetting.

58. The Coordinator-General's Report included a recommendation that the Commonwealth approval include a condition requiring the proponent to prepare an Offset Management Plan to compensate for authorised unavoidable impacts to listed migratory species and their habitat.

59. I have therefore included a condition requiring the proponent to prepare an Offset Management Plan to detail how the proponent will compensate for residual significant impacts to EPBC Act listed migratory species and their habitat. Further discussion on

13


the requirements for the Offset Management Plan is provided in paragraphs 43 - 48 above.

Conclusion

60. Having regard to the relevant briefing material provided to me by the Department, I found that the proposed action would not have any unacceptable impacts on listed migratory species in view of all relevant avoidance, mitigation and compensation (offset) measures.

A water resource, in relation to coal seam gas development and large coal mining development

IESC advice

61. The IESC provided advice on 18 December 2014 in relation to the proposed action. I considered this advice in making my decision. The IESC concluded that the scale, the early stage and the geographic extent of the proposed project development, together with other significant coal seam gas projects in the region, creates scientific uncertainty about potential impacts on surface water and groundwater and associated ecosystems. These include:

a. reduced water supply to Groundwater Dependent Ecosystems, including the EPBC Act listed endangered community of native species dependent on natural discharge of groundwater from the Great Artesian Basin;

b. cumulative impacts of Surat and Bowen Basin activities, particularly coal seam gas and coal mining, on surface water, groundwater pressures and laq-tirne effects on groundwater resources;

c. hydrological and ecological consequences of surface water discharge into the Dawson River potentially impacting the surface water flow regime, geomorphology, water quality and instream biota; and

d. changes to groundwater and surface water quality due to direct project activities and management of co-produced water.

62. The Coordinator-General considered the matters raised by the IESC in his assessment and in making recommendations for the Environmental Authority and the Commonwealth conditions of approval.

Impacts

63. The action will result in the construction of up to 6,100 coal seam gas production wells and associated infrastructure. Impacts to water resources as a result of the proposed action are considered likely to occur through:

a. impacts to surface water quality as a result of the construction and operation of infrastructure;

b. the extraction of groundwater during gas production;

14


c. the management and release of treated and untreated co-produced water; and

d. contamination of surface and groundwater resources as a result of chemicals used in drilling, hydraulic fracturing and water treatment.

64. The assessment of impacts to ground and surface water in relation to State matters is provided in Chapter 5.5 of the Coordinator-General's Report. The Coordinator-General found that the total amount of water estimated to be extracted over the life of the project is 218.8 gigalitres and, based on the current total water production, approximately 824,000 tonnes of salt is estimated to be produced over the life of the project.

Mitigation and management measures

65. The proponent has made commitments to measures to avoid, mitigate and manage impacts to surface and groundwater resources, including through the application of its constraints protocol to avoid and minimise direct impacts to watercourses and Groundwater Dependent Ecosystems.

66. The proponent has also made commitments to manage impacts to groundwater and Groundwater Dependent Ecosystems in accordance with the requirements of the Underground Water Impact Report for the Surat Cumulative Management Area (2012).3

67. The Coordinator-General concluded that impacts on groundwater will be adequately addressed through the proponent's mitigation and management measures, his recommended and stated conditions and through implementation of the requirements of the Underground Water Impact Report for the Surat Cumulative Management Area (2012).

68. The Coordinator-General further concluded that impacts on surface water resources will be regulated through the stated conditions for an Environmental Authority which addresses monitoring requirements, works in watercourses, wetlands and floodplains, release of contaminants to waters and management of coal seam gas produced water.

69. The Coordinator-General recommended that the Commonwealth approval include conditions to address any surface and groundwater impacts which will not be addressed under State legislation.

70. The Department considered that the proponent's commitments and the requirements of the Underground Water Impact Report for the Surat Cumulative Management Area (2012) are likely to adequately address impacts to groundwater and Great Artesian Basin springs as a result of drawdown and water quality changes at a regional scale. To ensure that there will be no impacts to Great Artesian Basin springs associated with the project, I have included a condition limiting drawdown to 0.2.m, which will allow for limitations associated with groundwater modelling (condition 20).

3 Further information on the requirements of the Underground Water Impact Report for the Surat Cumulative Management Area (2012) can be found in the Coordinator-General's Assessment Report, including the rules for make good obligations for bores likely to be affected by water extraction.

15


71. In line with the IESC's advice, I considered that further groundwater and surface water management is required to ensure that impacts to matters of national environmental significance are appropriately managed at the project scale.

72. I have attached a condition to the approval which requires the proponent to submit a peer-reviewed Groundwater Monitoring and Management Plan for my written approval. This plan must include a groundwater monitoring network to detect impacts on surface water and groundwater resources and changes in connectivity between surface and groundwater associated with the action. The plan also requires details of a risk-based exceedance response including early warning indicators and trigger thresholds (conditions 20-22).

73. In the event that agreed drawdown limits and trigger levels are exceeded, the condition allows me to direct the proponent to cease water and gas extraction from coal seam gas wells (conditions 23 and 24).

74. The proposed action includes the potential for the hydraulic fracturing of 50 to 90% of coal seam gas production wells, with some wells potentially fractured multiple times. The IESC noted that there was uncertainty regarding the management of hydraulic stimulation and that further work was required to address the risks to water quality as a result of the chemicals used in hydraulic stimulation.

75. The Coordinator-General has stated conditions relating to well construction, maintenance and stimulation activities. These conditions include the management of well integrity, the potential for enhanced aquifer connectivity, limits to certain chemicals used in stimulation activities, a stimulation risk assessment, baseline water monitoring and a stimulation impact monitoring program.

76. To address the issues raised by the IESC and provide greater certainty in relation to potential impacts to water resources, I have attached a condition to the approval requiring the proponent to undertake a chemical risk assessment as part of a Water Quality Management Plan (conditions 28-31). This condition only allows the proponent to use chemicals which have a low risk to matters of national environmental significance after management measures have been implemented.

77. I have also attached conditions to the approval requiring the proponent to use chemicals only in the manner identified in the approved Water Quality Management Plan.

78. As noted in paragraph 23 of these reasons, the proponent has not sought approval to release coal seam gas produced water to surface waters and the State's assessment did not consider the release of coal seam gas produced water to watercourses. Any such release of coal seam gas produced water which is likely to have a significant impact to matters of national environmental Significance would require further referral and approval under the EPBC Act.

79. The draft Environmental Authority notes that conditions regarding brine and salt management will be completed at the time of an Environmental Authority application by the proponent.

16


80. Due to the uncertainty relating to the management of coal seam gas produced water and how brine and salt produced during coal seam gas production will be managed, I have included conditions requiring the proponent to submit a Coal Seam Gas Waste Management Plan. The Coal Seam Gas Waste Management Plan must detail the management and disposal of coal seam gas produced water and waste products, . including brine and salt. The proponent must not commence the extraction of water or coal seam gas until the Coal Seam Gas Waste Management Plan has been approved by me (conditions 25 - 27).

Cumulative impacts

81. The Terms of Reference for the proponent's EIS, as issued by the Queensland Coordinator-General, required the proponent to undertake a cumulative impact assessment that provides information on the cumulative effects of the proposed action, including the interrelationship of these impacts with other existing and proposed projects in the region.

82. The Coordinator-General concluded that the mitigation measures described in the environmental impact statement can adequately manage the contribution of potential impacts of the project to the cumulative impacts of gas extraction activities on water resources in the project area.

83. I noted the IESC's advice in relation to potential cumulative impacts to water resources in the Surat and Bowen basins. Cumulative impacts as a result of the action are currently regulated through the Underground Water Impact Report for the Surat Cumulative Management Area (2012). I have included conditions of approval requiring the proponent to make data and relevant information from the project accessible to the Department and Queensland Government authorities for inclusion in any cumulative impact assessment, regional water balance model, bioregional assessment or relevant research.

84. In addition, I have included conditions of approval requiring the proponent to make data and relevant information from the project publicly accessible to assist the knowledge base for future research and regional scale assessments.

Conclusion

85. I found the combination of the Queensland Coordinator-General's conditions of approval for the proposed action and the conditions of approval I have required for the proposed action discussed in paragraphs 65 to 84 above addresses the concerns of the IESC and will ensure that the proposed action will not have an unacceptable impact on water resources.

Economic and social matters

86. The proposed action is expected to generate significant economic benefits for the region as well as for the Queensland and Australian economies, including significant increases in industry output, gross regional product, employment and incomes. The proponent's modelling forecasts to 2040 have estimated that the proposed action will

17


contribute $12.1 billion to $20 billion to the State of Queensland under the moderate and maximum scenarios respectively.

87. The proponent has estimated that the proposed action would generate a peak net increase of approximately 1,980 full time equivalent employees during the construction phase. This includes a minimum recruitment target of 20% local/regional workers during the construction phase and 50% during the operational phase.

Additional considerations

Considerations in deciding on conditions - section 134(4)

88. In deciding whether to attach conditions to the approval, I considered relevant imposed conditions and recommended conditions, as outlined in Appendix 1 and Appendix 2 of the Coordinator-General's Report. I considered the extent to which these conditions adequately avoided mitigated or offset the impacts of the proposed action on relevant matters of national environmental significance.

89. In deciding on conditions, I also took into consideration the information provided by the proponent, and whether the conditions are a cost effective means of achieving the object of the conditions.

90. I considered that the conditions attached to my approval are generally complementary to those likely to be imposed under Queensland legislation (as set out in the Coordinator-General's Assessment Report), augmenting them when necessary to ensure the impacts of the proposed action on each relevant controlling provision of the EPBC Act are not unacceptable.

Environmental history- subsection 136(4)

91. In deciding to approve the taking of the proposed action with attached conditions, in accordance with section 136(4) of the EPBC Act, I considered whether the proponent is a suitable person to be granted an approval, having regard to:

a. the person's history in relation to environmental matters;

b. if the person is a body corporate - the history of its executive officers in relation to environmental matters; and

c. if the person is a body corporate that is a subsidiary of another body or company (the parent body) - the history in relation to environmental matters of the parent body and its executive officers.

92. The Department conducted a search of its compliance database to determine whether the proponent had an adverse compliance history in respect of the EPBC Act. There are no significant findings of adverse environmental history for Santos Limited.

93. The Department noted that approximately 60 projects have been referred by Santos under the EPBC Act. The majority of these projects relate to exploration and surveys, and are subject to not controlled action particular manner decisions.

18


94. A recent audit of a Santos gas field project (EPBC 2008/4059) identified general compliance with the conditions of approval in relation to implementation of management plans concerning EPBC Act listed threatened species

95. I concluded that the proponent is a suitable person to be granted an approval.

Precautionary principle - section 391

96. In making my decision whether to approve the proposed action, I considered the precautionary principle in accordance with section 391 of the EPBC Act - "that lack of full scientific certainty should be not used as a reason for postponing a measure to prevent degradation of the environment where there are threats of serious or irreversible environmental damage."

97. The Coordinator-General's Report notes that a conservative approach has been taken in documenting estimates of impacts based on a maximum development scenario, and when there was insufficient information, a precautionary approach was taken in proposing conditions.

98. I agreed with the conclusions of the Coordinator-General's Report that there is sufficient scientific information to conclude that the proposal will be unlikely to result in unacceptable impacts to listed migratory species, listed threatened species and ecological communities, wetlands of international importance and water resources.

99. In relation to the likely impacts of the proposed action on water resources, the application of the precautionary principle is reflected in the approval conditions which require a Groundwater Management and Monitoring Program. I also included conditions to provide additional protection and to improve the scientific understanding regarding the potential impacts on matters of national environmental significance likely to be impacted by the proposed action. In particular, I required an adaptive management approach for mitigation, monitoring, review and offsets to deal with uncertainties over the life of the proposed action.

Principles of ecologically sustainable development - section 136(2)(a)

100. The principles of ecologically sustainable development, as defined in section 3A of the EPBC Act are:

a. decision-making processes should effectively integrate both long-term and short term economic, environmental, social and equitable considerations;

b. if there are threats of serious or irreversible environmental damage, lack of full scientific certainty should not be used as a reason for postponing measures to prevent environmental degradation;

c. the principle of inter-generational equity - that the present generation should ensure that the health, diversity and productivity of the environment is maintained or enhanced for the benefit of future generations;

d. the conservation of biological diversity and ecological integrity should be a fundamental consideration in decision-making; and

19


e. improved valuation, pricing and incentive mechanisms should be promoted.

101. In making my decision, I took into account the principles of ecologically sustainable development in accordance with section 136(2)(a) of the EPBC Act. In particular:

a. I considered the likely impacts of the proposed action on matters of national environmental significance are satisfactory in terms of their long-term and short term economic, social and equitable impacts.

b. I considered the precautionary principle as outlined in paragraphs 96 to 99 above.

c. I imposed conditions of approval that allow for the proposed action to be delivered and operated in a sustainable way to protect matters of national environmental significance, and the environment for future generations. In addition, the adaptive management approach applied to the conditions takes account of the 30 year lifespan of the proposed action.

d. I addressed the conservation of biological diversity and ecological integrity in relation to all of the controlling provisions for the proposed action through conditions that will avoid, mitigate and offset impacts to matters of national environmental significance.

e. I imposed conditions of approval that included measures to address improved valuation through requirements for offsets for any unavoidable residual significant impacts.

Ramsar wetlands - acting consistently with intemetions! obligations - section 138

102. Section 138 of the EPBC Act states that in deciding whether or not to approve for the purposes of sections 16 or 17B the taking of an action, and what conditions to attach to such an approval, I must not act inconsistently with Australia's obligations under the Ramsar Convention.

103. As a Contracting Party to the Ramsar Convention, Australia has made a commitment to:

a.· designate suitable wetlands for inclusion on the List of Wetlands of International Importance;

b. formulate and implement planning to promote conservation of listed wetlands and as far as possible the wise use of all wetlands;

c. arrange to be informed at the earliest possible time if the ecological character of any listed wetland has changed, is changing or is likely to change as a result of technological developments, pollution or other human interference, and report any such changes to the Ramsar Convention;

d. promote the conservation of wetlands and waterfowl by establishing nature reserves on wetlands;

20


e. encourage research and exchange of data and publications;

f. promote the training of personnel in the fields of wetland research and management;

g. consult with other contracting parties to the Convention to review and promote the implementation of the Convention; and .

h. represent Australia at the triennial Conference of the Contracting Parties, collating the National Report for these meetings and other reporting to the Convention.

104. For the reasons discussed in paragraphs 22 to 23 of this statement, I concluded that the proposed action is unlikely to impact on a Ramsar wetland or be inconsistent with the wise use of other wetlands. On that basis I am satisfied that my decision is therefore not inconsistent with Australia's obligations under the Ramsar Convention.

Listed threatened species and communities considerations - section 139

105. Section 139( 1) of the EPBC Act requires that in deciding whether to approve a proposed action for a subsection of section 18 or 18A, and what conditions to attach to such an approval, I must not act inconsistently with Australia's obligations under the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD), the Convention on Conservation of Nature in the South Pacific (Apia Convention) or the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES).

Biodiversity Convention

106. The objectives of the Biodiversity Convention (CBO), to be pursued in accordance with its relevant provisions, are the conservation of biological diversity, the sustainable use of its components and the fair and equitable sharing of the benefits arising out of the utilisation of genetic resources, including by appropriate access to genetic resources and by appropriate transfer of relevant technologies, taking into account all rights over those resources and to technologies, and by appropriate funding. Additionally, the CBD promotes environmental impact assessment as a means of avoiding and minimising the adverse impacts of development on biological diversity.

107. The proposed action was assessed by environmental impact statement which included a process for public review. The proponent's environmental impact statement identified the impacts of the proposed action on listed threatened species and communities. The Coordinator-General's Report concludes that there will be a significant residual impact to listed threatened species and communities such that offsetting would be required and recommended that the Commonwealth apply conditions to address these offset requirements.

108. I agreed with the Coordinator-General's conclusions and attached a series of conditions to the approval to address the impacts of the proposed action on listed threatened species and ecological communities (as discussed in paragraphs 25 - 51 of these reasons).

21


109. I considered the CBD's ultimate aim of conservation of listed threatened species and communities in the wild when attaching the specific conditions for listed threatened species and communities requiring mitigation, management and compensation (offset) measures.

110. As set out in paragraphs 25 to 51, I concluded that the proposed action will not have unacceptable impacts on listed threatened species and communities in view of all relevant avoidance, mitigation and compensation (offset) measures.

111. In light of the above matters, I am satisfied that my decision to approve the proposed action (including the conditions attached to the approval) is not inconsistent with Australia's obligations under the CBD.

Apia Convention

112. The Apia Convention was suspended with effect from 13 September 2006. While this Convention has been suspended, I took into account Australia's obliqatlons under the Convention in making my decision.

113. The Apia Convention encourages the creation of protected areas which together with existing protected areas will safeguard representative samples of the natural ecosystem therein (particular attention being given the endangered species), as well as superlative scenery, striking geological formations, and regions and objects of aesthetic interest or historic, cultural or scientific value.

114. The proposed approval requires the proponent to secure, protect and improve large areas of high value habitat to offset for residual significant impacts to listed threatened species and communities.

115. Accordingly, I was satisfied that my decision to approve the proposed action (including the conditions attached to the approval) is not inconsistent with Australia's obligations under the Apia Convention.

22


Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES)

116. I was satisfied that my decision to approve the proposed action (including the conditions attached to the approval) was not inconsistent with Australia's obligations under CITES as the proposed action does not involve international trade in endangered species of wild fauna and flora.

Approved conservation advices

117. In deciding whether or not to approve for the purposes of a subsection of section 18 or section 18A the taking of an action, and what conditions to attach to such an approval, I must not act inconsistently with any relevant recovery plan or threat abatement plan. I must also have regard to any approved conservation advice for a species or community that is likely to be significantly impacted by the proposed action.

118. I found that the following approved conservation advices are relevant to the proposed action:

• Approved Conservation Advice for Xerothamnella herbacea (2008)

• Approved Conservation Advice for Tylophora Iinearis (2008)

• Approved Conservation Advice for Daviesia discolor (2008)

• Approved Conservation Advice for Swainsona murrayana (Slender Darling-pea) (2008)

• Approved Conservation Advice for Westringia parvifolia (2008)

• Approved Conservation Advice for Logania diffusa (2008)

• Approved Conservation Advice for Acacia curranii (Curly-bark Wattle) (2008)

• Approved Conservation Advice for Acacia grandifolia (2014)

• Approved Conservation Advice for Calytrix gurulmundensis (2008)

• Approved Conservation Advice for Eucalyptus beaniana (2008)

• Approved Conservation Advice for Homoranthus decumbens (2013)

• Approved Conservation Advice for Phaius australis (Common Swamp-orchid) (2014)

• Approved Conservation Advice for Aristida annua (a tufted grass) (2014)

• Approved Conservation Advice for Arthraxon hispidus (Hairy-joint Grass) (2008)

• Approved Conservation Advice for Dichanthium queenslandicum (king blue-grass) (2013)

• Approved Conservation Advice for Dichanthium setosum (blue-grass) (2008)

23


• Approved Conservation Advice for Homopholis belsonii (2008)

• Approved Conservation Advice for Hakea fraseri (Gnarled Corkbark) (2008)i

• Approved Conservation Advice for Thesium australe (austral toadflax) (2013)

• Approved Conservation Advice for Cadellia pentastylis (Ooline) (2008)

• Approved Conservation Advice for Botaurus poiciloptilus (Australasian bittern) (2011 )

• Approved Conservation Advice for Rostratula australis (Australian painted snipe) (2013)

• Conservation Advice Turnix melanogaster black-breasted button-quail (2015)

• Conservation Advice Erythrotriorchis radiatus red goshawk (2015)

• Conservation Advice for Geophaps scripta scripta (Squatter pigeon (southern» (2015)

• Approved Conservation Advice for Neochmia ruficauda ruficauda (Star finch (eastern» (2008)

• Approved Conservation Advice for Pedionomus torquatus (Plains-wanderer) (2015)

• Conservation Advice Nyctophilus corbeni south-eastern long-eared bat (2015)

• Approved Conservation Advice for Phascolarctos cinereus (combined populations of Queensland, New South Wales and the Australian Capital Territory) (koala Northern Designatable Unit) (2012)

• Approved Conservation Advice for Delma torquata (Collared delma) (2008)

• Approved Conservation Advice for Furina dunmalli (Dunmall's snake) (2014)

• Approved Conservation Advice for Rheodytes leukops (Fitzroy tortoise) (2008)

• Approved Conservation Advice for Anomalopus mackayi (Five-clawed worm-skink) (2008)

• Approved Conservation Advice for Denisonia maculata (Ornamental snake) (2014)

• Approved Conservation Advice for Egernia rugosa (Yakka skink) (2014)

• Approved Conservation Advice for the Brigalow (Acacia harpophylla dominant and co-dominant) ecological community (2013)

• Approved Conservation Advice for Coolibah - Black Box Woodlands of the Darling Riverine Plains and the Brigalow Belt South Bioregions ecological community (2011 )

24


• Approved Conservation Advice for Natural grasslands of the Queensland Central Highlands and the northern Fitzroy Basin (2008)

• Approved Conservation Advice for Weeping Myall Woodlands ecological community (2008)

119. In accordance with section 139(2) of the EPBC Act, I had regard to those approved conservation advices in deciding whether to approve the proposed action for the purposes of sections 18 and 18A.

Recovery plans

120. I found that the following recovery plans are relevant to the proposed action:

• Recovery plan for the community of native species dependent on natural discharge of groundwater from the Great Artesian Basin (2010)

• Recovery plan for Bertya sp. Cobar-Coolabah (2002)

• National Multi-species Recovery Plan for the cycads, Cycas megacarpa, Cycas ophiolitica, Macrozamia cranei, Macrozamia lomandroides, Macrozamia pauliguilie/mi and Macrozamia platyrhachis (Queensland Herbarium 2007)

• National recovery plan for the black-breasted button-quail Turnix me/anogaster (2009)

• National Recovery Plan for the Black-throated finch southern subspecies Poephila cincta cincta (2007)

• National Recovery Plan for the Red goshawk (Erythrotriorchis radiatus) (2012)

• National Recovery Plan for the Superb parrot (Polytelis swainsonil) (2011)

• National Recovery Plan for the Swift Parrot (Lathamus discolor) (2011)

• National Recovery Plan for the Murray cod (Maccul/ochel/a pee/ii peelil) (2010)

• National Recovery Plan for the Brush-tailed rock-wallaby Petrogale penicillata (2011 )

• National recovery plan for the Large-eared Pied Bat (Chalinolobus dwyen) (2011 )

• National Recovery Plan for the Northern quoll (Oasyurus hal/ucatus) (2010)

• Recovery Plan for the Bridled nailtail wallaby (Onychogalea fraenata) (2005-2009) (2005)

• National recovery plan for the "Semi-evergreen vine thickets of the Brigalow Belt (North and South) and Nandewar Bioregions" ecological community (2010)

121. In accordance with section 139(1 )(b) of the EPBC Act, I found that approval of the proposed action (including the conditions attached to the approval) would not be inconsistent with those recovery plans.

25


122. I found that the following threat abatement plans are relevant to the proposed action:

• Threat abatement plan for competition and land degradation by unmanaged goats (2008)

• Threat abatement plan for competition and land degradation by rabbits (2008)

• Threat abatement plan for beak and feather disease affecting endangered psittacine species (2005)

• Threat abatement plan for predation by the European red fox (2008)

• Threat abatement plan for predation by feral cats (2015)

• Threat abatement plan to reduce the impacts of tramp ants on biodiversity in Australia and its territories (2006)

• Threat abatement plan to reduce the impacts on northern Australia's biodiversity by the five listed grasses (2012)

• Threat abatement plan for the biological effects, including lethal toxic ingestion, caused by cane toads (2011)

123. In accordance with section 139(1)(b) of the EPBC Act, I found that approval of the proposed action (including the conditions attached to the approval) would not be inconsistent with those threat abatement plans.

Listed migratory species considerations - acting consistently with international obligations - section 140

124. Section 140 of the EPBC Act requires that in deciding whether to approve a proposed action for the purposes of sections 20 and 20A, and what conditions to attach to such an approval, I must not act inconsistently with Australia's obligations under whichever of the following conventions and agreementsthe species is listed:

a. the Convention on Migratory Species (Bonn Convention);

b. the Agreement between the Government of Japan and the Government of Australia for the Protection of Migratory Birds and Birds in Danger of Extinction and their Environment (JAMBA);

c. the Agreement between the Government of Australia and the Government of the People's Republic of China for the Protection of Migratory Birds and their Environment (CAMBA); or;

d. an international agreement approved under subsection 209(4) of the EPBC Act (currently only the Agreement between the Government of Australia and the Government of the Republic of Korea on the Protection of Migratory Birds (ROKAMBA» .

26


125. I have included conditions which aim to avoid or mitigate the impacts of the proposed action on listed migratory species and, where necessary require significant residual impacts to listed migratory species to be offset. I consider that my approval of this action, and the proposed conditions of that approval, would not be inconsistent with Australia's obligations under the above conventions and agreements.

Reasons for decision

126. In deciding whether or not to approve the taking of the proposed action, I took into account (among other matters) the principles of ecologically sustainable development as required under section 136(2)(a) of the EPBC Act, and the precautionary principle as required under section 391 of the EPBC Act.

127. In light of my findings in paragraphs 25 to 125, I decided to approve, subject to conditions, the taking of the proposed action for the purposes of sections 16 and 17B, sections 18 and 18A, sections 20 and 20A, and sections 240 and 24E of the EPBC Act.

128. My approval will remain valid until 31 March 2066. This allows for the proposed project life of approximately 30 years, plus time to ensure the proposed action is decommissioned and rehabilitated satisfactorily and so that offsets can be secured and managed to ensure a conservation gain is achieved.

Signed

Minister for the Environment

May 2016

27


Annexure A

Legislative extracts relevant to decisions under Part 9 of the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (EPBC Act).

The following relevant legislative provisions of the EPBC Act were taken into account when making my decision.

Legislative Considerations

3 Objects of Act

(1) The objects of this Act are: (a) to provide for the protection of the environment, especially those aspects of

the environment that are matters of national environmental significance; and

(b) to promote ecologically sustainable development through the conservation and ecologically sustainable use of natural resources; and

(c) to promote the conservation of biodiversity; and (ca) to provide for the protection and conservation of heritage; and (d) to promote a co-operative approach to the protection and management of

the environment involving governments, the community, land-holders and indigenous peoples; and

(e) to assist in the co-operative implementation of Australia's international environmental responsibilities; and

(f) to recognise the role of indigenous people in the conservation and ecologically sustainable use of Australia's biodiversity; and

(g) to promote the use of indigenous peoples' knowledge of biodiversity with the involvement of, and in co-operation with, the owners of the knowledge.

(2) In order to achieve its objects, the Act: (a) recognises an appropriate role for the Commonwealth in relation to the

environment by focussing Commonwealth involvement on matters of national environmental significance and on Commonwealth actions and Commonwealth areas; and

(b) strengthens intergovernmental co-operation, and minimises duplication, through bilateral agreements; and

(c) provides for the intergovernmental accreditation of environmental assessment and approval processes; and

(d) adopts an efficient and timely Commonwealth environmental assessment and approval process that will ensure activities that are likely to have significant impacts on the environment are properly assessed; and

(e) enhances Australia's capacity to ensure the conservation of its biodiversity by including provisions to: (i) protect native species (and in particular prevent the extinction, and

promote the recovery, of threatened species) and ensure the conservation of migratory species; and

(ii) establish an Australian Whale Sanctuary to ensure the conservation of . whales and other cetaceans; and

28

statement of reasons for approval of a proposed action ...€¦ · my decision of 22 march 2016,...

Documents