Download - Theodore to Gilmore 132 Kv transmission line · 132 kV transmission line upgrade Application for s211 exemption consideration report April 2013. ... between the Theodore Electricity

Theodore to Gilmore 132 kV transmission line upgrade

Application for s211 exemption consideration report

April 2013

Application for s211 Exemption Consideration Report i Theodore to Gilmore 132kV Transmission Line Upgrade Version: 1.1 FINAL – 12/04/2013

Table of Contents Application for s211 Exemption Consideration Report – Theodore to Gilmore 132kV Transmission Line Upgrade ............................................................................................................................................ i

1. Introduction ................................................................................................................................ 1

1.1. Project ................................................................................................................................. 1

1.2. Background ......................................................................................................................... 3

1.3. Public consultation .............................................................................................................. 3

2. Environmental impact assessment ............................................................................................. 5

2.1. Impact track ........................................................................................................................ 5

2.1.1. Impact track triggers ....................................................................................................... 5

2.2. s211 Process ........................................................................................................................ 6

2.3. s211 requirements under the Planning and Development Regulation 2008 ..................... 7

2.4. The s211 application ........................................................................................................... 8

2.5. Project risk assessment ....................................................................................................... 8

2.6. Entity referral ...................................................................................................................... 9

3. Matters of National Environmental Significance ...................................................................... 11

3.1. EPBC referral ..................................................................................................................... 11

4. Evaluation of information - Schedule 4 items ........................................................................... 13

4.1. - Schedule 4, Part 4.2, Item 2 – proposal that involves construction of 132kV electricity transmission lines in excess of 500m in length ............................................................................. 13

4.2. - Schedule 4, Part 4.3, Item 1 – impacts on species or ecological communities .............. 15

4.3. - Schedule 4, Part 4.3, Item 2 – Removal of more than 0.5 ha of native vegetation ........ 19

4.4. - Schedule 4, Part 4.3, Item 3– proposal for development on land reserved under s 315 of the Act for the purpose of a nature reserve ............................................................................. 21

5. Other potential environmental impacts ................................................................................... 25

5.1. Traffic ................................................................................................................................ 25

5.2. Visual Impact ..................................................................................................................... 25

5.3. Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal cultural heritage .............................................................. 25

6. Development application considerations ................................................................................. 27

7. Conclusion ................................................................................................................................. 31

8. Bibliography .............................................................................................................................. 33

Appendix 1. - Referral Entity Comments ....................................................................................... 35

Appendix 2. – EPBC Act Referral Decision ..................................................................................... 41

Application for s211 Exemption Consideration Report ii Theodore to Gilmore 132kV Transmission Line Upgrade Version: 1.1 FINAL – 12/04/2013

Figures

Figure 1 – Location of Transmission Lines, Application for s211 exemption – Theodore to Gilmore, Purdon 2012. ........................................................................................................................................... 2 Figure 2 - The s211 process ..................................................................................................................... 7

Tables

Table 1 - Legal land description and tenancy ......................................................................................... 3 Table 2 - EIS triggers per Schedule 4 of the Act ...................................................................................... 5 Table 3 - Assessment of supporting information - Item 2, Part 4.2, Schedule 4 .................................. 14 Table 4 - Listed species and ecological communities ........................................................................... 15 Table 5 – Protected and rare plants ...................................................................................................... 15 Table 6 - Assessment of supporting information - Item 1, Part 4.3, Schedule 4 .................................. 16 Table 7 - Mitigation measures - species and ecological communities.................................................. 18 Table 8 - Assessment of supporting information - Item 2, Part 4.3, Schedule 4 .................................. 19 Table 9 - Mitigation measures – removal of native vegetation ............................................................ 20 Table 10 - Assessment of supporting information - Item 3, Part 4.3, Schedule 4 ................................ 21 Table 11 - Mitigation measures – works in nature reserve .................................................................. 23 Table 12 - Development application considerations ............................................................................ 28

Glossary and Definitions

ACT Australian Capital Territory

BGGW ‘White box yellow Box – Blakely’s Red Gum grassy Woodland and Derived Native Grassland’: EPBC Act listed ecological community; the ACT equivalent being ‘Yellow Box-Red Gum Grassy Woodland’ listed under the Nature Conservation Act.

CEEC Critically Endangered Ecological Community (as listed under the EPBC Act)

CEMP construction environmental management plan

DA development application

DM daily maximum (typical daily maximum, TDM)

EAR Environmental Assessment Report

EIA environmental impact assessment: the process of identifying, predicting, evaluating and mitigating the biophysical, social, and other relevant effects of development proposals before major decisions and commitments are made1.

1 International Association for Impact Assessment in cooperation with Institute of Environmental Assessment, UK, ‘Principles of Environmental Impact Assessment Best Practice’, <http://www.iaia.org/modx/assets/files/Principles%20of%20IA_web.pdf>, viewed on 2 June 2009.

Application for s211 Exemption Consideration Report iii Theodore to Gilmore 132kV Transmission Line Upgrade Version: 1.1 FINAL – 12/04/2013

EIS environmental impact statement: a document prepared to detail the expected environmental, social and economic effects of a development, and state commitments to avoid, mitigate or satisfactorily control and manage any potential adverse impacts of the development on the environment2. In the ACT, an EIS is required for proposals in the impact track as per Section 123 of the Planning and Development Act 2007.

EMF Electromagnetic field (also referred to as electric and magnetic fields): a physical field produced by moving electrically charged objects. It affects the behaviour of charged objects in the vicinity of the field.

EMP environmental management plan

EPBC Act The Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (Commonwealth)

ESDD Environment and Sustainable Development Directorate

EPA Environmental Protection Authority (part of ESDD)

milliGauss one thousandth of a gauss. Gauss: unit of magnetic induction in the centimetre-gram-second system of physical units. One gauss corresponds to the magnetic flux density that will induce an electromotive force of one abvolt (10-8 volt) in each linear centimetre of a wire moving laterally at one centimetre per second at right angles to a magnetic flux. One gauss corresponds to 10-4 tesla (T), the International System Unit. The gauss is equal to 1 maxwell per square centimetre, or 104 weber per square metre.3

MNES Matters of National Environmental Significance - under the EPBC Act:

NC Act Nature Conservation Act 1980

PAD potential archaeological deposit

PDZ pole disturbance zone (60m x 20m)

PTWL Pink-tailed Worm-lizard (Aprasia parapulchella)

RAO Representative Aboriginal Organisations

SEWPAC Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities

TWA time weighted average

WMP waste management plan

2 Ceduna Marina Development Company, 2004, ‘Guidelines for the preparation of an Environmental Impact Statement’, <http://dataserver.planning.sa.gov.au/publications/1017p.pdf>, viewed on 5 June 2009 3 Encyclopaedia Britannica Inc, 2013, Encyclopaedia Britannica. Encyclopaedia Britannica Online “gauss.” Web. <http://www.britannica.com.ezproxy.cit.act.edu.au/EBchecked/topic/227199/gauss> Accessed 3 April 2013.

Application for s211 Exemption Consideration Report iv Theodore to Gilmore 132kV Transmission Line Upgrade Version: 1.1 FINAL – 12/04/2013

This page has been left intentionally blank.

Application for s211 Exemption Consideration Report 1 Theodore to Gilmore 132kV Transmission Line Upgrade Version: 1.1 FINAL – 12/04/2013

1. Introduction This report is to the ACT Minister for Environment and Sustainable Development on the assessment of the request for exemption from requiring a completed Environmental Impact Statement for the Theodore to Gilmore 132kV Transmission Line Upgrade (the Project). The application for exemption is made by ActewAGL Distribution Ltd (the Proponent) under section 211 (s211) of the Planning and Development Act 2007 (the Act).

The Proponent has prepared an application identifying potential impacts of the proposed development and providing information supporting their request for Ministerial exemption under s211.

1.1. Project It is proposed to replace the existing ActewAGL electricity transmission lines and supporting pylons between the Theodore Electricity Substation and the Gilmore Electricity Substation. In most supporting pylon locations the two existing pylons will be replaced with a single pylon. The existing wiring will be replaced by new conductors of greater carrying capacity. The Proponent describes the following actions as part of the Project:

• All 119 existing single-line poles and wiring will be removed and replaced by approximately 51 poles plus new wiring

• The replacement single poles will be capable of supporting the increased load of electricity-bearing wiring

• The replacement single poles will be positioned in existing holes to minimise the visual and environmental impact of the transmission easement

• In some instances, such as where the line changes direction, a second pole will be required for structural support

• Measures to protect endangered species and communities and soil stability will be implemented

• Cables will be removed manually from each pole and wound back along the ground (in a straight line) via a reel located at points along the route

• Construction of a new 3m wide access track and crossings of local water courses along parts of the alignment

• Establishment of a temporary site compound and several pole-laydown areas during the construction process

1.1.1. Project location The project will be located on land in the Tuggeranong district of the Australian Capital Territory. The proposed route is along the existing electricity transmission line corridor between the Theodore and Gilmore Electricity Substations.

From the Theodore substation the line travels in a north-east direction and crosses over the Monaro Highway. The line then turns north and passes over Dunns/Monks Creek and then the Tuggeranong Pines before rejoining the eastern side of the Monaro Highway. Just south of the Gilmore substation the line crosses the Monaro Highway again in a west-nor-west direction. Figure 1 depicts the route.


Figure 1 – Location of Transmission Lines, Application for s211 exemption – Theodore to Gilmore, Purdon 2012.

1.1.2. Legal land description and tenancy The project will cross 13 blocks as well as the Monaro highway in two locations and the Old Tuggeranong Road. Table 1 shows the legal land description for each block affected by the project and the details of tenancy type and tenant.


Table 1 - Legal land description and tenancy

District Block Section Tenancy Tenant Custodian Theodore 10 682 Private lease ACTEW Corporation

Conder 14 117 Public land TAMSD –- Environment Tuggeranong 1634 Public land TAMSD –- Environment

1305 Public land TAMSD –- Environment 1441 Public land TAMSD –- Environment

56 Public land TAMSD –- Forests 1563 Public land TAMSD –- Environment 1564 Public land TAMSD –- Environment 1565 Public land TAMSD –- Environment 1566 Public land TAMSD –- Environment 1568 Public land TAMSD –- forests

Gilmore 23 65 Public land TAMSD –- Environment 15 65 Private lease ACTEW Corporation

Tuggeranong Monaro Highway (south) Public land TAMSD - Roads Old Tuggeranong Road Public land TAMSD - Roads

Monaro Highway (north) Public land TAMSD - Roads

1.2. Background According to the Proponent the objective of the Project is to carry an increased supply of electricity provided by the new Williamsdale Line to the ACT.

The Proponent applied for a s211 exemption for the Williamsdale to Theodore Transmission Line in 2008 and was granted an exemption in November that year. The Williamsdale to Theodore Transmission Line construction and associated remediation works were completed in November 2012.

1.3. Public consultation This s211 application has not been the subject of any public consultation. However the Ecological Assessment Report (Biosis Research, June 2012) which was submitted in support of the s211 application was made publically available in the invitation for public comment made by SEWPAC in its consideration of the referral decision (EPBC 2012/6443). Other details of the proposal are available in the referral documentation (available at: http://www.environment.gov.au/cgi-bin/epbc/epbc_ap.pl?name=current_referral_detail&proposal_id=6443 ).

http://www.environment.gov.au/cgi-bin/epbc/epbc_ap.pl?name=current_referral_detail&proposal_id=6443

http://www.environment.gov.au/cgi-bin/epbc/epbc_ap.pl?name=current_referral_detail&proposal_id=6443


2. Environmental impact assessment Environmental impact assessment is a process for identifying, predicting, planning for and managing the physical, ecological, economic and social impacts of development proposals prior to approval being considered.

2.1. Impact track A development proposal which requires development approval is in the impact track if the development is of a type mentioned in s123 of the Act. Section 123 of the Act states that the impact track applies to a development if:

• the relevant development table states that the impact track applies • the proposal is of a kind mentioned in schedule 4 of the Act • the Minister makes a declaration under section 124 • section 125 or section 132 applies to the proposal, or • the Commonwealth Minister responsible for the Environment Protection and Biodiversity

Conservation Act 1999 (the EPBC Act) advises the Minister in writing that the development is a controlled action under the EPBC Act, section 75.

2.1.1. Impact track triggers The project is a development in the impact track as it triggers the items from schedule 4 of the Act outlined in Table 2. Table 2 - EIS triggers per Schedule 4 of the Act

Item Number Description Part 4.2, item 2 proposal that involves—

(a) electricity transmission line construction, including additions or realignment works, outside an existing easement or exceeding 500m in length, that are intended to carry underground or above-ground transmission lines with a voltage of 132kV or more...

Part 4.3, item 1 proposal that is likely to have a significant adverse environmental impact on 1 or more of the following, unless the conservator of flora and fauna produces an environmental significance opinion that the proposal is not likely to have a significant adverse environmental impact: (a) a species or ecological community that is endangered...

Part 4.3, item 2 proposal involving— (a) the clearing of more than 0.5ha of native vegetation other than on land that is designated as a future urban area under the territory plan unless the conservator of flora and fauna produces an environmental significance opinion that the clearing is not likely to have a significant adverse environmental impact

Part 4.3, item 3 proposal for development on land reserved under s 315 for the purpose of a wilderness area, national park, nature reserve or special purpose reserve, unless the conservator of flora and fauna produces an environmental significance opinion that the proposal is not likely to have a significant adverse environmental impact


2.2. s211 Process A s211 report documents the information presented by the proponent to demonstrate that the environmental impacts of a project have been investigated and are fully understood. It informs both decision makers and the community of the likely impacts or the proposal. The s211 report should also include measures, or reasonable alternatives that would avoid or minimise adverse impacts or enhance the quality of the environment.

A s211 exemption may be given for a proposal if the Minister is satisfied that the expected environmental impact of the development proposal has already been sufficiently addressed by another study, whether or not the study relates to the particular development proposal.

An overview of the s211 process is outlined in the flowchart at Figure 2.


Prepare and lodge application for exemption (under s211)

ESDD assesses application for s211 exemption

The Minister may:1. Grant the proposal an exemption

2. Refuse to grant the project an exemption

Proponent prepares a Development Application under impact track

Legend

ESDD

Proponent

If studies have been completed which demonstrate that the environmental impacts

of the development have been sufficiently addressed – the Proponent may apply for an

exemption from the requirement to completed an EIS (s211).

Unsatisfactory application is rejected and proponent advised to undertake

an EIS

ESDD prepares a report for consideration by the Minister

Exemption granted

Proposed development is in the impact track under s123 of the P&D Act

Notes:• Proponent is strongly advised to seek advice from ESDD before submitting an application• ESDD may seek advice from relevant agencies to inform it’s assessment of the application• The exemption and report are a Notifiable Instrument which is placed on the legislation register and valid for 18 months from

the date of notification

Guidance Note

Proponent submits a request for an EIS Scoping Document (separate process).

Figure 2 - The s211 process

2.3. s211 requirements under the Planning and Development Regulation 2008 Section 211 of the Act requires the Minister to take into account prescribed criteria in deciding whether the environmental impact of the development proposal has been sufficiently addressed by the other study in deciding whether to grant an exemption from requiring a completed EIS. Section 50A of the Planning and Development Regulation 2008 (the Regulation) prescribes the following criteria that the Minister must consider:


a) whether the study was conducted by an appropriately qualified person with relevant expertise and experience in relation to the environmental values of the land in the proposal;

b) if the study does not relate directly to the proposal—whether there is sufficient detail to allow assessment of the environmental impacts likely to occur if the proposal proceeds;

c) whether the part of the study relevant to the proposal required public consultation through a statutory process or as part of a government policy development;

d) that the study is not more than 5 years old; e) if the study is more than 18 months old—that an appropriately qualified person with no

current professional relationship with the proponent verifies that the information in the study is current.

For each impact track trigger of the proposal (as identified in section 2.1.1 of this report) an assessment of the supporting information will be made against the criteria above in the corresponding sub-sections under section 4 of this report.

2.4. The s211 application The request for a s211 exemption was submitted by Purdon Associates Pty Ltd on behalf of ActewAGL Distribution Ltd to the Planning and Land Authority, within ESDD on 10 January 2013. In accordance with the requirements of Application for exemption from EIS (s211) - Form 1M, the application contained the following information to inform the assessment of the application:

• Theodore to Gilmore 132kV Transmission Line Upgrade - Application for EIS Exemption under Section 211 of the Planning and Development Act 2007 (ACT), Purdon Associates Pty Ltd, 7 December 2012.

• Theodore to Gilmore 132kV Powerline Replacement - Ecological Assessment - Prepared for Purdon Associates and ActewAGL - November 2012, Biosis Pty Ltd, 2012.

• T2G Electricity Transmission Line Easement Cultural Heritage Assessment, Biosis Pty Ltd, November 2012.

• Theodore to Gilmore Transmission Line Upgrade Construction Environmental Management Plan, Purdon Associates Pty Ltd, December 2012.

• Preliminary Traffic Management Assessment - Theodore to Gilmore transmission 132kV Line Upgrade, Mott MacDonald Australia Pty Limited, November 2012.

• Site Inspection Report – ActewAGL Williamsdale to Theodore 132kV Sub-Transmission line, Soil Conservation Service (NSW), November 2012.

• Visual Impact Assessment, Purdon Associates Pty Ltd, November 2012. • Electromagnetic Field (EMF) Profile Study – Proposed Gilmore to Theodore 132kV Line,

ActewAGL Distribution Ltd, March 2013.

2.5. Project risk assessment The Proponent performed a risk assessment for the Project. The methodology used was to identify the potential impacts associated with the Project in accordance with Triple Bottom Line principles; Environmental, Economic and Social. For each identified impact the Proponent then assessed the likelihood of occurrence and the likely consequence. The criteria used for likelihood and


consequence ratings accords with those in the guidance document Preparation of an application for scoping, (ACT Planning and Land Authority, Updated 2011).

Whilst not required under the Act, the risk assessment by the Proponent is beneficial in identifying and addressing the potential impacts of the Project. The scope and methodology of the risk assessment are appropriate.

2.6. Entity referral The Act does not require mandatory referral of an application for s211 exemption to entities. ESDD may however seek advice from entities on more specific subject matter. For the project, ESDD referred the application to the following entities:

• The Conservator of Flora and Fauna (The Conservator) • The ACT Heritage Council • Environment protection Authority (EPA) • Territory and Municipal Services Directorate (TAMSD)

The comments of each agency are included in Appendix 1 of this report. If matters raised by an entity relate to a trigger or potential impact it will be addressed in the relevant section of this report. Any conditions recommended by a referral entity will be included in section 6 of this report.


3. Matters of National Environmental Significance Under the EPBC Act a person must not take an action that has, will have, or is likely to have a significant impact on any MNES without approval from the Australian Government Minister for Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities (Australian Government Minister). The key MNES associated with this application is listed threatened species and communities and includes:

• White Box, Yellow Box – Blakely’s Red Gum Grassy Woodland and Derived Native Grassland (Box-Gum Woodland)

• Aprasia parapulchella - Pink tailed worm lizard (PTWL)

3.1. EPBC referral On 26 June 2012, Purdon Associates Pty Ltd referred the project to the Australian Government Minister as required under the EPBC Act.

On 26 September 2012 a delegate of the Australian Government Minister determined the project to be “not a controlled action if undertaken in a particular manner”. The Project did not therefore require detailed assessment and approval under the EPBC Act.

A copy of the referral decision is included at Appendix 2.


4. Evaluation of information - Schedule 4 items This section summarises the impacts of the development on relevant items from Schedule 4 of the Act. Key findings are presented for each item based on an as assessment of the information provided by the Proponent and the supporting studies, investigations or reports. The comments of referral entities are listed along with any recommended mitigation measures. A conclusion is made on whether or not the information satisfies the requirements of s211 of the Act.

4.1. - Schedule 4, Part 4.2, Item 2 – a proposal that involves construction of 132kV electricity transmission lines in excess of 500m in length

The Project involves the replacement of approximately 7 Km of existing 132kV electricity transmission lines and supporting poles. The works will be located within an existing electricity transmission easement which was established approximately 25 years ago during construction of the transmission line. Most of the potential impacts identified for the construction of the project are associated with impacts on flora and fauna and the natural environment. The impacts from the project on the natural environment will be discussed against the other trigger items in sections 4.2, 4.3 and 4.4 of this report. The potential impacts on human health associated with the electricity transmissions lines will be discussed in this section.

The International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) includes radiation from low frequency magnetic fields as a possible carcinogen (in there evaluation they state that there is limited evidence in humans for the carcinogenicity of extremely low-frequency magnetic fields in relation to childhood leukaemia)4. According to the World Health Organisation there is limited evidence which can state that magnetic fields have a causal effect for any diseases or adverse health effects, however it cannot be ruled out that magnetic fields could be harmful and precautionary measures are warranted.5

As the effects of magnetic fields associated with electrical infrastructure cannot be excluded from having adverse health effects, as a precautionary approach it is prudent to avoid exposure to these fields where possible. Known as ‘prudent avoidance,’ methods to reduce exposure to magnetic fields should be undertaken when it can be achieved at modest cost and without undue inconvenience6. For the Project this would require that the transmission lines be located where they will have negligible potential impacts on human health.

It is acknowledged that the 132kV electricity transmission lines are being replaced by lines of the same capacity. The lines will be in the same alignment and the alignment is separate from existing residential areas and isolated settlements by a distance which on average exceeds 500m.

4 IARC, 2002, IARC Monograph, Volume 80 - Non-Ionizing Radiation, Part 1: Static and Extremely Low-Frequency (ELF) Electric and Magnetic Fields, World Health Organisation Press. 5 World Health Organisation, 2007, Environmental Health Criteria 238 – Extremely Low Frequency Fields, World Health Organisation Press. 6 World Health Organisation, 2007, Environmental Health Criteria 238 – Extremely Low Frequency Fields World Health Organisation Press.


4.1.1. Impacts The following potential impacts were identified:

• Adverse health effects from exposure to electric and magnetic fields

4.1.2. Previous Studies and Investigation The proponent has submitted one supporting document which addresses impacts from the construction of 132kV electricity transmission lines in support of the s211 request. The information submitted by the proponent to support the application is listed in Table 3.

Table 3 - Assessment of supporting information - Item 2, Part 4.2, Schedule 4

Title of report Public consultation7

Age of report Reviewed for currency8

Expert/Peer reviewed

Electromagnetic Field (EMF) Profile Study – Proposed Gilmore to Theodore 132kV Line, ActewAGL Distribution Ltd. March 2013.

No 1 Months No No

4.1.3. Key findings The s211 application and supporting document in Table 3 discuss the following key findings with regards to potential impacts from the construction of 132kV electricity transmission lines:

• There are no residential properties within close proximity to the transmission lines and on average residential properties are greater than 500m from the lines.

• The maximum calculated EMF within the powerline easement for the proposed line is 82 milliGauss (directly under the line).

• The maximum recommended EMF exposure for the general public is 1000 milliGauss over a 24hr period and for occupation exposure, 5000 milliGauss (over 8 hours).

• The existing transmission line arrangement (twin circuits on parallel alignment on paired poles) have higher maximum calculated EMF fields of 101 milliGauss and it two locations closer to the edge of the easement.

The s211 application summarises that the risks associated with EMF associated with the Project as very low, due to the remote possibility of people being affected. This is accepted for most of the proposed alignment, as the project will be located in areas which are not used for residential purposes and are seldom used for recreation.

However people would be expected to gather regularly at the nearby paintball facility in Tuggeranong Pines. The impacts of the project (and the existing transmission lines) on staff and visitors of this facility have not been discussed.

7 Has the report been made available as part of a public consultation process for comment for this or another project? 8Content of reports should be reviewed for currency if report is older than 18 months as environmental values may have changed.


4.1.4. Entity referral and comments No entities provided comments on the proposal which related specifically to the impacts of construction of a 132kV electricity transmission line. The comments of the referral entities and notes on an assessment of the matters raised can be found in Appendix 1 this report.

The paintball facility which operates in the vicinity of the proposal was contacted during the preparation of this report. The facility manager stated that staff and players were not required to be within close proximity to the transmission line easement for time periods greater than around 15 minutes.

4.1.5. Recommended mitigation measures There were no identified mitigation measures against the impacts of the proposal on human health from exposure to EMF in the s211 application and supporting information.

4.1.6. Conclusion The application and supporting study provide sufficient information on the impacts from the construction of 132kV electricity transmission lines.

It is ESDD’s assessment that further investigation and environmental assessment of the impacts of the proposal from the construction of 132kV electricity transmission lines is not required for this project. The recommended mitigation measures will be applied where possible, through conditions of approval in any subsequent development application, and also through the particular manner requirements of the EPBC Act Referral Decision (see Appendix 2).

4.2. - Schedule 4, Part 4.3, Item 1 – impacts on species or ecological communities The Project will result in impacts on threatened species and ecological communities listed under both the EPBC Act (discussed in section 3 of this report) and the NC Act. The proposal is likely to impact on the listed threatened species and ecological communities as outlined in Table 4. The project will also potentially have an impact on four species of protected and rare plants shown in Table 5.

Table 4 - Listed species and ecological communities

Threatened Species or Ecological Community NC Act status EPBC Act status

White Box, Yellow Box – Blakely’s Red Gum grassy Woodland and Derived Native Grassland (Box-Gum woodland)

Endangered Critically Endangered

Aprasia parapulchella - Pink tailed worm lizard (PTWL) Vulnerable Vulnerable

Table 5 – Protected and rare plants

Protected and Rare Plants NC Act status EPBC Act status

Swainsona sericea – Silky Swainson Pea Not listed (Protected ACT, Vulnerable NSW)

Not listed

Pomaderris pallida - Pale Pomaderris Not listed (Protected ACT)

Vulnerable


Styphelia triflora – Pink Five-corners Not listed (a rare plant ACT)

Not listed

Diuris dendrobiodes – Wedge Diuris Not listed (a rare plant ACT)

Not listed

4.2.1. Impacts The identified impact on species and ecological communities are:

• Removal of CEEC – Box Gum Woodland in PDZs and along the new access track from the operation of machinery, the removal of the existing poles and installation of the new poles.

• Damage to or removal of PTWL habitat from construction activities within the PDZs, the construction of access track, Pole Laydown areas and vehicle manoeuvring.

• Removal of rare or locally uncommon flora by establishment of PDZs and access tracks. • Damage to existing environment and degradation of CEEC from weed invasion associated

with ground disturbance and weed propagule importation.

4.2.2. Previous Studies and Investigation The proponent has submitted one supporting document which addresses impacts on species or ecological communities in support of the s211 request. The information submitted by the proponent to support the application is listed in Table 6.


Title of report Public consultation9

Age of report Reviewed for currency10


Theodore to Gilmore 132kV Powerline Replacement - Ecological Assessment - Prepared for Purdon Associates and ActewAGL - November 2012, Biosis Pty. Ltd. 2012.

No (although an earlier version by the same author was made publically available as part of EPBC Controlled Action referral)

4 Months No Earlier version subject to assessment by SEWPAC

4.2.3. Key findings The s211 application and supporting documents in Table 6 discuss the following key findings with regards to likely impacts on endangered species and ecological communities:

• Approximately 2.35 Km of the transmission line will transect Box-Gum Woodland. • A maximum total area of 2.145ha of Box- Gum Woodland will disturbed in the PDZs and by

the construction of the new access tracks. • It is unlikely that the whole area of the identified each PDZ (20m x 60m) will actually be

disturbed.

9 Has the report been made available as part of a public consultation process for comment for this or another project? 10Content of reports should be reviewed for currency if report is older than 18 months as environmental values may have changed.


• In some locations the construction of ‘new’ access tracks is actually the re-establishment of the original 25 year old access track and as such much of this area is considered previously disturbed.

• The project area contains 0.88ha of confirmed PTWL habitat. • The proposal will result in localised and temporary disturbance of approximately 0.09ha of

confirmed PTWL habitat. • A single Pale Pomaderris which has been identified in the vicinity of the proposal will not be

affected by the proposal. • For the other rare and uncommon flora including the Silky Swainson Pea, Pink Five-corners

and Wedge Diuris, there is not expected to be a significant impact: o “Wedge Diuris - A single plant was recorded within the site. This plant will not be

removed by the proposed works.”11 o “Pink Five-corners - 246 individuals were recorded in the broader study area, 56 of

these occur within the site and 16 of these will be removed by the proposed works. The species was observed to occur at a similar scatter density throughout the adjoining lands to the east of Segments C and the northern half of Segment B.”11

o “Silky Swainson Pea – A large population of this species was identified within and adjoining Segment B of the site.” “Whilst an accurate count of individuals in this population was not made, it was estimated that approximately 800 plants were actively flowering during Survey 4. The species' flowering period can progress over numerous weeks. This was observed during Survey 4 with some plants yet to flower, some actively flowering and others with pods that had developed post-flowering. Given that the species is difficult to identify when not actively flowering it is likely that a more accurate estimate of population size would be 1500 to 2500 plants.” 11

o A small portion (less than 10%) of the identified Silky Swainson Pea population will be potentially impacted by one PDZ.

4.2.4. Entity referral and comments Two entities provided comment on the proposal which related to impacts on species and ecological communities. Their comments are summarised below:

• Strict vehicle hygiene must also be followed, to prevent the spread of weeds onto site, or from one site to another.

• Only sterile materials are to be used on site e.g. jute/hessian or rice straw for soil stabilisation or similar purposes. No topsoil is to be imported onto the site.

• The proposal will result in significant and ongoing adverse environmental impact by creating well over 2km of new or widened access track within the reserve network and other additional areas of disturbance, and over the long term is likely to exacerbate existing weed issues which will require additional conservation management actions than would otherwise be needed.

• Offset of the residual impacts that will occur from the proposal or contingency funding for impacts or restoration works required beyond a three year period have not currently been

11 Biosis Pty Ltd, 2012, Theodore to Gilmore 132kV Powerline Replacement - Ecological Assessment - Prepared for Purdon Associates and ActewAGL - November 2012, unpublished report


considered. Such a package should be included in the application with the aim of improving PTWL habitat and the populations of the rare plant species in the immediate vicinity of the works and include a contribution to ongoing management.

The comments of the referral entities and notes on an assessment of the matters raised can be found in Appendix 1 of this report.

4.2.5. Recommended mitigation measures The recommended mitigation measures from the entity comments received and the reports submitted by the proponent against the impacts of the development on species and ecological communities are included in Table 7.

Table 7 - Mitigation measures - species and ecological communities

Number Impact of development Mitigation Measure 1 Removal of CEEC – Box Gum Woodland Defined disturbance zones should be

established at each power pole replacement site prior to works commencing. Vehicle and equipment parking/storage sites should be established in previously disturbed areas (i.e. areas already cleared of native vegetation in all strata) Movement of machinery and vehicles should occur along/within the established power line easement.

2 Damage to or removal of PTWL habitat Limit clearance to a total area across all pole disturbance zones not exceeding 0.09 ha of confirmed PTWL habitat Engage a suitably qualified ecologist to implement (as identified in Attachment B of the EAR) the Pink-tailed Worm-Lizard Protection and Management Plan to minimise the impacts on the PTWL prior to, during and upon completion of construction. Vehicle movements are confined to existing or proposed access tracks. Appropriate vehicle hygiene will be maintained, all vehicles and machinery will be cleaned of all weed seed or propagules prior to entry to the work site Only sterile materials such as hessian/jute will be used for soil stabilisation or similar purposes. Construction personnel will not bring domestic pets to the work site.

3 Removal of rare or locally uncommon flora Development and implementation of a CEMP 4 Damage to existing environment and

degradation of CEEC from weed invasion Appropriate vehicle hygiene will be maintained, all vehicles and machinery will be cleaned of all weed seed or propagules prior to entry to the work site Only sterile materials such as hessian/jute will be used for soil stabilisation or similar purposes. An offset package should be developed for the management and improvement of the environment after three years post construction


4.2.6. Conclusion The supporting study and the comments of the referral entities provide sufficient information on the impacts of the proposal on species and ecological communities.

It is ESDD’s assessment that further investigation and environmental assessment of the impacts of the proposal on species and ecological communities is not required for this project. The recommended mitigation measures will be applied where possible, through conditions of approval in any subsequent development application, and also through the particular manner requirements of the EPBC Act Referral Decision (see Appendix 2).

4.3. - Schedule 4, Part 4.3, Item 2 – Removal of more than 0.5 ha of native vegetation The project will result in the removal of and disturbance of native vegetation through the construction of new access tracks and the works in the PDZs.


• Removal of native vegetation • Invasion of native vegetation ecosystems by weeds imported on vehicles and materials and

encouraged by ground surface disturbance.

4.3.2. Previous Studies and Investigation The proponent has submitted two supporting documents which addresses impacts from the removal of native vegetation. This information is listed in Table 8.


Title of report Public consultation

Age of report Reviewed for currency


Theodore to Gilmore 132kV Powerline Replacement - Ecological Assessment - Prepared for Purdon Associates and ActewAGL - November 2012, Biosis Pty. Ltd. 2012



Site Inspection Report – ActewAGL Williamsdale to Theodore 132kV Sub-Transmission line, Soil Conservation Service (NSW), November 2012.

No 4 Months No Prepared by Regulatory Authority on results of performance audit.


4.3.3. Key findings The s211 application and supporting documents in Table 8 discuss the following key findings with regards to the likely impacts from the removal of native vegetation:

• When the existing transmission line was established 25 years ago, existing trees were removed and have not been allowed to re-establish within the powerline easement.

• The ground storey vegetation within the easement supports a moderate to very high cover (approximately 40-90%) and moderate diversity of native grasses and forbs and low to moderate infestation of exotic grass and herbaceous weeds. This classifies the vegetation as native vegetation.

• The proponent states that impacts on native vegetation will be appropriately reduced based on their performance in the past on a similar project (Williamsdale to Theodore Transmission Line) and by implementation of appropriate mitigation measures.

4.3.4. Entity referral and comments Two entities provided comment on the proposal which related to impacts from the removal of native vegetation. The comments received from the referral entities which relate to this trigger are the same as those outlined in section 4.2.4 of this report.

The comments of the referral entities and notes on an assessment of the matters raised can be found in Appendix 1 this report.

4.3.5. Recommended mitigation measures The recommended mitigation measures from the entity comments received and the reports submitted by the proponent against the impacts of the development from the removal of native vegetation are included in Table 9.

Table 9 - Mitigation measures – removal of native vegetation

Number Impact of development Mitigation Measure 1 Removal of native vegetation Rehabilitation of soils and vegetation within

PDZs, within 1 month of the completion of works at each individual PDZ. Disturbed areas are to be re-vegetated with a mixture of native grass species seeds, preferably collected from the local region. Minimising areas of disturbance by confining works to PDZs and vehicle movements to access tracks.

2 Invasion of native vegetation ecosystems by weeds

Appropriate vehicle hygiene will be maintained, all vehicles and machinery will be cleaned of all weed seed or propagules prior to entry to the work site. Only sterile materials such as hessian/jute will be used for soil stabilisation or similar purposes. An offset package should be developed for the management and improvement of the environment beyond the first three years post construction.


4.3.6. Conclusion The two supporting studies and the comments of the referral entities provide sufficient information on the impacts of the proposal from the removal of native vegetation.

It is ESDD’s assessment that further investigation and environmental assessment of the impacts of the proposal from the removal of native vegetation is not required for this project. The recommended mitigation measures will be applied where possible, through conditions of approval in any subsequent development application, and also through the particular manner requirements of the EPBC Act Referral Decision (see Appendix 2).

4.4. - Schedule 4, Part 4.3, Item 3– proposal for development on land reserved under s 315 of the Act for the purpose of a nature reserve

Almost the entire 7 km length of the electricity transmission line is within land reserved for the purpose of nature conservation. Development activities within the nature reserve will have the potential to impact upon the natural conservation values of the reserve and require dedicated measures and actions to avoid and reduce the potential impacts.


• Sedimentation and erosion including impacts on waterways caused by vegetation removal and soil disturbance

• Introducing/spreading weeds from imported materials and on vehicles • Litter and waste generation from construction activities • Pollution from spilt fuel and other contaminants used during construction

4.4.2. Previous Studies and Investigation The proponent has submitted three supporting documents which addresses the potential impacts of the project on the nature reserve in support of the s211 request. The information submitted by the proponent to support the application is listed in Table 10.





Theodore to Gilmore 132kV Powerline Replacement - Ecological Assessment - Prepared for Purdon Associates and ActewAGL - November 2012, Biosis Pty. Ltd. 2012.



Theodore to Gilmore Transmission Line Upgrade Construction Environmental Management Plan, Purdon Associates Pty. Ltd. December 2012.

No 3 Months No No





Site Inspection Report – ActewAGL Williamsdale to Theodore 132kV Sub-Transmission line, Soil Conservation Service (NSW), November 2012.

No 4 Months No Prepared by Regulatory Authority on results of performance audit.

4.4.3. Key findings The s211 application and supporting documents in Table 10 discuss the following key findings with regards to potential impacts on nature reserves:

• The electricity transmission line easement currently has areas of significant weed infestation. Vehicle and equipment movements and the importation of materials have the potential to spread weeds into previously un-affected areas of the reserve.

• Vehicles have the potential to collect and carry spoil on tyres and undercarriages which could be washed or fall into waterways.

• Impacts on water quality are expected to be short term in nature and limited in extent due to the site location being at the head of the Tuggeranong Creek watershed where lower stream flows are expected.

• Access tracks have been aligned to result in the shortest possible length and are in most places are confined to previous track alignment.

4.4.4. Entity referral and comments Two entities provided comment on the impacts of the proposal on the nature reserve. The comments received from the referral entities which relate to this trigger are similar to those outlined in section 4.2.4 of this report. Additional comments from the entities which relate to impacts on the nature reserve summarised below:

• The possible pole lay-down locations should be outside of the nature reserve area unless it can be demonstrated that there are no other options and the sites chosen are the best possible locations. Proposed lay down areas 3 (south) and 2 seem particularly unwarranted as they are in close proximity to other pole laydown areas outside of the nature reserve.

• The report states that passing bays will be created along the access track, clarification is required as to why these are required and in which locations due to the infrequent nature of inspection and maintenance requirements for the line.

• Revegetation must only utilise native grass seed mixes, no exotic species seeding is appropriate.

The comments of the referral entities and notes on an assessment of the matters raised can be found in Appendix 1 this report.

4.4.5. Recommended mitigation measures The recommended mitigation measures from the entity comments received and the reports submitted by the proponent against the impacts of the development on the nature reserve are included in Table 11.


Table 11 - Mitigation measures – works in nature reserve

Number Impact of development Mitigation Measure 1 Sedimentation and erosion Development and implementation of a site

specific CEMP to include measures to mitigate erosion. Track construction should be restricted to the alignment of the previous track wherever appropriate. Construction of appropriate waterway crossing along the access track. Rehabilitation of soils and vegetation within PDZs, within 1 month of the completion of works at each individual PDZ. Disturbed areas are to be re-vegetated with a mixture of native grass species seeds, preferably collected from the local region. Minimising areas of disturbance by confining works to PDZs and vehicle movements to access tracks.

2 Infestation of previously weed free areas Appropriate vehicle hygiene will be maintained, all vehicles and machinery will be cleaned of all weed seed or propagules prior to entry to the work site. Only sterile materials such as hessian/jute will be used for soil stabilisation or similar purposes. An offset package will be developed for the management and improvement of the environment beyond the first three years post construction.

3 Litter and waste A WMP will be developed and implemented for construction activities. Excess materials such as concrete slurry from truck and pump wash-out will not be dumped on site. Rather, it must be dumped into a plastic lined bund or skip bin.

4 Pollution and contamination The CEMP should include measures to protect the environment from contaminants such as vehicle fuel. Vehicles should be refuelled in appropriate locations such as bunded areas and with spill kits available.

4.4.6. Conclusion The three supporting studies and the comments of the referral entities provide sufficient information on the impacts of the proposal on the nature reserve.

It is ESDD’s assessment that further investigation and environmental assessment of the impacts of the proposal on land reserved under s315 for the purpose of a nature reserve is not required for this project. The recommended mitigation measures will be applied where possible, through conditions of approval in any subsequent development application, and also through the particular manner requirements of the EPBC Act Referral Decision (see Appendix 2).


5. Other potential environmental impacts This section summarises the potential impacts of the development on the environment other than those impacts which are impact track triggers discussed in section 4.

5.1. Traffic Due to the proximity of the project to the Monaro Highway and the locations at which heavy articulated vehicle access will be required for construction of the project, there is the potential for impacts on traffic.

Out of seven proposed access points there are three identified access points to the project site which would involve vehicles crossing traffic. At these points there is increased potential for accidents and specific temporary traffic controls should be implemented.


• Vehicles entering or leaving the project site causing or being involved in a traffic accident.

5.1.2. Recommended mitigation measures The key commitments and mitigation measures recommended in the traffic study accompanying the application are:

• Provision of advanced warning signs of potential for truck movements • Provision of flagmen at points where vehicles are required to cross traffic • Mandating that vehicles should make u-turns at roundabouts where they are available in

strict preference to crossing median strips or oncoming traffic

5.2. Visual Impact There is a limited number of residential properties which have direct lines of sight to the current transmission lines. The existing transmission lines are highly visible from certain locations along the Monaro Highway.

It is likely that the visual impacts of the existing transmission lines will be reduced by the proposal, as the number of poles is being significantly reduced. There is no perceived negative impact on the landscape associated with the proposal compared to the existing situation.

5.3. Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal cultural heritage A cultural heritage study was undertaken for the project. Field surveys of the electricity transmission line easement resulted 13 Aboriginal heritage items being located. One previously recorded site was relocated and this brings the total number of objects/sites to 14.

One site, a PAD was rated as being of moderate significance. All of the other 13 identified objects were deemed to be low significance – isolated finds and low density artefact scatters.


The works and associated vehicle movements have the potential to disturb, damage, or destroy the identified Aboriginal heritage items.

A single non-Aboriginal heritage item was located during investigations on the site. The identified item is a ruin of hut on the banks of Tuggeranong Creek. It consists of a house platform, remnant chimney remains and exotic garden and tree plantings. It is believed to be the remains of the house of Frank Brennan and has been assessed as being of low significance. It will be outside of the area of impact of the proposal.


• Damage to or destruction of the identified heritage items. • Damage to or destruction of previously un-identified heritage items.

5.3.2. Recommended mitigation measures The key commitments and mitigation measures recommended in the report accompanying the application and by the referral entities are:

• The adherence to the recommendations of the submitted cultural heritage report. • The development and implementation of a Conservation Management Plan and an

Unanticipated Discovery Protocol.


6. Development application considerations This section outlines key considerations for the Planning and Land Authority to take into consideration when assessing a development application for the proposal. The development application considerations include any recommendations from the supporting information submitted by the proponent as well as any matters raised by referral entities. Any matters which are not addressed at the time of submission of a development application may be required to be complied with as conditions of approval.

Development application considerations are summarised in Table 12.


Table 12 - Development application considerations

No Consideration requirement Endorsement/ approval Development stage Details of considerations

1 Construction Environment Management Plan

Land Manager, Conservator of Flora and Fauna, Environment Protection Authority

Prior to construction Comprehensive Construction Environment Management Plans CEMPs should be developed prior to the undertaking of any construction or development activities. These plans should include as a minimum: • Measures to avoid impacts on areas outside of development

footprints; • Erosion and Sediment controls to be implemented during

construction and remediation; • PTWL Protection and Management Plan; • Waste management plans for construction activities; • Workplace health and safety plans to protect workers and the

public from harm; • Unanticipated Discovery Protocols for the management of impacts

unexpected heritage object finds; • Traffic management plans; • Revegetation/remediation plans.

2 PTWL Protection and Management Plan

Conservator of Flora and Fauna

Prior to construction Engage a suitably qualified ecologist to implement the Pink-tailed Worm-Lizard Protection and Management Plan (as identified in Attachment B of the EAR) to minimise the impacts on the PTWL prior to, during and upon completion of construction.

3 Revegetation and remediation plan

Land Manager, Conservator of Flora and Fauna, Environment Protection Authority

Prior to development approval

A revegetation end remediation plan should be developed which outlines what actions will be implemented upon the completion of construction activities at each PDZ. The plan should include information on the species to be used for revegetation, the method and person to undertake the task and the availability of suitable seed.


No Consideration requirement Endorsement/ approval Development stage Details of considerations

4 Conservation Management Plan and Unanticipated Discovery Protocol

ACT Heritage Council Prior to Construction A Conservation Management Plan and Unanticipated Discovery Protocol will be developed to reduce the potential impacts on heritage objects which will be retained in place or salvaged.


7. Conclusion ESDD has assessed that the Project meets the requirements of s211 of the Act.

It is ESDD’s assessment that the proponent has provided sufficient information to the ACT Government to allow an informed evaluation of potential environmental impacts which could be attributed to the proposal. The supporting information and referral entities have proposed a range of mitigation measures to reduce or avoid potential environmental impacts arising from construction and operational activities associated with the Project. It is considered that any potential adverse environmental impacts can be adequately addressed by implementing these measures and the relevant development application considerations outlined in this report.

ESDD’s recommendation is that the supporting information submitted with the application has adequately identified and considered the potential impacts on the environment and that further environmental assessment is not required.

ESDD’s recommendation is that the Minister grants the Theodore to Gilmore 132kV Transmission Line Upgrade project an exemption under section 211 of the Act from the requirement to complete an Environmental Impact Statement.


8. Bibliography 1) International Agency for Research on Cancer, 2002, IARC Monograph, Volume 80 - Non-

Ionizing Radiation, Part 1: Static and Extremely Low-Frequency (ELF) Electric and Magnetic Fields, World Health Organisation Press.

2) World Health Organisation, 2007, Environmental Health Criteria 238 – Extremely Low Frequency Fields, World Health Organisation Press.

3) National Health and Medical Research Council, 1989, Interim guidelines on limits of exposure to 50/60Hz electric and magnetic fields (rescinded and under review), Australian Radiation Laboratory on behalf of the National Health and Medical Research Council, accessed at: http://www.arpansa.gov.au/pubs/rhs/rhs30.pdf , accessed on 21 March 2013.

4) ActewAGL Distribution Ltd, March 2013, Electromagnetic Field (EMF) Profile Study – Proposed Gilmore to Theodore 132kV Line, unpublished report.

5) Purdon Associates Pty Ltd, 7 December 2012, Theodore to Gilmore 132kV Transmission Line Upgrade - Application for EIS Exemption under Section 211 of the Planning and Development Act 2007 (ACT), unpublished report.

6) Biosis Pty Ltd, 2012, Theodore to Gilmore 132kV Powerline Replacement - Ecological Assessment - Prepared for Purdon Associates and ActewAGL - November 2012, unpublished report.

7) Soil Conservation Service (NSW), November 2012, Site Inspection Report – ActewAGL Williamsdale to Theodore 132kV Sub-Transmission line, unpublished report.

http://www.arpansa.gov.au/pubs/rhs/rhs30.pdf


Appendix 1. - Referral Entity Comments


Entity Comment Assessment note

Conservator of Flora and Fauna

In general it is considered that there is sufficient information in the Request for Exemption from an EIS application documents to determine the expected environmental impact of the proposal. However, there are a few matters that require clarification. These are:

1. That the new 132kV line will not require additional slashing, tree removal or trimming to what is already required for the existing power line;

2. Identification of the location and impact from the passing bays described in the application, as they don't appear to have been included in the brief for the ecological report;

3. The possible pole lay-down locations should be outside of the nature reserve area unless it can be demonstrated that there are no other options and the sites chosen are the best possible locations. Proposed lay down areas 3 (south) and 2 seem particularly unwarranted;

4. Clarification of the re-vegetation measures as the documents are inconsistent in their description. Some state that natural regeneration will be encouraged, while others involve seeding. Certainly a revegetation plan will need to be developed, while the example revegetation outcome at Williamsdale (establishment of what appears to be predominately exotic grass cover) will not be appropriate within the nature reserve areas of this project; and

5. Clarification as to whether any large hollow bearing trees will be removed for the proposed site office location.

The proposal will result in significant and ongoing adverse environmental impact by creating well over 2km of new or widened access track within the reserve network and other additional areas of disturbance; and, over the long term, is likely to exacerbate existing weed issues which will require additional conservation management actions than would otherwise be needed. On the basis of a recent review of vegetation data, including species data from over 2700 vegetation polygons covering ACT's lowland woodland and natural temperate grasslands, the immediate vicinity of the works contain key habitat for swainsona sericea, listed as vulnerable in NSW and protected in the ACT, Pomaderris pallida, listed as vulnerable by the Commonwealth and protected in the ACT, and Styphelia triflora, a rare plant, as well as supporting endangered woodland and habitat of the pink-tailed worm lizard.

The advice of the Conservator of Flora and Fauna is noted. It will be required to be demonstrated during the DA that the listed items have been satisfactorily addressed and conditions on a decision may be applied to ensure appropriate outcomes.



Offset of the residual impacts that will occur from the proposal or contingency funding for impacts or restoration works required beyond a three year period have not currently been considered. Such a package should be included in the application with the aim of improving pink tailed worm lizard habitat and the populations of the rare plant species in the immediate vicinity of the works and include a contribution to ongoing management.

Environment Protection Authority

The Environment Protection Authority (EPA) has reviewed the s211 application for the exemption from a EIS. The EPA has no issues with the development of the Theodore to Gilmore - 132kV Transmission line upgrade that would warrant the submission of an EIS.

The EPA’s requirements can be dealt with through the development application process for the proposal.

The EPA’s comments and support for a s211 exemption is noted. As indicated in this advice, the EPA will be requested to provide advice during assessment of a subsequent DA to provide comment, conditions on a decision may be applied to ensure appropriate outcomes.

ACT Heritage Council The Heritage Council notes the applicant's request for consideration for Ministerial exemption from the requirement to complete an EIS pursuant to s211 of the Planning and Development Act 2007.

A cultural heritage assessment has been undertaken in the line easement corridor, and the following report has been produced: Theodore to Gilmore Electricity Easement Cultural Heritage Study (BIOSIS 2012). The Heritage Council is currently awaiting submission of the final report for ratification, as the version received has not been approved.

The Heritage Council does not oppose the request for exemption from EIS scoping pursuant to s211 of the Planning and Development Act 2007, provided a final report is approved by Council prior to the submission of a Development Application.

It is noted that the ACT Heritage Council supports the granting of an s211 exemption for the Project. The advice is subject to the condition that a final cultural heritage study report is presented and ratified by the council. The advice of the ACT Heritage Council would be sought during the assessment of a DA to ensure that this requirement had been satisfied and that the required Unanticipated Discovery Protocol has been prepared.

Territory and Municipal Services Directorate

A number of aspects of the proposed development are insufficiently elucidated to provide support at this stage; however, at the DA stage proponent must adhere to the comments provided below:

• The area of the proposed development is subject to bushfire slashing, grazing and hazard reduction burning. These activities must occur as scheduled in order to meet the fuel management standards defined in the Strategic Bushfire Management Plan. TAMS is audited in the maintenance of the standards by JACS. Of particular concern is that the proposal may prevent grazing during the critical period in spring and summer. TAMS needs to know the type of procedures that will be in placed to prevent the works causing bushfires. As such, on completion,

It is noted that TAMSD indicate that they do not support the application at this stage. However the matters raised are assessed as being able to be appropriately addressed during the assessment of the DA and by the plans required to be prepared by section 6 of this report. The advice of TAMSD will be sought during the assessment of a DA to ensure that the matters raised have been satisfactorily addressed and that any required conditions have been applied.



the works must not prevent continuing fuel management in the area;

• Strict vehicle hygiene must also be followed, to prevent the spread of weeds onto site, or from one site to another. Vehicles and equipment will be thoroughly washed down, using a high pressure portable water wash down unit, to remove seeds and plant propagules, prior to entering a site, or moving to another site.

• NO topsoil is to be imported onto site.

• Only sterile materials are to be used on site e.g. jute/hessian or rice straw for soil stabilisation or similar purposes.

• Any work in the Gilmore Horse holding paddocks must be fenced out of the horse paddock for a period satisfactory to allow full rehabilitation of the site. Fencing to be of horse safe standard in consultation with horse paddock manager, and at ACTEW AGL expense.

• After installation, all areas are to be filled and land surfaces levelled;

• Trench/ holes must be fully compacted on filling to remove hazard and risk to people and horses from subsidence. If follow up is required, ACTEW AGL will undertake a top up of and re levelling of the site at their expense.

• Trench/ work site and damage caused by access is to be fully rehabilitated on completion, including sowing suitable pasture mix to minimise weed growth on disturbed area;

• Care and appropriate precautions must be taken at all times to ensure public safety;

• Follow all relevant environmental legislations;

• Must remove any spoils from site generated by ACTEW AGL works;

• Any fences damaged during this activity to be fully repaired to the satisfaction of the horse paddock manager;

• If a horse/s is found to be within an area affected when ACTEW AGL staff / contractors are to commence works, works must cease whilst the horse paddock manager is notified and the horse removed. (from time to time horses may be



inadvertently access the wrong paddock. Care to ensure no injury brought about)

• The Horse paddock manager to be notified directly at least 2 weeks in advance of works commencing to allow horses to be relocated out of affected areas. ActewAGL need to notify Territory Agistment directly. They can be contacted via email: [email protected];

• Note that TAMS manages the Horse Holding Paddock contract. ActewAGL also needs to alert TAMS to the commencement of work at the same time they notify Territory Agistment (2 weeks in advance). For this matter, proponent must contact Josh Clancy of TAMS via email [email protected].


Appendix 2. – EPBC Act Referral Decision