Regulatory Burden in the Renewable Energy Sector in NSW

of 39
THE CASE TO REDUCE THE REGULATORY BURDEN ON UTILITY-SCALE SOLAR CONSTRUCTION
PROJECTS IN NEW SOUTH WALES
Dr. Turlough F. Guerin
Sunbury, Victoria
Email: turlough.guerin@hotmail.com
Highlights and Summary
 The renewable energy sector in NSW is highly regulated, reflected in the extensive approval
and consent conditions and their cost impacts
 The EIS/EIA process verified expected risks including logistics, fauna, and dust
 Risks were managed through a mix of black letter law, co-regulation and self-regulatory
mechanisms
 There is a need to reduce the regulatory burden in building out the utility-scale solar energy
(USSE) industry in NSW
 Reduced regulatory burden, balanced by more self- and co-regulation, will help incentivise
investment
A review of legislation in Australia’s most populous and most regulated construction environment
was undertaken in the jurisdiction of New South Wales (NSW). Logistics, fauna, biodiversity, noise,
general administration, infrastructure and camp establishment issues, and the construction and
operational environmental management plans, have the most planning approval requirements. A
case study on the construction of a large scale solar PV plant is described highlighting how a range of
identified (expected) environmental and community risks (totalling 296) were not experienced in the
field during construction, and those risks that did eventuate were managed effectively. There is a
need to reduce regulatory red tape, to encourage investment to help reach the state’s target for
renewable energy installations, while at the same time protecting communities, the environment,
human health and safety. This submission argues and provides support for a reduction in the
environmental and community related regulatory burden for new renewable energy projects in
NSW, presenting evidence of low actual impacts compared to those identified as expected during
the planning and approval stages.

of 39
INTRODUCTION
At the end of 2015, Australia had 19 operational solar projects larger than 1 MW in size, including 17
solar farms which use solar photovoltaic (SPV) technology and two solar thermal plants – a total of
217 MW of potential generating power. Large-scale Solar PV (defined as greater than 5 MW)
remains in its infancy in Australia, however, with only 4 projects commissioned and a further 4 under
construction so far in 2016. When the projects currently under construction are complete, installed
capacity of large-scale PV will total 262 MW (Anonymous 2016). This is well behind the installed
capacity of comparable international markets. The cost trajectory of USSE Solar PV is expected to see
the technology become competitive without additional support within the medium term.
Australia has traditionally been reliant on fossil fuels and coal (black and brown) in particular as its
main baseload energy source, as well as being its single largest contributor to GDP through exports.
Thus much of the current regulatory planning landscape is aligned to working in with these
traditional energy sources. Federal government policies have tended to favour the incumbent
traditional energy sector, through low aspirations for emissions reductions and only a relatively low
level of commitment to the growth of the clean energy sector, including large scale wind and solar.
In Australian politics, there has been an active policy agenda that has been supportive of fossil fuels
and at times, even negative towards renewable or alternative energy generation which has resulted
in investors taking a risk-averse approach to renewable energy projects (Pears 2016).
In order to deliver a project which will be acceptable to international lending institutions (e.g. to
enable finance to be provided), environmental and social assessments should be carried out in
accordance with the requirements of the key international standards and principles, namely the
Equator Principles (Anonymous 2013) and IFC’s Standards (Anonymous 2007). National standards
should also be observed which may be more stringent than lender requirements.
The Regulatory Landscape
For large scale developments in New South Wales (Australia), the range of legal requirements are
identified in the EIS/EIA stage of the developments. The applicable laws range from those addressing
climate, planning, to operational environmental issues (Lyster, Lipman et al. 2012).
There is a tension between the needs for the development of any new sector, balanced with that of
black letter law and industry self-regulation. Self-regulation has been shown to be ineffective in
some sectors, becoming a “tick and flick” exercise, and particularly when it comes to safety and
environmental performance (Neale 1997, Steinzor 1998). However, self-regulation is an important
part of the toolkit to regulate industry (Altham and Guerin 1999), particularly in the clean energy
sector as it struggles to establish itself in Australia.

of 39
Improving environmental performance requires regulatory mechanisms that stimulate industry’s
development, and transfer and adoption of technologies that protect and enhance the environment
(Gunningham 1995). Traditional, direct environmental regulation will always be required to
motivate laggards who are the slowest to adopt the most appropriate course of action. Proactive
companies (innovators and leaders) on the other hand in any industry, will respond to the
opportunities and incentives that self-regulation offers to improve environmental and community
performance. An excessive reliance on black letter law to regulate the renewable energy sector in
Australia may only serve to further stifle innovation and ultimately growth, and at the same time,
discounting the long term environmental and social benefits such technological advancements (in
clean energy) can bring.
An Overview of Solar PV Developments
PV facilities utilise PV cells which are assembled to form panels or modules that are then lined up
into solar arrays. PV cells convert sunlight into electric current using the photoelectric effect. Most
solar arrays use an inverter to convert the DC power produced by the PV panels into AC power. Solar
PV plants can use either fixed-mount solar arrays or automated tracking systems that allow the solar
arrays to follow the sun’s daily path across the sky and optimise electricity production, though these
require higher outlays of capital.
A solar PV facility typically comprises a series of PV panel arrays and inverters, mounts, trackers (if
used), cabling, monitoring equipment, substation and access tracks. The amount of electricity
generated by a PV facility will be dependent on a number of factors including the type, location of
the installation, positioning of the panels, and whether trackers are used.
In essence, USSE developments conform to construction methodologies common to earthworks, civil
and structural, trenching, and electrical work scopes.
PV plant design is developed initially as part of a prefeasibility study which is based on preliminary
energy resource and yield estimates, as well as other site-specific requirements and constraints. The
plant design is further improved during the feasibility study, which considers site measurements, site
topography, and environmental and social considerations. Key design features include the type of PV
module used, tilting angle, mounting and tracking systems, inverters, and module arrangement.
Optimization of plant design involves considerations such as shading, performance degradation, and
trade-offs between increased investment (e.g. for tracking) and energy yield. Usually, the feasibility
study also develops design specifications on which the equipment to be procured is based.
PURPOSE
The purpose of this submission is to identify the laws applicable to construction of USSE projects in
the most populous jurisdiction of Australia and to demonstrate how these laws were complied to

of 39
through the application of a case study. These laws relate to approval (consent conditions), access to
land suitable for solar PV installations, impacts on the community, and operationally-focused laws
governing direct environmental impacts from the project.
A case study is described where the attributes of the project and site are introduced.
The project site is located in Central West NSW. The case study presents the environmental legal
background to the project and illustrates the relatively low environmental impact a USSE project had
on the local environment and community.
METHODS
Case Study Site Location, Description and Construction Process
The site is located in Central NSW, Australia, approximately 10 km west of the nearest township
(Figure 1). The USSE power plant (now completed and in operations and maintenance stage), has an
installed capacity in excess of 100 MW, the largest plant of its kind in Australia at the time of
publication. The project was constructed on entirely rural land and was located on one land parcel.
Approximately 250 ha of land was required for the plant. Along with the solar plant,
the development included the installation and operation of a 132 kV transmission
line, approximately 4 km long x 40 m (wide) to the main network interconnection. The solar plant
consists of more than one million photovoltaic (PV) modules. The modules were mounted on steel
post and rail (table) support structures up to 2 m in total height. Supporting infrastructure includes
the installation of above and underground electrical conduits, construction of a substation, site
office and maintenance building, provision of perimeter fencing, unsealed access road and the
transmission line. The stages of construction are outlined in Figure 2.
Regulatory Review
A review of the relevant laws and a comprehensive planning application and EIS (EIA) review process
was conducted prior to the construction stage. The proposed solar plant described in the case study
was declared to be a State Significant Development for the purposes of the NSW Environmental
Planning and Assessment (EP&A) Act (1979). The commonwealth and state legislation used to
develop the approval documentation, and which formed the basis of the controls used in the
construction, are discussed in the results and discussion section. Specific legislative requirements are
identified and are referred to throughout this paper. The project was constructed under the
following self-regulatory mechanisms including an ISO 14001 based environmental management
system, International Association for Public Participation (IAP2) for community consultation and
AS4801 for safety management.

of 39
Environmental and Community Management Methodology
In conducting the construction works to build the solar power plant, a series of subplans were
developed which addressed each of the risks and impact areas. These included: transport and
logistics, fauna, flora, visual, bushfire, dangerous goods, soil and water management, air quality,
noise, spill management and waste and resource use, complaints and incident management,
heritage management, and community management (Table 1). The EIS/EIA process required under a
State Significant Development was undertaken as per the process outlined on the NSW Government
Department of Planning and Environment website and as described in the applicable legislation
(Anonymous 2011).
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
A Review of Environmental and Community Regulatory Requirements
This section provides an overview of the major environmental legal obligations for the project and
how they were addressed during construction. Of all the relevant legislation required to be complied
to, several discrete laws stood out as requiring particular attention, relevant to the construction
stage. A description of these laws and their importance is described in this section and further
details provided in Table 3.
Renewable Energy (Electricity) Act 2000 Commonwealth (Cth) (Act)
The key legislative policy mechanism driving renewable energy investment in Australia is the
Renewable Energy Target (RET). The regulatory framework that established the RET is set out in this
Act. When passed as legislation, the Act set a target for renewable energy generation from eligible
renewable energy power stations in Australia of 41,000GWh by 2020. This represented a target of
20% of Australia’s electricity being supplied by renewable sources by 2020 and maintained at this
level until 2030. In June 2015, however, the Coalition Government passed legislation to cut this
target to 33,000GWh. This lower figure reflects the recommendation in a recent government
sponsored Review of the RET, discussed below. The rationale, in part, for this change was to reflect
overall lower energy demand and represent a ‘real 20%’ figure. The target works by placing an
obligation on electricity retailers for acquiring and surrendering large-scale generation certificates.
They must take this into account in their forward planning. While each retailer will have its own
strategy to meet its obligations, their cumulative demand for certificates must add up to the target.
The RET drives investment by creating a guaranteed market for additional renewable energy
deployment using a mechanism of tradable Renewable Energy Certificates (RECs). RECs are market-
based instruments generated by accredited renewable energy power stations and that can be traded
and sold. Demand for RECs is created by a legal obligation that the Act places on parties who buy

of 39
wholesale electricity (retailers and large users of electricity known as ‘liable entities’) to purchase
and surrender a certain amount of RECs each year.
With settled policy underpinning demand for large-scale generation certificates through to 2030 and
record high certificate prices, the RET provides an incentive to invest in this sector. To meet the
target, approximately 6000 megawatts of new large-scale renewable energy capacity will need to be
built between the beginning of 2016 and 2020. The majority of this capacity must be committed in
by the end of 2017 to ensure sufficient time for build and generation by 2020. And project financing
is a key determinant of the pace of future construction.
The Act requires, however, a review of the RET and the Act (and its sub-ordinate regulations) to be
conducted every two years by the Commonwealth (or Federal) Government. The most recent review
was conducted in 2012 and the key recommendation was that the RET should be left largely
untouched to preserve investor confidence. This review schedule has had the unintended negative
effect of causing businesses to be reluctant to make significant investment decisions regarding
installing renewable energy infrastructure.
Nevertheless, this legislation has enabled the project in the case study to progress with funding for
the infrastructure obtained from an energy retailer and the balance being provided by two levels of
government. The solar plant described in the case study will help the energy retailer (operator)
building the plant, to meet its renewable energy obligations under this Act.
Clean Energy Act 2011 (Cth) (repealed 2014)
This Act set up a carbon pricing mechanism to deal with climate change by encouraging the use of
clean energy in Australia. The mechanism began on 1 July 2012, and the mechanism is administered
by the Clean Energy Regulator. The carbon pricing mechanism was an emissions trading scheme that
put a price on Australia's carbon pollution. It was introduced by this Act and related legislation and
applied to Australia's biggest carbon emitters (called liable entities). Under the mechanism, liable
entities had to pay a price for the carbon emissions they produced. This Act was repealed in the
Federal Parliament in 2014 and has been replaced by a new mechanism called the Emissions
Reduction Fund (ERF), though this in not a market based mechanisms for pricing carbon.
Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (EPBC Act) (Clth)
This Act regulates activity that can impact upon flora and fauna during project development across
Australia. A search of the Commonwealth Protected areas indicates that there are no World
Heritage or National Heritage areas or items within the project area. The solar plant is
however, located in the same catchment as the Macquarie marshes Nature Reserve Site, listed as
a Ramsar Wetlands of international significance, but is located approximately 100 km from this site
and is unlikely to affect the wetlands. It was concluded that the project is not likely to have

of 39
a significant impact on the environment of Commonwealth land. The grey-crowned babbler
(GCB) (Eastern subspecies) was identified on the project site and is a “vulnerable” species within
a habitat likely to occur within project locality. Under this legislation the project development is
considered as having a moderate impact as it may impact on woodland and isolated trees with
hollows which provide habitat and potential nesting opportunities for the species. All GCB nests and
all other nests were protected during the construction stage and these habitats were offset
according to the NSW State Government protocols.
Native Title Act 1993 (Clth)
A native title search was undertaken for the area potentially impacted by the construction project
to determine whether it may be affected by a native title determination, application or an
indigenous land use agreement (ILUA). The results showed that there is a native title claimant
in the project area. All relevant land for the solar plant was the subject of grants of freehold estate
made before 1996, with the exception of the Crown Land parcel used for the transmission line to the
main connection to the grid. In accordance with the Native Title Act 1993, these grants have
extinguished any native title that existed in relation to all the land used.
The Project’s Environmental Manager engaged with the local Aboriginal land council on a regular
basis during the construction of the case study project. This was to ensure any concerns from
potential indigenous land owners were being raised and communicated to the project team, and
that advice was sought from this council in designing landscaping for the site.
Environmental Planning and Assessment (EP&A) Act 1979 (NSW)
This is an Act to institute a system of environmental planning and assessment for the State of New
South Wales. The Act incorporated a three-tiered system of state, regional (now repealed) and local
levels of significance, and required the relevant planning authority to take into consideration the
impacts to the environment (both natural and built) and the community of proposed development
or land-use change. Most development requires a Statement of Environmental Effects detailing the
impacts to both natural and human environments, which should be taken into consideration by the
regulatory authority, while larger projects (only) require a more thorough Environmental Impact
Statement (EIS) (or Assessment), and greater public scrutiny. Projects, including renewable energy
developments that are valued at ≥$30 million (AUD), will be classified as a State Significant
Development (SSD) and will be required to go through an extensive EIS (or assessment) process. The
case study described in this paper met the requirements of a SSD and this legislation directed the
planning process for the case study project. Parts 4 and 5 of this Act allow for the community (and
other groups and agencies) to participate in the regulatory process by reviewing the developer’s
proposed development plans through the Submissions Report process.

of 39
Roads Act 1993 (NSW)
This Act enables the classification of roads and regulates activities on and over roads and is
applicable to proposed developments that expose roads to high numbers of vehicles, and loads such
as the logistical impacts from building renewable energy projects.
Approval from the Roads and Maritime Services Department (RMS) and the local council was
required and obtained under s138 to erect a structure or carry out a work in, on or over
a public road. This was important because of the speed and frequency of traffic passing the entry
point into the solar plant. Approvals were obtained for the construction works to build a site-specific
turn-in lane for entry into the project site because of the exceedingly high number of road visits to
and from the site during construction (i.e. estimated at 600 for road trains alone). Road dilapidation
assessments were conducted before and after the construction stage and no discernible impact was
measured from the construction works, and no road safety incidents. There were no non-
compliances in relation to the condition approvals.
The Threatened Species Conservation Act (TSCA) 1995 (NSW)
This is a NSW state-based piece of legislation to provide for the conservation of threatened species,
populations and ecological communities of animals and plants. The Act sets out a number of specific
objects relating to the conservation of biological diversity and the promotion of ecologically
sustainable development and supplements the EPBC Act (1999) described earlier. The Act sets up a
Scientific Committee, whose functions include identifying and classifying (as “endangered”,
“critically endangered” or “vulnerable”) the species, populations and ecological communities with
which it is concerned, and identifying key threatening processes that may threaten the survival of
those species, populations and ecological communities. Identified species, populations, ecological
communities and key threatening processes are listed in the Schedules to the Act. Provision is made
for the preparation of recovery plans for listed threatened species, populations and ecological
communities and threat abatement plans to manage key threatening processes. The intent of this
law was met during construction through implementing the fauna management plan which was part
of the CEMP. The GCB was the key threatened species identified at the case study project site.
Weeds Act 1993 (NSW)
The administration of noxious weed control in NSW is the responsibility of the State Minister for
Primary Industries under the Act. The Act is however, implemented and enforced by the local
government. The Act aims to ensure a uniform and coordinated approach to the control of noxious
weeds, define the roles and responsibilities of all authorities and occupiers of land, provide powers
to enable the coordinated control of weeds in NSW, and provide for funding assistance from the
State Government. It defines the categories of weeds based on their overall risk to the land they are

of 39
invasive to. Several species were identified that were classified in categories that required active
management for their control and eradication. The objects of the Act were met through
implementation of the flora and groundcover management plans (within the CEMP) which included
a weed management plan with requirements for cleaning all plant and equipment entering the site.
A register of all plant and equipment entering the site that was used during construction, including
all modular building infrastructure, was kept detailing the inspection and method of cleaning prior to
site entry. It is noted that due to logistical reasons, road trains carrying containers of solar panels
were not cleaned prior to entry. This policy may have contributed to at least to a small extent, the
appearance of Mexican Poppy plants along the roadside within the site boundary.
Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997 (POEO Act) (NSW)
This Act and regulations regulate environmental issues that are relevant during construction and
operations and include air quality, dust, noise, litter, soil and water pollution. No contraventions of
this Act occurred during the construction stage as there were no non-compliance in relation to
offsite movement of pollutants in dust, mud or water runoff.
Local Government Act (1993) (NSW)
NSW has undergone significant legislative reform to encourage community engagement. The Local
Government Amendment (Planning and Reporting) Act 2009 introduced changes to the Local
Government Act 1993 (NSW) requiring local governments to implement Community Plans, also
referred to in the Act as Community Strategic Plans (CSPs). These amendments are part of reforms
to the planning and reporting structures of local government, both in relation to the State
Government and local communities. The framework requires that each council has a long term
Community Strategic Plan, a Resourcing Strategy and a Delivery Program for each elected council
term for each council jurisdiction in NSW. This legislation requires that local government are actively
involved ensuring local communities are consulted about new developments such as renewable
energy construction developments.
National Parks and Wildlife Act 1974 (NSW)
The Act is a broad piece of legislation that covers the reserving of lands, managing reserved lands,
the protection of Aboriginal objects and places, the protection of fauna and native vegetation. The
Act allows for the reservation of different types of land being: National parks; Historic sites; State
conservation areas; Regional parks; Karst conservation areas; Nature reserves; and Aboriginal areas.
The purpose of reserving land as a national park is to identify, protect and conserve areas containing
outstanding or representative ecosystems, natural or cultural features or landscapes or phenomena
that provide opportunities for public appreciation and inspiration and sustainable visitor or tourist
use and enjoyment. The Act also provides for the conservation of objects, places and features that

of 39
are of significance to Aboriginal people and for the protection of all Aboriginal objects and places in
NSW, whether they are on national park estate or not. The Act makes it an offence to harm or
desecrate an Aboriginal object or place. The NSW Office of Environment and Heritage (OEH) can
however issue an Aboriginal Heritage Impact Permit (AHIP) that provides a defence to offences
under the Act and allows the holder to harm an Aboriginal object or place in accordance with the
conditions of the AHIP.
Regulatory Analysis
The objective of the project development and implementation process is to complete the project on
schedule and within the allocated budget, with a PV power plant that operates efficiently and
reliably, and generates the expected volumes of energy and revenue. In order to achieve this
objective, a number of key activities need to be completed successfully. Permits and licensing is
often a very bureaucratic process involving multiple agencies in the federal, state and local
governments which may not coordinate their procedures and requirements. The list of
permits/agreements needed is usually very long and differs from country to country. Typically, at
least the following are needed: 1) Project site lease agreement; 2) Site access permit; 3) Building
permits; 4) Environmental permit; 5) Grid connection agreement; and 6) Operator/generation
license. Understanding the requirements and the local context is essential. Consultations with the
relevant authorities, the local community, and stakeholders are also important for a smoothe
approval process.
Environmental and social assessments should be performed early in the project planning process
and actions should be taken to mitigate potential adverse impacts. Outcomes of environmental and
social assessments, as well as stakeholder consultation, provide feedback into the design process
which is facilitated by the Submissions Process that is required to occur under the EP&A Act (1979)
(NSW). Sometimes this includes design changes, or developing measures to mitigate any significant
impacts. It is therefore important that these assessments are carried out in a timely manner that
allows for any potentially necessary design amendments. Furthermore, leading lending institutions
will require that the project adhere to rigorous environmental standards and principles, such as the
Equator Principles (EPs) and/or IFC Performance Standards (IFC) though in Australia these are not
explicitly used to assess new renewable energy projects against.
The preceding sections and Table 3 highlight the main pieces of legislation relevant to the
development of USSE developments in NSW and provided some commentary on the applicability of
these laws to renewable energy developments. These related to approval conditions which
attracted the most attention during the planning and approval process in terms of number of
specific consent conditions. Key observations on these items of legislation is that many of these
focus on short term impacts, which is more relevant to the construction and operation of new fossil

of 39
fuel electricity generation, and do not necessarily address and consider the long term impacts and
benefits of developments over a long time period, such as those afforded by construction of
renewable energy infrastructure. Other studies have shown that these perceived barriers can limit
the adoption and diffusion of large-scale USSE infrastructure (Tsoutsos, Frantzeskaki et al. 2005).
One example is the requirements for some of the Commonwealth laws to be reviewed regularly
which impacts on investment decisions such as the Renewable Energy (Electricity) Act (2000), and its
subordinate regulations, which regulates activities to achieve the RET in Australia.
Given the concerns regarding the impact of renewable energy developments on fauna, road safety,
visual impacts, the range of laws addressing these risks is noted. As described in the following
sections, the actual impact of solar PV plants, and in particular the development in the case study
described, had a negligible impact on fauna at the project site during construction, and no impacts
on road safety, or noise or visual impacts on the local community.
Many of the environmental and community consultation objectives of the case study project were
met not by black letter law alone but through self-regulatory approaches including the IAP2
(Anonymous 2015), ISO14001 (Guerin 2000), and the Australian safety standard, AS4801. For
example, no laws were identified that explicitly and directly regulated the community consultation
process, other than the Local Government Act (1993) which provides for local government
representation of community stakeholders, and Parts 4 and 5 of the EP&A Act (1979) (NSW) and the
specific consent conditions set out in the project’s approval documentation. These consent
conditions are summarised in Table 4 and the risk impacts of these are given in Table 5.
Environmental Impacts from Case Study
A high-level summary of the groupings of consent conditions for the case study project development
have been prepared from the 296 individual consent conditions in the approval documentation
(Table 4). These groupings included logistics impacts, fauna, biodiversity and flora management,
visual impact, fire, soil, water and dust management and waste management and resource use
impacts, and were all identified in the Project’s EIS as key impact areas.
A summary of the targets and actual environmental and community outcomes during construction
of the case study project is given in Table 6. A key finding is that these risks did not correlate with
the expected environmental and community risks that were ascertained when the consent
conditions were developed.
The following subsections briefly describe the key impact areas related to the environment and
community associated with the construction of the solar PV plant case study.
Transport and Logistics Impacts

of 39
The construction and operation of the solar plant did not have a significant or measurable impact on
traffic flows on this main road, given that there was an increase in traffic volumes from both light
and heavy vehicles during the 18 month construction period. A Traffic Management Plan was
developed as part of the CEMP and implemented with only minor non-conformances observed.
During the 18-month period of construction, approximately 600 road trains each loaded with 2 x 12
m shipping containers made deliveries to the project site delivering solar panels (modules) and
related construction materials.
Visual Impacts
A visual impact assessment examined the impact of the proposal when viewed from distances of up
to 16 km. The visual impact assessment consisted of 17 viewpoints. Perceived to be one of the major
risks to the project prior to construction works, this issue was re-evaluated as a low risk given the
lack of complaints and the unexpected requests for viewing platforms to be constructed after the
construction period. Key learnings from managing this risk were the importance of project
proponents keeping attuned to the needs, expectations and concerns of community members, and
not to assume the construction of renewable energy infrastructure will be perceived as negative.
Fauna Impacts
The pre-construction fauna surveys identified a total of 24 native bird, 2 native mammal, 3 exotic
mammal and 12 microbat species within the development area (which was wider than the current
study area). Two “threatened” bird species were identified which included the grey-crowned babbler
(GCB) listed as “vulnerable”, and Superb Parrot listed as ‘vulnerable’ under the Threatened Species
Act (TSC Act) and EPBC Act. Specifically, three GCB nests and up to 10 hollow bearing trees were
impacted by the proposal (6 on the solar plant site and 4 within the transmission line easement), as
well as approximately 10 ha of over-storey vegetation (5.7 ha of Poplar Box Woodland vegetation
within the solar plant and 4.2 ha within the transmission line easement) that could be used for
forage. A vegetation strip was left as a north – south corridor through the middle of the four blocks
of arrays as a key part of the project’s biodiversity offset management plan (Figure 2). This has and
will enable the movement of avifauna through the overall site.
Flora Impacts
Risks to surrounding agricultural lands through the spreading of weed species and introduction of
pest animals were largely managed through the implementations of the project’s weed
management plan. The development and implementation of the ground cover management plan,
within the CEMP, also ensured weed management measures were (and are) implemented to control
and prevent the spread of noxious weeds, and to provide a needed cover to reduce dust generation.
No threatened or vulnerable plant species were identified at the site. Key learnings from managing

of 39
this risk has been to ensure a high level of diligence during routine and initial inspection of vehicles
and plant entering project construction sites.
Soil Conditions and Dust Impacts
During the construction stage of the project, visible dust was observed present during many of the
weekly and monthly inspections. This was generated from vehicular traffic on roads and alleys, from
bare soil areas including road verges, as well as sources from offsite. It was noted that only on two
occasions was the site works stopped because of dust generation (onsite only) due to its high
intensity and inability to see clearly.
Another issue that has potential to impact USSE projects is dust deposition (Hernandez, Easter et al.
2014). Dust deposition can incur a negative impact to solar generation performance by decreasing
the amount of solar radiation absorbed by panels. In the current study there was no negligible
derating of power output as a result of dust deposition on the panels. Evidence for this was that the
control panels (12 panels on a single array), which were established at the western end of the array
blocks were cleaned routinely and provided a measure of the effect of dust on the panels. There was
no discernible loss of power generation (i.e. <1% loss) reported between rainfall events (the latter
which washed away any retained dust). Key learnings from managing this risk was that constructors
should be aware of the possibility of extremely high dust levels (particularly in dry, low rainfall
climates of <350-400 mm such as those at the case study site), and to prepare unpaved roads with a
suitable long-term dust suppressant before construction traffic reaches the project site. Planning for
sufficient water availability is also important as the case study project used up to 0.15-0.3 ML per
day for dust suppression.
Waste Management and Resource Use Impacts
The following end-of-life materials were generated during the construction stage of the project, as a
result of implementing the site’s CEMP. These were:
 Wooden pallets, cardboard boxes, plastic over wrap and plastic strapping.
 Various metal and plastic wastes from construction eg empty cable drums.
 Liquid sewage wastes are generated from the toilets (approximately 500 kL in total).
 General office waste was collected and disposed of locally via landfill.
 Concrete wastes (20 t) were generated from building foundations and fencing activities.
 An extensive litter minimisation and collection regime was in place ensuring the site has
been kept clean with respect to litter and extraneous, wind-blown wastes.
An extensive litter minimisation and collection regime was in place ensuring the site has been kept
clean with respect to litter and extraneous, wind-blown wastes. In relation to the end of life

of 39
packaging materials (EOLPMs), the project made available a small proportion (1000 units) of used
pallets, plastic and cardboard, offsite for re-use. One packaging unit consisted of a virgin (thermally
treated only) wooden pallet (36 kg), a cardboard box (22 kg) (stapled to the pallet) with ribbing
internally to protect the panels in transit, plastic overwrap (0.3 kg) and 4 m of plastic strapping. All
remaining wood and cardboard EOLPMs (approximately 27,000 packaging units), were shredded for
on-site incorporation into the soil as soil amendments. This work was completed at the end of the
construction stage. All plastics (approximately 30 t) were collected, baled and recycled offsite.
Logistics was a limiting factor in enabling further quantities of used packaging to be recycled or re-
used offsite, with transport costs too high and the value of resources insufficient to enable it to
occur commercially to a further extent.
Water Quality Impacts
Erosion sediment controls (ESCs) were put in place around the site using the prescribed standard
specified under the approval conditions (Anonymous 2004). No events have occurred on site where
there have been discharges of water runoff onto adjoining lands. The site is flat and water tends to
stay on site.
Noise Impacts
Due to the nature of the activities, plant and equipment on site during the construction stage, there
were not expected to be many sources of excessive noise or vibration. Post pounding, heavy and
light vehicular traffic, and portable diesel-powered generators and equipment, were the main noise-
generating items. Based on the monitoring record, less than 10 % of the times at which noise
monitoring was conducted, post-pounding was audible early in the construction stage (an interval of
3 months). However, these levels did not exceed the background of non-construction noises at the
designated receptor sites (1.5 km from the construction site).
Community Consultation, Complaints and Incident Management
The primary community consultation objective of the case study development was to deliver best
practice community engagement, throughout all stages of the development and construction of the
renewable energy plant, in accordance with the law and relevant industry standards. The framework
that governs how the developer of the case study project site engages with the community was
developed by the International Association for Public Participation (IAP2) and is not governed by any
laws currently in place in NSW other than the Local Government Act (1993) and consent conditions
set in the approvals for the case study construction project (established under the EP&A Act 1979).
No formal complaints from the community were received regarding the project though two
complaints were received regarding issues external to the construction project site. These were
related to employment issues and were managed and resolved immediately. Environmental

of 39
incidents were reported internally and of the three recorded none reached the reporting threshold
required by the government department responsible for issuing the consent and approval
conditions.
Other Impacts
During the construction stage of the case study project, an Heritage Management Plan and an
Aboriginal Heritage Plan were developed as part of the approval conditions and implemented.
During the pre-construction, construction, and early operations and maintenance stages, no heritage
issues were encountered such as siting or inadvertent excavation of heritage items. Table 5 presents
all of the impact areas that were measured during the construction stage.
A Role for Self-Regulation?
Self-regulation, including codes of practice and standards (Table 2), are developed by industry for
many diverse reasons, including as a means of showing social responsibility, and a desire by industry
to reclaim the agenda-setting of their industry from other stakeholders (Campbell 1988). The
development of EMS standards (ISO 14001 and EMAS) were an important step in the development
of modern environmental regulation (Altham and Guerin 1999).
Self-regulatory mechanisms, including the ISO 14000 series and community engagement processes,
accept the legislative regulations as a minimum standard that industry must achieve. Self-regulation
implies (to a large extent) no legal requirement to comply, though it is generally considered to be
effective when it operates within a range of regulatory mechanisms (Aalders 1993, Bomsel, Borkey
et al. 1996, Rehbinder 1997). Therefore some other type of incentive for organisations to adopt such
mechanisms is required. The major initial incentive for organisations to adopt self-regulation,
including ISO 14001, is provided by the market. That is, organisations adopting them will, it is
commonly claimed by advocates, be more efficient and competitive, gaining a marketing advantage
in the longer term.
With continuous additions and changes to regulations, it is often difficult to determine where any
particular regulator or regulation fits. One way of understanding the situation is through the
concept of a seamless web of regulation. A seamless web implies an integrated set of regulations,
regulators and incentives. Regulations involve a mix of traditional regulation (black letter law),
market mechanisms, co-regulation and self-regulation. Regulators in this context include federal,
state and local government regulators, NGO’s, peers, other companies along the supply chain,
service providers, investors, standard setting organisations, local communities and consumers.
Incentives for improved environmental performance range from lower costs to increased market
share and long term resource access, with sanctions ranging across incarceration of directors, license
withdrawal, fines, falling profits (or surpluses), loss of market share, falling investor confidence,

of 39
impacts on reputation, social licence to operate and ultimately loss of resource access (Altham and
Guerin 1999).
The literature suggests that greater use of multi-sectoral stakeholder forums for the governance of
complex environmental and community impacts can bolster the legitimacy of both the industry and
its regulatory regime, including those aspects handled through self-regulation (Boutilier and Black
2013). Where there are combinations of government regulation, industry self-regulation, and
regulation by multi-sectoral networks of stakeholders, self-regulation tends to be most effective,
which has been demonstrated in an Eastern Australian context (Boutilier and Black 2013).
Penalising companies in emerging business sectors by enforcing black letter law more appropriate
for previous generations (of an industry) is not a viable situation. Self-regulation, on the other hand,
when demonstrated as effective, and that can be relied upon, can assist a new industry such as
renewable (or clean) energy, to establish itself without incurring the unnecessary burden of over-
regulation.
CONCLUSIONS
Impacts from the case study development were primarily short term in nature including dust,
obtaining a balance between weeds and bare ground, fauna impacts, transportation and logistics
relating to getting materials to the site, managing the potential for fire and managing the EOLPMs.
Interestingly noise and visual impacts were not found to be issues at the case study site even though
the planning stages clearly identified these as high risk areas for the project’s development. The
community consultation and related processes including complaints and incident management,
were effective under the regime used in the case study. Overall there were high levels of regulation
on the case study project though the actual impacts were relatively low.
In the case study, 296 consent conditions were placed on the construction of the USSE Solar PV
development, the majority of these relating to infrastructure and camp issues, environmental
controls during construction, and community consultation. This is relatively high particularly as LNG
plant developments, generating orders of magnitude more energy, were regulated by approximately
550 consent conditions in Western Australia (Guerin 2012). Other solar PV sites also have a similar
number and types of consent conditions to the current case study project (Anonymous 2016). Figure
3 illustrates these differences showing a proposed shift in regulatory intensity.
The regulatory analysis identified several items of legislation that apply to renewable energy
developments in NSW. While regulatory controls for any industry is important, the author makes
the point here that the setting of a project as a State Significant Development (because of its capital
investment requirement of $AUD 30 million or greater) does not necessarily mean that the same
intensity of controls should be placed upon renewable energy developments as a new fossil fuel

of 39
electricity generating plant. The author recommends that (1) the renewable energy sector seek
more favourable approval conditions such as pre-approval for selected potential impact areas, to
reduce the regulatory burden on the sector and to encourage the adoption of further self-
regulation; and (2) that Australian governments at all levels, including the NSW State Government,
actively engage with the renewable energy sector to reduce the regulatory burden experienced in
renewable energy infrastructure development.
While only part of the overall challenge and constraint to the adoption of clean energy technology in
Australia, the environmental and community regulatory burden is nevertheless an area that can be
improved to assist in the uptake of renewable energy and investment in the sector.
REFERENCES
Aalders, M. (1993). "Regulation and In-Company Environmental Management in the Netherlands."
Law & Policy 15(2): 75-94.
Altham, W. J. and T. F. Guerin (1999). "Environmental self-regulation and sustainable economic
growth : The seamless web framework." Eco-Management and Audit - Journal of Corporate
Environmental Management 6(2): 61-75.
Altham, W. J. and T. F. Guerin (1999). "Where does ISO 14001 fit into the environmental regulatory
framework?" Australian Journal of Environmental Management 6(2): 86-98.
Anonymous. (2004). "Managing urban stormwater: soils and construction." 4th. from
http://www.environment.nsw.gov.au/stormwater/publications.htm.
Anonymous (2007). IFC Environmental, Health, and Safety General Guidelines. New York, NY, World
Bank Group: 99.
Anonymous (2011). State Environmental Planning Policy (State and Regional Development) 2011. N.
Government. Sydney, NSW, NSW Government: 30.
Anonymous (2013). The Equator Principles. London, UK, The Equator Principles Association: 24.
Anonymous. (2015). "Quality Assurance Standard in Community and Stakeholder Engagement." from
https://www.iap2.org.au/documents/item/391.
Anonymous. (2016). "Australian Renewable Energy Agency (ARENA)." Retrieved 7 October 2016,
2016, from http://arena.gov.au.
Anonymous. (2016). "NSW Planning ", from http://www.planning.nsw.gov.au/.
Bomsel, O., P. Borkey, M. Glachant and F. Leveque (1996). "Is There Room for Environmental Self
Regulation in the Mining Sector?" Resources Policy 22(1-2): 79-86.
Boutilier, R. G. and L. Black (2013). "Legitimizing industry and multi-sectoral regulation of cumulative
impacts: A comparison of mining and energy development in Athabasca, Canada and the Hunter
Valley, Australia." Resources Policy 38(4): 696-703.
Campbell, J. L. (1988). Business Associations and Industrial Self-Regulation: When Do Corporations
Organize Collectively?
Guerin, T. F. (2000). "Corporate environmental management - A new paradigm emerges."
Agricultural Science 13(4): 32-35.
Guerin, T. F. (2009). Improving Environmental Performance in the Minerals Supply Chain Using a
Life-Cycle Approach: The Role of Fuel and Lubricant Suppliers in Enabling Sustainable Development.
Mining, Society, and a Sustainable World. J. P. Richards. Berlin, Heidelberg, Springer-Verlag: 205-250.
Guerin, T. F. (2012). "Best Practise Matters." Ethical Investor April(99): 21.
Gunningham, N. (1995). "Environment, Self-Regulation, and the Chemical Industry: Assessing
Responsible Care." Law & Policy 17(1): 57-109.
Hernandez, R. R., S. B. Easter, M. L. Murphy-Mariscal, F. T. Maestre, M. Tavassoli, E. B. Allen, C. W.
Barrows, J. Belnap, R. Ochoa-Hueso, S. Ravi and M. F. Allen (2014). "Environmental impacts of utility-
scale solar energy." Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 29: 766-779.

of 39
Lyster, R., Z. Lipman, N. Franklin and L. Pearson (2012). Environmental and Planning Law in New
South Wales. Sydney, New South Wales, The Federation Press.
Neale, A. (1997). "Organising Environmental Self-Regulation: Liberal Governmentality and the
Pursuit of Ecological Modernisation in Europe." Environ Politics 6(4): 1.
Pears, A. (2016). Pears Report Collection: Reflections on two decades of energy and climate policy
Melbourne, The Alternative Technology Association (ATA) 188.
Rehbinder, E. (1997). "Environmental Agreements-a New Instrument of Environmental Policy."
Environ Policy Law Aug 27(4): 258.
Steinzor, R. I. (1998). "Reinventing Environmental Regulation: The Dangerous Journey from
Command to Self-Control." Harv Environ Law Rev 22(1): 103.
Tsoutsos, T., N. Frantzeskaki and V. Gekas (2005). "Environmental impacts from the solar energy
technologies." Energy Policy 33(3): 289-296.

of 39
(a) The case study site location is a former rural landholding 10 km west of local township
(north facing orientation). Note site is middle LHS with boundary marked.
(b) An ariel view of the case study site prior to installation of tables and solar panels (top left
hand corner of image is due south and bottom right hand corner is due north).
Figure 1. Location of the solar PV construction site relative to local township and neighbouring
properties

of 39
Figure 2. An outline of the construction of solar PV projects. Note: PCS = power conditioning system; PVCS = Photovoltaic
Combining Switchgear

of 39
Table 1. Environment & Community Subplans Applied During the Construction of the
Case Study USSE Power station
Subplan Names
Erosion and Sediment Control Plans
Soil and Water Management Plan
Flora and Fauna Management Plan
Landscape and Visual Impact Management Plan
Rehabilitation and Revegetation Management Plan
Ground Cover Management Plan
Weed Management Plan
Aboriginal Heritage Management Plan
Historical Heritage Management Plan
Construction Noise Management Plan
Bush Fire Management Plan
Air Quality Management Plan
Traffic Management Plan
Waste Management Plan
Dangerous Goods and Spill Response Plan
Community Consultation Plan
Complaints Management Plan
Incident Management Plan
Aboriginal Heritage Plan
Historical Heritage Plan
Note:
1. These subplans formed the Construction Environmental Management Plan (CEMP).

of 39
Table 2. Examples of Self-regulatory Approaches that Contribute to Management of Environmental
and Community Risks
Area Mechanism
Community1
IAP2 Standard; AS 8000; Industry Guidelines
Environmental ISO 14000 based environmental management
systems
Waste & Resource management Global take back system (for disused PV
modules)
Supply Chain Risks Contractor and Vendor Management Systems
and engagement processes2
HSE and Community Reporting GRI, sustainability and corporate citizenship
reporting
HSE Inspections Corporate safety and environmental
management systems (based on AS4801)
Notes:
1. These also include industry guidelines such as the NSW Minerals Industry Exploration Handbook
Leading practice for NSW explorers 2013 Edition, the Australian Federal Government’s Leading
Practice Sustainable Development Program for the Mining Industry, and Community Engagement
Guidelines For the Australian Wind Industry
2. Voluntary methods for engagement with stakeholders including suppliers are previously described
(Guerin 2009)

of 39
Table 3. An Overview of all the Applicable Laws relevant to Utility Scale Solar Construction Sites
Impact Area Legislation/
Jurisdiction
Details Application to USSE Sites Applicable Stage
of Development
Renewable
Energy
Generation,
climate,
carbon
emissions
reduction
Clean Energy Act
2011 (repealed
2014)
(Commonwealth,
abbr. Clth)
This Act set up a mechanism to deal with climate change by encouraging the use of clean energy. The
carbon pricing mechanism began on 1 July 2012, and the mechanism is administered by the Clean Energy
Regulator. This mechanism covered approximately 60 per cent of Australia's carbon emissions including
from electricity generation, stationary energy, landfills, wastewater, industrial processes and fugitive
emissions. The carbon pricing mechanism covered a range of large business and industrial facilities. It did
not, however, directly cover the vast majority of Australian businesses, including smaller businesses, or
households. For each financial year, liable entities were required to surrender one eligible emissions unit
for every tonne of carbon dioxide equivalent (CO2-e)—that they produced. In 2012–13, carbon units could
be purchased from the Clean Energy Regulator for a fixed price of $23 per unit, and in 2013–14 carbon
units could be purchased for $24.15 per unit. If a liable entity did not surrender any or enough units, it
incurred a 'unit shortfall charge'. From 2012 to 2014, this charge was set at 130 per cent of the fixed price
for the relevant financial year multiplied by the number of units in the shortfall. The unit shortfall charge
created an incentive to surrender units under the mechanism rather than pay the higher unit shortfall
charge. The carbon pricing mechanism included systems for assessing liability for emissions, issuing free
units to energy intensive trade exposed industries, meeting liability for emissions through payment and
surrender processes for eligible emissions units, and relinquishing units.
Enabling competitive advantage of
investment in low carbon energy
sources over fossil fuel generation
Approvals
Renewable Energy
(Electricity) Act
2000 (Clth) (Act)
The Act set a target for renewable energy generation from eligible renewable energy power stations in
Australia. The target is 33,000GWh by 2020 and to be maintained at this level until 2030.
During 2009 and 2010, strong demand for small-scale renewable technologies, including solar hot water
and residential solar PV, meant that an increasingly large number of RECs were entering the market from
small-scale technologies. This led to market volatility and depressing of REC prices, which caused
investment uncertainties and delays for large-scale renewable energy projects. In June 2010, Federal
Parliament passed legislation to split the RET into the Large-Scale Renewable Energy Target (LRET) with
Large-Scale Generation Certificates (LGCs) and the Small-Scale Renewable Energy Scheme (SRES) with
Small-Scale Technology Certificates (STCs). The LRET covers large scale renewable energy projects including
wind farms, utility scale solar PV and solar thermal, hydro and geothermal, whereas the SRES covers small-
scale technologies such as residential rooftop solar PV and solar hot water systems. The reforms are aimed
to allow the market to set a LRET price to provide incentives for large-scale renewables. As the increasing
obligation of liable entities to purchase LRECs to 2020 increases demand, LREC prices are expected to
increase, supporting the investment and expansion of large-scale renewable energy generation. The RET
scheme has been designed such that the majority of the RET will be delivered by large-scale renewable
energy projects. The LRET includes legislative annual targets, starting at 10,000GWh in 2011 and increasing
to 33,000GWh in 2020 and remaining at that level until 2030. Under the LRET, accredited renewable
energy power stations are entitled to create one LGC for each MWh of electricity generated which can then
be sold and transferred to liable entities using the REC Registry. Power stations using at least one of the
more than 15 types of “eligible renewable energy sources” can become accredited.
Under the SRES, owners of small-scale technology will receive one STC for each MWh generated by the
Enabling competitive advantage of
investment in low carbon energy
sources over fossil fuels
Approvals

of 39
Jurisdiction
of Development
small-scale system or displaced by the installation of a solar hot water heater or heat pump. In contrast to
LGCs, STCs are available upfront on the installation of the system rather on an ‘as generated’ basis. The
SRES is an uncapped scheme in that its annual targets are set based on the number of SRECs expected to
be created in that year.
Liable entities are required to purchase an amount of both LGCs and STCs and surrender them on an
annual basis (for LGCs) and a quarterly basis (for STCs). Liable entitles may purchase LGCs directly from
renewable energy power stations or from agents dealing in LGCs. The market price of LGCs is dependent on
supply and demand and has varied between $10 and $60. Thirteen liable entities may purchase STCs
through an agent who deals with STCs or through the STC clearing house. There is a government-
guaranteed price of $40 for all STCs sold through the clearing house, but no price is set for STCs sold in the
market. If a liable entity does not meet its obligations under the Act, it must pay a “shortfall charge”,
currently set at $65 per LGC or STC not surrendered (in 2016).
Planning Environmental
Planning and
Assessment (EP&A)
Act 1979
(NSW)
Prior to any development taking place in New South Wales a formal assessment needs to be made of the
proposed work to ensure it complies with relevant planning controls and, according to its nature and scale,
confirm that it is environmentally and socially sustainable. State, regional and local planning legislation
indicates the level of assessment required, and outlines who is responsible for assessing the development,
be it the local council, an accredited private professional or the Minister for Planning. The development
assessment system outlined in Parts 4 and 5 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979
allows for members of the public to participate in the decision making process that will determine the
future of the community. Part 5 of the Act institutes a system of environmental assessment for matters
not covered by Parts 3 and 4. Part 5 includes but is not limited to the following: a public authority carrying
out or consenting to activity of certain types is required to examine fully and take into consideration all
matters likely to affect the environment by reason of such activity (s111); and a determining authority
cannot carry out an activity or grant an approval that is likely to significantly affect the environment etc
unless it has obtained and examined an Environment Impact Study (EIS) in relation to the activity (s112).
Investments of ≥$30m (AUD)
trigger state significant
developments which requires a
highly regulated process, applicable
to both electricity generation from
fossil fuel developments or those in
renewable energy
Approvals,
Construction,
Operations and
Decommissioning
Flora and
Fauna
Environment
Protection and
Biodiversity
Conservation Act
1999 (EPBC Act)
(Cth)
Under the EPBC Act, if the relevant Minister determines that an action is a ‘controlled action’ which will
have or is likely to have a significant impact on a matter of national environmental
significance (NES) or Commonwealth land, then the action may not be undertaken
without prior approval of the Minister. The EPBC Act identifies seven matters of NES, of potential
relevance to the project and the relevant ones for renewable energy projects are the threatened species
and ecological communities. When a person proposes to take an action that they
believe may be a ‘controlled action’ under the EPBC Act, they must refer the proposal to the relevant
commonwealth department for a decision about whether the proposed action is a ‘controlled action’.
Potentially impacted communities
of flora and fauna must be
assessed for significance. This will
be the case for any type of large
scale development including USSE
projects
Approvals,
Construction,
Operations and
Decommissioning
Aboriginal
Heritage
Native Title Act 1993
(Cth)
This Act provides a legislative framework for the recognition and protection of common law native title
rights. Further details are provided in the body of the text. The Australian legal system recognises native
title where: the rights and interests are possessed under traditional laws and customs that continue to be
acknowledged and observed by the relevant Indigenous Australians, by virtue of those laws and customs,
the relevant Indigenous Australians have a connection with the land or waters, and the native title rights
and interests are recognised by the common law of Australia. The Native Title Act sets up processes to
determine where native title exists, how future activity impacting upon native title may be undertaken, and
All projects will be assessed against
this. This will be the case for any
type of large scale development
including USSE projects
Approvals,
Construction,
Operations

of 39
Jurisdiction
of Development
to provide compensation where native title is impaired or extinguished. The Act gives Indigenous
Australians who hold native title rights and interests—or who have made a native title claim—the right to
be consulted and, in some cases, to participate in decisions about activities proposed to be undertaken on
the land. Indigenous Australians have been able to negotiate benefits for their communities, including in
relation to employment opportunities and heritage protection.
The Act also establishes a framework for the recognition and operation of representative bodies that
provide services to native title claimants and native title holders. The Australian Government provides
significant funding to resolve native title issues in accordance with the Act, including to native title
representative bodies, the National Native Title Tribunal and the Federal Court.
Water Water Act 1912;
Water Management
Act 2000 (NSW)
In those water sources (rivers, lakes and groundwater aquifers) in NSW where water sharing plans have not
commenced, the Water Act 1912 governs the issue of new water licences and the trade of water licences
and allocations. Developments must have a water licence or authority to:
 Take water from a stream or river via a pump or other work for all purposes other than for basic
landholder rights.
 Capture surface water from rainfall runoff in a farm dam with a storage capacity greater than the
calculated Maximum Harvestable Right Dam Capacity for the property from river flow in a dam
(any size) located on a river or stream.
 Extract groundwater via any type of bore, well, spearpoint or groundwater interception scheme
for all purposes except to take water from an aquifer under a basic landholder right.
From 28 February 2011, all landholders across NSW wanting to construct a water bore to take water for
domestic consumption or stock watering under a domestic and stock right are required to obtain a water
supply work approval under the Water Management Act 2000. A Water Act licence covers both the right to
take a specific volume of water as well as the works to be constructed.
Water usage can be up to 250-350
ML per day during peak
construction of USSE projects
(depending on size), therefore a
licence will be required.
Approvals,
Construction,
Operations
Dust, water
pollution
Protection of the
Environment and
Operations Act 1997
(NSW)
The POEO Act enables the Government to set out explicit protection of the environment policies (PEPs) and
adopt more innovative approaches to reducing pollution. PEPs are instruments for setting environmental
standards, goals, protocols and guidelines. They provide both the framework for Government decisions
that affect the environment and the means of adopting Australia-wide environment protection measures
set by the National Environment Protection Council. Before a PEP can be made, the POEO Act requires
public consultation on the draft PEP, and an analysis of the economic and social impact of the PEP. The
POEO Act provides a single licensing arrangement to replace the different licences and approvals under
existing separate Acts relating to air pollution, water pollution, noise pollution and waste management. See
Licensing for more detailed information about environment protection licensing under the POEO Act. The
EPA is the appropriate regulatory authority for the activities specified in Schedule 1 of the POEO Act
(scheduled activities). In most cases, local councils are the regulatory authorities for non-scheduled
activities, except activities undertaken by a public authority which the EPA will regulate or where a public
authority has been declared the appropriate regulatory authority. The EPA licenses scheduled activities. In
general, local councils can regulate non-scheduled activities through notice and enforcement powers in
their local government area. However, the EPA can issue a licence to regulate water pollution from a non-
scheduled activity. If it does, the EPA becomes the regulator for all environmental impacts from the activity
under the POEO Act instead of the local council.
This regulates the offsite
movement of dust or water-laden
contaminants including sediment.
Applicable to all construction sites
including USSE projects.
Construction,
Operations

of 39
Jurisdiction
of Development
Flora and
Fauna
The Threatened
Species Conservation
Act (TSCA) 1995
(NSW)
This is a NSW state-based piece of legislation to provide for the conservation of threatened species,
populations and ecological communities of animals and plants. The Act sets out a number of specific
objects relating to the conservation of biological diversity and the promotion of ecologically sustainable
development. The Act sets up a Scientific Committee, whose functions include identifying and classifying
(as “endangered”, “critically endangered” or “vulnerable”) the species, populations and ecological
communities with which it is concerned, and identifying key threatening processes that may threaten the
survival of those species, populations and ecological communities. Identified species, populations,
ecological communities and key threatening processes are listed in the Schedules to the Act. Provision is
made for the preparation of recovery plans for listed threatened species, populations and ecological
communities and threat abatement plans to manage key threatening processes.
Potentially impacted communities
of flora and fauna must be
assessed for significance. This will
be the case for any type of large
scale development including USSE
projects
Approvals,
Construction,
Operations
Heritage NSW Heritage Act
1977 (NSW)
This Act makes provisions to conserve the State’s environmental heritage. It provides for the identification
and registration of items of State heritage significance, provides for the interim protection of items of State
heritage significance, constitutes the Heritage Council of New South Wales and confers on it functions
relating to the State's heritage.
Applies to all construction projects Approvals,
construction
Flora, fauna,
heritage
National Parks and
Wildlife Act 1974
(NSW)
The Act is a broad piece of legislation that covers a number of different areas including reserving lands,
managing certain reserved lands, the protection of Aboriginal objects and places, the protection of fauna
and the protection of native vegetation. The Chief Executive of the Office of Environment & Heritage (OEH)
has responsibility for the care, control and management of all national parks and historic sites, unless there
is a board of management for the park or site and is responsible for ensuring that all reserved lands are
covered by a Plan of Management.
Applies to all construction projects Approvals,
construction,
Operations
Local
Government
Local Government
Act 1993 (NSW)
The Act principally deals with the governance of councils in New South Wales. The purposes of this Act are
as follows:
(a) to provide the legal framework for an effective, efficient, environmentally responsible and open system
of local government in New South Wales,
(b) to regulate the relationships between the people and bodies comprising the system of local
government in New South Wales,
(c) to encourage and assist the effective participation of local communities in the affairs of local
government,
(d) to give councils: (i) the ability to provide goods, services and facilities, and to carry out activities,
appropriate to the current and future needs of local communities and of the wider public; (ii) the
responsibility for administering some regulatory systems under this Act; (iii) a role in the management,
improvement and development of the resources of their areas, and (iv) to require councils, councillors and
council employees to have regard to the principles of ecologically sustainable development in carrying out
their responsibilities.
The Act states that ecologically sustainable development requires the effective integration of economic and
environmental considerations in planning (s402). A Council’s charter should include: (i) to properly manage,
develop, protect, restore, enhance and conserve the environment of the area for which it is responsible, in
a manner that is consistent with and promotes the principles of ecologically sustainable development; (ii)
to have regard to the long term and cumulative effects of its decisions; (iii) to engage in long-term strategic
While local government can place
restrictions on USSE developments,
they can also enable such projects
to progress smoothly by directly
supporting these projects,
engendering community support.
Approvals,
Construction,
Operations

of 39
Jurisdiction
of Development
planning on behalf of the local community; (iv) to exercise its functions in a manner that is consistent with
and promotes social justice principles of equity, access, participation and rights.
Supply Chain Extended Producer
Responsibility (EPR)
Priority Statement
(under the WWRA
2001 Act) (NSW)
EPR policy was introduced in NSW in 2001 through the Waste Avoidance and Resource Recovery Act 2001
(WARR Act). New South Wales was the first state or territory to establish extended producer responsibility
policy. Section 15 of the WWRA Act defines an EPR scheme as one in which “producers” responsibilities for
their products (physical or financial) are extended to the post-consumer stage of the products’ life cycle”.
‘EPR schemes’ also refer to schemes that may be labelled as ‘product stewardship’ schemes.
Applicable to USSE projects which
can generate large volumes of
packaging and electronic wastes.
Construction,
Operations,
Decommissioning
Weed, pest
control
Agricultural and
Veterinary Chemicals
(NSW) Act 1994;
Agricultural and
Veterinary Chemicals
(NSW) Regulation
2010 (NSW)
An Act to apply certain laws of the Commonwealth relating to agricultural and veterinary chemical
products as laws of New South Wales. Key aspects of this law is that the protection of the health and safety
of human beings, animals and the environment is essential to the well-being of society and can be
enhanced by putting in place a system to regulate agricultural and veterinary chemical products, and that
the principle of ecologically sustainable development requires a regulatory system that is designed to
ensure that the use of such products today will not impair the prospects of future generations to meet
their needs.
Applies to USSE projects as weed
control is required during and post-
construction
Approvals,
Construction,
Operations
Pest control Pesticide Act 1999
(NSW)
The Pesticides Act 1999 controls the use of pesticides in New South Wales. The Act aims to reduce the risks
associated with the use of pesticides to human health, the environment, property, industry and trade. It
also aims to promote collaborative and integrated policies for the use of pesticides. Pesticides must be
registered by the Australian Pesticides and Veterinary Medicines Authority (APVMA) before they can be
manufactured, supplied, sold or used. Registered pesticides carry an APVMA-approved label that provides
users with instructions that are designed to minimise impacts on health, the environment and trade, and
which are based on good agricultural practice. The Environment Protection Authority (EPA) enforces the
proper use of all pesticides in NSW, after the point of sale. This includes pesticide use in agriculture, on
public lands and on domestic and commercial premises. The EPA encourages pesticide users to improve
their management of pesticides through education programs and by facilitating communication among
different stakeholder groups.
control is required during and post
construction
Approvals,
Construction,
Operations
Health &
Safety
WHS Act 2011, WHS
Regulations 2012
(NSW)
The Work Health and Safety (WHS) Act and the Work Health and Safety (WHS) Regulations came into effect
on 1 January 2012. In addition to the WHS laws, there are also model Codes of Practice which provide
support and guidance on different issues in work health and safety. The Model Work Health and Safety Act
can be viewed on the Safe Work Australia website. These include the following which are relevant to the
construction and operation of renewable energy projects: How to Manage Work Health and Safety Risks;
Hazardous Manual Tasks; Managing the Risk of Falls at Workplaces; Labelling of Workplace Hazardous
Chemicals; Preparation of Safety Data Sheets for Hazardous Chemicals; Confined Spaces; Managing Noise
and Preventing Hearing Loss at Work; Managing the Work Environment and Facilities; Work Health and
Safety Consultation Cooperation and Coordination.
Applicable to the WHS aspects of
USSE projects, and any
construction project, as well as
environmental related issues such
as dangerous goods storage and
hazardous materials management.
Construction,
Operations
Roads Roads Act 1993
(NSW)
The Roads Act provides for the classification of roads and for the declaration of the Roads and Maritime
Services (RMS) and other public authorities as roads authorities for both classified and unclassified roads in
NSW. It also regulates the carrying out of various activities, on and over public roads.
USSE projects require extensive
transport of materials to project
construction sites
Approvals,
Construction,
Operations
Aboriginal
heritage; Land
National Parks and
Wildlife Act 1974
The Act is a broad piece of legislation that covers a number of different areas including reserving lands,
managing certain reserved lands, the protection of Aboriginal objects and places, the protection of fauna
USSE projects require access to Approvals,
Construction,

of 39
Jurisdiction
of Development
access;
Reserving of
land;
Protection of
fauna and flora
(NSW) and the protection of native vegetation. The Act allows for the reservation of different types of land. Under
the Act it is an offence to harm protected fauna and flora. Protected fauna includes all fauna other than
locally unprotected fauna, interstate threatened species, endangered populations, or endangered
ecological communities. Unprotected fauna and threatened interstate fauna are specified in schedules to
the Act. It is an offence to pick or possess a protected native plant and it is also an offence to sell a
protected native plant. A protected native plant is a plant listed in a schedule to the Act. The Act allows for
the issuing of licences to authorise a number of different activities relating to native plants. Under the Act it
is an offence to harm or pick a threatened species, endangered population or endangered ecological
community. The Act regulates the entering into of leases and licences over reserved lands, including any
new or existing buildings or structures. Before granting a lease or licence, the Minister must be satisfied of
certain matters set out in the Act, and includes: the compatibility of the proposal with natural and cultural
values; the sustainable and efficient use of natural resources, and energy and water. In addition,
easements, rights of way and licences can be granted for public infrastructure purposes such as pipelines,
electricity transmission and telecommunications.
land Operations
Dangerous
Goods
Dangerous Goods
(Road and Rail
Transport) Act 2008
This Act commenced on 1 May 2009 and appoints the EPA and SafeWork NSW (formerly WorkCover) as
competent authorities to administer the legislation. The EPA regulates the on-road transport of dangerous
goods while SafeWork NSW regulates activities prior to transport, including correct classification, packaging
and labelling. The transport of dangerous goods by rail is regulated by the Independent Transport Safety
Regulator on behalf of the EPA.
Applicable to the WHS aspects of
USSE projects, and any
construction project, as well as
environmental related issues such
as dangerous goods storage and
hazardous materials management.
Approvals,
Construction,
Operations
Pests and
weeds and
their control
Biosecurity Act 2015 The Biosecurity Act 2015 (the Biosecurity Act), was assented to in September 2015 and is expected to come
into effect in 2017. n 2013, the NSW Government released the NSW Biosecurity Strategy 2013 – 2021, that
is based on the principle that biosecurity is a shared responsibility between governments, industries and
individuals. The Strategy outlines how government, industry and the community need to work together to
identify, prevent, eradicate, minimise, respond to and manage biosecurity risks. The Biosecurity Act
complements that principle, and provides for a range of tools and powers that can be used to support risk
based management and allow for increasing efficiency and decreasing regulation. Unlike the current
situation where something needs to be listed before response action can be initiated, the Biosecurity Act
allows for a response to be mounted regardless of whether we know what the actual biosecurity matter is.
The broad objectives for biosecurity in NSW are to manage biosecurity risks from animal and plant pests
and diseases, weeds and contaminants by: preventing their entry into NSW; quickly finding, containing and
eradicating any new entries; and effectively minimising the impacts of those pests, diseases, weeds and
contaminants that cannot be eradicated through robust management arrangements.
control is required during and post-
construction
Approvals,
Construction,
Operations

of 39
Table 4. Planning and Approvals (Consent Conditions) on the Case Study Construction Project and Their
Ownership
General Approval
Conditions
Specific Groupings of Approval Conditions No. Conditions
General
Administrative
conditions
Obligation to minimise harm to environment; Staging of project; Structural
adequacy (of buildings); Compliance awareness (of staff, contractors,
visitors); Dispute resolution
19
Environmental
Performance
Health, safety and facility (infrastructure) placement issues; Camp
management issues (i.e. offsite)1
32
Fire and bushfire management 2
Dangerous goods, chemical and spill management 3
Dust and air quality2
1
Water quality 2
Soil and water management3
9
Waste management & resource use 11
Utilities including powerline installation 1
Flora management including groundcover and weed management5
2
Fauna management including snake capture and relocation 1
Visual amenity protection (tree planting) 8
Noise management including controls 20
Traffic and transport management eg onsite vehicle speeds, loading routes
for logistics, modification to site entry4
42
Aboriginal and European heritage management 9
Perimeter fencing including bird strike prevention 1
Environmental
management
and reporting
Environmental Representative (statutory role on state significant
developments in planning jurisdiction)
7
Construction environmental management plan (CEMP) 36

of 39
General Approval
Conditions
Specific Groupings of Approval Conditions No. Conditions
Operational environmental management plan (OEMP) 15
Biodiversity Offset Management Plan (BOMP) 35
Traffic management plan for offsite roads 12
Incident reporting 1
Regular reporting (including project updates, community consultation
reports)
1
Community Consultation
11
Complaints6
10
Compliance tracking6
6
Cumulative effects
1
Notes:
1. Camp management: A camp located in the nearest township provided housing 10 km away from construction site in local community. Housed
up to 250 personnel during peak construction. Health and safety was in relation to the camp setting and environment.
2. Dust: Compliance to approval conditions required daily carting of water from source to work front. There were two events where the dust
levels were so high on site, works had to be shut down resulting in downtime and costs for the EPC. The soil type was a red clay loam. Actual
tests undertaken on soil from the site revealed that the fine fraction of <1 mm represented 44% of the soil fraction, revealing a high
susceptibility to wind-blown dust generation. The broader issue of air quality i.e. vehicle emissions, was considered and evaluated as a “low”
risk. The “very high” ranking for non-conformances was due to the dust interfering with workers on the work front.
3. Soil and water management: Though there were no significant risks in meeting the compliance requirements for soil management,
compliance to water management was extensive, requiring the purchasing and recording of all water usage and of water transport from local
licence holder. Earthworks valuing $250,000 were undertaken even though the actual flood risks were relatively low and equivalent to 1:100
to 1:200 year flood risk. Erosion and sediment control was expected to be an important risk at the site however this was not found to be the
case during construction.
4. Traffic and transport: The majority of the costs (approximately $240K) were associated with making the entrance to the site safe with respect
to main road traffic interactions. The relatively high non conformances were primarily due excessive speed of vehicles travelling on the site.
5. Flora: The majority of costs were those associated with application of knock-down herbicide, slashing and mowing of grass within the
construction footprint (under and immediately around the Solar PV arrays). These costs will vary according to climate and soil type. Spreading
of weeds was not identified as an issue until 12 months into the construction stage.
6. Observed non-conformances: It is noted that non-conformances are self-reported as observed during daily, weekly and monthly inspection
and hazard reports from site personnel. Low = <10 reports; M= 10-100 reports; H= 100-200 reports; VH = >200 reports.

of 39
Table 5. Observed Versus Expected Planning and Approvals Risks
General Approval
Conditions
Specific Groupings of Approval Conditions No.
Conditions
Owner vs EPC
Responsible
Risk Profile2
Cost
Estimate1
Expected
Risk (HAZID
Process)
Observed
Risk9
Complexity of
Integration
of controls
Observed
Non-
conformances8
General
Administrative
conditions
Obligation to minimise harm to
environment; Staging of project; Structural
adequacy (of buildings); Compliance
awareness (of staff, contractors, visitors);
Dispute resolution
19 Owner 40 L M-H M-H L
Environmental
Performance
Health, safety and facility (infrastructure)
placement issues; Camp management3
issues (i.e. offsite)
32 EPC 50 M-L H H H
Fire and bushfire management 2 EPC 20 M VH L-M H
Dangerous goods, chemical and spill
management
3 EPC 5 M M-L L M
Dust and air quality4
1 EPC 200 H VH VH VH
Water quality 2 EPC 150 M VL VL VL
Soil and water management5
9 EPC 250 M H H H

of 39
General Approval
Conditions
Conditions
Owner vs EPC
Responsible
Risk Profile2
Cost
Estimate1
Expected
Risk (HAZID
Process)
Observed
Risk9
Complexity of
Integration
of controls
Observed
Non-
conformances8
Waste management & resource use 11 EPC 600 L VH H-VH VH
Utilities including powerline installation 1 Owner 5 M M L L
Flora management including groundcover
and weed management7
2 EPC 120 M VH H VH
Fauna management including snake
capture and relocation
1 EPC 30 M VH M-H M
Visual amenity protection (tree planting) 8 Owner 150 L VL VL VL
Noise management including controls 20 EPC 10 M-H L M M-L
Traffic and transport management eg
onsite vehicle speeds, loading routes for
logistics, modification to site entry6
42 EPC 250 M M-H H H
Aboriginal and European heritage
management
9 EPC 25 M VL VL L
Perimeter fencing including bird strike 1 EPC 20 M L L L

of 39
General Approval
Conditions
Conditions
Owner vs EPC
Responsible
Risk Profile2
Cost
Estimate1
Expected
Risk (HAZID
Process)
Observed
Risk9
Complexity of
Integration
of controls
Observed
Non-
conformances8
prevention
Environmental
management
and reporting
Environmental Representative (statutory
role on state significant developments in
planning jurisdiction)
7 EPC/Owner 40 H H L L
Construction environmental management
plan (CEMP)
36 EPC/Owner 200 M H M L
Operational environmental management
plan (OEMP)
15 EPC 60 H H H L
Biodiversity Offset Management Plan
(BOMP)
35 Owner/EPC 60 M L M L
Traffic management plan for offsite roads 12 Owner/EPC 15 M VL VL L
Incident reporting 1 EPC/Owner 5 M L M-H L
Regular reporting (including project
updates, community consultation reports)
1 EPC/Owner 5 L L M L

of 39
General Approval
Conditions
Conditions
Owner vs EPC
Responsible
Risk Profile2
Cost
Estimate1
Expected
Risk (HAZID
Process)
Observed
Risk9
Complexity of
Integration
of controls
Observed
Non-
conformances8
Community Consultation
11 Owner/EPC 20 M L M L
Complaints
10 Owner/EPC H M L L
Compliance tracking
6 EPC 20 H VH M M
Cumulative effects
1 EPC/Owner L VL L L
Notes:
1. Costs: These are those in excess to preparation of planning documents ($AUDk). These are based on estimates of time input and expenses associated with the full compliance with each of the approval
conditions including the production of approval documentation to comply with conditions, time and resources used during the construction phase. It excludes any costs associated with the operations and
maintenance phase of the project. Single largest spend item was due to compliance to waste and resource re-use requirements. They are provided in $AUD as of time of publication.
2. Expected/unexpected priority: Groupings of approval conditions were classified according to the expected versus actual risk presented to the project, before and after the construction stages,
respectively. The risk profile was calculated using the risk assessment matrix used across the project during a HAZID meeting 12 months prior to construction. Of the 27 specific condition categories, only
12 were identified during the HAZID. This is at least partly due to the fact that some of the categories were a requirement of the approval conditions and not a result of HAZID process. The risk assessment
process followed the protocol described in the ISO 31000 on Risk management.
3. Camp management: A camp located in the nearest township provided housing 10 km away from construction site in local community. Housed up to 250 personnel during peak construction. Health and
safety was in relation to the camp setting and environment.
4. Dust: Compliance to approval conditions required daily carting of water from source to work front. There were two events where the dust levels were so high on site, works had to be shut down resulting
in downtime and costs for the EPC. The soil type was a red clay loam. Actual tests undertaken on soil from the site revealed that the fine fraction of <1 mm represented 44% of the soil fraction, revealing a
high susceptibility to wind-blown dust generation. The broader issue of air quality i.e. vehicle emissions, was considered and evaluated as a “low” risk. The “very high” ranking for non-conformances was
due to the dust interfering with workers on the work front.

of 39
5. Soil and water management: Though there were no significant risks in meeting the compliance requirements for soil management, compliance to water management was extensive, requiring the
purchasing and recording of all water usage and of water transport from local licence holder. Earthworks valuing $250,000 were undertaken even though the actual flood risks were relatively low and
equivalent to 1:100 to 1:200 year flood risk.
6. Traffic and transport: The majority of the costs (approximately $240K) were associated with making the entrance to the site safe with respect to main road traffic interactions. The relatively high non
conformances were primarily due excessive speed of vehicles travelling on the site.
7. Flora: The majority of costs were those associated with application of knock-down herbicide, slashing and mowing of grass within the construction footprint (under and immediately around the SPV
arrays). These costs will vary according to climate and soil type. Spreading of weeds was not identified as an issue until 12 months into the construction stage.
8. Observed non-conformances: It is noted that non-conformances are self-reported as observed during daily, weekly and monthly inspection and hazard reports from site personnel. Low = <10 reports; M=
10-100 reports; H= 100-200 reports; VH = >200 reports
9. It is noted that the observed risks, where these were higher than medium, were reduced to medium or lower during the project.

of 39
Table 6. Outcomes, Measures and Targets Related to Environmental Impacts from the Project
Impact Area Measure Description Target Actual Actual Measure/Quantity
Power generation/
export
Rehabilitation of impacted
areas during transmission
line installation (%)
Land was cleared of native vegetation for array and transmission
line installation
100% 100% 10 ha
Installed capacity Planned installation: 102 MW 100% 100% 102 MW±4 MW
Power generation Design power output: 233,000 MWhr 233,000 MWhr
Total construction
footprint
Area was formerly dryland cropping and sheep grazing 100% 100% 250 ha
No of posts installed Approximately 300,000 steel posts were installed 100% 100% 300,000
No of panels (modules)
installed
Modules were installed on above ground posts/tables. 100% 100% 1.36 million + 3000
replacement panels
Planning and
environment
Objectives
Staff awareness All staff to be aware of their environmental obligations 100% 100% 800 visitors, contractors, staff
Trenching inspected Trenching was prepared for installation of AC and DC cabling 100% 100% 110 km of trenching was
open in total
No of fauna deaths Fauna deaths were due to machine-fauna interactions. 0 20 1 injury was sustained by a
bird (not a death)

of 39
No of Noise complaints Emanating from construction activities on the site and at the
residential camp
0 0 No formal complaints
received (re project)
No environmental related
incidents
Zero reportable incidents. This data was extracted from the HSE
incident register.
0 3 Note: numerous
environmental issues were
raised as hazard observations
No of non-conformances Prior to practical completion, an independent audit was
conducted against approval conditions
0 5 Non-conformances were
raised in audit
Community consultation
meetings
All planned meetings to occur. 100% 100%
Community complaints Complaints related to any aspect of the project construction
stage
0 2 Complaints related to off-site
issues
Compliance to complaint
response time frames
Close out process for individual complaints 100% 100% All completed
Environmental
Representative (ER)
inspections
These were scheduled on a monthly basis 100% 100% ER worked independently to
project
Number of Hollow Bearing
Trees (HBT) protected
Hollow bearing trees (HBTs) were expected to be disturbed
during the construction stage.
100% 100% Approximately 50 habitats
were impacted. These were
offset by 166 nest boxes and
hollows
Waste to landfill Waste generated from office activity including food scraps 0 15-20 t No local council recycling
services provided

of 39
% panels/modules
returned to manufacturer
1.36 million solar PV panels/modules were installed 100% 100% 3000 disused modules
returned to manufacturer
Compliance to audit
timeframes
Inspections and completion of corrective actions 100% 80% Audits and inspections were
conducted weekly, monthly
and at 6-12 month (external)
Fauna relocations and
release
Snakes and reptiles were to be relocated to less hazardous i.e.
non-work areas
100% 95% Approximately 20 snake
releases occurred
Nest sites of the Grey-
crowned babbler (GCB)
protected
These were the only endangered species identified as living in
the construction area
100% 100% 3 potential nests (of GCBs)
were identified and relocated
Number of nest box types
(species targeted)
Five different bird species (including the GCB) were identified as
living in the construction area
100% 80% 4 out of 5 types of
recommended nest boxes
were constructed and placed
in adjacent off set area
Notes:
1. It was noted that the two complaints were not project related.
2. Only 20 t of office waste and 100 t of construction wastes (mainly used concrete), totaling 120 t out of a larger 2000 t from EOLPM, were sent to landfill.
3. A relatively small number (3000) of modules were identified as broken during construction and immediately after practical completion of the construction stage (due
to cracking from excessive pressure on installation and or physical damage).
4. A total of 296 approval conditions were applicable to the site during the construction stage of the development.

of 39
Figure 3. A proposed shift in regulatory intensity for clean energy projects

Regulatory Burden in the Renewable Energy Sector in NSW

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

What's hot

What's hot (20)

Similar to Regulatory Burden in the Renewable Energy Sector in NSW

Similar to Regulatory Burden in the Renewable Energy Sector in NSW (20)

More from Turlough Guerin GAICD FGIA

More from Turlough Guerin GAICD FGIA (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

Regulatory Burden in the Renewable Energy Sector in NSW