Do you have any evidence to suggest water discharges from the project should be exempt from Clause 22 of the State Environment Protection Policy (SEPP) Waters which forbids the EPA from approving new water discharges in areas of high conservation value?
The State Environment Protection Policy (Waters) does apply to our proposed facility. The EPA will be required to consider this provision, together with other relevant provisions (for example) under other state environment protection policies at the time it makes a determination on AGL’s works approval application under the Environment Protection Act.
thanks for your reply. I agree, the EPA is the statutory decision maker. But I am interested in understanding AGL's position.
Does AGL think that an LNG terminal with an open loop system (which would release chlorinated cold sea water) would be compatible with the prohibition established in the clause 22 of the SEPP (Waters)? If yes. How so?
Hi @Rai88 ,
We’d just like to apologise for the delay in addressing your enquiry – we have received a large number of complex and detailed questions that we need to discuss with a few specialists.
This is not the way we want to deal with community concerns and we’re working to be more responsive in the future.
We’ll respond to your question shortly.
Our previous response sought to highlight that clause 22 of the SEPP (Waters) cannot be viewed in isolation and that there are other relevant provisions that are to be considered by the EPA when a works approval application for the FSRU is being assessed.
The information gathering and assessment of the proposed project as part of the EES is ongoing. This process includes an assessment of whether the proposed project can protect relevant beneficial uses (clause 25 of the SEPP (Waters)), and all other relevant provisions the EPA is to have regard to when determining AGL’s works approval application. We are not able to pre-empt the outcomes of that assessment at this stage.