annual2011-12 report

Environmental Protection Authority and Office of the Environmental Protection Authority Acknowledgments This report was prepared by the Business Operations Division, Office of the Environmental Protection Authority. For more information contact: Office of the Environmental Protection Authority Level 8 The Atrium 168 St Georges Terrace Perth WA 6000 Locked Bag 33, Cloisters Square, Perth, Western Australia 6850 Telephone 08 6467 5600 Facsimile 08 6467 5562

Recommended reference The recommended reference for this publication is: Environmental Protection Authority and Office of the Environmental Protection Authority 2011–2012 Annual Report, Office of the Environmental Protection Authority, 2012. This annual report is available in alternate formats on request.

24 September 2012 Letter to the Minister

Hon Bill Marmion MLA Minister for Environment In accordance with s21 of the Environmental Protection Act 1986 and s63 of the Financial Management Act 2006, we submit for presentation to Parliament the combined Annual Reports of the Environmental Protection Authority and the Office of the Environmental Protection Authority for the year ended 30 June 2012. This report has been prepared in accordance with the Financial Management Act 2006.

Dr Paul Vogel Kim Taylor Chairman General Manager 24 September 2012 24 September 2012

About this annual report The Office of the Environmental Protection Authority (OEPA) is a Department of State and is required to publish an Annual Report under s63 of the Financial Management Act 2006. The Environmental Protection Authority (EPA) is an independent statutory authority established under the Environmental Protection Act 1986 (EP Act). Under s21 of the EP Act the EPA has a separate obligation to provide an Annual Report to the Minister. Much of the work of the OEPA services the EPA in undertaking its statutory functions. As such, much of the information required for each entity’s annual report is common. This combined annual report is provided to meet both statutory obligations, with distinctions drawn between the EPA and OEPA where appropriate.

1

Contents

Letter to the Minister 1 Waste to Energy 25 Contents 3 Environmental Protection (South West Agriculture Zone 26 Wetlands) Policy 1998 PART 1 - Executive summary and significant issues 7 Environmental Protection (Western Swamp 26 Message from the Chairman 9 Tortoise Habitat) Policy 2011 General Manager’s overview 13 Hydraulic Fracturing of Gas Reserves – Environmental 27 Protection Bulletin 15 PART 2 - Relationship between the EPA and OEPA and 15 Minor or Preliminary Works and Investigation 27 legislative framework Works – Environmental Protection Bulletin 16 Relationship between the EPA and OEPA 16 Strategic and Derived Proposals – Environmental 28 Protection Bulletin 17 Legislative framework and specific responsibilities under 16 the Environmental Protection Act 1986 Sea Level Rise – Environmental Protection Bulletin 18 28 Subsidiary legislation 17 Enhance the value placed by the community on the 29 environment Changes and updates during 2011—12 17 Public reports and recommendations 29 PART 3 - Environmental Protection Authority 19 Community engagement 29 Attendance at meetings 21 Stakeholder Reference Group 29 EPA Strategic Plan 21 Site visits 29 Provide early strategic advice and guidance 22 EPA website and newsletter 30 Policy, guidelines and strategic advice 22 Reform business practices to improve certainty, 30 Environmental Assessment Guideline for Marine rigour and timeliness Dredging Proposals (EAG 7) 22 Reform initiatives in 2011—2012 30 Environmental Protection Bulletin 14 - Guidance 23 for the assessment of benthic primary producer Outcome of consultation on conditions 30 habitat loss in and around Port Hedland Defining the Key Characteristics of a Proposal – 31 Fortescue Marsh strategic guidance 23 Environmental Assessment Guideline 1 Strategic Assessment of the Perth-Peel Region and 24 Changes to Proposals after Assessment – 31 development of EPA Strategic Advice Environmental Assessment Guideline 2 Shared Environmental Assessment Knowledge (SEAK) 32 Subterranean fauna 24 Project State Environmental (Cockburn Sound) Policy 2005 25

3

Bilateral Agreement between the Commonwealth of 32 Post approval assessment 55 Australia and the State of Western Australia relating to Policy development and strategic planning 56 Environmental Impact Assessment Greenhouse Gas Conditions 56 PART 4 - Office of the Environmental Protection Authority 35 Marine Technical Report No.4: Petroleum hydrocarbon 56 Organisational structure 37 content of shoreline sediment and intertidal biota at Assessment and Compliance Division 37 selected sites in the Kimberley bioregion, Western Australia Strategic Policy and Planning Division 37 Background water quality in the Kimberley region 56 Business Operations Division 38 Dredging Science Node – Western Australian 57 Strategic Support Division 38 Marine Science Institution

Performance management framework 38 Introduced Marine Pests 57 Performance analysis and trends 39 Reform initiatives 58 Resource agreement 39 Aboriginal heritage 58 Financial targets 39 OEPA Key Performance Indicators 58 Key Performance Indicators 39 Environmental Compliance Audits 59 Environmental Impact Assessment and Policies 40 Overview 59 Overview 40 Compliance and audit activity 59 Mining and industrial 41 PART 5 - Disclosures and legal compliance 63 Iron ore 42 Financial Statements 67 Uranium 44 Certification of Financial Statements 67 Key Performance Indicators 107 Oil and gas 45 Certification of Key Performance Indicators 107 Coal 46 Other disclosures 115 Other 47 Ministerial directives 115 Planning and infrastructure 49 Other financial disclosures (TI 903) 115 Planning 49 Pricing Policies of Services Provided 115 Infrastructure 51 Other 55

4 Governance disclosures (TI 903) 115 Contracts with senior officers 115 Other legal requirements 115 Expenditure on advertising, market research, polling 115 and direct mail Disability Access and inclusion plan outcomes 116 (Disability Services Act 1993, s29 and Schedule 3 of the Disability Services Regulations 2004) Equal Employment Opportunity and Diversity 116 Management Outcomes Compliance with Public Sector Standards and 116 Ethic Codes Recordkeeping Plans 116 Government Policy Requirements 118 Occupational Safety, Health and Injury Management 118 (Public Sector Commissioner’s Circular 2009-11: Code of Practice: Occupational Safety and Health in the Western Australian Public Sector) Harmonised OSH laws – Work Health and Safety 119 legislation

Appendix 1 - Public reports and recommendations to the 122 Minister for Environment Appendix 2 - Section 45C approved changes to proposals 125 Appendix 3 - Other publications 131 Appendix 4 - Acronyms 132

5 6 Executive summary and significant issues

7 PART 1 PART 408 referrals Public advice given on 120 referrals 38 reports released 5 assessment reports released under a Commonwealth bilateral agreement 27 meetings of the EPA 55 compliance audits completed 15 changes to conditions approved 80% of assessments met agreed initial timelines First uranium assessment 45 changes to proposals approved Accuracy of predicting environmental impacts 100% Average cost per environmental compliance audit $27,594 87% of audited projects met all environmental conditions 80 Environmental Management Plans approved Average cost per policy development $120,693 Average cost per assessment $40,688 ever before. EPA faceinmakingrecommendations willbegreater than demands placedontheenvironment andthechallenges the to more thanfivemillionpeopleinthenext45years, the WesternAustralia’sWith populationprojected to double potential riskstotheenvironment. However itistheexploitationoftheseresources thatposes exploitation bringswithitjobsandprosperity. with enormousmineral,oilandgasresources andtheir Our geology, ofcourse,hasalsoendowedWesternAustralia any otherregion intheworld. documented inWesternAustralia’s NorthWest Shelfthan in in theentire UnitedKingdom andmore marinebiodiversity more plantspeciesinFitzgerald RiverNationalParkthan State’s biodiversityare theinteresting factsthatthere are Offering aglimpseintothescaleandcomplexityof Earth. and mostthreatened reservoirs ofplantandanimallife on world’s 34biodiversity‘hotspots’,withsomeoftherichest Indeed thesouth-westofWesternAustraliaisone nowhere elseintheworld. Message from theChairman fauna andflora,someofwhichexist isolation, wehaveavastarrayof geology, variedclimateandrelative By virtueofourState’s size, subnational entityintheworld. largest stateandthesecond Western AustraliaisAustralia’s oftheState, south-west corner 85 percentofwhomliveinthe Home to2.3millionpeople, other. Western Australiaisastatelikeno

referrals totheEPA. industry thispastyearhaveonceagaindriventhenumberof Economic conditionsinthemininganddevelopment should apply if itgainstheGovernment’s seal ofapproval. and whatimpact avoidanceandriskreduction measures a viewabouttheenvironmental acceptabilityofaproposal process toform thatallowsthecommunityandgovernment evidence, legislationandpolicy, anEIAisasystematic A universallyrecognised predictive toolbasedonscience, the Minister. that theEPA isabletomakeinformedrecommendations to environmental impactassessment, alsoknownasanEIA, environment from aproposed developmentthrough an It isthrough identifyingthe impactsandriskstothe several proposals withina region. environmental impactsarising from thedevelopmentof development buttoalsounderstandthecumulative potential environmental impact associatedwithaparticular referred to-ourrole istonotonlyidentifyandassesseach As theState’s environmental watchdog-asweare often marine environment, heritageandairquality. on vegetation,flora,fauna,wetlands,groundwater, the Each of these projects had numerous environmental impacts mine proposals andWest intheYilgarn Pilbara. operations atJackHillsandCloudbreak andnewiron ore ore exportfacilityatPortHedland,expansionofiron ore Port HedlandOuterHarbourproject, amulti-useriron Other majorassessmentreports includedBHPBilliton’s proposal toestablishWesternAustralia’s firsturaniummine. including thereport andrecommendation intoToro Energy’s Many ofthesereports generatedhighpublicinterest, Plans andreleased 38reports. changes toproposals and80Environmental Management In 2011—12,theEPA received 408referrals, approved 45

9 Executive summary and significant issues

In other words, an EIA seeks to understand the In saying that, as Western Australia’s growth is projected environmental consequences of putting things into the to increase dramatically over the next decade, we face environment, such as chemicals and infrastructure, and/ the imminent challenge of further improving the timeliness, or taking things out, such as wetlands and marine habitat, certainty and effectiveness of the EIA process to meet and if and how these consequences can be avoided or demand. mitigated. The EPA and Office of the EPA’s reform agenda, which The process is based on predicting the impacts and risks began in February 2008, is already paying dividends. of a proposal in its environmental setting using extensive information and experience, including from other similar One example where reform has made a real, practical projects. difference is how we consult with proponents on the technical aspects of the EPA’s recommended conditions, Though we will never be in a position of knowing everything, leading to a significant reduction in the time that proposals it is important that we can satisfy ourselves that we know spend in the appeals process. enough to provide informed advice and recommendations to the Government. Strongly supporting the concept of ‘front-end loading’, whereby the proponent engages in robust planning and I am pleased that a recent report prepared for the Victorian design at the front end of a project where the cost to make Parliament considered the EIA process in Western changes in design is relatively low, the above reform has led Australia as an example of best practice both nationally to quantifiable economic benefits for both the proponents and internationally, modelling its own recommendations and the State, with the revised administrative procedures on Western Australia’s legislation and administrative resulting in 80 per cent of proposals reported on within arrangements. agreed time frames, without compromising environmental standards. A comparative study in the academic literature found Western Australia’s EIA process was the one jurisdiction, Another significant reform we have undertaken is our very of eight jurisdictions world-wide, which satisfied 14 key successful ‘outreach’ program, which allows us to engage criteria for environmental impact assessment effectiveness. stakeholders both at EPA board meetings and on our site visits. Other strengths noted in the report included the EPA’s independence and the scientific and technical approach the This program is providing the EPA with a better EPA applies to environmental assessment. understanding of issues concerning the community, industry, peak bodies and environmental groups. With EPA boards meeting more than 1000 times over the past 41 years, it is fair to say we have collectively It is clear that for the EPA and OEPA to meet increasing accumulated considerable experience in using the best demands, and in a timely manner, we must work with information available to make informed and transparent industry and other government departments to further judgements. evolve our processes.

10 CHAIRMAN EPA Dr PaulVogel environmental impactson our prosperous State. we are wellplacedtomeet thechallengeofmanaging Finally, astheEPA movesintoitsfifth decade,Ibelieve change. enormously beneficialgovernance tosupporttheEPAby Government hasproven tobean OEPA. HavingaseparatedepartmentofStatecreated support andadvicewehavereceived from staff ofthe appreciation andthanksforthehighlevelofprofessional On behalfoftheEPA board, Iwishtoexpress my Elizabeth Carr, fortheirprofessionalism andintegrity. (Deputy Chairman),DenisGlennon,DrRodLukatelichand I wishtothanktheotherboard members,DrChrisWhitaker demands. direction, havesetthefoundationsneededtomeetfuture Reform initiativesIhaveoutlined,combinedwithclearpolicy assessment andenvironmental management. and inclusiveapproach tothelifecycleofdevelopment Australia necessitatesamore sophisticated,strategic The scale,paceandcomplexityofdevelopmentinWestern likely tobe,are incloseproximity. together, particularlywhenprojects underassessmentor information -withcompetitors,toalsoconsiderworking amenable tosharinginformation-particularlyenvironmental Likewise, Iwouldcallonindustry, whichisnotusually 11 Executive summary and significant issues

of thedepartment’s approvals processes electronically. comprehensive casemanagementsystemtocoordinate all management systems.We alsobegandevelopment ofa Strategy toguidedevelopment oftheOEPA’s information A keystepwaspreparation ofanInformationManagement improving itsbusinessprocesses. approval processes, theOEPA alsocontinueditsfocuson Consistent withtheGovernment’s goalofbestpractice desalination plants. with specificattentiongiventoquarryingprojects and continued tobeamajorfocusfortheOEPA in2011—12, Monitoring compliancewithMinisterialapproval conditions gas reserves usinghydraulic fracturing. management ofdevelopmenttheState’s largeonshore strategic adviceonensuringbestpracticeenvironmental more timelyandefficientassessments.Thisincluded achievement ofbetterenvironmental outcomesanddeliver Environmental AssessmentGuidelinestoinfluencethe strategic advice,Environmental Protection Bulletinsand The OEPA alsoassistedtheEPA inthedevelopmentof Development. UraniumProject andPortHedlandOuterHarbour Wiluna General Manager’s overview assessments includingthe a numberoflargeandcomplex assessments. Theseincluded planning schemesandstrategic covering developmentproposals, to undertake36assessments OEPA officersassistedtheEPA and otherservicestotheEPA. environmental impactassessment Office oftheEPA inproviding in asignificantworkloadonthe Australia in2011—12wasreflected Strong economicgrowth inWestern and capabilitydevelopmentstructuralimprovements. Program includingenhancingitsserviceculture, leadership implementation ofasubstantialOrganisationalDevelopment During theyear, thedepartmentdevelopedandbegan GENERAL MANAGEROEPA Kim Taylor guidance toofficersoftheOEPA throughout theyear. Protection Authoritywhoprovided significantadvice and and commitmentofthemembersEnvironmental I wouldalsoliketoacknowledgetheongoingsupport performance. essential partofimproving ourpolicyoutputsandbusiness with industryandenvironmental stakeholdershasbeenan and Conservation.Additionally, constructiveengagement State agencies,particularlytheDepartmentofEnvironment be possiblewithoutitscollaborativerelationships withother The OEPA’s capacitytoundertakeitsfunctionswouldnot environment. work commitmentanddesire forprotection oftheState’s the yearwasareflection ofthestaff’s continuingstrong Achievement ofthedepartment’s substantialworkfor 13 Executive summary and significant issues 14 Relationship between the EPA and OEPA and legislative framework

15 PART 2 PART Relationship between the EPA and OEPA The Environmental Protection Authority is a five-member Legislative framework and specific board appointed by the Governor of Western Australia. responsibilities under the Neither the Authority nor its Chairman, Dr Paul Vogel, is Environmental Protection Act 1986 subject to the direction of the Minister. The EPA is established under s7 of the EP Act as The EPA has statutory obligations under the Environmental an independent statutory authority, and its advice to Protection Act 1986 (EP Act) to conduct environmental Government is public. EPA members are not public impact assessments, initiate measures to protect the servants. environment from environmental harm and pollution and to provide advice to the Minister on environmental matters Under the EP Act, the objective of the EPA is to: ‘use its generally. best endeavours – a) to protect the environment; and b) to prevent, control and abate pollution and environmental The Minister provides the EPA with services and facilities harm’. to help it perform its functions. These support services are provided by the Office of the Environmental Protection The functions of the EPA outlined under s16 of the EP Act Authority (OEPA), which is a State Government department are broad and include: and accountable to the Minister for Environment, as well as to the EPA. • conducting environmental impact assessments The OEPA supports the EPA in conducting environmental • preparing statutory policies for environmental protection impact assessments and developing policies to protect • preparing and publishing guidelines for managing the environment. The OEPA also monitors compliance with environmental impacts, and Ministerial conditions related to approvals. • providing strategic advice to the Minister for Environment.

Figure 1: Relationship between the EPA, OEPA and the Minister for Environment

ENVIRONMENTAL • Environmental impact assessment MINISTER FOR reports and recommendations PROTECTION AUTHORITY • Policy and strategic advice ENVIRONMENT

• Whole of Government policy advice • Environmental impact assessment • Advice on Ministerial approval services statements (Part IV approvals) • Environmental policy and strategic OEPA • Compliance and enforcement advice services (Part IV approvals)

16 • • • • • functions includes: Subsidiary legislationalsorelevant totheEPA/OEPA’s Subsidiary legislation combined EPA andOEPA annualreport for2011–12. The activitiesoftheOEPA are addressed inPart4ofthis approval conditionsandreporting onthistotheMinister. EP Actinmonitoringcomplianceofprojects withMinisterial The OEPA isalsoresponsible foradministerings48ofthe Divisions 2and3ofPartIVtheEPAct. Ministerial approval statementsforprojects under under theEPAct,particularlyforgrantingandmanaging the MinisterforEnvironment inperformanceofhisfunctions In linewiths22(1),theOEPA isalsoresponsible forservicing EPA inlinewiths17Aands22(1)oftheEPAct. Sector ManagementAct1994 The OEPA wasestablishedinaccordance withthe combined EPA andOEPA annualreport for2011–12. The activitiesoftheEPA are addressed inPart3ofthis assessment) oftheEPAct. and Divisions13ofPartIV(environmental impact administration ofPartIII(environmental protection policies) In linewiththesefunctions,theEPA isresponsible for Wastes) Policy 1999 Environmental Protection (Kwinana)(Atmospheric Policy 1992 Environmental Protection (Peel Inlet-HarveyEstuary) Land) Policy1992 Environmental Protection (Gnangara MoundCrown Policy 1992 Environmental Protection (SwanCoastalPlainLakes) Environmental Protection Regulations1987 , andprovides servicestothe

Public • • is themostendangered tortoise intheworld. protects keyhabitatforthe WesternSwampTortoise, which Policy. Thepolicy, whichwasoriginallyputinplace2002, the WesternSwampTortoise Environmental Protection In February2012,theMinisterapproved therenewal of where noiseisthekeyenvironmental factor. Regulations 1997.Thisdelegationwillstreamline approvals regulation 17oftheEnvironmental Protection (Noise) of Environment andConservation ofitspowersunder the EPA’s delegationtotheCEOofDepartment In January2012,theMinisterforEnvironment approved during 2011—12Changes andupdates and Conservation. are alsoadministered bytheDepartmentofEnvironment observance ofthesubsidiarylegislationreferred toabove It shouldbenotedthatotherpartsoftheEPActand • • • Environmental Protection (GoldfieldsResidentialAreas) Wastes) Regulations1992 Environmental Protection (Kwinana)(Atmospheric Habitat) Policy2011 Environmental Protection (WesternSwampTortoise Wetlands) Policy1998 Environmental Protection (SouthWest AgriculturalZone (Sulphur Dioxide)Regulations2003 Environmental Protection (GoldfieldsResidentialAreas) (Sulphur Dioxide)Policy2003 17 Relationship between the EPA and OEPA and legislative framework 18 Protection Authority Environmental

PART19 3 The EPA’s key strategies for 2010–2013 are to:

• Provide early strategic advice and guidance • Enhance the value placed by the community on the environment • Reform its business practices to improve certainty, rigour and timeliness. Environmental Protection Authority The five members of the EPA are appointed by the Governor on the recommendation of the Minister for EPA Strategic Plan Environment. The current EPA is Dr Paul Vogel (Chairman), The EPA Strategic Plan 2010—2013 outlines the context Dr Chris Whitaker (Deputy Chairman), Dr Rod Lukatelich, in which the EPA operates and its strategies and priorities. Mr Denis Glennon AO, and Ms Elizabeth Carr. The Plan also articulates the EPA’s vision for reforming its Profiles of all current EPA members are on the EPA website. practices to stay ahead of the changing environmental and business conditions in which it operates. The EPA met 27 times during the year. The EPA Strategic Plan 2010—2013 is available on the EPA Attendance at meetings website. The EPA’s key strategies for 2010—13 are to: Dr Paul Dr Chris Mr Denis Dr Rod Ms • Provide early strategic advice and guidance Vogel Whitaker Glennon Lukatelich Elizabeth Carr • Enhance the value placed by the community on the environment 24 24 20 23 15* • Reform its business practices to improve certainty, rigour * Ms Carr was appointed in October 2011. and timeliness. During 2011—12, the EPA continued its reform initiatives. The Chairman, Dr Paul Vogel, discusses the EPA’s direction ProtectionEnvironmental Authority in his message at the beginning of this annual report. This section is structured under the three key strategies.

The EPA meets to consider proposals and deal with other business each fortnight. Additional meetings may be arranged if required. Meetings of the Board are usually held in Perth, but may be combined with site visits to regional areas.

21 Provide early strategic advice Environmental Assessment Guideline for Marine Dredging Proposals (EAG 7) and guidance Dredging proposals considered by the EPA are often large The EPA will provide early strategic advice and by global standards, frequently located in environmentally guidance to Government and proponents to influence sensitive settings, and can attract considerable public the achievement of better environmental outcomes. scrutiny. This will also deliver more timely and efficient Recognising that considerable uncertainty remains in assessments on individual proposals. relation to proponents’ predictions of environmental impacts The EPA will strengthen its partnerships with other from dredging proposals, the EPA developed a framework agencies and promote collaborative approaches to for presenting impact predictions that allows predictive addressing cumulative impacts and emerging issues, uncertainty to be taken into account during assessments. including through the use of strategic assessments. A fundamental part of the EPA’s framework is a spatial zonation scheme designed to allow clear and consistent Policy, guidelines and strategic advice presentation of the extent, severity and duration of a range of likely impacts. This range of predicted impacts is a basis The EPA develops a range of policies, guidelines and other on which the EPA develops advice regarding environmental instruments to provide guidance and advice to Government approval conditions. and proponents. The EPA is constantly seeking to review existing policy and develop new policy where required to The guidance also takes steps to ensure efficiency ensure that this guidance is provided to proponents to and cost-effectiveness can be factored into monitoring convey the EPA’s current thinking in relation to specific and management programs implemented by dredging aspects of the EIA process. proponents. Environmental Protection Policies (EPP) are statutory The Environmental Assessment Guideline for Marine policies under Part III of the Environmental Protection Act Dredging Proposals was released to coincide with the 1986 (the EP Act). PIANC/Environmental Consultants Association dredging workshop held in Perth from 26—27 September 2011. State Environmental Policies (SEP) are developed by the EPA under Part II of the EP Act, and are considered by Cabinet before adoption as whole-of-Government policies. Environmental Protection Bulletins (EPB) outline the view of the EPA on various environmental or procedural matters. Environmental Assessment Guidelines (EAG) are issued by the EPA to provide advice to proponents and the public generally on the procedures and minimum environmental requirements that the EPA expects to be met during the environmental impact assessment process. 22 31 August2011. Environmental Protection Bulletin 14wasreleased on development-related marinehabitatlossovertime. and helpportmanagersdevelop systemstoaccountfor information tostreamline theimplementationofEAG 3 proponents andstakeholders withcriticallocation-specific for thePortHedlandinnerharbour. Thebulletinprovides Bulletin 14toestablishacommonLocalAssessment Unit In response, theEPA prepared Environmental Protection the EPA’s assessments. calculations ofhabitatloss,impactingontheconsistency of proponents useddifferent assessmentunitsfortheir previously assessedproposals, theEPA foundthatdifferent Through itsanalysisofassessment unitsappliedin within definedareas. things, thatthecumulativelossofhabitatisconsidered Marine Environment Producer HabitatinWesternBenthic Primary Australia’s Environmental AssessmentGuidelinesforProtectionof assessed inthecontextofguidancepresented intheEPA’s assesses newdevelopmentintheport.Theselossesare is afactorroutinely considered bytheEPA whenit The incremental lossofbenthicprimaryproducer habitats Port Hedland’s marinehabitats. world’s busiestports,whichcontinuestoplacepressure on The portofPortHedlandhasdevelopedintoonethe Pilbara mines. mainly tosupportincreased throughput ofiron ore from Port Hedlandinnerharbourhasincreased considerably, In recent years,thescaleandrateofdevelopmentin lossinandaroundhabitat Hedland Port producerfor assessment the ofbenthicprimary Bulletin14-GuidanceEnvironmental Protection

(EAG3)whichrequires, amongother

terminus oftheUpperFortescueRiverinPilbara.There Fortescue Marshisahighlybio-diversewetlandatthe guidance Marshstrategic Fortescue Marsh area. understanding ofthehydrogeology andbiodiversityofthe the Marsh,furtherworkisneededtodevelopabetter step towards improved protection andmanagementof While provision oftheguidance willrepresent asignificant strategies. identifying relevant values,objectivesandmanagement biodiversity andmaintainingwaterregimes togetherwith various zonesaround theMarshintermsofprotecting The guidance,whichisyettobepublished,hasprioritised to thewaterregime andenvironmental valuesofthe Marsh. approach tomanagementoftheriskcumulativeimpacts is expectedtocontributeanimproved andconsistent for theMarsh.Thefeedbackreceived from stakeholders appropriate assessmentandmanagementapproaches undertaking stakeholderconsultationduring2011—12on State Development,andMinesPetroleum, after the departmentsofWater, Environment andConservation, guidance fortheFortescueMarshincollaborationwith On behalfoftheEPA, theOEPA hasbeenfinalisingstrategic surrounding areas. are extensiveminingoperationsandmineraldepositsinthe 23 Environmental Protection Authority

Strategic Assessment of the Perth-Peel Region Subterranean fauna and development of EPA Strategic Advice In April 2011, the EPA resolved to pursue a more risk- All significant developments in Western Australia based approach to assessing subterranean fauna within are potentially subject to State and Commonwealth environmental impact assessment and established an environmental laws. Advisory Group to provide advice on development of a discussion paper, leading to an Environmental Assessment In order to streamline the approvals process in the Perth- Guideline. Peel region under the federal Environmental Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (EPBC Act), the In March 2012, the EPA released the discussion paper Western Australian ministers for Planning and Environment A review of subterranean fauna assessment in Western signed an agreement with the Commonwealth Government Australia for a four week public comment period of targeted in May 2011 to pursue a Strategic Assessment of the Perth- stakeholders and general public review. Peel region. Key elements of the discussion paper included a summary The final agreement was announced on 18 August 2011. of the state of knowledge of subterranean fauna in Western The Strategic Assessment applies to matters that are of Australia and their consideration in environmental impact concern to the Commonwealth Government, in particular assessment, a risk based assessment approach and Matters of National Environment Significance. the use of surrogates to determine connectivity between subterranean ecosystems. To ensure parallel consideration of State environmental issues not included in the scope of the Commonwealth Following consideration of the submissions received, Government’s assessment, the EPA decided to provide a Technical Group was established to provide advice. separate strategic advice under section 16(e) of the EP Act Information from the review and input from the Technical and began preparation of its advice during the year. Group will be used to develop a draft Environmental Assessment Guideline during 2012—13. The OEPA has also actively contributed information to the Commonwealth Government’s strategic assessment during 2011—12.

Matters of National Environmental Significance are defined under the EPBC Act, which provides a legal framework to protect and manage nationally and internationally important flora, fauna, ecological communities and heritage places. 24 consultation onbehalfoftheEPA. supporting documentsforthepurposeofstakeholder started reviewing the policy document and the two technical the review, incloseconsultationwiththeCSMC,andhas The OEPA hasidentifiedtheissuestobeaddressed in 2012. The EPA formallyinitiatedthereview oftheSEPinFebruary Sound SEPreview. immediately, whileotherswillbeaddressed intheCockburn A numberofrecommendations were implemented put forward bytheAuditor-General. the otherorganisationstoaddress therecommendations implementation. TheEPA andOEPA workedcloselywith but thatanumberofgapsexistinmonitoringand Sound framework hasbeenestablishedforCockburn The report foundthatastrong policyandmanagement SoundSEP). Sound)Policy 2005 (Cockburn (Cockburn report ontheimplementationofStateEnvironmental to respond totheWesternAustralianAuditor-General’s Sound Management Council(CSMC) and theCockburn The EPA andOEPA workedcollaborativelywiththeDEC 2005 EnvironmentalState (Cockburn Sound) Policy Waste AuthorityandtheEPA worktogethertoprovide him In late2011theMinisterforEnvironment requested that the Waste Energy to Part 4). of wastetoenergyproposals currently beingassessedin recently referred wastetoenergyfacilities(seedescriptions reference tosupporttheEPA’s assessmentofanumber finalised bytheendof2012.Itwillprovide animportant under section16(e)oftheEPActandisexpectedto be The advicetotheMinisterwillbepublishedbyEPA project onbehalfoftheWaste AuthorityandtheEPA. The DECandtheOEPA are workinginpartnershiponthe under whichtheyoperate. operation andemissions,theregulatory framework number offacilities,examiningtheirfeedstock,design, Australia. Itwilldevelopacomprehensive profile ofa of jurisdictionsinEurope, theUnitedStates,Japanand incineration, gasification,andpyrolysis, across anumber a varietyofwastetoenergytechnologiesincluding review isexaminingarangeofoperatingfacilitiesemploying waste toenergyfacilitieshasbeencommissioned.The As partoftheproject,review aninternational ofexisting level hazardous wasteorhospitalwaste. tyres, paintsandcommonsolvents.Itwillnotcoverhigh commercial waste)andlowlevelhazardous wastesuch as non-hazardous waste(includingmunicipalrefuse and The focusoftheadvicewillbeonprocessing ofmixed waste toenergyfacilities,internationally. with adviceontheenvironmental andhealthperformanceof 25 Environmental Protection Authority

Environmental Protection (South West Agriculture Environmental Protection (Western Swamp Zone Wetlands) Policy 1998 Tortoise Habitat) Policy 2011 This EPP protects registered wetlands from further This EPP declares beneficial uses that are to be protected degradation by human activities such as filling, excavating, and aims to ensure management activities within the discharging of effluent, draining and damaging or clearing policy area do not adversely impact on the habitat or these fringing native vegetation. It also promotes the rehabilitation beneficial uses. of wetlands in the South West Agricultural Zone of the State. The EPA transmitted its report and a revised draft EPP to the Minister in October 2010. The report recommended Wetlands may be nominated for registration under the EPP retaining the 2002 EPP unchanged and introducing Special whether they are on Crown land or on private land where Control Areas over the existing policy area and translocation landowner consent has been given. sites for the tortoise. There are currently two wetlands on the Register of The Minister supported the EPA’s recommendations to Protected Wetlands. These are Lake Monjingup in the continue the protection of the western swamp tortoise Shire of Esperance and Koojedda Swamp in the Shire of habitat through the release of a new policy Environmental Northam. Protection (Western Swamp Tortoise Habitat) Policy 2011, gazetted on 14 February 2012. In December 2008 the EPA reviewed the South West Wetlands EPP and released a new draft EPP for public comment. The comment period closed in March 2009 and submissions received were considered by the EPA during 2010—11. Further discussions with regional Natural Resource Management groups were carried out during 2011—12. A revised draft EPP and a report to the Minister for Environment are expected to be completed in 2012—13.

The Western Swamp Tortoise, Pseudemydura umbrina, is listed as critically endangered. There are estimated to be less than 50 adults in the wild. 26 in August2011. EPB 15 - petroleum projects. case basis,inthesamemannerasforothermining and will continuetoassessfrackingprojects onacase-by- regarding frackingproposals, inparticularnotingthatit The BulletinoutlinestheEPA’s approach andexpectations unconventional gasprojects beingdeveloped. there issubsequentlylikelytobeanincreasing number of an importantpartofWesternAustralia’s energyfuture and Unconventional gas,particularlyshaleislikelytobe commercially viable. formations thatwere previously inaccessibleandnot The techniqueallowsgastobeextractedfrom geological gas reserves. formations, increasing theflowofandallowingextraction under highpressure intowellstoopenchannelsinthe rock Fracking isaprocess thatpumpsfluidsandothermaterials fracturing (fracking). was theincreasing levelofpublicinterest inhydraulic An emergingtrend inWesternAustraliaduring2011—12 Bulletin15 Environmental Protection Hydraulic Fracturing ofGasReserves – Hydraulic fracturingofgasreserves

was published The EPA publishedEPB16toprovide guidanceto Work Bulletin16 –Environmental Protection WorksMinor orPreliminary andInvestigation was publishedinDecember2011. EPB 16- work andinvestigationwork. Authorities andprovides examplesofminororpreliminary The bulletinalsoprovides informationforDecisionMaking or theMinister’s future decisions. significance thatwouldcompromise theEPA’s assessment implementation ofaproposal butare notofascaleor Minor orpreliminary worksare associatedwiththe so. minor orpreliminary works,andwhenitisappropriate todo proponents onmakingarequest totheEPA toundertake Minor or preliminary works andinvestigationwork Minor orpreliminary

27 Environmental Protection Authority

Strategic and Derived Proposals – Environmental Sea Level Rise – Environmental Protection Protection Bulletin 17 Bulletin 18 In undertaking environmental impact assessment, it is The EPA believes that managing for the risk of sea level widely recognised that strategic or ‘big picture’ approaches, rise is important to both protect infrastructure and mitigate rather than case by case assessments, can lead to more the impact of proposals, particularly for those proposals in efficient planning and better environmental outcomes. coastal areas with a long operational life. Provisions in the EP Act allow for the assessment of The EPA released this bulletin to outline its expectations ‘strategic proposals’ by the EPA, although their use has for environmental impact assessment with respect to rising been limited. Under these provisions, the assessment of sea levels. It describes the considerations the EPA will a strategic proposal may give rise to more streamlined apply through the EIA process and the requirements for consideration of future ‘derived’ proposals that fall within proponents to identify and include related matters in their the parameters of the strategic proposal. environmental assessment documentation. The EPA believed it was timely to provide information, It is expected that proponents will develop an and published EPB 17 to describe its approach and understanding of the potential consequences of sea level its expectations of proponents of strategic and derived rise for EIA of their proposals and develop management proposals. strategies to address them. The bulletin outlines the relevant provisions of the EP Act, EPB 18 - Sea level rise was published in June 2012. the assessment process, the EPA’s expectations regarding public involvement, and its approach to setting conditions. EPB 17 - Strategic and derived proposals was published in February 2012.

While there are a range of predictions, a rise of 0.9 metre in mean sea level by 2110 is the projection endorsed by the Western Australian Government as currently the best for decision making. 28 constructively. stakeholders toraisetopics tobediscussedandcontribute the EPA’s work,aswelltoprovide atwo-wayforumfor advice onthepolicies,strategies andprocesses that frame The SRGmeetseveryquarter toprovide highlevelstrategic conservation groups,departments. and other government consists ofrepresentatives from peakindustrybodies, environmental matters.The core membershipoftheSRG from theimplementationof approvals reform tobroader SRG were reviewed toreflect theshiftinfocusofSRG In 2011–12,theTerms ofReference andmembershipof the consult withkeystakeholdersandpeakindustrybodies. The EPA hasaStakeholderReference Group (SRG)to Stakeholder Reference Group public communications,withthesupportofOEPA. Throughout 2011—12theEPA continuedtostrengthen its Community engagement Appendix 1. which canbefoundinPart4–OfficeoftheEPA andin During 2011–12,theEPA published38reports, detailsof andrecommendations Public reports community engagementstrategies. explaining itsdecisionsthroughbulletins,reportsand community abouttheState’s environmentalvalues, and The EPA willplacegreateremphasisoninformingthe ontheenvironmentcommunity Enhance thevalue placedby the Organisations represented ontheSRGare: hydraulic fracturingofconventionalgasresources. A keyissueconsidered bytheSRGduring2011–12was stakeholders. andideasofallinterestedviews, concerns partiesand might bemanaged.TheEPA also wantstolistenthe potential environmental impactsandriskshowthey proposed development,where itsitsinthelandscape, appreciation ofthenature and scaleofsignificant It isvitallyimportantthatthe EPA gainsafirst-hand visits Site • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • Department ofWater Department ofHealth Fund World Wildlife Environmental DefendersOffice Department ofEnvironment andConservation Conservation CouncilofWA Environmental ConsultantsAssociation Department ofPlanning WA Association LocalGovernment Urban DevelopmentInstituteofAustralia Department ofStateDevelopment Department ofMinesandPetroleum Chamber ofMineralsandEnergy Chamber ofCommerce andIndustry Association Australian Petroleum Production andExploration Association ofMiningandExplorationCompanies 29 Environmental Protection Authority

Site visits are invaluable in informing the Authority’s decisions and advice to the Minister for Environment. These Reform business practices to visits are frequently combined with local Civic and Business improve certainty, rigour and Leaders’ Breakfasts as an opportunity to share information about the role of the EPA in development assessment, timeliness the approaches it takes in formulating its advice, and the assessment and approvals reform agenda being The EPA will continue to implement the environmental implemented in the EPA and across Government. impact assessment reform program and other initiatives to improve the rigour, policy settings and During 2011–12, the EPA visited Kings Park and the timeliness of its decision making. WA Herbarium to gain a better understanding of seed collection and seed banking and of contemporary practices in protection of rare species. Reform initiatives in 2011—2012 In November 2011, the board visited James Price Point, site of the proposed Browse LNG Precinct, to meet with Outcome of consultation on conditions Traditional Owners and representatives of various groups During the year, the OEPA concluded a review on behalf both in favour of and opposed to the precinct. of the EPA on the impact of consulting proponents and decision making authorities on draft conditions. The EPA website and newsletter practice is outlined in Environmental Protection Bulletin 11 Consultation on Conditions Recommended by the EPA The EPA website continues to be a major vehicle for (EPB 11) (EPA, June 2010). dissemination of EPA information including reports, guidance, bulletins and opportunities for public comment EPB 11 describes new administrative procedures and formal submissions. During the year, progress was relating to consultation on EPA recommended conditions made towards providing a single online point for all EPA and with proponents and decision making authorities. OEPA consultation. This ‘consultation hub’ is expected to Consultations under these procedures are designed to be in use in the first half of 2012—13. identify any technical errors or unnecessary difficulties with implementation of the recommended conditions. Quarterly issues of the EPA’s electronic newsletter were produced throughout the year, distributed to stakeholders The review examined whether the consultation on and available on the EPA’s website. conditions has reduced the number of appeals and if there has been a reduction in the time it takes to determine appeals. It found changes in the pattern of appeals which suggest significant improvements have been achieved. The percentage of appeals has halved and the number and percentage of ‘no appeals’ has nearly quadrupled. Appeal and condition setting times have been reduced by eight to 10 weeks.

30 published on25May2012. EAG 1- through theMinisterialApproval Statement. They are alsousedtodefinethescopeofanapproval impacts canbemanaged and, ifso,underwhatconditions. those activitiesandtodetermineiftheenvironmental The EPA usestheKeyProposal Characteristicstoassess approval isbeingsought. the proposal thatwillimpact theenvironment andforwhich however, shouldbedistinguishedfrom thekeyelements of to properly evaluatetheproject. Thisgeneralinformation, andthecommunitywithsufficientcontext Government when, where andhow)isimportant toprovide theEPA, Clear informationexplainingtheproject (what,why, through theKeyProposal Characteristics. during theyeartoadviseproponents ondefiningaproposal the KeyCharacteristicsofaProposal The final Environmental Assessment Guideline 1 Key the Defining ofaProposal – Characteristics Government’s approvals streamlining agenda. improvements are makingasignificantcontribution to the improvements beingmadebyEPA/OEPA. These The results reflect thebenefitsofongoing process cause. in EPB11,itisreasonable toconcludethatitistheprimary direct result ofthenewadministrativeprocedures outlined is difficulttoconclusivelystatethatthischangewhollythe after theintroduction ofconsultationonconditions.Whileit times (section101EPAct)from 14weekstofour significant reduction intheMinister’s appealdetermination The results showthatthere hasbeenastatistically Defining thekeycharacteristics ofaproposal Environmental AssessmentGuidelineforDefining (EAG1)wasreleased was Sometimes proposals needtobemodifiedafterthe Environmental Assessment Guideline 2 Assessment – Proposals after Changes to published on26August2011. 45C oftheEnvironmentalProtectionAct1986 EAG 2- changes toproposals afterassessment. all therequired informationisprovided withtherequest for achieve atimelydecisiontogetherwithchecklisttoensure Handy hintsare includedinEAG2forproponents to assess whethertheproposed changecanbeapproved. The guidelineoutlinesthesixaspectswhichare usedto proposal. appropriate, approval oftheproposed changestoa from proponents toenabletheconsiderationand,if 45C oftheEPAct.Itdescribesinformationrequired guidance toproponents onthescopeanduseofsection Environmental ProtectionAct1986 to ProposalsafterAssessment–section45Cofthe Environmental AssessmentGuideline2-Changes assessment andauthorisationundertheEPAct. Changes toProposalsafterAssessment-Section (EAG2)provides was 31 Environmental Protection Authority

Shared Environmental Assessment Knowledge Bilateral Agreement between the Commonwealth (SEAK) Project of Australia and the State of Western Australia relating to Environmental Impact Assessment As part of approvals reforms, a Government Taskforce was established in 2009 to develop a model for the sharing On 21 March 2012 a bilateral agreement was entered into of information and knowledge generated through the by the State of Western Australia and the Commonwealth of environmental impact assessment process. Australia, replacing the previous 2002 bilateral agreement. The SEAK Taskforce was chaired by EPA Chairman Dr Paul To be accredited, a state/territory process needs to meet Vogel with members from industry, government and non- ‘best practice’ criteria. government organisations. Its specific terms of reference were to: The need for a new bilateral agreement was triggered by the gazettal of the Environmental Impact Assessment • develop a model for delivering improved environmental Administrative Procedures 2010 on 26 November 2010. data management and knowledge building in relation to The new procedures provided for two levels of assessment, the assessment and approvals process reduced from five. • develop a business case for implementation of the The new bilateral agreement accredits the Western model using a co-investment government-industry- Australian environmental impact assessment process. It community partnership approach, and allows the Australian Government Minister for Sustainability, • provide a report to the Minister with recommendations Environment, Water, Population and Communities to rely on for the model and business case. specified environmental impact assessment processes of the State of Western Australia in assessing actions under The SEAK report was delivered to the Minister during the the EPBC Act. year and is available on the EPA’s web site. After assessment, the proposed action still requires approval from the Australian Government Minister for Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities under the EPBC Act.

32 federal government website federal government published undersection49AoftheEPBCActare onthe public commentsreceived onthedraftbilateralagreement reasons forenteringintotheagreement andareport onthe Copies ofthefinalbilateralagreement, astatementof • • • • • 2011—12 were conductedunderthebilateralagreement: The followingEPA assessmentreports publishedin Report No 1437: Wiluna UraniumProject Report No1437:Wiluna Report No1429:Cloudbreak LifeofMineProject Mining Report No1425:ExtensionofSilicaSandsDredge Report No1420:PointGrey Marina Project Report No1410:ParkerRange(MountCaudan)Iron Ore Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population rely on andCommunities to The bilateral agreement bilateral The allowsAustralian the Government for Minister . Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 Act Conservation Biodiversity and Protection Environment specified environmental assessment processesthe impact of State ofWesternState Australia underthe inassessingactions

.

33 Environmental Protection Authority

34 34 Protection Authority Environmental oftheOffice

PART35 4 MINISTER FOR ENVIRONMENTAL ENVIRONMENT PROTECTION AUTHORITY HON BILL MARMION MLA CHAIRMAN DR PAUL VOGEL

General Manager Kim Taylor

Strategic Support Assessment and Compliance Strategic Policy and Planning Business Operations Director: Colin Murray Director: Anthony Sutton Director: Darren Foster Director: Steve Beilby

Mining and Industrial Marine Ecosystems Information Management Assessments

Planning and Infrastructure Terrestrial Ecosystems Business Processes Assessments

Executive and administrative Compliance Strategic Policy support to the EPA Director: SteveBeilby Business Operations • • • • • The divisionisresponsible for: Ministerial approval conditions. schemes. Thedivisionalsomonitorscompliancewith developments), strategicproposals andforplanning projects, industrial,mining,petroleum andinfrastructure significant proposals (thatis,proposals involvingmajor environmental impactassessmentsupporttotheEPA for The AssessmentandComplianceDivisionprovides Assessment Division andCompliance four divisions: The OfficeoftheEnvironmental Protection Authority has Organisational structure ofthe Office Environmental Protection Authority monitoring theimplementationofproposals. conditions, and managing environmental approval statementsand assisting theMinisterforEnvironment inissuingand Minister forEnvironment on environmental assessments preparing draftEPA reports andrecommendations tothe and regional schemes subdivisions, townplanningschemesandamendments the EPA onallmajorinfrastructure proposals, major providing environmental impactassessmentadviceto strategic proposals andtownplanningschemes processes on behalf of the EPA, for significant proposals, administering theenvironmental impactassessment provide adviceandsupporttotheEPA, theMinisterfor The StrategicPolicyandPlanningDivision’s role isto Strategic Policy andPlanning Division • • • • • • • • Environment by: andotherpartsofGovernment innovative technicalorpolicysolutions. identifying emergingenvironmental pressures and approaches, and the naturalenvironment and informsuccessfulpolicy conducting investigationstoimprove understandingof agencies Federal, Stateandlocalgovernment including industry, environmental organisationsandother developing strategicpartnershipswithstakeholders, contributing tostrategicenvironmental planning Environmental Protection Policies managing theformulationandreview ofstatutory and review ofenvironmental policiesandguidelines coordinating thedevelopment,analysis,implementation issues ingeneral providing technicalandpolicyadviceonenvironment proposals andschemes environmental impactassessmentofsignificant providing technicalandpolicyadviceinrelation to 37 Office of the Environmental Protection Authority

Business Operations Division Performance management The Business Operations Division provides a range of framework support services to the EPA and the OEPA including: The OEPA’s management framework is consistent with the • ministerial liaison Government goal for social and environmental responsibility, which is to ensure that economic activity is managed in • legal services and Freedom of Information (FOI) a socially and environmentally responsible manner for the • financial services long-term benefit of the State. • information management The desired outcome is an efficient and effective • spatial data analysis environmental assessment and compliance system. • media and communications, and To achieve this outcome, the OEPA performs two services: • executive support and administrative services to the 1. Environmental Impact Assessment and Policies EPA. 2. Environmental Compliance Audits. This division also facilitates and administers the corporate To deliver our services, the OEPA undertakes three key services arrangements with DEC. functions: Environmental impact assessment is undertaken Strategic Support Division to ensure the environmental impacts of development proposals and planning schemes are properly assessed This division provides strategic support to the Chairman of and that appropriate conditions are applied. the EPA and the General Manager of the OEPA. Environmental policies and strategic advice contribute to EPA and Government environmental policy so that environmental values are protected. Compliance and enforcement is undertaken to ensure projects and planning schemes comply with Ministerial approval conditions. Audits monitor compliance and the Minister is advised of any non-compliance. During 2011—12 there was a strong focus on enhancing the way the OEPA operates as a department, and developing a robust Corporate Planning and Organisational Development Framework to guide the department through 2012—14. This framework integrates our corporate and organisational development roles in the context of the EPA’s Strategic Plan 2010—2013. 38 Financial targets the department,assummarisedinfollowingtables. Efficiency Indicatorsshowthecostofservicesdelivered by department achieveditsdepartment-leveloutcomeandthe Effectiveness Indicatorsshowtheextenttowhich Indicators. ‘KPIs’. KPIscomprisebothEffectiveness andEfficiency level outcomesthrough KeyPerformanceIndicatorsor effectiveness ofitsservicesinachievingdesired agency The OEPA evaluates,measures andreports onthe operational performanceofOEPA. a transparenttomonitorthe wayfortheStateGovernment and performancetargetstobeachieved.Theagreement is to Government-desiredoutcomes,servicesbedelivered Thesetargetsrelatetargets setbytheStateGovernment. Each yeartheOEPA isrequired tomeetanumberof Resource agreement Performance analysis andtrends staff level equivalence (FTE) Approved fulltime held (decrease) incash Net increase/ Total equity Net costofservices (expense limit) Total costofservices Target 15,269 16,509 $ (650) 103 517 (1)

Actual 13,863 13,991 1,555 $ 969 96

Variation (1,039) $ 1,619 1,406 2,518 (2) 7

Key Indicators Performance 3 Statement inPart5. 2 1

audit completed Average costperenvironmental 2:EnvironmentalComplianceAudits Service policy developed Average costperenvironmental assessment Average costperenvironmental 1:EnvironmentalImpactAssessmentandPolicies Service Key EfficiencyIndicators have beenmet where allenvironmental conditions Percentage ofauditedprojects meet agreed initialtimelines Percentage ofassessmentsthat assessment those predicted duringthe with actualimpactsnotexceeding Percentage ofapproved projects compliance system environmental assessmentand Outcome: Anefficientandeffective Key Effectiveness Indicators Explanations forthevariations betweentargetandactualresultsarepresented Explanations arecontained in Note26totheFinancialStatements-Explanator As specifiedinthebudget statements for2011—12. in theKeyPerformance IndicatorsinPart 5. 2011-12 $263,689 Target $49,077 $23,264 100% 80% 80% (1)

2011-12 $120,693 $40,688 Actual $27,594 100% 87% 80%

Variation ($142,996) ($8,389) $4,330 7% 0% 0% y (3)

39 Office of the Environmental Protection Authority

Environmental Impact Assessment and Overview Policies A key role of the EPA is to assess the environmental impacts of proposed developments and report to the Manage the environmental impact assessment process and coordinate Minister for Environment. A total of 408 development the development of policy for the Office to enable sound environmental proposals and planning schemes were referred to the advice to be provided to the Government, developers and the public in EPA for consideration in 2011—12: a slight decrease in accordance with statutory functions. comparison to 2010—11. Of these, the EPA determined that 17 referred proposals warranted formal assessment. 2010–11 2011–12 2011–12 Variance actual target actual of target to A further 120 referrals did not require assessment but $ $ $ actual specific advice was provided to proponents and approval $ agencies, primarily in relation to planning schemes. Total cost of service 11,769,231 15,113,000 12,231,628 (2,881,372) In setting the level of assessment and carrying out environmental impact assessment, the EPA is guided by Efficiency indicators the Environmental Impact Assessment Administrative Procedures 2010. Average cost per 39,336 49,077 40,688 (-8,389) environmental The EPA began a review of the 2010 procedures in assessment January 2012. The purpose of the review is to improve the Average cost per 192,162 263,689 120,693 (-142,996) certainty and clarity of the procedures based on lessons environmental learnt during its operation over the past 18 months. The policy developed review is considered minor because the fundamental objectives, principles and practices identified in the procedures will not change considerably. The EPA consulted with stakeholders to inform the review. The EPA also sought comment on the existing procedures from its Stakeholder Reference Group (SRG), which includes representatives from peak industry groups, government and non-government organisations, the university sector and environmental consultants, and invited comment from the broader public. The new procedures are expected to be finalised in the third quarter of 2012.

40 Table 1:Completedassessmentsin2011—12 Planning andInfrastructure. this sectionundertheheadingsofMiningandIndustrial Some ofthemore significantassessmentsare discussed in proposals assessedisshowninAppendix1. assessments for2011—12showninTable 1.Alistofall released 38reports, withthetypeandnumberof Under thecurrent AdministrativeProcedures, theEPA Total Noise Regulation17Variation Reports Planning –Section48AReports Changes toConditions–Section46Reports Audit -Required underMinisterialConditions Category A Assessment onProponent Information– Review Reports Programme (ERMP)andPublicEnvironmental Environmental ReviewandManagement Type ofassessment Number 38 15 12 1 1 1 8 mining projects assessedbytheEPA withkeydevelopment The iron ore industrycurrently represents themajorityof Mining andindustrial generally atasmallerscale. and are planningnewmines,although advantage ofthemarketopportunities ore entrantsare alsolooking attaking already progressing. OtherPilbarairon mine andinfrastructure assessments during 2012,inadditiontothecurrent proposals foranumberof new mines Major companiesare intending tosubmit into thefuture. underway tomaintainthislevelofactivity and portinfrastructure. Planning isalso and expandedminesadditionalrail means thatthere willneed tobenew almost onebilliontonnes.Thisincrease iron ore exportsoverthenextdecadeto are planningondoublingtheirannual The majoriron ore minersinthePilbara relation tosuchanapproach. Key agencieshavealsobeenconsultedin developments. more strategicapproach totheirfuture to explore opportunitiesarisingfrom a companies tounderstandtheirplansand Discussions have been held with the major proposals inthePilbara. for twelveiron ore miningandassociatedinfrastructure In 2011—12,theOEPA prepared assessmentreports areas beingthePilbara,MidwestandYilgarn. S Figure 2:Locationofmining andindustrial O ( ! P P U E ( ! ( ! ( ! ( ! E T R G E H ( ! T ( ! A L

H W O O U I S ro ( ! ( ! C ra E t i ( ! l h n

O S a ( ! e n

T Y O n r i u ( ! N d ( ! re m W G ( ! E ( !

G R H 2011—12 proposals assessed during ( ! a E E ( ! s A A T T

B S ( ! E O L ( ! ( ! ( ! ( ! U T ( ! ( ! T ( ! H ( ! ( ! E R N M I ( ! D

W E S G T O L D F I E L P D I L S B / K E A I S M R P A B E E R R A L N E C Y E 41 Office of the Environmental Protection Authority

While the mining industry has done considerable planning Iron ore to meet its business objectives, information to support improved local and regional conservation outcomes is Cloudbreak Life of Mine Project still being prepared. A key part of that information will be finalised and published during 2012, following an analysis of Fortescue Metals Group Ltd’s Cloudbreak Life of Mine data from the 2002—07 Pilbara Biodiversity Survey. Project was assessed as a Public Environmental Review (PER). Future concentration of mines in parts of the Pilbara, such as around the margins of the Fortescue Marsh, and the The proposal involves the expansion of the existing large scale of mining expansion in general raises the need to Cloudbreak Iron Ore Mine along the northern boundary consider cumulative issues more consistently. Increasingly, of the Fortescue Marsh, by increasing the number of pits these issues will have to be examined at landscape levels and depth of mining, development of additional waste within which multiple mines and companies are currently landforms, an increase in groundwater reinjection and and will continue to operate. This information is informing an abstraction bores, and an upgrading of the ore processing OEPA project looking at a more strategic approach to the facility. An additional 8,133 ha of vegetation will be required assessment of Pilbara iron ore mines, which allows a range to be cleared for the expansion resulting in a total of of impacts beyond biodiversity values to be addressed, 13,100 ha for the entire Cloudbreak Life of Mine Project. including complex water management matters. The proposal will also have an increased rate of ore production of up to 50 million tonnes per annum (Mtpa). The use of a more strategic approach is generally supported by iron ore miners. Such an approach is also Key environmental factors evaluated were flora and consistent with the application of the Commonwealth vegetation, conservation significant fauna, surface water EPBC Act. flows, groundwater quantity and quality, rehabilitation and closure, and residual impacts. In addition to iron ore mines, the EPA also assessed a variety of other mining and industrial proposals across The EPA concluded that the proposal could be the state, including: the Wiluna Uranium Project and Gold implemented subject to a number of recommended Mining Developments on Lake Lefroy in the Goldfields; the conditions. extension to the Kemerton Silica Sand Dredge Mining in The EPA recognised that the protection of the Fortescue the South West; and the Ammonium Nitrate Production Marsh is important and recommended conditions including Expansion Project in the Kwinana industrial area. management of groundwater levels at and within the The key mining and industrial proposals assessed in Fortescue Marsh, and management of groundwater and 2011—12 are described below. surface water quality. Given the scale of clearing and the position of the project within the landscape, the EPA identified the need to progressively re-create landforms, re-establish surface water flows and revegetate. In order to achieve this, the EPA recommended conditions that provided for appropriate surface water management and the backfilling of pits, 42 two separate borefields beingstudied. More testworkis Large waterrequirements fortheproposal haveresulted in previously recorded. species havebeenextended significantlyfurthernorththan region. Aswell,theknownrangesofthree trapdoorspider communities andseveralpriority floraspeciesinthe the distributionsof of theproposal, there isnowmuchmore knownabout As aresult ofthebiological surveysrequired forassessment rehabilitation andmineclosure. drainage, groundwater supply, significantheritageareas, acidandmetalliferousfauna, surfacewaterflowpatterns, short rangeendemicfauna(trapdoorspiders),aquatic The keyenvironmental factors were vegetationandflora, of Geraldton. formation rocks intheMid West, about400 kmnorth-east rock andtailingsfacilities.Theminesiteisinbandediron was approved inSeptember2006,aswellthewaste The proposal istoexpandtheoriginaliron ore mine,which Oakajee PortandRailPtyLtd. Metal Ltd,MitsubishiDevelopmentCorporationPtyLtdand PER assessmentfrom itssubsidiarycompaniesMurchison Crosslands Resources Ltdmanagedtheinputsfor Jack HillsStage2MineDevelopment EPA Report1429waspublishedon8February2012. implementation oftheproposal. conservation initiativeforresidual impactsasaresult of of weeds,andcontributionstoastrategicregional weed managementtoensure noincrease intheabundance indirect impactstoconservationsignificantvegetation, Other conditionsrecommended bytheEPA includelimiting progressively throughout thelifeofmine. establishment oflandforms,andrehabilitation tooccur Triodia melvillei Priority1ecological protected. and ensure thatgroundwater-dependent ecosystemswillbe proposed andisintendedtoaccuratelydefinetheiryields are thepresence ofconservationsignificant floraspecies, Key environmental factorsrelevant tothe twoproposals RangeW4Eastdeposits. Windarling the area. Cliffs haveproposed tominetheDeception and Operationstoinclude newdepositsin expand theYilgarn known asCliffs’ Operations.Cliffs Yilgarn havesoughtto Range, about400 kmeastofPerth.Theseare collectively ranges atKoolyanobbing,MtJacksonandtheWindarling operating iron ore minesacross bandediron formation Cliffs AsiaPacificIron Ore PtyLtd(Cliffs) haveexisting Operations Yilgarn EPA Report1413waspublishedon15August2011. • • • • • • • subject torecommended conditionsspecifying: The EPA foundthattheproposal couldbeimplemented adjacent totheminefootprint. the protection ofvariousindigenous heritagesites stygofauna communities,and to groundwater-dependent ecosystemsincluding monitoring ofborefields with respect topotentialimpacts patterns tailings storagefacilitiesandtosurfacewaterflow attention towaterqualityfrom thewasterock and trenches strategies tominimiseimpactsfaunainwaterpipeline to the protection of significant habitats (particularly in regard weed control and theminimisationofclearingtothem further documentationofvegetationandfloraspecies Idiosoma nigrum spiders) 43 Office of the Environmental Protection Authority

specially protected fauna (principally Malleefowl), and Uranium rehabilitation and mine closure. Wiluna Uranium Project Biological surveys for the two projects identified the presence of the Declared Rare Flora Ricinocarpos brevis, Toro Energy Limited proposes to develop the Centipede a number of priority flora species and a new species. and Lake Way deposits located 30 km south and 15 km Windarling Range was also considered to be key Malleefowl south-east of Wiluna respectively. The project would habitat. involve mining, processing and transport of uranium oxide concentrate from the proposed mine site to the Western The EPA considered that the two proposals could be Australian border over a 14 year mine life. Production implemented provided that further flora surveys were carried of up to 1,200 tonnes per annum (tpa) of uranium oxide out to identify additional populations of Priority 1 and new concentrate is expected. flora species and that research and translocation trials were put in place to offset the impacts to Ricinocarpos brevis. The Wiluna uranium project is the first uranium mine to be assessed under section 38 of the EP Act. Management plans consistent with Cliffs’ existing operations were recommended to protect Malleefowl During assessment of the proposal the EPA consulted populations while the EPA concluded that rehabilitation and extensively with the DMP and the Radiological Council and closure could be managed by the Department of Mines concluded that the existing regulatory framework provides and Petroleum (DMP) in accordance with the DMP/EPA a comprehensive legislative system for regulating uranium Guidelines for Preparing Mine Closure Plans (2011). mining and transport. EPA Report 1426 was published on 9 January 2012. The EPA determined that the proposal could meet its objectives for key environmental factors, including radiation management, transport, mine closure and rehabilitation, groundwater and water supply, surface water, air quality, flora and vegetation, fauna and habitat and Aboriginal heritage. The main ecological issues identified related to the protection of the plant species Tecticornia and the protection of underground stygofauna species. While stygofauna were unlikely to be impacted significantly, the EPA recommended strict conditions, including The main ecological issues identified offsets, to ensure the protection of the Tecticornia. The related to the protection of the plant offsets will contribute to the EPA’s objective to maintain the abundance, diversity, geographic distribution and species Tecticornia and the protection of productivity of flora species through research to improve underground stygofauna species. Tecticornia knowledge. is a genus of succulent, salt tolerant plants. EPA Report 1437 was published on 21 May 2012. 44 ERMP inthe first quarterof2012—13. August 2011.TheEPA expects thesubmissionofdraft The scopingdocumentwas approved bytheEPA in uranium oxideconcentrate. mining overa15yearperiod toproduce upto3,600 tpaof Perth intheShire ofEastPilbara.Theproposal includes uranium mineoperation1,200kmnorth-north-east of Cameco Corporation(Australia)proposes todevelopa Kintyre UraniumProject of thedraftERMPinNovember2012. EPA inSeptember2010.TheEPA expectsthesubmission The proponent’s scopingdocumentwasapproved bythe concentrate overa10yearperiod. involves production ofupto 1,000tpaofuraniumoxide Theproposal mine operation105 kmsouth-eastofWiluna. Mega UraniumLimitedproposes todevelopauranium Lake MaitlandUraniumProject the ERMPdocument. May 2010.TheEPA iscurrently awaitingthefirstdraftof The scopingdocumentwasapproved bytheEPA in produce upto3,500tpaofuraniumoxideconcentrate. west ofMtKeithandinvolvesminingover30yearsto The proposal istodevelopauraniummineoperation60 km Yeelirrie UraniumProject Management Programme (ERMP)level. these uraniumproposals attheEnvironmental Review and Uranium Project. TheEPA setthelevelofassessmentforall Uranium Project andCamecoCorporation’s Kintyre Yeelirrie UraniumProject, MegaUraniumLimited’s Mega The EPA isassessingthree otheruraniumprojects —the Status ofotheruraniumprojects

Browse Oil andgas process, in2012. which describesthestrategic proposal assessment The EPA released formal assessmentasastrategicproposal. the JamesPricePointsitethatissubjectofcurrent liquefied naturalgasprecinct intheKimberley. Itistherefore James PricePointhadbeenchosenasthesitefora On 22December2008thePremier announcedthat is likelytobelow.” The riskoffuture expansion beingsignificantlyconstrained in theJamesPricePointarea are likelytobemanageable. “The environmental impacts andrisksoflocatingaprecinct At thattimetheEPA concludedthat: precinct. EP ActaboutanumberofsitesintheKimberleyforanLNG In 2008theEPA issuedadviceundersection16(e)ofthe Previous process proponent fortheprecinct. Limited hasbeenappointedasapotentialfoundation the proposal onbehalfoftheState.Woodside Energy The DepartmentofStateDevelopment(DSD)ismanaging Minister forStateDevelopment. Commonwealth. Theproponent fortheprecinct isthe north ofBroome. Thisisajointassessmentwiththe at JamesPricePointontheDampierPeninsula60km Browse liquefiednaturalgas(LNG)processing precinct The EPA isformallyassessing,asastrategicproposal, the EPB 17 Strategic andderivedproposals

, 45 Office of the Environmental Protection Authority

Key factors Coal

The key factors for the Browse proposal are marine Vasse Coal Project fauna, marine environmental quality, benthic habitats, terrestrial biota, landscape processes, surface and ground The Vasse Coal Project (VCP) consisting of an underground water, Aboriginal and natural heritage, air emissions and coal mine, coal handling and preparation plant, associated greenhouse gases. mine infrastructure and transportation, was proposed by Vasse Coal Management Pty Ltd (VCM), and managed by During the course of the EPA’s assessment, additional LD Operations Pty Ltd. The proposal was to be located issues have come to light. A highly credible public approximately 15 km east-north-east of Margaret River. submission, provided in confidence to the EPA, highlighted the presence of important fossilised dinosaur footprints near The VCP was referred to the EPA on 13 October 2010, James Price Point. The EPA responded by requiring the and considered at a level of assessment of Assessment on proponent to source independent international experts to Proponent Information (API) Category B (environmentally examine the area and report on the significance of footprints unacceptable). they found there. In assessing the VCP the EPA concluded that: The experts recommended that the northern 900 m of the shore crossing to the precinct should not be • even though some of the significant impacts/risks may developed. The proponent accepted this recommendation be considered as having a low probability of occurring, and modified the proposal. The EPA sees this as a very the environmental consequences of some low probability good example of the value of public submissions on the events are such (i.e. serious, widespread or irreversible) environmental impact assessment process resulting in that when the proposal is taken as a whole, on balance, important changes being made to the proposal. presents unacceptable risks to important values Additional information on Greater Bilby activity in the • due to the nature of the environment where the proposal precinct surroundings, and on previously undetected turtle was to be located, even with additional investigations, it nesting near James Price Point, were also supplied by was unlikely to provide the EPA with an adequate level community members and considered by the EPA. Again, of confidence that impacts/risks could be managed as these are good examples of community engagement with uncertainty would remain the environmental impact assessment process. • due to the nature of the proposed development, adaptive management methodologies are not practical, The EPA also appreciated the opportunity to meet a and range of interest groups in Broome and Perth. These meetings allowed the EPA to further understand a range • the proposal could not be reasonably modified to meet of perspectives about this environment of the James Price the EPA’s objectives. Point area. It was therefore the judgement of the EPA that the proposal The EPA’s report and recommendations on the Browse was environmentally unacceptable and the proposal should LNG Precinct is due to be released in the first quarter of not be implemented. 2012—13. 46 7 February 2012. determined thattheproposal maynotbeimplementedon after consultationwithrelevant decisionmakingauthorities, The MinisterforEnvironment dismissedtheappealsand, received ontheEPA Report. Minister inMay2011(Report1395).Fiveappealswere The EPA released itsreport andrecommendations tothe

Ammonium NitrateProduction ExpansionProject: Other • Review. Theseare: assessed bytheEPA atthelevelofPublicEnvironmental Three proposalswaste intoenergyare toturn being Waste toEnergyProposals EPA Report1407waspublishedon18July2011. to greenhouse gasabatementanddecommissioning. implemented subjecttorecommended conditionsrelating The EPA concludedthattheproposal couldbe greenhouse gasemissions. air quality, noise,liquidwastedisposal,watersupply, and The keyenvironmental factorsevaluatedbytheEPA were 936,000 tpa. ammonium nitrateproduction capacityfrom 520,000 tpa to engineering someexistingcomponentsinorder toincrease additional componentsintotheexistingfacilityandre- The proposed expansionincludestheincorporationof Nitrate Production FacilitywasassessedatthelevelofPER. CSBP Limited’s proposal toexpanditsKwinanaAmmonium Phase 2,Kwinana landfill site. preferable. Theproject would besituatedontheRedHill of recyclable materials)shouldthisbefoundto using ananaerobic digestionprocess (aftertheremoval optionofproducingalternative energyandcompost a gasificationprocess. This proposal alsohasan waste (aftertheremoval of recyclable materials)using (EMRC) toproduce energy from metropolitan solid a proposalMetropolitan bytheEastern RegionCouncil 47 Office of the Environmental Protection Authority

• a proposal by New Energy Corporation to produce to undertake a study of waste to energy technology. The energy from metropolitan solid waste residuals (after consultant will provide information to the EPA on other the removal of recyclable material by other recyclers) legislative and regulatory frameworks, operating waste to commercial and industrial, and construction and energy plants and the health and environmental impacts of demolition waste via a gasification process. This waste to energy plants. proposal is situated in East Rockingham. Waste to energy projects have the advantage of diverting • a proposal by New Energy Corporation to produce non-recyclable materials from landfill and recovering an energy from metropolitan solid waste (after the removal energy resource from them. Much of the energy produced of economically recyclable material), commercial and would be classified as ‘renewable’ and a reduction in industrial, construction and demolition, green waste, and greenhouse gases compared to landfilling is expected. oily waste via a gasification process. This proposal is There are a number of plants already using gasification situated in Port Hedland. technology operating around the world. Gasification is a thermal process in a limited oxygen Read more about the EPA’s study of waste to energy environment which produces a combustible gas (syngas) facilities in Part 3. from waste material. The gas is subsequently burnt to produce heat which is used to generate steam, which in turn generates electricity via a steam turbine. The anaerobic digestion process is the breaking down of organic matter in the absence of oxygen to produce biogas which can be burnt in a gas engine to produce electricity. Liquid fertiliser and compost can also be produced as products. The Red Hill gasification facility would be able to process approximately 200,000 tonnes of waste per annum. If anaerobic digestion is chosen for the Red Hill project 150,000 tonnes of waste per annum could be processed. East Rockingham and Port Hedland gasification facilities would be able to process approximately 140,000 tonnes and between 86,000 to 205,000 tonnes of waste per annum producing 15 and 18 megawatts of electricity respectively. The EPA will be considering the impacts to the environment from the proposals in its assessments, including impacts from air emissions (including odour), liquid waste, noise and solid waste products. The EPA has employed a consultant

48 report in2012—13. number ofother proposals onwhichthe EPA expectsto 2004—13 Forest ManagementPlanFinalAudit,and a Extension andtheMangles BayTourist Precinct, the The EPA alsoprogressed assessment oftheRoeHighway Hedland. Multi-user Iron Ore Export(Landside)Facility, bothatPort such astheproposed BHP BillitonOuterHarbourandthe with theEPA reporting onmajorprojects foriron ore export The Pilbararegion hasbeen anarea ofparticularinterest, major area ofactivity. ports, marinasandmajorinfrastructure hasagainbeena proposals andoverthelast yeartheformalassessmentof The EPA considersabroad rangeofinfrastructure dealt withearlierintheplanningprocess. sub-division proposals ifenvironmental issueswere not proposals andfrom timetowillformallyassess structure plans,developmentplansandsub-division The EPA alsoprovides advice,where appropriate, on for anyremaining environmental impacts. minimised, andappropriate managementtobeputinplace for significantenvironmental impactstobeavoidedand planning process. Thisprovides greater opportunity environmental constraintscanbeidentifiedearlyinthe the referral ofschemeamendments,sothatpotential State agenciesandthedevelopmentindustrybefore Increasingly, theEPA isengagingwithlocalgovernments, ongoing area ofactivityduring2011—12. Consideration ofschemeamendmentshasbeenan Authority torefer schemeamendmentstotheEPA. andthe Metropolitanlocal governments Redevelopment Metropolitan RedevelopmentAuthorityAct2011 The Planning andinfrastructure Planning andDevelopmentAct2005 andthe require

Assessment ofmarinaproposals Planning marinas and canal estates. and managementofwater qualityin for Environment theongoingmonitoring policy whenrecommending totheMinister for theprinciplesandrequirements ofthis Developments Canal EstatesandArtificial Waterway Development ControlPolicy–DC1.8 Planning Commissionpublishedthe More recently, theWesternAustralian Management StrategyReportNo.6 Framework EPA’s natural waterwaysinthecontextof water andsedimentqualityinadjacent environmental impactsofmarinas on The EPA willcontinuetoassessthe responsibility foritsmanagement. is operationalanddefiningtheongoing and sedimentqualityoncethemarina impacts onandmanagementofwater flora andfauna.Anotheristheongoing of waterandsedimentquality, andaquatic reclamation ontheenvironmental factors related effects from dredging and marinas isthemanagementofconstruction environmental impactassessmentof A keyissueassociatedwiththe Sound. endofCockburn in ManglesBayatthesouthern Peel-Harvey estuaryandtheManglesBayTourist Precinct of twomarinaproposals —thePointGrey Marinain the During 2011—12theEPA wasinvolvedintheassessment Environmental QualityManagement andthe . TheEPA willhaveregard State Water Quality . S Figure 3:Locationofplanning and O P P U E E ( ! ( ! T R G E H T A L

H ( ! W S I P n ( ! C E l f a r O S ( ! n a T Y n s N t i n r W G E u g R c H assessed during 2011—12 infrastructure proposals t E E u A A r T e T ( ! ( !

( ! B ( ! S E O L U T T H E R N M I D

W E S G T O ( ! L D F I E L P D I L S B / K E A I S M R P A B E E R R A L N E C Y E 49 Office of the Environmental Protection Authority

Point Grey Marina of any planning approval by the Shire of Murray, a fund will be set up to provide for this future maintenance dredging of The proposal to construct and operate a land-based marina the channel. on the western side of the Point Grey peninsula and a 2.5 km channel across the Harvey Estuary was assessed The EPA noted in its assessment report that there are by the EPA as a PER. uncertainties regarding estimates of the siltation rate in the channel and the potential for release of nutrient. The marina plans to accommodate up to 300 boat It therefore recommended conditions to require monitoring pens through the installation of finger jetties and floating of sediments and water quality in the development area, pontoons. About 5.1 ha of foreshore will accommodate and the implementation of contingency actions if excessive 200 parking bays and four boat ramps. Groynes will be releases of nutrients are detected. This could require an constructed on either side of the entry channel to protect increased frequency of maintenance dredging compared to the estuary from erosion and sedimentation, as well as to that predicted by the development proponent. provide a safe passage for boats entering and departing the marina. EPA Report 1420 Point Grey Marina was published on 5 December 2011. The EPA concluded that the proposal could be implemented subject to recommended conditions. The Mangles Bay Marina Based Tourist Precinct recommended conditions included measures to protect foreshore vegetation, terrestrial flora and fauna, estuary The proposal by Cedar Wood Properties Limited proposal, water and sediment quality and limited the timing of a joint venture with Landcorp, is to develop a tourist dredging of the navigation channel to the winter and based marina development located in Mangles Bay at the spring months to avoid breeding times of key species. southern end of Cockburn Sound. The proposal comprises Environmental offsets would also be necessary to mitigate a single entrance marina to accommodate up to 500 the impacts to terrestrial vegetation and fauna. pens and moorings and a surrounding land development comprising tourism, commercial, public open space and The EPA did not recommend any conditions for monitoring residential land uses. It is being assessed as a PER. or management of water quality within the marina itself in view of the procedures and requirements of the Western Key environmental factors likely to be evaluated in the Australian Planning Commission Development Control report are marine environmental quality, benthic habitat, Policy – DC1.8 Canal Estates and Artificial Waterway coastal processes, terrestrial water quality (including Lake Developments. Richmond, surface and groundwater), terrestrial flora and vegetation, terrestrial fauna and conservation estate and A significant issue associated with approval of this Bush Forever sites. development is ensuring that adequate funds are available for maintenance dredging of the navigation channel to The PER document was released for public review from avoid excessive build up of monosulphidic black oozes and February to April 2012 and 262 submissions were received. possible nutrient releases to the estuary. The EPA has prepared a summary of submission issues and was waiting on a response from the proponent as at the During the assessment the proponent estimated that end of 2011—12. dredging would be required every five to 10 years. As part 50 major infrastructure has again beenamajor area ofactivity.major infrastructure marinasand over year formal last the assessment the ofports, EPAThe proposalsand considers abroad rangeofinfrastructure release itsreport in2012—13. recommendations totheMinister. TheEPA expectsto response from theproponent toprepare itsreport and The EPA willusethePER,submissionsand Roe HighwayExtension Infrastructure the proposal in2012—13. The EPA expectstoconcludeitsassessmentandreport on agencies, andfrom members ofthepublic. were received fromandnongovernment government September 2011.Aconsiderablenumberofsubmissions The publicreview periodforthePERdocumentclosedin which arechainoftheBeeliarWetlands. partoftheeastern Scheme in1963.ItalignsbetweenNorthandBibralakes, a road reserve thatwassetasideintheMetropolitan Region Generally theproposal isorientatedeast-westlargelywithin Wetlands. to flora,fauna,aBushForever siteandtheBeeliar vegetation, andpotentiallyresult inenvironmental impacts five kilometres andwouldinvolvetheclearingofnative The proposed extensioncoversadistanceofapproximately the EPA asaPER. and anextensionofMurdoch Drive,isbeingassessedby to StockRoad,includingmodificationsintersecting roads Roe Highwayfrom itscurrent terminusatKwinanaFreeway The proposal byMainRoadsWesternAustraliatoextend 51 Office of the Environmental Protection Authority

Expansion and development of Pilbara Ports has then been able to assess the likely environmental impact by the application of a risk-based framework to Overview evaluate the cumulative irreversible loss of, or serious During 2011—12, the EPA progressed assessment of damage to, benthic primary producer habitats. the proposed expansion or development of three iron-ore Similarly, all three proposals require marine dredging to be ports in the Pilbara Region. The first of these, Anketell Point conducted and the predicted impacts will be presented Port, located 30 km north-east of Karratha, would see the and assessed in the context of the EPA’s EAG 7 Marine development of a ‘greenfield’ site that would have both Dredging Proposals (September 2011). significant terrestrial and marine infrastructure components associated with the construction of the facility. Port Hedland Outer Harbour Development The second of the proposals, the Outer Harbour The EPA assessed BHP Billiton Iron Ore’s (BHPBIO) Development at Port Hedland, is a stand-alone port proposal to construct and operate the Outer Harbour that would operate in conjunction with the existing Development in Port Hedland as a PER. Inner Harbour, which is understood to be close to the maximum allocated capacity. As with Anketell Port, this The proposal is recognised as a project of state significance proposal includes significant terrestrial and marine based and, if implemented, will enable BHPBIO to increase its infrastructure as part of its implementation. export of iron ore from 240 Mtpa to 480 Mtpa. Finally, the Multi-user Iron Ore Facility proposal, located The proposal involves the construction of a new wharf within Port Hedland’s Inner Harbour, is the smallest of offshore from Finucane Island, a four kilometre jetty, and the three in terms of capacity, however was assessed dredged shipping channel and basin. The proposal also against similar environmental impacts of marine habitat includes the construction and operation of new rail loops, and environmental quality, emissions (dust and noise) and ore stockpile facilities, lay-down area, road and associated terrestrial fauna, flora and vegetation. supporting infrastructure. In conducting its assessment of all three proposals, the In its assessment of the proposal, the EPA determined that EPA was able to rely on a strong policy framework within the key environmental factors requiring detailed evaluation which the key environmental factors were identified and in the report were marine habitat (mangroves and subtidal assessed. The EPA also received positive feedback from marine benthic communities), marine fauna, marine the proponents involved that EPA policy provided clear environmental quality, terrestrial biodiversity, and dust and guidance during all stages of the assessment of the port noise emissions. proposals. With regard to the assessment of the environmental factors This was evident for all three proposals in the proponent of noise and dust emissions that would be likely to result application of the EPA’s EAG 3 Protection of Benthic from the proposal, the EPA, through its close working Primary Producer Habitats in Western Australia’s Marine relationship with the Department of Environment and Environment (2009) to formulate the environmental review Conservation, determined that the most appropriate way to documentation in accordance with a set of defined regulate dust emissions is under Part V of the EP Act. overarching environmental protection principles. The EPA 52 Statement 890whichwaspublishedon28February 2012. implemented subjecttotheconditionssetoutinMinisterial other decisionmakingMinistersthattheproposal couldbe The MinisterforEnvironment reached agreement with EPA Report1427waspublishedon23January2012. recommended conditions. factors, provided thattheproponent implementsthe the EPA’s objectivesinrelation tothekeyenvironmental environmentally acceptableandcouldbemanagedtomeet The EPA concludedthattheproposal waslikelytobe $10 million. residual impact.Thecostofthesemeasures isestimated at a seriesofmanagementmeasures tooffset thelevel of agencies,recommendedBHPBIO andothergovernment In response tothis,theEPA, through consultationwith communities, marinefaunaandenvironmental quality. to mangrove habitat,sub-tidalBPPHandotherbenthic there waslikelytobeanunavoidableresidual impact wherever practicable,itwasdeterminedbytheEPA that minimise andavoidsignificantenvironmental impact Despite aproposal designbyBHPBIOthatsoughtto (March 2010)oritsapproved updates. the operation oftheproposal are managedinaccordance with dust emissionsfrom allsources duringconstructionand to theproponent requirement toensure thatnoiseand condition fornoiseordust,butmadespecific reference As such,theEPA didnotrecommend anenvironmental Port HedlandAirQualityandNoiseManagementPlan The port of Port Hedland is the largest tonnage port in port tonnage largest Hedlandisthe ofPort port The Australia, largest bulk mineral export port in the world inthe Australia, bulkport largest mineralexport

Limited, Brockman Resources LimitedandFerrAusLimited) The proposal byNorthWest Infrastructure (AtlasIron Multi-user IronOreExportFacility–PortHedland existing facilitiesintheportofPortHedland. company activelyminingore andexportingthrough the developing newiron ore projects inthePilbara,withone for export.Eachoftheshareholders isexploringand NWI shareholder’s minesandloadthisproduct ontoships at PortHedlandtoreceive andstockpiletheore from The current proposal wouldprovide additionalportfacilities Statement 859during2011—12. January 2011)andwasgrantedapproval underMinisterial South West Creek Dredging andReclamationProject proposal wasassessedseparately( The dredging required fortheberthandwharfofthis export. conveyor, toshippingberthsinSouthWest Creek for being reclaimed anddelivered, viaanelevatedoverland transport atBoodarietostockpilesviaaconveyorbefore The proposal isthatiron ore wouldbetransferred from rail assessed onproponent information(API). land andtheBoodarieMulti-userStockyard Area was existing orproposed PortHedlandAuthority(PHPA) (NWI) toconstructandoperateportinfrastructure withinthe and the largest iron ore port in the world inthe iron largest ore andthe port ( PHPA Annual Report 2011 Report Annual PHPA EPA Report1380 , ).

53 Office of the Environmental Protection Authority

The EPA noted that the proponent’s proposal would The proposal being assessed is consistent with the draft result in the loss of up to 4.5 ha of mangroves within the Anketell Port and Strategic Industrial Area Port Master development envelope of the proposal and concluded that Plan (Port Master Plan) prepared by the Dampier Port this loss is not a significant contribution to the cumulative Authority and the Department of State Development. API loss figure within the Port Hedland Industrial Area Local has amended its original port design to accommodate the Assessment Unit. requirements of the Port Master Plan. In particular, the Port Master Plan design comprises a single causeway stepping During its assessment, the EPA noted that the proposal directly off the mainland which now avoids Dixon Island, an would marginally increase ambient dust levels and the area important for indigenous heritage and fauna values. number of exceedances in Port Hedland, but that it The amended proposal also reduces impacts on Bouguer would be a minor contributor to the overall dust load Passage. in Port Hedland. Further, the EPA concluded that the most appropriate way to reduce dust levels in Port Development of the port infrastructure to its full capacity Hedland is through continuous improvement involving a will be staged and likely to occur over at least a twenty coordinated port-wide approach for all port users, and dust year period. API’s initial requirements for the port are to management measures throughout the port are expected export up to 45 Mtpa and the initial capacity of the port is to be reflected in licence conditions applied under Part V of expected to be 115 Mtpa. the EP Act. The main components of the proposal will be 22 km of The EPA concluded that that the proposal could be railway to complete the rail corridor from the West Pilbara managed to meet the EPA’s environmental objectives Iron Ore Project Stage 1 mines to the port, a 3 km long provided there is satisfactory implementation of the rock causeway, a 1.1 km piled trestle jetty supporting four proposal as assessed, and implementation of the berths, and a 15.2 km shipping channel. The proposal recommended conditions. would have a total marine disturbance footprint of 2,710 ha and a terrestrial footprint of 1,275 ha. EPA Report 1419 was published on 28 November 2011. The key environmental factors being evaluated are marine Ministerial Statement No. 891 was released in April 2012. habitats and environmental quality, marine fauna, terrestrial Anketell Point Port fauna and flora and vegetation. The EPA is also finalising its assessment of the proposed The EPA’s Report and recommendations on the Anketell port at Anketell Point 30 km north-east of Karratha and Point Port Development are expected to be released in early 6 km north-west of Wickham. API Management Pty 2012—13. Limited is proposing to establish and operate a multi-user deepwater port with iron ore stockpiling, transfer and ship loading facilities. The proposal allows for facilities required by API and future third parties to be developed with a nominal ultimate capacity expected to be 350 Mtpa.

54 EPA Report1443waspublishedon22June2012. Conservation CommissionandassessedbytheEPA. Management Plancurrently beingprepared bythe need tobeaddressed inthe next(2014—23)Forest areas where theFMPcouldbeimproved andwhichwill The auditsalsoprovided a usefulfunctioninidentifying targets forkeyperformanceindicatorswere notmet. of-term auditsofperformancedescribedareas inwhich the mid-termaudit.However, boththemid-termandend- any newmattersthatwere notalready evidentatthe timeof 13: End–of-termauditofperformancereport The EPA foundthatthe June 2012. end-of-term audittotheMinisterforEnvironment in Management Plan,theEPA provided apublicreport onthe accordance withtheenvironmental conditionsonthe Forest end-of-term auditofperformanceforthecurrent FMP. In In April2012theConservationCommissionsubmittedits mid-term auditin2010. EPA in2008andtheEPA released itspublicreport onthe Management Plan2004—13 A mid-termauditoftheConservationCommission’s Term AuditofPerformancereport Forest ManagementPlan2004-2013—End-of- Other Forest ManagementPlan2004— (FMP)wassubmittedtothe didnotidentify

Forest proposals andimplementationconditionsunders45C The OEPA isresponsible forassessingchangesto Post approval assessment Table 2: Postapprovalworkassessedfrom1July2011– conditions. approvals forchangestoproposals orimplementation processes toensure timelyassessmentsleadingto The OEPA hascontinuedtoreview itspostapproval proposal unders45C. information required forassessmentofachangeto published toprovide guidancetoproponents onthe for ChangestoProposalsafterAssessment In August2011an as required byconditionsofimplementationstatements. acceptability ofEnvironmental ManagementPlans(EMPs) an implementationstatement.TheOEPA alsoassesses the s46 oftheEPActrespectively, followingthepublicationof EMP Section 46C Section 46 Section 45C 30 June2012 Environmental AssessmentGuideline Requests received 99 12 49 1 (EAG2)was Completed 80 15 45 1 55 Office of the Environmental Protection Authority

Policy development and strategic In June 2012, the findings of this second survey were planning published in Marine Technical Report 4. Pleasingly, the results of the follow-up survey closely reflected those In addition to assisting the EPA with policy and strategy from the baseline work. No detectable concentrations of development as identified in Part 3 of this report, the OEPA petroleum hydrocarbons were found in any of the shoreline contributed to the following government policy and strategy sediment or oyster tissue samples collected during the development. follow-up survey. Marine Technical Report 4 is available for download from Greenhouse Gas Conditions the EPA’s web site. To coincide with the introduction of the Commonwealth Government’s carbon pricing mechanism on 1 July 2012, Background water quality in the Kimberley the OEPA has been working closely with a number of region Government agencies to develop a process for assessing the complementarity of greenhouse gas conditions set on The OEPA’s Marine Ecosystems Branch collected and proposals through Ministerial Approval Statements. analysed marine water samples from selected sites across the Kimberley region during field surveys associated with the Browse LNG precinct short-listing process. Marine Technical Report 4: Petroleum The water quality data generated from the surveys allowed hydrocarbon content of shoreline sediment and the OEPA to establish natural background levels of nutrients intertidal biota at selected sites in the Kimberley and heavy metals in Kimberley marine waters, including bioregion, Western Australia waters off the Dampier Peninsula and James Price Point, The Montara wellhead platform incident began on and confirm that theAustralian and New Zealand Guidelines 21 August 2009 and resulted in petroleum hydrocarbons for Fresh and Marine Water Quality (2000) are relevant spilling into the Timor Sea continuously for approximately for application in these waters. The data also provide a 10 weeks. The incident occurred approximately 175 km baseline that can be used to predict and manage the from Western Australian waters, but due to the nature of potential impacts associated with developments that the spill it was considered that it presented a sufficient level propose to discharge waste to the marine environment. of risk to the Kimberly marine environment that baseline and Nutrient related water quality data from waters off the follow-up surveys of petroleum hydrocarbons at locations Dampier Peninsula are presented in Marine Technical across the Kimberley region were needed as part of the Report 5 published in March 2012. State’s response. Background concentrations of selected metals and total The OEPA published the findings of the 2009 baseline suspended solids in marine waters of the Kimberley Region survey in Marine Technical Report 3 in July 2010, the same are presented in Marine Technical Report 6 published in month that the follow-up survey was conducted. June 2012.

56 activate formal scienceplanning. closely withWAMSI partnerresearch organisationsto (both OEPA officers)havefacilitated workshopsandworked Science), NodeLeaderPolicy andtheScienceCoordinator Node Leader Science (from the Australian Institute of Marine In additional,theNodeLeadership Team, comprisingthe organisms. of dredging onreproduction incoralsandotherbenthic biological responses ofkey biotatosediment,andeffects themes coveringareas including physicalmodelling, WAMSI Board. TheSciencePlansetsoutnineresearch Plan bytheDredging Science AdvisoryCommitteeandthe highlight istheapproval in late 2011oftheNodeScience This yearhasbeenabusyonefortheNode.Akey regulators alike. that istargetedtowards aneedshared byindustryand represents anewwayofdoinganddeliveringscience clear pathwaystoadoptionofresearch outputs,the Node researchers, participationofworld-classscientistsand by theindustrycontributors,regulatory agenciesand arrangementthatincorporatesoversight agovernance With impact uncertaintyidentifiedduringEIA. research asameasure toaddress residual impactsor approval, toimplementdredging-related environmental proponents whoare required, asaconditionofproject The Node’s principalsource offundingisfrom industry impacts associatedwithdredging activities. the privatesectortopredict andmanageenvironmental and aimed atenhancingthecapacityofGovernment Science Institution(WAMSI) toconductscientific research under theumbrella oftheWesternAustralianMarine A Dredging ScienceNode(theNode)hasbeenestablished Marine ScienceInstitution Dredging ScienceNode–Western Australian following appropriate review andapproval laterin to detailedproject plansandproject implementation been developedanditisexpectedthatthesewillprogress Science ConceptPlansforthenineresearch streams have for aMinisterialConditionundertheEPAct. power tomanageIMPswithouttheadditionalrequirement biosecurity inWA, havingthe legislativeandregulatory towards DoF, whichisthelead agency foraquatic This collaborativeworkispartofalongertermtransition amendments. duplication withnewDoFprocedures andlegislative associated withbiofoulingofvessels,whileavoiding introduction andspread ofintroduced marinepests(IMPs) The intentoftheconditionistoreduce theriskof to WesternAustralia. proposals thathavethepotentialtointroduce marine pests Ministerial Conditiontobeappliedsignificantmarine Department ofFisheries(DoF)todevelopastandardised In 2011—12,theOEPA workedincollaborationwiththe Introduced MarinePests 2012—13.

57 Office of the Environmental Protection Authority

Reform initiatives

Aboriginal heritage Both the EP Act and the Aboriginal Heritage Act 1972 (AH Act) have the legal capacity to consider aspects of protecting Aboriginal heritage. The focus of the AH Act is the protection of sites with social and heritage significance. A primary focus of the EP Act is to consider proposals which have the potential to have a significant impact on the environment, for which some sites may have Aboriginal heritage significance. As part of the Reform of the Aboriginal Heritage Act process during 2011—12, the OEPA continued to work with the Department of Indigenous Affairs to investigate options to remove potential duplication in the approvals process relating to Aboriginal sites.

OEPA Key Performance Indicators In January 2012, the OEPA began a process to develop new, more meaningful key performance indicators. Dr Gordon Robertson PSM, a former Deputy Auditor General, prepared a report for the OEPA that reviewed current agency performance measures in relation to their effectiveness and efficiency, and to desired EPA and OEPA outcomes. The OEPA will begin the progressive implementation of the new performance measures during 2012—13.

58 desalination plants and quarrying operations. andquarrying desalination plants reviews sector included period.Industry reporting Fifty-five the during audits were conducted statements andundertakeenforcementactionasappropriate. Audit thecompliancewithconditionssetunderMinisterialapproval Environmental ComplianceAudits Efficiency indicator Total costofservice completed environmental audit Average costper 2010–2011 1,495,338 actual 32,020 $

2011–2012 1,396,000 target 23,264 $

2011–2012 1,759,938 actual 27,594 $

to actual Variance of target 363,938 $ 4,330

with implementationstatementsandtheirconditionsin The OEPA hasresponsibilities formonitoringcompliance Overview and aliquidnaturalgasfacility were undertaken. Audits ofamine,port,land development,ammoniaplant South West andPilbararegions duringthereporting period. Compliance officersconducted arangeofauditsinthe review willbeanalysedandreported onduring2012—13. regions ofthestate.Theresults oftheindustrysector proposals locatedinthesouth, metropolitan andnorthern Perth, BinningupandBurrupPeninsula,sixquarrying program whichincludedthree desalinationplantslocatedin Industry sectorreviews were undertakenaspartofthe Fifty-five auditswere conducted duringthe reporting period. andauditCompliance activity process. program andtotheenvironmental impactassessment from complianceauditsfeedbacktothe when dealingwithsignificantoremergentissues.Results Resources are usedstrategicallyandcanbereallocated and achievethebestenvironmental outcome. reactive auditsasrequired, usingfinite resources tomanage of proactive auditsandindustryreviews, whileallowing for of implementationstatements.Theprogram ismadeup A complianceprogram isdevelopedannuallytoplanaudits monitoring ofimplementationstatements. to improve itssystemsandprocedures incompliance The department’s ComplianceBranchiscontinuing and complianceauditing. changes toproposals, review ofimplementationconditions the formofenvironmental managementplanapprovals, 59 Office of the Environmental Protection Authority

An audit of the Gorgon Gas Development on Barrow Island focused on compliance with the approved Terrestrial and Subterranean Environmental Monitoring Program and the Coastal Stability Management and Monitoring Plan. Monitoring the implementation of the Wheatstone Gas Development near Onslow has begun. A number of management plans are required to be approved before construction activities commence. Appropriate resources have been applied to this proposal to ensure timely approval of the plans to enable implementation of this $29 billion project. A number of audits of proposals identified non compliances ranging from late submission of management plans or compliance reports, to exceedances of trigger levels or limits. On each occasion the proponent was sent a letter of non compliance and actions to be taken to rectify the issue. The Minister for Environment is informed of non compliances which enable a range of actions to be used as required. During 2011 the Auditor General undertook a review of various agencies’ approaches to monitoring compliance with conditions on mining. The Auditor General’s report Ensuring Compliance with Conditions on Mining September 2011 supported the EPA’s approach to increase the proponent’s accountability and responsibility with respect to compliance, such as requiring managing directors to formally approve reports submitted.

The OEPA has responsibility for auditing compliance with approximately 550 active Ministerial statements. Each year, many of these statements are subject to amendments, which are also managed by the department. 60 This pageisintentionallyblank 61 Office of the Environmental Protection Authority 62 Disclosures and legal compliance

63 PART 5 PART Independent Auditor’s Report To the Parliament of Western Australia

OFFICE OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AUTHORITY

Report on the Financial Statements

I have audited the accounts and financial statements of the requirements relating to audit engagements and that the Office of the Environmental Protection Authority. audit be planned and performed to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are free The financial statements comprise the Statement of from material misstatement. Financial Position as at 30 June 2012, the Statement of Comprehensive Income, Statement of Changes in Equity, An audit involves performing procedures to obtain audit Statement of Cash Flows, Schedule of Income and evidence about the amounts and disclosures in the Expenses by Service, Schedule of Assets and Liabilities financial statements. The procedures selected depend on by Service, and Summary of Consolidated Account the auditor’s judgement, including the assessment of the Appropriations and Income Estimates for the year then risks of material misstatement of the financial statements, ended, and Notes comprising a summary of significant whether due to fraud or error. In making those risk accounting policies and other explanatory information. assessments, the auditor considers internal control relevant to the Office’s preparation and fair presentation of the General Manager’s Responsibility for the Financial financial statements in order to design audit procedures that Statements are appropriate in the circumstances. An audit also includes The General Manager is responsible for keeping proper evaluating the appropriateness of the accounting policies accounts, and the preparation and fair presentation of used and the reasonableness of accounting estimates the financial statements in accordance with Australian made by the General Manager, as well as evaluating the Accounting Standards and the Treasurer’s Instructions, and overall presentation of the financial statements. for such internal control as the General Manager determines I believe that the audit evidence obtained is sufficient and is necessary to enable the preparation of financial appropriate to provide a basis for my audit opinion. statements that are free from material misstatement, whether due to fraud or error. Opinion Auditor’s Responsibility In my opinion, the financial statements are based on proper accounts and present fairly, in all material respects, As required by the Auditor General Act 2006, my the financial position of the Office of the Environmental responsibility is to express an opinion on the financial Protection Authority at 30 June 2012 and its financial statements based on my audit. The audit was conducted performance and cash flows for the year then ended. They in accordance with Australian Auditing Standards. Those are in accordance with Australian Accounting Standards Standards require compliance with relevant ethical and the Treasurer’s Instructions.

64 appropriate to provide abasisformyaudit opinion. I believethat the auditevidenceobtained issufficientand of relevant controls. and includeanevaluation of thedesignandimplementation procedures selecteddepend ontheauditor’s judgement the Officecomplieswith legislativeprovisions. The evidence abouttheadequacyofcontrols toensure that An auditinvolvesperformingprocedures toobtainaudit Australian AuditingandAssuranceStandards. Authority basedonmyauditconductedinaccordance with exercised bytheOfficeof the Environmental Protection responsibility istoexpress anopiniononthecontrols As required bythe Auditor’s Responsibility other relevant writtenlaw. Management Act2006andtheTreasurer’s Instructions,and the incurring of liabilities are in accordance with the Financial acquisition anddisposalofpublicotherproperty, and the receipt, expenditure andinvestmentofmoney, the controlan adequatesystemofinternal toensure that The GeneralManagerisresponsible formaintaining General Manager’s ResponsibilityforControls provisions. of liabilitieshavebeeninaccordance withlegislative acquisition anddisposalofproperty, andtheincurring the receipt, expenditure andinvestmentofmoney, the established bytheGeneralManagertoensure that Protection Authorityare thosepoliciesandprocedures Controls exercised bytheOfficeofEnvironmental 30 June2012. Environmental Protection Authorityduringtheyearended I haveauditedthecontrols exercised bytheOfficeof the Report onControls Auditor GeneralAct2006 , my the Environmental Protection Authorityare sufficiently In myopinion,thecontrols exercised bytheOfficeof Opinion evidence about thekeyperformanceindicators. The An auditinvolvesperforming procedures toobtainaudit Standards. in accordance withAustralianAuditingandAssurance performance indicatorsbased onmyauditconducted responsibility istoexpress an opiniononthekey As required bythe Auditor’s Responsibility performance. the keyperformanceindicatorsfairlyrepresent indicated the GeneralManagerdeterminesnecessarytoensure that and theTreasurer’s Instructionsandforsuchcontrols as in accordance withtheFinancial ManagementAct2006 and fairpresentation ofthe keyperformanceindicators The GeneralManagerisresponsible forthepreparation Performance Indicators General Manager’s ResponsibilityfortheKey information onoutcomeachievementandserviceprovision. indicators andthekeyefficiencythatprovide The keyperformanceindicatorsare thekeyeffectiveness 30 June2012. of theEnvironmental Protection Authorityfortheyear ended I haveauditedthekeyperformanceindicatorsofOffice Report ontheKeyPerformanceIndicators year ended30June2012. been inaccordance withlegislativeprovisions during the disposal ofproperty, andtheincurringofliabilitieshave expenditure andinvestmentofmoney, theacquisitionand adequate toprovide reasonable assurancethatthereceipt, Auditor GeneralAct2006 , my 65 Disclosures and legal compliance procedures selected depend on the auditor’s judgement, only to the financial statements and key performance including the assessment of the risks of material indicators described above. It does not provide an opinion misstatement of the key performance indicators. In making on any other information which may have been hyperlinked these risk assessments the auditor considers internal to/from these financial statements or key performance control relevant to the General Manager’s preparation indicators. If users of the financial statements and key and fair presentation of the key performance indicators in performance indicators are concerned with the inherent order to design audit procedures that are appropriate in risks arising from publication on a website, they are advised the circumstances. An audit also includes evaluating the to refer to the hard copy of the audited financial statements relevance and appropriateness of the key performance and key performance indicators to confirm the information indicators for measuring the extent of outcome achievement contained in this website version of the financial statements and service provision. and key performance indicators. I believe that the audit evidence obtained is sufficient and appropriate to provide a basis for my audit opinion. Opinion In my opinion, the key performance indicators of the Office of the Environmental Protection Authority are relevant and appropriate to assist users to assess the Office’s GLEN CLARKE performance and fairly represent indicated performance for the year ended 30 June 2012. DEPUTY AUDITOR GENERAL Delegate of the Auditor General for Western Australia Independence Perth, Western Australia In conducting this audit, I have complied with the independence requirements of the Auditor General Act 21 September 2012 2006 and Australian Auditing and Assurance Standards, and other relevant ethical requirements. Matters Relating to the Electronic Publication of the Audited Financial Statements and Key Performance Indicators This auditor’s report relates to the financial statements and key performance indicators of the Office of the Environmental Protection Authority for the year ended 30 June 2012 included on the Office’s website. The Office’s management is responsible for the integrity of the Office’s website. This audit does not provide assurance on the integrity of the Office’s website. The auditor’s report refers

66 Financial Statements in thefinancialstatementsmisleadingorinaccurate. circumstances whichwouldrender anyparticularsincluded At thedateofsigningweare notaware ofany 30 June2012. year ended30June2012andthefinancialpositionasat to present fairlythefinancialtransactionsfor Management Act2006 prepared incompliancewiththeprovisions ofthe of theEnvironmental Protection Authorityhavebeen The accompanyingfinancialstatementsoftheOffice For year the ended30June 2012 Statements of FinancialCertification 17 September2012 Chief FinanceOfficer Steve Beilby from proper accountsandrecords Accountable Authority 17 September2012 Kim Taylor Financial

67 Disclosures and legal complaince Statement of Comprehensive Income For the year ended 30 June 2012 2012 2011 Note $ $ COST OF SERVICES Expenses Employee benefits expense 5 10,105,526 9,887,084 Supplies and services 6 3,611,054 3,127,662 Depreciation expense 7 76,921 54,366 Other expenses 8 198,063 195,457 Total cost of services 13,991,564 13,264,569

Income Revenue Other revenue 9 127,967 157,405 Total revenue 127,967 157,405

Total income other than income from State Government 127,967 157,405

NET COST OF SERVICES 13,863,597 13,107,164

Income from State Government 10 Service appropriation 13,689,000 12,402,000 Resources received free of charge 570,684 541,618 Grant from other Government agency 390,000 390,000

Total income from State Government 14,649,684 13,333,618 SURPLUS FOR THE PERIOD 786,087 226,454 TOTAL COMPREHENSIVE INCOME FOR THE PERIOD 786,087 226,484

See also the ‘Schedule of Income and Expenses by Service’ The Statement of Comprehensive Income should be read in conjunction with the accompanying notes. 68 Statement ofFinancial Position Total Current Assets Other current assets Receivables Restricted cashandequivalents Cash andcashequivalents Current Assets ASSETS Total Current Liabilities Provisions Payables Current Liabilities LIABILITIES TOTAL ASSETS Total Non-current Assets Intangible assets Plant andequipment Amounts receivable forservices Restricted cashandequivalents Non-current Assets The Statement of FinancialPositionshouldbe read inconjunctionwiththe accompanyingnotes. See alsothe‘Schedule ofAssetsandLiabilities byService’ As at 30June 2012 Note 19 18 16 15 13 11 14 12 11 21 2012 1,842,538 1,509,437 4,454,696 1,216,308 3,238,388 1,648,060 1,443,577 $ 333,101 278,705 677,000 243,503 124,898 17,100 21,853 2011 2,126,658 1,608,927 3,795,621 1,096,483 2,699,138 1,146,325 1,024,712 $ 517,731 290,254 611,000 195,229 528,101 - - 69 Disclosures and legal compliance Statement of Financial Position As at 30 June 2012

2012 2011 Note $ $

Non-current Liabilities Provisions 19 1,056,783 1,003,675 Total Non-current Liabilities 1,056,783 1,003,675

TOTAL LIABILITIES 2,899,321 3,130,333

NET ASSETS 1,555,375 665,288

EQUITY 20 Contributed equity 375,675 271,675 Accumulated surplus 1,179,700 393,613

TOTAL EQUITY 1,555,375 665,288

See also the ‘Schedule of Assets and Liabilities by Service’ The Statement of Financial Position should be read in conjunction with the accompanying notes. 70 Statement ofChanges inEquity The Statement of ChangesinEquityshouldbe read inconjunctionwith the accompanyingnotes. For year the ended30June 2012 Transactions withownersintheircapacityasowners: Total comprehensive incomefortheperiod Balance at30June2012 Total Capital appropriations Transactions withownersintheircapacityasowners: Total comprehensive incomefortheyear Balance at1July2011 Balance at30June2011 Total Capital appropriations Balance at1July2010

Note 20 Contributed Equity 375,675 104,000 104,000 271,675 271,675 226,675 $ 45,000 45,000 - - Accumulated surplus 1,179,700 786,087 393,613 393,613 226,454 167,159 $ - - - - Total equity 1,555,375 104,000 104,000 786,087 665,288 665,288 226,454 393,834 $ 45,000 45,000 71 Disclosures and legal compliance Statement of Cash Flows 2012 2011 For the year ended 30 June 2012 Note $ $

CASH FLOWS FROM STATE GOVERNMENT Service appropriation 13,623,000 12,336,000 Capital contributions 104,000 45,000 Net cash provided by State Government 13,727,000 12,381,000

Utilised as follows: CASH FLOWS FROM OPERATING ACTIVITIES Payments Employee benefits (10,166,472) (9,577,666) Supplies and services (3,231,909) (2,445,022) GST payments on purchases (332,297) (263,272) GST payments to the taxation authority (11,892) (33,373) Other payments (198,443) (170,249)

Receipts GST receipts on sales 102,352 14,040 GST receipts from the taxation authority 265,529 235,751 Other receipts 897,479 210,805 Net cash used in operating activities 21 (12,675,653) (12,028,986)

CASH FLOWS FROM INVESTING ACTIVITIES Payments Payments for construction of non-current assets - (211,276) Purchase of non-current physical assets (82,473) (5,886) Net cash used in investing activities (82,473) (217,162)

Net increase in cash and cash equivalents 968,874 134,852

Cash and cash equivalents at the beginning of period 2,366,266 2,231,414

CASH AND CASH EQUIVALENTS AT THE END OF THE PERIOD 21 3,335,140 2,366,266

The Statement of Cash Flows should be read in conjunction with the accompanying notes. 72 Schedule by ofIncomeandExpenses Service For year the ended30June 2012 PERIOD SURPLUS/(DEFICIT) FOR THE Government Total incomefrom State Grant from agency otherGovernment Resources received free ofcharge Service appropriation Income from StateGovernment NET COSTOFSERVICES from StateGovernment Total incomeotherthan Other revenue Income Total costofservices Other expenses Depreciation expense Supplies andservices Employee benefitsexpense Expenses COST OFSERVICES 12,790,526 11,901,177 12,173,138 12,231,628 Environmental Impact 3,208,593 8,805,329

2012 617,388 390,000 499,349 150,069 Assessment and 58,490 58,490 67,637 $ Policies 12,047,625 11,183,709 11,671,451 11,769,231 2,769,094 8,795,953 2011 376,174 390,000 473,916 149,886

97,780 97,780 54,298 $ 1,859,158 1,787,823 1,690,459 1,759,936 1,300,197 Compliance Audits 2012 168,699 427,861 71,335 69,477 69,477 22,594 Environmental $ 9,284 - 1,285,993 1,218,291 1,435,713 1,495,338 1,091,131 (149,720) 2011 381,668 67,702 59,625 59,625 22,471 $ 68 - 14,649,684 13,689,000 13,863,597 13,991,564 10,105,526 3,636,454 2012 786,087 390,000 570,684 127,967 127,967 172,663 76,921 $ Total 13,333,618 12,402,000 13,107,164 13,264,569 3,150,762 9,887,084 2011 226,454 390,000 541,618 157,405 157,405 172,357 54,366 $ 73 Disclosures and legal compliance Schedule of Assets and Liabilities by Service As at 30 June 2012

Environmental Impact Assessment and Environmental Policies Compliance Audits Total 2012 2011 2012 2011 2012 2011 $ $ $ $ $ $

Assets Current assets 2,944,638 2,587,765 293,750 111,374 3,238,388 2,699,139

Non-current assets 1,059,815 995,771 156,493 100,711 1,216,308 1,096,482 Total Assets 4,004,453 3,583,536 450,243 212,085 4,454,696 3,795,621

Liabilities Current liabilities 1,612,279 1,871,139 230,259 255,519 1,842,538 2,126,658

Non-current liabilities 924,685 878,215 132,098 125,460 1,056,783 1,003,675 Total Liabilities 2,536,964 2,749,354 362,357 380,979 2,899,321 3,130,333

NET ASSETS/(NET LIABILITIES) 1,467,489 834,182 87,886 (168,894) 1,555,375 665,288

The Schedule of Assets and Liabilities should be read in conjunction with the accompanying notes. 74 and IncomeEstimates Account ofConsolidated AppropriationsSummary 2011. Note 26‘Explanatory Statement’provides detailsofanysignificantvariations betweenestimatesand actual results for2012and betweentheactual results for2012and Adjustments comprisemovements incashbalancesandotheraccrualitemssuchasreceivables, payablesandsuperannuation. For year the ended30June 2012 Capital appropriations Adjustments forotherfunding sources Purchase ofnon-current physical assets Capital Expenditure Total appropriations provided todeliverservices Adjustments Net CostofServices Less Total Income Total CostofServices Environmental Compliance Audits Environmental ImpactAssessment andPolicies Details ofExpensesbyService GRAND TOTAL Item 162Capitalappropriations Capital Total appropriations provided todeliverservices - Amount AuthorisedbyOtherStatutes Section 25transferofserviceappropriation Item 108Netamountappropriated todeliverservices Delivery ofServices Salaries andAllowancesAct1975 14,119,000 15,269,000 16,509,000 15,113,000 14,223,000 14,119,000 14,119,000 Estimate (1,150,000) (1,240,000) 1,396,000 2012 104,000 104,000 104,000 $ - - - 13,689,000 13,863,597 13,991,564 12,231,628 13,793,000 13,689,000 13,689,000 1,759,936 Actual (174,597) (127,967) 2012 104,000 104,000 $ 38,628 65,372

- - (1,405,403) (2,517,436) (2,881,372) Variance 1,112,033 (430,000) (430,000) (430,000) (430,000) 975,403 363,936 (38,628) $ 38,628 - - - - 13,689,000 13,863,597 13,991,564 12,231,628 13,793,000 13,689,000 13,689,000 1,759,936 Actual (174,597) (127,967) 2012 104,000 104,000 $ 38,628 65,372 - - 12,402,000 13,107,164 13,264,569 11,769,231 12,447,000 12,402,000 12,354,000 1,495,338 Actual (172,162) (705,164) (157,405) 2011 217,162 $ 45,000 45,000 48,000

- Variance 1,287,000 1,346,000 1,287,000 1,335,000 (151,790) 210,790 530,567 756,433 726,995 264,598 462,397 (48,000) $ 59,000 29,438 59,000 - 75 Disclosures and legal compliance Notes to the Financial Statements For the year ended 30 June 2012

The Financial Management Act and the Treasurer’s 1 AUSTRALIAN ACCOUNTING STANDARDS instructions impose legislative provisions that govern the General preparation of financial statements and take precedence over Australian Accounting Standards, the Framework, The Department’s financial statements for the year Statements of Accounting Concepts and other authoritative ended 30 June 2012 have been prepared in accordance pronouncements of the AASB. with Australian Accounting Standards. The term ‘Australian Accounting Standards’ includes Standards Where modification is required and has had a material or and Interpretations issued by the Australian Accounting significant financial effect upon the reported results, details Standard Board (AASB). of that modification and the resulting financial effect are disclosed in the notes to the financial statements. The Department has adopted any applicable new and revised Australian Accounting Standards from their (b) Basis of preparation operative dates. The financial statements have been prepared on the accrual Early adoption of standards basis of accounting using the historical cost convention. The Department cannot early adopt an Australian The accounting policies adopted in the preparation of Accounting Standard unless specifically permitted by TI the financial statements have been consistently applied 1101 Application of Australian Accounting Standards and throughout all periods presented unless otherwise stated. Other Pronouncements. There has been no early adoption The financial statements are presented in Australian dollars of Australian Accounting Standards that have been issued and all values are rounded to the nearest dollar. or amended (but not operative) by the Department for the annual reporting period ended 30 June 2012. There are no judgements made in the process of applying the Department’s accounting policies that have a 2 SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING significant effect on the amounts recognised in the financial POLICIES statements. (a) General statement Note 3 ‘Key sources of estimation uncertainty’ discloses The Department is a not-for-profit reporting entity key assumptions made concerning the future, and other that prepares general purpose financial statements in key sources of estimation uncertainty at the end of the accordance with Australian Accounting Standards, the reporting period, that have a significant risk of causing a Framework, Statements of Accounting Concepts and other material adjustment to the carrying amounts of assets and authoritative pronouncements of the AASB as applied by liabilities within the next financial year. the Treasurer’s instructions. Several of these are modified by the Treasurer’s instructions to vary application, disclosure, (c) Reporting entity format and wording. The reporting entity comprises the Department and entities listed at note 30 ‘Related and affiliated bodies’. 76 contributions havebeendesignatedas contributionsby transfers can berecognised asequitycontributions. Capital by owners(atthetimeof, or priortotransfer)before such (theowner)ascontributions designated bytheGovernment of arestructure ofadministrative arrangements,tobe in thenature ofequitycontributions,otherthanasa result to Wholly-OwnedPublicSector Entities AASB Interpretation 1038 (d) Contributedequity appropriate. approvals andundertakeenforcement actionas Audit thecompliancewithconditionssetunderMinisterial 2:EnvironmentalComplianceAudits Service public inaccordance with statutory functions. to beprovideddevelopersandthe totheGovernment, Protection Authoritytoenablesoundenvironmental advice coordinate thedevelopmentofpolicyforEnvironmental Manage theenvironmental impactassessmentprocess and Policies 1:Environmental ImpactAssessmentand Service The Departmentprovides thefollowingservices: Services on itsfunctions. through whichtheDepartmentcontrols resources tocarry service basis.Thefinancialstatementsencompassallfunds appropriations. Itdoesnotprovide servicesonafee-for- The Departmentispredominantly fundedbyParliamentary audits. advice andpolicies,toundertakeeffective compliance by providing rigorous environmental impactassessment The Department'smissionistosupporttheworkofEPA Mission Contributions byOwnersMade requires transfers directly toContributedequity. Owned PublicSectorEntities owners byTI955 control overthe funds.TheDepartment obtainscontrol fair valueinthe periodinwhichtheDepartment obtains Royalties forRegionsfunds are recognised asrevenue at not donated. reliably determinedandtheserviceswouldbepurchased if of servicesare onlyrecognised whenafairvaluecanbe by ownersare recognised at theirfairvalue.Contributions Other non-reciprocal contributionsthatare notcontributions contributions, usuallywhencashisreceived. obtains control overtheassets comprisingthe Revenue isrecognised atfair valuewhentheDepartment contributions Grants, donations,giftsandothernon-reciprocal for services’(holdingaccount)heldatTreasury. the bankaccountorcredited tothe‘Amountsreceivables appropriated fundsatthetimethoseare deposited to of theappropriated funds.TheDepartmentgainscontrol of value intheperiodwhichDepartmentgainscontrol Service Appropriations are recognised asrevenues atfair appropriations Service for themajorbusinessactivitiesasfollows: consideration received orreceivable. Revenueisrecognised Revenue isrecognised andmeasured atthefairvalue of Revenue recognition (e) Income are non-discretionary andnon-reciprocal. designated ascontributionsbyownerswhere thetransfers a result ofarestructure ofadministrativearrangements,are Transfer ofnetassetsto/from otheragencies,thanas Contributions byOwnersmadetoWholly andhavebeencredited 77 Disclosures and legal compliance Notes to the Financial Statements

of the funds at the time the funds are deposited into the Derecognition Department’s bank account. Upon disposal or derecognition of an item of plant and Gains equipment, any revaluation surplus relating to that asset is retained in the asset revaluation surplus. Gains may be realised or unrealised and are usually recognised on a net basis. These include gains arising on Depreciation the disposal of non-current assets and some revaluations of non-current assets. All non-current assets having a limited useful life are systematically depreciated over their estimated useful lives (f) Plant and equipment in a manner that reflects the consumption of their future economic benefits. Capitalisation/Expensing of assets Items of plant and equipment costing $5,000 or more are Depreciation is calculated using the straight line method, recognised as assets and the cost of utilising assets is using rates which are reviewed annually. Estimated useful expensed (depreciated) over their useful lives. Items of plant lives for each class of depreciable asset are: and equipment costing less than $5,000 are immediately Other plant and equipment 5 to 20 years expensed direct to the Statement of Comprehensive Income (other than where they form part of a group of Information technology assets 3 to 4 years similar items which are significant in total). Marine equipment 3 to 10 years Initial recognition and measurement (g) Intangible assets All items of plant and equipment are initially recognised at cost. Capitalisation/expensing of assets For items of plant and equipment acquired at no cost or Acquisitions of intangible assets costing $5,000 or more for nominal cost, the cost is the fair value at the date of and internally generated intangible assets costing $50,000 acquisition. or more are capitalised. The cost of utilising the assets is expensed (amortised) over their useful lives. Costs incurred Subsequent measurement below these thresholds are immediately expensed directly to the Statement of Comprehensive Income. Subsequent to initial recognition as an asset, historical cost is used for the measurement all plant and equipment. Intangible assets are initially recognised at cost. For assets All items of plant and equipment are stated at historical acquired at no cost or for nominal cost, the cost is their fair cost less accumulated depreciation and accumulated value at the date of acquisition. impairment losses. The cost model is applied for subsequent measurement requiring the asset to be carried at cost les any accumulated amortisation and accumulated impairment losses.

78 depreciation/amortisation reflects thelevel ofconsumption assets isreviewed annuallytoverifythat theaccumulated a significantchangeinuseful life.Each relevant class of where thereplacement cost isfallingorwhere there is where anasset’s depreciation ismateriallyunderstated, The riskofimpairmentisgenerally limitedtocircumstances value lesscoststosellanddepreciated replacement cost. asset, therecoverable amount isthehigherofanasset’s fair entity, unlessanassethasbeenidentifiedasasurplus loss isrecognised. Asthe Department isanot-for-profit written downtotherecoverable amountandanimpairment carrying amount,theassetisconsidered impaired andis estimated. Where therecoverable amountislessthanthe is anindicationofimpairment,therecoverable amountis impairment at the end of each reporting period. Where there Plant andequipmentare tested foranyindicationof (h) Impairmentofassets expensed intheyearofacquisition. an intangibleasset.Software costinglessthan$5,000is an integralpartoftherelated hardware isrecognised as recognised asplantandequipment.Software thatis not Software thatisanintegralpartoftherelated hardware is Computer software (a) Software thatisnotintegraltotheoperationofany Software assets is: The expectedusefullifeforthecurrent classofintangible have afiniteusefullifeandzero residual value. basis. Allintangibleassetscontrolled bytheDepartment useful lifewhichisreviewed annually)onthestraightline calculated fortheperiodofexpectedbenefit(estimated Amortisation forintangibleassetswithfiniteusefullivesis related hardware (a)

3 to5years (i) Leases evaluate anyimpairmentriskfrom fallingreplacement costs. or expirationofasset’s future economicbenefitsandto required asthe effect ofdiscountingisnot material. interest rateapplicableandsubsequentmeasurement isnot the transactioncostor facevaluebecausethere isno The fairvalueofshort-term receivables andpayables is amortised costusingtheeffective interest method. cost orthefacevalue.Subsequent measurement is at is atfairvaluewhichnormallyequatestothetransaction Initial recognition andmeasurement offinancialinstruments • Financial Liabilities • • • • Financial Assets These havebeendisaggregated intothefollowingclasses: • • financial instrument: In additiontocash,theDepartmenthastwocategoriesof (j) Financialinstruments derived from theleasedproperties. over the lease term as this represents of benefits the pattern Lease paymentsare expensedonastraightlinebasis The Departmentholdsanoperatingleaseforvehicles. Payables Amounts receivable forservices Receivables Restricted cashandequivalents Cash andcashequivalents Financial liabilitiesmeasured atamortisedcost. Loans andreceivables; and 79 Disclosures and legal compliance Notes to the Financial Statements (k) Cash and cash equivalents uncollectible amounts (doubtful debts) is raised when there is objective evidence that the Department will not be able to For the purpose of the Statement of Cash Flows, cash and collect the debts. The carrying amount is equivalent to fair cash equivalent (and restricted cash and cash equivalent) value as it is due for settlement within 30 days. assets comprise cash on hand and short-term deposits with original maturities of three months or less that are (o) Payables readily convertible to a known amount of cash and which are subject to insignificant risk of changes in value. Payables are recognised at the amounts payable when the Department becomes obliged to make future payments as (l) Accrued salaries a result of a purchase of assets or services. The carrying amount is equivalent to fair value, as settlement is generally Accrued salaries (see note 18 ‘Payables’) represent the within 30 days. amount due to staff but unpaid at the end of the financial year. Accrued salaries are settled within a fortnight of the (p) Provisions financial year end. The Department considers the carrying amount of accrued salaries to be equivalent to its fair value. Provisions are liabilities of uncertain timing or amount and are recognised where there is a present legal or The accrued salaries suspense account (refer to note 11 constructive obligation as a result of a past event and when ‘Restricted cash and cash equivalents’) consists of amounts the outflow of resources embodying economic benefits paid annually into a suspense account over a period of 10 is probable and a reliable estimate can be made of the financial years to largely meet the additional cash outflow in amount of the obligation. Provisions are reviewed at the end each eleventh year when 27 pay days occur instead of the of each reporting period. normal 26. No interest is received on this account. Provisions - employee benefits (m) Amounts receivable for services (holding account) All annual leave and long service leave provisions are in respect of employees’ services up to the end of the The Department receives funding on an accrual basis. reporting period. The appropriations are paid partly in cash and partly as an asset (holding account receivable). The accrued amount Annual leave receivable is accessible on the emergence of the cash funding requirement to cover leave entitlements and asset The liability for annual leave tt)at is expected to be settled replacement. within 12 months after the reporting period is recognised and measured at the undiscounted amounts expected to (n) Receivables be paid when the liabilities are settled. Receivables are recognised at original invoice amount less Annual leave that is not expected to be settled more than an allowance for any uncollectible amounts (i.e. impairment). 12 months after the reporting period is recognised and The collectability of receivables is reviewed on an ongoing measured at the present value of .amounts expected to be basis and any receivables identified as uncollectible are paid when the liabilities are settled using the remuneration written-off against the allowance account. The allowance for rate expected to apply at the time of settlement.

80 as current liabilities astheDepartmentdoes nothavean Unconditional longserviceleaveprovisions are classified estimated future cashoutflows. terms tomaturitythatmatch, ascloselypossible,the of thereporting bondswith periodonnationalgovernment payments are discountedusingmarketyieldsatthe end departures andperiodsofservice.Theexpectedfuture contributions, aswelltheexperienceofemployee non-salary componentssuchasemployersuperannuation is giventoexpectedfuture wageandsalarylevelsincluding When assessingexpectedfuture paymentsconsideration settlement. the remuneration rateexpected toapplyatthetimeof expected tobepaidwhentheliabilitiesare settledusing recognised andmeasured atthepresent valueofamounts within 12monthsaftertheendofreporting periodis Long serviceleavethatisnotexpectedtobesettled amounts expectedtobepaidwhentheliabilityissettled. period isrecognised andmeasured attheundiscounted settled within12monthsaftertheendofreporting The liabilityforlongserviceleavethatisexpectedtobe leave Long service after theendofreporting period. right todefersettlementoftheliabilityforatleast12months liabilities astheDepartmentdoesnothaveanunconditional The provision forannualleaveisclassifiedascurrent estimated future cashoutflows. terms tomaturitythatmatch,ascloselypossible,the of thereportingbondswith periodonnationalgovernment payments are discountedusingmarketyieldsattheend departures andperiodsofservice.Theexpectedfuture contributions, aswelltheexperienceofemployee non-salary componentssuchasemployersuperannuation is giventoexpectedfuture wageandsalarylevelsincluding When assessingexpectedfuture paymentsconsideration classified asnon-current liabilitiesbecausetheDepartment conditional andlongserviceleaveprovisions are least 12monthsaftertheendofreporting period.Pre- unconditional righttodefersettlementoftheliabilityforat the GSSbecame non-contributorymembers ofthe 2007 whowere notmembersofeither the Pensionor Employees commencingemployment priorto16April the DepartmenttoGESB. obligations are fundedbyconcurrent contributionsmadeby Scheme, are assumedbytheTreasurer. AllotherGSS attributable tomemberswho transferred from thePension Pension SchemeandtheunfundedGSStransferbenefits Scheme ortheGSS.Theliabilitiesforunfunded The DepartmenthasnoliabilitiesunderthePension obligations totherelated superannuation liability. by theDepartmenttoGESBextinguishesagency’s the concurrent contributions (definedcontributions)made is adefinedcontributionplanforagencypurposes because reporting.employees and whole-of-government However, it The GSSisadefinedbenefitschemeforthepurposes of members since1995. (GSS), adefinedbenefitlumpsumschemeclosedtonew since 1987,ortheGoldStateSuperannuationScheme defined benefitpensionschemeclosedtonewmembers Eligible EmployeescontributetothePensionScheme,a according tocommencementandimplementationdates. in particularschemesforpublicsectoremployeesvaries legislative requirements. Eligibilitycriteriaformembership arrangements inWesternAustraliaaccordance with and otherfundsadministerpublicsectorsuperannuation Employees SuperannuationBoardThe Government (GESB) Superannuation of service. liability untiltheemployeehascompletedrequisite years has anunconditionalrighttodeferthesettlementof 81 Disclosures and legal compliance Notes to the Financial Statements West State Superannuation Scheme (WSS). Employees (r) Resources received free of charge or for commencing employment on or after 16 April 2007 nominal cost became members of the GESB Super Scheme (GESBS). Resources received free of charge or for nominal cost From 30 March 2012, existing members of the WSS or that can be reliably measured are recognised as income, GESBS and new employees became able to choose their at fair value. Where the resource received represents a preferred superannuation fund. The Department makes service that the Department would otherwise pay for, a concurrent contributions to GESB and other funds on corresponding expense is recognised. Receipts of assets behalf of employees in compliance with the Commonwealth are recognised in the Statement of Financial Position. Government’s Superannuation Guarantee (Administration) Act 1992. Contributions to these accumulation schemes Assets or services received from other State Government extinguish the Department’s liability for superannuation agencies are separately disclosed under Income from State charges in respect of employees who are not members of Government in the Statement of Comprehensive Income. the Pension Scheme or GSS. (s) Comparative figures The GESB makes all benefit payments in respect of the Pension Scheme and GSS, and is recouped from the Comparative figures are, where appropriate, reclassified Treasurer for the employer’s share. to be comparable with the figures presented in the current financial year. Provisions – other 3 KEY SOURCES OF ESTIMATION UNCERTAINTY Employment on-costs Key estimates and assumptions concerning the future are Employment on-costs, including workers’ compensation based on historical experience and various other factors insurance, are not employee benefits and are recognised that have a significant risk of causing a material adjustment separately as liabilities and expenses when the employment to the carrying amount of assets and liabilities within the to which they relate has occurred. Employment on-costs next financial year. are included as part of ‘Other expenses’ and are not included as part of the Department’s ‘Employee benefits Long Service Leave expense’. The related liability is included in ‘Employment Several estimations and assumptions used in calculating on-costs provision’. the Department’s long service leave provision include expected future salary rates, discount rates, employee (q) Superannuation expense retention rates and expected future payments. Changes The superannuation expense in the Statement of in these estimations and assumptions may impact on the Comprehensive Income comprises of employer carrying amount of the long service leave provision. contributions paid to the GSS (concurrent contributions), the WSS, the GESBS or other superannuation fund. The employer contribution paid to the GESB in respect of the GSS is paid back into the Consolidated Account by the GESB.

82 4 of othercomprehensive incomereconciling thecarrying the Statement ofChangesinEquity. Thedisaggregation The amendmentstoAASB 101clarifythepresentation of required tobedisclosed.There isnofinancialimpact. impaired whosetermshavebeenrenegotiated isnolonger of financialassetsthatwould otherwisebepastdueor disclosures inrelation tocredit risk.Thecarryingamount The amendmentstoAASB7clarifyfinancialinstrument Improvements Project[AASB1,7,101&134and Int13] Accounting StandardsarisingfromtheAnnual AASB 2010-4 is nofinancialimpact. Australian AccountingStandards andInterpretations. There This Standard makeseditorial amendmentstoarangeof 139, 1023&1031andInt2,4,16,10391052] Standards [AASB5,8,108,110,112,119,133,137, AASB 2009-12 Accounting Standards. There isnofinancialimpact. convergence betweenAustralianandNewZealand and incorporatestheminasingleStandard toachieve removes disclosure requirements from otherStandards arising from theTrans-Tasman Convergence Project, Amendments toAustralianAccountingStandards This Standard, inconjunctionwithAASB2011-1 AASB 1054 Department. beginning onorafter1July2011thatimpactedthe Accounting Standards effective forannualreporting periods The DepartmenthasappliedthefollowingAustralian Standard Initial applicationofanAustralianAccounting POLICY ANDESTIMATES DISCLOSURE OFCHANGESINACCOUNTING AustralianAdditionalDisclosures AmendmentstoAustralianAccounting Further AmendmentstoAustralian financial impact. Statement ofChangesinEquityortheNotes.There isno each componentofequitycanbepresented ineitherthe amount atthebeginningandendofperiodfor Accounting Standards. There isnofinancialimpact. convergence betweenAustralianandNewZealand incorporates theminasingleStandard toachieve disclosure requirements from otherStandards and This Standard, inconjunction withAASB1054,removes 108, 121,128,132&134andInt2,112113] Tasman ConvergenceProject[AASB1,5,101,107, Accounting StandardsarisingfromtheTrans- AASB 2011-1 no financialimpact. of whentherelated transfer transactionoccurred. There is transferred asset,existingatthereporting date,irrespective not derecognised andanycontinuinginvolvementina shall disclosealltransferred financialassetsthatare to transfersoffinancialassetsinAASB7.Anentity This Standard introduces additionaldisclosure relating of FinancialAssets[AASB1&7] Accounting Standards–DisclosuresonTransfers AASB 2010-6 is nofinancialimpact. Australian AccountingStandards andInterpretations. There This Standard makeseditorialamendmentstoarangeof 1023 &1038andInt112,115,127,1321042] 112, 118,119,121,132,133,134,137,139,140, Accounting Standards[AASB1,3,4,5,101,107, AASB 2010-5 Amendments toAustralian Amendments toAustralian Amendments toAustralian 83 Disclosures and legal compliance Notes to the Financial Statements AASB 2011-5 Amendments to Australian Accounting Standards – Extending Relief from Consolidation, the Equity Method and Proportionate Consolidation [AASB 127, 128 & 131] This Standard extends the relief from consolidation, the equity method and proportionate consolidation by removing the requirement for the consolidated financial statements prepared by the ultimate or any intermediate parent entity to be IFRS compliant, provided that the parent entity, investor or venturer and the ultimate or intermediate parent entity are not-for-profit non-reporting entities that comply with Australian Accounting Standards. There is no financial impact. Future impact of Australian Accounting Standards not yet operative The Department cannot early adopt an Australian Accounting Standard unless specifically permitted by TI 1101 Application of Australian Accounting Standards and Other Pronouncements. Consequently, the Department has not applied early any following Australian Accounting Standards that have been issued and that may impact the Department. Where applicable, the Department plans to apply these Australian Accounting Standards from their application date.

Operative for reporting periods beginning on/after AASB 9 Financial Instruments 1 Jan 2013 This Standard supersedes AASB 139 Financial Instruments: Recognition and Measurement, introducing a number of changes to accounting treatments. The Standard was reissued in December 2010. The Department has not yet determined the application or the potential impact of the Standard. AASB 10 Consolidated Financial Statements 1 Jan 2013 This Standard supersedes requirements under AASB 127 Consolidated and Separate Financial Statements and Int 112 Consolidation – Special Purpose Entities, introducing a number of changes to accounting treatments. The Standard was issued in August 2011. The Department has not yet determined the application or the potential impact of the Standard. 84 AASB 128 AASB 127 AASB 119 AASB 13 AASB 12 AASB 11 impact oftheStandard. 2011. TheDepartmenthas notyetdeterminedtheapplicationorpotential number ofchangestoaccounting treatments. TheStandard wasissuedinAugust This Standard supersedesAASB128Investmentsin Associates,introducing a Investments inAssociates andJointVentures the applicationorpotentialimpactofStandard. The Standard wasissued in August2011.TheDepartmenthasnotyetdetermined treatments. Separate FinancialStatements This Standard supersedes requirements underAASB127 Separate FinancialStatements determined theapplicationorpotentialimpactof theStandard. The Standard wasissued in September2011.TheDepartmenthasnotyet changes toaccountingtreatments. This Standard supersedes AASB119 Employee Benefits requires disclosures aboutfairvaluemeasurements. There isnofinancialimpact. This Standard definesfairvalue,setsoutaframeworkformeasuringvalueand Fair Value Measurement the applicationorpotentialimpactofStandard. The Standard wasissuedinAugust2011.TheDepartmenthasnotyetdetermined and SeparateFinancialStatementsAASB131Interests inJointVentures. This Standard supersedesdisclosure requirements underAASB127Consolidated Disclosure ofInterestsinOtherEntities the applicationorpotentialimpactofStandard. The Standard wasissuedinAugust2011.TheDepartmenthasnotyetdetermined number ofchangestoaccountingtreatments. This Standard supersedesAASB131 Joint Arrangements

, introducing anumberofchanges toaccounting

Employee Benefits Interests inJointVentures

, introducing anumberof Consolidated and , introducing a for reporting 1 Jan2013 1 Jan2013 1 Jan2013 1 Jan2013 1 Jan2013 1 Jan2013 beginning Operative on/after periods

85 Disclosures and legal compliance Notes to the Financial Statements

Operative for reporting periods beginning on/after AASB 1053 Application of Tiers of Australian Accounting Standards 1 Jul 2013 This Standard establishes a differential financial reporting framework consisting of two tiers of reporting requirements for preparing general purpose financial statements. There is no financial impact. AASB 2009-11 Amendments to Australian Accounting Standards arising from AASB 9 [AASB 1 Jul 2013 1, 3, 4, 5, 7, 101, 102, 108, 112, 118, 121, 127, 128, 131, 132, 136, 139, 1023 & 1038 and Int 10 & 12] [Modified by AASB 2010-7] AASB 2010-2 Amendments to Australian Accounting Standards arising from Reduced 1 Jul 2013 Disclosure Requirements, [AASB 1, 2, 3, 5, 7, 8, 101, 102, 107, 108, 110, 111,112, 116, 117, 119, 121, 123, 124, 127, 128, 131,133, 134, 136, 137, 138, 140, 141, 1050 & 1052 and Int 2, 4, 5, 15, 17, 127, 129 & 1052] This Standard makes amendments to Australian Accounting Standards and Interpretations to introduce reduced disclosure requirements for certain types of entities. There is no financial impact. AASB 2010-7 Amendments to Australian Accounting Standards arising from AASB 9 1 Jan 2013 (December 2010) [AASB 1, 3, 4, 5, 7, 101, 102, 108, 112, 118, 120, 121, 127, 128, 131, 132, 136, 137, 139, 1023 & 1038 and Int 2, 5, 10,12, 19 & 127] This Standard makes consequential amendments to other Australian Accounting Standards and Interpretations as a result of issuing AASB 9 in December 2010. The Department has not yet determined the application or the potential impact of the Standard. AASB 2011-2 Amendments to Australian Accounting Standards arising from the Trans- 1 Jul 2013 Tasman Convergence Project – Reduced Disclosure Requirements [AASB 101 & 1054] This Standard removes disclosure requirements from other Standards and incorporates them in a single Standard to achieve convergence between Australian and New Zealand Accounting Standards for reduced disclosure reporting. There is no financial impact.

86 AASB 2011-9 AASB 2011-8 AASB 2011-7 AASB 2011-6 application orthepotential impactoftheStandard. (reclassification adjustments).TheDepartmenthas not yetdeterminedthe the basisofwhetherthey are potentiallyreclassifiable toprofit orlosssubsequently This Standard requires togroup itemspresented inother comprehensive income on 1039 &1049] Other ComprehensiveIncome[AASB1,5,7,101, 112,120,121,132,133,134, Amendments toAustralianAccountingStandards –PresentationofItems 13 inSeptember2011.There isnofinancialimpact. Australian AccountingStandards andInterpretations astheresult ofissuingAASB This Standard replaces theexistingdefinitionandfairvalueguidanceinother 1038 andInt2,4,12,13,14,17,19,131&132] 119, 120,121,128,131,132,133,134,136, [AASB 1,2,3,4,5,7,9,2009-11,2010-7,101,102, 108,110,116,117,118, Amendments toAustralianAccountingStandards arisingfromAASB13 has notyetdeterminedtheapplicationorpotential impactoftheStandard. AASB 128 of AASB10,11,127 This Standard giveseffect toconsequentialchanges arisingfrom theissuance 5, 9,16&17] 11, 101,107,112,118,121,124,132,133,136,138,139,1023&1038andInt Consolidation andJointArrangementsStandards[AASB1,2,3,5,7,9,2009- Amendments toAustralianAccountingStandardsarisingfromthe no financialimpact. or AustralianAccountingStandards –ReducedDisclosure Requirements. There is ultimate orintermediateparent entitycomplywithAustralianAccountingStandards be IFRScompliant,provided thattheparent entity, investororventurer andthe financial statementsprepared bytheultimateorany intermediateparent entityto proportionate consolidationbyremoving therequirement fortheconsolidated This Standard extendstherelief from consolidation,theequitymethodand Disclosure Requirements[AASB127,128&131] Consolidation, theEquityMethodandProportionateConsolidation–reduced Amendments toAustralianAccountingStandards–ExtendingRelieffrom Investments inAssociatesandJointVentures Separate FinancialStatements 138, 139,140,141,1004,1023& t n e m t r a p e D e h T . and for reporting 1 Jan2013 1 Jan2013 beginning Operative 1 Jul2012 1 Jul2013 on/after periods

87 Disclosures and legal compliance Notes to the Financial Statements

Operative for reporting periods beginning on/after AASB 2011-10 Amendments to Australian Accounting Standards arising from AASB 119 1 Jan 2013 (September 2011) [AASB 1, 8, 101, 124, 134, 1049 & 2011-8 and Int 14] This Standard makes amendments to other Australian Accounting Standards and Interpretations as a result of issuing AASB 119 Employee Benefits in September 2011. The Department has not yet determined the application or the potential impact of the Standard. AASB 2011-11 Amendments to AASB 119 (September 2011) arising from Reduced Disclosure 1 Jul 2013 Requirements This Standard gives effect to Australian Accounting Standards – Reduced Disclosure Requirements for AASB 119 (September 2011). There is no financial impact. AASB 2012-11 Amendments to Australian Accounting Standards – Fair Value Reduced 1 Jul 2013 Measurement - Reduced Disclosure Requirements [AASB 3, 7, 13, 140 & 141] This Standard establishes and amends reduced disclosure requirements for additional and amended disclosures arising from AASB 13 and the consequential amendments implemented through AASB 2011-8. There is no financial impact.

88

7 6 5

Total depreciation Other plantandequipment Marine equipment Other Communications Materials Travel Consultants andcontractors SUPPLIES ANDSERVICES The employmenton-costsliabilityisincludedatnote19‘Provisions’. Employment on-costssuchasworkers’compensationinsuranceare includedatnote8‘Otherexpenses’. (c) Includesasuperannuationcontributioncomponent. (b) Definedcontributionplansinclude West StateandGoldGESBSuperScheme(contributionspaid). (a) Includesthevalueoffringebenefittoemployeeplusbenefitstaxcomponent. Annual leave Long serviceleave Superannuation -definedcontributionplans Wages andsalaries EMPLOYEE BENEFITSEXPENSE Information technologyassets DEPRECIATION EXPENSE (c) (c) (a)

(b)

10,105,526 3,611,054 2,852,820 1,180,164 7,648,647 2012 304,433 210,701 199,618 423,892 852,823 $ 76,921 61,402 14,057 43,482 1,462 3,127,662 2,633,290 9,887,084 1,647,033 6,927,015 2011 209,436 160,403 102,001 529,716 783,320 $ 54,366 20,770 32,183 22,532 1,413 89 Disclosures and legal compliance Notes to the Financial Statements

2012 2011 $ $ 8 OTHER EXPENSES Vehicle leases 141,437 139,081 Audit fees 25,400 23,100 Employment on-costs (a) 31,226 33,276 198,063 195,457 (a) Includes workers’ compensation insurance and other employment on-costs.

9 OTHER REVENUE Cost recoup for site visits, audits and administration 127,967 157,405 127,967 157,405

10 INCOME FROM STATE GOVERNMENT Appropriations received during the year: Service appropriation (a) 13,689,000 12,402,000 13,689,000 12,402,000

Resources received free of charge (b) Determined on the basis of the following estimates provided by agencies: Department of Environment and Conservation 525,000 516,500 State Solicitor’s Office 45,684 25,118 570,684 541,618

Royalties for Region Fund: - Pilbara Cities (c) 390,000 390,000 390,000 390,000 14,649,684 13,333,618

90 11 Royalties forRegions-PilbaraCities8) Terrestrial ecosystemsresearch andanalysisaccount7) SoundEPP6) Cockburn Marine studies5) Strategic policyresearch andanalysisaccount4) Fertiliser Initiativesaccount3) Gorgon GasDevelopmentaudit2) Funds heldforvariousSpecificPurposeaccounts Current RESTRICTED CASHANDEQUIVALENTS (c) Thisisasub-fundwithintheover-arching ‘RoyaltiesforRegionsFund’.Thecurrent fundsare committedto (b) Assetsorservicesreceived free ofchargeorfornominal costare recognised asrevenue atfairvalueoftheassets (a) Serviceappropriations fundthenetcostofservicesdelivered. Appropriation revenue comprisesacash 5) Contributions from andprivate organisationsformarine studiestosupport Commonwealth,state government 4) Fundingforenvironmental analysisandresearch associate withcyclicalreview ofstatutorypoliciesandother fertiliserinitiatives. 3) Specificpurposefunding tosupportGovernment 2) Fundingprovided forauditingofGorgonGas. 1) Fundingforspecificprojects, forimproving process andproviding trainingforOfficeoftheEnvironmental (a) SpecificPurposeaccounts Environmental ImpactAssessmentexecutive1) environmental protection. strategic projects. Protection Authority, andAssessment andComplianceservicesrelated toEIA. projects andprograms inWA regional areas. Contributions ofassetsorservicesinthenature ofcontributionsbyownersare recognised direct toequity. and/or servicesthatcanbereliably measured andwhich wouldhavebeenpurchased iftheywere notdonated. year andanyagreed increase inleaveliabilityduring the year. component andareceivable (asset).Thereceivable (holding account)comprisesthedepreciation expenseforthe (a) 1,648,060 2012 439,340 123,015 232,852 340,797 107,782 304,464 $ 43,448 56,362 1,146,325 2011 123,015 165,000 340,797 107,782 340,764 $ 43,448 25,519

- 91 Disclosures and legal compliance Notes to the Financial Statements

6) Funds to support the 2012 review and revision of the Cockburn Sound State Environmental Policy (2005) and associated environmental quality criteria. 7) Funding for research and analysis associated with strategic biodiversity conservation and planning. 8) Unspent funds are committed to projects and programs in WA regional areas

2012 2011 $ $ Non-current Accrued salaries suspense account (b) 243,503 195,229 (b) Amount held in suspense account is only to be used for the purpose of meeting the 27th pay in a financial year that occurs every 11 years.

12 RECEIVABLES Current Receivables 74,637 467,452 Accrued revenue - 22,405 GST receivable 50,261 38,244 124,898 528,101

The Department does not hold any collateral as security or other credit enhancements relating to receivables.

13 AMOUNTS RECEIVABLE FOR SERVICES (HOLDING ACCOUNT) Non-current 677,000 611,000 677,000 611,000 Represents the non-cash component of service appropriations. It is restricted in that it can only be used for asset replacement or payment of leave liability.

92 15 14 Transfer toMarineequipment In progress costs Other plantandequipment workinprogress Accumulated impairmentlosses Accumulated depreciation At cost Other plantandequipment Accumulated impairmentlosses Accumulated depreciation At cost Marine equipment Accumulated impairmentlosses Accumulated depreciation At cost Information technologyassets PLANT ANDEQUIPMENT Prepayments Current OTHER ASSETS 2012 (211,276) 278,705 211,276 258,501 352,737 (94,236) (67,002) $ 13,242 16,625 73,964 21,853 (3,383) 6,962 - - - - 2011 290,254 211,276 211,276 (32,834) (52,945) $ 11,347 48,532 81,366 21,019 73,964 (1,920) 9,427 - - - - - 93 Disclosures and legal compliance Notes to the Financial Statements

Reconciliation of plant and equipment Reconciliations of the carrying amounts of plant and equipment at the beginning and end of the reporting period are set out below. Information Marine Other Other Total technology equipment plant and plant and $ assets $ equipment equipment $ work in progress $ 2012 Carrying amount at start of period 21,019 48,532 9,427 211,276 290,254 Additions - 60,095 5,277 - 65,372 Transfers - 211,276 - (211,276) - Depreciation (14,057) (61,402) (1,462) - (76,921) Carrying amount at end of period 6,962 258,501 13,242 - 278,705

2011 Carrying amount at start of period 53,202 69,302 4,954 - 127,458 Additions - - 5,886 211,276 217,162 Depreciation (32,183) (20,770) (1,413) - (54,366) Carrying amount at end of period 21,019 48,532 9,427 211,276 290,254

2012 2011 $ $ 16 INTANGIBLE ASSETS

Computer software At cost 17,100 - Accumulated amortisation - - Accumulated impairment losses - - 17,100 -

94 19 18 17 Employment on-costs Other provisions Long serviceleave Annual leave Accrued salaries Accrued expenses Current PAYABLES All surplusassetsat30June2012haveeitherbeenclassifiedasheldforsaleorwritten-off. the endofreporting periodthere were nointangibleassetsnotyetavailableforuse. The Departmentheldnogoodwillorintangibleassetswithanindefiniteusefullifeduringthe reporting periodandat There were noindicationsofimpairmenttoplantand equipmentorintangibleassetsat30June2012. IMPAIRMENT OFASSETS Carrying amountatendofperiod Additions Carrying amountatstartofperiod Reconciliation ofcomputersoftware Employee benefitsprovision Current PROVISIONS (a) (b) (c) 1,509,437 1,497,087 2012 858,120 638,967 333,101 236,585 $ 12,350 96,516 17,100 17,100

- 1,608,927 1,595,763 2011 712,745 883,018 517,731 251,531 266,200 $ 13,164

- - - 95 Disclosures and legal compliance Notes to the Financial Statements

2012 2011 $ $ Non-current Employee benefits provision Long service leave (b) 1,048,136 995,463

Other provisions Employment on-costs (c) 8,647 8,212 8,647 8,212 1,056,783 1,003,675

(a) Annual leave liabilities have been classified as current where there is no unconditional right to defer settlement for at least 12 months after the reporting period. Assessments indicate that actual settlement of the liabilities will occur as follows: Within 12 months of the end of the reporting period 511,174 706,414 More than 12 months after the reporting period 127,793 176,604 638,967 883,018

(b) Long service leave liabilities have been classified as current where there is no unconditional right to defer settlement for at least 12 months after the reporting period. Assessments indicate that actual settlement of the liabilities will occur as follows: Within 12 months of the end of the reporting period 300,342 249,461 More than 12 months after the reporting period 1,605,914 1,458,747 1,906,256 1,708,208

(c) The settlement of annual and long service leave liabilities gives rise to the payment of employment on-costs including workers’ compensation insurance. The provision is the present value of expected future payments. The associated expense is included at note 8 ‘Other expenses’.

Movements in other provisions Movements in each class of provisions during the financial year, other than employee benefits, are set out below.

96 20 Total equity atendofperiod Balance atendofperiod Result fortheperiod Balance atstartofperiod Accumulated surplus Balance atendofperiod Total contributionbyowners Capital appropriation Contributions byowners Balance atstartofperiod Contributed equity residual interest inthenetassetsofDepartment. holdsthe equityinterestThe Government intheDepartmentonbehalfofcommunity. Equityrepresents the EQUITY Carrying amountatendofperiod Additional/(reversals of)provisions recognised Carrying amountatstartofperiod Employment on-costprovision 1,555,375 1,179,700 2012 786,087 393,613 375,675 104,000 104,000 271,675 $ 20,997 21,376 (379) 2011 665,288 393,613 226,454 167,159 271,675 226,675 $ 45,000 45,000 21,376 18,681 2,695 97 Disclosures and legal compliance Notes to the Financial Statements

2012 2011 $ $ 21 NOTES TO THE STATEMENT OF CASH FLOWS Reconciliation of cash

Cash at the end of the financial year as shown in the Statement of Cash Flows is reconciled to the related items in the Statement of Financial Position as follows:

Cash and cash equivalents 1,443,577 1,024,712 Restricted cash and cash equivalents (see note 11 ‘Restricted cash and cash 1,891,563 1,341,554 equivalents’) 3,335,140 2,366,266

Reconciliation of net cost of services to net cash flows used in operating activities

Net cost of services (13,863,597) (13,107,164)

Non-cash items: Depreciation expense (note 7) 76,921 54,366 Resources received free of charge (note 10) 570,684 541,618

Increase in assets: Current receivables (c) 805,221 (73,634) Other current assets (21,853) -

Increase in liabilities: Current payables (c) (184,630) 44,507 Current provisions (99,490) 335,834 Non-current provisions 53,108 182,228

98 23 22 The commitments are inclusiveofGST. no optiontorenew theleaseatend oftheleaseterm. depending onthevehicle. Theleasepaymentsare fixed forthetermofleaseandare payablemonthly. There is The Departmenthasentered intononcancellableoperating vehicleleasecommitments.Theterm varies Non-cancellable operating leases Representing: Later than1yearandnotlater5years 1year Within but notrecognised inthefinancial statementsare payableasfollows: Commitments inrelation to leasescontractedforattheendofreporting period Non-cancellable operatingleasecommitments COMMITMENTS operations oftheDepartment. During theyearthere were noresources provided tootheragenciesfree ofchargeforfunctionsoutsidethenormal RESOURCES PROVIDEDFREEOFCHARGE reconciling items. respect ofthesale/purchase ofnon-current assetsare notincludedintheseitemsastheydoformpartofthe (c) NotethattheAustralianTaxation office(ATO) receivable/payable in respect ofGSTandthe receivable/payable in (b) Thisreverses outtheGSTinreceivables andpayables. (a) ThisisthenetGSTpaid/received, ie.cashtransactions. Net cash(usedin)operatingactivities Change inGSTreceivables andpayables Net GSTreceipts (a) (b) (12,675,653) 2012 (35,710) $ 87,170 87,170 17,211 69,959 23,693 (12,028,986) 2011 115,086 115,086 (46,852) $ 43,941 71,145 40,111 99 Disclosures and legal compliance Notes to the Financial Statements

24 CONTINGENT LIABILITIES AND CONTINGENT ASSETS The Department has no contingent liabilities and contingent assets as at 30 June 2012.

25 EVENTS OCCURRING AFTER THE END OF THE REPORTING PERIOD No events have occurred after the end of the reporting period which would materially impact on the financial statements.

26 EXPLANATORY STATEMENT Significant variations between estimates and actual results for income and expense as presented in the financial statement titled ‘Summary of Consolidated Account Appropriations and Income Estimates’ are shown below. Significant variations are considered to be those greater than 10% or $200,000.

Total appropriations provided to deliver services

Significant variances between estimate and actual for 2012 2012 2012 Estimate Actual Variance $ $ $ Total appropriation provided to deliver services for the period 14,119,000 13,689,000 (430,000) (a) Total income 1,240,000 127,967 (1,112,033) (b)

(a) Appropriations were reduced as funds for the Legacy EPACIS System and Case Management System were transferred into the 2012/13 budget year. (b) Income is based on historical results and the expected one-off grants did not materialise.

Significant variances between actual results for 2012 and 2011 2012 2011 Variance $ $ $ Total appropriation provided to deliver services for the period 13,689,000 12,354,000 1,335,000 (a) Total income 127,967 157,405 (29,438) (b)

100 (b) There wasanincrease in therequired resources toundertakethecompliance auditservice. (a) Variance isattributabletotheincreased resources beingrequired tocopewiththeincreased assessment Environmental Compliance Audits Environmental ImpactAssessment andPolicies Significant variancesbetweenactual results for2012and2011 (b) Arevision oftheallocationbasiswasundertakenwhichincreased theEnvironmental ComplianceAudit (a) Estimatesare madebasedonthefullFTEcapandrelated expensesandduring2011—12anumberof Environmental ComplianceAudits Environmental ImpactAssessmentandPolicies Significant variancesbetweenestimateandactualfor2012 Service expenditure (b) Incomeisdependentupontheaccessingofone-off grantsforparticularprojects andcanvaryfrom yearto (a) Additionalappropriations were received toassistOEPA toprovide qualifiedstaff toundertakecomplex workload andtheintroduction ofpositionsrequired to servicethemore complex Environmental Assessments. services. positions remained vacantwithdifficultiesinsourcing Environmental Officers. year. and toundertakeareform process foramore efficientassessmentprocess. environmental assessmentsandtheprovision ofstrategic policyadviceforgreater certaintyforproponents Estimate 12,231,628 15,113,000 1,759,936 1,396,000 2012 2012 $ $

11,769,231 12,231,628 Actual 1,495,338 1,759,936 2011 2012 $ $

Variance Variance (2,881,372) 264,598 462,397 363,936 $ $

(b) (a) (b) (a) 101 Disclosures and legal compliance Notes to the Financial Statements

Capital contribution

Significant variances between estimate and actual for 2012 No significant variance in Capital contribution.

Significant variances between actual results for 2012 and 2011 2012 2011 Variance $ $ $ Capital contribution 104,000 45,000 59,000 (a)

(a) The capital contribution variance reflects the increased need to provide essential computing equipment to assist in the implementation of improved assessment process.

27 FINANCIAL INSTRUMENTS other than government, the Department trades only with recognised, creditworthy third parties. The Department (a) Financial risk management objectives and has policies in place to ensure that sales of products and policies services are made to customers with an appropriate credit Financial instruments held by the Department are cash and history. In addition, receivable balances are monitored on cash equivalents, restricted cash and cash equivalents, an ongoing basis with the result that the Department’s receivables, and payables. The Department has limited exposure to bad debts is minimal. At the end of the exposure to financial risks. The Department’s overall risk reporting period there were no significant concentrations of management program focuses on managing the risks credit risk. identified below. Liquidity risk Credit risk Liquidity risk arises when the Department is unable to meet Credit risk arises when there is the possibility of the its financial obligations as they fall due. Department’s receivables defaulting on their contractual The Department is exposed to liquidity risk through its obligations resulting in financial loss to the Department. trading in the normal course of business. The maximum exposure to credit risk at the end of the The Department has appropriate procedures to manage reporting period in relation to each class of recognised cash flows including drawdowns of appropriations by financial assets is the gross carrying amount of those assets monitoring forecast cash flows to ensure that sufficient inclusive of any provisions for impairment as shown in the funds are available to meet its commitments. table at note 27(c) ‘Financial instrument disclosures’ and note 12 ‘Receivables’. Credit risk associated with the Department’s financial assets is minimal because the main receivable is the amounts receivable for services (holding account). For receivables

102 (a) Theamountofloansandreceivables excludesGST at theendofreporting periodare asfollows: following categoriesoffinancialassetsandliabilities In additiontocash,thecarryingamountsofeach (b) Categoriesoffinancialinstruments not materiallyexposedtootherpricerisks. The Departmentdoesnottradeinforeign currency and is instruments. Department’s incomeorthevalueofitsholdingsfinancial as foreign exchangeratesandinterest rateswillaffect the Market riskisthethatchangesinmarketpricessuch Market risk impaired and impaired financialassets. Thetableisbased the ageingof financialassetsthatare past duebutnot the financialassetsasshown below. Thetablediscloses at theendofreporting periodisthecarryingamount of assets. TheDepartment’s maximumexposure tocredit risk exposure tocredit riskand theageinganalysisoffinancial The followingtablesdisclose theDepartment’s maximum Credit risk c) Financialinstrumentdisclosures amortised cost Financial liabilitiesmeasured at Financial Liabilities Loans andreceivables equivalents Restricted cashand Cash andcashequivalents Financial Assets recoverable from theATO (statutoryreceivable). (a) $000 2012 1,892 1,444 333 752 $000 2011 1,101 1,341 1,025 518 other credit enhancementrelating tothefinancialassets it The Departmentdoesnotholdanycollateralassecurityor Department. on informationprovided toseniormanagementofthe holds. 103 Disclosures and legal compliance Notes to the Financial Statements

Aged analysis of financial assets

Not Past due but not impaired past due 3 More Impaired Carrying and not Up to 1 1-3 months 1-5 than 5 financial Amount impaired month months to I year years years assets $000 $000 $000 $000 $000 $000 $000 $000 2012 Cash and cash equivalents 1,444 1,444 ------Restricted cash and cash 1,892 1,892 ------equivalents Receivables (a) 75 - 75 - - - - - Amounts receivable for 677 677 ------services 4,088 4,013 75 - - - - -

2011 Cash and cash equivalents 1,025 1,025 ------Restricted cash and cash 1,341 1,341 ------equivalents Receivables (a) 490 23 - 467 - - - - Amounts receivable for 611 611 ------services 3,467 3,000 - 467 - - - -

(a) The amount of receivables excludes the GST recoverable from the ATO (statutory receivable).

104 (a) Theamount ofreceivables excludes the GSTrecoverable from theATO (statutoryreceivable). only thecarryingamountsofeachitem. financial liabilities.Thematurityanalysissectionincludesinterest andprincipalcashflows.Theinterest rateexposure sectionanalyses The followingtabledetailstheDepartment'sinterest rateexposure andthecontractualmaturityanalysisoffinancialassets Liquidity riskandinterestrateexposure Payables Financial Liabilities Amounts receivable forservices Receivables equivalents Restricted cashand Cash andcashequivalents Financial Assets 2011 Payables Financial Liabilities Amounts receivable forservices Receivables equivalents Restricted cashand Cash andcashequivalents Financial Assets 2012 (a) (a) Interest rateexposure andmaturityanalysisof financial assetsandliabilities Weighted Effective Average Interest Rate % Interest rateexposure

Carrying Amount

$000 3,467 1,341 1,025 4,088 1,892 1,444 518 518 611 490 333 333 677 75 Variable interest $000 rate

------interest bearing Non- $000 3,467 1,341 1,025 4,088 1,892 1,444 518 518 611 490 333 333 677

75 Nominal Amount $000 3,467 1,341 1,025 4,088 1,892 1,444 518 518 611 490 333 333 677 75 month $000 2,389 1,341 1,025 3,411 1,892 1,444 to 1 Up 518 518 333 333 23 75 - - months $000 1-3 467 467 Maturity dates ------months $000 year to 1 3 ------years $000 1-5 611 611 677 677 ------years More $000 than 5 ------105 Disclosures and legal compliance Notes to the Financial Statements 28 REMUNERATION OF SENIOR OFFICERS 30 RELATED AND AFFILIATED BODIES The number of senior officers whose total of fees, salaries, The Department does not provide any assistance superannuation, non-monetary benefits and other benefits to other agencies which would deem them to be for the financial year fall within the following bands are: regarded as related or affiliated bodies under the definitions included in Treasurer’s Instruction 951. $ 2012 2011 40.001-50,000 - 1 31 SUPPLEMENTARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION 120,001-130,000 1 - (a) Write-offs 150.001-160,000 - 1 The Department did not write off any bad debts, 160,001-170,000 - 1 revenue, debts due to the State, public or other property during the financial year. (2011: nil) 170,001-180,000 1 - 180,001-190,000 1 1 (b) Losses through theft, defaults and other 190,001-200,000 1 - causes 300,001-310,000 1 - The Department had no losses through theft, defaults and other causes during the financial year. (2011: nil) Total renumeration of senior $983,128 $550,545 (c) Gifts of public property officers The Department had no gifts of public property during the financial year. (2011: nil) The total remuneration includes the superannuation expense incurred by the Department in respect of senior officers. One senior officer is a member of the Pension Scheme. This increase is related to the successful filling of two director positions in 2012 and incremental adjustment to the General Manager’s salary. 29 REMUNERATION OF AUDITOR Remuneration paid or payable to the Auditor General in respect of the audit for the current financial year is as follows:

2012 2011 $ $ Auditing the accounts, financial 25,400 23,100 statements and key performance indicators

106 Key Performance Indicators Authority forthefinancialyearended30June2012. performance oftheOfficeEnvironmental Protection Protection Authority’s performance,andfairlyrepresent the assisting userstoassesstheOfficeofEnvironmental based onproper records, are relevant andappropriate for I hereby certifythatthekeyperformanceindicatorsare For year the ended30June 2012 Indicators of Key Certification Performance 17 September2012 Accountable Authority Kim Taylor The OfficeoftheEnvironmental Protection Authority (OEPA) Perfomance information purpose. indicators thatare more robust, contemporaryandfitfor are currently underreview inorder todevelopanewset of It shouldbenotedthattheOEPA’s performanceindicators 2. Environmental complianceaudits 1. Environmental impactassessmentandpolicies and efficiencyis reported. outcome andagainstwhichtheDepartment’s effectiveness The OEPA has two key services that contribute to the above assessment andcompliancesystem. outcome ofanefficientandeffective environmental It supportsthisgoalbyworkingtodeliverthedesired benefit oftheState. and environmentally responsible mannerforthelong term of ensuringthateconomicactivityismanagedinasocially 2009. TheOEPA workstosupporttheGovernment’s goal was establishedasaseparateDepartmentinNovember 107 Disclosures and legal compliance Key Performance Indicators Outcomes and key effectiveness indicators

There are three current effectiveness indicators for the OEPA:

2009-10 2010-11 2011-12 2011-12 2011-12 Variance Actual Actual Target Actual Variance of Actual of Target 2010-11 to Actual and 2011-12 Percentage of approved projects with actual 100% 100% 100% 100% 0% 0% impacts not exceeding those predicted during the assessment Percentage of assessments that meet 84% 82% 80% 80% 0% -2% agreed initial timelines Percentage of audited projects where all n/a (a) 58% 80% 87% 7% 29% environmental conditions have been met (a) Indicator not in place during 2009-10

100% Percentage of approved projects with actual impacts not exceeding those 80% predicted during the assessment

60% Accuracy of predicting environmental impacts % Accurately predicting likely environmental impacts is 40% essential to the development of appropriate conditions for any approval. 20% The OEPA assesses the effectiveness of its environmental 0% impact assessments by determining the number of times 2011-12 2009-10 2010-11 2011-12 Variance that action needs to be taken beyond routine compliance Target to achieve protection of the environment as specified under % 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0%0.0% conditions in an Implementation Statement. Such action could relate to the issuing of a notice by Percentage of assessments where actual environmental impacts the Minister for Environment under section 48 (4) of the have not been found to have seriously exceeded predicted impacts Environmental Protection Act 1986.

108 by theMinisterialconditions. indicating environmental impactsbeyondthoseregulated No informationwasreceived from thepublicin2011—12 Information reported by thepublic. by theMinisterialconditions. indicating environmental impacts beyondthoseregulated No reports were received from proponents in2011—12 Reports submittedbyproject proponents regulated bytheMinisterial conditions. 2011—12 indicatingenvironmental impactsbeyondthose No advicewasreceived from agenciesin otherGovernment agencies Audits byotherGovernment regulated bytheMinisterialconditions. projects where environmental impactswere beyondthose branch in2011—12didnotresult inthedetectionofany The 55auditsundertakenbytheStatementCompliance Information from OEPA audits harm causedbynon-compliance. to prevent, control orabateanypollutionenvironmental There were nonoticesissuedin2011—12bytheMinister Orders/notices issuedbyMinister considering thefollowingcriteria: The 2011-12result of100percentwasdeterminedby proponents andfrom informationreported bythepublic. agencies, reportsother government submittedbyproject based oninformationfrom theOEPA audits,auditsby exceeding thosepredicted duringtheassessmentis The determinationofwhetheraproject hashadimpacts Explanatory notes Percentage of assessmentswhereoriginal timelines have beenmet % 100 20% 40% 60% 80% agreed timelines Percentage thatmet ofassessments environmental matters. of extendedconsultationwithproponents oncomplex not meetitstimelineobjectivewere generallyasaresult cent ofcases,asforecast. Instanceswhere theOEPA did In 2011—12,theOEPA metitstimelineobjectivein80per timeline objective. assessment report totheMinisterwhetherithasmet The EPA hasadoptedapracticeofpublishinginits proponent soonafterthelevelofassessmentisdetermined. complexity oftheproject andare usuallyagreed withthe foranassessmentmayvaryaccording tothe Timelines Explanatory notes timelines havebeenmet. percentage ofassessmentswhere thoseinitiallyagreed assessment iscommenced.Thisgraphillustratesthe Expected timelinesare usuallyagreed atthetimean Timeliness ofEIAprocess 0% % % 2009 84. 0% -1 02 82. 01 0- 0% 11 2011 Ta 80.0 rg -1 et %8 2 2011 0. 0% -1 2V ar 0. ia 0% nc e 109 Disclosures and legal compliance Key Performance Indicators Percentage of audited projects where The percentage of audited projects where all environmental all environmental conditions have conditions have been met is determined from the audits of been met statements within this program. Explanatory notes Rates of compliance with ministerial conditions The Priority Matrix incorporates a number of factors to Compliance monitoring is managed through a structured priority rank Ministerial Statements. An audit program of annual Compliance Management Program. The program statements is developed based on the priority ranking. sets out the number of audits to be undertaken and using a priority matrix identifies the Ministerial Statements to be Audits consist of a desk top review of all information audited. submitted to demonstrate compliance and site audits where further verification is required to assess the compliance The priority matrix considers: status. • Condition of existing receiving environment. Improved efficiencies in undertaking audits have assisted • Potential consequence of failed key management in achieving a greater number of audits. 55 audits were actions on environment and or human recipients. undertaken in 2011—12 compared to 47 audits during • Environmental Performance. 2010—11. • Stakeholder Interest. All high priority ranked Statements are audited as part of the Compliance Management Program.

100%

80% e nc

lia 60% mp

Co 40% % 20%

0% 2011-12 2009-10 2010-11 2011-12 Variance Target Overall 0% 58% 80% 87% 7.0%

Percentage of audited projects where all environmental conditions have been met 110 they usuallyattract ahighdegree ofpublic interest, and attract thehighest weightingof5inview ofthefactthat Strategic proposals andPublicEnvironmental Reviews assessment canserveas a generalguide. interest). However, thestatutory process and/orlevelof sensitivity ofthereceiving environment, degree ofpublic on avarietyoffactors(scale,experiencetheproponent, resources expendedonindividualproposals depending There canbesignificantvariation intimetakenand Explanatory notes weighted numberofoutputEIAservicesprovided. of providing theservice(including overheadcosts)bythe The weightedaveragecostiscalculatedbythetotal cost Each group isgivenaweighting of1to5. the complexityofassessmentorstatutoryprocess. reviews are categorisedintoseveralgroups, dependingon Environmental impactassessmentsandpostapproval asessment Average perenvironmental cost 1:Environmental assessment andpolicies Service impact andkeyServices indicators efficiency developed Average costperenvironmental policy assessment Average costperenvironmental 2009-10 $161,699 Actual $39,138

2010-11 $192,162 Actual $39,336 Average cost perenvironmentalimpact assessment proposal. A recent exampleistheBrowse LNGprecinct strategic significant investmentofofficertimebytheDepartment. may beofascaleandcomplexitythatwouldinvolve

2011-12 $,000 $263,689 - - Target 20. 10. 10. 20. 30. 40. 50. 60. $49,077 $, 0. 000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

2009 39. 2011-12 $120,693 -1 1 Actual $40,688 0 2010

39. -1 Variance of 34 Target to 1 2011-12 ($142,996) Actual ($8,389) 2011 Ta

9. rg -1 14 et 2 2010-11 and Variance of 2011-12 Actual ($71,469) 2011 $1,352 0. -1 7- 2V

ar 8. ia nc 4 e 111 Disclosures and legal compliance

Section 48A planning scheme referrals also attract a Average cost per environmental policy weighting of 5 because they are generally broad scale and developed involve multiple land uses in areas of high biodiversity. The OEPA develops environmental protection policies, Assessments based on proponent information are generally guidelines and strategic advice for the EPA and for for more routine proposals with fewer environmental factors Government. Policy and guidelines assist in minimising and as such they attract a weighting of 2. environmental impacts and protecting important parts of Section 46 changes to approved Ministerial implementation the environment. They also provide guidance about the conditions result in a public report by the EPA and attract a EPA’s expectations in relation to environmental impact weighting of 2. assessment and assist users of the OEPA’s services to navigate the statutory processes. Less complex activity includes review of environmental management plans and amendments to proposals under Policies, guidelines and strategic advice vary in type. The s45(c) of the EP Act. These are given a weighting of 1. type of instrument, as well as the complexity of the topic, can have a significant bearing on the effort involved in its preparation. Policy development is divided into three categories based upon the type of policy, guidance or strategic advice. These are: • Maximum complexity (weight 3); 300.0 • Medium complexity (weight 2); and 250.0 200.0 • Low complexity (weight 1) 150.0 The weighted average cost is calculated by dividing the 100.0 total cost of policy, guidance or strategic advice by the weighted number of output services provided.

000 50.0 $, 0.0 Explanatory notes -50.0 Only those policies completed, published and/or delivered -100.0 to the end user are counted for the purpose of calculating -150.0 efficiency. -200.0 2011-12 The policy output is divided into three categories which 2009-10 2010-11 2011-12 Variance Target broadly reflect their statutory importance and degree of $,000 161.7 192.2 263.7 120.7 -143.0 complexity. Average cost per policy development

112

Actual. This contributedtothedifference betweenTarget and not completed,publishedand/ordelivered totheenduser. exclude policies,guidelinesandstrategicadvicethatwere previous yearstoapplytheweightedaverageand In 2011—12,thecalculationmethodwasvariedfrom average. of 1toreflect thattheytakeupto300hourscompleteon protection bulletinsandreviews whichare givenaweighting The lowestlevelofcomplexityappliestoenvironmental to complete. complexity. Thesemaytakeanaverageof300-600hours given aweightingof2toreflect theirmoderatelevelof Strategic advice,guidelinesandknowledgeservicesare to complete. assumed thesemaytakeanaverageof600and900hours complexity. Basedonjudgementandpastexperience,itis are giventhehighestweightingof3toreflect their relative Statutory andCabinetendorsedpoliciesframeworks 113 Disclosures and legal compliance Key Performance Indicators Service 2: Environmental Compliance Audits

2009-10 2010-11 2011-12 2011-12 2011-12 Variance of Actual Actual Target Actual Variance of Actual Target to 2010-11 and Actual 2011-12 Average cost per environmental audit $22,140 $32,020 $23,264 $27,594 $4,330 ($4,426) completed

Average cost per environmental audit completed The average cost of compliance auditing is calculated by dividing the total cost of compliance services by the number of audits undertaken.

Explanatory notes The target average cost per compliance audit is based on a predicted 60 audits being completed during the period. 55 audits were actually undertaken during 2011—12 and 35.0 as a result the average cost per compliance audit has increased. There is a clear trend that the complexity of 30.0 approved projects increases year on year. The fewer audits 25.0 undertaken in 2010—11 in comparison with 2011—12 is a reflection of the increased effort required to undertake the 20.0 higher complexity audits. 000

$, 15.0

10.0

5.0

0.0 2011-12 2009-10 2010-11 2011-12 Variance Target $,000 22.1 32.0 23.3 27.64.3

Weighted average cost of audits and verification inspections and scans of annual compliance reporting

114 Other disclosures contracts oragreements with thedepartment. had substantial interests in entities with existing or proposed employment contracts.Noseniorofficersofthedepartment held nocontractswiththedepartmentotherthannormal At thedateofreporting, seniorofficersofthedepartment seniorofficers with Contracts Governance disclosures (TI903) does notchargeanyfeeforservice. The departmentisfullyfundedfrom appropriations and Pricing PoliciesProvided of Services financialdisclosuresOther (TI903) financial year. No MinisterialDirectives were received duringthe2011—12 directives Ministerial Other legalrequirements Other department’s EIAreforms. useful stakeholderfeedbackontheprogress ofthe OEPA inApril2012.Resultsofthissurveyhaveprovided environmental impactassessment process onbehalfofthe Integral Developmentconductedasurveyofclients of the reports andrecommendations released. assessment setandopentopublicappealaswell EPA Australian newspapereachMondaynotifyinglevels of Media advertisingisprimarilyapublicnoticeintheWest Expenditure wasincurred inthefollowingareas: Total expenditure for2011–12was$45,363.75 advertising: advertising, marketresearch, polling,direct mailandmedia 1907 In accordance withSection175ZEofthe mail anddirect polling Expenditure onadvertising,market research, organisations Media advertising Direct mailorganisations Polling organisations organisations Market research Advertising agencies , thedepartmentincurred thefollowingexpenditure in $26,175.37 $38.38 NIL $19,150.00 NIL Electoral Act AdCorp key2creative Development Integral 115 Disclosures and legal compliance Other disclosures

Disability Access and inclusion plan outcomes Target Actual* (Disability Services Act 1993, s29 and Schedule 3 FTE compared to FTE ceiling 103 96 of the Disability Services Regulations 2004) % women in agency 50% 50% The OEPA receives corporate services from the Department % women in Management Tier 1 (GM) 50% 0% of Environment and Conservation. This includes DEC’s and Tier 2 (Directors) Disability Access and Inclusion Plan (DAIP) 2007 – 2012 % women in Management Tier 3 50% 45% that continues with an ongoing program of improving (Managers) access, facilities, and services to ensure they meet the needs of our customers and staff. % people with disabilities in agency 3% 0% % indigenous employees in agency 3% 1% The plan is monitored by DEC’s Disability Access and % employees aged < 25 years 5% 3.85% Inclusion Committee, and the OEPA’s Corporate Executive continues to meet and takes into account the interests of all % part-time employees in agency 20% 17.48% OEPA staff that are covered by the plan. * As at 30 June 2012

Equal Employment Opportunity and Diversity Management Outcomes

Workforce and Diversity Plan 2012—2014 OEPA has implemented a Workforce and Diversity Plan to assist in the identification of current and future workforce needs and to provide business initiatives that align with the Strategic Directions for the Public Sector Workforce 2009— 2014 and Equal Opportunity Act 1984. We are building a culture that will enhance how we work together as a group of professional individuals towards our shared vision with EPA of ‘an environment that is highly valued and protected’ through achieving an enhanced service culture with improved stakeholder relationships. OEPA is committed to an inclusive work environment that is free from any form of harassment or discrimination and is progressing through a review of all Human Resource policies and additionally, as part of the Workforce and Diversity Plan, implementing a Work Life Policy to achieve the goal of attracting a skilled diverse workforce within an efficient and flexible Public Sector. 116 ( Ethic Codes Standards and Public with Compliance Sector Public SectorManagementAct1994 in 2011–12. code ofconduct breaches ofthe There were no Conduct Code of Department’s Ethics the WA Codeof compliance with reports ofnon- There were no Ethics WA Codeof 2011—12. lodged in breach claims There were no Standards Public Sector Compliance issue

• • • • monitor andensure compliance gifts andbenefits. Commission onrisksrelating to from theCrimeandCorruption to includeinformationreceived revised andupdatedinApril 2012 The OEPA CodeofConductwas Public SectorCodeofEthics”. sitefor“WesternAustralia internet includes ahyperlinktothePSC Conduct. TheCodeofConduct contained withinOEPA’s Codeof The WA CodeofEthicsis relevant standard. to ensure compliancewiththe participate onrecruitment panels available toofficers required to grievance officersandmade Ongoing trainingisprovided to site. (OPSSC) internet Standards Commissioner’s to theOfficeofPublicSector Standards includingahyperlink information onthePublicSector OEPA intranetisasection,has The DECintranet,ofwhichthe Significant actiontakento , s31(1)) Commission Standard 2,Principle6) ( Recordkeeping Plans training sessionsforcertainroles were alsoconducted. to OEPA staff. Additionally, more specialisedandindividual During 2011—12,theDECprovided traininginObjective management system,Objective. for correspondence recorded inthedepartment’s records Convention Information ManagementPolicy-CorrespondenceNaming its informationmanagementstrategy. InMay2012,an procedures aspartofanoverarching implementationof The OEPA iscurrently reviewing itsrecord keeping September 2010. was approved bytheStateRecords Commissionon 15 revised The EPA andOEPA havebeenincorporatedintoDEC’s the continues tosupporttheEPA andOEPA’s compliancewith DEC’s CorporateInformationServices(CIS)Section State RecordsAct2000 State RecordsAct2000 Recordkeeping PlanDECRK2010043 was introduced to define the naming convention andStateRecords . which 117 Disclosures and legal compliance Other disclosures Government Policy Requirements • Communication to employees of the OSH management system on implementation and on review. • Inclusion of OSH management system requirements in Occupational Safety, Health and Injury employee inductions. Management (Public Sector Commissioner’s • Regular reporting of OSH issues at corporate executive Circular 2009-11: Code of Practice: Occupational meetings. Safety and Health in the Western Australian Public Sector) • Reporting of any irregular OSH risks or incidents to the DEC Audit and Risk Management Committee. The OEPA is committed to achieving a high standard of occupational safety and health performance. This is The OEPA is committed to providing quality and prompt achieved in accordance with the Occupational Safety and injury management support to all its employees who may Health Act 1984 and the Government of Western Australia’s sustain a work-related injury or illness, with a focus on safe Occupational Safety and Health in the Western Australian and early return to meaningful work and in accordance with Public Sector. the Workers’ Compensation and Injury Management Act 1981. The OEPA adopts the Department of Environment and Conservation’s policies to support a workplace that is free The expected injury management outcomes are: of work-related injuries and diseases. 1. Return to work in the same position This is done by operating in accordance with occupational safety and health legislation, regulations, approved codes of 2. Return to work in a new position practice and WorkSafe Plan. 3. Return to work in a position with another agency The OEPA makes all employees and contractors aware of their OSH responsibilities through access to OSH information and training, and by encouraging senior management to take leadership in OSH matters with a common view to improve OSH outcomes. The following actions form the basis of the OEPA’s consultation mechanism: • Employee involvement in hazard identification, risk assessment and risk control process through the reporting of potential risk to either their manager or by entering that incident in the central register. • Feedback from employees on occupational safety and health issues through an annual survey and during team meetings. 118 January 2012andthereafter nolaterthanJune2016. of modelWork HealthandSafetylegislationscheduled for the policywouldneedtobe reviewed followingthepassage reviewed inDecember2011. Atthattimeitwasnoted The DEC’s OccupationalSafetyandHealthpolicywas legislation Harmonised OSHlaws –Work andSafety Health % ofinjured severity rate Lost timeinjury incidence rate disease (LTI/D) Lost timeinjury/ fatalities Number of responsibilities management and injury safety, health occupational trained in % ofmanagers 26 weeks 13 weeksand(ii) to workwithin(i) workers returned Indicator Not applicable Performance Zero (0) Zero (0) Zero (0) 0% equal to80% Greater thanor within 26weeks return towork equal to80% Greater thanor (3) years the previous three improvement on 0 or10% (3) years the previous three improvement on 0 or10% 0 Target 119 Disclosures and legal compliance 120 APPENDICES Appendix 1 - Public reports and recommendations to the Minister for Environment

Report Title Proponent Type of Released number report 1406 Voyager Quarry, Lots 11 and 14 Horton Road, The Lakes, BGC (Australia) Pty Ltd s46 4-Jul-11 Avon Location 1881, Shire of Northam - Proposal to delete Conditions 6 and 11 and amend Condition 12 of Ministerial Statement 706 1407 Ammonium Nitrate Production Expansion Project: Phase 2, CSBP Ltd PER - pre 18-Jul-11 Kwinana 2010 1408 Cape Lambert to Emu Siding Rail Duplication Rio Tinto Iron Ore API 25-Jul-11 1409 West Pilbara Iron Ore Project - Stage 1 Mine and Rail API Management Pty PER - pre 3-Aug-11 Proposal Ltd 2010 1410 Parker Range (Mount Caudan) Iron Ore Project Cazaly Iron Ore Pty Ltd PER - pre 3-Aug-11 2010 1411 Gold Mining Developments on Lake Lefroy - Beyond 2010 St Ives Gold Mining PER - pre 3-Aug-11 Company Pty Ltd 2010 1412 Cape Lambert Port B development - proposal under s46 of Pilbara Iron Pty Ltd s46 3-Aug-11 the Environmental Protection Act 1986 to change Condition 8-1 of Ministerial Statement 840 (Assessment No. 1884) 1413 Jack Hills Expansion Project Crosslands Resources PER - pre 15-Aug-11 Ltd 2010 1414 Town of Port Hedland Town Planning Scheme No. 5 Town of Port Hedland 29-Aug-11 Amendment 22: Rezone Residential Land in the West End of Port Hedland 1415 Magellan Lead Carbonate Project, Wiluna – to facilitate the Magellan Metals Pty s46 3-Oct-11 export of containerised lead from the Port of Fremantle, Ltd change to environmental conditions 1416 Hamersley Agriculture Project Hamersley Iron Pty Ltd API 17-Oct-11 1417 Spotted Quoll open pit nickel project - Proposal under s46 Western Areas NL s46 24-Oct-11 of the EP Act to change Condition 8-2 and 8-3 of Ministerial Statement 808 (Assessment No. 1881) 1418 Busselton Regional Aerodrome - proposal under s46 of the Shire of Busselton s46 31-Oct-11 EP Act to replace Condition 4-4 of Ministerial Statement 399 1419 Multi-user Iron Ore Export (Landside) Facility North West API 28-Nov-11 Infrastructure 1420 Point Grey Marina Point Grey PER - pre 5-Dec-11 Development 2010 Company Pty Ltd 122 number Report 1434 1433 1432 1431 1430 1429 1428 1427 1426 1425 1424 1423 1422 1421 Transmission Substations Noise Regulation 17Exemption,Western Power RangeW3/5DepositDeepening Windarling Lease 3H/034,8kmsouthwest ofExmouth Expansion toLimestoneQuarry onMiningLease08/06Sub Cape RicheSeawaterDesalination Plant Ministerial Statement728 substantial commencement–s46changetocondition 4of Wagerup AluminaRefinery – Extensionoftimelimitfor Cloudbreak LifeofMineProject Statement 399 46 oftheEPActtoreplace condition4-4ofMinisterial Busselton RegionalAerodrome –Proposal undersection Port HedlandOuterHarbourDevelopment Operations-DeceptionDeposit Yilgarn Extension ofKemertonSilicaSandDredge Mining Statement 584unders46oftheEPAct Pilbara Region-ChangetoconditionsofMinisterial Hope DownsIron Ore Mine,75kmnorthwestofNewman, amend Condition8-1ofMinisterialStatement730 Shire ofDandaragan-proposal unders46oftheEP Actto Expansion ofJurienGypsumMiningOperationML70/1161, Shire ofDerby/West Kimberley Finfish Aquaculture Venture, Aquaculture Licence1465, Transitional DevelopmentofConeBayMarineTropical Statement 753) Corridor, andCondition15PerfomanceBond(Ministerial Condition 13FaunaManagementalongtheServices of Yalgoo -Proposal unders46oftheEPActtoamend Mt GibsonIron Ore MineandInfrastructure Project, Shire Title Mount GibsonMining Western Power Ore PtyLtd Cliffs AsiaPacificIron LG andHMMcDonald Grange Resources Alcoa World Alumina Group Ltd Fortescue Metals Shire ofBusselton BHP BillitonIron Ore Ore PtyLtd Cliffs AsiaPacificIron Pty Ltd Kemerton SilicaSand Pty Ltd Management Services Hamersley Hope Cement CSR Gyprock Fibre Australia Ltd Marine Produce Hill PtyLtd Limited andExtension Proponent Reg 17 API API PER s46 2010 PER -pre s46 2010 PER -pre API 2010 PER -pre s46 s46 API s46 Type of report 19-Dec-11 19-Dec-11 27-Feb-12 13-Feb-12 13-Feb-12 26-Mar-12 12-Mar-12 30-Jan-12 23-Jan-12 Released 9-Dec-11 5-Dec-11 8-Feb-12 9-Jan-12 9-Jan-12 123 Appendices Appendix 1 - Public reports and recommendations to the Minister for Environment

Report Title Proponent Type of Released number report 1435 Busselton Regional Aerodrome - Noise Management Plan - City of Busselton s46 26-Mar-12 s46 inquiry into conditions 1436 Ministerial Statements 805 and 806 - Karara Mining Ltd s46 Karara Mining Ltd s46 26-Mar-12 condition changes 1437 Wiluna Uranium Project Toro Energy Ltd ERMP 21-May-12 1438 Yilgarn Operations – Windarling Range W4 East Deposit Cliffs Asia Pacific Iron API 28-May-12 Ore Pty Ltd 1439 Roy Hill 1 Iron Ore Mining Project Stage 1 – Section 46 Roy Hill Iron Ore Pty s46 5-Jun-12 Change to Condition 9 of Ministerial Statement 824 – Short Ltd Range Endemic Invertebrates 1440 Wheatstone Development – s46 changes to conditions 6 Chevron Australia Pty s46 5-Jun-12 and 8 of Ministerial Statement 873 Ltd 1441 Weld Range Iron Ore Project PER 18-Jun-12 1442 Augusta Wastewater Treatment Plant – proposal under s46 18-Jun-12 s46 of the EP Act to remove implementation conditions of Ministerial Statement 126 1443 Forest Management Plan 2004-2013 – end-of-term audit of audit 18-Jun-12 performance report

124 proposals Appendix approved 45C 2-Section changesto Statement number 634 749 723 481 773 690 735 789 Mingenew CoalProject Wagoo HillsVanadium Project and Midwest Vanadium PtyLtd weathering, Shire ofMountMagnet clearing andminingbelowthebaseof VanadiumWindimurra Project: Land Fortescue MetalsGroupLimited Port &North-SouthRailway(StageA) Pilbara Iron Ore &Infrastructure Project: Pipeline trading astheDampierBunbury DBNGP (WA) NomineesPtyLimited Stage 5expansion Dampier toBunburynaturalgaspipeline Doral MineralSandsPtyLtd Burekup MineralSandsDeposit Mineral SandsProject toincludethe Western ExtensiontotheDardanup Dampier PortAuthority BGC ContractingPtyLtd and Site, KingBay, BurrupPeninsula Development ofaQuarryand Industrial Tanami GoldNL Hall’s Creek of Hall’s Creek, Tanami Desert,Shire of approximately 280kilometres southeast Coyote GoldMine,Stage2, Gunson ResourcesLtd East ofDenham,Shire ofShark Bay MineralSandProject,Coburn South- Midwest Vanadium PtyLtd Proposal title Proponent Change totheBurekup West Minedisturbance volume Change tositeboundaries andincrease inquarry increase topitandlanddisturbance areas. volumes, deepeningoftheKookaburrapit,andan Increase tominelife,ore minedandwasterock footprint. Change toproject lifeand location ofdisturbance Production ofiron ore. Additional landclearing. hectares) duetowideningofcauseway. infrastructure. Increase inportoperatingarea (3 hectares) duetoconstructionofadditional Increase inrailwaycorridordisturbance(371 Dampier toBunburyNaturalGasPipeline. easements grantedforthepurposesof To allowforconstructionwithinadditional footprint area. Variation 28-Sept-11 28-Sept-11 21-Sept-11 30-Aug-11 23-Aug-11 21-Aug-11 Approval 5-Aug-11 8-Jul-11 date 125 Appendices Appendix 2 - Section 45C approved changes to proposals

Statement Proposal title Variation Approval number Proponent date 695 Yandicoogina Junction South East Mine, To clear an additional 212 ha of vegetation for 12-Oct-11 Mining Lease 274SA, Shire of East waste dumps, topsoil stockpiles and haul road Pilbara diversions and to increase the mining rate by 2 Hamersley Iron Pty Ltd million tonnes per annum. 16 Channar Mining Project – Hamersley Amendment to disturbance boundaries. 12-Oct-11 Range Pilbara Iron on behalf of the Channar Mining Joint Venture 859 South West Creek Dredging and Relocation of DMMA G Discharge Point and 27-Oct-11 Reclamation Project Modification of zone of Permanent Mangrove Loss. Port Hedland Port Authority 834 Orebody 24/25 Upgrade Project The disturbance area and ore processing rate are 16-Nov-11 BHP Billiton Iron Ore Pty Ltd changed to enable a rail spur, train load-out facility, and on-site ore handling plant (approved in the original proposal) to be constructed and used at the Orebody 24 Mine. 816 Albany Iron Ore Project – Southdown Change to waste dump footprint. 22-Nov-11 Magnetite Proposal mine, ore slurry and water pipelines, and port loading facilities, 90 kilometres east-north-east of Albany Grange Resources Limited 718 Gwindinup Mineral Sands Mine, Shire of Increase the mine footprint, increase the amount of 24-Nov-11 Capel ore mined and change the mining period. Cable Sands (WA) Pty Ltd 627 Koolyanobbing Iron Ore Expansion, Change to Schedule 1, Key Proposal 13-Dec-11 Windarling Range and Mt Jackson, Shire Characteristics Table. of Yilgarn Cliffs Asia Pacific Iron Ore Pty Ltd 862 Solomon Iron Ore Project Change to Schedule 1, Key Proposal 13-Dec-11 Fortescue Metals Group Limited Characteristics Table.

126 Statement number 514 506 844 715 606 476 840 523 Facility, Shire ofDerby-West Kimberley Koolan IslandIron Ore MineandPort Newcrest MiningLimited Mine, Great SandyDesert Telfer Project, ExpansionofTelfer Gold Mt Weld MiningPtyLtd Processing atMeenaar, nearNortham at MtWeld, Laverton,andSecondary Rare EarthsMiningandBeneficiation Pilbara IronPtyLtd Shire ofRoebourne Cape LambertPortBDevelopment, Hamersley IronPtyLtd Hamersley Range 90 kilometres north-westofNewman, Yandicoogina Iron Ore MineRailway, Robe RiverMiningCompany PtyLtd East Pilbara,Ashburtonand Roebourne West AngelasIron Ore Project, Shires of Minara ResourcesLtd Leonora Stage 2Expansion,60kmeastof Murrin Nickel-CobaltProject BHP BillitonPetroleum Ashburton Macedon GasDevelopment,Shire of Mount GibsonIronLimited Proposal title Proponent To increase thesitefootprintby225ha,toallow Deepening ofexistingpits andadditionofPitE. 0.5 Mtpafor‘lifeofmine’ Leach Facilityallowingore processing toremain at relating tothecontinuedoperation oftheHeap Changes toSchedule1,KeyCharacteristicsTable supply. Offshore pipelinerealignment andchangetowater water from existingbores, forpotableuse. kilolitres perdayto120kilolitres perdayoffresh Increase ingroundwater abstractionfrom 75 supply. production, processing thoughputandwater existing staggersborefield, andincrease toore an additional11.5hectares forextensionofthe To increase disturbanceimpacts,byclearing additional infrastructure. Operations –increase inproduction andassociated Mt Weld Rare EarthsProject Stage2Expansionof Figure 5,Table 4andKeyCharacteristicsTable. area” and“tugharbourdredge area” (replaced Additional dredging –increase in“largedredge to 36Mt/a. the site,andadjustsitemaximumminingrate increase area), tosetanupdatedfootprintfigure for infrastructure (withintheproposed footprint for additionalore stockpilesandassociated Variation 22-Dec-11 15-Dec-11 30-Jan-12 24-Jan-12 17-Jan-12 11-Jan-12 11-Jan-12 11-Jan-12 Approval date 127 Appendices Appendix 2 - Section 45C approved changes to proposals

Statement Proposal title Variation Approval number Proponent date 824 Roy Hill 1 Iron Ore Mining Project Stage Change to mining schedule, location of key 3-Feb-12 1, 110 Kilometres North of Newman, infrastructure, groundwater drawdown figure and Shire of East Pilbara coordinates (this attachment replaces Figure 2, Roy Hill Iron Ore Pty Ltd Figure 3, Figure 4 and Figure 5 of Schedule 1, and the table of GIS coordinates in Schedule 2). 829 Roy Hill 1 Iron Ore Mining Project Stage Change to mining schedule, location of key 3-Feb-12 2, 110 km North of Newman, Shire of infrastructure, groundwater drawdown figure and East Pilbara coordinates (this attachment replaces Figure 2, Roy Hill Iron Ore Pty Ltd Figure 3 and Figure 5 of Schedule 1). 786 Extension Hill haematite haulage, road Increased Rail Siding stockpile capacity and water 14-Feb-12 and rail siding, Shires of Perenjori and use for dust suppression, and increased variability Yalgoo in train movements per day. Mount Gibson Mining Limited 591 Boddington and Hedges Gold Mines, Increase to project disturbance area (by 29 ha 24-2-12 Shire of Boddington – including 13.81 ha of state forest), increase to Newmont Boddington Gold Pty Ltd crushing infrastructure, modifications to the existing Thirty-four Mile Brook diversion and North Clear Water Pond, and change to chemical resource consumption. 730 Expansion of Jurien Gypsum Mining Change to mining method, increase to quantity of 12-Mar-12 Operation ML70/1161, Shire of material mined per year. Dandaragan CSR Building Products Ltd (T/A CSR Gyprock Fibre Cement) 840 Cape Lambert Port B Development, Additional clearing – additional 46 ha of terrestrial 28-Mar-12 Shire of Roebourne clearing. Inclusion of Figure 7 depicting Terrestrial Pilbara Iron Pty Ltd Component of the Proposed Footprint. 707 Pilbara Iron Ore Infrastructure Project: Construction of additional rail infrastructure. 28-Mar-12 East-West Railway Mine Sites Stage B Construction of an access/transport route between Fortescue Metals Group Limited the Christmas Creek mine site and Marble Bar Road, as shown in Figure 8 (this replaces the section of road between the Christmas Creek mine site and Marble Bar Road depicted in Figure 3 of Attachment 1); and removal of production rate from Key Characteristics Table.

128 Statement number 859 719 584 837 658 741 854 131 Phase IIIandIV, Shire of Collie, Bluewaters PowerStationExpansion– Metro BrickBristileClayTiles PtyLtd Swan lot 36GreatHighway, Northern Upper Clay ExcavationLots10,11andpart Robe RiverIronAssociates annum, Shire ofRoebourne throughput to85milliontonnesper Cape Lambertupgrade–increase in Hamersley HMSPtyLimited East Pilbara Hope Downs4Iron Ore Mine,Shire of Hamersley HMSPtyLimited Brockman No.2DetritalIron Ore Mine Port HedlandAuthority Reclamation Project South West Creek Dredging and BHP BillitonWorsley AluminaPtyLtd and AssociatedMining Maximum Capacityof4.4MtpaAlumina Worsley Alumina-Production to PtyLtd Services Hamersley HopeManagement North-West ofNewman,Pilbara Region Hope DownsIron Ore Mine,75km Griffin PowerPtyLtd Shire ofDardanup, Shire ofHarvey Proposal title Proponent Further developmentofpartstheexistingPit5, changes tothezoneofpermanent mangrove loss Point Roadandthedredging area, andassociated Realignment oftheaccess trackbetweenUtah emissions. Change toSulphurDioxideandCarbonMonoxide Schedule 1. Remove Weeli Wolli Springsupplementationlimitin superseded byFigure 6. Figure 5ofStatement837 isreplaced and part lot36to201asseeninfigure 3. Redefine LeesPitboundaryfrom lots10,11and Linkage. Inclusion ofFigure 3–IndicativeLayoutofthe Mtpa to105andadditionalinfrastructure. Linkage proposal -Increase inthroughput from 85 groundwater bores. and re-development andrelocation oftwoexisting Kalgan Creek excesswaterpipelinerealignment, Realignment oftheinfrastructure corridorandthe Project. This changeisreferred toastheSustainingTonnes surface wastedumpadjacenttotheminepits. disturbance areas fortopsoilstockpilingandanew 6 and7abovethewatertable;increase insurface Variation 28-Mar-12 28-Mar-12 30-Apr-12 20-Apr-12 18-Apr-12 16-Apr-12 Approval 2-May-12 4-Apr-12 date 129 Appendices Appendix 2 - Section 45C approved changes to proposals

Statement Proposal title Variation Approval number Proponent date 605 Telfer Project, Power Supply & Consolidation and Amendment of Key 2-May-12 infrastructure Corridor, Port Hedland to Characteristics Table Option 1a (Supplying natural Telfer Gold Mine, Great Sandy Desert gas from Port Hedland via a buried pipeline to the Newcrest Mining Limited Telfer Gold Mine for on-site electricity generation at a new open cycle gas fired power plant) 775 Pardoo Iron Ore Mine and Direct Increase the volume of annual dewatering and 24-May-12 Shipping from Port Hedland – Shire of environmental discharge from 2 GL per annum to East Pilbara and Town of Port Hedland 4.0 GL per annum Atlas Iron Limited 880 Cape Lambert to Emu Siding Rail Realignment of the originally proposed rail 19-Jun-12 Duplication duplication. Rio Tinto Iron Ore 805 Karara Iron Ore Project, 215 Kilometres Increase in disturbance area to allow for increased 21-Jun-12 east-southeast of Geraldton and 320 waste dump area, rail loop and airstrip clearing kilometres north-northeast of Perth, Shire of Perenjori Karara Mining Limited 715 Koolan Island Iron Ore Mine and Port Increase to Disturbance Footprint from 590 ha to 21-Jun-12 Facility, Shire of Derby – West Kimberley 650 ha. Mount Gibson Iron Limited 852 Carina Iron Ore Mine, approximately 60 Changes to clearing areas and project boundaries 28-Jun-12 kilometres north-east of Koolyanobbing, associated with the Rail Siding, Haul Road, and Shire of Yilgarn new Powerline Corridor. Polaris Metals Pty Ltd

130 Appendix 3-Otherpublications Cost recovery forapprovalsprocesses-InfoSheet Cost recovery A reviewofsubterraneanfauna assessmentinWestern Australia-Discussionpaper Miscellaneous Western SwampTortoise -FrequentlyAskedQuestions Factsheets Region MTR 6- bioregion, Western Australia MTR 4- Marine Technical Reports EPB 18- EPB 17- EPB 16- EPB 15- EPB 14- Bulletins Environmental Protection PAG 1- Post Assessment Guidelines EAG 7- EAG 2- EAG 1- Environmental Assessment Guidelines , April2012 Preparing anAuditTable Marine DredgingProposals Changes toProposalsafterAssessment-Section45Cofthe Defining thekeycharacteristicsofaproposal Background concentrationsofselectedmetalsand total suspendedsolidsinthecoastalwatersofKimberley Petroleum hydrocarboncontentofshorelinesedimentandintertidalbiotaatselectedsitesintheKimberley Sea levelrise Strategic andderivedproposals works orinvestigationwork Minor orpreliminary Hydraulic fracturingofgasreserves producerhabitatlossinandaroundPortHedland Guidance fortheassessmentofbenthicprimary , June2012 , March 2012 , February2012 , September2011 , February2012 , September2011 , June2012 , May2012 , February2012 , December2011 Environmental Protection Act1986,August2011 , February2012 , August2011 131 Appendices Appendix 4 - Acronyms API A Assessment on Proponent Information (Category A) API B Assessment on Proponent Information (Category B) DEC Department of Environment and Conservation DMA Decision-making authority DMP Department of Mines and Petroleum DoW Department of Water EAG Environmental Assessment Guideline EIA Environmental Impact Assessment EMP Environmental Management Plan EP Act Environmental Protection Act 1986 EPA Environmental Protection Authority EPB Environmental Protection Bulletin EPP Environmental Protection Policy ERMP Environmental Review and Management Programme FOI Freedom of Information, as defined under theFreedom of Information Act 1992 FMP Forest Management Plan 2004–2013 KPI Key Performance Indicator LNG Liquified natural gas LOA Level of Assessment OEPA Office of the Environmental Protection Authority PER Public Environmental Review SEA Strategic Environmental Assessment SEAK Shared Environmental Assessment Knowledge SRG Stakeholder Reference Group

132

Main image: Western Australia’s Pilbara Region.

During 2011—12, the EPA assessed and made recomendations on twelve iron ore mining and infrastructure proposals in the Pilbara. Predicted future expansion in iron ore mining in the region has led to a need to consider cumulative impacts more consistently and is the subject of an OEPA project looking at a more strategic approach to the assessment of Pilbara iron ore mines.