Environment Report - Santos

More documents

Recommendations

Info

3. Stakeholder Consultation Table 3.1 Key stakeholders Stakeholder Category Organisation/Agency/Role Key Issues Raised Landholders Private landholders along the onshore pipeline route options Impact to existing and future farm operations Construction duration and timing Pipeline alignment location Compensation Impacts of previous gas facility and pipeline developments Commercial fishers Apollo Bay Professional Fishermen’s Association Port Campbell Professional Fishermen’s Association Port Fairy Professional Fishermen’s Association Warrnambool Professional Fishermen’s Association Well-field exclusion zones Pipeline alignment location Interaction during construction Compensation for lost catch Portland Professional Fishermen’s Association Victorian Abalone Divers Association Seafood Industry Victoria Indigenous groups Framlingham Aboriginal Trust Heritage assessment process Heritage management during construction Interest groups Port Campbell Environment Group Shipwreck Coast Regional Tourist Authority Shipwreck Coast Tourism Pipeline alignment location Additional shore crossings Potential for impacts to significant marine habitat Port Campbell Recreational Fishers Association Port Campbell Progress Association Victorian Farmers Federation (VFF) Construction traffic Condensate transport Adverse impacts to local community Gas infrastructure rationalisation Minimising new easements Campbells Creek crossing water quality Recreation and tourism Politicians Victorian State Premier Victorian Minister for Energy and Resources Victorian Minister for Innovation, Industry and Regional Development Victorian Minister for Planning Corangamite Shire Councillors Local State and Federal MPs Regulatory approvals Capital expenditure Regional development Landholder liaison Potential environmental impacts Gas infrastructure rationalisation Government revenue Lead regulatory authorities Government technical advisory/land management agencies Victorian Department of Primary Industry (DPI), Minerals and Petroleum Victorian Department of Sustainability and Environment (DSE) Commonwealth Department of Environment and Heritage (DEH) Commonwealth Department of Industry, Tourism and Resources (DITR) DPI Fisheries Environment Protection Agency (EPA) DSE, Flora and Fauna Parks Victoria Corangamite Catchment Management Authority (CCMA) Glenelg-Hopkins Catchment Management Authority (GHCMA) Corangamite Shire Council Regulatory approvals Potential for impacts in the Port Campbell National Park Landholder liaison Potential impacts to whales Potential environmental impacts Condensate transport Gas infrastructure rationalisation TXU WUGS facility upgrades Regulatory approvals process Campbells Creek crossing Potential impacts to whales Impacts on terrestrial habitat Impacts on terrestrial flora and fauna Impacts on marine habitat Recreation and tourism 12 Casino Gas Field Development
3. Stakeholder Consultation Table 3.1 Key stakeholders (cont’d) Stakeholder Category Government technical advisory/land management agencies (cont’d) Infrastructure and utilities Moyne Shire Council Western Coastal Board Department of Human Services Organisation/Agency/Role Department of Victorian Communities - Aboriginal Affairs Victoria Department of Industry Innovation and Regional Development WorkSafe Country Fire Authority BHP Billiton TXU Woodside Energy Limited Corangamite Shire Council GasNet Optus Southern Rural Water Telstra Key Issues Raised Construction traffic Condensate transport TXU WUGS facility upgrades HDD water resources Impacts on archaeological sites VicRoads Media Cobden Times General interest Warrnambool Standard Camperdown Herald Colac Herald Proximity to existing infrastructure Construction timing (potential for simultaneous construction of pipelines and shore crossing with Woodside) Reinstatement Table 3.2 Communication Activity Casino Gas Field Development consultation summary Subject Date Media release Casino gas sales agreement with TXU September 2003 Media release Casino 3 appraisal drilling successful November 2003 Invitation for public comment Stakeholder briefings Mail-out Landholder liaison EPBC referral lodged on DEH website for public comment Project development inception briefings to key stakeholders Notification to commercial fishers of timing of planned bathymetry survey Initial briefings to landholders – access consent requested November 2003 December 2003 December 2003 January 2004 Landholder liaison Pipeline route options February 2004 Media release Invitation for public comment Media briefings Casino front-end engineering and design contract awarded EPBC Preliminary Document lodged on DEH website and advertised for public comment Project briefings to regional Victoria media February 2004 March 2004 March 2004 Landholder liaison Pipeline route survey April 2004 Landholder liaison Easement compensation negotiations May 2004 Mail-out Invitation for public comment Notification to landholders of Pipeline Permit application Pipeline Permit application and Environment Report (this document) May 2004 May–June 2004 – Project information displays at regional and metropolitan centres. • Project information telephone number – to provide the opportunity for stakeholder input. Site inspections of the project area were conducted as required to support an increased understanding of the development proposal and the on-ground technical issues. Table 3.2 lists the communication activities undertaken specifically in relation to the development of the Casino gas field at the time of preparing this Environment Report. Further consultation is planned for the detailed design, construction and operation phases, including the timely dissemination of project information (e.g., brochures) to stakeholders. 3.3 Consultation Records A project specific stakeholder database has been established for the Casino Gas Field Development to record the contact details of relevant stakeholders and to document consultation undertaken and the relevant outcomes, such as commitments and requirements for the construction phase. Casino Gas Field Development 13
Page 1 and 2: Environment Report Casino Gas Field
Page 3: Preface The Casino Gas Field Develo
Page 6 and 7: Executive Summary TXU WUGS facility
Page 8 and 9: Executive Summary ment from the Cas
Page 10 and 11: Executive Summary 9 8 N Casino offs
Page 12 and 13: Executive Summary 668 000 670 000 6
Page 14 and 15: Executive Summary Alignment of the
Page 16 and 17: Executive Summary Table 1 Environme
Page 18 and 19: Executive Summary Table 1 Environme
Page 20 and 21: Executive Summary xx Casino Gas Fie
Page 22 and 23: Contents 4.3.4 Commercial Benefits
Page 24 and 25: Contents 6.15.1 Existing Environmen
Page 26 and 27: Contents 6.3 Locations of commercia
Page 28 and 29: Contents xxviii Casino Gas Field De
Page 30 and 31: 1. Introduction 640 000 650 000 660
Page 32 and 33: 1. Introduction • Provision of an
Page 34 and 35: 2. Regulatory Framework • Commonw
Page 36 and 37: 2. Regulatory Framework Santos has
Page 38 and 39: 2. Regulatory Framework 10 Casino G
Page 42 and 43: 3. Stakeholder Consultation This re
Page 44 and 45: 4. Project Rationale ability to sto
Page 46 and 47: 4. Project Rationale mary energy so
Page 48 and 49: 5. Project Description network. A n
Page 50 and 51: 5. Project Description 640 000 650
Page 52 and 53: 5. Project Description Proposed Otw
Page 54 and 55: 5. Project Description Table 5.3 As
Page 56 and 57: 5. Project Description 668 000 670
Page 58 and 59: 5. Project Description and hydrauli
Page 60 and 61: 5. Project Description with a ‘pu
Page 62 and 63: 5. Project Description HDD Profile
Page 64 and 65: 5. Project Description Restoration
Page 66 and 67: 5. Project Description Enesar Court
Page 68 and 69: 5. Project Description move weld de
Page 70 and 71: 5. Project Description tion contrac
Page 72 and 73: 5. Project Description corrosion in
Page 74 and 75: 6. Impact Assessment 10.3 m (WNI, 2
Page 76 and 77: 6. Impact Assessment 9 8 Flaxman's
Page 78 and 79: 6. Impact Assessment 640 000 650 00
Page 80 and 81: 6. Impact Assessment Drill Fluid an
Page 82 and 83: 6. Impact Assessment coated or thic
Page 84 and 85: 6. Impact Assessment mammals such a
Page 86 and 87: 6. Impact Assessment noise were red
Page 88 and 89: 6. Impact Assessment Physiological
Page 90 and 91:
6. Impact Assessment SIV, 2003). Ke
Page 92 and 93:
6. Impact Assessment the proposed s
Page 94 and 95:
6. Impact Assessment Table 6.4 Geol
Page 96 and 97:
6. Impact Assessment • Route plan
Page 98 and 99:
6. Impact Assessment Project, Santo
Page 100 and 101:
6. Impact Assessment 668000 670000
Page 102 and 103:
Page 104 and 105:
Page 106 and 107:
6. Impact Assessment Park and Loch
Page 108 and 109:
6. Impact Assessment side native ve
Page 110 and 111:
6. Impact Assessment Curdie Vale -
Page 112 and 113:
6. Impact Assessment Habitat Loss.
Page 114 and 115:
6. Impact Assessment Table 6.9 Pote
Page 116 and 117:
6. Impact Assessment 6.9.5 Residual
Page 118 and 119:
o 6. Impact Assessment 630000 65000
Page 120 and 121:
6. Impact Assessment Electricity. P
Page 122 and 123:
6. Impact Assessment will be requir
Page 124 and 125:
6. Impact Assessment requirements.
Page 126 and 127:
6. Impact Assessment of the project
Page 128 and 129:
6. Impact Assessment 6.13.2 Potenti
Page 130 and 131:
6. Impact Assessment will be contra
Page 132 and 133:
6. Impact Assessment dicted noise l
Page 134 and 135:
6. Impact Assessment occupants of R
Page 136 and 137:
6. Impact Assessment • Minimising
Page 138 and 139:
6. Impact Assessment - Pipeline mon
Page 140 and 141:
7. Environmental Management Framewo
Page 142 and 143:
Page 144 and 145:
Page 146 and 147:
8. References CSC. 2004c. Industry.
Page 148 and 149:
8. References Force on Marine Prote
Page 150 and 151:
9. Glossary laydown area: sites at
Page 153 and 154:
Appendix 1 Appendix 1 - Terrestrial
Page 155 and 156:
Appendix 1 List of flora species th
Page 157 and 158:
Appendix 1 Status List of flora spe
Page 159 and 160:
Appendix 1 List of fauna species th
Page 161 and 162:
Appendix 1 List of fauna species th
Page 163:
Appendix 2 Santos Environment, Heal
Page 166 and 167:
INTRODUCTION Introduction Message f
Page 168 and 169:
2 > FRAMEWORK EHSMS Framework The S
Page 170 and 171:
4 > MANAGEMENT STANDARDS EHSMS 01 |
Page 172 and 173:
6 > MANAGEMENT STANDARDS EHSMS 05 M
Page 174 and 175:
8 > MANAGEMENT STANDARDS EHSMS 07 M
Page 176 and 177:
unless otherwise stated, be based o
Page 178 and 179:
12 > MANAGEMENT STANDARDS EHSMS 10
Page 180 and 181:
Page 182 and 183:
Page 184 and 185:
Page 186 and 187:
Page 188 and 189:
22 > HAZARD STANDARDS Hazard Standa
Page 190 and 191:
24 > GLOSSARY Glossary EHSMS Perfor
Page 192:
Santos Head Office Santos House 91
show all

Environment Report - Santos

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?