Submission on Stage 1 of the Integrated Mining Policy. prepared by

Transcription

1 Submissin n Stage 1 f the Integrated Mining Plicy prepared by EDO NSW 9 July

2 Abut EDO NSW EDO NSW is a cmmunity legal centre specialising in public interest envirnmental law. We help peple wh want t prtect the envirnment thrugh law. Our reputatin is built n: Successful envirnmental utcmes using the law. With ver 25 years experience in envirnmental law, EDO NSW has a prven track recrd in achieving psitive envirnmental utcmes fr the cmmunity. Brad envirnmental expertise. EDO NSW is the acknwledged expert when it cmes t the law and hw it applies t the envirnment. We help the cmmunity t slve envirnmental issues by prviding legal and scientific advice, cmmunity legal educatin and prpsals fr better laws. Independent and accessible services. As a nn-gvernment and nt-fr-prfit legal centre, ur services are prvided withut fear r favur. Anyne can cntact us t get free initial legal advice abut an envirnmental prblem, with many f ur services targeted at rural and reginal cmmunities. EDO NSW is part f a natinal netwrk f centres that help t prtect the envirnment thrugh law in their states. Submitted t: The Executive Directr - Resurces & Industry Plicy NSW Department f Planning & Envirnment GPO Bx 39 Sydney NSW 2001 Fr further infrmatin n this submissin, please cntact: Rachel Walmsley, Plicy & Law Refrm Directr EDO NSW T: E: Rachel.walmsley@ednsw.rg.au EDO NSW ABN Level 5, 263 Clarence Street Sydney NSW 2000 AUSTRALIA E: ednsw@ednsw.rg.au W: T: F:

3 Intrductin EDO NSW welcmes the pprtunity t cmment n Stage 1 f the Integrated Mining Plicy (IMP). Our cmments frm part f a significant bdy f plicy and law refrm wrk cncerning planning, mining and bidiversity ffsets in NSW. While the purpse f this submissin is t address specific elements f the IMP, we wish t reiterate that legislative refrm is necessary if the envirnmental and scial impacts assciated with large-scale mining in NSW are t be managed cnsistently with the principles f eclgically sustainable develpment (ESD). 1 This submissin addresses the fllwing cmpnents f the IMP: Part 1: Plicy Framewrk fr Bidiversity Offsets fr Upland Swamps and Assciated Threatened Species (Swamps Offset Plicy r Plicy). 1. Why upland swamps shuld be red flag areas 2. Cmments n the Upland Swamps Plicy Part 2: Mine Applicatin Guideline (Guideline), Standard Secretary s Envirnmental Assessment Requirements (SEARs) and Frequently Asked Questins (FAQs). Part 1: Swamps Offset Plicy EDO NSW des nt supprt the Swamps Offset Plicy. Our bjectins are based n specific elements f the Plicy itself, as well as flaws in the underlying plicy framewrk. These flaws are canvassed in ur submissin respnding t the Draft NSW Bidiversity Offsets Plicy fr Majr Prjects (Majr Prjects Offsets Plicy) and the Draft Framewrk fr Bidiversity Assessment (FBA). 2 Our bjectins are set ut in tw sectins. The first sectin utlines why upland swamps are unsuitable fr ffsetting and shuld be classified as red flag areas. The secnd sectin cmments n specific elements f the Swamps Offset Plicy. 1. Why upland swamps shuld be red flag areas High value bidiversity under threat EDO NSW has cnsistently argued that any successful ffsets plicy must include red flag areas where develpment is simply nt permissible. Our argument is based n the wellsupprted premise that sme species, habitat and ecsystems are simply nt amenable t ffsetting due t their high bidiversity value. Rather, and in accrdance with ESD, these 1 Our submissins, briefing ntes and discussin papers cncerning mining are available at: 2 Submissin available nline at: _Bidiversity_Offsets_Plicy_fr_Majr_prjects_-_EDO_NSW_Submissin.pdf?

4 areas shuld be prtected utright and in perpetuity. Upland swamps are f high bidiversity value and in need f prtectin fr the fllwing reasns: A significant number f upland swamps threatened by lngwall mining are listed as endangered eclgical cmmunities (EECs) under either the Envirnment Prtectin and Bidiversity Cnservatin Act 1999 (Cth) (EPBC Act) r the Threatened Species Cnservatin Act 1995 (NSW) (TSC Act). Appendix 1 prvides further details regarding these listings. Upland swamps f high bidiversity values extend well beynd listed cmmunities. Fr example, the frmer Australian Gvernment was advised t remve the existing elevatin criteria (>600 metres abve sea level) fr listing under the Temperate Highland Peat Swamps n Sandstne. This wuld in turn facilitate the inclusin f many similar swamps in New Suth Wales, particularly in the lwer elevatin areas (<600 metres abve sea level), such as the Wrnra Plateau, suth f Sydney, abve the Suthern cal field. 3 T that end, we recmmend that red flag areas include all swamps f high bidiversity value, listed r therwise. Numerus upland swamps cntain habitat fr individually listed species. Fr example, the Newnes Plateau Shrub Swamp prvides habitat fr threatened species including the Giant Dragnfly and the Blue Muntains Water Skink. 4 The dcumented threats t upland swamps reinfrce that they are in urgent need f prtectin. Cmpellingly, alteratins t the natural flw regimes f rivers and streams and their fldplains and wetlands is listed as a key threatening prcess under the TSC Act. Mst swamps are particularly susceptible t changes in hydrlgy. This is supprted by cmments made by the NSW Scientific Cmmittee in their final determinatin fr the Castal Upland Swamp in the Sydney Basin Biregin. Specifically, their recmmendatin that this swamp be listed as an EEC was partly based n evidence that [s]ubsidence and warping f the land surface assciated with lngwall mining f undergrund cal seams ptentially changes hydrlgical prcesses invlving bth grund water and surface water. 5 Finally, these threats are cmpunded by the fact that safeguards under the TSC Act (such as the need t prepare a threatened species impact statement r in the alternative, apply Part 7A f the Act) d nt apply t State Significant Develpment (SSD). This is cunterintuitive insfar as SSD is by definitin likely t have a high impact n the envirnment. 3 Cmmnwealth f Australia 2014, Temperate Highland Peat Swamps n Sandstne: evaluatin f mitigatin and remediatin techniques, Knwledge reprt, prepared by the Water Research Labratry, University f NSW, fr the Department f the Envirnment, Cmmnwealth f Australia, p NSW Scientific Cmmittee Final Determinatin fr the Newnes Plateau Shrub Swamp in the Sydney Basin Biregin endangered eclgical cmmunity listing. Available at (accessed 26 June 2015). 5 NSW Scientific Cmmittee Final Determinatin fr the Castal Upland Swamp in the Sydney Basin Biregin endangered eclgical cmmunity listing. Available at: (accessed 26 June 2015). 4

5 T summarise, upland swamps listed r therwise are fragile, unique envirnments under serius threat frm lngwall mining. This threat is exacerbated by the fact that SSD is nt subject t the full suite f safeguards available under the TSC Act. Inability t rehabilitate swamps A reprt prepared fr the Australian Gvernment 6 evaluating mitigatin and remediatin techniques in respect f lngwall mining beneath the Temperate Highland Peat Swamps n Sandstne cncluded that: 7 The nly strategy that has been prven t effectively mitigate the impacts f lngwall mining is t change the mine plan layut. There were n examples upland peat swamps impacted by lngwall mining that have been remediated. That is, it is nt pssible t remediate peat. Existing remediatin techniques are unprven and appear insufficient withut the destructin f the surface envirnment. Red flag areas must therefre be cmplemented by legislatin requiring all mines be designed s as t avid impacts n upland swamps. It is ur understanding that further research is required t determine the buffer zne required t prtect each swamp frm the impacts assciated with subsidence. Accrdingly, a full study f lcal aquifers and gelgy is needed t determine the apprpriate buffer zne fr each affected swamp, rather than the generic distances specified in the Plicy. Furthermre and as utlined in ur submissin n the Majr Prjects Offset Plicy, EDO NSW bjects t rehabilitated mine sites being recgnised tward the calculatin f ffsets. We are particularly cncerned that any swamp lcated abve a mining peratin culd be defined as part f the mine site, and t that extent available as an ffset. This is entirely inapprpriate given peat swamps cannt be rehabilitated. Majr Prjects Offset Plicy and FBA fcus n clearing f vegetatin The Majr Prjects Offset Plicy and FBA fcus n the remval f native vegetatin and assciated impacts n fauna. The Plicy explicitly states that it: des nt prvide guidance arund certain impacts f a prject n bidiversity that are nt assciated with clearing f vegetatin. Examples f these impacts include subsidence and cliff falls assciated with mining develpments 8 6 Prepared n the advice f the Independent Expert Scientific Cmmittee n Cal Seam Gas and Large Cal Mining Develpment. 7 Cmmnwealth f Australia 2014, Temperate Highland Peat Swamps n Sandstne: evaluatin f mitigatin and remediatin techniques, Knwledge reprt; prepared by the Water Research Labratry, University f New Suth Wales, fr the Department f Envirnment, Cmmnwealth f Australia, p Majr Prjects Offset Plicy, p. 9. 5

6 In ther wrds, the underlying plicy framewrk was nt drafted with a view t creating ffsets fr upland swamps. This is entirely lgical insfar as upland swamps are cmplex ecsystems which d nt lend themselves t ffsetting. Variatin f like-fr-like and supplementary measures EDO NSW has expressed cnsiderable cncern abut the bradening f the like-fr-like methdlgy and the inclusin f supplementary measures in the Majr Prjects Offset Plicy. Bth f these changes are likely t seriusly undermine the preservatin f upland swamps shuld the Swamp Offset Plicy be given effect. EDO NSW is cncerned that given the nature and lcatin f swamps, few are likely t be available fr ffsets credits. This being the case, nly tw pssibilities remain: t ffset impacts with a variatin 9 frm the same vegetatin frmatin r t purchase Tier 1 supplementary measures. 10 In rder t purchase supplementary measures, the prpnent must demnstrate that all reasnable steps have been taken t secure the number and type f species credits impacted at the develpment site. 11 Hwever, the FBA des nt specify what cnstitutes all reasnable steps. Cnsequently, the Gvernment has abslute discretin t determine whether r nt the prpnent has satisfied this requirement. Furthermre, as the requirement is enshrined in plicy (nt law), third party appeal rights are limited. EDO NSW is therefre f the view that supplementary measures (which may technically accunt fr 100% f a prpnent s cntributin under the Majr Prjects Plicy and FBA) are likely t be purchased by prpnents in lieu f actual ffsets. This is an unacceptable utcme which reinfrces the need fr red flag areas prtecting upland swamps. Offset sites may be mined Assuming a prpnent is able t purchase an upland swamp as an ffset, there is a real risk that the ffset site will be impacted by lngwall mining. This is particularly likely fr tw reasns. First, many upland swamps sit abve r adjacent t cal seams. 12 Secnd, there is n legislated requirement t prtect ffset sites in perpetuity. While the Majr Prjects Offset Plicy requires an ffset site t be secured with a Bibanking agreement, 13 under the TSC Act these may be varied r terminated by the Minister in rder t facilitate mining explratin 9 The Majr Prjects Offset Plicy nly exempts species r cmmunities listed as critically endangered frm the variatin rules (p. 19). N upland swamps are listed as critically endangered eclgical cmmunities. As such, they are subject t variatins. 10 Only a critically endangered species that has nt been excluded in the SEARs OR a threatened species r ppulatin nminated in the SEARs as likely t becme extinct r have its viability significantly reduced, are exempted frm supplementary measures (FBA, 9.5.1, ). 11 FBA, Cmmnwealth f Australia 2014, Temperate Highland Peat Swamps n Sandstne: evaluatin f mitigatin and remediatin techniques, Knwledge reprt, prepared by the Water Research Labratry, University f NSW, fr the Department f the Envirnment, Cmmnwealth f Australia, pp Ibid, p

7 r prductin. 14 Furthermre, the Warkwrth case has clearly demnstrated the Gvernment s willingness t allw mining t be undertaken n ffset sites. Recmmendatins Upland swamps shuld be classified as red flag areas. An apprpriate buffer zne arund each swamp shuld be included in the red flag ftprint. Impacts n red flag areas are t be avided by ensuring that mine layut is apprpriately adapted t the envirnment. A full study f lcal aquifers and gelgy is needed t determine the apprpriate buffer zne fr each affected swamp. 2. Cmments n Upland Swamps Plicy EDO NSW reiterates that it des nt supprt the ffsetting f upland swamps. Nevertheless, we cnsider it imprtant t engage with the particularities f this Plicy and t prvide specific recmmendatins where relevant. Recmmendatin A definitin f upland swamp shuld be included in the Plicy. Nil r negligible impacts We nte that the Swamps Offset Plicy cntemplates the pssibility that a lngwall mining prject may have nil r negligible cnsequences fr upland swamps and threatened species, in which case n up-frnt ffset is required. The Plicy ges n t state that a negligible envirnmental cnsequences perfrmance measure must be included as a cnditin f cnsent, with mnitring required t measure cmpliance with this perfrmance measure, with a fcus n shallw grundwater mnitring in swamps. If mnitring indicates that mining has significantly impacted a shallw grundwater aquifer in a swamp and that impact has stabilised fr a perid f 12 mnths, then an ffset must be purchased within six mnths. EDO NSW has serius reservatins abut this cmpnent f the Plicy. In the first instance, the Plicy des nt clarify what cnstitutes a negligible impact, perhaps because there is n accepted definitin f this term in relatin t upland swamps. In any case, available evidence indicates that the impact f lngwall mining n these swamps tends t be significant. 15 Indeed, it has been nted that when the relatinship between grundwater and lngwall 14 TSC Act, s. 127S. 15 Cmmnwealth f Australia 2014, Temperate Highland Peat Swamps n Sandstne: evaluatin f mitigatin and remediatin techniques, Knwledge reprt, prepared by the Water Research Labratry, University f NSW, fr the Department f the Envirnment, Cmmnwealth f Australia, pp

8 mining is cnsidered, the questin is nt if impacts will ccur, but when they will ccur. 16 As such, the cncept f negligible impact is meaningless in discussins f upland swamps. Further t this pint, impacts significant r therwise are generally nly detected nce irreversible damage has ccurred r will inevitably ccur. As nted in a reprt prepared n the advice f the IESC, 17 Recent literature has discussed the delay between undermining f upland peat swamp and ther systems, such as streams, and the bservatins f impacts. Tw prblems are assciated with this delay: it is nt knwn immediately if mining has had an impact, and, by the time remediatin is necessary, the swamp may be irreversibly damaged. Secnd, the Plicy simply states that a predictin f nil r negligible cnsequences must be supprted by evidence. It des nt qualify r quantify what srt f evidence is required t substantiate the claim. As these details are nt suitable fr inclusin in the SEARs 18, they shuld be included in the Plicy itself. Recmmendatins Negligible impacts shuld be remved frm the Plicy. The evidence required t substantiate a nil impacts predictin shuld be utlined in the Plicy. The nly effective means f aviding impacts n upland swamps is apprpriate mine layut. The Plicy shuld therefre clearly utline the avid, mitigate, ffset hierarchy and explicitly state that avidance must fcus n apprpriate mine design. Calculating the maximum predicted ffset liability Damage t swamps arises frm a cmplex chain f interactins. Specifically, subsidence and cracking f valley flrs and creeks alter surface and grundwater hydrlgy, 19 which in turn causes destructin f peat, which results in lss f flra and fauna. 20 EDO NSW therefre questins whether a partial impact t a swamp is likely (as ppsed t mre generalised damage). 16 Ibid, p. 40. Citing Pells and Pells (2012). 17 Ibid, p As they nly apply t a discrete number f State Significant prjects. 19 Cmmnwealth f Australia 2014, Temperate Highland Peat Swamps n Sandstne: evaluatin f mitigatin and remediatin techniques, Knwledge reprt, prepared by the Water Research Labratry, University f NSW, fr the Department f the Envirnment, Cmmnwealth f Australia, p Ibid, p

9 Recmmendatin Given the high prbability f irreversible damage, it wuld be prudent t assume that the entire swamp will be impacted and t calculate ffsets n that basis. This wuld be cnsistent with ESD, and in particular the precautinary principle. Securing an apprpriate ffset fr predicted impacts EDO NSW bjects t the delay surrunding the securing f ffsets. Specifically, the Swamps Offset Plicy states that [t]he ffsets identified in the Bidiversity Offset Strategy are nly required t be secured r credits retired nce the utcmes f mining are cnfirmed thrugh agreed mnitring. While prpnents must demnstrate hw they can legally secure the prpsed ffsets, this is nt tantamunt t purchasing and retiring credits. Nr des it prvide any security if mnitring shws that impacts exceed predictins. This is particularly prblematic as we have been advised that prpnents frequently underestimate the likely impacts f subsidence n upland swamps. Appendix 2 prvides a specific example f impacts exceeding predictins. Recmmendatin Prpnents shuld be required t purchase and retire ffsets befre cmmencing develpment. Furthermre, they shuld be required t demnstrate that they can legally secure additinal ffsets t accunt fr unintended impacts. This wuld arguably create a greater incentive t fcus n avidance measures. Mnitring While the Plicy states that a minimum f tw years pre-mining piezmetric data shuld be used t establish the baseline shallw grundwater regime within 400m f lngwall mining it cntemplates the pssibility that less than tw years baseline data will be cllected. A reprt prepared n the advice f the IESC cncluded that at least tw years wrth f baseline data must be cllected in rder t understand natural variatins within the system. 21 As mst mnitring has histrically been fcused n channel hydrlgy and flw at the dwnstream bundary it is further recmmended that future mnitring be cnducted within a brader catchment fcus, including hydrlgical and water balance data fr the entire upland peat swamp, rather than just the dwnstream channel Cmmnwealth f Australia 2014, Temperate Highland Peat Swamps n Sandstne: eclgical characteristics, sensitivities t change, and mnitring and reprting techniques, Knwledge reprt, prepared by Jacbs SKM fr the Department f the Envirnment, Cmmnwealth f Australia, p Cmmnwealth f Australia 2014, Temperate Highland Peat Swamps n Sandstne: evaluatin f mitigatin and remediatin techniques, Knwledge reprt, prepared by the Water Research Labratry, University f NSW, fr the Department f the Envirnment, Cmmnwealth f Australia, p

10 Recmmendatins A minimum f tw years baseline data must be cllected befre mining is permitted t cmmence. A full BiBanking Assessment under the FBA methdlgy must be prduced prir t the cmmencement f mining in rder t have baseline data. This is in additin t the BACI mnitring mentined in the Plicy. The calculatin f Bidiversity credits requires vegetatin plt data t assess quality, type and area size f each cmmunity. Due t the ftprint f the ptential impact being unknwn befre the mining peratins cmmence, the vegetatin f the whle swamp as well as a sizeable buffer area (t be defined by experts) shuld be surveyed. Catchment-scale mnitring shuld be undertaken with a view t btaining water balance data fr the entire upland peat swamp. All baseline data shuld be made available t the public. Cnsideratin f actual and predicted utcmes As nted abve, we are f the view that ffsets shuld be purchased prir t the cmmencement f develpment, and that an additinal bank shuld be legally secured t accunt fr any exceedance f predicted utcmes (which we are advised is cmmn). We nte that the Plicy nly cnsiders changes grundwater within 400 m f the swamp as a relevant measure f impact t the swamp itself. EDO NSW questins this demarcatin, particularly in light f the recmmendatin that mnitring be cnducted acrss the catchment in rder t btain water balance data fr the entire swamp. Furthermre, 12 mnths (after the cessatin f mining activities) may be an insufficient perid t determine whether impacts have been definitively avided. Recmmendatins Offsets are t be purchased prir t the cmmencement f develpment. Additinal ffsets shuld be legally secured t accunt fr any exceedance f predicted utcmes. The 400m rule shuld be replaced by studies aimed at fully understanding lcal hydrgelgy and hydrlgy prcesses with a view t determining the apprpriate buffer fr each swamp. The 12 mnth rule shuld be replaced by nging mnitring until lcal hydrgelgy and hydrlgy prcesses have reached a new, dynamic equilibrium pst-mining. Wrk shuld be stpped when impacts exceed predictins. 10

11 Part 2: SEARs, Guideline and Frequently Asked Questins While ur recmmendatins relate t specific elements f the Guidelines and SEARs, we wish t restate (cnsistently with previus submissins and reprts) 23 that legislative refrm is required in rder reduce the envirnmental and scial impacts assciated with large scale mining prjects. Recmmendatins Envirnmental Impact Assessment (EIA) - SEARs and Guideline Fr the sake f clarity, all infrmatin regarding the cntents f an EIA shuld be cntained in the SEARs dcument 24. The SEARs dcument shuld indicate that Schedule 2 f the Envirnmental Planning and Assessment Regulatin 2000 (EPA Regulatin) als utlines mandatry EIA requirements. A single dcument utlining the cntents f a Preliminary Envirnmental Assessment (PEA) wuld prvide greater clarity. That is, the EIA requirements and PEA requirements shuld be specified in separate dcuments. Mre generally, legislative refrm is needed t streamline EIA requirements. Ultimately, SEARs shuld be included in the EPA Regulatin. The SEARs shuld be amended t: include a requirement t assess whether impacts n matters f natinal envirnmental significance are likely, and what thse impacts will be. include a requirement t assess scpe 1, 2 and scpe 3 greenhuse gas emissins. This is cnsistent with internatinal best practice principles fr impact assessment. 25 ensure that cumulative impacts are assessed acrss all impact areas (including water and bidiversity, which are currently mitted). An assessment f cumulative impacts must take int accunt all develpment (nt just mining develpment) impacting n the same envirnmental features. require air dispersal mnitring fr all prjects. state that subsidence cnsideratins are nt limited t significant features but extend t all surface impacts. ensure that genuine (nt prescriptive) cnsultatin with traditinal wners is mandatry. 23 Our submissins, briefing ntes and discussin papers cncerning mining are available at: 24 At present, infrmatin regarding the cntents f an EIS is als included in the Guideline. There is sme incnsistency between this and the SEARs dcument. 25 Internatinal Assciatin fr Impact Assessment, Climate Change in Impact Assessment: Internatinal Best Practice Principles. Available at: 11

12 require prpnents t undertake health impact assessment in accrdance with specific guidelines (see belw). require prpnents t undertake scial impact assessment in accrdance with specific guidelines (see belw). require prpnents t undertake cmmunity cnsultatin in accrdance with specific guidelines (see belw). FAQs EDO NSW is cncerned by references t ecnmic guidelines. We understand that these guidelines have been made available t bth industry and the Planning and Assessment Cmmissin (PAC), and that industry is using a draft versin f the guidelines t justify inadequate assessment f certain prjects. By way f cntrast, the NSW Gvernment has nt released these guidelines t the cmmunity, despite requests t d s. We therefre strngly recmmend that they be made available t the cmmunity immediately. Generally A standalne dcument clearly utlining the steps invlved in assessing and apprving State Significant mining develpments wuld assist the cmmunity t understand the cmplexities f these prcesses, and when they can engage. A flwchart wuld be useful. A plicy f n final vid shuld be established. Cmprehensive scial impact assessment guidelines and health impact assessment guidelines are necessary. Based n feedback we have received frm the cmmunity, cmprehensive cmmunity cnsultatin guidelines are necessary t imprve the quality f these prcesses. Fr further infrmatin please cntact rachel.walmsley@ednsw.rg.au r

13 Appendix 1: Listed upland swamps Swamp Listing Temperate highland peat swamp cmmunity Listed as EEC under EPBC Act. Listed as EEC under TSC Act (as part f the Mntane peatlands and swamps f the New England Tableland, NSW Nrth Cast, Sydney Basin, SE Crner, SE Highlands and Australian Alps bireginal). Castal Upland Swamp in the Sydney Basin biregin Mntane peatlands and swamps f the New England Tableland, NSW Nrth Cast, Sydney Basin, SE Crner, SE Highlands and Australian Alps biregins Newnes Plateau Shrub Swamp in the Sydney Basin biregin Blue Muntains swamps in the Sydney Basin biregin Listed as EEC under EPBC Act. Listed as EEC under TSC Act. Listed as EEC Under EPBC Act (under the Temperate Highland Peat Swamps n Sandstne). Listed as EEC under TSC Act. Listed as EEC under EPBC Act (under Temperate Highland Peat Swamps n Sandstne). Listed as EEC under TSC Act. Listed as EEC under EPBC Act (under under Temperate Highland Peat Swamps n Sandstne). Listed as Vulnerable Eclgical Cmmunity under TSC Act 13

14 Appendix 2: Example f impacts exceeding predictins Narrw Swamp, Newnes Plateau: timeline and impact infrmatin frm available references. Key infrmatin and bserved impacts Undermined by the 265-m-wide lngwall 940 (3 July 2007). Greater than expected subsidence (1.456 m), assciated with a fault/fracture zne at the nrthern end f the swamp (reprted February 2008). Significant reductin in flw has been bserved, frm 8 ML/day at Springvale s discharge pint LDP5, abve Narrw Swamp, t 4 ML/day at the weir dwnstream f Narrw Swamp, amunting t 244 ML ver the perid May t July Once emergency discharges ceased, the near-surface grundwater fell rapidly belw the base f mnitring bres (reprted December 2009). Octber 2011: Enfrceable undertaking is issued fllwing alleged breach f EPBC Act. References Adhikary & Gu 2009; Muir 2010 Muir 2010 Muir 2010 Muir 2010 DSEWPaC 2011 August 2012: Referral by Centennial Cal t DSEWPaC f prpsed actin fr remediatin and restratin wrks within Narrw Swamp. DSEWPaC 2012b Reference: Cmmnwealth f Australia 2014, Temperate Highland Peat Swamps n Sandstne: evaluatin f mitigatin and remediatin techniques, Knwledge reprt, prepared by the Water Research Labratry, University f NSW, fr the Department f the Envirnment, Cmmnwealth f Australia, p