Appendix I

Terms of Reference

The broad purpose of the enquiry is to pre pare a report for the Minister for Environment and Conservation concerning the circumstances leading to the flooding of Lake Pedder in Tasmania, in order to assist him in an examination of the Australian Government's role with respect to the environment in relation to development projects in the States and Territories. In particular it is intended that the Committee shall analyse the events surrounding the flooding of Lake Pedder and draw conclusions and recommendations from them, with the object of assisting in the formulation of procedures and guidelines to ensure that development projects are undertaken with due regard for the protection of the environment and after a proper consideration of all relevant factors. The terms of reference are:

1. To enquire into the history and circumstances surrounding the flooding of Lake Pedder and in particular to consider:

(a) whether there was at any stage insufficient or inadequate investigation of factors relevant to the decision to flood the lake;

(b) the legal or administrative procedures leading to the making of such decisions.

In making such investigation the Committee will concern itself with the facts and matters of principle and will not attempt to attribute fault or blame should any deficiencies in investigational or administrative procedures become apparent.

2. To suggest what action, if any, might be taken to alleviate, or compensate for, any adverse consequence which may be considered to have arisen from the flooding of Lake Pedder.

3. To state what lessons, if any, may be learned from a study of the above matters, with particular reference to the Australian Government's future role in relation to development projects in the States and Territories.

4. To recommend with regard to development projects which may have significant adverse effects on the environment, such changes and improvement; in investigational, legal and administrative procedures as may be considered necessary or desirable to prevent or minimise the likelihood of such effects.

In pursuing its enquiries and making its recommendations, the Committee is authorised and requested to seek information and assistance from such governmental, statutory or private bodies and such persons or organisations, and to make such interim and final reports, as it sees fit, on any aspect of the various matters falling within the scope of the Enquiry.

The Committee has been asked to prepare its final Report before 31 July 1973.

Appendix II

Cost of Moratorium

The cost of adopting the moratorium proposal is assessed on the following assumptions:

1. The variable cost of a hydro station is nit.

2. The variable cost of a thermal station is 0.34 c/kWhr, based on information for Bell Bay in the HEC report on the Gordon scheme, covering fuel and part of the operating/maintenance cost. Not all the operating cost is included because salaries, for example, would be incurred whether or not the station operated.

3. The period before 1976 is irrelevant because the Gordon machines will not be operational.

4. The Bell Bay stations would, in any case, run for some part of the time to maintain effective operation. We have assumed that they run for ten per cent of the time at a minimum.

5. The rest of the system is run in preference to either the Gordon or the Bell Bay stations; the Gordon is run in preference to Bell Bay because it is cheaper, even though this will resuIt in its filling more slowly.

6. The rest of the system is run at its average output. This is a conservative assumption because the other storages in the scheme could be run down prior to introduction of the Pieman.

7. The Pieman scheme is introduced in 1980. The Gordon storage will be lower in 1980 for the moratorium case than for the current scheme. The period after 1980 is discussed in the text of the report.

The tables below show, for the various cases, the following information:

(a) anticipated demand

(b) the output from the remainder of the system, excluding Bell Bay and the Gordon.

(c) the difference required to be provided from the Gordon or Bell Bay (d) actual output from the Gordon, either to Gordon capacity or as required after ten per cent running of Bell Bay.

(e) output required from Bell Bay, with a ten per cent minimum

Demand Growth 5%

Current Scheme

Demand Growth 5%

Moratorium/Reflood

Demand Growth 5%

Demand Growth 5%

Current Scheme

Demand Growth 3.5%

Demand Growth 3.5%

Moratorium/Reflood

Demand Growth 3.5%

Demand Growth 3.5%

1110 million kWhr @ 0.34c -$3.8 million alternative

1376 million kWhr @ 0.34c -$4.7 million

30.jpg