• Overview

    This page provides updated information to assist submitters in understanding the Project, reviewing the EES and preparing submissions. This includes information prepared in response to ongoing stakeholder engagement by AGL and APA and requests for additional information from the community and other stakeholders, subject to privacy and commercial in confidence considerations.

    1. Visual aids

    a)    Pipeline alignment video
    b)    Pipeline alignment aerial imagery
    c)    Hearing presentations, day one - 12 October 2020

    2. Documents referenced in the EES

    a)    Combined habitat loss area
    b)    Terrestrial reports (Biosis and Monarc)
    c)    Desktop geotechnical and hydrology study
    d)    Peer review of the Terrestrial and freshwater biodiversity impact assessment
    e)    Initial QRA - Gas Import Jetty Works
    f)    Initial QRA – Pakenham End of Line Facility

    3. Pipeline alignment options

    a)    Pipeline alignment option BJ-11 (Warringine Park / Reid Parade)
    b)    Pipeline alignment option BH-11 (Bloomfield Lane)

    4. Technical notes

    TN001 - Response to IAC RFIs 037 and 038:  Offset strategy
    TN002 - Response to IAC RFI 058:  Greenhouse gas
    TN003 - Response to IAC RFI 076:  Background noise levels
    TN004 - Response to IAC RFIs 095 and 126 to 130:  Land use impact and pipeline measurement length
    TN005 - Response to IAC RFI 097:  Vic Track
    TN006 - Response to IAC RFIs 112, 113 and 114:  FSRU questions
    TN007 - Response to IAC RFI 021 - Section 2.5 Chlorine and temperature discharge conditions
    TN008 - Response to IAC RFI 133 - Section 14.1 Social and Business - Community fund
    TN009 - Response to IAC RFI 052 - Section 5.1 condition of bore water
    TN010 - Response to IAC RFI 053 - Section 5.2 CPRF piles
    TN011 - Response to IAC RFIs 138 and 139 - Section 15.3 Soil profile re-instatement
    TN012 - Response to IAC RFIs 45, 46 and 47 - Section 4.1 Waterway pipeline crossings
    TN013 - Response to Mornington Peninsula Shire Council RFI
    TN014 - Response to RFI 092 - Section 10.4 Residential properties proximate to the Crib Point Jetty
    TN015 - Response to IAC RFI 007 - Section 2.3 Re-gasification when LNG tanker is present
    TN016 - FSRU Safety International classification and regulation
    TN017 - Response to IAC RFIs 123 and 124 - Section 13.3 Pipeline alignment
    TN018 - Response to IAC RFIs 115, 116, 117, 119, 120 and 131 - Section 12.8, 12.96 and 13.5 - Pipeline design
    TN019 - Societal risk assessment
    TN020 - Response to IAC RFIs 93, 94 and 96 - Section 11.1 Use of rail line right of way
    TN021 - Response to IAC RFIs 39 and 40 - Section 3.3 Threatened species
    TN022 - Responses to RFIs 48, 49, 50 and 51 - Section 4.2 Coastal inundation
    TN023 - Responses to IAC RFIs 140 to 145 - Sections 16.1 - 16.4 Aboriginal cultural heritage
    TN024 - Response to RFIs 85 to 89 - Section 10.1 Landscaping and Section 10.2 Landscape character
    TN025 - Response to RFIs 147 and 149 - Section 17.1 Specific controls overlay and 17.2 Incorporated Document
    TN026 - Response to RFIs 75, 77 and 84 - Section 9.1 Background noise levels and Section 9.4 Mitigation measures
    TN027 - Response to evidence of G Lorimer
    TN028 - Response to RFIs 1 and 3 - Section 2.1 Seawater use
    TN029 - Response to RFIs 8, 9, 12, 13, 14 and 15 - Section 2.4 Ramsar values
    TN030 - Response to RFIs 155, 156 and 157 - Sections 19.1 Baseline assessment of MNES marine species and 19.2 Western Port Ramsar
    TN031 - Response to RFI 164 - Section 20.2 Clarification of risk register
    TN032 - Response to RFI 104 - Section 12.2 Risk methodology - assessment of spills
    TN033 - Response to IAC Further RFI (Document 234) - FSRU operation
    TN034 - Response to RFI 002 - Section 2.1 Seawater use
    TN035 - Response to RFIs 16, 17, 18 and 19 - Section 2.5 Chlorine and temperature discharge conditions
    TN036 - Response to RFIs 161, 162 and 163 - Section 20.1 Consequence criteria

  • Visual aids

    This page contains visual aids to assist you to understand the Project.

    a) Pipeline alignment video

    This video is an animation depicting the proposed pipeline alignment. It shows a digital representation of the pipeline that has been overlaid on a 3D, georeferenced model of the terrain. The model was created from aerial imagery and elevation data (Lidar) captured in February and March 2020.

    uCjSN-6pnBY

    b) Pipeline alignment aerial imagery

    The two .kmz files below can be used to access alignment imagery using Google Earth.

    Instructions for use

    1. Save the two .kmz files to your computer desktop

    2. Use Google Earth software for free. Go to: https://www.google.com/earth/versions/

    3. Click on “Launch Earth” in the top right corner

    4. Click on the “Projects” tab on the left side panel

    5. Click on “New project” and select “Import KML file from computer” and select the first .kmz file on your computer

    6. Click the back button at the top of the panel

    7. Repeat step number 5 and select the second .kmz file on your computer

    8. Click the back button at the top of the panel to view both projects together

    For technical help contact APA on: 1800 531 811

    Pipeline Construction Method

    Construction Footprint

    Key

    The pipeline alignment is coloured:

    • blue to represent areas where the pipeline is proposed to be installed by open cut

    • orange to represent areas where the pipeline is proposed to be installed by trenchless bore

    • yellow to represent areas where the pipeline is proposed to be installed by horizontal directional drilling (HDD)

    • Areas subject to the project (e.g. proposed laydowns, construction area) are shown by a red line.

    Limitations/Disclaimer

    In some areas you can use the Street View function to see the alignment. However, this might not be consistent across the entire alignment because of the way Google Earth manages gradients. At some points it will place the alignment below the surface of the land and not be visible.  

    The intent of these files is not to supplement, replace or vary what is in the EES and while APA has made every effort to make sure they are the same as in the EES map-book, primary regard should be had to the EES map-book.

    Alternative alignment areas, and certain other features that are shown in the EES map-book, are not represented in these files.

    c) Hearing presentations, day one - 12 October 2020

    On day one of the Inquiry and Advisory Committee (IAC) Hearing, AGL and APA presented pre-recorded presentations describing the Project. The slides supporting these presentations have been filed with the IAC and are tabled documents 182, 183 and 184. Copies of the pre-recorded presentations are available below.

    Hoegh LNG FSRU presentation

    AGL Jetty Works and Crib Point Receiving Facility presentation

    APA Pipeline selection and construction process presentation

  • Documents referenced in EES

    This page includes copies of reports referenced in the Environment Effects Statement that have been requested.

    a) Combined habitat loss area

    Table 31 in Technical Report B (page 155) includes an incorrect figure for the Combined Mornington Peninsula, Casey and Cardinia LGAs Habitat Loss Area.  The figure published in the EES was 14.48 ha. This figure has been corrected to 13.91 ha in the revised Table 31. 

    EES Technical Report B - Terrestrial Biodiversity Table 31

    b) Terrestrial reports (Biosis and Monarc)

    Section 10 - References in Technical Report B lists several survey reports that are summarised in the Technical Report.

    Monarc Environmental 2018. Southern Brown Bandicoot Targeted Survey Report.

    Monarc Environmental 2018. Growling Grass Frog Targeted Survey Report.

    Monarc Environmental 2018. Aquatic Survey Report.

    Monarc Environmental 2018. Swamp Skink Targeted Survey Report.

    Monarc Environmental 2018. Southern Toadlet Targeted Survey Report.

    Biosis 2019. Crib Point to Pakenham: Dwarf Galaxias targeted surveys (Draft)

    Biosis 2019. Crib Point Pakenham Pipeline: Flora survey report (Draft)

    Biosis 2019. Crib Point Pakenham pipeline: Flora survey report for River Swamp Wallaby-grass (Draft)

    c) Desktop geotechnical and hydrology study

    Section 10 - References in Technical Report C: Surface water impact assessment lists an additional report undertaken in relation to the Project.

    The report described as ‘Coffey, 2018. Desktop Geotechnical and Hydrology Study' is available here.

    Coffey 2018, Desktop Geotechnical and Hydrology Study

    d) Peer Review of the Terrestrial and freshwater biodiversity impact assessment

    The Terrestrial and freshwater biodiversity impact assessment (Technical Report B) in the EES was independently peer reviewed by Nic McCaffrey at WSP Australia Pty Ltd. Section 4.6 of Technical Report B made reference to WSP having conducted a peer review, but no report was attached.

    In accordance with the approach taken to publish other peer review reports referenced in the EES, the peer review is available here.

    Peer review of the Terrestrial and freshwater biodiversity impact assessment

    e)    Initial QRA - Gas Import Jetty Works

    Chapter 16 (Safety, hazard and risk) and Technical Report K (Safety, hazard and risk assessments), refer to an interim Quantitative Risk Assessment (QRA) undertaken in relation to the Project. The initial QRA for the Gas Import Jetty Works is available below.

    The results from the initial QRA are presented in the EES, including at Section 9.0 and Appendix C of Technical Report K.

    Initial QRA - Gas Import Jetty Works

    f)    Initial QRA – Pakenham End of Line Facility

    Chapter 16 (Safety, hazard and risk) and Technical Report K (Safety, hazard and risk assessments), refer to an interim Quantitative Risk Assessment (QRA) undertaken in relation to the Project. The initial QRA for the Pakenham End of Line Facility is available below.

    The results from the initial QRA are presented in the EES, including at Section 8.6 and Appendix D of Technical Report K. 

    Initial QRA – Pakenham End of Line Facility

  • Pipeline alignment options

    APA is continuing to consult with landowners and stakeholders in relation to the pipeline alignment. Where an alignment change is being considered or further investigated, documentation including maps will be provided here.

    If you would like to discuss proposed design modifications, contact APA.

    a) Pipeline Alignment Option BJ-11 (Warringine Park / Reid Parade)

    In response to stakeholder engagement and landowner consultation with Mornington Peninsula Shire Council, APA is assessing a potential alternative alignment in and around Warringine Park.

    The alignment change avoids impacts to an area of vegetation in Warringine Park by extending a horizontal directional drill length and utilising an existing open space on Reid Parade, Hastings as a construction area, rather than the previously proposed area within the Warringine Park.

    APA has directly notified the local residents and is open to discussing concerns and possible measures to address them, should the proposed project go ahead.

    The Alignment Option document provides detail on the design modification, including a map of the construction area.

    Alignment Option document BJ-11

    b) Pipeline Alignment Option BH-11 (Bloomfield Lane)

    In response to landowner consultation, APA is assessing a potential alternative alignment for the pipeline to follow the property boundary more closely with in CPT107.

    The Alignment Option document provides detail on the design modification, including a map of the construction area.

    Alignment Option document BH-11

  • Technical notes

    Technical Note 001 - Response to IAC RFIs 037 and 038 - Offset strategy

    Technical Note 002 - Response to IAC RFI 058 - Section 7.1 Greenhouse gas

    Technical Note 003 - Response to IAC RFI 076 - Section 9.1 Background noise levels

    Technical Note 004 - Response to IAC RFIs 095, 126, 127, 128, 129 and 130 - Land use impacts and pipeline measurement length

    Technical Note 005 - Response to IAC RFI 097 - VicTrack

    Technical Note 006 - Response to IAC RFIs 112, 113 and 114 - Section 12.7 Floating Storage Regasification Unit

    Technical Note 007 - Response to IAC RFI 021 - Section 2.5 Chlorine and temperature discharge conditions

    Technical Note 008 - Response to IAC RFI 133 - Section 14.1 Social and Business - Community fund

    Technical Note 009 Response to IAC RFI 052 - Section 5.1 Condition of bore water

    Technical Note 010 - Response to IAC RFI 053 - Section 5.2 CPRF piles

    Technical Note 011 - Response to IAC RFIs 138 and 139 - Section 15.3 Soil profile re-instatement

    Technical Note 012 - Response to IAC RFIs 45, 46 and 47 - Section 4.1 Waterway pipeline crossings

    Technical Note 013 - Response to Mornington Peninsula Shire Council RFI

    Technical Note 014 - Response to RFI 092 - Section 10.4 Residential properties proximate to the Crib Point Jetty

    Technical Note 015 - Response to IAC RFI 007 - Section 2.3 Regasification when Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG) tanker is present

    Technical Note 016 - FSRU Safety - International classification and regulation

    Technical Note 017 - Response to IAC RFIs 123 and 124 - Section 13.3 Pipeline alignment

    Technical Note 018 - Response to IAC RFIs 115, 116, 117, 119, 120 and 131 - Section 12.8, 12.96 and 13.5 - Pipeline design

    Technical Note 019 - Societal risk assessment

    Technical Note 020 - Response to IAC RFIs 93, 94 and 96 - Section 11.1 Use of rail line right of way

    Technical Note 021 - Response to IAC RFI 39-40 - Section 3.3 Threatened species

    Technical Note 022 - Responses to RFIs 48, 49, 50 and 51 - Section 4.2 Coastal inundation

    Technical Note 023 - Responses to IAC RFIs 140 -145 - Sections 16.1 - 16.4 Aboriginal cultural heritage

    Technical Note 024 - Response to RFIs 85, 86, 87, 88 and 89 - Section 10.1 Landscaping and Section 10.2 Landscape character

    Technical Note 025 - Response to RFIs 147 and 149 - Section 17.1 Specific Controls Overlay and 17.2 Incorporated Document

    Technical Note 026 - Response to RFIs 75, 77 and 84 - Section 9.1 Background noise levels and Section 9.4 Mitigation measures

    Technical Note 027 - Response to evidence of G Lorimer

    Technical Note 028 - Response to RFIs 1 and 3 - Section 2.1 Seawater use

    Technical Note 029 - Response to RFIs 8, 9 , 12, 13, 14 and 15 - Section 2.4 Ramsar values

    Technical Note 030 - Response to RFIs 155, 156 and 157 - Sections 19.1 Baseline assessment of MNES marine species and 19.2 Western Port Ramsar

    Technical Note 031 - Response to RFI 164 - Section 20.2 Clarification of risk register

    Technical Note 032 - Response to RFI 104 - Section 12.2 Risk methodology - assessment of spills

    Technical Note 033 - Response to IAC Further RFI (Document 234) - FSRU operation

    Technical Note 034 - Response to RFI 002 - Section 2.1 Seawater use

    Technical Note 035 - Response to RFIs 16, 17, 18 and 19 - Section 2.5 Chlorine and temperature discharge conditions

    Technical Note 036 - Response to RFIs 161, 162 and 163 - Section 20.1 Consequence criteria