20 April Energy industry and government response to COVID-19 April 20, 2020 By AMPLA Admin General, Industry 0 In response to the coronavirus (COVID-19) crisis, government and industry have come together to ensure the community, economy and industry are supported. The Council of Australian Governments Energy Council (COAG Energy Council) has formed the Energy Coordination Mechanism (ECM) which is expected to have a complete plan by the end of April. The immediate focus of these efforts has been on four areas 1. Helping consumers To assist consumers and small businesses, retailers have already come together to provide financial relief to those facing hardship. In addition, networks are deferring or rebating electricity and gas network charges. While this is necessary, there is a real risk that smaller retailers may face financial difficulties providing hardship relief. While supporting consumers is paramount, maintaining competition through this period is also important. So small retailers that are finding it difficult to meet their obligations to consumers should speak to their relevant industry organisation for support. 2. Infection control and workforce management Every workplace needs to manage the risk of infection but social distancing laws may directly conflict with staffing and regulatory obligations under a wide variety of frameworks, from Occupational Health and Safety to Environmental regulations. In some situations, there have been clear guidelines and specific exemptions to enable work to continue at plants or mines. For example, Queensland has exempted critical interstate fly-in-fly-out (FIFO) and drive-in-drive-out (DIDO) workers for mineral and energy sites. While this is some relief, organisations still need to meet stringent infection control precautions for these workers while both living and moving to and from work. In other circumstances, some guidance has been issued but it’s not always clear what it means for organisations. For example, Safe Work Australia has told businesses that any regulatory action will be proportionate with a focus on what is reasonably practicable in these exceptional circumstances. This means organisations are in the difficult position of having to pre-empt regulatory responses while waiting for practical guidance. To assist, industry bodies are playing a key role in identifying best practices. For example, NOSEC is currently collecting contingency plans and control measures that are in place as part of the coordination effort. While the Minerals Council of Australia (MCA) has convened a working group to share best practice in mine safety during this time. Documenting each decision and maintaining an open dialogue with industry bodies to access best practices and understand how other organisations are addressing specific issues is critical at this time. 3. Managing supply To manage supply states and territories are collating information on stocks and supply and demand forecasts. As the pandemic may impact major supply chains in the Americas, Asia and Europe this may have a flow-on impact to supply and/or pricing. To help organisations alleviate this some industry bodies are already starting put in place plans and support. For example, the AEMO has a response to the pandemic to ensure that critical operations are protected and able to continue. They’re working with electricity generators, gas facilities, network businesses and other industry participants to support the sector. While the MCA is addressing supply chain shortages by maintaining a list of alternative suppliers available in Australia that you can access. 4. Removing barriers To enable the industry to focus on energy security and reliability, timelines for market design reforms are being extended with regulators developing objectives and criteria for amending rule change dates. For example, implementing the five-minute settlement rule is likely to be delayed. It is expected that more detail will be available on this in coming weeks This is likely to give organisations some relief as they focus on addressing how their business is impacted by the pandemic. While considerable uncertainty still remains over many aspects of the industry, organisations can take some comfort in the fact that government, regulators and industry are working closely together to identify issues and provide clarity where possible. Related Articles POWERING CONSUMER PROTECTIONS: WHY DECENTRALISED AND DISTRIBUTED ENERGY RESOURCES WARRANT A NEW LENS ON CONSUMER PROTECTION REGULATIONS Recent years have seen distributed energy resources usher in a new era of self-generation and reduced reliance on traditional centralised energy networks. Australian customers are increasingly enabled to access unconventional “behind the meter” energy sources and contribute to a two-way flow of energy back to the grid. Submission - DISER Consultation Paper December 2020 ‘Enhancing Australia’s decommissioning framework for offshore oil and gas activities’ Government support for a gas-led COVID-19 recovery Prime Minister Scott Morrison recently announced a gas-led recovery to the economic recession brought on by the COVID-19 pandemic. A key part of the government’s JobMaker plan, the government expects the industry to create over 4,000 jobs. COMMUNITY LEGAL RIGHTS IN MINE CLOSURE PLANNING; A COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF THREE AUSTRALIAN STATES Professor Alex Gardner, University of Western Australia Law School, and Laura Hamblin, formerly research associate at the UWA Law School, 2021 Why does the Mining Act 1978 (WA) not provide secure legal rights for community consultation in relation to mining lease proposals and mine closure plans? Addressing this question presents an important theme for this comparative review of some core features of the regulatory frameworks for mine closure in three Australian States. It also raises important questions for future legal research. Western Australia, Queensland and Victoria have prominent but vastly different, and thus uniquely significant, mining industries. Western Australia’s mining industry has a long history of large and smaller scale mining of a diverse range of minerals by various methods that pose significant mine rehabilitation challenges.[i] Queensland’s mining industry is similarly large and diverse, dominated by export coal production, and planning future minerals development in a decarbonising world.[ii] Victoria has a smaller mining industry with a large historical legacy dominated by a coal mining industry for domestic electricity generation in the Latrobe Valley, which is closing as the State actively transitions to renewable power sources.[iii] These States also have significant differences in the regulation of their mining industries. What all three States do have in common is the significance of their mining industries to both the State economy and the communities who depend on or live near mining operations. Importantly, all three States are confronting large legal and regulatory challenges in managing mine rehabilitation and closure. The key to addressing these challenges is effective mine closure planning: the closure of a mine site has ripple effects that are not merely environmental and economic, but social and cultural too. The initial approval of a mine closure plan occurs before any mining has begun and, with the life cycle of a mine often spanning decades, regulatory bodies are approving hypothetical closure scenarios, potentially subject to vast changes. Regulatory bodies may then seek to enforce closure requirements enshrined in a plan that may wane in relevance as mining operations progress, the updating of which may depend on the miner. Yet remedying the regulatory system so that it creates adaptable but consistently effective mine closure outcomes for affected communities still begins at planning. Although that planning is an iterative process across the life of the mine, it is very important at the initial stage of approval. Recent legislative reforms in all three States are adding to the regulatory rigour and adaptability of mine closure planning, though there are very different legal requirements for community consultation. This article aims to explain and assess the regulatory reforms by undertaking a comparative analysis of mine closure planning across Western Australia, Queensland and Victoria, with a focus on the initial approval stage and how stakeholders and communities are brought into that process. The facilitation of continuous and comprehensive community engagement is critical to ensuring that mine closure planning accounts for environmental, economic, social, cultural and safety outcomes after mine closure, but it has not been possible to consider here the process of ongoing mine closure planning, especially for amending mine closure plans and determining satisfaction of mine closure plans leading to resource tenure relinquishment.[iv] The article begins by considering core concepts of mine closure planning and the regulatory goals that inform it. It then provides a comparative overview of each State’s mine closure planning requirements under the mineral resources, environmental and land use planning laws and draws out some of the different regulatory structures and processes for mine closure within each State. The third step in our analysis compares the ways in which those laws provide for local communities’ participation in mine closure planning, with specific attention to whether the regulatory provisions create legally enforceable rights for effective community engagement. The article concludes with a summary of the key points from the discussion of three themes in our analysis: (i) the importance of clear definitions of core concepts and key goals, (ii) mine closure planning as an essential part of a mining proposal, and (iii) the legal definition of community engagement and consultation rights. Mine closure planning and implementation is necessarily influenced by many other spheres of law including taxation law, investment law, water law, and the rights of traditional owners, to name a few. A potentially directly relevant Commonwealth law is the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (Cth), which may require environmental impact assessment of a mining proposal and closure plan and lead to approval conditions supplementing State requirements.[v] Whilst acknowledging the importance of these adjacent spheres of the regulatory frameworks for effective mine closure planning, this article does not attempt to address their impact. In particular, the rights of Traditional Custodians are a crucial part of mine closure planning that are only briefly noted here and that would benefit from future research. WA Department of Mines, Industry Regulation and Safety, Major Commodities Review 2022-23”. Qld Government, Department of Resources, Queensland Resources Industry Development Plan, June 022. Vic Government, Department of Jobs, Precincts and Regions, Latrobe Valley Regional Rehabilitation Strategy. See L Hamblin, A Gardner, Y Haigh, Mapping the Regulatory Framework of Mine Closure, May 2022, CRC TiME, for a broader exploration of the full life cycle of mine closure regulation. In Buzzacott v Minister for Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities [2013] FCAFC 111; (2013) 214 FCR 301, [144], [227]-[230], referring to the range of approval conditions, which included mine closure. In setting conditions under the EPBC Act, the Commonwealth Minister must consider any relevant conditions under State or Territory law: at [80] citing Lansen v Minister for Environment and Heritage (2008) 174 FCR 14. The states boost the energy and resources sector This year will be remembered for the many challenges that it brought to both individuals and industry. As Australia starts to return to some normality, many states are looking to boost industry, increase jobs and innovate for the future. In this article, we look at various state initiatives designed to boost the energy and resources sector. Overview of the Government’s Resources and Energy Report The Department of Industry, Science and Resources recently published its quarterly report on Resources and Energy. The report includes forecasts from the Office of the Chief Economist on the value, volume and price of major Australian resources and energy commodity exports. Showing 0 Comment Comments are closed.