Appendix 2: Key Issues Raised by Submitters on the Proposed Transmission Activities NES

Table A2: Summary of key issues raised by submitters on the proposal for the transmission activities NES Issue Response The presumption that transmission activities require resource consent unless specifically identified as permitted activities means that anything left off the list will default to discretionary. The proposed NES now states that all transmission activities are permitted provided they comply with specific terms and conditions. If an activity fails to comply with the terms and conditions, the NES states what the consent category will be. An analysis of the potential effects of transmission activities and the controls imposed to control these effects has been undertaken to ensure there are no significant adverse effects. The proposals are extremely detailed and will override the provisions of district and regional plans. Councils are concerned about their ability to implement the standards. The lack of specificity in plans is one of the issues being addressed. Plans that are expressed in general terms are subject to too much interpretation about what is permitted and what requires consent. The standards have been condensed and simplified to some extent, but it is inevitable that they will be more detailed than district plans. Guidance on how to use the standards will be provided to assist councils. The proposals as written may generate more resource consents for transmission activities in some districts, which is not desirable for either councils or Transpower. Other councils noted that the standards would be more lenient than their plans. A review of plans has been undertaken (see section 5.5) and this showed that more consents may be required for placing transmission lines underground and for new access tracks. Fewer consents would be required for dry abrasive blasting of tower foundations, increasing the current and voltage (provided ICNIRP guidelines are met), and (in a handful of plans) increasing the height of transmission support structures. The standards do not take enough account of the sensitivity of the environment the transmission activities will occur in. The standards distinguish between more sensitive environments and sensitive land uses. In a national standard it will not be possible to take account of the sensitivity of the local environment at the same level of detail as local plans do. The standards do not contain limits for electric and magnetic fields. The standard now includes a condition on electric and magnetic fields associated with increasing the current and voltage of transmission lines, and specifies how compliance with the ICNIRP guidelines will be demonstrated. The standards will prevail over future designations, which could cause problems for councils and Transpower in the future (for example, resource consents may be required as well as designation, doubling the workload associated with an upgrade). Legal input is still required. No provision has been made for minor discharges, nor for minor activities in the beds of lakes and rivers or coastal activities. Some allowance has been made for these activities, subject to stringent terms and conditions. Many regional councils provide for such minor activities, particularly those associated with existing structures, as permitted activities. The consultation is insufficient: it should include a second round of consultation on the regulations. Representatives from several local authorities and Local Government New Zealand were invited to participate in revising the proposed NES. Further local government input will be sought at the legal drafting stage. No formal consultation step is proposed, because this proposed NES mainly affects Transpower and local authorities. A number of issues were raised about interpretation and implementation of the NES. The Ministry will produce guidelines on implementing the NES, and proposes to hold workshops (in conjunction with the implementation phase of the NPS on electricity transmission).