Appendix A: Alternatives to the NPS

Call in*

Would fully explore the national implications of a proposal in addition to local considerations.

Would not provide a policy framework within which decisions on transmission proposals could be made.

Whole-of-government submissions*

Would set out the Government's position, including national policy considerations, on a proposal.

Would not provide a policy framework within which decisions on transmission proposals could be made.

Changes to the RMA

Could provide a clear signal on the importance of transmission to decision-makers.

Would not provide a detailed policy framework, within which decisions on transmission could be made.

Enhanced status quo: NPS Policy 5 (maps) and NZECP 34*

Would increase awareness, and increase protection.

NZECP 34 will only address a limited range of activities that create risk.

Better enforcement of the NZECP 34 would cost more.

Negotiation of easements* over the entire existing network

Would enable Transpower to incorporate restrictions on activities adjoining the network.

Would only address activities on land directly affected by the network, not the effects of activities on nearby properties.

Could have significant costs due to compensation associated with the easements, and significant time requirements in negotiating such easements.

Would represent a re-litigation of matters considered for the Electricity Act 1992.

Deemed designations* over the existing network

Would confirm the right of the existing network as a legally established activity.

Would enable maintenance and some upgrades of the existing network without further resource consent requirements under district plans.

Would not provide for new lines in new locations, and would not provide a policy framework within which decisions on new transmission could be made.

Would not remove the need for resource consent under regional plans.

Would have significant costs and delays because of Transpower's need to purchase land or compensate landowners for the interest taken by the designation.

Would significantly reduce participation rights.

Transpower requiring designations over the existing network

Would confirm the right of the existing network as a legally established activity.

Would not provide a policy framework within which decisions on new transmission could be made.

Would not remove the need for resource consent under regional plans.

Would significantly increase costs and delays because of Transpower's need to purchase land or compensate landowners for the interest taken by the designation, and the designation process.