Proposal lodged
A plan amendment application (the 'supporting' plan amendment application) dealing with the planning provisions relating to the grant of the right to apply for coastal permits for marine farming in the MSRMP. These are concurrent applications to the master plan amendment request, as aquaculture is currently prohibited in the MSRMP at these eight sites2 (the "concurrent process" is further discussed in Section 3 of this Board Paper); and. This site is located in coastal marine zone 2 as defined in the MSRMP, where aquaculture is assumed to be a discretionary activity.
The only difference between these areas relates to the provisions for sea farms/mariculture (each term is defined in the MSRMP and described in Appendix 2). This means that mariculture is currently a Prohibited Activity and it is not possible to apply for resource consents for mariculture in those countries. 3 Plan Amendment 16 provides a method for allocating the right to apply for a coastal mariculture permit within the Aquaculture Management Areas (AMAs) included in the MSRMP as a result of standard private plan amendments.
Further information requests made
NZKS has applied for nine resource consents, one for each of the nine sites. NZKS has questioned the obligation to provide a navigation risk assessment as they consider that their navigation and engineering reports provide all the elements required for a risk assessment of proposed salmon farm sites. They have advised EPA that they intend to engage an expert to undertake a formal navigation risk assessment of the proposed salmon farm sites.
Rather, the information was deemed necessary to enable stakeholders and the substantive decision-making body to better understand the actual and potential effects of the proposal. This may include information to better understand the nature of the claim in terms of the impact it will have on the environment (subject to the provisions of Annex 4); ways in which potential adverse effects can be mitigated; benefits/costs,. However, the Board may double the time frame for requesting additional information under 37/s37A RMA.
Aquaculture legislative reform (1 October 2011)
While subsection 4 of Part 7A of the RMA outlines the concurrent process of submitting an application to a Regional Council, s149P(8) to (10) of the RMA describes the process for a Board of Inquiry to consider a plan amendment request and a concurrent application (and specifically refer to provisions in Subpart 4 of Part 7A that apply). This ensures that, should the outcome of the plan amendment be that of the most restrictive activity category, sufficient information has been presented to the council to enable them to make a decision on the concurrent resource permit applications. Once the hearing is closed, the Board must consider and determine the concurrent applications for resource authorization based on the fact that the activities for which the application was submitted fall within the activity category identified in their decision on the request for amendment of the plan (s149P(9) and s165ZW(2) from the RMA).
Since the White Horse Rock source permission application is not a concurrent application, it should be considered and determined as a discretionary activity under the MSRMP under s104B of the RMA. Under the RMA's new s123A, a coastal permit for aquaculture operations must specify the period for which it is granted. With the removal of the AMA requirement, the UAE is now activated by the resource consent request process.
Other matters
The White Horse Rock site currently has an existing non-implemented source permit for mussel farming and NZKS is proposing to turn it into a salmon farm. NZKS has communicated that prior to the recent changes to aquaculture legislation, the White Horse Rock site was a supposed AMA. Permission was granted, but an appeal was lodged with the Environmental Court, where a point of jurisdiction over the status of the presumed AMA meant that the merits of the appeal were not decided.
NZKS advises that this means that the above appeal to the High Court will be returned to the Environment Court for decision. In a letter accompanying the proposal (3 October 2011), NZKS has advised that due to the complexity and history of the White Horse Rock application, and the uncertainty of how the new law will work in practice, they have decided to make the White Horse Rock Page Rock is part of her proposal and applies to the EPA for a source approval under the new legislation (under which the AMAs do not exist). NZKS does not intend to withdraw the resource consent application currently under appeal at this time.
Next Steps
The Board may deny the requests only on the grounds set out in cl 25(4) of Schedule 1 of the RMA:. a) The request or part of the request is frivolous or vexatious; or. b) Within the past 2 years the content of the request or part of the request:. i) has been considered and carried out to, or rejected by, the local government or the Environmental Court; or. ii) has been carried out by regulations made under s360A; or. c) The request or part of the request is inconsistent with good resource management; or. d) the request or part of the request would conflict the policy statement or plan with Part 5; or. e). In the event of a proposed amendment to a policy statement or plan, the policy statement or plan will be in effect for less than 2 years. Request this information again from NZKS before deciding to accept or reject the plan changes; or.
Note that in relation to any other aspect of the proposal, the Council may also request further information under s149L(1) and s92 of the RMA. The nature of the plan change request in respect of the effects it will have on the environment, taking into account the provisions of Schedule 4 of the RMA; or. The benefit and cost, the effectiveness and efficiency, and any possible alternatives to the request; or.
When consulting MDC on the acceptance/denial of the plan amendment requests, the Board could expect to ask MDC for their opinion on whether the plan amendment requests should be accepted or rejected in accordance with the criteria in cl 25(4) of Schedule 1 of the RMA. Is further information needed to make an acceptance/denial decision on the requests; If the board decides to grant the change request, MDC has a maximum of four months to do so.
Once the plan change request is prepared, the plan changes and the resource consents (including the White Horse Rock application) will be publicly notified.
Reports and commissions
Once this report is complete, it will be circulated to the Board, NZKS and all persons making submissions on the proposal. EPA is currently procuring a planning expert and legal advice to be made available to you if you wish to use their advisory/independent report services. We are also in the process of procuring facilitator/s for use by the Board should it find that it requires these services.
The role of the FOS is to provide guidance on the process to interested parties during the submission period. An FOS only provides assistance to the process and will not claim any position on the merits of the proposal.
Recommendations
Map showing the location of the proposed plan change and the nine resource consent sites
These plans and drawings are made as a result of information provided by the customer and/or originating or provided by a third party to Boffa Miskell Limited for the purpose of providing the services. Boffa Miskell Limited takes no responsibility for any liability or action arising out of any incomplete or inaccurate information provided to Boffa Miskell Limited (from the customer or any third party).
Selection of definitions from the operative Marlborough Sounds Resource Management Plan 18
Further information on each of the sites is provided below and the Environmental Effects Assessment (EIA) on tab 3 of the Sustainable Growing King Salmon Plan Amendment application. Maps and plans of the eight proposed sites are shown on Tab 8 of the Sustainable Growing King Salmon Plan Amendment Application and Tab 31(a) for the White Horse Rock site. The Landscape Report (refer Tab 20 and, for the location of White Horse Rock, Tab 31(c)) provides an inventory of all buildings in the vicinity of the sites.
The AEE for the Resource Permissions is set forth in Tab 3 of the Sustainably Growing King Salmon Plan Change Application and, for the White Horse Rock site, Tab 31. The Resource Permission Applications are submitted in terms of the MSRMP as amended by the Sustainably Growing King Salmon Plan Amendment. This filing is accompanied by a request for two private plan changes to the EPA that are also part of the .
More details on these plan changes are provided below and in the AEE on Tab 3 of the Sustainable King Salmon Farming Plan Change Application. A detailed description of the proposal is available in the attached booklets (see in particular Section 3 Tab 3 of the Sustainable King Salmon Farming Plan Amendment Application). Full details of requested Private Plan changes are provided in the Private Plan Change Request.
The nature of the application to enable marine salmon farming at a number of specified sites (a major aquaculture proposal) is of widespread public interest, represents a doubling of salmon farming in the Marlborough Sounds and will result in nationally significant economic benefits (e.g. up to $1,030m . to 2026). Based on the nature of the project, it is appropriate for the matter to be submitted to a board of inquiry. It is understood Marlborough District Council is not opposed to the matter being referred to a board of inquiry.
This part of the form includes additional information that will assist in processing the application. NZ King Salmon also engaged Taylor Baines & Associates to undertake a social impact assessment of the proposal. Those persons include neighbors of the nine sites (ie those persons with homes within 1 kilometer of any proposed farm), those persons within a reasonable distance (4 kilometres) who will have direct line of sight over the proposed farms, as well as iwi and fishing groups, both recreational and commercial (although note that the effects on fishing are addressed in the undue adverse effects on fishing test to be undertaken by the Ministry of Fisheries after the consent process).
Definitions of Coastal Marine Area and Common Marine and Coastal Area
