|
Public Consultation Drafts
On-line
consultation forum
|
|
November-December 2004
Feedback on consultation
Thank you to all those who submitted responses to the EPA discussion
paper on options for a conceptual licence fee structure. Your
comments are valuable to us, and have assisted the EPA, the Licence
Fee Structure (LFS) Reference Group, the LFS Steering Committee
and the EPA Board in selecting a conceptual licence fee structure.
A letter, fax or email was sent to all respondents, including
information on the selected licence fee structure.
Conceptual licence fee structure
Consultation process
Analysis of submissions
Selection and endorsement of conceptual licence
fee structure
Conceptual licence fee structure
The EPA Board endorsed the following conceptual licence fee structure
on 8 March 2005:
Combined environment management and load based performance
fees, without revenue recycling
Consultation process
A discussion paper and introductory letter were sent to the following
groups:
- all licensees—sent to the address on the licence.
- other SA government departments—Primary Industries and
Resources South Australia, Department of Treasury and Finance,
Department for Trade and Economic Development, Small Business
Advisory Council, and the Manufacturing Consultative Committee
- all members on the Licence Fee Structure Reference Group
- prescribed bodies and other associations—Australian Conservation
Foundation, Conservation Council of SA, SA Chamber of Mines
and Energy, Business SA, SA Farmers Federation, Engineering
Employers Association, Environmental Defenders Office, Local
Government Association, SA Wine Industry Association
- interstate EPAs.
The discussion paper and consultant report were available on
the EPA web site. An online consultation forum was available.
In addition, a media release was issued and advertisements were
placed in the public notices of the following newspapers:
- The Advertiser
- all Messenger and regional newspapers.
Analysis of submissions
The SA EPA consulted with all stakeholders on options for a proposed
conceptual licence fee structure for the SA EPA in November and
December 2004. A total of 84 responses were received in the following
formats:
- discussion paper form filled in and posted (12%)
- discussion paper form filled in and faxed (27%)
- e-mail response (23%) and e-mail query (4%)
- telephone query (note that not all telephone queries were
included, only those where issues were raised, e.g. on the process)
(9%)
- letter posted or faxed (19%)
- on-line submission using consultation forum (6%).
The submissions were grouped into the following categories, and
the number of responses per category is shown as a percentage:
- small industry 36%
- medium industry 10%
- large industry 8%
- community 1%
- other SA govt. departments 6%
- industry associations 8%
- not-for-profit clubs (licensed by the EPA) 4%
- councils 14%
- hospital/funeral services 6%
- interstate or international government agencies 2%
- other 5%
Selection and endorsement of conceptual
licence fee structure
Very useful comments were received, and assisted the EPA and
the Reference Group in selecting a conceptual licence fee structure.
The responses were collated in an Access database and a summary
of comments on the process, revenue recycling, and the proposed
options for a licence fee structure was presented to the Reference
Group and the Steering Committee, together with all submissions
(with personal details omitted).
The Reference Group consists of members representing the Engineering
Employers Association, SA Wine Industry Association, SA Water,
Business SA, SA Chamber of Mines and Energy, Energy sector in
Port Adelaide Region, Local Government Association, Department
for Trade and Economic Development, Environmental Defenders Office,
Waste Management Association, SA Farmers' Federation and the Northern
Industry Environmental Forum.
Some respondents requested that their details be kept confidential.
For this reason, personal details of respondents and their organisations
were kept separate. This had the added benefit that ideas raised
in submissions were considered on merit, and not based on where
the ideas originated.
The Reference Group analysed submissions and reached consensus
in selecting the following option for recommendation to the Steering
Committee:
Combined environment management and load-based performance
fees, without revenue recycling.
The Steering Committee endorsed this for recommendation to the
EPA Board. The EPA Board endorsed this as the conceptual licence
fee structure for the SA EPA.
The summary documents.
The detailed submissions (476KB
PDF).
This page was last modified 15-05-2007
|
