Peer reviews and additional information

Additional information

This page provides additional information relevant to the Western Renewables Link Environment Effects Statement (EES) and updates on the Western Renewables Link Project. Submissions should not be based on the information on this page and instead should be based on the EES and draft Planning Scheme Amendment (PSA), which can be found on our Environment Effects Statement page.

Additional information:
Peer review reports
Program change advice
Biodiversity Report and Offset Management Strategy

Peer review reports

As part of the quality assurance process adopted by AusNet for preparing the EES technical assessments, AusNet sought peer reviews of their key technical assessments.

Reviewers were asked to review:

  • the methodology, assumptions and limitations,
  • the impact assessment’s findings,
  • the suitability of any Environmental Performance Requirements, and
  • if the report adequately addresses if the Project can meet the relevant evaluation objective in the EES scoping requirements.

The peer reviews were initially completed on earlier versions of the technical reports and where the experts agreed, technical reports have adopted the recommendations of the reviewers, which informed the final technical reports exhibited with the EES. The reports prepared by the peer reviewers identify their comments on the technical reports, including where there are differences of opinion.

Peer reviews were undertaken with respect to the following areas:

    • Agriculture and Forestry
    • Aviation
    • Biodiversity
    • Bushfire
    • EMI and EMF
    • Historical heritage
    • Landscape and Visual
    • Land use and planning

To give the reader the best understanding of the reviews, the peer review reports should be read in conjunction with the relevant technical reports exhibited with the EES.

The technical reports that form part of the EES are available on the Environment Effects Statement page.

    Peer review reports

    Agriculture and Forestry
    Aviation
    Biodiversity
    Bushfire
    EMI and EMF
    Historical heritage
    Landscape and Visual
    Land use and planning

    Program change advice

    In June 2025 it was identified that the construction and delivery timeframe for WRL may need to be revised, so as to be different from what was assessed in the EES. This change has been informed by early contractor engagement, and a changed approach to the method of construction.

    As a consequence, EES technical specialists were asked to consider if a revised construction and delivery timeframe would change the outcomes of their technical assessments. The changes are as follows:

    • The proposed change to the construction method is for there to be a single construction work front commencing at the western end and moving east along the Proposed Route to complete the Project. The EES has assumed two construction work fronts working in parallel from each end of the Project and meeting towards the centre.
    • The EES was based on an overall construction program of two years, noting that the schedule is dependent on contractor engagement and receipt of project approvals (See EES Chapter 6 Project description). As a result of removing the concurrent construction at the eastern end, the Project construction end date is now Q4 of 2029, approximately 12 months later than considered in the EES. Rehabilitation will occur progressively and be completed in 2030. This change to overall duration is not expected to result in a change in the time of construction on any one property.
    • The change in construction method would also change the program for energisation of the project to be 12 months later than what was assessed in the EES.
    • The duration of construction activities on each property would, however, not change and rehabilitation works would still commence progressively as areas are no longer required to support construction.

    Each EES technical specialist has considered the program change and their advice is provided below. Overall, the technical specialists found there would be no material change to the conclusions of their technical assessments or require any changes to the recommended Environmental Performance Requirements.

    The technical specialists for the greenhouse gas and economic assessments did, however, note that the revised program would change some aspects of their assessments. The greenhouse gas specialist anticipates there would be changes to the calculated greenhouse gas emissions from the longer program but concludes it would not change their overall conclusions. The economic specialist confirmed that with respect to agricultural and local business impacts the change to program would not change their conclusions but were unable to comment in relation to the outcome of updated computable general equilibrium (CGE) modelling.

    Program change advice

    The program change advice from the technical specialists include:

    Aboriginal cultural heritage
    Air quality
    Agriculture and forestry
    Aviation
    Biodiversity
    Bushfire
    Climate change
    Contaminated land
    EMI and EMF
    Greenhouse gas
    Geology and soils
    Groundwater
    Historical heritage
    Economic
    Landscape and visual
    Land use and planning
    Noise and vibration
    Social
    Surface water
    Transport

    Biodiversity Report and Offset Management Strategy

    Report 1 on Ecological Surveys Required by EPR BD1 (BD1 Report 1) has been prepared to outline the work that has been progressed to show how the proposed Environmental Performance Requirement (EPR) BD1 that has been recommended in the EES Biodiversity Impact Assessment (Technical Report A) would be applied. EPR BD1 requires:

    1. that further ecological surveys be undertaken as access to previously inaccessible parcels becomes available;
    2. identification of tree protection zones associated with access tracks outside of the Easement Corridor and abutting the Easement Corridor; and
    3. that the extent of vegetation identified to be removed within the Easement Corridor is reduced by, among other things, identifying no-go zones within the Easement Corridor, being areas where native vegetation and habitat can be avoided through project design and does not need to be removed.

    BD1 Report 1 reflects the findings of additional survey data that was obtained between the finalisation of the Biodiversity Impact Assessment for the EES and May 2025, identifies tree protection zones (now called notional root zones) and associated impacts, and includes no-go zones in the assessment of impacts arising from the Western Renewables Link Project. BD1 Report 1 would be supplemented by additional reports in accordance with EPR-BD1.

    BD1 Report 1 is accompanied by an updated version of EES Attachment V – Offset Management Strategy that was exhibited with the EES. The updated strategy accounts for changes in offsets required as a result of the changed amount of native vegetation and species impacts documented in BD1 Report 1, as well as incorporating edits to improve clarity and consistency.

    Biodiversity Report
    Part 1 (PDF 1MB)  |  Part 2 (PDF 32MB)  |  Part 3 (PDF 8MB)  |  Part 4 (PDF 8MB)
    Offset Management Strategy


    The technical reports that form part of the EES are available on the Environment Effects Statement page.