version 2.0 infrastructure sustainability council of

ISv2.0 Technical Manual

Design and As Built rating

© 2018 Infrastructure Sustainability Council of Australia (ISCA)

Version 2.0

July 2018

The information contained in this publication has been compiled in good faith, exercising all due care and attention.

No representation is made about the accuracy, completeness or suitability of the information in this publication for

any particular purpose. ISCA shall not be liable for any damage which may occur to any person or organisation

taking action or not on the basis of this publication. Readers should seek appropriate advice when applying the

information to their specific needs.

ISCA and IS are registered trademarks of the Infrastructure Sustainability Council of Australia. For information about

ISCA or the Infrastructure Sustainability (IS) rating scheme visit isca.org.au.

Published by:

Infrastructure Sustainability Council of Australia Pty Ltd

ABN: 53 131 329 774

www.isca.org.au

Phone +61 2 9252 9733

Email [email protected]

PO Box R655 Royal Exchange NSW 1225

Suite 6.03, 220 George Street, Sydney NSW 2000

Page 1 of 477



With thanks to the ISv2.0 funders:

Page 2 of 477



AUTHORISATION AND DISCLAIMER

The Infrastructure Sustainability (IS) rating scheme has been developed by ISCA. The IS rating scheme

evaluates sustainability initiatives and potential environmental, social and economic impacts of

infrastructure projects and assets. It is intended for use by stakeholders, including proponents,

designers, construction and operation-project team members, as a guide for sustainable design,

procurement, construction and operation for infrastructure projects and assets. The IS rating scheme

is subject to continuous improvement and further development.

The IS rating scheme has been developed with the assistance and participation of representatives from

many organisations. The views and opinions expressed have been determined by ISCA and its

Committees.

ISCA, the IS rating scheme and all accompanying documentation represent ISCA’s approved standard

to improve the sustainability of infrastructure using established and/or advanced industry principles,

practices, materials and standards.

ISCA authorises you to view and use the IS rating scheme for your individual use only. In exchange for

this authorisation, you agree that ISCA retains all copyright and other proprietary notices, rights

contained in and in relation to the IS rating scheme, and you agree not to sell, modify, or use for another

purpose the IS rating scheme or to reproduce, display or distribute the IS rating scheme in any way for

any public or commercial purpose, including display on a website or in a networked environment.

Unauthorised use of the IS rating scheme will violate copyright and other laws, and is prohibited. All

text, graphics, layout and other elements of content contained in the IS rating scheme are owned by

ISCA and are protected by copyright, trademark and other laws.

To the maximum extent permitted by law, ISCA does not accept responsibility, including without

limitation for negligence, for any inaccuracy within the IS rating scheme and makes no warranty, express

or implied, including the warranties of merchantability and fitness for a particular purpose, nor assumes

any legal liability or responsibility to you or any third party for the accuracy, completeness, or use of, or

reliance on, any information contained in the IS rating scheme, or for any injury, loss or damage

(including, without limitation, equitable relief and economic loss) arising out of or in connection with any

such use or reliance.

ISCA and the IS rating scheme are no substitute for professional advice. You should seek your own

professional and other appropriate advice on the matters addressed by them.

As a condition of use, you covenant not to sue, and agree to waive and release ISCA, its officers, agents,

employees and members from any and all claims, demands and causes of action for any injury, loss,

destruction or damage (including, without limitation, equitable relief and economic loss) that you may

now or hereafter have a right to assert against such parties arising out of or in connection with your use

of, or reliance on, ISCA or the IS rating scheme.

ISCA does not endorse any self-assessed ISCA rating achieved by the use of the IS rating scheme.

ISCA offers a formal certification process; this service provides for independent third-party review of

points claimed to ensure all points can be demonstrated to be achieved by the provision of the necessary

documentary evidence. The use of the IS rating scheme without formal certification by ISCA does not

entitle the user or any other party, to promote any rating achieved.

The application of the IS rating scheme to any and all infrastructure projects and assets is encouraged

including to assess and improve the sustainable design, construction and operating attributes of such

infrastructure projects and assets. No fee is payable to ISCA for such use, however formal recognition

of the IS rating – and the right to promote the same – requires the undertaking of the formal certification

process which is offered by ISCA.

You agree and acknowledge that you are only authorised to proceed to use the IS rating tool on the

basis described above.

Page 3 of 477



© Infrastructure Sustainability Council of Australia

All rights reserved.

Page 4 of 477



TABLE OF CONTENTS

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ........................................................................................................................ 6

ABOUT ISCA ......................................................................................................................................... 11

ABOUT INFRASTRUCTURE SUSTAINABILITY .................................................................................. 12

ISV2.0 DESIGN AND AS BUILT RATING ............................................................................................. 14

GUIDE TO CREDIT LAYOUT ............................................................................................................... 17

ISV2.0 CREDITS ................................................................................................................................... 18

IS RATING PROCESS .......................................................................................................................... 25

BASE CASE PROPOSAL...................................................................................................................... 34

CASE STUDIES, GUIDELINES AND TOOLS....................................................................................... 37

NOTES, EXCEPTIONS AND DISCLAIMERS ....................................................................................... 38

CATEGORY INDEX ............................................................................................................................... 39

GOVERNANCE THEME

CONTEXT .............................................................................................................................................. 40

LEADERSHIP AND MANAGEMENT .................................................................................................... 56

SUSTAINABLE PROCUREMENT ......................................................................................................... 88

RESILIENCE ....................................................................................................................................... 110

INNOVATION ...................................................................................................................................... 140

ECONOMIC THEME

OPTIONS ASSESSMENT AND BUSINESS CASE ............................................................................ 146

BENEFITS ........................................................................................................................................... 164

ENVIRONMENT THEME

ENERGY AND CARBON..................................................................................................................... 174

GREEN INFRASTRUCTURE .............................................................................................................. 198

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS ............................................................................................................. 214

RESOURCE EFFICIENCY .................................................................................................................. 266

WATER ................................................................................................................................................ 326

ECOLOGY ........................................................................................................................................... 342

SOCIAL THEME

STAKEHOLDER ENGAGEMENT ....................................................................................................... 372

LEGACY .............................................................................................................................................. 396

HERITAGE .......................................................................................................................................... 406

WORKFORCE SUSTAINABILITY ....................................................................................................... 424

Page 5 of 477



ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

The Infrastructure Sustainability Council of Australia would like to acknowledge and thank the financial

supporters of ISv2.0.

Figure Int1 ISv2.0 funders

We would also like to acknowledge and thank the hundreds of Advisory group members, developers

and industry reviewers that generously donated their time to develop the ISv2.0 content.

ISv2.0 Advisory Group members

Table Int1 Advisory group members

Name Organisation

Context Advisory Group

Bernard Connell Lendlease Bouygues Joint Venture

Christina Silk Silk Consulting Landscape Architects

Christine Dewar Viridis

Daniel Bennett Adelaide City Council

Dieter Lim Tract

Emma Wood GG Anderson

Geoff Hudson ARTC

Greg Jackson RMS Centre for Urban Development

Ian Don John Holland

Joseph Filia Main Roads WA

Kate Hardwick Melbourne Metro Rail Authority

Lorrae Wild Office of the Victorian Government Architect / VicRoads

Michael Cassidy CPB Contractors

Penny Hall Arup

Ecology Advisory Group

Christine Dewar Viridis

Page 6 of 477



Name Organisation

Gaynor Owen GHD

Julie Ravillion NSW Roads and Maritime Service

Naomi Martin Green Building Council of Australia

Peter Monsted CPB Contractors

Simon Hooper John Holland

Stephanie Mifsud Sydney Light Rail, Transport for NSW

Steven Ward Eco Logical

Vanessa Clarke Main Roads WA

Economic Advisory Group

Corey Dykstra Water Corporation

David Jackson Queensland Treasury

Greg Garrett John Holland

Joshua Bishop WWF-Australia

Mark Harvey Department of Infrastructure, Regional Development and Cities

Saori Peguicha Pacific Partnership

Sarah Tasic Arup

Environmental Impacts Advisory Group

Ken MacDonald Ramboll

Lara Daddow Jacobs

Thirukumaran Jallendran John Holland

Heritage Advisory Group

Erin Williams RPS

Karen Murphy Jacobs

Mark Oneil Queensland Rail

Todd Craig Main Roads WA

Resource Efficiency Advisory Group

Amardeep Wander Aprince Consulting

Andrew Kovacs CPB Contractors/KBR

Andrew Douglas Resource Recovery Australia

Anthony NG OneSteel

Billy Lai Transport for NSW

Celia Tesoriero NSW Environmental Protection Agency

Dharshi Hasthanayake Arcadis

Emily Townsend ThinkStep

Guy Raithby-Veall Independent Consultant

James Logie WSP

John Gertsakis EcoActiv

John Harvison Roads and Maritime Service

Jonas Bengtsson Edge Environment

Judith Schinabeck GECA

Matt Allen Community Recyclers

Matt Hunter Downer

Melanie Ayre CSIRO

Page 7 of 477



Name Organisation

Michael Dash Holcim

Narelle Dobson TMR

Nicole Neal Cardno

Paul O’Connell LendLease LXRA

Rebecca Hendy CPB Contractors

Rob Rouwette Start2see

Rod Clare NSW Office of Environment and Heritage Sustainability Advantage

Ross Davies

BlueScope Steel

Ross Brookshaw Downer

Shaila Divakaria GECA

Sustainable Procurement Advisory Group

Abigail Heywood Lendlease

Alyssa Gleeson Transport for NSW

Camilla Edmunds Transport for NSW

Chris Bolzenius Laing O’Rourke

Darren Willman NSW OEH Sustainability Advantage

Donna Wills NSW Roads and Maritime Services

Jackie Aggett Laing O’Rourke

Jane Inglis Transport for NSW

Jean-Louis Haie Action Sustainability

Lyn Hopewell Department of Infrastructure, Local Government and Planning

Mark Daniels Social Traders

Martin Cowling Department of Jobs and Small Business

Monique Cornish Tonkin + Taylor

Penny Townley Townley’s Environment Services Pty Ltd

Ramon Dobb Fulton Hogan

Rochelle Kirk NSW Roads and Maritime Services

Ross Davis BlueScope Steel

Samantha Hays CPB Contractors

Seraphine Bray CPB Contractors

Stakeholder Engagement Advisory Group

Amanda Muir Jacobs

Douglas Lindsay Transport for NSW

Ed Nieman Main Roads Western Australia

Emily Santostefano Water Corporation

Frances Walker CPB Contractors

Helen Ketelbey Ketelbey Associates

James Herbert AECOM

Joan Brierley Main Roads Western Australia

Julie-Anne Braithwaite Jacobs

Justine Voigt Lendlease

Kirsty O'Connell The Engagement People

Page 8 of 477



Name Organisation

Meg Wrixon Mirvac

Penny Townley Townley’s Environment Services Pty Ltd

Rebecca Miller AECOM

Susan Crawford FloCom/Laing O'Rourke

Water Advisory Group

David Kirby KBR

Jody Finsen Arup

Juan Pablo Alvarez Gaitan UNSW - Water Research Centre

Julian Fyfe Parks Shire Council

Ken Lunty Edge Environment

Martin Budd Royal Haskoning

Stuart Khan UNSW - School of Civil & Environmental Engineering

Workforce Sustainability Advisory Group

Andrew Nolan Laing O’Rourke

Chris Bourne Lendlease

Emma Dade Jacobs

Faye Turner Main Roads WA

Ina Willman Independent consultant

Lisa McRae Transurban Limited

Martin Cowling Department of Jobs and Small Business

Richard Brincat Transport for NSW

Content Developers

Table Int2 Content developers

Content Developers

Context Arup

Leadership & Management ISCA

Sustainable Procurement ActionSustainability and Tonkin + Taylor

Resilience AECOM

Innovation ISCA

Option Assessment & Business Case Arup

Benefits Arup

Energy & Carbon AECOM & ISCA

Green Infrastructure Arup

Environmental Values ISCA

Resource Efficiency Ramboll

Water ISCA

Ecology Arup

Stakeholder Engagement Jacobs

Page 9 of 477



Content Developers

Legacy ISCA

Heritage element

Workforce Sustainability Hiller Parry

Legislation review GHD

Materials Calculator start2see

Formatting of Technical Manual GHD – in-kind

Proof reading Gumhill Proofreading

ISCA Technical and Ratings Committee

Table Int3 ISCA Technical and Ratings Committee

Name Organisation

David Kinniburgh GHD

Dorte Ekelund ISCA Board Director

Leo Coci Main Roads WA

Menno Henneveld Menno Henneveld Consulting Pty Ltd

Scott Losee Losee Consulting Pty Ltd

ISCA team

Table Int4 ISCA team that contributed to ISv2.0 development

Name Position

Nicole Boyd Development Manager

Ainsley Simpson Chief Executive Officer

Angus Blackmore Development Coordinator

Kelly Chan Development Coordinator

Ranul Narangoda Development Coordinator

Kirsty Bauer Case Manager

Maria Palma Case Manager

Kieren Heikkinen Case Manager

Jaclyn Fathers Case Manager – Seconded from Lendlease

Jessica Cairns Case Manager

Page 10 of 477



ABOUT ISCA

The Infrastructure Sustainability Council of Australia (ISCA) is a member-based, not-for-profit peak body

operating in Australia, New Zealand and globally with the purpose of enabling sustainability outcomes

in infrastructure. We do this in the following ways:

With an Infrastructure Sustainability (IS) rating scheme for design, construction and operations of

infrastructure assets,

• Education, training and capacity building,

• Connecting suppliers of sustainable products and services with projects through ISupply,

• Bringing together experts to share knowledge and lift the community of practice, and

• Recognising and rewarding best practice.

ISCA’s greatest strength is our community of engaged stakeholders – we have a great deal of expertise

within our network of members. We position ourselves as a network for collaboration, discussion and

education. Our regular events, conferences and seminars facilitate knowledge sharing and enable

experts to get together in a focused environment.

We provide three primary services to the infrastructure industry:

Figure Int2 ISCA services

Page 11 of 477



ABOUT THE INFRASTRUCTURE SUSTAINABILITY RATING SCHEME

Infrastructure sustainability

Infrastructure can be defined as the structural elements of the economy and society which allow for

production and distribution of goods and services without themselves being part of the production

process.

The most common definition of sustainability or sustainable development is: “development that meets

the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs.”

(United Nations, 1987)

Infrastructure is a vital part of the workings of society and when planned and delivered sustainably,

infrastructure enhances society by solving an identified social problem. Infrastructure sustainability is

infrastructure that has been planned, designed and delivered to meet the needs of society whilst

enhancing our environment and economy.

To have the best infrastructure sustainability outcomes, sustainability needs to be considered as early

in the infrastructure life cycle as possible.

The IS rating scheme

The Infrastructure Sustainability (IS) rating scheme has been designed to help infrastructure meet its

full potential, from projects early in the planning phase, to projects in design and construction and to

assets in operation. ISCA offers ratings across the full life cycle of an infrastructure asset.

Figure Int3 ISCA rating products across the infrastructure life cycle

The IS rating scheme v1.0 was first released in 2012 with ISv2.0 released on 1 July 2018.

Figure Int4 The IS rating scheme timeline

Page 12 of 477



The IS rating scheme comprises:

• The IS rating tools for Planning, Design and As Built and Operation

• ISCA education and training programs (including the IS Accredited Professional program)

• Working and Advisory Groups.

The IS rating tool is the tangible part of the scheme, used to undertake assessment. It comprises:

• The IS Technical Manual

• IS rating tool scorecard (IS Scorecard)

• IS Materials Calculator – a calculator used to measure performance in the Materials category

• Various guidelines - that support the application of the tool.

The ISv2.0 rating scheme has been developed by the industry for the industry through industry advisory

groups, consultants and peer reviewers. IS is Australia’s only comprehensive rating system for

evaluating sustainability across planning, design, construction and operation of infrastructure.

Scheme intent

The rating scheme aims to advance infrastructure sustainability by providing guidance for planners,

designers, builders, owners, operators and investors to make decisions that optimise the environmental,

social and economic outcomes of infrastructure.

The outcomes are achieved and validated through an evidence-based assessment and verification

scheme and the sharing of leading practices.

Asset types

The following asset types can apply the IS rating scheme:

Figure Int5 Asset types

Page 13 of 477



ISV2.0 DESIGN AND AS BUILT RATING

The Design and As Built rating can be undertaken with or without an ISv2.0 Planning rating being

completed prior. The Design and As Built rating has an interim verification step after Design which is

known as the ‘Design rating’. Once the As Built component of the rating has been verified, the Design

rating score is replaced with the final Design and As Built rating score.

Rating award levels

The rating scheme is rated out of 100 points, with 10 bonus points available for innovation. There are

five award categories:

Table Int5 Rating award levels

Award logo Award name Score range

Diamond 95-110

Platinum 80-94.9

Gold 60-79.9

Silver 40-59.9

Bronze 20-39.9

No rating awarded <19.9

Page 14 of 477



Themes, categories, credits, levels, criterion and must statements

Each Theme is made up of categories and each category is divided into a number of credits. Each credit

has up to three levels of achievement and addresses a specific aspect of sustainability performance

within the category. This may relate to a mitigation or improvement initiative, or a process that supports

achievement of sustainable outcomes.

Within each credit are criterion which are numbered as per the level and rating that they respond to.

Within each criterion there are ‘must statements’. Must statements outline requirements that must be

evidenced in order to achieve that credit. Must statements have been bolded for clear identification.

‘Should’ or ‘may’ statements are guidance and do not need to be evidenced to achieve the requirements

of the credit.

To achieve Level 1, all the criterion and must statements must be achieved. To achieve Level 2, all the

Level 1 and the Level 2 criterion and must statements must be achieved, and to achieve Level 3, all the

Level 1 and Level 2 criterion must be achieved. This process is true unless otherwise stated.

To achieve Level 1, all the criterion and must statements must be achieved. To achieve Level 2, all the

Level 1 and the Level 2 criterion and must statements must be achieved, and to achieve Level 3, all the

Level 1 and Level 2 criterion must be achieved. This process is true unless otherwise stated.

Each credit has a three-letter abbreviation based on the category name and then a sequential number,

a title and an aim which describes what the credit is trying to reward or encourage.

Please see the ‘Guide to credit layout’ section for more detail.

Scoring and weightings

Each credit has a default weighting shown as the ‘score possible’ within the scorecard and in the ‘default

weighting’ section of this Technical Manual. The ‘points per level’ is the ‘score possible’ divided by the

number of levels available for that credit. For example, if a credit has 6 points allocated to it, and the

project achieves a Level 2 for that credit, then 4 points would be awarded (6*(2/3)=4).

The category score is simply the sum of the ‘points achieved’ for each credit. The overall score is the

sum of the category scores, resulting to a total number on a 100-point scale.

The rating award level is assigned based on the overall score as shown in Table Int1.

Each credit weighting reflects the credits importance and therefore its relative contribution to the

sustainability performance of the overall project or asset. Through the materiality assessment

undertaken as part of Lea-1 and at the commencement of a rating, the default weightings are adjusted

based on the materiality of each category for that particular project. The weightings assessment may

retain, lower or raise the weighting of each credit based on how material (important) it is to the overall

sustainability performance of the asset. Credits whose weightings fall to zero or below a materiality

threshold are ‘scoped out’.

The default weightings were determined through an industry weightings survey as part of the ISv2.0

development.

Scaled Credits

Certain credits in the IS rating tool are ‘scaled credits’. This means that fractions of scores are achievable

on a sliding scale. This approach encourages pursuit of every incremental improvement possible.

The level for scaled credits is determined on a sliding scale either from 0 to Level 3 (full points) or in

some cases from Level 1 to Level 3. For every unit of performance improvement up to Level 3, fractions

of levels may be achieved on a sliding scale.

For example, for the Ene-1 credit, Level 1 simply requires measurement of GHG footprint (no reduction)

whereas Level 3 requires a 30% reduction in GHG emissions compared to the Base Case. Therefore,

a 10% reduction would achieve Level 1 + (10% / 30%) x (3 - 1) = Level 1.67. This decimal level is

Page 15 of 477



entered into the scorecard which then calculates the points achieved for the credit by multiplying the

Level Achieved by the Points Per Level.

Where a project can demonstrate a substantial improvement above the Level 3 performance, then it

may be eligible for Innovation points. As a guide, the credit Level 3 benchmark would need to be

exceeded by at least a similar magnitude as the performance increment between Level 2 and Level 3.

Evidence

Evidence is required for each credit to demonstrate that a certain performance benchmark (Level) is

being met. Note that the evidence listed in the IS rating tool is only a guide and the Assessor must

determine the best evidence to demonstrate if the benchmark is achievement.

It is recognised that project or asset-management accountability and structures often change during the

life of a project or asset. Evidence should be provided to cover the duration of the relevant rating phases.

Page 16 of 477



GUIDE TO CREDIT LAYOUT

ISv2.0 Design <this section outlines if it is a Design or As Built credit.

Exa-1 Example heading

Aim

Each credit has an aim which describes what the credit is trying to reward or encourage. This is the

intent of the credit.

Criteria

Table G1 Exa-1 Design summary criteria table

Level 1 Level 2 Level 3

DL1.1 Criterion is labelled

numerically. ‘DL’ refers to Design

Level, and ‘ABL’ refers to As Built

Level. This table provides a

summary of the criterion, however

the detail of the credit requirements

are provided in the section below.

AND

DL1.2 More level one criterion.

The requirements for Level 1 are

achieved

AND

DL2.1 Level 2 criterion is labelling

with a ‘2’.

AND

DL2.2 More level 2 criterion.


achieved

AND

D3.1 Level 3 criterion.

Introduction to the credit if relevant

Definitions

Definitions mean an explanation of the terminology used in this credit. Definitions are outlined at the

beginning of each credit.

Level 1

DL1.1 Criterion is outlined here.

The criterion in detail is outlined here. This section must be read to understand the requirements of the

criterion. The ‘must’ in a must statement is bolded for clearer identification. All ‘must’ statements require

evidence to be provided in order to meet the requirements of the credit. ‘May’ and ‘should’ statements

are provided as helpful guidance; however, they do not require evidence to be provided.

Example evidence for Level 1

This section outlines some example evidence that could be used.

This list is not exhaustive and provides examples only.

Page 17 of 477



ISV2.0 CREDITS

Credit structure

The themes, categories and credits of the ISv2.0 Design and As Built rating are highlighted below.

Table int6 ISv2.0 credit structure

Theme Category Credits ISv2.0 Planning

ISv2.0 Design

ISv2.0 As Built

ISv2.0 Operations (TBC)

Go

vern

an

ce

Context Con-1 Strategic Context x

Con-2 Urban and Landscape Design context

x x x x

Leadership & Management

Lea-1 Integrating Sustainability x x x x

Lea-2 Risks and Opportunities x x x x

Lea-3 Knowledge Sharing x x x x

Sustainable Procurement

Spr-1 Risk and Opportunity Assessment and Procurement Strategy

x x x x

Spr-2 Supplier Assessment and Selection

x x x x

Spr-3 Contract and Supplier Management

x x x x

Resilience Res-1 Resilience Strategy x x x x

Res-2 Climate and Natural Hazard Risks

x x x x

Innovation Inn-1 Innovation x x x x

Eco

no

mic

Options Assessment & Business Case

Ecn-1 Options Assessment x x x x

Ecn-2 Valuing and Considering Externalities

x

Ecn-3 Equity and Distributional Impacts

x

Ecn-4 Economic and Financial Sustainability

x x x x

Benefits Ecn-5 Benefits Mapping x x x

Ecn-6 Post Project Evaluation x

En

vir

on

men

t

Energy & Carbon

Ene-1 Energy Efficiency x x x x

Ene-2 Renewable Energy x x x x

Ene-3 Offsetting x x x x

Green Infrastructure

Gre-1 Green Infrastructure x x x x

Environmental Impacts

Env-1 Receiving Water Quality x x x x

Env-2 Noise x x x x

Env-3 Vibration x x x x

Env-4 Air Quality x x x x

Env-5 Light Pollution x x x x

Resource Efficiency

Rso-1 Resource Strategy Development

x x x x

Page 18 of 477



Theme Category Credits ISv2.0 Planning

ISv2.0 Design

ISv2.0 As Built

ISv2.0 Operations (TBC)

Rso-2 Contamination Remediation Material

x x x x

Rso-3 Management of Acid Sulfate Soil

x x x x

Rso-4 Resource Recovery x x x x

Rso-5 Adaptability x x x x

Rso-6 Material Life cycle Impact Measure and Management

x x x

Rso-7 Sustainability Labelled Products and Supply Chains

x x x

Water Wat-1 Water use x x x x

Wat-2 Appropriate use of Water Sources

x x x x

Ecology Eco-1 Ecological Assessment and Risk Management

x x x x

Eco-2 Ecological Monitoring x x x x

So

cia

l

Stakeholder Engagement

Sta-1 Stakeholder Engagement Strategy Development

x x x x

Sta-2 Stakeholder Engagement Strategy Implementation

x x x x

Legacy Leg-1 Leaving a Lasting Legacy x x x x

Heritage Her-1 Heritage Assessment and Monitoring

x x x x

Workforce Sustainability

Wfs-1 Strategic Workforce Planning

x x x x

Wfs-2 Jobs and Skills x x x x

Wfs-3 Workforce Culture and Wellbeing

x x x

Wfs-4 Diversity and Inclusion x x x

Wfs-5 Sustainable Site Facilities x x x

Page 19 of 477



Alignment with the Sustainable Development Goals

The ISv2.0 categories align with the SDGs as outlined below. The relevant SDG icons are provided in

the header of each category.

Table int7 ISv2.0 credit alignment with the SDGs

Figure Int6 17 UN SDGs

SD

G

Co

nte

xt

Le

ad

ers

hip

&

Ma

nag

em

en

t

Su

sta

ina

ble

Pro

cu

rem

en

t

Res

ilie

nce

Inn

ov

ati

on

Op

tio

ns

Ass

es

sm

en

t &

Bu

sin

ess

Ca

se

Ben

efi

ts

En

erg

y &

Carb

on

Gre

en

Infr

as

tru

ctu

re

En

vir

on

me

nta

l

Imp

ac

ts

Res

ou

rce

Eff

icie

nc

y

Wa

ter

Ec

olo

gy

Sta

ke

ho

lde

r

En

ga

ge

men

t

Le

ga

cy

Heri

tag

e

Wo

rkfo

rce

Su

sta

ina

bil

ity

1

2

3 X X

4 X

5 X X

6 X X

7 X

8 X X X X X X X

9 X X X X X X X

10 X X X X

11 X X X X X X X X X X

12 X X X

13 X X X X

14 X X X X

15 X X X X X X

16 X X X X

17 X X X X X X

Page 20 of 477



Category linkages

ISv2.0 categories have been developed to be linked and aligned with one another. The following table

outlines those linkages which may be helpful in identifying possible efficiencies that may be gained by

understanding those linkages prior to undertaking each credit.

Table Int8 Category linkages

Th

em

e

Category Credits

Co

nte

xt

Le

ad

& M

men

t

Su

s P

rocu

rem

en

t

Resil

ien

ce

Inn

ov

ati

on

Op

t A

ss &

Bu

s C

ase

Ben

efi

ts

En

erg

y &

Carb

on

Gre

en

In

frastr

uctu

re

En

v Im

pa

cts

Reso

urc

e E

ffic

ien

cy

Wate

r

Eco

log

y

Sta

. E

ng

ag

em

en

t

Le

gacy

Heri

tag

e

Wo

rkfo

rce S

ust

Go

vern

an

ce

Context Con-1 Strategic Context x x

Con-2 Urban and Landscape Design context

x


Lea-1 Integrating Sustainability

x x x x x x x

Lea-2 Risks and Opportunities

x

Lea-3 Knowledge Sharing



x x x x x

Spr-2 Supplier Assessment and Selection

x x x x x x

Spr-3 Contract and Supplier Management

x x

Resilience Res-1 Resilience Strategy x

x

Res-2 Climate and Natural Hazard Risks

x x

Innovation Inn-1 Innovation x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x

Eco

no

mic


Ecn-1 Options Assessment

x x x x x x x

Ecn-2 Valuing and Considering Externalities

x

Ecn-3 Equity and Distributional Impacts

x


x

Benefits Ecn-5 Benefits Mapping x

x

Ecn-6 Post Project Evaluation

x x

En

vir

on

men

t

Energy & Carbon

Ene-1 Energy Efficiency x

Ene-2 Renewable Energy

x

Ene-3 Offsetting

x


Gre-1 Green Infrastructure

x x x x x x x


Env-1 Receiving Water Quality

x x

Page 21 of 477



Th

em

e

Category Credits

Co

nte

xt

Le

ad

& M

men

t

Su

s P

rocu

rem

en

t

Resil

ien

ce

Inn

ov

ati

on

Op

t A

ss &

Bu

s C

ase

Ben

efi

ts

En

erg

y &

Carb

on

Gre

en

In

frastr

uctu

re

En

v Im

pa

cts

Reso

urc

e E

ffic

ien

cy

Wate

r

Eco

log

y

Sta

. E

ng

ag

em

en

t

Le

gacy

Heri

tag

e

Wo

rkfo

rce S

ust

Env-2 Noise x

Env-3 Vibration

x

Env-4 Air Quality

x

Env-5 Light Pollution

x

Resource Efficiency

Rso-1 Resource Strategy Development

x x x

Rso-2 Contamination Remediation Material


Rso-4 Resource Recovery

x

Rso-5 Adaptability

Rso-6 Material Life cycle Impact Measure and Management

Rso-7 Environmentally Labelled Products and Supply Chains

Water Wat-1 Water use

Wat-2 Appropriate use of Water Sources

x


x x x

Eco-2 Ecological Monitoring

x x x

So

cia

l



x x x x x x x x x x x x


x x x x x x x x x x x x

Legacy Leg-1 Leaving a Lasting Legacy

x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x


x x



x

Wfs-2 Jobs and Skills x x


x x

Wfs-4 Diversity and Inclusion

x

Wfs-5 Sustainable Site Facilities

Page 22 of 477



Default weightings

The default credit weightings are outlined below. Note, these weighting may be adjusted as a result of

the materiality assessment.

Theme Category Credits Default weighting

Go

vern

an

ce

Context Con-2 Urban and Landscape Design context

2.5

TOTAL 2.5


Lea- 1 Implementing Sustainability 4

Lea- 2 Risks and Opportunities 2.5

Lea- 3 Knowledge Sharing 2.5

TOTAL 9



3

Spr- 2 Supplier Assessment and Selection

2.5

Spr- 3 Contract and Supplier Management

2.5

TOTAL 8

Resilience Res-1 Resilience Strategy 4

Res-2 Climate and Natural Hazard Risks 2.5

TOTAL 6.5

Innovation Inn-1 Innovation 10 (bonus)

TOTAL 10

Eco

no

mic


Ecn-1 Options Assessment 4


2

TOTAL 6

Benefits Ecn-5 Benefits Mapping 2

TOTAL 2

En

vir

on

men

t

Energy & Carbon Ene-1 Energy Efficiency 2.75

Ene-2 Renewable Energy 2.75

Ene-3 Offsetting 2

TOTAL 7.5

Green Infrastructure Gre-1 Green Infrastructure 2

TOTAL 2

Environmental Impacts Env-1 Receiving Water Quality 1.63

Env-2 Noise 1.63

Env-3 Vibration 1.62

Env-4 Air Quality 1.62

Env-5 Light Pollution 1

TOTAL 7.5

Resource Efficiency Rso-1 Resource Strategy Development 2 (AU) 2.2 (NZ)

Rso-2 Contamination and Remediation 1 (AU) 1.2 (NZ)

Rso-3 Management of Acid Sulfate Soil 1 (AU) N/A (NZ)

Rso-4 Resource Recovery 2 (AU) 2.2 (NZ)

Page 23 of 477



Rso-5 Adaptability 2 (AU) 2.2 (NZ)

Rso-6 Material Lifecycle Impact Measure and Management

4.5 (AU) 4.6 (NZ)

Rso-7 Environmentally Labelled Products and Supply Chains

1.5 (AU) 1.6 (NZ)

TOTAL 14

Water Wat-1 Water use 3

Wat-2 Appropriate use of Water Sources 3

TOTAL 6


3.5

Eco-2 Ecological Monitoring 3.5

TOTAL 7

So

cia

l



3.5


3.5

TOTAL 7

Legacy Leg-1 Leaving a Lasting Legacy 2.25

TOTAL 2.25


2.5

TOTAL 2.5


Wfs-1 Strategic Workforce Planning 2

Wfs-2 Jobs and Skills 2

Wfs-3 Workforce Culture and Wellbeing 2.25

Wfs-4 Diversity and Inclusion 2

Wfs-5 Sustainable Site Facilities 2

TOTAL 10.25

TOTAL 110

Page 24 of 477



IS RATING PROCESS

The following detail outlines the IS rating process.

Figure Int7 IS rating process

Page 25 of 477



Key roles

Table Int9 Key roles

Roles Responsibilities

Assessor The Assessor is the primary contact person on the project/asset-management

team who liaises with ISCA during the rating process and is ultimately

responsible for organising and submitting all evidence and documentation

required to complete the self-assessment.

It is recommended that this person be an IS Accredited Professional.

Case Manager The Case Manager is an ISCA staff member assigned to the project/asset once

they complete the Registration stage of the rating process. The Case Manager

is the first point of the contact for the Assessor and provides support to the

Assessor and other members of the project/asset-management team

throughout the rating process.

Rating Partner The term ‘rating partner’ refers to all parties involved in delivering the IS rating

and usually includes the proponent, design team, construction team, owners

and operators.

Registrant The ‘‘registrant’ is the party who signs the rating contract with ISCA.

Technical

Specialists

ISCA maintains a panel of Technical Specialists who can be used by ISCA as

required to address technical queries and issues.

Technical Rating

Committee

The Technical Steering Committee is a sub-committee of the ISCA Board. They

govern the rating process and are primarily responsible for certifying the

achievement of a rating at either ‘Commended’, ‘Excellent’ or ‘Leading’

performance level, providing governance of tool development projects, and

reviewing of Technical Clarifications (TCs) and Credit Interpretation Requests

(CIRs).

Verifiers ISCA maintains a panel of Verifiers for appointment to registered IS ratings.

Verifiers are independent specialists who are assigned to projects/assets

during the Assessment stage to provide independent verification of the

weightings assessment and Base case proposal, and the self-assessment.

Registration

Registration is the first stage in the rating process. This stage establishes a formal agreement with ISCA.

Key activities which make up the Registration stage include:

Registration of Interest (RoI)

To notify ISCA of the intent to register a project/asset for an IS rating, the Registrant should submit a

completed RoI form to ISCA (available on the ISCA website). This form contains basic information such

as the project/asset name, contact names, registering organisation, details for the rating, and the type

of rating/score which the Registrant intends to target.

The ISCA Case Manager will be the main point of contact from the time the Registration of Interest is

received. They will contact the Registrant to discuss the IS rating and next steps.

IS Rating Agreement

Once ISCA has received the RoI form and confirmed the various details for registration, a draft IS Rating

Agreement will be issued to the Registrant. The Rating Agreement is a formal contract which sets out

the terms on which the IS rating will take place and the basis on which the Registrant may promote the

Page 26 of 477



Rating for the Project/Asset, and use the Trademarks and any associated logos. Once the agreement

has been approved by ISCA and the Registrant, it can be executed and the Rating can formally

commence.

At the time the Rating Agreement is executed, the first invoice for the Registration and Support fee will

be issued.

Project Detail Form

The Case Manager will issue the Project Detail Form with the draft IS Rating Agreement.

Once completed and signed, the Project Detail Form will form the first part of the IS rating agreed

content. This content will be used to populate a Rating Profile on the IS Ratings Directory on the ISCA

website. The Ratings Directory is a means to promote the project/assets commitment to pursue an IS

rating.

Assessment

Soon after registration, the Assessor and Case Manager will discuss and confirm the timing and agenda

for a kick-off workshop. The kick-off workshop will be held with the Case Manager and the project/asset-

management team to brief the team on the process for pursuing an IS rating, establish project/asset

parameters, undertake the weightings assessment, to clarify scope, timing and base case, and generally

to commence the assessment process on a positive basis.

Projects/assets then undertake self-assessment using the IS rating tool as they proceed through the

relevant infrastructure life cycle phases. Self-assessment essentially involves the project or asset-

management team assessing their sustainability performance and determining their rating using the

rating tool.

The Assessor should lead the assessment process and preparation of the assessment for submission

but for best results, many team members need to be involved and manage the aspects relevant to their

area of specialisation. A benefit of the self-assessment is that it can provide the team with a checklist of

activities and initiatives that can be implemented to improve the overall sustainability performance of the

project or asset.

Key activities which make up the Assessment stage include:

IS Management Plan

Following registration, the Case Manager will provide the Assessor with a template for an IS

Management Plan. The purpose of the IS Management Plan is to facilitate the management and

implementation of IS Design and As Built rating on a registered project/asset. The objectives of the

management plan are to:

• Describe the objectives of applying the IS rating scheme on the project/asset,

• Outline the approach to applying the IS rating tool on the project/asset (scope and boundaries,

timing, reference design, weightings assessment etc.),

• For complex projects/programs made up of several packages, describe a suitable program

delivery approach,

• Describe and facilitate planning towards key IS timing and milestone requirements,

• Outline ISCA’s role and specific support requirements for the duration of the rating process,

• Assign responsibility and key tasks associated with achieving the IS rating, and

• Outline a management approach for capturing the business case for Infrastructure

Sustainability.

The IS Management Plan should also include key communication activities and marketing opportunities

which the project/asset can implement throughout the rating process, including but not limited to:

• The promotion of the commitment to pursue an IS rating.

Page 27 of 477



• Communication of achievements and good news stories throughout the assessment stage.

• Facilitating internal buy-in and team support of the IS Rating.

• Promotion of the achievement of a certified rating including the Certification Award event.

ISCA encourages Assessors to consider each section within the plan and how they might be

appropriately used on the project/asset, either as part of this IS Management Plan or as part of another

management system (e.g. project sustainability plan/strategy).

Kick-Off Workshop

The kick-off workshop is the first time where ISCA and the project/asset-management team can sit

down, engage with each other and discuss the rating as a whole. It is important that a good cross-

section of the team are represented at the workshop to promote internal buy-in and ownership of the IS

rating and infrastructure sustainability more generally. Examples of the participants might include, but

are not limited to:

• Project Director

• Construction Manager

• Network Operations

• Quality Manager

• Area Managers

• Commercial Manager

• Design Leads

• Stakeholder Relations Manager

• Environment Manager

• Sustainability Manager

• Risk Manager.

Key agenda items for this workshop may include:

• A presentation by ISCA staff of an overview of the IS ratings scheme, trends and traction, and

the IS rating process,

• A presentation by the Assessor to describe some of the drivers for pursing a rating, how the IS

rating aligns with other key sustainability targets/contract requirements, how the IS rating is

going to be delivered and managed within the project/asset team,

• Discussion of the project scope and boundaries, schedule, and roles and responsibilities,

• Team break-out sessions

Verifier Appointment

Shortly after the completion of the kick-off workshop, ISCA will nominate Verifiers (from the verifier

panel) to the Assessor for endorsement. It is important that verifiers have no conflict of interest with the

project/asset. Once endorsed the verifier(s) will be appointed for the life of the rating.

Verifiers are used for two key activities from the Assessment and Verification stages. During the

Assessment stage, a verifier will review and verify the materiality assessment and associated weightings

adjustment and the Base Case Proposal. During the verification stage the verifiers will complete the

review and verification of the self-assessment submission.

Materiality Assessment and weightings Assessment

The materiality assessment identifies the most important (material) sustainability issues for

infrastructure projects and assets, and results in an adjustment to the default weightings (the weighting

assessment) within the IS rating tool to tailor and focus the tool to the specific project/asset stakeholders

and context. For example, if an asset uses significant energy in operation (e.g. a railway) and also in

construction (e.g. due to lots of earth moving and tunnelling) then ‘Energy and Carbon’ is likely to be an

Page 28 of 477



issue of high Materiality and therefore it is sensible to increase the weighting of the Energy and Carbon

credits compared to less material issues.

The materiality assessment should be undertaken as part of Lea-1 and includes two approaches:

1. Using the traditional materiality approach where stakeholder value and impacts to society,

environment and the economy is assessed in collaboration with internal/external

stakeholders.

2. Assessing materiality of each UN Sustainable Development Goal to the project/asset.

The materiality assessment process involves three main steps:

1. Preparation.

2. Assessment.

3. Verification.

Preparation

See the Lea category to understand how to undertake the materiality assessment.

Assessment

As outlined in the Lea-1 credit, there are two options for assessing the materiality of the project; the GRI

Materiality Assessment or SDG Materiality Assessment. The scorecard has a different weighting

assessment process depending on the approach chosen. This process will most likely be undertaken

as part of the kick-off workshop with support from ISCA. Note that some topics are assessed at the

category level and some at the credit level.

Relevant documentation to justify the assessment must be provided in the Evidence Supplied column

within the scorecard. Please remember to number the evidence using the Evidence Naming Convention

(refer to the ‘Assessment submission’ section below for details) and refer to relevant sections of the

assessment to assist the Verifier(s).

Once completed, the tool calculates a Materiality Score from 0 to 4 as follows:

0 Not material (scoped out)

1 Low materiality (half as important as moderate)

2 Moderate materiality

3 High materiality (50% more important than moderate)

4 Very high materiality (twice as important as moderate)

Based on the Materiality Scores, the tool adjusts the credit weightings from their defaults, it removes

any credits that fall below a threshold and normalises the points so that they total 100 (excluding

Innovation credits).

If the team disagrees with any of the credit weightings then an Alternate Materiality Score may be

proposed with suitable justification.

The completed weightings assessment and relevant evidence is then provided to the ISCA Case

Manager for independent verification.

Verification

The purpose of verification is to check that the materiality assessment has been conducted appropriately

and that the resulting weightings are fair and appropriate to be used within the IS rating tool scorecard

for this rating. The ISCA Case Manager will review and issue the weightings assessment to a Verifier(s)

for verification.

The Verifier(s) may verify the assessment or ask for further information. The Case Manager will notify

the Assessor whether the assessment has been verified or whether further information is requested.

Page 29 of 477



The Assessor will update and resubmit the assessment if required and verifier(s) review will be repeated.

If the assessment is not verified after round two then the Case Manager and Assessor will discuss

appropriate actions.

Once the materiality assessment has been verified, the Materiality Scores and final credit weightings

will be issued to the Assessor to use throughout the Assessment process.

Technical Clarifications (TC) and Credit Interpretation Requests (CIR)

A TC or CIR can be submitted to ISCA where the Assessor would like a technical aspect of the rating

tool clarified or interpreted.

Technical Clarifications

During the assessment stage, where the Assessor is uncertain as to how a credit is interpreted, the

Assessor should submit to the Case Manager a Technical Clarification with sufficient supporting

evidence for ISCA to make a ruling.

Credit Interpretation Request

During the assessment stage, where the Assessor wishes to propose an alternative, yet equivalent

method for meeting a credit, the Assessor should submit a Credit Interpretation Request (CIR) with

sufficient supporting evidence for ISCA to make a ruling.

TCs and CIRs do not need to be submitted as one package to ISCA. They should be submitted as the

issues arise throughout the assessment stage to enable the issues to be resolved and feedback to be

provided in a timely manner.

TCs and CIRs should be submitted to ISCA using the appropriate forms and procedures available

through the rating site. These submissions will be reviewed by ISCA and provided to the ISCA Technical

Steering Committee for review. The Technical Rating Committee will review TCs/CIRs and make rulings

on each. Rulings will be published on the ISCA website and can be downloaded for use by all registered

IS projects/assets.

ISCA staff may also raise ‘non-rating’ TCs and CIRs at their discretion.

Where necessary ISCA may seek advice from Technical Specialists regarding TC/CIRs to assist the

TSC to make a ruling.

ISCA Support

Case Managers provide technical support throughout the assessment stage. This support includes:

1. Facilitating the kick-off workshop

2. Answering technical queries (including Technical Clarifications and Credit Interpretation

Requests)

3. Monthly meetings with the Assessor and other key stakeholders as required (either face to face

or by telephone) to review progress

4. Ongoing phone and email support

5. Managing the IS rating process with the Assessor.

To contact ISCA for technical support, please email [email protected]

Assessment Submission

Once the project/asset has reached the end of the assessment stage (for the Design component of the

rating this would be at the end of design, for the As Built component of the rating this would be close to

the end of construction), the finalised self-assessment, including a completed scorecard, a completed

set of credit summary forms (refer to Section 3 of each credit in the scorecard) and all evidence, needs

to be submitted to ISCA for verification.

One Credit Summary Form (refer to Section 3 of each credit in the scorecard) must be completed per

credit (these forms are integrated into the IS Scorecard). These forms allow the Assessor to provide

Page 30 of 477



additional information and context to the Verifier. The forms should be used to explain the evidence so

the Verifiers are able to understand the whole story and how the credit requirements have been met.

To submit the self-assessment for verification the Assessor should upload all required information onto

their rating site (this can be uploaded throughout the assessment process if desired) and notify their

Case Manager when this is ready.

Evidence Documents

Evidence documents must be supplied to ISCA electronically and stored on the secure Rating Site.

Evidence documents should be stored in the evidence folder under sub-folders as set out. Files should

be named using the evidence naming convention as follows:

Yyy-x i. File name [Section z, pw], where:

Yyy = the category abbreviation,

x = the credit number within that category and

i = the sequential document letter (i.e. a, b, c etc.).

z = the section number

w= the page number

Also indicate precisely the section(s) and page number(s) within the document where the evidence can

be found. This will assist the verifiers to undertake their review.

For example, a monitoring report which is the 2nd evidence document for the 3rd credit within the ‘Lea’

category would be listed as:

Lea-3 b. Monitoring Report [Section 3.1, p45].

Where one document is used as evidence for more than one credit, it need not be saved in another

category sub-folder again. The reference in the evidence column in the tool scorecard can simply refer

back to the file previously identified.

Documents will be kept confidential and will only be accessible by ISCA and the verifiers.

Verification

At least four (4) weeks before the first round of verification, the Case Manager will issue the Assessor

with an invoice for the Verification and Certification fee.

Before the self-assessment is submitted to the verifiers for verification, the Case Manager will review

the submission to run a quality check through sampling to make sure that it conforms to submission

requirements (as per above evidence discussion). Once all requirements have been addressed, ISCA

will request the verifier(s) to undertake the verification.

The verification of the project/asset self-assessment will be completed in two rounds.

Round 1

Verifiers review the submitted self-assessment including all evidence, and agree to a level and score

verified, plus a set of recommendations which advise the Assessor of what is needed to meet their

original self-assessed score. That is, if the Assessor self-assesses at Level 2 but the Verifiers verify at

Level 1, they will outline what else would be required to meet Level 2.

The outcomes of the round 1 verification will be provided to the Assessor by the Case Manager.

The Assessor needs to confirm whether they will accept the round 1 score achieved or will revise and

resubmit their self-assessment for a second round of verification.

Round 2

If desired, the Assessor will resubmit their self-assessment to include:

Page 31 of 477



• Any amended self-assessment levels. This cannot include revised levels higher than the original

self-assessed levels, that is, if the round 1 self-assessed Level was Level 2, the round 2 self-

assessed Level cannot be Level 3, if changed it can only be to Level 1 or nil. At this point the

Assessor may decide to accept the verified score for some credits, thereby reducing the Level,

and provide additional evidence for others,

• Any additional evidence to address the Verifier(s) comments, and

• Any revised credit summary forms to address the Verifier(s) comments. Any changes to the

originally submitted credit summary forms need to be made using red text.

The revised self-assessment will be provided to the Verifier(s) for verification. The outcomes of the round

2 verification will be provided to the Assessor by the Case Manager.

Following the round 2 verification, and before the rating moves into certification, the Assessor will be

asked to confirm whether they intend to dispute the verification outcomes. If they do, a dispute process

will be initiated to resolve the issue. They will also be asked to the best of the management team’s

knowledge if the project/asset has any actual, pending or possible fines, penalties or prosecutions. Once

confirmed that there are no fines, penalties or prosecutions, the rating will move to Certification. If this

is confirmed otherwise, then ISCA, at its discretion, will consider whether to proceed to Certification or

not.

Certification

The Verifiers will provide a recommendation to the Technical Rating Committee as to the score and

rating level the rating has achieved.

Subject to meeting necessary requirements, ISCA will certify the achievement of a rating at either

‘Bronze’, ‘Silver’, ‘Gold’, ‘Platinum’ or ‘Diamond’ performance level.

The certified rating is awarded to the defined infrastructure project or asset itself. Following achievement

of certification, rating partners will be able to publicly claim an IS rating for the infrastructure asset.

Key activities of the Certification stage include:

Certificate Award

The achievement of a Certified Rating is celebrated by awarding the Rating Certificate to a

representative of the Registrant organisation(s). This is best done at an event and ISCA will work with

the project/asset team to develop a suitable approach.

Key messages

ISCA and the Registrant will agree on a suite of key sustainability messages that can be used by both

organisations to promote the project/assets achievement of a certified IS rating. These messages will

be presented on the ISCA website within the IS Ratings Directory and will highlight the areas of the

rating where the project/asset has performed particularly well (rating highlights).

Case Studies

Elaborating on the key messages, the Case Manager and Assessor should work together to

develop/confirm a set of case studies which can be used to promote the achievement of the Certified IS

rating. These case studies may already have been developed throughout the Assessment stage and

may include:

• Case studies which highlight the business case for infrastructure sustainability,

• Initiatives that have been implemented on the project, and

• Category/Credit specific case studies which can be used as examples on the ISCA website

and/or various ISCA training/presentation materials.

Page 32 of 477



Feedback

ISCA will seek formal feedback from the Assessor following certification. The objectives of the feedback

process include:

• To query whether the Registrant’s objectives for applying the rating scheme were achieved,

• To understand how well ISCA provided support throughout the rating process,

• To gather feedback on the rating tool and rating process and their effectiveness,

• To understand and reflect on any issues or constraints experienced by the team throughout

their pursuit of the ISCA rating, and

• To discuss the business case for sustainability and the cost/benefit impact of the IS rating tool.

Design to As Built transition

The Design component of the rating is an interim rating and is therefore superseded by the As Built

component of the rating once completed.

Once the Design component of the rating is certified the rating will automatically move on to the As Built

component of the rating unless otherwise advised. The As Built component of the rating will build on

the already certified Design component which means that evidence from the design phase does not

need to be re-assessed.

The transition from the Design component of the rating to the As Built component of the rating will be

facilitated by the Case Manager and involves the Case Manager issuing an As Built scorecard (contains

the Design rating outcomes and verifier comments), and seeking a meeting to discuss the Design rating

comments and any advice for As Built.

The following process should be followed when preparing the As Built submission after a certified Design

rating:

• Use the revised As Built scorecard provide by the Case Manager to prepare the self-

assessment,

• The design submission evidence needs to be updated only where something has changed

during the construction phase e.g. if a late change to the design has been made then the Base

Case Proposal and relevant credits would need to be updated and resubmitted for verification

in the As Built rating submission, and

• The evidence should focus on demonstrating how the credits have been met through

construction e.g. photos of a design initiative being implemented, monitoring reports.

During the Design component of the rating, the verifier may have made specific comments for the As

Built component of the rating. These would have been noted in the scorecard and presented as blue

text. These comments must be addressed for the As Built component of the rating.

Evidence labelling should continue from the Design component of the rating, that is, if 5 pieces of

evidence were provided in the Design component of the rating then the first piece of evidence for the

As Built component of the rating would be labelled ‘6 (f)’.

When creating Credit Summary Forms (refer to Section 3 of the scorecard), do not generate new Credit

Summary forms for As Built. Update the Design submissions with the further relevant information and

highlight the changes using red text.

Page 33 of 477



BASE CASE PROPOSAL

In the Energy & Carbon, Water and Resource Efficiency categories, several of the credits adopt an

approach of modelling and measuring the performance of the project or asset (in terms of resource

consumption or greenhouse gas emissions) and comparing it to a business as usual (BAU) Footprint.

Despite industry efforts, including the delivery of the IS rating scheme, there is only limited, industry

baseline data for Energy and Carbon, Water and Materials impacts at the project/asset level to use for

comparison and benchmark efficiency and performance. Consequently, the Energy & Carbon, Water

and Resource Efficiency categories adopt an approach of comparing actual and predicted performance

for energy and carbon, materials and water against a self-proposed project/asset Base Case. This

approach will also ultimately facilitate the capture of good quality industry data over time which could

support a shift to absolute performance benchmarks in later iterations of the rating scheme.

The Base Case approach is used to model and measure the performance of the project or asset (in

terms of resource consumption or greenhouse gas emissions) and compare it to a business as usual

base case footprint. Guidance for these concepts and the approach is provided here. ‘Footprint’ is a

term that means the quantified impact of a certain issue across the infrastructure life cycle. This term is

used throughout these categories, except for the Resource Efficiency category, where the term ‘impact’

is more correctly used.

Base Case process

A base case should be chosen that is a suitable, early design accepted by key stakeholders as being

representative of the original concept for the infrastructure development. The design should be

advanced enough to provide sufficient details, such as a bill of quantities, from which footprints can be

calculated and, ideally where business-as-usual (BAU) technologies can be identified. This might be a

concept design or a reference design which is used for tendering purposes.

The Base Case Design needs to be formally adopted by the key stakeholders in the project or asset and

documentation of this must be provided. The same Base Case must be used consistently across the

following credits in the Energy & Carbon, Water and Resource Efficiency categories:

• Ene-1 (Level 2 to 3 only)

• Rso-6 (Level 2 to 3 only)

• Wat-1 (Level 2 to 3 only)

The establishment of a suitable Base Case should be discussed at the Kick-off Workshop. The Assessor

must submit the Base Case Proposal Form to the Case Manager following the Kick-off Workshop and

as early as possible in the Assessment phase. The form includes details on the name of the design, the

design’s purpose and function and the design life.

The form also includes section on ‘base case qualities’. These include:

• Applied Business As Usual Technologies - BAU technologies should be recent, used for similar

purposes and in similar locations. Assumptions should be stated. The design selected may or

may not apply business as usual technologies. Where a later design is chosen, which has

technologies/initiatives that do not represent business as usual, the base case and footprints

may need to be adjusted. See the ‘Base Case Adjustment’ section below.

• Transparency – This can be demonstrated by showing that the base case is accepted by key

stakeholders and/or that it was developed independently of those delivering the project/asset.

• Matching Scope – Show that the scope of the Base Case matches the scope of the IS rating.

Explain any boundary differences, their significance and how they will be addressed. If the

scope of the base case does not completely match the actual case, the base case footprints will

need to be adjusted.

Page 34 of 477

IS2.0 Technical Manual


• Accuracy and Detail – Describe how the Base Case provides suitable detail to allow robust

estimation of appropriate base case footprints including how any gaps will be addressed.

Explain how the Base Case information covers the full infrastructure life cycle (construction and

operation).

• Alternatives – Describe the alternative designs that were considered for adoption as the Base

Case and justify why these were not chosen (relating back to the Base Case qualities above).

In addition, the following is required:

• identification of which credits are to use the base case, and

• descriptions of how the Base Case Footprint(s) will be calculated from the Base Case including

any BAU assumptions and use of any base case adjustment (see below).

The Base Case needs to be verified through ISCA early in the assessment process to ensure the

approach is sound and the correct data is collected for the assessment. This process will help to prevent

unnecessary time being spent analysing footprints of inappropriate designs. Once the Base Case has

been verified, this Base Case must be used for all relevant credits in the Assessment.

Base Case Adjustment

It is common that the decision of a suitable base case is largely pragmatic, based on what suitable

design information is available. Very early designs may be too high-level to allow footprints to be

estimated, while later designs may already incorporate beyond BAU sustainability initiatives which

should rightfully be recognised in any measurement of project performance. To address the situation

where a later design is chosen which incorporates beyond BAU initiatives, a process of ‘extracting’ these

initiatives from the selected design can be applied to establish a base case.

This process is outlined as follows:

1. Select a suitable design upon which to base the base case as per the processes described

above.

2. Identify whether there are key sustainability initiatives that form part of the proposed design that

are clearly beyond BAU and should be recognised as part of the project’s performance

measurement through the rating tool.

3. Estimate the (relevant environmental) footprint(s) for the chosen design.

4. Replace the key sustainability initiatives with a BAU alternative in the base case footprint(s).

5. Provide the explanation for this process and the sustainability initiatives in the base case

proposal form as per above, including justification that the initiatives are beyond BAU.

6. Provide summary and details of the footprint and initiative calculations in the credit summary

form for the relevant credit in the Assessment submission.

Actual Case

For the Design component of the rating, the actual case is the design at the end of the design phase.

For the As-Built component of the rating, the actual case is the as-built design at the end of construction.

Actual Case Footprints

For the Design component of the rating, the actual case footprint is the estimated environmental impact

of the design, over the entire infrastructure life cycle (construction and operations phases), in relation to

the particular impact being measured. For example, the actual carbon footprint for the ‘Design’ rating is

the estimated total GHG emissions for the construction and operations phases based on the actual

case.

For the As Built component of the rating, the actual case footprint is the estimated environmental impact

of the as-built design, over the entire infrastructure life cycle (construction and operations phases), in

relation to the particular impact being measured. This will consist of the measured construction footprint

plus the modelled operation footprint. For example, the actual case carbon footprint for the ‘As-Built’

component of the rating is the measured GHG emissions for the construction phase plus the modelled

Page 35 of 477



GHG emissions for the operations phase based on the planned (future) operation of the as-built

infrastructure.

Reductions

The Ene-1, Rso-6 and Wat-1 credits and are ‘scaled’. No reduction between base case and actual case

is required to be demonstrated to achieve Level 1 (only monitoring and modelling). In fact, no base case

is required at all. To achieve higher than Level 1, a reduction between base case and actual case

footprints is required. For every unit of performance improvement up to Level 3, fractions of Levels may

be achieved on a sliding scale. This sliding scale approach provides encouragement to pursue every

reduction opportunity possible.

The difference between the base and actual case footprints should be explained in the credit summary

form by describing the key changes and their impacts in terms of reductions or increases in footprint. It

is recommended that this is supported by using a waterfall chart or similar (see example in Figure int3).

See each of the relevant credits for details.

Figure Int8 Waterfall chart comparing actual case to base case (Rso-6) for Whitsunday Sewage Treatment Plant Upgrade. Source: Downer

The Base Case Proposal should be proposed using the form and procedure available through the rating

site.

The Case Manager will review the Base Case Proposal and issue the proposal and the weightings

assessment to a Verifier(s) for verification.

Page 36 of 477



CASE STUDIES, GUIDELINES AND TOOLS

Case Studies

There are a number of case studies for ISv2.0 categories available on the ISCA website. The case

studies provide good and best practice examples.

Guidelines and Appendices

The following guidelines are available on the ISCA website:

• Energy and Carbon Guideline

• Climate and Natural Hazards Risks Guideline

• Design Review Guide

• The Materials Calculator Guideline

• ISv2.0 Knowledge Sharing Initiatives Appendix

• ISv2.0 Innovation Challenge Appendix

Tools

The ISv2.0 scorecard is provided for assessors to track their progress and to manage evidence. The

scorecard must be submitted for verification along with evidence supporting the projects submission.

The ISv2.0 scorecard can be found on the ISCA website.

The Materials Calculator version 2.0 accompanies the rating tool and can be found on the ISCA website.

Please ensure you are using the correct version of the Materials Calculator. All ISv2.0 projects are to

use the ISv2.0 Materials Calculator.

Page 37 of 477



NOTES, EXCEPTIONS AND DISCLAIMERS

Must statements

The Technical Manual outlines the requirements of each credit and criterion through ‘must’ statements.

‘Must statement’ are bold as a visual aid in the Technical Manual and provided as a checklist in the

scorecard. While every effort is made to ensure all must statements are bolded and included correctly

in the scorecard, it is the assessor’s responsibility to ensure they have read the Technical Manual in full,

and ISCA will not accept liability for any un-bolded must statements, or discrepancies in the scorecard.

Should there be any un-bolded must statements or discrepancies between the Technical Manual and

the scorecard, the Technical Manual overrules the scorecard and the discrepancies should be brought

to the attention of ISCA.

Multidisciplinary teams

In numerous categories, the structure of a multidisciplinary team is defined, often as part of a ‘must

statement’. Where job titles are identified, it is acceptable to have people with similar experience, or

similar roles as to those job titles identified. For example, if a Workforce Manager is identified as a role

required to make up a multidisciplinary team, then it is acceptable to have a HR Manager, or a person

with experience in workforce management such as a Sustainability Manager who previously worked in

Human Resources. It is recommended to speak to your Case Manager prior to submission to ensure

the make-up of the multidisciplinary team will likely meet the requirements of the criterion.

Case Manager advice and verification

Case Managers provide support throughout the rating process and will provide advice to rating partners

and assessors. Case Managers cannot influence the decisions of Verifiers, and the verification process

is undertaken independently of the Case Managers. For this reason, Case Managers will provide advice

to the best of their abilities, however, this advice cannot be treated as a guarantee or assurance that the

evidence or approach discussed will be accepted by the verifiers.

Verifiers act independently from ISCA and will make a decision based on the evidence provided to

support the claims of that submission.

Page 38 of 477



CATEGORY INDEX

Context



Resilience

Innovation


Benefits

Energy & Carbon



Resource Efficiency

Water

Ecology


Legacy

Heritage


Lea

Spr

Res

Inn

Ecn

Ecn

Ene

Gre

Env

Wat

Eco

Sta

Leg

Her

Wfs

Con

Rso

Page 39 of 477



Lea

Spr

Res

Res

Ecn

Ecn

Ene

Gre

Env

Wat

Eco

Sta

Leg

Her

Wfs

Con CONTEXT

Infrastructure is critical to the sustainability of cities, regions and countries, both in the way it addresses

community needs and objectives, and in the way it integrates into its physical and social context in order

to optimise the benefits that can be generated. The significant investment required to deliver

infrastructure assets, together with their long lifespans, means infrastructure assets can fundamentally

shape cities and regions for better or for worse with far-reaching impacts.

To be sustainable, infrastructure must be planned, designed, built, and operated with a sound

understanding of its role in meeting community needs and objectives. There must also be an

understanding of how an asset can be knitted into the fabric of a place to form an integral part of a

healthy, vibrant and sustainable society. As the management of the built environment becomes more

complex, so does the process of successfully integrating infrastructure into our local areas, cities and

regions.

Strategic Context

Policies and programs that are developed through robust strategic planning, particularly integrated

infrastructure and land use planning, provide a good foundation for planning, design, delivery, and

operation of infrastructure assets. They can also assist with the identification of complementary

initiatives (for example, manage demand measures) which, when implemented, enhance the benefits of

investment in infrastructure assets. Confirming strategic alignment between proposed infrastructure

projects and strategic plans is an important first step in delivering infrastructure that meets the broader

needs of society.

Many leading infrastructure agencies in Australia and New Zealand have policies and processes to

guide the review of their infrastructure projects to ensure they are aligned with their strategic context

and address the key challenges, opportunities, and aspirations set out in infrastructure and land use

plans - some examples include:

Infrastructure Australia’s Assessment Framework: Detailed Technical Guidance

Transport for NSW, Principles and Guidelines of Transport Investment and Initiatives

Victoria Department for Transport, Economic Evaluation Guidelines

New Zealand Treasury, Better Business Cases: Guide to Developing the Strategic Assessment

Urban and Landscape Design

Understanding and responding to the physical and social context in which infrastructure is planned,

designed, built, and operated are determining factors in the success of projects. Urban and landscape

design is ‘the art of making places’ (Cowan, 2000) particularly concerned with the constituent physical

parts of the environment, the way these parts fit together to create networks of space and activity, the

function of those space networks, and their role as a social venue (DETR and CABE, 2000).

Urban design is both a process and an outcome, creating places in which people live and interact with

each other and the physical world around them. Urban design operates on a variety of scales, from the

macro scale of the urban structure (land use planning, transport and infrastructure networks) to the micro

scale of street furniture and lighting (Department of Infrastructure and Transport, 2011).

In this context, urban and landscape design focuses specifically on the analysis, planning, and design

of the infrastructure asset within its community and environment.

The design of urban places is the starting point for how they will ultimately function and perform for all.

While urban design excellence is sometimes seen as a costly ‘optional extra’, it is actually a cost-

effective necessity. The NSW Government Architect (NSW GA, 2016) makes the case that urban design

excellence delivers value in numerous ways:

Embedding accessibility via walking, cycling and public transport, reducing travel costs for all, and

boosting the economic viability of local businesses and services

Page 40 of 477


Design and As Built Rating

Delivering a people-friendly public realm, which supports community development and social

interaction and provides enhanced recreation opportunities

Supporting conditions for social interaction

Supporting businesses and economic performance through a ‘critical mass’ of local residents, and

easy access between home and work

Enabling housing, living and working diversity and choice

Embedding opportunities for affordable housing and living

Reducing energy and water costs through compact and accessible development patterns.

Conversely, poorly designed urban places can create long-term costs:

Limiting the public to expensive, car-only transport with impacts on amenity, liveability and the cost

of development

Limiting access and interaction, and contributing to social isolation

Limiting opportunities for local small business to access local populations

Increasing infrastructure and resources costs substantially

‘Done well, urban design results in resilience, safety and security, longevity of investment, reduced

operating costs, and increased land value in the wider precinct. It has a positive impact on reputation

and brand and therefore on the ability to attract talent and visitors to our cities – to live, work, and invest’

(NSW GA, 2016).

High quality urban design is becoming increasingly important as the density of our cities increases and

our population grows and changes. Creating Places for People: an urban design protocol for Australian

cities (the Australian Urban Design Protocol) was developed collaboratively as an action from Australia’s

National Urban Policy and establishes 12 broadly agreed principles for quality urban places that can be

applied to any project in any location. The Australian Urban Design Protocol (www.urbandesign.org.au)

is hosted by the Australian Sustainable Built Environment Council (ASBEC), of which ISCA is a member,

and it is an excellent source of information from around the country.

Similarly, the New Zealand (NZ) Ministry for the Environment developed the NZ Urban Design Protocol

as part of the Government’s Sustainable Development Programme of Action. The NZ Urban Design

Protocol is a key deliverable of the ‘Sustainable Cities’ action area, which seeks to make New Zealand’s

cities healthy, safe and attractive places where business, social and cultural life can flourish. The NZ

Urban Design Protocol is hosted by the Ministry for the Environment

(http://www.mfe.govt.nz/publications/towns-and-cities/new-zealand-urban-design-protocol) and

identifies seven essential design qualities that create quality urban design.

A number of leading infrastructure agencies in Australia and NZ have policies and processes to guide

improved urban and landscape design for their assets. The following may be considered particularly

instructive for roads and transport projects:

‘Beyond the Pavement – Urban Design Policy Procedures and Design Principles’, NSW Roads and

Maritime Centre for Urban Design,

‘Around the Tracks – urban design for heavy and light rail’, Transport for NSW, and

‘Bridging the gap’, NZ Transport Agency Urban Design Guidelines.

NSW Roads and Maritime Services has developed a comprehensive set of documents that are publicly

available. These focus on effective urban and landscape design and management through all phases

of its road assets, with a strong emphasis on contextual design and community involvement.

The Western Australian Government’s Visual Landscape Planning in Western Australia is a key source

of good practice guidance for considering factors, such as visual and landscape values for a broad range

of development and infrastructure assets/networks. The Australian Wind Energy Association and

Australian Council of National Trust Wind Farms and Landscape Values National Assessment

Framework is also a high standard example of a comprehensive policy, as is the RMS Guidelines for

landscape character and visual impact assessment. The Planning Institute of Australia and the

Australian Institute of Landscape Architects each has a range of relevant policies that address broad

Page 41 of 477



Lea

Spr

Res

Res

Ecn

Ecn

Ene

Gre

Env

Wat

Eco

Sta

Leg

Her

Wfs

Con

planning, design and sustainability issues related urban and landscape design and visual impact

assessment and are continuing to develop relevant guidance.

There are a number of high quality urban and landscape design policies and guidelines, developed

internationally and in Australia and New Zealand, which are applicable to integration of infrastructure

into towns and regions. Some notable examples include:

NSW Government Architect, Better Placed – A design led approach: developing an Architecture

and Design Policy for NSW,

Victorian Urban Design Charter,

Adelaide Design Manual,

People, places, spaces – A design guide for urban New Zealand, and

UK Urban Design Compendium

Internationally, schemes such as The Sustainable Sites Initiative: Guidelines and Performance

Benchmarks 2009 (US), CEEQUAL (UK), Greenroads (US), and LEED 2009 for Neighbourhood

Development (US), all address urban and landscape design to differing extents and in different ways.

Also emerging are a number of tools that seek to measure aspects of the quality of place and thereby

provide an approach to evaluating the effectiveness of urban and landscape design – some key

examples, include:

Link and Place (University College London)

Walk Score (Walk Score)

The overarching objective of this category is to achieve strategically aligned, contextually appropriate

infrastructure planning, design, construction, and operation. To do so requires evidence of a

collaborative, interdisciplinary approach that has been influenced by the local context and creates

infrastructure that fits its setting, while preserving and enhancing scenic, aesthetic, cultural, community,

and environmental resources, and values.

There are two credits in the Context category:

Con-1 Strategic Context (Planning only)

Con-2 Urban and Landscape Design Context

Category Linkages

The following ISv2.0 categories have linkages with the Context category;

Table G1 Category linkages

Credit Description Planning Design As Built Operations

Sta-1 Including stakeholder views

throughout Con-2 is required

x x x x

Page 42 of 477



ISv2.0 Design

Con-2 Urban and Landscape Design Context

Aim

To reward adoption of best practice urban and landscape design.

Criteria

Table G2 Con-2 Context summary criteria table


DL1.1 An urban and landscape

design plan is developed and

implemented

AND

DL1.2 A member(s) of the senior-

management team has central

responsibility for incorporation of

urban and landscape elements

into design.

AND

DL1.3 The ongoing maintenance

arrangements for the project’s

urban and landscape design have

been reviewed.


achieved.

AND

DL2.1 An urban and landscape

design statement has been

prepared.

AND

DL2.2 The urban and landscape

design plan has been

independently reviewed at key

stages throughout the design.


achieved

AND

DL3.1 The infrastructure

contributes a net increase in

permeability.

Definitions

Objectives are specific and measurable steps taken that will contribute to the achievement of the vision.

Senior management refers to the top level of management within the project or asset management

organisation.

Suitably qualified professional is a person with a planning, design, landscape architecture or urban

design qualification with a minimum of 10 years’ experience.

Suitably qualified multidisciplinary team for the purposes of this credit should include

representatives from a range of different disciplines, including city planners, urban designers and

landscape architects.

A vision statement is a description of the desired outcome to be accomplished for infrastructure users

and the broader community through successful project planning, design, construction, and operation.

For the purposes of this credit the design vision must be related to the need for the project and its role

and purpose, as identified by relevant government strategies, plans, programs, and priorities which set

the context for the project. The design vision must also be related to the physical and social environment

into which the project will be integrated.

Level 1

DL1.1 An urban and landscape design plan has been developed and implemented.

For infrastructure to be, incorporate or facilitate, well-designed and well-functioning places, it requires

a high standard of urban and landscape design (achieved through multidisciplinary teams of suitably

qualified specialists working collaboratively at all stages, from design through to procurement,

Page 43 of 477



Lea

Spr

Res

Res

Ecn

Ecn

Ene

Gre

Env

Wat

Eco

Sta

Leg

Her

Wfs

Con implementation, operation, and maintenance). Good processes prioritise design excellence through

leadership, teamwork and integration.

A high standard of design should be reflected in the urban and landscape design plan which must be

prepared for the project. If an urban and landscape design plan was developed in the planning phase,

that plan must be reviewed and updated by a suitably qualified multidisciplinary team to ensure it aligns

with the requirements of this credit.

If no urban and landscape design plan exists then one must be prepared by a suitably qualified

professional with a planning or design qualification with a minimum of ten years’ experience. The

preparation of the plan must involve the following tasks;

Site analysis

Site analysis is crucial to the understanding of the urban and landscape context of the site. It provides

the underlying rationale for the vision, objectives and scope of the project. A site analysis must identify

key features that will influence the planning and design of the infrastructure asset. Depending on the

size and scale of the asset, the site analysis should also consider national, regional, sub-regional, city-

level, and suburban perspectives. The site analysis must include a general context analysis, a local

site context analysis, and a site characteristics analysis.

1. General context analysis

This component of the analysis identifies the key features that will influence the planning and design

of the infrastructure from regional, subregional, or suburban perspectives depending on the size of

the site. The area of interest should increase, as the size of the infrastructure increases, in order to

allow for consideration of relevant features.

The general site context findings should show the following information, as a minimum:

Topography,

Trunk (arterial) infrastructure (e.g. water, sewerage, electricity),

Significant water bodies and major waterways,

The coastline, high-water mark, coastal management zone (or similar),

Broad land uses, including land-use categories and/or designations,

Major community facilities,

Transport infrastructure,

Natural environmental features, and

Major hazard areas.

2. Local context analysis

This component of the analysis identifies the key elements on the site and in the area immediately

surrounding the site that will influence the planning and design of the infrastructure. The local site

context findings should be presented in plans, and should show the following information:

Statutory planning,

Legal constraints,

Land uses,

Community facilities,

Movement network (e.g. roads, transport infrastructure, pedestrian network),

Natural physical features,

Hazards,

Ground conditions,

Heritage,

Amenity,

Views and vistas,

Climate,

Page 44 of 477



Socio-economic characteristics,

Local cultures,

Site boundary interfaces,

Built form,

Utilities infrastructure, and

Other site features.

3. Site Characteristics Analysis

Using the information from the general and local context analysis, the project team must identify

elements and /or features that will be affected by the project. The project team must also apply a

weighting or ranking to the identified impacts, in order to examine where impacts will be more or

most significant. This forms the basis for the site characteristics analysis. Where impacts are more

significant or the complexity of constraints and challenges is greater, more detailed analysis must

be undertaken to establish how these will affect the fulfilment of the overall project vision and

objectives.

The site characteristics analysis must provide the following output:

a synthesis of the general and local site context findings, identifying the constraints,

opportunities and influences; and

the relative importance of the identified constraints, opportunities and influences.

The site characteristics analysis should be represented using a combination of plans, text and

images to represent the above output requirements. A summary must also be provided on how the

general and local context analysis will inform the planning and design process.

Vision, principles, objectives and scope

Following the site analysis, the overall urban and landscape vision, values and objectives for the asset

should be agreed upon. The vision should be related to the wider system or network vision and the

vision articulated in the project development plan, and address the relevant design policy for the system

or network. The vision must be supported by a set of design principles which will guide and provide a

focus for the design process. The design objectives must support the design vision and principles, and

demonstrate how the achievement of the objectives will lead to the overall fulfilment of the design vision

and principles.

The scope of a project must be clearly defined. This is especially important as the scope defines the

boundaries of a project and can be used to monitor and review the project as it progresses. The scope

also defines what can or cannot be evaluated at project completion.

Options and strategies

Urban and landscape design options and strategies must be prepared with reference to the previous

stages including site analysis and planning, and the vision, principles and objectives of the urban and

landscape design plan. They should also respond to the people and place principles set out in the

Australian Urban Design Protocol, the seven Cs set out in the New Zealand Urban Design Protocol or

other ISCA approved guidelines.

The relevant People and Place principles outlined in the Australian Urban Design Protocol include:

Design Principles for People: Liveability

o Comfortable

o Vibrant

o Safe

o Walkable

Design Principles about Place: Productivity and Sustainability

Page 45 of 477



Lea

Spr

Res

Res

Ecn

Ecn

Ene

Gre

Env

Wat

Eco

Sta

Leg

Her

Wfs

Con o Enhancing,

o Connected,

o Diverse,

o Enduring, and

o The principles are described in more detail in the protocol

(www.urbandesign.org.au.)

The seven Cs outlined in the New Zealand Urban Design Protocol include:

Context

Character

Choice

Connections

Creativity

Custodianship

Collaboration

Urban and landscape design options and strategies should also influence and be integrated into the

broader project options and the options assessment process such that the project at large is shaped by

the urban and landscape design vision, principles and objectives.

The urban and landscape design options should be assessed using Ecn-1 and Ecn-4, in order to

determine their potential for achieving wider sustainability outcomes. This analysis or assessment may

reference related credits within the IS rating scheme, including the following:

Table G3 Con-2 related IS credits

Credit Area of reference

Lea-1 Integrating sustainability The project’s sustainability vision, objectives and targets

Res-1-2 Resilience strategy,

Climate and natural

hazard risks

Resilience and climate considerations

Ene-1 Energy and carbon

reduction

Opportunities to enhance energy efficiency and reduce demand for

energy consumption which contributes to carbon emissions

Ene-2 Renewable energy Opportunities to integrate renewable energy generation

Gre-1 Green infrastructure The design strategy should identify potential opportunities for integrating

green infrastructure into the proposed design

Env 1-5 Environmental impacts

(water discharges, noise,

vibration, air quality and

light pollution)

Environmental impacts must be addressed in the design strategy,

particularly in terms of how the proposed design will address potential

water discharges, noise, vibration, air quality and light pollution

Rso-1-7 Resource Efficiency Opportunities to minimise resource consumption and select low-impact

materials

Wat-1-3 Water Opportunities for minimising water use, sourcing non-potable water and

water-sensitive urban design

Eco-2 Identifying and managing

impacts

Minimising impacts and enhancing ecology

Sta-1-2 Stakeholder engagement Responding to stakeholder perspectives and priorities

Page 46 of 477



Credit Area of reference

Leg-1 Leaving a lasting legacy Incorporating initiatives that leave a wider and lasting legacy for

community

Her-1 Heritage Protecting heritage and providing access to cultural sites where

appropriate

Wfs-6 Sustainable site facilities The design strategy should address potential for sustainable site

facilities, especially during construction, as-built and operation.

Urban and Landscape Design Plan

An urban and landscape design plan is a concept or master plan (or similar) identifying the key planning

and design features of the infrastructure and its surrounds. This plan must reflect: the site analysis; the

vision, principles and objectives, and; the options and strategies. It should include the following

elements:

Road network and hierarchy (including treatment of access points),

Public transport network,

Walking and cycling paths,

Land use distribution (and indicative maximum heights),

Residential densities including minimum lot sizes,

Open space network and hierarchy,

Activity centre location and hierarchy,

Other employment areas,

Community facilities location and type,

Nature conservation areas,

Heritage features,

Buffer zones,

Waterways and water bodies,

Other trunk infrastructure networks including related easements, and

Staging and development time frames.

It must propose objectives in relation to the following, where relevant:

Integrating with existing infrastructure and development,

Urban form,

Public transport,

Activity centres and employment, and

Landscape and green infrastructure.

The urban and landscape design plan must also specify regular intervals for review and evaluation

throughout the project lifecycle.

Procurement requirements

Please see the Sustainable Procurement category to ensure the procurement approach aligns with the

requirements of the Sustainable Procurement category.

DL1.2 A member(s) of the senior-management team has central responsibility for incorporation of urban

and landscape elements into design.

‘Central responsibility for incorporation of urban and landscape design into the broader project design’

means that a person or persons must have specific accountabilities in relation to decision making and

management of urban and landscape design and its incorporation into the broader design. This must

be specified in a position description(s).

Page 47 of 477



Lea

Spr

Res

Res

Ecn

Ecn

Ene

Gre

Env

Wat

Eco

Sta

Leg

Her

Wfs

Con DL1.3 The ongoing maintenance arrangements for the project’s urban and landscape design have been

reviewed.

A review must be undertaken by a suitably qualified professional (that is a landscape architect or urban

designer) to confirm the design and ongoing maintenance arrangements for the project’s urban and

landscape design will ensure the vision, principles and objectives and detailed design elements are

realised and maintained over the life of the infrastructure asset.


A copy of the urban and landscape design plan

Report documenting results of consultation and/or engagement with the operator

Position description for the designated member(s) of the senior-management team responsible for

incorporation of urban and landscape design into the broader design

Level 2

DL2.1 An urban and landscape design statement has been prepared.

An urban and landscape design statement must be prepared and describe how urban and landscape

design and relevant stakeholder input has influenced the project design, including options development,

assessment, selection, and refinement. Enough information must be provided to make clear any

changes made or alternatives rejected through the design process, and reasons for the decisions made.

The project landscape and urban design statement must also document how the project delivers on

the urban and landscape vision, objectives and principles and the detailed design elements. The

statement must include evidence for the community benefits anticipated to be generated by the

project’s urban and landscape design.

DL2.2 The urban and landscape design plan has been independently reviewed at key stages throughout

the design.

The review of the urban and landscape design plan must adhere to the Principles of Design Review

set out in the Infrastructure Sustainability Rating Tool Design Review Guide, and be conducted by an

independent Design Review Panel or an independent qualified individual.

If a panel is undertaking the review then the panel must be comprised of one panel chair and a minimum

of two panel members. Members of the panel must be independent from the project in review and

possess project relevant skills and experience (including at least one member with relevant skills and

experience in infrastructure planning, city planning, urban and landscape design and/or economics),

and be recognised experts in their discipline, with a minimum of 10 years’ experience. Members must

be registered by a relevant professional peak body and will be bound by that institute’s code of ethics

in relation to objectivity, integrity and accountability. The same panel chair and members must be

present in all design review panel meetings. If, at any point, the chair, or a panel member is replaced,

their replacement must comply with the requirements of this guide.

If an individual is undertaking the review then they must provide evidence of their independence have

at least 10 years’ experience in infrastructure planning, city planning, urban and landscape design

and/or economics. They must be registered by a relevant professional peak body and will be bound by

that institute’s code of ethics in relation to objectivity, integrity and accountability.

If a person at the Government Architect’s Office (or alike) is undertaking the review, then they meet the

requirements of this criterion.

Page 48 of 477



The frequency of the review must be identified and justified.


Independent review report for each identified stage of review

Urban and landscape design statement.

Level 3

PL3.1 The infrastructure contributes a net increase in permeability.

The infrastructure must contribute a net increase in the permeability of its surrounding area for the

benefit of the community. An improvement in permeability should be demonstrated by an improved Link

and Place Score or similar methodology which recognises the value of streets as movement conduits

as well as destinations in their own right.

This benchmark may not be relevant for all projects. If this is the case, the project team must

demonstrate permeability is not a material consideration. This may be in the form of a statement or

report.


Statement or report showing an improved Link and Place score or similar, where relevant

Statement or report demonstrating that improved permeability is not relevant to the project, where

relevant.

Page 49 of 477



Lea

Spr

Res

Res

Ecn

Ecn

Ene

Gre

Env

Wat

Eco

Sta

Leg

Her

Wfs

Con ISv2.0 As Built

Con-2 Urban and Landscape Context

Aim

To reward adoption of best practice urban design principles and practice.

Criteria

Table G4 Con- 2 Context summary criteria table


ABL1.1 Urban and landscape

plans are implemented and

effective measures are

employed to ensure the

successful establishment and

ongoing maintenance of

plantings and other landscape

and public realm features.

The requirements for Level 1

are achieved

AND

ABL2.1 Project evaluation is

undertaken at key stages to

ensure ongoing alignment with

the project urban and

landscape vision, objectives

and principles as articulated in

the urban and landscape

design plan.

AND

ABL2.2 The asset/network is

constructed in accordance with

the urban and landscape plan

and achieves a high degree of

compliance.


are achieved

AND

ABL3.1 A user evaluation is

undertaken and confirms that

90% of users are satisfied that

the urban and landscape plan

has been successfully

implemented.

Definitions

An urban and landscape design plan is a concept or master plan (or similar) identifying the key

planning and design features of the infrastructure and its surrounds. It aims to ensure that the final

development integrates into its setting and provides a unique experience. Urban and Landscape design

plans represent the broadest level of landscape planning and design for infrastructure projects. They

provide a coordinated design approach to the landscape and urban design treatment of infrastructure

systems within a particular area. They are an illustrated report, containing plans and supporting written

description that documents the design process, including site analysis and integrated landscape

assessment. This report should also identify specific design strategies which are to be incorporated into

later design phases.

A user evaluation is an evaluation of the infrastructure users’ (for roads, this would be drivers, for

airports this would be airlines and/or passengers, for railways this would be commuters, etc) satisfaction

with the implementation of the vision, principles and objectives of the urban and landscape plan, the

detailed design aspects of the plan and its ongoing implementation

A suitably qualified professional for the purposes of this credit is a person with a planning, design,

landscape architecture or urban design qualification with a minimum of 10 years’ experience.

Independence means a person independent from the project team. To determine independence the

person(s):

must not work directly on the project or asset or be employed by a parent organisation.

must not work for one of the organisations contracted to the project (such as one organisation

involved in a joint venture or alliance to deliver the project)

Page 50 of 477



must be engaged to act independently of the project or asset and be able to show no vested

interest in the project or asset.

Level 1

ABL1.1 Urban and landscape plans are implemented and effective measures are employed to ensure

the successful establishment and ongoing maintenance of plantings and other landscape and public

realm features.

Urban and landscape plans must be reflected in the infrastructure asset as built. As-Built drawings

must be prepared and evaluated against the urban and landscape plan to confirm this consistency.

Where circumstances have required deviation from the urban and landscape plans, a clear justification

for the deviation(s) must be provided. Design changes must result in ‘no net loss’ of benefits to the

community or key stakeholders. This may require alternative urban and landscape initiatives to be

implemented to ensure that the overall level of benefit to each stakeholder group remains constant or

improves.

Measures must be identified and implemented to ensure that plantings and other landscape and public

realm features are effectively established and can be readily maintained during operations. These

measures must be documented in an urban and landscape plan, along with arrangements for

monitoring the successful maintenance of plantings and other landscape and public realm features. The

measures must also identify the party responsible for monitoring and review during the construction

and operations phase, as well as the party responsible for taking action where monitoring highlights

that the vision, principles and objectives set out in the urban design and landscape plan are not being

met.


Urban and landscape design plan

Urban and landscape As-Built design

Urban and Landscape maintenance or management plans.

Level 2

ABL2.1 Project evaluation is undertaken at key stages to ensure ongoing alignment with the project

urban and landscape vision, principles and objectives as articulated in the urban and landscape design

plan.

The urban and landscape plan must identify regular intervals for review and evaluation during

construction. This may include site visits at regular intervals. On each occasion, the evaluation must

be documented. The findings and recommendations of the evaluation must be highlighted, including

the identification of parties required to conduct remedial action. The frequency of evaluation must be

justified.

ABL2.2 The asset/network is constructed in accordance with the urban and landscape plan and

achieves a high degree of compliance.

The asset/network must be constructed in accordance with the urban and landscape plan to a high

degree of compliance. For a high degree of compliance, there must be no major or recurring non-

compliances identified during the project evaluations. Recurring non-compliances are defined as more

than two of a similar nature.

Page 51 of 477



Lea

Spr

Res

Res

Ecn

Ecn

Ene

Gre

Env

Wat

Eco

Sta

Leg

Her

Wfs

Con Example evidence for Level 2

Results of evaluation

Report documenting the level of compliance of the asset/network to the urban and landscape

design plan.

Level 3

ABL3.1 A user evaluation is undertaken and confirms that 90% of users are satisfied that the urban and

landscape plan has been successfully implemented.

An evaluation must be conducted following construction of the urban and landscape design features to

evaluate the level of user satisfaction with the implementation of the vision, principles and objectives of

the urban and landscape plan, the detailed design aspects of the plan and its ongoing implementation,

unless justification can be provided as to why this is not relevant or appropriate.

If it is justified that a user evaluation is not relevant or appropriate, then the implementation of the urban

and landscape design plan or independent post occupancy evaluation must be undertaken by an

independent suitably qualified professional.

The implementation of the urban and landscape design plan or the post-construction evaluation must

be documented. The findings and recommendations of the evaluation must be highlighted, including

the identification of parties required to conduct remedial action.


Post-construction evaluation, including sample surveys, collated survey data, findings and

recommendations.

Page 52 of 477



References Ausroads, 1998. Cities for tomorrow – integrating land use, transport, and the environment: Ausroads

Better Practice Guide 1998.

Australian Transport Council, 2016. Australian Transport Assessment and Planning Guidelines.

City of New York, 2010. Active Design Guidelines: Promoting physical activity and health in design.

City of New York, 2013. Active Design: Shaping the sidewalk experience.

Cowan R, 2000. Placecheck, A Users’ Guide.

Commonwealth of Australia, 2011. Australian Urban Design Protocol - Creating Places for People.

Design Council, 2013. Design review: Principles and practice.

Government Architects NSW, 2016. Better Placed – A design led approach: developing an Architecture

and Design Policy for New South Wales.

Homes and Communities Agency, 2000. Urban Design Compendium.

HM Treasury, 2013. The Green Book: Appraisal and evaluation in central government.

Infrastructure Australia, 2011. Our Cities Our Future – A National Urban Policy for a productive,

sustainable and liveable future.

Infrastructure Australia, 2016. Australian Infrastructure Plan: Priorities and reforms for our nation’s

future.

Infrastructure Australia, 2017. Assessment Framework: detailed technical guidelines.

Infrastructure Sustainability Council of Australia, 2015. Infrastructure Sustainability Rating Tool Design

Review Guide.

Infrastructure Sustainability Council of Australia, 2016. Infrastructure Sustainability Planning

Guidelines.

Ministry for the Environment, 2005. New Zealand Urban Design Protocol.

Ministry for the Environment, 2001. People, places, spaces: A design guide for urban New Zealand.

New Zealand Transport Agency, 2013. Bridging the gap: NZTA Urban Design Guidelines.

New Zealand Transport Agency n.d. Integrated planning for transport land use and investment.

New South Wales Government Treasury, 2007. Guidelines for economic appraisal.

Portland Development Commission, 2011. Portland Main Street Design Handbook: A guide on a

neighborhood commercial district revitalization.

Roads and Maritime Services, 2008. Landscape guideline: Landscape design and maintenance

guidelines to improve the quality, saftey and cost effectiveness of road corridor planting and seeding.

Roads and Maritime Services Centre for Urban Design, 2014. Beyond the pavement: Urban design

policy procedures and design principles.

Roads and Maritime Services Centre for Urban Design, 2012. Bridge aesthetics: Design guideline to

improve the appearance of bridges in NSW.

Roads and Maritime Services Centre for Urban Design, 2013. Guideline for Landscape Character and

Assessment Practice Note.

Transport for NSW n.d. Around the tracks: Urban design for heavy and light rail.

Transport for NSW, 2016. Principles and guidelines of transport and investment and initiatives.

Page 53 of 477



Lea

Spr

Res

Res

Ecn

Ecn

Ene

Gre

Env

Wat

Eco

Sta

Leg

Her

Wfs

Con UK Department of the Environment, Transport and the Regions (DETR) and Commission for

Architecture and the Built Environment (CABE), 2000. By Design.

UK Department of the Environment, Transport and the Regions (DETR), Commission for Architecture

and the Built Environment (CABE) and University College London, 2000. The Value of Urban Design.

VIC Department of Sustainability and Envrionment, 2005. Activity Centre Design Guidelines.

VIC Department of Sustainability and Environment & Crime Prevention Victoria, 2005. Safer Design

Guidelines for Victoria.

Western Australian Planning Commission and Department for Planning and Infrastructure, 2007. Visual

Landscape Planning in Western Australia – a manual for evaluation, assessment, siting and design.

Page 54 of 477



THIS PAGE IS INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK

Page 55 of 477



Lea

Spr

Res

Res

Ecn

Ecn

Ene

Gre

Env

Wat

Eco

Sta

Leg

Her

Wfs

Con LEADERSHIP AND MANAGEMENT

The world population is growing which creates many challenges such as inequality, environmental

degradation and conflict. In response to these challenges the United Nation’s Sustainable Development

Goals (SDGs) were developed. SDGs are an internationally agreed set of targets to achieve by 2030.

The Australian and New Zealand governments have both signed up to the SDGs making them the

framework in which Australia and New Zealand set our sustainable development objectives (ACFID,

ACOSS, GCNA & SDSN Australia/Pacific, 2016) (New Zealand Foreign Affairs & Trade, 2018). Other

governments around the world have signed up to them and as such, they are being embedded into

government policies and reporting frameworks. For this reason, it is highly likely that the SDGs will

become the standard approach to measuring and reporting sustainability.

The Sustainable Development Goals were launched in September 2016. With a total of 17 SDGs and

169 targets, countries around the world have come together and committed to the following:

• No poverty

• Zero hunger

• Good health and well-being

• Quality education

• Gender equality

• Clean water and sanitation

• Affordable and clean energy

• Decent work and economic growth

• Industry innovation and infrastructure

• Reduced inequalities

• Sustainable cities and communities

• Responsible consumption and production

• Climate action

• Life below water

• Life on land

• Peace, justice and strong institutions

• Partnerships for the goals

(United Nations, 2015)

The UN SDGs have also been developed to stimulate industry engagement and commitment to

sustainability. Although progress is being made towards achieving the SDGs, the Sustainable

Development Goals Report highlights that progress is far slower than planned (United Nations, 2017).

It is therefore critical that a culture of sustainability is embedded into our projects and assets from options

assessment to operations.

In 2016, the Australian SDGs Summit was held, making it the first high-level multi-stakeholder medium

for leaders and decision makers in Australia to discuss the necessary steps to achieve the SDGs. The

importance of using appropriate frameworks for monitoring and reporting progress was recognised and

the need for expansion of current reporting schemes and models was identified. It was also

acknowledged that collaboration efforts across all sectors are the key to achieving the SDGs.

As of May 2018, the New Zealand Government is assessing alignment with their existing policies and

frameworks such as the Living Standards Framework and will coordinate a measurement and reporting

approach in the near future (New Zealand Foreign Affairs & Trade, 2018).

The SDG Index measures a country’s progress towards the SDGs. In 2017, New Zealand was ranked

20P

thP, with a score of 77.6 and Australia was ranked 26P

thP with a score of 75.9 (Sachs, et al, 2017). An

analysis by the Bertelsmann Stiftung and Sustainable Development Solutions Network reveals that

Australia is making progress towards the SDG achievement for SDG3 (good health and well-being) and

SDG6 (clean water and sanitation). Likewise, New Zealand is making progress for SDG1 (no poverty),

SDG3 (good health and well-being), SDG4 (quality education), SDG7 (affordable and clean energy) and

SDG11 (sustainable cities and communities). While this is encouraging, it also highlights the lack of

progress for the other goals which further emphasises the need for effective actions and plans to achieve

the other SDGs. (Sachs, et al, 2017)

One approach projects and assets can measure their performance against the SDG is through their

sustainability or project/asset reporting process or framework. A common approach to sustainability

Page 56 of 477



reporting is to align sustainability reports to the Global Reporting Initiative (GRI). The GRI Sustainability

Reporting Standard provides guidelines to economic, environmental and social impact reporting.

Sustainability reporting creates transparency for internal and external stakeholders. It also encourages

industry to share knowledge about sustainable practices and recognises high performers that contribute

to better outcomes for society.

As a response to the 2030 Sustainable Development Agenda, Global Reporting Initiatives (GRI) updated

their five-year strategy, placing emphasis on areas such as enabling smart policy, better reporters and

reporting, innovation and collaboration (Global Reporting Initiative, 2016b). In collaboration with United

Nations Global Compact (UNGC) and the World Business Council for Sustainable Development

(WBCSD), GRI have also released The Guide for Business Action on the SDGs (SDG Compass, 2017)

which has helped inform this category.

It is now acknowledged that both public and private sectors hold the responsibility to ensure sustainable

development, rather than just government bodies (Global Reporting Initiative, 2016b). Organisations are

engaged in sustainability through corporate sustainability strategy development and reporting which can

be used to assess progress made towards sustainable developed as well as private sector contribution

to sustainable development.

This category aims to motivate the infrastructure industry to respond to the Sustainable Development

Goals, identify any risks and opportunities involved with the project/asset and to encourage shared

knowledge and expertise.

A holistic approach to sustainability should be integrated into the project/asset through governance

structures and performance objectives. Creating a sustainability culture throughout the organisation will

improve the efficiency and effectiveness of the sustainability practices being carried out, and ultimately

lead to greater sustainability outcomes.

The three credits applicable to leadership and management are:


Lea-2 Risk and opportunities

Lea-3 Knowledge sharing

Category linkages

The Leadership and management category links with the following ISv2.0 categories:



Res-1 The Resilience Strategy should

be incorporated into the

Sustainability Plan.

x x x x

Res-2 Risk and opportunity assessment

aligns with the approach taken in

Res-2

x x x x

Ecn-1 L3 of Lea-2 requires treatment

options to be assessed in

accordance with Ecn-1.

x x x x

Ecn-4 L3 of Lea-2 requires treatment

options to be assessed in


x x x x

Page 57 of 477



Lea

Spr

Res

Res

Ecn

Ecn

Ene

Gre

Env

Wat

Eco

Sta

Leg

Her

Wfs

Con


Sta-1 Stakeholders need to be

engaged in the sustainability

plan development in Lea-1 and

L3 of the risk and opportunity

assessment in Lea-2.

x x x x

Spr-1 The Sustainable Procurement

Strategy should be incorporated

into the project’s sustainability

plan as a sub-plan. Procurement

risks and opportunities should be

included in Lea-2.

x x x x

Rso-1 The Resource Efficiency Action

Plan should be incorporated into

the Sustainability Plan as a sub-

plan.

x x x x

Wfs-1 The Strategic Workforce Plan

should be incorporated into the

Sustainability Plan as a sub-plan.

x x x x

Gre-1 The Green Infrastructure

Strategy should be incorporated

into the Sustainability Plan as a

sub-plan.

x x x x

Page 58 of 477



ISv2.0 Design


Aim

To reward the development and implementation of an approach to apply infrastructure sustainability

practices throughout the project life cycle that will help achieve the UNSDGs by 2030.

Criteria

Table G7 Lea- 1 Design summary criteria table


DL1.1 A materiality assessment is

undertaken or reviewed and

updated with internal stakeholders

to identify the material

sustainability topics.

AND

DL1.2 Sustainability targets,

responsibilities and a reporting

framework is developed or

reviewed and updated.

AND

DL1.3 A management plan is

developed in conjunction with the

construction team.

The requirements for level 1 are

achieved

AND

DL2.1 A materiality assessment is

undertaken or reviewed and

updated with key internal and

external stakeholders to identify

the material sustainability topics.

AND

DL2.2 The sustainability targets

are mapped against the

Sustainable Development Goals.

AND

DL2.3 Sustainability targets are

publicly stated.

AND

DL2.4 Achievement against the

sustainability targets are reported

publicly on an annual basis.

AND

DL2.5 Sustainability targets

allocated to Design are achieved

and reported to the senior-

management team.

The requirements for L1 and L2

are not required to be met to meet

the requirements of L3.

DL3.1 The project maps its

impacts (positive and negative)

against each of the 17 Sustainable

Development Goals.

AND

DL3.2 Material Sustainable

Development Goals are identified

with stakeholders.

AND

DL3.3 Sustainability targets are

developed to contribute to all

material Sustainable Development

Goals.

AND

DL3.4 Sustainability targets

allocated to Design are achieved


management team.

AND

DL3.5 Performance (both positive

and negative) against the material

Sustainable Development Goals is

reported publicly.

AND

DL3.6 The Sustainability report is

independently reviewed by a

sustainability expert.

AND

DL3.7 A management plan is


construction team.

Definitions


person(s):

• must not work directly on the project or asset or be employed by a parent organisation,

• must not work for one of the organisations contracted to the project (such as one

organisation involved in a joint venture or alliance to deliver the project), and

Page 59 of 477



Lea

Spr

Res

Res

Ecn

Ecn

Ene

Gre

Env

Wat

Eco

Sta

Leg

Her

Wfs

Con

• must be engaged to act independently of the project or asset and be able to show no

vested interest in the project or asset.

A materiality assessment is a process to identify the priority sustainability topics that should be

included in the sustainability plan, strategy or targets

Multidisciplinary team includes as a minimum; a representative from the senior-management team,

the Design Manager, Engineering Manager, Construction Manager, a Risk Manager, a Sustainability

Manager, a Project Manager/Director, a Stakeholder Engagement Manager, a Workforce Manager, an

Environmental Manager and a Finance Manager or Economist.

A Supply chain is the network between a company or project and its suppliers to produce and distribute

a product or service.

Sustainability action plans are plans that outlined the actions to achieve sustainability targets

Sustainability topics are a list of possible sustainability areas or categories.

Sustainability plan/strategy is a plan that outlines the sustainability objectives and targets and how to

integrate sustainability throughout the project.

Sustainability targets are objectives to achieve throughout the project life cycle.

Sustainability reporting framework is a framework outlining how performance against the

sustainability targets will be measured and reported. It includes responsible positions for data collection,

frequency of data collection and reporting requirements.

SMART targets are targets that are Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Realistic, Time-bound

Senior-management team refers to the top level of management within the project or asset

management organisation.

Suitably qualified professional is someone with at least 7 years’ experience in sustainability and of

that, has at least 3 years’ experience developing, implementing and reporting on sustainability plans,

strategies or action plans.

A Value chain is the process by which a company or project adds value to raw materials through various

processes to create a finished product. A value chain looks at the supply chain and the value added

steps involved in producing a finished product.

Level 1

DL1.1 A materiality assessment is undertaken or reviewed and updated with internal stakeholders to identify the material sustainability topics

If a materiality assessment has been undertaken and verified as part of a Planning rating, then that

materiality assessment must be reviewed and updated with an internal multidisciplinary team.

If a materiality assessment has not been undertaken, then the following applies:

A materiality assessment must be undertaken to identify and prioritise the sustainability topics for

inclusion in the sustainability targets (see DL1.2). The materiality assessment must assess the influence

on stakeholder assessments and decisions (AKA the importance to stakeholders) and the significance

of economic, environmental and social impacts (AKA the impact on the economy, environment and

society both now and in the future).

The assessment should consider:

• The project’s function and the value it creates,

• The full value and supply chain from raw materials to customer experience and including

supporting services such a geotechnical investigation, consultants, maintenance, labour hire

etc,

Page 60 of 477



• The impacts associated with designing, constructing and operating the asset, and

• Both positive and negative impacts as well as benefits and opportunities.

This approach aligns with the materiality approach undertaken in the Global Reporting Initiative GRI 101: Foundations standard (2016) and The Natural Capital Protocol (2017). An example is provided in

figure G1 below outlining how sustainability topics can be assessed using a matrix approach.

Figure G1 Visual representation of prioritisation of sustainability topics. Source: (Global Reporting Initiative, 2016a), (Natural Capital Coalition, 2017)

A threshold for defining material sustainability topics must be defined and justified. An example

threshold is all material topics with a rating above a certain number are considered material. Another

example is the top 10 material topics are considered material.

The materiality assessment must be undertaken with an internal multidisciplinary team and ensure

external stakeholder views are represented during the process. This can be done by the Stakeholder

Manager/s representing external stakeholder views.

Assessment of the materiality of each sustainability topic should be based on factual evidence wherever

possible. This may require further analysis to take place before the materiality assessment can be

finalised. For transparency, the source of information which informed decision-making for each

sustainability topic must be noted. It is acceptable to base decisions on consensus if research, data or

other external sources of information are not available.

The risk and opportunity assessment undertaken in Lea-2 may be helpful in informing the materiality

assessment and all risks and opportunities identified as extreme, high or medium should be assessed

in the materiality assessment. In addition, all material sustainability topics should feature in the risk and

opportunity assessment where relevant. The sustainability topics for assessment must include all ISv2.0

category areas as a minimum. Additional sustainability topics that are not covered under ISv2.0, such

as homelessness or corruption, should be assessed if identified as an extreme, high or medium risk or

opportunity in the risk and opportunity assessment undertaken in Lea-2, or if considered important for

other reasons (such as corporate values).

The assessment of externalities in Ecn-1 may either be used to meet the requirements of this criterion

(if applied as outlined above) or may form the basis of the externality identification and assessment.

Note: if a project identifies a material sustainability topic that is not assessed under ISv2.0, you may be awarded points under the innovation category if the project’s responsive actions are considered innovative. See the Inn-1 category for more detail.

The Natural Capital Protocol (2017) and the GRI Materiality webpage (GRI, 2018) provides some

additional guidance on undertaking a materiality assessment. Another good resource is the KPMG

Page 61 of 477



Lea

Spr

Res

Res

Ecn

Ecn

Ene

Gre

Env

Wat

Eco

Sta

Leg

Her

Wfs

Con

Sustainable Insight named ‘The Essentials of Materiality Assessment’ (KPMG International Cooperative,

2014).

DL1.2 Sustainability targets, responsibilities and a reporting framework is developed or reviewed and updated.

If sustainability targets have been developed and verified as part of a Planning rating, then those

sustainability targets must form the basis of the sustainability targets developed for the Design and As

Built phases.

Sustainability targets must be developed for the project’s delivery and operations. Targets developed

in the Planning phase can be used. It is recommended that the targets are SMART and associated

action plans are developed. The targets must respond to material sustainability topics as identified in

DL1.1. If not all material topics are covered by the sustainability targets, then justification must be

provided as to why they were excluded. Targets to respond to material sustainability topics should

consider the whole supply chain– both upstream suppliers and downstream customers and the full

infrastructure life cycle. Consideration should also be given to how partnerships can help mitigate a risk

or realise an opportunity.

Each target must have a person or position responsible and their responsibility formalised in their job

descriptions or Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) or alike. If the responsible person or position is that

of a supplier, evidence must be provided as to how these targets will be embedded in to their contracts,

performance targets, position descriptions, KPIs or alike. See the Sustainable Procurement category for

more information on this process.

An associated reporting framework outlining how each sustainability target will be monitored and

measured throughout the project must also be developed. If a reporting framework was developed as

part of a Planning rating, then it can be used as the basis of the reporting framework for this criterion.

A standalone sustainability plan/strategy or the sustainability management plan developed for the

project may be used if it meets the requirements of this criterion. Alternatively, sustainability targets,

responsibility for each target and a reporting framework may be outlined in a relevant management plan

or intergraded into numerous management plans or governance frameworks. The purpose of this

criterion is to outline that sustainability is integrated throughout the project and embedded into

governance processes.

The sustainability targets, responsibilities and reporting framework must be developed in collaboration

with an internal multidisciplinary team. To get the best outcome, the sustainability targets,

responsibilities and reporting framework should be developed in collaboration with key stakeholders to

obtain their buy-in and contribution. Collaboration can be evidenced by workshop minutes, meeting

minutes, emails, etc.

The sustainability targets and responsibilities and reporting framework must be approved by the senior-

management team including the Project Director or alike.

UFor projects developing a sustainability plan/strategy

There are a number of credits throughout the IS rating scheme that require a strategy or action plan to

be written. For efficiency and good governance, those strategies and actions plans could be included in

the sustainability plan/strategy. The graphic below outlines a proposed structure to manage the various

strategies and actions plans required through the IS rating tool.

Page 62 of 477



Figure G2 proposed structure of the sustainability plan that incorporates other IS credit strategy requirements

DL1.3 A management plan is developed in conjunction with the construction team

A management plan must developed in conjunction with the construction team. The management plan

must include, at least:

• Project contacts

• Project description including the project program and IS rating boundary

• Any sustainability policies, strategies, targets or actions plans relevant to the project including

the targets developed in DL1.2

• Roles and responsibilities for each of the sustainability objectives including responsibility for

each IS credit

• Knowledge sharing requirements across the project life cycle

• Base case assumptions

• Reporting and review requirements across the project life cycle

• A communication plan between ISCA, the project proponent, designers and contractors to

communicate sustainability related matters.

The management plan may take the form of the IS management plan undertaken at the commencement

of a rating.


• The materiality assessment (this may be the same assessment as undertaken in Ecn-1)

• The risk and opportunity assessment undertaken in Lea-2

• A sustainability plan/strategy and associated strategies/action plans

• Management plans with sustainability targets, responsibilities and a reporting framework

• Performance against the sustainability targets outlining at least 75% have been achieved

• PDs or KPIs of responsible staff

• Extract from contacts outlining how sustainability targets will be embedded in supplier contacts

• Meeting, workshop minutes and emails to show collaboration on the development of the plan,

targets or alike

• Senior-management approval of the sustainability plan/strategy or targets, responsibilities and a

reporting framework

• Sustainability reports provided to senior management on the performance of the sustainability

plan/strategy/targets

• A management plan and evidence that it has been developed in collaboration with the construction

team.

Sustainability Plan


Plan

Action plans


Strategy

Policies, procedures

Resilience Strategy

Action plans

Resources Efficiency

Action Plan

Delivery plans

Strategic Workforce

Plan

Action plans, policies,

procedures


strategy

Implementation plan

Other sustainability

actions

Action plans, delivery plans,

policies etc

Page 63 of 477



Lea

Spr

Res

Res

Ecn

Ecn

Ene

Gre

Env

Wat

Eco

Sta

Leg

Her

Wfs

Con

Level 2

DL2.1 A materiality assessment is undertaken or reviewed and updated with key internal and external stakeholders to identify the material sustainability topics.

If a materiality assessment has been undertaken in collaboration with key external stakeholders (as

outlined below), and verified as part of a Planning rating, then that materiality assessment must be

reviewed and updated with an internal multidisciplinary team.

If a materiality assessment has not been undertaken and verified as part of a Planning rating, or has not

been undertaken with key external stakeholder, then the following applies:

The materiality assessment undertaken in DL1.1 must be extended to include external stakeholders.

External stakeholders included in the materiality assessment must include, as a minimum:

• A representative from high influence and affected groups (particularly affected minority groups)

as identified in Sta-1

• A Mana Whenua representative or a representative from local Aboriginal or Torres Strait

Islander community

• The proponent, the appointed contractor and operator if known

• A representative shareholder or investor if relevant.

External stakeholder views must be treated as equal and included equally in the assessment process.

This can be evidenced by outlining the results of stakeholder engagement and the corresponding

responsive actions.

External stakeholder’s reviews may include inviting them to a workshop, reviewing the materiality

process and outcomes and having an opportunity to provide comments (such as through a public

exhibition), through a questionnaire undertaken to gather feedback on the outcomes of the materiality

process or similar.

Where the above stakeholder groups are invited but decline to participate, every effort should be made

to accommodate their views, such as alternative approaches to collating their views (for example as a

survey rather than face-to-face meetings). However, if reasonable effort is made and the stakeholder

views cannot be obtained, then evidence of that reasonable effort can be submitted to meet the

requirements of this criterion.

DL2.2 The sustainability targets are mapped against the Sustainable Development Goals.

The sustainability targets developed in DL1.2 must be mapped against the 17 Sustainable Development

Goals. This mapping process must identify both positive and negative impacts on each of the 17

Sustainable Development Goals.

Table G8 Example of mapping sustainability strategy against the SDGs

Sustainability

plan objective

Sustainability Action Actions positively

contributes to these

SDGs

Actions negatively

contribute to these

SDGs

Reduce water

use by 20%

Recycle water on site 6, 14 13

Truck in recycled water

for dust suppression

6, 14, 8 13

Etc. Etc.

Additional mitigating strategies or actions to realise opportunities identified through this assessment

should be included in the sustainability targets.

Page 64 of 477



DL2.3 Sustainability targets are publicly stated.

The project’s sustainability targets must be made publicly available at least on the project or

organisation’s website. The sustainability targets must be publicly available within one month of their

approval.

DL2.4 Achievement against the sustainability targets are reported publicly on an annual basis.

The project must release a sustainability report outlining achievement against the sustainability targets

publicly. As a minimum, this must be provided on the project or organisation’s website. The

sustainability report must be publicly available within one month of its approval and no later than 6

months after the end of the reporting period.

DL2.5 Sustainability targets allocated to Design are achieved and reported to the senior-management team.

At least 75% of the targets allocated to the Design phase must be achieved. If more than 75% of targets

are not achieved, then the project cannot be awarded points under this credit.

Achievement against the sustainability targets must be reported to the senior-management team on a

quarterly basis for the duration of the Design phase.


• Workshop notes from the external materiality workshops,

• A list of attendees from the materiality workshops,

• Summary outlining how stakeholder views were considered in the materiality workshops or

engagement process,

• A document showing the project’s sustainability targets mapped against the 17 sustainable

development goals,

• A website link to the sustainability strategy/plan/targets and evidence of upload date,

• Dated approval of the sustainability strategy/plan/targets,

• A website link to the sustainability report and evidence of upload date, and

• Dated approval of the sustainability report.

Level 3

Note: The requirements for L1 and L2 are not required to be met to meet the requirements of L3.

DL3.1 The project maps its impacts (positive and negative) against each of the 17 Sustainable Development Goals.

If a Planning rating was undertaken and Lea-1 L3 was achieved, the mapping undertaken as part of

Lea-1 L3.1 of the Planning rating can form the basis of this criterion. The material SDGs identified as

part of the Planning rating must be reviewed by a multidisciplinary team to identify the material SDGs

for the design and construction phase. To understand which SDGs are material to the design and

construction phase the following criterion must be applied to each material SDG:

• The SDG is not only associated with the purpose of the project

o An example of this is SDG 11: Sustainable Cities and Communities. This SDG for a rail

project (for example) is material as the rail project contributes towards target 11.2 ‘By 2030, provide access to safe, affordable, accessible and sustainable transport systems for all…’. However, this SDG is not relevant in the design and construction phases as it

is related only to the purpose of the project and cannot be influenced in the design and

construction phase. • The SDG can be impacted either positively or negatively by decisions made or actions undertaken

in design and/or construction

Page 65 of 477



Lea

Spr

Res

Res

Ecn

Ecn

Ene

Gre

Env

Wat

Eco

Sta

Leg

Her

Wfs

Con

Note: as SDGs have many targets, it is possible for one SDG to both be relevant to the purpose of the

project and for there to be scope in the design and construction phases to impact it. If this is the case,

then the SDG is still considered relevant in design and construction.

The material SDGs identified in Planning that meet the criterion above form the materiality assessment

for this criterion.

For projects that have not completed a L3 of Lea-1 as part of a Planning rating, the following applies:

The following process is adapted from the SDG Compass The Guide for Business Action on the SDGs (SDG Compass, n.d). The SDG Compass is a collaboration between GRI, UNGC and WBCSD.

The project’s value chain must be mapped against the 17 SDGs. The mapping process must consider

both positive and negative impacts. A useful resource to help understand the mapping process is the

SDG Compass The Guide for Business Action on the SDGs (SDG Compass, n.d).

The first step to mapping the project’s impacts (both positive and negative) against each of the 17

Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) is to understand each goal.

A good resource to understand each goal, the role of business, example actions and the SDG indicators

is the SDG Compass website.

Not all 17 SDGs will be equally relevant to the project, so it is important to identify the material SDGs

that the project impacts (both positive and negative). The identification of material SDGs must be

undertaken by mapping the project’s value chain to identify impacts (both positive and negative) to each

SDG. This process does not need to be a detailed analysis but rather a high-level assessment to identify

potential areas of impact. The mapping process should consider the following:

• The full value chain from raw materials to customer experience and including supporting

services such a geotechnical investigation, consultants, maintenance, labour hire, haulage, etc,

• The impacts associated with designing, constructing and operating the asset, and

• Both positive and negative impacts as well as benefits and opportunities.

A threshold for defining material SDGs must be defined and justified.

The figure below provides an example of mapping the SDGs against a value chain.

Figure G3 Mapping the SDGs against a value chain. Adapted from (SDG Compass, 2017)

Page 66 of 477



The risk and opportunity assessment undertaken in Lea-2 may be helpful in informing the mapping

assessment and all risks and opportunities identified as extreme, high or medium should be considered

in the mapping process. In addition, all material SDGs should feature in the risk and opportunity

assessment where relevant.

DL3.2 Material Sustainable Development Goals are identified with stakeholders.

If a Planning rating was undertaken and Lea-1 L3 was achieved, then this criterion does not apply.

For projects that have not completed a L3 of Lea-1 as part of a Planning rating, the following applies:

Both internal and external stakeholders must be included in the mapping process undertaken in DL3.1.

External stakeholders included in the review must include, as a minimum:

• A representative from high influence and affected groups (particularly affected minority groups)

as identified in Sta-1,

• A Mana Whenua representative or a representative from the local Aboriginal or Torres Strait

Islander community,

• The appointed designer, contractor and operator if known, and

• A representative shareholder or investor if relevant.

Particular attention should be given to minority groups and access for those groups should be

considered (such as translation services, meetings held at appropriate times and locations, etc.). In

addition, experts in the areas that the SDGs cover would be helpful in identifying potential impacts of

the project through its supply chain.

External stakeholder may be included by attending a mapping workshop, through reviewing the mapping

process and outcomes and having an opportunity to provide comments (such as through a public

exhibition), through a questionnaire undertaken prior to the workshop or a similar process.

Where the above stakeholder groups are invited but decline to participate, every effort should be made

to accommodate their views such as alternative approaches to collating their views (such as survey

rather than face-to-face meetings). However, if reasonable effort is made and the stakeholder views

cannot be obtained, then evidence of that reasonable effort can be submitted to meet the requirements

of this criterion.

DL3.3 Sustainability targets are developed to contribute to all material Sustainable Development Goals.

Sustainability targets must be developed for the project’s delivery and operations. It is recommended

that the targets are SMART and associated action plans are developed. If sustainability targets aligned

with Lea-1 L3 requirements have been developed and verified as part of a Planning rating, then those

targets must form the basis of the sustainability targets for the project delivery and operations phases.

The sustainability targets developed must respond to material SDGs as identified in PL3.1. If the targets

do not respond to all the identified impacts (both positive and negative) to material SDGs, then

justification must be provided as to why they are not considered. Actions to respond to material SDGs

should consider the whole supply chain – both upstream suppliers and downstream customers and the

full infrastructure life cycle. Consideration should also be given to how partnerships can help mitigate a

risk or realise an opportunity.

Each target must have a person or position responsible and their responsibility formalised in their job

descriptions or Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) or alike.

An associated reporting framework outlining how each sustainability target will be monitored and

measured throughout the project must also be developed.

A standalone sustainability plan/strategy or the sustainability management plan developed for the

project may be used if it meets the requirements of this credit. Alternatively, sustainability targets,

responsibility for each target and a reporting framework may be outlined in a relevant management plan

or intergraded into numerous management plans or governance frameworks. The purpose of this

Page 67 of 477



Lea

Spr

Res

Res

Ecn

Ecn

Ene

Gre

Env

Wat

Eco

Sta

Leg

Her

Wfs

Con

criterion is to outline that sustainability is integrated throughout the project and embedded into

governance processes.

To get the best outcome, the sustainability targets, responsibilities and reporting framework should be

developed in collaboration with key stakeholders to gain their buy-in and contribution. The sustainability

targets, responsibilities and reporting framework must at least be developed in collaboration with an

internal multidisciplinary team, however it is recommended that the project includes key external

stakeholders as well. Collaboration can be evidenced by workshop minutes, meeting minutes, emails

etc.

The SDG Compass website provides an inventory of indicators for each of the 17 SDGs which should

be utilised wherever relevant. The inventory also references existing standards and indicators such as

GRI and CDP to provide a very useful resource when identifying relevant indicators. This resource could

be referenced when developing indicators or provide inspiration for developing indicators/metrics for the

project’s sustainability targets.


organisation’s website. The sustainability targets must be publicly available within one month of its

approval.

UFor projects developing a sustainability plan/strategy

There are a number of credits throughout the IS rating tool that require a strategy or action plan to be

written. For efficiency and good governance, those strategies and actions plans should be included in

the sustainability plan. The graphic below outlines a proposed structure to manage the various strategies

and actions plans required through the IS rating tool.

Figure G4 proposed structure of the sustainability plan that incorporates other IS credit strategy requirements

DL3.4 Sustainability targets allocated to Design are achieved and reported to the senior-management team.

At least 75% of the targets allocated to the Design phase must be achieved. If more than 75% of targets

are not achieved, then the project cannot be awarded points under this credit.


quarterly basis for the duration of the Design phase.

DL3.5 Performance (both positive and negative) against the material Sustainable Development Goals is reported publicly.

The project must release the sustainability report outlining achievement against the sustainability

targets and impact on material SDGs publicly at least on the project or organisation’s website.

The report must outline both positive and negative impacts the project has (including through its supply

chain) on each of the material SDGs. It is important to report negative impacts as well as positive in

order to be transparent and believable. It is acknowledged that it would be extremely difficult (if not

Sustainability Plan


Strategy

Action plans


Strategy

Policies, procedures

Resilience Strategy

Action plans

Resources Efficiency

Action Plan

Delivery plans

Strategic Workforce

Plan

Action plans, policies,

procedures


strategy

Implementation plan

Other sustainability

actions

Action plans, delivery plans,

policies etc

Page 68 of 477



impossible) to have only positive impacts on the SDGs and the aim is to communicate the full impact

(both positive and negative) of a project against the SDGs.

The sustainability report must be approved by the Senior-Management Team or Project director.

The sustainability report must be publicly available within one month of its approval and no later than 6

months after the reporting period have ended.

DL3.6 The Sustainability report is independently reviewed by a sustainability expert.

The sustainability report must be independently reviewed by a suitably qualified professional.

It must be shown how any feedback raised in the review has been addressed, including any updates to

assumptions, reasoning, analysis or results.

The reviewer must outline they are satisfied with the methodology and outcomes of the report.

DL3.7 A management plan is developed in conjunction with the construction team.

A management plan must be developed in conjunction with the contractor if known or representatives

with construction experience if not known. The management plan must be provided to the construction

teams once selected. The management plan must include, at least:

• Project contacts,

• Project description including the project program and IS rating boundary,

• Any sustainability policies, strategies, targets or actions plans relevant to the project including

the targets developed in DL3.3,

• Roles and responsibilities for each sustainability target including responsibility for each IS credit,

• Knowledge sharing requirements across the project life cycle,

• Base case assumptions,

• Reporting and review requirements across the project life cycle, and

• A communication plan between ISCA, the project proponent, designers and contractors to

communicate sustainability related matters.

The management plan may take the form of the IS management plan undertaken at the commencement

of a rating.


• Project impacts mapped against the SDGs

• The project’s supply/value chain outlining impacts on SDG areas

• Sustainability strategy/plan/targets and associated responsibilities

• Reporting framework

• Approvals from senior management or Project director

• Workshop minutes, survey results, public review feedback

• Sustainability report on the project’s website or alike

• An assessment report outlining the independent reviewer’s findings.

Page 69 of 477



Lea

Spr

Res

Res

Ecn

Ecn

Ene

Gre

Env

Wat

Eco

Sta

Leg

Her

Wfs

Con

ISv2.0 As Built


Aim

To reward the development and implementation of an approach to apply infrastructure sustainability

practices throughout the project life cycle that will help achieve the UNSDGs by 2030.

Criteria

Table 19 Lea- 1 As Built summary criteria table


ABL1.1 Sustainability targets,

responsibilities and reporting

framework is reviewed and

updated where required.

AND

ABL1.2 A management plan is


operators.


achieved

AND

ABL2.1 Sustainability targets are

publicly stated.

AND

ABL2.2 Achievement against the

sustainability targets are reported

publicly on an annual basis.

AND

AB2.3 Sustainability targets

allocated to As Built are achieved


management team.


achieved

AND

ABL3.1 Performance (both

positive and negative) against the

Sustainable Development Goals is

reported publicly on an annual

basis.

AND

ABL3.2 A Sustainability report is

independently reviewed by a

sustainability expert.

Definitions


person(s):








Suitably qualified professional is someone with at least 7 years’ experience in sustainability and of

that, has at least 3 years’ experience developing, implementing and reporting on sustainability plans,

strategies or action plans.

Level 1

ABL1.1 Sustainability targets, responsibilities and reporting framework is reviewed and updated where required.

The targets, responsibilities and reporting framework developed or updated in Design must be reviewed

and updated. If targets are updated, they must only be updated where justification can be provided

outlining how updating the targets will result in better sustainability outcomes.

Responsibility for each sustainability target must be identified, and outlined in the responsible person’s

position description or Key Performance Indicators (KPIs).

Page 70 of 477



ABL1.2 A management plan is developed in conjunction with the operators.

A management plan must be developed in conjunction with the operators outlining the sustainability

actions and targets. The management plan must include, at least:

• The sustainability targets and initiatives developed and implemented,

• Roles and responsibilities for each sustainability objective relevant to operations,

• Reporting and review requirements for operations, and

• A communication plan between the project proponent and operators to communicate

sustainability related matters.

This could form part of the operational management plan prepared for the asset.


• The sustainability plan/strategy/targets,

• Responsibilities for each target,

• Reporting framework,

• A report outlining achievement against the sustainability plan,

• Minutes from senior-management meeting showing sustainability performance as an agenda item

and associated actions,

• Performance against the sustainability targets outlining at least 75% have been achieved, and

• A management plan and evidence it has been handed over to the operator.

Level 2

ABL2.1 Sustainability targets are publicly stated.


organisation’s website. The sustainability targets must be publicly available within one month of their

approval.

ABL2.2 Achievement against the sustainability targets are reported publicly on an annual basis.

The project must release the sustainability report outlining achievement against the sustainability

targets publicly. As a minimum, this must be provided on the project or organisation’s website. The

sustainability report must be approved by the senior-management team including the Project Director.

The sustainability report must be publicly available within one month of its approval.

AB2.3 Sustainability targets allocated to As Built are achieved and reported to the senior-management team.

The targets developed in Design and/or updated in As Built must be implemented. At least 75% of

sustainability targets must be achieved by the project. If more than 75% of targets are not achieved,

then the project cannot be awarded points under this credit.


quarterly basis for the duration of the As Built phase.


• Website link showing access to the sustainability plan and reports, and

• Website link showing sustainability targets.

Page 71 of 477



Lea

Spr

Res

Res

Ecn

Ecn

Ene

Gre

Env

Wat

Eco

Sta

Leg

Her

Wfs

Con

Level 3

DL3.1 Performance (both positive and negative) against the Sustainable Development Goals is reported publicly on an annual basis.

The sustainability performance of the project must be reported annually against the 17 Sustainable

Development Goals. The sustainability report must outline performance against each of the

sustainability targets developed in Design and/or updated in ABL1.1. The report must identify both

positive and negative impacts on each of the 17 Sustainable Development Goals.

The report must be approved by the senior-management team including the Project Director and be

made publicly available within 30 days of its approval.

DL3.2 A Sustainability report is independently reviewed by a sustainability expert.

The sustainability report outlining performance against the sustainability targets must be independently

reviewed by a suitably qualified professional.


assumptions, reasoning, analysis or results.

The reviewer must outline they are satisfied with the methodology and outcomes of the report.


• A report outlining the project’s impacts (both positive and negative) on the 17 SDGs,

• Web address of report online,

• Approval of the sustainability report, and

• Independent review report.

Page 72 of 477



ISv2.0 Design


Aim

To reward the assessment and mitigation/realisation of sustainability risks and opportunities.

Criteria



DL1.1 UDirect Ugovernance,

economic, environmental and

social risks and opportunities are

assessed.

AND

DL1.2 Treatment options for Udirect

risksU and implementation actions

for Udirect opportunitiesU are

identified and implemented and

after treatment there are no

residual high priority Udirect risksU.

AND

DL1.3 A multidisciplinary internal

team participated in the

identification and assessment of

direct risks and opportunities,

including selection of treatment or

implementation options.

AND

DL1.4 The risk and opportunity

assessment is reviewed and

updated at least annually.

The requirements of Level 1 are

achieved.

AND

DL2.1 The risk and opportunity

assessment also considers

Uindirect risks and opportunitiesU to

the asset.

AND

DL2.2 Treatment options for

Uindirect risksU and implementation

actions for Uindirect opportunitiesU

are identified and implemented

and after treatment there are no

residual high priority Udirect or

indirect direct risks and

opportunities.


achieved.

AND

DL3.1 Treatment options have

been assessed considering the

optimal scale and timing, and

costs and benefits of addressing

the risks and opportunities.

AND

DL3.2 A comprehensive set of

affected external stakeholders

participated in identifying Udirect

and indirectU risks, opportunities,

treatment and implementation

options.

Definitions

Direct risks relate to the chance of an impact on an infrastructure system or asset causing damage,

extra maintenance or replacement costs, accelerated deterioration or disruption of services provided.

An example is increased storm or flood damage to an asset.

Direct opportunities relate to opportunities that can directly benefit the project.

Indirect risks relate to the chance of an impact on another system or asset disrupting the operational

capacity of the asset or network (for example the disruption of supply of good or services). Indirect risks

include consideration of interdependent and cumulative impacts of different risks and their sources. For

example, power supply interruptions caused by excessive power demand during periods of extreme

temperature. Another example would be storm damage or disruption at a nearby port, which delays the

delivery of urgently-needed equipment so that the infrastructure has to be closed or its services curtailed.

This type of risk focuses on the consequence or impact to the asset itself.

Indirect opportunities relate to the opportunities that can indirectly impact the project such as

opportunities that can impact the project’s supply chain.



Page 73 of 477



Lea

Spr

Res

Res

Ecn

Ecn

Ene

Gre

Env

Wat

Eco

Sta

Leg

Her

Wfs

Con

Multidisciplinary team includes, as a minimum a risk manager, a sustainability manager, an

environmental manager, a social/community manager, a finance manager or economist and a

governance manager/project director/project manager.

Governance risks and opportunities are risks and opportunities concerned with the governing of the

project.

Economic risks and opportunities are risks and opportunities concerned with the economy. Such

risks and opportunities may include risks and opportunities to local businesses, local jobs, risks and

opportunities to exports and imports, risks and opportunities to the local and regional economy, etc.

Note, economic risks and opportunities are different from financial risks and opportunities which are

concerned with profit and expenditure of the project.

Environmental risks and opportunities are risks and opportunities associated with the natural and

physical environment.

Social risks and opportunities are risks and opportunities associated with people and communities.

Treatment options also known as ‘treatments’ or ‘mitigations’ are the actions to mitigate a risk or realise

an opportunity.

Level 1

DL1.1 UDirectU governance, economic, environmental and social risks and opportunities are assessed.

If a risk and opportunity assessment was undertaken and verified in the Planning phase, then it may be

used as the basis of the risk and opportunity assessment required for this criterion.

Direct governance, economic (not financial), environmental and social risks and opportunities must be

assessed for the full project life cycle. Risks associated with not perusing an opportunity must also be

assessed. This may be undertaken as part of the overall project risk assessment or undertaken

separately. Evidence must be provided showing how the governance, economic, environmental and

social risks and opportunities are managed as part of the project’s normal risk management process.

If governance, economic, environmental or social risks and opportunities are assessed separately from

the project’s overall risk and opportunity assessment, then any risks rated as extreme, very high, or high

(or an equivalent rating scale) must be included in the project’s overall risk register. Similarly, any

opportunities rated as extreme, very high, or high (or an equivalent rating scale) must be included in

the project’s overall opportunity register if one exists or included in governance documents such as the

sustainability plan/strategy/targets (Lea-1).

The risk and opportunity criteria to evaluate the significance of risks and opportunities must be provided

as evidence.

ISO 31000:2009 provides guidance on managing risks including defining a risk criterion.

The completed risk and opportunity assessment must be provided to the Contractor/s.

Note: the risk assessment undertaken in Res-2 can be used for climate and natural hazard risks. This means, if the project is attempting to achieve Res-2, climate and natural hazard risks can be left and updated once Res-2 is completed.

DL1.2 Treatment options for Udirect risksU and implementation actions for Udirect opportunitiesU are identified and implemented and after treatment there are no residual high priority Udirect risksU.

If treatment options were developed in the Planning phase, then they may be used as the basis of the

requirements for this criterion.

Treatment options for all direct governance, economic (not financial), environmental and social risks

must be identified and implemented. Implementation may include outlining management actions in a

Page 74 of 477



management plan or risk management system. Where treatment options relate to other phases of the

project then a review/handover action could be used to demonstrate ‘implementation’.

Implementation actions for all direct governance, economic, environmental and social opportunities may

be undertaken at the same time as risk treatment options or undertaken separately. Either way

implementation actions for opportunities must be identified and implemented. Implementation may

include outlining management actions in a management plan or governance documents such as the


Treatment options for risks and implementation actions for opportunities must be outlined in a risk and

opportunity plan. For simplicity, this plan will be referred to as the ‘risk and opportunity treatment plan’

from hereon in. The risk and opportunity treatment plan must include, as a minimum:

• The risks and their treatment option/s,

• The opportunity and their implementation option/s,

• The selected treatment/implementation options and the reason for selecting the

treatment/implementation option,

• Resources required to implement treatment/implementation options,

• Timing and schedule,

• Reporting and monitoring requirements, and

• Persons responsible for implementing the treatment/implementation options, measurement,

monitoring and reporting.

ISO 31000:2009 provides guidance on managing risks including treatment options.

After treatment/implementation options are identified and implemented, there must be no residual

extreme, high or very high risks. Note, the risks here only relate to sustainability (governance, economic,

environmental and social) risks and opportunities therefore other projects risks (such as commercial,

financial and legal) are not included in this requirement.

The risk and opportunity treatment plan must be reviewed and approved by the senior-management

team.

The completed risk and opportunity treatment plan must be provided to the Design team and

Contractor/s. It is acceptable that any commercially sensitive information is removed from the risk and

opportunity treatment plan prior to it being handed over.

Note: the treatment options undertaken in Res-2 can be used for climate and natural hazard risks. This means, if the project is attempting to achieve Res-2, then treatments for climate and natural hazard risks can be left and updated once Res-2 is completed.

DL1.3 A multidisciplinary internal team participated in the identification and assessment of Udirect risksU and opportunities, including selection of treatment or implementation options.

A multidisciplinary team including the Design and Construction Managers must participate in the risk

and opportunity assessment (DL1.1) and the identification of treatment and implementation options for

risks and opportunities (DL1.2).

DL1.4 The risk and opportunity assessment is reviewed and updated at least annually.

The risk and opportunity assessment must be reviewed and updated at least quarterly for the duration

of the Design phase.


• Risk and opportunity assessment outlining governance, economic, environmental and social risks,

• The risk and opportunity management process,

Page 75 of 477



Lea

Spr

Res

Res

Ecn

Ecn

Ene

Gre

Env

Wat

Eco

Sta

Leg

Her

Wfs

Con

• The risk criteria used in the risk assessment,

• The project risk assessment showing extreme, very high or high sustainability risks,

• Evidence that the risk assessment and treatment plan is provided to the designers and contractors

such as emails,

• Risk and opportunity treatment plan/assessment,

• Senior-management approval,

• Names and positions of people attending risk and treatment workshops,

• Workshop agendas, photos, minutes, and

• Evidence of annual reviews of the risk and opportunity assessment.

Level 2

DL2.1 The risk and opportunity assessment also considers Uindirect risks and opportunitiesU to the asset.

The risk and opportunity assessment undertaken in DL1.1 must be extended to include indirect

governance, economic (not financial), environmental and social risks and opportunities.

If a risk and opportunity assessment was undertaken in the Planning phase, then it may be used as the

basis of the risk and opportunity assessment required for this criterion.

Indirect risks, also known as ‘Interdependencies’ generally fall into three categories of interaction

namely, upstream, internal or downstream and each category of interaction can include one or more of

four classes of dependency, including physical, cyber, geographic or logical (Rinaldi, S.M., J.P.

Peerenboom, and T.K. Kelly, 2001). These categories and classes of dependencies are summarised in

Table G11.

Table G11 Dependency types. Source: (Rinaldi, S.M., J.P. Peerenboom, and T.K. Kelly, 2001)

Group Description

Category of dependencies

Upstream

dependencies

The products or services provided to one infrastructure by another external infrastructure

that are necessary to support its operations and functions.

Internal

dependencies

The interactions among internal operations, functions, and missions of the infrastructure.

Internal dependencies are the internal links among the assets constituting a critical

infrastructure (e.g. an electric generating plant that depends on cooling water from its own

onsite water well).

Downstream

dependencies

The consequences to a critical infrastructure’s consumers or recipients from the

degradation of the resources provided by a critical infrastructure.

Classes of dependencies

Physical Infrastructure is physically dependent if the state of its operations is dependent on the

material output(s) of another infrastructure through a functional and structural linkage

between the inputs and outputs of two assets: a commodity (i.e. goods or services)

produced or modified by one infrastructure (an output) is required by another

infrastructure for its operation (an input).

Cyber Infrastructure has a cyber dependency if its state of operation depends on information

and data transmitted through the information infrastructure via electronic or informational

links. Outputs of the information infrastructure are inputs to the other infrastructure, and

the commodity passed among the infrastructure assets is information.

Geographic Infrastructure assets are geographically dependent if a local environmental event can

create changes in the state of operations in all of them. A geographic dependency occurs

when elements of infrastructure assets are in close spatial proximity (e.g. a joint utility

right-of-way).

Page 76 of 477



Logical Infrastructure is logically dependent if its state of operation depends on the state of

another infrastructure via a mechanism that is not a physical, cyber, or geographic

connection. Logical dependency is attributable to human decisions and actions and is not

the result of physical or cyber processes.

DL2.2 Treatment options for Uindirect risksU and implementation actions for Uindirect opportunitiesU are identified and implemented and after treatment there are no residual high priority Udirect or indirect direct risks and opportunities.

If treatment options were developed in the Planning phase, then they may be used as the basis of the


Treatment options for risks and implementation actions for opportunities assessed and implemented in

DL1.2 must be extended to include indirect governance, economic (not financial), environmental and

social risks and opportunities. After treatment options are implemented, the must be no residual

extreme, very high or high risks or opportunities.


• Risk and opportunity assessment outlining governance, economic, environmental and social direct

and indirect risks

• The risk and opportunity management process

• The risk criteria used in the risk assessment

• The project risk assessment showing extreme, very high or high sustainability risks


such as emails

• Risk and opportunity treatment plan/assessment

• Senior-management approval

• Names and positions of people attending risk and treatment workshops

• Workshop agendas, photos, minutes.

Level 3

DL3.1 Treatment options have been assessed considering the optimal scale and timing, and costs and benefits of addressing the risks and opportunities.

If a treatment plan was developed in the Planning phase, then it may be used as the basis of the


The optimal scale and timing and costs and benefits of implementing each treatment

option/implementation action must be assessed before the preferred option is selected and

implemented. Considering the optimal scale and timing in the risk and opportunity assessment and

treatment/implementation process recognises that some risks and opportunities are best not

treated/implemented immediately. For example, the impact may not occur for many decades, a

satisfactory treatment may not yet be available or greater certainty projections are required before a

difficult decision can be made. It may also not be obvious how narrowly or extensively the treatment

measure should be applied – in stages or all at once, and everywhere or only at the most vulnerable

sites.

An assessment in accordance with Ecn-1 and Ecn-4 must be undertaken to quantify treatment options

identified. Impacts such as negative consequences of treatment options on other assets or systems

must be included in the assessment. For example, the construction of a sea wall which displaces natural

habitat may have a negative impact on aquatic species. Decision-making related to treatment options

Page 77 of 477



Lea

Spr

Res

Res

Ecn

Ecn

Ene

Gre

Env

Wat

Eco

Sta

Leg

Her

Wfs

Con

should review each decision that needs to be made, the lifetimes and flexibility of these decisions, and

the need to address near-term issues while strategically creating options for the long-term future.

For treatments/implementation that cannot be implemented in the design immediately, a treatment

action plan must be prepared to formalise decision-making related to these treatments. The risk and

opportunity treatment plan undertaken in DL1.2 should be extended to include timing of implementation

and associated governance/responsibility to ensure it is undertaken at that time. In principle commitment

should be made to address treatment options when appropriate as asset ownership changes. This

should include a commitment embedded within management plans or a strategy document to ensure it

has been formalised.

DL3.2 A comprehensive set of affected external stakeholders participated in identifying Udirect and indirectU risks, opportunities, treatment and implementation options.

A comprehensive set of affected stakeholders must be engaged in the direct and indirect identification

and treatment option stages and should include the following where appropriate:

• Key affected stakeholders as identified in Sta-1

• Government (local, state and federal as appropriate)

• infrastructure utilities

• emergency services

• other facilities and assets in the region

Attendee names and titles as well as minutes from the engagement must be captured and provided as

evidence.


• Risk and opportunity treatment plan/assessment outlining optimal time and scaling

• Economic assessments undertaken for treatment options in accordance with Ecn-1 and Ecn-4

• Workshop attendees, agenda, minutes, photos.

Page 78 of 477



ISv2.0 As Built


Aim

To reward the assessment and mitigation/realisation of sustainability risks and opportunities.

Criteria

Table G12 Lea- 2 As Built summary criteria table


ABL1.1 UDirect Ugovernance,

economic, environmental and

social risks and opportunities are

assessed.

AND

ABL1.2 Treatment options for

Udirect risksU and implementation

actions for Udirect opportunitiesU are

identified and implemented and

after treatment there are no

residual high priority Udirect risksU.

AND

ABL1.3 A multidisciplinary internal



Udirect risksU and opportunities,

including selection of treatment or

implementation options.

AND

ABL1.4 The risk and opportunity

assessment is reviewed and

updated at least quarterly.


achieved.

AND

ABL2.1 The risk and opportunity

assessment also considers

Uindirect risks and opportunitiesU to

the asset.

AND

ABL2.2 Treatment options for

Uindirect risksU and implementation

actions for Uindirect opportunitiesU

are identified and implemented

and after treatment there are no

residual high priority Udirect or

indirect direct risks and

opportunities.


achieved.

AND

ABL3.1 Treatment options have


optimal scale, timing, costs and

benefits of addressing the risks

and opportunities.

AND

ABL3.2 A comprehensive set of


participated in identifying Udirect

and indirect risks,U opportunities,

treatment and implementation

options.

Definitions

Direct risks relate to the chance of an impact on an infrastructure system or asset causing damage,

extra maintenance or replacement costs, accelerated deterioration or disruption of services provided.

An example is increased storm or flood damage to an asset.

Direct opportunities relate to opportunities that can directly benefit the project.

Indirect risks relate to the chance of an impact on another system or asset disrupting the operational

capacity of the asset or network (for example the disruption of supply of goods or services). Indirect

risks include consideration of interdependent and cumulative impacts of different risks and their sources.

For example, power supply interruptions caused by excessive power demand during periods of extreme

temperature. Another example would be storm damage or disruption at a nearby port, which delays the

delivery of urgently-needed equipment so that the infrastructure has to be closed or its services curtailed.

This type of risk focuses on the consequence or impact to the asset itself.

Indirect opportunities relate to the opportunities that can indirectly impact the project such as

opportunities that can impact the project’s supply chain.



Page 79 of 477



Lea

Spr

Res

Res

Ecn

Ecn

Ene

Gre

Env

Wat

Eco

Sta

Leg

Her

Wfs

Con

Multidisciplinary team includes, as a minimum a risk manager, a sustainability manager, an

environmental manager, a social/community manager, a finance manager or economist and a

governance manager/project director/project manager

Governance risks and opportunities are risks and opportunities concerned with the governing of the

project.

Economic risks and opportunities are risks and opportunities concerned with the economy. Such

risks and opportunities may include risks and opportunities to local businesses, local jobs, risks and

opportunities to exports and imports, risks and opportunities to the local and regional economy etc. Note,

economic risks and opportunities are different from financial risks and opportunities which are concerned

with profit and expenditure of the project.

Environmental risks and opportunities are risks and opportunities associated with the natural and

physical environment.

Social risks and opportunities are risks and opportunities associated with people and communities.

Treatment options also known as ‘treatments’ or ‘mitigations’ are the actions to mitigate a risk or realise

an opportunity.

Level 1

ABL1.1 UDirectU governance, economic, environmental and social risks and opportunities are assessed.

The risk and opportunity assessment undertaken in the Design phase may be used as the basis of the

risk and opportunity assessment required for this criterion.

Direct governance, economic (not financial), environmental and social risks and opportunities must be

assessed for the full project life cycle. Risks associated with not perusing an opportunity must also be

assessed. This may be undertaken as part of the overall project risk assessment or undertaken

separately. Evidence must be provided showing how the governance, economic, environmental and

social risks and opportunities are managed as part of the project’s normal risk management process.

If governance, economic, environmental or social risks and opportunities are assessed separately from

the project’s overall risk and opportunity assessment, then any risks rated as extreme, very high, or high

(or an equivalent rating scale) must be included in the project’s overall risk register. Similarly, any

opportunities rated as extreme, very high, or high (or an equivalent rating scale) must be included in

the project’s overall opportunity register if one exists or included in governance documents such as the


The risk and opportunity criteria to evaluate the significance of risks and opportunities must be provided

as evidence.

ISO 31000:2009 provides guidance on managing risks including defining a risk criterion.

The completed risk and opportunity assessment should be provided to the operator within the handover

documents.



Note: the risk assessment undertaken in Res-2 can be used for climate and natural hazard risks. This means, if the project is attempting to achieve Res-2, climate and natural hazard risks can be left and updated once Res-2 is completed.

ABL1.2 Treatment options for Udirect risksU and implementation actions for Udirect opportunitiesU are identified and implemented and after treatment there are no residual high priority Udirect risksU.

The treatment options developed in the Design phase may be used as the basis of the requirements for

this criterion.

Page 80 of 477



Treatment options for all direct governance, economic (not financial), environmental and social risks

must be identified and implemented. Implementation may include outlining management actions in a

management plan or risk management system. Where treatment options relate to other phases of the

project then a review/handover action could be used to demonstrate ‘implementation’.

Implementation actions for all direct governance, economic, environmental and social opportunities may

be undertaken at the same time as risk treatment options or undertaken separately. Either way

implementation actions for opportunities must be identified and implemented. Implementation may

include outlining management actions in a management plan or governance documents such as the


Treatment options for risks and implementation actions for opportunities must be outlined in a risk and

opportunity plan. For simplicity, this plan will be referred to as the ‘risk and opportunity treatment plan’

from hereon in. The risk and opportunity treatment plan must include, as a minimum:

• The risks and their treatment option/s

• The opportunity and their implementation option/s

• The selected treatment/implementation options and the reason for selecting the

treatment/implementation option

• Resources required to implement treatment/implementation options

• Timing and schedule

• Reporting and monitoring requirements

• Persons responsible for implementing the treatment/implementation options, measurement,

monitoring and reporting.

ISO 31000:2009 provides guidance on managing risks including treatment options.

After treatment/implementation options are identified and implemented, there must be no residual

extreme, high or very high risks. Note, the risks here only relate to sustainability (governance, economic,

environmental and social) risks and opportunities therefore other projects risks (such as commercial,

financial and legal) are not included in this requirement.

The risk and opportunity treatment plan must be reviewed and approved by the senior-management

team.

The completed risk and opportunity treatment plan must be provided to the Design team and

Contractor/s. It is acceptable that any commercially sensitive information is removed from the risk and

opportunity treatment plan prior to it being handed over.

Note: the treatment options undertaken in Res-2 can be used for climate and natural hazard risks. This means, if the project is attempting to achieve Res-2, then treatments for climate and natural hazard risks can be left and updated once Res-2 is completed.

ABL1.3 A multidisciplinary internal team participated in the identification and assessment of Udirect risksU and opportunities, including selection of treatment or implementation options.

A multidisciplinary team including the Design and Construction Managers must participate in the risk

and opportunity assessment (ABL1.1) and the identification of treatment and implementation options for

risks and opportunities (ABL1.2).

ABL1.4 The risk and opportunity assessment is reviewed and updated at least quarterly

The risk and opportunity assessment must be reviewed and updated at least quarterly for the duration

of the construction phase.


Page 81 of 477



Lea

Spr

Res

Res

Ecn

Ecn

Ene

Gre

Env

Wat

Eco

Sta

Leg

Her

Wfs

Con

• Risk and opportunity assessment outlining governance, economic, environmental and social risks,





such as emails,



• Names and positions of people attending risk and treatment workshops, and


Level 2

ABL2.1 The risk and opportunity assessment also considers Uindirect risks and opportunitiesU to the asset.

The risk and opportunity assessment undertaken in ABL1.1 must be extended to include indirect

governance, economic (not financial), environmental and social risks and opportunities.



Indirect risks, also known as ‘Interdependencies’ generally fall into three categories of interaction



Peerenboom, and T.K. Kelly, 2001). These categories and classes of dependencies are summarised in

Table G13


Group Description


Upstream

dependencies


that are necessary to support its operations and functions

Internal

dependencies



infrastructure (e.g., an electric generating plant that depends on cooling water from its

own onsite water well).

Downstream

dependencies






between the inputs and outputs of two assets: a commodity (i.e., good or service)









when elements of infrastructure assets are in close spatial proximity (e.g., a joint utility

right-of-way).

Page 82 of 477







ABL2.2 Treatment options for Uindirect risksU and implementation actions for Uindirect opportunitiesU are identified and implemented and after treatment there are no residual high priority Udirect or indirect direct risks and opportunities.

The treatment options that were developed in the Design phase may be used as the basis of the


Treatment options for risks and implementation actions for opportunities assessed and implemented in

ABL1.2 must be extended to include indirect governance, economic (not financial), environmental and

social risks and opportunities. After treatment options are implemented, the must be no residual extreme

or very high or high risks or opportunities.


• Risk and opportunity assessment outlining governance, economic, environmental and social direct

and indirect risks,





such as emails,



• Names and positions of people attending risk and treatment workshops, and


Level 3

ABL3.1 Treatment options have been assessed considering the optimal scale, timing, costs and benefits of addressing the risks and opportunities.

The treatment plan developed in the Design phase may be used as the basis of the requirements for

this criterion.

The optimal scale and timing and costs and benefits of implementing each treatment

option/implementation action must be assessed before the preferred option is selected and

implemented. Considering the optimal scale and timing in the risk and opportunity assessment and

treatment/implementation process recognises that some risks and opportunities are best not

treated/implemented immediately. For example, the impact may not occur for many decades, a

satisfactory treatment may not yet be available or greater certainty projections are required before a

difficult decision can be made. It may also not be obvious how narrowly or extensively the treatment

measure should be applied – in stages or all at once, and everywhere or only at the most vulnerable

sites.



must be included in the assessment. For example, the construction of a sea wall which displaces natural

habitat may have a negative impact on aquatic species. Decision-making related to treatment options

Page 83 of 477



Lea

Spr

Res

Res

Ecn

Ecn

Ene

Gre

Env

Wat

Eco

Sta

Leg

Her

Wfs

Con

should review each decision that needs to be made, the lifetimes and flexibility of these decisions, and

the need to address near-term issues while strategically creating options for the long-term future.

For treatments/implementation that cannot be implemented in the design immediately, a treatment

action plan must be prepared to formalise decision-making related to these treatments. The risk and

opportunity treatment plan undertaken in ABL1.2 should be extended to include timing of implementation

and associated governance/responsibility to ensure it is undertaken at that time. In principle

commitment, should be made to address treatment options when appropriate as asset ownership

changes. This should include a commitment embedded within management plans or a strategy

document to ensure it has been formalised.

ABL3.2 A comprehensive set of affected external stakeholders participated in identifying Udirect and indirectU UrisksU, UopportunitiesU, treatment and implementation options.


and treatment option stages and should include the following where appropriate:

• Key affected stakeholders as identified in Sta-1,

• Government (local, state and federal as appropriate),

• infrastructure utilities,

• emergency services, and

• other facilities and assets in the region.


evidence.


• Risk and opportunity treatment plan/assessment outlining optimal time and scaling,

• Economic assessments undertaken for treatment options in accordance with Ecn-1 and Ecn-4, and

• Workshop attendees, agenda, minutes, photos.

Page 84 of 477



ISv2.0 Design


Aim

To reward sustainability knowledge sharing initiatives.

Criteria


Up to 2.5 points available

L1.1 Knowledge Sharing Initiatives are completed.

Up to 4 knowledge sharing initiatives can be submitted for the available 2.5 points. No more than 4

initiatives per project will be reviewed. Projects will be assessed against the knowledge sharing guidance

current at the time of their registration.

Knowledge Sharing points are reviewed by the Verifiers but awarded entirely at the discretion of ISCA.

In reviewing the submission, the verifiers and ISCA will consider the sustainability benefit of the

Knowledge Sharing Initiative relative to existing IS rating scheme credits where relevant. Where projects

are unsure whether their proposed Knowledge Sharing initiative fits within the categories outlined in the

credit criteria, Case Managers will be able to help identify other avenues that may be pursued. This

could be achieved through Technical Clarifications or through the development of a new Knowledge

Sharing Initiative with ISCA.


Compliance must be demonstrated with any of the IS Knowledge Sharing Initiatives outlined on the

ISCA website. These Knowledge Sharing Initiatives have been designed to help the industry share

information and knowledge to create continuous improvement cycles, share lessons learn and capture

information and data that ultimately benefit society and the environment.

Page 85 of 477



Lea

Spr

Res

Res

Ecn

Ecn

Ene

Gre

Env

Wat

Eco

Sta

Leg

Her

Wfs

Con

ISv2.0 As Built


Aim

To reward sustainability knowledge sharing initiatives.

Criteria

Table G15 Lea- 3 As Built summary criteria table

Up to 2.5 points available


Up to 4 knowledge sharing initiatives can be submitted for the available 2.5 points. No more than 4

initiatives per project will be reviewed. Projects will be assessed against the knowledge sharing guidance

current at the time of their registration.

Knowledge Sharing points are reviewed by the Verifiers but awarded entirely at the discretion of ISCA.


Knowledge Sharing Initiative relative to existing IS rating scheme credits where relevant. Where projects

are unsure whether their proposed Knowledge Sharing initiative fits within the categories outlined in the

credit criteria, Case Managers will be able to help identify other avenues that may be pursued. This

could be achieved through Technical Clarifications or through the development of a new Knowledge

Sharing Initiative with ISCA.


Compliance must be demonstrated with any of the IS Knowledge Sharing Initiatives outlined on the

ISCA website. These Knowledge Sharing Initiatives have been designed to help the industry share

information and knowledge to create continuous improvement cycles, share lessons learn and capture

information and data that ultimately benefit society and the environment.

Page 86 of 477



References

ACFID, ACOSS, GCNA & SDSN Australia/Pacific, 2016. Australian SDGs Summit On the Road to Implementation, Sydney: Global Compact Network Australia.

Global Reporting Initiative, 2016a. GRI 101: Foundation, s.l.: GRI.

Global Reporting Initiative, 2016b. GRI’s Contribution to Sustainable Development, Netherlands: GRI.

Government of SA, n.d. Infrastrcuture SA - South Road Superway Project Impact Report. [Online]

Available at:

Uhttp://www.infrastructure.sa.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0016/43261/Part_B_Section_20_Greenhou

se_gases.pdfU

[Accessed February 2014].

GRI, 2018. Materiality. [Online]

Available at: Uhttps://g4.globalreporting.org/how-you-should-report/reporting-principles/principles-for-

defining-report-content/materiality/Pages/default.aspx

KPMG International Cooperative, 2014. KPMG Sustainable Insight: The Essentials of Materiality Assessment, s.l.: KPMG International Cooperative.

Natural Capital Coalition, 2017. The Natural Capital Protocol, s.l.: The Natural Capital Protocol.

New Zealand Foreign Affairs & Trade, 2018. Sustainable Development Goals. [Online]

Available at: Uhttps://www.mfat.govt.nz/en/peace-rights-and-security/work-with-the-un-and-other-

partners/new-zealand-and-the-sustainable-development-goals-sdgs/U

[Accessed 16 March 2018].

Rinaldi, S.M., J.P. Peerenboom, and T.K. Kelly, 2001. Complex Networks, Identifying, Undertsanding

and Analyzing Critial Infrastructure Interdependencies. IEEE Control Systems Magazine, pp. 11-25.

Sachs, J. et al., 2017. SDG Index and Dashboards Report 2017, New York: Bertelsmann Stiftung &

Sustainable Development Solutions Network (SDSN).

SDG Compass, 2017. The guide for business action on the SDGs, s.l.: SDG Compass.

SDG Compass, n.d. The Guide for Business Action on the SDGs, s.l.: SDG Compass.

United Nations, 2015. Transforming our world: the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. New

York, United Nations.

United Nations, 2017. The Sustainable Development Goals Report 2017, New York: United Nations

Publications.

Page 87 of 477



Lea

Spr

Res

Res

Ecn

Ecn

Ene

Gre

Env

Wat

Eco

Sta

Leg

Her

Wfs

Con SUSTAINABLE PROCUREMENT

Procurement is a key function to facilitate the delivery of sustainability objectives in the planning, design,

construction and operation of infrastructure projects and assets. Tier 1 contractors typically spend 60-

80% of the costs of a project with their extended supply chains. The achievement of many sustainability

objectives for infrastructure project development or asset operation, as described in the economic,

social and environmental categories of the IS rating scheme, requires the proactive engagement and

contribution of suppliers at different tiers of the supply chains, and at different stages of the asset life

cycle. This is particularly the case when considering emerging themes such as the participation of

Indigenous or Māori businesses, establishing social enterprises, reducing embodied carbon, and

mitigating adverse human rights and modern slavery impacts potentially embedded in project supply

chains.

Procurement is defined by the International Organization for Standardization as the ‘activity of acquiring

goods or services from suppliers’. As shown in Figure G5 below, procurement is an activity that occurs

between the buying organisation and its supply chains and ensures that specified requirements are met

through the selection of the fit-for-purpose goods/services and suppliers, and usually made explicit in

an agreement or contract. Procurement thus plays a major role in ensuring that supply chains deliver

what the buying organisation needs, including sustainability requirements.

Figure G5 Overview of the role of Procurement

What is Sustainable Procurement (SP)?

In ISO 20400: 2017 - Sustainable Procurement - Guidance, sustainable procurement (SP) is defined

as:

Page 88 of 477



‘procurement that has the most positive environmental, social and economic impacts possible over the entire life cycle’. It ‘involves the sustainability aspects related to the goods or services and to the suppliers along the supply chains’ and ‘contributes to the achievement of organisational sustainability objectives and goals and to sustainable development in general’.

ISO 20400 is the first international guidance standard on SP, published in April 2017. It was developed

by 52 countries as well as major international organisations such as the UN Environment, the UN Global

Compact, OECD and European Commission. It covers all areas of procurement (planning, sourcing,

managing contracts – see Figure G6 below) and addresses most environmental, social and economic

issues. This SP category aims to align with ISO 20400 and has been designed to adapt its principles to

the infrastructure sector.

In the context of the IS rating scheme, the SP category acts as a lever to use procurement to facilitate

the delivery of other IS rating scheme category outcomes, as well as to proactively manage

sustainability risks and opportunities in the supply chain.

Who is responsible for SP?

Organisations usually have a team or department responsible for their procurement activity, sometimes

called ‘purchasing’ or ‘sourcing’. Depending on the organisation or project, this function may be

centralised, centre-led or decentralised. The procurement function is traditionally most active during the

selection of goods and/or suppliers, and less in the strategic planning area and the management of

contracts, although this varies between organisations. Often having a different reporting line, quantity

surveyors, commercial and contract managers are also major players in the procurement process.

It is important to note that the audience for this Category is all relevant individuals involved in

procurement activities, as major decisions relating to procurement will often be taken by individuals

outside of the procurement function e.g. designers, cost estimators, project directors and engineers. It

is also important to note that all procurement activity that occurs during each rating phase is within the

scope of this category, irrespective of the purchasing organisation.

Figure G6 Typical procurement process and the role of the Procurement team

What makes infrastructure SP so unique?

In terms of SP, all industries are different. Key features of infrastructure projects/assets are:

1. UThe importance of planningU – Key decisions impacting sustainability issues in supply chains

are taken by the infrastructure project/asset owner, often very early in the project life cycle. Tier

1 contractors may thus be constrained by client decisions that impact on what they can or

cannot do in terms of sustainability, and the extent to which the procurement function can

influence final outcomes.

Page 89 of 477



Lea

Spr

Res

Res

Ecn

Ecn

Ene

Gre

Env

Wat

Eco

Sta

Leg

Her

Wfs

Con 2. UProjects are differentU – There is no one ‘SP strategy’ for infrastructure projects. Each asset

delivery and maintenance team will need to define its own tailored approach to achieve the

desired sustainability objectives through procurement.

3. UThe structure of the supply chains is complexU - Tier 1 contractors and lead consultants are

often large companies, whereas many of the Tier 2, 3, etc., sub-contractors who supply a large

portion of goods and services are small and medium enterprises (SMEs); and in many

instances, SMEs source their own goods from large Tier 1 suppliers. This may make some

procurers feel they have limited ability to influence sustainability outcomes within their supply

chains.

The benefits of SP

The benefits of practising SP differ depending on the type of project/asset and its context. Examples

include:

• UCompetitive advantageU - Responding to client sustainability expectations and using it as a

differentiator.

• UTotal Cost of Ownership savingsU – Optimising the use of resources can lead to cost savings,

economies of scales and improved return on investment.

• UInnovationU - Using SP to stimulate innovation from the supply chains in order to gain greater

shared value and to generate new markets.

• URisk managementU - Sustainability issues can influence brand value and reputation, price

volatility, access to supply, financial liabilities, moral/ethical exposures and the risks associated

with operating licenses.

• USupply chain securityU - Avoiding disruptions due to product recall, financial penalties or supplier

failure, implementing continual improvement processes, avoiding depletion of resources.

• UStakeholder expectationsU - Responding to increasing stakeholder expectations to take account

of environmental and social factors, e.g. in order to maintain a societal license to operate.

• UTalent managementU - Paying attention to sustainability issues can lead to greater productivity

and attract, motivate and retain talent.

• USupplier commitmentU - Paying attention to sustainability issues can lead to improved supplier

relationships, leading to improved supplier contribution to project objectives.

• UOrganisational ethicsU - Paying attention to sustainability issues can enhance the ethical

behaviour of the organisation and increase alignment with the organisation’s culture and values.

• UComplianceU - Compliance with regulations and public policies throughout the entire supply

chain.

The approach for the SP Category: a flexible framework

This SP Category does not prescribe what the sustainability objectives and outcomes of an

infrastructure project/asset should be, as these should be defined in the sustainability strategy credit

(Lea-1) and across each of the relevant categories of the IS rating scheme. Rather, the SP credits

describe leading practices and processes that will enable the project to use the power of procurement

to achieve its sustainability objectives and manage sustainability risks and opportunities in its supply

chains.

The requirements have been designed so that they can be applied to most project/asset sizes, classes

and stages of the project life cycle, which gives each project/asset the flexibility to apply them for its

specific context and environment. It covers three levels:

Spr- 1 Risk and opportunity assessment and procurement strategy

Spr- 2 Supplier assessment and selection

Spr- 3 Contract and supplier management

It is important to note that the SP Category includes the objective of managing material sustainability

risks and opportunities in the supply chains as well as the project’s/assets sustainability objectives.

Page 90 of 477



Objective of the category

The objective of this category is to facilitate projects to:

(i) Procure goods and services which have the most positive environmental, social and economic

impacts over the entire life cycle; and

(ii) Enable project leaders (i.e. owner, main contractor, community) to achieve their sustainability

objectives and goals where relevant on the project, in addition to contributing to sustainable

development in general throughout the entire supply chain.

Scope of this category

All procurement activities occurring within the Planning, Design, As Built and Operation phases,

irrelevant of the procurement organisation, is within the scope of this category. For example, if a tunnel

boring machine is procured by the proponent for the construction of the project, the procurement of the

tunnel boring machine will be within the scope of the planning rating. Another example is if there is plant

and equipment procured during the design phase for operations, then the procurement of the plant and

equipment is within the scope of the design phase.

Category linkages

The following ISv2.0 categories have linkages with the Sustainable Procurement category.

Table G16 Spr-1 category linkages


Lea-1 Sustainable procurement

activities should be outlined in

the project/asset’s sustainability

plan.

x x x x

Lea-2 The risk and opportunity

assessment undertaken in Lea-

2 should include procurement

risks and opportunities.

x x x x

Ecn-1 Selection of suppliers needs to

be undertaken in accordance

with Ecn-1 L1.2.

x x x x

Ene-1 Procurement activities to

reduce energy and emissions

such as energy efficient

equipment may need to be

assessed according to the

sustainable procurement

category.

x x x

Ene-2 Procurement activities for

renewable energy options Solar

PV or Power Purchase

Agreements (PPAs) may need

to be assessed according to

the sustainable procurement

category.

x x x x

Page 91 of 477



Lea

Spr

Res

Res

Ecn

Ecn

Ene

Gre

Env

Wat

Eco

Sta

Leg

Her

Wfs

Con Credit Description Planning Design As Built Operations

Ene-3 The procurement of carbon

offsets may be assessed under

the sustainable procurement

category.

x x x

Leg-1 Supply chain legacy initiatives

may be rewarded under the

legacy category.

x x x x

Rso-1 The Resource Efficiency

Strategy actions may be

achieved through procurement

activities.

x x x x

Rso-4 Resource recovery objectives

may be achieved through

procurement activities.

x x x x

Wfs-1 Workforce sustainability

requirements need to be

embedded in contractual

requirements for L3.

x x x x

Wfs-2 The procurement of labour may

utilise the sustainable

procurement category.

x x x

Wfs-5 The procurement sustainable

site facilities may utilise the

sustainable procurement

category

x x x

Page 92 of 477



ISv2.0 Design, As Built

Spr-1 Risk and opportunity assessment and procurement strategy

Aim

To reward the development of a tailored project/asset procurement strategy that both enables the

achievement of the project/asset’s sustainability objectives and manages the material sustainability

risks and opportunities in the supply chain.

Criteria

Table G17 Spr – 1 summary criteria table


L1.1 Material sustainability risks

and opportunities in the

project/asset’s supply chains are

agreed and reviewed annually in

collaboration with key internal

stakeholders.

AND

L1.2 There is a commitment to SP

in the project/asset’s governance

framework.

AND

L1.3 There is a clear point of

accountability to manage SP for

the project/asset.


achieved.

AND

L2.1 A strategy and management

framework is in place to manage

SP across the project/asset’s

rating type.

AND

L2.2 SMART sustainability

objectives and related

performance indicators, in line with

the risk and opportunity

assessment (L1.1), are included in

the project/asset’s procurement or

sustainability strategy.


achieved.

AND

L3.1 The procurement strategy

includes at least one initiative to

create long-term positive impacts

in the project/asset’s supply

chains.

Definitions

Goods include products, materials and equipment used at different stages of the project/asset life cycle.

Key internal stakeholders include, as a minimum, Sustainability Managers, Procurement specialists,

project managers and specialists with appropriate knowledge of the goods or service being procured

unless otherwise stated.

Material sustainability risks and opportunities refers to the most significant risks or opportunities for

the project/asset and in its supply chain. Material project/asset sustainability risks and opportunities

may be determined as part of the sustainability strategy (Lea-1) and project-level sustainability risk and

opportunity assessment (Lea-2). Material risks and opportunities in the supply chain should be identified

based on impacts as part of Spr-1 L1.1. Stakeholder expectations and values, expenditure and ability

to influence may also contribute to the overall materiality of a good or service.

If the assessment undertaken in Spr-1 identifies a material risk good or service in the supply chain,

which was not initially identified in the project risk and opportunity assessment and/or incorporated into

the project’s sustainability strategy, the risk and opportunity assessment (Lea-2) and the sustainability

strategy (Lea-1) should be updated accordingly.

Risk and opportunity refers to any sustainability impact that represents a risk (potential negative

occurrence) and/or an opportunity (potential positive occurrence) to the project/asset directly or in the

contributing supply chains, depending on the context of the project. The risk and opportunity

assessment undertaken in the Risk and Opportunity credit (Lea-2) should form the basis of this

assessment, and procurement actions to mitigate those risks or implement opportunities should be

deployed through this category. It is important to note that the concept of due diligence, as described

Page 93 of 477



Lea

Spr

Res

Res

Ecn

Ecn

Ene

Gre

Env

Wat

Eco

Sta

Leg

Her

Wfs

Con in major international texts such as the UN Guiding Principles on Human Rights or ISO 20400:2017

Sustainable Procurement Guidance, requires organisations to manage adverse sustainability impacts

throughout the entire supply chain, regardless of whether organisations are explicitly required to

manage them, e.g. by regulations or other external pressures.

Risk and opportunity management in the context of SP is the process to identify, prioritise and

manage the project/asset and supply chain sustainability risks and opportunities related to procurement

activities.

SMART means Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Realistic and Time-bound

Level 1

L1.1 Material sustainability risks and opportunities in the project/asset’s supply chains are agreed and reviewed annually in collaboration with key internal stakeholders.

A risk and opportunity assessment must be developed to help identify material sustainability impacts

in the project/asset’s supply chains.

Key internal stakeholders must include as a minimum:

• Representatives of procurement functions e.g. Sourcing, Commercial, Category Management,

Contract Management, Supplier Management;

• Representatives of sustainability functions e.g. Sustainability, WHS, Environment, Planning,

Human Resources, Diversity;

• Representatives of the Project e.g. Project Manager, Project Director; and

• Other functions with technical and/or industry knowledge (e.g. Specifiers, Legal, Engineers,

Quantity Surveyors, etc.).

The risk and opportunity assessment undertaken in Lea-2 should include supply chain risks and

opportunities and if so, can be used as evidence to meet this criterion if undertaken with the

stakeholders outlined above. If this is not the case, then the risk and opportunity assessment

undertaken in Lea-2 must be reviewed and updated with supply chain risks and opportunities. Other

supporting IS resources include the initial materiality assessment undertaken in Lea-1 and materials

calculator in Rso-6 (design, as built and operations only).

Note: If projects are attempting to achieve L3 in Wfs-1, then relevant workforce sustainability objectives as outlined in the Strategic Workforce Plan (Wfs-1 L3.1) need to be included in supplier contracts (that meet the supplier threshold as outlined in Wfs-1). If projects are attempting to achieve L3 in Wfs-4 then relevant diversity and inclusion requirements will need to be included in supplier contacts (that meet the supplier threshold as outlined in Wfs-4).

The following sustainability impacts, aligned with ISO 20400, must be considered as part of the risk

and opportunity assessment, at a minimum:

• Human rights: due diligence, human rights risk situations, avoidance of complicity, resolving

grievances, discrimination and vulnerable groups, civil and political rights, economic, social and

cultural rights, fundamental principles and rights at work;

• Labour practices: employment and employment relationships, conditions of work and social

protection, social dialogue, health and safety at work, human development and training in the

workplace;

• The environment: prevention of pollution, sustainable resource use, climate change mitigation

and adaptation, protection of the environment, biodiversity and restoration of natural habitats;

• Fair operating practices: anti-corruption, responsible political involvement, fair competition,

promoting sustainability in the value chain, respect for property rights;

Page 94 of 477



• Consumer issues: fair marketing, factual and unbiased information, fair contractual practices,

protecting consumers’ health and safety, sustainable consumption, consumer service and support,

and complaint and dispute resolution, consumer data protection and privacy, access to essential

services, education and awareness; and

• Community involvement and development: community involvement, education and culture,

employment creation and skills development, technology development and access, wealth and

income creation, health, social investment.

It is acknowledged that not all impacts identified above will be relevant for each goods and/or service,

however they must have been considered.

The risk and opportunity assessment must be reviewed and updated annually (at a minimum, and as

required in Lea-2) and any goods or services identified as being material must be included.

UAssessing sustainability risks and opportunities in extended supply chains

Goods and services that have been identified as having material risks or opportunities must have their

extended supply chains assessed to understand sustainability risks and opportunities. This must

include consideration of the typical stages of a good’s life cycle: raw material extraction, materials

processing, manufacture, distribution, use, repair and maintenance, and disposal or recycling. The

assessment must also include sustainability risks and opportunities related to the activities of suppliers,

contractors, business partners or intermediaries.

For the purpose of this credit ‘assessed’ means to undertake an assessment with key internal

stakeholders, including sustainability professionals, to identify potential sustainability risks and

opportunities associated with goods and services to be procured, and agreeing the most material risks

to be actively managed.

Many resources and services can support you in this process. Examples include the Responsible

Sourcing Tool, which provides a child and forced labour risk map of commodities from each region.

In addition, supply chain and product certifications can be a useful proxy for goods where their supply

chains meet appropriate sustainability standards. An example of this is Forest Stewardship Council

(FSC) certified timber. Note: Supply chains certification schemes should be ISEAL compliant to obtain points under Rso-7.

L1.2 There is a commitment to SP in the project/asset’s governance framework.

A formal commitment to address sustainability risks and opportunities in the supply chain and leverage

procurement to achieve sustainability objectives must be approved by senior management such as the

Project Director, Procurement Director, Board, CEO, etc., and included in the overall project/asset

management framework. This commitment can be reflected in documents such as a policy, charter or

supplier code of conduct.

L1.3 There is a clear point of accountability to manage SP for the project/asset.

Appropriate (i.e. level of seniority or authority) accountabilities for the management of SP must be

formalised (e.g. in an organisational chart and reflected in the position description of the accountable

position).

Accountabilities must be identified for each phase in the infrastructure life cycle within the realms of

control and influence.

Example evidence for level 1

• Risk and opportunity assessment procedures, frameworks and registers or similar;

• Materiality assessment of sustainability impacts including supply chains, and any related study or

report if relevant;

Page 95 of 477



Lea

Spr

Res

Res

Ecn

Ecn

Ene

Gre

Env

Wat

Eco

Sta

Leg

Her

Wfs

Con • Formal commitment to SP for the project/asset, formalised in a policy, strategy, code of conduct or

similar;

• Organisational chart showing SP processes, accountabilities and approval level steps; and

• SP accountabilities included in Position Description(s).

Level 2

L2.1 A strategy and management framework is in place to manage SP across the project/asset rating type.

The project/asset’s strategy and governance framework/management plan must clearly describe how

material sustainability risks and opportunities assessed in L1.1 or Lea-2 will be managed through

procurement processes. This may be outlined in the sustainability strategy undertaken in Lea-1 or

through other governance frameworks. Management options must be identified in collaboration with

key internal stakeholders.

It is suggested that SP objectives and actions are integrated into existing governance and procurement

arrangements rather than in a separate governance framework or strategy developed specifically for

SP. Projects often have a specific entity or group of people providing governance oversight for the

management of sustainability and procurement related issues. There should be a clear connection

between how procurement is governed and how the project sustainability objectives will be achieved.

The project governance framework strategy or management plan must include the following SP aspects

as a minimum:

• SP referenced in overarching project/asset sustainability policy;

• SP objectives included in project/asset sustainability performance KPIs, measurement, reporting

and assurance processes;

• SP requirements included in project/asset procurement policies and procedures; and

• Approved project/asset procurement or sustainability strategy and action plan.

An SP action plan must be developed by a multidisciplinary team and it must include the following

elements:

• WHAT – Activities / tasks;

• WHO – RACI (Responsible, Accountable, Consulted and/or Informed) or similar;

• WHEN – Timeline; and

• HOW – Resources, budget.

The SP action plan must have actions to manage material sustainability risks and opportunities as

identified in L1.1 (and Lea-2).

L2.2 SMART sustainability objectives and related performance indicators, in line with the risk and opportunity assessment (L1.1), are included in the project/asset’s procurement or sustainability strategy.

SMART (specific, measurable, achievable, realistic and time-bound) sustainability objectives and

performance indicators must be integrated in the project procurement strategy or management plan.

There are several types of indicators that can be considered:

• Process indicators: related to the measurement and monitoring of progress towards the

achievement of the procurement-related sustainability objectives, e.g. establishment of policy and

procedures.

• Output indicators: related to the measurement of the outputs of the SP approach, e.g. the % of

products certified from sustainable sources, GHG emissions avoided, number of new apprentices

included on the project, spend with Indigenous or Māori businesses or social enterprises.

Page 96 of 477



• Outcome indicators: related to the sustainability performance of the project/asset. These indicators

show what has changed as a result of the outputs achieved e.g. increased skill level of apprentices

or increased capability of social enterprises to access the market.

• Impact indicators: relating to broader (i.e. beyond project physical and temporal boundaries)

material economic, environmental and social impacts that are positive/negative, actual/potential,

direct/indirect, short-term/long-term, intended/unintended e.g. reduced unemployment rate,

reduced crime rate, reduced recidivism, reduced mental health costs, etc.


• Documentation showing material sustainability risks and opportunities are included in the

procurement strategy and management framework; and

• Documentation showing SMART sustainability KPIs are included in the procurement strategy and

management frameworks as outlined above.

Level 3

L3.1 The procurement strategy includes at least one initiative to create long-term positive impacts in the project/asset’s supply chains.

The project/asset must show how it has considered the positive long-term impacts that the project can

generate on its supply chains over its life cycle and how it will deliver on these outcomes. Examples

include:

• Contributing to the development of a sustainable workforce in regional areas where unemployment

is high, with a focus on disadvantaged communities (may also be rewarded under Wfs and Leg-1)

• Contributing to the development of innovative business models based on circular economy

principles (may also be rewarded under Rso-1).

• Improving Industry standards on managing modern slavery issues on material risk supply chains

(may also be rewarded under Leg-1).

• Reducing risks related to climate change and extreme weather events for the community (may

also be rewarded under Res-1).

Example evidence Level 3

• Assessment of specific initiatives which could be included in the procurement strategy to create

innovative, beyond business-as-usual project/asset and or broader supply chain opportunities that

have the potential to generate significant and durable positive sustainability impacts; and

• Details of how at least one initiative will be progressed, including outcomes and impact indicators.

Page 97 of 477



Lea

Spr

Res

Res

Ecn

Ecn

Ene

Gre

Env

Wat

Eco

Sta

Leg

Her

Wfs

Con ISv2.0 Design, As Built

Spr-2 Supplier assessment and selection

Aim

To reward the assessment and selection of suppliers, goods and/or services that both contribute to

achieving the project/asset’s sustainability objectives and manage the material sustainability risks and

opportunities in the supply chain.

Criteria

Table G18 Spr 2 - Summary criteria table

Definitions








in major international texts such as the UN Guiding Principles on Human Rights or ISO 20400:2017





L1.1 Prior to going to market,

strategies or action plans to

manage the material sustainability

risks and/or opportunities of

specific goods and/or services to

be procured are agreed, in

collaboration with key internal

stakeholders.

AND

L1.2 Specific sustainability

requirements for goods and/or

services identified as having

material sustainability risks and/or

opportunities are included in

specifications to potential

suppliers.

AND

L1.3 Project sustainability

commitments are acknowledged

by potential suppliers.

AND

L1.4 Supplier sustainability

credentials are weighted as part of

supplier evaluation.


achieved.

AND

L2.1 Sustainability objectives and

expectations are proactively

communicated to potential

suppliers before going to market.

AND

L2.2 Suppliers’ responses to

sustainability requirements (L1.2)

are assessed by a suitably

qualified person or team as part of

the procurement process.

AND

L2.3 Unsuccessful suppliers are

informed of how they performed in

terms of sustainability.


achieved.

AND

L3.1 The market is engaged well

in advance and suppliers are

encouraged to collaborate and

provide innovative sustainability

solutions that go beyond initial

sustainability objectives.

Page 98 of 477





activities.




opportunity assessment (Lea-2). Material risks and opportunities in the supply chain should be identified







Specification document stating requirements, i.e. provisions that convey criteria to be fulfilled by

goods, processes or services.

Suitably qualified professional refers to an individual having 5-years’ experience in infrastructure

sustainability.




Level 1

L1.1 Prior to going to market, strategies or action plans to manage the material sustainability risks and/or opportunities of specific goods and/or services to be procured are agreed, in collaboration with key internal stakeholders.

Sustainability risks and opportunities can vary significantly from one type of goods or service to another

and from one supplier to another. Relevant considerations include technical aspects, sourcing locations

and supply chain structures. Therefore, for each goods or service to be procured, that has been

identified as having potentially material sustainability risks or opportunities (Spr-1 L1.1), a refined

assessment of those risks and opportunities must be undertaken, and appropriate management

options must be developed, in collaboration with key internal stakeholders to address the

risks/opportunities identified.

Key internal stakeholders must include as a minimum:

• Representatives of procurement functions e.g. Sourcing, Commercial, Category Management,

Contract Management, Supplier Management,

• Representatives of sustainability functions e.g. Sustainability, WHS, Environment, Planning,

Human Resources, Diversity,

• Representatives of the Project e.g. Project Manager, Project Director, and

• Other functions with technical and/or industry knowledge (e.g. Specifiers, Legal, Engineers,

Quantity Surveyors, etc.).

This process will help refine the risks and opportunities identified in Spr-1 L1.1, and identify additional

potential risks and opportunities that may have been overlooked in the risk and opportunity assessment

undertaken in Spr-1 L1.1 (especially as not all goods and services that are to be procured will be known

at the commencement of a project).

If additional material risks or opportunities are identified through this process, the risk and opportunity

assessment undertaken in Spr-1 must be updated.

Page 99 of 477



Lea

Spr

Res

Res

Ecn

Ecn

Ene

Gre

Env

Wat

Eco

Sta

Leg

Her

Wfs

Con

L1.2 Specific sustainability requirements for goods and/or services identified as having material sustainability risks and/or opportunities are included in specifications to potential suppliers.

The sustainability requirements for infrastructure projects are likely to be included in a number of

procurement documents.

For each material risk and opportunity, as defined in Spr-2 L.1.1, the associated management actions

must be used to outline sustainability requirements in specifications to potential suppliers.

Specifications must request that potential suppliers provide the following as a minimum:

• Sustainability management system, describing how the organisation addresses the sustainability

performance of its operations, and

• Sustainability credentials of goods and services when relevant, e.g. credentials for low-carbon

products or evidence of audit of the associated supply chain.

It is recommended that specifications are linked back to the material risks and opportunities as

specifically as possible, so that the information provided by suppliers can be used to assess their ability

to address the material risks/opportunities identified.

L1.3 Project sustainability commitments are acknowledged by potential suppliers.

Suppliers must acknowledge the project/asset SP policy and/or supplier code of conduct or similar

performance standards. For the purpose of this criteria, ‘acknowledgement’ can take the form of one of

the following:

• Signed supplier code of conduct,

• Signed letter acknowledging the project’s sustainability commitments or requirements, and/or

• Submission of suppliers’ own code of conduct or policy that meets or exceeds project

requirements.

UAbout supplier codes of conduct

Projects may choose to formalise their sustainability expectations in a code of conduct or similar. This

document should:

• Reflect the project’s values, principles, objectives and goals,

• Reflect the project’s commitment to sustainability as outlined in their sustainability strategy (Lea-

1),

• Address the three pillars of sustainability (at a minimum): environmental, social and economic

considerations,

• Address key considerations of SP such as exercising due diligence, avoiding complicity and

exercising influence in extended supply chains through purchasing power, and

• Explain how compliance with expectations (i.e. contract and supplier code of conduct) will be

monitored and enforced.

L1.4 Supplier sustainability credentials are weighted as part of supplier evaluation.

Supplier selection criteria must include an appropriate weighting for sustainability criteria based on the

specific goods or services and/or sustainability risks and opportunities. The assessment must be

undertaken in accordance with Ecn-1 DL1.2 of the Design credits.

The selection criteria and weightings must be provided to all suppliers prior to procurement.


• UAt least 3 contracts Uthat are considered material for the project/asset. At least one example should

represent a significant procurement for the project in terms of overall delivery. Documentation

should show that:

Page 100 of 477



o Material sustainability risks and opportunities of the specific goods and services to be

procured have been assessed,

o Specific management plans to address the material risks and opportunities have been

developed, and

o Specific requirements, goals and/or objectives of address the material risks and

opportunities have been include in supplier specifications prior to contract award.

• Project/asset level sustainability performance standards have been developed and communicated

to all suppliers, and

• Documentation showing how sustainability performance requirements have been included in

evaluation criteria and communicated to potential suppliers in advance of contract award.

Level 2

L2.1 Sustainability objectives and expectations are proactively communicated to potential suppliers before going to market.

The project must send the market clear signals that sustainability is going to be an important element

of supplier selection for all material goods and services (as identified in Spr-1 L1.1 and Spr-2 L1.1).

To provide the market and suppliers with sufficient time to prepare, develop capabilities, and/or goods

or services to meet the needs of the project, the buying organisation/project must provide timely and

appropriate communication on the project/asset’s sustainability objectives as well as likely

requirements, specifications and/or KPIs.

This may include:

• Publication of project/asset’s sustainability strategy (Lea-1), objectives, KPIs and targets, product

or service standards and specific contract expectations (e.g. supplier code of conduct), and

• Hosting project/asset supplier meetings/days, which include communication of sustainability

strategy, objectives, KPIs and targets, product or service standards and specific contract

expectations.

L2.2 Suppliers’ responses to sustainability requirements (L1.2) are assessed, by a suitably qualified person or team, as part of the procurement process.

The assessment process must be undertaken by suitably qualified professional/s, including a

sustainability professional with at least 5-years’ experience.

The assessment process must be done in coordination with key internal stakeholders, to ensure a

holistic assessment of the implications of different evaluation perspectives on one another.

L2.3 Unsuccessful suppliers are informed of how they performed in terms of sustainability.

For material goods/services notifications and/or debriefs must include sustainability credentials or

performance, as this enables suppliers to understand where they have performed well and where they

could improve. It also sends a clear message to the market about the importance of sustainable

business practices for the project.


• Outline of the communication techniques employed to send the market clear signals that

sustainability is going to be an important element of supplier selection,

• Short CV’s of individuals involved in the assessment of sustainability requirements,

• Supplier / bid assessment report or similar, and

• Documentation related to supplier feedback on sustainability performance in tender submission.

Page 101 of 477



Lea

Spr

Res

Res

Ecn

Ecn

Ene

Gre

Env

Wat

Eco

Sta

Leg

Her

Wfs

Con Level 3

L3.1 The market is engaged well in advance and suppliers are encouraged to collaborate and provide innovative sustainability solutions that go beyond initial sustainability objectives.

Evidence must be provided that the project/asset has worked with its suppliers to exceed, or improve

upon, the project’s sustainability objectives as outlined in Lea-1 and/or Spr-2 L1.1 within their

control/contract scope.

Evidence must be provided outlining that the suppliers have been encouraged to submit innovative

proposals and solutions that could significantly enhance the sustainability outcomes of the project/asset

and/or impact sustainability risks and opportunities in the supply chain.


• Industry forums: organising events where the project and its suppliers can exchange information,

ideas and learn on how to achieve sustainability objectives together,

• Early engagement methods: e.g. competitive dialogue, early contractor involvement, etc,

• Evaluation criteria: suppliers encouraged to provide their sustainability best offer in comparison to

price, quality, etc,

• Negotiations: Sustainability is part of the negotiation agenda and suppliers are pushed to improve

the performance of their sustainability offer (e.g. ‘bid back’ practices), and

• Contractual terms: Suppliers are contractually incentivised (financial and non-financial) to achieve

performance above expected or agreed targets.

Page 102 of 477




Spr-3 Contract and supplier management

Aim

To reward the management of suppliers throughout the project to ensure compliance with the agreed

sustainability requirements.

Criteria

Table G19 Spr-3 Summary criteria table


L1.1 Supplier contracts include

relevant sustainability requirements

and how non-compliance will be

managed as part of the contract

management process.


achieved.

AND

L2.1 Supplier compliance with

sustainability contractual

requirements is monitored and

reported internally throughout the

contract.

AND

L2.2 Feedback on sustainability

performance is provided to

suppliers as part of contract

management.

AND

L2.3 Non-compliance is actively

managed, and where necessary

alternative approaches are

negotiated to achieve the

project/assets sustainability

objectives, KPIs and deliverables.


achieved.

AND

L3.1 Supplier contracts do not

enable negative practices in the

buyer-supplier relationship.

AND either

L3.2 Suppliers are engaged during

the contract to build their

sustainability capabilities.

OR

L3.3 Suppliers are engaged during

the contract to deliver innovative

solutions that provide increased

sustainability benefits.

Definitions








in major international texts such as the UN Guiding Principles on Human Rights or ISO 20400:2017






activities.




Page 103 of 477



Lea

Spr

Res

Res

Ecn

Ecn

Ene

Gre

Env

Wat

Eco

Sta

Leg

Her

Wfs

Con opportunity assessment (Lea-2). Material risks and opportunities in the supply chain should be identified







SMART means Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Realistic and Time-bound.

Specification: document stating requirements, i.e. provisions that convey criteria to be fulfilled by

goods, processes or services.

Suitably qualified person refers to an individual having 5-years’ experience in infrastructure

sustainability.




Level 1

L1.1 Supplier contracts include relevant sustainability requirements and how non-compliance will be managed as part of the contract management process.

Sustainability commitments and compliance management mechanisms must be written into contracts

where there is a material sustainability risk or opportunity to ensure that suppliers are contractually

bound to deliver on sustainability commitments / requirements, or improve their performance over time.

Compliance management mechanisms may include sustainability KPIs, deliverables, performance

reporting, etc.

It may be appropriate to include contractual clauses that enable the project to increase its control over

what happens in supply chains, such as:

• Provision to assess/audit all parties involved in supply chains,

• Obligations on suppliers to inform the project/asset delivery team of any significant impacts in the

supply chains, e.g. breaches of environmental licence in downstream production facilities,

• Minimum standards to be met by suppliers at lower tiers of supply chains,

• Rights to terminate the contract for breaches of sustainability obligations,

• Overall project/asset sustainability objectives and KPIs,

• SMART sustainability performance requirements (objectives, KPIs, measures) for the specific

goods or service,

• Desirable sustainability performance standards for the project as a whole e.g. IS rating, Greenstar,

etc. or pertaining to individual goods/services, and

• Performance reporting obligations.


• UAt least 3 contracts Uthat are considered material for the project/asset. At least one example should

represent a significant procurement for the project in terms of delivery. Evidence needs to include:

o Contractual sustainability performance requirements and obligations, and

o Consequences of non-compliance.

Page 104 of 477



Level 2

L2.1 Supplier compliance with sustainability contractual requirements is monitored and reported internally throughout the contract.

At a minimum, the following must be included in contract management systems for all goods and

services with material sustainability risks and/or opportunities:

• SMART sustainability objectives, KPIs and deliverables included in supplier performance

requirements,

• SMART sustainability objectives, KPIs and deliverables monitored and reported internally on a

regular basis (e.g. monthly, quarterly or annually as appropriate),

• Supplier sustainability performance reports detailing any non-compliances and acknowledging

good performance, and

• Periodic audits of sustainability performance against standards where relevant.

Justification must be provided as to the time frames selected for monitoring and reporting. This is most

effective if carried out on a regular basis and as part of the normal contract management process.

It is acknowledged that changes in project circumstances may lead to negotiating variations on supplier

requirements over the contract period. The ability of the procurement function to strategically monitor

and manage these variations is important. However, the renegotiation of any contract which includes

material sustainability risks and/or opportunities must maintain the intent of the original clauses related

to sustainability performance and management.

L2.2 Feedback on sustainability performance is provided to suppliers as part of contract management.

Feedback on sustainability performance must be provided to suppliers as part of contract management.

An important aspect of managing sustainability throughout the contract is the provision of feedback to

suppliers on performance in a timely and constructive manner. Justification must be provided as to the

time frames selected for providing feedback. This is most effective if carried out on a regular basis and

as part of the normal contract management process.

This relies on the capacity of the procurement function to carry out adequate monitoring and reporting

of sustainability performance as outlined in L2.1. It also relies on the supplier being able to report on

their sustainability performance against contractual obligations.

L2.3 Non-compliance is actively managed, and where necessary alternative approaches are negotiated to achieve the project/assets sustainability objectives, KPIs and deliverables.

Non-compliance with contractual obligations may happen due to inadequate supplier performance,

changing project circumstances, lack of market capacity to deliver, etc. Whatever the circumstances,

non-compliance related to a supplier’s sustainability requirements must be managed formally through

action plans, negotiations, collaboration, etc.

Poor performance is often not down to one supplier but often a failure of client, contractor and multiple

players in the supply chain. Addressing poor performance is a complex issue that will require a

collaborative effort to resolve.

In circumstances where the project/asset operating environment has changed, it may be necessary to

engage with the supplier to consider alternative solutions to deliver equivalent or better outcomes. The

ability of the procurement function to accommodate this in a timely manner is important in overcoming

non-compliance and changing circumstances.


• Evidence of monitoring supplier performance for at least 3 contracts that are considered material

for the project/asset. At least one example should represent a significant procurement for the

Page 105 of 477



Lea

Spr

Res

Res

Ecn

Ecn

Ene

Gre

Env

Wat

Eco

Sta

Leg

Her

Wfs

Con project in terms of delivery. This may include the use of a performance dashboard or similar to pro-

actively manage sustainability performance,

• Documentation showing feedback to suppliers on sustainability performance,

• Documentation identifying non-conformance notifications to suppliers,

• Documentation showing how non-compliance or changing circumstances were managed (e.g.

rectification measures, variations and/or alternative solutions negotiated and agreed) to ensure

sustainability objectives were achieved, and

• Documentation showing proactive collaboration with suppliers to manage sustainability issues.

Level 3

Note: projects can select either L3.2 or L3.3 to meet L3 and are not required to do both. L3.1, however, is compulsory to meet L3.

L3.1 Supplier contracts do not enable negative practices in the buyer-supplier relationship.

Supplier contracts must avoid the following practices:

• Contract structuring that excludes participation by disadvantaged groups, minorities, etc,

• Long and late payments,

• Unrealistic delivery requirements,

• Unfair penalties, and

• Requiring exclusivity (e.g. not allowing a social enterprise to work with competitors).

Where such practices are identified in contracts, evidence must be provided outlining rectifying actions.

L3.2 Suppliers are engaged during the contract to build their sustainability capabilities.

Improving sustainability capabilities in supply chains takes time and requires proactive engagement

with suppliers beyond contractual requirements to develop these capabilities. Suppliers must be

proactively supported; this can include the whole supply base and/or strategic suppliers to build

sustainability capabilities throughout the supply chain.

There are many ways to do this. Examples include:

• Capacity building programmes: offering training to suppliers (e.g. Supply Chain Sustainability

School), workshops with suppliers, etc,

• Supplier development: providing individual technical and/or financial support to suppliers to

develop their sustainability capabilities over time, and

• Supplier relationship management (SRM) initiatives: developing structured relationships with

critical/strategic suppliers in order to achieve greater levels of sustainability benefits and

innovation.

L3.3 Suppliers are engaged during the contract to deliver innovative solutions that provide increased sustainability benefits.

Suppliers must be proactively engaged to develop and deliver new methods or products that generate

better sustainability outcomes than the original contract or specification. This can include:

• New technologies, techniques and processes,

• New business models, e.g. circular economy, and

• New certifications and standards.

This can typically be done through supplier development or supplier relationship management

initiatives, as described in L3.2.


• Contract documentation,

Page 106 of 477



• Regular engagement with suppliers on sustainability e.g. emails, meeting agendas and minutes,

industry briefing, market sounding,

• Extracts of communications with suppliers e.g. website screen shots, newsletter, annual repor,

• Industry forum agendas, minutes and attendance lists,

• Supplier attendance/subscription to learning program,

• Training agenda and attendance list,

• Participation in the Supply Chain Sustainability School,

• Supplier development and/or supplier relationship management plans, agendas, meeting minutes,

and

• Documentation showing how innovations have been developed with suppliers.

Page 107 of 477



Lea

Spr

Res

Res

Ecn

Ecn

Ene

Gre

Env

Wat

Eco

Sta

Leg

Her

Wfs

Con References

International Organization for Standardization, ISO 20400:2017 Sustainable Procurement – Guidance,

(2017).

Page 108 of 477




Page 109 of 477



Lea

Spr

Res

Res

Ecn

Ecn

Ene

Gre

Env

Wat

Eco

Sta

Leg

Her

Wfs

Con RESILIENCE

About Resilience

Infrastructure can play a vital role in the resilience of our cities, towns and communities. This category

seeks to consider how an asset can improve its resilience to a shock or stress event, and explores the

role infrastructure assets play in contributing towards the resilience of a city, town or community by

considering the complex and interdependent systems that bind them together (Res-1). As climate and

natural hazards are one of the biggest resilience risks for infrastructure projects and assets, a specific

Climate and Natural Hazards credit (Res-2) considers how assets can adapt to the changing climate

and respond to existing natural hazard risks.

“City and community resilience is about making a community better, in both good times and bad for the benefit of all its citizens, particularly the poor and vulnerable” (100 Resilient Cities, pioneered by the Rockefeller Foundation).

This category marks the inception of the transformational change required across industry to deliver

infrastructure that is more resilient and responsive to the needs of our cities and communities. At its

core, this category is about the sphere of impact and influence our infrastructure assets have, and the

inclusive approach to engagement required to respond to the needs of communities and key

stakeholders in the face of shocks and chronic stresses.

Our cities and communities are reliant on the provision of well maintained, functioning infrastructure

such as telecommunications, electricity, water and transportation networks. While this dependence is

thrown into sharp relief in times of crisis or disaster (for example during flood events or extreme storms),

it is also increasingly tested by the series of underlying stresses ranging from ageing infrastructure

through to population density and competing investment priorities that are often overlooked. While the

ability of these stresses to amplify, or exacerbate shock events is being increasingly observed. For

example, the linkages between social exclusion and poor race relations were brought into sharp relief

during the post-disaster recovery response to Hurricane Katrina in 2005. Infrastructure can play a vital

role in responding to such stresses at a city scale. An example of this can be seen in the City of Medellin,

Columbia where the introduction of the Metrocable has helped address stresses associated with lack

of employment and educational opportunities; poverty; and social exclusion, has and improved the

mental and physical health of some of the city’s most vulnerable members (refer Case Study 2).

A more concerted effort is also required in considering the varying levels of interdependency across a

range of systems and supporting services to support our cities and communities in times of need. Due

to their network properties, damage to infrastructure in one place may interrupt service over a large

geographic area. As explored by Sajoudi et al (2013) the scale of social disruption caused by the loss

of infrastructure is often disproportionate to the actual amount of physical damage. With this in mind,

greater emphasis needs to be placed on the consideration of these impacts but more importantly, on

supporting the successful day-to-day delivery of well-functioning and operational infrastructure systems.

The Lloyd’s City Risk Index found that $4.6 trillion of the projected Gross Domestic Product (GDP) of

301 of the world’s leading cities is at risk from 18 different types of shock events over the next decade

(Lloyds, 2017). With cities needing to respond to an ever-evolving set of disparate and diverse risks,

the need to plan and build resilient infrastructure to help communities respond and recover quickly in

the face of change is becoming increasingly necessary.

As a practice, resilience has evolved much in recent years and in particular, since its initial definition by

Holling as “a measure of the persistence of systems and of their ability to absorb change and

disturbance and still maintain the same relationships between populations or state variables” (1973,

p.14). A more commonly used approach to resilience thinking, particularly in the context of infrastructure

and urban systems, expands on the notion of maintaining functionality; considering how assets and

Page 110 of 477



systems might bounce back, and indeed bounce forward to create a ‘new normal’ in the face of a diverse

range of shocks and stresses (Davoudi et al, 2012; Rockefeller Foundation, 2013; UNISDR, 2015;

Lloyds, 2017).

A growing body of work led by international organisations such as the United Nations International

Strategy for Disaster Reduction (UNISDR), the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals, the

World Bank, and the 100 Resilient Cities Initiative pioneered by the Rockefeller Foundation are shaping

implementation and action in this space. In the context of this category, urban resilience is defined as:

“the capacity of individuals, communities, institutions, businesses, and systems within a city to survive, adapt, and grow no matter what kinds of chronic stresses and acute shocks they experience” (Rockefeller Foundation; 2014).

The approach of considering resilience no matter what the cause, focusses on improving the individual

systems that make up a city and increasing the resilience of the city (and/or regional community) overall.

The 100 Resilient Cities program is supported by the City Resilience Framework which provides a lens

through which the complexity of cities and the drivers that contribute to their resilience might be

understood. It is centred on four essential dimensions of urban resilience: Health & Wellbeing, Economy

& Society; Infrastructure & Environment and Leadership and Strategy. In addition to the framework, 100

Resilient Cities have identified the following seven qualities considered central to driving urban

resilience:

• Reflective: Reflective systems use past experience to inform future decisions and are

accepting of the inherent and ever-increasing uncertainty and change in today’s world.

• Resourceful: Resourceful(ness) recognizes alternative ways to use resources and implies that

people and institutions are able to rapidly find different ways to achieve their goals or meet their

needs during a shock or when under stress.

• Inclusive: Inclusion emphasizes the need for broader consultation and engagement of

communities, including the most vulnerable groups. Inclusiveness prioritizes broad consultation

to create a sense of shared ownership in decision making.

• Integrated: Integration and alignment between city systems promotes consistency in decision-

making and ensures that all investments are mutually supportive to a common outcome. This

approach seeks to bring together a range of distinct systems and institutions.

• Robust: Robust systems include well-conceived, constructed and managed physical assets.

• Redundant: Redundancy refers to spare capacity purposely created within systems so that

they can accommodate disruptions.

• Flexible: Flexibility implies a willingness and ability to adopt alternative strategies in response

to changing circumstances.

This approach also focuses on delivering the ‘resilience dividend’ that is, those co-benefits and

opportunities that might be realised to help build resilience across a range of shocks and stresses.

Both the UN Sustainable Development Goals (launched in 2015) and the United Nations ‘Sendai

Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction’ highlight the importance of resilience when considering the role

of infrastructure in society.

The recent Future Cities: Building Infrastructure Resilience published by Lloyds of London and Arup

(2017) outlines a set of key concepts infrastructure resilience should embrace, specifically the ability to:

• Withstand and endure: The capacity of infrastructure systems to continue to perform and

provide their intended functions in the face of shocks and stresses,

Page 111 of 477



Lea

Spr

Res

Res

Ecn

Ecn

Ene

Gre

Env

Wat

Eco

Sta

Leg

Her

Wfs

Con • Learn and adapt: The ongoing process of evaluating and adapting performance (systems,

processes and assets) to better cope with shocks and stresses. This can also be described as

‘adaptive capacity’, and

• Achieve transformational change: Infrastructure functions evolve at system level to meet

rapidly changing urban needs and better support city-scale resilience.

At a national level, the case for a more comprehensive consideration of risk and resilience is clearly

articulated in the Australian Business Round Table for Disaster Resilience and Safer Communities

(ARBT) ‘Building Resilient Infrastructure’ report (Deloitte, 2016) which states:

“Beyond the direct costs of rebuilding, there are also substantial indirect costs associated with losing infrastructure services. The loss of such services affects businesses, communities and the broader economy via delays, interruption, financial losses, loss of customers and broader social impacts such as stress and anxiety.

As such, the total cost of infrastructure damage is substantially higher than the direct replacement costs.”

About Climate and Natural Hazards

The most significant shocks and stresses for infrastructure in Australia and New Zealand are climate

change and natural hazards. For this reason, a specific credit focused on climate and natural hazards

has been developed, aligning the requirements of the ISv1.2 Climate Change category, with Resilience

approaches while also including the management of natural hazard risks.

For the purpose of this category, natural hazards are defined as a “natural process or phenomenon that

may cause loss of life, injury or other health impacts, property damage, loss of livelihoods and services,

social and economic disruption, or environmental damage.” This definition has been informed by the

Hyogo Framework for Action 2005-2015 (United Nations, 2005) and the Sendai Framework for Disaster

Risk Reduction 2015-2030 (United Nations, 2015). Examples of natural hazards include bushfires,

heatwaves, cyclones, extreme storms and widespread flooding. Broader geological hazards such as

earthquakes and tsunamis are also included (however these are only considered in Res-1 where

relevant).

‘Natural Hazards’ includes hazards resulting from climate change (considered in Res-2), as well as

hazards not associated with climate change (considered in Res-1), including those that are occurring

now and into the future.

The benefits of identifying natural hazard risks, including those resulting from climate change, and

developing a proactive approach to treatment is considerable. Work commissioned for the ABRT

estimates that between the years 2002–03 and 2010-11 more than $450 million was spent by the

Australian governments (local, state and federal) to restore critical infrastructure after extreme weather

events (Deloitte, 2016).

Regarding climate risk specifically, traditional design approaches based on historical weather records

are no longer valid. Long lifespan infrastructure now needs to be designed, constructed and operated

to cope with projected hotter, drier and stormier conditions, combined with higher sea levels. Climate

projections released by Australia’s CSIRO and Bureau of Meteorology in 2015 indicate that under all

future emissions scenarios:

• average temperatures will continue to increase (very high confidence in this outcome) and Australia

will experience more heat extremes (very high confidence) and fewer frosty days (high confidence),

• extreme rainfall events are likely to become more intense (high confidence), and

• the number of tropical cyclones is projected to become less frequent with a greater proportion of

high intensity storms (medium confidence) and a greater proportion extending beyond the southern

latitude of 25 degrees (low confidence).

Page 112 of 477



The Australian Government recognises that “climate change poses significant risks to our economies,

communities and the natural environment” (Commonwealth of Australia, 2015). According to the

Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) (Climate Change 2014: Synthesis Report.

Contribution of Working Groups I, II and III to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental

Panel on Climate Change, 2014., 2014), the major risks for Australia and New Zealand are:

• increased frequency and intensity of flooding, resulting in damage to housing, roads and other

infrastructure,

• increased illness, death and infrastructure damages during heat waves,

• constraints on water resources in southern Australia, Northland and parts of eastern the lowlands

of NZ,

• significant reduction in agricultural production in the Murray-Darling Basin and far south-eastern

and south-western Australia and eastern NZ if scenarios of severe drying are realised,

• increasing risks to coastal infrastructure and low-lying ecosystems from continued sea-level rise,

• increased damages to ecosystems and human settlements, infrastructure, economic losses, and

risks to human life from bushfires in most of southern Australia and the Southern Alps and their

National Parks and eastern lowlands of NZ,

• significant change in the ecological community composition and structure of coral reef systems,

• loss of mountain ecosystems and some native species, and

• change in ecosystems and species distribution, including pests and vector-related diseases.

Figure G7 Key Hotspots indented for Australia and New Zealand, assuming a medium emissions scenario

for 2050. Source: (IPCC, 2007)

UNational Strategies

In March 2015 New Zealand made a commitment to the international1T 1TSendai Framework for Disaster

Risk Reduction and are in the process of developing the National Disaster Resilience Strategy.

The Australian Government has developed the Critical Infrastructure Resilience Strategy: Plan (Critical

Infrastructure Resilience Strategy Plan, 2015) which outlines the government’s approach to ensuring

Page 113 of 477



Lea

Spr

Res

Res

Ecn

Ecn

Ene

Gre

Env

Wat

Eco

Sta

Leg

Her

Wfs

Con

critical infrastructure is resilient to natural hazards, and in conjunction with COAG, released the National Strategy for Disaster Resilience (NSDR) which more recently has given rise to the Enhancing Disaster Resilience in the Built Environment: Roadmap which sets out the activities required to achieve broader

disaster resilience in the built environment.

Further, the National Climate Resilience and Adaptation Strategy (Commonwealth of Australia, 2015)

builds on the National Climate Change Adaptation Framework (Council of Australian Governments,

2007) and identifies ‘Cities and the built environment’ and ‘Water resources’ as two of eight key sectors

for priority action and ‘upgrading or hardening the design of buildings and infrastructure’ as one of the

key adaptation actions. The strategy identified the following risks to cities and the built environment:

• Challenges to often ageing publicly and privately-owned and managed assets and infrastructure

systems including, commercial and residential buildings, energy, water and communications

utilities, and transport systems, both from gradual impacts like sea level and temperature rise, and

from extreme events like floods, heatwaves and bushfires.

• Greater risk of human injury, disease and death, and interrupted labour force productivity, due to

hotter, drier conditions, increasing the bushfire risk to lives and private property, and the incidence

of heatwaves in the coastal zone—where most of Australia’s urban infrastructure and population is

located—more intense storms and cyclones and rising sea levels could worsen storm surge, coastal

inundation and erosion.

• Damage to biodiversity and ecosystems that support social wellbeing, provide services that are

fundamental to our health like clean air and fresh water, and offer protection from natural disasters.

• Negative impacts on Government budgets, including growing costs to the Government to cover its

contingent liability for natural disasters, and constraining existing Government capital for new

investments and the need to rebuild or harden existing infrastructure.

• Failure in one part of a city’s social, economic or infrastructure networks which may have cascading

or unanticipated effects elsewhere. For example, in Melbourne (in 2009) a heatwave-induced

blackout shut down the city’s rail and tram networks, forcing thousands of businesses to close,

while also crippling internet services nationwide. These interdependencies are local, national and

global.

UAustralian State Strategies

Most states and infrastructure agencies have developed plans, policies and processes to respond to

natural hazard risk and/or assess and reduce the climate change vulnerability of their projects or assets.

The Transport for NSW Climate Risk Assessment Guidelines (Transport for NSW, 2016) provides an

example of an infrastructure agency guideline. Further, collaborative work between NCCARF and the

Department of the Environment has delivered the CoastalAdapt project which, in addition to providing

useful information regarding coastal inundation, sea level rise and erosion, also provides a series of

templates and supporting information to guide the climate risk assessment process.

The following credits apply to this category:

Res-1 Resilience Plan

Res-2 Climate and natural hazards risks

Page 114 of 477



Category linkages

The ISv2.0 Resilience category has linkages with the following categories:



Ecn-1 Res-2 requires resilience

options to be assessed using

Ecn-1 and Ecn-4.

x x x

Ecn-4 Res-2 requires resilience


Ecn-1 and Ecn-4.

x x x

Lea-2 Risk and opportunity

assessment mirrors the

approach taken in Lea-2

x x x x

Sta-1 Stakeholder engagement is

fundamental to Res-1 when

developing a resilience plan, in

particular, when identifying

vulnerable communities.

Stakeholders also need to be

engaged in developing the

climate and natural hazards risk

and treatment assessment.

x x x x

Page 115 of 477



Lea

Spr

Res

Res

Ecn

Ecn

Ene

Gre

Env

Wat

Eco

Sta

Leg

Her

Wfs

Con

ISv2.0 Design

Res-1: Resilience Plan 40T

Aim

To reward the consideration and planning of the role an asset plays in contributing towards the

resilience of a city, region, town or community.

Criteria

Table G21 Res-1 Design summary criteria


DL1.1 In collaboration with key

stakeholders, identify a range of

acute shocks and chronic

stresses, likely to impact the

functionality of the identified

asset and its delivery to the

community it services.

AND

DL1.2 Identify the key

interdependent physical assets

and services within the

city/town/community likely to be

impacted should the identified

asset lose functionality or be

forced to operate at minimal

capacity.

AND

DL1.3 Identify treatment options

to manage the impact to critical

interdependent assets and

services in the event of the

identified asset losing

functionality.


achieved.

AND

DL2.1 An expanded selection of

external representatives

participated in the identification

of interdependent assets and

services within the

city/town/community.

AND

DL2.2 Identify the vulnerable

communities at a local level

likely to be most impacted in the

event of the asset failing.

AND

DL2.3 Treatment options are

extended to address impacts to

vulnerable communities.

AND

DL2.4 All treatment options are

assessed and prioritised based

on their ability to address key

resilience qualities.


achieved.

AND

DL3.1 Use the information and

research gathered to develop a

resilience plan

AND

DL3.2 Treatment options are

prioritised based on their ability

to deliver co-benefits across a

range of interdependent assets

and services and are

implemented.

AND

DL3.3 Community consultation

with key stakeholders within

relevant communities is

undertaken to test and refine

the draft Resilience Plan.

AND

PL3.4 Community feedback has

informed the final Resilience

Plan for the asset.

AND

PL3.5 Evidence of how the

identified treatment options will

be implemented through the

relevant phases of the project.

Note: Shocks associated with extreme events and natural disasters such as those identified through the Climate and Natural Hazards credit (Res-2) may be used to achieve partial compliance with Level 1 of Res-1. Additionally, consideration should be given to other shock events and stresses that may impact on the ability of the asset to maintain operation and functionality.

Definitions:

Engagement/participation means the involvement, through an appropriate means, of stakeholders

that are directly or indirectly interested or affected by the infrastructure development. Appropriate

engagement must include at least one of the following:

• A face-to-face workshop with relevant representatives from stakeholder organisations,

• A web conference with relevant representatives from stakeholder organisations, and

Page 116 of 477



• Formal review of the draft resilience strategy with feedback from stakeholders provided either

verbally or electronically.

Timely and inclusive engagement with key stakeholders representing interdependent assets, services

and communities is a critical component of the resilience process and one that distinguishes from a

business-as-usual approach. While external engagement within the earlier stages of a project and within

the lower levels of ISCA compliance is unusual, it is an essential component in developing a resilience

approach that fully responds to the ability of the identified asset to contribute towards a community’s

overall resilience.

Interdependent assets and services relate to those components of a city or a community likely to be

impacted as a result of the identified asset failing or being forced to operate at minimal capacity. For

example, if a water treatment plant is unable to function at capacity it may force other systems and

services to be disrupted. An example of this was seen in 2013 when the Mt Crosby Treatment plant in

Brisbane was operating at minimal capacity as result of recent flooding. The impacts of this were far

reaching with hospitals rescheduling elective surgeries and childcare providers closing until service was

re-established.

Resilience dividend refers to the co-benefits and opportunities that might be realised to help build

resilience across a range of shocks and stresses.

Resilience qualities refer to the seven resilience qualities as defined by the Rockefeller Foundation

and Arup as: flexible, inclusive, integrated, redundant, reflective, resourceful and robust.

Shocks refer to large-scale high impact events and catastrophes such as man-made and natural

disasters. Example shocks could include: cyber-attack; digital network failure; terrorist attack; war and

conflict, collapse of financial systems; natural disasters, widespread pandemics and/or diseases.

Stresses are often defined as the underlying ‘slow burn’ issues that have the potential to exacerbate a

shock. Examples of stresses in the context of a city may include: social cohesion, housing affordability;

access to transport; demand on health infrastructure; ageing populations, etc.

Co-benefits: occur when treatment options to build resilience deliver multiple benefits across a range

of areas. For example, in addition to managing and treating stormwater runoff, water sensitive urban

design can deliver other benefits (co-benefits). At a minimum, these could include improving visual

amenity, responding to climate change and supporting local ecosystem health within waterways.

Co-benefits are linked to the ability for projects to deliver the ‘resilience dividend’ the term used to

identify actions or initiatives that address multiple benefits that help respond to resilience qualities.

Level 1

DL1.1 In collaboration with key stakeholders identify a range of acute shocks and chronic stresses, likely to impact the functionality of the identified asset and its delivery to the community it services.

Where a resilience plan or analysis has been undertaken and verified as part of an IS planning rating,

the plan or analysis must be review and updated. The review must be undertaken by a multidisciplinary

team and must include the following representatives as a minimum:

• Key internal stakeholder including the Project Director, Sustainability Manager, Community

Engagement Manager, Engineers and Risk Managers,

• Representatives from within local council e.g. relevant engineers, asset managers, risk managers,

community relations staff and designers,

• Community representatives,

• First responders such as State Emergency Services, Fire, Police, Ambulance,

Page 117 of 477



Lea

Spr

Res

Res

Ecn

Ecn

Ene

Gre

Env

Wat

Eco

Sta

Leg

Her

Wfs

Con

• Impacted infrastructure providers such as roads, transport services,

• Key community support agencies (e.g. Red Cross; Salvation Army, etc.), and

• Constructor/contractor building the project, if known.

It is expected that the updated resilience plan or analysis will be extended as more information about

the project is available. This may include a risk assessment that has been updated with more specific

risks or engagement with more specific community members, etc.

If a resilience plan or analysis has been undertaken, but it has not been developed in accordance with

the requirements in DL1.2, then this criterion is not applicable. Please use the criterion under the

subheading ‘where a resilience plan has not been developed’.

By meeting this criterion, full points will be awarded for this credit.

Where a resilience plan as not been undertaken as part of a Planning rating, then the following applies:

A multidisciplinary team comprising key internal and selected external project stakeholders (as

identified as appropriate through the stakeholder analysis undertaken in Sta-1) must participate in

identifying acute shocks and stresses likely to impact the functionality of the asset and its delivery to

the community it services.

Central to this credit is identifying and understanding the role the asset performs in the context of the

community. For example, if the identified asset is unable to function or provide service, how will

interdependent infrastructure assets and services be impacted? If an Information and Communications

Technology (ICT) hub goes down, what impact will that have on surrounding communities,

infrastructure, services, economic growth and activity?

Note: Projects completing the Res-2 – Climate and Natural Hazards credit will observe some overlap between the requirements listed here and the identification of direct and indirect climate-related risks as per Res-2. These should be used to inform the process of identifying appropriate shocks and stresses and will contribute in part to meeting the requirements of this credit.

External stakeholders must include key representatives from within local council e.g. relevant

engineers, asset managers, risk managers, community relations staff and designers, as well as

community representatives.

In addition to climate-related shock events identified within Res-2 (e.g. natural disasters such as

bushfires, cyclones and flooding), the shocks and stresses identified in Table G22 should be considered

and assessed based on their relevance to the identified asset.

Table G22 Example shocks and stresses

Example shocks: short-term disruptions Example stresses: long-term systemic disruptions

• cyber-attack

• digital network failure

• terror attack

• failure of critical infrastructure

• war and conflict

• collapse of financial systems

• natural disasters including both those

associated with climate change as well as a

broader set of geological hazards e.g.

landslides, earthquakes, tsunamis, etc.

• diminishing social cohesion

• homelessness

• increasing chronic illness

• increasing energy costs

• increasing unemployment

• ageing infrastructure

• inadequate urban planning

• rising income and wealth disparity

• profound social instability

• rising cyber dependency

• loss of housing affordability

Page 118 of 477



Example shocks: short-term disruptions Example stresses: long-term systemic disruptions

• water crises including water shortages,

flooding, water contamination, etc.

• widespread pandemics and/or diseases.

• lack of transport accessibility and availability

• demand on health infrastructure and

services

• ageing population

• depleted or degraded natural resources.

The following questions are designed to guide the process of selecting and assessing the relevant

shocks and stresses for the project. It is important to note there is no minimum number of shocks or

stresses that will be relevant, these are likely to be different for each project and asset type and as such

it is important to consider and assess each of the potential impact areas individually.

Note: completing Res-2: Climate and Natural Hazards will assist the process of identifying climate-related shocks and stresses. These outputs will contribute (in part) towards meeting the requirements of this credit and should be used to inform the broader process of identifying appropriate shocks and stresses.

UDefining likelihood:

When undertaking the assessment of the likely shocks and stresses with key external stakeholders, the

following clarifies the anticipated likelihood of the shock event occurring. UAllU shocks considered likely

or very likely to relate to the project must be considered.

• Very likely – The shock is expected to occur (>70% probability over the lifetime of the asset)

• Likely - The shock could occur (30 – 70% probability over the lifetime of the asset)

• Unlikely - The shock is unlikely, but could potentially occur (<30% probability over the lifetime of

the asset)

UIdentifying relevant stresses

To identify the relevant stresses for a project the following question must be reviewed against a

selection of at least 10 of the shocks listed in Table G21 and assessed for relevance.

“Does the identified asset provide an opportunity to reduce the impact of the associated stress?”

How likely is it that the shock will:

• Impacts to functionality:

- How likely is it that the shock will significantly constrain the identified asset’s ability

to function and support the surrounding community for at least a month?

- How likely is it that the shock will constrain the ability of the identified asset to

function for between one week and one month?

• Injury and loss of life:

- How likely is it that the shock will result in loss of life or injury for asset employees or

members of the community?

- How likely is it that the shock will result in isolated loss of life or injury for asset

employees or members of the community?

• Economic growth and activity:

- How likely is it that the shock will constrain the identified asset’s contribution

towards regional activity and growth for at least 6-months

- How likely is it that the shock will constrain the identified asset’s contribution to

regional activity and growth for up to 6-months

Page 119 of 477



Lea

Spr

Res

Res

Ecn

Ecn

Ene

Gre

Env

Wat

Eco

Sta

Leg

Her

Wfs

Con

• Possibly: It is possible the asset will provide an opportunity to reduce the impact of the associated

stress.

• Unlikely: It is unlikely the asset will provide an opportunity to reduce the impact of the associated

stress.

If the answer is ‘possible’, then it should be considered as a relevant stress for the identified asset.

In addition to the requirements listed above, a high-level community context analysis is to be undertaken

at a relevant scale (e.g. regional, metropolitan, city/Local Government area, and precinct) for the project

outlining the current state of the community the asset is passing through and servicing.

As a minimum, community information considered must include:

• Population demographics

• Social stability, security and justice

• Economic prosperity

• Public health

• Education and employment

DL1.2 Identify the key interdependent physical assets and services within the city/town/community likely to be impacted should the identified asset lose functionality or be forced to operate at minimal capacity.

A preliminary desktop assessment should be undertaken to identify key assets and services likely to be

affected as a result of the asset’s failure. At a minimum, assets considered must include: water, power,

telecommunications, transport, parks and community facilities. Note: not all interdependent assets need

to be assessed, just the assets that will be majorly affected by the asset failing. This means, additional

assets may need to be assessed.

A summary of the location and/or the proximity of the interdependent assets/services to the identified

assets and services must also be stated. This list must then be tested with external stakeholders from

local council during the consultation workshop or similar engagement method.

Interdependencies generally fall into three categories of interaction namely, upstream, internal or

downstream and each category of interaction can include one or more of four classes of dependency,

including physical, cyber, geographic or logical. These categories and classes of dependencies are

summarised in Table G23. (Rinaldi, S.M., J.P. Peerenboom, and T.K. Kelly, 2001).

Example: Assessing stresses for a new train station

Does the identified asset provide an opportunity to reduce the impact of the associated stresses?

Answer: Possibly – it is possible the asset will provide an opportunity to reduce the impact of:

• transport accessibility and availability – by providing a service where none previously

existed

• unemployment – by improving connectivity and enabling people greater access to

employment opportunities

Answer: Unlikely - it is unlikely the asset will provide an opportunity to reduce the impact of the

associated stress.

• Homelessness: it is unlikely the asset will provide an opportunity for reducing the impact

of homeless on the community

• High energy costs: it is unlikely the asset will provide an opportunity for easing the impact

of high energy costs.

Page 120 of 477



Table G23 Dependency types (Source: (Rinaldi, S.M., J.P. Peerenboom, and T.K. Kelly, 2001)

Group Description


Upstream

dependencies


that are necessary to support its operations and functions.

Internal

dependencies




onsite water well).

Downstream

dependencies






between the inputs and outputs of two assets: a commodity (i.e. goods or service)










right-of-way).





Following identification of the interdependent assets and services, a high-level summary of the current

condition and level of criticality of interdependent assets and services should also be identified.

DL1.3 Identify treatment options to manage the impact to critical interdependent assets and services in the event of the identified asset losing functionality.

Treatment options to address the impact the identified asset may have on the range of interdependent

assets and services must be identified in consultation with relevant stakeholders (this may be with the

same stakeholder engagement with in PL1.1). Consideration should also be given to the stage in the

asset-life cycle when the treatment would be most applicable e.g. planning, design, construction, and

operation.

Example evidence for Level 1:

Report including:

• A summary of stakeholders engaged and means for engagement,

• Assessment of shocks and stresses including those identified as relevant to the identified asset,

• Outcomes from the community context analysis,

• The key interdependent physical assets and services within the area likely to be impacted

(including an assessment on their criticality), and

• The relevant treatment options identified.

Page 121 of 477



Lea

Spr

Res

Res

Ecn

Ecn

Ene

Gre

Env

Wat

Eco

Sta

Leg

Her

Wfs

Con

Level 2

DL2.1 An expanded selection of external representatives participated in the identification of interdependent assets and services within the city/town/community.

People-centred decision-making is a key attribute of resilience practice, as such, engagement with

external stakeholders must be expanded from local council representation to include other tiers of state

or federal government and include a selection of business and community stakeholders. An example

of relevant stakeholders includes:

• First responders such as State Emergency Services, Fire, Police, Ambulance,

• Impacted infrastructure providers such as roads, transport services, and

• Key community support agencies (e.g. Red Cross; Salvation Army, etc.).

DL2.2 Identify the vulnerable communities at a local level likely to be most impacted in the event of the asset failing.

When infrastructure assets fail the impact is often felt across a whole community, and at times even at

a city-scale. However, within these communities, the vulnerable and sensitive members often have the

least capacity to respond to these disruptions and the least adaptive capacity (ability to cope). As part

of external engagement efforts aligned with PL2.1, engagement with relevant external stakeholders

must be expanded from identifying interdependent assets and services, to identifying those vulnerable

members of the community likely to be impacted and disadvantaged in the event of the asset failing.

Vulnerable members of the community should include, as a minimum (Griffith University, 2017):

• People for whom English is a second-language (Culturally and Linguistically Diverse),

• Above 65 years and living alone,

• Full dependent (4 years and under),

• People with physical and mental-health problems,

• Those earning lower than the median household income average (below $750 per week), and

• Those experiencing financial hardship and distress; renters and/or people in social housing.

DL2.3 Treatment options are extended to address impacts to vulnerable communities.

Treatment options must be expanded to reduce the negative impact to vulnerable members of the

community that may arise in the event of the identified asset failing or operating at minimal capacity.

As an example, if service along a train line is suspended due to a shock event, what impact might that

have on vulnerable community members? As a minimum, in this instance the project should consider if

there are aged care homes or retirement villages within close proximity to the impacted stations which

may result in elderly members of the community being unable to access health or support services. It

should also consider whether there are local schools or childcare centres within close proximity of the

line that may result in children/dependants being stranded as parents or guardians are unable to collect

them. Once these potential vulnerable communities have been identified, the project team must engage

with the managers of these facilities to identify appropriate treatment options to manage the impacts of

this disruption.

DL2.4 All treatment options are assessed and prioritised based on their ability to address key resilience qualities

All identified treatment options to minimise impacts to interdependent assets, services and vulnerable

communities must be assessed and prioritised for implementation against the following resilience

qualities:

Using the following as criteria, actions should be assessed using a simple ‘yes/no’ response to confirm

whether the proposed treatment option will address or respond to the associated resilience quality. The

qualities do not need to be weighted (they are considered to have equal weighting) however treatment

Page 122 of 477



options should be prioritised based on the ability for the treatment option to address multiple resilience

qualities.

Treatment options that deliver against multiple resilience qualities should be prioritised.


Report including:

• Summary of relevant external stakeholders engaged as part of the process to identify

interdependent assets, services and vulnerable communities;

• Treatment option assessment matrix/summary including a list of treatment options identified to

address vulnerable communities and prioritised based on their ability to deliver the identified

resilience qualities.

Level 3

DL3.1 Use the information and research gathered to develop a resilience plan

Using the information, research and analysis undertaken in levels 1 and 2, a draft resilience plan must

be developed.

The draft Resilience Plan must include:

• Background and overview re. the identified asset and context,

• Summary of stakeholder engagement and community consultation approach including which

actions have been informed or developed through the community consultation approach,

• Analysis of relevant shocks and stresses highlighting those considered and those included as

relevant,

• Analysis of interdependent infrastructure and services including condition and criticality,

• Impacts to vulnerable communities and their location within the community, and

Reflective: is the treatment option informed by past experiences and knowledge?

Consider: is the option considered appropriate based on past delivery experience?

Resourceful: does the treatment option consider alternative ways of using resources?

Consider: have alternative energy options including generators, renewable technologies etc. been

considered to support supply consistency?

Inclusive: does the treatment option prioritise consultation, engagement and shared ownership in

decision-making?

Consider: will the treatment option/s be informed by inclusive engagement and consultation

approaches?

Integrated: will the treatment option respond to a diverse set of interdependent assets and services?

Consider: who will be engaged, how they will be engaged and what benefit will be delivered to multiple

stakeholders as result of the treatment option being delivered.

Robust: how will the treatment option respond to future impacts and shocks?

Consider: what impact would result in the future failure and/or operation at minimal capacity for the

identified asset - is this acceptable and/or tolerable and if not, what should be done to address this

more comprehensively?

Redundant: will the treatment option result in spare capacity for the identified asset?

Page 123 of 477



Lea

Spr

Res

Res

Ecn

Ecn

Ene

Gre

Env

Wat

Eco

Sta

Leg

Her

Wfs

Con

• Proposed treatment options (including those identified for vulnerable communities) supported

by an identified timeframe for delivery; responsibility; funding/cost implications and relevant

stakeholders to support implementation:

- Evidence should also be included as to how the options have been shortlisted (e.g.

through the use of the Resilient Qualities listed) and prioritised to deliver the resilience

dividend.

DL3.2 Treatment options are prioritised based on their ability to deliver co-benefits across a range of interdependent assets and services and are implemented.

Identifying associated co-benefits supports the delivery of the resilience dividend and assists with

decision-making, resourcing and prioritisation. The treatment option assessment must analyse and

prioritise options based on their ability to deliver co-benefits.

Note: DL2.2 requires the consideration of how treatment options respond to multiple resilience qualities to support prioritisation, however, DL3.2 requires the project team to consider whether the treatment options deliver multiple benefits.

While a treatment options may address or respond to several resilience qualities at a time, it does not

necessarily follow that it will deliver a solution for multiple issues. E.g. an emergency evacuation plan

could be developed to address multiple shocks and therefore provide multiple benefits (co-benefits). In

contrast upgrading the HVAC system within a train station to respond to the stress of increased

temperatures may respond qualities associated with being ‘reflective; robust and redundant’, but is

unlikely to deliver broader benefits beyond those using the station.

Those treatment options that deliver a greater number of co-benefits should be prioritised for

implementation. Further prioritisation can assist with identifying and allocating delivery timeframes for

response and funding the associated initiatives. As a minimum, treatment options must be prioritised

based on their ability to deliver the greatest proportion of risk reduction to affected people and

communities.

DL3.3 Community consultation with key stakeholders within relevant communities is undertaken to test and refine the draft Resilience Plan

The identified and prioritised treatment options along with responses for each level of this credit must

be consolidated into a draft Resilience Plan which is released for public consultation. Consultation must

include online publication; community consultation sessions and; group consultation as a minimum with

key stakeholders.

Consultation approaches for community engagement should reference the requirements outlined in

Sta-1 and Sta-2 regarding Stakeholder Engagement. Evidence must be provided to show how a

Diverse, Influential and Representative sample of the community has been consulted and engaged.

DL3.4 Community feedback has informed the final Resilience Plan for the asset.

The final Resilience Plan must include reference to the feedback gained during the community

consultation period and how these suggestions have informed the plan.

DL3.5 Evidence of how the identified treatment options will be implemented through the relevant phases of the project.

The final Resilience Plan must include references to how the identified treatment options (as identified

in DL3.2) will be implemented through the relevant phases of the project.

Page 124 of 477




• Draft Resilience Plan

• Details of community engagement

• List of attendees at community engagement sessions

• Treatment options assessment.

Page 125 of 477



Lea

Spr

Res

Res

Ecn

Ecn

Ene

Gre

Env

Wat

Eco

Sta

Leg

Her

Wfs

Con

ISv2.0 As Built

40TRes-1: Resilience

Aim

To reward the consideration and planning of the role an asset plays in contributing towards the

resilience of a city, region, town or community.

Criteria

Table G24 Res-1 As Built summary criteria

Level 1

ABL1.1 Actions outlined in the Resilience Plan for the As Built phase are implemented according to the plan.

AND

ABL1.2 Actions that require a management or governance response are to be incorporated into operational

management plans, or similar.

Level 1

ABL1.1 Actions outlined in the Resilience Plan for the As Built phase are implemented according to the plan.

All actions outlined in the Resilience Plan (including any actions implemented in the design) that are to

be implemented during construction must be implemented.

53TABL1.2 Actions that require a management or governance response are to be incorporated into operational management plans, or similar53T.

Actions that require a management or governance response must be incorporated into operational

asset or management plans, in collaboration with the operator. Commitment from the operator must be

obtained to address resilience actions when appropriate.

Details on the person/department who will receive the relevant operational management documentation

must be provided as evidence.


• Resilience Plan,

• Design plans, minutes, attendee lists to show evidence of the implementation of As Built actions,

• Evidence of management actions or incorporated into asset or management plans, and

• Commitment letter from operator to embed resilience actions in management plans/strategy/asset

maintenance plans, etc.

Page 126 of 477



ISv2.0 Design

40TRes-2 Climate and natural hazards risks

Aim

To reward the assessment and treatment of risks associated with climate change and natural hazards.

Criteria

Table G25 Res-2 Design summary criteria


DL1.1 A review of climate and

natural hazard risks is completed

using readily available and current

natural hazard data and climate

change projections for all Udirect

risksU to the asset.

AND

DL1.2 Treatment options for Udirect

risksU are identified and

implemented and after treatment

there are no residual extreme and

high priority Udirect risksU.

AND

DL1.3 A multidisciplanary internal



climate and natural hazard Udirect

risksU, including the selection of

treatment options.


achieved.

AND

DL2.1 The natural hazard risk

assessment also considers Uindirect

risksU to the asset.

AND

DL2.2 Treatment options for

Uindirect risksU are identified and

implemented and after treatment

there are no residual extreme and

high priority Udirect or indirect risksU.

AND

DL2.3 Government representatives

participated in the identification of

climate and natural hazard Udirect

and indirect risksU, including the

selection of treatment options.


achieved.

AND

DL3.1 Treatment options have


optimal scale and timing, 88Tcosts and

benefits of addressing the climate

and natural hazard risk.

AND

DL3.2 A comprehensive set of


participated in identifying climate

and natural hazard Udirect and

indirect risksU and treatment

options.

Definitions

Direct natural hazard risks (for level 1) relate to the chance of an impact (attributable to natural

hazards including climate change) on an infrastructure system or asset causing damage, extra

maintenance or replacement costs, accelerated deterioration or disruption of services provided. An

example is increased storm or flood damage to an asset.

Indirect risks (for level 2) relate to the chance of an impact on another system or asset disrupting the

operational capacity of the asset or network (for example the disruption of supply of goods or services).

Indirect risks include consideration of interdependent and cumulative impacts of different risks and their

sources. For example, power supply interruptions caused by excessive power demand during periods

of extreme temperature. Another example would be storm damage or disruption at a nearby port, which

delays the delivery of urgently-needed equipment so that the infrastructure has to be closed or its

services curtailed. This type of risk focuses on the consequence or impact to the asset itself (inwards

focused).

Engagement for the purposes of this credit means the involvement, through an appropriate means, of

stakeholders that are directly or indirectly interested or affected by the infrastructure development.

Appropriate engagement needs to include at least one of the following:

• A face-to-face workshop with relevant representatives from stakeholder organisations, and

• A web conference with relevant representatives from stakeholder organisations

Page 127 of 477



Lea

Spr

Res

Res

Ecn

Ecn

Ene

Gre

Env

Wat

Eco

Sta

Leg

Her

Wfs

Con

• Formal review of risk and adaptation assessments with feedback provided either verbally or

electronically.

Hazard refers to the potential occurrence of a natural or human-induced physical event that may cause

loss of life, injury, or other health impacts, as well as damage and loss to property, infrastructure,

livelihoods, service provision, and environmental resources.

Suitable qualified professional means a person with at least 3 years of experience in natural hazard

and/or climate change treatments options and treatments. A CV of this professional must be provided.

Treatment measures associated with climate and natural hazard risks can include:

• structural measures such as physical changes to the infrastructure to achieve or facilitate

adaptation, and

• ‘non-structural’ measures, such as changes to maintenance contracts or implementing an

emergency management plan.

The term adaptation and treatment can sometimes be used interchangeably. For the purposes of this

credit, treatment includes adaptation and is the more appropriate word to summarise the ways various

risks can be managed. Treatment can be undertaken immediately, or at different timescales when the

risk occurs.

Level 1

53TDL1.1 A review of climate and natural hazard risks is completed using readily available and current natural hazard data and climate change projections for all Udirect risksU to the asset53T.

The assessment of climate and natural hazard risks must include climate-change related risks. Risks

associated with geological impacts should be considered in Res-1 when identified as a potential shock

event. Risk assessments must be undertaken in alignment with AS 5334 – Climate Change Adaptation

for Settlements and Infrastructure: A Risk Based Approach (Australian Standard, 2013) or Climate

Change Impacts & Risk Management: A Guide for Business and Government (Australian Greenhouse

Office, 2006).

Consideration must be given to an asset’s impacts and relationship to a Local Government region. As

a minimum, any existing Local Government natural hazard and/or climate change management plans

must be considered in the development of the climate and natural hazards risk assessment.

National and state government data associated with historic natural hazards such as volcanic and

seismic (earthquake and tsunami) activity as well as details on landslides that is publicly available must

be used to inform assessments.

For climate change projections, detail of the adopted projection including year and data source must

be provided. As a minimum, the following climate change and natural hazards impacts must be

considered in the climate and natural hazard risk assessment process:

Table G26 Risks to be assessed in the climate and natural hazards risk assessment, as a minimum

Risk Stresses Shocks

Air temperature x

Humidity x

Sea surface temperature x

Precipitation x x

Sea level rise x

Page 128 of 477



Risk Stresses Shocks

Wind and hail x x

Bushfire x

Coastal inundation x x

Cyclones/storms x

Flooding x

Heatwave x

Drought x

It is acknowledged that not all impacts will relate to all assets and therefore will not be included in the

assessment process; where this is the case justification must be provided as to why certain impacts

were excluded from the study.

It is expected that published natural hazard data and climate change projections for the asset’s region

is adopted to inform the risk assessment process.

When assessing climate change risk, the latest climate change projections must be used. When

identifying relevant climate variables, the scenarios used by the applicant should be sourced from IPCC

endorsed Global Circulation Models (GCMs) and may include CSIRO/NIWA, State or Federal climate

projections. In addition, data can be sourced from local council climate-change adaptation plans or

using more detailed climate modelling software. If the forecast useful life for the asset is over 20 years,

at least two time horizons must be selected and at least one must be beyond the end of the asset life.

For example, if the life is 70 years, then 2050 and 2100 may be selected for assessment. If projections

do not exist (e.g. for an asset with a 100-year design life) then use the longest projections available.

The Assessor must justify the selection of the emissions scenario/s and climate change projections

used.

Finer-scale projections specific to major cities and regions have also been developed. If warranted,

climate change projections can be developed for specific sites by down-scaled or statistical climate

modelling, although this is not a requirement. Projections are generally available at specific dates, such

as 2030, 2040, 2050, 2055, 2060, 2070, 2080, and 2090.

A suitably qualified professional must be involved throughout the climate and natural hazard risk

assessment process. This should include oversight of the natural hazard data and climate-change

projection identification and the risk assessment.

For step-by-step guidance to undertaking a natural hazards risk assessment, see the ISCA Climate and

Natural Hazards Guideline.

DL1.2 Treatment options for Udirect risksU are identified and implemented and after treatment there are no residual extreme and high priority Udirect risksU.

Treatment options must be identified and assessed in accordance with Ecn-1 and Ecn-4 and all feasible

options implemented in the final design, to address all direct risks identified through the risk

assessment.

Treatment options for extreme or high priority direct risks, involving major or catastrophic consequences

with loss of life and/or severe adverse social, environmental or economic impacts should be assessed

using quantified projections and estimates for the impact, and considering the quantity, locations and

timing of the physical impacts.

For all other direct risks, the appropriateness of a treatment option should be determined through a

qualitative assessment which considers the appropriateness/viability of each treatment option and

Page 129 of 477



Lea

Spr

Res

Res

Ecn

Ecn

Ene

Gre

Env

Wat

Eco

Sta

Leg

Her

Wfs

Con

determined through prioritisation, which treatment options will be implemented and how. This

assessment must be undertaken in accordance with Ecn-1 and Ecn-4.

Following treatment there must not be any residual extreme of high direct risks.

The treatment options to address all direct natural hazard risks must be incorporated into final designs

(where appropriate). Where adaptation through design is not feasible then treatment may also include

mitigation, management or monitoring of a particular risk through ongoing management plans, a

commitment to complete further studies or a commitment to undertake reviews or inspections. Ongoing

management of these risks must be documented and should make reference to the hazard impact, key

vulnerabilities and risk, treatment option, timing of implementation, and governance/responsibility.

A suitably qualified professional must be involved in assessment and review of treatment options and

treatments.

DL1.3 A multidisciplinary internal team participated in the identification and assessment of climate and natural hazard Udirect risksU, including the selection of treatment options.

A multidisciplinary internal team must participate in identifying climate and natural hazard direct risks.

This should include risk managers, designers (e.g. with backgrounds in flooding, civil and structural

design, corrosion, fire), asset operators and maintainers, environmental staff, and community relations

staff as relevant. The name, company and role title of each participant must be provided as evidence.

A multidisciplinary team must also participate in the identification and selection of climate and natural

hazard treatment options. This may be as part of the risk identification process or separately through a

specific treatment option assessment process. Attendee names and titles as well as minutes from the

engagement must be captured and provided as evidence.


• A Climate and Natural Hazards report outlining the project’s or asset’s forecast useful life, details

of the adopted projection including years, natural hazard risk and adaptation assessment, details

of whether the project will form or impact Local Government natural hazard risk or climate-change

management plans,

• Climate and Natural hazard adaptation/treatment plan,

• Summary report highlighting relevant climate projections, data relating to natural hazards, identified

climate and natural hazard risks and methods for implementing relevant treatment options including

reference to relevant Local Government plans,

• Designs and/or management plans include treatment measures to treat (at least) all extreme and

high priority natural hazard risks, and

• Minutes of risk assessment meeting(s)/workshop(s) including the position of each attendee.

Level 2

DL2.1 The natural hazard risk assessment also considers Uindirect risksU to the asset.

The natural hazard risk assessment must be broadened to cover indirect risks. Risk assessments must

be undertaken in alignment with AS 5334 – Climate Change Adaptation for Settlements and

Infrastructure: A Risk Based Approach (Australian Standard, 2013) or Climate Change Impacts & Risk

Management: A Guide for Business and Government (Australian Greenhouse Office, 2006).

‘Indirect risks, also known as "Interdependencies"; generally fall into three categories of interaction



Peerenboom, and T.K. Kelly, 2001). These categories and classes of dependencies are summarised

in Table G27.

Page 130 of 477




Group Description


Upstream

dependencies


that are necessary to support its operations and functions

Internal

dependencies




onsite water well).

Downstream

dependencies






between the inputs and outputs of two assets: a commodity (i.e., good or service)










right-of-way).





DL2.2 Treatment options for Uindirect risksU are identified and implemented and after treatment there are no residual extreme and high priority Udirect or indirect risksU.

Treatment options must be identified and assessed in accordance with Ecn-1 and Ecn-4 with all

feasible options being implemented to address all indirect risks identified through the risk assessment.

All feasible options for treatment must be implemented. The appropriateness of a treatment option

should be determined through a qualitative assessment which considers the appropriateness/viability

of each treatment option and determined through prioritisation which treatment options will be

implemented and how. This assessment must be undertaken in accordance with Ecn-1 and Ecn-4.

The treatment options to address all indirect climate and natural hazard risks must be incorporated into

final designs (where appropriate). Where adaptation through design is not feasible then treatment may

also include mitigation, management or monitoring of a particular risk through ongoing management

plans, a commitment to complete further studies or a commitment to undertake reviews or inspections.

Ongoing management of these risks must be documented and should make reference to the hazard

impact, key vulnerabilities and risk, treatment option, timing of implementation, and

governance/responsibility.

A suitably qualified professional must be involved in assessment and review of treatment options and

treatments.

Page 131 of 477



Lea

Spr

Res

Res

Ecn

Ecn

Ene

Gre

Env

Wat

Eco

Sta

Leg

Her

Wfs

Con

53TDL2.3 Government representatives participated in the identification of climate and natural hazard Udirect and indirectU risks, including the selection of treatment options53T.

Engagement with government (local, state or federal) must be completed as part of the direct and

indirect risk identification and assessment process. The engagement must consider and address

impacts on the relevant agencies’ natural hazard/climate change management plans if available. As a

minimum, this engagement must include any asset owners/managers of impacted assets and/or

systems. Attendee names and titles as well as minutes from the engagement must be captured and

provided as evidence.


• Risk assessment,

• Risk assessment including treatment options,

• Workshop minutes/reports,

• Adaptation plan, and

• Emails, minutes or documented evidence of government consultation.

Level 3

53TDL3.1 Treatment options have been assessed considering the optimal scale and timing, costs and benefits of addressing the natural hazard risk53T.

The optimal scale and timing and costs and benefits of implementing each treatment option must be

assessed before the preferred option is selected and implemented. Considering the optimal scale and

timing in the risk assessment and treatment process recognises that some climate change risks are

best not treated immediately. For example, the impact may not occur for many decades, a satisfactory

treatment may not yet be available or greater certainty about climate change projections is required

before a difficult decision can be made. It may also not be obvious how narrowly or extensively the

treatment measure should be applied – in stages or all at once, and everywhere or only at the most

vulnerable sites.



must be included in the assessment. For example, the construction of a sea wall which displaces

natural habitat may have a negative impact on aquatic species. Decision-making related to treatment

options should review each decision that needs to be made, the lifetimes and flexibility of these

decisions, and the need to address near-term issues while strategically creating options for the long-

term future.

For treatments that are not implemented in design immediately, a treatment action plan must be

prepared to formalise decision-making related to these treatments. This action plan should include:

• The risks and their treatment option/s,

• The selected treatment options and the reason for selecting the treatment option,

• Resources required to implement treatment options,

• Timing and schedule of implementation,

• Reporting and monitoring requirements, and

• Persons responsible for implementing the treatment options, measurement, monitoring and

reporting.

In principle, commitment should be made to address treatment and treatment options when appropriate

as asset ownership changes. This should include a commitment embedded within management plans

or a strategy document to ensure it has been formalised.

Page 132 of 477



DL3.2 A comprehensive set of affected external stakeholders participated in identifying climate and natural hazard Udirect and indirect risksU and treatment options.


and treatment option stages and include the following as a minimum:

• Government (local, state and federal as appropriate);

• infrastructure utilities;

• emergency services;

• affected and interested community groups; and

• other facilities and assets in the region.


evidence.


• Report or risk register showing optimal timing and scale

• Adaptation option assessment

• Adaptation plan

• Workshop minutes

• Cost benefit analysis

• Minutes of external engagement meetings.

Page 133 of 477



Lea

Spr

Res

Res

Ecn

Ecn

Ene

Gre

Env

Wat

Eco

Sta

Leg

Her

Wfs

Con

ISv2.0 As Built

40TRes-2 Climate and Natural Hazards risks

Aim

To reward the assessment and treatment of risks associated with natural hazards and climate change.

Criteria

Table G28 Res-2 As Built summary criteria


ABL1.1 Treatment measures are

implemented for all direct risks.


achieved.

AND

ABL2.1 Treatment measures are

implemented for all indirect risks.


achieved.

AND

ABL3.1 A management plan

outlining optimal scale and timing

for future treatments has been

developed and embedded in

operational management plans.

Definitions

Direct natural hazard risks (for level 1) relate to the chance of an impact (attributable to natural

hazards including climate change) on an infrastructure system or asset causing damage, extra

maintenance or replacement costs, accelerated deterioration or disruption of services provided. An

example is increased storm or flood damage to an asset.

Indirect risks (for level 2) relate to the chance of an impact on another system or asset disrupting the

operational capacity of the asset or network (for example the disruption of supply of goods or services).

Indirect risks include consideration of interdependent and cumulative impacts of different risks and their

sources. For example, power supply interruptions caused by excessive power demand during periods

of extreme temperature. Another example would be storm damage or disruption at a nearby port, which

delays the delivery of urgently-needed equipment so that the infrastructure has to be closed or its

services curtailed. This type of risk focuses on the consequence or impact to the asset itself (inwards

focused).

Engagement for the purposes of this credit means the involvement, through an appropriate means, of

stakeholders that are directly or indirectly interested or affected by the infrastructure development.

Appropriate engagement must include either:

• A face-to-face workshop with relevant representatives from stakeholder organisations,

• A web conference with relevant representatives from stakeholder organisations, and

• Formal review of risk and adaptation assessments with feedback provided either verbally or

electronically.

Suitable qualified professional means a person with at least 3 years of experience in natural hazard

and/or climate change treatments options and treatments. A CV of this professional must be provided.

Treatment measures associated with natural hazard risks can include:

• structural measures such as physical changes to the infrastructure to achieve or facilitate

adaptation, and

• ‘non-structural’ measures, such as changes to maintenance contracts or implementing an

emergency management plan.

Page 134 of 477



The term adaptation and treatment can sometimes be used interchangeably. For the purposes of this

credit, treatment includes adaptation and is the more appropriate word to summarise the ways various

risks can be managed. Treatment can be undertaken immediately, or at different timescales when the

risk occurs.

Level 1

ABL1.1 Treatment measures are implemented for all Udirect risksU.

All treatment measures to address all direct risks that have been assessed as feasible in Design must

be implemented in the final construction. Treatment measures that require a management or

governance response must be incorporated into operational management plans, or similar.




• As built plans identifying treatment measures for direct risks,

• Operational management plans for treatment measure requiring a management or governance

response,

• Document control/transmittal advice, and

• Correspondence confirming person/department to receive the operational management

documents.

Level 2

ABL2.1 Treatment measures are implemented for all Uindirect risksU.

Treatment measures to address all indirect risks must be implemented in the final construction.

Adaptation measures that require a management or governance response must be incorporated into

operational management plans.




• As built plans identifying treatment measures for direct and indirect risks,


response,

• Document control/transmittal advice, and

• Correspondence confirming person/department to receive the operational management

documents.

Level 3

ABL3.1 A management plan outlining optimal scale and timing for future treatments has been developed and embedded in operational management plans.

The optimal scale and timing, and costs and benefits of implementing each adaptation or treatment

option must be embedded into operational management plans in collaboration with the operator. The

inclusion of optimal scale and timing recognises that some climate change risks are best not treated

immediately. For example, the impact may not occur for many decades, a satisfactory treatment may

Page 135 of 477



Lea

Spr

Res

Res

Ecn

Ecn

Ene

Gre

Env

Wat

Eco

Sta

Leg

Her

Wfs

Con

not yet be available or greater certainty about climate change projections is required before a difficult

decision can be made. It may also not be obvious how narrowly or extensively the treatment measure

should be applied – in stages or all at once, and everywhere or only at the most vulnerable sites.

For treatments that were not implemented in design, a treatment action plan should be prepared to

formalise decision-making related to these treatments. This action plan should include details on the

hazard impact, key vulnerabilities and risk, treatment option, timing of implementation and

governance/responsibility. If the plans completed in design are still relevant then no further treatment

plan is required. Commitment from the operator must be obtained to address treatment and treatment

options when appropriate. Evidence that it has been embedded within management plans or a strategy

document to ensure it has been formalised must be provided.


• Updated cost benefit analysis,

• Formal commitment from the operator to embed the plan outlining optimal timing and scale for

treatment treatments into management plans,

• As built plans identifying treatment measures for direct, indirect and flow on risks, and


response.

Page 136 of 477



References

Commonwealth of Australia, 2015. Critical Infrastructure Resilience Strategy Plan, Canberra:

Commonwealth of Australia.

Council of Australian Governments, 2007. National Strategy for Disaster Resilience, 2011 CSIRO, Australian Climate Futures, Canberra: COAG.

Deloitte, 2016. Building Resilient Infrastructure, Sydney: Deloitte.

Griffith University, 2017. Aurin. [Online]

Available at: Uhttps://aurin.org.au/projects/lens-sub-projects/vulnerability-analysis-of-mortgage-

petroleum-and-inflation-risks-and-expenditure-vampire-index/

IPCC, 2007. Contributions of Working Group II to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, Geneva: IPCC.

Rinaldi, S.M., J.P. Peerenboom, and T.K. Kelly, 2001. Complex Networks, Identifying, Undertsanding

and Analyzing Critial Infrastructure Interdependencies. IEEE Control Systems Magazine, pp. 11-25.

Transport for NSW, 2016. Climate Risk Assessment Guidelines, Sydney: TfNSW.

United Nations, 2005. Hyogo Framework for Action 2005-2015: Building the Resilience of Nations and Communities to Disasters, s.l.: International Strategy for Disater Reduction.

United Nations, 2015. Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction, New York: United Nations.

Page 137 of 477



Lea

Spr

Res

Res

Ecn

Ecn

Ene

Gre

Env

Wat

Eco

Sta

Leg

Her

Wfs

Con Resources:

• Geosciences Australia is Australia’s pre-eminent geoscience organisation providing a range

of data relevant to the geology and geography of Australia. It contains detailed information

regarding bushfires, cyclones, earthquakes, landslides, floods, tsunamis, and volcanos

Refer: http://www.ga.gov.au/

• CoastAdapt is an information delivery and decision support tool designed to help coastal

managers adapt to climate change and sea level rise.

Refer: https://coastadapt.com.au/

• The Bureau of Meteorology (BoM) is Australia’s national weather, climate and water agency.

Their website provides detailed information related to natural hazard events such as tropical

cyclones and tsunamis

Refer: www.bom.gov.au

• National Emergency Risk Assessment Guidelines (NERAG): NERAG provides a method to

assess emergency-related risks from all hazards and is principally concerned with enabling

the consistent application of emergency-risk related assessment practices across Australia.

Refer: https://www.aidr.org.au/media/1413/nerag-handbook10.pdf

• Within Australia each state undergoes its own natural hazard risk assessment and disaster

management. A selection of reports that contain regionally relevant information for use when

considering natural hazard risk are included for example (this list is not exhaustive):

- Queensland: http://disaster.qld.gov.au/Disaster-Resources/SWNHRA.html

- Tasmania:52Thttp://www.ses.tas.gov.au/h/em/risk-mgmt/tasmanian-state-natural-

disaster-risk-assessment

- Victoria: http://assets.justice.vic.gov.au/justice/resources/ccae0110-ea30-4f89-85a2-

2bfb4eb06bbf/repor_stateemergencyriskassessment2014emergencyrisksinvictoria.pd

f

Page 138 of 477




Page 139 of 477



Lea

Spr

Res

Inn

Ecn

Ecn

Ene

Gre

Env

Wat

Eco

Sta

Leg

Her

Wfs

Con INNOVATION

The global drive for higher living standards coupled with population growth is placing considerable

stresses on our planet. Innovations and new technology can provide ways to reduce the environmental

impacts of development and promote social progress through smarter ways of conducting our activities.

Innovation is the creation of better or more effective products, processes, services, technologies, or

ideas that are accepted by markets, governments, and society.

Innovation can:

• involve products or processes i.e. changes to things we use or changes to how products are made;

• occur as relative change (when something better and/or cheaper comes along), or as absolute

change (which delivers something entirely new); and

• be sudden and transformative, or it can be incremental.

The changes that enable and accompany innovation fall into three main categories (Moody & Nogrady,

2010)

1. Development of new technologies.

2. Changes in the market, or the demand for new or existing technologies.

3. Changes in the institutions that link, enable and encourage the first two components to come

together.

ISCA recognises the key role that innovation plays in our economy, society and environment. The IS

rating scheme specifically aims to support efforts by industry to find innovative ways to achieve more

sustainable outcomes across the triple bottom line and to enhance society’s prosperity.

The Innovation category is included in the IS rating scheme as a way of rewarding the spread of

innovative technologies, designs and processes for infrastructure applications that impact upon

sustainability performance. The category also recognises efforts which demonstrate that sustainability

principles have been incorporated outside the scope of the existing rating scheme.

The following credit applies to the Innovation category:

Inn-1 Innovation strategies and technologies

Innovative technologies, designs and processes may be applied to any of the other categories to achieve

good outcomes. Innovations that contribute to achieving credits in other categories can also apply to

this category if they meet the credit criteria.

Innovations can be registered on ISCA’s Innovations Register. Registering an innovation gives

confidence that the innovation credit can be achieved and that a certain initiative can be recognised as

a ‘first’. Please see the Rating Process section at the beginning of the manual or the Innovation Register

factsheet for more information.

Page 140 of 477




Inn-1 Innovation

Aim

To reward pioneering initiatives in sustainable design, process or advocacy.

Criteria

Table G29 Inn- 1 summary criteria table

Up to 10 innovation points available.

L1.1 Each innovation falls within one or more of the following categories:

• World (5pts), National (3pts) or State (1pt) ‘first’ innovative technology or process,

• market transformation,

• improving on credit benchmarks, and

• Innovation challege.

AND

L1.2 Initiatives meet the following criteria, as a minimum:

• address a valid sustainable development issue,

• be quantifiable and capable of being assessed without subjective interpretation, and

• be related to the design, construction and/or operation of infrastructure.

AND

L1.3 Innovation(s) are implemented.

AND

L1.4 The sustainability benefits of the innovation(s) are reported in an innovation submission.

Up to ten initiatives can be submitted for the available 10 points in this category. No more than ten

initiatives per project will be reviewed. Projects will be assessed against the innovation guidance current

at the time of their registration. Project teams can submit a credit interpretation request (CIR) or register

their innovation to receive advice on whether an initiative can be considered innovative or not under this

credit.

Innovation points are reviewed by the Verifiers, but awarded entirely at the discretion of ISCA.


innovative initiative relative to existing IS rating scheme credits where relevant.

Where projects are unsure whether their proposed innovation fits within the innovation criteria they

should speak to their Case Manager about other avenues that may be pursued. This could be achieved

through Technical Clarifications or through the development of a new Innovation Challenge with ISCA.

Definitions

Innovation submissions are documents that describe an innovation and quantify the sustainability

benefits that are provided by its implementation on the rating project.

Initiatives are specific programs or sub-projects defined by ISCA or submitted by a project that seek to

achieve strategic goals, which would include sustainability goals or targets such as reducing costs and

increasing efficiency.

Sustainability initiatives, for the purpose of this credit, mean initiatives designed to achieve an

outcome that has a social, environmental or economic (not just financial) benefit. This does not include

cost saving initiatives without a social, environmental or economic benefit.

Sustainable development is development that meets the needs of the present without compromising

the ability of future generations to meet their own needs. (Brundtland Comission, 1987)

Page 141 of 477



Lea

Spr

Res

Inn

Ecn

Ecn

Ene

Gre

Env

Wat

Eco

Sta

Leg

Her

Wfs

Con

L1.1 Each innovation falls within one or more of the following categories: first innovative technology or process; market transformation; improving on credit benchmarks or innovation challenge

Each innovation must fall within one or more of the following categories:

1. innovative technology or process

2. market transformation

3. improving on credit benchmarks

4. innovation challenge.

U1. Innovative technology or process

The initiative must be a process, method and/or technology that is considered a ‘first’ in that state or

territory (1 point), in Australia or New Zealand (3 points) or in the world (5 points) and must demonstrate

a contribution to sustainable development.

Examples of initiatives may include, but are not limited to:

• Energy saving technology,

• New material used,

• Site-wide infrastructure systems,

• Workshop/engagement processes,

• Software programs to aid in sustainability performance,

• Partnership and other arrangements and mechanisms that deliver sustainability outcomes.

To demonstrate compliance against this criterion it is essential that the submission is able to prove that

the innovation is a state or territory, Australian, New Zealand or a world first.

Project teams may register their innovations at any point during the assessment phase and have it pre-

verified as a ‘first’. See the Innovations Register in the Ratings Process Chapter or at the ISCA website.

Example evidence for innovative technology or process

• A letter from the relevant peak body e.g. Australasian Rail Association or a supplier/product peak

body,

• Patents in Australia or overseas,

• Relevant research acknowledgements or peer-reviewed publications,

• Qualification for R&D tax concession, and

• Awards won by the innovation.

U2. Market Transformation

The initiative must substantially contribute to broader market transformation towards sustainable

development in that state or territory, in Australia or New Zealand or in the world. The innovation must

transform the market, and result in new ways of approaching, applying or achieving sustainable

outcomes. Whilst the innovation may not be necessarily new, the way it is applied in the market may be.

Example evidence for market transformation

• Comparison of innovation to previous market approach/application outlining benefit such as

economic impact, environmental impacts or social impacts.

Page 142 of 477



U3. Improving on Credit Benchmarks

To claim this innovation credit criterion, the project must demonstrate a substantial improvement to a

specific benchmark (environment, social, economic), addressed by an existing IS credit in which the

project is targeting. As a guide, the credit top level benchmark should be exceeded by at least a similar

magnitude as the performance increment between Level 2 and Level 3. This approach can apply to both

scaled and non-scaled credits although it is recognised that it may be easier to demonstrate and quantify

a substantial improvement for scaled credits. Data must be provided in the innovation submission to

justify assertions made as to the particular benchmark criteria achieved.

Example evidence for improving on credit benchmarks

• Evidence required as per the exceeded credit benchmarks.

• Any additional material required to demonstrate the improved performance.

U4. Innovation Challenge

To claim innovation under this criterion, the innovation must address an issue that is not included within

the current IS rating scheme. This may be done in two ways:

1. New Innovation Challenge

The innovation addresses a sustainable development issue not included within any of the credits in the

existing IS rating scheme or an existing Innovation Challenge. In this case, the project team must

develop an Innovation Challenge with ISCA and demonstrate compliance with the Innovation Challenge.

Innovation Challenges will be made public and available to other project teams for them to comply with.

2. Current Innovation Challenge

Compliance must be demonstrated with any of the IS Innovation Challenges listed on the ISCA website.

These Innovation Challenges have been designed to challenge infrastructure owners, developers,

contractors and project teams to push the bar higher and to experiment.

For more information on applying for new Innovation Challenges and a list of existing Innovation

Challenges, refer to the Innovation section of the ISCA website.

Example evidence for Innovation Challenges

• See the relevant Innovation Challenge for example evidence.

L1.2 Initiatives meet the following criteria, as a minimum; address a valid economic, environmental or social concern; be quantifiable and capable of being assessed without subjective interpretation; be related to the design, construction and/or operation of infrastructure.

Initiatives must meet the following criteria, as a minimum:

1. address a valid sustainable development issue.

2. be quantifiable and capable of being assessed without subjective interpretation.

3. be related to the design, construction and/or operation of infrastructure.

Example evidence of meeting criteria

• A report outlining:

o the sustainable development issue being addressed and why it is an issue,

o details of the initiative,

Page 143 of 477



Lea

Spr

Res

Inn

Ecn

Ecn

Ene

Gre

Env

Wat

Eco

Sta

Leg

Her

Wfs

Con

o the quantified sustainable development benefits (outlining social, environmental and

economic benefits separately) of the initiative/s with relevant evidence,

o the relevant phase in which the initiative relates, and

o justification as to why this initiative should be awarded innovation points.

L1.3 Innovation(s) are implemented.

Innovation(s) must have been implemented to achieve any score under this credit i.e. an initiative

investigated but not implemented will not achieve a score.

Example evidence for implementation

• Photos

• Receipts

• Memos.

L1.4 The sustainability benefits of the innovation(s) are reported in an innovation submission.

An innovation submission should be a concise report that clearly articulates the nature and magnitude

of the sustainable development benefits achieved by proposed initiative(s). The report must clearly

justify (and quantify whenever relevant) the environmental, social, and/or economic (not just financial)

benefits of the initiative. Submissions that are purely qualitative and/or unsupported by documented

data will not be awarded Innovation points. The submission may cover a single innovation or multiple

innovations, but all innovations should meet the credit criteria.

Example evidence for the report submission

• Innovation report (see L1.3).

Page 144 of 477



References

Brundtland Comission, 1987. Our Common Future, s.l.: Oxford University Press.

Moody, J. B. & Nogrady, B., 2010. The Sixth Wave - How to succeed in a resource-limited world. s.l.:Random House Australia.

Page 145 of 477



Lea

Spr

Res

Res

Ecn

Ecn

Ene

Gre

Env

Wat

Eco

Sta

Leg

Her

Wfs

Con

Rso

OPTIONS ASSESSMENT AND BUSINESS CASE

A sustainable infrastructure asset is one which meets the needs of users, society as a whole, the

environment, and the wider economy in the long-term. It would ideally provide flexibility and adaptability

for future technological and behavioural changes to prevent premature obsolescence and maximise

whole of life benefits. Thorough options assessment and robust business case preparation can underpin

successful, sustainable outcomes.

There are a number of existing guidance documents which relate to options assessments and business

cases. These include:

• Building Queensland, Business Case Development Framework (2016a),

• Infrastructure Australia, Assessment Framework: Detailed Technical Guidance (2016),

• New Zealand Treasury, Better Business Cases – Guidance on Using the Five Case Model: An

Overview (2014),

• New South Wales Treasury, Guidelines for Capital Business Cases (2008), and

• Australian Transport Assessment and Planning framework (Australian Government Department of

Infrastructure and Regional Development, 2016).

This category seeks to reward:

1. broad identification and thorough assessment of project options.

2. the effective determination of net impacts and their distribution. and

3. the careful assessment and measurement of risk and whole-of-life financial and economic

viability.

In determining credible project options to address a problem or opportunity, it is important that due

consideration of all viable options is given. This includes options to promote behavioural change (at

either user or organisational levels), and the utilisation of existing assets for alternative purposes or

developing new assets.

Key to the options assessment process is the genuine consideration of associated social, economic and

environmental aspects, including externalities (impacts resulting from an action which affect external

parties, and which are not generally included within standard pricing mechanisms).

A project should not disproportionately or excessively impact on disadvantaged or vulnerable parts of

society. An infrastructure project may impact upon the quality of life and level of disadvantage

experienced by individuals in a variety of ways. As such, due consideration of equity and distributional

impacts are essential.

Funding and financing requirements throughout the project’s life must be well understood through

consideration of ongoing operational, maintenance and adaptive reuse costs.

The following four credits apply to the Options assessment and Business Case category:


Ecn-2 Valuing and considering externalities

Ecn-3 Equity and distributional impacts

Ecn-4 Economic viability and financial affordability

Category linkages

The following ISv2.0 categories have linkages with the Options Assessment and Business Case

category;

Page 146 of 477



Table Ec1 Category linkages


Lea-2 To achieve L3, the optimal scale

and timing and costs and

benefits of implementing each

treatment option/implementation

action needs be assessed before

the preferred option is selected

and implemented. This

assessment needs to be

undertaken in accordance with

Ecn-1, Ecn-2 (planning only) and

Ecn-4.

x x

Ene-1 Energy efficiencies need to be

assessed using Ecn-1 and Ecn-

2.

x x x x

Ene-2 Renewable energy options need

to be assessed using Ecn-1 and

Ecn-2.

x x x x

Wat-2 Appropriate water sources in

Wat-2 L2 need to be assessed

using Ecn-1 and Ecn-4.

x x x x

Res-2 Climate adaptation options need

to be assessed using Ecn-1 and

Ecn-4.

x x x

Sta-1 Stakeholder values discovered

through Sta-1 may be

considered as a non-financial

element in Ecn-1.

x x x x

Rso-2 A formal assessment in

accordance with Ecn-1 is

required to identify remediation

option of contaminated material.

x x x x

Spr-2 The selection of suppliers in Spr-

2 need to be undertaken in


x x x x

Page 147 of 477



Lea

Spr

Res

Res

Ecn

Ecn

Ene

Gre

Env

Wat

Eco

Sta

Leg

Her

Wfs

Con

Rso

ISv2.0 Design


Aim

To reward robust options assessment in promoting positive sustainability outcomes.

Criteria

Table Ec2 Ecn-1 Design summary criteria table

Level 1 Level 2

DL1.1 A range of options are considered for

significant project related initiatives.

AND

DL1.2 Options for project initiatives are evaluated by

considering environmental, social and economic

aspects through the use of a formal assessment

technique.

AND

DL1.3 The assessment of the project options informs

decision making.

The requirements for Level 1 are achieved.

AND

DL2.1 An independent review of the investment

options assessment is undertaken.

3

Infrastructure projects are significant consumers of scarce resources (both financial and physical), the

depletion of which impacts upon the wider economy. The productive use and preservation of resources

is a wider economic issue, and should be considered as such at organisational and industry-specific

levels.

Resources and factors of production continue to be utilised post-construction and throughout the

infrastructure lifecycle. Ongoing maintenance and operation functions have a significant impact on the

asset’s total resource usage and economic impact over its useful life.

Genuine consideration of behavioural options to address a problem, together with better use of existing

assets can avoid undue expansion or new establishment of assets.

It is important that significant project initiatives are carefully considered in sustainability terms, and

assessed to maximise resource efficiency. For example, which energy saving initiative should be chosen

when taking into account environmental, social and economic elements.

Assessment Techniques

For assessment of both the strategic and project options it is suggested that a tiered filtering approach

is undertaken as suggested in both the Australian Transport Assessment and Planning Guidelines

(Australian Government Department of Infrastructure and Regional Development, 2016) and the

Infrastructure Australia Assessment Framework (2017).

This approach can be categorised by the general steps below (adapted from the ATAP Guidelines,

(2016)):

• Stage 1: Strategic Merit Test (SMT)

o Consideration of an option's or initiative’s alignment with goals, objectives and strategic

plans, and

o Recommended techniques - Multi Criteria Assessment or an Objective Impact

Assessment.

Page 148 of 477



• Stage 2: Rapid appraisal

o An initial indicative assessment of the scale of an option's or initiative’s benefits and

costs, and

o Recommended techniques – Rapid Cost Benefit Analysis.

• Stage 3: Detailed appraisal

o A detailed assessment of an option's or initiative’s benefits and costs, and other impacts,

and

o Recommended techniques – Detailed Cost Benefit Analysis.

Table Ec3 – Guidance documents for assessment techniques

Formal Assessment Method Guidance Documents

Cost Benefit Analysis • DIRD, ATAP Guidelines T6 (2016)

• IA, Assessment Framework: Part D (2017)

• Developing a Business Case for Sustainability

Initiatives in Infrastructure: A ‘How To’ Guide

(ISCA, 2016)

Rapid Cost Benefit Analysis • DIRD, ATAP Guidelines F3, provides a guide to

what should be included in a rapid vs detailed

cost benefit analysis (2016)

Multi Criteria Assessment • UK Department for Communities and Local

Government, Multi Criteria Assessment: A

guideline (2009)

Definitions

Externalities are impacts (positive or negative) imposed on society which are not reflected in normal

pricing charges and which are not generally costed as part of a traditional business e.g. noise, emissions

and social impacts, etc.

Independence means a person or persons independent from the project team. To determine

independence the person(s):

• must not work directly on the project or asset or be employed by a parent organisation.

• must not work for one of the organisations contracted to the project (such as one organisation

involved in a joint venture or alliance to deliver the project)

• must be engaged to act independently of the project or asset and be able to show no vested interest

in the project or asset.

Materiality is defined as all aspects of a project or asset that reflect significant economic, environmental

and social impacts or substantively influence the assessment and decisions of stakeholders (adapted

from the Global Reporting Initiative’s (2015) definition of materiality). Such an externality will cause

significant impact to the surrounding community and the wider economy which should be taken into

account. Natural Capital Coalition’s publication, Natural Capital Protocol, (2016) and the GRI G4

framework (plus various other resources, see Lea-1) provide methodologies to consider material

externalities. It is important to be clear that materiality should be considered on a cumulative basis, for

example if a project produces a small amount of noise pollution but is located in an already noisy area

this externality may still be material.

Using materiality to assess the significance of externalities is valuable as it encourages teams to

concentrate effort on the key externalities on a project by project basis. For example, a relatively small

incremental noise impact may be material if the baseline is such that the total noise levels become

unacceptable from a human health point of view.

Page 149 of 477



Lea

Spr

Res

Res

Ecn

Ecn

Ene

Gre

Env

Wat

Eco

Sta

Leg

Her

Wfs

Con

Rso

Common examples of material externalities arising from various infrastructure projects include:

• Noise

• CO2-e emissions

• Human health impacts

• Air and water pollution

• Education and skills development

• Enhanced safety

• Aesthetics

• Productivity

• Biodiversity

• Land use changes and urban renewal

• Agglomeration economies

The materiality assessment undertaken in Lea-1 will provide a good basis for this credit.

Monetisation is the process of assigning dollar values to reflect the net impact of an externality to

society.

Multi-disciplinary team includes the following as a minimum:

• Environmental experts,

• Social/community experts,

• Business case experts, and

• Infrastructure experts.

Significant project related initiatives are defined by the project, based on internal approval processes.

For example, initiatives that need a certain level of authorisation or a dollar amount may define

‘significant’. Such initiatives in the Design phase could be the remaining alignment options, materials

selection, technologies applied or mitigation measures required.

Suitably qualified person means a suitably and qualified professional with qualifications in

infrastructure, project evaluation and has a specific economics related qualification. They also must

have at least 5 years’ experience in developing or reviewing business case documentation in

infrastructure. The role could be fulfilled by a combination of people where it can be demonstrated that

their combined skills and experience address the credit requirements.

Level 1

DL1.1 A range of options are considered for significant project related initiatives.

The assessment of significant project related initiatives must consider a credible range of high level

options. Evidence must be provided showing how ‘significant’ is defined. Where Ecn-2 has been

referenced for options assessment such as in Ene-1, Ene-2, Wat-2, Rso-2, Spr-2 and Res-2, then those

initiatives are considered ‘significant’ for the purpose of this credit when these credits and associated

levels have been attempted.

Options considered may be behaviour change, better use of existing service/assets/technology,

improving the existing service/asset/technology and new services/assets/technology.

The identification of complementary projects or works which may be delivered as part of project related

initiatives to realise wider system or network improvements (such as energy efficiency, capacity and

safety enhancements) may also form part of the options assessment.

DL1.2 Options for project initiatives are evaluated by considering environmental, social and economic aspects through the use of a formal assessment method.

There must be a clear rationale for determining the preferred option for significant project issues through

a formal assessment method considering material environmental, social and economic aspects. The

choice of assessment methodology must be justified. Options must be identified or assessed through

a multidisciplinary team workshop or alike.

The relative merits of each option must be thoroughly considered, explained and justified.

Page 150 of 477



Criteria must be weighted (or ranked) in terms of their relative importance and must be assessed by

the multidisciplinary team workshop or alike. The options assessment must incorporate at least one

criteria directly relating to each of the environmental, social and economic areas. Criteria must be

weighted equally across economic, social and environmental aspects unless justification can be

provided as to why this is not appropriate. Procurement decisions made in Spr-2 may form part of this

process.

Externalities must be considered in the assessment. Externalities should be monetised wherever

possible.

Where monetisation is used, justification must be provided for the cost benchmarks used for monetised

externalities; for instance, whether existing secondary benchmarks are applied or project specific

benchmarks are developed. Monetised externalities must be calculated in terms of Net Present Value

(NPV) and must feed into the formal assessment.

Material externalities should have been identified in Lea-1 which should form basis of this criterion. The

Natural Capital Protocol (Natural Capital Coalition, 2016) is a useful guide for identifying materiality and

valuing externalities.

Equity and distribution considerations should also feature in the assessment where applicable i.e.

assess the extent to which project initiatives are distributed evenly geographically and demographically.

DL1.3 The assessment of the project options informs decision making.

It must be demonstrated how decision-making is informed by the options assessment, with justification

based on environmental, social and economic grounds.

Evidence that sustainability lessons learned from previous or similar projects have been incorporated

into the options assessment and decision making processes should be provided.


• Strategic options assessment and report,

• Results of MCA or alike, and

• Business case excerpts.

Level 2

DL2.1 An independent review of the significant initiative assessment is undertaken.

In order to provide assurance of robust assessment, an independent review of all the initiative options

assessments must be performed by a suitably qualified person.

The review/s must cover the assessment’s assumptions, reasoning, techniques and modelling.

It must be shown how any feedback raised in the review/s has been addressed, including any updates

to assumptions, reasoning, analysis or modelling results.

The reviewer/s must outline they are satisfied with the assessment methodology and outcomes.


• Options assessment report or analysis, • Options assessment workshop, • Business Case, • Design reports / as built drawings, • Meeting minutes with attendee names and positions, • Lessons learned papers / research reports,

• CV of suitably qualified professional, and


Page 151 of 477



Lea

Spr

Res

Res

Ecn

Ecn

Ene

Gre

Env

Wat

Eco

Sta

Leg

Her

Wfs

Con 67TISv2.0 As Built


Aim

To reward robust options assessment promoting positive sustainability outcomes.

Criteria

Table Ec4 Ecn-1 As Built summary criteria table


ABL1.1 A range of options are

considered for significant project related

initiatives.

AND

ABL1.2 Options for project initiatives are

evaluated by considering environmental,

social and economic aspects through the

use of a formal assessment technique.

AND

ABL1.3 The assessment of project

initiatives options informs decision

making.


achieved.

AND

ABL2.1 An independent review

of the options assessment is

undertaken.

Not applicable.

Infrastructure projects are significant consumers of scarce resources (both financial and physical), the

depletion of which impacts upon the wider economy. The productive use and preservation of resources

is a wider economic issue, and should be considered as such at organisational and industry-specific

levels.

Resources and factors of production continue to be used post-construction and throughout the

infrastructure lifecycle. Ongoing maintenance and operation functions have a significant impact on the

asset’s total resource use and economic impact over its useful life.

It is important that significant project decisions are carefully considered in sustainability terms, and

options considered are assessed to maximise resource efficiency. For example, which energy-saving

initiatives should be chosen when taking into account environmental, social and economic elements.

A suggested approach to options assessment can be categorised by the general steps below (adapted

from the ATAP Guidelines, (2016)):

• 77TStage 177T: Strategic Merit Test (SMT)

o Consideration of an option's or initiative’s alignment with goals, objectives and strategic

plans

o Recommended techniques - Multi Criteria Assessment or an Objective Impact

Assessment

• Stage 2: Rapid appraisal

o An initial indicative assessment of the scale of an option's or initiative’s benefits and

costs

o Recommended techniques – Rapid Cost Benefit Analysis

• Stage 3: Detailed appraisal

o A detailed assessment of an option's or initiative’s benefits and costs, and other impacts.

o Recommended techniques – Detailed Cost Benefit Analysis

Page 152 of 477



Table Ec5 – Guidance documents for assessment techniques

Formal Assessment Method Guidance Documents

Cost Benefit Analysis • DIRD, ATAP Guidelines T6 (2016)

• IA, Assessment Framework: Part D (2017)

• Developing a Business Case for Sustainability

Initiatives in Infrastructure: A ‘How To’

Guide(ISCA, 2016)

Rapid Cost Benefit Analysis • DIRD, ATAP Guidelines F3, provides a guide to

what should be included in a rapid vs detailed

cost benefit analysis (2016)

Multi Criteria Assessment • UK Department for Communities and Local

Government, Multi Criteria Assessment: A

guideline (2009)

Definitions

Externalities are impacts (positive or negative) imposed on society which are not reflected in normal

pricing charges and which are not generally costed as part of a traditional business e.g. noise, emissions

and social impacts etc.


person(s):



involved in a joint venture or alliance to deliver the project), and



Materiality is defined as all aspects of a project or asset that reflect significant economic, environmental

and social impacts or substantively influence the assessment and decisions of stakeholders (adapted

from the Global Reporting Initiative’s (2015) definition of materiality). Such an externality will cause

significant impact to the surrounding community and the wider economy which should be taken into

account. Natural Capital Coalition’s publication, Natural Capital Protocol, (2016) and the GRI G4

framework (plus various other resources, see Lea-1) provide methodologies to consider material

externalities. It is important to be clear that materiality should be considered on a cumulative basis, for

example if a project produces a small amount of noise pollution but is located in an already noisy area

this externality may still be material.

Using materiality to assess the significance of externalities is valuable as it encourages teams to

concentrate effort on the key externalities on a project by project basis. For example, a relatively small

incremental noise impact may be material if the baseline is such that the total noise levels become

unacceptable from a human health point of view.

Common examples of material externalities arising from various infrastructure projects include:

• Noise

• CO2-e emissions

• Human health impacts

• Air and water pollution

• Education and skills development

• Enhanced safety

• Aesthetics

• Productivity

• Biodiversity

• Land use changes and urban renewal

• Agglomeration economies

The materiality assessment undertaken in Lea-1 will provide a good basis for this credit.

Page 153 of 477



Lea

Spr

Res

Res

Ecn

Ecn

Ene

Gre

Env

Wat

Eco

Sta

Leg

Her

Wfs

Con





• Infrastructure experts



‘significant’. Such initiatives in the As Built phase could be the plant selection, materials selection,

technologies applied or mitigation available required.


infrastructure, project evaluation and has a specific economics related qualification. They also must




Level 1

ABL1.1 A range of options are considered for significant project related initiatives.

The assessment of significant project related initiatives must consider a credible range of high level

options. Evidence must be provided showing how ‘significant’ is defined. Where Ecn-2 has been

referenced for options assessment such as in Ene-1, Ene-2, Wat-2, Rso-2, Spr-2 and Res-2, then those

initiatives are considered ‘significant’ for the purpose of this credit when these credits and associated

levels have been attempted.

Options considered may be behaviour change, better use of existing service/assets/technology,

improving the existing service/asset/technology and new services/assets/technology.

The identification of complementary initiatives or works which may be delivered as part of project related

initiatives to realise wider system or network improvements (such as energy efficiency, capacity and

safety enhancements) should also form part of the options assessment.

ABL1.2 Options for project initiatives are evaluated by considering environmental, social and economic aspects through the use of a formal assessment method.

There must be a clear rationale for determining the preferred option for significant project issues through

a formal assessment method considering material environmental, social and economic aspects. The

choice of assessment methodology must be justified. Options must be identified through a

multidisciplinary team workshop.

The relative merits of each option must be thoroughly considered, explained and justified.

Criteria must be weighted (or ranked) in terms of their relative importance and must be assessed by

the multidisciplinary team workshop. The options assessment must incorporate at least one criteria

directly relating to each of the environmental, social and economic areas. Criteria must be weighted

equally across economic, social and environmental aspects unless justification can be provided as to

why this is not appropriate. Procurement decisions made in Spr-2 may form part of this process.

Externalities must be considered in the assessment. Externalities should be monetised wherever

possible. Justification must be provided for the cost benchmarks used for monetised externalities; for

instance, whether existing secondary benchmarks are applied or project specific benchmarks are

developed. Monetised externalities must be calculated in terms of Net Present Value (NPV) and must

feed into the formal assessment.

Page 154 of 477



Material externalities should have been identified in Lea-1 which should form basis of this criterion. The

Natural Capital Protocol (Natural Capital Coalition, 2016) is a useful guide for identifying materiality and

valuing externalities.

Equity and distribution considerations should also feature in the assessment where applicable i.e.

assess the extent to which project initiatives are distributed evenly geographically and demographically.

ABL1.3 The assessment of project options informs decision making.

It must be demonstrated how decision making is informed by an options assessment with justification

based on environmental, social and economic grounds.

Evidence that sustainability lessons learned from previous or similar projects have been incorporated

into the options assessment and decision making processes should be provided.

The preferred options must be constructed and/or incorporated into operational plans.


• Investment options assessment report or analysis,

• Minutes with the name and position of attendees at multi-criteria workshop/s,

• Decision report, and

• Procurement decisions made as part of Spr-2.

Level 2

ABL2.1 An independent review of the options assessment is undertaken.

In order to provide assurance of robust assessment, an independent review of the options assessment

must be performed by a suitably qualified person.

The review must cover the assessment’s assumptions, reasoning, techniques and modelling.

It must be shown how the feedback raised in the review has been addressed, including any updates to

assumptions, reasoning, analysis or modelling results.

The reviewer must outline they are satisfied with the assessment methodology and outcomes


• Options assessment report or analysis, • Options assessment workshop, • Business Case, • Design reports / as built drawings, • Meeting minutes, • Lessons learned papers / research reports,

• CV of suitably qualified professional, and


Page 155 of 477



Lea

Spr

Res

Res

Ecn

Ecn

Ene

Gre

Env

Wat

Eco

Sta

Leg

Her

Wfs

Con

ISv2.0 Design


Aim

To reward the application of economic and financial techniques to understand risk, resource

requirements and ensure adequate funding for the project’s life.

Criteria


Level 1 Level 2

DL1.1 Whole-of-life costing for project initiatives is

undertaken.


AND

DL2.1 An independent review of the whole-of-life

costing is undertaken.

The cost-effective and fit-for-purpose operation of an asset in the long-term is key to its economic

sustainability. A sustainable asset effectively adapts to the needs of the community and wider economy

throughout its life. Robust economic and financial evaluation of significant project initiatives is a key

element in the long-term sustainability of an infrastructure project. Ongoing operational, maintenance,

adaptive reuse and embedded material costs are among those regularly underestimated or overlooked

in the appraisal of investment decisions across the asset’s useful life.

It is important that whole-of-life costing techniques are used to ensure that a project initiative remains

affordable throughout a variety of future scenarios, and represents value for money.

Definitions


person(s):








‘significant’.


infrastructure, project evaluation and who has a specific economics related qualification. They also must




Level 1

51TDL1.1 Whole-of-life costing for project initiatives is undertaken51T.

The cost of significant project related initiatives must be considered over the asset’s lifecycle. Option

selection undertaken in Ene-1, Ene-2, Wat-2, Rso-2, Spr-2 and Res-2 are considered ‘significant’ for

Page 156 of 477



the purpose of this credit. Evidence must be provided showing how ‘significant’ is defined. The

significant initiatives that are assessed in Ecn-1 should align with those assessed in this criterion.

A monetised assessment of whole-of-life costing must form part of the financial analysis for significant

project related initiatives. Whole-of-life costing must consider the total costs and potential benefits of

the investment decision across its life. These include:

• Up-front and transactional costs,

• Capital costs,

• Holding costs,

• Costs incurred during operations,

• Costs incurred during the expected life of the investment to upgrade or refresh an asset,

• End of life decommissioning,

• Revenue streams for the infrastructure, and

• Organisational benefits.

Where applicable, additional investments may seek to future-proof the asset and integrate flexibility for

changes in future demand; one example of this would be design changes to a section of highway

infrastructure which is mindful of both autonomous and electric vehicles.

The recommended point of reference for whole-of-life costs is a guidance note from New Zealand

Treasury entitled Whole of life Costs (2015).


• Investment options assessment report or analysis, and

• Policy/authorisation process/delegations outlining how ‘significant’ is defined.

Level 2

DL2.1 An independent review of the whole-of-life costing is undertaken.

In order to provide assurance of robust assessment, an independent review of all of the financial and

economic assessment/s undertaken for significant project options must be performed by a suitably

qualified professional.



The reviewer/s must outline they are satisfied with the assessment methodology and outcomes.


• Investment options assessment report(s) or analysis/analyses,

• CV of suitably qualified person, and

• Report of the independent review.

Page 157 of 477



Lea

Spr

Res

Res

Ecn

Ecn

Ene

Gre

Env

Wat

Eco

Sta

Leg

Her

Wfs

Con

ISv2.0 As Built


Aim

To reward the application of economic and financial techniques to understand risk, resource

requirements and ensure adequate funding for the project’s life.

Criteria



ABL1.1 Whole-of-life costing for

project initiatives is undertaken.


achieved.

AND

ABL2.1 An independent review of

the monetised assessment is

undertaken.

Not applicable.

Robust economic and financial evaluation of significant project initiatives is a key element in the long-

term sustainability of an infrastructure project. Ongoing operational, maintenance, adaptive reuse and

embedded material costs are among those regularly underestimated or overlooked in the appraisal of

investment decisions across the asset’s useful life.

It is important that whole-of-life costing techniques are used to ensure that a project remains affordable

throughout a variety of future scenarios, and represents value for money.

Definitions


person(s):








‘significant’.






Level 1

ABL1.1 Whole-of-life costing for project initiatives is undertaken.

The cost of significant project decisions must be considered over the asset’s lifecycle. Where Ecn-4

has been referenced for options assessment such as in Ene-1, Ene-2, Wat-2, Rso-2, Spr-2 and Res-2,

then those initiatives are considered ‘significant’ for the purpose of this credit when these credits and

associated levels have been attempted.

Page 158 of 477



Evidence must be provided showing how ‘significant’ is defined. These decisions should align with those

in Ecn-1.

A monetised assessment of whole-of-life costing must form part of the financial analysis for significant

project decisions. Whole-of-life costing must consider the total costs and revenue of the investment

decision across its life. These include:

• Up-front and transactional costs,

• Capital costs,

• Holding costs,

• Costs incurred during operations,

• Costs incurred during the expected life of the investment to upgrade or refresh an asset,

• End of life decommissioning,

• Revenue streams for the infrastructure, and

• Organisational benefits.

Where applicable, additional investments may seek to future-proof the asset and integrate flexibility for

changes in future demand; one example of this would be design changes to a section of highway

infrastructure which is mindful of both autonomous and electric vehicles.

The recommended point of reference for whole-of-life costs is a guidance note from New Zealand

Treasury entitled Whole of life Costs (2015).


• Investment options assessment report or analysis, and

• Policy/authorisation process/delegations outlining how ‘significant’ is defined.

Level 2

ABL2.1 An independent review of the monetised assessment is undertaken.

In order to provide assurance of robust assessment, an independent review of the financial and

economic assessment must be performed by a suitably qualified person.



The reviewer must outline they are satisfied with the assessment methodology and outcomes.


• Investment options assessment report or analysis,

• Independent review report, and

• CV of independent reviewer.

Page 159 of 477



Lea

Spr

Res

Res

Ecn

Ecn

Ene

Gre

Env

Wat

Eco

Sta

Leg

Her

Wfs

Con 20TReferences

Australian Government Department of Finance and Administration, 2006. Handbook of Cost-Benefit Analysis. [Online]

Available at: Uhttps://www.finance.gov.au/sites/default/files/Handbook_of_CB_analysis.pdfU

[Accessed 18 April 2017].

Building Queensland, 2016a. Business Case Development Framework. [Online]

Available at: Uhttp://buildingqueensland.qld.gov.au/wp-content/uploads/2016/12/Business-Case-

Development-Framework-Overview.pdfU

[Accessed 5 May 2017].

Building Queensland, 2016c. Investment Mapping and Benefits Management Frameworks, s.l.: s.n.

European Commission, 2014. Guide to Cost Benefit Analysis of Investment Projects. [Online]

Available at: Uhttp://ec.europa.eu/regional_policy/sources/docgener/studies/pdf/cba_guide.pdfU


European Investment Bank, 2013. The Economic Appraisal of Investment Projects at the EIB. [Online]

Available at:

Uhttp://www.eib.org/attachments/thematic/economic_appraisal_of_investment_projects_en.pdfU


European University Institute THINK, 2013. Cost Benefit Analysis in the Context of the Energy Infrastructure Package. [Online]

Available at: Uhttp://www.eui.eu/Projects/THINK/Documents/Thinktopic/THINKTopic10.pdfU



Available at:


se_gases.pdfU


Infrastructure Sustainability Council of Australia (ISCA), 2016. Developing a Business Case for Sustainability Initiatives in Infrastructure: A ‘How To’ Guide. [Online]

Available at: Uhttp://isca.org.au/images/pdf/BusinessCaseGuide_v1.0.pdfU


Natural Capital Coalition, 2016. Natural Capital Protocol. [Online]

Available at: Uhttp://naturalcapitalcoalition.org/protocol/U


New South Wales Treasury, 2007. Guidelines for Economic Appraisal. [Online]

Available at: Uhttps://www.finance.nsw.gov.au/sites/default/files/policy-documents/tpp07-5.pdfU


New South Wales Treasury, 2008. Guidelines for Capital Business Cases. [Online]



New Zealand Transport Agency, 2016. Economic Evaluation Manual. [Online]

Available at: Uhttps://www.nzta.govt.nz/assets/resources/economic-evaluation-manual/economic-

evaluation-manual/docs/eem-manual-2016.pdfU


Page 160 of 477



New Zealand Treasury, 2014. Better Business Cases – Guidance on Using the Five Case Model: An Overview. [Online]

Available at: Uhttp://www.infrastructure.govt.nz/publications/betterbusinesscases/files/bbc-oview-gd.pdfU


New Zealand Treasury, 2015. Whole-of-life Costs Guidance. [Online]

Available at: Uhttp://www.treasury.govt.nz/publications/guidance/planning/costbenefitanalysisU


Queensland Department of Infrastructure, Local Government and Planning, 2016. State Infrastructure Plan, Part A. [Online]

Available at: Uhttp://www.dilgp.qld.gov.au/resources/plan/sip/sip-part-a.pdfU


Queensland Government, 2015. Project Assessment Framework: Business Case Development. [Online]

Available at: Uhttps://www.treasury.qld.gov.au/publications-resources/project-assessment-

framework/paf-business-case-development.pdfU


Transport for New South Wales (TfNSW), 2013. Principles and Guidelines for Economic Appraisal of Transport Investment. [Online]

Available at: Uhttp://www.transport.nsw.gov.au/sites/default/files/b2b/publications/tfnsw-principles-and-

guidelines-for-economic-appraisal-of-transport-initiatives.pdfU


United Kingdom Department for Transport, 2013. Transport Appraisal Guidance: WebTAG. [Online]

Available at: Uhttps://www.gov.uk/guidance/transport-analysis-guidance-webtagU


United Kingdom Department for Transport, 2015. Transport Appraisal Guidance: WebTAG unit 4-2. [Online]

Available at:

Uhttps://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/487691/TAG_unit_a4.2

_distrib_imp_app_dec2015.pdfU


United Kingdom HM Treasury, 2011. The Green Book: Appraisal and Evaluation in Central Government. [Online]

Available at:

Uhttps://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/220541/green_book_co

mplete.pdfU


United States Agency for International Development (USAID), 2002. Best Practices Guide: Economic & Financial Evaluation of Renewable Energy Projects. [Online]

Available at: Uhttp://pdf.usaid.gov/pdf_docs/Pnadb613.pdfU


University of Tasmania, 2015. Project management methodology Benefits realisation. [Online]

Available at: Uhttp://www.utas.edu.au/project-management-methodology/useful-resources/expected-

benefitsU


Page 161 of 477



Lea

Spr

Res

Res

Ecn

Ecn

Ene

Gre

Env

Wat

Eco

Sta

Leg

Her

Wfs

Con

Victorian Department of Treasury and Finance, 2013. Economic Evaluation for Business Cases: Technical guidelines. [Online]

Available at: Uhttp://www.dtf.vic.gov.au/files/bad1e4dd-01e5-4cbe-99f0-a1e000de5f26/Economic-

Evaluation-Technical-Guide.pdfU


Page 162 of 477




Page 163 of 477



Lea

Spr

Res

Res

Ecn

Ecn

Ene

Gre

Env

Wat

Eco

Sta

Leg

Her

Wfs

Con BENEFITS

A benefit is the “measurable improvement resulting from an outcome perceived as an advantage by one

or more stakeholders” (University of Tasmania, 2015). Benefits Realisation is the process of identifying

and measuring costs and benefits, and defining the success and impacts of a project.

Benefits management, and to a lesser extent post-project evaluation, are covered in existing guidance

documents which include:

• Building Queensland, Benefits Management Framework (2016c),

• Victoria Department of Treasury and Finance, Benefit map template – Initiative (2012a), and

• Victoria Department of Treasury and Finance, Benefit management plan template – Initiative

(2012b).

This category seeks to reward:

1. a robust approach to understanding and planning benefits realisation, and

2. a robust approach to managing, monitoring and evaluating benefits realisation and also

providing evidence and lessons learned for future projects.

To ensure targeted realisation of benefits across stakeholder groups, the environment, and the wider

economy, it is essential that processes be enacted and formally managed throughout the entirety of the

project’s life. Having effective, proactive processes to monitor and manage the benefits will increase the

project’s ability to ultimately realise them.

Targeted benefits should be SMART (specific, measurable, achievable, relevant and time-bound) with

descriptions, targets and interdependencies clearly outlined. How these benefits align with strategic

governmental, organisational, project and sustainability goals should also be clearly defined. It is

important that the realisation of benefits be treated as a dynamic and ongoing process.

As the majority of benefits arise over the medium to long-term following the completion of the

infrastructure project, it is important that a post-project evaluation process is undertaken. It is important

that this evaluation includes a critical review of the original business case and associated assessments

to compare actual outcomes and performance to those projected.

In most instances, original forecasts (such as demand levels) are found to vary in reality. However, the

root causes of these variances are rarely analysed and available in the public domain. As a result,

opportunities for valuable insights into how performance and outcomes can be enhanced for future

works are lost.

Post-project reviews provide highly valuable insights and learnings for use in future endeavours, and

will ultimately contribute to improved decision-making. By ensuring that effective monitoring of benefits

is undertaken, the organisation has means to ensure that the project, and indeed future projects, will

deliver genuine results in line with objectives and sustainable drivers.

The effective identification, measurement and ultimate realisation of benefits in infrastructure projects is

important to everyone. Their scale and resource-intensive nature has wide-reaching impacts on the

community, environment and economy. Failures to realise intended benefits may impose significant

costs on society for decades to come.

There are two credits in this category:

Ecn-5 Benefits Mapping

Ecn-6 Post Project Evaluation (Operations only).

Page 164 of 477



ISv2.0 Design

Ecn-5 Benefits mapping

Aim

To reward a robust approach to understanding and planning benefits realisation.

Criteria



DL1.1 A benefits management

plan including clear planning for

high level measurement of benefits

is developed or updated.

AND

DL1.2 Qualitative approach to

seeking opportunities to achieve

targeted benefits and act on

opportunities to realise additional

benefits.


achieved.

AND

DL2.1 A baseline of business as

usual performance is established

or updated.

AND

DL2.2 Groups to whom benefits

will accrue are identified.

AND

DL2.3 Measures to monitor,

manage and maximise benefits

during project implementation are

identified.

AND

DL2.4 Quantitative approach to

seeking opportunities to achieve

targeted benefits and act on

opportunities to realise additional

benefits.

AND

DL2.5 An independent review of

the business as usual baseline is

undertaken.


achieved.

AND

DL3.1 A baseline projecting future

performance is established or

updated.

AND

DL3.2 An independent review of

the projected baseline is

undertaken.

Effective benefits realisation is a key element in ensuring that economic benefits are realised in practice,

as opposed to merely being forecast in an ex-ante cost benefit analysis. Benefits mapping is the process

whereby the benefits in initial projections are fostered throughout delivery by means of an active

management and monitoring plan. This enacts a proactive process to ensure benefits are adequately

tracked and ultimately realised.

This credit relates to the importance of seeking sustainability benefits throughout a project, rather than

simply the planning phase.

There are a number of useful points of reference for benefits mapping and management:

• Australian Transport Assessment and Planning Guidelines: T6 Benefits Management (Australian

Government Department of Infrastructure and Regional Development, 2016)

• Investment Management Tools (Victorian Department of Treasury and Finance)

• Benefits Realisation Management Framework (NSW Department of Finance, Innovation and

Services, 2015)

• Investment Logic Mapping and Benefits Management Frameworks (Building Queensland, 2016)

These points of reference provide templates for benefit maps and benefit management plans, together

with ideas for a benefits definition workshop, examples of KPIs and reports.

Page 165 of 477



Lea

Spr

Res

Res

Ecn

Ecn

Ene

Gre

Env

Wat

Eco

Sta

Leg

Her

Wfs

Con

Definitions




• Economists,


• Infrastructure experts.


person(s):











Level 1

DL1.1 A benefits management plan including clear planning for high level measurement of benefits is developed or updated.

The benefits management plan must demonstrate critical consideration of how targeted outcomes will

be achieved in practice. The plan must present objectives and SMART (Specific, Measurable,

Achievable, Relevant and Time-bound) targets for each targeted benefit category. The plan must also

clearly outline actions, responsibilities and key milestones for ongoing management and monitoring of

projected benefits.

If a benefits management plan was completed as part of a planning/project development rating, then it

must be reviewed and updated.

Development or review of a benefits management plan must be undertaken with a multi-disciplinary

team.

DL1.2 Qualitative approach to seeking opportunities to achieve targeted benefits and act on opportunities to realise additional benefits.

Evidence must be provided of active benefits management for targeted or additional benefits, this

should include analysis of the final design to ensure targeted benefits are being met. This may relate to

project initiatives, for example energy options, or changes in the external context, for example

technological or policy, which provide opportunities for additional benefits.


• Benefits management plan, and

• CVs of people involved in the plan development/review.

Page 166 of 477



Level 2

DL2.1 A baseline of business as usual performance is established or updated.

A clear baseline must be established, such that current or business-as-usual performance can be

measured against the specified targets. Given this, the baseline must, as a minimum, identify current

performance of indicators for identified targeted benefits. This will provide a point of comparison

throughout development.

If a baseline was completed as part of a planning/project development rating, then it must be reviewed

and updated where necessary.

Development or review of a baseline must be undertaken with a multi-disciplinary team.

DL2.2 Groups to whom benefits will accrue are identified.

The benefits management plan must create a benefits map and calculate the predicted benefits flowing

to all relevant stakeholders in the project, including the community. The stakeholder assessment

undertaken in Sta-1 should provide a useful outline of the project stakeholders.

If the benefits management plan mapping was completed as part of a planning/project development

rating, then it must be reviewed and updated where necessary.

Development or review of the benefits management plan mapping must be undertaken with a multi-

disciplinary team.

DL2.3 Measures to monitor, manage and maximise benefits during project implementation are identified.

The baseline must be linked to the benefits management plan in that it must also identify how benefits

will be managed, monitored and maximised during project implementation (including hand over to

construction) If the benefits management plan was updated during the design phase, these changes

should be reflected.

DL2.4 Quantitative approach to seeking opportunities to achieve targeted benefits and act on opportunities to realise additional benefits.

Quantitative evidence must be provided demonstrating how the targeted benefits will be achieved

and/or how additional benefits will be realised in the design. For achieving targeted benefits, evidence

must justify how the stated target will be sought. For realising additional benefits, the quantified

evidence must clearly establish additional objectives. These must be SMART (Specific, Measurable,

Achievable, Relevant and Time-bound).

DL2.5 An independent review of the business as usual baseline is undertaken.

In order to provide assurance of robust assessment, an independent review of the business as usual

baseline must be performed by a suitably qualified professional.






• Benefits management plan,

• Current baseline,

• Calculations or excerpts from report, analysis or similar demonstrating benefits distribution, and


Page 167 of 477



Lea

Spr

Res

Res

Ecn

Ecn

Ene

Gre

Env

Wat

Eco

Sta

Leg

Her

Wfs

Con

Level 3

DL3.1 A baseline projecting future performance is established or updated.

A projected future baseline must be established. This must provide reasonable projections of

performance in the targeted benefit categories for the ‘do minimum’ scenario (that is, in the absence of

the project).

The projected future baseline should establish a comparator against which it is possible to measure the

extent to which impacts (for instance, traffic congestion or access issues) will be diminished through the

project intervention. Performance indicators for future measurement must be established.

If a projected future baseline was completed as part of a planning/project development rating, then it

must be reviewed and updated where necessary.

DL3.2 An independent review of the projected baseline is undertaken.

In order to provide assurance of robust assessment, an independent review of the projected baseline

must be performed by a suitably qualified professional. This step is only required if the baseline has

significantly altered.






• Benefits management plan,

• Current baseline,

• Calculations or excerpts from report, analysis or similar demonstrating benefits distribution,

• Independent review report,

• Projected baseline,

• Independent review report, and

• CV of independent reviewer/s.

Page 168 of 477



ISv2.0 As Built

Ecn-5 Benefits mapping

Aim

To reward a robust approach to understanding and planning benefits realisation.

Criteria



ABL1.1 The actions and monitoring

measures that have been assigned

to the As Built

organisation/contractor are

implemented.

Not applicable. Not applicable.

Effective benefits realisation is a key element in ensuring that sustainability benefits are realised in

practice, as opposed to merely being forecast in an ex-ante cost benefit analysis. Benefits mapping is

the process whereby the benefits in initial projections are ensured throughout delivery by means of an

active management and monitoring plan. This enacts a proactive process to ensure benefits are

adequately tracked and ultimately realised.

This credit relates to the importance of managing sustainability benefits throughout a project, rather than

simply the planning phase.

There are a number of useful points of reference for benefits mapping and management:

• Australian Transport Assessment and Planning Guidelines: T6 Benefits Management (Australian

Government Department of Infrastructure and Regional Development, 2016),

• Investment Management Tools (Victorian Department of Treasury and Finance),

• Benefits Realisation Management Framework (NSW Department of Finance, Innovation and

Services, 2015), and

• Investment Logic Mapping and Benefits Management Frameworks (Building Queensland, 2016).

These points of reference provide templates for benefit maps and benefit management plans together

with ideas for a benefits definition workshop, examples of KPIs and reports.

Level 1

ABL1.1 The actions and monitoring measures that have been assigned to the As Built organisation/contractor are implemented.

All actions and monitoring measures that have been assigned to the As Built organisation/contractor in

the proponent or Designer’s benefits management plan must be implemented. Where the assigned

actions have not been implemented justification must be provided.

Where the implemented actions do not achieve the targeted benefits the As Built organisation/contractor

should consult with the proponent/designer to update the assigned actions in line with the overarching

benefits management plan.

Page 169 of 477



Lea

Spr

Res

Res

Ecn

Ecn

Ene

Gre

Env

Wat

Eco

Sta

Leg

Her

Wfs

Con


• Monitoring logs

• Action plans

• Risk register

Page 170 of 477



20TReferences

Australian Government Department of Infrastructure and Regional Development, 2016. Australian Transport Assessment and Planning Guidelines. [Online]

Available at: Uhttps://atap.gov.au/U

[Accessed 20 October 2016].

Building Queensland, 2016c. Benefits Realisation Framework. [Online]

Available at: Uhttp://buildingqueensland.qld.gov.au/wp-content/uploads/2016/12/Benefits-Management-

Framework-1.pdfU


Building Queensland, 2016c. Investment Mapping and Benefits Management Frameworks, s.l.: s.n.

European Investment Bank, 2013. The Economic Appraisal of Investment Projects at the EIB. [Online]

Available at:

Uhttp://www.eib.org/attachments/thematic/economic_appraisal_of_investment_projects_en.pdfU



Available at:


se_gases.pdfU


Infrastructure Australia, 2017. Assessment Framework: Detailed Technical Guidance. [Online]

Available at:

Uhttp://infrastructureaustralia.gov.au/projects/files/Assessment_Framework_Detailed_Technical_Guida

nce.pdfU


New South Wales Treasury, 2007. Guidelines for Economic Appraisal. [Online]



New Zealand Transport Agency, 2016. Economic Evaluation Manual. [Online]

Available at: Uhttps://www.nzta.govt.nz/assets/resources/economic-evaluation-manual/economic-

evaluation-manual/docs/eem-manual-2016.pdfU


NSW Department of Finance, Innovation and Services, 2015. Benefits Realisation Management Framework, s.l.: s.n.

Queensland Department of Infrastructure, Local Government and Planning, 2016. State Infrastructure Plan, Part A. [Online]

Available at: Uhttp://www.dilgp.qld.gov.au/resources/plan/sip/sip-part-a.pdfU


United Kingdom Department for Transport, 2013. Transport Appraisal Guidance: WebTAG. [Online]

Available at: Uhttps://www.gov.uk/guidance/transport-analysis-guidance-webtagU


Page 171 of 477



Lea

Spr

Res

Res

Ecn

Ecn

Ene

Gre

Env

Wat

Eco

Sta

Leg

Her

Wfs

Con

United Kingdom Department for Transport, 2015. Transport Appraisal Guidance: WebTAG unit 4-2. [Online]

Available at:

Uhttps://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/487691/TAG_unit_a4.2

_distrib_imp_app_dec2015.pdfU


United Kingdom HM Treasury, 2011. The Green Book: Appraisal and Evaluation in Central Government. [Online]

Available at:

Uhttps://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/220541/green_book_co

mplete.pdfU


University of Tasmania, 2015. Project management methodology Benefits realisation. [Online]

Available at: Uhttp://www.utas.edu.au/project-management-methodology/useful-resources/expected-

benefitsU


Victorian Department of Treasury and Finance, 2012a. Benefit map template – Initiative. [Online]

Available at: Uhttp://www.dtf.vic.gov.au/files/7bd36894-e1cb-4788-90cc-a1cc00bd72a9/IMS-5-0-FS-

Benefit-Management-Plan-Template.pptxU


Victorian Department of Treasury and Finance, 2012b. Benefit management plan template – Initiative. [Online]

Available at: Uhttp://www.dtf.vic.gov.au/files/2569d1b3-677d-4b12-9e0f-a1cc00beb451/IMS_5-

0_FS_BMP-Template_Word.docxU


Victorian Department of Treasury and Finance, 2013. Economic Evaluation for Business Cases: Technical guidelines. [Online]

Available at: Uhttp://www.dtf.vic.gov.au/files/bad1e4dd-01e5-4cbe-99f0-a1e000de5f26/Economic-

Evaluation-Technical-Guide.pdfU


Page 172 of 477




Page 173 of 477



Lea

Spr

Res

Res

Ecn

Ecn

Ene

Gre

Env

Wat

Eco

Sta

Leg

Her

Wfs

Con ENERGY & CARBON

About Energy and Carbon

Global energy use continues to rise as economies grow. The majority of Australian energy and a

proportion of New Zealand energy is derived from non-renewable fossil fuel resources (coal, natural

gas and oil) (Office of the Chief Economist, 2016) . The use of fossil fuels creates greenhouse gas

(GHG) emissions (also referred to as carbon emissions, carbon equivalents or CO2-e) which

contributes towards human-induced climate change.

Australia is one of the highest per capita emitters of GHGs (World Bank, 2017). Recognising the threat

posed by climate change, the Australian and New Zealand Governments have committed to reduce

GHG emissions. Australia has committed to reducing emissions by 26-28% below 2005 levels by 2030

(Australian Government, 2017). Similarly, New Zealand has committed to reducing emissions by 30%

below 2005 levels by 2030. (Ministry for the Environment, 2017). In 2016, both Australia and New

Zealand ratified the Paris Agreement, a global agreement under the United Nations Framework

Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) to limit global temperature rise to well below 2°C (Ministry

for the Environment, 2017) (Australian Government, 2017). Additionally, Infrastructure Australia has

identified a need to reduce GHG emissions in their Australian Infrastructure Plan (Infrastructure

Australia, 2016).

To achieve our targets, all industries and individuals will need to reduce their energy consumption and

GHG emissions and convert to a low carbon economy.

There are no current estimates of the contribution of infrastructure to Australia and New Zealand’s

GHG emissions, however, in Australia, the built environment (electricity, gas, water, services,

construction and transport) contributes 47% of Australia’s emissions (Australian Government

Department of Environment and Energy, 2015). Sources of GHG emissions include electricity use,

stationary energy, transport, fugitive emissions, industrial processes and product use, agriculture,

waste and land use change.

The Australian Government has legislated the measurement and reporting of GHG emissions through

the National Greenhouse and Energy Reporting Act (NGER) 2007 to collect data on Australia’s GHG

emissions. The Act requires companies that reach a certain emissions threshold to report emission on

a yearly basis. There are no regulatory initiatives specifically requiring infrastructure projects or assets

to report on their energy and GHG emissions at the project or asset level.

About this Category

The intent of this category is to encourage behaviours and outcomes which prioritise reductions in

energy demand and GHG emissions before purchasing carbon offsetting. The credit structure therefore

aligns with the following hierarchy:

• Reducing energy demand and GHG emissions through design (i.e. designing out the need for

activities that use energy or generate GHG emissions) and construction (Ene-1),

• Undertaking any necessary activities as efficiently as possible (e.g. maximising energy efficiency)

(Ene-1),

• Where feasible, using renewable energy sources to replace non-renewable sources. (Ene-2), and

• Carbon offsetting (Ene-3).

The following three credits comprise the Energy and Carbon category:

Ene-1 Energy efficiency

Ene-2 Renewable energy

Ene-3 Carbon offsetting

Page 174 of 477



Category Linkages

The following ISv2.0 categories have linkages with the Energy and Carbon category.

Table En1 Category linkages


Ecn-1 Ene-1 and Ene-2 require energy

efficiency and renewable energy


Ecn-1.

x x x

Ecn-4 Ene-1 and Ene-2 require energy

efficiency and renewable energy


Ecn-4.

x x x

Sta-1 Identifying the scope 3 boundary

may require engagement with

the key stakeholders.

x x x x

Page 175 of 477



Lea

Spr

Res

Res

Ecn

Ecn

Ene

Gre

Env

Wat

Eco

Sta

Leg

Her

Wfs

Con

ISv2.0 Design

Ene-1 Energy efficiency

Aim

To reward the reduction of energy use and carbon emissions across the infrastructure lifecycle.

Criteria

Table En2 Ene- 1 Design summary criteria table

Level 1 Level >1 to 3 on a sliding scale

DL1.1 Modelling of carbon emissions and energy use

for scope 1, 2 & 3 is completed for operational and

construction impacts.

AND

DL1.2 Energy and carbon emissions reductions

opportunities are fully investigated for whole of life

and a minimum of 3 reduction initiatives are identified

for construction.

AND

DL1.3 All feasible opportunities are implemented in

the design and confirmed for implementation in

construction.

The requirements for level 1 are achieved

AND

DL2.1 Modelling demonstrates a reduction in carbon

emissions compared to a base case footprint. For

reductions, up to 30% (which corresponds to Level 3),

fractions of levels may be achieved on a sliding scale.

Note: Carbon offsets and renewable energy are not rewarded for the purposes of this credit. Renewable

energy is rewarded in Ene-2 and offsetting is rewarded in Ene-3. Embodied energy and emissions in

materials must not be included, as they are considered in the Resources Category.

The intent of this credit is to reward a reduction in energy and carbon emissions in accordance with

ISCA’s ISv2.0 Energy and Carbon Guideline.

The objective of the Energy and Carbon Guideline is to provide guidance for developing the scope,

collection of data, management of emissions and purchase of eligible offsets.

Definitions

Carbon or carbon emissions refers to carbon dioxide equivalents (CO2-e) also referred to as

greenhouse gas emissions (GHG emissions)

Constant energy consumption is defined as energy consumption which is relatively consistent year

on year; where a pattern or trend can be measured for comparison purposes. Examples include:

• Stationary energy use, e.g. site offices and depots

• Mobile energy usage, e.g. operational vehicle fleet/plant/equipment utilisation

• Asset utilisation (as utilised in normal operations)

• Standard preventative maintenance and standard reactive maintenance - as defined in asset

management plans, operating procedures, budget plans or equivalent

Constant energy consumption may vary from day to day, or month to month, but on looking at annual

consumption, the patterns across one full year would likely be similar to another year (assuming no or

little change to operational practices/activities across the years). This may be measured using functional

units, such as MJ/passenger/year used by airports or MJ/TEU/year (twenty-foot equivalent unit) used

by container ports.

Page 176 of 477



Greenhouse gas emissions include greenhouse gases covered under the Kyoto Protocol: carbon

dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4), nitrous oxide (N2O), hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs), perfluorocarbons

(PFCs), sulphur hexafluoride (SF6) and nitrogen trifluoride (NF3).

Modelling refers to reasonable estimates, calculations or predictions. This may also be referred to as

an energy footprint.

Scope 1 emissions are direct GHG emissions occurring from sources that are owned or controlled by

the project, for example, emissions from combustion in owned or controlled boilers, furnaces, vehicles,

generators etc.; and emissions from chemical production in owned or controlled process equipment.

Direct CO2 emissions from the combustion of biomass, and GHG emissions not covered by the Kyoto

Protocol, e.g. CFCs, NOx, etc. shall not be included (Greenhouse Gas Protocol, 2015).

Scope 2 emissions accounts for GHG emissions from the generation of purchased electricity,

consumed by the project. Purchased electricity is defined as electricity that is purchased or otherwise

brought into the project boundary. Scope 2 emissions physically occur at the facility where electricity is

generated (Greenhouse Gas Protocol, 2015).

Scope 3 emissions are all other indirect emissions. Scope 3 emissions are a consequence of the

activities of the project, but occur from sources not owned or controlled by the project. Examples of

scope 3 activities are: extraction and production of purchased materials; transportation of purchased

fuels; and use of sold products and services (Greenhouse Gas Protocol, 2015). See the Energy and

Carbon Guideline for further examples.

For the purpose of this category, Scope 3 emissions are included if they are deemed material and

relevant (see the Energy and Carbon Guideline for more details).

Suitably qualified professional for the purposes of this credit is someone who has a formal

qualification and a minimum of five years’ experience in energy or GHG management including GHG

assessment and auditing aligned with the Greenhous Gas Protocol Corporate Reporting Standard. A CV

of the suitably qualified professional must be provided as evidence. Being registered on the Register of

Greenhouse and Energy Auditors meets this requirement (without needing to supply further evidence

of experience).

For those projects using a Life Cycle Assessment, then a suitably qualified professional for the purposes

of this credit is someone who is recognised as a Life Cycle Assessment Certified Professional (LCACP)

by the Australian LCA Society (ALCAS), as evidenced by being registered on the ALCAS list of certified

practitioners.

Variable energy consumption refers to energy used by activities that are relatively unplanned and/or

change year by year depending on upgrades, budget/funding, responses to incidents or reactive

maintenance. Examples of such activities include:

• Accident/incident management

• Unexpected repairs/reactive maintenance

• Intermittent or periodic capital enhancements/renewal/upgrade/ replacement works

• Intermittent/outlying/abnormal demand/ utilisation and/or service changes

Zero-emission energy sources are sources of energy from a grid or energy system where there are

zero/negligible greenhouse gas emissions associated with energy production, and where the project

or asset has no control over the source of that energy.

Page 177 of 477



Lea

Spr

Res

Res

Ecn

Ecn

Ene

Gre

Env

Wat

Eco

Sta

Leg

Her

Wfs

Con

Level 1

DL1.1 Modelling of carbon emissions and energy use for Scope 1, 2 & 3 is completed for operational

and construction impacts.

The term modelling refers to reasonable estimates, calculations or predictions. This

may also be referred to as an energy footprint, carbon footprint or carbon account.

No base case development is required for Level 1, as no reductions need to be demonstrated. The data

collected for the various activities is required to be reported.

Energy use and carbon emissions must be modelled across the infrastructure lifecycle including

construction and operation. Modelling must be undertaken in accordance with the Energy and Carbon

Guideline, in particular sections 2.1.1 and 2.1.2.

The finalised energy model must be either reviewed or audited by a suitably qualified professional. If

audits are undertaken, they must be undertaken in accordance with the principles of ISO 14064.3.

A final modelling review or audit report must be prepared by a suitably qualified professional and outline,

as a minimum:

• a description of the scope, objectives and criteria of the review or audit

• evidence of the sampled data and sampling methods used, including examples of raw data used

to crosscheck and error checking methodologies

• evidence of review or audit of materiality process

• a statement that the carbon data has been checked to ensure compliance with the Greenhouse

Gas Protocol Corporate Reporting Standard

• The reviewer’s or auditor’s conclusions on the carbon footprint including any qualification or

limitations

DL1.2 Energy and carbon emissions reduction opportunities are fully investigated for whole of life and

a minimum of 3 reduction initiatives are identified for construction.

If 80% or more of the energy footprint consists of energy from zero-emissions energy sources, then

reduction initiatives must be modelled and assessed using gigajoules rather than emissions.


zero/negligible greenhouse gas emissions associated with energy production, and where the project or

asset has no control over the source of that energy. For example, if a town has committed to being

100% carbon neutral and that has been achieved through power purchase agreements, then as long as

the project or asset’s emissions are covered by the commitment, the project is considered to have

energy from zero-emissions sources. If those emission-free sources make up at least 80% of the energy

footprint, then reduction initiatives must be calculated using gigajoules rather than emissions. The

reason for this is so projects and assets that are in low emissions regions can still be rewarded for

reducing energy demand.

Energy and carbon emissions reduction opportunities must be assessed in accordance with Ecn-1 and

Ecn-4. The assessment must consider the forecast useful life of the asset.

The use of a Life-Cycle Assessment (LCA) is considered suitable evidence for Level >1-3 if it is

developed in accordance with ISO 14040 and ISO 14044 standards.

A minimum of 3 reduction initiatives for construction must be identified and assessed in accordance

with Ecn-1 and Ecn-4 unless a limited scope of works can be demonstrated.

DL1.3 All feasible opportunities are implemented in the design and confirmed for implementation in

construction.

All feasible energy and carbon opportunities must be implemented in the design. This includes

demonstration through final design reports, design drawings or other suitable design related evidence.

Page 178 of 477



All feasible energy and carbon reduction opportunities must be confirmed for implementation in

construction. This can be demonstrated through construction environmental management plans or other

similar construction documentation. At least one construction initiative must be confirmed for

implementation unless a limited scope of works can be demonstrated.

The outcomes of the opportunities assessment must be used to determine the feasibility of an

opportunity in accordance with Ecn-1 and Ecn-4.


• Final design drawings/report,

• Energy and carbon footprint model,

• Opportunities workshop minutes,

• Audit report,

• Evidence of how financial, social and environmental impacts were considered in decision-making,

• Construction environment management plan,

• Supplier contracts,

• Opportunity analysis register, and

• CV of suitably qualified professional.

Level >1 to 3

DL2.1 Modelling demonstrates a reduction in carbon emissions compared to a base case footprint. For

reductions up to 30% (which corresponds to Level 3), fractions of levels may be achieved on a sliding

scale.












Energy and carbon modelling must demonstrate a reduction in carbon emissions compared to the base

case. The development of a base case must be undertaken in accordance with the Energy and Carbon

Guideline. Please refer to sections 2.1.1, 2.1.2, and 2.1.3.

The use of a Life-Cycle Assessment (LCA) is considered suitable evidence for Level >1-3 if it is

developed in accordance with ISO 14040 and ISO 14044 standards.

Modelling must be reviewed or audited by a suitably qualified professional to verify the reductions

claimed. If an audit is undertaken, it must be undertaken in accordance with ISO 14064.3. This includes

critical review by a suitably qualified professional (LCA).

A final review or audit report must be prepared by the qualified professional and outline, as a minimum:

• a description of the scope, objectives and criteria of the review or audit,


to crosscheck as well as error checking methodologies,

• evidence of review or audit of materiality process,

Page 179 of 477



Lea

Spr

Res

Res

Ecn

Ecn

Ene

Gre

Env

Wat

Eco

Sta

Leg

Her

Wfs

Con • a statement that the carbon data has been checked to ensure compliance with the Greenhouse

Gas Protocol Corporate Reporting Standard,

• the reviewer’s or auditor’s conclusions on the carbon footprint including any qualification or

limitations,

• the reviewer’s or auditor’s opinion on whether or not the reductions claimed are compliant with

Greenhouse Gas Protocol Corporate Reporting Standard, and

• a comparison of the base case energy use with the modelled energy use for design and

construction.

This is a scaled credit. Where a reduction compared to a base case footprint is achieved, for every unit

of reduction up to 30%, fractions of levels may be achieved on a sliding scale of 1 to 3. For example, a

10% reduction would achieve Level 1.67 (1 + (10%/30%) x (3-1)). This sliding scale approach provides

encouragement to pursue every possible reduction opportunity. Significant reductions beyond 30% may

be awarded innovation points on a case by case basis.


• Model or report comparing modelled carbon emissions to a base case footprint, and

• Life-cycle assessment reports including compliant peer review.

Page 180 of 477



ISv2.0 As Built

Ene-1 Energy Efficiency

Aim

To reward the reduction of energy use and carbon emissions across the infrastructure lifecycle.

Criteria

Table En3 Ene-1 As Built summary criteria


ABL1.1 Monitoring of carbon emissions and energy

use for Scope 1, 2 & 3 during the construction period

is undertaken.

AND

ABL1.2 Feasible energy and carbon emissions

reduction opportunities identified in design are fully

implemented.


AND

ABL2.1 Monitoring demonstrates a reduction in

carbon emissions compared to a base case footprint.

For reductions up to 30%, fractions of levels may be

achieved on a sliding scale.

Note: Carbon offsets and renewable energy are not rewarded for the purposes of this credit. Renewable

energy is rewarded in Ene-2 and Offsetting is rewarded in Ene-3. Embodied energy and emissions in

materials, must not be included, as they are considered in the Resources Category.

The intent of this credit is to reward a reduction in energy and emissions in accordance with the Energy

and Carbon Guide.

The objective of the Energy and Carbon Guideline is to provide guidance for carbon emissions scope,


Definitions

Carbon or carbon emissions refers to carbon equivalents (CO2-e) also referred to as greenhouse gas

emissions (GHG emissions)

Greenhouse gas emissions include greenhouse gases covered under to Kyoto Protocol: carbon

dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4), nitrous oxide (N2O), hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs), perfluorocarbons

(PCFs), sulphur hexafluoride (SF6) and nitrogen trifluoride (NF3).

Scope 1 emissions are direct GHG emissions occurring from sources that are owned or controlled by

the project for example, emissions from combustion in owned or controlled boilers, furnaces, vehicles,

generators etc.; emissions from chemical production in owned or controlled process equipment. Direct

CO2 emissions from the combustion of biomass and GHG emissions not covered by the Kyoto Protocol,

e.g. CFCs, NOx, etc. shall not be included. (Greenhouse Gas Protocol, 2015).

Scope 2 emissions accounts for GHG emissions from the generation of purchased electricity,

consumed by the project. Purchased electricity is defined as electricity that is purchased or otherwise

brought into the project boundary. Scope 2 emissions physically occur at the facility where electricity is

generated. (Greenhouse Gas Protocol, 2015).

Scope 3 emissions are all other indirect emissions. Scope 3 emissions are a consequence of the

activities of the project, but occur from sources not owned or controlled by the project. Some examples

of Scope 3 activities are extraction and production of purchased materials; transportation of purchased

fuels; and use of sold products and services. (Greenhouse Gas Protocol, 2015).

For the purpose of this category, scope 3 emissions are those scope 3 emissions that are deemed

material and relevant (see the Energy and Carbon Guideline for more details).

Page 181 of 477



Lea

Spr

Res

Res

Ecn

Ecn

Ene

Gre

Env

Wat

Eco

Sta

Leg

Her

Wfs

Con

Suitably qualified professional for the purposes of this credit is someone who has a formal qualification

and a minimum of five years’ experience in energy or GHG management including GHG assessment and

auditing aligned with the Greenhouse Gas Protocol Corporate Reporting Standard. A CV of the suitably

qualified professional must be provided as evidence. Being registered on the Register of Greenhouse

and Energy Auditors meets this requirement (without needing to supply evidence of experience).

For those projects using a Life Cycle Assessment, then a suitably qualified professional for the purposes

of this credit is someone who is recognised as a Life Cycle Assessment Certified Professional (LCACP)

by the Australian LCA Society (ALCAS), as evidenced by being registered on the ALCAS list of certified

practitioners.



asset has no control over the source of that energy.

Level 1

ABL1.1 Monitoring of carbon emissions and energy use for Scope 1, 2 & 3 during the construction period

is undertaken.

Energy use and carbon emissions must be monitored across the construction period. Monitoring must

be undertaken for all emissions sources identified in the design phase as outlined in sections 2.1 and

2.2 of the Energy and Carbon Guideline.

The scope of the monitored energy and carbon footprint/report should align with the modelled predicted

data from the design rating. If the model and monitored footprint do not match, an explanation as to why

should be provided.

All energy and carbon monitoring must comply with the Greenhouse Gas Protocol Corporate

Accounting and Reporting Standard.

The monitoring of energy and carbon emissions must be either reviewed or audited by a suitably

qualified professional. If audits are undertaken, they must be undertaken in accordance with the

principles of ISO 14064.3.

A final monitoring review or audit report must be prepared by a suitably qualified professional and

outline, as a minimum:



to crosscheck and error checking methodologies,

• evidence of review or audit of materiality process,




limitations, and

• the reviewer’s or auditor’s opinion on whether or not the monitoring was undertaken in accordance

with the Greenhouse Gas Protocol Corporate Reporting Standard.

ABL1.2 Feasible energy and carbon emissions reduction opportunities identified in design are fully

implemented.

Feasible energy and carbon emissions reduction opportunities, identified in the design rating, must be

implemented. These opportunities must be the same as the initiatives identified for implementation in

the design rating. If not, an explanation must be provided as to why they have not been implemented

and three new opportunities must be assessed in accordance with Ecn-1 and Ecn-4. All feasible

opportunities must then be implemented.

Page 182 of 477



Implementation means that design related initiatives are documented in final design reports and as built

drawings and any construction related initiatives have occurred during the construction phase.

If final design reports have been previously provided and verified through the Design rating, then further

design reports are not required. However, if the design has progressed since the design rating, final

design drawings must be provided.


• Energy and carbon footprint,

• Design reports,

• As built drawings,

• Audit report,

• Photos,

• Supplier details/receipts/agreements/contracts,

• Design drawings, and

• CV of suitably qualified professional

Level >1 to 3

ABL2.1 Monitoring demonstrates a reduction in carbon emissions compared to a base case footprint.

For reductions up to 30%, fractions of levels may be achieved on a sliding scale.












Energy and carbon monitoring must demonstrate a reduction in energy and carbon emissions compared

to the base case. The development of a base case must be undertaken in accordance with the Energy

and Carbon Guideline. Please refer to sections 2.1.1, 2.1.2, and 2.1.3.

The use of a Life-Cycle Assessment (LCA) report is considered suitable evidence for Level >1-3 if it is

developed in accordance with ISO 14040 and ISO 14044 standards. This includes critical review by a

suitably qualified professional (LCA).




encouragement to pursue every possible reduction opportunity. Reductions beyond 30% may be

awarded innovation points on a case by case basis.

Monitoring must be reviewed or audited by a suitably qualified professional to verify the reductions

claimed. If an audit is undertaken, it must be undertaken in accordance with ISO 14064.3.



Page 183 of 477



Lea

Spr

Res

Res

Ecn

Ecn

Ene

Gre

Env

Wat

Eco

Sta

Leg

Her

Wfs

Con • evidence of the sampled data and sampling methods used, including examples of raw data used


• evidence of audit of materiality process,




limitations,

• the reviewer’s or auditor’s opinion on whether or not the reductions claimed are compliant with

Greenhouse Gas Protocol Corporate Reporting Standard, and


construction and the monitored energy use for construction, including an explanation of any

discrepancies.

Examples evidence for Level >1 to 3

• Monitoring report comparing base case footprint to actual footprint,

• Audit report, and

• Details of reduction initiatives including photos, design drawings etc.

Page 184 of 477



ISv2.0 Design


Aim

To reward the use of renewable energy.

Criteria

Table En4 Ene-2 Design summary criteria


DL1.1 At least 3 renewable energy options are

assessed in accordance with Ecn-1 and Ecn-4.


AND

DL2.1 Renewable energy substitutions up to 100% of

the balance of the projected energy consumption for

scopes 1 & 2 may be achieved on a sliding scale.

Note: this credit rewards renewable energy only; offsets from renewable energy projects can be

rewarded under Ene-3.

Note: For projects that install or purchase enough renewable energy to cover their whole footprint

(including Scope 3) they will automatically achieve L3 on Ene-3.

Note: this credit uses actual case data not base case data

Definitions

Renewable energy is defined as energy which comes from natural resources that can be constantly

replenished (Australian Renewable Energy Agency, 2016). Renewable energy technologies include, for

the purposes of this credit, electricity, gas and heat generated from solar, wind, ocean, hydropower,

biomass (waste to energy, landfill gas), geothermal resources, and/or hydrogen derived from renewable

resources. It also includes renewable energy purchased through an energy retailer or renewable energy

project developer that is in addition to the mandatory Renewable Energy Target (RET).

Table En5 below has been adapted from Helping Business – Pathways to Purchase Renewable Energy

(WWF, 2016) and outlines renewable energy options rewarded under this credit.

Table En5 Renewable energy options that are rewarded under Ene-2. Adapted from (WWF-Australia, 2016)

Option Details Grid/Local Counterparty Additional to

RET?

Rewarded

under Ene-2?

Electricity

Install on-

site

renewable

technology

Any onsite

renewable

energy

technology such

as a photovoltaic

array or biogas

from a waste

water treatment

facility or landfill

Local Project/

Retailer

Only if Small-scale

Technology

Certificates (STC)

or Large-scale

Generation

Certificates (LGC)

are surrendered

Yes, if STCs or

LGCs are

surrendered

Page 185 of 477



Lea

Spr

Res

Res

Ecn

Ecn

Ene

Gre

Env

Wat

Eco

Sta

Leg

Her

Wfs

Con GreenPower Retailer

purchases

renewable

energy on your

behalf

Grid Retailer Yes Yes

Power

Purchase

Agreement

(PPA)

Offtake

agreement

Purchase some

or all generation

from utility-scale

project

Grid Project

Developer

Only if LGC are

surrendered

Yes, if LGCs are

surrendered

Connect

local

projects with

offsite

demand

Import

renewable

energy from

local renewable

energy projects

Local

distribution

Market

participant

Only if LGCs are

surrendered

Yes, if LGCs are

surrendered

Gas

Biogas Gas produced in

Australia from

waste or end of

life products

such as landfill

gas

Local

distribution

Market

participant

Yes Yes, if created

from waste or

end of life

materials and

produced in

Australia

Liquid fuel

Biofuels Liquid fuel

created in

Australia from

waste or end of

life products

such as

agricultural

waste

Local

distribution

Market

participant

Yes Yes, if created

from waste or

end of life

materials and

produced in

Australia

Other

Other fuels Other renewable energy sources may be considered. Please speak with your Case

Manager for further advice.

Page 186 of 477



Level 1

DL1.1 At least 3 renewable energy options are assessed in accordance with Ecn-1 and Ecn-4.

At least 3 renewable energy options, as outlined in Table En5, must be assessed in accordance with

Ecn-1 and Ecn-4 over the full infrastructure lifecycle including options for construction. Renewable

energy options should be assessed as part of the options assessment in Ene-1. Please see section

2.4.2 of the Energy and Carbon Guideline for an example of using Ecn-1 and Ecn-4 to assess technology

options.

Options could include three separate renewable technologies (such as solar PV, solar thermal and wind)

or a combination of options described in Table En5 (such as GreenPower, PPA, and onsite solar PV).

Justification must be provided for the options that are selected for implementation and why other options

are not selected.

For projects that have at least 80% of their energy from zero-emissions sources, the renewable energy

options must be assessed for the remaining emissions intensive component of their energy mix only.


• Opportunity assessment,

• Design report,

• Final drawings, and

• Management plans.

Level >1 to 3

DL2.1 Renewable energy substitutions up to 100% of the balance of the projected energy consumption

for Scopes 1 & 2 may be achieved on a sliding scale.

Modelling must be undertaken to show the percentage of Scope 1 & 2 energy demand that will be

substituted by renewable energy. The modelling used in Ene-1 should be used if it outlines renewable

energy substitution. Scopes 1 & 2 must be modelled, however Scope 3 may be included.

Renewable energy options rewarded under this credit are outlined in Table En5.

Modelling must include:

• Total energy use (expressed in MJ) and total carbon emissions (expressed in tonnes CO2-e) during

delivery (design and construction) of the infrastructure. These figures should be calculated over the

entire delivery (design and construction) period,

• Monthly energy use (in MJ/month) and monthly carbon emissions (in tonnes CO2-e /month) during

delivery of the infrastructure. These figures should be calculated over the entire delivery (design

and construction) period,

• Annual operational energy use (in MJ/year) and annual operational carbon emissions (in tonnes

CO2-e/year) over the forecast useful life of the asset,

• Total energy use (expressed in MJ) and total carbon emissions (expressed in tonnes CO2-e) over

the full infrastructure lifecycle, and

• Total energy substituted by renewable energy (expressed in MJ) and total carbon emissions (in

tonnes CO2-e) over the full infrastructure lifecycle.

Beyond Level 1, for every unit of substitution up to 100%, fractions of levels may be achieved on a

sliding scale. For example, a 25% substitution of renewable energy would achieve Level 1.5 (1 + (25

/100) x (3–1)). This sliding scale approach provides encouragement to pursue every substitution

opportunity possible.

For electricity sources, the percentage of substitution claimed can only be associated with the electricity

in the grid which is non-renewable. For example, for a project in South Australia which has approximately

Page 187 of 477



Lea

Spr

Res

Res

Ecn

Ecn

Ene

Gre

Env

Wat

Eco

Sta

Leg

Her

Wfs

Con

40% renewables in the grid, the percentage substitution claimed under this credit would be based on

any renewable replacement of the 60% non-renewable portion. If a project used 100MWh over its life,

then 60MWh (60%) would be available for substitution under this credit. To achieve level 0.75, a 25%

reduction would be required ((25 /100) x 3). 25% of 60MWh is 15MWh. Therefore, 15MWh of renewable

electricity would achieve a 25% reduction and be awarded level 0.75. If the project has energy sources

other than electricity, they would also need to be included in the calculation.

Example evidence for level >1 to 3

• Receipts,

• Energy modelling reports,

• Design drawings, and

• Agreements/contracts.

Page 188 of 477



ISv2.0 As Built


Aim

To reward the use of renewable energy.

Criteria

Table En6 Ene- 2 As Built summary criteria

Level 0 to 3 on a sliding scale

ABL1.1 Renewable energy substitutions up to 100% of the balance of the projected energy consumption may

be achieved on a sliding scale.

Note: this credit rewards renewable energy only; offsets from renewable energy projects can be

rewarded under Ene-3.


(including Scope 3) they will automatically achieve L3 on Ene-3.

Note: this credit uses actual case data not base case data

Definitions

Renewable energy is defined as energy which comes from natural resources that can be constantly

replenished (Australian Renewable Energy Agency, 2016). Renewable energy technologies include, for

the purposes of this credit, electricity, gas and heat generated from solar, wind, ocean, hydropower,

biomass (waste to energy, landfill gas), geothermal resources, and/or hydrogen derived from renewable

resources. It also includes renewable energy purchased through an energy retailer or renewable energy

project developer that is in addition to the mandatory Renewable Energy Target (RET).

Table En7 below has been adapted from Helping Business – Pathways to Purchase Renewable Energy

(WWF- Australia, 2016) and outlines renewable energy options rewarded under this credit.

Table En7 Renewable energy options that are rewarded under this credit. Adapted from (WWF- Australia, 2016)

Option Details Grid/Local Counterparty Additional to

RET?

Rewarded under

Ene-2?

Electricity

Install on-

site

renewable

technology

Any onsite

renewable

energy

technology such

as a photovoltaic

array or biogas

from a waste

water treatment

facility or landfill

Local Project/

Retailer

Only if Small-

scale

Technology

Certificates

(STC) or Large-

scale

Generation

Certificates

(LGC) are

surrendered

Yes, if STCs or

LGCs are

surrendered

Page 189 of 477



Lea

Spr

Res

Res

Ecn

Ecn

Ene

Gre

Env

Wat

Eco

Sta

Leg

Her

Wfs

Con GreenPower Retailer

purchases

renewable

energy on your

behalf

Grid Retailer Yes Yes

Power

Purchase

Agreement

(PPA)

Offtake

agreement

Purchase some

or all generation

from utility-scale

project

Grid Project

Developer

Only if LGC are

surrendered

Yes, if LGCs are

surrendered

Connect

local

projects with

offsite

demand

Import renewable

energy from local

renewable

energy projects

Local

distribution

Market

participant

Only if LGCs

are

surrendered

Yes, if LGCs are

surrendered

Gas

Biogas Gas produced in

Australia from

waste or end of

life products such

as landfill gas

Local

distribution

Market

participant

Yes Yes, if created

from waste or end

of life materials

and produced in

Australia.

Liquid fuel

Biofuels Liquid fuel

created in

Australia from

waste or end of

life products such

as agricultural

waste

Local

distribution

Market

participant

Yes Yes, if created

from waste or end

of life materials

and produced in

Australia

Other

Other fuels Other renewable energy sources may be considered. Please speak with your Case

Manager for further advice.

Level 0-3

ABL1.1 Renewable energy substitutions up to 100% of the balance of the projected energy consumption

may be achieved on a sliding scale.

Monitoring must be undertaken to show the percentage of energy demand that will be substituted by

renewable energy during the construction phase. The monitoring used in Ene-1 should be used if it

Page 190 of 477



outlines renewable energy substitution. Scopes 1 & 2 must be monitored, however additional Scope 3

may be included.

Renewable energy options rewarded under this credit are outlined in Table En7.

Monitoring must include:

• Total energy use (expressed in MJ) and total carbon emissions (expressed in tonnes CO2-e) during

delivery of the infrastructure. These figures should be calculated over the entire delivery period,

• Monthly energy use (in MJ/month) and monthly carbon emissions (in tonnes CO2-e /month) during

delivery of the infrastructure. These figures should be calculated over the entire delivery period,

and

• Total energy substituted by renewable energy (expressed in MJ) and total carbon emissions (in

tonnes CO2-e) over the projected lifecycle of the asset.

Monitoring must be reviewed or audited by a suitably qualified professional to verify the substitutions

claimed. If an audit is undertaken, it must be undertaken in accordance with ISO 14064.3 (this step may

have been competed in Ene-1).





• evidence of audit of materiality process,




limitations, and


construction and the monitored energy use for construction, including an explanation of any

discrepancies.

Beyond Level 1, for every unit of substitution up to 100%, fractions of levels may be achieved on a

sliding scale. For example, a 25% substitution of renewable energy would achieve Level 1.5 (1 + (25

/100) x (3–1)). This sliding scale approach provides encouragement to pursue every substitution

opportunity possible.

For electricity sources, the percentage of substitution claimed can only be associated with the electricity

in the grid which is non-renewable. For example, for a project in South Australia which has approximately

40% renewables in the grid, the percentage substitution claimed under this credit would be based on

any renewable replacement of the 60% non-renewable portion. If a project used 100MWh over its life,

then 60MWh (60%) would be available for substitution under this credit. To achieve level 0.75, a 25%

reduction would be required ((25 /100) x 3). 25% of 60MWh is 15MWh. Therefore, 15MWh of renewable

electricity would achieve a 25% reduction and be awarded level 0.75. If the project has energy sources

other than electricity, they would also need to be included in the calculation.

Example evidence for Levels 1 to 3

• Evidence of installation of renewable energy – photos, receipts etc,

• Energy modelling reports, and

• Receipts/contracts.

Page 191 of 477



Lea

Spr

Res

Res

Ecn

Ecn

Ene

Gre

Env

Wat

Eco

Sta

Leg

Her

Wfs

Con

ISv2.0 Design


Aim

To reward the offsetting of residual carbon emissions from a project’s construction, commission and

operational activities.

Criteria

Table En8 Ene-3 Design summary criteria

Level 0-3

DL1.1 Commitment is made to offset residual emissions up to 100% of the project carbon footprint comprising

scope 1, 2 and 3. Fractions of levels may be achieved on a sliding scale.


(including Scope 3) they will automatically achieve L3 on this credit.

The intent of this credit is to reward a commitment to the offsetting of monitored residual emissions in

accordance with the Energy and Carbon Guideline.

The objective of the Energy and Carbon Guideline is to provide guidance for developing the scope,


Definitions

Carbon or carbon emissions refers to carbon equivalents (CO2-e) also referred to as greenhouse gas

emissions (GHG emissions)

A Carbon offset (or carbon credit) is generated from an activity that prevents, reduces or removes

greenhouse gas emissions from being released into the atmosphere to compensate for emissions

occurring elsewhere (Carbon Neutral, 2017).

Residual emissions refer to emissions left over once energy efficiencies are identified and

implemented, and renewable energy is utilised.

Level 0-3

DL1.1 Commitment is made to offset residual emissions up to 100% of the project carbon footprint

comprising Scope 1, 2 and 3. Fractions of levels may be achieved on a sliding scale.

Projects are rewarded from level 0 to 3 for the proportion of their residual emissions offset up to 100%

(carbon neutral).

For every percentage point offset up to 100%, fractions of levels may be achieved on a sliding scale.

Please note: the scope of the carbon footprint must be aligned with sections 2.1.2 and 2.3 of the Energy

and Carbon Guideline.

The percentage offset claimed under this credit must only be associated with the residual emissions.

Residual emissions consist of the forecast emissions over the asset lifecycle, minus energy efficiencies

(Ene-1), minus any reductions made through the use of renewables (Ene-2). For example, if an asset’s

modelling shows that it produces 10,000 tCO2-e over its lifecycle and 1,200 tCO2-e were reduced

through energy efficiencies (Ene-1), with an extra 2,300 tCO2-e reduced through renewables (Ene-2),

then the residual emissions would be 6,500 tCO2-e. To achieve level 3 the full 6,500 tCO2-e would need

to be offset, however fractions of levels may be achieved. To achieve level 0.75, a commitment to offset

Page 192 of 477



25% of the residual emissions would need to be made ((25 /100) x 3). 25% of 6,500 tCO2-e is 1,625

tCO2-e, therefore a commitment to offset 1,625 tCO2-e would be awarded level 0.75.

Offsets must be deemed eligible according to the National Carbon Offset Standard – Appendix A.

Recognising that offsetting would not be confirmed until practical completion, a commitment to carbon

offsetting must be provided. A commitment must be made to purchase offsets for the full construction

impacts and the operational impacts for the useful life of the asset. A commitment may take the form of

a trust account, pre-purchased offsets, incorporation in the management plan (or similar), forward

commitment letter or contract outlining the type of offset. The quantity to be cancelled and the method,

including the project where the offsets have originated from must be outlined. This commitment must

be against the modelled carbon footprint for construction and operations undertaken in Ene-1, and state

the percentage of total carbon emissions to be offset.

If offsets are purchased and cancelled, they must do so in accordance with section 2.5.3 of the Energy


Example evidence for Level 0-3

• Letter of commitment or certificate of purchase/currency/purchase agreement/ carbon offset

purchase agreement,

• Trust account set up to set aside funds to pay for committed offsets,

• Receipts from the pre-purchase of carbon offsets,

• Management plan or similar showing commitment to carbon offsetting, and

• Energy model.

Page 193 of 477



Lea

Spr

Res

Res

Ecn

Ecn

Ene

Gre

Env

Wat

Eco

Sta

Leg

Her

Wfs

Con

ISv2.0 As Built


Aim

To reward the offsetting of residual carbon emissions from a project’s construction, commission and

operational activities.

Criteria

Table En9 Ene-3 As Built summary criteria


ABL1.1 Residual emissions up to 100% of the carbon foorprint comprising Scope 1, 2 and 3 are offset.

Fractions of levels may be achieved on a sliding scale.


(including Scope 3) they will automatically achieve L3 on this credit.

The intent of this credit is to reward a commitment to the offsetting of monitored residual emissions in

accordance with the Energy and Carbon Guide.

The objective of the Energy and Carbon Guide is to provide guidance for carbon emissions scope,


Definitions

A Carbon offset (or carbon credit) is generated from an activity that prevents, reduces or removes

greenhouse gas emissions from being released into the atmosphere to compensate for emissions

occurring elsewhere (Carbon Neutral, 2017)

Residual emissions refer to emissions left over once energy efficiencies are identified and

implemented, and renewable energy is utilised.

Levels 0-3

ABL1.1 Residual emissions up to 100% of its carbon footprint comprising Scope 1, 2 and 3 are offset.

Fractions of levels may be achieved on a sliding scale.

Projects are rewarded from level 0 to 3 for the proportion of their residual emissions offset up to 100%

(carbon neutral).

For every percentage point offset up to 100%, fractions of levels may be achieved on a sliding scale.

Please note: the scope of the carbon footprint must be aligned with sections 2.1.2 and 2.3 of the Energy


The percentage offset claimed under this credit must only be associated with the residual emissions.

Residual emissions consist of the forecast emissions over the asset lifecycle, minus any reductions

made through the use of renewables (Ene-2). For example, if an asset’s base case shows that it

produces 10,000 tCO2-e over its lifecycle and 1,200 tCO2-e were reduced through energy efficiencies

(Ene-1), with an extra 2,300 tCO2-e reduced through renewables (Ene-2), then the residual emissions

would be 6,500 tCO2-e. To achieve level 3 the full 6,500 tCO2-e would need to be offset, however

fractions of levels may be achieved. To achieve level 0.75, a commitment to offset 25% of the residual

emissions would need to be made ((25 /100) x 3). 25% of 6,500 tCO2-e is 1,625 tCO2-e, therefore a

commitment to offset 1,625 tCO2-e would be awarded level 0.75.

Offsets must be deemed eligible according to the National Carbon Offset Standard – Appendix A.

Page 194 of 477



Proof of cancellation of offsets must be undertaken in accordance with section 2.5.3 of the Energy and

Carbon Guideline.

Example evidence for Level 0-3

• Certificate of purchase/currency/purchase agreement/ carbon offset purchase agreement,

• Memo confirming cancellation of offsets and percentage of total carbon emissions offset, and

• Energy model outlining total energy and emissions of the project.

Page 195 of 477



Lea

Spr

Res

Res

Ecn

Ecn

Ene

Gre

Env

Wat

Eco

Sta

Leg

Her

Wfs

Con References

Carbon Neutral, 2017. Offsetting. [Online]

Available at: https://carbonneutral.com.au/carbon-offsets/

Greenhouse Gas Protocol, 2015. A Corporate Accounting and Reporting Standard, s.l.: s.n.

Office of the Chief Economist, 2016. Australian Energy Update, Canberra: Australian Government.

World Bank, 2017. CO2 emissions. [Online]

Available at: https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/EN.ATM.CO2E.PC?page=4

WWF-Australia, 2016. Helping Business- Pathways to Purchase Renewable Energy, Sydney: WWF-

Australia.

Page 196 of 477




Page 197 of 477



Lea

Spr

Res

Res

Ecn

Ecn

Ene

Gre

Env

Wat

Eco

Sta

Leg

Her

Wfs

Con GREEN INFRASTRUCTURE

Green infrastructure also known as ‘living infrastructure’ refers to the system and features of natural

landscape elements that provides “environmental, economic and social benefits such as clean air and

water, climate regulation” (CSIRO, 2017).

Examples of green infrastructure include: Water Sensitive Urban Design (WSUD) features to treat water

quality and quantity, street trees to reduce surface temperatures, green roofs and walls to reduce heat

and increase air quality. These individual components are often referred to as green infrastructure

assets. Green infrastructure is fundamentally different from grey infrastructure as “it has the unique,

inherent capacity to enhance and regenerate natural resources, rather than simply minimise the damage

to environmental systems” (AILA, 2017).

Green infrastructure provides a wide range of engineering, environmental and human services,

collectively known as ecosystem services – such services include (Millennium Ecosystem Assessment

2003):

a. provisioning (such as food, water, fibre and fuel)

b. supporting (such as soil formation and nutrient cycling)

c. regulating (such as climate, flood and disease control regulation, and water purification)

d. cultural services (such as aesthetic, spiritual, symbolic, educational and recreational).

The value of green infrastructure has been recognised through a number of publications such as:

1. Cities Alive: Rethinking green infrastructure by ARUP

2. Adapting to climate change: Green infrastructure by the Australian Institute of Landscape

Architects

3. Green infrastructure: A vital step to brilliant Australian cities by AECOM

4. Establishing a national agenda for urban green infrastructure by the CSIRO

Green infrastructure advances sustainability outcomes by encouraging multifunctional assets that

maximise land use while providing economic, social and environmental benefits. It also presents a

unique opportunity to connect the natural and the built environment; however, despite its benefits,

adoption of green infrastructure remains limited and the integration of landscape elements into grey

infrastructure assets is sometimes merely decorative. “The natural world, its biodiversity and its

constituent ecosystems, are critically important to our wellbeing and economic prosperity but are

consistently undervalued in conventional economic analyses and decision-making” (ARUP, 2014).

The objective of this category is to reward the implementation and/or incorporation of green

infrastructure. The implementation of green infrastructure, and in some cases the subsequent

replacement of grey infrastructure, are practices that can enhance the efficiency of the overall urban

ecosystem. This category is also closely related to other categories within the IS rating tool, such as

resilience, innovation, energy & carbon, natural hazards, pollution, water, ecology and cultural

consideration. By implementing green infrastructure, project planners and stakeholders, as well as asset

owners, can mutually reinforce the ability of infrastructure to drive sustainability outcomes.

There is one credits in this category:


Page 198 of 477



Category linkages

The following ISv2.0 categories have linkages with the Green Infrastructure category.



Con-2 Green infrastructure can contribute to

enhancing the integration of

infrastructure into the surrounding

urban fabric through improving

connectivity to and through local

precincts as well as enhancing visual

amenity.

x x x x

Res-1 Green infrastructure elements and/or

assets can contribute to city resilience

to shocks and stressors.

x x x x

Res-2 Green infrastructure has a critical role

to play in managing the impacts of

future climate, for example to manage

flood events, reduce the impacts of

extreme heat events and more.

x x x x

Ene-1 Green infrastructure can contribute to

carbon sinks and storage as well as

reducing energy consumption by

helping to cool buildings for heating

and cooling buildings.

x x x x

Env-1 WSUD strategies and treatment

options can improve the overall quality

of waterways by minimising the reach

of stormwater and increases

impervious surfaces.

x x x

Env- 2 Green infrastructure such as

landscaped berms can help mitigate

the impacts of noise.

x x x

Env- 4 Green infrastructure can ameliorate air

pollution along transport corridors. x x x

Eco-2 Green infrastructure can contribute to

reducing or avoiding impacts on

biodiversity and can also enhance

biodiversity outcomes.

x x x X

Leg-1 Green infrastructure, when

implemented and maintained,

presents the opportunity to go beyond

business as usual for infrastructure

assets. The many benefits from green

infrastructure can leave a lasting

legacy for the benefit of the community

at large for example new or enhanced

green pedestrian and cyclist links,

recreation spaces and public realm.

x x x x

Her-1 Green infrastructure can integrate

heritage features and facilitate access

to cultural sites.

x x x x

Page 199 of 477



Lea

Spr

Res

Res

Ecn

Ecn

Ene

Gre

Env

Wat

Eco

Sta

Leg

Her

Wfs

Con

ISv2.0 Design


Aim

To reward incorporation of green infrastructure.

Criteria

Table En11 Gre- 1 Green infrastructure summary criteria table


DL1.1 A green infrastructure

plan, including targets and

associated strategies, has been

developed for the project.

AND

DL1.2 A member(s) of the

management team has

responsibility for incorporation of

green infrastructure elements

into design.

AND

DL1.3 The design and ongoing

maintenance arrangements for

the project’s green infrastructure

has been reviewed.

AND

DL1.4 The project environmental

management plan incorporates

approaches for managing green

infrastructure during construction

and operation.


are achieved.

AND

DL2.1 The project design

incorporates at least two green

infrastructure strategies that

contribute to awarding credits

in a minimum of one other

category.

AND

DL2.2 The green infrastructure

plan has been reviewed.

AND

DL2.3 Suitable measures for

green infrastructure

performance monitoring and

reporting have been

established.


are achieved.

AND

DL3.1 The project incorporates

at least four green

infrastructure strategies that

contribute to awarding credits

in a minimum of two other

categories.

Definitions

The design principles for the purposes of this credit are a set of guiding statements that will provide a

focus for the design process.

Green infrastructure refers to a network of natural landscape assets which underpin the economic,

socio-cultural and environmental functionality of our cities and towns – i.e. the green spaces and water

systems which intersperse, connect, and provide vital life support for humans and other species within

our urban environments (Australia Institute of Landscape Architect, 2012).

Green infrastructure elements include but are not limited to: rain gardens, permeable pavements,

green roofs, infiltration planters, trees and tree boxes, rainwater harvesting systems, green roofs and

walls. At a larger scale, the preservation and restoration of natural landscapes (such as forests,

floodplains and wetlands) are considered green infrastructure.

A green infrastructure plan identifies the ecosystem services to be provided by the project’s green

infrastructure, establishes targets for those ecosystem services and describes the green infrastructure

strategies to be employed to meet those targets, including the role of the various green infrastructure

elements in meeting those targets. The green infrastructure plan may be integrated with an urban and

landscape plan, however the requirements of the green infrastructure plan should be clearly met within

this broader plan.

Page 200 of 477



A green infrastructure strategy is defined as a system of green infrastructure elements which when

integrated contribute to the achievement of a defined target(s) for an ecosystem service. For example,

green roofs, landscaping and street trees may contribute to increased canopy cover and stormwater

treatment. In this case, the reduction of urban heat is the objective of the green infrastructure strategy

which should identify a target area of canopy cover. These same green infrastructure elements may

also form part of a water-sensitive urban design approach using green infrastructure to meet a targeted

area of stormwater treatment. While the green infrastructure elements may be common to both

strategies, they may collectively be considered part of two separate green infrastructure strategies by

virtue of the two ecosystem services being provided.

Grey infrastructure is defined as the conventional engineered structures and facilities, constructed

using manmade materials such as concrete and steel, which are employed to support the operation of

a society i.e. the pipes, pumps, ditches and drains engineered by people.

The management team is the group that makes day-to-day management decisions as opposed to an

oversight group such as a board or steering committee. The management team would typically consist

of the Project/Asset Management Director/Manager and their direct reports.

Management refers to the top level of management within the project or asset management

organisation.

A suitably qualified person for the purposes of this credit is a person with a landscape architecture or

environmental engineering qualification with a minimum of 10 years’ experience, or qualifications

relevant to a specific topic area (such as water when working with water qualify metrics and green

infrastructure design) and a minimum of 10 years’ experience.

A suitably qualified multidisciplinary team for the purposes of this credit should include

representatives from different disciplines, including landscape architects, city planners, urban designers,

arborists, horticulturalists and engineers.

A vision statement for the purposes of this credit is a description of the desired outcome to be

accomplished for infrastructure users and the broader community as these relate to green infrastructure

and provision of ecosystem services. The vision needs to articulate the role the infrastructure will play

in enhancing green infrastructure and its ecosystem services within the sphere of its influence be it at a

precinct, sub-regional or regional scale. The vision needs to respond to priorities established in relevant

government strategies, plans, programs and priorities which set the context for the project as well as

the physical and social environment into which the project will be integrated.

Page 201 of 477



Lea

Spr

Res

Res

Ecn

Ecn

Ene

Gre

Env

Wat

Eco

Sta

Leg

Her

Wfs

Con

Level 1

DL1.1 A green infrastructure plan, including targets and associated strategies, has been developed for the project.

If a green infrastructure plan was developed and verified as part of the Planning rating, then the plan

must be reviewed and updated by a suitably qualified professional.

If a green infrastructure plan was not developed as part of a Planning rating, then the following applies:

A green infrastructure plan must be prepared which sets out:

• a vision, for implementing and/or incorporating green infrastructure,

• the principles and objectives to be achieved, and

• the resources and methods needed to meet those objectives.

The green infrastructure plan must be prepared by a suitably qualified and experienced landscape

architect in collaboration with a suitably qualified multidisciplinary team with expertise in the various

ecosystem services provided by green infrastructure (for example, a civil engineer with expertise in

water-sensitive urban design). The preparation of a green infrastructure plan, while similar to that of an

urban and landscape design plan, should identify opportunities for integration of green infrastructure.

USite and context analysis

A site and context analysis is crucial to understanding the potential to include green infrastructure in the

project. It provides the underlying rationale for the vision, principles and objectives for green

infrastructure in the project.

A context analysis must involve a review of the relevant plans, strategies and programs which set the

strategic framework for the project and the network of green spaces into which the project will be

integrated. Depending on the size and scale of the asset, the context analysis should consider national,

regional, sub-regional, city-level and suburban perspectives. It should highlight the key implications of

these plans, strategies and programs as well as other related projects for the planning and design of the

project and its green infrastructure assets.

The site analysis must identify the key physical and social features that will influence the planning and

design of green infrastructure elements. It should also identify the wider network of green infrastructure.

The site analysis should involve the following tasks:

• Community appraisal or value audit,

• Relevant planning policy analysis,

• Landscape Character assessment/appraisal,

• Environmental and landscape appraisal – this should include surveys of topography, geology,

ground conditions and contamination, flooding and drainage systems, significant water bodies

and major waterways, the coastline, high-water mark, coastal-management zone (or similar),

views and vistas, heritage and places of cultural or social significance (as undertaken in Her-1),

climate and micro-climate,

• Access and movement analysis,

• Engineering feasibility,

• Examination of ecological values and biodiversity (as undertaken in the Eco-1), and

• Identification of existing green infrastructure and any deficiencies in existing green

infrastructure.

Following the site and general context analysis, green infrastructure opportunities must be identified.

These opportunities must identify demands and/or needs that green infrastructure can address.

Page 202 of 477



UVision, principles and objectives

Following the site and context analysis, the overall vision for the asset must be agreed upon. The vision

should be related to the wider system or network vision while articulating a clear aspiration specifically

as this relates to the implementation and/or incorporation of green infrastructure.

The vision must be supported by a set of green infrastructure principles which will guide and provide a

focus for the design process. Design objectives must be developed to support the design vision and

principles and demonstrate how the achievement of the objectives will lead to the overall fulfilment of

the design vision and principles.

UGreen infrastructure targets

Green infrastructure targets must be set for the project. Green infrastructure targets are targets derived

from the site and general context analysis, the overall project vision and objectives, and design vision

and objectives. Targets can also be derived from community demand and/or need for elements such as

open space and trees. Targets should address the targets of local authorities and must not be set at a

level below those of the relevant local authority. For example, if a local authority has a minimum

threshold of offsetting strategy for planting new street trees, the target set in the green infrastructure

plan must not be below this threshold unless justification can be provided as to why.

Importantly, green infrastructure targets must address the ecosystem services to be provided and must

specify a measurable outcome, for example the proportion of water to be detained on-site via swale

drains and naturalised detention basins. Ecosystem services to be provided by green infrastructure

may address one or more of the ecosystem services associated with the following related credits:

Table En12 Related ISv2.0 categories

Credit Delivery Area

Con-2 Context Green infrastructure can contribute to enhancing the integration of

infrastructure into the surrounding urban fabric through improving

connectivity to and through local precincts as well as enhancing visual

amenity.

Res-1 Resilience Plan Green infrastructure elements and/or assets can contribute to city

resilience to shocks and stressors.

Res-2 Climate and Natural

Hazard Risks

Green infrastructure has a critical role to play in managing the impacts

of future climate, for example to manage flood events, reduce the

impacts of extreme heat events and more.

Ene-1 Energy and Carbon Green infrastructure can contribute to carbon sinks and storage as well

as reducing energy consumption by helping to cool buildings for heating

and cooling buildings.

Env-1 Receiving Water Quality WSUD strategies and treatment options can improve the overall quality

of waterways by minimising the reach of stormwater and increases

impervious surfaces.

Env-2 Noise Green infrastructure such as landscaped berms can help mitigate the

impacts of noise.

Env-4 Air quality Green infrastructure can ameliorate air pollution along transport

corridors.

Eco-2 Identifying and Managing

Impacts

Green infrastructure can contribute to reducing or avoiding impacts on

biodiversity and can also enhance biodiversity outcomes.

Leg-1 Leaving a Lasting Legacy Green infrastructure, when implemented and maintained, presents the

opportunity to go beyond business as usual for infrastructure assets.

The many benefits from green infrastructure can leave a lasting legacy

Page 203 of 477



Lea

Spr

Res

Res

Ecn

Ecn

Ene

Gre

Env

Wat

Eco

Sta

Leg

Her

Wfs

Con

Credit Delivery Area

for the benefit of the community at large for example new or enhanced

green pedestrian and cyclist links, recreation spaces and public realm.

Her-1 Heritage Green infrastructure can integrate heritage features and facilitate

access to cultural sites.

Examples of ecosystem services and potential corresponding green infrastructure elements are

summarised in the diagram below.

Figure En1 Examples of ecosystem services and potential corresponding green infrastructure elements

The project green infrastructure plan must include green infrastructure targets addressing:

• Biodiversity – green infrastructure elements needs to enhance the existing ecological values

and biodiversity within the surrounding area and/or broader landscape This may include

thermal heat mitigation (AKA the urban heat island effect) and may also include introducing

new ecological values into the project’s surrounding area and/or broader landscape.

• Community connectivity – green infrastructure elements needs to be integrated with existing

and/or proposed green infrastructure elements in the surrounding area and the wider green

infrastructure network. For example, the green infrastructure plan may adopt a tree and/or

planting palette similar to the surrounding green grid network and include links to that green

grid network.

• Visual impact – green infrastructure elements needs to reduce the visual impact of the

project and enhance the landscape and/or urban character of the surrounding area and/or

broader landscape.

UGreen infrastructure strategies

A green infrastructure strategy is a system of green infrastructure elements which when integrated

contribute to the achievement of the target for a given ecosystem service. For example, green roofs,

landscaping and street trees may contribute to a net decrease in average summer temperatures across

Page 204 of 477



the infrastructure asset. In this case, the reduction of urban heat is the objective of the green

infrastructure strategy which should identify a target for reducing the severity of thermal hotspots (as a

temperature reduction may be difficult given the number of factors contributing to urban heat). These

same green infrastructure elements may also form part of a water-sensitive urban design approach

using green infrastructure to meet a project water-quality target. While the green infrastructure elements

may be common to both strategies, they may collectively be considered part of two separate green

infrastructure strategies by virtue of the two ecosystem services being provided.

The project green infrastructure plan must include a minimum of three green infrastructure strategies

addressing each of the visual impact, biodiversity and community connectivity targets for the project

respectively. Each green infrastructure strategy must identify the green infrastructure elements that

constitute the green infrastructure strategy and define the role of each, either individually or collectively,

in meeting the relevant ecosystem service target.

DL1.2 A member(s) of the management team has responsibility for incorporation of green infrastructure elements into design.

A member of the management team must have specific accountabilities in relation to decision-making

and management of green infrastructure and its incorporation into design. This responsibility must be

specified in a management plan KPIs, job description or alike.

DL1.3 The design and ongoing maintenance arrangements for the project’s green infrastructure has been reviewed.

A review of the green infrastructure plan/s must be undertaken by the operator, or a professional with

at least 10 years of landscape maintenance experience to confirm the design and ongoing maintenance

arrangements for the project’s green infrastructure. The reviewer must provide an expert opinion

outlining that the green infrastructure plan/design can be reasonably maintained to a standard which will

enable it to meet the required ecosystem services performance requirements over the life of the

infrastructure asset.

DL1.4 The project environmental management plan incorporates approaches for managing green infrastructure during construction and operation.

Approaches for the management of green infrastructure during construction and operation must be

incorporated into the project environmental management plan(s) or similar.


• Green infrastructure plan, including targets and strategies (reviewed and updated, if

relevant) • Urban or landscape character assessment • Visual impact assessment • Statement addressing the integration of the project with existing and/or proposed green

infrastructure elements in the surrounding area • Statement addressing the enhancement of ecological values and biodiversity • Position description for the designated member(s) of the senior-management team

responsible for incorporation of green infrastructure elements into design • Expert opinion outlining the maintainability of the green infrastructure plan/design

undertaken by an experienced landscaper or asset manager • Report documenting results of consultation and/or engagement with the operator • Environmental management plan.

Page 205 of 477



Lea

Spr

Res

Res

Ecn

Ecn

Ene

Gre

Env

Wat

Eco

Sta

Leg

Her

Wfs

Con

Level 2

DL2.1 The project design incorporates at least two green infrastructure strategies that contribute to awarding credits in a minimum of one other category.

The green infrastructure plan must incorporate a minimum of two green infrastructure strategies that

provide ecosystem services that contribute to awarding credits in a minimum of one other IS credit. The

final design drawings (or drawing issued for construction) must be provided as evidence outlining how

the green infrastructure strategies have been incorporated. The relevant green infrastructure strategy

must achieve a relevant metric as developed by a suitable qualified professional. Justification must be

provided for the metric/s chose. Example credits and metrics are provided in the table below.

Table En13 Example green infrastructure metrics

Category Related Credit Metric Target

Resilience Res-2 Climate

and

Natural

Hazard

Risk

Percentage of treatment options under

Res-2 which were grey infrastructure

and have been replaced with green

infrastructure (in whole or in part)

15%

Energy

and

carbon

Ene-1 Energy

and

Carbon

Reduction

Percent reduction in energy

consumption for heating and cooling

achieved through integration of green

infrastructure elements such as green

roofs.

Percentage shade from tree canopy

25%

30%

Environm

ental

Impacts

Env-2 Noise Level of noise impact mitigation (in dB)

achieved through integration of green

infrastructure elements

25%

Env-4 Air Quality Level of air quality improvement

achieved (in parts per million) through

integration of green infrastructure

elements

10% in total or (15% for

ozone, 14% for sulphur

dioxide, 13% for particulate

matter, 8% for nitrogen

dioxide, and 0.05% for

carbon monoxide)

Env-5 Light

Pollution

Level of light pollution mitigation

achieved (in lumens) through

integration of green infrastructure

elements

10%

Legacy Leg-1 Leaving a

Lasting

Legacy

Percentage increase in community

accessibility (in walkability) achieved

through integration of green


15% (improve walkability

catchment– within 400m

walking and 800m cycling

proximity distance to green

infrastructure elements)

Percentage of increase in physical

activity (in physically inactive or not

sufficiently active people becoming

sufficiently physically active) achieved

through integration of green


5%

Page 206 of 477



Category Related Credits Metric Target

Water Env-1 Receiving

Water

Quality

Percentage of water (in litres) treated

via green infrastructure elements

Percentage reduction in stormwater

flow rate

Total dissolved solids: 80%

Total phosphorous: 60%

Total nitrogen: 45%

50%

DL2.2 The green infrastructure plan has been reviewed.

The green infrastructure plan must be reviewed by a suitably qualified person that is external to the

project team but can be within the same organisation or project. For the purposes of this credit, a suitably

qualified professional can be a certified practitioner of landscape architecture with at least 10 years of

experience or a professional with a minimum of 5 years’ experience in the specific ecosystem services

to be provided through implementation of the strategies within the green infrastructure plan. For

example, a strategy pertaining to receiving water quality should be reviewed by a professional, such as

an engineer or scientist, with experience in water-sensitive design and water-quality modelling.

DL2.3 Suitable measures for green infrastructure performance monitoring and reporting have been established.

Measures must be identified to ensure that green infrastructure will be effectively established and can

be readily maintained throughout construction and operations. These measures must be documented

in the green infrastructure plan along with arrangements for monitoring the successful maintenance of

the green infrastructure and the ongoing provision of the ecosystem services the green infrastructure is

designed to deliver. The measures must establish the party responsible and the frequency for

monitoring, reporting and review during the construction and operations phases as well as the party

responsible for taking action where monitoring highlights that the vision, objectives and/or targets set

out in the green infrastructure plan are not being met.

Performance monitoring metrics must be derived from the green infrastructure targets and set out in

the green infrastructure plan. Each target must have at least one corresponding measure to be

monitored over the lifespan of the project. For example, a target pertaining to tree and/or planting

diversity can be monitored by the number of new trees and/or planting introduced and maintained over

the lifespan of the project. These measures should reference any feedback or points for improvement

from the external review.

If a green infrastructure plan was developed in the planning phase, metrics and targets should be

consistent.


• Report documenting the replacement of grey infrastructure systems with at least two green

infrastructure strategies each,

• Application and awarding of two credits for each strategy,

• Results of external review, and

• Green infrastructure performance monitoring and reporting framework.

Level 3

DL3.1 The project incorporates at least four green infrastructure strategies that contribute to awarding credits in a minimum of two other categories.

The green infrastructure plan must be extended to incorporate a minimum of four green infrastructure

strategies that provide ecosystem services that contribute to awarding credits in a minimum of two other

Page 207 of 477



Lea

Spr

Res

Res

Ecn

Ecn

Ene

Gre

Env

Wat

Eco

Sta

Leg

Her

Wfs

Con

credits. The relevant green infrastructure strategy must achieve a relevant metric as developed by a

suitable qualified professional. Example metric that can be used are provided in table En12. Justification

must be provided for the metric/s chosen.


• Report documenting the four green infrastructure strategies that contribute to the awarding of

credits in a minimum of two other categories respectively, and

• Design drawings (final, IFC or 90% complete).

Page 208 of 477



ISv2.0 As Built

Gre-1 As Built

Aim

To reward incorporation of green infrastructure.

Criteria

Table En14 Gre- 1 Green infrastructure summary criteria table

Level 1

ABL1.1 The green infrastructure elements have been constructed according to the green infrastructure plan.

AND

ABL1.2 The project environmental management plan incorporates provision for successful establishment and

ongoing management of green infrastructure during construction and operation.

AND

ABL1.3 Green infrastructure has been subjected to testing to confirm its performance and an appropriate

monitoring and reporting framework has been established.

Definitions

Green infrastructure refers to a network of natural landscape assets which underpin the economic,

socio-cultural and environmental functionality of our cities and towns – i.e. the green spaces and water

systems which intersperse, connect, and provide vital life support for humans and other species within

our urban environments (Australia Institute of Landscape Architect, 2012).

Green infrastructure elements include but are not limited to: rain gardens, permeable pavements,

green roofs, infiltration planters, trees and tree boxes, rainwater harvesting systems. At a larger scale,

the preservation and restoration of natural landscapes (such as forests, floodplains and wetlands) are

considered green infrastructure.

A green infrastructure plan identifies the ecosystem services to be provided by the project’s green

infrastructure, establishes targets for those ecosystem services and describes the green infrastructure

strategies to be employed to meet those targets, including the role of the various green infrastructure

elements in meeting those targets. The green infrastructure plan may be integrated with an urban and

landscape plan; however the requirements of the green infrastructure plan should be clearly met within

this broader plan.

A green infrastructure strategy is defined as a system of green infrastructure elements which when

integrated contribute to the achievement of a defined target(s) for an ecosystem service. For example,

green roofs, landscaping and street trees may contribute to a net decrease in average summer

temperatures across the infrastructure asset. In this case, the reduction of urban heat is the objective of

the green infrastructure strategy which should identify a target temperature reduction. These same

green infrastructure elements may also form part of a water-sensitive urban design approach using

green infrastructure to meet the project’s water quality target. While the green infrastructure elements

may be common to both strategies, they may collectively be considered part of two separate green

infrastructure strategies by virtue of the two ecosystem services being provided.

Level 1

ABL1.1 The green infrastructure elements have been constructed according to the green infrastructure plan.

The green infrastructure plan must be reflected in the infrastructure asset as built drawings. As Built

drawings must be prepared and evaluated against the green infrastructure plan to confirm this

consistency.

Page 209 of 477



Lea

Spr

Res

Res

Ecn

Ecn

Ene

Gre

Env

Wat

Eco

Sta

Leg

Her

Wfs

Con

Where circumstances have required deviation from the original green infrastructure plan, a clear

justification must be provided. Design changes must not result in changes to the targets as set out in

the green infrastructure plan or result in changes which would mean that any credits awarded during the

design phase would no longer be awarded. This may require new green infrastructure initiatives to be

implemented during construction to ensure that the overall targets and/or credits remain constant or

improve.

ABL1.2 The project environmental management plan incorporates provision for successful establishment and ongoing management of green infrastructure during construction and operation.

Measures for the maintenance and management of green infrastructure during construction and

operation must be incorporated into the project environmental management plan(s) or similar. Green

infrastructure must be managed and maintained in accordance with the green infrastructure plan for the

As Built phase. Monitoring and evaluation must be undertaken to ensure that the targets set out in the

green infrastructure plan are met during construction.

ABL1.3 Green infrastructure has been subjected to testing to confirm its performance and an appropriate monitoring and reporting framework has been established.

The green infrastructure elements must be tested to confirm their performance in collectively meeting

the targets for the ecosystem services set out in the respective green infrastructure strategy(s).

Measures must be identified and implemented to ensure that green infrastructure is effectively

established and can be readily maintained during construction and operations. These measures must

be documented in the green infrastructure plan along with arrangements for monitoring successful

maintenance of plantings and other green infrastructure elements. This must include the party

responsible for monitoring and review during the construction and operations phases as well as the

party responsible for taking action where monitoring highlights that the targets and strategies set out in

the green infrastructure plan are not being met.

The framework for monitoring and evaluation should include the following:

1. Purpose of the monitoring and evaluation process

2. Objectives for monitoring performance

3. Evaluation indicators

4. Implementation process for the performance monitoring framework

5. Analysis and interpretations

6. Report and recommendations

The monitoring and reporting framework should be documented in the project environmental

management plan or similar.


• Assessment of the implementation of green infrastructure elements according to the green

infrastructure plan,

• Project environmental management plan,

• Report documenting green infrastructure performance testing, and

• Monitoring and reporting framework.

Page 210 of 477



References

AECOM, 2017. Green Infrastructure: A vital step to brilliant cities.

Arup, 2014. Cities Alive: Rethinking green infrastructure.

Auckland Council, 21015. Water sensitive design for stormwater.

Australian Institute of Landscape Architects, 2017. Adapting to climate change – Green infrastructure

– Green infrastructure planning increasing connectivity, multifunctionality, and landscape performance in the built environment.

CABE, 2010. Managing green spaces: Seven ingredients for success.

CABE Space, 2004. Green space strategies: A good practice guide.

Center for Neighborhood Technology, 2010. The Value of Green Infrastructure: A guide to recognizing its economic, environmental and social benefits.

Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation, 2017. Establishing a national agenda for urban green infrastructure.

Commission for Architecture and the Built Environment, 2004. Green space strategies: a good practice guide.

City of New York, 2010. Active Design Guidelines: Promoting physical activity and health in design.

City of New York, 2013. Active Design: Shaping the sidewalk experience.

City of San Francisco, 2015. San Francisco Parklet Manual.

Cooperative Research Centre Australia, 2012. Liveability and the Water Sensitive City: Science-Policy Partnership for Water Sensitive Cities.

Cooperative Research Centre for Catchment Hydrology, 2001. Water Sensitive Urban Design in the Australian Context.

Creating Places for People, 2011. Australian Urban Design Protocol.

Department of Infrastructure, Planning and Natural Resources, 2004. Guideline for the Preparation of Environmental Management Plans.

Department of Infrastructure and Transport, 2011. Australian Urban Design Protocol – Creating Places for People – an urban design protocol for Australian cities.

Design Council, 2013. Design review: Principles and practice.

Government Architects NSW, 2016. Better Placed – A design led approach: developing an Architecture and Design Policy for New South Wales.

Homes and Communities Agency, 2000. Urban Design Compendium.

Infrastructure Australia, 2011. Our Cities Our Future – A National Urban Policy for a productive, sustainable and liveable future.

Infrastructure Australia, 2016. Australian Infrastructure Plan: Priorities and reforms for our nation’s future.

Infrastructure Sustainability Council of Australia, 2015. Infrastructure Sustainability Rating Tool Design Review Guide.

Infrastructure Sustainability Council of Australia, 2016. Infrastructure Sustainability Planning Guidelines.

Loci Environment & Place, 2017. Metro Tunnel Living Infrastructure Plan.

Page 211 of 477



Lea

Spr

Res

Res

Ecn

Ecn

Ene

Gre

Env

Wat

Eco

Sta

Leg

Her

Wfs

Con

Millennium Ecosystem Assessment, 2003. Ecosystems and human well-being: A framework for assessment. Washington, D.C.: Island Press.

Millennium Ecosystem Assessment, 2005. Ecosystems and Human Well-being: Synthesis. Washington, D.C.: Island Press.

NSW Office of the Environment & Heritage. Technical Guidelines for Urban Green Cover in NSW.

Portland Development Commission, 2011. Portland Main Street Design Handbook: A guide on a neighborhood commercial district revitalization.

Roads and Maritime Services, 2015. Guideline for batter surface stabilisation using vegetation.

Roads and Maritime Services, 2008. Landscape guideline: Landscape design and maintenance guidelines to improve the quality, saftey and cost effectiveness of road corridor planting and seeding.

Roads and Maritime Services, 2008. R178 Vegetation Edition 5/Revision 4.

Roads and Maritime Services, 2009. R179 Landscape planting Edition 1/Revision 1.

Roads and Maritime Services, 2017. Water sensitive urban design guideline: Applying water sensitive urban design principles to NSW transport projects.

Roads and Maritime Services. D&C G36 Environmental protection.

VIC Department of Environment and Primary Industries, 2014. Growing Green Guide: A guide to green roofs, walls and facades in Melbourne and Victoria, Australia.

Page 212 of 477




Page 213 of 477



Lea

Spr

Res

Res

Ecn

Ecn

Ene

Gre

Env

Wat

Eco

Sta

Leg

Her

Wfs

Con ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS

Population growth and resource consumption have caused pollution over a long period of time resulting

in the degradation of our environment and loss of amenity. To address this, governments have

increasingly sought to reduce and limit polluting activities.

There are several types of pollution from infrastructure that can cause harmful impacts to the

environment and communities, for example:

• Pollution of waterways and oceans harms ecosystems by disrupting their natural balance. This

can lead to loss of biodiversity and of ecosystem services such as water supply. It is projected

that nutrient pollution from urban wastewater (and agriculture) will worsen in most regions of the

world, intensifying eutrophication and damaging aquatic biodiversity (OECD, 2012),

• Noise and vibration can intrude on community amenity and in severe cases contribute to

psychological effects or hearing damage. Vibration can also impact on buildings, including

heritage buildings, and on sensitive industries,

• Air pollution causes respiratory effects and in extreme events illness and death, particularly in

urban areas (Commonwealth of Australia, 2016). The OECD (2012) predict that air pollution will

become the world’s top environmental cause of premature mortality by 2050, and

• Light pollution can disturb neighbours and disrupt the habits of migratory species, nocturnal

animals and insects.

More needs to be done to reduce or eliminate these impacts and encourage restoration whereby past

impacts are reversed.

Australian and New Zealand governments have laws and standards that seek to limit pollution. In

Australia, there is some coordination of these efforts at the federal level through COAG. This

coordination has resulted in National Environmental Protection Measures (NEPMs) covering various

pollution issues (NEPC, 2018). The NEPMs have been implemented through state government

legislation. State governments set limits for activities and pollution levels through licences and other

means and, with local government, police these limits.

Despite these laws, a range of pressures continue to drive the need for further action on pollution. These

pressures include population growth, changing land uses and urban encroachment. At the same time,

the understanding of pollution impacts is improving and public expectations are increasing.

The infrastructure industry, particularly the transport and construction sectors, is a significant source of

pollution. Pollution and discharges from infrastructure may be potentially significant, especially in

sensitive locations.

Discharges to water may include:

• Run off from the site after storm events,

• Run off from dust suppression,

• Leaking vehicles, and

• Overflow from vehicle washing stations.

Discharges to air may include:

• Dust from clearing, crushing, traffic and general construction site operations,

• Combustion emissions from plant, equipment and vehicles (note that greenhouse gas emissions

are addressed in the Energy and Carbon category),

• Emissions from specific site processes, including abrasive blasting and painting,

• Odours from site operations or facilities, including temporary wastewater treatment plants, and

• Discharges into water bodies may include discharges to inland or coastal waters, or to

groundwater, from:

Page 214 of 477



- spills from diesel, chemical and waste storage facilities, or from plant and vehicles,

- spills or releases from sewage or temporary effluent treatment plants, vehicle washes and

general cleaning,

- releases of soil from erosion during storms and from construction activity,

- residue in runoff from hard surfaces such as roads, and

- discharges from wastewater treatment plants.

Noise and vibration may be generated by:

• vehicle movements including reversing alarms,

• rock-breaking and piling,

• use of explosives for blasting,

• operational public-address (PA) systems announcements,

• radios, broadcast systems and worker chatter and, and

• tunnelling machinery.

Light pollution may be caused by:

• temporary construction lighting for night work,

• road, station, pedestrian or car park lighting and, and

• building and security lighting.

Infrastructure designers, constructors and operators have compliance programs which aim to achieve

compliance with laws and standards covering environmental issues and impacts.

Various factors have been driving efforts to improve environmental management in infrastructure

projects, including:

• Regulatory demands - management plans for addressing potential impacts are a condition of

approval for major projects, or projects in sensitive locations,

• Risks of fines and harm to reputation from improper management where discharges impact on

the external environment, and

• Costs - high costs of clean up and disruption to activities.

Various guidelines have been produced to encourage best practice in infrastructure environmental

management. These include the Civil Contractors Federation Environmental Guidelines for Construction

(Civil Contractors Federation, 2010). There are also extensive Australian and international general and

issue-specific guidelines produced by regulatory, industry and other bodies on best environmental

practice which may be relevant to infrastructure. The approach to compliance and operating in

accordance within legal limits is generally rigorous, however, there has been some challenges in going

beyond compliance.

The approach to this category has purposefully considered that projects/assets/networks applying this

rating will vary in many ways, including context, geography, and legal compliance/licencing

requirements. Therefore, the category and credits each aim to provide a consistent method which should

suit such different scenarios and lead to improved management of all discharges towards best practice.

This category assesses the level and effectiveness of management practices for preventing and

mitigating discharges to air, water and land including receiving water quality, noise, vibration, air quality

and light pollution over the life cycle of a given piece of infrastructure. It also seeks to encourage the

restoration and enhancement of natural capital.

There are five credits in this category:


Env-2 Noise

Env-3 Vibration

Page 215 of 477



Lea

Spr

Res

Res

Ecn

Ecn

Ene

Gre

Env

Wat

Eco

Sta

Leg

Her

Wfs

Con

Env-4 Air Quality

Env-5 Light pollution

Category Linkages

The following ISv2.0 categories link to the Environmental Impacts category.



Lea-2 The risks and opportunities

identified in this category should

feed into the project risk and

opportunity assessment in Lea-2.

x x x

Sta-1 Stakeholders affected by the

environmental impacts may need

to be identified and engaged.

x x x

Sta-2 Stakeholders affected by the

environmental impacts may need

to be identified and engaged.

x x x

Eco-1 Enhancements may result in

ecological enhancements.

x x x

Eco-2 Ecological monitoring may be

undertaken in conjunction with

monitoring required in the

Environmental Impacts credits.

x x x x

Page 216 of 477



ISv2.0 Design


Aim

To reward the management of impacts on local receiving water quality.

Criteria

Table En16 Env-1 Design summary criteria table


DL1.1 Baseline studies of existing

receiving water environment have

been carried out for the project.

AND

DL1.2 Modelling and/or predictions

for receiving water quality impacts

have been developed for

construction and operation phases

of the project.

AND

DL1.3 Water discharge and

receiving water quality goals are

identified for the project.

AND

DL1.4 Measures to minimise

adverse impacts and to meet the

goals developed in DL1.2 during

construction and operation have

been identified and implemented.

AND

DL1.5 Monitoring requirements of

water discharges and receiving

water quality is included in relevant

management plans.


achieved.

AND


of water discharges and receiving

waters demonstrates no adverse

impact on receiving water

environmental values.

AND

DL2.2 The infrastructure does not

increase peak stormwater flows for

rainfall events of up to a 1.5 year

ARI event discharge.


achieved.

AND

DL3.1 Opportunities to improve

receiving water environmental

values have been identified and

implemented.

AND


demonstrates an improvement in

receiving water environmental

values.

Water quality in Australia and New Zealand is directed by the National Water Quality Management

Strategy (NWQMS) (Department of the Environment and Energy, 2015).The NWQMS objective is ‘to

achieve sustainable use of the nation's water resources by protecting and enhancing their quality while

maintaining economic and social development’.

Note that in the title of this credit, receiving water refers to the impacts from water discharges from a

project or asset onto downstream receiving water bodies. Downstream receiving water bodies include

groundwater below or down gradient to the project/asset site and potentially impacted by discharges or

other activities. The ANZECC (2000) Guidelines (which form part of the NWQMS) define environmental

values as: ‘particular values or uses of the environment that are important for a healthy ecosystem or

for public benefit, welfare, safety or health and that require protection from the effects of pollution, waste

discharges and deposits. Several environmental values may be designated for a specific waterbody.’

Environmental values may include:

• aquatic ecosystems,

• recreational water quality and aesthetics,

• raw water for drinking water supplies, and

• agricultural and industrial water use.

Page 217 of 477



Lea

Spr

Res

Res

Ecn

Ecn

Ene

Gre

Env

Wat

Eco

Sta

Leg

Her

Wfs

Con

Definitions

Exceedances are measured water discharges and/or receiving water quality levels outside the set goals

causing a negative impact. Recurring exceedances are defined as more than two of a similar type

within a 12-month period. Major exceedances are defined as exceeding the water discharges and/or

receiving water quality goals by more than 50%.

Feasible - A work practice or abatement measure is feasible if it is capable of being put into practice or

of being engineered and is practical to build given project constraints such as safety, cost and

maintenance requirements.

'Hot spots' are defined as receiving water locations with pollutant levels elevated above background

and/or particular environmental sensitivity levels.

Operating licences and compliance criteria are limits set by regulatory authorities, such as water

quality and discharge limits for a water treatment facility. This is compliance criteria.

Suitably qualified professional is a professional with at least five years’ experience in environmental

management and/or Environmental Impact Assessments, or equivalent.

Water discharge and receiving water quality goals are beyond compliance limits that cannot be

exceeded or levels that the project aims to keep within. They are sometimes referred to as limits,

objectives, targets, criteria or standards. Goals need to be established to demonstrate no net impact;

no major exceedances as well as enhancement. Receiving water quality goals are levels at sensitive

receiver locations (including surface and groundwater) while water discharge goals are levels at the

discharge point from the infrastructure site (e.g. stormwater drain or directly into a water course).

Level 1

53TDL1.1 Baseline studies of existing receiving water environment have been carried out for the project.

If baseline studies have been undertaken and verified as part of a Planning rating, then the requirements

of this criterion have been met unless the scope and/or footprint of the project has changed. If the scope

and/or footprint has changed, then the baseline studies undertaken as part of a Planning rating must

be reviewed and updated where necessary by a suitably qualified professional.

If baseline studies have not been undertaken as part of a Planning rating, then the following applies:

Baseline studies must be undertaken by a suitably qualified professional to identify the pre-exiting water

discharges and receiving water quality condition and environmental values prior to any potential project

impacts (for example, prior to demolition works or breaking ground in construction).

Baseline studies may come from an environmental impact assessment or similar process. These studies

must consider seasonal and rainfall effects, representative sampling and links to activities in the

catchment likely to affect the baseline.

Measurements of baseline conditions are key methods for understanding change in impacts over time.

In addition, such measurements may be relied upon to manage and respond to risk, demonstrate due

diligence and offer social response, as well as providing valuable data for comparing future

enhancements.

Baseline measurements are required to show the effectiveness of management and mitigation

measures during the whole of life of the asset. Therefore, the baseline assessment must identify the

relevant environmental parameters and the minimum time and location monitoring requirements to

suitably demonstrate change in environmental impacts throughout the duration of the construction and

operational phases.

Page 218 of 477



The following must be included in the assessment:

• Peak and average measurements of monitoring parameters,

• Seasonal and/or time of day variations (whichever is most appropriate for accurate baselines to

be established),

• Specific local variations, representative sampling and links to activities likely to affect the

baseline (such as urban stormwater contributing to increases in impact), and

• The measurement criteria/indicators/factors used in the assessments and associated

justification of how these link to goals.

Including background concentrations of pollutants in the assessment enables the total impact to be

assessed.

The following are typical Surface Water Monitoring Parameters that should be included in baseline

measurements:

• pH,

• Temperature,

• Electrical conductivity (EC),

• Dissolved oxygen (DO), and

• Turbidity.

And depending on the risk assessment may include:

• Total Suspended Solids,

• Redox potential,

• Oil and Grease,

• Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons,

• Total Phosphorous and Total Nitrogen, and

• Heavy Metals (Selenium, Silver, Zinc, Aluminium, Arsenic, Cadmium, Chromium, Copper, Iron,

Lead, Manganese, Mercury, Nickel).

The following are typical Groundwater Monitoring Parameters that should be included in baseline

measurements:

• pH,

• Temperature,

• Electrical conductivity (EC),

• Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons,

• Total Phosphorous and Total Nitrogen,

• Dissolved oxygen (DO),

• Major Cations (Sodium, Potassium, Calcium and Magnesium),

• Major Anions (Chloride, Sulfate, Bicarbonate) Ammonia, Calcium, Magnesium),

• Heavy Metals (Selenium, Silver, Zinc, Aluminium, Arsenic, Cadmium, Chromium, Copper, Iron,

Lead, Manganese, Mercury, Nickel),

• Groundwater levels, and

• Recharge rates.

If groundwater is being assessed as a potential water option in Wat-2, the following may need to be

assessed in addition to the baselining information:

• Groundwater quality,

• Aquifer yield,

• Impacts on other groundwater uses and users (particularly those downgradient of the extraction

point),

• Depth of groundwater extraction,

Page 219 of 477



Lea

Spr

Res

Res

Ecn

Ecn

Ene

Gre

Env

Wat

Eco

Sta

Leg

Her

Wfs

Con • Volumes of groundwater to be extracted and time frame and the sustainability of the aquifer to

provide these volumes for the period,

• Longer-term impacts on the health of the aquifer such as drawdown and recharge,

• Interaction with surface water bodies,

• Ecological impacts including groundwater-dependent ecosystems and ecosystems developed

within groundwater (e.g. the presence of stygofauna, Hose GC. et al 2015), and

• Regulatory management of groundwater aquifers including aquifer interference.

53TDL1.2 53TModelling and/or predictions53T for receiving water quality impacts have been developed for construction and operation phases of the project.

Modelling means reasonable estimates, calculations or predictions. An excel spreadsheet may be

sufficient for capturing historical information from similar asset performance or similar projects and

inputting estimates across the forecast useful life of the asset. For others (for example, complex

networks), computer modelling software may be more appropriate and/or already be used for making

predictions. For example, the Model for Urban Stormwater Improvement Conceptualisation (MUSIC

modelling) for water.

Any water discharge and receiving water quality impacts identified by the models or predictions must

be defined for the construction and operation phases of the project, and consider a comparison against

the baseline data. Modelling and/or predictions must be developed by a suitably qualified professional

and incorporate all work activities proposed to be used through the construction and operation of the

project that could result in water discharge and receiving water quality impacts.

Predictions must factor in any sensitive receivers and the impact that changes in water discharges and

receiving water quality may have on them. Impacts can vary greatly depending on the distance to each

sensitive receiver, as well as any intervening ground and water environments. These factors should be

considered when identifying sensitive receivers, as locations other than those closest to the site may

also be affected. Examples of sensitive receivers include:

• Residences,

• Schools and childcare centres,

• Passive recreation areas such as outdoor grounds used for teaching,

• Active recreation areas such as parks, sports grounds, swimming pools and golf courses

• Areas used for agriculture and aquaculture,

• Fauna and flora habitats, waterways, migrating animals and insects (including surface and

groundwater habitats) (e.g. the presence of stygofauna),

• Other land uses that may at times be sensitive include:

o Commercial premises, such as research facilities, entertainment spaces, temporary

accommodation (such as caravan parks and camping grounds).

Predictions must be incorporated and influence water discharge and receiving water quality goals

established in DL1.3. Additionally, predictions should consider the impact of accumulated impacts (i.e.

multiple impacts affecting the same sensitive receiver).

53TDL1.3 Water discharge and receiving water quality goals are identified for the project.

If water discharge and receiving water quality goals have been established and verified as part of a

Planning rating, then those goals must be incorporated into the project’s management plan or similar.

If the scope and/or footprint of the project has changed, then the goals established as part of a Planning

rating must be reviewed and updated where necessary by a suitably qualified professional.

If water discharge and receiving water quality goals have not been established as part of a Planning

rating the following applies:

Page 220 of 477



The process for water quality management uses the concept of environmental values to set local water

quality targets. These targets are usually established by government and regulatory bodies, either

directly or in partnership with the community.

ANZECC (2000) outlines that after all available information has been collated for a defined water body

the following should be considered for receiving waters at a local level:

• Identify the environmental values that are to be protected in a particular water body and the spatial

designation of the environmental values (i.e. decide what values will apply where), and

• Identify management goals and then select the relevant water quality guidelines for measuring

performance. Based on the guidelines, set water quality parameters that will maintain the


In many cases of infrastructure development or operation, water quality objectives will have already

been established by regulators and may be communicated through approval conditions and/or licenses.

Water discharge goals may be expressed as load reduction targets, where this is the case, an alternative

method, as proposed in DL2.1, may be adopted.

Water discharge and receiving water quality goals must be established for the project considering the

baseline data established in DL1.1. The goals must be SMART (specific, measurable, achievable,

relevant and time-bound) and must align with a no net impact outcome. The evidence for this criterion

must include:

• Any assumptions made, with relevant calculations,

• The methodology used to develop the goals,

• Background information demonstrating how the goals align with the intended outcome/s, and

• How the baseline assessment has been incorporated.

Goals established by regulators may be used if they meet the requirements of this criterion.

DL1.4 Measures to minimise adverse impacts and to meet the goals developed in DL1.2 during construction and operation have been identified and implemented.

Measures to minimise adverse impacts to meet the goals developed in DL1.2 must be identified and

implemented into the design and construction methodology. During the design phase, this means

measures implemented into the design to mitigate impacts in operation and for construction, controls

required to mitigate impacts in the construction phase.

Measures may come from an environmental impact assessment or similar process. Baseline studies

and predictions will inform the management process and measures. Measures should be documented

in management plans such as Construction and Operational Environmental Management Plans, specific

Water Management Plans or similar.

Implementation of measures could be demonstrated by design reports, as-built drawings, environmental

management plans and asset management plans as appropriate. The measures implemented/adopted

to meet the goals identified in DL1.2 must be detailed for construction and operation.

Discharges into water bodies may include discharges to inland or coastal waters, or to groundwater,

from:

• Spills from diesel, chemical and waste storage facilities, or from plant and vehicles (including

the maintenance thereof),

• Spills or releases from sewage or effluent treatment plants, vehicle washes and general

cleaning,

• Releases of soil from erosion during storms and from construction activity (e.g. sediment),

• Residue in runoff from hard surfaces such as roads,

• Discharges from wastewater treatment plants, and

• Discharges of sewerage systems, or other substances, from third-party hits (rupturing) to buried

network assets.

Page 221 of 477



Lea

Spr

Res

Res

Ecn

Ecn

Ene

Gre

Env

Wat

Eco

Sta

Leg

Her

Wfs

Con

The Civil Contractors Federation Environmental Guidelines for Civil Construction (Civil Contractors

Federation, 2010) offers a useful industry guide for managing environmental aspects including

discharges and pollution. Some examples of cited mitigation and management measures include those

stated below. Some may be appropriate for operation and maintenance activities being explored for

asset/network:

• Wastewater treatment - preventing pollution from wastewater (from toilets, vehicle washing,

concrete plant and other processes):

o Wastewater treatment plants

o Settlement ponds, etc.

• Protection of land and waterways - drainage control for site:

o Catch drains, earth banks (or cut off drains)

o Energy dissipaters at discharge points

• Sediment and flow control, waterways and floodplains protection:

o Stream diversion

o Use of measures recommended by CCF for horizontal directional drilling near waterways

• Preventing pollution from chemicals or waste:

o Appropriate operations, storage and handling of fuels, chemicals and hazardous waste e.g.

away from sensitive areas

o The use of bunding, spill kits, impervious liners and personnel trained in spill response.

ANZECC (2000) outlines that after all available information has been collated for a defined water

body and following on from DL1.2 the point below should be considered for receiving waters at a

local level:

• Initiate appropriate management responses to attain (or maintain if already achieved) the water

quality goals.

DL1.5 Monitoring requirements of water discharges and receiving water quality is included in relevant management plans.

ANZECC (2000) outlines that after all available information has been collated for a defined water body

and following on from DL1.2 and DL1.3 the points below should be considered for receiving waters at a

local level:

• Develop statistical performance criteria to evaluate the results of the monitoring programs (e.g.

statistical decision criteria for determining whether the water quality objectives have been exceeded

or not), and

• Develop tactical monitoring programs focusing on the water quality objectives.

Monitoring requirements of water discharge and receiving water quality must be included in relevant

management plans for construction and operation & maintenance manuals for the operational phase

(where required).

These must include the frequency, duration and locations of monitoring, any relevant triggers (e.g. high-

risk activities) and the parameters to be monitored.

Justification of the frequency and duration of monitoring during the construction phase must be included

and be sufficient to appropriately review the efficacy of control measures implemented.

Page 222 of 477




• Baseline studies,

• Water discharge and receiving water quality goals established,

• Control measures within an Environmental Management Plan or similar,

• Monitoring requirements/plans,


• Map showing the location of any considered sensitive receivers.

Level 2

DL2.1 Modelling and/or predictions of water discharges and receiving waters demonstrates no adverse impact on receiving water environmental values.


sufficient for capturing historical information from similar asset performance or similar projects and



predictions. For example, the Model for Urban Stormwater Improvement Conceptualisation (MUSIC

modelling) for water.

Modelling and/or predictions must demonstrate there no adverse impact on water discharge or receiving

water quality goals.

In simplest terms, 100% achievement of the water discharge and receiving water quality goals i.e. all

modelling results meeting the goals, would demonstrate no adverse impact to environmental values.

Where a project or asset’s water discharge goals are expressed as load reduction targets, the following

alternative method may be adopted to demonstrate that the predictions will result in no adverse impact

to the receiving water quality environmental values.

1. The stormwater quality design within the site and the environmental constraints adheres to the

accepted stormwater management best management practices and principles

2. The modelled analysis (e.g. MUSIC modelling) demonstrates the level of performance against

the load reduction targets

3. Interpretation of the results is provided by a suitably qualified professional to demonstrate that

water quality performance is best characterised as ‘no adverse impact’ with accompanying

evidence to prove the claim.

Justification must be provided for areas where load reductions are not achieved.

Evidence must be provided to show acceptance by the relevant authority (i.e. that approves the design

and/or its environmental conditions on behalf of the government authority with jurisdiction).

Please note that, evidence of acceptance by the relevant authority alone does not demonstrate that

there are no adverse impacts to receiving water quality. A clear explanation must be provided as to why

exceedances to required targeted load reductions were deemed acceptable.

DL2.2 The infrastructure does not increase peak stormwater flows for rainfall events of up to a 1.5 year ARI event discharge.

To demonstrate there has been no increase in peak stormwater flows for rainfall events of up to a 1.5

year Average Recurrence Interval (ARI) event, a report must be prepared comparing the post-

construction peak 1.5 year ARI event discharge to the pre-construction peak 1.5 year ARI event

discharge. This report should include:

• Drawings or aerial photographs with land types indicated and quantified,

Page 223 of 477



Lea

Spr

Res

Res

Ecn

Ecn

Ene

Gre

Env

Wat

Eco

Sta

Leg

Her

Wfs

Con • A description of the conditions of the site prior to any works commencing,

• A description of the prior site usage and any changes to the impervious areas of the site,

• A description of the proposed strategy for addressing the stormwater,

• The quantity of stormwater captured and used on site (annually),

• The water balance and total storage capacity of any systems that use stormwater on site,

• The quantity of stormwater discharge to be addressed by each stormwater treatment system

(annually), and

• The size of all stormwater treatment systems installed.

The ARI is the average, or expected value of the periods between exceedances of a given rainfall total

accumulated over a given duration. Data can be obtained from the Bureau of Meteorology (BOM), or

sources such as Australian Rainfall & Runoff, Engineers Australia (1999), and National Committee for

Water Engineering.

Where a longer ARI (up to 5-year ARI event discharge) is used in lieu of 1.5 ARI for modelling of peak

stormwater flows, it must be demonstrated that there is no increase in peak stormwater flows for rainfall

events.

During the construction phase, stormwater leaving the site is, for this criterion, any stormwater leaving

the infrastructure and the stormwater entering any water bodies that may exist within (or intersect with)

the infrastructure. Water bodies do not include project specific treatment facilities such as settlement

ponds. Evidence of treatment of discharged stormwater could include documentation of the two or five-

year storm event for the location. Records of these events during the construction period, and any lesser

events must demonstrate that there have been no untreated discharges.

The infrastructure must not increase peak stormwater flows for rainfall events of up to a 1.5 year ARI

event discharge. This is not a net increase, but is measured at the individual property/lot level.


• Modelling results showing no adverse impact on receiving water environmental values,

• Interpretation reports by the suitably qualified person,

• Alternative method as described in DL2.1 (if applicable), and

• Peak stormwater report with evidence listed in DL2.2.

Level 3

DL3.1 Opportunities to improve receiving water environmental values have been identified and implemented.

Any additional opportunities to further enhance environmental values must be identified and included

in risk and opportunity assessment undertaken in Lea-2. Any feasible opportunities must be

implemented. A definition of feasibility must be provided as evidence.

DL3.2 Modelling and/or predictions demonstrates an improvement in receiving water environmental values.

Modelling and/or predictions must demonstrate an improvement in receiving water environmental

values.

An improvement to receiving water environmental values should be demonstrated by a modelled and/or

predicted long-term trend of improvement to receiving water quality and positive impact on

environmental values compared to baseline data. A long-term trend would need to be demonstrated on

a rolling 12-month average basis.

Page 224 of 477



Following from DL2.1, using the alternative method, Level 3 may be awarded if the level of performance

against the load reduction targets demonstrates a net improvement to receiving water environmental

values, however, modelled load reduction targets must not be exceeded.


• Modelling results showing improvement and/or enhancements to water discharge or receiving

water quality goals

• Opportunities register detailing identified and implemented opportunities.

Page 225 of 477



Lea

Spr

Res

Res

Ecn

Ecn

Ene

Gre

Env

Wat

Eco

Sta

Leg

Her

Wfs

Con

ISv2.0 As Built


Aim

To reward the management of impacts on local receiving water quality.

Criteria

Table En17 Env-1 As Built summary criteria table


ABL1.1 Measures to minimise


goals developed in construction

and operation have been

implemented.

AND

ABL1.2 Monitoring of water

discharges and receiving water

quality is undertaken at

appropriate intervals and in

response to complaints during

construction.


achieved.

AND

ABL2.1 Monitoring demonstrates

no adverse impact on receiving

water environmental values.

AND

ABL2.2 The infrastructure does not

increase peak stormwater flows for

rainfall events of up to a 1.5 year

ARI event discharge.


achieved.

AND


an improvement of receiving water


Water quality in Australia and New Zealand is directed by the National Water Quality Management

Strategy (NWQMS) (Department of the Environment and Energy, 2015).The NWQMS objective is: ‘to

achieve sustainable use of the nation's water resources by protecting and enhancing their quality while

maintaining economic and social development.

Note that in the title of this credit, receiving water refers to the impacts from water discharges from a

project or asset onto downstream receiving water bodies. Downstream receiving water bodies include

groundwater below or down gradient to the project/asset site and potentially impacted by discharges or

other activities. The ANZECC (2000) Guidelines (which form part of the NWQMS) define environmental

values as: ‘particular values or uses of the environment that are important for a healthy ecosystem or

for public benefit, welfare, safety or health and that require protection from the effects of pollution, waste

discharges and deposits. Several environmental values may be designated for a specific waterbody.’

Environmental values may include:

• aquatic ecosystems,

• recreational water quality and aesthetics,

• raw water for drinking water supplies,

• agricultural water use, and

• Industrial water use.

Definitions Exceedances are measured water discharges and/or receiving water quality levels outside the set goals

causing a negative impact. Recurring exceedances are defined as more than two of a similar type

within a 12-month period. Major exceedances are defined as exceeding the water discharges and/or

receiving water quality goals by more than 50%.


of being engineered and is practical to build given project constraints such as safety and maintenance

requirements.

Page 226 of 477



'Hot spots' are defined as receiving water locations with pollutant levels elevated above background

and/or particular environmental sensitivity levels.


person(s):






Operating licences and compliance criteria are limits set by regulatory authorities, such as water

quality and discharge limits for a water treatment facility. This is compliance criteria.


management and/or Environmental Impact Assessments, or equivalent.

Water discharge and receiving water quality goals are beyond compliance limits that cannot be

exceeded or levels that the project aims to keep within. They are sometimes referred to as limits,

objectives, targets, criteria or standards. Goals need to be established to demonstrate no net impact;

no major exceedances as well as enhancement. Receiving water quality goals are levels at sensitive

receiver locations (including surface and groundwater) while water discharge goals are levels at the

discharge point from the infrastructure site (e.g. stormwater drain or directly into a water course).

Level 1

ABL1.1 Measures to minimise adverse impacts and to meet the goals developed in DL1.2 during construction and operation have been implemented.

Measures to minimise adverse impacts and to meet the goals identified in DL1.2 of the Design rating

must be implemented. Implementation of measures for the construction phase means providing

evidence to show how the measures identified in DL1.2 are actioned and communicated to all relevant

internal and external stakeholders (e.g. toolbox talk agendas/outlines and community letter box drops).

The implementation for measures identified for the operational phase should include as built drawings

detailing any changes to the design and/or operational controls/ongoing monitoring required detailed in

operation & maintenance manuals or similar.

ABL1.2 Monitoring of water discharges and receiving water quality is undertaken at appropriate intervals and in response to complaints during construction.

Monitoring of water discharges and receiving water quality must be undertaken at appropriate intervals

as identified by a suitably qualified professional for example, during high-impact works, and/or after a

community complaint.

The evidence must include details of the monitoring frequency, duration and locations, any relevant

triggers (e.g. high-risk activities) and the results of the parameters monitored.

Any divergences from the monitoring plan developed during design must be justified showing no

adverse impacts to receiving water quality environmental values has occurred.

Where complaints were received or incidents occurred the investigation reports must be provided.

These reports should comprehensively detail the causes, consequences, response/actions taken, and

outcomes and improvements/controls put in place to avoid reoccurrences.

Page 227 of 477



Lea

Spr

Res

Res

Ecn

Ecn

Ene

Gre

Env

Wat

Eco

Sta

Leg

Her

Wfs

Con


• Photos and/or documentation showing control measures implemented on site,

• Site plans, Environmental Control Plans or as built drawings,

• Complaint and incident logs, with relevant investigation reports, and

• Monitoring results.

Level 2

ABL2.1 Monitoring demonstrates no adverse impact on receiving water environmental values.

Monitoring must demonstrate there are no adverse impacts on water discharge or receiving water

quality goals. This must be linked to and/or compared with the baseline assessments undertaken.

In simplest terms, 100% achievement of the water discharge and receiving water quality goals i.e. all

monitoring results meeting the goals, would demonstrate no adverse impact to environmental values.

Where a project or asset’s water discharge goals are expressed as load reduction targets, and the

alternative method described in DL2.1 has been used, the monitoring results must show that there was

no adverse impact of receiving water quality environmental values has occurred. The following must be

provided:

1. Implementation of the stormwater quality design within the site and the environmental constraints

adhering to the accepted stormwater management best management practices and principles

2. Monitoring according to the (e.g. MUSIC modelling undertaken in DL2.1) to demonstrate the level

of performance against the load reduction targets

3. Interpretation of the results by a suitably qualified professional to demonstrate that water quality

performance is best characterised as ‘no adverse impact’ with accompanying evidence to prove the

claim or in an independent audit report which includes assessment of supporting evidence.

Justification must be provided for areas where load reductions have not been not achieved.

Evidence must be provided to show acceptance by the relevant authority (i.e. that approves the design

and/or its environmental conditions on behalf of the government authority with jurisdiction)

Please note that, evidence of acceptance by the relevant authority alone does not demonstrate that

there have been no adverse impacts to receiving water quality. A clear explanation must be provided

as to why exceedances to required targeted load reductions were deemed acceptable.

For this criterion, the evidence must include details of the monitoring frequency, duration and locations,

any relevant triggers (e.g. high-risk activities) and the results of the parameters monitored.

A report must be provided with interpretation of the results and appropriate justification provided for any

divergences from the monitoring plan developed during design.

ABL2.2 The infrastructure does not increase peak stormwater flows for rainfall events of up to a 1.5 year ARI event discharge.

To demonstrate there has been no increase in peak stormwater flows for rainfall events of up to a 1.5

year Average Recurrence Interval (ARI) event, a report must be prepared comparing the post-

construction peak 1.5 year ARI event discharge to the pre-construction peak 1.5 year ARI event

discharge. This report should include:

• Drawings or aerial photographs with land types indicated and quantified,

• A description of the conditions of the site prior to any works commencing,

• A description of the prior site usage and any changes to the impervious areas of the site,

• A description of the proposed strategy for addressing the stormwater,

• The quantity of stormwater captured and used on site (annually),

Page 228 of 477



• The water balance and total storage capacity of any systems that use stormwater on site,

• The quantity of stormwater discharge to be addressed by each stormwater treatment system

(annually), and

• The size of all stormwater treatment systems installed.

The ARI is the average, or expected value of the periods between exceedances of a given rainfall total

accumulated over a given duration. Data can be obtained from the Bureau of Meteorology (BOM), or

sources such as Australian Rainfall & Runoff (all J, Babister M, Nathan R, Weeks W, Weinmann E,

Retallick M, Testoni I, (Editors),, 2016) and National Committee for Water Engineering (Engineers

Australia, 2018).

Where a longer ARI (up to 5-year ARI event discharge) is used in lieu of 1.5 ARI for modelling of peak

stormwater flows, it must be demonstrated that there is no increase in peak stormwater flows for rainfall

events.

During the construction phase, stormwater leaving the site is, for this criterion, any stormwater leaving

the infrastructure and the stormwater entering any water bodies that may exist within (or intersect with)

the infrastructure. Water bodies do not include project specific treatment facilities such as settlement

ponds. Evidence of treatment of discharged stormwater could include documentation of the two or five

year storm event for the location. Records of these events during the construction period, and any lesser

events must demonstrate that there have been no untreated discharges.

The infrastructure must not increase peak stormwater flows for rainfall events of up to a 1.5 year ARI

event discharge. This is not a net increase, but is measured at the individual property/lot level.


• Photos and/or documentation showing control measures implemented,


• Complaint and incident logs, with relevant investigation reports,

• Monitoring results showing no adverse impact on receiving water environmental values,

• Interpretation reports,

• Audit report highlighting that monitoring results have been assessed,

• Alternative method as described in ABL2.1 (if applicable), and

• Peak stormwater report with evidence listed in DL2.2.

Level 3

ABL3.1 Monitoring demonstrates an improvement of receiving water environmental values.

Monitoring must demonstrate an improvement of receiving water environmental values. This must be

linked to and/or compared with the baseline assessments undertaken.

For the operational phase, an improvement to receiving water environmental values should be

demonstrated by monitoring any long-term trends of improvement to receiving water quality and detailing

positive impacts on environmental values. Long-term trends would need to be demonstrated on a rolling

12-month average basis. In this instance, any ongoing monitoring requirements must be communicated

to the operator in operation & maintenance manuals or similar.

Following from DL2.1, using the alternative method, Level 3 may be awarded if the level of performance

against the load reduction targets demonstrates a net improvement to receiving water environmental

values, however, monitoring must demonstrate that load reduction targets must not be exceeded.

Improvement of the local receiving water environmental values can also be demonstrated by monitoring

receiving waters at 'hot spots'. In these instances, monitoring must show a significant reduction in the

concentrations of pollutants.

Page 229 of 477



Lea

Spr

Res

Res

Ecn

Ecn

Ene

Gre

Env

Wat

Eco

Sta

Leg

Her

Wfs

Con

For this criterion, the evidence must include details of the monitoring frequency, duration and locations,

any relevant triggers (e.g. high-risk activities) and the results of the parameters monitored.



Where this credit has low materiality, if improvements are made to stormwater management that result

in improvements to receiving water quality, improvement can be demonstrated through a qualitative

assessment, and monitoring of the receiving water is not required.


• Monitoring results showing improvement and/or enhancements to water discharge or receiving

water quality goals,

• Interpretation reports, and

• ARI assessment report.

Page 230 of 477



ISv2.0 Design

Env-2 Noise

Aim

To reward the management of noise impacts.

Criteria



DL1.1 Baseline studies of the

existing noise environment have

been carried out for the project. AND DL1.2 Modelling and/or predictions

for noise have been developed for


of the project. AND DL1.3 Noise goals are identified

for the project. AND DL1.4 Measures to mitigate noise

during construction and operation

have been identified and

implemented to meet the goals

developed in DL1.3. AND DL1.5 Monitoring requirements of

noise impacts are included in

relevant management plans (i.e.

during high-impact activities)


achieved. AND DL2.1 Modelling and/or predictions

demonstrate no recurring or major

exceedances of the noise goals

set in DL1.3.


achieved. AND DL3.1 Modelling demonstrates no

exceedances of the noise goals.

The delivery and operation of infrastructure, particularly in the transport and construction sectors, can

be a continuous source of noise which may be potentially significant, especially in sensitive locations.

Noise can intrude on community amenities and, in severe cases, contribute to psychological effects or

hearing damage as well as impact on buildings, including local businesses, and sensitive industries.

Noise can be caused through both the construction and operation of infrastructure assets through the

following means:

• Vehicle movements including reversing alarms,

• Rock-breaking and piling,

• Use of explosives for blasting,

• Radios, broadcast systems and worker chatter,

• The operation of the asset/network (e.g. trains running, traffic on the roads, airplanes flying

overhead),

• Equipment used during maintenance and repair, and

• Human activities (e.g. crowds in stadia or people using gym equipment).

More needs to be done to reduce and eliminate noise pollution to move towards zero impacts and zero

harm and to encourage restoration whereby past impacts are reversed. This category assesses the

Page 231 of 477



Lea

Spr

Res

Res

Ecn

Ecn

Ene

Gre

Env

Wat

Eco

Sta

Leg

Her

Wfs

Con

level and effectiveness of management practices for preventing and mitigating noise impacts over the

life cycle of a given piece of infrastructure.

Definitions Exceedances are measured noise levels greater than 2 dBA above the noise goals. Recurring

exceedances are defined as more than two exceedances of a similar nature within a 12-month period.

Major exceedances are defined as exceeding noise goals or objectives by more than 10 dBAF.

The definitions for Feasible and Reasonable below are taken and adapted from the NSW Interim

Construction Noise Guideline (2009).



maintenance requirements. For example, the use of low-noise power tools or hydraulic or electrically

controlled equipment instead of petrol or pneumatic equipment to reduce noise impacts at the source.

Noise goals are limits that need to not be exceeded or noise levels that projects aim to keep within.

They are sometimes referred to as limits, targets, objectives or criteria. They are normally levels at

sensitive receiver locations and are measured in dB. There are different measures of noise levels

relating to different noise level statistics e.g. LAeq, LA10, LAmax.

Reasonable - Selecting reasonable measures from those that are feasible involves making a judgement

to determine whether the overall benefits outweigh the overall adverse social, economic and

environmental effects, including the cost of the measure. To make such a judgement, consideration may

be given to:

• The level of impacts – existing and future levels and projected changes in impact levels

• Number of people affected or annoyed,

• The amount of impact reduction expected, including the cumulative effectiveness of the

proposed work practices/abatement measures,

• Potential ability of the work practices/abatement measures to reduce the impact during the

construction stage (and preferably also the operational stage) of the project,

• The number of people protected,

• Cost effectiveness of the mitigation,

• Impact of disruption to essential transport and utility networks (for example, main roads,

railways, water supply, electricity supply),

• Risk to worker safety during live traffic (road or rail) conditions,

• Community views (including views of all affected land users not just those making complaints,

determined through early community consultation), and

• Practices/measures with majority support from the affected community.

Sensitive receivers are typically residences, schools, childcare centres, aged care facilities or

hospitals. Sensitive receivers can also include the neighbouring businesses and local flora and fauna.

(DEC 2005)


management and/or Environmental Impact Assessments, and/or acoustic engineering or equivalent.

Level 1

53TDL1.1 Baseline studies of the existing noise environment have been carried out for the project.





Page 232 of 477




Baseline studies must be undertaken by a suitably qualified professional to identifying the pre-exiting

noise environment prior to any potential project impacts (for example, prior to demolition works or

breaking ground in construction).

Baseline studies, predictions and measures may come from an environmental impact assessment or

similar process. These studies must consider representative sampling and links to activities in the area

likely to affect the baseline.




enhancements.


measures during the whole of life of the asset. Therefore, the baseline assessment must identify the

relevant environmental parameters and the minimum time and location monitoring requirements to


operational phases.

The following must be included in the assessment:

• Peak and average measurements of monitoring parameters,

• Seasonal and/or time of day variations (whichever is most appropriate for accurate baselines to

be established),

• Specific local variations, representative sampling and links to activities likely to affect the

baseline (such as nearby construction works or rail transport services), and

• The measurement criteria/indicators/factors used in the assessments and associated

justification of how these link to goals and targets.

A baseline for background noise levels must be determined using the assessment methodology for the

type of works and operation for the asset development. Accurate measurement of the background level

is important, as it is often one of the criteria used when assessing the impact or potential impact of

intrusive noise (DEHP 2013). Noise measurements should be undertaken in line with AS 1055.1:

Acoustics - Description and measurement of environmental noise General procedures.

• The measurements must be taken in locations that can be/are likely to be accessible throughout

the construction and operational phases of the asset development. This is important to show

the change in the impact over time. Where measurement locations are temporary or are likely

to change this must be clearly identified with appropriate justification, and

• Studies have shown that long-term noise exposure can increase stress levels leading to

physiological impacts, such as a raised heart rate and higher blood pressure (Babisch, W,

2003). The baseline assessment must consider existing long-term noise impacts that may be

affecting human health and detail the noise source, time measured and associated peak and

average noise levels.

Additionally, baseline studies must consider the location of sensitive receivers. Examples of sensitive

receivers include:

• Residences,

• Classrooms,

• Hospitals,

• Places of worship,

• Passive recreation areas such as outdoor grounds used for teaching, and

• Active recreation areas such as parks and sports grounds.

Page 233 of 477



Lea

Spr

Res

Res

Ecn

Ecn

Ene

Gre

Env

Wat

Eco

Sta

Leg

Her

Wfs

Con

Other land uses that may at times be sensitive include:

• Commercial premises, such as film and television studios, research facilities, entertainment

spaces, temporary accommodation (such as caravan parks and camping grounds), childcare

centres, restaurants, office premises and retail spaces, and

• Fauna and flora habitats, waterways, nocturnal and migrating animals and insects

A map showing the location of any considered sensitive receivers should be provided with the baseline

study.

53TDL1.2 53TModelling and/or predictions53T for noise have been developed for construction and operation phases of the project.


sufficient for capturing historical information from the previous asset performance or similar projects and



predictions.

Noise predictions must be established for the construction and operation phases of the project, and

consider a comparison against the baseline data as established in DL1.1. Predictions must be

developed by a suitably qualified professional and incorporate all equipment proposed to be used

through the construction and operation of the project that could result in noise impacts. For the

operational phase predictions are normally demonstrated using modelling results from the design

development.

Predictions must factor in sensitive receivers and the increased impact that noise may have on them.

Impacts can vary greatly depending on the distance to each sensitive receiver, as well as any intervening

topography or buildings. These factors should be considered when identifying sensitive receivers, as

locations other than those closest to the site may also be affected. Examples of sensitive receivers

include:

• Residences,

• Classrooms,

• Hospitals,








• Fauna and flora habitats, waterways, nocturnal and migrating animals and insects.

Predictions must be incorporated and influence noise goals established in DL1.3. Additionally,

predictions should consider the impact of accumulated impacts (i.e. multiple impacts affecting the same

sensitive receiver such as construction fatigue).

Where potential construction noise impacts of a project are expected to be minor (AKA have low

materiality), the qualitative method (outlined in Interim Construction Noise Guideline (DECC 2009) for

assessing and managing construction noise can be used. This method focusses on community

engagement and managing noise impacts through feasible and reasonable management measures. It

is a simplified way to identify the cause of potential construction noise impacts and, where appropriate,

Page 234 of 477



avoids the need to perform complex noise predictions by using a checklist approach for assessing and

managing noise.

The qualitative assessment method can be applied to projects involving the following (or similar)

activities:

• Short-term infrastructure maintenance (not likely to affect an individual or sensitive land use for more

than three weeks in total), and

• Small construction projects in rural areas which may not generate significant noise at surrounding

residences due to the typically large distances involved.

The assessor must provide evidence to show that the requirements of the guideline have been met.

Where the construction noise impacts are minor and the qualitative method has been appropriately

applied, then the Level 1 benchmark will apply and this can receive full points for the credit, subject to

meeting operational noise benchmarks.

53TDL1.3 Noise goals are identified for the project.

If noise goals have been established and verified as part of a Planning rating, then those goals must be

incorporated into the project’s management plan or similar. If the scope and/or footprint of the project

has changed, then the goals established as part of a Planning rating must be reviewed and updated

where necessary by a suitably qualified professional.

Where noise goals have not been established as part of a Planning rating the following applies.

Noise goals must be established for the project considering the baseline data (DL1.1) and predictions

(DL1.2). The goals must be SMART (specific, measurable, achievable, relevant and time-bound) and

must align with a no net impact outcome. The evidence for this criterion must include:





Noise goals are typically based on achievable noise levels which have been predicted can be met. Noise

goals should be determined based on relevant regulations and the advice of a qualified acoustic

specialist. An example goal is to not to exceed the background noise level by more than 5 dB. There

may be different noise goals for different locations, times of day, receiver types and activities (noise

types).


53TDL1.4 Measures to mitigate noise during construction and operation have been identified and implemented to meet the goals developed in DL1.3


and noise predictions must be used to inform the management process and measures.

Example noise control measures include:

• Control of noise at the source (e.g. enclosures or barriers),

• Control of transmission (e.g. barriers – natural or built, noise buffers),

• Location and orientation to avoid noise nuisance to neighbours and other sensitive receptors

(e.g. railway station public addressing systems),

• Control at the receivers (e.g. insulation and double-glazed windows),

Page 235 of 477



Lea

Spr

Res

Res

Ecn

Ecn

Ene

Gre

Env

Wat

Eco

Sta

Leg

Her

Wfs

Con • Imposed limitations for noise generating activities such as time and duration restrictions or

replacing tonal for non-tonal reversing alarms for trucks, and

• Consultation (e.g. letter box drops, community consultation and information hotline).

Measures to meet the goals identified in DL1.3 must be identified for construction and operation and

must be included in the project’s Environmental Management, Construction and Operational

Environmental Management Plans, specific Noise Management Plans or similar.




The measures identified for construction and operational phases must be implemented. During the

design phase, this means measures implemented into the design to mitigate impacts in operation and

for construction, controls required to mitigate impacts in the construction phase.

UUnavoidable or essential works

Where works are deemed unavoidable or essential, suitable control measures must be used to ensure

that the impact is minimised as much as is feasible and reasonable. A schedule for all planned works

with appropriate approvals process and identified control measures must be provided as evidence

during the design phase.

53TDL1.5 Monitoring requirements of noise impacts are included in relevant management plans (i.e. during high-impact activities)

When undertaking noise monitoring it is imperative that the measured noise level is representative of

the noise emissions from the activity being considered, and that the impacts of extraneous noise (be

they from road traffic, aircraft noise, or other industrial sources) are excluded from the measurements.

In some situations, it is not practical to use unattended noise loggers to monitor noise, because it is

difficult to determine what, exactly, is causing the ‘offending’ noise. In those situations, it is appropriate

to adopt alternative noise measurement techniques such as:

• Using directional unattended noise loggers, which can exclude noise from certain directions –

some mine sites adopt this approach, but it is expensive, and not appropriate for all situations,

• Undertaking some attended noise measurements to enable the ‘offending’ noise to be positively

identified more readily – but there are even some situations where attended measurements can

pose practical difficulties, and

• Undertaking derived point compliance measurements (i.e. measuring in representative

locations nearer to the noise source, for example, and back-calculating noise levels at

receivers).

Monitoring requirements of noise must be included in relevant management plans for construction and

operation & maintenance manuals for the operational phase (where required).


risk activities like night works) and the parameters to be monitored.



Where potential construction noise impacts of a project are expected to be minor (AKA low materiality),

the qualitative method (outlined in Interim Construction Noise Guideline (DECC 2009)) for assessing

and managing construction noise can be used. This method focusses on community engagement and

managing noise impacts through feasible and reasonable management measures. It is a simplified way

to identify the cause of potential construction noise impacts and, where appropriate, avoids the need to

perform complex noise predictions by using a checklist approach for assessing and managing noise.


activities:

Page 236 of 477






residences due to the typically large distances involved







• Construction Noise Impact Statement,

• Noise goals established,


• Monitoring requirements/plans,



Level 2

53TDL2.1 Modelling and/or predictions demonstrate no recurring or major exceedances of the noise goals set in DL1.3.

Modelling means reasonable estimates, predictions or calculations. An excel spreadsheet may be




predictions.

Modelling and/or predictions must demonstrate no recurring or major exceedances of the noise goals

set in DL1.3.

Where exceedances are predicted, these must be clearly identified with the appropriate control

measures to limit the scale of the impact. In addition, a report developed by a suitable qualified

professional must be provided, providing justification and interpretation of the results with any

recommended controls.


• Modelling results showing no recurring or major exceedances, and

• Interpretation reports by the suitably qualified person.

Level 3

53TDL3.1 Modelling demonstrates no exceedances of the noise goals.

Modelling and/or predictions must demonstrate no exceedances of the noise goals set in DL1.3.


• Modelling results showing no exceedances


Page 237 of 477



Lea

Spr

Res

Res

Ecn

Ecn

Ene

Gre

Env

Wat

Eco

Sta

Leg

Her

Wfs

Con

ISv2.0 As Built

Env-2 Noise

Aim

To reward the management of noise impacts.

Criteria



AB1.1 Measures to mitigate noise

and meet the goals developed in

Design during construction and

operation have been implemented. AND AB1.2 Monitoring of noise is

undertaken at appropriate intervals

and in response to complaints

during construction.


achieved. AND AB2.1 Monitoring demonstrates no

recurring or major exceedances of

the noise goals set in Design.


achieved. AND AB3.1 Monitoring demonstrates no

exceedances of the noise goals.


be a continuous source of noise which may be potentially significant, especially in sensitive locations.

Noise can intrude on community amenities and, in severe cases, contribute to psychological effects or

hearing damage as well as impact on buildings, including local businesses, and sensitive industries.

Noise can be caused through both the construction and operation of infrastructure assets through the

following means:

• Vehicle movements including reversing alarms,



• Radios, broadcast systems and worker chatter,


overhead),



More needs to be done to reduce and eliminate noise pollution to move towards zero impacts and zero

harm and to encourage restoration whereby past impacts are reversed. This category assesses the

level and effectiveness of management practices for preventing and mitigating noise impacts over the

life cycle of a given piece of infrastructure.

Definitions Exceedances are measured noise levels greater than 2 dBA above the noise goals. Recurring

exceedances are defined as more than two exceedances of a similar nature within a 12-month period.

Major exceedances are defined as exceeding noise goals or objectives by more than 10 dBA.


of being engineered and is practical to build given project constraints such as safety and maintenance

requirements. For example, the use of low-noise power tools or hydraulic or electrically controlled

equipment instead of petrol or pneumatic equipment to reduce noise impacts at the source.

Page 238 of 477



Noise goals are limits that need to not be exceeded or noise levels that projects aim to keep within.

They are sometimes referred to as limits, targets, objectives or criteria. They are normally levels at

sensitive receiver locations and are measured in dBA. There are different measures of noise levels

relating to different noise level statistics e.g. LAeq, LA10, LAmax.




be given to:

• The level of impacts – existing and future levels and projected changes in impact levels,


• The amount of impact reduction expected including the cumulative effectiveness of the





• Cost effectiveness of the mitigation,









(DEC 2005).



Level 1

AB1.1 Measures to mitigate noise and meet the goals developed in Design during construction and operation have been implemented.

Measures to mitigate noise and meet the goals identified in DL1.2 of the Design rating must be

implemented. Implementation of measures for the construction phase means providing evidence to

show how the measures identified in DL1.2 are actioned and communicated to all relevant internal and

external stakeholders (e.g. toolbox talk agendas/outlines and community letter box drops).




AB1.2 Monitoring of noise is undertaken at appropriate intervals and in response to complaints during construction.

Monitoring of noise must be undertaken at appropriate intervals as identified by a suitably qualified

professional for example, during high-impact works, and/or after a community complaint.



Any divergences from the monitoring plan developed during design must be justified showing no

adverse impacts to sensitive receivers has occurred.

Page 239 of 477



Lea

Spr

Res

Res

Ecn

Ecn

Ene

Gre

Env

Wat

Eco

Sta

Leg

Her

Wfs

Con

Where complaints were received or for exceedances the investigation reports must be provided. These

reports should comprehensively detail the causes, consequences, response/actions taken, outcomes

and improvements/controls put in place to avoid reoccurrences.

Where potential construction noise impacts of a project were expected to be minor (AKA low materiality),







activities:











• As built drawing,


• Monitoring results,

• Justification report, and


Level 2

AB2.1 Monitoring demonstrates no recurring or major exceedances of the noise goals set in Design.

Monitoring must demonstrate there no recurring or major exceedances of the noise goals. This must

be linked to and/or compared with the baseline assessments undertaken in DL1.1.





Where potential construction noise impacts of a project were expected to be minor (aka low materiality),






Page 240 of 477




activities:

• Short-term infrastructure maintenance (not likely to affect an individual or sensitive land use for

more than three weeks in total), and











• Monitoring results showing no recurring or major exceedances of the noise goals, and


Level 3

AB3.1 Monitoring demonstrates no exceedances of noise goals.

Monitoring must demonstrate there no exceedances of the noise goals. This must be linked to and/or

compared with the baseline assessments undertaken.

A report with interpretation of the results with appropriate justification provided for any divergences from

the monitoring plan developed during design, should be provided and undertaken by a suitably qualified

person.

Where potential construction noise impacts of a project were expected to be minor (aka low materiality),







activities:

• Short-term infrastructure maintenance (not likely to affect an individual or sensitive land use for

more than three weeks in total), and







Page 241 of 477



Lea

Spr

Res

Res

Ecn

Ecn

Ene

Gre

Env

Wat

Eco

Sta

Leg

Her

Wfs

Con


• Modelling data showing no exceedances of noise goals, and


Page 242 of 477



ISv2.0 Design

Env-3 Vibration

Aim

To reward management of vibration impacts.

Criteria



DL1.1 Baseline studies of the

existing vibration environment and

dilapidation surveys have been

undertaken for properties

potentially impacted by vibration. AND DL1.2 Modelling and/or predictions

for vibration have been developed

for construction and operation

phases of the project. AND DL1.3 Vibration goals are identified

for the project. AND DL1.4 Measures to mitigate

vibration during construction and

operation have been identified and

implemented to meet the goals

developed in DL1.3. AND DL1.5 Monitoring requirements of

vibration impacts are included in

relevant management plans (i.e.

during high-impact activities)


achieved. AND DL2.1 Modelling demonstrates no

exceedances of vibration goals for

structural damage to buildings and

structures. AND DL2.2 For operation, modelling

demonstrates no recurring or

major exceedances of vibration

goals for human comfort criteria.


achieved. AND DL3.1 For operation, modelling

demonstrates no exceedances of

vibration goals for human comfort

criteria.


be a continuous source of vibration which may be potentially significant, especially in sensitive locations.

Vibration can intrude on community amenities and, in severe cases, contribute to psychological effects

or hearing damage as well as impact on buildings, including heritage buildings, and on sensitive

industries.

Vibration can be caused through both the construction and operation of infrastructure assets through

the following means:

• Vehicle and equipment movements,


• Tunnelling machinery,


• The operation of the asset/network (e.g. trains running),


• Human activities (e.g. people using gym equipment).


mitigating vibration impacts over the life cycle of a given piece of infrastructure.

Page 243 of 477



Lea

Spr

Res

Res

Ecn

Ecn

Ene

Gre

Env

Wat

Eco

Sta

Leg

Her

Wfs

Con

Definitions

Exceedances are measured vibration levels above the vibration goals. Recurring exceedances are

defined as more than two of a similar type within a 12-month period. Major exceedances are defined as

more than doubling the vibration goals.





Vibration goals are limits that need to not be exceeded or vibration levels which the asset/network aims

to keep within. They are sometimes referred to as limits, objectives or criteria. They are normally levels

at sensitive receiver locations and are measured in mm/s (velocity), mm/sP

2P (acceleration) or Vibration

Dose Value (VDV).

Level 1

53TDL1.1 Baseline studies of the existing vibration environment and dilapidation surveys have been undertaken for properties potentially impacted by vibration.






Baseline studies must be undertaken by a suitably qualified professional to identify the pre-existing

vibration environment ideally prior to the procurement phase of the project commencing.


similar process.




enhancements.


measures during the whole of life of the asset. As such establishing the baseline in the planning phase

informs all other phases of the assets development. Therefore, the baseline assessment should identify

the relevant environmental parameters and the minimum time and location monitoring requirements to


operational phases.

Dilapidation surveys must be undertaken for properties potentially impacted by vibration if they exist.

Additionally, baseline vibration monitoring should be undertaken at locations where identified vibration

sensitive receivers are located, such as:

• Heritage buildings, hospitals, commercial premises (such as film and television studios and research

facilities) and industrial premises with vibration sensitive equipment, and


If heritage buildings and sensitive environments do exit on or near the project site, and baseline studies

are not required, then justification must be provided by a suitably qualified professional outlining why

baseline studies are not needed.

A map showing the location of any considered sensitive receivers should be provided with the

dilapidation surveys and/or baseline studies.

Page 244 of 477



53TDL1.2 53TModelling and/or predictions53T for vibration have been developed for construction and operation phases of the project.





predictions.

Vibration predictions must be established for the construction and operation phases of the project,

considering the baseline data established in DL1.1. Predictions must be developed by a suitably

qualified professional and incorporate all equipment proposed to be used through the construction and

operation of the project that could result in vibratory impacts. For the operational phase predictions are

normally demonstrated using modelling results from the design development.

Predictions must factor in sensitive receivers and the increased impact that vibration may have on them.

Sensitive receivers to be accounted for in predictions should include:

• Heritage buildings, Hospitals, commercial premises (such as film and television studios and

research facilities) and industrial premises with vibration sensitive equipment, and


Predictions must be incorporated and influence vibration goals established in DL1.3. Additionally,



Where the risk of vibration impacts in the operation phase has a low materiality, modelling of operational

vibration impacts is not required.

Suitable evidence to demonstrate that the risk of vibration is insignificant must be provided for

verification. Evidence could include an impact assessment, expert advice or a vibration management

plan. Other types of evidence would also be appropriate.

Modelling and monitoring of construction impacts would still be required unless vibration impacts

generally can be shown to be low or nil materiality.

53TDL1.3 Vibration goals are identified for the project.

If vibration goals have been established and verified as part of a Planning rating, then those goals must

be incorporated into the project’s management plan or similar. If the scope and/or footprint of the project

has changed, then the goals established as part of a Planning rating must be reviewed and updated

where necessary by a suitably qualified professional.

Where vibration goals have not been established as part of a Planning rating the following applies:

Vibration goals must be established for the project considering the baseline data and predictions. The

goals must be SMART (specific, measurable, achievable, relevant and time-bound) and must align with

a no net impact outcome. The evidence for this criterion must include:





Page 245 of 477



Lea

Spr

Res

Res

Ecn

Ecn

Ene

Gre

Env

Wat

Eco

Sta

Leg

Her

Wfs

Con

Vibration goals are typically set to meet two objectives:

1. To maintain human comfort in buildings affected by the construction. British Standard BS 6472:1992

is often referred to.

2. To avoid damage to buildings affected by construction vibration. German Standard DIN 4150 and

British Standard BS 7385: Part 2 1993 are often referred to.

There may be different vibration goals for different times of day, receiver types and activities. Activities

may result in different vibration frequencies and natures – continuous, impulsive or intermittent.


53TDL1.4 Measures to mitigate vibration during construction and operation have been identified and implemented to meet the goals developed in DL1.3.


should be undertaken and vibration predictions used to inform the management process and measures.

Measures should be documented in management plans such as Construction and Operational

Environmental Management Plans, specific Vibration Management Plans or similar.







53TDL1.5 Monitoring requirements of vibration impacts are included in relevant management plans (i.e. during high-impact activities)

Monitoring requirements of vibration must be included in relevant management plans for construction

and operation & maintenance manuals for the operational phase (where required).





Where vibration has low materiality in the construction phase, monitoring is only required in response

to complaints. In this case only Level 1 applies and this receives the full points for the credit. Verifiers

will determine whether the monitoring is appropriate. They should consider the nature of vibration,

objectivity, repeatability, probably of identifying vibration impacts, complaints and complaint

management and meeting the intent of the credit.


• Dilapidation surveys,


• Construction Vibration Impact Statement,

• Vibration goals established,


• Monitoring requirements/plans, and

• CV of suitably qualified person.

Page 246 of 477



Level 2

53TDL2.1 Modelling demonstrates no exceedances of vibration goals for structural damage to buildings and structures.

Modelling must demonstrate there are no exceedances of vibration goals for structural damage to

buildings and structures. Structural vibration goals are typically set to meet German Standard DIN 4150

and British Standard BS 7385: Part 2 1993 are often referred to.

Where exceedances are predicted, these must be identified with the appropriate control measures to

limit the scale of the impact.

The controls identified for construction and operational phases must be implemented. During the design

phase, this means controls implemented into the design to mitigate impacts in operation and controls

required in the construction phase that must be incorporated into management plans or similar.

The suitable control measures identified must be communicated to the relevant stakeholders for

implementation in construction and include the methods that will be used to communicate the controls

required (e.g. toolbox talk agendas/outlines).

53TDL2.2 For operation, modelling demonstrates no recurring or major exceedances of vibration goals for human comfort criteria

Modelling must demonstrate there are no recurring or major exceedances of vibration goals for human

comfort criteria for operation. Human vibration goals are typically set to meet British Standard BS

6472:1992.

Where exceedances are modelled/predicted, these must be identified with the appropriate control

measures to limit the scale of the impact.







verification. Evidence could include an impact assessment, expert advice or a vibration management


Modelling of construction impacts would still be required unless vibration impacts generally can be

shown to be low or nil materiality.


• Modelling data showing no exceedances to structural vibration goals,

• Modelling data showing no recurring or major exceedances against human comfort vibration

goals,

• Interpretation reports by the suitably qualified person, and

• Toolbox talks and meeting minutes.

Page 247 of 477



Lea

Spr

Res

Res

Ecn

Ecn

Ene

Gre

Env

Wat

Eco

Sta

Leg

Her

Wfs

Con

Level 3

53TDL3.1 For operation, modelling demonstrates no exceedances of vibration goals for human comfort criteria.

Modelling must demonstrate there are no exceedances of vibration goals for human comfort criteria.

Human vibration goals are typically set to meet British Standard BS 6472:1992.









verification. Evidence could include: an impact assessment, expert advice or a vibration management


Modelling of construction impacts would still be required unless vibration impacts generally can be

shown to be low or nil materiality.


• Modelling data showing no exceedances for operation of vibration goals for human comfort

criteria, and

• Toolbox talks and meeting minutes.

Page 248 of 477



ISv2.0 As Built

Env-3 Vibration

Aim

To reward management of vibration impacts.

Criteria



ABL1.1 Measures to mitigate

vibration are implemented and

meet the goals developed in

Design. AND ABL1.2 Monitoring of vibration is

undertaken at appropriate intervals

and in response to complaints

during construction.


achieved. AND ABL2.1 Monitoring demonstrates

no exceedances of vibration goals

for structural damage to buildings

and structures. AND ABL2.2 No physical damage has

been caused to any buildings or

structures by vibration caused by

construction. AND ABL2.3 For operation, modelling

demonstrates no recurring or

major exceedances of vibration

goals for human comfort criteria.


achieved. AND ABL3.1 For operation, modelling

demonstrates no exceedances of

vibration goals for human comfort

criteria.


be a continuous source of vibration which may be potentially significant, especially in sensitive locations.

Vibration can intrude on community amenities and, in severe cases, contribute to psychological effects

impact buildings, including heritage buildings, and on sensitive industries.

Vibration can be caused through both the construction and operation of infrastructure assets through

the following means:

• Vehicle and equipment movements,


• Tunnelling machinery,



overhead),

• Equipment used during maintenance and repair , and



mitigating vibration impacts over the life cycle of a given piece of infrastructure.

Definitions Exceedances are measured vibration levels above the vibration goals. Recurring exceedances are

defined as more than two of a similar type within a 12-month period. Major exceedances are defined as

more than doubling the vibration goals.

Page 249 of 477



Lea

Spr

Res

Res

Ecn

Ecn

Ene

Gre

Env

Wat

Eco

Sta

Leg

Her

Wfs

Con



(DEC 2005).



Vibration goals are limits that need to not be exceeded or vibration levels which the asset/network aims

to keep within. They are sometimes referred to as limits, objectives or criteria. They are normally levels

at sensitive receiver locations and are measured in mm/s (velocity), mm/sP

2P (acceleration) or Vibration

Dose Value (VDV).

Level 1

ABL1.1 Measures to mitigate vibration are implemented and meet the goals developed in Design.

Measures to meet the goals identified in DL1.2 of the Design rating must be implemented on site.

Implementation of measures for the construction phase means providing evidence to show how the

measures identified in DL1.2 are actioned and communicated to all relevant internal and external

stakeholders (e.g. toolbox talk agendas/outlines and community letter box drops).




ABL1.2 Monitoring of vibration is undertaken at appropriate intervals and in response to complaints during construction.

Monitoring of vibration must be undertaken at appropriate intervals as identified by a suitably qualified

professional for example, during high-impact works, or after a community complaint.

Monitoring requirements of vibration must be included in relevant management plans for construction

and operation & maintenance manuals for the operational phase (where required).





Where vibration has low materiality, monitoring is only required in response to complaints. In this case

only Level 1 applies and this receives the full points for the credit. Verifiers will determine whether the

monitoring is appropriate. They should consider the nature of vibration, objectivity, repeatability,

probably of identifying vibration impacts, complaints and complaint management and meeting the intent

of the credit.




• Complaint logs, and

• Monitoring data.

Page 250 of 477



Level 2

ABL2.1 Monitoring demonstrates no exceedances of vibration goals for structural damage to buildings and structures.

Monitoring must demonstrate there are no exceedances of vibration goals for structural damage to

buildings and structures. Structural vibration goals are typically set to meet German Standard DIN 4150

and British Standard BS 7385: Part 2 1993 are often referred to.

ABL2.2 No physical damage has been caused to any buildings or structures by vibration caused by construction.

Projects must demonstrate that there has been no physical damage caused throughout the construction

of the project. This can be achieved through meeting vibration goals and implementing control

measures.

Dilapidation surveys must show that the construction has not resulted in any physical damage.

All complaints received about damage to property must be closed and evidenced as not being due to

works associated with the construction of the project. Where damage has been claimed, evidence of

how it has been appropriately managed must be provided.

All complaints received where damage has occurred or for exceedances in the investigation reports

must be provided. These reports should comprehensively detail the causes, consequences,

response/actions taken, outcomes and improvements/controls put in place to avoid reoccurrences.

ABL2.3 For operation, modelling demonstrates no recurring or major exceedances of vibration goals for human comfort criteria.

Modelling must demonstrate there are no recurring or major exceedances of vibration goals for human

comfort criteria for operation. Human vibration goals are typically set to meet British Standard BS

6472:1992.


limit the scale of the impact. A report should be provided including an interpretation by a suitably qualified

person of the results with appropriate justification and associated controls identified for any

exceedances.


• Monitoring data showing no exceedances of structural vibration goals,

• Modelling data showing no recurring or major exceedances of human comfort vibration goals

for operation,

• Construction Vibration Impact Statements,

• Dilapidation surveys,


• Monitoring results, and


Page 251 of 477



Lea

Spr

Res

Res

Ecn

Ecn

Ene

Gre

Env

Wat

Eco

Sta

Leg

Her

Wfs

Con

Level 3

ABL3.1 For operation, modelling demonstrates no exceedances of vibration goals for human comfort criteria.

Modelling must demonstrate there are no exceedances of vibration goals for human comfort criteria.

Human vibration goals are typically set to meet British Standard BS 6472:1992.



The controls identified for construction and operational phases must be implemented. Implementation

of measures for the construction phase means providing evidence to show how the measures identified

in DL1.2 are actioned and communicated to all relevant internal and external stakeholders (e.g. toolbox

talk agendas/outlines and community letter box drops).





• Modelling data showing no exceedances for operation against human comfort vibration goals.

Page 252 of 477



ISv2.0 Design

Env-4 Air Quality

Aim

To reward management of air quality impacts.

Criteria

Table En22 Env- 4 Design summary criteria table


DL1.1 Baseline studies of existing

air quality have been carried out

for the project.

AND

DL1.2 Modelling and /or

predictions for air quality impacts

have been developed for


of the project

AND

DL1.3 Air quality goals are

identified for the project.

AND

DL1.4 Measures to minimise


goals developed in DL1.3 during

construction and operation have

been identified and implemented.

AND

DL1.5 Monitoring requirements of

air emission and/or air quality is

included in relevant management

plans.


achieved.

AND

DL2.1 Modelling demonstrates no

recurring or major exceedances of

air emission or air quality goals.


achieved.

AND

DL3.1 Modelling demonstrates no

exceedances of air emission or air

quality goals.

Air quality studies such as (ENVIRON Australia Pty Ltd, 2010) have shown that national air quality

standards for particles (PM10) and ozone are regularly exceeded in Australian cities, with significant

implications in terms of adverse health effects and environmental impacts. The contribution of non-road

engines to total anthropogenic NOx (a precursor pollutant necessary for the formation of photochemical

smog, notably ozone) and particle emissions has been concluded by previous national and state studies

to be worthy of further consideration and is under discussion at COAG. Industry can play a role in

addressing this important aspect of air quality. ISCA has partnered with NSW EPA to identify industry

case studies of best practice (see ISCA website for more details).

Air emission or air quality goals are typically based on nationwide air quality objectives such as National

Environment Protection Measures (National Environment Protection Council, 1998) or on regional

objectives. Air emission or air quality goals should be based on relevant regulations and the advice of a

qualified air quality specialist.

Definitions Air emission or air quality goals are limits that cannot be exceeded or levels that the project aims to

keep within. They are sometimes referred to as limits, objectives, criteria or standards.

Page 253 of 477



Lea

Spr

Res

Res

Ecn

Ecn

Ene

Gre

Env

Wat

Eco

Sta

Leg

Her

Wfs

Con

Air quality goals are limits that cannot be exceeded or levels that the project aims to keep within. They

are sometimes referred to as limits, objectives, criteria or standards. Air quality goals are levels at

sensitive receiver (ambient) locations while air emission goals are levels at the discharge point from

the infrastructure site (e.g. a tunnel vent facility). They may relate to different airborne pollutants such

as particulate matter (PM), Carbon monoxide or Nitrogen dioxide.

Exceedances are measured air emission or air quality levels above the goals. Recurring exceedances

are defined as more than two of a similar type within a 12-month period. Major exceedances are defined

as exceeding the air emission or air quality goals by more than 50%.



maintenance requirements. For example, the use of low-noise power tools or hydraulic or electrically

controlled equipment instead of petrol or pneumatic equipment to reduce noise impacts at the source.




be given to:

• The level of impacts – existing and future levels and projected changes in impact levels,


• The amount of impact reduction expected including the cumulative effectiveness of the





• Cost effectiveness of the mitigation







Suitably qualified professional is a professional with relevant air quality qualifications and a minimum

of 5 years’ experience in air quality assessment and monitoring.

Level 1

53TDL1.1 Baseline studies of existing air quality have been carried out for the project53T.





If baseline studies have not been undertaken as part of a Planning rating, then the following applies.

Baseline studies must be undertaken by a suitably qualified professional to identifying the pre-exiting

air quality prior to the project commencing.


similar process.

Baseline studies should include background concentrations of the following:

• Sulfur dioxide (SOR2R),

• Oxides of Nitrogen, including (NO and NOR2R),

Page 254 of 477



• Ozone (OR3R),

• Particulate matter less than 10 µm in aerodynamic equivalent diameter (PMR10R),

• Particulate matter less than 2.5 µm in aerodynamic equivalent diameter (PMR25R),

• Total suspended particulates (TSP),

• Volatile organic compound (VOC),

• Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon (PAH),

• Deposited dust,

• Lead (Pb),

• Carbon monoxide (CO),

• Hydrogen fluoride (HF), and

• Odour (where relevant).

DL1.2 Modelling and/or predictions for air quality impacts have been developed for construction and operation phases of the project.





predictions.

Air quality predictions must be established for the construction and operation phases of the project, and

consider a comparison against the baseline data. Predictions must be developed by a suitably qualified

professional and incorporate all equipment proposed to be used through the construction and operation

of the project that could result in air quality impacts. For the operational phase predictions are normally

demonstrated using modelling results from the design development.

Predictions must factor in sensitive receivers and the increased impact that air quality may have on

them. Impacts can vary greatly depending on the distance to each sensitive receiver, as well as any

intervening topography or buildings. These factors should be considered when identifying sensitive

receivers, as locations other than those closest to the site may also be affected. Examples of sensitive

receivers include:

• Residences,

• Classrooms,

• Hospitals,









Predictions must be incorporated and influence air quality goals established in DL1.3. Additionally,



Page 255 of 477



Lea

Spr

Res

Res

Ecn

Ecn

Ene

Gre

Env

Wat

Eco

Sta

Leg

Her

Wfs

Con

DL1.3 Air quality goals are identified for the project.

If air quality goals have been established and verified as part of a Planning rating, then those goals

must be incorporated into the project’s management plan or alike. If the scope and/or footprint of the

project has changed, then the goals established as part of a Planning rating must be reviewed and

updated where necessary by a suitably qualified professional.

Where air quality goals have not been established as part of a Planning rating the following applies:

Air quality goals must be established for the project taking into account the baseline data established

in DL1.1. The goals must be SMART (specific, measurable, achievable, relevant and time-bound) and

must align with a no net impact outcome. The evidence for this criterion must include:





Goals established by regulators may be used as long as they meet the requirements of this criterion.

DL1.4 Measures to minimise adverse impacts and to meet the goals developed in DL1.3 during construction and operation have been identified and implemented


and predictions will inform the management process and measures. Measures should be documented

in management plans such as Construction and Operational Environmental Management Plans, specific

Water Management Plans or similar.

Implementation of measures could be demonstrated by design reports, as-built drawings and asset

management plans as appropriate. The measures implemented/adopted to meet the goals identified in

DL1.2 must be detailed for construction and operation.




UUnavoidable or essential works

Where works are deemed unavoidable or essential, suitable control measures must be used to ensure

that the impact is minimised as much as is feasible and reasonable. A schedule for all planned works

with appropriate approvals process and identified control measures must be provided as evidence

during the design phase.

DL1.5 Monitoring requirements of air emission and/or air quality is included in relevant management plans.

Monitoring requirements of air emission and/or air quality must be included in relevant management

plans for construction and operation & maintenance manuals for the operational phase (where required).





Page 256 of 477





• Air quality goals established,

• Control measures within an Environmental Management Plan or alike,

• Monitoring data, and


Level 2

DL2.1 Modelling demonstrates no recurring or major exceedances of air emission or air quality goals.

Modelling means reasonable estimates, predictions or calculations. An excel spreadsheet may be




predictions.

Modelling and/or predictions must demonstrate no recurring or major exceedances of the noise goals

set in DL1.3.


measures to limit the scale of the impact. A report must be provided with interpretation of the results

and appropriate justification provided for any divergences from the monitoring plan developed during

design.


• Modelling results showing no recurring or major exceedances, and

• Justification report.

Level 3

DL3.1 Modelling demonstrates no exceedances of air emission or air quality goals.

Modelling and/or predictions must demonstrate no exceedances of air emissions or air quality goals set

in DL1.3.


• Modelling results showing no exceedances, and


Page 257 of 477



Lea

Spr

Res

Res

Ecn

Ecn

Ene

Gre

Env

Wat

Eco

Sta

Leg

Her

Wfs

Con

ISv2.0 As Built

Env-4 Air Quality

Aim

To reward management of air quality impacts.

Criteria

Table En23 Env- 4 Design summary criteria table


ABL1.1 Measures to minimise


goals developed in Design have

been implemented during

construction and operation.

AND

ABL1.2 Monitoring of air emissions

and/or air quality is undertaken at

appropriate intervals and in

response to complaints during

construction.


achieved.

AND


no recurring or major exceedances

of air emission or air quality goals.


achieved.

AND


no exceedances of air emission or

air quality goals.

Air quality studies such as (ENVIRON Australia Pty Ltd, 2010) have shown that national air quality

standards for particles (PM10) and ozone are regularly exceeded in Australian cities, with significant

implications in terms of adverse health effects and environmental impacts. The contribution of non-road

engines to total anthropogenic NOx (a precursor pollutant necessary for the formation of photochemical

smog, notably ozone) and particle emissions has been concluded by previous national and state studies

to be worthy of further consideration and is under discussion at COAG. Industry can play a role in

addressing this important aspect of air quality. ISCA has partnered with NSW EPA to identify industry

case studies of best practice (see ISCA website for more details).

Air emission or air quality goals are typically based on nationwide air quality objectives such as National

Environment Protection Measures (National Environment Protection Council, 1998) or on regional

objectives. Air emission or air quality goals should be based on relevant regulations and the advice of a

qualified air quality specialist.

Definitions Air emission or air quality goals are limits that cannot be exceeded or levels that the project aims to

keep within. They are sometimes referred to as limits, objectives, criteria or standards. Air quality goals

are levels at sensitive receiver (ambient) locations while air emission goals are levels at the discharge

point from the infrastructure site (e.g. a tunnel vent facility). They may relate to different airborne

pollutants such as particulate matter (PM), Carbon monoxide or Nitrogen dioxide.

Air quality goals are limits that cannot be exceeded or levels that the project aims to keep within. They

are sometimes referred to as limits, objectives, criteria or standards. Air quality goals are levels at

sensitive receiver (ambient) locations while air emission goals are levels at the discharge point from

the infrastructure site (e.g. a tunnel vent facility). They may relate to different airborne pollutants such

as particulate matter (PM), Carbon monoxide or Nitrogen dioxide.

Exceedances are measured air emission or air quality levels above the goals. Recurring exceedances

are defined as more than two of a similar type within a 12-month period. Major exceedances are defined

as exceeding the air emission or air quality goals by more than 50%.

Page 258 of 477



Level 1

ABL1.1 Measures to minimise adverse impacts and to meet the goals developed in Design have been implemented during construction and operation.

Measures to mitigate adverse impacts and meet the goals identified in DL1.2 of the Design rating must

be implemented. Implementation of measures for the construction phase means providing evidence to

show how the measures identified in DL1.2 are actioned and communicated to all relevant internal and

external stakeholders (e.g. toolbox talk agendas/outlines and community letter box drops).

The implementation for measures identified for the operational phase should include as 17T-17Tbuilt drawings



ABL1.2 Monitoring of air emissions and/or air quality is undertaken at appropriate intervals and in response to complaints during construction.

Monitoring of air emission and/or air quality must be undertaken at appropriate intervals as identified by

a suitably qualified professional for example, during high-impact works, or after a community complaint.





Where complaints were received or for exceedances the investigation reports must be provided. These

reports should comprehensively detail the causes, consequences, response/actions taken, outcomes

and improvements/controls put in place to avoid reoccurrences.





• Monitoring results,

• Interpretation reports by the suitably qualified person ,

• Map showing the location of any considered sensitive receivers, and


Level 2

ABL2.1 Monitoring demonstrates no recurring or major exceedances of air emission or air quality goals.

Monitoring must demonstrate there are no recurring or major exceedances of air emissions or air quality

goals. This must be linked to and/or compared with the baseline assessments undertaken in DL1.1.







Page 259 of 477



Lea

Spr

Res

Res

Ecn

Ecn

Ene

Gre

Env

Wat

Eco

Sta

Leg

Her

Wfs

Con





• Monitoring results showing no recurring or major exceedances of the noise goals, and


Level 3

ABL3.1 Monitoring demonstrates no exceedances of air emission or air quality goals.

Monitoring must demonstrate there are no exceedances of air emissions or air quality goals. This must

be linked to and/or compared with the baseline assessments undertaken.




• Modelling data showing no exceedances of noise goals, and


Page 260 of 477



ISv2.0 Design


Aim

To reward prevention of light spill.

Criteria


Level 1

DL1.1 A lighting audit or assessment has been conducted to establish existing conditions.

AND

DL1.2 Design measures have been identified and implemented to prevent light spill.

AND

DL1.3 Affected sensitive receptors have been identified and modelling demonstrates the effective mitigation of

light spill to these receptors.

Light pollution is an increasing environmental problem especially in urban landscapes. Numerous

studies can be found outlining the harmful and negative effects of light pollution to visual environment,

human health, flora and wildlife and balance of ecosystem. Proper lighting system design is vital in

solving light pollution and in saving energy.

Light reflected off external surfaces (which do not form part of the light fitting) is not considered light spill

in relation to this credit. The most relevant standards and guidelines for the mitigation of light spill

supported with an expert advice of a qualified light specialist is required to be used to demonstrate

reduction of light spill.

Definitions Light pollution refers to lighting condition that prevents views of the night sky or the adverse effect of

artificial light and can be classified as glare, light trespass and sky glow.

Suitably qualified professional is a professional with relevant qualifications and a minimum of 5 years’

experience in lighting design, light spill assessment and monitoring.

Level 1

53TDL1.1 A lighting audit or assessment has been conducted to establish existing conditions.

If a lighting audit has been undertaken and verified as part of a Planning rating, then the requirements


and/or footprint has changed, then the lighting audit undertaken as part of a Planning rating must be

reviewed and updated where necessary by a suitably qualified professional.

If lighting audit has not been undertaken as part of a Planning rating, then the following applies:

A lighting audit must be conducted to establish the condition of an existing lighting system of the site

and to assess the interaction between the lighting and the sensitive receptors. The audit will help in

establishing benchmarks for determining any new lighting system to be designed or improved.

A site investigation should be conducted to conduct the assessment and audit. A desktop review of

existing site plans and GIS maps will help to establish the existing condition. The following are key steps

in conducting the audit:

Page 261 of 477



Lea

Spr

Res

Res

Ecn

Ecn

Ene

Gre

Env

Wat

Eco

Sta

Leg

Her

Wfs

Con • Record the age, condition, wattage, light types/ballast types, quantity and model numbers of the

existing lighting fixtures,

• Establish photometrics using manufacturer’s data if possible,

• Check automated lighting controls or system, and

• Conduct field measurements (where applicable) at appropriate night time where light spill could

create disturbance to users or occupants of surrounding dwellings to gain representative lighting

samples from sensitive receptors.

DL1.2 Design measures have been identified and implemented to prevent light spill.

A multidisciplinary team must involve a qualified lighting specialist and must seek design solutions to

address light pollution. Common considerations for efficient lighting design are the location, mounting

height, type and aim of luminaires. The most relevant standards and guidelines for the mitigation of

light spill should be used, to demonstrate the reduction of light spill.

A lighting desktop study (modelling or calculations) must be undertaken to identify whether and where

sensitive receptors (residential and commercial dwellings and ecologically sensitive areas) may be

impacted by light spill. Modelling software includes AGI32 and DIALUX. The studies must demonstrate

compliance with the horizontal light spill and upward light ratio criteria.

DL1.3 Affected sensitive receptors have been identified and modelling demonstrates the effective mitigation of light spill to these receptors.

Using design data, a lighting desktop study through modelling or calculations must be conducted to

identify whether and where sensitive receptors (e.g. residential and commercial dwellings and

ecologically sensitive areas) may be impacted by light spill. Examples of modelling software that may

be utilised include AGI32 and DIALUX.

For construction activities, the sensitive receivers should be identified as defined within AS4282, and

luminaires be aimed away from these areas. Direct views from these areas towards luminaires should

also be minimised.

Where modelling cannot be provided due to site constraints (e.g. located in highly-urbanised areas

with numerous light sources) or ownership and management restrictions, preliminary design initiatives

must be proposed which demonstrate prevention of light spill and a lighting management system plan

must be provided including any scope for sustainable lighting solutions. The following must also be

provided, as a minimum:

1. Calculations to show that allowable lighting levels at the site boundary fall below the maximum

allowable light technical parameters stipulated on AS1158 and AS4282.

2. Plans to show location of sensitive receivers.

3. List of luminaire types to be installed within the project.

Any alternative approach to light spill mitigation or management should be outlined and proposed.


• Lighting audit or assessment,

• Design report,

• Environmental management plan,

• Asset management plan,

• Modelling results,

• Light spill design measures,

• List of design luminaires, and


Page 262 of 477



ISv2.0 As Built


Aim

To reward prevention of light spill.

Criteria


Level 1

ABL1.1 Design measures and construction initiatives have been implemented to prevent light spill.

Light pollution is an increasing environmental problem especially in urban landscapes. Numerous

studies can be found outlining the harmful and negative effects of light pollution to visual environment,

human health, flora and wildlife and balance of ecosystem. Proper lighting system design is vital in

solving light pollution and in saving energy.

Light reflected off external surfaces (which do not form part of the light fitting) is not considered light spill

in relation to this credit. The most relevant standards and guidelines for the mitigation of light spill

supported with an expert advice of a qualified light specialist is required to be used to demonstrate

reduction of light spill.

Definitions Light pollution refers to lighting condition that prevents views of the night sky or the adverse effect of

artificial light and can be classified as glare, light trespass and sky glow.

Suitably qualified professional is a professional with relevant qualifications and a minimum of 5 years’

experience in lighting design, light spill assessment and monitoring.

Level 1

ABL1.1 Design measures and construction initiatives have been implemented to prevent light spill.

Lighting design measured developed in Design must be implemented. Implementation of measures for

the construction phase means providing evidence to show how the measures identified in DL1.2 are

actioned and communicated to all relevant internal and external stakeholders (e.g. toolbox talk

agendas/outlines and community letter box drops). In addition, a night-time defects inspection which

shows no lighting defects (or that such defects are rectified) must be undertaken during construction.

This inspection should include some spot measurements of horizontal light spill (it is not practical to

measure upward light spill). In areas that are highly-urbanised with numerous light sources, an

alternative approach to light spill mitigation or management must be outlined and proposed.

The implementation for measures identified for the operational phase should include as 17T-17Tbuilt drawings



Any additional light mitigation construction initiatives must aim to prevent light spill and may comply

with light technical parameters such as that stipulated in AS1158 and AS4282.

Evidence should show how mitigation measures for any sensitive receptors has been applied for any

construction related lights sources and an internal night time audit must be undertaken during the

construction phase.

Page 263 of 477



Lea

Spr

Res

Res

Ecn

Ecn

Ene

Gre

Env

Wat

Eco

Sta

Leg

Her

Wfs

Con

A mitigation plan including a complaints management procedure must be developed to appropriately

manage and mitigate light spill during construction.


• Lighting audit or assessment,

• As Built Drawings,

• Environmental management plan,

• Asset management plan,

• Modelling results,

• Light spill design measures,

• List of design luminaires,

• Monitoring reports,

• Inspection reports, and


Page 264 of 477



References

All, J, Babister M, Nathan R, Weeks W, Weinmann E, Retallick M, Testoni I, (Editors), 2016. Australian Rainfall and Runoff: A Guide to Flood Estimation, Canberra: Commonwealth of Australia.

Babisch, W, 2003. Stress hormones in the research on cardiovascilar effects of noise. Noise Health, Volume 5, pp. 1-11.

Civil Contractors Federation, 2010. CCF Environmental, s.l.: CCF Environmental.

Commonwealth of Australia, 2016. State of the Enviornment Report , Canberra: Commonwealth of

Australia.

Department of the Environment and Energy, 2015. National Water Quality Management Strategy , Canberra: Australian Government.

Engineers Australia, 2018. National Committee for Water Engineering. [Online]

Available at: Uhttps://www.engineersaustralia.org.au/Communities-And-Groups/National-Committees-

And-Panels/Water-EngineeringU


ENVIRON Australia Pty Ltd, 2010. Cleaner Non-road Diesel Engine Project – Identification and Recommendation of Measures to Support the Uptake of Cleaner Non-road Diesel Engines in Australia, s.l.: ENVIRON Australia Pty Ltd.

National Environment Protection Council, 1998. National Environmental Protection (Ambient Air Quality) Measure, s.l.: NEPC.

NEPC, 2018. National Environmental Protection Measures. [Online]

Available at: Uhttp://www.nepc.gov.au/nepmsU


OECD, 2012. OECD Environmental Outlook to 2050, s.l.: OECD Publishing.

Page 265 of 477



Lea

Spr

Res

Res

Ecn

Ecn

Ene

Gre

Env

Wat

Eco

Sta

Leg

Her

Wfs

Con

Rso

RESOURCE EFFICIENCY

In a finite world, with growing population, consumption and demand for resources, there is an increasing

imperative to manage resources sustainably.

The concepts of resource efficiency (using resources as efficiently as possible) and eco-efficiency

(producing more with less) have long been established as a core element of sustainable development,

alongside the need to reduce the associated supply chain effects of resources use and the impacts of

waste. This category includes waste, land and materials and does not include energy or water, which

are addressed in their respective categories.

Sustainable Development Goal 12 is Responsible Consumption which aims to increase resource

efficiency and decrease waste generation. Resource efficiency is also interlinked with long-established

concepts such as waste minimisation, cleaner production (optimising resource and economic efficiency

and minimising pollution and waste), industrial ecology, resource recovery and industrial symbiosis

(wastes from one industry become materials for another).

More recently the concept of the circular economy has emerged as an alternative economic model. In

summary, a circular economy seeks to minimise the need for new resources within a system by closing

the loop making waste itself a resource. This contrasts with the traditional linear economy that operates

on the basis that new natural resources are always available. Thus, the circular economy encourages

design based on the ability to continuously re-use resources to reduce the dependency on sourcing new

materials.

The general objective of all these concepts and models is more efficient and sustainable use of natural

resources.

The infrastructure sector is a major consumer of natural resources and generator of resource outputs

(waste). Therefore, the industry has an important position in meeting the challenge of resource efficiency

and achieving the necessary improvements through application of best practice and development of

innovative solutions.

As a subset of industrial ecology, industrial symbiosis looks beyond traditional asset management

models and supply chains by considering the overall flow of material and energy across an asset/project

or business system and utilising resource outputs (waste) as resources. It is based upon understanding

how systems work and identifying opportunities to operate more efficiently and profitably through cross-

industry integration, collaboration and technological improvement.

Industrial symbiosis supports the circular economy model by minimising the consumption of resources

such as water, and energy whilst reducing resource output (waste) production. When executed well it

inevitability leads to cost savings and financial benefits to industry and community.

The application of industrial symbiosis can provide the following benefits:

• Cost savings,

• Optimised use of resources (e.g. energy, resource outputs, water and/or by-products),

• Minimised environmental impact (including resource outputs and pollution),

• Improved reputation

• Improved integration with local industry and community,

• Enhanced innovation and opportunities for economic growth,

• Reduced risk (e.g. resource availability and price volatility),

• Enhanced corporate responsibility and regulatory compliance, and

• Behaviour change throughout the supply chain.

While sustainability can be a nebulous term, resource efficiency is increasingly being used as the

terminology to describe practical environmental sustainability in a language that resonates with industry.

Page 266 of 477



Resource Efficiency - Australian and New Zealand context

The benefits of resource efficiency as a key sustainability implementation approach is well-established

across Australia and New Zealand. Examples are outlined below:

• NSW EPA Industrial Ecology Program - The NSW EPA is actively driving industrial ecology in

NSW, with facilitators helping organisations identify and implement opportunities.

• Kwinana Industrial Area, Western Australia - The Kwinana Industrial Area contains numerous

heavy process industries, including chemicals manufacturing, mine processing facilities and oil

refining. Industrial ecology has been actively applied in Kwinana mainly through the Centre of

Excellence in Cleaner Production at Curtin University, in collaboration with the Kwinana Industries

Council.

• Gladstone, Queensland - Similar to Kwinana, Gladstone has a large heavy process industrial

area with an active approach to identifying and implementing industrial symbiosis synergies

between industries.

• The NSW Government Waste and Resource Recovery Initiative has led to the creation of four

industrial ecology networks as part of its Business Recycling Program.

• Sustainability Victoria is a Victorian government statutory authority delivering programs on

integrated waste management and resource efficiency. Established under the Sustainability

Victoria Act 2005, Sustainability Victoria’s board is appointed by the Minister for Energy,

Environment and Climate Change. Sustainability Victoria has produced a suite of resources and

tools that business can use to better understand resource efficiency and determine resource

intensity such as case studies, Top Tips, Energy Efficiency Best Practice Guide and Process

Mapping tools.

• Queensland’s Waste Strategy 2010 – 2020 identifies resource efficiency as one of its guiding

principles and aims for all business to be aware of, and take part in, work to avoid waste

generation and improve resource efficiency.

• The Government of South Australia, through Green Industries SA, “helps develop the green

economy in response to the demand for clean and green produce, and the reduction of emissions

to air, water and soil from industry. Green Industries SA promotes the more efficient use of

resources, and the conservation and recovery of scarce resources”. This includes offering

Resource Efficiency and Productivity (REaP) Grants to kickstart implementation of eligible

recommendations.

• The Northern Territory Government has committed to promote community awareness and

understanding of resource efficiency as part of its management actions within the Waste

Management Strategy for the Northern Territory 2015-2022 (July 2015).

• EPA Tasmania has a dedicated Resource Efficiency webpage providing resource efficiency case

studies.

• Auckland Council through its waste minimisation plan aims to reach zero waste by 2040 and

supports programmes like the Resource Recovery Network (RRN). RRN works through

community recycling, re-use and repair fairs and supporting local employment. The overarching

aim of the plan is moving away from traditional waste management to a vision of resource

management. This strategy led Auckland to be selected to lead the international C40 Waste to

Resources Network.

• The New Zealand Waste Strategy 2010 is a national strategy which identifies resource efficiency

as one of its two goals and aims local government, businesses and communities to “improve the

efficiency of resource use to reduce the impact on the environment and human health and

capitalise on potential economic benefits”.

• Target Sustainability: A programme run by the Christchurch City Council, provides free

support to help Christchurch businesses become more resource efficient through reducing waste

and being energy and water efficient.

• WasteMINZ: is the largest representative body of the waste, resource recovery and

contaminated land sectors in New Zealand. They work with industry partners and government on

advancing waste and contaminated land management issues which has yielded national

programmes such as Love Food Hate Waste NZ which focuses on resource efficiency through

prevention of food waste.

Page 267 of 477



Lea

Spr

Res

Res

Ecn

Ecn

Ene

Gre

Env

Wat

Eco

Sta

Leg

Her

Wfs

Con

Rso

The following credit apply to this category:

Rso-1 Resource Efficiency Strategy and Management

Rso-2 Contamination and Remediation

Rso-3 Management of Acid Sulfate Soils (AU only)


Rso-5 Adaptability

Rso-6 Material Life Cycle Impact Measurement and Reduction

Rso-7 Sustainably Labelled Products and Supply Chains

Category linkages

The ISv2.0 Resource Efficiency category links with the following categories:



Lea-1 The REAP developed in Rso-1 should be outlined in the project/asset’s sustainability plan.

x x x

Lea-2 The risk and opportunity assessment undertaken in Lea-2 should include risks and opportunities related to resource use and efficiency.

x x x x

Spr-1 Material resource efficiency risks and opportunities should be included in the sustainable procurement strategy.

x x x x

Ecn-1 Rso-1 DL1.6 references the economic theme as a useful resource for undertaking a cost-benefit analysis. Rso-2 PL2.2, DL2.1 and ABL2.1 require an assessment to be undertaken in accordance with Ecn-1.

x x x x

Ecn-2 Rso-2 PL2.2 requires an assessment to be undertaken in accordance with Ecn-2.

x

Ecn-4 Rso-1 DL1.6 references the economic theme as a useful resource for undertaking a cost-benefit analysis. Rso-2 PL2.2, DL2.1 and ABL2.1 require an assessment to be undertaken in accordance with Ecn-4.

x x x x

Page 268 of 477



ISv2.0 Design


Aim

To reward the development and implementation of resource efficiency strategy and associated action

plans.

Criteria

Table En27 Rso-1 Design summary criteria table


DL1.1 A resource efficiency workshop is held to define the strategy and performance expectations for the project. AND DL1.2 A Resource Efficiency Strategy (RES) is developed to set the expectations for design, construction and operation of the project. AND DL1.3 A design workshop is held to identify resource efficiency opportunities. AND DL1.4 A Resource Efficiency Action Plan (REAP) is developed to describe how the Resource Efficiency Strategy will be implemented. AND DL1.5 An up-to-date regulatory approvals/permitting register and all relevant approvals documentation is provided to the proponent and contractor prior to the commencement of construction.

The requirements for Level 1 are achieved. AND DL2.1 Performance targets demonstrate circular economy outcomes. AND DL2.2 REAP actions outlined for design are met.

The requirements for Level 2 are achieved. AND DL3.1 The project is designed to align with a broader regional resource efficiency (or equivalent) program.

The overarching intent of this credit is to enable the project to identify and convey specific resource

efficiency expectations for each phase of the infrastructure life cycle and develop circular economic

strategies for the project.

Clear, measurable, project-specific performance expectations should be conveyed in the whole project

planning philosophy including: concept design, environmental impact assessment briefs, contamination

investigations, stakeholder engagement, baseline assessments/monitoring, environmental approvals,

and procurement processes (such as early contractor involvement (ECI) processes, requests for

expressions of interest, requests for proposals, subsequent contract documentation, specifications and

tender evaluation processes).

The Resource Efficiency Strategy (RES) aims to encourage design, construction and operational teams

to apply some of the key principles of industrial ecology by looking outside of their traditional vertical

supply/disposal routes for solutions which lead to circular economic outcomes.

Identifying opportunities to consolidate resource streams can enhance commercial viability and create

new market opportunities for potential solutions. Proximity of the solution is particularly relevant for high-

volume and/or low-value resources such as excavation spoil, due to the costs and impacts of transport

Page 269 of 477



Lea

Spr

Res

Res

Ecn

Ecn

Ene

Gre

Env

Wat

Eco

Sta

Leg

Her

Wfs

Con

Rso

and handling. Another benefit of mapping nearby asset, project and organisational activity is that market

opportunities for resources, especially resource outputs, are often enhanced by increasing volume.

Consideration throughout all phases should employ a holistic model of thinking.

Definitions

Circular economic outcome means that resources are used for the maximum amount of time and

value, then are recovered and regenerated into other resources.

Resource Efficiency Action Plan (REAP) is developed for project/asset delivery and operation to

describe how the Resource Efficiency Strategy will be implemented.

Resource efficiency related program is defined as a network or program that results in sharing of

resource data, efficiency ideas and ongoing exchange or re-use of resources between different

organisations and across industries. Programs/initiatives may include:

• Resource output (waste) exchange networks,

• Industrial ecology programs,

• Industrial symbiosis programs, and

• Resource efficiency programs.

Resource Efficiency Strategy (RES) identifies and conveys specific high-quality baseline information

and a clear set of resource efficiency performance expectations for each phase of the infrastructure life

cycle.

Resource inputs are materials which are used to build an asset, e.g. steel, concrete, brick.

Resource outputs are traditionally known as ‘waste’.

SMART targets are targets which are specific, measurable, achievable, relevant and time-bound

Suitably Qualified Professional is a person with experience in managing resource efficiency

requirements for construction projects. This may include a construction phase experienced

environmental professional, an experienced Infrastructure Sustainability Accredited Professional or an

environmental auditor.

Level 1

DL1.1 A resource efficiency workshop is held to define the strategy and performance expectations for the project.

If a Resource Efficiency Strategy (RES) was developed and verified in a Planning rating, then this

criterion is not applicable.

A resource efficiency workshop must be held to define resource efficiency goals, a whole-of-project

strategy and identify project-specific performance expectations for the project.

The resource efficiency workshop must be multidisciplinary and include the following:

• Representation from senior project/organisational leadership,

• A Sustainability Manager,

• An Environment Manager (or equivalent),

• A Project Manager/Director or a representative from a senior-leadership team,

• Representation from the designers if known or professionals with relevant design experience,

• Representation from the contractor if known or professionals with relevant construction

experience, and

• Representation from the operator if known or professionals with relevant operational

experience.

Page 270 of 477



The resource efficiency workshop must identify the following, for inclusion in the RES:

• Overarching project/asset resource efficiency goals and prioritisation of those goals,

• Regionally-specific ‘business as usual’ and ‘best practice’ outcomes for resource efficiency for

each identified resource to determine project-specific objectives and SMART targets. An

example could be all inert construction resource outputs are re-used onsite/recycled by an

appropriately licenced facility,

• Current/previous activity of recent similar projects/assets relating to resource efficiency,

• The resources inputs and outputs that apply to the project/asset by location, classification/type

and volume (if known),

• Specific opportunities to improve resource efficiency,

• Key actions to be implemented for each phase of the infrastructure life cycle,

• Possible partnerships that could help achieve the objectives of the strategy, and

• Strategic logistics and how logistics can be used to meet the objectives of the RES.

DL1.2 A Resource Efficiency Strategy (RES) is developed to set the expectations for design, construction and operation of the project.

If a RES has been developed and verified in a Planning rating, then it must be reviewed and updated

considering any new information or changes to the project.

If a RES has not been developed, then the following applies:

The RES must be developed, defining the resource efficiency expectations for project delivery and

operation.

The RES should convey the project-specific resource efficiency goals and define the requirement for a

Resource Efficiency Action Plan (REAP) to be developed during the project delivery and operational

phases. The intent of the REAP is to translate the resource objectives and targets into an action plan

that can enable the achievement of the targets, via appropriate initiatives and resource management.

The Resource Efficiency Strategy must include:

1. Relevant background and/or baseline information

• An overview of regulatory approvals requirements/consents relevant to the project/asset,

providing clear guidance related to resource re-use/disposal, including onsite re-use, offsite re-

use, stockpiling and transportation where applicable,

• Documentation, data and summaries of consultation/meetings relating to permits, approvals and

licences,

• Guidance and existing information (where applicable) related to resource efficiency work

undertaken to date,

• Baseline information relevant to resource efficiency. This includes predicted resource inputs,

outputs and existing on-site resources by location, classification/type and volume,

• Roles and responsibilities for key stakeholders with regards to resource efficiency throughout

the project life cycle (including the proponent, regulators and project delivery and operational

teams),

• A register of resource efficiency opportunities (where applicable) (see Table En28) if possible,

identify opportunities, constraints, mitigations and recommended actions for implementation,

• Overarching resource efficiency milestone expectations, and

• Identified partnerships to meet the objectives of the strategy for formation in later stages of the

infrastructure life cycle.

2. Project-specific resource efficiency expectations

The RES must outline project-specific resource efficiency SMART targets for the project through each

phase of the infrastructure life cycle. This information will be used in the Design and As Built phases to

develop the REAP.

Page 271 of 477



Lea

Spr

Res

Res

Ecn

Ecn

Ene

Gre

Env

Wat

Eco

Sta

Leg

Her

Wfs

Con

Rso

Table En28 outlines the key areas of resource efficiency that must be considered, as a minimum, in the

RES. Justification must be provided outlining which opportunities will be pursued and which

opportunities will not be pursued on the project.

Table En28 Summary of resource efficiency opportunity areas and goals

Resource efficiency opportunity areas (SMART targets to be developed for L2)

Re

so

urc

e O

utp

uts

Minimisation of resource output generation (including striving towards cut-and-fill balance)

Maximised onsite re-use of reusable resource outputs material (including contaminated and acid sulfate soil)

Maximised offsite re-use of reusable resources where onsite solutions cannot be identified (including contaminated material and acid sulfate soil)

Deconstruction/disassembly/adaptability of the asset

Beneficial re-use of existing onsite resources

Beneficial re-use of resource outputs by nearby projects/assets

Re

so

urc

e In

pu

ts

Optimisation of overall resource use (including striving towards cut-and-fill balance)

Minimised use of virgin resources

Maximised use of local resources

Maximised use of resources that can be re-used or recycled

Beneficial re-use of resource outputs from nearby projects/assets

Maximised use of resource inputs (materials) with recycled waste content

Minimised environmental and social impact of logistics (transport and handling)

DL1.3 A design workshop is held to identify resource efficiency opportunities.

A design workshop must be held to identify resource efficiency opportunities to meet the objectives and

targets of the RES. The workshop must include a multidisciplinary team and include the following as a

minimum:

• Design engineers working on the design of the project,

• Relevant subject matter experts,

• A logistics expert,

• An expert in construction planning,

• An asset management/operation & maintenance expert, and

• Contracts & procurement experts.

The opportunities identified in the workshop must be captured and all feasible options must be

incorporated in the REAP, the final design and/or management plans. Feasible opportunities are those

considered logistically and technically possible, that meet the objectives of the RES and for which the

benefits outweigh the costs (see Ecn-1 and Ecn-4 for guidance on cost and benefit assessment).

DL1.4 A Resource Efficiency Action Plan (REAP) is developed to describe how the Resource Efficiency Strategy will be implemented

A Resource Efficiency Action Plan (REAP) must be developed and describe how the objectives of the

RES will be met in the design, construction and operational phases.

The REAP must include the following:

• Resource inputs (resources needed to build the project) and outputs (excess resources

including ‘waste’),

Page 272 of 477



• Actions to achieve 64Tresource efficiency opportunities and associated SMART targets 64Toutlined in

the RES,

• Responsibility and time line for each action,

• An outline of the64T constraints, risks, opportunities, costs and actions required to implement the

resource efficiency opportunities and associated SMART targets outlined in the RES, and

• Approval requirements (including costs and timeframes) for resource efficiency opportunity

implementation.

The REAP must be reviewed and updated at least annually by a suitably qualified professional.

The REAP must be provided to the contractor in handover documents.

DL1.5 An up-to-date regulatory approvals/permitting register and all relevant approvals documentation is provided to the proponent and contractor prior to the commencement of construction.

An up-to-date register of approvals, permits and licences and all relevant supporting data and

documentation (such as approval submissions, comments/responses, letters, emails, raw data and

shapefiles) relating to resource management (including waste re-use, recycling, stockpiling and

transportation as well as material use) must be provided to the proponent and contractor prior to the

commencement of construction. If there are any changes to the register between construction

commencement and design completion, an updated register and evidence must be provided.


• Resource Efficiency Strategy,

• Resource Efficiency Action Plan,

• Design drawings,

• Finalised and approved REAP,

• Workshop notes, agenda, minutes, photos, etc,

• Approvals/permitting register, and

• Evidence the REAP is provided to the contractor in handover documents.

Level 2

DL2.1 Performance targets demonstrate circular economy outcomes.

Performance targets must demonstrate circular economy outcomes. This can be achieved through

internal or external partnerships, forward planning, or identifying industrial symbiotic relationships.

Justification must be provided if circular outcomes are not achieved.

DL2.2 REAP actions outlined for design are met.

80% or more of the targets and actions outlined in the REAP for the design phase must be achieved. If

less than 80% of the targets and actions allocated to the design phase are achieved, then points cannot

be awarded for this criterion.


• REAP outlining performance targets that demonstrate circular economy outcomes, and

• Reports outlining the achievement of REAP actions and targets.

Page 273 of 477



Lea

Spr

Res

Res

Ecn

Ecn

Ene

Gre

Env

Wat

Eco

Sta

Leg

Her

Wfs

Con

Rso

Level 3

PL3.1 The project is designed to align with a broader regional resource efficiency (or equivalent) program.

The project must align with, or contribute to, a broader regional resource efficiency (or equivalent)

program.

The development of regionally-focused programs that support resource efficiency (this may include

industrial ecology, industrial symbiosis, materials and/or resource output exchange programs) will

significantly benefit all participants and will accelerate circular economy thinking across and beyond the

infrastructure sector.

Involvement in regional programs will not only identify opportunities for direct exchange of resource

between assets, it will also help to identify market gaps and opportunities for difficult resource output

stream management and sustainable product demand.


• Documentation of broader program policy,

• Certification of membership for programs/organisation,

• Meeting Minutes,

• Opportunities Register,

• Newsletters/Publications highlighting project involvement, and

• Digital presence (social media platforms/forums/websites/mobile device apps). For example: the

project could participate or facilitate the development of a resource-sharing mobile app where

surplus hoarding from one site can be posted to the app and another party could use it as a

resource.

Page 274 of 477



ISv2.0 As Built


Aim

To reward the development and implementation of resource efficiency strategy and associated action

plans.

Criteria

Table En29 Rso-1 As Built summary criteria table


ABL1.1 The Resource Efficiency Action Plan (REAP) is reviewed and updated. AND ABL1.2 The regulatory approvals/permitting register is reviewed and updated.

The requirements for Level 1 are achieved. AND ABL2.1 REAP actions outlined for construction are met. AND ABL2.2 REAP actions for operations are reviewed, updated and provided to the operator in handover documents.

The requirements for Level 2 are achieved. AND ABL3.1 New resource efficiency opportunities are identified, included in the updated REAP and implemented during the construction phase.

Definitions





cycle.



Suitably Qualified Professional is a person with experience in managing resource efficiency

requirements for construction projects. This may include a construction phase experienced

environmental professional, an experienced Infrastructure Sustainability Accredited Professional or an

environmental auditor.

Level 1

ABL1.1 The Resource Efficiency Action Plan (REAP) is reviewed and updated.

The REAP must be reviewed and updated during the construction phase where necessary, considering

any new information or changes to the design or construction methodology. This must be undertaken

at least annually by a suitably qualified professional.

ABL1.2 The regulatory approvals/permitting register is reviewed and updated.

An up-to-date register of approvals, permits and licences, all relevant supporting data and

documentation (such as approval submissions, comments/responses, letters, emails, raw data and

shapefiles) relating to resource management (including waste re-use, recycling, stockpiling and

Page 275 of 477



Lea

Spr

Res

Res

Ecn

Ecn

Ene

Gre

Env

Wat

Eco

Sta

Leg

Her

Wfs

Con

Rso

transportation as well as material use) must be reviewed and updated at least annually. Appropriately

collated documentation across the construction stage must be provided to the operator.


• Updated REAP,

• Approvals/permitting register,

• Evidence that the approvals/permitting register has been provided to the operator, and

• Management plans/handover documents.

Level 2

ABL2.1 REAP actions outlined for construction are met.

80% or more of the targets and actions outlined in the REAP for the construction phase must be

achieved. If less than 80% of the targets and actions allocated to the construction phase are achieved,

then points cannot be awarded for this criterion.

ABL2.2 REAP actions for operations are reviewed, updated and provided to the operator in handover documents.

The operational actions in the REAP must be reviewed and updated during construction where

necessary, considering any new information or changes to the design or construction methodology, and

provided to the operator in handover documents.


• Resource efficiency performance reports,

• Updated REAP,

• Evidence that the REAP actions have been provided to the operator, and

• Management plans/handover documents.

Level 3

ABL3.1 New resource efficiency opportunities are identified, included in the updated REAP and implemented during the construction phase.

New resource efficiency opportunities regarding diversion from landfill or virgin resource use must be

identified and implemented during the construction phase. The opportunities identified and implemented

in construction must result in a minimum of 10% reduction of resource outputs to landfill or 10%

reduction in virgin resource use from the completed detailed design either on the project/asset itself or

10% reduction in partnership’s project’s virgin resource use.

An example of this could be resource outputs sold or donated to a local community in need or a resource

output that is re-used onsite instead of the detailed design’s specification for a virgin resource.

The intent is to encourage the project delivery teams to continuously identify resource efficiency

improvements and partnerships throughout project delivery and not stop once design is complete.

Page 276 of 477




• Design Reports,

• Opportunities Register,

• Updated REAP,

• Resource input/output reporting, and

• Partnership documentation.

Page 277 of 477



Lea

Spr

Res

Res

Ecn

Ecn

Ene

Gre

Env

Wat

Eco

Sta

Leg

Her

Wfs

Con

Rso

ISv2.0 Design


Aim

To reward the consideration of sustainable contamination and remediation strategy within a broader

resource efficiency strategy on a project-specific basis.

Criteria



DL1.1 A desktop risk assessment that identifies contamination risk is undertaken or reviewed. AND DL1.2 Any further site investigations to confirm and quantify contamination risk are undertaken. AND DL1.3 Project-specific performance targets for contaminated material are developed. AND DL1.4 A Site Contamination Management Plan (SCMP) (or equivalent) is developed to outline the management of contaminated material along with opportunities for retention and/or re-use of any contaminated material. AND DL1.5 The proposed design and construction methodology has considered contamination risk.

The requirements for Level 1 are achieved. AND DL2.1 A formal assessment to determine the remediation options/strategy for identified contaminated material is undertaken. AND DL2.2 The SCMP (or equivalent) is reviewed and updated as a result of further investigation and information.

The requirements for Level 2 are achieved. AND DL3.1 The effectiveness and durability of the remedial solutions are outlined.

The intent of this credit is:

• To encourage the project delivery and operational teams to demonstrate that they understand

the risk and opportunities related to contaminated material early enough in project planning to

be able to implement best-practice solutions, and

• To reduce the levels of uncertainty and therefore risk and cost related to contaminated material

as early as possible in project delivery and operation.

Contamination is one of the greatest risks to a project as it is often difficult to estimate, has restrictive

disposal and remediation options, can delay the construction program and typically incurs a high cost

burden to manage, store, transfer and dispose.

Definitions

Contamination is defined in the National Environmental Protection Measure (NEPM 1999 (as amended

2013)) for the Assessment of Site Contamination, as “the condition of land or water where any chemical

substance or waste has been added at above background level, and represents, or potentially

represents, an adverse health or environmental impact”. Note that contamination addresses the

condition of land or water and does not address the presence of hazardous substances in buildings or

Page 278 of 477



structures which is dealt with separately. For clarity, contamination includes asbestos but does not

include acid sulfate soils. While the NEPM for the Assessment of Contamination is a nationally

consistent approach to assessing site contamination, each state and territory regulates the assessment

of site contamination separately.


person(s):




• must be engaged to act independently of the project or asset and be able to show no vested


Preliminary site investigation usually involves: (a) establishing a site history to identify the

characteristics of the site (such as the location and layout of the site, the building construction on the

site, the geological setting, current and past activities at the site, current and past uses of the site, and

heritage considerations); and (b) inspecting the site; and (c) interviewing representatives for the site.

Please see Schedule A 'Recommended general process for assessment of site contamination' of

National Environment Protection (Assessment of Site Contamination) Measure 1999 (amended 2013)

for more details.





cycle.



Suitably Qualified Professional is a professional that meets the requirements of Schedule B(9) of the

NEPM 1999 (as amended 2013). While a contaminated land auditor accredited by the relevant state

authority would be acceptable, others who meet the NEPM requirements would also be acceptable, for

example CRC CARE Site Contamination Practitioners Australia (Certified Practitioner Site Assessment

and Management – CP SAM) and EIANZ Certified Environmental Practitioner (CEnvP Site

Contamination Specialist).

Sustainable remediation is the practice of demonstrating, in terms of environmental, economic and

social indicators, that the benefit of undertaking remediation is greater than its impact, and that the

optimum remediation solution is selected through the use of a balanced decision-making process (SuRF

UK, 2010).

Level 1

DL1.1 A desktop risk assessment that identifies contamination risk is undertaken or reviewed.

If a desktop contamination risk assessment has been undertaken and verified in a Planning rating, then

it must be reviewed and updated considering any new information or changes to the project.

If a desktop contamination risk assessment has not been undertaken, then the following applies:

A desktop risk assessment must be undertaken to identify potential contamination risk. The assessment

may be part of a broader project risk assessment or a standalone environmental risk assessment and

may be undertaken as part of Lea-2. It must identify the risk, assess the likelihood of the risk occurring,

estimate the expected consequence; and identify potential mitigation measures (or recommendations)

with regards to potential contaminants.

Page 279 of 477

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural_environment



Lea

Spr

Res

Res

Ecn

Ecn

Ene

Gre

Env

Wat

Eco

Sta

Leg

Her

Wfs

Con

Rso

DL1.2 Any further site investigations to confirm and quantify contamination risk are undertaken.

Any further site investigations to verify and quantify contamination risk must be undertaken in

accordance with Schedule A 'Recommended general process for assessment of site contamination' of

National Environment Protection (Assessment of Site Contamination) Measure 1999 (amended 2013).

Justification must be provided if no further site investigations are required.

DL.1.3 Project-specific performance targets for contaminated material are developed.

If project-specific targets were developed and verified as part of the Planning rating, then those targets

can be used to meet the requirements of this criterion.

If project-specific targets were not developed18T,18T then the following applies:

Project-specific performance targets for contaminated material must be developed for achievement of

Levels 2 and 3 in As Built and incorporated into the RES (according to potential location,

classification/type and volume). These targets must take into account all previous site investigations

and any other baseline contamination information. The default targets in Table En31 may be used to

meet this criterion.

Specific actions relating to contaminated material are intended to encourage effort by project delivery

and operational teams in relation to waste streams that may not be significant by overall percentage of

waste but have a disproportionately negative impact on the environment.

If project-specific targets are developed that deviate from Table En31 the proposed targets must assess

the importance/degree of scrutiny of each contamination streams based on:

• The relative impact of that contamination stream upon the environment, and

• Demonstration that significant barriers exist to meeting the performance targets. This could

include restrictions on remediation options and/or overcoming lack of existing recycling/re-use

options.

Note: The aim is to develop targets for the contamination streams that are actually relevant to the project,

e.g. the project is rewarded for addressing its contamination risks rather hitting a generic percentage

that may not recognise individual project needs. For example, the same landfill diversion target should

not apply to a tunnel project with high volumes of clean fill and minimal contamination as to a brownfield

project with high volumes of contamination with minimal clean spoil.

Performance targets for contamination can be excluded where it can be demonstrated that they are not

applicable to the specific project.

Project-specific Level 2 and 3 targets for the Design, As Built and Operations ratings must be reviewed

by a suitably qualified professional, unless the default targets in Table En31 are used.

The review must cover the assumptions, reasoning, and feasibility of the project-specific targets.


assumptions, reasoning or targets.

Table En31 Project default targets for resource efficiency performance criteria: Contamination

Rating/Phase Level 2 Target Level 3 Target Justification

As Built >65% onsite retention/re-use <10% Landfill

>75% onsite retention/re-use <5% Landfill

To be developed by the Designer

Operations >65% onsite retention/re-use <10% Landfill

>75% onsite retention/re-use <5% Landfill


Page 280 of 477



DL1.4 A Site Contamination Management Plan (SCMP) (or equivalent) is developed to outline the management of contaminated material along with opportunities for retention and/or re-use of any contaminated material.

A Site Contamination Management Plan (SCMP) (or equivalent) must be developed to outline

contamination management actions. The SCMP should outline opportunities for retention and/or re-use

of any contaminated material.

The SCMP must consider the following unless justification can be provided as to why some elements

are not applicable:

• How contaminated material is to be characterised, classified, tracked, re-used, disposed of and

monitored throughout the project duration,

• An indicative program for disposal and/or re-use of contaminated material and how relevant

legislation will be complied with for the duration of the project schedule,

• How the volume of contaminated material will be minimised throughout the project by the

contractor and their sub-contractors,

• Specific documented mechanisms for adopting a ‘reduce, re-use, and recycle’ approach for

dealing with all contaminated material,

• How it links to the requirements of the REAP, and

• A procedure for the identification, classification and disposal of any previously unknown

contaminated material in the event such material is encountered.

DL1.5 The proposed design and construction methodology has considered contamination risk.

The project design and construction methodology must reflect management actions or design initiatives

to reduce contamination risk across design, construction and operation. This should be incorporated in

the REAP. The final design drawings must be provided as evidence with justification of how

contamination risk has been managed.


• Project-specific targets,

• Design and construction drawings/methods/plans,


• Site Contamination Management Plan (or equivalent), and

• Site assessment information.

Level 2

DL2.1 A formal assessment to determine the remediation options/strategy for identified contaminated material is undertaken.

If a formal assessment has been undertaken and verified in a Planning rating, then it must be reviewed

and updated considering any new information or changes to the project.

If a formal assessment has not been undertaken, then the following applies:

A formal assessment must be undertaken in accordance with Ecn-1 and Ecn-4 to determine the

remediation options/strategy for identified contaminated material. Please see the Economic Theme

introduction for an outline of formal assessment options which include rapid cost-benefit analysis and

multi-criteria assessment.

The formal assessment must include ongoing post-construction management costs and consider the

sustainability indicators in Table 4.3 of ‘A Framework for Assessing the Sustainability of Soil and

Groundwater Remediation’ (SuRF, 2010) and/or ISO 18405:2017 Soil Quality – Sustainable

Remediation. Indicators should be project-specific and agreed with stakeholders.

Page 281 of 477



Lea

Spr

Res

Res

Ecn

Ecn

Ene

Gre

Env

Wat

Eco

Sta

Leg

Her

Wfs

Con

Rso

DL2.2 The SCMP (or equivalent) is reviewed and updated as a result of further assessment and investigation.

The SCMP (or equivalent) must be reviewed and updated if appropriate, considering changes to the

risk assessment, which may result from further site investigations or changes to design or construction

methodology prior to construction commencement.


• Cost-benefit analysis to determine the remediation options/strategy for contaminated material,

• Specific remediation options for contaminated material, and

• Site Contamination Management Plan (or equivalent).

Level 3

DL3.1 The effectiveness and durability of the remedial solutions are outlined.

The effectiveness and durability of the remedial solution for contaminated material, including ongoing

maintenance and monitoring must be outlined over the lifetime of the project and incorporated into the

SCMP.

Evidence should be available regarding the longevity of the remedial solution and normal maintenance

requirements. Long-term monitoring may be required to ensure the continued effectiveness of some

solutions, including natural attenuation, permeable reactive barriers, slurry walls, ongoing process-

based treatments for groundwater, etc. Monitoring arrangements will depend on the type of remediation

method chosen and its projected lifetime. Where monitoring is necessary, there should also be

contingency plans in case monitoring data should demonstrate any fault or deterioration in the remedial

solution.


• Updated SCMP.

Page 282 of 477



ISv2.0 As Built


Aim

To reward the consideration of sustainable contamination and remediation strategy within a broader


Criteria



ABL1.1 The project-specific contamination risk assessment is reviewed and updated. AND ABL1.2 Any further site investigations to verify and quantify contamination risk are undertaken. AND ABL1.3 Recommendations and mitigation measures identified from the risk assessment associated with contamination risk are implemented. AND ABL1.4 The SCMP (or equivalent) is reviewed and updated.

The requirements for Level 1 are achieved. AND ABL2.1 The formal assessment examining remediation options/strategy is updated. AND ABL2.2 Level 2 project-specific targets for construction are achieved. AND ABL2.3 The SCMP (or equivalent) has been implemented.

The requirements for Level 2 are achieved. AND ABL3.1 Level 3 project-specific targets for construction are achieved.

Definitions

Contamination is defined in the National Environmental Protection Measure (NEPM 1999 (as amended

2013)) for the Assessment of Site Contamination, as “the condition of land or water where any chemical

substance or waste has been added at above background level, and represents, or potentially

represents, an adverse health or environmental impact”. Note that contamination addresses the

condition of land or water and does not address the presence of hazardous substances in buildings or

structures which is dealt with separately. For clarity, contamination includes asbestos but does not

include acid sulfate soils. While the NEPM for the Assessment of Contamination is a nationally

consistent approach to assessing site contamination, each state and territory regulates the assessment

of site contamination separately.

Suitably Qualified Professional is a professional that requirements of Schedule B(9) of the NEPM

1999 (as amended 2013). While a contaminated land auditor accredited by the relevant state authority

would be acceptable, others who meet the NEPM requirements would also be acceptable for example

CRC CARE Site Contamination Practitioners Australia (Certified Practitioner Site Assessment and

Management – CP SAM) and EIANZ Certified Environmental Practitioner (CEnvP Site Contamination

Specialist).

Resource outputs is traditionally known as ‘waste’.

Suitably Qualified Professional is a professional that requirements of Schedule B(9) of the NEPM

1999 (as amended 2013). While a contaminated land auditor accredited by the relevant state authority

would be acceptable, others who meet the NEPM requirements would also be acceptable.

Sustainable remediation is the practice of demonstrating, in terms of environmental, economic and

social indicators, that the benefit of undertaking remediation is greater than its impact, and that the

optimum remediation solution is selected through the use of a balanced decision-making process (SuRF

UK, 2010).

Page 283 of 477

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural_environment

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economic

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social



Lea

Spr

Res

Res

Ecn

Ecn

Ene

Gre

Env

Wat

Eco

Sta

Leg

Her

Wfs

Con

Rso

Level 1

ABL1.1 The project-specific contamination risk assessment is reviewed and updated.

The project-specific contamination risk assessment must be reviewed and updated during construction

where necessary, considering any new information or changes to the design or construction

methodology. This review and update must occur at least annually and be undertaken by a suitably


ABL1.2 Any further site investigations to verify and quantify contamination risk are undertaken.

If further site assessments are required, as recommended in the project risk assessment (ABL1.1) or

SCMP, then the site assessment must follow the recommended approach in Schedule A

'Recommended general process for assessment of site contamination' of National Environment

Protection (Assessment of Site Contamination) Measure 1999 (amended 2013). If there is no

recommendation for further site investigations then this criterion does not apply.

ABL1.3 Recommendations and mitigation measures identified from the risk assessment associated with contamination risk are implemented.

Recommendations from the risk assessment associated with contamination risk for the construction

phase must be implemented.

ABL1.4 The SCMP (or equivalent) is reviewed and updated.

The contamination management plan (or equivalent) must be reviewed and updated during the

construction phase where necessary, considering changes to the risk assessment, which may result

from further site investigations or changes to design or construction methodology. The SCMP must be

reviewed and updated at least annually by a suitably qualified professional.



• Contamination reports,

• Remediation Action Plan,

• Review/audit reports, and

• Updated SCMP.

Level 2

ABL2.1 The formal assessment examining remediation options/strategy is updated.

The formal assessment must be updated based on any unexpected finds of contaminated material

during delivery to predetermine the remediation options/strategy for contaminated material in

accordance with Ecn-1 and Ecn-4. Please see the Economic Theme introduction for an outline of formal

assessment options which include rapid cost-benefit analysis and multi-criteria assessment.

The formal assessment must be updated outlining post-construction and ongoing management costs

and consider the sustainability indicators in Table 4.3 of ‘A Framework for Assessing the Sustainability

of Soil and Groundwater Remediation’ (SuRF, 2010) and/or ISO 18405:2017 Soil Quality – Sustainable

Remediation with respect to any unexpected finds.

ABL2.2 Level 2 project-specific targets for construction are achieved.

Monitoring and auditing of contamination and remediation must be undertaken monthly to show that the

Level 2 project-specific targets (as outlined in Design Rso-2) are achieved.

The project delivery and operational teams may propose changes to the project-specific targets for

contamination and remediation (as defined in Design Rso-2). The reason for changing the project-

specific targets may include:

Page 284 of 477



• Changes to design and/or construction or operational methodologies,

• Changes to market conditions i.e. supply, demand and costs, and

• Changes to legislation.

If any changes are made to the project-specific targets, then the new targets must be independently


The review of the updated project-specific targets must cover the assumptions, reasoning, and

feasibility of the new targets. The independent suitably qualified professional must outline that they

agree with the reasoning for the updated targets, and that they believe the new targets will result in

greater sustainability outcomes.


assumptions, reasoning or suggested targets.

ABL2.3 The SCMP (or equivalent) has been implemented.

The SCMP or Environmental Management Plan (or equivalent) must be implemented including the

treatment and/or management of contaminated material to be re-used onsite or offsite, along with

ongoing maintenance and monitoring.



• Contamination reports,

• Cost-benefit analysis,

• Remediation Action Plan,

• Review/audit reports,

• Contamination register, and

• Documentation (invoices, dockets, online billing) of Contamination management.

Level 3


Monitoring and auditing of contamination and remediation must be undertaken monthly to show that the

Level 3 project-specific targets (as outlined in Design Rso-2) are achieved.


contamination and remediation (as defined in Design Rso-2). The reason for changing the project-

specific targets may include:












Page 285 of 477



Lea

Spr

Res

Res

Ecn

Ecn

Ene

Gre

Env

Wat

Eco

Sta

Leg

Her

Wfs

Con

Rso


• Monitoring reports,

• Validation reports,

• Documentation (invoices, dockets, online billing) of Contamination management, and

• Review report.

Page 286 of 477



ISv2.0 Design


Aim

To reward the consideration of sustainable acid sulfate soil management strategy within a broader


Criteria


Introduction to Acid Sulfate Soil (ASS)

The description below of how ASS is formed, the potential risks and how ASS should be managed is

from the Queensland Acid Sulfate Soil Technical Manual (Dear et al, 2002).

UFormation of acid sulfate soils

The terms ASS and potential acid sulfate soils (PASS) comprise the common names given to sediments

and soils containing iron sulfides which, when exposed to atmospheric conditions generate, or have the

potential to generate, sulfuric acid. The majority of PASS were formed by natural processes when certain

conditions existed in the Holocene geological period (the last 10,000 years). Formation conditions

require the presence of iron-rich sediments, sulfate (usually from seawater), removal of reaction

products such as bicarbonate, the presence of sulfate reducing bacteria and a plentiful supply of organic

matter). It should be noted that these conditions exist in mangroves, salt marsh vegetation or tidal areas,

and at the bottom of coastal rivers and lakes (Ahern et al, 1998).

The relatively specific conditions under which ASS are formed usually limit their occurrence to low-lying

parts of coastal floodplains, rivers and creeks. Sulfidic sediment may be found at any depth in suitable

coastal sediments, usually beneath the water table (Ahern et al, 1998).

Any lowering in the water table that covers and protects PASS will likely result in their aeration and the

exposure of iron sulfide sediments to oxygen. PASS can also be exposed to air during physical


DL1.1 A desktop risk assessment that identifies acid sulfate soil risk is undertaken or reviewed. AND DL1.2 Site investigations to confirm and quantify acid sulfate soil risk are undertaken. AND DL1.3 Recommendations and mitigation measures from the risk assessment associated with acid sulfate soil risk are implemented during design. AND DL1.4 Project-specific performance targets for acid sulfate soils are developed. AND DL1.5 The proposed design and construction methodology has considered acid sulfate soil risk.

The requirements for Level 1 are achieved. AND DL2.1 An Acid Sulfate Soil Management Plan (or equivalent) is developed outlining opportunities for retention and/or re-use of any treated acid sulfate soil material.

The requirements for Level 1 are achieved. AND DL3.1 The effectiveness and durability of the remedial solutions are outlined.

Page 287 of 477



Lea

Spr

Res

Res

Ecn

Ecn

Ene

Gre

Env

Wat

Eco

Sta

Leg

Her

Wfs

Con

Rso

disturbance with the material at the disturbance face, as well as the extracted material, both potentially

being oxidised (Ahern et al, 1998).

UPotential risks from acid sulfate soils

The oxidation of iron sulfides present in the sub-surface generally leads to the transformation of PASS

to actual acid sulfate soils (AASS) and the acidification of groundwater. The increasing acidity can

subsequently lead to the mobilisation of the naturally occurring metals in the soil or aquifer matrix. The

AASS associated leachate and low pH groundwater can potentially have significant adverse effects on

the natural and built environments, the economy and human health including:

• The release of acid and metal contaminants into the environment can have significant adverse

effects on the ecology of wetlands and shallow freshwater and brackish aquifer systems by

degrading water quality, habitat and groundwater dependant ecosystems. Acidified groundwater

discharging to surface water systems may also result in fish disease or mortality and impact on

other aquatic organisms,

• The presence of actual ASS and any release of leachate can have significant adverse economic

consequences upon crop productivity and commercial and recreational fisheries,

• The leachate can corrode concrete and steel infrastructure, such as culverts, pipes, bridges and

buildings, reducing their functional life span, and

• Ground and surface waters containing toxic concentrations of acid and metal contaminants can

cause dermatitis, and dust from disturbed ASS may cause eye irritation (Queensland Government

2002).

UManagement of acid sulfate soils

The Queensland Acid Sulfate Soil Technical Manual (Dear et al, 2002) recommends the application of

the following eight management principles:

1. The disturbance of ASS should be avoided wherever possible.

2. Where disturbance of ASS is unavoidable, preferred management strategies are:

• Minimisation of disturbance,

• Neutralisation e.g. with agricultural lime (ag-lime), and

• Hydraulic separation of sulfides, either on its own or in conjunction with dredging strategic reburial

below the water table or other water body.

3. Works should be performed in accordance with best practice environmental management when it

has been demonstrated that the potential impacts of works involving ASS are manageable to

ensure that short and long-term environmental impacts are minimised.

4. The material being disturbed (including the in-situ ASS) and any potentially contaminated waters

associated with ASS disturbance should be considered in developing a management plan for ASS

and/or in complying with environmental standards.

5. Receiving waters, be they marine, estuarine, brackish or freshwaters, should not be used as a

means of diluting and/or neutralising ASS or associated contaminated waters.

6. Management of disturbed ASS and/or groundwater should occur if the relevant ASS action criteria

are reached or exceeded.

7. Stockpiling of untreated ASS above the permanent water table with (or without) containment is not

an acceptable long-term management strategy. For example, soils that are to be stockpiled,

disposed of, used as fill, placed as temporary or permanent cover on land or in waterways, sold or

exported off the treatment site or used in earth bunds that exceed relevant action criteria should be

treated/managed.

8. The following issues should be considered when formulating ASS environmental management

strategies:

• The sensitivity and environmental values of the receiving environment. This includes the

conservation, protected or other relevant status of the receiving environment,

• Whether groundwater and/or surface waters are likely to be directly or indirectly affected,

• The heterogeneity, geochemical and textural properties of soils on site, and

Page 288 of 477



• The management and planning strategies of local government and/or state government.

Note: Areas of disturbed ASS that have above background concentrations of contaminants in soils,

sediments and/or waters and present, or have the potential to present a risk to human health, the

environment or any environmental value, may then be classified as contaminated sites, under provisions

of relevant state environmental and/or contaminated sites legalisation (or equivalent). Such impacts if

they occur should be remediated, treated and/or managed wherever possible. If at all possible, ASS

should not be disturbed as ASS is benign when left in a waterlogged, undisturbed environment. Avoiding

disturbance can often be the most environmentally sustainable and economic option.

Definitions

ASS Acid sulfate soils (ASS) are naturally occurring soils and sediments containing iron sulfides, most

commonly pyrite. When ASS are exposed to air the iron sulfides in the soil react with oxygen and water

to produce a variety of iron compounds and sulfuric acid (Government of Western Australia, Department

of Environmental Regulation, 2015).

AASS When PASS are disturbed or exposed to oxygen, the iron sulfides are oxidised to produce sulfuric

acid and the soil becomes strongly acidic (usually below pH 4). These soils are then called actual acid

sulfate soils (AASS)—that is, they are already acidic (Government of Western Australia, Department of

Environmental Regulation, 2015).


person(s):






PASS Acid sulfate soils which have not been oxidised by exposure to air are known as potential acid

sulfate soils (PASS). While contained in a layer of waterlogged soil, the iron sulfides in the soil are stable

and the surrounding soil pH is often weakly acid to weakly alkaline (Government of Western Australia,

Department of Environmental Regulation, 2015).



cycle.

Site investigation: Requirements may vary by local authorities but a site investigation should determine

the extent and severity of acid sulfate soils on a site and evaluate the potential for harm to the

environment or to constructed assets as a result of the development (DER: Treatment and management

of soil and water in acid sulfate soil landscapes, 2015).







Level 1

DL1.1 A desktop risk assessment that identifies acid sulfate soil risk is undertaken or reviewed.

If a desktop acid sulfate soil risk assessment has been undertaken and verified in a Planning rating,

then it must be reviewed and updated considering any new information or changes to the project.

Page 289 of 477



Lea

Spr

Res

Res

Ecn

Ecn

Ene

Gre

Env

Wat

Eco

Sta

Leg

Her

Wfs

Con

Rso

If a desktop acid sulfate soil risk assessment has not been undertaken, then the following applies.

A desktop risk assessment must be undertaken to identify potential contamination risk. The assessment

may be part of a broader project risk assessment or a standalone environmental risk assessment and

may be undertaken as part of Lea-2. It must identify the risk, assess the likelihood of the risk occurring,

estimate the expected consequence; and identify potential mitigation measures (or recommendations)

with regards to acid sulfate soils.

DL1.2 Site investigations to confirm and quantify acid sulfate soil risk are undertaken.

Any further site assessment investigations required to confirm and quantify acid sulfate soil risk must

be undertaken in accordance with local acid sulfate soil management guidelines (or QASSIT if no local

guidelines exist). The desktop risk assessment must be updated if the site investigation provides

information to change the nature or severity of risks.

DL1.3 Recommendations and mitigation measures from the risk assessment associated with acid sulfate soil risk are implemented during design.

Mitigation measures must be developed and implemented to mitigate ASS risks identified in the desktop

risk assessment and investigations.

The following must be considered when developing the mitigation measures, unless justification can be

provided:

1. How contaminated material is to be characterised, classified, tracked, re-used, disposed of and

monitored throughout the project duration.

2. An indicative program for disposal and or re-use of contaminated material and how relevant

legislation will be complied with for the duration of the project schedule.

3. How the volume of contaminated material will be minimised throughout the project by the

contractor and their sub-contractors.

4. Specific documented mechanisms for adopting a ‘reduce, re-use, and recycle’ approach for

dealing with all contaminated material.

5. A procedure for the identification, classification and disposal of any previously unknown

contaminated material in the event such material is encountered.

6. Mitigation identified from the risk assessment associated with acid sulfate soil risk are

implemented during design.

DL1.4 Project-specific performance targets for acid sulfate soils are developed.

If project-specific targets were developed and verified as part of the Planning rating, then those targets

can be used to meet the requirements of this criterion.

If project-specific targets were not developed18T,18T then the following applies:

Project-specific performance targets for ASS must be developed for achievement of Levels 2 and 3 in

As Built and incorporated into the RES (according to potential location, classification/type and volume).

These targets must take into account all previous site investigations and any other baseline ASS

information. The default targets in Table En34 may be used to meet this criterion.

Project-specific Level 2 and 3 targets for the Design, As Built and Operations ratings must be reviewed


The review must cover the assumptions, reasoning, and feasibility of the project-specific targets.


assumptions, reasoning or targets.

Page 290 of 477



Table En34 Project default targets for resource efficiency performance criteria: treated acid sulfate soil

Rating/Phase Level 2 Target Level 3 Target Justification

As Built >85% diverted from landfill (including >50% onsite re-use)

>95% re-use diverted from landfill (including >75% onsite re-use)


Operations >85% diverted from landfill

>95% re-use diverted from landfill


DL1.5 The proposed design and construction methodology has considered acid sulfate soil risk.

The project design and construction methodology must reflect management actions or design initiatives

to reduce ASS risk across design, construction and operation. This should be incorporated in the REAP.

The final design drawings must be provided as evidence with justification of how contamination risk has

been managed.


• Risk Assessment,

• Acid sulfate soil management plan (or equivalent), and

• Proposed design showing consideration for ASS.

Level 2

DL2.1 An Acid Sulfate Soil Management Plan (or equivalent) is developed outlining opportunities for retention and/or re-use of any treated acid sulfate soil material.

Acid Sulfate Soil Management Plan (ASSMP) (or equivalent) must be developed by a suitably qualified

professional to outline opportunities for retention and/or re-use of any acid sulfate soil material. The

ASSMP (or equivalent) must be reviewed and updated by a suitably qualified professional if appropriate,

considering changes to the risk assessment, which may result from further site investigations or changes

to design or construction methodology prior to construction commencement.


• Acid sulfate soil management plan (or equivalent).

Level 3

DL3.1 The effectiveness and durability of the remedial solutions are outlined.

The effectiveness and durability of the remedial solution for acid sulfate soils, including any potential

ongoing maintenance and monitoring must be considered over the lifetime of the project.

Evidence should be available regarding the longevity of the remedial solution and normal maintenance

requirements. The forecast life of the asset should not be longer than the remedial solution. Long-term

monitoring may be required to ensure the continued effectiveness of some solutions, including natural

attenuation, permeable reactive barriers, slurry walls, ongoing process-based treatments for

groundwater, etc. Monitoring arrangements will depend on the type of remediation method chosen and

its projected lifetime. Where monitoring is necessary, there should also be contingency plans in case

monitoring data should demonstrate any fault or deterioration in the remedial solution.

Page 291 of 477



Lea

Spr

Res

Res

Ecn

Ecn

Ene

Gre

Env

Wat

Eco

Sta

Leg

Her

Wfs

Con

Rso


• Design documentation

• Monitoring designs

• Management plans,

Page 292 of 477



ISv2.0 As Built


Aim

To reward the consideration of sustainable acid sulfate soil management strategy within a broader


Criteria


Definitions

ASS Acid sulfate soils (ASS) are naturally occurring soils and sediments containing iron sulfides, most

commonly pyrite. When ASS are exposed to air the iron sulfides in the soil react with oxygen and water

to produce a variety of iron compounds and sulfuric acid (Government of Western Australia, Department

of Environmental Regulation, 2015).

AASS When PASS are disturbed or exposed to oxygen, the iron sulfides are oxidised to produce sulfuric

acid and the soil becomes strongly acidic (usually below pH 4). These soils are then called actual acid

sulfate soils (AASS)—that is, they are already acidic (Government of Western Australia, Department of

Environmental Regulation, 2015).


person(s):






PASS Acid sulfate soils which have not been oxidised by exposure to air are known as potential acid

sulfate soils (PASS). While contained in a layer of waterlogged soil, the iron sulfides in the soil are stable

and the surrounding soil pH is often weakly acid to weakly alkaline (Government of Western Australia,

Department of Environmental Regulation, 2015).



cycle.


ABL1.1 The desktop acid sulfate soil risk assessment is reviewed and updated. AND ABL1.2 Any further site investigations to confirm and quantify acid sulfate soil risk are undertaken. AND ABL1.3 Recommendations and mitigation measures associated with acid sulfate soil risk are implemented. AND ABL1.4 The ASSMP (or equivalent) is reviewed and updated.

The requirements for Level 1 are achieved. AND ABL2.1 The ASSMP (or equivalent) has been implemented. AND ABL2.2 Level 2 project-specific targets for construction are achieved.

The requirements for Level 2 are achieved. AND ABL3.1 Level 3 project-specific targets for construction are achieved.

Page 293 of 477



Lea

Spr

Res

Res

Ecn

Ecn

Ene

Gre

Env

Wat

Eco

Sta

Leg

Her

Wfs

Con

Rso

Site investigation: Requirements may vary by local authorities but a site investigation should determine

the extent and severity of acid sulfate soils on a site and evaluate the potential for harm to the

environment or to constructed assets as a result of the development (DER: Treatment and management

of soil and water in acid sulfate soil landscapes, 2015).







Level 1

ABL1.1 The desktop acid sulfate soil risk assessment is reviewed and updated.

The desktop acid sulfate soil risk assessment must be reviewed and updated during the construction

phase where necessary, considering any new information or changes to the design or construction

methodology. This review and update must occur at least annually and be undertaken by a suitably


ABL1.2 Any further site investigations to confirm and quantify acid sulfate soil risk are undertaken.

Any further site investigations recommended through the desktop risk assessment (DL1.1 and ABL1.1)

to confirm and quantify acid sulfate soil risk must be undertaken in accordance with local acid sulfate

soil management guidelines (or QASSIT if no local guidelines exist). The desktop risk assessment in

DL1.1 must be updated if the site investigation provides information to change the nature or severity of

risks.

ABL1.3 Recommendations and mitigation measures associated with acid sulfate soil risk are implemented.

Construction phase recommendations and mitigation measures from the desktop acid sulfate soil risk

assessment must be implemented in accordance with local acid sulfate soil management guidelines (or

in accordance with the Queensland Acid Sulfate Soil Technical Manual – QASSIT if no local guidelines

exist). Implementation can be shown through plans, photos, extracts of management plans, receipts,

reports outlining the risk has been mitigated, etc. After implementation there should be no high or

extreme risks.

ABL1.4 The ASSMP (or equivalent) is reviewed and updated.

The ASSMP (or equivalent) must be reviewed and updated during the construction phase where

necessary, considering changes to the risk assessment, which may result from further site investigations

or changes to design or construction methodology. The ASSMP must be reviewed and updated at least

annually by a suitably qualified professional.


• Risk Assessment,

• Acid sulfate soil plan (or equivalent),

• ASSMP reviews, and

• Results from site investigation.

Page 294 of 477



Level 2

ABL2.1 The ASSMP (or equivalent) has been implemented.

The ASSMP (or equivalent) must be implemented including the treatment and/or management of acid

sulfate soil to be re-used onsite or offsite, along with any ongoing maintenance and monitoring

requirements outlined in the ASSMP. Implementation can be shown through plans, photos, extracts of

management plans, receipts, reports, etc.


Monitoring and auditing of acid sulfate soil must be undertaken monthly to show that the Level 2 project-

specific targets (as outlined in Design Rso-3) are achieved.

The project delivery and operational teams may propose changes to the project-specific targets for ASS

(as defined in Design Rso-3). The reason for changing the project-specific targets may include:













• Acid sulfate soil management plan (or equivalent), and

• Photos, reports, extracts of management plans, etc. to show implementation of management

actions.

Level 3


Monitoring and auditing of acid sulfate soil must be undertaken monthly to show that the Level 3 project-

specific targets (as outlined in Design Rso-3) are achieved.

The project delivery and operational teams may propose changes to the project-specific targets for ASS

(as defined in Design Rso-3). The reason for changing the project-specific targets may include:










Page 295 of 477



Lea

Spr

Res

Res

Ecn

Ecn

Ene

Gre

Env

Wat

Eco

Sta

Leg

Her

Wfs

Con

Rso




• Photos, reports, extracts of management plans, etc. to show implementation of management

actions, and

• Review report.

Page 296 of 477



ISv2.0 Design


Aim

To reward the sustainable management of resource outputs (waste).

Criteria



DL1.1 A desktop risk assessment that identifies project resource output risks is undertaken or updated. AND

DL1.2 Measures to minimise resource outputs during design, construction and operation have been identified and implemented. AND

DL1.3 Project-specific performance targets for resource outputs are developed. AND DL1.4 A management plan (or equivalent) for resource outputs is developed and implemented for design.

The requirements for Level 1 are achieved. AND DL2.1 Opportunities are identified to beneficially re-use resource outputs. OR DL2.2 The market is approached for an innovative resource output solution.

The requirements for Level 2 are achieved. AND DL3.1 Opportunities are implemented to beneficially re-use a significant resource output. OR DL3.2 The market is approached for an innovative resource output solution through forward procurement.

The intent of this credit is to encourage the transition away from traditional waste management to a

resource management perspective within a broader resource efficiency strategy, and to provide clear

guidance, support and expectations to the project delivery and operational teams regarding project-

specific performance outcomes.

Waste (referred to in this category as ‘resource outputs’) is one of the most well-established and well-

known areas of environmental performance but one that is still developing in Australia and New Zealand.

It is a significant environmental issue for infrastructure and there are clear resource savings and financial

and social benefits from waste minimisation.

The infrastructure industry has a general awareness of the ‘waste hierarchy’ as engineers intrinsically

maximise the efficiency of their asset whilst keeping to budget and design specifications. Project delivery

teams keenly know the value in accurate estimating information for their project budgets. However, there

is still a significant gap between business as usual and best practice resource recovery due to the lack

of understanding of the significance of early and specific planning for resource output streams. The

opportunities and costs for alternative methods to handle surplus resources, by-products, and general

construction and demolition (C&D) resource outputs are most efficiently captured in the planning stage.

Resource outputs such as clean excavated material, concrete, bricks and timber in traditional waste

streams represent a business cost through disposal and transport costs, and hidden costs such as the

value of lost raw resources and the value-added cost from labour and energy. This is true regardless of

whether these resources are recycled or sent to landfill. There are many feasible opportunities in large

scale construction to reduce this through efficient design, procurement and construction practices

(Hyder Consulting, 2011). It’s important to note that due to the developing maturity of the Australian/New

Zealand markets even easily re-used/recycled resource outputs may lack a local network to utilise these

resources.

Page 297 of 477



Lea

Spr

Res

Res

Ecn

Ecn

Ene

Gre

Env

Wat

Eco

Sta

Leg

Her

Wfs

Con

Rso

Shifting the paradigm from waste management to resource management can be as simple as the

following:

• Where one site’s excavated spoil could constitute a ‘waste’ to their project another site may

benefit from a valuable material for a road build,

• Old uPVC piping is often easily recycled and many manufacturers will take their product back for

free to be re-used, saving the project delivery team costs on disposal fees, and

• Detailed monitoring of resource inputs and outputs on a site even over a short period of months

can give an in-depth baseline of information which can give insight on real project cost versus

estimated cost and can provide more accurate figures for tendering future work.

It is acknowledged that the challenges in these examples can be logistics, design specifications, or

simply not knowing what can go where. By considering these various end-of-life resource streams in

detail during the planning phase, more options can be explored. As a result, they may be more financially

and environmentally beneficial than diversion from landfill. An excellent resource for ideas and case

studies can be accessed via The Considerate Contractor Scheme: Best Practice Hub

(https://ccsbestpractice.org.uk).

This category assesses the level and effectiveness of resource output management practices towards

achieving the goal of zero waste to landfill over the life cycle of a given piece of infrastructure through

re-use, design optimisation, recycling and contract management.

Definitions

CEMP is a Construction Environmental Management Plan.

Forward procurement for the purpose of this credit means making a commitment to purchase a product

or service if and when it is developed to meet a set of requirement or function. It is generally used to

challenge the industry to innovate a new product or service to meet a project’s needs, and committing

to purchasing that service or product once developed.


person(s):

• must not work directly on the project or asset or be employed by a parent organisatio,





Inert resource outputs are materials that will not undergo physical, chemical, or biological

transformation; be chemically or biologically reactive; will not adversely affect other matter it comes into

contact with which would harm human or environmental health. Examples of inert end of life resources

could be: bricks, concrete, paper, plastics, glass, metal and timber, asphalt, used, rejected or unwanted

tyres, pallets, metals, plastics, material resulting from construction and demolition activities.

Landfill is a waste disposal site used for the controlled deposit of solid wastes onto or into land. Landfills

in Australia and New Zealand have multiple classes which dictate what types of waste they will accept.

For example, in New Zealand, Clean Fill is class 4 landfill which accepts only clean fill material, including

clean excavated natural materials.

Office resource outputs are office paper, cardboard, plastics, and food waste that are generated from

office activities. This includes the project’s main office and onsite offices.





cycle.

Page 298 of 477





Resource recovery is the process of reclaiming energy or materials that are discarded as waste and

reapplying them to a beneficial purpose such as composting, energy generation, repurposing or

recycling.

Suitably Qualified Professional is a professional with at least five years’ resource output (waste)

management experience, a NABERS Assessor, or equivalent.

Spoil is uncontaminated excavated clay, gravel, sand, soil or rock that is not mixed with any other type

of waste and resulting from construction and demolition activities. Acid sulfate soils are not included in

this definition.

Level 1

DL1.1 A desktop risk assessment that identifies project resource output risks is undertaken or updated.

If a desktop risk assessment has been undertaken and verified as part of a Planning rating, it must be

reviewed and updated considering any new information or changes to the project.

If a desktop risk assessment has not been undertaken, then the following applies:

A desktop risk assessment must be undertaken to identify risk associated with resource outputs. The

assessment may be part of a broader project risk assessment or a standalone environmental risk

assessment and may be undertaken as part of Lea-2. It must identify the risk, assess the likelihood of

the risk occurring, estimate the expected consequence, and identify potential mitigation (or

recommendations) measures.

DL1.2 Measures to minimise resource outputs during design, construction and operation have been identified and implemented.

Measures to minimise resource outputs during design, construction and operation must be identified

and implemented.

Within the framework of complying with laws and regulations, it must be demonstrated that the waste

hierarchy (Figure En2) is applied to the resource input and output streams identified in the RES. If an

option less favourable than the first option is selected, then justification for not selecting options higher

on the hierarchy must be provided.

Page 299 of 477



Lea

Spr

Res

Res

Ecn

Ecn

Ene

Gre

Env

Wat

Eco

Sta

Leg

Her

Wfs

Con

Rso

Figure En2 Overview of waste hierarchy

DL1.3 Project-specific performance targets for resource outputs are developed.

If project-specific performance targets have been developed and verified in a Planning rating, then those

targets can be used to meet the requirements of this criterion.

If project-specific targets have not been developed, then the following applies:

Project-specific resource output targets must be developed for achievement of Levels 2 and 3 in As

Built and incorporated into the RES and REAP (according to location, classification/type and volume).

The default targets in Table En37 may be used to meet this criterion.

The key objective is to develop performance targets for resource outputs recovery that are tailored to

the specific project, resulting in targets which are relevant and push the boundaries of best practice.

Typical resource outputs from infrastructure construction and operation include:

• Vegetation and overburden from clearing, excavation, earthworks,

• Demolition outputs,

• Concrete, scrap metal, timber, plastics packaging and other general construction waste,

• Oily and other hazardous waste from plant and vehicle maintenance, spills, etc,

• General rubbish from camps, cribs, offices, etc,

• Biosolids, including sewage or sludge from on-site wastewater treatment plants, septic tanks,

chemical toilets, etc,

• End-of-project resource outputs, including damaged equipment, temporary facilities and

contaminated soil, and

• Resource outputs resulting from over-ordering left at the end of the project.

Project-specific Level 2 and 3 targets for the Design, As Built and Operation ratings must be reviewed


When developing project-specific performance targets, consideration should be given to the following:

• The relative impact of that waste stream upon the environment and/or communities, and

• Significant barriers that exist to meeting the performance targets. This could include market

demand for the material and/or overcoming lack of existing recycling/re-use options.

Prevention

•Minimise or avoid resource outputs through design, procurement or other processes

Re-use

•Re-using resource outputs, especially on-site, for some other purpose

Recycle

•Turning discarded resource outputs into some kind of useful resource by chemically transformation, typically into either energy or compost

Recover

•Breaking down into raw materials and reprocessing either into the same or a new product, usually offsite

Disposal

•Landfill, where the other options are unavailable or not feasible, usually offsite

Page 300 of 477



Project delivery and operational teams may propose changes to the project-specific targets at key

phases during the project when it can be justifiably demonstrated with supporting evidence. The reasons

for change may include:




The following default project-specific resource outputs diversion targets have been developed to broadly

align with best practice Australian targets based on the data from the Australian National Waste Report

2016 (prepared for the Department of Environment and Energy by Randell Environmental Consulting).

The following information was used to help develop the default targets:

• About 20mt of C&D waste was generated in 2014-15 in Australia with 64% recovered,

• Western Australian landfill diversion targets for C&D waste was 60% by 2015 and 75% by 2020,

• New South Wales C&D waste target for C&D increasing from 75% to 80% by 2021/22,

• Queensland C&D recycling targets increasing from 61% to 80% by 2024, and

• South Australia C&D waste landfill diversion target increasing to 90% by 2020.

Table En37 Project default targets for resource efficiency performance criteria: Inert resource output

Resource output category Rating/Phase Level 2 Target Level 3 Target

Clean/inert excavation spoil As Built >85% diverted from landfill (including >50% onsite re-use)

>95% re-use diverted from landfill (including >75% onsite re-use)



Office resource outputs As Built >60% diverted from landfill

>70% diverted from landfill



Other inert resource outputs

As Built >70% diverted from landfill




DL1.4 A management plan (or equivalent) for resource outputs is developed and implemented for design.

A management plan (or equivalent) must be developed to outline how the project-specific targets will

be implemented. Management for resource outputs can be integrated into a greater management plan

(e.g. the REAP or a CEMP), or as a standalone document. The management plan must include the

following, unless justification can be provided:

• Project-specific performance targets (DL1.3),

• Resource output (waste) characterisation, and

• A monitoring plan for resource outputs identified in the REAP (Rso-1), outlining how data will be

collected for streams that are destined for re-use/landfill/recycling/capping, quantities

(volumes/weights) and destinations during construction and operational activities.

Page 301 of 477



Lea

Spr

Res

Res

Ecn

Ecn

Ene

Gre

Env

Wat

Eco

Sta

Leg

Her

Wfs

Con

Rso

All actions in the management plan identified for the design phase must be implemented. This should

include consideration of resource output management in the final design and construction management

plans, etc.


• Construction management plan outlining resource recovery methodologies,

• Design reports,

• Resource output management plan, and

• Final design plans.

Level 2

DL2.1 Opportunities are identified to beneficially re-use resource outputs.

If opportunities to beneficially re-use resource outputs have been provided and verified as part of a

Planning rating, then those opportunities must be reviewed and updated reflecting any new information

or changes to the project.

If opportunities were not identified and verified as part of a planning rating, then the following applies:

Opportunities to beneficially re-use resource outputs either onsite or offsite must be identified and

provided to the constructors of the project and operational teams (if known). The beneficial re-use of

resource outputs may include partnerships with other local construction projects or collaboration with

other projects being built by the proponent/designer/contractor, etc.

UOR

DL2.2 The market is approached for an innovative resource output solution.

The market must be approached for an innovative solution to move an identified resource output at

least one tier higher on the waste hierarchy (Figure En2 (e.g. from recycling an output to reusing an

output). This could be achieved by utilising a platform such as the Industry Capability Network (ICN)

(http://www.icn.org.au/). If solutions were identified in a Planning rating, they can be used to inform this

process.


• Opportunities register,

• Feasibility assessment of opportunities,

• Review report,

• Supplier workshops details, and

• Procurement documentation.

66TLevel66T 3

DL3.1 Opportunities are implemented to beneficially re-use a significant resource output.

Opportunities must be implemented in the final design and/or management plans to beneficially re-use

a resource output (as identified in the RES). The resource output opportunity must represent at least

20% of the resource output footprint (waste footprint). This will require resource outputs to be predicted

for the project which may have been undertaken in Rso-1.

See the Crossrail Resource Efficiency case study available on the ISCA website for further reference

on beneficial re-use of spoil for an ecological conservation site.

Page 302 of 477



The opportunities identified in a Planning rating may be used if they meet the requirements of this

criterion.

UOR

DL3.2 The market is approached for an innovative resource output solution through forward procurement.

If forward procurement was undertaken and verified in a Planning rating and the agreement continues

into design, then this criterion can be met with no further action.

If forward procurement was not undertaken as part of a Planning rating, then the following applies:

The market must be approached for an innovative solution to move an identified resource output at

least one tier higher on the waste hierarchy (Figure En2 (e.g. from recycling an output to reusing an

output). The project/asset must engage in forward procurement of the solution for this criterion to be

achieved.


• Evidence of partnerships,

• Procurement documentation,

• Supplier workshops notes,

• Beneficial use evidence/data,

• Resource output predictions, and

• Review report.

Page 303 of 477



Lea

Spr

Res

Res

Ecn

Ecn

Ene

Gre

Env

Wat

Eco

Sta

Leg

Her

Wfs

Con

Rso

ISv2.0 As Built


Aim

To reward the sustainable management of resource outputs (waste).

Criteria



ABL1.1 The desktop resource output risk assessment is reviewed and updated. AND ABL1.2 The management plan for resource outputs is reviewed, updated and construction actions are implemented.

The requirements for Level 1 are achieved. AND ABL2.1 100TResource outputs are tracked all the way to final destination. 100TAND ABL2.2 Resource output data has been audited. AND ABL2.3 Level 2 project-specific targets for construction are achieved.

The requirements for Level 2 are achieved. AND ABL3.1 Level 3 project-specific targets for construction are achieved. AND ABL3.2 Opportunities to beneficially re-use resource outputs internally or externally are implemented. OR ABL3.3 Market developed innovative solution(s) for a resource output is implemented.

The intent of this credit is to encourage the transition away from traditional waste management to a

resource management perspective within a broader resource efficiency strategy, and to provide clear

guidance, support and expectations to the project delivery and operational teams regarding project-

specific performance outcomes.

Waste (referred to in this category as ‘resource outputs’) is one of the most well-established and well-

known areas of environmental performance but one that is still developing in Australia and New Zealand.

It is a significant environmental issue for infrastructure and there are clear resource savings and financial

and social benefits from waste minimisation.

The infrastructure industry has a general awareness of the ‘waste hierarchy’ as engineers intrinsically

maximise the efficiency of their asset whilst keeping to budget and design specifications. Project delivery

teams keenly know the value in accurate estimating information for their project budgets. However, there

is still a significant gap between business as usual and best practice resource recovery due to the lack

of understanding of the significance of early and specific planning for resource output streams. The

opportunities and costs for alternative methods to handle surplus resources, by-products, and general

construction and demolition (C&D) resource outputs are most efficiently captured in the planning stage.

Resource outputs such as clean excavated material, concrete, bricks and timber in traditional waste

streams represent a business cost through disposal and transport costs, and hidden costs such as the

value of lost raw resources and the value-added cost from labour and energy. This is true regardless of

whether these resources are recycled or sent to landfill. There are many feasible opportunities in large

scale construction to reduce this through efficient design, procurement and construction practices

(Hyder Consulting, 2011). It’s important to note that due to the developing maturity of the Australian/New

Zealand markets even easily re-used/recycled resource outputs may lack a local network to utilise these

resources.

Page 304 of 477



Shifting the paradigm from waste management to resource management can be as simple as the

following:

• Where one site’s excavated spoil could constitute a ‘waste’ to their project another site may

benefit from a valuable material for a road build,

• Old uPVC piping is often easily recycled and many manufacturers will take their product back

for free to be re-used, saving the project delivery team costs on disposal fees, and

• Detailed monitoring of resource inputs and outputs on a site even over a short period of months

can give an in-depth baseline of information which can give insight on real project cost versus

estimated cost and can provide more accurate figures for tendering future work.

It is acknowledged that the challenges in these examples can be logistics, design specifications, or

simply not knowing what can go where. By considering these various end-of-life resource streams in

detail during the planning phase, more options can be explored. As a result, they may be more financially

and environmentally beneficial than diversion from landfill. An excellent resource for ideas and case

studies can be accessed via The Considerate Contractor Scheme: Best Practice Hub

(https://ccsbestpractice.org.uk).

This category assesses the level and effectiveness of resource output management practices towards

achieving the goal of zero waste to landfill over the life cycle of a given piece of infrastructure through

re-use, design optimisation, recycling and contract management.

Definitions

CEMP is a Construction Environmental Management Plan

Forward procurement for the purpose of this credit means making a commitment to purchase a product

or service if and when it is developed to meet a set of requirement or function. It is generally used to

challenge the industry to innovate a new product or service to meet a project’s needs, and committing

to purchasing that service or product once developed.


person(s):






Inert resource outputs are materials that will not undergo physical, chemical, or biological

transformation; be chemically or biologically reactive; will not adversely affect other matter it comes into

contact with which would harm human or environmental health. Examples of inert end of life resources

could be: bricks, concrete, paper, plastics, glass, metal and timber, asphalt, used, rejected or unwanted

tyres, pallets, metals, plastics, material resulting from construction and demolition activities.

Landfill is a waste disposal site used for the controlled deposit of solid wastes onto or into land. Landfills

in Australia and New Zealand have multiple classes which dictate what types of waste they will accept.

For example, in New Zealand, Clean Fill is class 4 landfill which accepts only clean fill material, including

clean excavated natural materials.

Office resource outputs are office paper, cardboard, plastics, and food waste that are generated from

office activities. This includes the project’s main office and onsite offices.





cycle.

Page 305 of 477



Lea

Spr

Res

Res

Ecn

Ecn

Ene

Gre

Env

Wat

Eco

Sta

Leg

Her

Wfs

Con

Rso



Resource recovery is the process of reclaiming energy or materials that are discarded as waste and

reapplying them to a beneficial purpose such as composting, energy generation, repurposing or

recycling.

Suitably Qualified Professional is a professional with at least five years’ resource output (waste)

management experience, or a NABERS Assessor, or equivalent.

Spoil is uncontaminated excavated clay, gravel, sand, soil or rock that is not mixed with any other type

of waste and resulting from construction and demolition activities. Acid sulfate soils are not included in

this definition.

Level 1

ABL1.1 The desktop resource output risk assessment is reviewed and updated.

The desktop risk assessment must be reviewed and updated during construction where necessary,

considering any new information or changes to design or construction methodology. This review and

update must occur at least annually and be undertaken by a suitably qualified professional.

ABL1.2 The management plan for resource outputs is reviewed, updated and construction actions are implemented.

The resource output management plan (or equivalent) must be reviewed and updated during

construction where necessary, considering any new information or changes to design or construction

methodology. The review and update of the management plan must be undertaken by a suitably



reviewed by a suitably qualified professional. The independent suitably qualified professional must

outline that they agree with the reasoning for the updated targets, and that they believe the new targets

will result in greater sustainability outcomes.


feasibility of the new targets.



All actions outlined in the management plan for the construction phase must be implemented including

monitoring requirements.


• Risk assessment, and

• Review report.

Level 2

ABL2.1 Resource outputs are tracked all the way to final destination.

Resource outputs must be tracked all the way to their final destination. An audit to final destination must

be undertaken at least once every six months for the full As Built phase. The audit must be undertaken

by a suitably qualified professional. Each audit must cover at least 10% (by volume) of the project’s

resource output footprint. Over the life of the project a minimum of 80% of all resource output (waste)

streams (AKA waste categories) must be audited at least once.

Page 306 of 477



Final destination means at least to a resource output facility where the resource is transformed into

another product or material or into landfill. Physical sorting of waste is not considered a final destination.

For final destinations that are distant (>250 km) from the project site, records through examination of

waste sub-contractor records or similar are sufficient.

ABL2.2 Resource output data has been audited.

Resource output data must be audited by an independent suitably qualified professional at least

annually. The review/audit must cover both systems and data i.e. the systems used to manage resource

outputs and the data recording and reporting systems. The scope of the audit must include an objective

assessment of the accuracy and completeness of reported waste/resource information with the aim to

provide confidence that the reported information represents a faithful, true, and fair account of resource

output management practices and performance.

An audit report must be provided by the independent suitably qualified professional outlining:

• a description of the scope, objectives and criteria of the audit,

• evidence of the sampled data and sampling methods used, including examples of raw data

used to crosscheck and error checking methodologies,

• a statement that the resource output (waste) data has been checked to ensure accuracy, and

• the reviewer’s or auditor’s conclusions on the resource output data including any qualifications

or limitations.


Monitoring and auditing of resource outputs must be undertaken monthly to show that the Level 2

project-specific targets (as outlined in Design Rso-4) are achieved.


resource outputs (as defined in Design Rso-4). The reason for changing the project-specific targets may

include:














• Construction reports,

• Resource output management plan or specific resource output integrated section of a broader

management plan (e.g. REAP or CEMP),

• Resource outputs register,

• Opportunities register, and

• Documentation (invoices, dockets, online billing) of resource output management.

Page 307 of 477



Lea

Spr

Res

Res

Ecn

Ecn

Ene

Gre

Env

Wat

Eco

Sta

Leg

Her

Wfs

Con

Rso

Level 3


Monitoring and auditing of resource outputs must be undertaken monthly to show that the Level 3

project-specific targets (as outlined in Design Rso-4) are achieved.


resource outputs (as defined in Design Rso-4). The reason for changing the project-specific targets may

include:












ABL3.2 Opportunities to beneficially re-use resource outputs internally or externally are implemented.

Opportunities to beneficially re-use resource outputs either onsite or offsite as outlined in design must

be implemented. The beneficial re-use of resource outputs may include partnerships with other local

construction projects or collaboration with other projects being built by the proponent/ designer/

contractor etc.

OR

ABL3.3 Market developed innovative solution(s) for a resource output is implemented.

The market must be engaged for an innovative solution to move an identified resource output at least

one tier higher on the waste hierarchy (e.g. from recycling an output to reusing an output). This could

be achieved by utilising a platform such as Industry Capability Network (ICN) (http://www.icn.org.au/).

If the market solution differs from the market solution presented in the design rating, then justification

must be provided.


• Opportunities register,

• Review report,

• Supplier workshop details,

• Procurement documentation, and

• Receipts, etc.

Page 308 of 477



ISv2.0 Design

Rso-5 Adaptability

Aim

To reward design and planning for deconstruction, disassembly and adaptability of infrastructure in the

future.

Criteria



DL1.1 An adaptability workshop is held. AND DL1.2 A strategy for adaptability is developed. AND DL1.3 Project design and construction planning demonstrates that the outcomes of the adaptability strategy are incorporated into the project. AND DL1.4 The adaptability strategy is reviewed and updated.

The requirements for Level 1 are achieved. AND DL2.1 The adaptability strategy is developed into a detailed adaptability/deconstruction plan. AND DL2.2 0-100% by value of components or pre-fabricated units can be easily separated on disassembly into material types suitable for re-use or recycling.

The intention of this credit is to reward planning for adaptability and disassembly of the asset/network

to reduce resource output by avoidance, and plan for the adaptation of the project/asset as the utilisation

and/or infrastructure use requirements change. There is often an underlying premise of permanence in

infrastructure but the society in which the asset was built for is always changing and it is feasible that

the asset will need to adapt to respond to the changing demands of society.

A sustainably planned project/asset is one which embraces evolution of use and lends its design to

adaption.

This credit is applied at the macro level – looking at the project/asset as a whole. A highway for example,

may see increased utilisation over time with increased vehicle numbers due to population growth and

urbanisation of an area. To extend the life of the road it requires the highway to be upgraded to cope

with demand by increasing the number of lanes. If this isn’t planned for during design, future upgrades

may require extensive active construction on a working asset which increases health and safety risks

for workers and drivers, increases traffic congestion and correspondingly increases greenhouse gas

emissions, increases stress upon drivers, and can impede emergency response teams because cars

have few options to make way for them. Adaptable design would be to build-in an allowance for a

widening of the road by modifying the shoulder and verges before it’s needed, making the

upgrade/adaption process quicker, cheaper, safer, and less resource intensive.

Some projects/assets cannot be usefully upgraded so another example of adaptive design is changing

a raised railway line that is no longer being utilised by the network into a pedestrian walkway, like High

Line in New York (http://www.thehighline.org/).

Additionally, the application of this credit at the micro level is also important. This includes the

components that are a part of the whole project/asset, such as signalling equipment for a railway to

operate or lighting for a highway. These elements may be replaced and/or redesigned a number of times

within the whole asset/network’s forecast useful life. The replacement/refurbishment/upgrading of these

components also contributes to the resource output generated from the asset/network.

When planning and/or designing for future capital works or upgrades to the project/asset, resource

inputs and components/equipment should be chosen that can be easily disassembled and re-used,

recycled or repurposed where possible.

Page 309 of 477



Lea

Spr

Res

Res

Ecn

Ecn

Ene

Gre

Env

Wat

Eco

Sta

Leg

Her

Wfs

Con

Rso

By making infrastructure components easier and faster to remove, it is easier to adapt or change the

infrastructure to meet evolving functions over its lifetime. This reduces the cost of upgrades and extends

infrastructure life by making upgrades economic. Extending the useful life of an infrastructure is in many

cases the most sustainable outcome, and when that lifetime comes to an end, infrastructure components

which are easy to remove can go on to be re-used on another project.

Definitions

Adaptability is the capacity of an infrastructure system to adapt to changes of design or purpose.

Suitably qualified professional is someone with at least 10 years' infrastructure design experience

and of that, can demonstrate at least 2 years’ experience developing adaptation/ disassembly/

deconstruction plans, designs, programs or alike.

Level 1

DL1.1 An adaptability workshop is held.

An adaptability workshop must be held to explore the adaptability potential of the project/asset.

The adaptability workshop must include the following people as a minimum:

• Project designers including at least one senior representative from the design team,

• The person responsible for sustainability for the proponent, designer and contractor,

• The project manager,

• Professionals with adaptability experience, this may include deconstruction experience, and

• Operators if known or professionals with relevant operational experience.

The adaptability workshop must identify the following, for inclusion in an adaptability strategy:

• Consideration of how the project/asset could be adapted in the future with its intended function

in an increased or decreased capacity. It should also consider alternate uses for the

project/asset for new/modified functions. A manner to approach this is to consider the history of

a similar asset and discuss how that asset changed or has been superseded and why. The

resulting ideas from this discussion should give foundation to the project/asset’s adaptability

potentials and challenges,

• Identify and capture specific opportunities to improve adaptability, and

• Identify key actions to be implemented for each phase of the infrastructure life cycle to achieve

identified adaptability opportunities.

DL1.2 A strategy for adaptability is developed.

Based on the adaptability workshop a strategy (or equivalent) must be created incorporating the

elements discussed in the workshop. The strategy must include, as a minimum:

• Which parts of the asset will most often need adaption/maintenance/replacement and estimates

of when,

• What could be done in the design to facilitate easier long-term maintenance or adaption, and

• At least one example of a feasible alternate function for the project/asset (e.g. redundant railway

turned into a cycle path) and what if anything could be done to facilitate that outcome in the

design.

The adaptation strategy should consider the following adaptive principles (Crowther, 2000b; Ng, 2009;

Brand, 1994):

1. Document materials and methods. As-built drawings, labelling, on-going photographic

documentation of connections and materials.

Page 310 of 477



2. Simplicity of structure and form. Simple open-span structural systems, simple forms, and

standard dimensional grids will allow for ease of construction, adaptability, deconstruction in

increments.

3. Select materials using the precautionary principle. Materials that are chosen with

consideration for future impacts and that have high quality will retain value and/or be more

feasible for re-use and recycling.

4. Interchangeability. Using materials and systems that exhibit principles of modularity,

independence, and standardisation will facilitate re-use.

5. Separate, document and label utility systems. Disentangling mechanical, electrical and

plumbing (MEP) systems from the assemblies that host them makes it easier to separate

components and materials for repair, replacement, re-use and recycling. Documentation

should ideally also include any in situ unmapped utilities discovered by project delivery team

for future reference.

6. Design for the future worker and labour. Human-scale components or conversely attuning

to ease of removal by standard mechanical equipment will decrease labour intensity and

increase the ability to incorporate a variety of skill levels. Designing for future movement and

safety of workers, equipment and site access, and ease of materials flow will make upgrade

and disassembly more economical and reduce risk.

7. Minimise or eliminate chemical connections. Use bolted, screwed and nailed connections.

Using standard and limited palettes of connectors will decrease tool needs, and time and effort

to switch between them.

DL1.3 Project design and construction planning demonstrates that the outcomes of the adaptability strategy are incorporated into the project.

Project design and construction planning must demonstrate that the outcomes of the adaptability

strategy are incorporated into the project.

DL1.4 The adaptability strategy is reviewed and updated.

The adaptability strategy must be reviewed by a suitably qualified professional at least once in the rating

phase and updated if required. The strategy must consider major changes to technology, design, and

infrastructure planning.

Example evidence for Design Level 1

• REAP with integrated adaptability strategy,

• Design reports, and

• Workshop minutes/notes.

Level >1 to 3

DL2.1 The adaptability strategy is developed into a detailed adaptability/deconstruction plan.

Development of an adaptability/deconstruction plan must involve the following tasks (Davies, 2008; Guy

2006), unless justification can be provided for segments which are deemed not relevant:

1. Statement of strategy for design for adaptability and deconstruction relating to the infrastructure (This

can be satisfied by the adaptability strategy developed for DL1.2)

• Demonstrate the strategy behind the designed adaptable or re-usable elements and describe

best practice to ensure they are handled in a way which preserves maximum adaptability

potential.

Page 311 of 477



Lea

Spr

Res

Res

Ecn

Ecn

Ene

Gre

Env

Wat

Eco

Sta

Leg

Her

Wfs

Con

Rso

2. List infrastructure elements

• Provide an inventory of all materials and components used in the project together with full

specifications and warranties (if applicable), including details of manufacturers. It should be

specified which manufactures will take their product back and what (if any) conditions apply,

• Describe the design life and/or service life of major materials and components as well as materials

and components which will need to be replaced/maintained often, and

• Identify best current options for re-use, reclamation, recycling and resource outputs to energy for

all major and short life span infrastructure elements. This should link to the list of manufacturers

who are willing to take their products back after use.

3. Provide instructions on how to adapt or deconstruct elements

• Provide accurate location plans for identifying information on how to adapt or deconstruct

infrastructure,

• Where necessary add additional information to the “as built” set of drawings to demonstrate the

optimum technique for removal of specific elements,

• Describe the equipment required to dismantle or alter the infrastructure, the sequential processes

involved and the implications for health and safety, and

• Ensure that the plan advises the future project delivery teams on the best means of categorising,

recording and storing dismantled elements.

4. Storage and Distribution of the plan

• The plan must be updated for any major works/adaptions/repairs and reissued to all parties at the

handover stage, so that there is maximum awareness of the plan for the future, including owner,

designer and builder, and

• Place copies of the revised plan with the legal documents, the Health and Safety file and the

maintenance file.

DL2.2 0-100% by value of components or pre-fabricated units can be easily separated on disassembly into material types suitable for re-use or recycling.

Between 0 and 100% (by value) of components or pre-fabricated units outlined in the design of the

project must be easily separable on disassembly/deconstruction into material types suitable for re-use

or recycling.

This is a scaled credit. For every percentage point of adaptability/disassembly (by value) projects can

receive points on a sliding scale.

Examples of material types that may be suitable for disassembly include: bricks, blocks, stone and

concrete, treated and untreated timber, glass, PVC, different types of plastic, metal, paper and

cardboard, and components (for example, sinks, toilets, radiators). The value of materials should be

based on the purchase price. Evidence must be provided to substantiate the percentage being claimed

and how each material is easily disassembled/deconstructed or easily separated.

Example evidence for Level >1 to 3

• Adaptability strategy with detailed adaptability and deconstruction plan,

• Plan reviews,

• Purchase orders or invoices for materials, and

• Design and/or construction reports.

Page 312 of 477



ISv2.0 As Built

Rso-5 Adaptability

Aim

To reward design and planning for deconstruction, disassembly and adaptability of infrastructure in the

future.

Criteria


Level 1 Level >1 to 3 on sliding scale

ABL1.1 The adaptability strategy is reviewed and updated. AND ABL1.2 Project design and construction demonstrates that the outcomes of the adaptability strategy are incorporated into the project.

The requirements for Level 1 are achieved. AND ABL2.1 0-100% by value of components or pre-fabricated units can be easily separated on disassembly into material types suitable for recycling or re-use.

Definitions

Adaptability is the capacity of an infrastructure system to adapt to changes of design or purpose.

Suitably qualified professional is someone with at least 10 years’ infrastructure design experience

and of that, can demonstrate at least 2 years’ experience developing adaptation /disassembly /

deconstruction plans, designs, programs or alike.

Level 1

ABL1.1 The adaptability strategy is reviewed and updated.

The adaptability strategy must be reviewed and updated during construction where necessary,

considering any new information or changes to design or construction methodology. This review and

update must be undertaken by a suitably qualified professional and consider major changes to

technology, design, and infrastructure planning.

ABL1.2 Project design and construction demonstrates that the outcomes of the adaptability strategy are incorporated into the project.

It must be demonstrated that the actions outlined in the adaptability strategy have been incorporated

into the project.


• Adaptability strategy,



• As built drawings.

Page 313 of 477



Lea

Spr

Res

Res

Ecn

Ecn

Ene

Gre

Env

Wat

Eco

Sta

Leg

Her

Wfs

Con

Rso

Level >1 to 3

ABL2.1 0-100% by value of components or pre-fabricated units can be easily separated on disassembly into material types suitable for re-use recycling or re-use.

Between 0 and 100% (by value) of components or pre-fabricated units used in construction must be

easily separable on disassembly/deconstruction into material types suitable for re-use recycling or re-

use.

This is a scaled credit. For every percentage point of adaptability/disassembly (by value) projects can

receive points on a sliding scale.

Examples of material types that may be suitable for disassembly include: bricks, blocks, stone and

concrete, treated and untreated timber, glass, PVC, different types of plastic, metal, paper and

cardboard, and components (for example, sinks, toilets, radiators). The value of materials should be

based on the purchase price. Evidence must be provided to substantiate the percentage being claimed

and how each material is easily disassembles/deconstructed or easily separated.


• Adaptability and deconstruction plan,

• Construction reports,


• Review reports.

Page 314 of 477



ISv2.0 Design

Rso-6 Material Life Cycle Impact Measurement and Reduction

Aim

To reward design and practice that reduces life cycle environmental impacts of materials.

Criteria



DL1.1 Modelling of material life cycle impacts is undertaken using the Materials Calculator (or other suitable Life Cycle Assessment technique) across the infrastructure life cycle.

The requirements for Level 1 are achieved. AND DL2.1 Modelling demonstrates a reduction in materials’ life cycle impacts compared to a Base Case footprint. For every percentage point reduction up to 30%, fractions of levels may be achieved on a sliding scale.

Infrastructure construction and operation consumes significant volumes of materials derived from

natural resources – materials such as aggregates, concrete, steel, oil and wood. The processing and

supply of these materials and their derivative products can have adverse environmental, social and

economic impacts. The supplies of some of these resources are limited and are becoming increasingly

scarce. It is important therefore that proper consideration is given to embodied energy, responsible

sourcing and efficient use of materials.

Moving to more sustainable materials consumption in the infrastructure industry means reducing the

use of “new” materials. Residual needs should as far as possible be satisfied by re-used and recycled

materials. Materials used should have durability appropriate to the asset life cycle (i.e. fit for purpose),

minimal inbuilt redundancy/failure and have minimal short or long-term impacts on the environment.

Maintenance issues and demolition/disposal and recyclability are also important considerations

throughout the life of projects/assets.

Internationally, it is acknowledged that life cycle (environmental) impact assessment (LCIA) is the most

complete and appropriate way to assess the environmental impacts of material and resource use in all

applications including infrastructure. Life cycle assessment (LCA) considers the processes used to

extract raw materials, transport them, process them into usable materials and products, construct or

assemble them onsite, operate, maintain and refurbish the structures over their service life, dismantle

and re-use, recycle or dispose of the component materials or products at the end of the infrastructure’s

life.

The intent of this credit is to encourage design that minimises the consumption of precious resources,

optimises resource efficiency and reduces the environmental impacts of infrastructure, ensuring that

natural resources are consumed no faster than the planet can replenish them and that environmental

pollution is released at a rate that lies within the earth’s carrying and rejuvenation capacity. Materials’

selection should consider environmental aspects throughout the material life cycle including energy

aspects (i.e. embodied energy).

The IS Materials Calculator and the IS Materials Calculator Guideline are available from the ISCA

website. An equivalent life cycle assessment technique may be used.

Definitions

Embodied energy is the sum of all energy required to produce any material, considered as if that energy

was incorporated in the material itself.

Page 315 of 477



Lea

Spr

Res

Res

Ecn

Ecn

Ene

Gre

Env

Wat

Eco

Sta

Leg

Her

Wfs

Con

Rso

Suitably qualified professional refers to someone with 5 years’ experience and relevant qualifications

in one of the following fields; life cycle assessment, engineering or material science.

Level 1

DL1.1 Modelling of materials’ life cycle impacts is undertaken using the Materials Calculator (or other suitable Life Cycle Assessment technique) across the infrastructure life cycle.

To achieve Level 1, the materials environmental impact must be modelled. The term modelling refers

to reasonable estimates or predictions. For a Design rating, this should be based on the detailed design.

No Base Case impact needs to be established for Level 1. No reduction is required to be demonstrated

to achieve Level 1 (only modelling).

Documentation must take the form of a completed copy of the Materials Calculator, dated and signed

as a true record by the ‘engineer of record’ or other suitably qualified professional. ISCA may require

proof of the claimed quantities and services used in the form of purchase requisitions and invoices for

the project.

A Life Cycle Assessment report may also be used in replacement of the Materials Calculator.


• Completed Materials Calculator or LCA,

• Register of materials and associated activities and consumption data, and

• Modelling assumptions.

Level >1 to 3

DL2.1 Modelling demonstrates a reduction in materials’ life cycle impacts compared to a Base Case footprint. For every percentage point reduction up to 30%, fractions of levels may be achieved on a sliding scale.

A reduction in EnviroPoints v2.0 compared to a Base Case must be achieved.

Where a reduction compared to a Base Case footprint is achieved, the Level is determined on a sliding

scale from Level 1 to Level 3. Every 15-percentage point reduction achieves one level above Level 1,

up to Level 3 for a 30% reduction. Fractions of levels may be achieved, for example, a 10% reduction

would achieve Level 1.67 (1 + (10%/30%) x (3-1)). This sliding scale approach provides encouragement

to pursue every reduction opportunity possible. Reductions beyond 30% may be awarded innovation

points.


• Base Case footprint,

• Materials Calculator output, and

• Design reports.

Page 316 of 477



ISv2.0 As Built

Rso-6 Material Life cycle Impact Measurement and Reduction

Aim

To reward design and practice that reduces life cycle environmental impacts of materials.

Criteria



ABL1.1 Monitoring of material life cycle impacts is undertaken using the Materials Calculator (or other suitable Life Cycle Assessment technique) across the infrastructure life cycle.

The requirements for Level 1 are achieved. AND ABL2.1 Monitoring demonstrates a reduction in materials’ life cycle impacts compared to a Base Case footprint. For every percentage point reduction up to 30%, fractions of levels may be achieved on a sliding scale.

Level 1

ABL1.1 Modelling of material life cycle impacts is undertaken using the Materials Calculator (or other suitable Life Cycle Assessment technique) across the infrastructure life cycle.

To achieve Level 1, the materials environmental impact must be monitored. Monitoring should be based

on the actual quantities used. No Base Case impact needs to be established for Level 1. No reduction

is required to be demonstrated to achieve Level 1 (only monitoring).

Documentation must take the form of a completed copy of the Materials Calculator, dated and signed

as a true record by the ‘engineer of record’ or other suitably qualified professional. ISCA may require

proof of the claimed quantities and services used in the form of purchase requisitions and invoices for

the project.

A Life Cycle Assessment report may also be used in replacement of the Materials Calculator.


• Completed Materials Calculator or LCA,

• Register of materials and associated activities and consumption data, and

• Monitoring assumptions.

Level >1 to 3

ABL2.1 Monitoring demonstrates a reduction in materials life cycle impacts compared to a Base Case footprint. For every percentage point reduction up to 30%, fractions of levels may be achieved on a sliding scale.

A reduction in EnviroPoints v2.0 compared to a Base Case must be achieved.

Where a reduction compared to a Base Case footprint is achieved, the Level is determined on a sliding

scale from Level 1 to Level 3. Every 15-percentage point reduction achieves one level above Level 1,

up to Level 3 for a 30% reduction. Fractions of levels may be achieved, for example, a 10% reduction

would achieve Level 1.67 (1 + (10%/30%) x (3-1)). This sliding scale approach provides encouragement

to pursue every reduction opportunity possible. Reductions beyond 30% may be awarded innovation

points.

Page 317 of 477



Lea

Spr

Res

Res

Ecn

Ecn

Ene

Gre

Env

Wat

Eco

Sta

Leg

Her

Wfs

Con

Rso


• Base Case footprint,

• Materials Calculator output, and

• Design reports

Page 318 of 477



ISv2.0 Design


Aim

To reward procurement of materials that have sustainability labels or are from sustainable supply chains.

Criteria



DL1.1 Use of ISCA approved sustainability labelled products up to 5% based on value, for Level 3, will be awarded points on a sliding scale.

Reward is given for the use of materials and products that have achieved certification by recognised

environmental labelling bodies or stewardship schemes (Type I and Type III environmental labels).

Type I sustainability labels are voluntary, multiple-criteria based, third-party programs that award a

license that authorises the use of environmental labels on products indicating overall environmental

preferability of a product within a particular product category based on life cycle considerations.

Type II sustainability labels are informative environmental self-declaration claims made about goods by

their manufacturers, importers or distributors. They are not independently verified and do not use

predetermined and accepted criteria for reference. These labels are not recognised under this credit.

Environmental Product Declarations (EPDs) are Type III environmental declarations which provide

valuable environmental impact data, and often capture the 'better than average' options available to

industry, but they do not strictly compare products to other options like Type I labels do. For the purposes

of this credit, EPDs must be third-party verified to be compliant with both ISO 14025 and EN 15804.

The Australasian EPD Programme (www.epd-australasia.com) has been established, aligned with its

partner organisation, the International EPD® System (www.environdec.com), to enable a harmonised

and efficient platform for global EPD® development and communication. There are already 239

‘Construction products’ EPDs, 20 ‘Transport vehicles and equipment’ EPDs and 12 ‘Constructions and

infrastructure’ EPDs available globally.

Table En44 Sustainability Factors for ISCA Approved Environmental Labels

Level 0 to 3

ISCA Approved Environmental Labels Label Type Sustainability

Factor (SF)

Good Environmental Choice Australia Ecolabel I 1.00

Green Building Council of Australia BEP I 1.00

Global GreenTag Certification: GreenRate and LCARate Schemes I 1.00

Environmental Choice New Zealand I 1.00

ISEAL Alliance compliant whole supply chain Stewardship Scheme certification

I 1.00

Environmental Product Declarations – product-specific III 0.75

Environmental Product Declarations – industry-wide III 0.50

Page 319 of 477



Lea

Spr

Res

Res

Ecn

Ecn

Ene

Gre

Env

Wat

Eco

Sta

Leg

Her

Wfs

Con

Rso

DL1.1 Use of ISCA approved sustainability labelled products up to 5% based on value, for Level 3, will be awarded points on a sliding scale.

Products purchased, up to 5% (based on value), must be certified by an ISCA approved label (see

Table 12).

This is a scaled credit. For every percentage point of value spent on sustainability labelled products,

fractions of levels are awarded. For example, a 2% of total spend on sustainability labelled products

would achieve Level 1.2 as (2/5) x 3 =1.2.

In calculating performance, the value of any material/product with a sustainability label must be

multiplied by the corresponding sustainability factor (SF) listed in Table En44.

The materials or products with sustainability labels must be used on the permanent infrastructure which

makes up the project or asset. Materials or products used in temporary construction offices (e.g.

construction office chairs) will not be accepted.

ISCA may independently verify the validity of the certificate from the certification body and may require

proof of the claimed quantities in the form of purchase requisitions and invoices for the project.

The evidence must include a report describing:

• Major materials used on the project and their value;

• For those products with sustainability labels, the products used, their labels and their value;

• The proportion of the total material value of the project made up by products with environmental

labels; and

• Certificates for the products.

Example evidence for Level 0 to 3

• Report showing use of a product with the environmental credentials, and

• Product certificate.

Page 320 of 477



ISv2.0 As Built


Aim

To reward procurement of materials that have sustainability labels or are from sustainable supply chains.

Criteria



ABL1.1 Use of ISCA approved sustainability labelled products up to 5% based on value, for Level 3, will be awarded points on a sliding scale.

Reward is given for the use of materials and products that have achieved certification by recognised

environmental labelling bodies or stewardship schemes (Type I and Type III environmental labels).

Type I sustainability labels are voluntary, multiple-criteria based, third-party programs that award a

license that authorises the use of environmental labels on products indicating overall environmental

preferability of a product within a particular product category based on life cycle considerations.

Type II sustainability labels are informative environmental self-declaration claims made about goods by

their manufacturers, importers or distributors. They are not independently verified and do not use

predetermined and accepted criteria for reference. These labels are not recognised under this credit.

Environmental Product Declarations (EPDs) are Type III environmental declarations which provide

valuable environmental impact data, and often capture the 'better than average' options available to

industry, but they do not strictly compare products to other options like Type I labels do. For the purposes

of this credit, EPDs need to be third-party verified to be compliant with both ISO 14025 and EN 15804.

The Australasian EPD Programme (www.epd-australasia.com) has been established, aligned with its

partner organisation, the International EPD® System (www.environdec.com), to enable a harmonised

and efficient platform for global EPD® development and communication. There are already 239

‘Construction products’ EPDs, 20 ‘Transport vehicles and equipment’ EPDs and 12 ‘Constructions and

infrastructure’ EPDs available globally.

Table En46 Sustainability Factors for ISCA Approved Environmental Labels

ISCA Approved Environmental Labels Label Type Sustainability

Factor (SF)

Good Environmental Choice Australia Ecolabel I 1.00

Green Building Council of Australia BEP I 1.00

Global GreenTag Certification: GreenRate and LCARate Schemes I 1.00

Environmental Choice New Zealand I 1.00

ISEAL Alliance compliant whole supply chain Stewardship Scheme certification

I 1.00

Environmental Product Declarations – product-specific III 0.75

Environmental Product Declarations – industry-wide III 0.50

Page 321 of 477



Lea

Spr

Res

Res

Ecn

Ecn

Ene

Gre

Env

Wat

Eco

Sta

Leg

Her

Wfs

Con

Rso

Level 0 to 3

ABL1.1 Use of ISCA approved sustainability labelled products up to 5% based on value, for Level 3, will be awarded points on a sliding scale.

Products purchased, up to 5% (based on value), must be certified by an ISCA approved label (see

Table En44).

This is a scaled credit. For every percentage point of value spent on sustainability labelled products,

fractions of levels are awarded. For example, a 2% of total spend on sustainability labelled products

would achieve Level 1.2 as (2/5) x 3 =1.2.

In calculating performance, the value of any material/product with a sustainability label must be

multiplied by the corresponding sustainability factor (SF) listed in Table En44.

The materials or products with sustainability labels must be used on the permanent infrastructure which

makes up the project or asset. Materials or products used in temporary construction offices (e.g.

construction office chairs) will not be accepted.

ISCA may independently verify the validity of the certificate from the certification body and may require

proof of the claimed quantities in the form of purchase requisitions and invoices for the project.

The evidence must include a report describing:

• Major materials used on the project and their value,

• For those products with sustainability labels, the products used, their labels and their value,

• The proportion of the total material value of the project made up by products with environmental

labels, and

• Certificates for the products.

Example evidence for Level 0 to 3

• Report showing use of a product with the environmental credentials, and

• Product certificate.

Page 322 of 477



References

Auckland Council, 2012. Auckland Waste Management and Minimisation Plan. [Online] Available at:

59TUhttp://temp.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz/EN/environmentwaste/rubbishrecycling/wastemanagementandmi

nimisationplan/Pages/home.aspxU59T

Australian Government – Department of the Environment and Energy, 2013. National Waste Report

2013. [Online] Available at: 59Thttp://www.environment.gov.au/protection/national-waste-policy/national-

waste-reports/national-waste-report-2013/national-waste-stream#a1

Australian Government, Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and

Communities, 2012. Construction and Demolition Waste Guide - Recycling and Re-Use Across the

Supply Chain (Prepared by Edge Consulting). [Online] Available at:

59Thttps://www.environment.gov.au/system/files/resources/b0ac5ce4-4253-4d2b-b001-

0becf84b52b8/files/case-studies.pdf59T

BRANZ. Resource Efficiency in the Building and Related Industries (REBRI). [Online] Available at:

https://www.branz.co.nz/REBRI

59TBrand, S. 1994. How Buildings Learn: What Happens After They're Built. Indiana University: Viking.

Christchurch City Council. Target Sustainability. [Online] Available at:

https://www.ccc.govt.nz/environment/sustainability/target-sustainability/

CRC CARE, 2015. National Framework for Remediation and Management of Contaminated Sites in

Australia (Draft guidance documents). [Online] Available at: 59Thttp://www.crccare.com/knowledge-

sharing/national-remediation-framework

Crossrail. Learning Legacy. [Online] Available at: http://learninglegacy.crossrail.co.uk/

Department of the Environment and Energy & Blue Environment Pty Ltd, 2016. Australian National

Waste Report 2016 (prepared in association with Randell Environmental Consulting). [Online]

Available at: http://www.environment.gov.au/system/files/resources/d075c9bc-45b3-4ac0-a8f2-

6494c7d1fa0d/files/national-waste-report-2016.pdf

Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities - Queensland

Department of Environment and Resource Management, Hyder Consulting, Encycle Consulting &

Sustainable Resource Solutions, 2011. Construction and demolition waste status report. [Online]

Available at: 59Thttps://www.environment.gov.au/system/files/resources/323e8f22-1a8a-4245-a09c-

006644d3bd51/files/construction-waste.pdf

Ellen Macarthur Foundation. Effective Industrial Symbiosis. [Online] Available at:

59Thttps://www.ellenmacarthurfoundation.org/case-studies/effective-industrial-symbiosis59T

European Commission, 2011. Roadmap to a resource Efficient Europe. [Online] Available at:

http://www.cbss.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/energy-efficient-europe.pdf

European Commission. Online Resource Efficiency Platform (OREP). [Online] Available at:

59Thttp://ec.europa.eu/environment/resource_efficiency/re_platform/index_en.htm

European Environment Agency, 2016. Circular Economy in Europe, Developing the Knowledge Base.

[Online] Available at: 59Thttp://www.international-synergies.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/09/Circular-

economy-in-Europe-Developing-the-Knowledge-Base.pdf59T

Environment Protection Authority Tasmania. Resource Efficiency. [Online] Available at:

59Thttp://epa.tas.gov.au/sustainability/resources-for-business-and-industry/resource-efficiency59T

Page 323 of 477

http://wasteplan.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz/

http://temp.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz/EN/environmentwaste/rubbishrecycling/wastemanagementandminimisationplan/Pages/home.aspx

http://temp.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz/EN/environmentwaste/rubbishrecycling/wastemanagementandminimisationplan/Pages/home.aspx

http://www.environment.gov.au/protection/national-waste-policy/national-waste-reports/national-waste-report-2013/national-waste-stream#a1

http://www.environment.gov.au/protection/national-waste-policy/national-waste-reports/national-waste-report-2013/national-waste-stream#a1

https://www.environment.gov.au/system/files/resources/b0ac5ce4-4253-4d2b-b001-0becf84b52b8/files/case-studies.pdf

https://www.environment.gov.au/system/files/resources/b0ac5ce4-4253-4d2b-b001-0becf84b52b8/files/case-studies.pdf

https://www.branz.co.nz/REBRI

https://www.ccc.govt.nz/environment/sustainability/target-sustainability/

https://www.environment.gov.au/system/files/resources/323e8f22-1a8a-4245-a09c-006644d3bd51/files/construction-waste.pdf

https://www.environment.gov.au/system/files/resources/323e8f22-1a8a-4245-a09c-006644d3bd51/files/construction-waste.pdf

https://www.ellenmacarthurfoundation.org/case-studies/effective-industrial-symbiosis

http://ec.europa.eu/environment/resource_efficiency/re_platform/index_en.htm

http://www.international-synergies.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/09/Circular-economy-in-Europe-Developing-the-Knowledge-Base.pdf

http://www.international-synergies.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/09/Circular-economy-in-Europe-Developing-the-Knowledge-Base.pdf

http://epa.tas.gov.au/sustainability/resources-for-business-and-industry/resource-efficiency



Lea

Spr

Res

Res

Ecn

Ecn

Ene

Gre

Env

Wat

Eco

Sta

Leg

Her

Wfs

Con

Rso

Environment Protection Authority Victoria. Resource Efficiency Case Studies. [Online] Available at:

59Thttp://www.epa.vic.gov.au/business-and-industry/lower-your-impact/resource-efficiency/case-studies59T

Government of South Australia – Greening Industries SA. Improving resource efficiency and

business productivity, and helping to reduce consumption, waste and costs for South Australians.

[Online] Available at: 59Thttp://www.greenindustries.sa.gov.au/59T

Green Building Council Australia. Case Studies. [Online] Available at:

59Thttp://new.gbca.org.au/advocacy/state-and-territory-government/

0TLondon Organising Committee of the Olympic and Paralympic Games (LOCOG), 2013. Sustainable

Procurement – The London 2012 Olympics Games and Paralympic Games. [Online] 0TAvailable at:

http://learninglegacy.independent.gov.uk/documents/pdfs/sustainability/cs-games-sustainable-

procurement.pdf

McKinsey & Company. Moving Towards a Circular Economy. [Online] Available at:

59Thttp://www.oecd.org/env/indicators-modelling-outlooks/resourceefficiency.htm 59T

National Environment Protection (Assessment of Site Contamination) Measure, 1999 (amended

2013). Available at: http://www.nepc.gov.au/nepms/assessment-site-contamination

New Zealand Government, Ministry for the Environment. New Zealand’s goals for managing and

minimising waste. [Online] Available at: 59Thttp://www.mfe.govt.nz/publications/waste/new-zealand-

waste-strategy-reducing-harm-improving-efficiency/new-zealand%E2%80%99s-goals59T

New Zealand Government. Waste Minimisation Act 2008. [Online] Available at:

59Thttp://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/2008/0089/latest/DLM1235823.html59T

Northern Territory Environment Protection Authority, 2015. Waste Management Strategy for the

Northern Territory 2015 – 2022. [Online] Available at:

59Thttps://ntepa.nt.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0008/284948/ntepa_waste_strategy_2015_2022.pdf 59T

NSW Government, 2014. NSW Government Resource Efficiency Policy. [Online] Available at:

59Thttp://www.environment.nsw.gov.au/resources/government/140567NSWGREP.pdf 59T

Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). Resource Efficiency. [Online]

Available at: 59Thttp://www.oecd.org/env/indicators-modelling-outlooks/resourceefficiency.htm 59T

The State of Victoria Department of Sustainability and Environment, 2006. Ministerial Guidelines for

Assessment of Environmental Effects under the Environmental Effects Act 1978. [Online] Available at:

59Thttps://www.planning.vic.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0020/9443/DSE097_EES_FA.pdf 59T

The Status of Industrial Ecology in Australia: Barriers and Enablers, 2014. Glen D. Corder; Artem

Golev; Julian Fyfe; Sarah King [Online] Available at: 59Thttp://www.mdpi.com/2079-9276/3/2/34059T

Queensland Government - Department of Science, Information Technology, Innovation and the Arts,

2014. Queensland Acid Sulfate Soil Technical Manual. [Online] Available at:

59Thttps://publications.qld.gov.au/storage/f/2014-09-01T07%3A37%3A45.276Z/queensland-ass-

management-guideline-2014.pdf59T

Queensland Government, 2010. Queensland’s Waste Strategy 2010 – 2020 – Waste Avoidance and

Recycling Consultation Draft. [Online] Available at:

59Thttp://www.parliament.qld.gov.au/Documents/TableOffice/TabledPapers/2010/5310T2329.pdf 59T

Victoria State Government. Business and Energy Efficiency. ([Online] Available at:

59Thttp://www.sustainability.vic.gov.au/services-and-advice/business/energy-and-materials-efficiency-for-

business/what-is-resource-efficiency59T

Page 324 of 477

http://www.epa.vic.gov.au/business-and-industry/lower-your-impact/resource-efficiency/case-studies

http://www.greenindustries.sa.gov.au/

http://new.gbca.org.au/advocacy/state-and-territory-government/

http://www.oecd.org/env/indicators-modelling-outlooks/resourceefficiency.htm

http://www.nepc.gov.au/nepms/assessment-site-contamination

http://www.mfe.govt.nz/publications/waste/new-zealand-waste-strategy-reducing-harm-improving-efficiency/new-zealand%E2%80%99s-goals

http://www.mfe.govt.nz/publications/waste/new-zealand-waste-strategy-reducing-harm-improving-efficiency/new-zealand%E2%80%99s-goals

http://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/2008/0089/latest/DLM1235823.html

https://ntepa.nt.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0008/284948/ntepa_waste_strategy_2015_2022.pdf

http://www.environment.nsw.gov.au/resources/government/140567NSWGREP.pdf

http://www.oecd.org/env/indicators-modelling-outlooks/resourceefficiency.htm

https://www.planning.vic.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0020/9443/DSE097_EES_FA.pdf

http://www.mdpi.com/2079-9276/3/2/340

https://publications.qld.gov.au/storage/f/2014-09-01T07%3A37%3A45.276Z/queensland-ass-management-guideline-2014.pdf

https://publications.qld.gov.au/storage/f/2014-09-01T07%3A37%3A45.276Z/queensland-ass-management-guideline-2014.pdf

http://www.parliament.qld.gov.au/Documents/TableOffice/TabledPapers/2010/5310T2329.pdf

http://www.sustainability.vic.gov.au/services-and-advice/business/energy-and-materials-efficiency-for-business/what-is-resource-efficiency

http://www.sustainability.vic.gov.au/services-and-advice/business/energy-and-materials-efficiency-for-business/what-is-resource-efficiency



Waste and Resources Action Programme. Resource Efficiency. [Online] Available at:

59Thttp://www.wrap.org.uk/category/subject/resource-efficiency-059T

WasteMINZ. National Waste Data Framework Project. [Online] Available at:

59Thttps://www.wasteminz.org.nz/projects/national-waste-data-framework-project/59T

WRAP, 2016. WRAP Designing Out Waste Actions (Crossrail), Author: Mike de Silva BSc PhD

FCIWEM MIEEM CSci C.WEM Available at:

59Thttp://learninglegacy.crossrail.co.uk/documents/designing-out-waste/59T

Page 325 of 477

http://www.wrap.org.uk/category/subject/resource-efficiency-0

https://www.wasteminz.org.nz/projects/national-waste-data-framework-project/

http://learninglegacy.crossrail.co.uk/article-author/mike-de-silva/

http://learninglegacy.crossrail.co.uk/article-author/mike-de-silva/

http://learninglegacy.crossrail.co.uk/documents/designing-out-waste/



Lea

Spr

Res

Res

Ecn

Ecn

Ene

Gre

Env

Wat

Eco

Sta

Leg

Her

Wfs

Con WATER

Water resources are becoming increasingly scarce and excessive consumption can threaten the

functioning of our ecosystems. Conserving water is particularly important in Australia as large parts of

the country face a widening gap between a diminishing supply due to climate change and an increasing

demand due to population growth. Some parts of the country where periodic drought conditions occur

make water availability a key issue of concern. With such constraints, environmental and economic cost

of water use and water discharge is a significant consideration for all infrastructure assets.

For Australian and New Zealand communities, environments, industries and economy, water is an

essential resource. The wellbeing of our population depends on the availability of water.

In 2004 the Council of Australian Governments (COAG) endorsed the National Water Initiative (NWI)

(Department of Agriculture and Water Resources, 2017). The NWI aims to improve the way Australia

manages its water resources. Efforts to better manage water use in infrastructure can be seen as part

of a commitment to better meet and manage urban and rural water demands (Department of Agriculture

and Water Resources, 2017). Reducing water consumption in infrastructure can contribute to meeting

NWI objectives by helping to (Deaprtment of Agriculture and Water Resources, 1994):

• restore water-stressed ecosystems,

• provide healthy, safe and reliable water supplies,

• encourage re-use and recycling of wastewater where cost effective,

• facilitate water trading between and within the urban and rural sectors, and

• encourage innovation in water supply sourcing, treatment, storage and discharge.

The NWI reflects the need to conserve precious water resources through best practice water

management. In the water sector, this has typically been approached through demand management.

Demand management (DM) takes what is called an ‘end use’ focus. In other words, it focuses on what

the water is used for and aims to reduce the volume required whilst maintaining the service. DM

programs in the urban water sector have led to huge water savings for utilities and for residential and

industrial customers. Looking at water use from an end use perspective also allows a water planner to

identify what quality of water is required. Non-potable water supplies can then be identified (e.g.

rainwater, industrial or residential wastewater, stormwater) and treated to the appropriate quality. The

National Water Recycling Guidelines (www.recycledwater.com.au) were developed to provide a

reference for those involved in the supply and use of non-potable water sources.

Water is used in infrastructure projects and assets to achieve a wide array of outcomes, such as dust

suppression during construction; public health protection for workers (e.g. ablution blocks); and vehicle

or equipment washing or irrigation. There is also a special subset of infrastructure projects/assets

whose purpose is to provide water, wastewater, or stormwater services. For those projects/assets,

water has much more significance.

Except during periods of declared drought, there has been little or no legislative or commercial drivers

to reduce water use in infrastructure, so where water conservation has occurred, it has been driven by

other factors, such as local constraints (e.g. water restrictions), economic reasons or sustainability

aspirations. Nevertheless, there is a growing interest in the use of alternative water supplies in

infrastructure. This is reflected in the policies and plans of leading Australian infrastructure agencies.

For example, VicRoads has identified potential non-potable water sources for road activities (VicRoads,

2018). The roads and traffic authorities of NSW (RMS) and Victoria (VicRoads) both have policies that

encourage the re-use of non-potable water in road construction and maintenance.

There are schemes that rate water efficiency and effectiveness. One such scheme is Smart Approved

WaterMark (Smart Approved WaterMark, 2018). Smart Approved WaterMark is a voluntary not-for-

profit organisation that independently accredits water efficient devices and products, including some

Page 326 of 477



that may be relevant to infrastructure, such as vehicle and tool cleaning products, nozzles and

landscape irrigation systems.

Sustainable water use is based on three basic principles which are relevant to every stage in the life of

an infrastructure asset:

• the first is simply to minimise the volume of water used,

• the second is to be sensible about what type of water is used – that is, utilise appropriate water

source and then use alternative water sources where whatever scale of recycling makes

environmental or ecological and economic sense and to minimise the impacts associated with

the water supply, and

• third principle is to measure water.

Achieving the first two outcomes requires a good understanding of how, where and why water is used.

Monitoring how much water is consumed by different water demands (i.e. end uses) is not standard

practice. Little general data is available, making benchmarking difficult. So, one focus of this category

is to collect water use data and in the future, make it available to the industry.

The intent of this category is to facilitate the development of infrastructure that through innovative

planning, design, construction and operation:

• reduces the volume of water use,

• encourages the effective substitution of potable water with locally appropriate alternative

sources,

• minimises the ecosystem impacts of local water extraction/harvesting and discharging, and

• encourages the collation and sharing of water use data for industry benchmarking purposes.

Water used throughout the life cycle of infrastructure varies considerably, by asset type, by activity (end

use), volume, quality, and impact. Accordingly, credits for this category apply the basic principles

embedded in the water reduction hierarchy (i.e. eliminate use, alternative water source, reduce, re-use,

recycle, disposal) and fit-for-purpose water use.

The Water category credits were developed to be non-prescriptive and performance-based (i.e.

outcomes) because water use varies across different infrastructure types.

State and/or Local Government guidelines or standards relating to water conservation and replacing

potable water should be consulted as they may differ from region to region. Similarly, project/asset-

specific guidelines from infrastructure agencies of specific states and or jurisdictions should be

consulted.

The following two credits apply to the Water category:

Wat-1 Avoiding unnecessary water use

Wat-2 Utilising appropriate water sources

This Water category focuses on water efficiency and water re-use, rather than on the downstream

environmental impacts of water use which is dealt with in the ‘Environmental Impacts’ category.

Management of aquatic ecosystems is dealt with in the Ecology category.

Page 327 of 477



Lea

Spr

Res

Res

Ecn

Ecn

Ene

Gre

Env

Wat

Eco

Sta

Leg

Her

Wfs

Con

Category Linkages

The following ISv2.0 categories have linkages with the Water category.

Table En47 Category Linkages


Ecn-1 Ecn-1 and Ecn-4 could be

(planning) or must be (Design)

used to assess water options in

Wat-2.

x x x

Ecn-4 Ecn-1 and Ecn-4 could be

(planning) or must be (Design)

used to assess water options in

Wat-2.

x x x

Sta-1 Identifying the impacts to water

sources may require stakeholder

engagement.

x x x x

Page 328 of 477



ISv2.0 Design

Wat-1 Avoiding Water use

Aim

To reward the reduction of water demand across the infrastructure life cycle.

Criteria

Table En48 Wat-1 Design summary criteria table


D1.1 A water use and demand assessment is

undertaken for construction and operational phases.

AND

DL1.2 Opportunities to avoid water use, including a

minimum of three construction initiatives, are

identified and included in design and construction

planning.

The requirements for Level 1 are achieved

AND

L2.1 The assessment undertaken in DL1.2 is

extended to assess options using a formal

assessment method.

AND

DL2.2 A reduction up to 30% in water use in

construction and operational phases is forecast

compared to a base case data. Fractions of levels

may be achieved on a sliding scale.

Definitions

Non-potable water means lower-quality water suitable for other purposes such as toilet flushing or

dust suppression.

Potable water means high-quality water suitable for drinking and cooking. This is the standard supplied

by water utilities which is sometimes called town water or reticulated water.

Significant water uses are those that are likely to make up >5% of the total water use over its life

cycle.

Water Footprint means the quantified impact of water use across the asset life cycle.

Water use means all direct use of potable and non-potable water throughout the design, construction

and operation phases of the infrastructure asset.

A suitably qualified professional is a person with relevant engineering or science qualifications and

has at least 5 years’ experience in water demand modelling or forecasting.

Level 1

DL1.1 A water use and demand assessment is undertaken for construction and operational phases.

If a water use and demand assessment was undertaken and verified as part of a Planning rating, then

the assessment must be reviewed and updated to ensure it is reflective of any design changes, by a

suitably qualified professional.

If a water use and demand assessment has not been undertaken as part of a Planning rating, then the

following applies:

A demand assessment of significant water use (water footprint) for the infrastructure project must be

undertaken by a suitable qualified professional to provide reasonable estimates or predictions of all key

activities (water end uses). The demand assessment must include all water consumption from both

potable and non-potable sources within the boundaries of the project/asset type. Water used outside

the boundaries of the project/asset (i.e. concrete mixing by a third party) can be included in the water

footprint scope where possible to calculate but is not required.

Page 329 of 477



Lea

Spr

Res

Res

Ecn

Ecn

Ene

Gre

Env

Wat

Eco

Sta

Leg

Her

Wfs

Con

The assessment must consider whole of life including construction and operation. The assumptions

must be clearly identified and outlined as part of the assessment. Assumptions are required as the

level of sophistication will vary depending on the available design data.

Construction phase rainfall forecasts must use local average Bureau of Meteorology records (unless

an alternative forecasting method can be justified). Operational phase rainfall calculations must use

local average Bureau of Meteorology records with adjustments from climate change projections over

the life cycle of the asset (unless an alternative forecasting method can be justified).

Significant water end uses must be identified and quantified/estimated using a spreadsheet, or a water

modelling method. Water end uses might include: office ablutions, user/workers ablutions, dust

suppression, sub-grade stabilisation, moisture control of fills and pavement layers, wash down/cleaning,

on-site manufacture, landscape irrigation/ erosion control watering, water line testing, fire-fighting,

equipment cooling and cleaning.

Undertaking a Water Balance Study to develop a water footprint is a suitable means to model the water

use across the infrastructure life cycle. A Water Balance Study analyses and brings together the end

uses, the volumes required over time (technologies and behaviours), and the possible water sources.

It allows the required water volumes and qualities over the different stages of a project/asset to be

estimated.

DL1.2 Opportunities to avoid water use, including a minimum of three construction initiatives, are identified and included in design and construction planning.

Where water reduction opportunities have been developed and verified as part of a Planning rating,

then the opportunities must be reviewed and updated to reflect additional information and changes to

the project design. The review and update must be undertaken by a suitably qualified professional.

If an opportunities assessment has not been undertaken as part of a Planning rating, then the following

applies:

To aid in achieving water reductions, an analysis of water reduction opportunities must be undertaken

to help eliminate excessive water use or reduce water consumption across the infrastructure life cycle.

Water conservation must also be a key consideration in the re-use or upgrade of an existing asset

where applicable.

The opportunity analysis must include the following as a minimum:

• the process used to identify opportunities to reduce water use,

• a list of all the opportunities identified (with explanations),

• the process used to analyse and evaluate opportunities,

• commitments to implement opportunities during delivery and operation, and

• explanations of why other identified opportunities were not included in the design or construction

methodology.

A minimum of three reduction initiatives for construction must be identified and assessed unless a

limited scope of works can be demonstrated.

It may be useful to incorporate identified opportunities into management plans.

Water reduction initiatives should also be incorporated into sustainability opportunities (or initiatives)

register in Lea-2.


• Demand assessment report,

• Water footprint report,

Page 330 of 477



• Final design showing water efficiency measures, and

• Construction methodology including water reduction initiatives

Level >1 to 3 on sliding scale

DL2.1 The assessment undertaken in DL1.2 is extended to assess options using a formal assessment method.

If an options assessment that meets the requirements of this criterion has been undertaken and verified

as part of a Planning rating, then that options assessment must be reviewed and updated to reflect any

additional information or changes to the design or construction methodology. The review and update

must be undertaken by a suitably qualified professional with experience in formal assessments.

If an options assessment has not been undertaken as part of a Planning rating, or it has been

undertaken but has not been undertaken in accordance with Ecn-1 and Ecn-4, then the following

applies:

The options assessment undertaken in DL1.2 must be extended to include a formal assessment of

each water reduction option and consider the whole life costs of each option. The formal assessment

must be undertaken in accordance with Ecn-1 and Ecn-4. The formal assessment and whole of life

costing needs to only be completed on options that are identified as having a reasonable risk according

to the project. This means, if options assessed in DL1.2 are deemed to have a too greater risk to

proceed, then those options do not need to be assessed using a formal assessment method and whole

of life costing.

A minimum of three reduction initiatives for construction must be identified and assessed unless a

limited scope of works can be demonstrated.

It is recommended to use either a cost benefit analysis and/or multi-criteria assessment on each option.

For more guidance on the formal assessment methods and whole of life costing approach, please see

the Ecn-1 and Ecn-4 credits. The Energy and Carbon Guideline provides an example of these formal

methods being used to assess energy options which may be useful as an example.

All feasible options must be incorporated in the final design and construction planning. An explanation

of feasibility must be provided as evidence.

DL2.2 A reduction up to 30% in water use in construction and operational phases is forecast compared to a base case data. Fractions of levels may be achieved on a sliding scale.

An assessment of water use compared to a base case must show a reduction of up to 30%.

Water use modelled must show a reduction of up to 30% compared to a base case.






Example evidence for Level >1-3

• Water model showing a reduction up to 30% compared to the base case, and

• Base case

Page 331 of 477



Lea

Spr

Res

Res

Ecn

Ecn

Ene

Gre

Env

Wat

Eco

Sta

Leg

Her

Wfs

Con

ISv2.0 As Built

Wat-1 Avoiding Water use

Aim

To reward the reduction of water demand across the infrastructure life cycle.

Criteria

Table En49 Wat-1 As Built summary criteria table


ABL1.1 Feasible water reduction opportunities

identified in design are implemented.

AND

ABL1.2 Water usage is measured and monitored.


AND

ABL2.1 Actual water consumption demonstrates a

reduction up to 30% in water use compared to a base

case.

Definitions


dust suppression.



Significant water uses are those that are likely to make up >5% of the total water use over its life

cycle.

Water use means all direct use of potable and non-potable water throughout the design, construction

and operation phases of the infrastructure asset.

Level 1

ABL1.1 Feasible water reduction opportunities identified in design are implemented.

Water reduction opportunities identified in design and assessed as feasible must be implemented

including all feasible construction initiatives. Implementation can include the construction of water

reduction measures, the incorporation of management actions in management plans or alike.

If there are opportunities that are no longer feasible, then justification must be provided and should

include a formal assessment to support this claim.

Management actions that are required in operations to achieve water reductions must be outlined in

handover documents and provided to the operator.

ABL1.2 Water usage is measured and monitored.

Water usage for must be measured and monitor during the As Built phase and reported on a monthly

basis. The water usage measurement and monitoring must cover all significant water end uses on site

for each water use and each water source. Mitigating actions must be implemented if expected or

planned water consumption is exceeded.

It is suggested that the water usage data is check annually to identify any unexpected discrepancies in

the data.

Page 332 of 477



Level >1 to 3 on a sliding scale

ABL2.1 Actual water consumption demonstrates a reduction up to 30% in water use compared to a base case.

Monitoring data must demonstrate a reduction of up to 30% in water use when compared to a base

case.






Example evidence for Level >1-3

• As Built plans,

• Water management plan and monitoring data, and

• Monthly water monitoring reports.

Page 333 of 477



Lea

Spr

Res

Res

Ecn

Ecn

Ene

Gre

Env

Wat

Eco

Sta

Leg

Her

Wfs

Con

ISv2.0 Design


Aim

To reward the identification and allocation of appropriate water sources.

Criteria

Table En50 Wat-2 Design summary criteria table


DL1.1 An assessment is

undertaken to identify available

and appropriate water sources for

the asset.


achieved

AND

DL2.1 The assessment undertaken

in DL1.1 is extended to assess

options using a formal assessment

method.


achieved

AND

DL3.1 Water use demonstrates no

adverse impacts to water

resources or communities.

The regional variations in Australia and New Zealand affect the accessibility to water source – be it

potable or non-potable. This credit intends to check status and test vulnerability of the available water

sources used for infrastructure. The quality and quantity of water use in any activity are jointly

determined by the supply of water available to support that activity and the demand for water in that

activity. The sustainability of water source tends to be location specific and depends on a wide range

of factors, including but not limited to:

• Climate,

• Volume of water that percolates to groundwater tables and the recharge rate,

• Volume of storage available (dams, reservoirs, aquifers),

• Availability of surface water flows (rivers, creeks and streams),

• Availability of recycled, reclaimed water and/or desalinated water,

• Population and demographic change,

• Intensity of water use,

• Land use and geology, and

• Water price and economics.

Definitions

Formal assessment is an economic assessment of option including methods such as cost benefit

analysis, rapid cost benefit analysis, multi-criteria assessment and objective impacts assessment. For

more detail, please see the Ecn-1 credit introduction.


dust suppression.



Reclaimed water or recycled water means converted wastewater into water that can be re-used for

other purposes.

A suitably qualified professional is a person with relevant engineering or science qualifications and

has at least 5 years’ experience in water management on infrastructure projects or groundwater

experience where appropriate.

Page 334 of 477



Level 1

DL1.1 An assessment is undertaken to identify available and appropriate water sources for the asset.

If an assessment that identifies available and appropriate water sources that meets the requirements

of this criterion has been undertaken and verified as part of a Planning rating, then that assessment

must be reviewed and updated to reflect any additional information or changes to the design. The

review and update must be undertaken by a suitably qualified professional.

If an options assessment has not been undertaken as part of a Planning rating then the following

applies:

After quantifying water requirements for the asset (Wat-1 DL1.1), an assessment must be conducted

to identify available water sources to determine what options are appropriate for the asset. The

assessment may include a combination of a desktop assessment and site surveys where extra

information is required. This assessment must include:

• All legal water source options available to the project site such as potable, non-potable, recycled

or reclaimed water, bore water, water extracted from waterways or dams, etc,

• water source options for each water use,

• Risks and opportunities of each option for each water source including the full life cycle impacts

from extraction to discharge. This includes consideration of how the particular source of water

can impact the environment or community once it is discharged, and

• Site assessments where additional information is required to perform the assessment.


• Options assessment,

• Risk and opportunity assessment register, report and matrix,

• Management plans, and

• Design reports.

Level 2

DL2.1 The assessment undertaken in DL1.1 is extended to assess options using a formal assessment method.

If an options assessment that meets the requirements of this criterion has been undertaken and verified

as part of a Planning rating, then that options assessment must be reviewed and updated to reflect any

additional information or changes to the design. The review and update must be undertaken by a

suitably qualified professional with experience in formal assessments.

If an options assessment has not been undertaken as part of a Planning rating then the following

applies:

The options assessment undertaken in DL1.1 must be extended to include a formal assessment of

each water source option and consider the whole life costs of each option. The formal assessment

must be undertaken in accordance with Ecn-1 and Ecn-4. The formal assessment and whole of life

costing needs to only be completed on options that are identified as having a reasonable risk according

to the project. This means, if options assessed in DL1.1 are deemed to have a too greater risk to

proceed, then those options do not need to be assessed using a formal assessment method and whole

of life costing.

It is recommended to use either a cost benefit analysis and/or multi-criteria assessment on each option.

For more guidance on the formal assessment methods and whole of life costing approach, please see

Page 335 of 477



Lea

Spr

Res

Res

Ecn

Ecn

Ene

Gre

Env

Wat

Eco

Sta

Leg

Her

Wfs

Con

the Ecn-1 and Ecn-4 credits. The Energy and Carbon Guideline provides an example of these formal

methods being used to assess energy options which may be useful as an example.

All feasible options must be incorporated in the final design and construction methodology. An

explanation of feasibility must be provided as evidence.


• Formal assessment of each option

• Final design showing water sources.

Level 3

DL3.1 Water use demonstrates no adverse impacts to water resources or communities.

Evidence must be provided showing that the water sources used on the project has no adverse impacts

to the environment or communities. Impacts may be short-term if it can be shown that they do not have

long-term impacts, and the short-term impacts are considered acceptable by the community or

environmental experts.

For example, a project may be considering using recycled water for dust suppression, however there is

a local waterhole downstream of the site. The community have voiced their concern stating that they

do not want to swim in the waterhole in case the recycled water runs off into it. In this instance, using

recycled water may not cause health or environmental risks, however will cause an adverse impact on

the community as they will not swim in the waterhole as a result.

Practices must be planned and implemented to avoid contamination of surface water and groundwater.

Any impacts must be temporary and isolated to the project site boundary.

UFor groundwater extraction

For projects that are utilising groundwater extraction, the following requirements apply.

Site and project-specific environmental and groundwater assessments must be undertaken by a

suitably qualified professional. The assessments must consider the local project conditions including,

but not limited to:

• Groundwater quality and quantity requirement for each end use (including an assessment of the

potential for contamination of the groundwater),

• Aquifer yield,

• Impacts on other groundwater uses and users, particularly those downgradient of the extraction

point(s),

• Depth of groundwater extraction,

• Volumes of groundwater to be extracted and timeframe and the sustainability of the aquifer to

provide these volumes for the period,

• Longer-term impacts on the health of the aquifer such as drawdown and recharge,

• Interaction with surface water bodies,

• Ecological impacts including groundwater-dependent ecosystems and ecosystems developed

within groundwater, and

• Regulatory management of groundwater aquifers including aquifer interference.

Page 336 of 477




• Impact assessments,


• Groundwater assessment where applicable.

Page 337 of 477



Lea

Spr

Res

Res

Ecn

Ecn

Ene

Gre

Env

Wat

Eco

Sta

Leg

Her

Wfs

Con

ISv2.0 As Built


Aim

To reward the identification and allocation of appropriate water sources.

Criteria

Table En51 Wat-2 As Built summary criteria table

Level 1 Level 2

ABL1.1 Feasible water source options

incorporated into the design and construction

methodology are implemented.


AND

DL2.1 Water use demonstrates no adverse

impacts to water resources or communities.

The regional variations in Australia and New Zealand affect the accessibility to water source – be it

potable or non-potable. This credit intends to check status and test vulnerability of the available water

sources used for infrastructure. The quality and quantity of water use in any activity are jointly

determined by the supply of water available to support that activity and the demand for water in that

activity. The sustainability of water source tends to be location specific and depends on a wide range

of factors, including but not limited to:

• Climate ,

• Volume of water that percolates to groundwater tables and the recharge rate,

• Volume of storage available (dams, reservoirs, aquifers),

• Availability of surface water flows (rivers, creeks and streams),

• Availability of recycled, reclaimed water and/or desalinated water,

• Population and demographic change,

• Intensity of water use,

• Land use and geology, and

• Water price and economics.

Definitions


dust suppression.



Reclaimed water or recycled water means converted wastewater into water that can be re-used for

other purposes.

Level 1

ABL1.1 Feasible water source options incorporated into the design and construction methodology are implemented.

All feasible water source options identified in design must be implemented including construction

opportunities. Implementation can include the construction of plant and equipment, the incorporation of

management actions in management plans, procurement or alike.

Page 338 of 477



If there are opportunities that are no longer feasible, then justification must be provided and should

include a formal assessment to support this claim.



• Management plans, and

• Procurement documents.

Level 2

DL2.1 Water use demonstrates no adverse impacts to water resources or communities.

Evidence must be provided showing that the water sources used on the project had no adverse long-

term impacts to the environment or communities. Impacts may be short-term if it can be shown that

they did not have long-term impacts, and the short-term impacts were considered acceptable by the

community or environmental experts.

For example, a project may have considered using recycled water for dust suppression, however there

is a local waterhole downstream of the site. The community voiced their concern stating that they did

not want to swim in the waterhole in case the recycled water runs off into it. In this instance, using

recycled water did not cause health or environmental risks, however caused an adverse impact on the

community as they avoided the waterhole as a result.

Practices must be planned and implemented to avoid contamination of surface water and groundwater.

Any impacts must be temporary and isolated to the project site boundary.


• Impact assessments,

• Design and monitoring reports, and

• Groundwater assessment where applicable.

Page 339 of 477



Lea

Spr

Res

Res

Ecn

Ecn

Ene

Gre

Env

Wat

Eco

Sta

Leg

Her

Wfs

Con

References Deaprtment of Agriculture and Water Resources, 1994. Intergovernmental agreement on a National Water Initiative, Canberra: National Water Initiative.

Department of Agriculture and Water Resources, 2017. National Water Initiative. [Online]

Available at: Uhttp://www.agriculture.gov.au/water/policy/nwi/U

[Accessed 6 July 2018].

Smart Approved WaterMark, 2018. Smart Approved WaterMark. [Online]

Available at: Uhttps://www.smartwatermark.org/U


VicRoads, 2018. Water. [Online]

Available at: Uhttps://www.vicroads.vic.gov.au/planning-and-projects/environment/waterU


Page 340 of 477




Page 341 of 477



Lea

Spr

Res

Res

Ecn

Ecn

Ene

Gre

Env

Wat

Eco

Sta

Leg

Her

Wfs

Con ECOLOGY

The loss of biodiversity is a growing global concern. Increasing rates of land use change, driven by

growing human populations and the demand for natural resources, has placed considerable pressures

on species, ecological communities, ecosystems and broader biomes (Gaston et al, 2002). Species

extinction rates are increasing and the legacy of historical land use in many regions has left a

considerable extinction debt, with many species predicted to go extinct without any further loss of habitat

(Tilman et al, 1994; Brooks et al, 1999; Krauss, 2010).

In Australia, the ongoing and cumulative impacts of land use change on terrestrial and aquatic

ecosystems are widely recognised (Jackson et al, 2017). Likewise, in New Zealand, population growth

and urban expansion is affecting land productivity and its ability to support biodiversity (Ministry for the

Environment & Statistics New Zealand, 2015). Given current trajectories in land use change, further

losses in the number of terrestrial and aquatic species, communities and habitats are expected. Shifts

in the distribution and abundance of species in response to climate change is likely to compound this

issue even further (Thomas et al, 2004). If these trends in biodiversity loss are to be arrested, a

transformation in the planning and delivery of developments is required involving substantial shifts

towards liveability, sustainability and resilience.

Since 1992, the pursuit of Ecologically Sustainable Development (ESD) has been increasingly

incorporated into the policies and programs of global governments. Founded in international policy

through the inception of the Convention on Biological Diversity, ESD is defined by the Commonwealth

Government of Australia as “using, conserving and enhancing the community's resources so that

ecological processes, on which life depends, are maintained, and the total quality of life, now and in the

future, can be increased” (Ecologically Sustainable Development Steering Committee, 1992).

Australia’s National Strategy for ESD identifies key outcomes for future growth and development in

Australia’s economic sectors including requirements for the sustainable development and use of

infrastructure. Infrastructure performance in relation to these outcomes is ultimately assessed against

the Environmental Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999. Similarly, in New Zealand, whole

of life infrastructure asset performance is primarily assessed against the requirements of the Resource

Management Act 1991.

This category aims to promote and recognise infrastructure developments and operations that protect

and enhance terrestrial and aquatic ecology through:

• Employing rigorous evidence-based approaches to identifying and managing ecological impacts

and opportunities (Eco-1), and

• Monitoring and reporting on project outcomes (Eco-2).

Ecological Impact Assessment

Ecological Impact Assessment (EcIA), is the process prescribed for identifying and managing the

ecological impacts and opportunities of infrastructure planning, design, construction and operation. It is

defined by the Environment Institute of Australia and New Zealand (EIANZ) as a series of actions for

“identifying, quantifying and evaluating the potential impacts of defined actions on ecosystems or their

components; and providing a scientifically defensible approach to ecosystem management” (EIANZ,

2015, p3). In Australia and New Zealand, EcIA often forms a mandatory requirement in the assessment

and approval of infrastructure developments under current regulatory frameworks. It provides a method

for demonstrating the protection or enhancement of ecological values including species, communities

and ecosystems; typically achieved through the prioritisation of measures to avoid, minimise, restore

and/or offset potential adverse impacts.

Page 342 of 477



Examples for managing adverse impacts to terrestrial and aquatic ecosystems include:

Table En52 Managing adverse impacts to terrestrial and aquatic ecosystems

Avoid Minimise Restore/ Remedy1 Offset

Avoid:

The removal of

significant vegetation or

habitat.

The loss of hollow-

bearing trees.

Clearing riparian

vegetation.

Sensitive habitats,

including wetlands.

Changes to local

hydrology.

Minimise the

development footprint

and any loss or

fragmentation of

vegetation and/or

habitats.

Control noise, light,

erosion, pollutant and

nutrient inputs.

Consolidate works to

avoid fragmenting

remaining habitats.

Control pests and weeds.

Maintain safe passage

for fish in waterways.

Rehabilitate areas of

cleared vegetation.

Restore damaged or

degraded habitats.

Reconnect fragmented

habitats.

Restore areas of cleared

vegetation.

Market based

instruments.

Habitat protection.

Indirect/ compensatory

actions.

Financial payments.

In this category, the concepts of protection and enhancement of ecological value equate to ‘no net loss’

and ‘net gain’ outcomes. ‘No net loss’ can be defined as “the point where biodiversity gains from targeted

conservation activities match the losses of biodiversity due to the impacts of a specific development

project, so that there is not net reduction overall in the type, amount and condition (or quality) of

biodiversity over space and time” (Business and Biodiversity Offsets Programme, 2012). A ‘net gain’ is

“where overall gains for vegetation and habitat are greater than overall losses and where individual

losses are avoided where possible” (Government of Victoria, 2002).

Biodiversity offsets are an EcIA measure that may be used to compensate for the ecological impacts of

a development in exchange for measurable biodiversity gains delivered elsewhere. These are intended

to facilitate the achievement of no net loss outcomes, whilst supporting ongoing development. Despite

the growing rigour of existing approaches, a number of shortfalls have been identified (Maron et al,

2015; Walmsley et al, 2014). It is for this reason that best practice EcIA minimises the use of biodiversity

offsets through the implementation of measures to avoid, minimise and remedy development impacts

on site wherever practicable. Where biodiversity offsets are required to address residual impacts,

several best practice principles have been identified. These are intended to assist infrastructure

developments in realising long-term biodiversity outcomes.

Fundamental principles for best practice biodiversity offsets, as identified by Walmsley et al, (2014):

• Biodiversity offsets must only be used as a last resort and clear limits must be placed on the

use of offsets,

• Offsets must be based on sound ecological studies and principles,

• Indirect offsets must be strictly limited,

• Offsetting must achieve benefits in perpetuity,

• Offsets must be based on principles of net gain,

• Offsets must be additional, and

• Offset arrangements must be legally enforceable.

Net gain or no net loss outcomes will only be realised where best practice biodiversity offsets are

provided for the life of the impact. For this reason, biodiversity offsets must be secured by means of an

appropriate legal mechanism such as a statutory covenant, Biodiversity Conservation Agreement or

1 These measures are also considered offsets, according to the Biodiversity Offset Scheme New South

Wales.

Page 343 of 477



Lea

Spr

Res

Res

Ecn

Ecn

Ene

Gre

Env

Wat

Eco

Sta

Leg

Her

Wfs

Con

Property Vegetation Plan. Wherever possible, biodiversity offsets should provide like-for-like (i.e.

ecologically equivalent) returns and be delivered prior to the project impact.

Ecological monitoring

In Australia, more resources than ever before are being spent on monitoring the state of terrestrial and

aquatic ecosystems. However persistent knowledge gaps, including a lack of understanding of the

effects and outcomes of management interventions, continue to hinder industry efforts to minimise and

manage the impacts of development on biodiversity. Without quantifying the state of a system before,

during and after development, it is difficult to rigorously assess the adequacy of management actions or

to establish the need for further intervention. For this reason, ecological monitoring is considered

essential in evaluating and ultimately improving ecological risk management practices.

Ecological monitoring programs that are not well designed and implemented provide little return on

investment. This is because they often lack an ability to detect effects where they occur and provide

guidance on ways to make management more effective (Lindenmayer et al, 2012). However, important

considerations made during the development of an ecological monitoring program can assist to ensure

that it is most effective (Field, 2007).

Best practice principles for ecological monitoring, as identified by Field et al, (2007), include:

• Allocate sufficient funding – the financial commitment made must allow sufficient time for

detecting change above that of natural variation. This will vary depending on the target species

or ecosystem and can be estimated more rigorously using statistical power analyses,

• Set clear objectives – it is necessary to clearly articulate monitoring objectives. These should

guide the selection of suitable ecological indicators and inform the amount of change necessary

to trigger a management response, and

• Implement appropriate sampling design– the sampling design must ensure sufficient statistical

power to detect an effect where it occurs. It is important to consider sample size, data

independence and error. To achieve sufficient statistical power it may be necessary to relax the

significance level above the conventional 5% level.

When implemented effectively, ecological monitoring provides a critical link in the adaptive management

of infrastructure projects; ensuring that the benefits of investment into protecting and enhancing

biodiversity are fully realised.


Eco-1 Ecological Assessment and Risk Management


Page 344 of 477



Category Linkages

The following ISv2.0 categories have linkages with the Ecology category.

Table En53 Category Linkages


Wat-2 The source and discharge of

water needs to consider

ecological impacts

x x x

Env-

1-5

Any discharges from the project

need to consider the ecological

impacts

x x x

Gre-1 Green infrastructure may

enhance ecological value

x x x x

Leg-1 The project may choose a

legacy initiative that enhances

ecological outcomes.

x x x x

Page 345 of 477



Lea

Spr

Res

Res

Ecn

Ecn

Ene

Gre

Env

Wat

Eco

Sta

Leg

Her

Wfs

Con

ISv2.0 Design


Aim

To reward the identification of ecological values, the management of impacts and opportunities to

achieve the maintenance or enhancement of ecological value.

Criteria

Table En54 Eco- 1 Design summary criteria table


DL1.1 The ecological impacts and

opportunities of the infrastructure

project are assessed and

quantified.

AND

DL1.2 The infrastructure project

design achieves a no net loss

ecological outcome (no offset

limitations).

AND

DL1.3 Management plans have

been prepared and implemented

to ensure the ecological outcomes

of the infrastructure project are

achieved.


achieved

AND


design achieves a quantifiable net

ecological gain (no offset

limitations).

AND

DL2.2 The project design

demonstrates all practicable

measures to avoid, minimise and

remedy impacts on site have been

implemented.


achieved

AND


design achieves a quanitifiable

net ecological gain (site-based

offsets only).

Definitions

Biodiversity offsets are actions or activities that contribute to no net loss or net gain ecological

outcomes. Biodiversity offsets can only be applied when all practicable measures have been

implemented at the site of the project to avoid or minimise impacts to ecological values. Offsets can be

land-based, financial or indirect measures where a benefit to the ecological feature or value is achieved.

Cumulative impacts, as defined by the International Finance Corporation (IFC), include the effects of

a project or activity combined with other existing, planned or reasonably anticipated activities.

Cumulative impact assessment and management is relevant where there are concerns for the long-term

health and viability of ecological values or in areas subject to considerable historical disturbance. The

types of cumulative impacts that are to be considered in this chapter are those that result from the

combined effects of multiple projects on identified ecological values.

Examples of cumulative impacts include:

• Loss of genetic diversity due to restricted fauna movement and dispersal,

• Increased pollution including noise and light,

• Habitat loss and fragmentation as a result of land clearing,

• Habitat degradation and a reduction in long-term carrying capacity due to edge effects and changes

to the level of disturbance,

• Increased pressure on the survival of threatened species due to a reduction in the availability and

increased competition for resources,

• Increased sedimentation or erosion,

Page 346 of 477



• Changed hydrology or decreased flows due to multiple withdrawals, and

• Increased fauna mortality due to vehicle strike and hunting.

Ecological features, as defined the EIANZ, are specific aspects of ecosystems that are described and

evaluated: the term includes components (e.g. species, habitats), processes (e.g. gene flow, nutrient

cycling) and functions (e.g. roosting, feeding, establishing territory).

Ecological Impact Assessment (EcIA), as defined by the EIANZ, is a process for identifying,

quantifying and evaluating the potential impacts of defined actions on ecosystems or their components;

and providing a scientifically defensible approach to ecosystem management. An EcIA must account for

all the adverse effects of a project including direct, indirect, temporary or permanent impacts on

terrestrial and aquatic systems. However, it is considered best practice to also identify and assess the

feasibility of opportunities to benefit biodiversity through project activities.

Ecological values, as defined by the EIANZ, are the worth placed on ecological features (e.g. species,

habitats, processes, ecosystems, community composition) determined by their rarity, vulnerability and

role in ecosystem functioning.

Financial offsets are financial payments made to a government or consenting authority to meet an

offset requirement, under relevant policy document. Many methods for calculating financial offset

obligations exist that incorporate the use of metrics to measure ecological value. These are typically

prescribed by the relevant policy document.

Indirect offsets, according to Walmsley et al, (2014), allow for the use of related activities or

compensatory actions (i.e. scientific research) in place of directly offsetting the biodiversity loss. The

use of indirect offsets is discouraged for four key reasons (Walmsley et al, 2014):

1. Ecological gains are difficult to measure and balance against the impacts of the development.

2. Ecological gains to be delivered through indirect actions often possess inherent uncertainty.

3. Indirect offsets fail to meet the requirements of additionality (i.e. measures undertaken above

and beyond what would be done anyway).

4. Indirect offsets fail to provide like-for-like (i.e. ecologically equivalent) returns.

Impacts include the direct, indirect or prescribed negative effects of a development, project or activity.

Direct impacts are those that occur as a direct result of an activity, such as vegetation clearing, habitat

replacement or modification and displacement of species. Indirect impacts are additional impacts that

generally occur as a result of direct impacts. Indirect impacts can include processes that can be difficult

to detect initially, such as inbreeding depression as a result of a population decline or habitat degradation

through increased weed cover. Prescribed impacts are those prescribed by relevant legislation. For

example, prescribed impacts under the Biodiversity Conservation Regulation 2017 (NSW) include

impacts to karst, caves and human-made structures that provide habitat for threatened species.

Land-based offsets include proponent-driven or direct offsets whereby actions are undertaken on land

to directly address the residual impacts of a project. Land-based offsets may include actions that create,

enhance and/or protect habitats or significant ecological values such as habitat restoration works or

market-based instruments. These actions must at a minimum provide like-for-like (i.e. ecologically

equivalent) returns.

Like-for-like offsets are targeted to the species, ecological communities or ecological features being

impacted by the project. They provide an equal ecological outcome or greater and cannot be traded in

exchange for other benefits. For example, providing extra koala habitat offsets must not reduce the need

to offset impacted Giant barred-frog habitat, where residual impacts to these habitats occur as a result

of the project.

Page 347 of 477



Lea

Spr

Res

Res

Ecn

Ecn

Ene

Gre

Env

Wat

Eco

Sta

Leg

Her

Wfs

Con

Management plans are drawings or documents that outline the objectives, planned procedures and

responsibilities for managing terrestrial and aquatic ecology.

Metrics that can be used to measure ecological value are varied and will depend on the ecological

features that contribute to the values being measured. They can include simple measures such as

population size, species richness or community diversity. More complex measures can also be used

that take into account numerous variables associated with ecological value.

No net loss ecological outcome is when the impacts associated with a development or activity do not

result in a reduction in ecological values. The impacts on ecological values are balanced or

compensated by measures to avoid or minimise the project’s impacts. Ideally this is demonstrated using

a quantifiable metric that provides a measure of the value to demonstrate that there is no decline in

value as a result of the project.

Net ecological gain occurs when the measures to avoid or mitigate an impact outweigh the impacts

and a measurable improvement to ecological values is achieved.

Opportunities include activities or measures included in the planning phase that can result in avoiding

or mitigating an impact to an ecological feature or value. Opportunities will also include activities or

measures that can result in an improvement to an ecological feature or value as a result of the proposed

development.

Significant: of greater concern, value or importance and can be defined in terms of the ecological

feature or process and the magnitude of impacts to ecological features and processes. For example,

significant ecological values are those recognised, on the basis of scientific concerns, community

concerns or public policy, as holding most value or importance. Significant impacts are those that can

result in substantial declines in the condition or extent of an ecological feature. These impacts can

operate on various spatial and temporal scales, and can be additive or interactive. These complexities

mean that an assessment of the significance of impacts must be specific to a development and the

features it is impacting. Most regulatory jurisdictions in Australia and New Zealand provide guidance on

what constitutes a significant impact to ecological features and processes.

Suitably qualified professional is a professional in the field of ecology with:

• Tertiary qualifications including ecology, natural resource management, environmental

management or environmental science,

• A minimum of five (5) years’ experience in the relevant field, and

• Professional industry certification and/or accreditation obtained through the EIANZ, Ecological

Consultants Association of NSW or under the Biodiversity Conservation Act 2016 (NSW), where

relevant.

Level 1

DL1.1 The ecological impacts and opportunities of the infrastructure project are assessed and

quantified.

An Ecological Impact Assessment (EcIA) must be carried out for the project by a suitably qualified

professional. If a Preliminary Environmental Assessment (PEA) has been completed as part of project

planning, the EcIA should build on the findings of the assessment. The EcIA must include an objectives

statement (i.e. no net loss/ net gain) and provide guidance on achieving specified outcomes.

The EcIA must include detailed investigations that describe and assess:

• Ecological features and values of the development site, as well as their spatial and temporal

contexts,

• Significance or importance of the ecological features and processes that are known to, or are

likely to, be present,

Page 348 of 477



• Potential impacts (direct, indirect, temporary and permanent) of the project activities on the

identified ecological features and processes,

• Cumulative impacts relevant to the project,

• Options for project development and impact management (avoid, minimise, rehabilitate) to

ensure a no net loss or net gain ecological outcome,

• Identification of any residual impacts after implementation of measures to avoid and minimise,

• Identification of any opportunities to be considered during the design phase or implemented

during future construction phases to enhance ecological features and values,

• Strategies for stakeholder management and community engagement,

• Compliance with legislative requirements and best practice industry standards, and

• Consideration of the effects of climate change on the ecological features of the site and how

this might influence management.

The scope of the EcIA must comply with best practice industry standards (i.e. EIANZ EcIA Guidelines)

and any relevant legislative requirements.

Guidance for undertaking the various components of an EcIA is provided in:

• Ecological Impact Assessment (EcIA) - EIANZ guidelines for use in New Zealand: terrestrial

and freshwater ecosystems (EIANZ 2015),

• Guidelines for Ecological Impact Assessment in the UK and Ireland – Terrestrial, freshwater

and coastal (CIEEM 2016),

• Biodiversity Assessment Method (OEH 2017),

• Guidelines for Assessment of Ecological Impacts of National Roads Schemes (NRA 2009),

• Fauna Sensitive Road Design Guidelines Victoria (VicRoads 2012),

• Matters of National Environmental Significance Significant Impact Guidelines 1.1, Environment

Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (Commonwealth of Australia 2013),



• Threatened Species Assessment Guidelines- The assessment of significance 2007 (DECC

2007),

• Biodiversity assessment guidelines - Permitted clearing of native vegetation (DEPI 2013).

• Policy for a Significant Environmental Benefit, Department of Natural Resources, South

Australia (DNR 2017), and

• Preparation of an application for scoping: Preparation of an application for an Environmental

Significance Opinion, ACT Planning & Land Authority (ACT Planning and Land Authority, no

date).

DL1.2 The infrastructure project design achieves a no net loss ecological outcome (no offset limitations).

The Project must consider and action the EcIA recommendations for maintaining the ecological values

during the design phase to achieve a no net loss ecological outcome.

Evidence must be provided that demonstrates how ecological features and values have been

maintained through the implementation of the EcIA recommendations. Evidence that ecological features

and values have been maintained must use quantifiable metrics where possible to demonstrate that no

net loss or net gain will be achieved. These metrics must be specific to the features and values impacted

and developed by a suitably qualified professional. Metrics should consider the attributes of the features

and values that are being measured. Simple, area based metrics related to measurements of ecological

features present pre- and post-development may be suitable in some situations, however there is a

preference for the use of metrics that measure the state or condition of the features being impacted,

protected or enhanced.

Page 349 of 477



Lea

Spr

Res

Res

Ecn

Ecn

Ene

Gre

Env

Wat

Eco

Sta

Leg

Her

Wfs

Con

Offsets can be used to minimise any residual impacts to ecological features and values, only following

the application of all practicable measures to avoid, minimise and remedy impacts on the project site.

Offsets can be used to demonstrate no net loss in ecological value as a result of the project. The

application of offsets should be land-based and relate to the features and values that are subject to

residual impacts. If financial or indirect offsets are proposed, evidence must be provided that the offset

proposed will benefit the impacted matter/s (i.e. like-for-like).

Evidence must be provided that shows how the offset achieves a no net loss outcome using accepted

metrics that are currently in use in the relevant jurisdiction, other jurisdictions or that are developed by

a suitably qualified professional. If land-based offsets are proposed, evidence must also be provided

that shows what actions will be implemented on the offset site (where applicable) to achieve no net loss,

ensuring these are additional to baseline duty of care. Evidence must also be provided that

demonstrates how the offset area will be protected and managed in perpetuity for conservation

purposes.

Examples of habitat assessment metrics that consider quantifiable measurements of value include:

• BioCondition: A Condition Assessment Framework for Terrestrial Biodiversity in Queensland

(Eyre et al, 2015),

• Biodiversity Assessment Method (OEH, 2017),

• Vegetation Quality Assessment Manual: Guidelines for applying the Habitat Hectares scoring

method (Victorian Government, Department of Sustainability and Environment, 2004).

• EPBC Act Offset Assessment Guide,

• Australian Rivers Assessment System (AUSRIVAS), and

• Stream Ecological Valuation (SEV): a revised method for assessing the ecological functions of

Auckland Streams (Storey et al, 2011).

DL1.3 Management plans have been prepared and implemented to ensure the ecological outcomes of

the infrastructure project are achieved.

Management plans must be prepared during the early design phase and be able to be implemented,

reviewed and updated during construction. The type and nature of management plans necessary will

vary reflecting the nature of the development, the ecological features and values of the site and any

legislative requirements. Management plans must be prepared for the construction and post-

construction phases to address impacts and opportunities associated with the project. If land-based

offsets are proposed to achieve a no net loss or net gain outcomes, a management plan must be

prepared that describes how these outcomes will be achieved.

Development management plans must have strategies, procedures and processes to be implemented

to protect retained ecological features and values, and where relevant, enhance or restore areas.

Wherever possible, these should address climate change impacts. At a minimum, a Vegetation

Management Plan and Fauna Management Plan or a comprehensive Biodiversity Management Plan

must be developed. These plans must include a:

• Description and maps of ecological features and values to be protected, maintained or

enhanced within and adjacent to the project site,

• Summary of the direct and indirect impacts identified in the EcIA,

• Description of the design elements that contribute to the protection, maintenance or

enhancement of ecological values and features,

• Measures to be implemented to protect ecological values and features during any future project

phases, including design, construction, post-construction and/or commissioning phases,

• Identification of roles and responsibilities for implementing the management procedures, and

• Any construction phase monitoring requirements.

Page 350 of 477



A management plan must be prepared to demonstrate how the planning and delivery of any biodiversity

offsets, will achieve a no net loss or net gain outcome. Subject to the method of offset delivery, this

management plan should include, but not be limited to:

• A summary of all the measures implemented to firstly avoid and minimise impacts to ecological

features and values,

• A description of the residual impacts to ecological features that are being offset. Where possible

this impact must be quantified using an applicable metric,

• A description of how the offset will be delivered, including combinations of land, financial and

indirect offsets,

• For land-based offsets, a description of the offset site, including where relevant:

o Location, tenure and landowner details

o Maps showing the areas to be subject to offset works

o Existing land uses, vegetation communities and habitat types

o Description of any existing threatening processes and how these will be managed

• A description of the required management actions to achieve the required net gain or no net

loss in ecological value required, including a program of works,

• Identification of any risks to the offset delivery and corrective actions to address these risks.

• Monitoring and reporting requirements, and

• Evidence that the offset site has been secured with a legal mechanism to ensure the protection

of the offset site in perpetuity. If the mechanism to ensure legal security has not been finalised,

evidence that the process is underway will be required.


• An EcIA Report prepared by a suitably qualified professional and completed prior to

construction. The level of detail contained within the report will vary reflecting the nature of the

development and ecological features and values of the site. The report should be independently

peer reviewed by another suitably qualified professional to ensure its rigour,

• Evidence that the project has resulted in a no net loss ecological outcome by using quantifiable

measures. Extracts from calculators or suitable metric tools will be required to demonstrate no

net loss,

• Compliance report, plans or drawings prepared by a suitably qualified professional

demonstrating the development is generally in accordance with the EcIA and has maintained

the ecological values,

• Detailed design drawings that show elements of the infrastructure design that avoid or minimise

impacts to ecological features and values, as well as any elements that enhance ecological

values,

• A Vegetation Management Plan, including a report or drawings, for the maintenance of

vegetation on site. Any other management plans necessary to ensure the ecological values of

the site can be maintained should also be provided. This may include species management

plans, habitat restoration plans, etc,

• A Fauna Management Plan that includes measures for minimising the likelihood of injury/harm

(such as directional clearing, use of a fauna spotter/catcher, installation of fauna exclusion

fencing), protecting or enhancing habitats (such as hollow-bearing tree retention or nest-box

supply) and maintaining or enhancing connectivity (such as fauna friendly fencing, movement

solutions),

• Flora and fauna management can be combined into a Biodiversity Management Plan for the

project that addresses impacts to flora and fauna, and

• Biodiversity Offset management plan or strategy, Biodiversity Development Assessment

Report, Biodiversity Certification Assessment Report or Biodiversity Site Stewardship

Assessment Report.

Page 351 of 477



Lea

Spr

Res

Res

Ecn

Ecn

Ene

Gre

Env

Wat

Eco

Sta

Leg

Her

Wfs

Con

Level 2

DL2.1 The infrastructure project design achieves a quantifiable net ecological gain (no offset limitations).

The Project must consider and action the EcIA recommendations for enhancing the ecological values

during the design and construction to achieve a net ecological gain. Evidence must be provided that

demonstrates how ecological features and values will be enhanced through the implementation of the

EcIA recommendations.

Evidence that ecological features and values have been enhanced must use quantifiable metrics to

demonstrate that a net gain has been achieved. Where quantifiable metrics cannot be developed,

justification is to be provided. The metrics used must be specific to the features and values impacted

and developed by a suitably qualified professional. Metrics should consider the attributes of the features

and values that are being measured. Simple, area based metrics related to measurements of ecological

features present pre- and post-development may be suitable in some situations, however there is a

preference for using metrics that include the significance or value of the features being impacted,

protected or enhanced.

Offsets can be used to demonstrate a net gain in ecological value as a result of the project. The



proposed will benefit the impacted matter/s (i.e. like-for-like). Where practical, offsets should be secured

and implemented prior to the commencement of the construction activities.

Evidence must be provided that shows how the offset achieves a net gain outcome using accepted


a suitably qualified professional. If land-based offsets are proposed, evidence must also be provided

that shows what actions will be implemented to achieve a net gain. Evidence must also be provided

that demonstrates how the offset area will be protected and managed in perpetuity for conservation

purposes, where relevant.

DL2.2 The project design demonstrates all practicable measures to avoid, minimise and remedy impacts

on site have been implemented.

The design of the project must seek to enhance ecological features and values at a local scale through

on site measures to avoid and minimise impacts and improve ecological condition or function. To

achieve this credit the design of the infrastructure project must demonstrate that all practicable

measures to avoid, minimise and remedy impacts within the project site have been implemented. The

EcIA will provide recommendations for measures to be implemented during the design and construction

phases of the project, and evidence that all practicable recommendations have been implemented is

required. This aims to reward projects that do not rely overly on offsets to achieve a net ecological gain.

Measures to avoid impacts can include changes to alignment, siting or design elements to avoid areas

of ecological significance. Measures to minimise impacts can include a wide variety of design elements,

such as stormwater treatment devices, fauna crossings, revegetation or ecological restoration works.

Measures to remedy impacts can include revegetation or habitat enhancement works.

Evidence must be provided that demonstrates all practicable measures to avoid and minimise impacts

on site have been implemented. If design recommendations to avoid or minimise impacts are not

practicable to implement, sufficient justification for why they have not been included must be provided.

Guidance on the type of evidence material required includes:

• A review of all recommended mitigation measures to avoid or minimise impacts identified within

the EcIA and an assessment of how they have been implemented, and

• Plans, drawings, maps and specifications that show how measures to minimise impacts have

been incorporated into the design.

Page 352 of 477




• Evidence that the project has resulted in a net gain ecological outcome by using quantifiable

measures. Extracts from calculators or suitable metric tools will be required to demonstrate the

achieved net gain, with the use of offsets if required,


demonstrating the development:

o Is generally in accordance with the EcIA;

o Has/will implement all practicable measures to avoid, minimise and remedy impacts on

site.




Assessment Report.

Level 3

DL3.1 The infrastructure project design achieves a quantifiable net ecological gain (site-based offsets

only).


during the design and construction. Measures to enhance ecological value must be delivered on site

and offsets must only be used where these are delivered on or immediately adjacent to the impact site.

Evidence must be provided that demonstrates how ecological features and values have been enhanced

through the implementation of the chosen on-site measures.





o Has implemented all mitigation measures on site; and

o Has achieved a net gain in ecological value.



achieved net gain with the use of site-based offsets only.

Page 353 of 477



Lea

Spr

Res

Res

Ecn

Ecn

Ene

Gre

Env

Wat

Eco

Sta

Leg

Her

Wfs

Con

ISv2.0 As Built


Aim

To reward the identification of ecological values, the management of impacts and opportunities to

achieve the maintenance or enhancement of ecological value.

Criteria

Table En55 Eco- 1 As Built summary criteria table


ABL1.1 The ecological impacts

and opportunities of the

infrastructure project are

assessed and quantified.

AND

ABL1.2 The infrastructure project

design achieves a no net loss

ecological outcome (no offset

limitations).

AND

ABL1.3 Management plans to

ensure the ecological outcomes of

the infrastructure project are

achieved have been prepared and

implemented.


achieved

AND


achieves a quantifiable net

ecological gain (no offset

limitations).

AND

ABL2.2 The project demonstrates

all practicable measures to avoid,

minimise and remedy impacts on

site have been implemented.


achieved

AND


achieves a quantifiable net

ecological gain (site-based offsets

only) and measures to maintain

the improved ecological value of

the site are incorporated into any

operational plans and programs.

Definitions

Biodiversity offsets are actions or activities that contribute to no net loss or net gain ecological

outcomes. Biodiversity offsets can only be applied when all practicable measures have been

implemented at the site of the project to avoid or minimise impacts to ecological values. Offsets can be

land-based, financial or indirect measures where a benefit to the ecological feature or value is achieved.

Cumulative impacts, as defined by the International Finance Corporation (IFC), include the effects of

a project or activity combined with other existing, planned or reasonably anticipated activities.

Cumulative impact assessment and management is relevant where there are concerns for the long-term

health and viability of ecological values or in areas subject to considerable historical disturbance. The

types of cumulative impacts that are to be considered in this chapter are those that result from the

combined effects of multiple projects on identified ecological values.

Examples of cumulative impacts include:

• Loss of genetic diversity due to restricted fauna movement and dispersal,

• Increased pollution including noise and light,

• Habitat loss and fragmentation as a result of land clearing,

• Habitat degradation and a reduction in long-term carrying capacity due to edge effects and

changes to the level of disturbance,

• Increased pressure on the survival of threatened species due to a reduction in the availability

and increased competition for resources,

• Increased sedimentation or erosion,

• Changed hydrology or decreased flows due to multiple withdrawals,

• Increased fauna mortality due to vehicle strike and hunting.

Page 354 of 477



Ecological features, as defined by the EIANZ, are specific aspects of ecosystems that are described

and evaluated: the term includes components (e.g. species, habitats), processes (e.g. gene flow,

nutrient cycling) and functions (e.g. roosting, feeding, establishing territory).

Ecological Impact Assessment (EcIA), as defined by the EIANZ, is a process for identifying,

quantifying and evaluating the potential impacts of defined actions on ecosystems or their components;

and providing a scientifically defensible approach to ecosystem management. An EcIA must account for

all the adverse effects of a project including direct, indirect, temporary or permanent impacts on

terrestrial and aquatic systems. However, it is considered best practice to also identify and assess the

feasibility of opportunities to benefit biodiversity through project activities.

Ecological values, as defined by the EIANZ, are the worth placed on ecological features (e.g. species,

habitats, processes, ecosystems, community composition) determined by their rarity, vulnerability and

role in ecosystem functioning.

Financial offsets are financial payments made to a government or consenting authority to meet an

offset requirement, under the relevant policy document. Many methods for calculating financial offset

obligations exist that incorporate the use of metrics to measure ecological value. These are typically

prescribed by the relevant policy document.

Indirect offsets, according to Walmsley et al, (2014), allow for the use of related activities or

compensatory actions (i.e. scientific research) in place of directly offsetting the biodiversity loss. The

use of indirect offsets is discouraged for four key reasons (Walmsley et al, 2014):

1. Ecological gains are difficult to measure and balance against the impacts of the development.

2. Ecological gains to be delivered through indirect actions often possess inherent uncertainty.

3. Indirect offsets fail to meet the requirements of additionality (i.e. measures undertaken above

and beyond what would be done anyway)

4. Indirect offsets fail to provide like-for-like (i.e. ecologically equivalent) returns.

Impacts include the direct, indirect or prescribed negative effects of a development, project or activity.

Direct impacts are those that occur as a direct result of an activity, such as vegetation clearing, habitat

replacement or modification and displacement of species. Indirect impacts are additional impacts that

generally occur as a result of direct impacts. Indirect impacts can include processes that can be difficult

to detect initially, such as inbreeding depression as a result of a population decline or habitat degradation

through increased weed cover. Prescribed impacts are those prescribed by relevant legislation. For

example, prescribed impacts under the Biodiversity Conservation Regulation 2017 (NSW) include

impacts to karst, caves and human-made structures that provide habitat for threatened species.

Land-based offsets include proponent-driven or direct offsets whereby actions are undertaken on land

to directly address the residual impacts of a project. Land-based offsets may include actions that create,

enhance and/or protect habitats or significant ecological values such as habitat restoration works or

market-based instruments. These actions must at a minimum provide like-for-like (i.e. ecologically

equivalent) returns.

Like-for-like offsets are targeted to the species, ecological communities or ecological features being

impacted by the project. They provide an equal ecological outcome or greater and cannot be traded in

exchange for other benefits. For example, providing extra koala habitat offsets must not reduce the need

to offset impacted Giant barred-frog habitat, where residual impacts to these habitats occur as a result

of the project.

Management plans are drawings or documents that outline the objectives, planned procedures and

responsibilities for managing terrestrial and aquatic ecology.

Metrics that can be used to measure ecological value are varied and will depend on the ecological

features that contribute to the values being measured. They can include simple measures such as

population size, species richness or community diversity. More complex measures can also be used

that take into account numerous variables associated with ecological value.

No net loss ecological outcome is when the impacts associated with a development or activity do not

result in a reduction in ecological values. The impacts on ecological values are balanced or

compensated by measures to avoid or minimise the project’s impacts. Ideally this is demonstrated using

Page 355 of 477



Lea

Spr

Res

Res

Ecn

Ecn

Ene

Gre

Env

Wat

Eco

Sta

Leg

Her

Wfs

Con

a quantifiable metric that provides a measure of the value to demonstrate that there is no decline in

value as a result of the project.

Net ecological gain occurs when the measures to avoid or mitigate an impact outweigh the impacts

and a measurable improvement to ecological values is achieved.

Opportunities include activities or measures included in the planning phase that can result in avoiding

or mitigating an impact to an ecological feature or value. Opportunities will also include activities or

measures that can result in an improvement to an ecological feature or value as a result of the proposed

development.

Significant: of greater concern, value or importance and can be defined in terms of the ecological

feature or process and the magnitude of impacts to ecological features and processes. For example,

significant ecological values are those recognised, on the basis of scientific concerns, community

concerns or public policy, as holding most value or importance. Significant impacts are those that can

result in substantial declines in the condition or extent of an ecological feature. These impacts can

operate on various spatial and temporal scales, and can be additive or interactive. These complexities

mean that an assessment of the significance of impacts must be specific to a development and the

features it is impacting. Most regulatory jurisdictions in Australia and New Zealand provide guidance on

what constitutes a significant impact to ecological features and processes.



management or environmental science;

• A minimum of five (5) years’ experience in the relevant field; and



relevant.

Level 1

ABL1.1 The ecological impacts and opportunities of the infrastructure project are assessed and

quantified.

Where a previous Ecological Impacts Assessment has been undertaken and verified as part of an IS

Design rating, then the requirements of this criterion has been achieved. Please proceed to L2.

An Ecological Impact Assessment (EcIA) must be carried out for the project by a suitably qualified

professional. If a Preliminary Environmental Assessment (PEA) has been completed as part of the

planning phase, the EcIA should build on the findings of the assessment. The EcIA must include an

objectives statement (i.e. no net loss/ net gain) and provide guidance on achieving specified outcomes.

The EcIA must include detailed investigations that describe and assess:

• Ecological features and values of the development site, as well as their spatial and temporal

contexts,

• Significance or importance of the ecological features and processes that are known to, or are

likely to, be present,

• Potential impacts (direct, indirect, temporary and permanent) of the project activities on the

identified ecological features and processes,

• Cumulative impacts relevant to the project,

• Options for project development and impact management (avoid, minimise, rehabilitate) to

ensure a no net loss or net gain ecological outcome,

• Identification of any residual impacts after measures to avoid and minimise,

• Strategies for stakeholder management and community engagement,

• Compliance with legislative requirements and best practice industry standards, and

• Consideration of the effects of climate change on the ecological features of the site and how

this might influence management.

Page 356 of 477



The scope of the EcIA must comply with best practice industry standards (i.e. EIANZ EcIA Guidelines)

and any relevant legislative requirements.

Guidance for undertaking the various components of an EcIA is provided in:

• Ecological Impact Assessment (EcIA) - EIANZ guidelines for use in New Zealand: terrestrial

and freshwater ecosystems (EIANZ 2015),

• Guidelines for Ecological Impact Assessment in the UK and Ireland – Terrestrial, freshwater

and coastal (CIEEM 2016),


• Guidelines for Assessment of Ecological Impacts of National Roads Schemes (NRA 2009),

• Fauna Sensitive Road Design Guidelines Victoria (VicRoads 2012),





• Threatened Species Assessment Guidelines - The assessment of significance 2007 (DECC

2007),

• Biodiversity assessment guidelines- Permitted clearing of native vegetation (DEPI 2013),

• Policy for a Significant Environmental Benefit, Department of Natural Resources, South

Australia (DNR 2017), and

• Preparation of an application for scoping: Preparation of an application for an Environmental

Significance Opinion, ACT Planning & Land Authority (ACT Planning and Land Authority, no

date).

ABL1.2 The infrastructure project achieves a no net loss ecological outcome (no offset limitations).

The Project must consider and action the EcIA recommendations for maintaining the ecological values

during the construction phase and demonstrate achievement of a no net loss ecological outcome.

Evidence must be provided that demonstrates how ecological features and values have been

maintained through the implementation of the EcIA recommendations. Evidence that ecological features

and values have been maintained must use quantifiable metrics where possible to demonstrate that no

net loss or net gain has been achieved. These metrics must be specific to the features and values

impacted and developed by a suitably qualified professional. Metrics should consider the attributes of

the features and values that are being measured. Simple, area based metrics related to measurements

of ecological features present pre- and post-development may be suitable in some situations, however

there is a preference for the use of metrics that measure the state or condition of the features being

impacted, protected or enhanced.

Offsets can be used to minimise any residual impacts to ecological features and values, only following

the application of all practicable measures to avoid or minimise impacts on the project site. The



proposed will benefit the impacted matter/s (i.e. like-for-like).

Evidence must be provided that shows how the offset achieves a no net loss outcome for the project

using accepted metrics that are currently in use in the relevant jurisdiction, other jurisdictions or that are

developed by a suitably qualified professional. If land-based offsets are proposed, evidence must also

be provided that shows what actions have been implemented on the offset site (where applicable) to

achieve no net loss. Where offsets have not yet been delivered, suitable justification must be provided.

Evidence must also be provided that demonstrates how the offset area is being protected and managed

in perpetuity for conservation purposes.

Page 357 of 477



Lea

Spr

Res

Res

Ecn

Ecn

Ene

Gre

Env

Wat

Eco

Sta

Leg

Her

Wfs

Con

Examples of habitat assessment metrics that consider quantifiable measurements of value include:

• BioCondition: A Condition Assessment Framework for Terrestrial Biodiversity in Queensland

(Eyre et al, 2015),


• Vegetation Quality Assessment Manual: Guidelines for applying the Habitat Hectares scoring

method (Victorian Government, Department of Sustainability and Environment 2004),

• EPBC Act Offset Assessment Guide,

• Australian Rivers Assessment System (AUSRIVAS), and


Auckland Streams (Storey et al, 2011).

ABL1.3 Management plans to ensure the ecological outcomes of the infrastructure project are achieved

have been prepared and implemented.

Management plans must be prepared during project design and be implemented, reviewed and updated

during construction. The type and nature of management plans necessary will vary reflecting the nature

of the development, the ecological features and values of the site and any legislative requirements.

Management plans must be prepared and implemented for the construction and post-construction

phases to address impacts and opportunities associated with the project. If land-based offsets are

proposed to achieve net gain or no net loss outcomes, a management plan should be prepared that

describes how these outcomes will be achieved.

Design and construction phase management plans are required to define strategies, procedures and

processes to be implemented to protect retained ecological features and value, and where relevant,

enhance or restore areas. Wherever possible, these should address climate change impacts. At a

minimum, a Vegetation Management Plan and Fauna Management Plan or a comprehensive

Biodiversity Management Plan must be developed. These plans should include a:

• Description and maps of ecological features and values to be protected, maintained or

enhanced within and adjacent to the project site,

• Summary of the direct and indirect impacts identified in the EcIA,

• Description of the design elements that contribute to the protection, maintenance or

enhancement of ecological values and features,

• Measures to be implemented to protect ecological values and features during any future project

phases, including design, construction, post-construction and/or commissioning phases,

• Identification of roles and responsibilities for implementing the management procedures, and

• Any construction phase monitoring requirements.

A management plan must be prepared to demonstrate how the planning and delivery of any biodiversity

offsets, will achieve a no net loss or net gain outcome. Subject to the method of offset delivery, this

management plan should include, but not be limited to:

• A summary of all the measures implemented to firstly avoid and minimise impacts to ecological

features and values,

• A description of the residual impacts to ecological features that are being offset. Where possible

this impact must be quantified using an applicable metric,

• A description of how the offset will be delivered, including combinations of land, financial and

indirect offsets,

• For land-based offsets, a description of the offset site, including where relevant:

o Location, tenure and landowner details

o Maps showing the areas to be subject to offset works

o Existing land uses, vegetation communities and habitat types

o Description of any existing threatening processes and how these will be managed

Page 358 of 477



• A description of the required management actions to achieve the required net gain or no net

loss in ecological value required, including a program of works,

• Identification of any risks to the offset delivery and corrective actions to address these risks,

• Monitoring and reporting requirements, and

• Evidence that the offset site has been secured with a legal mechanism to ensure the protection

of the offset site in perpetuity, where relevant. If the mechanism to ensure legal security has

not been finalised, evidence that the process is underway will be required.


• An EcIA Report prepared by a suitably qualified professional and completed prior to

construction. The level of detail contained within the report will vary reflecting the nature of the

development and ecological features and values of the site,

• The report which has been independently peer reviewed by another suitably qualified

professional to ensure its rigour,

• Evidence that the project has resulted in a no net loss ecological outcome by using quantifiable

measures. Extracts from calculators or suitable metric tools will be required to demonstrate no

net loss,


demonstrating the development is generally in accordance with the EcIA and has maintained

the ecological values,

• Detailed design drawings that show elements of the infrastructure design that avoid or minimise

impacts to ecological features and values, as well as any elements that enhance ecological

values,

• A Vegetation Management Plan, including a report or drawings, for the maintenance of

vegetation on site. Any other management plans necessary to ensure the ecological values of

the site can be maintained should also be provided. This may include species management

plans, habitat restoration plans, etc,

• A Fauna Management Plan that includes measures for minimising the likelihood of injury/harm

(such as directional clearing, use of a fauna spotter/catcher, installation of fauna exclusion

fencing), protecting or enhancing habitats (such as hollow-bearing tree retention or nest-box

supply) and maintaining or enhancing connectivity (such as fauna friendly fencing, movement

solutions),

• Flora and fauna management can be combined into a Biodiversity Management Plan for the

project that addresses impacts to flora and fauna, and



Assessment Report.

Level 2

ABL2.1 The infrastructure project achieves a quantifiable net ecological gain (no offset limitations).


during construction to achieve a net ecological gain. Evidence must be provided that demonstrates how

ecological features and values have been enhanced through the implementation of the EcIA

recommendations. Evidence that ecological features and values have been enhanced must use

quantifiable metrics where possible to demonstrate that net gain has been achieved. These metrics

must be specific to the features and values impacted and developed by a suitably qualified professional.

Metrics should consider the attributes of the features and values that are being measured. Simple, area

based metrics related to measurements of ecological features present pre- and post-development may

Page 359 of 477



Lea

Spr

Res

Res

Ecn

Ecn

Ene

Gre

Env

Wat

Eco

Sta

Leg

Her

Wfs

Con

be suitable in some situations, however there is a preference for using metrics that include the

significance or value of the features being impacted, protected or enhanced.

Offsets can be used to demonstrate net gain in ecological value as a result of the project. The application

of offsets should be land-based and relate to the features and values that are subject to residual impacts.

If financial or indirect offsets are proposed, evidence must be provided that the offset proposed will

benefit the impacted matter/s (i.e. like-for-like).

Evidence must be provided that shows how the offset achieves a net gain outcome using accepted


a suitably qualified professional. If land-based offsets are proposed evidence must also be provided

that shows what actions have been implemented to achieve a net gain. Where offsets have not yet been

delivered, suitable justification must be provided. Evidence must also be provided that demonstrates

how the offset area is being protected and managed in perpetuity for conservation purposes, where

relevant.

ABL2.2 The project demonstrates all practicable measures to avoid, minimise and remedy impacts on

site have been implemented.

The project must seek to enhance the value of ecological features at a local scale through on site

implementation of measures to avoid and minimise impacts and improve ecological condition or function.

To achieve this credit it must be demonstrated that all practicable measures to avoid, minimise and

remedy impacts within the project site have been implemented. The EcIA will provide recommendations

for measures to be implemented during the design and construction phases of the project, and evidence

that all practicable recommendations have been implemented is required. This aims to reward projects

that do not rely overly on offsets to achieve a net ecological gain.

During the construction phase, measures to avoid impacts involve the implementation of the design

strategies and solutions to avoid areas of ecological significance. Measures to minimise impacts can

include the implementation of a wide variety of control measures, such as the installation of sediment

basins to capture runoff, jute matting or mulching to prevent erosion, vegetation protection fencing,

engaging a fauna spotter/catcher to direct clearing works, temporary installation of next-boxes or other

temporary enhancement features and fauna exclusion fencing. Measures to remedy impacts can include

revegetation or habitat restoration works.

Evidence must be provided that demonstrates all practicable measures to avoid and minimise impacts

on site have been implemented. Guidance on the type of evidence material required includes:

• A review of all recommended mitigation measures to avoid or minimise impacts identified within

the EcIA and an assessment of how they have been implemented,

• If design recommendations to avoid or minimise impacts are not practicable to implement,

sufficient justification for why they have not been included must be provided, and

• Plans, drawings, maps and specifications that show how measures to minimise impacts have

been implemented during construction works.

To maintain the ecological value of the asset over the long term, operational plans and strategies must

be developed and provided to the operator. These may include ongoing monitoring and maintenance

plans, that includes trigger values and corrective actions.




achieved net gain, with the use of offsets if required,

Page 360 of 477






o Has implemented all practicable measures to avoid and minimise impacts on site.

• Extracts from any operational plans, strategies or programs that demonstrate how the ecological

values of the infrastructure will be maintained to ensure no net loss of value over the life of the

asset, and

• Biodiversity offset management plan or strategy, Biodiversity Development Assessment Report,

Biodiversity Certification Assessment Report or Biodiversity Site Stewardship Assessment

Report.

ABL3.1 The infrastructure project achieves a quantifiable net ecological gain (site-based offsets only)

and measures to maintain the improved ecological value of the site are incorporated into any operational

plans and programs.


during the design and construction. Measures to enhance ecological value must be delivered on site

and offsets must only be used where these are delivered on or immediately adjacent to the impact site.

Evidence must be provided that demonstrates how ecological features and values have been enhanced

through the implementation of the chosen on site measures.

To maintain the ecological value of the asset over the long term, operational plans and strategies must

be developed and provided to the operator. These may include ongoing monitoring and maintenance

plans, that include trigger values and corrective actions.


• Compliance report, plans, drawings or photographs prepared by a suitably qualified professional



o Has implemented all mitigation measures on site; and

o Has achieved a net gain in ecological value.



achieved net gain using site-based offsets only.

Page 361 of 477



Lea

Spr

Res

Res

Ecn

Ecn

Ene

Gre

Env

Wat

Eco

Sta

Leg

Her

Wfs

Con

ISv2.0 Design


Aim

To reward the implementation of monitoring methods to understand the ecological effects of the project

and to drive adaptive management.

Criteria

Table En56 Eco- 2 Design summary criteria table


DL1.1 An ecological monitoring

program is developed for the

design, construction and

operations phases of the

infrastructure asset.


achieved

AND

DL2.1 Qualitative baseline data is

collected.


achieved

AND

DL3.1 Quantitative baseline data

is collected

Definitions

Ecological monitoring is defined as the repeated collection and analysis of field-based empirical

measurements to quantify change in ecological value, condition and/or biodiversity in response to

project activities and/or management.

Baseline data involves the measurement of ecological value, condition and/or biodiversity prior to an

activity or event to serve as a basis for comparison or as a control.

Qualitative data is typically non-numeric and may include the use of photography or written

observations used to describe ecological value, condition or biodiversity. Some numeric data, such as

land area or clearing extents, may serve as qualitative measurements of biodiversity or habitat condition.

As this data does not allow the spatial and temporal quantification of the targeted ecological attributes

(i.e. biodiversity and/or habitat condition), it is not considered quantitative data for the purposes of

ecological monitoring.

Quantitative data allows for the direct measurement and statistical, mathematical or numerical analysis

of ecological value, condition or biodiversity. Examples of quantitative data include species richness and

abundance, density and percentage cover. Data that does not allow the spatial and temporal

quantification of the targeted ecological attributes (i.e. biodiversity and/or habitat condition) cannot be

considered suitable quantitative data for the purposes of ecological monitoring.

Level 1

DL1.1 An ecological monitoring program is developed for the design, construction and operations

phases of the infrastructure asset.

An ecological monitoring program must be developed for the project. The monitoring objectives,

indicators and survey design must be informed by the EcIA completed for the project (Eco-1).

The monitoring program must include:

• Clear objectives that relate specifically to the development impacts, mitigation measures and

ecological values to be monitored,

• Rigorous survey design that will address the monitoring objectives and ensure sufficient

statistical power to detect effects/change above natural variability as appropriate for the project

timeframe, geography and asset type,

• Guidance on monitoring data collection requirements including baseline data,

• Standardised and repeatable survey methodologies that are industry approved,

Page 362 of 477



• Clear data management protocols for capture, storage and management,

• Data analysis processes including methods and timeframes for analysing the data,

• Clear methods, timeframes and responsibilities for reporting,

• Triggers for prompting management response where effects are detected including processes

to follow and responsibilities for reviewing and updating management actions,

• Processes for reviewing and updating the ecological monitoring program.

The monitoring program must consider appropriate time scales over which monitoring is to occur to

gain an understanding of the baseline conditions and to detect any effects following the completion of

the construction phase.

Guidance on developing a monitoring program for terrestrial flora and fauna is provided in:

• Designing a Monitoring Program for Significant Native Flora 2010 WA (Harding & Williams,

2010), and

• Designing a Monitoring Program for Significant Native Fauna 2010 WA (Freegard & Williams,

2009).

Guidance for monitoring aquatic ecosystems includes:

• Australian Rivers Assessment System (AUSRIVAS),


Auckland Streams (Storey et al, 2011),

• Regional Guidelines for Ecological Assessments of Freshwater Environments: Aquatic Plant

Cover in Wadeable Streams, Environment Waikato Regional Council, 2006, and

• Regional Guidelines for Ecological Assessments of Freshwater Environments:

Macroinvertebrate Sampling in Wadeable Streams, Environment Waikato Regional Council

2005.


A report detailing the monitoring program requirements.

Level 2

DL1.1 Qualitative baseline data is collected.

Qualitative baseline data must be collected prior to the commencement of works and in accordance

with the requirements of the ecological monitoring program (DL1.1). Some examples of qualitative

monitoring data include photo-monitoring points or the extent of habitat, vegetation or disturbance.

Data should also be collected on other threats or disturbances that may confound the data.


A report presenting, summarising and analysing the qualitative baseline data.

Level 3

DL1.1 Quantitative baseline data is collected.

Quantitative baseline data must be collected prior to the commencement of works and in accordance

with the requirements of the ecological monitoring program (DL1.1). Some examples of quantitative

monitoring data for terrestrial ecosystems include species presence/absence, richness or diversity,

habitat condition, the density of flora and fauna, structural attributes such as canopy height or cover.

Page 363 of 477



Lea

Spr

Res

Res

Ecn

Ecn

Ene

Gre

Env

Wat

Eco

Sta

Leg

Her

Wfs

Con

Data should also be collected on other threats or disturbances that may confound the data.


A report presenting, summarising and analysing the quantitative baseline data.

Page 364 of 477



ISv2.0 As Built


Aim

To reward the implementation of monitoring methods to understand the ecological effects of the project

and to drive adaptive management.

Criteria

Table En57 Eco- 2 As Built summary criteria table


ABL1.1 The ecological monitoring

program for the infrastructure

asset is implemented, reviewed

and updated, where necessary.


achieved

AND

ABL2.1 A qualitative assessment

of the monitoring data against the

baseline data is undertaken and

management actions are

reviewed and updated, where

necessary.


achieved

AND

ABL3.1 A quantitative assessment

of the monitoring data against the

baseline data is undertaken and

management actions are

reviewed and updated, where

necessary.

Definitions

Ecological monitoring is defined as the repeated collection and analysis of field-based empirical

measurements to quantify change in ecological value, condition and/or biodiversity in response to

project activities and/or management.

Baseline data involves the measurement of ecological value, condition and/or biodiversity prior to an

activity or event to serve as a basis for comparison or as a control.

Qualitative data is typically non-numeric and may include the use of photography or written

observations used to describe ecological value, condition or biodiversity. Some numeric data, such as

land area or clearing extents, may serve as qualitative measurements of biodiversity or habitat condition.

As this data does not allow the spatial and temporal quantification of the targeted ecological attributes

(i.e. biodiversity and/or habitat condition), it is not considered quantitative data for the purposes of

ecological monitoring.

Quantitative data allows for the direct measurement and statistical, mathematical or numerical analysis

of ecological value, condition or biodiversity. Examples of quantitative data include species richness and

abundance, density and percentage cover. Data that does not allow the spatial and temporal

quantification of the targeted ecological attributes (i.e. biodiversity and/or habitat condition) cannot be

considered suitable quantitative data for the purposes of ecological monitoring.



management or environmental science,

• A minimum of five (5) years’ experience in the relevant field, and



relevant.

Level 1

ABL1.1 The ecological monitoring program for the infrastructure asset is implemented, reviewed and

updated, where necessary.

Page 365 of 477



Lea

Spr

Res

Res

Ecn

Ecn

Ene

Gre

Env

Wat

Eco

Sta

Leg

Her

Wfs

Con

The ecological monitoring program must be implemented for the infrastructure asset by a suitably

qualified professional. This must involve the collection of data (qualitative and/or quantitative) in

accordance with the program requirements.

Monitoring activities must be periodically reviewed and updated, as necessary.


• Schedule of completed monitoring activities including program reviews and revisions, and

• Report containing all monitoring data.

Level 2

ABL2.1 A qualitative assessment of the monitoring data against the baseline data is undertaken and

management actions are reviewed and updated, where necessary.

The monitoring data must be qualitatively analysed by a suitably qualified professional in accordance

with the requirements of the monitoring program. This may include comparison of photographic imagery,

clearing footprints and/or the extent of significant habitat.

The suitably qualified professional must interpret the data and provide recommendations for any

improvements to management necessary to ensure ‘no net loss/ net gain’ outcomes are realised.

A progress report is prepared for the infrastructure asset that presents and summarises the qualitative

monitoring data in the context of the monitoring objectives. Any emerging concerns are highlighted and

appropriate actions and responsibilities are identified. The report offers recommendations for improving

monitoring outcomes. The report must be independently peer reviewed.


Peer reviewed progress report with recommendations

Level 3

ABL3.1 A quantitative assessment of the monitoring data against the baseline data is undertaken and

management actions are reviewed and updated, where necessary.

The monitoring data must be quantitatively analysed by a suitably qualified professional in accordance

with the requirements of the monitoring program. Data analysis must incorporate the use of rigorous

statistical analyses. These must be determined based on the monitoring objectives and in consultation

with a suitably qualified professional. Appropriate statistical analyses may parameter estimation (within

confidence intervals) for target/ threshold objectives and significant testing for change/trend objectives

(Elzinga et al, 2001, cited in Harding & Williams, 2010).

The suitably qualified professional must interpret the data and provide recommendations for any

improvements to management necessary to ensure ‘no net loss/no net gain’ outcomes are realised.

Recommendations must be implemented in management plans or in improved practices in site

management.

Page 366 of 477




• The progress report incorporating the use of quantitative data and assessments,

• Independent peer review report,

• Photos,

• Meeting minutes, and

• Updated management plans.

Page 367 of 477



Lea

Spr

Res

Res

Ecn

Ecn

Ene

Gre

Env

Wat

Eco

Sta

Leg

Her

Wfs

Con References

Brooks TM, Pimm SL & Oyugi JO, 1999. Time lag between deforestation and bird extinction in tropical

forest fragments. Conservation Biology. 15(5):1140-1150.

Business and Biodiversity Offsets Programme (BBOP) 2012. Guidance Notes to the Standard on

Biodivesrity Offsets. BBOP, Washington.

Casson N, Downes S & Harris A, 2009. Native Vegetation Condition Assessment and Monitoring Manual

for Western Australia. Australian Government and Western Australian Government Department of

Environment and Conservation.

Chartered Institute of Ecology and Environmental Management (CIEEM) 2016. Guidelines for Ecoogical

Impact Assessment in the UK and Ireland: Terrestrial, Freshwater and Coastal. 2nd edition. CIEEM,

Winchester.

Commonwealth of Australia 2013. Matters of national environmental signficance: Significant impact

guidelines 1.1 Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999, Australian Government

Department of the Environment, Canberra.

Commonwealth of Australia 1999. Actions on, or impacting upon, Commonwealth land, and actions by

Commonwealth agencies: Significant impact guidelines 1.2 Environment Protection and Biodiversity

Conservation Act 1999, Australian Government Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water,

Population and Communities, Canberra.

Cooper LM, 2004. Guidelines for Cummulative Effects Assessment in SEA of Plans. Environmental

Policy and Management Group (EPMG) Occassional Paper 04/LMC/CEA, Imperial College London.

Ecologically Sustainable Development Steering Committee 1992. National Strategy for Ecologically

Sustainable Development. Australian Government Department of the Environment and Energy,

Canberra.

Elroy C 2004. Survey guidelines for Australia’s threatened mammals: Guidelines for detecting mammals

listed as threatened under the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999.

Australian Government Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and

Communities, Barton.

Environnent Institute of Australia and New Zealand Inc (EIANZ) 2015. Ecological Impact Assessment

(EcIA) EIANZ guidelines for use in New Zealand: terrestrial and freshwater ecosystems, EIANZ.

Melbourne.

Eyre TJ, Kelly AL, Neldner VJ, Wilson BA, Ferguson DJ, Laidlaw MJ & Franks AJ, 2015. BioCondition:

A Condition Assessment Framework for Terrestrial Biodiversity in Queensland. Assessment Manual.

Version 2.2. Queensland Herbarium, Quensland Government Department of Science, Information

Technology, Innovation and Arts, Brisbane.

Eyre TJ, Ferguson DJ, Hourigan CL, Smith GC, Mathieson MT, Kelly AL, Venz MF, Hogan LD &

Rowland J, 2014. Terrestrial Vertebrate Fauna Survey Assessment Guidelines for Queensland.

Queensland Government Department of Science, Information Technology, Innovation and the Arts,

Brisbane.

Environment Waikato Regional Council, 2006. Environment Waikato Technical Report 2006/47

Regional Guidelines for Ecological Assessments of Freshwater Environments: Aquatic plant cover in

wadeable streams, Enviroment Waikato, Hamilton.

Environment Waikato Regional Council, 2005. Environment Waikato Technical Report 2005/02

Regional Guidelines for Ecological Assessments of Freshwater Environments: Macoinvertebrate

sampling in wadeable streams, Enviroment Waikato, Hamilton.

Gaston KJ, Blackburn RM & Goldewijk KK, 2003. Habitat conversion and global avian biodiversity loss.

Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B. 270: 1293-1300.

Page 368 of 477



Field SA, O’Connor PJ, Tyre AJ & Possingham HP, 2007. Making monitoring meaningful. Austral

Ecology. 32:485-491.

Freegard C & Williams M, 2009. Designing a Monitoring Project for Significant Native Fauna Species.

Version 1.2 (July 2009). Prepared for Resource Condition Monitoring- Significant Native Species and

Ecological Communities Project. Department of Environment and Conservation.

Government of Victoria 2002. Native Vegetation Management – A Framework for Action. Victorian

Government Department of Natural Resources and Environment, Melbourne.

Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority (GBRMPA) 2013. A framework for understanding cumulative

impacts, supporting environmental decisions and informing resilience-based management of the Great

Barrier Reef Work Heritage Area. University of Melbourne and GBRMPA, Townsville.

Harding C & Williams M, 2010. Designing a Monitoring Project for Significant Native Flora. Version 1.0

(January 2010). Prepared for Resource Condition Monitoring Project: Significant Native Species and

Ecological Communities. Department of Environmnent and Conservation.

Heard L & Channon B (ed.), 1997. Guide to Native Vegetation Survey (Agricultural region) Using the

Biological Survey of South Australia Methodology, edition 1. South Australian Government Department

of Housing and Urban Development and Department of Environment and Natural Resources.

International Finance Corporation (IFC) 2013. Good Practice Handbook: Cummulative Impact

Assessment and Management: Guidance for the Private Sector in Emerging Markets. IFC. Washington.

Jackson WJ, Argent RM, Bax NJ, Clark GF, Coleman S, Cresswell ID, Emmerson KM, Evans K, Hibberd

MF, Johnston EL, Keywood MD, Klekociuk A, Mackay R, Metcalfe D, Murphy H, Rankin A, Smith DC &

Wienecke B 2017. Australia state of the environment 2016: overview, independent report to the

Australian Government Minister for the Environment and Envergy, Australian Government Department

of the Environment and Energy, Canberra.

Krauss J, Bommaro R, Guardiola M, Heikkinen RK, Helm A, Kuussaari M, Lindborg R, Öckinger E, Partel

M, Pino J, Poyry J, Raatikainen KM, Sang A, Stefansecu C, Teder T, Zobel M & Steffan-Dewenter I,

2010. Habitat fragmentation causes immediate and time-delayed biodiversity loss at different tropic

levels. Ecology Letters. 13: 597-605.

Lindenmayer DB, Gibbons P, Bourke M, Burgman M, Dickman CR, Ferrier S, Fitzsimons J,

Fruidenberger D, Garnett ST, Groves C, Hobbs RJ, Kingsford RT, Krebs C, Legge S, Lowe AJ, McLean

R, Montambault J, Possingham H, Radford J, Robinson D, Smallbone L, Thomas D, Varcoe R, Vardon

M, Wardle G, Woinarski J & Zerger A, 2012. Improving biodiversity monitoring. Austral Ecology. 37: 285-

294.

Maron M, Bull JW, Evans MC & Gordon A, 2015. Locking in loss: Baselines of decline in Australian

biodiversity offset policies. Biol. Conserv.(2015), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2015.05.017.

Ministry for the Environment & Statistics New Zealand, 2015. New Zealand’s Environmental Reporting

Series: Environment Aotearoa 2015. Available from www.mfe.govt.nz and www.stats.govt.nz.

National Roads Authority (NRA) 2009. Guidelines for the Assessment of Ecological Impacts of National

Roads Schemes, Revision 2. NRA.

Neldner VJ, Wilson BA, Dillewaard HA, Ryan TS & Butler DW, 2017. Methodology for Survey and

Mapping of Regional Ecosystems and Vegetation Communities in Queensland. Version 4.0. Updated

May 2017. Queensland Herbarium, Queensland Department of Science, Information Technology and

Innovation, Brisbane.

New South Wales Government Office of Environment and Heritage (OEH) 2017. Biodiversity

Assessment Method. OEH, Sydney.

New South Wales Government Office of Environment and Heritage (OEH) 2016. NSW Guide to

Surveying Threatened Plants. OEH, Sydney.

Page 369 of 477



Lea

Spr

Res

Res

Ecn

Ecn

Ene

Gre

Env

Wat

Eco

Sta

Leg

Her

Wfs

Con

Owens H (ed.) 2000. Guidelines for Vertebrate Surveys in South Australia using the Biological Survey

of South Australia, edition 1. South Australian Government Department for Environment and Heritage

Protection and National Parks and Wildlife.

Permitted clearing of native vegetation: Biodiversity assessment guidelines. 2013. Victorian

Government Department of Environment and Primary Industries, Melbourne.

Policy for a Significanta Environmental Benefit: Under the Native Vegetation Act 1991 and Native

Vegetation Regulations 2017. South Australian Government Department of Natural Resources and the

Native Vegetation Council.

Preparation of an application for scoping/ Preparation of an application for an Environmental Significant

Opinion: A guide. No date. ACT Planning and Land Authority.

Secretariat of the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD), 2006. Guidelines for the rapid ecological

assessment of biodiversity in inland water, coastal and marine areas. CBD Technical Series no. 22 and

the Secretariat of the Ramsar Convention, Gland, Switzerland, Ransar Technical Report no. 1.

Storey RG, Neale MW, Rowe DK, Collier KJ, Hatton C, Joy MK, Maxted J, Moore R, Parkyn SM, Phillips

N & Quinn JM, 2011. Stream Ecological Valuation (SEV): a method for assessing the ecological function

of Auckland streams. Auckland Council Technical Report 2011/009.

Threatened species assessment guidelines: The assessment of significance. 2007. New South Wales

Government Department of Environment and Climate Change, Goulbourn.

Thomas CD, Cameron A, Green RE, Bakkenes M, Beaumont LJ, Collingham YC, Erasmus BFN, de

Siquera MF, Grainger A, Hannah L, Hughes L, Huntley B, van Jaarsveld AS, Midgley GF, Miles L,

Ortega-Huerta MA, Townsend-Peterson A, Phillips OL & Williams SE, 2004. Extinction risk from climate

change. Nature. 427(6970): 145-148.

Tilman D, May RM, Lehman C & Nowak M, 1994. Habitat destruction and the extinction debt. Nature.

371:65-66.

VicRoads 2012. Fauna sensitive road design guidelines. Victorian Government, Kew.

Walmsley R, Kessler M & Hallinan J, 2014. Fundamental Principles for Best Practice Biodiversity

Offsets. Impact!. Issue 96 (September).

Page 370 of 477




Page 371 of 477



Lea

Spr

Res

Res

Ecn

Ecn

Ene

Gre

Env

Wat

Eco

Sta

Leg

Her

Wfs

Con STAKEHOLDER ENGAGEMENT

Stakeholder engagement is the process used by an organisation to engage relevant stakeholders for a

clear purpose to achieve agreed outcomes (AccountAbility, 2015). In this context ‘engagement’ is used

as an overarching term to cover activities such as communication, consultation, participation, community

involvement or collaboration. ‘Stakeholders’ are individuals or organisations which affect, or can be

affected by, project decisions. They can include interest groups, government departments, media,

business and industry (Victoria State Government, 2016).

Stakeholder engagement is increasingly recognised as an integral part of improving sustainability

outcomes in infrastructure planning, delivery and operations. For proponents, stakeholder engagement

is an essential component of managing risk and delivering successful projects. Successful stakeholder

engagement contributes to developing and maintaining relationships with stakeholders, gaining and

maintaining a social licence to operate, and delivering more sustainable infrastructure projects. For

stakeholders, it provides an opportunity to be involved in projects that affect them.

Broadly speaking, the key outcomes of stakeholder engagement are that:

• Stakeholders are informed about a project,

• Stakeholders have the opportunity to provide input to a project, and

• Stakeholder input is used in a project to guide decision-making.

These outcomes are relevant to all stages of the project life cycle, from planning through to design,

construction and operations.

This category focusses on the extent to which the outcomes outlined above are achieved, as well as the

extent to which the principles of good engagement are incorporated into a stakeholder engagement

strategy and its implementation (see Engagement principles). The reasons for this outcomes and

principles based approach are twofold:

1. Decisions on ‘how’ stakeholder engagement should be planned and executed are a matter for

project proponents and teams; proponents/contractors may utilise some of the tools and frameworks

discussed below (see Guiding frameworks) or their own tools and frameworks; and

2. Every infrastructure project is different. Each project has different challenges and opportunities as

well as different stakeholders with different interests. Therefore, there is no one-size-fits-all

approach to engaging stakeholders — each interaction needs to be tailored. The considerations for

different projects are discussed further below (see Differences across projects).

Similarly, the level of stakeholder support, or otherwise, for a project is not a focus for this category.

Rather, the focus is on the quality of engagement and the extent to which stakeholders have the ability

to provide input to a project which may affect them.

The responsible party(ies) for this category will differ by phase and project structure. The category will

need to be undertaken by the parties involved in stakeholder engagement, and often that includes the

project proponent, designer and contractor in collaboration.

UEngagement principles

The common principles of good engagement are generally incorporated into the frameworks available

to support stakeholder engagement planning and execution. They include accountability, honesty,

respect, transparency, consistency, timeliness and ethical conduct. Many of these principles are

‘business as usual’ in that they should be reflected in the planning and execution of all stakeholder

engagement programmes.

However, there are five key principles that go beyond ‘business as usual’ and are useful in differentiating

stakeholder engagement performance. These are outlined in Table S1 and are used to define the

stakeholder engagement credits and criteria in this chapter.

Page 372 of 477



Table S1 Guiding principles for the stakeholder engagement credits

Principle Description

Clarity of purpose –

the extent to which the

purpose of

engagement, and how

input will be used, is

clear

The purpose of engagement needs to be clear from the outset. Stakeholders should have

a clear understanding of how their contributions will be used and the degree of influence

their input will have. When stakeholders’ expectations cannot be met, anger, frustration

or cynicism may result, which will affect current and future relationships. The purpose of

the engagement and the role of participants, including how their input will be used, needs

to be clear from the beginning. This requires the project team to identify early, which

aspects of the project are ‘negotiable’ i.e. can be influenced by stakeholder input, and

which aspects are ‘non-negotiable’.

Inclusive – the extent

to which those that are

potentially affected by,

or interested in, a

project are able to be

involved

Being as inclusive as possible means identifying all of the groups and individuals who will

be affected by, or have an interest in, a project. This includes identifying potentially

‘difficult to reach’, disadvantaged or vulnerable stakeholders and providing opportunities

for them to be involved, such as through translators, using visual materials or in different

locations. Factors which can impede the ability of stakeholders to engage include:

• accessibility and neutrality of the engagement methods and location, for example,

some people may not be available at certain times due to hours of work,

• availability of Information and Communication Technologies (ICT), particularly in

remote areas where internet access may be limited,

• the need for anonymity,

• culture-specific communication styles/language barriers, for example, some

stakeholders may not speak English, or English may be their second language,

• special needs of those with a disability, such as vision or hearing difficulties,

• inclusion of those who represent children’s interests, and

• illiterate stakeholders (AA1000SES).

Integrated – the extent

to which stakeholder

engagement is

integrated into the

project

Stakeholder engagement will be the most effective, and deliver the most value for

organisations and stakeholders, when it is embedded into the culture and core functions

of an organisation and/or project (AccountAbility, 2015). Project managers and teams are

often the face of a project, in that stakeholders see them on and around project sites on

a day-to-day basis. They are also the key influencers, specialists and decision-makers.

Therefore, the extent to which project managers and teams are aware of, and understand,

stakeholder input is directly related to the extent to which stakeholder input can influence

project decision-making.

Credible – the extent

to which stakeholder

input influences the

project and decision-

making

There is little point in investing time and resources in stakeholder engagement, if the input

provided is ignored. In some cases, it could be argued that the risks – to credibility, trust,

reputation – of undertaking stakeholder engagement and ignoring the input provided, are

greater than not doing any engagement in the first place. In these cases, the potential

value of stakeholder input to the project will also not be realised.

Therefore, stakeholder engagement is not just about providing information. To be

credible, it must be a ‘two-way’ process of listening to stakeholders and using their input

to shape and improve the quality of a project.

Page 373 of 477



Lea

Spr

Res

Res

Ecn

Ecn

Ene

Gre

Env

Wat

Eco

Sta

Leg

Her

Wfs

Con

Principle Description

Continuous

improvement –

strategy and

implementation

contribute towards

improved stakeholder

engagement

The discipline of stakeholder engagement, particularly in an infrastructure-sustainability

context, is constantly evolving in terms of the capacity, skills and experience of

practitioners and broader project teams, as well as the engagement tools and techniques

available. As a result, projects can make an important contribution to the continuous

improvement of stakeholder engagement by:

• Considering lessons learnt from previous phases and/or projects when developing

strategy;

• Regularly monitoring progress against achieving the engagement objectives, and

updating the strategy if necessary; and

• Evaluating, documenting and sharing lessons learnt for future phases and/or

projects at the completion of a phase.

Sources: IS Technical Manual Version 1.2 (2016), IAP2 (2015), Victoria State Government (2016), IFC (2007), ISO (2010).

The way in which the credits and criteria have been developed to reflect these five principles are shown

in Table S2.

Table S2 Stakeholder engagement credits and principles


Sta-1 Stakeholder engagement strategy development

1.1 Stakeholder engagement

strategy is developed CLARITY OF PURPOSE

1.2 Strategy incorporates lessons

learnt CONTINUOUS IMPROVEMENT

1.3 Strategy is informed by the

local context and social risk

assessment

INCLUSIVE

1.4 Strategy is integrated into the

project

INTEGRATED

2.1 Strategy includes targeted

activities for different stakeholders

INCLUSIVE

3.1 Strategy is intergrated

throughout the project lifecycle

INTEGRATED

Sta-2 Stakeholder engagement strategy implementation

1.1 Strategy is implemented as per

Sta-1

1.2 Stakeholder input is considered

in the project

CREDIBLE

1.3 Priority negotiable issues are

identified with stakeholders

CREDIBLE

2.1 Stakeholder input influences

more than one of the project

priority ‘negotiables’

CREDIBLE

2.2 Implementation progress is

reviewed and used to update the

strategy

CONTINUOUS IMPROVEMENT

2.3 Lessons learnt are collected

and documented

CONTINUOUS IMPROVEMENT

3.1 Stakeholder input influences a

majority of the priority project

‘negotiables’

CREDIBLE

3.2 Stakeholders believe that their

input has influenced the project

CREDIBLE

Page 374 of 477



UGuiding frameworks

There are various frameworks available to support the planning and execution of stakeholder

engagement programmes. Those which are of particular relevance include:

• International Association for Public Participation Australasia (IAP2) Quality Assurance Standard,

• AA1000 Stakeholder Engagement Standard,

• IFC Performance Standards on Environmental and Social Sustainability (particularly Performance

Standard 1), and

• ISO26000 Social responsibility.

These frameworks provide guidance on how to develop and implement a stakeholder engagement

strategy, for example:

• how to identify and analyse stakeholders e.g. based on their level of influence on, and interest in,

a project,

• the tools and techniques available for undertaking engagement activities (and how to select the

right ones based on the analysis of stakeholders),

• how to record input received during engagement activities e.g. through the use of databases and

knowledge sharing platforms, and

• how to review and evaluate progress.

There may also be State or Local Government frameworks, or proponent or project specific frameworks,

that may be relevant and useful.

UDifferences across projects

Every project is different in terms of its context, range of stakeholders and goals of engagement. As a

result, the stakeholder engagement strategy needs to be developed with these differences in mind. A

different mix of approaches may also be required, as well as flexibility to review and adjust the approach

quickly if needed.

“The nature, frequency, and level of effort of stakeholder engagement may vary considerably and will be commensurate with the project’s risks and adverse impacts, and the project’s phase of development” (IFC, 2012).

Some of the differences that need to be considered in developing and implementing a stakeholder

engagement strategy include:

• Stakeholders – every stakeholder will have different interests, sentiment, capacity to engage, etc.

For example, Government agencies/organisations may be highly relevant in the planning phase,

but less so during construction. On the other hand, near neighbours may be highly relevant in all

phases. It is also important to consider that stakeholders may change over time,

• Sentiment there may be broad community support for the overall project, however, there may be

localised concerns about short-term negative impacts during construction, for example on a local

park if that land is required for construction. Conversely, meaningful engagement on project details

can be more challenging if there is broad community opposition to a project,

• History – previous projects and/or engagement programmes can influence how stakeholders

engage, including whether there are any legacy issues. Another consideration is the extent to which

stakeholders have previously been involved in consultation activities, including whether

‘consultation fatigue’ is a factor to consider,

• Location and size of project area - the location of a project e.g. urban vs remote, and size of the

project area, will influence which stakeholders need to be involved, the issues to be considered, as

well as practical considerations around accessibility during consultation,

• Socio-economic environment – the socio-economic characteristics of stakeholders may influence

their interest in a project, capacity to engage and the issues that are important to them,

Page 375 of 477



Lea

Spr

Res

Res

Ecn

Ecn

Ene

Gre

Env

Wat

Eco

Sta

Leg

Her

Wfs

Con • Type of infrastructure – stakeholder engagement for linear infrastructure will be different to that for

single site infrastructure. Similarly, the environmental, social and economic impacts of different

infrastructure will also influence the type and extent of stakeholder engagement,

• Time and resources available – stakeholder engagement activities need to be planned and

implemented to be most effective within any constraints imposed by the availability of time and

resources, and

• Project phase – there are potentially more ‘negotiables’ in the earlier planning and design phases,

with greater opportunities to be influenced by stakeholder input. These opportunities can decrease,

or will at least change, as the design is completed and the project moves into construction and

operation. In these later phases, the focus of stakeholder input may be more on impact

management and mitigation measures or assisting with aesthetics, including localised

reinstatement efforts such as plantings to re-establish parklands.




Category linkages

The following ISv2.0 categories have linkages with the Stakeholder Engagement category:

Table S3 Category linkages


Lea-1 Key external stakeholders need

to be identified and included in

the development of the

sustainability plan in Lea-1 L2

and L3.

x x x

Lea-2 Stakeholder risks and

opportunities need to be included

in the risk and opportunity

assessment.

x x x x

Con-1 L3 requires stakeholders to be

engaged in the preparation of the

project development strategy.

x

Spr-2 Key internal stakeholder need to

be included in the refined risk

and opportunity assessment

undertaken on Spr-2 L1.1.

x x x x

Ecn-1 Stakeholder views need to be

considered when considering

options.

x x x x

Ecn-2 Stakeholders need to be

considered when valuing and

considering externalities.

x

Page 376 of 477




Ecn-3 Stakeholder analysis undertaken

in this category may be utilised

when assessing equity and

distributional impacts.

x

Ecn-5 The benefits management plan

may reference opportunities

identified through stakeholder

engagement, and information

uncovered through stakeholder

analysis.

x

Ecn-6 Stakeholder engagement or

analysis may be referenced in

the post-project evaluation.

x

Leg-1 The Legacy credit required an

understanding of the community

need for any social legacy

initiatives and the credit requires

engagement with key

stakeholders.

x x x x

Res-1 Key stakeholders need to be

engaged with when developing

the Resilience Plan.

x x x

Res-2 Stakeholders need to be

engaged in the development of

the climate and natural hazards

risk and treatment assessment.

x x x

Ene-1 The identification of Scope 3

emissions may require

stakeholder engagement to

understand what they deem as

relevant scope 3 emissions.

x x x

Her-1 Stakeholders need to be

included in the assessment,

identification and management of

heritage items.

x x x x

Wfs-1 Wfs-1 L3.1 requires the key

internal and external stakeholder

to be identified and included in

the Strategic Workforce Plan.

x x x x

Page 377 of 477



Lea

Spr

Res

Res

Ecn

Ecn

Ene

Gre

Env

Wat

Eco

Sta

Leg

Her

Wfs

Con

ISv2.0 Design


Aim

To reward the development of a well-considered and strategic approach to stakeholder engagement

Criteria

Table S4 Sta-1 Design summary criteria table


DL1.1 Stakeholder engagement

strategy is developed (or reviewed

and updated)

AND

DL1.2 Strategy incorporates

lessons learnt

AND

DL1.3 Strategy is informed by the

local context and a social risk

assessment

AND

DL1.4 Strategy is integrated into

the project


achieved

AND

DL2.1 Strategy includes targeted

activities for different stakeholders


achieved

AND

DL3.1 Strategy is integrated

throughout the infrastructure life

cycle

The stakeholder engagement strategy shapes the overall approach to engagement for a project, and

will be most effective when it is comprehensive (i.e. incorporates the principles of good engagement)

and strategic (i.e. considers the overall aims and interests and means of achieving them).

Definitions

Negotiables are issues that can be negotiated with project stakeholders. These issues are identified

along with non-negotiables.

Non-negotiables are issues that cannot be negotiated with stakeholders for reasons such as legislation.

Senior member of the proponent/project team includes a person with overall accountability for project

delivery and/or someone in a senior-leadership position.

Suitably qualified professional includes someone with at least seven years’ experience in stakeholder

engagement and qualifications/training in a relevant discipline (i.e. stakeholder engagement, social

science, planning or communications).

Level 1

DL1.1 Stakeholder engagement strategy is developed (or reviewed and updated)

A stakeholder engagement strategy must be developed in parallel to early engagement activities, for

example – identifying key stakeholders, identifying how stakeholders would like to be engaged,

identifying project negotiables etc. Where a strategy has been developed during the Planning phase, it

must be reviewed and updated for the Design phase.

Where a strategy does not exist, the strategy must include the following unless justification can be

provided as to why some points are not relevant:

• Project background, including a summary of the project scope, the geographic area and overview

of timing,

Page 378 of 477



• The engagement purpose and goal, including measurable objectives,

• The scope of the engagement, including which aspects of the project are ‘negotiable’ (i.e. can be

influenced by stakeholder input) and which aspects are ‘non-negotiable’ (i.e. cannot be influenced

by stakeholder input). All non-negotiable issues must be justified as to why they are non-

negotiable. This approach is taken to limit projects from listing a very minimal number of negotiable

issues without due reason,

• Processes for identifying priority negotiable issues as identified by the stakeholders (this needs to

be undertaken for Sta-2),

• Summary of previous engagement (if any),

• Identification and analysis of stakeholders,

• Engagement activities to be undertaken,

• A detailed implementation program, including schedule and roles and responsibilities,

• Recording mechanism, outlining the process(es) to be used to record engagement and input

received, as well as commitments made and actions promised, • Feedback mechanism, outlining how feedback will be provided to stakeholders on input received

and if/how it was utilised in decision-making,

• Mechanism for managing any incidents or complaints received,

• Notification time frames and approvals process, and

• Monitoring and evaluation mechanism, outlining how and when progress on achieving the

stakeholder engagement objectives will be monitored and evaluated.

The stakeholder engagement strategy should also include definitions of terms used, an outline of any

regulatory requirements, project key messages, as well as any engagement principles adopted by the

project team in planning and executing engagement activities. The stakeholder engagement strategy

must be developed or approved by a suitably qualified professional.

The extent of negotiables and non-negotiables in the planning phase will vary. In most Design phases

there will be some non-negotiables, for example:

• A decision has been made to upgrade a major road – this is the non-negotiable. The negotiables

are around how the road is upgraded, such as location of widening, whether level crossings are

removed, opportunities for urban design enhancements to be incorporated in design, etc.

Page 379 of 477



Lea

Spr

Res

Res

Ecn

Ecn

Ene

Gre

Env

Wat

Eco

Sta

Leg

Her

Wfs

Con

DL1.2 Strategy incorporates lessons learnt

Stakeholder engagement has the best chance of producing successful outcomes if it considers and

incorporates lessons learnt. Therefore, the strategy must include discussion on the lessons learnt from

previous phases and/or similar projects, and how they have been considered in strategy development.

Examples include:

• Any stakeholder engagement activities undertaken in the planning phase for the same project may

have identified lessons for future stages, and gaps or issues which need to be considered in future

stages. These may include the identification of stakeholders not previously identified, a change in

the way stakeholders are analysed or the identification of risks and opportunities not previously

included.

Listing negotiable and non-negotiable items

Some decisions may be negotiable, such as the location of an asset, while other may be non-negotiable

such as licence conditions. Determining which issues are negotiable and which issues are non-

negotiable will help manage stakeholder expectations about how they can influence project outcomes.

Non-negotiable issues need to be justified, outlining why they are non-negotiable.

Negotiable issue should be itemised by the stakeholders to identify priority or important negotiable

issues. This process should take place as early as possible and may be included as part of other

engagement. Priority stakeholder issues need to be identified for Sta-2.

Figure S1 List of negotiable and non-negotiable items. Source: (Department of Infrastructure, Local Government and Planning, 2017)

Page 380 of 477



• Stakeholder engagement activities undertaken for similar projects may have identified lessons

learnt in terms of potential stakeholder issues and opportunities, and suitable engagement tools

and techniques.

DL1.3 Strategy is informed by the local context and a social risk assessment

The local context and potential social risks and opportunities relevant to a project assists in the

identification of stakeholders (including those who may be ‘difficult to reach’), their interests, and

identifying which engagement activities are likely to be the most effective.

The stakeholder engagement strategy must be informed by:

• local context and stakeholder characteristics – this information should be drawn from existing

documents where possible e.g. local and regional plans, ABS Census data, community profiles,

community needs assessments, social baselines and impact assessments. Aspects which should

be considered include:

o population size, projections, age and sex distribution,

o ethnic diversity and languages spoken,

o employment and livelihoods,

o service provision,

o community perceptions, and

o stakeholder preferences for engagement activities.

• potential social risks (i.e. issues, threats, opportunities) associated with the project and stakeholder

engagement – the risks should be identified and assessed through a formal risk-assessment

process and should be completed as part of Lea-2. This may be done as part of the overall project

risk assessment, or as a separate exercise focussing on the social risks, and

• Previous legacy issues – i.e. issues that had occurred prior to the project that could influence

stakeholder’s opinions, requirements or attitudes.

DL1.4 Strategy is integrated into the project

While stakeholder engagement professionals and specialists need to take the lead on developing and

implementing the stakeholder engagement strategy, the responsibilities for good outcomes are broader

within a project team.

Aspects of the stakeholder engagement strategy must be integrated into the project governance,

structure, systems and decision-making processes with evidence that, at a minimum:

• stakeholder engagement risks are included in the project risk register,

• stakeholder engagement activities are included in the project schedule, and

• stakeholder engagement principles and procedures (e.g. for land access and reporting complaints

and incidents) are included in the induction and training materials for anyone involved in work on

or around the project site.

Stakeholder engagement should also be integrated into a project by:

• Ensuring that project leads and other team members have some ownership of, and involvement in,

the development of the stakeholder engagement strategy, as well as having roles and

responsibilities for implementation. Project leads are often the ‘face’ of a project; some stakeholders

will want to have the opportunity to hear from them and also engage directly with them,

• Developing project ‘negotiables’ and ‘‘non-negotiables’ with the project team. These are an

essential part of the stakeholder engagement strategy and will generally need to be developed and

confirmed by others within the project team,

Page 381 of 477



Lea

Spr

Res

Res

Ecn

Ecn

Ene

Gre

Env

Wat

Eco

Sta

Leg

Her

Wfs

Con • Using stakeholder engagement to assist in identifying and managing potential social, environmental

and economic impacts of a project. The stakeholder engagement strategy should consider if and

how engagement activities associated with these assessments, and any related regulatory

approvals, need to be incorporated and supported, anf

• Including stakeholder engagement as a regular agenda item on relevant project meetings is

another way of integrating stakeholder engagement activities into a project. Topics might include

progress on engagement activities, summary of input received, any issues identified, etc.


• Stakeholder engagement strategy,

• Engagement reports,

• Notes/minutes from meetings held to discuss, develop and finalise/approve strategy,

• Organisation chart and CV of suitably qualified professional,

• Approval by senior member of project team,

• Lessons learnt from previous stakeholder engagement on the same or similar projects e.g. lessons

learnt workshop, assessment report, conference papers, case studies, personal experience,

• Position descriptions for key roles, which include stakeholder engagement expectations,

performance measures, etc,

• Project governance documents and controls e.g. schedule, protocols,

• Induction and training materials, and • Notes of project team meetings

Level 2

DL2.1 Strategy includes targeted activities for different stakeholders

Engagement will be more effective if activities are specifically tailored for different stakeholder groups,

accompanied by specific plans/sub-plans. A detailed understanding of the local context and social risks

can assist, for example, by identifying stakeholders with specific issues to engage on or particular

characteristics that warrant specialised and targeted engagement such as vulnerable and minority

groups.

The strategy must include targeted engagement activities for key stakeholder groups which are:

• informed by the results of the local context and social risk assessment; and

• outlined in specific plans/sub-plans.

Examples include:

• A group of households on a street near a project have concerns about the local impacts of a

particular design element. Meetings with key members of the design team and the households are

organised on the street, to walk the potentially affected area, discuss the proposed design options,

and gather feedback for the design team to consider; and

• A social profile prepared during planning for a new landfill facility identifies that the project area has

a significant population of people from non-English speaking backgrounds; languages spoken

include Korean and Taiwanese. In addition to English, project communications (newsletters) are

translated into Korean and Taiwanese, and an interpreter is commissioned to be present at the

drop-in information sessions organised in the local shopping centre.


• Stakeholder engagement strategy with specific plans/sub-plans for different stakeholders/activities.

Page 382 of 477



Level 3

DL3.1 Strategy is integrated throughout the infrastructure life cycle

The stakeholder engagement strategy developed, must be embedded throughout the infrastructure life

cycle. This can be done by integrating the stakeholder engagement strategy in management plans or

similar, showing evidence that the strategy has been provided to the constructors and operators (if

known), as part of handover documents, integrated into contracts, etc.


• Management plans showing the inclusion of the stakeholder strategy,

• Handover documents.

Page 383 of 477



Lea

Spr

Res

Res

Ecn

Ecn

Ene

Gre

Env

Wat

Eco

Sta

Leg

Her

Wfs

Con

ISv2.0 As Built


Aim

To reward the development of a well-considered and strategic approach to stakeholder engagement

Criteria

Table S5 Sta-1 As Built summary criteria table

Level 1 Level 2

ABL1.1 Stakeholder engagement strategy is

reviewed and updated

AND

ABL1.2 Strategy is integrated into the project


AND

ABL2.1 Strategy is integrated throughout the project

lifecycle

The stakeholder engagement strategy shapes the overall approach to engagement for a project and will

be most effective when it is comprehensive (i.e. incorporates the principles of good engagement) and

strategic (i.e. considers the overall aims and interests and means of achieving them).

Definitions



Non-negotiables are issues that cannot be negotiated with stakeholder for reasons such as legislation.






Level 1

ABL1.1 Stakeholder engagement strategy is reviewed and updated

The stakeholder engagement strategy developed or reviewed in Design must be reviewed and updated

where necessary, at least every 12 months throughout the As Built phase. As part of the strategy review,

the following must also be reviewed and updated at least every 12 months:

• Lessons learnt register or similar,

• Local context or social risk assessments, and

• Targeted activities for different stakeholders

A suitably qualified professional must either review or approve the updated strategy.

ABL1.2 Strategy is integrated into the project

While stakeholder engagement professionals and specialists need to take the lead on developing and

implementing the stakeholder engagement strategy, the responsibilities for good outcomes are broader

within a project team.

Page 384 of 477



Aspects of the stakeholder engagement strategy must be integrated into the project governance,

structure, systems and decision-making processes with evidence that, at a minimum:

• stakeholder engagement risks are included in the project risk register,

• stakeholder engagement activities are included in the project schedule, and

• stakeholder engagement principles and procedures (e.g. for land access and reporting complaints

and incidents) are included in induction and training materials for anyone involved in work on or

around the project site.

Stakeholder engagement should also be integrated into a project by:

• Ensuring that project leads and other team members have some ownership of, and involvement in,

the development of the stakeholder engagement strategy, as well as having roles and

responsibilities for implementation. Project leads are often the ‘face’ of a project; some stakeholders

will want to have the opportunity to hear from them and also engage directly with them,

• Using stakeholder engagement to assist in identifying and managing potential social, environmental

and economic impacts of a project. The stakeholder engagement strategy should consider if and

how engagement activities associated with these assessments, and any related regulatory

approvals, need to be incorporated and supported, and

• Including stakeholder engagement as a regular agenda item on relevant project meetings is

another way of integrating stakeholder engagement activities into a project. Topics might include

progress on engagement activities, summary of input received, any issues identified, etc.


• Updated stakeholder engagement strategy,

• Engagement reports,

• Notes/minutes from meetings held to discuss, develop and finalise/approve strategy,

• Organisation chart and CV of suitably qualified professional,

• Approval by senior member of project team,

• Lessons learnt from previous stakeholder engagement on the same or similar projects e.g. lessons

learnt workshop, assessment report, conference papers, case studies, personal experience,

• Position descriptions for key roles, which include stakeholder engagement expectations,

performance measures, etc,

• Project governance documents and controls e.g. schedule, protocols,

• Induction and training materials, • Project risk assessments, and • Notes of project team meetings

Level 2

ABL2.1 Strategy is integrated through the project life cycle

The stakeholder engagement strategy developed or reviewed in the Design phase must be embedded

throughout the infrastructure life cycle. This can be done by integrating the stakeholder engagement

strategy in the management plan or similar, showing evidence that the strategy has been provided to

the operators (if known), provided as part of handover documents, integrated into contracts etc.


• Management plans showing the inclusion of the stakeholder strategy,

• Handover documents, and

• Contract extracts.

Page 385 of 477



Lea

Spr

Res

Res

Ecn

Ecn

Ene

Gre

Env

Wat

Eco

Sta

Leg

Her

Wfs

Con

ISv2.0 Design


Aim

To reward implementation and review of the stakeholder engagement strategy and use of stakeholder

input

Criteria

Table S6 Sta-2 Design summary criteria table


DL1.1 Strategy is implemented as

per Sta-1

AND

DL1.2 Stakeholder input is

considered in the project

AND

DL1.3 Priority negotiables are

identifed by stakeholders


achieved

AND

DL2.1 Stakeholder input influences

more than one of the priority project

‘negotiables’

AND

DL2.2 Implementation progress is

reviewed and used to update the

strategy

AND

DL2.3 Lessons learnt are collected

and documented


achieved

AND

DL3.1 Stakeholder input influences

a majority of the priority project

‘negotiables’

AND

DL3.2 The majority of stakeholders

believe that their input has

influenced the project

Definitions









Level 1

DL1.1 Strategy is implemented as per Sta-1

The stakeholder engagement strategy developed in Sta-1 must be implemented, with all engagement

activities carried out. Justification must be provided if there have been deviations from the strategy

developed in Sta-1.

DL1.2 Stakeholder input is considered in the project

Input received from stakeholders during engagement must be collected, summarised and considered

in the project. A report outlining outcomes from stakeholder engagement must be developed and

reviewed by the project’s senior-management team.

For the purpose of this credit, ‘considered’ means that stakeholder input has been reviewed, but has not

directly influenced any of the project negotiables.

Page 386 of 477



DL1.3 Priority negotiables are identified by stakeholders

Negotiable issues must be reviewed and prioritised by stakeholders to identify priority negotiable issues

at least once every 12 months. This should be done at different stages throughout the design to ‘check

in’ to understand if priorities have changed as the design has progressed. The purpose of this criterion

is to understand which negotiable issues are most important to stakeholders, so those priority issues

can be the focus of negotiations.


• Notes from meetings, workshops etc. with stakeholders,

• Stakeholder engagement register and database, and

• Notes from design/project meetings where stakeholder input is discussed and considered.

Level 2

DL2.1 Stakeholder input influences more than one of the priority project ‘negotiables’

There must be evidence that stakeholder input has influenced more than one of the project priority

‘negotiables’ outlined in Sta-1 and DL1.3.

For the purpose of this credit, ‘influenced’ means that stakeholder input has directly contributed to a

project decision.

Examples include:

• Changes to elements of the design based on stakeholder input,

• Development of measures to mitigate impacts,

• Selection and inclusion of structures e.g. visual amenity bunds, noise walls, fauna fencing, fauna

crossings,

• Development of management plans e.g. to manage impacts in future phases, and

• Selection of landscape design and public art elements.

DL2.2 Implementation progress is reviewed and used to update the strategy

Progress on implementing the strategy (and achieving the measurable objectives), must be monitored,

reviewed and documented, and the strategy updated where necessary.

The review must be:

• Undertaken at least once during the Design phase, or annually if the phase is longer than one year,

and

• Undertaken or approved by a suitably qualified professional

DL2.3 Lessons learnt are collected and documented

At the end of the Design phase, lessons learnt from stakeholder engagement must be collated and

documented including:

• Records of engagement activities undertaken,

• A summary of key feedback themes,

• An outline of how stakeholder and/or community involvement/input has influenced the development

of the project, and

• An evaluation of the process, including what worked and what didn’t, to ensure future

activities/phases can build upon these learnings.

This must be done through a workshop with key members of the project team and include as a minimum:

• Stakeholder engagement manager,

• Site staff that have engaged with stakeholders, and

Page 387 of 477



Lea

Spr

Res

Res

Ecn

Ecn

Ene

Gre

Env

Wat

Eco

Sta

Leg

Her

Wfs

Con • Project manager

Key questions may include:

• What worked well? What didn’t work well?

• Did we fulfil the stakeholder engagement objectives?

• What would we do differently in future projects stages, and/or on different projects?

• What is the formal/informal feedback from stakeholders?

• What is the formal/informal feedback from the study team?


• Design reports,

• Stakeholder engagement strategy (list of project negotiables; evidence of review and update),

• Notes from meeting/discussion to review implementation progress,

• Notes from meeting/discussion/workshop to review lessons learnt, and

• Case studies, conference papers, award submissions, etc.

Level 3

DL3.1 Stakeholder input influences a majority of the priority project ‘negotiables’

There must be evidence that stakeholder input has influenced a majority (i.e. more than half) of the

priority project ‘negotiables’ outlined in Sta-1 and DL1.3.


project decision.

Examples include:

• Changes to elements of the design,


• Selection and inclusion of structures e.g. visual amenity bunds, noise walls, fauna fencing, fauna

crossings,

• Development of draft management plans e.g. to manage impacts in future phases, anf

• Selection of landscape design and public art elements.

DL3.2 The majority of stakeholders believe that their input has influenced the project

While stakeholder input may have influenced the project, engagement activities will be most credible –

and have the most reputational value – when stakeholders share the same view.

Feedback must be sought from stakeholders on engagement during the Design phase and whether

they feel that their input has influenced the project. The process used to collect feedback must be:

• undertaken at least once, towards the end of the project phase (or more regularly, if appropriate),

• documented, so that there is the opportunity to share lessons learnt (if appropriate), and

• designed and implemented by a suitably qualified professional (this can be the same person who

designed the stakeholder engagement strategy in Sta-1).

The size, nature and representation of the stakeholders from which feedback is sought must be

determined and justified. Feedback should be sought from each stakeholder group identified in the

stakeholder engagement strategy developed in Sta-1.

Stakeholder feedback should be obtained through surveys or similar, using one of the following

questions:

• To what extent do you think that stakeholder input has influenced the project? (large influence, moderate influence, minor influence, no influence, not sure), and

Page 388 of 477



• In your opinion, has stakeholder input influenced the project? (yes/no/not sure) How? (open response)


• Stakeholder feedback and results.

Page 389 of 477



Lea

Spr

Res

Res

Ecn

Ecn

Ene

Gre

Env

Wat

Eco

Sta

Leg

Her

Wfs

Con

ISv2.0 As Built


Aim

To reward implementation and review of the stakeholder engagement strategy and use of stakeholder

input

Criteria

Table S7 Sta-2 As Built summary criteria table


ABL1.1 Strategy is implemented

as per Sta-1

AND

ABL1.2 Stakeholder input is

considered in the project

AND

ABL1.3 Priority negotiables issues

are identified with stakeholders


achieved

AND

ABL2.1 Stakeholder input

influences more than one of the

priority project ‘negotiables’

AND

ABL2.2 Progress is reviewed and

used to update the strategy

AND

ABL2.3 Lessons learnt are

collected and documented


achieved

AND

ABL3.1 Stakeholder input

influences a majority of the priority

project ‘negotiables’

AND

ABL3.2 The majority of

stakeholders believe that their

input has influenced the project

Definitions









Level 1

ABL1.1 Strategy is implemented as per Sta-1

The stakeholder engagement strategy reviewed and updated in Sta-1 must be implemented, with all

engagement activities carried out. Justification must be provided if there have been deviations from the

strategy developed in Sta-1.

ABL1.2 Stakeholder input is considered in the project

Input received from stakeholders during engagement must be collected, summarised and considered

in the project. A report outlining outcomes from stakeholder engagement must be developed and

reviewed by the project’s senior-management team.

For the purpose of this credit, ‘considered’ means that stakeholder input has been reviewed, but has not

directly influenced any of the project negotiables.

Page 390 of 477



ABL1.3 Priority negotiable issues are identified with stakeholders

Negotiable issues must be reviewed and itemised by stakeholders to identify priority negotiable issues

at least once every 12 months. This should be done at different stages through the design to ‘check in’;

to understand if priorities have changes as the design has progressed. The purpose of this criterion is

to understand which negotiable issues are most important to stakeholders, so those priority issues can

be the focus of negotiations.


• Notes from meetings, workshops etc. with stakeholders,

• Stakeholder engagement register and database, and

• Notes from design/project meetings where stakeholder input is discussed and considered

Level 2

ABL2.1 Stakeholder input influences more than one of the priority project ‘negotiables’

There must be evidence that stakeholder input has influenced more than one of the priority project

‘negotiables’ outlined in Sta-1.


project decision.

Examples include:


• Revisions to management plans e.g. to manage impacts during construction,

• Design and implementation of environmental monitoring requirements and programmes, and

• Scheduling of works to reduce impacts on local community.

ABL2.2 Progress is reviewed and used to update the strategy

Progress on implementing the strategy (and achieving the measurable objectives), must be monitored,

reviewed and documented, and the strategy updated where necessary.

The review must be:

• Undertaken at least once during the As Built phase, or annually if the phase is longer than one

year, and

• Undertaken by a suitably qualified professional and approved by a senior member of the proponent/

project team.

ABL2.3 Lessons learnt are collected and documented

Towards the end of the As Built phase, lessons learnt from stakeholder engagement must be collated

and documented including:

• Record of engagement activities undertaken,

• A summary of key feedback themes,

• How stakeholder and/or community involvement/input has influenced the development of the

project, and

• An evaluation of the process, including what worked and what didn’t, to ensure future

activities/phases can build upon these learnings.

This must be done through a workshop with key members of the project team and include as a minimum:

• Stakeholder engagement manager,

Page 391 of 477



Lea

Spr

Res

Res

Ecn

Ecn

Ene

Gre

Env

Wat

Eco

Sta

Leg

Her

Wfs

Con • Site staff that have engaged with stakeholders, and

• Project manager,

Key questions may include:

• What worked well? What didn’t work well?

• Did we fulfil the stakeholder engagement objectives?

• What would we do differently in future projects stages, and/or on different projects?

• What is the formal/informal feedback from stakeholders?

• What is the formal/informal feedback from the study team?


• Stakeholder engagement strategy (list of project negotiables; evidence of review and update),

• Notes from meeting/discussion to review implementation progress,

• Notes from meeting/discussion/workshop to review lessons learnt, and

• Case studies, conference papers, award submissions, etc.

Level 3

ABL3.1 Stakeholder input influences a majority of the priority project ‘negotiables’

There must be evidence that stakeholder input has influenced a majority (i.e. more than half) of the

project ‘negotiables’ outlined in Sta-1.


project decision.

Examples include:


• Revisions to management plans e.g. to manage impacts during construction,

• Design and implementation of environmental monitoring requirements and programmes, and

• Scheduling of works to reduce impacts on local community.

ABL3.2 The majority of stakeholders believe that their input has influenced the project

While stakeholder input may have influenced the project, engagement activities will be most credible –

and have the most reputational value – when stakeholders share the same view.

Feedback must be sought from stakeholders on engagement during the As Built phase and whether

they feel that their input has influenced the project. The process used to collect feedback must be:

• undertaken at least once, towards the end of the As Built phase (or more regularly, if appropriate),

• documented, so that there is the opportunity to share lessons learnt (if appropriate), and

• designed and implemented by a suitably qualified professional (this can be the same person who

designed the stakeholder engagement strategy in Sta-1).

The size, nature and representation of the stakeholders from which feedback is sought must be

determined and justified. Feedback should be sought from each stakeholder group identified in the

stakeholder engagement strategy developed in Sta-1.

Stakeholder feedback should be obtained through surveys or similar, using one of the following

questions:

• To what extent do you think that stakeholder input has influenced the project? (large influence, moderate influence, minor influence, no influence, not sure), and

• In your opinion, has stakeholder input influenced the project? (yes/no/not sure) How? (open response)

Page 392 of 477




• Stakeholder survey and results.

Page 393 of 477



Lea

Spr

Res

Res

Ecn

Ecn

Ene

Gre

Env

Wat

Eco

Sta

Leg

Her

Wfs

Con References

AccountAbility, 2015. AA1000 Stakeholder Engagement Standard (AA1000SES)1T 1T

BSR, 2012. Back to Basics: How to Make Stakeholder Engagement Meaningful for Your Company

Department of Infrastructure, Local Government and Planning, 2017. Community engagement toolkit

for planning. Brisbane. Queensland Government.

International Association for Public Participation (IAP2), 2015. Quality Assurance Standard for Community and Stakeholder Engagement

International Finance Corporation, 2007. Stakeholder Engagement: A Good Practice Handbook for Companies Doing Business in Emerging Markets

International Finance Corporation, 2012. Performance Standards on Environmental and Social Sustainability

International Organisation for Standardization (ISO), 2010. Guidance on social responsibility

Victoria Government, 2016. Level Crossing Removal Authority, project communications and engagement handbook

Page 394 of 477




Page 395 of 477



Lea

Spr

Res

Res

Ecn

Ecn

Ene

Gre

Env

Wat

Eco

Sta

Leg

Her

Wfs

Con LEGACY

Legacy is something left or handed down by a predecessor (Oxford Dictionary, 2017). Legacy can be

positive or negative and can impact people, the environment and communities for generations into the

future.

This category focuses on the positive legacy that a project leaves behind, beyond the purpose of the

project itself. It focuses on the additional benefits the project can bring to the community and/or the

environment during its planning, design, construction and operation.

Legacy initiatives can be social, community, environmental or economic in nature and legacy initiatives

will have the biggest impact when they either solve an identified issue or implement an identified

opportunity as identified by the local community or environmental investigations.

Australia and New Zealand are great places to live. Regardless, there is room for improvement:

• New Zealand's glaciers have lost a quarter of their volume since 1977 (Ministry for the Environment,

2017),

• Environmental conditions in Australia such as biodiversity are in decline (Department of

Environment, 2017),

• Income inequality has increased in Australia and New Zealand since 2011 (OECD, 2017)

• The target to halve the gap in child mortality rates, life expectancy, and employment between

Indigenous and non-indigenous Australians is not on track to be achieved (Australian Government,

2017),

• New Zealand experiences inequalities in health outcomes for Māori, Pacific Islanders and people

living in low socio-economic communities (Ministry of Health, 2017),

• Our cities have high costs of living relative to other countries (The Economist, 2017) (Mercer, 2017),

• The proportion of the population living with a disability in New Zealand has increased from 20

percent in 2001 to 24 percent in 2013 (Ministry of Health, 2017),

• Premature mortality (that is, deaths among people aged less than 75 years) from chronic disease

accounted for 83 percent of all premature deaths in Australia (Australian Health Minister's Advisory

Council, 2017),

• One quarter of all children and adolescents, and two thirds of adults are obese in Australia

(Australian Institute of Health and Welfare, 2017), and

• 32% of adults in New Zealand are obese, with 67% of Pacific Islander adults and 47% Māori adults being obese (Ministry of Health, 2017).

Several governments and local councils have defined community, social, environmental and economic

indicators to measure their communities, such as the Community Strategic Plans in NSW (Office of

Local Government, 2017).

Legacy in this context, concerns all additional project actions to better society and the environment in

addition to the initiatives that are already rewarded under IS credits.

There is one category in this credit:

Leg-1 Leaving a lasting legacy

Page 396 of 477



Category linkages

The following ISv2.0 category have linkages with the Legacy category:



Sta-1 For social legacy initiatives,

local stakeholders need to be

engaged to identify a

community need.

x x x x

Page 397 of 477



Lea

Spr

Res

Res

Ecn

Ecn

Ene

Gre

Env

Wat

Eco

Sta

Leg

Her

Wfs

Con

ISv2.0 Design


Aim

To reward projects that will have a pronounced and long-lasting positive impact on the environment

and/or society.

Criteria

Table S9 Summary criteria for Leg-1


DL1.1 Initiatives to positively

contribute to the environment or

society for one priority issue or

opportunity has been

implemented.

AND

DL1.2 A monitoring program is

established to assess the

success of the legacy

initiatives/s.



society for two priority issues or

opportunities have been

implemented.



society for three priority issues

or opportunities have been

implemented.

Definitions

Environmental investigations are analysis, research, studies, collation of previous research,

assessments, amalgamation of information, etc. that outlines the environmental condition of the site in

question.

Priority issue or opportunity is an issue or opportunity identified as priority/significant/important by the

community, stakeholders, local, state or federal government, or through environmental investigations,

reports or monitoring programs (or alike).

Stakeholders are the stakeholders as identified in Sta-1.

Level 1

DL1.1 Initiatives to positively contribute to the environment or society for one priority issue or opportunity has been implemented.

Legacy initiatives to solve or implement one priority issue or opportunity as identified by stakeholders or

through environmental investigations must be implemented into the final design, management plans,

contracts or alike. Evidence must be provided to demonstrate how the priority issue was identified and

how the legacy initiative will contribute to a resolution of, resolve or enhance an identified priority issue

or opportunity.

Legacy initiatives must be in addition to the purpose of the project itself. For example, if the purpose of

the infrastructure project is to build a train line to an area that was not previously serviced, then providing

a train line to that community cannot be rewarded under this credit. However, an additional bike parking

area at one of the stations commissioned in response to a community need could be claimed.

Initiatives that are fully rewarded under other IS credits are not eligible under this credit, however,

initiatives that are only partially rewarded under other IS credits are eligible. For example, an initiative

that included the ecological rehabilitation of a site, research in partnership with a local university, an

MOU for the Local Council to take on the maintenance of the site, education programs and tree planting

Page 398 of 477



days with the local school, and the placement of educational signage and weekly site tours would receive

points under the ecology category. However, because there are additional elements that are not

rewarded under the ecology category or any other IS categories, it is eligible under the Legacy category.

Initiatives can be of a social, community, environmental or economic nature, see Table S11.

Initiatives must be identified based on a community or environmental need. Evidence must be provided

which demonstrates a relationship between each initiative and the community or environmental need.

Evidence to demonstrate this might include:

• Results of community engagement,

• Environmental studies,

• Community research,

• Local government plans, and

• Stakeholder feedback.

Local government or community plans are a good place to start and often outline social, environmental

and economic aspirations for the community. They also provide measurement indicators to track the

performance of sought outcomes. Community Plans are mandatory in Queensland, New South Wales

and Victoria.

Other baseline sources include Local Government corporate plans and local hospital health plans. Any

health and wellbeing outcomes that are appropriate to target are context specific and should be identified

through stakeholder consultation.

Environmental investigations could include local environmental studies or monitoring programs,

investigations undertaken by governments, community groups, not-for-profits, private corporations or

the project itself. Any environmental investigations must outline the environmental issue/s or

opportunities and evidence must be provided outlining how the project’s corrective or enhancement

actions will resolve, or contribute to a resolution of the identified environmental issue/s, or implement an

identified priority opportunity.

The issue(s) identified must be current and relevant to the local context.

The Sustainable Development Goals can be used as a source document as long as relevance to the

local context can be evidenced.

Example initiatives are provided in Table S11.

If legacy initiatives have been developed in planning and they remain unchanged, those initiatives and

supporting evidence can be used as evidence for this criterion.

DL1.2 A monitoring program is established to assess the success of the legacy initiative/s.

Indicators, measures and a monitoring program must be developed to measure the success of the

initiatives implemented through the design, construction and operational phases. If the monitoring

program was developed in the planning phase and remains unchanged, this can be used as evidence.

Evidence must be provided to demonstrate how the legacy initiative/s have either contributed to the

resolution of, resolved or enhanced the identified priority issues or opportunities.

The monitoring program must be provided to the constructers and operator (if known) and this can be

evidenced by inclusion in handover documents, contracts, management plans and alike.

Note: if levels 2 or 3 are being pursued, this monitoring program must also include those additional legacy initiatives.

Example measures and indicators are provided in Table S11.

Page 399 of 477



Lea

Spr

Res

Res

Ecn

Ecn

Ene

Gre

Env

Wat

Eco

Sta

Leg

Her

Wfs

Con


• Final design, management plan or contracts outlining legacy initiatives incorporated into the project,

• A monitoring plan included in handover documents/contracts/management plans, and

• Monitoring documentation showing the success of the legacy initiative.

77TLevel 2

DL2.1 Initiatives to positively contribute to the environment or society for two priority issues or opportunities have been implemented.

Initiatives developed and implemented in level 1 must be extended to contribute to two priority issues

or opportunities.




• Monitoring documentation showing the success of the legacy initiatives.

77TLevel 3

DL3.1 Initiatives to positively contribute to the environment or society for three priority issues or opportunities have been implemented.

Initiatives developed and implemented in level 2 must be extended to contribute to three priority issues

or opportunities.





Page 400 of 477



ISv2.0 As Built


Aim

To reward projects that will have a pronounced and long-lasting positive impact on the environment

and/or society.

Criteria

Table S10 Summary criteria for Leg-1


ABL1.1 Initiatives to positively


society for one priority issue or

opportunity has been

implemented.

AND

ABL1.2 A monitoring program is

implemented to assess the

success of the legacy

initiative/s.



society for two priority issues or

opportunities have been

implemented.



society for three priority issues

or opportunities have been

implemented.

Definitions

Environmental investigations are analysis, research, studies, collation of previous research,

assessments, amalgamation of information, etc. that outlines the environmental condition of the location

in question.

Priority issue or opportunity is an issue or opportunity identified as priority/significant/important by the

community, stakeholders, local, state or federal government or through environmental investigations,

reports or monitoring programs (or alike).

Stakeholders are the stakeholders as identified in Sta-1.

Level 1

ABL1.1 Initiatives to positively contribute to the environment or society for one priority issue or opportunity has been implemented.

Legacy initiatives to solve or implement one priority issue or opportunity as identified by stakeholders or

through environmental investigations must be constructed or implemented as outlined in the design.

ABL1.2 A monitoring program is implemented to assess the success of the legacy initiative/s.

Indicators, measures and a monitoring program must be implemented to measure the success of the

initiatives implemented through the construction and operational phases.

Evidence must be provided to demonstrate how the legacy initiative/s have either contributed to the

resolution of, resolved or enhanced the identified priority issues or opportunities.

The monitoring program must be provided to the operator and this can be evidenced by inclusion in

handover documents, contracts, management plans and alike.

Note: if levels 2 or 3 are being pursued, this monitoring program and baseline data must also include those additional legacy initiatives.

Example measures and indicators are provided in table S11.

Page 401 of 477



Lea

Spr

Res

Res

Ecn

Ecn

Ene

Gre

Env

Wat

Eco

Sta

Leg

Her

Wfs

Con



• Monitoring program included in handover documents/contracts/management plans, and


77TLevel 2

ABL2.1 Initiatives to positively contribute to the environment or society for two priority issues or opportunities have been implemented.

Initiatives developed and implemented in level 1 must be extended to contribute to two priority issues

or opportunities.





77TLevel 3

ABL3.1 Initiatives to positively contribute to the environment or society for three priority issues or opportunities have been implemented.

Initiatives developed and implemented in level 2 must be extended to contribute to three priority issues

or opportunities.





Page 402 of 477



Table S11 Example legacy initiatives and associated indicators

Topic area Identified

issue/

opportunit

y

Source of

identified

issue/

opportunity

Example initiative Example indicators

Education Skills

shortages

Department

of

Employment

School holiday program to get

students (especially young

girls) interested in the

construction sector

- Number of students

attended

- Number of students

interested in a career in

the construction sector

before and after the

program

Active

transport

Limited

connective

ness of

cycle and

walking

paths

Community

Strategic

Plan and

stakeholder

engagement

Additional cycle and walking

paths to connect and extend

existing networks included in

final design, with bike lockers

at local train station and

transport hubs

- Use of cycle and

walking path network

(before and after)

- Awareness within

community about the

improved cycle and

walking path network

(survey)

- Neighbourhood

walkability index

- Ratio of sidewalk length

to road length

Environmenta

l

rehabilitation

Low habitat

value

waterway

Melbourne

Water

A local fenced, concrete-lined

waterway is rehabilitated to

become a natural creek line

and is opened to the

community. Walking and

cycling paths built for the

community to access and

enjoy the creek with

educational signage. A MOU is

signed with Melbourne Water

and Parks Victoria to continue

maintenance of the waterway

and associated recreational

facilities.

- Index of stream quality

- Riparian vegetation

length and depth

- Maintenance

agreements signed

- Community feedback

- Number of people

visiting the waterway

(before and after)

Natural

Hazards

Urban heat

island

effect

Heat

modelling

undertaken

by Council

A new light rail network is

being constructed in the centre

of a metro area. The local

Council has identified this area

as having high heat intensity.

As part of the light rail design,

trees with large canopies are

included to reduce the urban

heat island effect

- 24TUrban Heat Island

Mitigation Performance

Index - 24TComparative

temperature measures

before and after

Page 403 of 477



Lea

Spr

Res

Res

Ecn

Ecn

Ene

Gre

Env

Wat

Eco

Sta

Leg

Her

Wfs

Con

Topic area Identified

issue/

opportunit

y

Source of

identified

issue/

opportunity

Example initiative Example indicators

Heritage Local

heritage

feature at

risk

Local

community

through

stakeholder

engagement

Enhancement of a local

parkland that was previously

unmaintained but had

significant value for the

community. Signage installed

to educate visitors of the

significance of the site. Local

community group set up to

maintain the parkland once the

project had been completed.

- Number of volunteers

joining community

group

- Number of visitors to

the parkland before and

after rehabilitation

works

- Community feedback on

rehabilitation works

- Community knowledge

of the site and its value

(before and after)

Economic Capacity

building of

local

businesses

Local

Government

data and

engagement

with local

businesses

The project identified local

businesses that could supply

products and services to the

project during construction and

then once it was operational,

however, some businesses

needed capacity building. The

project worked with local

businesses to build their

capacity so they could service

the asset during construction

and once operational

- Local employment

figures through the local

businesses engaged

- Spend with local

businesses with

capacity building

compared to forecast

spend with local

businesses without

capacity building

- Local business success

with tender submissions

Aesthetics

and crime

prevention

Project

area has

low

aesthetic

value and

high crime

rate

Community

engagement

and local

police crime

statistics

The project employed a local

artist to enhance the

aesthetics of the project site

which included murals, seating

and sculptures relevant to the

local context. This work

provided an inviting open

space for the community to

enjoy where previously it

remained unused and a spot

for local crime.

- Number of visitors

before and after

- Community feedback

- Crime statistics

Community

health

Obesity Local Health

Plan

Creation of a community

health education centre to

teach the community about

healthy lifestyles including

knowledge about local walking

and cycling paths, local sports

fields and sporting groups and

healthy resultants in the local

area

- Number of people

trained

- Average BMI of

community over time

- Community knowledge

of healthy lifestyles

Page 404 of 477



References

Australian Government, 2017. Closing the Gap Prime Minister's Report 2017, Canberra: Australian

Government.

Australian Health Minister's Advisory Council, 2017. National Strategic Framewoek for Chronic Conditions, Canberra: Australian Health Minister's Advisory Council.

Australian Institute of Health and Welfare, 2017. An interactive insight into overweight and obesity in Australia. [Online]

Available at: Uhttps://www.aihw.gov.au/reports/overweight-obesity/interactive-insight-into-overweight-

and-obesity/contents/how-many-people-are-overweight-or-obese

Department of Environment, 2017. State and trends overview. [Online]

Available at: Uhttps://soe.environment.gov.au/theme/overview/framework/state-and-trends

Mercer, 2017. Cost of Living rankings. [Online]

Available at:

Uhttps://mobilityexchange.mercer.com/Portals/0/Content/Rankings/rankings/col2017a986532/index.htm

l

Ministry for the Environment, 2017. New Zealand’s Environmental Reporting Series: Our atmosphere and climate 2017, Wellington: Ministry for the Environment and Stats NZ.

Ministry of Health, 2017. Health and Independence Report 2016, Wellington: Ministry of Health.

OECD, 2017. Income Inequality. [Online]

Available at: Uhttps://data.oecd.org/inequality/income-inequality.htm

Office of Local Government, 2017. Community Strategic Plan. [Online]

Available at: Uhttps://www.olg.nsw.gov.au/councils/integrated-planning-and-

reporting/framework/community-strategic-plan

Oxford Dictionary, 2017. English Oxford Living Dictionary. [Online]

Available at: Uhttps://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/legacy

The Economist, 2017. Measuring the cost of living worldwide. [Online]

Available at: Uhttps://www.economist.com/blogs/graphicdetail/2017/03/daily-chart-13

Page 405 of 477



Lea

Spr

Res

Res

Ecn

Ecn

Ene

Gre

Env

Wat

Eco

Sta

Leg

Her

Wfs

Con HERITAGE

Heritage can be an important definer of identity, it is what we have inherited from past generations and

what we value today, it is irreplaceable and precious. We are custodians of those evidences from past

societies, endeavouring to protect them for the future, especially in this rapid changing world. The

increasing importance given to heritage has proven to be a recognition that an inclusive and holistic

development can foster local growth, enhance livelihoods, and protect local assets. Therefore, “by

identifying, protecting, conserving, presenting and transmitting to present and future generations

irreplaceable cultural and natural heritage properties are considered a significant contribution to

sustainable development and harness the reciprocal benefits for heritage and society” (UNESCO,

2015).

Cultural heritage is composed of “the entire complex of distinctive spiritual, material, intellectual and

emotional features that characterise a community, society or social group” (ICOMOS 2002, 21). Cultural

heritage is described by the World Heritage Convention (UNESCO, 2012) as “constructions,

monuments, buildings and natural sites. It also includes the descriptions of cultural heritage, which

comprises natural and built heritage, cultural landscapes, intangible and moveable heritage”. The Burra

Charter provides an applicable definition recognised in Australia and New Zealand for cultural

significance, it means “aesthetic, historic, scientific, social or spiritual value for past, present or future

generations. Cultural significance is embodied in the place itself, its fabric, setting, use, associations,

meanings, records, related places and related objects. Places may have a range of values for different

individuals or groups” (ICOMOS 2013, 2). It also includes places that provide a physical location that is

integral to the existence, observation and practice of intangible heritage, as seen in many Aboriginal

Sacred Sites in Australia.

Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders cultural heritage is defined and managed by Traditional Owners,

or Indigenous communities who are culturally responsible for a place’s heritage values. According to the

World Heritage Convention (UNESCO, 2007) “it is essential that the preservation of knowledge,

innovations and practices of Indigenous and local communities, embodying both traditional and

contemporary lifestyles are considered as an ideal of sustainable development”. It continues,

“Indigenous approaches to heritage in particular are shaped by world views that align people with the

natural environment in a synergistic relationship. This support is necessary because often it is the

local/traditional and/or Indigenous people who have the knowledge of how to successfully conserve

sites of heritage value.” Furthermore, a suitable response to cultural value necessitates that the heritage

expert no longer carries his/her own culturally determined interpretations of a situation or behaviour, and

use of the ability to react appropriately to culturally rooted situations, contexts and behaviours

(UNESCO, 2015).

Heritage can also be natural, meaning “natural features consisting of physical and biological formations

or groups of such formations, which demonstrate natural significance; geological and physiographical

formations and precisely delineated areas that constitute the habitat of indigenous species of animals

and plants, which demonstrate natural significance, and/or natural sites or precisely-delineated natural

areas which demonstrate natural significance from the point of view of science, conservation or natural

beauty” (Commonwealth of Australia, 2002, p. 8). Natural heritage recognises the dynamic ecological

and evolutionary processes, evolution and the ability of ecosystems to be self-perpetuating. In the IS

rating tool, natural heritage is also addressed within ‘Ecology’ and ‘Context’ categories. It’s important to

note the difference between how the IS rating scheme treats natural heritage and ecology. Natural

Heritage comes from the perspective of human – the value and meaning they place on the natural

heritage item/s, whereas ecology comes from purely the scientific perspective and focuses on the

function of that ecosystem irrelevant of the value humans place on it.

Those places or items that become our heritage are valued not only in their own right as tangible

landscapes, objects, structures, buildings, or artefacts, but can also be valued for their intangible

benefits, such as creating a sense of place and a context for living culture. They encourage community

Page 406 of 477



interaction and so, facilitate the social and cultural layering by current and future generations.

Unacceptable or avoidable trade-offs in relation to heritage and associated cultural icons, places and

experiences can mean a failure to the communities which hold these values in significance.

Guiding the care and future use of heritage places is based on a clear understanding of heritage values

and available resources. Places of heritage significance have the potential to make lasting contributions

to the sustainability of infrastructure assets at all stages including planning, design, as built and

operation. Adaptive re-use, community engagement, sensitive and appropriate preservation and

conservation techniques together with due consideration of how an infrastructure asset/network can

enhance people’s connections to their past means that a considered approach to heritage can have

rewards for the built and natural environment, the asset/network, and the community.

For this reason, the purpose of this category is to reward projects/assets/networks that not only identify

and address heritage places of cultural value, but also adapt their heritage strategy to methodologies

that ensure mitigation and management are undertaken in a way that involve and engage the

project/asset/network owners, operators and the community with one another. An important outcome of

this is trust and transparency.

The aim of this category is that cultural heritage is appropriately valued, promoted, recognised and

addressed in project/asset/network in planning, design, construction and operation phases of a project.

In addition, considered and reflected in the design and delivery of capital upgrades. All aspects of the

infrastructure life cycle should be sensitive and sympathetic to heritage aspects and associated

community values. Any planned construction works should be undertaken in a manner which plan and

implement appropriate and suitable impact management measures (i.e. avoid, mitigate, manage or

offset).

In Australia, heritage is managed by various levels of government and peak bodies that identify and list

places for their heritage values. Significant heritage places are identified and grouped into lists that

guide the protection and management of heritage values. Statutory agencies and peak bodies such as

the Australian and local Heritage Councils, National Trusts and International Council on Monuments and

Sites (ICOMOS) Australia provide advice in relation to heritage issues.

There are various Commonwealth and state laws and regulations governing the protection of Australia’s

cultural heritage. In general:

• Laws governing Indigenous (natural/ cultural) heritage aim to create a decision-making framework

within which Indigenous people have a meaningful (and in some cases, determinative) role in

conserving their heritage, and

• Laws governing non-Indigenous natural/ cultural heritage aim to create a decision-making

framework process involving the identification and registration of historic and iconic heritage

aspects (structures, buildings, artefacts, precincts, landscapes) to ensure their ongoing

preservation and conservation through government heritage listings.

Compliance with heritage legislation is necessary for the protection of living and historic culture in

Australia. To ensure that compliance is not seen (and used) as an obstructive and adversarial process

for project/asset/network developers and operators and that heritage outcomes are maximised for the

community, it is essential that a proactive and informed approach be adopted.

A limitation of current heritage laws is the emphasis on listings and registers which encourages a ‘tick

box’ approach. If there is no known heritage item identified, then no action is deemed necessary. This

approach does not capture other ‘unknown’ heritage items, including intangible values, which may be

quite significant to the community. Heritage management should be continually updated to include any

recently identified heritage (including local and non-register values, such as areas or items identified by

key stakeholders and/or community).

The planning, design and construction of projects/assets/networks may have been informed by original

planning studies based on a previous heritage assessment requirement and consideration appropriate

Page 407 of 477



Lea

Spr

Res

Res

Ecn

Ecn

Ene

Gre

Env

Wat

Eco

Sta

Leg

Her

Wfs

Con to the time, location and potential impact of the asset to the surrounds, and vice versa. Hence, there

may be numerous background studies available and a range of management information in existence.

Community consultation should be undertaken in an engaged and transparent manner to assist in

identifying creative options for re-routing or avoiding disturbance, cultural interpretation, adaptive re-use

and so forth. The desired result is a cultural heritage assessment and management process which

protects, enhances and promotes heritage values in communities, rather than just ‘mitigation of impact’

or ‘offset’ approach.

Recent trends and attributes associated with Indigenous and historic heritage in the context of

infrastructure development and operation include:

• Extending the understanding of heritage beyond the tangible items listed on government registers

to include intangible values, which create a sense of place and context and contribute to a living

culture. Traditional Owners are also being invited to share knowledge about effective land and

resource management practices,

• Increasing community and project awareness of the importance of our cultural heritage resulting in

company and industry association policies and strategies for effective heritage management,

informed engagement with Indigenous and non-Indigenous communities, and more prescriptive

and consistent regulatory requirements, and

• Recognition of the environmental values inherent in heritage buildings and structures, including the

use of sustainable materials and climate-sensitive design, as well as embodied energy, carbon and

water attributes that support the case for adaptive re-use applications and/or recycling in instances

where demolition is unavoidable.

Adopting an approach to heritage that recognises its inherent and communal values is not without

challenges. The Burra Charter’s process (2013, 10) for managing heritage places is to minimise harm

to, or loss of significance of, these places. Thus, the multifaceted constraints and opportunities that are

innate in any major infrastructure asset/network mean that this category recognises the potential for

heritage places to be impacted and makes allowance, for and seeks to encourage, their use for a range

of opportunities to appropriately manage these impacts.

While there is a range of federal, state, local, and community based agencies and organisations that

have prepared legislation and guidelines and/or policies to protect heritage, it is the specific parameters

and local context of each project/asset/network that are the key considerations. While satisfying and

meeting legislative requirements must be the starting point for any project/asset/network developer or

operator’s engagement with heritage, it is understanding and engaging with the communal attachment

to heritage places that provides an opportunity for any asset to both conserve heritage and make a

significant and lasting contribution to the community.

The following credit applies to this category:

Her-1 Heritage assessment and monitoring

Page 408 of 477



Category linkages

The following ISv2.0 categories have linkages with the Heritage category.

Table S12 Credit linkages


Sta-1 Stakeholder participation is

important for this category in

terms of identifying and

contributing to identification and

enhancement of heritage values.

x x x x

Con-2 Good urban and landscape

design should consider heritage

values identified in this category.

x x x

Rso-1 The Resource Strategy should

consider existing items on site,

including existing heritage items,

and how they can be

incorporated into the design of

the asset.

x x x x

Rso-6 Re-use of heritage structures

and components is likely to be

rewarded in the Materials

calculator as a re-used item.

x x x

Page 409 of 477



Lea

Spr

Res

Res

Ecn

Ecn

Ene

Gre

Env

Wat

Eco

Sta

Leg

Her

Wfs

Con ISv2.0 Design


Aim

To reward the identification of tangible and intangible heritage values which may be impacted by the

project or asset.

Criteria

Table S13 Her-1 Design summary criteria table


DL1.1 A broad assessment of

heritage value is undertaken or

reviewed.

AND

DL1.2 A heritage monitoring

system is developed and

implemented for unforeseen

circumstances, unidentified sites

and unexpected finds.

AND

DL1.3 The public is informed of

assessment results and is

provided with a feedback

mechanism.

AND

DL1.4 The site induction covers

heritage.

AND

DL1.5 If the project involves

Indigenous heritage, training or

inductions are led and reviewed by

a registered Indigenous

stakeholder or Traditional Owner.

AND

DL1.6 The design maintains

heritage assets or values.

AND

DL1.7 A system for public

collaboration is established or

implemented.

AND

DL1.8 The heritage assessment

informs the project design.


achieved.

AND

DL2.1 A list of qualified heritage

experts relevant to each of the

heritage disciplines identified as

part of the design team.

AND

DL2.2 The design outlines an

enhancement to heritage assets or

values.


achieved.

AND

DL3.1 Interpretation strategies and

thematic history have been

implemented into the design

Definitions

Cultural landscapes are described as a landscape of intertwined physical and social heritage as

opposed to separate and discrete sites. It describes the relationship between objects in the landscape,

people and culture. It may describe a network of places linked through social or cultural activities or

beliefs. Cultural landscapes may extend further than the plot of land and involve pre-contact, settlement

and contemporary time periods. Landmarks are both metaphysical and physical. It may present

relationship to land as both an external landscape and an ‘in-scape’, that is, an internal relationship with

the Creative Beings in the landscape. (National Trust of Australia , 2012)

Page 410 of 477



Indigenous is the internationally recognised term for the first people of a land. (National Trust of

Australia , 2012)

Living culture is characterised by generations that have lived on and cared for this country for tens of

thousands of years. Art, Language, ceremonies, kinship and caring for country are all aspects of cultural

responsibility that have passed from one generation to the next, from the Creation time. Culture is not

something from the past but is alive and living today. (National Trust of Australia , 2012)

Place means a geographically defined area. It may include elements, objects, spaces and views. A

place may have tangible and intangible dimensions. (ICOMOS 2013, 2)

Sacred means that all beliefs and stories of The Dreaming are individually owned and kept secure by

individual members of a language group ensuring that they are protected for all people. These members

of a language group had and continue to have the great task of ensuring that these stories are correctly

remembered and passed on, and that the correct practice of rituals and ceremonies are performed to

do this. (National Trust of Australia , 2012)

Traditional Owners are the people who are recognised as belonging/connected to a particular

geographical area. (National Trust of Australia , 2012)

Value means the worth of the cultural heritage assets.

Natural Heritage are natural heritage places that demonstrate significant features of biodiversity,

geodiversity, ecological processes and/or demonstrate significance from the point of view of science,

conservation or natural beauty (Commonwealth of Australia, 2015, p. 11). For the purpose of the credit,

natural heritage is concerned with the human value placed on the natural feature.

Historic Heritage are places that tells us about the society we have formed over the past few centuries.

These include the buildings, monuments, gardens, landscapes and/or archaeological sites which

embody aesthetic, scientific, historic or social values, and provides us with a tangible link to past events,

processes and people. (Commonwealth of Australia, 2015, p. 11)

Indigenous Heritage are landscapes, sites and areas that are particularly important to Indigenous

people as part of their customary law, developing traditions, history and/or current practices.

(Commonwealth of Australia, 2015, p. 11)

Intangible Heritage means the practices, representations, expressions, knowledge, skills – as well as

the instruments, objects, artefacts and cultural spaces associated therewith – that communities, groups

and, in some cases, individuals recognize as part of their cultural heritage. This intangible cultural

heritage, transmitted from generation to generation, is constantly recreated by communities and groups

in response to their environment, their interaction with nature and their history, and provides them with

a sense of identity and continuity, thus promoting respect for cultural diversity and human creativity.

(UNESCO, 2003, p. Article 2)

Suitably qualified professional is someone who has a formal cultural heritage qualification and

minimum of five years’ experience or appropriate recognition of traditional knowledge of the local area

or as determined appropriate in the relevant jurisdiction.

Qualified heritage experts are experts with formal qualifications and at least five years’ experience in

their area of expertise.

Level 1

DL1.1 A broad assessment of heritage value is undertaken or reviewed.

A heritage assessment may have been completed and verified in the planning rating. If no major scope

or alignment changes have been made, this assessment can be used as evidence. If major scope or

alignment changes have occurred since the heritage assessment was completed, then the heritage

Page 411 of 477



Lea

Spr

Res

Res

Ecn

Ecn

Ene

Gre

Env

Wat

Eco

Sta

Leg

Her

Wfs

Con assessment must be reviewed and amended by a suitably qualified person and key stakeholders (as

identified in Sta-1).

If no heritage assessment has been completed and verified in a planning rating then the following

applies:

A broader approach to heritage is required which builds on the review of heritage registers. A heritage

assessment must be conducted in accordance with the latest version of the Burra Charter guidelines

and include heritage precincts, and heritage items and places in the vicinity that may be adversely

impacted by proximity to the infrastructure project or asset.

The Heritage assessment should include:

• community and key stakeholder values including access to sites and community use,

• identification of statutory and non-statutory heritage listings, both assets owners and neighbouring

sites,

• baseline surveys of existing heritage including predictive modelling of the presence of

archaeological remains based on historical records and modelling,

• predictions for heritage impacts during construction and operation of the infrastructure and

measures to mitigate are outlined,

• identification of existing built, natural, tangible or intangible heritage assets (such as the way the

site is used, its cultural values, the important activities/festivals/ceremonies), and

• impacts to access the heritage sites are identified and measures to mitigate impacts are outlined

The heritage assessment should also identify how much acceptable change can be undertaken to

existing heritage values.

If the heritage assets or part thereof it is not already listed on a local, state or national overlay or register

for protection, a statement of significance should be completed and if appropriate, the asset should be

nominated/flagged for inclusion on the heritage overlay of the local planning scheme or the state register

of heritage places.

UCommunity and key stakeholder values

Stakeholder engagement may have been completed and verified in the planning rating. If no major

scope or alignment changes have been made, then the outcomes of this engagement can be used as

evidence. If major scope or alignment changes have occurred since the stakeholder engagement was

completed, then stakeholder engagement must be undertaken again.

Consultation and engagement with communities and key stakeholders from an early stage and

throughout the design, construction and operation phases ensure that issues can be identified and

addressed early. The community has vital knowledge on local tangible and intangible heritage values

that is not available elsewhere.

Key stakeholders should be identified as part of the stakeholder analysis undertaken in Sta-1.

Community and key stakeholder’s values must be identified and integrated into the heritage

assessment.

This may be done through:

• A community reference group composed of different stakeholders to voice public concerns and

aspirations throughout the phases, and ensure the ongoing assessment of heritage values,

• Review of the heritage assessment as an opportunity to provide input,

• Participation in site visits, and

• Consultation meetings to discuss issues.

Local heritage experts should be included in the consultation processes.

Evidence must be provided as to how the community and stakeholder input has been incorporated into

the heritage assessment.

Page 412 of 477



DL1.2 A heritage monitoring system is developed and implemented for unforeseen circumstances, unidentified sites and unexpected finds.

A heritage monitoring system for identification of unforeseen circumstances, unidentified sites and

unexpected finds must be prepared and implemented for all phases of the infrastructure life cycle. The

monitoring system should include:

• a procedure for unforeseen circumstances, unidentified sites and unexpected finds. This includes

assessing its significant and appropriate management actions

• a process for identifying sensitive heritage values that may be unknown to the broader community

• a monitoring program for the full infrastructure life cycle which determines appropriate ways of

mitigating, controlling or eliminating risks, including possible and unexpected cultural heritage finds.

The heritage monitoring system (such as an audit) must have sign off from a member of the senior-

management team and monitoring must be undertaken, reviewed or audited by a suitably qualified

professional.

Evidence of implementation of the monitoring system must be provided. This may include forms that

have been filled in, monitoring records, etc.

A monitoring system may have been developed and verified in the Planning phase, if so the monitoring

system must be reviewed and updated where necessary.

DL1.3 The public is informed of assessment results and is provided with a feedback mechanism.

The community and key stakeholders must be informed of the results of the heritage assessment

undertaken in DL1.1. Suggested communication techniques include fact sheets, online portals or

information sessions.

A system must be created to enable the public to express comments and concerns with the project

team on heritage matters. This requirement may be fulfilled through other Planning requirements such

as conditions of approval, or impact statements.

DL1.4 The site induction covers heritage.

Site training and induction must include information on:

• a brief explanation of site values and significance,

• relevant conditions of consent and protection matters,

• a description on how to manage unexpected findings, and

• legal obligations regarding cultural heritage.

All employees that enter the site and require an induction must complete the training on heritage.

Employees may change during the life of a project, so it is important that any new employees or

contractors receive induction and appropriate training prior to starting works.

DL1.5 If the project involves Indigenous heritage, training or inductions are led and reviewed by a registered Indigenous stakeholder or Traditional Owner.

If the project identifies Indigenous heritage then a registered Indigenous stakeholder or Traditional

Owner must be engaged to provide Indigenous cultural heritage awareness induction sessions for all

site employees. This may be undertaken in accordance with the requirements of Wfs-4.

A registered Indigenous stakeholder may be sourced in the Register of Cultural Heritage Management

Training Providers that has been developed under the Australian Government's Working on Country

program as a resource for Indigenous land and sea managers who want to undertake training in cultural

heritage management.

All project employees must be briefed on the significance of Indigenous areas and values to the local

community, also encouraging questions or feedback on Indigenous issues.

Page 413 of 477



Lea

Spr

Res

Res

Ecn

Ecn

Ene

Gre

Env

Wat

Eco

Sta

Leg

Her

Wfs

Con An Indigenous participation plan should be created with the intention of integrating the local community

into the project as far as practically possible, and preferably with an Indigenous reference group taking

decisions collectively.

DL1.6 The design maintains heritage assets or values.

The design must outline initiatives to maintain identified tangible and intangible heritage assets and

values, by enhancing heritage characteristics of the place and respecting the place’s significance. For

example, a heritage building may have been incorporated into the design of a train station, maintaining

the building within a larger structure.

DL1.7 A system for public collaboration is established or implemented.

A system to involve key stakeholders in participatory decision-making during the design, construction

and operation of the assets must be established and implemented.

This may include:

• An ongoing heritage advisory board,

• Periodical community engagement workshops, and

• Reference group organised at project inception, and working collaboratively throughout the project

phases.

If a system for public consultation was established and verified for the planning rating, then just the

evidence of its implementation is required.

DL1.8 The heritage assessment informs the project design.

Evidence must be provided showing how the heritage assessment including community and

stakeholder input has been considered in the design. For example, the community may have identified

an area of cultural importance to that community, and the design of the asset avoids impacting that area.

Page 414 of 477



Evidence must also be provided to show that the community and key stakeholders are satisfied with

consideration or enhancement of heritage features.


• Heritage assessment,

• CV of suitably qualified professional/s,

• Examples of community information, and

• Public feedback,

Level 2

DL2.1 A list of qualified heritage experts relevant to each of the heritage disciplines identified as part of the design team.

A list of qualified heritage experts relevant to each of the heritage aspects present must be identified as

part of the design team (e.g. archaeologist, architect, geotechnical, historian, structural, hydraulic, and

others).

New Zealand Transport Agency Pūhoi to Warkworth Section of Ara Tūhono: Pūhoi to Wellsford Road

The Pūhoi to Warkworth section is an 18.5km extension of the existing northern motorway. It is one of the ‘Roads of National Significance’.

Through the design of the road, one parallel outcome defined by NZTA is to celebrate the cultural

footprint and values of the mana whenua.

The Urban and Landscape Design Framework was developed in collaboration with Hōkai Nuku, the alliance of mana whenua of the Project area, namely Ngāti Manuhiri, Ngāti Rango, Ngāti Mauku/Ngāti Kauae and Ngāti Whātua. Hōkai Nuku has developed the Cultural Footprint Framework to:

• express mana whenua connections to their ancestors (Mana Tangata), and

• highlight iconic identity markers that provide reference points in the environment (Mana

Whenua), and then note specific associations through historical events and activities (Pūtake).

To incorporate mana whenua culture into the project design, the following was included:

• Affirming the self determination of iwi and hapū and the Treaty partnership between Hōkai Nuku and the Transport Agency is honoured by active engagement throughout the Project

development,

• Tūpuna are celebrated in the naming of structures - Te Hēmara Tauhia, Te Koroto,

Kahumatamoemoe, Pohuehue,

• The use of Macrons and bilingual signage,

• Cultural reference points are acknowledged with pou whenua and other designs – Ngā Pā o Te Hēmara Tahuhia; Te Huarahi o Kahumatamoemoe, Te Awa Pūhoi, Waihe,

• Guardianship rights and responsibilities are actualised with enhanced Indigenous planting

which supports the ecosystem and cultural practices,

• Protecting and enhancing waterways, and

• Utilising sustainable design and practices.

This example outlines how cultural heritage has been considered and incorporated into the design

of the project.

Page 415 of 477



Lea

Spr

Res

Res

Ecn

Ecn

Ene

Gre

Env

Wat

Eco

Sta

Leg

Her

Wfs

Con DL2.2 The design outlines an enhancement to heritage assets or values.

The design must outline initiatives to enhance the identified tangible and intangible heritage assets or

values as identified in the heritage assessment undertaken in DL1.1. As an example, public artwork can

be included in strategic parts of a new highway reflecting the symbols of the local traditional communities

throughout the extent of the road. This artwork can even be inspired or designed by local artisans.


• Results of community and stakeholder collaboration, and

• Updated design drawing showing adjustment made as a result of stakeholder input

Level 3

DL3.1 Interpretation strategies and thematic history has been implemented into the design.

The interpretation of the heritage (which may have been undertaken in Planning) must be implemented

into the design or management plans and include the following, as a minimum:

1. Details on the history of the area

2. The location and extent of historic and cultural heritage sites

3. Objectives of interpretation

4. An Interpretation Strategy to enrich an understanding of the place while providing guidance for

aspects of the development of the area that will build on its unique characteristics.

Interpretation methods that promote heritage values could include:

• Installations: that may include public art/artwork, sculptures and similar items,

• Signage and landmarks: that reinforce community and historical identity,

• Design standards/guidelines: that promote the historical significance and cultural values of the

place,

• Plantings: that are relevant to the places or items,

• Hard landscaping: that may include boardwalks, seating and other structures,

• Promotion and marketing: that may include campaigns to raise awareness about the cultural values

of the site and invite involvement/visitation, and

• Ephemeral: that may include local festivals, commemoration days or other events that are open to

the public.


• Details of ongoing system for public collaboration, and

• Interpretation strategy.

Page 416 of 477



ISv2.0 As Built


Aim

To reward the identification of tangible and intangible heritage values which may be impacted by the

project or asset.

Criteria

Table S14 Her-1 As Built summary criteria table


ABL1.1 Heritage assessment is

reviewed every five years or with

each major change.

AND

ABL1.2 A heritage monitoring

system is implemented for

unforeseen circumstances,

unidentified sites and unexpected

finds.

AND

ABL1.3 All project employees have

been inducted on site-specific

heritage values.

AND

ABL1.4 If the project involves

Indigenous heritage, training or

inductions are led by a registered

Indigenous stakeholder or

Traditional Owner.

AND

ABL1.5 A conservation

management strategy (or alike) is

prepared.

AND

ABL1.6 Heritage mitigations and/or

enhancements outlined in the

design are built.


achieved.

AND

ABL2.1 A Heritage audit or review

confirms mitigation and/or

enhancement activities are

successful.


achieved.

AND

ABL3.1 A system for public

collaboration is implemented.

AND

ABL3.2 Interpretation strategies

have been implemented.

Definitions

Cultural landscapes are described as a landscape of intertwined physical and social heritage as

opposed to separate and discrete sites. It describes the relationship between objects in the landscape,

people and culture. It may describe a network of places linked through social or cultural activities or

beliefs. Cultural landscapes may extend further than the plot of land and involve pre-contact, settlement

and contemporary time periods. Landmarks are both metaphysical and physical. It may present

relationship to land as both an external landscape and an ‘in-scape’, that is, an internal relationship with

the Creative Beings in the landscape. (National Trust of Australia , 2012)

Indigenous is the internationally recognised term for the first people of a land. (National Trust of

Australia , 2012)

Living culture is characterised by generations that have lived on and cared for this country for tens of

thousands of years. Art, Language, ceremonies, kinship and caring for country are all aspects of cultural

Page 417 of 477



Lea

Spr

Res

Res

Ecn

Ecn

Ene

Gre

Env

Wat

Eco

Sta

Leg

Her

Wfs

Con responsibility that have passed from one generation to the next, from the Creation time. Culture is not

something from the past but is alive and living today. (National Trust of Australia , 2012)

Place means a geographically defined area. It may include elements, objects, spaces and views. A

place may have tangible and intangible dimensions. (ICOMOS 2013, 2)

Sacred means that all beliefs and stories of The Dreaming are individually owned and kept secure by

individual members of a language group ensuring that they are protected for all people. These members

of a language group had and continue to have the great task of ensuring that these stories are correctly

remembered and passed on, and that the correct practice of rituals and ceremonies are performed to

do this. (National Trust of Australia , 2012)

Traditional Owners are the people who are recognised as belonging/connected to a particular

geographical area. (National Trust of Australia , 2012)

Value means the worth of the cultural heritage assets.

Natural Heritage are natural heritage places that demonstrate significant features of biodiversity,

geodiversity, ecological processes and/or demonstrate significance from the point of view of science,

conservation or natural beauty. (Commonwealth of Australia, 2015, p. 11)

Historic Heritage are places that tells us about the society we have formed over the past few centuries.

These include the buildings, monuments, gardens, landscapes and/or archaeological sites which

embody aesthetic, scientific, historic or social values, and provides us with a tangible link to past events,

processes and people. (Commonwealth of Australia, 2015, p. 11)

Indigenous Heritage are landscapes, sites and areas that are particularly important to Indigenous

people as part of their customary law, developing traditions, history and/or current practices.

(Commonwealth of Australia, 2015, p. 11)


person(s):






Intangible Heritage means the practices, representations, expressions, knowledge, skills – as well as

the instruments, objects, artefacts and cultural spaces associated therewith – that communities, groups

and, in some cases, individuals recognise as part of their cultural heritage. This intangible cultural

heritage, transmitted from generation to generation, is constantly recreated by communities and groups

in response to their environment, their interaction with nature and their history, and provides them with

a sense of identity and continuity, thus promoting respect for cultural diversity and human creativity.

(UNESCO, 2003, p. Article 2)

Suitably qualified professional is someone who has a formal cultural heritage qualification and

minimum of five years’ experience or appropriate recognition of traditional knowledge of the local area

or as determined appropriate in the relevant jurisdiction.

Level 1

ABL1.1 Heritage assessment is reviewed every five years or with each major change.

The heritage assessment undertaken in design must be reviewed and updated when the following

occurs:

1. The heritage assessment is five years or more old, or

Page 418 of 477



2. There has been a major change to the project (such as scope, alignment, location etc.) since

the heritage assessment was developed.

The review of the heritage assessment must include a review of the following:

• community and key stakeholder values including access to sites and community use,

• identification of statutory and non-statutory heritage listings, both assets owners and neighbouring

sites,

• baseline surveys of existing heritage including predictive modelling of the presence of

archaeological remains based on historical records and modelling,

• predictions for heritage impacts during construction and operation of the infrastructure and

measures to mitigate are outlined,

• identification of existing built, natural, tangible or intangible heritage assets (such as the way the

site is used, its cultural values, the important activities/festivals/ceremonies), and

• impacts to access the heritage sites are identified and measures to mitigate impacts are outlined.

The review must be undertaken by a suitably qualified professional.

If changes are made to the heritage assessment, then key stakeholder identified in Sta-1 must be

engaged and their views must be incorporated into the updated heritage assessment.

ABL1.2 A heritage monitoring system is implemented for unforeseen circumstances, unidentified sites and unexpected finds.

A heritage monitoring system for identification of unforeseen circumstances, unidentified sites and

unexpected finds prepared in design must be implemented during construction.

Monitoring must be undertaken, reviewed or audited by a suitably qualified professional.

Evidence of implementation of the monitoring system must be provided. This may include forms that

have been filled in, monitoring records, etc.

ABL1.3 All project employees have been inducted on site-specific heritage values.

All employees that enter the site and require an induction must complete the training on heritage

developed in design. Employees may change during the life of a project, so it is important that any new

employees or contractors receive induction and appropriate training prior to starting works. This criterion

may be undertaken in accordance with Wfs-4.

Evidence must be provided such as induction or training records showing heritage inductions have been

undertaken by all site employees.

ABL1.4 If the project involves Indigenous heritage, training or inductions are led by a registered Indigenous stakeholder or Traditional Owner.

If the project identifies indigenous heritage then a registered indigenous stakeholder or Traditional

Owner must be engaged to provide Indigenous cultural heritage awareness induction sessions for all

site employees.

All project employees must be briefed on the significance of Indigenous areas and values to the local

community, also encouraging questions or feedback on Indigenous issues.

Evidence must be provided outlining the details of the facilitator of the Indigenous cultural awareness

training such as an induction register of participants and content of training.

ABL1.5 A conservation management strategy (or alike) is prepared.

The preparation of a conservation management strategy (CMS) (or alike) should equip the

owner/manager with the information necessary for the conservation of the place values. A conservation

management strategy (or alike) must be prepared in accordance with the Australia ICOMOS Burra

Charter (ICOMOS, 2013) and by a suitably qualified heritage professional. If alignment with the Burra

Charter would cause conflict with local planning laws, then an alternative approach can be adopted with

Page 419 of 477



Lea

Spr

Res

Res

Ecn

Ecn

Ene

Gre

Env

Wat

Eco

Sta

Leg

Her

Wfs

Con justification. A CMS (or alike) should include the understanding of the significance of the place, policies

to guide maintenance and change and develop an actions plan.

The conservation management strategy (or alike) must set out management actions to guide the

maintenance of the heritage assets and values.

Each State and Territory may require different inclusions in the conservation management plan (or

alike), so first check for examples from your state or territory government, of federal government if in

NZ.

ABL1.6 Heritage mitigations and/or enhancements outlined in the design are built.

All mitigation or enhancement strategies identified in the final design must be built. If there were

changes made during construction, justification must be provided.


• Heritage monitoring records,

• Induction register,

• Conservation Management Strategy, and

• Details of ongoing system for public collaboration.

Level 2

ABL2.1 A Heritage audit or review confirms mitigation and/or enhancement activities are successful.

A heritage audit or review must be completed to confirm mitigation and/or enhancement actions have

been implemented successfully. A heritage audit or review must be undertaken by an independent

suitably qualified processional.

The audit or review must cover the assessment’s assumptions, reasoning, techniques and modelling.




• Heritage audit.

Level 3

ABL3.1 A system for public collaboration is implemented.

A system to involve key stakeholders in participatory decision-making developed during planning or

design must be implemented.

This may include:

• An ongoing heritage advisory board,

• Periodical community engagement workshops, and

• Reference group organised at project inception, and work collaboratively throughout the project

phases.

DL3.2 Interpretation strategies have been implemented.

The interpretation strategies developed in design must be built or implemented in the final as built

drawings.

Page 420 of 477




• Interpretation strategy.

Page 421 of 477



Lea

Spr

Res

Res

Ecn

Ecn

Ene

Gre

Env

Wat

Eco

Sta

Leg

Her

Wfs

Con References

Commonwealth of Australia, 2002. Australian Natural Heritage Charter: for the conservation of places of natural heritage significance., s.l.: Australian Heritage Commission in association with the Australian

Committee for the International Union for the Conservation of Nature (ACIUCN).

Commonwealth of Australia, 2015. Australian Heritage Strategy., s.l.: Commonwealth of Australia.

ICOMOS, 2013. The Burra Charter. The Australia ICOMOS Charter for places of Cultural Significance. [Online]

Available at: Uhttp://australia.icomos.org/wp-content/uploads/The-Burra-Charter-2013-Adopted-

31.10.2013.pdfU

[Accessed 16 08 2017].

National Trust of Australia , 2012. ‘We’re a Dreaming Country’ Guidelines for Interpretation of Aboriginal Heritage , WA: National Trust of Australia .

UNESCO, 2003. Convention for the Safeguarding of the Intangible Cultural Heritage, Paris: UNESCO.

UNESCO, 2007. Proposal for a ‘Fifth C’ to be added to the Strategic Objectives. [Online]

Available at: Uhttp://whc.unesco.org/archive/2007/whc07-31com-13be.pdfU

[Accessed 16 08 2017].

UNESCO, 2012. Operational Guidelines for the Implementation of the World Heritage Convention. [Online]

Available at: Uhttp://whc.unesco.org/archive/opguide12-en.pdfU

[Accessed 16 08 2017].

UNESCO, 2015. Policy Document for the Integration of a Sustainable Development Perspective into the Processes of the World Heritage Convention. [Online]

Available at: Uhttp://whc.unesco.org/en/sustainabledevelopment/U

[Accessed 16 08 2017].

Page 422 of 477




Page 423 of 477



Lea

Spr

Res

Res

Ecn

Ecn

Ene

Gre

Env

Wat

Eco

Sta

Leg

Her

Wfs

Con WORKFORCE SUSTAINABILITY

Workforce sustainability is fundamental to project or business success. Ensuring sufficient workforce

capacity and capability will drive down cost, improve productivity, quality and employee wellbeing.

Employers that provide a positive workplace culture, embracing diversity and valuing the wellbeing of

its employees, will retain their existing workforce and become the employer of choice for new entrants

and skilled workers. A recent Australian survey confirmed that reduced staff retention has a negative

impact on productivity and quality (Human Resource Institute, 2015) and can prove costly. This issue is

universal and relates to all employers.

Where industry-wide, or government-led sustainable workforce practices are adopted, the impacts can

be significant and wide reaching. Industry Federally becomes more capable and competitive, both at

home and in global markets. Ultimately this will positively impact a country’s gross domestic product and

drive socio-economic benefits for individuals and communities.

That said, infrastructure sector has a skills shortage. The skills required to build and maintain

infrastructure such as technical and trade workers, civil engineers and architects are hard to fill and

there is competition from other industries for those same skills (Department of Employment, 2017). At

the same time, the number of apprenticeships and traineeships has declined (Department of

Employment, 2017). This means that industry is vulnerable to higher labour costs to attract skilled

workers, and cost and time delays due to labour shortages.

A number of progressive organisations are tackling this issue through innovative traineeship and

development programs to get more workers skilled up in areas of need. Governments in Australia and

New Zealand also proactively support the development of skills and job creation in their respective

procurement policies. For example, in New South Wales the ‘Jobs for the Future’ report has identified

four key challenges to meeting future jobs demand and supply (NSW Government, 2016):

1. Increasing global trade in the knowledge economy. 2. New challenges in faster changing industries. 3. Task automation and unbundling. 4. An ageing population.

As we look across the infrastructure sector, these challenges resonate with jobs and skills concerns,

affecting Planning, Design, As Built and Operations phases. Building sustainable workforce practices

into people and HR strategies will protect current and future jobs, which in turn will drive our economy

and increase individual prosperity.

UResponsibility for Workforce Sustainability

Workforce sustainability involves several disciplines, mainly within ‘people and talent’ areas. However,

it can also contribute to objectives within corporate social responsibility, social sustainability and

employee wellbeing.

It is recognised that leading and managing workforce sustainability will differ across project phases and

organisation sizes. Large or global organisations will have specialist functional areas and resources,

whereas responsibility within small and medium size enterprises (SMEs) is often within human

resources and training functions.

UStructure of the category

The credits are structured in a way to break down the steps involved in developing a Strategic Workforce

Plan (Wfs-1 L3.1).

Page 424 of 477



Figure S2 How the Workforce Sustainability category is structured to step projects towards developing a Strategic Workforce Plan

This approach steps projects and assets through the activities involved in developing a Strategic

Workforce Plan to guide the workforce activities on a project or asset.

There are five credits in this category:


Wfs-2 Jobs and Skills


Wfs-4 Diversity and Inclusion

Wfs-5 Sustainable Site Facilities

Category Linkages

The following ISv2.0 categories have linkages with the Workforce Sustainability category.


Credit Description Planni-

ng

Design As Built Opera-

tions

Sta-1 Key internal and external stakeholders need to

be identified as part of the Strategic Workforce

Plan.

x x x x

Lea-1 Sustainability targets identified in Lea-1 are

required to identify the supplier threshold in

Wfs-1.

x x x x

Spr-1 Material suppliers identified in Spr-1 need to

be identified to inform the supplier threshold on

Wfs-1

x x x x

Strategic Workforce Plan (Wfs-

1 L3.1)

Skills analysis (Wfs-1)

Talent management

(Wfs-1)

Recruitment & onboarding

strategy (Wfs-2)

Training management

(Wfs-2) Employee culture

program (Wfs-3) D&AB only

Diversity & Inclusion

program (Wfs-4) D&AB only

Sustainable site facilities (Wfs-5) D&AB only

Page 425 of 477



Lea

Spr

Res

Res

Ecn

Ecn

Ene

Gre

Env

Wat

Eco

Sta

Leg

Her

Wfs

Con

ISv2.0 Design


Aim

To reward the identification of skills gaps and actions to develop industry skills.

Criteria

Table S16 Wsf-1 Design summary table


DL1.1 A skills analysis is

undertaken detailing relevant

workforce capacity and capability

requirements across all parts of

the project life cycle.

AND

DL1.2 Actions to respond to

identified skills gaps are identified

and implemented.


achieved

AND

DL2.1 A talent management

process is developed and

implemented.


achieved

AND

DL3.1 A Strategic Workforce Plan

is developed and implemented.

AND

DL3.2 Performance against the

Strategic Workforce Plan is

reported to senior management

and reported publicly.

AND

DL3.3 Workforce sustainability

requirements are embedded in

contractual requirements.

Strategic Workforce Planning assists organisations to meet current and future skills needs and supports

their long-term goals. New technologies, increased automation and fast-changing global markets mean

that workforce planning is essential to building capacity and capability, and future-proofing

organisations.

UInfrastructure Industry Context

The level of infrastructure investment across Australia is unprecedented. Critical skills gaps and

shortages are already emerging due to new technologies, structural change and new business

opportunities.

The simultaneous delivery of major projects across Australia and New Zealand’s infrastructure

programs, together with strong investment in the private sector will place unparalleled demand on

industry skills. Jurisdictions and countries will compete for the same skills within the same timescales.

Civil infrastructure has a highly mobile workforce that often relocates to access the best opportunities.

The ongoing pipeline of infrastructure investment planned for the next decade provides an opportunity

to strategically grow and develop the existing workforce. This will mitigate future skills shortages and

gaps, which in turn can reduce cost, drive industry improvement and provide local sustainable

employment.

Infrastructure skills provide dual benefits. They are a viable commodity in their own right, both in

domestic and international markets. However, infrastructure is also an enabling industry, supporting

other priority sectors to maximise competitive advantage. The development of infrastructure skills

capacity and capability is critical to wider Australia and New Zealand growth. Industry workforce

development has already been identified as a priority across Australia (Council of Australian

Government, 2014).

The aim of Strategic Workforce Planning is to support current and longer-term goals through a planned

approach to building sufficient workforce capacity and capability. Strategic Workforce Planning focuses

Page 426 of 477



on people issues, matching resources to current and future needs, and macro-concerns about structure,

quality, culture, values and commitment. People and people-related costs can amount to 19-36% of

infrastructure project costs (Deloitte Access Economics, 2014, p. 15). This element has significant

importance in assuring work quality, employee health and safety, and workforce retention to avoid

significant recruitment and onboarding costs, and potential delays.

Definitions

An employee is someone working on the project who has a minimum employment period of 15 hours a

week, for 4 consecutive weeks. All employment is subject to the conditions of national employment

standards.

A Personal Development Plan is an individual employee plan for personal development within the

context of a career, or for self-improvement; organised and structured within the employer business.

A skills analysis is a formal or informal assessment of the levels and types of skills required during the

project life cycle and the current or anticipated gaps; such an analysis will enable decisions about what

learning and development provisions are needed at individual, team, organisational or industry level.

SMART targets are specific, measurable, achievable and time-bound targets

Supplier Threshold is a threshold for which workforce sustainability objectives are required in supplier

contracts. To meet the threshold, a supplier must:

1. Be identified as a material supplier (see Spr-1 L1.1 and Spr-2 L1.1) to meet the workforce

sustainability objectives of the sustainability plan/strategy/targets (Lea-1) as assessed in

the sustainable procurement category (Spr-1 L1.1 and Spr-2 L1.1). 2. Be engaged for $150,000 or more 3. Have at least 25 employees.

Suitable qualified processional refers to a person with qualifications in Human Resources and at least

5 years’ experience developing human resource strategies and action plans.

A Strategic Workforce Plan refers to a continuous business-planning process which structures the

workforce to ensure there is sufficient and sustainable capability and capacity to develop

project/organisational objectives both now and in the future. It identifies human resource strategies to

deliver the right people with the right skills in the right numbers to carry out the required work. (State

Library of Queensland, 2018)

Talent management process refers to the systematic attraction, identification, development,

engagement, retention and deployment of those individuals who are of particular value to an

organisation, either in view of their ‘high potential’ for the future or because they are fulfilling

business/operation-critical roles.

Level 1

DL1.1 A skills analysis is undertaken detailing relevant workforce capacity and capability requirements across all parts of the project life cycle.

The first step to developing a Strategic Workforce Plan is to understand current and future resourcing

requirements and to identify skills gaps. This analysis is referred to as a skills analysis.

If a skills analysis was undertaken and verified in a planning rating, then that skills analysis can form the

basis of this criterion.

A skills analysis must be undertaken for the project, and include, as a minimum:

• Occupation groups and skills required to deliver the project and operate the asset once delivered,

• Modelled number of employees required per occupation group,

Page 427 of 477



Lea

Spr

Res

Res

Ecn

Ecn

Ene

Gre

Env

Wat

Eco

Sta

Leg

Her

Wfs

Con

• An assessment of the skills/occupational gaps to deliver and operate the asset. This assessment

should consider changing demographics,

• Assumption that underpin the analysis, and

• Comparison of skills against project phase deliverables to identify possible gaps and shortages.

The skills analysis must be provided to the contractor of the project as part of the handover documents.

If the analysis contains sensitive or confidential information, this information may be redacted prior to

the handover to the contractors.

The skills analysis must be reviewed and updated (where required) at least once per year throughout

the project’s life.

The skills analysis must be undertaken by a suitably qualified professional.

DL1.2 Actions to respond to identified skills gaps are identified and implemented.

Actions to respond to identified skills gaps must be identified and implemented using the skills analysis

undertaken in DL1.1. Action plans must be developed and implemented to address the identified skills

gaps. Action plans must include the following as a minimum:

• SMART targets to fill identified skills gaps,

• Recruitment drives for critical skills roles e.g. graduates, apprentices, retraining,

• Internal mentoring and talent management programs supporting employee development (job

rotation, upskilling, secondments), with evidence that actions have been undertaken to meet

agreed outcomes,

• Formalised collaborative arrangements to support the delivery of the SMART targets. Some

examples include:

o MOUs

o Advisory groups

o Forums

o Collaborative branding (such as a project trademark)

o Publicly acknowledging the partnership

• A monitoring program to monitor the progress of each action plan.

Page 428 of 477



Implementation for the purpose of this credit may include assigning actions to responsible people,

embedded in procurement plans/processes/policies/requirements, entering into partnerships, etc.


• A current employee resource plan outlining current and future skills needed and the gaps identified,

• Competency matrix across the project’s life cycle, from Planning, Design, As Built and Operations

phases to illustrate skills requirements,

• Details of partnership to mitigate identified skills gaps,

• Example personal development plans,

• Acton plans outlining actions, targets and monitoring and reporting requirements to mitigate

identified skills gaps,

• A training plan for identified skills gaps,

• Responsible people for implementing the action plan,

• Procurement plans where relevant, and

• MOUs or partnerships where relevant.

Level 2

DL2.1 A talent management process is developed and implemented.

Talented people are important to all projects and when they are identified, supported and developed

they can be instrumental in closing skills gaps and creating successful projects. Therefore, a talent

management approach is required to ensure talented people are managed appropriately. This should

form a part of the analysis undertaken when considering what skills are required to deliver the project.

Northern Connector, South Australia

Northern Connector is an $855 million road project in South Australia. The proponent, Department

of Planning, Transport and Infrastructure (DPTI) identified a need to create employment

opportunities for ex-car manufacturing employees located in the northern suburbs. In the contract

DPTI put in a requirement for the Contractor to develop northern suburb workers in areas of

current skill gaps.

Major contractor Lendlease established NorthHub – an employment, skills and training centre to

help northern jobseekers secure some of the 480 jobs a year on average on the project.

NorthHub is a one-stop shop for vocational education and training, and other service providers to

meet on-site with industry partners, subcontractors and workers.

A dedicated ‘Employment Development Team’ has been established to work closely with the

Northern Connector Jobs Taskforce to maximise opportunities for local workers.

The project will focus on delivering local participation including:

• Creating 480 full-time equivalent jobs each year during construction,

• At least 50% of all jobs to be filled by northern suburbs residents,

• At least 90% of all on-site labour hours to be undertaken by South Australians, and

• At least 20 % of all on-site labour hours to be undertaken by ex-automotive industry workers,

Aboriginal people, people facing barriers to employment and trainees and apprentices.

To date this project has been successful in developing skilled workers in identified skills gap

areas.

Page 429 of 477



Lea

Spr

Res

Res

Ecn

Ecn

Ene

Gre

Env

Wat

Eco

Sta

Leg

Her

Wfs

Con

A talent management process/system/policy/strategy must be developed and implemented to identify

and develop talented people. The talent management approach must include the following as a

minimum:

• Talent policy or procedure to support the identification of talented individuals and the availability of

a structured talent development program,

• An outline of how the talent management program will contribute to closing identified skills gaps,

• Line management responsibility for identification and development of talent within teams and

individuals, and

• Senior management responsibility for the implementation of the talent management policy or

procedure.


• Talent review, succession planning, and identification and mentoring of high-potential employees,

• Talent management policies and processes, and

• Management job descriptions showing responsibility for talent management.

Level 3

DL3.1. A Strategic Workforce Plan is developed and implemented.

A Strategic Workforce Plan brings together various action plans and analysis undertaken throughout the

Workforce Sustainability Category, and creates a coherent plan for the current and future workforce.

The purpose of a Strategic Workforce Plan is to create a workforce comprised of the right people with

the right skills in the right numbers to deliver the required work now and in the future.

If a Strategic Workforce Plan has been developed and verified as part of a planning rating, then that

plan can be used as a basis of this criterion.

A Strategic Workforce Plan must be developed and should include unless justification can be provided

as to why some elements are not applicable:

• SMART workforce sustainability objectives for the project/asset to achieve for the current and future

phases of the project and includes objectives for, as a minimum:

o Skills development requirements for identified gap areas (see L1.1)

o Diversity and Inclusion (see Wfs-4)

o Culture and wellbeing (see Wfs-3)

• A project-wide skills analysis (L1.1),

• Skills gaps action plans for the full project life cycle (L1.2),

• Engagement requirements with industry and professional bodies supporting jobs and skills

development to meet the objectives of the Strategic Workforce Plan (L1.2),

• Talent management approach (L2.1),

• A recruitment and onboarding approach (Wfs-2 L1.1),

• Research and analysis defining future workforce requirements as a result of new technologies,

skills gaps and shortages,

• Identification of relevant industry and government legislation and policies,

• Identification of key internal and external stakeholders (as identified in Sta-1) and relevant

partnerships needed to deliver the objectives and targets of this plan,

• Defined timescales and review points for the reporting and review of the Strategic Workforce Plan,

and

• Long-term succession and talent management programs delivered collaboratively with strategic

partners. Examples include pre-employment programs, future leaders mentoring and development

Page 430 of 477



programs, graduate and undergraduate internships, traineeships and apprenticeships and work

experience, sponsorship of workforce events with relevant peak bodies and professional institutes,

sponsorship or collaboration with tertiary education supporting the development of future talent,

etc.

The Strategic Workforce Plan may be developed for the project specifically, or form part of a broader

industry or organisational-wide plan (such as the sustainability plan developed in Lea-1), as long as

specific actions and strategies for the project are defined and outlined.

The Strategic Workforce Plan must be reviewed and updated annually to ensure alignment with the

updated workforce analysis and to reflect changes in the community structure, legislative, socio-

economic and project design or objectives.

Senior management must be responsible for the implementation and monitoring of the Strategic

Workforce Plan. This can be evidenced by providing relevant senior management KPIs, job descriptions,

minutes of strategic workforce committee meetings with senior management representations and

associated actions, etc.

DL3.2. Performance against the Strategic Workforce Plan is reported to senior management and reported publicly.

Performance against the Strategic Workforce Plan as outlined in PL3.1 must be reported to senior

management at least on an annual basis. Where there are discrepancies between the objectives and

performance, agreed actions must be developed.

Reporting must be made public via an annual report or on the project/assets website within one month

of its approval.

DL3.3. Workforce sustainability requirements are embedded in contractual requirements.

An infrastructure project or asset’s workforce is not just made up of the people directly employed by the

project, either direct employment, through sub-contractors or labour hire. It also includes the employees

of the suppliers to the infrastructure project or asset. As infrastructure development can support local

economies and generate local jobs, it is the responsibility of the project to embed sustainable workforce

activities throughout the supply chain. For this reason, this criterion focuses on embedding the project’s

workforce sustainability objectives identified in DL3.1 in the employment practices of suppliers.

Relevant workforce sustainability requirements to meet the objectives outlined in the Strategic

Workforce Plan (L3.1) must be embedded within contractual obligations of all direct suppliers (AKA Tier

1 suppliers) that meet the supplier threshold (see definitions).


• Strategic Workforce Plan,

• Plans for recruitment and engagement with key stakeholders,

• Minutes from engagement with skills development peak and sector bodies, e.g. the Australian

Railway Association (ARA), Rail Workforce Development Committee (RWDC),

• Engagement and work experience activities for local schools and colleges, attendance at career

fairs, etc, and

• Workforce sustainability requirements in contracts.

Page 431 of 477



Lea

Spr

Res

Res

Ecn

Ecn

Ene

Gre

Env

Wat

Eco

Sta

Leg

Her

Wfs

Con

ISv2.0 As Built


Aim

To reward the identification of skills gaps and actions to develop industry skills.

Criteria

Table S17 Wsf-1 As Built summary table


ABL1.1 A skills analysis is

undertaken detailing relevant

workforce capacity and capability

requirements across all parts of

the project life cycle.

AND

ABL1.2 Actions to respond to

identified skills gaps are identified

and implemented.


achieved

AND

ABL2.1 A talent management

process is developed and

implemented.


achieved

AND

ABL3.1 A Strategic Workforce

Plan is developed and

implemented.

AND

ABL3.2 Performance against the

Strategic Workforce Plan is

reported to senior management

and reported publicly.

AND

ABL3.3 Workforce sustainability


contractual requirements.

Strategic Workforce Planning assists organisations to meet current and future skills needs and supports

their long-term goals. New technologies, increased automation and fast-changing global markets mean

that workforce planning is essential to building capacity and capability and future-proofing organisations.

UInfrastructure Industry Context

The level of infrastructure investment across Australia is unprecedented. Critical skills gaps and

shortages are already emerging due to new technologies, structural change and new business

opportunities.

The simultaneous delivery of major projects across Australia and New Zealand’s infrastructure

programs, together with strong investment in the private sector will place unparalleled demand on

industry skills. Jurisdictions and countries will compete for the same skills within the same timescales.

Civil infrastructure has a highly mobile workforce that often relocates to access the best opportunities.

The pipeline of infrastructure investment planned for the next decade provides an opportunity to

strategically grow and develop the existing workforce. This will mitigate future skills shortages and gaps,

which in turn can reduce cost, drive industry improvement and provide local sustainable employment.

Infrastructure skills provide dual benefits. They are a viable commodity in their own right, both in

domestic and international markets. However, infrastructure is also an enabling industry, supporting

other priority sectors to maximise competitive advantage. The development of infrastructure skills

capacity and capability is critical to wider Australia and New Zealand growth. Industry workforce

development has already been identified as a priority across Australia (Council of Australian

Government, 2014).

The aim of Strategic Workforce Planning is to support current and longer-term goals through a planned

approach to building sufficient workforce capacity and capability. Strategic Workforce Planning focuses

on people issues, matching resources to current, medium and future needs, and macro-concerns about

Page 432 of 477



structure, quality, culture, values and commitment. People and people-related costs can amount to 19-

36% of infrastructure project costs (Deloitte Access Economics, 2014, p. 15). This element has

significant importance in assuring work quality, employee health and safety, and workforce retention to

avoid significant recruitment and onboarding costs, and potential delays.

Definitions



standards.

A Personal Development Plan is an individual employee plan for personal development within the

context of a career, or for self-improvement; organised and structured within the employer business

A skills analysis is a formal or informal assessment of the levels and types of skills required during the

project life cycle and the current or anticipated gaps; such an analysis will enable decisions about what

learning and development provisions are needed at individual, team, organisational or industry level.




sustainability objectives of the sustainability plan (Lea-1) as assessed in the sustainable

procurement category (Spr-1 L1.1 and Spr-2 L1.1). 2. Be engaged for $150,000 or more 3. Have at least 25 employees.

Suitable qualified processional refers to a person with qualifications in Human Resources and at least

5 years’ experience developing human resource strategies and action plans.

A Strategic Workforce Plan refers to a continuous business-planning process which structures the

workforce to ensure there is sufficient and sustainable capability and capacity to develop

project/organisational objectives both now and in the future. It identifies human resource strategies to

deliver the right people with the right skills in the right numbers to carry out the required work. (State

Library of Queensland, 2018)

Talent management process refers to the systematic attraction, identification, development,

engagement, retention and deployment of those individuals who are of particular value to an

organisation, either in view of their ‘high potential’ for the future or because they are fulfilling

business/operation-critical roles.

Level 1

ABL1.1 A skills analysis is undertaken detailing relevant workforce capacity and capability requirements across all parts of the project life cycle.

The first step to developing a Strategic Workforce Plan is to understand current and future resourcing

requirements, and to identify skills gaps. This analysis is referred to as a skills analysis.

If a skills analysis was undertaken and verified in a design rating, then that skills analysis can form the

basis of this criterion.

A skills analysis must be undertaken for the project, and include, as a minimum:

• Occupation groups and skills required to deliver the project and operate the asset once delivered,

• Modelled number of employees required per occupation group,

• An assessment of the skills/occupational gaps to deliver and operate the asset. This assessment should consider changing demographics,

• Assumption that underpin the analysis, and

Page 433 of 477



Lea

Spr

Res

Res

Ecn

Ecn

Ene

Gre

Env

Wat

Eco

Sta

Leg

Her

Wfs

Con

• Comparison of skills against project phase deliverables to identify possible gaps and shortages.

The skills analysis must be reviewed and updated (where required) at least once per year throughout

the project’s life.

The skills analysis must be undertaken by a suitably qualified professional.

ABL1.2 Actions to respond to identified skills gaps are identified and implemented.

Actions to respond to identified skills gaps must be identified and implemented using the skills analysis

undertaken in DL1.1. Action plans must be developed and implemented to address the identified skills

gaps. Action plans must include the following as a minimum:

• SMART targets to fill identified skills gaps,

• Recruitment drives for critical skills roles e.g. graduates, apprentices, retraining,

• Internal mentoring and talent management programs supporting employee development (job

rotation, upskilling, secondments), with evidence that actions have been undertaken to meet

agreed outcomes,

• Formalised collaborative arrangements to support the delivery of the SMART targets. Some

examples include:

o MOUs

o Advisory groups

o Forums

o Collaborative branding (such as a project trademark)

o Publicly acknowledging the partnership

• A monitoring program to monitor the progress of each action plan

Implementation for the purpose of this credit may include assigning actions to responsible people,

embedded in procurement plans/processes/policies/requirements, entering into partnerships, etc.

Northern Connector, South Australia

Northern Connector is an $855 million road project in South Australia. The proponent, Department

of Planning, Transport and Infrastructure (DPTI) identified a need to create employment

opportunities for ex-car manufacturing employees located in the northern suburbs. In the contract

DPTI put in a requirement for the Contractor to develop northern suburb workers in areas of

current skill gaps.

Major contractor Lendlease established NorthHub – an employment, skills and training centre to

help northern jobseekers secure some of the 480 jobs a year on average on the project.

NorthHub is a one-stop shop for vocational education and training, and other service providers to

meet on-site with industry partners, subcontractors and workers.

A dedicated ‘Employment Development Team’ has been established to work closely with the

Northern Connector Jobs Taskforce to maximise opportunities for local workers.

The project will focus on delivering local participation including:

• Creating 480 full-time equivalent jobs each year during construction,

• At least 50% of all jobs to be filled by northern suburbs residents,

• At least 90% of all on-site labour hours to be undertaken by South Australians, and

• At least 20 % of all on-site labour hours to be undertaken by ex-automotive industry workers,

Aboriginal people, people facing barriers to employment and trainees and apprentices.

To date, this project has been successful in developing skilled workers in identified skills gap

areas.

Page 434 of 477




• An employee resource plan outlining current and future skills needed and the gaps identified,

• Competency matrix across the project’s life cycle, from Planning, Design, As Built and Operations

phases to illustrate skills requirements,

• Details of partnership to mitigate identified skills gaps,

• Example personal development plans,

• Acton plans outlining actions, targets and monitoring and reporting requirements to mitigate

identified skills gaps,

• A training plan for identified skills gaps,

• Responsible people for implementing the action plan,

• Procurement plans where relevant, and

• MOUs or partnerships where relevant.

Level 2

ABL2.1 A talent management process is developed and implemented.

Talented people are important to all projects and when they are identified, supported and developed

they can be instrumental in closing skills gaps and creating successful projects. Therefore, a talent

management approach is required to ensure talented people are managed appropriately. This should

form a part of the analysis undertaken when considering what skills are required to deliver the project.

A talent management process/system/policy/strategy must be developed and implemented to identify

and develop talented people. The talent management approach must include the following as a

minimum:

• Talent policy or procedure to support the identification of talented individuals and the availability of

a structured talent development program,

• An outline of how the talent management program will contribute to closing identified skills gaps,

• Line management responsibility for identification and development of talent within teams and

individuals, and

• Senior management responsibility for the implementation of the talent management policy or

procedure.


• Talent review, succession planning, and identification and mentoring of high-potential employees,

• Talent management policies and processes , and

• Management job descriptions showing responsibility for talent management.

Level 3

ABL3.1. A Strategic Workforce Plan is developed and implemented.

A Strategic Workforce Plan brings together various action plans and analysis undertaken throughout the

Workforce Sustainability Category, and creates a coherent plan for the current and future workforce.

The purpose of a Strategic Workforce Plan is to create a workforce comprised of the right people with

the right skills in the right numbers to deliver the required work now and in the future.

If a Strategic Workforce Plan has been developed and verified as part of a planning rating, then that

plan can be used as a basis of this criterion.

A Strategic Workforce Plan must be developed and should include:

Page 435 of 477



Lea

Spr

Res

Res

Ecn

Ecn

Ene

Gre

Env

Wat

Eco

Sta

Leg

Her

Wfs

Con

• SMART workforce sustainability objectives for the project/asset to achieve for the current and future

phases of the project and includes objectives for, as a minimum

o Skills development requirements for identified gap areas (see L1.1)

o Diversity and Inclusion (see Wfs-4)

o Culture and wellbeing (see Wfs-3)

• A project-wide skills analysis (L1.1),

• Skills gaps action plans for the full project life cycle (L1.2),

• Engagement requirements with industry and professional bodies supporting jobs and skills

development to meet the objectives of the Strategic Workforce Plan (L1.2),

• Talent management approach (L2.1),

• A recruitment and onboarding approach (Wfs-2 L1.1),

• Research and analysis defining future workforce requirements as a result of new technologies,

skills gaps and shortages,

• Identification of relevant industry and government legislation and policies,

• Identification of key internal and external stakeholders (as identified in Sta-1) and relevant

partnerships needed to deliver the objectives and targets of this plan,

• Defined timescales and review points for the reporting and review of the Strategic Workforce Plan,

and

• Long-term succession and talent management programs delivered collaboratively with strategic

partners. Examples include pre-employment programs, future leaders mentoring and development

programs, graduate and undergraduate internships, traineeships and apprenticeships and work

experience, sponsorship of workforce events with relevant peak bodies and professional institutes,

sponsorship or collaboration with tertiary education supporting the development of future talent,

etc.

The Strategic Workforce Plan may be developed for the project specifically, or form part of a broader

industry or organisational-wide plan (such as the sustainability plan developed in Lea-1), as long as

specific actions and strategies for the project are defined and outlined.

The Strategic Workforce Plan must be reviewed and updated annually to ensure alignment with updated

workforce analysis and reflect changes in the community structure, legislative, socio-economic and

project design or objectives.

Senior management must be responsible for implementation and monitoring the Strategic Workforce

Plan. This can be evidenced by providing relevant senior management KPIs, job descriptions, minutes

of strategic workforce committee meetings with senior management representations and associated

actions, etc.

ABL3.2. Performance against the Strategic Workforce Plan is reported to senior management and reported publicly.

Performance against the Strategic Workforce Plan as outlined in PL3.1 must be reported to senior

management at least on an annual basis. Where there are discrepancies between the objectives and

performance, agreed actions must be developed.

Reporting must be made public via an annual report or on the project/assets website within one month

of its approval.

ABL3.3. Workforce sustainability requirements are embedded in contractual requirements.

An infrastructure project or asset’s workforce is not just made up of the people directly employed by the

project either direct employment, through sub-contractors or labour hire. It also includes the employees

of the suppliers to the infrastructure project or asset. As infrastructure development can support local

economies and generate local jobs, it is the responsibility of the project to embed sustainable workforce

activities throughout the supply chain. For this reason, this criterion focuses on embedding the project’s

workforce sustainability objectives identified in PL3.1 in the employment practices of suppliers.

Page 436 of 477



Relevant workforce sustainability requirements to meet the objectives outlined in the Strategic

Workforce Plan (L3.1) must be embedded within contractual obligations of all direct suppliers (AKA Tier

1 suppliers) that meet the supplier threshold (see definitions).


• Strategic Workforce Plan,

• Plans for recruitment and engagement with key stakeholders,

• Minutes from engagement with skills development peak and sector bodies, e.g. the Australian

Railway Association (ARA), Rail Workforce Development Committee (RWDC),

• Engagement and work experience activities for local schools and colleges, attendance at career

fairs, etc, and

• Workforce sustainability requirements in contracts.

Page 437 of 477



Lea

Spr

Res

Res

Ecn

Ecn

Ene

Gre

Env

Wat

Eco

Sta

Leg

Her

Wfs

Con

ISv2.0 Design


Aim

To reward the implementation of training and recruitment programs effective in building capacity in skills

gap areas.

Criteria

T89Table S1889T Wsf-2 Design summary table


DL1.1 A Recruitment and

onboarding strategy is developed

and implemented.

AND

DL1.2 A Training Management

Plan to fill the gaps identified in the

Skills Analysis is developed and

implemented.


achieved

AND

DL2.1 Recruitment strategy and

training management plans

demonstrate alignment and

contribution to industry and

government jobs and skills

objectives.

AND

DL2.2 A project has a dedicated

learning and development

management team or advisory

group.


achieved

AND

DL3.1 Training and recruitment

strategies are effective in building

capability in skills gap areas.

Employment across the world is changing. Certain traditional industries are dying out. Others require a

smaller or a more skilled workforce due to the emergence of new technologies. These developments

will also provide new opportunities.

Infrastructure projects are often long-term and demand a wide range of skills. For example, it is

anticipated that in NSW there will be a 40% civil infrastructure skills shortage (Civil Contractors

Federation (NSW), 2014) resulting from new capital works programs. This will also increase pressure

within identified skills gap areas, with a resultant detrimental effect on cost and productivity.

Employers across the infrastructure sector are already reporting recruitment difficulties in engineering

trades due to skills deficits or remuneration factors. For these reasons, it is important that the industry

upskills, and that projects incorporate education, training and development into human resource

strategies.

Definitions



standards.

Verification of Compliance is a method of documented evaluation of the skill level of a person against

defined competency standards in order to evaluate the person's ability to carry out the relevant activity

or works.

Level 1

DL1.1 A Recruitment and Onboarding Strategy is developed and implemented.

A Recruitment and Onboarding Strategy/Program or alike must be developed to fill the skills gaps

identified in the skills analysis undertaken in Wfs-1 L1.1 and include, as a minimum:

Page 438 of 477



• Minimum levels of competency identified for all job roles,

• A program for all employees, contractors and persons who are working on the project, to be

checked for verification of competence (VOC),

• Diversity and inclusion objectives and considerations (to ensure no discriminatory recruitment

processes or behaviours) (see Wfs-4), and

• An onboarding processes.

It could also include careers programs, such as school and tertiary education collaboration, work

experience apprenticeships and graduate programs.

Careers information and case studies should be displayed on the project website, including information

for young people, apprentices, and examples of gender and cultural diversity.

As part of the recruitment and on onboarding strategy, an induction program must be included. The

induction program must, as a minimum:

• have an induction policy clearly indicating training and development processes,

• project and/or site-specific induction programs,

• an outline of the diversity and inclusion policies/objectives/programs,

• be provided to all project employees, and

• be current and be reviewed and updated at least every 2 years.

The recruitment and onboarding approaches may be detailed in separate or combined documents and

may be the responsibility of different people.

DL1.2 A Training Management Plan to fill the gaps identified in the Skills Analysis is developed and implemented.

A Training Management Plan linked to the skills analysis undertaken in Wfs-1 L1.1 must be developed

and include the following, as a minimum:

• Current and future skills gaps (as identified in the skills analysis undertaken in Wfs-1 L1.1),

• A review of employee records to identify any gaps in licences, certificates, etc. for the employee to

do their job. This must be undertaken on an ongoing basis and completed at least once per year,

• An overview of training options (formal training, on the job training),

• Training providers, trainers, and suppliers that will deliver training, and

• Structured development programs to fill identified skills gaps.

Evidence must be provided to show when programs have been planned and when attendees have

completed training.

The Training Management Plan must be reviewed at least annually to ensure relevancy and that future

required skills are being developed for the current and future phases of the project life cycle.

Page 439 of 477



Lea

Spr

Res

Res

Ecn

Ecn

Ene

Gre

Env

Wat

Eco

Sta

Leg

Her

Wfs

Con


• Recruitment and onboarding strategy,

• Training Management Plan,

• Training register outlining employee training history,

• Induction programmes (trainer/learner notes/workbook, presentation materials, quizzes and model

answers, content currency validated), and

• Skills analysis

Level 2

DL2.1 Recruitment strategy and training management plans demonstrate alignment and contribution to industry and government jobs and skills objectives.

Research and analysis must be undertaken to identify state, federal or industry skills gaps. For example;

reviewing skills shortage lists published by government agencies, local industry participation plans,

reviewing industry skills scans developed by industry bodies, Local Government skills shortage research

as part of community strategic plans.

If research has been provided from the planning phase, that research can be used as the basis of this

criterion if it is current (within 2 years).

The Recruitment Strategy and Training Management Plan must include the consideration of broader

skills gaps beyond the project, and related industry and government jobs and skills policy and legislation.

Barangaroo Skills Exchange

The Barangaroo Skills Exchange (BSX) was established to deliver skilling and training for the

Barangaroo project, Sydney's largest redevelopment project this century. The BSX offers a one-

stop learning shop in a range of areas, including literacy, numeracy, IT, construction skills and

leadership.

Achievements to date

• 10,000 workers trained onsite,

• 750 apprentices inducted onto the project,

• Over 4000 workers assessed for language literacy and numeracy with one-on-one or class-based support, and

• More than 100 leaders trained as part of the Barangaroo Leaders Safety program. BSX continued towards filling industry skills gaps through training and development of their employees.

NSW Infrastructure Skills Centre

Sydney Metro and TAFE NSW have collaborated on the development of the NSW Infrastructure

Skills Centre to provide state-of-the-art delivery sites offering current, high-quality industry resources

and equipment essential to the skills development requirements for infrastructure projects in the

Sydney region.

The Centre’s concept is based on a delivery model that best responds to the geographic and

specialist needs for projects. The centres provide consistent quality training and services with the

flexibility needed by existing workers, trainees and apprentices to complete their qualification on the

job, near work and near home.

Page 440 of 477



Training programs should be delivered so that they meet project needs and contribute to the wider

industry and government jobs and skills initiatives at the same time.

Evidence must be provided showing industry skills needs and how the project’s recruitment and training

programs are developing skills within those need areas.

DL2.2 The project has a dedicated learning and development management team or advisory group.

A project must have a learning and development management team dedicated to supporting the training

management plan. The learning and development management team may be made of dedicated

learning and development employees, or project employees with learning and development

responsibilities within their job requirements and may be in the form of an advisory group.

The learning and development management team or advisory group must have decision-making power

in regard to learning and development on the project. This may be evidenced by budget allocations to

learning and development which is managed by the learning and development management team or

advisory group, an organisational structure which outlines decision-making power provided to the

learning and development management team or advisory group, or senior management representation

with decision-making power sitting on the learning and development management team or advisory

group.

Level 3

DL3.1 Training and recruitment strategies are effective in building capability in skills gap areas.

The training and recruitment strategies must be shown to be effective in filling skills gaps and shortages.

This may be evidenced by:

• Employee surveys,

• WHS statistics,

• Productivity data,

• Quality data,

• Case studies,

• Retention, and

• Performance against objectives and targets.


• Research undertaken into boarder skills gaps,

• Evidence of how the recruitment and training plans respond to identified skills gaps,

• Learning and development management team or advisory group minutes, agenda, attendees,

employee learning and development KPIs,

• Employee survey results,

• Case studies, and

• Performance reports.

Page 441 of 477



Lea

Spr

Res

Res

Ecn

Ecn

Ene

Gre

Env

Wat

Eco

Sta

Leg

Her

Wfs

Con

ISv2.0 As Built


Aim

To reward the implementation of training and recruitment programs effective in building capacity in skills

gap areas.

Criteria

T89Table S1989T Wsf-2 As Built summary table


ABL1.1 A Recruitment and

Onboarding Strategy is developed

and implemented.

AND

ABL1.2 A Training Management

Plan to fill the gaps identified in the

Skills Analysis is developed and

implemented.


achieved

AND

ABL2.1 Recruitment strategy and

training management plans

demonstrate alignment and

contribution to industry and

government jobs and skills

objectives.

AND

ABL2.2 The project has a

dedicated learning and

development management team or

advisory group.


achieved

AND

ABL3.1 Training and recruitment

strategies are effective in building

capability in skills gap areas.

Employment across the world is changing. Certain traditional industries are dying out. Others require a

smaller or a more skilled workforce due to the emergence of new technologies. These developments

will also provide new opportunities.

Infrastructure projects are often long-term and demand a wide range of skills. For example, it is

anticipated that in NSW there will be a 40% civil infrastructure skills shortage (Civil Contractors

Federation (NSW), 2014) resulting from new capital works programs. This will also increase pressure

within identified skills gap areas, with a resultant detrimental effect on cost and productivity.

Employers across the infrastructure sector are already reporting recruitment difficulties in engineering

trades due to skills deficits or remuneration factors. For these reasons, it is important that the industry

upskills, and that projects incorporate education, training and development into human resource

strategies.

Definitions



standards.

Verification of Compliance is a method of documented evaluation of the skill level of a person against

defined competency standards in order to evaluate the person's ability to carry out the relevant activity

or works.

Level 1

ABL1.1 A Recruitment and Onboarding Strategy is developed and implemented.

A Recruitment and Onboarding Strategy/Program or alike must be developed to fill the skills gaps

identified in the skills analysis undertaken in Wfs-1 L1.1 and include, as a minimum:

Page 442 of 477



• Minimum levels of competency identified for all job roles,

• A program for all employees, contractors and persons who are working on the project, to be

checked for verification of competence (VOC),

• Diversity and inclusion objectives and considerations (to ensure no discriminatory recruitment

processes or behaviours) (see Wfs-4), and

• An onboarding process.

It could also include careers programs, such as school and tertiary education collaboration, work

experience apprenticeships and graduate programs.

Careers information and case studies should be displayed on the project website, including information

for young people, apprentices, and examples of gender and cultural diversity.

As part of the recruitment and on onboarding strategy, an induction program must be included. The

induction program must, as a minimum:

• have an induction policy clearly indicating training and development processes,

• project and/or site-specific induction programs,

• an outline of the diversity and inclusion policies/objectives/programs,

• be provided to all project employees, and

• be current and be reviewed and updated at least every 2 years.

The recruitment and onboarding approaches may be detailed in separate or combined documents and

may be the responsibility of different people.

ABL1.2 A Training Management Plan to fill the gaps identified in the Skills Analysis is developed and implemented.

A Training Management Plan linked to the skills analysis undertaken in Wfs-1 L1.1 must be developed

and include the following, as a minimum:

• Current and future skills gaps (as identified in the skills analysis undertaken in Wfs-1 L1.1),

• A review of employee records to identify any gaps in licences, certificates, etc. for the employee to

do their job. This must be undertaken on an ongoing basis and completed at least once per year,

• An overview of training options (formal training, on the job training),

• Training providers, trainers, and suppliers that will deliver training, and

• Structured development programs to fill identified skills gaps.

Evidence must be provided to show when programs have been planned and when attendees have

completed training.

The Training Management Plan must be reviewed at least annually to ensure relevancy and that future

required skills are being developed for the current and future phases of the project life cycle.

Page 443 of 477



Lea

Spr

Res

Res

Ecn

Ecn

Ene

Gre

Env

Wat

Eco

Sta

Leg

Her

Wfs

Con


• Recruitment and onboarding strategy,

• Training Management Plan,

• Training register outlining employee training history,

• Induction programmes (trainer/learner notes/workbook, presentation materials, quizzes and model

answers, content currency validated), and

• Skills analysis.

Level 2

ABL2.1 Recruitment strategy and training management plans demonstrate alignment and contribution to industry and government jobs and skills objectives.

Research and analysis must be undertaken to identify state, federal or industry skills gaps. For example;

reviewing skills shortage lists published by government agencies, local industry participation plans,

reviewing industry skills scans developed by industry bodies, Local Government skills shortage research

as part of community strategic plans.

If research has been provided from the design phase, that research can be used as the basis of this

criterion if it is current (within 2 years).

Research undertaken must be provided to the contractors of the project in handover documents.

Barangaroo Skills Exchange

The Barangaroo Skills Exchange (BSX) was established to deliver skilling and training for the

Barangaroo project, Sydney's largest redevelopment project this century. The BSX offers a one-

stop learning shop in a range of areas, including literacy, numeracy, IT, construction skills and

leadership.

Achievements to date

• 10,000 workers trained onsite,

• 750 apprentices inducted onto the project,

• Over 4000 workers assessed for language literacy and numeracy with one-on-one or class-based support, and

• More than 100 leaders trained as part of the Barangaroo Leaders Safety program. BSX continued towards filling industry skills gaps through training and development of their employees.

NSW Infrastructure Skills Centre

Sydney Metro and TAFE NSW have collaborated on the development of the NSW Infrastructure

Skills Centre to provide state-of-the-art delivery sites offering current, high-quality industry resources

and equipment essential to the skills development requirements for infrastructure projects in the

Sydney region.

The Centre’s concept is based on a delivery model that best responds to the geographic and

specialist needs for projects. The centre provides consistent quality training and services with the

flexibility needed by existing workers, trainees and apprentices to complete their qualification on the

job, near work and near home.

Page 444 of 477



The Recruitment Strategy and Training Management Plan must include the consideration of broader

skills gaps beyond the project, and related industry and government jobs and skills policy and legislation.

Training programs should be delivered so that they meet project needs and contribute to the wider

industry and government jobs and skills initiatives at the same time.

Evidence must be provided showing industry skills needs and how the project’s recruitment and training

programs are developing skills within those need areas.

ABL2.2 A project has a dedicated learning and development management team or advisory group.

A project must have a learning and development management team dedicated to supporting the training

management plan. The learning and development management team may be made of dedicated

learning and development employees, or project employees with learning and development

responsibilities within their job requirements and may be in the form of an advisory group.

The learning and development management team or advisory group must have decision-making power

in regard to learning and development on the project. This may be evidenced by budget allocations to

learning and development which is managed by the learning and development management team or

advisory group, an organisational structure which outlines decision-making power provided to the

learning and development management team or advisory group, or senior management representation

with decision-making power sitting on the learning and development management team or advisory

group.

Level 3

ABL3.1 Training and recruitment strategies are effective in building capability in skills gap areas.

The training and recruitment strategies must be shown to be effective in filling skills gaps and shortages.

This may be evidenced by:

• Employee surveys,

• WHS statistics,

• Productivity data,

• Quality data,

• Case studies,

• Retention, and

• Performance against objectives and targets.


• Research undertaken into boarder skills gaps,

• Evidence of how the recruitment and training plans respond to identified skills gaps,

• Learning and development management team or advisory group minutes, agenda, attendees, employee learning and development KPIs,


• Case studies, and

• Performance reports.

Page 445 of 477



Lea

Spr

Res

Res

Ecn

Ecn

Ene

Gre

Env

Wat

Eco

Sta

Leg

Her

Wfs

Con

ISv2.0 Design

WFS-3 Workplace Culture and Wellbeing

Aim

To reward a constructive and positive workplace culture appropriate for all people on the project team

and the development and effective implementation of employee wellbeing programs.

Criteria



DL1.1 An employee culture and

wellbeing program is developed

and actions to achieve them are

implemented.


achieved

AND

DL2.1 There is leadership

responsibility for culture and

wellbeing.

AND

DL2.2 An employee survey is

carried out annually, with at least

50% employee participation rate.

AND

DL2.3 There is at least one

commitment or partnership to a

charity or not-for-profit program.


achieved

AND

DL3.1 Employee Culture and

Wellbeing program supports

employees and their families and

enables engagement in community

and/or not-for-profit organisations.

AND

DL3.2 Employee survey results

show an improvement of at least

2% from the previous year.

AND

DL3.3 Annual employee survey

results are benchmarked to market

best practices and outlined in the

project’s annual report and/or on

the project’s webpage.

Good employers will recognise that they have the responsibility for the physical and mental wellbeing of

their employees. Fostering employee wellbeing is beneficial for both the employers and employees.

Promoting care of physical and mental health through early intervention and preventative measures

reduces the risk of health problems and creates a positive working environment where individuals and

organisations thrive.

Mental health and associated issues can have a significant impact on employee wellbeing, and are

recognised as major causes of long-term absence from work. Employers are encouraged to promote

good mental-health practices and provide support for employees with mental-health problems such as

anxiety or depression.

A positive culture that values employee wellbeing creates workplaces that support health and happiness,

enabling people to flourish and reach their potential. It involves the creation of an environment that

actively promotes a state of contentment, benefiting both employees and the organisation. Increasingly,

employers are extending their resources to include roles that have direct responsibility of the wellbeing

agenda.

Positive workplace culture extends beyond what happens directly in the workplace. Progressive

organisations may encourage employees to engage in local community and charity work. This presents

a double dividend for organisations, enhancing both their public reputation and the perception of their

employees, who are enabled to participate in activities that have personal importance.

The scope of this credit is both direct employees and sub-contractors. Please see the definition of

‘employees’ below.

Page 446 of 477



Definitions



standards.

Employee culture and wellbeing policy refers to a policy that outlines the organisation’s commitment

to workplace culture and employee wellbeing.

Employee wellbeing refers to an employee’s happiness, and psychological, emotional and mental

state. Therefore, it is strongly linked to how satisfied a person feels about both themselves and their life.

(Australian HR Institute, 2011)

A culture and wellbeing implementation plan is a plan that outlines workplace culture and employee

wellbeing actions to implement the Culture and Wellbeing policy

Workplace or organisational culture refers to the beliefs, values, and basic assumptions that are

shared by organisational members. (Schein, E. H, 1985)

Level 1

DL1.1 An employee culture and wellbeing program is developed and actions to achieve them are implemented.

An employee culture and employee wellbeing program must be developed and implemented on the

project for the duration of the design phase. The program must outline objectives and SMART targets

and must be approved by the Project Director or equivalent. The employee culture and wellbeing

program and/or objectives and SMART targets may be part of a broader policy or plan, or it may be a

standalone approach.

The employee culture and wellbeing program and the associated objectives and targets must be

reviewed and updated (where necessary), at least every 12 months. Participants in culture and wellbeing

programs should be invited to provide input or review the programs, and the associated action plan and

targets.

The culture and wellbeing program must cover at least the following culture wellbeing categories:

• Safety culture*

• Mental health,

• Bereavement,

• Carer responsibilities,

• Domestic violence,

• Long-term illness,

• Miscarriage,

• Work-life balance, and

• Workplace culture.

*Note: evidence of safety culture does not need to include safety data such as LTI, it just needs to show evidence that a culture of safety is embedded into the organisation.

The program may include culture and wellbeing programs such as:

• Safety awareness and education programs,

• Health promotions,

• Flexible working hours,

• Opportunities for career development,

• A positive and enabling leadership culture ,

• Employee Support Services,

Page 447 of 477



Lea

Spr

Res

Res

Ecn

Ecn

Ene

Gre

Env

Wat

Eco

Sta

Leg

Her

Wfs

Con

• Mental-Health First Aid training, and

• Education and training programs.

The employee culture and wellbeing program, including the objectives and targets must be developed

in collaboration with employees and include senior managers as well as lower-level employees. This

may be undertaken though employee surveys or an employee wellbeing committee, etc. The employee

culture and wellbeing program and any associated policies must be easily accessible to all employees.

This may be provided to employees at the commencement of their employment, on the project website

or intranet site, etc.

An implementation or action plan must be developed outlining how each objective and target will be

achieved. Performance against each objective and target must be monitored and reported to the senior-

management team at least on an annual basis. The performance report must be made available to all

employees.


• Culture and Wellbeing policy, targets and implementation plan,

• Organisational chart,

• Position descriptions, and

• Performance report provided to senior management.

Level 2

DL2.1 There is leadership responsibility for culture and wellbeing.

The project must have culture and wellbeing representatives with responsibility over the implementation

of the culture and wellbeing program. Culture and wellbeing representatives must have leadership or

operational responsibility. The representatives must be identified in relevant policies, procedures and

organisational communication.

The project or organisation’s senior-management team or Board must discuss workplace culture and

wellbeing matters on an ongoing basis, at least every 6 months.

DL2.2 An employee survey is carried out annually, with at least 50% employee participation rate.

An annual employee survey, including questions related to performance against culture and wellbeing

targets and objectives, and satisfaction levels must be undertaken. At least 50% of employees

employed at the time the survey is undertaken must participate in the survey.

An analysis and evaluation of the results must be undertaken and compared with previous years (where

relevant). The analysis must outline changes from previous years (where relevant), both positive and

negative, and must include recommendations for improvements. When the design phase is less than 2

years, then a comparative analysis is not required, however actions for improvement still need to be

developed. The results of the employee survey must be presented to the project or organisation’s

senior-management team or Board.

Results of the employee survey must be shared with all employees.

The culture and wellbeing program, including associated objectives and targets must be updated to

respond to the findings within the employee survey. The updated objectives and target must receive

senior-management team or Board approval. The updated implementation plan must be made available

to employees.

DL2.3 There is at least one commitment or partnership to a charity or not-for-profit program.

The project or organisation must have at least one partnership or commitment to charities and/or not-

for-profit organisations as part of their culture and wellbeing program. The partnership must be selected

Page 448 of 477



in collaboration with employees and should align with the culture and wellbeing objectives and targets.

Example initiatives include employee volunteering, providing in-kind professional support and payroll

giving.


• Senior and middle-management position descriptions,

• Employee survey questions,


• Annual report showing / webpage showing survey results,

• Survey benchmarking,

• Senior-management team or board agenda showing culture and wellbeing agenda item/s, and

• Details of charity or not-for profit partnership and how it links to the employee culture and wellbeing

program.

Level 3

DL3.1 Employee Culture and Wellbeing program supports employees and their families and enables engagement in community and/or not-for-profit organisations.

The culture and wellbeing of employees can be affected by the culture and wellbeing of their close family

members. Progressive organisations can see this and extend their wellbeing programs to their

employee’s close family.

Culture and wellbeing program must be extended to partners and direct family members (parents and

children including step and foster children), e.g. parental leave, aged care support, employee support

service. It is acknowledged that not all components of the culture and wellbeing program will be

extended to partners and family members, so justification must be provided as to which parts of the

program are extended.

DL3.2 Employee survey results show an improvement of at least 2% from the previous year.

Annual employee surveys must show an improvement in the culture of the organisation and wellbeing

of employee, as reported by employees, of at least 2% from the previous year.

If this is not statically possible, improvement can be demonstrated by improvements in specific cultural

and wellbeing initiatives using relative metrics captured through monitoring program.

DL3.3 Annual employee survey results are benchmarked to market best practices and outlined in the project’s annual report and/or on the project’s webpage.

Workplace culture and wellbeing survey results must be included in annual reports or provided on the

project’s webpage.

Workplace culture and wellbeing must be benchmarked with industry peers. There are a number of

employee survey providers that can benchmark. Alternatively, this may be done by comparing results

with industry peers who have made their results publicly available.

Page 449 of 477



Lea

Spr

Res

Res

Ecn

Ecn

Ene

Gre

Env

Wat

Eco

Sta

Leg

Her

Wfs

Con


• Yearly engagement survey,

• Incremental changes to engagement survey based upon results,

• Communications to organisation regarding employee survey results,

• Communications relating to culture and wellbeing results reported in annual report or board reports,

and

• Implementation plans reflecting changes roll out.

Page 450 of 477



ISv2.0 As Built

WFS-3 Workplace Culture and Wellbeing

Aim

To reward a constructive and positive workplace culture appropriate for all people on the project team

and the development and effective implementation of employee wellbeing programs.

Criteria



ABL1.1 An employee culture and

wellbeing program is developed

and actions to achieve them are

implemented.


achieved

AND

ABL2.1 There is leadership

responsibility for culture and

wellbeing.

AND

ABL2.2 An employee survey is

carried out annually, with at least

50% employee participation rate.

AND

ABL2.3 There is at least one

commitment or partnership to a

charity or not-for-profit program.


achieved

AND

ABL3.1 Employee Culture and

Wellbeing program supports

employees and their families and

enables engagement in community

and/or not-for-profit organisations.

AND

ABL3.2 Employee survey results

show an improvement of at least

2% from the previous year.

AND

ABL3.3 Annual employee survey

results are benchmarked to market

best practices and outlined in the

project’s annual report and/or on

the project’s webpage.

Good employers will recognise that they have responsibility for the physical and mental wellbeing of

their employees. Fostering employee wellbeing is beneficial for both the employers and employees.

Promoting care of physical and mental health through early intervention and preventative measures

reduces the risk of health problems and creates a positive working environment where individuals and

organisations thrive.

Mental health and associated issues can have a significant impact on employee wellbeing, and are

recognised as major causes of long-term absence from work. Employers are encouraged to promote

good mental-health practices and provide support for employees with mental-health problems such as

anxiety and depression.

A positive culture that values employee wellbeing creates workplaces that support health and happiness,

enabling people to flourish and reach their potential. It involves the creation of an environment that

actively promotes a state of contentment, benefiting both employees and the organisation. Increasingly,

employers are extending their resources to include roles that have direct responsibility for the wellbeing

agenda.

Positive workplace culture extends beyond what happens directly in the workplace. Progressive

organisations may encourage employees to engage in local community and charity work. This presents

a double dividend for organisations, enhancing both their public reputation and the perception of their

employees, who are enabled to participate in activities that have personal importance.

Page 451 of 477



Lea

Spr

Res

Res

Ecn

Ecn

Ene

Gre

Env

Wat

Eco

Sta

Leg

Her

Wfs

Con

The scope of this credit is both direct employees and sub-contractors. Please see the definition of

‘employees’ below.

Definitions



standards.

Employee culture and wellbeing policy refers to a policy that outlines the organisation’s commitment

to workplace culture and employee wellbeing.

Employee wellbeing refers to an employee’s happiness, psychological, emotional and mental state.

Therefore, it is strongly linked to how satisfied a person feels about both themselves and their life.

(Australian HR Institute, 2011)

A culture and wellbeing implementation plan is a plan that outlines workplace culture and employee

wellbeing actions to implement the Culture and Wellbeing policy.

Workplace or organisational culture refers to the beliefs, values, and basic assumptions that are

shared by organisational members. (Schein, E. H, 1985)

Level 1

ABL1.1 An employee culture and wellbeing program is developed and actions to achieve them are implemented.

An employee culture and employee wellbeing program must be developed and implemented on the

project for the duration of the construction phase. The program must outline objectives and SMART

targets and must be approved by the Project Director or equivalent. The employee culture and wellbeing

program and/or objectives and SMART targets may be part of a broader policy or plan, or it may be a

standalone approach.

The employee culture and wellbeing program and the associated objectives and targets must be

reviewed and updated where necessary at least every 12 months. Participants in culture and wellbeing

programs should be invited to provide input or review the programs and the associated action plan and

targets.

The culture and wellbeing program must cover at least the following culture wellbeing categories:

• Safety culture*

• Mental health,

• Bereavement,

• Carer responsibilities,

• Domestic violence,

• Long-term illness,

• Miscarriage,

• Work-life balance, and

• Workplace culture.

Note: evidence of safety culture does not need to include safety data such as LTI, it just needs to show evidence that a culture of safety is embedded into the organisation.

The program may include culture and wellbeing programs such as:

• Safety awareness and education programs,

• Health promotions,

• Flexible working hours,

• Opportunities for career development,

Page 452 of 477



• A positive and enabling leadership culture,

• Employee Support Services,

• Mental-Health First Aid training, and

• Education and training programs.

The employee culture and wellbeing program, including the objectives and targets must be developed

in collaboration with employees and include senior managers as well as lower-level employees. This

may be undertaken though employee surveys or an employee wellbeing committee, etc. The employee

culture and wellbeing program and any associated policies must be easily accessible to all employees.




achieved. Performance against each objective and target must be monitored and reported to the senior-

management team at least on an annual basis. The performance report must be made available to all

employees.


• Culture and Wellbeing policy, targets and implementation plan,

• Organisational chart,

• Position descriptions, and

• Performance report provided to senior management.

Level 2

ABL2.1 There is leadership responsibility for culture and wellbeing.

The project must have culture and wellbeing representatives with responsibility over the implementation

of the culture and wellbeing program. Culture and wellbeing representatives must have leadership or

operational responsibility. The representatives must be identified in relevant policies, procedures and

organisational communication.

The project or organisation’s senior-management team or Board must discuss workplace culture and

wellbeing matters on an ongoing basis, at least every 6 months.

ABL2.2 An employee survey is carried out annually, with at least 50% employee participation rate.

An annual employee survey, including questions related to performance against culture and wellbeing

targets and objectives, and satisfaction levels must be undertaken. At least 50% of employees must

participate in the survey.

An analysis and evaluation of the results must be undertaken and compared with previous years (where

relevant). The analysis must outline changes from previous years (where relevant), both positive and

negative, and must include recommendations for improvements. When the construction phase is less

than 2 years, then a comparative analysis is not required, however actions for improvement still need to

be developed. The results of the employee survey must be presented to the project or organisation’s

senior-management team or Board.

Results of the employee survey must be shared with all employees.

The culture and wellbeing program, including associated objectives and targets must be updated to

respond to the findings within the employee survey. The updated objectives and target must receive

senior-management team or Board approval. The updated implementation plan must be made available

to employees.

Page 453 of 477



Lea

Spr

Res

Res

Ecn

Ecn

Ene

Gre

Env

Wat

Eco

Sta

Leg

Her

Wfs

Con

ABL2.3 There is at least one commitment or partnership to a charity or not-for-profit program.

The project or organisation must have at least one partnership or commitment to charities and/or not-

for-profit organisations as part of their culture and wellbeing program. The partnership must be selected

in collaboration with employees and should align with the culture and wellbeing objectives and targets.

Example initiatives include employee volunteering, providing in-kind professional support and payroll

giving.


• Senior and middle-management position descriptions,

• Employee survey questions,


• Annual report showing / webpage showing survey results,

• Survey benchmarking,

• Senior-management team or board agenda showing culture and wellbeing agenda item/s, and

• Details of charity or not-for profit partnership and how it links to the employee culture and wellbeing

program.

Level 3

ABL3.1 Employee Culture and Wellbeing program supports employees and their families and enable engagement in community and/or not-for-profit organisations.

The culture and wellbeing of employees can be affected by the culture and wellbeing of their close family

members. Progressive organisations can see this and extend their wellbeing programs to their

employee’s close family.

Culture and wellbeing program must be extended to partners and direct family members (parents and

children including step and foster children), e.g. parental leave, aged care support, employee support

service. It is acknowledged that not all components of the culture and wellbeing program will be

extended to partners and family members, so justification must be provided as to which parts of the

program are extended.

ABL3.2 Employee survey results show an improvement of at least 2% from the previous year.

Annual employee surveys must show an improvement in the culture of the organisation and wellbeing

of employee, as reported by employees, of at least 2% from the previous year.

If this is not statically possible, improvement can be demonstrated by improvements in specific cultural

and wellbeing initiatives using relative metrics captured through monitoring program.

ABL3.3 Annual employee survey results are benchmarked to market best practices and outlined in the project’s annual report and/or on the project’s webpage.

Workplace culture and wellbeing survey results must be included in annual reports or provided on the

project’s webpage.

Workplace culture and wellbeing must be benchmarked with industry peers. There are a number of

employee survey providers that can benchmark. Alternatively, this may be done by comparing results

with industry peers who have made their results publicly available.

Page 454 of 477




• Yearly engagement survey,

• Incremental changes to engagement survey based upon results,

• Communications to organisation regarding employee survey results,

• Communications relating to culture and wellbeing results reported in annual report or board reports,

• Implementation plans reflecting changes roll out.

Page 455 of 477



Lea

Spr

Res

Res

Ecn

Ecn

Ene

Gre

Env

Wat

Eco

Sta

Leg

Her

Wfs

Con

ISv2.0 Design

WFS-4 Diversity and Inclusion

Aim

To reward initiatives to build a diverse and inclusive working environment.

Criteria



DL1.1 A Diversity and Inclusion

policy and implementation plan

is developed and implemented.

AND

DL1.2 Diversity and Inclusion

training is mandatory for all

supervisory and leadership

roles.


are achieved

AND

DL2.1 Employment targets for

defined diversity groups are

identified and reported publicly

on an annual basis.

AND

DL2.2 Targeted programs are

developed and implemented to

attract, recruit, retain and

develop defined diversity

groups.

AND

DL2.3 There are events and

communication to raise

awareness of Diversity and

Inclusion.

AND


training is available for all

employees.


are achieved

AND


initiatives are embedded in

business plans and

performance agreements for

senior executives and people

managers.

AND



contractual requirements by

procurement organisations.

Workplaces that value diversity and inclusion ensure equal access to opportunities and fair treatment.

An environment that’s free from discrimination, harassment, victimisation and bullying, and that actively

promotes diversity and inclusion, will thrive, allowing people of all backgrounds to come together to

achieve success.

Increased workforce diversity is known to provide better productivity, access to a wider talent pool,

workplace cohesion and economic benefits. (Community Relations Commission for a multicultural NSW,

2011)

Definitions

An employee is someone who has a minimum employment period of 15 hours a week, for 4 consecutive

weeks. All employment is subject to the conditions of national employment standards.

Defined Diversity groups for the purpose of this credit include the following:

• Indigenous people (Mana Whenua, Aboriginals, Torres Strait Islanders),

• Long-term unemployed – people out of work and looking for work for 12 months or more (OECD,

2017),

• Women in non-traditional roles (an occupation for females in which females comprise 25 percent

or less of total employment),

Page 456 of 477



• Culturally and linguistically diverse,

• Carers,

• Disability groups,

• LGBTQI (Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, Queer and Intersexed (Amnesty USA, 2017)),

• Age – people over 55/people under 25, and

• Refugees.

Mentoring is described as a relationship in which a more experienced colleague uses his or her greater

knowledge and understanding of the work or workplace to support the development of a more junior or

inexperienced member of staff. Mentoring relationships tend to be longer-term than coaching

arrangements. In a succession planning scenario, for example, a regional Finance Director might be

mentored by a group-level counterpart over a lengthy period to develop a sound understanding of

dealing with the boardroom, presenting to analysts and challenging departmental budgets, all in a

supportive environment.





procurement category (Spr-1 L1.1 and Spr-2 L1.1) 2. Be engaged for $150,000 or more 3. Have at least 25 employees.

Level 1

DL1.1 A Diversity and Inclusion policy and implementation plan is developed and implemented.

A Diversity and Inclusion (D&I) policy/program/strategy with objectives and SMART target must be

developed and cover the defined diversity groups, as a minimum. The objectives and targets should be

reflective of localised diversity and inclusion requirements. This detail may have been identified in the

skills analysis (Wfs-1 L1.1) or may require further research to identify. Further research may include

comparing demographics data with the employee demographics and identifying gaps, surveying

employees, referencing local council community plans, etc.

Note: the intention of the objectives and targets is to encourage inclusion, therefore objectives and targets do not need to be focused around employee data (such as number of employees from each defined group) and could include initiatives such as access, delivery programs and engagement activities.

The Diversity and Inclusion policy/program/strategy and associated objectives and SMART target must:

• be available and integrated into onboarding and induction programs (see Wfs-2 L1.1)

• be referenced in wider-workforce policies/programs such as the recruitment strategy (see Wfs-2

L1.1)

• be made available to all employees

• be reviewed annually

• include references to relevant government legislation and policy.

Objectives and targets may be part of a broader workforce-related, sustainability policy or a standalone

Diversity and Inclusion policy. The policy/program/strategy must be readily available to all employees.


or intranet site etc.


achieved. Performance against each objective and target must be monitored and reported on annually.

Page 457 of 477



Lea

Spr

Res

Res

Ecn

Ecn

Ene

Gre

Env

Wat

Eco

Sta

Leg

Her

Wfs

Con

The performance report must be made available to all employees.

Example diversity and inclusion programs are included below:

• removing identifying information from job applications such as names, gender, age, etc. to limit

unconscious bias through the recruitment process,

• mentoring programs for minority groups, and

• flexible working arrangement and part-time job opportunities

Diversity and inclusion checks should be included in recruitment processes and be compliant with

legislative obligations. A diversity inclusion check involves a voluntary self-declaration of diversity status

through anonymous surveys.

DL1.2 Diversity and Inclusion training is mandatory for all supervisory and leadership roles.

Diversity and inclusion training must be provided to all employees in supervisory and leadership roles

at least once every 2 years.

Training must cover the following topics as a minimum:

• what is diversity and inclusion?

• what is discrimination?

Transport for NSW: Diversity and Inclusion Plan

The plan embraces equal employment opportunity for all staff but also aims to drive a shift in thinking from a

predominantly compliance focus to one which recognises a diverse and inclusive workplace as beneficial to

meeting business objectives. A diverse and inclusive workforce contributes to improved customer service,

greater capacity for innovation, increased productivity and performance, increased employee satisfaction and

engagement, and increased access to a larger and more representative talent pool. To move beyond compliance,

the plan provides five focus areas, supported by a range of practical strategies.

Key focus areas are:

1. Leadership commitment, accountability and capability, where D&I is visibly promoted by leaders and managers both in design and implementation of initiatives

2. Organisational capability where D&I is understood and integrated into mainstream business process 3. Business measures that are business-driven metrics to drive desired outcomes 4. Internal and external communication to promote business benefits/outcomes of Diversity and Inclusion

adoption 5. Targeted programs to facilitate employment equity for diverse groups.

The successful delivery of these priorities requires the leadership of our executives and senior managers in:

• Championing the business benefits generated by Diversity and Inclusion practices,

• Integrating Diversity and Inclusion activities in the workforce and business-planning processes, and

• Measuring our success by having a workforce that is representative of the community that we serve and a workplace culture that is free from discrimination, bullying and harassment, and is characterised by respect and support for differences and diversity of thought.

The Diversity and Inclusion plan is aligned to key employment goals set by the NSW Government in 2021,

including:

• To reduce the gap in employment outcomes between Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal people within a decade,

• To increase the proportion of women in non-traditional occupations in NSW, and

• To increase the employment participation rate of: o Young people (15-24 years)

o People over 55

o People with disabilities

o People in regional and rural areas.

Page 458 of 477



• why it is important to have Diversity and Inclusion and a discrimination-free workplace?

• diversity groups in Australia/New Zealand

• cultural awareness, including Indigenous cultural awareness,

• unconscious bias, and

• the project’s diversity and inclusion policy/programs/objectives.

Training should reflect localised Diversity and Inclusion priorities, e.g. increased Indigenous cultural

awareness when there are a high number of Indigenous employees, in addition to generic themes. This

may be undertaken in accordance with Her-1.

Reports must be provided to senior management on an annual basis detailing numbers of employees

fully trained and those with actions yet to complete the training.


• Diversity and Inclusion Policy, program or strategy with objectives and targets,

• Monitoring reports outlining performance against objectives and targets,

• Other plans that reference Diversity and Inclusion,

• Recruitment policy and procedures that reference Diversity and Inclusion, and

• Training records.

Level 2

DL2.1 Employment targets for defined diversity groups are identified and reported publicly on an annual basis.

Employment actions including employment targets (where relevant) for defined diversity groups must

be set, monitored and reviewed on an annual basis. It is acknowledged that not all diversity groups will

have an employment target based on the number of people employed (as this can create privacy issues)

or actions, therefore justification must be made as to which diversity groups were selected and how the

employment targets or actions were created. Where targets based on the number of employees is not

appropriate, actions such as engagement actions can be defined, measured and monitored. The

selected diversity groups, associated actions and targets must be reflective of good-practice and the

context of the individual project. Data on diversity gaps within the project and local demographics may

be useful to justify targeted diversity groups.

Performance against employment actions and targets for selected diversity groups must be published

internally and publicly on an annual basis for the life of the project.

Note: the intention of the actions and targets is to encourage inclusion, therefore actions and targets do not need to be focused around employee data (such as number of employees from each defined group) and could include initiatives such as access, delivery programs and engagement activities.

DL2.2 Targeted programs are developed and implemented to attract, recruit, retain and develop defined diversity groups.

Programs must be implemented to increase employment, retention and development of under-

represented defined diversity groups.

These programs may include initiatives such as Indigenous or long-term unemployed pre-employment

training, women in engineering graduate programs, university scholarships, employment programs for

refugees, mentoring programs, etc.

Programs to increase retention of defined diversity groups must be developed and implemented in

collaboration with targeted diversity groups. This may be undertaken through advisory groups,

Page 459 of 477



Lea

Spr

Res

Res

Ecn

Ecn

Ene

Gre

Env

Wat

Eco

Sta

Leg

Her

Wfs

Con

engagement of a subject matter expert/s to develop the program, obtaining feedback from peak bodies

or leadership groups within targeted communities, etc. SMART targets must be developed for each

initiative and progress against each target must be reported to senior management on an annual basis.

Individuals who identify as being from a defined diversity group must be offered mentoring on

commencement of employment. Effort should be made to place mentees with mentors from similar

backgrounds wherever possible. Employees from minority groups must be given the option to decline

a mentor should they wish.


Mentoring support must be reviewed at least annually and must include feedback from both the mentee

and mentor about the mentoring program.

DL2.3 There are events and communication to raise awareness of Diversity and Inclusion.

Events and communication recognising relevant Diversity and Inclusion celebrations must be held on

an annual basis, e.g. NAIDOC week, Harmony Day, Pride. It is acknowledged that celebrating all

diversity events is not feasible, so justification must be provided as to which events are celebrated and

how they were selected.

Events must be open to all employees.

DL2.4 Diversity and Inclusion training is available for all employees.

Sydney Metro Pre-Employment Program

Sydney Metro’s Pre-employment Program aims to engage long-term unemployed candidates from the Western

Sydney area and provide them with the “job-ready” skills required by employers on the project and within the

Western Sydney region. The three-week program combines employability skills, such as communication, team

building and being in an effective team, together with entry-level technical skills defined by employers for

specified job roles.

Participants attain a minimum of five units of competency and associated construction cards and licenses at

successful completion of the three-week program.

Partners include:

• Sydney Metro principal contractors and supply chain Technical skills advice, site visits and employment opportunities

• TAFE Western Sydney Institute Lead training provider and funding to support LLN needs

• Commonwealth Department of Employment Funding via Jobactive providers

• Jobactive providers Sourcing candidates, assessments, drug and alcohol testing, application and interview

support.

All training programs are tailored to suit specific employer requirements, ensuring that upon completion the

participants have the necessary knowledge and skills to apply for job vacancies and successfully attain

employment.

The program is not a contractual requirement; however, it rewards the achievement of Diversity and Inclusion

targets. Employment outcomes contribute to contractors’ workforce financial KPIs.

Progression opportunities include apprenticeships, traineeships and other skills-development programs.

Page 460 of 477



Diversity and Inclusion training must be available to all employees. All employees must be trained

within 12 months of commencing a position with the project and again every 2 years.




• why it is important to have Diversity and Inclusion and a discrimination-free workplace,

• diversity groups in Australia/New Zealand,

• cultural awareness including Indigenous cultural awareness,



Training should reflect localised Diversity and Inclusion priorities, e.g. Indigenous cultural awareness

when there are a high number of Indigenous employees, in addition to generic themes.

The training program must be reviewed and evaluated on an annual basis. The review should consider

employee feedback.


• Employment targets and programs,

• Mentor programs in place and outcomes reported,

• Events program supporting defined diversity groups, and

• Photos and example communication from diversity and inclusion celebrations.

Level 3

DL3.1 Diversity and Inclusion initiatives are embedded in business plans and performance agreements for senior executives and people managers.

The project must demonstrate Diversity and Inclusion initiatives within business plans.

Senior Project managers and executives must have diversity and inclusion objectives incorporated into

their performance objectives.

DL3.2 Diversity and Inclusion requirements are embedded in contractual requirements by procurement organisations.

Relevant diversity and inclusion requirements to meet the objectives outlined in Diversity and Inclusion

plan/strategy must be embedded within the contractual obligations of all direct suppliers (AKA Tier 1

suppliers) that meet the supplier threshold (see definitions).


• Diversity and inclusion training program,

• Training register,

• Business plans showing diversity and inclusion KPIs,

• KPIs of senior managers and executives for D&I, and

• Extract from contracts showing D&I requirements.

Page 461 of 477



Lea

Spr

Res

Res

Ecn

Ecn

Ene

Gre

Env

Wat

Eco

Sta

Leg

Her

Wfs

Con

ISv2.0 As Built

WFS-4 Diversity and Inclusion

Aim

To reward initiatives to build a diverse and inclusive working environment.

Criteria



ABL1.1 A Diversity and

Inclusion policy and

implementation plan is

developed and implemented.

AND

ABL1.2 Diversity and Inclusion

training is mandatory for all

supervisory and leadership

roles.


are achieved

AND

ABL2.1 Employment targets for

defined diversity groups are

identified and reported publicly

on an annual basis.

AND

ABL2.2 Targeted programs are

developed and implemented to

attract, recruit, retain and

develop defined diversity

groups.

AND

ABL2.3 There are events and

communication to raise

awareness of Diversity and

Inclusion.

AND


training is available for all

employees.


are achieved

AND


initiatives are embedded in

business plans and

performance agreements for

senior executives and people

managers.

AND



contractual requirements by

procurement organisations.

Workplaces that value diversity and inclusion ensure equal access to opportunities and fair treatment.

An environment that’s free from discrimination, harassment, victimisation and bullying, and that actively

promotes diversity and inclusion, will thrive, allowing people of all backgrounds to come together to

achieve success.

Increased workforce diversity is known to provide better productivity, access to a wider talent pool,

workplace cohesion and economic benefits. (Community Relations Commission for a multicultural NSW,

2011)

Definitions

An employee is someone who has a minimum employment period of 15 hours a week, for 4 consecutive

weeks. All employment is subject to the conditions of national employment standards.

Defined Diversity groups for the purpose of this credit include the following:

• Indigenous people (Mana Whenua, Aboriginals, Torres Strait Islanders),

• Long-term unemployed – people out of work and looking for work for 12 months or more (OECD,

2017),

• Women in non-traditional roles (an occupation for females in which females comprise 25 percent

or less of total employment),

Page 462 of 477



• Culturally and linguistically diverse,

• Carers,

• Disability groups,

• LGBTQI (Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, Queer and Intersexed (Amnesty USA, 2017)),

• Age – people over 55/people under 25, and

• Refugees.

Mentoring is described as a relationship in which a more experienced colleague uses his or her greater

knowledge and understanding of the work or workplace to support the development of a more junior or

inexperienced member of staff. Mentoring relationships tend to be longer-term than coaching

arrangements. In a succession planning scenario, for example, a regional Finance Director might be

mentored by a group-level counterpart over a lengthy period to develop a sound understanding of

dealing with the boardroom, presenting to analysts and challenging departmental budgets, all in a

supportive environment.





procurement category (Spr-1 L1.1 and Spr-2 L1.1) 2. Be engaged for $150,000 or more 3. Have at least 25 employees.

Level 1

ABL1.1 A Diversity and Inclusion policy and implementation plan is developed and implemented.

A Diversity and Inclusion (D&I) policy/program/strategy with objectives and SMART target must be

developed and cover the defined diversity groups, as a minimum. The objectives and targets should be

reflective of localised diversity and inclusion requirements. This detail may have been identified in the

skills analysis (Wfs-1 L1.1) or may require further research to identify. Further research may include

comparing demographics data with the employee demographics and identifying gaps, surveying

employees, referencing local council community plans, etc.


The Diversity and Inclusion policy/program/strategy and associated objectives and SMART target must:

• be available and integrated into onboarding and induction programs (see Wfs-2 L1.1),

• be referenced in wider-workforce policies/programs such as the recruitment strategy (see Wfs-2

L1.1),

• be made available to all employees,

• be reviewed annually, and

• include references to relevant government legislation and policy.

Objectives and targets may be part of a broader workforce-related or sustainability policy or a standalone

Diversity and Inclusion policy. The policy/program/strategy must be easily accessible to all employees.




achieved. Performance against each objective and target must be monitored and reported on annually.

Page 463 of 477



Lea

Spr

Res

Res

Ecn

Ecn

Ene

Gre

Env

Wat

Eco

Sta

Leg

Her

Wfs

Con

The performance report must be made available to all employees.

Example Diversity and Inclusion programs are included below:

• removing identifying information from job applications such as names, gender, age, etc. to limit

unconscious bias through the recruitment process

• mentoring programs for minority groups

• flexible working arrangement and part-time job opportunities.

Diversity and Inclusion checks should be included in recruitment processes and be compliant with

legislative obligations. A diversity inclusion check involves a voluntary self-declaration of diversity status

through anonymous surveys.

ABL1.2 Diversity & Inclusion training is mandatory for all supervisory and leadership roles.

Diversity and inclusion training must be provided to all employees in supervisory and leadership roles

at least once every 2 years.




Transport for NSW: Diversity and Inclusion Plan

The plan embraces equal employment opportunity for all staff but also aims to drive a shift in thinking from a

predominantly compliance focus to one which recognises a diverse and inclusive workplace as beneficial to

meeting business objectives. A diverse and inclusive workforce contributes to improved customer service,

greater capacity for innovation, increased productivity and performance, increased employee satisfaction and

engagement, and increased access to a larger and more representative talent pool. To move beyond compliance,

the plan provides five focus areas, supported by a range of practical strategies.

Key focus areas are:

1. Leadership commitment, accountability and capability, where D&I is visibly promoted by leaders and managers both in design and implementation of initiatives

2. Organisational capability where D&I is understood and integrated into mainstream business process 3. Business measures that are business-driven metrics to drive desired outcomes 4. Internal and external communication to promote business benefits/outcomes of Diversity and Inclusion

adoption 5. Targeted programs to facilitate employment equity for diverse groups.

The successful delivery of these priorities requires the leadership of our executives and senior managers in:

• Championing the business benefits generated by Diversity and Inclusion practices,

• Integrating Diversity and Inclusion activities in the workforce and business-planning processes, and

• Measuring our success by having a workforce that is representative of the community that we serve and a workplace culture that is free from discrimination, bullying and harassment, and is characterised by respect and support for differences and diversity of thought.

The Diversity and Inclusion plan is aligned to key employment goals set by the NSW Government in 2021,

including:

• To reduce the gap in employment outcomes between Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal people within a decade,

• To increase the proportion of women in non-traditional occupations in NSW, and

• To increase the employment participation rate of: o Young people (15-24 years)

o People over 55

o People with disabilities

o People in regional and rural areas.

Page 464 of 477



• why it is important to have Diversity and Inclusion and a discrimination-free workplace





Training should reflect localised Diversity and Inclusion priorities, e.g. increased Indigenous cultural

awareness when there are a high number of Indigenous employees, in addition to generic themes. This

may be undertaken in accordance with Her-1.

Reports must be provided to senior management on an annual basis detailing numbers of employees

fully trained and those with actions yet to complete the training.


• Diversity and Inclusion Policy, program or strategy with objectives and targets,

• Monitoring reports outlining performance against objectives and targets,

• Other plans that reference Diversity and Inclusion,

• Recruitment policy and procedures that reference Diversity and Inclusion, and

• Training records.

Level 2

ABL2.1 Employment targets for defined diversity groups are identified and reported publicly on an annual basis.

Employment actions including employment targets (where relevant) for defined diversity groups must

be set, monitored and reviewed on an annual basis. It is acknowledged that not all diversity groups will

have an employment target based on the number of people employed (as this can create privacy issues)

or actions, therefore justification must be made as to which diversity groups were selected and how the

employment targets or actions were created. Where targets based on the number of employees is not

appropriate, actions such as engagement actions can be defined, measured and monitored. The

selected diversity groups, associated actions and targets must be reflective of good-practice and the

context of the individual project. Data on diversity gaps within the project and local demographics maybe

useful to justify targeted diversity groups.

Performance against employment actions and targets for selected diversity groups must be published

internally and publicly on an annual basis for the life of the project.

Note: the intention of the actions and targets is to encourage inclusion, therefore actions and targets do not need to be focused around employee data (such as number of employees from each defined group) and could include initiatives such as access, delivery programs and engagement activities.

ABL2.2 Targeted programs are developed and implemented to attract, recruit, retain and develop defined diversity groups.

Programs must be implemented to increase employment, retention and development of under-

represented defined diversity groups.

These programs may include initiatives such as Indigenous or long-term unemployed pre-employment

training, women in engineering graduate programs, university scholarships, employment programs for

refugees, mentoring programs, etc.

Programs to increase retention of defined diversity groups must be developed and implemented in

collaboration with targeted diversity groups. This may be undertaken through advisory groups,

engagement of a subject matter expert/s to develop the program, obtaining feedback from peak bodies

Page 465 of 477



Lea

Spr

Res

Res

Ecn

Ecn

Ene

Gre

Env

Wat

Eco

Sta

Leg

Her

Wfs

Con

or leadership groups within targeted communities, etc. SMART targets must be developed for each

initiative and progress against each target must be reported to senior management on an annual basis.

Individuals who identify as from a defined diversity group must be offered mentoring on commencement

of employment. Effort should be made to place mentees with mentors from similar backgrounds

wherever possible. Employees from minority groups must be given the option to decline a mentor should

they wish.


Mentoring support must be reviewed at least annually and must include feedback from both the mentee

and mentor about the mentoring program.

ABL2.3 There are events and communication to raise awareness of Diversity and inclusion.

Events and communication recognising relevant Diversity and Inclusion celebrations must be held on

an annual basis, e.g. NAIDOC week, Harmony Day, Pride. It is acknowledged that celebrating all

diversity events is not feasible, so justification must be provided as to which events are celebrated and

how they were selected.

Events must be open to all employees.

ABL2.4 Diversity and Inclusion training is available for all employees.

Sydney Metro Pre-Employment Program

Sydney Metro’s Pre-employment Program aims to engage long-term unemployed candidates from the Western

Sydney area and provide them with the “job-ready” skills required by employers on the project and within the

Western Sydney region. The three-week program combines employability skills, such as communication, team

building and being in an effective team, together with entry-level technical skills defined by employers for

specified job roles.

Participants attain a minimum of five units of competency and associated construction cards and licenses at

successful completion of the three-week program.

Partners include:

• Sydney Metro principal contractors and supply chain Technical skills advice, site visits and employment opportunities

• TAFE Western Sydney Institute Lead training provider and funding to support LLN needs

• Commonwealth Department of Employment Funding via Jobactive providers

• Jobactive providers Sourcing candidates, assessments, drug and alcohol testing, application and interview

support.

All training programs are tailored to suit specific employer requirements, ensuring that upon completion the

participants have the necessary knowledge and skills to apply for job vacancies and successfully attain

employment.

The program is not a contractual requirement; however, it rewards the achievement of Diversity and Inclusion

targets. Employment outcomes contribute to contractors’ workforce financial KPIs.

Progression opportunities include apprenticeships, traineeships and other skills-development programs.

Page 466 of 477



Diversity and Inclusion training must be available to all employees. All employees must be trained

within 12 months of commencing a position with the project and again every 2 years.




• why it is important to have Diversity and Inclusion and a discrimination-free workplace,





Training should reflect localised Diversity and Inclusion priorities, e.g. Indigenous cultural awareness

when there are a high number of Indigenous employees, in addition to generic themes.

The training program must be reviewed and evaluated on an annual basis. The review should consider

employee feedback.


• Employment targets and programs,

• Mentor programs in place and outcomes reported,

• Events program supporting defined diversity groups, and

• Photos and example communication from diversity and inclusion celebrations.

Level 3

ABL3.1 Diversity and Inclusion initiatives are embedded in business plans and performance agreements for senior executives and people managers.

The project must demonstrate Diversity and Inclusion initiatives within management plans.

Senior Project managers and executives must have diversity and inclusion objectives incorporated into

their performance objectives.

ABL3.2 Diversity and Inclusion requirements are embedded in contractual requirements by procurement organisations.

Relevant diversity and inclusion requirements to meet the objectives outlined in Diversity and Inclusion

plan/strategy must be embedded within contractual obligations of all direct suppliers (AKA Tier 1

suppliers) that meet the supplier threshold (see definitions).


• Diversity and inclusion training program,

• Training register,

• Business plans showing diversity and inclusion KPIs,

• KPIs of senior managers and executives for D&I, and

• Extract from contracts showing D&I requirements.

Page 467 of 477



Lea

Spr

Res

Res

Ecn

Ecn

Ene

Gre

Env

Wat

Eco

Sta

Leg

Her

Wfs

Con

ISv2.0 Design

WFS-5 Sustainable Site Facilities

Aim

To encourage the deployment of sustainable site accommodation facilities that reduce environmental

impacts and support site workers with a healthy indoor environment.

Criteria

Table S24 WFS-5 Design summary criteria

Level 1 Level 2

DL1.1 The project specifies site accommodation

facilities that meet the RCLG minimum Site

Accommodation Requirements (SAR).


AND

DL2.1 The project specifies site accommodation

facilities that meet the RCLG SAR section 3.2

Optional Extras.

64TDefinitions

64TAccommodation is defined as temporary facilities provided for the occupation and use of site teams

during the construction phase of a project.

64TAveraged daily site accommodation electricity demand is the expected yearly electricity demand in

kWh divided by 365 days.

64TPrefabricated Site Facilities are defined as factory manufactured, portable buildings that are

transported to site for part or full duration of the project. The buildings are those that are used by people

for work and/or recreation and include site offices, meeting rooms, lunch/crib rooms, first aid sheds and

toilet blocks as well as sleeping quarters. Some of the requirements will apply to all buildings, and some

only to the office components. Storage buildings, containers and buildings only infrequently visited by

people are not covered by this credit.

64TRCLG Site Accommodation Requirements (SAR) are defined as the set of site accommodation scope

items developed by the Responsible Construction Leadership Group that shall be adopted within

prefabricated and site built accommodation to achieve a minimum level of sustainability performance.

64TLevel 1

DL1.1 The project specifies site accommodation facilities that meet the RCLG minimum Site Accommodation Requirements (SAR).

64TSAR must be outlined in either the Environmental Management Plan (or similar) or in the specification

for site facilities. Section 3.1 of the SAR must be implemented for prefabricated site facilities, and

section 3.4 must be implemented for purpose-built site facilities. In addition, section 3.3 must be

implemented for all non-site facility related items (such as fridges and TVs).

64TFor facilities such as toilets only relevant specifications must be implemented. Justification must be

provided outlining which specifications have been excluded in which facilities and the reasons for their

exclusion.

64TWhere the SAR provide for an ‘and/or’, the project team is only required to demonstrate compliance with

one of the items.

Page 468 of 477



64TWhere the SAR nominates ‘energy efficient’ air conditioning equipment to be used, the project team

must justify how the selected equipment is more energy efficient than standard practice via annual

energy usage comparisons or ratings. This could be as simple as demonstrating that equipment is within

2 stars of the most efficient available Energy Rating for that category on the market.


• Environmental Management plan, and

• Site facilities specifications.

64TLevel 2

DL2.1 The project specifies site accommodation facilities that meet the RCLG SAR section 3.2 Optional Extras.

64TRequirements of section 3.2 (Optional Extras) of the SAR must be included in either the Environmental

Management Plan (or similar) or in the specifications for site facilities.64T

64TFor solar PV, panels must be sized to meet averaged daily site accommodation electricity demand.



exclusion.


• Environmental Management plan,

• Site facilities specifications,

• Solar PV modelling, and

• Air-conditioning energy specification and star rating.

64TAdditional Information

64TLink to RCLG Site Accommodation Requirements:

http://www.responsibleconstruction.org/sustainable-site-facilities.html

Link to Energy Ratings website: http://www.energyrating.gov.au/

Page 469 of 477



Lea

Spr

Res

Res

Ecn

Ecn

Ene

Gre

Env

Wat

Eco

Sta

Leg

Her

Wfs

Con

ISv2.0 As Built

WFS-5 Sustainable Site Facilities

Aim

To encourage the deployment of sustainable site accommodation facilities that reduce environmental

impact and support site workers with a healthy indoor environment.

Criteria

Table S25 WFS-5 As Built summary criteria

Level 1 Level 2

ABL1.1 The project site accommodation facilities

meet the RCLG minimum Site Accommodation

Requirements (SAR).


AND

ABL2.1 The project site accommodation facilities

meet the RCLG SAR section 3.2 Optional Extras.

64TDefinitions

64TAccommodation is defined as temporary facilities provided for the occupation and use of site teams

during the construction phase of a project.

64TAveraged daily site accommodation electricity demand is the expected yearly electricity demand in

kWh divided by 365 days.

64TPrefabricated Site Facilities are defined as factory manufactured, portable buildings that are

transported to site for part or full duration of the project. The buildings are those that are used by people

for work and/or recreation and include site offices, meeting rooms, lunch/crib rooms, first aid sheds and

toilet blocks as well as sleeping quarters. Some of the requirements will apply to all buildings, and some

only to the office components. Storage buildings, containers and buildings only infrequently visited by

people are not covered by this credit.

64TRCLG Site Accommodation Requirements (SAR) are defined as the set of site accommodation scope

items developed by the Responsible Construction Leadership Group that shall be adopted within

prefabricated and site built accommodation to achieve a minimum level of sustainability performance.

64TLevel 1

ABL1.1 The project site accommodation facilities meet the RCLG minimum Site Accommodation Requirements (SAR)

64TSAR must be implemented on site for the duration of the project construction period. Section 3.1 of

the SAR must the implemented for prefabricated site facilities, and section 3.4 must be implemented

for purpose-built site facilities. In addition, section 3.3 must be implemented for all non-site facility

related items (such as fridges and TVs).



exclusion.

64TWhere the SAR provide for an ‘and/or’, the project team is only required to demonstrate compliance with

one of the items.

64TWhere the SAR nominates ‘energy efficient’ air conditioning equipment to be used, the project team

must justify how the selected equipment is more energy efficient than standard practice via annual

Page 470 of 477



energy usage comparisons or ratings. This could be as simple as demonstrating that equipment is within

2 stars of the most efficient available Energy Rating for that category on the market.


• 64TRegular inspection reports confirming that the requirements of the SAR have been implemented

on the project for the duration of the construction period,

• 64TPhotos of the facilities in place,

• 64TContract documents with site accommodation supplier that confirm installation of facilities that meet

Site Accommodation Requirements, and

• 64TInvoice from site accommodation supplier that confirms lease/purchase of compliant facilities.

64TLevel 2

ABL2.1 The project site accommodation facilities meet the RCLG SAR section 3.2 Optional Extras.

64TRequirements of section 3.2 (Optional Extras) of the SAR must be implemented for the duration of the

project construction period.

64TFor solar PV, panels must be sized to meet averaged daily site accommodation electricity demand.



exclusion.


• 64TMetering data confirming PV electricity supply to site, and

• 64TPhotos of split system air conditioning unit connected to site accommodation facilities.

64TAdditional Information

64TLink to RCLG Site Accommodation Requirements:

http://www.responsibleconstruction.org/sustainable-site-facilities.html

Link to Energy Ratings website: http://www.energyrating.gov.au/

Page 471 of 477



Lea

Spr

Res

Res

Ecn

Ecn

Ene

Gre

Env

Wat

Eco

Sta

Leg

Her

Wfs

Con Appendix A. Government Regional Policy Context – Australia

NSW State

Priorities

The State Priorities include commitments to creating jobs, boosting

apprenticeships through infrastructure investment, and increasing

the proportion of people completing apprenticeships and

traineeships to 65% by 2019.

NSW Aboriginal

Participation in

Construction

Policy (APIC)

The APIC Policy aims to deliver more employment and business

opportunities for Aboriginal people on selected government

construction projects. The category of project defines the

percentage of the project spend directed to Aboriginal-related

employment and education activities, and procurement of goods or

services from recognised Aboriginal businesses or other programs.

Victoria Industry

Participation Plan

Through its Local Jobs First - Victorian Industry Participation Policy

(VIPP), the Victorian Government is committed to improving

opportunities for local suppliers to create more new jobs and grow

the economy. VIPP ensures that small and medium size enterprises

(SMEs) are given a full and fair opportunity to compete for

government contracts, such as hospitals, schools and road projects,

while still achieving value for money.

http://economicdevelopment.vic.gov.au/victorian-industry-

participation-policy

Queensland

Procurement

Policy

The Queensland Government Procurement Strategy is supported

by the Queensland Procurement Policy which will be applied across

all government agencies and government owned corporations.

http://www.hpw.qld.gov.au/Procurement/ProcurementStrategy/Poli

cy/Pages/default.aspx

Queensland

Backing

Queensland Jobs

Our new approach to purchasing puts the creation of quality

Queensland jobs as a first priority. The Queensland Procurement

Strategy ensures informed decisions are made about how

government funds are used to prioritise Queensland businesses,

support local jobs in regional Queensland and achieve more

positive outcomes on behalf of taxpayers.

http://www.hpw.qld.gov.au/SiteCollectionDocuments/QLDGovernm

entProcurementStrategy.pdf

Queensland 2016-

17 Annual VET

Investment Plan

The 2016-17 Annual VET Investment Plan details the Queensland

Government's $810.7 million investment in vocational education

and training (VET) in the 2016-17 financial year. Under this plan, the

government remains focused on investing in skills that align with

real job opportunities both now and into the future, boosting the

skills of our existing workforce and creating more opportunities for

those needing additional skills to compete for employment.

Advancing skills

for the future: A

strategy for

vocational

education and

training in

Queensland

Sets out the Queensland Government's vision for VET to ensure

that in a changing world, all Queenslanders are able to access - at

any stage in their lifetime and career - high-quality training that

improves their life prospects and supports industry development

and economic growth.

To achieve this vision, the consultation draft of Advancing skills for

the future focuses on three priority areas for action:

Page 472 of 477



- industry and innovation

- a quality system

- access and participation.

Queensland:

Moving Ahead

A strategic approach to increasing the participation of Aboriginal

people and Torres Strait Islander people in Queensland’s economy

2016–2022. Moving Ahead is designed to ensure that Aboriginal

and Torres Strait Islander people participate fully as possible in

Queensland’s growing economy.

Queensland

Government

Building and

Construction

Training Policy:

Guidelines for

Indigenous

Projects.

These guidelines provide Queensland Government agencies,

contractors and Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Councils and

authorities with the information necessary to comply with the

requirements for Indigenous projects under the Queensland

Government Building and Construction Training Policy (training

policy)

South Australia

Disability workforce projects are specifically aimed at meeting the

needs of disability sector employers who have identified

employment opportunities.

South Australian Skills Investment Plan 2017-18

Victoria (Victorian

Training

Guarantee)

The Victorian Training Guarantee makes vocational training more

accessible to people who do not hold a post-school qualification, or

who want to gain a higher-level qualification than they already hold.

Victorian Major

Projects Skills

Guarantee

The Victorian Government's Major Projects Skills Guarantee

provides opportunities for Victorian apprentices, trainees and

engineering cadets to work on some of Victoria's biggest building

and construction, infrastructure and civil engineering projects.

Under the Major Projects Skills Guarantee, all publicly funded works

contracts valued at or over $20 million are now required to use

Victorian apprentices, trainees or engineering cadets for at least 10

percent of the total estimated labour hours.

Queensland

Government

Building and

Construction

Training Policy

The training policy supports employment opportunities and skills

development in Queensland's building and construction industry. It

also focuses on increasing the economic independence of

Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Queenslanders in the industry.

It requires contractors to employ apprentices and trainees and

undertake other workforce training as a mandated component of

being awarded work on eligible Queensland Government projects.

Page 473 of 477



Lea

Spr

Res

Res

Ecn

Ecn

Ene

Gre

Env

Wat

Eco

Sta

Leg

Her

Wfs

Con Appendix B. Workforce Sustainability Funding & Programs – Australia

Program Description

Skilling

Australians Fund

The establishment of the Skilling Australians Fund is a commitment

by the Australian Government to funding for vocational education

and training allowing impact on skilling workers into the future. The

Fund is prioritised towards apprentices, trainees, and pre- and

higher apprentices in key areas:

- Occupations in demand

- Occupations with a reliance on skilled migration

- Industries and sectors of future growth

- Trade apprenticeships

- Rural and regional areas

VET Student

Loans Scheme

VET Student Loans is a loan program that helps eligible students

enrolled in certain higher-level vocational education and training

courses, at approved course providers, pay their tuition fees (up to

capped amounts). VET Student Loans commenced on 1 January

2017, replacing the VET FEE-HELP scheme.

South Australia,

Work Ready

Work Ready is a South Australian government initiative that brings

together funding for training, employment and skills activities. Work

Ready is about targeting training and employment opportunities to

the needs of people, strategic industries and regions.

http://www.skills.sa.gov.au/programs-and-initiatives

https://www.sa.gov.au/topics/education-and-learning/vocational-

education-and-training/skills-for-all

Victorian

Workforce

Training

Innovation Fund

The Workforce Training Innovation Fund (WTIF) will provide scope

and support for innovation in the training and TAFE system to

respond to workforce skill challenges and is aligned with the

Victorian Government’s broader economic development agenda and

priority sectors/industry strategies. An initial allocation of $40 million

in 2017 for Workforce Training Innovation will be available to

industry/training provider partnerships to improve the quality and

relevance of training to industry and/or enterprises to develop and

deploy new skills required for productivity improvement.

Fund categories include:

- Future Growth Sectors - development of skills development

approaches for new and emerging industries and Victorian

Government priority sectors

- Workforce Training and Skills Development - improving

delivery of workplace skills to support business productivity

- New Training Programs and Methods - innovation in course

development, product design and delivery in support of VET

sector improvement

- Applied Research - research solving 'real-world' industry and

business productivity challenges.

- Priority areas include construction and transport sectors

Page 474 of 477



Jobs Victoria

Employment

Network (JVEN)

JVEN significantly expands employment assistance to

disadvantaged jobseekers, providing additional resources in

communities across Victoria to assist unemployed people into work.

JVEN funding will provide flexible, responsive assistance to

unemployed Victorians who struggle to gain a foothold in the labour

market. A key component of the program will be its close

engagement with employers.

ABSTUDY: The

Aboriginal and

Torres Strait

Islander Study

Scheme

Financial help for Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander Australians who

are studying or undertaking an Australian Apprenticeship. Eligibility

includes undertaking an approved course, Australian Apprenticeship

or traineeship.

Indigenous

Cadetship

Support

The Indigenous Cadetship Support (ICS) is an Australian

Government initiative that improves the professional employment

prospects of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples. It links

Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander tertiary students with employers

in a cadetship arrangement involving full-time study and negotiated

work placements. Cadetships enable Aboriginal and Torres Strait

Islander students to gain the professional qualifications and

experience needed for a range of jobs in the private, public and

community sectors and assists them to move into employment on

completion of their studies.

Queensland

Indigenous VET

Partnerships

The Queensland Government is committed to improving training and

employment outcomes for Indigenous Queenslanders.

Complementing the investment through skilling strategies such as

the Certificate 3 Guarantee, the Indigenous VET Partnerships

supports participation in accredited training and assessment

services that will improve training and employment outcomes for

Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders across the state. The

Indigenous VET Partnerships is coordinated by the Department of

Education and Training in collaboration with the Department of

Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Partnerships. All areas of

Queensland will be included under this strategy, including Cape

York, the Gulf of Carpentaria and Torres Strait Islands.

Page 475 of 477



Lea

Spr

Res

Res

Ecn

Ecn

Ene

Gre

Env

Wat

Eco

Sta

Leg

Her

Wfs

Con References

Australian HR Institute. (2011, November 8). Health and Wellbeing. Retrieved from Australian HR

Institute: https://www.ahri.com.au/assist/health-and-wellbeing

Australian Workforce and Procductivity Agency. (2012). Future Focus: Australia’s Skills and Workforce Development Needs. Canberra: Commonwealth of Australia.

Civil Contractors Federation (NSW). (2014). 10 year forecast for civil construction and maintenance works.

Community Relations Commission for a multicultural NSW. (2011). The Economic Advanctages of Cultural Diversity in Australia. Sydney: Community Relations Commission for a multicultural NSW.

Retrieved from

http://www.crc.nsw.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0010/17479/The_economic_advantages_of_cultural

_diversity_in_Australia.pdf

Council of Australian Government. (2014). COAG National Agreement for Skills and Workforce Development. Canberra: COAG. Retrieved from

http://www.federalfinancialrelations.gov.au/content/npa/skills/skills-reform/national_agreement.pdf

Human Resource Institute. (2015). HR: Pulse Survey. Turnover and Retention. .

McKinsey & Company. (2007). Technology, Jobs, and The Future of Work. McKinsey Global Institute.

NSW Government. (2016). Jobs for the future. Sydney: NSW Government.

Royal Society for the encouragement of Arts, Manufactures and Commerce. (2017). Taylor Review of Modern Working Practices. London: RSA.

Schein, E. H. (1985). Organizational culture and leadership. San Francisco.

Page 476 of 477




Page 477 of 477