The applicant considers that the proposed changes fall within these parameters and therefore are suitable for consideration under the secondary consent condition in the permit.
5 Changes to plans under a permit need to be considered in a context of a continuum. At the lower end there are minor changes that have no external impact and are entirely uncontentious. Changes of this nature are best considered by way of secondary consent without the need for notification, the involvement of third parties or an extensive formal process. At the other end of the continuum are major changes that will have external impacts and affect third parties. Changes of this nature should be considered in the context of an application to amend the permit under section 72 of the Act. This process enables third party participation in the decision making process, unlike the secondary consent process.
6 It is the cases in the middle of the continuum that raise questions about which process should be used. There is no hard and fast rule for determining this. Rather, there are a set of criteria, which the Tribunal has summarised in the Westpoint Corporation case, that will provide guidance. It will be a question of judgement in each case as to whether changes to plans meet those criteria. In the present case, this is the fundamental issue in dispute between the applicant and the responsible authority.
7 As a normal rule I do not consider it is appropriate to direct advertising of applications for secondary consent or applications for review under section 149 of the Act relating to such consents. As the Tribunal said in the Westpoint Corporation case: