Referral of proposed action What is a referral? The Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (the EPBC Act) provides for the protection of the environment, especially matters of national environmental significance (NES). Under the EPBC Act, a person must not take an action that has, will have, or is likely to have a significant impact on any of the matters of NES without approval from the Australian Government Environment Minister or the Minister’s delegate. (Further references to ‘the Minister’ in this form include references to the Minister’s delegate.) To obtain approval from the Environment Minister, a proposed action should be referred. The purpose of a referral is to obtain a decision on whether your proposed action will need formal assessment and approval under the EPBC Act. Your referral will be the principal basis for the Minister’s decision as to whether approval is necessary and, if so, the type of assessment that will be undertaken. These decisions are made within 20 business days, provided sufficient information is provided in the referral.
Who can make a referral? Referrals may be made by or on behalf of a person proposing to take an action, the Commonwealth or a Commonwealth agency, a state or territory government, or agency, provided that the relevant government or agency has administrative responsibilities relating to the action.
When do I need to make a referral? A referral must be made for actions that are likely to have a significant impact on the following matters protected by Part 3 of the EPBC Act: World Heritage properties (sections 12 and 15A) National Heritage places (sections 15B and 15C) Wetlands of international importance (sections 16 and 17B) Listed threatened species and communities (sections 18 and 18A) Listed migratory species (sections 20 and 20A) Protection of the environment from nuclear actions (sections 21 and 22A) Commonwealth marine environment (sections 23 and 24A) Great Barrier Reef Marine Park (sections 24B and 24C) A water resource, in relation to coal seam gas development and large coal mining development (sections 24D and 24E) The environment, if the action involves Commonwealth land (sections 26 and 27A), including: o actions that are likely to have a significant impact on the environment of Commonwealth land (even if taken outside Commonwealth land); o actions taken on Commonwealth land that may have a significant impact on the environment generally; The environment, if the action is taken by the Commonwealth (section 28) Commonwealth Heritage places outside the Australian jurisdiction (sections 27B and 27C) You may still make a referral if you believe your action is not going to have a significant impact, or if you are unsure. This will provide a greater level of certainty that Commonwealth assessment requirements have been met. To help you decide whether or not your proposed action requires approval (and therefore, if you should make a referral), the following guidance is available from the Department’s website: the Policy Statement titled Significant Impact Guidelines 1.1 – Matters of National Environmental Significance. Additional sectoral guidelines are also available.
001 Referral of proposed action v May 2016 Page 1 of 16 the Policy Statement titled Significant Impact Guidelines 1.2 - Actions on, or impacting upon, Commonwealth land, and actions by Commonwealth agencies. the Policy Statement titled Significant Impact Guidelines: Coal seam gas and large coal mining developments—Impacts on water resources. the interactive map tool (enter a location to obtain a report on what matters of NES may occur in that location). Can I refer part of a larger action? In certain circumstances, the Minister may not accept a referral for an action that is a component of a larger action and may request the person proposing to take the action to refer the larger action for consideration under the EPBC Act (Section 74A, EPBC Act). If you wish to make a referral for a staged or component referral, read ‘Fact Sheet 6 Staged Developments/Split Referrals’ and contact the Referrals Gateway (1800 803 772). Do I need a permit? Some activities may also require a permit under other sections of the EPBC Act or another law of the Commonwealth. Information is available on the Department’s web site. Is your action in the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park? If your action is in the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park it may require permission under the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Act 1975 (GBRMP Act). If a permission is required, referral of the action under the EPBC Act is deemed to be an application under the GBRMP Act (see section 37AB, GBRMP Act). This referral will be forwarded to the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority (the Authority) for the Authority to commence its permit processes as required under the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Regulations 1983. If a permission is not required under the GBRMP Act, no approval under the EPBC Act is required (see section 43, EPBC Act). The Authority can provide advice on relevant permission requirements applying to activities in the Marine Park. The Authority is responsible for assessing applications for permissions under the GBRMP Act, GBRMP Regulations and Zoning Plan. Where assessment and approval is also required under the EPBC Act, a single integrated assessment for the purposes of both Acts will apply in most cases. Further information on environmental approval requirements applying to actions in the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park is available from http://www.gbrmpa.gov.au/ or by contacting GBRMPA's Environmental Assessment and Management Section on (07) 4750 0700. The Authority may require a permit application assessment fee to be paid in relation to the assessment of applications for permissions required under the GBRMP Act, even if the permission is made as a referral under the EPBC Act. Further information on this is available from the Authority: Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority 2-68 Flinders Street PO Box 1379 Townsville QLD 4810 AUSTRALIA Phone: + 61 7 4750 0700 Fax: + 61 7 4772 6093 www.gbrmpa.gov.au
What information do I need to provide? Completing all parts of this form will ensure that you submit the required information and will also assist the Department to process your referral efficiently. If a section of the referral document is not applicable to your proposal enter N/A. You can complete your referral by entering your information into this Word file. Instructions Instructions are provided in blue text throughout the form. Attachments/supporting information The referral form should contain sufficient information to provide an adequate basis for a decision on the likely impacts of the proposed action. You should also provide supporting documentation, such as environmental reports or surveys, as attachments.
001 Referral of proposed action v May 2016 Page 2 of 16 Coloured maps, figures or photographs to help explain the project and its location should also be submitted with your referral. Aerial photographs, in particular, can provide a useful perspective and context. Figures should be good quality as they may be scanned and viewed electronically as black and white documents. Maps should be of a scale that clearly shows the location of the proposed action and any environmental aspects of interest. Please ensure any attachments are below three megabytes (3mb) as they will be published on the Department’s website for public comment. To minimise file size, enclose maps and figures as separate files if necessary. If unsure, contact the Referrals Gateway (email address below) for advice. Attachments larger than three megabytes (3mb) may delay processing of your referral. Note: the Minister may decide not to publish information that the Minister is satisfied is commercial-in-confidence. How do I pay for my referral? From 1 October 2014 the Australian Government commenced cost recovery arrangements for environmental assessments and some strategic assessments under the EPBC Act. If an action is referred on or after 1 October 2014, then cost recovery will apply to both the referral and any assessment activities undertaken. Further information regarding cost recovery can be found on the Department’s website.
Payment of the referral fee can be made using one of the following methods: EFT Payments can be made to:
BSB: 092-009 Bank Account No. 115859 Amount: $6577 Account Name: Department of the Environment. Bank: Reserve Bank of Australia Bank Address: 20-22 London Circuit Canberra ACT 2601 Description: The reference number provided (see note below)
Cheque - Payable to “Department of the Environment”. Include the reference number provided (see note below), and if posted, address:
The Referrals Gateway Environment Assessment Branch Department of the Environment GPO Box 787 Canberra ACT 2601
Credit Card
Please contact the Collector of Public Money (CPM) directly (call (02) 6274 2930 or 6274 20260 and provide the reference number (see note below).
Note: in order to receive a reference number, submit your referral and the Referrals Gateway will email you the reference number.
How do I submit a referral? Referrals may be submitted by mail or email. Mail to: Referrals Gateway Environment Assessment Branch Department of Environment GPO Box 787 CANBERRA ACT 2601
If submitting via mail, electronic copies of documentation (on CD/DVD or by email) are required.
001 Referral of proposed action v May 2016 Page 3 of 16 Email to: [email protected] Clearly mark the email as a ‘Referral under the EPBC Act’. Attach the referral as a Microsoft Word file and, if possible, a PDF file. Follow up with a mailed hardcopy including copies of any attachments or supporting reports.
What happens next? Following receipt of a valid referral (containing all required information) you will be advised of the next steps in the process, and the referral and attachments will be published on the Department’s web site for public comment. The Department will write to you within 20 business days to advise you of the outcome of your referral and whether or not formal assessment and approval under the EPBC Act is required. There are a number of possible decisions regarding your referral: The proposed action is NOT LIKELY to have a significant impact and does NOT NEED approval No further consideration is required under the environmental assessment provisions of the EPBC Act and the action can proceed (subject to any other Commonwealth, state or local government requirements). The proposed action is NOT LIKELY to have a significant impact IF undertaken in a particular manner The action can proceed if undertaken in a particular manner (subject to any other Commonwealth, state or local government requirements). The particular manner in which you must carry out the action will be identified as part of the final decision. You must report your compliance with the particular manner to the Department. The proposed action is LIKELY to have a significant impact and does NEED approval If the action is likely to have a significant impact a decision will be made that it is a controlled action. The particular matters upon which the action may have a significant impact (such as World Heritage values or threatened species) are known as the controlling provisions. The controlled action is subject to a public assessment process before a final decision can be made about whether to approve it. The assessment approach will usually be decided at the same time as the controlled action decision. (Further information about the levels of assessment and basis for deciding the approach are available on the Department’s web site.) The proposed action would have UNACCEPTABLE impacts and CANNOT proceed The Minister may decide, on the basis of the information in the referral, that a referred action would have clearly unacceptable impacts on a protected matter and cannot proceed. Compliance audits If a decision is made to approve a project, the Department may audit it at any time to ensure that it is completed in accordance with the approval decision or the information provided in the referral. If the project changes, such that the likelihood of significant impacts could vary, you should write to the Department to advise of the changes. If your project is in the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park and a decision is made to approve it, the Authority may also audit it. (See “Is your action in the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park,” p.2, for more details).
For more information call the Department of the Environment Community Information Unit on 1800 803 772 or visit the web site http://www.environment.gov.au/topics/about-us/legislation/environment-protection-and- biodiversity-conservation-act-1999 All the information you need to make a referral, including documents referenced in this form, can be accessed from the above web site.
001 Referral of proposed action v May 2016 Page 4 of 16 Referral of proposed action
Project title: Castlemaine Link Project, Victoria
1 Summary of proposed action
1.1 Short description The southern townships of Kyneton, Castlemaine and the rural system of Harcourt are currently reliant on a single source of water, the Coliban Headworks Storages, Malmsbury, Lauriston and Upper Coliban Reservoirs (Coliban Southern System).
The objective of this project is to reduce Coliban Water’s risk exposure to future water shortages in the Coliban Southern system by providing a supplementary raw water transfer system from Bendigo’s Sandhurst Reservoir to Castlemaine, with capacity to supply Kyneton in the future. This will effectively allow supply from either, or a combination of, the Coliban Headworks Storages and the GMW Goulburn System (Waranga Western Channel via Colbinabbin Pump Station) or GMW Campaspe System (Lake Eppalock via Eppalock Pump Station).
The project has proceeded in two stages, as follows:
1. Harcourt Rural Modernisation Project (HRMP) – this includes the modernisation of the channel based rural irrigation network, construction of the Faraday and Barkers Creek Reservoir Pump Stations, the balancing tank and the Castlemaine Link Stage 1 (Backbone) pipeline.
2. Castlemaine Link Project – this includes construction of the Castlemaine Link Project pipeline and either a new pump station at Sandhurst Reservoir (Castlemaine Link Pump Station) or a connection to the Central Highlands Water (CHW) Goldfields Superpipe approximately 2km south of the Reservoir. The pump station and the first 2 km of pipeline may be deferred for a number of years if the connection to the CHW superpipe is adopted.
The HRMP has been constructed and is currently undergoing commissioning.
In June 2016 storage levels were almost low enough to trigger water restrictions. Since then significant rain has produced inflows to the storages which has delayed reaching the trigger for many months. The design and approvals are being progressed at this time to enable Coliban Water to initiate construction when conditions dictate it is appropriate. There is an additional 2 km of pipe that is required for project completion at the southern end of the project between the Faraday Pump Station and the Poverty Gully Channel.. However, this section does not have the urgency of the remainder of the project, requires upgrades to other infrastructure, and is not at the functional design stage. This section of the project has little potential to significantly impact on a protected matter. With consultation with the Department of Environment, this section of the project will be addressed as a staged development (Stage 3). This is addressed in more detail in Section 2.7. This referral relates to the Castlemaine Link Project only.
001 Referral of proposed action v May 2016 Page 5 of 16 1.2 Latitude and longitude
Latitude Longitude Location point degrees minutes seconds degrees minutes seconds Castlemaine Link Castlemaine Link -36 50 35 144 14 28.71 Pump Station Castlemaine Link pipeline (the majority will be within an area bounded by these co-ordinates) NW -36 50 35 144 13 45 SW corner -36 57 16 144 13 45 SE corner -36 57 16 144 15 3 NE corner -36 50 35 144 15 3
Please refer to Attachment A – Excel Spreadsheet with coordinates of each turning point for the project area.
Attachment B – Polyline layer of proposed alignment
Also attach the associated GIS-compliant file that delineates the proposed referral area. If the area is less than 5 hectares, please provide the location as a point layer. If greater than 5 hectares, please provide a polygon layer. If the proposed action is linear (eg. a road or pipeline) please provide a polyline layer (refer to GIS data supply guidelines at Attachment A).
Do not use AMG coordinates. 1.3 Locality and property description The Castlemaine Link Project commences at Sandhurst Reservoir approximately 10 km south of Bendigo in central Victoria. It heads south through a cleared corridor occupied by other utilities within the Greater Bendigo National Park and Bendigo Regional Park, and then crosses public and private land. It joins to the existing modernised Harcourt rural water supply network at Johansen’s Road, North Harcourt.
Attachment C – location of the Castlemaine Link Project
1.4 Size of the development The preferred construction corridor alignment footprint is 27.2 ha. footprint or work area (hectares) 1.5 Street address of the site Not applicable, please refer to locality description and Attachment C.
1.6 Lot description
The project affects a range of private and public land, including road reserves, City of Greater Bendigo, Mount Alexander Shire Council and Crown Land (Greater Bendigo National Park, Bendigo Regional Park and Sandhurst Reservoir).
A complete list of lot numbers and title descriptions of the land within the preferred construction corridor alignment can be provided if required.
The location of the pump station is as follows:
Castlemaine Link pump station (Sandhurst Reservoir Big Hill) – Crown Allotment 61 Section D Parish of Mandurang, 01822/262.
001 Referral of proposed action v May 2016 Page 6 of 16 1.7 Local Government Area and Council contact (if known)
Greater Bendigo City Council Emma Bryant Amendments, Heritage and Compliance Coordinat 15 Hopetoun Street, Bendigo, VIC 3550 PO Box 733, Bendigo, VIC 3552 Phone: 03 54346017 Email: [email protected]
Mount Alexander Shire Council Rebecca Stockfeld Manager Development Services Phone: 03 5471 1700 Email: [email protected]
1.8 Time frame The project seeks to ensure that Coliban Water can continue to supply water to meet essential urban and rural demand on the Coliban southern system. Coliban Water needs to prepare for dry conditions and low surface water reliability by improving the efficiency and security of the water supply to maintain the socio- economic health of the region and support anticipated growth in the Castlemaine and Harcourt localities.
The project would be implemented in response to continued dry conditions and may be deferred in full or in part depending on the extent of rainfall and volume held in water storages.
The timing of the project will be determined from pre-determined triggers related to the storage volumes available at October, being the time decisions are made relating to any restriction to urban or rural customers. A decision may also be made to reduce the security of supply risk by proceeding prior to it being immediately required. Once a contract is let for the works it is expected to take 12 months to complete.
To support the construction schedule, the project will proceed on multiple fronts.
1.9 Alternatives to proposed No action Were any feasible alternatives to taking the proposed action (including not taking the action) X Yes, you must also complete section 2.2 considered but are not proposed?
1.10 Alternative time frames etc No Does the proposed action include alternative time frames, X Yes, you must also complete Section 2.3. For each alternative, locations or activities? location, time frame, or activity identified, you must also complete details in Sections 1.2-1.9, 2.4-2.7 and 3.3 (where relevant). 1.11 State assessment No Is the action subject to a state or territory environmental X Yes, you must also complete Section 2.5 impact assessment? 1.12 Component of larger action No Is the proposed action a component of a larger action? X Yes, you must also complete Section 2.7 1.13 Related actions/proposals No Is the proposed action related to other actions or proposals in the X Yes, provide details: The project is related to the Harcourt region (if known)? Modernisation Project (Stage 1) which involved constructing pipelines, pump stations, balance storage facilities and associated infrastructure to upgrade the irrigation and raw water supply
001 Referral of proposed action v May 2016 Page 7 of 16 network. This project would deliver water from Sandhurst Reservoir to the Harcourt Modernisation Project.
The Harcourt Modernisation Project was referred to the then Commonwealth Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities (DSEWPAC) under the EPBC Act on 27 July 2011 (reference number 2011/6050). On 23 August 2011 the Acting Secretary of DSEWPAC notified Coliban Water that the Harcourt Modernisation Project is not a controlled action.
1.14 Australian Government X No funding Has the person proposing to Yes, provide details: take the action received any Australian Government grant funding to undertake this project? 1.15 Great Barrier Reef Marine X No Park Yes, you must also complete Section 3.1 (h), 3.2 (e) Is the proposed action inside the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park?
001 Referral of proposed action v May 2016 Page 8 of 16 2 Detailed description of proposed action
2.1 Description of proposed action The Project involves the construction of a new pipeline connecting Bendigo and Castlemaine (Castlemaine Link) via Sandhurst Reservoir and the modernised Harcourt rural water supply network.
The key elements of the Castlemaine Link include:
. A 13km pipeline between the Sandhurst Reservoir and the modernised Harcourt rural water supply network. Ancillary infrastructure will include scour valves, air valves, isolation valves and control valves. . A new pump station – Castlemaine Link pump station (located at Sandhurst Reservoir)
Attachment D contains a complete map series of the preferred construction corridor alignment for the Castlemaine Link Project.
There is an additional 2 km of pipe that is required for project completion. However, this requires upgrades to other infrastructure, which will take some time to develop after the project commences and will therefore not proceed at the same time. A substantial proportion of the benefit of the project can be realised without the immediate construction of this stage of the works.
This section of the project has little potential to significantly impact on a protected matter. With consultation with the Department of Environment, this section of the project will be addressed as a staged development (Stage 3). This is addressed in more detail in Section 2.7.
2.2 Alternatives to taking the proposed action
Numerous options and alternatives have been considered with the intention to minimise potential impacts of this project. Concept investigations and high level option assessments through to functional design refined these options to provide a minimum impact solution. A detailed account of the alternative options is provided in Section 2.3.
Numerous options have been investigated and the concept adopted was to provide a connection from Sandhurst Reservoir ultimately to McCay Reservoir via the modernised Harcourt rural pipeline network. The McCay Reservoir supplies the town of Castlemaine and its connected communities, Chewton, Campbell’s Creek, Maldon, Harcourt, Fryerstown, Guildford, Newstead, Elphinstone and Taradale .
The benefits to be delivered are: Avoidance of high level water restrictions in the southern townships of Castlemaine and Kyneton until at least 2040 Avoidance of significant reduction in annual rural water allocation, of rural water until at least 2040 Ability to maintain all storage levels above 24 months of reserves To meet Victorian Government Statement of Obligations (1.6, 5.1, 6.1, 6.4 and 6.5) To provide additional operational flexibility to overall system operations and to enable the system to be better balanced. To support the socio-economic development of the region
The maintain status quo alternative would involve continuing to rely on the existing water supply system and is unacceptable to Coliban Water because it would not provide for the level of regional water supply security demanded by current and future operating environments. In the event that there are continued below average inflows, the status quo has the potential to result in a critical water shortage that impacts on Castlemaine, Harcourt and Kyneton.
2.3 Alternative locations, time frames or activities that form part of the referred action
The project has evolved through a series of design processes that considered opportunities to minimise potential environmental impacts whilst achieving the functional design requirements. The key stages in the design process are outlined below and demonstrate that alternative alignments have been considered.
001 Referral of proposed action v May 2016 Page 9 of 16 Concept Design Investigation
A concept investigation of options for a new pipeline between the Sandhurst and Barkers Creek Reservoirs was undertaken in 2009 (CH2MHill 2009). Concept designs for alternative pipeline alignments between Sandhurst Reservoir and the Harcourt rural water supply network were developed and included the following options:
Seven alternative pipeline alignment options were evaluated and three pipeline alignment options were identified for further investigation.
A preliminary option was identified at a desktop level which followed the power-line corridor (including through the Greater Bendigo National Park and Bendigo Regional Park), railway easement and Council road reserves. This option was recommended to connect with the pipeline alignment evaluated for the Harcourt Rural Modernisation Project at Johansens Road.
In addition to the base case (i.e. do nothing option), four options have been considered to address the risk to essential water needs for Castlemaine and Kyneton.
The four options considered include:
Option 1: Linking Coliban’s southern supply system to Sandhurst Reservoir (Bendigo) – Option 1a supplies Castlemaine only (preferred short-medium term approach) – Option 1(a+b) supplies Castlemaine and Kyneton (preferred long term approach)
Option 2: Linking Coliban’s southern system to the Ballarat Goldfields Superpipe – Option 2a supplies Castlemaine only – Option 2(a+b) supplies Castlemaine and Kyneton
Option 3: Linking Coliban’s southern system to Melbourne Water’s Supply System – Option 3a supplies Kyneton only – Option 3(a+b) supplies Castlemaine and Kyneton
Option 4: Linking Castlemaine to the Ballarat Goldfields Superpipe and the Kyneton to the Melbourne Water supply system (combination of Option 2a and 3a)
Preferred Option
Option 1 (a + b) to construct a new pipeline between the Sandhurst, Barkers Creek and McCay Reservoirs, with an option to extend further to Kyneton, was identified as a preferred long to medium term option for the following reasons:
. It would provide the full flow rate requirements to enable Coliban Water to eventually move off stringent urban water restrictions, and introduce permanent water savings in the region. A connection to the Ballarat Goldfields Superpipe (Option 2 (a + b)) included capacity constraints which meant that it could provide sufficient flows to meet both Kyneton’s and Castlemaine’s future water demand.
. It would benefit the Harcourt irrigation area. Option 1 (a + b) links the Harcourt district to the Goulburn River system which enables irrigators to have access to water from the Goulburn, Murray and Campaspe river systems and therefore allow them to better manage the business risk associated with low seasonal allocations. This would also potentially reduce the need for the Minister for Water to issue emergency water supply to priority customers when their seasonal allocations are zero.
. It would maximise system flexibility. The pipeline between Sandhurst, Barkers Creek and McCay Reservoirs could transfer water in two directions, either from the Coliban system to the Goulburn system or from the Goulburn system to the Coliban system. This flexibility is needed to ensure that the pipeline can also be utilised during years of moderate inflows. The pipeline’s flexibility contributes to the efficiency of the broader water grid.
001 Referral of proposed action v May 2016 Page 10 of 16 Functional Design Investigation
The concept design for the pipeline between Sandhurst and Harcourt rural water supply network and a new pump station was developed to a functional design stage by SKM1. The functional design process was informed by ‘ground truthing’ including stakeholder consultation with potentially affected landowners, field investigations, desktop specialist investigations (including archaeological / cultural heritage and flora and fauna assessments), and high level discussions with responsible authorities and other statutory stakeholders.
‘Ground truthing’ involved an assessment of a 30 m wide ‘investigation corridor’, excluding adjacent high value areas. Following the quantification of vegetation within the investigation corridor, a ‘construction corridor’ was identified for further investigation and detailed design. The Castlemaine Link construction corridor is up to 20 m wide.
Flora and Fauna Assessments
A number of flora and fauna assessments were carried out during the design phase. These were to determine the values present and to identify ways to reduce the impacts of the project. In summary, the assessments undertaken to date include:
Preliminary flora and terrestrial fauna assessment of proposed alignment options for the Castlemaine Link, Victoria (Biosis Research 2009) Castlemaine Link and Harcourt Modernisation Project Victoria: Flora, Fauna and Habitat Hectares Assessment (Biosis Research 2011, Attachment E). Including targeted surveys for the following significant species: o River Swamp Wallaby-grass Amphibromus fluitans o Golden Sun Moth Synemon plana o Growling Grass Frog Litoria raniformis o Brown Toadlet Pseudophryne bibronii Golden Sun Moth Survey, Ravenswood Run, Ravenswood Vic (Biosis Research 2012, Attachment F)) Castlemaine Link Project: Targeted Surveys for Spiny Rice-flower (Pimelia spinescens subsp. spinescens) (Biosis Research 2015, Attachment G)). Castlemaine Link Project, EPBC Aquatic Fauna Assessment (Biosis Research 2016, Attachment H)). This report included a desktop assessment of: o Murray Cod (Maccullochella peelii) o Macquarie Perch (Macquaria australasica).
Alternative alignment assessments 2015
In 2015 Coliban commissioned GHD to review a number of alternative pipeline options to connect Bendigo to Castlemaine. . It is notable that as a result of this option selection described above, the Harcourt Rural Modernisation Project proceeded, including the construction of the backbone 500mm backbone. The embedded investment associated with project rendered further consideration of the above mentioned alternatives impractical. Nevertheless, several new alternatives were compared to the previous Option 1a alignment. These options considered by GHD were:
Option 1 – “Ravenswood Run” route as per the existing detail design, including: - Ravenswood Run Pipeline - Castlemaine Link Pump Station
Option 5a – Goldfields Superpipe off-take at Hokins Road and existing Sandhurst Pump Station, including: - An upgrade to the existing Sandhurst Pump Station to cater for higher duty. - No pipeline duplication
Option 5b - Goldfields Superpipe off-take at Hokins Road and future Castlemaine Pump Station, including: - Utilising available surplus capacity (when available) from the existing Sandhurst Pump Station - Future CW Sandhurst Pump Station and Superpipe duplication through to the Hokins Road
1 SKM, 2009, Bendigo – Castlemaine Link and Harcourt Modernisation Project: Functional Design Report – Final Rev 1, 16 December 2009
001 Referral of proposed action v May 2016 Page 11 of 16 Option 5c - Goldfields Superpipe off-take at Hokins Road and future Castlemaine Pump Station, including: - Utilising available surplus capacity (when available) from the existing Sandhurst Pump Station - Deferred CW Sandhurst Pump Station and Castlemaine Link from Sandhurst to Hokins Road
Option 6a - Goldfields Superpipe off-take from the power easement and existing Sandhurst Pump Station, including: - An upgrade of the existing Sandhurst Pump Station. - No pipeline duplication
Option 6b – Goldfields Superpipe off-take from the power easement and future Castlemaine Pump Station, including: - Utilising available surplus capacity (when available) from the existing Sandhurst Pump Station - Deferred Castlemaine Pump Station and pipeline duplication through to the Superpipe off-take None of these alternative were adopted.
Alternative alignment assessments 2016
The design of the Castlemaine Link between Sandhurst Reservoir and Johansens Road, Harcourt was reviewed following Coliban Water’s decision in 2016 to recommence the project. This design review identified a number of issues with the alignment detailed in the 2011 referral and alternatives were investigated in two sections of the pipeline. The alternative alignments investigated were:
. At Sandhurst Reservoir (GHD 2016a, Attachment I) - The original alignment traversed a section of the Sandhurst Reservoir Water Treatment Plant site that was undeveloped at that time. Since 2011, infrastructure has been built along the existing alignment which means that it is no longer possible to construct a pipeline along this alignment. Two alternative alignments have been identified in this area. . Private property (GHD 2016b, Attachment J) - Coliban Water consulted with landholders along the original alignment and this process identified that the original alignment would be located across the middle of a paddock that was of high value to the land owner. An alternative alignment closer to the boundary fence was identified that minimised impacts on the paddock and satisfied the land owner’s concerns (approximate CH 13600 to CH14600).
During the flora and fauna assessment of these alternative alignments, impacts to protected matters were taken into consideration and compared to the original alignment options.
Attachment I Castlemaine Link - Sandhurst Reservoir Alignment Options, Flora and Fauna Assessment Attachment J Castlemaine Link - Alternative Alignment Options, Flora and Fauna Assessment
Assessment of proposed access tracks and turnaround areas 2016
Three proposed access tracks and two turnaround areas were investigated with desktop and site assessments (GHD 2016c, Attachment K). These are required for construction only and not the operational phase. The access tracks investigated utilise existing tracks/roads until in the paddocks to the alignment. These access tracks, and specifically the turn around points enable the reduction of the alignment through the known and likely Golden Sun Moth habitat. One access track will not be utilised as it impacts additional Golden Sun Moth habitat.
Attachment K Castlemaine Link – Access Tracks, Flora and Fauna Assessment
Alternative timeframes
The Castlemaine Link Project was originally referred to DSEWPAC on 7 July 2011 (reference number 2011/6044) and on 17 August 2011 the Assistant Secretary advised Coliban Water that it was a controlled action that requires assessment and approval by the Minister for SEWPAC before it can proceed.
Section 1.8 indicates that the project is proposed to be implemented in response to continued below average inflows to water storages, and the timeframe for it’s implementation is influenced by storage volumes. The project was not constructed following DSEWPAC’s decision in 2011 because rainfall in 2012 increased storage levels sufficiently to enable the project to be deferred. On 25 June 2012 Coliban Water notified DSEWPAC that
001 Referral of proposed action v May 2016 Page 12 of 16 it no longer proposed to proceed with the action set out in the referral (2011/6044) and therefore withdrew the referral.
Below average inflows in 2013 – 2016 depleted storage levels to the extent that Coliban Water has decided to proceed with the Castlemaine Link project.
2.4 Context, planning framework and state/local government requirements
Planning and Environment Act 1987 In Victoria, land use planning and development, including native vegetation removal, is managed under the Planning and Environment Act 1987 which is implemented through municipal planning schemes which are translated for each local government area (LGA). Under the Victorian planning system, each planning scheme contains State and local planning policy provisions as well as zone, overlay and other particular provisions that control the use and development of land.
The project will cross land through two municipalities — the City of Greater Bendigo and Mount Alexander Shire. These Councils govern land use and development in their municipality in accordance with the Greater Bendigo and Mount Alexander Planning Schemes.
In applying the planning schemes to the project, the most appropriate or ‘best fit’ land use terms and definitions for each component of the project are contained in the table below.
Table 1 – Land Use Terms and Definitions
Land Use Term Component Land Use Definition (Clause 74)) Pipeline Minor Utility Land used for a utility installation comprising: Power Lines Installation sewerage or water mains power lines designed to operate at less than 220,000 volts. Pump Station Utility Installation Land used: Balance Storage to collect, treat, transmit, store, or distribute water Facility Native Native Vegetation Plants that are indigenous to Victoria, including trees, shrubs, Vegetation herbs, and grasses.
In consultation with DELWP and both Councils, it has been determined that a planning scheme amendment facilitated by the Minister for Planning under Section 20(4) of the Planning and Environment Act 1987 will provide the most appropriate and comprehensive planning approval mechanism for the project. Support for this mechanism includes:
. The process will allow for a timely decision on a regionally significant water infrastructure project. . The potential impacts are known and the views of affected parties have been appropriately considered. . The matter is unlikely to be resolved in a timely manner by the planning processes normally available. . The processes minimise resource and administrative costs with the Minister for Planning as the planning authority.
The planning scheme amendment seeks to:
. Amend the Schedule to Clause 52.03 (Specific Sites and Exclusions) and Clause 81.01 (Documents Incorporated in this Scheme) of the Greater Bendigo and Mount Alexander Planning Schemes to include an Incorporated Document titled ‘Castlemaine Link Stage 2 Project Incorporated Document’.
The amendment will allow the use and development of land identified in the Incorporated Document for the purposes of the project without the need to obtain planning permits or to otherwise comply with the Greater Bendigo and Mount Alexander Planning Schemes.
001 Referral of proposed action v May 2016 Page 13 of 16 2.5 Environmental impact assessments under Commonwealth, state or territory legislation
Commonwealth Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999
The Castlemaine Link Harcourt Modernisation was initially referred as an entire project in April 2011. The Department of Environment advised Coliban Water to spilt the project and refer it as a staged development because the Harcourt Modernisation Project (Stage 1) would not have significant impacts on any protected matters, but the Castlemaine Link Project was expected to impact on protected matters (more details in Section 2.7). The Harcourt Modernisation Project was re-referred in July 2011 (referral EPBC 2011/6050) and was deemed not a controlled action (refer to section 1.13).
The Castlemaine Link Project was separately referred to the Department of the Environment in July 2011, with a response received on the 17/08/2011 (EPBC 2011/6044) determining that the project is a ‘controlled action’ due to the likelihood of a significant impact on listed threatened species and communities (sections 18 and 18A). Specifically, the proposed action was likely to have a significant impact on the Golden Sun Moth (Synemon plana). As indicated in section 2.3, Coliban Water notified DSEWPAC on 25 June 2012 that it no longer proposed to proceed with the action set out in the referral (2011/6044) and therefore withdrew the referral.
In the decisions on the referral for the Castlemaine Link project, DSEWPAC advised that the project would need to be assessed through preliminary documentation. A request for further information was outlined in DSEWPAC’s decision on the referral for the Castlemaine Link Project, including:
For the Golden Sun Moth: . Quantification of impact to Golden Sun Moth; . Proposed measures to reduce impact to GSM/compensatory measures such as offsets; . Justification that proposed offset will adequately compensate impacts to GSM; . Information on legal mechanisms, levels of protection and tenure afforded to offset to ensure perpetuity; . Details of offset management plan; . If applicable, information on indirect offsets;
For other matters: . Aquatic surveys to be conducted for Murray Cod (Maccullochella peellii) and Macquarie Perch (Macquaria australasica); . Targeted surveys to be undertaken for Spiny Rice-flower (Pimelea spinescens subsp. spinescens).
All of the above actions have since been undertaken and the additional information is detailed in the following documents: Castlemaine Link and Harcourt Modernisation Project Victoria: Flora, Fauna and Habitat Hectares Assessment (Biosis Research 2011) – Attachment E; Golden Sun Moth Survey, Ravenswood Run, Ravenswood, Victoria (Biosis Research 2012) – Attachment F; Castlemaine Link Project: Targeted Surveys for Spiny Rice-flower (Biosis Research 2015) – Attachment G; Castlemaine Link Project: EPBC Aquatic Fauna Assessment (Biosis 2016) – Attachment H;
Victorian Environmental Effects Act 1978
In 2011, the project was referred to the Minister for Planning under the Environment Effects Act 1978 (EE Act) for an assessment on whether an Environment Effects Statement (EES) was required. A referral was triggered via criteria in relation to potential significant impacts on habitat for the Golden Sun Moth (listed on the Flora and Fauna Guarantee Act 1988) and Aboriginal cultural heritage within the preferred pipeline alignment corridors (Referral number 2011R-05). The project was deemed not to require an EES, subject to a number of conditions. The Notice of Decision under Environmental Effects Act 1978 was received on 20 June 2011. The response supplied can be seen in Attachment L.
001 Referral of proposed action v May 2016 Page 14 of 16 The conditions are as follows: (i) Coliban Region Water Corporation (the proponent) must prepare an assessment report, in consultation with the Department of Sustainability and Environment (DSE), that:
documents existing habitat values for Golden Sun Moth and Brush-tailed Phascogale; describes the occurrence and implications of threatening processes listed under the Flora and Fauna Guarantee Act 1988;
documents opportunities for avoidance of habitat for Golden Sun Moth and Brush-tailed Phascogale;
specifies any proposed adjustments to works and related mitigation measures from the description provided in the referral that could reduce impacts on Golden Sun Moth and Brush- tailed Phascogale; and
describes the likely residual effects on Golden Sun Moth and Brush-tailed Phascogale.
(ii) The proponent must prepare a threatened fauna management plan, in consultation with the DSE, with respect to Golden Sun Moth and Brush-tailed Phascogale, including intended measures to address outcomes of the assessment report required under Condition (i), to the satisfaction of the Minister for Environment and Climate Change. (iii) Prior to the removal of any native vegetation, the proponent must prepare a native vegetation offset management plan in accordance with Victoria’s Native Vegetation Framework – A Framework for Action (2002), to the satisfaction of the Minister for Environment and Climate Change.
(iv) The proponent is to provide copies of final versions of the assessment report, threatened fauna management plan and native vegetation offset management plan to the Minister of Planning.
The conditions have been met for Stage 1 of the project (Harcourt Rural Modernisation), and construction of that stage of the project is in the final stages. Copies of the documents for Stage 1 can be supplied on request. No conditions have yet been met for the Castlemaine Link Project. The following documents will be submitted to address these conditions: Castlemaine Link Stage 2 Draft Threatened Fauna Management Plan (GHD 2016d) – Attachment M; Castlemaine Link Stage 2 Draft Assessment Report (GHD 2016e) – Attachment N;
As indicated in section 2.4, the project has been refined to include alternative pipeline alignments at the Sandhurst Reservoir, within private property approximate CH 13600 to CH14600, and to include additional access tracks. The Department of Environment, Land, Water and Planning (DELWP) was consulted in 2016 because these alternatives were not considered in the referral submitted under the Environmental Effects Act 1978 in 2011. DELWP advised that the project does not need to be re-referred under the Environmental Effects Act 1978 provided the alternatives would not result in any significant impacts. The project has not been re- referred because environmental investigations undertaken in 2016 indicate that the alternatives would not result in significant impacts.
Bilateral Agreement
In 2014, a Bilateral Agreement was made between the Commonwealth of Australia and the State of Victoria relating to environmental assessment. This agreement allows the Commonwealth Minister for the Environment to rely on specified environmental impact assessment processes of the Victorian Government in assessing actions under the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999.
DELWP has advised Coliban Water that the Castlemaine Link Project is a candidate for assessment under the Bilateral Agreement. The Department of Environment will notify DELWP if the project is a controlled action and DELWP will then determine if the Bilateral Agreement is to be applied.
001 Referral of proposed action v May 2016 Page 15 of 16 Other legislation
In addition to the above mentioned legislation, the following state legislation is also relevant to the project:
. Planning and Environment Act 1987 . Aboriginal Heritage Act 2008 . Traditional Owner Setlement Act 2010 . Native Title Act 1993 . Land User Activity Agreement . Flora and Fauna Guarantee Act 1988 . Wildlife Act 1975 and associated Regulations . Water Act 1989 . Environment Protection Act 1970: State Environmental Protection Policy (Waters of Victoria) 2003 . National Parks Act 1975
2.6 Public consultation (including with Indigenous stakeholders)
Coliban Water has developed a Southern Water Security Engangement Plan. This is still in draft form, but can be provided on request. Below is a summary of the public consultation actions.
Landowners
There are three landowners in the northern section of the alignment between Sandhurst Reservoir and Johansens Road in Harcourt which is where the Harcourt system commences.
We have had recent interactions with these landowners including - letters, emails, phone calls and/or onsite face to face meetings.
The things discussed or covered were:
land access for investigation purposes suggested changes to the alignment on one property construction methodologies and reinstatement processes timing of construction activity and easement acquisition
All of these have been addressed through onsite meetings on conversations with the relevant landowners, by providing additional information or undertaking to carry out further investigations.
Business/Community
The Harcourt Water Services Committee was formed in 2008 to act as a conduit between Coliban Water and the local community. The committee is made up of nine local land owners and they have been required to provide feedback and recommendations to the project team and Coliban Board of Directors regarding the Harcourt Modernisation project. Since its inception the committee has met on numerous occasions.
Coliban Water met with the Harcourt Fruit Growers Association in April and June 2016 to discuss seasonal outlooks for 2016/17 rural supply season. On both occasions they asked about the timing of the Castlemaine Link Project. As a group they understand the benefits that the connection will provide to their members from a rural water security perspective and they are fully supportive of the project. As community members they are also aware of the benefits that the project would provide to the urban towns and communities and that water security is critical to their growth and prosperity. The community supports the project being implemented within the next 12 – 24 months.
Coliban Water met with the Harcourt Progress Association in July 2015 to provide an update on the Harcourt Rural Modernisation Project. After the update, the community representatives asked questions about the status and timing of the Castlemaine Link Project. The Progress Association supports the delivery of both projects. Coliban Water committed to providing them with further updates regarding the Harcourt project, and news of any further plans for the commencement of the Castlemaine Link Project. Subsequently Coliban Water have provided regular Harcourt project updates to progress association members.
001 Referral of proposed action v May 2016 Page 16 of 16 Councils
In the first half of 2016, Coliban Water spoke to both planning departments at the City of Greater Bendigo and Mount Alexander Shire Councils about revisiting the planning and approvals for the Castlemaine Link Project. The councils did not raise any concerns and support Coliban Water pursuing a planning scheme amendment for the project.
Dja Dja Wurrung Clans
The Dja Dja Wurrung Clans Aboriginal Corporation is the Registered Aboriginal Party (RAP) for the Activity Area. The stages of assessment and investigation have been undertaken in consultation with, and with the participation of, the Dja Dja Wurrung Clans Aboriginal Corporation. Further liaison with the Dja Dja Wurrung Clans Aboriginal Corporation will be required under the Land Use Activity Agreement, which is part of the Recognition and Settlement Agreement under s 4 of the Traditional Owner Settlement Act 2010 (Vic).
2.7 A staged development or component of a larger project The Castlemaine Link Harcourt Modernisation Project is a staged project that aims to provide approximately 35 km of pipeline infrastructure in central Victoria, between Sandhurst Reservoir and Barkers Creek Reservoir, and Barkers Creek Reservoir to McCay Reservoir with approximately 50 km of reticulated pipelines in the Harcourt rural area. Stage 1 comprises the Harcourt Rural Modernisation Project and Stage 2 the Castlemaine Link Project. Stage 3 is the final 2 km of pipe that is required for project completion. However, this section does not have the urgency of the remainder of the project, requires upgrades to other infrastructure, and is not at the functional design stage. Each stage was to be undertaken with separate project schedules, the first (Harcourt Modernisation) was completed in 2016. The timing of the second stage (Castlemaine Link) is subject to per-determined triggers. These were reached in June 2016 but subsequent rains and substantial increase in storages is not now proposed for construction in 2017. While all stages of the project are described briefly below, this referral relates to Stage 2 Castlemaine Link Project only. Stage 1 Harcourt Modernisation Stage 1 of the project, the Harcourt Modernisation is now complete. It involved the upgrading of the open concrete and earthen rural irrigation water supply channel system for the Harcourt agricultural area. The project involved the construction of a pipeline between Barkers Creek Reservoir and the Coliban Main Channel at Faraday with reticulation feeds in the Harcourt rural area.
As discussed in Section 2.5, an EPBC referral was submitted for the Harcourt Modernisation Project in July 2011(EPBC 2011/6050), with a response indicating that the project is not a controlled action and did not require approval under the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999.
The Golden Sun Moth habitat that was identified within the area of Stage 1 has been totally avoided. This was achieved by: . Moving pipeline alignments . Boring under areas of habitat
Stage 2 Castlemaine Link Stage 2 of the project, the Castlemaine Link Project, is the focus of this referral. This stage of the project is the interconnection of the raw water supply between Bendigo and Castlemaine, Harcourt and surrounds to improve security of supply to the region.
The Castlemaine Link commences at Sandhurst Reservoir approximately 10 km south of Bendigo in central Victoria. It heads south through a cleared corridor occupied by other utilities within the Greater Bendigo
001 Referral of proposed action v May 2016 Page 17 of 16 National Park and Bendigo Regional Park, and then crosses public and private land. It then connects to the Harcourt rural water supply network at Johansens Road, Harcourt North.
At the time of the initial referral (2011), it was expected that the Castlemaine Link Project would form part of a future water planning period (the 5-year capital planning endorsed by the Essential Services Commission in Victoria). It was expected that at the earliest it would not commence until the 2013/14 financial year depending on the levels of water security at the time. Stage 3 Southern connection to Poverty Gully Channel As discussed in Section 2.1, about 2 km of pipeline from the Faraday Pump Station to the Poverty Gully Channel that needs to be delivered to complete the overall project. This section of pipeline is not proposed to be constructed until 2019 at the earliest. Additional engineering and environmental investigations, along with stakeholder consultation, is required to confirm the preferred alignment for this section of pipeline. As such, it is not considered in this referral.
It is considered unlikely that this section of pipeline would have a significant impact on a protected matter (Attachment J, Chapter 3). Subject to the outcome of further investigations, under the self-assessment process, it may be determined that this stage of the project does not require a referral or formal assessment and approval under the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999.
001 Referral of proposed action v May 2016 Page 18 of 16 3 Description of environment & likely impacts
3.1 Matters of national environmental significance
The proposed pipeline alignment has been designed to avoid and minimise impacts to native vegetation and fauna habitat. For much of its length, the project area (approximately 20 m wide construction corridor) traverses pasture and other areas of predominantly introduced vegetation. However, the investigation corridor traverses some areas of native vegetation and areas of scattered remnant trees and based on the current construction footprint, approximately 2.7 ha of native vegetation (see Table 2) and 49 scattered trees are proposed to be impacted. The scattered trees range in size class and will either be directly removed or indirectly impacted through encroachment of greater than 10% of their Tree Protection Zone (TPZ).
Table 2 – Total Area of remnant vegetation proposed to be impacted during the construction of the Castlemaine Link Project Total Area EVC (ha) 20 Heathy Dry Forest 1.014 22 Grassy Dry Forest 0.037 61 Box Ironbark Forest 0.243 175_62 Granitic Grassy Woodland 1.362 TOTAL 2.655
The project area has been subject to several ecological assessments to determine the values present and to identify ways to reduce the impacts of the project. In summary, the assessments undertaken to date include:
Preliminary flora and terrestrial fauna assessment of proposed alignment options for the Castlemaine Link, Victoria (Biosis Research 2009) Castlemaine Link and Harcourt Modernisation Project Victoria: Flora, Fauna and Habitat Hectares Assessment (Biosis Research 2011 – Attachment E). Including targeted surveys for the following significant species: o River Swamp Wallaby-grass Amphibromus fluitans o Golden Sun Moth Synemon plana o Growling Grass Frog Litoria raniformis o Brown Toadlet Pseudophryne bibronii Golden Sun Moth Survey, Ravenswood Run, Ravenswood Vic (Biosis Research 2012 Attachment F)) Castlemaine Link Project: Targeted Surveys for Spiny Rice-flower (Pimelia spinescens subsp. spinescens) (Biosis 2015 Attachment G)). Castlemaine Link Project, EPBC Aquatic Fauna Assessment (Biosis Research 2016 Attachment H)). This report included a desktop assessment of: o Murray Cod (Maccullochella peelii) o Macquarie Perch (Macquaria australasica). Castlemaine Link - Sandhurst Reservoir Alignment Options, Flora and Fauna Asssessment (GHD 2016a, Attachment I) Castlemaine Link - Alternative Alignment Options, Flora and Fauna Assessment (GHD 2016b, Attachment J) Castlemaine Link– Access Tracks, Flora and Fauna Assessment (GHD 2016c, Attachment K)
As part of the ecological assessments, information in regard to flora and fauna of the local area was supplemented with information from relevant databases. Database searches typically encompassed the area within 5 km or 10 km (depending on the information required for particular assessments) of the respective investigation areas/corridors. For all assessments, the following databases were reviewed:
Victorian Biodiversity Atlas (VBA) (records compiled and managed by DELWP). Last accessed by GHD in July 2016; and Department of the Environment (DotE) Protected Matters Search Tool (PMST), which lists species and communities listed under the EPBC Act 1999 known or predicted to occur within a specified search area. Last accessed by GHD on 13 July 2016.
001 Referral of proposed action v May 2016 Page 19 of 16 The results of the flora and fauna assessments, including the targeted surveys, are detailed in the ecological assessment and accompanying targeted survey reports. These assessments form the basis of the information provided in Section 3.1 below.
3.1 (a) World Heritage Properties Description The PMST reports identified no World Heritage Properties within the search area. Nature and extent of likely impact Not applicable.
3.1 (b) National Heritage Places Description The PMST reports identified no National Heritage Places within the search area. Nature and extent of likely impact Not applicable.
3.1 (c) Wetlands of International Importance (declared Ramsar wetlands) Description A PMST search (conducted by GHD on 13 July 2016) for sections of the project area identified seven Ramsar wetlands that are downstream of the project area: Banrock Station Wetland Complex - 400 – 500 km downstream Gunbower Forest - 50 – 100 km downstream Hattah-Kulkyne Lakes - 200 – 300 km downstream Kerang Wetlands - 100 – 150 km downstream NSW Central Murray State Forests - 50 – 100 km downstream Riverland - 400 – 500 km downstream The Coorong, and Lakes Alexandrina and Albert Wetland - 300 – 400 km downstream
Nature and extent of likely impact The waterways traversed by the construction corridor do not drain directly into any of these Ramsar wetlands, and are large distances upstream from the Ramsar site boundaries. Management measures would be implemented to minimise the potential for water quality in these waterways to be impacted by construction activities. The proposed action is not expected to have a direct or indirect impact on any declared Ramsar wetlands.
3.1 (d) Listed threatened species and ecological communities Description The assessment reports identified above in Section 3.1 were used to compile a list of EPBC Act-listed ecological values relevant to the project. The area being considered as the Castlemaine Link Project Area includes areas that have been assessed by GHD in 2016 as well as some areas originally assessed as a part of the Harcourt Modernisation Project Area by Biosis in 2011 and 2015. The main sources of information were the Biosis (2011) report, which pertained to the broader Harcourt Modernisation Project Area, and three recent (2016) flora and fauna assessments pertaining to the Castlemaine Link project.
The values for significant species and communities from these reports are presented below as relates to the Castlemaine Link Project Area only.
Flora Fifteen EPBC Act-listed flora species were identified during the desktop components of the three GHD ecology assessments undertaken for the Castlemaine Link Project Area (GHD 2016a, 2016b, 2016c). One additional species was identified during the desktop phase of the Harcourt Modernisation Project that was not identified during the PMST searches undertaken in 2016, but has also been considered for the project (see Table 3). There are VBA records of three of those species as having been recorded within 5 km of the Castlemaine Link Project Area.
001 Referral of proposed action v May 2016 Page 20 of 16 The likelihood of occurrence for each of these species as determined by Biosis (2011) for the Harcourt Modernisation Area as well as within the Castlemaine Link Project Area is outlined below in Table 3. One category of likelihood is assigned to each threatened species according to the following criteria: High - species was recorded within the study site or is considered likely to be found within study site; Moderate – suitable habitat occurs within the study site and species’ known range encompasses the study site. Generally, there are historical records within 5 km of the study site, and generally within the last 20 years though there may be exceptions to this with explanation. Low – species’ known range encompasses the study site, but suitable habitat does not occur within study site, or occurs within study site but with generally low quality and quantity. Unless otherwise specified, the species has been recorded historically within 5 km of the study site, but generally not within the last 20 years.
001 Referral of proposed action v May 2016 Page 21 of 16 Table 3 – Likelihood of Occurrence of EPBC-listed flora species recorded or predicted to occur within 5 km of the Castlemaine Link Project area Likelihood of occurrence for VBA Record Harcourt within 5 km of Modernisation Likelihood of Castlemaine Area occurrence for Link Project (determinations Castlemaine Link Scientific name Common name EPBC status Source Habitat Description Area? from Biosis 2011) Project Area Amphibromus fluitans River Swamp Vulnerable PMST 2016 This species mainly occurs No records Biosis (2011) Low Likelihood. Wallaby-grass in permanent swamps concluded a There are no principally along the medium records on the VBA Murray River Between likelihood for the for this species Wodonga and Echuca; it is entire Harcourt within 5 km of the uncommon to rare in the Modernisation Castlemaine Link south probably due to project area. Project Area and alteration of habitat (Walsh no suitable habitat and Entwisle 1994). was identified during the field assessment. Ballantinia antipoda Southern Shepherd's Endangered Biosis 2011 This species is endemic to Yes - most Biosis (2011) Low Likelihood. Purse south-eastern Australia, recently in 2003 reported VBA The species was where it once occurred in records and not identified by a central and western concluded a low PMST search for Victoria, in the Victorian likelihood for the the Castlemaine Volcanic Plains and entire Harcourt Link project area Victorian Midlands Modernisation and the closest bioregions. It was project area. VBA records are presumed existint but is from the Harcourt now known to occur in ten Area (in the Mount small populations within Alexander Regional the Mount Alexander Park). Regional Park (Nevill and Camilleri 2010).
001 Referral of proposed action v May 2016 Page 1 of 16 Likelihood of occurrence for VBA Record Harcourt within 5 km of Modernisation Likelihood of Castlemaine Area occurrence for Link Project (determinations Castlemaine Link Scientific name Common name EPBC status Source Habitat Description Area? from Biosis 2011) Project Area Caladenia audasii McIvor Spider-orchid Endangered PMST Occurs in open forests and Yes - most Biosis (2011) Moderate 2016, woodlands on shallow, recently in 2010 reported no VBA Likelihood. VBA gravelly clay loams records and There are VBA (Backhouse and Jeanes concluded a low records within 5 1995). likelihood for the km of the northern entire Harcourt section of the Modernisation Castlemaine Link project area. project area and some potential habitat was identified within the Sandhurst Reservoir Area section of the alignment within areas mapped as Box Ironbark Forest (EVC 61) only. However there is a low likelihood that this species would occur within the majority of the project area, in any other areas of native or non- native vegetation.
001 Referral of proposed action v May 2016 Page 2 of 16 Likelihood of occurrence for VBA Record Harcourt within 5 km of Modernisation Likelihood of Castlemaine Area occurrence for Link Project (determinations Castlemaine Link Scientific name Common name EPBC status Source Habitat Description Area? from Biosis 2011) Project Area Caladenia concolor Crimson Spider- Vulnerable PMST 2016 Found in open forests and No records Not assessed for Moderate orchid woodlands, often among the Harcourt Likelihood. low, heathy shrubs. Soils Modernisation There are no VBA are generally sand and clay Area. records within 5 loams that are often km of the gravelly or stony and Castlemaine Link always well drained project area, (Backhouse and Jeanes however some 1995). potential habitat was identified within the Sandhurst Reservoir Area section of the alignment within areas mapped as Box Ironbark Forest (EVC 61) only. However there is a low likelihood that this species would occur within the majority of the project area, in any other areas of native or non- native vegetation.
001 Referral of proposed action v May 2016 Page 3 of 16 Likelihood of occurrence for VBA Record Harcourt within 5 km of Modernisation Likelihood of Castlemaine Area occurrence for Link Project (determinations Castlemaine Link Scientific name Common name EPBC status Source Habitat Description Area? from Biosis 2011) Project Area Caladenia formosa Elegant Spider- Vulnerable PMST 2016 Currently known only from No records Not assessed for Low Likelihood. orchid a few endemic sites in the the Harcourt There are no South West region. Grows Modernisation records on the VBA on heathy woodland and Area. for this species woodlands on well-drained within 5km of the sandy soils and clay loams Castlemaine Link (Backhouse & Jeanes 1995) Project Area and no suitable habitat was identified during the field assessment. Caladenia tensa Greencomb Spider- Endangered PMST 2016 Found in woodlands No records Not assessed for Low Likelihood. orchid dominated by Eucalyptus the Harcourt There are no leucoxylon (Yellow Gum) Modernisation records on the VBA and Callitris preissii Area. for this species (Slender Cypress Pine) on within 5 km of the well-drained, reddish sandy Castlemaine Link loams (Backhouse and Project Area and Jeanes 1995). no suitable habitat was identified during the field assessment. Caladenia versicolor Candy Spider-orchid Vulnerable PMST 2016 Found mainly in woodlands No records Not assessed for Low Likelihood. dominated by Eucalyptus the Harcourt There are no leucoxylon (Yellow Gum), Modernisation records on the VBA on seasonally inundated Area. for this species sandy loams (Backhouse within 5 km of the and Jeanes 1995). Castlemaine Link Project Area and
001 Referral of proposed action v May 2016 Page 4 of 16 Likelihood of occurrence for VBA Record Harcourt within 5 km of Modernisation Likelihood of Castlemaine Area occurrence for Link Project (determinations Castlemaine Link Scientific name Common name EPBC status Source Habitat Description Area? from Biosis 2011) Project Area no suitable habitat was identified during the field assessment.
Dianella amoena Matted Flax-lily Endangered PMST Grasslands and grassy No records Biosis (2011) Moderate 2016; woodlands (Walsh & reported VBA Likelihood. Biosis 2011 Entwisle 1994). records from There are no VBA within the records within 5 Harcourt km of the Modernisation Castlemaine Link area (most project area, recently 2005) however some and concluded a potential habitat medium was identified in likelihood for the areas of Grassy entire Harcourt Woodland within Modernisation the project area. project area. While these areas are disturbed, this species is known to occur in areas of modified and degraded habitat.
001 Referral of proposed action v May 2016 Page 5 of 16 Likelihood of occurrence for VBA Record Harcourt within 5 km of Modernisation Likelihood of Castlemaine Area occurrence for Link Project (determinations Castlemaine Link Scientific name Common name EPBC status Source Habitat Description Area? from Biosis 2011) Project Area Dodonaea Trailing Hop-bush Vulnerable PMST 2016 Largely confined in Victoria No records Not assessed for Low Likelihood. procumbens to the south-west, with the Harcourt There are no disjunct occurrences near Modernisation records on the VBA Castlemaine, Skipton and Area. for this species Puckapunyal. Grows in low- within 5 km of the lying often winter wet Castlemaine Link areas in woodland, low Project Area and open-forest and grasslands no suitable habitat on sands and clays (Walsh was identified & Entwisle 1996). during the field assessment. Eucalyptus aggregata Black Gum Vulnerable PMST 2016 Very restricted in Victoria No records Not assessed for Low Likelihood. to the Woodend - Gisborne the Harcourt There are no region (Walsh & Entwisle Modernisation records on the VBA 1996). Area. for this species within 5 km of the Castlemaine Link Project Area and this species has a very limited distribution range that falls outside of the project area. Glycine latrobeana Clover Glycine Vulnerable PMST Widespread but of No records Biosis (2011) Low Likelihood. 2016; sporadic occurrence and reported VBA There are no Biosis 2011 rarely encountered. Grows records and records on the VBA mainly in grasslands and concluded a low for this species grassy woodlands. (Walsh likelihood for the within 5 km of the and Entwisle 1996). entire Harcourt Castlemaine Link
001 Referral of proposed action v May 2016 Page 6 of 16 Likelihood of occurrence for VBA Record Harcourt within 5 km of Modernisation Likelihood of Castlemaine Area occurrence for Link Project (determinations Castlemaine Link Scientific name Common name EPBC status Source Habitat Description Area? from Biosis 2011) Project Area Modernisation Project Area and project area. no suitable habitat was identified during the field assessment as the Grassy Woodland identified within the project area had a highly modified understorey with a history of grazing and other disturbance and is unlikely to support Clover Glycine. Leucochrysum albicans Grassland Paper Endangered PMST 2016 Very rare in Victoria, the No records Not assessed for Low Likelihood. subsp. albicans var. Daisy only collections are from the Harcourt There are no tricolor roadside verges near Modernisation records on the VBA Wickliffe, Willaura, Area. for this species Streatham, Inverleigh and within 5km of the Creswick. All other Castlemaine Link collections at MEL were Project Area and gathered last century, from no suitable habitat Mt Cole, the Grampians was identified and the Port Fairy district during the field (Walsh and Entwistle assessment. 1999).
001 Referral of proposed action v May 2016 Page 7 of 16 Likelihood of occurrence for VBA Record Harcourt within 5 km of Modernisation Likelihood of Castlemaine Area occurrence for Link Project (determinations Castlemaine Link Scientific name Common name EPBC status Source Habitat Description Area? from Biosis 2011) Project Area Pimelea spinescens Spiny Rice-flower Critically PMST Grows in grassland or open No records No VBA records Low Likelihood. subsp. spinescens Endangered 2016; shrubland on basalt- within 5 km of There are no Biosis 2011 derived soils west of the entire records on the VBA Melbourne (Walsh and Harcourt for this species Entwisle 1999). Modernisation within 5 km of the project area. Castlemaine Link Targeted survey Project Area and undertaken no suitable habitat (Biosis 2011), but was identified species not during the field detected. assessment. Prasophyllum frenchii Maroon Leek-orchid Endangered PMST 2016 Widespread across No records Not assessed for Low Likelihood. southern Victoria but of the Harcourt There are no disjunct occurrence. Found Modernisation records on the VBA mostly in grasslands, Area. for this species heathlands and grassy within 5 km of the woodlands on moderately Castlemaine Link rich sandy and black clay Project Area and loams (Backhouse and no suitable habitat Jeanes 1995). was identified during the field assessment as the Grassy Woodland identified within the project area had a highly modified understorey with a history of grazing
001 Referral of proposed action v May 2016 Page 8 of 16 Likelihood of occurrence for VBA Record Harcourt within 5 km of Modernisation Likelihood of Castlemaine Area occurrence for Link Project (determinations Castlemaine Link Scientific name Common name EPBC status Source Habitat Description Area? from Biosis 2011) Project Area and other disturbance and is unlikely to support Maroon eek- orchid.
Senecio macrocarpus Large-headed Vulnerable Biosis 2011 Largely confined to Yes - most Biosis (2011) Low Likelihood. Fireweed Themeda grasslands on recently in 1998 reported VBA There are records loamy clay soils derived records and on the VBA for this from basalt near concluded a low species within 5km Melbourne, west to likelihood for the of the Castlemaine Skipton area. Also known entire Harcourt Link Project Area, from auriferous ground Modernisation however no near Stawell (Walsh and project area. suitable habitat Entwisle 1999). was identified during the field assessment. Thelymitra matthewsii Spiral Sun-orchid Vulnerable PMST 2016 Scattered sporadically No records Not assessed for Low Likelihood. across southern Victoria the Harcourt There are no and extending as far inland Modernisation records on the VBA as the northern Grampians. Area. for this species Favours open forests and within 5 km of the woodlands, where it is Castlemaine Link found in well-drained sand Project Area. and clay loams. Grows best in areas where there has been soil disturbance, for example around old
001 Referral of proposed action v May 2016 Page 9 of 16 Likelihood of occurrence for VBA Record Harcourt within 5 km of Modernisation Likelihood of Castlemaine Area occurrence for Link Project (determinations Castlemaine Link Scientific name Common name EPBC status Source Habitat Description Area? from Biosis 2011) Project Area quarries and gravel pits, and on road verges, disused tracks or animal trails (Backhouse & Jeanes 1995).
001 Referral of proposed action v May 2016 Page 10 of 16 Fauna
Eighteen EPBC Act-listed fauna species (five mammals, six birds, two reptiles, one frog, three fish and one invertebrate) were identified (Table 4). There are VBA records of ten of those within five kilometres of the project area. Most of the identified fauna species are unlikely to occur within the project area due to the absence of suitable habitat, or the degraded condition of the habitats that do occur.
Two of the fauna species were observed during site assessments (Biosis 2011): Grey-headed Flying-fox and Golden Sun Moth (Synemon plana). Another two species have a high likelihood (Swift Parrot, Lathamus discolor) or medium likelihood (Painted Honeyeater, Grantiella picta) of occurrence within habitats in the project area. One additional species (Growling Grass Frog, Litoria raniformis) has been the subject of targeted surveys in the area (as reported in Biosis 2011). All five of these species are discussed below, along with the two fish species assessed by Biosis (2016).
Table 4 – EPBC-listed fauna species recorded or predicted to occur within 5 km of the project area from 2016 assessments by GHD and Biosis Research, and the Biosis Research 2011 report.
Scientific name Common name EPBC Source Most recent Likelihood of occurrence status record in investigation corridor (VBA) MAMMALS Dasyurus maculatus Spot-tailed Quoll EN Biosis none Low. 2011 No VBA records within 5 km of the entire Harcourt Modernisation project area, including the Castlemaine Link project area. Species not identified by the 2016 PMST search for Castlemaine Link area. Miniopterus Common Bent-wing CR Biosis none Low. schreibersii bassanii Bat (southern 2011 No VBA records within 5 subspecies) km of the entire Harcourt Modernisation project area, including the Castlemaine Link project area. Species not identified by the 2016 PMST search for Castlemaine Link area. Pteropus Grey-headed VU PMST; 2009 Present. poliocephalus Flying-fox VBA; Observed by Biosis (2011) Biosis within the Castlemaine 2011 Link project area, but presence of species considered uncommon in this area. Previous VBA record from 1964 (from Biosis 2011). Discussed in more detail below. Petauroides volans Greater Glider VU PMST none Low. No VBA records within 5 km of the Castlemaine Link project area, and no VBA records within this part of Victoria. Project area is outside the known
001 Referral of proposed action v May 2016 Page 1 of 16 Scientific name Common name EPBC Source Most recent Likelihood of occurrence status record in investigation corridor (VBA) distributional range of this species. Nearest records are > 40 km south of Ravenswood. Pseudomys fumeus Smoky Mouse EN Biosis none Low. 2011 No VBA records within 5 km of the entire Harcourt Modernisation project area, including the Castlemaine Link project area. Species not identified by the 2016 PMST search for Castlemaine Link area. BIRDS Pedionomus Plains-wanderer VU Biosis none Low. torquatus 2011 No VBA records within 5 km of the entire Harcourt Modernisation project area, including the Castlemaine Link project area. Species not identified by the 2016 PMST search for Castlemaine Link area. Rostratula australis Australian Painted EN PMST, 1969 Low. Snipe VBA No recent VBA records within 5 km of the project area. Botaurus Australasian Bittern EN PMST, 1992 Low. poiciloptilus VBA Species not identified in Biosis 2011 (not listed under EPBC Act at the time of report preparation). VBA records within 5 km of the Castlemaine Link project area. Lathamus discolor Swift Parrot CR PMST, 2006 High. VBA Recent VBA records within 5 km of the project area, and suitable habitats within the area. Discussed in more detail below. Grantiella picta Painted Honeyeater VU PMST, 1991 Moderate. VBA Species not identified in Biosis 2011 (not listed under EPBC Act at the time of report preparation). VBA records within 5 km of the Castlemaine Link project area. Potentail habitat around the Sandhurst Reservoir. Discussed in more detail below.
001 Referral of proposed action v May 2016 Page 2 of 16 Scientific name Common name EPBC Source Most recent Likelihood of occurrence status record in investigation corridor (VBA) Anthochaera phrygia Regent Honeyeater CR PMST, 2008 Low. VBA In Victoria, species rarely occurs outside the Chiltern-Mt Pilot area. Individual records near Bendigo in 2008 and 1990 are the only records in the area since 1985. REPTILES Aprasia Pink-tailed Worm- VU PMST, 2012 Low. parapulchella Lizard VBA Numerous VBA records in apparently similar and contiguous habitat north- east of Sandhurst Reservoir, but intensive targeted survey north of Sandhurst Reservoir in 2003 failed to detect the species (Biosis 2004a, as cited in Biosis 2011). Delma impar Striped Legless VU PMST none Low. Lizard No VBA records within 5 km of the entire Harcourt Modernisation project area, including the Castlemaine Link project area. FROGS Litoria raniformis Growling Grass VU PMST, 1788 Low. Frog VBA One poorly described VBA record within 5 km of the Castlemaine Link project area. Targeted survey undertaken (Biosis 2011), but species not detected. Discussed in more detail below. FISH Maccullochella peelii Murray Cod VU PMST, 1970 Low. peelii VBA The determination from the original referral requested more information on the impacts to this species. Therefore, included in Biosis (2016) desktop report and discussed in more detail below. Macquaria Macquarie Perch EN PMST none Low. australasica The determination from the original referral requested more information on the impacts to this species. Therefore, included in Biosis (2016)
001 Referral of proposed action v May 2016 Page 3 of 16 Scientific name Common name EPBC Source Most recent Likelihood of occurrence status record in investigation corridor (VBA) desktop report and discussed in more detail below. Galaxias rostratus Flat-headed CR PMST none Low. Galaxias Listed under EPBC Act recently (May 2016), so not included in previous assessments or reports for this project. Usually below 150 m altitude in Murray system in still or gently flowing waters, lakes, billabongs and backwaters. Project area outside the known distributional range of this species. No VBA records in or around waterways in the project area – nearest records are > 50 km north-east of Bendigo (>140 km if following waterways). INVERTEBRATES Synemon plana Golden Sun Moth CR PMST; 2010 Present. VBA; Recorded onsite by Biosis Biosis (2011). 2011 Discussed in more detail below. Key: CR Critically Endangered PMST Protected Matters Search Tool EN Endngered VBA Victorian Biodiversity Atlas VU Vulnerable
Ecological communities
The GHD (2016) PMST report identified two threatened ecological communities listed under the EPBC Act that are likely to occur within 5 km of the study site:
Grey Box (Eucalyptus microcarpa) Grassy Woodlands and Derived Native Grasslands of South- eastern Australia (listed as Endangered); and
White Box– Yellow Box– Blakely’s Red Gum Grassy Woodland and Derived Native Grassland (listed as Critically Endangered). Neither community was identified within the Castlemaine Link Project Area by Biosis (2011) or during the recent assessments undertaken by GHD (2016a, 2016b, 2016c). Therefore, the works associated with the project are not expected to have any impacts on either of these communities.
Nature and extent of likely impact Flora Species The following section discusses the potential impacts to EPBC-listed flora species which were identified as having at least a moderate likelihood of occurring within the Castlemaine Link project area (Table 3).
Crimson Spider-orchid Caladenia concolor (Endangered).
No Crimson Spider-orchid individuals were identified during the field assessments for the Castlemaine Link
001 Referral of proposed action v May 2016 Page 4 of 16 Project Area (GHD 2016a, GHD 2016b, GHD 2016c Attachments I-K). Nor are there any VBA records for Crimson Spider-orchid within 5 km of the Castlemaine Link Project Area. Modified forest (consistent with EVC 61 Box Ironbark Forest) that is considered potential habitat for Crimson Spider-orchid was identified within the Sandhurst Reservoir Area (GHD 2016c) within the northern section of the Castlemaine Link Project Area. The alignment within this area was identified by utilising previously cleared and disturbed areas, and the construction impacts within this area have been minimised to reduce impacts to the Box Ironbark Forest to the removal of 0.24 hectares. It is considered possible that this species may occur within the project area within areas mapped as Box Ironbark Forest, however, there’s a low likelihood that this species would be present based on the proximity of records and the nature of the habitat present within the proposed corridor. It is considered that this project would not constitute a significant impact for this species.
Matted Flax-lily Dianella amoena (Endangered).
During the original assessment of the broader Harcourt Modernisation Project area, Biosis (2011 Attachment E) identified that there was the potential for this species to be present within the investigation corridor, with a particular focus on the Harcourt Area where suitable habitat was identified and where VBA records for the species identified that the Matted Flax-lily had been recorded within 5 km of the alignment. Biosis (2011) did not identify any individuals of this species during the field assessments, and reported that any impacts to the species, if present, would be to an individual (or very few individual) plants and would not constitute a significant impact.
No Matted Flax-lily individuals were identified during the field assessments for the Castlemaine Link Project Area (GHD 2016a, GHD 2016b, GHD 2016c Attachments I-K). Nor are there any VBA records for Matted Flax-lily within 5 km of the Castlemaine Link Project Area. Modified woodland (consistent with EVC 175_62 Granitic Grassy Woodland) with a history of disturbance was identified within the Castlemaine Link Project Area that may support habitat for Matted Flax-lily, which is known to occur in areas of modified and degraded habitat. It is considered possible that this species may occur within the project area, however, any impact to this species, if present, would be to a small number of individuals at most, and is unlikely to constitute a significant impact.
McIvor Spider-orchid Caladenia audasii (Vulnerable).
No McIvor Spider-orchid individuals were identified during the field assessments for the Castlemaine Link Project Area (GHD 2016a, GHD 2016b, GHD 2016c Attachments I-K). However, there are VBA records for McIvor Spider-orchid within 5 km of the Castlemaine Link Project Area, with the most recent records identified in 2010 within the One Tree Hill Regional Park just south of Bendigo. Modified forest (consistent with EVC 61 Box Ironbark Forest) that is considered potential habitat for McIvor Spider-orchid was identified within the Sandhurst Reservoir Area (GHD 2016c) within the northern section of the Castlemaine Link Project Area. The alignment within this area was identified by utilising previously cleared and disturbed areas, and the construction impacts within this area have been minimised to reduce impacts to the Box Ironbark Forest to the removal of 0.24 hectares. It is considered possible that this species may occur within the project area within areas mapped as Box Ironbark Forest, however, there’s a low likelihood that this species would be present based on the proximity of records and the nature of the habitat present within the proposed corridor. It is considered that this project would not constitute a significant impact for this species.
Fauna Potential impacts on EPBC-listed fauna species are discussed below. This section is limited to species that were: i) recorded in or near the site and/or ii) identified as having a medium or high (but not low) likelihood of occurrence within the project area, and/or iii) identified for targeted surveys or additional information required (Table 4). The information presented below is derived from work undertaken by Biosis Research (2011, 2012 and 2016) and GHD (2016a-c) – see Attachments E to K:
Grey-headed Flying-fox Pteropus poliocephalus (Vulnerable). Two Grey-headed Flying-foxes were observed flying over the investigation corridor in the vicinity of Buckeye Creek, approximately 2.5 km south of Sandhurst Reservoir, during nocturnal surveys (Biosis 2011).
The Grey-headed Flying-fox is a highly mobile, large species of fruit bat. It feeds on nectar and pollen from a range of flowering native trees (e.g. eucalypts, melaleucas and banksias), and supplements its diverse diet with fruit from native and introduced plants. Its movement patterns are determined by changes in climate, and timing of fruiting and flowering of food plants. This species can roost in groups ranging from small numbers to large camps of several thousand animals. As a transient species, colonies
001 Referral of proposed action v May 2016 Page 5 of 16 of varying sizes can be established for short periods in areas where food is abundant. In Victoria, colonies are currently established in Melbourne, Geelong and Mallacoota (DEWHA 2010). In early 2010, a small colony was also established in Rosalind Park in Bendigo.
The investigation corridor provides a food resource for a small number of Grey-headed Flying-foxes, but it does not currently provide important roosting and foraging habitat for this species and impacts associated with the proposed action are expected to be minimal.
Threats faced by the Grey-headed Flying-fox in Victoria and relevant to this project include loss and fragmentation of habitat (DOTE 2016a). Given the small numbers of records of this species in this area, and the regional extent of remaining habitat similar to that within the proposed impact area (i.e., habitats within the project area are not considered critical to the survival of the Grey-headed Flying-fox), the project is not expected to:
lead to a long-term decrease in the size of an important population of a species reduce the area of occupancy of an important population fragment an existing important population into two or more populations adversely affect habitat critical to the survival of a species disrupt the breeding cycle of an important population modify, destroy, remove or isolate or decrease the availability or quality of habitat to the extent that the species is likely to decline result in invasive species that are harmful to a vulnerable species becoming established in the vulnerable species’ habitat introduce disease that may cause the species to decline, or interfere substantially with the recovery of the species.
Swift Parrot Lathamus discolor (Critically Endangered). The Swift Parrot is an annual winter migrant to Victoria and other parts of mainland south-eastern Australia from its breeding habitats in Tasmania. Important mainland habitat for overwintering Swift Parrots is the Box-Ironbark Forests of central Victoria and southern NSW, where the species feeds on the flowering Red Ironbarks Eucalyptus tricarpa (central Victoria), Mugga Ironbark E. sideroxylon (north eastern Victoria) and other flowering eucalypts. River Red Gums are also known food trees for the Swift Parrot.
The VBA database contains several records for Swift Parrot in Greater Bendigo National Park and near Barkers Creek Reservoir. This species is likely to forage in eucalypts within the investigation corridor, particularly where these are connected with the larger woodland/forest areas, including those associated with road reserves. Adverse impacts on Swift Parrots and their habitat will be minimal as the construction corridor alignment avoids high quality habitats and larger areas of forest and woodland habitats.
Threats faced by the Swift Parrot in Victoria and relevant to this project include loss and fragmentation of winter range habitat (Box Ironbark woodland), and competition by Noisy Miners and other aggressive honeyeaters in association with fragmentation of habitat (DOTE 2016b).
Given the sparsity of Swift Parrot records in this area, the irregularity of the species’ visits to the area, the fact that the species does not breed in this area, the existing presence of Noisy Miners and other aggressive honeyeaters in the area, and the regional extent of remaining habitat similar to that within the proposed impact area (i.e., habitats within the project area are not considered critical to the survival of the Swift Parrot), the project is not expected to:
lead to a long-term decrease in the size of a population, reduce the area of occupancy of the species fragment an existing population into two or more populations adversely affect habitat critical to the survival of a species disrupt the breeding cycle of a population modify, destroy, remove, isolate or decrease the availability or quality of habitat to the extent that the species is likely to decline result in invasive species that are harmful to a critically endangered or endangered species becoming established in the endangered or critically endangered species’ habitat introduce disease that may cause the species to decline, or interfere with the recovery of the species.
001 Referral of proposed action v May 2016 Page 6 of 16 Painted Honeyeater Grantiella picta (Vulnerable). The Painted Honeyeater is largely nomadic across suitable dry woodland habitats in inland eastern Australia. Its diet is varied, but typically includes a large proportion of mistletoe berries. Box-Ironbark habitats in the project area are suitable habitat for the Painted Honeyeater.
The VBA database contains several records for Painted Honeyeater in and around the project area, including old breeding records (from 1950 and 1980). This species is likely to forage occasionally in habitats within the investigation corridor, particularly where these are connected with the larger woodland areas that support mistletoe. Adverse impacts on the Painted Honeyeater and its habitat will be minimal as the construction corridor alignment avoids high quality habitats and larger areas of woodland habitats.
Threats faced by the Painted Honeyeater in Victoria and relevant to this project include land clearing, habitat fragmentation and/or habitat degradation in association with agriculture (DOTE 2016c). Given the small numbers of records of this species in this area, the species’ nomadic habitat use, and the regional extent of remaining habitat similar to that within the proposed impact area (i.e., habitats within the project area are not considered critical to the survival of the Painted Honeyeater), the project is not expected to:
lead to a long-term decrease in the size of an important population of a species reduce the area of occupancy of an important population fragment an existing important population into two or more populations adversely affect habitat critical to the survival of a species disrupt the breeding cycle of an important population modify, destroy, remove or isolate or decrease the availability or quality of habitat to the extent that the species is likely to decline result in invasive species that are harmful to a vulnerable species becoming established in the vulnerable species’ habitat introduce disease that may cause the species to decline, or interfere substantially with the recovery of the species.
Growling Grass Frog Litoria raniformis (Vulnerable). This species inhabits permanent and semi- permanent waterbodies (dams, watercourses, wetlands) that are typically open (i.e., not shaded) and expansive and that contain abundant submerged and emergent vegetation within the water and along their margins. The species can move between habitats in a short space of time.
There is one VBA record of this species (potentially from 1982) approximately 7 km north-west of Sandhurst Reservoir, but little information accompanying it. Biosis conducted a targeted survey for this species during January and February 2010, in and around 11 sites that contained potential habitat within the project area. No Growling Grass Frogs were detected (Biosis 2011, Attachment E). The likelihood of Growling Grass Frogs occurring within the investigation corridor is considered low.
Given that the species appears to be absent from the project area, the project is not expected to:
lead to a long-term decrease in the size of an important population of a species reduce the area of occupancy of an important population fragment an existing important population into two or more populations adversely affect habitat critical to the survival of a species disrupt the breeding cycle of an important population modify, destroy, remove or isolate or decrease the availability or quality of habitat to the extent that the species is likely to decline result in invasive species that are harmful to a vulnerable species becoming established in the vulnerable species’ habitat introduce disease that may cause the species to decline, or interfere substantially with the recovery of the species.
Murray Cod Maccullochella peelii (Vulnerable) (the following information is taken from Biosis 2011 and 2016). The Murray Cod is the largest freshwater fish in Australia. The species has been measured at up to 1.8 metres in length and over 100 kg. Murray Cod was historically distributed throughout the Murray- Darling Basin (the Basin) with the exception of the upper reaches of some tributaries. There have been numerous attempts to translocate hatchery-bred and wild-caught Murray Cod by government authorities, acclimatisation societies and private individuals outside of the species natural range. Introduced populations persist in some waterways, impoundments or artificial lakes. In Victoria, Murray Cod numbers
001 Referral of proposed action v May 2016 Page 7 of 16 are much lower than pre-European levels. The Murray Cod utilises a diverse range of habitats from clear rocky streams, such as those found in the upper western slopes of NSW (including the ACT), to slow- flowing, turbid lowland rivers and billabongs. Murray Cod are frequently found in the main channels of rivers and larger tributaries. The species is, therefore, considered a main-channel specialist.
The Biosis 2016 desktop report indicates that there are no recent records of Murray Cod within 20 kilometres of the project alignment. Numerous historical records are available within the Campaspe River Basin, however these are predominantly associated with translocations into the area or surveys near to the release of translocated individuals. Murray Cod have been recorded in the Campaspe River Basin, however Murray Cod is restricted to the main channel of the Campaspe River and immediate and larger tributaries. Biosis 2016 indicates that this species is unlikely to be subject to impacts associated with the Castlemaine Link Project, and is considered to have a negligible likelihood of occurrence within 20 kilometres of the study area.
Given that the species appears to be absent from the project area, the project is not expected to:
lead to a long-term decrease in the size of an important population of a species reduce the area of occupancy of an important population fragment an existing important population into two or more populations adversely affect habitat critical to the survival of a species disrupt the breeding cycle of an important population modify, destroy, remove or isolate or decrease the availability or quality of habitat to the extent that the species is likely to decline result in invasive species that are harmful to a vulnerable species becoming established in the vulnerable species’ habitat introduce disease that may cause the species to decline, or interfere substantially with the recovery of the species.
Macquarie Perch Macquaria australasica (Endangered) (the following information is taken from Biosis 2011 and 2016). The Macquarie Perch is a moderate-sized fish with an elongate-oval body which is laterally compressed. The largest remaining populations of Macquarie Perch occur in Lake Dartmouth on the Mitta Mitta River (Victoria) and several isolated populations in the Goulburn River catchment (Victoria), including Hughes Creek and the upper reaches of the Seven Creeks system and Lake Eildon on the Goulburn River. A translocated population located in the Yarra River appears to be large and self- sustaining. The Macquarie Perch is a riverine, schooling species. It prefers clear water and deep, rocky holes with lots of cover. As well as aquatic vegetation, additional cover may comprise of large boulders, debris and overhanging banks. Spawning occurs just above riffles (shallow running water). Populations may survive in impoundments if able to access suitable spawning sites.
The Biosis 2016 desktop report indicates that there are no recent records of this species within 20 kilometres of the project alignment. Numerous historical records are available within the Campaspe River Basin, however these are predominantly associated with translocations into the area or surveys near to the release of translocated individuals. Macquarie Perch have been recorded in the Campaspe River Basin, however, it is considered unlikely to continue to persist although it may still occur in headwater streams containing sufficient undisturbed habitat. Biosis 2016 suggests that this species is unlikely to be subject to impacts associated with the Castlemaine Link Project, and is considered to have a negligible likelihood of occurrence within 20 kilometres of the study area.
Given that the species appears to be absent from the project area, the project is not expected to:
lead to (or contribute to) a long-term decrease in the size of a population, reduce the area of occupancy of the species fragment an existing population into two or more populations adversely affect habitat critical to the survival of a species disrupt the breeding cycle of a population modify, destroy, remove, isolate or decrease the availability or quality of habitat to the extent that the species is likely to decline result in invasive species that are harmful to a critically endangered or endangered species becoming established in the endangered or critically endangered species’ habitat introduce disease that may cause the species to decline, or interfere with the recovery of the species.
001 Referral of proposed action v May 2016 Page 8 of 16 Golden Sun Moth Synemon plana (Critically Endangered). This small diurnal moth occurs in south- eastern Australia. It is typically associated with native grasslands dominated by wallaby-grasses Austrodanthonia/Rytidosperma spp, but relatively recent surveys around Melbourne found that Golden Sun Moths also inhabit grasslands supporting predominately introduced vegetation which were previously considered unsuitable habitat for the species (Gilmore et al. 2008).
In December 2009, this species was recorded in a patch of native grassland on the north side of McIvor Road, south of the Stage 1 Harcourt Modernisation project area (Figure 4.16 in Biosis 2011 - Attachment E). Potential habitat was also identified within the investigation corridor on Ravenswood Run (Property P353; Figure 4.29), which is within the Stage 2 Castlemaine Link Project Area. A targeted survey of this property was partially undertaken during 2010/2011 to determine presence (Figures 4.27–4.31 in Biosis 2011 - Attachment E). Golden Sun Moths were found (four male moths) at one site within the investigation corridor on Ravenswood Run, but survey of the property was restricted due to access difficulties following heavy rain throughout the survey period. Follow-up surveys of the Ravenswood Run property were conducted during the following flying season in December 2011 and Golden Sun Moths were recorded on all survey days (Biosis 2012). Surveys focused on the proposed alignment corridor, but included areas adjacent to, and up to 100 m outside, the corridor. A total of 71 GSM (all males) were recorded within Ravenswood Run during the 2010/2011 and 2011/2012 flying seasons. Biosis (2012) reports that the Golden Sun Moth and its habitat are widespread at Ravenswood Run (but in generally low numbers in several areas) and the species is not limited to areas within the project area (being found at locations up to ~100 m outside the proposed alignment).
Habitat supporting Golden Sun Moth at Ravenswood Run consisted of uncultivated areas with granite outcropping and a large proportional cover of native grasses, and in particular, wallaby-grasses (a Golden Sun Moth larval food plant). Broader inspection of the Ravenswood Run property found this habitat type to be widespread outside the proposed alignment. While not all of this habitat was surveyed for Golden Sun Moth (survey generally undertaken within 100 m of the alignment), populations of this species are highly likely to be present in these areas (Biosis 2012).
Areas considered unsuitable for Golden Sun Moth (and where no Golden Sun Moth were recorded) were typically areas that were subject to past cultivation, or that lacked granite outcropping and were dominated by areas of dense exotic grasses such as Toowoomba Canary Grass.
The distribution and abundance of Golden Sun Moth as observed on the survey days (Biosis 2011; Biosis 2012) is shown on Figures 2a-c of Attachment F. Likely Golden Sun Moth habitat (as determined by Biosis 2012) is shown in Figures 2a-c of Attachment F. Unsuitable habitat (as determined by Biosis 2012) is mapped in Figures 2a-c of Attachment F.
Project specific impacts on Golden Sun Moth Construction of the pipeline will impact on Golden Sun Moth habitat in some sections of the Ravenswood Run property. Individual moths (in adult and/or larval phase) may be killed by ground disturbance such as excavation and soil compaction, and areas of habitat will be lost. Construction activities through Golden Sun Moth habitat areas will be limited to the smallest practicable area, thereby minimising the impact. There is limited opportunity to shift the alignment to avoid Golden Sun Moth habitat entirely because suitable habitat is widespread in the area surrounding the proposed alignment. The impacts on Golden Sun Moth are potentially temporary. Areas of known habitat adjacent to the alignment will remain unaffected and the population is likely to recolonise disturbed areas with time.
Given the extent of granite outcrops and subsurface rock along the corridor, and particularly within Ravenswood Run, high disturbance techniques (such as blasting) may be required in potential GSM habitat. It is considered unlikely that the physical disturbance from these techniques will go beyond the approved construction corridor. If physical impacts do breach the boundary of the approved construction corridor, it will be treated as a non-compliance as outlined in Section 5.2 of the attached Threatened Fauna Management Plan (GHD 2016d) (Attachment M).
The 2011/2012 survey resulted in maps showing the Ravenswood Run property to be a mosaic of known, likely and unlikely habitat. In accordance with project objectives to avoid and minimise impacts on ecological values, the construction corridor width has been reduced to 10 m in all areas of known and likely GSM habitat in the Ravenswood Run property (as mapped by Biosis 2012). By reducing the corridor width to 10 m, and by moving all access points and vehicle turnaround points to be within unlikely GSM habitat, the total area of impact on known or likely GSM habitat has been reduced to 3.598 ha (0.345 ha known and 3.253 ha likely habitat). Attachment O illustrates the proposed construction corridor through the Golden Sun Moth habitat in Ravenswood Run.
001 Referral of proposed action v May 2016 Page 9 of 16 The main threats to the Golden Sun Moth that have the potential to occur through this project include loss, degradation, modification and fragmentation of habitat through removal of vegetation, weed invasion, and soil compaction, and fragmentation or isolation of Golden Sun Moth populations through habitat fragmentation (DOTE 2016d).
According to the Significant Impact Guidelines for the Critically Endangered Golden Sun Moth (Synemon plana) (DEWHA 2009), a significant impact on the species is possible if the following impact thresholds are reached:
For large or contiguous habitat areas (>10 ha), a significant impact would result if 0.5 ha or more of habitat is lost, degraded or fragmented; or For small or fragmented habitat areas (<10 ha), a significant impact results if ANY habitat is lost, degraded or fragmented.
Regardless of the extent of habitat that occurs beyond the proposed corridor, impacts from this project are likely to exceed both thresholds, and consequently, the impact on Golden Sun Moth is likely to be considered significant under the EPBC Act. Because the Golden Sun Moth breeds in the grassland areas, suitable habitat is considered ‘habitat critical to the survival of a species’. Impacts resulting from this project have the potential to:
adversely affect habitat critical to the survival of a species disrupt the breeding cycle of a population result in invasive species that are harmful to a critically endangered or endangered species becoming established in the endangered or critically endangered species’ habitat; and interfere with the recovery of the species.
Given the narrow width (10 m) and linear nature of the impacts, this project is not expected to:
lead to a long-term decrease in the size of a population reduce the area of occupancy of the species fragment an existing population into two or more populations modify, destroy, remove, isolate or decrease the availability or quality of habitat to the extent that the species is likely to decline; or introduce disease that may cause the species to decline.
3.1 (e) Listed migratory species Description Eighteen fauna species (all birds) recorded or predicted to occur within 5 km of the study area are listed as migratory species under the EPBC Act (Table 5). Many migratory species tend to be associated with coastal or wetland habitats, but some are associated with woodland and forest habitats. Few of the identified species are expected to occur within the project area regularly or frequently, and none is expected to make significant use of habitats within the project area.
Table 5 – EPBC listed migratory fauna recorded or predicted to occur within 5 km of the project area
Common Name Scientific Name Most recent record (VBA) Lewin's Rail Rallus pectoralis 1994 Caspian Tern Hydroprogne caspia 2004 Wood Sandpiper Tringa glareola 1987 Red-necked Stint Calidris ruficollis 1999 Sharp-tailed Sandpiper Calidris acuminata 1954 Latham's Snipe Gallinago hardwickii 1991 Glossy Ibis Plegadis falcinellus 1912 Eastern Great Egret Ardea modesta 1990 Cattle Egret Ardea ibis 1989 Rainbow Bee-eater Merops ornatus 2004
001 Referral of proposed action v May 2016 Page 10 of 16 White-throated Needletail Hirundapus caudacutus 1993 Fork-tailed Swift Apus pacificus 1994 Rufous Fantail Rhipidura rufifrons 1961 Satin Flycatcher Myiagra cyanoleuca 1986 Black-faced Monarch Monarcha melanopsis None Clamorous Reed Warbler Acrocephalus stentoreus 2009 Regent Honeyeater Anthochaera phrygia 2008 Yellow Wagtail Motacilla flava None
Nature and extent of likely impact
In terms of assessment under the EPBC Act, a significant impact on a migratory species is possible if there is a real chance or possibility that it will: Substantially modify (including by fragmenting, altering fire regimes, altering nutrient cycles or altering hydrological cycles), destroy or isolate an area of important habitat for a migratory species;
Result in an invasive species that is harmful to the migratory species becoming established in an area of important habitat for the migratory species; or
Seriously disrupt the lifecycle (breeding, feeding, migration or resting behaviour) of an ecologically significant proportion of the population of a migratory species. Some of the identified species are associated with woodland and forest habitats and may occur within the project area occasionally, but none is expected to make significant use of habitats within the project area. Habitats present do not provide important habitat for an ecologically significant proportion of any of these listed migratory species and therefore the project is not likely to result in a significant impact on any migratory listed species.
3.1 (f) Commonwealth marine area (If the action is in the Commonwealth marine area, complete 3.2(c) instead. This section is for actions taken outside the Commonwealth marine area that may have impacts on that area.) Description The project area is not within or near a Commonwealth marine area, and the project will not impact on a Commonwealth marine area.
Nature and extent of likely impact Not applicable.
3.1 (g) Commonwealth land (If the action is on Commonwealth land, complete 3.2(d) instead. This section is for actions taken outside Commonwealth land that may have impacts on that land.) Description
Not applicable.
Nature and extent of likely impact
Not applicable.
3.1 (h) The Great Barrier Reef Marine Park
001 Referral of proposed action v May 2016 Page 11 of 16 Description Not applicable.
Nature and extent of likely impact Not applicable.
3.1 (i) A water resource, in relation to coal seam gas development and large coal mining development
Description Not applicable.
Nature and extent of likely impact Not applicable.
3.2 Nuclear actions, actions taken by the Commonwealth (or Commonwealth agency), actions taken in a Commonwealth marine area, actions taken on Commonwealth land, or actions taken in the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park
3.2 (a) Is the proposed action a nuclear action? X No Yes (provide details below) If yes, nature & extent of likely impact on the whole environment
3.2 (b) Is the proposed action to be taken by the X No Commonwealth or a Commonwealth agency? Yes (provide details below) If yes, nature & extent of likely impact on the whole environment
3.2 (c) Is the proposed action to be taken in a X No Commonwealth marine area? Yes (provide details below) If yes, nature & extent of likely impact on the whole environment (in addition to 3.1(f))
3.2 (d) Is the proposed action to be taken on X No Commonwealth land? Yes (provide details below) If yes, nature & extent of likely impact on the whole environment (in addition to 3.1(g))
3.2 (e) Is the proposed action to be taken in the X No Great Barrier Reef Marine Park? Yes (provide details below) If yes, nature & extent of likely impact on the whole environment (in addition to 3.1(h))
001 Referral of proposed action v May 2016 Page 12 of 16 3.3 Other important features of the environment
3.3 (a) Flora and fauna
Flora
The original flora and fauna assessment for the broader Castlemaine Link and Harcourt Modernisation Project (Biosis 2011) reported a total of 164 indigenous and 87 introduced plant species as being present within the investigation corridor for stage 1 and stage 2 of the project (see Attachment E, Appendix 3.2 for a complete list). During three recent assessments a total of 63 indigenous and 41 introduced flora species were identified within the Castlemaine Link Project Area (see Attachments I-K, GHD 2016a, 2016b, 2016c).
No flora species listed as rare or threatened under the EPBC Act or the FFG Act were identified during any of the assessments undertaken for the project to date. However, one flora species (Grevillea dryophylla, Goldfields Grevillea) listed as rare under the Department of Environment, Land, Water and Planning (DELWP) Advisory List of Rare or Threatened Plants in Victoria (VROTS) was identified within the Castlemaine Link Project Area. During the original field assessments associated with the Harcourt Modernisation Project undertaken by Biosis (2011) numerous plants of Goldfields Grevillea were identified from a treeless area within Greater Bendigo National Park (Biosis 2011). This area now forms a part of the Castlemaine Link Project Area, and a number of individuals will be removed. The Biosis (2011) report stated that considering the context in which these plants were growing, the impacts to this species would not be considered significant. During the assessment at Sandhurst Reservoir (GHD 2016c) hundreds of individual Goldfields Grevillea were identified, including approximately 64 individuals within the proposed construction footprint within this section. Given the extent of the distribution of this species it is considered that the impacts to this species as a part of the Castlemaine Link Project would not be significant.
There were no floristic communities listed as threatened under the FFG Act, recorded within the Castlemaine Link Project area by Biosis (2011) or GHD (2016a, 2016b, 2016c).
Fauna
The most recent desktop assessment of the project area (Access Tracks Assessment GHD 2016c) identified records of a total of 284 indigenous and 24 introduced fauna species for the Stage 2 Castlemaine Link Project Area (within five kilometres of the proposed alignment). The complete list can be found in Attachment K, Appendix 4.1. This includes records of the EBPC listed species identified and discussed in Sections 3.1(d) and 3.1(e).
There are records of 38 species listed as threatened under the Victorian Flora and Fauna Guarantee Act 1988 within five kilometres of the project area, and 40 species listed as threatened on the DELWP advisory lists of threatened fauna in Victoria (DSE 2009, DSE 2013). Twelve of these are listed as threatened under the EPBC Act also and were included in Section 3.1(d). Another 17 fauna species are listed as Near Threatened or Data Deficient (neither category is considered ‘threatened’) on the DELWP advisory lists.
One fauna community listed as threatened under the FFG Act occurs within the study area: Victorian Temperate Woodland Bird Community. The description of this community identifies 24 key indicator bird species (the presence of which confirm the presence of the community) and 21 associated bird species (the presence of which indicate the potential presence of the community). Nineteen key indicator species and 15 associated bird species have been recorded historically within five kilometres of the project area.
3.3 (b) Hydrology, including water flows
The proposed construction corridor traverses a mix of natural and artificial watercourses, including, Big Hill High Level Channel, Buckeye Creek and Bullock Creek. The artificial watercourse consists of a concreted channel and generally lacks suitable habitat features such as aquatic vegetation. During the course of the field investigations, many of the natural watercourses did not contain water. A number of unnamed small creeks and tributaries are also traversed by the investigation corridor. These are generally ephemeral, low-flowing watercourses which were either dry at the time of the field investigations, or contained small pools of water.
001 Referral of proposed action v May 2016 Page 13 of 16 3.3 (c) Soil and Vegetation characteristics
Soil
The land systems occurring in the project area are ‘granitic’ and ‘sedimentary’ on the basis of geology as discussed below.
The granite land system is characterised by undulating and rolling low granite hills. Rock outcrops are present on crests and steeper slopes. The sedimentary land system is characterised by low sedimentary hills. It is typically steep and rocky terrain, with occasional rock outcrops.
A range of soils occur within each of these broad groups. In the areas underlain by granite, the soils tend to be duplex (i.e. texture contrast, having a rapid increase in texture between a lighter topsoil and a heavier subsoil) or uniform (i.e. having uniform texture down the profile) and sandy. A typical soil profile within the project area is coarse sandy loam topsoil over clay subsoil. In steeper areas the depth to rock is shallow.
In the areas underlain by sedimentary rock, the soils may be duplex or gradational (i.e. having a gradual increase in texture with depth). Sedimentary land systems cover only a small part of the project area which includes typical soil profile is loam topsoil over clay subsoil.
Vegetation The Castlemaine Link Project Area is located entirely within the Goldfields Bioregion. The landscape of this bioregion has been significantly modified within the last 150 years. The majority of the bioregion is private freehold land dominated by agriculture and there are large blocks of public land. Only 25% still has a cover of native vegetation.
The proposed construction corridor is predominantly located within disturbed farming land consisting of pasture for grazing, with remnant patches of vegetation. The pasture consists of a mixture of introduced and native grasses and herbs. Due to the presence of suitable habitat for GSM, targeted surveys were undertaken by Biosis for GSM and to prepare detailed mapping of GSM habitat. The Biosis (2012) surveys identified known and likely GSM habitat across much of the Ravenswood Run property within the Castlemaine Link Project Area, and 3.598 hectares of that is likely to be removed by the proposed works. Whilst the majority of the pasture areas identified during the target GSM surveys was found to be dominated by dense swathes of exotic grasses, some small areas (such as those with granite outcropping) supported a higher cover of native grasses, in particular Wallaby grasses (Rytidsoperma spp.) and were considered to be habitat for GSM (Biosis 2012). Some of these patches had a high enough cover of native grasses to be classified as native vegetation and were mapped by Biosis as treeless Granitic Grassy Woodland (EVC 175_62). GHD undertook additional ecological assessments within areas with the potential to contain habitat for GSM, where efforts were being made to avoid and minimise impacts to GSM habitat. GHD surveyed additional access tracks and alternative alignment options (2016a and 2016b) within the Castlemaine Link Project area. These assessments were undertaken in winter which is not considered a suitable time of year to undertake surveys for GSM habitat and native grassland species, and found a high cover of introduced annual herbs and grasses of unknown origin (GHD 2016b). The survey during winter suggested that much of the pasture was <25% native and therefore not a remnant patch.
Important remnant vegetation and fauna habitats within the investigation corridor and the surrounding local landscape includes the Greater Bendigo National Park, through which approximately 850 m of the proposed construction corridor runs. In the Greater Bendigo National Park the proposed construction corridor traverses an area occupied by other utilities. Here the majority of the corridor occurs in a cleared corridor through forest, where the tree layer is absent and the shrubs are regrowth that are maintained to less than 1.5 m in height due to their location beneath powerlines (Biosis 2011). Additionally, patches of vegetation, often containing trees, in road reserves or within paddocks within the investigation corridor contain remnant vegetation which provides connectivity with these larger patches of important habitat.
3.3 (d) Outstanding natural features
None identified.
3.3 (e) Remnant native vegetation The original assessment (Biosis 2011) indicated that the areas assessed that are included within the current Castlemaine Link Project Area supported three Ecological Vegetation Classes (EVCs): Heathy Dry Forest EVC
001 Referral of proposed action v May 2016 Page 14 of 16 20, Box Ironbark Forest EVC 61 and Granitic Grassy Woodland EVC 175_62. The recent assessments (GHD 2016a, 2016b, 2016c) identified the presence of the latter two EVCs as well as Grassy Dry Forest (EVC 22) as occurring within the Castlemaine Link Project Area. The total area of native vegetation proposed to be removed during the Castlemaine Link Project is 2.7 ha (summarised in Table 2 and detailed in Biosis 2011 and GHD 2016a, 2016b and 2016c).
3.3 (f) Gradient (or depth range if action is to be taken in a marine area)
The average slope is approximately 5 percent, with some steeper sections up to 15 percent.
3.3 (g) Current state of the environment
The investigation corridor is predominantly located within disturbed farming land consisting of pasture or orchards. Many of the road reserves within the investigation corridor contain remnant vegetation which provides connectivity with larger patches of remnant vegetation within the local area.
The landscape of this bioregion has been significantly modified within the last 150 years. The majority of the bioregion is private freehold land dominated by agriculture and there are large blocks of public land. Only 25% still has a cover of native vegetation, and at the time of publication of the ‘Strategic Overview for the Goldfields Bioregion Victoria’, less than 4% of this was in formal reserves (NRE 2002).
3.3 (h) Commonwealth Heritage Places or other places recognised as having heritage values
The PMST for the project area does not list any Commonwealth Heritage Places. A National Heritage Place: the Castlemaine Diggings National Heritage Park is located 40 km south of the project area.
3.3 (i) Indigenous heritage values
The area is rich in Aboriginal heritage. Aboriginal cultural heritage records of the project and surrounding area indicate that the most intensive Aboriginal cultural activities occurred around granite stony rises and permanent watercourses including Barkers and Bullock Creeks, usually within 200m of the creek banks. Smaller less dense artefact scatters also typically occur adjacent to ephemeral creeks or depressions, or on higher grounds with elevated views of the region.
Sixty-nine Aboriginal Places are located within the original construction corridor (‘Activity Area’) for stage 1 and stage 2 of the project, forty-two of which are on the Castlemaine Link alignment, with seventeen requiring salvage prior to works commencing.
A Cultural Heritage Management Plan (CHMP) was prepared for the Castlemaine Link and Harcourt Modernisation Project by SKM (dated September 2011). An additional CHMP (dated 22 November 2012) was prepared by SKM that considered amendments to the alignments assessed in the September 2011 CHMP. On 19 December 2012 the Dja Dja Wurrung Clans Aboriginal Corporation approved the final version of the CHMP dated 22 November 2012 (CHMP number 12359).
The approved CHMP applies to all sections of the project, aside from the alternative alignments identified in 2016 that are detailed in section 2.3. An additional CHMP is currently being prepared for these sections of the project.
3.3 (j) Other important or unique values of the environment
The investigation corridor passes through or is located in close proximity to the Greater Bendigo National Park and Bendigo Regional Park.
The Greater Bendigo National Park and the Bendigo Regional Park are known to contain important habitat values for several significant flora and fauna, including the FFG-listed Victorian Temperate-woodland Bird Community.
3.3 (k) Tenure of the action area (eg freehold, leasehold)
The project will be located on road reserves, freehold private land and crown land parcels.
001 Referral of proposed action v May 2016 Page 15 of 16 A complete list of lot numbers, title and crown descriptions of the land within the preferred pipeline corridor alignment are provided in Attachment P.
3.3 (l) Existing land/marine uses of area
The project is located between Bendigo and Castlemaine in North Central Victoria. This area is characterised by the woodland and rocky ridgeline of the Greater Bendigo National Park and Bendigo Regional Park in the north and the undulating rural landscape to the south. The rural landscape is largely cleared of canopy vegetation for agricultural use and includes activities including orchards for fruit production, broad acre cropping, grazing and timber plantations. Scattered trees dominate the landscape with patches of remnant vegetation present along waterways and in road reserves. The landscape also incorporates several small communities and subdivision patterns.
The Castlemaine Link pipeline will be constructed in a 10-20 m wide cleared existing easement area through the Greater Bendigo National Park and then through large scale agricultural land primarily used for broad scale grazing and cropping. A large property known as ‘Ravenswood Run’ and another large property to the south occupies 75 % of the alignment.
The Castlemaine Link pipeline route then traverses through, or alongside a number of smaller agricultural properties in the Harcourt Region of the proposal. This section is supported by an piped irrigation network supplied by the Coliban Main Channel and is recognised for its production of apples, stone fruit, pears, grapes (viticulture) and timber production. In this section, the pipeline will pass through, or alongside a number of waterways and areas of remnant vegetation.
3.3 (m) Any proposed land/marine uses of area
This is covered in point above.
001 Referral of proposed action v May 2016 Page 16 of 16 4 Environmental outcomes
It is understood that the outcomes-based conditions are intended to supplement the historical prescriptive conditions method through achieving tailored outcomes specific to each project and the protected matter that is being impacted. The Castlemaine Link Project is anticipated to have a significant impact on a protected matter, the Golden Sun Moth (Synemon plana). The likely impacts to the species are discussed in Section 3, and the measures taken to avoid and reduce impacts to the species are outlined in Section 5.
A number of outcomes-based options have been put forward for this species with regard to the impact. This has been done with consideration of the advice provided by DoE at the pre-referral meeting held on 5 July 2016. Coliban Water was advised that if the Castlemaine Link was determined to be a controlled action, it is likely that the Bilateral Agreement would be applied and the project approval requirements would lie with the State. Therefore, it was recommended that minimal detail be provided with the proposed outcomes based options, and this would be discussed further once the governance of the project was better understood.
There is no National Recovery Plan for the species. However, the Victorian Action Statement 106, Golden Sun Moth (Synemon plana) states that the major conservation objective is to ensure the protection and conservation of existing known populations of the Golden Sun Moth. With this objective in consideration, the outcomes- based options for the Golden Sun Moth on the Castlemaine Link project may include:
No introduction of new weeds or spread of existing weeds, Revegetate the impact area in all GSM areas so that the percentage cover of Rytidosperma is greater than forty percent (as stated in Action Statement), No net loss of potential GSM habitat within the Ravenswood Run property (post rehabilitation), Purchase and manage approved GSM offset site, The viability of the population at the offset site is maintained.
The details of these outcome-based options, including timeframes and monitoring requirements, will be discussed with DoE once it has been determined whether the project is considered a controlled action, and whether the bilateral agreement will stand.
001 Referral of proposed action v May 2016 Page 17 of 16 5 Measures to avoid or reduce impacts
Measures have been taken already to greatly reduce the impacts on Golden Sun Moth, and mitigation measures will be implemented in relevant parts of the project area, in addition to other measures (e.g. weed control), to further reduce impacts. These are briefly described below and presented in more detail in a Threatened Fauna Management Plan (GHD 2016d - Attachment M), which has been prepared specifically for the project due to potential impacts on the Golden Sun Moth (Synemon plana) and the FFG-listed Brush-tailed Phascogale (Phascogale tapoatafa). All measures proposed here aim to comply with relevant legislation, policy and Action Statements for the Golden Sun Moth.
Planning and design phase measures
Refining the alignment to reduce the extent of habitat impacted. The primary measure to reduce impacts on biodiversity values within the investigation corridor is to avoid removal of native vegetation and habitats. For this project, the investigation corridor was designed in response to feedback given to designers during the fieldwork period, and represents numerous alignment revisions. Where values were identified, an alternative alignment was suggested and implemented where practicable.
There is limited opportunity to shift the alignment through Ravenswood Run to avoid Golden Sun Moth habitat entirely. Because the Ravenswood Run property appears to be a mosaic of known, likely and unlikely Golden Sun Moth habitat, it is not practicable to re-align the corridor to avoid all known and likely Golden Sun Moth habitat.
Using directional drilling is another way to avoid Golden Sun Moth habitat. Directional drilling tends to be sub- surface, so is likely to have a smaller impact on larval Golden Sun Moths. Drilling > 1 m below the surface effectively burrows beneath (and therefore avoids) Golden Sun Moth habitat. However, directional drilling through Ravenswood Run is unfeasible, because much of the alignment through that property contains embedded granite outcrops, which precludes the directional drilling process. The cost of installing a 500 mm pipe using directional drilling is also prohibitive.
Consequently, other opportunities to reduce the impact on Golden Sun Moth habitat have been adopted, including: The construction corridor within areas mapped as known or likely Golden Sun Moth habitat has been reduced from 20 m wide to 10 m wide; and Vehicle turn-around areas, laydown areas and access points have been moved to be within areas of unlikely Golden Sun Moth habitat.
This has effectively halved the impact on Golden Sun Moth habitat. With the originally proposed corridor and access points, the impact on known or likely Golden Sun Moth habitat was 6.728 hectares (Table 6). By reducing the corridor width to 10 m, and by moving all access points and vehicle turnaround points to be within unlikely GSM habitat, the total area of impact on known or likely GSM habitat has been reduced to 3.598 ha (Table 6), which represents a reduction of approximately 47%. Attachment O illustrates the proposed construction corridor through the Golden Sun Moth habitat in Ravenswood Run.
001 Referral of proposed action v May 2016 Page 18 of 16 Table 6 Areas of GSM habitat impacted by the reduced-width construction corridor (10 m wide) compared with the originally proposed corridor (20 m wide)
Original corridor (20 m wide) Reduced corridor (10 m wide) in GSM habitat
GSM Habitat Potential Corridor Access track Corridor Access track
(Area, hectares) (Area, hectares) (Area, hectares) (Area, hectares)
Known Habitat 0.673 - 0.345 -
Likely Habitat 5.901 0.154 3.253 -
Unlikely Habitat 2.722 - 2.722 0.484
Construction phase measures Mitigation measures implemented during the construction phase in relevant parts of the project area will help to further reduce impacts. These are outlined below.
Training and induction of all site personnel All personnel working within the study area will undergo training and induction regarding threatened fauna management actions (particularly those relevant to Golden Sun Moth) as a part of the general site induction prior to commencing work on site in the Ravenswood Run property.
Protection of habitats near to the construction area In the Ravenswood Run property, the construction area will be fenced off and clearly signed to prevent construction activities from expanding into adjacent habitat. All works will be restricted to the designated construction area throughout the project. No construction vehicles, machinery or equipment, lay down of materials or unauthorised personnel will be allowed within areas of known or likely Golden Sun Moth habitat. Where the land within the construction area slopes towards areas of known Golden Sun Moth habitat (adjacent to the construction area), sediment fencing will be installed along the down slope side of the construction area to avoid sediments impacting on such habitat.
Given the extent of granite outcrops and subsurface rock along the corridor, and particularly within Ravenswood Run, high disturbance techniques (such as blasting) may be required in potential GSM habitat. It is considered unlikely that the physical disturbance from these techniques will go beyond the approved construction corridor. If physical impacts do breach the boundary of the approved construction corridor, it will be treated as a non-compliance as outlined in Section 5.2 of the attached Threatened Fauna Management Plan (GHD 2016d) (Attachment M).
Prevention of spreading or introducing weeds Across the entire project area, including in the Ravenswood Run property, all vehicles, machinery and equipment will use formed and approved access tracks, and be regularly cleaned of mud and dirt to prevent the spread and establishment of weeds and diseases.
Timing of construction works in Golden Sun Moth habitat In known or likely Golden Sun Moth habitat, construction will be limited to the non-breeding/non-flying season (January to October). This will greatly reduce the direct mortality of breeding adult moths, particularly the relatively immobile, semi-flightless females. Larvae of Golden Sun Moth are present in the ground all year, and cannot be avoided through seasonal limitations on construction. If construction activities within Golden Sun Moth habitat are scheduled to commence within the month following the flying season (i.e., January to February), then relevant sections of habitat will be slashed and managed through the preceding flying season in an effort to discourage moths from breeding within the proposed impact area.
001 Referral of proposed action v May 2016 Page 19 of 16 Pre-construction management of Golden Sun Moth habitat Known and likely Golden Sun Moth habitat within the construction area will be slashed before the onset of the flying season (i.e., on or before 14 October) and maintained in a slashed condition throughout the flying season or until construction takes place. This is to discourage moths from breeding within the site immediately prior to construction. If habitat slashing cannot be done on or prior to 14th October, but construction still must occur during or immediately after the flying season, then the first slashing will be done in the presence of ecologists looking for semi-flightless female moths in the alignment, to be relocated to adjacent (undisturbed) known or likely habitat.
Post-construction phase and habitat reinstatement measures Mitigation measures implemented after the construction phase in relevant parts of the project area will help to further reduce impacts. These are outlined below.
Site rehabilitation/reinstatement All vehicles, equipment and materials (including any temporary fencing) will be removed at the completion of construction. Disturbed known and likely Golden Sun Moth habitat will be progressively returned to its pre-construction condition, with weed control implemented as required to keep the native/non-native species ratio similar or better to the original condition and to adjacent (undisturbed) habitat.
Weed and pest animal management On-going appropriate weed control will be continued in accordance with the Environmental Management Plan for at least 2 years post-construction to ensure that the project does not result in the spread and establishment of weeds that might reduce the condition of the habitat for Golden Sun Moth.
001 Referral of proposed action v May 2016 Page 20 of 16 6 Conclusion on the likelihood of significant impacts Identify whether or not you believe the action is a controlled action (ie. whether you think that significant impacts on the matters protected under Part 3 of the EPBC Act are likely) and the reasons why.
6.1 Do you THINK your proposed action is a controlled action?
No, complete section 5.2 X Yes, complete section 5.3
6.2 Proposed action IS NOT a controlled action. Specify the key reasons why you think the proposed action is NOT LIKELY to have significant impacts on a matter protected under the EPBC Act.
6.3 Proposed action IS a controlled action Type ‘x’ in the box for the matter(s) protected under the EPBC Act that you think are likely to be significantly impacted. (The ‘sections’ identified below are the relevant sections of the EPBC Act.)
Matters likely to be impacted World Heritage values (sections 12 and 15A) National Heritage places (sections 15B and 15C) Wetlands of international importance (sections 16 and 17B) X Listed threatened species and communities (sections 18 and 18A) Listed migratory species (sections 20 and 20A) Protection of the environment from nuclear actions (sections 21 and 22A) Commonwealth marine environment (sections 23 and 24A) Great Barrier Reef Marine Park (sections 24B and 24C) A water resource, in relation to coal seam gas development and large coal mining development (sections 24D and 24E) Protection of the environment from actions involving Commonwealth land (sections 26 and 27A) Protection of the environment from Commonwealth actions (section 28) Commonwealth Heritage places overseas (sections 27B and 27C)
Specify the key reasons why you think the proposed action is likely to have a significant adverse impact on the matters identified above.
Significant impacts on a Critically Endangered fauna species (Golden Sun Moth, Synemon plana) are considered likely due to the extent of suitable habitat to be disturbed in the Ravenswood Run property. According to the Significant Impact Guidelines for the Critically Endangered Golden Sun Moth (Synemon plana) (DEWHA 2009), a significant impact on the species is possible if the following impact thresholds are reached:
For large or contiguous habitat areas (>10 ha), a significant impact would result if 0.5 ha or more of habitat is lost, degraded or fragmented; or For small or fragmented habitat areas (<10 ha), a significant impact results if ANY habitat is lost, degraded or fragmented.
Impacts from this project are likely to exceed these thresholds.
001 Referral of proposed action v May 2016 Page 21 of 16 Prior to the implementation of mitigation measures, impacts resulting from this project have the potential to:
adversely affect habitat critical to the survival of a species disrupt the breeding cycle of a population result in invasive species that are harmful to a critically endangered or endangered species becoming established in the endangered or critically endangered species’ habitat; and interfere with the recovery of the species.
Given the narrow width (10 m) and linear nature of the impacts, this project is not expected to:
lead to a long-term decrease in the size of a population reduce the area of occupancy of the species fragment an existing population into two or more populations modify, destroy, remove, isolate or decrease the availability or quality of habitat to the extent that the species is likely to decline; or introduce disease that may cause the species to decline.
001 Referral of proposed action v May 2016 Page 22 of 16 7 Environmental record of the responsible party NOTE: If a decision is made that a proposal needs approval under the EPBC Act, the Environment Minister will also decide the assessment approach. The EPBC Regulations provide for the environmental history of the party proposing to take the action to be taken into account when deciding the assessment approach.
Yes No 7.1 Does the party taking the action have a satisfactory record of responsible X environmental management?
Provide details
Coliban Water has a maintained Environmental Management System certified to 14001/2008, which enables: The identification, recording and communication of the environmental aspects of business activities and the associated impacts Extensive regulatory obligations to be met and the expensive costs of non- compliance to be avoided. The ecological health of the natural environment to be protected. The risk of serious injury to third parties to be reduced. The protection of property and reputation. A business quality system that can demonstrate environmental due diligence. A proactive program to control environmental incidents if they occur. Direct cost savings to the business by avoiding environmental impact and improving operational practices. A system of continuous improvement.
7.2 Has either (a) the party proposing to take the action, or (b) if a permit has been X applied for in relation to the action, the person making the application - ever been subject to any proceedings under a Commonwealth, State or Territory law for the protection of the environment or the conservation and sustainable use of natural resources?
If yes, provide details
In 2005, the Environment Protection Agency (EPA) fined Coliban Water $60,000 for discharge from a Sewer Pump Station into the environment.
In 2006, the EPA fined Coliban Water $5,241 for odour emitted from a Sewer Pump Station.
In 2013 the EPA fined Coliban Water $7,218 for breaching Licence requirement LI DW2 (Discharge to Water) at the Kyneton Water Reclamation Plant.
In 2016 the EPA fined Coliban Water $75,000 for discharge from two sewer manholes into the environment.
7.3 If the party taking the action is a corporation, will the action be taken in accordance X with the corporation’s environmental policy and planning framework?
001 Referral of proposed action v May 2016 Page 23 of 16 If yes, provide details of environmental policy and planning framework
Yes, Coliban Water’s vision is to meaningfully contribute to improving living standards in their region. Coliban Water’s Environmental Policy is to actively contribute to the sustainability of the region by:
Embracing sustainable innovation and technology. Maximising the efficient use of water, energy and other resources. Minimising waste, preventing pollution and continuously improving. Managing facilities and land in a manner that demonstrates good environmental stewardship. Contributing to catchment management and promotion of a conservation ethic within our community. Minimising biodiversity losses. Considering the life cycle of our supply processes, products and by-products to enhance environmental performance. Maintaining an Environmental Management System certified to AS/NZ ISO 14001. Complying with legislative and applicable other requirements relating to our environmental aspects. Working in partnership with our environmental stakeholders. Ensuring our employees have the environmental awareness, skill, motivation and resources to implement the policy. Annually developing, setting and reporting performance against environment targets Regularly reviewing our performance and reporting our progress Pursuing the goals outlined in the Sustainability Strategy Operating in line with strategic priorities established by the Board and its Risk and Community Committee.
7.4 Has the party taking the action previously referred an action under the EPBC Act, or X been responsible for undertaking an action referred under the EPBC Act?
Provide name of proposal and EPBC reference number (if known)
2006 / 3170 – Goulburn to Campaspe Water Pipeline Project, Victoria 2011 / 5931 – Castlemaine Link and Harcourt Modernisation Project (withdrawn) 2011 / 6050 – Harcourt Modernisation Project 2011 / 6044 – Castlemaine Link Project (withdrawn) 2011 / 6167 – Epsom Brine Evaporation Lagoon Project
001 Referral of proposed action v May 2016 Page 24 of 16 8 Information sources and attachments (For the information provided above)
8.1 References Backhouse, G. & Jeans J.1995. Wild Orchids of Victoria, Australia. Aquatic Photographics. Biosis Research 2009. Preliminary flora and terrestrial fauna assessment of proposed alignment options for the Castlemaine Link, Victoria. Report for Coliban Water. Authors: Sofo, K., Franco, J., Bloink, C. & Steer, R. Biosis Research 2011. Castlemaine Link and Harcourt Modernisation Project Victoria: Flora, Fauna and Habitat Hectares Assessment. Report for Coliban Water. Authors: Steer, R., Sofo, K., & Franco, J. Biosis Research 2012. Golden Sun Moth Survey, Ravenswood Run, Ravenswood Victoria Biosis Research 2015. Castlemaine Link Project: Targeted Surveys for Spiny Rice-flower (Pimelia spinescens subsp. spinescens). Biosis Research 2016. Castlemaine Link Project, EPBC Aquatic Fauna Assessment. CH2MHill 2009. Bendigo to Castlemaine Pipeline: Concept Design – Coliban Water, April 2009 DEWHA 2009. EPBC Act Policy Statement 3.12 - Significant Impact Guidelines for the Critically Endangered Golden Sun Moth (Synemon plana) (Department of the Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts (DEWHA), 2009p) [Admin Guideline]. DEWHA 2010. Pteropus poliocephalus in Species Profile and Threats Database, Department of the Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts, Canberra. Available from: http://www.environment.gov.au/sprat. Accessed May 2010. Department of the Environment 2016a. Pteropus poliocephalus in Species Profile and Threats Database, Department of the Environment, Canberra. Available from: http://www.environment.gov.au/sprat. Accessed June 2016. Department of the Environment 2016b. Lathamus discolor in Species Profile and Threats Database, Department of the Environment, Canberra. Available from: http://www.environment.gov.au/sprat. Accessed July 2016. Department of the Environment 2016c. Grantiella picta in Species Profile and Threats Database, Department of the Environment, Canberra. Available from: http://www.environment.gov.au/sprat. Accessed July 2016. Department of the Environment 2016d. Synemon plana in Species Profile and Threats Database, Department of the Environment, Canberra. Available from: http://www.environment.gov.au/sprat. Accessed July 2016. DSE 2009. Advisory List of Threatened Invertebrate Fauna in Victoria – 2009. Victorian Department of Sustainability and Environment, East Melbourne, Victoria DSE 2013. Advisory List of Threatened Vertebrate Fauna in Victoria – 2013. Victorian Department of Sustainability and Environment, East Melbourne, Victoria GHD 2016a. Castlemaine Link – Sandhurst Reservoir Alignment Options, Flora and Fauna Assessment. GHD 2016b. Castlemaine Link– Alternative Alignment Options, Flora and Fauna Assessments. GHD 2016c. Castlemaine Link – Access Tracks, Flora and Fauna Assessment. GHD 2016d. Castlemaine Link Stage 2 Draft Threatened Fauna Management Plan. GHD 2016e. Castlemaine Link Stage 2 Draft Assessment Report. Gilmore, D., Koehler, S. O’Dwyer, C. and Moore, W. 2008. Golden Sun Moth Synemon plana (Lepidoptera: Castniidae): results of a broad survey of populations around Melbourne. The Victorian Naturalist, 125 (2) 230-37. Nevill, G. & Camilleri, M. 2010. National Recovery Plan for Southern Shepherd’s Purse Ballantina antipoda. Victorian Department of Sustainability and Environment, East Melbourne, Victoria. NRE 2002. Strategic Overview for the Goldfields Bioregion Victoria. Department of Natural Resources & Environment, Victoria. Authors: Lowe, K., Ahern, L., Park, G., Moorrees, A. and Price, R. SKM 2009. Bendigo – Castlemaine Link and Harcourt Modernisation Project: Functional Design Report – Final Rev 1, 16 December 2009 Walsh, N.G. & Entwisle, T.J. 1994. Flora of Victoria – Volume 2: Ferns and Allied Plants, Conifers and Monocotyledons. Inkata Press. Walsh, N.G. & Entwisle, T.J. 1996. Flora of Victoria – Volume 3: Dicotyledons, Winteraceae to Myrtaceae. Inkata Press. Walsh, N.G. & Entwisle, T.J. 1999. Flora of Victoria – Volume 4: Dicotyledons, Cornaceae to Asteraceae. Inkata Press.
001 Referral of proposed action v May 2016 Page 25 of 16 8.2 Reliability and date of information The information provided in section 3 has been sourced from the flora and fauna assessment undertaken by Biosis Research (2011) (Attachment E) and GHD in 2016. The latest database searches were conducted in July 2016 and the field investigations were completed between September 2009 and July 2016.
8.3 Attachments Indicate the documents you have attached. All attachments must be less than three megabytes (3mb) so they can be published on the Department’s website. Attachments larger than three megabytes (3mb) may delay the processing of your referral. attached Title of attachment(s) You must attach figures, maps or aerial photographs Attacment A, B, showing the project locality (section 1) GIS file delineating the boundary of the referral area (section 1) figures, maps or aerial photographs Attachment C, D showing the location of the project in Attachment O respect to any matters of national environmental significance or important features of the environments (section 3) If relevant, attach copies of any state or local government Attachment L approvals and consent conditions (section 2.5) copies of any completed assessments to Attachment M, N meet state or local government approvals and outcomes of public consultations, if available (section 2.6) copies of any flora and fauna investigations Attachment E, F, G, H, and surveys (section 3) I, J, K technical reports relevant to the Attachment E, F, G, H, assessment of impacts on protected I, J, K, M, N matters that support the arguments and conclusions in the referral (section 3 and 4) report(s) on any public consultations Attachment Q undertaken, including with Indigenous stakeholders (section 3) Attachment A – coordinates of turning points Attachment B – polyline layer of alignment Attachment C – Location of the Castlemaine Link Project Attachment D – Castlemaine Link Project Alignment
001 Referral of proposed action v May 2016 Page 26 of 16 Attachment E – Flora, Fauna, Habitat Hectares and Threatened Species surveys, Biosis 2011 Attachment F – Golden Sun Moth Surveys, Biosis 2012 Attachment G – Spiney Rice Flower Targeted Surveys, Biosis 2015 Attachment H – Aquatic Fauna Assessment, Biosis 2016 Attachment I – Sandhurst Reservoir Alignment Options, Flora and Fauna Assessment, GHD 2016 Attachment J – Alternative Alignment Options, Flora and Fauna Assessment, GHD 2016 Attachment K – Access Tracks, Flora and Fauna Assessment, GHD 2016 Attachment L – EE Act determination Attachment M – Threatened Fauna Management Plan, GHD 2016 Attachment N – Assessment Report, GHD 2016 Attachment O – Proposed construction corridor through GSM habitat Attachment P – Properties being impacted Attachment Q – Southern Wtaer Security Engagement Plan (DRAFT)
001 Referral of proposed action v May 2016 Page 27 of 16 9 Contacts, signatures and declarations
Project title: Castlemaine Link Project, Victoria
9.1 Person proposing to take action This is the individual, government agency or company that will be principally responsible for, or who will carry out, the proposed action.
If the proposed action will be taken under a contract or other arrangement, this is: the person for whose benefit the action will be taken; or the person who procured the contract or other arrangement and who will have principal control and responsibility for the taking of the proposed action.
If the proposed action requires a permit under the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Act2, this is the person requiring the grant of a GBRMP permission.
The Minister may also request relevant additional information from this person.
If further assessment and approval for the action is required, any approval which may be granted will be issued to the person proposing to take the action. This person will be responsible for complying with any conditions attached to the approval.
If the Minister decides that further assessment and approval is required, the Minister must designate a person as a proponent of the action. The proponent is responsible for meeting the requirements of the EPBC Act during the assessment process. The proponent will generally be the person proposing to take the action3. 1. Name and Title: Neville Pearce , General Manager Service Delivery and Infrastructure 2. Organisation (if applicable): Coliban Region Water Corporation 3. EPBC Referral Number (if known): 4: ACN / ABN (if applicable): ABN 96 549 082 360 5. Postal address PO Box 2770, Bendigo DC, VIC, 3554 6. Telephone: (03) 5434 1256 7. Email: [email protected] 8. Name of proposed proponent (if not the same person at item 1 above and if applicable): 9. ACN/ABN of proposed proponent (if not the same person named at item 1 above): COMPLETE THIS SECTION ONLY IF YOU QUALIFY FOR EXEMPTION FROM THE FEE(S) THAT WOULD OTHERWISE BE PAYABLE
I qualify for exemption □ an individual; OR from fees under section 520(4C)(e)(v) of the EPBC Act because I am:
2 If your referred action, or a component of it, is to be taken in the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park the Minister is required to provide a copy of your referral to the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority (GBRMPA) (see section 73A, EPBC Act). For information about how the GBRMPA may use your information, see http://www.gbrmpa.gov.au/privacy/privacy_notice_for_permits.
001 Referral of proposed action v May 2016 Page 28 of 16
001 Referral of proposed action v May 2016 Page 30 of 16 REFERRAL CHECKLIST NOTE: This checklist is to help ensure that all the relevant referral information has been provided. It is not a part of the referral form and does not need to be sent to the Department.
HAVE YOU: Completed all required sections of the referral form? Included accurate coordinates (to allow the location of the proposed action to be mapped)? Provided a map showing the location and approximate boundaries of the project area? Provided a map/plan showing the location of the action in relation to any matters of NES? Provided a digital file (preferably ArcGIS shapefile, refer to guidelines at Attachment A) delineating the boundaries of the referral area? Provided complete contact details and signed the form? Provided copies of any documents referenced in the referral form? Ensured that all attachments are less than three megabytes (3mb)? Sent the referral to the Department (electronic and hard copy preferred)?
001 Referral of proposed action v May 2016 Page 31 of 16 Attachment A
Geographic Information System (GIS) data supply guidelines
If the area is less than 5 hectares, provide the location as a point layer. If the area greater than 5 hectares, please provide as a polygon layer. If the proposed action is linear (eg. a road or pipeline) please provide a polyline layer.
GIS data needs to be provided to the Department in the following manner: Point, Line or Polygon data types: ESRI file geodatabase feature class (preferred) or as an ESRI shapefile (.shp) zipped and attached with appropriate title Raster data types: Raw satellite imagery should be supplied in the vendor specific format. Projection as GDA94 coordinate system.
Processed products should be provided as follows: For data, uncompressed or lossless compressed formats is required - GeoTIFF or Imagine IMG is the first preference, then JPEG2000 lossless and other simple binary+header formats (ERS, ENVI or BIL). For natural/false/pseudo colour RGB imagery: o If the imagery is already mosaiced and is ready for display then lossy compression is suitable (JPEG2000 lossy/ECW/MrSID). Prefer 10% compression, up to 20% is acceptable. o If the imagery requires any sort of processing prior to display (i.e. mosaicing/colour balancing/etc) then an uncompressed or lossless compressed format is required.
Metadata or ‘information about data’ will be produced for all spatial data and will be compliant with ANZLIC Metadata Profile. (http://www.anzlic.org.au/policies_guidelines#guidelines).
The Department’s preferred method is using ANZMet Lite, however the Department’s Service Provider may use any compliant system to generate metadata.
All data will be provide under a Creative Commons license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/au/)
001 Referral of proposed action v May 2016 Page 32 of 16