Penrith Lakes Development Corporation 13 March 2012
Nepean River Pump and Pipeline
Environmental Impact Statement Scoping Study
AECOM Nepean River Pump and Pipeline
Nepean River Pump and Pipeline Environmental Impact Statement Scoping Study
Prepared for Penrith Lakes Development Corporation
Prepared by
AECOM Australia Pty Ltd Level 21, 420 George Street, Sydney NSW 2000, PO Box Q410, QVB Post Office NSW 1230, Australia T +61 2 8934 0000 F +61 2 8934 0001 www.aecom.com ABN 20 093 846 925
13 March 2012
60221206
AECOM in Australia and New Zealand is certified to the latest version of ISO9001 and ISO14001.
© AECOM Australia Pty Ltd (AECOM). All rights reserved.
AECOM has prepared this document for the sole use of the Client and for a specific purpose, each as expressly stated in the document. No other party should rely on this document without the prior written consent of AECOM. AECOM undertakes no duty, nor accepts any responsibility, to any third party who may rely upon or use this document. This document has been prepared based on the Client’s description of its requirements and AECOM’s experience, having regard to assumptions that AECOM can reasonably be expected to make in accordance with sound professional principles. AECOM may also have relied upon information provided by the Client and other third parties to prepare this document, some of which may not have been verified. Subject to the above conditions, this document may be transmitted, reproduced or disseminated only in its entirety.
P:\60221206_NRPP_Relocation\6. Draft docs\6.1 Reports\5. EIS Scoping Study\Final draft\NRPP EIS Scoping Study_130312.docx Revision D - 13 March 2012 AECOM Nepean River Pump and Pipeline
Quality Information
Document Nepean River Pump and Pipeline
Ref 60221206
Date 13 March 2012
Prepared by Deborah Bowden, Elizabeth Thornton, Vanessa Organ°
Reviewed by Scott Jeffries
Revision History
Authorised Revision Revision Details Date Name/Position Signature
A 23-Dec-2011 Internal review Scott Jeffries Associate Director - Environment . B 16-Jan-2012 " Working draft for PLDC review Scott Jeffries Associate Director - Environment C 01-Mar-2012 Final draft for PLDC review Scott Jeffries Associate Director - Environment ..e.: D 13-Mar-2012 Final for lodgement with DP8d Scott Jeffries Associate Director - 4011114„,,,r.4 / Environment
P:V60221206_NRPP_RelocationS6. Drat] docsS6.1 Reportsa EIS Scoping Studffinal draft1NRPP EIS Scoping Study_130312.docx Revision 0- 13 March 2012 AECOM Nepean River Pump and Pipeline
Table of Contents Executive Summary i 1.0 Introduction 1 1.1 Background and context 1 1.2 Development overview 1 1.3 Development location 2 1.4 Development need and justification 2 1.5 Capital Investment Value 3 2.0 Development Description 7 2.1 The Development 7 2.1.1 Pumping station, pump and intake point 7 2.1.2 Pipeline 7 2.1.3 Water intake and discharge 7 2.1.4 Pumping rules and volume of water intake 7 3.0 Statutory Planning Considerations 10 3.1 Permissibility 10 3.2 Environmental Assessment Process 10 3.3 Environmental Planning Instruments 10 3.3.1 State Environmental Planning Policy (Penrith Lakes Scheme) 1989 10 3.3.2 Sydney Regional Environmental Plan No 20 (Hawkesbury-Nepean River) 11 3.3.3 State Environmental Planning Policy No. 55 11 3.3.4 Penrith Local Environmental Plan 2010 11 3.4 Strategic Land Use Planning 12 3.5 Other NSW Environmental Approvals 12 3.6 Commonwealth Environmental Approvals 13 3.6.1 Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 13 4.0 Agency and Stakeholder Consultation 15 4.1 Consultation approach 15 4.2 Key activities 15 4.2.1 NSW Government agencies and other stakeholders 15 5.0 Identification of Key Issues 16 5.1 Approach to identification of key environmental issues 16 5.1.1 Environmental risk screening 16 5.1.2 Expected stakeholder issues 17 5.2 Identification of key environmental issues 17 6.0 Key Environmental Issues 20 6.1 Hydrology 20 6.1.1 Existing Environment 20 6.1.2 Issues for Consideration 21 6.1.3 Method for Assessment 21 6.2 Water Quality 22 6.2.1 Existing Environment 22 6.2.2 Issues for Consideration 23 6.2.3 Method for Assessment 23 6.3 Terrestrial and aquatic ecology 23 6.3.1 Existing Environment 23 6.3.2 Issues for Consideration 27 6.3.3 Method of Assessment 28 6.4 Indigenous heritage 28 6.4.1 Existing Environment 28 6.4.2 Issues for Consideration 30 6.4.3 Method of Assessment 30 6.5 Non-Indigenous heritage 30 6.5.1 Existing Environment 30 6.5.2 Previous Heritage Assessments 31 6.5.3 Issues for Consideration 31
P:\60221206_NRPP_Relocation\6. Draft docs\6.1 Reports\5. EIS Scoping Study\Final draft\NRPP EIS Scoping Study_130312.docx Revision D - 13 March 2012 AECOM Nepean River Pump and Pipeline
6.5.4 Method of Assessment 32 7.0 Other Environmental Issues 33 7.1 Land use 33 7.1.1 Existing Environment 33 7.1.2 Issues for Consideration 33 7.1.3 Method of Assessment 33 7.2 Landscape and visual amenity 33 7.2.1 Existing Environment 33 7.2.2 Issues for Consideration 34 7.2.3 Method of Assessment 34 7.3 Topography, geology and soils 34 7.3.1 Existing Environment 34 7.3.2 Issues for Consideration 35 7.3.3 Method of Assessment 35 7.4 Noise and vibration 35 7.4.1 Existing Environment 35 7.4.2 Issues for Consideration 36 7.4.3 Method of Assessment 36 7.5 Air quality 36 7.5.1 Existing Environment 36 7.5.2 Issues for Consideration 36 7.5.3 Method of Assessment 37 7.6 Waste 37 7.6.1 Existing Environment 37 7.6.2 Issues for Consideration 37 7.6.3 Method of Assessment 38 8.0 Conclusions 39 9.0 References 40
P:\60221206_NRPP_Relocation\6. Draft docs\6.1 Reports\5. EIS Scoping Study\Final draft\NRPP EIS Scoping Study_130312.docx Revision D - 13 March 2012 i AECOM Nepean River Pump and Pipeline
Executive Summary This Environmental Impact Statement Scoping Study is submitted on behalf of Penrith Lakes Development Corporation in support of a development application for the construction and operation of a pumping station and pipeline (the Development) to pump water from the Nepean River to the lakes of the Penrith Lakes Scheme. The objective of the Development is to allow the extraction of water from the Nepean River to discharge into the Penrith Lakes Scheme to enable initial filling of the lakes as well as securing a long-term water supply, to maintain water levels in the lakes. The Development would be submitted under Division 4.1, Part 4 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 as a State Significant Development. A project application was previously submitted and approved in 2007 under Part 3A of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 for a pump and pipeline at a different location to that proposed for this development. The previous approved location has since been reviewed due to the Western Sydney Recycled Water Initiative – Replacement Flows Project. A new location was determined to be more suitable following changes since the 2007 approval. The 2007 Part 3A approval will lapse in 2012. The Development The Development to be assessed would involve the construction of a pumping station, motor control centre and up to 150 m of pipeline from the Nepean River to the discharge point on Penrith Lakes Development Corporation land. From the discharge point the water would filter through a constructed wetland into the lakes system. The detailed design of the wetlands will form part of the PLDC two-year plan approval process. Key Environmental Issues The key environmental issues associated with the Development would include: - Hydrological regime and water quality of Nepean River and Penrith Lakes Scheme; - Terrestrial and aquatic ecology; and - Indigenous and non-Indigenous heritage. Other environmental issues that would be considered in the Environmental Impact Statement but are not considered to be key environmental assessment issues include land use, landscape and visual amenity, topography, geology and soils, noise and vibration, and waste. As part of the preparation of the Environmental Impact Statement, studies would be carried out to assess the potential environmental impacts of the Development and to identify mitigation and management measures to minimise impacts on the environment during construction and operation of the Development. The preparation of the Environmental Impact Statement would include consultation with key stakeholders, including State government agencies, and the local community as required.
P:\60221206_NRPP_Relocation\6. Draft docs\6.1 Reports\5. EIS Scoping Study\Final draft\NRPP EIS Scoping Study_130312.docx Revision D - 13 March 2012 1 AECOM Nepean River Pump and Pipeline
1.0 Introduction Penrith Lakes Development Corporation (PLDC) is seeking approval for the construction and operation of a pumping station and pipeline to extract water from the Nepean River and discharge it into the Penrith Lakes Scheme (PLS) (the Development). The Development would provide the infrastructure required to pump water from the Nepean River to initially fill the lakes within the PLS and to maintain ongoing lake water levels. The PLS is located on 1,935 ha of the Cumberland floodplain on the banks of the Nepean River, to the north-west of the Penrith Central Business District (CBD), and approximately 55 km to the west of the Sydney CBD (Figure 1.1) (PLDC, 2007). PLDC and the concept of the PLS was established in 1980, comprising an alliance between the companies originally mining in the area. Since the establishment of the PLS, sand and gravel mining in the area has provided approximately 50% of Sydney’s sand and aggregate requirements, with approximately nine million tonnes of raw material remaining to be extracted (PLDC, 2012). Ultimately, the PLS will involve the transformation of the quarries into a water based recreational parkland. The key feature of the PLS is the establishment of an interconnected lakes system to create a new recreational precinct to service western Sydney (PLDC, 2007). The PLS is to be developed in accordance with the provisions of a Deed of Agreement (the Deed) between PDC and the NSW Government that was made in 1987. This Environmental Impact Statement Scoping Study (EIS SS) provides an overview of the proposed Development and an outline of associated potential environmental impacts. This report is being submitted under Division 4.1, Part 4 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (EP&A Act), to support a request for Director-General’s Requirements (DGRs) that will guide the preparation of an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for the Development.
1.1 Background and context In 2007, PLDC was granted approval under the former Part 3A of the EP&A Act for the construction and operation of a water pipeline and pumping station to be located upstream of the Penrith Weir and of the confluence of Nepean River and Boundary Creek (major project number MP 05_0078). The purpose of the pumping station and pipeline was to extract water from the Nepean River for the short-term filling of lakes and to maintain lake water levels as part of the PLS. Construction of the approved Nepean River Pump and Pipeline project has not commenced. The location of the previous project application was designed to avoid the intake of tertiary treated effluent that was discharged from the then Penrith Sewage Treatment Plant (STP) to Boundary Creek. The tertiary treated effluent entered the Nepean River downstream of Penrith Weir. The pumping station was to be located upstream of Penrith Weir to avoid intake of the discharged effluent. Subsequent to granting the approval for the Nepean River Pump and Pipeline project in 2007, the Western Sydney Recycled Water Initiative – Replacement Flows project (MP 06_190) was approved, constructed and is now operational. The Replacement Flows project treats STP effluent to a higher standard than the previous tertiary treatment system prior to its ultimate discharge to Boundary Creek. As a result of the improved water quality of discharged effluent, previous issues associated with the intake of effluent no longer restrict the location of the pump station to upstream of the Penrith Weir. As a result, PDLC has reviewed the location and design of the pump and pipeline. A preferable location has been identified based on an initial constraints analysis that assessed environmental, engineering and cost issues. The preferred location for the pumping station and pipeline is downstream of the Boundary Creek and Nepean River confluence which is in closer vicinity to the PLS. Following the repeal of Part 3A, the Development would now be subject to assessment and determination as State Significant Development under Division 4.1, Part 4 of the EP&A Act.
1.2 Development overview The Development would include the following: - Construction and operation of a pumping station containing centrifugal pumps located approximately 600 m downstream of the Penrith Weir on the eastern embankment of the Nepean River;
P:\60221206_NRPP_Relocation\6. Draft docs\6.1 Reports\5. EIS Scoping Study\Final draft\NRPP EIS Scoping Study_130312.docx Revision D - 13 March 2012 2 AECOM Nepean River Pump and Pipeline
- Construction and operation of a water supply pipeline extending from the Nepean River, via the pump station, to a discharge point on PLDC land; and - Provision of ancillary infrastructure, such as intake/discharge pipework and structures, and works to enable the construction works. The water extracted from the Nepean River would be discharged to a proposed constructed wetland system that would be located to the north to north-west of the extraction location. The constructed wetland would be designed using a system of wetlands, screens and grates, rip rap, silt curtains and/or other physical barriers, such as weed booms, to achieve the water quality criteria established as part of this assessment. Whilst the concept plan for the constructed wetland will be referenced in this application, it does not form part of the current application for approval. As such, the scope for this application includes the construction and operation of the pumping station, water pipeline and ancillary infrastructure only, related to the extraction of water from the Nepean River and discharge to the PLS.
1.3 Development location An options study was prepared by AECOM (AECOM, 2011a) in which four location options were assessed for the pumping station and pipeline route (refer Figure 1.2). The proposed options were positioned at various locations along the Nepean River to the south and west of the PLS. Each of the proposed options was assessed against the following criteria: - Potential environmental impact; - Ease of access to pump station; - General arrangement of pumping equipment; - Suitability of river bathymetry and adequacy of pump submergence; - Access and flood protection of the Motor Control Centre (MCC); - Power availability; - Pipeline route; - Constructability; and - Costs (indicative for comparison purposes). A Preferred Option Feasibility Study was carried out by AECOM (2011b) in which Location A was the preferred location based on engineering and environmental constraints (refer to Figure 1.3). Locations B, C and D were deemed to be less preferable for various reasons including distance to power supply, potential aquatic and terrestrial ecology impacts, access and constructability limitations, and water depth.
1.4 Development need and justification Completion of the PLS will seek to enhance local visual amenity and provide an interconnected system of lakes that would satisfy the recreational needs of western Sydney. Adequate water supply to the lakes is essential for the completion and long-term viability of the PLS. The Development, together with rainfall and stormwater runoff within the local catchment area would provide the mechanisms to fill the lakes and maintain long-term water levels. On an annual average basis the stormwater runoff is approximately 1GL/yr short of supplying the top-up water for the lakes to offset evaporation losses. Coupled with the variability of local climatic conditions, particularly rainfall, this water source is considered not to be adequate to maintain the lake’s water levels within acceptable operating ranges. The PLS design is based upon the lakes being maintained within normal operating ranges 90 per cent of the time. A number of alternative water supply options for the PLS have previously been assessed by the Independent Expert Panel (IEP) for the Hawkesbury Nepean River on behalf of the Penrith Lakes Water Committee. The IEP recommended that the Nepean River be used as the long-term, sustainable water supply for the PLS including establishment of a specific receiving lake (i.e. Quarantine Lake) to receive the river water (DIPNR June 2005).
P:\60221206_NRPP_Relocation\6. Draft docs\6.1 Reports\5. EIS Scoping Study\Final draft\NRPP EIS Scoping Study_130312.docx Revision D - 13 March 2012 3 AECOM Nepean River Pump and Pipeline
Once completed, the lakes would hold approximately 35,000 ML of water. Currently around 10,000 ML is stored on site. Relying on stormwater runoff from the catchment alone could take decades to fill the lakes. Water extracted from the Nepean River would provide the 30,000 ML of water required to fill the lakes. Based on flow records from 1909 to 1995, Water Research Laboratory (WRL, 2006) estimated that it might take from less than one year to in excess of 13 years to fill the lakes. Ultimately, timing of the completed PLS would be dependent on the adopted pumping rules and climatic conditions. The median time to fill the lakes has previously been predicted to be between two and three years (WRL, 2006). The advantage of Location A over the previously approved location (upstream of the Boundary Creek and Nepean River confluence) is the reduced distance from the pumping station to the PLS resulting in a shorter pipeline with no creek crossings. A shorter pipeline has environmental, social and economic benefits through reduced construction and operational costs, and reduced disturbance to the surrounding natural and human environments.
1.5 Capital Investment Value The estimated capital investment value of the development is $3,840,000. This value includes: - Site preparation - Piling - Structural steelwork - Pumps and piping - Electrical - Landscaping A total of 14 construction jobs and one full-time operational job would be generated as a result of the development.
P:\60221206_NRPP_Relocation\6. Draft docs\6.1 Reports\5. EIS Scoping Study\Final draft\NRPP EIS Scoping Study_130312.docx Revision D - 13 March 2012 Maraylya Richmond Hillside Palm Beach Berowra Waters Grose Wold East Richmond Fiddletown Little Head Clarendon Scheyville Anaparoo Berowra Heights Berrilee Oakville Arcadia Berowra Mulgrave Pittwater
Lovett Bay Middle Dural Nelson Church Point Box Hill Mount Kuring-gai
Hornsby Heights Bayview Duffys Forest Castlereagh Annangrove Mount Colah Berkshire Park Riverstone Terrey Hills Ingleside PENRITH LAKES SCHEME Dural Asquith Round Corner Elanora Turimetta Rouse Hill Head Springwoodpringwood Schofields Heights Cranebrook Shane Park Hornsby Waitara Kellyville Glenhaven Narrabeen Beach Wahroonga St Ives Belrose Quakers Hill Cromer Collaroy Beach Cochrane Castle Hill Turramurra Heights DEVELOPMENT AREA Davidson Pymble Long Reef Point Dunheved Plumpton Marayong Baulkham Beecroft Frenchs Forest Hills Dee Why Beach Penrith Kingswood Gordon
TO Rev C St Marys Brookvale Mount Druitt Blacktown Killara Lapstone Epping Curl Curl Beach Regentville Seven Hills Lindfield Northmead Carlingford Roseville Toongabbie Eastern Creek Eastwood Telopea Chatswood Manly Model Farms Prospect Dundas West Ryde Erskine Park Westmead Artarmon Parramatta Meadowbank St Leonards North Head Rhodes Granville North Sovereign Sydney Horsley Park Clyburn Olympic Park Word Cave Dunbar Head Auburn Drummoyne Guildford Concord Lidcombe Cecil Park Fairfield Homebush SYDNEY Berala Badgerys Creek Kings Cross Edensor Park Villawood Edgecliff Boshops Croydon Leichhardt Central Canley Vale Delec Redfern Cabramatta Elcar Petersham Bondi Junction Hope Street Mackenzies Point Erskineville Waverley Yagoona Enfield South St Peters Warwick Farm Sydenham Randwick Shark Point KEY Bankstown Belmore Mascot Liverpool Punchbowl Tempe Kingsford National Park and Wildlife Estate Hoxton Park Bushrangers Cave Austral Major road/highway Arncliffe Bringelly Kingsgrove Mistral Point Minor road Rossmore Prestons Narwee Casula Rockdale Maroubra Beach Rail Revesby PACIFIC 05 10km Leppington East Hills Botany OCEAN Allawah Glenfield Holsworthy
WerombiWerombi G:\Projects\602 Projects\60221206 Penrith Lakes\FIGURES\EIS Scoping Report\60221206 F1 Regional Context 07 02 2012 Denham Court Sandy Point Oatley Macquarie Fields Botany Bay REGIONAL CONTEXT Ingleburn Illawong Environmental Impact Statement Scoping Report Cape Banks Theresa Park Como Nepean River Pump and Pipeline Project Kurnell Oran Park Bow Bowing Menai Jannali Raby Grahams Hill FIGURE 1.1 Castlereagh
Castlereagh Road Smeeton Road Road
Nepean River
PENRITH LAKES SCHEME
Road
Road Tempest Street Tadmore Road
Street Taylor Road
Recreation Lake B
Recreation Lake A
Option D
Cranebrook Lakes
North Lake
Cranebrook
Penrith Whitewater Stadium Sydney International Regatta Centre Middle Basin
Warm Up Lake
Road Duck Pond Rowing Lake
Castlereagh Road Cranebrook Road
Final Basin Western Tailings PondPond Option C Eastern Tailings PondPond DEVELOPMENT AREA EmuHeights
KEY
Penrith Lakes Scheme Existing waterbody Option B Development Area Pump location options
0 1 2km Option A
Castlereagh Road
G:\Projects\602 Projects\60221206 Penrith Lakes\FIGURES\EIS Scoping Report\60221206 F1.2 Proposed River Pump Locations 09 03 2012 TO Rev B PROPOSED RIVER PUMP LOCATIONS Environmental Impact Statement Scoping Report Nepean River Pump and Pipeline Project
FIGURE 1.2 KEY
CastlereaghPenrith Lakes Scheme Non Quarry Zone Development Area Public Roads Water Flood Cell Wetland System Flood Outlet Pipe Floodway Overland Flow Channel Weir Reticulation Pipe Parkland Water Source Pipe (Pump) Castlereagh Road Smeeton Road Wildlife Lake Road 0 1 2km
Nepean River
Road
PENRITH LAKES SCHEME
Road
Road Tempest Street Tadmore Road
Street Taylor Road
Main Recreation Lake B
Cranebrook Lakes Main Recreation Lake A
North Lake
Cranebrook
Penrith Whitewater Stadium Sydney International Regatta Centre Middle Basin
Warm Up Lake
Road Duck Pond Quarantine Rowing Lake Lake
Castlereagh Road Cranebrook Road
Wetland Final Basin
Eastern Tailings PondPond DEVELOPMENT AREA EmuHeights
Castlereagh Road
G:\Projects\602 Projects\60221206 Penrith Lakes\FIGURES\EIS Scoping Report\60221206 F1.3 Existing Site Layout and Project Area 2902 2012 TO Rev E DEVELOPMENT AREA IN RELATION TO PENRITH LAKES SCHEME Environmental Impact Statement Scoping Report Nepean River Pump and Pipeline Project
FIGURE 1.3 7 AECOM Nepean River Pump and Pipeline
2.0 Development Description
2.1 The Development The Development would involve the construction and operation of a pumping station, intake/discharge pipework and structures, water supply pipeline and instrumentation equipment (Figure 2.1). The extracted water would be discharged to a constructed wetland system for treatment prior to being discharged to the lakes within the PLS. The constructed wetland is an integral component of the pump and pipeline Development to the extent that the latter would not be possible until the wetland is constructed. However, until the quarrying activities and use of the tailings ponds in the south of the PLS have been confirmed, it is not possible to detail the configuration of the wetland. As such, the design of the wetland is rudimentary at present and does not form part of this application. Furthermore, PLDC is required to submit to Department of Planning and Infrastructure two-year plans outlining future proposals regarding landforms within the PLS. Details pertaining to the constructed wetland would be included as part of a two-year plan approval process in the future. The wetland design would be developed to achieve water quality criteria established as part of this application. In turn, operation of the Nepean River Pump and Pipeline would be scheduled to coincide with the design and approval of the constructed wetland to ensure the two developments are delivered in a coordinated and consistent manner. 2.1.1 Pumping station, pump and intake point The water intake point would be located approximately 600 metres downstream of Penrith Weir, on the eastern bank of the Nepean River and adjacent to a light industrial area. The motor control centre of the pump station comprising the motor and electrical equipment would be constructed above the 100 year Average Recurrence Interval (ARI) flood event. The pump would be installed below the minimum operating level of the river. This would allow sufficient depth for the pump to ensure the submergence criterion is met. The pump support structure would comprise piled foundations supporting a stainless steel frame, extending from above the 100 year flood level on the bank to the edge of the Nepean River. 2.1.2 Pipeline The pipeline would be up to 150 m long and would traverse both Penrith City Council managed land (i.e. Nepean River) and land within the PLDC property boundary. The proposed route is the shortest possible length between the pump station and the lakes. The pipeline would be installed underground from the pumping station to a point approximately 20 metres from the bank. The purpose of this underground section would be to avoid a section of land that may be developed in the future for an extension of the Great River Walk. The pipeline would then resurface and traverse above-ground until the discharge location. Extracted water would be pumped through the pipeline and discharged, from which point it would be treated via a constructed wetland system before being ultimately discharged to the PLS. Approval to construct and operate the wetland system would be sought separately to this application. Construction of the wetland system would be scheduled to be operational prior to the operation of the Nepean River pump and pipeline development. 2.1.3 Water intake and discharge River water would pass through a fine mesh screen fitted at the intake prior to being transferred through the main pipeline system. The screen would filter aquatic river weeds, large to medium-sized debris and sediments. Water would be transferred through the pipeline to the discharge point where it would flow via a constructed wetland and transfer system to a quarantine lake and be directed to the lakes as required. The flow of the water through the PLS is illustrated on Figure 1.3. 2.1.4 Pumping rules and volume of water intake As part of this application, two key scenarios would be considered with regard to identifying appropriate pumping rules for the operation of the pump. The scenarios have been based on the pumping rules outlined within the Conditions of Approval for the Nepean River Pump and Pipeline project that was approved in 2007. Scenario A would comprise turning on the pumps when the total river flow exceeds 500ML/day and turns off when the river drops below 350ML/day. This scenario would consider the relation between the net flow in the river
P:\60221206_NRPP_Relocation\6. Draft docs\6.1 Reports\5. EIS Scoping Study\Final draft\NRPP EIS Scoping Study_130312.docx Revision D - 13 March 2012 8 AECOM Nepean River Pump and Pipeline
downstream of the pump intake and environmental flows. Scenario B would comprise setting the trigger for pumping based on the tributary flows only, rather than on the total river flows. A number of variations to these two key scenarios would also be considered as part of the assessment to determine pumping rules and volume of water intake.
P:\60221206_NRPP_Relocation\6. Draft docs\6.1 Reports\5. EIS Scoping Study\Final draft\NRPP EIS Scoping Study_130312.docx Revision D - 13 March 2012 Discharge to Penrith Lakes Scheme
Pump arrangement Underground Pipeline
Security fence Above-ground Pipeline
Motor Control Centre
Nepean River
Extend overhead power (assumed alignment)
Pad mounted transformer
KEY Future constructed wetlands (not part of this development application) Cadastral boundary
0 20 40m CASSOLA PLACE
G:\Projects\602 Projects\60221206 Penrith Lakes\FIGURES\EIS Scoping Report\60221206 F2.1 Site Plan 09 03 2012 TO Rev E PROPOSED NEPEAN RIVER PUMP AND PIPELINE SITE PLAN Environmental Impact Statement Scoping Report Nepean River Pump and Pipeline Project
FIGURE 2.1 10 AECOM Nepean River Pump and Pipeline
3.0 Statutory Planning Considerations
3.1 Permissibility The Development would mostly traverse the lands to which State Environmental Planning Policy (Penrith Lakes Scheme) 1989 (SEPP (Penrith Lakes Scheme)) applies. A small portion of the Development would also traverse land that is subject to the zoning controls administered by Penrith City Council under the Penrith Local Environmental Plan 2010 (LEP). The Development would extend into the Nepean River which is zoned as W1 - Natural Waterways under the Penrith LEP 2010. While the Development is permissible with consent where it lies within lands subject to SEPP (Penrith Lakes Scheme) the Development would be prohibited under the Penrith Local Environmental Plan (LEP) 2010 where it lies within land zoned as W1 – Natural Waterways. Section 89E(2) of the EP&A Act provides that Development consent for State Significant Development (refer to Section 3.2) may be granted despite the development being partly prohibited by an environmental planning instrument.
3.2 Environmental Assessment Process The Development is declared to be State Significant Development as the development lies within the Penrith Lakes Site specified in Schedule 2 of the State Environmental Planning Policy (State and Regional Development) 2011 (State and Regional Development SEPP) and is development for the purposes of extraction, rehabilitation or lake formation (including for the purposes of associated infrastructure on land located within or outside the Penrith Lakes Site). Accordingly, the Development would be assessed and determined as State Significant Development by the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure, or the Minister’s delegate, under Division 4.1, Part 4 of the EP&A Act.
3.3 Environmental Planning Instruments Environmental planning instruments that contain provisions that may be relevant to the Development and would be considered in the EIS including the following: - State Environmental Planning Policy (Penrith Lakes Scheme) 1989 - Sydney Regional Environmental Plan No 20 (Hawkesbury-Nepean River); - State Environmental Planning Policy No. 55 – Remediation of Land; and - Penrith Local Environmental Plan 2010. 3.3.1 State Environmental Planning Policy (Penrith Lakes Scheme) 1989 The aim of this plan is to permit the implementation of the Penrith Lakes Scheme on the land to which the plan applies. The majority of the Development is situated on PLDC land, and is therefore subject to SEPP (Penrith Lakes Scheme). The aims of SEPP (Penrith Lakes Scheme) are: - to provide a development control process establishing environmental and technical matters which must be taken into account in implementing the Penrith Lakes Scheme in order to protect the environment; - to identify and protect items of the environmental heritage; - to identify land which may be rezoned for urban purposes; and - to permit interim development in order to prevent the sterilisation of land to which this plan applies during implementation of the Penrith Lakes Scheme. Under section 8(4), the consent authority for any development to implement the Penrith Lakes Scheme shall take into consideration a range of matters, the following of which are most relevant to the Development: (f) the management and control of water resources including:
P:\60221206_NRPP_Relocation\6. Draft docs\6.1 Reports\5. EIS Scoping Study\Final draft\NRPP EIS Scoping Study_130312.docx Revision D - 13 March 2012 11 AECOM Nepean River Pump and Pipeline
(i) the source of water in order to fill any lake (including the quality and quantity of water from that source), (ii) water reticulation systems from the Nepean River to any lake, from lake to lake and from any lake to the Nepean River, (xii) the effect upon the Hawkesbury/Nepean River system, 3.3.2 Sydney Regional Environmental Plan No 20 (Hawkesbury-Nepean River) The aim of this plan is to protect the environment of the Hawkesbury-Nepean River system by ensuring that the impacts of future land uses are considered in a regional context. The specific planning policies and recommended strategies for this plan relevant to the Development that would be considered as part of the EIS are as follows: - Total catchment management: Total catchment management is to be integrated with environmental planning for the catchment; - Environmentally sensitive areas: The environmental quality of environmentally sensitive areas must be protected and enhanced through careful control of future land use changes and through management and (where necessary) remediation of existing uses. Environmentally sensitive areas include the river and riparian lands; - Water quality: Future development must not prejudice the achievement of the goals of use of the river for primary contact recreation (being recreational activities involving direct water contact, such as swimming) and aquatic ecosystem protection in the river system. - Water quantity: Aquatic ecosystems must not be adversely affected by development, which changes the flow characteristics of surface or groundwater in the catchment. - Cultural heritage: The importance of the river in contributing to the significance of items and places of cultural heritage significance should be recognised, and these items and places should be protected and sensitively managed and, if appropriate, enhanced. - Flora and fauna: Manage flora and fauna communities so that the diversity of species and genetics within the catchment is conserved and enhanced. - Riverine scenic quality: The scenic quality of the riverine corridor must be protected. - Recreation and tourism: The value of the riverine corridor as a significant recreational and tourist asset must be protected. - Metropolitan strategy: Development should complement the vision, goal, key principles and action plan of the Metropolitan Strategy. This plan does not apply to the land to which SEPP (Penrith Lakes Scheme) applies. Therefore the majority of the Development is not subject to the policies outlined in SREP 20. However, the pipeline extends into the Nepean River, which would be subject to provisions under SREP 20. Also, the action of extracting flows from the Nepean River would need to be considered in the context of the downstream receiving environment of the Nepean River with the aim of minimising the impacts of flow alteration on the natural river environment. 3.3.3 State Environmental Planning Policy No. 55 State Environmental Planning Policy No. 55 – Remediation of Land (SEPP 55) requires a consent authority, when assessing and determining a development application, to consider whether the land the subject of the development is contaminated and if so, whether the land requires remediation before the intended land use can proceed. There are no known contaminated sites along the pipeline route or at the proposed location of the pumping station. The potential for contaminated land to be encountered, based on historical land use, would be considered as part of the EIS and appropriate mitigation measures identified where required. 3.3.4 Penrith Local Environmental Plan 2010 The Development traverses land zoned as W1 – Natural Waterways under the Penrith LEP 2010. As a result the Development would be considered as prohibited development under the Penrith Local Environmental Plan (LEP) 2010 where it lies within land zoned as W1 – Natural Waterways. However, as discussed above, consent may still be granted as the Development is only partially prohibited.
P:\60221206_NRPP_Relocation\6. Draft docs\6.1 Reports\5. EIS Scoping Study\Final draft\NRPP EIS Scoping Study_130312.docx Revision D - 13 March 2012 12 AECOM Nepean River Pump and Pipeline
In designing the Development and preparing the EIS, the objectives of this zone and permissible uses would be considered to minimise potential conflicts between the Development and the land use zoning.
3.4 Strategic Land Use Planning Strategic land use planning for the PLS is managed by PLDC and the regional importance of the PLS is recognised by both the draft North West Subregional Strategy (NSW Department of Planning, 2007) and the Metropolitan Plan for Sydney 2036 (NSW Government, 2010). The strategic planning direction for the PLS is for the rehabilitation of the site which adjoins the Nepean River resulting in large urban parks, comprising of parklands and lakes. An integrated area of urban land is also proposed including areas for employment uses. Both the Metropolitan Plan for Sydney 2036 (NSW Government, 2010) and the draft North West Subregional Strategy (NSW Department of Planning, 2007) outline the strategy to develop Penrith as a regional city and the western gateway to Sydney. In addition, it is projected that the North West Subregion would have the highest housing and job growth in the Sydney region. The PLS is discussed throughout the draft North West Subregional Strategy and is referred to as an important feature of the region. It is seen as being a major contributor to a range of actions outlined within the strategy including increasing access to quality parks and public places and improving Sydney’s major sporting and cultural event facilities. The PLS is presented in the strategy as providing a unique regional sports and recreation venue and space for cultural activities such as festivals and performances. One of the future directions for the region is to improve connectivity with surrounding precincts including PLS. The PLS, and associated development, would provide important regional open space for Penrith and the North West Subregion as well as recreational, residential and employment lands that are accessible from Penrith CBD. The Development is an essential component of completing the PLS.
3.5 Other NSW Environmental Approvals Under sections 89J and 89K of the EP&A Act, certain separate environmental approvals would not be required for the Development or would be required to be issued consistent with the planning approval granted for the Development. Notwithstanding, the potential impact associated with matters addressed by each of the approvals would still need to be considered regardless of the need for the approval. Environmental approvals that may be applicable to the development and a brief discussion of their relevance, as well as the need (or not) to obtain a separate approval, is outlined in Table 3.1. Other environmental approvals may be required in addition to those referred to under sections 89J and 89K of the EP&A Act, and these would be considered and outlined where relevant to the assessment of the Development as part of the EIS.
Table 3.1 Environmental approvals that may be required for the Development Applicable to Approval the Comment Development? Approvals not required under section 89J A permit under section 201, 205 or 219 Potential The Development would not involve dredging or of the Fisheries Management Act 1994 reclamation works, would not result in harm to marine vegetation and would not block fish passage. However, some disturbance of the Nepean River may be required during construction or for on-going access to the pumping station. An approval under Part 4 or an Unlikely The Development would not impact a place, building, excavation permit under section 139 of work, relic, moveable object, precinct, or land, that is the Heritage Act 1977 subject to an interim heritage order or that is listed on the State Heritage Register. An excavation permit would not be required. An Aboriginal heritage impact permit Potential The Development would be designed and under section 90 of the National Parks constructed to avoid impacts on Aboriginal heritage objects, places, land or persons wherever reasonable
P:\60221206_NRPP_Relocation\6. Draft docs\6.1 Reports\5. EIS Scoping Study\Final draft\NRPP EIS Scoping Study_130312.docx Revision D - 13 March 2012 13 AECOM Nepean River Pump and Pipeline
Applicable to Approval the Comment Development? and Wildlife Act 1974 and feasible to do so. However, until more detailed survey work is undertaken within the Development footprint, total avoidance of impacts to Aboriginal cultural heritage is not certain. An authorisation to clear native Potential The Development would be designed and vegetation or State protected land constructed to minimise the need to remove under section 12 of the Native vegetation. Vegetation Act 2003 A bushfire safety authority under Unlikely The Development would be located within an area section 100B of the Rural Fires Act identified as bushfire prone land (vegetation category 1997 1) on the Penrith City Council Bushfire Prone Land Map (dated 1 April 2009). For this approval to be relevant the Development would also need to include subdivision of land that could be lawfully used for residential development. A water use approval under section 89, Yes The Development would extract water from the a water management work approval Nepean River and would involve water supply and under section 90 or an activity approval drainage works within the meaning of the Water (other than a groundwater interference Management Act 2000 (section 90). The approval) under section 91 of the Development would also involve works on waterfront Water Management Act 2000 land, and would therefore constitute a controlled activity under section 91.
Approvals required to be issued consistently under section 89K An environment protection licence No The Development would not fall within one of the under Chapter 3 of the Protection of scheduled development categories listed in Schedule the Environment Operations Act 1997 1 of the Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997. A consent under section 138 of the No The Development would not cross any public road. Roads Act 1993 A licence under the Pipelines Act 1967 Potential The Development would involve the operation of a pipeline requiring a licence under the Pipelines Act 1967.
3.6 Commonwealth Environmental Approvals 3.6.1 Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 The Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (EPBC Act) requires approval from the Commonwealth Minister for Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities where an action has or would have a significant impact on a matter of National Environmental Significance (NES). A search of the EPBC Protected Matters database has been conducted for the area of the Development to identify potential matters of NES that may trigger the need for a referral of the action to the Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities. The results of the database search are presented in Table 3.2. Of the potential EPBC Act triggers, potential impacts on threatened species and ecological communities pose the greatest likelihood of triggering the need for EPBC Act approval. The Development would be designed to avoid listed threatened species and ecological communities wherever reasonable and feasible to do so. The need for an EPBC Act referral based on these species and communities would be considered further during the detailed ecological assessment to be undertaken for the Development, and a referral made if relevant.
P:\60221206_NRPP_Relocation\6. Draft docs\6.1 Reports\5. EIS Scoping Study\Final draft\NRPP EIS Scoping Study_130312.docx Revision D - 13 March 2012 14 AECOM Nepean River Pump and Pipeline
Table 3.2 Matters of National Environmental Significance
Matters of NES Matters within the immediate vicinity of the Development World Heritage Properties None
National Heritage Places None
Wetlands of International Importance None
Commonwealth listed threatened 5 listed threatened ecological communities have been recorded in the species and ecological communities study area. 35 listed threatened species have either been recorded, or their potential habitat has been recorded, within the study area:
Commonwealth listed Migratory 12 listed migratory species have either been recorded, or their potential Species habitat has been recorded, within the study area:
Nuclear Action The Development would not result in any nuclear action nor would any nuclear activity need to be undertaken.
Commonwealth Marine Areas There are no Commonwealth marine areas proximate to the study area.
P:\60221206_NRPP_Relocation\6. Draft docs\6.1 Reports\5. EIS Scoping Study\Final draft\NRPP EIS Scoping Study_130312.docx Revision D - 13 March 2012 15 AECOM Nepean River Pump and Pipeline
4.0 Agency and Stakeholder Consultation PLDC recognises the importance of delivering the Development in a manner that avoids and minimises potential impacts on the environment and the local community in the vicinity of the Development area. An important input into the consideration of environmental and social impacts would come from direct and transparent consultation with relevant government agencies, stakeholders and potentially affected members of the community.
4.1 Consultation approach
The consultation approach has considered the location and nature of the proposed activities and has been designed to be commensurate with the level of perceived interest in the development. Consultation activities with NSW Government agencies and relevant stakeholders, including adjacent property owners who may be affected during the construction phase, would be undertaken throughout the preparation of the EIS. Public participation in the assessment process would be realised through the EIS submission period. NSW Government agencies and stakeholders that would be consulted during the preparation of the EIS would include: - Department of Planning and Infrastructure (DP&I); - Office of Environment and Heritage (OEH) (specifically National Parks and Wildlife Service (NPWS)); - Department of Primary Industries (DPI) (specifically Fishing and Aquaculture and NSW Office of Water); - Office of the Hawkesbury-Nepean; and - Penrith City Council.
4.2 Key activities 4.2.1 NSW Government agencies and other stakeholders Consultation with key NSW Government agencies would include the following activities: - Consultation meetings as required, in person and/or via phone, in response to requests for information and clarification on specific issues; and - Management of responses to submissions submitted by agencies and key stakeholders.
P:\60221206_NRPP_Relocation\6. Draft docs\6.1 Reports\5. EIS Scoping Study\Final draft\NRPP EIS Scoping Study_130312.docx Revision D - 13 March 2012 16 AECOM Nepean River Pump and Pipeline
5.0 Identification of Key Issues
5.1 Approach to identification of key environmental issues An initial screening of potential issues for consideration in the EIS has been undertaken with the aim of determining the likely level of assessment required to adequately and appropriately address each issue. In undertaking the initial screening, consideration has been given to the significance of each potential environmental impact (through a preliminary environmental risk screening) and also the likely level of stakeholder interest in each issue. Inclusion of stakeholder perceptions of potential environmental impacts is considered an important part of determining the level of assessment that should be applied given that key stakeholder concerns may not necessarily align with a purely technical analysis of environmental risks. By combining the likely significance of each environmental impact with the expected level of stakeholder interest or concern, an assessment has been made of whether each issue is key to the assessment of the Development, and whether a detailed specialist investigation or desktop analysis would be appropriate. Where a high level of stakeholder interest is expected, a potential environmental impact has been determined to be a key issue requiring detailed assessment irrespective of the outcomes of environmental risk screening. 5.1.1 Environmental risk screening The preliminary environmental risk screening for the Development has included consideration of the likelihood of an environmental impact occurring and the consequence of that impact should it not be mitigated. The screening levels applied to the likelihood and consequence of each relevant environmental impact is presented in Table 5.1. The likelihood and consequence of each impact have been combined through the significance screening matrix (Table 5.2) to establish the likely significance of the issue for the environmental assessment of the Development.
Table 5.1 Environmental risk screening levels
Likelihood of impact Consequence of impact High (probable) There is likely to be an High (major) International or national environmental effect. implications, major adverse environmental change, serious or long term cumulative impacts, mitigation measures not available. Medium (possible) There is potential for an Medium (moderate) Regional implications, environmental effect. moderate adverse environmental change, modest or medium-term cumulative impacts, non- standard mitigation measures required. Low (improbable) There is little potential for Low (minor) Localised implications, an environmental effect. imperceptible or short- term cumulative impacts, standard mitigation measures appropriate or none required.
P:\60221206_NRPP_Relocation\6. Draft docs\6.1 Reports\5. EIS Scoping Study\Final draft\NRPP EIS Scoping Study_130312.docx Revision D - 13 March 2012 17 AECOM Nepean River Pump and Pipeline
Table 5.2 Significance matrix
Consequence of effect Likelihood of effect Minor Moderate Major Improbable Low significance Low significance Medium significance Possible Low significance Medium significance High significance Probable Medium significance High significance High significance
5.1.2 Expected stakeholder issues The expected level of stakeholder interest in each potential environmental impact has been considered based on the outcomes of stakeholder consultation undertaken for a previous Part 3A application for a similar pipeline and pump structure (major project number MP 05_0078). These issues have then been reviewed for relevance based on the location of the pumping station and pipeline proposed as part of this Development. Those issues identified as part of the current proposal that were also recorded during a previous Part 3A application for a similar development provide a strong indication of the issues that are likely to be raised. These issues have been noted in Table 5.3.
5.2 Identification of key environmental issues Using the methods outlined in Section 5.1, the environmental issues key to this Development have been identified and are summarised in Table 5.3. This process allows for the prioritisation of environmental issues and the level of detail necessary for the EIS. In all cases, reasonable and feasible mitigation measures would be developed to lower the risk rating of the issues identified, and these would be detailed in the EIS.
P:\60221206_NRPP_Relocation\6. Draft docs\6.1 Reports\5. EIS Scoping Study\Final draft\NRPP EIS Scoping Study_130312.docx Revision D - 13 March 2012 18 AECOM Nepean River Pump and Pipeline
Table 5.3 Significance rating of key environmental issues associated with the Development
Unmitigated environmental risk screening Stakeholder interest during consultation Issue Likelihood Consequence Significance process for similar proposal? Air quality Dust generated during construction Possible Minor Low No Emissions from plant, equipment and vehicles Probable Minor Low No during construction Indirect greenhouse gas emissions during Improbable Minor Low No operation (i.e. electricity to operate the pump) Ecology Impact on aquatic ecology of Nepean River Possible Moderate Medium Yes Impact on terrestrial ecology through vegetation Probable Minor Medium Yes clearance Potential spread of aquatic weeds Possible Moderate Medium Yes Heritage Impacts on Indigenous heritage Possible Moderate Medium No Impacts on non-Indigenous heritage Improbable Moderate Low No Land use Impact of construction on land uses other than Possible Minor Medium No PLDC (i.e. for installation of overhead power supply) Impact of noise and vibration during construction Possible Moderate Medium No on surrounding developments Impact of noise and vibration during operation on Improbable Moderate Low No surrounding developments Socio-economic Impact of the construction and operational phases Possible Minor Low Yes of Development on the Great River Walk Restriction of areas of Nepean River available for Improbable Moderate Low Yes recreational activities
P:\60221206_NRPP_Relocation\6. Draft docs\6.1 Reports\5. EIS Scoping Study\Final draft\NRPP EIS Scoping Study_130312.docx Revision D - 13 March 2012 19 AECOM Nepean River Pump and Pipeline
Unmitigated environmental risk screening Stakeholder interest during consultation Issue process for similar Likelihood Consequence Significance proposal? Soils and topography Disturbance of soils and alteration of existing Possible Minor Low No topography Surface water Impact of construction on water quality Possible Moderate Medium No Impact on Nepean River flow from water Possible Moderate Medium Yes extraction Impact on flooding Possible Moderate Medium Yes Impact on water quality within PLS Possible Moderate Medium Yes Traffic and transport Impact of construction traffic on local access Possible Moderate Medium No roads in industrial estate adjacent to development area Visual amenity Construction-related visual amenity impacts Possible Minor Low No Impacts related to visual amenity of pump station Possible Minor Low Yes and associated infrastructure Waste generation Impact of construction waste on surrounding Possible Minor Low No environment Impact of operational waste on surrounding Improbable Minor Low No environment
P:\60221206_NRPP_Relocation\6. Draft docs\6.1 Reports\5. EIS Scoping Study\Final draft\NRPP EIS Scoping Study_130312.docx Revision D - 13 March 2012 20 AECOM Nepean River Pump and Pipeline
6.0 Key Environmental Issues This section considers the key environmental assessment issues for the Development as determined by the environmental risk screening presented in Section 5.0. The approach for considering each of these issues, both through this EIS SS and through the future EIS for the Development, has been and would continue to be avoidance of impacts, with residual environmental implications mitigated and managed to minimise impacts.
6.1 Hydrology 6.1.1 Existing Environment Watercourses within the study area The Nepean River is located within the Hawkesbury Nepean Catchment Area which drains an area of 22,000 km2 extending from Goulburn in the south, to Lithgow in the west and Broken Bay to the north of Sydney. The Hawkesbury Nepean Catchment Area is characterised by a diverse range of landforms, including undulating hill and valley systems and deeply cut floodplains. Land use within the catchment comprises a mixture of native bushland and National Parks, agriculture and rural lands, urban and industrial development, transport corridors and utility infrastructure. The Development is located on a floodplain, which straddles the main channel of the Nepean River. The floodplain is gently undulating with elevations varying between 25 metres to 28 metres AHD. To the west of the study area the steep slopes and ridgelines of the Blue Mountains escarpment flank the floodplain rising to an elevation of approximately 220 metres at Mt Riverview. A dendritic system of land drains, gullies and creek lines incise these slopes conveying surface waters to the Nepean River. To the south and east of the study area, surface waters enter the local catchment from the urban and industrial areas of Cranebrook and Penrith. The Nepean River is the principal watercourse in the study area. It flows in a predominantly northerly direction from its headwaters to the south of Goulburn prior to its confluence with the Grose River at Agnes Bank. At this point the river forms the Hawkesbury River and it continues to flow in a predominantly easterly direction before discharging into Broken Bay and ultimately the Pacific Ocean. The river provides valuable environmental and economic benefits to the Sydney region including provision of water for a range of domestic uses and irrigation purposes. Within the study area the Nepean River forms an ‘S-type’ bend as it meanders in a northerly direction, downstream from Penrith Weir. It continues to flow westwards along the PLS southern boundary before turning north and flowing along the western boundary of the PLS. There are two minor watercourses in the study area, Peach Tree Creek and Boundary Creek. Peach Tree Creek flows from Surveyors Creek under Jamieson Road in a northerly direction along the eastern side of Panthers Cable Ski Park and Ladbury Avenue. It is culverted under the Great Western Highway and Main Western Railway Line before flowing in a north-westerly direction prior to its confluence with the Nepean River, approximately 100 metres downstream of Penrith Weir. Boundary Creek flows across the southern part of the study area and discharges into the Nepean River approximately 25 metres downstream of Peach Tree Creek. The majority of flow in Boundary Creek is attributed to a constant discharge of treated effluent from the St Mary’s Water Recycling Plant. Nepean River Flows at Penrith Weir and Environmental Flows Flow data recorded between 1909 and 2004 at Penrith Weir for the Nepean River was reviewed by WRL (WRL, 2006) to determine median flows, and those flows experienced during periods of drought and heavy rainfall. Generally, peak flows are experienced in the river in autumn through to winter and smaller flows occur during the summer and spring months. The median flow during periods of drought (early 1940’s and between 1999 and 2004) was approximately 145 ML/day. During times of heavy rainfall (generally 1950 to 1980) the median flow was in the order of 300 ML/day, with 10 per cent of flows exceeding 12,000 ML/day. The overall median flow for the Nepean River over the Penrith Weir based on records between 1909 and 2004 was 205 ML/day. Environmental flow requirements refer to the amount of water that is required to maintain the natural flows of the river. Ultimately this may impact on the ecological and water quality status of the river. A key issue for the
P:\60221206_NRPP_Relocation\6. Draft docs\6.1 Reports\5. EIS Scoping Study\Final draft\NRPP EIS Scoping Study_130312.docx Revision D - 13 March 2012 21 AECOM Nepean River Pump and Pipeline
Development is therefore to protect environmental flows within the Nepean River whilst extracting the appropriate volume of water to supply the PLS. It is necessary therefore to consider the impact of extracting water for use in the PLS on the Nepean River and to determine pump rules that are appropriate to the needs of the Nepean River. PLDC currently hold a license to extract water from the Nepean River that outlines the following pumping rules: - Water would be extracted at a flowrate of no greater than 1.0 cubic metre per second. - Extraction of water would commence once the flowrate of water over the Penrith Weir reaches 500ML per day. - Once extraction of water has commenced, water would continue to be extracted while the flowrate of water over the weir lies above 350ML per day. The license was sought for the Nepean River Pump and Pipeline project that was approved in 2007. Although the pumping rules are likely to remain the same for the Development, the license states that water would be extracted from upstream of the Penrith Weir, and would therefore need to be modified to reflect the location of the Development. Water Balance Within the PLS The existing water balance within the PLS is an important aspect for the Development, as the pumping regime must interrelate and take into consideration the existing interconnectivity of the PLS lakes. The existing flow paths between the lakes are illustrated on Figure 1.3. Lake Operating Levels within the PLS The Deed specifies that operating levels for the lakes within the PLS should be in the order of plus or minus 0.5 metres, to be exceeded for only five percent of the time (i.e. the 95th percentile drawdown). The exception to this is the Rowing Lake, which is to have an operating level of 15 metres with operational variation between 14.75 and 15.4 metres (Independent Expert Panel, 2004). Flooding The PLS lakes are interconnected via a series of reticulation pipes, lake to lake weirs, and overland flow channels. The weirs are designed to overtop during certain flood conditions and there is a flood outlet pipe connecting the Main Recreation Lake ‘A’ with the Nepean River. 6.1.2 Issues for Consideration - Geomorphological impacts on the Nepean River - Water balance and maintenance of lake operating levels - Nepean River water flow - Altered Nepean River flow regimes in the event of a flood and impact on pump infrastructure 6.1.3 Method for Assessment Geomorphological impacts Instream geomorphic features, such as pools and riffles, are products of the sediment and flow regime of rivers. Alterations to flow may result in changes to bed and bank characteristics, which in turn may impact instream habitat. A qualitative assessment of geomorphic impacts on the Nepean River would be undertaken by conducting a review of a previous study undertaken for a similar project in the immediate vicinity of the Development. Water Research Laboratory (WRL) undertook a study in 2006 that included a detailed analysis of the river rapids in the area downstream of the Penrith Weir. The study would be reviewed to determine relevance to the Development and appropriate conclusions developed. In addition, the assessment would include a comparison of the number of days when the proposed flowrate exceeds that of the rate specified in the WRL (2006) study. A qualitative assessment of geomorphic impacts is considered appropriate as it is anticipated that the environmental flows in the Nepean River would have increased since the WRL (2006) study due to increased flow from St Mary’s Water Recycling Plant. The assessment would be supplemented by a site visit to ascertain instream geomorphology in the vicinity of the intake location and immediately downstream. The assessment would be cross-referenced with the aquatic ecology assessment to identify potential repercussions of geomorphic impacts. Water Balance and Lake Operating Levels
P:\60221206_NRPP_Relocation\6. Draft docs\6.1 Reports\5. EIS Scoping Study\Final draft\NRPP EIS Scoping Study_130312.docx Revision D - 13 March 2012 22 AECOM Nepean River Pump and Pipeline
A model would be established to investigate a range of options with regard to appropriate pumping rules and volume of water intake. Two key scenarios would be investigated. Scenario A would comprise turning on the pumps when the total river flow exceeds 500ML/day and turns off when the river drops below 350ML/day. This scenario would consider the relation between the net flow in the river downstream of the pump intake and environmental flows. Three variations to Scenario A would also be considered. Scenario A1 would be the same as Scenario A but with unlimited inflows from the Nepean River. This scenario would form the base scenario that would be used for the majority of the assessment. Scenario A2 would be the same as scenario A but pumping from the Nepean River would not occur until the Main Recreation Lake ‘A’ water level falls below 14mAHD. The purpose of this scenario would be to show the reduction in the required pumped inflow volumes. Scenario A3 would comprise switching off the pumping when the flow in the Nepean River exceeds 5,000ML per day. This scenario would show the reduction in the required pumped inflow volumes as a result of this trigger. Scenario B would comprise setting the trigger for pumping based on the tributary flows only, rather than on the total river flows. The results of the modelling would be analysed to determine the approximate time required to fill the lakes to their operational levels. This analysis would be based on the results of the modelling using spreadsheet methods. The time required to fill the lakes would be calculated based on the following assumptions: - No pump would be provided from Main Recreation Lake ‘A’. This aims to simplify the water balance for the scheme and enables a simple calculation to be undertaken for the filling of the lakes. - Water flow along the existing pipes between the Nepean River and Main Recreation Lake ‘A’ would be controlled (via a weir structure or similar) to enable water to flow from Main Recreation Lake ‘A’ to the Wildlife Lake only. The pumping rules would be developed to ensure adequate flows are maintained in the Nepean River downstream of the intake structure. Flooding A qualitative assessment would be undertaken to determine the potential impact of a range of flood events on the pump infrastructure and altered flow regimes downstream of the intake structure and how these would relate to the flood controls within the PLS.
6.2 Water Quality 6.2.1 Existing Environment The PLS Lakes Currently the PLS contains two recreational lakes; Rowing Lake and Warm-up Lake. The lakes are used for whole body contact (primary) and incidental contact (secondary) recreation including activities such as rowing, canoeing and swimming. The PLS lakes operate as a ‘closed system’ with the major water sources to the PLS comprising overland flows, stormwater runoff within the local catchment, rainfall discharges from quarry pits and tailings dams and groundwater recharge. Overland flow from the local catchment is pretreated by detention basins located in the east of the PLS prior to entering the lakes. The Development would enable the transfer of water from the Nepean River to the PLS lakes via a constructed wetland and a Quarantine Lake that would form an extension of the Warm-up Lake. Schedule 7 of the Deed specifies certain ‘end uses’ for each of the PLS lakes and water quality in each of the lakes must satisfy their respective end user requirements. The end user requirements are outlined below:
P:\60221206_NRPP_Relocation\6. Draft docs\6.1 Reports\5. EIS Scoping Study\Final draft\NRPP EIS Scoping Study_130312.docx Revision D - 13 March 2012 23 AECOM Nepean River Pump and Pipeline
Table 6.1 Water Quality Requirements Specified in the Deed of Agreement Water Quality Requirements Specified in the 1987 Lake Deed of Agreement Main Recreation Lakes ‘A’ and ‘B’ Primary and Secondary Contact, Aesthetic Sydney International Regatta Centre Lakes (Rowing Primary Contact, Aesthetic Lake and Warm-Up Lake) Quarantine Lake Water Management Wildlife Lake Wildlife Habitat, Aesthetic Detention Basins Water Management, Aesthetic
A water quality monitoring program has been undertaken by PLDC for the three southern detention basins (Final Basin, Middle Basin and Stilling Basin), the Rowing Lake, Warm-up Lake, and Main Recreation Lake ‘A’ since 1995. Results from the monitoring program indicate that the detention basins have reduced turbidity, nutrients and bacteria in the source water prior to discharging into the PLS lakes. However, following large storm events, when catchment water quality is very poor, guidelines have been exceeded in the Rowing Lake and Warm-up Lake (ERM Australia, 2001). Furthermore, cyanobacteria (blue-green algae) tend to reach unacceptable levels during dry weather when nutrients, especially phosphorus, and sunlight penetration are high. Since monitoring began in 1995, algae blooms have previously been recorded during the month of February in the PLS lakes. Subsequently, elevated bacterial levels and blue-green algae plumes have been identified as the key water quality issues within the lakes. 6.2.2 Issues for Consideration - Degradation of Nepean River water quality during construction (i.e. resulting from sedimentation during bank disturbance, fuel and chemical spills, disturbance of exotic weeds along the river bank) and operation (disturbance of aquatic weeds and potential for spreading prior to transfer to the PLS). - Water quality within the PLS (i.e. resulting from transferral of noxious weeds and seed material and cyanobacteria blooms from high nutrient loads in the Nepean River). 6.2.3 Method for Assessment The assessment would consider current water quality benchmarks and guidelines (including the Australian and New Zealand Guidelines for Fresh and Marine Water Quality) with respect to the required end user requirements to recommend suitable criteria and trigger values to maintain appropriate water quality within the PLS. A desktop review of previous studies and existing available data would be undertaken to determine the water quality within the Nepean River. Sampling results would be obtained from the Hawkesbury-Nepean Catchment Management Authority and Sydney Catchment Authority as a minimum. Sydney Catchment Authority has undertaken water quality sampling at Penrith Weir since 1984. The data would be analysed to identify correlation between water quality, seasonality and flow to determine whether pumping rules should consider environmental factors in addition to flowrates.
6.3 Terrestrial and aquatic ecology 6.3.1 Existing Environment A database search of threatened flora and fauna species likely to be present in the area (a nominal 10km buffer was applied) was undertaken in July 2011 (refer Table 6.1). A site walkover was undertaken in July 2011 as part of an Options Assessment report (AECOM, 2011). The information contained in this section has been informed by the findings of that study. Terrestrial ecology Flora The vegetation at the Development site is mapped as being representative of River-flat Eucalypt Forest on Coastal Floodplains of the NSW North Coast, Sydney Basin and South East Corner bioregions. This community is listed as an Endangered Ecological Community (EEC) under the Threatened Species Conservation Act 1995 (TSC Act). The existing vegetation at the Development site would not be commensurate with this EEC due to
P:\60221206_NRPP_Relocation\6. Draft docs\6.1 Reports\5. EIS Scoping Study\Final draft\NRPP EIS Scoping Study_130312.docx Revision D - 13 March 2012 24 AECOM Nepean River Pump and Pipeline
domination by introduced species however the site may constitute as habitat for the community. Vegetation located at the top of bank comprises planted native trees and shrubs which are still relatively juvenile with a sparse ground cover, which in the vicinity of walking trails is maintained by mowing or slashing. Plantings include Eucalyptus baueriana (Blue Box), Leptospermum polygalifolium ssp. polygalifolium (Lemon-scented Tea-tree), Acacia decurrens (Green Wattle), Acacia fimbriata (Fringed Wattle) and Casuarina cunninghamiana sp cunninghamiana (River She-oak). River bank vegetation is dominated by a dense layer of introduced shrubs, grasses, herbs, and vines, with no upper stratum present. Native species present include dense patches of Imperata cylindrica (Blady Grass) that line the western and northern edges of the development area at the top of bank, and occasional small regenerating Ficus coronata (Sandpaper Fig). Dominant introduced shrubs include Lantana camara (Lantana), Ligustrum lucidum and Ligustrum sinense (Large-leaved and Small-leaved Privet), Olea europaea ssp. cuspidata (African Olive), Lycium ferocissimum (African Boxthorn), Cestrum parqui (Green Cestrum), and Ricinus communis (Castor Oil Plant). Dominant and introduced ground cover species include Ehrharta erecta (Panic Veldt Grass), Paspalum dilatatum (Paspalum), Pennisetum clandestinum (Kikuyu), Foeniculum vulgare (Fennel), Bidens pilosa (Cobblers Pegs), Solanum nigrum (Deadly Nightshade), Tradescantia fluminescens (Wandering Jew) with Cardiospermum grandiflorum (Balloon Vine) and Hedera helix (Ivy) is abundant and widespread. Fauna The site lacks mature hollow bearing trees, fallen logs, rock outcrops, dense leaf litter and other habitat features, although native plantings and Lantana thickets would provide habitat for a range of local bird species. A targeted survey of fauna species has not been undertaken but no threatened or protected species were noted during the site walkover undertaken in July 2011.
P:\60221206_NRPP_Relocation\6. Draft docs\6.1 Reports\5. EIS Scoping Study\Final draft\NRPP EIS Scoping Study_130312.docx Revision D - 13 March 2012 25 AECOM Nepean River Pump and Pipeline
Table 6.2 Database search results for flora and fauna species Relevant Database Species legislation OEH Wildlife Atlas TSC Act 15 flora species Database - Marsdenia viridiflora - Allocasuarina glareicola - Acrophyllum austral - Leucopogon fletcheri - Dillwynia tenuifolia - Pultenaea parviflora - Pultenaea villifera - Bynoe's Wattle (Acacia bynoeana) - Camden White Gum (Eucalyptus benthamii) - Deane's Paperbark (Melaleuca deanei) - Micromyrtus minutiflora - Juniper-leaved Grevillea (Grevillea juniperina subsp. Juniperina) - Hairy Geebung (Persoonia hirsute) - Nodding Geebung (Persoonia nutans) - Spiked Rice-flower (Pimelea spicata)
44 fauna species - Giant Burrowing Frog (Heleioporus australiacus) - Red-crowned Toadlet (Pseudophryne australis) - Speckled Warbler (Pyrrholaemus saggitatus) - Spotted Harrier (Circus assimilis) - Little Eagle (Hieraaetus morphnoides) - Square-tailed Kite (Lophoictinia isura) - Freckled Duck (Stictonetta naevosa) - Australasian Bittern (Botaurus poiciloptilus) - Bush Stone-curlew (Burhinus grallarius) - Gang-gang Cockatoo (Callocephalon fimbriatum) - Glossy Black-Cockatoo (Calyptorhynchus lathami) - Black-necked Stork (Ephippiorhynchus asiaticus) - Diamond Firetail (Stagonopleura guttata) - White-fronted Chat (Epthianura albifrons) - Painted Honeyeater (Grantiella picta) - Black-chinned Honeyeater (Melithreptus gularis gularis) - Regent Honeyeater (Xanthomyza Phrygia) - Varied Sittella (Daphoenositta chrysoptera) - Scarlet Robin (Petroica boodang) - Flame Robin (Petroica phoeniceai) - Pink Robin (Petroica rodinogaster) - Little Lorikeet (Glossopsitta pusilla) - Swift Parrot (Lathamus discolour) - Turquoise Parrot (Neophema pulchella) - Barking Owl (Ninox connivens) - Powerful Owl (Ninox strenua) - Masked Owl (Tyto novaehollandiae) - Sooty Owl (Tyto tenebricosa) - Cumberland Plain Land Snail (Meridolum corneovirens) - Giant Dragonfly (Petalura gigantean) - Eastern Pygmy-possum (Cercartetus nanus) - Spotted-tailed Quoll (Dasyurus maculates)
P:\60221206_NRPP_Relocation\6. Draft docs\6.1 Reports\5. EIS Scoping Study\Final draft\NRPP EIS Scoping Study_130312.docx Revision D - 13 March 2012 26 AECOM Nepean River Pump and Pipeline
Relevant Database Species legislation - Brush-tailed Phascogale (Phascogale tapoatafa) - Eastern Freetail-bat (Mormopterus norfolkensis) - Yellow-bellied Glider (Petaurus australis) - Squirrel Glider (Petaurus norfolcensis) - Koala (Phascolarctos cinereus) - Grey-headed Flying-fox (Pteropus poliocephalus) - Large-eared Pied Bat (Chalinolobus dwyeri) - Eastern False Pipistrelle (Falsistrellus tasmaniensis) - Eastern Bentwing-bat (Miniopterus schreibersii oceanensis) - Southern Myotis (Myotis macropus) - Greater Broad-nosed Bat (Scoteanax rueppellii) - Broad-headed Snake (Hoplocephalus bungaroides) DSEWPC Protected Matters EPBC Act 5 ecological communities Search Tool - Cumberland Plain Shale Woodlands and Shale-Gravel Transition Forest - Turpentine-Ironbark Forest in the Sydney Basin Bioregion - White Box-Yellow Box-Blakely's Red Gum Grassy Woodland and Derived Native Grassland - Shale/Sandstone Transition Forest - Temperate Highland Peat Swamps on Sandstone
35 threatened species - Regent Honeyeater (Anthochaera phrygia); - Australasian Bittern (Botaurus poiciloptilus); - Swift Parrot (Lathamus discolour); - Australian Painted Snipe (Rostratula australis); - Macquarie Perch (Macquaria australasica); - Australian Grayling (Prototroctes maraena); - Giant Burrowing Frog (Heleioporus australiacus); - Green and Golden Bell Frog (Litoria aurea); - Littlejohn's Tree Frog (Litoria littlejohni) - Stuttering Frog (Mixophyes balbus) - Giant Barred Frog (Mixophyes iterates) - Large-eared Pied Bat (Chalinolobus dwyeri); - Spotted-tail Quoll (Dasyurus masculatus masculatus); - Brush-tailed Rock-wallaby (Petrogale penicillata); - Long-nosed Potoroo (Potorous tridactylus tridactylus); - New Holland Mouse (Pseudomys novaehollandiae); - Grey-headed Flying-fox (Pteropus poliocephalus); - Bynoe’s Wattle (Acacia bynoeana); - Wattle (Acacia gordnii); - Leafless Tongue-Orchid (Cryptostylis hunteriana); - White-flowered Wax Plant (Cynanchum elegans); - Hal (Haloragodendron lucasii); - Deane’s Melaleuca (Melaleuca deanei;) - Micromyrtus minutiflora; - Persoonia hirsuta; - Persoonia nutans; - Pimela curviflora var. Curviflora; - Rufous Pomaderris (Pomaderris brunnea); - Illawarra Greenhood (Pterostylis gibbosa); - Sydney Plains Greenhood (Pterostylis saxicola); - Smooth Bush-Pea (Pultenaea glabra);
P:\60221206_NRPP_Relocation\6. Draft docs\6.1 Reports\5. EIS Scoping Study\Final draft\NRPP EIS Scoping Study_130312.docx Revision D - 13 March 2012 27 AECOM Nepean River Pump and Pipeline
Relevant Database Species legislation - Pultenaea parvilflora; - Eastern Underground Orchid (Rhizanthella slateri); - Kangaloon Sun-orchid (Thelymitra sp. Kangaloon); - Broad-headed Snake (Hoplocephalus bungaroides);
12 migratory species - Fork-tailed Swift (Apus pacificus); - Great Egret (Ardea alba); - Cattle Egret (Ardea ibis); - White-bellied Sea-Eagle (Haliaeetus leucogaster); - White-throated Needletail (Hirundapus caudacutus); - Rainbow Bee-eater (Merops ornatus); - Black-faced Monarch (Monarcha melanopsis); - Satin Flycatcher (Myiagra cyanoleuca); - Rufous Fantail (Rhipidura rufifrons); - Regent Honey-eater (Xanthomyza phrygia); - Latham’s Snipe (Gallinago hardwickii); and - Painted Snipe (Rostratula benghalensis s. lat.).
Aquatic ecology Vegetation along the edge of the Nepean River comprises introduced juvenile Erythrina crista-galli (Coral Tree) with the floating attached Alternanthera philoxerioides (Alligator Weed) widespread and some stranded Salvinia molesta (Salvinia). No submerged or emergent macrophyte growth was evident and would not be expected to persist at this location due to prevailing high flow velocity. Instream habitat features such as submerged logs, gravel, stone, boulders, emergent vegetation were absent and quiet zones were limited to the area immediately adjacent to the bank where tree roots were present. Sparse and small levels of woody debris were evident. An infield survey of aquatic fauna has not been undertaken. However, the locality provides potential habitat for threatened fish species (refer Table 6.2). An aquatic fauna survey for the Development site would be undertaken as part of the EIS.
Table 6.3 Database search results for aquatic species Relevant Database Species legislation DTIRIS Fisheries (threatened species) 3 threatened fish species and 2 dragonfly species Database FM Act 1 protected fish species 6.3.2 Issues for Consideration Construction and operation of the Development may impact flora and fauna species by key threatening processes (KTP) listed under the TSC Act, FM Act and/or the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (EPBC Act) that could cause a species, population or ecological community to become threatened. KTPs relevant to the Development include: - Clearing of native vegetation and land clearance; - Installation and operation of in-stream structures and other mechanisms that alter natural flow regimes of rivers and streams; - Degradation of native riparian vegetation; and - Removal of large woody debris. Construction of the Development has the potential to directly impact on terrestrial ecology along the pipeline route as follows:
P:\60221206_NRPP_Relocation\6. Draft docs\6.1 Reports\5. EIS Scoping Study\Final draft\NRPP EIS Scoping Study_130312.docx Revision D - 13 March 2012 28 AECOM Nepean River Pump and Pipeline
- Clearing of native vegetation along the Nepean River’s eastern bank; - Potential loss of habitats for threatened species; - Fragmentation of riparian habitat creating barriers to faunal movement; - Weed invasion; and - Destabilisation and erosion of river banks. Construction of the Development has the potential to directly impact on aquatic ecology as follows: - Installation of instream structures, involving the disturbance of the river bed at the intake structure and pump station sites; - Temporary loss of macrophytes within the construction corridor; - Loss of aquatic habitat; - Extraction of river water, reducing stream flow within the Nepean River; and - Erosion of river bank and bed leading to sedimentation within the Nepean River. 6.3.3 Method of Assessment The Development site provides potential habitat for threatened fish species (refer Table 6.1) and assessments of significance under the EPBC Act, TSC Act and Fisheries Management Act 1994 (FM Act) would be required in relation to the proposed intake pipeline. Targeted field surveys would be undertaken to identify the presence of: - Terrestrial threatened species and EECs, riparian zone vegetation and stability; and - Aquatic threatened species and aquatic habitats. The approach for the ecological targeted surveys would be confirmed following consultation with OEH and DPI. The results of the surveys would inform the assessment of direct and indirect impacts on the terrestrial and aquatic ecology including the movement of fish and macro-invertebrates in the river and cleared areas. Likely impacts of changes to the physical habitat of the Nepean River as a result of the Development, including secondary impacts on flora and fauna, would also be assessed. Changes to the physical habitat of the area include altered geomorphology at the Development site following the installation of the pumping station and altered flow regime as a result of the extracted water volumes. Measures would be developed that would be aimed at reducing the impacts of the Development on ecological values, specific to managing impacts on flora and fauna species (terrestrial and aquatic). Measures would include requirements for riparian zone rehabilitation and methods to control pest aquatic species.
6.4 Indigenous heritage 6.4.1 Existing Environment A desktop review of the existing environment and previous environmental assessment for the Nepean River Pump and Pipeline project that was approved in 2007 was undertaken in February 2012. Key landforms likely to contain archaeological deposits near the study area include areas within 200 metres of Nepean River banks, a series of levees and islands located within the river channel, and the banks of a large lagoon mapped on early parish maps (refer Figure 6.1). A small drain connecting the lagoon and river is likely to be a focal point for past Aboriginal occupation with large sites of varying density spread over several hundred metres typical for the area.
P:\60221206_NRPP_Relocation\6. Draft docs\6.1 Reports\5. EIS Scoping Study\Final draft\NRPP EIS Scoping Study_130312.docx Revision D - 13 March 2012 29 AECOM Nepean River Pump and Pipeline
Figure 6.1 Castlereagh Parish Map circa 1883 showing the approximate location of the Project Area
Approximate Location of Project Area
The Aboriginal people who lived in the vicinity of the Nepean River belonged to the Darug tribe. The tribe probably comprised 500 to 600 members divided into smaller bands of 40 to 50 people. The movements of these smaller tribal bands would have been influenced by seasonal changes, hunting, and the need to establish shelters. Tribes living along the Nepean River would have had access to the stone resources in the gravel beds. Two types of rock were also recorded as being found in these beds, chert and basalt, which were utilised to make sharp cutting and scraping tools, and to supply blanks for grinding into hatchet heads. The historical abundance of plant and animal resources for food and craft would have influenced Aboriginal movement around the Nepean River. Throughout the 19th and 20th Centuries intensive land clearing associated with agricultural development and urban settlement in the area resulted in land ploughing, the introduction of grasses and significant clearing of the original timber and native vegetation stocks. The area between natural resource focal areas such as the Nepean River, lagoon and creekline indicate that this area would have been an area of plentiful hunter and gatherer resources prior to European settlement. Native vegetation remnants are currently restricted along the banks of the Nepean River. The earliest account of Aboriginal artefacts in the vicinity of the Nepean River dates back to 1880 when a farmer exhibited eight stone axe-heads turned up by a plough at Castlereagh on the Nepean River floodplain. A number of recent archaeological assessments undertaken in the vicinity of the Nepean River have been completed by Jim Kohen, who has been investigating the archaeological potential within and surrounding the Scheme site since 1981. Historically the majority of archaeological sites identified by Kohen have occurred adjacent to waterways, along ridge lines, and on rising ground near swamps. These sites have mainly comprised surface and near ground deposits. The general correlation for the existence of sites is that archaeological potential is likely to exist in areas that have been subject to limited ground disturbance only. In 2005, Biosis Research undertook an Aboriginal Cultural Heritage Assessment as part of an environmental assessment for the Nepean River Pump and Pipeline project that was approved in 2007. The previous assessment aimed to identify any known or potentially indigenous archaeological concerns associated with the project. An assessment was undertaken along the length of the original pipeline alignment and no surface scatters were identified. 30 AECOM Nepean River Pump and Pipeline
6.4.2 Issues for Consideration 6.4.2.1 AHIMS Registered Aboriginal Sites
2 A search of the then NSW DEC AHIMS was conducted by Biosis Research on 4 April 2005 using a 10 km search area surrounding the similar pump and pipeline project in the vicinity. The search identified 82 known Aboriginal archaeological sites within the search area. Of these, three were located within 1 kilometre of the proposed project area. All three sites are open camp sites located close to existing waterways and contain surface scatters of stone, quartz and chert flakes. An updated AHIMS Register would need to be conducted to capture any sites recorded since the original search by Biosis Research.
Table 6.4 AHIMS Registered Sites within 1km of the proposed impacts
AHIMS # Site Name Site Type 45-5-0290 The Island Artefact Scatter 45-5-0360 Emu Plains 4 Artefact Scatter 45-5-0522 Penrith P/L Artefact Scatter Site Name Site Type 6.4.2.2 Native Title and Indigenous Land Use Agreements It is recommended that a search of the native title databases is conducted to determine if any outstanding native title claims and/or Indigenous Land Use Agreements encompass the proposed Development area. 6.4.2.3 Potential Impacts to Cultural Heritage Sensitive Landforms The project would impact an area within 200 metres of the Nepean River. Typically in Australia, indigenous archaeology can be expected upwards of 500 and sometimes 800 metres from established large permanent river courses. It is noted that sand mining has historically extensively disturbed the surrounding area, however OEH would require a due diligence assessment to be conducted to determine whether this disturbance extends to the Development area and the nature of the disturbance. 6.4.3 Method of Assessment An Aboriginal archaeological due diligence assessment of the proposed impact area would be undertaken in accordance with Due Diligence Code of Practice for the Protection of Aboriginal Objects in New South Wales (DECCW 2010). Key tasks will include: - A search of the AHIMS database for previously recorded Aboriginal sites and places within and surrounding the proposed drill sites and additional clearance area; - A desktop review of relevant Aboriginal archaeological assessment reports for the Development area; - A desktop review of the existing environment of the Development area, with specific consideration to its Aboriginal archaeological implications; - A half-day visual inspection of the proposed drill sites by a qualified archaeologist; - Constraints mapping; and - Preparation of a short report identifying heritage constraints and opportunities and recommendations regarding approval pathways and requirements for inclusion in the EIS.
6.5 Non-Indigenous heritage 6.5.1 Existing Environment 6.5.1.1 European Settlement The area known as Castlereagh was originally declared by Governor Macquarie in 1810 although the first recorded European settlers were present up to 15 years earlier. The first land grants were made between 1795 and 1799 and were located along the banks of the Nepean River. The land was heavily forested and was cleared with the help of convicts, with much of the timber being transported to Sydney to aid development.
P:\60221206_NRPP_Relocation\6. Draft docs\6.1 Reports\5. EIS Scoping Study\Final draft\NRPP EIS Scoping Study_130312.docx Revision D - 13 March 2012 31 AECOM Nepean River Pump and Pipeline
Agricultural activities typically comprised wheat and general crop cultivation prior to the 1820s (Department of Environment and Planning, 1984) however due to changing marketplace demand the emphasis shifted to cattle grazing which became the predominant land use by the mid 19th Century. A secondary stage of settlement and subdivision took place from the 1860s onwards with the development of additional small holdings and allotments and market gardens in the local area. There was also an increase in the number of cottages being built (typically of the slab and weatherboard variety) and other infrastructure items such as the extension of the railway line to Penrith in 1862. The introduction of rail and road infrastructure to the area precipitated residential and commercial development. The first formal gravel quarry established in the area was the Emu Gravel Company at Emu Plains during the late 19th Century. 6.5.2 Previous Heritage Assessments During preparation of the Penrith Lakes Scheme Regional Environmental Study (RES), an extensive specialist study was undertaken by Fran Bently and Judy Birmingham in 1981 (RES: History of European Settlement, Working Paper). The primary purpose of this study was to determine the extent, type and presence of European heritage sites and items in and around the PLS site. The study identified 75 heritage items including cemeteries, landscape features and structures. As a result of these investigations, six items within the PLS area were identified under the SEPP (Penrith Lakes Scheme) as requiring retention, namely: - Hadley Park. - Nepean Park. - McCarthys Cemetery. - Upper Castlereagh Methodist Church and Hall. - Upper Castlereagh School and Residence. - Methodist Cemetery. These items were identified for preservation and integration into the PLS design. As part of the technical and operational requirements of quarrying activities within the PLS boundary, some remaining items of interest have been removed. Subsequent reports and studies conducted by Jim Kohen have identified a small number of additional items of non-indigenous heritage interest within the PLS area. In 2005, Maunsell conducted a site walkover for the Nepean River Pump and Pipeline project that was approved in 2007 to identify the presence of non-indigenous heritage items located along the pipeline route. The purpose of the site walkover was to confirm the removed status or otherwise of all items previously identified, and to check for potential new items. 6.5.3 Issues for Consideration Three non-indigenous heritage items are located proximate to the proposed Development area.
Table 6.5 Closest non indigenous items to the Development
Item Description Location Listing Castlereagh The Castlereagh Area is listed as the earliest Upper Indicative Place on the Area official settlement on the Nepean River. Castlereagh, RNE (place ID 101338) Castlereagh has been described as the last Castlereagh remaining remnant of early settlement on the Road Cumberland Plain, with surviving examples of The European building styles from the past 200 years Castlereagh (DEH, 2005). Area is located It is important to note that the majority of this area approximately has been quarried within the PLS boundary and 2km north-west only isolated items of historical interest currently of the exist within the area. Development
Mouquet A concrete slab remains at the site of the former Adjacent to the None farmhouse Mouquet farm on the banks of the Nepean River. Nepean River, approximately 350 meters
P:\60221206_NRPP_Relocation\6. Draft docs\6.1 Reports\5. EIS Scoping Study\Final draft\NRPP EIS Scoping Study_130312.docx Revision D - 13 March 2012 32 AECOM Nepean River Pump and Pipeline
Item Description Location Listing north west of the Development area
Allen’s Mill No description provided 100 metres Recorded as being north of the removed from the Development Heritage Register. area Potential for archaeological deposits exists.
6.5.4 Method of Assessment A non-indigenous archaeological due diligence assessment of the proposed impact area would be undertaken in accordance with Due Diligence Code of Practice for the Protection of Aboriginal Objects in New South Wales (DECCW 2010). Key tasks would include: - Undertake brief historical research to gain an appreciation of the archaeological potential of the area. The research would utilise the resources of the following, as appropriate: x Mitchell Library; x On-line sources; x Parish Maps; x Aerial photographs; and x Heritage Lists, Registers and Schedules; - Review of background data and local heritage literature relevant to the area. - A half-day site inspection. - Mapping of sites of non-indigenous significance in proximity and surrounding the Development. - Preparation of a short report identifying heritage constraints and opportunities and recommendations regarding approval pathways and requirements for inclusion in the EIS.
P:\60221206_NRPP_Relocation\6. Draft docs\6.1 Reports\5. EIS Scoping Study\Final draft\NRPP EIS Scoping Study_130312.docx Revision D - 13 March 2012 33 AECOM Nepean River Pump and Pipeline
7.0 Other Environmental Issues This section considers the other (non-key) environmental assessment issues for the Development. The approach for the assessment of these issues would be similar to that utilised for the key environmental issues, though they are prioritised as less significant due to the nature of the Development.
7.1 Land use 7.1.1 Existing Environment The Development area is contained wholly within the Penrith Local Government Area. The land uses within the Penrith LGA are regulated by the Penrith Local Environmental Plan 2010. Strategic land use planning of the PLS is governed by PLDC and the regional importance of the PLS is recognised by both the draft North West Subregional Strategy (NSW Department of Planning, 2007) and the Metropolitan Plan for Sydney 2036 (NSW Government, 2010). The ultimate strategic plan for the PLS is for the rehabilitation of the site which adjoins the Nepean River, comprising of parklands and lakes. Access to the site is via a sealed public road (Cassola Place), which intersects with Borec Road to the east and terminates adjacent to open space that fringes the riverbank. The open space area has been planted with native trees and shrubs and includes a section of the Great River Walk, which provides for public passive recreation. Recreational pursuits evident during the site visit in July 2011 included bird watching and dog walking. Land to the east of the site is occupied by light industrial and commercial premises. To the west of the site, on the opposite side of the Nepean River, the land is used for existing quarrying activities and owned by Boral. To the south-west of the Boral land is the Emu Plains Correctional Centre and residences. The Development is situated in the southern portion of the PLS. 7.1.2 Issues for Consideration The Development would be fundamental to achieving the future strategic land use planning direction for the site as water extracted from the Nepean River is required for the initial filling and ongoing top-up of the lakes within the PLS. The PLS is recognised as being an important current and future regional recreational area with planning in place to enhance accessibility to the area (NSW Government, 2010). Ongoing development of the PLS is in line with the Metropolitan Plan for Sydney 2036 (NSW Government) in that it will provide and enhance regional open space in the Sydney region and assist Penrith to operate as the capital of its region, containing a full range of services and activities including recreational activities. Land use issues associated with the Development may include the impact of construction on the users of the Great River Walk and the integrity of the Great River Walk itself. Once the pump and pipeline is operational, access to a small portion of the bank of the Nepean River would also be restricted. This is not inconsistent with other parts of the bank in this area. The pipeline would be installed underground for approximately 20 metres from the bank inland, to account for potential future use of a corridor for an extension of the Great River Walk. Other land use issues could be associated with the clearing of native vegetation communities on the eastern bank of the Nepean River. Severance of a portion of the Nepean River during the installation of the intake structure and pipework may also pose an issue on recreational users of the river at this location, particularly during construction. However, this is highly unlikely as this portion of the river is seldom used for recreational activity, due to its distance from the nearest river access point. 7.1.3 Method of Assessment As part of the EIS, a detailed investigation of land use zonings and current development in the vicinity of the proposed pumping station and pipeline would be conducted, including consultation with potentially affected landowners. This investigation would be used to avoid potential land use conflicts wherever possible.
7.2 Landscape and visual amenity 7.2.1 Existing Environment The landscape along the pipeline route and surrounding the pump station is characterised by a mixture of degraded riparian forest and woodland interspersed with exotic plant communities along the eastern bank of the
P:\60221206_NRPP_Relocation\6. Draft docs\6.1 Reports\5. EIS Scoping Study\Final draft\NRPP EIS Scoping Study_130312.docx Revision D - 13 March 2012 34 AECOM Nepean River Pump and Pipeline
Nepean River, bare ground and disturbed grassland associated with the Penrith Valley Industrial Area near Cassola Place, and quarrying areas on the southern part of the PLS. Views along the Nepean River are framed by 10 to 15 metre high riverbanks to the west and east, and the long views along the Nepean River channel which extend north and south. On the high bank of the Nepean River there is a strong visual contrast between the urban and industrial areas to the east and the natural river environment and Blue Mountains escarpment beyond to the west. The built form is typically two to three-storey high industrial buildings with front and side access and parking areas. Inside the PLS boundary the landscape is dominated by the quarrying activities and largely comprises a cleared and highly modified landform, predominantly devoid of vegetation. 7.2.2 Issues for Consideration As part of the proposed pump arrangement and intake structure would be aboveground and immediately adjacent to the proposed future location of the Great River Walk there is potential for impacts to visual amenity associated with the introduction of industrial elements into a relatively natural riparian zone (within the immediate vicinity). The pad mounted transformer would be approximately 4m x 4m (footprint) x 2.5m (height), the motor control centre approximately 3m x 0.8m (footprint) x 2.5m (height) and the head works approximately 6m x 3m (footprint) x 1.5m (height). The columns and some sections of the stairway would also be visible where it traverses the bank. Strategies and mitigation measures to minimise these potential impacts would be investigated during the detailed design phase. Impacts on the local landscape and visual amenity would largely occur during and for a period after construction of the pipeline and pump station. There may be some temporary and minor impacts on the visual amenity along a short portion of the Great River Walk (should it be constructed prior to the pump station) during the construction of the pump station, though these are likely to be minor, and would require confirmation during detailed assessment. 7.2.3 Method of Assessment An assessment of visual amenity impacts would be prepared for inclusion in the EIS, including identification of sensitive receivers, local publicly accessible viewpoints to the Development area, and consideration of potential mitigation measures. The assessment would include: - Access to key visually-sensitive receiver locations to assess potential impacts; and - Assessment of viewpoints from the Great River Walk and other publicly accessible viewpoints to determine strategies to minimise visual impacts. Landscape guidelines would also be developed for management of the site clearing, construction and landscape mitigation measures. Design considerations for the pumping station would include opportunities to minimise or otherwise screen visual impacts from the site when viewed from surrounding receiver locations.
7.3 Topography, geology and soils 7.3.1 Existing Environment The riverbank has a steep profile increasing from approximately 7 m to 27 m Australian Height Datum (AHD). A narrow bench runs along the river (maximum width of five metres) before the river bank rises steeply. Topography between the top of the river bank and termination point of the pipeline is relatively flat. . The geomorphology at the site of the pump, pumping station, and along the pipeline route comprises the following environments: - Narrow bench running along the Nepean River and likely acting as the top of bank for the low flow channel of the Nepean River; - An embankment which rises steeply from the eastern edge of the Nepean River to 27m AHD; and - Nepean River floodplain extending eastwards from the top of the embankment. The 1:100,000 scale geological map of Penrith (Geological Survey NSW, 1991) indicates the site is situated on the Cranbrook Formation, a quaternary deposit comprising gravel, sand, silt and clay. The Development area is underlain by Ashfield and Bringelly shales of the Wianamatta group and alluvium from the Quaternary period.
P:\60221206_NRPP_Relocation\6. Draft docs\6.1 Reports\5. EIS Scoping Study\Final draft\NRPP EIS Scoping Study_130312.docx Revision D - 13 March 2012 35 AECOM Nepean River Pump and Pipeline
Potentially contaminating activities previously carried out within the PLS boundary include agriculture and quarrying. Potential agricultural contaminants from dairy and turf farming would be generally confined to specific locations and activities including storage and use of pesticides, storage and use of hydrocarbons, machinery and vehicle maintenance areas and the use of asbestos cement pipes for irrigation. Asbestos cement pipes have previously been removed to licensed waste disposal areas. However, additional pipes may still be present within the proposal site. Quarrying and earthmoving activities previously conducted in the area may have produced contaminants such as hydrocarbons from fuel storage and vehicle maintenance. However these would be confined to specific areas and the potential for residual contamination is likely to be low due to the shallow depth of penetration of contamination and the homogenisation and mixing of the soils during quarrying activities (Coffey, 2001). A groundwater plume has been identified to the east of the pipeline alignment in the vicinity of Cassola Place. Previous environmental site assessment results indicate the plume is contained within an underlying aquifer and is progressing west toward the Nepean River. General depth of the plume is approximately six metres. Maximum depth of construction work for the Development in the vicinity of the plume is anticipated to be up to 3.5 metres and therefore it is considered that the construction activities would not intercept the groundwater plume. 7.3.2 Issues for Consideration The key environmental impacts affecting soils and topography would be associated with the construction phase of the Development. Potential impacts would be associated with the disturbance of soils and changes to local topography during the construction of the pipeline and pumping station, including: - Erosion from disturbed areas and potential sedimentation within the Nepean River; - Alteration of the river banks, benches and other physical features of the Nepean River. These changes to local geomorphology may have repercussions for instream habitat features utilised by flora and fauna; - Construction impacts to riparian vegetation and bank stability; - Potential to intercept the groundwater plume during construction; - Accidental spillages of chemicals/fuel by construction plant and equipment which may leach in to the soil and ultimately be washed into the Nepean River; and - Disturbance of localised contamination from previous land uses. 7.3.3 Method of Assessment A desktop geomorphology study of the river within this reach would be undertaken to determine the potential for erosion and instability. Also, the extent to which the Development would impact local geomorphology and physical habitats would be assessed including impacts resulting from altered flow as well as the construction of the Development. Records on relevant historical information and past reports on the area would be gathered, examined and used as supporting information for the assessments. The EIS for the Development would consider the potential for impacts such as erosion and sedimentation, alteration to physical instream and riparian habitats, spills and leaks, and construction site run-off. The EIS would present a suite of mitigation measures to be applied to construction works to mitigate and manage these potential impacts within acceptable environmental limits.
7.4 Noise and vibration 7.4.1 Existing Environment The Development area is characterised as a riparian zone in close vicinity of light industrial development. Human occupation proximate to the site is limited to workers within the adjacent industrial estate (approximately 50m east at its closest point). The existing acoustic environment would be dominated by noise from ongoing quarrying activities and the adjacent industrial estate. While, the reach of the Nepean River immediately upstream of the weir is used for rowing activities, recreational pursuits on the reach of the river that is proximate to the Development area would be unlikely. As such the ambient noise in the vicinity of the Development area would arise from commercial and industrial land uses. Sensitive receivers in the area would include workers of the light industrial facilities in the area. The nearest residential receivers would comprise the residential properties along Old Castlereagh Road approximately 600-700m north west of the pumping station.
P:\60221206_NRPP_Relocation\6. Draft docs\6.1 Reports\5. EIS Scoping Study\Final draft\NRPP EIS Scoping Study_130312.docx Revision D - 13 March 2012 36 AECOM Nepean River Pump and Pipeline
7.4.2 Issues for Consideration Construction works for the Development would generate temporary noise, which may exceed the noise levels existing in the area. Construction noise would be associated with the laying of the pipeline and construction of the intake structure and pumping station. The principal source of operational noise would be the operation of pumping equipment (within the pump station). The high prevalence of night-time temperature inversions in western Sydney may also exacerbate noise levels. The pumps housed within the pump station would have the ability to operate 24 hours per day, though this would be unlikely to be the general operating schedule. PLDC holds a NSW Office of Water license (dated 17 April 2010), which would govern the operation of the pump. The license was obtained for a previous similar pump and pipeline project and would need to be modified to reflect the current location of the Development. Notwithstanding it is anticipated that the conditions in the modified license would remain the same as those in the current license. Operational times are not defined in the license, rather the operation of the pump would be dependent upon the conditions which specify the pumping rules. In particular pumping would be limited to those times when the flowrate of water over the Penrith Weir reaches 500 megalitres per day and would continue while the flowrate of water over the Penrith Weir lies above 350 ML of water per day. Once the lakes are initially filled, water extraction would be limited to times when required to fill up and maintain water levels in the Penrith Lakes Scheme within operating limits. 7.4.3 Method of Assessment The noise and vibration assessment process would be undertaken in line with the NSW Industrial Noise Policy (INP) (EPA, 2000) and would include monitoring of existing noise levels. A determination of typical repeated minimum background noise levels (from the LA90 data) and typical ambient noise levels (from the LA10 and LAeq data) would be made and attended noise surveys at locations deemed relevant to the noise study area to identify noise source contribution would be conducted, e.g. road traffic, industrial noise, general environmental noise within the study area. The assessment would identify periods of adverse weather conditions occurring during the monitoring period, direction of dominant wind conditions, and prevalence of temperature inversions; and the establishment of appropriate construction and operational environment noise and vibration criteria based upon measured background noise level, in accordance with the relevant legislation, regulations and guidelines. Mitigation measures would be determined if required. The mitigation measures would be in line with the Interim Construction Noise Guideline (DECC, 2009). Mitigation measures may include limits on permissible hours of construction, silencing treatment of mechanical and mobile plant, management of mechanical and mobile plant and consultation with neighbouring properties.
7.5 Air quality 7.5.1 Existing Environment The closest Bureau of Meteorology monitoring station to the Development area is located at the PLS and has been recording data for the past 11 years (BoM, 2011). The average temperatures of Penrith range from a minimum of 11qC to 24qC, with climate generally being more extreme than the rest of Sydney, due to large flat open plains which expose the area to both frosts and extreme heat (PCC, 2011). The prevailing annual wind direction is predominantly from the east to northeast during the summer months. Winter winds tend to be dominated by westerlies and winds from the southwest. Local landform and topography also affect the direction and speed of the prevailing winds throughout the year. Existing air quality in Penrith LGA is reported via State of the Environment reporting against the Regional Air Quality Index (RAQI). The RAQI is based on five criteria pollutants as per national standards (ozone, carbon monoxide, sulfur dioxide, nitrogen dioxide and air particles), plus visibility as per the NSW Standard. A RAQI value of 100 indicates these standards have been exceeded. Penrith LGA had six days in the 2007- 2008 reporting period and 13 days in the 2008-2009 reporting period where the RAQI exceeded the relevant standards (PCC, 2009). 7.5.2 Issues for Consideration The principal air pollutant of concern associated with the Development would be attributed to the generation of windblown dust during the construction works. The nature of the impact would be short term, temporary and limited to the relatively small footprint required for the works. The potential for windblown dust would be
P:\60221206_NRPP_Relocation\6. Draft docs\6.1 Reports\5. EIS Scoping Study\Final draft\NRPP EIS Scoping Study_130312.docx Revision D - 13 March 2012 37 AECOM Nepean River Pump and Pipeline
associated with soil disturbance and earthmoving activities during preparatory earthworks and pipeline trench excavation/backfilling/reinstatement. The operation phase of the Development would generate negligible air quality impacts as the pumps would be generated by electricity (as opposed to fuel). 7.5.3 Method of Assessment An assessment of the potential air quality impacts of the Development would be undertaken in accordance with Approved Methods for the Modelling and Assessment of Air Pollutants in NSW (DECC, 2005). A quantitative assessment would be conducted for the construction phase given the potential for dust generation while a qualitative assessment only would be completed for the operational phase. The assessment would focus on construction management and dust mitigation measures to be applied to the Development, having regard to the proximity and sensitivity of surrounding receivers. Sensitive receivers in the area would include workers of the light industrial facilities in the area and users of the Great River Walk. The nearest residential receivers would comprise the residential properties located along Old Castlereagh Road approximately 600-700m north west of the pumping station.
7.6 Waste 7.6.1 Existing Environment The existing waste management facilities with the potential to service construction waste associated with the Development are outlined in Table 7.1. These waste disposal facilities accept waste classed as either General, Solid Waste Class 1 (putrescible waste) or Solid Waste Class 2 (inert materials only).
Table 7.1 Waste management facilities in vicinity of Development area Accepted waste Name of facility Location Local Government Area classification Blacktown Waste 920 Richmond Road, Solid Waste Class 2 Blacktown Services Marsden Park Asbestos Waste Categories 1,2 and 3 Brandown Lot 90, Elizabeth Drive, General Solid Waste Liverpool Kemps Creek Resource Recovery Veolia Environmental 716-752 Wallgrove Road, General Solid Waste Fairfield Services Horsley Park SITA Environmental Wallgrove Road, Eastern Solid Waste Class 1 Blacktown Solutions Creek Erskine Park Landfill – 50 Quarry Road, Solid Waste Class 2 Penrith Transpacific Erskine Park Glenfield Waste Disposal Cambridge Avenue, Solid Waste Class 2 Campbelltown Glenfield Penrith Waste Services Mulgoa Road, Solid Waste Class 2 Penrith Penrith
7.6.2 Issues for Consideration Management of waste would need to be considered to ensure incorrect handling and disposal does not degrade the surrounding local environment. During construction of the Development, waste generation would be limited to waste types typically associated with construction works for these types of developments, including steel scrap/off cuts, excess concrete, potential excess spoil and domestic waste generated by construction workers. Vegetation waste is likely to be produced for both the pipeline and pumping station components of the Development. The Development is unlikely to generate significant volumes of waste during operation. Infrastructure maintenance waste streams such as occasional component replacements and associated oil and grease from maintenance plant and equipment would also be generated from time to time and would be required to be disposed by the contractors undertaking the work.
P:\60221206_NRPP_Relocation\6. Draft docs\6.1 Reports\5. EIS Scoping Study\Final draft\NRPP EIS Scoping Study_130312.docx Revision D - 13 March 2012 38 AECOM Nepean River Pump and Pipeline
7.6.3 Method of Assessment The EIS would identify all waste streams likely to be generated during the construction and operation of the pipeline and pumping station. Mitigation measures would be proposed and would include as a minimum that waste streams would be classified, separated and disposed in accordance with the Waste Classification Guidelines (DECCW, 2009) at local facilities where possible.
P:\60221206_NRPP_Relocation\6. Draft docs\6.1 Reports\5. EIS Scoping Study\Final draft\NRPP EIS Scoping Study_130312.docx Revision D - 13 March 2012 39 AECOM Nepean River Pump and Pipeline
8.0 Conclusions PLDC is seeking approval for the construction and operation of a pumping station and pipeline to extract water from the Nepean River and discharge it into the PLS. The Development would provide the infrastructure required to pump water from the Nepean River to initially fill the lakes within the PLS and maintain ongoing lake water levels. This EIS SS has provided an overview of the proposed Development and an outline of associated potential environmental impacts. This report is being submitted under Division 4.1, Part 4 of the EP&A Act, to support a request for DGRs that will guide the preparation of an EIS for the Development. The key environmental issues identified for the Development which would be assessed in more detail during the preparation of the EIS include: - Hydrology - Water quality; - Terrestrial and aquatic ecology; and - Indigenous and non-Indigenous heritage. Other environmental issues that would be considered in the EIS include: - Land use; - Landscape and visual amenity; - Topography, geology and soils; - Noise and vibration; and - Waste. As part of the preparation of the EIS, consultation with NSW Government agencies and relevant stakeholders would be undertaken as required and further assessments would be carried out to analyse the potential environmental impacts associated with the Development. The assessments would enable the development of mitigation and management measures to reduce potential impacts during both construction and operational phases. Throughout the assessment of the Development, priority would be given to avoiding and minimising impacts on the environment and local community.
P:\60221206_NRPP_Relocation\6. Draft docs\6.1 Reports\5. EIS Scoping Study\Final draft\NRPP EIS Scoping Study_130312.docx Revision D - 13 March 2012 40 AECOM Nepean River Pump and Pipeline
9.0 References AECOM, 2011a, Relocation of the Nepean River Pump and Pipeline Feasibility Study – Options Assessment, Technical Memorandum, Sydney. AECOM, 2011b, Nepean River Pump and Pipeline Relocation – Preferred Option Feasibility Study, Sydney. Blacktown Waste Services, 2011, About Us, accessed 15/12/2011, http://www.blacktownwasteservices.com.au/page/about_us.html Brandown, 2008, About Brandown, accessed 15/12/2011, http://www.brandown.com.au/ Bureau of Meteorology, 2011, accessed 13/12/2011, http://www.bom.gov.au/ Campbelltown City Council, 2011, Waste Management Centres, accessed 15/12/2011, http://www.campbelltown.nsw.gov.au/default.asp?iNavCatID=477&iSubCatID=1182 Department of Environment and Climate Change, 2005, Approved Methods for the Modelling and Assessment of Air Pollutants in NSW, accessed 15/12/2011, http://www.environment.nsw.gov.au/resources/air/ammodelling05361.pdf Department of Environment, Climate Change and Water, 2009, Waste Classification Guidelines, accessed 15/12/2011, http://www.environment.nsw.gov.au/waste/envguidlns/index.htm Geological Survey of NSW, 1:100,000 scale geological map of Penrith, 1991 Maunsell, 2006, Nepean River Pump and Pipeline Environmental Assessment. Penrith City Council, 2005, City of Penrith, accessed 13/12/2011, http://www.penrithcity.nsw.gov.au/index.asp?id=413 Penrith City Council, 2011, Waste Services, accessed 15/12/2011, www.penrithcity.nsw.gov.au Penrith Lakes Development Corporation, 2007, Penrith Lakes, About Us, accessed 13/12/2011, http://www.penrithlakes.com.au/mainsite/site/html/about_us.htm Penrith Lakes Development Corporation, 2010, Penrith Lakes – Environment, accessed 13/12/2011, http://www.penrithlakes.com.au/mainsite/site/pdf/factSheet/Environment.pdf SITA Environmental Solutions, 2011, Our Services, accessed 15/12/2011, http://www.sita.com.au/our- services/collection--recycling-services.aspx Transpacific, 2011, Erskine Park Landfill, accessed 15/12/2011, http://www.transpacific.com.au/content/erskine- park-landfill.aspx Veolia Environmental Services, 2011, Facility Locations, accessed 15/12/2011, http://www.veoliaes.com.au/
i
P:\60221206_NRPP_Relocation\6. Draft docs\6.1 Reports\5. EIS Scoping Study\Final draft\NRPP EIS Scoping Study_130312.docx Revision D - 13 March 2012