Saltas Enterprises of Tasmania, Drum Filter Project, Florentine Hatchery

Saltas Enterprises of Tasmania Florentine Hatchery Construction & Operation of Drum Filters

Environmental Effects Report

October 2018

SALTAS FLORENTINE HATCHERY, DRUM FILTER ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS REPORT

Contents 1 PART A – Proponent Information ...... 6 2 PART B - Proposal Description ...... 7 2.1 Description of the proposed activity ...... 7 2.1.1 Description of proposed activity ...... 7 2.1.2 Summary of works ...... 12 2.1.3 Commissioning and timeframes ...... 13 2.1.4 Production rates ...... 14 2.1.5 Solid organic waste and biosolid management plan ...... 15 2.2 Proposal area ...... 19 2.3 Map and site plan ...... 21 2.4 Rationale and alternatives ...... 25 2.5 Planning information ...... 27 2.6 Existing activity ...... 27 3 PART C - Potential Environmental Effects ...... 28 3.1 Flora and fauna ...... 28 3.2 Weeds and disease ...... 32 3.3 Aquatic environment and wastewater ...... 32 3.3.1 Aquatic Environment ...... 33 3.3.2 Wastewater...... 39 3.3.3 Alternative options for Wastewater Management ...... 41 3.3.4 Therapeutic treatments ...... 42 3.3.5 Stormwater, sediment and runoff control ...... 42 3.3.6 De-sludging ...... 43 3.4 Significant areas ...... 43 3.5 Air emissions ...... 43 3.5.1 Odour Management ...... 44 3.5.2 Dust ...... 44 3.6 Solid wastes ...... 45 3.7 Noise emissions ...... 45 3.8 Transport impacts ...... 47

SALTAS FLORENTINE HATCHERY, DRUM FILTER ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS REPORT

3.9 Other off-site impacts ...... 48 3.10 Hazardous substances ...... 48 3.11 Site contamination (historical) ...... 49 3.12 Heritage ...... 49 3.13 Sites of high public interest ...... 49 3.14 Monitoring and review ...... 49 3.15 Rehabilitation ...... 52 4 PART D - Management Commitments ...... 53 5 PART E - Public and Stakeholder Consultation ...... 55 6 References ...... 56

SALTAS FLORENTINE HATCHERY, DRUM FILTER ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS REPORT

List of Figures

Figure 1 Process flow arrangement for current operations at Florentine Hatchery ...... 8 Figure 2 Process flow arrangement for Florentine Hatchery post installation of drum filter (green boxes)...... 9 Figure 3 Illustration of a Hydrotech drum filter ...... 10 Figure 4 Schematic of Florentine Hatchery drum chamber isometric ...... 11 Figure 5 Illustrations of the sludge clarifier (a); internal schematic of sludge clarifier (b) ...... 16 Figure 6 Flow diagram of waste removal process with the proposed drum filter ...... 18 Figure 7 Location map of Florentine Hatchery and surrounding area with intake and discharge locations (red and yellow stars) 22 Figure 8 Schematic of the current site arrangement at Florentine Hatchery ...... 23 Figure 9 Schematic of the Florentine Hatchery settlement pond with the proposed drum filter location and surrounding existing and proposed infrastructure ...... 24 Figure 10 Location of observations of Wedge-tailed Eagles nests and modelled Wedge-tailed Eagle habitat in the vicinity of the Florentine Hatchery...... 31 Figure 11 Coordinates and diagram of water quality sampling locations for Florentine Hatchery ..... 51

SALTAS FLORENTINE HATCHERY, DRUM FILTER ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS REPORT

List of Table

Table 1 Drum filter specifications ...... 10 Table 2 Expected excavation volumes ...... 13 Table 3 Biomass levels and maximum feed rates at Florentine Hatchery ...... 14 Table 4 Typical daily water intake in the RAS and flowthrough systems at the Florentine Hatchery .. 14 Table 5 Monthly average of river flow discharge from Hydro Tas Station 40.1 on Florentine River ... 19 Table 6 Monthly average rainfall and temperatures for Florentine area ...... 20 Table 7 Data sources and approaches to aquatic biodiversity-focused environmental impact assessment for Tassal and SALTAS freshwater hatcheries. TSPA = Tasmanian Species Protection Act (1995); EPBC = Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act (1999) ...... 29 Table 8 Details of observations of nearest Wedge-tailed Eagle nests to the Florentine Hatchery in the Tasmanian Natural Values Atlas...... 31 Table 9 List of upstream sampling events from 2015, 2016, 2017 and 2018. Note that not all parameters were sampled and/or analysed during each sampling event...... 34 Table 10 Number of data points for each parameter by year and season. Parameter 1 refers to parameters measured in the Florentine Hatchery sampling program. Parameter 2 refers to the equivalent label in Water Quality Default Guideline Values for the Upper Derwent...... 35 Table 11 Annual default water quality guideline values for the Upper Derwent (DER) and (preliminary) derived water quality guideline values for Florentine Hatchery (FLO)...... 37 Table 12 Seasonal default water quality guideline values for the Upper Derwent (DER) and preliminary derived water quality guideline values for Florentine Hatchery (FLO)...... 38 Table 13 Median, 90th percentile and maximum parameter values for water samples taken from the settlement pond and downstream of Florentine Hatchery...... 40 Table 14 Interim effluent quality limits for Florentine Hatchery ...... 41 Table 15 Chemical agents used at Tassal and Saltas hatchery facilities (data source: Tassal and SALTAS) ...... 42 Table 16 Water quality parameters measured for monitoring program ...... 50 Table 17 Commitments table ...... 53

SALTAS FLORENTINE HATCHERY, DRUM FILTER ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS REPORT

1 PART A – Proponent Information

Saltas enterprises of Tasmania Pty Ltd (SALTAS) is an industry owned hatchery operation which produces salmon eggs, fry and smolt. SALTAS shareholders comprise of Tassal Operations Pty Ltd, Huon Aquaculture Company Pty Ltd, Petuna Aquaculture Pty Ltd, Alstergren Aquaculture and the Tasmanian Government. The registered address of Saltas is:

Salmon Enterprises of Tasmania Pty Ltd 289 Wayatinah Road Wayatinah Tasmania 7140 ABN 38 106 324 127

The contact person for this project is:

Craig Selkirk – Senior Manager (Freshwater) Email: [email protected] Ph: 0407 318 068

This document has been prepared in consultation with suitably qualified consultants and the Tassal Environment and Engineering Departments.

SALTAS FLORENTINE HATCHERY, DRUM FILTER ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS REPORT

2 PART B - Proposal Description

2.1 Description of the proposed activity

• Description of the proposed activity, including method of operation and the main items of equipment. • Provide details on collection, storage and use of influent water, including coordinates for the location of the water off-take, quantity of influent water, use of the water and any contingency water sources. • Summary of works to be undertaken to prepare the site for installation of the drum filter and associated infrastructure. • Timeframe over which each component of the activity is proposed to occur. • Solid organic waste management including expected volumes, disposal arrangements with contractual arrangements with third party service providers. • Specify production capacity, production rates and describe any seasonal variations.

2.1.1 Description of proposed activity

SALTAS proposes to install and operate drum filters as part of the treatment system of the hatchery’s effluent water. The drum filter is deemed the most feasible system to remove solid particles and reduce the organic and nutrient concentrations of the effluent being released to the receiving environment (the Florentine River).

Currently, Florentine Hatchery consists of an incubation and fry system and a broodstock and on- growing system. Water to supply these systems comes from the Florentine River (Eastings 459436, Northings 5301067).

For the purposes of this proposal it is assumed that daily flow through the hatchery is equivalent to 600-900 litres/second (approximately 20,075,000 to 28,470,000 m3 per year) with an approximately equal intake contribution (50:50) from the river and the lake pumps. These values are assumed on hatchery tanks and channels being at maximum holding capacity. Based on current operations at the hatchery these maximum flow rates are unlikely to be reached. These flow rates are consistent with the design specification for the drum filters at maximum flow loading whilst also maintaining redundancy capabilities.

Currently all hatchery through flows and waste streams are directed to the existing settlement pond, situated at a lower elevation than the rest of the hatchery infrastructure. The hatchery water flows to the settlement pond under gravity via a network of buried pipes, pits and channels. All flows are combined to enter the settlement pond via one large diameter pipe (outfall pipe). Figure 1 illustrates the current arrangement of the process flow at the hatchery. SALTAS FLORENTINE HATCHERY, DRUM FILTER ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS REPORT

Figure 1 Process flow arrangement for current operations at Florentine Hatchery

The proposed drum filters would remove solid particles from the hatchery outflow by passing the effluent stream through a micron filter mesh. A fine mesh filter with aperture size of 80 µm would remove solid particles from the effluent flow. The filter mesh is attached to a rotating mechanical drum which rotates at a predefined speed and interval to maximise solids capture. As the effluent passes through the rotating drum filter mesh, solid particles (>80 µm) build up on the filter panels and begin to form a sludge cake layer. Formation of the sludge layer on the filter mesh improves the capture rate of the filter mechanism until the sludge thickens to a point of blockage. As the drum filter continues to rotate, the sludge cake passes an elevated backwash spray bar, backwashing the sludge into an internal trough. Plumbing directs the backwash sludge away from the drum to the transfer pump. The drum filter is supplied on a stainless steel frame, with control panel and backwash pump included. The frame allows the drum filter to be submersed in the effluent stream. High-density polyethylene (HDPE) weirs direct the flow to the filter inlet.

SALTAS FLORENTINE HATCHERY, DRUM FILTER ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS REPORT

The proposed drum filter arrangement specifies two drum filters be installed side by side, each filtering 50% of the total flow. Both drum filters have been designed to cope with 100% flow rate to accommodate for any cases of a drum filter malfunction or when maintenance is required. Any scheduled maintenance would occur outside of peak biomass periods at the hatchery.

The drum filters would be housed in a concrete structure that enables the hatchery outflow to be directed to the drum filter inlets. Predominantly, the concrete structure would be a pre-cast concrete which is lifted into position using a mobile crane. Elements of the structure such as the base and stitch joints shall be cast in-situ concrete.

The drum filter structure would be situated on the hatchery outfall pipe, in the hatchery settlement pond. Figure 2 illustrates the updated process flow arrangement post drum filter installation (proposed drum filters are illustrated by the green boxes).

Figure 2 Process flow arrangement for Florentine Hatchery post installation of drum filter (green boxes).

SALTAS FLORENTINE HATCHERY, DRUM FILTER ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS REPORT

Table 1 and Figures 3 and 4 provide a description and schematics of the proposed drum filter and model specifications.

Table 1 Drum filter specifications

Drum Filter Specifications Make/Model Hydrotech HDF1606-2S – 316SS Micron filtration 80um Flowrate Capacity 588L/s (2 drum filters in parallel) (1,176L/s combined) Steel Frame 316SS Backwash Pump MTR5-24/16

Figure 3 Illustration of a Hydrotech drum filter

SALTAS FLORENTINE HATCHERY, DRUM FILTER ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS REPORT

Figure 4 Schematic of Florentine Hatchery drum chamber isometric

SALTAS FLORENTINE HATCHERY, DRUM FILTER ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS REPORT

2.1.2 Summary of works

To prepare the site for installation of the proposed drum filters a work zone perimeter would be established around the existing settlement pond to control access to the works area (the work zone perimeter is illustrated by the red hatched areas in Figure 9). Civil preparation work would be undertaken in the settlement pond to enable footings to be installed and the relative construction levels to be completed. No native vegetation currently exists within the construction zone area and clearing of any native vegetation outside the construction zone will not occur without express permission of the Site Manager.

Due to the nature of the flow-through hatchery operations, outfall water through the discharge pipe cannot be stopped without stopping flow through the fish tanks. However, undertaking construction works in the settlement pond while outflow continues creates a workplace health and safety risk and is not feasible from a constructability perspective. Therefore, it is proposed to manage the settlement pond water volume and construction works zone via two methods:

• lower the settlement pond water volume by opening the weir bypass valve at the settlement pond outlet; and • install a temporary dam wall around the construction work zone (sand bag or approved equivalent).

A submersible slurry pump would be utilised to mitigate pond/ground water in the works zone. The pump outfall would be directed to a sedimentation trap established as part of the works. Suitable sediment controls will be implemented to allow sediment to be contained (such as sediment fencing, earth bunds, filter socks, etc.) and run off to be returned to the settlement pond.

The existing settlement pond is not considered to function as a sufficient water treatment plant therefore, the effluent water following into the Florentine River during the construction phase of the project is not expected to result in increased inputs of organic nutrients. A further discussion of this can be found in section 2.4 of this document.

During the construction period while pond levels are lowered, de-sludging would be undertaken in line with draft Tassal Freshwater Hatcheries Wastewater Solids Management Plan.

Within the work zone a sump would collect residual ground water and sump pump would remove the water to a sediment trap established adjacent to the settlement pond. Silt traps, hay bales or approved equivalent would be used to construct the silt trap.

Diversion of the hatchery water flow is not required as the work would be undertaken adjacent to the settlement pond.

Civil preparation work would include:

• establishing a temporary dam; • excavation to formation levels; and SALTAS FLORENTINE HATCHERY, DRUM FILTER ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS REPORT

• ground water management.

Due to the proposed location of the drum filter structure occurring within the settlement pond, little excavation spoil would be generated. Any removed material would be stockpiled on site and will be maintained to industry best practice through the use of sediment fences, earth bunds and appropriate soil stabilisation techniques. This includes re-vegetating stockpiles where necessary.

Expected excavation volumes are shown Table 2. No excavated material would be removed from the site, as it will be reused and compacted as trench backfill where possible.

Table 2 Expected excavation volumes

Florentine Civil Volumes Excavation Cut 155m3 Excavation Fill 70m3

Commissioning will be undertaken in a multi-stage approach. During project implementation, equipment will be inspected for damage and completeness. Once approved, and mounting arrangements are complete, equipment will be installed to specifications. All auxiliary systems, plumbing and electrical would be attached in line with the appropriate project sequencing. Equipment will only be energised once all systems installations have been completed and signed off.

Once the civil/concrete works are complete, mechanical install would begin. To commence commissioning of the drum filter system, the plumbing and sludge system must also be completely installed. When the drum filter is commissioned, the system will generate sludge from the outset, therefore the full process flow would be completely installed before any operations were ‘switched on’.

2.1.3 Commissioning and timeframes

The construction period for the Principal contractor/Civil works contract is anticipated to take approximately 15 weeks from contract award, based on the contractor supplied schedules.

Mechanical installation is expected to take approximately three weeks.

Commissioning is expected to take two weeks with the operational observation period expected to take six weeks. This six week observation period will allow for monitoring of system performance to make any necessary adjustments to improve efficiency/effectiveness, and also to identify how the system handles unknowns such as river debris or weeds that may hinder operation, as well as make adjustments in process flow.

The total timeframe of construction to end of commissioning period is expected to be a five month period commencing in December 2018 or January 2019 pending approval.

Once fully operational, the drum filter is expected to operate on 24 hour/year round basis.

SALTAS FLORENTINE HATCHERY, DRUM FILTER ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS REPORT

2.1.4 Production rates

Table 3 shows the total biomass and maximum feed rates at the hatchery for each month of the year 2017. Maximum figures can fluctuate depending on the year.

Table 3 Biomass levels and maximum feed rates at Florentine Hatchery

Flow-through biomass Flow- through feed rates Month (tonnes) (tonnes) January 47 26.2 February 61.3 21.3 March 87.7 31.5 April 87.8 37.6 May 60.2 20.4 June 74.3 13.7 July 24.4 11.1 August 36.4 11.2 September 15 5.6 October 38 13.5 November 9 6.6 December 19.4 12.2

The associated volumes of water passing through the RAS and flowthrough systems at the hatchery are presented in Table 4.

Table 4 Typical daily water intake in the RAS and flowthrough systems at the Florentine Hatchery

Daily Water Intake (kL) Month Flow Through Recirculation TOTAL January 48000 42.8 48042.8 February 59760 42.8 59802.8 March 59760 42.8 59802.8 April 59760 51.6 59811.6 May 48000 8.8 48008.8 June 42000 8.8 42008.8 July 53760 22 53782 August 30240 22 30262 September 30240 23.7 30263.7 October 13440 34.4 13474.4 November 25200 34.4 25234.4 December 33600 34.4 33634.4

SALTAS FLORENTINE HATCHERY, DRUM FILTER ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS REPORT

2.1.5 Solid organic waste and biosolid management plan

The sludge stream from the proposed drum filter configuration would be pumped to the proposed sludge dewatering plant via the sludge transfer pump. The sludge dewatering plant will consist of a plate clarifier and a series of agitated storage tanks and will be installed adjacent to the drum filter (within 30m radius).

A single buried pipe would deliver the sludge stream to a plate clarifier (Figure 5a) that acts as a pre- treatment thickener. The sludge stream would have a high water/low solids content at this stage of the process flow (<1% solids).

The clarifier uses specific gravity and low velocity to passively settle out solid particulate from the main flow stream, concentrating the sludge to a higher percentage of solid content (estimated 5 to 10%). The clarified main flow stream is returned to the drum filter inlet. The concentrated sludge is pumped via a dedicated sludge pump (Figure 5b). It is considered that returning the clarified main flow stream back into the drum filter inlet would not result in high concentrations of dissolved nutrients, however if exceedances of the interim effluent quality limits (see Table 14) occur then SALTAS will conduct analysis of the clarifier overflow and if necessary will implement a management control to separate this water and divert to a storage tank for removal from site or provide treatment of the water before it re-enters the drum filter.

As the sludge is removed from the main flow stream, it falls into the bottom of the clarifier and forms a sludge layer in the hopper below (integrated in the clarifier housing). This sludge layer is evacuated from the hopper and forms a new concentrated sludge stream which will be pumped to aerated/agitated storage tanks. The storage tanks will fill gradually and when full shall be pumped out by an approved sludge removal contractor.

The overflow from the storage tanks will be plumbed to a buffer tank which will capture any overflow. The buffer tank will also be pumped out as required.

Figure 6 illustrates the waste removal process a detailed schematic of the sludge treatment plant can be found in Appendix A.

SALTAS FLORENTINE HATCHERY, DRUM FILTER ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS REPORT

a b

Figure 5 Illustrations of the sludge clarifier (a); internal schematic of sludge clarifier (b)

The total solid organic waste captured by the drum filter is based on the solids leaving the hatchery, which is dependent on biomass carrying capacity and feeding rates. The estimated volume of solid waste generated in the effluent at Wayatinah Hatchery is 149 kg/day. This equates to 4.5 dry tonnes/month or 24.8 wet tonnes/month. Note: dry weight refers to the dry weight of solids, without water content. The wet weight refers to the solids including the wet content. After the dewatering process, the dry solids content is 18%, meaning 82% is water.

Based on a pump frequency of 10 L/sec for 20 seconds every hour (between the clarifier to tank) it is estimated 4.8 kL/day of sludge will be transferred to the storage tank. Removal of the sludge from the storage tank would occur every four days, with a second 22 kL storage tank acting as a buffer for any overflow. The amount of sludge generated will not change during peak biomass periods, it will only result in a more concentrated stream of sludge.

The storage tanks will be located on a concrete hardstand and will be removed by licenced waste removal contractor (e.g. Spectran Group – controlled waste handler CWTEMP224TA/1) and taken to an approved waste facility that is licenced to take organic waste of these volumes (e.g. Brightside Composting EPN 8894/1) where it will be land spread or composted.

The removal of the solid organic waste would be managed under an approved biosolids management plan for the hatchery. The draft Tassal Freshwater Hatcheries Wastewater Solids Management Plan is currently being developed in accordance with the Tasmanian Biosoilds Reuse Guidelines 1999 and encompasses all Tassal hatcheries and the Saltas hatcheries.

Initial screening of wastewater solids was carried out in 2018 for Tassal’s Rookwood, Russell Falls and Karanja hatcheries to determine the contaminant grade of biosolids. Results indicated that all test parameters were within accepted thresholds defined in Tasmanian Biosolids Reuse Guidelines 1999. It is expected that screening results of the biosolids produced by the operation of the drum filter will

SALTAS FLORENTINE HATCHERY, DRUM FILTER ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS REPORT

be similar. Biosolids monitoring will be undertaken in accordance with the draft Tassal Freshwater Hatcheries Wastewater Solids Management Plan.

Biosecurity

Management of biosecurity is vitally important to hatchery operations to safeguard the health of the fish is maintained. A number of existing internal policies are implemented at SALTAS Wayatinah Hatchery to ensure biosecurity is managed effectively including:

• ENV-001 Waste Management Policy • ENV-002 Biosolids Management Policy • WHS-022 Biosecurity Visitor Policy • WHS-023 Biosecurity Staff Policy

Furthermore, the biosecurity management of the sludge waste generated from the drum filter will be managed in accordance with the draft Tassal Freshwater Hatcheries Wastewater Solids Management Plan. The biosecurity controls requirement outlined in the Plan are listed below:

• The sludge storage tank and buffer tank are to be maintained in good condition (i.e. no leakages or cracks) and is to be inspected on a weekly basis; • Removal of the sludge occurs every four days to prevent the tank overflowing (to be managed under an ongoing contractual arrangement with waste transporter); • The sludge storage tank and buffer tank are enclosed; • Transport of sludge will be in an enclosed tanker; • SALTAS will ensure that the waste transport contractor implements a truck washdown procedure for all vehicles prior to entering the hatchery site; and • SALTAS will ensure that the waste transport contractor has an adequate spill prevention and control procedure in place.

SALTAS FLORENTINE HATCHERY, DRUM FILTER ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS REPORT

Buffer tank

Figure 6 Flow diagram of waste removal process with the proposed drum filter SALTAS FLORENTINE HATCHERY, DRUM FILTER ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS REPORT

2.2 Proposal area

• General description of the physical environment surrounding the proposed activity – topography, vegetation, wetlands, watercourses, buildings. • Description of receiving environment for effluent discharge; identify Protected Environmental Values, current downstream uses, general hydrology, seasonal flows. • Description of local climate – rainfall, temperatures. • Current and historical use of the site. • Land tenure, land zoning of the site and surrounding land. • Description of surrounding land use, including location of nearest residents and other sensitive uses. • Description of soils and underlying rock types.

Florentine Hatchery (PID 3386594) is located at 675 Florentine Road: E459991, N5301356 and is owned by Forestry Tasmania. Under the Central Highlands Interim Planning Scheme 2015 the hatchery site is located on land zoned as 26 – Rural Resource.

The Florentine Rive is the largest tributary of the lower Derwent River System. It contributes 11% of the total flow of the Derwent at Lake Meadowbank, or 30% of the Derwent’s flow that is derived below Tarraleah and Tungatinah. Historic monitoring shows naturally elevated conductivities in the Florentine River, with values up to 400 µS/cm. Elevated conductivity, pH and nitrate values have been attributed to the presence of limestone in the Florentine River Catchment. The catchment is primarily under wood production. From the Florentine Hatchery, the Florentine River flows into the Derwent River (approx. 1 km downstream) which is dammed to formed Lake Catagunya (Davies, 2015).

Table 5 shows the monthly average of river flow discharge from Station 40.1 (Lat: -42.44; Long: 146.52) on the Florentine River below the Florentine Hatchery since Jan-17. The data indicates that highest flow is generally during the winter to spring months with lowest flow in summer though autumn.

Table 5 Monthly average of river flow discharge from Hydro Tas Station 40.1 on Florentine River

Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Mean flow discharge 2017* 3410 3809 1850 2164 4922 7324 12595 19823 29582 14400 4787 6736 (litres/second) Mean flow discharge 2018* 2362 3428 4448 7543 11600 12138 27281 27768 9763 - - - (litres/second) *Hydro Tasmania watercourse discharge station (#40.1 Florentine River – A/B Derwent River)

Table 6 shows the monthly average rainfall and temperatures for the area. The prevailing wind direction at Florentine is westerly. SALTAS FLORENTINE HATCHERY, DRUM FILTER ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS REPORT

Table 6 Monthly average rainfall and temperatures for Florentine area

Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Annual Mean Rainfall 58.1 50.7 64.5 78.9 116.2 108.1 137.6 169.0 158.0 132.0 83.4 88.8 1292.6 (mm)* Mean Temperature 18.9 18.8 16.6 13.1 10.0 7.8 7.0 8.0 10.2 12.6 14.7 16.7 12.9 (°C)** *BOM Wayatinah (Saltas) station **BOM Butlers Gorge station

There are no formal or informal reserves associated with aquatic habitats within the vicinity of the Florentine Hatchery, or within 10+ km upstream or downstream of the outfall. The Forest Practices Code applies to forestry operations in the catchment immediately upstream of the hatchery, but does not constitute a formal reserve system. All land associated with the Florentine Hatchery and the river and riparian zones upstream and downstream of it fall within a Permanent Timber Production Zone declared under the Tasmanian Forest Management Act.

Overall, there are no aquatic habitats that are reserved. Some aspects of riparian land upstream of the Florentine Hatchery is either formally reserved or subject to operational or informal reservation constraints under production forest operations, none of this reservation is predicated on or enacted in relation to specific aquatic environmental values, nor places obligations or requirements on SALTAS in relation to aquatic impact management (Davies, 2017).

The hatchery was constructed in 1987 by SALTAS. Prior to construction the land was managed by Forestry Tasmania. The nearest residences are situated in the township of Wayatinah approximately 6 km north of the hatchery. Wayatinah is a small township with a population of approximately 20-30 permanent residents. There is no line of site to Wayatinah from the hatchery.

Vegetation surrounding the hatchery is classified as Eucalyptus obliqua forest with broad leaf shrubs (TASVEG 3.0). There are no threatened vegetation communities in the area. The underlying rock type at the site is dolerite (tholeiitic) with locally developed granophyre (LISTMap 2018). There area has not been identified as having an acid sulphate soils risk or being susceptible to erosion.

The Protected Environmental Values (PEVs) that have been identified downstream of the Florentine Hatchery at Lake Catagunya include:

• Ecosystem protection • Recreational water quality (primary and secondary) and aesthetics

The identification of these values means that, at minimum, the water quality management strategies of the hatchery should seek to provide water of a physical and chemical nature to support a healthy, but modified aquatic ecosystem from which edible fish may be harvested and which will allow people to safely engage in primary contact recreational activities such as swimming (at specific sites) and secondary contact recreational activities such as paddling or fishing in aesthetically pleasing waters

SALTAS FLORENTINE HATCHERY, DRUM FILTER ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS REPORT

(DRC 2003). Refer to section 3.3.1 for discussion on the water quality management strategies of Florentine Hatchery and impacts on the PEVs.

2.3 Map and site plan

• General location map (e.g. 1:25,000 scale). • Site plan showing boundary of the land and footprint (operational area), position of existing structures and proposed drum filter, native vegetation, watercourses, potential locations for effluent disposal, effluent conduits, sources of noise and odour emissions, stormwater collection systems, drainage control and significant earthworks.

Figure 7 illustrates the boundaries of the Florentine Hatchery and the surrounding environment including watercourses (Florentine and Derwent rivers and Lake Catagunya) and roads. The proposed drum filter will be installed within the existing boundaries of the Florentine Hatchery site. The nearest residents are located within the Wayatinah village more than 7 km from the hatchery.

Figure 8 is a schematic of the current site arrangement including buildings (including RAS), broodstock and on-growing fish tanks, and settlement pond.

Figure 9 is a schematic of the Florentine Hatchery settlement pond with the proposed drum filter location and nearest associated existing and proposed infrastructure. Refer to Appendix B for further detailed schematics.

SALTAS FLORENTINE HATCHERY, DRUM FILTER ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS REPORT

River intake 459427 E 5301052 N pump

Effluent 4601885 E 5301333 N Derwent River N discharge point

SALTAS Florentine Hatchery

Florentine Road

Florentine River

Figure 7 Location map of Florentine Hatchery and surrounding area with intake and discharge locations (red and yellow stars) SALTAS FLORENTINE HATCHERY, DRUM FILTER ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS REPORT

Figure 8 Schematic of the current site arrangement at Florentine Hatchery SALTAS FLORENTINE HATCHERY, DRUM FILTER ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS REPORT

Figure 9 Schematic of the Florentine Hatchery settlement pond with the proposed drum filter location and surrounding existing and proposed infrastructure SALTAS FLORENTINE HATCHERY, DRUM FILTER ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS REPORT

2.4 Rationale and alternatives

• Describe the rationale for the proposal. Explain benefits and disadvantages of alternative options that have been considered. • Justification for any proposed diversion of effluent to the receiving environment during construction phase.

Effluent management at the Florentine Hatchery has consisted of discharge of combined aquatic waste from all farm areas through a single settling pond facility and discharge point to the receiving watercourse.

As stated in section 2.1.4, the current settlement pond is considered inadequate to effectively treat hatchery effluent water through the settling of suspended solids. Therefore, the drum filter is considered necessary to improve effluent quality released from the hatchery into the receiving environment of the Florentine River.

Flow through hatcheries take freshwater from the natural water course via an upstream weir, or similar, and direct the water through the hatchery fish tanks, returning water back to the watercourse. For Florentine Hatchery water comes from the Florentine River with discharge directed back into the Florentine River. Water flow into the hatchery equals water flow out of the hatchery. Any treatment methodology implemented to improve nutrient loading at the outflow (end-of-pipe) must be adequately sized to treat the high volumetric flowrate (hydraulic loading) of the hatchery at peak loading.

Preliminary scoping discussions at project concept state identified a number of possible alternate treatment methodologies. These options included:

• Increased desludging • Increased retention in existing settlement pond • Wetlands • Bio-filtration • Drum filter

Each option was considered in terms of hydraulic loading, required footprint and the layout of the existing site, as well as capital investment, power consumption and additional staffing requirements.

The following summary describes each option assessed against site constraints and considered in terms of the existing operation and expected environmental performance.

Increased desludging

Desludging is the manual removal of settled sludge from the pond basin by pump or excavation. This is a maintenance requirement for settlement ponds and is considered to improve water quality by limiting the breakdown of settled sludge. SALTAS FLORENTINE HATCHERY, DRUM FILTER ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS REPORT

Desludging is common practice for settlement ponds and the settlement pond at Florentine Hatchery has desludging factored into the maintenance program. However, this practice alone is not considered adequate enough to remove solids from hatchery effluent.

Increased retention in existing settlement pond

To increase retention time to improve settling of solids, the settlement pond at the hatchery would need to be increased in size. The settlement pond has a current volume capacity of 2,150 m3 with a retention time of 40-60 minutes. The industry standard for retention time in a settlement pond is considered to be at least one hour at 900 L/s.

To increase the pond to an adequate size to allow for more than one hour retention time is not possible in the ponds current location because of:

• the adjacent Florentine River and risk of flooding; • the limited space available to expand the pond and access road around the perimeter of the pond; and • the elevation requirement to make it work.

Additionally, settlement ponds are deemed ineffective as the primary method of treatment due to their inefficiency, particle breakdown within the pond, and anaerobic microbial reaction of the sludge accumulated in the pond basin.

Wetland

Typically, wetlands use a catchment basin designed for nominally five-day retention time combined within selected plant life population to filter nutrients from the flow stream. Due to the topography of the surrounding area, the large footprint required and the availability of land, this option was not considered viable for Florentine Hatchery.

Bio-filtration

Bio-filtration uses multi-stage filtration chambers, micron screens, sludge pumping and bio media to improve water quality parameters. Suspended solids are removed using micron filtration and dissolved nutrients such as ammonia are removed by microbial reaction.

Project and operational considerations for this option included:

• high power consumption; • significant infrastructure upgrade; • multiple pumping stations; • deep excavation; and • multiple auxiliary support systems.

Based on Tassal’s recent Rookwood Road Hatchery project, the estimated concrete structure required to treat 900 L/s flow rate would be 20m x 20m x 4.5m deep.

SALTAS FLORENTINE HATCHERY, DRUM FILTER ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS REPORT

As part of implementing a biofilter to improve dissolved nutrient loading, the solids load would need to be reduced using a micron filter. Estimated capital required to implement a micron screen system with a bio-filtration system sized for a hydraulic load of 900 L/s exceeds $4 million. Therefore, from both a financial and size perspective, this option is not considered viable.

Drum filter

A drum filter removes suspended organics in the effluent stream using micron filtrations. Captured particulate matters is generally dewatered using a sludge plant or stored in bulk volumes prior to being removed from site. Suspended particles in flow-through hatcheries contain nutrients such as phosphorus and nitrogen, and BOD, bound into the particles. As the particles flow downstream, turbulence encourages the soft particles to break down releasing the bound nutrients and allowing them to dissolve in the water stream.

Micron filtration gently removes the particulate matter from the water stream before it breaks down, thus reducing the nutrient loading. Drum filters are widely used in a variety of industries for solid particle removal. By design, drum filters, have the capacity to filter high volumetric flow rates efficiently and with low maintenance costs. Substantial capital investment is required for implementing adequate permanent infrastructure to manage water flow and handle sludge generation.

Based on the flow rates and solid loading that currently exists for the Florentine Hatchery, the drum filter is considered the most viable and effective option for improving effluent water.

2.5 Planning information

• Identify components of the proposal to which the planning application relates. • Description of the status of the activity under LUPAA 1993 and local Council’s Planning Scheme.

In December 2018, Schedule 2(4) Environmental Management and Pollution Control Act 1994 (EMPCA) was amended to include finfish farming as level 2 activity. On 4 January 2018, Saltas was notified by the Director of the EPA that all fish farms that hold an existing authorisation are taken to have applied for an environmental license under the Land Use Planning and Approvals Act 1993 (LUPAA) and that any proposed modification of an existing fish farm, will be environmentally assessed under EMPCA.

2.6 Existing activity

• Details of any current regulatory approvals (permit, licence, EPN, etc.) relating to the existing activity. • Provide summary of existing environmental monitoring results, public complaints and breaches of conditions of current regulatory approvals. • Details of any contraventions of environmental law (if any).

SALTAS FLORENTINE HATCHERY, DRUM FILTER ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS REPORT

Florentine Hatchery operates under Inland Fisheries Services (IFS) Finfish Licence No. 40, issued by the IFS under section 40 of the Inland Fisheries Act 1995 (Appendix C) and Environmental Licence No. 9840/1, issued under the Environmental Management and Pollution Control Act 1994.

SALTAS has no records of public complaints relating to operations at Florentine Hatchery nor any breaches of regulatory conditions as listed in the documents described above.

All environmental monitoring is detailed in section 3.14.

3 PART C - Potential Environmental Effects

3.1 Flora and fauna

• Are there any known occurrences of species of conservation significance, threatened fauna or flora species or threatened vegetation communities on or near the site? If so, or if the site has potential habitat for any such species, a detailed survey is likely to be required and the results should be presented in the report. • Provide a statement as to whether the proposals may impact upon matters of national environmental significance or upon Commonwealth land.

In 2017, to address indicators within the Aquaculture Stewardship Council (ASC) Salmon standard, Saltas conducted an aquatic Biodiversity Focused Environmental Impact Assessment (BFEIA) for its facilities discharging to freshwater receiving environments. The assessment included a description of habitats and species that could be reasonable impacted by the farm, incorporating the identification of proximity to critical, sensitive or protected habitats and species and any potential impacts the farm may have on biodiversity (see Table 7).

SALTAS FLORENTINE HATCHERY, DRUM FILTER ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS REPORT

Table 7 Data sources and approaches to aquatic biodiversity-focused environmental impact assessment for Tassal and SALTAS freshwater hatcheries. TSPA = Tasmanian Species Protection Act (1995); EPBC = Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act (1999)

Assessment Component Data source(s) BFEIA Approach Listed species Species listed under the TSPA and EPBC; the Review data to identify candidate species and locations. List relevant species and Tasmanian Natural Values Atlas; the CFEV characterise relative risks. database (Conservation of Freshwater Ecosystem Values) database

Sensitive non-threatened species Inland Fisheries Service fishery management Review sources and identify: Priority species – CFEV; commercial fishery species – plans and fishery performance data; CFEV eels; recreational fishery species - brown trout and bream. Assess relative database. significance of farm receiving waters for sensitive species within local and state context. List relevant species and characterise relative risks.

High conservation value aquatic CFEV database Identify all CFEV High rated ICV (Integrated Conservation Value) stream reaches habitats and lakes potentially affected by farm operations and discharges (within 5-10 km downstream). List relevant habitats and characterise relative risks.

Identification and description of Tassal/Saltas data on water quality, farm List potential causes/risk factors of environmental aquatic impact. Scan data potential impacts disease status, antibiotic and chemical use and sources for potential nutrient, antibiotic, toxicant, xenobiotic chemical and disease discharge; WIST (Water Information System levels and impacts on receiving rivers, nutrient status of lakes. Rate against Tasmania) database; Hydro Tasmania water ANZECC (2000) water quality guidelines where relevant. List and characterise risks quality data. from most relevant potential causes/risk factors.

Current and future programs and Documentation on Tassal/Saltas procedures Summarise current Tassal/Saltas procedures and assessments. Discuss strategies strategies to eliminate or and risk assessments with Tassal/Saltas personnel. Collate information and summarise key features and minimise identified impacts needs of programs and strategies.

Monitoring of outcomes of above Tassal/Saltas monitoring program plans and Review current Tassal/Saltas monitoring programs. Collate information and programs and strategies reports summarise key features and needs for monitoring.

SALTAS FLORENTINE HATCHERY, DRUM FILTER ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS REPORT

A desktop assessment of the area surrounding the Florentine Hatchery was conducted using LISTMap (2018). No listed flora or fauna species were identified to occur within the immediate proximity of the Florentine Hatchery. However, the habitat surrounding the hatchery is identified as highly suitable nesting habitat for the Wedge-tailed Eagle.

The Tasmanian Wedge-tailed Eagle is listed as endangered under the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 and the Threatened Species Protection Act 1995. The major threat to this species is the loss of nesting habitat and disturbance of nesting birds (Threatened Species Section 2006). Tasmanian conservation agencies apply a basic policy of not having heavy disturbance within 500 m, or 1 km if within line-of-sight, of nests of the Wedge-tailed Eagle during breading season (FPA 2013). These distance-based guidelines were developed to control the impacts of forestry operations (which involve both extensive habitat loss and heavy, sometimes prolonged disturbance) on breeding eagles and have been successful in minimizing the effects of forestry disturbance on breeding birds (FPA 2013).

A search of the Tasmanian Natural Values Atlas for observations of the Wedge-tailed Eagle within the vicinity of the Florentine Hatchery was conducted with 1 km buffers drawn around each nest to assess if the hatchery fell within the threshold distance applied by Tasmanian management agencies (Figure 10). There were no known Wedge-tailed Eagle nests identified within 1 km of the Florentine Hatchery. The nearest site was approximately 1.5-1.7 km from the hatchery. This nesting site has been observed eight times between 2003 and 2015 but notes state that the nest is not active (Table 8). SALTAS FLORENTINE HATCHERY, DRUM FILTER ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS REPORT

Figure 10 Location of observations of Wedge-tailed Eagles nests and modelled Wedge-tailed Eagle habitat in the vicinity of the Florentine Hatchery.

Table 8 Details of observations of nearest Wedge-tailed Eagle nests to the Florentine Hatchery in the Tasmanian Natural Values Atlas.

Date Type Notes

Florentine

21-Oct-15 Nest Not active

18-Nov-13 Nest

15-Nov-13 Nest Not in use

30-Jul-13 Nest

15-Sep-09 Nest Small nest with no signs of use

18-Sep-08 Nest no birds observed nest reduced in size

21-Nov-05 Nest not in use

27-Jul-03 Nest

SALTAS FLORENTINE HATCHERY, DRUM FILTER ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS REPORT

Conservation planners in Tasmania generally impose restrictions on activities for known Tasmanian Wedge-tailed Eagle nests within 1 km (FPA 2013). Birds nesting within 1 km are generally considered at risk from noise and visual disturbance. There are no eagle nests within this distance threshold in the Tasmanian Natural Values Atlas, nor have any nests been identified via visual assessment by personnel at the hatchery. Additionally, the construction phase of the drum filter would likely occur outside of breeding season for Wedge-tailed Eagles. Therefore, the impacts upon known nesting Tasmanian Wedge-tailed Eagles is considered likely to be low.

There is high-quality modelled Tasmanian Wedge-tailed Eagle habitat in the vicinity of the hatchery with noise and visual disturbance from the installation and operation of the drum filters conceivably discouraging raptors from establishing nests in the area. However, the disincentive is considered unlikely to be significantly over and above the current operations of the hatchery (refer to section 3.7 for more detail) and specific consideration is being given to the drum filter design to ensure noise and visual aspects of the infrastructure do not significantly impact upon native fauna in the area. There is also very large areas of highly suitable nesting habitat in the region providing ample alternatives to the habitat in the immediate vicinity of the hatchery.

3.2 Weeds and disease

• Are weeds and diseases that may affect native flora and fauna known to be present on or near the site or are there reasons to expect their presence? If so, a survey and recommended control measures are likely to be required. • Does the proposal have the potential to spread weeds and diseases that may affect native flora and fauna? If so, recommendations for ongoing weed and pathogen management should be presented in the EER in accordance with the weed management and hygiene guidelines.

There is no record of weeds or disease in the vicinity of the Florentine Hatchery. It is not anticipated that the installation and operation of the drum filter at the Hatchery will result in the spreading of weed species.

During construction all construction machinery will be cleaned prior to and on leaving site to remove all soil and botanic matter as described in Wash Down Guidelines for Weed and Disease Control Edition 1 (DPIPWE, 2004). Weed infested material will not be used as mulching to reduce the propagation of weeds. During the construction phase an ongoing weed management program will be undertaken to minimise weeds. Gravel and fill etc. will be sourced from areas considered low risk of importing phytophthora to site.

3.3 Aquatic environment and wastewater

• Identify all protected environmental values for the receiving environment downstream of the outfall and describe relevant uses of the downstream environment. • Provide determined (from current operations) or estimated wastewater throughput volumes after installation of the drum filters including seasonal variation and longer-term trends associated with production levels.

SALTAS FLORENTINE HATCHERY, DRUM FILTER ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS REPORT

• Determine water quality guideline values for key receiving water quality indicators to protect the identified environmental values for the receiving waters. • Propose effluent quality limits, including expected median, 90th percentile and maximum values for BOD, non-filterable residue, thermotolerant coliforms, total and dissolved nitrogen, phosphorus, conductivity and pH and any other potential contaminants of concern. • Where guideline values will potentially be impacted then the extent of the required mixing zone must be determined. • Contingency measures for unforeseen circumstances that may require alternative options for management of wastewater. • Detail any therapeutic treatments that may be used in the hatchery and any potential impacts. • Describe management of stormwater from the construction area during the installation of the drum filter. • Detail the management for draining and desludging of the current treatment ponds.

3.3.1 Aquatic Environment

3.3.1.1 Protected Environmental Values and downstream uses

As highlighted in section 2.2, two PEVs – ecosystem protection; recreational water quality and aesthetics) were identified for the receiving environment (Florentine and Derwent River into Lake Catagunya) of the Florentine Hatchery effluent water. These values are in line with the most relevant uses of the Lake Catagunya including recreational fishing, boating and paddling.

Recreational fishing targets brown trout, with occasional catches of escapee rainbow trout and Atlantic salmon. Brown trout populations are self-sustaining in the Lagoon and are widespread across Tasmania. Atlantic salmon are occasionally actively stocked in in-land lakes across Tasmania, with some stocking occurring in the Lagoon over the last 10 years. These stockings are for the purpose of ‘put and take’ recreational fishing, and do not result in permanently established populations. The recreational fishery of Wayatinah Lagoon includes Lake Catagunya is considered small and frequented by less than 100-200 anglers a year, with a low fishing effort and catch rate. Lake Catagunya is also utilised for other recreational activities including boating and kayaking, usually during the summer months.

Potential impacts to these identified PEVs could include:

• changes to water quality • aesthetic changes (i.e. odour, water colour)

To mitigate any potential impacts to the identified PEVs from hatchery operations, the monitoring program includes water quality guideline values (refer to section 3.3.1.2) and effluent limits (refer to section 3.3.2.1). These guideline values and limits seek to provide water quality of a physical and chemical nature that will support downstream ecosystem health.

SALTAS FLORENTINE HATCHERY, DRUM FILTER ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS REPORT

3.3.1.2 Water quality guideline values

Water quality has been monitored upstream and downstream of Florentine Hatchery since 2015 (Table 9). Water quality data collected from upstream sites provides an opportunity to calculate site- specific trigger values that can be set as a benchmark against which downstream water quality can be assessed.

There have been 24 sampling events upstream of Florentine Hatchery since May 2015. The frequency of sampling was approximately quarterly between May 2015 and March 2018, then changed to fortnightly between March 2018 and September 2018. Nineteen parameters were measured from the water samples however, not all parameters were sampled and/or analysed for each sampling event. Sixteen analytes were sampled twenty or more times between 2015 and 2018. Temperature, DO (mg/L) and DO (%) were only measured on 10, 13 and 5 occasions, respectively. Data available for parameters were unevenly spread across years (quarterly sampling between 2015-2017; fortnightly samples for 2018) and seasons (autumn and winter well represented; summer and spring poorly represented; Table 10).

Values for some parameters often fell below lab detection limits. The laboratory (Analytical Services Tasmania) reported these parameters with a prefix ‘<’ (e.g. <0.005 mg/L). In these cases, the upper value of the detection limit was used in calculations. For example, a value of <0.005 mg/L was converted to 0.005 mg/L.

Raw data for the upstream water samples at Florentine Hatchery is available in Appendix D.

Table 9 List of upstream sampling events from 2015, 2016, 2017 and 2018. Note that not all parameters were sampled and/or analysed during each sampling event.

2015 2016 2017 2018 8-May 29-Mar 11-Jan 13-Mar 7-Jul 28-Jul 27-Apr 26-Mar 18-Aug 18-Oct 27-Jul 11-Apr 16-Dec 18-Oct 19-Apr 3-May 16-May 5-Jun 21-Jun 17-Jul 16-Aug 18-Sep

SALTAS FLORENTINE HATCHERY, DRUM FILTER ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS REPORT

Table 10 Number of data points for each parameter by year and season. Parameter 1 refers to parameters measured in the Florentine Hatchery sampling program. Parameter 2 refers to the equivalent label in Water Quality Default Guideline Values for the Upper Derwent.

Parameter 1 Parameter 2 2015 2016 2017 2018 Autumn Winter Spring Summer Total Florentine Alkalinity 4 3 4 12 9 9 2 3 23 Ammonia 4 3 4 12 9 9 2 3 23 BOD 4 3 4 12 9 9 2 3 23 Coliforms 4 3 4 12 9 9 2 3 23 DO (% sat) DO (% sat)^ 0 1 1 11 6 3 2 2 13 DO (mg/L) DO (mg/L)^ 0 1 1 3 1 0 2 2 5 EC Cond^ 4 3 4 13 9 9 3 3 24 Hardness 4 3 4 12 9 9 2 3 23 Nitrate NO3 as N^ 4 3 4 12 9 9 2 3 23 Nitrite NO2 as N^ 2 3 4 12 8 8 2 3 21 pH pH^ 4 3 4 12 9 9 2 3 23 Phosphorus DRP as P^ 4 3 4 12 9 9 2 3 23 TDS 4 3 4 12 9 9 2 3 23 Temperature Temp (oC)^ 0 1 4 5 2 3 3 2 10 Total Mg 4 3 4 12 9 9 2 3 23 Total Nitrogen TAN as N^ 4 3 4 12 9 9 2 3 23 Total Phosphorus Total P as P^ 4 3 4 12 9 9 2 3 23 Total Zinc 4 3 4 12 9 9 2 3 23 TSS TSS* (1.5 µm) 4 3 4 12 9 9 2 3 23 SALTAS FLORENTINE HATCHERY, DRUM FILTER ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS REPORT

Calculation of receiving Water Quality Guideline Values

The National Water Quality Management Strategy considers that the 80th percentile provides an upper limit for stressors that cause problems at high values, while the 20th particle provides a lower limit for stressors that cause problems at low values. These site-specific trigger values set a benchmark against which future variation in water quality at sites can be assessed.

It is considered that sufficient information should be available from historical upstream sampling of Florentine Hatchery to calculate preliminary guideline values for receiving water quality. The water quality default guideline values for the Upper Derwent provide a set of relevant parameters and these default guideline values can be referred to when data is insufficient.

Preliminary annual guideline values

The preliminary annual trigger values for 20th and 80th percentiles were calculated using all available data (i.e. all water samples collected between 2015-2018) in the Excel formula PERCENTILE.INC. Table 11 displays the preliminary annual trigger values.

It is important to note that the annual trigger values derived from the sampling data is subject to yearly and seasonal bias because of (a) unbalanced sampling across years (see Table 10) and (b) unbalanced sampling across seasons (see Table 10). This may have an effect on parameters with a strong seasonal cycle, for example, the over-representation of cold water in autumn and winter samples compared to spring and summer samples will result in temperature trigger limits that may be considerably cooler than true conditions.

Preliminary seasonal guideline values

The water quality default guideline values for the Upper Derwent include seasonal values. The 20th and 80th percentiles were calculated for each season for the Florentine Hatchery (see Table 12). It should be noted that these values are considered to be preliminary values only and are subject for review upon the accumulation of more data from sampling events. SALTAS FLORENTINE HATCHERY, DRUM FILTER ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS REPORT

Table 11 Annual default water quality guideline values for the Upper Derwent (DER) and (preliminary) derived water quality guideline values for Florentine Hatchery (FLO).

Site Period Value o DO (mg/L)^ DO (% sat)^ Cond^ pH^ Turb^ Temp ( C)^ TAN NO3 as NO2 as Total DRP as Total TSS* TSS^ as N^ N^ N^ N as P^ P as (1.5 (0.45 N^ P^ µm) µm) lower upper lower upper (µs/cm) lower upper NTU lower upper (mg/L) (mg/L) (mg/L) (mg/L) (mg/L) (mg/L) (mg/L) (mg/L)

DER Annual Guideline 9.4 11.8 90.3 103.8 123.4 6.2 7.4 8.3 6.5 13.5 0.012 0.020 0.003 0.394 0.004 0.022 5.00 11.00

FLO Annual Guideline 11.1 12.8 100.4 108.9 224.8 7.6 8.2 NA 6.4 10.3 0.010 0.090 0.005 0.406 0.005 0.010 4.00 NA

# FLO Annual 5 5 7 7 24 23 23 NA 11 11 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 NA Samples

NOTE: For Florentine Hatchery, lower (20th percentile) and upper (80th percentile) were calculated for DO, pH and temperature. Upper (80th percentile) values were calculated for the remaining parameters, including conductivity (Cond). The total number of data points for Florentine Hatchery (FLO) are included. Parameters with poor data resolution (n-11 measurements highlighted in red) and good resolution (n=>20 measurements highlighted in green).

SALTAS FLORENTINE HATCHERY, DRUM FILTER ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS REPORT Table 12 Seasonal default water quality guideline values for the Upper Derwent (DER) and preliminary derived water quality guideline values for Florentine Hatchery (FLO).

Site Period Value o DO (mg/L)^ DO (% sat)^ Cond^ pH^ Turb^ Temp ( C)^ TAN as NO3 as NO2 as Total N DRP as Total P TSS* TSS^ N^ N^ N^ as N^ P^ as P^ (1.5 (0.45 µm) µm) lower upper lower upper (µs/cm) lower upper NTU lower upper (mg/L) (mg/L) (mg/L) (mg/L) (mg/L) (mg/L) (mg/L) (mg/L)

DER Summer Guideline 8.9 10.5 90.3 103.1 140.4 6.5 7.8 6.7 11.2 16.9 0.011 0.008 0.003 0.370 0.004 0.023 5.00 15.20

FLO Summer Guideline 10.7 11.9 102.0 113.3 299.2 8.1 8.2 NA 13.6 14.8 0.007 0.069 0.004 0.328 0.005 0.010 3.2 NA

FLO Summer # Samples 2 2 2 2 3 3 3 NA 2 2 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 NA

DER Autumn Guideline 9.7 11.7 89.5 103.8 124.4 6.3 7.6 6.0 7.6 12.2 0.011 0.020 0.004 0.323 0.004 0.016 5.00 12.00

FLO Autumn Guideline 13.0 13.0 105.0 109.0 307.4 7.7 8.3 NA 7.1 7.3 0.010 0.068 0.004 0.504 0.006 0.014 9.6 NA

FLO Autumn # Samples 1 1 6/1 6/1 9 9 9 NA 2 2 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 NA

DER Winter Guideline 11.1 13.0 90.5 105.1 116.5 6.0 7.0 13.0 4.5 7.0 0.016 0.071 0.005 0.529 0.004 0.028 10.00 7.00

FLO Winter Guideline NA NA 100.8 102.0 172.4 7.6 7.9 NA 4.5 6.1 0.009 0.097 0.005 0.414 0.004 0.010 4.0 NA

FLO Winter # Samples NA NA 3 3 9 9 9 NA 3/4 3/4 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 NA

DER Spring Guideline 9.5 11.8 90.5 103.7 114.6 6.2 7.3 9.1 7.0 11.7 0.012 0.009 0.004 0.392 0.004 0.022 5.00 8.20

FLO Spring Guideline 11.6 12.5 101.5 107.0 186.2 7.8 8.0 NA 7.9 9.1 0.009 0.105 0.003 0.298 0.004 0.010 2.0 NA

FLO Spring # Samples 2 2 2 2 3 2 2 NA 3 3 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 NA

NOTE: For Florentine Hatchery, lower (20th percentile) and upper (80th percentile) were calculated for DO, pH and temperature. Upper (80th percentile) values were calculated for the remaining parameters, including conductivity (Cond). The total number of data points for Florentine Hatchery (FLO) are included. Parameters with poor data resolution (n-8 measurements highlighted in red) and good resolution (n=>9 measurements highlighted in green).

SALTAS FLORENTINE HATCHERY, DRUM FILTER ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS REPORT

3.3.2 Wastewater

3.3.2.1 Existing effluent quality

As discussed in the previous section 3.3.1.2, there have been 24 sampling events upstream of the Florentine Hatchery settlement pond since May 2015. The frequency of sampling was approximately quarterly between May 2015 and March 2018, then changed to fortnightly between March 2018 and September 2018. There have been 12 sampling events downstream of the hatchery since February 2018.

Nineteen parameters were measured from the water samples. Not all parameters were sampled and/or analysed for each sampling event. Data available for parameters were unevenly spread across years (quarterly sampling between 2015-2017; fortnightly samples for 2018) and seasons (autumn and winter well represented; summer and spring poorly represented).

The median, 90th percentile and maximum values for settlement pond and downstream sampling locations for the Florentine Hatchery were calculated (Table 13) using the raw data from the Florentine sampling program (refer to Appendix E for the raw data).

It should be noted that the sample collection is unbalanced across years and seasons and statistics may be skewed towards winter and autumn conditions; and for some seasons (i.e. spring/summer) and some parameters (i.e. dissolved oxygen and temperature) are based on very small sample sites. SALTAS FLORENTINE HATCHERY, DRUM FILTER ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS REPORT

Table 13 Median, 90th percentile and maximum parameter values for water samples taken from the settlement pond and downstream of Florentine Hatchery.

Pond Downstream Median 90th Max Median 90th Max

Florentine Alkalinity mg CaCo3 71.0 154.2 161.0 74.0 100.0 157.0 Ammonia mg-N/L 0.340 0.726 0.780 0.150 0.537 0.720 BOD mgO2/L 5.0 8.8 11.0 5.0 6.9 8.0 Coliforms* cfu/100mL 20.0 58.0 160.0 25.0 86.0 120.0 DO mg/L 11.2 13.1 13.4 12.1 12.7 12.8 DO % 106.0 109.1 112.3 102.2 106.0 106.5 EC uS/cm 178 329 359 176 229 340 Hardness mg CaCoO3 72.000 155.000 166.000 78.500 105.900 169.000 Nitrate mg-N/L 0.110 1.420 4.900 0.150 0.881 2.500 Nitrate_Nitrite mg-N/L 0.120 1.600 4.900 0.155 0.899 2.500 Nitrite mg-N/L 0.007 0.021 0.052 0.009 0.016 0.024 pH 7.4 7.8 8.1 7.6 7.7 7.8 Phosphorus mg-P/L 0.063 0.192 0.330 0.050 0.089 0.170 TDS mg/L 128.0 194.4 208.0 123.5 149.0 199.0 Temperature deg C 7.4 13.4 15.3 6.8 10.7 13.3 TKN mg-N/L 0.980 1.900 2.500 0.940 1.200 1.800 Total_Ca mg/L 24.700 55.300 58.900 27.200 37.080 60.100 Total_Mg mg/L 2.380 4.106 4.580 2.600 3.231 4.670 Total_N mg-N/L 1.400 3.220 6.600 1.200 2.080 3.500 Total_P mg-P/L 0.140 0.394 0.850 0.105 0.307 0.360 Total_Zn µg/L 5.0 9.0 18.0 7.0 10.8 13.0 TSS mg/L 5.0 9.8 22.0 4.0 9.8 25.0 *Coliforms = Thermotolerant coliforms

SALTAS FLORENTINE HATCHERY, DRUM FILTER ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS REPORT

3.3.2.2 Interim effluent quality limits

Interim effluent quality limits would generally be determined on a seasonal basis in order to reflect influencing factors such as biomass levels/feed rates and climatic factors such as rainfall. However, due to the limitation in the dataset as described in section 3.3.2.1, the interim limits have been based on the 90th percentile values calculated from the settlement pond dataset. The pond values are considered equivalent to ‘end-of-pipe’ values as the samples are taken from the point just before discharge to the river.

Table 14 describes the proposed interim effluent quality limits that will be implemented for Wayatinah pond values during the construction and commissioning period of the drum filter. A review of the interim limits will be undertaken six months after commissioning to establish seasonal values that more accurately reflect the hatchery operation with the drum filter.

Table 14 Interim effluent quality limits for Florentine Hatchery

Parameter Interim Limit Value

Alkalinity mg CaCo3 154.2 Ammonia mg-N/L 0.726 BOD mgO2/L 8.8 Coliforms* cfu/100mL 58.0 DO mg/L 13.1 DO % 109.1 EC uS/cm 329 Nitrate mg-N/L 1.420 Nitrate_Nitrite mg-N/L 1.600 Nitrite mg-N/L 0.021 pH 7.8 Phosphorus Dissolved Reactive mg-P/L 0.192 TDS mg/L 194.4 Temperature deg C 13.4 TKN mg-N/L 1.900 Total_Ca mg/L 55.300 Total_Mg mg/L 4.106 Total_N mg-N/L 3.220 Total_P mg-P/L 0.394 TSS mg/L 9.8

3.3.3 Alternative options for Wastewater Management

As described in section 2.4, a range of options have been assessed to improve the treatment of effluent water being discharged from Florentine Hatchery. These options included increased desludging, increasing the settlement pond retention time, develop wetlands, bio-filtration and installation of drum filter. Through these scoping discussions it was established that the installation and operation of drum filters was the most viable option in relation to site constraints, existing SALTAS FLORENTINE HATCHERY, DRUM FILTER ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS REPORT

hatchery operations and expected environmental performance. It should also be noted that desludging of the settlement pond will still occur on an annual basis at Florentine Hatchery.

3.3.4 Therapeutic treatments

A wide range of chemicals are used for a variety of purposes at the SALTAS facilities (Table 15). Some chemicals are used routinely, while others are used in response to specific events (e.g. disease management, animal transport). SALTAS policy as outlined in its internal procedure ENV-001 is that all chemical agents (including antibiotics) are to be used in accordance with the manufacturer’s guidelines and all containment/disposal procedures are carried out in line with MSDS (safety data sheet) standards. The chemical agents listed in Table 15 are generally used in volumes well below guideline recommendations and most are used to treat tanks within the recirculating aquaculture system (RAS).

Table 15 Chemical agents used at Tassal and Saltas hatchery facilities (data source: Tassal and SALTAS)

Agent Use description Disinfectant, cleaning etc. Formalin Aqueous Formaldehyde stabilized with methanol - disinfectant and anti-parasitic Virkon (Aquatic) Inorganic disinfectant, fish tank treatment, used at ca. 2 ppm (100 g at a time) Chloramine T Routine cleaning - biocide and disinfectant Sodium hypochlorite Routine cleaning Ethanol Varying topical uses

Water quality control Salt Sodium chloride. Used for tank treatment and brining of sand filters Hydrated lime Calcium hydroxide. Routine pH control Hydro-mags Magnesium hydroxide. Routine pH control Sodium bicarbonate Routine pH control

Fish anaesthetics Benzocaine Anaesthetic Clove Oil Anaesthetic, used during harvesting and transport Aqui-S Water dispersible liquid anaesthetic, used during harvesting, husbandry and transport

Disease/growth control Yersinivac-B Whole-cell vaccine for Yersinia infection prevention Antibiotic Typically Trimethoprim, varying formulations, mixed with feed

3.3.5 Stormwater, sediment and runoff control

The footprint of the proposed works would have no impact on the existing stormwater drainage systems in the surrounding area. All disturbed ground would be brought to pre-existing standard or better. Surface drains directing groundwater to the settlement pond would be installed as required to control erosion of the new finished surface.

SALTAS FLORENTINE HATCHERY, DRUM FILTER ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS REPORT

Sediment and runoff control measures have been identified and will be implemented during the construction phase of the project. These identified measures include:

• All spoil stockpiles to be maintained to industry best practice through the use of sediment fences, earth bunds and appropriate soil stabilisation techniques. This includes re-contouring and re-vegetating stockpiles. • Installation of appropriate sized sediment control basins, gross pollutant traps, and other erosion and sediment control measures (sediment fencing, filter socks, etc.) as required. • Contaminated water to be removed from the site using an appropriately licensed transport contractor and transferred to an approved treatment facility. • All stormwater management infrastructure to be regularly monitored and maintained. As part of the proposed works, the existing settlement pond would be brought back into service once the new drum filter system is commissioned. It is anticipated the settlement pond shall have minimal solids loading due to the efficiency of the proposed drum filter upstream. Surface drains in the immediate area around the new drum filter structure shall direct surface water to the settlement pond to manage and prevent erosion.

3.3.6 De-sludging

During the construction period while the outflow water is being diverted, the settlement pond shall be emptied and desludged. Desludging would be undertaken in line with the draft Tassal Freshwater Hatcheries Wastewater Solids Management Plan.

3.4 Significant areas

• Is the proposal located within or adjacent to an existing reserved area (e.g. National Park, State Reserve, Regional Reserve, Nature Reserve, Forest Reserve or Conservation Area)? If yes, provide details.

Florentine Hatchery is more than 4 km downstream of the World Heritage Listed Franklin-Gordon Wild Rivers National Park. As the hatchery is an existing operation located downstream the construction and operation of the drum filter will not have any impacts on the National Park.

There are no other areas of significance within the vicinity of the proposed activity.

3.5 Air emissions

• Demonstrate, any air emissions at the various stages of the wastewater treatment will not cause environmental harm (includes environmental nuisance). Provide evidence, potential odour sources will be enclosed and any odour will be maintained at levels to satisfy the requirements of the Environmental Protection Policy (Air Quality) 2004. • Identify and describe each potential source of air emissions (i.e. point or fugitive). • Describe the management of all potential sources of air emissions, including solid organic waste. Discuss design features of the equipment, infrastructure and systems, and other processes, strategies or procedures, which will mitigate atmospheric emissions.

SALTAS FLORENTINE HATCHERY, DRUM FILTER ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS REPORT

• Discuss contingency management for unforeseen events, such as excessive volume of solid organic waste on site, which could comprise the function of the system/facility.

Dust and odour are identified as potential air emissions resulting from the proposed activity. These emissions could potentially cause a nuisance to the hatchery staff and visitors to the site.

3.5.1 Odour Management

Solid organic waste (sludge) is the most significant source of odour resulting from the operation of the drum filter. The generated sludge would be stored in an enclosed polyethylene tank that would be emptied every four days. The waste would be transported in an enclosed tanker. The odour emissions are expected to be low to negligible due to:

• Experience from other existing hatcheries (Tassal’s Russell Falls and Rookwood facilities) that produce biosolids similar in nature. Employee observations from these hatcheries have found that odour is only occasionally noticeable in distances less than 10 m from the tank and there is no obvious odour being emitted from the sludge clarifier (as per observations at Russell Falls Hatchery). There have also been no reports from residents close to these hatcheries in relation to odour complaints. • Distance of nearest residents (Wayatinah Village) is more than 7 km away with no line of sight due to topography and vegetation.

As part of the draft Biosolids Management Plan the location, storage arrangements and removal frequency of the sludge produced will be detailed and odour mitigation methods will be implemented if required.

It should also be noted that Florentine Hatchery currently produces and manages biosolids from the RAS and desludging of the settlement pond and no complaints relating to odour emissions have been received.

In the unlikely event that odour concentrations become noticeable to sensitive receptors, SALTAS would engage an odour specialist to conduct an assessment and will investigate odour mitigation options.

3.5.2 Dust

There may be an increase of dust generation at the Florentine Hatchery site during the construction phase. Dust prevention and mitigation strategies are for the construction of the drum filter include:

• Surfaces of work and heavy vehicle movement areas are to be of compacted gravel to minimise vehicle generated dust emissions; • Water tanker and water sprays to be used to suppress dust when necessary; • Spray stockpiles with water to suppress dust when necessary; • Service and maintain all plant and equipment powered by internal combustion engines to ensure emissions comply with the relevant legislation;

SALTAS FLORENTINE HATCHERY, DRUM FILTER ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS REPORT

• Loads on trucks to be covered to prevent dust generation; and • Vehicles not to be left idling unnecessarily.

3.6 Solid wastes

• Will the activity produce or result in solid wastes? If yes, provide details of the nature of the waste types and proposed methods for reuse, recycling or disposal of such wastes. • Can generation of the wastes be reduced or avoided in the first place?

The proposed activity will result in the production of solid wastes both during and after construction. During construction the following mitigation measures will be implemented to avoid/minimise generation of solid wastes:

• All contractors must define the likely solid and controlled wastes they will produce and how they will be disposed of. • Weekly inspections to include litter checks and consequent clean-up if necessary. • Controlled waste to be removed from the site on a progressive basis and not allowed to stockpile unduly. • Store and disposal of any general garbage to licensed landfill. Litter bins to have secure lids to prevent access by animals. • Construction waste to be sent to recycling where practicable. • Segregate and recycle general solid wastes generated by construction activities.

Post construction solid waste will be generated in the form of organic sludge from the drum filter. This waste will be managed under the draft Biosolids Management Plan which will include removal of the waste by a third party contractor who is authorised to transport controlled wastes under EMPCA or subordinate legislation. The waste would be transported to an authorised composting facility for final disposal.

3.7 Noise emissions

• Will the activity include fixed or mobile equipment that emits noise? If yes, provide details of the noise sources including size, power ratings, noise attenuation and hours of operation. Show the expected locations of the noise sources on the site plan and locations of nearby residences and other noise sensitive premises on the area map. • Describe the potential impacts from noise generated by the activity and the need or otherwise for detailed technical review and additional mitigation measures.

The main noise sources associated with the drum filter installation and operation include truck movements, ancillary equipment and excavation equipment/machinery.

Construction

• Contractor construction traffic (6-8 cars and 2 trucks per day). Note no material is being removed from site.

SALTAS FLORENTINE HATCHERY, DRUM FILTER ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS REPORT

• Earthmoving equipment (standard excavation for period of 3 weeks) • Earthmoving equipment (rock removal i.e. ripping or hydraulic hammer for estimated 3 days) • Truck reversing signal • Mobile crane operation (2-3 days)

Operation – drum filter

• Drum filter spray bar - primary noise source similar to other drum filters running full-time at Tassal’s Rookwood and Russell Falls hatcheries. • Sludge pump, water pump – start/stop operation

Operation – sludge plant

• Lamella plate clarifier– start/stop operation • Auxiliary blower and diffuser system in each sludge tank – primary noise source with plant running full-time

Potential impacts from these noise sources could include:

• Nuisance to on-site staff and visitors • Disturbance to nesting Wedge-tailed Eagle

To mitigate these potential impacts during the construction phase of the project the following control measures would be implemented:

• Construction activities, including entry and departure of vehicles shall be restricted to the hours 7.00am to 7.00pm (Monday to Friday) and 8.00am to 5.00pm (Saturdays) and at no time on Sundays. Work outside of these hours can only occur if: o delivery of materials is required for safety or emergency reasons; o emergency work is required to avoid loss of life, property damage or environmental damage; and/or o any other work agreed between SALTAS and neighbours. • Ensure construction equipment has adequate noise and vibration control equipment and is maintained in good working order. Measures include: o Earth moving equipment fitted with residual class mufflers o Acoustic enclosures for any diesel generators and/or air compressors o Where possible, use high pressure hydraulic systems instead of pneumatic hammers to split rock. • Properly maintaining vehicles and equipment to ensure noise source levels are not exceeded. • Monitor excessively noisy equipment and modify or remove from site if noise levels are exceeded.

SALTAS FLORENTINE HATCHERY, DRUM FILTER ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS REPORT

To mitigate the on-going noise sources as part of the drum filter operation SALTAS will consider potential noise sources and levels as part of the detailed design of the drum filter and identify any necessary additional noise reduction measures (such as acoustic barriers) to ensure that noise levels are maintained at the target levels.

The operation of the drum filter in relation to noise nuisance is considered to be very minimal (if not negligible). The Florentine Hatchery is surrounded by Forestry owned plantations and the nearest residents are located at Wayatinah Village approximately 6 km away, with no line of sight to the hatchery. It should also be noted that the hatchery has been operating for 32 years with no noise complaints resulting from its operation. In relation to disturbance to nesting Wedge-tailed Eagles, as described in section 3.1, the nearest nest was last surveyed in 2015 and was noted as not active. This nest is also approximately 1.5-1.7 km from the hatchery with no line-of-sight to the hatchery. Additionally, the construction of the drum filter would likely not occur during the Wedge-tailed Eagle breeding season. It should also be noted that current operations at the hatchery could be used as a baseline for visual and noise impact on wildlife in the area (including Wedge-tailed Eagles). Annual de-sludging of the settlement pond (usually in Oct-Nov) includes use of an excavator and/or pumps which are equivalent or similar to the machinery required during the construction phase of this proposal. Other machinery (such as cranes) that may be required for discrete small pieces of construction work have previously been used on site for past developments such as the new RAS building. In addition, large trucks both on-site (such as smolt trucks and waste removal vehicles) and off-site (log trucks) generally frequent the area. Overall, it is considered that the activities associated with the drum filter installation would not significantly differ in scale and intensity from the types of activities previously undertaken at this site. This proposal is not considered to expose protected wildlife (such as Wedge-tailed Eagles) to the types of machinery or operations generally regarded as threatening processes. The proposed installation of drum filters at the Florentine Hatchery is unlikely to significantly impact on Wedge-tailed Eagle populations, their behaviour or breeding success.

Appendix F is an assessment provided by noise specialist Steven Carter (Environmental Dynamics) summarised that noise impact from construction and operations would be low. SALTAS however, is committed to commissioning a further assessment post installation if deemed necessary.

3.8 Transport impacts

• Will the activity result in or require substantial transport of goods or materials to or from the site, which may affect the amenity of the surrounding area? If yes, provide details such as vehicle types, number of vehicle movements, times of movements and route(s).

The construction and installation of the drum filter will result in infrastructure and other materials being transported to the Florentine Hatchery site. The traffic movement will be restricted to the

SALTAS FLORENTINE HATCHERY, DRUM FILTER ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS REPORT

existing traffic paths, and all vehicles will be restricted to daylight hours (7:00am to 7:00pm Monday- Friday; 8:00am to 5:00pm Saturday; no movement on Sundays).

Once the drum filter is operational and sludge is being generated, there will be additional truck movements to remove the sludge from site. Removal of the sludge is expected to occur every 2-3 days during peak biomass periods. The additional truck movement is not expected to affect the amenities of the surrounding area as the increase is minimal (and based on ‘peak volumes’) and the area/route is subject to regular traffic movement of logging trucks and fish transport tankers.

3.9 Other off-site impacts

• Does the activity have the potential to generate any other off-site impacts that may affect the amenity of residences or other sensitive uses? • Describe the main processes which occur in the commissioning phase, the likely duration of the commissioning phase and the criteria used to determine whether commissioning has been completed. • Comprehensive description of the management arrangements pertaining to the hatchery-wastewater and existing settlement pond during the commissioning phase, particularly the management of untreated wastewater.

Refer to section 3.3 of this document for details of impacts to downstream environment and its uses.

There are no other off-site impacts that have been identified that is relevant to the proposed activity.

3.10 Hazardous substances

• Has the activity involve the use and/or storage of hazardous substances that have the potential to cause environmental harm if released? If so, provide details of the nature and quantity of the materials, their storage location and methods and proposed measures to prevent their release. • Describe proposed measures for responding to accidental spillage or escape of hazardous substances. • Identify all controlled wastes likely to be present on the site, with reference to standard classification. • Identify all dangerous goods likely to be present of the site.

During construction works unleaded petrol and/or diesel will be stored on site for refuelling of the civil plant. In the unlikely event of a spill event adequate spill controls and clean up kits will be easily accessible on site and all construction personnel will be adequately trained to transfer fuels and manage spill clean-up.

Cleaning and wash down chemicals may also be stored on site.

All hazardous substances will be managed in accordance with Australian Standard (AS 1940:2017) for the storage and handling of flammable and combustible liquids.

SALTAS FLORENTINE HATCHERY, DRUM FILTER ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS REPORT

3.11 Site contamination (historical)

• Has the site on which the activity is to be located been used in the past for activities which may have caused soil or groundwater contamination? If so, provide details.

Florentine Hatchery has been operated for over 30 years. No other potentially contaminating activity is known to have been carried out at the site. No spill incident is known to have taken place at the site.

3.12 Heritage

• Is the proposed activity on or near a place listed on the Tasmanian Heritage Register or Tasmanian Historic Places Inventory? If yes, provide details. • Describe any potential effects on historic heritage (including Aboriginal heritage) and proposed management measures.

No historic heritage values have been identified in the vicinity of the Florentine Hatchery and the proposed activity (construction area) will occur within the boundaries of the existing operation.

3.13 Sites of high public interest

• Details in relation to the activity’s proximity to places of public interest (such as recreational fishing areas, etc.).

Refer to section 2.2 of this document for details on recreational uses for the area downstream of Florentine Hatchery.

3.14 Monitoring and review

• Detail monitoring and maintenance programs to support best practice environmental management. The monitoring program should report on key water quality parameters for treated wastewater (at end-of-pipe. Specify reporting arrangements of monitoring data and observations. • Describe any surveys, studies or monitoring proposed or underway in relation to the key issues for the proposal and include any proposed monitoring points on the site plan.

The current monitoring program at Florentine Hatchery includes fortnightly water quality sampling of nutrients, chemicals and physiochemical characteristics (refer to Table 16 for list of parameters) at three location sites (upstream of hatchery, outfall from settlement pond and downstream of hatchery – refer to Figure 11) and bi-annual macroinvertebrate sampling at upstream (Easting 459395, Northing 5301039) and downstream (Easting 460314, Northing 5301367) locations.

The frequency of fortnightly water quality sampling was initiated in March 2018 to develop a more robust dataset for the Florentine Hatchery. The water quality program will continue with fortnightly sampling until the drum filter has been operating for six months. The sampling program will then be reduced to monthly sampling. This change to sampling frequency is still in-line with best practice methodologies and is the frequency required at other finfish flow-through hatcheries.

SALTAS FLORENTINE HATCHERY, DRUM FILTER ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS REPORT

Bi-annual macroinvertebrate sampling will also continue with an accompanying assessment report developed for each sampling event.

Table 16 Water quality parameters measured for monitoring program

Parameter Unit Temperature °C Dissolved Oxygen % and mg/L pH pH units Conductivity (EC) µS/cm Total Dissolved Solids (TDS) mg/L Total Suspended Solids (TSS) mg/L Ammonia mg/L Total Alkalinity mg CaCO3/L Hardness mg CaCO3/L Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen (TKN) mg/L BOD mg/L Nitrate mg/L Nitrate + Nitrite mg/L Nitrite mg/l Total Nitrogen mg/L Total Phosphorus mg/L Ca (total) mg/L Mg (total) mg/L Zn (total) µg/L Dissolved Reactive Phosphorus mg/L Thermocoliforms cfu/100mL

In addition to the water quality monitoring program, a short-term intensive monitoring of effluent discharge for periods of 24-48 hours is proposed to be undertaken on a quarterly rotation over a period of 18 months to assess the degree of diurnal and seasonal variability in water quality parameters. These occasions would be timed to actively select ‘worst case’ conditions (such as during peak biomass periods) and provide information on maximum likely analyte concentrations. The data from this monitoring would be analysed to assess any in-farm improvements to water quality management that may be required, as well as assess the statistically representativeness of the routine monthly monitoring of the hatchery effluent and receiving watercourses.

SALTAS FLORENTINE HATCHERY, DRUM FILTER ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS REPORT

SITE COORDINATES (GD94 MGA55) F001 – upstream of the hatchery (on the 459436E 5301067N Florentine River) F002 – settlement pond at the hatchery – 460184E 5301286N effluent release to river F003 – downstream of hatchery (on the 460231E 5301344N Florentine River)

Figure 11 Coordinates and diagram of water quality sampling locations for Florentine Hatchery

A review of the preliminary water quality guideline values and interim effluent limits is proposed for six-months post commissioning of the drum filter. This review is proposed to be conducted by a freshwater specialist (in conjunction with the EPA) who would assess the gathered data to date to assess the monitoring program and to establish if (a) finalised water quality guideline values and effluent limits can be set or; (b) if more monitoring and changes to the interim limits and proposed values is required.

Ongoing installation and development of water quality treatment mitigation would be conducted as part of an adaptive continuous improvement strategy. The drum filters will be assessed for performance, and modifications made where necessary to both the installations themselves (filter size, numbers of screens, settlement pond management) and other on-farm practices – all in response to the findings of the receiving environment monitoring.

As part of the monitoring programs, SALTAS would provide an annual report to the EPA including all water quality data, biomonitoring assessments and any other relevant information within the reporting period.

SALTAS FLORENTINE HATCHERY, DRUM FILTER ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS REPORT

3.15 Rehabilitation

• Describe proposed decommissioning and rehabilitation measures in the event of cessation of the activity. • Describe any proposed rehabilitation of disturbed native vegetation.

As the proposed activity will not involve any disturbance of native vegetation and does not have a finite life, no rehabilitation plan is warranted at this stage. However, SALTAS is committed to its responsibilities and obligations in respect to decommissioning and rehabilitation if cessation of hatchery operations was to occur.

SALTAS FLORENTINE HATCHERY, DRUM FILTER ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS REPORT

4 PART D - Management Commitments

• Specific, unambiguous written commitments for avoiding, minimising and managing the potential environmental impacts of the proposal (as identified in Part C) should be documented in Part D.

The preceding description of environmental management issues and approaches leads to the following commitments, which will be implemented by SALTAS under this EER (Table 17).

Table 17 Commitments table

No. Commitment Timeframe By Whom Construction phase 1 A Construction Safety and Environmental Management Plan (CEMP)will be Completed Construction contractors implemented, appropriate to the construction complexity and risks (Appendix G)

2 Training of the management requirements contained in the CEMP will be Before construction Project manager provided to contractors prior to commencement of construction 3 Development and implementation of a weekly inspection checklist of the On-going through Project manager CEMP construction Operation phase 4 Finalise the draft Tassal Freshwater Hatcheries Wastewater Solids Before commissioning Tassal Environment Dept. Management Plan including obtaining the appropriate transport and disposal approvals 5 Undertake fortnightly water quality sampling as per parameters outlined in On-going Tassal Environment Dept. Table 16 and at the locations outlined in Figure 11. 6 Undertake a short-term intensive monitoring of effluent discharge for On-going Tassal Environment Dept. periods of 24-48 hours is proposed to be undertaken on a quarterly rotation over a period of 18 months to assess the degree of diurnal and seasonal variability in water quality parameters SALTAS FLORENTINE HATCHERY, DRUM FILTER ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS REPORT 7 Review all monitoring data and the preliminary water quality guideline Six months post Tassal Environment Dept. values and interim effluent limits commissioning of drum filter 8 Review on-going monitoring program Six months post Tassal Environment Dept. commissioning of drum filter 9 Provide annual report on monitoring data Annually Tassal Environment Dept.

SALTAS FLORENTINE HATCHERY, DRUM FILTER ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS REPORT

5 PART E - Public and Stakeholder Consultation

• Has public consultation taken place (such as with government agencies, community groups or neighbours), or is it intended that consultation will take place? If so, provide details.

The proposed activity has been presented and discussed with the Central Highlands Council and Sustainable Timber Tasmania (STT) who both have indicated full support. The proposal will go through a development application (DA) process, which will have opportunities for community input.

The small size of the drum filter, its location within the existing hatchery boundaries, the environmental controls that will be implemented during and after installation, and the distance/native forest buffer to nearest neighbours mean that no specific community consultation outside the DA process is deemed necessary.

SALTAS FLORENTINE HATCHERY, DRUM FILTER ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS REPORT

6 References

Bell, P. and Mooney, N. J. (1999). Wedge-tailed Eagle Recovery Plan, 1998-2003. Tasmania, Department of Primary Industries, Water and Environment.

Brown, W.E. and Mooney, N.J. (1997). Modelling of the Nesting Habitat of the Wedge-tailed Eagle (Aquila audax fleayi) in Tasmania. Unpublished Report to the Tasmanian RFA Environment and Heritage Technical Committee, Commonwealth of Australia and State of Tasmania.

Bureau of Meterology. (2018) Water Data Online. http://www.bom.gov.au/waterdata/ (accessed October 2018)

Bureau of Meterology. (2018). Weather Station Directory. http://www.bom.gov.au/climate/data/stations/ (accessed July 2018).

Davies, P. (2017). Biodiversity-focused environmental impact assessment freshwater aquaculture facilities providing smolt to Tassal. (unpublished document).

DPIPWE (2003). Environmental Management Goals for Tasmanian Waters – Derwent River Catchment. http://epa.tas.gov.au/Documents/Derwent_River_Catchment_Final_Paper.pdf

DPIPWE (2004). Tasmanian Washdown Guidelines for Weed and Disease Control. http://dpipwe.tas.gov.au/Documents/Washdown-Guidelines-Edition-1.pdf

Freshwater Systems (2015). Hatchery ASC Macroinvertebrate Context Report (October 2015). (unpublished document).

Forest Practices Authority (FPA) (2013). Wedge-tailed Eagle Nest Monitoring Project 2007-12: Nest site use, timing of breeding, and review of the nesting habitat model’. Report to Roaring 40s, Threatened Species and Marine Section (DPIPWE), April 2013, Forest Practices Authority Scientific Report.

Forest Practices Authority (FPA) (2014). Wedge-tailed eagle nesting habitat model. Fauna Technical Note No.6, Forest Practices Authority, Hobart, Tasmania.

LISTMap. (2018) https://maps.thelist.tas.gov.au/listmap/app/list/map