I SE R/ NSWSPCC PR 0/79 I I e STATE POLLUTION CONTROL COMMISSION I I I I Proposed Bayswater I . Power Station: I Environmental Impact 1 Assessment I I I I I I I
Issued under the authority of I THE HON PAUL LANDA LL B, M LC , Minister for Planning and Environment I I I
PROPOSED BAYSWATER POWER STATION
r ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT
[ CONTENTS Page 1 INTRODUCTION 1
2 THE PROPOSAL 2
3 SUBMISSIONS AND PUBLIC COMMENT 3 3.1 . Government Authorities 3 3.2 Local Government and Interested Organizations 5 3.3 Private Submissions 6
4 ADEQUACY OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT 8
5 NEED AND ALTERNATIVES 9 r 5.1 Need 9 5.2 Alternatives 9 I 6 .ASSESSMENT OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT FROM CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION OF THE POWER STATION 10 1 6.1 Environmental Factors 10 6 .1.1 Water Quality 10 6 .1. 2 Air Quality 13 ( 6 .1. 3 Noise Emissions 17 6 .1.4 Earthworks and Spoil Disposal 18 L 6 .1. 5 Visual Impact 18 6 .1. 6 Terrestrial Habitats, Flora and Fauna 18 6 .1. 7 Archaeological Sites 19 6 .1. 8 Social Impacts 19 6 .1. 9 Other 20
(i) l
I r Page 6.2 Associated Activities 22 6.2.1 Transmission Lines 22 6.2.2 Coal Mines 22 6.2.3 Coal Transportation 23
7 FACTORS PERTINENT TO THE DECISION 25 7.1 Effect on Water Resources of the Hunter Valley 25 7.2 Effect on the Air Quality of the Region 25 7.3 Need for Impact Statements for Transmission Lines and Coal Mines 26
8 CONCLUSIONS AND CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL 27
(ii) REPORT ON THE ASSESSMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT RESULTING FROM THE CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION OF BAYSWATER POWER STATION
l 1 INTRODUCTION [ An environmental impact statement· and a supplementary information volume dated June 1979 for the construction and operation of the four unit Bayswater Powe r Station has been [ submitted to the Commission by the Electricity Commission of New South Wales . In view of the significance of the environmental issues involved with the development of the [ power station, it was considered appropriate that public display · of the impact statement and the analysis of submissions received be undertaken by the Commission as part of its review process. l Public display of the impact statement was arranged by the Commission for the four,week period ending 17 August 1979. Notification was made in Sydney, Newcastle and local newspapers during the week ending 18 July 1979 and the closing date for receipt of submissions was set at 20 August 1979.
Copies of the environmental impact statement we r e sent to government departments with an interest in the development, Singleton Shire Council and Muswellbrook Shire Council with a request for comment on the proposal . A summary of comments from the government departments, councils, other interested organizations and persons is included in Section 3 of this report.
Seminars arranged by the University of Newcastle in conjunction with Singleton Shire Council, Muswellbrook Shire Council and I the Electricity Commission were conducted to enable the public to discuss with and question representatives of t he Electricity Commission and to comment on the proposal s for the power { station development. Social issues predominated the discussions at the seminar s.
In the impact statement the Electricity Commission has identified sources of coal for the power station and transmission line requirements for the four generating unit development. However, these developments are still being formulated and will conse quently be the subject of future impact statements .
Applications for approval of all four generating units of the power station under the pollution control acts have been lodged with the Commission .
.I - 2 -
2 THE PROPOSAL
The Bayswater power station is to be located adjacent to the New England Highway between Singleton and Muswellbrook . It . will be near the Liddell power station.
The project is to consist of four 660 MW generating units, the first two units are scheduled for operation in 1985 and 1986,respectively. The dates for the other two units to come into service have not as yet been determined, these being debendent upon future power demands.
Four natural-draft cooling towers will be utilized for the condenser circulating- water system. Water requirements of approximately 36000 ML pa for the power station will be drawn from the Hunter River with storage facilities in a dam to be constructed on Saltwater Creek.
Ash will initially be disposed of in an area to be provided on Pikes Gully followed later by disposal in the final trench remaining on compl etion of the open~cut mining at Ravensworth No 2 colliery.
Coal supplies for the power station will come from coal deposits at Ravensworth, Liddell State mine and Mount Arthur North . Mining will be by both open cut and underground methods. Transport of coal to the power station will be by conveyor- and private road haulage.
Power from units 1 and 2 will be .transmitted south using the existing 330 kV transmission lines. To accommodate units 3 and 4 an additional transmission line likely to be for 500 kV operation .will be constructed from Bayswater to a point near Eraring power station, which is on Lake Macquarie. No other proposals for power transmission have been foreshadowed . r
- 3 -
3 SUBMISSIONS AND PUBLIC COMMENT
3.1 Government Authorities
3. 1.1 The Planning and Environment Commission listed a number of points on the impact statement including comment on the "step by step" approach to presentation of the overall project; the sparseness of data in the impact statement; the exclusion of recreation activity from Saltwat er Creek Reservoir; the need to ensure water flows in the Hunter River downstream of Jerry 9 s Plains; the possible problems associated with ash disposal proposals; the need to adequately landscape 1. the site and choose suitable materials for the s tructure so as to lessen the visual impact of . the power station. { 3.1.2 The Joint Coal Board indicated its concern regarding sterilization of coal reserves with open cut potential by { construction of the proposed channel to the pumping station from the Saltwater Creek Reservoir .
3.1.3 The Department of Mineral Resources indicated that each major mining proposal associated with the power station development must be the subject of an· environmental impact { statement; the proposal to dispose of ash in the final void at Ravensworth No 2 mine would requir e its Minis ter's consent { and that further studies would be ne cessary; measures to conceal the coal stockpile from view and control spontaneous combustion therein require amplification; the sterilization of coal by the proposed Saltwater Creek Reservoir and associated canal system cannot be condoned; the possibility of the use of coal washed for export rejec t mater ial at the power station should be negotiated with the pr ivate companies involved in this activity. f 3.1.4 The Energy Authority of New South Wales is concerned about the use of light diesel oil at the power station for auxiliary firing and believes an alternative fuel such as { synthetic or natural gas should be considered.
3.1.5 The Water Resources Commission indicated its concern regarding the i mpact statement not covering the geological environment of the proposed storage r eservoir sites; groundwater quality, movement and discharges a t storage and
ash-disposal sites; the quality 1 quantity and frequency of discharges to the Hunter River dur ing and after heavy storms; the potential for eutrophication of Salt Water Creek storage. - 4 -
3.1.6 The Department of Agriculture indicated its concern for the sufficiency of water supply for irrigators a long the Hunter River from Ponds Creek to Glennies Creek; the need to identify the chemical residues in the ash deposits and the quality of water discharges from the ash-disposal areas and its cumulative effect with discharges from other developments in the mid and upper Hunter Valley on the Hunter River; the need for an estimation of the heat and water loss from the cooling towers; the need for the Electricity Commission to require .land-improvement provisions in any grazing leases granted over any of the Commission's land no t required for station operations.
3. 1. 7 The National Parks and Wildlife .Service emphasized that the Electricity Commission would require permits before any aboriginal relics are collected from sites to be flooded. It also expressed concern about the lack of information in the impact statement on transmission line routes to service the power station.
3.1.8 The Department of Main Roads indicated that modific ations necessary to the Liddell interchange to ac·commodate Bayswater traffic would need to be to its standards and cost of the Electricity Commission; landscaping should not affect the sight distance of traffic and should comprise species formerly native to the area; mining proposals adjacent to Main Road 209 should incorporate measures to prevent dust blowing across this road.
3.1.9 The New South Wales State Fisheries advised that it has no objection to the proposal; should .the water quality in Saltwater Creek Reservoir prove satisfactory for the survival and growth of suitable angling species the question of stocking the impoundment and providing access for recreation fishing would be taken up with the Electricity Commission. I 3.1.10 The Crown Lands Office, Public Transport Commission · of NSW, Department of Decen tralisation, Department of Sport f and Recreation and the Division of Inspection Services,all indicated there were no matters arising which warranted a submission. r
f - 5 -
f 3.2 Local Gov ernment and Interested Organizations
3.2.1 Singleton Shire Council raised the following matters: [ The level of fly ash from Liddell power station [ is a matter of concern; consequently in assessing the project consideration should be given to the cumulative effect of Liddell and Bayswater power stations to ensure a substantial reduction in fly ash emissions with both power stations in operation.
( The level of loca l participat ion in the construction workforce is likel y to be less than for t he Liddell ! power station. 3. 2. 2 Muswellbrook Shire Council f orwarded a comprehensive ! submission. The main points were as follows: Consider ation should be given to providing alternative access to the power station from Mitchell Line of f Road.
Arrangements satisfactory to Council should be ma.de in connecti on with the movem ent of heavy loads etc over roads under Council control.
Concern about the level of atmospheric pollution from Liddell power station and that action should be taken to ensur e both stations comply with air-quality ! standards referred to in the Bayswater impact state ment. The State Pollµtion Control Commission should f establish permanent monitoring stations i n the area. Accommodation for the construction work could be a { problem unless early and detaile Information is required on housing requirements for permanent Electricity Commission staff and how housing is to be provided . Consideration should be given t o Denman as a housing area. - 6 - Construction and permanent employees of the Bayswater power station will place demands on the services available in the local community. Council is concerned that no arrangements have as yet been made between the Electricity Commission and itself regarding provision of infrastructure costs for expansion of the services. Saltwater Creek Reservoir should be proclaimed a nature reserve with some restricted pedestrian access. 3.2.3 Newcastle Ecology Centre considers that the project should be assessed in relation to other power sources and developments planned for the region; t he impact statement is only a public relations e.xercise; the funds being committed to the Bayswater project would be better utilized i n creating jobs in public transport, health or development of solar industry in the region; consideration should be given to compensation to dairy farmers and winegrowers in the region for degradation of the environment by the project. 3.2.4 · The University of Newcastle found that the impact statement seriously under-estimated the social impacts resulting from the proposal . 3.3 Private Submissions 3. 3. 1 Mr C ·M Fisher, Member for Upper Hunter, raised the following matters: The effect of the water requirements of the power station on other users particularly on the section of the Hunter River between the power station pumping station and the confluence of Glennies Creek. Possible salinity problems in Lake Liddell as a result of the Bayswater development . · The type of fly ash collection equipment proposed for Bayswater power station is similar to that installed at Liddell power station which is not operating at a satisfactory level . Questions why the type of plant proposed to be installed at Eraring power station has not been adopted ~t Bayswater. { r - 7 - f Alienation of coal was a factor in excluding alternative sites for the ~ater storage proposed on Saltwater Creek. Questions whether there is coal under Saltwater Creek. The social impacts on Muswellbrook and Singleton townships is little mentioned. Accommoda tion and services in these towns is already stressed. Transport of auxiliary-firing fuel to Bayswater should be by rail not road ; The use of fuel oil for this purpose is questioned. 3.3.2 Glutha Developments Pty Ltd advised that the power station ~roject will affect its future mining inteiests. Location of transmission lines , ash disposal pipelines will conflict with company transportation routes and mining areas. 3.3.3 Bayswater Colliery Company Pty Ltd advised that power station access roads, transmission lines, conveyors etc should be located so as not to sterilize any open cut reserves r in the area; any restrictions on the company 9 s presen_t shot f iring techniques could affect its cost of production; any { upgrading of the Mitchell Line of Road would sterilise valuable coal r eserves; the proposed Saltwater Creek Reservoir will sterilize coal reser ves which is not mentioned in the impact statement; this reservoir should be relocated to avoid the sterilization. ( 3.3.4 J & A Brown & Abermain Seaham Collieries Ltd and Thiess Bros Pty Ltd advised that the Bayswater power station proposal does not appear to affect their interests. { . ( : f 4 •1 • ' , , I • ' ' • I • t \ 1 1,_. , I I ,1 \ ' . ,_,:. - 8 - 4 ADEQUACY OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT During preparation of the impact statement, liaison was maintained with the Electricity Commission with the object of ensuring that the final document covered all pertinent environmental factors. Two drafts were received, the first of which was significantly deficient in adequate detail and quantification of the proposal, its environmental safeguards and the anticipated impact on the environment of the total development, including coal sources, transmission lines and water-resource utilization. Furthermore, it did not take into account additional future power development in the Hunter Valley which is anticipated. The Electricity Commission subsequently amended the document, however it declined to provide information on the total future scene claiming that it is not possible to make a firm assess ment of overall power station development at this stage. Whilst most of the environmental issues that are likely to occur are referred to, the amount of information provided in certain cases is so brief that it is difficult to gain a ready appreciation of the environmental acceptability of· the project. Althou~h it was agreed that the associated coal mines and transmission lines could be the subject of subsequent impact statements, it was expected that the key environmental issues anticipated therefrom should be described in the power station document but this has not been adequately met. Additionally, social impacts of the construction and permanent workforce have been inadequately accoi..mted for. Because of the urgent need to proceed with. construction of the power station to ensure that power is available to meet anticipated industrial demands, particularly by proposed aluminium smelters, the impact statement was placed on public display . Nevertheless.it is considered that assessment of a project of this magnitude in isolation from infbr~ation on likely future overall power station development in the region could in the long run prove to be detrimental to environmental constraints and pollution controls on subsequent projects, Furthe~ information was sought from the Electricity Commission by letter of 30 August 1979 concerning matters inadequately covered in the impact statement. The Electricity Commission responded to the request for further information on 11 October 1979 . - 9 - f f 5 NEED AND ALTERNATIVES 5.1 Need Assessment of past trends and likely future community require ments indicate the need to provide for the addition of at least one new 660 MW generating unit each year up to 1990 to meet increases in demands from both domestic and industrial consumers. The Bayswater power station construction forms part of the programme to cater for .the anticipated demands which are accelerating due to decisions taken to construct alumin'ium smelters in the Hunter River region. 5.2 Alternatives { Consideration was given to the further use of Lake Liddell as a cooling pond for a .new power station by augmentation of the existing Liddell power itation or a co~pletely new facility. f However, the required area of land for such developments is not available. Additionally, an unacceptably high rate of { flushing of Lake Liddell would be necessary to maintain dissolved-sal~ concentration~ within acceptable limits. Provision of another pond is feasible only at Saltwater Creek or Ponds Creek, however it would not be possible to fill either of these storages in time to meet the programmed dates for the operation of the units. Accordingly it is proposed to utilize cooling towers for the condenser circulating water system. Four sites for a power station using cooling towers were examined, these being Bayswater, Whites Creek, Upper Sadlers l Creek and Ponds Creek. All these sites 9 re located between Singleton and Muswellbrook townships. Each included common { features of physical dimensions. and layout . of main plant, water supply from the Hunter River and storage of water in a reservoir on Sal twater Creek and coal sl1pply. Maj or aspects { not common to all were ash- disposal facilities and coal- transport systems . None have any relative environmental dis ) advantage or advantage and the Bayswater site. was therefore ( selected on the basis of other criteria. l - 10 - 6 ASSESSMENT OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT FROM CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION OF THE POWER STATION 6.1 Environmental Factors The key considerations relating to potential water, air and noise pollution are considered in this section, but the detailed aspects will of course be subject to examinaLion under the relevant pollution control act requirements. 6.1.1 Water Quality 6.1.1.1 Saltwater Creek Reservoir This reservoir forms part of the water supply system for Bayswater power station. The darn embankment will be 44 metres in height and will have an active storage of 64,000 ML. The storage .area will be cleared of trees and bushes before it is filled. There will be facilities provided for drawing off oxygenated water from the storage throughout the full oper ating range of storage level. The Electricity Commission believes; based on its experience with the Liddell reservbir, that eutrophication will not be a problem at Saltwater Creek. Advice was sought from the Electricity Commission regarding increased salt contamination potential arising from the construction of the dam and the filling/operation of the reservoir; on the salt content and permeability of soils and rock strata below the storage and of the as- built darn emplacement taking into account the utilization of borrow materials for same within the storage area; on existing ground water quality and ground water · levels within the vicinity of the reservoir; on the likely effect of water irnpoundrnent on such ground water levels and 011 the movement of ground waters with potential for discharge to the Hunter River and its tributaries; on information substantiating its belief that eutrophication will not be a problem at Sal t water Creek Reservoir. The Electricity Commission has advised that it expects the filling of Saltwater Creek to result in a reduction in the salt discharged from Saltwater Creek to the Hunter. This will be a consequence of the reduced flow of poor quality water from the Creek to the Bunter River caused by the construction of the darn. Water from the reservoir -will be transferred to Lake Liddell and subsequently used in the cooling water system which will have salt r emoved by the proposed desalination - 11 - plant. Past experience at Lake Liddell which is claimed to r have similar geologic conditions, suggests t hat seepage from the Saltwater Creek dam will b~ very small. As this information is not considered to be conclusive, further studies by the Electricity Commission on these matters will be necessary. 6.1.1.2 Ash Disposal Dams Discharge The ash-disposal arrangement comprises a system of pumps and pipes to convey ash as a slurry to the ash-disposal areas and to return the water for re-use. The Pikes Gully disposal area will be formed by the construction of an earth embankment. The system provides for the level of water retained in the storage area to be controlled by means of a staged outlet structure·. The level of water in the ash dam will be kept as low as possible to provide for maximum flood detention storage. A spillway will be provided but it is ex pected to operate only when the storage is almost filled with ash. The Electricity Commission has advised of studies it has carried out relevant to the predicted hydrological performance of the Pikes Gully ash disposal area, and based on 75 year rainfall records estimates no spillage would occur until after about 15 i to 20 years operation. On this basis it considers spillage from Pikes Gully should not be a problem. However, it is considered prudent to monitor Pikes Gully dischar ges because of possible l seepage problems. The Ravensworth fly ash-disposal ar ea will be the trench left when the Ravensworth No 2 open- cut · mine is worked out. It is intended to keep the level of the water in the trench as low as possible at all times so as to minimise the escape of water by seepage. The deposited ash will blanket the sides of the trench and should be effective in limiting seepage losses . Should the banks of the disposal area prove to be more permeable than expected, arrangements will· be made to grout or further blanket the side of the trench with ash or soil or the seepage · water will be recovered by a series of wells fitted with pumps. Further advice was sought from _the Electricity Commission on the seepage potential of the proposed ash-disposal areas; on possible increased salinity concentrations in the receiving waters having regard for the effect on the quality and movements of ground water in the vicinity. - 12 - The Electricity Commission advised that permeability tests of open- cut mine spoil dumps at Wallerawang i ndicate that it is difficult if not impossible to demonstrate by testing in normal fashion whether overburden dump material will be water tight at Ravensworth mine. It expects seepage from the area to be low because of the long length of path from the ash deposits to the natural ground to which the seepage must travel. Should seepage occur the alternative methods of control indicated above will be implemented. It is considered there is a need for a full geotechnical study of the Ravensworth open- cut disposal area to enable an informed decision to be made on the environmental acceptability of the proposal . 6.1.1.3 Runoff from Coal Stockpile Perimeter drains will collect runoff from rainfall on the coal stockpile area and lead it to a settling basin. The settling basin will discharge to Lake Liddell. Runoff f rom areas outside the coal storage area will be intercepted and diverted away from the coal stockpile area. It is proposed to use dust-suppressant spraying equipment , activated by conveyor belt movement to control dust from the stockpile. Advice was sought from the Electricity Comm ission on alternative stockpile options considered for the power station and on the details of the dust suppr essant chemical to be used. The Electricity Commission advised that details of t he methods of stacking and r eclaiming the coal have yet to be decided. I An engineering consultant has been engaged to recommend on the best type of system for Bayswater. ,. The dust suppressant will be a biodegradable wetting agent such as Mecal. Precise information regarding the Mecal chemical is not readily available but it has been ascertained that it is a reaction .. product of a long chai n linear alcohol with ethylene oxide . It is a wetting agent which meets National Health and Medical Research Council requirements for biodegrad ability when subjected to the test procedures stipulated by that Council . The chemical is no more toxic than normal household detergents and its combustion products are carbon dioxide and water with complete decomposition occurring a t relatively low temperatures. I I I - 13 - Any of the chemical washed from the coal storage area will be discharged to a settling basin and then to Lake Liddell. The long residence times in the basin and lake will allow the chemical to degrade . This, t ogether with the strong mixing action in the lake created by the Liddell cooling water system, means that any chemical reaching the lake will be dilut ed to ( extremely low concentrations. These factors, combined with the normal low incidence of spill from the lake, will mean that negligible quantities of chemical will be discharged to Bays f water Creek and the Hunter River. 6.1.1.4 Desalination Plant It is planned to re-use water and to eliminate, except during exceptional floods, all water discharges from the project works area. A desalination plant using either reverse osmosis or electro- dialysis will be used to treat the condenser circulating water. The saline concentrates from the desalination plant will be discharged to the ash-disposal system. Water will be discharged from the ash-disposal system only during infrequent floods when the ash storages are nearly full of ash at which time flood storage is reduced to a minimum. It is expected that water discharged will be °'lost11 in the general runoff. The Electricity Commission has engaged a consultant to investi gate and recommend on the type and duty of the desalination plant . The report is to cover the total water management of Liddell power station as well as Bayswater power station. 6.1.1.5 Runoff from Site during Construction Settling basins will be provided to minimize cont amination of streams by suspended material in runoff from construction areas. [ 6.1.2 Air Quality { 6.1 .2.1 Combustion Products The station will use pulverised- coal fired boilers and will be similar in many respects to the recently approved Eraring station. The coal to be burnt at Bayswater will have a higher average sulphur content than at Eraring, _and in addition Bayswater will be located in very close proximity t o another large power station; consequentl y it is proposed to use 250 metre stacks at Bayswater compared to the 180 metre stacks proposed for Eraring. A further consideration in the assessment of this proposal is that there is a possibility of three further stations of a similar size being established within eleven kilometres of Liddell. - 14 - The major sources of air pollution from t he station will be combustion ·products emitted thr ough the stacks, coa l dust emitted from the coal handling and storage f acilities and water vapour emitted from the cooling towers. I n a ddition, du st will be generated by the open cut coal mines supplying the station, Combustion products from the station will consist mainly of sulphur oxides, nitrogen oxides, and fly ash. Gr ound level concentrations of sulphur and nitrogen oxide s are nor mally controlled by adjusting stack height. The State Pollution Control Commission calculates ground level concentrat ions using the procedure proposed by Sutton and Bosanquet and determines stack heights requirement so as to obtain a glc of 860 ug/m3 (30 pphm) of sulphur dioxide (3 minute mean). At Bayswater the mass emission of sulphur dioxide will be higher than elsewhere owing to the high sulphur content of the coals being burnt. This results in a calculated maximum glc of 1014 ug/m3 (35.5 pphm at o0 c) for Bayswater alone and 1558 ug/m3 (54.5 pphm) for Bayswater and Liddell combined, using a 250 metre stack. Further calculations have been carried out assuming three additional stations of the same size as Bayswater located at the alternative sites proposed in the environmental "impact statement. These show that the additional stationi are riot additive to the point of increasing the maximum gl c but do increase the occurrence of high levels and incr ease annual averages. Increasing stack height to 400 metres would only r educe the maximum glc to 1239 ug/m3 (43 pphm) . A 1000 metre stack would reduce the glc to 863 ug/m3 (30 pphm). These f i gures indicate that there is little reduction in maximum glc obtained by increasing stack height s above 250 metres, although the frequency of occurrence of high concentrations would probably be reduced somewhat. The Electricity Commission has calculated ground level concen trations of sulphur dioxide using the T.V. A. - Pasquill method. This method in gener al gives lower concentr ations than the Sutton - Bosanquet method. The esti mated maxi mum 3 minute average glc is 930 ug/m3 (32.6 pphm) . Fr om the graph prepared by the Electricity Commission (Figure El) it can also be seen that little improyement in maximum glc can be achieved by in creasing stack heights above 250 metres . - 15 - The accuracy of the two methods in predicting glc is difficult to assess without embarking on a comprehensive monitoring programme. The Sutton- Bosanquet method was developed based on [ observations of small low level emissions . The T.V.A. Pasquill method was based on observations of large power plants with stacks of up to 244 metres . On this basis it would appear that [ the T.V.A. method should be more reliable in this case. However, the glc is also affected by the localised meteorology, especially the dispe~sion coefficients , which in turn are r affected by the local topography. The topography is different between the Hunter Valley and the Tennessee Val ley, the latter being much larger and flatter . The Electricity Commission has begun monitori ng sulphur dioxide levels around their power stations , and initial results seem to indicate that actual glc's are lower than those predicted by either method. However, only rudimentary analysis of the monitoring data has been carried out t o date and a more detailed f analysis will be required over an extended period to arrive at a definite conclusion. f From the monitoring data at hand, the basis of development of the T. V.A. - Pasquill method, and the Commission's experience with emiss i ons from power stations over many years, it appears 1 that the T.V. A. calculated glc figures will be conservative. However, the calculations have not taken into account the effect of local meteor ology, especially ground- based and elevated inversions. Preliminary calculations show that under conditions where trapping occurs under certain low level f subsidence inversions or where fumigation occurs following certain high ground- based inversions, high maximum ground-level concentrations may occur. These concentrations will be further 1 increased if additional power stations are constructed in the area, and may cause a major problem. At the present time there is no data available on the occurrence, height or strength of either ground-based or elevated inversions. The wind data for the area is also suspect, having been measured only near the floor of the valley until very recently. Without such data it is impossible to forecast the likelihood of major problems occurring. The initial calculations indicate that minor problems with acid gas concentrations may occur with the operation of Bayswater and Liddell, and that major problems may occur if additional stations are constructed in the same area. l - 16 - Particulates (fly ash) have previously been controlled using electrostatic precipitators. Vast improvements have been made in the performance of these units since their inception. Even · so none of even the mos§ recent installations has been able to comply with the .25 g/m emission limits at all times. In addition all presently operating units have visible emissions · which draw adverse comments from the public. The Electricity Commission is now installing fabric filters on Eraring. This decision was based on the performance of retro fitted fabric filter installations at Wangi and Tallawarra power stations. The Electricity Commission now has seven years operational experience with fabric filters. Depending on the age of the filter sleeves, emissions vary from clear to light. Apart from periods during commissioning difficulties all emission tes§s on the units have shown them to be well within the 0.25 h/m emission limit. . . . Since preparation of the impact statement a decision has been made to install fabric filter fly ash collection plant at Bayswater power station. Monitoring of the stack emissions would be prudent. 6.1.2.2 Water Vapour from Cooling Towers Overseas experience in the United Kingdom and elsewhere has shown that water vapour plumes from natural draught cooling towers do not present a problem with formation of fogs. Modelling of cooling tower plume behaviour carried out by the Electricity Commission also indicates that no problems should occur. 6.1.2.3 Coal Dust The coal presently being handled at Liddell is extremely dusty, and as a result dust emissions occur during coal handling, stockpiling and reclaiming. At Liddell the Electricity Commission is using all the control measures outlined in the Bayswater environmental i~pact statement and claim that the use of agglomeration and water tankers has resulted in sig~ nificant reductions in dust emissions. Even so, significant dust blow-off still occurs under windy conditions, especially from vehicle movements and conveyor discharges to stockpiles. { - 17 - . ., The Electricity Commission has not yet decided on the design of the coal storage area, but has stated that it will be similar to that used at Vales Point or Eraring. Eraring will have a live storage area where coal will be handled using mechanical stacker- reclaimers. Vales Point uses a ground level hopper-conveyor system for reclaim of coal. Coal dust generation during reclaimi ng operations would vary according to the method u sed but the difference in overall emissions from the coal stockpiling area would be minimal . The statio11 layouts show the stockpiling area l ocated adjacent to the New England Highway, and 3 km from the other nearest l site boundary . The coal stockpile at Liddell is similarly located and dust emi ssions are not causing problems . The controls prpposed meet the State Pollution Control Commis sion's { normal requirements with the exception that the Electricity Commission ts not proposing the use of stockpile water sprays { and :Ls int ending to use mobile plant on the stockpile surface. Although it is expected t hat some emission of coal dust will occur during periods of high wind it is not considered this will constit ute a major problem, taking into account t he location of the power station in a r u ral area among a number of very large open- cut coal mines, and the control measures proposed . Coal dust emissions from open- cut mining will have a far more significant impact. 6.1. 3 No ise Emissions f The power station site is such that it is considered noise emissions will not be a problem at any existing residences . { Site boundaries have been fixed so that any residence con structed in the future will not be affected by nois e from the I power station. Plant to be installed at Bayswater will be required by speci { fication to limit noise emissions. To process the Section 27 application 9 an acoustical report will be required showing adequate plans of the station and detailing individual noi se l evels and typical frequency spectrums ·f or each item of equipment together with the pre ventative noise-control measures proposed for preserving the general acoustic environment of the area. I l - 18 - 6 . 1. 4 Earthworks and Spoil Disposal Considerable earthworks are required f or the pr eparation of the site, for the power station complex and the Saltwater Creek reservoir embankment . Cr oss sect ions have not been supplied, however the Elect ricity Commission has i ndi cated that cut and fill operations for the power station .s i te will largely be in balance . Borr ow areas f or the Sa l t water Creek dam embankment , if not located withi n t he water stor age ar ea, will be drained, sloped and revegeta ted . 6.1. 5 Visual Impact The impact statement contains a landscaping plan showing areas to be planted with native ,trees to screen the development from the New England Highway and Lake Liddell. No infor ma t ion i s provided on the species of t r ees to be used for this pur pose. Land not required for s tation operation purposes will be leased for grazing .. The coal stockpile is situat ed in a depr ession near the domestic water reservoir with a ridge sit uated between the ar ea and the New Englaiid Highway. This, together with the landscaping proposals, will effectively shield the stockpile area from the view of travellers on the h i ghway . Assurances have been given that the power station complex is being designed so as ther e will be a visual balance when practical . Ext ernal sur faci ng of buildi ngs housing the boilers and turbines will consist of coloured metal sheeting. 6. 1. 6 Terr estrial Habita ts , Flor a and Fauna The vegetation of the area has a lready been affected by human activity. The only f eatur e worthy of pr eservat ion is a casuarina gallery forest on Saltwater Creek. This however is not possible as it is within t he proposed r eser voir area. There are no animal species in the area that are rare or en dangered. [ r - 19 - 6. 1. 7 Archaeological Sites The only aboriginal relics of any significance are located within the Saltwater Creek reservoir site. The Electr icity f · Commission proposes to ar range to salvage these. ( 6. 1. 8 Social Impacts Singleton and Muswellbrook are two major towns in the area and, with the small township of Denman and village of Jerry's Plains, will be subject to growth and social pressur es resulting { from ~he power station development. The Electricity Commissi'on expects the number of personnel r employed on the development will reach a peak of 1200. with an average over the construction period of 500. A permanent work { f orce for the operation of the power station and associated coal mines will be approximately 730 for units 1 and 2 and 1200 when all four units are in operation. ( As discussed previously in Section 4 of this report, it is considered the impact statement has not covered in sufficient { depth the social impacts of the proposal. Accordingly, advice was sought from the Electricity Commission as to the estimated demands on local services and facilities which will be created { by the personnel required to construct and operate the project. The Electricity Commission has advised that arrangements for { accommodation for the temporary workforce will be the subject of detailed negotiations between successful cont~actors and the local government authorities. It will also cooperate closely [ with Singleton and Muswellbrook Shire Councils concerning s teps necessary to provide facilities for the expected growth in population. However it believes other authorities should { be responsible for the quantification of the facilities required t o meet the demand. Concern was expressed by the University of Newcastle in its submission about the lack of information in the impact statement on these matters. Muswellbrook Shire Council stated in its submission that no arrangement has been made between itself and the Electricity Commission regarding provision for infrastructure costs f or expansion of services. r - 20 - . ., 6.1.9 Other 6.1.9.1 Auxiliary Firing Fuel The Electricity Commission was asked to clarify the s i t uation regarding trans_port proposals for the 20 tanker loads of fuel oil per week required for the station. Use of rail facilities for this would be preferable. A comparison of the advantages and disadvantages of using synthetic or natural gas for these purposes in lieu of fuel oil was also requested. The Electricity Commi ssion advised that the use of natural gas J as an alternative fuel for auxiliary firing has been reviewed and it is understood from discussions with the Energy Authority that there is a possibility that a gas pipeline from Newcastle J to Muswellbrook may be available to supply auxiliary fuel to Bayswater. Should for some reason it ·be found that gas cannot be used, consideration will be given to transporting fuel oil J to the station by rail. It is envisaged that the rail oil unloading sidings would be located near the sidings which serve the mines and washeries located down·stream of Liddell dam. 6.1.9.2 Effect on New England Highway The Electricity Commission was asked to provide details of landscaping of the power station with particular reference to sight distances o_f traffic ori the highway and species of trees to be used; modifications to the Liddell interchange; of proposals for the crossing of the coal conveyors with the highway. The Electricity Commission has supplied a modified landscaping plan with a statement that it can be seen that sight- distances will not be affected. Sight distance diagrams have not been provided. I Design of modifications to the interchange has been given to a consultant experienced in this type of work. l Conveyors will extend under the highway in box culverts. - 21 - •. ,,_ 6.1.9.3 Sterilisation of Coal Reserves The Electricity Commission was asked to comment on the possible sterilization of coal by Saltwater Creek dam? Saltwater Creek dam outlet channel, transmission lines, and transport corridors. { The Electricity Commission advised that consideration would be given to moving the dam upstream so as to avoid or minimize alienation of coal but the final site location and the ext ent of any alienation of coal will not be known until detailed drilling of the dam site ha s been carried out. Location of transmission lines from Bayswater power station is not possible without alienation of some coal. Transport corridors will be located on mine lease boundaries so as to minimize disruption { to mining operaiions . Cr ossover points on the conveyors will also be provided to allow movement of personnel and equipment. The question of cos t of provision of the crossover points and { removal of the transmission lines would appear to be of concern, however this would not be an environmental consideration. 6.1.9.4 Use of Coal Reject Material The probability of incorporating coal reject material from [ nearby washeries into the power station coal feed was raised with the Electricity Commission. { The Electricity Comm ission advised that it has been experiencing major problems with boiler plan t at its power stations brought about by high ash contents of the coals burnt . The problems manifest themselves in extremely high wear rates in pulverising mills and through erosion of boiler and economiser tubes. The use of washery reject under these circumstances cannot be con sidered as a viable proposition. However the Electricity Commission is taking an active r ole in the development of { technology to per mit use of such material i n its coal feed . 6.1.9.5 Use of Public Roads under Local Government Contr ol { for Cons truction Purpose~ Advice was sought from the Electricity Commission as to the possible use of these roads f or transport of heavy loads. The Electricity Comm ission advised that the extent to which council roads will be used for the transpor t of heavy loads to Bayswater will not be known until tenders have been awarded. However it is expected that all major heavy plant and structural steel is to be transported by rail or by main highway. In the r 1 I - 22 - case of Liddell a rail siding was established at Ravensworth and heavy l oads t ransported by rail. Some concrete 9 aggregates and sand were transported by roa d from Scone while filter material f or dam construction was transported over the Mitchells Line of Road from Lem ington. Sim ilar arrangements can be expected for Bayswater. 6 . 1.9.6 Recreational Use of Saltwater Creek Reservoir The Electricity Commission has i ndicated that the reservoir will not be available f or recreational use by the public. Concern has been expressed i n the submissions about this aspect. The Electricity Commission was requested to make available details of its studies i nto utilisation of t he potential of the reservoir f or recreation/boating/picnicking/camping purposes. It advised that it has undertaken to the Sports and Recreation Department to keep under review the need for additional areas for water recreati on in the Hunter Valley. 6.2 Associated Ac t ivities J I 6. 2.1 Transmissi on Lines The State transmission line system will have sufficient capacity to accommodate Bayswater generating units 1 and 2, however a small deviation of two 330 kV transmission lines to the east of the Bayswater power station site will be necessary. Befor e generating units 3 and 4 can be placed in service a new 1 ' transmission line will be required. This will be constructed from Bayswater to a point southwest of Eraring power station and there connect to the Eraring-Kemps Creek transmission line. The transmission line will most likely be a double cir cuit type designed t o operate at 500 kV. No information as to the likely route of this transmission line or its environmental impacts has been provided. 6. 2. 2 Coal Mines Up to 3 .5 million tonnes of coal per annum will be required for generating units 1 and 2 and a similar quantity for generating units 3 and 4. It i s proposed to obtain t hese quantities of coal from deposits within and adjacent to the existing Ravensworth No 2 colliery, f rom the Liddell State Mine holding and from Mount Arthur North. Coal will be mined by both underground and open-cut methods. - 2.3 - It i s expected that Ravensworth No 2 mine will be "worked out" duri ng the latter half of the 1980's and workings will then be extended to the south. No indication is given as to ( when coal from the proposed Mount Arthur North mine will be required. { Since preparation of the impact statement the northern-most boundary of the Mount Arthur lease, which was the Denman Muswellbrook Road, has been relocated to the north and now { includes the Hunter River. It also approaches much more closely the town of Muswellbrook. { The Electricity Commission has advised that insufficient engineering studies have been carried out to date to give any more information on the proposed mining operations than that { contained in the environmental impact statement. Detail plans for the mining of coal have not been formulated. However it is proposed to provide a buffer zone 1 km wide around the proposed open-cut mining development except where the bound ary is adjacent to other coal mine holdings. The Electricity Commission believes that the buffer zones should ensure that dust, noise and vibration from mining operations will not be a nuisance at locations beyond the mine boundaries. Water quality will be controlled by the use of settling bas"ins and further treatment if necessary. The question of permitting mining under or in the floodplain of the Hunter River will require full evaluation before such could be accepted~ 6.2.3 Coal Transportation Coal from the existing Ravensworth and Liddell mines will be taken to Bayswater power station on the existing conveyor system supplying Liddell power station; a short length of new conveyor will be required. Some of the station 9 s coal requirements could also come by truck using the existing J & A Brown coal haul road. It is not planned to transport coal to the power station using public roads. Coal from the new mine of Mount Ar thur North will be transported by a new conveyor. J 1 I - 24 - New conveyors and extension of existing conveyors required for t he project will be of the semi-enclosed type. In view of the State Pollution Contcol Commission's requirement for coal conveyors for the Eraring power station to be fully enclosed? the Electricity Commissi on was requested to provide a justification for its sel ection of semi-enclosed conveyors. It has advised that fully enclosed conveyors have certain dis advantages in that they produce a chimney effect in the event of fire or explosion and they make access for maintenance much more diffi cult. The routes of the new conveyors proposed in connection with Bayswater power station and the precautions to ~ be taken t o prevent unauthorized access are such that in balance I the open type of conveyor is preferred and should be adopted. f I I 1 f ! - 25 - r 7 FACTORS PERTINENT TO THE DECISIO~ 7. 1 Effect on Water Resources of the Hunter Valley The regulated flow in the Hunter River by construction of Glennies Creek dam will make water available t o Bayswater { power station without prejudice to supply of water t o existing water users in the valley. ( The "Preliminary Plan for Development of Water Resources in the Hunter River Basin" prepared in January 1979 by the Water { Resources· Commis sion of NSW takes into account the need to supply additional water for power generation purposes in the years up to 1996. As the water resour ces of the valley are ( developed the water requirements f or the Liddell power station which are currently being me t f rom surplus fl ows in the river will need to be met from regulated fl ows. ( Concern was expressed in some of the submissions and at the seminars , about the effect of t he Bayswater power station water r requirement on other u sers in the section of the Hunter River, particularly from Ponds Creek to Glennies Creek. The Electricity Commission has pointed out that the abovementioned l report shows that proposed development of the water resources of the valley are adequate t o meet the anticipated demands of all wa t er user s in the period studied. The Water Resources f Commission will, through its licencing system, control the supply of water to all users. 7.2 Effect on the Air Quality of the Region ( Em i ssions of sulphur oxides, nitrogen oxides 9 fly ash, water vapour and coal dust will occur as a result of the operation of { this station. Unde r normal weather conditions it is expected that the use of { a tall stack will allow a dequate dispersion of sulphur and nitrogen oxides. Some minor problems may occur during periods of ground based and elevated inversions. A more detailed knowledge of the l ocal meteorology is required to fully assess the likelihood of such problems and t o finally determine the required stack height . However, the foreseeable ground level concentrations from Bayswater and Liddell's operation are not sufficien t to preclude the installation of the new pl.ant. l f I - 26 - ' '· Serious doubts are held concerning the ability of the valley to cope with the emissions from further stations under inversion conditions . These could only be assessed by a comprehensive study of the meteor ology of the region, together with monitoring of the ground level concentra tions of sulphur dioxide resulting from the operations of Bayswater and Liddell. Owing to the wide variabil ity in the sulphur contents of the coals to be burnt, sulphur dioxide flue gas monitoring should also be required on at least one boiler. Insufficient information is available to assess the performance of the fly-ash collection equipment. However as fabric filters are to be used it is expected these emissions will be satis factory and vis i ble emissions should not pose a problem. The State Poll ution Control Commission should require continuous opacity monitoring of the stack emissions. Although there have been some problems in regard to the control I of particulate . emissions from Liddell power station in the past, extensive rehabilitation works are currently being undertaken to upgr ade the performance of its electrostatic precipitators. r Some emissions of coal dust will occur but these are expected to be minor compared to the emissions resulting from widespread l . open- cut coal mining in the area. It is unlikely that the localized emissions of coal dust from the stockpiling area will cause complaints in such a mining region. l Based on over seas experience , emissions from the cooling towers I ar e not expected t o be a problem. I . 7.3 Need for Impact Statements for Transmi$sion Lines and Co al Mi nes I Information provided in the Bayswater power station impact statement i s inadequate to allow an assessment of the environ mental impacts o.f the transmission line and coal mines associated l with the development. The El ectricity Commission has indicated that it will provide impact statements for the transmission line and coal mine proposals in due course. l ' l I [ ( - 27 - r 8 CONCLUSIONS AND COND ITIONS OF APPROVAL The magnitude of the Bayswater power station proposal, and the timi ng of the project's announcement to the public have dictated l that the impact s tatement be somewhat conceptual in content. Impacts arising from the coal mines and transmission lines which ( are an essential part of the project have not been adequately accounted for, but will be the subject of separate impact ( statements . There are no environmental reasons why a power station should not be located at Bayswater. However, due to the conceptual { nature of the impact statement and lack of quantification of various aspects, it is not possible for approvals under the Control Acts to be granted a t this stage. Undoubtedly the ( vari ous · components of the scheme, Saltwater Creek dam, desalination plant, ash disposal arrangement's, plant-noise emissions, stack emissions , coal dust emissions from the stockpile and conveyors etc can be constructed and controlled ' to acceptable environmental standards. The Commission therefore agrees in principle to the proposals by the Electricity Comm i ssion of NS W f or the development of Bayswater power station as described in the environmental impact l statement and supplem~ntary information volume dated June 1979 1 provi ded the Electricity Comm ission:- (a) Obtains from the State Pollution Control Commission all necessary approvals under the Clean Air Act, ( the Cl ean Waters Act,and the Noise Con trol Act (b) Meets the requirements of all public authorities having statutory responsibilities in respect of the construc tion and operation of the power station (c) Submits to the State Pollution Control Commission for its consideration prior t o construction, environmental impact statements f or all new major l transmission lines required to convey power from ·l Bayswater and Liddell power stations. ( d) Submits t o the State Pollution Control Commission for its consideration prior t o commencement of site operations,environmental impact s tatements f or all l new coal mines required for fuel supply to the power station, including the proposal f or the expansion of the existing Ravensworth mine. The envi ronmental [ ( - 28 - (d) cont'd. impact statement f or the Mount Arthur North mine should include a full study of the consequences of mining in or under the Hunter River and its r floodplain. (e) Submits to the State Pollution Control Commission I I full details of the proposed desalination plant, including the nacure of the salt residues antici pated therefrom,together with evidence of the I environmental acceptability of the proposals for the disposal of same. I , ( f) Submits to the State Pollution Control Comm ission results of site investigations and studies of existing ground water quality and ground water flows I in the catchment of the proposed Saltwater Creek dam,together with an assessment of the potential for L any increase in salinity to the Hunter River from changes to ground water flows that may result from the construction and operation of the dam. (g) Implements a monitoring programme to the satis faction of the State Pollution Control Commission relative to the nutrient levels in Saltwater Creek res ervoir, and should such monitoring indicate at any time a potential f or eutr ophi cation of the reservoir then it makes suitable arrangements to alleviate the adverse effects of same. (h) Submits to the State Pollution Control Commission a full study of its proposals for the disposal of f · ash in the final void of the Ravensworth open-cut to assess the likelihood of cont aminated seepage infiltrating i nto receiving waters, such study to include an appropriate geotechnical survey of the site. (i) I mplements a mon itoring programme to t he satis faction of the State Pollution Control Commission relative to the quality of the Pikes Creek ash disposal dam discharge water and makes suitable arrangements to alleviate any significan t adverse effects should they arise. - 29 ~ (j) Implements a monitoring programme to the satis r faction of the State Pollution Control Commission relative to the ground-level concentrations of sulphur dioxide resulting from the operations of t . Bayswater and Liddell power stations. (k) Implements a monitoring programme to the satis faction of the State Pollution Control Commission relative to the sulphur dioxide content of flue gas and opacity of the stack emissions. (1) Carries out an appropriate study programme to the satisfact ion of the State Pollution Control Comm i ssion into local meteorology to assist in the final·determination of the stack height. (m) Cooperates with the State Pollution Control Commis sion in regard to a l ong-term comprehensive meteorology ·s tudy to determine the capacity of the region to sustain likely emissions from further [ power SLation development . (n) Implements a monitoring programme to the satis faction of the State Pollution Control Commission relative t o air particulate concentrations consequent to the coal stockpil e and makes suitable ' arrangements to alleviate any significant adverse effects should they arise. (o) Reports to t he Planning and Environment Commission within six months on the possibility of using Saltwater Creek reservoir for suitable recreational purposes by the public and providing appropriate r access to same. (p) Formulates a land-management programme f or the l buffer zones surrounding the power station to the satisfaction of the State Pollution Control Commiss ion . l - 30 - (q) Negotiates with Singleton and Muswellbrook Shire Councils and any other public authorities that have an interest in the project with a view to meeting any reasonable requirements r ela t ive to the development, and refers any dis puted environmental matters to the State Pollution Control Commission before determining them. (r) Reports to the Planning and Environment Commission as soon as it is able to confirm the accommodation, infrastr1:1cture and transport requirements of personnel engaged in the construction and operation of the power station so that appropriate action can be taken to plan and provide for all necessary facilities required.