DOCSLIB.ORG

Kintyre Uranium Project Environmental Scoping Document

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Kintyre Uranium Project Environmental Scoping Document Kintyre Uranium Project Environmental Scoping Document for assessment under the Western Australian Environmental Protection Act 1986 and the Commonwealth Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 Prepared for: Cameco Australia Pty Ltd Perth, Western Australia Prepared by: ENVIRON Australia Pty Ltd Date: August 2011 Project Number: AS110500 Cameco Australia Pty Ltd Kintyre Uranium Project August 2011 Environmental Scoping Document Page ii Prepared by: ENVIRON Australia Pty Ltd Authorised by: Cameco Australia Pty Ltd Name: Brian Bell Name: Simon Williamson Title: Principal Title: Environmental Manager Phone: 08 9225 5199 Phone: 08 9216 7500 Email: [email protected] Email: [email protected] Signature: Date: 09/08/2011 Signature: Date: 09/08/2011 This document is issued to Cameco Australia Pty Ltd as an Environmental Scoping Document for assessment of the Kintyre Uranium Project under Part IV of the Environmental Protection Act 1986 and the Commonwealth Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999. It should not be used for any other purpose. Whilst reasonable attempts have been made to ensure that the contents of this report are accurate and complete at the time of writing, ENVIRON Australia Pty Ltd disclaims any responsibility for loss or damage that may be occasioned directly or indirectly through the use of, or reliance on, the contents of this report. © ENVIRON Australia Pty Ltd VERSION CONTROL RECORD Document File Name Date Issued Version Author Reviewer AS110500A_Kintyre 20 December 2010 0 K. Pope B. Bell ESD_20-12-10 S. Williamson AS110500A_Kintyre 11 February 2011 1 S. Williamson ESD_110211 AS110500A_Kintyre 17 February 2011 2 (presentation to S. Williamson ESD_110211 EPA) AS110500A_Kintyre 24 March 2011 3 (Public Release) S. Williamson ESD_240311 AS110500A_Kintyre 9 August 2011 4 (Response to S. Williamson ESD_090811 Public Submissions) AS110500 AS110500A_Kintyre ESD_090811 Final Cameco Australia Pty Ltd Kintyre Uranium Project August 2011 Environmental Scoping Document Page iii (This page has been left blank) AS110500 AS110500A_Kintyre ESD_090811 Final Cameco Australia Pty Ltd Kintyre Uranium Project August 2011 Environmental Scoping Document Page iv Contents Page Executive Summary viii 1 Introduction 1 1.1 Overview 1 1.2 Purpose of Document 1 1.3 Proponent 2 1.4 Project History 2 2 The Project 3 2.1 Project Location 3 2.2 Proposal Summary and Key Characteristics 3 2.3 Mining 6 2.4 Dewatering 6 2.5 Mineral Processing 7 2.5.1 Tank Leaching of Beneficiated Ore 7 2.5.2 Tank Leaching of Whole Ore 8 2.5.3 Heap Leach of Whole Ore 8 2.6 Tailings Management 8 2.7 Radiation Management 9 2.8 Waste Management 11 2.9 Product Packaging and Transport 12 2.10 Supporting Infrastructure 13 2.10.1 Power 13 2.10.2 Water 13 2.10.3 Access Roads 14 2.10.4 Accommodation and Personnel Transport 14 2.10.5 Parkeston Transport Hub 14 2.10.6 Other Facilities 14 2.11 Workforce 15 2.12 Rehabilitation and Closure 15 3 Project Justification and Alternatives 17 3.1 Basis for Justifying Proposal 17 3.2 Alternatives Considered 19 3.2.1 Mining Methodology 19 3.2.2 Waste Rock Disposal 19 3.2.3 Processing Options 19 3.2.4 Plant and Infrastructure Locations 20 3.3 Customers 20 4 Applicable Legislation and Environmental Impact Assessment Process 21 4.1 Western Australian Environmental Assessment Process 21 AS110500 AS110500A_Kintyre ESD_090811 Final Cameco Australia Pty Ltd Kintyre Uranium Project August 2011 Environmental Scoping Document Page v 4.2 Federal Environmental Assessment Process 22 4.3 Other Approvals Required 22 4.4 Radiation Management Legislation 25 4.5 Guidelines, Standards and Policies 26 5 The Environment 33 5.1 Regional Setting 33 5.2 Climate 33 5.3 Geology 35 5.3.1 Geochemistry 35 5.4 Landforms and Soils 36 5.5 Surface Water 38 5.6 Groundwater 39 5.7 Flora and Vegetation 42 5.7.1 Significant Flora 43 5.7.2 Weeds 44 5.7.3 Groundwater Dependent Vegetation 45 5.8 Fauna 45 5.8.1 Terrestrial Fauna 46 5.8.2 Aquatic Fauna 48 5.8.3 Short Range Endemic Species 49 5.8.4 Subterranean Fauna 49 5.9 Threatened and Priority Ecological Communities 50 5.10 Radiological Environment 50 5.10.1 Physical radiological environment 50 5.10.2 Biological radiological environment 52 5.10.3 Human radiological environment 53 5.10.4 Transport and Radiation 55 5.11 Air Quality 55 5.12 Noise 57 5.13 Conservation Areas 57 5.13.1 Karlamilyi National Park 57 5.13.2 Register of the National Estate 58 5.14 Social Environment 58 5.15 Indigenous Heritage 59 5.15.1 Heritage Surveys 60 5.15.2 Heritage Management within the Project Area 60 5.15.3 Section 18 Consent 61 5.16 European Heritage 61 5.17 Traffic 62 AS110500 AS110500A_Kintyre ESD_090811 Final Cameco Australia Pty Ltd Kintyre Uranium Project August 2011 Environmental Scoping Document Page vi 6 Principles of Environmental Protection 63 7 Potential Impacts and Management 65 8 Scope of Works 91 8.1 Flora and Vegetation Survey 91 8.2 Fauna Surveys 91 8.2.1 Terrestrial Fauna 92 8.2.2 Subterranean Fauna 93 8.3 Surface Water Investigations 93 8.4 Groundwater Investigations 94 8.4.1 Pit Dewatering 95 8.4.2 Water Supply Borefield 95 8.5 Seepage Investigations 96 8.6 Radiation Assessments 96 8.7 Meteorology and Ambient Dust Study 97 8.8 Noise Assessment 98 8.9 Greenhouse Gas Assessment 99 8.10 Geochemical Characterisation 99 8.11 Ethnographic and Archaeological Studies 100 8.12 Social Impact Assessment 100 8.13 Transport Risk Study 100 8.14 Environmental Management Plans 101 8.15 Mine Closure and Rehabilitation Plan 102 9 Community and Other Stakeholder Consultation Programme 103 9.1 Overview 103 9.2 Consultation Programme 103 10 Project and Assessment Schedule 107 11 Study Team and Peer Review 109 12 References 111 13 Glossary 115 List of Tables Table E1: Indicative Project Characteristics viii Table 1: Indicative Project Characteristics 4 Table 2: Other Approvals Required 23 Table 3: Radiation protection and radioactive substances legislation 25 Table 4: Environmental Guidelines Standards and Policies 26 Table 5: Radiation Guidelines 28 Table 6: Soil Units in the Kintyre Area 37 AS110500 AS110500A_Kintyre ESD_090811 Final Cameco Australia Pty Ltd Kintyre Uranium Project August 2011 Environmental Scoping Document Page vii Table 7: Significant Fauna listed under the EPBC Act that may occur in the Project Area 47 Table 8: Significant Fauna listed under the Wildlife Conservation Act that may occur in the Project Area 48 Table 9: Typical Radiation Levels from Trailer of Uranium Oxide Concentrate (UOC) 55 Table 10: Principles of Environmental Protection 63 Table 11: Key Environmental Factors Table 66 Table 12: Indicative Environmental Assessment Schedule 107 List of Figures Figure 1 Regional Location Figure 2 Project Location Figure 3 Conceptual Project Layout Figure 4 Preferred Transport Route from Kintyre to Kalgoorlie Figure 5 Location of Meteorological and Air Quality Monitoring Stations Figure 6 Surface Water Catchment Areas Figure 7 Vegetation Units of the Project Area List of Appendices Appendix A: Radiation Assessment Scope AS110500 AS110500A_Kintyre ESD_090811 Final Cameco Australia Pty Ltd Kintyre Uranium Project August 2011 Environmental Scoping Document Page viii Executive Summary Cameco Australia Pty Ltd (Cameco) is proposing to develop the Kintyre Uranium Project located approximately 1,200 km north northeast of Perth in the Shire of East Pilbara of Western Australia (WA). On 20 September 2010 the Western Australian Environmental Protection Authority advertised the level of assessment for the Kintyre Uranium Project as an Environmental Review and Management Programme (ERMP) with a 14-week public review period. This level of assessment requires a proponent to prepare and release an environmental scoping document for public review for at least two weeks and to modify the document in response to submissions. This Environmental Scoping Document (ESD) has been prepared to enable key stakeholders and the public to comment on the proposed scope of works for the environmental impact assessment of the proposed Kintyre Uranium Project (the Project). The Project will consist of an open-cut uranium mine, process plant and associated infrastructure. The Project will produce between 2.7 and 3.6 kilotonnes (kT) (six and eight 1 million pounds ) per year uranium oxide concentrate (UOC) as U3O8 equivalent for transport via road from the mine site to the proposed Parkeston transport hub near Kalgoorlie, WA. Transport of UOC by road and/or rail from Parkeston to export ports in Adelaide South Australia or Darwin in the Northern Territory will be the subject of a separate environmental assessment. Indicative project characteristics are outlined in Table E1 below. Table E1: Indicative Project Characteristics Project Element Description Life of Project Nominally 15 years (based on current geological modelling) Timing Commencement of construction after 2013 (subject to approvals) Commencement of operations after 2015 Size of orebody 28 – 36 kT (62 – 80 million pounds) uranium oxide (U3O8) with ore grade of 0.3 – 0.4% U3O8 Exploration drilling is ongoing to define the resource in compliance with Canadian Mineral Resource and Reporting Standards. Mining method Selective open pit mining Major components Open pits Permanent waste rock dump Temporary waste rock dump BOGUM dump ROM pad Process Plant 1 The standard unit of measurement in the uranium industry is pounds. AS110500 AS110500A_Kintyre ESD_090811 Final Cameco Australia Pty Ltd Kintyre Uranium Project August 2011 Environmental Scoping Document Page ix Table E1: Indicative Project Characteristics Project Element Description Tailings Storage Facility (TSF) Mine workshop and administration buildings Mining method Rock blasting, with conventional excavator and truck Mining rate 15 Mtpa – 24 Mtpa (140 Mt total) Area of disturbance Approximately 600 ha Processing method • Acid or alkaline tank leaching of beneficiated ore; and/or • Acid or alkaline tank leaching of whole ore; and/or • Acid or alkaline heap leaching.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Seed Ecology Iii
    SEED ECOLOGY III The Third International Society for Seed Science Meeting on Seeds and the Environment “Seeds and Change” Conference Proceedings June 20 to June 24, 2010 Salt Lake City, Utah, USA Editors: R. Pendleton, S. Meyer, B. Schultz Proceedings of the Seed Ecology III Conference Preface Extended abstracts included in this proceedings will be made available online. Enquiries and requests for hardcopies of this volume should be sent to: Dr. Rosemary Pendleton USFS Rocky Mountain Research Station Albuquerque Forestry Sciences Laboratory 333 Broadway SE Suite 115 Albuquerque, New Mexico, USA 87102-3497 The extended abstracts in this proceedings were edited for clarity. Seed Ecology III logo designed by Bitsy Schultz. i June 2010, Salt Lake City, Utah Proceedings of the Seed Ecology III Conference Table of Contents Germination Ecology of Dry Sandy Grassland Species along a pH-Gradient Simulated by Different Aluminium Concentrations.....................................................................................................................1 M Abedi, M Bartelheimer, Ralph Krall and Peter Poschlod Induction and Release of Secondary Dormancy under Field Conditions in Bromus tectorum.......................2 PS Allen, SE Meyer, and K Foote Seedling Production for Purposes of Biodiversity Restoration in the Brazilian Cerrado Region Can Be Greatly Enhanced by Seed Pretreatments Derived from Seed Technology......................................................4 S Anese, GCM Soares, ACB Matos, DAB Pinto, EAA da Silva, and HWM Hilhorst
    [Show full text]
  • Acacia Inaequilatera Domin
    Acacia inaequilatera Domin Identifiants : 196/acaina Association du Potager de mes/nos Rêves (https://lepotager-demesreves.fr) Fiche réalisée par Patrick Le Ménahèze Dernière modification le 29/09/2021 Classification phylogénétique : Clade : Angiospermes ; Clade : Dicotylédones vraies ; Clade : Rosidées ; Clade : Fabidées ; Ordre : Fabales ; Famille : Fabaceae ; Classification/taxinomie traditionnelle : Règne : Plantae ; Sous-règne : Tracheobionta ; Division : Magnoliophyta ; Classe : Magnoliopsida ; Ordre : Fabales ; Famille : Fabaceae ; Genre : Acacia ; Synonymes : In the past often confused with Acacia pyrifoli ; Nom(s) anglais, local(aux) et/ou international(aux) : baderi , Partirri ; Rapport de consommation et comestibilité/consommabilité inférée (partie(s) utilisable(s) et usage(s) alimentaire(s) correspondant(s)) : Rapport de consommation et comestibilité/consommabilité inférée (partie(s) utilisable(s) et usage(s) alimentaire(s) correspondant(s)) : Données absentes/manquantes et/ou insuffisantesµ{{{(dp*)µ. Les graines vertes sont consommées néant, inconnus ou indéterminés.néant, inconnus ou indéterminés. Illustration(s) (photographie(s) et/ou dessin(s)): Autres infos : dont infos de "FOOD PLANTS INTERNATIONAL" : Distribution : Il pousse dans les zones arides. Il convient aux climats chauds et secs. Il a besoin d'un sol bien drainé et d'une Page 1/2 position ensoleillée{{{0(+x) (traduction automatique). Original : It grows in arid areas. It suits hot dry climates. It needs a well drained soil and a sunny position{{{0(+x). Localisation : Australie*{{{0(+x) (traduction automatique). Original : Australia*{{{0(+x). Notes : Il existe environ 1350 espèces d'Acacia. Plus de 1 000 se produisent en Australie. Aussi comme Mimosaceae{{{0(+x) (traduction automatique). Original : There are about 1,350 Acacia species. Over 1,000 occur in Australia. Also as Mimosaceae{{{0(+x).
    [Show full text]
  • Palatability of Plants to Camels (DBIRD NT)
    Technote No. 116 June 2003 Agdex No: 468/62 ISSN No: 0158-2755 The Palatability of Central Australian Plant Species to Camels Dr B. Dorges, Dr J. Heucke, Central Australian Camel Industry Association and R. Dance, Pastoral Division, Alice Springs BACKGROUND About 600,000 camels (Camelus dromedarius) are believed to inhabit the arid centre of Australia, mainly in South Australia, Western Australia and the Northern Territory. Most of these camels are feral. A small camel industry has developed, which harvests selected animals for domestic and export markets, primarily for meat. Camels can eat more than 80% of the common plant species found in Central Australia. Some plant species are actively sought by camels and may need to be protected. METHOD Observations of grazing preferences by camels were made periodically for up to 12 years on five cattle stations in Central Australia. Where camels were accustomed to the presence of humans, it was possible to observe their grazing preferences from a few metres. Radio transmitters were fitted on some camels for easy detection and observation at any time. These evaluations were used to establish a diet preference or palatability index for observed food plants. Table 1. Palatability index for camels Index Interpretation 1 only eaten when nothing else is available 2 rarely eaten 3 common food plant 4 main food plant at times 5 preferred food plant 6 highly preferred food plant 7 could be killed by camel browsing More information can be obtained from the web site of the Central Australian Camel Industry Association http://www.camelsaust.com.au 2 RESULTS Table 2.
    [Show full text]
  • Sites of Botanical Significance Vol1 Part1
    Plant Species and Sites of Botanical Significance in the Southern Bioregions of the Northern Territory Volume 1: Significant Vascular Plants Part 1: Species of Significance Prepared By Matthew White, David Albrecht, Angus Duguid, Peter Latz & Mary Hamilton for the Arid Lands Environment Centre Plant Species and Sites of Botanical Significance in the Southern Bioregions of the Northern Territory Volume 1: Significant Vascular Plants Part 1: Species of Significance Matthew White 1 David Albrecht 2 Angus Duguid 2 Peter Latz 3 Mary Hamilton4 1. Consultant to the Arid Lands Environment Centre 2. Parks & Wildlife Commission of the Northern Territory 3. Parks & Wildlife Commission of the Northern Territory (retired) 4. Independent Contractor Arid Lands Environment Centre P.O. Box 2796, Alice Springs 0871 Ph: (08) 89522497; Fax (08) 89532988 December, 2000 ISBN 0 7245 27842 This report resulted from two projects: “Rare, restricted and threatened plants of the arid lands (D95/596)”; and “Identification of off-park waterholes and rare plants of central Australia (D95/597)”. These projects were carried out with the assistance of funds made available by the Commonwealth of Australia under the National Estate Grants Program. This volume should be cited as: White,M., Albrecht,D., Duguid,A., Latz,P., and Hamilton,M. (2000). Plant species and sites of botanical significance in the southern bioregions of the Northern Territory; volume 1: significant vascular plants. A report to the Australian Heritage Commission from the Arid Lands Environment Centre. Alice Springs, Northern Territory of Australia. Front cover photograph: Eremophila A90760 Arookara Range, by David Albrecht. Forward from the Convenor of the Arid Lands Environment Centre The Arid Lands Environment Centre is pleased to present this report on the current understanding of the status of rare and threatened plants in the southern NT, and a description of sites significant to their conservation, including waterholes.
    [Show full text]
  • Supplementary Material Overcoming Physical Seed Dormancy in Priority Native Species for Use in Arid-Zone Restoration Programs
    Australian Journal of Botany 64(5), 401-416 © CSIRO 2016 http://dx.doi.org/10.1071/BT16059_AC Supplementary material Overcoming physical seed dormancy in priority native species for use in arid-zone restoration programs Todd E. EricksonA,B,C, David J. MerrittB,A and Shane R. TurnerA,B ASchool of Plant Biology, University of Western Australia, Crawley, WA 6009, Australia. BKings Park and Botanic Garden, Kings Park, WA 6005, Australia. CCorresponding author Email. [email protected] Table S1. Seed and embryo characteristics for each of 12 PY species utilised in this study (data adapted from Erickson et al. 2016a; 2016b) Species Family Seeds per gram Embryo type E:S ratio Acacia Fabaceae 26 (range 22-31) Investing 1.00 ancistrocarpa Acacia Fabaceae 58 (range 31-58) Investing 1.00 bivenosa Acacia Fabaceae 105 (range 76-105) Investing 1.00 cowleana Acacia Fabaceae 17 (range 17-24) Investing 1.00 inaequilatera Acacia Fabaceae 23 (range 17-27) Investing 1.00 pyrifolia Acacia Fabaceae 16 (range 16-23) Investing 1.00 tumida Senna Fabaceae 51 (range 51-58) Investing 1.00 glutinosa Abutilon Malvaceae 458 Folded 1.59 otocarpum Androcalva Spatulate, fully Malvaceae 212 (range 182-212) 0.96 luteiflora developed Corchorus Spatulate, fully Malvaceae 1422 1.22 lasiocarpus developed Hibiscus Malvaceae 153 Folded 1.66 haynaldii Sida Fruits = 167, Malvaceae Folded 1.90 echinocarpa seeds = 493 Table S2. Species level generalised linear modelling using a binomial distribution showing the main effects of heat shock type (wet or dry), duration of treatment (2-30 minutes), and temperature exposure (40- 100°C) on germination of seven Fabaceae species (Acacia ancistrocarpa, A.
    [Show full text]
  • Localised and Regional Patterns in Ground-Dwelling Beetle Assemblages in a Semi-Tropical Arid Zone Environment
    DOI: 10.18195/issn.0313-122x.78(1).2010.169-184 Records of the Western Australian Museum, Supplement 78: 169–184 (2010). Localised and regional patterns in ground-dwelling beetle assemblages in a semi-tropical arid zone environment Nadine A. Guthrie1*, Tom Weir2 and Kipling Will3 1Department of Environment and Conservation, PO Box 51, Wanneroo, Western Australia 6946, Australia. Email: [email protected] 2Australian National Insect Collection, CSIRO Entomology, GPO Box 1700, Canberra, Australian Capital Territory, 2601, Australia. 3ESPM Department & Essig Museum of Entomology, University of California, Berkeley, California, U.S.A. Abstract – Ground-dwelling beetles were sampled by pitfall traps at 304 quadrats positioned to represent the geomorphic extent and profi le of the Pilbara Region, a semi-tropical arid region in north-west Western Australia. For each quadrat, 47 climatic, soil, landform, geological and vegetation attributes were determined. A total of 429 taxa across the Bolboceratidae, Carabidae, Hybosoridae, Scarabaeidae and Tenebrionidae were identifi ed, of which 68% could not be assigned to currently recognised species. Species richness ranged from 1 to 36 species per quadrat, with an average of 11.6±5.9 species (n = 296 quadrats). Species recorded at one quadrat only (‘singletons’) constituted 33% of the fauna and were collected mainly from areas near the edge of the region or were associated with the Fortescue subregion; they included 36% of the Bolboceratidae (8 species), 32% of the Carabidae (72 species), 33% of the Hybosoridae (2 species), 46% of the Scarabaeidae (45 species) and 22% of the Tenebrionidae (17 species). Those from the region’s edge may have their distributions centred elsewhere, while singletons from the Fortescue subregion may be restricted to marsh habitats that are rare elsewhere in the region.
    [Show full text]
  • Analyzing Effects of International Cooperation
    SYSTEMATICS AND EVOLUTION OF COMMIPHORA JACQ. (BURSERACEAE) IN MADAGASCAR by Morgan Robert Gostel A Dissertation Submitted to the Graduate Faculty of George Mason University in Partial Fulfillment of The Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy Environmental Science and Public Policy Committee: _________________________________________ Dr. Andrea Weeks, Dissertation Director _________________________________________ Dr. Cody Edwards, Committee Member _________________________________________ Dr. James Lawrey, Committee Member _________________________________________ Dr. Donald Seto, Committee Member _________________________________________ Dr. Albert Torzilli, Graduate Program Director _________________________________________ Dr. Robert Jonas, Department Chairperson __________________________________ Dr. Donna Fox, Associate Dean, Student Affairs & Special Programs, College of Science _________________________________________ Dr. Peggy Agouris, Dean, College of Science Date: __________________________________ Summer Semester 2015 George Mason University Fairfax, VA Systematics and Evolution of Commiphora Jacq. (Burseraceae) in Madagascar A dissertation submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Doctor of Philosophy at George Mason University By Morgan Robert Gostel Master of Science Virginia Commonwealth University, 2010 Bachelor of Science Virginia Commonwealth University, 2008 Director: Andrea Weeks, Associate Professor Department of Biology Summer Semester 2015 George Mason University Fairfax, VA Acknowledgements
    [Show full text]
  • Marillana Vegetation and Flora Report
    MARILLANA VEGETATION AND FLORA REPORT A1. Results of the DEC Database Searches for Rare and Priority Flora October 2009 Page 67 MARILLANA VEGETATION AND FLORA REPORT This page has been left intentionally blank. October 2009 Page 68 MARILLANA VEGETATION AND FLORA REPORT Priority Species Location Wittenoom Gorge, Hamersley Range, Weeli Wolli, Lepidium catapycnon Newman Rare Hamersley Range, Mt Augustus, Carnarvon Range, Thryptomene wittweri White Cliffs Stn, NT Barbula ehrenbergii Dale's Gorge, Hamersley Range Calotis squamigera Wittenoom, Hamersley Range Eragrostis sp. Mt Robinson Hamersley Range (S.van Leeuwen 4109) Mt Marsh, Chichester Range, Marillana Station, Mulga Eremophila spongiocarpa Downs Station Genus sp. Hamersley Range Hamersley Range 1 hilltops (S van Leeuwen 4345) Hamersley Range, Paynes Find, Yannarie River, Juna Myriocephalus nudus Downs, Swan River (Drummond) Rhagodia sp. Hamersley (M. Hamersley Range Trudgen 17794) Sida sp. Pilbara (S. van Hamersley Range, Lawloit Range Leeuwen 4377) Tetratheca fordiana West Angelas, Hamersley Range Acacia daweana Hamersley Range, Karijini N.P. Eremophila forrestii subsp. Karijini NP, Hamersley Range NP, Turee Creek Stn Pingandy (M.E. Trudgen 2662) Hamersley Range, Karijini N.P., West Angelas, Olearia fluvialis 2 Newman Pilbara trudgenii Hamersley Range Scaevola sp. Hamersley Range Hamersley Range basalts (S. van Leeuwen 3675) Spartothamnella puberula Mt Bruce, Hamersley Range, West Angelas, NT Tom Price, Balfour Downs Stn, West Angelas, Hope Acacia bromilowiana Downs, Hamersley Range, Marillana Stn, Ophthalmia Range Hamersley Range, Hancock Range, Ophthalmia Acacia subtiliformis Range, Hope Down North, Marillana Stn Giles, Warburton, Blackstone Range, Rawlinson Calotis latiuscula Range, Hamersley Range Cynanchum sp. Hamersley (M Hamersley Range, Marandoo, Turner Syncline, West Trudgen 2302) Angelas Mt Bruce, Mt Nameless, Hamersley Range, Mt Sheila, Dampiera anonyma Karijini NP Hamersley Range, Mt Meharry, West Angelas, Karijini Dampiera metallorum NP Eremophila magnifica subsp.
    [Show full text]
  • BHP Billiton Iron Ore Pilbara Expansion Strategic Proposal Environmental Scoping Document November 2013
    BHP Billiton Iron Ore Pilbara Expansion Strategic Proposal Environmental Scoping Document November 2013 This page has been left blank intentionally BHP Billiton Iron Ore Pilbara Expansion Strategic Proposal Environmental Scoping Document November 2013 DOCUMENT ABBREVIATIONS Abbreviation Meaning ABS Australian Bureau of Statistics AMA Adaptive Management Approach AMF Adaptive Management Framework CCG Community Consultative Group CIA Cumulative Impact Assessment DER Department of Environment Regulation (State) DMA Decision Making Authority DMP Department of Mines and Petroleum (State) DoE Department of the Environment (Commonwealth) DoW Department of Water (State) DPaW Department of Parks and Wildlife (State) EIA Environmental Impact Assessment EPA Environmental Protection Authority (State) EP Act Environmental Protection Act 1986 (State) EPBC Act Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (Commonwealth) EPHC Environment Protection and Heritage Council ESD Environmental Scoping Document HSEC Health, Safety, Environment and Community HSEMS Health, Safety and Environmental Management System IBRA Interim Biogeographic Regionalisation of Australia MNES Matters of National Environmental Significance NEPM National Environment Protection Measure NRM Natural Resource Management OEPA Office of the Environmental Protection Authority OHP Ore Handling Plant OSA Overburden Storage Areas PBS Pilbara Biological Survey PER Public Environmental Review PERSP Public Environmental Review Strategic Proposal RMS Regional Management Strategy
    [Show full text]
  • The Conservation Significance of the Biota of Barrow Island, Western Australia
    Journal of the Royal Society of Western Australia, 102: 98–133, 2019 The conservation significance of the biota of Barrow Island, Western Australia A. JASMYN J. LYNCH 1*, RoBert J.S. BeeToN 2 & PeNeLoPe GReeNSLADe 3,4 1 Molonglo Conservation Group, Fyshwick ACT 2609, Australia 2 School of Earth and Environmental Sciences, University of Queensland, St Lucia Qld 4072, Australia 3 Centre for Environmental Management, School of Health and Life Sciences, Federation University, Ballarat Vic. 3353, Australia 4 Research School of Biology, Australian National University, Acton ACT 2601, Australia * Corresponding author: [email protected]; [email protected] Abstract Offshore islands are often important in conservation because of the presence of locally endemic species and for acting as refuges for native wildlife from the impacts of invasive species and inappropriate development. Barrow Island, a small, semi-arid island off the Pilbara coast of north- western Australia, has maintained the integrity of its terrestrial and aquatic biota despite sporadic incursions by invasive species and the operation of commercial oil extraction and liquified natural gas processing for over 50 years. We collate information from a wide range of sources to provide a framework to inform the ongoing management of the terrestrial and aquatic fauna and flora species that have conservation significance on the island. These include endemic flora and fauna; species listed as threatened by state, national and international authorities; species that are rare or extinct in other parts of their original range; species of biogeographic significance; and migratory birds and marine fauna of national and international significance. In addition, Barrow Island has been of value in acting as a source area for translocations of vulnerable and endangered mammal species that have been eradicated in other parts of their range.
    [Show full text]
  • Vegetation and Flora Report.Pdf
    KING BAY EASTERN LEASE AREA INDUSTRIAL ESTATE VEGETATION AND FLORA REPORT Prepared for: BGC Contracting Astron Environmental Suite 7, 11 Hedland Place PO Box 713 Karratha, WA 6714 Phone: (08) 9144 1679 Fax: (08) 9144 2638 Email: [email protected] Report Reference No: 1583-RV-02 BGC Contracting King Bay Eastern Lease – Vegetation and Flora Report REVISION STATUS REVISIONS Rev Date Description Prepared Reviewed Approval By By Name Name Init. A 02/04/03 Draft Issued for Client Review V. Long J. Kruger G. Pember 0 09/06/03 Issued for DEP Review V. Long J.Kruger G. Pember Report Reference: 1583-RV-02 Report Parameters Checking Status Text Word Text IR Referencing NR Figures IR Text File J:\Reimbursible\Miscellaneous 1500\1583 Proposal to develop King Bay Tabulations IR eastern lease area\Vegetation\1583rv02.doc Figures Calculations NR Statistics NR Copyright 2003 Astron Environmental Astron Environmental has prepared this document and information contained in it under the terms and conditions of its contract with its client. The report is for the clients use only and may not be used, exploited, copied, duplicated or reproduced in any form or medium whatsoever without the prior written permission of Astron Environmental or its client. Astron Environmental i Shire of Roebourne The Maitland Heavy Industrial Estate: Assessment and Comparison with the Burrup Industrial Estate TABLE OF CONTENTS 1 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................ 1 1.1 Background.............................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • AMD 21 Flora & Fauna Assessment.Pdf
    APPENDIX B GHD FLORA AND FAUNA ASSESSMENT Landcorp Report for Karratha Land Release - Amendment 21 Flora and Fauna Assessment September 2011 This Karratha Land Release – Amendment 21 Flora and Fauna Assessment Report (“Report”): 1. has been prepared by GHD Pty Ltd (“GHD”) for LandCorp; 2. may only be used and relied on by LandCorp; 3. must not be copied to, used by, or relied on by any person other than LandCorp without the prior written consent of GHD; GHD and its servants, employees and officers otherwise expressly disclaim responsibility to any person other than LandCorp arising from or in connection with this Report. To the maximum extent permitted by law, all implied warranties and conditions in relation to the services provided by GHD and the Report are excluded unless they are expressly stated to apply in this Report. The services undertaken by GHD in connection with preparing this Report: x were limited to those specifically detailed in section 3.4 of this Report; GHD expressly disclaims responsibility for any error in, or omission from, this Report arising from or in connection with any of the Assumptions being incorrect. Subject to the paragraphs in this section of the Report, the opinions, conclusions and any recommendations in this Report are based on conditions encountered and information reviewed at the time of preparation and may be relied on until 12 months, after which time, GHD expressly disclaims responsibility for any error in, or omission from, this Report arising from or in connection with those opinions, conclusions and any recommendations. 61/27315/113497 Karratha Land Release Flora and Fauna Assessment Contents 1.
    [Show full text]