Ardglen Quarry Extension
Environmental Assessment
for Daracon Quarries
June 2007
0038419 www.erm.com
Delivering sustainable solutions in a more competitive world Ardglen Quarry Extension Project Carolyn Maginnity Manager:
Signed: Environmental Assessment
Date: 20 June 2007 for Daracon Quarries Partner: Mike Shelly
June 2007 Date: 20 June 2007 Project No. 0038419 Environmental Resources Management Australia Pty Ltd Quality System
This report has been prepared in accordance with the scope of services described in the contract or agreement between Environmental Resources Management Australia
Pty Ltd ABN 12 002 773 248 (ERM) and the Client. The report relies upon data, surveys, measurements and results taken at or under the particular times and conditions specified herein. Any findings, conclusions or recommendations only apply to the aforementioned circumstances and no greater reliance should be assumed or drawn by the Client. Furthermore, the report has been prepared solely for use by the Client and ERM accepts no responsibility for its use by other parties. SUBMISSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT PREPARED UNDER THE ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT ACT 1979 - SECTION 75
EA PREPARED BY Names: Michael Shelly Carolyn Maginnity Qualifications: BSc BURP
Address: 53 Bonville Avenue, THORNTON NSW, 2322
PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT Daracon Quarries is proposing to extend the extraction area of the existing Ardglen Quarry. The extension will ensure the continuing availability of high quality aggregates for rail and civil construction in the Upper Hunter and New England regions.
PROJECT APPLICATION Applicant Name: Buttai Gravel Pty Ltd (Daracon Quarries) Applicant Address: PO Box 299, Wallsend 2287 Land to be developed: Lot 1 DP 1001734 and Lot 218 DP 751028, Quarry Road, Ardglen Proposed Development Extension of an existing hard rock quarry
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT An environmental assessment (EA) is attached.
CERTIFICATE I certify that I have prepared the contents of this EA and to the best of my knowledge it is in accordance with Section 75 of the EP&A Act and the Director Generals Requirements (DGRs); it contains all available information that is relevant to the environmental assessment of the development to which this statement relates; and it is true in all material particulars and does not, by its presentation or omission of information, materially mislead.
Name: Michael Shelly Name: Carolyn Maginnity
Signature: Signature:
Date: 20 June 2007 Date: 20 June 2007
0038419EA / FINAL / June 2007 CONTENTS
1 INTRODUCTION
1.1 BACKGROUND 1 1.2 PROJECT OBJECTIVES 1 1.3 SITE CONTEXT 1 1.4 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT APPROACH 2 1.5 REPORT STRUCTURE 3
2 DESCRIPTION OF THE PROJECT
2.1 PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT 4 2.1.1 QUARRYING 4 2.1.2 PROCESSING AND TRANSPORT 5 2.1.3 REHABILITATION AND FINAL LAND USE 6 2.1.4 ENDANGERED ECOLOGICAL COMMUNITY OFFSETS 10 2.2 NEED FOR THE PROJECT AND ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED 12
3 STATUTORY PROVISIONS
3.1 NEW SOUTH WALES LEGISLATION 17 3.1.1 ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT ACT 1979 AND REGULATION 2000 17 3.1.2 STATE ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING POLICES 17 3.1.3 PROTECTION OF THE ENVIRONMENT OPERATIONS ACT 1997 19 3.1.4 MURRURUNDI LOCAL ENVIRONMENTAL PLAN 1993 19 3.2 COMMONWEALTH LEGISLATION 20 3.2.1 ENVIRONMENT PROTECTION AND BIODIVERSITY ACT 1999 20
4 STAKEHOLDER CONSULTATION
4.1 CONSULTATION WITH GOVERNMENT AUTHORITIES 23 4.1.1 GENERAL 23 4.1.2 PLANNING FOCUS MEETING 23 4.2 CONSULTATION WITH LOCAL COMMUNITY 25 4.2.1 KEY COMMUNITY ISSUES 26 4.3 ABORIGINAL COMMUNITY CONSULTATION 26
5 FLORA AND FAUNA
5.1 SURVEY RESULTS 28 5.1.1 VEGETATION COMMUNITIES 28 5.1.2 THREATENED FLORA 28 5.1.3 FAUNA HABITAT 28 5.1.4 FAUNA 29 5.1.5 THREATENED SPECIES 29 5.2 IMPACT ASSESSMENT 30 5.2.1 VEGETATION CLEARING AND HABITAT LOSS 30 5.2.2 HABITAT FRAGMENTATION AND CORRIDORS 30 5.2.3 THREATENED SPECIES 30 CONTENTS
5.2.4 COMMONWEALTH THREATENED AND MIGRATORY SPECIES 30 5.3 MITIGATION MEASURES 31
6 NOISE
6.1 EXISTING NOISE ENVIRONMENT 32 6.2 OPERATIONAL NOISE CRITERIA 33 6.2.1 GENERAL CRITERIA 33 6.2.2 PROJECT SPECIFIC NOISE GOALS 34 6.2.3 CUMULATIVE NOISE 34 6.2.4 ROAD TRAFFIC NOISE 35 6.2.5 SLEEP DISTURBANCE 35 6.2.6 BLASTING 35 6.3 PREDICTED NOISE LEVELS 36 6.3.1 SCENARIO 0–EXISTING SITUATION 36 6.3.2 SCENARIO A–OVERBURDEN STRIPPING 36 6.3.3 SCENARIO B–EXTRACTION 37 6.3.4 ROAD TRAFFIC NOISE 38 6.3.5 SLEEP DISTURBANCE 38 6.3.6 BLASTING AND VIBRATION 39 6.4 MITIGATION MEASURES 41 6.5 CONCLUSIONS 42
7 AIR QUALITY
7.1 IMPACT ASSESSMENT CRITERIA AND METHODOLOGY 43 7.2 EXISTING AIR QUALITY 43 7.3 ESTIMATED EMISSIONS 44 7.4 PREDICTED IMPACTS 45
7.4.1 PREDICTED PM10 (24 HOUR)IMPACTS 47
7.4.2 PREDICTED PM10 AND TSP (ANNUAL)IMPACTS 47 7.4.3 PREDICTED DUST DEPOSITION IMPACTS 47 7.5 DUST MITIGATION MEASURES 47
8 TRAFFIC AND TRANSPORT
8.1 EXISTING ROAD NETWORK 49 8.2 TRAFFIC GENERATION 49 8.3 ROAD IMPACT ASSESSMENT 50 8.4 RAIL OPERATIONS 50 8.5 CONCLUSION 51
9 WATER RESOURCES
9.1 BACKGROUND 52 9.1.1 CATCHMENT DESCRIPTION 52 9.1.2 GROUNDWATER 52 9.1.3 ENVIRONMENTAL VALUE OF RECEIVING WATERS 53 9.2 WATER MANAGEMENT 53 CONTENTS
9.2.1 OVERVIEW 53 9.2.2 CLEAN WATER RUNOFF 53 9.2.3 POTABLE WATER AND SEWAGE 54 9.2.4 PIT WATER AND RUNOFF FROM DISTURBED AREAS 54 9.3 IMPACTS 63 9.3.1 ALTERATION TO CATCHMENTS AND YIELDS 63 9.3.2 WATER QUALITY 63 9.3.3 MITIGATION MEASURES 63
10 CULTURAL HERITAGE
10.1 METHODOLOGY 64 10.2 SIGNIFICANCE AND IMPACTS 64
11 SOCIO-ECONOMIC IMPACTS
11.1 SOCIAL IMPACTS 66 11.2 ECONOMIC IMPACTS 67 11.3 SOCIO-ECONOMIC MANAGEMENT COMMITMENTS 69
12 VISUAL IMPACTS
12.1 VISUAL MODIFICATION 70 12.2 VISUAL SENSITIVITY 71 12.3 VISUAL IMPACT MATRIX 71 12.4 IMPACT ASSESSMENT 72 12.4.1 LANDSCAPE CHARACTER 72 12.4.2 VIEW POINT ANALYSIS 73 12.4.3 ASSESSMENT OF VISUAL IMPACT 73
13 DRAFT STATEMENT OF COMMITMENTS
13.1 INTRODUCTION 75 13.2 DRAFT STATEMENT OF COMMITMENTS 75 13.2.1 GENERAL 75 13.2.2 WATER MANAGEMENT 75 13.2.3 FLORA AND FAUNA 76 13.2.4 NOISE 78 13.2.5 BLASTING AND VIBRATION 79 13.2.6 AIR QUALITY 79 13.2.7 REHABILITATION 80 13.2.8 VISUAL AMENITY 80 13.2.9 CULTURAL HERITAGE 80 13.2.10 SOCIO-ECONOMIC 80
14 CONCLUSION
14.1 SITE SUITABILITY 81 14.2 ECOLOGICALLY SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT 81 14.2.1 PRECAUTIONARY PRINCIPLE 82 CONTENTS
14.2.2 SOCIAL EQUITY INCLUDING INTERGENERATIONAL EQUITY 83 14.2.3 CONSERVATION OF BIOLOGICAL DIVERSITY AND MAINTENANCE OF ECOLOGICAL INTEGRITY 83 14.2.4 IMPROVED VALUATION AND PRICING OF ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES 84 14.3 BENEFITS OF THE PROJECT 85
REFERENCES
GLOSSARY OF TERMS AND ACRONYMS
ANNEXURES
ANNEX A LETTER OF CONSENT ANNEX B THE DIRECTOR-GENERAL’S REQUIREMENTS ANNEX C COMMUNITY NEWSLETTER ANNEX D FLORA AND FAUNA ASSESSMENT ANNEX E NOISE ASSESSMENT ANNEX F AIR QUALITY ASSESSMENT ANNEX G TRAFFIC AND TRANSPORT ASSESSMENT ANNEX H CULTURAL HERITAGE ASSESSMENT
LIST OF FIGURES
FOLLOWS PAGE NO.
FIGURE 1.1 LOCALITY PLAN 1 FIGURE 1.2 EXISTING QUARRY AND PROPOSED EXTENSION AREA 1 FIGURE 1.3 AERIAL VIEW OF SITE 2 FIGURE 2.1 CONCEPTUAL CROSS SECTIONS 8 FIGURE 2.2 FINAL LANDFORM 8 FIGURE 2.3 OFFSET PLAN 11 FIGURE 4.1 GEOGRAPHICAL EXTENT OF LANDHOLDERS CONSULTED 25 FIGURE 6.1 EXISTING EXTRACTION PROCESS AND RAIL LOADING (UNTREATED) 32 FIGURE 6.2 SCENARIO B-PROPOSED EXTRACTION,PROCESSING LOADING (UNTREATED) 37
FIGURE 7.1 CONCENTRATION CONTOURS CUMULATIVE PM10 (24 HOUR) 47
FIGURE 7.2 CONCENTRATION CONTOURS CUMULATIVE PM10 (ANNUAL) 47 FIGURE 7.3 CONCENTRATION CONTOURS CUMULATIVE TSP (ANNUAL) 47 FIGURE 7.4 CONCENTRATION CONTOURS DUST DEPOSITION GRAMS/M2/MONTH 47 FIGURE 9.1 WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN 53 FIGURE 12.1 PHOTO MONTAGE 72
FIGURE 12.2 VIEW POINT ANALYSIS 73 CONTENTS
LIST OF PHOTOGRAPHS
FOLLOWS PAGE NO.
PHOTOGRAPH 1VIEW FROM NOWLANDS GAP LOOKOUT 73
PHOTOGRAPH 2VIEW FROM THE NEW ENGLAND HIGHWAY 73
LIST OF TABLES
PAGE NO.
TABLE 2.1 BIODIVERSITY OFFSET AREAS 10
TABLE 4.1 DIRECTOR-GENERAL’S REQUIREMENTS 24
TABLE 4.2 ABORIGINAL GROUPS CONSULTED 27
TABLE 6.1 SUMMARY OF EXISTING SITE NOISE AS DETERMINED FROM ATTENDED MEASUREMENTS 32
TABLE 6.2 SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND AND AMBIENT NOISE LEVELS 32
TABLE 6.3 INTRUSIVENESS CRITERIA FOR RECEIVER LOCATIONS 33
TABLE 6.4 EPA BASE AMENITY CRITERIA 34
TABLE 6.5 PROJECT SPECIFIC NOISE LIMITS 34
TABLE 6.6 NOISE MODELLING SUMMARY –SCENARIO 0 36
TABLE 6.7 NOISE MODELLING SUMMARY –SCENARIO A 37
TABLE 6.8 NOISE MODELLING SUMMARY –SCENARIO B 37
TABLE 6.9 NOISE MODELLING SUMMARY –EVENING AND NIGHT OPERATIONS WITH RAIL LOADING 38
TABLE 6.10 SLEEP DISTURBANCE IMPACT 39
TABLE 6.11 OVERPRESSURE LEVELS AT RECEIVERS 40
TABLE 6.12 GROUND VIBRATION LEVELS AT RECEIVERS 40
TABLE 7.1 PREDICTED GROUND LEVEL CONCENTRATION (ANNUAL AVERAGE) 45
TABLE 9.1 MONTHLY WATER BALANCE FOR CURRENT QUARRY CATCHMENT (15 HECTARES) 57
TABLE 9.2 MONTHLY WATER BALANCE FOR MID-RANGE QUARRY CATCHMENT,15YRS (26 HECTARES) 59
TABLE 9.3 MONTHLY WATER BALANCE FOR FINAL QUARRY CATCHMENT,30YEARS (37 HECTARES) 61
TABLE 12.1 VISUAL MANAGEMENT UNITS AND VISUAL SENSITIVITY 71
TABLE 12.2 VISUAL IMPACT MATRIX 71
TABLE 13.1 BIODIVERSITY OFFSET AREAS 76 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
INTRODUCTION
Environmental Resources Management Australia Pty Ltd was engaged by Daracon Quarries (Daracon) to prepare this Environmental Assessment (EA). The report is prepared under Part 3A of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 to accompany an application to the Minister for Planning for project approval for an extension to an existing hard rock quarry at Ardglen, New South Wales.
The EA report describes the project, outlines relevant statutory provisions, identifies the key issues and comprehensively assesses potential environmental and community impacts. It also describes a range of management, mitigation and offsetting measures proposed to ensure that short term impacts are minimised and that there is a net benefit from the proposal in the medium to long term.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Daracon currently operates a hard rock quarry at Ardglen, is a small rural community approximately 4.5 kilometres north-west of Murrurundi, 50 kilometres north-west of Scone and 60 kilometres south-west of Tamworth. The quarry produces high quality aggregates for rail and civil construction in the Upper Hunter and New England region.
Existing on-site reserves of hard rock are diminishing. Daracon therefore proposes to extend the existing extraction area into the adjoining properties to the west to enable up to 500 000 tonnes of material to continue to be extracted each year for a period of up to 30 years. It is estimated that existing on-site reserves of hard rock will be exhausted within the next five years. A five year deferred commencement consent is therefore being sought, with quarrying within the proposed extension area expected to commence in 2012.
Daracon have acquired land adjoining the existing quarry and propose to extract material from an area of approximately 17.8 hectares. The remaining area will be fenced and revegetated with indigenous species characteristic of the box-gum woodland on the site.
The project will involve an extension of the extraction area into Lot 218 DP 751028 to the west. The quarry will continue to operate, six days a week.
The project has been identified as a major project under Part 3A of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979. This EA responds to the Director-General’s environmental assessment requirements.
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT AUSTRALIA 0038419EA/FINAL/20 JUNE 2007 i STAKEHOLDER CONSULTATION
A Planning Focus Meeting (PFM) coordinated by the Department of Planning was held on 28th June 2006 and attended by local and state government stakeholders. The PFM was an essential component of the EA process, facilitating information exchange between relevant government agencies and the proponent relating to the details of the proposal and potential issues relevant to each agency. The Director-General’s Requirements for the preparation of this EA were developed from the issues raised at the PFM and subsequent agency consultation.
Consultation with the local community has been undertaken during preparation of the EA and included preparation of a community newsletter outlining the proposal and the assessment process, and individual face-to-face meetings with potentially- affected landowners. Issues raised by the local community have been considered in the assessment process and in developing the draft Statement of Commitments.
ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT
A series of specialist studies have assessed the likely impacts of the proposal, including impacts on flora and fauna, noise impacts, air quality impacts, traffic impacts, impacts on cultural heritage, and hydrological impacts. The key findings of these studies are summarised as follows.
Flora and Fauna
The proposed extension area supports and would clear 17.8 hectares of white box- yellow box-Blakely’s red gum woodland and associated derived grassland, a community listed as an endangered ecological community under the Threatened Species Conservation Act 1995. The community is also representative of white box-yellow box-Blakely’s red gum grassy woodland and derived native grassland, which is listed as critically endangered under the Environmental Protection and Biodiversity Act 1999.
To offset the loss of vegetation, a 2.1 offset area has been purchased and will be enhanced and revegetated as box gum woodland.
Noise
All feasible and reasonable mitigation measures have been incorporated into the design of quarry operations to minimise potential noise impacts upon nearby residences. In addition to the mitigation measures already employed, the following measures are incorporated into the design and operation of the quarry:
rail loading will be limited to the day period (7am to 6pm) as much as practicable;
the surge bin will be lined with latex or polymer liners to reduce impulsive noise;
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT AUSTRALIA 0038419EA/FINAL/20 JUNE 2007 ii a sheet metal enclosure will be built around the rail loader discharge and extended to include the rail wagon loading area; and,
the two scrapers initially assigned for overburden striping will be replaced by one excavator and two articulated dump trucks.
Implementation of these measures will ensure that noise levels will be reduced to or below existing noise levels at all receivers surrounding the quarry; however, the noise emissions received at most nearby residences will remain above the standard Industrial Noise Policy criteria.
Air Quality
Predicted total suspended particulate ground-level concentrations comply with the New South Wales Department of Environment and Climate Change assessment criterion at nominated receptors for quarry and background contributions, as do the predicted ground level concentrations of PM10 (annual average and 24 hour average) (particulate matter less than 10 microns in diameter).
The predicted dust deposition levels (monthly average) comply with the NSW assessment criterion at all but one receptor, which is being purchased by Daracon.
Traffic and Transport
Fifty per cent of the product will continue to be transported by rail and fifty per cent by road. Given that the extraction rate of the existing quarry will not be increasing, the volume of traffic associated with the quarry and its proposed extension will have a minimum impact on road users. The level of traffic turning into and out of Quarry Road is very low, which combined with the relatively low traffic flows along the New England Highway means that delays through traffic movements will be small. There will be little, if any, increase in traffic flows associated with the proposed extension of the quarry.
Cultural Heritage
A detailed cultural heritage assessment has been undertaken in consultation with the Nungaroo Local Aboriginal Land Council (NLALC). The proposed extension area is relatively undisturbed in an archaeological sense, with the exception of clearing for grazing. During the field survey, no sites containing Aboriginal cultural materials were identified within the proposed extension area and no structures or other items of potential historical heritage significance were recorded. No archaeological sites or areas of archaeological potential were identified within the proposed extension area. Further, officers from the NLALC who participated in the survey indicated that the proposed extension area does not contain any areas or sites of particular cultural value. Therefore no further archaeological investigation was required.
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT AUSTRALIA 0038419EA/FINAL/20 JUNE 2007 iii Socio-Economic Impacts
The project is expected to have considerable social and economic benefits at both the local and state level in terms of securing an ongoing supply of high quality aggregates for use in rail and civil construction in the Upper Hunter and New England regions, and in local expenditure and employment opportunities.
Potential adverse impacts of the proposal relate primarily to the amenity and quality of life experienced by residents in the surrounding locality. Impacts will be kept at an acceptable level with the implementation of appropriate mitigation measures and management techniques.
Water Resources
It is proposed to modify the current water management system to reduce reliance on flows from the adjacent Doughboy Hollow Creek and provide a self sufficient in- pit water supply. Water-balance modelling has shown that in wet years the proposed system will produce excess water that can be safely discharged into Doughboy Hollow Creek, or irrigated onto adjoining alluvial flats. In mean rainfall years, little irrigation or discharges would be required.
The proposed extension of quarrying will cause a very minor reduction in total flows into the adjoining surface watercourses, but this will be significantly offset by a reduction in pumping direct from the creek.
Visual
The existing quarry has been a part of the Ardglen community for over 100 years. While the quarry does impact on the visual quality of the existing landscape, the impact of the proposed quarry extension will not represent a significant decrease in the current visual amenity.
Those areas of the quarry in which the resource has been exhausted will be progressively rehabilitated and revegetated to reduce the potential visual impacts of the project.
Site Rehabilitation
Little rehabilitation or assisted revegetation has occurred on the site in previous years. Daracon will complete quarrying in the southern part of Lot 1 and, only then commence quarrying in the proposed extension area that is the subject of this EA. The rehabilitation plan and procedures approved under the current development consent (DA1/1994/153) will be implemented as the southern resource is exhausted.
The proposed rehabilitation of the site, along with a related biodiversity offset plan, will enhance the local diversity in the long term.
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT AUSTRALIA 0038419EA/FINAL/20 JUNE 2007 iv CONCLUSION
The proposed quarry extension will ensure the continued supply of high quality aggregates for rail and civil construction in the Upper Hunter and New England regions. The project can be implemented with minimal adverse environmental impacts as demonstrated throughout this assessment and is justified in terms of the overall economic benefits to both the local and regional economies.
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT AUSTRALIA 0038419EA/FINAL/20 JUNE 2007 v 1 INTRODUCTION
Chapter One identifies the purpose of this report, provides relevant background information and describes the report structure.
1.1 BACKGROUND
For over 100 years NSW Railways has been operating a hard rock quarry at Ardglen, adjacent to the Main Northern Railway. A locality plan is included as Figure 1.1. Buttai Gravel Pty Limited, trading as Daracon Quarries (Daracon), recently purchased the quarry and wishes to continue the production of high quality hard rock products that are generally used in railway and civil construction. Existing reserves of hard rock are diminishing and, therefore, Daracon proposes to extend the extraction area to the west as illustrated in Figure 1.2 to enable up to 500 000 tonnes of material to continue to be extracted each year for a period of up to 30 years. This extraction will ensure the continuing availability of high quality aggregates for rail and civil construction in the Upper Hunter and New England regions.
1.2 PROJECT OBJECTIVES
The objectives of the project are to:
secure a long-term viable source of high quality hard rock products for use in railway and civil construction in the Upper Hunter and New England regions;
maintain the supply of rail ballast for use on the State rail network and continue to supply quarry by-products for local and regional use;
maximise the efficient use of existing quarry infrastructure and investment through maintaining the approved production rate of the existing processing plant;
conduct operations in an environmentally sensitive manner through effectively managing, mitigating and off-setting environmental impacts; and
contribute to the local and regional economies through provision of employment, capital expenditure and supply of extractive material.
1.3 SITE CONTEXT
Ardglen Quarry is adjacent to the village of Ardglen, which is a small rural community approximately 4.5 kilometres northwest of Murrurundi, 50 kilometres northwest of Scone and 60 kilometres southwest of Tamworth. There are approximately 11 residences in Ardglen.
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT AUSTRALIA 0038419EA/FINAL/20 JUNE 2007 1 Legend
Project Application Area
Australia Pty Ltd
ARDGLEN
0 200 Environmental Resources Management
10457JD
Fg .1 Locality Plan.cdr
Revised EAR -
Source: 1:25,000 Topographic Series Temi Sheet
Jobs/2005/0038419/ Figure 1.1 Locality Plan 0 500m
Daracon Engineering - Ardglen Quarry, NSW Jobs/2005/0038419/Revised EAR - Fg1057 . 2 Existing Quarry and Proposed Extension Area.cdr 04 200 SP Environmental Resources Management Australia Pty Ltd
Boundary of Existing Quarry
Boundary of Proposed Extension Area
Limit of Extraction
Project Application Area
Source: Neil Charters Pty Ltd 10014/5 14-11-05 Figure 1.2 Existing Quarry and Proposed Extension 0 100m Area Approximate Only Daracon Engineering - Ardglen Quarry, NSW A local road connects Ardglen Quarry with State Highway No. 9, the New England Highway. The quarry also has a connection to the Main Northern Railway (via a railway siding) east of the quarry.
Ardglen Quarry is in the Liverpool Range, part of the Great Dividing Range on the western boundary of the Hunter Valley. The proposed extension area has an elevation ranging from 660 to 744 metres Australian Height Datum (AHD). The quarry and proposed extension area are visible from Nowlands Gap lookout and from the New England Highway as it descends from the Gap.
Ardglen Quarry is on Lot 1 DP 1001734, Quarry Road, Ardglen, and consists of a pit and ancillary processing works, weighbridge, railway siding, office facilities and car parking with continuing use rights, and a quarry extension area that was approved by Murrurundi Shire Council on 20 May, 1994 (DA1/1994/158). Lot 1 DP 1001734, which is approximately 32 hectares in area, is owned by Daracon.
The application area to the west of the existing quarry incorporates Lot 218 DP 751028, owned by Hunter Industrial Rental Equipment Pty Ltd, ATF. S Mingay Family Trust. A letter of consent to lodge the Project Application is reproduced in Annex A. An aerial photo of the existing quarry and proposed extension area is shown in Figure 1.3.
1.4 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT APPROACH
The Environmental Assessment (EA) assesses the potential environmental impacts associated with the proposed extension of Ardglen Quarry. The EA has been undertaken in accordance with the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979 (EP&A Act) and the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulations, 2000 (EP&A Regs).
The project has been classified as a ‘Major Project’ under Part 3(A) of the EP&A Act. The EA has been prepared in accordance with the environmental assessment requirements of the Director-General of the Department of Planning (DoP).
The Director-General’s requirements (DGRs) were developed by the DoP in consultation with relevant government agencies. The DGRs are attached as Annex B.
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT AUSTRALIA 0038419EA/FINAL/20 JUNE 2007 2 Jobs/2005/0038419/Revised EAR - Fg1 . 3 Aerial View.cdr 04 0 5 200 7 SP Environmental Resources Management Australia Pty Ltd
Legend Project Application Area
Source: Neil Charters Pty Ltd 10183/31611 - -0 5 Figure 1.3 Aerial View of Site 0 100m
Approximate Only Daracon Engineering - Ardglen Quarry, NSW 1.5 REPORT STRUCTURE
The EA is structured as follows:
Chapter 1 – Introduction: describes the site and provides relevant background information;
Chapter 2 – Description of the Project: provides a detailed description of the project, including the need for the project and alternatives considered;
Chapter 3 – Statutory Provisions: outlines the relevant statutory provisions applying to the site;
Chapter 4 – Stakeholder Consultation: describes the consultation undertaken with government and community stakeholders;
Chapter 5 – Flora and Fauna: describes the impacts of the proposal on the ecology of the site and discusses mitigation measures;
Chapter 6 – Noise: describes how the proposal will impact on the noise in the Ardglen community and discusses mitigation measures;
Chapter 7 – Air Quality: addresses the impact the proposal will have on air quality and discusses mitigation measures;
Chapter 8 – Traffic and Transport: describes how traffic and transport will be affected as a result of the proposal and discusses mitigation measures;
Chapter 9 – Water resources: addresses the impact the proposal will have on water resources in the vicinity of Ardglen and discusses mitigation measures;
Chapter 10 – Cultural Heritage: addresses what impact the proposal is likely to have on cultural heritage;
Chapter 11 – Socio-Economic Impacts: discusses the socio-economic impacts of the proposal and the mitigation measures employed to protect against adverse impacts;
Chapter 12 – Visual Impacts: addresses the visual impacts of the proposal and discusses mitigation measures;
Chapter 13 – Draft Statement of Commitments: provides a draft Statement of Commitments, outlining proposed environmental management, mitigation and monitoring measures; and
Chapter 14 – Conclusion: provides justification for the project, having regard to the environmental impacts, the suitability of the site and the benefits of the project.
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT AUSTRALIA 0038419EA/FINAL/20 JUNE 2007 3 2 DESCRIPTION OF THE PROJECT
Chapter Two provides a description of the project.
2.1 PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT
2.1.1 Quarrying
Existing approved reserves of hard rock are diminishing at Ardglen. Therefore, Daracon proposes to extend the existing extraction area into the adjoining properties to the west to enable up to 500 000 tonnes of material to be extracted each year for a period of up to 30 years.
The existing quarry on Lot 1 DP 1001734 operates under continuing use rights, and an existing development consent issued by Murrurundi Shire Council on 20 May, 1994 (DA1/1994/158). The existing on-site reserves of hard rock will be exhausted within the next five years. As resources are exhausted, it is proposed to cease quarrying within Lot 1 and rehabilitate the southern portion of the lot in accordance with the requirements of the 1994 development consent. Quarrying will then commence within the proposed extension area to the west of the existing quarry (Lot 218 DP 751028). A five year deferred commencement consent is therefore being sought, with quarrying within the proposed extension area expected to commence in 2012.
Vegetation from an area equivalent to approximately 12 months quarrying will be cleared at the one time and the layer of topsoil and overburden from this area will be removed. Topsoil stripped from the western extension will either be used promptly in rehabilitating the southern quarry, or stockpiled in low, domed mounds and temporarily revegetated to maintain biological activity. Unsold overburden will be hauled to emplacement areas or used for rehabilitation.
A cutting will be driven from the existing quarry into the extension area. Once the cutting has been established the working area, that is the floor, benches and faces, will be developed.
Daracon proposes to continue the following current hours of operation:
quarry opening hours 6.00 am to 5.30 pm six days per week;
truck loading and haulage, 6.00 am to 5.30 pm six days per week;
rail loading and haulage, 24 hours per day, seven days per week, but limited to 7.00 am to 6.00 pm wherever possible;
overburden stripping or extraction, 7.00am to 5.00pm six days per week; and
processing, 7.00 am to 5.00pm six days per week.
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT AUSTRALIA 0038419EA/FINAL/20 JUNE 2007 4 Drilling and blasting will produce broken stone. Approximately 15 blasts are proposed each year however this number may vary depending on the demand for the product. Detonation of blasts will generally be scheduled for between 10.00 am and 4.00 pm Mondays to Fridays. As is the current practice at the quarry, the surrounding residents in the immediate vicinity of the quarry will be notified of the forthcoming blast.
The footprint of the proposed extraction area is illustrated in Figure 1.2.
2.1.2 Processing and Transport
Raw material stockpiles will be located at the quarry face. Existing mobile plant and equipment will transport raw material from the extension area to the existing processing plant. This transportation will involve the broken stone being loaded by excavators into haul trucks for transport to the crushing and screening plant. Broken stone too large to be fed directly into the crusher will be split at the quarry face by a rock pick mounted on an excavator. No processing will be carried out within the extension area and there will be no increase in the amount of aggregate processed at the quarry each year.
Product stockpiles will continue to be located at the existing quarry adjacent to the crushing plant. As the amount of material processed at the quarry will not increase, the existing traffic levels for product transport will remain the same. The current off site transport mix is 50 percent (250 000 tonnes) by rail and 50 percent (250 000 tonnes) by road. The rail infrastructure (which includes a rail siding that connects to the Main Northern Railway) has been maintained and utilisation maximised to reduce impacts on the road network. It is the only quarry in the region using rail transport. The road transport is predominantly via truck and dogs and semi-trailers to minimise traffic movements.
The existing quarry hours will not change as a result of the proposal.
The quarry currently employs eight people on site with indirect employment numbers between 20 and 30 people, mainly in the transport, and repair and maintenance industries. One additional person is proposed to be employed as a direct result of the quarry extension. The proposed extension will provide surety of employment for existing employees and the many subcontractors indirectly employed.
Existing site environmental management processes and procedures will continue, and will be enhanced as appropriate as part of the quarry extension.
The capital cost of the proposed quarry extension is estimated to be in the order of $200 000 for management works.
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT AUSTRALIA 0038419EA/FINAL/20 JUNE 2007 5 2.1.3 Rehabilitation and Final Land Use
Ardglen quarry had been operated by the State Government for many decades before the recent purchase by Daracon. During this long period, little rehabilitation or assisted revegetation occurred, due to the need for floor space for product stockpiles and ongoing quarrying.
Daracon will complete quarrying in the southern part of Lot 1 and only then will commence quarrying in the proposed western extension area that is the subject of this EA. The rehabilitation plan and procedures approved under the current development consent (DA1/1994/153) will be implemented as the southern resource in Lot 1 is exhausted. The previous operator did not separately strip topsoil in this area so additional topsoil will be sourced from the proposed western extension to improve the quality of the southern rehabilitation. This operation will therefore require some period of overlap in quarrying in Lot 218 and rehabilitation in Lot 1.
Condition 3 of the development consent for the southern part of Lot 1 specifies that rehabilitation be addressed as part of a sediment and erosion control plan. This plan was subsequently prepared in 1994 with the concurrence of the then Department of Conservation and Land Management.
In essence this plan provided a program of erosion control, quarrying and revegetation; supplied details of the final landform; the planting regime and species; and outlined maintenance requirements. The plan calls for the planting of nurse crops of various pasture species, followed by planting of “local species from the adjacent roughbarked apple-white box woodland/open forest” adjacent. This plan details the current approved rehabilitation process and final landform, the intent of which is in keeping with modern practice. The rehabilitation of the southern part of Lot 1 would be well underway before extraction in the proposed extension area commences, and would be integrated into the western extension final landform plan by the following:
selection of similar plant species and provenance throughout Lot 1, the western extension and the biodiversity offset areas;
blending of common quarry benches between Lot 1 and the western extension;
common management of weeds and vertebrate pests;
integrated final landform water management; and
common maintenance program.
The EA addresses quarrying of the site for thirty years, however, there are further basalt resources available adjacent to the application area. While it is difficult to predict future aggregate and ballast demand, it seems likely that there is the potential for quarrying past thirty years.
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT AUSTRALIA 0038419EA/FINAL/20 JUNE 2007 6 Regardless of the eventual land use, it is unrealistic to expect that the western extension will ever revert to productive agriculture. The carrying capacity of the land post-quarrying and after rehabilitation will be slight. The site classification after quarrying is likely to change from Class 4 to Class 5. Class 5 land is not suitable for agriculture or suitable only for light grazing.
The following descriptions of rehabilitation are based on two scenarios: the first which assumes ongoing quarrying, and the second based on the premise that no further quarrying would occur after thirty years. In either case, Daracon commits to lodging an appropriate security deposit to ensure adequate rehabilitation. Additionally, in either case, rehabilitation species will be as selected for the offset plan to increase the area of box gum woodland.
Rehabilitation Assuming Further Quarrying
The old quarry, which is currently used for processing and stockpiling, will not be generally available for rehabilitation within the next 30 years, as the floor area will be required for ongoing processing and stockpiling. The floor of the western extension will be used by haul trucks transporting blasted rock to the plant and would contain additional raw material and product stockpiles. The majority of the benches formed in the western extension will be active for 30 years and therefore unavailable for progressive rehabilitation. The exception will be the northern-most benches that will be capped with overburden, topsoiled and planted with trees representative of the local box- gum woodland community. Figure 2.1 shows conceptual sections through both the main pit from east to west and through the northern benches of the western extension. Daracon is committed to progressive rehabilitation of the extension and adjacent quarry areas.
The final landform of the western extension will blend with the current quarry landform and consist of a series of benches and batters that will extend westwards from the old quarry and eventually form an amphitheatre shape. The floor will appear flat to the eye, but will have an imperceptible fall to the east to facilitate water management.
At this time, the final landform of the proposed extension can only be considered conceptual, as local variation in rock strength and quality may vary the final benching and batter grades.
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT AUSTRALIA 0038419EA/FINAL/20 JUNE 2007 7 Rehabilitation Assuming No Further Quarrying
In the case of no further quarrying beyond 30 years:
a series of benches, nominally 12 metres high, will be formed during quarrying;
the benches will be capped with previously stockpiled overburden and topsoil, and planted with a range of species including trees to soften the visual impact (see Figures 2.1 and 2.2);
the benches will have a nominal 2% cross-fall into the face. A longitudinal grade of approximately 0.25% will drain the benches toward the northern and western ends of the worked area. Any surface runoff will flow down the harder bedrock onto the quarry floor, and from the floor, which in turn will remain free-draining, into the existing 63 ML sump. The sump may overflow in very wet weather into Doughboy Hollow Creek;
the feasibility of planting directly into a hard rock quarry floor remains questionable, so smaller patches of overburden capped with topsoil will be formed on the quarry floor and planted. If the quarry floor proves soft enough or suitably fractured, it will be intermittently ripped to encourage seed germination and plant establishment;
all infrastructure, apart from the rail-siding which would remain available for general railway purposes, will be removed and the land remediated;
the entire site will be fenced to prevent unauthorised access; and
apart from routine weed control and replacement of dead plants, it is not expected that significant management will be required post-quarrying.
The final landform of the western extension will blend with the current quarry landform and consist of a series of benches and batters that will extend westwards from the old quarry and eventually form an amphitheatre shape. The floor will appear flat to the eye, but will have an imperceptible fall to the east to facilitate water management.
Site preparation on the quarry benches and floor will be important to the success of the rehabilitation program, although only a limited number of options will be suitable. The highly compacted surface and limited access means that mechanical ripping is not a feasible option. Where possible, areas to be revegetated will be softened by the partial filling of the benches with overburden and topsoil if available.
The addition of overburden and topsoil to the pit floor will encourage rapid seed germination and retention of moisture. If sufficient amounts of topsoil or overburden can be locally sourced, it will be spread into contoured mounds as a suitable base for tubestock planting.
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT AUSTRALIA 0038419EA/FINAL/20 JUNE 2007 8 Jobs/2005/0038419/ Revised EAR - Fg 2 . 1 Conceptual Cross Section .cdr 27 0 4 200 7 JD Environmental Resources Management Australia Pty Ltd
PLANT WHITE BOX, YELLOW BOX AND BLAKLEY’S RED GUM TUBESTOCK
BACKFILL BENCH WITH CONCEPTUAL CROSS SECTION THROUGH SIDE WALL OVERBURDEN AND TOPSOIL
0 25m
Approximate Only BENCH
BATTER
PIT FLOOR
EXISTING SURFACE
LOT BOUNDARY
700
CONCEPTUAL CROSS SECTION THROUGH MAIN PIT
0 50m
AHD 650 Approximate Only
METRES
SUMP LOT 218 LOT 1
600
Figure 2.1 Conceptual Cross Sections
Daracon Engineering - Ardglen Quarry, NSW Jobs/2005/0038419/Revised EAR - Fg 2 . 2 Final Landform .cdr 01 06 05 200 7 JD Environmental Resources Management Australia Pty Ltd
Legend
Boundary of Existing Quarry
Boundary of Proposed Extension Area
Limit of Extraction
Project Application Area
Sump
Proposed Revegetation
Rehabilitated According to 1994 Consent
Source: Neil Charters Pty Ltd 10014/5 14-11-05 Figure 2.2 Final Landform 0 100m
Approximate Only Daracon Engineering - Ardglen Quarry, NSW The haul roads and ramps will be deep-ripped to 50cm to relieve soil compaction and improve moisture retention. These areas will provide a greater opportunity to plant tubestock characteristic of the surrounding vegetation. Ripping will be undertaken two to three months prior to planting to allow the soil to settle.
Direct seeding is envisaged for much of the rehabilitation as it has many advantages. It is quick, there is little labour involved, the cost per plant is low, plants grow quickly because their roots have not been disturbed, and the random placement looks more natural. There is some evidence to suggest that directly seeded trees and shrubs, once established, are more resistant to drought and better able to recover from insect defoliation. Hand broadcasting is suitable for small areas or areas where access is poor or slopes are steep. Seeds can be sprinkled over the prepared site and covered lightly with soil or quarry dust.
The seed mix will be dominated by colonising native grasses, with a lower percentage of colonising shrubs such as wattles. Following the establishment of the grass layer, tube stock will be planted in isolated patches, where sufficient overburden and topsoil has been introduced.
Early autumn is the best season to broadcast seed as it gives time for the seedlings to establish before winter. Where suitable, tubestock grown from local provenance seeds will be planted, and maintained as follows:
fitted with biodegradable tree guard at planting;
watered initially and as required;
weeded to reduce competition; and
replaced if deaths occur.
Biodegradable tree guards will be erected on the same day as planting as they provide the seedlings with protection from drying, winds, frosts and grazing animals such as rabbits and hares. Where practical, a layer of mulch or weedmat will be placed around the individual plants to help control weeds and conserve moisture.
Any revegetation project should aim for as little reliance on watering as possible but instead develop an ecosystem that can cope with local conditions. In the first year of establishment, some watering may be needed, but limited to several good drenchings. For tube stock, it is important to water the seedlings the day prior to planting and then again within 24 hours of planting, which helps to remove any air pockets around the roots.
Controlling weeds throughout the first year is critical for long term success. In many cases the most cost-effective and sustainable way to control weeds is to combine or integrate a number of different control methods. Each method needs to target weed species when they are most vulnerable. Knowledge of the life cycle of each species is essential to determine the timing of different treatments.
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT AUSTRALIA 0038419EA/FINAL/20 JUNE 2007 9 A common example of integrated weed management is the use of slashing to destroy large woody weeds, followed by herbicide applications to control seedlings. This management is then followed by hand removal of plants before they can re-seed. This method is recommended on the old haul roads, ramps and buffers and will be complemented with the planting of native species. An integrated approach generally means that less herbicide is needed and less follow-up time required than if just one method of control was applied. Following the planting of tubestock, weeds around the trees can also be controlled by the use of weedmats.
Given the high levels of disturbance and limited access on the quarry benches, herbicide treatment followed by hand removal of weeds will be used. In some instances, there will be no weeds present on the benches prior to revegetation and no weed control will be required within the site preparation phase.
Monitoring of each revegetated area will be required every four months for at least one year or until the plants have become established. Monitoring will involve a visual inspection of the area to identify any bare patches or dead tubestock. If large areas of the revegetation have been unsuccessful, the management plan will need to be refined and methodologies reviewed. Performance indicators are identified in Table 2.1.
Table 2.1 Performance Indicators
Objective Performance Indictor Stabilise all worked-out areas to All worked out areas are rehabilitated as soon as minimise ongoing erosion. they are no longer needed for access. Revegetate worked-out areas with seed Seed has been collected from the property or sourced from the local area. tubestock has been propagated from local seed stock. Certification must be obtained from the nursery. Revegetate box gum woodland EEC in Characteristic species of this EEC have been areas of suitable habitat. successfully established within areas of suitable habitat. Any dead tubestock have been replaced. Ensure that worked-out areas are safe All worked out areas have been stabilised and for future uses. revegetated. Maintain and enhance habitat for Retention and use of logs within the revegetated existing flora and fauna species. areas.
2.1.4 Endangered Ecological Community Offsets
Approval of the quarry extension would lead to the loss of:
10.2 hectares of white box-yellow box-Blakely’s red gum woodland endangered ecological community (box-gum woodland); and
7.6 hectares of grassland derived from the box-gum woodland.
For the purpose of generating an offset plan, the whole 17.8 hectares of the quarry extension is considered box-gum woodland. The DoP has indicated the need to apply a 2:1 offset ratio and consequently Daracon has purchased the following land to facilitate this offset plan:
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT AUSTRALIA 0038419EA/FINAL/20 JUNE 2007 10 Lot 187 DP 751028 south of the extension area;
Lot 39 DP 751028 southeast of the extension; and
Lot 49 DP 751028 to the south east of the extension.
Figure 2.3 shows the location of these areas and Table 2.2 summarises the relevant details of each lot in the proposed offset area. These areas will become the subject of voluntary conservation agreements in liaison with the DoP and DECC.
Table 2.2 Biodiversity Offset Areas
Vegetation Area Proposed offset management description (hectares) Lot 187 Box-gum woodland 8.2 stock removal, weed control, and derived planting of EEC trees, transport of grassland logs and rocks, provision of nest boxes. Lot 39 Box-gum woodland 11.65 stock removal, weed control, major and derived planting of EEC trees and grasses, grassland, and transport of logs and rocks. cultivation Lot 49 Box-gum woodland 16.3 stock removal, weed control. Total 36.15
Lot 187 adjoins both the extension area and the approved existing quarry on Lot 1. Much of the Lot is derived grassland, with the balance being box-gum woodland, particularly the northern section. There are few hollows and substantial clearing is evidenced by long dead tree trunks. Fencing would remove stock pressure and encourage natural regeneration, while infill tubestock planting in the southern section of the lot will improve biodiversity. Trees felled in the quarry extension area would provide a source of ground habitat while artificial nest boxes would provide habitat for arboreal mammals in particular.
Lot 39 contains approximately 5.5 hectares of box-gum woodland, adjoining the existing quarry on Lot 1, while the balance is derived grassland and cultivation. The woodland section will only require stock removal and weed control to allow strong natural revegetation. Conversely, the derived grassland and cultivation areas will require intensive planting, weed control and management to provide a vegetation community that simulates box-gum woodland. Again logs transported from the quarry extension area would provide ground habitat while nest boxes would be affixed to the few existing trees. Weed control will be particularly important on Lot 39 owing to the high current weed load.
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT AUSTRALIA 0038419EA/FINAL/20 JUNE 2007 11 730
730
750
720 740
760
710 770
Area
Project Application 780
HIGHWAY
630 710
RAILWAY 630 640 Limit of Extraction
ARDGLEN ENGLAND STOCK REMOVAL, WEED CONTROL 620 Offset Plan
620 Daracon Engineering - Ardglen Quarry, NSW 700
NEW Figure 2.3 Lot 49
NORTHERN
DP 751028
600
610 620 630
MAIN
750
720 740 730 Lot 39 DP 751028 STOCK REMOVAL, WEED CONTROL Lot 1 MAJOR PLANTING OF EEC TREES AND GRASSES, TRANSPORT OF LOGS AND ROCKS
DP 1001734 720
710 Lot 218
DP 751028 690 Lot 187
700
730
DP 751028
740
750
710
760 760
720
750
760 770 660 STOCK REMOVAL, WEED CONTROL PLANTING OF EEC TREES, TRANSPORT OF LOGS AND ROCKS, PROVISION OF NEST BOXES 200m 0 Source: LPI Data Jobs/2005/0038419/Revised EAR - Fg2.3 Offset Plan.cdr 26 04 2007 JD Environmental Resources Management Australia Pty Ltd 650
640 Lot 49 is a reasonably intact area of box-gum woodland, although it is apparent that it has been, and continues to be, heavily grazed by cattle and horses. Removal of stock and active weed control is likely all that is required to allow successful natural regeneration, although this will require monitoring.
When considered alongside the Lot 1 quarry area that has an existing condition of consent to enforce rehabilitation, Lots 187, 39 and 49 will provide, in the long-term, a continuous strip of box-gum woodland vegetation connected with other stands of native woodland to the east, south and west. More tenuous links would exist to the north with the retention of box-gum woodland on the perimeter of lot 218.
The proposed detailed offset plan, to be prepared in liaison with the DECC and the DoP, will detail the following:
staging;
planting details such as final density, species mix, sowing rates, fertiliser;
maintenance schedule;
weed control;
importation of rock and log shelter;
topsoil handling;
fencing;
pre-clearing surveys of all hollow bearing trees within the proposed quarry extension area;
herbivore control; and
number and location of nest boxes.
2.2 NEED FOR THE PROJECT AND ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED
Alternative Locations
Alternative resources are likely to exist in the region within the Liverpool Range volcanics. However, alternative resources could not be extracted and processed using the existing Ardglen quarry infrastructure and, hence, would require the establishment of new facilities and decommissioning of the existing quarry. A new quarry would require both adequate reserves of suitable rock, as well as the construction of a rail siding to load the ballast product. A greenfield site satisfying both of these requirements is likely to be both difficult to find and expensive to establish.
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT AUSTRALIA 0038419EA/FINAL/20 JUNE 2007 12 Ardglen is the sole quarry in the Upper Hunter / New England region that has rail access for the loading of quarry materials. Alternatively, Martins Creek Railway Quarry (Dungog), Dubbo Boral Quarry and Crooble Quarry (Moree) also have rail access. The closest of these quarries is located in excess of 200 kilometres from Ardglen. Should Ardglen Quarry not be available, these quarries themselves would need to expand their existing operations to accommodate the shortfall in the market.
A significant proportion of rail maintenance ballast is distributed by rail ballast wagons. Should the Ardglen Quarry not be available, the additional distance the ballast wagons would have to be transported from alternate quarries equipped with rail sidings would add the equivalent of $20.00 per tonne to the delivered ballast cost. Given the average ballast currently distributed by rail ballast wagons from the Ardglen quarry, this would result in an additional $0.75M to $1.0M per annum in freight costs for track maintenance in this region. Further, the turn around trip time for rail maintenance ballast wagons would be increased by a full day. This would require additional ballast wagons to be acquired by the rail infrastructure maintainer. Additional capital cost of 25 ballast wagons is of the order of $2.5M to $3.0M.
Other existing quarries in the vicinity would face considerable challenges and costs if they were to attempt the installation of rail access. They are generally located too far from the rail corridor and it would involve major works on land not owned by the rail infrastructure manager or the respective quarries. This infrastructure would need environmental assessment and development consent. It is estimated that the establishment of equivalent infrastructure elsewhere for train loading would cost in excess of $1.5M. A further consideration is that the possibility of prompt approval for such construction is very unlikely due to the difficulties that would be encountered obtaining approvals for an interface agreement with the infrastructure owner. The loss of rail transport infrastructure would significantly increase road transport through the towns of Ardglen, Scone, Murrurundi and Willow Tree.
Alternative Materials
While Ardglen Quarry is the preferred supplier of high quality hard rock aggregates and quarry product materials in the Upper Hunter / New England region, the option of using alternative materials has been considered in this Environmental Assessment.
Ardglen Quarry is the only quarry in the locality that can provide aggregates that comply with the benchmark RTA anti-skid safety criteria specified for highway application which calls for a Polished Aggregate Friction Value (PAFV) in excess of 50. This product is, and has been, used extensively on the New England Highway from Singleton through to the southern regions of Armidale for this important safety reason for sealing works.
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT AUSTRALIA 0038419EA/FINAL/20 JUNE 2007 13 Australian Rail Track Corporation (ARTC) makes extensive use of the Ardglen Quarry resource for rail ballast. It is used for railway track maintenance, construction and upgrading works. The rail-siding and rail-loading facilities are purpose designed to provide high capacity quality service for the rail maintenance and construction industry.
It is expected that the market for quarry materials will remain very strong in the coal mining sector in the Upper Hunter and Gunnedah Basin. This sector has traditionally demanded high quality stemming and mine haul road resurfacing materials. Other materials include asphalt and road sealing materials.
Overall, anticipated demand from Ardglen Quarry for high grade aggregates, ballast, stemming and roadbases is expected to be between 400Kt and 500 Kt per annum.
No other quality hard rock quarry exists between Scone and Tamworth that could replace Ardglen. Should Ardglen Quarry not extend operations, other quarries will need to be developed at greenfield sites or existing operations will have to increase extraction rates to meet the shortfall in demand.
Alternative Quarry Methods
Almost all hard rock quarries drill and blast a face to produce raw material. Dimension stone quarries use alternative methods such as rock saws or drilling close-spaced holes that are filled with low yield explosive, a chemical expanding agent, or in cold climates with water that then freezes, expands and splits the rock. These methods can only produce large stone at relatively low rates. There are few current alternatives to drill and blast if the object is to produce high volumes of relatively uniformly sized material for subsequent crushing. None of these alternatives have proved to be economically feasible.
Alternative Transport Methods
Currently, Ardglen quarry hauls approximately 50% of its product by rail and approximately 50% by road. Road transport is available along Quarry Road off the New England Highway and rail transport using the existing rail spur from the Main Northern Line. Both forms of transport offer their own benefits and disadvantages.
Road transport provides additional flexibility and reduces the need to double- handle at the receiving end of the supply chain. Truck fleets are readily available, can be loaded quickly and easily, and can transport products directly to the final user. However, while trucks require far less capital investment, they do have relatively high environmental operating costs.
The volume of the traffic associated with the quarry, together with the current flows on the New England Highway will have a minimum impact upon the level of service for all road users. The level of traffic turning in and out of
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT AUSTRALIA 0038419EA/FINAL/20 JUNE 2007 14 Quarry Road is very low which, combined with the relatively low traffic flows along the New England Highway, mean that delays through traffic movements will be small. There are no other potential alternative haulage routes.
Given the relatively low impact that current haulage levels are having on the road network, the consequences of increasing the road haulage of quarry product to 100% may include:
increased pressure on the New England Highway and Quarry Road intersection;
increased dust emissions as vehicle movements along unsealed roads increases;
increased fossil fuel usage, by and emissions from, trucks; and
increased traffic on the New England Highway.
Alternatively, rail haulage uses less fossil fuel, causes no damage to road pavements and is safer for road users. Rail transport is efficient for moving large volumes of material over long distances with relatively low environmental operating costs. However, operation of trains is considerably less flexible, requires dedicated sidings or rail loops and cannot generally deliver to the end user. Road transport provides additional flexibility in the transport of materials. While the main product of Ardglen Quarry is high quality ballast, sealing aggregates, asphalt aggregates and concrete aggregates, other by-products of the quarry, such as roadbase, also form part of the market. Transport of these by products is not feasible via the rail network.
“No Development” Alternative
Should the project not proceed, existing reserves of hard rock would be exhausted within five years and the quarry would be forced to close. Alternative sources of extractive material would need to be obtained to meet the State’s current and likely future demand for rail ballast, sealing aggregates, concrete aggregates and asphalt aggregates. The alternative of not proceeding with the project would also result in the loss of environmental, economic and social benefits.
Specific consequences of not proceeding with the project would include:
the opportunity to secure long term protection for and enhancement of viable areas of the box-gum woodland EEC within the proposed offset areas would be lost;
closure of the existing quarry would significantly impact on the existing employees and their families, as well as local suppliers of goods and services. As a number of the local residents work at the quarry, the closure would have significant impacts on the Ardglen community generally;
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT AUSTRALIA 0038419EA/FINAL/20 JUNE 2007 15 the economic cost to the State would be substantial should the development not proceed. Existing quarries other than Ardglen would be required to increase extraction to meet the shortfall in the market. It is unlikely that these quarries will have the benefit of rail infrastructure. It is also likely that greenfield sites would need to be developed to meet the shortfall in the market; and
currently, there is no requirement for the existing quarry face to be rehabilitated. Approval of the project will enable the staged rehabilitation of the existing face, thereby eliminating a significant safety hazard and improving the visual amenity of the area in the long term.
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT AUSTRALIA 0038419EA/FINAL/20 JUNE 2007 16 3 STATUTORY PROVISIONS
Chapter Three assesses the proposed development against all relevant statutory provisions which affect the site.
3.1 NEW SOUTH WALES LEGISLATION
3.1.1 Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 and Regulation 2000
The Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (EP&A Act) and the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2000 provide a framework for environmental planning in New South Wales.
Part 3A of the EP&A Act, which took effect on 1 August 2005, provides a streamlined assessment and approvals process for major infrastructure and other projects for which the Minister for Planning is the approval authority.
The provisions of Part 3A apply to major projects where the Minister has made a declaration relating to the specific development or a class of developments to which that project belongs. The Minister may declare a development to be a major project in a State Environmental Planning Policy (SEPP) or in an order published by the Minister in the Government Gazette.
The proposal is defined as a major project in SEPP (Major Projects) 2005. A project approval under section 75J of the EP&A Act is being sought for the proposed quarry extension.
Under section 75R of the EP&A Act, environmental planning instruments other than State Environmental Planning Policies (SEPPs) do not apply to ‘Major Projects’. A discussion of the SEPPs applicable to the project is provided in Section 3.1.2.
3.1.2 State Environmental Planning Polices
State Environmental Planning Policy (Major Projects) 2005
State Environmental Planning Policy (Major Projects) 2005 identifies development to which the development assessment and approval process of Part 3A of the EP&A Act applies. The Policy establishes the Minister for Planning as the consent authority for any development classified as a ‘major project’.
Clause 6(1) of the SEPP (Major Projects) identifies projects under Part 3A as development that, in the opinion of the Minister for Planning, is development of a kind listed in either Schedule 1, 2, 3 or 5 of the Policy.
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT AUSTRALIA 0038419EA/FINAL/20 JUNE 2007 17 Schedule 1 of the policy includes development for the purposes of extractive industry that:
‘(a) extracts more than 200 000 tonnes of extractive materials per year, or
(b) extracts from a total resource (the subject of the development application) of more than 5 million tonnes, or
(c) extracts from an environmentally sensitive area of State significance.’
The proposed extension of Ardglen Quarry will enable up to 500 000 tonnes of material to continue to be extracted per year. Consequently, as confirmed in a letter from the DoP (refer to Annex B), the Minister for Planning has formed the opinion that the proposal is a project to which Part 3A of the EP&A Act applies and the Minister will be the consent authority for the project application.
State Environmental Planning Policy No 11 – Traffic Generating Developments
State Environmental Planning Policy No. 11 – Traffic Generating Developments (SEPP 11) aims to ensure that the Roads and Traffic Authority (RTA) is made aware of applications for developments likely to generate significant traffic impacts, and to provide the RTA with an opportunity to make representations in respect of such developments.
Traffic generating developments are identified in Schedules 1 and 2 of SEPP 11 and include extractive industries. The proposal is therefore classified as a traffic generating development and the project application will therefore need to be referred to the RTA.
A detailed traffic impact assessment has been undertaken for the project. The findings and conclusions of this assessment are summarised in Chapter 8.
State Environmental Planning Policy No 33 – Hazardous and Offensive Development
State Environmental Planning Policy No. 33 - Hazardous and Offensive Development (SEPP 33) provides definitions for ‘hazardous industry’, ‘hazardous storage establishment’, ‘offensive industry’ and ‘offensive storage establishment’. The new definitions enable decisions to approve or refuse a development to be based on the merit of the proposal. The approval authority must carefully consider the specifics of the case, the location and the way in which the proposed activity is to be carried out. This policy also requires specified matters to be considered for proposals that are ‘potentially hazardous’ or ‘potentially offensive’ as defined in the policy.
The objective of this section is to establish whether the proposed development would fit within the definition of ‘potentially offensive industry’ and hence, come under the provisions of the policy. A proposal cannot be considered to
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT AUSTRALIA 0038419EA/FINAL/20 JUNE 2007 18 be an offensive industry unless it is first identified as a potentially offensive industry. Under SEPP 33, potentially offensive industry is defined as follows:
“potentially offensive industry means a development for the purposes of an industry which, if the development were to operate without employing any measures (including, for example, isolation from existing or likely future development on other land) to reduce or minimise its impact in the locality or on the existing or likely future development on other land, would emit a polluting discharge (including for example, noise) in a manner which would have a significant adverse impact in the locality or on the existing or likely future development on other land, and includes an offensive industry and an offensive storage establishment.”
SEPP 33 also ensures that appropriate measures are taken to reduce the impact of the development on the environment. All reasonable and feasible mitigation measures will be employed on site and activities and emissions will be within DECC licensing requirements. SEPP 33 states that in most cases compliance with the DECC requirements should be sufficient to demonstrate that the proposal is not an offensive industry.
Another prescription of SEPP 33 is to ensure that the Minister, through DoP as the approval authority, is provided with sufficient information to assess whether the development is hazardous or offensive. The information provided throughout this EA satisfies these requirements and demonstrates that the proposal is not a potentially offensive industry.
3.1.3 Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997
An environment protection licence (No. 1115) under the Protection of the Environment Operations Act (PoEO Act) is held for Ardglen Quarry which relates to “Crushing, Grinding or Separating Works” and “Extractive Industries”. This licence will require modification to include the extension area.
Section 75V(1)(e) of the EP&A Act specifies that an environment protection licence under the PoEO Act cannot be refused if it is necessary for the carrying out of an approved project under Part 3A of the EP&A Act, and the licence must be substantially consistent with the development consent.
3.1.4 Murrurundi Local Environmental Plan 1993
Under the Murrurundi Local Environmental Plan 1993 (LEP 1993), the site is zoned 1(a) Rural. Extractive industries are permissible in the 1(a) Rural zone with consent. The objectives of this zone, as set out in clause 9(3) of LEP 1993, are as follows:
(a) ‘to encourage the productive and efficient use of land for agricultural purposes,
(b) to control subdivision of land having regard to the efficient use of land for the purposes of agriculture,
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT AUSTRALIA 0038419EA/FINAL/20 JUNE 2007 19 (c) to ensure that the type and intensity of development is appropriate, having regard to the characteristics of the land, the rural environment and the cost of providing services and amenities, and
(d) to protect, conserve and enhance the natural and scenic resources of the Shire.’
The proposed quarry extension is not inconsistent with these objectives.
The quarry site is not prime agricultural land. The proposed extension area is classified as Class 4 land under the Agricultural Land Classification System developed by NSW Agriculture. Class 4 land is described as land suitable for grazing but not cultivation, where overall production is low due to major environmental constraints. Under the Land Capability Classification System, the proposed extension area is Class VI land, which is land restricted by a wide range of physical limitations and suited to grazing only.
3.2 COMMONWEALTH LEGISLATION
3.2.1 Environment Protection and Biodiversity Act 1999
The Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (EPBC Act) requires the approval of the Commonwealth Minister for the Environment for actions that may have a significant impact on matters of National environmental significance. Matters of National environmental significance under the Act include the following:
World Heritage Areas;
National heritage places;
Ramsar wetlands of international importance;
threatened species or ecological communities listed in the EPBC Act;
migratory species listed in the EPBC Act;
Commonwealth marine environment; and
nuclear actions.
There are no World Heritage Areas, National heritage places, Ramsar wetlands, Commonwealth marine areas on or near the site. The proposal does not involve a nuclear action.
Several flora and fauna species listed as threatened in the EPBC Act have a moderate to high likelihood of occurring within the site. Six species listed in the migratory provisions of the EPBC Act have the potential to transit the locality. None of these threatened or migratory species were recorded during
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT AUSTRALIA 0038419EA/FINAL/20 JUNE 2007 20 ecological surveys. The proposal is not expected to have a significant impact upon the heath and viability of any of these species.
The white box-yellow box-Blakely’s red gum grassy woodland and derived native grassland is listed as critically endangered under the EPBC Act. The proposal will require the removal of approximately 17.8 hectares of this critically endangered ecological community. Locally, this may have a significant impact but, on a regional scale, provided appropriate mitigation measures are implemented, the impacts are not likely to be significant. The matter will, however, be referred to the Department of Environment and Heritage to determine whether approval from the Minister for the Environment is required.
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT AUSTRALIA 0038419EA/FINAL/20 JUNE 2007 21 4 STAKEHOLDER CONSULTATION
Chapter Four describes the consultation undertaken with key stakeholders to identify relevant issues associated with the proposed future use of the site.
4.1 CONSULTATION WITH GOVERNMENT AUTHORITIES
4.1.1 General
Throughout the EA process, regular consultation with State government agencies and Liverpool Plains Sire Council, both formally and informally, has aided in refining the proposal and developing the assessment methodology.
Consultation has included:
initial briefing meetings regarding the project and proposed environmental assessment methodology;
a Planning Focus Meeting with all key agencies, which included an inspection of the project application area; and
informal consultation with various government agencies to discuss assessment methodology and key findings.
4.1.2 Planning Focus Meeting
A Planning Focus Meeting was held at the Ardglen Quarry on 28 June, 2006. The Planning Focus Meeting is an essential component of the EA process, facilitating information exchange between relevant government agencies and the proponent relating to the details of the project and potential issues relevant to each agency.
A preliminary assessment report was prepared and distributed to all participants prior to the meeting. The report provided an overview of the proposal, a summary of the relevant statutory provisions and likely environmental issues associated with the project.
Representatives from the following agencies attended the meeting:
Department of Planning;
Department of Natural Resources;
Department of Environment and Conservation;
Roads and Traffic Authority;
Department of Primary Industries (DPI); and
Liverpool Plains Shire Council.
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT AUSTRALIA 0038419EA/FINAL/20 JUNE 2007 23 The Director General’s requirements for the preparation of this EA were developed from the issues raised at the Planning Focus Meeting and subsequent agency consultation. A summary of key issues raised in the Director General’s requirements, as well as the relevant section of the EA where they are addressed, is provided in Table 4.1
Table 4.1 Director General’s Requirements
Key Issue Relevant Section in EA General Requirements The Environmental Assessment should include: an executive summary; Executive Summary a detailed project description including need for the project; alternatives considered; and various components and stages of the Chapter 2 project; consideration of any relevant statutory provisions; Chapter 3 A general overview of all the environmental impacts of the project and identification of the key issues for further assessment, taking into Throughout consideration the issues raised during consultation; an assessment of the key issues specified below and other significant issues identified in the general overview of environmental impacts Chapters 5 – 12 (see above), which includes: a description of the existing environment; an assessment of the potential impacts of the project; a description of the measures that would be implemented to avoid, minimise, offset, manage, and/or monitor the impacts of the project; Chapter 13 a draft Statement of Commitments, outlining environmental management, mitigation and monitoring measures; Chapter 13 a conclusion justifying the project, taking into consideration the Chapter 14 environmental impacts of the proposal, the suitability of the site, and the benefits of the project; and a signed statement from the author of the Environmental Assessment certifying that the information contained in the report is neither false nor misleading.
Surface and Groundwater a site water balance; Chapter 9 a description of the proposed water management system, including any sediment/water supply dams; and a contingency strategy setting out the measures that would be implemented to protect the water supply (quality and quantity) of surrounding landowners and the environment.
Flora and Fauna impacts on critical habitats (including riparian habitat), threatened Chapter 5 and species, populations, ecological communities and native vegetation; Annex D and details of any vegetation offsets to ensure that there would be no net loss of flora and fauna values in the area in the medium to long term.
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT AUSTRALIA 0038419EA/FINAL/20 JUNE 2007 24 Key Issue Relevant Section in EA Rehabilitation a description of how the site would be progressively rehabilitated Chapter 12 and integrated into the surrounding landscape; justification for the proposed final land form and use in relation to any strategic land use objectives; and a description of final void management and ongoing management of the site following cessation of quarrying activities.
Noise operational and off-site road and rail noise impacts Chapter 6 and Annex E
Blasting and Vibration Chapter 6 and Annex E
Air Quality Chapter 7 and Annex F
Heritage both Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal. Chapter 10 and Annex H
Traffic and Transport an assessment of the capacity and safety of the proposed transport Chapter 8 and route; and Annex G traffic volumes.
Visual Chapter 12
Social and Economic Chapter 11
4.2 CONSULTATION WITH LOCAL COMMUNITY
Daracon has undertaken extensive communications with the local community in Ardglen (refer to Figure 4.1 that shows the extent of consultation).
Given that the community is quite small, this consultation process has involved personal visits and discussions with community members to obtain a broad perspective of view and an understanding of how the quarry operation interacts with this community. These communications have been undertaken by Daracon site representatives and Senior and Executive Management.
Feedback from the community has been largely positive for the quarry operation itself and there have generally been no concerns over the prospective extension of the extraction area into Lot 218. The primary concerns raised relate to potential transport impacts that may eventuate from road vehicles. The community has given positive feedback for the utilisation of rail transport.
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT AUSTRALIA 0038419EA/FINAL/20 JUNE 2007 25 Jobs/2005 /00 38321/Revised EAR -F g4.1Landowners Consulted .cdr 04 05 200 7 JD Environmental Resources Management Australia Pty Ltd 70027 70026 70022
70059 70059 70022 70027 70026
70027 70059 70042 70027 70022 70042
70042 70028 70028 70028 70027 70042 70028 70028 70042 70028 70028 70062 70068 70062 71423 70070 70033 70042 71423 71422 70028 70042 71423 70028 70080 70028 70028 70064 70028 70042 70075 70028 70078 70028 70028
70028 70028 70028 70034 70032 70039 70039 70028 70034
70028 70042 70035 70035 70035 70028 70028 70039 70028 70028 70036 70035 70028 70028 70035 70035
70028 70028 70028 70029 70035 70035 70036 70028
70028 70036 70036
70036
70028
70036
70036
Reference No. Landholders 70022 - Rossgole Pastoral Company Legend 70025 - MsMGRichardson 70026 - Mr D N Dutton Project Application Area 70027 - Mr J J Thompson & Ms L D Johnson 70028 - Mr A W Harris Landholders Consulted 70029 - Hammond Springs Pty Ltd 70032 - Mrs L A Rose 70036 Landholders Reference 70033 - Mr R W Hancock 70034 - MrG&MsDRoss Nearest Residences 70035 - Mrs M M Burraston 70036 - MrDJBurraston Daracon Owned 70039 - Buttai Gravel Pty Ltd 70042 - Hunter Industrial Rental Equipment ATS S Mingay Family Trust 70058 - Miss J L Fryer 70059 - MrDJBates 70062 - Mr R K Best & Ms T M Hall 70064 - Ms P Purtell 70065 - MrGWShipman 70067 - Mr S Thompson & Mrs S L Latter-Thompson 70068 - MrDJBates 70069 - Mr D J Bates 70070 - County Property Holdings Pty Ltd 70075 - Mr P A Bojba 70076 - Ms C M Thompson 70078 - Mr P R & Mrs B Ross 70079 - Mr E F Taylor 70080 - The Trustees Ardglen Hall 70081 - Mr P A Bojba 70082 - Mr P Colbert 71422 - Mrs N Wamsley 71423 - Mr R C Hall Source: Liverpool Plains Shire Council
Figure 4.1 Geographical Extent of Landholders Consulted
0 400m Daracon Engineering - Ardglen Quarry NSW A community newsletter has been circulated to affected landowners during the preparation of the EA, providing an outline of the project, approvals process and environmental assessment methodology. A copy of the newsletter is provided in Annex C.
4.2.1 Key Community Issues
Issues raised by the local community related to local amenity and quality of life in the locality.
One community member expressed particular concern over despatch times and the impacts of blasting upon the dwelling. The blast in question was addressed by liaison with the local Department of Mineral Resources Inspectorate and the community member. The transport issue has been addressed by a review of transport operations and some modifications to procedures to improve the amenity for the local environment initiated. Persons at a second dwelling expressed general concerns about the extension and the possible impacts of dust and transport that may eventuate. They have been advised of the investigation and assessment process into impacts. They have been reassured that the process specifically addresses their concerns.
The local community members have been advised that, should they have any concerns, they should raise them either directly with the quarry site Manager representative Mr Duncan, the Quarries Manager Mr Bowen, or the Daracon Managing Director Mr Mingay and they were provided with contact details. These persons received communications over the ensuing period verifying the community consultation process has been effective.
During recent times, feedback relates to road transport and air quality impacts.
4.3 ABORIGINAL COMMUNITY CONSULTATION
The following organisations were contacted in accordance with the Department of Environment and Conservation (DECC) Interim Community Consultation Requirements:
Nungaroo Local Aboriginal Land Council (NLALC);
Liverpool Plains Shire Council;
DECC;
Native Title Services; and
the Office of the Registrar of Aboriginal Owners.
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT AUSTRALIA 0038419EA/FINAL/20 JUNE 2007 26 As a result of discussions with DECC Northern Directorate, ERM were advised that the registered Aboriginal groups for the Hunter Valley should be contacted to determine whether they would like to be involved in the project. Subsequent advice from DECC, was that the Ardglen area is actually in the Western Directorate and that the NLALC were the only group that ERM were required to contact.
The groups listed in Table 4.2 (including a number of groups from the Hunter Valley) expressed an interest in being consulted in relation to all aspects of the project. All groups were provided with a survey methodology and further information regarding the proposed extension. No objections were raised regarding the proposed survey methodology. Representatives from NLALC participated in the field survey.
Table 4.2 Aboriginal Groups Consulted
Group Name Representative Nungaroo Local Aboriginal Land Council Sandra Allen Aboriginal Native Title Consultants John and Margaret Matthews Wonnarua Nation Aboriginal Corporation Robert Lester Wattaka Wonnarua Cultural C. Service Des Hickey Upper Hunter Heritage Consultants Melissa Newman Giwiirr Consultants Pty Ltd Rodney Matthews Hunter Valley Cultural Consultants Christine Matthews Wonnarua Culture Heritage Gordon Griffiths
In August 2006, each of the interested parties was provided with a copy of the draft Cultural Heritage Assessment report and invited to comment. No comments were received from these groups by the given due date. In November 2006, groups were again contacted by phone and invited to provide comment, either verbally or in writing. However, at the time of finalising the Cultural Heritage Report, no comments had been received.
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT AUSTRALIA 0038419EA/FINAL/20 JUNE 2007 27 5 FLORA AND FAUNA
Detailed flora and fauna investigations within the proposed extension area have assessed the impacts of the proposal on threatened species and ecological communities listed under State and Commonwealth legislation. A copy of the flora and fauna assessment report is provided in Annex D and a summary of the key findings of the investigations is provided in this chapter.
5.1 SURVEY RESULTS
5.1.1 Vegetation Communities
The proposed extension area supports a single vegetation community, white box-yellow box-Blakely’s red gum woodland (hereafter referred to as box- gum woodland). This is listed as an endangered ecological community (EEC) under the Threatened Species Conservation Act 1995 (TSC Act) and occupies the entire extension area (approximately 17.8 hectares). The woodland is also representative of white box-yellow box-Blakely’s red gum grassy woodland and derived native grassland (known informally as box-gum grassy woodland and derived grassland), which is listed as an EEC under the EPBC Act.
5.1.2 Threatened Flora
Despite targeted searches, no threatened plants were identified.
5.1.3 Fauna Habitat
The scattered sections of woodland occurring throughout the study area may provide a seasonal foraging resource for nectivorous birds and mammals, as well as suitable feeding/foraging resources for leaf eating fauna, such as the common brushtail possum and insectivorous birds such as treecreepers.
Limited areas of moderately dense Cassinia shrub layers, may provide habitat for small birds such as fairy wrens. The dense groundcover of grasses and herbs provide stem and seed resources for granivorous and herbivorous species, whilst logs may provide shelter for small ground-dwelling mammals and reptiles. Water bird or amphibian habitat is limited to those species not dependent on permanent water.
A limited number of mature eucalypts provide hollows suitable for shelter and breeding habitat for birds and arboreal mammals. The open woodland also provides a foraging habitat for macropods.
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT AUSTRALIA 0038419EA/FINAL/20 JUNE 2007 28 5.1.4 Fauna
Eight bird species common to the woodland environment were observed during the survey period, including Cacatua galerita (sulphur crested cockatoo), Eolophus roseicapillus (galah), Vanellus miles (masked lapwing), Rhipidura leucophrys (willie wagtail), Rhipidura fuliginosa (grey fantail), Dacelo novaeguineae (laughing kookaburra), Gymnorhina tibicen (magpie) and Platycercus eximius (eastern rosella).
No microchiropteran bats were recorded. No nocturnal fauna were observed during the spotlighting. No reptiles were recorded during the survey.
Crinia signifera (common eastern froglet) was heard calling at dusk. Macropus giganteus (eastern grey kangaroo) and Wallabia bicolor (swamp wallaby) were observed.
5.1.5 Threatened Species
Schedules 1, 1A and 2 of the TSC Act list species, populations and ecological communities of native flora and fauna considered to be threatened in New South Wales. No threatened species or populations currently listed on the TSC Act, 1995 were recorded within the study area. However, the following species have the potential to occur in the study area, based on DECC and DEH databases:
Bothriochloa biloba (lobed bluegrass);
Dichanthium setosum (bluegrass);
Digitaria porrecta (finger panic grass);
Eucalyptus glaucina (slaty red gum);
Xanthomyza phrygia (regent honeyeater);
Polytelis swainsonii (superb parrot);
Neophema pulchella (turquoise parrot);
Geophaps scripta (squatter pigeon);
Nyctophilus timoriensis (greater long-eared bat);
Anomalopus mackayi (five clawed worm skink); and,
Hoplocephalus bitorquatus (pale headed snake).
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT AUSTRALIA 0038419EA/FINAL/20 JUNE 2007 29 5.2 IMPACT ASSESSMENT
5.2.1 Vegetation Clearing and Habitat Loss
The proposed quarry extension will clear approximately 17.8 hectares of box- gum woodland EEC. Whilst the quarry will contribute to the incremental loss of this habitat within the locality, the study area is adjacent to a much larger area of superior quality habitat and the proposed clearing is unlikely to result in the significant loss of habitat on a local or regional scale.
With the proposed offset plan applied, the proposed development is unlikely to have a significant detrimental impact on local populations of threatened species or the box-gum woodland EEC.
5.2.2 Habitat Fragmentation and Corridors
The study area is not a corridor and is already fragmented from habitat to the east by the existing quarry. However, adjacent areas of box-gum woodland to the north and west and woodland to the south provide connectivity between the study area and adjacent areas of habitat. The proposed development will not result in the isolation of any habitat areas and will not significantly impact on the corridor function of the surrounding habitats.
5.2.3 Threatened Species
The project will remove potential foraging and roosting habitat associated with 17.8 hectares of box-gum woodland EEC. However, the proposed development is unlikely to have a significant detrimental impact on local populations of threatened species or the EEC.
5.2.4 Commonwealth Threatened and Migratory Species
The Commonwealth EPBC Act requires approval for actions that may have a significant impact on matters of National environmental significance or Commonwealth land. There are no World Heritage properties, National heritage places, Ramsar wetlands, Commonwealth marine areas or nuclear actions within or near the study area. One ecological community, five flora species and seven fauna species listed as threatened under the EPBC Act have the potential to occur in the locality and six species listed in the migratory provisions of the EPBC Act have the potential to transit the locality.
The proposal will result in the clearing of approximately 17.8 hectares of box gum woodland. More of this community will be retained and enchanced under the offset plan.
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT AUSTRALIA 0038419EA/FINAL/20 JUNE 2007 30 The long term impact of the proposed quarry extension will not be significant. However, the proposal will impact on the EEC within the extension area. The matter will therefore be referred to the Department of Environment and Heritage to determine whether approval from the Commonwealth Minister for the Environment is required.
5.3 MITIGATION MEASURES
Mitigation measures are outlined in the offset plan and will include the preparation of a detailed offset plan, to be prepared in liaison with the DECC and DoP that will detail specifics including the following:
staging;
planting details such as final density, species mix, sowing rates, fertiliser;
maintenance schedule;
weed control;
importation of rock and log shelter;
topsoil handling;
fencing;
pre-clearing surveys of all hollow bearing trees within the proposed quarry extension area;
herbivore control; and
number and location of nest boxes.
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT AUSTRALIA 0038419EA/FINAL/20 JUNE 2007 31 6 NOISE
A detailed noise and vibration assessment is included in Annex E. This chapter summarises the key elements of the assessment, which was prepared in accordance with the DECC’s Industrial Noise Policy (INP) 2000. Using the Environmental Noise Model (ENM), which is a widely accepted and reliable method of predicting noise levels from industrial sources, noise emissions are predicted at the nearest affected residences.
6.1 EXISTING NOISE ENVIRONMENT
The existing noise environment is influenced by road traffic from the New England Highway, rail traffic from the Main Northern Railway and the existing quarry.
Ten residential properties were identified to be nearest affected residential receivers affected by the proposed quarry extension. The location of these receivers is shown in Figure 6.1.
Figure 6.1 shows the locations of the attended noise measurement locations and they are summarised in Table 6.1.
Table 6.1 Summary of Existing Site Noise as Determined from Attended Measurements
Location MGA Time Duration Total Measured Site Notes Coordinates (min) Noise Levels, Contribution dB(A) dB(A)
Leq L90 A 290108 6486407 14:25 5 62 59 59 - B 289889 6486258 14:42 15 68 59 67 - C 289463 6485816 15:44 6 42 39 <39 Quarry noise inaudible
Summaries of unattended continuous monitoring data are presented in Table 6.2.
Table 6.2 Summary of Background and Ambient Noise Levels
Rating Background Level, Ambient Noise Level, Location dB(A) dB(A)Leq,period Day1 Evening1 Night1 Day1 Evening1 Night1 6. North of Quarry 36 35 28 58 54 54 2. East of Quarry 34 38 51 50 58 58 1. Day is from 7am to 6pm; Evening is from 6pm to 10pm; and Night is from 10pm to 7am. 2. Noise data during periods of any rainfall and/or wind speeds above 8m/s were discarded. This is based on AS1170 wind speed data height corrections.
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT AUSTRALIA 0038419EA/FINAL/20 JUNE 2007 32
730
750
720 740
760
40
710
35 45
HIGHWAY
40 45 eq Haul Road Noise Contour L 15mins dB(A) Attended Noise Monitoring Location Receiver Location Project Application Area 50 Boundary of Proposed Extension Area
5 A
630 35
Legend 710
RAILWAY 630 640
ARDGLEN ENGLAND 620
620 700
NEW 3 4 Existing Extraction, Processing and Rail Loading (untreated) Daracon Engineering - Ardglen Quarry, NSW A 10 Figure 6.1 Lot 49
NORTHERN DP 751028
5 55
9
2
620 630
MAIN 55 B Lot 39 8 DP 751028 6 7
1 C
55
50
Lot 1 40
45
45
40 DP 1001734 50
35 35 Lot 218
DP 751028 690 Lot 187
700
730 200m
DP 751028
740
750
710
760 760 720
0 660 Co-ordinates in MGA 56 Datum Jobs/2005/0038419/EA- Fg6.1.cdr 18 06 2007 JD Environmental Resources Management Australia Pty Ltd 6.2 OPERATIONAL NOISE CRITERIA
6.2.1 General Criteria
The intrusiveness criterion requires that noise from a newly introduced source during the day, evening and night does not exceed the existing Rating Background Levels (RBL) by more than 5dB over a 15 minute period.
Using the monitoring data and conservatively estimating existing background levels, the intrusiveness criteria derived for the proposed extension of the quarry are shown in Table 6.3.
Table 6.3 Intrusiveness Criteria for Receiver Locations
Location Leq,15min Intrusiveness Noise Goals, dB(A) Receiver Day Evening Night 1 35 35 35 2 35 35 35 3 40 40 35 4 40 40 35 5 35 35 35 6 40 40 35 7 40 40 35 8 40 40 35 9 40 40 35 10 40 40 35 1. Day is from 7am to 6pm; Evening is from 6pm to 10pm; and Night is from 10pm to 7am (INP).
For receivers 1, 2 and 5, the noise level of 30dB(A) was deemed to the background noise without site influence. This is due to the lack of any other noise source in the vicinity of these receivers and the noise environment being typically rural.
For receivers 3, 4 and 6 to 10, the predominant noise source in the area other than the existing Ardglen Quarry is traffic on the New England Highway. The day and evening traffic noise contribution to these receivers was calculated using the United Kingdom 1988 Calculation for Road Traffic Noise (CORTN). The noise level for receivers 3, 4, 6 and 7 were 50dB(A), 47dB(A), 42dB(A) and 42dB(A), respectively. On this basis the existing representative background noise levels of 35dB(A) was adopted as the likely minimum for any of locations 3, 4 and 6 to 10. Hence, the criteria were determined to be Leq,15min 40dB(A).
The EPA’s amenity criterion requires industrial noise to be within an acceptable level for the particular locality and land use. Where ambient noise is already high, the acoustic environment should not be deteriorated significantly.
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT AUSTRALIA 0038419EA/FINAL/20 JUNE 2007 33 Private residences potentially affected by the proposal are covered by the EPA’s rural amenity categories. The EPA’s definition for a rural area is:
“an acoustical environment that is dominated by natural sounds, having little or no road traffic”.
Base amenity criteria for this category are given in Table 6.4.
Table 6.4 EPA Base Amenity Criteria
Location Indicative Area Time Recommended Leq period Noise Level dB(A) Acceptable Maximum Residential Rural Day 50 55 Evening 45 50 Night 40 45 Suburban Day 55 60 Evening 45 50 Night 40 45
6.2.2 Project Specific Noise Goals
Project specific noise goals are presented in Table 6.5. The more stringent intrusiveness goals are the criteria that are used.
Table 6.5 Project Specific Noise Limits
Location Leq,15minute Noise Level Criteria, dB(A) Residence Day Evening Night 1 35 35 35 2 35 35 35 3 40 40 35 4 40 40 35 5 35 35 35 6 40 40 35 7 40 40 35 8 40 40 35 9 40 40 35 10 40 40 35
6.2.3 Cumulative Noise
The cumulative impact of more than one development can be compared against the base amenity criteria listed above (refer Table 6.4). This is consistent with the INP’s holistic approach to industrial noise. However, no other industries are located near Ardglen Quarry for cumulative noise to be a concern.
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT AUSTRALIA 0038419EA/FINAL/20 JUNE 2007 34 6.2.4 Road Traffic Noise
The NSW DECC Environmental Criteria for Road Traffic Noise (ECRTN) recommends external and internal traffic noise goals.
Where a local authority identifies a principal haulage route, such as Swinging Bridges Road on the basis of Ardglen Quarry’s operations and ERM’s observations, the policy suggests that the traffic noise criteria for the route match those for collector roads. For collector roads the ECRTN recommends the following criteria:
daytime: Leq,1hr60dB(A); and
night time: Leq,1hr55dB(A).
For traffic noise assessment the ECRTN defines daytime and night time hours as 7am to 10pm and 10pm to 7am respectively.
6.2.5 Sleep Disturbance
While the EPA’s INP does not specify a criterion for assessing sleep disturbance, its Environmental Noise Control Manual (EPA, 1994) recommends that L1,1minute noise from a source should not exceed the existing background noise by more than 15 dB. Depending on the measured background noise, the sleep disturbance criteria for the quietest location could be as low as 45 dB(A)L1. This conservative sleep disturbance criterion was adopted.
6.2.6 Blasting
Recommended criteria for the assessment of noise and vibration from blasting are provided by the Australian and New Zealand Environment and Conservation Council’s Technical Basis for Guidelines to Minimise Annoyance due to Blasting Overpressure and Ground Vibration (ANZECC, 1990).
The ANZECC guidelines specify that air-blast overpressure should not exceed 115 dB(Lpeak) for more than 5% of the total number of blasts over a period of 12 months. However, the maximum level should not exceed 120 dB(Lpeak) at any time. The dB(Lpeak) unit of sound measurement considers the low frequency sounds which are not audible to the human ear but can be ‘felt’.
The ANZECC guidelines specify that the peak particle velocity from ground vibration should not exceed 5 mm/s for more than 5% of the total number of blasts over a period of 12 months. However, the maximum level should not exceed 10 mm/s at any time. The ANZECC guidelines also recommend that a level of 2 mm/s be considered as the long-term regulatory goal for the control of ground vibration.
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT AUSTRALIA 0038419EA/FINAL/20 JUNE 2007 35 The ANZECC guidelines state that blasting should generally be limited to the hours from 9am to 5pm, Monday to Saturday, and should not take place on Sundays or public holidays. The ANZECC guidelines recognise that under some circumstances, blasting cannot always be restricted to general working hours and achieve compliance within blast level limits. This may be due to prevailing winds being less favourable during these periods.
6.3 PREDICTED NOISE LEVELS
Three different scenarios were modelled. Two worst-case scenarios, that is overburden stripping (Scenario A) and extraction (Scenario B), as well as the existing situation (Scenario 0).
6.3.1 Scenario 0 – Existing Situation
The modelling results for Scenario 0 are presented in Table 6.6 and Figure 6.1. Note that discrepancies exist between plotted contours and tabled results are due to the greater accuracy of the ENM model in producing the single point calculations reported in tables.
Table 6.6 Noise Modelling Summary – Scenario 0
Operations without Rail Operations with Rail Location Loading, dB(A) Loading, dB(A)
Receiver Untreated Treated Untreated Treated 1 32 27 33 28 2 68 63 70 65 3 48 43 51 46 4 56 51 58 53 5 53 48 57 52 6 45 40 47 42 7 38 33 40 35 8 41 36 48 43 9 42 37 47 42 10 48 43 53 48
6.3.2 Scenario A – Overburden Stripping
The modelling results for Scenario A are presented in Table 6.7 where cumulative predictions include existing and proposed emissions. The stipulated criteria is exceeded at Receivers 2 to 10 by varying degrees. Without rail loading, Receivers 1 to 5 and 10 have either no or marginal increase to their existing noise levels. Receivers 6 and 7 have a 7 dB(A) and a 17dB(A) increase respectively due to the close proximity of the overburden stripping fleet to these residences despite there being no direct line of sight. The existing noise levels are slightly exacerbated during rail loading for Receiver 6 as there is a direct line of sight to the rail loader.
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT AUSTRALIA 0038419EA/FINAL/20 JUNE 2007 36 Table 6.7 Noise Modelling Summary – Scenario A
Without Rail Loading, Project Specific Location With Rail Loading, dB(A) dB(A) Criterion, dB(A) 7.00am 6.00pm Overburden Overburden Receiver Cumulative Cumulative to to stripping stripping only 6.00pm 7.00am 1 23 29 25 29 35 35 2 47 63 62 65 35 35 3 36 44 43 46 40 35 4 42 51 51 54 40 35 5 41 49 50 52 35 35 6 47 47 47 48 40 35 7 49 50 49 50 40 35 8 46 46 47 48 40 35 9 41 42 43 44 40 35 10 40 45 48 49 40 35 1. The period 7.00am to 6.00pm adopts the Day INP criterion while the period 6.00am to 7.00am adopts the Night INP criterion.
6.3.3 Scenario B – Extraction
The modelling results for Scenario B are presented in Table 6.8 and Figure 6.2 Due to the depth of the shelf where extraction takes place, there is a marginal increase of up to 3dB(A) of existing noise levels at Receivers 1 to 5 with and without rail loading. Receivers 6 to 10 experience a 4 dB(A) to 10dB(A) noise level increase respectively.
Table 6.8 Noise Modelling Summary – Scenario B
Without Rail Loading, Operations with Rail Loading, Project Specific Location dB(A) dB(A) Criterion, dB(A) Proposed 7.00am 6.00pm Proposed Receiver Extraction Cumulative Cumulative to to Extraction only only 6.00pm 7.00am 1 25 29 27 30 35 35 2 49 63 62 65 35 35 3 38 45 44 47 40 35 4 44 52 51 54 40 35 5 46 50 51 53 35 35 6 44 45 45 46 40 35 7 39 40 40 41 40 35 8 46 46 48 48 40 35 9 44 45 45 46 40 35 10 45 47 49 50 40 35 1. The period 7.00am to 6.00pm adopts the Day INP criterion while the period 6.00am to 7.00am adopts the Night INP criterion. Due to lower background noise during the evening and night periods, rail loading noise may be intermittent. Hence, the INP modifying factor of 5 dB is added to the noise contribution of the rail loader discharge at the receivers to account for this noise. For a representative subset of residences, rail loading noise levels are presented below in Table 6.9 for evening or night-time rail loading.
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT AUSTRALIA 0038419EA/FINAL/20 JUNE 2007 37
730
750
720 740
760
40 710 PLANT Rail Loader Drill Rig Primary Crusher Secondary Crusher Tertiary Plant Front End Loader Front End Loader Road Truck Water Cart Road Truck Excavator Articulated Dump Truck Articulated Dump Truck Road Truck Rail Locomotive
HIGHWAY 35 1 3 2 4 5 6 7 11 20 14 12 13 15 19 21 ID eq Haul Road Noise Contour L 15mins dB(A) Equipment Location Receiver Location Project Application Area Boundary of Proposed Extension Area
1 5
35 630 Legend 45
710 45
630 640
ARDGLEN ENGLAND RAILWAY 620 620
50 o B - Proposed Extraction, 700
NEW
3 4 Scenari Processing and Rail Loading (treated) Daracon Engineering - Ardglen Quarry, NSW 55 10 Figure 6.2 Lot 49
NORTHERN 45 DP 751028 5
9
2
620 630 MAIN 21 20 19 Lot 39 2 1 4 8 DP 751028 6 3 6 5
45 7 40 14 1 7
13
11 55 50
Lot 1
15 40
DP 1001734
50
55
45 35
45
Lot 218 40 DP 751028
35 690 Lot 187
700
730 200m
DP 751028
740
750
710
760 760 720
0 660 Co-ordinates in MGA 56 Datum Jobs/2005/0038419/EA- Fg6.2.cdr 18 06 2007 JD Environmental Resources Management Australia Pty Ltd Table 6.9 Noise Modelling Summary –Night Rail Loading
Location Rail Loading, dB(A) Project Specific Criterion, dB(A)
6.00pm to 10.00pm 10.00 pm to 7.00 am Receiver Rail Loading Noise Contribution (evening) (night) 1 22 35 35 2 62 35 35 3 42 40 35 4 50 40 35 5 49 35 35 6 49 40 35 7 30 40 35
While the treatment measures substantially ameliorate the noise levels, the criterion is still exceeded at Receivers 2 to 6. It is important to note that the INP addresses ‘Existing Situations’ in Chapter 10 and states:
“Where existing noise emissions exceed the project-specific noise level, the regulatory authorities and the noise-source manager need to negotiate achievable noise limits for the site. The project –specific noise levels should not be applied as mandatory noise limits. …Achievable noise limits result from applying all feasible and reasonable noise control measures.”
6.3.4 Road Traffic Noise
Receivers 4 to 9 are adjacent to the truck route. For each residence, the assessment location is 1m from its worst-affected façade facing the road.
From ERM’s database of noise measurements, a truck pass-by typically creates a sound exposure level (SEL) of 75dB(A) at 20m. The haul trucks passing by are approximately 20m from the façade of the closest residence (Receiver 6) and calculations were performed under a hypothetical worst case scenario of there being 5 truck movements within a 1 hour period. The noise level was calculated to be Leq,1hr46dB(A). This complies with both the day criteria of Leq,1hr60dB(A) and the night criteria of Leq,1hr55dB(A. Hence, road traffic noise due to Ardglen quarry is not expected to create an adverse noise impact at any receivers. In any event, there is no proposed increase in truck haulage.
6.3.5 Sleep Disturbance
Only the rail loading facility will operate at night and only occasionally. Maximum noise levels were calculated under calm conditions for each location during the night period. Table 6.10 shows calculated maximum noise levels for a representative subset of receivers. The criteria used to assess sleep disturbance are based on the EPA’s background plus 15 dB for the L1,1min
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT AUSTRALIA 0038419EA/FINAL/20 JUNE 2007 38 noise level (which in this case is conservatively approximated by the maximum noise level (Lmax)).
Table 6.10 demonstrates that calculated noise levels under calm weather conditions exceed the EPA’s conservative sleep disturbance criterion at all the residences.
Scheduling of the trains to avoid night-time loading is beyond Daracon’s control, however will not be a common occurrence. From 2001 to 2006, only 6 trains have been loaded over the night period and these events have occurred over two separate week-long periods.
Table 6.10 Sleep Disturbance Impact
Lmax Noise Level From Rail Location L1,1min Criteria, dB(A) Load-out, dB(A) Receiver Calm Weather
1 49 45 2 76 45 3 68 45 4 64 45 5 66 45 6 60 45 7 49 45
6.3.6 Blasting and Vibration
Blast overpressure and ground vibration levels were predicted based on minimum and maximum separation distances from potential blast holes to representative residences 1 to 7. A maximum instantaneous charge (MIC) of 50kg was used, which is typically used at Ardglen Quarry. The results are shown in Table 6.11 and Table 6.12.
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT AUSTRALIA 0038419EA/FINAL/20 JUNE 2007 39 Table 6.11 Overpressure Levels at Receivers
Location Overpressure, dB(lin) For Maximum For Minimum ANZECC 95% ANZECC Receiver Distance Distance limit Maximum limit 1 121 124 115 120 2 115 123 115 120 3 113 122 115 120 4 112 122 115 120 5 113 126 115 120 6 115 137 115 120 7 115 139 115 120 1. These results are derived from equations contained in the Drill and Blast Study, Mount Pleasant prepared by Blastronics Pty Limited for CNA in September 1994 2. Minimum separation distances correspond to maximum overpressure and vibration levels and vice versa.
Table 6.12 Ground Vibration Levels at Receivers
Location Ground Vibration, mm/s For Maximum For Minimum ANZECC 95% ANZECC Receiver Distance Distance limit Maximum limit 1 3 4 5 10 2 1 4 5 10 3 1 3 5 10 4 1 3 5 10 5 1 6 5 10 6 1 27 5 10 7 1 36 5 10 1. These results are derived from equations contained in the Drill and Blast Study, Mount Pleasant prepared by Blastronics Pty Limited for CNA in September 1994 2. Minimum separation distances correspond to maximum overpressure and vibration levels and vice versa.
The predictions show that exceedances of the criteria are likely at all the residences at the minimum separation distance for overpressure and at Receivers 6 and 7 for ground vibration.
Results of actual blast monitoring at the quarry, however, indicate much lower overpressure and ground vibration at receivers than predicted using empirical formulae. In addition, blast design and, hence, corresponding air blast overpressure and ground vibration is within the control of operators. The existing site blast management strategy will be used to ensure criteria are met. All blasting will continue to be monitored to optimise blast performance and minimise impacts.
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT AUSTRALIA 0038419EA/FINAL/20 JUNE 2007 40 6.4 MITIGATION MEASURES
Several noise mitigation measures are currently in place at Ardglen Quarry and will continue to be employed throughout the proposed extension. These measures are summarised as follows:
quarry hours are restricted to between 6am and 5.30pm;
blasting is carried out infrequently between 2pm and 4pm, Mondays to Fridays, with notification provided to the residents;
noise created by the haul trucks, both empty and loaded, is reduced by imposing a speed limit of 60km/h when travelling on local roads between the quarry and the highway. Trucks on site are limited to a speed of 25km/h; and
all on-site, fixed and mobile diesel powered plant, excluding road vehicles, are fitted and maintained to manufacturer’s specifications. Particular attention is given to engine exhaust systems and the care and maintenance of mufflers.
Further noise control is nominated through the implementation of the following measures:
reduction of equipment through the separation of site activities to overburden stripping and extraction, whereby they do not occur simultaneously;
rail loading will be limited to the day period (7am to 6pm) as much as practicable;
the surge bin will be lined with latex or polymer liners to reduce impulsive noise;
a sheet metal enclosure will be built around the rail loader discharge and extended to include the rail wagon being loaded. The enclosure will be constructed of sheet metal and will cover the length of a minimum of three wagons, whereby the wagon being loaded will be in the centre of the enclosure. The enclosure will be open at the ends and will contain a roof which will be connected to the rail loader discharge. Gaps between the loader discharge and the roof will be sealed;
purchase of the’ Quambi’ property (Receiver 2); and
the two scrapers initially assigned for overburden striping will be replaced by one excavator and two articulated dump trucks.
In addition, the following noise mitigation measures are proposed but have not been incorporated into the assessment:
fixed crushers and screens will be acoustically treated with cladding;
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT AUSTRALIA 0038419EA/FINAL/20 JUNE 2007 41 transportable crushers and screens will be relocated behind earth bunds; and
mobile acoustic barriers will surround the drill rig.
These various mitigation proposals represent the best feasible practices available. Notwithstanding, as technologies change, Daracon will continue to investigate new possibilities for noise reduction.
6.5 CONCLUSIONS
Noise modelling predicts that project specific noise goals would be exceeded at all receiver locations. Implementation of the noise mitigation measures outlined in Section 6.4 can be expected to reduce noise to, or below, existing noise levels at all receivers surrounding Ardglen Quarry.
Conservative calculations of road traffic noise associated with Ardglen Quarry found that levels complied with stipulated criteria at potentially affected residences.
Noise and vibration from blasting will be strictly managed to minimise any discomfort or annoyance experienced by local residents.
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT AUSTRALIA 0038419EA/FINAL/20 JUNE 2007 42 7 AIR QUALITY
A comprehensive air quality assessment has been undertaken in accordance with the Director General’s requirements and relevant DECC guidelines. The report is included in Annex F and is summarised as follows.
7.1 IMPACT ASSESSMENT CRITERIA AND METHODOLOGY
The air quality assessment is in accordance with the following applicable guidelines:
the DECC Approved Methods and Guidance For the Modelling and Assessment of Air Pollutants in New South Wales (2005); and
theNEPC National Environment Protection (Ambient Air Quality) Measure (as amended).
A Level 2 impact assessment, as described by DECC methodology, determined potential impacts from the proposed quarry extension to provide a realistic and comprehensive level of assessment based on site specific input data.
The DECC impact assessment criteria are published in their 2005 document. These criteria incorporate the National Environment Protection Measure (NEPM) goals and are the criteria against which the proposal will be assessed. It is important to note that the impact assessment criteria refer to cumulative emissions, not just the pollutants from the quarry. Therefore existing background levels must be combined with predicted impacts to allow for assessment of impacts against the criteria.
AUSPLUME Version 6.0 is the current DECC approved regulatory model for use in most applications in NSW. AUSPLUME has been used in this assessment as sensitive receptors are located within a short distance of the site. As such, near field impacts are the only impacts being considered in this assessment.
7.2 EXISTING AIR QUALITY
Discussion with the Sydney and Hunter Valley offices of the DECC have indicated that there is no continuous ambient air monitoring carried out in the Ardglen/Murrurundi regions by those departments. While the DECC Approved Methods for the Modelling and Assessment of Air Pollution in NSW, 2005, stipulate that contemporaneous hourly average meteorological and pollutant monitoring data are required for an assessment of cumulative air quality impacts. This approach was not possible given no continuous dust monitoring data is available for the project area. On that basis, the conventional approach to assess air quality impacts from the proposal is to
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT AUSTRALIA 0038419EA/FINAL/20 JUNE 2007 43 add the predicted incremental impact of the project to an average background level and to compare the result with the relevant air quality goal. This approach is referred to as a cumulative assessment.
In the absence of any monitoring data, the maximum monthly average reported from monitoring stations in Newcastle and the Hunter Valley has been used as a conservative estimate of annual background particulate levels
in the project area. The maximum annual average PM10 level reported in 2004 or 2005 is 22 µg/m3, from the suburban Newcastle monitoring station.
The NSW DECC was consulted in an effort to determine if background air
quality data for PM10 (24 hour average) was available in the area. DECC
indicated that they do not carry out monitoring for PM10 in this area and they were not aware of any monitoring carried out by other parties. Therefore,
assessment of PM10 (24 hour average) has been carried out using the approach that the 24 hour average predicted by the model (the increment) should not exceed 50 µg/m3 at the sensitive receptors modelled.
Assuming that 39 per cent of TSP is in the PM10 range the background level for TSP (annual emissions) used in the assessment is 56 µg/m3.
In terms of deposited dust, no monitoring has been carried out in the project area. A report compiled by the NSW Department of Planning in 2005, titled ‘Coal Mining Potential in the Upper Hunter Valley - Strategic Assessment’, included information on background dust levels in the area of a coal bulk sampling development located near Murrurundi. The report presented an annual average of 1.1 g/m2/month for the coal development site. In the absence of monitoring data, this value has been used as an estimate of deposited dust levels in the Ardglen area.
Therefore the background levels employed in this assessment are:
annual average TSP of 56 µg/m3 ;
3 annual average PM10 of 22 µg/m ;
3 annual average PM2.5 of 2.3 µg/m ; and
annual average dust deposition of 1.1 g/m2/month.
7.3 ESTIMATED EMISSIONS
Particulate emissions will arise from the following activities at the quarry:
stripping of overburden;
drilling and blasting of rock;
loading product to haul and road trucks;
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT AUSTRALIA 0038419EA/FINAL/20 JUNE 2007 44 dumping broken stone to the primary crusher;
crushing and screening;
dumping of product to stockpiles by front end loaders and conveyors;
wheel generated dust from road trucks, haul trucks and mobile equipment; and
wind generated dust from exposed areas and stockpiles.
Emissions have been estimated using published emission factors from the US EPA AP 42 document ‘Compilation of Air Pollutant Emission Factors’, and the Australian National Pollutant Inventory emission estimation technique manuals. Emission estimates have been based on a maximum annual output of 500 000 tonnes and a quarry operating schedule of six days per week (approximately 306 working days a year). Wind erosion has been modelled as occurring 24 hours a day, 365 days a year.
7.4 PREDICTED IMPACTS
Dispersion modelling results have been summarised in terms of the pollutant concentrations at the nominated sensitive receptors. Predicted pollutant concentrations at each receptor are presented in Table 7.1 and Table 7.2.
Table 7.1 Predicted ground level concentrations (24 hour Average) – Increment Only
Incremental Contribution from the proposed Quarry Development1
Receptor PM10 (µg/m3) 1 8.04 2 46.0 3 7.63 4 5.04 5 4.22 6 18.0 7 17.2
Criteria 50 µg/m3
1 Sufficient background data are unavailable to adequately assess the cumulative PM10 24
hour average impacts. Therefore a cumulative assessment of PM10 (24 hour average) was not undertaken, and the interim approach approved by the NSW DEC, of assessing against 50µg/m3 has been applied.
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT AUSTRALIA 0038419EA/FINAL/20 JUNE 2007 45 9.34 4g/m2/month 1.1 Background Cumulative Background 1 8.24 ) Deposited Dust ) Deposited 30µg/m3 2g/m2/month 10 Background Cumulative Increment 1 Background Cumulative Increment 1 indicate an exceedance of the nominated criteria indicate an exceedance bold Increment 3 0.8 56 4 0.4 56.8 0.6 56 22 5 0.3 56.4 0.3 22.6 56 0.56 22 1.1 6 1.9 56.3 1.66 0.3 22.3 56 0.28 22 1.1 7 1.6 57.9 1.38 1.4 22.3 56 0.21 22 1.1 57.6 1.31 1.2 23.4 1.30 22 1.1 2.40 23.2 1.13 1.1 2.23 1 0.6 56 2 7.3 56.6 0.4 56 22 63.3 4.7 22.4 0.19 22 1.1 1.29 26.7 Criteria 90µg/m3 90µg/m3 30µg/m3 Receptor Total Suspended Particulate Particulate Matter (PM 1 in proposed Quarry Development Incremental Contribution from the 2 Figures Table 7.2 Predicted ground level concentrations (Annual Average)
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT AUSTRALIA 0038419EA/FINAL/20 JUNE 2007 46 7.4.1 Predicted PM10 (24 hour) Impacts
Predicted incremental PM10 (24 hr average) ground level concentrations, shown in Figure 7.1 comply with DECC assessment criterion of 50µg/m3 at all nominated sensitive receptors.
Sufficient background data are unavailable to adequately assess the
cumulative PM10 24 hour average impacts. Therefore, a cumulative
assessment of PM10 (24 hour average) was not undertaken, and the interim approach approved by DECC of assessing against 50µg/m3 has been applied.
7.4.2 Predicted PM10 and TSP (Annual) Impacts
The predicted annual average ground level concentrations of PM10 (see Figure 7.2) comply with the DECC assessment criterion of 30 µg/m3 at nominated sensitive receptors.
The predicted (incremental and cumulative) ground level concentrations of TSP (annual average) (see Figure 7.3), comply with the DECC assessment criterion of 90µg/m3 at nominated sensitive receptors.
7.4.3 Predicted Dust Deposition Impacts
The predicted monthly average incremental deposition levels (see Figure 7.4) do not comply with the DECC assessment criterion of 2 g/m2/month of a maximum increase in deposited dust at Receptor 2 (residence located to the south-east of the quarry). Similarly, the predicted deposition levels (monthly average) for the cumulative operations do not comply with the NSW assessment criterion of 4 g/m2/month as a maximum total deposited dust level at Receptor 2. However, Daracon is currently in the process of purchasing this property.
Predicted deposition levels are in compliance with the criterion at all other nominated receptors.
7.5 DUST MITIGATION MEASURES
In addition to the dust mitigation measures currently employed at the site, the following will be implemented to ensure particulate matter emissions are minimised:
revegetation of exposed surfaces where possible;
sealing the haul road;
limiting the speed limit on unpaved surfaces to 15 km/hr;
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT AUSTRALIA 0038419EA/FINAL/20 JUNE 2007 47 high level watering of unpaved road surfaces (greater than 2l/m2/hr);
covering all loads leaving the site;
building a wheel wash at the end of the unpaved section of the haul road (after the weighbridge); and
wet suppression or chemical coating of static stockpiles.
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT AUSTRALIA 0038419EA/FINAL/20 JUNE 2007 48 Jobs/2005/0038419/Revised EAR/ A ir - Fg 7. 1.cdr 07 05 200 7 JD Environmental Resources Management Australia Pty Ltd
20 10 50
100
10 20 100 7
50 150 50 200
6
150 100 5 100
1 10
50 4 Legend
20 10 Project 2 Application Area 3
6 Receptor Locations Source: Neil Charters Pty Ltd 10183/1 28-5-04 Figure 7.1 Concentration Contours 0 100m PM10 (24 hour) µg/m³ Approximate Only Daracon Engineering - Ardglen Quarry, NSW Jobs/2005/0038419/Revised EAR/ A ir - Fg 7.2 .cdr 07 05 200 7 JD Environmental Resources Management Australia Pty Ltd
30 25 40
50 30 40
7 40 30 50 30 6 25
40 50
40 40 5 25
1 30 50 40 4 Legend
Project Application 2 Area 3
6 Receptor Locations Source: Neil Charters Pty Ltd 10183/1 28-5-04 Figure 7.2 Concentration Contours Cumulative 0 100m PM10 (Annual) µg/m³ Approximate Only Daracon Engineering - Ardglen Quarry, NSW Jobs/2005/0038419/Revised EAR/ A ir - Fg 7.3 .cdr 07 05 200 7 JD Environmental Resources Management Australia Pty Ltd
70
60 90
90 7 70 70
90 6 60 70
90 90 5
1 70
4
60 Legend
Project 2 Application Area 3
6 Receptor Locations Source: Neil Charters Pty Ltd 10183/1 28-5-04 Figure 7.3 Concentration Contours Cumulative 0 100m TSP (Annual) µg/m³ Approximate Only Daracon Engineering - Ardglen Quarry, NSW Jobs/2005/0038419/Revised EAR/ A ir - Fg 7.4 .cdr 30 05 200 7 JD Environmental Resources Management Australia Pty Ltd
2 5 10
5 15 5 1
1
5 2 7 2 10
15 5 6
5
1 5
2
5 1
15 1 4
2 Legend
10 Project 2 Application Area 3
6 Receptor Locations Source: Neil Charters Pty Ltd 10183/1 28-5-04 Figure 7.4 Concentration Contours Dust Deposition 0 100m grams/m2 /month Approximate Only Daracon Engineering - Ardglen Quarry, NSW 8 TRAFFIC AND TRANSPORT
Chapter Eight examines traffic and transport. A detailed traffic impact assessment undertaken by Better Transport Futures in September 2006 is summarised below and the assessment report is attached in full in Annex G.
8.1 EXISTING ROAD NETWORK
The New England Highway is the main road through the locality and it provides the major connection from Newcastle in the Hunter Valley through to Tamworth and Queensland. The New England Highway, accessed via Quarry Road, provides two lanes of travel in both directions. The highway has a sealed shoulder in both directions and has a general posted speed limit of 100km/h. Road alignment is generally very good with good visibility along its length.
Quarry Road is a two lane rural road with a single lane of travel in both directions. It provides access to the village of Ardglen and the quarry site. There are few intersections in the general vicinity of the site. The major intersection used by the quarry is the intersection of the New England Highway and Quarry Road.
This intersection is well laid out with a sheltered right turn lane for southbound traffic on the New England Highway turning right into the side road. Given the low traffic volumes on the New England Highway, it is considered that left turn deceleration or acceleration lanes are not necessary. In addition, it is noted that there is no acceleration lane for traffic turning right out of the side road, again due to the low traffic volume.
8.2 TRAFFIC GENERATION
The proposed extraction rate will remain for the existing facility and the number of annual truck movements will not alter as a result of this development.
The current quarry transports an average of 250 000 tonnes per annum by road, which gives an average number of 25 truck movements each day (outbound laden, and corresponding unladen truck movements inbound). This number will not alter as a result of the proposed development.
All machinery required for the work is currently located on site. No additional machinery or access will be required as part of this development. Existing maintenance and service vehicles will remain as per existing levels.
Parking for the current operations is contained on site. The extension will not generate any increase in parking requirements and all parking can be provided on site.
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT AUSTRALIA 0038419EA/FINAL/20 JUNE 2007 49 8.3 ROAD IMPACT ASSESSMENT
The volume of traffic associated with the quarry, together with the current flows on the New England Highway will have a minimum impact on road use. The level of traffic turning in and out of Quarry Road is very low, which combined with the relatively low traffic flows along the New England Highway, mean that delays through traffic movements will be minimal.
There will be little, if any, increase in traffic flows associated with the proposed extension of the quarry. There is no capacity issues associated with the intersection of the New England Highway and Quarry Road.
The existing intersection of the New England Highway and Quarry Road has been reviewed against the standards within the RTA Road Design Guide to review the impact upon the road safety for all users on the New England Highway as well as traffic associated with the on-going use of this intersection by quarry trucks. The side road of the intersection is located on the outside of a curve and, accordingly, offers good visibility for the drivers exiting the side road. The visibility has been measured on the site and exceeds the requirements of the RTA Road Design Guide.
An audit of existing traffic speeds through this intersection shows that B- double trucks travelling southbound on the New England Highway pass through the intersection at speeds in the order of 90km/hr, but then the speed of the trucks decreases significantly down to 60-65 km/hr due to the uphill gradient of the New England Highway. The alignment of the road, together with the low traffic speeds means that southbound traffic can pull out into the outside lane or brake to avoid a collision with these slow moving vehicles.
A speed audit of the existing trucks from the quarry shows that these trucks accelerate to a maximum speed in the order of 39 km/hr and do not reach the posted speed limit until they have passed the summit of the hill.
8.4 RAIL OPERATIONS
Rail operations at Ardglen currently exist only for the transport of rail ballast. A typical ballast train consists of 20 ballast wagons with a capacity of 54 tonnes per wagon. The train will also have a ballast “plough wagon” attached. Normally, the train will be pulled by two locomotives due to the surrounding track gradients. Locomotives push the wagons up into the Ardglen siding. The wagons are loaded individually from the outloading bin as the locomotives progressively push the train, stopping as each wagon is loaded. The process from train arrival to departure takes around two hours.
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT AUSTRALIA 0038419EA/FINAL/20 JUNE 2007 50 8.5 CONCLUSION
The rail infrastructure (which includes a rail siding that connects to the Main Northern Railway) has been maintained, and utilisation maximised, to reduce impacts on the road network. It is the only quarry in the region using rail transport.
The current off-site transport mix is 50 percent (250 000 tonnes) by rail and 50 percent (250 000 tonnes) by road. It is not economically feasible or practical to increase this mix in favour of the rail network. The transport of aggregate by rail requires unloading facilities that are not currently available in the Upper Hunter / New England region. Besides, given that aggregate is used on the road network, it must at some point be transported by road to its point of use.
The extension of the quarry is unlikely to impact adversely on other road users. The proposed extraction rate will remain as per the existing facility, the number of annual truck movements will not alter and, therefore, the safety of the New England Highway and Quarry Road intersection will be maintained.
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT AUSTRALIA 0038419EA/FINAL/20 JUNE 2007 51 9 WATER RESOURCES
Chapter Nine examines impacts on the catchment, groundwater and surface water, and other water management issues.
9.1 BACKGROUND
9.1.1 Catchment Description
Ardglen quarry adjoins the left bank of headwaters of Doughboy Hollow Creek, which flows into Chilcotts Creek, approximately six kilometres to the north. Chilcotts Creek flows into Borambil Creek and eventually into Mooki River. Runoff from the western-most part of the proposed quarry extension flows north-west into a series of unnamed watercourses that flow into Borambil Creek.
The terrain to the east of the quarry is a relatively flat floodplain associated with Doughboy Hollow Creek, while the land around this floodplain is relatively steep. The Great Dividing Range is approximately one kilometre east of the quarry, indicating that the quarry lies in the Murray Darling Basin.
9.1.2 Groundwater
The Department of Natural Resources Bore Search database show clusters of alluvial bores around Murrurundi and Blandford for town water supply. No bores are registered in Ardglen, which is expected given the lack of shallow alluvial aquifers. There may however be small volume, shallow domestic, unregistered bores. These are most likely to occur in or close to Doughboy Hollow Creek, tapping into the limited and localised surficial aquifer adjacent to the creek.
The potential for local groundwater was examined during geological investigations. Numerous holes were recently drilled into the targeted resource area and all holes were dry. Anecdotal data from the previous quarry operator has also shown that production drill holes, even for blasting the current in-pit sump, were dry. Heavy rain sometimes enters the holes.
Regular inspections of the quarry face over several months have shown no evidence of seepage through the intensive jointing in the basalt. Accordingly, it is apparent that there is no surficial basalt aquifer, although this investigation has not considered the potential for a deeper aquifer.
Given the lack of a surficial aquifer and the absence of groundwater dependent ecosystems or groundwater dependent fauna on the extension site, further consideration of site groundwater is not justified. However, given that the site may be a recharge area for a larger groundwater system, the statement of commitments outlines various controls to prevent the egress of fuels and oils.
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT AUSTRALIA 0038419EA/FINAL/20 JUNE 2007 52 9.1.3 Environmental Value of Receiving Waters
Doughboy Hollow Creek and Chilcotts Creek are the primary receiving watercourses for any discharges or runoff from the site. These creeks provide unfenced stock water access, domestic water supplies for rural properties and aquatic habitat.
Water quality objectives to achieve these environmental values are provided in terms of numerical guidelines in Australian and New Zealand Guidelines for Fresh and Marine Waters Quality (ANZECC 2000 Guidelines).
9.2 WATER MANAGEMENT
9.2.1 Overview
Currently, the quarry pumps from a licensed point on a small weir built across Doughboy Hollow Creek, with the in-pit sump only used for occasional filling of water carts. The weir and pump where installed by the previous operator before the large in-pit sump was formed by quarrying into the floor of the old quarry. While this water source has been adequate for many years, it makes more environmental sense to change the water management system to pump from the in-pit sump and allow stream flows to go past the quarry. Accordingly, Daracon intends to modify the pumping system, and the following water balance has been based on zero in-puts from Doughboy Hollow Creek.
Given recent drought conditions around NSW, it is intended that the quarry is to be independent as far as possible from external water sources and minimise the potential for offsite impacts to local receiving waters.
It is proposed to build on the successful water management system currently employed at Ardglen and various aspects of proposed water management are discussed as follows.
9.2.2 Clean Water Runoff
Runoff from undisturbed areas will be diverted around areas disturbed or affected by quarry activities wherever practical by diversion drains, contour drains, bunds, levees, weirs and pipe culverts (see Figure 9.1). Sediment traps will be installed wherever there is a risk of erosion and storages will have capacity to contain potential spills in undisturbed areas. The western extension area will have a series of 1% graded banks built that divert clean water away from the quarry face and generally to the north. As quarrying progresses westwards, these banks will be removed one by one, and the catchment added to the quarry floor catchment.
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT AUSTRALIA 0038419EA/FINAL/20 JUNE 2007 53 730
730
750
720 740
760
710 770
Project Application Area 780
HIGHWAY
630 710
RAILWAY 630 640
ARDGLEN ENGLAND
620 Water Management Plan 620 Daracon Engineering - Ardglen Quarry, NSW
Graded Bank 700
NEW Figure 9.1 Lot 49
NORTHERN
DP 751028
600
610 620 630
MAIN
Creek 750
720 740 730 Lot 39
DP 751028 Hollow Sump Lot 1
DP 1001734 720
710 Doughboy Lot 218
DP 751028 690 Lot 187
700
730
DP 751028
740
750
710
760 760
720
750
760 770 660 200m 0 5 38419/Revised EAR g 9.1 Water Management 04 05 2007 SP Environmental Resources Management Australia Pty Ltd Source: Google Maps 2006 Jobs/200 /00 -F .cdr 650
640 All diversion banks will be designed with sufficient capacity to convey critical flows from a 1 in 20 year average recurrence interval (ARI) storm. Temporary drains may be designed for smaller storm events depending on their design life.
9.2.3 Potable Water and Sewage
The potable water supply system will store rainwater off roofs and the existing effluent treatment system will remain.
Water will be required for drinking and other uses in offices and amenities for a workforce of up to five people in any shift. Based on a conservative usage of 170L/person/day approximately 0.5 ML of potable water would be consumed per year.
The expected raw water demand for quarry operations is:
dust suppression by water cart 150 000 litres per day;
plant water consumption 6 000 litre per hour; and
truck wheel wash 10 000 litres per day.
9.2.4 Pit Water and Runoff from Disturbed Areas
It is intended to base the site water management system around the existing in-pit sump formed by deep quarrying of the old quarry floor. This sump has a surveyed capacity of 63 ML.
Operational criteria for the dam include:
provision of sufficient storage capacity for quarry operational water demands including dust suppression, process needs and truck wash requirements; and
provision of detention for the peak flow volume from a 12 hour, 20 year ARI storm event.
To test whether the existing sump has sufficient capacity to cater for the western extension, a water balance was modelled. Given the quarry extension is expected to be operational for another 30 years, the contributing catchment for the dam used in volume calculations was modelled in three phases:
the current scenario with a catchment of 15 ha. Note that the approved southern pit does not contribute water to the sump as it is and will remain separate whereby runoff water collects and soaks away into cracks and fissures;
a mid-range scenario with a catchment of 26 ha; and
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT AUSTRALIA 0038419EA/FINAL/20 JUNE 2007 54 the final (‘worst-case’) scenario with the catchment boundaries set as the maximum proposed extent of the quarry at an area of 37 ha.
In addition, water balance modelling used the following data:
existing site daily water use of 220 kL, 370 kL and 370 kL respectively for the three time scenarios;
existing pond volume of approximately 63 ML/63 000m3;
sump surface area of 12 000 m2; and
rainfall and evaporation data from the Bureau of Meteorology Weather Stations #61051 (Murrurundi Post Office) and #61089 (Scone Soil Conservation Service).
Intensity-frequency-duration (IFD) data were derived in accordance with procedures contained in Volume 1 of Australian Rainfall and Runoff (AR&R) (Institution of Engineers Australia, 1987). IFD data were used as an aid to assess the performance of the on-site dam and assess the requirements for additional water management at the site.
Estimates of stormwater runoff were made using the procedures of AR&R. Peak catchment flow rates were estimated using the rational method.
Monthly rainfall and evaporation data and the three catchment scenarios were used to develop the model for the 90th percentile, mean and 10th percentile monthly rainfall volumes.
Based on the rational method for the catchment, and a conservative calculation of storm flows, the dam is capable of holding up to the 20 year, 12 hr rainfall event, allowing for 70% of the dam volume being available and 30% of the existing volume being occupied by sediment or remaining dam water.
The water balance showed that over three modelled time periods and catchment areas, the required dam volume will increase in proportion to the catchment size and runoff volumes, in excess of the expected on-site water demand. Whilst dust control will also increase proportionately to the active quarry area, the additional volumes of water generated in larger rainfall events will require disposal by one or more controlled releases to Doughboy Hollow Creek or increased irrigation. There are suitable areas for irrigation on both the Daracon land and adjacent landholdings. Limited testing of water in the sump suggests that little to no flocculation would be required to have discharge water meet likely licence standards of total suspended solids.
Daily rainfall modelling showed that 25mm of rain falling over the quarry catchment over a 24-hour period equates to approximately 7.4 ML of water volume reaching the dam. Over the maximum 37 ha catchment area, the monthly model showed that to prevent overflows and maintain the sump at full capacity (63 ML), the desirable irrigation rate for a 90th percentile rainfall
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT AUSTRALIA 0038419EA/FINAL/20 JUNE 2007 55 month is up to 2200 kL irrigation and/or release each day, depending on the month in which it occurred. The average monthly rainfall scenario showed that up to 460 kL irrigation or release each day would be required over the year, in particular during late spring-summer (October to February) to prevent overflows and maintain the sump at full capacity. Releases of larger volumes than this will be required to maintain the dam at a lower level. Anecdotal evidence shows that the sump has never overflowed, suggesting that the model may be overconservative.
Further details of the water management system will be developed as quarrying progresses into the western extension, as this is when the need for increased irrigation use and discharge to Doughboy Hollow Creek will be required.
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT AUSTRALIA 0038419EA/FINAL/20 JUNE 2007 56 ¾ full excess (kL/day) ¾ full excess adjusted ¾ full storage volume adjusted ¾ full (kL/month) storage volume ½ full excess adjusted ½ full storage volume adjusted ) 3 ½ (m Storage Volume ) 3 Loss (m Evaporation Rate Evaporation (mm/month) ) 3 (m Inflow Volume (mm/ month) Rainfall Jul 116 12180.00 5764.4 192.15 63000.0 84210.6 116 Jul 63000.0 5764.4 55.8 98210.6 669.6 Jul 15.2 1596.00 55.8 -9690.9 -9690.9 669.6 0.0 4309.1 0.00 4309.1 0.00 Jan 192.3 20191.50 220.1 42804.3 2641.2 42804.3 0.0 56804.3 56804.3 0.0 0.00 Jan 18 1890.00 220.1 2641.2 24502.8 24502.8 0.0 38502.8 38502.8 0.00 24502.824502.8 0.00 0.0 1890.00 38502.8 220.1 Jan 18 2641.2 Jun 135.8 14259.00 135.8 7937.0 264.57 63000.0 78446.2 Jun 63000.0 7937.0 48 92446.2 576.0 Jun 17.2 1806.00 48 -4871.3 -4871.3 576.0 0.0 9128.7 0.00 9128.7 0.00 Oct 22.1 2320.50 158.1 1897.2 -26158.2 -26158.2 0.0 -12158.2 -12158.2 0.00 -12158.2 -26158.2 0.0 -12158.2 -26158.2 1897.2 2320.50 158.1 22.1 Oct Oct 137.1 14395.50 158.1 1897.2 101290.8 63000.0 6752.3 115290.8 63000.0 6752.3 225.08 63000.0 101290.8 63000.0 6752.3 14395.50 115290.8 137.1 158.1 Oct 1897.2 Feb 173.6 18228.00 173.6 53203.1 2083.2 53203.1 0.0 63000.0 4203.1 67203.1 140.10 Feb 14.9 1564.50 18238.1 173.6 18238.1 2083.2 0.0 32238.1 0.00 32238.1 0.00 Sep 13.2 1386.00 117 1404.0 -20835.5 -20835.5 0.0 -6835.5 -6835.5 0.00 0.00 0.00 -6835.5 -20835.5 0.0 -6835.5 -20835.5 1404.0 1386.00 117 13.2 Sep Sep 105.3 11056.50 117 1404.0 94538.5 63000.0 3906.5 108538.5 63000.0 3906.5 130.22 63000.0 11056.50 94538.5 105.3 63000.0 3906.5 108538.5 Sep 117 1404.0 Dec 161.1 16915.50 226.3 2715.6 115977.7 63000.0 8453.9 129977.7 63000.0 8453.9 281.80 63000.0 115977.7 63000.0 8453.9 16915.50 129977.7 161.1 226.3 Dec 2715.6 Apr 108.7 11413.50 105 1260.0 64820.1 63000.0 1820.1 78820.1 63000.0 4407.5 146.92 11413.50 64820.1 63000.0 108.7 63000.0 1820.1 Apr 105 78820.1 1260.0 Apr 5.3 556.50 4980.6 4980.6 105 18980.6 1260.0 0.00 0.0 0.00 18980.6 Mar 141.1 14815.50 155 60412.6 1860.0 60412.6 0.0 63000.0 7209.5 74412.6 240.32 Mar 7.6 798.00 11430.1 11430.1 25430.1 0.00 0.0 155 0.00 1860.0 25430.1 Aug 13.4 1407.00 86.8 1041.6 -15071.5 -15071.5 0.0 -1071.5 -1071.5 0.00 0.00 0.00 -1071.5 -15071.5 0.0 -1071.5 -15071.5 1041.6 1407.00 86.8 13.4 Aug Aug 125.8 13209.00 86.8 1041.6 90632.0 63000.0 6421.4 104632.0 63000.0 6421.4 214.05 63000.0 13209.00 90632.0 63000.0 6421.4 125.8 104632.0 86.8 Aug 1041.6 Nov 20.1 2110.50 183 2196.0 -31989.7 -31989.7 0.0 -17989.7 -17989.7 0.00 -17989.7 -31989.7 0.0 -17989.7 -31989.7 2110.50 2196.0 183 20.1 Nov Nov 135 14175.00 183 2196.0 107523.8 63000.0 6233.0 121523.8 63000.0 6233.0 207.77 63000.0 107523.8 14175.00 63000.0 6233.0 135 Nov 121523.8 183 2196.0 May 116.7 12253.50 5689.1 189.64 63000.0 70509.2 116.7 63000.0 5689.1 68.2 May 84509.2 818.4 May 11.7 1228.50 68.2 -355.3 818.4 -355.3 0.0 13644.7 0.00 13644.7 0.00 Month 90%ile 90%ile 10%ile 10%ile Table 9.1 Monthly Water Balance for Current Quarry Catchment (15 hectares)
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT AUSTRALIA 0038419EA/FINAL/20 JUNE 2007 57 ¾ full excess (kL/day) ¾ full excess adjusted ¾ full storage volume adjusted ¾ full (kL/month) storage volume ½ full excess adjusted ½ full storage volume adjusted ) 3 ½ (m Storage Volume ) 3 Loss (m Evaporation Rate Evaporation (mm/month) ) 3 (m Inflow Volume (mm/ month) Rainfall Jul 63.5 6667.50 30566.1 55.8 30566.1 669.6 0.0 44566.1 0.00 44566.1 0.00 Jan 92.1 9670.50 32283.3 220.1 32283.3 2641.2 0.0 46283.3 0.00 46283.3 0.00 Jun 69.3 7276.50 30314.2 48 30314.2 576.0 0.0 44314.2 0.00 44314.2 0.00 Oct 73.7 7738.50 29355.3 158.1 29355.3 1897.2 0.0 43355.3 0.00 43355.3 0.00 Feb 77.7 8158.50 32612.6 173.6 32612.6 2083.2 0.0 46612.6 0.00 46612.6 0.00 Sep 58 6090.00 117 1404.0 29260.0 29260.0 0.0 43260.0 43260.0 0.00 29260.0 29260.0 0.00 6090.00 0.0 Sep 58 43260.0 117 1404.0 Dec 29 3045.00 226.3 2715.6 -37406.3 -37406.3 0.0 -23406.3 -23406.3 0.00 -23406.3 -37406.3 0.0 -23406.3 -37406.3 2715.6 3045.00 226.3 29 Dec Dec 88.2 9261.00 29940.7 226.3 29940.7 2715.6 0.0 43940.7 0.00 43940.7 0.00 Apr 53.6 5628.00 30054.6 105 30054.6 1260.0 0.0 44054.6 0.00 44054.6 0.00 Mar 61.2 6426.00 31432.6 155 31432.6 1860.0 0.0 45432.6 0.00 45432.6 0.00 Aug 62.3 6541.50 30320.0 86.8 30320.0 1041.6 0.0 44320.0 0.00 44320.0 0.00 Nov 73.6 7728.00 29141.3 183 29141.3 2196.0 0.0 43141.3 0.00 43141.3 0.00 May 55.9 5869.50 29359.7 68.2 29359.7 818.4 0.0 43359.7 0.00 43359.7 0.00 Month MEAN MEAN
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT AUSTRALIA 0038419EA/FINAL/20 JUNE 2007 58 ¾ full excess (kL/day) ¾ full excess adjusted ¾ full storage volume adjusted ¾ full (kL/month) storage volume ½ full excess adjusted ½ full storage volume adjusted ) 3 ½ (m Storage Volume ) 3 Loss (m Loss Evaporation Rate Evaporation (mm/month) ) 3 Inflow Volume (m (mm/ month) Rainfall Jul 116 24128.00 55.8 176483.2 547.08 669.6 63000.0 16412.4 63000.0 16412.4 0.00 190483.2 4468.8 0.0 -9531.2 0.0 -9531.2 40446.0 3161.60 669.6 55.8 15.2 Jul Jan 192.3 39998.40 220.1 61311.2 2641.2 61311.2 410.37 0.0 12311.2 75311.2 75311.2 Jan 18 3744.00 220.1 2641.2 25056.8 25056.8 0.0 39056.8 39056.8 0.0 39056.8 0.0 25056.8 0.0 39056.8 25056.8 2641.2 220.1 3744.00 18 Jan Jun 135.8 28246.40 48 160070.8 687.48 576.0 63000.0 20624.4 63000.0 20624.4 0.00 174070.8 9022.8 0.0 -4977.2 0.0 -4977.2 40955.6 3577.60 576.0 48 17.2 Jun Oct 22.1 4596.80 158.1 1897.2 -24882.4 -24882.4 0.0 40653.6 -10882.4 0.0 0.00 -10882.4 0.0 -24882.4 0.0 40653.6 -24882.4 1897.2 158.1 4596.80 22.1 Oct Oct 137.1 28516.80 158.1 227588.0 652.45 1897.2 63000.0 19573.6 63000.0 19573.6 241588.0 Feb 173.6 36108.80 173.6 88290.8 2083.2 1309.69 63000.0 25290.8 63000.0 39290.8 102290.8 Feb 14.9 3099.20 173.6 2083.2 19026.8 19026.8 0.0 33026.8 33026.8 0.0 0.00 33026.8 0.0 19026.8 0.0 33026.8 19026.8 2083.2 173.6 3099.20 14.9 Feb Sep 13.2 2745.60 117 1404.0 -20536.0 -20536.0 0.0 39295.6 -6536.0 0.0 0.00 -6536.0 0.0 -20536.0 0.0 39295.6 -20536.0 1404.0 2745.60 117 13.2 Sep Sep 105.3 21902.40 117 208014.4 448.41 1404.0 63000.0 13452.4 63000.0 13452.4 222014.4 Dec 161.1 33508.80 226.3 270173.2 791.57 2715.6 63000.0 23747.2 63000.0 23747.2 284173.2 Apr 108.7 22609.60 105 123037.2 476.79 1260.0 63000.0 14303.6 63000.0 14303.6 137037.2 Apr 5.3 1102.40 105 1260.0 4498.0 4498.0 0.0 37796.4 18498.0 0.0 0.00 18498.0 0.0 4498.0 4498.0 0.0 37796.4 1260.0 1102.40 105 5.3 Apr Mar 141.1 29348.80 155 108733.6 681.43 1860.0 63000.0 20442.8 63000.0 20442.8 122733.6 Mar 7.6 1580.80 155 1860.0 11701.6 11701.6 0.0 37674.8 25701.6 0.0 0.00 25701.6 0.0 11701.6 0.0 37674.8 11701.6 1860.0 1580.80 155 7.6 Mar Aug 13.4 2787.20 86.8 1041.6 -14831.6 -14831.6 0.0 39699.6 -831.6 0.0 0.00 -831.6 0.0 -14831.6 0.0 39699.6 -14831.6 1041.6 2787.20 86.8 13.4 Aug Aug 125.8 26166.40 86.8 194562.0 602.63 1041.6 63000.0 18078.8 63000.0 18078.8 208562.0 Nov 20.1 4180.80 183 2196.0 -29943.6 -29943.6 0.0 39938.8 -15943.6 0.0 0.00 -15943.6 0.0 -29943.6 0.0 39938.8 -29943.6 2196.0 4180.80 183 20.1 Nov Nov 135 28080.00 183 246426.0 627.93 2196.0 63000.0 18838.0 63000.0 18838.0 260426.0 May 116.7 24273.60 68.2 139446.4 546.97 818.4 63000.0 16409.2 63000.0 16409.2 153446.4 May 11.7 2433.60 68.2 818.4 -932.8 -932.8 0.0 39569.2 13067.2 0.0 0.00 13067.2 0.0 -932.8 -932.8 0.0 39569.2 2433.60 818.4 68.2 11.7 May 90%ile 90%ile 10%ile 10%ile Month Table 9.2 Monthly Water Balance for Mid-range Quarry Catchment, 15yrs (26 hectares)
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT AUSTRALIA 0038419EA/FINAL/20 JUNE 2007 59 ¾ full excess (kL/day) ¾ full excess adjusted ¾ full storage volume adjusted ¾ full (kL/month) storage volume ½ full excess adjusted ½ full storage volume adjusted ) 3 ½ (m Storage Volume ) 3 Loss (m Loss Evaporation Rate Evaporation (mm/month) ) 3 Inflow Volume (m (mm/ month) Rainfall Jul 13208.00 63.5 183.08 55.8 70216.0 63000.0 5492.4 669.6 63000.0 5492.4 84216.0 Jan 92.1 19156.80 220.1 2641.2 40469.6 40469.6 0.0 54469.6 54469.6 0.0 0.00 54469.6 0.0 40469.6 0.0 54469.6 40469.6 2641.2 220.1 19156.80 92.1 Jan Jun 14414.40 69.3 226.41 48 64723.6 63000.0 1723.6 576.0 63000.0 6792.4 78723.6 Oct 15329.60 212.88 73.7 85087.2 158.1 63000.0 6386.4 1897.2 63000.0 6386.4 99087.2 Feb 77.7 16161.60 173.6 2083.2 47502.0 47502.0 0.0 61502.0 61502.0 0.0 0.00 61502.0 0.0 47502.0 0.0 61502.0 47502.0 2083.2 173.6 16161.60 77.7 Feb Sep 12064.00 58 120.47 78700.8 117 63000.0 3614.0 1404.0 63000.0 3614.0 92700.8 Dec 29 6032.00 226.3 2715.6 -33673.2 -33673.2 0.0 41270.4 -19673.2 0.0 0.00 -19673.2 0.0 -33673.2 0.0 41270.4 -33673.2 2715.6 226.3 6032.00 29 Dec Dec 88.2 18345.60 226.3 2715.6 99738.0 63000.0 8584.0 113738.0 63000.0 8584.0 286.13 Dec 18345.60 88.2 99738.0 226.3 63000.0 8584.0 63000.0 8584.0 2715.6 113738.0 Apr 53.6 11148.80 Apr 53.6 94.76 54168.4 54168.4 105 1260.0 2842.8 0.0 63000.0 68168.4 Mar 61.2 12729.60 Mar 61.2 77.52 51325.6 51325.6 155 1860.0 2325.6 0.0 63000.0 65325.6 Aug 12958.40 62.3 162.36 75086.8 86.8 63000.0 4870.8 1041.6 63000.0 4870.8 89086.8 Nov 15308.80 73.6 202.23 91154.0 183 63000.0 6066.8 63000.0 6066.8 2196.0 105154.0 May 55.9 11627.20 May 55.9 125.43 57931.2 68.2 57931.2 818.4 3762.8 0.0 63000.0 71931.2 Month MEAN MEAN
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT AUSTRALIA 0038419EA/FINAL/20 JUNE 2007 60 ¾ full excess (kL/day) ¾ full excess adjusted ¾ full storage volume adjusted ¾ full (kL/month) storage volume ½ full excess adjusted ½ full storage volume adjusted ) 3 (m Volume ½ Storage ) 3 Loss (m Loss Evaporation h) n Rate (mm/mont Evaporatio ) 3 Inflow Volume (m nth) Rainfall (mm/mo Jul 15.2 4499.20 55.8 -19820.0 25183.6 0.00 669.6 0.0 -5820.0 0.0 39183.6 Jul 116 34336.00 55.8 669.6 55020.4 800.68 63000.0 24020.4 63000.0 24020.4 69020.4 Jan 18 5328.00 220.1 2641.2 24040.8 24040.8 0.0 38040.8 38040.8 0.0 0.00 38040.8 0.0 24040.8 0.0 24040.8 38040.8 2641.2 220.1 Jan 18 5328.00 Jan 192.3 56920.80 220.1 887.79 75633.6 2641.2 12633.6 75633.6 26633.6 89633.6 89633.6 Jun 17.2 5091.20 48 -14003.6 25869.2 576.0 0.0 0.00 39869.2 -3.6 0.0 Jun 135.8 40196.80 48 576.0 60974.8 999.16 63000.0 29974.8 63000.0 29974.8 74974.8 Oct 137.1 40581.60 158.1 1897.2 60038.4 967.95 63000.0 29038.4 63000.0 29038.4 74038.4 Oct 22.1 0.00 -38685.6 6541.60 25998.4 158.1 1897.2 -24685.6 0.0 0.0 39998.4 Feb 14.9 4410.40 23681.2 16722.0 173.6 0.00 2083.2 0.0 30722.0 0.0 37681.2 Feb 173.6 51385.60 173.6 2083.2 70656.4 2209.67 63000.0 52290.0 63000.0 66290.0 84656.4 Sep 105.3 31168.80 117 670.63 51118.8 1404.0 20118.8 63000.0 20118.8 63000.0 65118.8 Sep 13.2 3907.20 0.00 -33684.0 23857.2 117 1404.0 -19684.0 0.0 0.0 37857.2 Dec 161.1 47685.60 226.3 2715.6 66324.0 1177.47 63000.0 35324.0 63000.0 35324.0 80324.0 Apr 5.3 1568.80 105 1260.0 21662.8 -1871.6 0.0 35662.8 12128.4 0.0 0.00 12128.4 -1871.6 21662.8 Apr 5.3 0.0 0.0 1568.80 105 1260.0 35662.8 Apr 108.7 32175.20 105 1260.0 52269.2 708.97 63000.0 21269.2 63000.0 21269.2 66269.2 Mar 7.6 2249.60 155 1860.0 21743.6 7465.6 0.0 35743.6 21465.6 0.0 0.00 21465.6 21743.6 7465.6 0.0 7.6 Mar 0.0 2249.60 155 1860.0 35743.6 Mar 141.1 41765.60 155 1860.0 61259.6 1008.65 63000.0 30259.6 63000.0 30259.6 75259.6 Aug 125.8 37236.80 86.8 884.97 57549.2 1041.6 26549.2 63000.0 26549.2 63000.0 71549.2 Aug 13.4 3966.40 0.00 -26541.2 24278.8 86.8 1041.6 -12541.2 0.0 0.0 38278.8 Nov 135 39960.00 183 2196.0 59118.0 937.27 63000.0 28118.0 63000.0 28118.0 73118.0 Nov 20.1 5949.60 0.00 -44578.0 25107.6 183 2196.0 -30578.0 0.0 0.0 39107.6 May 11.7 3463.20 68.2 23998.8 -8872.8 818.4 0.00 0.0 5127.2 37998.8 0.0 May 116.7 34543.20 68.2 802.63 55078.8 818.4 24078.8 63000.0 24078.8 63000.0 69078.8 10%ile 10%ile 90%ile 90%ile Month Table 9.3 Monthly Water Balance for Final Quarry Catchment, 30 years (37 hectares)
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT AUSTRALIA 0038419EA/FINAL/20 JUNE 2007 61 ¾ full excess (kL/day) ¾ full excess adjusted ¾ full storage volume adjusted ¾ full (kL/month) storage volume ½ full excess adjusted ½ full storage volume adjusted ) 3 (m Volume ½ Storage ) 3 Loss (m Loss Evaporation h) n Rate (mm/mont Evaporatio ) 3 Inflow Volume (m nth) Rainfall (mm/mo Jul 63.5 18796.00 55.8 669.6 39480.4 63000.0 8480.4 53480.4 63000.0 8480.4 282.68 Jul 63.5 18796.00 55.8 8480.4 8480.4 39480.4 63000.0 63000.0 669.6 53480.4 Jan 92.1 27261.60 45974.4 45974.4 220.1 0.00 2641.2 0.0 59974.4 0.0 59974.4 Jun 69.3 20512.80 48 576.0 41290.8 343.03 63000.0 10290.8 63000.0 10290.8 55290.8 Oct 73.7 21815.20 158.1 1897.2 41272.0 342.40 63000.0 10272.0 63000.0 10272.0 55272.0 Feb 77.7 22999.20 173.6 2083.2 42270.0 57244.4 0.0 56270.0 63000.0 8244.4 274.81 Feb 77.7 22999.20 42270.0 57244.4 173.6 2083.2 8244.4 0.0 63000.0 56270.0 Sep 58 17168.00 117 1404.0 37118.0 63000.0 6118.0 51118.0 63000.0 6118.0 203.93 6118.0 63000.0 6118.0 51118.0 63000.0 37118.0 17168.00 1404.0 117 Sep 58 Dec 88.2 26107.20 226.3 2715.6 44745.6 458.19 63000.0 13745.6 63000.0 13745.6 58745.6 Dec 29 8584.00 226.3 2715.6 27222.4 -48355.6 0.0 41222.4 -34355.6 0.0 0.00 -34355.6 0.0 -48355.6 0.0 27222.4 41222.4 2715.6 226.3 Dec 29 8584.00 Apr 53.6 15865.60 105 1260.0 35959.6 63000.0 4959.6 49959.6 63000.0 4959.6 165.32 Apr 53.6 15865.60 4959.6 4959.6 35959.6 63000.0 63000.0 105 1260.0 49959.6 Mar 61.2 18115.20 155 1860.0 37609.2 63000.0 853.6 51609.2 63000.0 6609.2 220.31 Mar 61.2 18115.20 37609.2 63000.0 155 6609.2 853.6 63000.0 1860.0 51609.2 Aug 62.3 18440.80 86.8 1041.6 38753.2 63000.0 7753.2 52753.2 63000.0 7753.2 258.44 Aug 62.3 18440.80 7753.2 7753.2 38753.2 63000.0 63000.0 86.8 1041.6 52753.2 Nov 73.6 21785.60 183 2196.0 40943.6 63000.0 9943.6 54943.6 63000.0 9943.6 331.45 Nov 73.6 21785.60 9943.6 9943.6 40943.6 63000.0 63000.0 183 2196.0 54943.6 May 55.9 16546.40 68.2 818.4 37082.0 63000.0 6082.0 51082.0 63000.0 6082.0 202.73 May 55.9 16546.40 68.2 6082.0 6082.0 37082.0 63000.0 63000.0 818.4 51082.0 Month MEAN MEAN
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT AUSTRALIA 0038419EA/FINAL/20 JUNE 2007 62 9.3 IMPACTS
9.3.1 Alteration to Catchments and Yields
The western quarry extension covers approximately 17.8 hectares, approximately half of which sheds runoff to the west and half east towards Doughboy Hollow Creek. The diversion of this small western catchment away from the unnamed ephemeral drainage lines that eventually flow into Borambil Creek will redirect approximately 10 hectares into another part (further upstream) of the Borambil Creek catchment.
Of more substantial impact is the benefit of ceasing direct pumping from the weir on Doughboy Hollow Creek, in favour of pumping from the in-pit sump.
9.3.2 Water Quality
Water quality sampling of the in-pit sump showed a total suspended solids level of 2 mg/l on the day of testing (some days after rain). Excess water from the in-pit sump will be either discharged via licence to Doughboy Hollow Creek or used to irrigate adjacent creek flats. Prior to discharge into the Creek, water quality will be tested to ensure it is within licence requirements, most likely 50 milligrams per litre total suspended solids. Should the water not meet this limit, it will be retained in-pit, used for irrigation or treated with flocculant.
9.3.3 Mitigation Measures
Spill kits will be provided and site personnel trained in their use to ensure that in the event of any spills, appropriate action can be taken rapidly to prevent and minimise impacts to surface waters or groundwater. Should the in-pit sump require wet weather discharge to Doughboy Hollow Creek, the water will be tested to ensure it meets the licence conditions.
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT AUSTRALIA 0038419EA/FINAL/20 JUNE 2007 63 10 CULTURAL HERITAGE
A cultural heritage assessment was undertaken in consultation with the Nungaroo Local Aboriginal Land Council (NLALC). The assessment report is attached as Annex H and the findings of the assessment are summarised in this chapter.
10.1 METHODOLOGY
The assessment involved the following tasks:
a search of the relevant databases, inventories and registers, including the Aboriginal Heritage Information Management System (AHIMS) database, historical heritage registers and Murrurundi Local Environment Plan 1993, to determine the location of any sites and heritage items within the vicinity of the site;
a review of the archaeological, historical and environmental context of the area;
consultation with the Aboriginal community in regard to the social significance of the site and any Aboriginal sites/objects incorporated within the boundaries of the proposed extension area;
a field survey with members of the Aboriginal community to identify and record any Aboriginal sites/objects and historic heritage items that may be present within the proposed extension area; and
a review of the potential impacts of the proposed extension on cultural heritage and a discussion of the relevant mitigation and management strategies where applicable.
10.2 SIGNIFICANCE AND IMPACTS
The proposed extension area is relatively undisturbed, with the exception of past vegetation clearance for grazing. The lack of available resources and level areas suitable for camping and with access to water means that the area is unlikely to have been the focus of activity or a major transitory route.
During the field survey, no sites containing Aboriginal cultural materials were identified within the proposed extension area and no structures or other items of potential historical heritage significance were recorded. No archaeological sites or areas of archaeological potential were identified within the proposed extension area. Further, officers from the NLALC who participated in the survey indicated that the proposed extension area does not contain any areas or sites of particular cultural value. Therefore no further archaeological investigation was required.
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT AUSTRALIA 0038419EA/FINAL/20 JUNE 2007 64 However, should any Aboriginal artefacts be exposed during ground surface disturbance, all works involving ground surface disturbance will be suspended and the DECC notified.
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT AUSTRALIA 0038419EA/FINAL/20 JUNE 2007 65 11 SOCIO-ECONOMIC IMPACTS
Chapter Eleven examines the socio-economic aspects of the project.
The project is expected to have considerable social and economic benefits at both the local and state level in terms of securing an ongoing supply of high quality aggregates for use in rail and civil construction in the Upper Hunter and New England regions and in local expenditure and employment opportunities.
Potential adverse impacts of the proposal relate primarily to the amenity and quality of life experienced by residents in the surrounding locality. Detailed noise, air quality, traffic and visual impact assessments have been undertaken as part of this Environmental Assessment to determine potential impacts on surrounding areas.
11.1 SOCIAL IMPACTS
Ardglen is a small rural community which consists of approximately eleven dwellings, of which eight to ten are permanently occupied. The total population of Ardglen is approximately twenty persons, three of whom are directly employed at the Ardglen quarry.
Ardglen is in the Liverpool Plains local government area (LGA), in an area that was formerly within the Murrurundi LGA. The Liverpool Plains Shire Council was formed in 2004, following amalgamation of the former Quirindi Shire and portions of the former Murrurundi and Parry Shire councils.
Originally named Doughboy Hollow, Ardglen has traditionally had strong ties with the transport industry and with the quarry which, because of its long history as the prime local employer, forms an important part of the Ardglen community. This, together with the small size of the community and its remote geographic location, has contributed to the development of a strong ‘sense of community’ amongst local residents.
The area surrounding the quarry is typical of a rural setting, with larger properties being predominantly used for cattle grazing. Typically, residents in rural areas place value on quality of life in terms of maintaining their rural amenity and are concerned with issues that may impact on that amenity, such as noise and vibration, dust, traffic and visual impacts.
Consultation with the surrounding landholders has revealed that the issues of most concern to residents regarding the proposed quarry extension relate to potential impacts from noise, dust, and traffic.
The Ardglen community grew up alongside the quarry, so that the noise emissions now received at some houses exceeds modern criteria. Thorough
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT AUSTRALIA 0038419EA/FINAL/20 JUNE 2007 66 application of additional noise mitigation structures and measures has meant that the extension will not generate additional noise.
A detailed air quality assessment has shown that predicted air emissions from the quarry will be within DECC criteria apart from at receptor 2, where dust deposition are above criterion. However, Daracon is currently in the process of purchasing this property.
Given that there will be no increase in production or transport, and that the intersection of Quarry road with the New England Highway has an adequate level of service, no additional rail or road impacts are expected.
11.2 ECONOMIC IMPACTS
Local Employment
The quarry currently employs nine full-time staff and indirectly employs between 20 and 30 people, mainly in the transport and repair and maintenance industries. One additional person is proposed to be employed as a direct result of the quarry extension.
The proposed extension will provide surety of employment for existing employees and the many subcontractors indirectly employed. The continuance of the quarry as a source of direct employment is vital to retain the economic health of the Ardglen community. Further, the suppliers of domestic and industrial goods and services to the quarry and quarry employees rely, at least partially, on the continued operations of the quarry for their economic prosperity.
Regional Economic Impact
Ardglen Quarry is the only quarry in the locality that can provide aggregates that comply with the benchmark RTA anti-skid safety criteria specified for highway application which calls for a polished aggregate friction value (PAFV) in excess of 50. This product is, and has been, used extensively upon the New England Highway for this important safety reason for sealing works from Singleton through to the southern regions of Armidale.
Australian Rail Track Corporation (ARTC) makes extensive use of the Ardglen Quarry resource for rail ballast. It is used for railway track maintenance, construction and upgrading works. The rail siding and rail loading facilities are purpose designed to provide high capacity, quality service for the rail maintenance and construction industry.
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT AUSTRALIA 0038419EA/FINAL/20 JUNE 2007 67 It is expected that the market for quarry materials will remain very strong in the coal mining sector in the Upper Hunter and Gunnedah Basin. This sector has traditionally demanded high quality stemming and mine haul road resurfacing materials. Civil, rail and construction industries all require high quality aggregates for concrete, asphalt and road sealing.
Overall, anticipated demand from Ardglen Quarry for high grade aggregates, ballast, stemming and roadbases is expected to be between 400 000 tonnes and 500 000 tonnes per annum.
If Ardglen does not extend reserves, other quarries will need to be developed at greenfield sites. Existing operations in the Upper Hunter, Liverpool Plains Shires and at Tamworth will themselves need to seek to expand their existing operations to accommodate the shortfall in the market.
Rail Infrastructure
Ardglen is the sole quarry in the Upper Hunter / New England region that has rail access for the loading of quarry materials. Alternatively, Martins Creek Railway Quarry (Dungog), Boral Quarry (Dubbo) and Crooble Quarry (Moree) also have rail access. The closest of these quarries is in excess of 200 kilometres from Ardglen.
A significant proportion of rail maintenance ballast is required to be distributed by rail ballast wagons. Should the Ardglen Quarry not be available, the additional distance the ballast wagons would have to be transported from alternate quarries equipped with railways would add the equivalent of $20.00 / tonne to the delivered ballast cost for maintenance. Given the average ballast currently distributed by rail ballast wagons from the Ardglen quarry, this would result in an additional $0.75M to $1.0M per annum in freight costs for track maintenance in this region. Further, the turn around trip time for rail maintenance ballast wagons would be increased by a full day. This would require additional ballast wagons to be acquired by the rail infrastructure maintainer. Additional capital cost of 25 ballast wagons is of the order of $2.5M to $3.0M.
Other existing quarries in the vicinity would face considerable challenges and costs if they were to attempt the installation of rail access. They are generally located too far from the rail corridor. It would involve major works on land not owned by the rail infrastructure manager or the respective quarries. This infrastructure would itself need to be the subject of environmental assessment and development consent. It is estimated that the establishment of equivalent infrastructure elsewhere for train loading would cost in excess of $1.5M. A further consideration is that prompt approval for such construction is very unlikely due to the difficulties that would be encountered obtaining approvals for an interface agreement with the infrastructure owner.
A further consideration is that the loss of rail transport infrastructure would significantly increase road transport through the towns of Ardglen, Scone, Murrurundi and Willow Tree.
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT AUSTRALIA 0038419EA/FINAL/20 JUNE 2007 68 It should be noted that should the additional reserves associated with the proposed extension area not be forthcoming, existing reserves at Ardglen may well be retained for aggregate purposes and not made available for ballast, due to the higher specific value of aggregates and the existing customer arrangements.
The quarry and associated rail infrastructure facilities are strategically located for the proposed upgrading and on-going maintenance works of the inland Melbourne to Brisbane rail link through Parkes. The link directly passes Ardglen. Anticipated additional demand for rail ballast in the region to supply capital upgrading works associated with the proposed concrete re- sleepering and ballast cleaning programme is 35 000 tonnes per annum for a minimum of three years. This would equate to an additional $2.1M in rail freight costs of importing rail ballast longer distances for the owner of the rail infrastructure.
There is a proposal to upgrade the rail link between Willow Tree and Murrurundi. The proposed reconstruction will remove the steep grades associated with the current Ardglen tunnel crossing of the Great Dividing Range near Murrurundi. This diversion is proposed to avoid the current freight impost to the Gunnedah Coal Basin to take coal to the Port of Newcastle. Given the current demand for coal, this project is likely to be progressed. The project involves a 21 km diversion of the track which will require extensive quarry products. This proposal would consume approximately 63 000 tonnes of ballast, 30 000 tonnes of capping and 100 000 tonnes of select engineering fill. Additional freight costs to bring materials into the region should Ardglen be unavailable, would equate to an additional road freight cost to this project of in excess of $1.0M.
11.3 SOCIO-ECONOMIC MANAGEMENT COMMITMENTS
Measures to mitigate potential impacts from noise, vibration and dust have been discussed in previous sections of this report and are detailed in the Statement of Commitments in Chapter 13.
Should the project be approved, Daracon will continue to engage the community in consultation, with the aim of providing the community with up-to-date information in relation to the project and quarry operations in general and allowing the community to provide feedback to Daracon and raise any issues or concerns.
It is anticipated that on-going consultation will include distribution of a six monthly community newsletter and regular face-to-face meetings with adjoining landholders.
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT AUSTRALIA 0038419EA/FINAL/20 JUNE 2007 69 12 VISUAL IMPACTS
A visual impact assessment was undertaken as part of this EA to determine the likely visual impacts of the proposed quarry extension on the existing environment. Potential visual impacts were determined through evaluation of the interaction between visual modification and visual sensitivity, as described in this chapter.
12.1 VISUAL MODIFICATION
Visual modification expresses the visual interaction between the proposal and the existing visual environment. It is the visual contrast between pre and post development and is a combination of the appearance of the development (size, form, colour, texture etc), the absorptive capacity of the landscape setting, and the distance from which the development is viewed. Visual modification is often expressed as high, medium or low.
A high degree of visual modification will result if a proposed development contrasts strongly with the existing landscape. This contrast is likely to occur if there is little or no natural screening or integration created by vegetation or if there is an open plain.
A medium degree of visual modification will result if a proposed development is visible and contrasts with the landscape but is integrated with it to some degree. This will occur if the surrounding vegetation and or topography provides some measure of visual screening, background or other form of visual integration of the development with its setting.
A low degree of visual modification occurs if there is minimal visual contrast and a high level of integration of size, form, colour, or texture between a development and the environment. This will occur if a high degree of visual integration of a development into the existing landscape or a low level of visual modification of the existing visual setting results. A low visual modification may reflect a situation where a development may be noticeable, but it does not markedly contrast with the existing landscape.
The degree of visual modification is dependent on the distance the viewer is to a location. As the distance from the quarry to the viewing location increases, the development becomes less prominent, and therefore its visual modification is less. Viewing location distances of up to 0.5 kilometres (foreground), 0.5 to two kilometres (middle ground) and more than two kilometres (background) are incorporated into the assessment of visual modification.
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT AUSTRALIA 0038419EA/FINAL/20 JUNE 2007 70 12.2 VISUAL SENSITIVITY
Visual sensitivity is a measure of how critically a change to the existing landscape will be viewed from various viewpoints. This sensitivity is dependent on a number of viewer characteristics which, for the purposes of this study, are land use, distance of the quarry from viewers and the visibility of the quarry from critical viewing locations.
To assess the visual sensitivity of the proposed extension, a number of visual management units may be used. A visual management unit is in which the visual sensitivity is similar from the majority of viewing locations. Visual management units and their associated visual sensitivity depending on the distance from which the line is viewed, are listed in Table 12.1.
Table 12.1 Visual Management Units and Visual Sensitivity
Management Unit Foreground Middleground Background 0 – 0.5 km 0.5 – 2 km > 2 km Open Space High Medium Low (farmland) Low Density High Medium Low Residential (rural) Main Thoroughfare Medium Medium Low
The quarry and proposed extension area are visible from Nowlands Gap lookout and from the New England Highway as it descends from the Gap.
12.3 VISUAL IMPACT MATRIX
The visual impact of the proposed quarry extension resulting from the combination of visual modification and visual sensitivity can be illustrated in a visual impact matrix as illustrated in Table 12.2.
Table 12.2 Visual Impact Matrix
Visual Sensitivity Visual Modification High Moderate Low High High Impact High Impact Moderate Impact Moderate High Impact Moderate Impact Low Impact Low Moderate Impact Low Impact Low Impact
As Table 12.2 illustrates, the potential impact within each visual management unit can be expressed as high, moderate or low. For example, if the visual sensitivity of an area is low but the visual modification of the extension is high, then the resulting visual impact is moderate. A high visual sensitivity and a moderate visual modification combine to give a high potential visual impact.
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT AUSTRALIA 0038419EA/FINAL/20 JUNE 2007 71 The visual impact assessment was conducted in four stages as follows:
1. a description of the existing landscape character;
2. a description of the visual changes that will be imposed by the development;
3. a viewpoint analysis to identify where visual impact is likely to occur; and
4. an assessment of the visual impact of the proposal.
This methodology was adopted in an effort to reduce subjectivity.
12.4 IMPACT ASSESSMENT
12.4.1 Landscape Character
The existing landscape character of an area is a fundamental factor in determining the visual impact of any development. The background setting and surrounding natural or built environments can either expose a new development to view or help absorb the visual effects. The following elements influence the character of the landscape and visibility of a development:
vegetation – influences lines of view as well as the visual character of an area;
topography – can obscure or expose a development;
distance of views – influences the area potentially affected by a development and the degree of impact; and
built structures – form part of the visual character of an area and may also block or create lines of view.
The visual catchment of the study area is characterised as predominantly rural interspersed with some low density rural residential development. A photomontage illustrating the existing character of the landscape is included as Figure 12.1.
As shown in Figure 12.1, the visual landscape comprises predominantly rural lands, with approximately 11 dwellings and the existing quarry. The landscape is impacted by linear structures such as the New England Highway, a rail siding that connects to the Main Northern Railway and the Main Northern Railway itself.
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT AUSTRALIA 0038419EA/FINAL/20 JUNE 2007 72 Jobs/2005/0038419/Revised EAR - Fg 12.1 Photo Montage .cdr 04 05 200 7 JD Environmental Resources Management Australia Pty Ltd
Figure 12.1 Photo Montage
Daracon Engineering -Visual Impact Ardglen Quarry, NSW 12.4.2 View Point Analysis
A view point analysis from a number of residential vantage points surrounding the quarry has been included as Figure 12.2. Residence 5 faces away from the quarry and has only one south looking window. The view is shielded from the quarry by a rise in the topography and vegetation. The proposed extension will not be visible from here.
Residence 3 currently has views to the quarry and the proposed extension will be just as visible as the existing quarry face from this residence.
Residence 1 is separated from the extension by a substantial vegetated hill.
Residence 2, under purchase negotiation by Daracon, currently has views to the quarry processing area and the quarry face. As the proposed extension proceeds, the view of the quarry face will recede from the premises, but will still be clearly visible.
Residences 3 and 4 currently have views to the quarry processing area and the quarry face. The residences located around here also have views to the quarry processing area and the quarry face; however, these residences are largely screened by existing vegetation. The proposed extension will also be visible from the properties on and surrounding Residence 4; however, the dwellings will largely be shielded by existing vegetation. Views from Point 6, Point 7 and Point 8 are totally obscured by the small ridge and existing vegetation. The proposed extension will not impact visually on these residences.
There are no residences to the west of the quarry in the visual catchment of the proposed extension.
The extension area is visible from Nowlands Gap lookout (Photograph 1). The highway itself, vegetation and the rural landscape dominates the foreground of the view from the lookout. The quarry is visible in the middle ground between a small gap in the vegetation.
Views from the highway are generally filtered by existing roadside vegetation and are largely transient. As the New England Highway descends the Gap heading north, the quarry is visible through gaps in the vegetation (see Photograph 2). It should be noted that the speed limit along this section of the New England Highway is 100 km/h and it is unlikely that the quarry would significantly impact on the visual amenity of the road users.
12.4.3 Assessment of Visual Impact
The visual contrast between pre- and post-development is a combination of the appearance of the development, the absorptive capacity of the landscape setting, and the distance from which the development is viewed. The visual modification of the proposed development is moderate given that:
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT AUSTRALIA 0038419EA/FINAL/20 JUNE 2007 73 Jobs/2005/0038419/Revised EAR - Fg 12.2 View Point Analysis .cdr 04 05 200 7 JD Environmental Resources Management Australia Pty Ltd
4 5 7
6 8
5
3
4
1 2 3
2 Legend Project Application Area
Source: Neil Charters Pty Ltd 10183/31611 - -0 5 Figure 12.2 View Point Analysis 0 200m
Approximate Only Daracon Engineering -Visual Impact Ardglen Quarry, NSW Photograph 1
View from Nowlands Gap Lookout.
Australia Pty Ltd
04 05 7 Photograph 2
View from New England Highway.
R Photos 1 & 2
A - .cdr 200 SP Environmental Resources Management
obs/2005/0038419/
J Revised E Photographs
Daracon Engineering - Ardglen Quarry, NSW the proposed development does not include an increase to the size of the processing area. The visual modification comes in the form of the quarry face moving into the extension area;
partial rehabilitation of the existing quarry and the surrounding area will assist in screening the visual impact of the proposed extension; and
the distance between the dwellings that look directly into the quarry and the quarry face will increase as the extension progresses.
Visual sensitivity is a measure of how critically a change to the existing landscape will be viewed from various viewpoints. The visual sensitivity of the development is moderate given that:
Ardglen is essentially a rural area;
the proposed development does not represent a departure from the existing land use and will not represent a significant change in the current visual amenity;
while the quarry is visible from public vantage points, the view from the highway is generally filtered by trees and is largely transient; and
while the extension will be visible to residences surrounding the quarry, these residences currently look into the existing quarry; therefore, visual amenity will not be significantly impacted.
The existing quarry has been a part of the Ardglen community for over 100 years. While the quarry does impact on the visual quality of the existing landscape, the visual impact of the proposed development will not represent a significant decrease in the current visual amenity.
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT AUSTRALIA 0038419EA/FINAL/20 JUNE 2007 74 13 DRAFT STATEMENT OF COMMITMENTS
Chapter Thirteen outlines the Draft Statement of Commitments.
13.1 INTRODUCTION
The following draft Statement of Commitments has been prepared in accordance with the Director-General’s environmental assessment requirements and Part 3A of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (EP&A Act). These commitments outline the environmental management, mitigation and monitoring measures to be adhered to by Daracon Quarries throughout construction and operation of the proposed Ardglen Quarry extension to manage potential environmental impacts arising from the project.
13.2 DRAFT STATEMENT OF COMMITMENTS
13.2.1 General
Prior to the commencement of quarrying within the proposed extension area, Daracon will prepare and implement an Environmental Management System (EMS) based on the AS/NZA ISO 14001:2004 - Environmental Management Systems.
The EMS will:
incorporate an operational Environmental Management Plan (EMP);
detail potential environmental risks due to operation of the proposed quarry;
provide measures for the prevention, minimisation and management of these impacts to within acceptable limits; and
provide a means for the project to improve environmental performance and move towards environmental sustainability.
13.2.2 Water Management
Prior to quarrying commencing within the proposed extension area, Daracon will prepare a Water Management Plan that will include:
an Erosion and Sediment Control Plan (including procedures to minimise erosion, capture of sediment on-site, and maintenance of control structures);
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT AUSTRALIA 0038419EA/FINAL/20 JUNE 2007 75 a Surface Water Management Plan (including management of surface runoff to minimise pollution, storage and handling of chemicals, site water storage volumes and irrigation requirements, site discharge procedures and water quality monitoring); and
a Water Quality Monitoring Program.
13.2.3 Flora and Fauna
For the purpose of generating an offset plan, the whole 17.8 hectares of the quarry extension is considered box-gum woodland. The Department of Planning has indicated the need to apply a 2:1 offset ratio and consequently Daracon has purchased the following land to facilitate this:
Lot 187 DP 751028 south of the extension area;
Lot 39 DP 751028 southeast of the extension; and
Lot 49 DP 751028 to the southeast of the extension.
Table 13.1 summarises the relevant details of each lot in the proposed offset area. These areas will become the subject of voluntary conservation agreements in liaison with the Department of Planning and DECC.
Table 13.1 Biodiversity Offset Areas
Vegetation Area Proposed offset management description (hectares) Lot 187 Box-gum woodland 8.2 stock removal, weed control, and derived planting of EEC trees, transport of grassland logs and rocks, provision of nest boxes Lot 39 Box-gum woodland 11.65 stock removal, weed control, major and derived planting of EEC trees and grasses, grassland, and transport of logs and rocks cultivation Lot 49 Box-gum woodland 16.3 stock removal, weed control total 36.15
Lot 187 adjoins both the extension area and the approved existing quarry on Lot 1. Much of the lot is derived grassland, with the balance being box-gum woodland, particularly the northern section. There are few hollows and substantial clearing is evidenced by long dead tree trunks. Fencing would remove stock pressure and encourage natural regeneration, while infill tubestock planting in the southern section of the lot will aid biodiversity outcomes. Trees felled in the quarry extension area would provide a source of ground habitat, while artificial nest boxes would provide habitat for arboreal mammals in particular.
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT AUSTRALIA 0038419EA/FINAL/20 JUNE 2007 76 Lot 39 contains approximately 5.5 hectares of box-gum woodland, adjoining the existing quarry on Lot 1, while the balance is derived grassland and cultivation. The woodland section will only require stock removal and weed control to allow strong natural revegetation. Conversely, the derived grassland and cultivation areas will require intensive planting, weed control and management to provide a vegetation community that simulates box-gum woodland. Again logs transported from the quarry extension area would provide ground habitat while nest boxes would be affixed to the existing trees. Weed control will be particularly important on Lot 39 owing to the high current weed load.
Lot 49 is a reasonably intact area of box-gum woodland, although it is apparent that it has been, and continues to be, heavily grazed by cattle and horses. Removal of stock and active weed control is all that is likely to be required to allow successful natural regeneration.
When considered alongside the Lot 1 quarry area that has an existing condition of consent to enforce rehabilitation, Lots 187, 39 and 49 will provide in the long-term, a continuous strip of box-gum woodland vegetation connected with other stands of native woodland to the east, south and west. More tenuous links would exist to the north with the retention of box-gum woodland on the perimeter of lot 218.
The proposed detailed offset plan, to be prepared in liaison with the DECC and the DoP, will detail specifics including:
staging;
planting details such as final density, species mix, sowing rates, fertiliser;
maintenance schedule;
weed control;
importation of rock and log shelter;
topsoil handling;
fencing;
pre-clearing surveys of all hollow bearing trees within the proposed quarry extension area;
herbivore control; and
number and location of nest boxes.
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT AUSTRALIA 0038419EA/FINAL/20 JUNE 2007 77 13.2.4 Noise
Several noise mitigation measures are currently in place at Ardglen Quarry and will continue to be employed throughout the proposed extension. These measures are summarised as follows:
quarry hours are restricted to between 6am and 5.30pm;
blasting is carried out infrequently between 2pm and 4pm, Mondays to Fridays, and adequate notification is provided to the residents;
noise created by the haul trucks, both empty and loaded, is reduced by imposing a speed limit of 60 km/h when travelling on local roads between the quarry and the highway. Trucks on site are limited to a speed of 25 km/h; and
all on-site, fixed and mobile diesel powered plant, excluding road vehicles, are correctly fitted and maintained with manufacturer specifications. Particular attention is given to engine exhaust systems and the care and maintenance of mufflers.
Further noise control is nominated through the implementation of the following measures:
reduction of equipment through the separation of site activities to overburden stripping and extraction, whereby they do not occur simultaneously;
rail loading will be limited to the day period (7am to 6pm) as much as practicable;
the surge bin will be lined with latex or polymer liners to reduce impulsive noise;
a sheet metal enclosure will be built around the rail loader discharge and extend to include the rail wagon being loaded. The enclosure will be constructed of sheet metal and will cover the length of a minimum of three wagons whereby the wagon being loaded will be in the centre of the enclosure. The enclosure will be open at the ends and will contain a roof which will be connected to the rail loader discharge. Gaps between the loader discharge and the roof will be sealed;
purchase of the’ Quambi’ property; and
the two scrapers initially assigned for overburden striping will be replaced by one excavator and two articulated dump trucks.
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT AUSTRALIA 0038419EA/FINAL/20 JUNE 2007 78 In addition, the following noise mitigation measures are proposed but have not been incorporated into the assessment:
the existing crushers and screens will be acoustically treated;
the existing crushers and screens will be located behind earth bunds; and
mobile acoustic barriers will surround the drill rig.
These various mitigation proposals represent the best feasible practices available. Notwithstanding this, as technologies change, Daracon will continue to investigate new possibilities for noise reduction.
13.2.5 Blasting and Vibration
Blasting and vibration commitments include:
limitation of blasting to between the hours of 10am and 4pm, Monday to Friday. A blast management strategy will be used to ensure appropriate charge masses are used to avoid excessive air blast overpressure and ground vibrations;
air-blast overpressure from any blast will not exceed 120 dB(Lpeak) at any residence in existence at the date of the Project Approval and 95% of all blasts over a 12 month period will not exceed 115 dB(Lpeak) at any such residence, unless specific prior agreement is reached with the affected landholder; and
peak particle velocity (ppv) from ground vibration will not exceed 5 mm/s for more than 5% of the total number of blasts over a period of 12 months. The maximum level will not exceed 10 mm/s at any time.
13.2.6 Air Quality
In addition to the dust mitigation measures currently employed, the following will be implemented to ensure particulate matter emissions are minimised:
revegetation of exposed surfaces where possible;
sealing the haul road;
limiting the speed limit on unpaved surfaces to 15 km/hr;
high level watering of unpaved road surfaces (greater than 2L/m2/hr);
covering all loads leaving the site;
building a wheel wash at the end of the unpaved section of the haul road (after the weighbridge); and
wet suppression or chemical coating of static stockpiles.
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT AUSTRALIA 0038419EA/FINAL/20 JUNE 2007 79 An air quality monitoring program will quantify air quality impacts, and to guide future dust management practices. Features of the air quality monitoring plan include:
a series of dust deposition gauges operated in accordance with Australian/New Zealand Standard AS/NZS 3580.10.1:2003; and
a series of high volume or low volume air samplers to monitor levels of PM10, operated in accordance with Australian/New Zealand AS/NZS 3580.9.6:2003 and AS/NZS 3580.9.6:2003.
13.2.7 Rehabilitation
Prior to quarrying commencing within the proposed extension area, Daracon will prepare a detailed offset plan to provide an integrated plan for the whole site, considering the existing quarry areas, the western extension, the areas of box-gum woodland to be preserved, and the areas to be planted as offsets. This plan will be prepared in liaison with the DECC and lodged for approval by the DoP.
13.2.8 Visual Amenity
The following mitigation measures will be implemented to reduce the potential visual impacts of the project:
those areas of the quarry in which the resource has been exhausted will be progressively rehabilitated and revegetated; and
further planting will be undertaken along the ridgeline to the west of the proposed extension area.
13.2.9 Cultural Heritage
Should any Aboriginal objects (artefacts) be exposed during ground surface disturbance, all works involving ground surface disturbance will be suspended. A representative of the Nungaroo Local Aboriginal Land Council and an archaeologist will conduct an assessment of the significance of the Aboriginal object(s) and identify appropriate mitigation and management measures.
13.2.10 Socio-economic
Should the project be approved, Daracon will continue to engage the community in consultation, with the aim of providing the community with up-to-date information in relation to the project and quarry operations in general, and allowing the community to provide feedback to Daracon and raise any issues or concerns. It is anticipated that on-going consultation will include distribution of an annual community newsletter and individual face- to-face meetings with adjoining landowners and other stakeholders when required.
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT AUSTRALIA 0038419EA/FINAL/20 JUNE 2007 80 14 CONCLUSION
Conclusions regarding the overall suitability of the project, taking into consideration the environmental impacts of the project, the suitability of the site and the benefits of the project, are outlined in this final chapter.
14.1 SITE SUITABILITY
The proposed extension to Ardglen Quarry is close to the existing quarry, crushing plant and loader. The proposed extension will access a proven hard rock resource that will continue to supply regional rail, road, civil and other infrastructure projects in the long term. Siting the extension in the proposed location will maximise use of existing infrastructure such as the plant, loader, local skills, water supplies, the old quarry floor and stockpiling area, the face itself and local support industries.
Ardglen Quarry, like all quarries, was located due to the accessible resource, in this case basalt, predominantly for the railways. The quarry was started by the NSW Government and around it grew into a small local community that at one stage boasted its own railway station. For nearly a hundred years, the quarry served the NSW railway system until recently when the quarry was offered for sale.
The Ardglen site offers an excellent potential for continued quarrying. Detailed impact prediction shows that both the existing quarry and the proposed extension, in most cases meet modern social and environmental expectations. In some cases, most notably noise, both the existing quarry and the proposed extension exceed recently imposed criteria. However, additional mitigation measures will ensure that significant additional impacts are not imposed on local residents.
14.2 ECOLOGICALLY SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT
The broadest meaning of ESD is:
“using, conserving and enhancing the community’s resources so that the ecological processes, on which life depends, are maintained and the total quality of life, now and in the future, can be increased” (Commonwealth of Australia 1992).
The main thrust behind ESD is that current and future generations should leave a natural environment that functions as well or better than the one inherited. This proposal addresses meeting societal needs through the provision of a valuable resource, while maintaining a balance with the potential impacts on the physical and social environment of the Ardglen area. The principles of ESD are considered in the following sections.
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT AUSTRALIA 0038419EA/FINAL/20 JUNE 2007 81 14.2.1 Precautionary Principle
Interpretation
According to the Protection of the Environment Administration Act, 1991, the precautionary principle means that if there are threats of serious or irreversible damage, lack of full scientific certainty should not be used as a reason for postponing measures to prevent environmental degradation. This principle was developed in response to one of the great difficulties of interpreting scientific data. The scientific method produces results based on confidence limits. These are controlled by the scope of data acquisition, interpretation methods and general understanding within a particular scientific discipline of a particular phenomenon. This has been used as a way of validating a lack of response to a potential threat of serious or irreversible environmental degradation.
In the application of this principle:
careful application should always be undertaken to avoid serious or irreversible environmental damage; and
an assessment of consequences of various options should be undertaken in formulating a proposal.
ESD requires that uncertainty and the associated risk level be considered in decision making.
Justification
The environmental consequences of the proposed extension of the Ardglen Quarry have been assessed as accurately as possible using appropriate specialists in relevant disciplines where required. The assessment process involved computer modelling, field validation, scientific analysis and interpretation of the individual and cumulative environmental impacts of the proposed development. This process has enabled the impacts of the proposed quarry to be predicted with a reasonable degree of certainty. All predictions, however, contain a degree of uncertainty, which reflects environmental variability. Where there has been any uncertainty in the prediction of impacts throughout the assessment process, a conservative approach was adopted to ensure the worst case scenario was predicted in the assessment of impacts.
The proposal is consistent with the precautionary principle to the extent that all potential threats to the environment have been identified and appropriate mitigation measures have been developed to minimise such impacts. All management procedures form part of the draft Statement of Commitments as outlined in Chapter 13 and will be implemented as part of the project application.
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT AUSTRALIA 0038419EA/FINAL/20 JUNE 2007 82 The environmental investigations undertaken during the preparation of this EA have identified potential impacts with adequate scientific certainty to justify proceeding with the proposed development. The proposal therefore meets the objectives of the precautionary principle of ESD.
14.2.2 Social Equity including Intergenerational Equity
Interpretation
Social equity involves value concepts of justice and fairness so that the basic needs of all sectors of society are met and there is a fair distribution of costs and benefits to improve the well-being and welfare of the community, population or society. Social equity does not imply equality but that there should be equal access to opportunities for improved welfare, with a bias towards advantaging the least well-off sectors of society.
Social equity includes both intra- and intergenerational equity, which requires that the present generation should ensure that the health, diversity and productivity of the environment is maintained or enhanced for the benefit of both present and future generations.
Justification
The proposal is consistent with the principles of social equity and intergenerational equity through the efficient use of a resource that provides fair and wide ranging benefits to society.
The proposed quarry extension will ensure the continued supply of high quality aggregates for rail and civil construction in the Upper Hunter and New England regions at a rate of 500 000 tonnes per year for a 30 year period. The proposed extension will ensure that the resource is extracted efficiently and sustainably and that the existing benefits afforded to the community are maintained or enhanced providing both intra- and intergenerational equity.
14.2.3 Conservation of Biological Diversity and Maintenance of Ecological Integrity
Interpretation
Biological diversity refers to the diversity of genes, species, populations, communities and ecosystems, and the linkages between them. Biological resources provide food, medicines, fibres and industrial products. They are also responsible for vital ecological services such as maintaining soil fertility and the supply of clean and fresh water. Maintaining biological diversity safeguards life support functions and can be considered a minimal requirement for intra- and intergenerational equity.
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT AUSTRALIA 0038419EA/FINAL/20 JUNE 2007 83 Justification
A comprehensive assessment of the likely impacts of the proposal on flora and fauna is detailed in Chapter 5 and Annex D
The proposed extension area contains two vegetation communities: box-gum woodland and non-derived grassland. The box-gum woodland is listed as an EEC under the TSC Act. In addition, the box-gum grassy woodland and derived grassland EEC is listed as critically endangered under the EPBC Act.
The proposed quarry extension will require the removal of approximately 17.8 hectares of this woodland community and will, therefore, contribute to the incremental loss of this habitat within the locality. However, the application area is adjacent to a much larger area of superior quality habitat and the proposed clearing is unlikely to result in the significant loss of habitat on a regional scale. Proposed mitigation measures aim to conserve, enhance and manage additional habitat so that local populations are maintained, ensuring adherence to the principles of the conservation of biological diversity and of ecological integrity.
14.2.4 Improved Valuation and Pricing of Environmental Resources
Interpretation
This principle is a component of intergenerational equity. The principle relates to the need to determine proper values for services provided by the natural environment, such as the ability of the atmosphere to receive gaseous emissions, cultural values and visual amenity.
Applying standard methods of valuation and pricing to environmental resources is a difficult process. This application is largely due to the intangible nature of much of the natural environment. The environment has conventionally been considered a free resource, with the true cost to the environment not factored into cost of production or use of that resource.
This principle involves placing a monetary or social value on the environment that ultimately increases its value so as to decrease future exploitation.
Pollution and future exploitation can be controlled under the polluter pays principle, whereby polluters who degrade the natural environment are responsible and accountable for returning it to its previous condition.
Justification
This EA has examined the environmental consequences of the project and has identified a number of mitigation measures to manage any adverse impacts associated with the proposal. These measures have been included in the draft Statement of Commitments. The mitigation measures have been developed
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT AUSTRALIA 0038419EA/FINAL/20 JUNE 2007 84 concurrently with the environmental assessment and have been incorporated directly into the quarry design. The proposal has, therefore, been refined and involves a higher initial capital expenditure to ensure a sustainable outcome. The additional costs involved in providing these measures provide an indirect indication of the value of environmental resources.
14.3 BENEFITS OF THE PROJECT
Approval of the project will ensure the ongoing and long term supply of rail ballast, high quality aggregates and other quarry products to State Government instrumentalities, local councils and private companies. The project will maximise the efficient use of existing quarry infrastructure and investment through the maintenance of an approved production rate of the existing processing plant.
The extension will enable Daracon to honour existing contracts and continue to provide surety of employment for existing employees and the many subcontractors indirectly employed by the quarry operation. The continuance of the quarry as a source of direct employment is vital to the economic health of the Ardglen community.
The proposal will enable the staged rehabilitation of the 42 metre high western quarry face formed by the previous quarry owner. Extension of the extraction area into the adjoining property will enable the elimination of a significant safety hazard, for both persons and stock and in addition, will significantly improve the visual amenity of the area in the long term.
To offset the loss of vegetation within the proposed extraction area, an offset area of 2:1 will be managed to enhance floristic and fauna values through restriction of access and exclusion of stock and planting or regeneration of indigenous species characteristic of box-gum woodland.
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT AUSTRALIA 0038419EA/FINAL/20 JUNE 2007 85 REFERENCES
ACT Commissioner for the Environment (2004). State of the Environment Report.
Australia and New Zealand Environment and Conservation Council (ANZECC) (1990). Technical Basis for Guidelines to Minimise Annoyance due to Blasting Overpressure and Ground Vibration.
Australia and New Zealand Environment and Conservation Council (ANZECC) (2000). Australian and New Zealand Guidelines for Fresh and Marine Water Quality.
Australian ICOMOS Incorporated (1999). The Burra Charter: the ICOMOS charter for conservation of places of cultural significance Canberra: Australian ICOMOS.
Australian ICOMOS Incorporated (2000). The Burra Charter: the ICOMOS charter for the conservation of places of cultural significance with associated Guidelines and Code on the Ethics of Coexistence Canberra: Australian ICOMOS.
Bell, S A J (2004). The Vegetation of Werakata National Park, Hunter Valley New South Wales, Cunninghamia 8: 331-347.
Bennett A F, Lumsden L F, Alexander J S A, Duncan P E, Johnson P G, Robertson P and Silveira C E (1991). Habitat use by arboreal mammals along an environmental gradient in north-eastern Victoria, Wildlife Research 19: 125-146.
Beruldson, G (2003). Australian Birds their Nests and Eggs, Phoenix Offset, China.
Blastronics Pty Ltd (1994). Drill & Blast Study, Mount Pleasant Mine A report prepared for CNA.
Brayshaw, H (1981). Archaeological Survey of Proposed Enlargement of Glenbawn Dam Unpublished report to NSW Water Resources Commission.
Brayshaw, H (1983). Preliminary archaeological investigation of the proposed Camerons Dam Site on the Pages River, NSW Unpublished report to NSW Water Resource Commission.
Briggs, J.D. and Leigh, J.H. (1996). Rare or Threatened Australian Plants, Centre for Plant Biodiversity Research, CSIRO, Canberra.
Bureau of Meteorology (2006). Climate Data for Murrurundi, NSW, Station number 061392.
City of Tamworth website. http://www.cityoftamworth.com.au/asp /index.asp?pgid=9281&cid=48883&id=7186
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT AUSTRALIA 0038419EA/FINAL/20 JUNE 2007 86 Davey, S M (1993). Notes on the Habitat of Four Australian Owl Species in Australian Raptor Studies Ed. P. Olsen, Australian Raptor Association, Royal Australian Ornithologists Union, Melbourne.
Debus, S J S and Rose, A B (1994). The Masked Owl Tyto novaehollandiae in New South Wales Australian Birds (supplement) 28: 40-64.
Department of Environment and Conservation (2004). Quarterly Air Quality Monitoring Report 1 (January- February – March 2004), Part A: DECC Data.
Department of Environment and Conservation (2004). Quarterly Air Quality Monitoring Report 2 (April-May-June 2004), Part A: DECC Data.
Department of Environment and Conservation (2004). Quarterly Air Quality Monitoring Report 3 (July-August-September 2004), Part A: DECC Data.
Department of Environment and Conservation (2004). Quarterly Air Quality Monitoring Report 4 (October – November-December 2004), Part A: DECC Data.
Department of Environment and Conservation (2004). White box yellow box Blakely’s red gum woodland - endangered ecological community listing. NSW Scientific Committee – final determination.
Department of Environment and Conservation (2005). Approved Methods for the Modelling and Assessment of Air Pollutants in New South Wales.
Department of Environment and Conservation (2005). Threatened Species Profiles, www.threatenedspecies.environment.nsw.gov.au/tsprofile/cma_subregion_li st
Department of Environment and Conservation and Department of Primary Industries (2005). Draft Guidelines for Threatened Species Assessment.
Department of Environment and Heritage (2006). Advice to the Minister for the Environment and Heritage from the Threatened Species Scientific Committee (TSCC) on Amendments to the List of Ecological Communities under the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (EPBC Act).
Effenberger, S (1993). Archaeological survey and assessment single mode optical fibre cable route between Scone and Ellerston exchanges Unpublished report to Telecom Australia.
Environmental Resources Management Australia Pty Ltd (ERM) (in prep.). Proposed Quarry Extension Flora and Fauna Assessment Unpublished report to Daracon Quarries Pty Ltd.
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT AUSTRALIA 0038419EA/FINAL/20 JUNE 2007 87 Environmental Resources Management Australia Pty Ltd (ERM) (2004). Upper Hunter Valley Aboriginal Heritage Baseline Study Unpublished report to Upper Hunter Aboriginal Heritage Trust.
Garnett, S (1992). Threatened and Extinct birds of Australia RAOU No. 82 prepared for Australian National Parks and Wildlife Service, Royal Australasian Ornithologists Union, Victoria.
Gutheridge Haskins and Davey (2005). Peer Review of Air Quality Assessment for Proposed Extension of the Mt Shamrock Quarry Pakenham.
Harden, G J (Ed.) (1992). Flora of New South Wales Volume 3 New South Wales University Press.
Harden, G J (Ed.) (1993). Flora of New South Wales Volume 4 New South Wales University Press, Sydney.
Harden, G J (Ed.) (2000). Flora of New South Wales Volume 1 Revised Edition New South Wales University Press.
Harden, G J (Ed.) (2002). Flora of New South Wales Volume 2 Revised Edition New South Wales University Press.
Hollands, D (1991). Birds of the Night: Owls, Frogmouths and Nightjars of Australia Reed Books Pty Ltd, Balgowlah.
Hoye, G A and Richards, G C (1995). Greater Broad-nosed Bat Scoteanax rueppellii in The Mammals of Australia (Ed. R Strahan) Australian Museum / Reed Publications, Chatswood.
Hughes, P J (1984). An overview of the archaeology of the Hunter Valley, its environmental setting and the impact of development - Volume 1 NSW National Parks and Wildlife Service Hunter Valley Region Archaeology Project Stage 1.
Hunter Central Rivers Catchment Management Authority (2005). Vegetation Profile Volume 2 Final Draft.
Institute of Australian Engineers (1987). Australian Rainfall and Runoff.
Koettig, M (1984). Archaeological investigation in the Merriwa Plateau and Northeastern Mountain Subregions - Volume 3 NSW National Parks and Wildlife Service Hunter Valley Region Archaeology Project Stage 1.Macquarie Generation (2005) Statement of Environmental Effects Liverpool Range Wind Farm, Nowlands Gap, Murrurundi.
Long, A (2005). Aboriginal scarred trees in New South Wales: A field manual Department of Environment and Conservation Sydney.
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT AUSTRALIA 0038419EA/FINAL/20 JUNE 2007 88 McDonald, R C, Isbell R F, Speight J G, Walker J and Hopkins M S (eds). Australian Soil and Land Survey Field Handbook, Second Edition Inkata Press, Australia.
McInnes-Clarke, S K (2002). Soil Landscapes of the Murrurundi 1:100 000 Sheet Department of Land and Water Conservation Sydney.
Menkhorst, P W, Weavers, B W and Alexander J S A (1988). Distribution, Habitat and Conservation Status of the Squirrel Glider Petaurus australis (Petauridae: Marsupialia) in Victoria Australian Mammalogy.
Menkhorst, P W (1987). Diet of the Squirrel Glider Petaurus norfolcensis (Marsupialia : Petauridae) in Victoria Australian Mammalogy pp 109 - 116.Holmes Air Sciences (2005) Air Quality Impact Assessment Tweed Quarry.
Mitchell, P (no date). Quarrying the Ardglen Way Unpublished report provided by the author.
National Pollutant Inventory (2001). Emission Estimation Technique Manual for Mining Version 2.3 December 2001
NEPC (2003). National Environment Protection Ambient Air Quality Measure (as amended).
NSW Environment Protection Authority (EPA) (1995). Environment Protection Authority Best Practice Environmental Management in Mining Rehabilitation and Revegetation.
NSW Environment Protection Authority (EPA) (1994). Environmental Noise Control Manual.
NSW Environment Protection Authority (EPA) (2000). Industrial Noise Policy.
NSW Environment Protection Authority (EPA) (1999). Environmental Criteria for Road Traffic Noise.
NSW Minerals Council (2000). Technical Paper - Particulate Matter and Mining Interim Report.
NSW National Parks and Wildlife Service (1997). Aboriginal Cultural Heritage: Guidelines for Archaeological Survey Reporting.
NSW National Parks and Wildlife Service (2002). White Box-Yellow Box- Blakely’s Red Gum (Box-Gum) Woodland: Fact Sheet for NSW.
NSW National Parks and Wildlife Service (2002). Final Determination to list White Box Yellow Box Blakely’s Red Gum Woodland as an endangered ecological community.
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT AUSTRALIA 0038419EA/FINAL/20 JUNE 2007 89 NSW National Parks and Wildlife Service (2004). Identification Guidelines for Endangered Ecological Communities: White Box Yellow Box Blakely’s Red Gum Woodland (Box-Gum Woodland).
NSW National Parks and Wildlife Service (2005). Threatened species information http://www.nationalparks.nsw.gov.au/npws.nsf/Content/Threatened+spec ies+publications
Pearson, M and Sullivan, S (1995). Looking After Heritage Places: the Basics of Heritage Planning for Managers, Landowners and Administrators Melbourne: University Press Melbourne.
Perry, T M (1963). Australia’s First Frontier: the spread of settlement in New South Wales 1788-1829 Melbourne University Press Melbourne.
Rehwinkel, R (1999). Conservation assessment of grasslands and grassy woodlands in the Goulburn City Council Area A report by NSW National Parks and Wildlife Service for the Goulburn City Council.
Roads and Traffic Authority of NSW (RTA Technology). Environmental Noise Model Windows Version 3.06.
Roads and Traffic Authority of NSW. Road Design Guide.
Schodde, R and Mason, I J (1980). Nocturnal birds of Australia Landsdowne, Melbourne.
State Rail Authority of NSW (1993). Environmental Impact Statement - SRA Ardglen Railway Quarry, Murrurundi.
Story, R, Galloway R W, van de Graaff, R H M and Tweedie A D (1963). General Report on the Lands of the Hunter Valley Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation Melbourne.
Suckling, G C (1995). Squirrel Glider, Petaurus norfolcensis in The Mammals of Australia (Ed. R Strahan) Australian Museum/Reed Publications, Chatswood pp 234-235.
Thackway, R and Cresswell, I D (1995). An Interim Biogeographic Regionalisation for Australia: A Framework for Establishing the National System of Reserves Version 4.0 Australian Nature Conservation Agency, Canberra.
Tidemann, C R (1999). Biology and management of the Grey-headed Flying- fox, Pteropus poloiocephalus Acta Chiropterologica 1: 151-164.
UK Department of Transport (1988). Calculation of Road Traffic Noise.
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT AUSTRALIA 0038419EA/FINAL/20 JUNE 2007 90 Umwelt Australia Pty Ltd (2004). Cultural Heritage Assessment of a Proposed Open Cut Coal Mine at South Bickham, near Wingen NSW Report to Bickham Coal Company.
US Environment Protection Authority (1995). Aggregate Handling and Storage Piles Chapter 13.2.4-1 of the Compilation of Air Pollutant Emission Factors AP-42 Fourth Edition, United States Environmental Protection Agency.
US Environment Protection Authority (1998). Western Surface Coal Mining Chapter 11.9 of the Compilation of Air Pollutant Emission Factors AP-42 Fourth Edition, United States Environmental Protection Agency.
US Environment Protection Authority (2004). Crushed Stone Processing and Pulverised Mineral Processing, Chapter 11.19.2 of the Compilation of Air Pollutant Emission Factors AP-42 Fourth Edition, United States Environmental Protection Agency.
US Environment Protection Authority (2006). Unpaved Roads, Draft Chapter 13.2.2 of the Compilation of Air Pollutant Emission Factors AP-42 Fourth Edition, United States Environmental Protection Agency.
US Environment Protection Authority (2006). Paved Roads, draft Chapter 13.2.1 of the Compilation of Air Pollutant Emission Factors AP-42 Fourth Edition, United States Environmental Protection Agency.
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT AUSTRALIA 0038419EA/FINAL/20 JUNE 2007 91 GLOSSARY OF TERMS AND ACRONYMS
Term Description ABL Assessment Background Level (ABL) is defined in the INP as a single figure background level for each assessment period (day, evening and night). It is the tenth percentile of the measured L90 statistical noise levels. ABS Australian Bureau of Statistics AHD Australian Height Datum AHIMS Aboriginal Heritage Information Management System ANFO Ammonium Nitrate Fuel Oil ANZECC Australian and New Zealand Environment Conservation Council ARI Average Recurrence Interval AR&R Australian Rainfall and Runoff ARTC Australian Rail Track Corporation AUSPLUME DECC AUSPLUME Version 6.0 BoM Bureau of Meteorology BSD Bore Search Database CORTN United Kingdom 1988 Calculation of Road Traffic Noise Daracon Daracon Quarries dB(A) Noise is measured in units called decibels (dB). There are several scales for describing noise, the most common being the ‘A-weighted’ scale. This attempts to closely approximate the frequency response of the human ear. DECC Department of Environment and Conservation DEH Department of the Environment and Heritage DGRs Director-General’s Requirements DNR Department of Natural Resources DPI Department of Primary Industries DoP Department of Planning EA Environmental Assessment EAR Environmental Assessment Report ECRTN Environmental Criteria for Road Traffic Noise EEC Endangered Ecological Community EIA Environmental Impact Assessment EMP Environmental Management Plan EMS Environmental Management System ENM Environmental Noise Model EPA Environmental Protection Authority EP&A Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1975 EPBC Environmental Protection and Biodiversity Act 1999 ERM Environmental Resources Management (Australia) Pty Ltd ESD Ecologically Sustainable Development IFD Intensity Frequency Duration INP Industrial Noise Policy ISO International Standards Organisation
L1 The noise level exceeded for 1 % of a measurement period.
L10 A noise level which is exceeded 10 % of the time. It is approximately equivalent to the average of maximum noise levels.
L90 Commonly referred to as the background noise, this is the level exceeded 90 % of the time. LEP Local Environment Plan LGA Local Government Area MIC Maximum Instantaneous Charge. mtpa Million tonnes per annum NEPC National Environmental Planning Criteria NEPM National Environmental Planning Measure NLALC Nungaroo Aboriginal Land Council
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT AUSTRALIA 0038419EA/FINAL/20 JUNE 2007 92 Term Description PAFV Polished Aggregate Friction Value PFM Planning Focus Meeting
PM2.5 Particulate Matter less than 2.5 microns in diameter
PM10 Particulate Matter less than 10 microns in diameter PoEO Protection of the Environment Operations Act ppv Peak Particle Velocity. The maximum velocity of a particle of the transmission medium, used in assessment of vibration. RBL The Rating Background Level (RBL) is an overall single figure background level representing each assessment period over the whole monitoring period. The RBL is used to determine the intrusiveness criteria for noise assessment purposes and is the median of the ABL’s. ROTAP Rare or Threatened Australian Plants RTA NSW Roads and traffic Authority SEPP State Environmental Planning Policy TSC Threatened Species Conservation Act 1995 TSP Total Suspended Particulates US EPA The United States Environmental Protection Agency
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT AUSTRALIA 0038419EA/FINAL/20 JUNE 2007 93 ANNEXURES ERM has over 100 offices across the following countries worldwide
Australia Netherlands Argentina New Zealand Belgium Peru Brazil Poland China Portugal France Puerto Rico Germany Singapore Hong Kong Spain Hungary Sri Lanka India Sweden Indonesia Taiwan Ireland Thailand Italy UK Japan USA Korea Venezuela Malaysia Vietnam Mexico
Environmental Resources Management
53 Bonville Ave Thornton NSW 2322 PO Box 71, Thornton NSW 2322
T: 61 2 4964 2150 F: 61 2 4964 2152 www.erm.com