Referral of proposed action What is a referral? The Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (the EPBC Act) provides for the protection of the environment, especially matters of national environmental significance (NES). Under the EPBC Act, a person must not take an action that has, will have, or is likely to have a significant impact on any of the matters of NES without approval from the Australian Government Environment Minister or the Minister’s delegate. (Further references to ‘the Minister’ in this form include references to the Minister’s delegate.) To obtain approval from the Environment Minister, a proposed action should be referred. The purpose of a referral is to obtain a decision on whether your proposed action will need formal assessment and approval under the EPBC Act. Your referral will be the principal basis for the Minister’s decision as to whether approval is necessary and, if so, the type of assessment that will be undertaken. These decisions are made within 20 business days, provided sufficient information is provided in the referral.
Who can make a referral? Referrals may be made by or on behalf of a person proposing to take an action, the Commonwealth or a Commonwealth agency, a state or territory government, or agency, provided that the relevant government or agency has administrative responsibilities relating to the action.
When do I need to make a referral? A referral must be made for actions that are likely to have a significant impact on the following matters protected by Part 3 of the EPBC Act: World Heritage properties (sections 12 and 15A) National Heritage places (sections 15B and 15C) Wetlands of international importance (sections 16 and 17B) Listed threatened species and communities (sections 18 and 18A) Listed migratory species (sections 20 and 20A) Protection of the environment from nuclear actions (sections 21 and 22A) Commonwealth marine environment (sections 23 and 24A) Great Barrier Reef Marine Park (sections 24B and 24C) A water resource, in relation to coal seam gas development and large coal mining development (sections 24D and 24E) The environment, if the action involves Commonwealth land (sections 26 and 27A), including: o actions that are likely to have a significant impact on the environment of Commonwealth land (even if taken outside Commonwealth land); o actions taken on Commonwealth land that may have a significant impact on the environment generally; The environment, if the action is taken by the Commonwealth (section 28) Commonwealth Heritage places outside the Australian jurisdiction (sections 27B and 27C) You may still make a referral if you believe your action is not going to have a significant impact, or if you are unsure. This will provide a greater level of certainty that Commonwealth assessment requirements have been met. To help you decide whether or not your proposed action requires approval (and therefore, if you should make a referral), the following guidance is available from the Department’s website: the Policy Statement titled Significant Impact Guidelines 1.1 – Matters of National Environmental Significance. Additional sectoral guidelines are also available.
001 Referral of proposed action v May 2016 Page 1 of 51 the Policy Statement titled Significant Impact Guidelines 1.2 - Actions on, or impacting upon, Commonwealth land, and actions by Commonwealth agencies. the Policy Statement titled Significant Impact Guidelines: Coal seam gas and large coal mining developments—Impacts on water resources. the interactive map tool (enter a location to obtain a report on what matters of NES may occur in that location). Can I refer part of a larger action? In certain circumstances, the Minister may not accept a referral for an action that is a component of a larger action and may request the person proposing to take the action to refer the larger action for consideration under the EPBC Act (Section 74A, EPBC Act). If you wish to make a referral for a staged or component referral, read ‘Fact Sheet 6 Staged Developments/Split Referrals’ and contact the Referrals Gateway (1800 803 772). Do I need a permit? Some activities may also require a permit under other sections of the EPBC Act or another law of the Commonwealth. Information is available on the Department’s web site. Is your action in the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park? If your action is in the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park it may require permission under the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Act 1975 (GBRMP Act). If a permission is required, referral of the action under the EPBC Act is deemed to be an application under the GBRMP Act (see section 37AB, GBRMP Act). This referral will be forwarded to the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority (the Authority) for the Authority to commence its permit processes as required under the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Regulations 1983. If a permission is not required under the GBRMP Act, no approval under the EPBC Act is required (see section 43, EPBC Act). The Authority can provide advice on relevant permission requirements applying to activities in the Marine Park. The Authority is responsible for assessing applications for permissions under the GBRMP Act, GBRMP Regulations and Zoning Plan. Where assessment and approval is also required under the EPBC Act, a single integrated assessment for the purposes of both Acts will apply in most cases. Further information on environmental approval requirements applying to actions in the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park is available from http://www.gbrmpa.gov.au/ or by contacting GBRMPA's Environmental Assessment and Management Section on (07) 4750 0700. The Authority may require a permit application assessment fee to be paid in relation to the assessment of applications for permissions required under the GBRMP Act, even if the permission is made as a referral under the EPBC Act. Further information on this is available from the Authority: Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority 2-68 Flinders Street PO Box 1379 Townsville QLD 4810 AUSTRALIA Phone: + 61 7 4750 0700 Fax: + 61 7 4772 6093 www.gbrmpa.gov.au
What information do I need to provide? Completing all parts of this form will ensure that you submit the required information and will also assist the Department to process your referral efficiently. If a section of the referral document is not applicable to your proposal enter N/A. You can complete your referral by entering your information into this Word file. Instructions Instructions are provided in blue text throughout the form. Attachments/supporting information The referral form should contain sufficient information to provide an adequate basis for a decision on the likely impacts of the proposed action. You should also provide supporting documentation, such as environmental reports or surveys, as attachments.
001 Referral of proposed action v May 2016 Page 2 of 51 Coloured maps, figures or photographs to help explain the project and its location should also be submitted with your referral. Aerial photographs, in particular, can provide a useful perspective and context. Figures should be good quality as they may be scanned and viewed electronically as black and white documents. Maps should be of a scale that clearly shows the location of the proposed action and any environmental aspects of interest. Please ensure any attachments are below three megabytes (3mb) as they will be published on the Department’s website for public comment. To minimise file size, enclose maps and figures as separate files if necessary. If unsure, contact the Referrals Gateway (email address below) for advice. Attachments larger than three megabytes (3mb) may delay processing of your referral. Note: the Minister may decide not to publish information that the Minister is satisfied is commercial-in-confidence. How do I pay for my referral? From 1 October 2014 the Australian Government commenced cost recovery arrangements for environmental assessments and some strategic assessments under the EPBC Act. If an action is referred on or after 1 October 2014, then cost recovery will apply to both the referral and any assessment activities undertaken. Further information regarding cost recovery can be found on the Department’s website.
Payment of the referral fee can be made using one of the following methods: EFT Payments can be made to:
BSB: 092-009 Bank Account No. 115859 Amount: $7352 Account Name: Department of the Environment. Bank: Reserve Bank of Australia Bank Address: 20-22 London Circuit Canberra ACT 2601 Description: The reference number provided (see note below)
Cheque - Payable to “Department of the Environment”. Include the reference number provided (see note below), and if posted, address:
The Referrals Gateway Environment Assessment Branch Department of the Environment GPO Box 787 Canberra ACT 2601
Credit Card
Please contact the Collector of Public Money (CPM) directly (call (02) 6274 2930 or 6274 20260 and provide the reference number (see note below).
Note: in order to receive a reference number, submit your referral and the Referrals Gateway will email you the reference number.
How do I submit a referral? Referrals may be submitted by mail or email. Mail to: Referrals Gateway Environment Assessment Branch Department of Environment GPO Box 787 CANBERRA ACT 2601
If submitting via mail, electronic copies of documentation (on CD/DVD or by email) are required.
001 Referral of proposed action v May 2016 Page 3 of 51 Email to: [email protected] Clearly mark the email as a ‘Referral under the EPBC Act’. Attach the referral as a Microsoft Word file and, if possible, a PDF file. Follow up with a mailed hardcopy including copies of any attachments or supporting reports.
What happens next? Following receipt of a valid referral (containing all required information) you will be advised of the next steps in the process, and the referral and attachments will be published on the Department’s web site for public comment. The Department will write to you within 20 business days to advise you of the outcome of your referral and whether or not formal assessment and approval under the EPBC Act is required. There are a number of possible decisions regarding your referral: The proposed action is NOT LIKELY to have a significant impact and does NOT NEED approval No further consideration is required under the environmental assessment provisions of the EPBC Act and the action can proceed (subject to any other Commonwealth, state or local government requirements). The proposed action is NOT LIKELY to have a significant impact IF undertaken in a particular manner The action can proceed if undertaken in a particular manner (subject to any other Commonwealth, state or local government requirements). The particular manner in which you must carry out the action will be identified as part of the final decision. You must report your compliance with the particular manner to the Department. The proposed action is LIKELY to have a significant impact and does NEED approval If the action is likely to have a significant impact a decision will be made that it is a controlled action. The particular matters upon which the action may have a significant impact (such as World Heritage values or threatened species) are known as the controlling provisions. The controlled action is subject to a public assessment process before a final decision can be made about whether to approve it. The assessment approach will usually be decided at the same time as the controlled action decision. (Further information about the levels of assessment and basis for deciding the approach are available on the Department’s web site.) The proposed action would have UNACCEPTABLE impacts and CANNOT proceed The Minister may decide, on the basis of the information in the referral, that a referred action would have clearly unacceptable impacts on a protected matter and cannot proceed. Compliance audits If a decision is made to approve a project, the Department may audit it at any time to ensure that it is completed in accordance with the approval decision or the information provided in the referral. If the project changes, such that the likelihood of significant impacts could vary, you should write to the Department to advise of the changes. If your project is in the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park and a decision is made to approve it, the Authority may also audit it. (See “Is your action in the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park,” p.2, for more details).
For more information call the Department of the Environment Community Information Unit on 1800 803 772 or visit the web site http://www.environment.gov.au/topics/about-us/legislation/environment-protection-and- biodiversity-conservation-act-1999 All the information you need to make a referral, including documents referenced in this form, can be accessed from the above web site.
001 Referral of proposed action v May 2016 Page 4 of 51 Referral of proposed action
Proposed Expansion of Extractive Operation, Clarkes Road, Gin Gin Project title:
1 Summary of proposed action NOTE: You must also attach a map/plan(s) and associated geographic information system (GIS) vector (shapefile) dataset showing the location and approximate boundaries of the area in which the project is to occur. Maps in A4 size are preferred. You must also attach a map(s)/plan(s) showing the location and boundaries of the project area in respect to any features identified in 3.1 & 3.2, as well as the extent of any freehold, leasehold or other tenure identified in 3.3(i).
1.1 Short description Use 2 or 3 sentences to uniquely identify the proposed action and its location.
Coachtrail Investments Pty Ltd is proposing to expand an existing quarry located on Clarkes Road, Gin Gin, Queensland. The expansion will include extracting, screening and processing up to 250,000 tonne per annum of quarry material within eight extraction areas over five stages.
1.2 Latitude and longitude Latitude and longitude details are used to accurately map the boundary of the proposed action. If these coordinates are inaccurate or insufficient it may delay the processing of your referral.
001 Referral of proposed action v May 2016 Page 5 of 51 Location point (refer Figure 1) Latitude Longitude 1 -25.00885344 152.0281082 2 -25.00962137 152.0287181 3 -25.01019633 152.0285371 4 -25.01053397 152.0282784 5 -25.01091499 152.028124 6 -25.01113433 152.0276569 7 -25.01146654 152.0269399 8 -25.01146154 152.025804 9 -25.01204152 152.0247384 10 -25.01228593 152.0237727 11 -25.01288328 152.020569 12 -25.01263069 152.0201507 13 -25.01235466 152.0194062 14 -25.01242641 152.0189569 15 -25.01227102 152.0187625 16 -25.01218759 152.0185912 17 -25.01212471 152.0183608 18 -25.01186717 152.0182775 19 -25.01175201 152.0183095 20 -25.0115759 152.0183286 21 -25.01133421 152.0183082 22 -25.01142378 152.0173148 23 -25.0114072 152.0172021 24 -25.01141414 152.0170738 25 -25.01142397 152.0170729 26 -25.01196398 152.0167553 27 -25.01297645 152.0173001 28 -25.01188597 152.013511 29 -25.010321 152.0158768 30 -25.00976581 152.0173631 31 -25.0097636 152.017369 32 -25.00915425 152.0179797 33 -25.00885269 152.0183417 34 -25.0089406 152.0188444 35 -25.00891342 152.0190565 36 -25.00756322 152.0210466 37 -25.00735234 152.0209832 38 -25.00699901 152.0210762 39 -25.00685484 152.0212577 40 -25.00659718 152.0214816 41 -25.00624672 152.0220115 42 -25.00580846 152.0226462 43 -25.00561496 152.0230153 44 -25.00449432 152.0246471 45 -25.00505389 152.0251628 46 -25.00520035 152.0253281 47 -25.00537158 152.0254169 48 -25.00570122 152.0255669
001 Referral of proposed action v May 2016 Page 6 of 51 1.3 Locality and property description Provide a brief physical description of the property on which the proposed action will take place and the project location (eg. proximity to major towns, or for off-shore projects, shortest distance to mainland).
The project area is located on land formally described as Lot 104 on RP21941 and is located along Clarkes Road, Gin Gin, Queensland; refer to Figure 1 for a locality plan of the site. The closest town is Gin Gin, which is located approximately 6.5 km south-west of ther project area.
1.4 Size of the development The location of the development footprint within the project area extent is footprint or work area shown in Figure 1. (hectares) The project area covers approximately 69 ha (depicted by the red perimeter line in Figure 1). The proposed development footprint (situated within the extent of the project area) is comprised of the domains listed in the Table below.
Domain Description Total surface area (ha) Expanded operations Comprises the existing and 4.5 area future operations areas Staged extraction area Comprises eight proposed 44 quarrying areas Haul road Haul road from the initial 0.5 crusher site to the operations area Sediment catch dams Includes eight sediment catch 0.8 dams
1.5 Street address of the site Clarkes Road, Delan QLD 4671
The closest named crossroad is Mcilwraith Road, approximately 300 m west of the project area. 1.6 Lot description Describe the lot numbers and title description, if known.
Lot 104 on RP21941 1.7 Local Government Area and Council contact (if known) If the project is subject to local government planning approval, provide the name of the relevant council contact officer. Bundaberg Regional Council local government area. 1.8 Time frame Specify the time frame in which the action will be taken including the estimated start date of construction/operation.
Construction is anticipated to commence within two years, dependent on finance and State Government approvals. The project will be developed over a 30-40 year period to minimise potential environmental impacts at any one time. 1.9 Alternatives to proposed X No action Were any feasible alternatives to taking the proposed action (including not taking the action) Yes, you must also complete section 2.2 considered but are not proposed?
1.10 X No
001 Referral of proposed action v May 2016 Page 7 of 51 Alternative time frames etc Yes, you must also complete Section 2.3. For each alternative, Does the proposed action location, time frame, or activity identified, you must also complete include alternative time frames, details in Sections 1.2-1.9, 2.4-2.7 and 3.3 (where relevant). locations or activities? 1.11 State assessment X No Is the action subject to a state or territory environmental Yes, you must also complete Section 2.5 impact assessment? 1.12 Component of larger action X No Is the proposed action a component of a larger action? Yes, you must also complete Section 2.7 1.13 Related actions/proposals X No Is the proposed action related to other actions or proposals in the Yes, provide details: region (if known)? 1.14 Australian Government X No funding Has the person proposing to Yes, provide details: take the action received any Australian Government grant funding to undertake this project? 1.15 Great Barrier Reef Marine X No Park Yes, you must also complete Section 3.1 (h), 3.2 (e) Is the proposed action inside the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park?
001 Referral of proposed action v May 2016 Page 8 of 51 400,000 400,400 400,800 401,200 401,600 402,000
65
44 Bundaberg !( .! 85 Gin Gin 85 .! 100 45 !( 46 !( Childers 47 .! Fraser Island !( .! 43 !( 48 42 !( !( 115 Maryborough .! 41 !(
7,234,000 40 7,234,000 !( * 110 39 !( 7 38 SD7 3 70 !( RL 90 135 RL 110 While every care is take to ensure the accuracy of this information, the Department of Natural Resources and Mines makes no representations or warranties about its accuracy, reliability, completeness or suitability 37 95 for any particular purpose and disclaims all responsibility and all liability ( including without limitation, liability !( in negligence) for all expensed, losses, damages (including indirect or consequential damage) and costs which might be incurred as a result of the information being inaccurate or incomplete in any way and for 36
any reasons. © State of Queensland (Department of Natural Resources and Mines) 2016. !( 120
140 125 70 SD8 90 *
135 130 1 33 2 !( !( 34 35 RL 110 !( !(
105 32 105 !(
100 2 !( Quarry Operations Area 1 31 RL 110 (Product stockpile !( 115 30 Initial Crusher Site 4
7,233,600 crusher RL 95 3 7,233,600 !( 110 site office 29 weigh bridge) !( SD6 4 55 5 !( 1A RL 70 RL 90 6 *5 RL 70 !( 95 SD5 6 Existing Dam !(
95
100 21 24 25 22 !( 8 * 7 !( !( !( !( Existing SD1 !( !( 20 90 Operations Area 23 !( 8 19 RL 85 SD4 28 * !( !( 26 !( 18 9 !( * !( !( 17 16 SD2 SD3 !( 10 Existing Operations Area !( 13 !( 15 !( !( * * 75 14 12 60 !( 11 85 27 !( !( 65 7,233,200 7,233,200
90
105
65 80
95 90 90
85 95 95 90
90
105 95
400,000 400,400 400,800 401,200 401,600 402,000
Coachtrail Investments Pty Ltd Job Number 41-29519 Paper Size A3 LEGEND SARA Information Request Revision 0 0 25 50 100 150 200 !( EPBC Referral Coordinates Existing Track Existing Operations Area 2 7 Protected Date 18 Apr 2017 Haul Road (10m wide) General Quarrying Areas 3 8 Vegetation Metres * Sediment Dam 5m Contours Extraction Area 4 Initial Crusher Site Cadastre Map Projection: Transverse Mercator Blasting Direction General extraction area boundary 1 5 Operations Area Horizontal Datum: GDA 1994 o Grid: GDA 1994 MGA Zone 56 Direction Drainage Runoff Existing Dam 1A 6 Locality plan Figure 1 G:\41\29519\GIS\Maps\MXD\41-29519_011_rev_0.mxd 145 Ann Street Brisbane 4000 Australia T 61 7 3316 3000 F 61 7 3316 3333 E [email protected] W www.ghd.com © 2017. Whilst every care has been taken to prepare this map, GHD, DNRM, GE and GA make no representations or warranties about its accuracy, reliability, completeness or suitability for any particular purpose and cannot accept liability and responsibility of any kind (whether in contract, tort or otherwise) for any expenses, losses, damages and/or costs (including indirect or consequential damage) which are or may be incurred by any party as a result of the map being inaccurate, incomplete or unsuitable in any way and for any reason. Data source: GHD, Existing Track (2016), EPBC Referral Coordinates, Quarry Detail (2016), DNRM, Cadstre (2016), 5m Contours (2015), Watercourse (2014), Railways (2014), Highways (2015), Regional Ecosystems (2015), hillshade (2012), Towns (2015), GA, mainlands (2008), Google Imagery Extracted 11/05/2016. Created by: AJ 2 Detailed description of proposed action NOTE: It is important that the description is complete and includes all components and activities associated with the action. If certain related components are not intended to be included within the scope of the referral, this should be clearly explained in section 2.7.
2.1 Description of proposed action This should be a detailed description outlining all activities and aspects of the proposed action and should reference figures and/or attachments, as appropriate.
The proposed action includes the expansion of the existing quarry operations within the project area at Clarkes Road, Gin Gin (described as Lot 104 on RP21941) (herein referred to as ‘the site’). The expanded operation will provide increased supply of road base and other quarry materials in response to increased current and forecast demand in the broader region. The existing facility is licensed to extract and screen up to 49,900 tonne of quarry materials per year. The proposed action seeks to increase operations for extraction, screening and processing of quarry materials up to 250,000 tonne per annum. A locality plan showing the orientation and scale of the proposed quarry development is provided in Figure 1.
Proposed activities The proposed expansion will involve the following activities: Progressive development of new extraction areas (vegetation clearing, blasting and extraction of up to 250,000 tonne of quarry materials per annum) Development of new material stockpile areas Installation of new facilities (proposed weighbridge and site office) Construction of new sediment catch dams Screening and processing of quarry materials (up to 250,000 tonne per annum) Progressive rehabilitation of extraction areas
The development of extraction areas will be staged over the life of the quarry, such that no more than 10 ha of the land surface within the proposed extraction areas (shown in Figure 1) will be actively developed at any one time. The 10 ha under development may comprise multiple quarry pits across various extraction areas but the total surface area subject to active quarrying operations will not exceed 10 ha. Extraction areas (pits) will be progressively rehabilitated following extraction operations and new areas (in addition to the 10 ha) will not be developed until an equivalent area has been successfully rehabilitated. By way of example, if 50% of the 10 ha area under development has been successfully rehabilitated, an additional 5 ha would be available for development. This approach will allow flexibility to cater for changing market demands whilst also limiting the impact on the environment throughout the life of the operation. The total surface area extents of the proposed operational and extraction areas (shown in Figure 1) are provided in Table 2.
Table 2: Surface area extents of the proposed operational and extraction areas Area Surface area (ha)
Operations Area and Haul Road 5.0 Extraction Area 1 5.615 Extraction Area 2 4.131 Extraction Area 3 12.419 Extraction Area 4 6.185 Extraction Area 5 1.414 Extraction Area 6 1.245 Extraction Area 7 5.274 Extraction Area 8 7.715
001 Referral of proposed action v May 2016 Page 10 of 51 Proposed facilities The quarry operation will comprise the following facilities: Quarry access road and haul road Operations office and carpark Crusher feed stockpile area Crusher plant pad Product stockpile area Initial crushing pad RL 90 Sediment catch dams Water management system
2.2 Alternatives to taking the proposed action This should be a detailed description outlining any feasible alternatives to taking the proposed action (including not taking the action) that were considered but are not proposed (note, this is distinct from any proposed alternatives relating to location, time frames, or activities – see section 2.3). Not applicable.
2.3 Alternative locations, time frames or activities that form part of the referred action If you have identified that the proposed action includes alternative time frames, locations or activities (in section 1.10) you must complete this section. Describe any alternatives related to the physical location of the action, time frames within which the action is to be taken and alternative methods or activities for undertaking the action. For each alternative location, time frame or activity identified, you must also complete (where relevant) the details in sections 1.2-1.9, 2.4-2.7, 3.3 and 4. Please note, if the action that you propose to take is determined to be a controlled action, any alternative locations, time frames or activities that are identified here may be subject to environmental assessment and a decision on whether to approve the alternative. Not applicable.
2.4 Context, planning framework and state/local government requirements Explain the context in which the action is proposed, including any relevant planning framework at the state and/or local government level (e.g. within scope of a management plan, planning initiative or policy framework). Describe any Commonwealth or state legislation or policies under which approvals are required or will be considered against.
State legislation or policies that have bearing on this project are discussed in Table 1.
Table 1 Relevant legislation and policies Legislation/Policy Requirement Administrating Authority Aboriginal Cultural Under the Aboriginal Cultural Heritage Act 2003, a Duty of Care applies at Department of Heritage Act 2003 all times to all persons undertaking a land-use activity. Aboriginal and Torres Strait No Aboriginal cultural heritage sites were recorded within the project area Islander during a search of the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Cultural Partnerships Heritage Database and Register. (DATSIP) Environmental The proposed quarry is a prescribed Environmentally Relevant Activity Department of Protection Act 1994 (ERA) under the Queensland Environmental Protection Act 1994 (EP Act). Environment and An application for an Environmental Authority to carry out the ERA has been Heritage Environmental submitted as part of a Development Application for a Material Change of Protection Protection Regulation Use for the proposed expansion of the existing quarry. (DEHP) 2008 All persons also have an obligation under the EP Act to not carry out any activity that causes or is likely to cause environmental harm unless all reasonable and practicable measures are taken to prevent or minimise harm.
The General Environmental Duty (GED) and Duty to Notify set out under Section 320 – 320G of the Environmental Protection Act 1994 remains applicable at all times for all persons undertaking works on site.
Onsite construction works are also required to comply with the Regulation and the following relevant EPPs: Environmental Protection (Air) Policy 2008 Environmental Protection (Noise) Policy 2008 Environmental Protection (Water) Policy 2009 Biosecurity Act 2014 All persons must take all reasonable and practical steps to minimise the DAF risks associated with invasive plants and animals under their control.
001 Referral of proposed action v May 2016 Page 11 of 51 Legislation/Policy Requirement Administrating Authority Nature Conservation The project is located within a ‘high risk area’ on DEHP’s Flora Survey DEHP Act 1992 (NC Act) Trigger mapping. This triggers a requirement to undertake targeted searches for flora species that are protected plants (endangered, vulnerable Nature Conservation or near threatened) pursuant to the NC Act. A vegetation survey conducted (Wildlife by WBB in 2016 did not identify any protected plants within the project area; Management) however, the applicant will be required to submit a clearing permit Regulation 2006 application to DEHP under section 261ZA of the Nature Conservation (Wildlife Management) Regulation 2006 if intending to clear any native vegetation within 100 m of a known protected plant.
Given that the works are not anticipated to impact breeding habitat for any fauna species listed as ‘threatened’ under the NC Act, a high risk SMP is not required. Sustainable Planning A Development Application for a Material Change of Use— Department of Act 2009 Extractive Industry (Extension to existing gravel quarry including extracting, Infrastructure, screening and processing up to 250,000 tonne per annum over four stages) Local has been lodged with Bundaberg Government and Regional Council and is currebntly being assessed. Planning Vegetation The project area is mapped by a certified PMAV (PMAV 2015/002421) as Department of Management Act containing least concern regional ecosystem 12.910.2. Propsed vegetation Natural 1999 (VM Act) clearing for the project will be assessed under the VM Act by the Resources and Queensland Government during its assessment of the Development Mines (DNRM) Application for a Material Change of Use for the proposed expansion of the existing quarry.
2.5 Environmental impact assessments under Commonwealth, state or territory legislation If you have identified that the proposed action will be or has been subject to a state or territory environmental impact statement (in section 1.11) you must complete this section. Describe any environmental assessment of the relevant impacts of the project that has been, is being, or will be carried out under state or territory legislation. Specify the type and nature of the assessment, the relevant legislation and the current status of any assessments or approvals. Where possible, provide contact details for the state/territory assessment contact officer. Describe or summarise any public consultation undertaken, or to be undertaken, during the assessment. Attach copies of relevant assessment documentation and outcomes of public consultations (if available). Not applicable. No environmental impact assessments are required or have been undertaken under Commonwealth or State legislation. 2.6 Public consultation (including with Indigenous stakeholders) Your referral must include a description of any public consultation that has been, or is being, undertaken. Where Indigenous stakeholders are likely to be affected by your proposed action, your referral should describe any consultations undertaken with Indigenous stakeholders. Identify the relevant stakeholders and the status of consultations at the time of the referral. Where appropriate include copies of documents recording the outcomes of any consultations. Public consultation No public consultation has been undertaken for the proposed works. Consultation with Aboriginal Parties A search of the Queensland Government Department of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Partnerships (DATSIP) cultural heritage database for a search area on Lot 104/RP21941 found there were: No cultural heritage site points or polygons recorded within the search area No cultural heritage management plans within the search area No Designated Landscape Areas (DLA) within the search area No Registered Study Cultural Heritage Areas within the search area 2.7 A staged development or component of a larger project If you have identified that the proposed action is a component of a larger action (in section 1.12) you must complete this section. Provide information about the larger action and details of any interdependency between the stages/components and the larger action. You may also provide justification as to why you believe it is reasonable for the referred action to be considered separately from the larger proposal (eg. the referred action is ‘stand-alone’ and viable in its own right, there are separate responsibilities for component actions or approvals have been split in a similar way at the state or local government levels).
Not applicable. The existing quarry is not a larger action than that proposed in this referral document.
001 Referral of proposed action v May 2016 Page 12 of 51 3 Description of environment & likely impacts
3.1 Matters of national environmental significance Describe the affected area and the likely impacts of the proposal, emphasising the relevant matters protected by the EPBC Act. Refer to relevant maps as appropriate. The interactive map tool can help determine whether matters of national environmental significance or other matters protected by the EPBC Act are likely to occur in your area of interest.
Your assessment of likely impacts should refer to the following resources (available from the Department’s web site): specific values of individual World Heritage properties and National Heritage places and the ecological character of Ramsar wetlands; profiles of relevant species/communities (where available), that will assist in the identification of whether there is likely to be a significant impact on them if the proposal proceeds; Significant Impact Guidelines 1.1 – Matters of National Environmental Significance; and associated sectoral and species policy statements available on the web site, as relevant.
Your assessment of likely impacts should consider whether a bioregional plan is relevant to your proposal. The Minister has prepared four marine bioregional plans (MBP) in accordance with section 176. It is likely that the MBP’s will be more commonly relevant where listed threatened species, listed migratory species or a Commonwealth marine area is considered.
Note that even if your proposal will not be taken in a World Heritage area, Ramsar wetland, Commonwealth marine area, the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park or on Commonwealth land, it could still impact upon these areas (for example, through downstream impacts). Consideration of likely impacts should include both direct and indirect impacts.
3.1 (a) World Heritage Properties
Description No World Heritage Properties have been identified in the EPBC Act Protected Matters Report as occurring within a 10 km radius of the site. The nearest World Heritage Places are located approximately 60 km north-east of the site (Great Barrier Reef) and 100 km east-south-east of the site (Fraser Island)
Nature and extent of likely impact Address any impacts on the World Heritage values of any World Heritage property. No World Heritage Properties will be directly or indirectly impacted by the proposed works.
3.1 (b) National Heritage Places
Description No National Heritage Places have been identified in the EPBC Act Protected Matters Report as occurring within a 10 km radius of the site. The nearest National Heritage Places are located approximately 60 km north-east of the site (Great Barrier Reef) and 100 km east-south-east of the site (Fraser Island)
Nature and extent of likely impact Address any impacts on the National Heritage values of any National Heritage place. No National Heritage Places will be directly or indirectly impacted by the proposed works.
001 Referral of proposed action v May 2016 Page 13 of 51 3.1 (c) Wetlands of International Importance (declared Ramsar wetlands) Description No Wetlands of International Importance have been identified in the EPBC Act Protected Matters Report as occurring within a 10 km radius of the site. The nearest Wetland of International Importance is located approximately 94 km south-east of the site (Great Sandy Strait (including Great Sandy Strait, Tin Can Bay and Tin Can Inlet)).
Nature and extent of likely impact Address any impacts on the ecological character of any Ramsar wetlands. No Wetlands of International Importance will be directly or indirectly impacted by the proposed works.
3.1 (d) Listed threatened species and ecological communities Description A search of the DoEE’s EPBC Act Protected Matters Search Tool was conducted using a 10 km buffer around the centre of the Project area. A copy of the EPBC Act Protected Matters Report is included as Appendix A of Attachment 1 of this referral document. Previous field surveys Two field surveys have been previously undertaken within the Project area. These field surveys have focused on the assessment and characterisation of the ecological features within the Site. Table 1 provides a description of each of the previous field surveys. Table 1 Summary of previous ecological investigations Date Assessment undertaken Reference
2015 A flora investigation was undertaken to confirm regional ecosystems Wide Bay Burnett present on the site. Opportunistic searches for conservation Environmental, 2015 significant species were also undertaken at the time of survey.
2016 A preliminary one-day field survey was conducted by a suitably GHD, 2016a qualified ecologist on 28 April 2016 to verify the results of the desktop assessment and assess general habitat values for flora and fauna species listed under the EPBC Act.
2016 A two-day targeted survey was then undertaken by two ecologists on GHD, 2016b 31 August and 1 September 2016 to search for individuals or signs of the collared delma (Delma torquata) and koala (Phascolarctos cinereus).
Threatened ecological communities The critically endangered Lowland Rainforest of Subtropical Australia Occurring on Basalt and Alluvium threatened ecological community (TEC) was identified as potentially occurring in the EPBC Act Protected Matters Report desktop search extent (refer to Appendix A of Attachment 1). No previous ecological assessments undertaken for the Project identified the presence of TECs within the site. Listed threatened species Listed threatened species identified as a result of both desktop and field investigations have been assigned a likelihood of occurrence within the site based on the following criteria:
Unlikely to occur – species has not been recorded in the desktop search extent and/or current known distribution does not encompass the site and/or suitable habitat is generally lacking from the site. May occur – has not been recorded in the desktop search extent although species’ distribution incorporates the site and potentially suitable habitat occurs in the site (but may not be particularly abundant or optimal habitat). Likely to occur – species has been recorded in the desktop search extent and suitable habitat is present on the site (species determined to be ‘likely to occur’ are otherwise known to occur on the site or surrounding landscape, and has suitable habitat present; however, were not recorded during field surveys). Confirmed present – The species has been recorded during field surveys on the site.
001 Referral of proposed action v May 2016 Page 14 of 51 Threatened flora species The EPBC Act Protected Matters Report (refer to Appendix A of Attachment1) identified nine threatened flora species as potentially occurring within a 10 km radius of the site. Field investigations did not identify the presence of any threatened flora species within the site. A likelihood of occurrence assessment has been prepared (refer to Table 2) for the ten flora species identified in the EPBC Act Protected Matters Report. The assessment is based on habitat preferences, known populations and distributions sourced from DoEE’s Species Profile and Threats Database (DoEE, 2016). Table 2 Threatened flora species likelihood of occurrence assessment Species Name EPBC Act Habitat Likelihood of Occurrence within Project Status Area
Acacia attenuata Vulnerable Occurs on flat coastal plains at Species habitat does not occur within altitudes of <30 m. Found in high the site. whipstick wattle rainfall areas with soils of coastal No previous records within 10 km of the sands or sandy, peaty soils that site. are mostly poorly drained (DoEE, 2017). Not observed during field investigations. Unlikely to occur due to lack of potential habitat and lack of previous records within the site
Alectryon ramiflorus Endangered Confined to remnant microphyll Species habitat does not occur within vine forest growing on hillslopes, the site. Isis Tamarind gullies and alluvial terraces with No previous records within 10 km of the shallow pale brown, gravelly site. sandy clay soil (EHP, 2013) Not observed during field investigations. Unlikely to occur due to lack of potential habitat, lack of previous records and restricted distribution
Bosistoa transversa Vulnerable Found in lowland rainforest, Species habitat does not occur within mainly subtropical to an altitude the site. three-leaved of 300 m (DoEE, 2017). bosistoa One previous records within 10 km of the site. Not observed during field investigations. Unlikely to occur due to lack of potential habitat and lack of previous records within the site
Cupaniopsis Vulnerable Occurs in dry rainforest Species habitat does not occur within shirleyana vegetation types, including vine the site. thicket communities on hillsides, wedge-leaf tuckeroo Two previous records within 10 km of stream beds and along the site. riverbanks. Predominately found on dark brown sandy loams and Not observed during field investigations. sandy clay loams (pH 5-7.5) and rocky scree slopes (DoEE 2017). May occur due to previous records within 10 km of the site
Dichanthium Vulnerable Associated with heavy basaltic Potential habitat occurs within the site. setosum black soils and red-brown loams No previous records within 10 km of the with clay subsoil (DoEE, 2017). bluegrass site.
Not observed during field investigations. May occur due to potential habitat within the site
Eucalyptus hallii Vulnerable Goodwood Gum is known from Marginal habitat present (i.e. eucalypt the coastal lowlands between woodland present but development
001 Referral of proposed action v May 2016 Page 15 of 51 goodwood gum Bundaberg and Maryborough, footprint greater than recorded altitude Queensland (DoEE 2017). range for the species ) on the site. One previous records within 10 km of the site. Not observed during field investigations. May occur due to potential habitat within the site
Macadamia Vulnerable Occurs within remnant rainforest Species habitat does not occur within integrifolia and closed forests patches. The the site. species has been recorded macadamia nut No previous records within 10 km of the within hill crests, slopes, gullies site. and terrace plains (DoEE, 2017). Not observed during field investigations. Unlikely to occur due to lack of potential habitat and lack of previous records within the site
Phaius australis Endangered Commonly associated with Species habitat does not occur within coastal wet heath/sedgeland the site. lesser swamp-orchid wetlands, swampy grassland or No previous records within 10 km of the swampy forest and often where site. broad-leaved paperbark or swamp mahogany occur (DoEE, Not observed during field investigations. 2017). Unlikely to occur due to lack of potential habitat and lack of previous records within the site
Phebalium distans Critically Populations are known from Species habitat does not occur within Endangered near Mt Berryman, Kingaroy (Mt the site. Mt Berryman Jones Plateau and surrounds) phebalium No previous records within 10 km of the and Mt Walla (Coalston Lakes). site. Mt Berryman phebalium is found in semi-evergreen vine thicket Not observed during field investigations. on red volcanic soils, or in communities adjacent to this Unlikely to occur due to lack of potential vegetation type (DoEE, 2017). habitat and lack of previous records within the site
Samadera bidwillii Vulnerable Commonly occurs in lowland Species habitat does not occur within quassia rainforest or on rainforest the site. margins, but it can also be found No previous records within 10 km of the in other forest types, such as site. open forest and woodland (DoEE, 2017). Commonly found Not observed during field investigations. in areas adjacent to both temporary and permanent Unlikely to occur due to lack of potential watercourses in locations up to habitat and lack of previous records within 510 m altitude (DoEE, 2017). the site
Results of the desktop likelihood of occurrence assessment indicate that Cupaniopsis shirleyana (wedge-leaf tuckeroo), Dichanthium setosum (bluegrass) and Eucalyptus hallii (goodwood dum) may occur within the site due to either previous records within 10 km of the site or the presence of potentially suitable habitat. None of these threatened flora species were identified within the site during the flora investigation undertaken on the site (Wide Bay Burnett Environmental, 2015). Therefore, these species are considered not to be present within the site and not impacted by the proposed works. In this regard, impacts to these species are not considered further in this referral. Threatened fauna species The EPBC Act Protected Matters Report (refer to Appendix A of Attachment 1) identified 22 threatened fauna species as potentially occurring within a 10 km radius of the site. The 22 threatened fauna species consist of eleven birds, one fish, six mammals and four reptiles.
001 Referral of proposed action v May 2016 Page 16 of 51 Historical records (including Wildlife Online and previous ecological studies) and the presence of suitable potential habitat according to the existing Regional Ecosystem mapping indicated the following Commonwealth listed fauna species had the potential to occur:
Phascolarctos cinereus (koala) – listed as ‘vulnerable’ under the EPBC Act Pteoropus poliocephalus (grey-headed flying fox) – listed as ‘vulnerable’ under the EPBC Act Delma torquata (collared delma) - listed as ‘vulnerable’ under the EPBC Act Targeted surveys were undertaken at the project site over two events, in April and August/September 2016. The distribution of targeted search efforts is shown in Figure 2. Based on the survey results, the collared delma was confirmed present, the koala and grey-headed flying fox were considered ‘likely to occur’. Collared delma habitat: Habitats across the project footprint were consistent with those typically recorded for the collared delma. In general, eucalypt woodland was uniformly present across the project footprint with a canopy dominated by Corymbia citriodora, Eucalyptus acmenoides and Lophostemon confertus in varying densities. A regenerating sub- canopy tree layer was present in higher densities in localised areas. The shrub layer was generally absent, with occasional Acacias and patches of Lantana camara. Native grasses including Themeda triandra, Cymbopogon refractus and wiry panic grass (Entolasia stricta) were present in the ground layer. Most areas had a rocky substrate with an abundance of exposed loose sedimentary rocks ranging between 5 cm and 30 cm. Leaf litter mats were ubiquitous but generally relatively thin, ranging between 2 and 5 cm in depth. Terrain was gently to moderately inclined and soil was generally grey sandy loam. Exposed rock was present in highest densities along slopes and ridgelines at elevations between 80 and 145 m. Typical collared delma habitats within the project footprint are shown in Plate 1.
Plate 1 Typical collared delma habitat within the project footprint – rocky Corymbia citriodora woodland
Collared delma presence. Confirmed present during GHD 2016 survey. Details as follows: Nine individuals were captured from six locations within rocky Corymbia citridora woodland within the project footprint. These individuals were found on undulating terrain, generally on slopes with both easterly or westerly aspect, in areas with exposed rocky substrate. All individuals were found beneath mid-sized rocks, 15 – 20 cm in diameter. Within the project footprint, the collared delma is considered likely to occur wherever surface rock is exposed. Photo vouchers of all specimens were sent to the Queensland Museum and were confirmed to be the collared delma (Plate 3). All individuals had the diagnostic features of the species, with two pre-anal scales, snout-vent length half the total body length and characteristic marbling on the throat (Plate 2). The distribution of collared delma habitat and records within the project site is shown in Figure 3.
001 Referral of proposed action v May 2016 Page 17 of 51
Plate 2 Collared delma individuals captured from the project site Koala Targeted koala surveys were undertaken at 14 sites across the project footprint using the Spot Assessment Technique (SAT) devised by Phillips and Callaghan (1995), searching for koala pellets. Incidental searches were also undertaken for characteristic koala scratch marks and observations of individual koalas. An assessment of habitat values for the koala was undertaken using the koala habitat assessment toolkit in the EPBC Referral guidelines for the vulnerable koala (DotE 2014). The results of this assessment indicate that the habitat present within the project footprint is not critical to the survival of the koala (refer Table 3). No koala faecal pellets or signs (i.e. scratches) were observed during SAT searches undertaken across the project footprint. Despite this, suitable koala habitat is present across the project footprint with a mix of koala preferred food trees including Corymbia citriodora, Eucalyptus acmenoides and occasional Lophostemon confertus. The absence of faecal pellets or koala scratches suggest that koalas only occur in very low densities within the project footprint, if at all. This is likely to be attributed to the isolated nature of the project footprint, which is surrounded by cleared agricultural land. Due to the species mobile nature, the koala is considered likely to occur within the project site at some time.
Table 3 Koala habitat assessment using the referral habitat assessment toolkit Attribute Score Project habitat appraisal
Koala occurrence 0 No records of koalas within 5 km of the project footprint according to the Wildlife Low Online database (DISTI 2016). There are only four records of koalas within 10 km of the project footprint (DISTI, 2017). No koalas or evidence were detected during the field survey.
Vegetation +2 RE mapping shows the development footprint contains suitable REs - 12.9-10.2 composition High (Corymbia citriodora subsp. variegata open forest or woodland usually with Eucalyptus crebra. Other species such as Eucalyptus tereticornis, E. moluccana, E. acmenoides and E. siderophloia may be present in scattered patches or in low densities). Field surveys confirmed the presence of two or more koala food trees.
Habitat connectivity 0 Review of aerial imagery and RE mapping shows that the project footprint is part Low of a patch of native vegetation less than < 300 ha.
Key existing threats +1 Compared with urban koala populations, local threats are likely to be relatively Medium low. Threats from roadkill are expected to be infrequent.
Recovery value 1 Review of Biodiversity Planning Assessment mapping shows the vegetation within Medium the project footprint is not part of a significant ecological corridor (State, regional or local). The habitats in the project footprint are unlikely to contribute to the interim recovery objectives by maintaining corridors and connective habitat between areas of suitable koala habitat.
Total score1 4 Habitat not critical to the survival of the koala
*Impact areas that score four or less are not considered habitat critical to the survival of the koala
001 Referral of proposed action v May 2016 Page 18 of 51 Grey-headed flying fox – likely to occur: Targeted surveys did not confirm the presence of the grey-headed flying-fox. No roosting camps are present. Despite this, suitable foraging habitat was present across the project site. The species is regionally widespread and is likely to forage occasionally, particularly along the more fertile alluvial flats to the south of the project site. A likelihood of occurrence assessment has been prepared and detailed in Table 4 for the 22 potentially occurring threatened fauna species based on habitat preferences noted in DoEE’s Species Profile and Threats Database (DoEE, 2017) for known populations and species’ distributions. Table 4 Threatened fauna species likelihood of occurrence assessment Species Name EPBC Act Likelihood of Occurrence within Project Habitat Status area
Birds
Botaurus Endangered Occurs in terrestrial freshwater No potential habitat exists on the poiciloptilus wetlands and, rarely, estuarine site. habitats. This species favors Australasian bittern Not previously recorded within 10 km permanent and seasonal freshwater of the site. habitats, particularly those dominated by sedges, rushes Not observed during field and/or reeds (DoEE, 2017). investigations. Unlikely to occur due to lack of suitable habitat and previous records
Calidris ferruginea Critically Occur on intertidal mudflats in No potential habitat exists on the endangered sheltered coastal areas, such as site. curlew sandpiper estuaries, bays, inlets and lagoons, Not previously recorded within 10 km and also around non-tidal swamps, of the site. lakes and lagoons near the coast, and ponds in saltworks and sewage Not observed during field farms (DoEE, 2017). investigations. Unlikely to occur due to lack of suitable habitat and previous records
Cyclopsitta Endangered Prefers dry cool subtropical and No potential habitat exists on the diophthalma coxeni littoral forests, tropical semi- site. deciduous vine forests and gallery Coxen’s fig parrot Not previously recorded within 10 km forests, open forest, riparian of the site. corridors in woodland, open woodland and cleared land, usually Not observed during field containing fig trees. These are investigations. usually large forest tracts. Breeding occurs in hollows of living or dead Unlikely to occur due to lack of suitable trees within or at the edge of habitat and previous records rainforest, eucalypt forest or melaleuca woodland. Occasional visitors to wooded urban areas (Higgins, 1999; Gynther, 2004).
Erythrotriorchis Vulnerable The red goshawk is an uncommon Species foraging habitat exists on radiatus bird species of eastern and northern the site in the form of woodland Australia that prefers landscapes vegetation. Small isolated dams red goshawk containing a mosaic of habitats holding permanent water within 200 including coastal and sub-coastal m of the site. tall open forest, woodland and One previous recorded within 10 km rainforest edges (Marchant and of the site. Higgins, 1993). Forests of intermediate density are particularly Not observed during field favoured, as are ecotones between investigations. variably dense habitats (i.e. ecotone between rainforest and sclerophyll No suitable nesting habitat observed forest) (DoEE, 2017). Large bird on the site.
001 Referral of proposed action v May 2016 Page 19 of 51 populations (the primary prey of this May occur due to suitable foraging species) are also an important habitat and a previous record within 10 determinant of red goshawk habitat km of the site utilisation (DoEE, 2017). It generally avoids open habitats, and is only rarely encountered over agricultural land (Marchant and Higgins, 1993). Nesting occurs in tall trees within one km of permanent water, generally in open, biologically-rich forest or woodland (Marchant and Higgins, 1993).
Geophaps scripta Vulnerable Generally defined as open-forests to Species habitat is present within the scripta sparse, open-woodlands and scrub site.
that are mostly dominated in the squatter pigeon Not previously recorded within 10 km overstorey by Eucalyptus, of the site. Corymbia, Acacia or Callitris species, remnant, regrowth or partly Not observed during field modified vegetation communities, investigations. and within 3 km of water bodies or courses (DoEE, 2017). Unlikely to occur due to limited habitat value present and lack of previous records within the site.
Lathamus discolor Endangered Prefers dry open eucalypt forest and Species habitat does not exist in the woodlands on the mainland with a site. swift parrot preference for some eucalypt Not previously recorded within 10 km Listed species. Also often in urban areas, of the site. Marine parks and gardens, farmlands and remnant eucalypt patches. Breeding Not observed during field only occurs in Tasmania. investigations. Infrequently recorded in Queensland in Gold Coast, Unlikely to occur due to limited habitat Toowoomba, Noosa, Warwick and value present and lack of previous Lockyer Valley in winter months, records within the site. mainly western slopes of Great Dividing Range or on coastal plains (Higgins, 1999; DoEE, 2017).
Rostratula australis Vulnerable Prefers shallow freshwater wetlands No potential habitat exists on the and other ephemeral or permanent site. Australian painted waterbodies (e.g. lakes, swamps, snipe Not previously recorded within 10 km Migratory dams) with emergent vegetation. of the site. (wetland) Nests among tall rank grass, reeds, rushes or samphire (Marchant and Not observed during field
Higgins, 1993). Now regarded as investigations. Listed same species as migratory Unlikely to occur due to lack of suitable Marine Rostratula benghalensis. habitat and previous records
Turnix melanogaster Vulnerable Rainforest and forests experiencing No suitable habitat occurs within the 770 – 1,200 mm rainfall per annum. site. black-breasted Prefers low closed forest in button-quail Three previous records within 10 km particular semi-evergreen vine of the site. thicket and other vine forest complexes. Required deep leaf Not observed during field litter. Nests within rainforest or investigations. under lantana (Marchant and Higgins, 1993). Unlikely to occur due absence of suitable habitat within the site.
Fish
Neoceratodus Vulnerable Prefers slow flowing rivers and still Species habitat does not exist on the forsteri water and most common in deep site.
001 Referral of proposed action v May 2016 Page 20 of 51 Australian lungfish pools (3-10 m). Found over mud, 148 previous records within 10 km of sand and gravelly substrates. In the the site. Mary River is associated with Not observed during field instream woody debris, overhanging investigations. vegetation and dense macrophyte beds. Spawning occurs in shallow May occur within a certain distance of free flowing reaches, usually with the site due to numerous previous macrophytes (Pusey et al. 2004). records however no suitable habitat is present on the site.
Mammals
Chalinolobus dwyeri Vulnerable Most commonly found in dry Species habitat does not exist in the sclerophyll forests and woodlands, site. large-eared pied bat, but also known from rainforest large pied bat Not previously recorded within 10 km edges and wetter sclerophyll of the site. forests. Roosts in caves, cliffs or mines. Little is known about Not observed during field foraging behaviours however investigations. thought to forage for insects around roost sites (up to several kilometres Unlikely to occur due to limited habitat away) (Churchill, 2008). value present and lack of previous records within the site.
Dasyurus hallucatus Endangered While the distribution of the northern Species habitat does not exist in the quoll covers much of north eastern site. northern quoll Australia, the current range of the Not previously recorded within 10 km species has contracted considerably of the site. such that it is now thought to be restricted to six discrete areas Not observed during field across northern Australia (Strahan, investigations. 1995). While the species does not have highly specific habitat Unlikely to occur due to limited habitat requirements, rocky areas value present and lack of previous associated with open woodland and records within the site. open forest are considered optimal habitat for the northern quoll (Hill and Ward, 2010).
Nyctophilus corbeni Vulnerable Found in a wide range of inland Species habitat does not exist in the woodland vegetation types. These site. Corben’s long-eared include box / ironbark / cypress pine bat Not previously recorded within 10 km woodlands, Buloke woodlands, of the site. Brigalow woodland, Belah woodland, smooth-barked apple Not observed during field woodland, river red gum forest, investigations. black box woodland, and various types of tree mallee (TSSC, 2015). Unlikely to occur due to limited habitat value present and lack of previous records within the site.
Petauroides volans Restricted to large remnants of Species habitat does not exist in the Vulnerable mature eucalypt woodland with an site. greater glider abundance of mature hollow- Not previously recorded within 10 km bearing trees. Sensitive to of the site. fragmentation, generally only maintaining viable populations in Not observed during field extensive remnants <160 km2 in investigations. size (Eyre, 2002). Unlikely to occur due to limited habitat value present and lack of previous records within the site.
Phascolarctos Vulnerable Known to inhabit a range of Suitable habitat occurs within the cinereus temperate, sub-tropical and tropical development footprint but habitat is forest, woodland and semi-arid
001 Referral of proposed action v May 2016 Page 21 of 51 koala communities dominated by not considered critical to the survival Eucalyptus species (DoEE, 2017). of the koala. Suitable habitat is broadly defined Four previous records within 10 km as any forest or woodland of the site. containing species that are known koala food trees, or shrubland with Not observed during field emergent food trees. Preferred food investigations. No evidence of the and shelter trees are naturally species was recorded during abundant on fertile clay soils (DoEE, targeted surveys. 2017). Likely to occur
Pteropus Vulnerable The species is organised around Foraging habitat exists within the poliocephalus roost sites commonly formed in site. gullies, typically near water and grey-headed flying- One previous record within 10 km of usually in vegetation with a dense fox the site. canopy. Bats commute daily to foraging areas, typically within No known roosting camps are 15 km of the day roost where they located within 10 km of the site on feed on a wide variety of flowering the National Flying Fox Monitoring and fruiting plants including the Programme (DoEE, 2017). blossoms of eucalypts. Known populations in the region (e.g. Not observed during field Peachester and Eerwah Vale) (Van investigations. Dyck and Strahan, 2008). Likely to occur
Reptiles
Delma torquata Vulnerable Normally inhabits eucalypt- Suitable habitat occurs within project dominated woodlands and open- footprint and the site occurs within collared delma forests in Alluvium (river and creek the modelled distribution for the flats), undulating country on fine- species. grained sedimentary rocks, and One previous record within 10 km of sandstone ranges. Regional the site. ecosystems 11.3.2; 11.9.10; 11.10.1; and 11.10.4. Requires Nine individuals found within the site rocks, logs, bark and other coarse (GHD, 2016). woody debris, and mats of leaf litter (DoEE 2017). Confirmed present
Egernia rugosa Vulnerable Occurs in open dry sclerophyll Species habitat is not present within forest, woodland and scrub. The the site yakka skink core habitat of this species is within Not previously recorded within 10 km the Mulga Lands and Brigalow Belt of the site. South Bioregions (DoEE, 2017). Commonly found in cavities under Not observed during field and between partly buried rocks, investigations. logs or tree stumps, root cavities and abandoned animal burrows Unlikely to occur due to the lack of (DoEE, 2017). suitable habitat and historical records
Elseya albagula Critically Endemic to the Mary, Burnett and Species habitat does not exist on the endangered Fitzroy River catchments. Prefers site. southern snapping- clear, flowing, well-oxygenated turtle, white-throated Six previous records within 10 km of waters. Requires shelter such as snapping-turtle the site. submerged logs and undercut banks (TSSC 2014). Nesting occurs Not observed during field on sandy loam banks in traditional investigations. areas. Unlikely to occur due to lack of suitable habitat within the site
Furina dunmalli Vulnerable Found in a broad range of habitats Species habitat does not exist in the including acacia and eucalypt site. Dunmall’s snake woodlands (DoEE, 2017). This
001 Referral of proposed action v May 2016 Page 22 of 51 species occurs primarily in the Not previously recorded within 10 km Brigalow Belt region (DoEE, 2017). of the site. Not observed during field investigations. Unlikely to occur due to lack of suitable habitat and previous records within the site.
Nature and extent of likely impact Threatened Ecological Communities No Threatened Ecological Communities were recorded within the project site. As such, the project will have no significant impact on TEC’s. Threatened flora species No threatened flora species are considered likely to occur within the project site. As such, the project will have no significant impact on threatened flora species.
Threatened fauna species Three threatened fauna species listed under the EPBC Act are likely to occur within the project site. Of these, the project is condidered likely to have a significant impact on an important population of the collared delma. The project is unlikely to have a significant impact on habitat for the koala and grey-headed flying fox. An assessment of impacts on each species is detailed below, with reference to the Significant Impact Guidelines.
Impacts on the collared delma The project will result in the clearance of 28 ha of confirmed habitat for the collared delma. Nine collared delma individuals were recorded from within the project footprint during field surveys. As detailed in the Draft Referral Guidelines for the nationally listed brigalow reptiles (SEWPaC, 2011), important habitat is considered a surrogate for an important population. Suitable habitat is considered important if the species has been confirmed present in a field survey. The local population present within the project site is therefore considered an ‘important population’ under the EPBC Act. Given the magnitude of the local impact, and the reliance on specific microhabitats, the action is likely to have a significant impact on the local ‘important population’ as detailed in Table 4.
Table 4 Assessment of significant impacts on the collared delma Significant impact criteria Potential to occur
Lead to a long-term Likely decrease in the size of an Over the life of the project, the action will result in the clearance of 28 ha of important population ‘important habitat’ for the collared delma. Given the project site is spatially isolated from other areas of confirmed habitat within the surrounding area (i.e. within Bullyard Conservation Park), actions at the project site cannot be overcome by immigration from external sources. Mitigating impacts at the site will therefore be determined by local actions. The severity of impact on the population will be minimised by staging the action, with a maximum of 10 ha to be cleared at any given time. Draft referral guidelines for the nationally listed brigalow reptiles (SEWPaC, 2011) suggest that a loss of > 2 ha of important habitat for the collared delma will constitute a significant impact Nevertheless, the loss of habitat is expected to lead to a reduction in the size of the ‘important population’.
Reduce the area of Likely occupancy of an important The project will likely reduce the area of occupancy of the local ‘important’ population population of the collared delma (at a 1km grid square scale).
001 Referral of proposed action v May 2016 Page 23 of 51 The project will result in a loss of 28 ha of confirmed habitat, representing 93 percent of area of occupancy of the local population While all habitats cleared will be subject to rehabilitation, some reduction in the area of occupancy is considered likely. Fragment an existing Likely important population into two Due to the relatively intensive and localised nature of impact, the project is likely or more populations. to fragment the existing important population of collared delma into two or more popuations. Mitigation measures detailed in Section 5 will be implemented to reduce the severity of habitat fragmentation by staging the development in a way that maintains connectivity between areas of remaining habitat
Adversely affect habitat Likely critical to the survival of a The project will result in direct loss of 28 ha of important habitat for the collared species. delma. Mitigation measures including staging of the development and progressive rehabilitation of cleared areas will be undertaken to reduce the impact on the quality of habitats The species has also been recorded from other locations within the region, notably the nearby Bullyard Conservation Park. Due to the spatial isolation of the project site, breeding at other sub-populations/populations in the region will not be impacted by the reduction in the size of the local population. The mitigation measures proposed, staging of the development, rehabilitation and maintaining connectivity will minimise the impact on the local population and reduce the chances of localised population loss. The local population is unlikely to be genetically diverse, particularly given its limited size. Larger local occurrences in Bullyard Conservation Park are expected to have higher levels of genetic diversity and play an important role in maintaining genetic diversity of the taxon.
Disrupt the breeding cycle of Possible an important population. Habitat loss will be staged over a period of 30 - 40 years. While there will be some disruption to breeding rates within the population, attributed to direct mortality of individuals, the impacts will not be expected to disrupt the breeding cycle of the entire population. Some breeding opportunities may be maintained throughout the project within areas of rehabilitated habitat and habitat yet to be cleared
Modify, destroy, remove or Unlikely isolate or decrease the No widespread decline in the species is predicted to occur as a result of the availability or quality of project. The project will have a highly localised impact on one, spatially isolated habitat to the extent that the population of the species. As such, there is no potential for broader impact on species is likely to decline. the species as a whole.
Result in invasive species Unlikely. that are harmful to a The collared delma is susceptible to habitat degradation resulting from weed vulnerable species becoming incursions. Despite this, the proposed activity is not likely to result in significant established in the vulnerable increase in weed infestation that could compromise the integrity of remaining species’ habitat. habitats. As a microhabitat specialist, the collared delma is susceptible to degradation of ground-level habitats through grazing, inappropriate fire regimes and weed
001 Referral of proposed action v May 2016 Page 24 of 51 infestation The presence of the collared delma provides evidence that existing land management practices have preserved the integrity of microhabitats at the project site. The proposed action represents an expansion of existing activities that have been operational at the project site for the past four years. The high value of ground-level microhabitats observed (and the absence of weeds) is evidence of the weed hygiene and management practices already in place The proposed expansion will not result in any change in operation processes that would result in any significant increase in weed infestations that could be harmful to the local collared delma population
Introduce disease that may Unlikely. cause the species to decline. The SPRAT profile for collared delma does not list disease as a threat to the taxon. Furthermore, the proposed action is not predicted to introduce any disease.
Interfere substantially with Unlikely. the recovery of the species. Although the local population is considered ‘important’, impacts will occur on a local scale only such that interference with the recovery of the species on a wider scale is not predicted to occur as a result of the project. A mitigation strategy will be implemented to rehabilitate areas after impact
Impacts on koala habitat The project will impact on 69 ha of RE 12.9-10.2 Corybia citriodora woodland. While this area supports koala food trees, an assessment of the value of habitat undertaken using the habitat assessment toolkit within the EPBC referral guidelines for the vulnerable koala (DoEE, 2016), indicates this is not habitat critical to the survival of the koala.
The absence of faecal pellets or koala scratches in targeted assessments of the project footprint indicate that the species is likely to occur in very low abundance if at all. The project footprint is surrounded by cleared agricultural land and is therefore functionally disconnected from other areas of potentially suitable koala habitat. Given these factors, the project is considered unlikely to have a significant impact on the koala. An assessment of impacts on the koala is detailed below. Table 5 Assessment of significant impacts on the koala Significant impact criteria Potential to occur
Lead to a long-term Unlikely decrease in the size of an Important populations have not been identified for the koala. In the absence of important population this information, significance of impact assessments for the koala focus on the protection of ‘habitat critical to the survival of the koala. Habitats within the project site are not considered habitat critical to the survival of the species, based on the results of the habitat assessment toolkit. The loss of 69 ha of a relatively isolated koala habitat that shows no evidence of recent utilisation by the species is unlikely to lead to long-term decrease in the size of an important population. Mortality of individual koalas during vegetation controls will be mitigated through implementation of standard controls including the use of fauna spotter-catchers and speed restrictions.
001 Referral of proposed action v May 2016 Page 25 of 51 Reduce the area of Unlikely occupancy of an important The project will not impact habitat critical to the survival of the species and is population therefore unlikely to reduce the area of occupancy of the species The loss of 69 ha of relatively isolated koala habitat, showing no signs of recent koala utilisation is unlikely to reduce the area of occupancy of the species The loss of habitat represents a loss of 1 percent of koala habitat available within the surrounding 10 km area (7,701 ha) and 0.2 percent of koala habitat available within the surrounding 20 km area (44,011 ha).
Fragment an existing Unlikely important population into two Habitats at the site are already substantially isolated from external areas of or more populations. suitable koala habitat, being surrounded by cleared agricultural land The localised fragmentation of habitats is at a smaller scale. Efforts to maintain connectivity of habitats for the collared delma will maintain natural links within the project site that can be utilised by the koala. Existing external isolation effects are therefore considered substantially more significant than any new fragmentation created within the site as a result of the project.
Adversely affect habitat Unlikely critical to the survival of a Habitats within the project site do not represent habitat critical to the survival of species. the species, based on the results of the koala habitat assessment toolkit (Table 3). The clearance of 69 ha of isolated koala habitat that does not show any signs of recent utilisation will therefore not have an adverse impact on the species.
Disrupt the breeding cycle of Unlikely. an important population. Given the staged nature of the project development plan, any fragmentation of habitat will occur at a relatively localised scale and will maintain opportunities for local movement of koalas Opportunities for breeding will therefore be maintained throughout the course of the project Fauna spotter-catchers will be used to avoid any direct impact on breeding individuals that could disrupt local breeding success
Modify, destroy, remove or Unlikely isolate or decrease the No widespread decline in the species is predicted to occur as a result of the availability or quality of project. The project will have a highly localised impact on habitat that is not habitat to the extent that the considered critical for the survival of the species. species is likely to decline.
Result in invasive species Unlikely. that are harmful to a The project represents an expansion of existing quarrying activities that have vulnerable species becoming been undertaken at the site over the past four years established in the vulnerable No evidence of dogs was observed during the field survey. While feral dogs are species’ habitat. likely to occur within the project area, the absence of any scats or tracks indicates they are not likely to be present in high local densities. The site is relatively remote from urban areas where domestic dogs are likely to access the site
001 Referral of proposed action v May 2016 Page 26 of 51 Given these reasons, the proposed action is considered unlikely to lead to a substantial increase in mortality threats to koalas due to feral and domestic dogs.
Introduce disease that may Unlikely. cause the species to decline. The project is unlikely to cause a significant increase in chlamydia levels in the local koala population. Given the project will be staged and result in no greater than 10 ha of habitat being cleared at any one time, koalas will have the ability to move away from the construction area to reduce stress levels.
Interfere substantially with Unlikely. the recovery of the species. The project will have only limited and localised impact on koala habitat and negligible impact on regional koala movement.
Impacts on grey-headed flying fox habitat The project will result in the loss of 69 ha of potential foraging habitat for the grey-headed flying fox. No roosting habitat will be impacted. The project is considered unlikely to have a significant impact on the grey-headed flying fox, as detailed in Table 6 below. Table 6 Assessment of significant impacts on the grey-headed flying fox Significant impact criteria Potential to occur
Lead to a long-term Unlikely decrease in the size of an No roosting camps occur on or adjacent to the project site. The nearest roost important population site (Avoca, McCoys Creek) is located approximately 25 km north-east of the site. The project will result in a loss of 69 ha of potential foraging habitat for the species. This represents 1 percent of suitable foraging habitat available within a 10 km radius of the site (8,060 ha) and 0.2 percent of suitable habitat within a 20 km radius of the site (44,439 ha). Suitable foraging habitats are widespread and abundant within the surrounding region. The loss of a small area of localised foraging habitat will have negligible impact on the species
Reduce the area of Unlikely occupancy of an important The project will impact a small, localised area of foraging habitat only and will population therefore not reduce the area of occupancy of the species
Fragment an existing Unlikely important population into two Given the highly mobile, wide-ranging nature of the species, small localised or more populations. losses of habitat within the project site will not result in any fragmentation of habitat at a population level
Adversely affect habitat Unlikely critical to the survival of a The project will impact a small, localised area of foraging habitat only and will species. therefore not adversely affect habitat critical to the survival of the species The loss of foraging habitat is equivalent to 1 percent of foraging habitat available within the surrounding 10 km and 0.2 percent available within the surrounding 20 km
001 Referral of proposed action v May 2016 Page 27 of 51 Disrupt the breeding cycle of Unlikely. an important population. Loss of localised areas of foraging habitat will have no impact on the species capacity to move between breeding camps and will therefore have negligible impact on the breeding cycle of the species
Modify, destroy, remove or Unlikely isolate or decrease the No widespread decline in the species is predicted to occur as a result of the availability or quality of project. The project will have a highly localised impact on habitat that is not habitat to the extent that the critical for the survival of the species. species is likely to decline.
Result in invasive species Unlikely. that are harmful to a The project represents an expansion of existing quarrying activities that have vulnerable species becoming been undertaken at the site over the past four years established in the vulnerable These activities will not introduce any harmful species that could become species’ habitat. established in the species habitat
Introduce disease that may Unlikely. cause the species to decline. The project will have a small, localised impact on foraging habitat only, and has no potential to introduce or exacerbate the spread of infectious diseases that may harm the grey-headed flying fox
Interfere substantially with Unlikely. the recovery of the species. The project will have only limited and localised impact on foraging habitat and negligible impact on regional movement of the grey-headed flying fox.
3.1 (e) Listed migratory species
001 Referral of proposed action v May 2016 Page 28 of 51 Description The EPBC Act Protected Matters Report lists 11 migratory species that have the potential to occur within a 10 km radius of the site. No migratory species were observed during site investigations. Table 7 presents a summary of the migratory species identified in the EPBC Act Protected Matters Report and their likelihood of occurrence to occur within the site. Table 7 Likelihood of occurrence assessment for migratory species Species EPBC Act Habitat Likelihood of Occurrence within the Status Project Area Migratory Marine Birds
Apus pacificus Listed Low to very high airspace over a Habitats present within the site are Migratory variety of habitats (semi-desert to among those the species is known to fork tailed swift Marine rainforest) (Morcombe, 2003). fly over One previous record within 10 km of the site. Not observed during field investigations. May occur in airspace over the site due to the wide-ranging nature of the species and records within 10km of the site.
Migratory Marine Species
Crocdylus Listed Mostly occurs in tidal rivers, Species habitat does not exist within porosus marine coastal floodplains and channels, the site. billabongs and swamps up to 150 Salt-water Not previously recorded within 10 km of km inland from the coast (DoEE, crocodile the site. 2017). Not observed during field investigations. Unlikely to occur due to limited habitat value present and lack of previous records within the site
Migratory Terrestrial Species
Cuculus opatus Migratory Occurs on rainforest edges, river Species habitat does not exist within Terrestrial plains and leafy trees in paddocks the site. oriental cuckoo Species (Pizzey and Knight, 2007). Four previous records within 10 km of the site. Not observed during field investigations. May occur due to previous records within 10 km of the site
Hirundapus Migratory Mostly aerial when visiting Species habitat does not exist within caudacutus Terrestrial Australia in the non-breeding the site. Species season, although most often white-throated Two previous records within 10 km of recorded above open forest and needletail the site. rainforest (Pizzey and Knight, 2007). Not observed during field investigations. May occur due to previous records within 10 km of the site
001 Referral of proposed action v May 2016 Page 29 of 51 Monarcha Migratory Range of habitats including Species habitat does not exist in the melanopsis Terrestrial rainforest, open forest, scrub, site. Species woodland, gullies, mangroves black-faced Two previous records within 10 km of and gardens (DoEE, 2017). monarch the site. Not observed during field investigations. Unlikely to occur due to limited habitat value present and lack of previous records within the site
Monarcha Migratory Understory of mountain / lowland Species habitat does not exist in the trivirgatus Terrestrial rainforests, thickly wooded site. Species gullies, mostly below well covered spectacled Not previously recorded within 10 km of canopy’s (Pizzey and Knight, monarch the site. 2007). Not observed during field investigations. Unlikely to occur due to limited habitat value present and lack of previous records within the site
Myiagra Migratory Tall forests in wetter habitats Species habitat does not exist in the cyanoleuca Terrestrial such as gullies, but not rainforest site. Species (DoEE, 2017). satin flycatcher Three previous records within 10 km of the site. Not observed during field investigations. May occur due to previous records within 10 km of the site
Rhipidura Migratory Rainforest and wet forests with Species habitat does not exist in the rufifrons Terrestrial thick understorey, swamps and site. Species mangroves. Often moves about rufous fantail One previous record within 10 km of close to the ground. May overfly the site. open areas during migration (DoEE, 2017). Not observed during field investigations. May occur due to previous records within 10 km of the site
Migratory Wetland Species
Gallinago Migratory Permanent and ephemeral Species habitat does not exist in the hardwickii Wetland wetlands, usually freshwater with site. Species low dense vegetation, however Latham's snipe One previous record within 10 km of also in saline or brackish water the site. with disturbed habitat (Pizzey and Knight, 2007). Not observed during field investigations. May occur due to previous records within 10 km of the site
Pandion Migratory Occurs in littoral and coastal Species habitat does not exist in the haliaetus Wetland habitats and terrestrial wetlands site. Species of tropical and temperate osprey Not previously recorded within 10 km of Australia and offshore islands. the site. They are mostly found in coastal areas but occasionally travel Not observed during field inland along major rivers, investigations.
001 Referral of proposed action v May 2016 Page 30 of 51 particularly in northern Australia Unlikely to occur due to limited habitat (DoEE, 2017) value present and lack of previous records within the site
Tringa Migratory Found in a wide variety of inland Species habitat does not exist in the nebularia Wetland wetlands and sheltered coastal site. Species habitats of varying salinity. It common Not previously recorded within 10 km of occurs in sheltered coastal greenshank the site. habitats, typically with large mudflats and saltmarsh, Not observed during field mangroves or seagrass. Habitats investigations. include embayments, harbours, river estuaries, deltas and Unlikely to occur due to limited habitat lagoons and are recorded less value present and lack of previous records often in round tidal pools, rock- within the site flats and rock platforms (DoEE, 2017).
The likelihood of occurrence assessment undertaken in Table 7 for migratory species indicates that the following species ‘may’ occur within the site: Apus pacificus (fork-tailed swift) – listed as ‘migratory species’ under the EPBC Act Cuculus opatus (oriental cuckoo) – listed as ‘migratory species’ under the EPBC Act Gallinago hardwickii (Latham's snipe) – listed as ‘migratory wetland species’ under the EPBC Act Hirundapus caudacutus (white-throated needletail) – listed as ‘migratory species’ under the EPBC Act Myiagra cyanoleuca (satin flycatcher) – listed as ‘migratory species’ under the EPBC Act Rhipidura rufifrons (rufous fantail) – listed as ‘migratory species’ under the EPBC Act
Nature and extent of likely impact No EPBC migratory species were ‘confirmed present’ or are considered ‘likely to occur’ Species identified as ‘may occur’ include the following groups that will not be adversely impacted by the project: aerial species that will overfly the site and not be impacted by localised losses of woodland vegetation (i.e. the fork-tailed swift and white-throated needletail) rainforest and wet sclerophyll dwelling species that if present will occur along the wetter vegetation areas associated with the alluvial creekflats (i.e. oriental cuckoo, satin flycatcher and rufous fantail) wetland associated species likely to occur outside the project footprint (i.e. Latham’s snipe)
3.1 (f) Commonwealth marine area (If the action is in the Commonwealth marine area, complete 3.2(c) instead. This section is for actions taken outside the Commonwealth marine area that may have impacts on that area.) Description
Not applicable. No Commonwealth marine areas are present within a 10 km radius of the proposed works.
Nature and extent of likely impact Address any impacts on any part of the environment in the Commonwealth marine area.
No direct or indirect impacts will occur to a Commonwealth marine area as a result of the proposed works.
001 Referral of proposed action v May 2016 Page 31 of 51 3.1 (g) Commonwealth land (If the action is on Commonwealth land, complete 3.2(d) instead. This section is for actions taken outside Commonwealth land that may have impacts on that land.) Description If the action will affect Commonwealth land also describe the more general environment. The Policy Statement titled Significant Impact Guidelines 1.2 - Actions on, or impacting upon, Commonwealth land, and actions by Commonwealth agencies provides further details on the type of information needed. If applicable, identify any potential impacts from actions taken outside the Australian jurisdiction on the environment in a Commonwealth Heritage Place overseas.
Not applicable. No Commonwealth land is present within the vicinity of the site.
Nature and extent of likely impact Address any impacts on any part of the environment in the Commonwealth land. Your assessment of impacts should refer to the Significant Impact Guidelines 1.2 - Actions on, or impacting upon, Commonwealth land, and actions by Commonwealth agencies and specifically address impacts on: ecosystems and their constituent parts, including people and communities; natural and physical resources; the qualities and characteristics of locations, places and areas; the heritage values of places; and the social, economic and cultural aspects of the above things.
No direct or indirect impacts will occur to Commonwealth land as a result of the site.
3.1 (h) The Great Barrier Reef Marine Park
Description
Not applicable. The site is not in the vicinity of the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park. The Great Barrier Reef Marine Park is located 60 km to the north (straight line) at its nearest point.
Nature and extent of likely impact Address any impacts on any part of the environment of the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park. No direct or indirect impacts will occur to the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park as a result of the proposed works. Note: If your action occurs in the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park you may also require permission under the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Act 1975 (GBRMP Act). If so, section 37AB of the GBRMP Act provides that your referral under the EPBC Act is deemed to be an application under the GBRMP Act and Regulations for necessary permissions and a single integrated process will generally apply. Further information is available at www.gbrmpa.gov.au
001 Referral of proposed action v May 2016 Page 32 of 51 3.1 (i) A water resource, in relation to coal seam gas development and large coal mining development
Description If the action is a coal seam gas development or large coal mining development that has, or is likely to have, a significant impact on water resources, the draft Policy Statement Significant Impact Guidelines: Coal seam gas and large coal mining developments—Impacts on water resources provides further details on the type of information needed.
Not applicable. The proposed works do not involve coal seam gas development or large scale mining development or is likely to impact upon water resources.
Nature and extent of likely impact Address any impacts on water resources. Your assessment of impacts should refer to the draft Significant Impact Guidelines: Coal seam gas and large coal mining developments—Impacts on water resources.
No direct or indirect impacts will occur to water resources as a result of the proposed works.
3.2 Nuclear actions, actions taken by the Commonwealth (or Commonwealth agency), actions taken in a Commonwealth marine area, actions taken on Commonwealth land, or actions taken in the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park You must describe the nature and extent of likely impacts (both direct & indirect) on the whole environment if your project: is a nuclear action; will be taken by the Commonwealth or a Commonwealth agency; will be taken in a Commonwealth marine area; will be taken on Commonwealth land; or will be taken in the Great Barrier Reef marine Park.
Your assessment of impacts should refer to the Significant Impact Guidelines 1.2 - Actions on, or impacting upon, Commonwealth land, and actions by Commonwealth agencies and specifically address impacts on: ecosystems and their constituent parts, including people and communities; natural and physical resources; the qualities and characteristics of locations, places and areas; the heritage values of places; and the social, economic and cultural aspects of the above things.
3.2 (a) Is the proposed action a nuclear action? No Yes (provide details below) If yes, nature & extent of likely impact on the whole environment
3.2 (b) Is the proposed action to be taken by the No Commonwealth or a Commonwealth agency? Yes (provide details below) If yes, nature & extent of likely impact on the whole environment
3.2 (c) Is the proposed action to be taken in a No Commonwealth marine area? Yes (provide details below) If yes, nature & extent of likely impact on the whole environment (in addition to 3.1(f))
001 Referral of proposed action v May 2016 Page 33 of 51 3.2 (d) Is the proposed action to be taken on No Commonwealth land? Yes (provide details below) If yes, nature & extent of likely impact on the whole environment (in addition to 3.1(g))
3.2 (e) Is the proposed action to be taken in the No Great Barrier Reef Marine Park? Yes (provide details below) If yes, nature & extent of likely impact on the whole environment (in addition to 3.1(h))
3.3 Other important features of the environment Provide a description of the project area and the affected area, including information about the following features (where relevant to the project area and/or affected area, and to the extent not otherwise addressed above). If at Section 2.3 you identified any alternative locations, time frames or activities for your proposed action, you must complete each of the details below (where relevant) for each alternative identified.
3.3 (a) Flora and fauna Flora The State’s Wildlife Online database records 317 flora species within a 10 km radius of the site. Fauna The State’s Wildlife Online database records 349 fauna species within a 10 km radius of the site. The fauna species list comprises 22 amphibians, 219 birds, 3 insects, 1 lobe-finned fish, 19 ray-finned fish, 35 mammals and 50 reptiles. 3.3 (b) Hydrology, including water flows
A single ‘first order’ waterway as mapped on DNRM’s ordered drainage on the southern boundary of the site. This waterway begins in the south-western corner of the site and drains to the east, appears to be ephemeral and traverses the southern boundary of the property. The waterway is likely to receive significant runoff during wet periods.
3.3 (c) Soil and Vegetation characteristics
Three rock types have been identified through geotechnical surveys: Meta-Sandstone. A sandstone that has been subjected to low-grade metamorphic processes. It is the dominant rock type across the block. Initial laboratory testing indicates it would be a suitable product for road base, ballast, and concrete aggregate. Hornfels. A moderate-grade metamorphic rock that has undergone low-moderate thermal alteration. It has been assessed as suitable for road base, ballast, and concrete aggregate Conglomeratic arkosic sandstone. A sedimentary rock that contains acid volcanic/tuffaceous inclusions. It appears to have been subjected to only minor metamorphic alteration.
3.3 (d) Outstanding natural features
No outstanding natural features are present on the site or within the immediate vicinity of the site. 3.3 (e) Remnant native vegetation
The site supports remnant vegetation comprising the following regional ecosystems (REs): 12.3.3 (endangered) – Eucalyptus tereticornis woodland. Eucalyptus crebra and E. moluccana are sometimes present and may be relatively abundant in places, especially on edges of plains and higher level alluvium. Other species that may be present as scattered individuals or clumps include Angophora subvelutina or A. floribunda, Corymbia clarksoniana, C. intermedia, C. tessellaris, Lophostemon suaveolens and E. melanophloia. Occurs on Quaternary alluvial plains, terraces and fans where rainfall is usually less than 1000mm/y.
001 Referral of proposed action v May 2016 Page 34 of 51 12.9-10.3 (of concern) - Eucalyptus moluccana +/- Corymbia citriodora subsp. variegata open forest. Other species include Eucalyptus siderophloia or E. crebra, E. tereticornis. Understorey generally sparse but can become shrubby in absence of fire. Occurs on Cainozoic and Mesozoic sediments, especially shales. Prefers lower slopes. 12.3.7 (least concern) - Narrow fringing woodland of Eucalyptus tereticornis, Casuarina cunninghamiana subsp. cunninghamiana +/- Melaleuca viminalis, Waterhousea floribunda. Other species associated with this RE include Melaleuca bracteata, M. trichostachya, M. linariifolia and M. fluviatilis in north of bioregion. Lomandra hystrix often present in stream beds. Occurs on fringing levees and banks of rivers and drainage lines of alluvial plains throughout the region. 12.8.17 (least concern) - Eucalyptus melanophloia +/- E. crebra, E. tereticornis, Corymbia tessellaris, C. intermedia and/or C. clarksoniana, E. melliodora, Angophora subvelutina grassy woodland. Occurs on Cainozoic igneous rocks, especially basalt. 12.9-10.2 (least concern) - Corymbia citriodora subsp. variegata open forest or woodland usually with Eucalyptus crebra. Other species such as Eucalyptus tereticornis, E. moluccana, E. acmenoides and E.siderophloia may be present in scattered patches or in low densities. Understorey can be grassy or shrubby. Shrubby understorey of Lophostemon confertus (whipstick form) often present in northern parts of bioregion. Occurs on Cainozoic and Mesozoic sediments. Field surveys have confirmed that the regional ecosystems present within the site are consistent with those depicted in the Queensland Department of Natural Resources and Mines’ Vegetation Management Supporting Map. It is noted that the proposed works include the clearing of only the least concern remnant vegetation community mapped as 12.9-10.2. The other mapped regional ecosystems will not be cleared as part of the proposed works; this vegetation will remain intact to provide a visual and noise buffer around the works.
3.3 (f) Gradient (or depth range if action is to be taken in a marine area)
The site is dominated by a high ridge running north-east/south-west through the north western section of the block and parallel to the north-western property boundary. Steep slopes and gullies run off this ridge. Towards the south-east and south-west sections of the block, the topography flattens to moderate slopes, with a very flat section adjacent to the waterway near the south-east boundary.
Contours on the site range from approximently 55 m AHD to 140 m AHD.
3.3 (g) Current state of the environment The project site has been subjected to existing disturbance from quarrying activities for a period of four years. These activities have resulted in localised intense impact that is confined to a 1.4 ha area in the south-west of the project site. Remaining areas are relatively well-maintained. Remnant vegetation has been subject to only very low intensity cattle grazing. The quality of ground-level microhabitats is high as is evident by the relative abundance of the microhabitat specialist collared delma. Across the rocky hillside areas, weeds were generally absent. Weeds including Lantana camara and other riparian associated weeds were found along the alluvial creekflats at the south of the project site. 3.3 (h) Commonwealth Heritage Places or other places recognised as having heritage values
No Commonwealth heritage places or places of heritage value are present within or adjacent to the site.
3.3 (i) Indigenous heritage values
A search of DATSIMA’s cultural heritage database details an item of Aboriginal cultural heritage has been recorded on the 21 February 2017. A search of the DATSIP cultural heritage database found there was: No cultural heritage site points or polygons recorded within the search area No cultural heritage management plans within the search area No Designated Landscape Areas (DLA) within the search area No Registered Study Cultural Heritage Areas within the search area
001 Referral of proposed action v May 2016 Page 35 of 51 3.3 (j) Other important or unique values of the environment Describe any other key features of the environment affected by, or in proximity to the proposed action (for example, any national parks, conservation reserves, wetlands of national significance etc).
Bullyard Conservation Park which is tenured as a National Park is located 4.5 km to the north-east of the site. No additional important or unique values are located within the vicinity of the site.
3.3 (k) Tenure of the action area (eg freehold, leasehold)
The site is located on Lot 104 on RP21941 which is currently held under freehold tenure.
3.3 (l) Existing land/marine uses of area
The site is currently utilised as a quarry however the operations are currently confined to the south-western corner of the site. Surrounding land uses include mostly agricultural land uses including sugar cane farming, small crop production and rural dwellings.
3.3 (m) Any proposed land/marine uses of area
The site is proposed to continue to operate as a quarry operation, albeit on a larger scale.
001 Referral of proposed action v May 2016 Page 36 of 51 4 Environmental outcomes
Provide descriptions of the proposed environmental outcomes that will be achieved for matters of national environmental significance as a result of the proposed action. Include details of the baseline data upon which the outcomes are based, and the confidence about the likely achievement of the proposed outcomes. Where outcomes cannot be identified or committed to, provide explanatory details including any commitments to identify outcomes through an assessment process.
If a proposed action is determined to be a controlled action, the Department may request further details to enable application of the draft Outcomes-based Conditions Policy 2015 and Outcomes-based Conditions Guidance 2015 (http://www.environment.gov.au/epbc/consultation/policy-guidance-outcomes-based-conditions), including about environmental outcomes to be achieved, details of baseline data, milestones, performance criteria, and monitoring and adaptive management to ensure the achievement of outcomes. If this information is available at the time of referral it should be included.
General commitments to achieving environmental outcomes, particularly relating to beneficial impacts of the proposed action, CANNOT be taken into account in making the initial decision about whether the proposal is likely to have a significant impact on a matter protected under the EPBC Act. (But those commitments may be relevant at the later assessment and approval stages, including the appropriate level of assessment, and conditions of approval, if your proposal proceeds to these stages).
Baseline data
The proposed environmental outcomes presented in this referral have been based on baseline data and information sourced from the following surveys, reports and management plans: Application for Extractive Industry on Lot 104 RP21941 (Wide Bay Burnett Environmental Consulting Services 15 July 2015) Report prepared to clear vegetation under the Vegetation Management Act, 1999. This included an assessment against Module 8 of the State Development Assessment Provisions Rehabilitation Plan Lot 104 RP21941 (Wide Bay Burnett Environmental Consulting Services November 2015) Report prepared detailing the preliminary rehabilitation plan for the proposed action. This was prepared prior to the confirmation of habitat for the collared delma Proposed Extraction Industry, Clarkes Road Gin Gin, Matters of National Environmental Significance Assessment (GHD December 2016) – A one day preliminary ecological field survey was undertaken by a GHD senior ecologist in April 2016 to assess the suitability of habitats for EPBC Act listed flora and fauna species. A follow-up two-day ecological field survey was conducted by two GHD senior ecologists in August/September 2016. Survey techniques included targeted surveys for conservation significant terrestrial fauna species identified as potentially present in the GHD April 2016 survey and/or the desktop assessment. The follow-up survey was conducted in accordance with relevant State and Commonwealth survey guidelines for relevant species. EPBC Act Referral guidelines for the vulnerable koala (combined populations of Queensland, New South Wales and the Australian Capital Territory) (Department of the Environment, 2014) National koala conservation and management strategy 2009 – 2014 (NRMMC 2009). Draft Referral Guidelines for the nationally listed Brigalow Belt reptiles (Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Populations and Communities, 2011) Matters of National Environmental Significance, Significant Impact Guidelines 1.1 Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (Department of the Environment 2013)
As described in Section 3 of this referral, MNES known or likely to occur within the project site include the following threatened species: collared delma (Delma torquata) – known to occur koala (Phascolarctos cinereus) – likely to occur grey-headed flying-fox (Pteropus poliocephalus) – likely to occur.
Based on the Significance of Impact Assessment undertaken in Section 3, the proposed action has the potential to significantly impact one of these species only: the collared delma. Given the project will have no significant impact on the koala or grey-headed flying fox, Section 4 and 5 refer only to measures to mitigate impact on the collared delma. Proposed key environmental outcomes for the protection of this species, together with performance measures are provided in Table 8.
001 Referral of proposed action v May 2016 Page 37 of 51 Table 8 Environmental outcomes proposed for the project No Environmental outcome Milestone and performance indicator Monitoring and reporting
1 The area of collared delma Clearing extents will be demarcated During vegetation clearing – habitat (i.e. mapped areas of on the ground prior to clearing daily monitoring will be rocky microhabitat) subject to operations to prevent exceeding the undertaken by the site active quarrying at any given 10 ha active quarrying footprint supervisor to ensure exclusion time will not exceed 10 ha and threshold. zones are maintained and new areas (in addition to the environmental outcome is initial 10 ha) will not be Development of new extraction areas achieved. developed until an equivalent (i.e. additional to the initial 10 ha area has been successfully quarrying footprint) will not proceed Before each new stage of rehabilitated following until an equivalent area of previously development, monitoring of extraction operations. quarried land surface (within the rehabilitation areas will be mapped extent of collared delma undertaken by a suitably habiat) has met the following qualified and experienced rehabilitation benchmarks: ecologist to determine the success of rehabilitation in mulch and rock cover in achieving the benchmarks rehabilitation areas exceeds detailed in this table. 30% and 5% of the ground surface respectively The results of rehabilitation dominant woody native monitoring will be sent to DoEE vegetation within rehabilitation prior to the commencement of areas has achieved stem each new stage of the densities equivalent to that development recorded prior to clearing native grass cover within
rehabilitation areas is at least 50% of that recorded prior to clearing weeds account for less than 15 % of vegetation cover within rehabilitated areas
3 Suitable corridors containing Prior to commencement of each Before each stage of the high value habitat for the stage of the development, a suitably development, monitoring will be collared delma will be qualified ecologist will identify and undertaken to confirm the maintained for each stage of demarcate suitable corridors of presence of suitable the development to allow collared delma habitat that can retain microhabitat within the opportunities for ongoing opportunities for local movement of proposed corridors. movement of collared delma the collared delma. individuals The results of monitoring will be Suitable corridors will attain the sent to the DoEE prior to each following benchmarks: stage of development. presence of surface rock over at least 50% of the corridor width presence of leaf litter to a depth of at least 2 cm presence of native grasses weeds account for less than 15 % of vegetation cover presence of canopy vegetation consistent with remnant vegetation status corridor width of at least 30 m to minimise edge effects
Corridor locations will be mapped on project development plans and demarcated on the ground to prevent accidental clearing.
001 Referral of proposed action v May 2016 Page 38 of 51 4 The integrity of the pre- Prior to development, a suitable Prior to each stage of clearance and translocation qualified and experienced ecologist development, the results of pre- process will be upheld, will identify and prepare a suitable clearance searches will be maintained and monitored for ‘soft release’ site. For the first (initial) recorded, documenting the each stage of development to stage of development, the soft number of collared delma increase knowledge of the release site will be within the 2 ha of individuals salvaged and practical effectiveness of suitable habitat not to be cleared on translocated to the soft release translocation as a method for the project site. For each successive site. mitigating injury and mortality stage, the soft release site will be impacts on the collared delma located within recently rehabilitated During clearing activities, the associated with construction areas. The soft release sites will meet results of spotter-catcher the following criteria: searches will be documented, detailing the number of dead, presence of suitable injured or translocated collared microhabitat for the collared delma individuals. The welfare delma of injured collared delma located immediately adjacent to individuals will be managed in a more extensive network of accordance with the animal collared delma habitat ethics permit of the spotter- fenced with impenetrable mesh catcher. fencing dug 40 cm into the ground to prevent collared Soft release sites will be delmas from burrowing through monitored for the presence of or beneath the fencing collared delma individuals every 12 months for a period of 2 For three consecutive days prior to years following each each new stage of development, a translocation event suitably trained and experienced spotter-catcher will search the proposed new quarry area to identify and translocate collared delma individuals to the soft release site
The spotter-catcher will oversee vegetation clearance for each stage of development and salvage any collared delma individuals encountered during clearing. These will be translocated to the soft release site
Fencing on each soft release site will be maintained for a period of 2 years after translocation has occurred.
Likelihood of achieving proposed environmental outcomes It is expected with a high degree of confidence that the proposed environmental outcomes specified in Table 8 will be achieved. The outcomes have been developed in close consultation with GHD ecologists, project managers and with the proponent to ensure the measures proposed are practical and likely to deliver positive outcomes. Regular monitoring will be undertaken and will allow opportunities for adaptive management. The process of staged development is closely tied to and dependent upon the success of rehabilitation actions. With ongoing monitoring and reporting to the DoEE, this will manage risk to the collared delma and its habitat through the life of the project.
001 Referral of proposed action v May 2016 Page 39 of 51 5 Measures to avoid or reduce impacts
Note: If you have identified alternatives in relation to location, time frames or activities for the proposed action at Section 2.3 you will need to complete this section in relation to each of the alternatives identified.
Provide a description of measures that will be implemented to avoid, reduce, manage or offset any relevant impacts of the action. Include, if appropriate, any relevant reports or technical advice relating to the feasibility and effectiveness of the proposed measures.
For any measures intended to avoid or mitigate significant impacts on matters protected under the EPBC Act, specify: what the measure is, how the measure is expected to be effective, and the time frame or workplan for the measure.
Examples of relevant measures to avoid or reduce impacts may include the timing of works, avoidance of important habitat, specific design measures, or adoption of specific work practices.
Provide information about the level of commitment by the person proposing to take the action to achieve the proposed environmental outcomes and implement the proposed mitigation measures. For example, if the measures are preliminary suggestions only that have not been fully researched, or are dependent on a third party’s agreement (e.g. council or landowner), you should state that, that is the case.
Note, the Australian Government Environment Minister may decide that a proposed action is not likely to have significant impacts on a protected matter, as long as the action is taken in a particular manner (section 77A of the EPBC Act). The particular manner of taking the action may avoid or reduce certain impacts, in such a way that those impacts will not be ‘significant’. More detail is provided on the Department’s web site.
For the Minister to make such a decision (under section 77A), the proposed measures to avoid or reduce impacts must: clearly form part of the referred action (eg be identified in the referral and fall within the responsibility of the person proposing to take the action), be must be clear, unambiguous, and provide certainty in relation to reducing or avoiding impacts on the matters protected, and must be realistic and practical in terms of reporting, auditing and enforcement.
If a proposed action is determined to be a controlled action, the Department may request further details to enable application of the Outcomes-based Conditions Policy 2016 (http://www.environment.gov.au/epbc/publications/outcomes- based-conditions-policy-guidance), including information about the environmental outcomes to be achieved by proposed avoidance, mitigation, management or offset measures, details of baseline data, milestones, performance criteria, and monitoring and adaptive management to ensure the achievement of outcomes. If this information is available at the time of referral it should be included in the description of the proposed measures.
More general commitments (e.g. preparation of management plans or monitoring), commitments to achieving environmental outcomes and measures aimed at providing environmental offsets, compensation or off-site benefits CANNOT be taken into account in making the initial decision about whether the proposal is likely to have a significant impact on a matter protected under the EPBC Act. (But those commitments may be relevant at the later assessment and approval stages, including the appropriate level of assessment, if your proposal proceeds to these stages).
The measures described within this section are project-specific and have been carefully developed in consideration of available information and baseline data to avoid, reduce or manage impacts to the collared delma. The measures have been subjected to close scrutiny by project managers, ecologists and the proponents to ensure that they are realistic and achievable.
Reduction The Project plan has been revised to reduce the area of impact to 69 ha, resulting in a loss of 28 ha of collared delma habitat. A 2 ha area of confirmed habitat for the collared delma, shown as rocky microhabitat in Figure 4 will be avoided. This will protect 7 percent of available collared delma habitat present within the project site from permanent impact. The following measures will be implemented to preserve the integrity of habitats within this area: Exclusion fencing will be maintained for the life of the project The area will be designated as a ‘No Go’ area with appropriate warning signs and information provided in new worker inductions Existing weed management protocols will be maintained at the site
001 Referral of proposed action v May 2016 Page 40 of 51 Monitoring will be undertaken every five years over the life of the project to assess the habitat condition of ‘No Go’ areas. This will be undertaken by a suitably qualified ecologist with experience with the habitat requirements of the collared delma. Mitigation The following mitigation measures will be used to reduce the severity of impact on habitat and individuals: Staging the development Maintaining habitat connectivity Rehabilitating impacted areas Translocating affected individuals Monitoring the recovery of rehabilitated and protected areas
Staging the Development The development will be staged over a period of 30 - 40 years, with areas sequentially cleared. This will mean the immediate impact footprint at any stage of the development will be confined to an area < 10 ha in size. Minimising the spatial extent of immediate impact, will reduce the severity of impact on the local population by preserving local habitats and maintaining ongoing opportunities for breeding and movement of individuals. Impacted areas will be sequentially rehabilitated over the life of the project, with the next phase of development only proceeding once rehabilitation milestones have been achieved.
Maintaining connectivity Maintaining habitat connectivity is important for the collared delma (SEWPaC, 2011). Habitat corridors will be maintained throughout the life of the project. The spatial arrangement and timing of staged development will be such that habitat corridors will be strategically identified within the project development plan. Habitat corridors will be a minimum of 30 m in width and contain remnant vegetation with suitable microhabitat for the collared delma. Connectivity within these habitat corridors will be maintained at all times throughout the life of the project. Corridor locations will be selected to maintain habitat connectivity between areas of unimpacted habitat within the project footpint and rehabilitated collared delma habitat and to protected habitats on the alluvial flats to the south of the project site. The integrity of microhabitats within habitat corridors will be assessed during periodic monitoring of the project site. Monitoring and maintaining the integrity of microhabitats within habitat corridors will maximise their ongoing effectiveness.
Rehabilitating impacted areas A rehabilitation strategy has been prepared for the project. This was prepared prior to the confirmation of the presence of the collared delma. The rehabilitation plan will be revised to outline measures to rehabilitate and enhance the value of areas impacted by the development for use as microhabitats by the collared delma. The revised rehabilitation strategy will include: A timeline for the rehabilitation of the site that complements the staged development of the project Provision for decommissioning and rehabilitation of haul roads no longer required Provision for rehabilitation of decommissioned quarry areas. This will include: – The preservation and on-site stockpiling of topsoil and mulch to be used in rehabilitation areas – The preservation and on-site stockpiling of surface rock that provides an essential microhabitat component for the collared delma – Landscaping of cleared substrate following completion of quarrying activities – The re-spreading of topsoil, surface rock and leaf litter or mulch across areas to be rehabilitated – A re-seeding process will be implemented to stabilise the substrate and minimise the potential for erosion – Use of local topsoil will replace the seedbank which contains native grasses and ground plants that provide suitable microhabitat for the collared delma including kangaroo grass (Themeda triandra), barbed-wire grass (Cymbopogon refractus), wiry panic grass (Entolasia stricta), wiregrass (Aristida spp.) and Lomandras (Lomandra spp.) – The replacement of local topsoil will also encourage regeneration of quick-growing succession species such as Acacia leiocalyx, Allocasuarina luehmannii, Alphitonia excelsa and Lophostemon confertus – Topsoil will also contain locally occurring canopy tree species including Corymbia citriodora,Eucalyptus crebra, E. tereticornis, E. moluccana and E. exserta – Rehabilitated areas will be designated as ‘No Go’ areas, protected from machinery and general staff access – Monitoring of topsoil stockpile areas will be undertaken to minimise potential for weed incursions and increases in the densities of weed seeds – Monitoring of rehabilitated areas will be undertaken to assess the efficacy of rehabilitation and allow opportunities for adaptive management
001 Referral of proposed action v May 2016 Page 41 of 51 Translocating affected individuals While translocation was generally not considered an effective measure to mitigate impact on the collared delma, the measure has been effective in the Main Roads Toowoomba Range Crossing Project. Translocation efforts will therefore be undertaken to reduce the extent of injury and direct mortality of collared delma individuals with pre-clearance surveys to be undertaken within areas subject to immediate clearing disturbance.
For each stage of the development, pre-clearance surveys will be undertaken by a suitably qualified and experienced fauna spotter-catcher. Individuals captured will be immediately relocated to a dedicated release site in area of suitable habitat available on the project site. The dedicated release site will be a ‘soft release site – i.e. temporarily fenced to minimise external impacts on translocated individuals and prevent animals from returning to the impact zone. For the first stage of the project, the soft release site will be located within the 2 ha area of habitat that is not subject to development. For all progressive stages of development, the soft release site will be located within rehabilitation areas.
Efforts to translocate surface rocks and other subtsrate to be preserved for use in rehabilitation will be overseen by the fauna spotter-catcher. Newly translocated rocks and topsoil will be searched for collared delmas. Any individuals will be translocated to the designated release site.
The spotter-catcher will then be present during vegetation clearing. Any collared delma individuals that can be retrieved during clearing will be captured and relocated outside the project footprint at the designated release point.
The number of collared delma individuals captured and successfully released in each stage of the development (during pre-clearance and clearance) will be recorded to assess the efficacy of this as an ongoing mitigation measure. Similarly, all incidents of injury and mortality of collared delma individuals will be reported.
Monitoring Monitoring will be undertaken every five years to assess the following indicators of local population health: The quality of microhabitats in: – designated habitat corridors – rehabilitated areas The continued presence of collared delmas within: – areas of protected collared delma habitat – areas of suitable habitat within the project footprint that are yet to be impacted – designated habitat corridors – rehabilitated areas Monitoring of translocated collared delmas will be undertaken every 12 months for 2 years after a translocation event.
Weed management Any outbreak of weed species withinareas of mapped rocky microhabitats, particularly Lantana camara, (known to occur at the project site and is a recognised threat to the quality of habitat for the collared delma) will be subject to active weed management through physical removal.
001 Referral of proposed action v May 2016 Page 42 of 51 6 Conclusion on the likelihood of significant impacts Identify whether or not you believe the action is a controlled action (ie. whether you think that significant impacts on the matters protected under Part 3 of the EPBC Act are likely) and the reasons why.
6.1 Do you THINK your proposed action is a controlled action?
No, complete section 5.2 Yes, complete section 5.3
6.2 Proposed action IS NOT a controlled action. Specify the key reasons why you think the proposed action is NOT LIKELY to have significant impacts on a matter protected under the EPBC Act.
6.3 Proposed action IS a controlled action Type ‘x’ in the box for the matter(s) protected under the EPBC Act that you think are likely to be significantly impacted. (The ‘sections’ identified below are the relevant sections of the EPBC Act.)
Matters likely to be impacted World Heritage values (sections 12 and 15A) National Heritage places (sections 15B and 15C) Wetlands of international importance (sections 16 and 17B) Listed threatened species and communities (sections 18 and 18A) Listed migratory species (sections 20 and 20A) Protection of the environment from nuclear actions (sections 21 and 22A) Commonwealth marine environment (sections 23 and 24A) Great Barrier Reef Marine Park (sections 24B and 24C) A water resource, in relation to coal seam gas development and large coal mining development (sections 24D and 24E) Protection of the environment from actions involving Commonwealth land (sections 26 and 27A) Protection of the environment from Commonwealth actions (section 28) Commonwealth Heritage places overseas (sections 27B and 27C)
Specify the key reasons why you think the proposed action is likely to have a significant adverse impact on the matters identified above.
001 Referral of proposed action v May 2016 Page 43 of 51 7 Environmental record of the responsible party NOTE: If a decision is made that a proposal needs approval under the EPBC Act, the Environment Minister will also decide the assessment approach. The EPBC Regulations provide for the environmental history of the party proposing to take the action to be taken into account when deciding the assessment approach.
Yes No 7.1 Does the party taking the action have a satisfactory record of responsible environmental management?
Provide details Yes, the proponent has not had an environmental incident recorded. Furthermore, the proponent is aware of their environmental obligations and responsibilities under various Acts of parliament.
7.2 Has either (a) the party proposing to take the action, or (b) if a permit has been applied for in relation to the action, the person making the application - ever been subject to any proceedings under a Commonwealth, State or Territory law for the protection of the environment or the conservation and sustainable use of natural resources?
If yes, provide details
7.3 If the party taking the action is a corporation, will the action be taken in accordance with the corporation’s environmental policy and planning framework?
If yes, provide details of environmental policy and planning framework The proponent has complied with the statuatory responsibilities under Commonwealth, State and local legislation for the proposed expansion. The proponent has also invited State Departmental Officers onto the site to provide a brief and update on the proposed expansion works.
7.4 Has the party taking the action previously referred an action under the EPBC Act, or been responsible for undertaking an action referred under the EPBC Act?
Provide name of proposal and EPBC reference number (if known)
001 Referral of proposed action v May 2016 Page 44 of 51 8 Information sources and attachments (For the information provided above)
8.1 References List the references used in preparing the referral. Highlight documents that are available to the public, including web references if relevant. Churchill, S. (2008) Australian Bats; Allen & Unwin, Crows Nest, NSW. Department of the Environment and Energy (DoEE) (2015) Species Profile and Threats Database. Available from: http://www.environment.gov.au/cgi-bin/sprat/public/sprat.pl. Accessed: 20 February 2017. Department of the Environment and Heritage Protection (EHP) Alectryon ramiflorus. Available from: https://www.ehp.qld.gov.au/wildlife/threatened-species/endangered/endangered- plants/alectryon_ramiflorus.html. Accessed: 20 February 2017. Gynther, I. (2004) Pers Comm: Coxen’s Fig-Parrot – recent records. Higgins, P.J. (Ed) (1999) Handbook of Australian, New Zealand and Antarctic Birds. Volume Four – Parrots to Dollarbird; Melbourne: Oxford University Press. Marchant, S. & Higgins, P.J. (Eds) (1993) Handbook of Australian, New Zealand and Antarctic Birds; Oxford University Press, Melbourne. Threatened Species Scientific Committee (TSSC) (2015) Conservation Advice, Nyctophilus corbeni, south- eastern long eared bat. Available from: http://www.environment.gov.au/biodiversity/threatened/species/pubs/83395-conservation_advice- 01102015.pdf. Accessed: 20 February 2017. Van Dyck, S. & Strahan, R. (Ed) (2008. The Mammals of Australia (3rd Edition), Reed New Holland, Sydney. 8.2 Reliability and date of information For information in section 3 specify: source of the information; how recent the information is; how the reliability of the information was tested; and any uncertainties in the information. 8.3 Attachments Indicate the documents you have attached. All attachments must be less than three megabytes (3mb) so they can be published on the Department’s website. Attachments larger than three megabytes (3mb) may delay the processing of your referral.
attached Title of attachment(s) You must attach figures, maps or aerial photographs Locality map titled ‘Figure 1’ and included in Section 1 of showing the project locality (section 1) this referral document GIS file delineating the boundary of the referral area (section 1) GIS file provided with this referral as an attached file titled EPBC_Referral_Data_GHD. gdb figures, maps or aerial photographs Not applicable showing the location of the project in respect to any matters of national environmental significance or important features of the environments (section 3)
001 Referral of proposed action v May 2016 Page 45 of 51 If relevant, attach copies of any state or local government Not applicable approvals and consent conditions (section 2.5) Attachment 2 - Development copies of any completed assessments to meet state or local government approvals Application Material Change of Use — Extractive Industry and outcomes of public consultations, if (Extension to existing gravel available (section 2.6) quarry including extracting, screening and processing up to 250,000 tonne per annum over four stages) Clarkes Road, Gin Gin (described as Lot 104 on RP21941)
Appendix B of Attachment 1– Applicationto Clear Regulated Vegetation for Extractive Industry Lot 104 on RP21941
Attachment 3 - Extractive Industry (Gravel Quarry— Extracting, Crushing& Screening) Site Based Management Plan Clarkes Road, Gin Gin Lot 104 on RP21941
Attachment 4 – Applicant’s response to Council’s information request
Attachment 5 - Response to SARA Information Request Items, 5, 6 and 8
Attachment 6 - Response to Information Request SDA- 0815-023256, Concurrence Agency Lot 104 on RP21941 –Clarkes Road, Gin Gin: Extractive Industry
Attachment 7 - Rehabilitation Plan Lot 104 on RP21941
Appendix B of Attachment 1– copies of any flora and fauna investigations and surveys (section 3) Applicationto Clear Regulated Vegetation for Extractive Industry Lot 104 on RP21941 Attachment 1 - Proposed technical reports relevant to the assessment of impacts on protected Extractive Industry, Clarkes Road, Gin Gin matters that support the arguments and Matters of National conclusions in the referral (section 3 and 4) Environmental Significance Assessment report(s) on any public consultations Not applicable undertaken, including with Indigenous stakeholders (section 3)
001 Referral of proposed action v May 2016 Page 46 of 51 9 Contacts, signatures and declarations NOTE: Providing false or misleading information is an offence punishable on conviction by imprisonment and fine (s 489, EPBC Act).
Under the EPBC Act a referral can only be made by: the person proposing to take the action (which can include a person acting on their behalf); or a Commonwealth, state or territory government, or agency that is aware of a proposal by a person to take an action, and that has administrative responsibilities relating to the action2.
Project title:
9.1 Person proposing to take action This is the individual, government agency or company that will be principally responsible for, or who will carry out, the proposed action.
If the proposed action will be taken under a contract or other arrangement, this is: the person for whose benefit the action will be taken; or the person who procured the contract or other arrangement and who will have principal control and responsibility for the taking of the proposed action.
If the proposed action requires a permit under the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Act3, this is the person requiring the grant of a GBRMP permission.
The Minister may also request relevant additional information from this person.
If further assessment and approval for the action is required, any approval which may be granted will be issued to the person proposing to take the action. This person will be responsible for complying with any conditions attached to the approval.
If the Minister decides that further assessment and approval is required, the Minister must designate a person as a proponent of the action. The proponent is responsible for meeting the requirements of the EPBC Act during the assessment process. The proponent will generally be the person proposing to take the action4. 1. Name and Title: Wayne and Judy Honor 2. Organisation (if applicable): Coachtrail Investments Pty Ltd 3. EPBC Referral Number (if known): 4: ACN / ABN (if applicable): ABN: 36 165 901 708 5. Postal address 285 McIlwraith Rd McIlwraith Qld 4671 6. Telephone: 0405451916 7. Email: [email protected]
8. Name of proposed
proponent (if not the same person at item 1 above and if applicable):
2 If the proposed action is to be taken by a Commonwealth, state or territory government or agency, section 8.1 of this form should be completed. However, if the government or agency is aware of, and has administrative responsibilities relating to, a proposed action that is to be taken by another person which has not otherwise been referred, please contact the Referrals Gateway (1800 803 772) to obtain an alternative contacts, signatures and declarations page.
3 If your referred action, or a component of it, is to be taken in the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park the Minister is required to provide a copy of your referral to the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority (GBRMPA) (see section 73A, EPBC Act). For information about how the GBRMPA may use your information, see http://www.gbrmpa.gov.au/privacy/privacy_notice_for_permits.
001 Referral of proposed action v May 2016 Page 47 of 51 001 Referral of proposed action v May 2016 Page 48 of 51 07 4130 8400 Telephone [email protected] Email
Declaration I declare that to the best of my knowledge the information I have given on, or attached to this form is complete, current and correct. I understand that giving false or misleading information is a serious offence.
Signature Date 18/04/2017
001 Referral of proposed action v May 2016 Page 49 of 51 REFERRAL CHECKLIST NOTE: This checklist is to help ensure that all the relevant referral information has been provided. It is not a part of the referral form and does not need to be sent to the Department.
HAVE YOU: Completed all required sections of the referral form? Included accurate coordinates (to allow the location of the proposed action to be mapped)? Provided a map showing the location and approximate boundaries of the project area? Provided a map/plan showing the location of the action in relation to any matters of NES? Provided a digital file (preferably ArcGIS shapefile, refer to guidelines at Attachment A) delineating the boundaries of the referral area? Provided complete contact details and signed the form? Provided copies of any documents referenced in the referral form? Ensured that all attachments are less than three megabytes (3mb)? Sent the referral to the Department (electronic and hard copy preferred)?
001 Referral of proposed action v May 2016 Page 50 of 51 Attachment A
Geographic Information System (GIS) data supply guidelines
If the area is less than 5 hectares, provide the location as a point layer. If the area greater than 5 hectares, please provide as a polygon layer. If the proposed action is linear (eg. a road or pipline) please provide a polyline layer.
GIS data needs to be provided to the Department in the following manner: Point, Line or Polygon data types: ESRI file geodatabase feature class (preferred) or as an ESRI shapefile (.shp) zipped and attached with appropriate title Raster data types: Raw satellite imagery should be supplied in the vendor specific format. Projection as GDA94 coordinate system.
Processed products should be provided as follows: For data, uncompressed or lossless compressed formats is required - GeoTIFF or Imagine IMG is the first preference, then JPEG2000 lossless and other simple binary+header formats (ERS, ENVI or BIL). For natural/false/pseudo colour RGB imagery: o If the imagery is already mosaiced and is ready for display then lossy compression is suitable (JPEG2000 lossy/ECW/MrSID). Prefer 10% compression, up to 20% is acceptable. o If the imagery requires any sort of processing prior to display (i.e. mosaicing/colour balancing/etc) then an uncompressed or lossless compressed format is required.
Metadata or ‘information about data’ will be produced for all spatial data and will be compliant with ANZLIC Metadata Profile. (http://www.anzlic.org.au/policies_guidelines#guidelines).
The Department’s preferred method is using ANZMet Lite, however the Department’s Service Provider may use any compliant system to generate metadata.
All data will be provide under a Creative Commons license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/au/)
001 Referral of proposed action v May 2016 Page 51 of 51