Application on Notification – State Agency Development

APPLICATION ON NOTIFICATION – STATE AGENCY DEVELOPMENT

Type of development: S49 – Public Infrastructure Development Number: 711/V049/20 Applicant: Origin Energy (sponsored by DEM) Nature of Development: Construction of Stage 1 of a solar farm (up to 150MW) and associated battery energy storage system (up to 30MW), and ancillary infrastructure Subject Land: Woods and Forest Road, Stuart (CT 6154/656, Piece 103 of DP 93178) Development Plan: Mid Murray Council Zone / Policy Area: Rural Zone / Policy Area 15 – Pastoral Policy Area Contact Officer: Sharon Wyatt Phone Number: 7109 7132 Consultation Start Date: 10 November 2020 Consultation Close Date: 11 December 2020

During the notification period, the application documentation can be viewed at the following locations: - Office of the State Commission Assessment Panel (SCAP), Level 5, 50 Flinders Street, Adelaide - Morgan Office of the Mid Murray Council, Morgan & Districts Community Hub, Fourth Street (cnr Eighth Street), Morgan - SA Planning Portal: https://www.saplanningportal.sa.gov.au/public_notices.

Written representations must be received by the close date (indicated above) and can either be posted, hand-delivered, or emailed to the State Commission Assessment Panel (SCAP). A representation form is provided as part of this document.

Any representations received after the close date will not be considered.

Postal Address: The Secretary State Commission Assessment Panel GPO Box 1815 ADELAIDE SA 5001

Street Address: Planning and Land Use Services Attorney-General’s Department Level 5, 50 Flinders Street ADELAIDE

Email Address: [email protected]

DEVELOPMENT ACT, 1993 S49 – CROWN DEVELOPMENT REPRESENTATION ON APPLICATION Applicant: Origin Energy (sponsored by Department for Energy and Mining) Development Number: 711/V049/20 Nature of Development: Morgan Solar Farm (stage 1) 150MW and associated infrastructure Zone / Policy Area: Rural Zone / Pastoral Policy Area 15 Subject Land: Woods and Forest Road, Stuart Contact Officer: Sharon Wyatt Phone Number: 7109 7132 Close Date: 11 December 2020

My Name: My phone number:

Primary method(s) of contact: Email:

Postal Address: Postcode:

You may be contacted via your nominated PRIMARY METHOD(s) OF CONTACT if you indicate below that you wish to be heard by the State Commission Assessment Panel in support of your submission.

My interests are: owner of local property (please tick one) occupier of local property

a representative of a company/other organisation affected by the proposal

a private citizen

The address of the property affected is:

Postcode

My interests are: I support the development (please tick one) I support the development with some concerns

I oppose the development

The specific aspects of the application to which I make comment on are:

I: wish to be heard in support of my submission

(please do not wish to be heard in support of my submission tick one) (Please tick one)

By: appearing personally

(please being represented by the following person tick one) (Please tick one)

Signature: Date:

Return Address: The Secretary, State Commission Assessment Panel, GPO Box 1815, Adelaide, SA 5001 /or Email: [email protected]

SECTION 49 & 49A – CROWN DEVELOPMENT DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION FORM

PLEASE USE BLOCK LETTERS FOR OFFICE USE

COUNCIL: ______Mid Murray Council DEVELOPMENT No: ______APPLICANT: ______Origin Energy Power Limitied PREVIOUS DEVELOPMENT No:______L32, Tower 1, 100 Barangarro Ave, ADDRESS: ______Barangaroo, NSW 2000 DATE RECEIVED: / /

CROWN AGENCY: ______Department for Energy and Mining

CONTACT PERSON FOR FURTHER INFORMATION Complying Decision: ______Name: ______Lauren Barnaby Simone Fogarty Origin SFC Merit Type: ______Telephone: ______0472879898 [work] ______0417800468 [Ah] Public Notification Finalised: / / Fax: ______[work] ______[Ah] lauren.barnaby@originenergy Referrals Email: ______.com.au [email protected]

NOTE TO APPLICANTS:

(1) All sections of this form must be completed. The site of Decision Fees Receipt No Date the development must be accurately identified and the required nature of the proposal adequately described. If the expected development cost of this Section 49 or Section 49A Planning: ______application exceeds $100,000 (excl. fit-out) or the development involves the division of land (with the creation Land Division: ______of additional allotments) it will be subject to those fees as outlined in Item 1 of Schedule 6 of the Development Additional: ______

Regulations 2008. Proposals over $4 million (excl. fit-out) will be subject to an advertising fee. (2) Three copies of the Minister’s application should also be provided. Approval

EXISTING USE:______Stock Grazing ______

DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT:______Solar Farm and______ancillary infratructure ______

______

LOCATION OF PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT:______House No: ______Lot No: 103____ Street: ______Woods and______Forrest Road Town/Suburb: ______Stuart 5320 _____ Section No [full/part] ______Hundred: ______Stuart______Volume: ______6154 Folio: ______656______Section No [full/part] ______Hundred: ______Volume: ______Folio: ______LAND DIVISION:

Site Area [m 2] ______Reserve Area [m 2] ______No of existing allotments ______Number of additional allotments [excluding road and reserve]: ______Lease: YES NO

DEVELOPMENT COST [do not include any fit-out costs] : $ ______110,000,000200,000,000

POWERLINE SETBACKS: Pursuant to Schedule 5 (2a)(1) of the Development Regulations 2008, if this application is for a building it will be forwarded to the Office of the Technical Regulator for comment unless the applicant provides a declaration to confirm that the building meets the required setback distances from existing powerlines. The declaration form and further information on electricity infrastructure and clearance distances can be downloaded from sa.gov.au .

I acknowledge that copies of this application and supporting documentation may be provided to interested persons in accordance with the Development AcActt 1993 and meet the requirements fofor lodgement under s.49 of the Development Act 1993.

SIGNATURE: ______Dated: ! #####$"########!$!$ / /

Origin Energy

Morgan Solar Farm

Development Application

September 2020

SECTION 49 & 49A – CROWN DEVELOPMENT DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION FORM

PLEASE USE BLOCK LETTERS FOR OFFICE USE

CROWN AGENCY: ______Department for Energy and Mining

NOTE TO APPLICANTS:

Regulations 2008. Proposals over $4 million (excl. fit-out) will be subject to an advertising fee. (2) Three copies of the Minister’s application should also be provided. Approval

EXISTING USE:______Stock Grazing ______

DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT:______Solar Farm and ancillary______infratructure ______LOCATION OF PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT:______House No: ______Lot No: 103____ Street: ___Woods______and Forrest Road Town/Suburb: ______Stuart 5320 Section No [full/part] ______Hundred: ______Stuart Volume: ______6154 Folio: ______656 Section No [full/part] ______Hundred: ______Volume: ______Folio: ______LAND DIVISION:

Site Area [m2] ______Reserve Area [m2] ______No of existing allotments ______Number of additional allotments [excluding road and reserve]: ______Lease: YES NO

DEVELOPMENT COST [do not include any fit-out costs]: $ ______110,000,000200,000,000

I acknowledge that copies of this application and supporting documentation may be provided to interested persons in accordance with the Development Act 1993 and meet the requirements for lodgement under s.49 of the Development Act 1993.

SIGNATURE: ______Dated: 21 / 09 / 2020

Table of Contents

1. INTRODUCTION...... 1 2. PROCEDURAL MATTERS...... 3 ASSESSMENT PATHWAY & REQUIREMENTS ...... 3 OTHER APPROVALS AND PROCESSES ...... 3 3. DESCRIPTION OF THE SITE AND THE LOCALITY ...... 5 SUBJECT SITE ...... 6 LOCALITY ...... 7 4. IMPACT ASSESSMENT AND CONSIDERATIONS ...... 8 INITIAL SCOPING ...... 8 ECOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT ...... 9 TRAFFIC IMPACT ASSESSMENT ...... 12 CULTURAL HERITAGE ASSESSMENT ...... 13 VISUAL ASSESSMENT ...... 13 MANAGEMENT CONSIDERATIONS ...... 16 5. DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT ...... 18 PROJECT ELEMENTS ...... 18 CONSTRUCTION AND LAND MANAGEMENT IMPACTS...... 20 DECOMMISSIONING ...... 21 6. PROJECT ASSESSMENT ...... 22 DEVELOPMENT PLAN POLICY OVERVIEW ...... 22 IMPACT CONSIDERATIONS ...... 23 RELEVANT DEVELOPMENT PLAN POLICY ...... 24 EVALUATION ...... 25 7. CONCLUSION ...... 27

APPENDICIES

A. Development Act requirements B. Application Plans C. Certificate of Title D. Specialist Studies

1. Introduction

Origin Energy is proposing to develop a large-scale photo-voltaic (PV) solar farm of up to approximately 300MWac in two stages near Morgan in the Riverland Region of South Australia. The whole site is approximately 947ha in area (over two parcels) and is located on the Woods and Forest Road, Stuart SA 5320 which is situated some 6 km to the north east of Morgan and just to the north of the Goyder Highway. The site is not located within the River Murray Protection Area. The Morgan Solar Farm project was initially identified in 2016 at which time preliminary scoping work was undertaken to identify potential red flag issues and impacts. No fundamental red flag or significant impact issues were identified. Those issues that were identified were evaluated to have minimal impact or were considered highly manageable. Following this assessment, Origin proceeded to purchase the land from the previous owners in Mid-2019. Origin then proceeded to secure an appropriate assessment pathway in May 2020 and engage suitable specialists to evaluate the relevant impact issues and prepare an application. Oigi i Aalia lage eeg eaile b ce acc ih illi ce ac electricity, natural gas and LPG. Origin has an electricity generation capacity of more than 6,000MW, has over 6,000 employees, a market capitalisation of around $9.5 billion (AUD) and an S&P credit rating of BBB (stable). The proposed project complements Oigi strategic business directions and i wider operational portfolio.

Figure 1: Origin areas of Operation

Origin are seeking planning consent for Stage 1 of this project which represents up to 150MW (120MWac) and associated storage (battery). Stage 1 will connect to the grid via the existing ElectraNet 132/66kV North West Bend substation which is located within the site. Since the original investigations, Origin have become aware of the possibility for Stage 2 to connect via the proposed SA-NSW interconnector (Energy Connect). Origin will seek OTR certification and planning approval for Stage 2 separately, when the technical requirements are clearer. It should be noted that the specialist studies and the site planning has been considered for the site as a whole. As such the information provided in this application includes information relevant to Stage 2, but Origin are only seeking approval for Stage 1.

Figure 2: Location of Proposed Development

2. Procedural Matters

Origin are seeking approval for Stage 1 of the project which comprises approximately an 120MWac or 150MWdc solar farm and ancillary facilities including up to 30MW of battery. The proposed solar farm will be wholly owned and operated by Origin; who has also purchased the subject land. The applicant details are set out below.

Company Name Origin Energy Power Limited Registered Company Level 32, Tower 1, 100 Barangaroo Avenue, Barangaroo, Address NSW, 2000 ABN 93 008 289 398 Registration Date 07 Apr 2000

Assessment Pathway & Requirements

The proposed development involves electricity generation (in the form of a solar farm) with ceci he aial elecici gid Thi deele fall ihi he defiii f blic iface a aed i Seci f he Deele Act. Origin have sought and received the relevant Agency Sponsorship and certification from the Office of the Technical Regulator that is required for this assessment pathway (copies are provided in Appendix A). With respect to approval timeframes, Origin is seeking to have some flexibility in relation to the commencement and completion timeframes: two (2) years to substantially commence and four (4) years to complete is requested. This will enable optimal construction timing with Stage 2. Origin is aware that is it a requirement of the Development Act that Section 49 applicants are required to obtain Buildings Rules consent (where necessary) from a Private Certifier.

Other Approvals and Processes

Origin is aware that a number of other approvals, permits and licences will be required in addition to approval under the Development Act, 1993. These are likely to include the following: Appropriate permits from DPTI Transport (oversized vehicles and Goyder Highway access); Native Vegetation Clearance approval (following Development Approval); Agreements with Council relating to the use of roads under the care and control of the Council; Appropriate agreements with ElectraNet in relation to the substation connection. Origin is fully aware of its obligations relating to the protection of Aboriginal Heritage and artefacts under the Aboriginal Heritage Act 1988.

EPBC Act Protected Matters Jacobs, appointed to undertake the flora and fauna assessment for this project, have conducted two environmental surveys in close proximity to the proposed site within the last 12 months. Based on this background, the preliminary desk top assessment and the more recent site investigations, it is considered highly unlikely that the EPBC Act will be triggered for Stage 1. It is also unlikely that it will be triggered for Stage 2 provided the two vegetation associations identified during the field survey are protected. Jacobs have recommend undertaking a self-assessment to ensure appropriate documentation of this issue which Origin supports.

3. Description of the Site and the Locality

Stage 1 of the proposed development will be located on the parcel of land identified in the table below and the following figure. Copies of the Certificate of Title are contained in Appendix C. Element Description Address Woods and Forest Road, Stuart SA 5320 Title References Certificate of Title: 6154/656. Piece 103 of DP 93178 Total Site Area Approximately 317ha Council Mid Murray Council Zoning Rural Zone, Pastoral Policy Area

The selected site has several favourable attributes for the development of a solar farm, including; A large, relatively flat site; Strong insolation (solar energy) levels; Lcaed ea Adelaide elecici lad cee A grazed site that is free of protected flora or fauna; Iediae ii Elecae kV Nh We Be bai Future proximity to the SA-NSW Interconnector; and Proximity to town amenities, good quality local roads and highways.

Figure 3: Subject Site

Subject Site

The site is triangular in shape and abuts the Woods and Forrest Road. This road is informally gated at the Goyder Highway intersection to contain stock and this arrangement is likely to continue as the surrounding land will be retained for stock grazing by the previous landowners.

There are a number of unmade road easements in the vicinity of the site (including along its boundaries). These easements and the Woods and Forest Road do not form part of the subject site.

ElecaNe Nh We Bed bai i lcaed i he cee f he ie lcaed j he ea of the Woods and Forrest Road. The substation has two access points: one directly off Woods and Forrest Road (first photo below) and one directly off the Goyder Highway (second photo). The substation and associated access and transmission line routes have easement and igh f a rights over the subject land.

Figure 4: North West Bend Substation access: Woods and Forrest Road and Goyder Highway

The development will be owned and operated by Origin who will engage contractors for cleaning and maintenance purposes. Origin may consider low level grazing to assist with vegetation management which will be agreed with the relevant stock owner.

The site of the proposed solar farm is predominantly flat, with some undulation and was previously subject to low level grazing. The typical native vegetation type found on the site is Chenopod shrubland.

Figure 5: CT6154/656 – Parcel 103 – View from western corner (Woods and Forest Road)

The southernmost corner of Parcel 103 abuts the Goyder Highway road easement. The land in this area takes the form of a minor depression that is likely to serve as a drainage area during rain

events. This area will not be developed as part of the solar farm and its management will be incorporated into a site wide stormwater management plan.

Locality

The site is located 6km to the north east of the nearest township of Morgan and on the northern side of the River Murray but is not within the River Murray Protection Area. Much of the land north of the Goyder Highway is relatively flat and dominated by Chenopod shrubland. Little land division has occurred in this area which is characterised by relatively large parcels used predominantly for grazing. This has been the primary land use for a long period of time and all the land immediately adjacent to the site is used for grazing. This area is characterised by very low population density. There is an ephemeral water course located to the west of the site that links to the River Murray. However, only the north western corner of Parcel 102 has the potential to drain to this system. The area to the north and west of the site is dominated by small catchments and associated dams providing water for stock.

Dwellings

The nearest dwelling is located on the southern side of the Goyder Highway and situated on the edge of the River Murray some 840m from the southern tip of the subject site. However, the solar farm elements will be located some 600m to the north of this boundary point which means that the separation distance is likely to be in the order of at least 1.4km. This dwelling is part of a row of allotments and dwellings situated on the edge of the River Murray escarpment and generally located at an elevation lower than the Goyder Highway. It is expected that the project will not be visible from these dwellings and they will not be affected by noise impacts. Another dwelling is located near the intersection of Bungunnia Road and the Goyder Highway and is situated approximately 2.3km from the closest site boundary which is the southern boundary of Stage 2. This is owned by the previous owners of the subject land, who are supportive of the project.

Mining Two mining operations are located approximately 5km to the north-east of the site. It is understood that these are gypsum mines with current Mining Leases. It is understood that these mines tend to be most active in March-May in response to local demand for materials for land preparation prior to the sowing season. The mines currently use the Woods and Forest Road for access and cooperate with the previous landowner to ensure that stock gates remained closed. The Woods and Forest Road is a public road and will remain a public road with associated public access rights. The proposed project poses no impediment to the continued access arrangements for these operations.

4. Impact Assessment and Considerations

Initial Scoping

Origin undertook an initial scoping study in late 2016 to identify potential statutory and development impact issues. This study identified that the proposed site has very few development and impact constraints: The current zoning is compatible with the nature of the proposed land use; There are no recorded European or Aboriginal Heritage sites on or in the near vicinity of the site; While the site contains native vegetation, this has been grazed over an extended period of time; The site is well situated to enable connection to the grid without extensive overhead transmission lines; and The site is located in an area of low population density. The following issues were identified as warranting additional investigation.

Native Vegetation The site has been subject to grazing for some considerable time. However, remnant native vegetation is present over much of the site. Origin engaged consultants to undertake specialist investigation and advice regarding native vegetation impacts, the results of which are described in more detail in this Chapter. Origin aims to minimise impacts on native vegetation by having regard to: Existing cleared areas and more disturbed area; The approach to construction; Soil erosion and weed management practices.

Cultural Heritage Origin understand the SA legislative requirements in relation to the protection of Aboriginal heritage, particularly in relation to protection of artefacts during the construction phase. It is anticipated that there may be sites of Aboriginal Heritage significance in and around the Murray River and its floodplain. Origin engaged specialist heritage advisors to undertake additional investigations, the results of which are described in more detail in this Chapter.

Transport and Access Access to the site from the Goyder Highway will be required, particularly during the construction phase. Origin engaged specialist traffic and transport consultants to assist with addressing the access and traffic management issues associated with the proposed project. This advice will also consider the need to ensure that access to the mining operation to the north-east of the site is maintained.

Water and Services The subject site does not have direct water or sewer services. Limited servicing is needed for the maintenance shed and associated staff amenities. Origin are currently considering the most appropriate servicing arrangements given that the site will not be used or occupied on a regular basis. Servicing will be in the form of small scale, independent technology for water and wastewater which will be designed in consultation with Council.

Stormwater and Dust Management The site is located in an area known to have a relatively low rainfall, but which can also be subject to intense rainfall events. In addition to this, its proximity to the River Murray and potential feeder waterways means that water quality management is an important consideration. I i ed ha he Gde Higha eablihe a baie elad fl ad he Rie ad hee ae deei a he he-most tip of the site that may act as a natural ponding area. It is also noted that the north-western most corner of the Stage 2 site connects to a drainage line that does feed into the Murray. The scale of the proposed development is significantly less than the area available, which means that there is reasonable opportunity to avoid this area, which is also a significant distance from the substation connection point. Origin has included in its considerations, the need for appropriate stormwater management and Construction Environment Management Plan strategies. The intent is to address soil erosion (wind and water) as well as water quality management both during construction and on an on-going basis.

Ecological Assessment

Origin commissioned Jacobs to undertake an ecological assessment of the site which included desktop and field assessment (conducted in March 2020). The study was commissioned to inform the layout of the solar farm and its ancillary infrastructure as well as informing a future native vegetation clearance application if this application is approved and the construction environment management plans. No threatened fauna or flora species were observed during the survey. Jacobs has conducted two environmental surveys in close proximity to the current Project Area in the last 12 months. No EPBC threatened flora or fauna were recorded on either of these surveys at sites near to the current Project Area (Jacobs unpublished data). Fauna The desktop and field assessments indicated that no threatened ecological communities (TEC) listed under the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (EPBC Act). However, two EPBC threatened species were identified as possibly occurring within the Study Area: Regent Parrot (eastern), Polytelis anthopeplus monarchoides. While the Project Area does not contain nesting habitat, there are records in the wider Study Area and there is foraging habitat in close proximity to the project area. In addition, scattered mallee at the western end of the project area could represent potential habitat for the species. Therefore, species presence in the project area is considered possible. Cbe Lg-eared Bat, Nyctophilus corbeni). Although there are no records within the Study Area and the core population occurs in NSW, the species does have scattered distribution in the Murray-Darling Basin and there is some mallee habitat, albeit low suitability, present on site. Therefore, it is considered possible that the species occurs. It is unlikely that a core / important population occurs at the site, avoiding impacts to the mallee present on site would avoid potential impacts to individuals if present.

Fork-tailed Swift (Apus pacificus ) Species may occur in the Study Area due to the proximity of the site to the Murray River. The species has potential to occur above the Project Area, but due to its aerial nature is unlikely to be impacted by the Project.

Vegetation The site was surveyed following years of prolonged drought in the region. A recent summer rainfall event in February 2020, has caused regeneration events for species observed, particularly Maireana sedifolia (Pearl Bluebush) which formed the dominant overstorey across most of the site. Of the 947 ha, 939ha was found to be native vegetation. Three major vegetation associations were identified across the two parcels: Maireana sedifolia (Pearl Bluebush) low open shrubland (approx. 842.22ha). Site 2 was located in a shallow depression in the south-east corner of the project area. Eucalyptus socialis +/- Myoporum platycarpum open woodland (49.06ha). It is recommended that clearance of mallee trees present in the project area be avoided where possible to minimise potential impacts on this species. Multiple active bird nests were observed with repeated calls heard, although the species were not identified. Maireana sedifolia low open shrubland with emergent Myoporum platycarpum and Acacia oswaldii (48.04ha). While these species are not threatened, they represent habitat that is not common across the rest of the site. Therefore, it would be advised to avoid or minimise disturbance to this area during construction if possible. However, the Stage 1 site was only found to containe Maireana sedifolia (Pearl Bluebush) low open shrubland (approx. 842.22ha). The field results also noted that BAM Sites 1 and 2 in Stage 1 were heavily grazed with sheep and kangaroo scats observed.

Figure 6: BAM site 1. Facing South. Maireana sedifolia (Pearl Bluebush) low open shrubland

Figure 7: Summary of Field Results

Weeds

No Weeds of National Significance (WoNS) or Declared Weeds were observed during the survey. However, there were weeds observed growing in localised areas such as low-lying depressions, likely in response to the summer rain that fell preceding the survey. Saffron Thistle (Carthamus lanatus) was observed growing along the edges of tracks in low lying areas, particularly in Parcel 103 between the substation and site 2. All depressions across the landscape were dominated by weeds.

Citrullus sp. (Wild Melon) was recorded along the edge of the driving track, again in a low-lying depression, just south of site 4.

In order to avoid the introduction and spread of invasive weed species, the implementation of the following standard weed management practices are recommended by Jacobs: ensure environmental safeguards and management measures are incorporated into construction plans and contract specifications; ensure that any machinery and vehicles arriving on construction site has been inspected for any foreign soil or plant matter/weed material and has been washed down before entering the work site; weeds should be controlled within the work area according to the requirements of the Natural Resource Management Act (2004) / Landscape South Australia Act 2019; all noxious weeds which are cleared as part of the project must be disposed of appropriately; conduct post construction weed survey and control program with particular focus on any weed infestations identified in pre-construction surveys; minimise the extent of vegetation clearance wherever practicable, by clearly defining and marking clearance extents and avoiding disturbance beyond the work area; limit vehicle and machinery access to existing tracks and cleared areas where possible; implement a weed control program for vehicles accessing the site; and protect and maintain soil surface stability and take measures to minimise surface run-off when leaving sites. Origin propose to include these practices in the Construction Environment Management Plan (CEMP).

Traffic Impact Assessment

A traffic impact assessment was undertaken by Jacobs which is based on both Stage 1 and Stage 2 and therefore presents a worst-case scenario. The assessment considered three options for the construction phase access point from the Goyder Highway and found that the ElectraNet access road offered the best and safest sightlines. This would also reduce traffic impacts on the Woods and Forest Road as well as any potential conflict with traffic associated with the mines to the north of the site. Origin have obtained in principal agreement from ElectraNet to use this access for construction purposes (subject to final agreement on use conditions). However, should this option not be available, the TIA has identified that the Woods and Forrest Road could be used provided the speed limit is reduced to 90km/h, particularly for the western approach, as part of the Traffic Management Plan. In both cases the TIA recommends some additional intersection treatment measures to further improve the safety standards. Overall the TIA found the following: The affic ad a ie aiig f he ed Mga Sla Fa ill ee a minor impact to the local community surrounding the proposed site that the through traffic along the surrounding highways. This is impact will be primarily during the construction

phase where there will be a more concentrated number of vehicle movements to the site within a short period of time compared to the operational phase. Through implementing the recommended upgrades discussed in Section 6 and implementing the management and mitigation measures discussed in Section 7, the traffic impacts associated with the additional vehicle movements generated during the construction stages should be minimised and road safety on the road network maintained The TIA also recommends the preparation of a detailed Traffic Management Plan prior to construction.

Cultural Heritage Assessment

Origin commissioned Independent Heritage Consultants (ICH) to undertake an Aboriginal heritage study and risk assessment The heritage risk assessment is based upon the results of heritage register searches, a review of past archaeological and anthropological research relevant to the region, an examination of historical soil impacts/landforms, consideration of the proposed works, and a site inspection by IHC archaeologists.

Considering the absence of sites within the project area, the proposed works, environmental ladf ad he leel f hiical deele IHC ha aeed a l ik f k encountering Aboriginal heritage for this project. The assessment noted the following:

There are no Aboriginal heritage sites listed on the Department of Premier and Cabinet Aboriginal Affairs and Reconciliation (DPC-AAR) Register for the current project area. Therefore, there is no requirement to seek authorisation from the Minister under section 23 of the AHA. If a previously unknown Aboriginal heritage site is discovered during works and cannot be avoided. Ministerial authorisation under section 23 of the AHA will be required.

The report makes a number of recommendations for further mitigating heritage risk in the lead up to and during the construction phase. Should this development application be approved, this will be addressed by Origin as part of the preparation for the ground works.

(Note: a full copy of the Aboriginal Heritage Assessment report has not been included as it may contain sensitive information about the location of Aboriginal heritage sites)

Visual Assessment

Origin has given consideration to the potential visual impact of the proposed development from the Goyder Highway. While the Woods and Forest Road is a public road and provides access to two mining leases, it is informally gated to manage stock which significantly reduces general public access. Therefore, visual impact along Woods and Forrest Road is not considered to be a priority impact issue and the focus of the visual impact considerations has been given to the Goyder Highway.

Figure 8: Gated access to Woods and Forest Road at the Goyder Highway

The proposed site is situated in a relatively remote location with few residential dwellings in the locality. The landscape already accommodates a significant amount of overhead electricity infrastructure associated with the North-West Bend substation. At a macro scale, the topography is relatively flat with eleaed ie-points in the vicinity. At the micro scale, the site has slightly undulating topography and low scale vegetation typical of this arid setting.

Figure 9: North-facing view of the southern tip of the site from Goyder Highway

It is noted that only the southern tip of the site abuts the Goyder Highway road reserve and that the Goyder Highway carriageway is located on the southern edge of this road reserve some 84m from the site fence line. Thee i a able deei a he he ip of the Stage 1 site, which is not suitable for solar panel construction. For this reason, the closest line of panels will be setback approximately 600m from the southern-most boundary. Thus, the solar farm will be setback some 684m from the edge of the Highway. In addition, the first row of panels will only be in the order of 500m long. With a maximum tilt height of 4m, the solar panels will be visible but difficult to see with clarity from a moving vehicle. While much of the site is relatively flat there is some undulation across the site which assists with managing the overall visual impact because this prevents long views of the solar farm. In addition, the Goyder Highway itself is quite undulating along this section of road, which also minimises direct and extended views of the site.

Figure 10: East facing view of the Goyder Highway from ElectraNet substation access road

Driver distraction

Consideration has been given to the potential for driver distraction due to sunlight reflecting in the f f gli glae Sligh efleci i fe eceied a a igifica ie i elai la fa b ael d eflec ligh i he ae a ha ical gla de a he ae designed to absorb light in order to generate electricity. Solar panels are manufactured to include an anti-reflection coating in the solar cell wafers. Sun glint results from the direct reflection of sunlight from a reflective surface when the sun reflects on the surface of a panel at the same angle from which it is viewed. Glare may occur where sunlight is reflected off the internal structure of the panel at many angles. The proposed panels will tilt from east to west but the Goyder Highway is located well to the south of the site. Given the relatively flat terrain at the macro level, there are no locations where a driver would be sufficiently elevated to view the solar farm and experience glare. It is possible that the panels igh geeae liied gli i he eal ig ad lae afe I i heeicall possible that a driver might see glint when approaching the solar farm from the east in the early morning in winter or from the west in the late afternoon in winter. However, the combination of the position of the Goyder Highway (to the south), the undulating nature of the Highway, the distance between the panels and the road and the presence of some

roadside vegetation (albeit patchy) means that the likelihood of actually experiencing glint will be minimal if at all.

Overall Visibility

The visibility of the proposed solar farm is tempered by the following factors: a minimum setback of approximately 684m between the Highway and the southern edge of the solar farm; the relatively low scale nature of the solar infrastructure; the lack of elevated views of the whole site; the localised undulation (which prevents long, extended views); and the existing electrical infrastructure in the landscape. It is acknowledged that the development will be visible, but the views will be relatively distant and fleeting and will be seen in the context of other electrical infrastructure, including the SA-NSW interconnector in the future.

Management Considerations

Origin is aware that the site is located in an area of relatively low rainfall and generally harsh climatic cdii While ihi he Rie Ma Peci aea he ie ii he Rie Murray warrants careful consideration of stormwater and water quality management. As such Origin will place an emphasis on soil erosion management (water and dust) and water management during construction and on an on-going basis. This will include the preparation of suitable Construction Environment Management Plans (construction and operation) and the preparation of an erosion and sediment control sub-plan. The required construction works will be undertaken with the aim to minimise overall site disturbance. The largest clearing will occur in the area which includes the electrical and battery facilities, O&M shed, laydown areas and the access tracks. Key principles will include: Retain existing vegetation hee ible icldig llig egeai ahe ha removal): Stripping areas progressively and only where it is necessary for works to occur; Employing stabilisation methods such as matting or mulch; Dampening dust sources with a light water spray; Covering stockpiles and locating them where protected from the wind or constructing wind breaks (temporary fencing, hay bales); Restricting vehicle movements (clear access tracks); Covering loads when transporting material; and Progressive rehabilitation.

The on-going land management regime will be explored to determine the best balance between minimising native vegetation clearance, maintaining a protective vegetation cover, management of vegetation growth and management of dust. While not part of the Stage alicai i i Oigi iention that the vegetation associations identified in the Ecological Assessment will be protected and retained in Stage 2.

5. Description of the Proposed Development

Project Layout

The following plan provides an overview of the project layout. A more detailed solar layout plan is also contained in Appendix B. The layout has been designed to avoid sensitive environmental areas as well as the various easements and corridors associated with existing electrical infrastructure.

The proposed development for Stage 1 will include: Approximately 171ha of solar panels and inverters; An operations centre of approximately 2.5ha that includes a control room, an O&M shed, a switchboard and substation and the 30 MW BESS (battery); Two laydown areas of 3ha and 5ha; and An area of approximately 15ha in the southern tip that has been excluded to accommodate drainage and reduce visual impact.

The detailed layout of the operations centre will be developed in consultation with ElectraNet.

Figure 11: Overview of project layout

Ne eliia MW eiae ae ac efeece aiael le ha dc MW efeece

Project Elements

The proposed development will take the form of a utility scale solar PV project of up to 150MWdc (120MWac) and up to 30MW Battery Energy Storage System (battery) and ancillary infrastructure,

that will connect to the grid via the North West Bend substation which is located in the centre of the site. The permanent project elements will include the following:

Element Description Solar Mono-facial modules of approximately 1m x 2m mounted on single-axis tracking. Modules

Inverters Inverters to convert the DC power generated by the modules to AC power. (typical example)

Switchyard/ A Stage 1 switchyard/substation and associated control room Substation & Control Room (typical example)

BESS Battery Energy Storage System (battery) - specific technology to be confirmed. (typical example)

Operations & Shed including workshop, storage and staff amenities. Maximum dimensions of Maintenance 7.5 (height), 27m (length) and 15m (width). Colorbond cladding (cream or light Shed grey). Underground Underground cabling within the solar farm and connection to the cabling substation/switchyard Access tracks A network of internal access tracks of up to 7m in width Fencing & Standard solar security fencing up to 2.5 m high, chain mesh and security barbed lighting wire top. Lighting located adjacent building entrances for emergency use Signage 1 discreet operation information sign (1.5m x 2m) located adjacent the access point on Woods and Forest Road.

In addition to the proposed permanent elements, the project will include a number of facilities for the purposes of construction including: Construction site office and employee facilities; and Laydown areas and materials storage. A layout plan is contained in Appendix B. During the operation phase, the project is likely to employ 5-10 positions plus part-time contracted for specialist electrical work, module cleaning and other maintenance. Maintenance contracts may be issued to third parties who will be responsible to Origin under contract in relation to their activities and practices.

Construction and land management

The peak construction phase for Stage 1 is likely to involved approximately 200-300 people over 2 years. The layout plan identifies two construction lay down areas which will also include parking and other construction site amenities. These sites may be rehabilitated and replaced with solar panels up to the MW limit sought. Origin is aware that the site is located in an area of relatively low rainfall and generally harsh climatic conditions. While not within the River Murray Protection area, the ie ii he Rie Murray warrants careful consideration of stormwater and water quality management.

As such Origin will place an emphasis on soil erosion management (water and dust) and water management during construction and on an on-going basis. This will include the preparation of suitable Construction Environment Management Plan for both the construction and operation phases. The on-going land management regime will be explored to determine the best balance between minimising native vegetation clearance, maintaining a protective vegetation cover, management of vegetation growth and management of dust. The eclgical aee ha eceded llig vegetation rather that its full clearance as a means of both managing dust and facilitating rehabilitation.

Access

The site has access via Woods and Forrest Road (under the care and control of Council) which connects to the Goyder Highway (under the care and control of DIT). This access will be used for the operational phase of the development which will have limited traffic volumes. An alternate access option during the construction phase is available from the Goyder Highway via the ElectraNet access road to the North West Bend substation. ElectraNet have approved the use of this access subject to ensuring that the landowners agree, the road is reinstated to the same or better standard and ElectraNet access to the substation is maintained. It is acknowledged that the detailed design of this access will include appropriate consideration of the intersection with the Goyder Highway in consultation with DIT, should Stage 1 be approved.

Decommissioning

The proposed technology is expected to have an economic life of approximately 25-30 years. At the end of this time, a decision would be made whether to: decommission the project permanently; or to up-grade the infrastructure. If the project is to be upgraded, then a new development application would be lodged at that time if required. In the event that the project is permanently decommissioned, Origin would take full responsibility for decommissioning and rehabilitation works. A decommissioning plan would be prepared and submitted to the relevant authority for approval. Decommissioning would include the following: De-energising plant and equipment; Dismantling and removal of solar panels, batteries and transmission lines, as well as all other aboveground buildings, foundations and equipment; Rehabilitation of disturbed land; and Recycling of recyclable materials (including batteries).

As per accepted industry practice, decommissioning does not include the removal of infrastructure that is located more than 600mm below the surface. This acknowledged that the earthworks required cause considerable and unnecessary vegetation and soil disturbance, and this infrastructure, if left in place, causes no harm to the environment or disruption to potential future agricultural practices.

6. Project Assessment

The proposed development is located within the Mid Murray Council area and the Mid Murray Council Development Plan (Consolidated 23 August 2018) is the relevant development assessment policy document.

Development Plan Policy Overview

The subject land is currently within the Rural Zone and Policy Area 15 - Pastoral Policy Area. The Rural Zone covers an extensive proportion of the Council area and therefore the policy aims to cover a wide range of situations. The focus of the policy within the Zone and Policy Area is to protect and enhance the farming, agriculture and horticultural activities.

The proposed site is low value, marginal grazing land and as such will not conflict with the Development Plan polices that aim to protect and enhance valuable agricultural activities.

It is noted that this policy is quite dated and while it does acknowledge renewable energy as a land use, the emphasis is on addressing impacts and issues associated with wind generation.

Council has advised that a number of other solar farm projects have been approved in this Zone. This indicates that previous assessments of solar farms within the Rural Zone have concluded that it is potentially compatible with the existing primary production land uses.

The proposed site is located near, but not within, the River Murray Protection Area and is not within the 1956 flood extent. Council have also confirmed that the Goyder highway is not a scenic tourist route.

The Development Plan makes the following observation:

Dryland primary production is the dominant land use throughout the Zone. In the south this comprises cropping and grazing, but in response to lower rainfall to the north cropping is less prevalent and there are considerable areas of remnant mallee and saltbush, particularly in the pastoral lands where rangeland grazing is predominant. (Rural Zone, Background).

This description is highly relevant to the subject site which is in the north.

The Desired Character statement for the Zone, acknowledges that renewable energy projects are envisaged and acceptable in the Zone. However, it is noted that the policy refers specifically to wind farms. It is generally acknowledged that this policy is out of date and will not be up-dated to recognise other forms of renewable energy technology until the Planning and Development Code is introduced. Nevertheless, the intent of the policy can be extrapolated to indicate the suitability of solar farms. The following is an extract from the Rural Zone Desired Character Statement:

Wind farms and ancillary development such as substations, maintenance sheds, access roads and connecting power-lines (including to the National Electricity Grid) are envisaged within that part of the zone outside of the Barossa Valley Character Preservation district (as defined by Character Preservation legislation) and constitute a component of the desired character of this part of the zone. These facilities will need to be located in areas where they can take advantage of the natural resource upon which they rely.

The proposed development is not listed as an unacceptable form of development.

Figure 11: Overview of zoning

Impact Considerations

The proposed development involves the establishment of a solar farm by way of installing small scale structures (and their footings) to support the solar panels. The highest impacts are likely to occur during construction with relatively high levels of traffic, noise and other typical construction impacts. The most significant impact is potentially the clearance of native vegetation which would be managed as part of a clearance application. The ecological assessment has identified three areas of vegetation retention and protection in Stage 2 but no such areas were identified in Stage 1. Given the climatic conditions of this area (low rainfall) the construction approach is unlikely to take the form of wholesale clearance of vegetation as this could result in uncontrollable dust and soil management issues. The clearance approach will ile eleced cleaace ad llig f vegetation. Renewable energy facilities generate minimal on-going activity and therefore have very limited impacts in terms of traffic and noise when compared to other uses. These facilities also generate virtually no waste or emissions other than very limited noise associated with the transformers. Post construction, the solar farm will have almost no impacts apart from the visual impact of the panels but, as previously discussed this is likely to be minimal.

The proposed development is compatible with managed levels of stock grazing. This is managed carefully to provide a balance between continued primary production activity, management of vegetation levels (so as not to interfere with the operation of the panels) and maintenance of an appropriate level of land cover to minimize dust (on panels).

Relevant Development Plan Policy

Rural Zone & Policy Area 15 (Pastoral Policy Area)

The following is a summary of the key relevant policy extracted from the Rural Zone and its Policy Area 15.

Sustainable Industry Accommodation of wind farms and ancillary development outside of the - Objective 1 Barossa Valley Character Preservation District as defined by Character Preservation legislation. Stormwater - Maintenance of natural hydrological systems and environmental flows. Objective 3: Stormwater - Surface runoff designed to protect property and life and environmental Objective 4: quality. Vegetation and Retention and maintenance of wetlands and existing native vegetation for Landscape Character its conservation, biodiversity, and habitat value and environmental - Objective 5 management function. Built Form and Buildings and structures compatible with the environmental qualities, Design - Objective 21 built-form and character of the surrounding area and landscape. Infrastructure - Economic provision of infrastructure in an environmentally sensitive Objective 22 manner. Form of Development should not be undertaken unless it is consistent with the Development - PDC 1 desired character and acceptable forms of development for the zone and the relevant policy area. Stormwater - PDC 2 No adverse impact on natural hydrological systems and environmental flows. Design Techniques (ONE WAY of meeting requirements of the principle of development control) 2.1 Modifications to the landform are not located closer than 50 metres to the bank of a watercourse identified on a current series 1:50 000 SA Government topographic map. 2.2 The quality of water leaving the site, be of a physical, chemical and biological condition equivalent to or better than pre-development conditions. 2.3 The rate of discharge from the site shall not exceed the rate of discharge from the site in the pre-development condition for all storm durations up to and including storms having an ARI of 100 years. Soil - PDC 6 6 Development should minimise the loss of soil from a site through soil erosion or siltation both: (a) during the construction phase; and (b) following commencement of an activity. Design Techniques (ONE WAY of meeting requirements of the principle of development control)

6.1 Erosion and sediment control measures such as grade furrows, contour banks, catch/diversion drains, level spreaders, revegetation, hay bale barriers, filter fences, sediment traps and basins are implemented during the construction phase to prevent silt or sediment leaving the subject land. Soil - PDC 7 Development should not result in alterations to the landform or drainage patterns which will impede natural processes of sediment transfer. Built Form and Sites should be provided with a safe and convenient means of access Design - PDC 20 which: (a) avoids unreasonable interference with the flow of traffic on adjoining roads; (b) accommodates all types and the volume of traffic likely to be generated by the development or land use; and (c) is located and designed to minimise any adverse impact on the occupants of visitors to neighbouring properties. Policy Area 15 – The majority of the Pastoral Area is used for extensive grazing on property Pastoral Policy Area sizes of an average size of 900ha. Land Management practices should Desired Character improve the marginal quality of the land, and not result in further land degradation or land fragmentation. PDC 1 Development should not be undertaken unless it is consistent with the desired character for the policy area.

General Section Policy

The General Section of the Development Plan also contains policy that seeks to address general impact issues including: Safe access Protection of the amenity of localities Management of the interface between land uses to avoid adverse impact and conflict Retention, protection and restoration of natural resources and environment Protection of water and soil resources

Renewable Energy Policies

The specific PDC policies that address renewable energy facilities are primarily aimed at managing the perceived impacts of wind turbines. The less specific policy includes the following:

Objective 103: Development of renewable energy facilities that benefit the environment, the community and the state. Objective 104: The development of renewable energy facilities, such as wind farms and ancillary development, in areas that provide opportunity to harvest natural resources for the efficient generation of electricity. Objective 105: Location, siting, design and operation of renewable energy facilities to avoid or minimise adverse impacts on the natural environment and other land uses.

Evaluation

Suitability of the land use

The proposed development is compatible with the typical land uses and activities that occur within this rural locality and in particularly with dryland grazing activity. While, it will limit the intensity of grazing, some level of grazing is possible to provide a balance between managing vegetation and dust. As such, the proposed form of land use does not prevent primary production activities on adjacent land not generate impacts that might limit activity or efficient practices. It is noted that the Stage 1 site is bounded by unmade road easements on its south-western and eastern sides which provides additional separation from adjacent properties. Overall the proposed land use is considered to be compatible with the policy intent of the zone which is to protect and enhance the farming, agriculture and horticultural activities.

Traffic and access

The proposed development has direct access to a public road which will be used for day-to-day access. The existing ElectraNet access, which has better sightlines, will be used during the construction phase, particularly for heavy vehicles. This arrangement is considered to be appropriate for the nature and scale of the construction phase and the on-going nature of this type of land use which has low vehicle generation levels.

Vegetation and land management

There is no vegetation of significance identified within the boundaries of Stage 1 but the site does contain native vegetation that will be impacted by the development. It is proposed that this egeai be lled ahe ha hle cale eal hich ill ai ih d aagee Removal of vegetation will be confined to the access tracks, building and infrastructure footprints and solar farm footings.

Origin will eie i cac prepare a Construction Environment Management Plan which will include the preparation of an erosion and sediment control sub-plan.

Visual Impact

Consideration has been given to visual impact issues. Given the low scale nature and setbacks of the proposed development and the existing nature of the surrounding topography and landscape, the proposed development is unlikely to have a significant impact on the existing landscape character and driver distraction.

7. Conclusion

The proposed development is compatible with the desired character of the zone and the policy area. The ongoing impacts of the development are minimal and compatible with existing envisaged land uses. There is potential for localised impacts during construction which are able to be suitably managed by accepted construction management approaches (including appropriate CEMPs).

The applicant has clearly indicated that other potential impacts will be address by committing to the following: The preparation of a detailed Traffic Management Plan (TMP) The preparation of a Construction Environment Management Plan (erosion & sediment control, dust management, water quality, noise, traffic, vegetation protection) (CEMP) The preparation of at Stormwater Management Plan (soil erosion, water quality) (SMP) The preparation of an Operational Environment Management Plan (grazing, dust, maintenance activities, vegetation management, weed management) (OEMP) Detailed design of the solar farm layout and supporting infrastructure

The Native Vegetation Clearance application process will further manage and minimize the impact on native vegetation and habitat.

The proposed development of the solar farm is also consistent with Oigi blicl aed aegic objective of accelerating towards clean energy. Origin has supported, through contracts and developments, over 1,300 MW of solar and wind farms across the National Electricity Market and, when developed, Morgan will be an important contributor to achieving this strategic objective.

Accordingly, the proposed development is considered to warrant planning consent with appropriate conditions.

Appendix A

Development Act Requirements Crown Sponsorship letter OTR Certification Electricity Act Declaration

Our Ref: D20027060

Ms Lauren Barnaby Group Manager Environment and Community Origin Energy Level 32, Tower 1, Barangaroo Avenue Barangaroo, NSW, 2000 Via: [email protected]

Dear Ms Barnaby

CROWN SPONSORSHIP MORGAN SOLAR FARM (STAGE ONE)

Thank you for your letter of 27 April 2020 (and subsequent update on 4 August 2020) requesting Crown Sponsorship under section 49 of the Development Act 1993 and section 131 of the Planning, Development and Infrastructure Act 2016 to assist with the first stage of Origin Energys proposed Morgan Solar Farm (Project).

This Project has been considered within the South Australian Department for Energy and Mining (DEM) with input from the Department of Infrastructure and Transport, the Attorney Generals Department, the Department for Environment and Water, the Environment Protection Authority and the Technical Regulator. In principle, the Project is supported, recognising the possible environmental and community issues that will need to be addressed through the development assessment process.

On balance, the development of Origin Energys proposed Project has the potential to benefit South Australia and can be considered public/essential infrastructure. Accordingly, I, as Chief Executive of DEM, will support the development and specifically endorse the Development Application to construct the Project comprising up to 150MW DC of solar PV and potentially a large-scale battery of up to 80MW as a development of:

‘public infrastructure pursuant to section 49(2)(c) of the Development Act 1993; or ‘essential infrastructure under section 131(2)(c) of the Planning, Development and Infrastructure Act 2016.

Dependent on the date of application lodgement and the phased introduction of the Planning, Development and Infrastructure Act 2016 across South Australia, this sponsorship remains valid in respect to both Acts (but only one will apply from the date of lodgement).

It is the responsibility of Origin Energy to prepare all documentation as required by the relevant Act. This includes all costs in the preparation, lodgement and assessment of the Development Application and any other subsequent action in relation to this Application.

A certificate from the Office of the Technical Regulator must also accompany your Development Application to ensure that your Project meets either Real Inertia or Fast Frequency Response criteria to safeguard the stability and reliability of the states electricity network.

When you submit a development application it must be submitted to the DEM Clean Energy Transition Division ([email protected]) who will lodge it with the State Commission Assessment Panel (SCAP). These lodgement documents can be provided in electronic form or made available via download link. Any development fee levied by SCAP is the responsibility of Origin Energy.

It is also a requirement that you contact Mr Richard Webster, Principal Industry Development Officer, on (08) 8429 5285 or via email: [email protected] prior to the lodgement of your Development Application to ensure all relevant statutory requirements are met.

DEM makes no representations and gives no warranties in relation to the outcome of the Development Application or time that it takes to secure a planning outcome. It is the responsibility of Origin Energy to obtain all other statutory approvals, licences, connection agreements and permits from relevant authorities, manage community expectations and to fund the Project. The South Australian Government makes no commitment to purchase any product or service related to the Project.

If the Development Application has not been received electronically, by mail or in person by the State Commission Assessment Panel (SCAP) within 12 months from the date of this letter, my support for this Crown Sponsorship under section 49 (2)(c) of the Development Act 1993 and section 131(2)(c) of the Planning, Development and Infrastructure Act 2016 will lapse.

Yours sincerely

Paul Heithersay CHIEF EXECUTIVE

24/08/2020

DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS 2008 Form of Declaration (Schedule 5 clause 2A)

To: State Commission Assessment Panel

From: Origin Energy Power Limited

Date of Application: / /

Location of Proposed Development: ______Stuart 5320

House No: _____ Lot No: _____ Street: ______Woods and Forrest Road

Town/Suburb: ______Stuart Piece Section No (full/part): ______103 Hundred: _____Stuart

Volume: _____6154 Folio: _____656

Nature of Proposed Development:

Solar Farm and ancillary infrastrucutre

I ______being the applicant/ a person acting on behalf of the applicant (delete the inapplicable statement) for the development described above declare that the proposed development will involve the construction of a building which would, if constructed in accordance with the plans submitted, not be contrary to the regulations prescribed for the purposes of section 86 of the Electricity Act 1996. I make this declaration under clause 2A(1) of Schedule 5 of the Development Regulations 2008.

Signed: ______Date: / /

Note 1 This declaration is only relevant to those development applications seeking authorisation for a form of development that involves the construction of a building (there is a definition of building contained in section 4(1) of the Development Act 1993), other than where the development is limited to

a) an internal alteration of a building; or b) an alteration to the walls of a building but not so as to alter the shape of the building.

Note 2 The requirements of section 86 of the Electricity Act 1996 do not apply in relation to:

a) an aerial line and a fence, sign or notice that is less than 2.0 m in height and is not designed for a person to stand on; or b) a service line installed specifically to supply electricity to the building or structure by the operator of the transmission or distribution network from which the electricity is being supplied.

Note 3 Section 86 of the Electricity Act 1996 refers to the erection of buildings in proximity to powerlines. The regulations under this Act prescribe minimum safe clearance distances that must be complied with.

Note 4 The majority of applications will not have any powerline issues, as normal residential setbacks often cause the building to comply with the prescribed powerline clearance distances. Buildings/renovations located far away from powerlines, for example towards the back of properties, will usually also comply.

Particular care needs to be taken where high voltage powerlines exist; or where the development:

is on a major road; commercial/industrial in nature; or built to the propert boundar.

Note 5 An information brochure: Building Safel Near Poerlines has been prepared by the Technical Regulator to assist applicants and other interested persons.

This brochure is available from council and the Office of the Technical Regulator. The brochure and other relevant information can also be found at sa.gov.au/energy/powerlinesafety

Note 6 In cases where applicants have obtained a written approval from the Technical Regulator to build the development specified above in its current form within the prescribed clearance distances, the applicant is able to sign the form.

Appendix B

Application Plans

29 B1 B E 1000m N 800 82 82 205 TBA 231.8 19,516 526,932 3,639,656 STAGE 2 600 27 24 2.5 TBA 440W 20mm 42,072 0 NORTH 400 2110mm 1052mm 60 FROM HORIZONTAL 39 39 97.5 TBA INFMAIN 9,282 110.3 250,614 1,710,448 200 STAGE 1 DAING N IW227900-0000-EE-DRG-0001 0 ACCESS ROAD LOT BOUNDARY BAM SITE 100 PV ARRAY SCHEDULE 200 MORGAN SOLAR FARM SITE LAYOUT (SINGLE AXIS TRACKING) ALL INFORMATION AS PER "MORGAN SF ENERGY YIELD REPORT - CONTRACTOR TO CONFIRM ALL SERVICES ON SITE. LAYOUT SUBJECT TO DETAILED DESIGN AND SYSTEM STUDIES. EASEMENT DETAILS TO BE CONFIRMED BY SITE SURVEY DOWNER_V1" TABLE 1 (COLUMNS 4 AND 5) ILE CALE AS SHOWN (A1) 4. 2. 3. LEGEND NOTES 1. ARRAY TOTAL AREA (m) AZIMUTH ARRAY BLOCK (MW ac) ARRAY BLOCK (MWh) ARRAY BLOCK AREA (m2) WEIGHT (kg) TILT (INCLUDING ACCESS ROADS) STRING LENGTH SPACING SYSTEM YIELD (MWh) PCU COUNT MODULE COUNT No. OF STRINGS MODULE MODULE SIZE PLANT SIZE (MW dc) PLANT SIZE (MW ac) INVERTER COUNT 25.08.2020 SCALE 1:10000 AED K. FELS DAE 25.08.2020 J. ROSSER EIEED DAE DAING CHECK P. FAGGION DEIGN EIE J. ROSSER ORIGIN ENERGY POWER LIMITED MORGAN SOLAR FARM CLIEN JEC DAN P. CAMPAGNA DEIGNED P. FAGGION WATER PIPE EASEMENT : +61 2 9928 2100 F: +61 2 9928 2500 : .. NATIVE VEGETATION

STAGE 1 ELECTRANET LINE EASEMENT LINE ELECTRANET ABN 37 001 024 095 ACN J G (A) L L 7, 177 H N , N 2060 AALIA

ELECTRANET OHL EASEMENT SA-NSW INTERCONNECTOR LOT BOUNDARY

* * SA POWER NETWORKS LINE EASEMENT

* *

* LOW LYING AREA

* 10m BUFFER

* * *

* *

* * *

* *

* * * * * * *

* * *

* * * * *

* * * * * * FUTURE STAGE 2

* * * * *

* * * * * 4 SA POWER NETWORKS DISTRIBUTION EASEMENT 3 1 2

* STAGE 2 33kV SWITCHBOARD (30m 10m)

* *

* * * * STAGE 1

GOYDER HIGHWAY SITE PLAN SCALE 1:10000

* * * * * * *

* * * * * * * *

* * * * * * * (TYPICAL) LAYDOWN AREA

* * * * * *

FUTURE STAGE 2 WOODS AND FOREST ROAD FOREST AND WOODS STAGE 2 ELECTRANET SUBSTATION (150m 150m)

* * * * * * SUBSTATION EXISTING ELECTRANET ACCESS MAIN CONSTRUCTION

* * * * * STAGE 2 ACCESS ELECTRANET SUBSTATION *

* * * * LOT BOUNDARY

* POWER CONVERSION UNIT & INVERTER

* STAGE 1 33kV SWITCHBOARD & SUBSTATION STAGE 1 BESS CONTROL ROOM O & M SHED

* ELECTRANET OHL EASEMENT To 1 Stage in developed be APPROXIMATE 7600m 4. 2. 3. MORGAN SF STAGE 1 & 2 OPERATIONS CENTRE INCLUDES: 1.

* 108.7m

BUGUNNIA ROAD NTS 9m * AHD TYPICAL ARRAY BLOCK (2.5MW ac) 108.7m EIIN HEIGHT DATUM: 5.6m

NATIVE VEGETATION

89.4m 89.4m NATIVE VEGETATION 7m N GDA2020 ISSUED FOR INFORMATION ISSUED FOR DISCUSSION A'D DAE 25.08.20 12.08.20

B A

CO-ORDINATE SYSTEM: E

J:\IE\Pojec\06_Cenal We\IW227900\01_Deign\Daing\Eleccial\IW227900-0000-EE-DRG-0001.dg J:\IE\Pojec\06_Cenal LOCATION: inclding phoocoping, ecoding, o b an infomaion oage and eieal em, iho pemiion in iing fom Jacob Gop (Aalia) P Ld. Ld. P (Aalia) Gop Jacob fom iing in pemiion iho em, eieal and oage infomaion an b o ecoding, phoocoping, inclding

C Jacob Gop (Aalia) P Ld ABN 37 001 024 095. No pa of hi docmen o he infomaion i conain ma be epodced o anmied in an fom o b an mean eleconic o mechanical, o eleconic mean an b o fom an in anmied o epodced be ma conain i infomaion he o docmen hi of pa No 095. 024 001 37 ABN Ld P (Aalia) Gop Jacob C CAMPAGNA, PHILLIP CAMPAGNA, NAME: PM 2:46:38 25/08/2020 DATE:

Morgan Solar Morgan O&M Shed Storage Electrical Office/Storage 15000 Work Area Work SCADA WC/Change

Appendix C

Certificate of Title

30 Product Title Details Date/Time 24/04/2020 09:59AM Customer Reference Origin Order ID 20200424002056

Certificate of Title Title Reference CT 6154/656 Status CURRENT Easement YES Owner Number 7115885* Address for Notices L 32, TOWER 1, 100 BARANGAROO AV BARANGAROO, NSW 2000 Area 947HA (APPROXIMATE) Estate Type FEE SIMPLE Registered Proprietor ORIGIN ENERGY POWER LIMITED (ACN: 008 289 398) OF L 32 TOWER 1 100 BARANGAROO AVENUE BARANGAROO NSW 2000 Description of Land ALLOTMENT COMPRISING PIECES 102 AND 103 DEPOSITED PLAN 93178 IN THE AREA NAMED STUART HUNDRED OF STUART Last Sale Details Dealing Reference TRANSFER (T) 13147108 Dealing Date 19/07/2019 Sale Price $1,375,000 Sale Type FULL VALUE / CONSIDERATION AND WHOLE OF LAND Constraints Encumbrances NIL Stoppers NIL Valuation Numbers

Valuation Number Status Property Location Address 7126453058 PROPOSED CANCELLED Lot 103 WOODS AND FOREST ROAD, STUART, SA 5320 7126453402 PROPOSED CURRENT Lot 102 WOODS AND FOREST ROAD, STUART, SA 5320

Notations Dealings Affecting Title NIL

Land Services SA Page 1 of 2 Copyright: www.landservices.com.au/copyright | Privacy: www.landservices.com.au/privacy | Terms of Use: www.landservices.com.au/sailis-terms-of-use Product Title Details Date/Time 24/04/2020 09:59AM Customer Reference Origin Order ID 20200424002056

Notations on Plan NIL Registrar-General's Notes NIL Administrative Interests NIL

Land Services SA Page 2 of 2 Copyright: www.landservices.com.au/copyright | Privacy: www.landservices.com.au/privacy | Terms of Use: www.landservices.com.au/sailis-terms-of-use Product Register Search Date/Time 15/06/2016 01:33PM Customer Reference Gabrielle Priest Order ID 20160615006855 Cost $27.25

The Registrar-General certifies that this Title Register Search displays the records maintained in the Register Book and other notations at the time of searching.

Registrar-General Certificate of Title - Volume 6154 Folio 656 Parent Title(s) CT 6141/70 Dealing(s) TG 12129928, TG 12129929, TG 12129930, TG 12129930A, TG 12280933 Creating Title Title Issued 27/03/2015 Edition 1

Edition Issued 27/03/2015 Estate Type FEE SIMPLE Registered Proprietor IAN MURRAY MCWATERS RUDITE MCWATERS OF PO BOX 97 MORGAN SA 5320 AS JOINT TENANTS Description of Land ALLOTMENT COMPRISING PIECES 102 AND 103 DEPOSITED PLAN 93178 IN THE AREA NAMED STUART HUNDRED OF STUART Easements SUBJECT TO EASEMENT(S) OVER THE LAND MARKED F ON FP 41416 FOR WATER SUPPLY PURPOSES (TG 12280933) SUBJECT TO EASEMENT(S) OVER THE LAND MARKED C AND D ON FP 41416 TO DISTRIBUTION LESSOR CORPORATION (SUBJECT TO LEASE 8890000) (TG 12129929) SUBJECT TO EASEMENT(S) OVER THE LAND MARKED E ON FP 41416 TO TRANSMISSION LESSOR CORPORATION OF 1 UNDIVIDED 2ND PART (SUBJECT TO LEASE 9061500) AND ELECTRANET PTY. LTD. OF 1 UNDIVIDED 2ND PART (TG 12129930A) SUBJECT TO FREE AND UNRESTRICTED RIGHT(S) OF WAY OVER THE LAND MARKED A ON FP 41416 (TG 12129928 AND TG 12129930) Schedule of Dealings Dealing Number Description

Land Services Group Page 1 of 2 Copyright Privacy Disclaimer: www.sailis.sa.gov.au/home/showCopyright www.sailis.sa.gov.au/home/showPrivacyStatement www.sailis.sa.gov.au/home/showDisclaimer Product Register Search Date/Time 15/06/2016 01:33PM Customer Reference Gabrielle Priest Order ID 20160615006855 Cost $27.25

12521223 CAVEAT BY ORIGIN ENERGY POWER LTD. (ACN: 008 289 398) Notations Dealings Affecting Title NIL Priority Notices NIL Notations on Plan NIL Registrar-General's Notes NIL Administrative Interests NIL * Denotes the dealing has been re-lodged.

Land Services Group Page 2 of 2 Copyright Privacy Disclaimer: www.sailis.sa.gov.au/home/showCopyright www.sailis.sa.gov.au/home/showPrivacyStatement www.sailis.sa.gov.au/home/showDisclaimer

Appendix D

Specialist Studies

Ecological Assessment Traffic Impact Assessment Cultural Heritage Assessment Summary

Morgan Solar Farm Ecological Assessment

REV_0 24 August 2020

Origin Energy

Ecological Assessment O r i g i n E n e r g y

Document history and status

Revision Date Description Author Checked Reviewed Approved

D 25.03.2020 Draft for client review L Clive Z Bull Z Bull K Fels

Rev 0 24.08.2020 Final for public release L Clive Z Bull Z Bull K Fels

Ecological Assessment

Morgan Solar Farm

Project No: IW227900 Document Title: Ecological Assessment Document No.: Final Revision: REV_0 Date: 24 August 2020 Client Name: Origin Energy Project Manager: Katie Fels Author: Lucy Clive File Name: IW227900-RPT-0001-Rev0 - Morgan Ecological Assessment_public

Jacobs Australia Pty Limited

Level 3, 121 King William Street Adelaide SA 5000 Australia T +61 8 8113 5400 F +61 8 8113 5440 www.jacobs.com

© Copyright 2019 Jacobs Australia Pty Limited. The concepts and information contained in this document are the property of Jacobs. Use or copying of this document in whole or in part without the written permission of Jacobs constitutes an infringement of copyright.

Limitation: This document has been prepared on behalf of, and for the exclusive use of Jacobs’ client, and is subject to, and issued in accordance with, the provisions of the contract between Jacobs and the client. Jacobs accepts no liability or responsibility whatsoever for, or in respect of, any use of, or reliance upon, this document by any third party.

Final i

Ecological Assessment

Contents Executive Summary ...... iv 1. Introduction ...... 1 1.1 Commonwealth Legislation ...... 1 1.1.1 Environmental Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (EPBC Act) ...... 1 1.2 South Australian Legislation ...... 2 1.2.1 Native Vegetation Act (1991) ...... 2 1.2.2 National Parks and Wildlife Act (1972)...... 2 1.2.3 Natural Resources Management Act (2004) ...... 2 1.2.4 Development Act (1993) ...... 3 1.3 Study Area ...... 3 1.4 Previous Studies ...... 6 2. Methods ...... 7 2.1 Desktop Assessment ...... 7 2.2 Field Assessment ...... 7 3. Desktop Results ...... 9 3.1 Regional Context...... 9 3.2 Local Context ...... 10 3.3 Ecological Constraints ...... 10 3.3.1 Threatened Ecological Communities (TEC) ...... 10 3.3.2 EPBC Threatened Fauna & Flora Species ...... 10 3.3.3 EPBC listed Migratory Fauna ...... 15 3.3.4 NPW Act Threatened Species ...... 20 3.3.5 Weeds and Pest Species ...... 20 4. Field Results ...... 22 4.1 Vegetation Associations ...... 22 4.1.1 Vegetation association 1 – Maireana sedifolia (Pearl Bluebush) low open shrubland ...... 24 4.1.2 Veg association 2 – Eucalyptus socialis +/- Myoporum platycarpum open woodland ...... 24 4.1.3 Vegetation association 3 – Maireana sedifolia low open shrubland with emergent Myoporum platycarpum and Acacia oswaldii ...... 26 4.2 Vegetation Condition Summary ...... 27 4.3 Threatened flora and fauna species ...... 28 4.4 Weeds...... 28 5. Native Vegetation Clearance and Offset ...... 30 6. Conclusions and Recommendations ...... 31 7. References ...... 32

Figures

Figure 1-1: Project Area for the proposed Morgan Solar Farm ...... 4

Final ii

Ecological Assessment

Figure 1-2: Study Area for the proposed Morgan Solar Farm ...... 5 Figure 4-1: Summary of the three vegetation associations recorded across the Project Area ...... 23

Tables

Table 2-1: Likelihood of occurrence criteria ...... 7 Table 3-1: IBRA area statistics for the Study Area ...... 9 Table 3-2: IBRA details and descriptions ...... 9 Table 3-3: Likelihood of occurrence assessment of EPBC listed threatened Fauna potentially occurring within the Project Area ...... 10 Table 3-4: Likelihood assessment of EPBC listed Migratory species potentially occurring within the Project Area ...... 16 Table 3-5: Weed species identified as possible occurring in the Study Area ...... 20 Table 4-1: Vegetation Condition Scores and Corresponding Vegetation Condition Ratings ...... 27 Table 4-2: Summary of Unit Biodiversity Score, BAM Vegetation Condition Score and Vegetation Condition Category ...... 27

Plates

Plate 1: BAM site 1. Facing South. Maireana sedifolia (Pearl Bluebush) low open shrubland ...... 24 Plate 2: BAM site 6. Facing South. Eucalyptus socialis +/- Myoporum platycarpum open woodland ...... 25 Plate 3: BAM site 3. Facing West. Widely spaced Myoporum platycarpum +/- Acacia oswaldii ...... 26 Plate 4: Citrullus sp. (Wild Melon) recorded alongside the edge of a driving track in the centre of Parcel 102, at a junction south of site 4 ...... 28

Appendix A. PMST Output Appendix B. Bushland Assessment sheets

Final iii

Ecological Assessment

Executive Summary

Origin are proposing to develop a large-scale photo-voltaic (PV) solar farm (and ancillary battery) near Morgan in the Riverland Region of South Australia. In addition to the construction of solar panels, a project switchyard and substation, a control room, an operations and maintenance shed and employee amenities are proposed. During construction, a site office and laydown area will also be required on the site. The solar farm would be developed in two stages. This assessment covers both stages.

This report presents the findings of an ecological assessment, including desktop and field assessment of ecological values in the Project Area, which may be impacted by the development. Included is an assessment of Protected Matters listed under the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (EPBC Act). The desktop assessment involved a review of the likelihood of occurrence of Protected Matters in the Project Area with a 5km buffer (the Study Area), followed by a determination on the likelihood of occurrence. The results of a desktop assessment of the likelihood of occurrence of state listed conservation species in the area is also presented, that can be used to inform a vegetation clearance application. A field assessment was undertaken (2 March 2020) including a review of vegetation community types, habitat potential for listed fauna and flora, and weed and pest species to further ground truth desktop results. The information presented within will be used to inform approvals and construction environmental management plans.

Desktop and field assessments indicated that no threatened ecological communities (TEC) listed under the EPBC Act were identified within the Study Area.

Eleven EPBC threatened fauna, one EPBC threatened flora species and 12 EPBC listed migratory species were highlighted in the EPBC Protected Matters Search Tool output as potentially being present in the Study Area. Of these, two EPBC threatened species (Regent Parrot (eastern), Polytelis anthopeplus monarchoides and Corben’s Long-eared Bat, Nyctophilus corbeni), and one migratory EPBC listed species (Fork-tailed Swift, Apus pacificus) were considered as possibly occurring in the Project Area. The remaining species were considered unlikely. For the Fork- tailed Swift, impacts are considered unlikely, due to the mobile / aerial nature of the species as it generally occurs 1000m above ground level. For the other two species a significant impact assessment would need to be undertaken addressing the EPBC Significant Impact Assessment Criteria (DotE 2013), against the proposed area of impact.

Four state listed species (one bird, one amphibian and two plants) with recent records (i.e. within the last 20 years) within the Study Area, have potential to occur in the Project Area. However, none were observed during survey of the Project Area and are considered unlikely to occur based on the life history of the species and the lack of (or limited) suitable habitat being present.

A desktop review indicated 14 invasive weed species were potentially present in the Study Area, including seven Weeds of National Significance (WoNS). However, no WoNS or State Declared weeds were recorded during survey of the site. There were environmental weeds observed growing in localised areas such as low-lying depressions, likely in response to the summer rain that fell in February 2020. Saffron Thistle (Carthamus lanatus) and Citrullus sp. (Wild Melon) were recorded in the Project Area and recommendations for their management have been made in this report.

Final iv

Ecological Assessment

1. Introduction

Origin are proposing to develop a large-scale photo-voltaic (PV) solar farm (and ancillary battery) near Morgan in the Riverland Region of South Australia. In addition to the construction of solar panels, the project includes a project switchyard & substation, a control room, an operations and maintenance shed and employee amenities. During construction a site office and laydown area will also be required on the site. The solar farm would be developed in two stages. This assessment covers both stages.

To support and progress the proposed development, Origin engaged Jacobs to undertake an ecological assessment. These studies included a desktop ecological assessment of the Study Area (Project Area and 5km buffer) and a field assessment. The assessments were undertaken to identify any ecological values within the Study Area (e.g. presence threatened and protected species, vegetation association extent and condition and habitats present), to determine whether the development represents any significant risks to ecological values and inform relevant approvals.

The intent of this ecological assessment is to:

Provide an early indication of potential ecological constraints to the approval process associated with the preliminary layout and, if necessary, identify options for adjusting the preliminary layout.

Identify any ecological constraints that should be considered during the development of the project layouts and design (e.g. threatened and protected species and high value habitat).

Provide necessary ecological assessment to support a Development Application for the project.

Collect vegetation association data using Bushland Assessment Method (BAM) (Native Vegetation Branch 2019), which can be used to support a native vegetation clearance application and offsetting determination under the Native Vegetation Act (1991) and Native Vegetation Regulations (2017) required as part of the project. However, development of a native vegetation clearance application is not included in the current scope.

The sections below identify legislation relevant to the development of the Origin solar farm in relation to terrestrial ecology.

1.1 Commonwealth Legislation

Legislation relevant to the planning and delivery of the Morgan Solar Farm project, in relation to terrestrial ecology, is summarised below.

1.1.1 Environmental Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (EPBC Act)

The EPBC Act is the Australian Government’s central piece of environmental legislation. It provides a legal framework to protect and manage nationally and internationally important flora, fauna, ecological communities and heritage places — defined in the EPBC Act as Matters of National Environmental Significance (MNES). Under the environmental provisions of the EPBC Act, actions that are likely to have a significant impact on a matter of National Environmental Significance are identified as ‘controlled actions’ and cannot be undertaken without referral to the Department of Agriculture Water and the Environment (DAWE) for consideration and approval under the EPBC Act.

The nine matters of national environmental significance identified in the EPBC Act are: world heritage properties national heritage places

Final 1

Ecological Assessment

wetlands of international importance (listed under the Ramsar Convention) threatened species and ecological communities migratory species as listed under international agreements Commonwealth marine areas the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park nuclear actions (including uranium mining); and a water resource, in relation to coal seam gas development and large coal mining development.

If an action has the potential to have a significant impact on a MNES, the proposed action is referred to the DAWE to determine the requirement for formal assessment and approval under the EPBC Act.

1.2 South Australian Legislation

A summary of South Australian Legislation relevant to flora and fauna for this Project Area is provided below.

1.2.1 Native Vegetation Act (1991)

The Native Vegetation Act 1991 (NV Act) and Native Vegetation Regulations 2017 outline incentives, education measures, and assistance to land owners in relation to the preservation and enhancement of native vegetation and acts to control the clearance of native vegetation. Under the SA NV Act, legal clearance of native vegetation may be permissible through one of two mechanisms: either by an application to the Native Vegetation Council (NVC), or under exemptions contained within the regulations. Remnant native vegetation is present within the project footprint and is represented in DEW vegetation mapping layers (NatureMaps 2019).

1.2.2 National Parks and Wildlife Act (1972)

The National Parks and Wildlife Act 1972 (NPW Act) allows for the protection of habitat and wildlife through the establishment of parks and reserves (both on land and in State waters) and provides for the use of wildlife through a system of permits allowing certain actions, i.e. keeping, selling, trading, harvesting, farming, hunting and the destruction of native species. The NPW Act assigns flora and fauna species to state conservation categories (i.e. threatened species); Endangered (Schedule 7), Vulnerable (Schedule 8), and Rare (Schedule 9).

1.2.3 Natural Resources Management Act (2004) (at time of report preparation)

**The NRM Act is due to be repealed by the Landscape South Australia Act (2019). The Landscape South Australia Act (2019) is not expected to be operational until the second half of 2020. Until then, the NRM Act remains operational.

The intent of the Natural Resources Management Act 2004 (NRM Act) is to assist in the achievement of ecologically sustainable development in the State by establishing an integrated scheme to promote the use and management of natural resources while recognising and protecting the intrinsic values of natural resources. The NRM Act addresses management of water resources, soil resources and pest control among other issues.

The NRM Act establishes Natural Resources Management Regions and Boards and requires development of Natural Resources Management Plans for each region. The NRM Boards may be a referral agency for a development application and will consider how the development meets the requirements of the NRM Act including management of water affecting activities (e.g. construction in a watercourse or use of prescribed water resources).

Final 2

Ecological Assessment

The Act further legislates for designated control requirements for a series of ‘Declared’ plants (as specific to each region or state-wide), which effectively: bans the sale of Declared weeds controls the movement of Declared weeds requires landowners / managers to destroy or control infestations of Declared weeds; and requires further notification of authorities when an infestation is detected. This project occurs in the South Australian Murray-Darling Basin region.

1.2.4 Development Act (1993)

The State Government is in the process of introducing the Planning, Development and Infrastructure Act 2016. The Mid Murray Council are is likely to be converted to the new system on 2021. Until that time, the Development Act still applies to applications within this Council area.

The Development Act 1993 (Development Act) and associated regulations is the legislation related to planning and development matters. The Act establishes an integrated development and environmental assessment process. Development Approval is required prior to the commencement of development as defined in the Development Act, for example, a building, building work, change in the use of land. In order to obtain Development Approval, Development Plan Consent and Building Rules Consent/Certification is required. Development Plan Consent is obtained by lodging a development application with the relevant authority (either the Minister for Planning, State Commission Assessment Panel, or the local Council depending on the approval pathway). Building Rules Consent can be issued by Council or by a Private Certifier.

1.3 Study Area

The Project Area for the Morgan Solar Farm project (approximately 947 hectares) includes two cadastral parcels:

D93178 Q103 (Volume 6154, Folio 656, Parcel 102) – 613 hectares

D93178 Q102 (Volume 6154, Folio 656, Parcel 103) – 334 hectares

Parcel 103 also includes two cadastral parcels which the North West Bend Substation occupies:

D53644 A502 (Volume 6154, Folio 653) – 0.37 hectares

D69034 A1 (Volume 6154, Folio 654) – 2.44 hectares

The Project Area is located on the Woods and Forest Road, Stuart SA 5320, which is situated some 6 km to the north east of Morgan and on the northern side of the Goyder Highway (Figure 1-1).

The Study Area for this project includes the Project Area plus a 5km buffer (Figure 1-2).

Final 3

Ecological Assessment

Stage 2

Stage 1

Figure 1-1: Project Area for the proposed Morgan Solar Farm

Final 4

Ecological Assessment

Figure 1-2: Study Area for the proposed Morgan Solar Farm

Final 5

Ecological Assessment

1.4 Previous Studies

Jacobs has conducted two environmental surveys in close proximity to the current Project Area in the last 12 months. No EPBC threatened flora or fauna were recorded on either of these surveys at sites near to the current Project Area (Jacobs unpublished data).

Final 6

Ecological Assessment

2. Methods

The Project Area is defined as the cadastral parcels listed in Section 1.3 (Figure 1-1) and is currently used for grazing.

The Study Area is defined as the Project Area plus a 5km buffer.

2.1 Desktop Assessment

The desktop assessment of the proposed Study Area included the following:

Review of EPBC Act Protected Matters Database via the online Protected Matters Search Tool (PMST) (including a 5km buffer) and high-level assessment of the likelihood of occurrence of listed threatened flora and listed threatened or migratory faun species and Threatened Ecological Communities (TECs). The results of the Protected Matters output (January 2020) are presented in Appendix A.

Review of Biological Databases of South Australia (BDBSA) records (DEW 2020) for the Study Area (i.e. includes 5 km buffer) for threatened flora, fauna and ecological communities.

Review of the Department for Environment and Water’s (DEW) NatureMaps tool (NatureMaps 2020) to describe the vegetation communities present and identify any ecologically significant features that may occur at the site or surrounds.

General ecology flora and fauna reference material (as referenced throughout) e.g. fauna field guides, native and exotic plant identification sources, previous studies done in the area.

Assessment of the likelihood of occurrence of protected fauna, threatened flora and fauna or ecological communities in the vicinity of the Project Area based on the criteria outlined in Table 2-1.

Table 2-1: Likelihood of occurrence criteria

Likelihood Criteria category Unlikely There is a lack of suitable habitat for the species (or community) in the Project Area and a lack of proximate or recent historic records which indicate previous or current occurrence (i.e. BDBSA records older than 20 years). Possible Suitable habitat is present for the species in the Project Area, but no or very limited recent (BDBSA last 20 years) database record(s) exist from the Study Area.

Likely Suitable habitat is present in the Project Area and multiple recent database records exist from the Study Area within the last 20 years.

Present Presence indicated by known recent (within 20 years) records in the Project Area, habitat present within the Study Area or observed during site survey of the Project Area.

2.2 Field Assessment

The Project Area was surveyed on 2 March 2020 by Jacobs Ecologists Katie Fels (accredited Native Vegetation consultant) and Dr Lucy Clive (Graduate Ecologist). The survey consisted of a site walkover, describing high-level vegetation associations present and any weed infestations identified, as well as Bushland Assessment Methodology

Final 7

Ecological Assessment

(DEWNR 2019). Observational notes were recorded regarding fauna presence and potential for habitat and opportunistic bird presence. Detailed fauna trapping and bird surveys were not undertaken.

The survey involved:

Bushland Monitoring Method (BAM), as required for vegetation clearance approval under the NV Act and Regulations, to describe native vegetation communities present on the proposed development site, including existing levels of disturbance and condition

assessment of vegetation associations and vegetation condition across the Project Area, with a focus on recording the presence of any threatened species, their habitat or Threatened Ecological Communities (TECs, if relevant); and

identifying any environmental management issues that will require further consideration, including the presence of declared weed species listed under the NRM Act.

Final 8

Ecological Assessment

3. Desktop Results

3.1 Regional Context

The Interim Biogeographical Regionalisation of Australia (IBRA) identifies geographically distinct bioregions based on common climate, geology, landform, native vegetation and species information (Thackway and Cresswell 1995; Environment Australia 2000). The bioregions (Table 3-1) are further defined by subregions (Table 3-2) and environmental associations within the broader bioregion. The Morgan Solar Farm Study Area is located in the MDD07 (Braemer) and MDD02 (Murray Mallee) subregions of the Murray Darlin Depression (MDD) bioregion in addition to the RIV6 (Murray Scroll Belt) subregion of the Riverina (RIV) bioregion.

Table 3-1: IBRA area statistics for the Study Area IBRA Region IBRA Subregion Hectares within Study % of the within Study Area (5km buffer) Area (5 km buffer)

Murray Darlin Depression Braemer (MDD07) 9525.69 57.5% (MDD) Murray Mallee (MDD02) 5796.55 35.0% Riverina (RIV) Murray Scroll Belt (RIV06) 1234.35 7.5% TOTAL 16,556.59 100%

Table 3-2: IBRA details and descriptions Riverina (RIV) IBRA Bioregion

Murray Scroll Belt (RIV06) IBRA subregion Landform Floodplain and channel of Lower Murray River. Floodplains, terraces, residual islands, lakes Geology Mainly alluvium: sand, silt & clay. Point bar, shoal, back swamp, splay & lake deposits & gravel Soil Cracking clays, Brown sands Vegetation Eucalyptus woodlands with a shrubby understorey Murray Darlin Depression (MDD) IBRA Bioregion

Braemer (MDD07) IBRA subregion Landform Plains with variable dune cover, from dune formations with relatively small plains between to plains with isolated tracts of dunes. Claypans, saline soils, swamps, and intermittent lakes in low-lying areas Geology Exposed caliche & crusty loamy soils; colluvial sand, silt, clay & gravel along foot slopes of Olay Spur. Evaporite deposits; gypsum & halite Soil Brown calcareous earths, Highly calcareous loamy earths, Cracking clays, yellow grey, Hard setting loamy soils with red clayey subsoils Vegetation Chenopod shrublands Murray Mallee (MDD02) IBRA subregion Landform Very gently undulating, to flat aeolian sand covered depositional plain of the central- southern Murray Basin Geology East-west linear dunes, regularly spaced with cusp-like crests which are consistently steeper on the southern side. Up to four buried paleosols within the dune. Dunes composed of pale to dark reddish-brown calcareous sand with some clay fraction Soil Brown calcareous earths and highly calcareous brown loamy earths, Hard setting loamy soils with red clayey subsoils, Cracking clays Vegetation Mallee heath and shrublands

Final 9

Ecological Assessment

3.2 Local Context

The Morgan Solar Farm is located 150km North-East of Adelaide in the Murray-Darling region of South Australia. The Project Area is mapped as chenopod shrubland (Maireana sedifolia, Maireana pyramidata low open shrubland over Sclerolaena obliquicuspis +/- Eriochiton sclerolaenoides +/- Carrichtera annua +/- Austrostipa spp. +/- Rhodanthe pygmaea) (NatureMaps 2020).

3.3 Ecological Constraints

3.3.1 Threatened Ecological Communities (TEC)

No EPBC listed TECs are likely to be present within the Study Area, based on EPBC PMST output, Naturemaps / DEW vegetation association mapping, and results of the field assessment.

3.3.2 EPBC Threatened Fauna & Flora Species

The EPBC Protected Matters Search Tool (PMST) highlighted eleven threatened fauna species (6 birds, 3 fish, 1 amphibian and 1 mammal) and one threatened flora species as potentially occurring in the Study Area. The likelihood of occurrence for these species and justification for the likelihood of occurrence is summarised in Table 3-3 below. Of these species two are considered possible (Corben’s Long-eared Bat, Regent Parrot) and ten are considered unlikely.

Table 3-3: Likelihood of occurrence assessment of EPBC listed threatened Fauna potentially occurring within the Project Area

Species Name Common EPBC NPW Likelihood Justification3 Name Act1 Act2 of Occurrence

Birds

Grantiella picta Painted V R Unlikely EPBC PMST report suggested that the species or Honeyeater species habitat may occur within the Study Area. There are no records in the Study Area (BDBSA 2020). Endemic to mainland Australia, primarily occurring in Queensland and New South Wales and Victoria. It is also found occasionally in the Northern Territory and may be a vagrant to South Australia. It is rare throughout its range. There are few records in South Australia and these are outside of the known range. Occurs in dry open forests and woodlands, and is strongly associated with mistletoe. It may also be found along rivers, on plains with scattered trees and on farmland with remnant vegetation. It has been seen in urban parks and gardens where large eucalypts are available. Given the lack of records or suitable habitat, and its status as a vagrant in South Australia, its

Final 10

Ecological Assessment

Species Name Common EPBC NPW Likelihood Justification3 Name Act1 Act2 of Occurrence occurrence within the Project Area is considered unlikely.

Leipoa ocellata Malleefowl V V Unlikely EPBC PMST report suggested that the species or species habitat likely to occur within the Study Area. There are no records in the Study Area (BDBSA 2020). Terrestrial ground-dwelling species which makes large conspicuous nesting mounds. Preferred habitat is semi-arid to arid shrublands and low woodlands, especially those dominated by mallee and/or acacias. Sandy soils and abundance leaf litter are required for breeding (National Malleefowl Recovery Team 2019). Over the course of a year the birds may range over one to several square kilometres; home- ranges overlap considerably. Species is found principally in the semi-arid to arid zone in shrublands and low woodlands dominated by mallee (Frith 1962a, b) and associated habitats such as Broombush Melaleuca uncinata (Woinarski 1989a; Woinarski 1989b) and Scrub Pine Callitris verrucosa. Typically, these mallee areas have an understorey of Hard/Lobed Spinifex Triodia basedowii or other Triodia species, and shrub thickets on the ridges where Umbrella Bush Acacia ligulata and other seed-bearing shrubs are often common. Given the lack of suitable habitat, or records in the wider Study Area, species presence is considered unlikely in the Project Area.

Manorina Black-eared E E Unlikely EPBC PMST report suggested that the species or melanotis Miner species habitat may occur within the Study Area. There are no records in the Study Area (BDBSA 2020). Endemic to the Murray Mallee region of Victoria, South Australia and New South Wales where the majority of records are from the Riverland Biosphere Reserve, South Australia and the Murray-Sunset National Park, Victoria. Species is restricted to large tracts of mature, unfragmented mallee eucalypt woodland, in areas that have not been burnt for at least 50 years and have not been cleared (McLaughlin 1990; Muir et al. 1999; Starks 1987; Higgins et al. 2001). Records are primarily in the Riverland Biosphere Reserve and the Tarawi Nature Reserve in NSW, where more than 80% of mallee vegetation is older than 50 years, and hence suitable for the species.

Final 11

Ecological Assessment

Species Name Common EPBC NPW Likelihood Justification3 Name Act1 Act2 of Occurrence Given lack of records in the Study Area and lack of suitable mallee habitat within the Project Area, considered unlikely to occur in the Project Area.

Pedionomus Plains- CE E Unlikely EPBC PMST report suggested that the species or torquatus wanderer species habitat likely to occur within the Study Area. There are no records in the Study Area (BDBSA 2020). Nomadic species, which inhabits sparse, treeless, lowland native grasslands which usually occur on hard red-brown clay soils. Occasionally occurs in other types of habitat such as in stubble; amongst low cereal crops; and in low, sparse chenopod shrubland (Menkhorst et al. 2017). The highest concentrations of records are in the Riverina region of south-western NSW and north- central region of Victoria. Species inhabit sparse grasslands with 50% bare ground, with most vegetation less than 5 cm in height and some widely spaced plants up to 30 cm high. The species may occasionally use lower- quality habitat including cereal stubble but cannot persist in an agricultural landscape. Plains-wanderers are sedentary for as long as the habitat remains suitable (Garnett et al., 2011). Given the lack of records in the Study Area, distance to strongholds / known populations and the lack of suitable habitat in the Project Area, the species is considered unlikely to occur in the Project Area.

Pezoporus Night Parrot EN E Unlikely EPBC PMST report lists species as extinct in the occidentalis area and there are no records within the Study Area (BDBSA 2020). Extant breeding populations in Qld and WA recorded in Triodia spp. (Spinifex) hummock grassland on stony plains and / or chenopod shrublands. Other habitat species include Sclerolaena spp., Maireana spp. (Saltbush spp.), Astrebla spp. (Mitchell grass), shrubby samphire and chenopod associations, scattered trees and shrubs, Acacia aneura (Mulga) woodland (TSSC 2016b, DOtE 2020). Species is known to still occur in confined locations in WA and Qld, records in northern SA have not been confirmed (Night Parrot Recovery Team 2020). Given lack of records in SA and in Study Area and lack of suitable habitat within the Project Area, considered unlikely.

Polytelis Regent Parrot V V Possible EPBC PMST report suggested that breeding likely anthopeplus (eastern) to occur within the Study Area. There are 14 monarchoides records in the Study Area, close to the Murray River which is 2km south of the Project Area

Final 12

Ecological Assessment

Species Name Common EPBC NPW Likelihood Justification3 Name Act1 Act2 of Occurrence (BDBSA 2004-2013). The record closest to the Project Area were approximately 2.5km away, in a creekline woodland south-west of the project area, north of the Murray River. Nest within River Red Gums (Eucalyptus camaldulensis) forests. Typical nest trees are large, mature healthy trees with many hollows (though dead trees are used) and are usually located close to watercourses. Principal foraging habitat is mallee woodlands, though foraging also occurs in riverine forests and woodlands, e.g. adjacent Black Box (E. largiflorens) woodlands. Mallee woodland within 20 kilometres of nesting sites is considered critical foraging habitat for breeding birds (Baker-gabb and Hurley 2011). Foraging in open mallee woodland or shrubland, usually with a ground cover of spinifex (Triodia) or other grasses, supporting various eucalypts. They often occur in farmland, especially if the farmland supports remnant patches of woodland along roadsides or in paddocks, and is within proximity to nesting areas. The subspecies seldom occurs in more extensively cleared areas (Beardsell 1985; Burbidge 1985; Emison et al. 1987; Webster 1991). While the Project Area does not contain nesting habitat, there are records in the wider Study Area and there is foraging habitat in close proximity to the Project Area. In addition, scattered mallee at the western end of the Project Area could represent potential habitat for the species. Therefore, species presence in the Project Area is considered possible.

Mammals

Nyctophilus Corben’s Long- V V Possible EPBC PMST report suggested that the species or corbeni eared Bat, species habitat may occur within the Study Area. South-eastern There are no records in the Study Area (BDBSA Long-eared Bat 2020). Species has scattered distribution in the Murray- Darling basin. Occurs within a wide range of inland woodland vegetation types. In South Australia, records are all confined to mallee shrubland. It is most commonly recorded in extensive stands of vegetation, old-growth vegetation, and areas with a dense understorey. Bushfires are a likely threat, causing direct mortality and through loss of foraging habitat and roosting sites. In South Australia species is confined to tall mallee shrublands (Duncan et al., 1999). The main population of this species occurs in the Piliga Scrub in NSW. All South

Final 13

Ecological Assessment

Species Name Common EPBC NPW Likelihood Justification3 Name Act1 Act2 of Occurrence Australian records are within a large tract of intact mallee. The closest historical record is 26km north-east of the Project Area (BDBSA 1980). Although there are no records within the Study Area and the core population occurs in NSW, the species does have scattered distribution in the Murray-Darling Basin and there is some mallee habitat, albeit low suitability, present on site. Therefore it is considered possible that the species occurs. It is unlikely that a core / important population occurs at the site, avoiding impacts to the mallee present on site would avoid potential impacts to individuals if present.

Fish

Craterocephalus Murray E Unlikely EPBC PMST report suggested that the species or fluviatilis Hardyhead species habitat are likely to occur within the Study Area. There are no records in the Study Area (BDBSA 2020). Species may occur in the Study Area due to the proximity of the site to the Murray River. However, it is unlikely that the species would be present within the Project Area, given the lack of aquatic habitat.

Galaxias Flathead CE Unlikely EPBC PMST report suggested that the species or rostratus Galaxias species habitat may occur within the Study Area. There are no records in the Study Area (BDBSA 2020). Species may occur in the Study Area due to the proximity of the site to the Murray River. However, it is unlikely that the species would be present within the Project Area, given the lack of aquatic habitat.

Maccullochella Murray Cod V Unlikely EPBC PMST report suggested that the species peelii was known to occur within the Study Area. There are no records in the Study Area (BDBSA 2020). Species may occur in the Study Area due to the proximity of the site to the Murray River. However, it is unlikely that the species would be present within the Project Area, given the lack of aquatic habitat.

Amphibians

Litoria Growling Grass V Unlikely EPBC PMST report suggested that the species or raniformis Frog species habitat was known to occur within the Study Area. The species is usually found among vegetation within or at the edges of permanent water such as slow flowing streams, swamps, lagoons and lakes. In disturbed areas it also commonly occurs

Final 14

Ecological Assessment

Species Name Common EPBC NPW Likelihood Justification3 Name Act1 Act2 of Occurrence in artificial waterbodies such as farm dams, irrigation channels, irrigated rice crops and disused quarries, particularly where natural habitat is no longer available (Hamer and Organ 2008; Heard et al. in prep.). Favoured sites frequently have a large proportion of emergent, submerged and floating vegetation, and slow- flowing or still water (Robertson et al. 2002; Scroggie and Clemann 2003; Heard et al. 2004; in prep, Hamer and Organ 2008). There is 1 record in the Study Area (BDBSA 2006), in a small lake south of the Murray River, 4.5km away from the Project Area. Species may occur in the Study Area due to the proximity of the site to the Murray River. However, it is unlikely that the species would be present within the Project Area, given the lack of suitable aquatic habitat.

Plants

Dodonaea Peep Hill Hop- E E Unlikely EPBC PMST report suggested that the species or subglandulifera bush species habitat may occur within the Study Area. There are no records in the Study Area (BDBSA 2020). Species occurs primarily on low hills on loamy soils associated with rocky (limestone, slate, shale) outcrops (Jusaitis and Sorensen, 1994; Smith, 2000). These low hills occur to the east of the range country, just before the vegetation changes to mallee flats (Smith, 2000). The species has also been recorded from plains country in sandy soils over limestone. Species occurs in native vegetation associated with rock outcrops including low open woodland, open shrubland and mallee. The understorey is quite variable at most sites. Given the lack of records within the Study Area and lack of suitable habitat within the Project Area, the species is considered unlikely to occur. 1Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 Status: Critically Endangered (CE); Endangered (EN), Vulnerable (VU); Migratory Wetland (MW). 2South Australian National Parks and Wildlife Act 1972 Status: Rare (R); Vulnerable (V); Endangered (E) 3Biological Database of South Australia (BDBSA), Protected Matters Search Tool (PMST), Atlas of Living Australia (ALA).

3.3.3 EPBC listed Migratory Fauna

The EPBC PMST output highlighted 12 EPBC listed Migratory bird species that could potentially be present in the Study Area (Table 3-4), of which one species (Curlew Sandpiper) is also EPBC listed and discussed as a threatened species in Section 3.3.2 above. However, of the 12 species, none are considered likely, one is possible (Fork-tailed Swift) and 11 unlikely to occur within the Project Area.

Final 15

Ecological Assessment

Table 3-4: Likelihood assessment of EPBC listed Migratory species potentially occurring within the Project Area

Species Name Common EPBC NPW Likelihood Justification3 Name Act1 Act2 of Occurrence Migratory Marine

Apus pacificus Fork-tailed Possible EPBC PMST report suggested that the species Swift or species habitat likely to occur within the Study Area. There are no records within the Study Area (BDBSA 2020). Highly mobile, migratory, almost entirely aerial species, flying <1 m to 1000 m above the ground. This species seldom recorded on the ground (Simpson and Day 2010). Primarily occurs over inland plains in Australia, but sometimes recorded over coastal cliffs. Feeds on insects whilst flying, roosts on the wing. The entire global population can visit Australia during summer, where it is widespread throughout Australia. In SA, occurs west of Spencer Gulf, Coastal Eyre Peninsula, Flinders Ranges, Maree, Lake Eyre and Innamincka. The species occurs aerially over a wide range of habitats, which vary from rainforests to treeless plains. Species may occur in the Study Area due to the proximity of the site to the Murray River. The species has potential to occur above the Project Area, but due to it’s aerial nature is unlikely to be impacted by the Project. Migratory Terrestrial

Motacilla cinerea Grey Wagtail Unlikely EPBC PMST report suggested that the species or species habitat may occur within the Study Area. There are no records within the Study Area (BDBSA 2020). Uncommon migratory wagtail (DOTE 2015). Breeds in Europe and Asia and rarely spring/summer non-breeding migrant to Australia (Pizzey and Knight 2012, Menkhorst et al. 2017). Prefers higher altitudes, near fast- running water, rocky substrates, lakes and marshes. Vagrant to South Australia with the only two records being from near Adelaide. Species may occur in the Study Area due to the proximity of the site to the Murray River. However, given the lack of records in SA and the Study Area, it is unlikely to be present within the Project Area. Motacilla flava Yellow Wagtail Unlikely EPBC PMST report suggested that the species or species habitat may occur within the Study Area. There are no records within the Study Area (BDBSA 2020).

Final 16

Ecological Assessment

Species Name Common EPBC NPW Likelihood Justification3 Name Act1 Act2 of Occurrence Uncommon migratory wagtail (DOTE 2015). Breeds in Europe, Africa and Alaska and occasional spring/summer non-breeding migrant to Australia (Pizzey and Knight 2012). Habitat includes well-watered open grasslands, fringes and wetlands. Roosts in mangroves and other dense vegetation (D0TE 2015). Species may occur in the Study Area due to the proximity of the site to the Murray River. However, given the lack of records in SA and in the Study Area, it is unlikely that the species would be present within the Project Area. Myiagra Satin Unlikely EPBC PMST report suggested that the species cyanoleuca Flycatcher or species habitat is known to occur within the Study Area. There are no records within the Study Area (BDBSA 2020). Occurs along the east coast of Australia from far northern Queensland to Tasmania, including south-eastern South Australia. In South Australia, records are few and far between. Inhabits vegetated gullies in eucalypt-dominated forests and taller woodlands, often near watercourses (Menkhorst et al. 2017). Within the SA, there are 3 historical records (1998), near Burra and Morgan. An occasional visitor to South Australia and considered unlikely within the Project Area, given limited records. Species may occur in the Study Area due to the proximity of the site to the Murray River. However, given the lack of records in the Study Area, and lack of suitable habitat it is considered unlikely that the species would be present within the Project Area.

Migratory Wetlands

Actitis hypoleucos Common Unlikely EPBC PMST report suggested that the species Sandpiper or species habitat may occur within the Study Area. There are no records within the Study Area (BDBSA 2020). Migratory wader / shorebird. Breeds in northern hemisphere (Eurasia), migrates to Africa, regular summer migrant to Australia (more common in northern than southern Australia (Geering et al. 2008, Simpson and Day 2010). Species may occur in the Study Area due to the proximity of the site to the Murray River. However, given the lack of records in the Study Area and lack of suitable habitat, it is unlikely to be present within the Project Area.

Final 17

Ecological Assessment

Species Name Common EPBC NPW Likelihood Justification3 Name Act1 Act2 of Occurrence

Calidris acuminata Sharp-tailed Unlikely EPBC PMST report suggested that the species Sandpiper or species habitat is known to occur within the Study Area. There are no records within the Study Area (BDBSA 2020). Migratory wader / shorebird. Breeds in Siberia migrates to New Guinea and Australia. Prefers coastal and inland areas, non-tidal fresh or brackish wetlands (Geering et al. 2008, Simpson and Day 2010). Species may occur in the Study Area due to the proximity of the site to the Murray River. However, given the lack of records in the Study Area and the lack of suitable habitat, it is unlikely to be present within the Project Area. Calidris ferruginea Curlew CE CE Unlikely EPBC PMST report suggested that the species Sandpiper or species habitat may occur within the Study Area. There are no records within the Study Area (BDBSA 2020). Migratory wader, shorebird. Breeds in Siberian high arctic coastal tundra migrates to Africa, Asia and regular spring/summer migrant to Australia (Geering et al. 2008). Preferred habitat includes exposed intertidal mudflats and less frequently inland freshwater wetlands, saltworks and mudflats (Geering et al. 2008, Simpson and Day 2010). Species may occur in the Study Area due to the proximity of the site to the Murray River. However, given the lack of records in the Study Area, and lack of suitable habitat, it is unlikely to be present within the Project Area. Calidris melanatos Pectoral Unlikely EPBC PMST report suggested that the species Sandpiper or species habitat likely to occur within the Study Area. There are no records within the Study Area (BDBSA 2020). Migratory wader / shorebird. Breeds in North America and Siberia. Prefers freshwater or brackish wetlands, grassy or lightly vegetated coastal and inland swamps (Geering et al. 2008). Dams and areas of shallow open water within the Study Area could provide occasional foraging habitat for the species, when they are in Australia (during non-breeding season September to April). Species may occur in the Study Area due to the proximity of the site to the Murray River. However, it is unlikely that the species would be present within the Project Area due to a lack of suitable habitat. Gallinago Lathams Snipe Unlikely EPBC PMST report suggested that the species hardwickii or species habitat may occur within the Study

Final 18

Ecological Assessment

Species Name Common EPBC NPW Likelihood Justification3 Name Act1 Act2 of Occurrence Area. There are no records within the Study Area (BDBSA 2020). Species may occur in the Study Area due to the proximity of the site to the Murray River. However, given the lack of records within the Study Area and lack of suitable habitat, it is unlikely to be present within the Project Area. Numenius Eastern Curlew Unlikely EPBC PMST report suggested that the species madagascariensis or species habitat may occur within the Study Area. There are no records within the Study Area (BDBSA 2020). Species may occur in the Study Area due to the proximity of the site to the Murray River. However, given the lack of records in the Study Area and lack of suitable habitat, it is unlikely to be present within the Project Area. Pandion haliaetus Osprey Unlikely EPBC PMST report suggested that the species or species habitat likely to occur within the Study Area. There are no records within the Study Area (BDBSA 2020). A medium-sized coastal raptor that feeds primarily on fish. There is a breeding population along the coast of SA extending from Head of Bight east to Cape Spencer and Kangaroo Island (SPRAT 2019). Historically, pairs formerly bred along the eastern coast of Spencer Gulf and along the lower Murray River. They will also utilise artificial / man- made structures near water habitats for nesting. Species may occur in the Study Area due to the proximity of the site to the Murray River. However, given the lack of records in the Study Area and lack of suitable habitat, it is unlikely to be present within the Project Area.

Tringa nebularia Common Unlikely EPBC PMST report suggested that the species Greenshank or species habitat likely to occur within the Study Area. There are no records within the Study Area (BDBSA 2020). Migratory wader / shorebird. Breeds in northern hemisphere from Europe to Siberia, summer migrant to Australia, Africa and Asia. Prefers intertidal mudflats, fresh and saltwater wetlands of coast and inland (Geering et al. 2008). Nearby dams and areas of shallow open water within the Study Area could provide foraging habitat for the species (EBS 2018). Species may occur in the Study Area due to the proximity of the site to the Murray River. However, given the lack of records in the Study

Final 19

Ecological Assessment

Species Name Common EPBC NPW Likelihood Justification3 Name Act1 Act2 of Occurrence Area and lack of suitable habitat, it is unlikely to be present within the Project Area .

1Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 Status: Critically Endangered (CE); Endangered (EN), Vulnerable (VU); Migratory Wetland (MW). 2South Australian National Parks and Wildlife Act 1972 Status: Rare (R); Vulnerable (V); Endangered (E) 3Biological Databases of South Australia (BDBSA), Protected Matters Search Tool (PMST), Atlas of Living Australia (ALA).

3.3.4 NPW Act Threatened Species

In addition to Commonwealth listed species, there are recent records for threatened flora and fauna listed under the SA NPW Act within the Study Area. Two EPBC listed fauna species (Regent Parrot and Southern Bell Frog) were already listed in Section 3.3.2 and will not be discussed further here. Two state listed flora species have records within the Study Area:

Creeping Boobialla (Myoporum parvifolium, listed as Rare): There are two records within the Study Area (BDBSA 2002), 100m south of the River Murray. Species occurs in coastal and floodplain areas in all agricultural districts of South Australia. Due to the absence of suitable habitat, this species is considered unlikely to be present in the Project Area.

Prickly Bottlebrush (Callistemon brachyandrus, listed as Rare): There are two records within the Study Area (BDBSA 2002), 100m south of the River Murray. Species is found along the Murray River in South Australia mainly between Swan Reach and Wailkerie growing in the sandy soils of alluvial flats. Due to the absence of suitable habitat, this species is considered unlikely to be present in the Project Area.

3.3.5 Weeds and Pest Species

Fourteen weed species, including Weeds of National Significance (WoNS) or Declared plants, were identified as potentially occurring in the Study Area (Table 3-5). If present, these species warrant elevated environmental management considerations to treat and prevent potential spread by construction activities.

Table 3-5: Weed species identified as possible occurring in the Study Area

Species Name Common AWC1 NRM Comments Name Act2 Asparagus Bridal WoNS D There are 2 records in the Study Area (BDBSA 2010). asparagoides Creeper, Bridal Veil Creeper, Smilax, Florist’s Smilax, Smilax Asparagus Asparagus D There are 2 records in the Study Area (BDBSA 2010, 2012). declinatus Carrichtera annua Ward’s Weed There are no records in the Study Area (BDBSA 2020).

Chrysanthemoides Bitou Bush WoNS D Species grows in a range of environments – from open monilifera exposed dunes to shaded forests. It is tolerant of shade, salinity, strong wind, windblown sand and water, drought,

Final 20

Ecological Assessment

Species Name Common AWC1 NRM Comments Name Act2 low nutrients and, to some extent, disturbances such as fire. It grows poorly in wet or swampy soils and has a low tolerance to frost. There are no records in the Study Area (BDBSA 2020). Chrysanthemoides Boneseed WoNS D Infestations of boneseed and the closely related bitou bush monilifera ssp. mainly occur on public lands. Boneseed grows under a wide Monilifera range of climatic conditions but prefers sandy or medium- textured soils and disturbed situations, particularly near the sea because it tolerates salty conditions. There are 14 records in the Study Area (BDBSA 2011). Cylindropuntia spp. Prickly pears WoNS D Species grows throughout a wide climatic range, from arid and semi-arid environments to warm temperate, sub- tropical and tropical areas. Species appears to have no preference for soil types and are found growing in calcareous loam, shallow granite, sandy soils, red earths and clay soils. There are 13 records in the Study Area of Opuntia sp. (BDBSA 2010). Echium Salvation D There are 5 records in the Study Area (BDBSA 2002). plantagineum Jane

Gazania linearis Gazania D There is 1 record in the Study Area (BDBSA 2003)

Lycium African WoNS D There are 45 records within the Study Area (BDBSA 2010- ferocissimum Boxthorn 2014).

Marrubium vulgare Horehound D There are 2 records in the Study Area (BDBSA 2002).

Olea europaea Common D EPBC PMST suggests species or species habitat may occur Olive within the Study Area. There are no records in the Study Area (BDBSA 2020).

Rubus fruticosus Blackberry WoNS D EPBC PMST suggests species or species habitat is likely to aggregate occur within the Study Area. There are no records in the Study Area (BDBSA 2020).

Salix spp. (except Willows WoNS D EPBC PMST suggests species or species habitat is likely to S.babylonica, S.x (except occur within the Study Area. calodendron & S.x Weeping There are no records in the Study Area (BDBSA 2020). reichardtii) Willow, Pussy Willow and Sterile Pussy Willow Tribulus terrestris Caltrop D There are 5 records in the Study Area (BDBSA 2004).

1Australian Weeds Committee (2012): Weeds of National Significance (WoNS) 2Natural Resources Management Act 2004 (to be repealed by the Landscape South Australia Act 2019) Status: Declared (D)

Final 21

Ecological Assessment

4. Field Results

4.1 Vegetation Associations

There were three vegetation associations identified within the Project Area (Figure 4-1). On the 947-hectare property, approximately 939 hectares were found to be native vegetation.

The site was surveyed following years of prolonged drought in the region. A recent summer rainfall event in February 2020, has caused regeneration events for species observed, particularly Maireana sedifolia (Pearl Bluebush) which formed the dominant overstorey across most of the site.

Final 22

Ecological Assessment

Stage 2

Stage 1

Figure 4-1: Summary of the three vegetation associations recorded across the Project Area

Final 23

Ecological Assessment

4.1.1 Vegetation association 1 – Maireana sedifolia (Pearl Bluebush) low open shrubland

This association comprises BAM sites 1, 2, 4 and 7 that have been consolidated due to the similarity in floral composition between sites, with variation in site score reflective of density and condition. There was approximately 842.22 hectares of this association within the Project Area.

Maireana sedifolia (Pearl Bluebush) forms the dominant overstorey in this association. The understorey varied between sites with species common occurring at different densities, including: Sclerolaena patenticuspis (Spear- fruit Bindyi) and Euphorbia drummondii (Caustic Weed). Other native species recorded across these sites include Eriochyton sclerolinoides (Wooly-fruit Bluebush), Enchylaena tomentosa (Ruby Saltbush) and Nitraria billardierei (Nitre Bush). Site 4 had two Myoporum platycarpum (False Sandalwood) stumps that have been previously felled.

Sites 1 and 2 in the eastern parcel were heavily grazed with sheep and kangaroo scats observed. Site 4 had an active rabbit warren, with rabbit scats and evidence of digging recorded. Kangaroos were also observed on site.

No Weeds of National Significance (WoNS) or Declared Weed species were recorded at any of the BAM sites. However, Salvia verbanaca (Wild Sage), Medicago sp. (Medic) and Heliotropium europaeum (Common Heliotrope) were common across the Project Area and reflect the recent summer rainfall event. Site 2 was located in a shallow depression in the south-east corner of the Project Area. All depressions across the landscape were dominated by weeds. .

Plate 1: BAM site 1. Facing South. Maireana sedifolia (Pearl Bluebush) low open shrubland

4.1.2 Veg association 2 – Eucalyptus socialis +/- Myoporum platycarpum open woodland

This site comprises BAM sites 5 and 6 that were grouped together into one association due to the similarity in overstorey species. There was approximately 49.06 hectares of this association with the Project Area.

Final 24

Ecological Assessment

The overstorey was formed by Myoporum platycarpum (False Sandalwood) and old-growth Eucalyptus socialis (Red Mallee). The mallee contained small hollows which provide habitat for common bird and bat species. While the nearest significant population is in NSW, records do exist in South Australia, 26km from the Project Area in a nearby patch of mallee. It is unlikely that clearance of this area would impact the significant population in NSW but clearance of mallee trees present in the Project Area is recommended to be avoided where possible to minimise potential impacts on this species. Multiple active bird nests were observed with repeated calls heard, although the species were not identified. The soil at site 5 was slightly heavier, likely due to proximity to the ephemeral water course west of the site boundary. As a result, the understorey composition was dominated by Maireana pyramidata (Black Bluebush) and Nitraria billardierei (Nitre Bush), which are species more commonly found in loamy soil. However, site 6 had an understorey dominated by Maireana sedifolia (Pearl Bluebush), common across the rest of the Project Area.

There was a disused rabbit warren at BAM site 5 and kangaroos observed at BAM site 6. Grazing pressure was still evident although at a lower level to sites 1 and 2. Regeneration was observed of Nitre Bush, Pearl Bluebush and Sclerolaena brevifolia (Small-leaf Bindyi).

No Weeds of National Significance (WoNS) or Declared Weed species were recorded. However, Salvia verbanaca (Wild Sage), Medicago sp. (Medic) and Heliotropium europaeum (Common Heliotrope) were recorded and reflect the recent summer rainfall event. In addition, Wild Mustard (Sisymbrium sp.) was recorded at site 5, likely due to the loamy soil. Wild Mustard was observed to occur in localised patches across the Project Area, particularly in low lying depressions.

Plate 2: BAM site 6. Facing South. Eucalyptus socialis +/- Myoporum platycarpum open woodland

Final 25

Ecological Assessment

4.1.3 Vegetation association 3 – Maireana sedifolia low open shrubland with emergent Myoporum platycarpum and Acacia oswaldii

This vegetation association includes BAM site 3. There was approximately 48.04 hectares of this association within the Project Area.

The vegetation at site 3 can be characterised as a Maireana sedifolia (Pearl Bluebush) low open shrubland, over Nitraria billardierei (Nitre Bush) with emergent Myoporum platycarpum (False Sandalwood) and Acacia oswaldii (Umbrella Wattle).

In the north-eastern corner of Parcel 102, there is an area of emergent trees including Myoporum platycarpum (False Sandalwood) and Acacia oswaldii (Umbrella Wattle) (Figure 4-1). While these species are not threatened, they represent habitat that is not common across the rest of the site. Therefore, it would be advised to avoid or minimise disturbance to this area during construction if possible.

No Weeds of National Significance (WoNS) or Declared Weed species were recorded. However, Salvia verbanaca (Wild Sage), Medicago sp. (Medic) and Heliotropium europaeum (Common Heliotrope) were recorded in addition to Carthamus lanatus (Saffron Thistle), which was observed along the edges of tracks particularly in low lying areas throughout the Project Area.

Plate 3: BAM site 3. Facing West. Widely spaced Myoporum platycarpum +/- Acacia oswaldii

Final 26

Ecological Assessment

4.2 Vegetation Condition Summary

The BAM datasheet provides a single, numerical ‘Vegetation Condition Score’ for each site assessed. This score represents an amalgamation for all the vegetation condition attributes assessed, such as species diversity, structural diversity, weed threat rating, tree health and density. Vegetation Condition Scores were calculated for each of the survey sites assessed.

Each BAM Vegetation Condition Score (numerical) was then assigned to one of six qualitative condition categories (Very Low, Low, Low/Medium, Medium, Medium/High and High). Categories were validated by comparing the BAM condition graphs (within the BAM data sheet) with the numerical BAM score (Table 4-1).

Table 4-1: Vegetation Condition Scores and Corresponding Vegetation Condition Ratings

Vegetation Condition Rating BAM Vegetation Condition Score Very Low 0-20

Low 21-35

Low/ Medium 36-40

Medium 41-50

Medium/High 51-60

High 61+

A summary of the vegetation condition recorded at the seven BAM sites is provided in Table 4-2 below.

It is noted that the condition rating applied for SA utilises the BAM score and is therefore cross-checked and standardised against representative benchmark sites

Table 4-2: Summary of Unit Biodiversity Score, BAM Vegetation Condition Score and Vegetation Condition Category Site Relative Unit Biodiversity Score BAM Vegetation Condition Vegetation Condition Category Score (rounded to a whole number)

1 33.50 31.61 Low

2 46.12 43.51 Medium

3 49.35 46.56 Medium

4 38.48 36.31 Low/ Medium

5 46.57 43.93 Medium

6 43.27 40.83 Low/ Medium

7 51.92 48.98 Medium/ High

Final 27

Ecological Assessment

4.3 Threatened flora and fauna species

No threatened fauna or flora species were observed during the survey.

Of the eight national and four state threatened species identified in sections 3.3.2 and 3.3.4, none have been identified as likely occurring within the Project Area with an absence of suitable habitat and / or conditions occurring at the site.

4.4 Weeds

No Weeds of National Significance (WoNS) or Declared Weeds were observed during the survey. However, there were weeds observed growing in localised areas such as low-lying depressions, likely in response to the summer rain that fell preceding the survey. Saffron Thistle (Carthamus lanatus) was observed growing along the edges of tracks in low lying areas, particularly in Parcel 103 between the substation and site 2. Citrullus sp. (Wild Melon) was recorded along the edge of the driving track, again in a low-lying depression, just south of site 4.

Plate 4: Citrullus sp. (Wild Melon) recorded alongside the edge of a driving track in the centre of Parcel 102, at a junction south of site 4

Final 28

Ecological Assessment

Although none of the weed species observed are WoNS or Declared species, in order to avoid the introduction of invasive weed species and spread of existing weeds, implementation of standard weed management practices are recommended in addition to a weed control program for all vehicles accessing the site. It is acknowledged that traffic unrelated to this project will still have access to Woods and Forest Road to access the mining operation situated to the north-east of the Project Area, which is a potential source of new weed invasion.

In order to avoid the introduction and spread of invasive weed species, implementation of standard weed management practices are required such as: ensure environmental safeguards and management measures are incorporated into construction plans and contract specifications ensure that any machinery and vehicles arriving on construction site has been inspected for any foreign soil or plant matter/weed material and has been washed down before entering the work site weeds should be controlled within the work area according to the requirements of the Natural Resource Management Act (2004) / Landscape South Australia Act 2019 all noxious weeds which are cleared as part of the project must be disposed of appropriately conduct post construction weed survey and control program with particular focus on any weed infestations identified in pre-construction surveys minimise the extent of vegetation clearance wherever practicable, by clearly defining and marking clearance extents and avoiding disturbance beyond the work area limit vehicle and machinery access to existing tracks and cleared areas where possible implement a weed control program for vehicles accessing the site; and protect and maintain soil surface stability and take measures to minimise surface run-off when leaving sites

Final 29

Ecological Assessment

5. Native Vegetation Clearance and Offset

A Native Vegetation Clearance application is not included in the scope of the current report. However, information generated from the survey on 2 March 2020 will be used to advise Origin about what to expect from that process.

A Significant Environmental Benefit (SEB) is required for approval to clear under Division 5 of the Native Vegetation Regulations 2017. This can either be an on-ground SEB or Origin can pay into the Native Vegetation Fund (if it can be demonstrated that an on-ground approach is not a possibility).

The Bushland Assessment Method (BAM) considers the biodiversity value of each patch of vegetation assessed, through the calculation of ‘Unit Biodiversity Scores’ (UBS). The UBS builds on the vegetation conditions scores by considering the conservation significance of the patch as well as the context of the patch within the landscape. The USB scores, and proposed area of clearance provide a Total Biodiversity score which informs the vegetation clearance approval pathway and the required offset.

Preliminary information suggests that clearance of the 947-hectare Project Area would be assessed as Level 4 clearance under the Native Vegetation Act (1991) and Regulations because the Total Biodiversity Score (TBS) exceeds 250 points, however this would be confirmed once final clearance areas are known.

In order to obtain vegetation clearance approval a number of processes are required (including demonstration of mitigation hierarchy). Criteria for a level 4 assessment include:

A field assessment undertaken by accredited NVC consultant, e.g. Bushland Assessment for this region.

A documented fauna survey, where appropriate. For the current site targeted fauna trapping is unlikely to be required, based on the results of the desktop study and field survey, which highlighted the lack of available habitat for EPBC listed and State listed threatened species in the Project Area. However, this dispensation would need to be agreed upon with the Native Vegetation Management Unit (DEW) prior to lodgement of the Native Vegetation Clearance application.

Determination of how the Significant Environmental Offset (SEB) will be provided (i.e. payment into the Native Vegetation Offset Fund or use of SEB approved credit as per the SEB Policy and Guide (Natural Resources 2019,a).

Note, a level 4 assessment also requires a one-month online public consultation period, and approval by the Native Vegetation Council (NVC), which can include a presentation to the NVC if deemed necessary.

Final 30

Ecological Assessment

6. Conclusions and Recommendations

Native vegetation in the Project Area was surveyed to identify any ecological constraints that may affect the approvals process associated with development of a solar farm by Origin. The high-level ecological assessment presented within involved a review of the likelihood of occurrence of Protected Matters in the Study Area followed by an assessment of the potential for significant impacts upon those Protected Matters which were considered likely to be present or as possibly occurrences within the Project Area. The results of this report can be used to support native vegetation clearance applications lodged within two years of the date of assessment (2 March 2020).

No Threatened Ecological Communities (TECs) were identified as potentially occurring within the Study Area, and none were observed during survey of the Project Area.

Eleven EPBC threatened fauna, one EPBC threatened flora species and 12 EPBC listed migratory species were identified in the PMST report as potentially being present in the Study Area. Of these, two EPBC threatened species (Regent Parrot (eastern), Polytelis anthopeplus monarchoides and Corben’s Long-eared Bat, Nyctophilus corbeni), and one migratory EPBC listed species (Fork-tailed Swift, Apus pacificus) was identified as possibly occurring in the Project Area. The remaining species were considered unlikely. Whilst the Fork-tailed Swift is unlikely to be impacted by the proposed impacts at the site, due to the mobile and aerial nature of the species, further assessment is required for the other two species. A significant impact assessment should be undertaken for the Regent Parrot and the Corben’s Long-eared bat, addressing the EPBC Significant Impact Assessment Criteria (DotE 2013) against the proposed impacts / area of clearance.

Two state-listed flora were identified as potentially occurring within the Study Area, although none were observed during survey of the Project Area. Due to an absence of suitable habitat, they are unlikely to occur within the Project Area or be impacted by development of the site.

A total of approximately 947 hectares of vegetation would need to be cleared for the project, requiring an approval to clear native vegetation under the Native Vegetation Act (1991) and Regulations. Offsetting of this loss will be required as per the Significant Environmental Benefit Policy and Guide (Natural Resources 2019, a).

The vegetation in the Project Area largely consisted of chenopod shrubland with emergent tree species such as Myoporum platycarpum (False Sandalwood), Eucalyptus socialis (Red mallee), Acacia Oswaldii (Umbrella Wattle) and Eremophila longifolia (Weeping Emubush).

The old-growth mallee (Eucalyptus socialis, Red Mallee) recorded at BAM sites 5 and 6 (vegetation association 2) had small hollows that could provide habitat for various common bird species and bat species.

The emergent M. platycarpum and A. oswaldii trees recorded at BAM site 3 provides additional structural complexity and habitat to fauna, not present in other areas. As such, it is recommended that disturbance of vegetation associations 2 and 3 in the west and north-east of Parcel 102 is minimised and or avoided if possible.

Final 31

Ecological Assessment

7. References Baker-Gabb D and Hurley VG (2011) National Recovery Plan for the Regent Parrot (eastern subspecies) Polytelis anthopeplus monarchoides. Department of Sustainability and Environment, Melbourne. Beardsell C (1985) The Regent Parrot: A report on the nest-site survey in south-eastern Australia, September 1983 to January 1984. Australian National Parks & Wildlife Service, Canberra. Burbidge A (1985) The Regent Parrot: A report on the breeding distribution and habitat requirements along the Murray River in south-eastern Australia. Australian National Parks & Wildlife Service, Canberra. BDBSA (2020) Biological Database of South Australia. Output, flora and fauna records within 5km buffer of Morgan solar farm Project Area. Department of Environment and Water Resources (DEWNR). Provided on 10 March 2020 Campbell AJ (1900) Nests and Eggs of Australian Birds. Sheffield, Private.

DEWNR (2019) Native Vegetation Council (NVC) Bushland Assessment Method. Revised July 2019.

Department of the Environment (DotE) (2013). Matters of National Environmental Significance Significant impact guidelines 1.1 Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999. Available from: http://www.environment.gov.au/epbc/publications/significant-impact-guidelines-11-matters-national- environmental-significance. Duncan A, Baker GB, Montgomery N (1999) The action plan for Australian bats. Environment Australia. Canberra, Australia. Emison WB, Beardsell CM, Norman FI, Loyn RH & Bennett SC (1987) Atlas of Victorian Birds. Melbourne: Department of Conservation (Forest & Lands) & Royal Australian Ornithological Union. Forshaw JM and Cooper WT (1981) Australian Parrots second (revised) edition. Lansdowne Editions, Melbourne. Frith HJ (1962a) Conservation of the Mallee Fowl, Leipoa ocellata Gould (Megapodiidae). CSIRO Wildl. Res. 7:33- 49. Frith HJ (1962b) The Mallee Fowl. Angus and Robertson, Sydney. Garnett ST, Szabo JK and Dutson G (2011). The Action Plan for Australian Birds 2010. Birds Australia, CSIRO Publishing, Melbourne. Geering A, Agnew L and Harding S (2008) Shorebirds of Australia. Updated 2008. CSIRO Publishing.

Hamer A and Organ A (2008) Aspects of the ecology and conservation of the Growling Grass Frog Litoria raniformis in an urban-fringe environment, southern Victoria. Aust. Zool. 34, 393-407.

Heard GW, Scroggie MP and Clemann N (in prep.) Correlates and consequences of chytridiomycosis for the Growling Grass Frog Litoria raniformis in peri-urban Melbourne. Arthur Rylah Institute for Environmental Research, Department of Sustainability and Environment, Heidelberg.

Heard GW, Robertson P and Scroggie MP (2004) The ecology and conservation status of the Growling Grass Frog (Litoria raniformis) within the Merri Creek Corridor. Second report: additional field surveys and site monitoring. Wildlife Profiles Pty Ltd and the Arthur Rylah Institute for Environmental Research. Report to the Department of Sustainability and Environment, East Melbourne, Victoria.

Higgins PJ (ed.) (1999) Handbook of Australian, New Zealand and Antarctic Birds. Volume Four - Parrots to Dollarbird. Melbourne: Oxford University Press

Higgins PJ, Peter JM and Steele WK (Eds) (2001) Handbook of Australian, New Zealand and Antarctic Birds. Volume Five - Tyrant-flycatchers to Chats. Melbourne: Oxford University Press. Jacobs (2019a) Consolidated Vegetation Assessments. Report written for ElectraNet. Jacobs, Adelaide. Jacobs (2019b) Ecological Constraints assessment. Report written for ElectraNet. Jacobs, Adelaide.

Final 32

Ecological Assessment

Jusaitis M and Sorensen B (1994) Conservation Studies on Endangered Plant Species from South Australia’s Agricultural Regions. Black Hill Flora Centre McLaughlin, J (1990) Surveys and observations of the Black-eared Miner Manorina melanotis in Victoria, 1989- 1990. RAOU Report Series. 71. Menkhorst P, Rogers D, Clarke R, Davies J, Marsack P and Franklin K (2017) The Australian Bird Guide. CSIRO Publishing, Australia. Muir A, Quin D & Dominelli S (1999) Habitat Requirements of Black-eared Miners in South Australia. Unpubl. report to the Black-eared Miner Recovery Team. Natural Resources (2019) Policy for a Significant Environmental Benefit Under the Native Vegetation Act 1991 and Native Vegetation Regulations 2017. Department of Environment and Water, SA Government. July 2019).

Natural Resources (2019a) Guide for calculating a Significant Environmental Benefit Under the Native Vegetation Act 1991 and Native Vegetation Regulations 2017. Department of Environment and Water, SA Government. July 2019).

Pizzey G and Knight F (2012) The Field Guide to the Birds of Australia 9th Edition. Harper Collins.

Ross JA & Howe FE (1930) Parrots of the genus Polytelis. Emu. 29:161-162

Scroggie M and Clemann N (2003) Habitat assessment and ecological requirements of the Growling Grass Frog Litoria raniformis in the area of proposed drainage works, Benwell-Koondrook region. Unpublished report. Arthur Rylah Institute for Environmental Research, Department of Sustainability and Environment, Heidelberg, Victoria. Simpson K and Day N (2010) Field Guide to the Birds of Australia. 8th edition, revised and updated. Smith J (2000) A survey for nationally threatened plant species on Local Government reserves and roadsides in the Northern Mount Lofty Ranges. Unpublished Thesis for an Honours Degree in Natural Resource Management. University of Adelaide Starks J (1987) The status and distribution of the Black-eared Miner (Manorina melanotis) in Victoria. Arthur Rylah Institute of Environmental Research Technical Report. 49 Thackway R and Cresswell I (1995) An Interim Biogeographic Regionalisation for Australia: a framework for setting priorities in the National Reserves System Cooperative Program Version 4, Australian Nature Conservation Agency, Canberra. Webster R (1991) The Biology and Management of the Regent Parrot (Polytelis anthopeplus) in New South Wales. NSW National Parks & Wildlife Service, Sydney Woinarski JCZ (1989a) Broombush harvesting in southeastern Australia. Pages 362-378 in J. C. Noble, and R. A. Bradstock, editors. Mediterranean Landscapes in Australia: Mallee Ecosystems and Their Management. CSIRO, Melbourne. Woinarski JCZ (1989b) The vertebrate fauna of Broombush Melaleuca uncinata vegetation in north-western Victoria, with reference to effects of broombush harvesting. Aust. Wildl. Res. 16:217-238.

Final 33

Ecological Assessment

Appendix A. PMST Output

Final EPBC Act Protected Matters Report

This report provides general guidance on matters of national environmental significance and other matters protected by the EPBC Act in the area you have selected.

Information on the coverage of this report and qualifications on data supporting this report are contained in the caveat at the end of the report.

Information is available about Environment Assessments and the EPBC Act including significance guidelines, forms and application process details.

Report created: 23/01/20 10:07:36

Summary Details Matters of NES Other Matters Protected by the EPBC Act Extra Information Caveat Acknowledgements

This map may contain data which are ©Commonwealth of Australia (Geoscience Australia), ©PSMA 2010

Coordinates Buffer: 5.0Km Summary

Matters of National Environmental Significance

This part of the report summarises the matters of national environmental significance that may occur in, or may relate to, the area you nominated. Further information is available in the detail part of the report, which can be accessed by scrolling or following the links below. If you are proposing to undertake an activity that may have a significant impact on one or more matters of national environmental significance then you should consider the Administrative Guidelines on Significance.

World Heritage Properties: None National Heritage Places: None Wetlands of International Importance: 1 Great Barrier Reef Marine Park: None Commonwealth Marine Area: None Listed Threatened Ecological Communities: 2 Listed Threatened Species: 16 Listed Migratory Species: 12

Other Matters Protected by the EPBC Act

This part of the report summarises other matters protected under the Act that may relate to the area you nominated. Approval may be required for a proposed activity that significantly affects the environment on Commonwealth land, when the action is outside the Commonwealth land, or the environment anywhere when the action is taken on Commonwealth land. Approval may also be required for the Commonwealth or Commonwealth agencies proposing to take an action that is likely to have a significant impact on the environment anywhere.

The EPBC Act protects the environment on Commonwealth land, the environment from the actions taken on Commonwealth land, and the environment from actions taken by Commonwealth agencies. As heritage values of a place are part of the 'environment', these aspects of the EPBC Act protect the Commonwealth Heritage values of a Commonwealth Heritage place. Information on the new heritage laws can be found at http://www.environment.gov.au/heritage

A permit may be required for activities in or on a Commonwealth area that may affect a member of a listed threatened species or ecological community, a member of a listed migratory species, whales and other cetaceans, or a member of a listed marine species.

Commonwealth Land: None Commonwealth Heritage Places: None Listed Marine Species: 18 Whales and Other Cetaceans: None Critical Habitats: None Commonwealth Reserves Terrestrial: None Australian Marine Parks: None

Extra Information

This part of the report provides information that may also be relevant to the area you have nominated.

State and Territory Reserves: None Regional Forest Agreements: None Invasive Species: 26 Nationally Important Wetlands: None Key Ecological Features (Marine) None Details

Matters of National Environmental Significance Wetlands of International Importance (Ramsar) [ Resource Information ] Name Proximity The coorong, and lakes alexandrina and albert wetland 100 - 150km upstream

Listed Threatened Ecological Communities [ Resource Information ] For threatened ecological communities where the distribution is well known, maps are derived from recovery plans, State vegetation maps, remote sensing imagery and other sources. Where threatened ecological community distributions are less well known, existing vegetation maps and point location data are used to produce indicative distribution maps. Name Status Type of Presence Buloke Woodlands of the Riverina and Murray-Darling Endangered Community may occur Depression Bioregions within area River Murray and associated wetlands, floodplains and Approval Disallowed Community likely to occur groundwater systems, from the junction with the within area Darling River to the sea Listed Threatened Species [ Resource Information ] Name Status Type of Presence Birds Botaurus poiciloptilus Australasian Bittern [1001] Endangered Species or species habitat known to occur within area

Calidris ferruginea Curlew Sandpiper [856] Critically Endangered Species or species habitat may occur within area

Grantiella picta Painted Honeyeater [470] Vulnerable Species or species habitat may occur within area

Leipoa ocellata Malleefowl [934] Vulnerable Species or species habitat likely to occur within area

Manorina melanotis Black-eared Miner [449] Endangered Species or species habitat may occur within area

Numenius madagascariensis Eastern Curlew, Far Eastern Curlew [847] Critically Endangered Species or species habitat may occur within area

Pedionomus torquatus Plains-wanderer [906] Critically Endangered Species or species habitat likely to occur within area

Pezoporus occidentalis Night Parrot [59350] Endangered Extinct within area Polytelis anthopeplus monarchoides Regent Parrot (eastern) [59612] Vulnerable Breeding likely to occur within area Rostratula australis Australian Painted Snipe [77037] Endangered Species or species habitat likely to occur within area Name Status Type of Presence Fish Craterocephalus fluviatilis Murray Hardyhead [56791] Endangered Species or species habitat likely to occur within area

Galaxias rostratus Flathead Galaxias, Beaked Minnow, Flat-headed Critically Endangered Species or species habitat Galaxias, Flat-headed Jollytail, Flat-headed Minnow may occur within area [84745] Maccullochella peelii Murray Cod [66633] Vulnerable Species or species habitat known to occur within area

Frogs Litoria raniformis Growling Grass Frog, Southern Bell Frog, Green and Vulnerable Species or species habitat Golden Frog, Warty Swamp Frog [1828] known to occur within area

Mammals Nyctophilus corbeni Corben's Long-eared Bat, South-eastern Long-eared Vulnerable Species or species habitat Bat [83395] may occur within area

Plants Dodonaea subglandulifera Peep Hill Hop-bush [11956] Endangered Species or species habitat may occur within area

Listed Migratory Species [ Resource Information ] * Species is listed under a different scientific name on the EPBC Act - Threatened Species list. Name Threatened Type of Presence Migratory Marine Birds Apus pacificus Fork-tailed Swift [678] Species or species habitat likely to occur within area

Migratory Terrestrial Species Motacilla cinerea Grey Wagtail [642] Species or species habitat may occur within area

Motacilla flava Yellow Wagtail [644] Species or species habitat may occur within area

Myiagra cyanoleuca Satin Flycatcher [612] Species or species habitat known to occur within area

Migratory Wetlands Species Actitis hypoleucos Common Sandpiper [59309] Species or species habitat may occur within area

Calidris acuminata Sharp-tailed Sandpiper [874] Species or species habitat known to occur within area

Calidris ferruginea Curlew Sandpiper [856] Critically Endangered Species or species habitat may occur within area

Calidris melanotos Pectoral Sandpiper [858] Species or species habitat likely to occur within area

Gallinago hardwickii Latham's Snipe, Japanese Snipe [863] Species or species habitat may occur within area Name Threatened Type of Presence Numenius madagascariensis Eastern Curlew, Far Eastern Curlew [847] Critically Endangered Species or species habitat may occur within area

Pandion haliaetus Osprey [952] Species or species habitat likely to occur within area

Tringa nebularia Common Greenshank, Greenshank [832] Species or species habitat likely to occur within area

Other Matters Protected by the EPBC Act Listed Marine Species [ Resource Information ] * Species is listed under a different scientific name on the EPBC Act - Threatened Species list. Name Threatened Type of Presence Birds Actitis hypoleucos Common Sandpiper [59309] Species or species habitat may occur within area

Apus pacificus Fork-tailed Swift [678] Species or species habitat likely to occur within area

Ardea alba Great Egret, White Egret [59541] Species or species habitat known to occur within area

Ardea ibis Cattle Egret [59542] Species or species habitat may occur within area

Calidris acuminata Sharp-tailed Sandpiper [874] Species or species habitat known to occur within area

Calidris ferruginea Curlew Sandpiper [856] Critically Endangered Species or species habitat may occur within area

Calidris melanotos Pectoral Sandpiper [858] Species or species habitat likely to occur within area

Chrysococcyx osculans Black-eared Cuckoo [705] Species or species habitat likely to occur within area

Gallinago hardwickii Latham's Snipe, Japanese Snipe [863] Species or species habitat may occur within area

Haliaeetus leucogaster White-bellied Sea-Eagle [943] Species or species habitat likely to occur within area Name Threatened Type of Presence Merops ornatus Rainbow Bee-eater [670] Species or species habitat may occur within area

Motacilla cinerea Grey Wagtail [642] Species or species habitat may occur within area

Motacilla flava Yellow Wagtail [644] Species or species habitat may occur within area

Myiagra cyanoleuca Satin Flycatcher [612] Species or species habitat known to occur within area

Numenius madagascariensis Eastern Curlew, Far Eastern Curlew [847] Critically Endangered Species or species habitat may occur within area

Pandion haliaetus Osprey [952] Species or species habitat likely to occur within area

Rostratula benghalensis (sensu lato) Painted Snipe [889] Endangered* Species or species habitat likely to occur within area

Tringa nebularia Common Greenshank, Greenshank [832] Species or species habitat likely to occur within area

Extra Information Invasive Species [ Resource Information ] Weeds reported here are the 20 species of national significance (WoNS), along with other introduced plants that are considered by the States and Territories to pose a particularly significant threat to biodiversity. The following feral animals are reported: Goat, Red Fox, Cat, Rabbit, Pig, Water Buffalo and Cane Toad. Maps from Landscape Health Project, National Land and Water Resouces Audit, 2001.

Name Status Type of Presence Birds Alauda arvensis Skylark [656] Species or species habitat likely to occur within area

Anas platyrhynchos Mallard [974] Species or species habitat likely to occur within area

Carduelis carduelis European Goldfinch [403] Species or species habitat likely to occur within area

Columba livia Rock Pigeon, Rock Dove, Domestic Pigeon [803] Species or species habitat likely to occur within area

Passer domesticus House Sparrow [405] Species or species habitat likely to occur within area

Streptopelia chinensis Spotted Turtle-Dove [780] Species or species habitat likely to occur within area Name Status Type of Presence Sturnus vulgaris Common Starling [389] Species or species habitat likely to occur within area

Turdus merula Common Blackbird, Eurasian Blackbird [596] Species or species habitat likely to occur within area

Mammals Bos taurus Domestic Cattle [16] Species or species habitat likely to occur within area

Canis lupus familiaris Domestic Dog [82654] Species or species habitat likely to occur within area

Capra hircus Goat [2] Species or species habitat likely to occur within area

Felis catus Cat, House Cat, Domestic Cat [19] Species or species habitat likely to occur within area

Lepus capensis Brown Hare [127] Species or species habitat likely to occur within area

Mus musculus House Mouse [120] Species or species habitat likely to occur within area

Oryctolagus cuniculus Rabbit, European Rabbit [128] Species or species habitat likely to occur within area

Rattus rattus Black Rat, Ship Rat [84] Species or species habitat likely to occur within area

Vulpes vulpes Red Fox, Fox [18] Species or species habitat likely to occur within area

Plants Asparagus asparagoides Bridal Creeper, Bridal Veil Creeper, Smilax, Florist's Species or species habitat Smilax, Smilax Asparagus [22473] likely to occur within area

Carrichtera annua Ward's Weed [9511] Species or species habitat may occur within area

Chrysanthemoides monilifera Bitou Bush, Boneseed [18983] Species or species habitat may occur within area

Chrysanthemoides monilifera subsp. monilifera Boneseed [16905] Species or species habitat likely to occur within area

Cylindropuntia spp. Prickly Pears [85131] Species or species habitat likely to occur within area

Lycium ferocissimum African Boxthorn, Boxthorn [19235] Species or species habitat likely to occur within area

Olea europaea Olive, Common Olive [9160] Species or species habitat may occur within Name Status Type of Presence area Rubus fruticosus aggregate Blackberry, European Blackberry [68406] Species or species habitat likely to occur within area

Salix spp. except S.babylonica, S.x calodendron & S.x reichardtii Willows except Weeping Willow, Pussy Willow and Species or species habitat Sterile Pussy Willow [68497] likely to occur within area Caveat The information presented in this report has been provided by a range of data sources as acknowledged at the end of the report.

This report is designed to assist in identifying the locations of places which may be relevant in determining obligations under the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999. It holds mapped locations of World and National Heritage properties, Wetlands of International and National Importance, Commonwealth and State/Territory reserves, listed threatened, migratory and marine species and listed threatened ecological communities. Mapping of Commonwealth land is not complete at this stage. Maps have been collated from a range of sources at various resolutions.

Not all species listed under the EPBC Act have been mapped (see below) and therefore a report is a general guide only. Where available data supports mapping, the type of presence that can be determined from the data is indicated in general terms. People using this information in making a referral may need to consider the qualifications below and may need to seek and consider other information sources.

For threatened ecological communities where the distribution is well known, maps are derived from recovery plans, State vegetation maps, remote sensing imagery and other sources. Where threatened ecological community distributions are less well known, existing vegetation maps and point location data are used to produce indicative distribution maps.

Threatened, migratory and marine species distributions have been derived through a variety of methods. Where distributions are well known and if time permits, maps are derived using either thematic spatial data (i.e. vegetation, soils, geology, elevation, aspect, terrain, etc) together with point locations and described habitat; or environmental modelling (MAXENT or BIOCLIM habitat modelling) using point locations and environmental data layers.

Where very little information is available for species or large number of maps are required in a short time-frame, maps are derived either from 0.04 or 0.02 decimal degree cells; by an automated process using polygon capture techniques (static two kilometre grid cells, alpha-hull and convex hull); or captured manually or by using topographic features (national park boundaries, islands, etc). In the early stages of the distribution mapping process (1999-early 2000s) distributions were defined by degree blocks, 100K or 250K map sheets to rapidly create distribution maps. More reliable distribution mapping methods are used to update these distributions as time permits.

Only selected species covered by the following provisions of the EPBC Act have been mapped: - migratory and - marine The following species and ecological communities have not been mapped and do not appear in reports produced from this database:

- threatened species listed as extinct or considered as vagrants - some species and ecological communities that have only recently been listed - some terrestrial species that overfly the Commonwealth marine area - migratory species that are very widespread, vagrant, or only occur in small numbers The following groups have been mapped, but may not cover the complete distribution of the species: - non-threatened seabirds which have only been mapped for recorded breeding sites - seals which have only been mapped for breeding sites near the Australian continent Such breeding sites may be important for the protection of the Commonwealth Marine environment.

Coordinates

-33.99315 139.73105 Acknowledgements This database has been compiled from a range of data sources. The department acknowledges the following custodians who have contributed valuable data and advice: -Office of Environment and Heritage, New South Wales -Department of Environment and Primary Industries, Victoria -Department of Primary Industries, Parks, Water and Environment, Tasmania -Department of Environment, Water and Natural Resources, South Australia -Department of Land and Resource Management, Northern Territory -Department of Environmental and Heritage Protection, Queensland -Department of Parks and Wildlife, Western Australia -Environment and Planning Directorate, ACT -Birdlife Australia -Australian Bird and Bat Banding Scheme -Australian National Wildlife Collection -Natural history museums of Australia -Museum Victoria -Australian Museum -South Australian Museum -Queensland Museum -Online Zoological Collections of Australian Museums -Queensland Herbarium -National Herbarium of NSW -Royal Botanic Gardens and National Herbarium of Victoria -Tasmanian Herbarium -State Herbarium of South Australia -Northern Territory Herbarium -Western Australian Herbarium -Australian National Herbarium, Canberra -University of New England -Ocean Biogeographic Information System -Australian Government, Department of Defence Forestry Corporation, NSW -Geoscience Australia -CSIRO -Australian Tropical Herbarium, Cairns -eBird Australia -Australian Government – Australian Antarctic Data Centre -Museum and Art Gallery of the Northern Territory -Australian Government National Environmental Science Program -Australian Institute of Marine Science -Reef Life Survey Australia -American Museum of Natural History -Queen Victoria Museum and Art Gallery, Inveresk, Tasmania -Tasmanian Museum and Art Gallery, Hobart, Tasmania -Other groups and individuals

The Department is extremely grateful to the many organisations and individuals who provided expert advice and information on numerous draft distributions.

Please feel free to provide feedback via the Contact Us page.

Ecological Assessment

Appendix B. Bushland Assessment sheets

Final Bushland Assessment Scoresheets (Version - 1 July 2019)

Block Morgan Solar Farm ASSESSOR(S) Katie Fels, Lucy Clive Size of Block (Ha) 947.000 NRM RegionSA Murray Darling Basin DATE OF ASSESSMENT 02.03.2020 BCM Region Murray Darling Basin IBRA Association Florieton

Map of the Block (Including the Sites)

Landscape Context Scores % native veg. remaining in IBRA Assoc. 99 0-5% = 0.1 pts; >5-10% = 0.08 pts; >10-20% = 0.06 pts; >20-40%= 0.04 pts; >40-80%= 0.02 pt; >80% = 0 pts Score 0 Percent Vegetation Cover (5km radius) (%) 81 0-5% = 0 pts; >5-10% = 0.01 pts; >10-25% = 0.02 pts; % native veg. protected IBRA Assoc. 0 >25-50% = 0.03 pts; >50-75% = 0.01 pt; >75-100% = 0 pts 0-5% = 0.03 pts; >5-10% = 0.02 pts; >10-25% = 0.01 pt; Score 0 >25% = 0 Score 0.03

Block Shape Cleared perimeter:Area (km/km2) Wetland or Riparian Habitat present Cleared Perimeter (m) = 0 Riparian zone present (Yes/No) = 0.02 pt No Cleared Perimeter to area ratio 0.00 Swamp/wetland present (Yes/No) = 0.03 pts No <6 = 0.03 pts; 6 to <12 = 0.02 pts; 12 to <18 = 0.01 pt (Swamp/wetland may be +/- riparian zone) Score 0.03 Score 0

VEGETATION ASSOCIATION DESCRIPTION Maireana sedifolia low open shrubland SIZE OF SITE (Ha) 842.22

Benchmarked attributes Native Plant Cover (Scores determined by comparing to a Benchmark community) Life Forms rating Trees > 15m Number of Native Species (Minus herbaceous annuals for spring Surveys) 5Trees 5 - 15 m Native Plant Species Diversity Score (max 30) from benchmark score Trees < 5m weighted by a factor of 2 8.0 Mallee > 5m Mallee < 5m Number of regenerating native species 1Shrubs > 2m Regeneration Score (max 12) from benchmark community weighted by a factor of 1.5 Shrubs 0.5 - 2m 3 4.5 Shrubs < 0.5 4 Forbs Weed species Cover Weed Threat C x I Mat Plants (Top 5 Cover x Invasiveness) (max 6) Rating (max 5) Grasses > 0.2m Medicago spp. 1 2 2Grasses < 0.2m 1 0Sedges > 1m 0Sedges < 1m 0Hummock grasses 0Vines, scramblers Cover x Threat 2Mistletoe Weed Score (max 15) from benchmark community 15 Ferns Grass-tree Total 8 Native Plant Life Forms (max 20) from benchmark score weighted by a factor of 2 12.0

Non-Benchmarked Attributes Is the community naturally treeless? TRUE (Scores determined from direct field observations) Tree attributes not scored for treeless Native:exotic Understorey biomass Score (max 5) 5 communities or communities with only emergent trees

Vegetation Condition Score calculation Positive Vegetation Attributes Score = Native species diversity + Regeneration + Native Plant Life Forms Fallen timber/debris + Hollow-bearing trees - If the community Score is Not Benchmarked (SNB) for regeneration this score is multiplied 1.24 - If the community is naturally treeless this score is multiplied by 1.29 31.61 Negative Vegetation Attributes Score = (15 - Weeds) + ((10 - (Biomass score x 2))exp2/2) 0.00 VEGETATION CONDITION SCORE (Positive veg attributes x ((80 - Negative vegetation attributes) / 80)) 31.61

LowMaximumMedium s 10 High NativePlantSpeciesDiversity Vegetation Co 0.3950625 1 WeedScore # NativePlantLifeForms # # Regeneration # Native:exoticUnderstoreyBiomass Native:exotic U 1 0 Regeneration 0.375 1 Native Plant L 0.6 0

Weed Score 1 0 Native Plant S 0.2666667 1

VegetationConditionScore Conservation Significance Score Is the vegetation association considered a Threatened Ecological community or Ecosystem? Yes/No State (Provisional List of Threatened Ecosystems of SA) Rare community (0.1 pt) FALSE State (Provisional List of Threatened Ecosystems of SA) Vulnerable community (0.2 pts) FALSE State (Provisional List of Threatened Ecosystems of SA) Endangered community (0.3 pts) FALSE Nationally (EPBC Act) Vulnerable community (0.35 pts) FALSE Nationally (EPBC Act) Endangered or Critically Endangered community (0.4 pts) FALSE Note; all sites will score a minimum Conservation Significance Score of 1 Score 1

Number of Threatened Plant Species recorded for the site (within the site) Number *If a species has both a State (NP&W Act) and National (EPBC Act) rating, it's only recorded for its National rating. State Rare species recorded (1 pt each) 0 State Vulnerable species recorded (2.5 pt each) 0 State Endangered recorded (5 pts each) 0 Nationally Vulnerable species recorded (10 pts each) 0 Nationally Endangered or Critically endangered species recorded (20 pts each) 0 0 = 0 pts; <2 = 0.04 pts; 2 - <5 = 0.08 pts; 5 - <10 = 0.12 pts; 10 - <20 = 0.16 pts; 20 or > = 0.2 pts 0 Score 0

Potential habitat for Threatened Animal Species (number observed or previously recorded) Number *If a species has both a State (NP&W Act) and National (EPBC Act) rating, it's only recorded for its National rating. State Rare species observed or locally recorded (1 pt each) 0 State Vulnerable species observed or locally recorded (2.5 pt each) 0 State Endangered species observed or locally recorded (5 pt each) 0 Nationally Vulnerable species observed or locally recorded (10 pts each) 0 Nationally Endangered or Critically endangered species observed or locally recorded (20 pts each) 0 0 = 0 pts; <2 = 0.02 pts; 2 - <5 = 0.04 pts; 5 - <10 = 0.06 pts; 10 - <20 = 0.08pts; 20 or > = 0.1 pts 0 Score 0

CONSERVATION SIGNIFICANCE SCORE 1

Total Scores for the Site Vegetation Condition x Landscape Context x Score Conservation Significance = LANDSCAPE CONTEXT SCORE 1.06 UNIT BIODIVERSITY SCORE 33.50 VEGETATION CONDITION SCORE 31.61 Total Biodiversity Score CONSERVATION SIGNIFICANCE SCORE 1.00 (Biodiversity Score x hectares) 28215.46

Photo Point and Vegetation Survey Location Direction of the Photo North GPS Reference Datum GDA94 Zone (52, 53 or 54) 54 Easting (6 digits) 382915 Northing (7 digits) 6237418 Description

Whatisthepurpose ofAssessment? Clearance SEBArea Other

Assessment for Clearance Approximate hectares required 3703.28 Loss Factor 1.0 Economies of Scale Factor 0.23 Loadings for clearance of protected areas Mean Annual rainfall for the site (mm) 254 Reductions for rehabilitation of impact site Payment into the fund (GST Exclusive) $ SEB Points required 29626.24 Administration fee (GST Inclusive) $ Bushland Assessment Scoresheets (Version - 1 July 2019)

Map of the Block (Including the Sites)

Note; Blocks will score a minimum Landscape Context Score of 1 LANDSCAPE CONTEXT SCORE (max 1.25) 1.06 Plant Species Recorded (Native and Introduced) Listed Species Natives only Not in Annual Herbs Introduced Species Common Name EPBC SA quadrat Regen Spring survey Species MaireanaMaireana sedifolia sedifolia Bluebush Yes SclerolaenaSclerolaena patenticuspis patenticuspis Spear-fruit Bindyi AustrostipaAustrostipa sp. sp. Spear-grass EuphorbiaEuphorbia drummondii drummondii group group MaireanaMaireana enchylaenoides enchylaenoides Wingless Fissure-plant EriochitonEriochiton sclerolaenoides sclerolaenoides Woolly-fruit Bluebush NitrariaNitraria billardierei billardierei Nitre-bush Yes EnchylaenaEnchylaena tomentosa tomentosa var. var. tomentosa tomentosa Ruby Saltbush DysphaniaDysphania cristata cristata Crested Crumbweed PtilotusPtilotus seminudus seminudus Rabbit-tails Threatened or Introduced Animal Species Recorded or Observed Threatened (Native and Introduced) Species Introduced Species Common Name EPBC SA Past Record Observed Species CalamanthusCalamanthus (Calamanthus) (Calamanthus) campestris campestris Rufous Fieldwren y MacropusMacropus sp. sp. y FalcoFalco cenchroides cenchroides Nankeen Kestrel y Vegetation Condition Scores SITE: BAM 2 BCM COMMUNITY MDBSA 2.2 Chenopod Open Shrublands

VEGETATION ASSOCIATION DESCRIPTION Maireana sedifolia low open shrubland in low lying depression SIZE OF SITE (Ha) 842.22

Benchmarked attributes Native Plant Cover (Scores determined by comparing to a Benchmark community) Life Forms rating Trees > 15m Number of Native Species (Minus herbaceous annuals for spring Surveys) 10 Trees 5 - 15 m Native Plant Species Diversity Score (max 30) from benchmark score Trees < 5m weighted by a factor of 2 18.0 Mallee > 5m Mallee < 5m Number of regenerating native species 2Shrubs > 2m Regeneration Score (max 12) from benchmark community weighted by a factor of 1.5 Shrubs 0.5 - 2m 3 6 Shrubs < 0.5 3 Forbs 2 Weed species Cover Weed Threat C x I Mat Plants (Top 5 Cover x Invasiveness) (max 6) Rating (max 5) Grasses > 0.2m Salvia verbenaca var. 2 2 4Grasses < 0.2m 1 Heliotropium europaeum 2 1 2Sedges > 1m Medicago spp. 1 2 2Sedges < 1m Nicotiana glauca 1 2 2Hummock grasses Romulea rosea var. australis 1 2 2Vines, scramblers Cover x Threat 12 Mistletoe Weed Score (max 15) from benchmark community 8 Ferns Grass-tree Total 9 Native Plant Life Forms (max 20) from benchmark score weighted by a factor of 2 14.0

Non-Benchmarked Attributes Is the community naturally treeless? TRUE (Scores determined from direct field observations) Tree attributes not scored for treeless Native:exotic Understorey biomass Score (max 5) 4 communities or communities with only emergent trees

Vegetation Condition Score calculation Positive Vegetation Attributes Score = Native species diversity + Regeneration + Native Plant Life Forms Fallen timber/debris + Hollow-bearing trees -If the community Score is Not Benchmarked (SNB) for regeneration this score is multiplied 1.24 - If the community is naturally treeless this score is multiplied by 1.29 49.02 Negative Vegetation Attributes Score = (15 - Weeds) + ((10 - (Biomass score x 2))exp2/2) 9.00 VEGETATION CONDITION SCORE (Positive veg attributes x ((80 - Negative vegetation attributes) / 80)) 43.51

LowMaximumMedium s 10 High NativePlantSpeciesDiversity Vegetation Co 0.5438156 0 WeedScore # # NativePlantLifeForms # Regeneration # Native:exoticUnderstoreyBiomass Native:exotic U 0.8 0 Regeneration 0.5 1 Native Plant L 0.7 0

Weed Score 0.5333333 0 Native Plant S 0.6 0

CONSERVATION SIGNIFICANCE SCORE 1

Total Scores for the Site Vegetation Condition x Landscape Context x Score Conservation Significance = LANDSCAPE CONTEXT SCORE 1.06 UNIT BIODIVERSITY SCORE 46.12 VEGETATION CONDITION SCORE 43.51 Total Biodiversity Score CONSERVATION SIGNIFICANCE SCORE 1.00 (Biodiversity Score x hectares) 38839.45

Photo Point and Vegetation Survey Location Direction of the Photo East GPS Reference Datum GDA94 Zone (52, 53 or 54) 54 Easting (6 digits) 383153 Northing (7 digits) 6236086 Description

Whatisthepurpose ofAssessment? Clearance SEBArea Other

Assessment for Clearance Approximate hectares required 5097.68 Loss Factor 1.0 Economies of Scale Factor 0.23 Loadings for clearance of protected areas Mean Annual rainfall for the site (mm) 254 Reductions for rehabilitation of impact site Payment into the fund (GST Exclusive) $ SEB Points required 40781.42 Administration fee (GST Inclusive) $ Bushland Assessment Scoresheets (Version - 1 July 2019)

Map of the Block (Including the Sites)

Note; Blocks will score a minimum Landscape Context Score of 1 LANDSCAPE CONTEXT SCORE (max 1.25) 1.06 Plant Species Recorded (Native and Introduced) Listed Species Natives only Not in Annual Herbs Introduced Species Common Name EPBC SA quadrat Regen Spring survey Species MaireanaMaireana sedifolia sedifolia Bluebush Yes NitrariaNitraria billardierei billardierei Nitre-bush MyoporumMyoporum platycarpum platycarpum ssp. ssp. False Sandalwood EuphorbiaEuphorbia drummondii drummondii group group AustrostipaAustrostipa elegantissima elegantissima Feather Spear-grass ConvolvulusConvolvulus remotus remotus Grassy Bindweed EnchylaenaEnchylaena tomentosa tomentosa var. var. Ruby Saltbush AcaciaAcacia oswaldii oswaldii Umbrella Wattle RhagodiaRhagodia spinescens spinescens Spiny Saltbush MaireanaMaireana brevifolia brevifolia Short-leaf Bluebush Threatened or Introduced Animal Species Recorded or Observed Threatened (Native and Introduced) Species Introduced Species Common Name EPBC SA Past Record Observed Species Vegetation Condition Scores SITE: BAM 3 BCM COMMUNITY MDBSA 2.2 Chenopod Open Shrublands

VEGETATION ASSOCIATION DESCRIPTION Maireana sedifolia low open shrubland with emergent Myoporum platyca SIZE OF SITE (Ha) 48.04

Benchmarked attributes Native Plant Cover (Scores determined by comparing to a Benchmark community) Life Forms rating Trees > 15m Number of Native Species (Minus herbaceous annuals for spring Surveys) 10 Trees 5 - 15 m Native Plant Species Diversity Score (max 30) from benchmark score Trees < 5m 2 weighted by a factor of 2 18.0 Mallee > 5m Mallee < 5m Number of regenerating native species 1Shrubs > 2m 1 Regeneration Score (max 12) from benchmark community weighted by a factor of 1.5 Shrubs 0.5 - 2m 3 4.5 Shrubs < 0.5 3 Forbs 2 Weed species Cover Weed Threat C x I Mat Plants (Top 5 Cover x Invasiveness) (max 6) Rating (max 5) Grasses > 0.2m Heliotropium europaeum 2 1 2Grasses < 0.2m 1 Salvia verbenaca var. 1 2 2Sedges > 1m Medicago spp. 1 2 2Sedges < 1m Carthamus lanatus 1 2 2Hummock grasses Sonchus oleraceus 1 1 1Vines, scramblers Cover x Threat 9Mistletoe Weed Score (max 15) from benchmark community 10 Ferns Grass-tree Total 12 Native Plant Life Forms (max 20) from benchmark score weighted by a factor of 2 16.0

Non-Benchmarked Attributes Is the community naturally treeless? FALSE (Scores determined from direct field observations) Tree attributes not scored for treeless Native:exotic Understorey biomass Score (max 5) 5 communities or communities with only emergent trees

Vegetation Condition Score calculation Positive Vegetation Attributes Score = Native species diversity + Regeneration + Native Plant Life Forms Fallen timber/debris + Hollow-bearing trees -If the community Score is Not Benchmarked (SNB) for regeneration this score is multiplied 1.24 - If the community is naturally treeless this score is multiplied by 1.29 49.67 Negative Vegetation Attributes Score = (15 - Weeds) + ((10 - (Biomass score x 2))exp2/2) 5.00 VEGETATION CONDITION SCORE (Positive veg attributes x ((80 - Negative vegetation attributes) / 80)) 46.56

LowMaximumMedium s 10 High NativePlantSpeciesDiversity Vegetation Co 0.5820117 0 WeedScore Fallen timber # Tree Hollows # NativePlantLifeForms Tree Canopy C # Regeneration Mature Trees # Native:exoticUnderstoreyBiomass Native:exotic U 1 0 Regeneration 0.375 1 MatureTrees Native Plant L 0.8 0 TreeCanopyCover Weed Score 0.6666667 0 TreeHollows Native Plant S 0.6 0 Fallentimber VegetationConditionScore Conservation Significance Score Is the vegetation association considered a Threatened Ecological community or Ecosystem? Yes/No State (Provisional List of Threatened Ecosystems of SA) Rare community (0.1 pt) FALSE State (Provisional List of Threatened Ecosystems of SA) Vulnerable community (0.2 pts) FALSE State (Provisional List of Threatened Ecosystems of SA) Endangered community (0.3 pts) FALSE Nationally (EPBC Act) Vulnerable community (0.35 pts) FALSE Nationally (EPBC Act) Endangered or Critically Endangered community (0.4 pts) FALSE Note; all sites will score a minimum Conservation Significance Score of 1 Score 1

CONSERVATION SIGNIFICANCE SCORE 1

Total Scores for the Site Vegetation Condition x Landscape Context x Score Conservation Significance = LANDSCAPE CONTEXT SCORE 1.06 UNIT BIODIVERSITY SCORE 49.35 VEGETATION CONDITION SCORE 46.56 Total Biodiversity Score CONSERVATION SIGNIFICANCE SCORE 1.00 (Biodiversity Score x hectares) 2370.99

Photo Point and Vegetation Survey Location Direction of the Photo North GPS Reference Datum GDA94 Zone (52, 53 or 54) 54 Easting (6 digits) 384588 Northing (7 digits) 6239115 Description

Whatisthepurpose ofAssessment? Clearance SEBArea Other

Assessment for Clearance Approximate hectares required 311.19 Loss Factor 1.0 Economies of Scale Factor 0.23 Loadings for clearance of protected areas Mean Annual rainfall for the site (mm) 254 Reductions for rehabilitation of impact site Payment into the fund (GST Exclusive) $ SEB Points required 2489.54 Administration fee (GST Inclusive) $ Bushland Assessment Scoresheets (Version - 1 July 2019)

Map of the Block (Including the Sites)

Note; Blocks will score a minimum Landscape Context Score of 1 LANDSCAPE CONTEXT SCORE (max 1.25) 1.06 Plant Species Recorded (Native and Introduced) Listed Species Natives only Not in Annual Herbs Introduced Species Common Name EPBC SA quadrat Regen Spring survey Species MaireanaMaireana sedifolia sedifolia Bluebush Yes MaireanaMaireana brevifolia brevifolia Short-leaf Bluebush AustrostipaAustrostipa sp. sp. Spear-grass EuphorbiaEuphorbia drummondii drummondii group group EnchylaenaEnchylaena tomentosa tomentosa var. var. Ruby Saltbush SclerolaenaSclerolaena patenticuspis patenticuspis Spear-fruit Bindyi MaireanaMaireana pyramidata pyramidata Black Bluebush Threatened or Introduced Animal Species Recorded or Observed Threatened (Native and Introduced) Species Introduced Species Common Name EPBC SA Past Record Observed Species TiliquaTiliqua rugosa rugosa Sleepy Lizard Y Vegetation Condition Scores SITE: BAM 4 BCM COMMUNITY MDBSA 2.2 Chenopod Open Shrublands

VEGETATION ASSOCIATION DESCRIPTION Maireana sedifolia low open shrubland over Schlerolaena patenticuspis o SIZE OF SITE (Ha) 842.22

Benchmarked attributes Native Plant Cover (Scores determined by comparing to a Benchmark community) Life Forms rating Trees > 15m Number of Native Species (Minus herbaceous annuals for spring Surveys) 7Trees 5 - 15 m Native Plant Species Diversity Score (max 30) from benchmark score Trees < 5m 1 weighted by a factor of 2 12.0 Mallee > 5m Mallee < 5m Number of regenerating native species 1Shrubs > 2m Regeneration Score (max 12) from benchmark community weighted by a factor of 1.5 Shrubs 0.5 - 2m 2 4.5 Shrubs < 0.5 3 Forbs 2 Weed species Cover Weed Threat C x I Mat Plants (Top 5 Cover x Invasiveness) (max 6) Rating (max 5) Grasses > 0.2m Medicago spp. 1 2 2Grasses < 0.2m 1 Heliotropium europaeum 2 1 2Sedges > 1m 0Sedges < 1m 0Hummock grasses 0Vines, scramblers Cover x Threat 4Mistletoe Weed Score (max 15) from benchmark community 14 Ferns Grass-tree Total 9 Native Plant Life Forms (max 20) from benchmark score weighted by a factor of 2 14.0

Vegetation Condition Score calculation Positive Vegetation Attributes Score = Native species diversity + Regeneration + Native Plant Life Forms Fallen timber/debris + Hollow-bearing trees -If the community Score is Not Benchmarked (SNB) for regeneration this score is multiplied 1.24 - If the community is naturally treeless this score is multiplied by 1.29 39.35 Negative Vegetation Attributes Score = (15 - Weeds) + ((10 - (Biomass score x 2))exp2/2) 1.00 VEGETATION CONDITION SCORE (Positive veg attributes x ((80 - Negative vegetation attributes) / 80)) 38.85

LowMaximumMedium s 10 High NativePlantSpeciesDiversity Vegetation Co 0.4856648 1 WeedScore Fallen timber # Tree Hollows # NativePlantLifeForms Tree Canopy C # Regeneration Mature Trees # Native:exoticUnderstoreyBiomass Native:exotic U 1 0 Regeneration 0.375 1 MatureTrees Native Plant L 0.7 0 TreeCanopyCover Weed Score 0.9333333 0 TreeHollows Native Plant S 0.4 1 Fallentimber VegetationConditionScore Conservation Significance Score Is the vegetation association considered a Threatened Ecological community or Ecosystem? Yes/No State (Provisional List of Threatened Ecosystems of SA) Rare community (0.1 pt) FALSE State (Provisional List of Threatened Ecosystems of SA) Vulnerable community (0.2 pts) FALSE State (Provisional List of Threatened Ecosystems of SA) Endangered community (0.3 pts) FALSE Nationally (EPBC Act) Vulnerable community (0.35 pts) FALSE Nationally (EPBC Act) Endangered or Critically Endangered community (0.4 pts) FALSE Note; all sites will score a minimum Conservation Significance Score of 1 Score 1

CONSERVATION SIGNIFICANCE SCORE 1

Total Scores for the Site Vegetation Condition x Landscape Context x Score Conservation Significance = LANDSCAPE CONTEXT SCORE 1.06 UNIT BIODIVERSITY SCORE 41.18 VEGETATION CONDITION SCORE 38.85 Total Biodiversity Score CONSERVATION SIGNIFICANCE SCORE 1.00 (Biodiversity Score x hectares) 34686.31

Photo Point and Vegetation Survey Location Direction of the Photo West GPS Reference Datum GDA94 Zone (52, 53 or 54) 54 Easting (6 digits) 382536 Northing (7 digits) 6239348 Description

Whatisthepurpose ofAssessment? Clearance SEBArea Other

Assessment for Clearance Approximate hectares required 4552.58 Loss Factor 1.0 Economies of Scale Factor 0.23 Loadings for clearance of protected areas Mean Annual rainfall for the site (mm) 254 Reductions for rehabilitation of impact site Payment into the fund (GST Exclusive) $ SEB Points required 36420.62 Administration fee (GST Inclusive) $ Bushland Assessment Scoresheets (Version - 1 July 2019)

Map of the Block (Including the Sites)

AustrostipaAustrostipa elegantissima elegantissima Feather Spear-grass EriochitonEriochiton sclerolaenoides sclerolaenoides Woolly-fruit Bluebush MaireanaMaireana sedifolia sedifolia Bluebush Yes ConvolvulusConvolvulus remotus remotus Grassy Bindweed AustrostipaAustrostipa sp. sp. Spear-grass RoeperaRoepera ammophila ammophila Sand Twinleaf MaireanaMaireana brevifolia brevifolia Short-leaf Bluebush EuphorbiaEuphorbia drummondii drummondii group group ChenopodiumChenopodium curvispicatum curvispicatum Cottony Goosefoot Threatened or Introduced Animal Species Recorded or Observed Threatened (Native and Introduced) Species Introduced Species Common Name EPBC SA Past Record Observed Species Vegetation Condition Scores SITE: Morgan Solar Farm BCM COMMUNITY MDBSA 2.1 Open Mallee / Low Open Woodland with Chenopod Shrub Understorey VEGETATION ASSOCIATION DESCRIPTION Eucalyptus socialis/ Myoporum platycarpum very open woodland over M SIZE OF SITE (Ha) 49.06

Benchmarked attributes Native Plant Cover (Scores determined by comparing to a Benchmark community) Life Forms rating Trees > 15m Number of Native Species (Minus herbaceous annuals for spring Surveys) 15 Trees 5 - 15 m 2 Native Plant Species Diversity Score (max 30) from benchmark score Trees < 5m weighted by a factor of 2 24.0 Mallee > 5m 2 Mallee < 5m Number of regenerating native species 2Shrubs > 2m Regeneration Score (max 12) from benchmark community weighted by a factor of 1.5 Shrubs 0.5 - 2m 3 6 Shrubs < 0.5 3 Forbs 1 Weed species Cover Weed Threat C x I Mat Plants (Top 5 Cover x Invasiveness) (max 6) Rating (max 5) Grasses > 0.2m Medicago spp. 1 2 2Grasses < 0.2m 1 Heliotropium europaeum 1 1 1Sedges > 1m Sisymbrium spp. 1 1 1Sedges < 1m 0Hummock grasses 0Vines, scramblers Cover x Threat 4Mistletoe Weed Score (max 15) from benchmark community 14 Ferns Grass-tree Total 12 Native Plant Life Forms (max 20) from benchmark score weighted by a factor of 2 16.0

Non-Benchmarked Attributes Is the community naturally treeless? FALSE (Scores determined from direct field observations) Fallen Timber/Debris (max 5) 2.5 Native:exotic Understorey biomass Score (max 5) 5 Hollow-bearing trees Score (max 5) 1 Mature Tree Score (max 8) Tree Canopy Cover Score (max 5) 1

Vegetation Condition Score calculation Positive Vegetation Attributes Score = Native species diversity + Regeneration + Native Plant Life Forms Fallen timber/debris + Hollow-bearing trees -If the community Score is Not Benchmarked (SNB) for regeneration this score is multiplied 1.24 - If the community is naturally treeless this score is multiplied by 1.29 49.50 Negative Vegetation Attributes Score = (15 - Weeds) + ((10 - Biomass score - Tree Canopy Cover Score)exp2/2) 9.00 VEGETATION CONDITION SCORE (Positive veg attributes x ((80 - Negative vegetation attributes) / 80)) 43.93

LowMaximumMedium s 10 High NativePlantSpeciesDiversity Vegetation Co 0.5491406 0 WeedScore Fallen timber 0.5 1 Tree Hollows 0.2 1 NativePlantLifeForms Tree Canopy C 0.2 1 Regeneration Mature Trees 0 1 Native:exoticUnderstoreyBiomass Native:exotic U 1 0 Regeneration 0.5 1 MatureTrees Native Plant L 0.8 0 TreeCanopyCover Weed Score 0.9333333 0 TreeHollows Native Plant S 0.8 0 Fallentimber VegetationConditionScore Conservation Significance Score Is the vegetation association considered a Threatened Ecological community or Ecosystem? Yes/No State (Provisional List of Threatened Ecosystems of SA) Rare community (0.1 pt) FALSE State (Provisional List of Threatened Ecosystems of SA) Vulnerable community (0.2 pts) FALSE State (Provisional List of Threatened Ecosystems of SA) Endangered community (0.3 pts) FALSE Nationally (EPBC Act) Vulnerable community (0.35 pts) FALSE Nationally (EPBC Act) Endangered or Critically Endangered community (0.4 pts) FALSE Note; all sites will score a minimum Conservation Significance Score of 1 Score 1

CONSERVATION SIGNIFICANCE SCORE 1

Total Scores for the Site Vegetation Condition x Landscape Context x Score Conservation Significance = LANDSCAPE CONTEXT SCORE 1.06 UNIT BIODIVERSITY SCORE 46.57 VEGETATION CONDITION SCORE 43.93 Total Biodiversity Score CONSERVATION SIGNIFICANCE SCORE 1.00 (Biodiversity Score x hectares) 2284.58

Photo Point and Vegetation Survey Location Direction of the Photo East GPS Reference Datum GDA94 Zone (52, 53 or 54) 54 Easting (6 digits) 380260 Northing (7 digits) 6239753 Description

Whatisthepurpose ofAssessment? Clearance SEBArea Other

Assessment for Clearance Approximate hectares required 299.85 Loss Factor 1.0 Economies of Scale Factor 0.23 Loadings for clearance of protected areas Mean Annual rainfall for the site (mm) 254 Reductions for rehabilitation of impact site Payment into the fund (GST Exclusive) $ SEB Points required 2398.81 Administration fee (GST Inclusive) $ Bushland Assessment Scoresheets (Version - 1 July 2019)

Map of the Block (Including the Sites)

SclerolaenaSclerolaena patenticuspis patenticuspis Spear-fruit Bindyi EnchylaenaEnchylaena tomentosa tomentosa var. var. Ruby Saltbush MyoporumMyoporum platycarpum platycarpum ssp. ssp. False Sandalwood AcaciaAcacia nyssophylla nyssophylla Spine Bush LysianaLysiana exocarpi exocarpi ssp. ssp. exocarpi exocarpi Harlequin Mistletoe SclerolaenaSclerolaena sp. sp. Bindyi Threatened or Introduced Animal Species Recorded or Observed Threatened (Native and Introduced) Species Introduced Species Common Name EPBC SA Past Record Observed Species MacropusMacropus sp. sp. y Vegetation Condition Scores SITE: BAM 6 BCM COMMUNITY MDBSA 2.1 Open Mallee / Low Open Woodland with Chenopod Shrub Understorey VEGETATION ASSOCIATION DESCRIPTION Eucalyptus socialis/ Myoporum platycarpum very open woodland over M SIZE OF SITE (Ha) 49.06

Benchmarked attributes Native Plant Cover (Scores determined by comparing to a Benchmark community) Life Forms rating Trees > 15m Number of Native Species (Minus herbaceous annuals for spring Surveys) 12 Trees 5 - 15 m 2 Native Plant Species Diversity Score (max 30) from benchmark score Trees < 5m weighted by a factor of 2 20.0 Mallee > 5m Mallee < 5m 2 Number of regenerating native species 1Shrubs > 2m Regeneration Score (max 12) from benchmark community weighted by a factor of 1.5 Shrubs 0.5 - 2m 3 4.5 Shrubs < 0.5 2 Forbs 1 Weed species Cover Weed Threat C x I Mat Plants (Top 5 Cover x Invasiveness) (max 6) Rating (max 5) Grasses > 0.2m Salvia verbenaca var. 1 2 2Grasses < 0.2m 1 Medicago spp. 1 2 2Sedges > 1m 0Sedges < 1m 0Hummock grasses 0Vines, scramblers Cover x Threat 4Mistletoe 1 Weed Score (max 15) from benchmark community 14 Ferns Grass-tree Total 12 Native Plant Life Forms (max 20) from benchmark score weighted by a factor of 2 16.0

Vegetation Condition Score calculation Positive Vegetation Attributes Score = Native species diversity + Regeneration + Native Plant Life Forms Fallen timber/debris + Hollow-bearing trees -If the community Score is Not Benchmarked (SNB) for regeneration this score is multiplied 1.24 - If the community is naturally treeless this score is multiplied by 1.29 46.00 Negative Vegetation Attributes Score = (15 - Weeds) + ((10 - Biomass score - Tree Canopy Cover Score)exp2/2) 9.00 VEGETATION CONDITION SCORE (Positive veg attributes x ((80 - Negative vegetation attributes) / 80)) 40.83

LowMaximumMedium s 10 High NativePlantSpeciesDiversity Vegetation Co 0.5103125 0 WeedScore Fallen timber 0.5 1 Tree Hollows 0.2 1 NativePlantLifeForms Tree Canopy C 0.2 1 Regeneration Mature Trees 0.25 1 Native:exoticUnderstoreyBiomass Native:exotic U 1 0 Regeneration 0.375 1 MatureTrees Native Plant L 0.8 0 TreeCanopyCover Weed Score 0.9333333 0 TreeHollows Native Plant S 0.6666667 0 Fallentimber VegetationConditionScore Conservation Significance Score Is the vegetation association considered a Threatened Ecological community or Ecosystem? Yes/No State (Provisional List of Threatened Ecosystems of SA) Rare community (0.1 pt) FALSE State (Provisional List of Threatened Ecosystems of SA) Vulnerable community (0.2 pts) FALSE State (Provisional List of Threatened Ecosystems of SA) Endangered community (0.3 pts) FALSE Nationally (EPBC Act) Vulnerable community (0.35 pts) FALSE Nationally (EPBC Act) Endangered or Critically Endangered community (0.4 pts) FALSE Note; all sites will score a minimum Conservation Significance Score of 1 Score 1

CONSERVATION SIGNIFICANCE SCORE 1

Total Scores for the Site Vegetation Condition x Landscape Context x Score Conservation Significance = LANDSCAPE CONTEXT SCORE 1.06 UNIT BIODIVERSITY SCORE 43.27 VEGETATION CONDITION SCORE 40.83 Total Biodiversity Score CONSERVATION SIGNIFICANCE SCORE 1.00 (Biodiversity Score x hectares) 2123.05

Photo Point and Vegetation Survey Location Direction of the Photo South GPS Reference Datum GDA94 Zone (52, 53 or 54) 54 Easting (6 digits) 380768 Northing (7 digits) 6239579 Description

Whatisthepurpose ofAssessment? Clearance SEBArea Other

Assessment for Clearance Approximate hectares required 278.65 Loss Factor 1.0 Economies of Scale Factor 0.23 Loadings for clearance of protected areas Mean Annual rainfall for the site (mm) 254 Reductions for rehabilitation of impact site Payment into the fund (GST Exclusive) $ SEB Points required 2229.20 Administration fee (GST Inclusive) $ Bushland Assessment Scoresheets (Version - 1 July 2019)

Map of the Block (Including the Sites)

Note; Blocks will score a minimum Landscape Context Score of 1 LANDSCAPE CONTEXT SCORE (max 1.25) 1.06 Plant Species Recorded (Native and Introduced) Listed Species Natives only Not in Annual Herbs Introduced Species Common Name EPBC SA quadrat Regen Spring survey Species MaireanaMaireana sedifolia sedifolia Bluebush Yes EnchylaenaEnchylaena tomentosa tomentosa var. var. Ruby Saltbush PtilotusPtilotus seminudus seminudus Rabbit-tails AustrostipaAustrostipa sp. sp. Spear-grass SclerolaenaSclerolaena patenticuspis patenticuspis Spear-fruit Bindyi AustrostipaAustrostipa elegantissima elegantissima Feather Spear-grass EremophilaEremophila longifolia longifolia Weeping Emubush AcaciaAcacia nyssophylla nyssophylla Spine Bush ChenopodiumChenopodium sp. sp. Goosefoot LawrenciaLawrencia squamata squamata Thorny Lawrencia Threatened or Introduced Animal Species Recorded or Observed Threatened (Native and Introduced) Species Introduced Species Common Name EPBC SA Past Record Observed Species OryctolagusOryctolagus cuniculus cuniculus Rabbit (European Rabbit) Y * ColumbaColumba livia livia Feral Pigeon Y * MacropusMacropus sp. sp. Y Vegetation Condition Scores SITE: BAM 7 BCM COMMUNITY MDBSA 2.2 Chenopod Open Shrublands

VEGETATION ASSOCIATION DESCRIPTION Maireana sedifolia open shrubland with emerging Eremophila longifolia in SIZE OF SITE (Ha) 842.22

Benchmarked attributes Native Plant Cover (Scores determined by comparing to a Benchmark community) Life Forms rating Trees > 15m Number of Native Species (Minus herbaceous annuals for spring Surveys) 10 Trees 5 - 15 m 1 Native Plant Species Diversity Score (max 30) from benchmark score Trees < 5m 1 weighted by a factor of 2 18.0 Mallee > 5m Mallee < 5m Number of regenerating native species 1Shrubs > 2m 1 Regeneration Score (max 12) from benchmark community weighted by a factor of 1.5 Shrubs 0.5 - 2m 3 4.5 Shrubs < 0.5 3 Forbs 3 Weed species Cover Weed Threat C x I Mat Plants (Top 5 Cover x Invasiveness) (max 6) Rating (max 5) Grasses > 0.2m 1 Heliotropium europaeum 2 1 2Grasses < 0.2m 1 Malva parviflora 1 1 1Sedges > 1m Salvia verbenaca var. 1 2 2Sedges < 1m Medicago spp. 1 2 2Hummock grasses Romulea rosea var. australis 1 2 2Vines, scramblers Cover x Threat 9Mistletoe Weed Score (max 15) from benchmark community 10 Ferns Grass-tree Total 14 Native Plant Life Forms (max 20) from benchmark score weighted by a factor of 2 18.0

Vegetation Condition Score calculation Positive Vegetation Attributes Score = Native species diversity + Regeneration + Native Plant Life Forms Fallen timber/debris + Hollow-bearing trees -If the community Score is Not Benchmarked (SNB) for regeneration this score is multiplied 1.24 - If the community is naturally treeless this score is multiplied by 1.29 52.25 Negative Vegetation Attributes Score = (15 - Weeds) + ((10 - (Biomass score x 2))exp2/2) 5.00 VEGETATION CONDITION SCORE (Positive veg attributes x ((80 - Negative vegetation attributes) / 80)) 48.98

LowMaximumMedium s 10 High NativePlantSpeciesDiversity Vegetation Co 0.6122461 0 WeedScore # # NativePlantLifeForms # Regeneration # Native:exoticUnderstoreyBiomass Native:exotic U 1 0 Regeneration 0.375 1 Native Plant L 0.9 0

Weed Score 0.6666667 0 Native Plant S 0.6 0

CONSERVATION SIGNIFICANCE SCORE 1

Total Scores for the Site Vegetation Condition x Landscape Context x Score Conservation Significance = LANDSCAPE CONTEXT SCORE 1.06 UNIT BIODIVERSITY SCORE 51.92 VEGETATION CONDITION SCORE 48.98 Total Biodiversity Score CONSERVATION SIGNIFICANCE SCORE 1.00 (Biodiversity Score x hectares) 43726.77

Photo Point and Vegetation Survey Location Direction of the Photo West GPS Reference Datum GDA94 Zone (52, 53 or 54) 54 Easting (6 digits) 381631 Northing (7 digits) 6239584 Description

Whatisthepurpose ofAssessment? Clearance SEBArea Other

Assessment for Clearance Approximate hectares required 5739.14 Loss Factor 1.0 Economies of Scale Factor 0.23 Loadings for clearance of protected areas Mean Annual rainfall for the site (mm) 254 Reductions for rehabilitation of impact site Payment into the fund (GST Exclusive) $ SEB Points required 45913.11 Administration fee (GST Inclusive) $

Morgan Solar Farm Traffic Impact Assessment

IW227900-CT-RPT-0001 | C 9 September 2020

Origin Energy

Traffic Impact Assessment O r i g i n E n e r g y

Document history and status

Revision Date Description Author Checked Reviewed Approved

A 14/07/2020 Draft issue for comment CB MH MH / NA NA

B 04/09/2020 Final Issue MH NA NA

C 09/09/2020 Revised Final Issue MH CB NA NA

Distribution of copies

Revision Issue Date Issued to Comments approved issued

Origin Energy, A NA 14/07/2020 Draft issue for comment Simone Fogarty

Origin Energy, B NA 04/09/2020 Final Issue Simone Fogarty

Origin Energy, C NA 09/09/2020 Revised Final Issue Simone Fogarty

Traffic Impact Assessment

Morgan Solar Farm

Project No: IW227900 Document Title: Traffic Impact Assessment Document No.: IW227900-CT-RPT-0001 Revision: C Document Status: Final Date: 9 September 2020 Client Name: Origin Energy Client No: Client Reference Project Manager: Katie Fels Author: Chris Babadimas File Name: IW227900-CT-RPT-0001_RevC - Morgan Solar Farm TIA (FINAL 2020-09-09)

Jacobs Group (Australia) Pty Limited ABN 37 001 024 095 Level 3, 121 King William Street Adelaide SA 5000 Australia T +61 8 8113 5400 F +61 8 8113 5440 www.jacobs.com

© Copyright 2019 Jacobs Group (Australia) Pty Limited. The concepts and information contained in this document are the property of Jacobs. Use or copying of this document in whole or in part without the written permission of Jacobs constitutes an infringement of copyright.

Limitation: This document has been prepared on behalf of, and for the exclusive use of Jacobs’ clie, ad i bjec , ad ied i accdace ih, he provisions of the contract between Jacobs and the client. Jacobs accepts no liability or responsibility whatsoever for, or in respect of, any use of, or reliance upon, this document by any third party.

IW227900-CT-RPT-0001 | C i

Traffic Impact Assessment

Contents 1. Introduction...... 1 1.1 Background ...... 1 1.2 Overview ...... 1 2. Proposed Development ...... 2 2.1 Description of On-Site Development ...... 2 3. Existing Area Conditions ...... 5 3.1 Study Area and Land Use ...... 5 3.2 Site Accessibility ...... 5 3.3 Existing Road Conditions ...... 6 3.3.1 Goyder Highway ...... 6 3.3.2 Bungunnia Road ...... 8 3.3.3 Woods and Forest Road ...... 9 3.3.4 ElectraNet Easement Access Road ...... 9 3.4 Crash History ...... 10 3.5 Restricted Access Vehicle Network ...... 12 4. Transportation Requirements for Development ...... 16 4.1 Development Lifespan Phases ...... 16 4.1.1 Construction Phase ...... 16 4.1.2 Operations and Maintenance Phase ...... 16 4.1.3 Decommissioning / Renewal Phase ...... 16 4.2 Equipment Specifications ...... 17 4.3 Vehicle Types and Permits ...... 17 4.3.1 Over Mass and Over Dimensional Permits ...... 17 4.4 Sight Distance Requirements ...... 18 5. Projected Traffic Generation ...... 19 5.1 Generated Traffic ...... 19 5.1.1 Construction Phase Traffic Generation ...... 19 5.1.2 Operations and Maintenance Phase Traffic Generation ...... 20 5.1.3 Decommissioning / Renewal Phase ...... 20 6. Traffic Impact Assessment and Recommended Upgrades ...... 21 6.1 Traffic Impacts ...... 21 6.2 Site Access Assessment and Recommended Upgrades ...... 22 6.2.1 Site Access Upgrade Requirements ...... 22 6.2.2 Site Access Upgrade Introduction ...... 23 6.2.3 Local Road Access Point 1 – Bungunnia Road / Goyder Highway junction ...... 23 6.2.4 Local Road Access Point 2 – Woods and Forest Road / Goyder Highway junction ...... 24 6.2.5 Local Road Access Point 3 – ElectraNet Easement Road / Goyder Highway junction ...... 26 6.2.6 Local Road Potential for Site Access Locations 1 – Woods and Forest Road ...... 28

IW227900-CT-RPT-0001 | C ii

Traffic Impact Assessment

6.2.7 Local Road Potential for Site Access Locations 2 – ElectraNet Easement Road ...... 29 7. Findings and Recommendations ...... 30 7.1 Site Accessibility ...... 30 7.2 Traffic Management Plan ...... 30 7.3 Improvements ...... 30 8. Conclusions ...... 32

Appendix A. Site Visit Capture (2020-03-02) A.1 Goyder Highway / Woods and Forest Road A.2 Goyder Highway / Bungunnia Road A.3 Goyder Highway / ElectraNet Easement Appendix B. Intersection Treatment Types Appendix C. Crash Types

IW227900-CT-RPT-0001 | C iii

Traffic Impact Assessment

1. Introduction

1.1 Background

Jacobs have been engaged by Origin Energy to undertake ecology and traffic assessments to assist in the development application for the Morgan Solar Farm project, to be located approximately eight kilometres north- east of the township of Morgan in the mid north region of South Australia.

The Morgan Solar Farm is proposed to incorporate up to 350 megawatt (MW) of solar panels across two stages and associated infrastructure including but not limited to underground and above ground electrical cable network linking the solar farm to the substation or 132 kV line. Other infrastructure may include a maintenance and site office facility, and a network of internal access tracks and roads.

1.2 Overview

Thi echical e dce’ he Taffic Iac Aee (TIA) f he Mga Sla Fa Deele Application.

This TIA outlines the envisaged traffic and transport impacts of construction, operation and decommission traffic of the Morgan Solar Farm development site and provides recommendations in response to the impacts.

This TIA is an expression of the professional opinion of Jacobs, based upon details that were available during the execution of the assessment. It is not a final conclusion and should only be taken as a guideline in terms of consideration for actual transport setup and routes to be used, and/or modifications to be done. Those details will be finalised in the Traffic Management Plan once the development is approved. Jacobs does not take responsibility in the case where any assumptions and considerations made in this document are not accurate for execution.

This document does not include calculations for any bridge infrastructure load-bearing capacities. Any description of bridges in this document is for guideline only and Jacobs recommends engaging a structural engineer, to verify the structural capacity of any such installations highlighted as areas of concern in this report.

This TIA is based on observations made of each route on a site visit on 2 March 2020. All parties should be aware that road conditions could change anytime between the date of route observations and the project execution, for reasons including adverse weather, road modifications/repairs by authorities and general deterioration.

IW227900-CT-RPT-0001 | C 1

Traffic Impact Assessment

2. Proposed Development

2.1 Description of On-Site Development

The proposed Morgan Solar Farm area is wholly located in the Mid Murray Council, approximately 8km north- east of the township of Morgan. The triangular shaped site is located north of the Goyder Highway and east of Bungunnia Road, extending north approximately 4km and east approximately 5km. Woods and Forest Road intersects the proposed site diagonally. Refer Figure 2-1 for the location of Morgan Solar Farm in relation to Adelaide (site is located approximately 175km north-east of Adelaide).

MORGAN SOLAR FARM

MORGAN

ADELAIDE

Figure 2-1: Location of the Morgan Solar farm in relation to Adelaide (Source: Location SA Viewer, 2020)

The Morgan Solar Farm will be capable of up to 350MW of solar. The key structures for the Morgan Solar Farm development will include: Solar panels, photovoltaic boxes or skids and fencing – occupying an area of up to 1000 hectares. Refer Figure 2-2 for site location in relation to the surrounding road network. Overhead and/or underground transmission from the solar farm to the substation or 132 kV line. Network of internal access tracks and roads.

IW227900-CT-RPT-0001 | C 2

Traffic Impact Assessment

Potential maintenance and site office facility.

WOODS AND FOREST ROAD

PROPOSED SITE AREA Stage 2

ELECTRANET SUBSTATION BUNGUNNIA Stage 1 ROAD

GOYDER HIGHWAY ELECTRANET EASEMENT ROAD

Figure 2-2: Location of the proposed Morgan Solar Farm site area (Source: MetroMap, 2020)

The development is proposed to be split into two stages. Stage 1 is proposed to be constructed first and is located south of Woods and Forest Road, whilst the future Stage 2 is proposed to the north of Woods and Forest Road. Stage 1 will be capable of up to a maximum 150MW of solar, whereas Stage 2 will be capable of up to a maximum 200MW of solar). It should also be noted that Stage 1 is proposed to connect into existing infrastructure, whereas Stage 2 assumes connection into the future Interconnector. Refer Figure 2-3 for a detailed site layout plan (which includes distinction between the proposed development stages).

For the purpose of this assessment, both development stages are assumed to occur currently in order to assess the worst case traffic impact.

IW227900-CT-RPT-0001 | C 3

Traffic Impact Assessment

Figure 2-3: Proposed site layout plan of the Morgan Solar Farm

IW227900-CT-RPT-0001 | C 4

Traffic Impact Assessment

3. Existing Area Conditions

3.1 Study Area and Land Use

The Morgan Solar Farm development area is located within the jurisdiction of the Mid-Murray Council Development Plan (consolidated 23 August 2018), and is currently designated as pastoral land (refer Figure 3-1). The land is low-intensity grazing land and sparsely populated.

Located within the proposed site area is the existing ElectraNet Substation, which can be accessed via the ElectraNet Easement Road or Woods and Forest Road (refer Figure 3-2). Approximately eight kilometres north- east of the proposed site is the Grandy Range Gypsum Mine, which is also accessed via Woods and Forest Road.

South of the Goyder Highway (refer red area in Figure 3-1), the land is zoned as River Murray Protection Area.

The land uses about the site and the current level of development of these areas are not considered to be significant trip generators.

GANDY RANGE GYSPSUM MINE APPROX. 8KM PROPOSED SITE AREA

ELECTRANET SUBSTATION

MORGAN TOWNSHIP CADELL TOWNSHIP

Figure 3-1: Pastoral land zoning (orange) and River Murray Protection Area land zoning (red) at the proposed development site (dark blue outline) (Source: Location SA Viewer, 2020)

3.2 Site Accessibility

Site access proposed for the Morgan Solar Farm is from the Goyder Highway. Figure 3-2 below highlights the existing unsealed access roads that provide direct access to the site from the Goyder Highway, which include: Bungunnia Road Woods and Forest Road

IW227900-CT-RPT-0001 | C 5

Traffic Impact Assessment

ElectraNet Easement Road.

These roads are described in further detail in the following section.

GANDY RANGE GYSPSUM MINE APPROX. 8KM

PROPOSED SITE AREA

WOODS AND FOREST ROAD ELECTRANET SUBSTATION BUNGUNNIA ROAD

ELECTRANET EASEMENT ROAD

GOYDER HIGHWAY

MORGAN TOWNSHIP CADELL TOWNSHIP

Figure 3-2: Sealed (solid grey line), unsealed (solid yellow line) and unformed roads (grey dashed line) in the vicinity of the proposed site (dark blue outline) (Source: Location SA Viewer, 2020)

3.3 Existing Road Conditions

The existing road conditions adjacent to the Morgan Solar Farm development area are described, as follows:

3.3.1 Goyder Highway

Goyder Highway is an arterial road under the care and control of the Department for Infrastructure and Transport (DIT). The highway extends some 265 kilometres between the Augusta Highway near Crystal Brook to the Sturt Highway near Barmera.

IW227900-CT-RPT-0001 | C 6

Traffic Impact Assessment

In the vicinity of the development area, the highway has a posted speed limit of 110 km/h, and has a sealed width of approximately 7 m with 3.5 m wide lanes and wide sealed shoulders in each direction.

Figure 3-3: Site visit capture looking west along the Goyder Highway on approach to Bungunnia Road (left) and on approach to the ElectraNet Easement Road (right)

The majority of the Goyder Highway in the vicinity of the development area (i.e. between Morgan and Cadell) has either single broken barrier lines, double two-way barrier lines or several short sections of alternating double one-way barrier lines.

There is one bridge structure (Burra Creek Bridge) along the Goyder Highway, located approximately 100m east of the Goyder Highway and Bungunnia Road intersection (refer Figure 6-2, page 24, for location of bridge). As the Goyder Highway is currently gazetted for OSM 4.5m Wide up to 93.5t Low Loader vehicles (refer Figure 3-12, page 15), it is assumed that the bridge structures are suitable for the transport of over mass and over dimensional vehicles up to this gazetted level.

The Goyder Highway also forms part of the current gazetted routes for GML and HML vehicles up to 36.5m Road Trains (refer Figure 3-10, page 13), and PBS Level 3A vehicles (refer Figure 3-11, page 14). Note that there is a restriction of 80km/h on the Burra Creek Bridge for those gazetted levels.

The most recent DIT traffic data sourced along the Goyder Highway (along the section between the Thiele Highway / Morgan township and Cadell Valley Road) indicates traffic volumes in the order of 460 vehicles per day (vpd) with 24 percent (or 110 vpd) commercial vehicles (2015 data (month unknown) sourced from Location SA Viewer).

Several rural properties are noted to have direct access points to/from the Goyder Highway (refer Figure 3-4).

IW227900-CT-RPT-0001 | C 7

Traffic Impact Assessment

PROPOSED SITE AREA

Figure 3-4: Rural Property Access Points (pink stars) in the vicinity of the proposed development site (dark blue outline) (Source: Location SA Viewer, 2020)

3.3.2 Bungunnia Road

Bungunnia Road is an unsealed road under the care and control of the Mid Murray Council. The road extends from the Goyder Highway to approximately 15km north. However, only approximately 2.3km of the road forms part of the internal side road network. Bungunnia Road has a formed road width of approximately 10m, located within a 50m wide road corridor reserve. Given the unsealed nature of the road, the default rural speed limit of 100 km/h applies.

IW227900-CT-RPT-0001 | C 8

Traffic Impact Assessment

Figure 3-5: Site visit capture looking north along Bungunnia Road

The road does not form part of the restricted access vehicle gazetted road network. There are no records available to provide traffic volume information. No rural properties near the vicinity of the site appear to have direct access to/from Bungunnia Road (refer Figure 3-4).

3.3.3 Woods and Forest Road

Woods and Forest Road is an unsealed road under the care and control of the Mid Murray Council. The road extends from the Goyder Highway to approximately 11km north-east. However, only approximately 5.5km of the road forms part of the internal site road network. Woods and Forest Road has a formed road width of approximately 10m, located within a 60m wide road corridor reserve. Given the unsealed nature of the road, the default rural speed limit of 100 km/h applies.

Figure 3-6: Site visit capture looking north-east (left), and looking south-west (right) along Woods and Forest Road

The road does not form part of the restricted access vehicle gazetted road network. There are no records available to provide traffic volume information. One rural property appears to have direct access to/from Woods and Forest Road, this property is close to the Goyder Highway (refer Figure 3-4). Woods and Forest Road also provides access to a local mine site (Gandy Range Gypsum Mine) (refer Figure 3-2).

3.3.4 ElectraNet Easement Access Road

The ElectraNet Easement Access Road is an approximate 2km road which provides access to the ElectraNet North West Bend Substation (refer Figure 3-2). The road has an unsealed formed width of approximately 7m, and is understood to be owned by ElectraNet and used as an easement access to reach the substation.

IW227900-CT-RPT-0001 | C 9

Traffic Impact Assessment

Figure 3-7: Site visit capture looking north at the ElectraNet Easement Access Road at the gated access from Goyder Highway

The road does not form part of the restricted access vehicle gazetted road network. There are no records available to provide traffic volume information.

For the purpose of this assessment, it is assumed this access point can be used for vehicle access to this development with ElectraNet’ aal1.

3.4 Crash History

A review of the available crash data along the roads in the vicinity of the proposed Morgan Solar Farm development area, as noted from Location SA Map Viewer, indicates numerous road crashes over the most recent reported five-year period between 2014 and 2018.

1 On 26th August 2020, ElectraNet granted approval for Origin Energy to use this access road for the proposed Morgan Solar Farm development.

IW227900-CT-RPT-0001 | C 10

Traffic Impact Assessment

PROPOSED SITE AREA

Figure 3-8: Location of recorded road crashes (orange dots) within a five-year period between 2014 and 2018 in the vicinity of the proposed development site (dark blue outline) (Source: Location SA Viewer, 2020)

Details of the recorded road crash statistics in the vicinity of the proposed development site to/from Morgan Township (as highlighted by yellow rings in Figure 3-8) are summarised below.

Table 3-1: Crash data (2014-2018) summary by crash type and severity

Road Segment Crashes TOTAL No. Crashes by Severity No. Crashes by Type TOTAL No. of Casualties Fatality Injury Serious Minor Injury PDO Object FixedHit Head On Animal Hit Side Swipe Rear End Over Roll Angle Right Vehicle Hit Parked RoadLeft Turn Right Fatality Injury Serious Minor Injury Casualties

–

Out of Control of Out

Goyder Highway – 4 1 1 2 2 1 1 2 1 1 between Morgan Terrace and Bungunnia Road

Goyder Highway – 2 1 1 1* 1* 2 1 1 between ElectraNet Easement Road and Cadell Valley Road

Bungunnia Road 1 1 1 0

* Crashes occurred at night

IW227900-CT-RPT-0001 | C 11

Traffic Impact Assessment

3.5 Restricted Access Vehicle Network

A significant amount of the road network across the regional South Australia forms part of the current approved restricted access vehicle network routes for B-doubles and Road Trains. Refer Figure 3-9 and Figure 3-10 for snapshots of these Restricted Access Vehicle Network maps.

Figure 3-9: Restricted Access Vehicle Network gazettal for 26m B-Double (GML) (Source: DIT RAVnet, 2020)

IW227900-CT-RPT-0001 | C 12

Traffic Impact Assessment

Figure 3-10: Restricted Access Vehicle Network gazettal for 36.5m Road Train (HML) (Source: DIT RAVnet, 2020)

IW227900-CT-RPT-0001 | C 13

Traffic Impact Assessment

Figure 3-11: Restricted Access Vehicle Network gazettal for PBS Level 3A Vehicles (Source: DIT RAVnet, 2020)

It should be noted that some of the current Restricted Access Vehicle Network routes between Adelaide and the proposed development site are subject to imposed restrictions which limit the speeds on sealed and unsealed roads, across bridge structures, and through townships.

Note that OSM 4.5m wide up to 93.5t Low Loader vehicles can currently travel from Adelaide to the site (i.e. to the Goyder Highway) (refer Figure 3-12), if required for site construction and operation transportation needs, using the current gazetted Restricted Access Vehicle Network routes.

IW227900-CT-RPT-0001 | C 14

Traffic Impact Assessment

Figure 3-12: Restricted Access Vehicle Network gazettal for OSM 4.5m Wide up to 93.5t Low Loader vehicles (Source: DIT RAVnet, 2020)

IW227900-CT-RPT-0001 | C 15

Traffic Impact Assessment

4. Transportation Requirements for Development

4.1 Development Lifespan Phases

There are three phases involved over the lifespan of the Morgan Solar Farm development. These phases are the construction phase, operational phase, and the decommissioning / renewal phase.

4.1.1 Construction Phase

The construction phase for the Morgan Solar Farm development is anticipated to be a 24-month process. The construction phase will have impact on the surrounding road network.

The traffic and transport activities carried out during the construction phase are assumed to access the proposed site via the existing road network surrounding the site as identified in Section 3.2. These construction traffic and transport activities include the following: Delivery of the solar farm components; Delivery of underground / above ground electrical cables; Delivery of materials for site office facility; Delivery of other construction equipment and materials; and Transport of construction staff.

The construction workforce will arrive from off-site, there is to be no on-site worker accommodation. It is anticipated that the peak staffing requirements required over a sustained period in the middle of the project.

It is anticipated that construction staff will likely travel to/from the site from the surrounding local centres, as well as the wider area, via a combination of private buses and private car-pooling. For this assessment, it is assumed private buses are used to transport 50% of the workforce.

Normal construction activities are planned to occur on weekdays only, with day shifts. Origin Energy may consider the option of night or weekend work where required to accelerate the construction program.

4.1.2 Operations and Maintenance Phase

The operations phase of the proposed Morgan Solar Farm development is forecasted to last approximately 30 years. The traffic and transport movements associated with the operation and maintenance of the site are also assumed to access the site via the existing road network surrounding the site as identified in Section 3.2. These movements include the following: Staff travelling to the site for regular inspections; Routine servicing and maintenance of solar panels; Replacement of solar panel components; and Possible maintenance of internal roads and access tracks.

4.1.3 Decommissioning / Renewal Phase

The solar panels have an approximate lifespan of 30 years. Towards the end of this lifespan a decision will be made on whether to decommission the site, involving removal of solar panels, and other related site equipment, or to renew the site, involving installation of new solar panels (requiring a new Development Approval). The construction traffic and transport movements involved in this phase will likely be similar to those in the first construction phase.

IW227900-CT-RPT-0001 | C 16

Traffic Impact Assessment

4.2 Equipment Specifications

The construction phase will have an impact on the existing road network, which is dependent of the number, size and weight of the particular components and equipment to be transported to the site.

The core components required for the construction of the solar farm are noted below. It is assumed the bulk of the components will be transported via 40 ft containers, using a combination of B-Doubles and semi-trailers transporters. These are unlikely to require OSOM vehicle permits. Modules Racking and structure: - Tables - Posts and tilts Electrical connection materials Inverter stations (PS Skid assembly)

The other core components required are listed below: Electrical cabling Construction equipment – Post rammers, excavators / piling, road building equipment and bulk civil. Internal road construction – Road aggregate and concrete. Site office facility Transformers.

It is noted that the only component which will require an OSOM vehicle to transport is the site office facility.

4.3 Vehicle Types and Permits

4.3.1 Over Mass and Over Dimensional Permits

Over-size and/or over-mass (OSOM) permits will be obtained through the National Heavy Vehicle Regulator (NHVR) and Department for Infrastructure and Transport (DIT). Vehicles exceeding the following criteria require an OSOM permit: Over mass limit: 42.5 tonnes Over dimensional limits: - Width: 2.5m - Height: 4.3m - Length: 19m (for a combination other than B-double, road train, car carrier).

Conditions employed for the transport of over mass and/or over dimensional loads will involve: Pilot and escort requirements – to provide advanced warning to approaching traffic through appropriate signage, Police escort requirements – required for the safe movement of other traffic. Night travel restrictions.

This assessment assumes the transport of the site office facility and transformers will require OSOM vehicle permits only.

IW227900-CT-RPT-0001 | C 17

Traffic Impact Assessment

4.4 Sight Distance Requirements

Appropriate vehicle sight distance at key intersections and site access points is an important requirement. Delivery vehicles will often be slow moving and take time to clear the road, hence it is critical for oncoming vehicles to have sufficient time to reduce speed and avoid a collision.

The required stopping sight distance under Austroads guidelines is 279m for heavy vehicles and 241m for passenger vehicles. These distances consider the following assumptions: Minimum reaction time of 2.5s (design worst-case); Design speed of 120 km/hr (for a posted speed limit of 110 km/h); Coefficient of deceleration of 0.36 (desirable minimum value).

The assessment of the sight distances for the key intersections and site access points using the values above are discussed in Section 6.2.

IW227900-CT-RPT-0001 | C 18

Traffic Impact Assessment

5. Projected Traffic Generation

5.1 Generated Traffic

5.1.1 Construction Phase Traffic Generation

Estimated construction vehicle trip movements per construction stage are detailed in the tables following.

An increase of 10% has been applied by Jacobs to the estimated one-way trips for construction vehicles listed in the tables below (see Revised Estimated Total trips (one way) column). This is to allow for any unforeseen increases in trip movements during the construction phase.

Table 5-1: Estimated total construction component traffic

Components Estimated Total Construction Traffic for Construction Materials over the construction phase

Estimated Total Trips Revised Estimated Vehicle Type (One Way) Total Trips (One Way)

Solar Modules 2,888 3,177 B-Double/Semi-Trailer Components Racking and structure tables 2,450 2,695 B-Double/Semi-Trailer

Racking and structure posts and tilts 263 289 B-Double/Semi-Trailer

Electrical connection materials 350 385 B-Double/Semi-Trailer

Inverter stations (PS Skid assembly) 350 385 B-Double/Semi-Trailer

Other Electrical cabling 146 161 B-Double/Semi-Trailer Components Construction equipment 140 154 Semi-Trailer

Internal road construction 251 276 Semi-Trailer

Site office facility 2 2 Heavy Duty Semi-trailer (Over-mass / Over-size)

Transformer 2 2 Heavy Duty Semi-trailer (Over-mass / Over-size)

Total Total Light Vehicle Movements - - Car / Light Vehicles Vehicle (one-way) Movements Total Heavy Commercial Vehicle 6,838 7,522 HCVs (HCV) Movements (one-way)

Total Over-Dimensional (OD) 4 4 OD Vehicles Vehicle Movements (one-way)

Table 5-2: Estimated total construction staff traffic for site establishment / demobilisation

Components Estimated Total Construction Traffic for Construction Materials over the construction phase

Estimated Total Trips (One Revised Estimated Total Trips Vehicle Type Way) (One Way)

Construction workforce 8,321 9153 Light Vehicles

0 0 Private Buses

Total Light Vehicle Movements 8,321 9,153 Light Vehicle (one-way)

IW227900-CT-RPT-0001 | C 19

Traffic Impact Assessment

5.1.2 Operations and Maintenance Phase Traffic Generation

The traffic associated with the long-term operation of the Morgan Solar Farm development will be minimal. This phase involves the commissioning and testing and then the ongoing operations and maintenance. It is anticipated that the commissioning and testing will require attendance by a number of technical and maintenance staff on a daily basis for a period of up to 6 months directly after the construction phase is complete. The vehicles used will be typically commercial vehicles such as light vehicles and four-wheeled drives.

Once the commissioning and testing is complete, the development will move into operation. The traffic generated during the operations phase is significantly lower than the construction phase and therefore the traffic impacts on the surrounding area will be minimal. The traffic generated during the operations phase will largely consist of the following: Permanent on-site operations personnel (most likely living locally) travelling to and from their homes to the operations and maintenance (O&M) compound/site office on a daily basis in light vehicles and four- wheel drives. Routine inspection and maintenance by operations personnel (most likely living locally) travelling from the O&M compound/site office to the solar arrays on a daily basis in light vehicles and four-wheel drives. Note that only a small section of solar array would be subject to inspection and maintenance per day.

5.1.3 Decommissioning / Renewal Phase

Two options may be considered towards the end of the lifespan of the Morgan Solar Farm project. These options are (1) to decommission the site, or (2) to renew the site. Regardless of which option is chosen, both options will require the removal of the solar panels. Traffic generation will be similar to the first construction phase. If the project is renewed, a separate Development Application will be required, which is outside the scope of this TIA.

The traffic generation and impacts should be re-assessed around the time when the site will be decommissioned or renewed, as the baseline traffic conditions on the road network will likely be changed over the lifespan.

IW227900-CT-RPT-0001 | C 20

Traffic Impact Assessment

6. Traffic Impact Assessment and Recommended Upgrades

The following section details the suitability of the existing road network regarding the impacts of traffic and transport related activities associated with the Morgan Solar Farm during the construction, operational and decommissioning / renewal phases of the project.

The project will generate additional traffic during the construction and operational phases, with the traffic generated during the construction phase expected to be greater than that generated during the ongoing operational phase. The extra movement of traffic has been considered in this assessment.

6.1 Traffic Impacts

The impact of the generated traffic during the construction stage has been divided into three categories: Light Vehicle traffic (e.g. 4WDs and cars) associated with staff movements to and from the construction site. Heavy Commercial Vehicles (e.g. >2-tonne trucks, semi-trailers, dump trucks etc.) associated with deliveries to site that will travel on State controlled roads. Over dimensional vehicles associated with the haulage of the site office that may only travel under NHVR and DIT permit.

To evaluate impacts of generated traffic on the capacity of the adjacent road system, the estimated trips from Section 5.1.1 have been converted to daily traffic volumes in each category in the table below.

Table 6-1: Traffic generated during the construction phase (one-way)

Vehicle Type Total Traffic During Peak Construction Peak Daily Generated Period (months 6-18) (12 months Traffic Traffic = 240 working days) between Months 6 and 12 (of 24 month delivery program when construction volumes are at their highest)

Light Vehicles 9,153 7,322 31 trips/day

Heavy Commercial Vehicles 7,522 6,018 26 trips/day (HCVs)

Over-Dimensional (OD) Vehicles 4 3 1 trip

Total 16,679 13,343 58 trips/day

Note: A 24 month construction phase is assumed. During the construction phase, it is assumed (as a worst case) that 80% of activity occurs within a 12 month peak construction period between Months 6 – 18. A four (4) week or 28 day month has been assumed. A five (5) day working week has been assumed.

These generated daily trips (doubled to reflect two-way movements, i.e. 116 trips per day) may then be compared to the current daily traffic volumes along the proposed routes.

IW227900-CT-RPT-0001 | C 21

Traffic Impact Assessment

Table 6-2: Traffic impact along assessed highways and roads

Start Finish Existing Total (Existing + Traffic Increase Existing Total HV% (Existing (Intersecting (Intersecting VPD Generated) VPD (Existing vs. Total) HV% + Generated) Road) Road)

Goyder Highway

Thiele Highway Cadell Valley 460 576 25% 24% 29% Road

From a traffic capacity viewpoint, the impact of the construction traffic is considered to be minimal.

The roads and highways operating level of service based on the construction phase figures from the table above is as following: Gde Higha: Leel f Seice (LOS) “A” (i.e. cgeed) for existing traffic and with construction traffic.

6.2 Site Access Assessment and Recommended Upgrades

Discussed here are the standards for minimum requirements of intersection geometry based on vehicle through and turning volumes. Discussed next is an assessment of the specific site access points with proposed recommended upgrades (if deemed necessary).

Although the impact is not considered significant, the following section of this report makes some recommendations for intersection upgrades to safely accommodate the construction and passing by traffic during the project.

6.2.1 Site Access Upgrade Requirements

The standards for the upgrades of intersections are described below. The process of selecting an appropriate treatment includes consideration of: Safety of road users; Traffic volumes; Objectives for the road network; Topography and natural/built environment; Speed environment.

The following information regarding turn treatment types and selection is taken from the Austroads Guide to Traffic Management. The three types of unsignalised at-grade turn treatments, including considerations in selection between treatments are as follows (example intersection turn treatments are shown in Appendix B): Basic: Suitable for rural locations with low cross and turning volumes. Auxiliary: Suitable for rural locations where high-speed, low-volume traffic occurs and the volume and slow manoeuvring of turning traffic is sufficient to create a conflict with following traffic. Channelised: Suitable when turning traffic movements are heavy with frequent queuing, and where conflicting vehicle paths need to be separated.

The warrants for the preferred minimum treatments are shown in Figure 6-1. These warrants were used for treatment selection for the route network intersection upgrades. As the available information regarding traffic volumes on the major roads/highways is for vehicles per day, assumptions have been made for vehicles per hour based on the vehicles per day value. The assumption made is that the vehicles per hour volume is 20% of the vehicles per day volume (worst-case scenario). This number was chosen with consideration to peaks which may occur in the morning or afternoon when residents are travelling to/from work.

IW227900-CT-RPT-0001 | C 22

Traffic Impact Assessment

An assumption has also been made that the estimated construction vehicles per hour is 20% of the estimated construction vehicles per day (calculated in Section 5). Another assumption has been made that the construction vehicles per hour equals the turn volumes per hour.

Figure 6-1: Warrants for turn treatments on major roads at unsignalised intersections (Source: Austroads Guide to Traffic Management Part 6, 2020)

6.2.2 Site Access Upgrade Introduction

This traffic impact assessment has considered several access points for the Morgan Solar Farm via locations along two local roads; Bungunnia Road, and Woods and Forest Road; and/or via the private road; ElectraNet Easement Road. No new access roads from the Goyder Highway to the Morgan Solar Farm site are proposed.

This traffic impact assessment has also considered its assessment of each intersection as though it is the sole entrance/exit to the proposed development. As such this assessment assumes the full development construction traffic will use the junction being assessed.

Discussed in the sections below are the following: The existing conditions of the local roads considered to provide site access. An assessment of local roads’ (and their junctions with the Goyder Highway) suitability for the movements of construction vehicles. Proposed recommended upgrade requirements.

6.2.3 Local Road Access Point 1 – Bungunnia Road / Goyder Highway junction

Bungunnia Road has been considered as a potential local road to provide access to the proposed site area. Figure 6-2 below shows aerial imagery and images of the Bungunnia Road / Goyder Highway junction, which construction traffic would need to travel through in order to gain direct access to the site from Bungunnia Road. Refer to Appendix A for pictures and video footage screenshots captured during the site visit.

IW227900-CT-RPT-0001 | C 23

Traffic Impact Assessment

BURRA CREEK BRIDGE

Figure 6-2: Aerial image (left) (Source: MetroMap, 2020) and site visit capture looking east (right) of Bungunnia Road / Goyder Highway junction

At this location, the Goyder Highway has a sealed width of approximately 7 m, with 3.5 m wide lanes and sealed shoulders and a 110 km/h speed limit applies. The highway also has double solid barrier lines and continuous edge lines. There are an existing 460 two-way recorded vehicles per day travelling along this section of the highway, which is considered relatively low. There are also currently no left-turn or right-turn treatments at the junction with Bungunnia Road. The highway is straight and flat at the intersection, however, on each approach there are sight distance issues: Western approach: - There is a bend in the highway which starts approximately 140m away, as seen in Figure 6-2. The sight distance is approximately 210m between vehicles stopped on Bungunnia Road at the intersection to vehicles approaching from the west along Goyder Highway after they exit the bend in the highway. This does not meet the minimum requirement of 279m. - Site observations noted an existing sign located towards the middle of the bend on the western approach to provide prior warning to drivers that they are approaching a T-intersection (referring to the junction with Bungunnia Road). - It is also noted that two crashes have occurred in the last five-years after the bend in the highway on the western approach to the junction. Eastern approach: - There is a slight bend in the road, as seen in Figure 6-2. There is also a significant elevation difference between the intersection location (lower elevation) and further east towards the intersection with Woods and Forest Road (higher elevation). The bend and elevation difference do not cause any sight distance issues (i.e. they meet the minimum requirement of 279m). However, it is noted that from approximately 300m onwards, the combination of the bend and elevation difference does cause sight distance issues. - On the eastern approach there is a sign indicating a T-intersection is coming up (referring to the intersection with Bungunnia Road). - On the eastern approach there is a recommended speed sign of 75km/hr for vehicles travelling along the bend on the Goyder Highway.

Due to the above sight distance issues from the western approach not meeting the minimum requirements for sight distance, it is not recommended to use the Bungunnia Road for access to the site.

6.2.4 Local Road Access Point 2 – Woods and Forest Road / Goyder Highway junction

Woods and Forest Road has been considered as a potential local road to provide access to the proposed site area. Figure 6-3 below shows aerial imagery and images of the Woods and Forest Road / Goyder Highway junction, which construction traffic would need to travel through in order to gain direct access to the site from

IW227900-CT-RPT-0001 | C 24

Traffic Impact Assessment

Woods and Forest Road. Refer to Appendix A for pictures and video footage screenshots captured during the site visit.

Figure 6-3: Aerial image (left) (Source: MetroMap, 2020) and site visit capture looking west (right) of the Woods and Forest Road / Goyder Highway junction

At this location, the Goyder Highway has a sealed width of approximately 8 m, with 3.7 m wide lanes and sealed shoulders and a 110 km/h speed limit applies. The highway also has double one-way barrier lines and continuous edge lines. There are an existing 460 two-way recorded vehicles per day travelling along this section of the highway, which is considered relatively low. There are also currently no left-turn or right-turn treatments at the intersection. The highway is straight and flat at the intersection, however, on the western approach there are sight distance issues: Western approach (similarly to the Local Road Access Point 1 - Eastern approach comments): - There is a slight bend in the road, as seen in Figure 6-3. There is also a significant elevation difference between the intersection location (higher elevation) and further west towards the intersection with Bungunnia Road (lower elevation). The combined bend and elevation difference lead to an approximate sight distance of 225m for vehicles. This does not meet the minimum requirement of 279m. Eastern approach: - There is a rise in the road level approximately 640m towards the east which does not cause sight distance issues.

Due to the above sight distance issues from the western approach not meeting the minimum requirements for sight distance, it is not recommended to use Woods and Forest Road as an access point without implementing certain measures. Measures which are recommended to allow Woods and Forest Road to be used as an access point are: 1) Reduced Speed Limit Implementing a Traffic Management Plan (TMP) during the construction phase, whereby the speed limit along the Goyder Highway is temporarily reduced. A reduction of the speed limit to 90 km/h (i.e. design speed 100 km/h) would lead to a minimum sight distance requirement of 205m, which is lower the current sight distance of 225m at the existing junction. 2) Intersection Turn Treatments Implementing Intersection Turn Treatments during the construction phase. There is expected to be a generated additional 116 two-way vehicles (62 light vehicles, 54 heavy vehicles) per day during the peak of the construction phase. Table 6-3 below shows the known and assumed movement volumes considered for turn-treatment assessment.

IW227900-CT-RPT-0001 | C 25

Traffic Impact Assessment

Table 6-3: Major road traffic volume (VPD/VPH) and Turn Volumes for Access Point 2

Existing Vehicles Per Day Assumed Existing Vehicles Per Estimated Construction Total Vehicles Per Hour (VPH) (VPD) Hour (VPH) Vehicles Per Hour (VPH)

460 92 23 115

Assumed Existing Turn Estimated Construction Turn Total Turn Volumes Per Hour Volumes Per Hour* Volumes Per Hour

5 23 28

* Te “Aed Eg T Ve Pe H” ae a a aace f e ea seasonal mine traffic vehicle volumes travelling along Woods and Forest Road.

Given the total vehicles per hour and turn volumes per hour assumed in the table above, and the warrants for turn treatments noted in Figure 6-1, the recommendation is that that the existing junction be upgraded with widened shoulders to meet DIT, Council, and Austroads requirements to safely accommodate the traffic travelling both to the site and passing by the junction during the construction phase. In summary, the recommendation is to provide the following turn treatment upgrades for the existing Woods and Forest Road / Goyder Highway junction: - Basic right turn (BAR) on the major road - Basic left turn (BAL) on the major road - Basic left turn (BAL) on the minor road. Note that the minimum specified treatment in Austroads Guidelines is the BAR and BAL treatments. 3) Provide double two-way barrier lines (i.e. no overtaking), with a break in the barrier lines at the junction. 4) Provide a 50m sealed apron (50m sealed road from the highway) along Woods and Forest Road.

6.2.5 Local Road Access Point 3 – ElectraNet Easement Road / Goyder Highway junction

The existing ElectraNet Easement Road has been considered as a potential local road to provide access to the proposed site area. Figure 6-4 below shows aerial imagery and image of the ElectraNet Easement Road / Goyder Highway junction, which construction traffic would need to travel through in order to gain direct access to the site from the ElectraNet Easement Road. Refer to Appendix A for pictures and video footage screenshots captured during the site visit.

It is noted that this access is an ElectraNet Easement for access to an ElectraNet substation. Approval would be required from ElectraNet to use the Easement for access. The road is gated off 90m from where the Easement Road intersects the Goyder Highway (refer Figure 3-7). It is understood that ElectraNet have granted approval for Origin Energy to use this access road to access the proposed Morgan Solar Farm site2.

2 On 26th August 2020, ElectraNet granted approval for Origin Energy to use this access road for the proposed Morgan Solar Farm development.

IW227900-CT-RPT-0001 | C 26

Traffic Impact Assessment

Figure 6-4: Aerial image (left) (Source: MetroMap, 2020) and site visit capture looking east (right) of the ElectraNet Easement Road / Goyder Highway junction

At this location, the Goyder Highway has a sealed width of approximately 8 m, with 3.7 m wide lanes and sealed shoulders and a 110 km/h speed limit applies. The highway also has single broken barrier lines and continuous edge lines.

The highway is straight and flat at the intersection, with sight distances (in both directions) extending well beyond the minimum requirements of 279m.

There are an existing 460 two-way recorded vehicles per day travelling along this section of the highway, which is considered relatively low. There are also currently no left-turn or right-turn treatments at the intersection. There is expected to be a generated additional 116 two-way vehicles (62 light vehicles, 54 heavy vehicles) per day during the peak of the construction phase. Table 6-4 below shows the known and assumed movement volumes used for turn-treatment assessment.

Table 6-4: Major road traffic volume (VPD/VPH) and Turn Volumes for Access Point 3

Existing Vehicles Per Day Assumed Existing Vehicles Per Estimated Construction Total Vehicles Per Hour (VPH) (VPD) Hour (VPH) Vehicles Per Hour (VPH)

460 92 23 115

Assumed Existing Turn Estimated Construction Turn Total Turn Volumes Per Hour Volumes Per Hour* Volumes Per Hour

- 23 23

* Te “Aed Eg T Ve Pe H” assumes a negligible ElectraNet vehicle traffic volume along the ElectraNet Easement Road.

Measures which are recommended to allow ElectraNet Easement Road to be used as an access point are: 1) Given the total vehicles per hour and turn volumes per hour in the table above, and the warrants for turn treatments noted in Figure 6-1, the recommendation is that the existing junction be upgraded with widened shoulders to meet DIT, Council, and Austroads requirements to safely accommodate the traffic travelling both to the site and passing by the junction during the construction phase. In summary, the recommendation is to provide the following turn treatment upgrades for the existing ElectraNet Easement Road / Goyder Highway junction: - Basic right turn (BAR) on the major road - Basic left turn (BAL) on the major road - Basic left turn (BAL) on the minor road. Note that the minimum specified treatment in Austroads Guidelines is the BAR and BAL treatments. 2) Provide double two-way barrier lines (i.e. no overtaking), with a break in the barrier lines at the intersection.

IW227900-CT-RPT-0001 | C 27

Traffic Impact Assessment

3) Provide a 50m sealed apron (50m sealed road from the highway) along the existing side road.

6.2.6 Local Road Potential for Site Access Locations 1 – Woods and Forest Road

Woods and Forest Road provides direct access to the Morgan Solar Farm area, and the road generally runs through the centre of the proposed solar farm area. The area around the road is generally barren and flat, with no sight visibility issues. Refer to Figure 6-5 below for pictures taken during the site visit.

Figure 6-5: Site visit capture of Woods and Forest Road looking south-west (left) and looking north-east (right)

Several unsealed existing easements (refer Figure 6-6) and unformed roads (refer Figure 3-2) are present within the proposed Morgan Solar Farm site, which intersect Woods and Forest Road. These existing easements and unformed road corridors are assumed to form part of the internal site access road network (note that this detail has only been formally defined for the Stage 1 development, refer Figure 2-3), and will be formalised into four- way intersections to provide access between the south-east (Stage 1) and north-west (Stage 2) land parcels located on either side of Woods and Forest Road.

IW227900-CT-RPT-0001 | C 28

Traffic Impact Assessment

STAGE 2

STAGE 1

Figure 6-6: Existing easement corridors (Source: ElectraNet, 2020) about the Morgan Solar Farm site (blue areas) with proposed internal access roads for Stage 1 (red lines)

Each of these existing easements and unformed road corridors which intersect Woods and Forrest Road within the proposed site area are positioned along straight sections of the existing unsealed road corridor, with no sight visibility issues.

Woods and Forest Road is believed to be of sufficient quality to serve as an access road for the Morgan Solar Farm Site. As part of the TMP process, the suitability (and exact locations of the intersecting internal access roads) would need to be assessed further.

6.2.7 Local Road Potential for Site Access Locations 2 – ElectraNet Easement Road

The condition of the ElectraNet Easement Road was not inspected during the site visit because Jacobs did not have the required permissions to access the road at time of site visit. However, from aerial imagery and noting the road gives primary access to the ElectraNet substation, it is assumed the road is of sufficient quality to serve as an access road for the Morgan Solar Farm Site. As part of the TMP process, the suitability would need to be assessed further.

IW227900-CT-RPT-0001 | C 29

Traffic Impact Assessment

7. Findings and Recommendations

7.1 Site Accessibility

Following assessment of the existing roads in the vicinity of the proposed Morgan Solar Farm development area, it is recommended that either ElectraNet Easement Road or the Woods and Forest Road be used to gain access to the site from the Goyder Highway. The ElectraNet Easement Road is the preferable access road from the Gde Higha, gie hi eiig jci’ e deiable road environment conditions.

The existing gazetted restricted access vehicle network extending from Adelaide to the proposed site via the Goyder Highway (excluding the local access roads) caters for all construction access vehicles that are assumed to travel to the site – assumed to be limited to vehicles up to a 26m B-double, with the exception of an Over- Sized/Over-Mass (OSOM) vehicle to cater for the transportation of a site office facility only.

OSOM vehicle access to the site may be required indirectly via Blanchetown, depending on the OSM limits.

7.2 Traffic Management Plan

The assessment of the transportation impacts on the road network identified the principal traffic and safety issues associated with the construction phase. The traffic generated during the operational and maintenance phase will be a minimal increase compared to the existing traffic movement volumes on the road network.

To ensure the transportation impacts on the road network, adjacent towns and local residents are minimised, it is recommended that a specific Traffic Management Plan (TMP) be developed to coordinate between the transport contractor programs. A TMP should be developed in consultation with DIT and local councils to ensure all road safety and traffic issues are addressed and the impacts to the local communities and road users are minimised.

The TMP should include: Specified delivery periods, routes and access points to the development area for all equipment and materials supplied. Designated warning signage, appropriate controls and procedures to address potential traffic impacts. Controls to inform road users and local communities of any changed traffic conditions.

7.3 Improvements

As noted above, it is recommended that either the ElectraNet Easement Road and/or Woods and Forest Road be used to gain access to the site from the Goyder Highway. However, the ElectraNet Easement Road is the efeable acce ad f he Gde Higha, gie hi eiig jci’ e deiable ad eie conditions.

It is recommended that both junctions be subjected to minor upgrades to widen the shoulders at the junctions to improve safety for all road users, if used to provide access to the development. More specifically: If the ElectraNet Easement Road is to be used as an access point, the following improvements are recommended: - Full basic turn treatment (i.e. widened shoulder treatments at the junction). - Provide double two-way barrier lines. - Provide 50m sealed apron. If Woods and Forest Road is to be used as an access point, the following improvements are recommended: - Full basic turn treatment (i.e. widened shoulder treatments at the junction). - Provide double two-way barrier lines.

IW227900-CT-RPT-0001 | C 30

Traffic Impact Assessment

- Provide 50m sealed apron. - Consider speed limit reduction during construction phase.

IW227900-CT-RPT-0001 | C 31

Traffic Impact Assessment

8. Conclusions

The traffic and transport issues arising from the proposed Morgan Solar Farm will see a minor impact to the local community surrounding the proposed site and the through traffic along the surrounding highways. This impact will be primarily during the construction phase where there will be a more concentrated number of vehicle movements to the site within a short period of time compared to the operational phase.

Through implementing the recommended upgrades discussed in Section 6, and implementing the management and mitigation measures discussed in Section 7, the traffic impacts associated with the additional vehicle movements generated during the construction stages should be minimised and road safety on the road network maintained.

Traffic impact can also be minimised by providing adequate notification to the local community and employment centres of appropriate temporary traffic control measures in place.

A detailed Traffic Management Plan (TMP) will need to be prepared in consultation with DIT and Council prior to construction to ensure that the overall impact and disturbance to infrastructure and other road users is minimal.

Based on the assessment undertaken for the proposed Morgan Solar Farm project, the following conclusions are reached: Recommendations for intersection upgrades and traffic management measures to improve the efficiency and safety at either Woods and Forest Road or the ElectraNet Easement Road, due to the increased number of turning vehicle movements in the construction phase. The ElectraNet Easement Road is the preferable acce ad f he Gde Higha, gie hi eiig jci’ e deiable ad eie conditions. There will be a slight increase in general vehicle and heavy vehicle traffic during the construction stages of the project, however the existing traffic volumes surrounding the project area are relatively low and therefore the development traffic will have little impact congestion on the road network. Due to the greatly reduced traffic generation during the operational phase of the project, no significant operational traffic impacts have been identified in addition to construction stage impacts. The lifespan of the technology associated with the project is approximately 30 years. Towards the end of this lifespan a decision will be made either for decommissioning or renewal. In either instance another assessment of traffic impacts will be required (and in the case of renewal, as part of a full DA).

IW227900-CT-RPT-0001 | C 32

Traffic Impact Assessment

Appendix A. Site Visit Capture (2020-03-02)

A.1 Goyder Highway / Woods and Forest Road

IW227900-CT-RPT-0001 | C

Traffic Impact Assessment

A.2 Goyder Highway / Bungunnia Road

IW227900-CT-RPT-0001 | C

Traffic Impact Assessment

A.3 Goyder Highway / ElectraNet Easement

IW227900-CT-RPT-0001 | C

Traffic Impact Assessment

IW227900-CT-RPT-0001 | C

Traffic Impact Assessment

Appendix B. Intersection Treatment Types

IW227900-CT-RPT-0001 | C

Traffic Impact Assessment

IW227900-CT-RPT-0001 | C

Traffic Impact Assessment

IW227900-CT-RPT-0001 | C

Traffic Impact Assessment

Appendix C. Crash Types

IW227900-CT-RPT-0001 | C Morgan Solar Farm –Heritage Assessment Summary

Heritage Summary Advice

Morgan Solar Farm Project Title: Morgan Solar Farm Heritage assessment & site inspection Location: Stuart, Morgan South Australia Client: Origin Energy Date: March 2020 Authors: Gordon Stenhouse, Guadalupe Cincunegui, Steve Damhuis

Heritage Assessment – Summary

Independent Heritage Consultants Pty Ltd (IHC) was engaged by Origin Energy Australia (Origin) to carry out an Aboriginal heritage desktop assessment and site inspection for work associated with Stage 1 and Stage 2 of the Morgan Solar Farm. The desktop assessment was prepared to inform Origin of any significant heritage concerns during initial planning and development for this project.

As part of the assessment, IHC reviewed relevant heritage register search results, previous relevant heritage work, academic papers, historical impacts and the proposed works to develop an understanding of the risk proposed to heritage by the planned development. A site visit was also carried out with the project team as part of the assessment (Jacobs, Origin).

A literature review of previous heritage work carried out in wider River Murray region identified that Aboriginal people densely occupied the River Murray, which provided rich food sources, water, manufacturing and trading resources. This is evident in the many heritage sites that have been recorded along the river, including stone artefact scatters, shell middens, hearths, mounds, burials, culturally significant and culturally modified trees, all within close proximity to the river.

The literature review also identified that in contrast to the River Murray trench, the elevated Mallee plains adjacent to the river, including the current project area, were more sparsely occupied, with Aboriginal sites focused around permanent water sources. IHC concluded that while it was possible that European settlement and agricultural practices played a major role in the surviving Aboriginal heritage site distribution. The background research and site inspection confirmed that the project area is located on elevated, cleared and heavily grazed lands away from the River Murray. Based on this, it was assessed that there was a very low likelihood that any previously undiscovered heritage sites would be found within the proposed project location.

IHC has made Origin aware of its responsibilities in relation to works impacting on Aboriginal heritage and archaeological features in line with the requirements of the South Australia Aboriginal Heritage Act. IHC has provided Origin with a suite of heritage management options (consultation with relevant Traditional Owners, site discovery processes, inductions) to manage heritage risks and ensure that the proposed works comply with the requirements of the relevant Commonwealth and State heritage legislation.

1 | Page