DOCSLIB.ORG

ASSESSMENT REPORT for the CENTRAL EYRE IRON PROJECT

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
ASSESSMENT REPORT for the CENTRAL EYRE IRON PROJECT ASSESSMENT REPORT for the CENTRAL EYRE IRON PROJECT Environmental Impact Statement Land use components ‐ Sea Port at Cape Hardy, Infrastructure Corridors and Wudinna long‐term employee village Iron Road Ltd March 2017 Department of Planning, Transport and Infrastructure ISBN 978‐0‐7590‐0258‐6 1 Table of Contents 1 INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................................................... 6 2 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT ............................................................................................ 7 2.1 Major Development Declaration and Guidelines ................................................................... 7 2.2 Environmental Impact Statement exhibition .......................................................................... 8 2.3 Response Document ............................................................................................................... 8 2.4 Final Environmental Impact Statement .................................................................................. 9 2.5 Assessment Report ................................................................................................................. 9 2.6 Decision ................................................................................................................................... 9 2.7 Subsequent Decisions Environment Protection Act 1993 (EP Act) ......................................... 10 3. CAPE HARDY SEA PORT ............................................................................................................. 11 3.1 General .................................................................................................................................. 11 3.1.1 Site and locality ............................................................................................................. 11 3.1.2 Existing environment .................................................................................................... 12 3.2 Project description – key elements ....................................................................................... 13 3.3 Summary of submissions ...................................................................................................... 18 3.3.1 Public submissions ........................................................................................................ 18 3.3.2 Government submissions.............................................................................................. 18 3.4 Key Environmental, social and economic issues ................................................................... 19 3.4.1 Site selection and consideration of alternative sites .................................................... 20 3.4.2 Air Quality ..................................................................................................................... 20 3.4.3 Noise and Vibration ...................................................................................................... 21 3.4.3 Terrestrial Environment ................................................................................................ 22 3.4.4 Coastal and Marine Environment ................................................................................. 26 3.4.5 Hazard and Risk ............................................................................................................. 36 3.4.6 Light Spill ....................................................................................................................... 37 3.4.7 Visual Amenity and Landscape Character ..................................................................... 37 3.4.9 Heritage Impacts ........................................................................................................... 39 3.4.10 Climate Change/Greenhouse Gas/Sustainability ...................................................... 40 3.4.11 Management Strategies during Construction and Operation .................................. 42 4 PRINCIPAL INFRASTRUCTURE CORRIDOR (Rail, Water & Electricity Supply) .......................... 44 4.1 General .................................................................................................................................. 44 4.1.1 Site and locality ............................................................................................................. 44 4.1.2 Existing environment .................................................................................................... 45 4.1.3 Project Description – key elements .............................................................................. 45 4.2 Summary of Submissions ...................................................................................................... 46 2 4.2.2 Public submissions ........................................................................................................ 46 4.2.3 Government submissions.............................................................................................. 48 4.3 Key environmental, social and economic issues ................................................................... 48 4.3.1 Rail alignment selection and consideration of alternatives .......................................... 48 4.3.2 Land Tenure .................................................................................................................. 49 4.3.3 Impact on Road network/treatment for road/rail crossings ........................................ 50 4.3.4 Transport safety and emergency response .................................................................. 51 4.3.5 Moving over – dimensional (OD) loads ......................................................................... 51 4.3.6 Air Quality ..................................................................................................................... 52 4.3.7 Noise and vibration ....................................................................................................... 54 4.3.8 Light spill/nuisance ....................................................................................................... 56 4.3.9 Hambidge Wilderness Protection Area (WPA) ............................................................. 57 4.3.10 Fire Management ...................................................................................................... 58 4.3.11 Terrestrial impacts (flora and fauna) ........................................................................ 59 4.3.14 Visual impacts/landscape quality .............................................................................. 62 4.3.15 Agricultural practice impacts .................................................................................... 63 4.3.16 Surface Water ........................................................................................................... 64 4.3.17 Groundwater ............................................................................................................. 66 4.3.18 Greenhouse gas/sustainability .................................................................................. 67 4.4 ELECTRICITY INFRASTRUCTURE CORRIDOR (Yadnarie Spur) ................................................. 68 4.4.1 General .............................................................................................................................. 68 4.4.1.2 Existing environment ................................................................................................ 68 4.4.2 Project Description – key elements ......................................................................................... 69 4.4.3 Key environmental, social and economic issues ............................................................... 69 4.5 WATER SUPPLY (Borefield) Corridor .................................................................................... 70 4.5.1 General .............................................................................................................................. 70 4.5.2 Project Description – key elements .............................................................................. 71 4.6 Summary of Submissions ...................................................................................................... 72 4.6.1 Public Submissions ........................................................................................................ 72 4.6.2 Government Submissions ............................................................................................. 72 4.7 Key Environmental, Economic and Social Issues ........................................................................ 72 4.7.1 Construction and operation .......................................................................................... 73 4.7.2 Impact on other uses/users .......................................................................................... 73 5 WUDINNA LONG‐TERM EMPLOYEE VILLAGE .................................................................... 74 5.1 General ........................................................................................................................................ 74 5.1.1 Site and locality ............................................................................................................. 74 3 5.1.2 Existing Environment .................................................................................................... 75 5.2 Project description – key elements ............................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Preliminary Assessment of a Strategic Port Expansion Option – Port Prepared For: Port Pirie Regional Council Pirie Regional Council Revision: FINAL 20 December 2013
    Reference: 239048 Project: Preliminary Assessment of a Strategic Port Expansion Option – Port Prepared for: Port Pirie Regional Council Pirie Regional Council Revision: FINAL 20 December 2013 Document Control Record Document prepared by: Aurecon Australia Pty Ltd ABN 54 005 139 873 55 Grenfell Street Adelaide SA 5000 Australia T +61 8 8237 9777 F +61 8 8237 9778 E [email protected] W aurecongroup.com A person using Aurecon documents or data accepts the risk of: a) Using the documents or data in electronic form without requesting and checking them for accuracy against the original hard copy version. b) Using the documents or data for any purpose not agreed to in writing by Aurecon. Preliminary Assessment of a Strategic Port Expansion Option – Port Pirie Regional Council Date | 20 December 2013 Reference | 239048 Revision | FINAL Aurecon Australia Pty Ltd ABN 54 005 139 873 55 Grenfell Street Adelaide SA 5000 Australia T +61 8 8237 9777 F +61 8 8237 9778 E [email protected] W aurecongroup.com Contents 1 Overview of this Preliminary Assessment 4 1.1 Purpose & Key Topics Covered in this Preliminary Assessment 4 1.2 Key Findings 5 1.3 Limitations of this Preliminary Assessment 6 1.4 Contacts for Interested Parties 6 2 Port Pirie – A Strategic Service Hub for the Minerals & Resources Sector 7 2.1 Growing Exploration Activity in South Australia 7 2.2 Introduction to Port Pirie 8 2.3 Access to Prime Infrastructure 10 2.4 Development Role of Port Pirie Council and Regional Development Australia Yorke & Mid North 11 2.5 Background
    [Show full text]
  • For Personal Use Only
    31 January 2020 QUARTERLY ACTIVITIES REPORT For the period ended 31 December 2019 Highlights • The Hon Michael McCormack MP, Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Infrastructure, Transport and Regional Development announced on 15 December 2019 that $25 million will be provided by the Federal Government to support the Cape Hardy port precinct in order to enhance regional economic growth benefits in the Eyre Peninsula that will arise from more efficient supply-chain and export infrastructure. • Cape Hardy Stage I port development update released 31 October 2019 indicating a capital cost estimate of $167 million for marine and landside facilities. • Stage I port capex estimate based on definitive CEIP feasibility study port design, further supported by supplementary 2019 vendor estimates and industry cost comparison analysis. • Iron Road, in collaboration with Eyre Peninsula Cooperative Bulk Handling (EPCBH), continues to advance Cape Hardy Stage I financing plan and delivery model - several potential strategic investors and debt finance providers engaged following announcement of Federal government funding support. • During November 2019 the Company’s General Manager, Mr Larry Ingle succeeded Mr Andrew Stocks as Iron Road’s Chief Executive Officer. For personal use only Extract of 15 December 2019 media release by the Hon Michael McCormack MP, Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Infrastructure, Transport and Regional Development (full media release and MYEFO 2019-20 extract attached). GPO Box 1164, Adelaide 5001 South Australia | T +61 (8) 8214 4400 [email protected] | ironroadlimited.com.au | ABN: 51 128 698 108 Central Eyre Iron Project (CEIP) Project Commercialisation The Hon Michael McCormack MP, Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Infrastructure, Transport and Regional Development announced on 15 December 2019 that $25 million will be provided to support the Cape Hardy port precinct in South Australia’s Eyre Peninsula.
    [Show full text]
  • Broken Hill Complex
    Broken Hill Complex Bioregion resources Photo Mulyangarie, DEH Broken Hill Complex The Broken Hill Complex bioregion is located in western New South Wales and eastern South Australia, spanning the NSW-SA border. It includes all of the Barrier Ranges and covers a huge area of nearly 5.7 million hectares with approximately 33% falling in South Australia! It has an arid climate with dry hot summers and mild winters. The average rainfall is 222mm per year, with slightly more rainfall occurring in summer. The bioregion is rich with Aboriginal cultural history, with numerous archaeological sites of significance. Biodiversity and habitat The bioregion consists of low ranges, and gently rounded hills and depressions. The main vegetation types are chenopod and samphire shrublands; casuarina forests and woodlands and acacia shrublands. Threatened animal species include the Yellow-footed Rock- wallaby and Australian Bustard. Grazing, mining and wood collection for over 100 years has led to a decline in understory plant species and cover, affecting ground nesting birds and ground feeding insectivores. 2 | Broken Hill Complex Photo by Francisco Facelli Broken Hill Complex Threats Threats to the Broken Hill Complex bioregion and its dependent species include: For Further information • erosion and degradation caused by overgrazing by sheep, To get involved or for more information please cattle, goats, rabbits and macropods phone your nearest Natural Resources Centre or • competition and predation by feral animals such as rabbits, visit www.naturalresources.sa.gov.au
    [Show full text]
  • Central Eyre Iron Project Environmental Impact Statement
    Central Eyre Iron Project Environmental Impact Statement EIS REFERENCES REFERENCES COPYRIGHT Copyright © Iron Road Limited, 2015 All rights reserved This document and any related documentation is protected by copyright owned by Iron Road Limited. The content of this document and any related documentation may only be copied and distributed for the purposes of section 46B of the Development Act, 1993 (SA) and otherwise with the prior written consent of Iron Road Limited. DISCLAIMER Iron Road Limited has taken all reasonable steps to review the information contained in this document and to ensure its accuracy as at the date of submission. Note that: (a) in writing this document, Iron Road Limited has relied on information provided by specialist consultants, government agencies, and other third parties. Iron Road Limited has reviewed all information to the best of its ability but does not take responsibility for the accuracy or completeness; and (b) this document has been prepared for information purposes only and, to the full extent permitted by law, Iron Road Limited, in respect of all persons other than the relevant government departments, makes no representation and gives no warranty or undertaking, express or implied, in respect to the information contained herein, and does not accept responsibility and is not liable for any loss or liability whatsoever arising as a result of any person acting or refraining from acting on any information contained within it. References A ADS 2014, Adelaide Dolphin Sanctuary, viewed January 2014, http://www.naturalresources.sa.gov.au/adelaidemtloftyranges/coast-and-marine/dolphin-sanctuary. Ainslie, RC, Johnston, DA & Offler, EW 1989, Intertidal communities of Northern Spencer Gulf, South Australia, Transactions of the Royal Society of South Australia, Adelaide.
    [Show full text]
  • Phylogenetic Structure of Vertebrate Communities Across the Australian
    Journal of Biogeography (J. Biogeogr.) (2013) 40, 1059–1070 ORIGINAL Phylogenetic structure of vertebrate ARTICLE communities across the Australian arid zone Hayley C. Lanier*, Danielle L. Edwards and L. Lacey Knowles Department of Ecology and Evolutionary ABSTRACT Biology, Museum of Zoology, University of Aim To understand the relative importance of ecological and historical factors Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI 48109-1079, USA in structuring terrestrial vertebrate assemblages across the Australian arid zone, and to contrast patterns of community phylogenetic structure at a continental scale. Location Australia. Methods We present evidence from six lineages of terrestrial vertebrates (five lizard clades and one clade of marsupial mice) that have diversified in arid and semi-arid Australia across 37 biogeographical regions. Measures of within-line- age community phylogenetic structure and species turnover were computed to examine how patterns differ across the continent and between taxonomic groups. These results were examined in relation to climatic and historical fac- tors, which are thought to play a role in community phylogenetic structure. Analyses using a novel sliding-window approach confirm the generality of pro- cesses structuring the assemblages of the Australian arid zone at different spa- tial scales. Results Phylogenetic structure differed greatly across taxonomic groups. Although these lineages have radiated within the same biome – the Australian arid zone – they exhibit markedly different community structure at the regio- nal and local levels. Neither current climatic factors nor historical habitat sta- bility resulted in a uniform response across communities. Rather, historical and biogeographical aspects of community composition (i.e. local lineage per- sistence and diversification histories) appeared to be more important in explaining the variation in phylogenetic structure.
    [Show full text]
  • E-F-82-TEM-0026 1 (Report Template 2010)
    Central Eyre Iron Project Environmental Impact Statement CHAPTER 22: SOCIAL ENVIRONMENT CHAPTER 22 SOCIAL ENVIRONMENT COPYRIGHT Copyright © Iron Road Limited, 2015 All rights reserved This document and any related documentation is protected by copyright owned by Iron Road Limited. The content of this document and any related documentation may only be copied and distributed for the purposes of section 46B of the Development Act, 1993 (SA) and otherwise with the prior written consent of Iron Road Limited. DISCLAIMER Iron Road Limited has taken all reasonable steps to review the information contained in this document and to ensure its accuracy as at the date of submission. Note that: (a) in writing this document, Iron Road Limited has relied on information provided by specialist consultants, government agencies, and other third parties. Iron Road Limited has reviewed all information to the best of its ability but does not take responsibility for the accuracy or completeness; and (b) this document has been prepared for information purposes only and, to the full extent permitted by law, Iron Road Limited, in respect of all persons other than the relevant government departments, makes no representation and gives no warranty or undertaking, express or implied, in respect to the information contained herein, and does not accept responsibility and is not liable for any loss or liability whatsoever arising as a result of any person acting or refraining from acting on any information contained within it. 22 Social Environment .............................................. 22-1 22.1 Applicable Legislation and Standards .................................................................................... 22-1 22.2 Impact Assessment Method .................................................................................................. 22-2 22.2.1 Study Areas ............................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Electranet Pty Ltd Eyre Peninsula Analysis
    ELECTRANET PTY LTD EYRE PENINSULA ANALYSIS WS:ANZ_Active:41075381:v1 08 June 2018 Mr. Brad Parker ElectraNet Pty Ltd 52-55 East Terrace Adelaide, SA 5000 AUSTRALIA Dear Mr. Parker, RE: Eyre Peninsula Analysis AME Consulting Pty Ltd (“AME”) has been engaged by ElectraNet Pty Ltd (“ElectraNet”, or the “Client”) to assess the Iron Ore projects on the Eyre Peninsula and discuss the likelihood of the projects commencing over the next 20 years (the “Report”). We understand and acknowledge that ElectraNet will use this report, in whole or part, with their advisors, on their planning report for network upgrades on the Eyre Peninsula. Production and Cost Analysis Available data varies greatly between operations and projects. Much information is not reliable due to language difficulties, the confidential nature of the information, the inability to estimate the reliability of AME’s sources and general lack of data. Consequently, much information has to be estimated and the quality, accuracy and completeness of the resulting cost comparisons will reflect this and cannot be guaranteed. Furthermore, forecast costs embody a number of significant assumptions with respect to exchange rates and other technical variables. Because of these factors, direct comparability between individual projects may be limited and, as such, our supply and cost estimates must be treated with caution and cannot be relied upon. Supply/Demand Analysis In addition, AME has supplied tables of historical data and estimated future supply, demand and market trends by compiling, interpreting and analysing engineering, supply, economic, statistical and technical information from many third-party sources. Such company and country statistics usually contain inconsistencies and utilise sampling data techniques and, thus, should not be relied upon.
    [Show full text]
  • ASX ANNOUNCEMENT Iron Road Limited (Iron Road, ASX:IRD)
    13 December 2016 ASX ANNOUNCEMENT Iron Road Limited (Iron Road, ASX:IRD) CAPE HARDY PORT DEVELOPMENT – CALLS FOR PRELIMINARY REGISTRATIONS OF INTEREST Opportunity for Regional Businesses to Utilise First Capesize Capable Port Facilities for South Australia Iron Road Limited (Iron Road, ASX: IRD) is pleased to announce that Regional Development Australia Whyalla and Eyre Peninsula (RDAWEP), on behalf of Iron Road, has commenced a Registration of Preliminary Interest process in relation to the Cape Hardy port development. An invitation for individuals and businesses seeking to utilise the proposed facilities, located 7km south of Port Neill on the eastern Eyre Peninsula, in South Australia, is now open. RDAWEP and Iron Road are keen to maximise the benefits of this important development to the region and encourage any parties that may be interested in the import or export of commodities, goods and services to register a non-binding preliminary interest. Service providers essential to general port operations are also invited to participate. Cape Hardy is a deep water development that will support vessels up to Capesize class, allowing some of the world’s most efficient dry cargo ships and bulk carriers to service the port. Regional Development Australia is an Australian Government initiative established to encourage partnership between all levels of government and industry to enhance the growth and development of Australia’s regional communities. RDAWEP is the peak body driving the expansion and growth of economic activity across Eyre Peninsula. Iron Road Managing Director Mr Andrew Stocks said that RDAWEP was contracted to undertake this important process on behalf of the Company due to its knowledge of, and commitment to, economic development in the region.
    [Show full text]
  • 30 June 2020
    Period 1 April – 30 June 2020 Each year the Eyre Peninsula Landscape Board enters into a Service Level Agreement with the Department for Environment and Water (DEW) for the delivery of the Board’s programs plus services provided by business support and the regional management team. Details of the Board’s programs can be found in the Board’s Business Plan (2017-2020). This report provides a quarterly update of each program, including: Program highlights this period Local government engagement for this period Upcoming priorities for the next period Each milestone is assigned a status, based on its current progress. On track to deliver On track to deliver most milestones. Unlikely to meet all milestones. May be some delays. milestones. Further details of each of these programs can be found on the Eyre Peninsula Landscape Board website or by contacting Tim Breuer (Team Leader, Landscape Operations - Eastern District) for projects in the City Council of Whyalla and District Councils of Kimba, Franklin Harbor and Cleve areas on 0488 000 481. Eyre Peninsula Landscape Board 1 SLA Quarterly Report Eastern District Landscapes Milestones Status Conserving and protecting species and ecosystems Improving community skills, knowledge and engagement in landscapes management Program highlights this period EP Blue Gum tree planting Staff, volunteers, school students, and landholders planted around 450 EP Blue Gum (Eucalyptus petiolaris) trees in the Cleve district during the month of June. Three hundred and fifty trees were planted in a 1 km stretch of fenced area along a creek line on Turnbull’s private farm in the Cleve Hills. A further fifty were planted along a fenced creek-line alongside an already occurring EP Blue Gum community at Paul Harris’s farm at Gum-Flat.
    [Show full text]
  • Exploring Adaptive Responses in Dryland Cropping Systems to Increase Robustness to Climate Change
    Exploring adaptive responses in dryland cropping systems to increase robustness to climate change. Samantha Doudle1, Peter Hayman2, Nigel Wilhelm2, Bronya Alexander2, Andy Bates3, Ed Hunt3, Bruce Heddle4, Andrew Polkinghorne3, Brenton Lynch3, Mark Stanley5, Alison Frischke1, Naomi Scholz1, Barry Mudge6 1 SARDI, Minnipa Agricultural Centre, 2SARDI, Waite Agricultural Institute, 3Eyre Peninsula Agricultural Consultant, 4Eyre Peninsula Agricultural Research Foundation, 5 Eyre Peninsula Natural Resources Management Board, 6Rural Solutions SA, Jamestown Funded by the Department of Climate Change Project # 0711Doudle Department of Climate Change, Comprehensive Project Report 1. Table of Contents Page No Title Page 1. Table of Contents 2 2. Abstract 3 3. Introduction 5 4. Materials and Methods 7 A. Develop a descriptive climate change adaptation framework for upper EP low rainfall farming systems 7 B. Apply the framework to current farming systems 8 C. Apply the framework to a farming system under climate change 8 D. Use framework for gap analysis 8 5. Results 13 Q1: What are the common characteristics of the robust businesses examined? 13 Q2: What are their important key strengths and associated management strategies? 15 Q3: What are the important vulnerabilities and associated management? 18 SARDI Climate Applications Unit Yield Simulation Analysis of Low Rainfall Areas 18 6. Discussion 21 Q1: What are the common characteristics of robust businesses examined? 21 Q2: What are their important key strengths and associated management strategies? 21 Q3: What are their important vulnerabilities and associated management? 22 Q4: How can their current strengths be maintained or further strengthened and how can the vulnerabilities be minimised in the future? 22 7.
    [Show full text]
  • Port Spencer Grain Export Facility Peninsula Ports
    Port Spencer Grain Export Facility Peninsula Ports Amendment to Public Environmental Report IW219900-0-NP-RPT-0003 | 2 8 November 2019 Amend ment to Pu blic Envir onm ental Rep ort Peninsula P orts Amendment to Public Environmental Report Port Spencer Grain Export Facility Project No: IW219900 Document Title: Amendment to Public Environmental Report Document No.: IW219900-0-NP-RPT-0003 Revision: 2 Date: 8 November 2019 Client Name: Peninsula Ports Client No: Client Reference Project Manager: Scott Snedden Author: Alana Horan File Name: J:\IE\Projects\06_Central West\IW219900\21 Deliverables\AMENDMENT TO THE PER\Amendment to PER_Rev 2.docx Jacobs Group (Australia) Pty Limited ABN 37 001 024 095 Level 3, 121 King William Street Adelaide SA 5000 Australia www.jacobs.com © Copyright 2020 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’ 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. Document history and status Revision Date Description By Review Approved H 31.10.2019 Draft AH NB SS 0 1.11.2019 Draft issued to DPTI AH SS DM 1 8.11.2019 Issued to DPTI AH SS DM 2 13.1.2020 Re-issued Volume 1 to DPTI.
    [Show full text]
  • The ISA Discussion Paper (DP) Identifies The
    The ISA Discussion Paper (DP) identifies the following four projects within the Eyre & Western Region as priorities ‐• 6‐Star $500m International Holiday Resort • Competitive Export Pathways for Primary Industries • Super School in Whyalla Education & Training Precinct • Energy Transmission and Generation on EP. This information is sourced (acknowledged) from the RDSA Infrastructure Priorities Report. The priorities require updating to reflect changes since the report was published and the report, within the context of this region and ISA’s objectives, requires a broader perspective. For instance RDAWEP has successfully supported and advocated for; the $100m Super School (due for completion in 2021) and has broadened the agenda to advocate for an integrated Education and Innovation Precinct (EIP) an $280m upgrade of the energy transmission network (Electranet due to commence construction in 2020) and is progressing various energy generation projects across the region – however the planned transmission upgrade will be at maximum capacity when completed and therefore requires greater capacity than is planned Competitive Export Pathways for Primary Industries which is a catch‐all for the ports of Thevenard, Port Lincoln, Lucky Bay, Whyalla, approved port at Cape Hardy together with bulk handling, storage and transport network efficiencies, including road & rail, for agriculture, mining and processing – this catch‐all represents many projects that drives efficiency, enhances global competitiveness and collectively exceeds $1bn, ranging from maintenance and enhancement of existing assets (i.e. dredging Thevenard) to building new Infrastructure (i.e. Cape Hardy Port and connection to national rail grid) Early high level master planning, identification of key stakeholders, location & land acquisition and potential partners for a multi experience International Resort.
    [Show full text]