WESTERN TURNER SYNCLINE STAGE 2 B1 and S17 Deposits
Assessment on Proponent Information
Environmental Review Document
Hamersley Iron Pty Limited 152‐158 St Georges Terrace, Perth GPO Box A42, Perth, WA 6837
April 2013
Disclaimer and Limitation
This document has been based on draft documents prepared by Strategen environmental consultancy, amended by Rio Tinto in response to comments from the Office of the Environmental Protection Authority. The efforts of Strategen in contributing to this document are appreciated. Copyright and any other Intellectual Property arising from this report and the provision of the services in accordance with the Agreement belongs exclusively to Strategen unless otherwise agreed. This document may not be reproduced or disclosed to any person without the express written authority of Rio Tinto unless the document has been released for referral and assessment of proposals.
Revision Submission Report version Purpose Author/Reviewer No. To whom Date Preliminary Draft Rev. A Review Strategen (N. Zago) Rio Tinto 28/09/12 Report Draft Report Rev B Review Strategen (N. Zago) Rio Tinto 12/10/12 Draft Report Rev O Review Strategen (N. Zago/H. Ventriss) Rio Tinto 25/10/12 Draft Report Rev 1 Review Strategen (N. Zago) Rio Tinto 29/10/12 Draft Report Rev C Review Strategen (N. Zago/H. Ventriss) Rio Tinto 08/11/12 Draft Report Rev D Review Strategen (N. Zago) Rio Tinto 12/12/12 Final Draft Report Rev E Review Strategen (N Zago/K Oliver) Rio Tinto 19/12/12 EPA Final Report Rev 2 Strategen (N Zago) EPA 20/12/12 Review Final Report Rev F Review Strategen (N Zago/H Ventriss) Rio Tinto 07/02/13 Final Report Rev G Review Strategen (N Zago) Rio Tinto 14/02/13 Final Report Rev H Review Strategen (N Zago) Rio Tinto 15/02/13 Final Report Rev 3 Review Strategen (N Zago) Rio Tinto 18/02/13 EPA Final Report Rev 4 Rio Tinto (J. English) EPA 10/04/13 Review
Page ii Western Turner Syncline Stage 2 – B1 and S17 Deposits API: Environmental Review Document
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Disclaimer and Limitation ii
1 PROPOSAL 1 1.1 Proponent Details 1 1.2 Proposal Description 1 1.3 Changes to the Proposal since Referral 3 1.4 Proposal Tenure 4 1.5 Land Use and Social Environment in Proximity to the Proposal 5
2 STAKEHOLDER CONSULTATION 15
3 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS AND MANAGEMENT 27 3.1 Environmental Impacts and Management 27 3.2 Environmental Management Overview 27
4 OTHER ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS 61
5 OTHER LEGISLATION AND APPROVALS 69
6 PRINCIPLES OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AND EIA 71 6.1 Principles of Environmental Protection 71 6.2 Principles of EIA for the Proponent 72 6.3 Criteria for API Category A 74
7 REFERENCES 75
FIGURES
Figure 1‐1: Regional Location 6 Figure 1‐2: Proposal Locality 7 Figure 1‐3: Proposal Boundary and Indicative Infrastructure Layout 8 Figure 1‐4: Landscapes and Vegetation of the WTS Area 9 Figure 1‐5: Proposal Boundary Revision 13 Figure 1‐6: Proposal Tenure 14 Figure 3‐1: Vegetation and Flora of Localised Conservation Significance 37 Figure 3‐2: B1 Groundwater Drawdown and Dewatering Discharge 39 Figure 3‐3: Significant Species and Fauna Habitats 43 Figure 3‐4: Modelled Discharge Extent and Aquatic Fauna Sampling Sites 49 Figure 3‐5: B1 Deposit Geological Sections 53 Figure 3‐6: Section 17 Geological Sections 54
Page iii Western Turner Syncline Stage 2 – B1 and S17 Deposits API: Environmental Review Document
TABLES
Table 1‐1: Proposal Summary 3 Table 1‐2: Location and Extent of Physical and Operational Elements of the Proposal 3 Table 1‐3: Changes to the Proposal since Referral 3 Table 2‐1: Stakeholder Consultation Relevant to the Proposal 16 Table 3‐1: Summary of Supporting Studies 29 Table 3‐2: Vegetation and Flora: Description of Factor, Impact Assessment and Management 35 Table 3‐3: Terrestrial Fauna: Description of Factor, Impact Assessment and Management 41 Table 3‐4: Subterranean Fauna: Description of Factor, Impact Assessment and Management 45 Table 3‐5: Hydrological Processes and Inland Water Environmental Quality (Aquatic Fauna): Description of Factor, Impact Assessment and Management 47 Table 3‐6: Hydrological Processes and Inland Waters Environmental Quality (Groundwater): Description of Factor, Impact Assessment and Management 51 Table 3‐7: Hydrological Processes and Inland Waters Environmental Quality (Surface Water): Description of Factor, Impact Assessment and Management 55 Table 3‐8: Rehabilitation and Closure: Description of Factor, Impact Assessment and Management 57 Table 3‐9: Residual Impacts: Description of Factor, Impact Assessment and Management 59 Table 4‐1: Other Environmental Factors, Impact Assessment and Management 62 Table 5‐1: Other Legislation and Approvals 69 Table 6‐1: Principles of Environmental Protection 71 Table 6‐2: Principles of EIA for the Proponent 72 Table 6‐3: Criteria for API Category A 74
LIST OF PLATES
Plate 1: Proposal Area from the Nanutarra‐Munjina Road, view Southwest to Northwest (L to R) from Point A on Figure 1‐4 11 Plate 2: Proposal Area from the Nanutarra Munjina Road; view Northwest to Northeast (L to R) from Point B on Figure 1‐4 11 Plate 3: B1 deposit; view to East, from Point C Figure 1‐4, B1 satellite pits will be located on the lower slopes of the ridgeline in right of picture 12 Plate 4: S17; view northwest to north (L to R), from Point D on Figure 1‐4 12
Page iv Western Turner Syncline Stage 2 – B1 and S17 Deposits API: Environmental Review Document
APPENDICES
Appendix 1 Supporting Tables 79 Appendix 2 A Vegetation and Flora Survey of the West Turner Section 10 Area and Infrastructure Corridor (Biota 2007). 89 Appendix 3 West Turner Syncline Section 10 Development Two‐Phase Fauna Survey (Biota 2009a). 89 Appendix 4 A Two‐Phase Fauna Survey of the West Turner Syncline Area, (Biota 2009b). 89 Appendix 5 West Turner Targeted Fauna Survey (Biota 2011a). 89 Appendix 6 West Turner Syncline Section 10 Expanded Vegetation and Flora Survey Report (Biota 2011b). 89 Appendix 7 West Turner Syncline Phase 2 Vegetation and Flora Report (Biota 2013a). 89 Appendix 8 West Turner Syncline NES Species Assessment (Biota 2012a). 89 Appendix 9 West Turner Syncline Fauna Survey Summary Report (Biota 2012b). 89 Appendix 10 West Turner Syncline Stage 2 – Phase 1 Survey and Targeted Vegetation Survey (Biota 2013b). 89 Appendix 11 West Turner Syncline Stage 2 B1 and Section 17 Deposits Subterranean Fauna Survey (Biota 2012c). 89 Appendix 12 Western Turner Syncline Stage 2 Visual Impact Assessment (Ecoscape 2012). 89 Appendix 13 Predicted Dust Levels from Western Turner Syncline Stage 2 (B1 and S17) Iron Ore Project (Environmental Alliances 2012). 89 Appendix 14 Western Turner Syncline Stage 2 Project Ecological Risk Assessment (Equinox Environmental 2012). 89 Appendix 15 WTS2 B1 Water Quality Assessment (KCB 2012b). 89 Appendix 16 Potential Impacts of Dewatering and Discharge to Duck Creek and Caves Creek, Greater Nammuldi (Rio Tinto 2011). 89 Appendix 17 Baseline Hydrology Assessment for Local Creek Discharge from WTS B1 (Rio Tinto 2012a). 89 Appendix 18 Western Turner Syncline B1 – Feasibility Study Groundwater Modelling: Dewatering and Closure (Rio Tinto 2013a). 89 Appendix 19 WTS Phase II Surface Water Management, unpublished report prepared by Rio Tinto (Rio Tinto 2012c). 89 Appendix 20 Western Turner Syncline B1 – Feasibility Studies Groundwater Modelling: Dewatering and Closure (Rio Tinto 2012d). 89 Appendix 21 Surface hydrology in the vicinity of the WTS2 infrastructure corridor between WTS B1 and S10; assessment and modelling of natural surface flows (Rio Tinto 2012e). 89 Appendix 22 Western Turner Syncline B1 and S17 AMD Risk Assessment (Rio Tinto 2012f). 89 Appendix 23 Western Turner Syncline (Stage 2) Closure Plan (Rio Tinto 2012g). 89 Appendix 24 Environmental Noise Assessment of Western Turner Syncline Stage II Project (SVT 2012). 89 Appendix 25 West Turner Syncline Stage 2 ‐ Potential impacts of mining operations on overland flow dependent vegetation ‐ Preliminary assessment (UWA 2012a). 89 Appendix 26 West Turner Syncline Stage 2 ‐ Potential impacts of mining operations on groundwater dependent vegetation ‐ Preliminary assessment (UWA 2012b). 89 Appendix 27 Western Turner Syncline Project, wet & dry 2011 sampling, final report (WRM 2012a). 89 Appendix 28 WTS2 – groundwater quality updated data (WRM 2012b). 89 Appendix 29 WTS Stage 2 FS – Water balance & strategy update (Rio Tinto 2013b). 89 Appendix 30 Checklist for documents submitted for EIA on marine and terrestrial biodiversity. 89 Appendix 31 EPA prepared scoping guideline. 89
Page v
Western Turner Syncline Stage 2 – B1 and S17 Deposits API: Environmental Review Document
1 PROPOSAL
The Proposal was referred to the Environmental Protection Authority (EPA) on 4 May 2012. The EPA set an Assessment on Proponent Information (API) level of assessment under s 38 of the Environmental Protection Act 1986 (EP Act) on 25 June 2012. An EPA prepared Environmental Scoping Document (ESD) was provided on 5 October 2012. This Environmental Review document has been prepared in accordance with the ESD, and the information requirements for a Category A API as set out in the Environmental Impact Assessment (Part IV Divisions 1 and 2) Administrative Procedures 2012 (2012 Administrative Procedures).
1.1 Proponent Details The Proponent for this Proposal is Hamersley Iron Pty Ltd. Hamersley Iron Pty Limited ABN: 49 004 558 276 GPO Box A42 PERTH WA 6837 The contact person for the Proposal is: Jeremy English Rio Tinto Iron Ore: Superintendent Approvals T: +61 (0)8 9205 2919 [email protected]
1.2 Proposal Description Hamersley Iron Pty Limited (a wholly‐owned subsidiary of Rio Tinto) proposes to develop the Western Turner Syncline Stage 2 – B1 and Section 17 Deposits (Proposal), located approximately 30 km west of Tom Price in the central Pilbara region of Western Australia (Figure 1‐1). The Proposal involves open‐ pit mining of the B1 and Section 17 (S17) iron ore deposits, transport of ore to the existing Western Turner Syncline (WTS) Section 10 (S10) mine (approximately 12 km east of the B1 deposit) and construction/operation of associated infrastructure (Figure 1‐2). The Proposal will operate at production rates of up to approximately 32 million tonnes per annum (Mtpa). The Proposal will be integrated into the current Rio Tinto Greater Tom Price mining operation. After transport to the WTS S10 mine, ore will be transferred via an existing transportation corridor to the Tom Price mine for further processing, and subsequently to port facilities at Cape Lambert and Dampier via the existing Rio Tinto rail network. The main components of the Proposal comprise the following elements: 1. Open pit mining of iron ore at productions rates of up to approximately 32 Mtpa from the B1 deposit (one main pit and four small satellite pits) and S17 deposit (eight pits) for at least 15 years. 2. An infrastructure corridor (approximate length of 12 km) linking B1 to the S10 mine site, including a conveyor system, light and heavy vehicle access roads, above‐ground power lines, water pipelines and communications.
Page 1 Western Turner Syncline Stage 2 – B1 and S17 Deposits API: Environmental Review Document
3. Mine support infrastructure (located predominantly near B1) including primary crushing facilities, ROM pad, workshops, fuel storage/refuelling facilities, waste disposal facilities, explosives storage facility, communications infrastructure, heavy and light vehicle access roads, power distribution infrastructure, administration facilities, and other ancillary facilities as required. 4. Dewatering of the B1 main pit via in‐pit bores at extraction rates up to approximately 30 ML/day (11 GL/annum) to enable mining to a depth of approximately 195 m below water table (BWT). Required rates of dewatering are expected to peak in the first three years of operation and then decline to approximately 14 ML/day from 2018 to 2027. The four B1 satellite pits are above water table (AWT). 5. Minor dewatering of S17 pits 3 and 8 (to enable mining to approximately 15 m BWT); the other six pits at S17 are AWT. 6. Water supply from mine dewatering with current demand expected to average approximately 6 ML/day. 7. Dewatering from the B1 deposit in excess of operational requirements will be discharged to a watercourse north of the deposit (discharge watercourse), that joins the Beasley River 10 km downstream of the discharge point. From 2015 to 2017, potential discharge of up to 30 ML/day (excluding expected on‐site water use of 6 ML/day) is predicted to extend approximately 18 km downstream of the discharge point. From 2018 to 2027, potential discharge of approximately 14 ML/day (excluding expected on‐site water use of 6 ML/day) is predicted to extend approximately 13 km downstream of the discharge point. With operational water use of approximately 6 ML/day, discharge is expected to be <10 ML/day for the majority of the life of the Proposal. 8. Mineral waste disposal in permanent out‐of‐pit waste dumps. Progressive backfill of the B1 satellite pits and S17 pits will be undertaken where practical, with prioritisation to ensure S17 pits 3 and 8 are backfilled to a level sufficient to prevent formation of pit lakes. 9. Stockpiling of high grade and low‐grade ore, topsoil and subsoil. 10. Power supply through connection to existing Rio Tinto power supply network. Diesel generators will be duse during construction and as emergency supply during operations. 11. Investigative and monitoring activities. The Proposal boundary, and indicative layout of the main mine and infrastructure components (during Feasibility Study) is illustrated in Figure 1‐3. The proposed extent of clearing (2700 ha) within the Proposal boundary (8430 ha) allows for an approximately 30% larger footprint than the current indicative layout. This is to enable: • potential design modifications during the Proposal Feasibility Study, detailed design, construction and operational phases; • temporary construction disturbance; • additional minor infrastructure components and activities. Landscapes and vegetation of the WTS area, where the Proposal is located, are illustrated in Figure 1‐4 and Plate 1 to Plate 4. Table 1‐1 summarises the Proposal and Table 1‐2 details the key characteristics of the Proposal.
Page 2 Western Turner Syncline Stage 2 – B1 and S17 Deposits API: Environmental Review Document
Table 1‐1: Proposal Summary
Western Turner Syncline Stage 2 – B1 and S17 Deposits
The proposal is to develop and operate an iron ore mine approximately 30 km west of Tom Price, Western Australia. The proposal involves open‐pit mining of the B1 and Section 17 Short description iron ore deposits, transport of ore to the existing Western Turner Syncline Section 10 mine (approximately 12 km east of the B1 deposit) and the construction/operation of associated infrastructure.
Table 1‐2: Location and Extent of Physical and Operational Elements of the Proposal
Element Location Extent
Clearing for mine pits and associated Up to 2700 ha within the 8430 ha Figure 1‐3 infrastructure Proposal boundary
Dewatering B1 and S17 deposits (Figure 1‐3) Up to 11 GL/annum
To watercourse near B1 deposit Discharge water Up to 11 GL/annum (Figure 1‐3)
1.3 Changes to the Proposal since Referral Changes to the proposal since referral to the EPA on 4 May 2012 are defined in Table 1‐3. The change in spatial extent of the Proposal boundary is illustrated in Figure 1‐5.
Table 1‐3: Changes to the Proposal since Referral
Proposed in Element Current Proposal Comment/Justification Referral
An additional 200 ha of clearing is required based on more detailed Proposal design during the Feasibility Study, Clearing 2,500 ha 2,700 ha primarily associated with an additional waste dump location and haul roads.
Construction Construction Rio Tinto has determined that alternative accommodation Construction workforce to be workforce to be options are preferable to construction of a new camp near camp located in a camp located off‐site. the WTS B1 deposit. near B1 deposit.
Maximum Maximum dewatering rate dewatering rate Based on data collected from bores in 2012, the B1 deposit 13 ML/day 30 ML/day groundwater model for the B1 deposit was updated in dewatering (5 GL/annum). (11 GL/annum). November. 2012 This model update has indicated an rate and Total dewatering increase in the required rate and volume of dewatering volume Total dewatering volume approx. volume approx. from the B1 deposit (Rio Tinto 2013a). 21 GL. 80 GL.
Page 3 Western Turner Syncline Stage 2 – B1 and S17 Deposits API: Environmental Review Document
Proposed in Element Current Proposal Comment/Justification Referral
Up to 13 ML/day Up to 30 ML/day Dewatering discharge. discharge. Due to the increased rate of dewatering from the B1 discharge Maximum Maximum deposit, an increase in the rate of dewatering discharge to rate, volume discharge extent discharge extent the environment is required (Rio Tinto 2013a, 2013b). and extent approx. 13 km. approx. 18 km. Based on higher level of certainty regarding infrastructure locations, and in consideration of outcomes of vegetation and fauna surveys, the western extent of the Proposal boundary has been reduced in size during the Feasibility Study (Figure 1‐5), achieving the following environmental outcomes: Significant reduction in the area of the locally significant ‘gorge and gully’ vegetation community within the Proposal boundary (e.g. from 61% to 34% of the mapped extent of the 'gorge and gully' community in WTS area).
Proposal Exclusion from the Proposal boundary of the gorge 9,000 ha 8,430 ha Boundary east of Mt Turner where both the Leaf‐nosed Bat and the Olive Python have been recorded. Exclusion from the Proposal boundary of three locations of the P1 species Hibiscus sp. Mt Brockman (Figure 3‐1). Two small additional areas have been included in the Proposal boundary: Near the existing Section 10 mine, to align with the boundary of a tenure application. Near the S17 waste dump, to provide additional area between the indicative dump footprint and the Proposal boundary.
1.4 Proposal Tenure Proposed infrastructure is located on current and pending tenure under the Iron Ore (Hamersley Range) Agreement Act 1963 (State Agreement Act), Mining Act 1978 (Mining Act), and the Land Administration Act 1997 (LA Act) as follows (Figure 1‐6): • The B1 and S17 deposits, and the majority of support infrastructure, are located on State Agreement Act tenure Mining Lease No. 4SA. • Applications for Miscellaneous Licences under the Mining Act have been submitted where required for infrastructure corridors. • Applications for leases under the LA Act have been made where required for infrastructure, stockpiles and waste dumps.
Page 4 Western Turner Syncline Stage 2 – B1 and S17 Deposits API: Environmental Review Document
The Proposal boundary incorporates some 'off tenure' areas where tenure is held by third parties (Exploration Licences under the Mining Act). While Proposal infrastructure is not planned to be located in these areas, they are included within the Proposal boundary to provide some flexibility if locations of infrastructure are modified duringg ongoin Proposal planning, or preferred tenure locations cannot be obtained. If any additional 'off‐tenure' areas are required due to modifications in planned location of infrastructure, suitable tenure and other legislative approvals required will be obtained prior to implementing activities within these areas.
1.5 Land Use and Social Environment in Proximity to the Proposal The Proposal is located within the Shire of Ashburton (Pilbara Region), approximately 30 km west of the town of Tom Price. Landscapes and vegetation of the WTS area, where the Proposal is located, are illustrated in Figure 1‐4 and Plate 1 to Plate 4. The Proposal is located within the traditional lands of the Eastern Guruma people, and the Yinhawangka people. The B1 deposit occurs within the Eastern Guruma native title claim area (WC97/89). Rio Tinto entered into an Indigenous Land Use Agreement (ILUA) with the Eastern Guruma People on 13 February 2008. The S17 deposit occurs within the Yinhawangka native title claim area (WC10/16). Rio Tinto has a Multiple Project Binding Agreement with the Yinhawangka people, and is currently in negotiations with a view to reaching a commercial Participation Agreement, that will be registered later as an ILUA. The Rocklea pastoral station (leased and operated by Hamersley Iron) is partially intersected by the north of the Proposal boundary, and occurs in close proximity to the west (4 km) and south (200 m) of the Proposal boundary (Figure 1‐6). The Hardey River borefield, that provides water to the Tom Price mining operation, occurs to the south east of the Proposal boundary, on a Land Act lease, held by Hamersley Iron. Mining operations in proximity to the Proposal include the WTS S10 mine (12 km to the east of B1), the Tom Price mine (30 km southeast of B1) and the Brockman 4 mine (22 km northwest of B1), all owned and operated by Hamersley Iron (Figure 1‐2). White Quartz Road, which passes through the north of the Proposal boundary, is a sealed private road constructed and operated by Hamersley Iron that provides access to the Brockman 4 mine site. The Proposal boundary intersects, and occurs in proximity to, several tMining Ac Exploration Licences held by third parties. A proposed LA Act lease to be held by the Eastern Guruma is located approximately 1.4 km west of the north‐west corner Proposal boundary, north of the White Quartz Road (Hamersley Iron has agreed to excise this area from the Rocklea pastoral station). The proposed lease includes a ~3.6 km section of the Beasley River, which is within the extent of dewatering discharge at rates >15 ML/day. Karijini National Park, 18 km east of the Proposal boundary, is the only location registered on the Australian Heritage Database in the vicinity of Tom Price. No Heritage Council of Western Australia listed sites occur within the vicinity of the Proposal.
Page 5 400,000 mE 500,000 mE 600,000 mE 700,000 mE 800,000 mE CapeCape LambertLambert 7,700,000 mN DampierDampier WickhamWickham KarrathaKarratha Resource Strategy & Planning KarrathaKarratha RoebourneRoebourne y RoebourneRoebourne wa gh Hi FIGURE 1 - 1 t es W Coastal 7,700,000 mN Regional Location of Western Turner Syncline
StageMarbleMarble 2 BarBar Drawn: T. Linklater Plan No. PDE0092359v1 Date: April, 2013 Proj: MGA94 Zone50
Millstream-Chichester G r e National Park a t
h 7,600,000 mN rt o PannawonicaPannawonica N OnslowOnslow OnslowOnslow MesaMesa AA
MesaMesa JJ N o 7,600,000 mN
r t h
e
r n
CloudbreakCloudbreak NammuldiNammuldi H w 7,500,000 mN BrockmanBrockman 22 y ChristmasChristmas N a LEGEND n CreekCreek u CreekCreek ta BrockmanBrockman 44 rr Brockman 4 MarandooMarandoo Mine a MarandooMarandoo WesternWestern TurnerTurner SynclineSyncline S10S10 TomTom PricePrice BHPIOBHPIO YandiYandi Town Western Turner Syncline Stage 2 7,500,000 mN YandicooginaYandicoogina Port YandicooginaYandicoogina - Mu MountMount TomTom PricePrice njina LOCATION MAP Railway Karijini MACMAC Road MACMAC National Park HopeHope DownsDowns 11 Sealed Road
Unsealed Road WesternWestern TurnerTurner WesternWestern TurnerTurner SynclineSynclineSyncline Stage StageStage 2 22 WestWest AngelasAngelas SynclineSynclineSyncline Stage StageStage 2 22 ParaburdooParaburdoo WestWest AngelasAngelas ParaburdooParaburdoo ChannarChannar NewmanNewman SCALE EasternEastern RangeRange ChannarChannar 10 0 10 20 30 40km MountMount WhalebackWhaleback 1:2 000 000 @ A4
400,000 mE 500,000 mE 600,000 mE 700,000 mE
Plate 1: Proposal area from the Nanutarra‐Munjina Road; view southwest to northwest (L to R) from point A on Figure 1‐4
Plate 2: Proposal area from the Nanutarra‐Munjina Road; view northwest to northeast (L to R) from point A on Figure 1‐4 Plate 3: B1 deposit; view to east from point C on Figure 1‐4
B1 satellite pits will be located on the lower slopes of the ridgeline in right of picture.
Plate 4: S17; view northwest to north (L to R), from point D on Figure 1‐4
Western Turner Syncline Stage 2 – B1 and S17 Deposits API: Environmental Review Document
2 STAKEHOLDER CONSULTATION
Identified key stakeholders for this project include:
Government agencies:
o Office of the Environmental Protection Authority (OEPA); o Department of Environment and Conservation (DEC) – Pilbara Region, Perth Environmental Management Branch (EMB), Perth Contaminated Sites Branch (CSB);
o Department of Mines and Petroleum (DMP); o Department of State Development (DSD); o Department of Water (DoW) – Pilbara regional office and Perth office; o Department of Indigenous Affairs (DIA); o Shire of Ashburton. Traditional Owners:
o Eastern Guruma Group; o Yinhawangka Group.
Stakeholder consultation undertaken to date, and Rio Tinto’s response to issues raised, is detailed in Table 2‐1. Rio Tinto will continue to consult with relevant stakeholders during the environmental approval process, and during implementation of the Proposal.
Page 15 Western Turner Syncline Stage 2 – B1 and S17 Deposits API: Environmental Review Document
Table 2‐1: Stakeholder Consultation Relevant to the Proposal
Date Topics/Issues Raised Proponent Response Office of the Environmental Protection Authority (OEPA) Rio Tinto provided a detailed overview of the Proposal, current/planned
environmental studies, potential environmental impacts and proposed management. Rio Tinto has addressed closure as a key issue during the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) for the Proposal. A Proposal Closure Plan has OEPA advised the key issue for Proposal is likely to be associated with closure. been prepared in accordance with the Guidelines for Preparing Mine 29/02/2012 Closure Plans (DMP/EPA), 2011 and is provided as Appendix 23. The referral document included an assessment of requirement for an OEPA advised the referral should include assessment of requirement for an offset in offset. accordance with Appendix 2 of EPA Guidance Statement No. 19. A proposed offset package has been provided as a separate document to the Environmental Review.
Discussion of key environmental factors identified in EPA‐prepared Environmental Rio Tinto to address key environmental factors in Environmental 3/09/2012 Scoping Document (ESD). Review.
Meeting included DMP. Rio Tinto provided detailed overview of the Proposal, with focus on waste characterisation, pit lake water quality modelling, and closure management. 5/10/2012
OEPA advised Environmental Review needs to clearly define whether impacts to Environmental Review provides detail that impact to potential GDV in potential groundwater‐dependent vegetation (GDV) are likely. the WTS area is highly unlikely.
Discussion of structure and content of Environmental Review document to be Rio Tinto will prepare the Environmental Review document in 2/11/2012 submitted for EPA assessment. General agreement reached. accordance with the agreed approach.
Discussion of OEPA comments on submitted Environmental Review document, and Rio Tinto will revise Environmental Review document in accordance 30/01/2013 approach to address. General agreement reached. with agreed approach, and resubmit.
Site visit to WTS2 with OEPA and DOW. 12/03/2013 General discussion of relevant environmental factors and potential impacts.
Page 16 Western Turner Syncline Stage 2 – B1 and S17 Deposits API: Environmental Review Document
Date Topics/Issues Raised Proponent Response DEC ‐ Environmental Management Branch (EMB) Rio Tinto provided a detailed overview of the Proposal, current/planned environmental studies, potential environmental impacts and proposed management, with focus on biological issues. Rio Tinto has subsequently implemented a more rigorous modelling DEC advised the proposed approach to identify areas where potentially overland approach to assess the potential impacts of the infrastructure corridor flow‐dependent vegetation may be impacted by the infrastructure corridor was on surface hydrology (Appendix 21). This updated approach was reasonable. discussed with DEC EMB on 23 October 2012.
DEC advised the proposed approach to assessment of impacts on troglofauna Rio Tinto has implemented proposed approach, as detailed in the 20/02/2012 identified in the Proposal area (genetic analysis, habitat assessment) was reasonable. Environmental Review.
Rio Tinto implemented further surveys outside the Proposal boundary DEC queried the potential for further ‘gorge and gully’ vegetation to occur outside in 2012, and has identified further areas of ‘gorge and gully’ vegetation the Proposal boundary. within the Environmental Review (Figure 3‐1). Rio Tinto has undertaken 2 phases of pit lake water quality modelling in DEC queried the timeframe to further develop understanding of likely pit lake water 2012 (Appendix 15). The modelling report is an appendix to the quality at the B1 deposit, and proposed management. Environmental Review. The Closure Plan (Appendix )23 provides detail on proposed management of the pit lake. Rio Tinto provided an overview of the Proposal with focus on: Outcomes of surface hydrology modelling that indicates any overland flow occurring in the vicinity of the proposed infrastructure corridor is highly unlikely (Appendix 21), and the approach is to optimise the location of culverts within watercourses.
Overview of subterranean fauna survey results, with focus on risk‐based 23/10/2012 approach that demonstrates Proposal is likely to comprise low risk to troglofauna based on (i) outcomes of genetic analysis of troglophiles collected at B1 and S17 deposits, and (ii) habitat assessment based on geology (Appendix 11). DEC indicated approach to issues generally considered reasonable, and that further comment on the Proposal will be provided if warranted following EMB assessment of Detail on issues has been provided in the Environmental Review. the Environmental Review document.
Page 17 Western Turner Syncline Stage 2 – B1 and S17 Deposits API: Environmental Review Document
Date Topics/Issues Raised Proponent Response DEC – Pilbara Region
Rio Tinto provided detailed overview of the Proposal, current/planned environmental
studies, potential environmental impacts and proposed management.
Weed monitoring methodology was discussed in the context of the recently updated Rio Tinto will align weed monitoring methodology with updated Weed Rio Tinto Weed Management Strategy, and potential Ministerial conditions for the Management Strategy, and potential Ministerial conditions for the 01/03/2012 Proposal. Proposal.
The possibility for baseline monitoring of potential overland flow‐dependent vegetation and weeds in 2012 was discussed. DEC advised that the EMB is the first Noted. point of contact to discuss monitoring methodologies.
DEC – Contaminated Sites Branch (CSB) Meeting included DoW. Rio Tinto provided overview of the Proposal, with focus on geology, hydrogeology, geochemical waste characterisation, pit lake water quality modelling, mineral waste management, and closure planning.
DEC advised approach to geochemical waste characterisation and pit lake water Acknowledged. quality modelling was reasonable, and appropriate for the stage of the Proposal.
1/11/2012 DEC provided several suggestions for consideration in future phases of pit lake water Rio Tinto confirms the LEAF procedures were considered during quality modelling, including: development of the current sequential leach scheme. consideration of sorption by iron oxides; Rio Tinto will investigate these recommendations and leach testing with water of similar total dissolved solids (TDS) to predicted incorporate in future phases of pit lake water quality modelling future pit lake TDS to investigate possible effects such as desorption of where appropriate. phosphates; Rio Tinto will continue to seek feedback from key stakeholders consideration of the Leaching Environmental Assessment Framework. regarding approach to pit lake water quality modelling.
Page 18 Western Turner Syncline Stage 2 – B1 and S17 Deposits API: Environmental Review Document
Date Topics/Issues Raised Proponent Response Department of Mines and Petroleum – Minerals Branch
Rio Tinto provided detailed overview of the Proposal, current/planned environmental studies, potential environmental impacts and proposed management, with focus on waste characterisation and closure issues.
DMP provided comment on a range of Proposal‐specific issues, predominantly associated with mine closure, including: • potential for dewatering of Mount McRae Shale to generate Acid and Metalliferous Drainage (AMD); • potential impacts of dewatering discharge on watercourse vegetation; • waste characterisation and volumes of material to be managed; • location of topsoil stockpiles preferably in proximity to rehabilitation areas; 28/02/2012 Rio Tinto has considered these issues during development of the • potential to recover material other than topsoil for utilisation as growth Proposal Closure Plan (Appendix 23). medium in rehabilitation; • commitments in relation to closure need to be realistic, site‐specific, consider available baseline data, and demonstrate a plan is in place to address knowledge gaps; • ensure any potential risk of fibrous material is addressed; • DMP also provided general advice on expectations regarding mine closure plans. DMP advised Rio Tinto to ensure Miscellaneous Licences are granted prior to Noted. submission of Mining Proposals under the Mining Act. Rio Tinto provided detailed overview of the Proposal, with focus on waste 05/10/2012 characterisation, pit lake water quality modelling, and closure management.
Page 19 Western Turner Syncline Stage 2 – B1 and S17 Deposits API: Environmental Review Document
Date Topics/Issues Raised Proponent Response DMP provided comment on a range of Proposal closure issues, including: The Closure Plan (Appendix 23) provides further justification that 1 • Provide justification that 1 m of competent capping material on outer surfaces of m of competent capping material is sufficient. waste dumps will be sufficient to ensure dump stability, and prevent tunnel The Closure Plan provides confirmation that dumps are located erosion. outside the modelled PMF extent of this watercourse. • If waste dumps are located within the potential maximum flood (PMF) extent of the watercourse to north of S17 ridge, consider armouring the toe of the dump The Closure Plan demonstrates material volumes required to to prevent erosion. achieve final landform designs are available, and will be stockpiled as required to ensure availability at closure. • Provide evidence that sufficient material (e.g. topsoil, competent capping material) will be available to achieve planned final landform designs. The Closure Plan provides detail on operational procedures relevant to issues identified during Proposal baseline studies. • Demonstrate issues identified during Proposal baseline studies (e.g. waste characterisation etc.) are considered and integrated into planned operational The Closure Plan provides closure objectives, indicative management procedures. completion criteria and proposed measurement tools, developed with consideration of SMART principles. • Demonstrate linkage between closure objectives, indicative completion criteria and proposed measurement tools, similar to table in Appendix K of Guidelines Low likelihood of encountering fibrous material, based on for Preparing Closure Plans (DMP/EPA 2011). Consider SMART principles during extensive drilling within the Proposal area. However, as stated in development of objectives and completion criteria, and ensure objectives are the Closure Plan, should fibrous material be encountered, it will be not a process. managed in accordance with the Rio Tinto Iron Ore (WA) Fibrous Minerals Management Plan. • Demonstrate fibrous material, if present, will be managed appropriately.
Department of Mines and Petroleum – Legislation and Compliance Branch Ongoing Rio Tinto to continue consultation with DMP regarding tenure since Ongoing consultation regarding Mining Act clearance for LA Act licences and tenure. requirements under the LA Act. 05/2012 Department of Water – Pilbara Region Rio Tinto provided detailed overview of the Proposal, current/planned environmental studies, potential environmental impacts and proposed management.
DoW advised key issues of interest to address in Environmental Review: 01/03/2012 • low connectivity of ore body aquifer to the regional aquifer; Rio Tinto has addressed these issues in the Environmental Review. • factors likely to influence the pit lake water quality; • minimisation of discharge water volumes.
Page 20 Western Turner Syncline Stage 2 – B1 and S17 Deposits API: Environmental Review Document
Date Topics/Issues Raised Proponent Response Department of Water – Perth Office
Rio Tinto provided detailed overview of the Proposal, current/planned environmental studies, potential environmental impacts and proposed management, with focus on water management issues.
02/03/2012 DoW indicated the proposed approach to discharge water quality management Rio Tinto is further developing the approach to discharge water quality strategy was reasonable and was willing to provide further advice on draft strategy. management strategy and will liaise with DoW as necessary.
A site visit was undertaken to WTS2 on 12/03/2013 with OEPA and DoW suggested a site visit would be beneficial. DoW. Meeting included DEC CSB. Rio Tinto provided overview of the Proposal, with focus on geology, hydrogeology, geochemical waste characterisation, pit lake water quality modelling, mineral waste 01/11/2012 management, and closure planning.
DoW advised approach to geochemical waste characterisation and pit lake water Acknowledged. quality modelling was reasonable, and appropriate for the stage of the Proposal.
Site visit to WTS2 with OEPA and DOW. 12/03/2013 General discussion of relevant environmental factors and potential impacts.
Department of State Development Ongoing Rio Tinto has provided ongoing updates on the Proposal at monthly meetings with since Rio Tinto will continue consultation with DSD regarding the Proposal. DSD. 11/2011 Department of Indigenous Affairs Rio Tinto will continue regular liaison with the DIA, and will discuss Proposal specific matters as required. Rio Tinto discussed the Proposal and heritage matters with DIA, at a regular liaison 13/12/2012 meeting. Rio Tinto will consult with DIA regarding any planned submissions for approval under s 18 of the Aboriginal Heritage Act 1972 to disturb any heritage sites.
Page 21 Western Turner Syncline Stage 2 – B1 and S17 Deposits API: Environmental Review Document
Date Topics/Issues Raised Proponent Response Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities Rio Tinto provided an overview of the Proposal, presence/absence of species listed under the Environmental Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (EPBC Rio Tinto will proceed with planned referral of Proposal under the EPBC 01/11/2012 Act), and approach to consider potential impacts of the Proposal on listed species at Act. a population or species level. Rio Tinto provided an overview of the Proposal, and approach to consider potential impacts of the Proposal on EPBC‐listed species at a population or species level. Rio Tinto will proceed with planned referral of Proposal under Cthe EPB Provided update on revised maximum dewatering volumes and discharge extent Act. since previous consultation.
28/11/2012 The referral how Proposal planning/design has implemented measures to reduce potential impact on EPBC‐listed species and/or potential DSEWPaC requested the Proposal referral under the EPBC Act provide detail on how ‘core’ habitat for these species. Rio Tinto referred the proposal under Proposal planning/design has implemented measures to reduce potential impact on the EPBC Act on 17/12/2013. On 11/01/2013 DSEWPaC advised the EPBC‐listed species and/or potential ‘core’ habitat for these species. proposal was not considered a proposed action under the EPBC Act (EPBC Ref: 2012/6681). Eastern Guruma – Traditional Owner Rio Tinto to continue consultation with the Eastern Guruma regarding 14/09/2011 Rio Tinto provided an overview of the Proposal during site visit. the Proposal. Rio Tinto to continue consultation with the Eastern Guruma regarding 04/10/2011 Rio Tinto provided overview of the Proposal. the Proposal during regular Monitoring and Liaison meetings. Rio Tinto to continue consultation with the Eastern Guruma regarding Rio Tinto provided overview of the Proposal, environmental studies, potential the Proposal during regular Monitoring and Liaison meetings. environmental impacts and proposed management, tenure requirements, and Note Monitoring and Liaison meetings with the Eastern Guruma overview of closure planning. scheduled for August and November 2012 were cancelled at the 24/04/2012 Group’s request. Potential impacts to planned Eastern Guruma lease north of White Quartz Road. Preferred access route joins White Quartz Road 8 km east of the area of Primary concern was traffic on site access road (e.g. north from B1 deposit to White concern; impacts due to site traffic are therefore expected to be Quartz Road), suggested access road be located as far east as practical. minimal.
Page 22 Western Turner Syncline Stage 2 – B1 and S17 Deposits API: Environmental Review Document
Date Topics/Issues Raised Proponent Response
Current infrastructure layout does not directly impact Mt Turner. Visual impact assessment (VIA) of the Proposal has been undertaken Visual impacts on Mt Turner. (Appendix 12). The VIA indicates minimal visual impact on views from the White Quartz Road, and no impact on views of Mt Turner from White Quartz Road.
Rio Tinto originally advised discharge not expected to reach the planned Eastern Guruma lease. General interest in the extent of dewatering discharge, including possible beneficial However, November 2012 revision to groundwater modelling indicates uses should discharge reach planned Eastern Guruma lease. discharge is now expected to reach the planned Eastern Guruma lease for approximately the first 5 years of operation. Rio Tinto will update the Eastern Guruma on this issue at the next Monitoring and Liaison meeting.
Existing prevalence of weeds on the Beasley River was discussed, in context of how to Rio Tinto will implement a weed monitoring/management strategy on differentiate between impacts of cattle and dewatering. the discharge water course, with appropriate control sites.
Rio Tinto mailed a copy of the Proposal referral (as submitted to the EPA) to the Rio Tinto to continue consultation with the Eastern Guruma regarding 08/05/2012 Eastern Guruma. the Proposal.
Rio Tinto mailed to the Eastern Guruma a copy of the Proposal Environmental Rio Tinto to continue consultation with the Eastern Guruma regarding 19/02/2013 Review, as submitted to the EPA on 19/02/2013 and distributed to other government the Proposal. agencies for comment.
Rio Tinto will ensure the Eastern Guruma continues to be involved in ongoing heritage surveys for the Proposal. All sites identified are Ongoing Representatives of the Eastern Guruma have participated in several ethnographic registered with the DIA and copies of all reports are provided to the since and archaeological heritage surveys of Proposal area. The archaeological surveys are Eastern Guruma. 08/2012 ongoing and are expected to be completed in 2013. The Eastern Guruma will be consulted if Rio Tinto seeks approval under s18 of the Aboriginal Heritage Act 1972 to disturb any heritage sites within the Eastern Guruma Native Title Claim area.
Page 23 Western Turner Syncline Stage 2 – B1 and S17 Deposits API: Environmental Review Document
Date Topics/Issues Raised Proponent Response Yinhawangka – Traditional Owners Rio Tinto provided brief overview of planned Rio Tinto expansion Proposals, including Rio Tinto to continue consultation with the Yinhawangka regarding the 17/06/2011 WTS Stage 2. Proposal. Rio Tinto to continue consultation with the Yinhawangka regarding the 10/10/2011 Rio Tinto provided overview of the Proposal. Proposal. Proposal information incorporated into Agreement negotiations presentation to describe proposed S31 Agreement application under the Native Title Act 1993 Rio Tinto to continue consultation with the Yinhawangka regarding the 28/02/2012 seeking conversion of part of the Western Turner Syncline exploration area into a Proposal. mining lease. Ongoing Ongoing meetings regarding negotiation of Participation Agreement and ILUA, with Resolution of Rio Tinto/Yinhawangka Participation Agreement since updates included regarding WTS Stage 2 Proposal tenure requirements. imminent; authorisation expected Q4 2012. 03/2012 Rio Tinto mailed a copy of the Proposal referral (as submitted to the EPA) to the Rio Tinto to continue consultation with the Yinhawangka regarding the 08/05/2012 Yinhawangka. Proposal. Rio Tinto mailed to the Yinhawangka a copy of the Proposal Environmental Review, Rio Tinto to continue consultation with the Eastern Guruma regarding 19/02/2013 as submitted to the EPA on 19/02/2013 and distributed to other government the Proposal. agencies for comment. Rio Tinto will ensure that the Yinhawangka continues to be involved in ongoing heritage surveys for the Proposal. All sites identified are Ongoing Representatives of the Yinhawangka have participated in multiple ethnographic and registered with the DIA and copies of all reports are provided to the since archaeological heritage surveys of Proposal area. Archaeological and ethnographic group. 06/2003 surveys are ongoing and are expected to be completed by 2014. The Yinhawangka will be consulted if Rio Tinto seeks approval under s 18 of the Aboriginal Heritage Act 1972 to disturb any heritage sites within the Yinhawangka Native Title Claim area. Shire of Ashburton
Rio Tinto provided overview of the Proposal, including plans for workforce Rio Tinto to continue consultation with the Shire regarding the 19/04/2012 accommodation, potential requirement for traffic management on the Nanutarra Proposal. Munjina road adjacent to S17 during blasting, and mine closure.
Page 24 Western Turner Syncline Stage 2 – B1 and S17 Deposits API: Environmental Review Document
Date Topics/Issues Raised Proponent Response
Rio Tinto advised water extracted for dewatering of B1 pit will be The Shire queried proposed management of water extracted during dewatering. preferentially utilised on site, with excess discharged to a watercourse.
Department of Regional Development and Lands (DRDL) Ongoing discussions regarding: Ongoing • s91 licences under the LA Act to enable access for investigative activities; Rio Tinto to continue consultation with DRDL regarding tenure since requirements under the LA Act. 05/2012 • final tenure requirements under the LA Act for the Proposal, and progress of tenure applications. Third Parties 1 FMG Rio Tinto provided overview of Proposal, proposed location of infrastructure and Rio Tinto will continue to discuss Proposal tenure issues with FMG and 17/01/2012 Proposal tenure applications. will continue to provide notification of activities on co‐existing tenure. FMG Ongoing meetings regarding proposed location of infrastructure and Proposal tenure Ongoing since applications. 05/2012 2 API Rio Tinto will continue to discuss Proposal tenure issues with API and Discussed WTS Stage 2 Proposal and proposed location of conveyor tenure. 24/02/2012 will provide notification of activities on co‐existing tenure. API Rio Tinto will continue to discuss Proposal tenure issues with API and Ongoing Ongoing meetings regarding conveyor alignment and Proposal tenure applications. since will provide notification of activities on co‐existing tenure. 02/2012
1 Fortescue Metals Group Ltd 2 API on behalf of Aquila Steel Pty Ltd and AMCI (IO) Pty Ltd.
Page 25 Western Turner Syncline Stage 2 – B1 and S17 Deposits API: Environmental Review Document
Page 26 Western Turner Syncline Stage 2 – B1 and S17 Deposits API: Environmental Review Document
3 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS AND MANAGEMENT
3.1 Environmental Impacts and Management The EPA‐prepared ESD, for the Proposal, identified the following preliminary key environmental factors: • vegetation and flora; • fauna (terrestrial, subterranean and aquatic); • ground and surface water; • rehabilitation and mine closure; • residual impacts. In accordance with the new framework for the EPA’s principles for environmental protection, the preliminary key environmental factors are identified as: • flora and vegetation; • terrestrial fauna and subterranean fauna; • hydrological processes and inland waters environmental quality; • rehabilitation and closure; • residual impacts. Studies and surveys utilised to support the impact assessment are summarised in Table 3‐1. Environmental impacts and management of the preliminary key environmental factors are addressed in a series of Tables (Table 3‐2 to Table 3‐9). The assessment of impacts and management of other factors is presented in Section 4 (Table 4‐1).
3.2 Environmental Management Overview Rio Tinto has developed and refined environmental management policies, systems and procedures over decades of operational mining experience in the Pilbara region that are successfully applied at multiple iron ore mine sites. The key components to be implemented during the WTS Stage 2 Proposal include: 1. The Rio Tinto Iron Ore group Health, Safety, Environment, Communities and Quality Policy (HSECQ Policy). The HSECQ Policy is the guiding document for environmental management and provides context and direction for continuous improvement. 2. Rio Tinto Iron Ore (WA) operates under an ISO14001 certified Environmental Management System (EMS), contained within the Health, Safety, Environment and Quality (HSEQ) Management System. The HSEQ Management System is a continuous improvement model covering:
systematic assessment of environmental risk and legal requirements; systems for training, operational control, communication, emergency response and corrective actions; the development of objectives and targets for improvement; audits and review.
Page 27 Western Turner Syncline Stage 2 – B1 and S17 Deposits API: Environmental Review Document
3. A Construction Environmental Management Plan (CEMP), that will interface with the HSEQ Management System. 4. An operational Environmental Management Plan (EMP) that will interface with the HSEQ Management System. 5. The Rio Tinto Closure Standard will continue to guide Proposal closure planning and implementation, addressing the development of a Closure Knowledge Base, developing and maintaining a Closure Strategy, developing and maintaining a Closure Management Plan, stakeholder consultation, financial provisioning for closure, reviews of closure plans on a regular basis, and developing a final decommissioning plan five years prior to scheduled closure. 6. The Rio Tinto Iron Ore (WA) Significant Species Management Plan (SSMP), which provides the framework for Rio Tinto to minimise impacts to Pilbara populations of species listed under the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (EPBC Act) from activities associated with expansions to its iron ore mining operations. The SSMP includes standard management measures to minimise impacts to Matters of National Environmental Significance (MNES), and requires development of further site‐specific management measures where species of MNES occur, or are likely to occur, in proximity to expansion projects in the Pilbara.
Page 28 Western Turner Syncline Stage 2 – B1 and S17 Deposits API: Environmental Review Document
Table 3‐1: Summary of Supporting Studies
Report author Study Type / Relevant Appendix Report Title and Field of Investigation and year Timing Standard/Guidance #
Vegetation and Flora EPA Guidance Statement Desktop review A Vegetation and Flora Survey of the West No. 51 ‐ Terrestrial Flora Biota and single Turner S10 Area and Infrastructure Corridor. and Vegetation Surveys for Environmental phase field Appendix Vegetation and flora survey of the WTS S10 Environmental Impact Consultants survey. 2 area and associated infrastructure corridor Assessment in Western 2007 ‐ July ‐ Oct to Tom Price. Australia (EPA 2004a), Level 2007. 1 survey. Desktop review Biota West Turner Syncline S10 Expanded and single Environmental Vegetation and Flora Survey Report. EPA Guidance Statement Appendix phase field Consultants 51, Level 1 survey. 6 Vegetation and flora survey of areas in survey. 2011b proximity to the WTS S10 mine site. ‐ Apr 2011.
West Turner Syncline Phase 2 Vegetation Desktop review and Flora Report. and two phase Biota Consolidates results of vegetation and flora field survey. Environmental surveys undertaken from 2007 to 2011 over ‐ July‐ Oct EPA Guidance Statement Appendix Consultants approximately 22,000 ha of the WTS area, 2007. 51, Level 2 survey. 7 2013a including second phase sampling of the ‐ Apr 2011. areas originally sampled and reported in ‐ June ‐ Oct Biota 2007 and Biota 2011b. 2011.
West Turner Syncline Stage 2 – Phase 1 Survey and Targeted Vegetation Survey. Desktop review Biota EPA Guidance Statement Summary report of first phase of vegetation and single 51, Level 1 survey (Level 2 Environmental Appendix and flora survey of an additional 4000ha in phase field survey on completion of Consultants 10 NW of the WTS area, and targeted search survey. 2nd phase sampling in 2013b for ‘gorge and gully’ vegetation in SW of the ‐ July 2012. 2013). WTS area.
Potential impacts of mining operations on University of overland flow dependent vegetation Desktop review Western (Preliminary assessment). and field Appendix n/a Australia Assessment of potential overland flow‐ survey. 25 2012a dependent vegetation in the WTS area, and ‐ June 2012. potential impacts of infrastructure corridor.
Potential impacts of mining operations on University of Desktop review groundwater dependent vegetation Western and field Appendix (Preliminary assessment). n/a Australia survey. 26 Assessment of potential groundwater‐ 2012b ‐ June 2012. dependent vegetation in the WTS area.
Page 29 Western Turner Syncline Stage 2 – B1 and S17 Deposits API: Environmental Review Document
Report author Study Type / Relevant Appendix Report Title and Field of Investigation and year Timing Standard/Guidance #
Fauna ‐ Terrestrial
Desktop review EPA Guidance Statement West Turner Syncline Section 10 Biota and two phase No. 56 ‐ Terrestrial Fauna Development Two‐Phase Fauna Survey Environmental field survey. Surveys for Environmental Appendix Fauna survey of the WTS S10 area and Consultants ‐ July & Sept Impact Assessment in 3 associated infrastructure corridor to Tom 2009a ’07. Western Australia (EPA Price. ‐ July 2008. 2004b), Level 2 survey. Desktop review A Two‐Phase Fauna Survey of the West Biota and two phase Turner Syncline Area. Environmental field survey. EPA Guidance Statement Appendix Fauna survey of the area encompassing the Consultants ‐ July & Sept 56, Level 2 survey. 4 WTS B1 and S17 deposits, and the 2009b ’07. north/centre of the WTS. ‐ July 2008. EPA Guidance Statement 56, Level 2 (targeted) survey. EPA Guidance Statement No. 20 ‐ Sampling of Short Desktop review Range Endemic Biota West Turner Targeted Fauna Survey and single Invertebrate Fauna for Environmental Appendix Targeted fauna survey in proximity to the phase field Environmental Impact Consultants 5 WTS B1 and Section 17 deposits. survey. Assessment in Western 2011a ‐ Sept 2011. Australia (EPA 2009). EPA/DEC Technical Guide ‐ Terrestrial Vertebrate Fauna Surveys for Environmental Impact Assessment (EPA/DEC 2010).
West Turner Syncline NES Species Biota Assessment. Desktop review Environmental An assessment of the potential impact of the EPA Guidance Statement Appendix of existing Consultants Proposal on species listed under the EPBC 56. 8 survey data. 2012a Act, based on fauna surveys in the WTS area (Biota 2009a, 2009b, 2011a, 2012b).
West Turner Syncline Fauna Survey Summary EPA Guidance Statement Report Desktop review 56, Level 2 (targeted) Biota Consolidated results of previous fauna of existing survey. Environmental surveys to date over a total of approximately survey data EPA Guidance Statement Appendix 24,000ha in the WTS area (Biota 2009a, Consultants and single 20. 9 2009b, 2011a), including a summary of key 2012b phase field results from an additional targeted survey in EPA Technical Guide – survey. the NW of the WTS area undertaken in Terrestrial Vertebrate Fauna 2012. Surveys.
Page 30 Western Turner Syncline Stage 2 – B1 and S17 Deposits API: Environmental Review Document
Report author Study Type / Relevant Appendix Report Title and Field of Investigation and year Timing Standard/Guidance #
Fauna – Subterranean and Aquatic EPA Guidance Statement No. 54 ‐ Consideration of Desktop Subterranean Fauna in review, genetic West Turner Syncline Stage 2 B1 and Section Groundwater and Caves analysis, and Biota 17 Deposits Subterranean Fauna Survey. during EIA in WA (EPA three phase Environmental Subterranean fauna surveys within and 2003). Appendix field survey. Consultants adjacent to the B1 and S17 deposits, and EPA Guidance Statement 11 ‐ June – July 2012c genetic analysis of troglomorphic Polyxenida No. 54a ‐ Sampling methods 2009. and Blattodea specimens. and survey considerations ‐ Aug – Dec for subterranean fauna in 2011. Western Australia (EPA 2007a). EPA Guidance Statement 56. Desktop review Wetland Western Turner Syncline Project, wet & dry EPA Guidance Statement and two phase Research and 2011 sampling, final report. 20. Appendix field survey. Management Aquatic fauna survey of ephemeral pools in Australian and New Zealand 27 ‐ April ‐ Aug 2012a the WTS area and surrounds. Guidelines for Fresh and 2011. Marine Water Quality (ANZECC/ARMCANZ 2000).
Groundwater
Western Turner Syncline Hydrogeological Desktop Bore Completion Report. analysis and URS 2009 Hydrogeological drilling investigation at B1 field drilling n/a n/a in 2008, including installation of three investigation in production bores and 11 monitoring bores. 2008.
B1 groundwater model. Desktop Development of a conceptual analysis of MWH 2009 n/a n/a hydrogeological model and a numeric existing data groundwater model for the B1 deposit. and modelling.
Western Turner Syncline B1 Dewatering Strategy – Groundwater numerical Desktop modelling. analysis of Rio Tinto Review of the conceptual hydrogeological existing data n/a n/a 2012b model, development of an updated and modelling numerical groundwater model, and update. prediction of dewatering requirements, for the B1 deposit.
Page 31 Western Turner Syncline Stage 2 – B1 and S17 Deposits API: Environmental Review Document
Report author Study Type / Relevant Appendix Report Title and Field of Investigation and year Timing Standard/Guidance #
Western Turner Syncline B1 – Feasibility Studies Groundwater Modelling: Dewatering and Closure. Desktop Initial memo updating the B1 groundwater analysis and Rio Tinto modelling predictions utilising data collected modelling Appendix n/a 2012d from bores during 2012, including update utilising 20 assessment of effect of revised pit lake 2012 bore recovery modelling on KCB (2012b) water data. quality predictions. Majority of information incorporated into Rio Tinto 2013a. Western Turner Syncline B1 – Feasibility Study Groundwater Modelling: Dewatering Desktop and Closure. analysis and Rio Tinto Update to the B1 groundwater model and modelling Appendix predicted dewatering requirements utilising n/a 2013a update utilising 18 data collected from bores during 2012. 2012 bore Assessment of B1 aquifer groundwater level data. recovery post closure. Incorporates majority of information in Rio Tinto 2012d. WTS Stage 2 FS: Water Balance and Water Strategy update. Desktop Rio Tinto Summarises the results of a water balance Pilbara water in mining Appendix analysis of 2013b update and assessment of beneficial use guideline (DoW 2009). 29 existing data. options for surplus dewatering, for the WTS Stage 2 feasibility study. Desktop analysis of WTS2 – groundwater quality updated data. Wetland water quality Australian and New Zealand Research and Summary of water quality of the B1 and S17 results from Appendix ore body aquifers, ephemeral pools in the Guidelines for Fresh and Management surface and 28 WTS area and surrounds, and regional Marine Water Quality. 2012b groundwater surface water. sampling 2008‐ 2012.
Surface Water
Baseline hydrology assessment for a local creek discharge from Western Turner Desktop Syncline (WTS) B1 deposit. Rio Tinto analysis of Pilbara water in mining Appendix Modelling of the extent of dewatering 2012a existing data guideline. 17 discharge downstream of the proposed and modelling. discharge point located north of the B1 main pit.
Page 32 Western Turner Syncline Stage 2 – B1 and S17 Deposits API: Environmental Review Document
Report author Study Type / Relevant Appendix Report Title and Field of Investigation and year Timing Standard/Guidance #
WTS Phase II Surface Water Management. Desktop Rio Tinto Development of a Proposal surface water Pilbara water in mining Appendix management plan, based on assessment of analysis of 2012c guideline. 19 surface catchments and hydrology in the existing data. Proposal area.
Desktop Surface hydrology in the vicinity of the WTS2 analysis of infrastructure corridor between WTS B1 and existing data Rio Tinto S10. Appendix and modelling, n/a 2012e Modelling of surface hydrology and 21 and field potential impacts of the infrastructure survey. corridor from B1 to S10. ‐ June 2012.
Rehabilitation and Mine Closure
Desktop EPA and DMP Guidelines for Rio Tinto Western Turner Syncline (Stage 2) Closure Appendix analysis of Preparing Mine Closure 2012g Plan. 23 existing data. Plans (DMP/EPA 2011).
Desktop Global Acid Rock Drainage assessment of Western Turner Syncline B1 and Section 17 (GARD) Guide. AMD Risk Assessment. geochemical Leading Practice Sustainable Acid and metalliferous drainage (AMD) risk data, from Rio Tinto Development Program for Appendix assessment for the B1 and S17 deposits, drilling 2012f the Mining Industry ‐ 22 based on comprehensive program of samples Managing Acid and geochemical waste characterisation, with collected/analy Metalliferous Drainage kinetic testing in progress. sed from 1982 (Commonwealth 2007). to 2011.
Western Turner Syncline B1 Pit Post Closure Desktop Klohn Crippen Water Quality Assessment. analysis of n/a n/a Berger 2012a Preliminary water quality modelling of the existing data B1 pit lake. and modelling.
Desktop WTS2 B1 Water Quality Assessment. Klohn Crippen analysis of Appendix Updated water quality modelling of the B1 n/a Berger 2012b existing data 15 pit lake. and modelling.
Australian Risk Equinox Desktop Management Standard Western Turner Syncline Stage 2 Project Appendix Environmental analysis of AS/NZS ISO 31000:2009 Risk Ecological Risk Assessment, Final Report. 14 2012 existing data. management — Principles and guidelines.
Page 33 Western Turner Syncline Stage 2 – B1 and S17 Deposits API: Environmental Review Document
Report author Study Type / Relevant Appendix Report Title and Field of Investigation and year Timing Standard/Guidance #
Other Factors
Visual Landscape Planning Desktop in Western Australia: a Visual Amenity Western Turner Syncline Stage 2 Visual analysis and Appendix manual for evaluation, Ecoscape 2012 Impact Assessment. field survey. 12 assessment, siting and ‐ June 2012. design (DPI 2007).
Air Quality – Desktop Predicted Dust Levels From Western Turner USEPA dust modelling Dust analysis of Appendix Syncline Stage 2 (B1 & Section 17) Iron Ore guidelines – refer to Environmental existing data 13 Project. references in report. Alliances 2012 and modelling.
Desktop Noise and EPA Guidance Statement Environmental Noise Assessment of Western analysis of Appendix Vibration No.8 – Environmental Noise Turner Syncline Stage II Project. existing data 24 SVT 2012 (EPA 2007b). and modelling.
Page 34 Table 3‐2: Vegetation and Flora: Description of Factor, Impact Assessment and Management Summary of how Proposal Description of factor Impacts and assessment of significance Management and mitigation meets EPA objective EPA objective Flora Flora ‐ clearing The following key management measures for To maintain representation, Flora and vegetation surveys have been Of the 13 locations of the P1 species Hibiscus sp. Mt Brockman recorded in the WTS area, three locations occur vegetation and flora will be implemented (and diversity, viability and ecological undertaken over approximately 26,000 ha of within the Proposal boundary, and one location occurs within the indicative infrastructure layout (Figure 3‐1, and where applicable have been implemented during function at the species the WTS area, incorporating the 8,430ha Table 1 of Appendix 1). Eleven (11) other locations of the species are known within 50 km of the Proposal, and Proposal design to date): population and community Proposal boundary and extensive surrounding some other existing records of Hibiscus haynaldii from the locality are likely to comprise Hibiscus sp. Mt Brockman Proposal design has, and will continue to, level. areas (Biota 2013a, 2013b): (Biota 2013a). Potential impact of the Proposal on this species is not considered significant. minimise planned vegetation clearing to areas Summary of how Proposal No Threatened flora species protected The two locations of the P1 species Grevillia sp. Turee and the single location of the P1 species Sida sp. Hamersley necessary for safe construction and operation. meets EPA objective under the Wildlife Conservation Act 1950 Range are outside the Proposal boundary (>2 km, Figure 3‐1) and will not be impacted by the Proposal. Proposal design has, and will continue to, avoid The proposal can be managed to (WC Act) were recorded in the WTS area Eight of the P3 and P4 species occur within the Proposal boundary; therefore, some locations of these species are and minimise clearing of elevated conservation meet the EPA environmental (Biota 2013a, 2013b). likely to be impacted by clearing for the Proposal (Table 1 of Appendix 1). However, based on the broader significance vegetation and flora, where objective for this factor, as Three Priority 1 (P1) species were distribution of these species both locally and regionally (Biota 2013a; Table 1 of Appendix 1), potential impact of practical: detailed in adjacent columns: recorded in the WTS area (Biota 2013a, the Proposal on these species is not considered significant. o Implementation of this key management Flora and vegetation 2013b), comprising Hibiscus sp. Mt Vegetation ‐ clearing measure during Proposal design has included potentially impacted by the Brockman (E. Thoma ET1354), Grevillia sp. More than 50% of the surveyed extent (in the WTS area) of each of the five vegetation communities of local modification of the Proposal boundary to Proposal is well represented Turee (J. Bull & G. Hopkinson ONS JJ significance occurs outside the Proposal boundary, and more than 85% occurs outside the indicative infrastructure exclude extensive areas of the locally outside the Proposal 01.01), and Sida sp. Hamersley Range (K. layout (Table 2 of Appendix 1). These vegetation communities, and/or the habitat in which they occur, are relatively significant ‘gorge and gully’ vegetation boundary, on a local and/or Newbey 10692). widespread regionally (Biota 2013a). Potential impact of the Proposal to these communities on a local or regional community, and three locations of the P1 regional scale. Multiple locations of eight Priority 3 (P3) scale due to clearing is not considered significant. species Hibiscus sp. Mt Brockman, in the north‐west of the WTS (Figure 1‐5). The spatial and temporal and four Priority 4 (P4) flora species have Vegetation ‐ dewatering discharge been recorded within the WTS area (Biota Proposal design has, and will continue to, extent of dewatering Two vegetation units of localised significance occur in proximity to the watercourses affected by the maximum extent 2013b; Figure 3‐1). incorporate consideration of surface water discharge is relatively of discharge; vegetation unit EvAciTeCEc (overstorey of scattered E. victrix) occurs adjacent to the lower 5 km of the management, including minimising disruption to limited. Vegetation 10 km discharge watercourse, and vegetation units EvAciTeCEc and EcEvAci (woodland of E. camaldulensis subsp. watercourses where practical (Rio Tinto 2012c, The infrastructure corridor is The Proposal is within the Fortescue refulgens and E. victrix) occur adjacent to the Beasley River (Figure 3‐1). Detrimental impact to EcEvAci on the 2012e). unlikely to impact overland Botanical District of the Eremaean Beasley River is considered unlikely, and detrimental impact to vegetation unit EvAciTeCEc is considered possible, flow or potentially Botanical Province as defined by Beard based on the following considerations: Targeted surveys will be undertaken in 2013 to further investigate occurrence and distribution dependent vegetation, and (1975) and intersects two Beard Expected dewatering discharge rates (Rio Tinto 2013b) indicate that during the initial stages of the Proposal of the Hibiscus sp. Mt Brockman (P1) in the WTS channelised flow will be vegetation units, both of which are (2015‐2017), discharge will affect the 10 km length of the discharge watercourse, and up to an 8 km length of the area. maintained where practical widespread in the Pilbara region (Biota Beasley River (Rio Tinto 2012a). For the majority of the Proposal life (e.g. approximately 2018‐2027), discharge via culvert installation. 2013a). will continue to affect the 10 km length of the discharge watercourse (where EvAciTeCEc occurs), and possibly a 1‐ A discharge water quality management and The predicted spatial extent No vegetation comprising Threatened or 2 km length of the Beasley River (where both EvAciTeCEc and EcEvAci occurs). If detrimental impacts to monitoring strategy (including site‐specific of groundwater drawdown Priority Ecological Communities was vegetation occur, it would most likely occur within this 10‐12 km length of watercourses affected by discharge for water quality trigger values) will be developed in during dewatering of the B1 recorded within the WTS area. >3 years. accordance with the ANZECC/ARMCANZ (2000) water quality management framework, to deposit is relatively limited, Fifty nine (59) vegetation units were Modelling indicates dewater discharge is expected to be contained within the low flow channel of the discharge manage the potential impacts of discharge and is not expected to identified within the WTS area (Biota watercourse and the Beasley River (e.g. the defined channel visible in Figure 1‐4, Photo Locations 1 to 4). water quality on the downstream environment. impact potentially 2013a, 2013b). Therefore, the potential impact due to waterlogging is expected to be confined to vegetation growing groundwater dependent Five vegetation communities within the immediately adjacent to the low flow channel, and the root systems of trees growing on the banks of these The Rio Tinto Iron Ore (WA) internal ground vegetation in the WTS area. WTS area were considered by Biota watercourses are likely to be partially, rather than completely, waterlogged. disturbance authorisation procedure will be implemented, including internal assessment and Clearing will be restricted to (2013a) to have elevated local significance The key species within vegetation units EvAciTeCEc and EcEvAci are considered tolerant (E. camaldulensis subsp. authorisation prior to any clearing of vegetation, 2,700 ha within the Proposal (Figure 3‐1): refulgens) or relatively tolerant (E. victrix) to waterlogging, based on a review of previous studies and observations boundary. and physical demarcation of areas to be cleared. o lower slope mulga (AanAprArTeTw in the Pilbara (Rio Tinto 2011). Detrimental impacts due to waterlogging may range from reduced growth and Appropriate management and AanAprTbr); health to tree death, with the degree of impact dependent on the species tolerance, complete or partial Management of weeds will be carried out in measures to avoid, minimise accordance with the Rio Tinto Iron Ore (WA) o valley floor mulga (AanApr and waterlogging of the root system, and duration of waterlogging. Weed Management Strategy, Equipment and mitigate potential AanTmTw); Based on these considerations, for the scattered E. victrix on the banks of the discharge watercourse, reduced growth Hygiene Inspections Procedure, Borrow Pit impacts of the Proposal on and health, and some tree death, is considered possible. For E. camaldulensis subsp. refulgens on the Beasley River, o riparian eucalypt woodland on major Specification and Management Procedure, and flora and vegetation will be some reduced growth and health is possible, but widespread tree death is considered unlikely. The vegetation ephemeral watercourses (EcEvAci and Soil Resource Management Procedure, including implemented (and where communities would be expected to recover after cessation of discharge (as only the areas/individuals immediately EvMgERlt); the following actions: applicable have been adjacent to the low flow channel may be detrimentally affected), with timeframe to recovery dependent on the o scattered riparian eucalypts on major implemented during degree of detrimental impact. o Weed monitoring will be undertaken within Proposal design). ephemeral watercourses the discharge watercourse and Potential detrimental impact to these vegetation units due to dewatering discharge is not considered significant, (EvAciTeCEc); management implemented as appropriate. based on consideration of the following: o gorges and gullies o A weed action plan will be developed and These vegetation units are widespread regionally (Biota 2013a). (CfAanAciTbrTeERlm and ElCfGOrTe). implemented during construction and The mulga vegetation in the central WTS On a local scale, the area of these vegetation units in the vicinity of the maximum discharge extent comprises only operations. Summary of how Proposal Description of factor Impacts and assessment of significance Management and mitigation meets EPA objective area, south of the infrastructure corridor 17% (EcEvAci) and 6% (EvAciTeCEc) of their surveyed extent in the WTS area (Table 2 of Appendix 1). Based on o All equipment will be inspected to ensure (primarily AxAanTw) was considered to helicopter and ground reconnaissance, and examination of aerial photography, extensive areas of eucalypt they are clean and free of built up mud, potentially comprise overland flow woodland occur locally on the Beasley and Hardey Rivers outside the extent of current vegetation surveys, and rock, soil and vegetation prior to entry to, dependent vegetation (OFDV) (UWA therefore the area of eucalypt woodland potentially impacted is relatively minor on a local scale. and departure from, site. 2012a). On a sub‐catchment scale, the length of watercourses within the maximum discharge extent is minimal (e.g. <8% o Areas to be cleared will be assessed for Three vegetation units within the study of the total length of the Beasley River, and the 10 km discharge watercourse comprises <5% of the total length of weeds; topsoil cleared from weed infested area were considered to potentially similar sized tributaries within the Beasley River sub‐catchment). areas will be separated from other comprise groundwater dependent The assessment that the potential impact of discharge is not significant also applies in the unexpected circumstance stockpiles and/or managed to prevent the vegetation (GDV) due to the presence of that dewatering discharge extendse beyond th predicted maximum extent of 18km. For example, if the maximum spread of weeds. facultative phreatophytes Eucalyptus extent of discharge extends to 22km (e.g. an additional 4km, assuming 25% variance in predicted discharge extent): o Borrow pit locations will avoid areas with camaldulensis subsp. refulgens and Only 12% of the total length of the Beasley River would be affected at maximum discharge rates. weed infestations. If they cannot be E. victrix (UWA 2012b, Figure 3‐2): avoided, appropriate weed treatment, The area of eucalypt woodland potentially impacted by discharge would increase by approximately 40ha to 109ha E. camaldulensis subsp. refulgens, hygiene and control will be implemented o total, comprising 26% of the 412ha of eucalypt woodland mapped to date in proximity to the Proposal on the E. victrix woodland over Acacia prior to disturbance. Beasley and Hardey Rivers. Based on helicopter and ground reconnaissance, and examination of aerial citrinoviridis tall open scrub (EcEvAci); photography, extensive areas of eucalypt woodland occur locally on the Beasley and Hardey Rivers outside the o E. victrix scattered trees over extent of current vegetation surveys, , and therefore the area of eucalypt woodland potentially impacted remains A. citrinoviridis tall shrubland over is relatively minor on a local scale (note that the Beasley River downstream of the current predicted discharge Triodia epactia open hummock extent will be vegetation surveyed in 2013). grassland and/or *Cenchrus ciliaris The vegetation units that may be impacted are widespread regionally (Biota 2013a). open tussock grassland (EvAciTeCEc); and Vegetation – disruption to surface flow o E. victrix low open woodland over Modelling of surface hydrology indicates no ‘overland flow’ is likely to occur in the vicinity of the infrastructure Melaleuca glomerata tall open corridor between B1 and S10 (Rio Tinto 2012e). shrubland over Eriachne tenuiculmis ‘Channelised flow’ within watercourses can generally be maintained where embankments are constructed within very open tussock grassland the infrastructure corridor via installation of culverts. (EvMgERIt). Modelling of surface hydrology and on‐ground assessment of the mulga community downstream of the infrastructure corridor indicates that areas where localised overland flow may occur are located at least several hundred metres south of the corridor (Rio Tinto 2012e; UWA 2012b). Installation of culverts, where practical, at watercourses intersected by the infrastructure corridor will reduce the potential for downstream impact due to alterations to surface hydrology. Vegetation – groundwater drawdown The most significant potential GDV unit, EcEvAci (with extensive occurrence of E. camaldulensis subsp. refulgens), only occurs on the Beasley and Hardey rivers at least 4.5 km beyond the predicted 5 m drawdown contour for the B1 pit (Figure 3‐2). It is highly unlikely groundwater drawdown will reach these areas, based on the distances from the pit, and the presence of typically low hydraulic conductivity rock types in these areas (Bunjima Formation and Weeli‐Wolli Formation, respectively). Potential GDV unit EvAciTeCEc (with scattered E. victrix) occurs on the dewatering discharge watercourse at least 1.5 km beyond the predicted 5 m drawdown contour for the B1 pit (Figure 3‐2). The relatively shallow groundwater beneath the plain north of the WTS (where this vegetation is located) is separated from the geological units being dewatered at the B1 deposit by the typically low hydraulic conductivity Jeerinah Formation. Therefore, it is considered highly unlikely drawdown from dewatering of B1 will affect these shallow aquifers, or the vegetation in this area. 4.3 ha of potential GDV unit EvMgErit is located within the predicted area of 5–10 m drawdown, in a gully to the southwest of the B1 pit at an elevation of 640 to 700 mRL (Figure 3‐2). The groundwater table where this vegetation occurs is considered to be >100 m below ground level, based on groundwater elevations at the B1 deposit (535 mRL), and the S17 deposit (500 mRL). E. victrix is a facultative phreatophyte that may utilise shallow groundwater, but also inhabits areas without access to permanent groundwater, relying on stored soil water recharged by direct infiltration of rainfall and episodic stream flows (Rio Tinto 2011). E. victrix at this location is not considered to be accessing the groundwater at depths >100 m. Rather, E. victrix at this location is considered likely utilising stored soil water periodically recharged by run‐off from the upstream catchment, and therefore is unlikely to be impacted by dewatering of the B1 deposit. In the unlikely circumstance impact to this vegetation occurs due to groundwater drawdown, it is not considered significant, given the limited area of vegetation (4.3 ha), and the broader occurrence of equivalent habitat throughout the Hamersley sub‐region (Biota 2013a).
Table 3‐3: Terrestrial Fauna: Description of Factor, Impact Assessment and Management Summary of how Proposal Description of factor Impacts and assessment of significance Management and mitigation meets EPA objective EPA objective Vertebrate terrestrial fauna and fauna Terrestrial fauna – habitat clearing The key potential impact of the Proposal on terrestrial To maintain representation, habitat The 15 fauna habitats within the study area are both common and widespread throughout the Hamersley sub‐ fauna (e.g. loss of habitat due to clearing) will diversity, viability and ecological Fauna surveys have been undertaken over region (Biota 2012b). The Proposal boundary contains <50% of the extent of each habitat type mapped in the generally be minimised via management measures to function at the species, approximately 24,000 ha of the WTS area, WTS area (with exception of habitat type 15) and the indicative infrastructure layout intersects <15% of the minimise potential impacts on flora and vegetation, as population and assemblage incorporating the 8,430ha Proposal boundary extent of each habitat type mapped in the WTS area (Table 3 of Appendix 1). Therefore, clearing of these detailed in Table 3‐2: Vegetation and Flora. level. and extensive surrounding areas (Biota 2009a, communities within the Proposal boundary is not expected to result in significant local or regional impact to In addition, the following key management measures Summary of how Proposal 2009b, 2011a, 2012b): fauna. will be implemented to manage potential impacts on meets EPA objective Eighteen (18) species of conservation Biota (2012a) identified two potential ‘core’ habitats of higher value to conservation significant fauna species fauna (and where applicable have been implemented The proposal can be managed to significant vertebrate fauna (listed under (listed under EPBC Act), comprising ‘gorges and gullies’ (habitat types 9, 13 and 15) and ‘eucalypt woodlands during Proposal design to date): meet the EPA environmental the EPBC Act, WC Act or as Priority species on major watercourses’ (habitat type 6). The Proposal boundary includes 34% and 4%, respectively, of the Ensure any sightings of conservation significant objective for this factor, as by DEC) are considered to potentially occur mapped extent of these potential core habitat types. The indicative infrastructure layout intersects 10% and fauna species (primarily species listed under the detailed in adjacent columns: in the WTS area. Seven of these species 0%, respectively, of the mapped extent of these potential core habitat types (Biota 2012a). Clearing of these EPBC Act) encountered by the workforce during Fauna habitats potentially were recorded during surveys (Biota communities within the Proposal boundary is not expected to result in significant local or regional impact to Proposal implementation are reported to site impacted by the Proposal 2009a, 2009b, 2011a, 2012b): the Pilbara conservation significant fauna species. Environmental Advisors, and recorded in a register. (including habitat of higher Olive Python (Liasis olivaceus barroni), Of the seven conservation significant vertebrate fauna recorded in the WTS area, only the Western Pebble‐ Proposal design has, and will continue to, avoid value for conservation Pilbara Leaf‐nosed Bat (Rhinonicteris mound Mouse and Rainbow Bee‐eater were recorded within the Proposal boundary (Table 4 of Appendix 1). and minimise clearing of higher value fauna habitat aurantia), Rainbow Bee‐eater (Merops significant fauna species) are Assessment of potential impacts to conservation significant species recorded in the WTS area (Table 4 of where practical: ornatus), Ghost Bat (Macroderma gigas), well represented outside the Appendix 1, Biota 2012a) concludes the Proposal is expected to have minimal impact on conservation o Implementation of this key management Western Pebble‐mound Mouse Proposal boundary, on a significant fauna species. measure during Proposal design has included local and regional scale. (Pseudomys chapmani), Australian Bustard modification of the Proposal boundary to (Ardeotis australis) and a skink None of the taxa that may represent SRE species are considered likely to represent species restricted to the Of the seven conservation exclude extensive areas of vegetation of higher (Notoscincus butleri) WTS area (Biota 2012b). The majority of specimens of all five of these taxa were collected from outside the significant vertebrate fauna value to conservation significant fauna species (Figure 3‐3). Proposal boundary (Table 4 of Appendix 1). The Proposal is expected to have minimal impact on these recorded in the WTS area, species. (Figure 1‐5). only the Western Pebble‐ 15 fauna habitat types were recorded in Food wastes appropriately disposed of in mound Mouse and Rainbow the WTS area (Figure 3‐3). bins/waste facilities to discourage scavenging by Bee‐eater were recorded Invertebrate terrestrial fauna both feral and native animals, and bin lids securely within the Proposal Five taxa that may represent short‐range closed. boundary. endemic (SRE) species were recorded within Fencing of dams/turkey nests to prevent access to None of the recorded taxa the WTS area (Barychelidae sp, Aname sp., permanent water sources by feral animals, and the that may represent SRE Conothele sp., Kwonkan sp. and Quistrachia installation of fauna egress mats in lined water species are considered likely sp) (Figure 3‐3); however, none of these are storage facilities. considered likely to represent species to represent species Internal reporting of all incidents involving fauna restricted to the WTS area (Biota 2012b). restricted to the WTS area, death. and the majority of records Implementing and enforcing appropriate vehicular of each of these taxa were speed limits on site access roads. collected from outside the Proposal boundary. Appropriate management measures to avoid, minimise and mitigate potential impacts of the Proposal on fauna will be implemented (and where applicable, have been implemented during Proposal design).
PERTH KARRATHA Location Location 7,480,000 mN 7,480,000 mN 7,480,000 mN 7,480,000 mN 7,480,000 mN 7,480,000 mN 7,480,000 mN 7,490,000 mN 7,490,000 mN 7,490,000 mN 7,490,000 mN 7,490,000 mN 7,490,000 mN 7,490,000 mN 7,500,000 mN 7,500,000 mN 7,500,000 mN 7,500,000 mN 7,500,000 mN 7,500,000 mN 7,500,000 mN 7,480,000 mN 7,480,000 mN 7,480,000 mN 7,480,000 mN 7,480,000 mN 7,480,000 mN 7,480,000 mN 7,490,000 mN 7,490,000 mN 7,490,000 mN 7,490,000 mN 7,490,000 mN 7,490,000 mN 7,490,000 mN 7,500,000 mN 7,500,000 mN 7,500,000 mN 7,500,000 mN 7,500,000 mN 7,500,000 mN 7,500,000 mN 7,480,000 mN 7,480,000 mN 7,480,000 mN 7,480,000 mN 7,480,000 mN 7,480,000 mN 7,480,000 mN 7,490,000 mN 7,490,000 mN 7,490,000 mN 7,490,000 mN 7,490,000 mN 7,490,000 mN 7,490,000 mN 7,500,000 mN 7,500,000 mN 7,500,000 mN 7,500,000 mN 7,500,000 mN 7,500,000 mN 7,500,000 mN 7,480,000 mN 7,480,000 mN 7,480,000 mN 7,480,000 mN 7,480,000 mN 7,480,000 mN 7,480,000 mN 7,490,000 mN 7,490,000 mN 7,490,000 mN 7,490,000 mN 7,490,000 mN 7,490,000 mN 7,490,000 mN 7,500,000 mN 7,500,000 mN 7,500,000 mN 7,500,000 mN 7,500,000 mN 7,500,000 mN 7,500,000 mN 7,480,000 mN 7,480,000 mN 7,480,000 mN 7,480,000 mN 7,480,000 mN 7,480,000 mN 7,480,000 mN 7,490,000 mN 7,490,000 mN 7,490,000 mN 7,490,000 mN 7,490,000 mN 7,490,000 mN 7,490,000 mN 7,500,000 mN 7,500,000 mN 7,500,000 mN 7,500,000 mN 7,500,000 mN 7,500,000 mN 7,500,000 mN 7,480,000 mN 7,480,000 mN 7,480,000 mN 7,480,000 mN 7,480,000 mN 7,480,000 mN 7,480,000 mN 7,490,000 mN 7,490,000 mN 7,490,000 mN 7,490,000 mN 7,490,000 mN 7,490,000 mN 7,490,000 mN 7,500,000 mN 7,500,000 mN 7,500,000 mN 7,500,000 mN 7,500,000 mN 7,500,000 mN 7,500,000 mN 7,480,000 mN 7,480,000 mN 7,480,000 mN 7,480,000 mN 7,480,000 mN 7,480,000 mN 7,480,000 mN 7,490,000 mN 7,490,000 mN 7,490,000 mN 7,490,000 mN 7,490,000 mN 7,490,000 mN 7,490,000 mN 7,500,000 mN 7,500,000 mN 7,500,000 mN 7,500,000 mN 7,500,000 mN 7,500,000 mN 7,500,000 mN Map Map Area KALGOORLIE
540,000540,000540,000 mEmEmE 540,000540,000540,000 mEmEmE Snails Spiders Quistrachia Kwonkan Conothele sp. Barychelidae Aname sp. sp. sp. sp. Vertebrate Fauna Australian Bustard Western Pebble-mound Mouse Notoscincus butleri Bee-eater Rainbow Pilbara Olive Python Ghost Bat Orange Leaf-nosed Bat
550,000550,000550,000 mEmEmE 550,000550,000550,000 mEmEmE WTS2 Indicative Project layout Project Indicative WTS2 WTS2 Proposal boundary Author: GHumphreys Drawn: M Robinson 0
560,000560,000560,000 mEmEmE 560,000560,000560,000 mEmEmE kilometres 2.5 Job No.:Job 794 Date: 02Apr 2013 Date: 5 Significant Species & Fauna Habitats Revised: Revised: Figure 3.3 West Turner Syncline Turner West 3.3 Figure Projection: MGA (GDA94) Z50 570,000570,000570,000 mEmEmE 570,000570,000570,000 mEmEmE Scale: 1:100,000 Scale: 7,480,000 mN 7,480,000 mN 7,480,000 mN 7,480,000 mN 7,480,000 mN 7,480,000 mN 7,480,000 mN 7,490,000 mN 7,490,000 mN 7,490,000 mN 7,490,000 mN 7,490,000 mN 7,490,000 mN 7,490,000 mN 7,500,000 mN 7,500,000 mN 7,500,000 mN 7,500,000 mN 7,500,000 mN 7,500,000 mN 7,500,000 mN 7,480,000 mN 7,480,000 mN 7,480,000 mN 7,480,000 mN 7,480,000 mN 7,480,000 mN 7,480,000 mN 7,490,000 mN 7,490,000 mN 7,490,000 mN 7,490,000 mN 7,490,000 mN 7,490,000 mN 7,490,000 mN 7,500,000 mN 7,500,000 mN 7,500,000 mN 7,500,000 mN 7,500,000 mN 7,500,000 mN 7,500,000 mN 7,480,000 mN 7,480,000 mN 7,480,000 mN 7,480,000 mN 7,480,000 mN 7,480,000 mN 7,480,000 mN 7,490,000 mN 7,490,000 mN 7,490,000 mN 7,490,000 mN 7,490,000 mN 7,490,000 mN 7,490,000 mN 7,500,000 mN 7,500,000 mN 7,500,000 mN 7,500,000 mN 7,500,000 mN 7,500,000 mN 7,500,000 mN 7,480,000 mN 7,490,000 mN 7,500,000 mN 7,480,000 mN 7,480,000 mN 7,480,000 mN 7,480,000 mN 7,480,000 mN 7,480,000 mN 7,490,000 mN 7,490,000 mN 7,490,000 mN 7,490,000 mN 7,490,000 mN 7,490,000 mN 7,500,000 mN 7,500,000 mN 7,500,000 mN 7,500,000 mN 7,500,000 mN 7,500,000 mN 7,480,000 mN 7,480,000 mN 7,480,000 mN 7,480,000 mN 7,480,000 mN 7,480,000 mN 7,480,000 mN 7,490,000 mN 7,490,000 mN 7,490,000 mN 7,490,000 mN 7,490,000 mN 7,490,000 mN 7,490,000 mN 7,500,000 mN 7,500,000 mN 7,500,000 mN 7,500,000 mN 7,500,000 mN 7,500,000 mN 7,500,000 mN 7,480,000 mN 7,480,000 mN 7,480,000 mN 7,480,000 mN 7,480,000 mN 7,480,000 mN 7,480,000 mN 7,490,000 mN 7,490,000 mN 7,490,000 mN 7,490,000 mN 7,490,000 mN 7,490,000 mN 7,490,000 mN 7,500,000 mN 7,500,000 mN 7,500,000 mN 7,500,000 mN 7,500,000 mN 7,500,000 mN 7,500,000 mN 7,480,000 mN 7,480,000 mN 7,480,000 mN 7,480,000 mN 7,480,000 mN 7,480,000 mN 7,480,000 mN 7,490,000 mN 7,490,000 mN 7,490,000 mN 7,490,000 mN 7,490,000 mN 7,490,000 mN 7,490,000 mN 7,500,000 mN 7,500,000 mN 7,500,000 mN 7,500,000 mN 7,500,000 mN 7,500,000 mN 7,500,000 mN
Table 3‐4: Subterranean Fauna: Description of Factor, Impact Assessment and Management Summary of how Proposal Description of factor Impacts and assessment of significance Management and mitigation meets EPA objective EPA objective Subterranean fauna are considered to occur in low Stygofauna – groundwater drawdown and habitat removal The following key management measure for To maintain representation, density and limited diversity at WTS (Biota 2012c). No significant populations or species of stygofauna have been recorded in the WTS area; therefore, the subterranean fauna will be implemented: diversity, viability and ecological Stygofauna Proposal is considered unlikely to have a significant impact on stygofauna. Comparisons of the Blattodea Lineage BNR to function at the species, Sixteen (16) stygobitic specimens were collected; 15 Troglofauna – habitat removal Blattodea specimens collected from ongoing Rio population and assemblage specimens from the Order Amphipoda were collected Both troglomorphic Polyxenida lineages and Blattodea Lineage BNA were detected at both the Tinto Iron Ore (WA) projects in the Pilbara will be level. at B1 and one specimen from the Order Cyclopoida B1 and S17 deposits, and from multiple sites elsewhere in the Pilbara; therefore, these species are undertaken via molecular analysis. Summary of how Proposal (juvenile, species indeterminate) was collected at not considered to be of conservation significance. The remaining three troglomorphic orders meets EPA objective S17. collected at S17 (Hemiptera, Pauropoda and Symphyla) are likely to have similar distributions to the The proposal can be managed to The amphipod species from B1 deposit is widespread Polyxenida and Blattodea, and therefore are not likely to be restricted to the WTS area (Biota meet the EPA environmental throughout the Pilbara; the copepod from S17 is also 2012c). objective for this factor, as likely to be widespread (Biota 2012c). The single specimen of troglomorphic Blattodea Lineage BNR is unlikely to be restricted to a single detailed in adjacent columns: The stygofauna results indicate a low density stygal site in the WTS area and is likely to be more widespread, based on the following considerations No significant populations or community, and suggest no significant groundwater (Biota 2012c): species of stygofauna were fauna occurs in the locality (Biota 2012c). o The single specimen of this species was recorded on the border of the Dales Gorge Member and recorded during surveys in Troglofauna Hydrated Zone at S17. Both of these geology units are considered continuous throughout the the Proposal boundary. The troglomorphic taxa collected at WTS comprise WTS area, and not restricted to the S17 deposit boundaries. Therefore, this species appears Troglofauna collected within troglophiles (e.g. are not obligated to live in unlikely to be restricted in terms of geology. the Proposal boundary subterranean environments) rather than true o The presence of both Polyxenida lineages and Blattodea Lineage BNA at both the B1 and S17 comprised troglophiles (e.g. troglobites. Similar sampling efforts at other sites deposits supports the previous observation that suitable habitat is unlikely to be restricted to are not obligated to live in known to support troglobitic communities typically deposit boundaries. Contiguous habitat extends at least along the ridge between the two subterranean environments) yield greater numbers of troglobitic animals deposits, and likely to be present more broadly in the WTS. rather than true troglobites; (Biota 2012c). o The apparent spatial restriction of this single specimen is more likely due to the limited therefore, the Proposal Seventy seven (77) troglophiles were collected from sequencing completed on Blattodea specimens from the Pilbara. poses a low risk of significant five orders, with the most abundant groups o Previous genetic studies on Blattodea in the Pilbara have found that short‐range endemism is not impact to these species. comprising the Polyxenida and Blattodea. characteristic of this order. Assessment of distribution of Genetic analysis of the Polyxenida specimens Based on these site‐specific considerations, and the consideration that troglophiles are generally at troglophiles, and likely indicated two lineages that occurred at both the minimal risk of conservation impacts due to local scale development proposals (Biota 2012c), the continuity of habitat (based B1 and S17 deposits – both have previously been Proposal is considered unlikely to have a significant impact on troglofauna. on geology) in the WTS area, sampled widely in the Pilbara. indicate significant impact to troglofauna is unlikely. Genetic analysis of the Blattodea specimens indicated two lineages. Lineage BNA comprised 24 individuals, collected at both the B1 and S17 deposits, and has previously been sampled widely in the Pilbara. Lineage BNR comprised one individual, collected at the S17 deposit, and has not been collected previously in the Pilbara, based on the limited material available for genetic comparison. Other orders collected from the S17 deposit comprised Hemiptera (16 juveniles, species indeterminate), Pauropoda (one juvenile, species indeterminate), and Symphyla (one specimen, insufficient taxonomic research to determine species).
Table 3‐5: Hydrological Processes and Inland Water Environmental Quality (Aquatic Fauna): Description of Factor, Impact Assessment and Management Summary of how Proposal Description of factor Impacts and assessment of significance Management and Mitigation meets EPA objective EPA objective Aquatic fauna Aquatic fauna – dewatering discharge The following key management measures for aquatic To maintain the quality of Helicopter reconnaissance in the 2011 wet Dewatering discharge will potentially impact aquatic fauna via changes in surface water quality and flow regimes: fauna will be implemented: groundwater and surface water, and dry seasons established no ephemeral Analysis of groundwater from the B1 aquifer indicates discharge water is generally of good quality, A Proposal discharge water quality management sediment and/or biota so that pools were present on the discharge concentrations of all analytes are less than ANZECC/ARMCANZ (2000) water quality trigger values (TVs) for and monitoring strategy (including site‐specific the environmental values, both watercourse between the discharge point drinking water and livestock water; however, some analytes exceed TVs for the protection of aquatic water quality trigger values), will be developed in ecological and social, are and the junction with the Beasley River, ecosystems, particularly nutrients (WRM 2012b). For further detail on groundwater quality refer to Table 3‐6: accordance with the ANZECC/ ARMCANZ (2000) protected. 10 km downstream (WRM 2012a). Groundwater. water quality management framework, to manage Summary of how Proposal Ephemeral pools occur on the Beasley Discharge could reduce the diversity and abundance of aquatic fauna within the discharge extent, via: the potential impacts of discharge water quality on meets EPA objective the downstream environment. River both upstream and downstream of o The particular chemical characteristics of the groundwater being unfavourable for some species. The proposal can be managed to the junction with the discharge o Elevated nutrient concentrations could cause eutrophication that may have detrimental effects on some meet the EPA environmental watercourse (e.g. the 8 km of the Beasley species. objective for this factor, as River within the maximum extent of Precipitation of carbonate minerals could cause areas of cementation of river alluvium, thereby reducing detailed in adjacent columns: discharge contains pools), and are o habitat availability for some species. All aquatic fauna species populated by aquatic fauna assemblages o Change in aquatic fauna assemblages from species adapted to ephemeral pools to species adapted to more recorded in ephemeral pools (Figure 3‐4). permanent water bodies. within the dewater discharge All aquatic fauna species recorded within extent have also been the dewater discharge extent were also The Proposal is considered unlikely to cause significant impacts to aquatic fauna on a local and regional scale, recorded outside the recorded at control sites (on the Beasley or based on: discharge extent, locally or Hardey River) or have been recorded o The generally good quality of discharge water. regionally. elsewhere in the Pilbara (WRM 2012a) o The flushing and diluting effect of natural surface flows of high volume during the wet season. Groundwater from the B1 (Table 5 of Appendix 1). o The relatively limited spatial and temporal extent of discharge (e.g. <8% of the total length of the Beasley aquifer that will be River may be impacted, and the 10 km discharge watercourse comprises <5% of the total length of similar discharged to the sized tributaries within the Beasley River sub‐catchment). environment is generally of o The present distribution, both locally and regionally, of aquatic fauna species recorded in the dewater good quality. discharge area (e.g. no species is confined to the discharge area). Appropriate monitoring of o The presence of similar habitat and fauna assemblages in the surrounding WTS area, including upstream of discharge water quality will the discharge area, which provides recruitment sources to repopulate the area after cessation of discharge be undertaken. should fauna assemblages be altered.
Table 3‐6: Hydrological Processes and Inland Water Environmental Quality (Groundwater): Description of Factor, Impact Assessment and Management Summary of how Proposal Description of factor Impacts and assessment of significance Management and mitigation meets EPA objective EPA objective Hydrogeology Groundwater abstraction The following key management measures for To maintain hydrological The B1 orebody aquifer is considered to be Dewatering of the B1 main pit via in‐pit bores is required at extraction rates of up to approximately groundwater will be implemented (and where regimes of groundwater and isolated from the regional groundwater system by 301 ML/da y (1 GL/annum) to enable mining to a maximum depth of approximately 195 m BWT. Total applicable have been implemented during Proposal surface water so that existing low permeability un‐mineralised Brockman Iron dewatering volume is approximately 80 GL. Required rates of dewatering are expected to peak at design to date): and potential uses, including Formation to the south, and Mount McRae Shale 30 ML/day in 2015‐2017 and then decline to approximately 14 ML/day in 2018 to 2027 (Rio Tinto Monitoring of water levels and abstraction rates ecosystem maintenance, are to the north (Figure 3‐5), Rio Tinto 2013a). 2013a). The modelled groundwater drawdown is relatively limited in extent (Rio Tinto 2013a) (Figure during B1 dewatering, and ongoing validation of protected. The B1 orebody aquifer is considered to be 3‐2). the hydrogeological conceptual model and To maintain the quality of isolated from the aquifer in the Wittenoom Abstraction of groundwater at B1 is expected to have minimal impact on other groundwater resources, numerical groundwater model. groundwater and surface formation located to the north of the deposit, by as the available data indicate the orebody aquifer is isolated by low permeability un‐mineralised Prioritisation of beneficial use of water extracted water, sediment and/or the low permeability Mount McRae Shale and Mt Brockman Iron Formation and Mount McRae Shale Formation (Rio Tinto 2013a). during dewatering, predominantly via utilisation to biota so that the Silvia Formations. At S17, minor dewatering is required for pits 3 and 8 (undertaken via in‐pit sumps) to a depth of meet operational requirements (including planned environmental values, both The water table is approximately 40 mbgl in the approximately 15 m BWT. The other six pits at S17 are AWT. Extraction of groundwater from the S17 supply to the nearby S10 minesite), with discharge ecological and social, are central area of the B1 deposit, and approximately aquifer is expected to have minimal impact on surrounding local groundwater resources due to the to the environment the least preferred protected. 62% of the B1 resource is BWT (Figure 3‐5). minor volumes extracted, and the isolation of the orebody aquifer by low permeability un‐mineralised management option (Rio Tinto 2013b). Summary of how Proposal The S17 orebody aquifer is considered to be Brockman Iron Formation and Mount McRae Shale Formation. Management of pit voids that extend BWT at meets EPA objective isolated from the regional groundwater system by Vegetation – groundwater drawdown cessation of mining are considered in Table 3‐8: The proposal can be managed to Rehabilitation and Closure. low permeability un‐mineralised Brockman Iron Refer to Table 3‐2: Vegetation and Flora. meet the EPA environmental Formation and Mount McRae Shale Formation. Subterranean fauna –groundwater drawdown objective for this factor, as The water table at S17 is approximately 40 to detailed in adjacent columns: 125 mbgl, and approximately 3% of the S17 Refer to Table 3‐4: Subterranean Fauna. The B1 ore body aquifer is resource is BWT (Figure 3‐6). isolated from the regional Groundwater quality groundwater system by low Analysis of the B1 orebody aquifer indicates the permeability geological units, groundwater is of good quality, concentrations of all and hence the total volume analytes are less than ANZECC/ARMCANZ (2000) of water required to dewater water quality trigger values (TVs) for drinking water the ore body, and the spatial and livestock water; however, several analytes extent of groundwater exceed the default TVs for the protection of aquatic drawdown, are relatively ecosystems (WRM 2012b): limited. Chromium and Copper are slightly above the 95% The aquifer is predicted to TVs, but are below 90% TVs. recover to near pre‐mining water levels within Zinc (Zn) is above the 95% TV; however, data for approximately 60 years after Zn should be treated with caution, as the cessation of dewatering. elevated levels are likely due to incidental contamination. No significant populations or species of stygofauna that Mean and median values for nitrate are above may be affected by the 95% TV, but are below the 80% TV. groundwater drawdown Other nutrients are above default TVs (associated have been recorded in the with eutrophication risk rather than direct vicinity of the B1 deposit. toxicity) ‐ total phosphorus, filterable reactive Groundwater drawdown phosphorus, nitrate‐nitrite nitrogen and total during dewatering of the B1 nitrogen (latter two analytes significantly above deposit is not expected to the default TVs). impact potentially groundwater dependent vegetation in the WTS area.
Cross Sections looking west 20300 N 18900 N RL 750m J3 RL 700m J2
RL 650m J2 J1 WS2 RL 600m HYD WS1 DET MIN DG3 Water Table RL 550m DG1 DG2 FWZ RL 500m DG1 MCS RL 450m FWZ A MCS RL 400m 9580E
RL 550m DET DET HYD DET IN HYD M N IN 1 Water Table IN MI M G M 3 G2 D RL 500m IN S1 G D M D N 3 W J6 MIN J5 MI J J6 IN FWZ MIN J4 M IN RL 450m M 2 J IN J5 M J1 N RL 400m J4 MI DG3 2 S J3 W Z DG2 FW RL 350m S B MC J2 DG1 RL 300m 10480 E J1 WS2 DOR RL 250m WS1 18900 N 20300 N
DET RL 550m DET HYD MIN HYD DET MCS Water Table J6 WS2 RL 500m S1 J5 W RL 450m J4 DG3 DOR J3 RL 400m DG2 C J2 DG1 RL 350m J1 DOR Z 11140E FW RL 300m WS2 MCS WS1
RL 250m DG3 18900 N DG2 20300 N Legend
DET Detritals FWZ FOOTWALL ZONE
BROCKMAN IRON FORMATION MCS MOUNT McRAE SHALE
MTS YS Yandicoogina Shale member MOUNT SYLVIA FORMATION J1 Joffre member - Strand J1 - J6 WD WITTENOOM FORMATION
9,000 mE WS1 Whaleback Shale member - Strand WS1 - WS2 A B C 10,000 mE 11,000 mE 12,000 mE DOR Dolerite DG3 Dales Gorge member - Strand DG3 DG2 Dales Gorge member - Strand DG2 MINERALISATION 20,000 mN DG1 Dales Gorge member - Strand DG1 HYD Hydrated ? ? MIN Mineralisation >55% Fe ? MainMain PitPit ? ? ? ? SatelliteSatellite PitPit SatelliteSatellite PitPit Satellite Pit ? FIGURE 3 - 5
19,000 mN B1 Deposit
0 500 1000m Geological Sections Local grid April 2013 PDE0094906v1 9600N 9600N 8,000 mN 9,000 mN 10,000 mN RL 450m RL 500m RL 400m RL 550m RL 450m RL 600m RL 500m RL 550m 14,000 mE 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 DIL 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 CAL 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 PIL 15,000 mE A DIW 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3
9700N RL 450m RL 500m RL 550m RL 600m RL 650m 0 MTS CA 16,000 mE HYD Local grid 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 1 MTS D HYD
G F
MCS 1 W
5 5 5 5 5 5 5 Z 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 M 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5
5 5 5 5 5 5 5 17,000 mE
5 5 5 5 5 5 5
B I M
N
I N Cross Sectionslookingwest
9800N F 9800N 9800N HYD
W
Z
M 2 km
I N MTS 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 DG1 MIN 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 MCS DG2 MIN DG1 MIN
F
DIL W
18,000 mE Z
HYD
M 7 7 7 7 7 7 7
7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7
7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7
7 7 7 7 7 7 7 I 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 N DG2 MIN HYD DG3 MIN DG1 MIN FWZ FWZ 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 C
19,000 mE
W
S
C 1
M A
B
I N MCS FWZ DG2 MIN DG1 HYD
DG1 DG3 MIN
DG3 W
S
DG1 DG2 WS1 CAL
DG3 DET DIW 2
J1 YS M
DG2 I N
10000N 10000N 10000N Calcrete Detrital Waste Detritals CAV Dales Gorgemember-StrandDG1 Dales Gorgemember-StrandDG2 Dales Gorgemember-StrandDG3 Joffre member-StrandJ1J6 Yandicoogina Shalemember BROCKMAN IRONFORMATION Whaleback Shalemember-StrandWS1WS2 DG1 DG2 HYD DG3 MIN WS1 MIN J1 MIN WS1 MIN WS1 DG2 April 2013 WS2
DG3
J
Geological Sections 1
M
I J1 N Legend WS1 FIGURE 3-6 DG3 HYD Section 17 HYD J2 J2 MIN WS2 Water Table500m 19040E Water Table500m 15320E WS1 MCS MTS FWZ HYD PIL CA WD MIN DIL J1 J2
10200N 10200N WS2 Hydrated Immature Detritals Pisolite Mineralisation >55%Fe Canga FOOTWALL ZONE MOUNT SYLVIAFORMATION MOUNT McRAESHALE MINERALISATION WITTENOOM FORMATION PDE0094906v1 J1 17120E Water Table500m J2 J3
10300N Table 3‐7: Hydrological Processes and Inland Waters Environmental Quality (Surface Water): Description of Factor, Impact Assessment and Management Summary of how Proposal meets Description of factor Impacts and assessment of significance Management and mitigation EPA objective EPA objectives Dewatering discharge Vegetation – dewatering discharge The following key management measures for To maintain hydrological regimes Dewatering in excess of operational requirements will be discharged to a minor watercourse north of the Detrimental impacts to vegetation bordering surface water will be implemented (and where of groundwater and surface B1 deposit, that joins the Beasley River approximately 10 km downstream of the discharge point (Figure 3‐2). the watercourses affected by dewatering applicable have been implemented during Proposal design to date): water so that existing and During the first three years of operation, potential discharge of up to 30 ML/day (excluding on‐site water use of discharge may occur, but is not considered potential uses, including 6 ML/day) is predicted to extend approximately 18 km downstream of the discharge point (Rio Tinto 2012a). significant, primarily due to the widespread The Proposal surface water management ecosystem maintenance, are plan has, and will continue to, be From 2018 to 2027, potential discharge of approximately 14 ML/day (excluding on‐site water use of 6 ML/day) is occurrence of the relevant vegetation protected. implemented (Rio Tinto 2012c) with the predicted to extend approximately 13 km downstream of the discharge point (Rio Tinto 2012a). communities in the local area, and the To maintain the quality of relatively limited temporal and spatial extent of objective of minimising adverse impacts to With on‐site water use of approximately 6 ML/day, discharge is expected to be <10 ML/day for the majority of groundwater and surface water, discharge. Refer to detailed assessment in water courses, water quality and the the life of the Proposal. sediment and/or biota so that Table 3‐2: Vegetation and Flora. downstream environment. Beasley River the environmental values, both Vegetation – disruption to surface flow Proposal design has, and will continue to, ecological and social, are The Beasley River is approximately 100km in length, and is a tributary of the Hardey River (that eventually joins incorporate consideration of surface water protected. the Ashburton River a further 90km downstream). Dewatering discharge will occur in the upper reaches of the No significant impact expected ‐ refer to management, including minimising Summary of how Proposal meets Beasley River, approximately 70km upstream of the junction with the Hardey River. detailed assessment in Table 3‐2: Vegetation disruption to watercourses where practical EPA objective Approximately 8% of the total length of the Beasley River is within the predicted maximum discharge extent and Flora. (Rio Tinto 2012c, 2012e). The proposal can be managed to (additionally, the 10 km discharge watercourse comprises <5% of the total length of similar sized tributaries Aquatic fauna – dewatering discharge Prioritisation of beneficial use of water within the Beasley River sub‐catchment). meet the EPA environmental Some detrimental impacts to aquatic fauna extracted during dewatering, objectives for this factor, as detailed The Beasley River sub‐catchment comprises 2.6% of the total area of the Ashburton River catchment. Multiple within the extent of dewatering discharge may predominantly via utilisation to meet in adjacent columns: named rivers and creeks in the southern half of the Hamersley sub‐region are tributaries of the Ashburton River occur, but is not considered significant, as all operational requirements (including Groundwater from the B1 (including the Hardey River, Angelo River, Turee Creek, Seven Mile Creek, Duck Creek, Urandy Creek). aquatic fauna species within the discharge planned supply to the nearby S10 mine orebody aquifer that will be A eucalypt woodland of of E. camaldulensis subsp. refulgens and E. victrix (EcEvAci) occurs immediately adjacent extent have been recorded elsewhere in the site), with discharge to the environment the discharged to the environment is to the Beasley River, bordered by scattered E. victrix (EvAciTeCEc). Extensive areas of these communities have Pilbara, and due to the relatively limited least preferred management option (Rio generally of good quality. also been mapped in the WTS area on the Hardey River. The Hardey River and associated eucalypt woodland in temporal and spatial extent of discharge. Refer Tinto 2012b). The spatial and temporal extent the WTS area is more substantial (e.g. vegetation unit EcEvAci generally mapped as 150‐400m in width) to detailed assessment in Table 3‐5: Aquatic A Proposal discharge water quality of dewatering discharge is compared to the Beasley River (vegetation unit EcEvAci generally mapeed as 50‐200 m in width) (Figure 7). Fauna. management and monitoring strategy relatively limited, and substantial Based on helicopter and ground reconnaissance, and examination of aerial photography, extensive areas of (including site‐specific water quality trigger areas of similar watercourses eucalypt woodland occur locally on the Beasley and Hardey Rivers outside the extent of current vegetation values), will be developed in accordance occur outside the discharge surveys, and therefore the area of eucalypt woodland on the Beasley River potentially impacted by discharge is with the ANZECC/ARMCANZ (2000) water extent within the Beasley River relatively minor on a local scale. quality management framework, to manage sub‐catchment. The vegetation communities EcEvAci and EvAciTeCEc on major ephemeral watercourses are considered to have the potential impacts of discharge water quality on the downstream environment. Appropriate monitoring and local significance as a vegetation community and as fauna habitat, but are not considered regionally significant management of discharge water as they are widespread in the Pilbara (Biota 2012a; Biota 2012b; Biota 2013a). quality will be undertaken, in Watercourses throughout the WTS area, including the Beasley River, are impacted cattle from the Rocklea accordance with the pastoral station. The surveyed extent of the Beasley River is colonised by multiple weeds (15 weed species ANZECC/ARMCANZ (2000) water recorded, more significant environmental weed species present include Buffel Grass, Kapok, Birdwood Grass, quality management framework. Mimosa Bush, Spiked Malvastrum). The condition of vegetation on the Beasley River, and on the 10km The infrastructure corridor is discharge watercourse, was described as good to very poor, due to weeds and cattle impacts (Biota 2013a). The unlikely to impact overland flow Hardey River has a similar suite of weeds present, and vegetation was also described as good to very poor due or potentially dependent to weeds and cattle impacts (Biota 2013a). vegetation, and channelised flow Although conservation significant fauna species are likely to utilise the eucalypt woodland within the surveyed will be maintained where extent of the Beasley River, no significant species were recorded on the Beasley River during fauna surveys practical via culvert installation. (Biota 2012a; Figure 9). Appropriate management Ephemeral pools occur on the Beasley River both upstream and downstream of the junction with the discharge measures to avoid, and minimise watercourse and are populated by aquatic fauna assemblages (Figure 3‐4). All aquatic fauna species recorded potential impacts of the Proposal within the dewater discharge extent on the Beasley River were also recorded at control sites (on the Beasley or on surface water will be Hardey River) or have been recorded elsewhere in the Pilbara (WRM 2012a) implemented (and where Surface water flows applicable have been Modelling of surface hydrology in the vicinity of the infrastructure corridor indicates the following outcomes (Rio implemented during Proposal Tinto 2012e): design). no ‘overland flow’ is likely to occur in the vicinity of the proposed infrastructure corridor; ‘channelised flow’ within watercourses can generally be maintained where embankments are constructed within the infrastructure corridor via installation of culverts.
Table 3‐8: Rehabilitation and Closure: Description of Factor, Impact Assessment and Management Summary of how Proposal Description of factor Impacts and assessment of significance Management and mitigation meets EPA objective EPA objectives Geology Waste dumps Closure will be undertaken in accordance with the To ensure that premises can be The B1 and S17 deposits occur within the Brockman Iron Formation of the Hamersley Waste dumps are considered unlikely to have significant Mine Closure Plan (Rio Tinto 2012g; Appendix 23), closed, decommissioned and Group, and are typical of similar Banded Iron Formation derived deposits that occur environmental impacts based on the following considerations: which details management and mitigation measures, rehabilitated in an ecologically throughout the Pilbara. The Brockman Iron Formation comprises four members waste dump designs have considered the physical and chemical including the following: sustainable manner, consistent (Yandicoogina Shale, Joffre, Whaleback Shale, and Dales Gorge), and is underlain by the properties of waste material; The Rio Tinto Iron Ore (WA) Landform Design with agreed outcomes and land Mount McRae Shale. Mineralisation at B1 and S17 occurs primarily within the Dales Gorge substantial volumes of competent waste is available, enabling Guidelines will continue to be implemented to uses, and without unacceptable and Joffre Members, and to a lesser extent within the Whaleback Shale Member design/construction of waste dumps that are stable and not ensure waste dumps meet closure objectives. liability to the State. (Figure 3‐5 and Figure 3‐6). Both7 B1 and S1 are predominantly bedded deposits, although susceptible to excessive erosion; and The Rio Tinto Iron Ore (WA) Mineral Waste Summary of how Proposal some deposits of secondary surficial ironstone have also accumulated. Rio Tinto has Management Plan, and the Spontaneous substantial volumes of inert waste material is available, enabling meets EPA objective extensive experience mining similar deposits within the Brockman Iron Formation at other Combustion and ARD (SCARD) Management Plan design/construction of waste dumps that encapsulate the low mines in the Pilbara. will continue to be implemented, to ensure waste The proposal can be managed to volumes of waste rock that poses a potential AMD risk. meet the EPA environmental Mineral waste physical characteristics material is adequately geochemically Pit voids objectives for this factor, as Substantial volumes of mineral waste classified as ‘low’ to ‘medium’ erodibility will be characterised (via static testing, and kinetic detailed in adjacent columns: mined from both the B1 and S17 deposits (Rio Tinto 2012g). Pit voids are considered unlikely to have significant environmental testing where warranted) during Proposal impacts based on the following considerations: Mineral waste dumps are Mineral waste geochemical characteristics planning and operational stages, and material S17 pits 3 and 8 (that extend approximately 15 m BWT) will be that poses an AMD risk is appropriately managed. unlikely to have significant The AMD risk assessment for the B1 deposit identified a moderate AMD risk, and for the preferentially backfilled to a level sufficient to prevent formation Ongoing tests and studies include: environmental impacts, S17 deposit a low‐moderate AMD risk. This assessment was based primarily on the of pit lakes. based on analysis of mineral presence of unoxidised Mt McRae Shale in proximity to the deposits (Rio Tinto 2012f). o Static and Kinetic testing of samples from B1 The B1 pit lake will comprise a groundwater sink, minimising and Section 17; waste volumes, and physical Additionally, some elevated Sulfur levels were recorded AWT in other rock types, that potential for impacts beyond the immediate vicinity of the pit and chemical properties, may contain alunite, which can release low levels of acid. o Leaching under highly saline conditions; which indicates the majority lake. Leaching under lower contact ratios. Mineral waste that may pose an AMD risk comprises <3% of the B1 waste, and <2% of o of mineral waste is relatively The B1 pit lake is predicted to maintain circumneutral pH over the S17 waste (Rio Tinto 2012f). The Rio Tinto Iron Ore (WA) Soil Resource benign. 1000 years, and while concentration of a limited suite of Pit voids and lakes Management Work Practice will be implemented Pit voids are unlikely to have elements may reach ANZECC/ARMCANZ (2000) trigger levels, a to manage recovery and storage of topsoil and The B1 main pit will be mined to a maximum depth of approximately 195 m BWT. The significant environmental preliminary assessment suggests the pit lake is likely to pose a subsoil resources. impacts, based on predicted four B1 satellite pits are AWT and will be progressively backfilled where practical. low ecological risk (Equinox Environmental 2012). Progressive backfill of the B1 main pit during operations is not practical due to the S17 Pits 3 and 8 will be preferentially backfilled to water quality of the Rio Tinto is committed to ensuring the B1 pit lake will meet a level sufficient to prevent formation of pit lakes. proposed B1 pit lake, and required pit design and operational constraints. closure objectives, in particular that “Pit voids do not cause Rio Tinto will undertake periodic review of the commitment to backfill S17 A pit lake will form in the B1 main pit void, with water level recovery to approximately significant adverse impacts on the regional groundwater preferred closure strategy for the B1 pit lake (no pits to a level sufficient to 525 mRL after 60 years (Rio Tinto 2013a), resulting in a maximum pit lake depth of resource, or environmental values of the WTS area”. During the backfill, potentially with implementation of prevent formation of pit approximately 185 m, and a pit lake surface approximately 50 mbgl. The B1 pit void will operational phase, Rio Tinto will undertake periodic review of additional management measures) based on lakes. comprise a groundwater sink (Rio Tinto 2013a). the preferred closure strategy for the B1 pit lake (no backfill, ongoing improvements in geological, The B1 pit lake is expected to salinise after approximately 450 years, with pH declining potentially with implementation of additional management A Mine Closure Plan has hydrogeological, geotechnical and environmental from 8.3 to 5.5 over 1000 years (KCB 2012b). measures) based on ongoing improvements in geological, been developed in knowledge, to ensure the pit lake closure strategy accordance with the hydrogeological, geotechnical and environmental knowledge. The final equilibrated water quality of the pit lake (at 1000 years) indicates B, F, SO4, and will achieve closure objectives. DMP/EPA (2011) Mine Se are above the ANZECC/ARMCANZ (2000) livestock water quality trigger values, while While a non‐preferred closure strategy, backfill of the B1 pit void Closure Guideline, which As, F, Mn, Pb, SO4 and Se are above the ANZECC/ARMCANZ (2000) drinking water trigger is a management option that will be considered should ongoing provides appropriate values (KCB 2012b). investigations, and/or monitoring, establish the predicted or management measures Groundwater recovery has been remodelled since the KCB (2012) water quality actual impacts of a pit lake managed via the preferred closure regarding closure and modelling; however, the predicted higher steady state water level (e.g. 525 mRL vs. strategy will not meet closure objectives. rehabilitation, and will be 490 mRL) and increased rate of recovery to a steady state water level (e.g. 60 vs. regularly reviewed and 150 years) is not expected to significantly change the KCB (2012b) water quality updated during the predictions (Rio Tinto 2012d). The water quality model will be re‐run to confirm this operational phase of the assessment. Proposal. At S17, pits 3 and 8 will be mined to approximately 15 m BWT; these pits will be preferentially backfilled to a level sufficient to prevent formation of pit lakes. The remaining pits at S17 are AWT, and backfill will be undertaken where practical; however, pit voids are expected to remain at closure.
Table 3‐9: Residual Impacts: Description of Factor, Impact Assessment and Management Summary of how Description of Impacts and assessment of Proposal meets EPA Management and mitigation factor significance objective EPA objective The potential A proposed offsets package to Management and mitigation To counterbalance any requirement for an counterbalance potential measures to prevent and significant residual offset was significant residual impacts of minimise significant environmental impacts determined based the Proposal has been environmental impacts will be or uncertainty through on recent WA provided to the OEPA in a implemented (and where the application of Ministerial separate document; applicable have been offsets. decisions for The Proposal will require implemented during Proposal Summary of how mining clearing of up to 2700ha of design to date), as specified in Proposal meets EPA developments in vegetation in good to Tables 3‐2 to 3‐8. objective the Pilbara and excellent condition; Management and mitigation advice provided by An assessment of Of the 2700ha of measures of direct relevance the OEPA in a potential impacts of vegetation clearing, up to to preventing and minimising meeting on the Proposal was 575ha comprises significant residual impacts are 26/03/2013. undertaken in vegetation considered of also detailed in in the accordance with EPA local environmental proposed offsets package Position Statement significance. provided to the OEPA in a No. 9, Environmental separate document. Offsets (EPA 2006) and EPA Guidance Statement No. 19, Environmental Offsets – Biodiversity (EPA 2008). The Proposal is considered unlikely to have significant adverse impacts on any potential ‘critical’ or ‘high value’ assets; no significant residual impact to these assets is expected.
Western Turner Syncline Stage 2 – B1 and S17 Deposits API: Environmental Review Document
4 OTHER ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS
Table 4‐1 briefly outlines potential impacts and management associated with other environmental factors for the Proposal, that were not identified as key factors in the EPA‐prepared Environmental Scoping Document.
Page 61 Western Turner Syncline Stage 2 – B1 and S17 Deposits API: Environmental Review Document
Table 4‐1: Other Environmental Factors, Impact Assessment and Management Factor EPA objective Description of factor Impacts Management and Mitigation
The Proposal is located within the traditional lands of the Eastern Guruma people and the Yinhawangka people. The B1 deposit occurs within the Eastern Heritage values will be addressed during planning Guruma native title claim area (WC97/89). Rio and implementation of the Proposal by: Tinto entered into an Indigenous Land Use Avoiding disturbance to heritage sites where Agreement (ILUA) with the Eastern Guruma practical. Surveys undertaken to date indicate People on 13 February 2008. the Proposal is unlikely to have Obtaining approval for any required disturbance to identified sites in accordance In the Eastern Guruma native title claim area, significant impact on Aboriginal with s 18 of the Aboriginal Heritage Act 1972 multiple archaeological sites have been heritage: To ensure that identified (sites of low–moderate significance) and in consultation with the Eastern Guruma or No ethnographic sites have been historical and and no ethnographic sites identified to date (Mt Yinhawangka people. identified to date within the cultural Turner was identified as an ethnographic site, Protecting all identified sites located near Heritage Proposal boundary. associations are but is outside the Proposal boundary). construction or operational areas that are not Some archaeological sites not adversely The S17 deposit occurs within the Yinhawangka approved to be disturbed under s 18 of the identified to date may be affected. native title claim area (WC10/16). Rio Tinto has Aboriginal Heritage Act 1972 (e.g. through the impacted by the Proposal; a Multiple Proposal Binding Agreement with the installation of physical barriers and buffer however, these sites identified to Yinhawangka people, and is currently in zones). date are of low to moderate negotiations with a view to reaching a significance. Documenting the location of all protected sites commercial Participation Agreement, that will in the Rio Tinto Iron Ore (WA) Geographic be registered later as an ILUA. Information System (GIS) database and on site In the Yinhawangka native title claim area, plans, and designating buffer zones around multiple archaeological sites have been these sites. identified (sites of low to moderate significance) and no ethnographic sites have been identified to date.
Page 62 Western Turner Syncline Stage 2 – B1 and S17 Deposits API: Environmental Review Document
Factor EPA objective Description of factor Impacts Management and Mitigation In general, visual impact of the Proposal from public roads and publicly accessible viewpoints is expected to be minimal, considering the following (Ecoscape 2012): Visual amenity will be addressed during planning and implementation of the Proposal by: The Proposal will be visually prominent when viewed from Undertaking waste dump design in accordance the unsealed Nanutarra‐Munjina with the Rio Tinto Iron Ore (WA) Landform Road within approximately 5 km Design Guidelines and with consideration of The visual landscape of the Pilbara is generally of the S17 pits. closure objectives for the Proposal, to achieve characterised by rugged ridges and ranges final landforms that are considered The Proposal will likely be visible supporting spinifex grasslands, with land uses aesthetically compatible with the surrounding from the Mt Nameless lookout, generally comprising pastoralism and mining landscape. To ensure that but is not expected to have a infrastructure. impacts to amenity significant visual impact due to Where practical, designing Proposal waste Amenity The visual character of the landscape in the are reduced as low the distance and the extensive dumps to abut adjacent ridgelines, and avoid (Visual) broader area around the Proposal is as reasonably mining infrastructure visible maximum dump heights that exceed the predominantly natural in appearance, with practicable. from this lookout (viewing the adjacent ridgeline. localised areas of highly modified landscapes Tom Price mine from this lookout Rehabilitating waste dumps with native due to multiple mining developments (e.g. Tom is promoted as an attraction by vegetation. Price mine, WTS S10 mine) and the Tom Price Tourism WA). Rehabilitating any long‐term low grade town site (Ecoscape 2012). The Proposal will not be visible stockpiles that remain in‐situ at mine closure from the 'Warlu Way' tourist with native vegetation (as per waste dumps). route; this route utilises the Removing infrastructure (other than pits and sealed section of the Nanutarra‐ dumps) at closure, and rehabilitate remaining Munjina Road from the NWCH to disturbed areas with native vegetation. the junction with the Paraburdoo‐Tom Price Road, approximately 28 km southwest of the Proposal.
Page 63 Western Turner Syncline Stage 2 – B1 and S17 Deposits API: Environmental Review Document
Factor EPA objective Description of factor Impacts Management and Mitigation The predicted dust concentrations at The Proposal will generate dust due to clearing, the Eastern Guruma facility are not blasting, loading, crushing and screening, Dust emissions will be managed in accordance with predicted to exceed the criteria conveyors, stockpiling, and vehicle activity. Rio Tinto Iron Ore (WA) Cleaner Air Management specified in the Rio Tinto Iron Ore Plan. Management measures to minimise dust will Dust modelling was undertaken based on the (WA) Cleaner Air Management Plan include: year of operation with peak production. (Environmental Alliances 2012): The application of water (or appropriate Rio Tinto has adopted criteria for dust PM10 concentrations at the suppressants) to haul roads, working surfaces concentrations at sensitive receptors in nearest sensitive receptor not to To maintain air and stockpiles (as required). proximity to inland Pilbara mining operations, exceed 70 µg/m3 over an average quality for the Sand sealinge th haul road from B1 to S10 based on review of relevant State and National period of 24 hours, on more than Air quality protection of the where practical. guidelines, as specified in the Rio Tinto Iron Ore 10 days per year. (Dust) environment and (WA) Cleaner Air Management Plan. Sand sealing the main site access road where PM10 concentrations at the human health and practical. The only sensitive receptor that could be nearest sensitive receptor not to amenity. affected by the Proposal (that is not part of the exceed an annual average of Incorporation of dust controls within key 3 infrastructure, such as water sprays at the ROM Proposal) is the Eastern Guruma facility, located 70 µg/m . approximately 6 km northwest of the B1 main bin, and dust collectors at major dust Deposited dust at sensitive pit. This facility comprises a fenced area with generating centres (primary crusher, conveyor receptors not to exceed a total of several transportable buildings. The facility is transfers). 4 g/m2/month from all sources located on a proposed LA Act lease, expected to 2 (equivalent to 2 g/m /month as Implementing and enforcing appropriate be granted to the Eastern Guruma people and additional maximum from mining vehicular speed limits on site access roads. utilised for training and cultural purposes. operations).
Page 64 Western Turner Syncline Stage 2 – B1 and S17 Deposits API: Environmental Review Document
Factor EPA objective Description of factor Impacts Management and Mitigation
The Proposal will generate noise and vibration from activities such as blasting, loading, crushing and screening, conveyors, and vehicle activity. Modelling was undertaken to determine if noise emissions from the Proposal are likely to exceed the Environmental Protection (Noise) Regulations 1997 at sensitive receptors. Modelling was undertaken for two scenarios: o the year of operation with peak To maintain air construction activity; Modelling indicates that noise from quality for the Air Quality the year of operation with peak production. the Proposal will not impact the The generation of noise and vibration from the protection of the o (Noise and Eastern Guruma facility, with Proposal will be managed in accordance with the environment and The only sensitive receptor that could be vibration) received noise below 20 dB (A) for all Rio Tinto Standard E6 ‐ Noise and Vibration Control. human health and affected by the Proposal (that is not part of the scenarios modelled (SVT 2012). amenity. Proposal) is the Eastern Guruma facility, located approximately 6 km northwest of the B1 main pit. This facility comprises a fenced area with several transportable buildings. This facility is located on a proposed LA Act lease, expected to be granted to the Eastern Guruma people and utilised for training and cultural purposes. The Eastern Guruma facility was modelled as a 'residence', the most noise sensitive premise under the Regulations, with the lowest levels of acceptable noise being 35 dB(A).
Page 65 Western Turner Syncline Stage 2 – B1 and S17 Deposits API: Environmental Review Document
Factor EPA objective Description of factor Impacts Management and Mitigation
GHG emissions from the Proposal In accordance with the Rio Tinto Standard will average approximately E4 ‐ Greenhouse Gas Emissions, opportunities To maintain air 85 000 tCO2‐e/year, or approximately for GHG emission reduction and energy quality for the Air Quality The major contributors to greenhouse gas (GHG) 5 tCO2‐e per tonne of ore (excluding efficiency improvement will be identified during protection of the (Greenhouse emissions from the Proposal will be mobile emissions from subsequent activities Proposal design/engineering phases and environment and gas emissions) equipment, crushing and conveying of ore. that are not part of the implemented where practical. human health and Proposal ‐ ore transport from S10 to The Rio Tinto Iron Ore (WA) Electrical Design amenity. Tom Price, ore processing at Tom Criteria ensure energy efficiency is considered Price, rail and port shipment). during the Proposal engineering design process.
All non‐mineral waste generated by the Proposal will be managed in accordance with Rio Tinto Standard E7 (Non‐mineral Waste Management) and the Non‐Mineral Waste Management Work Practice. The Proposal will generate non‐mineral waste that Inappropriate handling or disposal of will require disposal both on‐site and off‐site, non‐mineral waste has the potential Domestic wastes will be disposed of at an on‐ including: to result in the following impacts: site landfill, established and operated in accordance with the Rio Tinto Iron Ore (WA) domestic solid and liquid wastes (including discharges to the environment Procedure – Landfill Management Plan, or at an Non‐mineral general office waste); contaminating surface water, NA appropriate off‐site licensed facility. waste sewage; groundwater, soil or the Sewage will be treated at an on‐site wastewater general mine site waste (including scrap metal, atmosphere; treatment plant (WWTP) in accordance with drums, tyres); fire hazards; the Rio Tinto Iron Ore (WA) WWTP Standard food source attracting feral and controlled waste (e.g. paints, acids, Specification, or disposed at an appropriate off‐ native animals. hydrocarbons, batteries). site licensed facility. Controlled waste will be handled and disposed of in accordance with the Rio Tinto Iron Ore (WA) Procedure – Controlled Waste Guidelines. These guidelines address the requirements of
Page 66 Western Turner Syncline Stage 2 – B1 and S17 Deposits API: Environmental Review Document
Factor EPA objective Description of factor Impacts Management and Mitigation the Environmental Protection (Controlled Waste) Regulations 2004. Liquid hydrocarbon waste will be treated at an on‐site biofarm facility installed and operated in accordance with the Rio Tinto Iron Ore (WA) Biofarm Remediation Facility – Design, Construction & Management Guideline, or disposed at an appropriate off‐site licensed facility. Soil contaminated with hydrocarbons will be treated at an on‐site (or off‐site) land farm facility installed and operated in accordance with the Rio Tinto Iron Ore (WA) Procedure – Landfarm Management Plan.
Inappropriate handling and/or storage of hazardous materials has Hazardous materials will be managed in The Proposal will involve the use of a number of the potential to result in the accordance with the oRio Tint Standard E5 – hazardous materials. An indicative list of the types following impacts: Hazardous Materials and Contamination of hazardous materials that may be used includes Control and the Rio Tinto Iron Ore (WA) discharges to the environment Hazardous (but is not limited to): Hazardous Materials Management Work NA contaminating surface water, materials fuels including distillate and liquefied Practice. groundwater, soil or the petroleum gas; atmosphere; Any accidental discharges of hazardous oil, greases, coolants and degreasers; materials will be managed in accordance with creation of health hazards; ammonium nitrate. the Rio Tinto Iron Ore (WA) Procedure – Spill flammable or explosive safety Response. hazards.
Page 67 Western Turner Syncline Stage 2 – B1 and S17 Deposits API: Environmental Review Document
Factor EPA objective Description of factor Impacts Management and Mitigation
Temporary closure of the Nanutarra‐Munjina Road will be carried out in accordance with a traffic management plan developed in Due to the proximity of the S17 consultation with, and approved by, Main deposit to the Nanutarra‐ .Roads WA Munjina Road, it is likely the road All other road interactions (e.g. heavy vehicle will need to be temporarily access, signage, etc.) will be carried out in closed (for durations of up to The Proposal will likely require traffic accordance with the requirements of the approximately 1 to 2 hours) management on the Nanutarra‐Munjina Road, relevant road authority, and relevant during blasting of the most south a public, unsealed road. legislation. easterly pits. Of note, the ‘Warlu The Proposal will require transportation of Way’ tourist route will not be Utilisation of the private White Quartz Road, personnel, construction materials, fuel, and/or the haul road from B1 ‐ S10 ‐ Tom Price, Public risk and affected by the Proposal (e.g. NA explosives, hazardous materials and waste for a significant proportione of th transport safety closest point of the Warlu Way is route to/from Tom Price will reduce to/from Tom Price. The transport route the junction of the interactions with public traffic. to/from Tom Price will likely require utilisation Nanutarra‐Munjina Road with of the public Nameless Valley Road, the private the Paraburdoo‐Tom Price Road, Transport of any fuel, explosives or hazardous ad, and/or the haul road from White Quartz Ro approximately 28 km southwest materials will be undertaken in accordance with B1‐S10‐Tom Price. of the Proposal). the Dangerous Goods Safety Act 2004 and associated Dangerous Goods Safety Regulations Transportation of personnel and equipment will result in an 2007 at minimum, and in accordance with the e (WA) Hazardous Materials increase in traffic on the public Rio Tinto Iron Or Management Work Practice, which mandates Nameless Valley Road. practices to minimise adverse health, safety and environment risks from the use, storage, transport and disposal of hazardous substances.
Page 68 Western Turner Syncline Stage 2 – B1 and S17 Deposits API: Environmental Review Document
5 OTHER LEGISLATION AND APPROVALS
Other legislation applicable to regulation of the potential environmental impacts of the Proposal, and approvals required, are outlined in Table 5‐1. Rio Tinto will comply with all relevant legislation (including obtaining specific approvals where required) prior to, and during, implementation of the Proposal.
Table 5‐1: Other Legislation and Approvals
Environmental Secondary Approval Responsible Agency Statute Factor
Vegetation and Licence to take Rare flora (none Wildlife Conservation Act DEC flora identified in Proposal area to date). 1950
Licence to take Protected fauna (none Wildlife Conservation Act Fauna DEC identified in Proposal area to date). 1950
Interference with Permit to obstruct or interfere with Rights in Water and DoW watercourses bed/banks. Irrigation Act 1914
Licence to construct or alter wells. Groundwater Rights in Water and Licence to take DoW abstraction groundwater/amendment to existing Irrigation Act 1914 groundwater licences.
Licence to Operate for prescribed Dewatering Environmental Protection premises –e.g. Category 6, dewatering DEC discharge Act 1986 and discharge.
Mining Proposal and Mine Closure Plan Rehabilitation and – for infrastructure on Mining Act DMP Mining Act 1978 closure tenure.
Australian Government National Greenhouse and Greenhouse gas National Greenhouse and Energy (Clean Energy Energy Reporting Act emissions Reporting (NGER) Scheme. Regulator) 2007
Section 18 consent to disturb a heritage Aboriginal Heritage Act Aboriginal heritage DIA site. 1972
Visual amenity NA NA NA
Works Approval and Licence to Operate Environmental Protection Air quality (Dust) for prescribed premises – e.g. Category DEC Act 1986 5, crusher and conveyor.
Air Quality No specific approval required – Environmental Protection compliance with the regulations is DEC (Noise and (Noise) Regulations 1997 vibration) required.
Page 69 Western Turner Syncline Stage 2 – B1 and S17 Deposits API: Environmental Review Document
Environmental Secondary Approval Responsible Agency Statute Factor
Mining Proposal (includes other DMP, Resources Safety environmental aspects also) – for Mining Act 1978 Branch Public risk and infrastructure on Mining Act tenure. safety DMP, State Mining Mines Safety and Proposal Management Plan. Engineer Inspection Act 1994
Hazardous DMP, Resources Safety Dangerous Goods Safety Dangerous Goods Licence. materials Branch Act 2004
Works Approval and Licence to Operate Environmental Protection for prescribed premises – e.g. Category DEC Act 1986 63/64, Landfill.
Non‐mineral waste Health (Treatment of Application to construct or install an Shire of Sewage and Disposal of apparatus for the treatment of sewage. Ashburton/DoH Effluent and Liquid Waste) Regulations 1974
Iron Ore (Hamersley State Agreement Act approval. DSD Range) Agreement Act 1963 Other EPBC Approval (not required; decision of Environment Protection "not a controlled action" on 11 Jan 2013 DSEWPaC and Biodiversity [reference EPBC 2012/6681]). Conservation Act 1999
Page 70 Western Turner Syncline Stage 2 – B1 and S17 Deposits API: Environmental Review Document
6 PRINCIPLES OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AND EIA
This section describes how the object of the EP Act and the principles of EIA have been addressed, and how the proposal meets the criteria for an API category A assessment as described in the 2012 Administrative Procedures.
6.1 Principles of Environmental Protection The objective of the EP Act is to protect the environment of the State, having regard to five principles. These principles have been considered in the environmental impact assessment for the Proposal and are summarised in Table 6‐1.
Table 6‐1: Principles of Environmental Protection Principle Consideration given in Proposal 1. Precautionary Principle Where there are threats of serious or irreversible damage, lack of full scientific certainty should not be During Proposal planning and design phases, Rio Tinto will used as a reason for postponing measures to prevent continue to undertake comprehensive baseline studies, environmental degradation. investigations and modelling of Proposal aspects that may In the application of the precautionary principle, affect the surrounding environment. Where significant decisions should be guided by: potential environmental impacts are identified, measures Careful evaluation to avoid, where practicable, have been, and will continue to be, incorporated into serious or irreversible damage to the Proposal design and management to avoid or minimise these environment. impacts where practical. An assessment of the risk‐weighted consequences of various options. The Rio Tinto Iron Ore group HSECQ Policy incorporates the principles of sustainable development. This includes the following commitments: 2. Intergenerational equity Prioritising research and implementation programs The present generation should ensure that the through technology to reduce impacts to land, health, diversity and productivity of the environment enhancing our contribution to biodiversity and is maintained or enhanced for the benefit of future improving our efficiency in water and energy use. generations. Identifying climate change improvement solutions through dedicated optimisation work programs. Contributing to the health and well‐being of local communities. Biological investigations are undertaken by Rio Tinto during the Proposal planning process to identify aspects of the environment that are of conservation significance. Where 3. Conservation of biological diversity and significant potential environmental impacts are identified, ecological integrity measures have been, and will continue to be, incorporated Conservation of biological diversity and ecological into Proposal design and management to avoid or minimise integrity should be a fundamental consideration. these impacts where practical. The Rio Tinto HSEQ Management System has well established rehabilitation procedures for restoring disturbed environments.
Page 71 Western Turner Syncline Stage 2 – B1 and S17 Deposits API: Environmental Review Document
Principle Consideration given in Proposal 4. Improved valuation, pricing and incentive mechanisms Environmental factors should be included in the valuation of assets and services. The polluter pays principle – those who generate pollution and waste should bear the cost of Environmental factors have been considered during the containment, avoidance or abatement. Proposal planning phase, and will continue to be considered The users of goods and services should pay prices during the operational and closure phases of the Proposal. based on the full life cycle costs of providing Proposal planning, design and operational managementl wil goods and services, including the use of natural continue to investigate and implement opportunities to resources and assets and the ultimate disposal of reduce impact to land, and improve efficiency in water and any wastes. energy use, in accordance with the Rio Tinto Iron Ore group Environmental goals, having been established, HSECQ Policy. should be pursued in the most cost‐effective way, by establishing incentives structures, including market mechanisms, which enable those best placed to maximise benefits and/or minimise costs to develop their own solutions and responses to environmental problems. Proposal planning, design and operational management will continue to investigate and implement opportunities to reduce impact to land, and improve efficiency in water and 5. Waste minimisation energy use, in accordance with the Rio Tinto Iron Ore group All reasonable and practicable measures should be HSEQ Policy. The Proposal will be implemented in taken to minimise the generation of waste and its accordance with Rio Tinto Standard E7 – Non‐mineral Waste discharge into the environment. Management, which requires minimisation of waste generation and safe handling, treatment and disposal of all generated wastes.
6.2 Principles of EIA for the Proponent Table 6‐2 outlines the principles of EIA as described in clause 5 of the 2012 Administrative Procedures.
Table 6‐2: Principles of EIA for the Proponent The Principles of EIA for the Proponent Discussed in the Document Consult with all stakeholders, including the Table 2‐1 details the extensive stakeholder consultation undertaken EPA, DMAs, other relevant government to date. This consultation included the OEPA and relevant DMAs, as agencies and the local community as early as well as Traditional Owners and other mining companies. Rio Tinto 1 possible in the planning of their proposal, will continue to consult with relevant stakeholders during the during the environmental review and environmental approval process, and during implementation of the assessment of their proposal, and where Proposal. necessary during the life of the project.
Page 72 Western Turner Syncline Stage 2 – B1 and S17 Deposits API: Environmental Review Document
The Principles of EIA for the Proponent Discussed in the Document Table 3‐2 to Table 3‐9 provide an EIA of the Proposal, for the preliminary key environmental factors identified by the EPA, based on: Ensure the public is provided with sufficient a summary of the key findings of studies and investigations (full information relevant to the EIA of a proposal 2 reports provided as appendices); to be able to make informed comment, prior assessment of potential impacts of the Proposal; to the EPA completing the assessment report. key environmental management measures. Table 4‐1 provides a brief EIA of the Proposal for other environmental factors.
As stated in Table 3‐2 to Table 3‐9, avoiding and minimising impacts Use best practicable measures and genuine to the environment where practical is a key management evaluation of options or alternatives in commitment for the Proposal, and has been implemented during locating, planning and designing their Proposal design. For example, modification of the Proposal boundary proposal to mitigate detrimental 3 since referral has been undertaken, to exclude extensive areas of environmental impacts and to facilitate vegetation of elevated conservation significance, and several positive environmental outcomes and a occurrences of a Priority 1 flora species (Table 3‐2 and Figure 1‐5). continuous improvement approach to As detailed in Section 3.2, continuous improvement is a key aspect of environmental management. the Rio Tinto Iron Ore (WA) HSEQ Management System. Identify the environmental factors likely to be impacted and the aspects likely to cause Table 3‐2 to Table 3‐9 identifies the preliminary key environmental impacts in the early stages of planning for factors relevant to the Proposal, potential impacts, key management their proposal. The onus is on the proponent measures, and how the EPA objectives relevant to each 4 through the EIA process to demonstrate that environmental factor can be met by the Proposal. the unavoidable impacts will meet the EPA Table 4‐1 provides a brief EIA of the Proposal for other environmental objectives for environmental factors and factors. therefore their proposal is environmentally acceptable.
Consider the following, during project planning and discussions with the EPA, regarding the form, content and timing of their environmental review: The form and content of the environmental review has incorporated a. The activities, investigations (and advice provided by the OEPA in several meetings, and addressed consequent authorisations) required to OEPA comment on drafts eof th environmental review. undertake the environmental review. Comprehensive studies and investigations, of high standard, have b. The efficacy of the investigations to been undertaken to support the environmental review, and are 5 produce sound scientific baseline data provided as appendices. about the receiving environment. Project planning has considered the expected timeframes for c. The documentation and reporting of completion of supporting studies, environmental review preparation investigations. and assessment, and timings for key milestones are regularly d. The likely timeframes in which to discussed with .the OEPA complete the environmental review; e. Use best endeavours to meet assessment timelines.
Page 73 Western Turner Syncline Stage 2 – B1 and S17 Deposits API: Environmental Review Document
The Principles of EIA for the Proponent Discussed in the Document Identify in their environmental review, subject to EPA guidance: a. Best practicable measures to avoid, Table 3‐2 to Table 3‐9 and Table 4‐1 identifies key management where possible, and otherwise measures to avoid, where possible, and otherwise minimise, rectify, minimise, rectify, reduce, monitor and reduce, monitor and manage impacts on the environment. manage impacts on the environment. Table 3‐2 to Table 3‐9 provides an assessment of how the Proposal 6 b. Responsible corporate environmental meets EPA environmental objectives for relevant environmental policies, strategies and management factors, based on implementation of key management practices, and practices, which demonstrate how the corporate environmental policies and strategies (summarised in proposal can be implemented to meet Section 3.2). the EPA environmental objectives for environmental factors.
6.3 Criteria for API Category A Clause 10.1.1 in the 2012 Administrative Procedures states that the EPA applies an API level of assessment where the proponent has provided sufficient information about the proposal, its environmental impacts, proposed management, and it appears that the Proposal is consistent with category A criteria. Consistency of the Proposal with these criteria is addressed in Table 6‐3.
Table 6‐3: Criteria for API Category A
Category A criteria Discussion
The Proposal raises five preliminary key environmental factors as The proposal raises a limited number of key identified in the ESD, and assessed in Table 3‐2 to Table 3‐9. These environmental factors that can be readily factors are typical of iron ore mining in the Pilbara and can be managed and for which there is an established readily managed. Numerous operating iron ore mines in the region condition‐setting framework. subject to Ministerial Conditions provide appropriate precedents for assessment and condition‐setting.
The proposal is consistent with established The Proposal is consistent with established environmental policies, environmental policies, guidelines and guidelines and standards, as set out in Table 3‐1, Table 3‐2 to Table standards. 3‐9 and Table 4‐1.
The proponent can demonstrate that it has Section 2 details the extensive stakeholder consultation that has conducted appropriate and effective been undertaken to date, issues raised, and Proponent response to stakeholder consultation, in particular with issues raised. This consultation included the OEPA and other DMAs. DMAs, as well as Traditional Ownersd an other mining companies.
There is limited or local concern only about the Extensive stakeholder consultation has been undertaken to date; likely effect of the proposal, if implemented, on stakeholders have not raised any major concerns with the Proposal the environment. (Section 2).
Page 74 Western Turner Syncline Stage 2 – B1 and S17 Deposits API: Environmental Review Document
7 REFERENCES
Australian and New Zealand Environment and Conservation Council & Agriculture and Resource Management Council of Australia and New Zealand (ANZECC/ARMCANZ) 2000, Australian and New Zealand Guidelines for Fresh and Marine Water Quality, Australian Water Association, Sydney. Beard JS 1975, Pilbara Explanatory Notes and Map Sheet, 1:1,000,000 Series, Vegetation Survey of Western Australia, University of Western Australia Press, Nedlands. Biota Environmental Sciences (Biota) 2007, A Vegetation and Flora Survey of the West Turner Section 10 Area and Infrastructure Corridor, unpublished report prepared for Rio Tinto, RTIO‐HSE‐0063557, Perth. Biota Environmental Sciences (Biota) 2009a, West Turner Syncline Section 10 Development Two‐Phase Fauna Survey, unpublished report prepared for Rio Tinto, RTIO‐HSE‐0123438, Perth. Biota Environmental Sciences (Biota) 2009b, A Two‐Phase Fauna Survey of the West Turner Syncline Area, unpublished report prepared for Rio Tinto, RTIO‐HSE‐0063545, Perth. Biota Environmental Sciences (Biota) 2011a, West Turner Targeted Fauna Survey, unpublished report prepared for Rio Tinto Iron Ore, RTIO‐HSE‐0131480, Perth. Biota Environmental Sciences (Biota) 2011b, West Turner Syncline Section 10 Expanded Vegetation and Flora Survey Report, unpublished report prepared for Rio Tinto, RTIO‐HSE‐0123440, Perth. Biota Environmental Sciences (Biota) 2012a, West Turner Syncline NES Species Assessment, unpublished report prepared for Rio Tinto, RTIO‐HSE‐0164398, Perth. Biota Environmental Sciences (Biota) 2012b, West Turner Syncline Fauna Survey Summary Report, unpublished report prepared for Rio Tinto, RTIO‐HSE‐0164353, Perth. Biota Environmental Sciences (Biota) 2012c, West Turner Syncline Stage 2 B1 and Section 17 Deposits Subterranean Fauna Survey, unpublished report for Rio Tinto, RTIO‐HSE‐0159400, Perth. Biota Environmental Sciences (Biota) 2013a, West Turner Syncline Phase 2 Vegetation and Flora Report, unpublished report prepared for Rio Tinto, RTIO‐HSE‐0164513, Perth. Biota Environmental Sciences (Biota) 2013b, West Turner Syncline Stage 2 – Phase 1 Survey and Targeted Vegetation Survey, unpublished report for Rio Tinto, RTIO‐HSE‐0164845, Perth. Commonwealth of Australia (Commonwealth) 2007, Leading Practice Sustainable Development Program for the Mining Industry, Managing Acid and Metalliferous Drainage, Commonwealth of Australia, Canberra. Department of Water (DoW) 2009, Pilbara Water in Mining Guideline, Report no. 34, Department of Water, Perth Department of Mines and Petroleum and the Environmental Protection Authority (DMP/EPA) 2011, Guidelines for Preparing Mine Closure Plans, Department of Mines and Petroleum, Perth. Department of Planning and Infrastructure (DPI) (2007) Visual Landscape Planning in Western Australia: a manual for evaluation, assessment, siting and design. Western Australian Planning Commission, Perth.
Page 75 Western Turner Syncline Stage 2 – B1 and S17 Deposits API: Environmental Review Document
Ecoscape (Australia) Pty Ltd (Ecoscape) 2012, Western Turner Syncline Stage 2 Visual Impact Assessment, unpublished report for Rio Tinto, RTIO‐HSE‐0159656, Perth. Environmental Alliances 2012, Predicted Dust Levels from Western Turner Syncline Stage 2 (B1 and S17) Iron Ore Project, unpublished report for Rio Tinto, RTIO‐HSE‐0160666, Perth. Environmental Protection Authority (EPA) 2003, Consideration of Subterranean Fauna in Groundwater and Caves during EIA in WA, Guidance Statement No. 54, published by the Environmental Protection Authority, Perth. Environmental Protection Authority (EPA) 2004a, Terrestrial Flora and Vegetation Surveys for Environmental Impact Assessment in Western Australia, Guidance Statement No. 51, published by the Environmental Protection Authority, Perth. Environmental Protection Authority (EPA) 2004b, Terrestrial Fauna Surveys for Environmental Impact Assessment in Western Australia, EPA Guidance Statement No. 56, published by the Environmental Protection Authority, Perth. Environmental Protection Authority (EPA) 2006, Environmental Offsets, Position Statement No. 9, published by the Environmental Protection Authority, Perth. Environmental Protection Authority (EPA) 2007a, Sampling methods and survey considerations for subterranean fauna in Western Australia, Draft EPA Guidance Statement No. 54a, published by the Environmental Protection Authority, Perth. Environmental Protection Authority (EPA) 2007b, Environmental Noise, Draft Guidance Statement No.8, published by the Environmental Protection Authority, Perth. Environmental Protection Authority (EPA) 2008, Environmental Offsets – Biodiversity, Guidance Statement No. 19, published by the Environmental Protection Authority, Perth. Environmental Protection Authority (EPA) 2009, Sampling of Short Range Endemic Invertebrate Fauna for Environmental Impact Assessment in Western Australia, EPA Guidance Statement No. 20, published by the Environmental Protection Authority, Perth. Environmental Protection Authority and Department of Environment and Conservation (EPA/DEC) 2010, Technical Guide ‐ Terrestrial Vertebrate Fauna Surveys for Environmental Impact Assessment, published by the Environmental Protection Authority, Perth. Equinox Environmental 2012, Western Turner Syncline Stage 2 Project Ecological Risk Assessment, unpublished report for Rio Tinto, RTIO‐HSE‐0168076, Perth. Klohn Crippen Berger (KCB) 2012a, Western Turner Syncline B1 Pit Post Closure Water Quality Assessment, unpublished report for Rio Tinto, RTIO‐HSE‐0145681, Perth. Klohn Crippen Berger (KCB) 2012b, WTS2 B1 Water Quality Assessment, unpublished report for Rio Tinto, RTIO‐PDE‐0102103, Perth. MWH 2009, B1 Groundwater Model: A transient numerical groundwater model of the dewatering of the proposed B1 mine site in the Western Turner Syncline using MODFLOW 2000, unpublished report for Rio Tinto, RTIO‐PDE‐0062664, Perth.
Page 76 Western Turner Syncline Stage 2 – B1 and S17 Deposits API: Environmental Review Document
Rio Tinto 2011, Groundwater Dependant Ecosystems in the Pilbara and predicted impacts from dewatering and discharge along Caves and Duck Creek, internal memo prepared by Rio Tinto Iron Ore, RTIO‐ HSE‐0166230, Perth. Rio Tinto 2012a, Baseline hydrology assessment for a local creek discharge from Western Turner Syncline (WTS) B1 deposit , unpublished report prepared by Rio Tinto, RTIO‐HSE‐0095090, Perth. Rio Tinto 2012b, Western Turner Syncline B1 Dewatering Strategy – Groundwater Numerical Modelling, unpublished report prepared by Rio Tinto, RTIO‐PDE‐0092036, Perth. Rio Tinto 2012c, WTS Phase II Surface Water Management, unpublished report prepared by Rio Tinto, RTIO‐PDE‐0101051, Perth. Rio Tinto 2012d, Western Turner Syncline B1 – Feasibility Studies Groundwater Modelling: Dewatering and Closure, unpublished report prepared by Rio Tinto, RTIO‐PDE‐0103028, Perth. Rio Tinto 2012e, Surface hydrology in the vicinity of the WTS2 infrastructure corridor between WTS B1 and S10; assessment and modelling of natural surface flows, unpublished report prepared by Rio Tinto, RTIO‐PDE‐0103316, Perth. Rio Tinto 2012f, Western Turner Syncline B1 and S17 AMD Risk Assessment, November 2012, unpublished report prepared by Rio Tinto, RTIO‐PDE‐0102519, Perth. Rio Tinto 2012g, Western Turner Syncline (Stage 2) Closure Plan, unpublished report prepared by Rio Tinto, Perth. Rio Tinto 2013a, Western Turner Syncline B1 – Feasibility Study Groundwater Modelling: Dewatering and Closure, unpublished report prepared by Rio Tinto, RTIO‐PDE‐0104666, Perth. Rio Tinto 2013b, WTS Stage 2 FS – Water balance & strategy update, unpublished report prepared by Rio Tinto, Perth. SVT Engineering Consultants (SVT) 2012, Environmental Noise Assessment of Western Turner Syncline Stage II Project, unpublished report for Rio Tinto, RTIO‐HSE‐0160668, Perth. University of Western Australia (UWA) 2012a, West Turner Syncline Stage 2 ‐ Potential impacts of mining operations on overland flow dependent vegetation ‐ Preliminary assessment, unpublished report for Rio Tinto, RTIO‐HSE‐0159807, Perth. University of Western Australia (UWA) 2012b, West Turner Syncline Stage 2 ‐ Potential impacts of mining operations on groundwater dependent vegetation ‐ Preliminary assessment, unpublished report for Rio Tinto, RTIO‐HSE‐0159544, Perth. URS 2009, Western Turner Syncline Hydrogeological Bore Completion Report, unpublished report prepared for Rio Tinto, RTIO‐PDE‐0061401, Perth. Wetland Research and Management (WRM) 2012a, Western Turner Syncline: Baseline Assessment of Aquatic Fauna & Water Quality – Wet & Dry 2011 Survey, unpublished report prepared for Rio Tinto, RTIO‐HSE‐0134269, Perth. Wetland Research and Management (WRM) 2012b, WTS2 – groundwater quality – updated data, unpublished report prepared for Rio Tinto, RTIO‐HSE‐0166326, Perth.
Page 77
Western Turner Syncline Stage 2 – B1 and S17 Deposits API: Environmental Review Document
Appendix 1 Supporting Tables
Page 79 Appendix 1 Table 1 Potential impacts to conservation significant flora
Locations Locations within Locations within within WTS indicative Conservation proposal boundary 1 Species study area infrastructure layout Potential impact status % of total in % of total in # # # study area study area Two locations comprising one population2 of 15 individuals were recorded in the west of the WTS during 2012 (Biota 2013b), while three locations comprising one population of seven plants have been recorded east of Grevillia sp. Turee the WTS. These populations are 5.5 km west and 2.3 km east of the Proposal boundary, respectively, and will (J. Bull & G P1 2 0 0 0 0 not be impacted by the Proposal. This species occurs through the Hamersley Range over a range of Hopkinson ONS JJ approximately 220 km east‐west (from near Hope Downs to Mount Brockman) and 70 km north‐south. There 01.01) are currently over 80 additional location records from this area representing 30 separate populations, including one in Karijini National Park. Six locations (comprising five populations) were recorded in 2012, which led to the re‐examination of specimens previously assigned to the Hibiscus ‘haynaldii’ complex. This identified a further seven locations (comprising six populations) sampled previously to give a total of 13 locations, comprising 11 separate populations (Biota 2013a). Multiple individuals were recorded at these locations, which generally occurred in Hibiscus sp. Mt steep terrain in the west of the WTS, near Mt Turner. This species is currently known from 11 additional Brockman (E. P1 13 3 23 1 8 locations, comprising eight separate populations; however, it is probable that some of the other existing Thoma ET 1354) records of Hibiscus haynaldii from the locality will also prove to be this species (Biota 2013a). Based on the current records, the distribution of this species extends over a radius of approximately 35 km around the Brockman Syncline 4 locality. The Proposal is not expected to have significant local or regional impacts on this species, as only one location of this species is expected to be cleared (for a waste dump). This species was recorded from a single location on the southern edge of the study area (see Biota 2013a). Sida sp. Hamersley This location is over 5 km from the Proposal boundary, and no impacts are therefore expected on this species. Range (K. Newbey P1 1 0 0 0 0 This species has a range of approximately 100 km east‐west and 70 km north‐south, roughly centred on 10692) Mount Brockman. Twelve (12) locations with multiple individuals were recorded on upper slopes of the ridges in the west of the study area (Biota 2013a, 2013b), comprising five separate populations. The majority of these locations are not within close proximity to the indicative infrastructure layout; a single location lies within the western section of the Proposal boundary, approximately 200 m west of a proposed waste dump. This species has Dampiera anonyma P3 12 1 8 0 0 been previously recorded at 47 other locations within 60 km of the study area (which comprise all the other known locations), over a range approximately 100 km east‐west and north‐south. These locations represent 20 additional populations, eight of which are located in Karijini National Park. The Proposal is not expected to have significant local or regional impacts on this species. Eighty seven (87) locations with multiple individuals were recorded, concentrated on scree slopes of hills in the east of the study area (Biota 2013a); these locations comprised 10 populations. Five locations Eremophila (comprising one population) lie within the indicative infrastructure layout. Twenty six (26) additional magnifica subsp. P3 87 81 93 5 6 locations of the species have been recorded within 60 km of the study area, representing 11 additional velutina populations (including two populations in Karijini National Park). The species occurs over a range of approximately 300 km east‐west from Newman to west of Mount Brockman. The Proposal is not expected to have significant local or regional impacts to this species. Locations Locations within Locations within within WTS indicative Conservation proposal boundary 1 Species study area infrastructure layout Potential impact status % of total in % of total in # # # study area study area This species was distributed relatively widely through the centre of the study area. Five locations with multiple individuals were identified by Biota (2012a), while 242 additional locations were recorded by Rio Tinto botanists in 2003 and 2011 (Biota 2013a). These locations represented seven populations in total. All Goodenia sp. East records were within vegetation units EsMeAbTaTw and ElTwTa on calcrete outcrops. These locations are Pilbara (A.A. P3 247 36 15 0 0 generally not within close proximity to the indicative infrastructure layout. This species has been previously Mitchell PRP 727) recorded at 19 other locations within 50 km of the study area. It is known from a broad range of 320 km east‐ west, mainly distributed from the West Turner locality to Newman, with an outlying record from Noreena Downs. The Proposal is not expected to have significant local or regional impacts on this species. One hundred and thirteen (113) locations with multiple individuals were recorded from a variety of habitats within the western and southern sections of the study area, including scree slopes, gullies and creek lines (Biota 2013a, 2013b); these comprised 26 populations. This species has previously been recorded at Indigofera sp. hundreds of other locations within 50 km of the study area, representing approximately 50 additional Bungaroo Creek (S. P3 113 58 51 10 9 populations. It also occurs more widely from the Robe Valley (near Pannawonica) to Tom Price, a range of van Leeuwen 4301) over 200 km northwest‐southeast. Although some locations of this species within the Proposal boundary are in close proximity to the indicative infrastructure layout and will potentially be cleared, this is not expected to have significant local or regional impacts on this species. This species was recorded at one location in a gully east of Mt Turner during first phase sampling by Biota (2013a) outside the Proposal boundary. The species was not recorded during second phase sampling, but it is likely that it was not present or identifiable at the time given rainfall was low prior to the survey. This species Nicotiana P3 1 0 0 0 0 has previously been recorded from three locations within 50 km of the study area, all to the south. It occurs umbratica over a range of some 350 km southwest‐northeast, extending from near Paraburdoo to southeast of Port Hedland. One population is known from Karijini National Park. The Proposal is not expected to have significant local or regional impacts to this species. Ninety six (96) locations with multiple individuals were recorded on the low stony undulating plains in the north and west of the study area (Biota 2013a, 2013b). In addition, 45 locations were recorded during other previous surveys (Biota 2013a). These 141 total locations represent 19 separate populations in the study Ptilotus area. The distribution of this species extends over a radius of approximately 35 km around Mount Brockman, P3 141 119 84 0 0 subspinescens and all of the known records (in the order of 500 locations in total) lie within 50 km of the study area. The majority of locations of this species in the study area were not recorded within close proximity to the indicative infrastructure layout. Although some locations of this species within the Proposal boundary may be cleared, this is not expected to have significant local or regional impacts to this species. One hundred and eleven (111) locations with multiple individuals were recorded, widely distributed throughout the study area; these comprised 26 populations. This species is relatively common in the Sida sp. Barlee Mt Turner locality, having been recorded from approximately 200 additional locations within 50 km of the Range (S. van P3 111 77 69 7 6 study area, representing numerous populations. The species has a broad distribution across 370 km east‐ Leeuwen 1642) west, extending from Barlee Range Nature Reserve to near Newman. Although some locations of this species within the Proposal boundary are expected to be cleared, this is not expected to have significant local or regional impacts on this species. Two locations of this species were recorded near Mt Turner in the west of the study area (Biota 2013b), at least 1.4 km west of the Proposal boundary. This species has been recorded from several locations within Acacia 50 km of the study area, and is known from numerous populations, including two in Karijini National Park. P4 2 0 0 0 0 bromilowiana The species has a broad distribution through the Pilbara, occurring over a range of 390 km from Balfour Downs Station in the east to the Mount Brockman locality in the west. The Proposal is not expected to have significant local or regional impacts on this species. Locations Locations within Locations within within WTS indicative Conservation proposal boundary 1 Species study area infrastructure layout Potential impact status % of total in % of total in # # # study area study area A total of 108 locations with multiple individuals were recorded, on the scree slopes of the western and central northern hills of the study area, by Biota and previous surveys (Biota 2013a). These represented eight populations. It is relatively common in the Mount Brockman locality, with over 330 additional locations Eremophila (representing 46 additional populations) known from within 50 km of the study area (Biota 2013a). The magnifica subsp. P4 108 72 67 21 19 species occurs over a range of approximately 300 km east‐west, from Newman to west of Mount Brockman, magnifica with nine populations known from Karijini National Park. Although some locations of this species within the Proposal boundary are expected to be cleared, this is not expected to have significant local or regional impacts on this species. One location with six individuals was recorded on a flat stony plain in association with vegetation unit ElAsppTe in the southeast of the study area (Biota 2013a). This location is not within the Proposal boundary. This species has previously been recorded at numerous locations within 50 km of the study area, comprising over 40 populations. This species has a broad distribution; most records occur over a range of approximately Goodenia nuda P4 1 0 0 0 0 450 km through the Pilbara bioregion, with populations known from Karijini and Millstream‐Chichester National Parks. There are also two outlying records from east of Rudall River in the Great Sandy Desert and the Canning Stock Route in the Gascoyne bioregion. The Proposal is not expected to have significant local or regional impacts on this species. One location of this species was recorded near Mt Turner in the west of the study area, 1.4 km west of the Proposal boundary (Biota 2013a). A second location is known from the west of the study area, 200 m west of the Proposal boundary (Biota 2013b). This species has a broad distribution through the Pilbara, occurring Ptilotus mollis P4 2 0 0 0 0 over a range of approximately 300 km north‐south and 550 km east‐west, from Rudall River to the Mount Brockman locality. One population is known from Karijini National Park. The Proposal is not expected to have significant local or regional impacts on this species. 1 Based on indicative infrastructure layout during Proposal Feasibility Study. Infrastructure layout is subject to change during Project Feasibility Study, construction and operational phases. Proposed extent of clearing (2,700 ha) within the Proposal boundary (8,430 ha) allows for a footprint approximately 30% larger than the current indicative infrastructure layout, as detailed in Figure 3‐1
2 Location records greater than 500 m apart have been considered to represent separate populations.
Appendix 1 Table 2 Potential clearing and dewatering discharge impact to vegetation communities of localised conservation significance
Area within WTS study Area intersected by indicative Area in proximity to maximum extent Area within Proposal boundary area infrastructure layout 1 of dewatering discharge 2 Vegetation community % of total surveyed % of total surveyed % of total surveyed ha ha ha ha area area area Lower slope mulga 1,382 293 21 97 7 0 0 Valley floor mulga 354 162 46 20 6 0 0 Riparian eucalypt woodland on major ephemeral watercourses 412 0 0 0 0 69 17 Scattered riparian eucalypts on major ephemeral watercourses 877 53 6 0 0 55 6
Gorges and gullies 205 67 33 22 11 2.5 1
Total 3,230 575 18 139 4 126 4 1 Based on indicative infrastructure layout during Proposal Feasibility Study. Infrastructure layout is subject to change during ProposalFeasibility Study, construction and operational phases. Proposed extent of clearing (2,700 ha) within the Proposal boundary (8,430 ha) allows for a footprint approximately 30% larger than the current indicative infrastructure layout, as detailed in Figure 1‐3.
2 Highly conservative estimate of vegetation that may be affected by discharge at maximum rates of 30 ML/day, based on the area within 100 m of the centreline of the low flow channel(s) on the discharge watercourse and the Beasley River. On the Beasley River the low flow channel is generally 25 m width, and when braided, multiple channels can occur over approximately a 50 m width. On the discharge watercourse the low flow channel is generally 15 m width, and when braided, multiple channels can occur over approximately a 90 m width.
Appendix 1 Table 3 Potential Impacts to fauna habitat
Area within WTS Area within indicative Proposal Area within Proposal boundary study area footprint 1 No. Habitat description % of area in study % of area in study ha ha ha area area 1 Acacia inaequilatera tall shrubs over Triodia hummock grassland on low 37 0 0 0 0 hills. 2 Acacia spp. tall shrubland over *C. ciliaris tussock grassland on minor 315 43 14 1 0.2 drainages and flow lines. 3 Acacia xiphophylla shrubland over Triodia hummock grassland on clay 1,035 322 31 36 3 plains. 4 Corymbia spp. open woodland over mixed Acacia spp. shrubland over 1567 31 2 0 0 tussock grasslands on low hills and stony plains. 5 Disturbed. 35 27 77 1 3 6 Eucalypt woodland over Acacia citrinoviridis shrubland on major creeks. 1,285 53 4 0 0 7 Eucalypt woodland over Acacia spp. shrubland over Triodia hummock 5813 2,149 37 564 10 grassland on stony plains and slopes. 8 Eucalyptus leucophloia woodland over Acacia spp. shrubland over Triodia 11,300 4,279 38 1,014 9 hummock grassland on spurs and hill slopes. 9 Eucalyptus victrix woodland over Melaleuca glomerata shrubland over 4 0 0 0 0 tussock grassland on major creeks. 10 Mixed Acacia spp. shrublands over Triodia hummock grasslands on stony 2,557 499 20 164 6 plains and low hills. 11 Mulga and Acacia shrublands over Triodia hummock grasslands on rocky 723 292 40 76 11 hill slopes. 12 Eucalypt woodland over Acacia spp. shrubland over tussock grassland on 1,243 610 49 192 15 minor drainages. 13 Corymbia spp. and eucalypt open woodland over mixed Acacia spp. 198 66 33 22 11 shrubland over tussock grasslands in gullies and gorges. 14 Eucalypt woodland over Acacia spp. shrubland over Triodia hummock 137 51 37 3 2 grassland on incised flow lines. 15 Eucalyptus leucophloia over Mulga (Acacia aneura)/A. citrinoviridis over 14 8 57 1 7 Triodia hummock grassland in gullies and gorges. TOTAL 26,263 8,430 2074 1 Based on indicative infrastructure layout during Proposal Feasibility Study. Infrastructure layout is subject to change during Feasibility Study, construction and operational phases. Proposed extent of clearing (2,700 ha) within the Proposal boundary (8,430 ha) allows for a footprint approximately 30% larger than the current indicative infrastructure layout, as detailed in Figure 1-3. * Introduced species.
Appendix 1 Table 4 Potential impacts to conservation significant terrestrial fauna species
Locations recorded in Fauna Conservation Conservation Habitat Species relation to Proposal Description group status (EPBC Act) status (State) unit(s) boundary The Pilbara Leaf‐nosed Bat has only been recorded from three single calls in the WTS area (Biota 2012a). One of these was in 2011 from a site located in a gorge to the east of Mt Turner (site WTTBAT03), and two subsequent calls were recorded in 2012 on separate nights from a gully to the north of Mt Turner (site WTEBAT01 – Figure 3‐1). These records were all outside of the Proposal boundary. As these isolated single calls were the only records from four systematic field surveys, it is unlikely that there is a permanent roost supporting a colony of the species in the WTS area (Biota 2012a). Rhinonicteris 2 locations aurantius Field searches and helicopter reconnaissance have not located any caves of sufficient depth in Vulnerable Schedule 1 All outside Proposal 9 the WTS area to offer permanent roost sites for this species. The records are considered to (Pilbara Leaf‐ boundary represent itinerant individuals foraging at considerable distance from their roost, the latter two nosed Bat) calls were after midnight, consistent with individuals foraging at distance after dusk emergence Bats from the permanent roost (Biota 2012a). The only habitats that may be of value to this species would be the potential transitory roost sites (e.g. temporary overnight refuges for dispersing males) or foraging areas, within the ‘gorges and gullies’ (habitat types 9, 13, 15) and ‘major ephemeral creek’ habitats (habitat type 6) (Figure 3‐1). There is no evidence that a population of the species exists within the WTS area (Biota 2012a). The Proposal is expected to have minimal impact on this species. The Ghost Bat has been recorded from a single call in the WTS area, at site WTEbat05, in a gorge Macroderma 1 location (habitat type 13) west of the Proposal boundary (Biota 2012b). As this is the only call of this gigas NA Priority 4 13 species recorded to date at WTS, the Ghost Bat was considered to be foraging a significant Outside Proposal boundary (Ghost Bat) distance from a roost, suggesting it is unlikely a roost of any significance occurs in the area (Biota 2012b). The Proposal is expected to have minimal impact on this species. Two specimens of the Pilbara Olive Python have been recorded in the WTS area, at site WTC14E in 2009 (just beyond the eastern extent of the WTS survey area) and at site WTT02E in 2012, outside the Proposal boundary. It is likely the python occurs in the gorges and rocky habitats to the east of the WTS area. Within the WTS area, the ‘gorges and gullies’ habitat in the west Liasis olivaceus 2 locations represents the most suitable habitat (habitat types 9, 13 and 15), and the ‘major ephemeral barroni creeks’ habitat (habitat type 6) may also represent core habitat when temporary pools are Vulnerable Schedule 1 All outside Proposal 7, 13 (Pilbara Olive available (Biota 2012a). These habitats would potentially be utilised by the species for foraging boundary Python) or breeding activities at different times and subject to seasonal conditions. It is likely that a Reptiles 'population' of Pilbara Olive Pythons occurs in the WTS area, but it would be at the low density of individuals in the landscape typical of the species. The available data suggest that the area and population are typical of the broader Hamersley sub‐region (Biota 2012a). The Proposal is expected to have minimal impact on this species. N. butleri was recorded in mixed Acacia open shrubland over spinifex (Triodia sp.) hummock grassland (habitat type 2) near the Hardey River, south of the Proposal boundary (Figure 3‐1). Notoscincus 1 location NA Priority 4 2 The fauna habitats found within the study area are common and widespread throughout the butleri Outside Proposal boundary Hamersley sub‐region (Biota 2012a). The Proposal is expected to have minimal impact on this species. Locations recorded in Fauna Conservation Conservation Habitat Species relation to Proposal Description group status (EPBC Act) status (State) unit(s) boundary Active pebble‐mounds were located at six sites, both within and outside the Proposal boundary, Pseudomys 6 locations with three individuals recorded (Figure 3‐1). Mammals chapmani (excl. NA Priority 4 5 outside Proposal 7, 8, 10 The fauna habitats found within the study area are common and widespread throughout the (Western Pebble‐ bats) boundary Hamersley sub‐region (Biota 2012b). The Proposal is expected to have minimal impact on this mound Mouse) species.
Ardeotis australis 3 locations The Australian Bustard was recorded at three locations in the WTS area, all outside the Proposal boundary (Figure 3‐1). This species is relatively widespread and mobile, as the fauna habitats NA Priority 4 7, 8, 12 (Australian All outside Proposal found within the study area are common and widespread throughout the Hamersley sub‐region Bustard) boundary (Biota 2012b). The Proposal is expected to have minimal impact on this species. Birds Merops ornatus 7 locations The Rainbow Bee‐eater was recorded at seven sites distributed throughout the study area 2, 3, 7, (Figure 3‐1). The species has a wide ranging distribution and is highly mobile, and is one of the Migratory Schedule 3 (Rainbow Bee‐ 6 outside Proposal 10, 11 most commonly recorded birds in the Pilbara (Biota 2012b). The Proposal is expected to have eater) boundary minimal impact on this species. This species was recorded at 10 locations, in a variety of habitats, throughout the WTS area 10 locations (Figure 3‐1). Genetic analysis of several specimens that belong to a species widely distributed 2, 7, 8, Aname sp. NA NA across the Pilbara indicates the specimens are unlikely to represent a species restricted to the 7 outside Proposal 10, 13 boundary WTS area, and are unlikely to comprise an SRE species (Biota 2012b). The Proposal is expected to have minimal impact on this species.
6 locations This species was recorded at six locations, in a variety of habitats, throughout the WTS area (Figure 3‐1). The species is known from 25 specimens recorded at 23 localities (Biota 2012b). Barychelidae sp. NA NA 8, 10, 12 4 outside Proposal The species is considered to comprise an SRE, but is known to occur outside the WTS area (Biota boundary 2012b). The Proposal is expected to have minimal impact on this species. Potential This species was recorded from a single location 2 km south of the Proposal boundary in habitat SREs 1 location type 11 (Figure 3‐1). The specimen may represent an SRE, pending genetic analysis to confirm if Conothele sp. NA NA 11 Outside Proposal boundary the specimen comprises one of the 23 known Conothele species recorded from the Pilbara (Biota 2012b). The Proposal is expected to have minimal impact on this species. 4 locations Recorded from four locations in a variety of habitats, south of the Proposal boundary 2, 3, 10, Kwonkan sp. NA NA (Figure 3‐1). The taxa are unlikely to be restricted to the WTS area, pending genetic analysis to All outside Proposal 11 boundary confirm (Biota 2012b). The Proposal is expected to have minimal impact on this species.
2 locations This species was recorded from two locations south of the Proposal boundary (Figure 3‐1). The specimens are considered likely to comprise a species (Quistracia turneri) broadly distributed in Quistrachia sp. NA NA 2, 12 All outside Proposal the Pilbara, with identification from the WA Museum pending (Biota 2012b). The Proposal is boundary expected to have minimal impact on this species.
Appendix 1 Table 5 Conservation significant aquatic fauna in the WTS region (WRM 2012a)
Conservation status Recorded from Hardey or Control or Potential Fauna group Taxa EPBC Act State IUCN Beasley River Impact site Lecane noobijupi Both Both Micro‐invertebrates Synchaeta sp. Beasley Control (undescribed) Microcyclops varicans Both Both Scirtidae spp. Both Control Hyporheic fauna Oligochaeta spp. Both Both Pentaneura sp. Beasley Potential Impact Limbodessus occidentalis Beasley Control Hemicordulia koomina Near Threatened Both Both (Pilbara emerald dragonfly) Macro‐invertebrates Eurysticta coolawanyah Near Threatened Beasley Both (Pilbara pin damselfly) Haliplus pilbaraensis Beasley Both Leiopotherapon aheneus Lower Risk Near Fish Priority 4 Beasley Both (Fortescue grunter) Threatened
Western Turner Syncline Stage 2 – B1 and S17 Deposits API: Environmental Review Document
List of Appendices – Supporting Document Appendix 2 A Vegetation and Flora Survey of the West Turner Section 10 Area and Infrastructure Corridor (Biota 2007). Appendix 3 West Turner Syncline Section 10 Development Two‐Phase Fauna Survey (Biota 2009a). Appendix 4 A Two‐Phase Fauna Survey of the West Turner Syncline Area, (Biota 2009b). Appendix 5 West Turner Targeted Fauna Survey (Biota 2011a). Appendix 6 West Turner Syncline Section 10 Expanded Vegetation and Flora Survey Report (Biota 2011b). Appendix 7 West Turner Syncline Phase 2 Vegetation and Flora Report (Biota 2013a). Appendix 8 West Turner Syncline NES Species Assessment (Biota 2012a). Appendix 9 West Turner Syncline Fauna Survey Summary Report (Biota 2012b). Appendix 10 West Turner Syncline Stage 2 – Phase 1 Survey and Targeted Vegetation Survey (Biota 2013b). Appendix 11 West Turner Syncline Stage 2 B1 and Section 17 Deposits Subterranean Fauna Survey (Biota 2012c). Appendix 12 Western Turner Syncline Stage 2 Visual Impact Assessment (Ecoscape 2012). Appendix 13 Predicted Dust Levels from Western Turner Syncline Stage 2 (B1 and S17) Iron Ore Project (Environmental Alliances 2012). Appendix 14 Western Turner Syncline Stage 2 Project Ecological Risk Assessment (Equinox Environmental 2012). Appendix 15 WTS2 B1 Water Quality Assessment (KCB 2012b). Appendix 16 Potential Impacts of Dewatering and Discharge to Duck Creek and Caves Creek, Greater Nammuldi (Rio Tinto 2011). Appendix 17 Baseline Hydrology Assessment for Local Creek Discharge from WTS B1 (Rio Tinto 2012a). Appendix 18 Western Turner Syncline B1 – Feasibility Study Groundwater Modelling: Dewatering and Closure (Rio Tinto 2013a). Appendix 19 WTS Phase II Surface Water Management, unpublished report prepared by Rio Tinto (Rio Tinto 2012c). Appendix 20 Western Turner Syncline B1 – Feasibility Studies Groundwater Modelling: Dewatering and Closure (Rio Tinto 2012d). Appendix 21 Surface hydrology in the vicinity of the WTS2 infrastructure corridor between WTS B1 and S10; assessment and modelling of natural surface flows (Rio Tinto 2012e). Appendix 22 Western Turner Syncline B1 and S17 AMD Risk Assessment (Rio Tinto 2012f). Appendix 23 Western Turner Syncline (Stage 2) Closure Plan (Rio Tinto 2012g). Appendix 24 Environmental Noise Assessment of Western Turner Syncline Stage II Project (SVT 2012). Appendix 25 West Turner Syncline Stage 2 ‐ Potential impacts of mining operations on overland flow dependent vegetation ‐ Preliminary assessment (UWA 2012a). Appendix 26 West Turner Syncline Stage 2 ‐ Potential impacts of mining operations on groundwater dependent vegetation ‐ Preliminary assessment (UWA 2012b). Appendix 27 Western Turner Syncline Project, wet & dry 2011 sampling, final report (WRM 2012a). Appendix 28 WTS2 – groundwater quality updated data (WRM 2012b). Appendix 29 WTS Stage 2 FS – Water balance & strategy update (Rio Tinto 2013b). Appendix 30 Checklist for documents submitted for EIA on marine and terrestrial biodiversity. Appendix 31 EPA prepared scoping guideline.
Page 89