IVANPLATS SYERSTON PTYLIMITED Syerston Nickel Cobalt Burr STATEMENTy OF a ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS Tullamore Creek Bulbodne Project Mine and Processing Facility Tottenham to Bogan Gate Railway Kadungle Tullamore to Bogan Gate Road Creek Murda Fifield Carlisle Limestone Quarry Rail Siding Creek Gillenbine Creek Creek Trundle e Yarrabandai Springvale Road Condobolin Orange to Broken Hill Railway y Way Goobang erathong Creek Ootha Lachlan State Route 90 To Parkes GUNNINGG Gunningbland Creek U Valley N Creek N I dry Creek N G SEVEN Creek SISTERS RIR Way I RIDGE DGED Wallaroi LACHLAN G E RIVER Goobang ap Island amp Western Borefield May 2005 Creek Eastern Borefield Syerston Nickel Cobalt Project - SEE SYERSTON NICKEL COBALT PROJECT LIMESTONE QUARRY, RAIL SIDING, MINE AND PROCESSING FACILITY MODIFICATION STATEMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS IVANPLATS SYERSTON PTY LIMITED Project No. IVP-04-01 Document No. SEE-01-D Syerston Nickel Cobalt Project - SEE TABLE OF CONTENTS Section Page EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1 1 INTRODUCTION 1 1.1 OVERVIEW 1 1.2 PURPOSE OF THIS REPORT 5 1.3 STRUCTURE OF THIS REPORT 5 1.4 LEGISLATIVE FRAMEWORK - OVERVIEW 6 1.4.1 DIPNR Requirements for the SEE 11 1.5 CONSULTATION 11 2 DESCRIPTION OF THE APPROVED AND PROPOSED MINE AND PROCESSING FACILITY MODIFICATION 13 2.1 APPROVED MINE AND PROCESSING FACILITY 13 2.1.1 Overview 13 2.1.2 Operation 13 2.1.3 Ancillary Infrastructure 14 2.1.4 Workforce 15 2.2 PROPOSED MINE AND PROCESSING FACILITY MODIFICATION 15 2.2.1 Reasons for the Proposed Modifications 15 2.2.2 Description of the Proposed Mine and Processing Facility Modification 15 3 DESCRIPTION OF THE APPROVED AND PROPOSED QUARRY AND RAIL SIDING MODIFICATIONS 19 3.1 APPROVED QUARRY 19 3.1.1 Overview 19 3.2 PROPOSED QUARRY MODIFICATION 22 3.2.1 Reasons for the Proposed Modifications 22 3.2.2 Description of the Proposed Quarry Modification 22 3.3 APPROVED RAIL SIDING 25 3.3.1 Overview 25 3.4 PROPOSED RAIL SIDING MODIFICATION 26 4 DESCRIPTION OF THE APPROVED AND PROPOSED MATERIALS TRANSPORT ROUTE MODIFICATION 27 4.1 APPROVED MATERIALS TRANSPORT ROUTE 27 4.1.1 Overview 27 4.2 PROPOSED MATERIALS TRANSPORT ROUTE MODIFICATION 28 4.2.1 Description of the Proposed Materials Transport Route Modification 28 5 ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW 31 5.1 MINE AND PROCESSING FACILITY 31 5.1.1 Land Resources 31 5.1.2 Soils 32 5.1.3 Landforms 32 5.1.4 Visual Impact 33 May 2005 i Syerston Nickel Cobalt Project - SEE TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued) 5.1.5 Night Lighting 33 5.1.6 Water Resources 34 5.1.7 Flora 35 5.1.8 Fauna 36 5.1.9 Air Quality 39 5.1.10 Acoustics 42 5.1.11 Aboriginal Heritage 42 5.1.12 European Heritage 43 5.1.13 Risk Assessment 43 5.1.14 Socio-Economics 44 5.2 QUARRY AND RAIL SIDING 45 5.2.1 Land Resources 45 5.2.2 Visual Features 45 5.2.3 Water Resources 46 5.2.4 Flora 48 5.2.5 Fauna 49 5.2.6 Air Quality 50 5.2.7 Acoustics 51 5.2.8 Aboriginal Heritage 53 5.2.9 European Heritage 54 5.2.10 Risk Assessment 54 5.2.11 Socio-Economics 55 5.3 MATERIALS TRANSPORT ROUTE 55 5.3.1 Transport 55 5.3.2 Air Quality 58 5.3.3 Acoustics 59 5.3.4 Risk Assessment 60 6 ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING AND MANAGEMENT 61 6.1 ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING 61 6.2 ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT 63 6.2.1 Environmental Management Plans 63 6.2.2 Staged Timing of Environmental Management Measures 67 7 CONCLUSION 70 8 REFERENCES 72 LIST OF TABLES Table 1 Issues to be Addressed in the SEE Table 2 Summary of Consultation on Modified Project Table 3 Comparison of Approved and Modified MPF Table 4 Land Disturbance – Approved and Modified Quarry Table 5 Weekly Rail Movements – Approved and Modified Project Table 6 Summary of Materials Movement – Approved Project Table 7 Summary of Key Transport-related Differences Table 8 Summary of Materials Movement – Approved and Modified Project Table 9 Expected Distribution of Employees and Associated Traffic Table 10 MPF Site Vegetation Disturbance May 2005 ii Syerston Nickel Cobalt Project - SEE TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued) LIST OF TABLES (Continued) Table 11 EECs or Their Habitats Assessed by Eight Part Tests of Significance Table 12 Threatened Fauna Species or Their Habitats Assessed by Eight Part Tests of Significance Table 13 Comparison between Approved and Modified MPF – Predicted PM10 Concentrations at Nearest Residences Table 14 Comparison between the Approved and Modified MPF Emission Rates Table 15 Predicted 24-hour PM10 Concentrations at Nearest Residences Table 16 Proposed Blast Design Details Approved Quarry Table 17 EIS Predicted Daytime LAeq(15minute) Quarry Operating Noise Emissions – Year 5 Table 18 Summary of EIS Materials Movement Table 19 Summary of Key Transport-related Differences Table 20 Summary of Materials Movement Table 21 Expected Distribution of Employees and Their Traffic Table 22 Predicted Approved and Modified Future LAeq(1hour) Peak Traffic Noise Levels Table 23 Project Environmental Management Plans Table 24 Modified Timing of Environmental Requirements for Modified Project LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1 Project Location Figure 2 Project Components Figure 3 Local Transport Network Figure 4 Project Components to be Removed by Proposed Modification Figure 5 Quarry EIS General Arrangement - Year 5 Figure 6 Quarry EIS General Arrangement - Year 21 Figure 7 Quarry Modified General Arrangement - Year 5 Figure 8 Quarry Modified General Arrangement - Year 21 Figure 9 EIS Monitoring Locations for the Mine and Processing Facility Figure 10 EIS Monitoring Locations for the Quarry, Rail Siding and Materials Transport Route LIST OF APPENDICES Appendix A Syerston Nickel Cobalt Project Development Consent Appendix B IVP’s Letter of 18 April 2005 to DIPNR Appendix C Air Quality Assessment Appendix D Noise and Blast Assessment Appendix E Traffic Report Appendix F 8 Part Tests of Significance May 2005 iii Syerston Nickel Cobalt Project - SEE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Syerston Nickel Cobalt Project (the Project) is owned by Ivanplats Syerston Pty Limited (IVP). This Statement of Environmental Effects (SEE) is provided to support the application to modify the original Project Development Consent under Section 96(2) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (EP&A Act). The proposed modification arises predominantly as a consequence of proposed changes in the rate of ore processing from 2.3 million tonnes per annum (Mtpa) to approximately 2.5 Mtpa (acid pressure leach autoclave feed rate), and removing the refinery section of the processing plant. This results in some changes, including: • simplification of the metallurgical processing plant; • change in the product mix from metal and mixed sulphide to just mixed sulphide; • increase in the production of mixed nickel and cobalt sulphide; • reduced number of process consumables used and changes to consumable quantities; • changes in some processing air emissions; • a reduction in power consumption; • change in the number of transport movements from the Rail Siding and Limestone Quarry (Quarry); • increased production rate from the Quarry; and • a reduction in the operational workforce. Environmental reviews that have been conducted to evaluate the Project modification proposal have concluded the following: • From an operational noise perspective, a specialist review has concluded that the proposed modification to the Quarry design would result in no additional significant noise impacts beyond those assessed in the approved, consented Project Environmental Impact Statement (EIS). • From an air quality perspective, a specialist review has concluded that as a result of the proposed Project modifications at the Mine and Processing Facility (MPF) and Quarry, no residences are likely to experience dust deposition or emission concentration levels above the current Department of Environment and Conservation (DEC) assessment criteria. • From a traffic perspective, a specialist review has concluded that the management measures detailed in the EIS and Development Consent would remain unchanged and applicable to the modified Project. • The proposed modification would involve an approximate additional 53 hectares (ha) of land disturbance at the Quarry. IVP is required to implement management procedures for stripping, stockpiling and re-using soil resources in its progressive rehabilitation programme as part of the original Project Development Consent. • The additional material to be placed on the Quarry waste emplacement would have similar geological and geochemical characteristics to the waste rock generated by the approved Project, and is therefore not predicted to alter the potential impacts described in the EIS. May 2005 ES-1 Syerston Nickel Cobalt Project - SEE • Due to the screening effect of local ridgelines and vegetation screens, the number of publicly accessible roads and privately owned residences from which views of the Quarry would be available would remain substantially the same as those described in the EIS. For the privately owned residences which do have views of the Quarry, the visual impact of the proposed modification is predicted to be substantially the same as documented in the EIS due to the distances involved, screening effects of the local topography, and implementation of management measures required by the Development Consent. • From a flora perspective, through the application of Eight Part Tests of Significance, no threatened flora species, populations, ecological communities, or their habitats would be significantly affected by the Project modification proposal to the extent that the viability of a species, population, ecological community, or their habitats would be undermined. • From a fauna perspective, through the application of Eight Part Tests of Significance, no threatened fauna species, populations, ecological communities, or their habitats would be significantly affected by the proposal to the extent of undermining the viability of a species, population, ecological community, or their habitats. • Potential surface water and groundwater impacts for the modified Project are expected to be similar to those predicted for the approved Project.